________________
No. 7.]
DAMODARPUR COPPER-PLATE INSCRIPTIONS.
125
famour battle," which was fought in 191 G.E., the early Gupta supremacy was still prevalent in the neighbouring kingdom of Bhänu-gupta's feudatory Samkshobhal (Hastin's son), whose inscription is dated in 209 G.E., one feels inclined to believe that Bhanu-gupta was victorious in 191 G.E. over the Häņas. Hence it is clear that the authority of the Hina chief Toramāņa or his son, the tyrant Mihirakula, could not have penetrated into any kingdom east of Malwä. If oar Plate No. 5, dated in 214 G.E., belongs to Bhānu-gupta's reign, as we have supposed it to do, this Gupta ruler also, like his predecessor, had a very long reign, at least during the years from 191 G.E. to 214 G.E. (i.e. 510-11 A.D.-533-34 A.D.), so that both the Perivrăjaka maharajas Hastin and his son Samkshobba, as also the Uchchakalpa maharaja Sarvadātha, whose recorded dates are 193, 197 and 2:14 G.E., and probably his father Jayanātha also, were contemporaries of Bhānu-gupta and were probably his feudatories also. At any rate Professor Pathak's conclu. sions that the downfall of the Gupta empire, effected by the Hüņa invasion, took place towards the close of the fifth century A.D. does not seem to be warranted by facts; for we have shown above that the Hüņas occupied only a part of the Gupta empire in the west-the central and eastern provinces (e.g. Pandravardhana) were still under Gupta domination. Professor Rapson's view that during the last quarter of the 5th century A.D.“ the northern and central provinces (E. Málwa) were held by different branches of the imperial family, and in other parts of the empire powers previously subject or fendatory became independont" does not seem to be wholly correct; for, as far as is known, only one branch of the main line wielded some sort of authority somewhere in the east, and not all feudatories became independent of Gupta supremacy. Even if we accept Professor Pathak's view that the initial year of Mibirakula was 502 A.D., we cannot say that this year "marks the end of the Gupta empire ;" for we have a Gupta omperor still ruling as the " lord of the earth" in 214 G.E. (533-34 A.D.), having Pundravardhana under a governor of his own appointing, and it is perhaps bis rale that is referred to in the inscription dated in 209 G.E. The only natural conclusion to be drawn in this connection is that the vast Gupta empire began to be circumscribed in extent, owing to the troubles and inroads of the Hiņas, towards the close of the reign of the imperial monarch Budha-gupta, and that it was from Bbänu-gupta's time that the diminution of Gupta power and glory actually commenced. It may be rightly said that Mihirakula, who reigned at least for 15 years," was a contemporary of Bhanu-gupta, the imperial Gupta sovereign, and was himself not a paramount sovereign of the rank of the early Guptas, as supposed by some scholars, dominating the whole of the empire ruled over by the previous Gupta emperors, but was a king having under his jurisdiction only the western provinces of the Gupta empire.
Both Budha-gupta and Bhanu-gupta were contemporary overlords of many of the feudatory princes who were not dependent on the Hūņa chiefs, Toramāņa or Mihirakula. The decadence of the Gupta glory began, as remarked above, during the closing years of Budhagupta's reign; but the complete overthrow of the Gupta power of both the different branches of the main line was in all probability brought about not by the foreigners, the Häņas, but by the boastful chief Yasodharman of Mälwa. We learn from the three Vandasor stone inscrip. tions of two kings, named Yasodharman and Vishņuvardhana, in the Válwā region, Pleet, C. I. I., Vol. III, No. 25.
? T'ide ibid, Nos. 28, 30 and 31, respectively. Vide the Introduction to his Second Edition of the Meghadita (Poona, 1910), PP. xi-xii, and pp. 214-15 of his article on " Nero Light on the Gupta Era and Mihirakula" in the Sir R. G. Bhandarkar Conmemora. tion Volume.
• Rapson, Indian Coins (Encyclopedia of Indo-Aryan Researck), p. 20, S 92.
Pide p. 217, Sir R. G. Bhandarkar Commemoration Volume. • Fleet, C. 1. I., Vol. III, p. 25.
* Vide the Gwalior stone inscription, Fleet, C. I. I., Vol. 111, No. 37, wherein the 15th regnal year of Mihirakula is mentioned.
• Fleet, C. I. I., Vol. III, Nos. 33-35.
