________________
No. 11.] GHUGRAHATI COPPER-PLATE INSCRIPTION OF SAMACHARA-DEVA. 83
From the acknowledgment about the same time of the suzerainty of the Guptas in the eastern parts of the country (modern Central Provinces) by the Paribrajaka Mahārājas and Maharajas of Uchchakalpa, Prof. Basak has been led to suppose (Ep. Ind., XV, 7, p. 125) that Bhanu-Gupta was the victor in the battle in which Goparaja was killed. But I do not think that the supposition is reasonable. The following facts should be considered :
(1) Goparāja who appears to have been a powerful ally of Bhanu-Gupta was killed in the battle.
(ii) If Bhanu-Gupta were victorious, the fact would certainly have been mentioned. Victory lay on the other side, hence the silence and the consolation of some high-sounding adjectives.
(ii) Bhanu-Gupta had evidently lost his former power; for, had he still been the suzerain, the fact would have been mentioned; and the loss of power can only result from defeat in battle in such a situation.
(iv) The suzerainty of Toramana is acknowledged by Dhanya-Vishnu, king of Eran, while some years previously he and his elder brother Matri-Vishnu had acknowledged Budha-Gupta as the suzerain,1
From these it appears to be clear that the contest between Bhanu-Gupta and the aggressive Toramāņa took place in Erap about 191 G.E.=510 A.D., and that the battle resulted in the Gupta Emperor being worsted and having to cede Malwa to the invader, Bhanu-Gupta was probably killed in action, as was his faithful ally Goparaja, and also perhaps Matri Vishnu; or, if Bhanu-Gupta survived, he is not likely to have survived long.
Thus from Skanda-Gupta to Bhanu-Gupta we have an unbroken line of succession. Where, then, is the place for Pura-Gupta of the Bhitari seal and his line? Mr. Allan and others have assumed that during the latter days of Skanda-Gupta, Pura-Gupta, his brother or half-brother, revolted and established an independent principality (Allan, Intro., Sec. 62). But where was this principality? We find Budha-Gupta implicitly obeyed from Malwa to Paundravardhana. Where is the place in which Para-Gupta or his successors were obeyed ?
Prof. Basak wrote (Ep. Ind., XV, p. 120): "But with our present stock of knowledge, it is not very easy to indicate the place where the branch line headed by Pura-Gupta may have raled; . . . . ... It may be believed that the rulers of the stronger branch may, by courtesy and in good-will, have suffered the other branch to rule somewhere in the eastern portion of the Gupta empire, perhaps in south Bihar."
Such courtesy to a branch whose origin was in revolt would be, to say the least, impolitic. The truth seems to be that Pura-Gupta was a child of four or five when Kumara-Gupta I died and Skanda-Gupta succeeded him on the throne, and that the child was brought up in the harem, as his name signifies. When the last king Bhanu-Gupta of the main line died, possibly without leaving any successor, this Gupta prince, the grand-uncle of the last two kings, who must now have reached an age of at least 60 years, was called to fill the vacant throne. If subsequent researches prove my inference to be correct, a tragedy like the crowning of Pura-Gupta has seldom happened in history.
Pura-Gupta cannot have reigned for more than a few years and the accession of his son Narasimha Gupta Baladitya may be dated in 196 G.E.=515 A.D. Mihirakula may have succeeded his father at Sakala about this time.
We know from Yuan Chwang that Mihirakula invaded the kingdom of Baladitya, who is called king of Magadha. In the war that ensued Mihirakula seems to have been taken
[These ressons are not quite convincing.-Ed.]
[This does not appear to be a reasonable inference. The author is evidently led to it by Pura, meaning a narem.-Ed.]
L 2
