Book Title: Jignasa Journal Of History Of Ideas And Culture Part 01
Author(s): Vibha Upadhyaya and Others
Publisher: University of Rajasthan
View full book text
________________
Väkātaka Historiography as seen in the Beginning of the Twenty-first Century
/ 133
as regent upto circa 410, and then Pravarasena II ruled upto circa 440, Narendrasena upto circa 460 and Prthivishena II upto circa 480.
24. Cf. also his papers 'Were the Vākātakas Defeated by the Guptas in circa 350 A.D. ?", Indian Culture, IX, 1942-43.99-106; 'Some Alleged Näga and Vākätaka Coins', Journal of Numismatic Society of India, V, 1943, 111-34.
25. A. S. Altekar also wrote a chapter on the Vākātakas in The Early History of the Deccan, ed. by G. Yazdani, Oxford University Press, London, 1960. Its account of the political history of the Vākātakas is essentially similar to the one given in The Vākāțaka-Guptu Age.
26. Journal of Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal, Calcatta (L), XII, 1947, 1-5.
27. Ibid., pp. 71-72; ibid., XIII, ii, 1947, 75-79; Select Inscriptions, Vol. I, University of Calcutta: Calcutta, 2nd edn., 1965, 440, n. 2 and 3: The History and Culture of the Indian People, Vol. III: The Classical Age (CA), Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan: Bombay, 1954, 180-81.
28. In Political History of Ancient India H. C. Raychaudhuri briefly discusses the relations of the Gupta emperors with their contemporary Vākätaka kings. At least, that is the position in the sixth edition of the work published by the University of Calcutta in 1953. As the earlier editions of this work published respectively in 1923, 1927, 1931, 1938 and 1950 are not easily available, it is very difficult to know his earlier views on the subject.
29. CA, 177. 30. Ibid., 178. 31. Ibid., 179-80. 32. Ibid., 180.
33. K.A.N. Sastri, A History of South India.Oxford University Press: Madras, 1966, 107-10. For a critical assessment of K.A.Nilakanta Sastri's contribution to ancient Indian history vide Shankar Goyal, "Historiography of Professor K.A. Nilakantha Sastri, in Journal of Indian History and Culture, Vol. XII, Chennai, 2005, 36-50.
34. Also see Shankar Goyal, Recent Historiography of Ancient India, Kusumānjali Prakāshan: Jodhpur, 1997, 408.
35. Mirashi gives the following genealogy (with the approximate dates of accession): Vindhyasakti (250 A.D.), Pravarasena I (270 A.D.), Rudrasena I(330 A.D.). Prthivisenal (350 A.D.), Rudrasena II (400 A.D.), Diväkarasena (405 A.D.), Damodarasena-Pravarasena II (420 A.D.). Narendrasena (450 A.D.) and Pathivishena II (470 A.D.).
36. Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum. Vol. V: Inscriptions of the Vākātakas, Archaeological Survey of India: Ootacamund, 1963, xxii.
37. Ibid., xxxii. 38. S.R. Goyal, Gupta evan Samukālina Rajavarinsa, Central Book Depot: Allahabad, 1969, 345-46. 39. S.R. Goyal, A History of the Imperial Guptas (HIG ). Central Book Depot: Allahabad, 1967, 89-92.
40. Ibid., 41-46. On this suggestion of S. R. Goyal Joanna Gottfried Williams comments: "If Rudradeva of the inscription (that is, of the Pruvā ga prasasti of Samudragupta) can be identified with Rudrasena I, one must note that the Vākātakas alone in this first category soon returned to an independent status."(The Art of Gupta India, Heritage Publishers: New Delhi, 1983, 23, n. 5).
41. HIG, 246. 42. Ibid., 243-45. 43. Ibid., 256-57. 44. The chapter was apparently written much earlier than the date of the publication of the book.
45. We have also made some humble contribution in this field. For example, in one of our papers we have shown that the epigraphic data cited by scholars to prove the Gupta influence on the Vākāțaka court during the reign of Chandragupta II does not prove the point (Shankar Goyal, 'Chandragupta Il's Political Influence on the Vākātakas : Epigraphical Evidence Re-examined', in History and Archaeology (Professor H.D. Sankalia Felicitation Volume), ed. Bhaskar Chatterjee, Ramanand Vidya Bhawan: Delhi, 1989, 351-56; idem, in King Chandra and the Meharauli Pillar, eds. M. C. Joshi et al, Kusumanjali Prakashan: Meerut, 1989, 150-56). Later on, in 1997 Ajay Mitra Shastri expressed a similar view regarding the untenability of the suggestion that the Pune plates of Prabhāvatiguptă prove the Gupta influence on the Väkatakas (Vākāțakas: Sources and History, Aryan Books International: New Delhi, 1997. 182). Another contribution on our part to the subject has been an endowment lecture entitled The Vākātakas in the History of the Deccan: A Fresh Appraisal in the Light of Recent Discoveries and New Interpretations delivered
