Book Title: Political History Of Ancient India
Author(s): Hemchandra Raychaudhari
Publisher: University of Calcutta

Previous | Next

Page 571
________________ 542 POLITICAL HISTORY OF ANCIENT INDIA Now as Vyāghra of the Nāchnä and Ganj records acknowedges the supremacy of the Vākāțaka Prithivisheņa, this Prithivisheņa can only be Prithivisheņa I, who ruled before the establishment of the Gupta supremacy in Central India by Samudra Gupta and Chandra Gupta II" and not Prithivisheņa II during whose rule the Guptas, and not the Vākāțakas, were apparently the acknowledged suzerains of the Central Provinces as we learn from the records of the Parivrājaka Mahārājas:? The absence of any clear reference to Prithivishena I in Harisbeņa's Prašasti is explained by the fact that Samudra Gupta's operations were actually confined to the eastern part of Trans-Vindhyan India. There is no reliable evidence that the Gupta conqueror carried his arms to the central and western parts of the Deccan proper, i.e., the territory ruled by Prithivisheņa I himself. Professor Dubreuil has shown that the identification of Devarāshtra with Mahārāshtra and of Erandapalla with Erandol in Khandesh is probably wrong. Though Samudra Gupta did not invade the Western Deccan it is clear from his Era Inscription that he did deprive the Vākātakas of their possessions in Central India. These territories were not, however, directly governed by the Vākāțaka monarch, but were under a vassal prince. In the time of Prithivisheņa this prince was Vyāghra. We should naturally expect a conflict between the Vākāțaka feudatory and the Gupta and with the modern Padampur near Amgaon in the Bhandārā District of the Central Provinces. IHQ., 1935, 299; Ep. Ind. xxii, 207 ff. The Basim grant implies control of a branch of the family over the part of Berar south of the Ajanta range. 1 The Eran and Udayagiri Inscriptions. For evidence of Palaeography see JRASB, xii. 2. 1946. 73. 2 Cf. Modern Review, April, 1921, p. 475. For Dubreuil's views, see Ind. Ant., June, 1926. 3 Cf. Modern Review, 1921, p. 457. -

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714