The Vakataka–Gupta Age (circa 200–550 A.D.) c3: Preface

The Vākāṭaka–Gupta Age (circa 200–550 A.D.) c3

Language: English

Preface

A few words are necessary to explain the scope and nature of the history narrated in the following pages. This volume covers the period *c.* 200 to 550 A.D. and is called the Gupta-Vākāṭaka age. The title of the volume was selected for the sake of convenience only. It is not claimed that the political or cultural achievements of the Vākāṭakas were comparable to those of the Guptas and sufficiently important to justify their association with the name of the age. Although this volume is intended to cover the period from *c.* 200 to 550 A.D., it has not always been possible to conform to these chronological limits. The history of the Western Kshatrapas commences with *c.* 160 A.D., as the death of Rudradāman I is a convenient starting point. The history of Ceylon begins with 66 A.D., as the dynasty that was founded at that time continued to rule practically to the end of our period. The history of the Maghas of Kauśāmbī is taken back to *c.* 150 A.D. when their house started its career, as it was found more convenient to deal with the whole history of the dynasty in one place. The careers of the Vishṇukuṇḍins and the Maitrakas began at about 500 A.D., and several independent kingdoms, notably those of Nepal and Assam, arose about the same time. Their early history is not discussed in this volume but reserved for full treatment in the next one dealing with the period when they played an effective part in Indian history. In the case of the Maukharis and Later Guptas, however, their early history to the end of our period is dealt with, as it was necessary to discuss it in connection with the decline of the Gupta empire. It has been recently suggested (*IHQ.* XXI, 19) that the kings of Assam were mainly instrumental in bringing about the downfall of the Guptas, but hardly any convincing evidence has been adduced to support so novel a hypothesis.

c3.3

The reader of the modern or mediaeval history, whether of India or Europe, will no doubt find the narrative of the political history in this volume rather meagre and sketchy. But in the present state of our knowledge it is not possible to give a fuller account. In spite of the discovery of a large number of coins, inscriptions and monuments, it has to be confessed that there are some dynasties in our period where even the names of most of its rulers are unknown to us. Such, for instance, is the case with the Nāgas of Mathura and the Ābhīras of northern Mahārāṣṭra. Sometimes we know the names of the kings of a dynasty, but are ignorant of their dates and inter-relations, as for example, the Later Kuṣāṇas and the early Pallavas. Sometimes the evidence is so indecisive that the historian cannot state with certainty whether a particular event did or did not occur, or whether a certain personage, *e.g.*, king Rāma-gupta, is or is not a historical figure. Sometimes the evidence is so scanty and dubious that it lends itself to diverse interpretations and the historian finds it difficult to choose between two or more possible alternatives. Such, for instance, is the case with the history of the successors of Skanda-gupta. If, therefore, the picture appears at places to be hazy, the account scanty and the discussions inconclusive, the fault lies primarily with the original sources and not the writers who have attempted to reconstruct the history. As a matter of fact, the first part of the period dealt with in this volume, *viz.*, 200 to 300 A.D., is usually known to be the 'Dark Period' of ancient Indian history. An effort has, however, been made to elucidate it as best as possible.

c3.4

On account of the paucity of evidence some of the dynasties, which ruled during our period, have only been incidentally referred to, but not treated in detail. As notable examples may be mentioned the Ābhīras and the Traikūṭakas. We possess some coins and a few inscriptions of the Traikūṭakas, but beyond the names of two or three kings we know hardly anything about them. The Ābhīras are known from a single inscription and a number of incidental notices. But though the foundation of the so-called Kalachuri era, commencing in 248-9 A.D., has been ascribed to them, and an attempt has been recently made (*ABORI*. XXV, 161) to show that they established an empire, our knowledge of them is still very meagre. The little that is definitely known about them will be found in the chapters dealing with the history of the Western Kshatrapas and the Vākāṭakas, with whom they had come into close contact (pp. 45, 112). This book, it should be remembered, is intended to be a general history, and not an encyclopaedic account of each and every dynasty that ruled in our period. This will also explain the absence of reference to some of the unimportant feudatories or obscure chieftains that belonged to our age.

c3.5

In a co-operative work of this kind, based upon data so vague and uncertain, it is almost inevitable that different writers, including the two editors, will express or at least entertain different opinions. In spite of long discussions between the two editors it was not possible to eliminate these differences altogether. Among important points on which they could not agree may be mentioned ‘the extent of the Vākāṭaka empire (pp. 90 ff.) and the view that Pravara-sena II of the main dynasty was the Kuntaleśa of the Kālidāsa tradition’ (p. 102, fn. 1), the struggle for independence waged by the Yaudheyas and others against the Kushāṇas (pp. 26 ff), and the relation between Piro and Rāma-gupta and specially the inference drawn from the coins of Piro about his character (pp. 20-21). Nor did complete agreement become possible with reference to the views expressed about the abdication of Chandra-gupta I (pp. 126-27), the precise western boundary of the empire of Samudra-gupta (p. 132), the assumption by him of the title *Vikrama* towards the end of his reign (p. 142), and the nationality of Toramāṇa (p. 182).

c3.6

A careful reader would come across other instances of this kind in the body of this work, clearly showing that where difference really exists, no attempt has been made, by dogmatic assertions, to accept one view as authoritative and final and reject the others.

c3.7

We are fully conscious of the defects and imperfections of this volume. Most of its chapters were written during the unusual circumstances created by the second World War, when some of our contributors were denied the facilities of good reference libraries, as many of them had removed important books for safety. The proofs also could not be sent to some of our contributors owing to want of time. The fact that this, the sixth volume of the series, had to be published before its predecessors has also created some peculiar difficulties particularly with reference to controversial points of the earlier periods, which have their bearing on our age as well. We could not also know how the earlier history of the various cultural movements treated in this volume would be dealt with by other writers in the preceding volumes. We have, however, tried our best to give as complete and comprehensive a picture of the political and cultural history of the age as was possible in a volume of about 500 pages. The political history with its wars and conquests is not allowed to dominate the scene; cultural history, describing the religion and philosophy, the social and economic condition, the literature and sciences, and the art and architecture of the age occupies almost equal space with the political history. Nor have we looked at the history of our country from the view-point of the isolationist. India's commercial, cultural and religious contacts with and influence upon its neighbours, both in the east and the west, have been adequately described.

c3.8

We wish to express our thanks to our contributors for their promptness in sending their promised chapters. We are indebted to Prof. K. A. Nilkanta Sastri, M.A., for supplying us some data from the Tamil literature, which have been utilised in the chapters dealing with the cultural history of the age. Mr. S.K. Sarasvati, M.A., has been of immense help in seeing the volume through the press and we are thankful to him for his care and assiduousness. And finally we have great pleasure in expressing our indebtedness to Sir Jadu Nath Sarkar for his valuable advice and suggestions.

c3.9

R. C. MAJUMDAR, A. S. ALTEKAR.