Political History of Ancient India, from the Accession of Parikshit to the Extinction of the Gupta Dynasty c22.s3: Section III. Kumāra Gupta II and Vishnugupta
Political History of Ancient India, from the Accession of Parikshit to the Extinction of the Gupta Dynasty c22.s3
- Language
- English
Section III. Kumāra Gupta II and Vishnugupta
c22.s3.1
Kumāra Gupta II of the Bhitarī seal, son of Narasiṁha Gupta, has been identified with Kramāditya of certain coins of the Archer type that are closely connected with the issues of Narasiṁha Bālāditya. He is also identified with king Kumāra Gupta mentioned in the Sārnāth Buddhist Image Inscription of the year 154 G. E., *i.e.*, A.D. 473-74.¹ Drs. Bhaṭṭasālī, Basāk and some other scholars think that the Kumāra Guptas of the Bhitarī seal and the Sārnāth epigraph were distinct individuals. The former places Kumāra, son of Narasiṁha, long after A.D. 500.² But his theory is based upon the doubtful identification of Narasiṁha, with the conqueror of Mihirakula. According to Dr. Basāk Kumāra of the Sārnāth Inscription was the immediate successor of Skanda. In his opinion there were two rival Gupta lines ruling simultaneously, one consisting of Skanda, Kumāra of Sārnāth and Budha, the other comprising Puru, Narasiṁha and his son Kumāra of the Bhitarī seal. But there is not the slightest evidence of a partition of the Gupta empire in the latter half of the fifth century A.D. On the contrary inscriptions and coins prove that both Skanda and Budha ruled over the whole empire from Bengal to the West. We have already seen that according to the traditional account of the *Ārya-Mañjuśrī-mūla-kalpa* the kingdom of Bālākhya, *i.e.*, Bālāditya and his successor Kumāra embraced the *Pūrva-deśa* (Eastern India) including Gauḍa (Western and part of Northern Bengal).³ How can we reconcile the rule of these kings with the contemporary sovereignty of a rival line represented by Skanda and Budha?¹ There is no cogent reason for doubting the identity of Kumāra of the Bhitarī seal with his namesake of the Sārnāth inscription.
c22.s3.2
¹ See *ASI, AR*, 1914-15, 124, *Hindusthan Review*, Jan., 1918, *Ann. Bhand. Inst.*, 1918-19, 67 ff. and *JBORS*, iv, 344, 412, for the views of Venis, Pathak, Panday, Pannalall and others.
c22.s3.3
² *Dacca Review*, May and June, 1920, pp. 54-57.
c22.s3.4
³ *Ārya-Mañjuśrī-mūla-kalpa*, G. Sāstrī's ed., pp. 630 f.
c22.s3.5
¹ The seal of Budha Gupta (*MASB*, No. 66, p. 64) proves conclusively that Budha, far from belonging to a rival line, was actually a son of Puru Gupta. It also negatives the late date for Puru Gupta suggested by Dr. Bhaṭṭasālī.
c22.s3.6
Kumāra II's reign must have terminated in or about the year A.D. 476-77, the first known date of Budha Gupta.² The reigns of Puru, Narasiṁha and Kumāra II appear to be abnormally short, amounting together to only ten years (A.D. 467-77). This is by no means a unique case. In Veṅgī three Eastern Chālukya monarchs, *viz.*, Vijayāditya IV, his son Ammarāja I, and Ammarāja's son, another Vijayāditya, ruled only for seven years and six and a half months.¹ In Kaśmīra six kings, Sūravarman I, Pārtha, Saṁbhuvardhana, Chakravarman, Unmattāvanti and Sūravarman II, ruled within six years (A. D. 933-39); and three generations of kings, *viz.*, Yaśaskara, his uncle Varṇaṭa, and his son Saṁgrāmadeva ruled for ten years (A.D. 939-49). A fragmentary seal discovered at Nālandā refer to Kumāra's son **Vishṇu Gupta** who is probably to be identified with Chandrāditya of the coins.
c22.s3.7
² One of the successors of Kumāra (II), son of Bālāditya, is according to the *Ārya-Mañjuśrī mūla-kalpa*, a prince styled *Ukārākhya*. That appellation may according to Jayaswal apply to Prakāśāditya, for Allan finds the letters *ru* or *u* on his coins. But the identification of a prince whose designation was *u*, (*Ukārākhya*), with Budha Gupta (Jayaswal, *An Imperial History of India*, 38), does not seem to be plausible. The passage in the *Ārya-Mañjuśrī-mūla-kalpa* suggests a name like Upagupta, Upendra. Though there is no direct epigraphic evidence for the name Upagupta, the existence of such a prince does not seem to be improbable in view of the fact that an Upaguptā is mentioned in Maukhari records as the mother of Īśānavarman [Asīrgaḍh (Fleet, *CII*, p. 220) and Nālandā (*Ep. Ind.*, xxi, p. 74) seals]. *Cf.* Bhānu Gupta and Bhānu Guptā, Harsha Gupta and Harsha Guptā, Mahāsena Gupta and Mahāsena Guptā. On the analogy of these cases it is possible that there was a prince named Upagupta, apparently the brother of Upaguptā. If this surmise be correct Upagupta may have to be placed in the same period as the mother of Īśānavarman, *i.e.*, in the first half of the sixth century A.D., sometime after Budha Gupta. If *u* is the initial of Upendra (Vishṇu or Kṛishṇa) and not of Upagupta, it may refer to Vishṇu Gupta or to Kṛishṇa Gupta, just as Somākhya has reference to the Gauḍa king Saśāṅka. The existence of a son of Kumāra Gupta II named Mahārājādhirāja Śrī Vishṇu Gupta has recently been disclosed by a fragmentary seal at Nālandā (*Ep. Ind.*, xxvi. 235; *I.H.Q.*, XIX. 19). It is difficult in the present state of our knowledge to say whether he was the immediate successor of his father, or had to wait till the death of his great uncle Budha Gupta. Those who place him and his father *after* Budha Gupta, have to dissociate Kumāra of the Bhitarī and Nālandā seals from the homonymous prince of Sārnāth. This is not improbable but must await future discoveries for confirmation.
c22.s3.8
¹ Hultzsch, *SII*, Vol. I, p. 46.
Linked texts (1)
- Mañjuśrīmūlakalpa — Sanskrit