Political History of Ancient India, from the Accession of Parikshit to the Extinction of the Gupta Dynasty c22.s3.1

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.