The Early History of the Deccan (Parts I–XI) v1.c8.s1.11

v1.c8.s1.11

The marriage of princess Prabhāvatīguptā, a daughter of the Gupta emperor Chandragupta II (c. A.D. 375 to 414), with Rudrasena II, the sixth king of the Vākāṭaka dynasty, supplies the only reliable clue in determining its chronology. Rudrasena II died young and there is clear evidence to show that his wife relied upon the assistance of her illustrious father during the trying years of a long regency which terminated in c. A.D. 410, when her surviving son Pravarasena II became old enough to take the reins of administration into his own hands. The birth of this prince may be placed in c. A.D. 390 during the short reign of Rudrasena II, c. A.D. 385 to 390. The father of Rudrasena II, Pṛthivīṣeṇa I, had a successful reign, which may be placed during the years c. A.D. 360 to 385. An expression used in connexion with this king shows that the Vākāṭaka dynasty had been ruling prosperously for about a century before his accession.¹ We may place its rise to power in c. A.D. 260. The founder of the dynasty, Vindhyaśakti, therefore probably ruled from c. A.D. 255 or 250 to c. 275. His son and successor, Pravarasena I, is identical with King Pravīra of the Purāṇas, which credit him with a long rule of sixty years.² There is sufficient evidence to show that the various statements which the Purāṇas make about this ruler are substantially correct; we can therefore accept the Paurāṇic tradition and assume that he ruled for sixty years, from c. A.D. 275 to 335. Gautamīputra, the eldest son of Pravarasena I, died before the long reign of his father came to an end; the latter therefore was succeeded by his grandson Rudrasena I, who may be presumed to have ruled from A.D. 335 to 360. We have already stated that Rudrasena’s son and grandson, Pṛthivīṣeṇa I and Rudrasena II, ruled from c. A.D. 360 to 385 and 385 to 390 respectively. Then followed the regency of Prabhāvatīguptā, the queen dowager, from c. A.D. 390 to 410, at the end of which her surviving son Pravarasena II assumed the full responsibility of administration. It may, however, be pointed out that the periods assigned to each of these six reigns are only tentative and it is not unlikely that future discoveries may lead to modifications, but these will not in any case be considerable. The chronology of the successors of Pravarasena II will be discussed later in the course of our account of their reigns.