The State in Ancient India: A Study in the Structure and Practical Working of Political Institutions in North India in Ancient Times c15.44

c15.44

Paramadaivata.¹ The later Godval Plates of Vikramâditya I, A.D. 674, state that one of his ancestors Pulakeśin I acquired the title of Parameśvara by defeating Harṣavardhana but in the same sentence Pulakeśin’s father is also called Parameśvara. So in the Deccan, too, the title must be held to be the ordinary symbol of independence and suzerainty.² The Mankuwar Stone Inscription of Kumâragupta, of the Gupta year 129 (=448-49 A.D.), calls him only a Mahârâja.³ But this solitary instance hardly constitutes an exception to the general rule of titles. If it is not an error, it may mean that the Gupta ruler had been forced at the time to bow to his enemies who, as we know for certain from other inscriptions, assailed him on all sides and reduced him to a sorry plight. He might have been compelled temporarily to acknowledge the overlordship of others. The character of the imperial titles was so well recognised that the Hun ruler Torâmaṇa styled himself a Mahârâjâdhirâja.⁴ His son Mihirakula, however, does not style himself so, perhaps because at the time of the inscription in question, he did not retain his independence.⁵ Later, sometimes the shorter form Bhaṭṭâraka was coupled with Mahârâjâdhirâja.⁶ In point of titles, the practice of the north was the same as that of the Deccan and the south.⁷ In later times, the title Bhaṭṭâraka could be used of feudatories,⁸ but such instances are not common. One of the Basâḍh seals has Yuvarâja Bhaṭṭâraka, which may mean the chief minister of the heir-apparent but which may also imply that the title Bhaṭṭāraka was sometimes applied to the heir-apparent. The consort of a suzerain was called Mahâdevî but the title was occasionally applied also to the consort of a Mahârâja.¹