गुप्त अभिलेख संग्रह (जे. एफ. फ्लीट - गुप्त सम्राटों एवं परवर्ती नरेशों के ऐतिहासिक पाषाण व ताम्रलेख)

CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM
Vol. III
INSCRIPTIONS OF THE EARLY GUPTA KINGS
AND THEIR SUCCESSORS
BY
JOHN FAITHFULL FLEET, C.I.E.,
OF H. M.'S BOMBAY COVENANTED CIVIL SERVICE ;
MEMBER OF THE ROYAL ASIATIC SOCIETY OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND
MEMBER OF THE BOMBAY BRANCH OF THE ROYAL ASIATIC SOCIETY ;
MEMBER OF THE ASIATIC SOCIETY OF BENGAL ;
CORRESPONDING MEMBER OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF SCIENCE, GOTTINGEN
FELLOW OF THE UNIVERSITY OF BOMBAY.
INDOLOGICAL BOOK HOUSE
ANTIQUARIAN BOOKSELLERS & PUBLISHERS
VARANASI (INDIA), 1960

Third Revised Edition
PUBLISHED BY RAMESHWAR SINGH FOR INDOLOGICAL BOOK HOUSE,
VARANASI (INDIA), PRINTED AT TODAY & TOMORROW'S
PRINTERS & PUBLISHERS, FARIDABAD (HARYANA)

PUBLISHER'S NOTE
As book-sellers specializing in oriental books we
have been facing great difficulties in procuring rare and
out of print books to meet growing demands of our custo-
mers. If a copy or two of a rare book could be obtained
with much strenuous efforts it was always on prohibitive
price. We, therefore, decided to re-publish some of the
very rare and useful books on the various subjects in the
field of Indology. We are conscious of our difficulties and
limitations in facing this stupendous task but we hope
this will be minimized through the co-operation of
those for whom we have undertaken this enterprize.
After we had already gone ahead with the work of re-
printing some of the books, we were able to get the advice
and help of Professor A. K. Narain, Head of the Depart-
ment of Ancient Indian History, Culture and Archaeology
of Banaras Hindu University, who has kindly agreed to
supervise such publications and to be the General Editor
of such works which belong to his general field of studies.

INSTRUCTIONS TO BINDER.
INSTRUCTIONS TO BINDER.
Plate i. a folding Plate between . . . . . . . . . pages 8, 9
. . . ii. to face . . . . . . . . . page 20
. . . iii. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
. . . iv. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
. . . v. . . . . . . . . . . . . : . 44
. . . vi. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 46
. . . vii. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
. . . viii. a folding Plate between . . . . . . pages 60, 61
. . . ix. to face . . . . . . . . . page 68
. . . x. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
. . . xi. a folding Plate between . . . . . . . . . pages 82, 83
. . . xii. to face . . . . . . . . . page 90
. . . xiii. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
. . . xiv. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
. . . xv. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
. . . xvi. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
. . . xvii. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
. . . xviii. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 128
. . . xix. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
. . . xx. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
. . . xxi A. & B. a folding Plate between . . . . . . pages 142, 143
xxi C. to face . . . . . . . . . page 150
. . . xxii. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
. . . xxiii. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
. . . xxiv. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
. . . xxv. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
. . . xxvi. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
. . . xxvii. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
. . . xxviii. a folding Plate between . . . . . . pages 204, 205
xxix. to face . . . . . . . . . page 210
. . . xxx. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220
. . . xxxi. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
. . . xxxii. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
. . . xxxiii. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234
. . . xxxiv. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240
. . . xxxv. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248
. . . xxxvi. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250
. . . xxxvii. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256
. . . xxxviii. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260
. . . xxxix. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264
. . . xl. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270
. . . xli. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276
. . . xlii. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280
. . . xliii. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284
. . xliv . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290

CONTENTS.
Preface . . . . . . Page 1
Introduction . . . . . . . . 7
The Gupta Era . . . . . . . 16
Table I.—Genealogy of the Early Gupta Kings . . . . 17
The Nomenclature of the Era . . . . . . 19
Albêrûnî's Statements, as rendered by M. Reinaud . . . . 23
Albêrûnî's Statements, as rendered by Prof. Sachau . . . . 24
The Results of the above Renderings . . . . . . 25
Albêrûnî's Statements, as rendered by Prof. Wright . . . . 27
The Theories based on M. Reinaud's rendering of Albêrûnî's Statements . . . 31
Examination of the previous Theories . . . . . . 33
Table II.—Genealogy of the Kings of Valabhî . . . . 41
The Mandasôr Inscription of Mâlava-Saṁvat 529 . . . . . 65
The Determination of the Exact Epoch of the Era . . . . . 69
The Scheme of the Gupta-Valabhî Year . . . . . . 69
Table III.—Comparative Table of the Vikrama, Śaka, and Gupta-Valabhî Years . . 71
The Calculation of Recorded Dates . . . . . . . 80
The Êraṇ Inscription of the year 165 . . . . . . . 80
The Verâwal Inscription of Valabhî-Saṁvat 945 . . . . . 84
The Verâwal Inscription of Valabhî-Saṁvat 927 . . . . . 90
The Kaira Grant of the year 330 . . . . . . . 93
The Nêpâl Inscription of the year 386 . . . . . . 95
The Mōrbî Grant of the year 586 . . . . . . . 97
The Use of the Twelve-Year Cycle of Jupiter in Records of the Early Gupta Period . . . 101
A.—The Khôh Grant of the year 156 . . . . . . . 104
Table IV.—The Saṁvatsaras of the Twelve-Year Cycle of Jupiter . . . 105
B.—The Khôh Grant of the year 163 . . . . . . . 110
C.—The Majhgawâṁ Grant of the year 191 . . . . . . 114
D.—The Khôh Grant of the year 209 . . . . . . . 117
E.—The Bhumarâ Pillar Inscription . . . . . . . 119
Summary of Results . . . . . . . . . 124
The Origin of the Era . . . . . . . . 130
Appendix I.—A Note on the Epoch and Reckoning of the Śaka Era . . . . 137
Appendix II.—A Method of Calculating the Week-Days of Hindu Tithis and the correspond-
ing English Dates. By Shankar Balkrishna Dikshit; Bombay Educational
Department . . . . . . . . 145
Explanation of Technical Terms . . . . . . 145
To find the Week-Day of a given Tithi . . . . . 149
Table V.—Calculation of the Week-Day of a given Tithi . . . . 151
Table VI.—The Times, after Sunrise, of the ending of a given Tithi . . . 157
Table VII.—Calculation of the English Date of a given Tithi . . . . 157
To find the English Date for a given Tithi . . . . . . 158
2b

iv CONTENTS.
Appendix III.—The Twelve-Year Cycle of Jupiter. By Shankar Balkrishna Dikshit; Bombay
Educational Department . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 161
Table VIII.—Regulation of the Names of the Saṁvatsaras from the Nakshatras . . . 163
Table IX.—Longitudes of the Ending-points of the Nakshatras . . . . . . 165
Table X.—Details of two Twelve-Year Cycles of Jupiter . . . . . . 167
Appendix IV—The Chronology of the Early Rulers of Nêpâl . . . . . . . . . 177
Table XI.—List of the Early Rulers of Nêpâl . . . . . . . . . 189
Appendix V.—System of Transliteration . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
TEXTS AND TRANSLATIONS.
THE EARLY GUPTA KINGS.
No 1 Plate i . . Allahâbâd posthumous pillar inscription of Samudragupta . . . . . . 1
. . 2 . . . ii A . . . Êraṇ inscription of Samudragupta . . . . . . . . 18
. . . 3 . . . ii B . . . Udayagiri cave inscription of Chandragupta II.—The year 82 . . . 21
. . . 4 . . . iii A . . . Mathurâ inscription of Chandragupta II. . . . . . . . . 25
. . . 5 . . . iii B . . . Sâñchî inscription of Chandragupta II.—The year 93 . . . . . . 29
. . . 6 . . . iv A . . . Udayagiri cave inscription of Chandragupta II. . . . . . . 34
. . . 7 . . . iv B . . . Gaḍhwâ inscription of Chandragupta II.—The year 88 . . . . . . 36
. . . 8 . . . iv C . . . Gaḍhwâ inscription of Kumâragupta . . . . . . . . 39
. . . 9 . . . iv D . . . Gaḍhwâ inscription of Kumâragupta.—The year 98 . . . . . . 40
. . . 10 . . . v . . . Bilsaḍ pillar inscription of Kumâragupta.—The year 96 . . . . . . 42
. . 11 . . . vi A . . Mankuwâr image inscription of Kumâragupta.—The year 129 . . . 45
. . 12 . . . vi B . . Bihâr pillar inscription of Skandagupta . . . . . . . . 47
. . 13 . . . vii . . Bhitarî pillar inscription of Skandagupta . . . . . . . . 52
. . 14 . . . viii . . Junâgaḍh rock inscription of Skandagupta.—The years 136, 137, and 138 56
. . 15 . . . ix A . . . Kahâum pillar inscription of Skandagupta.—The year 141 . . . . . . 65
. . 16 . . . ix B . . . Indôr plate of Skandagupta.—The year 146 . . . . . . 68
THE RULERS OF MALAVA.
. . . 17 . . . x . . . Gangdhâr inscription of Viśvavarman.—The year 480 . . . 72
. . . 18 . . . xi . . Mandasôr inscription of Kumâragupta and Bandhuvarman.—The
Mâlava years 493 and 529 . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
BUDHAGUPTA AND BHANUGUPTA.
. . 19 . . . xii A . . . Êraṇ pillar inscription of Budhagupta.—The year 165 . . . . . . 88
. . 20 . . . xii B . . . Êraṇ posthumous pillar inscription of Gôparâja.—The year 191 . . . 91
THE PARIVRAJAKA MAHARAJAS.
. . 21 . . . Nil . . . Khôh plates of the Mahârâja Hastin.—The year 156 . . . . . . 93
. . 22 . . . xiii . . . Khôh plates of the Mahârâja Hastin.—The year 163 . . . 100
. . 23 . . . xiv . . . Majhgawâm plates of the Mahârâja Hastin.—The year 191 . . . 106
. . 24 . . . xv A . . . Bhumarâ pillar inscription of the Mahârâjas Hastin and Śarvanâtha 110
. . 25 . . . xv B . . . Khôh plates of the Mahârâja Saṁkshôbha—The year 209 . . . . . . 112

CONTENTS.
THE MAHARAJAS OF UCHCHAKALPA.
No. 26 Plate xvi ... Kârîtalâî plates of the Mahârâja Jayanâtha.—The year 174 ... Page 117
.. 27 ... xvii ... Khôh plates of the Mahârâja Jayanâtha.—The year 177 ... 121
... 28 ... xviii ... Khôh plates of the Mahârâja Śarvanâtha.—The year 193 ... ... 125
... 29 ... xix A ... Khôh plate of the Mahârâja Śarvanâtha ... ... 129
... 30 ... xix B ... Khôh plate of the Mahârâja Śarvanâtha.—The year 197 ... 132
... 31 ... xx ... Khôh plates of the Mahârâja Śarvanâtha.—The year 214 ... ... 135
CHANDRA.
... 32 ... xxi A ... Mêharaulî posthumous pillar inscription of Chandra ... ... ... 136
YASODHARMAN AND VISHNUVARDHANA.
... 33 ... xxi B ... Mandasôr pillar inscription of Yaśôdharman .. ... ... 142
... 34 ... xxi C ... Mandasôr duplicate pillar inscription of Yaśôdharman ... ... ... 149
... 35 ... xxii ... Mandasôr inscription of Yaśôdharman and Vishṇuvardhana.—The
Mâlava year 589 ... ... ... ... ... ... 150
TORAMANA AND MIHIRAKULA.
... 36 ... xxiii A ... Êraṇ boar inscription of Tôramâṇa ... ... ... ... ... 158
... 37 ... xxiii B ... Gwâlior inscription of Mihirakula ... ... ... ... ... 161
THE KINGS OF VALABHI.
... 38 ... xxiv ... Mâliyâ plates of the Mahârâja Dharasêna II.—The year 252 ... ... 164
... 39 ... xxv ... Âlînâ plates of Śîlâditya VII.—The year 447 ... ... ... 171
THE RAJAS OF SARABHAPURA.
... 40 ... xxvi ... Âraṅg plates of the Râja Mahâ-Jayarâja ... ... ... ... 191
... 41 ... xxvii ... Râypur plates of the Râja Mahâ-Sudêvarâja ... ... ... ... 196
THE GUPTAS OF MAGADHA.
... 42 ... xxviii ... Aphsaḍ inscription of Âdityasêna ... ... ... ... ... 200
... 43 ... xxix A ... Shâhpur image inscription of Âdityasêna ... ... ... ... 208
... 44 } Nil ... Mandâr Hill inscriptions of Âdityasêna ... ... ... ... 211
... 45 }
... 46 ... xxix B ... Dêô-Baraṇârk inscription of Jîvitagupta II. ... ... ... 213
THE MAUKHARIS.
... 47 ... xxx A ... Asîrgaḍh seal of Śarvavarman ... ... ... ... ... 219
... 48 ... xxx B ... Barâbar Hill cave inscription of Anantavarman ... ... ... 221
... 49 ... xxxi A ... Nâgârjunî Hill cave inscription of Anantavarman ... ... ... 223
... 50 ... xxxi B ... Nâgârjunî Hill cave inscription of Anantavarman ... ... 226
... 51 ... xxxii A ... Jaunpur inscription of Îśvaravarman ... ... ... ... ... 228
THE KINGS OF KANAUJ
... 52 ... xxxii B ... Sônpat seal of Harshavardhana... ... ... ... ... 231
THE VAKATAKA MAHARAJAS.
.. 53 ... xxxiii A } Nachnê-kî-talâî inscriptions of the Mahârâja Prithivîshêṇa ... ... 233
... 54 ... xxxiii B }
... 55 ... xxxiv ... Chammak plates of the Mahârâja Pravarasêna II.—(For the seal,
see Plate xxxiii C.) ... ... ... ... 235
... 56 ... xxxv ... Siwanî plates of the Mahârâja Pravarasêna II.—(For the seal, see
Plate xxxii D.) ... ... ... ... ... ... 243

vi CONTENTS.
MISCELLANEOUS INSCRIPTIONS.
No. 57 Plate xxxvi A . . . Pahlâdpur pillar inscription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 249
. . . 58 . . . xxxvi B . . . Bijayagaḍh inscription of the Yaudhêyas . . . . . . . . . . . . 251
. . . 59 . . . xxxvi C . . . Bijayagaḍh pillar inscription of Vishṇuvardhana.—The year 428 . . . 252
. . . 60 . . . xxxvii . . . Spurious Gayâ plate of Samudragupta . . . . . . . . . . . . 254
. . . 61 . . . xxxviii A . . . Udayagiri cave inscription.—The year 106 . . . . . . . . . . . . 258
. . . 62 . . . xxxviii B . . . Sâñchî inscription.—The year 131 . . . . . . . . . 260
. . . 63 . . . xxxix A . . . Mathurâ image inscription.—The year 135 . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
. . . 64 . . . xxxix B . . . Gaḍhwâ inscription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264
. . . 65 . . . xxxix C . . . Kôsam image inscription of the Mahârâja Bhîmavarman.—The
year 139 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
. . . 66 . . . xxxix D . . . Gaḍhwâ inscription.—The year 148 . . . . . . . . . . . . 267
. . . 67 . . . xl A . . . Tuśâm rock inscription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269
. . . 68 . . . xl B . . . Dêôriyâ image inscription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271
. . . 69 . . . xl C . . . Kasiâ image inscription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 272
. . . 70 . . . xl D . . . Mathurâ image inscription.—The year 230 . . . . . . 273
. . . 71 . . . xli A . . . Bôdh-Gayâ inscription of Mahânâman.—The year 269 . . . . . . 274
. . . 72 . . . xli B . . . Bôdh-Gayâ image inscription of Mahânâman . . . . . . . . . 278
. . . 73 . . . xlii A . . . Sâñchî pillar inscription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279
. . . 74 . . . xlii B . . . Calcutta Museum image inscription . . . . . . . . . . . . 280
. . . 75 . . . xlii C . . . Sârnâth inscription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
. . . 76 . . . xlii D . . . Bôdh Gayâ image inscription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
. . . 77 . . . xliii A . . . Lâhôr seal of the Mahârâja Mahêśvaranâga . . . . . . . . . 282
. . . 78 . . . xliii B . . . Rôhtâsgaḍh seal-matrix of the Mahâsâmanta Śaśâṅkadêva . . . . . . 283
. . . 79 . . . xliii C . . . Sârnâth inscription of Prakaṭâditya . . . . . . . . . . . . 284
. . . 80 . . . xliv . . . Nirmaṇḍ plate of the Mahâsâmanta and Mahârâja Samudrasêna . . . 286
. . . 81 . . . xlv . . . Râjim plates of the Râja Tîvaradêva . . . . . . . . . . . 291
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301
Errata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349

PREFACE.
JUST half a century ago, in 1837, in the Jour. Beng. As. Soc. Vol. VI. p. 663, Mr.
James Prinsep, by whom the study of Indian archæology was first placed on a sound
and critical basis, indicated the necessity of systematically arranging the epigraphical
materials for the study of the ancient history of India, which were then being gradually
found to exist in considerable numbers; and also suggested the name which the collective
publication of them should bear, viz. Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum.
For nearly forty years, however, owing to the manner in which the collection and
publication of these epigraphical materials was left almost entirely to private enterprise, the
scheme lay dormant; until it was revived, about ten years ago, by General Sir Alexander
Cunningham, C.S.I., K.C.I.E., who in 1870 was selected by the Government of India for the
newly-created post of Director-General of the Archæological Survey of India, and who, in
1877, brought out the first volume of this series, under the title of Corpus Inscriptionum
Indicarum, Volume I., containing the Inscriptions of Asôka.
At the same time, he announced that, in the continuation of the series, Volume II.
would contain the Inscriptions of the Indo-Scythians and of the Satraps of Saurâshṭra, and
Vol.·III. the Inscriptions of the Guptas and of other contemporary dynasties of Northern
India. And, with the special sanction of the Secretary of State for India, in 1882 I was
selected for the newly-created post of Epigraphist to the Government of India, with the
primary duty of preparing the volume that was to contain the Inscriptions of the Early
Gupta Kings. I joined that appointment on the 17th January, 1883; and held it up to
the 4th June, 1886, when it was abolished.
At first sight, the principal task that lay before me seemed neither lengthy nor labori-
ous; it being understood that the necessary materials had already been fully collected,
and merely required to be critically examined and published. And the only practical diffi-
culty that then appeared to lie in my way. was, that, as the intended volume of Indo-
Scythian inscriptions, which had been entrusted to other hands and ought, for the proper
consideration in due chronological order of all the questions concerned, to have appeared
first, had not been previously published,—and, in fact, it has not even yet been issued,—
and their dates had not been determined beyond dispute, the all-important question of the
exact historical period to which the Early Gupta dynasty must be referred, would probably
still be left undecided, save by historical and other inferences and arguments which might
at any future time be proved, by further discoveries, to be unsound and erroneous.
a 5

2 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
My task, however, quickly assumed more ample proportions; for I found at once
that hardly any of the materials previously collected, in the shape of ink-impressions of
the original records on stone and copper, could be relied on for purposes of critical
editing; and much less for the reproduction in facsimile Plates, which must always be an
inseparable part of such researches, in order that scholars who cannot examine the original
records themselves, may nevertheless be in a position to check the published results that
are submitted to them. I found, in fact, that, with only eleven or twelve exceptions, it
was unavoidable that I should have fresh impressions prepared of all the materials through-
out; and also that, as far as might be practicable, I should examine the original stone-
records in situ, and the original copper-records by collecting them together again from the
various owners of them. The arrangements entailed much correspondence, and a great
deal of travelling, than which nothing is more obstructive of continuous and successful
literary work. And it was not until April, 1885, that I found myself in possession of the
last of the materials required by me, viz. an ink-impression and estampage of the Gang-
dhâr inscription of Viśvavarman, No. 17, page 72.
Meanwhile, of course, a certain amount of progress had been made in the preparation
of the Texts and Translations, and in the arrangement of the Plates and other subsidiary
work; subject always to the fact that no division of the work could be actually finished
off, until it should be known that there were no more materials to come in. And the delay
that was entailed by the necessity of collecting all the previously known materials afresh,
has proved to be no matter for regret; if only for the reason that it enabled me to obtain,
amongst other perfectly new materials, the invaluable Mandasôr inscription, No. 18, page
79, which furnished the information that was required, to set at rest the long-disputed
question of the epoch of the Gupta era. This inscription was only discovered, under my
direction, in March, 1884; and even then the full value of it was not apparent, in conse-
quence of some serious imperfections in the ink-impressions that were first brought to me.
I myself visited Mandasôr at the end of February, 1885; and was then able to examine
this record in situ, and to have proper ink-impressions of it made; and thus to ascertain
its full and conclusive bearing. And it was on this journey that, for the first time, by visiting
Ujjain, I became aware of the almost equally important inscription of Yaśôdharman and
Vishnuvardhana, No. 35, page 150, which gave the key to the whole history of the period,
by supplying a definite date for Yaśôdharman, who was known, from the Mandasôr
inscription, No. 33, page 142, discovered under my direction in March, 1884, to have
overthrown the well-known foreign invader and conqueror, Mihirakula, who, again, I had
previously determined, must have effected the final downfall of the Early Gupta dynasty.
Without these discoveries, the period of the Early Gupta supremacy would have still
remained the subject of argument and doubt. Whereas, with them, I have been able now to
set this question at rest, and thus to establish a starting-point from which we can work back
in developing the Indo-Scythian history; and, also, through fixing, for the first time,

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS; PREFACE. 3
the date of Mihirakula,—who, as we learn from the writings of the Chinese pilgrim
Hiuen Tsiang, played a most leading and important part in early Indian history,—to furnish
the means of adjusting the chronology, before and after him, of the early history of Kaśmîr,
as recorded in the Râjataramgiṇî, and also of testing the accuracy of the Chinese accounts
of the same early period.
The collection of the required materials having been at length completed, the next
step was the preparation of the photo-lithographic facsimile Plates. And this was one of
the most special divisions of the work. My object throughout has been, to place before
my readers, in these Plates, as good substitutes, as can possibly be provided, for the ori-
ginal records; in order that they may be in a position to satisfy themselves as to the
correctness or otherwise of my readings, and, on any doubtful points, to adopt any im-
provements which future researches may indicate. Any lithographs prepared from hand-
tracings, eye-copies, or any similar materials, or even from mechanical impressions subse-
quently worked up by hand, are, of course, of absolutely no value whatever for critical pur-
poses; for the reason that, no matter what amount of personal learning, skill, and care, may
be brought to the work, the results are, not facsimiles of the original records as they really
stand, but only facsimiles of those records as they have presented themselves to the eye of
the individual reader of them; and, as long as such pseudo-facsimiles are the only substi-
tutes available, so long there cannot cease to be varieties of opinion, and doubts and specu-
lation, as to what the readings might be found to be, if the originals could be examined
again in situ. To avoid anything of this kind, such of the ink-impressions as have been
prepared under my own direction, i.e. all save eleven or twelve in the whole series, have
been made with the most particular care, by purely mechanical means, by a man whom I
have for a long time employed on such work, and who has attained considerable proficiency
in it. And, by special sanction, the reproduction of them was made over to the well-
known Photo-lithographic Establishment of Mr. W. Griggs, at Peckham, in which a good
deal of work of the same kind had been previously turned out; and I was allowed to
proceed to England, in order to superintend this part of the work in person. My own
share here has simply been to see that the photo-lithographic reproduction was a faithful
and mechanical process throughout; but this, of course, entailed the minute examina-
tion of two or three Proofs of each Plate, up to the final printing, in order to guard against
the occasional distortion and blocking-up of letters, which is always liable to occur in
reproducing such materials; and anyone, who has had practical experience, will know
that careful supervision of such work takes up no little time. The results, however, have
fully compensated for all the time and trouble that were spent in attaining them. And,
with the valuable co-operation given by Mr. Griggs himself, through the personal interest
which he takes in the reproduction of inscriptions, I am now able to submit to my readers
a series of as absolutely faithful reduced facsimiles, as could possibly be prepared, of the
original inscriptions and all their surroundings.

• B*

4 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
This part of the work was finished in December, 1885. I then returned to India, to
complete the volume; and the Texts and Translations were ready for the Press at the end of
May, 1886; though not quite in the same form throughout, in which they now appear. It
was, however, then found that a number of accented types had to be prepared specially for
this volume; and, owing to this and other causes, the first proofs were not fairly in hand
till the following November. That they were so far started then, and that the work has
progressed so quickly since then, is due to the friendly and earnest personal co-operation
of Messrs. E. J. Dean and A. Sanderson, the Superintendent and Deputy-Superintendent
of Government Printing, India, in whose office the volume has been printed; and I think I
may fairly say that the volume gives a most excellent specimen of the style in which, under
intelligent direction, the printing of large and important books can be done in India. I would
also acknowledge here much assistance given by my friend, Mr. W. Rees Philipps, in read-
ing the final proofs; as, since the commencement of the printing, I have never been less than
five days distant from the Press by post, and have been part of the time in England, the
assistance given by him on the spot, in Calcutta, has been most valuable in saving time.
The printing of the Texts and Translations was completed in July, 1887. And the delay
since then is due to the large amount of important matter, which, while they were being
taken through the Press, I found myself in a position to include in the Introduction.
It will doubtless be remarked that, in the notes to my Texts, I have but seldom re-
ferred to the readings given in previously published versions of the same inscriptions. It
soon became apparent to me that, to make any such references throughout, would increase
the bulk of the book to at least twice what it now is, and encumber the pages of it with
hundreds of footnotes of not the slightest practical value. I therefore abandoned, almost
at starting, any idea of such a course; considering that the point was one which could
interest only a very limited class of readers, and that, by giving in the introduction to
each Text every reference that I could find to previous versions of it by other hands, I
should afford those few special readers every facility for making any comparisons that
might be necessary; and I have confined myself to noting previous mislections, only when
they have had a bearing upon some historical name or other point of special importance.
I offer my present versions of the Texts, not as absolutely final ones throughout, but as
the most reliable ones that have as yet been produced; and as rendering possible now, for
the first time, a thoroughly critical start in all the lines of research connected with the
epigraphical materials of the period with which I have dealt. To take one special line
as an instance,—it is only now that we are beginning to know properly the correct pro-
cesses by which Hindu dates may be converted into their English equivalents. Much, in
connection with this, still remains to be made known. And, as our knowledge advances,
many improvements will undoubtedly be made in the interpretation, for instance, of
numerical symbols, and of the other particular details of recorded dates. As an apposite
instance, I would refer to note 2 on page 274. In this line, as in any other, I shall be only

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS: PREFACE. 5
too thankful for any suggestions that may be made to me, with a view to improvements in
any future edition.
A serious obstacle, hitherto, in the prosecution of epigraphical researches, has been
the want of full and systematic indexes. To the Index of the present volume, special
attention has been given; in order that it shall include an easy reference to anything
in this series of inscriptions that can bear on any of the lines of research connected with
epigraphy. And, to this point, I trust that full attention will be paid, in future volumes of
this series by other hands.
The original sanction for this volume, limited by the heavy cost of the Plates, was for
two hundred and fifty copies. Towards the end of my work, however, many gratifying
intimations came from England, the Continent, and India, that the book was likely to be
far more popular, and a far more general subject of study, than even I myself had ever
anticipated. Under these circumstances, there has now been printed an additional issue
of two hundred and fifty copies, without Plates, and thus procurable at a moderate price.
The copies of this issue, of course, contain everything that is essential for general readers.
And the complete copy, with Plates, in the nearest Public Library, Society's Rooms, or
College, will always furnish special students with the means of prosecuting inquiries on
particular points of interpretation of the original texts.
As I have indicated above, the volume does not appear in quite the form in which it
was originally prepared for the Press. It will not be thoroughly complete, without the
Historical Chapters that should form the second part of it. These however could not
be even drafted to any considerable extent, until the Texts and Translations were
all in print, in order to facilitate constant reference and quotation. And the writing
of the Historical Chapters will entail so enormous an amount of miscellaneous reading and
annotation, for the purpose of tracing to their origin, in order to explain and completely
refute, all the erroneous theories, in every connected line of inquiry, which have been
started during the last fifty years in order to support any epoch rather than the correct
one, that, having now again to give all my principal attention and energy to the ordinary
duties of official life in the Revenue Department, I doubt much whether those chapters
will ever be written by me. It has, in fact, been difficult enough for me to finish, to my
satisfaction, even the present part of the volume. I have, therefore, taken advantage of
the delay in printing, to incorporate in this part of the volume a variety of notes and
remarks which I should have preferred keeping back for the Historical Chapters. They
will, however, I think, be found to be not altogether misplaced; even if I may subsequently
have to modify the views expressed in some of them.
Another point in which the delay in publication has been turned to even greater
dvantage, is in respect of the valuable matter which I have been able to include in
the Introduction through the kind co-operation of Mr. Shankar Balkrishna Dikshit, of

6 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
the Bombay Educational Department. It was only at the end of December, 1886, that I
made his acquaintance. But, since then, he has been most assiduous in making all the
astronomical calculations, which were suggested by me to him as each new point deve-
loped itself in the special inquiries that, through his assistance, became possible. Two
of his papers will be given in full in Appendices II. and III.; and the first of them will be
found to explain thoroughly the process by which, with the late Professor Kero Lakshman
Chhatre's Tables, anyone may now be able to calculate correctly the week-day, and the
corresponding English date, for any given Hindu tithi or lunar day. The second point to
which he has given his attention, is the elucidation of the system of the Twelve-Year
Cycle of Jupiter, the years of which form so important a part in some of the records of the
Early Gupta period. I find it impossible to over-estimate the work which he has done
for me during the short period of our acquaintance. His assistance has been simply
invaluable. Without it, I must have left all these subsidiary points for future deter-
mination; and must, of course, have left the all-important subject of the epoch of the
Gupta era still open, within the limits of one year before and after the true date, to doubt
and argument. With it, I am now able to prove everything that I have sought to establish,
from the time when I first became aware of the full purport of the Mandasôr inscription
that gives the date of Kumâragupta and Bandhuvarman; and to present my case, as will
be seen, in a thoroughly complete and satisfactory form.
J. F. FLEET.

INTRODUCTION.
BEFORE entering on the leading subject of this Introduction,—the determination of
the epoch of the so-called Gupta era,—I would give a brief account of the scope
of the book, and the arrangement of its contents.
The leading records are, of course, those of the Early Guptas themselves;¹ from
No. 1, the Allâhâbâd posthumous stone pillar inscription of Samudragupta, down to
No. 16, page 68, the Indôr copper-plate grant of Skandagupta, who, as far as we know
at present, was the last of the direct line of the Early Gupta dynasty. The actual dates
of these records extend from A.D. 401 to A.D. 466.
To the same period belong the two inscriptions of the Rulers of Mâlava; No. 17,
page 72, the Gaṅgdhâr inscription of Viśvavarman, dated² in A.D. 424; and No. 18, page
79, the Mandasôr inscription, dated in A.D. 474, which gives us the date of A.D. 437
for Kumâragupta and his feudatory, Bandhuvarman; and, in doing so, has supplied what
was always felt to be the most urgent desideratum, viz. a date, for any one of the Early
Gupta kings, recorded in a standard era, capable of identification, other than the era which
was habitually used by the Early Guptas themselves. With the exception of a few among
the Miscellaneous Inscriptions, to be noticed hereafter, No. 17 is the last record that
belongs specifically to the Early Gupta dynasty.
But, shortly after the time of Skandagupta, we meet with the two names of Budha-
gupta and Bhânugupta, with the dates of respectively A.D. 484, in No. 19, page 88,
and A.D. 510, in No. 20, page 91. And, coupled with the fact that, in the inscriptions
of the Parivrâjaka Mahârâjas, the Gupta sovereignty is distinctly stated to have continued
down to A.D. 528, the termination of these names raises at least a presumption that
these two kings were of the Early Gupta lineage, though possibly not connected by direct
descent with Skandagupta. Budhagupta comes, chronologically, immediately after
Skandagupta. Bhânugupta comes somewhat later; after Tôramâṇa, whose power mean-
while succeeded that of Budhagupta in Eastern Mâlwa. But, under all the circumstances,
¹I call the members of this family the "Early Guptas," by way of easily distinguishing them from
the later Guptas of Magadha, whose genealogy is given in the Aphsaḍ inscription, No. 42, page 200,
and in the Dêô-Baraṇârk inscription, No. 46, page 213.
²In respect of these three dates, I follow here the equivalents that I have given in my introduc-
tory remarks to the two inscriptions. But, when the proper value of expired years of the Mâlava or
Vikrama era can be determined, perhaps it may be found that these three dates, and any others of the
same series, are each one year earlier than as at present given by me.

8 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
the most convenient arrangement has been, to place the record which mentions him, next
after that of Budhagupta.
In No. 21, page 93, down to No. 25, page 112, we have some inscriptions, ranging
from A.D. 475 to A.D. 528, which overlap, on one side, the time of Budhagupta, and
on the other, the periods of Tôramâṇa, Bhânugupta, and Mihirakula. They are the re-
cords of a feudatory family, to the members of which it is convenient to give the name of
the **Parivrâjaka Mahârâjas.**¹ And the extreme importance of them lies in the fact
that they expressly shew that, though the direct line of the Early Gupta dynasty itself
may have become extinct, the Gupta dominion still continued, and the name of the
Gupta kings was still recognised as a power, down to A.D. 528. Another very special
feature in them, as will be seen, is the use of the Twelve-Year Cycle of Jupiter, in the
records of the dates. As will now be shewn for the first time, this point really furnishes
most valuable corroboration, if not actually independent and conclusive proof, of my
general results as to the exact year from which the dates of the Early Guptas and their
successors run.
Closely connected with the preceding, both chronologically and territoriahy, was
another family, that of the Mahârâjas of Uchchakalpa, whose records we have in
No. 26, page 117, to No. 31, page 135; with also a mention of one member of this family,
the Mahârâja Śarvanâtha, in No. 24, page 110, which proves that, at the date therein
referred to, he was the contemporary of the Parivrâjaka Mahârâja Hastin. And the
recorded dates of this family, if referred to the Gupta era, range from A.D. 493 to 533-34.
That this is the proper interpretation of the dates, was assumed by General Cunningham
who first brought all the Uchchakalpa grants, save one, to notice.² And my own view has
been the same. But a later consideration of the question shewed that there are a few
points in the inscriptions, which, if the existence of the Kalachuri or Chêdi era, as a
separate era, could be satisfactorily established, render it possible that these dates are
recorded, not in the Gupta era, but in the Kalachuri era; which, even with General
Cunningham's proposed epoch³ of A.D. 249-50, would suit all the requirements almost
as well as the Gupta era, and, with an epoch about twenty-five or thirty years later, would
suit them much better. Thus, in particular, the understanding that, while the Parivrâjaka
Mahârâjas were feudatories of later members of the Early Gupta dynasty, the Mahârâjas of
Uchchakalpa, whose territories evidently lay more to the east and south-east, were feuda-
tories of Kalachuri kings, would explain at once why no era is quoted in the Bhumarâ
pillar inscription, No. 24, page 110; the reason being that the feudatories of the two rival
dynasties could not agree as to which of the two rival eras should be used. Again, this
same record shews that the Mahârâjas Hastin and Śarvanâtha were contemporaneous in the
Mahâ-Mâgha saṁvatsara that is mentioned in it. Now, for Hastin we have the extreme dates
¹ See page 95, note 1. ² Archæol. Surv. Ind. Vol. IX. p. 9 ff. ³ See Indian Eras, p. 60 ff.

of Gupta-Saṁvat 156 and 191; and for Śarvanâtha, the extreme dates of the years 193 and
214, with the year 177 as the latest known date for his father Jayanâtha. And, as it is un-
likely that Hastin continued alive and in power for any length of time after Gupta-Saṁvat
191, it seemed, on the supposition that both the series of dates were to be referred to
the Gupta era, that the Mahâ-Mâgha saṁvatsara in question was the one commencing in
Gupta-Saṁvat 189, rather than that commencing in Gupta-Saṁvat 201; since, the former
was easily obtained by adding only four years at the commencement of the period
for Śarvanâtha; whereas, to obtain the latter, we should have to add on ten years at
the end of Hastin's already long enough period of thirty-six years. On the other
hand, the Mahâ-Mâgha saṁvatsara occurred previously, in Hastin's period, in Gupta-Saṁ-
vat 165 and 177. If the Uchchakalpa dates were referred to the Kalachuri era, with
General Cunningham's epoch of A.D. 249-50, Śarvanâtha's latest date the year 214, would be
equivalent to A.D. 463-64, or Gupta-Saṁvat 144; and we should have to add on twenty-
one years at the end of his known period, in order to make him the contemporary of Hastin
in Gupta-Saṁvat 165. Whereas, if an epoch could be found for the Kalachuri era about
twenty-five years later than that proposed by General Cunningham, the two Mahârâjas
would be naturally contemporaneous in Gupta-Saṁvat 165 or A.D. 484-85. By calculation,
however, Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit found that, though General Cunningham's proposed
epoch might be very close to the real truth, yet it was certainly not the absolutely correct
one. Also, though he found that nearly all of the ten Kalachuri or Chêdi dates, given by
General Cunningham,¹ would work out correctly with an epoch of A.D. 248-49, or just
one year earlier than that proposed by General Cunningham, yet both he and I felt that the
available data, in the shape of the published readings and lithographs of the dates,
were not sufficiently reliable for any definite theory to be built up on the results obtained by
him. Again, if the Kalachuri era really existed in that early time,²—in which case,
of course, there were then actually kings of the Kalachuri dynasty,—it seemed strange that
no distinct reference should be made to the dynasty in the Allahâbâd pillar inscription,
which, with much minuteness of detail, claims for Samudragupta the conquest of the whole
earth;³ especially since the Mahâkûṭ pillar inscription of the Early Chalukya king

¹ Indian Eras, p. 61.
² I do not overlook the 'Pardi' grant of the Traikûṭaka Mahârâja Dahrasêna (Jour. Bo. Br. R.
As. Soc. Vol. XVI. p. 346 ff.), which is dated in the year 207 of an unspecified era; or the Kaṇheri plate
(see No. 10 of the separate publications of the Archæological Survey of Western India, p. 57 ff.),
which is dated "in two centuries of years, increased by forty-five, of the augmenting sovereignty of
the Traikûṭakas." But it still has to be proved, either, on general grounds, that the era of these two
records, is the Kalachuri era; or that the Trikûṭa whence these Traikûṭakas derived their name,
is identical with Tripura or Tripurî, the capital of the Kalachuris of Central India.
³ Prinsep, indeed (see, for instance, Prinsep's Essays, Vol. I. p. 237), found the possible mention
of a Tripura in the Kartṛipura which is spoken of in line 22 of this inscription. But he would have
identified it with the modern 'Tipperah.' And the immediate connection of Kartṛipura, in the
inscription, with Samataṭa or, Lower Bengal, Ḍavâka (? 'Dacca,' if the correct spelling really is
Ḍâkâ), Kâmarûpa or Assam, and Nêpâl, shews that the place was indeed very far away from Central
India.

10 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
Mangalîśa¹ shews that the dynastic name was very well established in at least the sixth
century A.D., and mentions it under the Sanskritised form of Kalatsûri. As, however, the
Kalachuris, in their later records, represent themselves as descendants of Sahasra-Arjuna
or Sahasrabâhu-Arjuna,² the required reference to them in the Allahâbâd inscription might
be found in the Ârjunâyanas, who are mentioned in line 22; and no special objection need
be taken on that ground. The real difficulty was to prove that the Kalachuri era, and, with
it, sovereigns of the Kalachuri dynasty, really existed in early times; and that the era
was not merely one of somewhat later invention, fitted to an early epoch. But, since the
time when I first drafted the preceding remarks, Prof. Kielhorn has determined, quite
recently,⁴ that, if we only take three of the ten dates in question as denoting expired years,
all the dates will work out correctly with the epoch of A.D. 248-49. It is, therefore, really
a question for consideration whether the Mahârâjas of Uchchakalpa were not indeed
feudatories of early kings of the Kalachuri dynasty; and whether the dates of their records
do not furnish the earliest instances of the use of the Kalachuri era. Unfortunately, these
Uchchakalpa dates do not contain details for computation; and the question, accordingly,
cannot at present be decided in that way.
The inscriptions contain various hints as to the causes which led to the downfall of
the Early Gupta sovereignty. But, looking round on all these intimations, with the
help of extraneous information, the person who accomplished their final extinction seems
ndoubtedly to have been the great king Mihirakula, of Śâkala in the Pañjâb, and subse-
quently of Kaśmîr, whose career in India is so graphically described by the Chinese pilgrim
Hiuen Tsiang. Among epigraphical records, his name had long been extant, though it
had not been recognised, in an inscription at Gwâlior, No. 37, page 161, where it occurs as
the name of a son of Tôramâṇa. I myself, when I first recognised the word as a proper
name, took it to be the appellation of a second Mihirakula, given in memory of his father
Tôramâṇa's former lord and master. The first discovery that militated against this view,
was, my finding that the great Mihirakula himself is mentioned in the Mandasôr duplicate
pillar inscriptions, No. 33, page 142, and No. 34, page 149, as having been overthrown by
a powerful king of Northern India named Yaśôdharman; shortly after which I obtained for
Yaśôdharman the date of A.D. 533-34, in the Mandasôr inscription, No. 35, page 150.
From certain details in their Êraṇ inscriptions, it was evident that Tôramâṇa came, in
Eastern Mâlwa, very shortly after Budhagupta; the proof of this is that Budhagupta's
inscription mentions a certain Mahârâja named Mâtṛivishṇu, and his younger brother
Dhanyavishṇu, as being both then alive; whereas Tôramâṇa's inscription mentions
Dhanyavishṇu as still alive, but Mâtṛivishṇu as deceased; and these statements shew that
Tôramâṇa followed Budhagupta, in Eastern Mâlwa, within the remnant of the generation
¹ See my Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts, pp. 22, 58
² Ind. Ant. Vol. XII. p. 250, line 16. ³ Archæol. Surv. Ind. Vol. IX. p. 92, verse 7.
⁴ See the Academy of the 10th December, 1887, p. 394 f.

to which the brothers Mâtṛivishṇu and Dhanyavishṇu belonged. Putting everything
together, in writing my paper on "The History and Date of Mihirakula,"¹ it soon became
perfectly clear that the king who is mentioned in the Gwâlior inscription, is the great
Mihirakula himself; that he was the son of Tôramâṇa; and that his downfall was accom-
plished by Yaśôdharman within a very few years on either side of A.D. 533-34. In proper
chronological order, therefore, Tôramâṇa and Mihirakula come next after Budha-
gupta; and Tôramâṇa certainly, and probably Mihirakula also, so far as Eastern Mâlwa
is concerned before Bhânugupta. Plate xxiii A. and B. should, therefore, properly have
been placed next after Plate xx. To my present brief notice of these two kings,—who
belonged to a foreign race, which, whether best and most properly known as Indo-Scythians,
Sakas, Hûṇas, Turushkas, Shâhis, Shâhanushâhis, or Daivaputras, had established itself
in the Pañjâb at an early date, and continued in power down to at least the time of
Samudragupta,—I will only add that, the first year of Tôramâṇa, which is recorded in his
inscription. and which fell for certain after A.D. 484, which is Budhagupta's inscrip-
tional date, and before A.D. 510, which is Bhânugupta's inscriptional date, is evidently
only the first year of his possession of Eastern Mâlwa. Coming down, as he did, from
the extreme north-west corner of India, it is impossible that we should suddenly find him,
fully established as the first of a new dynasty, in the very heart of the Gupta country, in
absolutely the first year of his reign. His own dynastic date, which must correspond to
just about the same year, is given in his silver coins, which follow the Early Gupta silver
coins in general style, but differ from them in certain marked peculiarities that were evi-
dently introduced for the express purpose of shewing that his power was hostile to theirs,
and had superseded it. There are two excellent specimens of his coins, which I have
examined, in the British Museum; and the date on them is the year 52 or 82, in numerical
symbols. General Cunningham² has read the dates as 52 and 53; but the second symbol
in each case is certainly 2; as regards the first symbol, I will not at present give a final
opinion as to whether it is 50 or 80; since, though probably a 50, it is possibly an 80,
turned half round on the die, so as to lie vertically, instead of horizontally, in order that it
might not fall chiefly beyond the edge of the coin. Without doubt, it would make the
case very simple indeed, if we could read the date as 182, as Mr. Thomas did,³— or
even read it as 82, and, on the theory of "omitted hundreds," interpret it as 182,— and
refer it to the Gupta era, with the result, now, of A.D. 501-502. But the date is either
52 or 82, and nothing else; without the slightest grounds for supposing that the symbol
for 100 was stamped, but has now become obliterated, or was engraved on the die, but, in
the stamping, fell beyond the edge of the coin; and, if it has to be interpreted as 152,
on the theory of "omitted hundreds," then at any rate it cannot possibly be referred

¹ Ind. Ant. Vol. XV. p. 245 ff.
² Archæol. Surv. Ind. Vol. IX. p. 26 f.; and see id. Plate v. Nos. 18, 19.
³ Prinsep's Essays, Vol. I. p. 340, and Archæol. Surv. West. Ind. Vol. II. p. 66; see also id.
p. 36, Plate vii. Nos. 27, 28.

12 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
to the Gupta era. I have shewn elsewhere¹ that Mihirakula's fifteenth year, which is
recorded in his Gwâlior inscription, must fall somewhere very close to A.D. 533-34, which
is the recorded date of Yaśôdharman ; and in all probability a year or two before it ; so
that we shall be very near the mark, if we select A.D. 515 for the commencement of his
career. If, then, the date on Tôramâṇa's coins is 52, and if we apply it as his regnal date,
about which there need be felt no special difficulty, Tôramâṇa's reign must have com-
menced, roughly, about A.D. 460. This falls very near the latest date, A.D. 466, that
we have for Skandagupta, who, up to A.D. 457-58, held the whole of Northern India, below
the Pañjâb, from Kâṭhiâwâḍ to the frontier of Nêpâl. And it was doubtless the death of
Skandagupta, that enabled the Hûṇas, who had been repulsed by him, to assume the
aggressive again, under the leadership of Tôramâṇa ; and, on this occasion, with such
success as to hold even Central India for a short time. This view is also in perfect
accordance with the statement of the Valabhî inscriptions,² that it was the founder of their
family, the Sênâpati Bhaṭârka ; with the date of about A.D. 500, who successfully
fought, in Kâṭhiâwâḍ, against the Maitrakas, i.e. the Mihiras, i.e. the particular family or
clan, among the Hûṇas, to which Tôramâṇa and Mihirakula belonged. If, on the other
hand, the date on Tôramâṇa's coins is 82, then it cannot be applied as a regnal date ; and,
though it must then run from the period at which his own branch of the Hûṇas rose to
power, it cannot be used to fix the commencement of his own accession. The general
outline of the history of the period, which I have briefly indicated above, would, however,
remain much the same.
To some time or other in this early period belongs the mysterious emperor Chandra,
of whom we have a posthumous record in the iron pillar inscription at Mêharaulî, No. 32,
page 139. I call him mysterious, because, though the inscription speaks of him as a
powerful supreme monarch, who conquered the whole of Northern India, from beyond
the river Indus down to the plains of Bengal, yet it makes no mention of his lineage, and
gives no clue by which we can determine exactly his period and surroundings. All that
we know for certain, is, that his inscription belongs, on palæographical grounds, to a
fairly early date. In the palæography of it, there is, in fact, no real obstacle to our
allotting it to Chandragupta I., the first paramount sovereign in the Early Gupta family ;
and the only objection that I can see, is, that it contains no reference to the Indo-Scythi-
an kings, unless they are here called Vâhlikas, by overthrowing whom Chandragupta I.
must have established the power of his own family. But there is an interesting point in
the fact that the name of the village at which this inscription stands, viz. Mêharaulî or
Mêṁharaulî, is an evident corruption of Mihirapurî, 'the city of the Sun, or of the Mihiras.'
Mihira, as a proper name, is a Saṁskṛitised form of the name of the family, clan, or tribe
among the Hûṇas, to which belonged Mihirakula and his father Tôramâṇa. And it is not

¹ Ind. Ant. Vol. XV. p. 252.
² See page 167, and note 11.