An Imperial History Of India/Imperial Mgadha - Gauda Dynasties

From Jatland Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Go to Index of the Book
An Imperial History Of India

By K.P. Jayaswal - the Sanskrit Text, Revised by Rahul Sankrityayana

Publisher - Motilal Banarasi Dass, The Punjab Sanskrit Book Depot, Sasdmrha, Lahore
Wikified by Laxman Burdak

East

Imperial [Magadha] Gauda Dynasties

(a) Before 320 A.D.; and (b) 320-750 A.D.)

23. L o k a (Gauda Dynasty) [before 320 A.D.]

In the East, many great (good) kings (nripavarah) past, future and present are related (641). First I shall state the kings of the dynasty of the Gaudas (642) (1) Loka, born at Vardhamana, to Yasasvin, becomes the cause of the prosperity of Gauda (Gauda-vardhanah). He will be religious. Several kings passed (643 ) .

24. Imperial Guptas [348 A.D.-500 A.D.]

"Listen about the Medieval and Madhyadesa kings (madhyakale, madhyama) who will be in a long period emperors (nripendra) and who will be confident and will be followers of via media" (in religious policy, madhyadharminah) , (645):

  • (1) Samudra, the king,
  • (2) Vikrama, of good fame (kirttitah), 'who is sung'.
  • (3) Mahendra, an excellent king and a leader (nripavaro Mukhya).
  • (4) S-initiailed (Skanda) after Ma. (i.e., Mahendra).

His name (will be) Devaraja; he will have several names (vividhakhya, T., against nirdhhakhya of S.); he will be the best, wise and religious king in that low age (646-647).

His younger successor (5) Bala (Balakhya, T.; S.Baladhyaksha) will be Buddhist; he will make the East up to the sea decorated with chaityas. He will build over the whole land monasteries, orchards, reservoirs, gardens and pavilions. His Majesty will then make passages (roads) and bridges, and will worship Buddha images. After reigning without any rival and peacefully he becomes a wanderer (Buddhist monk) and finally at the age of 36 years 1 month commits suicide by dhyana, swooning away. He had become a monk owing to grief for his dead son (648-52).

(Verses 653 to 670 deal with his rebirths) . In verse 671 he is called Bala the Easterner (purvadesakah) .

(6) "Following him (next to him, tasyaparena) the king declared is Kumar a by name, the great lord of the Gaudas. He too (will be) exceedingly virtuous." (674).

(7) "Following him (or next to him) (is) the well-known, the prosperous (sriman) U." (675).

25. Break-up and division of the Empire

(8) "After that there will be a mutual severance (vislesha)" (675).

Comments on 23- 24

(Gupta Imperial History)

The Imperial Period after the Nagas and before Vishnuvardhana which had been omitted from the Madhyadesa Imperial history is taken

An Imperial History Of India:End of page 33

up here under Eastern India, for the Guptas are treated as Eastern Emperors, evidently on account of their having ceremonial and official capital at Pataliputra.

The Gauda Dynasty

The Eastern history is, however, introduced with king Loka of the Gauda dynasty (Gaudanam vamsajah). He was born at Vardhamana (our modern Burdwan). He must have been a king before the Gupta epoch. In the summing-up, verse 876 (p. 646) we read

evam prakarah kathka bhupalah Loka-vardhana |
vidita sarvalokes' smim Prachya cha' sthitadehini (nah) ||

Does lokavardhana here refer to Loka the Gaudavardhana of our present section? There was probably a vardhana family of kings in Bengal in or about the third century A.D.

But after this introduction, and leaving the other kings unnamed (644) , the Imperial Guptas are taken up, meaning thereby that Bengal passed under the Guptas. It should be noted here that in the succeeding part dealing with the provincial history of Gauda and Magadha, the dynasty with which the history commences is of the Naga-raja, i.e., the Bharasivas or Navanagas (ss-30; 37).

The Gupta Emperors

The author or the authorities of the MMK had a true history of the Gupta times. The account, where verifiable, is very correct. It is sober and fuller. Along with this the personal history of [[Samudra Gupta]] in s-31 should be read where his northern conquests and correct reign-period are given. There are some most valuable details which illuminate the confused portions of the Gupta history and help us in coming to a decision on debated and doubtful points.

It is not a matter of small satisfaction to recover an actual Indian record in the form of a written history on the Great Gupta epoch. The character-estimate of the Gupta emperors by the Buddhist historian is very valuable and it is fortunately very sound even when the kings were not Buddhists. The account really constitutes true history. The names under which each king is described should be assumed to be the most common names amongst their perplexing series of virudas (विरुदस) , which causes no small trouble to the modern historian. Even our Buddhist historian complains, after recording two names of Skanda Gupta that he had too many names (vividhakhya (विविधाख्य), T.) . It should be marked that

An Imperial History Of India:End of page 34

Chandra Gupta I is not in the list of emperors which begins with Samudra. The Gupta kings who are described as Emperors (nripendrda) are from Samudra to Kumara Gupta II's son, 'His Majesty U. (675) whom I take to be identical with Budha Gupta (see below). After his reign the Empire is definitely stated to have been subject to 'disruption' (vislesha). This datum is one of the greatest contributions of the MMK, as we shall presently see.

The Kings and their character

The kings in the Imperial list of the MMK are Samudra, 'the king', that is, Samudra Gupta. His character is reviewed in the Provincial History of Bengal (s-31), a lord, superman, severe, ever vigilant, mindful about himself, unmindful about the hereafter sacrificing animals (horse-sacrifices). His reign in the Provincial History is most epigrammatically rendered:

(under his rule) men and manes had the various kinds of luxuries, and the king, various prosperity.

vividhakarabhogams cha
manusha pitaras tatha
vividham sampadam so'pi
praptavan nripatih tatha.

The rise of Brahmanas under Samudra is duly noted (s-31). Vikrama, i.e., Vikramaditya Chandra Gupta II, is of good fame. Here as in the Ayodhaya chronicles (noticed by Cunningham) 'Chandra Gupta' is not known, but Vikrama. This was the only popular name of this king.

(3) Mahendra is Mahendraditya Kumara Gupta I. He was an 'excellent' and 'leading' (mukhya) king. Here we should note that the estimate of the Indian historian regarding this king's character is different from that we read in V. Smith. By no means he seems to have been a weak king.

(4) 'After Ma.' (i.e., Mahendra) the succession of S. (i.e., Skanda) is specifically noted, and V. Smith is confirmed here. He bore the name of his grandfather (Devaraja) and had a variety of names (virudas).

The most important thing about this king is the highest praise reserved for him:

the best (sresbtha),
a wise (buddhiman)

An Imperial History Of India:End of page 35

and justice-loving (dharma-vatsala)
king in that low age (yugadhame)'.

This estimate of his character is noteworthy. He was in the opinion of the Indian historian, the greatest of the great Gupta sove- reigns. I may be permitted to add here that this has been my own humble opinion. He was the greatest of the Gupta kings. He was the only hero in Asia and Europe who could defeat the Huns at their rise. This he did at an early age which is evident from the Bhitari pillar inscription. His wise administration is attested to by Chakrapalita's Junagarh inscription.

[Wars of Skanda Gupta, from the Chandragarbha Sutra.]

How grateful we are to our Buddhist historians, not only for this valuable information about the personality of Skanda Gupta, but for a description of his successful war. In the Chandragarbha pariprichchha* cited by Buston in his history of Buddhist Doctrine, the war is thus described:

King Mahendrasena who was born in the country of Kausambi, had a son with arms of irresistible might. After he had passed the age of 12, Mahendra's kingdom was invaded upon by three foreign powers in concert Yavanas, Palhikas and Sakunas who first fought amongst themselves. They took possession of Gandhara and countries to the north of the Ganges. The young son 10 of Mahendrasena, of weighty hands and other congenital military marks distinguishing his person, asked for permission to lead his father's army. The enemy army numbered three hundred thousand men under the commands of the foreign kings, the chief of whom was the Yavana [or Yauna. The son of Mahendra put his army of two hundred thousand men divided under five hundred commanders, sons of ministers and other orthodox Hindus. With extraordinary quickness and a terrible drive he charged the enemy. In fury his veins on the forehead appeared like a visible mark (tilaka) and his body became steeled. The Prince broke the enemy army and won the battle. On his return his father crowned him king saying: 'henceforth rule the kingdom', and himself retired to religious life. For twelve years after this, the new king fought these foreign enemies and ultimately captured and executed the three kings. After that he ruled peacefully as the Emperor of Jambudvipa.

The three foreign powers who fought amongst themselves first are to be recognized as the Pahlavik (the official name of the Sansanians), the Sakas (that is, the Kushans) and the Yavanas, who stand here for the Hunas (Yaunas, Hyunas) . The Hunas, we know, actually fought the other two powers before attacking India.

  • I understand, the text itself is preserved in the Kangyur.
10.Compare Akbar taking the field at 14, and Harsha at 16.

An Imperial History Of India:End of page 36

It seems that this account is based on fact. The foreign army composed of three elements had penetrated up to the Ganges. It was the indomitable will and skill of Skanda Gupta which won the battle.

He led the flower of Orthodox Hindu India, i.e., excluding Buddhists, younger sons of ministers and noblemen, and played like his grandfather Chandra Gupta II under Rama Gupta, a game of sheer courage, in making an impetuous charge against the enemy, numerically stronger.

The battle was won, its fame spread in Hunnic Asia 'in the Mlechchha countries' as Chakrapalita puts it. But, according to the Buddhist authority, although the battle was won, the war was not over. A twelve years' war had to be waged before the foreign king were captured and punished.

Skanda Gupta ruled certainly from 455 A.D. to 467 A.D. (coins), for at least 12 years.

The view of V. Smith that Skanda Gupta fought more than one battle against the Huns proves to be correct, but his view that the empire of Skanda Gupta succumbed to repeated Hun attacks and perished after his death, is not only without any evidence, but is contradicted by the Chandragarbha sutra, and the MMK which says that the next king (5) Bala i.e., Baladitya had his reign (rajyam) nisa-patnamakantakam without any rival or obstacle. In other words, the wars had been finished by Skanda Gupta, and the foreigners had been beaten back. Dr. V. Smith did not realize the distinction between Baladitya I and Baladitya II; in fact, in his book (p. 329) , he gives Baladitya without any distinguishing "I" or "II" who are known to the Sarnath inscription of Prakataditya, and to the MMK ( 39ff). He makes the two Baladityas the successor of Skanda Gupta, and the victor of Mihirakula who conies in 60 years later one personality, and naturally transfers the second Hun invasion to the period of Skanda Gupta. The MMK (s-25) reveals that the second Hun invasion is to be dated fifty years later, and that the break-up of the Gupta empire came about, not under Skanda Gupta, but in the reign of the king following Budha Gupta (496 A.D., coins) after 500 A.D. The second defeat of the Huns was inflicted by Baladitya II before 533 A.D. the date of the Mandasor inscription, before which date Mihirakula had been already driven to Kashmir. We may date it about 520 A.D. for we must give a decade for the rise and digvijaya of Vish-

An Imperial History Of India:End of page 37

nuvardhana or Yasodharman. "We have a positive proof of the existence of two Baladityas in the same dynasty in the Sarnath inscription (GI, 281).

The omission of Pura Gupta is probably due either to a very short reign or to a loss of a portion of the text after anuja ('younger', 'younger brother') . But anuja is applied in this book elsewhere as meaning a successor, not necessarily a younger brother. It is not stated that Bala followed S. immediately. Skanda died evidently at an age of about 30.

Bala (ditya) is stated to be the first Buddhist king of the Gupta dynasty, which is true and correct and now proved by an inscription found at Nalanda.

Bala died young, at the age of 36. This explains the short reign of Baladitya gathered from the inscriptions.

In verse 668, in the glorification of religious merit, he is to be a chakravartin for several births. It is thus implied that he was a full and real emperor, with no diminution of territories inherited from his ancestors.

Immediately after him (Bala, tasyaparena) comes (6) Kumara i.e., Kumara Gupta II. He was exceedingly virtuous (dharmavan) . Under him Gauda prospered (Gaudanam prabhavishnavah) . His reign was short (473-476A.D.).

(7) Kumara's immediate successor was U. The kings after Skanda Pura, Bala (473 A.D.) and Kumara II had all short reigns, from or after 467 A.D. to 476, Kumara II having three years or less (473 A.D. -c. 476 A.D.). Kumara II must have died young. Budha Gupta succeeded in or before 476 A.D. There is hardly any room for another king to be the Sriman U. of the MMK. He was an emperor, and the empire broke up according to the MMK just after his death. He ruled at least up to 496 A.D., and the empire was intact from Bengal up to Malwa according to his inscriptions. The view of Mr. Allan and Dr. Smith that he was a provincial ruler of Malwa is now contradicted by the copperplates found in Dinajpur and his inscription at Sarnath. Budha Gupta's aditya-title was Prakasaditya. On Budha Gupta's Malwa coins (silver) we have his name Budha Gupta (Allan, G.C., p. 153), while we have the unidentified imperial gold coins with the name Prakasaditya (Allan, p. 135). Now as we are

An Imperial History Of India:End of page 38

certain about the imperial dominions of Budha Gupta which was not known when Mr. Allan wrote, as also about his long reign, we must have his imperial coins. Thanks to the MMK, we can now identify Prakasaditya with Budha Gupta. The MMK gives him the popular and well-known (visruta) name U. Prakasaditya's coins bear the initial U. below the king's picture (Allan, plate XXII). Thus the MMK's king 'His Majesty (Sriman) U'. is the Prakasdditya of the coin. The succession fixed by inscriptional dates and the succession noted in the MMK, fix his identity with Budha Gupta.

25. Disruption of the Empire

Budha Gupta's reign closes about 500 A.D. The disruption of the Gupta Empire follows his death. After 510 A.D. (see below) we find the Huns for the second time in India, and this time established as far as Gwalior. The Hun invasion, however, is not the cause but the effect of the disruption. The MMK describes a family feud, a severance and separation (vislesha) . The Hun king Toramana, therefore, took advantage of it. He must have been before that on the frontier, in Afghanistan or thereabout. The Huns had been so thoroughly beaten by Skanda Gupta that they dared not think of invading India as long as the Gupta empire lasted. A breach in the Gupta family which seems to have arisen on the death of Budha Gupta and the breaking-up of the empire into Gauda and Magadha, brought in Toramana at once.

The kings at the time of the breach were Bhanu Gupta in Malwa (according to Eran inscription) and Tathagata Gupta in Magadha, predecessor of Baladitya (that is, Baladitya II, victor of Mihirakula) according to Yuan Chwang. They are both given as contemporaries by the MMK in the Provincial History. The empire was thus broken up. It led to three great results one was the Hun occupation for about or over 16 years, and the rise of a new All-India Emperor in the person of Yasodharman Vishnuvardhana as the successor of the Gupta Emperor.11 Between these two facts the Hun occupation and the rise of Vishnuvardhana there was the display, once more, of that military genius and daring which was innate in the

11.It is wrong to suppose that this emperor was a Malwa ruler. In Malwa a viceroy if expressly mentioned with wide dominions in 533 A.D.

An Imperial History Of India:End of page 39

Guptas, in the defeat inflicted on Mihirakula by Baladitya II, successor of Tathagata Gupta. The ruse played by Baladitya II before the invading army of Mihirakula, succeeded so well that the tyrant who had levied exactions all over the north, according to Cosmas Indicopleustes and Yuan Chwang, became a prisoner and India was liberated by that daring feat and strategy of the Gupta sovereign.

This event can be almost definitely dated. It is somewhat surprising that the dates about the Hun invasion and the defeat of Mihirakula should not have been more narrowly limited down in the text-books. The Eran pillar memorial to Goparaja and his sail wife shows the undisputable fact that up to 510 A,D. (191 GE) Toramana had not conquered Malwa. In that year Goparaja under Bhanu Gupta fell on the battle-field and the memorial dated in the Gupta Era was raised; while in the very first year of Toramana at Eran itself the Gupta Era was given up and regnal years of the Hun king was used. Toramana, therefore, at Eran got established after 510 A.D., the date of Goparaja's death and memorial.

Now, the event of Mihirakula's invasion of Magadha must come after [510 A.D.+1 yr. (Toramana) +l5th year of Mihirakula (Toramana's son) at Gwalior=] 526 A.D., and before 533 A.D., the date at Mandasor for the Emperor (samrat) Yasodharman who had found Mihirakula in Kashmir, confirming Yuan Chwang's account of Mihirakula's expulsion to Kashmir by Baladitya. Within these fateful 7 years (526 A.D.-533 A.D.) the final act of the Gupta Imperial drama had been played out on the stage of time. The dynasty which had liberated India from the Kushan-Sassanian shadow, the dynasty which broke the Hun unbreakable throughout Asia and Europe the dynasty which made the name Vikramaditya a tradition immortal in their country, had to quit its monopoly of political history between those fateful years: 526 A.D.-533 A.D.

Need was once more felt, as it had been felt in the time of the Mauryas, as it had been felt in the time of the Vakatakas, that an All-India Empire be reconstituted and revived. Yasodharman, 'the leader of the people,' rose up during those seven years. He united the land under him. The parts which his "Gupta Masters" [Gupta-Nathah; not lords of the Guptas' (GI., p. 148) which will be meaningless], the parts which his Gupta lords could not reach (that is, the South) , the parts which the Huns could not succeed in reaching, that is, the East (Magadha Bengal

An Imperial History Of India:End of page 40

and Assam) recently attempted by Mihirakula, he acquired. And the Gupta empire disappeared.

Before 533 A.D. Malwa and West had come under the governorship of Dharmadosha, brother of Daksha the author of the dated stone inscription at Mandasor (GI., 150), dated in the Malava Era. Dharmadosha himself was the organizer of that state of Central India (lines 17-18). The new empire was thus a recent one; it has to be dated about 530 A.D. The forefathers of the governor must have served under the Guptas, for the present master Vishnuvardhana was atmavamsa, his own lineage, the very first ruler in his family.

It is evident that the very same events are recorded both in the inscription of Yasodharman, at Mandasor, and in the inscription of 533 A.D. under the name of Vishnuvardhana, bearing the title Rajadbiraja, Paramesvara 'the 'supreme king of kings', supreme lord'. This paramount sovereign, the Paramesvara, acquired sovereignty over the Prachi (the East) and North (i.e. Kashmir etc.) (line 6). How could two persons within the very few years acquire sovereignty over the very areas and both be emperors? both mentioned not only in records of the same place, but also in one and the same place, and in one and the same record. The conclusion is irresistible, that both these pedigree-less names, 'both' these emperors were one and the same, which is definitely stated in the inscription of Daksha itself (sa eva) . One was not a subordinate of the other; the Paramesvara, and the supreme king of kings (of India) Vishnuvardhana was identical with the Samrat Yasodharman. Rjajadbirdja and Samrat mean one and the same thing.

The MMK shows that he became known to chronicles under the name Vishnuvardhana, a style carried on by his decendants Naravardhana to Harshavardhana.

The Gupta king who lost to Yasodharman Vishnuvardhana was either Baladitya II himself or his son called Vajra by Yuan Chwang. Baladitya II hardly recovered the imperial position. We have no imperial issues of his; in fact his coins have not been distinguished and seem to be concealed amongst the rougher, eastern variety which bear no obverse legend and are distinguishable from those bearing both Kara and Baladitya legends of Baladitya I.

From Baladitya II down to Adityasena, who had all subordinate position from the Hun time to the last days of Harshavardhana, are omitted from the list by the MMK (see comments on the next section) .

An Imperial History Of India:End of page 41


26. Later Imperial Guptas of Gauda [c. 685- 730 A.D.] and Magadba

"The Separatist Gaudas (will be) terrible" (676).

(9) Thereafter, (there will be) Deva known as king of Magadha: He, surrounded on all sides by enemies, was suppressed and killed.

(10) "Immediately next Chandra will perform kingship (677) . He too will be severed by weapon on account of former (birth's) deeds."

(11) His son Dvadasa (द्वादश) (will) live for a few ('numbered') months. He too will be severed by weapon while a minor (678).

27-29. Bengal Election, Anarchy, and election of Gopalaka

"While these violent kings will be engaged in injury, wishing harm to each other, there will arise at that time Bh, a leading king, a popular leader of the Gaudas, but an invalid." He had a great malady and died of it (679-681).

28. Anarchy

Immediately following, D. for a few ten days (will be king) (681). In this Gauda country on the Ganges there be the next following Bh. ruling for three days. (682).

29. Pala Dynasty begins [c. 730 A.D.]

"Then, there will be king, from everyone, G o p a 1 a k a".

(Gopala and his character) [c. 730 A.D. 757 A.D.]

"That king (will be) sweet in speech (priywadin) , considerate (ghrini) and a power (mahabalah)" (683).

Formerly he will, in youth, be in the hands of women, miserable, foolish, having been subdued by enemies; but coming in contact with a good (religious) friend he will become very charitable. He (will) become the maker of viharas, chaityas, gardens, reservoirs, beautiful free hotels, bridges, Deva temples, and caves (guha, T.). He will be ready in matters praiseworthy. (684-86). The land will become surrounded by many heretics orthodox Hindus up to the sea. The king will be kind, a materialist (bhogin) but lover of justice or religion, (dharma) (688). He having ruled for 27 years died on the Ganges at the age of 80. (690).

Comments on 26-25

See Introduction to Part II. After the period of Harsha, there was a revival of the Empire under the Later Guptas. That history is touched upon by the MMK in the provincial history taken up next. Here the kings after Harshavardhana are taken up as introductory to the rise of G op a la, the new dynast.

The MMK is here again helpful in fixing the order of certain Later Guptas appearing on coins.

(9) Deva is Deva Gupta, who should be called Deva Gupta II,

An Imperial History Of India:End of page 42

the first Deva being Chandra Gupta II. This Deva Gupta II was attacked on all sides by enemies and killed in war. His identity is fixed by Deo-Barnark inscription where he is the son of Adityasena and father of Vishnu Gupta. Vishnu Gupta according to his coins had the viruda, Chandraditya (Allan, p. 145) who is given as (10) Chandra by the MMK, as the immediate successor of Deva, just as in Deo-Barnark inscription.

(11) Dvadasa of our text is the Dvadasaditya (with another name) of the coins (Allan, p. 144) who, in the absence of all other evidence about him, was treated as coming before Chandraditya (Allan, p. 144; pp. liii, lxi) . Vishnu Gupta had another son Jivita Gupta II according to the Deo-Barnark inscription (GI, p. 213). Jivita Gupta II has left no coins, while Dvadasaditya, though short-lived, has left coins. According to the MMK, Dvadasa was the last king of the Magadha Guptas who had sway over Bengal. Jivita Gupta II seems to have been either identical with or successor to Dvadasaditya, and to have been the last king of the dynasty which was swept away by G o p a l a who succeeded to the kingship of Bengal and Bihar within a year or so of Dvadasaditya. Jivita Gupta like Dvadasa seems to have had a very short reign. The MMK notes that the election by Gauda of its own king was required by the civil strife amongst the Guptas after the death of the boy king Dvadasa. If Jivita Gupta II was younger, he also must have been a minor, both being sons of the same father. It is, however, likely that Dvadasa, the minor was the last king of the dynasty, and Jivita Gupta (if not identical) an elder brother, had preceded him.

These Later Guptas mentioned here were important kings. Deva Gupta II's father was Adityasena who performed three Asvamedka-sacrifices (GI., 213, w.) and had succeeded in reaching the Chola capital. Deva Gupta II bore once more the imperial title of Paramabhattaraka, Maharajadhiraja, Paramesvara and so did his son Vishnu Gupta (GI., 213). The MMK thus has taken up here the Imperial line of the Later Guptas.

[The Cause of the fall of the Later Imperial Guptas]

Deva (Gupta) is expressly stated to have been attacked by enemies and killed. Who were these enemies? We find in the inscrip- tions of the contemporary Chalukya kings, the most powerful monarchy in India at the time, that "the Lord of All Northern India" (sakala-

An Imperial History Of India:End of page 43

Uttarapatha-natha; I A., VIII. 2)12 was defeated by the Chalukya king Vinayaditya (679 A.D.-696 A.D. ) Adityasena had successfully invaded up to Chola country, evidently, in the reign of Vinayaditya's predecessor or Vinayaditya himself. He seems to have achieved that wherein Harsha had failed in the time of Pulakesin. But the result was disastrous.

Gupta power, now revived once more after Baladitya II, courted trouble which led to its final weakening and extinction. In 679-696 A.D. there was no power in Northern India other than that of Magadha under Adityasena and his son which can be described as 'the emperor of ALL Uttarapatha'. It seems from the date that Deva Gupta must have been reigning at the time. He was, according to the dates, the Gauda king killed by Yasovarman of Kanauj, c. 700 A.D. Thus he was attacked on all sides by enemies (MMK) .

The immediate cause of Chandraditya Vishnu Gupta's death was family feud. It was probably Jivita Gupta II, who was the Gauda king who was defeated twice and taken to Kashmir and killed by Lalitaditya (730 A.D.) . It was fortunate for G o p a 1 a that Kanauj broke down about c. 740 A.D. and that the Chalukya power broke down c. 757 A.D. The Gupta dynasty was really destroyed by the Karkotas of Kashmir, who at 740 A.D. succeeded to the imperial throne of Northern India.

We may assign approximate dates to these Later Guptas as following:

  • Madhava Gupta [contemporary of Harsha]
  • Adityasena [650 A.D.-680 A.D.]
  • Deva Gupta [680-710 A.D.]
  • Vishnu Gupta Chandraditya [710 A.D.?]
  • Dvadasaditya Chandra Gupta III [710 A.D. (few months) ].
  • Jivita Gupta II [710-730 A.D.].

[BENGAL ELECTIONS]

About the period 735-740 A.D. Bengal elected her own king Bb., who was 'a leader of the people'. But unfortunately the choice fell upon a permanent invalid. He made a fairly good king nripa-pungava. After his death there was what is described in the Khalimpur copper-plate matsya-nyaya, anarchy: D. and Bb. ruling for 10 days and 3 days. This

12. Kjelhorn, EI, VIII, App. 2, 2,

An Imperial History Of India:End of page 44

was put an end to by the election of G o p a l a k a (c. 740-757 A.D.). This election was universal and unanimous, 'from all' (sarvatah correct sarvadah) . We are glad to get a character-sketch of the dear king, who not only brought peace to Eastern India but succeeded in establishing a dynasty which lasted longest. Although G o p a 1 a was a Sudra as stated in the next section of the MMK, he patronised both Buddhists and Brahmins, the latter more, as the complaint of the MMK indicates. His descendants became Buddhists, while he himself had a national outlook. His reign period (27 years) found in the MMK is a good datum. He died at the age of 80; he had been therefore elected at the age of 53, which speaks well of the choice of a mature and known man. The Gaudas were correct in their judgment. But something greater is conveyed by this election. It shows that the Bengalees had freed their mind, emancipated themselves from the Vedic theory of caste superiority, in that early time, the 8th century A.D. By that big political act they repealed, so to say, the Institutes of Manu. The election of a Sudra to kingship was as big a thing as the doctrine of egalite in 1789 A.D. To say, make a Sudra king, and to do it, was to break the slavery of mind perpetuated for ages. Even the great spiritual liberator, Lord Buddha, maintained the superiority of the Kshatriya. Even he probably would have said to the proposal moved in 740 A.D. Render unto the Caesar what is due to the Caesar! Here the Gaudas went beyond their country, law and old civilization. They were innovators, and emancipated; and Sudra added a chapter of glory to the history of India.

An Imperial History Of India: End of Chapter-Imperial Mgadha - Gauda Dynasties

Retrieved from "http://www.jatland.com/w/index.php?title=An_Imperial_History_Of_India/Imperial_Mgadha_-_Gauda_Dynasties&oldid=285739"