The Imperial Guptas

Gupta
 The genealogy of the Imperial Guptas, available from their inscriptions and seals, begins with Gupta.
 However, in some V¹k¹þaka records, Ghaþotkacha is mentioned as the first ruler.
 V A Smith earlier regarded Œrîgupta as the name of the first Imperial Gupta ruler.
 However, in Imperial Gupta genealogy, the names of all the rulers are preceded by the honorific title,
œrî.
 Had the name of the first Imperial Gupta ruler been Œrîgupta, he would have been mentioned in the
genealogy as Œrî-Œrîgupta, which is not the case.
 On this basis, scholars like J F Fleet, John Allan, and, later on, even Smith, regard the name of the first
Imperial Gupta ruler as Gupta.
 B Ch Chhabra : Gupta is one of the thousand names of Vishòu.

 In Imperial Gupta genealogy, Gupta has been given the title of mah¹r¹ja, which, in the age of the
Imperial Guptas, was a subordinate title.
 Hence, Gupta would have been a subordinate ruler.
 R D Banerji : Gupta, as a subordinate ruler, ruled under the Kush¹òas.

 K P Jayaswal, Sudhakar Chattopadhyay, and S K Maity : Gupta served under the Lichchhavis or the
V¹k¹þakas.
 Ashvini Agrawal : Taking advantage of the political instability, following the decline of the Kush¹òa
power in northern India, Gupta carved out a small independent kingdom for himself.
 Some scholars, however, do not agree with this.
 A few of them regard him as an independent ruler.
 Still others believe that he was a commoner, who was given the title of mah¹r¹ja in genealogy simply
because he was the grandfather of Mah¹r¹j¹dhir¹ja Chandragupta I.

 The Chinese pilgrim, I-tsing, mentions Che-li-ki-to, who has been identified with Gupta by Allan.
 According to I-tsing, he ruled 500 years before his visit to India.
 Fleet is not in favour of identifying Che-li-ki-to with Gupta.
 His first objection is that the Indian rendering of Che-li-ki-to would be Œrîgupta, while the name of the
first Imperial Gupta ruler was Gupta.
 Moreover, according to I-tsing’s account Che-li-ki-to ruled 500 years before the visit of the Chinese
pilgrim to India, which would place Che-li-ki-to around 175 AD.
 This date would be too early for the first Imperial Gupta ruler.
 But Allan : Chinese writers often tend to use the honorific title œrî with Indian names.
 Also, ‘500 years’ in the account of I-tsing need not be taken literally.
 Most of the scholars place Gupta between c 275 and 300 AD.

 No inscription or coin of Gupta is so far available.

 The legend on a seal, published by E J Rapson, has been read as Gutasya.
 The legend on a seal, published by Jagannath Agrawal, has been read as Œrîrguptasya.
 However, in the absence of any royal title for Gupta in these seal legends, some scholars are not in
favour of identifying the owner of these seals with Gupta, the first Imperial Gupta ruler.
 However, royal seals, referring to kings without using royal titles for them, are known.

1
 Ghaþotkacha
 Gupta was succeeded by his son, Gaþotkacha, c 300 AD.
 He, too, is called a mah¹r¹ja in Imperial Gupta genealogy.
 On this basis, he is regarded as a subordinate ruler by most of the scholars.
 The name, Ghaþotkacha, has been read on a sealing published by T Bloch.
 The legend on a gold coin in the Leningrad Museum has been read as Ghaþo.
 The legend on another gold coin, published by A Ghosh, has been read as Kram¹ditya.

 But most of the scholars identify this Ghaþotkacha Kram¹ditya with Ghaþotkacha-gupta, the younger
brother of Kum¹ragupta I, mentioned in the Tumain and Ramtek inscriptions.

 Ghaþotkacha, the son of Gupta, appears to be an ambitious ruler.

 It has been suggested that, in order to increase the power and prestige of his family, he managed to get
his son, Chandragupta I, married with the Lichchhavi princess, Kum¹radevî.
 According to Smith, this marriage took place c 308 AD, when Chandragupta I was about 25 years in
age.
 If Chandragupta I founded the Gupta era in 319 AD at the time of his accession, Ghaþotkacha would
have ruled up to that year.