1866.] Notes on Gupta Inscriptions from Aphsar and BeJiar, 271 



may consequently belong to Skanda Gupta, but in tbe absence 

 of connecting words sucb a supposition cannot be justifiable. The 

 document is most probably in verse, and tbe word Chandra in the first 

 line suggests the idea that the Kumara Gupta of the record was the son 

 of Chandra Gupta II. of the Kuban Pillar. The figure for the year 

 in the last line is perfectly clear, and is indicated, as usual in 

 Gupta records, by three parallel lines, but the letters before and after 

 it are very doubtful, and no reliance can be placed on the date. The 

 letter preceding the 3 may be a 60, and some of the letters after 

 the letter for S'aka may be figures, but I am not certain of their 

 value. As Kumara was the sixth in a direct line from S'ri 

 Gupta, the founder of the Gupta dynasty, it is certain that the date, 

 whether 3 or 63, cannot be of the Gupta era, for according to the 

 Udayagiri and the Sanchi inscriptions Chandra Gupta II. lived 

 from 82 to 93 of that era. It must therefore be either of the reigning 

 sovereign, or of some now unknown era other than that used in the 

 Allahabad column inscription. 



The second inscription is even more imperfect than the first, and 

 has no date ; but there is no doubt of its being an edict of the Gupta 

 who recorded the Bhitari inscription, or of one of his descendants. 

 General Cunningham imagines it to be a counterpart of the Bhitari 

 record, and says that the portion extant " is letter for letter the same 

 as the opening of the Bhitari pillar inscription." Such, however, is 

 not the case. It is true, the first line has an epithet which occurs in 

 the first line of the Bhitari inscription, and lines 3 to 12 are made 

 up of words whose counterparts are seen in that record. It may 

 also be admitted that Kumara Devi, the wife of Chandra Gupta. I, 

 is named in the 5th line, and the word Gupta occurs in the 10th, which 

 leave no doubt as to the race of the sovereign who recorded the docu- 

 ment. But as no specific name is legible, and the words common to the 

 two records are mostly adjectives expressive of royal qualities which 

 are generally attributed to all Hindu sovereigns, their evidence cannot 

 be accepted as conclusive as to the identity of the two records, 

 "Were it otherwise, still it would be of no use, for we have positive 

 proof to shew that they are not identical. The second line of the Behar 

 record has a word which does not occur in the first two lines of the 

 Bhitari inscription, and the matter from the 13th line to the end, 



