92 A. F. R. Hoernle— Inscribed Seal of Kumdra Gupta II. [No. 2, 



of subordinate value. They mention only the following seven kings : 

 1, Gupta, 2, Ghatotkacha, 3, Chandragupta I., 4, Samudragupta, 5, 

 Ghandragupta II., 6, Kumaragupta, 7, Skaudagupta. Here again each 

 king is expressly stated to have been the son of his predecessor. They 

 further name the following three queens : 1, Kumaradevi, wife of 

 Chandragupta I. and mother of Samudragupta ; 2, Dattadevi, wife of 

 Samudragupta and mother of Chandragupta II. ; 3, Dhruvadevi, wife 

 of Chandragupta II. and mother of Kumaragupta I. 



In the main these two records agree with that of the seal ; and this 

 proves that the seal is that of a member of the great Early (or Imperial) 

 Gupta family. This is shown also by the use of the imperial title Mahd- 

 rdjddJdrdja. But there are two important differences. Tho first is that 

 the seal calls the seventh member of the line Puragnpta, while the other 

 two records call him Skaudagupta. The second is that the seal carries the 

 line down to the ninth generation, to another Kumaragupta, and traces it 

 through Puragupta, instead of through Skaudagupta. This proves two 

 things : 1, that the Early Gupta dynasty did not terminate, as it has 

 been hitherto believed, with Skaudagupta, but that it lasted for, at least, 

 two generations longer (i, e., down to about 550 A. D.) ; and secondly 

 that there was a second Kumaragupta among the Early Guptas. The 

 latter discovery may possibly necessitate a reconsideration of all those 

 chronological and other speculations which were based on the (hitherto 

 uncontradicted) belief, that there was but one Kumaragupta in tho 

 dynasty. 



The chief difficulty is that with respect to the relation of Puragupta 

 to Skandagupta. Are they but different names of the same person, or 

 was one the (younger) brother of the othor ? 



One point may be noted with regard to these two kings. Tho inscrip- 

 tion on the seal states that Puragupta's mother, and, therefore, Kumara- 

 gupta I.'s queen, was named Anantadevi. The two stone inscriptions do 

 not name Skandagupta's mother or Kumaragupta's queen, though they 

 speak of her. In the Bhitari inscription it is related, how Skanda restored 

 the imperial power of the Guptas, which appears to have suffered a 

 serious reverse during his father Kumaragupta's time; and how he 

 afterwards visited his mother to report to her his victories ; but the 

 mother is not named. In the Bihar inscription, it is stated that Kumara- 

 gupta married the sister of some person, whose name, however, as well 

 as that of his sister are unfortunately lost in the mutilated record. But 

 from a subsequent equally fragmentary portion of the record (see 1. 13 in 

 Fleet's transcript) it would seem that tho brother's name may have boon 

 Ananlasena. In that case, his sister would probably have been named 

 Am rdadew : and this would agree with the record on the seal. In that case, 

 further, Skandagupta and Puragupta would have had not only the same 



