1839.] A. F. R. Hoernle— Inscribed Seal of Kumdra Gupta II. 97 



years, if lie was still reigning in A. D. 530. There is, however, nothing 

 at all improbable in this supposition. 



Further, Narasimhagupta calls himself Baladitya on his coins. 

 We have seen that the Baladitya of Hiuen Tsiang's account reigned 

 down to c. 530 A. D. ; and that it is quite possible that the Narasimha- 

 gupta of the seal reigned down to that date. It may, therefore, be con- 

 cluded as most probable that the Narasimhagupta of the seal is identical 

 with the Nara Baladitya of the coins as well as the Baladitya of Magadha, 

 by whom, or rather in whose reign Mihirakula was overthrown by 

 Yasodharman. 



A curious glimpse of Narasimhagupta is afforded in a passing allu- 

 sion, in connection with the Valabhi king Dronasimha, to his suzerain 

 power, the Early Guptas. The early Valabhi rulers, as is well known, 

 were vassals of the Early Guptas. The third of the Valabhi line vt as 

 Dronasimha, a younger son of the founder of that line, Bhatarka 

 Senapati. Regarding this Dronasimha it is mentioned in the Valabhi 

 genealogies that he " was anointed in the kingship by the paramount 

 master (parama-svamin) in person " Mr. Fleet* has suggested that this 

 " paramount master " was Tasodharman, who defeated Mihirakula c. 530 

 A. D. Now Dhruvasena L was reigning in 526, as shown by his in- 

 scription. Dronasimha was his predecessor ; and his accession must, 

 therefore, be placed c. 520 A. D. It is not probable that Yasodharinan 

 was already in 520 A. D. an 'emperor' whose sway extended over the 

 Valabhis. In fact, as I have tried to show, it is more probable, that in 

 A. D. 530 he was still a mere ' tribal chieftain ' and lieutenant of the 

 emperor Narasimhagupta, and that his great power only dated from that 

 victory over Mihirakula. On the other hand, about A. D. 520, Nara- 

 simhagupta must have still enjoyed the imperial dignity of the Guptas ; 

 and however much it may have been shorn of its ancient splendour, it 

 was clearly still so much recognised by the Valabhis, that Dronasimha 

 got himself " anointed" by the still existing representative of that power. 

 It may be added that the simple reference to the parama-svamin or 

 " paramount master" is more easily explainable if applied to the old ac- 

 customed suzerain power of the Guptas, than to a new emperor like 

 Tasodharman. 



That notice about Dronasimha's " being anointed by his paramount 

 master" is a rather curious one. His two predecessors enjoyed only the 

 title of senapati; he was the first of his house who bore the title of 

 vialtdrdja (equal to mahdsendpati). The notice about his 'anointment' 

 would seem to refer to his elevation to the higher rank of a Maharaja. 



* See Indian Antiquary, Vol. XV, p. 187, note ; also Corpxis Inscr. hid., Vol. Ill, 

 p, 1G8. 



