102 A. F. I?. Hoewtle— Inscribed Seal of Kwnfaa Gupta II. [No. 2, 



reigns, from o. A. D. 540 to 585, to the Maukhari dynasty, under fsana- 

 varnian, S'arvavarman, Sustbitavarnian and Avantivarman. Three of 

 those Varnians, I's&na, S'arva and Avanti, receive the imperial titles, 

 nialu'in'iji'tdltiraja or paramesvara in two inscriptions.* Snsthita is named 

 in an inscription of the Later Guptas without any particular title ;f but 

 if he is not identical with Avantivarman— which is quite possible ■ — , he 

 must, in all probability, have been a Maharajadhiraja, as the intermediate 

 ruler between two Mahaiajadhirajas (see column 8). That Susthita does 

 not receive that title in the Gupta inscription is no objection ; for 

 neither does Isaiia receive it ; the inscription, being one of the Later 

 Guptas, who were a rival family, probably denied the imperial title to 

 the Maukharis as usurpers. % 



From the Maukharis the imperial dignity passed to the Vardhana 

 dynasty of Thauesar and Kananj, for three reigns, under Prabhakara, 

 Rajya and the great llarshn, from c. A. D. 585 to 048, though at some 

 time between A. D. 013 and G3-A it was disputed by the Early Chalnkya 

 king Pulikesin II. § After Ilarsha Vardhana the imperial dignity 

 appears to have been held simultaneously in the West by the Valabhis of 

 Gujarat (commencing with Dharasena IV., c. A. D. 045) and in the East 

 by the Later Guptas of Magadha (commencing with Adityasena, c. A. D. 

 648). In the case of the Valabhis, the assumption of the imperial 

 dignity would seem, at first, to have been a temporary one. For after 

 Dharasena IV., who enjoyed it from c. A. D. 645-650, it lapsed again, 

 for about '20 years, dm inij; the two following reigns of Dhruvasena III. 

 and Kharagraha II., neither of whom seem to have borne any imperial 

 titles, perhaps owing to the rival emperor's, Adityasena's, ascendancy. 

 About A. D. 670, however, S'iladitya III. again became emperor of the 

 West; and henceforth the imperial dignity remained with these two 



with the legend of kida (wo Vroeeadiugs for August, 1888). Kida would appear 

 to be a tribal designation of tho Hunas. 



* See Fleet, in Corp. Inscr. Ind, Vol. Ill, pp. 218, 221. 



+ See ihid., p. 200. 



J It may be a question whether Yasovarman or Yasodharman did not himself 

 belong to a branch of tho Mankhari family of Varmans. There is nothing in Yaso- 

 dharman's inscriptions to prove that he belonged to tho Malava tribes. His relation 

 to the four imperial Maukharis requires further elucidation. If, as abovo suggested, 

 he is identical with the S'iladitya, who according to Hinen Tsiang reigned 50 years, 

 he must have been a contemporary and rival of the four imperial Maukharis. The 

 contemporary inscription of Asphad would certainly seem to show, that the latter 

 did not enjoy an undisputed title to the imperial dignity. 



§ He assumed the imperial title paramesvara after a thorough defeat of Harsha 

 Vardhana; see Indian Antiquary, Vol. VII, p. 164. He had not dono so before A. D. 

 013, nor was it after A. D. 031. ; see ibid., Vol. VIII, p. 210. 



