166 
V. A. Smith— History and Coinage of the Gupta Period. [No. 4, 
applies to king Dharmaditya the epithet ‘ Apratiratha ,’ ‘unsurpassable,’ 
which is the special epithet of Samudra Gupta, both in coins and inscrip¬ 
tions. These circumstances naturally suggest to Dr. Hoernle the 
hypothesis that Dharmaditya may be merely a title of Samudra 
Gupta. This suggestion is plausible, though not convincing. I doubt 
if the LaksmI device can ever have been the family device of the 
Guptas. The use of the Garuda cognizance was well established in the 
time of Samudra Gupta, who used it on his ‘ Javelin ’ and ‘ Archer ’ coins, 
in the form of the standard, and on a seal. The seal referred to is that 
of the spurious Gaya grant (Fleet, Gupta Inscriptions , p. 255, pi. xxxvii). 
I agree with Dr. Fleet in believing that, though the grant is a forgery, 
the seal is perfectly genuine. The “ Garuda-marked tokens ” (i.e., proba¬ 
bly, gold coins) are mentioned in the Allahabad inscription, as having 
been offered to Samudra Gupta ( Fleet , p. 14, note) by the subject 
nations. It is, therefore, improbable that this sovereign changed the 
family cognizance from the LaksmI to the Garuda device. The Farld- 
pur record unfortunately is not dated. If it was not executed on 
behalf of Samudra Gupta himself, it certainly seems to be approximately 
contemporary with him, and may very probably be a record of Kacha, 
whom I believe to have been the brother and predecessor of Samudra 
Gupta. 
I observe that Dr. Fiihrer, in his label on the seal of Kumara 
Gupta II, in the Lucknow Museum, definitely adopts the reading Sthira 
for the name of the predecessor of Nara Simha Gupta, and interprets it 
as a synonym for Skanda. 1 I adhere to the opinion ( Observations , 
p. 83, note ) that it is more probable that Sthira Gupta was the brother of 
Skanda Gupta, and that Skanda Gupta was omitted from the genealogy 
of the seal inscription, owing to his having died, leaving no male issue. 
Dr. Fiihrer reads the name of the queen of Nara Simha Gupta as 
being Maha LaksmI Devi. 
The paleography of the Gupta Period is discussed by Dr. Hoernle 
in his paper on the Weber Manuscripts, in J. A. S., Bengal, for 1893, 
Vol. LXII., Part I., p. 4 ; and in the Indian Antiquary for February, 1892, 
Yol. XXI, p. 40 seqq. The subject is further illustrated by the same 
scholar’s publications on the Bower Manuscript. 
I In reply to a reference, Dr. Fiihrer writes under date 3rd December, 1894: — 
“ I have looked again at the disputed reading on the Bhitaiu seal of Kumara Gupta 
II, and cannot agree with Dr. Hoernle’s reading of Pura Gnpta, or Cunningham’s 
Puru Gupta. There is no doubt it is Sthira Gupta, as Biililer reads. I sent Biihler 
a cast of the seal for the Vienna Oriental Institute at the time, and feel sure you 
would agree to the reading, if you saw the original with a magnifying glass. When 
you next pass through Lucknow, I shall be glad to show it to yon.” [See a note by 
Dr. Hoernle at the end of this paper.— Ed.] 
