The Vatsagulma Copper-plate Grant of King Vindhyasakti
Summary
The Vatsagulma Copper-plate Grant of King Vindhyasakti, dated to the 3rd or 4th century CE, is a Vakataka royal charter issued by King Vindhyasakti II, son of Sarvasena and grandson of Pravarasena I. The grant provides insights into the Vakataka dynasty's lineage and territorial divisions. Scholars like Dinesh Chandra Sircar and others have debated the chronology and genealogical connections, particularly the identification of Pravarasena I with the founder of the Vakataka dynasty, Vindhyasakti I. The text suggests that Sarvasena and Vindhyasakti II may have ruled concurrently or sequentially after Pravarasena I, preceding Rudrasena I, though Puranic traditions about divided kingdoms remain unverified. The grant also references administrative divisions like *phara* and *arama-rijya*, indicating a fragmented kingdom. Comparisons are drawn between Gupta and Vakataka genealogical records, noting similarities in royal lineages. The inscription's palimpsest and corrections, such as altered names and symbols, are documented.
AI-generated summary, automatically checked against the article text.
Conclusion
The Vatsagulma Copper-plate Grant of King Vindhyasakti offers critical insights into the Vakataka dynasty's genealogical structure and territorial organization. By identifying Vindhyasakti II as the great-grandson of Pravarasena I and situating him within a complex succession framework alongside Sarvasena, the document clarifies the division of power among Vakataka rulers. The designation of provinces like *phir* and *Arammi-rijya* suggests a fragmented kingdom, possibly reflecting earlier administrative divisions. Additionally, the grant's epigraphic and Puranic correlations—particularly the mention of Pravarasena's sons as rulers—provide a foundation for reconciling dynastic claims with territorial realities. This inscription thus advances our understanding of the Vakataka lineage's political dynamics and regional governance during the 3rd–4th centuries CE, while highlighting the interplay between epigraphic evidence and later literary traditions.