Origin of the Gupta dynasty

There are conflicting theories regarding the original homeland and ancestry of the Gupta dynasty that ruled northern India between 4th and 6th centuries. Modern historians variously theorize that it originated in present-day Uttar Pradesh or Bengal, based on epigraphic, numismatic and literary evidence. The social group (varna) of the dynasty is also a matter of debate, with scholars variously placing them in kshatriya Vaishya, Brahmana, or other categories.

Homeland

Nothing definitive is known about the Guptas' place of origin. The capital of the early rulers of the dynasty is uncertain: various cities, including Prayaga, Pataliputra, Ayodhya, Kosambi, Ujjayini, Mathura, and Eran have been proposed as possible candidates.

Eastern Uttar Pradesh

According to one theory, the Guptas originated in present-day eastern Uttar Pradesh, and expanded their empire to Pataliputra and Bengal later.

Proponents of this theory, such as S. R. Goyal, cite the provenance of the Gupta inscriptions and coins in their support. For example:

• Of the 15 inscriptions issued during the first 150 years of the Gupta rule, 8 have been found in eastern Uttar Pradesh. On the other hand, only 2 of these inscriptions have been found in Bihar (historical Magadha), and only 5 have been found in Bengal.
• Fourteen hoards of Gupta gold coins have been found in eastern Uttar Pradesh: these hoards generally include the coins of the early Gupta kings. On the other hand, only two hoards each have been found in Bihar and Bengal: these hoards mostly include the coins issued by the later Gupta kings.
• The Kaushambi style is prominent in the Gupta script.
• The popularity of the Ganga-Yamuna motif in the Gupta art suggests that the Prayaga (where these two rivers meet) was the centre of the original Gupta kingdom.
• B.P Sinha claims that -Mrigasthapana was in Utter Pradesh and Hwui-lun mistakenly said it's in East of Nalanda-.

Critics of this theory argue that:

• The Gupta coins discovered in eastern Uttar Pradesh date from the reign of the dynasty's third ruler Chandragupta I, and were part of hoards that included the coins of Samudragupta. Thus, these coins could not have been buried before the reign of Samudragupta, and thus, are not a conclusive proof of the location of the territory of his ancestors.
• Historian R. C. Majumdar dismisses the epigraphic evidence cited in support of this theory, pointing out that the earlier Maurya kings ruled in present-day Bihar, but most of their inscriptions have been found outside this area. Historian D. K. Ganguly similarly points out that the Varendra region in present-day Bengal was the homeland of the Pala kings, but most of the early Pala inscriptions have been discovered in present-day Bihar.
• The prevalence of the so-called Kaushambi style is not conclusive evidence either: this style was also used by the king Chandravarman, who ruled in present-day Bengal, and whose territory did not include eastern Uttar Pradesh. Moreover, so-called Malwa, Mathura and other 'eastern' styles were also prevalent alongside the Kaushambi style in the Gupta period.
• There is no evidence that the Ganga-Yamuna motif originated in Prayaga, and there is no evidence that the basin of these two rivers formed the heartland of the Gupta empire.
• According to B.P Shina,Mi-li-kia-si-kia-po-no was in Utter Pradesh and Hwui-lun mistakenly said it was in East of Nalanda.What B.P Shina said does not make sense as Hwui-Iun came way before him and would know more about the location of the temple.Chinese monk Yijing also said that it was in 40 yojanas East of Nalanda but his account isn't much reliable.There is a manuscript made in 1015 ad that also said that Mrigasthapana was in Bengal(in Varendra).This manuscript,Chinese monk Yijing account,RC Mujamder account,D.K Ganguly account easily debunks B.P Sinha's false theory.B.P Shina is the one who has mistaken.
• When Huns invaded India control of Bihar and Utter Pradesh was lost and they took a bit of Bengal of did not take any of Bengal.Guptas were still able to rule on Bengal during Huns but Utter Pradesh and Bihar was lost.That shows that Guptas might have had a stronger control on Bengal than Utter Pradesh.

Puranic evidence

Another argument cited in favour of this theory is the Puranic descriptions of the Gupta territory:

• The Vishnu Purana states that the Guptas and the Magadhas (that is, the people of Magadha) will enjoy "the territory along the Ganges (up to) Prayaga". Some manuscripts of the Vishnu Purana add Magadha to this list of territories. Alternative translations read that the Guptas and Magadhas will enjoy "Prayaga on the Ganges and Magadha" or "territory along the Ganges, Prayaga, and Magadha". The text clearly mentions the Guptas and the Magadhas as two different groups of people, and does not imply that the Guptas were one of the Magadhas.
• The corresponding Vayu Purana verse states that the Gupta kings will enjoy "Prayaga on the Ganges, Saketa, and Magadha". Alternatively, the verse has been translated to state that the Guptas will enjoy "along the Ganges, Prayaga, Saketa, and Magadha".
• The Bhagavata Purana also states that "the Guptas will enjoy the earth up to Prayaga on the Ganges".
• The Puranic passages refer to the territory of the early Gupta kings: they cannot be a reference to the Gupta territories during the empire's period of decline, as they do not mention Bengal, which formed a part of the Gupta kingdom during this period.

Critics argue that:

• The Puranic passages do not refer to the reign of a specific king, and may not refer to the territory of the dynasty's earliest kings. For example, historian S. R. Goyal identifies the Magadhas with the Licchavis (the clan of the queen of Chandragupta I), and thus, theorizes that the Vishnu Purana alludes to an early phase of Gupta expansion. Chandragupta I was the third ruler of the dynasty, and the territory ruled by him was not same as the one ruled by his ancestors.
• The Puranic evidence is problematic, because the various Puranas differ in their lists of the Gupta territories: for example, the Vishnu Purana omits Saketa from the list. Historian Dasharatha Sharma argues that the Gupta power was concentrated in a narrow corridor running along the Ganges: this corridor includes Saketa, therefore, the Vishnu Purana description implies that Saketa was a part of the Gupta kingdom. However, historian Dilip Kumar Ganguly notes that the Puranic descriptions are quite vague, and scholars have variously interpreted these verses to mean the Guptas ruled "Prayaga on the Ganges", or Prayaga and "the territory along the Ganges".
• The corresponding passage in the various manuscripts of Bhagavata Purana either does not mention the word "Gupta", or uses it as a common noun meaning "protected" instead of using it as the name of a specific dynasty. Even some manuscripts of the Vayu Purana use the words "Guhya", "sapta" or "Manidhanyaka" instead of "Gupta". Supporters of the theory dismiss these as scribal mistakes.

Bengal

According to another theory, the original capital of the territory was located in the present-day Bengal region. According to the proponents of this theory, the dynasty's founder Gupta probably ruled a small territory in the Bengal region, and his descendants captured a larger territory in the Ganges basin, which is described in the Puranas. Alternatively, they propose that Gupta's kingdom extended from Prayaga in the west to northern Bengal in the east.

Much of the debate on this view hinges around the identity of Mi-li-kia-si-kia-po-no, a place mentioned by the 7th century Chinese Buddhist monk Yijing. According to Yijing, king Che-li-ki-to (identified with the dynasty's founder Shri Gupta) built a temple for Chinese pilgrims near Mi-li-kia-si-kia-po-no. This temple was located more than 40 yojanas east of Nalanda, along the Ganges river.

Historian D. C. Ganguly located Mi-li-kia-si-kia-po-no in Murshidabad district of West Bengal state of India, by taking 1 yojana as 5.71 miles, and concluded that the Guptas originated in this area. According to R. C. Majumdar, Mi-li-kia-si-kia-po-no was located either in the Malda district of West Bengal or Rajshahi District of Bangladesh. However, unlike Ganguly, Majumdar does not consider this as evidence of Bengal being the Gupta homeland. According to Majumdar, this only proves that the Bengal region was a part of the territory ruled by the dynasty's founder; it may be possible that the Guptas originally ruled in Magadha, and extended their rule to Bengal, or vice versa.

To support his identification of Mi-li-kia-si-kia-po-no as a place in Bengal, Majumdar read interpreted the word as a transcription of Mriga-sthapana rather than Mriga-shikha-vana. According to a 1015 CE manuscript, Mṛgasthāpana was the name of a stupa located in the historical Varendra region, which is now a part of Bengal. Other scholars have disputed this interpretation, as "Mi-li-kia-si-kia-po-no" is closer to the word "Mriga-shikha-vana".

The Guptas ruled on Bengal as subordinates of the Kushan empire during the Kushan era.A number of Gupta coins has been discovered in West Bengal.Few has been discovered in Bangladesh.Among them two were found in Mohammadpur in Magura district in 1853.The other two were found at Mainamati in Comilla district in 1957.Another coin was later found at Kotalipara upazila in Gopalganj.The impact of the Gupta rule in Bengal was far reaching and very profound.In subsequent periods,The administration of Bengal was developed following the local administration and land system established by the Guptas.Nalrajar Garh in West Bengal is one of the last surviving remains from Gupta period in Bengal.There are ten copper plate charters issued during the Gupta rule.All of them are dated in the Gupta era ranging from 113 to 224(432/33-543 ad).The record transfer of lands in Pundravardhanabhukti and the neighbouring areas.This included the present Dinajpur district of West Bengal and Rajshahi division of Bangladesh, including the districts of present Bogra,Naogaon,Natore etc.Situated to the north of Bhagirathi and Padma this has been regarded as one of the important sub-regions of Bengal through which effective lineages with the mod Ganga valley and Padma was established since the Maurya period.When Huns invaded India Utter Pradesh and Bihar was lost but Bengal was still in Gupta control.

Critics of this theory argue out that there is no epigraphic or numismatic evidence connecting the early Guptas to the Bengal region. Critics such as B. P. Sinha identify Mriga-shikha-vana with the deer park of Sarnath in present-day Uttar Pradesh, theorizing that Hwui-lun erroneously mentioned its location as east of Nalanda.

Mriga-Shika-Vana location- 1.According to D.C Ganguly Mriga-Shika-Vana was in Murshidabad in present day Bengal 2.According to a 1015 ad manuscript it was in present day Varendra of Bengal 3According to R.C Mujamder it was in present day Bengal 4.According to a Chinese monk who was in the time of Gupta empire and knows the location more than any historians Mriga-Shika-Vana was in 40 yojanas East of Magadha(Bihar) which would mean it was somewhere in Bengal. 5.only 1 or some more historians argue.B.P Sinha argues about it being in Utter Pradesh.His theory of it being in Utter Pradesh does not make sense as the Chinese monk Yijing mentions the temple to be in Bengal. It's most likely that it was in Bengal.The Gupta origins were most likely Bengali as proven up there. Only 1 critics on Bengal but 5+ on Utter Pradesh and Puranas.

More-

• In the origins of Gupta empire page of Wikipedia it theories that it originated in present day Utter Pradesh or 'BENGAL' based on numistic,epigraphic and literary evidence.
• Gupta empire had influence in Bengal.
• Bengal was an important province in Gupta empire.
• Bengal was a part of the Gupta empire from its start
• Guptas ruled on Bengal for some centuries.
• The Later Gupta dynasty also ruled on Bengal.
• Even in its weak time the Gupta empire still had Bengal.
• Bengal is associated with being Gupta empire homeland.
• There are 10 copper plate charters issues during Gupta rule.All of them are dated back in the Gupta era ranging from 113 to 224(432/433-543 ad).They record transfer of land in Pundravardhanabhukti and neighbouring lands.This included the Dinajpur district of West Bengal and Rajshahi division of Bangladesh, Including the districts of present Dinajpur,Naogaon,Natore etc.Situated to the north of Bhagirathi and Padma this has been regarded as one of the important sub-regions of Bengal through which effective lineages through the mid-ganga valley was established since the Maurya period(source:'Gupta rule in Bengal' pdf written by Sayantani Pal)
• According to Allahabad prasasti,

The kingdoms laying on the Eastern side of Samudragupta's empire were Nepal,Kartrpura,Kamarupa,Devaka(Assam or 'DHAKA'), and Samatata(Southeast 'Bengal') which were made 'tributary' states.

• Several historians have identified the location of Mrghasikavana in present day Bengal situated to the East of Nalanda.
• According to D.C Ganguly the location of Mi-li-kia-si-kia-po-no was in 'Murshidabad' of 'West Bengal'.
• S.Chattopadhyaya identified Mi-Li-Kia-Si-Po-No as a place in Malda district of West Bengal.
• a prominent theory locates the Gupta homeland in the present day Bengal region in the Ganges basin,based on the account of the 7th century Chinese Buddhist Monk Yijing.
• According to Yijing,King Che-Li-Ki-To(identified with the Gupta dynasty founder Sri Gupta) built a temple for Chinese pilgrims near Mi-li-kia-si-kia-po-no.Yijing states that this temple was located more than 40 yojanas east of Nalanda,which would mean it was situated somewhere in the modern day Bengal region.
• D.R Ganguly concludes that the original homeland of the Guptas were in Bengal not Magadha
• It is a valid presumption that parts of North Bengal were included in the territory ruled over by the founder of the Gupta family.it is based on a tradition recorded by a Chinese pilgrim four centuries later.
• According to a 1015 CE Manuscript,Margasthapana was name of a stupa located in the historical Varendra region,which is now a part of Bengal.
• According to historian R.C Mujamder, Mi-Li-Kia-Si-Po-No was either in Malda district of West Bengal or Rajshahi district of Bangladesh.
• to support his identification of Mi-Li-Kia-Si-Po-No as a place of Bengal,R.C Mujamder read interpreted the word as a transcription of Mriga-Sthapana rather than Mriga-Shikha-Vana.
• On the basis of the copper plates discovered till now,it is proven that North Bengal was directly ruled by Gupta kings.
• At that time Bengal had trading link with Southeast Asia and China.The discovery of a large number of imitation Gupta coins from different places of Bengal prove that Bengal enjoyed the benefit of money economy.
• The Gupta school inspired the Bengal school of sculptural art distinctly in the Pala period.
• Gold and silver coins were brought into entire currency in Bengal.
• Introduction of a large number of gold coins proves economic prosperity of Bengal of that time
• During Gupta era,Betel nut,Silk,Cotton,Coconut,Salt and Sugar etc were probably exported from Bengal.
• Bengal was one of the strongholds of Indian Buddhism in the medieval period.Most of the Hindu temples were built in 'Gupta era',Shashanka,Pala and Sena Dynasty(source is Wikipedia itself).
• It is evident that Guptas started their rule from a small province in Bengal, probably as subordinates of Kushanas(source is google).
• According to another theory,the original capital of the Gupta empire was located in present day Bengal region.According to the proponents of this theory,the dynasties founder Gupta probably ruled a small area in Bengal and his descendants captured a larger area in Bengal and Ganges Bassin which is described by the Puranas.
• It is very likely that the region of Varendra was already under the Gupta rule of SriGupta in the late third century ad.
• According to many other groups the original homeland of the Gupta empire was in Varendri/Varendri Bhumi of Bengal.
• Bengali historians like RC Ray Choudhury theories that the Gupta empire originated in the Varendri region which is now present day Rajshahi and Rangpur Bangladesh.
• Chandragupta II successfully quelled the revolt of the allied chiefs of Bengal and brought them under his sway(source is Wikipedia).
• Gupta coins have been discovered at Bengal also.
• Guptas spread their religion in Bengal.
• Guptas visited Bengal.
• Guptas liked Bengal.
• History believes Guptas came from Magadha or 'NORTHERN BENGAL' which was the -original nucleus- of their empire.
• Bengal Gupta Viharas pdf.
• The Gupta governors who seemed to have become independent after about 550 AD,occupied the North part of Bengal.
• An Iron plate inscription at Mehrauli in Delhi indicates that Gupta empire included Bengal.
• Gupta land grand records from Bengal.
• 5 Gupta inscriptions has been found in Bengal.
• Two hoards of golden coins have been found in Bengal.
• R.C Mujamder dismisses the epigraphic evidence cited in support of Gupta empire being Utter Pradesh theory,pointing out that the earlier Maurya kings ruled in present day Bihar but most of their inscriptions have been found outside this area.

Which gives a disadvantage to the theory of Gupta empire being Utter Pradesh and gives an advantage to the theory of Gupta empire being Bengal.

• The Guptas used Kaushambi style which was used by the king Chandravarman,who ruled in present day Bengal and whose territory did not include present day Utter Pradesh.
• A number of Gupta coins have been discovered in West Bengal and few have been discovered in Bangladesh.among them two were found at Mohammadpur in Magura district in 1853 and the other two were found in Comilla district in 1957.
• Inscription on one of the Gupta coins found in Bengal indicates that the entire Vanga kingdom-Greater Bangla was most likely part of the Gupta empire during the reign of Chandragupta I.
• One of the Gupta coins found in Bengal indicates that Samudragupta advanced further during his reign and conquered the whole of Vanga upto Dhaka.
• the discovery of a Gupta coin in Kotalipara upazila in Gopalganj clearly indicates the rise of Varakamandala as a political and trade centre during Gupta era.Dr Sharif said, adding that the discovery of Gupta coins at Mohammadpur in Magura further indicates that it was quite close to Kotalipara.
• The impact of the Gupta rule in Bengal was very profound and far-reaching.
• In the subsequent periods,the administration of Bengal was developed following the local administration and land system established by the Guptas.
• Dr Sharif said,the Gupta coins discovered might reconstruct the history of Bengal.
• We have evidence,from pre-Gupta crafts and artefacts that these land around the Delta were far from uncivilized.indeed museum collections around Bangladesh reveal the advanced skills of sculptors,jewellers,metal workers and terracotta workers, amongst others who have left enduring traces.We can not forget the literature that originates in Bengal during Gupta era.
• Scientific and engineering skills of Gupta period are manifested in the enduring lost wax sculptural and casting work,still practiced largely as a tourist craft in Bangladesh.
• during the era of the Later Gupta dynasty,Krishnagupta's grandson Jivitagupta carried out military expeditions in the Himalayan region and Southwestern Bengal.
• The later Gupta ruler Adityasena became the sovereign ruler of a large kingdom extending from Ganges in the North to the Chotta Nagpur in the South;and from Gomati river in the east to 'BAY OF BENGAL' in the west(source is Wikipedia)
• Nalrajar Garh fortification wall in Chilapata forests in the 'WEST BENGAL', is one of the last surviving fortification remains from the 'GUPTA' period.
• some other pdfs about Guptas in Bengal
• some other websites about Guptas in Bengal
• An expert from the Bangladesh National Museum have deciphered the inscriptions on 17 coins dated back to the times of the Gupta dynasty, in the hope of unearthing more information about the era as well as ancient Bengal.
• Of the seven types of gold coins issued by Samudragupta three viz. Standard, Archer and Ashvamedha are known to be from Bengal.
• Only two types of coins of Chandragupta II, who incorporated vanga in the Gupta Empire, are known from Bengal
• Two types-Archer (Faridpur, Bogra, Hughli, Burdwan) and King and Queen (Midnapore) - of the four known types of Skandagupta, have been found in Bengal.  *Archer type coins of Kumaragupta II (Kalighat, North and South 24-Parganas, Midnapore), Vainyagupta (Kalighat and Hughli) Narasinghagupta (Kalighat, Hughli, Murshidabad, Birbhum and Nadia), Kumaragupta III (Hughli and Burdwan) and Visnugupta (Kalighat, Hughli and 24-Parganas, North) have been found in Bengal. Most have metrical legends inscribed in chaste Sanskrit, highlighting the issuer's achievements on the obverse of the coins. A symbol in geometrical design is usually found on the reverse of Gupta coins and a large number bear a Garuda standard on the obverse.
• A coin of Skandagupta has been reported from chandraketugarh. Apart from these coins, no other specimens of silver coins are known from Bengal but reference to them in the Gupta epigraphs from Bengal definitely indicate their prevalence in the country. They were issued on the weight standard of 32 grains and referred to as rupaka in the inscriptions. No copper issues of the Guptas have been reported from Bengal. [Ashvini Agrawal]
• DC Ganguly considers Murshidabad as the early home of the Guptas and not Magadha. The view is based on the tradition recorded by i-tsing.
• In an illustrated Cambridge Manuscript, dated 1015 AD, there is a picture of a stupa, with the label 'Mrgasthapana Stupa of Varendra'. It would, therefore, follow that the 'Temple of China' was near the Mrgasthapana Stupa in varendra, and must have been situated either in Varendra, or not far from its boundary, on the bank of the Bhagirathi or the padma. So it could be assumed that the original home of the Guptas was most probably Murshidabad in West Bengal or Varendra in North Bengal or Bangladesh.
• It's likely that on the eve of the eastward expansion of the Guptas Bengal was divided into a number of small but powerful independent states. A record engraved on the Susunia hill, about 12 miles to the northwest of Bankura town in West Bengal, mentions Puskaranadhipa Maharaja chandravarman, son of Maharaja Singhavarman.
• A sentence in the sanskrit text Chandra-Vyakarana(c.7th century) called Guptas as 'Gupto' which is the Bengali version of Gupta

Sources for these:google,some historians, Wikipedia, articles,some other websites the sources can be found in google if searched deeply

Other theories

Mathura

Historian B. P. Sinha theorized that the Guptas originated in the Mathura-Ayodhya region in present-day Uttar Pradesh. He interpreted a phrase in the Arya-manjushri-mula-kalpa to argue that the Guptas belonged to Mathura. In support of this theory, Sinha stated that Samudragupta's coins were influenced by the coinage of the Kushan Empire, of which Mathura was an important centre.

However, Sinha's interpretation of the Arya-manjushri-mula-kalpa passage is doubtful, and the phrase has been alternatively read as "Mathurayam-Jato-vamshadyah", referring to the birth ("jāto") of a person at Mathura. Moreover, Samudragupta's coins show the influence of the later Kushan coins of Punjab, not the coins of Mathura. Finally, it is generally accepted by modern scholars that Mathura first came under the Gupta rule, when Samudragupta defeated the Naga king Ganapati-naga, and annexed his territory to the Gupta empire.

Prayaga

Prayaga (modern Allahabad) has also been proposed as the original headquarters of the Guptas, as Samudragupta's Allahabad Pillar inscription is the dynasty's earliest extant information. However, archaeological evidence proves that Bhita, which is located less than 20 km from Prayaga, was under the control of the Magha dynasty. Therefore, it is likely that the Guptas conquered Prayaga at a later time.

Ancestry

The Pune and Riddhapur inscriptions of the Gupta princess Prabhavati-gupta, the daughter of Chandragupta II, state that she belonged to the Dharana gotra (clan). Her husband Rudrasena II belonged to the Vishnu-vriddha gotra, as attested by the Chamak copper plates of his son Pravarasena II. Therefore, it is likely that Dharana was the name of her paternal gotra, that is, the gotra of the Gupta family.

The Dharana gotra has been interpreted in various ways:

• K. P. Jayaswal connected it to the Jat clans named Dhanri and Dharaniya. To support his theory of Jat origin of the Guptas, Jayaswal identified king Chandrasena mentioned in the play Kaumudi-Mahotsava with Chandragupta I: this play mentions Chandrasena as Karaskara, which Jayaswal connected to "Kakkar", the name of a Jat gotra. However, the clans called Dharana are also found among other communities, and Jayaswal's identification of Chandrasena as Chandragupta I is wrong: it has now been conclusively proved that the play Kaumudi-Mahotsava has nothing to do with the early Gupta history. Historian B. P. Sinha interpreted a phrase in the Arya-manjushri-mula-kalpa to argue that the Guptas belonged to the Jat community of Mathura. However, Sinha's reading is doubtful, and the phrase has been alternatively read as "Mathurayam-Jato-vamshadyah", referring to the birth ("jāto") of a person at Mathura.
• Historian H. C. Raychaudhuri theorized that the Guptas may have been related to Dharini, the queen of the Shunga ruler Agnimitra. However, this theory has been rejected by other scholars. Mere similarity of the words "Dharana" and "Dharini" is not sufficient evidence to connect these two dynasties.
• Based on evidence from the Skanda Purana, historian Dasharatha Sharma theorizes that Dharana was a gotra of the Brahmanas of the historical Dharmaranya region in the present-day Mirzapur district. According to him, the Guptas were not Brahmanas, but "adopted" the gotra of their Brahmana gurus.
• Nepali scholar D. R. Regmi links the imperial Guptas with the Abhira Guptas of Nepal, noting that excavations in Nepal and Deccan have revealed that the Gupta suffix was common among Abhira kings.

An alternative reading of Prabhavati-gupta's inscriptions suggests that Dharana was not her gotra, but the gotra of her mother Kuberanaga.

Vaishyas

Some historians, such as A. S. Altekar, have theorized that the Guptas were originally Vaishyas, as some ancient Indian texts (such as the Vishnu Purana) prescribe the name "Gupta" for the members of the Vaishya varna.

Critics of this theory argue that:

• The suffix Gupta features in the names of several non-Vaishyas before as well as during the Gupta period, and cannot be considered as concrete evidence of the Gupta kings being Vaishyas.
• The early records of the Gupta dynasty do not describe "Gupta" as their family's name: it is possible that the family came to be known as Gupta simply because the names of their kings bore the suffix "-gupta", or after the dynasty's founder Gupta.

Brahmanas

Some scholars, such as S. R. Goyal, theorize that the Guptas were Brahmanas because they had matrimonial relations with Brahmanas:

• Prabhavati-gupta, a daughter of Chandragupta II, married the Vakataka king Rudrasena II, who was a Brahmana.
• The Kadamba king Kakustha-varman, also a Brahmana, married one of his daughters to a Gupta king.
• According to the Buddhist scholar Paramartha, the Gupta king Baladitya married his sister to Vasurata, who was a Brahman.
• According to the Mandsaur stone inscription of Yashodharman, the Brahmana Ravikirtti had a wife named "Bhanugupta". This "Bhanugupta" may actually have been a daughter of the Gupta king Bhanugupta.

Supporters of this theory also point out that there are several instances of Brahmana names ending in "-gupta", such as Vishnugupta and Brahmagupta.

Critics of this theory argue that:

• If the Guptas were indeed Brahmanas, they would have proudly mentioned this in their inscriptions, as the Brahmanas hold the highest status among the four varnas. But none of the Gupta records mention the dynasty's varna. Samudragupta proudly mentioned his maternal ancestry from the Licchavis, who were not Brahmanas, and are regarded as "impure" in the Brahmanical text Manusamhita.
• The marriage of the Kadamba princess to a Gupta king may have been a result of political considerations. The other three instances involve Gupta princesses marrying Brahmana men: the marriage of a lower-varna woman to a higher-varna man was acceptable (anuloma) in the contemporary society, and therefore, these marriages cannot be considered as evidence of the Guptas themselves being Brahmanas.
• There are several instances of ancient Indian kings marrying outside their social group, including foreigners.

References

Bibliography

• Ashvini Agrawal (1989). Rise and Fall of the Imperial Guptas. Motilal Banarsidass. p. 315. ISBN 978-81-208-0592-7.
• Dilip Kumar Ganguly (1987). The Imperial Guptas and Their Times. Abhinav. ISBN 978-81-7017-222-2.
• R. C. Majumdar (1981). A Comprehensive History of India. Vol. 3, Part I: A.D. 300-985. Indian History Congress / People's Publishing House. OCLC 34008529.
• R. C. Majumdar (1976). Readings in Political History of India, Ancient, Mediaeval, and Modern. B.R. ISBN 9788176467841.
• Shankar Goyal (2001). Problems of Ancient Indian History: New Perspectives and Perceptions. Book Enclave. ISBN 978-81-87036-66-1.
• Tej Ram Sharma (1989). A Political History of the Imperial Guptas: From Gupta to Skandagupta. Concept. ISBN 978-81-7022-251-4.