2 Gupt In Tamil Pdf Download

Chandragupta II (r.c. 376-415), also known by his title Vikramaditya, as well as Chandragupta Vikramaditya, was the third ruler of the Gupta Empire in India, and was one of the most powerful emperors of the Gupta dynasty.

Chandragupta continued the expansionist policy of his father Samudragupta, mainly through military conquest. Historical evidence suggests that he defeated the Western Kshatrapas, and extended the Gupta Empire from the Indus River in the west to the Bengal region in the east, and from the Himalayan foothills in the north to the Narmada River in the south. His daughter Prabhavatigupta was a queen of the southern Vakataka kingdom, and he may have had influence in the Vakataka territory during her regency.

The Gupta Empire reached its zenith during the rule of Chandragupta. The Chinese pilgrim Faxian, who visited India during his reign, suggests that he ruled over a peaceful and prosperous kingdom. The legendary figure of Vikramaditya is probably based on Chandragupta II (among other kings), and the noted Sanskrit poet Kalidasa may have been his court poet.

Chandragupta II was the second ruler of the dynasty to bear the name \"Chandragupta\", the first being his grandfather Chandragupta I. He was also simply known as \"Chandra\", as attested by his coins.[5] The Sanchi inscription of his officer Amrakardava states that he was also known as Deva-raja. The records of his daughter Prabhavatigupta, issued as a Vakataka queen, call him Chandragupta as well as Deva-gupta.[6] Deva-shri (IAST: Devaśri) is another variation of this name.[7] The Delhi iron pillar inscription states that king Chandra was also known as \"Dhava\": if this king Chandra is identified with Chandragupta (see below), it appears that \"Dhava\" was another name for the king. Another possibility is that \"dhava\" is a mistake for a common noun \"bhava\", although this is unlikely, as the rest of the inscription does not contain any errors.[8]

A passage in the Vishnu Purana suggests that major parts of the eastern coast of India - Kosala, Odra, Tamralipta, and Puri - were ruled by the Devarakshitas around the same time as the Guptas. Since it seems unlikely that an obscure dynasty named Devarakshita was powerful enough to control substantial territory during the Gupta period, some scholars, such as Dasharatha Sharma, theorize that \"Deva-rakshita\" (IAST: Devarakṣita) was another name for Chandragupta II. Others, such as D. K. Ganguly, oppose this theory, arguing that this identification is quite arbitrary, and cannot be explained satisfactorily.[9]

Chandragupta assumed the titles Bhattaraka and Maharajadhiraja, and bore the epithet Apratiratha (\"having no equal or antagonist\"). The Supiya stone pillar inscription, issued during the reign of his descendant Skandagupta, also calls him \"Vikramaditya\".[7]

Chandragupta was a son of Samudragupta and queen Dattadevi, as attested by his own inscriptions.[7] According to the official Gupta genealogy, Chandragupta succeeded his father on the Gupta throne. The Sanskrit play Devichandraguptam, combined with other evidence suggests that he had an elder brother named Ramagupta, who preceded him on the throne. In the play, Ramagupta decides to surrender his queen Dhruvadevi to a Shaka enemy when besieged, but Chandragupta goes to the enemy camp disguised as the queen and kills the enemy. Sometime later, Chandragupta dethrones Ramagupta, and becomes the new king.[10] The historicity of this narrative is debated among modern historians, with some believing it to be based on true historical events, while others dismissing it as a work of fiction.[11][12]

The Mathura pillar inscription of Chandragupta II (as well as some other Gupta inscriptions) mention two dates: several historians have assumed that one of these dates denotes the king's regnal year, while the other date denotes the year of the Gupta calendar era.[15] However, Indologist Harry Falk in 2004 has theorized that the date understood to be the regnal year by the earlier scholars is actually a date of the kālānuvarttamāna system.[16] According to Falk, the kālānuvarttamāna system is a continuation of the Kushana calendar era established by emperor Kanishka, whose coronation Falk dates to 127 CE. The Kushana era restarts counting after a hundred years (e.g. the year after 100 is 1, not 101).[17]

Falk notes that the \"dynastic year\" in the table above appears to be a year of the Gupta era. The kālānuvarttamāna year cannot be regnal year, because Chandragupta I is not known to have ruled for as long as 61 years. If we assume \"61\" of the Mathura pillar inscription denotes a year of the Gupta era (as assumed by Bhandarkar, Sircar and other scholars), we must assume that \"15\" of the Buddhist image pedestal also denotes a year of the Gupta era: this is obviously incorrect, since Kumaragupta I ruled after Chandragupta II. Scholars K.K. Thaplyal and R.C. Sharma, who studied the Buddhist image pedestal inscription, speculated that the scribe had mistakenly interchanged the years 121 and 15, but Falk calls this assumption unnecessary.[22]

According to Falk, the discrepancy can be explained satisfactorily, if we assume that the kālānuvarttamāna era denotes a system that restarts counting after a hundred years. The Yaksha figure inscription is dated to year 112 of the Gupta era (c. 432 CE), which corresponds to the kālānuvarttamāna year 5. Thus, the kālānuvarttamāna era used during Kumaragupta's time must have started in 432-5 = 427 CE. The years mentioned in the Buddhist image pedestal inscription also suggests that the epoch of this era was c. 426-427 CE.[23] Since the kālānuvarttamāna system restarts counting every 100 years, the kālānuvarttamāna era used during the reign of Chandragupta II must have started in 327 CE. Thus, the Mathura inscription can be dated to 327+61 = c. 388 CE.[24] While Falk's theory does not change the Gupta chronology significantly, it implies that the date of the Mathura inscription cannot be used to determine the beginning of Chandragupta's reign.[24]

The Sanchi inscription, dated to 412-413 CE (year 93 of the Gupta era), is the last known dated inscription of Chandragupta.[7] His son Kumaragupta was on the throne by the 415-416 CE (year 96 of the Gupta era), so Chandragupta's reign must have ended sometime during 412-415 CE.[25]

The Udayagiri inscription of Chandragupta's foreign minister Virasena suggests that the king had a distinguished military career. It states that he \"bought the earth\", paying for it with his prowess, and reduced the other kings to the status of slaves.[26] His empire seems to have extended from the mouth of the Indus and northern Pakistan in the west to the Bengal region in the east, and from the Himalayan terai region in the north to the Narmada River in the south.[5][27]

Chandragupta's father Samudragupta and his son Kumaragupta I are known to have performed the Ashvamedha horse sacrifice to proclaim their military prowess. In the 20th century, the discovery of a stone image of a horse found near Varanasi, and the misreading of its inscription as \"Chandramgu\" (taken to be \"Chandragupta\"), led to speculation that Chandragupta also performed the Ashvamedha sacrifice. However, there is no actual evidence to support this theory.[28]

Historical and literary evidence suggests that Chandragupta II achieved military successes against the Western Kshatrapas (also known as Shakas), who ruled in west-central India.[29] The Allahabad Pillar inscription of Chandragupta's father Samudragupta names the \"Shaka-Murundas\" among the kings who tried to appease him.[30][31] It may be possible that Samudragupta reduced the Shakas to a state of subordinate alliance, and Chandragupta completely subjugated them.[32]

The exact date of Chandragupta's victory is not known, but it can be tentatively dated to sometime between 397 and 409.[33] The last of the 4th century Kshatrapa coins - that of Rudrasimha III - can be dated to the Shaka year 310 or 319 (the coin legend is partially lost), that is 388 or 397.[29] Chandragupta's coins, dated to 409, are similar to the Kshtrapa coins, with the Shakas' Buddhist vihara symbol replaced by the Gupta symbol of Garuda.[33]

Literary evidence also corroborates Chandragupta's victory over the Western Kshatrapas. The Sanskrit play Devichandraguptam, whose historicity is disputed, narrates that Chandragupta's elder brother Ramagupta agreed to surrender his queen Dhruvadevi to a Shaka chief when besieged, but Chandragupta went to the enemy camp disguised as the queen, and killed the Shaka chief.[32] Chandragupta bore the title Vikramaditya, and several Indian legends talk of king Vikramaditya who defeated the Shakas. Several modern scholars have theorized that these legends may be based on Chandragupta's victory over the Shakas.[32]

The iron pillar of Delhi contains an inscription of a king called \"Chandra\".[35] Modern scholars generally identify this king with Chandragupta II, although this cannot be said with complete certainty.[36]

If Chandra is identified with Chandragupta, it appears that Chandragupta marched through the Punjab region, and advanced up to the country of the Vahlikas, that is, Balkh in present-day Afghanistan.[36] Some short Sanskrit inscriptions at the Sacred Rock of Hunza (in present-day Pakistan), written in Gupta script, mention the name Chandra. A few of these inscriptions also mention the name Harishena, and one particular inscription mentions Chandra with the epithet \"Vikramaditya\". Based on the identification of \"Chandra\" with Chandragupta, and Harishena with the Gupta courtier Harishena, these inscriptions can be considered as further evidence of a Gupta military campaign in the area. However, this identification is not certain, and Chandra of the Hunza inscriptions could have well been a local ruler.[5]

It is quite possible that Chandragupta passed through the Punjab region during this campaign: his political influence in this region is attested to by the use of the Gupta era in an inscription found at Shorkot, and by some coins bearing the name \"Chandragupta\". However, there is no evidence that Chandragupta annexed Punjab to the Gupta Empire, which suggests that Chandragupta's victory in this region was not a decisive one. There is little evidence of Gupta influence in Punjab after his reign: numismatic evidence suggests that Punjab was ruled by petty chieftains after his death. These chieftains bore Indian names, but issued coins that imitate the Kidarite coinage: they may have been Hinduized foreigners or Indians continuing the usage of foreign-style coinage.[38] 153554b96e

https://www.intemannart.com/forum/diy-forum/how-to-hack-private-chaturbate-exclusive

https://www.fortunare.com.br/group/mysite-231-group/discussion/d10f9c55-a264-477e-b63a-6b21e618a8b8

https://www.darkha.com/en/forum/bienvenido-al-foro/naruto-road-to-ninja-download-legendado-torrent