Goddesses from the East

? or Kot.ivars.a ? in cooperation with Yuko Yokochi

Introduction

We conclude our journey through the world of the Skandapur¯an. a in the east. After a brief note on the possible place of composition of our text, V¯ar¯an. as¯ı,our survey began in Kuruks.etra, the westernmost area covered by the Pur¯an. a. Via Hardwar and Kalinjar, we reached Mun. d. eśvar¯ıHill in Bihar in the previous chapter. From Tilottam¯a’sMan. d. aleśvara, we travel c. 500 km further eastwards until we come to the present-day village of in the Dakshin Dinajpur District of West (). As will be argued below, a historic site near this village can be identified as Kot.ivars.a. The glorification of Kot.ivars.a and its goddesses is the last M¯a- h¯atmya in the Skandapur¯an. a, found in the second half of chapter 171.686 Herewith we reach the eastern limit of the geographical area encompassed by our text, situated 81 km north-east of the army camp of King Hars.a in Kajurgira on the Ganges, the site where he reportedly met the Chinese pilgrim Xuanzang (see above, p. 97).

Bangarh or Kot. ivars.a: the material evidence

The Damodarpur Copperplate Inscriptions In April 1915 a set of five copperplates was discovered while constructing a road near the village of Damodarpur, 13 km west of Phulbari Railway

686 SPBh 171.78–137. This M¯ah¯atmya is inserted after the myth of Mount Krau˜nca. SPBh 171.1–77 tells how Skanda runs a race with Indra around Krau˜nca.He de- stroys the mountain and brings it back to life. Indra acknowledges Skanda’s great- ness. The M¯ah¯atmya answers Vy¯asa’squestion as to how Śam. kara became the leader of the M¯atr.s and who these Mothers are. SPBh 172 continues with the myth of Indra clipping the wings of the mountains.

241 242 Hans Bakker & Yuko Yokochi

Station in the Dinajpur District of what is now (see Plate 6).687 These documents record the legal execution of land transactions under the Imperial Gupta dynasty, two under Kum¯araguptaI (Nos. 1–2), two under Budhagupta (Nos. 3–4), and the last one, No. 5, issued under a Gupta king whose name (of two syllables) has been lost, and which has been, consequently, much debated. The opening of this 5th inscription runs as follows. On 5 Bh¯adrain the year 224—when the Paramadaivata, Parama- bhat.t.¯araka, Mah¯ar¯aj¯adhir¯aja,the illustrious . . . gupta was reigning over the earth, and when in the Kot.ivars.a District—thriving thanks to the government of Devabhat.t.¯araka Mah¯ar¯ajaputra,command- ing the infantry, cavalry and elephants, who had been elected by that venerable (king) to the position of viceroy in the province of Pun. d. ravardhana—(when thus in the Kot.ivars.a District) the prefect Svayambhudeva, who had been appointed in this (office) by that (viceroy), was leading the administration of the capital together with the venerable mayor . . . p¯ala,the merchant Sth¯an. udatta, the chief artisan Matidatta, and the first secretary Skandap¯ala—arequest was made by a man of good family hailing from Ayodhy¯a,Amr.tadeva.688 Various restorations have been proposed for the illegible Gupta name: Budha◦, Vis.n. u◦, Upa◦, Bh¯anu◦, or Kum¯ara◦,689 but we have argued

687 Basak in EI XV (1919–20), 113; Sircar in SI I, 332. Confusion about the findspot is caused by the editors of the revised edition of CII III (1981), when they describe the findspot as lying in ‘, ’ (p. 282), which would imply India. 688 Text based on EI XV, 142f. and SI I, 347f. (emended). Basak (EI XV, 142) reads this date as G.D. 214 (= ad 533/34). sahmvai 200 20 4 bh¯adra di 5, paramadaivataparamabhat..t¯arakamahh¯air¯aj¯adhir¯ajaśr¯ı ˘ ˘ gupte pr.thiv¯ıpatau, tatp¯adaparigr.h¯ıt(a)hsyai pun. d. ravardhanabhukt¯avuparihkamah¯ar¯ajaisya hmah¯ai- r¯ajaputradevabhat..t¯arakasya hastyaśvajanabhogen¯anuvaham¯ahnaike koh.tivairs.avi- .sahyei ca tanniyuktak(a) hiiha vis.ayapatisvayambhudeve adhis..th¯an¯adhikaran. ahmi ¯aryahnaigarahśres..thii ˘ ˘ p¯ala-s¯arthav¯ahasth¯an. udatta-prathamakulikamatidatta- prathamak¯ayasthaskandap¯ala-puroge hsam. ivyahvahairati, ¯ayodhyakakulaputraka-amr.tadevena vij˜n¯apitamh |i 689 Gupta 1974–79 I, 48f.; CII III (1981), 361; Sircar SI I, 346 n. 5. Willis 2005, 145 n. 68 assigns the inscription to Budhagupta and argues for an earlier date for this in- scription. He tentatively proposes the reading ‘154,’ but admits that this date ‘does not fit the case anymore than 224.’ Another argument advanced by Willis to assign the Damodarpur Inscription No. 5 to Budhagupta is that the title paramadaivata (found in the inscription at issue) is ‘favoured by Budhagupta.’ This argument is nullified by the fact that, on the one hand, this title is not found, to the best of my knowledge, in any other Budhagupta inscription from elsewhere (in the Shankarpur Copperplate Budhagupta is called paramadeva), and, on the other hand, this title is also bestowed on the Imperial Kum¯araguptain the two Damodarpur inscriptions