Введение
Рамагупта (IAST: Rāma gupta; правил ок. конец IV века н.э.), согласно санскритской пьесе «Девичандрагуптам», был императором династии Гупта в Северной Индии. Сохранившиеся фрагменты пьесы, в сочетании с другими литературными данными, указывают на то, что он согласился выдать свою жену Дхрувадеви врагу, шаке. Однако его брат Чандрагупта II убил шакского врага, а затем сверг его с престола и женился на Дхрувадеви. Официальная генеалогия Гуптов не упоминает Рамагупту, поэтому историчность сюжета, изложенного в «Девичандрагуптаме», остаётся предметом споров. Несколько других источников упоминают события, описанные в пьесе, но не называют Рамагупту по имени и, возможно, основаны на самой пьесе. Три недатированных надписи, выполненные на различных вариантах письма Гупта и обнаруженные в центральной Индии, упоминают царя по имени Рамагупта: это, по-видимому, подтверждает существование императора Гупта по имени Рамагупта, хотя и не является окончательным доказательством историчности истории, изложенной в «Девичандрагуптаме». Некоторые монеты, найденные в центральной Индии, также приписываются Рамагупте, но эта атрибуция не была единогласно принята современными историками.
Правление
Основываясь на сохранившихся фрагментах «Девичандрагуптами» и других подтверждающих свидетельствах, современные ученые предполагают, что Рамагупта был старшим сыном и преемником императора Гупты Самудрагупты. Согласно пьесе, Рамагупта решил сдать свою жену Дхрувудеви (или Дхрувусвамини) врагу, принадлежащему к племени шаков, но его младший брат Чандрагупта отправился в лагерь врага, переодевшись в королеву, и убил врага. Согласно отрывку из «Девичандрагуптами», цитируемому в «Шрингара Пракаше» Бходжи, лагерь врага находился в Алипуре. В «Харша-харите» Баны это место называется «Арипура» (буквально «город врага»), а в одной рукописи «Харша-хариты» – «Налинпура». Личность врага Рамагупты, принадлежащего к племени шаков (IAST: Śaka), не установлена. Предлагаемые идентификации включают: историк В. В. Мираши отождествлял его с кушанским царем, правившим в Пенджабе, который упоминается как «Девапутра Шахи Шанушахи» в надписи Самудрагупты на Аллахабадском столбе. Историк А. С. Алтекар отождествлял его с Пиро, сыном Кидара I, контролировавшим западный и центральный Пенджаб. Алтекар предположил, что Пиро вторгся в восточный Пенджаб, а Рамагупта попытался остановить его продвижение, что привело к войне. Основываясь на надписях на статуях джайнов (см. #Inscriptions ниже), историк Теж Рам Шарма предполагает, что Рамагупта, возможно, избрал «спокойный образ жизни» после своего унижения врагом из племени шаков, что может объяснить его склонность к джайнизму. Позже Чандрагупта, по-видимому, убил Рамагупту и женился на Дхрувадеви, которая упоминается как жена Чандрагупты в записях династии Гуптов.
Historian V. V. Mirashi identified him with the Kushan king who ruled in Punjab, and who is referred to as "Devaputra Shahi Shanushahi" in Samudragupta's Allahabad Pillar inscription. Historian A. S. Altekar identified him with Piro, a son of Kidara I, who controlled western and central Punjab. Altekar theorized that Piro invaded eastern Punjab, and Ramagupta attempted to check his advance, leading to a war. Based on the Jain statue inscriptions (see #Inscriptions below), historian Tej Ram Sharma speculates that Ramagupta may have adopted "a peaceful style of life" after his humiliation by the Shaka enemy, which may explain his inclination towards Jainism. Later, Chandragputa appears to have killed Ramagupta and married Dhruvadevi, who is mentioned as Chandragupta's queen in the Gupta records.
Надписи
Две каменные статуи джайновских тиртханкара, обнаруженные в Дурджанпуре (или Дурджанпуре) недалеко от Видиши, содержат надписи, в которых упоминается Махараджахираджа Рамагупта; частично поврежденная надпись на другой подобной статуе также, по-видимому, упоминает его имя. Статуи были обнаружены при расчистке поля бульдозером и частично повреждены им.
Based on the reconstructed text, all three inscriptions appear to contain same text except the name of the tirthankara. They state that emperor Ramagupta caused the statues to be built at the behest of a mendicant. The mendicant was named Chella Kshamana or Chelu kshamana (IAST: Celū kṣamaṇa), who was a son Golakyanti and a pupil of Acharya Sarppasena kshamana, who in turn, was a pupil's pupil of Chandra kshamana. These inscriptions do not mention that Ramagupta belonged to the Gupta dynasty, and do not mention any date. However, following arguments can be made to date them to the 4th century, and to support the identification of the Ramagupta mentioned in these inscriptions as a Gupta emperor:
According to epigraphist G. S. Gai, who edited the inscriptions, the inscriptions feature the so called southern or western variety of the Gupta script: the alphabet clearly resembles the alphabet of the Eran inscription of Samudragupta (who must have been Ramagupta's predecessor) and the Sanchi inscription of Chandragupta II (who must have been Ramagupta's successor). The medial 'i' character is different from the one featured in the Sanchi inscriptions, but such a character can also be found in earlier inscriptions, such as the Nandsa Yupa inscriptions of the 3rd century. Thus, on palaeographic basis, the Ramagupta inscriptions can be assigned to the 4th century CE. According to Gai, the sculptural features and styles of the statues also suggest that they belong to the 4th century CE. The prabhavali (halo) is not as developed and stylized as in the 5th century Buddha images from Sanchi. The pedestals of the statues feature a chakra at the centre, instead of the characteristic lanchanas (traditional symbols) associated with the tirthankaras, which suggests that the images belong to an "early stage in the development of the Jaina iconography". Maharajadhiraja is an imperial title, which indicates that Ramagupta was a historical Gupta emperor. However, according to another theory, the Ramagupta of the Durjanpur inscriptions is a later Gupta king, not the brother of Chandragupta II. Historian D. C. Sircar has dated these records to a later period, based on a comparison of letters and signs that occur in these inscriptions and the Sanchi inscriptions of Chandragupta II.
**Статуя – Состояние сохранности – Надпись на пьедестале** (транслитерация IAST, реконструированные части в квадратных скобках)
Based on the reconstructed text, all three inscriptions appear to contain same text except the name of the tirthankara. They state that emperor Ramagupta caused the statues to be built at the behest of a mendicant. The mendicant was named Chella Kshamana or Chelu kshamana (IAST: Celū kṣamaṇa), who was a son Golakyanti and a pupil of Acharya Sarppasena kshamana, who in turn, was a pupil's pupil of Chandra kshamana. These inscriptions do not mention that Ramagupta belonged to the Gupta dynasty, and do not mention any date. However, following arguments can be made to date them to the 4th century, and to support the identification of the Ramagupta mentioned in these inscriptions as a Gupta emperor:
According to epigraphist G. S. Gai, who edited the inscriptions, the inscriptions feature the so called southern or western variety of the Gupta script: the alphabet clearly resembles the alphabet of the Eran inscription of Samudragupta (who must have been Ramagupta's predecessor) and the Sanchi inscription of Chandragupta II (who must have been Ramagupta's successor). The medial 'i' character is different from the one featured in the Sanchi inscriptions, but such a character can also be found in earlier inscriptions, such as the Nandsa Yupa inscriptions of the 3rd century. Thus, on palaeographic basis, the Ramagupta inscriptions can be assigned to the 4th century CE. According to Gai, the sculptural features and styles of the statues also suggest that they belong to the 4th century CE. The prabhavali (halo) is not as developed and stylized as in the 5th century Buddha images from Sanchi. The pedestals of the statues feature a chakra at the centre, instead of the characteristic lanchanas (traditional symbols) associated with the tirthankaras, which suggests that the images belong to an "early stage in the development of the Jaina iconography". Maharajadhiraja is an imperial title, which indicates that Ramagupta was a historical Gupta emperor. However, according to another theory, the Ramagupta of the Durjanpur inscriptions is a later Gupta king, not the brother of Chandragupta II. Historian D. C. Sircar has dated these records to a later period, based on a comparison of letters and signs that occur in these inscriptions and the Sanchi inscriptions of Chandragupta II.
**A: Статуя Чандрапрабхи** – Лицо тиртханкара полностью повреждено, лицо левой фигуры-служащего повреждено, надпись хорошо сохранилась и завершена. *Bhagavatorhataḥ Candraprabhasya pratime yaṃ kāritā ma harājadhirāja śri Rāmaguptena upadeśāt Pāṇipā trika Candrakṣamacā ryya kṣamaṇa śramana praśiṣya acāryya Sarppasena kṣamaṇa śiṣyasya Golakyāntyā satputraasya Celūkṣamaṇasyeti*
Based on the reconstructed text, all three inscriptions appear to contain same text except the name of the tirthankara. They state that emperor Ramagupta caused the statues to be built at the behest of a mendicant. The mendicant was named Chella Kshamana or Chelu kshamana (IAST: Celū kṣamaṇa), who was a son Golakyanti and a pupil of Acharya Sarppasena kshamana, who in turn, was a pupil's pupil of Chandra kshamana. These inscriptions do not mention that Ramagupta belonged to the Gupta dynasty, and do not mention any date. However, following arguments can be made to date them to the 4th century, and to support the identification of the Ramagupta mentioned in these inscriptions as a Gupta emperor:
According to epigraphist G. S. Gai, who edited the inscriptions, the inscriptions feature the so called southern or western variety of the Gupta script: the alphabet clearly resembles the alphabet of the Eran inscription of Samudragupta (who must have been Ramagupta's predecessor) and the Sanchi inscription of Chandragupta II (who must have been Ramagupta's successor). The medial 'i' character is different from the one featured in the Sanchi inscriptions, but such a character can also be found in earlier inscriptions, such as the Nandsa Yupa inscriptions of the 3rd century. Thus, on palaeographic basis, the Ramagupta inscriptions can be assigned to the 4th century CE. According to Gai, the sculptural features and styles of the statues also suggest that they belong to the 4th century CE. The prabhavali (halo) is not as developed and stylized as in the 5th century Buddha images from Sanchi. The pedestals of the statues feature a chakra at the centre, instead of the characteristic lanchanas (traditional symbols) associated with the tirthankaras, which suggests that the images belong to an "early stage in the development of the Jaina iconography". Maharajadhiraja is an imperial title, which indicates that Ramagupta was a historical Gupta emperor. However, according to another theory, the Ramagupta of the Durjanpur inscriptions is a later Gupta king, not the brother of Chandragupta II. Historian D. C. Sircar has dated these records to a later period, based on a comparison of letters and signs that occur in these inscriptions and the Sanchi inscriptions of Chandragupta II.
**B: Статуя Пушпаданты** – Лицо тиртханкара полностью повреждено, фигуры-служащего и прабхавали хорошо сохранились, последние две строки надписи повреждены. *Bhagavatorhataḥ Puṣpadantasya pratime yaṃ kāritā ma harājadhirāja śri Rāmaguptena upadeśāt Pāṇipātrika Candrakṣama[nācā]ryya [kṣamaṇa] śramana praśi[ṣya] [поврежденная часть] ti*
Based on the reconstructed text, all three inscriptions appear to contain same text except the name of the tirthankara. They state that emperor Ramagupta caused the statues to be built at the behest of a mendicant. The mendicant was named Chella Kshamana or Chelu kshamana (IAST: Celū kṣamaṇa), who was a son Golakyanti and a pupil of Acharya Sarppasena kshamana, who in turn, was a pupil's pupil of Chandra kshamana. These inscriptions do not mention that Ramagupta belonged to the Gupta dynasty, and do not mention any date. However, following arguments can be made to date them to the 4th century, and to support the identification of the Ramagupta mentioned in these inscriptions as a Gupta emperor:
According to epigraphist G. S. Gai, who edited the inscriptions, the inscriptions feature the so called southern or western variety of the Gupta script: the alphabet clearly resembles the alphabet of the Eran inscription of Samudragupta (who must have been Ramagupta's predecessor) and the Sanchi inscription of Chandragupta II (who must have been Ramagupta's successor). The medial 'i' character is different from the one featured in the Sanchi inscriptions, but such a character can also be found in earlier inscriptions, such as the Nandsa Yupa inscriptions of the 3rd century. Thus, on palaeographic basis, the Ramagupta inscriptions can be assigned to the 4th century CE. According to Gai, the sculptural features and styles of the statues also suggest that they belong to the 4th century CE. The prabhavali (halo) is not as developed and stylized as in the 5th century Buddha images from Sanchi. The pedestals of the statues feature a chakra at the centre, instead of the characteristic lanchanas (traditional symbols) associated with the tirthankaras, which suggests that the images belong to an "early stage in the development of the Jaina iconography". Maharajadhiraja is an imperial title, which indicates that Ramagupta was a historical Gupta emperor. However, according to another theory, the Ramagupta of the Durjanpur inscriptions is a later Gupta king, not the brother of Chandragupta II. Historian D. C. Sircar has dated these records to a later period, based on a comparison of letters and signs that occur in these inscriptions and the Sanchi inscriptions of Chandragupta II.
**C: Статуя Чандрапрабхи** – Лицо тиртханкара частично сохранилось, фигуры-служащего и прабхавали полностью утрачены, надпись стерта (хотя некоторые слова и буквы могут быть реконструированы на основе двух других надписей). *Bhagava[to]rha[taḥ] [Candra]prabhasya pratime yaṃ [kā]ritā maha[rāja]dhirā[ja] śri [Rāmagupte]na u[padeśāt Pā]ṇi[pātri] [поврежденная часть]*
Based on the reconstructed text, all three inscriptions appear to contain same text except the name of the tirthankara. They state that emperor Ramagupta caused the statues to be built at the behest of a mendicant. The mendicant was named Chella Kshamana or Chelu kshamana (IAST: Celū kṣamaṇa), who was a son Golakyanti and a pupil of Acharya Sarppasena kshamana, who in turn, was a pupil's pupil of Chandra kshamana. These inscriptions do not mention that Ramagupta belonged to the Gupta dynasty, and do not mention any date. However, following arguments can be made to date them to the 4th century, and to support the identification of the Ramagupta mentioned in these inscriptions as a Gupta emperor:
According to epigraphist G. S. Gai, who edited the inscriptions, the inscriptions feature the so called southern or western variety of the Gupta script: the alphabet clearly resembles the alphabet of the Eran inscription of Samudragupta (who must have been Ramagupta's predecessor) and the Sanchi inscription of Chandragupta II (who must have been Ramagupta's successor). The medial 'i' character is different from the one featured in the Sanchi inscriptions, but such a character can also be found in earlier inscriptions, such as the Nandsa Yupa inscriptions of the 3rd century. Thus, on palaeographic basis, the Ramagupta inscriptions can be assigned to the 4th century CE. According to Gai, the sculptural features and styles of the statues also suggest that they belong to the 4th century CE. The prabhavali (halo) is not as developed and stylized as in the 5th century Buddha images from Sanchi. The pedestals of the statues feature a chakra at the centre, instead of the characteristic lanchanas (traditional symbols) associated with the tirthankaras, which suggests that the images belong to an "early stage in the development of the Jaina iconography". Maharajadhiraja is an imperial title, which indicates that Ramagupta was a historical Gupta emperor. However, according to another theory, the Ramagupta of the Durjanpur inscriptions is a later Gupta king, not the brother of Chandragupta II. Historian D. C. Sircar has dated these records to a later period, based on a comparison of letters and signs that occur in these inscriptions and the Sanchi inscriptions of Chandragupta II.
Основываясь на реконструированном тексте, все три надписи, по-видимому, содержат один и тот же текст, за исключением имени тиртханкара. В них говорится, что император Рамагупта повелел возвести статуи по просьбе отшельника. Отшельник был назван Челла Кшамана или Челу Кшамана (IAST: *Celū kṣamaṇa*), который был сыном Голакянти и учеником Ачарьи Сарппасены Кшаманы, который, в свою очередь, был учеником ученика Чандры Кшаманы. Эти надписи не указывают на принадлежность Рамагупты к династии Гупта и не содержат даты. Однако, можно привести следующие аргументы в пользу датировки их IV веком и подтверждения отождествления Рамагупты, упомянутого в этих надписях, с императором Гупта:
Based on the reconstructed text, all three inscriptions appear to contain same text except the name of the tirthankara. They state that emperor Ramagupta caused the statues to be built at the behest of a mendicant. The mendicant was named Chella Kshamana or Chelu kshamana (IAST: Celū kṣamaṇa), who was a son Golakyanti and a pupil of Acharya Sarppasena kshamana, who in turn, was a pupil's pupil of Chandra kshamana. These inscriptions do not mention that Ramagupta belonged to the Gupta dynasty, and do not mention any date. However, following arguments can be made to date them to the 4th century, and to support the identification of the Ramagupta mentioned in these inscriptions as a Gupta emperor:
According to epigraphist G. S. Gai, who edited the inscriptions, the inscriptions feature the so called southern or western variety of the Gupta script: the alphabet clearly resembles the alphabet of the Eran inscription of Samudragupta (who must have been Ramagupta's predecessor) and the Sanchi inscription of Chandragupta II (who must have been Ramagupta's successor). The medial 'i' character is different from the one featured in the Sanchi inscriptions, but such a character can also be found in earlier inscriptions, such as the Nandsa Yupa inscriptions of the 3rd century. Thus, on palaeographic basis, the Ramagupta inscriptions can be assigned to the 4th century CE. According to Gai, the sculptural features and styles of the statues also suggest that they belong to the 4th century CE. The prabhavali (halo) is not as developed and stylized as in the 5th century Buddha images from Sanchi. The pedestals of the statues feature a chakra at the centre, instead of the characteristic lanchanas (traditional symbols) associated with the tirthankaras, which suggests that the images belong to an "early stage in the development of the Jaina iconography". Maharajadhiraja is an imperial title, which indicates that Ramagupta was a historical Gupta emperor. However, according to another theory, the Ramagupta of the Durjanpur inscriptions is a later Gupta king, not the brother of Chandragupta II. Historian D. C. Sircar has dated these records to a later period, based on a comparison of letters and signs that occur in these inscriptions and the Sanchi inscriptions of Chandragupta II.
Согласно эпиграфисту Г. С. Гаю, который редактировал надписи, в них представлена так называемая южная или западная разновидность письма Гупта: алфавит отчетливо напоминает алфавит эранской надписи Самудрагупты (который, вероятно, был предшественником Рамагупты) и надписи Санчи Чандрагупты II (который, вероятно, был преемником Рамагупты). Медиальный знак «i» отличается от знака, представленного в надписях Санчи, но подобный знак встречается и в более ранних надписях, таких как надписи Нандса Юпа III века. Таким образом, на палеографической основе надписи Рамагупты можно отнести к IV веку н.э. По мнению Гая, скульптурные особенности и стили статуй также указывают на то, что они относятся к IV веку н.э. Прабхавали (нимб) не так развит и стилизован, как в изображениях Будды из Санчи V века. На постаментах статуй в центре расположена чакра, а не характерные ланчаны (традиционные символы), связанные с тиртханкарами, что позволяет предположить, что изображения относятся к «ранней стадии развития джайнской иконографии». Махараджахираджа – это имперский титул, указывающий на то, что Рамагупта был историческим императором Гупта. Однако, согласно другой теории, Рамагупта из надписей Дурджанпура – более поздний царь Гупта, а не брат Чандрагупты II. Историк Д. С. Сиркар датировал эти записи более поздним периодом, основываясь на сравнении букв и знаков, встречающихся в этих надписях и надписях Санчи Чандрагупты II.
Based on the reconstructed text, all three inscriptions appear to contain same text except the name of the tirthankara. They state that emperor Ramagupta caused the statues to be built at the behest of a mendicant. The mendicant was named Chella Kshamana or Chelu kshamana (IAST: Celū kṣamaṇa), who was a son Golakyanti and a pupil of Acharya Sarppasena kshamana, who in turn, was a pupil's pupil of Chandra kshamana. These inscriptions do not mention that Ramagupta belonged to the Gupta dynasty, and do not mention any date. However, following arguments can be made to date them to the 4th century, and to support the identification of the Ramagupta mentioned in these inscriptions as a Gupta emperor:
According to epigraphist G. S. Gai, who edited the inscriptions, the inscriptions feature the so called southern or western variety of the Gupta script: the alphabet clearly resembles the alphabet of the Eran inscription of Samudragupta (who must have been Ramagupta's predecessor) and the Sanchi inscription of Chandragupta II (who must have been Ramagupta's successor). The medial 'i' character is different from the one featured in the Sanchi inscriptions, but such a character can also be found in earlier inscriptions, such as the Nandsa Yupa inscriptions of the 3rd century. Thus, on palaeographic basis, the Ramagupta inscriptions can be assigned to the 4th century CE. According to Gai, the sculptural features and styles of the statues also suggest that they belong to the 4th century CE. The prabhavali (halo) is not as developed and stylized as in the 5th century Buddha images from Sanchi. The pedestals of the statues feature a chakra at the centre, instead of the characteristic lanchanas (traditional symbols) associated with the tirthankaras, which suggests that the images belong to an "early stage in the development of the Jaina iconography". Maharajadhiraja is an imperial title, which indicates that Ramagupta was a historical Gupta emperor. However, according to another theory, the Ramagupta of the Durjanpur inscriptions is a later Gupta king, not the brother of Chandragupta II. Historian D. C. Sircar has dated these records to a later period, based on a comparison of letters and signs that occur in these inscriptions and the Sanchi inscriptions of Chandragupta II.
Монетный двор
Несколько медных монет, на аверсе которых присутствует надпись "Рамагута" (пракритская форма имени "Рамагупта"), а на реверсе – изображение льва или гаруды, были найдены в Эране и Видише, в штате Мадхья-Прадеш. Некоторые исследователи приписывают эти монеты правителю династии Гуптов Рамагупте, в то время как другие полагают, что он был самостоятельным местным правителем. Поскольку гаруда являлась эмблемой имперской династии Гуптов, нумизмат К. Д. Баджпай утверждал, что эти монеты действительно были выпущены императором Гуптов Рамагуптой. Баджпай высказал предположение, что Самудрагупта назначил своего сына Рамагупту наместником восточного региона Мальва в центральной Индии; Рамагупта был вынужден оставаться там даже после смерти отца из-за войны с шаками, и именно там разворачивались события, описанные в пьесе «Девичандрагуптам». Однако историк Д. С. Сиркар не находит теорию Баджпая убедительной и считает, что эмитентом этих монет мог быть местный вождь, подражавший гуптской чеканке после упадка династии Гуптов в конце V века нашей эры. Сиркар отмечает, что известно о правителе по имени Харигупта, не принадлежавшем к династии Гуптов, который выпускал медные монеты с изображением гаруды, имитируя золотые монеты Чандрагупты II. Монеты другого подобного подражателя, по имени Индрагупта, были обнаружены в Кумхраре. Сиркар также указывает, что другие императоры Гуптов выпускали золотые монеты, однако золотые монеты, выпущенные Рамагуптой, не были найдены.