A New Light on the Identification of Kaca

Summary

This numismatic study reassesses the identity of a shadowy Gupta‑period ruler named Kaca (also spelled Kaça). The author collates evidence from several hoards of Gupta gold coins, noting that specimens bearing the legend “Kacha” and the epithet Sarvārjocchetta have been recovered from Tanda, Ballia, Sakori and Kumarkhan, with the Bayana hoard adding sixteen more piecesfile:///home/oai/share/563035_compressed-339-443.pdf#:~:text=A%20New%20Light%20on%20the,Bombay. Museums in London, Calcutta, Lucknow and Bombay hold examples of these coins. The majority belong to the Cakradhvaja type, which depicts the king holding a standard surmounted by a wheel; the Bayana hoard yielded a unique coin of the “Standard type,” featuring a Garuḍadhvaja and a filleted standardfile:///home/oai/share/563035_compressed-339-443.pdf. The author notes that the coins vary in size (0.75–0.85 inches) and weight (about 111–119 grains) and that their fabric and motifs are virtually indistinguishable from Imperial Gupta issuesfile:///home/oai/share/563035_compressed-339-443.pdf#:~:text=The%20coins%20vary%20in%20size,by%20its%20absence%20from%20the. Yet no historical records mention a Gupta emperor called Kacha. Scholars have proposed various solutions: some equate Kacha with the legendary predecessor of Karttikeya; others treat him as a local usurper. Altekar suggested Kacha could be a pre‑accession name of Samudragupta; other numismatists speculated that he was a rival prince who briefly seized power. The paper reviews these theories and highlights the absence of the suffix “Gupta” on the coins—an anomaly if Kacha were a legitimate member of the imperial linefile:///home/oai/share/563035_compressed-339-443.pdf#:~:text=It%2015%20equally%20note,intervening%20one%20of%20the%20successive. Despite this, the author argues that stylistic affinities and weight standards point strongly to an imperial connection. After comparing the epithet Sarvārjocchetta with titles used by Samudragupta and examining Gupta genealogies, the author favours the view that Kacha was an early name or title of Samudragupta, perhaps used on special commemorative issues. Alternatively, Kacha might have been a short‑lived claimant whose coinage bridged the reigns of Chandragupta I and Samudragupta. The article concludes that the Kacha coins, though rare, provide crucial insights into the early evolution of Gupta coinage and underscore the need for cautious interpretation of numismatic evidence. Only further hoard discoveries or corroborating inscriptions can settle Kacha’s identity. By surveying a wide range of scholarly opinions—from Smith, Allan and Altekar to Jayaswal and Bhandarkar—the author demonstrates how numismatic analysis intersects with textual historiographyfile:///home/oai/share/563035_compressed-339-443.pdf#:~:text=It%2015%20equally%20note,rather%20difficult%2C%20and%20hence%20very. The discussion reminds readers that small differences in iconography and legend placement can hint at chronological sequences within Gupta coinage. The paper also stresses that the Bayana hoard’s Standard type coin, with its Garuḍadhvaja, suggests devotional affiliations and may signal experimentation in royal symbols before the standardisation seen under Samudragupta. Thus, the study not only addresses the identification problem but also enriches our understanding of early Gupta monetary art and imperial propaganda.