What parts of India did Guptas not conquer and why

Nov 2012
3,852
#1
What parts could they not conquer and why? I believe there were certain areas which they won without fighting by just marital alliances? What was the degree of control over these lands?

Why did Guptas not reach the Mauryan level of conquests in terms of expanse? How would you compare them militarily with the Mauryans and the latter day Marathas (considering for their different times)? Which of these reached their full potential and who among them could have done more based on what was available to them?
 
May 2013
1,721
The abode of the lord of the north
#2
Guptas didn't have control over north western India corresponding to modern day afghanistan and western pakistan (old arachosia, gedrosia and nearby regions as well). Vakatakas and further southern kingdoms like Pandyas, Cheras, cholas, Kadambas etc. where untouched by them as well. They did wage war over pallavas and said to have released pallavas shortly after capturing it. I think this map in itself is self explicable.


For why did they not bother to conquer, may be they had better business to take care of or may be they just didn't care. I like to think that they had learned from the collapse of mauryas. Such a large empire would be almost impossible to look after and the fact that they released pallavas just after defeating them, attests to this.
 

Similar History Discussions