This question asks to identify which statement about the Gupta ruler Samudragupta is *not* supported by the evidence found in the Allahabad Pillar Inscription (Prayaga Prashasti).

Analyzing Samudragupta's Allahabad Pillar Inscription Facts

The Allahabad Pillar Inscription is a key source of information about Samudragupta's reign. Let's examine each option:

• Fact: Nominated by his father for rulership.

  The inscription explicitly states that Chandragupta I selected Samudragupta as his successor. This fact is corroborated by the inscription.

• Fact: He was a poet.

  The inscription refers to Samudragupta with the title 'kaviraja', meaning 'king of poets'. This fact is corroborated by the inscription.

• Fact: His mother was Kumaradevi.

  The inscription clearly mentions Samudragupta as the son of the illustrious Chandragupta and the illustrious Kumaradevi. This fact is corroborated by the inscription.

• Fact: He performed Asvamedha sacrifice.

  While other historical sources and coin evidence suggest Samudragupta performed the Asvamedha sacrifice, the text of the Allahabad Pillar Inscription does *not* directly mention or confirm this specific event. It focuses on his military conquests and other achievements.

  Therefore, this fact is not corroborated by the Allahabad Pillar Inscription itself.

Based on the analysis, the statement about performing the Asvamedha sacrifice is the one not directly supported by the Allahabad Pillar Inscription.