History of Orissa from the Earliest Times to the British Period v2.c48.5

v2.c48.5

With these three points of enquiry before us in the case of the Vizianagram family, we find that the first point is decidedly against the theory of Rajput descent. The name Rajput was not in existence in the 6th century, and even if a migration into the Krishna valley is admitted at that time from some unknown place in Northern India, it is not possible to connect such people with genuine Rajputs of the divine Agnikulas of legends. The subsequent Rajput intermarriages of the family are no proof of its descent, as later on all kings became Kshatriyas, genealogies were provided for them as late as the 16th and the 17th centuries (the Koches of Kuch Bihar and the Ahoms of Assam) and in the nineteenth century most princes became Rajputs. Inspite of the inherent defects in the story provided by the agents of the Vizianagram Estate to the compilers of the *Imperial Gazetteer*, it contains certain important pieces of information, and if they are correct and authentic they ought to prove the real descent of the family. The name Madhavavarman is very suggestive. Several chiefs of that name belonging to the Sailodbhava family ruled over the Kongoda-mandala in the seventh century. One of them, the subordinate of Sasānka, king of Gauda, was alive in 618 A. D., a date not very far removed from the traditional date of the migration of the so-called Rajputs into the Krishna valley. Mādhavavarman-Sainyabhīta was not a Rajput, but he was a king and his people ruled over Java and Sumatra when the Rajputs of the bluest blood were still wandering Gujars or unconverted Hunas.