The Dynastic History of Northern India (Early Mediaeval Period) v1.c14.20.3

v1.c14.20.3

Lévi has shown from Tibetan and Chinese sources that Nepal during Aṃśuvarman's reign was a vassal of the powerful Tibetan king Srong-btsan Sgam-po, to whom the Nepal king was compelled to give his daughter in marriage. In a note contributed to the *Journal Asiatique* the same scholar has tried to show that the year 34 of Aṃśuvarman corresponds to 629 of the Christian era. Thus, he came to the conclusion that the era used by the usurper started from 595 A.D., and as Aṁśuvarman was a vassal of the Tibetans, the era he uses is probably Tibetan in origin and possibly dates from the first king of Tibet, Lun-tsang so-lung-tsan. The fact that Aṁśuvarman celebrated his *Abhiṣeka* in the year 30 of the era seems to confirm the opinion that the era was a borrowed one.¹ Whatever might be the exact epoch of his era, there is no doubt that he was a successful king. The distribution of his inscriptions at Katmandu, Patan, Deo-Patan and Bagmati demonstrates that he exercised his sovereignty in the very centre of the valley of Népal. The fact that his name is registered by the Chinese annals and is joined with the Tibetan legends shows that he produced a profound impression on his contemporaries. But after his death, which must have happened some time before the year 48 (643 A.D. ?), the date of his successor Jiṣṇugupta,² Nepal enters upon a period of confusion. There is unquestionable evidence that the ancient dynasty of the Licchavis was again restored to power.