The Dynastic History of Northern India (Early Mediaeval Period) v1.c14.5

Language: English

v1.c14.5.1

For the history of Nepal we have a number of local chronicles, which attempt to give a connected history of the Valley from the beginning of creation down to modern times. The early attempts of European scholars like Kirkpatrick and Wright² to write a history of Nepal were almost solely based on these Vaṁśāvalīs. It remained for an Indian scholar, Dr Bhagwanlal Indraji, to demonstrate the unhistorical character of these documents.³ His publication of the "Inscriptions from Nepal,"⁴ in 1880 revealed for the first time the necessity of building on the more solid foundation of archæological evidence. Since then his work had been ably taken up by Bendall, Fleet, Sylvain Lévi, and a number of European and Indian scholars, and it has now become possible, though much still remains doubtful, to give a fairly accurate idea of the political events in the Valley from about the 2nd century of the Christian era downwards. For the pre-Christian period we have no epigraphic evidence,⁵ and must still depend on the Vaṁśāvalīs. These chroniclers, in their attempts to give a complete picture of the history of their country, have connected their accounts with the legendary four ages of the world and the Bhārata war on the field of Kurukṣetra. From the time of the sage Nemi, dynasties of the Gopālas, Ābhīras, Kirātas, the Somavaṁśīs, and the Sūryavaṁśīs are said to have held the Valley in succession till we come to the time of Aṁśuvarman, the founder of the Ṭhākuris.

v1.c14.5.2

The mention of Aṁśuvarman, who is referred by the chroniclers to 101 B.C.,¹ brings to light the fictitious character of the chronology adopted in the local Vaṁśāvalīs. This prince has been rightly identified with Ang-shu-fa-ma of Ni-p'o-lo (*Nepāla*) mentioned by Yuan Chwang, who flourished in the first half of the 7th century A.D.² The Vaṁśāvalīs have thus antedated him by about 700 years. The anxiety to connect their heroes with the Kuru-Pāṇḍava war and the lack of any authentic list of kings led these chroniclers to introduce in their lists many mythical kings of the Purāṇas and to assign to most of the princes reigns of truly patriarchal length, besides lengthening the reigns of many historical kings. Even then they failed to bridge the enormously long period which in their chronology separated the mythical from the historical period.³ But though the Vaṁśāvalīs as a whole have thus little or no historical value, it is nevertheless possible that they may contain in their narration of the events of the pre-Christian period some elements of historical truth. The period assigned to the Gopālas and Ābhīras might have been dominated by nomadic tribes who were in their turn supplanted by the Kirātas, in all likelihood a Tibeto-Burman people who lived between the high Himalayan plateau, the mouth of the Ganges, and the neighbouring sea-coast. Prof.

v1.c14.5.3

Sylvain Lévi has pointed out that the Nepalese usage still gives the name Kirāta to the country between the Dudh-Kosi, and the Arun, and that there is evidence that the Kirātas once occupied a much more extensive area in Nepal.¹ The passing away of the Kirātas and the reign of the Somavaṁśīs probably marks the definite entry of Nepal into the domain of precise historical tradition. Paśuprekṣa of this dynasty is credited by all the Vaṁśāvalīs, with having introduced the Hindu social system into the Valley. According to Prof. Lévi, the Nepal era, which in his opinion starts from 110 A.D., probably marks the date of the expulsion of the Kirātas from Nepal.² With the rule of next dynasty, the Sūryavaṁśī, Licchavis, we are first introduced to dated epigraphic records. The inscriptions, from the Chāṅgu-Nārāyaṇa pillar inscription of Mānadeva to the Khopasi inscription of Śivadeva, are dated in the years 386 to 520 of an unknown era.³ There has been considerable difference of opinion amongst scholars about the epoch of this era. As early as 1884 Bhagwanlal Indraji suggested the reference of the dates used by the Licchavi Mānadeva to the *Vikrama* era (58 B.C.),⁴ while Fleet in the next year referred them to the *Gupta* era (319-20 A.D.).⁵ The latest theory is that of Prof. Sylvain Lévi, who finds the astronomical data contained in the Kisipiḍi inscription of *Saṁvat* 449 in perfect agreement only with 482 *Śaka* current. Thus according to him the era starts from 110 A.D.

v1.c14.5.4

(482—449 = 33 *Śaka*).⁶ Whatever may be the real epoch of the era there can probably be little doubt that the first quarter of the 6th century of the Licchavi era, when *Mahāsāmanta* Aṁśuvarman was gradually rising into power in Nepal, must fall in about the first half of the 7th century A.D. It was probably during the reign of one of the early Licchavis that the great Gupta emperor Samudra Gupta claimed respectful homage of the *pratyanta Nepāla-nṛpati*.¹