The Dynastic History of Northern India (Early Mediaeval Period) v1.c14.5.2

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.