Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Dynastic History of Northern India (Early Mediaeval Period) v1.c15: Chapter V. Dynastic History of Assam

The Dynastic History of Northern India (Early Mediaeval Period) v1.c15

Language
English

Contents

Chapter V. Dynastic History of Assam

v1.c15.2

Assam lies on the north-eastern border of Bengal, and is situated roughly between 23° 40′ and 28° 16′ N. and 90° and 97°12′ E. It is bounded on the north by the eastern section of the great Himalayan range; on the east by the Patkai Hills and by the Burmese frontier which marches with that of Manipur; on the south by the Chin Hills, the Chittagong Hill Tracts, and the State of Hill Tippera; and on the west by the Bengal Districts of Tippera, Mymensingh, Rangpur, Jalpaiguri and the State of Cooch Behar. The province falls into three natural divisions: the valley of the Surma, the valley of the Brahmaputra, and the intervening range of hills, which projecting at right angles from the Burmese systems, runs like a wedge from east to west. Assam, under the names Prāgjyotiṣa and Kāmarūpa, is often mentioned in the Epic, Pauranic and Tantric tradition of India. The *Mahābhārata*, mentions *Kāmākhyā*, near Gauhati, and Bhagadatta, the powerful ruler of Prāgjyōtiṣa. The latter is said to have led a mighty *Mleccha* army of Kirātas and Cīnas in the field of Kurukṣetra. In the *Kālikā Purāṇa*, it is said that the temple of the goddess Kāmākhyā stands in the centre of Kāmarūpa. According to the *Viṣṇu Purāṇa*, the boundaries of Kāmarūpa extended around this temple for 100 *Yojans* or about 450 miles. Allowing for all exaggeration, Sir E. A. Gait has calculated that the area indicated by the *Purāṇa* must have embraced nearly the whole of the old province of Eastern Bengal, Assam and Bhutan.

v1.c15.3

But more strictly speaking, *Kāmarūpa* and *Prāgjyotiṣa* included Assam proper, *i.e.*, the Brahmaputra valley. According to the *Yoginī Tantra*, *Kāmarūpa* includes the country lying between the Karatoya and the Dikhu from west to east, with the mountains of Kanjagiri in the north and the junction of the Brahmaputra and Lākhyā rivers in the south; ‘that is to say, it comprised roughly the Brahmaputra valley, Bhutan, Rangpur, Cooch Behar, the north-east of Mymensing and, possibly, the Garo Hills.’ There is some agreement amongst scholars in identifying Ka-la-tu, the large river, which was crossed by Yuan Chwang when he travelled from the borders of Pun-na-fa-tan-na (Puṇḍravardhana) to Kia-mo-leu-po (Kāmarūpa), with the river Karatoya. The Chinese pilgrim estimated Kia-mo-leu-po to be more than 10,000 *li* or about 1,667 miles in circuit. According to Cunningham this shows that at that time it must have comprised the whole valley of the Brahmaputra river, together with Kusa-vihāra and Bhutan. The ancient capital of the country, which was known as Prāgjyotiṣapura, probably the same town which was 30 *li* in circuit in the time of the Chinese traveller, is generally taken to have stood somewhere near the modern town of Gauhati.¹

v1.c15.4

¹ *Mahābhārata*, II, Chapters 26, 27, 34 and 51; III, Chap. 82, V. 5047; V, Chapter 167, etc.; *IGI*, Vol. VI, 1909, pp. 14 ff.; Vol. XIV, pp. 230-32; *HA*, pp. 10 ff.; *BR*, Vol. II, p. 195; *YC*, Vol. II, pp. 184-87; *AGI*, pp. 572-74 and 729; Dey, *GDI*, pp. 87 and 158; *JRAS*, 1900, p. 25; *IHQ*, December, 1927, pp. 843-44.

v1.c15.5

Amongst the legendary kings of Kāmarūpa mentioned by Paurāṇic tradition the most important are the demons Naraka and his son Bhagadatta. The former, we are told, was born of the earth by Viṣṇu in his Varāha incarnation. He ruled over the country from his capital Prāgjyotiṣapur. It is interesting to note that the first historical king of Kāmarūpa for whom we have any reliable documentary evidence traces his descent to these mythical heroes. This is king Bhāskaravarman, the contemporary of the Puṣyabhūti monarch Harṣa and identical with *Keu-mo-lo P'o-se-kie-lo-fa-ma* of Yuan Chwang. In the Nidhanpur (Sylhet) copper-plates of this king we find the following genealogy.¹

v1.c15.6

¹ The seal of the inscription bears the figure of an elephant. *EI*, Vol. XII, pp. 65-79; Vol. XIX, pp. 245-50; *JBORS*, Vol. V, pp. 302-04; Vol. VI, pp. 151-52; *EI*, Vol. XIX, pp. 115-25; *IA*, 1914, Vol. 43, pp. 95-96. The alternative forms of names are given from the *Harṣacarita* and Yuan Chwang. See Beal, *BR*, Vol. II, pp. 196 ff.; *Harṣacarita*, translated by Cowell and Thomas, p. 217. In the Nowgong copper-plate of Balavarman Vajradatta is represented as *anuja* (younger brother) of Bhagadatta. See *JASB*, 1897, Vol. LXVI, pp. 118, 287 ff.

v1.c15.7

``` Cakrabhṛta

v1.c15.8

Naraka

v1.c15.9

Bhagadatta

v1.c15.10

| [Puṣpadatta]?

v1.c15.11

Vajradatta

v1.c15.12

His descendants rule for 3,000 years Then came—
1. Puṣyavarman

v1.c15.13

2. Samudravarman = Dattadevī

v1.c15.14

3. Balavarman = Ratnadevī

v1.c15.15

4. Kalyāṇavarman = Gandharvadevī

v1.c15.16

5. Gaṇapati = Yajñavatī

v1.c15.17

6. Mahendravarman = Suvratā

v1.c15.18

7. Nārāyaṇavarman = Devavatī

v1.c15.19

8. [Bhūtavarman] Mahābhūtavarman = Vijñānavatī

v1.c15.20

9 [Candramukhavarman] Candramukha = Bhogavatī

v1.c15.21

10. [Sthitivarman or Sthira- Sthitavarman = Nayanadevī varman] |
11. Susthitavarman = Śyāmādevī *alias Śrī-Mṛgāṅka* | . . . . . | . . . . .

v1.c15.22

12. Supratiṣṭhitavarman 13. Bhāskaravarman [Susthiravarman] [Kumāra; Bhāskaradyutī] ```

v1.c15.23

There is no conclusive proof that the Guptas conquered Kāmarupa, but attention may be drawn to the similarity of the name of the second ruler to that of the great Samudra Gupta. Curiously enough the names of the queens of the two rulers were also the same.¹ The discovery of an inscription in Assam dated in the Gupta era and the fact that there appears to be no insuperable chronological difficulties in regarding Samudravarman and Samudra Gupta as contemporaries, seem to strengthen the suspicion that Gupta influence at least must have penetrated in the valley of the Brahmaputra.² In the Allahabad *praśasti* of Hariṣeṇa the ruler of Kāmarūpa is included in the list of tributary *Pratyanta-nṛpatis* of the great Gupta emperor.³ The Damodarpur inscriptions refer to Gupta rule in Puṇḍravardhana, which as we have seen was only separated from Kāmarūpa by the river Karatoya. In the Aphsad inscription of Ādityasena, the later Gupta king Mahāsenagupta claims to have defeated the illustrious Susthitavarman on the banks of the Lauhitya (Brahmaputra). This prince has rightly been identified with the father of Bhāskaravarman.⁴ The latter ruled at least up to 648 A. D., when he supported the Chinese invasion of Tirhut under Wang Hiuen-t'se.⁵

v1.c15.24

¹ *GI*, pp. 27, 43, 50 and 53.

v1.c15.25

² *JBORS*, Vol. III, pp. 508 ff.; *NRGWG*, 1905, pp. 465 ff., *IHQ*, December, 1927, pp. 837-38. For Gupta inscriptions in North Bengal see *EI*, Vol. XV, pp. 113-45.

v1.c15.26

³ *GI*, p. 8.

v1.c15.27

⁴ *Ibid*, p. 203.

v1.c15.28

⁵ *JA*, 1900, Tome XV, pp. 308 ff. : 'Le roi de l'Inde orientale Chi-kieou-mo (*Śrī-Kumāra*).'

v1.c15.29.1

The history of Kāmarūpa after 648 A. D. is rather uncertain. We have no records, either literary or epigraphic, from the kings who immediately succeeded Bhāskaravarman. But fortunately for us there are references to these princes in the inscriptions of later kings of the Brahmaputra valley. Thus the Tezpur plates of *Māhārājādhirāja* Vanamāla, for whose father Harjara we have the date G. E. 510 (A. D. 829), refers to a line of princes beginning with Śālastambha, and ending in *Śrī-Hariṣa* (*Śālastambha-pramukhaiḥ Śrī-Hariṣānta-mahīpālaiḥ...*) who are placed between the descendants of Bhagadatta and Vajradatta and Prālambha, the grandfather of Vanamāla.¹ A stray plate of Harjara, recently discovered appears to mention three princes, viz., Kumāra, Vajradeva, and Harṣavarman of the dynasty of Śālastambha.² In the Nowgong copper-plate grant of Balavarman Śālastambha and the princes Pālaka and Vijaya belonging to his line are placed between the names of Vajradatta and Harjara.³ In the Bargaon copper-plate grant of Ratnapāla we are told that after the descendants of Vajradatta had ruled over Prāgjyotiṣa for some time there appeared a great *Mlecchādhinātha* in the person of Śālastambha. In succession to him there were chiefs 'altogether twice ten in number,' who were well known as Vigrahastambha and the rest. As the last of them, Tyāgasiṁha went to heaven without leaving any heir, his subjects chose Brahmapāla, the father of Ratnapāla.⁴ Now on palaeographic grounds the late Dr.

v1.c15.29.2

Hoernle referred the inscription to *c.* 1010-1050 A. D. As this inscription was dated in the 26th year of Ratnapāla, it would be probably reasonable to refer Brahmapāla to about 1000 A. D. Now Śālastambha was the 21st ruler, counting upwards from Brahmapāla (1000 A. D.). Calculating back from his date and assigning a minimum of 16 years for each king, we can reasonably assign Śālastambha to the middle of the 7th century A. D. In that case it would appear that Śālastambha probably overthrew the line of Puṣyavarman soon after the reign of Bhāskaravarman, who, as we have seen, ruled at least up to 648 A. D. The question whether Śālastambha established a separate line or whether he belonged to a collateral branch of Puṣyavarman’s family cannot be easily decided. The fact that Sālastambha is called a *Mlecchādhinātha* while Bhāskaravarman is referred to by Yuan Chwang as belonging to the Brahman caste, is not conclusive.¹ For, as we have seen, the latter in his Nidhanpur inscription traces his descent to Bhagadatta, who is described in the *Mahābhārata* as *‘Prāgjyo-tiṣādhipaḥ śūro mlecchānām adhipo balī.’* If there is any historical fact in the description of the Great Epic, then it is reasonable to regard Bhagadatta as a prince of the non-Aryan Tibeto-Chinese races referred to as Cīnas and Kirātas in ancient Indian Literature. As early as the time of the battle scenes of the Great Epic the leaders of these tribes had come into contact with Aryan culture.

v1.c15.29.3

By the middle of the 7th century the process of Aryanisation of the land beyond Karatoya had advanced to such an extent as to delude a foreigner into the belief that its rulers were themselves Brahmans. From the fact that the Chinese pilgrim says that a thousand generations elapsed between Bhāskaravarman and the founder of his dynasty, it would appear that there was a general belief that the dynasty was reigning in Kāmarupa in unbroken succession from the time of Bhagadatta. But as we have seen, the officer in charge of the royal grant discovered at Nidhanpur could not trace the descent of his master beyond Puṣyavarman, leaving a gap of 3,000 years between him and Vajradatta. It appears that the lines of Puṣyavarman and that of Sālastambha were closely related, inasmuch as both were of Mongolian origin. Though there is sufficient looseness in the expressions of the Tejpur plates of Vanamāla and the Nowgong plates of Balavarman to suggest the descent of Sālastambha from Bhagadatta,² yet it would probably be safer to regard the two dynasties as separate Mongoloid groups who each accepted Aryan culture and sought to establish their blue blood by claiming descent from that great Epic hero. Very few historical facts are known of the reign of these princes. From the fact that in the Bargaon grant of Ratnapāla Vigrahastambha is mentioned as the next ruler after Sālastambha, Hoernle supposed that *Stambha* was the distinguishing name of this line of rulers.

v1.c15.29.4

But it should be observed that *Stambha* is not a portion of the names of the other successors of Sālastambha mentioned above. Of these successors, *Śrī-Hariṣa*, the last prince in the line, according to the Tejpur plate of Vanamāla, is probably the same as Harṣavarman of the stray plate of Harjara.¹ *Śrī-Hariṣa* has been identified by Kielhorn with the *Gauḍ- Oḍrādi-Kaliṅga-Kosalapati-Śrī-Harṣadeva* of the Paśupati inscription (153+595=748 A. D. ?) of the Nepal Licchavi king Jayadeva Paracakrakāma.² This Harṣadeva's daughter Rājyamatī, who was married to the Nepal king, is referred to in the same inscription as *Bhagadatta-rājakulajā*.

v1.c15.30

¹ *JASB*, 1840, Vol. IX, Part II, pp. 766 ff.; *NKGWG*, 1905, pp. 465 ff..; *JBORS*, Vol. III, pp. 508 ff.

v1.c15.31

² *IHQ*, December 1927, pp. 888, 841 and 844.

v1.c15.32

³ *JASB*, 1897, Vol. LXVI, pp. 285 ff.

v1.c15.33

⁴ *JASB*, 1898, Vol. LXVII, pp. 106 ff.

v1.c15.34

¹ *BR*, Vol. II, p. 196. See also *supra*, pp. 5-6, fn. 5.

v1.c15.35

² *JASB*, 1897, Vol. LXVI, p. 119.

v1.c15.36

¹ *IHQ*, December, 1927, p. 841, fn. 1.

v1.c15.37

² *IA*, 1880, Vol. IX, p. 179, line 15; *JRAS*, 1898, pp. 384-85. See also *Dynastic History of Nepal, supra*, p. 192.

v1.c15.38

The line of Sālastambha appears to have been followed in Kāmarūpa by the dynasty of Prālambha. The Tejpur inscription of Vanamāla mentions Prālambha of the line of Bhagadatta, after the group of kings 'which began with Sālastambha and ended with Śrī-Hariṣa.' In the Nowgong plates of Balavarman, though Prālambha is omitted, the latter's son Harjara occupies the same position, *i.e.*, he is mentioned after the descendants of Sālastambha. In the Bargaon Grant of Ratnapāla, however, as I have elsewhere pointed out, the whole group of successors of Sālastambha up to Tyāgasiṃha is jointly mentioned as numbering 20. Hoernle had already demonstrated that it was not possible to identify Śrī-Hariṣa with Tyāgasiṃha, and that they must be accepted as the last kings of two distinct groups of princes.³ But the relationship between these two groups, *viz.*, Sālastambha—**Śrī-Hariṣa** (**Harṣa?**) and Pralambha—Tyāgasiṁha is again uncertain. Gait in his *History of Assam* follows Hoernle in treating the line of Prālambha as distinct from that of Sālastambha.¹ But recently an Indian scholar has tried to show that they belonged to the same family. His arguments are as follows : ² (1) Nowhere do the copperplates distinctly say that Prālambha belongs to a new line. (2) The grants of Ratnapāla, evidently show that all the 21 kings, starting from Sālastambha, belong to his line. (Hoernle's translation of vs. 9-10.) (3) In Balavarman's Nowgong grant verses 9-10 clearly show that Harjara (Prālambha's son) belonged to the *vaṁśa* of Sālastambha; (4) In Vanamāla's grant Prālambha's list of predecessors starts with Sālastambha and ends with *Śrī-Hariṣa*, who was probably his brother, as can be inferred from verse 9. In the present state of our knowledge of some of the inscriptions, which this scholar himself admits are 'full of mistakes,' it would be perhaps wise to defer our judgment on the point till they are re-edited by some competent scholar; but I should point out that a claim to Bhagadatta lineage should no more be treated as a serious evidence of kinship in Assam than a claim to lunar or solar origin in other parts of India.

v1.c15.39

³ *JASB*, 1898, Vol. LXVII, pp. 108 ff.

v1.c15.40

¹ Second Ed., 1926, pp. 30-31.

v1.c15.41

² Prof. Padmanath Bhattacharyya in *IHQ*, December, 1927, pp. 844-45.

v1.c15.42

For Prālambha, the first king of this group, we have no records. But in the Tejpur plates of his grandson Vanamāla he is called *Prāgjyotiṣeśa*, and the name of his queen (*rājñī*) is given as Jīvadā.³ If Major Jenkins' version of the inscription can be relied upon, then it also refers to his hostility to the Sālastambha—Hariṣa group of princes. From the fact, however, that the Nowgong grant of Balavarman omits him from the dynastic table it would seem that he was not a prince, who enjoyed any great degree of power. As his son's inscription is dated in 829 A.D., he can reasonably be referred to the beginning of the 9th century. The same inscription of Vanamāla mentions *nṛpendu Śrī*-Harjara and his *Agramahiṣī Mahādevī Tārā*. Harjara was the son and successor of Prālambha, and was probably the first ruler of this group to wield any considerable degree of power. This is confirmed by the fact that in the Nowgong copper-plate Balavarman omits Prālambha and traces his descent from Harjara. Of the reign of this prince we have the following inscriptions:—

v1.c15.43

³ *JASB*, 1840, Vol. IX, Part II, pp. 766 ff.

v1.c15.44

(1) *Tezpur Rock Inscription.*—A short inscription of 9 lines in ungrammatical Sanskrit incised on a big boulder of granite, lying on the northern bank of the Brahmaputra, about one mile below Tezpur (Darrang district). The rock, which from a distance resembles the head of an elephant, is locally known as Dhenkanal. Above the first line, near the middle, there is the figure of a *Triśūla* or trident. Immediately below the 9th line is given the date G.E. 510, corresponding roughly to A.D. 829. The characters agree with the date and belong to the northern class of alphabets of about the 9th century A.D. The inscription refers itself to the *Vardhamāna vijayarājya* of *Mahārājādhirāja-Parameśvara-Paramamāheśvara Śrī*-Harjjaravarmmadeva living in Harūppeśvara-pura. The inscription records the settlement of a dispute between the local *Kaivarta-nau-k(u)kṣi-sva-bhakṣa-sādhanī*,¹ the *naurajjaka*² and the *Nākkajosī*³ for tolls. The settlement was made with the arbitration of the local military commanders and *pañcakula* Brahmans. It was decided that the vessels, which henceforth failed to steer by the mid-stream were to pay a fine of five *buṭṭikas*.⁴ The dispute occurred in the administration (*adhikāradine*) of *Mahāsāmanta Senādhyakṣa* Sucitta.¹

v1.c15.45

¹ Literally 'eater of property in the interior of boats,' *i.e.*, 'collector of taxes on merchandise carried on the keel of boats' belonging to the Kaivarta caste.

v1.c15.46

² Towers; *naurajja* taken in the sense of towing rope; here probably means a class of officers who were in charge of piloting the laden boats by means of rope attachments, etc., to the local harbour.

v1.c15.47

³ Local Zamindars (?).

v1.c15.48

⁴ 100 cowries, Bengali 5 burhis = 100 cowries.

v1.c15.49

¹ The inscription was first brought to public notice by Gait in the 8th paragraph of his *Report on the Progress of Historical Progress in Assam*, 1897. It was then mentioned by Sir J. Marshall in *ASI*, 1902-03, p. 229. Kielhorn read the first 3 lines in *NKGWG*, 1905, pp. 465-71; fully edited by H. P. Sāstrī in *JBORS*, Vol. III, pp. 508-14. Dr. Barnett suggests: *Sādhanī* = controller? *Rajjaka* in meaning of clerks or the like (cf. *rajjaka*) ?

v1.c15.50

(2) *A stray plate.*—Probably the middle one; very much obliterated. It contains the names of Kumāra, Vajradeva and Harṣavarman, belonging to the Śālastambha group of princes, and refers to an order by *Yuvarāja* Vanamāla, the son of Harjara.²

v1.c15.51

² Noticed by Prof. Padmanath Bhattacharyya in the *IHQ*, December, 1927, pp. 888, 841 and 844. Not yet edited.

v1.c15.52

It is clear from these inscriptions that king Harjara was a worshipper of Śiva. After the shadowy figure of his father, his imperial titles come as a confirmation of our suggestion that he was the first sovereign ruler of this group. Hārūppeśvara-pura, the place of residence of Harjara, was probably also his capital.³ The reference to the order of *Yuvarāja* Vanamāla in his father's inscription may indicate that during the latter part of Harjara's reign his son was associated in the government of the kingdom. This finds a parallel in the history of the Gāhaḍavālas,⁴ where king Vijayacandra (*c.* 1155-70 A. D.) was associated with his son the *Yuvarāja* Jayaccandra (*c.* 1170-93 A. D.) Harjara was succeeded by his son Vanamāla. In his inscription he claims to belong to the line (*anvaya*) of the lords of Prāgjyotiṣa. He is further described as *a moon in the sky of Kṣiti-tanaya-nṛpati-vaṁśa*, and is said to have made gifts of gold, elephants, horses, lands, wives (brides ?), silver, and jewels. The river *Lauhitya-Sindhu*, which was as a friend to him, continually washed the sides of Mt. *Kāmakūṭa*, the tops of which were inhabited by *Kāmeśvara* (Śiva) and *Mahāgaurī*, and which apparently lay within his dominions.

v1.c15.53

³ Kielhorn real the name of the city as *H(a)ppeśvara-pura*, and suggested as a. possible reading *Hullappeśvara*.

v1.c15.54

⁴ *EI*, Vol. IV, pp. 118; *IA*, Vol. XV, p. 7, etc.

v1.c15.55

Of Vanamāla's reign we have only one inscription, the *Tezpur plates*, which were dug up near the station of that town in the Darrang district. It consists of three plates which are connected by a large copper ring. The seal contains within a raised rim a figure of Gaṇeśa. Below this figure runs the legend: *Svasti Śrīmān Prāgjyōtiṣādhipānvayō Mahā-rājādhirāja-Śrī-Vanamālavarma-deva*. The inscription opens with an invocation to *Lauhitya-Sindhu* (Brahmaputra) and *Pinākapāṇi* (Śiva). Then begins the genealogy of the donor. From Ādivarāha and the Earth was born Naraka. The latter has two sons, Bhagadatta and Vajradatta. The former got the lordship of Prāgjyotiṣa after the death of his father at the hands of Kṛṣṇa, and his posterity has ruled there ever since. In his line was born *Kṣitipāla-mauli-māṇikya kṣata-vairi-vīra* Prālambha, the lord of Prāgjyotiṣa. He was hostile to the princes *Sālastambha-pramukhaiḥ Śrī-Hariṣāntair mahīpālaiḥ*, who preceded him and were enemies of his ancestors. Prālambha's son through the queen Jivadā was Śrī-Harjara. The latter begot king Vanamāla by his *Agramahiṣī Mahādevī* Tārā. This king granted to Indoka, a Yajurvedī Brahman, the village Abhiśūravāṭaka, with its eight boundaries, situated on the west of Trisrotā (Tistā) in *Saṁvat* 19 *(Regnal)*.¹

v1.c15.56

¹ The inscription with a translation by Paṇḍit Saradaprasad Chakravarti was communicated to the Asiatic Society of Bengal and published in its Journal in 1840, Vol. IX, pp. 766 ff. The inscription requires re-edition. The translator takes *Trisrotā* to mean 'the Gaṅgā river' evidently a mistake, *ibid*, p. 775. See *JASB*, 1875, Vol. XLIV, p. 283.

v1.c15.57

From his seal and invocation to Śiva it appears that like his father he was also a worshipper of Śiva; but it is curious that he had dropped his father's title of *Paramamāheśvara*.² He reigned at least for 19 years, and if his *praśastikāra* is to be trusted, was master of the territories 'as far as the *Vanamālā* of the sea shore' and 'his footstool was borne by crowns of numerous *rājās*.’ It is not known how long he ruled; but a verse in the Nowgong inscription of Balavarman refers to him as one ‘who for a long time was king in the land.’¹ Hoernle referred his Tezpur grant on palaeographic grounds to about 925 A.D.² According to the Nowgong copper-plate grant of Balavarman, Vanamāla was succeeded by Jayamāla. According to Hoernle’s reading, Jayamāla again was succeeded by his son Vīrabāhu, who married Ambā; but Kielhorn has rejected this reading. He takes Vīrabāhu to be another name of Jayamāla, both referring to the same person.³ Jayamāla-Vīrabāhū is said to have contracted a disease while distinguishing himself in war, and after abdicating in favour of his son and having bravely endured the rite of religious suicide through starvation ‘became absorbed in the light of the divine being.’ This son, named Balavarman, was born to him, by his queen Ambā.

v1.c15.58

² In the Nowgong grant of Balavarman, Vanamāla is referred to as devoted to the faith of Bhava (Śiva), *JASB*, 1897, Vol. LXVI, pp. 287 ff.; but he is also called *Vanamāla*, an epithet of Viṣṇu, indicating devotion to that god.

v1.c15.59

¹ *Ibid.*

v1.c15.60

² *Ibid*, p. 120. But Kielhorn referred the 5 kings from Prālambha to Balavarman to the period 800-925 A.D.; see *NKGWG*, 1905, p. 470.

v1.c15.61

³ *Ibid*, p. 470; *JBORS*, Vol. III, p. 509; *JASB*, 1897, Vol. LXVI, p. 287 ff. In *HA*, no reference is made to Kielhorn’s reading. The author repeats Hoernle’s version.

v1.c15.62

The Nowgong grant is the only known inscription of the reign of Balavarman. It consists of three copper-plates, and is said to have been found by a cultivator of Sūtargāo, a village in Mauza Khātoālgao, on the right bank of the Kalang, opposite Puranigudam, in the Nowgong district in Assam. The ring, seal, and the general appearance of the inscriptions are very similar to those of Gauhati plates of Indrapālavarman. The heart-shaped seal contains in relief the figure of an elephant. Below this runs the legend: *Svasti Śrī-Śrī-Prāgjyotiṣādhipānvayō Mahārājādhirāja-Śrī-Balavarmadevaḥ.* After invocation of Rudra and Lauhitya, the inscription as usual refers to the birth of Naraka from Upendra and Vasumatī. Naraka conquered Kāmarūpa and founded the city of Prāgjyotiṣa. He had two sons, viz., Bhagadatta and Vajradatta. After the reign of their descendants there ruled Sālastambha and his descendants, Pālaka, Vijaya, (?), and others. Then arose the great king Harjara, his son Vanamāla, his son Jayamāla-Vīrabāhu, who had through his queen Ambā, the *Parameśvara-Parama-bhaṭṭāraka-Mahārājādhirāja-Śrī*-Balavarmadeva. The donee was the Yajurvedī Brahman Devadhara. The gift consisted of a piece of land known as Hēmsivā in the Dijjinnā-*Viṣaya* in the *Dakṣiṇakūla* (of the Brahmaputra ?), producing 4,000 (measures) of rice (*dhānya-catussahasrōtpattimatī*). There appears to have been a date at the end of the inscription, but it is illegible. An interesting feature of the plate appears to be the numerous plagiarised passages from Kālidāsa's well known *Raghuvaṁśa*. The grant was given from the 'ancestral camp' of Hāruppeśvara. Palaeographically the inscription has been referred to by Hoernle to a period not later than 975 A.D.¹ Kielhorn however placed Balavarman in about the first quarter of the 10th century A.D. It is difficult to say how long this dynasty lasted, or whether there were any more princes after Balavarman and before Tyāgasiṁha who, according to the Bargaon grant of Ratnapāla, immediately preceded Brahmapāla.² We have already seen that, according to Hoernle's calculations, based on the palaeographic evidence of the grants of Ratnapāla, Brahmapāla is to be placed in the neighbourhood of 1000 A.D.³ If Tyāgasiṁha, as seems not improbable, belonged to the line of Prālambha, then this dynasty appears to have reigned in Kāmarūpa from *c.* 800 to 1000 A.D. During this period Kāmarūpa sovereigns seem to have come into contact with the Pālas of Bengal and Bihar. In the Bhagalpur grant of Nārāyaṇapāla we are told that Jayapāla, at the command of his cousin, king Devapāla, undertook various expeditions ‘for the conquest of the quarters.’ The king of Prāgjyotiṣa ‘enjoyed peace at last surrounded by friends, only when he bore on his exalted head the command (of Jayapāla) that set at rest all talk of warfare.’¹ As Devapāla is usually referred to the period *c.* 815-54, it was probably Harjara or his son Vanamāla² who was the contemporary of Jayapāla. The Pālas appear to have grown very powerful under Dharmapāla and Devapāla. It is therefore not at all unlikely that Pāla arms really crossed the Karatoya and forced the princes of the Brahmaputra valley to acknowledge their hegemony.

v1.c15.63

¹ The inscription was first read and discussed in a local vernacular weekly named *Āsām* by Paṇḍit Dhireśvara Kaviratna of Kāmarūpa. Gait sent the plates to the Asiatic Society of Bengal, and Hoernle edited them in its *Journal*, Vol. LXVI, 1897, pp. 121, 285-97; see also Vol. LXVII, 1898, pp. 108 ff.

v1.c15.64

² *JASB*, 1898, Vol. LXVII, pp. 99 ff.

v1.c15.65

³ For a different view of the dates of the Pāla grants of Assam, see *EI*, Vol. XVIII, p. 290.

v1.c15.66

¹ *IA*, 1886, Vol. XV, p. 305, verse 6; also *ibid*, p. 308; *Gauḍalekhamālā*, p. 66, footnote. For a different interpretation of the verse see, Hultzsch in *IA*, 1886, Vol. XV, p. 308, footnote 24.

v1.c15.67

² *JASB*, 1921, Vol. XVII (N. S.), pp. 1-6. See also *infra*, *Dynastic History of Bengal and Bihar*.

v1.c15.68

As the names of the next group of princes who ruled in the Assam valley uniformly end in *pāla*, it is convenient to designate them as the Pālas of Kāmarūpa. The transition of the royal power from Pralambha’s successors to this new group is mentioned in the Bargaon grant of Ratnapāla. We are told that when Tyāgasiṁha the twenty-first sovereign of Kāmarūpa, counting from Śālastambha, departed from this world without leaving any of his race to succeed him, “his subjects thinking it well that a *Bhauma* (*i.e.* one of Naraka’s race) should be appointed as their lord, chose Brahmapāla, a kinsman of the deceased ruler, on account of his fitness to undertake the government of the country.” Thus, if the *praśastikāra* is to be believed, the new king was elected by his subjects, an incident which finds a parallel in the history of the founder of the Pāla dynasty of Bengal and Bihar.³ Brahmapāla, the founder of this new group of princes, apparently belonged to a collateral line of the same family as that of his predecessor, both tracing their descent from Narak’s line (*anvaya*). Both the dynasties certainly belonged to non-Aryan stock, as the sound of the name Harjara is distinctly non-Hindu.¹ But the names of his immediate successor and those of the Pālas show that they were speedily assimilated into the Hindu fold. They were right, however, in tracing their descent from Bhagadatta, the lord of the *Mleccha* Cīnas and Kirātas, inasmuch as they appear to have belonged to that great hive of Mongolian peoples which lies in the north, and east, of the Indian subcontinent. Both peaceful penetration and armed invasions by this stock, though never seriously affecting the general currents of Indian life, were nevertheless regular features in the history of this frontier. The invasion of the Ahoms, an offshoot of the Shan race in the 13th century, and of the Burmese in the 19th century, are only later episodes in this development. The Mongoloid physiognomy of the peoples of Assam and some of the districts of Northern and Eastern Bengal clearly shows the substantial accuracy of this conclusion.²

v1.c15.69

³ *JASB*, 1898, Vol. LXVII, p. 106 ff.; verse 10. See also Khalimpur grant of Dharmapāla; *EI*, Vol. IV, p. 243.

v1.c15.70

¹ *JASB*, 1898, Vol. LXVII, p. 105.

v1.c15.71

² H. H. Risley, *Peoples of India*, pp. 9-10, 40-43, etc. Consult also *The Tribes and Castes of Bengal*, by the same author.

v1.c15.72

Of Brahmapāla’s reign no records survive. He was succeeded by his son Ratnapāla who was begotten by his queen Kuladevī. In the inscriptions of his son, Brahmapāla is only called *Mahārājādhirāja*, while Ratnapāla has the full imperial titles : *Parameśvara Paramabhaṭṭāraka-Mahārājādhirāja*.³ It is likely that Ratnapāla was the first vigorous ruler of his line who had imperial pretensions. This is confirmed by the fact that in his Bargaon grant Ratnapāla claims to have come into hostile contact with the *Gurjarādhipa*, the *Gauḍendra*, the *Keraleśa*, the *Bāhikas*, the *Tāikas*, and the *Dākṣiṇātya-kṣōṇipati*. The *praśastikāra* thus refers to these incidents in his description of the king’s capital :—

v1.c15.73

³ In this connection note that Indrapāla in his Gauhati grant calls his grandfather Ratnapāla, his predecessor, *P. Pb. M.*, see *JASB*, 1897, p. 126.

v1.c15.74

Crowded with a dense forest, as it were, of arms of his brave soldiers, who were hankering after the plunder of the camps of all his enemies, yet was fit to be inhabited by wealthy people (merchants)......the disk of the sun was hidden (from view) by the thousand of its plastered turrets, .....adorned by learned men, religious preceptors and poets, it resembled the *parameśvara-ādhiṣṭhānam* (Kailāsa)......its boundaries were encompassed by a rampart furnished with a fence strong like that used for the game-birds of the Sakas, fit to cause chagrin to the *king of Gurjara*, to give fever to the heads of the untameable elephants of the *chief of Gauḍa*, to act like bitumen in the earth to the *lord of Kerala*, to strike awe into the *Bāhikas and Tāikas*, to cause pulmonary consumption to the *master of the Deccan country*.........It is rendered beautiful by the Lauhitya. Such is the town in which the *lord of Prāgjyotiṣa* took up his residence, and which he called by the appropriate name of the *Impregnable one* (*Prāgjyotiśeṣa-Durjayākhyapuram adhyuvāsa*).¹

v1.c15.75

¹ *JASB*, 1898, Vol. LXVII, pp. 115-118.

v1.c15.76

It is not unlikely that much of the above is merely the vapourings of the poet's brain. But, as is usual in such cases, there may have been in it some grains of facts of contemporary incidents which conveniently gave rise to such pretensions. Now taking for granted that Hoernle was correct in assuming the date of Ratnapāla to be *c.* 1010-1050 A. D.,² the two kings from the peninsular portion of India who invaded Northern India about this time were the Cola king Rājendra I (*c.* 1013-44 A.D.)³ and the Cāḷukya Vikramāditya VI (*c.* 1076-1126 A. D.). They might conveniently be described as *Keraleśa* and *Dākṣiṇātya-kṣoṇīpati*. It is interesting to note that the *Vikramāṅkadevacarita* actually refers to an invasion of Kāmarūpa by Vikramāditya during the reign of his father Someśvara I (*c.* 1040-1069).¹ By *Bāhikas* and *Tāikas* (Tājikas?) the author probably meant the Turkish invaders who under their leaders Maḥmūd of Ghazni and his son Mas‘ūd harried a considerable portion of Northern India during the period 1000 to 1037 A. D., and are reported to have come as far east as Benares. The *Gurjarādhipa* referred to here may have been Rājyapāla (*c.* 1018-19), or even Trilocanapāla (*c.* 1019-27), the contemporaries of Sulṭān Maḥmūd. The presence of the Gurjaras in Magadha and North Bengal probably made them familiar to the Kāmarūpa poets. As to the *Gauḍendra*, he certainly belonged to the dynasty of the Pālas, who, as we have seen, were the neighbours of the princes of the Brahmaputra valley from the 9th century A. D. onwards.²

v1.c15.77

² *JASB*, 1898, Vol. LXVII, pp. 102, 105, etc.

v1.c15.78

³ The Tirumalai inscription dated in the 13th year of his reign refers to his northern conquests. He ascended the throne in *c.* 1013 A. D. and as his inscription dated in his 9th year does not contain any reference to these victories I assume that the expedition probably occurred between his 9th and 12th regnal years (*c.* 1021-25 A D.). For the Tirumalai inscription see *EI*, Vol. IX, pp. 229 ff.

v1.c15.79

¹ Ed. by Bühler, Bombay, 1875, III, 74.

v1.c15.80

² Hoernle suggested that the rulers intended were perhaps: the Western Cālukya Jayasiṁha III or Someśvara I, the Coḷa Rājarāja, and the Pāla king Mahīpāla or Nayapāla. *JASB*, 1898, Vol. LXVII, p. 105.

v1.c15.81

This capital of the king, which baffled and struck terror into so many princes, was called *Śrī-Durjayā*. It would perhaps be wrong to accept this name as an *alias* for Prāgjyotiṣapura, as Hoernle has done from the fact, that the Pālas refer to themselves in their inscriptions as ‘lords of Prāgjyotiṣa.’³ For the line of Prālambha, who ruled from Hārūppeśvara, also described themselves as *Prāgjyotiṣādhipas*. It therefore appears that the epithet had by this time become a conventional title of all rulers of the Brahmaputra valley as *Trikaliṅgādhipati* became during this period amongst the rulers of Orissa and the Central Provinces. This does not of course preclude the possibility of the identity of all the three cities; but at present there are no facts to warrant this conclusion. It is not unlikely however that these capitals may have been situated in the neighbourhood of the modern town of Gauhati, not far from which stands the sacred temple of Kāmākhyā, undoubtedly an ancient site.

v1.c15.82

³ *Ibid*, p. 103.

v1.c15.83

For the reign of Ratnapāla the following two inscriptions have so far been found;—

v1.c15.84

(1) *Bargaon Grant.*—The findspot of the inscription is unknown, but it was found in the possession of a cultivator of the Mauza Bargāon, in the Tejpur subdivision of Darrang district. It is written on three plates in Sanskrit, partly in prose and partly in verse. The composition is very laboured and the mechanical execution very slovenly and inaccurate. A curiosity of the inscription is the existence of plagiarisms, or at least imitations from Bāṇa's *Harṣacarita*. The seal is exactly like that of the Gauhati grant of Indrapāla and bears the legend. *Prāgjyotiṣādhipati-Mahārājādhirāja-Śrī-Ratnapāla-varma-devaḥ*. On palaeographic grounds Hoernle placed it in the earlier half of the 11th century A. D. The inscription opens with two verses in praise of Śiva's *Tāṇḍava* dance, Śaṅkarī, and Lauhitya-Sindhu. Then is given the usual genealogy from Naraka, born to Hari, in the form of a boar, and Dharā. His two sons were Bhagadatta and Vajradatta. After their descendants had ruled for a long time there appeared the *Mlecchādhinātha* Sālastambha. Twenty chiefs, Vigrahastambha, and the rest, succeeded him. When the last amongst them, Tyāgasiṁha, died without issue, the subjects elected his relative Brahmapāla of Bhauma's race. His queen was Kuladevī. Their son Ratnapāla ascended the throne of the *Narakānvayas*. The object of the grant is to record that *P.Pb.M.-Śrī-Ratnapāla-varma-deva* gave the village (*pāṭaka*) of Vāmadeva, situated in the Trayodaśa-grāma-*Viṣaya* in the Uttarakula (of the Brahmaputra ?), producing 2,000 (measures of) rice, to the Vājasaneyaka Brahman Vīradatta on the Viṣṇupadī Saṁkrānti in the 25th year of his reign.¹

v1.c15.85

¹ Edited by Hoernle in *JASB*, 1898, Vol. LXVII, pp. 99 ff.

v1.c15.86

(2) *Sualkuci Grant.*—Found in the village of Sualkuci in the Gauhati subdivision of Kamrup district. It originally consisted of 3 plates, but the first is missing. The contents of the inscriptions, which is in a very bad state of preservation, appear to be almost identical with the Bargaon grant, the only difference being in the statements referring to the land and the donee. The workmanship is still more slovenly and inaccurate than in the other grant. Palaeographically they are exactly similar. The object of the grant is to record the gift of some land to the Vājasaneyaka Brāhmaṇa Kāmadeva by the king in the 26th year of his reign.¹

v1.c15.87

¹ *Ibid*, pp. 120-25.

v1.c15.88

From the invocation of his inscriptions it appears that Ratnapāla was a worshipper of Śiva. The description of his capital, that in it 'eating of flesh is only found in wild beasts'² affords an interesting insight into the form of Śaivism professed by him. Another interesting fact about his faith is the title 'illustrious *Varāha*' applied to him in the Gauhati plates of Indrapāla.³ This seems to indicate that he equally divided his devotion to the two gods. It is not known how far his reign extended beyond the 26th year recorded in his Sualkuci inscription, but scholars are generally agreed that he had a long reign. It appears from the Gauhati plates that Ratnapāla had a son named Purandarapāla, who married Durlabhā and had a son named Indrapāla, through her. Purandarapāla is described as a good poet, a great huntsman, and a successful warrior. It appears however that he did not rule, and perhaps died before his father. Though the mutilation of verse 16 of the inscription makes the point a little doubtful, the fact that Indrapāla omits his father's name and describes himself as 'meditating on the feet' of Ratnapāla, his grandfather in that portion of the inscription which usually contains the donor's father's name, should be taken as conclusive.

v1.c15.89

² *JASB*, 1898, Vol. LXVII, p. 117.

v1.c15.90

³ *Śrī-Varāha*, *ibid*, 1897, Vol. LXVI, p. 118.

v1.c15.91

So far the following two inscriptions have been found for the reign of Indrapāla :

v1.c15.92

(1) *Gauhati Plates.*—Discovered in a field in course of cultivation in the village of Bar Panara, Mauza Pati, Darrang district. The grant consists of three plates, held together by a massive pear-shaped seal, bearing on it the figure of an elephant. Below this figure is the legend : *Svasti Prāgjyotiṣādhipati Mahā-rājādhirāja-Śrī-Indrapāla-varma devaḥ*. The execution is very slovenly and inaccurate. According to Hoernle, palaeographically, it has close similarity to the Badal pillar inscription of the time of Nārāyaṇapāla.¹ Though it is not dated, the same scholar refers it 'with some probability' to the middle of the 11th century A.D. It begins with an invocation to Śambhu and the Lauhitya, then repeats the usual genealogy from Naraka, born of Mahāvarāha and Dharaṇī, to Vajradatta. Then after an undefined interval flourished Brahmapāla in the latter's family. His son was Ratnapāla; his son Purandarapāla married Durlabhā; his son was *P.-Pb.-M.-Śrīmad-Indrapāla-var-ma-deva*. The inscription records a grant by the king of some land bearing 4,000 (measures of) rice to the Yajurvedī Brahman Devapāla, and refers to his capital, full of elephants, horses, and jewels, and impregnable to the attacks of any royal dynasty, named *Śrī-Durjayā-nagarī*. Dated in the 8th year of his reign.²

v1.c15.93

¹ *EI*, Vol. II, p. 160.

v1.c15.94

² Edited by Hoernle, *JASB*, 1897, Vol. LXVI, pp. 113-32.

v1.c15.95

(2) *A Second Copper-plate Grant.*—Reported to be in fair condition, except the portion dealing with the boundary of the land granted. It does not supply any important historical fact in addition to what we know from (1).³

v1.c15.96

³ To my knowledge, not yet edited. Referred to in *IHQ*, December 1927, p. 839.

v1.c15.97

That the dynasty of the Pālas did not end with Indrapāla, appears to be probable from the copper-plate grant of Dharma-pāla.⁴ This king refers in his inscription to his father Harṣamāla (pāla ?) and grandfather Gopāla. In the present state of our knowledge it is impossible to decide whether Gopāla, if he really belonged to the line of Brahmapāla, was an immediate successor of Indrapāla. Another prince apparently of this family was the *Kāmarūpa-nṛpati* Jayapāladeva, referred to by the recently discovered Salimpur stone inscription of the Brahman Prahāsa. This inscription is incised on a slab of blackstone and was found in the Mauza Salimpur, Police Station Kethal, of the Bogra District in Bengal. The object is to record the erection of a temple wherein the above-mentioned Brahman set up an image of Amara-nātha. As in the Bhuvaneśvar inscription of Bhaṭṭa Bhavadeva,¹ we have here a record not of kings and ministers but the history of a Brahman family rendered illustrious by the birth of great scholars. Prahāsa traces his descent to a family which originally lived in Tarkāri within Śrāvasti and then in Bālagrāma in Varendrī. From Prahāsa upwards to Paśupati the *praśasti* mentions seven generations. In verse 22 of this inscription we are told that Prahāsa, 'though excessively solicited, did not by any means accept 900 gold coins (*hemnām śatāni nava nīrbharam*...) and a grant of land (*Śāsana*) yielding an income of a thousand (measures of rice) from Jayapāladeva, king of Kāmarūpa, when the latter was making a *Tulāpuruṣa* gift.² As the characters of the inscription are a variety of Northern alphabet which was used especially in Bengal and Magadha in the 11th century, and show close resemblance to the letters of the inscription of the Pāla king Nayapāla (*c.* 1040-55 A.D.), it is impossible to identify him with Jayapāla, the cousin of Devapāla (*c.* 815-50 A.D.).³ In view of the proximity of the findspot of this inscription to the frontier of Kāmarūpa and the similarity of its characters to those used in the inscriptions of the Pālas of Kāmarūpa it will perhaps be reasonable to accept this prince as belonging to that line. But his position in the order of kings is less certain. Mr. Basak, the editor of the inscription, has proposed to place him somewhere after Indrapāla; but it is not certain whether he should come after or before the Gopāla-Dharmapāla group. It was probably during the reign of these later Pāla rulers that the Varmans of Eastern Bengal invaded the Brahmaputra valley. The Belava grant of Bhojavarman informs us that his grandfather Jātavarman invaded Kāmarūpa. If the identification of Vīraśrī, the queen of this ruler, with a daughter of the Kalacuri Lakṣmī-Karṇa (*c.* 1041-70 A.D.) be accepted, Jātavarman was a contemporary of Vigrahapāla III of Bengal (*c.* 1055-81 A.D.).¹

v1.c15.98

⁴ An article on this inscription was published in *Raṅgpur-Sāhitya-Pariṣat Patrikā*, 1312 B.S., No. 9. Also referred to in *Prācīna-Kāmarūpa-Rājavalī*, in *Baṅgīya-Sāhitya Pariṣat-Patrikā*, 1320 B S., No. 3, p. 189. *IHQ*, 1927, December, pp. 839 and 842.

v1.c15.99

¹ *EI*, Vol. VI, pp. 203-07.

v1.c15.100

² *EI*, Vol. XIII, pp. 283-95.

v1.c15.101

³ See Bhagalpur grant of Nārāyaṇapāla, *IA*, 1886, Vol. XV, pp. 304-10 *Gauḍalekhamālā*, pp. 55-69. On the relationship of Devapāla and Jayapāla, see *infra*, Dynastic History of Bengal and Bihar.

v1.c15.102

¹ *EI*, Vol. XII, pp. 37 ff. For details see *infra*, *Dynastic History of Bengal and Bihar*.

v1.c15.103

For the period that follows, the records of Kāmarūpa supply us with no connected account. But the possibility that a line of kings still ruled in the Valley is revealed by the *Kamauli grant* of Vaidyadeva.² This inscription, written on three copper-plates, is supposed to have been dug out in the course of cultivation, in the village of Kamauli, near the confluence of the Barna and the Ganges at Benares. The seal contains the figure of Gaṇeśa, and is formed like a spoon. The characters resemble those of the Deopara inscription of Vijayasena (*c.* 1097-1159 A.D.).³ It was issued by *Paramamāheśvaraḥ-Paramavaiṣṇavo Mahārājādhirājaḥ Parameśvaraḥ Paramabhaṭṭāraka-Śrīmān* Vaidyadeva in year 4 (of his reign) from the *Haṁsākoñcī-Samavāsita-Śrīmaja-jaya-Skandhāvāra*. It records the grant of two villages named Sāntipāṭaka and Mandarā with a revenue of 400 (*catuḥśatikam*) and situated in the *Viṣaya* of Bāḍā, in the *Maṇḍala* of Kāmarūpa and the *Bhukti* of *Prāgjyotiṣa*. The donee is the Brahman Śrīdhara, son of Yudhiṣṭhira and Pālī his wife, and grandson of Bharata; he was born in the *gotra* of Viśvāmitra, in the village of Bhāva in Varendrī. Incidentally the inscription refers to the ancestors of the donor, who served as ministers of the Pāla kings of Bengal. He himself was the favourite minister of king Kumārapāla. The following chart illustrates the relationship¹:—

v1.c15.104

² *EI*, Vol. II, pp. 347-58; *Gauḍalekhamālā*, pp. 127-46.

v1.c15.105

³ *EI*, Vol. I, pp. 305-15; *JASB*, 1921, p. 16.

v1.c15.106

¹ For the dates, which are not given in the inscription, see *infra*, *Dynastic History of Bengal and Bihar*, pp. 281-82.

v1.c15.107

Vigrahapāla (*c.* 1055-81 A.D.) ………Yogadeva.

v1.c15.108

Rāmapāla (*c.* 1084-1126 A.D.) … Bodhideva

v1.c15.109

| | = Pratāpadevī.

v1.c15.110

Kumārapāla (*c.* 1126-30 A.D.)………Vaidyadeva.

v1.c15.111

We are further told that the *Gaudeśvara* Kumārapāla, having heard of the disaffection (*vikṛtim*) of Tiṅgyadeva, who had been formerly treated with high honour, appointed Vaidyadeva, as a ruler (*nareśvaratve*) in his place. The latter thereupon marched with his younger brother Budhadeva against that ruler (*Avanīpati*), and after defeating and killing him occupied his throne. Now who was this Tiṅgyadeva²? In the inscription itself he is described as a prince who ruled in the east (*Hari-harid-bhūvi*) of the Pāla dominions. As the land granted was situated in Kāmarūpa-*Maṇḍala* and Prāgjyotiṣa-*Bhukti*, and as the family of the donee belonged to Varendrī, *i.e.*, North Bengal, which bordered on Kāmarūpa, it is likely that he was a ruler of at least a portion of the Brahmaputra valley, which adjoined the kingdom of the Pālas on the west. It is also probable that he acknowledged the hegemony of his Western neighbours. Sir E. Gait has suggested that Vaidyadeva conquered Kāmarūpa and nominally remained a feudatory of the Pālas.³ It has recently been suggested that the Pālas conquered only a portion of the great kingdom of Kāmarūpa bordering on Gauḍa, wherein Tiṅgya was placed as a vassal; on his rebellion, Vaidyadeva defeated him, and was appointed a feudatory ruler in his place.¹ If this suggestion is accepted, it is likely that Tiṅgyadeva was placed in Kāmarūpa by Rāmapāla, who is credited with its conquest in the *Rāmacarita* of Sandhyākara Nandī.² In the present state of our knowledge it is impossible to decide what was the exact position of Tiṅgyadeva in relation to the two dynasties of the Pālas ruling in Bengal and Assam or what were the boundaries of his dominions. He certainly appears to have been a ruler of at least a portion of the Brahmaputra valley, in which he was supplanted by Vaidyadeva in the first half of the 12th century A.D.³ It is not impossible that Vaidyadeva was succeeded in his dominions by his brother Budhadeva, who so ably assisted him in gaining his throne; but of this we have no evidence.

v1.c15.112

² Through a mistake the name is given as Tishyadeva, in *HA*, p. 35 The regnal year of Vaidyadeva is also wrongly given as '9th year.' Verse 16 makes it clear that Tiṅgya was killed; see *EI*, Vol. II, p. 356.

v1.c15.113

³ *HA*, p. 35.

v1.c15.114

¹ *IHQ*, December, 1927, p. 842.

v1.c15.115

² *MASB*, Vol. III, No. 1, p. 50; III, 47.

v1.c15.116

³ Haṁsākoñcī, the place from which Vaidyadeva issued his Kamauli Inscription, has not yet been identified.

v1.c15.117

Another inscription of this period which refers to a king of Kāmarūpa is the Deopara stone inscription of Vijayasena.⁴ Umāpatidhara, the composer of this *praśasti*, tells us that Vijayasena in the course of his victorious career 'defeated Nānya and Vīra, impetuously assailed the lord of Gauḍa, and put down the prince of Kāmarūpa.' Who was this 'prince of Kāmarūpa'? It has been shown elsewhere that Vijayasena was a contemporary of Madanapāla (*c.* 1130-50 A.D.), who is probably to be identified with the defeated Gauḍa monarch. It is also very likely that Vijayasena (*c.* 1097-1159 A.D.) established his dominions in North Bengal after overthrowing this Pāla king, about 1130 A.D.⁵ This victory may have led Vijayasena into conflict with Vaidyadeva or one of his descendants. Vaidyadeva certainly appears as a friend, if not a vassal, of Kumārapāla in his Kamauli grant. There is no inherent impossibility in the friendship between the two families continuing till the reign of Madanapāla. But of this there is no actual proof. A more likely suggestion is that this 'prince of Kāmarūpa' is one of the rulers mentioned in the *Assam Plates of Vallabhadeva*.¹ The latter inscription consists of five plates of copper, and was presented to the Bengal Asiatic Society by Mr. W. Wincler, Assistant Executive Engineer of Tezpur. "The characters of the inscriptions belong to a variety of the Northern alphabet which was used in the 12th century A.D......in most eastern parts of Northern India," closely resembling those of the Deopara inscription of Vijayasena. It belongs to a prince named Vallabhadeva, for whom the following genealogy is given :—

v1.c15.118

⁴ *EI*, Vol. I, pp. 305-15.

v1.c15.119

⁵ *JL*, 1927, pp. 9-12; *JASB*, 1921, pp. 1-15.

v1.c15.120

¹ First edited by Hultzsch in *ZDMG*, 1886, Band XL, pp. 42-47; then by Kielhorn in *EI*, 1898-99, Vol. V, pp. 181-88.

v1.c15.122

The last prince in the *Saka* year 1107 (1184 or 1185 A.D. as the year is taken as current or expired), at the command of his father and for the spiritual welfare of his mother, founded an almshouse (*bhaktaśālā*, *anna-sattra*) near a temple of the god Mahādeva to the east of Kīrtipur in the Hāpyachā-*Maṇḍala*, and endowed it with the revenues of certain villages and hamlets. The localities mentioned have not yet been identified. The lack of any imperial titles suggests that these princes were not very important. But the close similarity of the script of this inscription and that of the Deopara inscription, as also its date points to the contemporaneity of Vijayasena and these rulers; and it is therefore not impossible that either Udayakarṇa or his father Rāyārideva may have been ‘the prince of Kāmarūpa’ who according to Umāpatidhara was defeated by his patron. It was again probably one of these princes, possibly Vallabhadeva, who was defeated by Vijayasena's grandson Lakṣmaṇasena.¹ A remark has recently been made, that, though discovered at Tezpur, ‘this grant and the donor seem to have belonged to Eastern Bengal very close to Kāmarūpa.’² But this assertion is, to my knowledge, not yet supported by any proof, and so the exact area over which this line ruled must remain for the present uncertain.

First 123 of 204 passages. Read on

Linked texts (6)