The Dynastic History of Northern India (Early Mediaeval Period) v1.c15.29

Language: English

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*.