The Dynastic History of Northern India (Early Mediaeval Period) v1.c15.38

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.