Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v1.c22: Chapter XVIII: Himalayan States

History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v1.c22

Language
English

Contents

Chapter XVIII: Himalayan States

v1.c22.2

It is necessary to add a chapter on the history of the many states small and great which existed in the valleys of the Himalaya mountain and adjoining parallel ranges on the side of India. We have already given a detailed history of Kashmir, which was always a part of and an important kingdom in India. Being in the north of the Panjab it was entered by the Indo-Aryans in prehistoric times. Although not settled and cultivated by an Aryan population like the Panjab, the Brahmins and Kshatriyas who formed the upper layer were numerous enough to stamp the country as a part of India. The Brahmins of Kashmir again took a leading part in the development of the Aryan civilization in India itself. They also established a reputation for learning which has existed down to this day. For Kashmir Brahmins have always prospered in Kashmir as well as abroad in India both as learned Pandits and as great administrators. Hence Kashmir has always been treated as an important part of India. It is mentioned in the Mahābhārata list of Indian kingdoms as also in Varāhamihira's. Its history naturally forms a part of Indian history.

v1.c22.3

But the case with other Himalayan states, especially Nepal is different. These states were in the first place inhabited by an aboriginal population which is not Indian *i. e.* Dravidian, but which is Mongolian by race and akin to the Tibetans and other people to the north of India. (The Dāmaras of Kashmir appear to be neither Aryan nor Mongolian and we are not quite sure if they are Dravidians. Their race requires to be carefully sifted). The Khasas, the Newars and the Bhotias are distinctly Mongolian by race. Secondly, these states have been entered into by Indo-Aryans only in historical times. Of course only Brahmins and Kshatriyas went there for religious and political purposes and impressed upon the local people their religion and their polity. And thirdly, Nepal has been an amphibious state, sometimes dependent on Tibet or China and sometimes dependent on Indian emperors. Even now Nepal is in this double position. While it entertains a Resident from British India, it still sends some presents to China in token of its vassalage to that empire. Bhotan is entirely Mongolian, it was never subject to India, nor was it ever entered into by the Indo-Aryans. It is, therefore, only as an adjoining state that that state is mentioned in political relations with British India. Nepal is sometimes mentioned in ancient Sanskrit works, but it is not included in the list of Indian kingdoms and is not mentioned in the Mahābhārata or Varāhamihira list of Indian peoples. We will, however, trace the history of Nepal during our period because it was under Indian rulers at this time and of other minor states which were more completely Indian and which lie between Nepal and Kashmir in a note. For this history inscriptions and coins are available as also legendery accounts preserved in Nepal and elsewhere.

Nepal.

v1.c22.s1.1

The present state of Nepal is about 500 miles long and about 100 miles broad and lies to the north of India. It extends from Kumaon on the west to Sikkim on the east. It is bounded on the south by the Sandstone Range of tills which are a continuation so to speak of the Siwalik range in the Panjab at the southern base of the Himalaya mountains. On the north of Nepal is the chief snowy range of the Himalayas and most of its highest peaks e. g. Mt. Everest, Dhavalagiri and Kanchanagangā are on the northern borders of Nepal beyond which extends Tibet. Three principal rivers rise thence and pass through this state viz. the Rapti in the western part, the Gandaka in the central and the Koshi or Kauśiki in the eastern, the latter two being also called Sapta Gandaka and Sapta Kauśiki in Nepal as seven streams unite to form them within the bounds of this state like the Sapta Ganga in Garhwal. The country is of course mostly mountainous, but there are several open valleys which are fertile and cultivated though they are generally limited in extent.

v1.c22.s1.2

The most noted and extensive of these valleys is the valley of Nepal properly so called. It is surrounded by mountains like the valley of Kashmir and is about 20 miles in length and 10 miles in breadth. A small river (lesser than the Vitastā of Kashmir) runs through this valley and unites with another river in the centre of it. These two riverss are named Bāgmati and Vishnumati and uniting they get out of the valley through a gorge in the southern hills into the plains of India. The valley is about 4700 ft. above the sea level and consequently enjoys a very fine climate which is not very cold. The soil is fertile and the chief crop is of course rice as in Kashmir. Vegetables and all sorts of fruit are grown in this and the adjoining valleys. It is, therefore, very thickly populated and there are several towns in it the chief being Kāthmāndu or Kāntipur which is situated on the confluence of the Bāgmati and Vishnumati and Lalitapātana and Bhātgaon (Bhaktagrama).

v1.c22.s1.3

The original inhabitants of Nepal are called Newars and belong as already stated to the Mongolian race. They are of short stature, but strong and muscular. They are flat faced and yellow. They do the agriculture as also the trade of the country and are thus true Vaiśyas according to the Bhagavadgīta. They are characterised like many Mongolian peoples by lax marital relations. A Newar girl when quite a child is married to a Bel fruit which then is thrown into a river. The girl is therefore never in want of a man when she is grown up, but can give him up if she is dissatisfied with him by simply placing two betel-nuts under his bed and walking out of his house. The story in the Mahābhārata is, therefore, not quite strange wherein it is stated that Pāndu when in the Himalayas said to his wife "Formerly women were unrestrained." In fact lax marital relations characterise most Mongolian Himalayan peoples and the ideas of Gandharvas and Apsarasas have developed out of them in the Hindu Purāṇas.

v1.c22.s1.4

The Indo-Aryans go to the other extreme in this matter; at least they have done so in Nepal. Among the higher castes in Nepal the Aryans or mixed Aryans punish adultery most severely. The guilty wife is imprisoned for life, while the injured husband has the right to cut down the guilty man in public; the latter, however, is allowed to run away if he can. No widows are allowed to remarry; while those who elect to burn themselves on the funeral pyre of their deceased husbands are compelled to do so, if by chance they lose heart and wish to turn back from the burning pile. Such extremely high notions of a wife’s duty in one caste and such lax views of it in another placed side by side in the same country afford an interesting example of the power of ideas on human customs.

v1.c22.s1.5

The Indo-Aryans have immigrated into Nepal within historical times. The latest invasion was that of the Gurkhas who claim descent from the Śisodias of Chitore whence after its fall before Allauddin some Rajputs migrated into a valley to the west of Nepal. There they appear to have mixed with the Himalayan people of the Mongolian race and formed the present Gurkha (or Gorkha) people. Their Aryan characteristics, however, are still apparent. Dr. Wright who has written a detailed history of Nepal from native chronicles says at page 25 in describing the Gurkhas “The Gorkhas or Gorkhālis formerly occupied the district round the town of Gorkha which is about 40 miles west of Kāthamāndu. They are said to be of Rajput descent and to have been driven out of Rajputana on the occasion of a Mahomedan invasion. They first settled near Pālpa having passed through the Kumaon hills and gradually extended their dominion to Gorkha. The Gorkhas are in general fine looking men. Some of the higher castes such as are found in regiments are tall and slim in figure and muscular and enduring and have high features like the natives of Hindustan.

v1.c22.s1.6

However owing to intermarriage they have become much mixed. They are essentially a military race. They are temperate and hardy and make good soldiers. They are by no means industrious and take but a small share in the agricultural or mechanical labours of the country. The Newars are in general a shorter set of men than the Gorkhas and their features are more of the Mongolian type.” ( page 26 ) * The Gorkhas are also fairer in complexion than the Newars who have more yellowish features”. Complexion, hereditary military tendencies and strict adherence to Hindu religion, therefore, unmistakably substantiate the tradition among the Gurkhas that they are descended from Śisodia Rajputs.

v1.c22.s1.7

Speaking of the religion of the people, the Newars and other older people of Nepal are mostly Buddhists, though a large minority of the Newars are also Hindus. The higher castes especially the Brahmins and Khatris including the Gurkhas are orthodox Hindus and devout worshippers of Śiva. Indeed the great temple of Paśupati is from ancient times the chief temple of the land and is also famous throughout India. Śiva’s consort Durgā and son Gaṇapati are also favourite deities and have many temples erected to them by devout kingly worshippers. And the wonder is that even the Buddhists are worshippers of Devi. Indeed the Mahāyāna or Tibet Buddhism which is prevalent here is so full of idolatry and superstition and has borrowed so much from Hindu ideas that the Buddhits of Nepal do not scruple to sacrifice cocks, goats, and buffaloes to the terrible Durgā; for this Buddhism has also invented its own goddesses the Tārās who are five in number and who are the wives of five Buddhas (!!!) and have five sons. The Buddhists in Nepal like the Hindus are also flesh-eaters. Of course cows are sacred to both and to kill or maim a cow is as heinous a crime as to kill or maim a human being.

v1.c22.s1.8

∗ A contrary statement appears in the Imperial Gazetteer under Nepal; which is probably inaccurate and is perhaps a wrong quotation of the words of Dr. Wright.

v1.c22.s1.9

Thus we see that in the physical aspects of the country and the characteristics of the people Nepal much resembles Kashmir, except in the fact already noticed viz. that while Kashmir has always been famous for the learning of its Pandits who have in historical and modern times too, migrated into other provinces and made their mark, Nepali Brahmins are not known for learning. Indeed Brahmins from outside have usually been indented for in Nepal and we know that the worshippers of Paśupati are Brahmins from the south (both Deccan and Madras). There are also Brahmins from Kanauj and Tirhut or Mithila which are contiguous to Nepal. These Brahmins very probably in modern days have written out the chronicles of Nepal from ancient Vamśāvalis which as in Kashmir give a history of the valley from the most ancient times commencing with even Satyayuga down to the conquest of the country by the Gurkhas under Prithvi-Narayana in 1768 A. D. This legendery history has been given in summary by Dr. Wright in his book entitled History of Nepal. This account on the face of it is legendary and jumbles facts and fancies in an undistinguishable mass. The chronology too is hopelessly at fault owing to what is imaginery and later theory. Some inscriptions, however, enable us in conjunction with this history to give some interesting detailed facts of Nepal history from about 600 A. D. to 800 A. D. the period we are concerned with in this volume. Before proceeding to detail it we must give a short summary of the preceding history.

v1.c22.s1.10

Whether Śiva worship is older in Nepal or Buddha worship cannot be determined. But Paśupati and Buddha equally claim the reverence of the people from ancient times. Aśoka certainly was once sovereign of this land and visited it. He is said to have given his daughter in marriage to a local king. Nāgas, Yakshas, Rākshasas and Durgas are common to both rleigions. And Nepal is considered a Mahāpītha” because it contains the four most sacred shrines of the world viz. Svayambhu Chaitya, Gujeśvari Pitha, Śivalinga Paśupati and Karlie Śmaśan”

v1.c22.s1.11

(Wright H. of N. p. 91). There is a tradition current in Nepal that Vikramājit also came to and ruled in Nepal and laid down laws. The Bhairavas of Śiva may perhaps be attributed to his influence and were introduced along with other attendants of Śiva. There is a jumble of dates here which may be neglected, for a Vikramājit is also mentioned further on. But Vikrama certainly introduced the Samvat era in Nepal and, it is said, paid off all debts. There is indeed a curious tradition all over India that the founder of an era must pay off all debts existing in the country, and thus make all men happy. There is not the least doubt that the Vikrama era has been in use in Nepal since a very long time. And here we come in contact with inscriptions which have been read and translated by two such learned antiquarians as Bhagvanlal Indraji and Buhler. These are all given together in Indian Antiquary Vol. IX, and we quote them from that journal.

v1.c22.s1.12

The first four inscriptions are in clear Gupta characters and are dated Samvat 386, 413, 435 and 535. What Samvat this is we shall see further on. The next important inscription given is that of Śivadeva of the Lichhavi family without date and mentions Mahāsāmanta Amśuvarman. The sixth inscription is dated Samvat 34 and belongs to Amśuvarman himself describing him as a servant of Mahādeva and of Bappa and styling him as Mahāsāmata. These two are in changed Gupta characters. A third dated S. 39 belongs to the same king. Besides other inscriptions there is next one in S. 49 by Jishṇugupta who was Yuvaraja to Vishṇugupta in which Mahārājādhirāja Amśuvarman is mentioned. Next comes a grant of Śivadeva for the maintenance of a Śiva temple Śiveśvara founded by him dated S. 119 and two others of this same Śivadeva in S. 143 and 145 in which a Yuvarāja Vijayadeva is mentioned. Lastly we have a most important inscription by Jayadeva in S. 153 which gives a legendery pedigree to the Lichhavi kings connecting them with the solar line, Lichhavi being said to be a descendant of Daśaratha after 8 intervening kings. In this line were born Śankaradeva, Dharmadeva, Mānadeva, Mahīdeva and Vasantadeva, then after 13 kings came Udayadeva whose son was the famous Śivadeva who married Vatsadevi daughter of the Maukhari king Bhogavarman and granddaughter of the king of Magadha Ādityasena. Their son was Jayadeva who married Rājyadevi daughter of Harshadeva king of Assam who had conquered Gauda, Udra, Kalinga and other countries. He records this inscription commemorating the placing of a silver lotus above Paśupati and in this inscription are certain verses composed by the king himself.

v1.c22.s1.13

These inscriptions and the eras noted in them are discussed by the well-known antiquarian Pandit Bhagavanlal Indraji in Ind. Ant. Vol. XIII p. 411 along with the traditional dynastic lists preserved in Nepal also given by him and by Dr. Wright who in his history noticed above summarises one such Vamśāvali given him by a Buddhist monk. These Vamśāvalis are all legendery but contain very many real facts buried under imaginary stories. Now Pandit Bhagavanlal rightly observes that Amśuvarman in these inscriptions is the same Amśuvarman who is spoken of by Hiuen Tsang as ruling in Nepal about his time. He appears to have been a Thakuri or Rajput and originally a Sāmanta or feudatory of the Lichhavi king of Nepal named Śivadeva; but gradually to have assumed real sovereignty himself. Now his first inscription is dated Samvat 34. This Samvat is clearly, therefore, the Harsha era. The Vamśavali history as given by Dr. Wright at Chap. III p. 133 says that the first king of the new dynasty was Amśuvarman. Just before this at p. 131 it is stated that Vikramājit a powerful monarch of Hindustan founded a new era and came to Nepal to introduce his era here. Now this is a second mention of the coming of Vikramājit and Pandit Bhagavanlal is correct in holding that this refers to the conquest of Nepal by Harsha and the introduction of his era, the legend confounding him with the Vikrama of 57 B. C. The change in the era in the inscriptions also indicates the same thing. This inscription with the garbled story of the Vamśāvalis and Hiuen Tsang's account combine to prove that Harsha conquered Nepal and introduced his era there most probably in the days of Śivadeva Licchavi. This conquest may be looked upon as attested to even by Bāṇa when he says in the Harsha Charita गृहीतः दुर्गायाः हिमसुवः करः

v1.c22.s1.14

Our history is concerned with the conquest of Harsha and with later events. But as we have said before, it would be interesting to note here the historical facts before this event which can be gathered from inscriptions. Now the Vamśāvalis mention certain kings before Harsha who are also mentioned in inscriptions and these are 1 Vrisha-deva 2 Śankaradeva 3 Dharmadeva 4 Mānadeva, 5 Mahī-deva and Vasantadeva. They are not only mentioned in Jayadeva's inscription (no. 15) of Harsha S. 153 i.e. A. D. 759 but they have left their own inscriptions as stated before dated S. 386, 435 and 535. The question here is what Samvat is this. They certainly precede Jayadeva of 759 A. D. by many generations i. e. several centuries. Now it is impossible to take the Gupta era here, for the years would be, adding 320, 706, 755, and 855 A. D. Śaka era of 78 A. D. and Vikrama era of 57 B. C. are both admissable. But Pandit Bhagavanlal has rightly held that the Vikrama era alone is applicable considering the number of generations that intervened between Jayadeva of 759 A. D. and Mānadeva of the first inscription. We find from inscription no. 15 that Jayadeva was preceded by the famous 1 Śivadeva son-in-law of the powerful Maukhari, 2 Narendradeva, then 13 unnamed kings then 17th Udayadeva, 18th Vasantadeva, 19th Mahīdeva and 20th Mānadeva son of Dharmadeva and Rājyadevi as mentioned in inscription No. 1 of S. 386. These 19 kings if assigned about 437 years at 23 year's average for each generation as usual will take Mānadeva to A.D. 322 (759-437). If S. 386 be treated as Vikrama Samvat we get A.D. 326 which is near Manadeva's date above obtained. But if we take Samvat 386 as given in the Saka era it gives us A. D. 464.

v1.c22.s1.15

Under this view there will be between Mānadeva and Jayadeva 759-464 = 295 years which for 19 or even 18 generations of kings in the interval gives 15 or 16 years only for each generation. One is, therefore, convinced that Pandit Bhagvanlal is correct in taking the Vikrama Samvat for the early inscriptions in Nepal; though this contradicts the view of many antiquarians, as the Pandit himself has observed, that the Vikrama Samvat was concocted about the beginning of the 5th century A.D. This is the great importance and value of these inscriptions as they umistaknably give us a date in Vikrama Samvat so old as 386 or A. D. 329 i. e. preceding the fifth century.

v1.c22.s1.16.1

We will now turn to our period. The first thing to be noticed is that Harsha seems very definitely to have conquered Nepal and introduced his era there. This was in the days of a Licchavi king named Śivadeva and must have happened very soon after Harsha's accesion, sometime about 610 A. D. The king being thus weakened his Sāmanta Amśuvarman, a powerful prince, easily became ascendent, but not so ascendent as to throw away Harsha's era, or to throw away his own title as Sāmanta. Hence his two inscriptions use the Harsha era and still retain the title Sāmanta though he virtually remained the master as chief minister or commander. This sort of double lordship lasted probably for some generations. Pandit Bhagvanlal mentions a parallel in the latest history of Nepal itself viz. of the family of the prime minister Jang Bahadur. But there are more such parallels in Indian history and we may quote the Peshwas themselves on our side who for four generations were both ministers and masters while the Satara chiefs for generations were ostensibly kings and yet powerless. Hiuen Tsang states that "the kings in Nepal were Kshatriyas and believed in Buddha. Amśuvarman a recent king had written a treatise on Etymology". This description shows that Amśuvarman was then dead but not necessarily when Hiuen Tsang visited Śrāvasti. It is probable he never went to Nepal personally but collected information which was noted later and at that time Amśuvarman was dead. Inscription no.

v1.c22.s1.16.2

7 is by Amśuvarman himself and is dated Samvat 39 which being in Harsha's era gives A. D. 645. He must have been alive then and it can not be explained how Sir Vincent Smith gives 641 A. D. as the date of his death (E. H. 3rd Ed. p. 366). But Amśuvarman must have died before Harsha very probably and he was not the man who gave assistance to the Chinese envoy who was maltreated by the ruler of Tirhut as stated in the history of Kanauj. For it appears that Amśuvarman at least in his later days was a staunch Hindu and a worshipper of Śiva as may be surmised from the following epithet applied to him in this very inscription viz. निशि निशि चानिकशास्त्रविमर्शविसादितसदर्शनतया धर्माधिकारास्थितिकारणमेवोत्सवनतिशयं मन्यमानः. This wording not only corroborates Hiuen Tsang's report about Amśuvarman's learning but shows that he had seen the fallacy of the wrong philosophy (of course Buddhism). The course of history in Nepal, therefore, at this time was the same as elsewhere. The kings upto Amśuvarman were sometimes Buddhists, sometimes Vaishnavites. The first Vishnudeva whose name we have in inscription No. 1 is described in Ins. No. 15 of Jayadeva as सुगतशासनपक्षपाती i. e. favourer of the teaching of Buddha. The Buddhist religion probably led to the enervation of the kingly line and Amśuvarman appears to have become supreme, being a professor of the sturdier religion of Śiva.

v1.c22.s1.16.3

It is pertinent to note that this Amśuvarman and his successors call themselves in the beginning of their inscriptions पशुपतिभट्टारकापदानुगृहीत i. e. favoured by the feet of Lord Paśupati while the first four inscriptions do not contain this epithet. The Lord Paśupati was certainly there before Amśuvarman. For Hiuen Tsang describing the people of Nepal says, "The people are rude and deceitful and ugly in appearance; but skilled mechanics (a true description of the Mongolian peoples). They believed both the false and true religions, Buddhist monasteries and Deva temples touching each other". We may, therefore, be sure that Paśupati was already there but the kings were usually Buddhists and sometimes Vaishnavites. Whatever be the reason, Amśuvarman established himself as paramount Sāmanta and was a worshipper of Paśupati. The other epithet बप्पपादानुध्यात occurs in all inscriptions both in Amśuvarman’s as in the previous ones dated in Vikrama Samvat. It seems that Bappa was the name or an epithet of the founder of the royal family of Licchavis, which was mentioned with reverence by all, like that of Sivaji Chhatrapati mentioned both by the Peshwas and the Satara kings. Another similarity to the later parallel may be found in the fact that while the Licchavi kings issue their edicts from Mānagriha, Amśuvarman and his successors issue them from Kailasakūta.

v1.c22.s1.16.4

These palaces must be located in different towns like Poona and Satara and the titular king ruled in one city while the real sovereign held his court in another.

v1.c22.s1.17

Amśuvarman probably died in 646 A. D. His son Vibhuvarman (S. 45 or A. D. 651) also filled the same position. The king Śivadeva must have afforded assistance to the Chinese envoy at this time against the governor of Tirhut. Inscription No. 8 (Ind. Ant. Vol. IX) of S. 49 or A. D. 655 mentions a king Jiṣṇugupta and his heir apparent Viṣṇugupta. The change of name-ending from Varman to Gupta indicates, probably that these were other than descendants of Amśuvarman. But the latter is mentioned in this record with great respect and styled as mahārājādhirāja. This indicates that they must have been his successors and relations and they also issued orders from Kailāsakūta. This inscription mentions one Dhruvadeva as king and he must have succeeded Śivadeva.

v1.c22.s1.18

We now come to Śivadeva the second a famous king, the father of Jayadeva. He has left three inscriptions. In the first dated S. 119 = A. D. 725 he grants a land for the due worship of Śiveśvara temple founded by himself to a Pāśupatāchārya. In the next dated 143 S. = 749 A. D. he assigns lands for the maintenance of Śivadeva Vihāra for Buddhists. This is characteristic of Nepal kings who like their subjects were worshippers of Hindu deities and Buddhistic gods. Even Hiuen Tsang as above quoted has noted that Buddhist monasteries and Deva temples were close together. In the third inscription H. S. dated 145 or 751 A.D. the Dūtaka or messenger is Yuvaraja Vijayadeva who may be Jayadeva the next king himself as Pandit Bhagvanlal says or his elder brother predeceased. In this inscription we come across a new śloka not yet found in inscriptions charging future rulers against the resumption of the gift, a śloka which may be quoted here for the information of the curious reader: “यथा चाह” (who says is not stated) :

v1.c22.s1.19

ये प्राक्तनावनिभुजां जगतीहितानां धर्म्यां स्थितिं स्थितिकृतामनुपालयेयुः।
लक्ष्म्या समेत्य सुचिरं निजभार्ययेव प्रेत्यापि वासवसमा दिवि ते वसेयुः॥

v1.c22.s1.20

This Śivadeva married a daughter of a Maukhari king and a grand-daughter of Ādityasena, the Gupta king of Magadha. This shows that the Nepal Lichhavi dynasty was related to the ruling Kshatriya families in India. His son Jayadeva came to the throne between 145 and 153 H. S. in the latter of which year his long interesting inscription is dated. The first portion of it gives the pedigree of the Lichhavis and assigns them to the solar line. With regard to this claim we will add a separate note. But the Lichhavis were then in the eighth century A. D. certainly treated as solar line Kshatriyas; and this king himself married a daughter of Harshadeva king of Assam. Who ruled after Jayadeva we do not know. But the Vamśāvalis of Nepal give the chronology of early Nepal kings in such a different manner that it is not possible to give a connected line without the corroboration of inscriptions. It is, therefore, not possible to say when this line of Lichhavi kings ended. A new Rajput dynasty was certainly founded in the 9th century and with that two new towns viz. Kirtipura and Bhaktapura or Bhātgaon as it is now called were founded and also a new era called the Nepali era dating from Oct. 879 A. D. (Śaka 801) was founded by this new dynasty. When this new dynasty came to power is also not certain; but certain it is that it is not the first king of this line who founded the era. Dr. Wright mentions in the history of the preceding dynasty towards the end that a Brahmin who was considered an incarnation of Śankarāchārya came to visit the country to see how the rules and customs established by Śankarāchārya were observed. This fact we will discuss at length in our next volume to which it pertains. We may generally state that the Lichhavi line of kings came to end sometime between 759 A. D. the date of Jayadeva's long inscription and 879 A. D. the starting date of the Nepali era.

v1.c22.s1.21

(1) LICHHAVIS.

v1.c22.s1.22

The Lichhavis, we have seen in Jayadeva’s inscription dated Harsha Era 153 or A. D. 759, connect themselves with the solar line of Kshatriyas, alleging that Lichhavi was the name of a king eighth in descent from Dasaratha father of Rāma. This was of course in consonance with the prevailing notions of the 8th century A. D. and those preceding and following it when every king tried to assign his family either to the solar or the lunar race. We similarly find the Cholas of the south call themselves solar Kshatriyas in inscriptions noted in the history of the Eastern Chālukyas and the Pāndya-Chola are Dravidas pre-eminently from the times of the Mahābhārata. It seems that the kingly families in the outlying territories who accepted the Aryan faith were, even in the days of the Manusmriti (2nd century B. C.), conceded by the orthodox Aryans to be Kshatriyas, but a distinction was made and they were called Vrātya Kshatriyas, that is, Kshatriyas who had lost the Samskāras or discontinued Aryan religious ceremonies owing to the loss of contact with Brahmins. These Vrātya Kshatriyas Manu enumerates in the following śloka :—

v1.c22.s1.23

झल्लो मल्लश्च राजन्याद्वात्यान्निच्छाविरेव च ।
नटश्च करणश्चैव खसो द्रविड एव च ।। (मनु X, 22).

v1.c22.s1.24

This śloka clearly contains the names of those outlying foreign peoples whose kingly families were admitted to be Vrātya Kshatriyas. The Dravidas are the well known Chola-Pandya-Kerala kings of the south, while the Nichhavis or Lichhavis and the Khasas are well known peoples of the north. (Nata, Karana and Zalla are lost to history while the Mallas are also lost probably, though Malla kingdoms are mentioned in the Mahābhārata list). Both the Khasas and Lichhavis are historical peoples and undoubtedly belong to the Mongolian race. The Lichhavis were rulers in India also and were allied to the Sākyas in which clan Buddha was born. They were included within Aryanism in most ancient times and a Lichhavi princess was the mother of the Gupta line of emperors of India. Perhaps she was a Nepal princess. It is not therefore strange that in later history the Lichhavis were practically treated as Kshatriyas and had marriage relations with most undoubted Aryan Kshatriya families like the Maukharis. The Khasas will be noticed in the next note.

v1.c22.s1.25

(2) MINOR HIMALAYAN STATES.

v1.c22.s1.26

Between Kashmir and Nepal there were then and there are even now many minor hill states in the Himalayan region. The chief inhabitants of this region were the Khasas or Khaśas mentioned even in the Manusmriti as one of the Vrātya Kshatriyas. This people are certainly Mongolian in race and at one time must have had their own kings in these regions. The Aryans, however, viz. Brahmins and Kshatriyas migrated into these regions probably about the time of the Greek or Śaka or Kuṣān invasions of the Panjab and the Kshatriyas founded Aryan kingdoms which have subsisted almost to this day. As has often been said these Himalayan dynasties of kings are very long lived like meat or fruit preserved in ice. These dynasties in the cold regions of the Himalayan mountains continued undecayed and undisturbed for centuries and many of them subsist to-day. They have also preserved old manners and traditions very faithfully and we can often go to the Himalayas for the purpose of ascertaining old customs which once prevailed in India. Some information relating to these states is given below from Cunningham's Archæological Survey Report (Vols. V and IX)

v1.c22.s1.27

Chambā :—The ancient name of this state is Champā as mentioned in the Rājatarangiṇī. The state occupies the whole course of the Ravi and its tributaries within the mountains. The Raja there is a Sūryavaṃśi king and his Purohita has preserved a genealogy of the reigning family which as usual begins with Brahmā. Some inscriptions at Barmāvar or Varmāpura on the Ravi preserve a few names of kings and the Rājatarangiṇī also mentions some. The inscriptions mention the Vaṃśa as Moshanāśva Gotrādityavaṃśa (मोशनाश्वगोत्रादित्यवंश), a gotra name which we do not find in the modern lists of Gotras which is a remarkable fact. The Rājas as usual are worshippers of Śiva, Parvati Gaṇeśa, Lakshmī and Nārāyaṇa or Viṣṇu and have founded many temples to them at Barmāvar, and Champā. The names of the kings all end in Varmā and we give the following names pertaining to our period from the list given by Cunningham, of course from the lists supplied by local Rajas (Arch. S. R. Vol. IX p. 114 and 115) (1) Adi-varmā (2) Deva V. (3) Mandra V. (4) Kāntāra V. (5) Parakalpa V. (6) Aja V. (7) Meru V. (8) Suvarna V. and (9) Lakshmī V. said in the local list to be killed in an invasion of Mlechhas. This invasion Cunningham strangely enough, takes to be that of Śankarvarman of Kashmir in 890 A. D. Taking 30 years as overage for each reign in this Himalayan line of kings we may take it that these nine kings ruled for about 270 years and that Ādiv. began to reign in about 620 A. D. The next king mentioned is Moshana V. (who may perhaps be the Moshanāśva of the inscriptions.)

v1.c22.s1.28

The names of later kings need not be given but those kings who are mentioned in the Rājatarangiṇī are the following, 1 Śala killed by Ananta of Kashmir in 1030 A. D. 2 Aśata whose sister was married by Kalaśa (A. D. 1060) and 3 Udaya who is mentioned about 1121 in this history of Kashmir.

v1.c22.s1.29

Nurpur :— The ancient name of this state was Udumbara. The chief city is now called Pathānkot which is situated in a narrow neck of land 16 miles in width which divides the valleys of the Bias and the Ravi. It is a great emporium of trade between the villages of Chambā and Kangra in the hills and Lahore and Jullandar in the plains”. The name Pathān is also written Paithan which is clearly an abbreviation of Pratisththana and is the same name as that of Paithan on the Godavarī.

v1.c22.s1.30

The old name of the country Udumbara is mentioned in Varāhamihira’s list of countries along with Kapisthala who are the Kambistholi of Arrian’s Indica. In the Vishnu Purāṇa, the name is mentioned with Trigarta and Kulinda which are Kangra and Kulu of modern days. The present Rajas are called Pathāniyas and trace their origin to twenty generations back. Probably before that time the small kingdom was under Jālandhara. The local list of kings given by Devi Sāh Braḷmin to Cunningham commenced with Jayapāla who is said to be a Pundir or descendent of Pandu i. e. a Tomar Rajput descended from Arjuna. The list extended from Jayapāla of about 1095 A. D. to Jaswantsing of 1846. These Rajas of Nurpur were of great note during Mahomedan times from the days of Raja Bakhtamalla who sided with Sikandur Sur against Akbar and who was put to death by Bairamkhan who placed his brother Takhtamalla on the gadi in his place.

v1.c22.s1.31

Mandi :— The mountain course of the Bias is divided between the three kingdoms of Kulu, Mandi and Kangra; Kangra being lowest, Mandi in the middle and Kulu, highest up. The Mandi family is a younger branch of the Suketa family the separation having taken place about 1200 A. D. as the story of the family tells. But the copper-plate inscription of the temple at Nirmand gives four names all of whom take the suffix Sena which is peculiar to the family of Suketa and Mundi and these four correspond to certain names in the local list of kings. The date of the last (Samudrasena) of the four is probably Samvat 1227 or 1170 A. D. which agrees well with the succeeding 27 names upto the death of Bala Birasena in 1857.

v1.c22.s1.32

The letters of the inscription at Nirmand are of the Gupta type which has misled some to believe that it must be dated in the 4th or 5th century A. D. “But these Gupta characters have been always in use in the hills between the Jumna and the Indus. They are found on the coins of the Kangra rajas so late as the time of Trailokya Chandra contemporary of Jehangir and in all inscriptions of Kashmir, Kangra, and Mandi whose king Jālamsena died in 1838 and the sati pillars in his reign bear the words Mahārāja in the same Gupta characters. In fact the Banias of Mandi still keep their accounts in Gupta characters and a Bania could easily read Samundra Gupta’s inscription on the Allahabad Pillar when shown to him.” This illustrates what we have said in the beginning viz. that things in the snows of the Himalayas are long preserved.

v1.c22.s1.33

The genealogy given by Cunningham from the local list begins with Virasena whom he places about 765 A. D. from whom Samundrasena the recorder of the Nirmand inscription above noted is the 17th and his date is 1166 A. D. The genealogy comes down to the 45th generation in Vijayasena of 1851 A. D. The number of sati pillars here is very large indeed the last being so late as 1838 A. D.

v1.c22.s1.34

Kulu and Simla states.—In all these States especially between Nepal and Kangra are spread the Kunet people who are a bratch of the Khaśas. They are very numerous in these regions. These are, according to Cunningham, the ancient Kunindas mentioned by Varāha Mihira and the Kulindas mentioned in the Viṣṇu Purāṇa. Kulindas are mentioned in the Mahābhārata list of peoples also but as no locations or even directions are mentioned in that list it is impossible to decide whether these Kulindas are the Himalayan Kunets. When the Aryan immigration among them took place cannot be determined. But the following observations of Cunningham may be given here. "The Kunets and the Khaśas both profess to have been the masters of these hills before the Aryan immigration which followed the Mahomedan conquest. All the ancient remains within the present area of Kunet occupation are assigned to a people who are called Mois or Mons and all agree that these were the Kunets themselves. The fact is that Mon is simply their Tibetan name while Kunind or Kunet is their Indian name" (Arch. S. R. Vol. IX p. 127). Further "in Dvāra Hāth in Garhwal there are a number of monuments like tombs built of large flat tiles which the people attribute to the Mois or Mons. These I take to be the ancient Kunets before they were driven from Dvāra Hāth to Joshimath".

v1.c22.s1.35

Here is a possible explanation of the riddle in the Purāṇas already noticed as to who the Monas were whose mlechha rule is said to follow that of the Śakas and Tukharas. It seems that these Monas of the Purāṇas were the very ancestors of the Kulindas who were a Tibetan people and who ruled for some time even in the plains of the Panjab and Cis-Sutlej provinces after the Kushans. They are said properly to be the ancestors of the modern Kunets because they were then unmixed mlechhas and the modern Kunets appear to be mixed Aryan and non-Aryan people or they may have been Khaśas proper who also are now mixed. But the Kunets themselves use that name (Mona) for the ancient possessors of these hills. These Cis-Himalayan Monas may also, Cunningham thinks, be connected with the Mundas of Eastern India; and strangely enough their name also appears in the Kaliyuga future kings of mlechha race. The following line from the Viṣṇu Purāṇa has been quoted already. ततश्चाष्टौ यवनाश्चतुर्दश तुरुष्कारा मुण्डाश्च त्रयोदश एकादश मौना एते वै पृथिवीपतयः पृथिवीं दशवर्षशतानि नवत्याधिकानि भोक्ष्यन्ति।। (वि. अंश ४ अध्या. २४. ५३). The period 1090 years is absurd but probably it represents the total of the reigns even if they were contemporaneous. However, the Mundas and the Monas mentioned here may well be identified according to Cunningham with these Eastern Indian and Cis-Himalayan peoples who may have become predominant after the Turushkas or Tukharas i. e. the Kushans were overthrown.

v1.c22.s1.36

Whatever that may be, the Kunindas were certainly a noted people in the days of Varāha-mihira (500 A. D.) who mentions them among the north-west section of India peoples and who even mentions them separately as pointed out by Cunningham (p. 134 ditto) where the evil influence of bad planets on each set of triple Nakshatras is mentioned. "The following in regular order will perish viz. Pāñchāla, Magadha, Kalinga, Avanti, Ānarta, Sindhu-Sauvira, Hārahūna, Madra, and finally, king of the Kunindas." Therefore there must have been in even Hiuen Tsang's days a Kuninda powerful separate kingdom. Cunningham identified their country with Srughna, the capital of which near Bāria on the west of the Jumna has been identified as Sugh by him. It comprised the greater part of the Kunet country, the remaining portion being divided between Kuluta or Kulu and Śatadru or Panjor. "This is the very district in which the coins of Amoghabhūti king of the Kunindas are found most plentifully. His date I have fixed approximately as B. C. 150 as three coins were found in company with 30 coins of the Greek king Apollodotus in a field near Jvālāmukhi (p. 134).*

v1.c22.s1.37

The people of these kingdoms were then Buddhists as all Mongolian peoples, generally were. Aryan influence must have therefore penetrated these hilly regions in ancient times. Who the kings were from the 7th to 12th century we cannot say. Certain it is that the Kunets the modern people of these parts are a mixed race "aboriginal Tartars by the mother's side but Aryans by the fathers," sons of Brahmins and Kshatriyas born of Kunet or Khaśa women who as mentioned in Nepal history were never unwilling to form such connections. Their progeny was and is treated as Kshatriyas; a fact which seems to western scholars inexplicable. But the simple explanation is that the Khaśas were from Manu's time treated as Vrātya Kshatriyas (see the śloka already quoted) and the marriage of Brahmins and Kshatriyas with them was never illegal in ancient times down even to the mediæval period. The progeny was of course treated as Kshatriyas. Marriage was formal but binding, the Kshatriya Khaśas being Vrātya. Hence there was no setting aside of Śastra in this custom which prevailed in the Himalayan regions where the emigrating Aryans, Brahmins and Kshatriyas having necessarily few women with them had perforce to take Kunet wives.

v1.c22.s1.38

∗ Another ancient king of Srughna is mentioned in inscriptions at Barhut where Cunningham has found an inscription on a Torana or gateway mentioning a Srughna king Dhanabhūti, whose inscription also was found in Mathura and who Cunningham says was contemporaneous with Apollodotus and Agnimitra. The Kunindas thus had once extensive sway upto Barhut in C. See Cunningham's Barh. pp. 127-130.

Linked texts (9)