History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v1.c5.15

v1.c5.15

Here ends the romantic, but not unauthentic story of Harsha and Rājyashrī given in the Harsha-Charita of Bāna, who, to the great regret of the historian and the general reader, unaccountably leaves off the story in the middle. But it is of great help to us in understanding the account recorded by Hiuen Tsang. Hiuen Tsang's account has been to my mind misunderstood. It plainly seems that that account relates to what happened subsequently at Kanauj and does not relate to what had already happened at Thanesar. Harsha probably was the sole remnant in the family of the kings of Thanesar, and his brother Rājya, young as he was, had left no issue. Rājya was probably not even married.¹ Harsha, therefore, became king of Thanesar at once and without any doubt. The doubts entertained by Harsha as to whether he should be king or not as related by Hiuen Tsang must be referred to his doubts as to whether he should be king of Kanauj. The whole story becomes intelligible, if we connect these doubts with the kingdom of Kanauj. When Harsha and Rājyashrī reached Kanauj, there must have been some anxious deliberation there as to the disposal of that kingdom. From the Harsha-Charita Grahavarmā appears to have been the eldest son of his father Avantivarmā¹. Should Rājyashrī be set aside and consigned to obscurity and some younger heir of Avantivarmā be raised to the throne? Harsha who had just brought the afflicted Rājyashrī back from a pyre and a hermitage was unwilling to do so. He was also unwilling to sieze the kingdom for himself. Grahavarmā was a Buddhist and presumably Rājyashrī also. Harsha, too, owing to his great and sudden afflictions in early age had Buddhistic inclinations though he was a declared devotee of Shiva.² It was thus naturally and perhaps astutely decided, that the difficulty should be solved by a reference to the Bodhisatva Avalokitesvara whose temple was outside the city of Kanauj, and the Bodhisatva solved the difficulty in a congenial manner. Rājyashrī, it was ordained, should rule and Harsha should be her lieutenant. He should not ascend the throne nor take the title of the king of Kanauj but should style himself only Rājaputra Śiladitya. According to the Chinese work, Fang Chih, Harsha henceforward "administered the kingdom in conjunction with his widowed sister" (page 338, V. Smith's E. History, 3rd edition). To my mind this explanation of the apparent hesitation of Harsha is simple and plain and it also explains why after Harsha's death there was anarchy and disorder again in the kingdom of Kanauj as will be related hereafter. At this stage it is difficult to understand how historians came to confound Thanesar and Kanauj³ and how it is for a moment entertained that the nobles of Thanesar hesitated to offer their allegiance to Harsha. The nobles of Thanesar, as related by Bāṇa, had at once acclaimed him king of Thanesar and it was only at Kanauj where he arrived in his conquering expedition with his widowed beloved sister Rājyashrī that doubts arose with regard to the succession to the throne of that kingdom—doubts which were finally removed as aforesaid. Harsha very naturally hereafter gave up residence at Thanesar and made Kanauj his capital which he ruled in conjunction with his sister. Between the two the fondest attachment subsisted throughout their reign. Their Buddhistic tendencies united them in religious sentiment also and it appears that during their long reign nothing happened to mar their amicable relations.