Epigraphia Indica Vol 15

SR No.: 032569
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Sten Konow, F W Thomas
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India
Publication Year: 1919
Total Pages: 478
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 23 MB

Page 330

No. 15.)
BARRACKPUR GRANT OF VIJAYASENA: THE 82ND YEAR.
281
not know anything about the date of this Nánya-dēva. Nepal Varsavalis supply varying dates for him (Saka 811=889 A.D. and Saka 1019=10971 A.D.), none of which can be accepted without further corroboration. Mr. Monmoban Chakravarti has fixed the date of Vijaya-88na rather arbitrarily. He puts him between 1140 and 1160 A.D., the lower limit of which is absolutely impossible. In & previous paper I have tried to show that the dates in the Dāna. sdgara and Adbhutasāgara are inadmissible as historical evidence. Mr. Chakravarti accepte those as valid dates, as he places Vallála-sēna's death in 1170 A.D. That in spite of the latest discoveries he has not changed his opinion is shown by his recent statement on the subject. In his paper on the "History of Mithilă during the pre-Mughal period," where he says, “As Vijayasena's lower limit I bave found out at 1158 A.D. or thereabout, this Nanya can only be the Nanyadova of Karpata kula, ... whose son is said to have taken service under Jayacandra."" This lower limit, which Mr. Chakravarti has found out, is absurd in the light of modern discoveries. The later date, 1160, for the death of Vijaya-sēna is out of the question, as we know from the Naihati grant of his son Vallála-sēna that the latter ruled for at least eleven years. If Vijaya-sēna died in 1160 A.D., then the 11th year of his son Vallala-söna would fall in 1171 A.D.; but according to the Adbhutasāgara Vallala-sēna died shortly after Saka 1091=1169 A.D. Therefore 1160 cannot be accepted as the lower limit for Vijaya-sēna. For a similar reason the earlier date, 1158 A.D., cannot be accepted as the lowest limit, as in that case it will have to be admitted that the grant was made immediately before the king's death. It cannot be asserted, upon the data available at present, that Vallala-sēna did not reign for more than eleven years. If 1158 A.D. be accepted as the lower limit for Vijaya-bēna, then the Ilth regnal year of Vallala-sõna falls in the year 1169, which according to the Adbhutasāgara is very close to the year of the latter's death. Consequently it is highly improbable that Vijaya-sēna died in 1158 A.D. Mr. Chakravarti was led to fix this limit for the reign of Vijays-sēna by a statement in a work called Ballala-charita, by one Ananda-Bhatta, which has been edited by Mahāmahopädbyâya Hara Prasad Sástri. In the 12th chapter of this book the genealogy of the Sena Kings is given and Vijaya-Bēna is entitled Chodaganga-sakha). As Chodaganga ascended the throne in 1078, and, as he ruled for seventy years, if Vijaya-sēna was his sakhi, the latter's accession must have taken place at least in 1140 A.D. Chodaganga died in 1142 A.D. According to the Deopärä inscription, Vijaya-sēna was the contemporary of one Råghava. Mr. Chakravarti assumes that this Raghava was the grandson of Chodagaðga. Rāghava's father Kämārnava came to the throne in 1142 A.D. He reigned for ten years, and Raghava reigned for fifteen years. Therefore Rägbava died in 1169 A.D. Mr. Chakravarti fixed 1158-60 A.D. as the lower limit for Vijaya-sēna because Vallala-sana died in 1169 A.D.; So, in order to make Vijaya-sons a contemporary of Rågbaya, the mean date 1158-60 was fixed. We have seen that this limit is impossible. Lakshmaņa-Bēna, the founder of the Lakshmanabëna era or La-sam, ascended the throne in 1119-20 A.D. His father Vallala-sēna reigned for at least eleven years. Therefore Vijaya-sana, ho reigned at least thirty-two years, must bave come to the throne in the last balf of the eleventh centary A.D.
In this connection it should be noted that the authenticity of the work published in the Bibliotheca Indica under tbe name of Vallāla-charita is very much to be doubted. Personally I am very much inclined to regard it as a modern forgery palmed off on the unsuspecting editor It does not agree in the least with a work of the same name which was already known in Bengal. It appeared at 'A time when there was a general movement among the lower classes to better
1 Katalog der Bibliothek der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, Bd. II, p. 8. : J.P. 4. 8. B. (X. S.), Vol. IX, pp. 274-77.
Ibid. • Ibid, Vol. XI, p. 409.
Report on the Search for St. MSS. in the Bombay Proxy., 1867-91, p. lxxxv. • Above, Vol. VIII, App. I, p. 17.