________________
DECEMBER, 1884.)
HISTORY OF NEPAL.
423
his inscription of Samvat 39 (No. 7), by which he assigns land without reference to a superior power. The ambiguous epithet Srithe illustrious' leaves it doubtful, if he had then assumed the title mahárája. But it is plain that he did 80 at some period or other of his career from the inscription No. 9, where he is described by Jishnugupta, as mahárdjádhirkja, as well as from the statements of Hiuen Thsang and of the Vasávali. Jishnugupta certainly was Amsu varman's immediate successor, and belonged to his family, being either his son or some other near relative. This follows from the closeness of his first date, Samvat 48 (No. 9) to that of Vibhuvarman's inscription (No. 8) which, if it is not Samvat 45, at least is more than 40. There is no room for another reign between them and, if the yuvarája or beir-apparent-Udaya ddva," who is mentioned as Dátaka or deputy in No. 7, did not belong to the Lichchhavi dynasty, it is probable that he never came to the throne. That Jishnagapta really belonged to Anuvarman's line is shown by the fact that he dates his edicts from the Kailasa kat a, the residence of Anavarman, and by his mentioning in two inscriptions a Lichchhavi king Dhruvadê ya as his suzerain, who resided at Mânagriha, the ancient, palace or fort of the Lichchhavis. These points, as well as the circumstance that Inscr. No. 11 is dated in the victorious and prosperous reign of Jis hņugupta, show further that during his time Nepal possessed a double government. The same fact is further attested by Jaya deva's inscription No. 15, which enumerates an uninterrupted line of thirty-five generations of Lichchhavi kinga But the first inscription of Jaya dê va's father Śivadeva II, dated Samvat 119, contains a significant fact which bears on the question, how long Amśavarman's descendants continued to hold their position, for he dates his grant from the palace Kaila sa kata where Amu varman and Jis hņugupta held their court. The explanation of these points appears to be as follows:-Amuvarman at first was a servant of Siva dava I, and gradually managed to get into his hands the whole of the royal power. He also assumed or received from the
So It soome more likely that Udayadeva was a Lichchbavi, * descendant of Sivadeva, because the name
king the title maharaja. But, like Jang Bahadur in modern times, he allowed his old master, and perhaps the successor of the latter, to retain nominally the position of an independent ruler. After his death which, as already stated, must have occurred some time after Sriharsha, Samvat 40 and before 48, or about the end of the fifth decade of the seventh century, Jishnugupta, possibly his son or, at all events, a near relative, inherit. ed his position. The country continued to possess & double government. But perhaps the Lichchhavis possessed a little more power than during A su varman's life-time. Such an inference is warranted by the double heading of Jishnugupta's two inscriptions. Afterwards, some time between Sri. harsha-Samvat 48 and 119, or 654 and 725 A.D., the old royal race regained possession of the whole country, and even made the former palace of Amsuvarman's family their residence. How this change came about is not clear from the inscriptions. But there is no doubt that Amba varman was not, as the | Vdoniavalt asserts, the father of a long line of kings, but merely the founder of an ephemeral dynasty of co-regents. It is even doubtful if among the kings of the Țh Akurt line, given in the Vanhadvali, any real descendants of Ameuvarman occur. The two names Narendrade va (No. 7) and Jayadeva (No. 12) which do occnrin the inscriptions, belong, according to the evidence of the latter, to the Lichchhavi or Sûrya vaši family, not to the Thakuri or Rajpat family of Amśn varman. It would be useless to enter on any speculations regarding the number and names of the latter. But through our inscription No. 15 we are placed in a somewhat better position with respect to the Lichchhavi family. It enables us to give with a careful utilisation of all the hints furnished by the other inscriptions, and in the Vankávali, a general outline of this dynasty, to determine the era in which the first five inscriptions are dated, and to assign approximate dates to all the undoubtedly historical kings.
The first part of the genealogical portion of the inscription No. 15 is clearly mythical, as most of the names mentioned have been taken from the Parânic Varias ; but it nevertheless renders occurs more than once among the Lichohhavis.
"See Inscr., 1-5, which are dated from Managriba.
