________________
272
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
[DECEMBER, - 1915
an exact copy of the latter with only a slight modification, not quito enough to shield its identity. Mr. Vasu's words are :-" They are both cast in the same form." The expression seems to us too mild to describe the actual identity of the records. in the second grant the expression Varmavasa-kulakamala has been substituted for the Senavansa-kulakamala of the first one, and the name, Syamalavarman appears in place of Visvarúpasena of the original. Hence, this piece of evidence may be rejected as unreliable, as it is based on a datu.n. of doubtful Validity. In this connoction, it might also be noted that only a copy of the wording of a grant can never lead us to any definite conolusion with regard to its genuineness, since any epigraphic discussion, under the circumstance, is impossible. The epigraphic evidence of an inscription is almost a sure test of its genuineness. In the case in which any particular record fails to stand this test, we are surely justified in rejecting it as spurious, and hence, not at all suitable for serving as a basis of any constructive argument.
Mr. Vasu admits that the manuscript, on which he based his original theory of SyamalaVarman's doscent, was a copy only, and as such it abounds in mistakes, which scribes and copyists of Inria, who are not always very accomplished scholars, are liable to commit. The passage quoted from this manuscript by Mr. Vasu reads as follows :--
Trivikramu maharaja Senava i sa-samudbhavah Asit paramadharmajñaḥ Käsipurasamipatah. Svar rarekha-nali yatra svarrayantramayi subha Svarganga-salilaih pútá sallokajanakatarini Asau tatra mahipala Malatyai namatah strian Atmaja i janayamasa namna Vijayasenakan. Asît sa eva raja ca tatra puryah mahấmatih Patni tasya Vilolâ ca půrna-candra-samad yutih. Striyantasyair hi putrau dvau Malla-Syamalavarmakau Sa eva janayamasa ksauni-rak akara bubhau. Malla statraiva prathitah Syamal'otra samagatah Jetuin satruganan sarvan Gaudadesanivâsinah Vijitya ripusárdulai Vangade sanivåsinan
Rajâsit paramadharmajño namna Syamalavarmakah. This passage is the key-note of Mr. Vasu's theory. It states that of the Senas, Vijayasena, son of Trivikrama, had two sons, Malla and Syâmala. Malla remained in his original home, on the banks of the Suvarnarekh â-iradi, while Syâmala came to Gauda, and established a kingdom in Bengal. This passage by itself militates against the accepted chronology and the recognised data for the history of Bengal. We might take this opportunity of reminding Mr. Vasu of certain evidence, if it is evidence at all, adduced from his favourite work of Danasagara, supposed to be written by Vallalasena, where it is found stated :
Tadanu Vijayasenaḥ pradurâsit Varendre "After (Hemantsasena) Vijayasena came to Northern Bengal."
So that, in the light of this passage, Syâmalavarman cannot be regarded as the first Sena King of Bengal as hinted by the Kulapanjikas : and the date Saka 994, i.e., 1072 A. D.. for the establishment of the Sena Kingdom in Eastern Bengal, by the supposed son of Vijayasena, is not only "too early", but altogether against all chronological data.
But now that the discovery of the Belâbo copper-plate Grant has brought to light the fact that the lineage of Syamalavarman, as deduced from the genealogical works, is no longer tenable, Mr. Vasu has come forward with another palm leaf manuscript, which he vouches to be an original one and about "three hundred years old.” It is a Kulapañjika by Isvara Vaidika, deposited with a local Pandit at Talâ, a place near Calcutta. This manuscript Mr. Vasu declares to be more reliable and free from such mistakes as are found in the one he first cited.
