Ancient Age in Bengal

Ancient Bengal was the site of several major Janapadas (kingdoms), while the earliest cities
date back to the Vedic period. ... The Muslim conquest of the Indian subcontinent absorbed
Bengal into the medieval Islamic and Persianate worlds. Between the 1204 and 1352, Bengal
was a province of the Delhi Sultanate

Ancient Janapads in Bengal

The historic term a ‘Janapada’ means early human settlement in Bengal. The sources of
ancient Bengal suggest that, in the earliest period Bengal was divided among various tribes or
kingdoms which are known as the Janapadas. The ancient Janapadas are as follows:

 Banga
 Pundra
 Gaura
 Radha
 Somotate
 Horikel

The name of these Janapads ware purely descriptive and had no ethnic connection. These
Janapads are inhabited by non-Aryan people. There are various sources of Janapads. The
Hindu sources like the Mohabharat and Bhedic literature, Kautilya’s Arthasastra, books of
Panini, Ramayon of Kalidas, stone inscriptions are the primary sources about these human
settlements.

The Banga
The Banga is an ancient human settlement situated in Eastern Bengal. But its geographical
connotation varied in different periods of history. The Hindu literatures indicate that the
Bangla is sea-faring nation and its realm extended up to the sea. They also mentioned that
this is an area where finest quality white & soft cotton fabrics were produced. There was a
coastal area approachable from the sea in the territory of Bangla. From the above mentioned
references, Bangla appears to be an area of south and south-eastern part of present
Bangladesh.

The Pundra
The Pundra or Pundranagara is the earliest urban centre in Bangladesh, which goes back to
the 4th century BC. The ruins of this have been identified at Mahasthan in Bogra district. It
continued to be the headquarters of the administration of Maurya, Gupta and Palas. It was the
capital of Pundrabardhan Bhukti under the Gupta rule. The famous China visitor Hiuen-tsang
visited this place in the 7th century AD. Pundra was situated on the western bank of the
Karatoya. It was well connected with other parts of Bengal through land and river routes. For
this connection it was an important centre of trade and commerce throughout the ancient
period. Pundra continued its importance after the Hindu regime and in the early Muslim
period. The famous Muslim saint Shah Sultan Balkhi Mahisawar established his learning.

The Gauda
As an ancient human settlement, Gauda is the important Janopad of Bengal. The discovered
evidence suggests that ancient Gauda located at coastal region. The famous & the first

1
independent ruler of Gauda is Shashanka. He ruled Gauda at the 7th century AD and his
capital was the Karnasuborna which is located at present Murshidabad district. The Janapad
of Gauda lay to the west of Bhagirathi and that its core area was Murshidabad.
In the 13th century, under the Sultans, Gauda denoted the entire area of the Muslim sultanate.
Its capital also called Gaur or Lakhnaboti, located at present Chapai Nawabgonj district.

The Radha(ra-ro)
Radha is the ancient human settlement of Bengal. It is difficult to locate exactly its
geographical position. But historical sources suggest that Radha is the west-southern part of
ancient Bengal. Howrah, Hughli and Burdwan in West Bengal are some areas of ancient
Radha.

The Samatate
Samatate is an ancient territorial unit in ancient Bengal.  Chinese traveller Hiuen-tsang visited
Samatat at 7th century AD. As per his account, it was the South-eastern part of Bengal and
was a Buddhist cultural centre. The archaeological discoveries in the Lalmai-Mainamati area,
it can now be stated with certainty that Samatata was formed at Comilla-Noakhali areas and
the adjacent parts of hilly Tripura.

The Harikel
Harikel is another geographical entity in ancient Bengal. But it is so difficult to locate it.
Most of the evidence support that Harikel is the similar with our present Sylhet region.
Archaeological evidence suggests its location at present Chittagong district. Harikel was
situated by the side of Samatate.

Aryans

Aryans began to infiltrate into the Bengal region from the first millennium BCE. Bengal was
then divided into many states and semi states dotted by autonomous tribes. The early Vedic
Aryans did not make any contact with this part of the world for colonization on the ground
that the region was unholy and inhabited by dasyus or outlandish barbarians. An account of
the Matsya Purana goes that a blind old sage was by mistake drifted on a raft down the
Ganges. A king called Bali had no children and he implored the sage to gift him children to
inherit his kingdom. The sage's blessings, the king got five sons from his old wife. They were
Anga, Vanga, Kalinga, Pundra and Suhma. Five countries of the blind king were named after
those of his sons. These mythical kingdoms roughly correspond to Mughal Bengal and Behar.

The region was so unholy to the Aryans that they carefully refrained themselves from coming
to this region and settle. The sage was blind and had no control over his raft floating on the
Ganges waters. Hence, the blind Aryan's contact with this region was an accident. But the
contact took place anyway and since then the Aryans began to come though very sparsely and
casually. Interestingly, even the much later Vedic literature also depicted the people of
Bengal as dasyus. 'The Mahabharata described the people of coastal Bengal as Mlechchhas.
The Bhagavata Purana described the Bengal peoples as papa or sinful. The Dharmasastra
prescribes expiatory rites after a contact with the Pundras and the Bangas. But as time passed
Aryan infiltration into Bengal increased and so did their influence on the region. While the
early Aryans accepted only the upper Ganges valley as their true home, the author of the
Manava Dharmasastra extended it from the western to the eastern sea, though the law-givers

2
branded the Paundras and Bangas as degraded. The Kshatryas, who made contact with them,
were treated as polluted too.

The Tirtha-yatra section of the Mahabharata made many spots along the Korotoya and the
lower reaches of the Ganges holy for sinners to come and make them pure. It only indicates,
Bengal was no longer an unholy place for the Aryans. But there is no reason to believe that
the Aryans came to Bengal on any large scale ever. Those who came earlier made their new
home habitable by making many spots holy for visiting. Thus Bengal entered into the Aryan
culture, though the Upper Ganges Aryans did never recognise the lower riparian peoples fit
for association. The Aryans lived in Bengal having maintaining a lot of restrictions about
their interactions with the local people.

By 500 BCE, Bengal region witnessed the rise of several powerful states against whom the
Aryan states of the Upper Ganges launched military campaigns. The Rama epic records a
story that the great Aryan heroes like Karna, Krishna and Bhimasena had battles with the
powerful kings of Bengal and came out victorious. The story goes that the Aryans began to
take the Bengal kings seriously from military point of view, at least. Krishna raised his status
as a warrior by defeating the kings of Vangas and Pundras. Bhimsena, in the course of his
eastern campaigns, subdued all the local princes of Bengal. All these epic stories are
indicative of the change of impression of the Aryans about the peoples of Bengal and also of
the beginning of the influence of the Aryan culture on the indigenous societies.

Mauryan Empire

In the political history of early Bengal the Maurya Dynasty has a pre-eminent position since
it established the earliest and largest empire, relatively brief period of about 140 years. The
immense power of the dynasty is best seen during the reigns of the first three rulers,
Chandragupta Maurya (c. 324–300 BCE), Bindusara (c.300–272 BCE) and Asoka (c.272–
233 BCE).

The sustained interests in the study of the Maurya Empire are ensured by the availability of
diverse sources. These are: 1. The Arthasastra of Kautilya, written by Chandragupta
Maurya’s chief minister. 2. Inscriptions of Asoka, which are perhaps the most important
source as the ruler’s proclamation. 3. A very large number of punch-marked coins, which are
ascribed to the Maurya period on the grounds of the common symbols on these coins. 4.
Field archaeological sources, which show material remains of Mauryan occupations. 5. Many
specimens of Mauryan sculpture. 6. Many texts, in Pali and Sanskrit, those speak of the
Mauryas, especially Asoka –the greatest Maurya ruler.

The origin of the dynasty is shrouded in uncertainty. The dynastic name Maurya could have
been derived from mayura or peacock, thereby suggesting their origin from a peacock-
tamers’ clan; the other alternative suggestion is that the name has its roots in Mura,
supposedly the name of Chandragupta’s mother, who is said to have been a slave woman
serving the last ruler of the immediately preceding Nanda dynasty.

A Buddhist canonical text going back to the pre-Mauryan times informs us of a non-
monarchical clan of the Moriyas. It is reasonable to assume that the Maurya dynasty emerged
from an ancient non-monarchical clan associated with a forest tract. In other words, the
Maurya dynasty did not enjoy a royal pedigree and an elite political background, an
impression also left behind in the Classical texts.

3
The founder of the dynasty,Chandragupta Maurya established the dynasty in the last quarter
of the 4th century BCE (324/321 BCE) after Alexander of Macedon had left the Punjab and
the north western parts of the subcontinent (c.327 BCE). He appears to have first ousted
Dhananda, the last ruler of the Nanda dynasty which, from its base in Magadha (south Bihar),
expanded over the greater parts of the Ganga valley. This resulted in Chandragupta’s
occupation of the sizable Nanda territories with Pataliputra as his capital. Just in credits
Chandragupta with the final ouster of the last Greek governors over the Punjab (appointed by
Alexander) around 316 BCE, leading to the further westward expansion of the Maurya realm,
now touching the northwest frontier of the subcontinent. This seems to have paved the way
for a conflict between Chandragupta and Seleucos (Alexander’s general), who controlled the
eastern sector of Alexander’s territories, possibly around 301 BCE. The exact outcome of this
conflict is uncertain; a treaty was signed between the two adversaries to end the conflict.
Chandragupta received from Seleucos three territories: Arachosia (Kandahar, Afghanistan),
Paropanisadae (region around Kabul to the south of the Hindukush), and Gedrosia
(Baluchistan); Seleucos received in return 500 war elephants from Chandragupta. The
incorporation of these three areas into the Mauryan realm is clearly evident from the
availability of Asoka’s Greek edicts precisely from these areas, which were not conquered,
but inherited by Asoka. Chandragupta’s son and successor Bindusara is not known to have
made any new conquests, and Asoka has only one conquest to his credit, that of Kalinga. Yet
the Mauryan political presence over western India and greater parts of the peninsula is clearly
visible from the wide distribution of Asoka’s edicts over these regions.The Maurya power
into the peninsula and western India should also go to the credit of Chandragupta.

The next Maurya ruler Bindusara, is not known to have made fresh conquests, nor lost any
territory, implying thereby that he maintained intact the expansive realm. To Bindusara goes
the credit of continuing the dynastic policy of maintaining friendly diplomatic relations with
Seleucid rulers of West Asia.

Maurya power reached its zenith during the reign of Asoka, the third and the most celebrated
ruler of the dynasty, known best from his own edicts, which mark important events and
promulgations of his reign in expired years since his coronation and not his accession to the
throne in c.273 BCE. The coronation took place in c.269 BCE, suggesting that the
intervening four years witnessed struggles for succession to the throne. His personal name
Asoka appears in only four inscription. Inscription carries an image of a royal figure with the
name Asoka. In 261 BCE, when, Asoka, conquered Kalinga (present Odisha), which was as
yet an unconquered area. The terrible violence in his war filled him with deep remorse. He
eschewed war for good, not in defeat but after a victory.

However, the conquered territory of Kalinga was annexed to the Maurya domain, leading to
the maximum expansion of the Mauryan realm. Asoka was himself clearly aware that his
realm was vast in size. The distribution of Asoka’s edicts is the best index of the vastness of
the empire, since these administrative orders were meant for areas under his jurisdiction.
These edicts show beyond doubt that the Maurya Empire stretched from Afghanistan in the
north to Karnataka in the south and from Kathiawad in the west to northern Bangladesh in the
east. It embraced a nearly pan-Indian territory, except the far southern parts and the areas to
the east of northern Bangladesh. This is indeed the largest territorial empire in early Indian
history. Within his realm were included diverse communities like the Bhojas, Rathikas,
Petenikas, Andhras , Pulindas and Yona-Kambojas . Mention of these rulers as
contemporaries of Asoka immensely helped scholars to determine the possible date of

4
Asoka’s reign. It cannot but demonstrate how the Mauryas maintained long-term diplomatic
relations with both the Seleucid and Ptolemaic rulers, while these kings were engaged in
hostilities. The striking point is that the areas clearly designated as unconquered areas beyond
the frontiers of the empire have not yielded any edicts of Asoka.

The realm was designated as a conquered area and a royal domain in Asoka’s records, which
also carried two other labels. These are the coterminous with the subcontinent and the Earth–
both terms actually stood for the Maurya Empire. In this vast realm existed three categories
of territories. The metropolitan area of Magadha(Bihar) was of outstanding importance as it
initiated and directed all conquests and to it flowed the bulk of resources procured from
disparate regions of the empire. The core areas of the realm embraced greater parts of the
Ganga valley where complex territorial polities (mahajanapadas) had existed prior to the
Mauryas and were annexed by them. In contrast to the metropolitan and the core areas stood
the peripheral zones, either located in outlying and border regions or in areas where complex
state society had not yet emerged. A good example is the peninsular territories of the
subcontinent which in spite of having been under the Maurya rule for nearly a century did not
experience any major restructuring of their socioeconomic and political milieu. In other
words, the Mauryas appear to have been interested in extracting mineral resources from the
peninsular parts to enrich the metropolitan Magadhan area.

The recent historiography highlights the imbalances in the material and political cultures in
these three zones, which suggest a much more complex arrangement than the conventional
portrayal of the Maurya realm as a unitary and heavily centralized polity. That the Maurya
realm contained in it various ethnic and social groups at different levels of their socio
-political developments and was marked by unequal economic conditions and religious
plurality is clearly demonstrated by the available sources, especially Asoka’s edicts.

The vastness of the realm and the accompanying multiplicities in socioeconomic, political,
and cultural situations required a statecraft far more complex than that in a compact territorial
polity (mahajanapada).Seen from this position, the Mauryan realm deserves the application of
the label “empire,” though a corresponding indigenous term is absent in Asoka’s edicts. The
pivotal figure in the Mauryan polity was the emperor himself who, in the light of the
combined evidence of the Arthasastra, the Greek texts, and the Asokan edicts, maintained a
hectic daily schedule to discharge administrative, legislative, and judicial affairs. Asoka
assumed a simple political title raja in his official records . The principal aim of the ruler was
to protect and maintain the ideal social order, in order to ensure the welfare and happiness of
his subjects.

The actual burden of administration was assigned to a large number of functionaries, who,
according to the Arthasastra, were salaried officials receiving payments in cash. The Mauryas
maintained a very large army, according to the Greek accounts, consisting of infantry,
cavalry, chariots, and elephant troops. The striking power of the Maurya army is borne out by
the number of conquests, especially that of Kalinga.The Maurya Empire employed
informants, overseers and secret agents for surveillance, spying, and the collection and flow
of information. The maintenance of a large army and a handsome number of functionaries
would further imply the availability of an enormous amount of resources which the Mauryas
garnered and mobilized by a strong revenue administration. The bulk of Mauryan revenue
must have come from the vast agrarian plains of northern India. Two revenue terms, bhaga
(share of the produce, usually one-sixth) and bali (similar to rent) figure in an Asokan

5
inscription. The Arthasastra further suggests that the Mauryas possibly also extracted
resources from mines, forests, and commerce (including tolls and customs from trade routes).

The chief political centre of the empire was Pataliputra (Patna, Bihar). At least four other
regional centers of administration at Tosali (Dhauli, Odisha), Takshasila (Taxila, Pakistan),
Ujjayini (Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh) and Suvarnagiri (Andhra Pradesh) were mentioned in
Asoka’s edicts. Princes of the blood royal (kumaras/aryaputras) were appointed to these
centres. Another kumara, named Samba, was stationed at Manemadesa (in present Madhya
Pradesh). The area of Kathiawad in western India was assigned to two administrators of non-
royal origin: Pushyagupta and Tushaspha (the latter possibly of Iranian origin). Below these
large province-like administrative units stood district- like local-level tiers.

To Asoka goes the credit of devising a distinct ideology of the state for integrating this realm
marked by immense diversities. This takes us to Asoka’s Dhamma. The term Dhamma or
Dharma is equated in too simplistic a manner with religion. As Asoka described himself as a
devout Buddhist, following his remorse after the violent Kalinga war, Asoka’s Dhamma is
widely, but erroneously, taken to mean his personal leanings to Buddhism, and therefore he is
perceived as an ideal Buddhist king (Dhammika dhammaraja) who turned Buddhism into a
state religion. In his Greek edicts the corresponding, its implying that Asoka’s Dhamma was
not equivalent to Buddhism. At the very root of Dhamma was the avoidance of violence,
resulting in the complete cessation of war and royal hunting expeditions and also the phasing
out of slaughter of animals for dietary and ritual practices. Without clearly defining Dhamma,
Asoka however highlighted some of its features, particularly emphasizing the cultivation of
some virtues (such as minimizing sin, meritorious deeds, kindness, liberality, truthfulness,
purity, and gratefulness) and avoidance of some vices (such as fierceness, cruelty, anger,
jealousy, pride). To this were added seemly behavior to one’s parents and teachers, and
kindness to slaves and servants.

There was a pronounced emphasis on the avoidance of sectarian differences and the
promotion of the essence of all religious ideas . With this purpose in view, he appointed high-
ranking functionaries in charge of the dissemination of piety (Dhamma-mahamatras) who
were to look after brahamans, Buddhist monks), Jainas and Ajivikas alike. The broadness of
his Dhamma policy allowed Asoka to make gifts of caves to the Ajivika monks near Gaya,
even though the Ajivikas were bitter critics of Buddhism. Asoka’s Dhamma had little
sectarian appeal or content. It stressed, on the other hand, several broad principles of social
and ethical conduct, in which no socio-religious groups could find anything objectionable.

Asoka’s Greek edict stated firm devotion to the king’s interests as one of the elements of
practicing Dhamma. Asoka would certainly look at his subjects as his children,but he also
demanded, through his Dhamma, complete allegiance to the ruler. Dhamma therefore had
distinct political elements, besides offering a broad social and ethical code of conducts. The
all-encompassing ideology of Dhamma is eloquently expressed by Asoka’s aim to “maintain
by Dhamma, to rule according to Dhamma, to make people happy according to Dhamma, and
to protect according to Dhamma. Dhamma thus was an ideology of the Maurya state designed
to weld together a widely divergent sub continental society, economy, polity, and culture.

The Mauryan Empire ceased to exist after c.185 BCE when the last Maurya ruler,
Brihadratha, was killed by his commander-in-chief (senapati), Pushyamitra Sunga, who
founded another dynasty. The Mauryan Empire thus collapsed in fewer than fifty years after
the death of Asoka. Among the successors of Asoka mentioned in the dynastic list in Sanskrit

6
Puranic texts, only two (Dasaratha and Brihadratha) are known from reliable historical
sources. The absence of able successors to Asoka could have contributed to the eclipse of
Mauryan power. The invasion of Bactrian Greeks from the north western parts of India
towards the end of the 3rd century BCE resulted in the disintegration of the empire. The
Mauryas were possibly also not able to enlarge the resource base of the vast empire. It is
likely that Asoka’s Dhamma, in spite of its remarkable broadness and non-sectarian features,
was imposed from above as the ideology of the state and did not enjoy popular roots. All
these factors could have hastened the process of the rapid decline of the first imperial power
in Indian history soon after the death of Asoka.

Ashoka (269-232 BC) the first Indian ruler of South Asia to have established imperial control
over the greater part of the sub-continent including pundravardhana (modern Bogra in North
Bengal) considered to be a province or an administrative unit of the Maurya empire. Either
Bindusara or his son and successor Ashoka possibly annexed the region to Maurya Empire.
Though Chandragupta Maurya set up the first extensive empire in the sub-continent, it was
only Ashoka who for the first time established a trans-Indian empire. On the death of his
father king Bindusara in 273-272 BC, Ashoka was crowned in 269-68 BC after about four
years of struggle for succession among the sons of Bindusara. Ashoka came out successful in
the struggle and ruled the empire until about 232 BC. In early part of his regal life, Ashoka
expanded his empire to almost all parts of the sub-continent, but the blood-spattered Kalinga
War changed his political and moral outlook. In his Rock and Pillar Edicts, Ashoka stated
how the Kalinga War changed him into a moral man. Since then he devoted himself to
establishing universal peace and moral regime in all spheres of life. Non-violent Dhamma
became his guide for the rest of his life. Ashoka ruled his vast empire from Pataliputra (a
place in and around modern Patna). From the point of view of the source of imperial revenue
and propagation of Dhamma, historians consider the Ganges Valley as the core of his vast
empire.

Until the orientalist researches revealed the extent and depth of ancient civilizations, our
knowledge about Ashoka was limited to some sketchy information provided by the Purana
literature in which Ashoka appeared as an inconspicuous ruler of the Maurya dynasty.
However, in 1837 James Prinsep deciphered some of Ashoka's Rock Edicts and came to the
conclusion that Ashoka was much greater king than narrated in the Purana literature. Prinsep
informed us for the first time that Ashoka became a Buddhist and preached Buddhism in the
name of Dhamma. Studying some more inscriptions of the time of Ashoka Prinsep came to a
further conclusion that Ashoka abandoned the policy of conquests after the Kalinga War. He
became a Buddhist and assumed a religio-royal title devanampiya piyadassi (the beloved of
the gods, Piyadassi) dedicating him to the cause of promoting peace and welfare of the
mankind. Subsequent discoveries and interpretations of Ashoka's numerous Rock and Pillar
Edicts reveal Ashoka's empire and his attitude to life, politics and ethics. The numerous Rock
Edicts of Ashoka discovered in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries acquaint us not only
with the personality of the king but also with the events of his reign and nature of his
administration. In his 13th Rock Edict, Ashoka articulated his attitude to life, polity and
religion. Never before and after his regime, we find royal thought and activities of ancient
times so plainly and extensively documented as those of Emperor Ashoka's regime. Ashoka
described in his Edicts the effects of warfare on human peace and welfare. The Kalinga War
taught him how destructive could be the impact of wars on human organisations, welfare and
peace. He argued that war could not be supported on any ground, religious, moral and
political.

7
Ashoka reflected on the evil effects of warfare both at social and individual levels and came
to believe that people's love and support and general welfare could be established by
abandoning the path of warfare and undertaking the responsibilities of establishing peace and
social harmony based on love and responsibilities. He defined his new thought in his state
and religious policy what he collectively called Dhamma, which was his own idea of religion
and morality. Ashoka expounded his Dhamma through numerous Rock and Pillar Edicts
addressed to state officials and people. He described how the Kalinga War changed his mind
and what he wanted to do to establish the environment of peace and social harmony among
the subjects of his empire. The 13th Rock Edict described in details the impact of the Kalinga
War made on his mind. It goes:

'When he (Ashoka) had been consecrated eight years the Beloved of the Gods, the king
Piyadassi, conquered Kalinga. A hundred and fifty thousand people were deported; a hundred
thousand were killed and many times of that perished. Afterwards, now that Kalinga was
annexed, the Beloved of the Gods very earnestly practiced Dhamma, desired Dhamma, and
taught Dhamma. On conquering Kalinga the Beloved of the Gods felt remorse, for, when an
independent country is conquered the slaughter, death, and deportation of the people is
extremely grievous to the Beloved of the Gods, and weighs heavily on his mind. What is even
more deplorable to the Beloved of the Gods, is that those who dwell there, whether brahmans,
shramans, or those of other sects, or those house holders who show obedience to their
superiors, obedience to mother and father, obedience to their teachers and behaved well and
devotedly towards their friends, acquaintances, colleagues, relatives, slaves and servants ' all
suffer violence, murder and separation from their loved ones. Even those who are fortunate to
have escaped the wrath of war and whose love is undiminished [by the brutalising effects of
the war] suffer from the misfortunes of their friends, acquaintances, colleagues and relatives.
This participation of all men in suffering weighs heavily on the mind of the Beloved of the
Gods....

'The Beloved of the Gods believes that one who does wrong should be forgiven as far as it is
possible to forgive him. And the Beloved of the Gods conciliates the forest tribes of his
empire.... and wishes that all beings should be allowed to live unharmed, self-controlled,
calm in mind, and gentle... (Description of countries of Asia and Europe where he sent his
envoys to propagate Dhamma). This inscription of Dhamma has been engraved so that any
sons or great grandsons that I may have should not think of gaining territories by new
conquests....They should only consider conquests by Dhamma to be a true and permanent
conquest, and delight in Dhamma should be their whole delight, for this is of value in both
this world and the next' (Translated by Romila Thapar in Ashoka and the Decline of the
Mauryas, Oxford University Press 1997, paperback, pp.255-57).

Ashoka's reign was particularly marked by the reorganization of the Buddhist Sangha. With
Ashoka's patronage and support the Third Buddhist Council at Pataliputra in c. 250 BC was
organised. He rendered his patronage to Theravada sect of Buddhism and asked the Sangha to
expel the dissidents. It was at this council that decision was taken to send Theravada
missionaries to all parts of Asia and even beyond and make Buddhism an actively
proselytizing religion. Ashoka mentions in his Edicts various countries of Europe and Central
Asia with whom he exchanged diplomatic and other missions. Ashoka's edicts were written
generally in local script. While Prakrit in brahmi was the dominant scripts in Ashokan
inscriptions, regional languages including south Indian and Hellenic languages were also
used in relevant places in the interest of making Buddhism known to peoples of all languages.

8
The concept of Dhamma was indeed a response to contemporary conditions characterised by
Vedic faiths, Buddhism and Jainism. Ashoka selected some values of the existing faiths and
thoughts and synthesised them to create a new ideology. Ashoka's great empire included
multiple religious, cultural, ethnic and social systems. He looked at such plurarity with the
pride that all of them were safe under his care. The principle of his Dhamma was such that it
was acceptable to peoples of all religions, caste and creed. Tolerance to all was the basic
message of Dhamma. Tolerance, according to Ashoka, should be extended to all people and
to their beliefs and ideas. He defined tolerance as kindness towards slaves and servants,
respect for teachers, obedience to mother and father, generosity towards friends,
acquaintances and relatives, regard for and donations to brahmans and shramanas, a concern
for all living beings. Ashoka asserts in Rock Edict 12 that one's greatest responsibility in life
is to think about the welfare and security of all faiths, not only of his own.

Ashoka started propagation of his ideology of Dhamma, as attested by his 5th Rock Edict,
from the 13th year of his reign. In this Edict, Ashoka directed the officers of Dhamma to be
kind to prisoners. He directed them to release from prison all prisoners who had children, and
who were old, infirm, and sick. Ashoka declared in several of his Edicts that he wanted
welfare and happiness for the mankind. How he wanted to achieve the goal has been
engraved in his 6th Rock Edict. Love and tolerance towards all faiths and practices made the
core of the thought of Dhamma. Ashoka's environmentalist commitment has been enshrined
in his second Rock Edict, in which he directed his people to show kindness not only to man,
animal and birds, but also to world of vegetation. He asked all to plant fruit trees and
medicinal herbs and trees for fuel, and never to disturb the natural growth of vegetations. One
institutional aspect of Ashoka's propagation of Dhamma was the system of holding local
assemblies by the rajukas or empire's rural officers by beating of drums and giving the
assembled crowd the sermons that 'they must obey mother and father, obey the teachers; have
mercy on living beings; speak the truth always.

Ashoka's philosophical views about state and statecraft declare the culmination of an epoch
of a few centuries of rational inquiry and cultural development. The change from the nomadic
pastoral culture of the early Aryans to more settle and urban culture under the Mauryas led to
a revolutionary change in the religious, social, economic and political outlook of the people.
The Jain and Buddhist thoughts had tremendously influenced the movement of the mind of
the era making a shift from the sacrificial tradition of rites and rituals of the Brahmanic
culture to the critical and independent abstract approach of the Maurya era was indeed a great
transition from sacrifice to the establishment of love and tolerance in social and political
relations.

It is well-known that Ashoka was not an avowed Buddhist when he entangled himself in a
war of succession after the death of his father Bindusara. His interest in Buddhism grew after
his accession to the Maurya throne. Historians are largely in agreement that Brahmanical
courtiers of Ashoka had little support to Ashoka in the war of succession and that
phenomenon might have influenced Ashoka to develop interest in resorting to the alternative
Buddhist thought of the time. In this he was also influenced possibly by the changed social
environment of the rise of a commercial class and expanded contact with the Hellenic world.

Thus Ashoka identified the new economic environment as an opportunity to reach the people
by adopting the idea of the Dhamma. Integrating the small political units into his larger
political domain might be another consideration of Ashoka's new state policy of Dhamma.
His dream might have been the unification of the myriad political entities into the Maurya

9
sovereignty without enacting the Kalinga experience again. His dream goes close in
similarity to the political unification of Europe by Charlemagne and Constantine in the name
of Christianity. Buddhists, who were previously frowned upon by Brahmanists were now
restored to a safe and respectable position by recognising them as a peaceful religious sect
under the banner of Dhamma. In analysing Ashoka's concept of universal state, scholars are
also inclined to give importance to the contemporary Buddhist ideal of chakravartin or
universal emperor, who is free from sin and symbol of kindness. Such a universal king is also
available in contemporary Jaina thought of digvijayins. But in his Edicts Ashoka had never
claimed to be either chakravartin or digvijayins.

Gupta Rule

Gupta Rule forms an important chapter in the history of ancient Bengal. Gupta rule spread
over Bengal probably in the reign of Chandragupta I or Samudragupta towards the end of the
3rd or the beginning of the 4th century AD. Eulogical inscriptions (prashasti lipi),
copperplates, coins, literary evidences, and foreign accounts bear testimony to the existence
of Gupta rule in Bengal. Scholars differ regarding the original home of the imperial Guptas.
Shrigupta was the progenitor of the Gupta dynasty. Allan propounded the view that Srigupta
ruled the area near Pataliputra (in Magadha). On the other hand DC Ganguly considers
Murshidabad as the early home of the Guptas and not Magadha. The view is based on the
tradition recorded by i-tsing.

I-tsing came to India in 673 AD. Five hundred years before his time ie second century AD
Chinese traveller Hui Lan visited Nalanda. At that time one Maharaja Srigupta built a temple,
known as the 'Temple of China', situated close to a sanctuary called 'mi-li-kia-si-kia-po-no'
(Chinese form of Mrgashikhavana or Mrgasthapana) for the Chinese priests. He also granted
twenty-four villages as an endowment for its maintenance. This temple was situated about
forty yojanas (equivalent to 240 miles) to the east of Nalanda. From Nalanda, following the
course of the Ganges, the distance of Murshidabad is about forty yojanas. DC Ganguly,
considering the distance and direction given by I-tsing, pointed out that the original home of
the Guptas must have been located near about Murshidabad. HC Raychoudhuri was in favour
of Varendri. In an illustrated Cambridge Manuscript, dated 1015 AD, there is a picture of a
stupa, with the label 'Mrgasthapana Stupa of Varendra'. It would, therefore, follow that the
'Temple of China' was near the Mrgasthapana Stupa in varendra, and must have been situated
either in Varendra, or not far from its boundary, on the bank of the Bhagirathi or the padma.
So it could be assumed that the original home of the Guptas was most probably Murshidabad
in West Bengal or Varendra in North Bengal. However, many scholars hold contrary
opinions and Raychaudhuri or Ganguly's theory shall have to wait for further corroborative
evidence.

It is likely that on the eve of the eastward expansion of the Guptas Bengal was divided into a
number of small but powerful independent states. A record engraved on the Susunia hill,
about 12 miles to the northwest of Bankura town in West Bengal, mentions Puskaranadhipa
Maharaja chandravarman, son of Maharaja Singhavarman. According to Allahabad Prasasti
of Harisena Samudragupta uprooted one Chandravarman. Puskaranadhipa Chandravarman
and Chandravarman of Allahabad Prasasti are most probably identical. However, by the
middle of the fourth century AD, the whole of Bengal with the exception of samatata (the
trans-Meghna region comprising the Comilla-Noakhali area), was incorporated in the Gupta
Empire.

10
The subject matter of an inscription engraved on an Iron Pillar at the compound of the
Kuwwatul Islam Mosque in Meherauli area close to the Qutb Minar at Delhi, throws some
fresh light on the history of expansion of the rule of the imperial Guptas in Bengal. In this
inscription, the victories of a king, named 'Chandra', are described. It mentions, among other
military exploits of the king, that he 'extirpated in battle in the vanga countries his enemies
who offered him a united resistance'. In the absence of full details about this king 'Chandra',
his identity is a matter of great uncertainty and has formed a subject of keen controversy
among scholars. King 'Chandra' has been identified, for example, both with Chandragupta I
and Chandragupta II. In the former case it must be held that the father of Samudragupta had
already added Vanga to the Gupta empire. In the latter case, it must be presumed that Vanga
had shaken off the yoke of the Gupta empire, and Samudragupta's son had to reconquer the
area by overcoming an united resistance. On the basis of the Meherauli inscription, however,
at least a conclusion may be drawn that at early phase of the Gupta expansion Vanga had a
number of independent states, who could offer a vigorous resistance against foreign invaders.

According to Allahabad Prasasti, the kingdoms lying on the eastern frontier of

Samudragupta's vast empire were Nepala, Kartrpura (identification controversial), Kamarupa,
Davaka (Assam or Dhaka), and Samatata (Souteast Bengal), which were made tributary
states. But in course of time Gupta suzerainty was established over Samatata and by the end
of the 5th century AD this area appears to have been ruled by a king whose name ends in
'Gupta' (Vainyagupta). It is mentioned in Gunaighar copper plate that Maharaja Vainyagupta
granted land to a loyal person. Although he is titled 'Maharaja' in his own record, he is given
the title of 'Dvadashaditya' in a gold coin, and 'Maharajadhiraja' in a seal found at Nalanda.

On the basis of the copper plates, discovered till now, it is proved that North Bengal was
ruled directly by the Gupta kings. In the days of Kumaragupta I (432-448 AD) Northern
Bengal formed an important administrative division, Pundravardhana-bhukti. The
Damodarpur copper plates of Budhgupta (478 AD) indicate that Northern Bengal formed an
integral part of the Gupta empire down to the end of the 5th century AD. Pundranagara
(Mahasthana) was the centre of the Gupta provincial administration in this region. Their well-
organised and well-controlled administration prevailed here.

In the Gupta period, Bengal was divided into some well-defined administrative units like
bhukti, visaya, mandala, vithi, and grama. Each of the units seems to have an adhikarana or
office of its own at its headquarters (adhisthana). Bhukti, corresponding to modern division,
was the largest unit of administration. From the contemporary epigraphic records, we know
the names of two bhuktis like Pundravardhana (the whole of north Bengal) and Vardhamana
(the southern part of ancient Radha). A deputy of the king governed bhukti and the title of
this high official was Uparika or Uparika Maharaja. Next to the bhukti, visaya was the second
largest administrative unit. The title of the administrator of visaya was Kumaramatya and
Ayuktaka. From the inscriptions, we know the names of such visayas like Kotivarsa visaya,
Panchanagari visaya, Barakmandala visaya etc. There was a kind of officials, named
pustapala (record keeper), in the adhikarana of the visaya.

It is learnt from the Damodarpur copperplate inscriptions Nos 2, 4, and 5 that the visayapati
(officer-in-charge) of the Kotivarsa visaya was aided by a 'Board of Advisers'. This 'Advisory
Board' was composed of, excluding himself, four other members representing various
important interest groups of those days. The members of the 'Board' were the nagara-shresthi
(the president of the various guilds or corporations of the town, or of the rich bankers), the
prathama-sarthavaha (the chief merchant), the prathama-kulika (the chief artisan), and the

11
prathama-kayastha (the chief scribe acting as a state official in the capacity of a Secretary of
modern days or representative the Kayastha class). However, the participation of the local
people in the administration bears clear testimony to the fact that the democratic principle
was pursued in local administration. It can also be asserted that Gupta administration was the
earliest instance of local government in Bengal.

The vithi forms the next administrative unit. From the contemporary epigraphic records, we
know the names of two vithis: Vakkattakkavithi (in Vardhamanabhukti) and
Daksinangshakavithi (in Pundravardhanabhukti). We have specific references to the
adhikaranas of the vithis, but we have no definite information regarding their constitution.
Most probably the 'Board of Advisors' of the vithis was constituted with mahattaras,
agraharinas, khadgis, vahanayakas etc. Village (grama) probably formed the smallest unit of
administration. It seems that Gramika, brahmins, mahattaras, kutumbins were closely
attached with village administration.

The land administration of the Guptas was also well controlled. We find references to some
varieties of land in the Gupta epigraphic records such as ksetra (a field under cultivation),
khila (uncultivated), and vastu (a dwelling site). In Gupta period, the accurate measurement
system of land was active. The terms like kulyavapa and dronavapa were the units of
measuring the lands. Apart from the units mentioned above, the terms pataka, bhu-pataka,
adhaka, kakini, khadika, hala, drona etc were said to be in practice for measuring the land.

In the vast Gupta Empire Bengal was an important province. The period of the imperial
Guptas is generally considered to be the 'golden age' of Indian history. During this period,
under a strong benevolent central authority, peace, wealth and prosperity were manifest for a
considerable time and Bengal enjoyed the benefit of being a part of the All-Indian empire.
Bengal had a participation in the All-Indian trade. Gold and silver coins brought into
currency in entire Bengal. Introduction of a large number of gold coins proves economic
prosperity of Bengal. Betel nut, silk, cotton, coconut, salt, and sugar etc were probably
exported from Bengal. At that time Bengal had trading link with Southeast Asia and China.
The discovery of a large number of imitation Gupta coins from different places of Bengal
prove that Bengal enjoyed the benefit of money economy.

This period also saw artistic excellence. During the Gupta age the evolution of sculptural art
that developed in Northern India had left a definite stamp on the sculptural art tradition of
Bengal. A few examples recovered from North Bengal clearly show this evolution. The
Gupta School inspired the Bengal School of sculptural art distinctly in the Pala period. The
Gupta period is also remarkable for religious toleration. The imperial Gupta monarchs were
followers of Brahmanic religion, but they patronised Buddhism, Jainism, and other religious
communities and the people of the period enjoyed an environment of religious toleration and
mutual coexistence of religions. Bengal was an integral part of All-Indian history for the
second time, the first probably in the age of the imperial Mauryas.

Samanta

Samanta was a title and position used by the army people of Kings. The institution of
Samanta finds mention for the first time in epigraphs of northern India dating to the 6th
century. The institution is considered to and is closely associated with the origin and growth
of feudalism in India.

12
However, the institution is known to have existed prior to the Gupta period, though details on
them are vague. A Pallava inscription dating to the time of Santivarman (AD 455 - 470) uses
the term Samanta-Chudamanayah (best feudatories). The Samanta in South-India was used to
mean a vassal to an emperor. In North-India, the earliest use of the term in a similar sense
was in Bengal in the Barabar Hill Cave Inscription of the Maukhari Chief, Anantavarman
(dating 6th century AD) in which his father is described as the Samanta-Chudamanih (best
among feudatories) of the imperial Guptas. The Samanta vassal provided military support to
the Monarch and governed over a portion of a territory.

Early development

The term 'Samanta' originally meant a 'neighbour' and in the Mauryan period, the term
referred to the independent ruler of an adjoining territory as is evident from its use in the
Arthashastra and Ashokan edicts. The 'border-kings' (pratyan-tanripati) mentioned by
Samudragupta in his Allahabad prashasti were such Samantas in the original use of the term.

However, the term underwent a change, and came to mean a 'vassal' by the end of the Gupta
period and in the post-Gupta period. In fact the institution of the Samanta was the main
innovation that distinguished the post-Gupta period from the periods of ancient India. By the
end of the Gupta period and by the 6th century the term Samanta came to be universally
accepted as the Prince of a subjugated but reinstated tributary region.

Early kingdoms of Medieval India would surround themselves with a "Samanta-Chakra", that
is, a 'circle of tributary chiefs'. By the time of King Harshavardhana, the institution of the
Samanta had become well-developed and the Samantas came to be considered powerful
figures. In order to integrate them into the hierarchy of the realm they were often given high
positions in the court. One such example is the king of Vallabhi who was defeated by King
Harsha and became a Maha-Samanta. This Vallabhi King then rose under Emperor Harsha to
the position of a Maha-Pratihara (guardian of the royal gateway or the royal door-keeper) and
went on to become a Maha-Danda-Nayaka (Royal Field Marshal). In effect, the institution of
the Samanta brought rulers of fragmented or tribalistic, small independent regions under
subjugation to serve the king or emperor as vassals. The office of the Samanta represented a
semantic change in state formation from an independent neighbour to a tributary chief and
finally to a high ranking court official.

Types of Samanta

Banabhatta describes several types of Samantas in his work, Harsha Charita. Bana's
Harshacharitra is the only work from which we know of various categories of Samantas.
Bana mentions a large number of conquered enemy Maha-Samantas in the royal camp who
were probably waiting to be assigned their new duties. Some types of Samantas mentioned by
Banabhatta are:

1. Samanta: which signified the lowest and ordinary type of vassal.

2. Mahasamantha (Maha-Samanta): a step higher than a Samanta.
3. Shatrumahasamanta (Shatru-Maha-Samanta): a conquered enemy chief.
4. Aptasamanta (Apta-Samanta): those who willingly accepted vassalage and the
emperor as their overlord.
5. Pradhanamahasamanta (Pradhana-Maha-Samanta): who were most trusted hands of
the emperor and never disregarded their advice.

13
 6. Pratisamanta (Prati-Saamanta): who were opposed to the king and meant a hostile
vassal. Though hostile, all Samantas had military obligations. If they did not fulfill
their obligations, the King could seize their territory and appoint a new Samanta.
Despite that, some Samantas however, would keep trying to throw off their allegiance
to the King and assert their own independent rule.

Obligations of the Samanta

From the Harshacharitra, we understand that the Samanta had 5 duties. They are:

1. Paying yearly tributes to the emperor.

2. Paying homage to the emperor in person.
3. Defeated Samantas had to offer their sons and minor princes to the Emperor so that
they are groomed in the imperial traditions and grow to be loyal to the emperor.
4. Render military aid to the emperor.
5. Perform administrative and judicial functions in times of peace.

In the nature of rendering military aid, paying tributes and performing administrative and
judicial functions, the office of the Samanta is comparable to the office of the Nayaka which
was followed by the Vijayanagar Empire. The Samanta system was followed by several
kingdoms across north and south India.

Samanta Raju

This compound Indian title refers to a territorial vassal or governor (a person who provides
military support and governs a territory) under a king or monarch in exchange for certain
guarantees) in South India. This should not be confused with the titles given in the colonial
British India.

Matsyanyayam

The condition of Bengal in the century following the death of Shasanka and before the rise of
the Palas (c 750-850 AD) has been described as Matsyanyayam (Matsyanyayam). In a near
contemporary inscription, the Khalimpur copperplate of the 32nd year of the second Pala
ruler Dharmapala, and the 12th century Ramacharitam kavya of Sandhyakaranandi the
anarchical condition of Bengal preceding the rise of the Pala dynasty is found mentioned as
matsyanyayam.

The Sanskrit term matsyanyayam, used in ancient texts, bears special significance. The
Kautilya Arthaxastra (1.4.13-14) defines the term as follows: When the law of punishment is
kept in abeyance, it gives rise to such disorder as is implied in the proverb of fishes, ie, the
larger fish swallows a smaller one, for in the absence of a magistrate, the strong will
swallow the weak.

Lama taranatha, the 17th century Tibetan historian of Buddhism in India, also mentions that
all of Bengal was pervaded by an unprecedented anarchy in the century before the rise of the
Palas. Government was fragmented, with no king having real control over Gauda, Banga or
Samatata. Ksatriyas, Brahmanas, merchants and townsmen all were kings in their own
homes. The sufferings and strife of the common people were intolerable. The writer of the
Manjusrimulakalpa declared that after Shashanka the state of Gauda was paralysed, and

14
whoever was king thereafter would not be able to rule for even a year. According to the same
source there was a disastrous famine in the period in the eastern region of India.

From the above it appears clear that in the century following the reign of Shashanka Bengal
saw very little of stable government. The country was torn into many small kingdoms and
internecine warfare among them caused the instability. In the absence of a strong force
capable of enforcing law and order, a situation prevailed that has been termed as
Matsyanyayam. Physical strength was the only strength, and throughout the land ran the
frenzy of unbridled, unruly might. In order to put an end to this state of affair, Gopala
emerged as the king of Bengal and founded the rule of the Pala dynasty.

We have no direct evidence from which to discern the social ramifications of this anarchy.
But indirect deductions from the available evidence makes it clear that in the absence of
peace and order there was a decline in trade and commerce. The loss of prominence of the
port of Tamralipti after the 8th century AD is suggestive of this decay. Among the ruins of
Mahasthana it can be seen that the temples and monasteries of the Pala period were built on
the ruins of the earlier Gupta and post-Gupta eras. It would seem that the destruction belongs
to the age of anarchy. The devastating famine mentioned earlier may have had a connection
with the prevailing anarchy. In the absence of a strong king, the feudal vassals, each one
independent and autonomous, must have been instrumental in creating anarchy. And the
sagacity of a few of them must have brought an end to the state of lawlessness; some of them
coming together brought Gopala to power.

Pala Dynasty

Pala Dynasty ruled Bengal and Bihar for about four centuries from the middle of the 8th
century AD. Founded by Gopala, the rule of the dynasty underwent various vicissitudes and
lasted for eighteen generations of kings. The reigns of Dharmapala and Devpala formed the
period of ascendancy of the dynasty, when the dynastic rule gained firm footing in Bengal
and Bihar and the Palas felt powerful enough to venture out in the political arena of northern
India. Both Dharmapala and Devapala were engaged in a long drawn struggle for the
possession of the madhyadexa of northern Indian empire with two other powers - the Gurjara
Pratiharas of western India and the Rastrakutas of Deccan, and they had success for a limited
period. Dharmapala succeeded in placing his protege on the throne of Kanauj. Devapala also
held his own against the Pratiharas. The Pala records are full of eulogistic verses portraying
Dharmapala and Devapala as great conquerors. Bengal came to be reckoned as a powerful
force in northern Indian politics. With the death of Devapala ended the period of ascendancy
and a period of stagnation followed which gradually led to decline and disintegration until
Mahipala I rejuvenated the rule of the dynasty. It is quite likely that stagnation and decline
came in as a result of a succession problem after the reign of Devapala.

15
.

The question of succession to the Pala throne after Devapala presents a fairly complicated
problem. Names of three kings are found in the Pala records- Surapala, mentioned in the
Badal pillar inscription in between Devapala and Narayanapala, Vigrahapala, mentioned in
the Bhagalpur copperplate of Narayanapala, and Mahendrapala, mentioned in the recently
discovered Jagjivanpur copperplate as the son and successor of Devapala. The Badal
inscription does not give any indication about the relationship either between Surapala and
Devapala, or Surapala and Narayanapala. Vigrahapala was the son of Jayapala and grandson
of Dharmapala's brother Vakpala. All the kings who ruled the Pala empire after Vigrahapala
were direct descendants of the line of Vakpala, brother of Dharmapala.

So it is clear that the rule of the direct descendants of Gopala came to an end after
Mahendrapala and passed on to the line of Vakpala. So the existence of three names after
Devapala is indicative of a dynastic trouble. Mahendrapala may have succeeded to the throne
of the Pala kingdom after Devapala, but the other claimants, Surapala and Vigrahapala, may
have carved out an independent status for themselves within the empire and ultimately the
dynastic rule passed on to the line descending directly from Vigrahapala.

16
The period of stagnation that followed the succession problem continued for more than a
hundred years covering the reigns of five generations of kings. During the period the Pala
kings lacked energy and vigour, hardly was there any attempt at expansion, and they were not
powerful enough to check invasions from outside (of the Chandellas and the Kalachuris
towards the end of the 10th century AD) or uprisings from inside. The Kamboja Gaudapatis
carved out for themselves an independent position in parts of western and northern Bengal in
the middle of the 10th century AD, when three kings (Rajyapala, Narayanapala and
Nayapala) ruled successively. For a time the Pala empire was confined to parts of Bihar only.

The reign of Mahipala I brought back vitality and vigour and gave a second lease of life to
the Pala empire. He succeeded in bringing back the lost territories in northern and western
Bengal and restored Pala dynastic rule to a firmer footing. Mahipala I captured a place in
popular imagination by his public welfare works and his name survived for long in the
ballads and folklore. During the reigns of his four successors (a period of about 40 years) up
to the reign of Ramapala the fortunes of the dynasty seem to have fallen to its lowest ebb.
The weakness of Pala rule was clearly exposed during the reign of Mahipala II, when the
revolt of the samantas (Varendra Rebllion) succeeded in establishing an independent rule of
Kaivarta chief Divya in northern Bengal.

Ramapala, during his long reign of over 40 years, succeeded in retrieving the position of the
dynasty by recapturing northern Bengal and also extending his empire towards Orissa,
Kamarupa and madhyadesha of northern India. He gave a check to the tendency to
dissension, which was evident from the reigns of Nayapala and Vigrahapala III. He gave the
decadent Pala power a new lease of life. Once he was gone the forces of disintegration and
dissension set in, which his successors could hardly cope with. It is likely that the Senas
asserted an independent position in southern Radha by the close of Ramapala's reign or early
in the reign of his successor, Kumarapala. Madanapala, the last known Pala emperor, lost
north Bengal to the Senas sometime after his 8th regnal year and his rule towards the closing
years of his reign was confined to parts of Bihar only. Govindapala and Palapala, whose
names are found in inscriptions from Bihar, kept up the pretence of being the successors of
the imperial Palas in small principalities of Bihar. But their connection with the Palas, if there
were any, cannot be proved.

Glories of the Palas' The long reign of the Palas form a glorious period in the history of
ancient Bengal. The dynasty ruled for about four hundred years, a rarity in the annals of
dynastic history. The achievements of Bengal during this long period are indeed the glories of
the Palas. Widespread empire organised administrative system, ruling policy oriented towards
welfare of the people, unprecedented excellence in the field of arts and cultivation of
knowledge and literatureall these are the achievements and glories of the Pala dynasty.

In the period of ascendancy the Pala empire witnessed widespread extension. In the
beginning of the ninth century the Palas succeeded in spreading their sphere of influence up
to Kanauj, if not over the whole of northern India, and this was Bengal's first successful
involvement in the politics of northern India. Though their hegemony in northern India did
not last long, but it must be said that the power and strength that was generated during the
early years of Pala rule, allowed them to hold their own against the aggressions of the
northern Indian powers in the 10th and 11th centuries AD.

More laudable were the achievements of the Palas in the field of administration. The Pala
copperplates bear ample testimony to their well-organised system of administration. An

17
organised system of administration prevailed from the village level to the central government
level. They inherited an administrative structure from the Guptas and it was to their credit
that they made the structure more efficient and added many new characteristics. They built up
an efficient structure for revenue collection. The long list of state-officials, found in the Pala
copperplates, clearly indicate that the administration was taking care of every aspect of public
life - from the ferry ghats to the riverways, land routes, trade and commerce, towns and ports,
and law and order in the country. Even forest or market management was not left out. The
basis of their long rule was the efficient administrative system.

The most glorious aspect of Pala rule was their policy of public-welfare. The Pala rulers were
Buddhists, but majority of their subjects were Hindus. Dharmapala had adopted the policy of
religious toleration as the state policy. He had declared that he is 'conversant with the
precepts of shastras' and he made 'the castes conform to their proper tenets'. This policy was
followed by his successors. There is no doubt that the Hindu gods and goddesses and the
Brahmins received liberal patronage from the Pala rulers, though they themselves were
devout Buddhists. Brahmins occupied high official posts. Except one or two, all the Pala
copperplates record grant of land to temples of Hindu gods and goddesses or to Brahmins.
There is no evidence of any religious discord between the Buddhists and the Hindus in the
society. Religious toleration and mutual coexistence can be identified as the characteristic of
the social life of the people in the Pala period.

This social peace over a long period of time must have contributed to developments in other
fields. There are instances of welfare activities of the Pala rulers. Dharmapala is known to
have excavated a few tanks by spending several thousands of dramma (silver coins).
Mahipala I had occupied a place in the hearts of the people of Bengal by his welfare activities
- digging tanks and establishing towns, which bear his name. Remains of many buildings of
the Pala period bear testimony to the welfare activities of the rulers of the dynasty. The
tradition of religious harmony and toleration that was created in the Pala period, was given a
sudden jolt during the period of the Senas and the ground was prepared for the easy
acceptance of Islam in the subsequent period. The long Pala period produced an atmosphere
of accommodation and admixture of Hindu-Buddhist culture and as a result were evolved the
sahajiya and tantrik cults, the legacy of which transcended through the medieval period down
to the modern. The legacy of religious-social-cultural synthesis that was evolved during the
rule of the Palas was a glorious achievement of the period and this trait was an important
ingredient in the 'personality' of ancient Bengal. Buddhism spread to Tibet, Java, Sumatra and
Malayasia during the Pala period. The pundits from the Buddhist Viharas of Bengal played
very significant role in the propagation and spread of Buddhism in these countries.

The brightest aspect of Pala glories was manifest in the field of different arts. Distinctive
achievements are seen in the arts of architecture, terracotta, sculpture and painting. The
somapura mahavihara at paharpur, a creation of Dhamapala, proudly announces the
excellence of the architectural art achieved in the Pala period. It is the largest Buddhist
Vihara in the Indian subcontinent and the plan of its central shrine was evolved in Bengal. In
the Nalanda inscription of Vipulasrimitra it has been described as jagatam netraikavishrama
bhu (pleasing to the eyes of the world). Experts believe that its architectural plan, especially
the gradually receding crucified plan of its central shrine, had influenced the architecture of
the neighbouring countries like Myanmar and Indonesia. A few Buddhist buildings in these
countries, built in the 13th and 14 centuries, seem to have followed the Paharpur example.

18
The terracotta plaques recovered from Paharpur amply demonstrate the excellence of the art
in the Pala period. These plaques, used mainly in surface decoration of the walls, have been
recognised as unique creation of the Bengal artists. Side by side with the depiction of
religious subjects, the artists have chosen subjects from the everyday life of the people, and
hence their importance as sources of social history cannot be overemphasised. There is no
doubt that the terracotta art reached a high water mark in the Pala period. Specimens of Pala
architecture are scattered over Bengal and Bihar. Dharmapala built the Vikramasila
Mahavihara (at Patharghata in Bhagalpur district of Bihar) and Odantpur Vihara in Bihar.
Somapura Vihara and Vikramasila Vihara were acknowledged in the Buddhist world as two
important centres of Buddhist learning in the period between 9th and 12th centuries AD.
Among other Viharas of the Pala period Traikutaka, Devikota, Pandita, Fullabadi and
Jagaddala Vihara are notable. It may rightly be said that the fame of Bengal spread in the then
Buddhist world for the cultivation of Buddhist religion and culture and of other knowledge in
the various centres that grew under the patronage of the Pala rulers. Many scholars came to
these centres from far and wide. Devapala granted five villages at the request of the Sailendra
king of Java for the upkeepment of the matha established at Nalanda for the scholars of that
country. The Buddhist Viharas in the Pala empire played a significant role in the propagation
of Buddhism in the neighbouring countries of Nepal, Tibet and Sri Lanka. Buddhist pundits
of Bengal contributed to the spread of Buddhist culture; among them the name of Atis
Dipankar Shrijnan stands out most prominently. No remains of Hindu temples of the Pala
period have yet been found. But parts of doorframes or pillars used in temples have been
found, and replicas of temples appear in the sculptures of the period. On the basis of these it
can be surmised that temple architecture also was developed in the period.

Of all the arts of the period sculptural art witnessed phenomenal development. The Gupta
tradition of sculptural art attained a new height under the patronage of the Pala rulers and it
came to be designated as 'Pala School of Sculptural Art'. The art incorporated lot of local
characteristics in Bengal under the Palas and it continued right up to the end of the 12th
century. In the museums in Bangladedesh and West Bengal the most notable exhibits are the
innumerable beautiful sculptures on Rajmahal black basalt stone. The deities seemed to have
assumed life through the masterly carving of the sculptors. The sculptural art of Bengal made
a mark in the arena of Indian sculptures. The artistic genius of the Bengal sculptors
blossomed to perfection in the period. Similarly Bronze sculptures of Bengal came to be
recognised as specimens of a matured art, and specialists think that the Bengal bronzes
influenced the art in south-east Asian countries.

The art of painting was not far behind. Any specimen of painting of the pre-Pala period has
not yet been found, even wall-paintings on religious buildings are absent. Taranatha (1608)
mentions the names of Dhiman and his son Vitpala, the master sculptors and painters of the
period of Dharmapala and Devapala. In many Vajrayana and Tantrayana Buddhist
manuscripts appear the beautiful paintings of the Buddhist gods and goddesses. The art of
painting is manifest in 400 odd paintings that appear in the so far discovered 24 painted
manuscripts of Pancharaksa, Astasahasrika Prajnaparamita, Panchavingshatisahasrika
Prajnaparamita and other texts. Though limited to manuscript paintings, the art shows a very
developed stage and scholars have held that the paintings of the Pala period definitely
influenced the Eastern Indian, Tibetan and Nepali paintings of the 14th century.

It is not possible to assess the development of literature in the Pala period. So far only a few
literary works have been found. But the prashastis in the numerous Pala copperplates clearly
indicate the development of Sanskrit language and poetry. The 9th century work

19
Ramacharitam, composed by poet Abhinanda in the Vaidarbhi style, made a mark in the
arena of all-Indian literature. Sandhyakara Nandi, a poet from Varendra, composed his
Ramacharitam under the patronage of the last known Pala king Madanapala. It was acclaimed
as a marvellous poetic work for its unique poetic style and use of words that carry double
meaning. The anthologies produced in the Sena period contain many poems composed by
10th and 11th century poets. These poems could find place in the anthologies due to their
literary value. These bear ample evidence of literary excellence of the Pala period.

There are evidences of works in different shastras. Gaudapada wrote the famous
Gaudapadakarika, known as Agamashastra, a very important philosophical work. Shridhara
Bhatta of Bhurishresti village of Vardhamana wrote Nyayakandali, Bhatta Bhavadeva of
Siddhala village of Birbhum wrote Karmanusthanpaddhati. Bhavadeva was also famous for
his smrtishastras. Chakrapani Datta, son of Narayanapala's officer Narayana Datta, authored a
few medical treatises - Chikitsa Sanggraha, Ayurvedadipika, Bhanumati, Shabda Chandrika
and Dravyagunasanggraha. The 12th century medical treatise Shabda Pradipa was written by
the royal physician Sureshvara, whose father, Bhadreshvara, was Ramapala's physician.
Sureshvara's other works include Vrksayurveda and Lohapaddhati. Vangasena, the author of
Chikitsasara Sanggraha, and Gadadharavaidya, who wrote the commentary on Sushrata
shastra, are considered to have flourished in the Pala period. Jimutavahana contributed to the
Dharmashastra literature through his Dayabhaga, Vyavaharamatrka and Kalaviveka. He was
born in Paribhadra family of Radha in the 11th or 12th century AD. All these are clear proof
of the development literature in the Pala period.

Thus, the long rule of the Pala dynasty for about four centuries bestowed glories on Bengal in
various fields of human activities. The Pala rulers as well as the people of Bengal can
legitimately claim credit for these glories. Glories of the Palas:

 Widespread extension
 Proper development of the field of administration
 Policy of public welfare
 Social peace
 Religious harmony and toleration
 The field of different arts
 Development of literature

Varendra Rebellion

Varendra Rebellion occurred during the reign of the Pala emperor Mahipala II (c 1075-1080
AD) and resulted in his death and the loss of Varendra (north Bengal) to the Kaivarta chief
Divya. The loss of Varendra and its recovery by Ramapala is the central theme of
Sandhyakaranandi's famous kavya Ramacharitam, the only source of information about the
incident.

Mahipala II is said to have imprisoned his two brothers, Shurapala and Ramapala, out of
suspicion that Ramapala would capture royal power. The possibility of a dynastic trouble
arising out of the ambition of a capable younger brother cannot be altogether ruled out. So, if
there is any truth in Sandhyakaranandi's story of the imprisonment of Ramapala, it may well
have been the outcome of a fraternal dispute between Ramapala and Mahipala II and the

20
rebellion that broke out during the reign of the latter may have been the consequence of this.
The rebellion has been mentioned, besides the Ramacharaitam, in three epigraphic records.

It is difficult to determine the causes and nature of the revolt. There are scholars who believe
that it was a rebellion of Divya and the Kaivartas against the oppressive rule of Mahipala II.
It has also been suggested that the Kaivartas were smarting under the Buddhist rulers who
were against their fishing profession. There are suggestions that the rebels were supporters of
Ramapala, but this cannot be accepted on the ground that the success of the rebellion led to
the loss of Varendra and did not benefit Ramapala.

The Ramacharitam describes the rebellion as anikam dharmmaviplavam. The commentator

explains anikam as alaksmikam (unholy or unfortunate) but does not offer any meaning of
dharmmaviplavam. It has been translated as 'civil revolution', as also 'transgression from duty
or from the right path'. The commentary of verse I/31 explains how Mahipala lost his life. He
is said to have sunk, having undertaken a difficult war, disregarding the advice of his
minister, who was endowed with all the six qualities of polity. His army felt frightened at the
accumulation of the huge army of the united innumerable feudatory chiefs
(militanantasamantachakra) and in the battle Mahipala lost his life. From this passage it is
clear that the opponents of Mahaipala were a chakra (confederacy) of samantas (feudal
chiefs).

It is gathered from verse I/38 of the Ramacharitam that subsequently his enemy Divya, 'who
was an officer sharing royal fortune and who rose to high position', occupied Varendra. In the
same verse Divya is mentioned as upadhivratin, and the commentator explains it as
avashyakarttavyataya arabdham karmmavratam chhadmani vrati. May be Divya had taken
possession of Varendra, as if he was doing the right thing as a royal officer, but it appeared to
be a fraudulent gesture when he ultimately declared independence in Varendra. It is quite
likely that Divya was secretly associated with the samantachakra, and may have been
instrumental in hatching up the rebellion. He remained on the royal side right up to the end of
Mahipala and after his death took possession of Varendra. This intricate play of power
politics naturally appeared to Sandhyakaranandi as dereliction of duty on the part of the royal
officer and the episode was termed a dharmmaviplava.

It is quite clear that the battle in which Mahipala II lost his life was against the combined
forces of samantas. As the rebellion terminated in the loss of Varendra it is likely that the
samantas belonged to that area, north Bengal. A revolt of the samantas was nothing unusual
in that period of history. The nature of the relation between the samanta and the sovereign
ruler depended largely on the comparative strength of the two. A samanta paid allegiance
only so long as the suzerain was powerful. On the least sign of weakness of the empire the
samantas would try to shake off the subordination. Viewed from this point of view the
rebellion was definitely not a revolt of the Kaivartas, but an attempt to overthrow the weak
royal power of the Palas by a few important feudal chiefs of northern Bengal. The dispute
among the brothers and the imprisonment of two brothers by Mahipala may have signalled
the weakness of the Palas and the rebellious samantas formed a confederacy against Mahipala
II. Divya, the chief of the Kaivartas and a royal officer may have played a role in building up
the confederacy and his connection with the rebels became apparent when he assumed
independent power in Varendra. Varendra was ruled successively by Divya, his younger
brother Rudoka and the latter's son Bhima before Ramapala (c 1082-1124 AD) re-established
Pala authority in the area.

21
 Sena Dynasty

Background of Sena Dynasty: The dynasty ruled Bengal for little over a century (c 1097-
1225). The emergence of the dynasty, who supplanted the Palas in Bengal towards the close
of the 11th century AD, is a very important chapter in the history of ancient Bengal. Taking
advantage of the revolt of the Samantachakra in the varendra during the reign of Mahipala II,
vijayasena, the founder of the Sena dynasty, gradually consolidated his position in Western
Bengal and ultimately assumed an independent position during the reign of Madanapala. One
important aspect of Sena rule in Bengal is that the whole of Bengal was brought under a
single rule for the first time in its history.

The Senas originally belonged to the Karnata country in South India, the Kanarese speaking
region in modern Mysore, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh of India, and they were Brahma-
Ksatriyas . It is recorded in the Deopara Inscription of Vijayasena that Virasena and others,
born in the family of the moon, were rulers of southern region and in that Sena family was
born Samantasena whose descendants ruled in Bengal. It is very difficult to conclude
satisfactorily as to when the Senas came and assumed power in Bengal. The Deopara
Inscription records that Samantasena, the head-garland of the Brahma-Ksatriyas proceeded
towards Rameshvara-Setubandha and subdued the wicked despoilers of the Laksmi (Wealth)
of Karnata. But in his last days he settled down on the bank of the Ganges. From this
reference it is clear that Samantasena spent his early life in the Karnata country where he
certainly held some power. He, however, came to Bengal in his old age and lived somewhere
near the Ganges. The Naihati copper plate of the time of vallalasena, refers to the settlement
of the Sena family in western Bengal before Samantasena was born. Samantasena's
descendants established the rule of the dynasty afterwards. It is impossible to give a definite
answer to the question as to how the family came to Bengal. The Sena records are silent on
this question. It has been suggested that the Senas came to Bengal from Karnata and were
employed in high offices like generals under the Palas. When the Pala power became weak
they usurped the royal power in Bengal. The phrase Gauda-Malava-Khasa-Huna-Kulika-
Karnata-Lata-Chata-Bhata occurs regularly in the Pala inscriptions, which refers to the area
from where the empire drew its recruits into various services. It may be that a Karnata official
in the service of the Pala empire gradually acquired power to set up an independent position.
Scholars have also suggested that the ancestors of the Senas came to Bengal along with some
invader form the Deccan. At first they established themselves as vassal lords and gradually
founded an independent kingdom in West Bengal. Very little is known regarding
Samantasena, the first historical figure of the Sena dynasty. He, as noted earlier, had settled
in his old age on the banks of the Ganges, evidently in some parts of radha. No royal title is,
however, ascribed to him. His son and successor Hemantasena seems to have been a ruling
chief. The disruption of the Pala kingdom following the revolt of the Samantas probably
offered him an opportunity to carve out an independent principality in Radha. No record
belonging to Hemantasena has yet been discovered but he is attributed the title of
Maharajadhiraja in one of the Sena records. He is also described as rajaraksasudaksah (skilful
in the protection of kings) in the Barrackpur plate of Vijayasena. From the above title it can
be deduced that Hemantasena held the position of a feudatory chief in the Pala empire and
extended his support for the protection of his overlord. There is no evidence regarding the
exact dates of Samantasena and Hemantasena. However, they can be placed in the second
half of the 11th century AD.

Vijayasena, son of Hemantasena, laid the foundation of the independent rule of the Senas. It
appears from his records that he inherited the position of a subordinate ruler under the Palas

22
in the Radha area. Among the fourteen Samanta kings who helped ramapala in his recovery
of Varendra, there was one known as Vijayaraja of Nidravali. He was perhaps identical with
Vijayasena. Vijayasena, however, made full use of the weakness of the Pala rule in Bengal.
He obtained an independent position in Radha in recognition of his help to Ramapala who
fought against the Kaivartas. He defeated the Palas and captured the throne of Gauda
afterwards. His queen Vilasadevi was a princess of the Shura dynasty. The existence of the
Sura family in Southern Radha in the first quarter of the 11th century is attested to by the
ramacharitam of Sandhyakaranandi. The same source, however, records the name of
Laksmishura in the list of the vassal chiefs of Ramapala as the lord of the Apara-Mandara,
identified with Mandaran in the Hooghly district. Vijaysena's matrimonial relation with the
Shura family enabled him to establish his political power over Radha. He might have entered
into an alliance with the Orissan king Anantavarman Codaganga. This alliance certainly
enhanced his political importance. He is described as Chodaganga-Sakha (friend of
Chodaganga) in the Vallalacharita of Anandabhatta. It is beyond any doubt that Vijayasena
established independent power in Bengal immediately after the demise of Ramapala. The lord
of gauda who fled before Vijayasena was certainly Madanapala, the last known Pala king
whose authority was, at that time, confined to North Bengal. It is learnt from the Pala
epigraphic records that Madanapala's authority over North Bengal continued up to 8th year of
his reign which falls in 1152-53 AD. Most Probably Vijayasena established his own
supremacy in North and North Western Bengal through ousting the Palas sometime after
1152-53 AD. Vijayasena is also recorded to have extended his hold over Bihar in the west
and vanga (southeastern Bengal) in the east. His Barrackpur copper plate was issued from
vikramapura the capital of the Varmanas who are found to have ruled in this area from the
last quarter of the 11th century to the middle of the 12th century AD. So it seems probable
that Vijayasena ousted the Varmans in the middle of the 12th century AD. Thus by the
middle of the 12th century AD Vijayasena supplanted the Varmans, ousted the Palas and
succeeded in establishing the rule of his own dynasty over the whole of Bengal. He had a
very long reign of abort 62 years (c 1098-1160 AD). He was a Saiva and was liberal towards
Brahmanas versed in the Vedas and the poor. Vijayasena assumed the imperial titles' of
Paramamaheshvara Paramabhattaraka Maharajadhiraja. He also took the proud epithet
Ariraja-Vrsabha-Shankara. It has been suggested on good grounds that Gaud-Ovisa-Kula-
prashasti (eulogy of the royal family of the Gauda) and the Vijaya-prashasti (eulogy of
Vijaya) of the famous poet Sriharsa were inspired by the career of Vijayasena.

Vallalasena succeeded his father Vijayasena The two epigraphs of the time of Vallalasena
(The Naihati copperplate and the Sanokhar Image Inscription) have been discovered so far.
They do not contain any record of his victory. He, however, had some military achievements
to his credit. It is stated in the Adbhutasagara that he was engaged in warfare with the king of
Gauda who is identified with Govindapala of the Pala dynasty. This information is also
corroborated by the Vallalachairta of Anandabhatta composed in 1510 AD. It is learnt from
various sources that Govindapala, the last Pala ruler of Magadha, lost his kingdom in 1160
AD. It is evident from the epigraphic records that this date falls in the reign of Vallalasena.
Hence the final blow to the Palas in Magadha may be ascribed to him. It is stated in the
Adbhutasagara that during the lifetime of his father, Vallalasena conquered Mithila.
Vallalasena's name is connected with the introduction of the practice of kulinism in Bengal. It
is believed that Vallalasena with a view to reorganising the social system introduced the
system of Kulinism. Through this system the ranks were bestowed upon a very few in
consideration of their sort of nobility in the society known as Kulina. The basis of knowledge
regarding the early history of Kulinism is the texts known as Kulagranthas or Kulajisastras.
Indeed these texts, composed five or six centuries after Vallalasena's reign, are full of

23
irregularities and contain many conflicting ideas. So the authenticity of the information
furnished by the texts can be questioned. Moreover none of the Sena epigraphic records refer
to Kulinism. It is known that Kulinism was the strongest force among the Bengali Brahmins
in the 18th and 19th centuries AD. Hence it is quite probable that the advocates of Kulinism
tried to give a historical basis to it and claimed its origin from the time of the Hindu King,
Vallalasena. It is evident from the Sena epigraphs and tradition that Vallalasena was a great
scholar and renowned author. He wrote the Danasagara in 1168 and started writing the
Adbhutasagara in 1169 but could not complete it. Like his father, he was also a worshipper of
Shiva. He assumed the epithet Ariraja-Nihshanka-Shankara along with other imperial titles. It
is learnt from the Adbhutasagara that in his old age Vallalasena left the responsibility of his
government to his son laksmanasena. He and his wife spent their last days on the bank of the
Ganges at a locality near Triveni. He had a successful reign of about 18 years (c 1160-78
AD).

Laksmanasena succeeded his father Vallalasena. It is evident from the records of his reign
that before he came to power he defeated the king of Gauda and Varanasi (Kasi) and made
expeditions against Kamarupa and Kalinga. It is quite probable that the above victories were
achieved by Laksmanasena in his youth and possibly during the reign of his grandfather,
Vijayasena, who was engaged in warfare against the kings of Gauda, Kalinga, Kamarupa and
also most probably against the King of Kasi of the Gahadaval dynasty. It appears from the
epigraphs of Laksmanasena that he was the first king among the Senas to assume the title of
Gaudeshvara. This title is, however, absent in the plates of both Vijayasena and Vallalasena.

There is no doubt that Laksmanasena came to the throne at a fairly old age. His reign was
famous for remarkable literary activities. He himself wrote many Sanskrit poems and
completed the Adbhutasagara, which was started by his father. His court was an assembly of
several renowned poets like Jayadeva, the author of Gitagovinda; Sharana; Dhoyi, the
composer of Pavanduta and probably also Govardhana. His friend Shridharadasa, son of
Vatudasa, compiled the saduktikarnamrta, an anthology of the Sanskrit verses during his
reign. His Chief Minister and Chief Judge was Halayudha Mishra, who wrote the
Brahmanasarvasva. Umapatidhara, the author of the Deopara Prashasti, is referred to have
been the minister and one of the several court poets of Laksmanasena. It is well known that
Laksmanasena was a staunch Vaisnava. He took the title of Paramavaisnava or
Paramanarasimha. Nothing definite is known regarding his change of faith. Laksmanasena
was famous for his exceptional qualities and proverbial generosity. Indeed his generosity
even attracted the attention of Minhaj-us-Siraj, the author of the tabaqat-i-nasiri, who
designated him as a 'great Rae' of Bengal and compared him with Sultan Qutbuddin.
Laksmanasena, however, became too weak to run the administration of his empire towards
the close of his reign. During this time there were signs of disruption and disintegration
within his empire. Contemporary epigraphic records refer to the emergence of a number of
independent chiefs in different parts of the Sena kingdom, which broke its solidarity and
paved the way of its decline. However, Muhammad bakhtiyar khalji, gave the final blow to
the Sena kingdom (1204 AD). Laksmanasena's presence in southeastern Bengal is, however,
proved by the epigraphic records. After the death of Laksmanasena in 1206 AD, his two sons
Vishvarupasena and Keshavasena occupied the throne one after the other. No detailed
account of their reign is available. It is evident from the epigraphic records that southern and
eastern parts of Bengal were under their domination for a period of nearly twenty-five years.
The plates of Vishvarupasena and Keshavasena granted lands in the Vikramapura and Vanga
areas which bears clear testimony to their authority in that area after the death of their father.
It is learnt from Tabaqat-i-Nasiri that the descendants of Laksmanasena ruled in Vanga at

24
least upto 1245 AD. But there is no evidence that the Senas ruled Bengal after Keshavasena.
In a Buddhist work, Pancharaksa, the name of one Madhusena, who is given the title
Gaudeshvara is preserved. He was the last known ruler of Bengal with the name-ending Sena.
However, in the third quarter of the 13th century AD, the Devas supplanted the Senas from
their hold over Vikramapura. By the end of the century whole of Bengal came under the
control of the Muslims. The rule of the Senas in Bengal is usually connected with the
emergence of orthodox Hinduism in a Hindu-Buddhist society which for long had enjoyed
the peaceful coexistence of the two religions resulting in an atmosphere of amalgam of the
two. The onslaught on the Buddhists in Bengal is believed to have started in this period,
which resulted in large scale Buddhist migration to the neighbouring countries. The Sena
period witnessed the development of Sanskrit literature. Vallalasena and Laksmanasena were
royal authors of Sanskrit texts, Danasagara and Adbhutasagara. Jayadeva, Umapatidhara,
Sharana, Dhoyi, Shridharadasa, Halayudha Mishra and Govardhana were literary luminaries
of the period. Sculptural art developed under the patronage of the Sena kings and courtiers.

Kulinism

Kulinism is a Hindu social institution asserting social and religious superiority over others.
Any race or community or caste or eminent family which enjoys social dignity is traditionally
known to have been eager to defend its socially respectful position as well as status as a kula.
This eagerness is known from the days of the Ramayana . Thus Kulina means belonging to a
noble, good family.

Aaccording to Vachaspati Mishra, marked with the qualities of ceremonial purity, learning,
discipline, reputation for purity, pilgrimage, piety, ascetic meditation, marriage among equal
ranks and liberality. Such qualities were usually in the Brahmin family, though the kayasthas
and Vaidyas acquiring these qualities together with wealth, education, good deeds etc. were
also considered to be kulinas. Marriage relations with such qualified families caused
jatyutkarsa, and that might open to an individual of a particular caste the door to become
kulina socially. This might have introduced the social institution of Kulinism.

Kulinism was prevalent among the Brahmins of Radha and Varenda who are invited by king
Adishura. It should be noted that the historicity of Adisura is not beyond doubt. The king did
respect in kukinism. The Sena king Vallalasena is also credited to have introduced Kulinism
in Bengal though there are no Sena records, literary and epigraphic, to support this claim.
Actually Brahmans strictly maintain the kulinism system.

The Kulaji texts or the genealogical books of the matchmakers of Bengal, which refer to this
importation of Brahmanas, form a class of literature by themselves. These are variously
called Kulaxastras, Kulagranthas or Kulapanjikas. Though this literature is considered to be a
separate xastra, scholars have generally expressed grave doubts as to its antiquity and
authenticity as sources of sober history. The Brahmanas of Radha, known as Radhiya, and
those of Varendra, known as Varendras, emerging of these two separate endogamous groups
was not sudden and various causes might have contributed to this. In course of time different
social customs and usage grew up in two parts of Bengal and from those point of view inter-
marriages between these two groups were not encouraged.

The Palas were tolerant towards other religions, the fervour of the Brahmanical religion was
not very much noticeable during their rule. Dharmapala and Vigrahapala II regarding the
preservation of the four Varnas in their proper order bear clear indication of the official

25
policy of the Palas towards the Brahmanical society. Vallalasena of the Sena family is also
credited to have brought Brahmans in kulinism. It appears that both the Varmans and Senas
came from outside Bengal and these families played important roles in the Brahmanisation of
Bengal.

It may be pointed out in this connection that the Senas were the champions of Brahmnical
religion and their rule gave great impetus to the development of Brahmanical culture. The
power and position of Brahmanas in the society grew considerably, and this was initially felt
necessary for the consolidation of the power of the kings who came from outside Bengal. But
the growth of the power of the Brahmanas at one stage became matters of a serious concern
for the rulers. Hence, the promulgation of Kulinism may be considered as a fine excuse for
dividing the Brahmanas and thereby weakening their power as a potential challenge to the
authority of the king.

The institution of Kulinism appears to have been gradually standardised by the Samajapatis
and the Ghatakas (professional matchmakers) who were the custodians of the family
traditions. This led them to introduce kulapanjika works divided mainly into three such
classes as (a) Adikulakarika and Dakas, (b) kulapanjika, Dhakuri, Samikaranakanika and
Kulakula vichara and (c) Kaksanirnaya, Bhavanirnaya, Dhakura and modern Kulapanjika.
Chandrapabha Kulapanjika by Bharata Mallika and Sadvaidya kulapanjika by
Kavikanthahara were two important Kulapanjika works.

The system of Kulinism led to the practice of polygamy among the kulina Brahmins. For the
sake of defending the kulina status and of having social status Shrotriya girls were given in
marriage to kulina males. This resulted in the dearth of the Shrotriya girls for arranging
marriage within the same class. This situation was utilised by the Ghataka Brahamins who by
taking bride prices arranged their marriage with Shrotriya males. On the other hand, marriage
among the kulinas became a profitmaking job. For the sake of defending the kulina status a
girl was given in marriage to an old male or a minor male was given in marriage to an old
female. Again many kulina women remaind unmarried throughout her life. Such abominal
practice began and continued for a long time. Even today some families try to maintain their
kulina status at the time of negotiating marriage though the system of Kulinism has lost its
edge much.

The Institution Kulinism rose in Bengal to meet certain socio-political ends, but, whatever be
its objectives, the system lingered, diluted and distorted beyond recognition towards the18th
and 19th centuries. It not merely became a social malady; it vitiated the entire social fabric of
Bengal. Vidyasagar had to fight relentlessly against this social evil.

26