CHAPTER IV

Political History

This chapter deals with the political history of the bhum territories with

special reference to Manbhum, Gopabhum and Mallabhum. It is well known that

there were several principalities or rajyas1 known as bhums, which emerged

mostly during the 10th century AD to 18th century AD in the fringe areas of the

Chhotanagpur plateau, i.e., parts of West Bengal, Bihar and Orissa2. During the

Mughal rule (16th - 18th centuries AD), there were several bhum territories in the

peripheral regions of the Gangetic deltaic plain of Bengal3. It has been discussed

in the previous chapter that following the theorisation of Paramananda Acharya4

there had developed ‘eighteen’ bhum territories in the forested and hilly frontiers5

of the Chhotanagpur plateau. There originated several tribal polities, the names of

which bearing the surname of the concerned families, had traditionally

established their supremacy6 in the undulating natural region7 in the fringes of the

plateau. These principalities or the bhums have evolved in the heart of the Radh

/Rarh region, which is geographically located in the eastern fringes of the

Chhotanagpur plateau or the extension of the eastem-Indian plateau region. These

tribal principalities emerged after undergoing various stages of evolution from the

initial tribal configuration to the principalities or rajyas and then to state system8.

The archaeological sources mainly in the form of the remains of the structural

edifices give some indications about the presence of such rajyas and to some

extent to such processes of evolution. There are Puranic and other literary

sources (like the Acharanga Sutra - composed in the 4th century BC and the

Rasikamangala - composed in the middle of the 17th century AD) refer to the

86
 countries bearing the name bhum or bhumi9 suffixed with the surnames of the

ruling families. The bhum territories, as geo-political units, evolved as nuclear

power centres. Stirling10 has furnished eight royal and military foci or tribes like

'Dhir. Dhal, Towang, Mai, Bhanj, Rai, Rawat and Khandait’. This reference finds

mention in a Sanskrit verse11. (This has been pointed out by the zaminder of

Haldia, (1927) in the subdivision of Khurda, Puri district.)

“Bhanj abhumi-dhalbhumivarttinastungasikhara-mahinivasinah |

Dhira-vira-vara-malla-namaka astabhumiharaschaiva parthivah ||”

The above brings to light eight bhumis or bhums the names of which were

suffixed by the surnames of the ruling tribal rajas. Apart from Bhanjabhumi,

Dhalbhumi, Mallabhumi and Virabhumi, the identification of Dhirabhumi is not

certain, albeit, the existence of the surname ‘Dhira’ is often found among the

zaminders of Madhupur in Cuttack. Acharya12 refers to the assumption of Stirling13

that Balbhum in Bishnupur and Bhawalbhum of the Ain-i-Akbari may be identified

with Varabhumi mentioned in the Bhavishyat Purana.

In this context, one of the major constraints is that there are limited numbers

of epigraphic sources, which refer to the names of the territories having bhum as

their suffix. Moreover, these records hardly focus on the details of the structural and

functional frameworks of the bhum territories since their inception which may be

‘from the early medieval period onwards (roughly between 10th-13°’ century CE)’14.

An example may be cited in the form of the family chronicles of the Malta dynasty,

which reveals that Mallabhum came to be ruled since the 8th century AD.

‘Mallabhum owes its name to the Malla dynasty which, as the chronicles of the

family claim, ruled over the territory since the eighth century, but held it for about

87
three centuries till the end of the eighteenth century’15. The epigraphic sources notify

on a limited perception about the ‘local ruling lineages’ of all the bhum territories

identified so far. The involvements of the local tribal lineages of the bhum territories

in the socio-economic and the religious affairs of their polities and in the

relationship with the neighboring tribal kingdoms were parts of an on-going

comprehensive process. It cannot be denied that the ‘monumental character’ of the

architectural relics strewn over the entire fringe areas of this plateau display signs of

both major and minor settlements mostly in the form of religious establishments and

secular structures16. On the other hand, literary evidence supports a complex social

identity resulting from political freedom. The structural vestiges and the habitational

remains found in the fringe areas of the Chhotanagpur plateau constitute the

archaeological database. The database reveals the sociological, political, religious

and ideological idioms, which may open avenues for the reconstruction of the

political history of the territorial chiefdoms. The entire gamut of the ambience may

disclose some codes that led to the formation of the processes for the evolution of

secondary state in the territories17, which belonged to the chieftains-turned rajas.

The rajyas, i.e., principalities were essentially ‘autonomous and semi­

independent’18 principalities. These principalities were considered as bhums or

territories ‘defined by the limits of political control’19.

It is evident from the contemporary researches that bhum territories had

evolved in the peripheral zones20 of the Chhotanagpur plateau where the topography

appears less undulating and occasionally hilly near the plains and coastal areas. The

strategic geo-physical situation can explain the existence of the geo-political units

and their survival as semi-independent or autonomous power centers.

88
 Paramananda Acharya, in Ws study, has attempted to identify the probable

locations of the respective bhum territories. This has been discussed in the

introductory chapter. Acharya has sought to establish historical linkages between the

environs of the concerned bhums and the autochthon rulers, which bore the family

names or the titles of the chiefs of the concerned tribal societies.

There were eighteen bhum territories like Manbhum, Mallabhum,

Samantabhum, Gopabhum, Nagbhum, Senbhum, Singhbhum, Dhalbhum, Sikharbhum,

Tungbhum, Surbhum, Aditbhum, Bagbhum, Bhawalbhum, Bhanjabhum,

Brahmanbhum, Barabhum, and Birbhum in the hilly and forested lands located in the

eastern and southeastern peripheries of the Chhotanagpur plateau region. This chapter

intends to present the politico-historical significance of the relatively important and

‘representative’ bhum territories, viz., Manbhum, Gopabhum and Mallabhum. Before

going into the details of these important bhum territories a brief historical account of

the rests has been enumerated below following the analyses of Paramananda

Acharya21.

To identify the historical connection of Aditbhum, the administrative reports of

the early British period suggest that the Jungal Mahal area of the present district of

Medinipur can be identified as Aditbhum or in corruption Adityabhumi22. The

genealogical records of the local rajas reveal the fact that there was a practice of using

certain titles or family names. It appears that Vikramaditya is traditionally regarded as

the founder of the kingdom of Patkum and his name ‘ Vikram’ belonged to the Aditya

family of Patkum. Patkum was situated in the vicinity of Manbhum. The ancestral record

of the Patkum raj family brings to light that starting from Vikramaditya, there were 68

rajas who used the titles like Vikramaditya, Udayaditya, and Satrughnaditya and so on.

It appears that these titles, or so to say, these names have repeatedly been used by the
89
successor rajas from the 28th generation to the present day in an alternate sequence. Such

tradition of using names in succession is also observed among the Somavamsi kings of

Daksina Kosala and Utkala where the cognomens like Mahasivagupta and

Mahabhavagupta were alternatively used by the kings. Similar tradition was followed in

the royal family of Khurda, i.e., modem Puri. In the genealogical record of the Gupta

dynasty, such traditions have also been met with. It has been found that ‘the second name

of Chandragupta II, Kumaragupta, Skandagupta, Narasimhagupta and Chandragupta III

was Vikramaditya, Mahendraditya, Vikramaditya, Valaditya and Devadasaditya

respectively’. Following the inscriptional reference of Narendraditya in the coins of

Sasanka, Radhagovinda Basak upholds the viewT ‘... the inscription on the alleged

Sasanka coins reads Narendraditya and ..... Sasanka, like the former imperial Gupta

rulers, enjoined a second name with an aditya title’ . Such postulation leads Acharya to

suggest that the possibility of the connection of King Sasanka with the Aditya family of

the Adityabhumi.

The modem Medinipur district is the place, which had harbored some bhums,

namely, Brahmanbhum or Brahmanabhumi and Baghbkum or Vyagrabhumi, which were

located in the northern and southern parts of the district respectively. It is difficult to

identify the exact location of Brahmanbhum or Brahmanabhumi due to insufficient data

Probably, the family name ‘Brahman’ is apparent from the name of the rajya -

Brahmanbhum. Reference to Bubbanbhum in the Ain-i-Akbari makes it clear that this

bhum territory was considered to be a mahal under the jurisdiction of Jaleswar, Orissa.

This Bubbanbhum in Orissa was largely resided by the Brahmans. As both the territories

referred to the same geo-physical terrains (i.e., modem Medinipur of West Bengal and

some adjacent part of Orissa) there must have been a connection between Brahmanbhum

and Bubbanbhum. Acharya has propounded another view regarding the identification of

90
Brahmanbhum in which he suggests that the rajas of Chhatna, lying in the vicinity of

Vishnupur/Bishnupur, were ‘originally’ Brahmans24. Their residence was at

Bahulyanagara and the Samantas killed one of the rajas. Therefore, Brahmanbhum

might have been the original abode of the rajas of Chhatna and was probably located in

the vicinity of Samantabhum.

Regarding the identification of Baghbhum or Vyaghrabhumi, J.C. Bose suggests

that there might have been a connection between the remote ancestors of this Vyaghra

family with Vyaghraraja mentioned in the inscription of Samudragupta. However, due to

inadequate data, it is very difficult to formulate arguments on such views .

Bhanjabhumi or Bhanjabhum might have been a territory situated in an area

covering the present Mayurbhanj district of Orissa and its adjacent parts within the limits

of the present districts of East and West Medinipur. Some epigraphic evidence throws

light on the history of the local ruling dynasty of the Bhanja family, which may go back

to the fourth or fifth century AD. Therefore, Bhanjabhum may also be traced to the same

period. The name of one ‘Ragaraja Sri Disa Bhanja Deva’ has been found in the rock

inscription of Keonjhar of fourth or fifth century AD26. The same name Rajaraja has

been noticed in a stone seal found from Khiching. The reference to the existence of many

Bhanja kings — Bhanjanaradhipayo Vahuva Vubhuvu — is found in the copper plates

belonging to the Bhanja families residing in Bauda and Gumsar, the southern region of

Orissa. These inscriptions mention Khijjinga Kotta, the capital of the Bhanja kings. This

Khijjinga Kotta may be identified with modem Khiching in Mayurbhanj. From this

evidence, Acharya regards that the Bhanja dyanasty was established at Khiching during

the early centuries of the Christian era. The families residing in Orissa with the surname

of Bhanja presently claim that they have migrated from their original home, i.e., the

Bhanjabhum or Bhanjabhumi. In this connection, it is to be noted that the socio-political

91
perspective of Chattisgarh region also played an important role (from the personal

communication with Dr. R.K. Chattopadhyay). From the epigraphic records, it appears

that, the seal of the Bhanjas ‘represents a bull and that of the (Varahas) Vahanas of the

Mayura family a peacock’. Logic behind the flag of the Bhanja rajas incorporating the

symbol of peacock lies in the belief that the Bhanjas conquered the Mayuradvajaraja.

However, a sympathetic feeling for the humble ‘prayer’ of the vanquished king, led the

Bhanjas to include the peacock-symbol in their flag. In all probability, the name

Mayurbhanj suggests that the kingdoms of the ‘Mayuras’ and that of the ‘Bhanjas’ were

merged to form the Mayurbhanj territory. The literary reference to the ‘Bhanja’ kings is

found in the Mugdhabodha Abhidhana, composed during the 13th -14th centuries AD by

one unnamed raja of Mayurbhanj. Bhanjabhumi is also referred to in the Rasikamangala

composed in the 17th century AD. References to Morbhanj or Mayurbhanja found in

Stirling’s translation (1822) of the settlement papers of Man Singh (1592 AD) depict the

fact that the variegated dimensions of the socio-political development of the geo-political

establishment of Bhanjabhum had not been sufficiently furnished in the records. More

data are required to reconstruct the political history of the territory of Bhanjabhum.

The reference of Bhawalbhum is found in the Ain-i-Akbari under ‘Sarkar

Mandaran’ but no detailed and reliable reports are available regarding the identification

of Bhawalbhum .

Bishnupur or Vishnupur and its fringes in the modem district of Bankura

constitute a vast territory, which had harboured bhums like Mallabhum,

Samantabhum, Surbhum, Sikharbhum, and Tungbhum. Surbhum or Surabhumi or

Shorbhum is located in the north of Mallabhum, Le., Bishnupur, in the present district

of Bankura. The reference to Lakshmi Sura is found in the Ramacharita and Rana

Sura of Dakshina Radha is mentioned in the Tirumalai inscription. It appears that

92
after some later kings, Lakshmi Sura became the ruler of the territory. During 11th

century AD, the capital of the territory was Apara Mandara. According to the Ain-i-

Akbari, the territories denoting Apara Mandara and that of ‘Sarkar Mandaran’ are

same. Apart from that, in the Radha region, the existence of Sikharbhum/

Sikharabhum or Sekharbhum or Sikharbhumi can presently be located in the region

under the police station of Gangajalghati, Bankura. Moreover, the Sikhara Rajas had

their capital at Trailakumpa or Telkupi. Samantabhum or Samantabhumi is identified

with the areas under the modem Chhatna police station, Bankura. The regions of

Shyamsundarpur and Phulkusma in the present district of Bankura constitute the

Tungbhum or Tungabhumi or Tungabani. It may be noted here that copperplates

issued by the Tungas were found from Orissa strengthen this viewpoint. Accordingly,

the latter migrated from Rotasgarh. The kings could extend their influence over

‘Yamagartta mandala’, which was also ruled by the rajas that belonged to the Sulki

dynasty. The reference to Tungabhum is also there in the Bhavisyat Purana 28.

Senbhum or Senabhumi or Sainbhum, as per the account of Blochmann, may be

identified with the area lying along the left bank of the river Ajay in the district of

Birbhum. This Senbhum is believed to be linked with the original homeland of the

famous Sena dynasty of Laksmanavati29.

Birbhum/VirabhumilViradesa is said to be the country of the Bira rajas

mentioned in the Brahmanda section of the Bhavisyat Purana. Since there is no

epigraphic record, by following the literary account of the Ain- i- Akbari, it is held by

Blochmann that the word Bira had Mundari origin, which signifies ‘jungle’30. Although,

there are few Kshatriya families who bear the surname of Vira in Bengal.

93
 Singhbhum or Simhabhumi lies in the Chhotanagpur division of Bihar, i.e., in

modem Jharkhand and interesting legendary accounts are attached with this bhum

territory. A pair of swan was considered as the insignia of the ruling dynasty31. In the

neighborhood, there was the territory of Dhalbhum or Dhavalabhumi now constituting

an indispensible part of the present district of Singhbhum in Jharkhand, incorporating

along with it some areas of the present districts of Medinipur and Bankura32. The

reference to Dhalbhumi is found in the Bhavisyat Purana. The Dhala cognomen was

found among the rajas of Dhalbhum and similar surname was probably used by the

zamindars of Damapura in the district of Cuttack.

Nagbhum might be located in Nagpura or Chhotanagpur. There are substantial

numbers of inscriptions of the medieval period relating this Naga dynasty with that of

the Central Provinces. It has also been revealed that the Raj family of the State of

Kalahandi and few other Raj families of the Chhatisgarh State Agency belong to the

Naga family33.

Barabhum or Varahabhumi was situated in the former Manbhum district,

(modem district of Purulia), in the neighbourhood of Patkum. The Udayavaraha

copper plate mentions the Varaha family of Barabhum. According to the Ethnology

of Bengal34, the foundation of the Varaha dynasty of this bhum bears a mythical

correlation. It is corroborated in the District Gazetteer of Manbhum.

It is conceived that the territory of Gopabhum35 was extended on both sides of the

bank of the river Ajay under the rule of Kamasena, during the over lordship of

Dharmapala, the Pala king.

Apart from the above bhum identities, this chapter particularly concentrates on

the political history of Manbhum, Gopabhum and Mallabhum (Map VUI), which may

94
be regarded as the representatives of the bhums that evolved roughly between 10th-!8th

centuries in the western and southwestern parts of the modem states of West Bengal and

Jharkhand.

Manbimm

At the outset, it may be mentioned that a proper study of the political history

of Manbimm suffers partially from inadequate literary and epigraphic sources. The

Jaina chronicles, the Puranas and a few inscriptions are considered as the major

sources, which, though, hardly provide any detailed information helping the

reconstruction of a chronological political history of Manbhum. Manbhum finds its

earliest reference in the Jaina treatise, Acharanga Sutra, of the 4 /5 century BC. The

Jaina account refers to the itinerary of Vardhamana Mahavira, the 24th Tirthankara,

in Subbha-bhumi or Subhabhumi or Suhmabhumi or Simhabhumi and Vajjabhumi

or Vajrabhumi39 or Vijayabhumi or Vhanjabhumf0. According to Herman Jacobi, the

region associated with the activity of Mahavira was, most probably, not Subbabhumi

or Suhmabhumi but the rugged terrain of Vajjabhumi or Vajrabhumi as found in the

surroundings of the modem district of Purulia. Subbhabhumi or Suhmabhumi may be

identified with the coastal plain of Dakshina-Radha41 and some parts of

Tamraliptaka, i.e., Tamralipta (Tamra Lipti42) or Tamluk in the undivided district of

Medinipur. It is quite evident that the coastal land does not incorporate Manbhum!

Purulia. The territory of Vajjabhumi/Vajrabhumi (as described in the Sutra tradition)

may be identified with the tract of Sarkar Mandaran, which has its reference in the

Ain-i-Akbari of Abul Fazl of 16th century AD. This territory of Sarkar Mandaran is

said to have incorporated a vast area in a south-east to north-west direction

95
comprising the modem districts of Hooghly, Bankura, Birbhum, Barddhaman and the

northern part of ManbhumfPnmlm respectively43. According to the Acharanga Sutra

the inhabitants of the Radha were, most probably, the pre-agriculturalists, hunters and

gatherers.

The deep-forested territory of Manbhum has been described in the

Mahabharata as ‘pasubhumi’ and in the Acharanga Sutra as ‘impenetrable forest....

inhabited by savage people’44. Regarding the naming of the country, Nandolal Dey

maintains that the country Manbhum, the corrupted form of Manyabhumi, was a

‘venerable country’. This country bears a close association with Mahavira’s itinerary.

The ‘travel’ of the Jaina monk may be regarded as the mark of the Aryan civilization

in the land of the Nisadic people45. The Jainas might have settled along the sides of

the river courses, namely the Damodar, the Kansabati, and the Subamarekha outside

the Nisadic settlements.

The reconstruction of the political history of Manbhum or Manabhumi or

Manyabhumi is an integral part of the general analysis of die evolution of the political

structures that came into being in the bhum territories of the Chhotanagpur plateau

region during pre-medieval-medieval period. In this context, it is to be pointed out

that limited literary and epigraphic data, and archaeological remains are the available

sources for the reconstruction of the same. It has to be kept in mind that, in the

adjoining areas of Manbhum there existed some bhum territories as well as other

erstwhile territories, which were in the pre-state and sub-state condition. Beglar had

observed the occurrences of large-scale ruins in Manbhum along the ‘great road’. He

maintains that the ruined structures are largely the witness of the glorious construction

works done by the Saraka who are ‘Jain by origin.... colonel Dalton would ascribe

the Jain remains...as far as back 500 or 600 years before Christ...’46. However, the

96
historical facts of Manbhum may be reconstructed with the partial help of a few

epigraphic sources.

According to the ‘lone’ record of the Susunia rock inscriptions (inscribed on

the rocks of the Susunia hills located in the north-eastern extremities of the district of

Bankura), it is evident that a king named Chandravarma, the son of Singhavarma,

ruled over a kingdom, named, Puskarana47. Presently, the village of Pakhanna, lying

on die right bank of the river Damodar, situated some 40 km north-east of the Susunia

hill, has been identified as Chandravarma’s capital Puskarana48. King Chandravarman

was a Vaisnava by faith. According to the Susunia rock inscription, the King

worshipped Chakraswami Visnu and donated an entire village or, so to say, the

produce of the village as revenue for the preservation of temple49. The epigraphic

evidence of the kingship of Chandravarman may be viewed as the kingship of ‘the

Aryans of Brahmanie variety’ who could establish the principality in the midst of an

utterly non-Aryan populace50. According to the Meherauli pillar inscription and the

Allahabad Prasasti, Samudragupta, the second Gupta Emperor, could establish his

sway in the south and southwestern part of Bengal by defeating the king Chandra.

However, there are some scholars, who maintain that king Chandra was only a local

king of the area. However, both the Meherauli inscription of Samudragupta and the

Allahabad Prasasti of Samudragupta refer to Chandra as one of the Aryavarta kings

whom Samudragupta defeated. Through this encounter, Samudragupta was able to

extend his kingdom in the Damodar region along with eastern Bengal. It may be that

the mention of the king Chandravarman in the Allahabad Prasasti imparts an idea of

the probability of the status of king Chandravarman, who gained the authority of

ruling the Radha region, as a vassal king under the superior Gupta monarch, Samudra

97
Gupta51. The latter king had conquered the entire region to bring Vanga under his

sway.

The capital of Chandravarman is not far away from the Susunia hill and the

latter lies near the boundary of Manbhum. It is most likely that the north-eastern

region of the Susunia hill along the Damodar-Kansabati valley also belonged to king

Chandravarman’s kingdom52. There is an ambiguity whether his kingdom actually

extended towards the central, western and southern region of Manbhum, as it is quite

evident that the entire area of Manbhum virtually remained in the ‘pre-state’ condition

for generations53. Moreover, the tract lying beyond the river Kansabati had not

experienced settled agriculture. Some isolated settlements, most probably, evolved in

such uneven and coarse wasteland topography.

However, during the post-Gupta period, i.e., from the 6th century AD

onwards, the entire kingdom of Puskarana came under the jurisdiction of the

independent local rulers54 who might be the governors of the Gupta emperors. The

Mallasarul inscription (found in the present Galsi police station) and the Kotalipur

inscription (discovered in Barisal, present Bangladesh) record the name of one

Maharaja Vijayasena, an Uparika or viceroy of Vardhamanabhuktt under

Maharajadhiraja Gopachandra. During the kingship of Gopachandra, Dharmaditya,

and Samachardeva the Manbhum area may be included within the territory of Bengal.

These kings emerged as independent kings between the periods of 525-575 AD55.

Two dated inscriptions found from Medinipur and one undated inscription

from Egra, near Kharagpur, suggests that during the 7th century AD Sasanka was

ruling over a large part of modem Bengal and Orissa. His capital was in Kamasuvama

and his empire was extended from Uttara-Radha56, conterminous with Gaudaka or

98
Gauda57, to Dakshina-Radha58 up to Medinipur. There is every possibility that

Sasanka’s kingdom might have included Manbhum, the eastern and northern parts of

modem Purulia59. The central and the western parts of modem Purulia must have

enjoyed some sort of independence in spite of the de jure control of the ‘guardian

monarch’ of Gauda60. Therefore, it can be surmised that in some portions of the

Damodar valley and probably in the eastern parts of the valleys of the Dwarakeswar

and Kansabati and the sedentary villages under the hierarchical authority might have

survived right from the 7th century onwards61. It can be inferred that Manbhum was a

continuation of the territory of Bengal, which was a constituting unit within the

kingdom of Gauda during the period between 580 AD and 637-38 AD62.

However, from the middle of the 8 century onwards, the suzerainty over the

southern part of the river Damodar, i.e., the entire tract of Manbhum often passed

either to the hands of the emperors of the Pala dynasty or to the Orissan rulers63.

Dharmapala, the son of Gopala, led an unsuccessful campaign to capture the region

on the southern bank of the Damodar from the hegemony of the Utkala ruler, Sivakara

I, who had gained a hold over the area of Dakshina-Radha. It was only Devapala, the

third ruler of the Pala dynasty, who was able to bring Dakshina-Radha under the Pala

suzerainty. The weak successors of the Pala dynasty could not maintain their firm

autonomy until the Pala Emperors Mahipala I, during the closing decades of the 10th

century, and Rampala, during the 12th century AD, gained an effective control over
3

the westernmost part of the southern Radha64. It is also evident that the Utkala kings,

namely, Sivakara I, Suvakara III, Anantavarman Chodaganga, Narasinghadeva I, and

Narasinghadeva II had established a deep-rooted sway over the southern parts of the

river Damodar encompassing Manbhum. At the same time, the Orissan rulers had to

withstand a series of assaults from the local chieftains, the Sena kings and the Turks

99
over a long period of time65. Among the Orissan rulers, the Palas and the Senas might

have not ruled the jungle-clad hilly tracts of Manbhum directly. Rather the clan or

feudatory chiefs and the territorial kings ruled the region under die superficial

hegemony of the powerful potentates like Mahipala I, Ramapala, Vallalasena,

Sivakara I, Suvakara III, Anantavarman Chodaganga, Narasinghadeva I, and

Narasinghadeva II respectively. The local chiefs were called upon to avow then-

loyalty and accept the suzerainty of an overlord by paying tributes and supplying

armed personnel to fight alongside the imperial army. Thus, the clan and feudatory

chiefs have maintained their independence or semi-independence, during the period

between 9 and 13 centuries AD, in their local spheres paying little attention either

to the royal expeditions or to the virtual changes of their ‘overlords’66.

In the 2nd half of die 9th century, following the disintegration of the Pala

Empire, there broke out repeated invasions from the Rastrakuta-Pratihara-Chandella-

Kalachuris and Chola dynasties over the region held previously by the Palas. This

phase of turmoil might have spread over the regions of Manbhum67 forming a part of

south Bihar. The epigraphic records of Narayanpala, Rajyapala, Gopala II,

Vigrahapala II, and Mahipala I found from the region of south Bihar68 provides the

idea of linkages with the territory considered as Manbhum during the period

approximately from the second half of 9th century AD to the last phase of 10th century

AD or 854 AD to 988 AD69.

The history of Manbhum appears to be ‘certainly non-existent’ in the period

between 10th - 11th and 16th centuries AD70. On the ground of the absence of

significant epigraphic evidence, the records from the sati-stones, boundary-stones and

Virakalas may give some partial idea regarding the political configurations of the

100
region of Manbhum around the period of 10th century AD. The names of Raja-putra

Sri Vadadhuga or Chadadugha and Raja-putra Sri Atandri Chandra are engraved on

a ‘Sati stone’ and ‘Virakal Stone Slab’ found in the sculptural ruins of Budhpur

village probably belonged to the 10th century AD71. It may be such that a pre-mature

death came to the holders of these names who might be princes. The ‘virakal stone’

marks the death of a martyr for a noble cause72. There is another inscription engraved

on the boundary stone pillar discovered in Budhpur. It contains the meaning, ‘The

boundary flag of the Lord of the Five Mountains which one should not curtail’. Walsh

had found another memorial stone inscription from the debris of Boram/Deulghat

lying on the riverbank of the Kansabati in 191673. It is presently in the police station

of Jaypur of modem Purulia. This inscription, according to R.C. Majumdar74 and

Jawasawal, belonged to the 13th - 14th centuries AD. The epigraph highlights the

powerful crown prince, according to R.C. Majumdar, as ‘Mighty, undecaying and the

lord of the three worlds (is) the crown prince, the son of illustrious Rudra. Powerful

and undecaying is also the king on the Lion-throne’. In Ramacarita, the temporal lord

has been described as ‘samara-parisara-visarad-ari-raja-rajV and ‘Tailakampiya-

kalpa-tanf15.

In the Ramacharitam of Sandhyakarandin/Sandhyakara Nandi, during 11

century AD, the court poet of the Pala ruler Ramapala has given a list of chiefs and

feudatories-vassals, semi-independent and nominally independent who had helped

Ramapala (1077-1120 AD) to regain his ancestral kingdom from the rebel Kaibarttas.

The list in the Ramacharitam, included the name of Rudrasikhara, the ‘raja-raji’ of the

kingdom of Tailakampi76. Several scholars have identified Tailakampi with modem

Telkupi situated in the Damodar valley. It may be that the kingdom of Tailakampi

could thrive only in the ‘bad days’ of the Pala dynasty77 during the period of 11th

101
century AD. The assistance of Rudrasikhara was sought by ‘a scion of once-mighty

Pala dynasty’ to acquire the Varendri kingdom from the hold of the Kaivarta rulers.

However, an inscription in proto-Bengali characters found from Deulghat in Arsha

police station area, mentions the succession to the throne of the ‘illustrious king’ Sri

Rudra- Sikha by his crown prince78. On epigraphie grounds, R.C Majumdar prefers to

assign the inscription to the 13th -14th century AD. However, if Sri Rudra Sikha of the

Deulghat inscription is synonymous to the Rudrasikhara of the Ramacharitam, then in

all probability, his son could not be enthroned during 13th century; rather the period of

the kingship of Rudrasikhara’s son would not, most probably, be later than the second

half of the 12th century AD79. If the inscription of Rudrasikhara of Tailakampi/

Telkupi is found from Deulghat/Deulghata (Kansabati valley) it may be, probably,

that both the places, Tailakampi and Deulghat, were included within the territorial

jurisdiction of the king of Tailakampi during the period of the closing decades of the

11th century to that of the 12* century AD80. The archaeological remains of temples

from Telkupi also support the postulation. Before the inundation of the place under

the Panchet dam, more than twenty temples were there. On stylistic grounds and

based on the evidence found from a few retrieved inscriptions, the temples are

assignable to a period between the 11th century and the 13th century AD81. It may be

such that, regarding the ‘attributes’ the person Rudra described in the Boram stone

inscription and Rudra Sikhara of Ramacarita are identical82. In the form of prasasti,

the Boram stone inscription may be considered as ‘posthumous document’ on the

ground that the crown prince reigned sitting on the ‘Lion throne’ (Ramacaritam)

around 11th century AD but the tribute might be inscribed in the 13th century AD as

‘we do not know why and what was the occasion’83. It may be the son or the

102
descendants of the crown prince were on the throne that had extended the territory up

to south-west of Manbhum during 13th -14th century Ad84.

So far as the medieval history of Manbhum is concerned it remained under the

strong hold of the governors of the Ganga Kings of Orissa. The Turkish conquest in

the Gauda region during 1204 AD had little impact on the western part of the Radha

region or the southern valley of the river Damodar. No substantial evidence is

available to confirm that Turks were anywhere in this region until the year 1360

AD85. According to the texts of Sirat-i-Firuz-Shahi and Munshat-i-Mahru, the first

Turkish ruler, Sultan Firuz Shah Tughluq, set foot upon the region of modem

Purulia m order to subjugate the Gauda Sultan and to conquer the Hindu kingdom of

Jajnagar in Orissa in 1360. Accordingly, during this expedition, the Sultan marched

over Patchet (modem Panchet ). Eventually, the Sultanate burst upon Sikhar whose

identification is quite uncertain. There are scholars who prefer to relate this Sikhar

with the Sikharabhum Parganah (comprising the modem police stations of Santuri,

Nituria, Raghunathpur, Para and Kashipur, i.e., the north and north-eastern parts of

the modem Purulia district) of the 16th- 17th centuries AD. However, it will be more

pertinent to suggest that the name Sikhara might have derived from the name of the

ruler Rudrasikhara of Tailakampi. Rudrasikhara, in all probability, was one of the

earliest rulers and following the title, Sikhara, the name of the territory might have

originated . There are scholars who suggest that Tailakampi or the modem Telkupi

was the capital of the Raja of Sikhar. According to Sirat-i-Firuz Shahi, this Raja of

Sikhar was a significant ruler who had thirty-six minor chiefs under his hegemony and

his vassals were residing in the territory lying between the Damodar on the north and

the Kansabati on the south. It may be inferred that the southern region beyond the

river Kansabati of present day Purulia remained outside the administrative domain of

103
any ruler. This region of erstwhile Manbhum was a sparsely populated area with a few

tribal settlements having very low subsistence level and in ‘state-less’ ambience89.

According to Sirat-i-Firuz Shahi, following the decline of the agricultural

production, fabrication of crafts as well as trading activities in the valley regions of

the Damodar and the Kansabati in Manbhum laid to the curtailment of its

communication with the rest of northern and eastern India. Dalton90 perceived that the

decline in the agricultural production, manufacture of craft-goods and the trading

activities, during the 14th - 15th centuries, paved the way for: (1) deurbanization and

(2) retribalization of the Damodar-Kansabati zone91. The resultant effect lies in the

immigration of the Mundari-speaking Kolerian tribes into this region and the

emigration of the Brahmanical and the Jaina communities elsewhere.

The account of the Brahmanda section of the Bhavishya/Bhavishyat Parana,

compiled in 15th - 16th century AD, delineates grossly the nature of the territory of

Barahabhum/Varahabhumi, which bordered with Tungabhumi in one direction and

Sikhara Mountain in other. The area comprises Varahabhumi, Samantabhumi

(identified with the area under the modem Chhatna police station of Bankura), and

Manabhumi . This mountainous and densely forested area has a rich deposit of

minerals like copper, tin, iron, and the like. The inhabitants, according to the

Bhavishyat Purancr93, were mostly Rajputs and robbers by profession. The author

states, ‘... they eat snakes and all sorts of flesh, drink spirituous liquors and live

chiefly by plunder or the chase. As for women, they are, in grab, manners and

appearance, more like Rakshasis than human beings. The only objects of veneration in

these regions are mde village divinities’94. However, the administrative composition

of former Manbhum had quite often faced changes. In fact, during the British period,

104
the parganas of Sonamukhi, Indas, Kotulpur, Shergarh and Senpahari were

transferred to Barddhaman and Manbhum was added to Bankura. In 1879, the areas

under the Khatra, Raipur and Simlapal police stations were transferred from

Manbhum. The entire territory to the west of the modem Bankura-Raniganj road and

the Bankura-Khatra road belonged to Manbhum. Throughout the 19th century, the

entire region was subject to multiple administrative divisional changes.

Regarding the origin of Panchakot Raj and Patkum Raj, mythical stories95

have been manufactured to substantiate the Kshatriyaization of the dynastic rule of the

region concerned. There was an important fort at Pachet or Panchkot or Panchakot or

the Garh Panchakot, which was the seat of the Raja of Pachet. The duplicate

inscriptions in Bengali character found on the two gates of the Garh Panchakot attest

the date of the fort. This refers to a name, Vira Hamira, and gives a date of about

Samvat 1657 or 1659, i.e., 1600 AD (approx.). Vira Hamira is apparently Bir Hambir,

the Raja of Bishnupur or Vishnupur. There is a dearth of substantial document

regarding the actual builder of the fort. Another ambiguity is there whether the

construction of the fort ensured protection against both Vira Hamira and the

Muhammadans. However, the legends connected with the Malla family of Bishnupur

repeatedly mention about the extensive conquests and subjugation of the kings of the

neighboring territories by the Malla Raj Bir Hambir. During 16th- 17th centuries AD,

there was a parganah named Sikharbhum96. A specific reference to the Raja of

Panchakot is found in a royal Firman of 1632 or 1633 AD. Accordingly, Bir Narayan

was a commander of 300 horses and died in the sixth year was the Zaminder of

Panchet, a country attached to Subah Bihar. The record of AD 1658 declares that

Panchet zamindari was a fixed-tribute or peshkush paying zamindari unit

acknowledging the suzerainty of the Mughal Subahdar of Bihar. The Raja of Panchet

105
was a semi-independent ruler. The pressure of paying increasing peshkush, however,

might have compelled the Raja to depart the fort and remove the capital to Kashipur

around AD 170097. During the eighteenth century, the Raja, in all probability, had

extended his territory in the neighboring areas, now fall under the police station of

Jhalda. Based on the records of 1590 AD onwards, it seems that the territory to the

south of the river Kansabati remained outside the domain of the Panehet Raj. There

grew up two semi-feudal, independent Bhumij states, viz., the Barabhum Raj and the

Manbhum Raj. The Mughals also had hardly any control over those tracts of lands.

The political status of Panchakot changed from time to time. The East India Company

acquired the right over Panehet with the acquisition of Diwani of Bengal, Bihar and

Orissa. In 1770 AD, Birbhum, Panchakot and Bishnupur were combined together

forming one single revenue district under Alexander Higginson, the appointed

supervisor. In 1772, Panchakot was separated from the other two. At this time, Jhalda

was attached to Panchakot forming a separate revenue district. In the vicinity of the

Panchakot Raj, there were Barahabhum Raj and Manbhum Raj having their central

administrative units at Barabazar and Manbazar respectively. The Barahabhum

pargana was consisting ofBarabazar and Balarampur98.

The traditional account concerning the territories of Patkum, Ichhagarh,

Dulmi, and Dayapur is associated with the king VIkramaditya. It is popularly believed

that king Vikramaditya used to rub oilITaila at Tailakumpi and after worshipping the

deity the king went to Chhatapokhar at Dulmi for bathing99. Though there is no

epigraphic/numismatic/genealogical list behind this popular description, yet it

suggests that Patkum, Ichhagarh, Dulmi, and Dayapur comprised the kingdom of

Telkupi. King Vikramaditya may be associated either with the kingdom of Telkupi or

with that of Panchakot. It is also believed that king Rudra Sikhara might have

106
assumed the title of Vikramaditya100. At the same time, the extensive rains along the

bank of the river Subamarekha often suggest that the territory of Patkum was included

within the kingdom of Vikramaditya101.

The political history of Manbhum requires the mention of the role of the

neighboring polities and that of the Delhi Sultanate as well as the Mughals from time

to time. During 1590 AD, in order to conquer Orissa, there was a second campaign

led by Mughal Emperor Akbar’s general Raja Man Singh who was the Governor of

the Subah of Bihar. Hambir, the king of Bishnupur, was an ally of the Mughals.

Several temples at Para (e.g., the Radharaman temple), Telkupi and in some other

places were built and repaired by different persons under the viceroyalty of Man

Singh.

However, the local chiefs and Rajas were not always ready to accept the total

suzerainty of the Mughals. The Rajas of Panchet, Birbhum, and Hijli were there to

secure their own freedom over their respective domains while showing the gesture of

formal obligation to the superior Mughal authority. The Mughal armies were

repeatedly sent to conquer these territories. During 1608 AD, the local Raja of

Panchet, Bir Hambir surrendered before the Mughal Subahdar’s (in Bengal) superior

army. Bir Hambir also assisted the Subahdar in the war against Sham Khan, the local

Raja of Birbhum (whose seat was most probably in Dami Hill) and Salim Khan, the

masnad-i-ala of Hijli102. Although there are differences of opinion among the

historians like J.N. Sarkar103 and M.L. Borah regarding the relationship of Bir Hambir

and the Rajas of other local kingdoms. It is maintained that, Bir Hambir, the Raja of

Bishnupur, was also the contemporaneous ruler of Panchakot during the Mughal

expedition under Sheikh Kamal. Panchakot previously belonged to Manbhum. In the

contiguous bhum territories, there were important local Rajas, namely, the Rajas of

107
Manbhum, Panchakot, and Mallabhum. The Manbhum Raj included Manbazar and

the area presently within the police station of Banduan104. The Barahabhum pargana

comprised Barahabhum and some areas under the Chhatna police station in Bankura,

the Manbhum region of Purulia and the region of Dhanbad respectively105. The

identity of bhum territories can be discerned from early-medieval-medieval period, as

an entirety, in the Chhotanagpur region apparently in its eastern extension106. This

naturally wooded, rough and rugged tract of land had come, repeatedly, within the

influence of powerful dynasties. However, by and large, the clan or tribal or territorial

chiefs, local kings mid feudatories used to enjoy de facto suzerainty over this region

for a considerable period of time. Over this tract of land, the emperors of southern or

northern India were the nominal overlords of the local rulers. These local rulers used

to pay tributes and also contributed armed personnel unavoidably grossly

acknowledging the de jure suzerainty of the powerful monarchs like Devapala,

Mahipala I, Ramapala, Vallalsena, Sivakara I, Suvakara III, Anantavarmana

Chodaganga, Narasinghadeva I, and Narasinghaveva II respectively. The internal

local administration of the autochthon chiefs generally remained least affected by the

eventual armed-encounters among their overlords as well as the expeditions and

frequent changes of the latter taken place outside their domains. The architectural,

sculptural, and epigraphic documents confirm the establishments of settlements

having secular/religious affiliation.

There are a large number of relics of temples and sculptural specimens, found

in different areas of Manbhum, datable to the early-medieval period onwards. These

archaeological vestiges signal the presence of a rather comprehensive networking of

economic, commercial, socio-cultural, religious and ideological basics in the royal

temperament and among the subjects of the respective bhum territories lying in the

108
outskirts of the rugged Chhotanagpur plateau. There was predominantly the practice

of the Jaina faith along with the Puranic, Brahmanical order besides some local tribal

divinities. The presence of numerous temples and deities around 9th- 13th centuries

AD over a broader area obviously ensures, to some extent, socio-economic stability.

The presence of such variables like the surplus agricultural produce, economic

prosperity, collection of revenue in the royal exchequer, and the possibility of big

hands of the local merchants, i.e., the Jaina Sarak community ensured a somewhat

peaceful ambience to worship deities of different faiths in the temples in Manbhum

for a long span of years. Inscriptions of Telkupi significantly assert that temples were

built at the heart of the work places of people10'. The temples and deities of those

days reflect the impacts of Puranic Hinduism in the tract of modem Purulia. It,

nevertheless, reminds the intimate partnership between and among the local artisans,

sculptors and architects of Vanga, Varendra, Radha and Utkal in the vicinity. The

temples of Purulia bear the stylistic similitude of those of the Pala-Sena period. At the

same time, the Nagara-Sikhara temples at Manbhum mirror the Orissan mode of

architecture of those days108.

Colonel Dalton has ascribed the occurrences of ruined structures in different

areas along the riverbanks as the Jaina remains109. The occurrences of enormous

archeological relics in the form of religious, sculptural specimens, and architectural

members in the distinctive anthropo-geographic setting110 of Manbhum help historians

and archaeologists consider links between the underline politico-religious processes

and the art objects. The remains of stone sculptural artifacts at abandoned temple

complex and sculptural pieces of architectural members, stray occurrences, and other

remains have been found at Boram, Charra, Anaijambad, Ralibera, Palma, Pakbira,

Budhpur, Manbazar and so on. This empirical database made Chattopadhyay to

109
visualize a close attachment within the networks of settlements111 in the above-

mentioned places and their links with the external world through the roads. Beglar’s

theory of ‘trade links’ by virtue of the ‘great old road’ corroborate the influences of

what Chattopadhyay112 visualizes *... all the prosperous Jain settlements harbouring

temples and icons were established along the cardinal routes of procurement network

of metal minerals and other forest product’. According to Beglar113 the route,

connecting Benaras with the eastern extensions of the Chhotanagpur plateau region

passed through Pakbira, Budhpur (closed to Barabhum and Dulmi) crossed the river

Subamarekha (closed to Ranchi) and Palamau across the river Son at Benaras. There

were two great roads, one from Tamluk to Patna and another Tamluk to Benaras. The

cross road connecting the above great roads ‘started from Palganj, going through

Katras, Chechgaongarh, Para and Charra are striking the great Benaras road at Pakbira

and Budhpur’.

The Dudhpani inscription of Hazaribagh discloses the fact of trade related

networking developed between Manbhum (modem Purulia) and Hazaribagh and the

concerned hinterlands114. The evolution and consolidation of the trading patterns and

trading centers were, nevertheless, founded on the principal routes since 8th century

AD onwards115 linking the port city of Tamralipta/Tamluk and Magadha and many

intermediate zones including the western part of West Bengal, Jharkhand and Orissa

in the early-medieval period. The reference of Tamralipta as a major center of Jaina

ideology and a trading center has been there in the Kalpa-Sutra. There is the mention

of Charudatta engaged in the trade of cotton and cotton-thread and many other traders

going to Tamralipta from Utkala116. The evidence of the sculptural remains of Jaina

ideology and the temple ruins at Itkhori (Sighbhum) and miscellaneous Jaina artefacts

substantiate117 the involvement of the fringe areas of the Chhotanagpur plateau in a

110
wider pattern of trading network. Whenever the ‘great old roads’ cross the natural

obstacles of the river courses like the Silai river near Ghatal, Dwarikeswar in between

Bahulara and Ekteswar, the Damodar at Telkupi, the Barakar near Palgunj etc and the

hilly corridors near Rajauli and Rajgir it led to the emergence of several large city

points118in the concerned regions.

Behind the development of the Jaina ideology in Manbhum region

Chattopadhyay depicts the fact119 that the Jaina community, locally known as the

Saraks/Srawaks, lived on the non-farming ‘procurement network of metal and

minerals’ in Manbhum known as the resource-bearing zone of metal, mineral and

forests products. In this regard, it may not be out of context to mention the concept of

Risley120 that metalworking was a common and popular job and the work of iron

smelting was widely done by the Shalo group of people belonging to the Bhumij tribe

and the Asura community respectively in the non-farming areas concerned. Dalton121

holds that the glory of temple construction work went to the Sarak community.

According to Ball122, the Jaina (Sravaks/Serawaks) community was accustomed with

the copper mining activities concentrated in nearby Singhbhum territory.

Another significant aspect of the Jaina settlement in the region of Manbhum

has been pointed out by R.K. Chattopadhyay ‘... to trace the genesis of Jainism in

eastern India as a whole... we have very little scope to explain such issue

elaborately’. He mentions that in the region of Orissa, the Jaina ideology was

propagated under the patronage of Kharavela during the post-Mauryan period. During

the Gupta period, the advent of centralized power in the political realm called for the

inauguration of Brahmanism. Due to the predominance of Brahmanism, the Jaina

ideology ‘gradually shifted further eastwards ... the sites of Koluha Hills, Itakhori,

Dulmi, Katrashgarh, Cheehgaongarh etc ...,123.

Ill
 The scarcity of Buddhist artefacts in the above-mentioned tract attempts to

unfold the pragmatism of limited influence of the Pala dynasty, which was Buddhist

by faith, over the territory of Manbhum. The archaeological sites of the territory of

Manbhum have been discussed separately in the fifth chapter.

Gopabhum

The geo-political unit of Gopabhum flourished in a territory that seems to cover

the modem district of Barddhaman124. After the dissolution of the Gupta Empire,

many independent kingdoms came into existence in Bengal. The territory of

Gopabhum evolved in the undulating terrain (having rocky outcrops) constituting

Salimpur, Shergarh and Senpahari parganas. The Shergarh pargana lies between the

river Ajay and the river Damodar. The Salimpur pargana lies in the south-western

boundary125 of the present district of Barddhaman. A Sadgop ruling lineage can be

traced126 in Gopabhum. The area covering Senpahari and Salimpur was perhaps the

seat of this local Sadgop dynasty. Among different mlers, Raja Mahendra Nath,

locally known as Mahindi Raja, had his capital in Amaragarh. The remains of

fortifications of Amaragarh can be traced at several locations near the present railway

station of Mankar. Salimpur was probably the seat of the other branches of the

Sadgop kings. The administrators of the said dynasty might have their seats at

Bharatpur and Kanksa127 as several archaeological remains in Bharatpur and Kanksa

indicate likewise. This leads us to contemplate that the hegemony of the Sadgop kings

might have extended towards the east, the region of Mangalkote might be within the

realm of the Sadgop kingdom. This contemplation is with reference to the nature of

the findings from the excavated Mangalkote in the concerned period. The descendents

112
of the Sadgop dynasty became the chiefs of Bharatpur, which was on the bank of the

Damodar. The Sadgop kingdom existed under the Mughals and afterwards under the

Varddhamana Rajm. The Puranic reference to the territory of Varddhamana

(presently Barddhaman) is found in the text of the Kurmabibhaga section of the

Markandeya Parana, Skanda Parana and in the Brhatsamhita. The Markandeya

Parana and the Skanda Parana are supposed to have been composed in the 4th

century AD while the Brhatsamhita in 6th century AD. The Mallasarul inscription of

the 6th century AD also referred to die Varkkattaka Vithi of Vardhamanabhukti129.

While delineating the political history of Gopabhum, it may not be out of

context to regard Varddhamanabhukti as the focal point of study and Gopabhum was.

in all probability, within the territorial expansion of Varddhamanabhukti. To explain

the context, it is to be noted that after the disintegration of the Gupta Empire there

evolved several independent kingdoms. Among the most notable kingdoms were the

Pushyabhutis of Thaneswar, the Maukharis of Kosala/Oudh, the later Guptas of

Malwa and Magadha, Gauda and Vanga130. In Bengal, there had emerged two

significant kingdoms namely, Vanga and Gauda during 6th century AD131. The

independent kingdoms, which came into being in Bengal, were extended over the

region of the eastern and southern Bengal and the southern part of western Bengal

including the provinces of Vardhamanabhukti and Navyavakasika. The latter was also

known as Suvarnavithi132.

The inscriptions of the Gupta period mention three bhuktis in this area. They

were Pundravardhanabhukti, Vardhamanbhukti, and an unnamed bhukti, which

included Suvama-vithi and Navyavakasika. In the Pala and Sena records133, there is a

reference to the first two bhuktis, i.e., Pundravardhanabhukti, Vardhamanabhukti

along with five other bhuktis134. They are, namely, Tira-bhukti, Srinagara-bhukti,

113
Kankagrama-bhukti, Danda-bhukti, and Pragjyotisha-bhvkti. These bhuktis were the

constituent units of the Gauda Empire, which encompassed the regions of north Bihar

(Tira-bhukti or Tirhut), South Bihar {Srinagara-bhukti or Magadha-bhukti) and

Assam (Pragjyotisha-bhukti) besides the territory comprising present West Bengal

and parts of Bangladesh.

The term bhukti (the reference first found in the Gupta records), though

literally means allotment, generally applied to denote the biggest administrative unit

within a kingdom or empire135. There were minor bhuktis and a minor bhukti was

often viewed as mandala. A bhukti was usually ‘divided into smaller’ units, namely,
i-j£

vishaya, mandala or vithi . Apparently, there were subtle differences in vishqya,

mandala or vithi but the points of their internal differences were not always distinct.

In the Barrackpore Grant, Khadi is referred to as a vishaya131 while in the Sundarban

Plate of Lakshmanasena it was mentioned as a mandala. There existed different

smaller administrative units but confusion arises regarding the connotations of these

terms. It is evident in the Khalimpur Plate138 of Dharmapala where the

Mahantaprakasa-vishaya is mentioned as a part of the Vyaghratajt-mandala.

Similarly, it appears that the reference of Gokalika-mandala finds expression in the

Bangarh inscription as a part of the Kotivarsha-vishaya. Apart from this, according to

the Irda record of 10th century AD, Danda-bhukti, which was a mandala of the

Vardhamanabhukti was actually regarded as a constituting part of the former139.

The terms vishaya and mandala did not generally bear the meaning of bhukti.

In the colophon of a manuscript of the Ashlasahasrika Prognaparamita written in the

15th year of Ramapala, described Magadha vishaya. In fact, this Magadha vishaya

was styled as a bhukti found in a Nalanda seal inscription140. It may, perhaps be, as

such that Magadha vishaya was part of Magadha bhukti141.

114
 Apart from bhukti, vishya, and mandate, the word vithi did not find any

distinct reference in the Gupta period. However, by the term vithi it meant the

subdivisions of both the bhuhtis and the mandates. The other subdivisions of

mandates were subdivided into khandala, avritti, and bhaga. The avritti was again

subdivided into chaturakas and chaturakas were subdivided into patakas. In some

grants chaturakas were often mentioned as subdivisions of a mandate and patakas

were mentioned as the subdivisions of a bhaga. The pataka, being the one-half of a

grama or village, was considered to be the lowest administrative unit142.

Apart from the administrative units, the five Kotalipada inscriptions,

discovered at Faridpur and the Mallasarul inscription found in the police station of

Gaisi in the present district of Barddhaman, refer to the names of three rulers such as

Gopachandra, Dharmaditya, and Samacharadeva (gold coins were issued by him) of

Vanga and all of them used the title of Maharajadhiraja143. Raychaudhuri mentions

that there is another unpublished copper plate, found at Kurpala, which reveals that a

further grant was issued by Samacharadeva. The title of Maharajadhiraja symbolised

higher status and independence of these rulers in comparison to the autonomy enjoyed

by their predecessors like Maharaja Vainyagupta (507-08 AD). Maharaja

Vainyagupta was supposed to be the ‘last vestige of the imperial authority of the

Guptas over this region’144. Maharaja Vijayasena seemed to have established contacts

between Maharaja Vainyagupta and Maharajadhiraja Gopachandra. It appears that

Maharaja Vijayasena who, most probably, ruled over Vardhamanbhukti might be the

vassal chief under both Maharaja Vainyagupta and Maharajadhiraja Gopachandra

during 6th century AD onwards. Raychaudhuri assumes, ‘Vainyagupta ruled over

eastern, southern and western Bengal and that this imperial province of the Guptas

constituted an independent kingdom under Gopachandra and his successors’.

115
 The Mallasarul inscription of 6th century AD, the Irda Grant of 10th century

AD, and the Naihati and Govindapur Grants of 12th century AD145 delineate the

territory of Vardhamanabhukti146 comprising such areas like the valley of the river

Damodar, the Uttara-radha mandala and Dandabhukti-mandala. It therefore,

signified a large territorial division of Bengal. However, its limits changed with time.

Sometimes it was extended towards the north up to the river Mor, i.e., Mayuriakshi

and the Subamarekha in the south. During 10th century AD, the southern boundary

extended to the lower reaches of the Subamarekha. About middle of 12th century AD,

the northern boundary is known to have extended beyond the river Ajay to embrace

within the limits of the village of Vallahittha situated in the Uttara- radha mandala.

During the last quarter of the 12th century AD. Uttara-radha formed part of the

Kankagrama-bhukti It seems that the border was stretched in the north-south

direction from Murshidabad to Balasore including the area of Gopabhum. The literary

evidences from both the Markandeya Parana and BrhatsamMta suggest the existence

of Varddhamana as an administrative unit along with Suhmas and the Tamraliptas

during the 6th century AD, though the territorial boundaries of these units were not

distinctly defined. In the Skanda Purana and more particularly in the Kurmabibhaga

section of die Markandeya Parana (might have been compiled in the 4th century AD)

the reference to Varddhamana is provided along with Suhmas, Danturakas,

Gaudakas, and Tamraliptas around the 4th century AD147. This further confirms that

Varddhamana was a significant administrative unit, which had its existence prior to

the Pala period148.

In course of time, Varddhamanabhukti became the centre of a large territorial

division and it came to stand for the whole country lying to the west of the Bhagirathi.

During the 10th century AD, the Dandabhukti mandala, which is generally identified

116
with the areas now felling under the modem Medinipur district and Balasore of Orissa

were included within the administrative division of Varddhamanabhukti as attested by

the inscription of Nayapaladeva. It can be said that Uttar-radha and Dakshin-radha,

Suhma, Tamralipta, and all other geographical divisions lying on the west of the

Bhagirathi were incorporated in Varddhamanabhuktil49. The Radhadesa was

conceptually coterminous with Varddhamana. Mention of Radhadesa is found in old

Jaina treatises like Bhagavatisutra150 which refers to Ladha being one of the 16th

kingdoms of that time. The Govindapur copper plate, assignable to the 12th century

AD, mentions that Vetadda-chaturaka was situated within Vardhamanabhukti151. The

reference of the extension of the tract of Uttar-radha mandala is evident from the

Naihati copper plate inscription found from the village Naihati of the modem Katwa

subdivision in modem Barddhaman district. The Belava copper plate inscription of

Bhojavarman of the 11th - 12th century AD shows that Siddhala (presently being

Siddhalgram in the district of Birbhum) was included within Uttar-radha . The

Govindapur copper plate (12th century) of Laksmanasena bears the mention of

Vetadda-Chaturaka signifying Vetadda situated in the present district of Howrah,

which was also included in the Vardhamanabhukti . There are inscriptions, which

signify the territorial expansion of Dakshin-radha and the latter being an

indispensible unit of Vardhamanabhukti. The Gaonri Plates of Vakpati Munja of 981

AD154 and the Irda plate mention the inclusion of Dakshin-radha within

Vardhamanabhukti. It is to be noted that the reference to the Dandabhukti of Irda

iL

plate and Tandabhukti and Takkanaladam of the Tirumalai inscription of the 11

century AD are considered identical. Dakshin-radha, consisting of the landmass

covered by the modem districts of Howrah and Medinipur, extended up to the limits

of the present state of Orissa.

117
 The historical expedition of Rama Pala towards Orissa was possible as the

Radhadesa was under his suzerainty or under his vassals. Shortly after the demise of

Rama Pala, Vijayasena conquered Radha and the territories of Varman in the southern

and eastern Bengal. Historically, Radha-Varddhamana area was a part of the

Mauryan Empire and it remained a constituent part under such empires of northern

India, like the Kusanas and the Guptas consecutively.

According to the Mallasarul inscription155, under the suzerainty of

Maharajadhiraja Gopachandra, land grant was prepared by Maharaja Vijayasena.

Maharaja Vijayasena was, in fact, an independent king as he retained die authority of

using his own seals and prepared land grants to his subjects. According to the small

inscription of Chandravarman, found in the region of the Susunia hill of the district of

Bankura, Chandravarman was the king of Radha and as per the Allahabad Pillar

inscription, Samudra Gupta ousted him. The western part of Bengal remained under

the Gupta dominion from 335 to 473 AD. According to die Nalanda seals, Skanda

Gupta (467-473 AD) had a brother named Puru Gupta and his three sons were Buddha

Gupta, Vainya Gupta and Narasimha Gupta. Vainya Gupta became the governor of

Radhadesa. The Gunaighar copper plate of Vainya Gupta, 507-08 AD, showed that he

bore the title of a provincial Governor, i.e., the title of Maharaja. However, from the

Nalanda copper plates it is evident that the Maharajadhiraja label of Vainya Gupta

signifies that he became a strong ruler after the demise of Buddha Gupta, the imperial

ruler of Radhadesa156. For the worship of Lord Buddha, land was granted by means of

the Gunaighar grant. Maharajasamanta Vijaysena was the executor of this Gunaighar

land grant and the Mallasarul grant. Avalokitesvara monastery was erected in order to

show respect for the Buddhist monk Santideva, the founder of the Vaivartika

congregation of monks. By means of the Mallasarul grant some land was granted in

118
the Vardhamanabhukti and the area came under the authority of Gopachandra. It,

later, belonged to die dominions of Dharmadilya and Samachardeva most probably

during 525-575 AD. According to the Irda copprer plate, there was an independent

kingdom of the Kamboja dynasty situated in southern Radha, which belonged to

Varddhamanabhukti. Since the 9th century AD, the territory of Vanga, (Abu’l-Fazl

mentioned that Vanga or Vangala as one and the same; originally it was Bang and the

addition of die suffix-a/, the name, Bengal, came into being)157 was segmented into

such parts like Dakshina (or South) Radha and Uttara (or North) Radha15*. Uttara-

radha or Uttiraladam under the Chola inscriptions of the Ganga King Devavarman is

being acknowledged by such inscriptions like the Indian Museum Plates159 probably

of the 9th century AD, the Belava Grant and the Naihati grant160.

As per the Bhaturia plate and the Irda plate, the region of southern Radha

denoting Suhmabhumi or Varddhamana actually passed into the hands of the Pala

dynasty either during the reign of Gopala II or his son Vigraha Pala II. According to

the Tirumalai inscription of Rajendra Chola, the Dandabhukti (Dantan area of

Medinipur) king Dharma Pala was defeated by Rajendra Chola. The areas of Daksina-

radha, Uttara-radha, and Vangala were conquered by him. Although the kings of

different segments of Varddhamana of this period can hardly be traced yet it is held

by the Tirumalai inscription that Lakshmisura was the king of Daksina-radha. At the

same time, according to Ramacharitam, the Sura dynasty was reigning in Apara-

Mandara, i.e., Garh Mandaran in the district of Hooghly. Mention of Ladha is found

in the Jaina Acharangasutra161 in 4th century BC, which refers to its division into

Vajjabhumi or Vajrabhtmi and Subbhabhumi or Suhmabhumi This sort of

segmentation of the area was apparently replaced during the 9th century AD when

Radha was subdivided by Dakshina (or South) radha and Uttam (or North) radha.

119
Afterwards, mentions of Vanga and Gauda have been found in the Baroda plates of

Karkaraja162 in 811-12 AD. The existence of Vanga as a politico-administrative unit

during 814-877 AD has been referred by the Nilgund inscription163 of the Rashtrakuta

monarch, Amoghavarsha I. Similarly, as a viskya or district the reference of Gauda

has been found in the Kanheri inscription164 of the same monarch in 814-877 AD.

Gopabhum, in all probability, was a later development and it was only a part

of Varddhamanabhukti. However, the genesis of Gopabhum can be traced from the

time of Gopachandra. Evidently, the administrative setup and the settlement hierarchy

that developed in this region in the post-Gupta period can be considered as the

foundation on which later socio-political developments related to Gopabhum and

Sikharabhum started taking their shapes. Direct testimony to this fact is borne out by

the Ramganj Copper plate of Isvaraghosha of later Pala period during which the

formation process of the aforementioned geo-political units were initiated. This

particular inscription165 refers to the grant of a village Digghasodika, belonging to the

Gallitipyaka vishaya of the Piyolla mandala by Mahamandalika Isvaraghosha to a

Brahmin Bhatta-Nibbokasarman, who emigrated from Chandavara. The provenance

of this issue according to this testimony is Dbekkari, variously identified by the

historians. H.P. Sastri is of the opinion that it can be identified with the site of

Gourangapur in the Aushgram police station. According to other historians, Dhekkari

is the modem village of Pratappur on the right bank of the Ajay. The inscription was

originally found in the vicinity of Ramganj, in the police station of Ranisankail of the

undivided Dinajpur district sometime before 1833. For a considerable period, it was in

the custody of Maldwar Raj family. Later on, the readings of Bachha Jha and A.K.

Maitra were compared by N.G. Majumdar166.

120
 The implication of the title, Mahamandalika, assumed by Isvaraghosha

deserves consideration. In this context, the observation made by A.K. Maitra is

significant According to him, Dhekkari was a seat of the Samantas or a vassal king

under the Palas and these Samantas were known as Mandaladhipati. Thus, there

should be no hesitation to assume that the reigning king Isvaraghosha under the title

of Mahamandalika was actually a vassal king under the Pala rule. Binoy Ghosh

inferred that during die rule of Pala ruler Mahipala I several foreign invasions by

Chola and Kalachuri rulers were responsible for the political upheavals in this region.

In all probability, under this situation, one of the vassal kings of Pala dynasty, i.e.,

Isvaraghosha asserted his power. R.C. Majumdar stated that ‘there can be hardly any

doubt that chiefs like Isvaraghosha were independent rulers for all practical purposes,

though they did not openly assume royal epithet’167. Nevertheless, Majumdar

preferred to place this inscription in the eleventh century AD about the time of the

rule of Pala king, Vigrahapala III. On palaeographic grounds, this inscription is

datable to the later Pala period. In reconstructing the socio-political situation of that

particular period this inscription has enough relevance. Firstly, it refers to at least

fifty-four types of administrative officers. Of these, R.C. Majumdar enlisted the name

of twenty-three officials, not met with any other records of Bengal. Some of them

definitely acquired a higher status in die contemporary administrative system. Five of

the enlisted names, according to Majumdar, were ‘palace officers’. In his words,

‘Mahatantradhikrita, probably the High-Priest in charge of religious rites, Maha-

karanadhyaksha, probably the chiefof the Secretariat, Sirorakshika, probably the chief

of the royal body guard, and Antahpratihara and Abhyantarika, both evidently

connected with the harem of the king’. Secondly, the list of officials also refers to one

woman administrator (rajni) which according to Majumdar ‘does not figure in similar

121
lists of even a single record of the Pala kings’. Interestingly, the mention of such class

of administrators was prevalent in the records of Chandras, Varmans, Kambojas, and

Senas. Further research to figure out the actual significance for such addition is a

desideratum. Thirdly, the donee of the land grant is said to have been emigrated from

a place called Chandavara, which according to N.G. Majumdar is same as modem

Chandwar near Etawa in U.P. If this postulation of Majumdar is accepted, then this

information definitely elucidates the social composition of the region. The study of

the ethno-history also substantiates the fact that the Brahmanas from middle Ganga

plain outnumbers the Radhi Brahmanas even today.

However, it is maintained that Isvaraghosha/iswar Ghosh has been depicted as

Ichhai Ghosh in the lyrics of Mangalakavya . According to Paschimbanger

Samskriti169, Iswar Ghosh of Dhekur can be identified as Ichhai Ghosh who was the

independent vassal king of the Gopa dynasty170. Authors like Harekrishna

Mukhopadhaya and Prabodh Kumar Chattopadhaya maintained that Arah gram might

be known as Radhapuri. Radhapuri was the kingdom of ancient Radha, and here

Radhadhip had built a colossal Siva temple which is still extant. This Siva deity is

acknowledged as Radhesvar Siva. Dhekur was the seat of Isvaraghosha / Iswar Ghosh

and he was the head of 63 forts, i.e., ‘Trisasthigarh’ consisting of Amrargarh,

Panagarh, Rajgarh, Balagarh, Shergarh, Dishergarh, Udaygarh etc. In a war against

Lausen, the general of the Gauda, Iswar Ghosh was defeated. He was a humble

devotee of the tantric goddess Shyamarupa and he established Shyama Rupargarh,

which is popularly known as Dhekur or the Trisasthigarh171.

Subsequently, the branches of the dynasties spread towards Dignagar, Kanksa,

Bharatpur and Mangalakote. There were other such Rajas of Gopabhum like, Raja

Pratap Singh and Raja Harish Chandra. However, Harish Chandra, Raja Mahendra
122
and others were capable of maintaining independent rule of the Gopa dynasty. When

the Muslim invaders entered Bengal the Gopa kings could not escape it. When the

Marathas started attacking in 1742-1751, the last Gopa king, probably Baidyanath,

was killed. When Varddhaman Raj Chitra Sen attempted to include Gopabhum in

1744, it was supposed to be the signal of the final collapse of the independence of

Gopabhumm.

Mallabhum

Mallabhum was situated in the heartland of the Radha region173 in Bengal, i.e.,

the eastern fringes of the Chhotanagpur plateau. On the undulating landscape there

evolved a series of bhumsm or principalities175 or Rajyas. Among them, Mallabhum

emerged as a powerful176 kingdom in western Bengal. It was ruled by the local rulers

of the Malta dynasty177. Geographically, Mallabhum was bordered by the territories

of Sikharbhum and parts of Senbhum and Surbhum in the north. To its east was

Gopabhum. Brahmanbhum was situated south of Mallabhum. Tungbhum was in the

south-west and Barabhum and Manbhum were to the west of Mallabhum11*.

Mallabhum or Mallabhumi or Mallabani or Mallamahi119 constituted the major part

of the modem district of Bankura180. It consisted of such areas, which are now under

the police stations of Bankura town (excepting the Chhatna outpost), Onda,

Bishnupur, Kotulpur, and Indas181. The Malta kings had occupied some territorial

parts of Sikharbhum and its capital Panchet. The local chiefs of Singhbhum,

Manbhum, Bagbhum, Brahmanbhum, Bhawalbhum, and Nagbhum accepted the

authority of the Malta rajas in different points of time. The raja of Surbhum was

considered as one of the Samanta rajas of Mallabhum1*1. The Malla rajas extended

123
their boundary by acquiring the territories of modem Damin-i-Koh in Santal

Parganas, some parts of present East and West Medinipur and a part of the eastern

section of modem Barddhaman183. Bishnupur was the capital of the Malta

principality184, which evolved on the forest-clad hilly ranges and on the flood plains

of the river Ajay, Damodar, Silavati, Kansabati, Subamarekha and many other

tributaries185.

As mentioned earlier, there is a dearth of information regarding the emergence

and formation of political structure186of the bhum territories of the Chhotanagpur

plateau. In the Ramacharita of Sandhyakamandi187, there is a mention of seven

principalities in the forest territories of south-west Bengal and Jharkhand. According

to this literary evidence, Mallamahi, the land of the Mallas, was ruled by the Malta

princes since the 8th century AD onwards188. The epigraphic record refers to the Malta

dynasty of the 16th century AD. The Mallabhum Raja was often known as the Bagdi

Raja of Bishnupur. The tribe Mai was the neighbor of the Bagdi tribe. These two

tribes were intimately connected with each other. The Bagdis are that part of the Mats

who had internalized different dimensions of civilization. Bishnupur was the seat of

the Malta ruling authority for many centuries. They assumed the title of Singh not by

descent. The genealogical account of the Singh dynasty of Bishnupur has been

outlined by R.C. Dutt and W.B. Oldham. These scholars have investigated the

genealogical basis of the Malta dynasty from the chronicles preserved by the

Bishnupur Raj family. Oldham189 delineates that among the Bagdis, the Mallas, (the

cognate group of the Mals) were respected as their supreme lord. In this regard, Dutt

holds that ‘they had a story made out about their respectable royal descent when they

became powerful in western Bengal and assumed Hindu civilization’. The exact date

of the beginning of the rule of the autochthon princes can hardly be predicted though

124
its genesis can be assignable prior to the advent of the Islamic rule in Delhi. Their

history and long independence worked as the seal of their Kshatriyahood. To trace the

genealogy of the Malta dynasty it appears that Raghunath Singh was the founder king

of the Bishnupur Raj. According to Hunter190, the parentage of Raghunath Singh can

be traced from the kings of Jainagar near Vrindavan. A brief account of the legendary

story refers to the king of Jainagar, father of Raghunath Singh, who had once set out

for Purushottam. On his way while passing through Bishnupur a male child was bom

from his wife. The king left behind both die mother and child and went away.

Kasmetia Bagdi, one aboriginal (Kusputra sub-cast) inhabitant, not getting any trace

of the baby’s mother took the newborn and looked after him until he was seven years

old. Afterwards a Brahman driven by the attractive features of the boy took interest on

Raghu and after many incidents the boy was enthroned by an elephant and the people

at large applauded the event as the grace of the god and the ministers also agreed to

make him their king. This is how Raghunath Singh became the founder king of his

dynasty in Bishnupur191. ‘The Mallas claim to be Kshatriya’192. There is a mythical

link found between the autochthon rulers and the ‘kshatriyah’ norms being brought

about by the Brahmanical agency in an unknown time and the provision of providing

virtual legitimacy to the newly conceived dynasty replacing the Bagdi Rajas of the

region. ‘... the chronicles of origin do not help us to ascertain whether the Malla rajas

were originally Bagdi or descended from a high bom Kshatriya family....the Malla

rajas operated in a situation where both the heritage of the indigenous social and

cultural forces as represented by the tribals and the lower castes and the influence of

the organized and systematized social order flourishing on the ideology of Smarta

Puranic Brahmanism had strong relevance ... The chronicles of origin provides

insight ... of the process of how the Malla rajas evolved the balance and to what

125
extent they succeeded in maintaining the balance. These are the central problems in

the history of MaHabhum’193. The legendary story, perhaps, appears as a device to

fulfill the missing link of transferring the authority and culture from the hands of the

aboriginal people to the persons holding the surname of North-Indian ruling dynasty

also importing the cultural outlook in a forest-clad tribal tract remaining almost

beyond the Gangetic influence.

The above legendary story appears different from the pundit’s chronicle

as provided in the Statistical Account of Barddhaman. In the Annals of Rural

Bengal, W. W. Hunter (holds that a Puri bound North-Indian pilgrim prince,

while crossing a dense forest at Laugram, six miles away from Kotalpur, had

made an arrangement with a Brahman, named Panchanan. The king kept his wife

to him and the lady gave birth to a male child. The mother and the child remained

there at Laugram under the care of one Kayasth, named, Bhagirath Guha194. At

the age of seven the boy was sent by the Brahman for an employment as a

cowherd. The boy exhibited his skill in art and different magical incidents

attached with the boy made the Brahman to introduce him with the Raja of

Panchamgarh and ‘earned for him the sobriquet of Adi Malta, the unique

wrestler. With the achievement of the favour of the Raja of Padampur, a place in

the vicinity of the modem village of Jaypur and eight miles away from Laugram,

Adi Malta first became the chieftain, received the grant of Laugram and the

nearby villages and became the Raja of Padampur. Raja Adi Malla waged war

against the neighbouring chief Pratap Narayan of Jotbihar and enlarged the

perimeter of his own territory. Raja Adi Malta had his reign over Laugram for

thirty-three years. He was succeeded by his son Jay Malla who made a greater

expansion of his territory and shifted his capital to Bishnupur. According to the

126
fragmentary account of the rulers of Bishnupur, O’Malley, mentions that the

fourth ruler was Kalu Malla, the sixth was Kau Malla, the seventh was Jhau

Malla, and the eighth was Sur Malla'95. These Rajas were credited for expanding

their territories progressively. However, the names of the following Rajas were

not mentioned in O’Malley’s account ‘as their reigns are barren in interest’.

According to the family chronicle, Dhar Hambir was the 49th ruler who ruled in

1586 AD (993 BS). According to Amiya Kumar Bandyopadhyay, Adi Malla was

bom in the year 695 AD. Abhoypada Mallik has furnished an elaborate list , of

the names of the Malla Rajas who reigned the kingdom of Mallabhum in

different points of time. Raghunath was the wrestler of Laugram and was called

upon by Nrisingha Deb, the ‘paramount’ king of Praddumnapur, nearly 16 mile

west of Laugram. The kingship of Laugram and the adjoining villages was

granted to Raghunath. The raja of Praddumnapur appointed Raghunath, the Adi

Malla to subdue the rebel chief of Jotbihar, Pratapnarayan. Adi Malla was able to

increase his influence and extended the periphery of his principality over

Kotulpur and Indas under the guidance of his ministers who belonged to the

family of Bhagirath Guha. This Malla chief and his wife, a Kshatriya lady, named

Chandrakumari had four sons. According to the literary account, the eldest son of

Adi Malla and Chandrakumari, Joy Malla191, after the death of his father in 709

AD, became the chief and he was engaged in constructing the Dandeswari

temple. Local myths associated with this place bespeaks about the fact that the

shrine was in a place where a serpent once raised its hood over Joy Malla. In his

kingdom this ‘petty king’ had invited his father’s friends and relations and there it

is found that Panchanan became the family priest198. Joy Malla, was a brave

person who with the assistance of the Santals became powerful enough to subdue

127
the raja of Praddumnapur and subsequently he transferred his capital to

Praddunmapur. He practiced the Brahmanical custom of worshipping ‘the flag of

Indra’ in his coronation ceremony199.

Kalu Malta, the fourth king, after defeating the neighboring chief

extended his kingdom and acquired the area presently denoting Indas200. During

the kingship of the 6th king of the Malla dynasty, Kakta was conquered. Sura

Malta conquered Bagri, a pargana situated to the north of Medinipur. The 12th

king annexed Kharagpur, a part of the present undivided Medinipur. This tract

came to be known after the name of the chiefKharga Malla. There is no concrete

evidence and traditional accounts differ regarding the shifting of the capital from

Praddumnapur to Bishnupur201. The inscription lying on the Sandeswar temple

dated 1335 AD (641 ME) attests to the fact that the setting up of the Bishnupur

capital may not be earlier than the 14* century AD202.

.i OA'3
Jagat Malla, the 19 king, reigned for thirteen years . According to

Hunter’s Rural Bengal Appendix-C, the capital city was gracefully built up with

white stones. There were theatre halls, dressing rooms, living rooms within the

palace along with temples, store houses, treasury, armouries, barracks for

soldiers, stables for elephants etc. There is ambiguity regarding the construction

of the palace with white stones204. Merchants and traders were also invited to

their establishments205. However, his kingship finds attachment with Ramai

Pandit - the composer of Shunya Purand^b and the ‘propagator of the worship of

Buddha under the guise of Dharma’ in a place near modem Moinapur207.

The king Rama Malta208 was a renowned king of the 13th century AD who

was enthroned after Jagat Malla. The king Rama Malla ruled the kingdom for 23

128
years. He introduced the practice of special uniforms for soldiers, perfection in

arms, improvement in the arrangements in forts etc.

Shib Singha Malla was the next important king who was responsible for

uplifting the glory of Bishnupur as a ‘great centre of music’209.

Dhari Malla was the 49th king of Mallabhum. He was a powerful raja

who could maintain his independence in lieu of paying one lakh seven thousand

rupees to the Nawab of Murshidabad. However, the Malla rajas were not regular

in payment210. Beera Hambeera, the ‘greatest king’211 of the Malta dynasty was

the son of Dhari Malla. In his rule of 48 years, he became the ally of the Mughal

Emperor Akbar’s generals Man Singh and Jagat Singh. The Malla king rescued

Jagat Singh212. During his rule he introduced a better organization of army in a

feudal line; he also increased the number of soldiers and improved the structure

of fortification213. Beera Hambeera was a follower of Vaishnava ideology and

Vaishnavism came to prominence under his kingship in Bishnupur214. He brought

from Brindaban a ‘new Vaishnava idea’215 for the naming of water reservoirs

(Jamuna, Kalindi, Shyam Kundu, Radha Kundu) and villages (Dwaraka, Mathura

etc)216. He introduced the festivals like Rash, Dole217. The king visited Brindaban

and there he passed away218.

Prithvi Malla, the 37th king of Bishnupur, built the Sandeswar temple in

641 ME, i.e., in the early years of the fourteenth century AD219. In 755 ME, Patia

Malla had built the Jagannath temple near Shyamkunda, situated in the north of

the royal palace220. The temple Mrinmoyee was built in 907 ME.

Ramai Pandit introduced ‘Dharma Puja’221. The ‘Paddhati’ introduced by

Ramai Pandit is followed in different parts of Bengal222. Before the introduction

129
 of Vaishnavism, the Dharma puja was introduced in Mallabhum during the

period of Ramai Pandit223.

The Malta rajas, during the later phase of their rule in Mallabhum,

emerged more as an ally than as independent chiefs under the superior forces of

Murshidabad. This is due to the fact, that latter had more hold over the rajas of

Birbhum and Barddhaman in comparison to Mallabhum224.

Beera Singha was succeeded by Durjan Singha in 174 ME (868 AD). He

built the temple of Madan Mohan and the idol is presently worshipped in the

Mitra family in Bag Bazar225. Raghu Nath Singha II became the king in 1008 ME

(1702 AD) and defeated the rebel Shova Singha. He brought an ‘accomplished’

Muslim lady, Lai Bai, from the palace of Shova Singh. The lady had a great

influence on the king. On the occasion of the conversion of the religion of the

king, the king Raghu Nath Singha II was murdered. There are different opinions

regarding the death of the king, his own queen and Lai Bai226.

Mallabhum came under direct contact with the Mughal administration since

the expedition of Raja Man Singh, the Subahdar of Bengal and the general of

Emperor Akbar. The degree of impact of the Mughal administrative pressure on the
♦ft

autochthon principalities like Mallabhum was felt from the end of the 16 century to

the early decades of the 17th century in turning them into ‘p&sMas/z-paying vassals’ or

‘ghair amli zamindarsHowever, Mallabhum did not confront any direct intervention

from the Mughal governors, be it the subahdars or nawabs. Thus, when Shah Suja

became the governor of Bengal the total amount payable, as peshkash, jointly by

Mallabhum and some other principalities, was Rs. 59,146 as revealed by the revised

revenue roll for the province of Bengal prepared in the year 1658 AD227. The amount

of tribute, although, was fixed at Rs. 17,806228. However, during the reign of Raja

130
Gopal Singha (1710-48 AD) at Mallabhum, Holwsll, during his visit to Mallabhum at

that time, observed that, the Raja had enjoyed the discretion to fix the amount of the

tribute, which varied in between Rs. 15,000 to Rs. 20,000 respectively229. However, to

control such financial pressure, the Rajas of Mallabhum had to render occasional

military service to the Mughals. Being forced by the Mughals, Raja Raghunath Singh

II (c. 1696-1710 AD) had to direct a campaign against the rebellion planned by Shova

Singh and his brother Hemmat Singh in 1701 AD. However, by the early decades of

the 17 century and 18 century, by means of the decree or ‘imperial furman’ the

Mughal power did not restrict itself only in the receipt of peskash but in the

accomplishment of converting most of the peshkash principalities into ithiman

zamindari, i.e., large zamindari which was liable to lump sum annual payment. By

means of the launching of the revenue reform, Murshid Quli Khan sought the

reduction of the autonomous status of Mallabhum from the position of the tributary

principality by attaching it with the Chakla (i.e., the new financial division introduced

by him) of Barddhaman230. By means of this measure, the demand on Mallabhum, all

on a sudden, increased to Rs. 1, 29,80s231. However, all these measures were not put

into effect. The Raja of Mallabhum continued to enjoy the privilege of paying the

previous amount of the tribute and he had the exemption to visit the court of the

governor personally. However, the measures of giving him the title deed and bringing

the Raja of Mallabhum in a regular fiscal division were considered to be the methods

of putting pressure on him by eroding his status of a tributary vassal state which was

‘the chastisement of the zamindar of Bishnupur’. The demand for peshkash from

Mallabhum was in a fluctuating mode, as it was in 1658 AD Rs. 59,146 (along with

other few principalities), in 1762 AD it was Rs. 1,36,045 (including additional levy).

After the acquisition of the Dewani of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa in 1765 AD, the

131
demand for peshkash was Rs. 1, 61,044 in 1766 AD and it was increased arbitrarily at

Rs. 2,10,001 (Rs. 48,957 was added to it)232.

Since the end of the 17th century, the relationship between the Mughal

governor and the Bishnupur Raj faced gross changes. It is evident that initially, during

16th- 17th centuries AD, the Mughal governors did not interfere much into the affairs

of the autochthon principalities like Mallabhum, which emerged as a major Rajya.

‘The chiefs of... Vishnupur, covered by a Hindu dynasty ... was founded in eighth

century and endured until the eighteenth ...,233. However, the Barddhaman zamindari,

which was situated on the east of Mallabhum began to stretch its boundary often

forcibly towards north, i.e., in Senbhum and towards south, i.e., to Brahmanbhum and

beyond it in Bagri and Gopabhum and Chitua-Barda which were situated on the south

of Mallabhum. This expansionist attitude of the zamindar of Barddhaman has an

obvious support in the form of grant from the Mughal authority. Thus the Mughal

overlords sought to boost up the power position of the zamindars of Barddhaman and

Kamagarh who occupied the position of ‘Chaudhuri’ and were in-charge of collecting

revenue from the smaller zamindars of the adjoining areas. The estate of the Raja of

Kamagarh concentrated in areas lay south of Mallabhum and was in charge of

collecting revenue from such zamindars of Chhatna, Supur, Ambikanagar, Dhalbum,

Barabhum, Manbhum, Shyamsundarpur and Fulkusma. Thus, in the beginning of the

18th century, Mallabhum came to be surrounded by the powerful Mughal officials,

i.e., zamindars and Chaudhuries of the neighbouring territories.

The Bishnupur Raj, the natural leaders of their people234 was capable of

maintaining their independence even when Delhi went under the control of the alien

Muslim power. The Malla (the wrestler) Rajas with the help of the natural

environment of the impenetrable sal wood and the rapid current of the extensive

132
Damodar River was able to maintain a native socio-economic and cultural network by

themselves for centuries. The advent of the Muslim rulers in Delhi and afterwards the

Mughal annexation of Bengal hardly provided any impact on the fertile plain of

Mallabhum in the initial phases. Subsequently, the potentates of Delhi began to

extend their power over the region of Murshidabad and thereby generated a more

effective control over the Rajas of Barddhaman. Under the pressure of this external

ambience and the demand for increased peshkash, the social base of the Malla rajas

started shrinking235. The Bishnupur Raj ws gradually brought under the influence of

the Rajas of Barddhaman. The force of the superior power base over the Malla raj

began to increase day by day. Allied with it, the incessant Maratha raids had been

there over the territory lying between Birbhum and Medinipur during period between

1740-1748 AD. It was the ‘havoc caused by the Marathas’ could finally bring the end

of the Bishnupur Raj by reducing it to a mute spectator of history.

133
Map VIII: Location of Mallabhum and some other adjacent bhums (after H. Sanyal).
REFERENCES

1. Sinha, S. (ed.) (1987) Tribal Polities and State Systems in Pre-Colonial

Eastern and North Eastern India, p. ix. CSSS. Calcutta.

2. Acharya, P. (1945) ‘A Note on the ‘Bhum’ Countries in Eastern India.’ 1C,

Vol. Vffl, p. 46.

3. Sanyal, H. (1987) ‘Mallabhum.’ In, Sinha, S. ed. Tribal Polities and State

Systems in Pre-Colonial Eastern and North Eastern India, p. 73. Calcutta.

4. Acharya, P. (1945) op. cit., p. 38.

5. Ibid., p. 37.

6. Acharya, P. (1969) Studies in Orissan History, Archaeology and Archives, p.

470. Cuttack.

7. Singh, R.L. (ed.) (1971) India: A Regional Geography, p. 649. Varanasi.

8. Sinha, S. (ed.) (1987) op. cit., p. xx.

9. Acharya, P. (1945) op. cit., p. 37.

10. Stirling, A. (1904) An account of Orissa proper or Cuttack. Bengal Secretariat

edition. Calcutta, p. 22.

11. Acharya, P. (1945) op. cit., p. 45.

12. Ibid., p. 46.

13. Stirling, A. (1904) op. cit., p. 22.

14. Chattopadhyay, R.K. and Acharya, D. (2010) ‘Contexts of Early Mediaeval

Remains of Purulia: Researching Ideologies.’ Pratnatattva. Vol. 16. June. p. 9.

15. Sanyal, H. (1987) op. cit., p. 73.

16. Chattopadhyay, R.K. (2010) Bankura: A Study of its Archaeological Sources.

p. 155. Kolkata.

17. Fried, M. (1967) The Evolution ofPolitical Society. New York. pp'231-242

134
18. Sanyal, H. (1987) op. cit., p.73.

19. Ibid.

20. Ibid.

21. Acharya, P. (1945) op. cit., pp. 40-45.

22. Ibid., p. 39.

23. Mukhopadhyaya, D.N. (1932) ‘The Gupta Era’. IHQ, Vol. VIII, (First Reprint

1985), p. 138. Delhi.

24. Acharya, P. (1945) op. cit., pp. 40-41.

25. Ibid., p. 41.

26. Ibid.

27. Ibid., p. 42.

28. Ibid., pp. 43-45.

29. Ibid., p. 43.

30. Blochmann, H. (1873) ‘Contribution to the Geography and History of Bengal

(Muhhamadan Period)’. JASB, Vol. XLQ, Pt. 1, p. 224.

31. Kielhom, F. (1979) ‘Kudopala Plates of the Time of Maha-Bhavagupta II’. El,

Vol. IV (1896-97), pp. 254-55. New Delhi.

32. Cited in Acharya, P. (1945) op. cit., p. 42.

33. Ibid., p. 43.

34. Dalton, E.T. (1872) Descriptive Ethnology ofBengal, pp. 175-76. Calcutta.

35. Acharya, P. (1945) op. cit., p. 42.

36. Raychaudhuri, H.C. (1943) ‘Physical and Historical Geography.’ In,

Majumdar, R.C. ed. The History ofBengal, Vol. 1, Chapter I, p. 9. Dacca.

37. Acharya, P. (1945) op. cit., p. 37.

38. Ibid.

135
39. Raychaudhuri, H.C. (1943) op. cit., p. 9.

40. Chakrabarti, M. (1910) ‘Notes on the Geography of Old Bengal’. JPASB, New

Series, Vol. IV, pp. 285-86. Calcutta.

41. Raychaudhuri, H.C. (1943) op. cit, p. 21.

42. Ibid., p. 22.

43. Bhattacharya, B.K. et al. (1985) Gazetteer ofIndia: West Bengal: Puruliya. p.

74. Calcutta.

44. Mukhopadhyay, S.C. (1983) Glimpses of the History of Manbhum. p. 25.

Calcutta.

45. Ibid.

46. Coupland, H. (1911) Bengal District Gazetteers: Manbhum. p. 50. Calcutta.

47. Bhattacharya, B.K. et al. (1985) op. cit, p.74.

48. Ibid.

49. Ibid., p.75.

50. Mukhopadhyay, S.C. (1983) op. cit, p. 25.

51. Ibid.

52. Bhattacharya, B.K. et al. (1985) op. cit., p.75.

53. Ibid.

54. Ibid.

55. Ibid., p. 25.

56. Raychaudhuri, H.C. (1943) op. cit., pp. 20-21.S

57. Ibid., pp. 12-13.

58. Ibid., p. 21.

59. Bhattacharya, B.K. et al. (1985) op. cit, p.76.

60. Ibid.

136
61. Ibid., p.75.

62. Mukhopadhyay, S.C. (1983) op. cit., p. 27.

63. Bhattacharya, B.K. et al. (1985) op. cit., p.76.

64. Ibid., p.76.

65. Ibid., p.78.

66. Ibid.

67. Mukhopadhyay, S.C. (1983) op. cit., p. 27.

68. Ibid.

69. Majumdar, R.C. (1971) History ofAncient Bengal, p. 134. Calcutta.

70. Coupland, H. (1911) op. cit., p. 51.

71. Mukhopadhyay, S.C. (1983) op. cit., p. 28.

72. Ibid., p. 30.

73. Walsh, E.H.C. (1937) ‘Virkal and Sati Memorial Stones at Budhpur and

Buram’. JBORS, Vol. XXIII, Pt. IV, pp. 429-443.

74. Majumdar, R.C. (1923) ‘Boram Temple Inscription (with plate)’. JBORS, Vol.

IX, Pt. I, p. 416.

75. Mukhopadhyay, S.C. (1983) op. cit., p. 28.

76. Ibid.

77. Ibid.

78. Bhattacharya, B.K. et al. (1985) op. cit., p.85.

79. Ibid.

80. Ibid.

81. Ibid.

82. Mukhopadhyay, S.C. (1983) op. cit., p. 32.

83. Ibid.

137
84. Ibid., p. 33.

85. Bhattacharya, B.K. et al (1985) op. cit., p.86.

86. Ibid., pp.85-86.

87. Ibid., p.86.

88. Ibid.

89. Ibid., p. 85.

90. Dalton, E.T. (1866) ‘Notes on a Tour in Manbhum in 1864-1865’. JASB, Vol.

XXXV, Pt. I, pp. 186-95.

91. Ibid.

92. Bhattacharya, B.K. et al. (1985) op. cit., p. 87.

93. Acharya, P. (1945) op. cit., p. 38.

94. Bhattacharya, B.K. et al. (1985) op. cit., p. 89.

95. Mukhopadhyay, S.C. (1983) op. cit., p. 33.

96. Bhattacharya, B.K. et al. (1985) op. cit., p. 87.

97. Ibid., p. 92.

98. Ibid., p. 93.

99. Mukhopadhyay, S.C. (1983) op. cit., p. 34.

100. Ibid.

101. Ibid.

102. Nathan, M. (1939) Baharstan-i-Ghaybi. (in Persian) Vol. I. Translated by

Borah, M.L. (1936) pp. 19-20.Gauhati.

103. Sarkar, J.N. (1948) History ofBengal. Vol. H, p. 249. Dacca.

104. Bhattacharya, B.K. et al. (1985) op. cit., p. 93.

105. Ibid., p. 88.

106. Chattopadhyay, R.K. (2010) op. cit., p. 217.

138
107. Bhattacharya, B.K. et al. (1985) op. cit., p. 83.

108. Ibid., pp. 83-84.

109. Coupland, H. (1911) op. cit., p. 50.

110. Chattopadhyay, R.K. et al. (2010) ‘Some Thoughts on the Jaina Heritage of

the Fringe Areas of the Chhotanagpur Plateau: A Case Study’. Kosala. No. 3.

p. 85.

111. Chattopadhyay, R.K. and Acharya, D. (2010) op. cit., p. 24.

112. Ibid.

113. Beglar, J.D. (1966) ‘Report of a Tour Through the Bengal Provinces of Patna,

Gaya, Mongir, Bhagalpur, The Santal Pargana, Manbhum, Singhbhum,

Birbhum, Bankura, Ranigunj, Burdwan and Hugli in 1872-73’ (A

Cunningham Reports). R-ASI, Vol. VIII, (Reprint), pp. 50-51. Varanasi.

114. Chakrabarti, Dilip K. (1993) Archaeology of Eastern India: Chhotanagpur

Plateau and West Bengal, p. 210. New Delhi.

115. Chattopadhyay, R.K. and Acharya, D. (2010) op. cit., p. 24.

116. Gupta, C. (2002,) ‘Jainaism in Bengal, Beginning of the Study, Problems and

Perspective’. Pratna Samiksha, Vol. 7, pp. 216-17.

117. Patil, D.R. (1963) The Antiquarian Remains in Bihar, pp. 217-18. Patna.

118. Beglar, J.D. (1966) op. cit., p. 50.

119. Chattopadhyay, R. K. and Acharya, D. (2010) op. cit., p. 24.

120. Risley, H.H. (1981) The Tribes and Castes ofBengal. Vol. 2. (Reprint) p. 249.

Calcutta.

121. Dalton, E.T. (1866) op. cit., p.186.

122. Ball, V. (1869) ‘On the ancient copper miners of Singbhum’. PASB, p.170.

123. Chattopadhyay, R.K. and Acharya, D. (2010) op. cit., p. 25.

139
124. Chaudhuri, S.B. et al. (ed.) (1994) West Bengal District Gazetteers:

Barddhaman. p. 78. Calcutta.

125. Ibid., p. 79.

126. Ibid., p. 78.

127. Ibid., p. 94.

128. Ibid., pp. 78-79.

129. Ibid., p. 64.

130. Majumdar, R.C. (ed.) (1943) The History ofBengal .Vol. I. p. 51. Dacca.

131. Ibid.

132. Ibid.

133. Raychaudhuri, H.C. (1943) op. cit., pp. 23-24.

134. Ibid., p. 23.

135. Ibid.

136. Ibid.

137. Ibid.

138. Ibid.

139. Ibid.

140. Sastri, H. (1927-28) ‘Decipherment of Inscriptions’. AR-ASI, p. 139.

141. Raychaudhuri, H.C. (1943) op. cit., p. 23.

142. Sarkar, D.C. (1965) Indian Epigraphy, p. 379. Delhi.

143. Majumdar, R.C. (1943) op. cit., p. 51.

144. Ibid.

145. Raychaudhuri, H.C. (1943) op. cit., pp. 26-27.

146. Ibid., p. 23.

147. Chaudhuri, S.B. et al. (1994) op. cit., pp. 63-64.

140
148. Ibid., p. 64.

149. Ibid., pp. 64-65.

150. Ibid., p. 66.

151. Ibid., p. 65.

152. Ibid., pp. 63-64.

153. Ibid., p. 65.

154. Raychaudhuri, H.C. (1943) op. cit., p. 21.

155. Majumdar, N.G. (1936) ‘Mallasarul Copper-Plate of Vijayasena’. El, Vol.

XXIII, pp. 155-58.

156. Chaudhuri, S.B. e. al. (1994) op. cit., p. 69.

157. Abu’l-Fazl, Ain-I-Akbari. Vol. II. p. 120. Cited in Majumdar, R.C. (ed) (1943)

op. cit., p. 19.

158. Raychaudhuri, H.C. (1943) op. cit., p. 21.

159. Majumdar, N.G. (1936) op. cit., p. 74.

160. Raychaudhuri, H.C. (1943) op. cit., p. 21.

161. Ibid., p. 36.

162. Ibid., p. 14.

163. El Vol. 103, cited in Majumdar, R. C. (ed.) (1943) op. cit., p. 14.

164. Kielhom, F. (1884) ‘Three inscription from Kanheri’. IA. Vol. XII. p. 134.

165. Majumdar, N.G. (2003) Ramganj Copper-Plate of Isvaraghosha Inscriptions

ofBengal Containing Inscriptions ofthe Candras, the Varmans and the Senas,

and ofIsvaraghosha and Damodara. (Reprint) pp. 149-157. Kolkata.

166. Ibid., p. 150.

167. Majumdar, R.C. and Basak, R. (1943) ‘Administration’. In, Majumdar, R.C.

ed. The History ofBengal, Vol.l, p. 275. Dacca.

141
168. Ghosh, B. (1976-77) Paschimbanger Samaskriti. Pt. 1. pp. 123-27. Kolkata.

(in Bengali).

169. Ibid., p. 217.

170. Ghosh, S. (2005) Gopabhumer Swamp Oitijjho o Samskriti. p. 124. Kolkata.

(in Bengali).

171. Ghosh, B. (1976-77) op. cit., p. 123.

172. Ghosh, S. (2005) op. cit., p. 155.

173. Raychaudhuri, H. C. (1943) op. cit., p. 20.

174. Acharya, P. (1945) op. cit., p. 38.

175. Sanyal, H. (1987) op. cit., p. 73.

176. Ibid.

177. Ibid.

178. Acharya, P. (1945) op. cit., p. 38.

179. Sanyal, H. (1987) op. cit., p. 73.

180. Ibid., p. 74.

181. Acharya, P. (1945) op. cit., p. 42.

182. Mallik, A.P. (1921) History ofBishnupur Raj. p. 85. Bankura.

183. Acharya, P. (1945) op. cit., p. 42.

184. Sanyal, H. (1987) op. cit., p. 73.

185. Ibid., p. 74.

186. Ibid.

187. Sastri, H.P. (ed.) (1969) Ramacaritam of Sandhyakaranandin. (Revised by

Radhagovinda Basak) p. xxviii. The Asiatic Society. Calcutta.

188. Sanyal, H. (1987) op. cit., pp. 76-80.

142
189. Oldham, W.B. (1894) Some Historical and Ethnical Aspects of the Burdwan

District, pp. 185-86. Calcutta.

190. Hunter, W.W. (1973) A Statistical Account of Bengal. Vol. 4. (Reprint) pp.

276-78. Delhi.

191. Baneiji, A.K. (1968) West Bengal District Gazetteers: Bankura. p. 89.

Calcutta.

192. Sanyal, H. (1987) op. cit., p. 79.

193. Ibid., p. 80.

194. Baneiji, A.K. (1968) op. cit., p. 91.

195. Ibid., p. 92.

196. Mailik, A. P. (1921) op. cit., pp. 128-30.

197. Ibid., p. 13.

198. Ibid., pp. 12- 13.

199. Ibid., Appendix.

200. Ibid., p. 13.

201. Ibid., p. 15.

202. Ibid.

203. Ibid., p. 16.

204. Ibid., p. 15.

205. Hunter. W.W. (1973) op. cit., pp. 276-78.

206. Mailik, A.P. (1921) op. cit., p. 16.

207. Ibid.

208. Ibid.

209. Ibid.

210. Ibid., p. 24.

143
211. Ibid., p. 25.

212. Ibid., p. 27.

213. Ibid., p. 25,

214. Ibid., p. 32.

215. Ibid., p. 34.

216. Ibid.

217. Ibid., p. 35.

218. Ibid., p. 37.

219. Ibid., p. 39.

220. Ibid.

221. Ibid., p. 17.

222. Ibid., p. 18.

223. Ibid., p. 19.

224. Baneiji, A.K. (1968) op. cit., p.88.

225. Mallik, A.P. (1921) op. cit., p. 45.

226. Ibid., p. 49.

227. Robertson. F.W. (1926) Final Report on the Survey and Settlement

Operations in the District ofBankura (1917-24). p. 28. Calcutta.

228. Grant, J. (1955) ‘Historical and comparative analysis of the finance of

Bengal.’ In, Firminger, W.K. ed. The Fifth Report from the Select Committee

ofthe House ofCommons on the Affairs ofthe East India Company, (Reprint),

p. 397. New York.

229. Holwell, J.Z.H. (1955) ‘Interesting Historical Events’. In, Firminger, W. K.

ed. The Fifth Report from the Select Committee of the House of Commons on

the Affairs ofthe East India Company, (Reprint), p. 198. New York.

144
230. Baneiji, A.K. (1968) op. cit., p. 107.

231. Grant, J. (1917) op. cit., p. 397.

232. Sanyal, H. (1987) op. cit., pp. 86-87.

233. Mukheijee, R.K. (1940) Indian Land System. Yol. II. p. 157. Calcutta.

234. Sanyal, H. (1987) op. cit., p. 129.

235. Ibid., p. 130.