l:I

HISTORICAL EXPERIENCE IN WESTERN ORISSA/

This Chapter gives details of the historical experiences in

western Orissa. We shall examine here our hypothesis that the

roots of many of the contemporary processes such as the

relationship of the tribal and non-tribal communities, emergence

of stratification, and the interaction of Hindu and tribal

traditions were in the pre-colonial era.

We shall analyse the state formation process of western

Orissa in the perspective of a zone of uncertain political

control between powers, e.g., Orissa and Ratanpur. How did the

indigenous chiefs and chiefs of obscure origin take advantage of

the uncertain control and weak central authority and assume power

and form kingdoms ? How di.d these new chiefs legitimise their

superio+ status or explain away the changes ? How were the

literati 'used by these chiefs to produce a sort of rajapura~as to

provide written support for their earlier claims ?

We will also critically analyse some of these rajapur~as

to derive the internal developments and conflict in society to

reconstruct the history of western Orissa in pre-colonial period.

Modern ,

Paschima (western Orissa) has been known

variously as Attabika Rajya, Ko~ala, Daksina Ko~ala, Trikalinga, . . . . . 1. Sambalpur, Bolangir, Kalahandi, Sundergarh districts of

Orissa. (Map no.3)

23

Mahakantara, Patna Rajya, Hirakhanda Rajya, and Sambalpur Garhjat

in the pre-colonial period.2 The inscriptional records from 5th

century to 16th century C.E. refer to this area as Kosala

(Dak~i~a Kosa~a).8 Even the literary works4 and accounts of

travellers5 mention the

Manakantara, Patna Rajya and Sambalpur Garhjat.

AN EARLY STATE AND ITS DISINTEGRATION

In the early historical period perhaps the middle basin of

river Mahanadi and its tributaries8 provided favourable

2. D.K. GangUly, 1975, Historical GeographY and D:maatic, History of Orissa, Punthi Pustak, Delhi, pp.75-79. N.K.Dash,1980, "Life and Culture of Medieval South Kosala", Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Sambalpur University, pp.l-2. P.C.Rath, 1947, "Geography of Patna as found in Kosala­nanda Kavya of Gangadhar Mi~hra", Journal of Kalinga Histo­rical Research Society, II, p.41. L.P.Pandey, 1937, "Hahako~ala in Inscriptions", Mahakosala Historical SocietY Papers I, pp.25-33.

4. Gangadhar Hishra (n.d) Ko5alinandam; Prahlad Dubey (n.d), Jayachandriki; Rajendra Singh Bariha, 1927 (reprint) Nrusbirilha Mah'Atmya (1908); Shibanarayan Deo (n.d) Raya~a Ati,gada Ubacha.

5. Thomas Walters, 1961 (reprint), On Yuan Cbwang's Trayels in India,II, Munshiram Manoharlal, Delhi, p.202(1906, London); Samuel Beal, 1969(reprint), Buddhist Records of Western World, II, Munshiram Manobarlal, Delhi, p.209 (1664, London}.

6. Imperial Gazetteer of India, 1906, X, p.3. River Mahanadi or Chitrotpala enters Orissa through Bilaspur district in Madhya Pradesh and turning south a~ Padampur town flows south and southeast through Sambalpur district. Its tributaries are Ong, Ib, Tel, Sunder and numerous other streams. (Map no.4)

24

conditions for settled cultivation and growth of civilisation.

The finding of ring stones7 of different sizes, chopper-

biface-flake and neolithic celts in this river valley ~uggests

that the early occupants may have been agriculturists. The

finding of a lac bridge,& a type of ancient bund in Giribara

stream (a tributary of river Jonk) and Raital Sagar in Haraguda

valley and Asurgarh in Sunder valley further reveals that there

was provision for irrigation in the fields.9

Good agricultural production helped in the development of

prosperous villages and towns. Perhaps thi~ attracted Buddhists

and Jains to establish their centres in this area.lO The Chinese

7. Ring stones locally known as Panka Pathar are available in plenty on the river valley. There is a large collection of this category of stones in Sambalpur University Museum, in Khariar Museum, and in the private possession of J.P.Singh Deo, Khariar. Singh Deo claims that some of the stones are agricultural implements of Neolithic period but their dates are not yet scientifically established. K.C.Tripathy, 1971, "Pre-historic Antiquities of western Orissa," in N.K.Sahu (ed) New Aspects ·of History of Orissa, Sambalpur University, pp.46-47.

8. P.K.Deo, 1973, "Forgotten Forts in Kalahandi District, Jumlagarh-Maraguda Complex", Orissa Historical Research Journal, XVI, 2, p.6; N.K.Sahu, 1983, "Report of the Archeological Excavation in the Upper Jonk Valley in Nawa-

. para Sub-division of Kalahandi, Orissa", in J.P.Singh Deo (ed) Satavarsbiki Smirki, pp.VI-IX suggests the date of the civilization as 5th century C.E. The above authors claim this to be of 5th and 6th century C.E., but this i~ not yet scientifically established.

10. N.K.Sabu, op.cit, p.IX.

25

pilgrim Yuang Chuawang visited one of the monasteries in the 7th

century C.E. He reports that there were one hundred Buddhist

monasteries and about 10,000 Brethren, all Mahayanists.ll There

were 70 Deva temples, frequented by heretics of different

persuasions.

How these centres were destroyed is still to be explained.

Due to lack of proper archeaological excavation in this area

there is a paucity of evidence. But interestingly most of the

ruins are found in the forest and hill tops in areas now

inhabited by tribals.l2 The ruined forts and towns in the

inaccessible areas . prove, contrary to the general view of

scholars, that western Orissa was one of the late areas to be

colonised by the Hindus .1 8 Not that the tribals had no c.apaci ty

11. Thomas Walters, op.cit, p.200.

12. Maraguda valley is situated at the border of Madhya Pradesh and Orissa, nearly 30 kms away from sub-divisional headquarters of Nawapara, Orissa. This place is not yet connected by an all-weather road and about 80% of the population of the locality are tribal {Orissa District Gazetteers. Kalahandi, 1980). Ruined Ranipur Jharial is situated in the tribal dominated area of Bolangir district. Asurgarh and Gudhandi are situated at hill tops. Kandh are in majority in Kalahandi district.

13. Imperial Gazetteer of India, X, p.3; Charles Grant, 1984 {reprint), The Gazetteer of the Central Provinces, Usta Publishers, New Delhi, p.159; P.V.Agnew, 1922, A report of the Subah of Cbbatjsgarh, Government Press, Nagpur, p.1. The settlement officers also suggested that Patna, Sambalpur, Kalahandi were amongst the last areas to be colonised by Hindus. But the findings of Maraguda valley, Ranipur Jharial, Gudhandi prove the Hindu penetration into this area as early as 5th century C.E. See fn.8 and 12 above.

26

to build forts;l4 only that the tribal mode of production cannot

sustain a kingdom and establish big forts and towns.l5 The

information regarding the tribals of this area and their

relations with non-tribals in the ancient period is very scanty.

RESUMPTION OF THE PROCESS OF STATE FORMATION

Here, we may suggest that the evidence of ruined towns,

temples, forts, landgrants, and coins points towards the

existence of an early state. It is very difficult to assign any

specific reason for its disintegration since the source materials

are lacking. The process of state formation was resumed in the

11th century.· It has been observed elsewhere that, "a given

society may reach the early state level more th~n once. Analyses

of actual state development clearly show that certain societies

did, in fact, reach the state level several times, with periods

of centralization alternating with periods of disintegration''.16

The process of state formation, and of its disintegraion, in

14. C. von Furer-Haimendorf, 1948, Raj Gonds of Adilabad, Mac­millan, London. E.A.Gait, 1983, HistorY of Assam, Barua and Mathur, Calcutta. R.D.Haldar, 1928, "An Abstract of the Annals of Nagvansi Raj Family of Chhotanagpur", Man in India, VII, 259-293. These authorities associate Raj Gonda, Ahoms and Nagavamsis with ruined forts in areas of their respective concentration i.e., Raj Gonds with Central India, Ahom with Assam and Nagavamsis with Chhotanagpur ..

15. By tribal mode of production we mean here ~ or swidden or shifting cultivation. Such a mode of production cannot generate adequate surplus to sustain a kingdom. The production of surplus is a precondition for the existence of the state. See H.M. Claessan and P.Skalnik (eds), 1978, The EarlY State, Mouton Publishers, The Hague.

16. H.M.Claessen and P.Skalnik, op.cit, p.22.

27

western Orissa can be understood in terms of its being a frontier

zone of uncertain control between different powers at least upto

the 15th century C.E. It has been observed by R.Thapar that

The significance of this process in the Indian sub-

continent is that it was a continuing one in different

regions until recent centuries. The emphasis in the sources

on the need of a state in the absence of which there would

be chaos arose from the constant need to justify new

states. Esrtwhile frontier zones of uncertain control would

gradually evolve into states. The emergence of the state

was not a terminal point since pre-existing states would

tend to change their character with the justaposition of

new states.l7

We have clearer evidence to show that in the last few

decades of the 11th century C.E., western Orissa became an

uncertain zone, liable to attack and conquest from several

directions. This uncertainty continued in the 12th century also.

During this period the Bhanjas18 captured Suvarnapura, follwed by . Nagas19 and Telugu Cho4as (c.1090-1119).30 In c.1119 C.E~ the

17. R.Thapar, 1982, "The Evolution of the State'in the Ganges Valley in Mid-First Millenium B.C.", Studies in HistorY, IV, 2, p.181.

18. K.C.Panigrahi, Cuttack, p.38.

1981, HistorY of Orissa, Kitab Mahal,

19. B.K.Rath, 1983, Cultural Historx of Orissa, Sun deep Prakashan, Delhi, p.86.

20. K.C.Panigrahi, op.cit, p.117-19.

28

king of Ratanpura Jajaldeva I defeated the Teluguchoda . governer of western Orissa.21 For nearly a hundred years western

Orissa remained under the Ka~achuri empire.22

In the beginning of the 12th century the Somavamsi rule in

eastern Orissa weakened. A new dynasty called the Gangas from

south Orissa captured eastern Orissa in c.lllO C.E.23 The new

ruler Cho?aganga tried to capture western Orissa from the

Ka~achuris but could not. Finally at the beginning of the 13th

century the Ganga ruler Anangabhimadeva III (1211-38 C.E.) was

able to defeat the Ka~achuri ruler of Ratanpur and to capture

western Orissa.2t He appointed a Mandalesvara at Suvar~apura to

govern western Orissa.

The second half of 13th century C.E. saw the attack of the

Delhi Sultans in eastern Orissa.25 So the Ganga rulers of Orissa

could not supervise the administration of western Orissa and left

it completely in the hands of the Mandale5vara.26 . . Taking

advantage of the situation the local chiefs and the Manga~esvara

21. !hid. p.120.,

22. lhid, p.120.

23. S.R.Nema,1978, Political History of the SomayamSis of South Kosala and Orissa, Orients, Delhi. El, XXVIII, pp.158 ff.

,24. K.C.Panigrahi, op.cit, pp.161-62; El, XXIX, pp.121 ff.

25. K.C.Panigrahi, op.cit, p.165.

26. S.P.Das, 1962, Sambalpur ltihas, Visbva Bbarati Press, Sambalpur, p.l85.

29

quarreled amongst themselves and perhaps the Man4a~e~vara of

Suvar~apura declared his independence.27

With the disintegration of the Somavamsi kingdom of Orissa

(supra), western Orissa became a zone of friction between eastern

Orissa and the Ratanpur empire. The uncertainty encouraged the

indigenous tribal chiefs to join with a Brahma~a to establish a

kind of oligarchy.28

In this historical background it would not be unfair to

suggest that one of the chiefs of the locality might have emerged

powerful enough to declare his independence and to join hands

with Brahmanas and claim superior status later, and gradually to

carve out a kingdom at Patna.

The political unrest of Orissa at the beginning of 16th

century C.E was also favourable for the local rulers of western

Orissa. The Suryavamsi rule of Orissa was overthrown by the

Bhois, ,.

a family of lesser origin, probably Sudra, in 1540 C.E.29

The middle of the sixteenth century saw the end of Hindu rule in

eastern Orissa, i.e., the last Hindu ruler Mukunda Deva was

defeated by the Sultan of Bengal Sulaiman Karrani in 1568 C.E.30

27. ..Ibid.

28. L.E.B., Cobden-Ramsay, 1982 (reprint), FeudatorY state§ of Orissa, Firma KLM, Calcutta, p.232 (1910).

29. K.C:Panigrahi, op.cit, p.239.

30. IQig, p.242.

30

This helped the feudatory rulers of Orissa to declare their

independence.81 The later rulers of eastern Orissa lacked the

capacity to re-claim all these feudatories immediately.

The rulers of Patna, in western Orissa, taking advantage of

this, expanded their control over Sambalpur, Sonepur, Boud,

Sakti, Sirguja, Sarangarh and Rerakhol.32 This was one element

contributing to the division of the kingdom into four parts,

i.e., Sambalpur, Patna, Sonepur and Khariar.aa Amongst them

Sambalpur emerged as the most powerful by the beginning of 17th

century. The ruler of Sambalpur claimed the title of Hirakud

Chhatrapatl Maharaja A~~hargarh Mau~amaqi.a4

In these circumstances the rulers of western Orissa may

have tried to claim to be Chauhans ---- an assertion of independent

status. The title which the Sambalpur ruler adopted clearly

indicates his independent status and the end of allegiance to the

Orissa Gajapatis.

THE PROCESS OF LEGITIMISATION

Perhaps, at this stage in c.17th century, poets were sought

to write the eulogies, a variety of rijapurina, to legitimrze the •

31. lhid.

32. S.P.Das, op.cit, p.198.

33. Orissa District Gazetteers, Bolangir, p.67.

34. S.P.Das, op.cit, p.236.

31

status of the new ruler. This resulted in several rajapurinas in •

western Orissa; of these, we shall discuss Kosa!inandam,

Jayachandrika, Nrushilnha Hahatmya,_ Ramai Dev, and Riivana Aahgada

Ubacha in this chapter.

Such a text cannot be accepted as authentic history in its

details but it does provide some historical indication of the

structuring of events. A careful study of these texts reveals

internal developments and the conflicts in society, which can be

tested in relation to validated historical findings. So let us

examine these literary sources carefully.

The literary sources referred to above generally support

the AgDiku!a myth of the origin of Chauhans; though Ko~a!anandam

refers to them as Chandravamsis85 and later sources as

Suryavam~is, possibly following the Rajasthani literary sourcesS6

Prithviraj Vijaya, Hammira· Hahakavya, Srujana Charita, which

describe the Chauhans of Rajasthan as Suryavamsis.

The reference to the Chauhans of Orissa as Chandravamsi in

Kosalanandam was perhaps due to the influence of the early ruling

dynasties of South Kosala and Orissa. The Somavam3is, Gangas,

Bhaumakaras and Bhartjas ·who preceded the Chauhans in Orissa

35. Kosa~anandam, III, 7,45-46.

36. Dasratha Sharma, 1959, Earlv Chauhan Dynasties, Mot~lal Banarsidass, Delhi, pp.l-13.

32

claimed descent from the lunar lineage;s7 Chandravamsi descent

came to denote a respectable and ancient origin.38 Th~s tradition

may have influenced the early Chauhan Rajput rulers of Orissa

also to claim Chandravam3i links. Similar claims by Chauhans were

also prevalent in Rajasthan.s9

Thirdly, all the sources refer to the great Chauhan rulers

of Garh Sambhar, Ajmer and Delhi, with little variation upto

Prithviraj Chauhan. Prithiviraj was killed by the Turks and one

of his successors, Govinda, established a kingdom at Ranthambore

as a feudatory state of Delhi Sultanate.40 Later, his successor

became independent of the Sultans. Finally, under Hammira Dev,

their territories expanded. He performed a digvijaya or ritual

conquest of the four quarters and established some degree of

power in the area. He finally killed himself, for fear of falling

into the hands of Ala-ud-din Khilji, in 1301 C.E.41 Rajasthani

sources refer to his wives performing jauhar. There is no mention

of escape or fleeing of any pregnant queen of Hammira. The only

37. K.C.Panigrahi, op,cit, 66, 96, 151.

38. A.P.Sah, 1976, Life in Medieval Orisaa, Chaukhamba Orientalia, Varanasi, pp.125-129.

39. D.Sharma, op.cit, p.8. AntiquitY of Ra.iasthan, p.357.

Also James Tod, 1932, Annals and II, K.M.N. Publishers, New Delhi,

40. D.Sharma, op.cit, p.118.

41. !hid. p.123.

33

reference is to a surviving son, Ratan.42

It seems that, the fleeing of a pregnant wife to Daksina . . Kosa+a and later her giving birth to Ramai Dev in a Brahma~a

house at Patnagarh is a poetic creation of the author of

Jayachandrika to explain away the obscure origin of the so called

Chauhans. There is no historical source to support it. There is

an analogous narrative regarding the establishment of a Chauhan

family ·at Pavagarh in Gujarat;48 The inscription of Pavagarh

reveals that a successor of Hammira Dev established Chauhan rule

at Pavagarh.44 Further, the first kavya in this regard in western

Orissa, Kosalanandam, describ~s Rama Dev (Jayachandrika mention~

him as Ramai) as a young man who entered rulerless Patnagarh with

his mother.

Interestingly, the names of the putative founders of

Patnagarh in Dak~i~a Kosa~a and that of Pavagarh of Gujarat are

the same, Ramadeva. So one can suggest that stories of this kind

are part of general pattern for seeking to legitimise the claims

of new dynasties. The literati, aware of the core event, i.e.,

the escape of Hammir's son, may have adopted it to suit the needs

of rulers in various localities.

42. lbld, p.131; K.R.Qanungo, 1960, Studies jn Raiput HistorY, lecture series, Calcutta University, New Delhi, p.15.

43. M.S.Commissariat, 1938, History of Gujarat, I, Green & Co., Bombay·, pp.187-196.

44. lA, VI, pp.l-9.

34

The story of Kosa~anandam narrates that God Brahma created

Maricha and Maricha's son Kashyapa had one hundred sons.45 Then

after giving the names of many mythological kings starting from

Maricha, Kashyapa, Aditya, Manu, Soma and others, it traces the

descent of Ramadeva from Vaishala Deva, the father of Prithviraj,

ruler of Delhi, of the Chauhan dynasty. The author further

mentions that Ramadeva, on the death of his brother Prithviraj

Chauhan of Delhi, wandered through many countries with his mother

and finally entered into the rulerless Kosaladesha and stayed •

with a Brahmana family.46 •

The author of Kosalinandam describes the situation of . Kosala prior to Chauhan rule. It says that in the year kaliyuga . 4200, a certain Ranasingha quarrelled with his overlord and by

his own -/ strength and tact became the K~hitesvara or lord of the

earth. He was an autocrat and became unpopular. The amatyas being

dissatisfied invited the Gajapati of Orissa who then captured

Kosala. He did not rule over this area directly. He appointed his . own mantri~, eight in number, in preference to previous amatyas

who were discarded as betrayers of their own master. One amongst

the above mentioned eight mantris was a Brahma~a, in whose house

Ramadeva stayed. Once in that area a lioness created terror, and

the people decided that whoever would kill the lioness would be

45. Kosalanandam, II, 8-15.

46. lbid, II,31.

35

the king of Patna.41

Ramadeva, at that time a youngman, killed the lioness and

became the ruler of the kingdom. People celebrated the occasion

and gave him bheti (presentation to the new ruler).48 After that

Ramadeva captured nearby areas but became a Samanta or feudatory

ruler of the Gajapati ruler of Orissa. The latter recognised

Ramadeva as Simanta, gave him his younger brother's daughter in

marriage, and presented him with a sword.49

The author of the kivya describes Ramadeva as the hero. He

links his genealogy with Prithviraj Chauhan of Delhi. He also

described the role and achievement of the successors of Ramadeva

upto Baliarsingha as the ruler of Sambalpur (1617-1657 C.E). He

depicts Baliarsingha as the second important character· of the

kavya. His achievements and character have been described in the

kavya vividly.so

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE ABOVE TEXTS

At this stage it will be of great importance to assess the

text in terms of the social milieu in which it was written, the

purpose it served and the historical point and geographical area

to which the kavya refers.

47. lhid, II, 43-44.

48. lhid, VIII, , 21.

49. IQid, XII, 66-67.

50. .I.hi..d, XXI, XXII.

36

DAKSINA KOSALA . . . Paschima Odisa was a part of Daksina Kosala in ancient and . .. . .

early medieval period.51 How the name Daksina Kosala emerged is a . . . matter of speculation. F.E.Pargiter believed that Ramachandra,

exiled from Ayodhya, stayed in Chhatisgarh for long.52 Kosala is . the name of the region around Ayodhya, Rama's dynastic capital;

and so the Chhatisgarh area came to be called Dak~i~a Kosa!a

distinguished from the former called Uttara Kosa~a.ss

Another myth54 says that to the South of the Vindhya there

was a nagara called Nagapattana, near modern Nagpur. Once a

powerful chief of this naaara, named Kosa~a, captured nearby

areas and formed a kingdom. His kingdom took its name from him.

After a few / generations Bhanumat became the king of Kosa~a. He

gave his daughter Kaushalya to Dasaratha, the king of Ayodhya.

Bhanumat died without male succesor, so his kingdom passed to his

son-in-law Dasaratha. At that time the Ayodhya region was also

called Kosa!a. So in.order to differentiate, Ayodhya Kosa~a was

called as Uttara Kosa~a or Kasi Kosa~a, and Nagapattan area was

named as Daksina Kosala. . . . 51. D.K.Ganguli, op.cit, pp. 75-79; S.R.Nema, op.cit, pp.14-17;

N.K.Das, op.cit, pp.l-2.

52. F.E.Pargiter, 1922, Ancient Indian Historical Tradition, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi, p.278.

53. K.D. Bajpai, 1978, 'Foreword' in S.R.Nema, op.cit., p.IX.

54. Kos+akbanqa (Hindi) unpublished manuscript of Anjani Nandan Saran, referred in J.P.Singh Deo, 1987, Cultural Profile of South Kosala, Gian Publication, New Delhi, appendix.

37

There is a local tradition that Ravana, the king of Lanka,

tried to prevent the marriage of Kaushalya and Dasaratha as he

could predict from his powers of prescience that he would be

killed by their son. So he attacked Kosala (Daksina) and captured . . . Kaushalya. As a mark of victory he installed the Goddess

Lankesvari at Suva~apura, modern Sonpur, on the bank of the

river Mahanadi. Later, Dasaratha defeated Ravana, rescued

Kaushalya and married her. Dasaratha received Kosala (Daksina) in . . . dowry from his father-in-law for this achievement. The above

local tradition seems a late attempt to explain why the area is

called Daksina Kosala. . . . According to the tradition, later, Ramachandra, son of

Dasaratha, became the king of Kosa~a. He divided his kingdom

between his sons Lava and Kusa. The former got Uttar Ko~ala and

the latter got Daksina Kosala near Vindhya.ss Kusa established . . . his capital at Kusastha~ipura. D.C.Sirkar56 locates Dak~i~a

Kosa~a in western Orissa and eastern Madhya Pradesh covering the

present day Sambalpur, Bolangir and Kalahandi districts of Orissa

and Bilaspur, Raipur, Raigarh and Durg districts of Madhya

Pradesh.

55. N.K.Dash, op.git, p.t.

56. D.C.Sircar, 1960, Studies in the Geography of Ancient and Medieval India, Varana~i, p.270. S.C.Behera, 1971, "Historical Geography of South Kosala", in N.K.Sahu (ed) New Aspects of History of Orissa, Sambalpur University, p.24.

38

The first epigraphical reference to Kosala (Daksina) is to . . . be found in the Allahabad Pillar Inscription of Samudra Gupta.

It says that on his way to South India, Samudragupta defeated

three chiefs Mahendra of Kosa~a, Vyaghraraja of Mahakantara and

Mantaraja of Kaurala.57 It indicates that these were small

principalities and that he defeated these chiefs but did not

annex their territories to his empire. Anyhow this is clear

evidence of Gupta influence on Kosala.6t

· Further evidence for this area emerges with the rule of

I. -Saravapurias in the late 5th and early 6th century C.E. The

nineteen copper plate grants and hundreds of coins of this

dynasty discovered so far indicate their boundaries and aspects

of the history of this area.59 Balaghat Plates80 of Prithvisena

of Vidarva indicate that Kosala was adjacent to Vidarva. The

Aihole cave inscription61 indicates that Kosa~a was adjacent to

57. ~~ III; D.K.Ganguli, op.cit, p.156-58. H.Kulke, 1982, "Fragmentation and Segmentation versus Integration ? Reflections on the concepts of Indian feudalism and the segmentary state in Indian History", Studies in History, IV, 2, p.256.

58. The use of Gupta era is found in Arang Plates of Bhimasena II, N.K.Dash, op.cit, p.5.

59. il, IX, pp.170-173, pp XXIII, pp.18-22 ff; XXXI, XXXIII, pp.155 ff; XXXIV, ff; IHQ, XIX, pp.139-146;

60. El, IX, pp.269-271.

61. El, VI, p.l.

281-285; XXII, pp 15-23, 53-54; pp.103 ff, pp.263 ff, pp.314-315; pp.28-31, 45-50; ~. III, pp.l91 XXI, pp.294-295.

39

Utkala. Yuan Chuawang indicates that Dak~i~a Ko~ala was to the

north-west of Kalinga, 1800 li or 300 miles from the capital of

Ka+inga.62 This means that, by the sixth and seventh century

C. E., the extensive land of Daksina Kosala was surrounded by , # • '

Vidharva ·in the West, Meka!a in the Northwest, and Utkala and

Ka+inga in the Southeast.6S

FORMATION OF NUCLEAR CIVILIZATIONAL AREAS AND EARLY STATE

With the disintegration of the Gupta empire, there arose

numerous kingships at the local, subregional and regional levels

throughout Northern and Central India;64 In Orissa and eastern

Madhya Pradesh this period saw the emergence of the rural foci of

political power, led by autochthonous chiefs and in some cases by

chiefs of obscure origin.85 They formed their principalities and

small kingdoms in the riverine basins and were champions of

brahmanism.68 These kingdoms had their bases in the tnuclear

62. Thomas Watters, op.cit, p.200; S.Beal, op.cit, pp.209-210.

63. S.C.Behera, qp.cit, p.24.

64. K.S.Singh, 1984 (3rd ed), "A study of State formation among Tribal Communities", in R.S.Sharma & V.Jha (eds) Indian Society : Historical Probings in memory of D.D.Kosambi, People's Publishing House, Delhi, p.317; H.Kulke, 1982, op.cit., p.246.

66. H.Kulke, 1978, "Early State formation and Royal legitimisation of Tribal areas of eastern India", H.N.Dash (ed) ~ Sidelight on History of Orissa, Vidyapuri, Cuttack, pp. 104-14. Surjit Sinha, 1962, "State Formation and Rajput myth in Central India", Man in India, XII, pp.35-80.

66. H.Kulke, 1978, op.cit, p.106, S.P.Tiwari, 1985, Comprehensive History of Orissa, Punthi Pustak, Calcutta, p.35.

40

areas' of Mahanadi basin. As most of the rulers of these kingdoms

originated from one of the aboriginal groups of the locality,

the rulers sought simultaneously to maintain their links with the

aborigines and integrate them into their states and to spread

Hindu culture. To sustain their rule they needed the loyalty of

the aborigines who constituted the vast bulk of the population.

So they could not displace the pastoral hunting society unlike

what happened in South India.67 So the special feature of the

formation of kingdoms of this area is that this was 'marked by

the acculturation of tribes' which were brought into the

brahmanic society and transformed mostly into peasant and other

occupational castes,68 rather than their 'sustained

displacement'. So the history of the area was marked by

integration of tribal elements or, more correctly, the synthesis

of tribal and Brahmanic elements which culminated in the

Jagannath culture in Orissa.69

67. B.Stein, 1969, "Integration of the Agrarian system of South India", in R.E.Frykenberg (ed) Land Control and Social Structure in Indian History, University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, 179-185, talks about 'sustained displacement' of tribal society in the 'nuclear areas' of South India. Contrasted with the south Indian proce.ss of 'su.stained displacement' of tribals, there are processes of integration and acculturation in Orissa. H.Kulke, op.cit, pp.104-14.

68. B.P.Sahu, 1983, "Social Morphology and Physiology of Early Medieval Orissa",Proceeding of the Indian History Congres.s, pp.133-144; and 1984, "Ancient Orissa- The Dynamics of Internal Transformation of Tribal Society" Proceeding of the Indian History Congress, pp.148-160.

69. H.Kulke, 19BO,"Rathas and Rajas, the Car festival of Puri", The Journal of Orissan History, I, 2, pp,20-39.

41

/ -THE SARA V APORIA KINGDOM

The / -Sarvapuria kingdom a very good example of how a

chief of obscure origin could manage to establish a kingdom in

western Orissa and eastern Madhya Pradesh after the

disintegration of Gupta Empire.

The disintegration of the Gupta empire created political

confusion in Daksina Ko~a~a. Taking advantage of the Gupta

decline~ the Nalas and Vakatakas of Southern India fought to

extend their sway over Dak~i~a Kosala.70 Political confusion as

well as the contest between the Vaka~akas and Na~as gave an

opportunity to the local chiefs to strengthen their position. / -

This finally resulted in the emergence of Sarvapurias,

Panduvam3is and Parvatadwarakas in Daksina Ko~ala. . . .

The / -Sarvapurias are known from their nineteen copper plate

grants71 discovered so far (noted earlier), which indicate that

their territory extended from the modern Durg district of Madhya

Pradesh in the west to the modern Bolangir district of Orissa in

the east and from Bilaspur district in the north to the southern

end of Raipur district in Madhya Pradesh (see Map no.4).

Unfortunately, their capital Saravapura has not yet been

definitely identified; and we lack any clues for dating them

70. S.R.Nema, op.cit, pp.21-30.

71. S.P.Tiwari, 1985, op.cit, pp.2-3.

42

exactly.12

They claim descent from ~arava, and the later rulers use

sovereign titles like MaharajA, f

Paramabhattaraka , and claim . . overlordship (Vikkam-opanta-Samanta-makuta-chUdamam-prabha-prasek

-ambu-dhota-Pada-Yugo~o) of the people, employing the titles given

general currency by rulers' Brahma~a advisers throughout the

subcontinent.71

Historians differ in identifying I Sarava, the first

I ; Saravapurla ruler, and upto now not a single grant by Sarava has

been discovered. 'It is only Maharaja Narendra who has claimed ,

descent from Sarava.74 The interesting point is that Maharaja

Narendra in his plate was not giving a grant himself, rather

confirming one made by some one else whose identity is not clear

72. This uncertainty is evident in the scholarly literature : A.Cunnigham, 1884, Archeological SurveY of India Report, XVIII, p.57ff. associates Arvi in Wardha district or with Sambalpur district of western Orissa. IHQ, XV, pp.475-476, L.P.Pandeya suggests the place, Sarpagarh or Sarbpur in Gangapur feudatory state of Orissa and Sarba or Sarabha near Seorinarayan of Bilaspur district of Madhya Pradesh. EI, XV, p.186. R.B.Hiralal suggests Sirpur in Madhya Pradesh as Saravapura. S.P.Tiwari, op.cit, p.5 locates it in Kalahandi district of 9rissa. EI, XI, p.186 fn.5 R.B. Hirala~ supposes that Saravapurias flourished after Somavamsi kings of Sirpur. Other Scholars V.V.Hirashi, L.P. Pandeya, S.R.Nerna, A.Cunningham, place them before S~mavamsis and Panduvamsis. IHQ, XXI, p.294, Panduvamsi king Nanndadeva's ·father Indrabala was serving' under /Saravapur1as.

73. El, XXXI, p.263 ff; lH2, XIX, p.139 ff; El, IX, p.172.

74. ..Il2.i.si.

43

Secondly, the use of the term Paramabhattaraka-padai75 indicates . . /

his subordinate position. Thirdly, the 'Sarava' means a fabulous

animal having eight legs, stronger than a lion.76 So N.K.Sahu,

A.P.Sah and / S. P. Tiwari suggest the tribal origin of the

" -Sarvapurias.77 At least it is clear that their origin was

obscure, and the early rulers were subordinate to some others.

The later rulers carved out a kingdom and claimed independent

status; to legitimise their status or to cover up their obscure

origin, they patronised the Brahma~as. Furthermore, later rulers

assert superior status by claiming to be AmararyakUla and

AmarajakUla7s. Later rulers, Prassannamatra7e and Jayarajaso

issued coins and patronised Vai~navism and Brahmanlsm.81

Most grants were made on the occasion of lunar and solar

eclipses, victory over enemies and marriages. Other than the

75. El, XXXI, V-5, p.172.

76. El, XI, fn 5, p.186; S.P.Tiwari, op.cit, pp.24-30.

77.

78.

N.K.Sahu, 1971, "A N.K.Sahu (ed) New University, p.15; op.cit, p.35.

Survey of the History of South Kosala", Aspect of History of Orissa, Sambalpur A.P.Sah, op.cit, p.125-129; S.P.Tiwari,

D.C.Sircar mother was XXXIV, p.48.

says perhaps Sarvapurla ruler Vyghraraja's the daughter of a person named Amara Arya. EI,

79. S.R.Nema, op.cit, p.35.

80. Jhid, pp.35-36.

81. El, 'IX, p.172. The rulers called themselves Parama bhagavato and granted lands to Brahmanas.

44

kings, the bhogapati (officials),82 amatyaaa, simanta84, mahar~ni

(patrini)8S and even the king's brother made grants.86 The grants

are always for Brahma~as except a few for temples.87 The

officials who donated were of rank of bhogapati and amatya88.

Their grants were later approved by the ruler. In some cases a

group of Brahma~as was granted a single village.88 The Brahma~as

were allowed to enjoy the grants rent free, and the villagers

were asked to pay the ruler's bhoga and bhagas to the donee

instead. In most cases the Brahmanas are referred to as experts . in Vedas90.

The above discussion clearly indicates that the rulers

patronised the Brahma~as and settled them in their kingdom. We

have noted earlier that probably the Sarvapur1as originated from

one of the autochthonous groups of the locality.&l The upper

82. _lOO, XIX, pp.l39-146; XXXIV, p .. 28-29.

83. El, XXXIV, p.29.

84. El, XXXI, p.265.

85. El, XI, p.l84 ff; XI, p.282 ff.

86. El, XXXIV, p.45 ff.

87. ~. III, pp.183-93.

88. lHQ, XIX, pp.l39-146; XXXIV, pp.28-29.

89. ~.-III, p.196 ff; ~. XI, p.185 ff.

90. .lhi!i.

91. ~. pp.20-21.

45

Mahanadi valley provided them with fertile land in which to base

their kingdom. The uncertain political situation due to the

disintegration of the Gupta empire provided an opportunity to

capture new territories. Finally, they were able to form a

kingdom. Perhaps in the beginning they accepted an overlord but

their later rulers became independent and took the title of

Maharaja and Paramabha~~araka and struck coins in their names.

From the copper plate text of these grants one can roughly

demarcate the geographical area of the kingdom, the nature of the .

grants, and the polity of the kingdom. Perhaps bhoga, bhukti,

vi~aya, patha, and rastra were administrative divisions. They had

officials like dutaka, amatya, bnogapati, sarvadhikaradhrita;

perhaps there were also soldiers. The grants mention that the

area is free from the interference of chatas and bhatas. They

were regular and irregular soldiers respectively.92

Brahmanas were settled in the tribal area deliberately.98

There was an attempt to improve the irrigation facilities also.94

Perhaps it was to initiate the process of acculturation and

settle the tribals as agriculturists. In one source a Brahma~a

was given a village and allowed to enjoy the bhogas and bhagas

92.

93.

94.

lA, VII p.250 fn.26; Ea, IX, p.284 fn.lO. ,

There was a division in Saravapura kingdom called Sabarabhogika. El, XXXI~, p.28 ff. Perhaps· rulers had sretia.l ~c\~·'"i.st.,.c\.nvt. e\lvi.siol'l Cbhoaz.J ~he.ve. -r.-a.~t~ live&.

~. Ill, p.l99 lines 25-26.

46

but was to contribute dhanya and h1ra~ya to the ruler i.e., it is

liable for dues.95

So, there was an attempt to raise the resources of the

kingdom through improvement of irrigation facilities and through

settled cultivation amongst the Sabara. The / -Saravapurias

patronised the Brahma~as for that purpose. After the decline of

the Gupta empire, the Brahma~as of north India were in search of

patrons,96 and the.newly emerging chiefs wanted these Brahma~as'

services to legitimise their claims.97

The chiefs needed access to the more elaborate Brahmanical

symbolic culture, seeking superior dealings with the super-

natural, in order to promote themselves socially; and the

Brahmanas needed patrons. Together, they provided the setting for . the acculturation of the autochthonous groups. Vaishnavism became

the vehicle to include the ,.tribals easily in the fold.98 The

ideology was incorporated / -

in Saravapuria polity as part of the

95. El, XXXI, pp.263 ff.

96. R.N.Nandi, Brahmanic pp.70-100.

1979, ''Client, Ritual and Conflict in Early Order", Indian Historical Review, VI, 1-2,

97. S.P.Tiwari, op.cit, p.35.

98. N.K.Sahu, 1974, "Two Obscure Dynasties of South Kosala", Sambalpur University Journal (Humanities}, VI & VII (combined) p.23. Bhagayata Purana, II, 4-18 says that Kirata, Pulinda, and Yavana can be purified by the worship of Vishnu. S.P.Tiwari, op.cit, p.131, opines that Saravapurias patronised Pancharatra school of Vaisnavism to integrate the tribals in the kingdom. This permitted the tribals to enter into the religious fold of Vaishnavism.

47

, Hinduised social promotion of the autochthonous chief Sarava to

the status of a Kshatriya raja of Aryan heritage.99

- . , . ~ PANDUVAMSI-SOMAVAMSI KINGDOM

When , -Sarvapurias established their kingdom, another chief

of obscure origin, possibly a Sabara chief, Udayana,lOO gradually

came into prominence in the Meka~a area. His successors claimed

to be Pan1uvamsis and linked their genealogy to the lunar / -

clan.lOl They established matrimonial alliances with Saravapurias

and in the beginning became the simanta and later the mahasamanta

" -of the Saravapurias and most probably also the chief minister

(sarvadhikaradhrita).l02

They gradually became so powerful that they could capture

99. As noted earlier, the Saravapurias did not link their genealogy to any mythical origin. They trace their descent from ~arabha i.e., an eight legged animal stronger than a lion (pp.l8-21 supra).

100. ASI, XVII, pp.25-26; Tbe Cult of Jagannath, ~. VII, 1, p.l2.

~. Ill, Calcutta,

p.293; K.C.Mishra,1971, p.8; ~. VI, p.357;

101. S.N.Rajguru, 1966, Inscriptions of Orissa, IV, pp.24-30.

102.

Tivaradeva, perhaps the first independent Panduvamsi ruler, used the title Parama Vai~nava and donated a village named Pimpani Padraka to two Brabmanas. In line 16 of his plate he links the' genealogy of his predecessor Nannadeva and lndrabala to the lineage of Puranic Pandu. El, VII, pp.104-107. •

S.N.Rajguru, op.cit., pp.l-7. D.C.Sircar, 1970, "The Panduvamsis of South Kosala", in R.C.Majumdar (ed) _.T ..... hue"---H.t..oi..,sw.t~o.r..z.Y---loaun&ldo6..-C~ulO.olol~t~ul..!lr~eot._.::o.:..f..__.=.l.un~d~i..,.a,...n~Pz...:e>t.o>o<..c::p_.l~e , I I I , George All en and Unwin, London, p.221.

48

the/Saravapuria kingdom and annex its territory.loa Unfortunately,

the period of Pan~uvam~i rule cannot be dated accurately.l04 Most

historians place them between the 7th and 8th century C.E.l05

SUB-REGIONAL AND REGIONAL STATE FORMATION

This provided a base for them to form a sub-regional and

later a regional state .l 06 The claims to being Panduvamsis and to

their descent from moon led to bolder claims of mythical origin

than what the ' - r -Saravapurias had attempted. The Saravapurias had

never claimed divine origin; their symbol of legitimisation

consisted of patronising Brahma~as and temples. The Pan9uvamsi

claim to divine origin by way of lunar clan was more

audacious.l07

The Panduvamsi ascedency was signalled by Nannadeva, ~on of , -

Indrabala of Meka~a, who was able to usurp the Saravapuria

kingdom.l08 Nannadeva's son Tivaradeva strengthened the kihgdom

103. S.R.Nema, op.cit, pp.Sl-62.

104. ~. XVII, 450 C.E., C.E.; .Qll, century C.E.

pp.17 ff; place Tivaradeva between 425 C.E. to El, IV, p.258 place Tivaradeva in 8th century

II, pp.293-294, also place him around 8th

105. El, IV, p.258; ~. II, pp.293-294.

106. Mahanadi and its tributories namely Seonath, Jonk, Tel, Sunder, Udanti and Ong provided fertile valleys and plains. This area became the nuclear area (Dak;iQa Kosala) and was ruled in succession by the ~aravapurias, Panduvamsis/ Somavamsis. Somavafusis finally conquered coastal Orissa. H. Kulke, 1982, op.cit, pp.257-25~.

107. Refer to fn. 101 above.

108. S.R.Nema, op.cit., pp.102-103.

49

and took the sovereign title Pratapasakala-Kosaladhipatitos. . . Historians agree that they established their capital at Sripura,

modern Sirpur.

Tivaradeva settled twenty-five Brahman as in two . villages.llO The Rajim copper plates indicate that he donated a

third village to another Brahmana.lll The land grants and the •

village grants increased during the rule of Mahasivagupta-

Balarjuna.ll2 Apart from Brahmanism, he patronised Vai~navism and

" Saivism and even granted villages for supporting a community of

venerable monks of a monastery.llS He donated five villages for

supporting La~smana temple of ~ripura and settled Brahmanas

there.ll4 The Brahma~as were entitled to enjoy one fourth of the

income from the village.llS Bardula platesll6 also indicate that

he settled a number of Brahmanas in the village Vatapadraka . . During the reign of Mahasivagupta, the patronage shifted

109. lQ, IV, pp.32-38.

110. El, XXXIV, p.ll·ff.

111. ~. III, p.291 ff.

112. El, XI p.l84; XXIII, pp.113 ff; XXVII pp.290 ff; XXXI, pp.107 ££; XXX, pp.60-65.

113. El, XXIII, pp.179-181.

114. El, XI, p.184 ££.

115. .l.hl..d.

116. El, XXVII, pp.290-291.

50

/

strongly towards Saivism.l17 While his predecessors had claimed

to be Parama Bhagavatas and Parama Vai~nava, he struck the emblem

of bull in his coins.118 During his rule tantric-saivism

flourished.119 There was a special grant for the rituals of a

~Siva temple called Gandhesvara of tripura.l20 Another village was

granted to the temple of Siva Isanesvara in the Pattana 4 •

Khadirapadrata~a identified as Baidpali village of Sambalpur

district of Orissa. The Panduvamsis are also known as

Somavain~is.121

In the ninth century C.E. I another dynasty of obscure

origin entered the scene in Dahala Man~a~a. They attacked the

western part of Daksina Kosala and extended their control over . . . " Sripura and in the lOth century upto Bilaspur district and,

taking on the title Kosalendra, •

claimed to be conquerors of

Kosala. The new dyna:sty became famous as the Kaiachuri's or . Haihaias.l22 They gradually extended their full control over the

117. lhid. pp.319 ff.

118. l.lWi.

119. S.R.Nema, op.cit, p.135.

120. JHQ, XXXIII, p.229 ff.

121. il, XXVII, p.319 ff.

122. H.C.Roy, 1931, DYnastic HistorY of North India,II, Calcutta, p.758. El, I, pp.256, 265; ~. IV, pp.XXVIII. The Balari stone inscription indicates that Mughatunga the son and successor of Kokolla I took Pali from the Lord of Kosala. Pali is identified in Bilaspur district of Madhya Pradesh.

51

western portion of Dak~i~a Kosa~a.12a

In these circumstances the Pan4uvamsis, also called

Somavamsis, might have extended their kingdom towards the east.

Between these early Somavameis (Pan9uvamsis) and the later

Somavam~is, there is a gap of about one hundred years for which

no linking record has been discovered so far. Perhaps after the

emergence of the Na+as and Kalachuris the Somavamsis may have had

to remain subordinate rulers for a hundred years or so, when they

could not issue any grant.

It is only after mid-tenth century that their records are

found again. This time they lay claim to being

Trikalingadhipatil24 and most of the charters are issued from •

Vinitapura and Suvar~apura, i.e., modern Binka and Sonepur in

western Orissa.l25 Most of the early charters were discovered in

the hilly tract of Orissa.l26

The charters of the later Somavamsis also do not offer any

clue to their dates. Some historians place their first ruler

123. llWl.

124. El, XI, pp.93-95; VIII, p.140 ff describe Si?agupta as Paramabhattaraka Mah~rajadhiraja Paramesvara ~ri-Sivagupta­deva. His· son Mahavabhagupta I. Janmenjaya for the first time claimed the title of Parame8vara Paramabhattaraka Maharajidhiraja Soma-Kula-Tilaka Trikalingadhipati;. · lHQ, XX, p.241 ff. . ~ .

125. K.C.Panigrahi, op.cjt, pp.93-133. S.R.Nema, op.cjt, p.14. B.K.Rath, op.cit, p.55.

126. Bolangir, Sambalpur, Phulbani districts of Orissa.

52

Sivagupta in the tenth century; others in the eleventh.l27 All

agree that they flourished and established their capital at

Vinitapura and Suvar~apura in western Orissa. From there they

patronised the Brahma~as and granted lands and villages.l28 They

started ruling over western Orissa, and a part of eastern Madhya

Pradesh, as independent rulers.l29 Dak~i~a Ko5a~a became the most

important 'nuclear area' under their rule.1ao They entered into

matrimonial alliance with the Bhaumakaras of OrissalSl. Mahasiva-

gupta Yajati I gave his daughter Prithvimahadevi to the Bhauma-

kara rulerl32. The Bhaumakaras had started their rule from Uttar

Tosala in the 8th century C.E.l88 and by the tenth century had

integrated the nuclear areas of coastal Orissa. They could

establish their sway over Daksina . . Tosala . and Kongoda.ta• The

127. S.R.Nema, K.C.Panigrahi, N.K.Sahu place them in lOth century. El, III, p.333 ff; J.F.Fleet places them not prior to 11th century.

128. El, VIII, p.138 ff; XI pp,93-95; lHQ, XX p.237 ff; ~. I, pp.4-8; JRA$B, XIX, p.l17 ff; IQ, IV, p.l64 ff.

129. B.N.Sharma, 1983, Somayamsi Rule in Orissa - A HistorY, Punthi Pustak, Calcutta, pp.17-18. K.C.Panigrahi, op.cit, pp.93-94.

130. H.Kulke, 1982, op.cit, p.257.

131. K.C.Panigrahi, op.cit, pp.84-85.

132. D.K.Ganguli, op.cit, p.198; B.Das, 1985, Orissa: Social Cultural and Religious Aspects, Sundeep Prakashan, Delhi, pp.ll-12.

133. H.Kulke, 1982, op.cit, p.258.

134. K.C.Panigrahi, op.cit, pp.84-85.

53

small rulers like Sulkis of Kongoda Manda~a and Bhanjas of

Khinjafi Manda~a also accepted them as sovereigns.lSS The

Bhaumakaras were the first rulers of Orissa to unite three

nuclear areas, i.e., U~~ar Tosa1a, Dask~i~a Tosala and Kongoda

Manda~a.l36 Fortunately for the Somavamsis of Dak~i~a Kosa1a,

their daughter, Prithvimahadevi, became the ruler of the

Bhaumakara kingdom. As she was issueless, the Somavamsis of

Kosala managed the state of their daughter in addition to their

own.lS7 After her death, they merged their own kingdom, Dak~i~a

Kosa~a with the newly gained kingdom of coastal Orissa in the

10th century C.E.l38 In the beginning they had to face opposition

from the other areas, but they could finally defeat them all and

unite their homeland Dak~i~a Kosa~a with Uttara and Dak~i~a

Tosa~a, Kongoda and Mandala . . This gave birth to the

first regional kingdom in Orissa under the Somavam5is.lS9

136. .llW;l.

137. Ganguli, op.Ci.t, p.203. K.C.Panigrahi, op.cit, pp.82-83 states that there was struggle for succession to the Bhaumakara throne; that the Somavam~i king Janmenjaya intervened in support of his daughter, that he killed his son-in-law's brother in the battle and finally placed his daughter on the Bhaumakara throne. lQ, IV, p.367, S.N. Rajguru argues differently ~hat some feudatory chief of Odra started disturbances in Bhaumakara country taking advantage of the weak administration of Lalitakara, husband of Tribhubana Mahadevi. Janmenjaya, hei father intervened on behalf of his daughter and suppressed the rebel. Thereafter this kingdom was merged with Kosa~a.

138. K.C.Panigrahi, op.cit, pp.99.

139. H.Kulke, 1982, op.cit, pp.258-259; B.Das, op.cit, p.13.

54

Becoming masters of three riverine nuclear areas (Dak~i~a Kosa+a,

Khinjali Mandala and Kongoda Mandala), they shifted their capital . . . from Suvar~apura in western Orissa to Yayatinagara on the coast.

Western Orissa was left in charge of a Manda~esvara named

Abhimanyu, perhaps a younger brother of the Somavam~i king.140

WESTERN ORISSA FRONTIER ZONE OF UNCERTAIN CONTROL

Perhaps in the 11th century C.E., this junior branch of

Somavainsis, incharge of western Orissa, declared their

independence. This is suggested by the use of the sovereign

title Para.mesvara, Paramabha~~araka and Para.mamahesvara by

king Somesvara.141

In the last decade of 11th century C.E. western Orissa

became a zone of uncertain political control liable to attack and

conquest from several directions and this uncertainty continued

upto the second half of the 13th century.

Perhaps Kosalinandam refers to this historical period,

dating it as Kaliyuga 4200, and to the autocratic ruler of

Mandale5vara of western Orissa.142 Perhaps the writer referred to

the Manda~e5vara declaring independence because his quarrelsome

and autocratic rule was the cause of his downfall and the

140. K.C.Panigrahi, op.cit, p.106; El., XII, pp.135 ff; XXVIII, p.321 ff.

141. lhid. p.117.

142. KosaH\nandain, I I, 43-44.

55

beginning of ash~asodara rule; this latter gave way later to

Chauhan rule in western Orissa. One may wonder how the poet could

put an exact date to the incident in this kavya which he wrote

nearly six hundred years after the incident. To assess this one

has to examine the point at which the kavya was written, the

social background of the writer and the identity of the sponsor

of the text. All of this will be discussed later.

~

TERRITORIAL INTEGRATION AND DISINTEGRATION OF DAK9I~A KOSA~A

From the discussion so far, we may conclude that the

political development of western Orissa was marked by local,

sub-regional and regional integration from below, laterally. This

continued for centuries and then the larger entity broke up.

The disintegration of the Gupta empire in the 5th century

C.E. had made Daksina Kosala an uncertain frontier zone between . . . the Na~a and Vakataka kingdoms. This helped the indigenous.tribal

chiefs to extend their political power in their respective zones.

This resulted in ~wo powerful kingdoms led successively by ,

Amaraaryakula of Saravapura and Panquvam~is of Mekala. To sustain . their kingdoms, these chiefs had to depend upon the bhogas and

bhagae.141 The chiefs had to persuade the tribals to become

settled agriculturists so that production would increase; because

a tribal economy based on shifting cultivation cannot sustain an

emerging kingdom. Given also the need to legitimise their claim

143. In most of the grants referred to earlier, the villagers were asked to give bhoga and bhaga to the grantee.

56

to their newly acquired position, and to their share of the

produce (bhaga), it will not be wrong to suggest that the

granting of lands to Brahma~as and temples during this period

contributed to changing the agrarian situation. The emergence of

sub-regional kingdoms induced changes in the society and economy.

Gradually, the earlier rights to land, based on indigenous

kinship ties, were partially usurped by the new kings, their

relatives, and service holders. This would have contributed to

increased stratification. In these circumstances the rulers /

adopted new ideologies Vai~navism, Bhagavtism, Saivism and , Saktism. This situation marks the transition from prestate to

state society in Dak~i~a Kosa~a.

Upto now we have analysed the territorial integration and

disintegration in Dak~ina Kosala. It has been observed that at

least upto the 14th century the political fragmentation and

decentralisation was initiated from below and not from above.

There was a strong pull towards fragmentation and decentra-

lisation, a pull coming from indigenous tribal chiefs and chiefs

of obscure origins, who took advantage of weak central authority,

assumed power, and formed kingdoms in the frontier zones of

uncertain control. The examples are Saravapurias, Panquvamsis or

Somavam~is and Chauhans in Daksina Kosala. . . . CHAUHAN MYTH AND ROYAL LEGITIMISATION

In the 15th and 16th century, after the disintegration of

•

57

the Ganga empire of Orissa, the pull for decentralisation and,

political fragmentation came mainly from the partition of ruling

families, and from grants of villages by the ruler to indigenou.s

tribal chiefs who ended up as independent potentates. These new

chiefs tried to legitimise their position in western Orissa. So

let us examine the specific historical background in which the

rajapura~a~ (~upra) in western Orissa originated.

We have mentioned earlier that with the disintegration of

the Somavainsi kingdom, western Orissa became an uncertain

frontier zone between .Orissa and Ratanpur. In this uncertainty,

the indigenous tribal chiefs began to join with Brahma~as t? form

a type of oligarchy.l44 Brahmanas had been active in the area •

/ - / with Saravapurias and Somavamsis. Now they needed new patrons,

and the tribal chiefs needed men who could provide them with the

customary forms of legitimacy, symbolism, myth etc. (supra)

The literary sources and local tradition refer to eight

chiefs, including a Brahma~a chief, ruling the Daksina Kosala . . . kingdom and jointly known as sodaral45 (brothers). The Brahmana . chief is said to have &iven shelter to Ramadeva or Ramai Dev.

Finally, Ramadeva became Raja (king).146 (~upra)

144. See fn 29.

145. Kosa+anandam, I, 30.

146. Jhid, IV, 31-34, Also fn.46 above.

58

We have no historical support for a Chauhan immigration to

western Orissa. It is more probable that one of the local chiefs

emerged powerful enough to declare his independence and, seeking

the Brahmanas' help and advice, claimed Chauhan status . . Secondly, the fleeing of Chauhan Rajputs from Rajasthan to

different areas of India after the death of Prithviraj of Delhi,

becoming rulers through showing some extraordinary powers -- in

west.~rn Orissa. one OT th"=""":: :..:::: ~co.id to have killed a lioness

this is a familiar motif advanced to legitimise claims to newly

acquired positions.

In Daksina . . Ko~ala . we have seen how the indigenous tribal

chiefs carved out their kingdoms and claimed Amara-~ .... "-"'-Kula and . . status. They patron:.:.:-:-'!. orahmanas and temples. The .

Brahmana grantees exercised various rights. They were generally . endowed with tax-free villages without any restraints

(Sakalabadhi-virodha adirahita). The dues granted to the donee,

along with land, included fines, taxes, and at times even rights

to the produce of adjacent forest area.147 The new knowledge of

the grantees helped improve cultivation, and their rites and

symbolism inculcated in the indigenous tribals a sense of loyalty

to the established order upheld by the ruler. The Brahmanas had a . tremendous influence upon the inner colonisation of the areas of

their settlement and in the maintenance of tHindu' law and

147. El, XXVII, p.327.

59

•Royal' order.l48 Although there was no contractual element in

the giving of land grants, the Brahma~as were probably obliged to

render religious services,· as seen elsewhere.l49

In these circumstances it is not difficult to believe in

the emergence of a Brahma~a-Kshatriya ruling coalition in western

Orissa. We have evidence of land grants to Brahmanas in western •

Orissa (see fn.128). One such Brahma~a of Patnagarh might have

emerged powerful enough during a time of political uncertainty to

join with tribal chiefs to form a kingdom. This may be seen as a·

local version of a pan-Indian pattern.

FROM ASTASODARA A TYPE OF OLIGARCHY TO ATTARGARH ADHIPATI . . . The geographical location of Patnagarh and the surrounding

area . was also helpful for them. This area was inaccessible till

the 19th century and even now it is inhabited by a majority of

tribal people. During the 11th and 12th centuries this area was

under the Mandalesvara of Suvarnapura or Sonepur.l50 Patanpattan . . . . . . or modern Patnagarh was a mandala under a Mandale~vara or

• • 0 " • •

148. H.Kulke, 1978, "Royal Temple Policy and the Structure of Medieval Hindu kingdoms", in A.Eschmann, H.Kulke, G.C. Tripathi (eds)~ 1986 (reprint) The Cult of Jagannath and Regional Tradition of Orissq, Manohar, Delhi, p.127. (1978, South Asia Institute)

149. B.D.Chattopadhyaya, 1983, Political Processes and Structure of Polity in Early Medieval India : Problems and Perspec­~; Presidential Address, Ancient History Section, Indian History Congress.

150. S.P.Das, op.cit, p.166.

I

60

Rinakal51 but due to its geographical location, this area as a . whole had never been completely incorporated into the political

system of the larger imperial power. The different rulers had

tried to incorporate the tribal population into the larger

society through various religious traditions ,

namely Saivism,

Vai~navism /

and Saktism. The best evidence of this lies in the ,

ruined 64 Yogini temple and Siva temple in the midst of a deep

forest, forty kilometres from Patnagarh.l52

The territories of the eight chiefs, to whom Jayachandrika

refers, are located in deep forest and on hill tops.l58 The chief

in tribal society may have emerged·as a result of the agrarian

changes initiated by the Somavamsi rulers (supra). The rulers of

the time had also sought to include them in the militia.l54 So

there was an attempt from above in the tribal areas to include

them in the state system. This indirectly helped in the growth of

a new system in about the 14th century which Kosalanandam records . as a"s-t:asodara, literally, "eight chiefs", or a type of oligarchy.

151. ll.i.d..

152. B.Das, 1979, 'Yogini Cult in Orissa', Proceeding of the Indian History Congress, Waltair, pp.91-98. He says, tthe coexistence of the Brahmanical and tribal culture led to interaction between the two, mother goddess, worshipped by the non-vedic tribes, entered the Br~hmanical pantheon. The hill tribes, who believed in matriarchy were worshipper of Sakti. So all the Yogini temple are found in tribal areas of Orissa and Madhya Pradesh'.

153. H.E.Impey, 1863, "Notes on Gujrat state of Patna··, (reprint) Orissa District Gazetters. Bolangir, 1968, p.63.

154. Jayachandrika, I, Ramai Dev, I.

61

One such chief emerged as the garhpati155 of Patnagarh< He

changed the egalitarian system of rule (a~tasodara rule) and . recognised the seven as garhpatis or mallicks of different areas,

who enjoyed superior status in their respective areas. He

gradually transformed the system. The recognition of tribal

chiefs as hereditory mallicks resulted in a hierarchical

arrangement. The garhpatis were allowed to administer their

respective areas and were required to pay a periodical tribute,

bhe~~i, and to help the king or overlord in an emergency.156 In

return for their service, they kept the income from a part of

their territory for their own maintenance.157 The village headman

was now recognised as hereditary head of the village, gaha~ia or

gaotia or gartia.158 He was required to supply military help

during an emergency like the mallicks159 to the overlord. For

that the gahatia enjoyed the land attached to a cluster of

155. Garb means a fort and garhpati means ruler/administrator of the fort. But in Chhatisgarh garb did not always mean a fort but rather a territorial division, a centre or even a place.

156. Jayachandrika, I, II, Orissa District Gazetteers. Bolangjr, p.65.

157. lhid, p.66, British Settlement Officers also report the process.

158. Jayachandrika, I, 10.

159. Jayachandrika and British records refer to the a~~asodara rule as a~tamallick rule. Mallick is an Arabic word which literally m~ans king or ruler, also a noble of high rank. So this addition was of a later period.

62

villages.l60 The revenue from this provided for his maintenance

and that of his paiks (soldiers).l81

Here, we see new ideas at work. A deeper reach. of

hierarchical ideas, obligation of military service, and provision

for maintaining soldiers. In the absence of evidence of Chauhan

immigration to this area, we suggest that one of the insiders,

i.e., one of the eight chiefs (~stasodara) listened to Brahmana . . advisers both regarding his own identity and regarding

hierarchical political relations; he used the opportunity then

and claimed a superior position. In the process he emulated the

hierarchical arrangements of the previous period in adjoining

areas.

The ruler of Patnagarh recognised the overlordship of the

Gajapati

c.1360

rulers of Orissa and became a samanta or feudatory

areas.

C.E.l82 His successor gradually encroached on nearby

By the end of the 15th century it became a vast kingdom,

at the beginning

Sambalpur (infra).

II (c.1520-1540)

of the 16th century it divided into Patna and

The eighth ruler of this dynasty, Vaijal Dev

for the first time claimed himself to be a

160. H.E.Impey, op.cit, p.67.

161. ~. p.73.

162. S.P.Das, op.cit, p.200.

63

Chauhan in his sanskrit work Vaijal-karika.16S

Again in the last decade of 16th century Sambalpur was

subdivided into two, Sonepur and Sambalpur; and Patna was

subdivided into Patna and Khariar.164 By early 17th century,

groups identified as, or proclaimed to be, Chauhan came into

salience. By that time the Sambalpur ruler had already emerged as

the most powerful ruler and had conquered the vicinity and became

the A~~argarh Adhipatl165. A~~argarh can literally mean eighteen

forts or places; but it came to be a general title of a Raja.166

Perhaps he became an independent Raja and ended his allegiance to

the Orissa Gajapati in the second half of the 16th century. The

defeat of Mukunda Deva, the Gajapati of Orissa by the Sultan of

Bengal in 1568167 helped the feudatory rulers of Orissa to

declare their independence.168 By the beginning of the 17th

century the Sambalpur ruler claimed the sovereign title of

163. Yaiial Karika, I, 6-7, Earlier rulers of this dynasty did not claim themselves to be Chauhans, e.g., in N~shimhanath Temple inscription, Vaijal Dev I, the third ruler of this dynasty, simply claims himself as son of Vatsaraj Dev of Patnanagara. B. Mishra, 1937, "Naras.ithhanath Stone Inscrip­tion of Vaijal Dev," l.HQ, XII, 3, pp.485-488.

164. Rajashree Devi, 1983, Khadialara Itihas, Cuttack, p.18.

165. S.P.Das, op.cit, p.200.

166. C.U.Wills, 1919, "Territorial System of Rajput Kingdoms of Medieval Chhatisgarh", ~. XV, p. 201.

167. K.C.Panigrahi, op.cit, pp.242-243.

168. ~- As a symbolic declaration of independence a Jagannath temple was built at Sambalpur.

64

Hirakha~4a Chhatrapati Maharaja Attargarh Maudamanitse. . . . Baliar

Singhlbecame the .ruler of A~~argarh Sambalpur in 1617 C.E.l70

Gangadhar Mishra the ~ .

author of Kosa~anandam, was a court

poet of Baliar Singh; his father had also been a court poet at

the Sambalpur durbar as well as the guru of the ruler.l71 He

received some villages from the king for his maintenance. He /-

belonged to the family of Sambhukara and Vidyakara, two renowned

SJ!lrli writers of Orissa. The Mishra family in Sambalpur is called

Utkali Brahmana, indicating that it had come from Utkal or . . eastern Orissa. The family were famous for composing poems and

kavyas for the rulers of Orissa. Gangadhar Mishra's son Gopal

Mishra migrated to the Ratanpur kingdom and became a court poet

there.

The above mentioned background of Gangadhar Mishra, the

author of Kosalanandam, indicates that he was patronised by the •

ruler of Sambalpur. And perhaps Mishra wrote the kavya in the

interest of his patron.

NEED OF A WRITTEN SUPPORT

At what point, we may ask, does it become necessary to

write such a kavya ? Did the Chauhan Rajputs of western Orissa

169. JaYachandrika refers to the Raja of Sambalpur with that epithet.

170. S.P.Das, op.cit, p.347, Orissa District Gazetters. Sambal­PYI:, 1'971, pp.63 place him between 1660-90 C.E.

171. S.P.Das, op.cit, p.348; Ko'Salana.ndain, XXI, 20.

65

need, in the beginning of the 17th century, to add written

supports to their earlier claim of superior status 7

The groups calling themselves Chauhan Rajputs, which ha~

emerged in mid-14th century, had, by early 17th century, extended

their sway all over western Orissa, had ended their allegiance to

the Orissa rulers, had stopped paying their dues to them, and had

taken on titles of sovereignty.

At this stage perhaps they felt the need to authenticate

their status and their exercise of political authority over a

vast area. There was also a need to account for the increasing

power of the ruler. With the end of Hindu rule in Utka~a,

furthermore, there was a shortage of patrons in eastern Orissa.

Perhaps during this period the Brahmanas from Utkala or eastern . . Orissa migrated to western Orissa in search of patrons in the new

kingdom, as had happened in northern India after the

disintegration of the Gupta empire (supra). The Brahmanas who

came from Utkala were called Utakali Brahmana. Gangadhar Mishra, . . . . the author of Ko5a~anandairi, was one such.

ANALYSIS OF THE TEXTS

A. / - . KOSALANANDAMl 7 2 . Koea~anandam, can be divided into three main sections. The

first, describes the mythical origin of Rajputs, the second

172. KQSalanandam, Acc.no.13, Orissa State Museum, Bhubaneswar. Besides, this these are three other versions. The details of which are given in the appendix I.

66

describes and eulogizes the Chauhan Rajput heroes of India and

the third describes Kosa~a (western Orissa) with a genealogy of

the Chauhans of Kosa+a and the achievements of Baliar Singh, the

ruler of Sambalpur.

• In this Kavya the author tried to explain the changes in

the state of affairs, and how the kingships had reached a

particular stage. He narrated the mythical origin of the Chauhan

dynasty, described as a great dynasty. Secondly, he tried to

connect its genealogy with that of the Chauhans of North India,

and finally it tried to legitimise the Chauhans as independent

rulers of Kosala . .

Such change is reminiscent of similar changes elsewhere. It

has been argued that

The emergence oi small regional kingdoms, based on a

feudalistic pattern of functioning, led to the development

of local loyalties and interest~ and a more strongly

defined association of a locality with its history.

Together with this, the centre of historical interest had

moved from the tribe to the king and his court. The heroic

tradition had given way to the court and the focus of the

court, the king. The suta receded into the background and

the court poet became central to historical writings.173

173. R.Thapar, 1978, Ancient Indian Social History pretations, Orient Longman, Hyderabad, p.274.

some Inter-

67

The story of dispersal of the Chauhan Rajputs of Northern

India after the Turki attack was widespread,l74 and bh~tts or

bards of western Orissa referred to their rulers as Garhsambhari

Chauhans. This may have provided a core story for the local

genealogies and helped create a myth, with the help of literati

to support the status claim of the Chauhan Rajput rulers of

Ko~ala. ~

In this kavya the author seeks to validate the Kshatriya

status of the Chauhan Rajput : the first Chauhan of Patnagarh is

said to have captured power with his own strength by killing a

lioness (the symbol of chaos in the absence of a king in a

kingdom) and capturing nearby areas. The kavya says that he was

finally recognised by the ruler of Orissa who gave him his

broth~r's daughter in marriage and recognised him as his

samantal75 or tributory ruler. This linking of the new ruler's

ancestors to the old dynasties, attributed in the kavya, would

confer high status o'n the new ruler.

B. JAYACHANDRIKA

Our second text, Jayachandrika was written in the second

half of 18th century by Prahlad Dubey, a court poet of Sarangarh

174. R.D.Banerjee, 1931, History of Orissa, II, R.Chatterji, Calcutta, Appendix-!.

175. KoSalinandam, XII, 26-36.

68

darbar.l76 Sarangarh was a garh of the Sambalpur A~~argarh.

Jayachandrika is written in Avadhi dialect in Devanagri

script but Oriya, Chhatisgarhi and Bhojpuri words are frequently

used. It is written in the Riso style in the form of seven

cantos. This suggests that the author had come from north India

or was well versed in the Raso style of writing of Rajasthan.

Dubey was a court poet of Biswanath Singh, ruler of Sarangarh,

and he got a village in Saria pargana from Biswanath for his

work.l77

In the first canto he has described how Prithviraj was

defeated by the follower of Allah and how his successor Garb

Sambhari Chauhan fled, accompanied by a pregnant queen and

reached Patnagarh. Chakradhar Panigrahi, a Brahma~who was a

mallick, gave shelter to the queen, and in his house she gave

birth to a boy named Ramai. Ramai in his childhood was herding

the sheep of ·Panigrahi. One day Panigrahi saw Ramai sleeping

under a tree with a snake shading him with its hood. The Brahma~a

recognised from this that Ramai was not an ordinary man and from

176. P.C.Rath, 1942, "History of Chauhans from the Jayachandrika of Prahlad Dubey", JBORS, XXXVIII, p.436. J.K.Sahu, 1967, "Historical value of Jayachandrika" QHB5., XV, pp.39 ff. C.M.Tiwari, 1982, Prahalad Dubey Krut Jayacbandrika, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Hindi, Utkal University, p.37.

177. C.M.Tiwari, op.cit, p.50. Tiwari has collected the local traditions from Sarangarh where Prahlad Dubey was a court poet. · One tradition associates Dubey with Ayodhya and another with "Saraju parin Brahmaz:t", p.59.

69

then on educated him properly. At that time eight mallioks were

ruling over Patna. They ruled for a day at a time, in turn. On

the day that Panigrahi was to rule, he could not attend the court

due to ill health and deputed Ramai to manage the state. Ramai

utilised the occasion to make lavish grants to officials and

soldiers and thus became popular. When he got another opportunity

to rule, he managed to kill all the seven chiefs and usurped the

throne.

The author describes Ramai as a Suryavam~i Chauhan of

Rama's lineage The canto ends with a list of Ramai's successors

upto the tenth generation.

The second canto justifies the division of Patnagarh and

Sambalpur. A few generations after Ramai, a second brother of the

king of Patnagarh named Balaram obtained the Sambalpur area for

services he had rendered to his elder brother, namely, that the

former had crossed the flooded river at midnight and brought the

medicine to save the life of the latter's wife. From this point

the description shifts from Patnagarh to Sambalpur and compares

it with Chittor. It describes the control of Sambalpur over

eighteen garbs. The chief of Sarangarh is described as the chief

Umrao under Sambalpur A~~argarh.

In the third canto we find a list of successors of Balram

Deo upto the tenth generation, and the role of Sarangarh chiefs

on different occasions. Thus, the Boud state (present Boud

70

sub-division; Phulbani district) could not be conquered by 17

Garhs of Sambalpur. Finally, the chief of the eighteenth garh,

Sarangarh, was invited to do so, and Bhikh Rai, its chief, was

able to conquer Boud state. For this achievement the Sambalpur

Raja made him a dewan. This canto ends with an account of the

breakdown of law and order in Sambalpur due to the autocratic

rule of Akbar Rai, the dewan of Sambalpur.

The f·ourth canto describes the Sarangarh chief's role in

giving shelter to the fugitive prince of Sambalpur, and the fifth

deals with the attack by the prince of Sambalpur to capture Akbar

Rai, the dewan.

The sixth canto continues the story of the attack and the

circumstances which led to Akbar's surrender and, eventually, the

restoration of the Sambalpur Raja in Samvat 1838 (1781 C.E).

The concluding canto deals with the Marahatta conqueror

Chinamji's retreat to Chanda for fear of the Sarangarh chief.

The appendix gives the agniku~a myth of the origin of the

Chauhans and traces the link from Prithviraj to Ramai. He ends

with the praise of Jay.ant Sai, the ruler of Sambalpur, in whose

reign he wrote the text.

Let us now evaluate the Jayachandrika and ~ee what it adds

to the previous text. In this text the story of Chauhan Rajputs

is repeated with some changes. Ramai Dev is referred to as a

71

Suryavam~i in the lineage of Rama and also linked to the agnikula • myth.1?8 Another important addition was the story of the fleeing

of a pregnant queen, her delivering a child, and a snake

protecting the young Ramai.l?9 Thirdly, the reference to the rule

of the eight mallicksl80 is new. Fourthly, the division of the

kingdom into Patnagarh and Sambalpur, and finally the role of the

Sarangarh chief and achievement of Jayant Sai, the ruler of

Sambalpur. 1 81

As with Kosalanandam this text can also be divided into . three sections: the mythological, the genealogicall82 and

finally, the contemporary happenings.18S Let us evaluate the

information in them.

By the 18th century (when Jayachandriki was composed) the

story of a snake protecting the ruler was already prevalent in

Orissa,184 Chotanagpur,l85 Chhatisgarh.186 The author may have

178.

179.

180.

181.

182.

183.

184.

185.

Jayachandriki, Appendix.

lJ2iji, I' 28.

.l.b.i..d, I, 30 .

.lb.i..d, II.

.l.bi..si' I & II.

.l.b.i..d, IV & VI.

K.C.Panigrahi, s:n2. ~it,

R.D.Haldar, Rajabansi pp.259-93.

1928, Family

"An of

p.190.

Abstract of Chhotanagpur"

the Annals of the Man in India, VII,

186. Imperial Gazetteer of India, X, p.20, Chhati~garh.

72

been tempted to add it in order to proclaim the king's

charismatic power, as part of justifying the overthrow of the

rule of eight mallicks by his patrons.l87 In the Ko~alanandam the

rise to power was represented as having been smooth; but in

Jayachandrika Ramai Dev is seen as usurping power by killing

seven mallicks. Secondly, Ko~alanandam referred to the then . rulers as a5tasodaral88 but the latter termed them as mallicks.

I

Another ~mportant addition in the latter was the symbolic rule of

the Golden Lemon, i.e., before Ramai Dev usurped the throne, the

eight mallicks ruled in turn and a Golden Lemon was considered to

be the king of Patna.l89

To posit a Golden Lemon as the king of Patna perhaps says

that the throne was vacant and, in the absence of a king, there

was chaos and the capture of the throne by Ramai was justified.

Secondly, to connect Ramai with the mythical Rama and the

Chauhans of North India was to proclaim the Kshatriya status of

Chauhans of Orissa~ Thirdly, the story of the snake served to

proclaim the supernatural power of the new ruler and of his

lineage, in the idiom then prevalent in the locality. Fourthly,

it deals with the story of the partition of Patna into two and

the creation of the Sambalpur kingdom.190 Finally, it deals with

187. Jayachandrika, II.

188. Kosa*anandam, I, 30.

189. Jayachandrika, I, 27.

190. ~. II.

73

the role of the Sarangarh dewin in maintaining law and order in

Sambalpur. The author eulogises the chief of Sarangarh and

depicts him as a great hero who was loyal to the raja of

Sambalpur.l91 This story is corroborated by the historical

development of Sambalpur. But the author has exaggerated the

roles of his patrons, i.e., Sarangarh chief and the Raja of

Sambalpur, Jayant Sai. This is evident from the note of a British

diamond merchant,192 who was an eye witness to the incident

mentioned in Jayachandrika and other sources. The author claimed

that it was due to the chivalry of the Sarangarh chief that the

throne of Sambalpur was regained by the Chauhan Rajputs around

1781, but Thomas Mottee, the British diamond trader, adds other

elements the fear of'attack from Marahatta, the role of the

Sonepur state as having helped the Sarangarh chief. Other

sources (see Chapter IV) indicate that Jayant Sai was not a legal

son of his' father. He had fled away to Chanda after an

unsuccessful attempt to capture Sambalpur gaddi during the life

time of his father. Around 1778, Akbar Rai, the dewan of

Sambalpur had placed Balabhadra Sai of Padampur, an appanage of

Sambalpur ruling family, on the Sambalpur gaddi, on the death of '

Jayant's father and elder brother. Around 1781, with the help of

191. Jhid, III, IV, V.

192. T.Mottee, 1799, "A Narrative of a Journey to the Diamond Mines pf Sambalpur in the Province of Orissa", Asiatic Ann­ual Register. Reprint in O'Malley's District 'Gazetteer of Sambalpur, pp.40 ff. and The Orissa Historical Research Journal, 1952, I, 2, Appendix, pp.l-49.

74

the Gond chief of Sarangarh, Jayant usurped the gaddi and put

both, Akbar and Balabhadra, to death. Therefore, he needed

legitimisation particularly acutely. So we witness large scale

land grants to Brahmanas and temples by him -- in measure . .

surpassing his predecessors.

At this stage the story provided in the earlier rajapura~a

(Kosa!anandam) had become irrelevant. There was a need for a new

rationalisation and a fresh interpretation of myth of the society

highlighting the role of Gond chief and justifying the capture of

power by force. So we see in Jayachandrika, the change from

as~asodara to a5tamallick and from smooth rise to power to

usurping of power by killing seven mallicks by the first founder

of Chauhan rule at Patnagarh.

C. ~USHIMHA MAHATMYA

The third source N.~shimha Hah~tmya was written by Rajendra

Singh Bariha in the 20th century. The author was the Zamindar of

Borasambar-Padampur.19S His text claimed to have been based upon

193. Orissa District Gazetteers. Bolangir, p.48 and The Orissa Historical Research Journal, 1,2, Appendix, pp.l-49, claims tha~ Nrushiffiha Mahatmya was written by Laxman Mishra. I utilisea a copy which was in possession of Subash Mehar of Ghess. The cover page is half damaged but it is clearly legible. The writer Rajendra Singh Bariha, the then Zamindar of Padampur in the preface says that he has given a poetic form to an earlier note of a jitiya Kondha poet Yogadas. The Manuscript was corrected by Pandit Laxman Mishra, headmaster of Barpali school. Rajendra Singh Bariah·, 1927 (reprint) NfushiiDba MahatmYa. The name of the press and place of prin ing are not clear. (First edition 1908) •

75

a durbar note of a sanyasi poet Yogadas of an earlier period.l94

While describing the importance of Nrushimhanath, a holy place in . Sambalpur district, he praises Harinath, the founder of the

temple.

This text presents another version of the origin story of

the Chauhans of Patna with some additions to give special

importance to the Zamindar of Borasamber who was a Binjhal, one

of the tribal peoples of the area.

This version of the story goes like this.l95 A Chauhan

Rajput chief Humer, after the capture of the Delhi throne by

Ala-ud-din, escaped and travelled as far as Gandhagiri (Gandha-

mardan near Paikmal in Sambalpur district) and established a fort

there. After some years he decided to take revenge against

Ala-ud-din and marched towards Delhi. At the time of departure he

told his seven queens that he was taking sua and sari (two birds}

with him; and in case the birds returned without him, the queens

should know he was no more in this world. He reached Delhi and

bravely fought against Ala-ud-din and freed some of the rajas who

were in the prisons of Delhi. But unfortunately while drinking

water in a pond the birds escaped and returned back to Gandhaairi

fort. Seeing the birds, without the king, six queens committed

194. Rajendra Singh Bariha, op.cit, preface to N;ushifuba Mah~tmYa.

195. NrushiiDba Mah!tmya.

76

suicide by jumping into a well and the seventh one decided

against it as she was pregnant. She left Gandhagiri fort and

travelled as far as Ramud village. Burner on his return found his

fort deserted and committed suicide. The surviving queen took

shelter in the house of the village headman of Ramud. There she

delivered a child, and the headman brought up the child. A Jhadua

Brahmana of the same village, Panigrahi, was appointed as guru of

the child. The child later became famous as Ramai Dev (the

founder of the Chauhan dynasty of Patna). At that time Patna

Rajya was ruled by astamallick. . The Barihas (the village

headman's relatives) of Ramud decided to install Ramai as the

ruler of Patna and the latter, with the help of Barihas or

Binjhals of Ramud, killed the as~amallick and became the ruler of

Patna Rajya. The Chief of the village put the turban over the

head of Ramai at coronation (the village chief had a turban

earlier which his ancestors had received for their show of valour

from the Raja of Puri). For the help to him and his mother during

their troubled days, the Bariha family was rewarded by Ramai. One

of their family members, Surya Bariha, was made the Zamindar of

Borasambar and was given a special role in the kingdom : at the

coronation of a new Raja, it was the special duty of the Binjhal

chief of Borasambar to take the king in his lap and fold the

turban of state over the king's head.l96

The above addition clearly emphasises the role of the

196. lbid, I.

77

Binjhal chief. The first two works Kosa~anandam and Jayachandrika

had not mentioned the Binjhal chief's role in the coronation.

Secondly, the author is trying to provide justification for

the new practice prevalent at the time of inheritance or the

coronation ceremony of new rulers of Patna State. Perhaps to

emphasise the authenticity of this story he adds ~hat his source

of information was a durbar note of a jatiya kavi or a people's

poet of the earlier period. Going to that original note,l91 we

find that Yogadas, the writer of the note, claims to be a Kandha

poet. He mentions that he was a contemporary of Mukunda Deva,

Gajapati ruler of Orissa. The editor of the note says that the

author of the no~e was the contemporary of Bhojaraja of

Borasambar estate (1550-1577).198

Comparing Nrushimha . Charita and Nrushimha Mahatmya, one . notices that the original source refers to Ala-ud-din as Ala-udal

and the story runs parallel upto the suicide of six queens and

the escape of the seventh one to Rumud. There she gave birth to

Ramai, who later became the R~ja of Patna. His note about the

Chauhans of Patna ends there; it does not mentioned the role of

the Bariha Chief or Binjhal chief. But the author of Ntushima

Mahatmya mentions the role of Binjhal, giving a succession list

for the Binjhal chiefs upto the 34th generation to claim

197. Yogdas, (n.d.), Nrushimba Charita (edited by Narayan Pruseth, 1982, Dora Art Press, Padampur)

198. !Qig, p.19.

78

kshatriya status for them. We recall that the author of Nrushima

Mahatmya claimed in his introduction that he was only giving a

poetic form to the note of Yogadas without changing its

content.199

It may be noted that the Borasambar chief was laying claim

to independence in the 19th century and had even stopped paying

revenue to his overlord, the RajA of Patna.2oo The Chief was

trying to claim an ancient origin for his •·

line. Nru~himha

Mahatmya provides a succession list of.the Binjhal chiefs upto 34

generations. The text conceded superi~r status to the Patna

rulers yet tried to validate the special role or position of the

Zamindar of Borasambar in the Patna kingdom. Secondly, by

mid-19th century, the British government had captured western

Orissa and did not recognise the Borasambar Zamindar. So the

ruler of Borasambar might have tried to claim ancient origin by

preparing a ty?e of rajapura~a. In the process he emulated the

earlier rajapura~as of the locality. The influence of Kosa~a-

nand am and Jayachandrika is clearly evident in Nrushimha . Mahatmya. In the earlier cases, the rulers utilised court poets,

and in the latter case, th~ Zamindar himself composed the Puri~a

and sought to enhance its authenticity by saying that his source

of information was a durbar note of a people's poet of an earlier

period. This case is a good illustration of a chief of an

199. Rajendra Singh Bariah, op.cit., preface.

200. Orissa District Gazetteers. Bolangir, p.57.

79

autoc~thonous group claiming superior status by way of a new

interpretation relying on a core story and prevalent custom and

tradition.

D. RAMAl DEV

AND

E. RAVANA ANGADA UBACHA •

The other t~o ~c~~ce~ Ramai Dev, and Rav~a Angada Ubacha

can be considered together as both follow the same story line

though the former was written at Bolangir and the latter at

Khariar. 'frd~ latter is in another way different f.rom all other

texts referred to earl.l~ ..... It is written in prose, i.e.- +1---~·-.:~

a conversation between Raval?-a and Ailga1:~·-. An.gada explains to

Ravana how the wn~li na~ changed and how the Chauhans of Orissa . came to power. Perhaps it was to give authenticity to the story

but it is difficult to see why he chooses these two characters,

Ravana and Angada, belonging to different camps in the Ramayana, . for a dialogue.

These texts also repeat the origin myth of the Chauhans of

North India but add a major change regarqing the first

establishment of Chauhans in western Orissa.

These texts claim Manikgarh, a ruined fort in Nawapara Sub-

division of Kalahandi, as the first seat of Chauhans in western

Orissa.201

201. Ramai Dev, I, 20, Ravaqa ADsada Qbacha, IV, p.2.

' I

I

80

The narrative states that Prithviraj's. successor, Hamir

Dev, fled to Daksina Ko§ala and was able to establish himself at . . . Manikgarh. He had seven wives. When Hamir was killed in a battle

his six wives performed jauhar but the last one Ashavati fled and

later gave ,birth to a child in the forest. The baby and mother

were taken care of by the tribals but, learning of their royal

origin, the tribals handed over the boy and the queen to

Chakradhar Panigrahi, a Brahma~a of Patnagarh. When the child

attained youth, he showed his valour and killed seven mallicks

and captured power in the Patna kingdom.

We can now assess the new stories added by the authors of

these texts. By the middle of the 19th century the British

government had captured western Orissa202 and recognised Patna as

feudatory state whereas it refused to recognise Padampur and

Khariar. Similarly,20S during the events of 1857 a ruined fort

called Manikgarh came into limelight in western Orissa. The

rebels utilised this ruined fort against the British and the

British force had difficulty in entering the fort.204 Because of

202. N.K.Sahu, Stirling. Mahatab, Cut tack.

(ed) 1956, HistorY of Orissa by W.W.Hunter. A. J.Beam and N.K.Sahu, Sunil Gupta, Calcutta; H.K. 1959, History of Orissa, I, Prajatantra Press,

203. S.R.Temple, 1963, Report on the Zamindaries of the Central Provinces, Nagpur; C.M.Aitchesan, 1909, A Collection of Treaties, Engagements and Sanads, I, relating to feudatory states of Orissa.

204. P.K.Mishra, 1983, Political Unrest in Orissa in the 19th Century, Calcutta p.l20; P.Mukherji, 1964, Utkal University History of Orissa, IV, p.261-62.

81

these circumstances perhaps the authors of the latter texts

claimed the ruined fort as the old seat of Chauhans in western

Orissa.

HISTORICAL VALUE OF THE ABOVE TEXTS

It is clear from the above text~ that before the emergence

of the Chauhan Rajputs, the tribal society was acquiring

chiefdoms.205 The egalitarian aspect had been declining. In the

next stage a kingdom emerged at Patna and its rulers laid formal

claims to be a Chauhan dynasty. To generate a surplus to sustain

the kingdom, the ruler may have tried to settle the tribals

(aborigines) as peasants.206 Of course it is very difficult to

distinguish between tribal and peasant communities in the modern

period;207 but at that stage hunting and gathering and shifting

agriculture were widespread, and by 'tribe' we mean peoples

engaged in this kind of economy. In this area the process of

settling tribes as agriculturists began as early as the 6th

century C.E. But the deep forests and hills allowed many such

groups to retain the tribal economy. Till today there are a few

communities in this area which live by hunting and gathering and

shifting agriculture. A few tribal groups could form kingdoms

205. Kosa~anandafu; I; Jayachandrika I; Ramai Dey I.

206. All these texts mention that forest people were civilised by the rulers. Forest was cleared for agriculture.

207. Andre Beteille, 1974, Six Essays in comparative Sociology, Oxford University Press, Delhi, p.58-74.

82

and acquire Rajput status. On the other hand, some tribal groups

withdrew to the forest and hills as nomads and gatherers. So the

processes can be observed simultaneously in this area, i.e.,

acculturation and deculturation.

The forming of kingdoms rested on generating a surplus, but

the tribals with their simple agricultural technology could not

generate much surplus. So the rulers invited non-tribals to

settle there and cultivate land.208 Tribal lands, Khudkatti or

communal land passed into the hands of non-tribals who were

brought and settled there by the rulers. In some places these

were the rulers' relatives and other service holders. Yet the

settled tribals retained their land under the control of their

tribal garhpati and gahatia or gartia. Those who could not cope

with the new context fell back on the forest as there was

sufficient forest to fall back upon.209

By the 17th century, the leaders of the first and second

categories emerged as the landlords. The first group in

particular attempted to grab the maximum rights. The land and

villages were granted to the relatives of the rulers, as

khorak-po~ak or bharan po~ak estate (for the maintenance) and

208. These texts frequently refer to the king's invitation to the non-tribals to settle in their kingdom.

209. F.Deo, 1984, "Tribal-non-tribal Interaction with Special Reference to Nawapara Sub-division, Kalahandi District, in western Orissa", M.Phil Dissertation, Centre for Historical Studies, School of Social Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.

83

they in turn granted lands to cultivators.210

Gradually, the earlier right to land based on kinship ties

was encroached upon by the king's relatives, service holders and

garhpatis. The latter acquired more rights and in turn granted

lands to the cultivators.211 This intensified the process of

social stratification which had earlier beginnings. Various

levels of intermediaries appeared and the system began to become

more complex. The king recognised these intermediaries by

receiving the tribute in which the hierarchical arrangement was

acted out.

Another feature of the expansion of the Chauhan kingdom in

western Orissa was the right of younger brothers to enjoy a share

of some areas of the kingdom.212 This located the right of

administrative authority and the collection of taxes and dues at

various ·levels. When the younger brothers become hereditory

owners of the garb, they would add to their domains through

conquest through matrimonial alliances with adjoining

kingdoms. The descendents of these younger brothers later became

independent rulers in Sambalpur, Sonepur and Khariar (supra) in

the 15th and 16th centuries.

210. Ibid, pp.36-37.

211. ~.

212. The right of the brothers has been justified in the texts i.e., Kosalanandam, Jayachandrika, Ramai Dev.

j

84

The division of the kingdom and the policy of aggression

and warfare may have introduced new ideas, e.g., the right of the

ruler to reorganise the agrarian order to obtain an agricultural

surplus. The texts refer to the digging of ponds, cutting of

forest for agricultural purposes, settlement of tribals as

agriculturists, inviting peasants from outside to settle, and to

the improvement of the kingdom. Kosalanandam deals in detail with

the importance of water. It also justifies the collection of

taxes from all cultivators including the Brahmanas. The expansion . of the kingdom indicates an expansion of the resource base,

drawing in the forest people too. But there was no sustained

displacement of the tribals. Rather they were integrated into the

emerging order. As noted earlier, most of the rulers originated

from one of the autochthone groups of the locality. The ruler

consolidated his position in a slow, long process. The ruler

recognised the tribal garhpatis and gahatias in return for an

annual tribute. The ruler also depended upon the tribals, who

were in a majority, for recruiting his soldiery.218

Another important development of this period was the

promotion of tribal deities as Esta Devi or tutelary deity. As . most of the ·rulers originated from one of the tribal groups it

was easy for them to raise their tribal deity to be the state

deity; e.g., Sambaleswari in Sambalpur, Raktamvari at Khariar.214

213. S.P.Das, op.cit, p.l80.

214. F.Deo, op.cit, p.36.

'• • I

~

MAP NO.6 • ...... ~-<.

,.,.."'"'

"' I

i \ ! \ , }

... ,,- -..._, \j I -s-..

\ \ ', ,, J ':f

DHENKANAL

' ' I I ,, ' ...

C / -~ ~, \ .. ~ ....__ ..,.

B\1-iAR

· , · - .... J' · ... · ...

, - ·""

. , . _.1

,/

, ... _ , ·- ...... . \

\

~

,

L.. \ I t' ,,. ,..-·

I

'

-.. ~ ' \

\

I \

\<'JON JHAR i.. . \ -/

.' J

10 . '10 50 60 , _ I rl

85

In this process it helped them to legitimise and consolidate

their political power over the area. The incorporation of tribals

into the wider order and their indoctrination, overseen by the

ruler, proceeded in a slow ·and multiface~ manner through

ceremonial and enactment of hierarchical relations and through

such agents as Brahma~as and non-tribal landlords.

The texts show that ru~ers in western Orissa alienated

important fiscal and adminstrative rights to their relatives and

to their dewans. The recognition of garhpati and gahatia helped

to establish a range of intermediaries between the ruler and the

peasant. The ruler's relatives transformed their villages into

their own estates. These developments, noted in the texts, are

confirmed by the historical evidence available now in copper

plates, landgrants, travellers' notes and settlement records

(infra).

It has been observed elsewhere that the disintegration of

the Gurjara Pratihara empire resulted in decentralisation and

political fragmentation, resulting partly from partition in the

:uling family and partly from "the widespread practice of

granting big and small territories to vassals who entrenched

themselves territorially and ended up as indpendent

potentates".215 A similar process can be observed in western

Orissa in the 15th and 16th centuries but a different earlier

215. R.S.Sharma, 1965, Indian Feudalism, c.300-1200, University of Calcutta, Calcutta, p.159.

86

process there should not be overlooked. In the earlier phase,

i.e., up to the 14th century the impul~es of political

fragmentation and decentralisation came from below, not from

above. Indigenous tribal chiefs and chiefs of obscure origin,

taking advantage of the weakness of central authority rose to

power in the frontier zones of uncertain control and formed their I

own kingdoms we have seen the examples ~ -of Saravapurias,

Panduvamsis and the Chauhans of Dak~i~a Ko~ala. We came across

the process of diffusion of king3hip that a large state

employing Brahma~as a3 court poets, mythographers etc., begins to

disintegrate in variou~ contexts noted above -- releasing a

double chain of possibility : ambitious chiefs laying claims to

being rajas on their own, and Brahma~as in search of new patrons,

ready to serve the chiefs in projecting their claims.

The tribals were in a predominant position in western

Orissa in the pre-colonial period. Still today they form a very

significant number, nearly 35%. So we will introduce some of the

tribal groups of western Orissa in the next chapter.

APPENDIX-I

The original kavya Kosalanandam is not available. We

utilised the following texts

A. Orissa State Museum, Bhubaneswar, Kosalanandam, Sanskrit

manuscript in Oriya script. Acc.no.S.Mss.13. The last

stanza of Canto XXII indicate that it was copied, from a

white ant eaten manuscript, by Ramachandra Satapathy and

corrected by Shyam Sunder Ratha and Gopinatha, under the

orders of Prataprudra Dev, the raja of Sonepur (1880-1888).

B. Orissa State Museum, Bhubaneswar, Kosalanandam, English

translation (manuscript) by Lingaraj Mishra, 1945, 6

c.

volumes. Acc.no.14. Hishra

College, Cuttack.

Orissa State Archives,

was a lecturer, Revenshaw

Bhubaneswar, Kosalanandam,

(manuscript), Sanskrit with Oriya translation in Oriya

Script, 5 volumes, Acc.nos.52,53,54,55,56.· The preface

indicates that it was copied and translated by Bauribandhu

Nanda, a Sanskrit teacher of a Sanskrit Tol (school) under

the order of the Raja of Bolangir in 1939.

D. Printed copy of Sonepur durbar. It was edited and published

by Biramitra Singh Deo, the raja of Sonepur in 1929, The

V.S.Press, Cuttack.

Manuscripts A, B and C contain 22 cantos each. These two

copies are similar in their contents but manuscript C contains

23 Cantos·and there are many interpolations. We have studied all

these manuscripts but quoted only from manuscript A as a

88

standard.

Canto XXII, 6, of manuscript A and C and the preface of

manuscript B indicate that the original kavya had 21 Cantos and

the 22nd Canto was added by Gangadhara Guru, a poet, to present

bapsa p~asasti of Chauhans of Patna in the durbar of Divya Singh

Dev, the Gajapati of Puri.

Historical sourcesl indicate that Aurangzeb, the emperor of

India had sent his Subadar to destroy the Puri temple in 1692.

Divya Singh Deo, the Gajapati of Puri, could bribe the Subadar

and according to the agreement between them the main gate of Puri

temple was closed and a fake Jagannath statue was send to

Aurangzeb. From that date till the death of the latter the temple

remained closed officially .. A few months after Aurangzeb's death

in 1707, the Garhjat Chiefs of Oris~a, including the raja of

Patna, forcibly opened the gate and restarted the daily rituals

of Jagannath. On this occasion a great durbar was arranged at

Puri by Divya Singh Dev, the Gajapati.

Perhaps at this durbar of Puri, there was a necessity to

present the family p~asasti(praise) of each Garhjat Chief. Ganga­

dhar Guru, a poet, rendered the p~asasti of Chauhans (Patna Chief)

derived from the Ko~a~inandam by Gangadhar Mishra of an earlier

period as indicated in Canto XXII, 6, of manuscripts A, B and C.

1. Tubsirat-ul-Nazirin quoted in R.L.Mitra, 1875, The Antiqui­ties of Orissa, II, Calcutta, p.112; Mada~apanJi, II, p.70; Jagannath Kaifiat and Cakadapothi quoted in H.Kulke, 1978c, op.cit., p.334. ·