Chutia Kingdom

The Chutia Kingdom (1187–1523) (also Sadiya[1]) was a late medieval state that developed around Sadiya in Assam and adjoining areas in Arunachal Pradesh.[2] It extended over almost the entire region of present districts of Lakhimpur, Dhemaji, Tinsukia and some parts of Dibrugarh.[3] The kingdom fell in 1523 to the Ahom Kingdom after a series of conflicts and the area ruled by the Chutia rulers became the administrative domain of the office of Sadia Khowa Gohain of the Ahom kingdom.[4]

This article is about the medieval kingdom of Assam Valley, India. For other related article that focuses on the Chutia community of Assam, see Chutia people.

Chutia Kingdom

CapitalSadiya (–1523)
Common languagesDeori language, Assamese language
Religion
Kechai Khaiti, Hinduism
GovernmentMonarchy
Monarch 
• 1522–1523
Nityapal (last)
Historical eraMedieval Assam
Preceded by		Succeeded by
Kamarupa
Ahom kingdom
Today part ofIndia
Rulers of Chutia kingdom
Part of History of Assam
Rulers of the Chutiya kingdom
Nandisvaralate 14th century
Satyanarayanalate 14th century
Lakshminarayanaearly 15th century
Durlabhnarayanaearly 15th century
Pratakshyanarayanaunknown
Yasanarayanaunknown
......
Dhirnarayanaunknown - 1523
Chutia monarchy data
  • Royal Flag
  • Mayuradhwaja
  • Coat of Arms
  • Gaja-Singha
  • Royal Heirlooms
  • Golden Cat and Sword
  • Golden Umbrella (Danda-Chhatra)
  • Golden Bracelet
  • Royal Throne
  • Tinisukia Mayur Singhakhana
  • Tutelary deity
  • Kechai-khati
Part of a series on the
History of Assam
Proto-historic
Medieval
Late Medieval
Modern
Contemporary
Categories
  • Architecture
  • Palaces
  • Forts

The Chutia kingdom was one among other ethnic groups (Ahom, Dimasa, Koch, Jaintia etc.) in the region that had emerged by the 13th century after the fall of the Kamarupa kingdom and had crystallised into rudimentary states by the 15th century.[5] Among these, the Chutia kingdom was the most advanced,[6] with its rural industries,[7] trade[8] surplus economy and advanced Sanskritisation.[9][10] After the Ahoms annexed the kingdom, the Chutia state was absorbed into the Ahom state—the nobility and the professional classes were given important positions in the Ahom officialdom[11] and the land was resettled for wet rice cultivation.[12]

Foundation and Polity
Further information: Chutia people

The kingdom emerged during the 13th century in eastern part of present-day Assam, with its capital at Sadiya. Though there is no doubt on the Chutia polity, the origins of this kingdom is obscure.[13] It is generally held that the Chutias originally had their habitat in the hills and that they established a state in the plains around Sadiya before the advent of the Ahoms in 1228.[14][15] The earliest Chutia king in the epigraphic records is Nandin or Nandisvara from the later half of the 14th century[16] mentioned in a grant by his son Satyanarayana who nevertheless draws his royal lineage from his maternal uncle[17] to asura origins.[18] On the other hand a later king Durlabhnarayana mentions that his grandfather Ratnanarayana (identified with Satyanarayana) was a Kamata king.[19] In these early inscriptions the kings are said to be seated in Sadhyapuri, identified with the present-day Sadiya;[20] which is why the kingdom is also called Sadiya. The Buranjis written is the Ahom language language called the kingdom Tiora whereas those written in the Assamese language called it Chutia.[21]

Vaishnava brahmins sanskritised the rulers with references to Krishna legends but placed them lower in the Brahminical social hierarchy because of their autochthonous origins.[22] Though asura lineage of the Chutia rulers have similarities with the Narakasura lineage created for the three Kamarupa dynasties, the precise historical connection is not clear.[23] Though a majority of the brahmin donees of the royal grants were Vaishnavas[24] the rulers patronized the non-brahmanised Dikkaravasini too.[25] Dikkaravasini (also Tamresvari or Kesai-khaiti), was either a powerful tribal deity, or a Buddhist deity adopted for tribal worship.[26] This deity, noticed in the 10th century Kalika Purana well before the establishment of the Chutia kingdom, continued to be presided by a Deori-Chutia priesthood well into the Ahom rule and outside brahminical influence.[27]

Spurious accounts

Unfortunately, there are many manuscript accounts of the origin and lineage that do not agree with each other or with the epigraphic records and they have no historical moorings.[28][29] One such source is Chutiyar Rajar Vamsavali first published in Orunodoi in 1850 and reprinted in Deodhai Asam Buranji.[30] Historians consider this document to have been composed in the early 19th century—to legitimize the Matak kingdom around 1805 or after the end of Ahom rule in 1826.[31] This document relates the legend of Birpal. Yet another Assamese document, retrieved by Ney Elias from Burmese sources, relates an alternative legend of Asambhinna.[32] These different legends suggest that the genealogical claims of the Chutias have changed over time and that these are efforts to construct (and reconstruct) the past.[33]

The Chutia people are considered to be cognate with the Bodo-Kachari peoples[34] and they have shifted from the Chutia language, which has disappeared, to Assamese.[35] The royal family traced its descent from the line of Viyutsva.[36]

Rulers

Only a few recent Buranjis provide the history of the Chutia kingdom,[37] but these compilations cannot be traced to earlier than 19th century[38] and scholars have shown great disdain for these accounts and legends.[39]

Neog (1977) compiled a list of rulers based on epigraphic records based crucially on identifying the donor-ruler named Dharmanarayan, mentioned as the son of Satyanarayana in the Bormurtiya grant[40] with the Dharmanarayan, the father of the donor-ruler Durlabhnarayana of the Chepakhowa grant.[41] This effectively results in identifying Satyanarayana with Ratnanarayana.[42]

List of Rulers from Neog [43]
Name Other names Reign Period Reign in Progress
Nandi Nandisara or Nandisvara late 14th century[44]
Satyanarayana Ratnanarayana late 14th century[44] 1392[45]
Lakshminarayana Dharmanarayana or Mukta-dharmanaryana[46] early 15th century 1392;[47] 1401;[48] 1442[49]
Durlabhnarayana early 15th century 1428[50]
Pratyaksanarayana[51]
Yasanarayana[51]

A late discovery of an inscription, published in a 2002 souvenir of the All Assam Chutiya Sanmilan[52] seems to geneologically connect the last historically known king, Dhirnarayan with Neog's list above.

List of Additional Rulers
Name Other names Reign Period Reign in progress
Yasamanarayana [53]
Purandarnarayana late 15th century
Dhirnarayana early 16th century 1522[54]

Though it is accepted that the rule of the Chutia rulers ended in 1523, it is unclear who the last Chutia ruler was.[55] The Ahom Buranji and the Deodhai Asam Buranji mention that in the final battles and the aftermath both the king Dhirnarayan and the heir-apparent Sadhaknarayan were killed; whereas according to the Chutiyar Katha incorporated into the Deodhai Asam Buranji Nitipal, Dhirnarayan's son-in-law and the reigning king, was killed and the life of Sadhaknarayan, the minor son of Dhirnarayan, was spared. The Ahom Buranji-Harakanta Barua mentions that the remnant of the royal family was deported to Pakariguri, Nagaon, which later historians agree is not possible since Nagaon was not in Ahom possession at that time.[56]

Domain

The extent of the power of the kings of the Chutia kingdom is not known in detail.[57] Nevertheless, it is estimated by most modern scholarship that Chutias held the areas on the north bank of Brahmaputra from Parshuram Kund in the east and included the present districts of Lakhimpur, Dhemaji, Tinsukia and some parts of Dibrugarh.[3][58] The Chutia people were originally a Tibeto-Burman speaking people that established themselves in the Sadiya region. Between 1228 and 1253 when Sukaphaa, the founder of the Ahom kingdom, was searching for a place to settle in Upper Assam, he and his followers did not encounter any trace of the Chutia state,[59] implying that the Chutia state must have been insignificant till the 14th century[60] when the Ahom chronicles mention them for the first time. At its largest extent, the Chutia influence might have extended up to Biswanath,[61][62][63] though the control was confined to the river valleys of Suvansiri, Brahmaputra, Lohit and Dihing and did not extend up to the hills in the north even at its zenith.[64]

After annexing the Chutia kingdom, offices of the Ahom kingdom, Thao-mung Mung-teu(Bhatialia Gohain) with headquarters at Habung (Lakhimpur), Thao-mung Ban-lung(Banlungia Gohain) at Banlung (Dhemaji), Thao-mung Mung-klang(Dihingia gohain) at Dihing (Dibrugarh, Majuli and northern Sibsagar), Chaolung Shulung at Tiphao (northern Dibrugarh) were created to administer the newly acquired regions.[65]

History
Some existing weaponry used by the Chutia kings

Chutia-Ahom conflicts (1512–1522)

The conflict between the Chutias and Ahoms started when Suhungmung annexed the Chutia principalities of Habung and Panbari[66] in 1512 AD.[67] The then Chutia king Dhirnarayan decided to attack the Ahom kingdom to prevent any further expansion. So, the following year Dhirnarayan, along with an army, sailed down the Dihing river and built a stockade of banana trees (Posola-garh) on the bank of the Dikhowmukh. A selected body of soldiers was stationed at a place near the Nongkongmung lake while another unit was dispatched with the navy to Shira-ati. The Chutia generals were Manik-Chandra Borua, Borhuloi Borua and Dhela Bora while the Ahoms were led by Chao Shukhring and two Railungia Gohains. A pitched battle was fought in which a large number of soldiers were killed. The Ahoms achieved victory in the battle and took possession of Mung-khrang (Dihingmukh region) and a part of the trans-Namdang region. In total, about 5,000 Chutia men were killed in the battle.[68] Suhungmung ordered a township to be built in the newly acquired territory.[69] After this defeat, Dhirnarayan reorganised his army and attacked the Ahom fort in Dihing-mukh in the year 1520 AD.[70] The Ahom commander Khenmung was killed and his whole garrison fled. Thus, the areas of Mung-khrang, Habung, Panbari once again came under Chutia rule.[71]

Downfall (1522–1524)

The kingdom saw its weakest state under Nityapal,[72] the husband of Dhirnarayan's daughter Sadhani. In 1522, Dhirnarayan due to his growing age passed down his throne to Nityapal. The Chutia nobilities and ministers resisted the decision of giving away the throne to Nityapal. Many other vassal chiefs of Lakhimpur‌, Majuli, Biswanath became independent and were eventually annexed by the Ahoms. In the same year, Suhungmung came near the Nongkongmung lake and sent his men to attack the Chutias in Dihingmukh. The Borgohain took leadership in the battle and pushed the Chutias northwards from Shup-Nam-Jon(Dihingmukh).[73] He sent a general named Lashaitai to meet the king, in a bor-nao (boat) obtained from the Chutias.[74] By that time, Suhungmung had come to a place named Cheruakata (Majuli). Lashatai met Suhungmung, who ordered him to fight with the Chutias stationed at Shup-Tiphao(Dibrumukh) river.[75] The Ahom king himself collected a great army and sailed to Dibrumukh. The Chutias were defeated there and retreated. In the month of Kati (1523 AD), Phrasengmung Borgohain and general Klinglun with their whole force, proceeded to the mouth of the Dibru river and constructed a fort (Dibrugarh) there. Suhungmung returned to Charaideo and offered sacrifices to the gods. In the next month Aghun, he stationed his forces at Shup-Shing-sa(Sessamukh). Nitipal at that time advanced from Sadiya to Larupara(Chabua). From there, he sent his army to Dibrugarh to fight with the invaders. The Chutia generals in this battle were Toktoru, Kasitara, Chuluki Chetia and Borpatra. Suhungmung hurried to the spot with strong reinforcements and routed the Chutias. The invading army then penetrated as far as Sonari (Kakopathar), when Nitipal sent Katakis (messengers) to the Ahom king along with gifts which included gold bedstead (ku), gold earrings (khao), gold-embroidered cloth (kham-sin), copper basket(tong-ru-khang), Arowan(phra-nun) and Xorai (phun) in order to settle for peace. In reply, Suhungmung asked for the Chutia royal heirloom (gold and silver cat, gold and silver umbrella, royal bedstead and scepter) along with elephants and a girl. Nitipal agreed on sending the elephants and the girl, but did not give the royal heirloom as it belonged to his ancestors. Instead, after a month, he sent other gifts like gold and silver-gilded Jaapi (Kham-Ngiu-Kup), gold ring (Khup-kham), gold basket(Liu-kham), gold umbrella(Chang-kham), gold bookstand (Khu-tin-kham), golden bracelets (Mao-kham), Xorai, elephants, horses, ivory-mats, knives and Panikamoli cloth and started building a fort on the banks of Lohit river.[76] The Ahom king took the knives and the building of the fort as a sign of war and attacked Sadiya during Bohag month of 1524.[77]

The sudden attack at Sadiya (Che-lung) during Bihu forced the king and queen along with some of the soldiers who survived, to flee to the hills situated above Sadiya. Kasitora(mentioned as Kaitora) was chased by the Dhanudhari Gohain(Chao-Song-Kung-Rin) Klangseng[78] and a battle was fought in Doithang hill. The king and his men took shelter in Chandangiri hill(Doi-Chantan). The Chutias attacked valiantly against the invaders from the hills. They applied gurella warfare strategies and used Faakdhenu (crossbows) and spears. The army killed hundreds of enemies. The queen Sadhani formed a female fighting squad of 120 warriors. They assisted the army by rolling big boulders onto the enemy below. The invaders were unable to do anything. That day was 21 April (7th Bohag) and was widely considered as Ujha (Drummer's) Bisu. Therefore, one of the former ministers of the Chutias whom Nitipal had removed sided with the Ahoms and suggested the Ahom commander Phrasengmung Borgohain to play the Dhol. Thus‌ the general ordered some captives to climb up Ghila creepers and play the Bihu drum or Dhol.[79] As it was the season of Bihu, the Chutia army took it to be a sign that re-enforcements had arrived from other parts and that it was a sign of victory, thinking the Ahoms were chased out. So, thinking the drum beats to be a signal of victory they came down to the lower hills where the enemies were hiding. Another former Chutia commander named Gajraj Borua who had sided with the Ahoms showed the enemies the exact way to the location where the king was hiding.[80] The king was attacked and killed by an arrow while the queen gave her life by jumping from the hill-top.

Aftermath (1524–1525)

After killing the Chutia royals, Chao-Cheng-Kung-rin Klangseng offered the severed head of the Chutia king and Kasitora to Suhungmung in Sadiya. Phrasengmung Borgohain was given three thousand men along with three elephants. and stationed at Sadiya.[81] To strengthen the rule, the Ahoms set up colonies in Sadiya as well as on the banks of the Dihing river.[82] The Ahom king then returned to Charaideo, performed the Rikkvan ceremony and ordered the heads of the Chutia royals to be buried at the base of the stairs attached to the Deoghars. A new capital was built in Bakata on the banks of Dihing river. A number of Brahmins, artisans like blacksmiths(Komar), goldsmiths(Sonari), potter(Kumar), weavers(Tanti), masons(Khanikar), carpenter (Barhoi) were deported from Sadiya to the new capital. A lot of precious articles and valuable products were recovered from the Chutia country and sent via boats through the Dihing river to the capital. These included gold dishes (Maihang), royal palanquin (Kekura-Dola), the gold throne (Hunor tinisukia hinghakhan), gold bedstead (Khat), gold kettles (Bhug-jara), gold foot-tub (Bela) gold embroidered wicker hats (Jaapi), gold spittoon(Pikdan), royal shade (Aruwan), big-drums (Doba), trumpets (Kali) gun-boats (Hiloi-chara-nao), weapons like hand-cannons (Hiloi), large cannons ( Mithahulung), Chutia bow (Faak-dhenu), Long-bow (Bor-dhenu), gunpowder (Barud), spears (Barsa) as well as cattle, elephants and horses. Upon annexing the Chutia territories, the Ahoms came in contact with hill tribes like Miris, Abors, Mishmis and Daflas. The newly acquired territories were divided among the Buragohain and Borgohain, while new offices were created to administer the country more efficiently. These included Thao-mung Mung-teu(Bhatialia Gohain)[83] with headquarters at Habung (Lakhimpur), Thao-mung Ban-lung(Banlungia Gohain) at Banlung (Dhemaji), Thao-mung Mung-klang(Dihingia gohain) at Dihing (Dibrugarh, Majuli and northern Sibsagar),[84] Chaolung Shuling at Tiphao (northern Dibrugarh).[85][86] In 1527, a new ministerial position named Borpatrogohain was created (borrowed from the Chutia Vrihat-patra),[87] and Klangseng(previously posted as Bhatialia Gohain) was given charge.[88][89]

Rebellions (1525–1673)

Although the Ahoms annexed the Chutia territories, a number of Chutias went to the countryside where they were still in power and continued their fight against the Ahoms to reclaim their lost territories. The conflict went on for the next 150 years until it finally ended in 1673 when the Chutias fell under the domination of the Ahoms and were absorbed into their state.[90] After the fall of the Chutia kingdom, many princes fled to the interior hills and lived with hill tribes like Mishmis and Miris. The Darrang Raj Vanshawali records this event.

See also

Chutia people Sati Sadhani Birpal Ratnadhwajpal History of Assam

References
  1. "Their kingdom called Sadiya..." (Gogoi 2002:20)
  2. "(T)he Chutiyas seem to have assumed political power in Sadiya and contiguous areas falling within modern Arunachal Pradesh." (Shin 2020:51)
  3. "Their kingdom called Sadiya extended in the north over the entire region from the Sisi in the west to the Brahmaputra in the east. The hills and the river Buri Dihing formed its norther and southern boundaries respectively. Thus the Chutiya territory extended over almost the entire region of present districts of Lakhimpur, Dhemaji, Tinsukia and some parts of Dibrugarh." (Gogoi 2002:20-21)
  4. "The Chutiya power lasted until 1523 when the Ahom king Suhungmung, alias Dihingia Rāja (1497–1539), conquered their kingdom and annexed it to his sphere of influence. A new officer of Ahom state, known as Sadiya Khowa Gohain, was appointed to administer the area ruled by the Chutiyas." (Shin 2020:52)
  5. "The period from the 13th to the 16th century saw the emergence and development of a large number of tribal political formations in north-east India. The Chutiya, the Tai-Ahom, the Koch, the Dimasa (Kachari), the Tripuri, the Meithei (Manipuri), the Khasi (Khyriem) and the Pamar (Jaintia)—all these tribes crystallised into rudimentary state formations by the 15th century." (Guha 1983:5)
  6. "The most developed of the tribes in the 15th century were the Chutiya(Guha 1983:5)
  7. "The growth of a number of professions among the people of this kingdom like tanti (weaver), kahar (bell-metal worker), sonari (goldsmith) ... indicates the growth of some rural industries among the Chutiyas." (Gogoi 2002:22)
  8. (Saikia 2004:8)
  9. "(T)he Chutiyas were one of the earliest tribes to be Hinduised and to form a state, may point to their surplus economy." (Gogoi 2002:21-22)
  10. (At the time of annexation by the Ahoms) caste system had become prevalent in (the Chutiya) society." (Gogoi 2002:21)
  11. (Baruah 1985:186)
  12. "[T]he Chutiya kingdom consisted of a vast plan level and fertile territory which provided for the Ahoms possibility of easy extension of wet rice culture in the region." (Gogoi 2002:22)
  13. "The origin of the Chutiya state is obscure." (Buragohain 2013:120)
  14. "According to the present day Deori Chutiyas, the priests of the Chutiya people, they are originally inhabitants of the hills to the north of the Brahmaputra, perhaps the northwestern portion of the Dibang valley. Moving down from the hills to the plains of upper Assam, at some point of time before the entry of the Shans, a Tai ethnic group of Southeast Asia, the Chutiyas seem to have assumed political power in Sadiya and contiguous areas falling within modern Arunachal Pradesh." (Shin 2020:51)
  15. (Gogoi 1968:266)
  16. "On the basis of these records, Neog reconstructed a line of kings ruling this region as follows: Nandin (or Nandīśvara), Satyanārāyaṇa (or Ratnanārāyaṇa), Lakṣmīnārāyaṇa, Durlabhanārāyaṇa, Dharmanārāyaṇa, Pratyakṣanārāyaṇa and Yaśanārāyaṇa (or Yamanārāyaṇa). Furthermore, it is fairly certain from the dates available in the inscriptions that Nandin and Satyanārāyaṇa ruled Sadhayāpurī in the latter half of the fourteenth century." (Shin 2020:52)
  17. "The epigraphic record of Satyanārāyaṇa, whose lineage is named in reference to his maternal uncle, is therefore significant. It may constitute evidence of matrilineality of the Sadiya-based Chutiya ruling family, or that their system was not exclusively patrilineal. (Shin 2020:54)
  18. "Auspicious Satyanārāyaṇa had his origin in Daivakī’s womb, ‘forming part of the lineage of the enemy of the gods’ (suraripu-vaṃśāṃśa-bhūto), making the uplift of the burden of the earth. Neog interprets ‘the lineage of the enemy of the gods’ as the asura dynasty. The reason for his asura lineage is not explicitly explained in the inscription; but the two statements that his mother is ‘Daivakī’ and he has ‘the shape of maternal uncle (who was) given the name of Daitya’ (daityanāmāttamāmāmatiḥ) can be seen as an indirect reference to his lineage." (Shin 2020:53)
  19. "Ratnanãrãyana is called king of Kamatãpura and his grandson Durlabhanãrãyana is described as giving lands under the administration of the Governor of Häbunga province." (Neog 1977:818)
  20. "Furthermore, it is fairly certain from the dates available in the inscriptions that Nandin and Satyanārāyaṇa ruled Sadhayāpurī in the latter half of the fourteenth century, while Lakṣmīnārāyaṇa belonged to the beginning, and Dharmanārāyaṇa to the middle of the fifteenth century. It is also nearly clear that Sadhayāpurī (or Svadhayāpurī) mentioned in the inscriptions is the same as Sadhiyā or Sadiya of later times." (Shin 2020:52)
  21. "In the past, there was a kingdom in Upper Assam that the Ahom chronicles called Tiora and the Assamese chronicles called Chutiya." (Jaquesson 2017:100)
  22. "Vaiṣṇava brahmins seemed to play an important role in the making of both the royal lineages defined as ‘demonic’; and ... this demonic maternal ancestry was the way to accommodate the local ruling families in the Brahmanical social hierarchy, but only in a lower position." (Shin 2020:55)
  23. "Though it is not clear whether the asura lineage of Chutiya ruling family had a historical connection with this earlier tradition of Kāmarūpa, there are some common points between the two genealogical claims..." (Shin 2020:54-55)
  24. "Most names of brahmin donees have Vaiṣṇava affiliation." (Shin 2020:55)
  25. " The Pãyã-Tãmresvari (Dikkaravãsiní) temple inscription announces that King Dharmanãrãyana raised in 1364 Šaka a wall (prãkãra) around the temple of Dikkaravãsiní, popularly known as Tãmresvari." (Neog 1977:817)
  26. (Gogoi 2011:235-236)
  27. 'According to E.A. Gait, "The religion of the Chutiyas was a curious one. They worshipped various forms of Kali with the aid not of the Brahmanas but of their own tribal priests or Deoris. The favorite form in which they worshipped this deity was that of Kesai-khati 'the eater of raw flesh' to whom human sacrifices were offered. After their subjugation by the Ahoms, the Deoris were permitted to continue their ghastly rites; but they were usually given for this purpose, criminals who have been sentenced to capital punishment..."' (Gogoi & 2011 236)
  28. "There are various accounts and succession lists of the rulers of the Chutiyãs (I do not call them Chutiyã kings precisely because in these accounts they are not described as Chutiyãs except the last one of them) with dates also assigned to their reign ; but these accounts are too much at variance with one another to deserve serious consideration as being of proper historical value." (Neog 1977:814)
  29. "The legends relating to the origin of the Chutiyas is full of absurdities without any historical moorings." (Buragohai 2013:120)
  30. (Nath 2013:27)
  31. "[T]his so called ancient chronicle might have been a later work of some members of the Chutiya aristocracy, as is possibly an attempt to legitimize the claims of the Chutiyas over a part of Assam during the establishment of the Matak kingdom in the beginning of the 19th century (1805) or after the Ahom power was abolished." (Nath 2013:27)
  32. (Nath 2013:29-30)
  33. (Shin 2020:58-59)
  34. (Shin 2020:51) The Chutias belong to the Bodos, a linguistic group of the Brahmaputra valley, speaking a Tibeto-Burman language and having different cognate groups within them
  35. "Today, there are tens of thousands of people who claim to be Chutiya, but they all speak Assamese because the Chutiya language has disappeared." (Jaquesson 2017:100)
  36. (Baruah 2007:42) The 1392 Bormurtia grant of Satyanarayan mentions Viyutsva-kula while the 1522 Dhakuakhana grant of Dhirnarayan mentions Viyutsva-banshada
  37. "Only a few chronicles of comparatively recent date, including the Deodhai Asam Buranji, Ahom Buranji, Satsari Asam Buranji, Purani Asam Buranji and the Asam Buranji obtained from the family of Sukumar Mahanta, preserve only a small part of their history." (Shin:52)
  38. "The following list of rulers of the Chutiyãs is given in one of the two short chronicles of them incorporated by Dr. S. K. Bhuyan in his Deodhäi Asam Burañji from an old manuscript published by William Robinson in the Baptist journal, Orunodoi, December, 1850. It very nearly corroborates a similar list in the vamsävali obtained by Kellner from Amrtanãrãyana of a Chutiyã princely family. Even Kellner considered this chronology apocryphal (Brown, op. cit., p. 83 ). It is not yet known for certain when at all such lists were prepared; but at the moment it is not possible to ascribe them to a date earlier than the 19th century. The dates given in the lists do not thus have historical moorings." (Neog 1977:817-818)
  39. " It is not known for sure when the story of Birpal was made nor when the list of kings was prepared; but at the moment, it is not possible for a scholar like Neog to ascribe them a date earlier than the nineteenth century. Scholars, therefore, questioned the accuracy of the historical information in these accounts and showed great disdain for the related legends.(Shin 2020:52)
  40. (Neog 1977:816)
  41. "An attempt might perhaps be made to correlate all these finds into the reconstruction of a line of kings ruling in this region. If we consider Dharmanãrãyana of the epigraphs [Bormurtiya], [Chepakhowa] and [Paya-Tamreshvari] as the same..." (Neog 1977:817)
  42. "We seek to identify Satyanãrãyana of Sadhayãpuri of Dhenukhanã, Ghilãmarã and Barmurtiyã- bil plates with Ratnanãrãyana of Kamatãpura of the Sadiyã-Chepã-khowã plate, as Dharmanãrãyana is described as Satyanäräyana's son in the Barmurtiyã-bil plate and as Ratnanârâyana's son in the Sadiyã-Chepãkhowâ plate, and, as already pointed out, more than one name seem to have been assumed by the kings of this region. (Neog 1977:818)
  43. (Neog 1977:817)
  44. "It is, however, fairly certain from the dates available in the epigraphs that King Nandisvara and Satyanarayana ruled in Sadhayapuri in the last half of the 14th century A.D." (Neog 1977:820)
  45. "Dhenukhanã copperplate grant of King Satyanãrãyana, son of Nandi, Nandisara or Nandivara, of Sadhayâpurï or Svadhayãpuri, dated 1392." (Neog 1977:813)
  46. "Dr. D. C. Sircar seeks to read the name of the king as 'Muktãdharmanãrãyana' which may really have been 'yuvã-Dharmanãrãyana' contrasting well with the reference to the bṛddharãja' in the first line of the inscription." (Neog 1977:813)
  47. "Barmurtiyã-bil copperplate inscription of King Dharmanãrãyana, son of Satyanãrãyana, dated 1392" (Neog 1977:813)
  48. "Ghilãmarã copperplate grant of King Laksmlnãrãyana, son of Satyanãrãyana, dated 1401." (Neog 1977:813)
  49. "Pãyã-Tãmresvari (Dikkaravãsini) temple wall inscription of King Dharmanãrãyana, son-regent of Brddharãja (Old King), dated 1364 Šaka/1442 AD" (Neog 1977:813)
  50. "The Sadiyã-Chepãkhowã copperplate grant of King (Durlabha-)nãrãyana, son of Dharmanãrãyana and grandson of Ratnanãrãyana originally of Kamatãpura, dated 1350 Šaka/1428 AD." (Neog 1977:813)
  51. "In the Dhenukhanã plate two later kings seem to have added postscripts to the original inscription of 1314 Šaka. They are Pratyaksanãrãyana and Yasanãrãyana or Yamanãrãyana. No dates are associated with them." (Neog 1977:819)
  52. (Nath 2013:43ff)
  53. (Barua 2007:124) "The plate discovered in 2001 identifies Yamkadnarayana or Yasamanarayana as the grandfather(pitamah) of Dhirnarayana. It is possible that this king was the same as Yasanarayana or Yamanarayana of the Dhenukhana plate."
  54. (Barua 2007:590-591)
  55. "Regarding the fate of the Chutia prince Sadhaknarayan and the identity of the Chutia king killed by the Ahoms in 1523, opinions differ." (Baruah 1983:229ff)
  56. (Baruah 1983:229ff)
  57. "(T)he geographical extent of these rulers' power is not yet known in detail..." (Shin 2020:52)
  58. Acharya.N.N., The History of Medieval Assam, 1966,p.232
  59. "The Assamese chronicles while recording the route of Sukapha across the Patkai hills till he reached Charaideo in the southeastern corner of the present Sibsagar district through the courses of the rivers Dihing, Brahmaputra and Dikhow do not mention a Chutiya state that offered any kind of resistance to the advancing forces of Sukapha." (Nath 2013:26)
  60. "This shows that if there was any Chutiya state it was of little significance till at least mid 14th century." (Nath 2013:26)
  61. (Nath 2013:27)
  62. "Though the geographical extent of these rulers' power is not yet known in detail, according to Neog, the present day North Lakhimpur district of Assam, which covers the find sites of most inscriptions, perhaps formed a part of their political dominion. If architectural continuity is admitted between the fortifications in the Sadiya region and the Burai river ruin site, it would be possible to believe that the kingdom of these rulers extended as far as the outer limit of Darrang district, in the westernmost extent of which Ahom conquerors settled the vanquished Chutiyas in the early part of the sixteenth century." (Shin 2020:52-53)
  63. (Datta 1985:28)
  64. "In the main, however, their territory was confined to the river valleys of the Suvansiri, Brahmaputra, Lohit and the Dihing and hardly extended to the hills at its zenith." (Nath 2013:27)
  65. (Gait 1963:8) In 1525, Suhungmung proceeded in person to the Dihing country and appointed officers to administer the frontier provinces of Habung, Dihing and Banlung.
  66. Some Buranjis like PAB and DAB mention Panbari to be a part of Habung
  67. A Chutia chief named Vrihat-patra referred to as Habung-adhipati is mentioned in the copper plate of Dharmarayan dated to 1428 AD.
  68. Assam Buranji(SM), p.9
  69. (Bhuyan 1962:15–16)
  70. Purani Assam Buranji, p.40
  71. The copper plate inscription of land grant found in Dhakuakhana(formerly Habung) indicates that king Dhirnarayan donated 4000 bighas of land in the year 1522 AD to Brahmins
  72. (Bhuyan 1962:xxviii) His son-in-law assumed the royal power under the name of Nityapal. He transpired to be a bad ruler. He removed old ministers and appointed common men in their place. He inflicted punishments on his subjects in an indiscriminate fashion. He deserted the niti or the procedure of olden times for which he was nicknamed Anitipal or the unrighteous one.
  73. Nam-jin/jon is the Tai equivalent of Dihing
  74. (Bhuyan 1962:17)
  75. Purani Assam Buranji,p.40
  76. (Barua 1939:56)
  77. (Wade 1927:24)
  78. Klangseng is mentioned as Chao-Cheng-Kung-rin
  79. (Bhuyan 1962:200)
  80. (Bhuyan 1960:10)
  81. (Acharya 1966:88)
  82. (Gait 1963:86)
  83. Chao-Cheng-Kung-rin Klangseng was made the first Bhatialia Gohain
  84. Mung-klang means "middle country"; refers to the region between Brahmaputra and Dihing which included today's Majuli.
  85. (Gait 1963:8)
  86. (Barua 1939:59–61)
  87. (Guha 1983:20)
  88. Thao-mung mungteu(Bhatialia Gohain) was made Chao-sheng-lung in Lakni Rungrao 1527.(p.61.)
  89. Klangseng is mentioned as Chao-sheng-lung in Lakni Dapplao 1531.(p.64)
  90. Prakash 2007, pp. 267.

Bibliography
  • Acharya, Nagendra Nath (1966). The History of Medieval Assam, from the Thirteenth to the Seventeenth Century (PDF). Dutta Baruah. Archived from the original (PDF) on May 2020.
  • Barua, G.C. (1939). Ahom Buranji.
  • Barua, Padmanath Gohain (2004). Asamar Buranji.
  • Baruah, Swarnalata (2007). Chutia Jatir Buranji (in Assamese).
  • Baruah, S L (1986), A Comprehensive History of Assam, Munshiram Manoharlal
  • Bhuyan, Suryya Kumar (1960). Assam buranji,from an old manuscript obtained in the family of the late Srijut Sukumar Mahanta of North Gauhati (in Assamese). Government of Assam in the Department of Historical and Antiquarian studies.
  • Bhuyan, Surya Kumar (1962). Deodhai Asam Buranji: with several shorter chronicles of Assam (compiled from old Assamese buranjis) (in Assamese).
  • Buragohain, Ramesh (2013). State formation in Early Medieval Assam:A case study of the Chutiya state (PDF).
  • Datta, S (1985). Mataks and their Kingdom (PDF).
  • Gait, Sir Edward Albert (1963). A History of Assam. Thacker, Spink.
  • Gogoi, Jahnavi (2002). Agrarian System of Medieval Assam. New Delhi: Concept Publishing Company.
  • Gogoi, Kakoli (2011). "Envisioning Goddess Tara: A Study of the Tara Traditions in Assam". Proceedings of the Indian History Congress. 72: 232–239. JSTOR 44146715.
  • Gogoi, Padmeshwar (1968), The Tai and Tai kingdoms
  • Goswami, Hemchandra (1977). Purani Assam Buranji.
  • Guha, Amalendu (1991), Medieval and Early Colonial Assam: Society, Polity and Economy, K.P. Bagchi & Co, Calcutta
  • Guha, Amalendu (December 1983), "The Ahom Political System: An Enquiry into the State Formation Process in Medieval Assam (1228-1714)", Social Scientist, 11 (12): 3–34, doi:10.2307/3516963, JSTOR 3516963
  • Jaquesson, François (2017). Translated by van Breugel, Seino. "The linguistic reconstruction of the past: The case of the Boro-Garo languages". Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area. 40 (1): 90–122. doi:10.1075/ltba.40.1.04van.
  • Khanikar, Surjya kanta (2003). Chutia Jatir Itihax aru Luko-sanskriti (PDF).
  • Nath, D (2013), "State Formation in the Peripheral Areas: A Study of the Chutiya Kingdom in the Brahmaputra Valley", in Bhattarcharjee, J B; Syiemlieh, David R (eds.), Early States in North East India, Delhi: Regency Publications, pp. 24–49, ISBN 978-81-89233-86-0
  • Neog, Maheswar Ed (1974). Prachya-sasanavali. Assam Prakashan Parisad, Guwahati.
  • Neog, Maheswar (1977). "Light on a Ruling Dynasty of Arunachal Pradesh in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries". Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. 58/59: 813–820. ISSN 0378-1143. JSTOR 41691751.
  • Prakash, Col. Ved (2007), Encyclopedia of North East India, 2, Atlantic Publishers & Dist.
  • Pathak, Guptajit (2008), Assam's history and its graphics, Mittal Publications
  • Saikia, Yasmin (2004). Fragmented Memories: Struggling to be Tai-Ahom in India. Duke University Press. ISBN 082238616X.
  • Shin, Jae-Eun (2020). "Descending from demons, ascending to kshatriyas: Genealogical claims and political process in pre-modern Northeast India, The Chutiyas and the Dimasas". The Indian Economic and Social History Review. 57 (1): 49–75. doi:10.1177/0019464619894134. S2CID 213213265.
  • Wade, J. P. (1927). Sharma, Benudhar (ed.). An account of Assam. R. Sarmah.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.