REVIEW OF LITERATURE

If one reviews the extant literature on the early history of Bengal, Rajani Kanta

Chakrabarti's Gauder ltihas published in two volumes (Chakrabarti 1999 rep.) was

definitely the pioneering work in the field in the sense that it attempted for the first

time at a complete reconstruction, in the light of the then available epigraphic-

literary sources, of the dynastic chronology of Bengal in the ancient and mediaeval

periods. Rajani Kanta v1as successful in meaningfully correlating ancient literary

and epigraphic works in determining historical chronologies and highlighting allied

geographical issues. Gauder Jlihas was immediately followed by the two works of

Rama Prasad Chanda and Akshay Kumar Maitreya published under the aegis of the

Varendra Research Society. While Chanda's Gauda Rajamaia (Chanda 1975 rep.)

was based on the textual sources and drew on the early-early mediaeval·

political- administrative history from the later first millennium BC to AD

twelfth-thirteenth centuries, Akshay Kumar's Cauda Lekhamala (Maitreya 2004

rep.) was possibly the first book on Bengal, written in the vernacular, where a

categorical argument on the use of epigraphi;::, materials for the reconstruction of

early history of Bengal was presented. Rakhal Das Banerji's Bangalar ltihas,

published in two volumes formulated the first attempt of regional history

from prehistoric to later medieval times (Banerji 1998 rep.). In 1915 Banerji

compiled the entire bulk of then known epigraphic sources of the time of the Palas

in order to comprehensively reconstruct the genealogy and chronology of that

lineage (Benerji 1915). One must not forget to mention the series of lectures

Akshay Kumar Maitreya delivered in 1915 in the University of Calcutta on the

problem of the decline of the Pala dynasty that came to be published later under the

title The Fall of the Pala Empire. It was possibly the only contemporary

reconstructive approach that focused exclusively on a precise historical question of

early mediaeval polity in Bengal (Maitreya 1987), with a fresh

illuminating 'Introduction' by D.C. Sircar. N.G. Majumdar's Inscriptions of Bengal, volume III (Majumdar 1929), not only supplemented the Gauda Lekhamala

but was also designed as a c01pus of epigraphic records of Bengal dated between the

tenth and the twelfth centuries. Further, it was the first such corpus on Bengal

written in English, with expert editorial notes.

Writing of Bengal's early history reached a new stage with B.C. Sen's Some

Historical Aspects of Inscriptions of Bengal (Sen 1942), published from the Calcutta

University, followed by the appearance of the History of Bengal, volume I from the

Dacca University, edited by R.C. Majumdar (Majumdar 1971 rep.). B.C. Sen's

attempt was to present a comprehensive reconstruction of the administrative history

of Bengal with special focus on the development of geopolity in the different segments of the Delta. History of Bengal, on the other hand, was a result of multiple

authorships aiming at compilation of different aspects of early Bengal polity, society

and economy in order to situate Bengal within the pan-Indian context of historical

development.

A completely new genre of research was initiated with the publication of the

Bcmgalir Ilihas by Niharranjan Ray (Ray 19^4). Ray dealt with various aspects of

societal changes, proliferation of caste system and complex class structures in early

Bengal. He tried to explain categorically these social processes as corollary to the

process of 'Aryanization' and changes in regimes from the Buddhist Palas and

Candras to the rigidly Bralimanical Varmans and Senas. Most importantly, N.R. Ray

successfully intertwined the societal changes in terms of shift from commercial to

agrarian economy.

The next stage of research on history and epigraphy were carried out by Puspa

Niyogi in her Brahmanic Settlements in Different Subdivisions of Ancient Bengal

(Niyogi 1967), followed by Barrie M. Morrison's Political Centers and Cultural

Regions in Early Bengal (Morrison 1970). Niyogi attempted at a reconstructive

explanatory model of the expansion of Brahmanical populations on the basis of

classified data provided in the then known inscriptions. Morrison, on the other hand,

put emphasis on the spatial distribution of copperplates along with a study of their and the characters of government and polity in four distinct sub-regions of early (A.D.

600-1200): Mainly a Socio-Economic Study (Chaudhary 1970), uniquely summarized

the literary and epigraphic sources of Bengal, among other regions, and drew on the

different aspects of rural settlements, though the work completely lacks the notion of

change. Amitabha Bhattacharyya's Historical Geography of Ancient and Early

Mediaeval Bengal (Bhattacharyya 1977) has still remained the most authentic work

dealing with the early mediaeval geopolitical units of Bengal like Radha, Suhma,

Va/iga, Samatata,, etc. and their changing geographical limits. Amita Ray dealt in

details, in her Presidential address of the Indian History Congress, on issues related to

Urbanisation in Bengal (Ray 1987).

Among recent works on the early mediaeval phase in Bengal, Aspects of Rural

Settlements and Rural Society in Early Medieval India by Brajadulal Chattopadhyaya

deserves special mention. Chattopadhyaya made a comprehensive comparative study

of village settlements in early mediaeval India, where Bengal formed a major chapter.

Chattopadhyaya delineated the varying spatial and compositional aspects of rural

settlements in tenns of geographical information contained in Gupta and post-Gupta

inscriptions of West Bengal and Bangladesh (Chattopadhyaya 1990). Annapurna

Chattopadhyaya, in her recent work The People and Culture of Bengal: A Study in

Origins, has utilized diverse source materials in underlining the genesis of early

Bengal in terms of overall social-political as well as regional cultural developrr:ents

(Chattopadhyaya 2002). All the above studies were being consistently supplemented

with D.C. Sircar's relentless works on primary epigraphic sources from Bengal which

encompasses a too long range to be incorporated in the present review. Two of his

most recent woks on the historical chronologies of the Bengal Delta, however, should

be specifically cited (Sircar 1982, 1985)·

The formation of Archaeological Survey of India (ASI hereinafter) in I 861 and

subsequent consolidations through the formation of the Bengal and the

permanent 'Eastern' Circles (present 'Kolkata' circle) in 1902 and 1906

respectively, marked a major step towards systematization of the then available

database through the appointment of 'men of the best scholarly tendencies'.

Initiated with the pioneering publications of A. Cunningham (Cunningham 2000

rep.) and his most 'trusted' associate J.D. Beglar (Beglar 2000 rep.) in the second half of the nineteenth century, the Annual Reports of the Eastern Circle of the ASI

started providing newer empirical materials by the early decades of the twentieth

century. Of utmost significance in these reports were of course the sketch maps of

many of the sites that Cunningham visited. Since Ct:.nningham's notion of field

archaeology was deeply rooted in his understandings of historical geography,

correlative studies based on textual and archaeological data with emphases on

identification of ancient sites formed the major focus of his works in Bengal.

In the context of sub-regional approaches on the history and archaeology of Bengal,

it is significant to note the unique contributions of Tarapada Santra (Santra 2001:70-

114) and Ashok Upadhyay (Upadhyay 2001) who presented exhaustive lists of

works on sub-regional history and archaeology that appeared since the early

twentieth centuries. It has been rightly suggested that 'it may be useful to research the

extent to which they are based on original field-investigations and the extent to which

they owed their structures and contents of the various relevant District

Gazetteers brought out by the Government' (Chakrabarti 2003 :269). Such a study is

expected to provide a good academic framework to understand the genesis of the

VSP from an institution of promoting vernacular literature to an organization

having quasi- archaeological interests with a well-organized museum to

preserve archaeological objects by the first quarter of the nineteenth century.

The Varendra Anusandhan Samiti or the Varendra Research Society (VRS Here in

after) was established at Rajshahi in 1910 under the enthusiastic academic and

infrastructural support from Kumar Sarat Kumar Ray of Dighapatiya and Akshay

Kumar Maitreya and with active participation of such young pioneering authorities of

Indology as Ramaprasad Chanda, Nanigopal Majumdar and Radaagobinda Basak

(Goswami 1993-94:1) The museum of the society soon became the house of one of

the richest collections of archaeological artifacts from different parts of Bengal. In the

early 1920s the VRS funded and took initiative towards first excavation at Paharpur,

although the ASI remained the chief working force in collaboration with the

University of Calcutta. Therefore, it may not be right to take Paharpur as the first

excavation in Bengal beyond the involvement of the ASI. It may be mentioned here

that the VRS had already conducted a trial excavation at Khoda Pathar, one of the

mounds in the vicinity of Mahasthangarh (Chakrabarti 1992:108). In the context of early archaeological surveys under the aegis of the VRS, one must take note of the

regional surveys of P.C Sen on Mahasthan (Sen 1929; see also Ahmed 1975 and

Chakrabarti 1992:44-51) and Kalidas Dutta on the Sundarban regions that were being

regularly published as reports in the form of Varendra Research Society Monographs

and contemporary Bengal periodicals (for a*t excellent collection of Kalidas Dutta's

writings, see Bose 1989 and Dutta 1989).