Jump to content

Chutia kingdom

Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Chutia Kingdom
Also known as Sadhaya or Sadiya
সধয়া / স্বধয়া / সধেয়া
Unknown (before Ahom state[1])–1523-24
Coat of Arms
Imperial Coat of arms
South Asia in 1400
StatusHistorical kingdom
CapitalSadhayapura
Common languagesAssamese language(common)
Deori language(religious)
Religion
Hinduism
Tribal religion
GovernmentMonarchy
Monarch 
• Unknown–1523-24
Dhirnarayana (last)
Historical eraMedieval India
• Established
Unknown (before Ahom state[1])
• Ahom-Chutiya conflict
1513 – 17th century
• Disestablished
1523-24
Preceded by		Succeeded by
Kamarupa
Ahom kingdom
Tribal chiefdoms of Arunachal
Today part ofIndia(Assam, Arunachal Pradesh)
Rulers of Chutia kingdom
Part of History of Assam
Rulers known from Inscriptions
Nandisvaralate 14th century
Satyanarayanalate 14th century
Lakshminarayanaearly 15th century
Dharmanarayanaearly 15th century
Durlabhnarayanaearly 15th century
Muktadharmanarayanamid 15th century
Pratyakshanarayanamid 15th century
Yasanarayanamid 15th century
Purandarnarayanalate 15th century
Dhirnarayanaunknown - 1524
Chutia monarchy data
  • Royal Flag
  • Mayuradhwaja[2]
  • Coat of Arms
  • Singha
  • Royal Heirlooms
  • Gold and Silver Cat(Mekuri)[3][4]
  • Gold and Silver Umbrella (Danda-Chhatra)[5]
  • Gold and Silver Bedstead(Sal-pira)[6]
  • Royal Throne
  • Sunuwali Tinisukia Singhakhana[7]
  • Royal residence
  • Kundilnagara/Barnagar
  • Tutelary deity
  • Kechai-khati

The Chutia kingdom[8] (also Sadiya[9], Pron: English: /ˈsʊtɪjə/, Assamese: [sutija] or Sutia) was a late medieval state that developed around Sadiya in present Assam and adjoining areas in Arunachal Pradesh.[10] It extended over almost the entire region of present districts of Lakhimpur, Dhemaji, Tinsukia, and parts of Dibrugarh (till the Burhi Dihing[11][12][13]) in Assam,[14] as well as the plains and foothills[15] of Arunachal Pradesh.[16] Some authors have suggested that the kingdom may have extended further west up to Viswanath, corresponding to the region of present-day Biswanath district.[17][18][19] The Chutia rulers exercised power by regulating eastward trade and the movement of people between Assam, Tibet, and southern China.[20][21] The kingdom fell around the year 1523-24 to the Ahom Kingdom after a series of conflicts, and the capital area ruled by the Chutia rulers became the administrative domain of the office of Sadia Khowa Gohain of the Ahom kingdom.[22]

The Chutia kingdom, believed to be founded in the early 13th century around Sadiya and contiguous areas,[23][1] came into prominence in the second half of the 14th century,[24] and was one among several rudimentary states (Ahom, Dimasa, Koch, Jaintia etc.) that emerged from tribal political formations in the region after the fall of Kamarupa kingdom, between the 13th and the 16th century.[25] Among these, the Chutia state was the most advanced,[26][27] with its rural industries,[28] trade,[29] surplus economy and advanced Sanskritisation.[30][31] It is not exactly known as to the system of agriculture adopted by the Chutias,[32] but it is believed that they were settled cultivators.[33] After the Ahoms annexed the kingdom in 1523-24, the Chutia state & its population was absorbed into the Ahom kingdom through Ahomisation — the nobility and the professional classes were given important positions in the Ahom officialdom[34][35] and the land was resettled for wet rice cultivation.[36]

Foundation and Polity

Though there is no doubt on the Chutia polity, the origins of this kingdom are obscure.[37] It is generally held that the Chutias, a grouping of different Bodo-Kachari cognate groups, established a state in the plains around Sadiya before the advent of the Ahoms in 1228.[38][1] Although Buranjis, the Ahom chronicles, indicate the presence of a Chutia state,[39] the evidence is scarce that it was of any significance before the second half of the 14th century.[40] Scholars, however, have also noted that this lack of recorded interaction may be due to the early Ahom state itself being precariously small.[41] Guha (1983) further characterises the late fourteenth-century Ahom polity as only a “state-like organisation”, rather than a full-fledged territorial state, while early Ahom rulers are also described as avoiding direct confrontation with larger population concentrations.[42][43]

Among the Chutia rulers known from epigraphic records, the earliest securely attested is Nandin or Nandisvara, who ruled Sadhayāpura in the latter half of the 14th century.[44] The damaged genealogical passage of the Dhenukhana copper-plate inscription traces Nandisvara's descent through his mother to an earlier figure whose name is illegible in the surviving text; Maheswar Neog identifies Nandi, Nandisara or Nandisvara as the ruler of Sadhayapura and Satyanarayana as his son.[45][a] Nandisvara is described in the same inscription as the lord of Sadhayāpura (sadhayāpurīśa), while his son Satyanarayana is described as drawing his royal lineage from the Asuras, the "enemies of the gods".[47] The mention of Satyanarayana as having the shape of his maternal uncle (which is also an indirect reference to the same Asura/Daitya lineage)[48] may also constitute evidence of matrilineality of the Chutia ruling family, or that their system was not exclusively patrilineal.[49] On the other hand, a later king Durlabhnarayana mentions that his grandfather Ratnanarayana (identified with Satyanarayana) was the king of Kamatapura[50] which might indicate that the eastern region of Sadhaya was politically connected to the western region of Kamata.[51]

In these early inscriptions, the kings are said to be seated in Sadhyapura, identified with the present-day Sadiya;[52] which is why the kingdom is also called Sadiya. The Buranjis written in the Ahom language called the kingdom Tiora whereas those written in the Assamese language called it Chutia.[8]

Brahmanical influence in the form of Vaishnavism reached the Chutia polity in the eastern extremity of present-day Assam during the late fourteenth century.[53][54] The copperplate grant of Chutia kings begin with salutations to Ganesha.[55] Vaishnava Brahmins created lineages for the rulers with references to Krishna legends but placed them lower in the Brahminical social hierarchy because of their autochthonous origins.[56] 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.[57] Although a majority of the Brahmin donees of the royal grants were Vaishnavas,[58] the rulers patronized the non-brahmanised Dikkaravasini[59] (also Tamresvari or Kechai-khati), which was either a powerful tribal deity, or a form of the Buddhist deity Tara adopted for tribal worship.[60] This deity, noticed in the 10th century Kalika Purana well before the establishment of the Chutia kingdom, continued to be presided by a Deori priesthood well into the Ahom rule and outside Brahminical influence.[61]

Genealogical traditions and accounts

Several later Assamese genealogical accounts preserve traditions concerning the origin, lineage and succession of the Chutia rulers. Their dates of composition, chronology and relationship to the securely dated inscriptional record, however, remain uncertain. Neog (1977) considered the different succession lists too inconsistent to be used straightforwardly as historical chronology, while Buragohain (2013) regarded the origin legends as lacking firm historical foundations.[62][63] The written genealogies seem to be based on oral traditions through which parts of the Chutia past continued to circulate. Writing in 1895, W. B. Brown recorded that traditions concerning the Chutias, including the story of the Chutia princess Sadhani and Nityapal, were preserved in modified forms among the Deoris, the Miris, and some Hindu Chutias and suggested that the written chronicle available to him may itself have been compiled from such traditions.[64] This indicates that some narrative elements associated with the chronicles circulated within a wider Chutia oral tradition.

One such account is the Chutiyar Rajar Vamsavali, first published in Orunodoi in 1850 and later reprinted in the Deodhai Asam Buranji.[65] It relates the legend of Birpal and provides a succession list beginning with Gaurinarayana or Ratnadhvajapala. Another Assamese account, obtained by Ney Elias from Burmese sources, preserves an alternative origin narrative centred on Asambhinna.[66] Nath has suggested that the Chutiyar Rajar Vamsavali may have been composed in the early nineteenth century, possibly in connection with claims advanced during the establishment of the Matak rajya or after the end of Ahom rule.[67] Shin notes that Neog could not securely date these accounts before the nineteenth century and that their succession lists cannot be consistently reconciled with the epigraphic record. She nevertheless cautions that this lack of correspondence does not entirely rule out the possibility that some names preserve alternative names or memories of different ruling houses.[68] In her interpretation, the changing genealogies are historically significant because they reveal successive attempts to construct Chutia political identity, including the later replacement of the asura lineage recorded in fourteenth-century inscriptions with the Bhismaka–Kubera narrative.[69]

Domain

Ruins of the Chutia kingdom near Dibang Valley of Arunachal Pradesh

The extent of the power of the kings of the Chutia kingdom is not known in detail.[70] Nevertheless, it is estimated by most modern scholarship that Chutias held the areas on the banks of Brahmaputra from Parshuram Kund (present-day Arunachal Pradesh) in the east and included the present districts of Lakhimpur, Dhemaji, Tinsukia and parts of Dibrugarh (till the Burhi Dihing[71][12][72]) in Assam,[14][73] along with the plains and foothills of Arunachal Pradesh.[10][15] Some scholars have suggested that the Chutia authority extended westward as far as the Viswanath area, in present-day Biswanath district of Assam.[65][74][75] Nath (2013), however, characterises the kingdom's principal area as comprising the river valleys of the Subansiri, Brahmaputra, Lohit and Dihing, and argues that, even at its zenith, its authority extended only marginally into the surrounding hills.[76] He further notes that the chronicles describing Sukaphaa’s migration and search for a settlement in Upper Assam between 1228 and 1253 record no resistance from a Chutia state,[77] and interprets this silence as evidence that the Chutia state remained of little significance until at least the mid-14th century,[78] when it is first mentioned in the Ahom chronicles. Shin (2020), however, argues that the Ahoms themselves were a people with a precariously small territory and population, which may indicate this absence of serious interaction with the old settled people of the neighborhood until the 14th century.[41] Saikia (2004) states that the chronicles refer to Chutias among the local people captured by Sukaphaa's followers during their movement into Upper Assam.The Satsari Assam Buranji tradition, as translated by Yasmin Saikia, states that during Sukapha's westward migration, people captured along the route included Chutias, Morans and Barahis.[79][80] Evidence of a wider, possibly temporary political connection farther west has been inferred from the 1428 Sadiya copperplate grant of Durlabhnarayana, which states that his grandfather Ratnanarayana became king of Kamatapur. Maheswar Neog identified Ratnanarayana with Satyanarayana, the ruler of Sadhayapura, and proposed that Sadiya and Kamatapur may at one time have been politically connected under the same dynasty.[81]

Economy and trade

The precise agricultural system followed in the Chutia kingdom is not known, although the relatively early development of the Chutia state has been interpreted as indicating the existence of an economic surplus.[82] Guha (1983) regarded the Chutia state as the most developed among the tribal political formations of Northeast India by the fifteenth century.[83] Agriculture was nevertheless the principal occupation of the population. Rice formed the principal crop, alongside pulses and oilseeds, while sugarcane, jute, spices, vegetables, fruits and betel were also cultivated. Plough cultivation using cattle and buffaloes was practised in the plains, although shifting cultivation probably continued among some communities in the peripheral areas.[84] The royal copper-plate grants provide evidence for the organisation of land and rural settlement under the Chutia rulers. The surviving charters record grants at Ludumimari and Vyaghramari in Satyanarayana's Dhenukhana grant of 1392, Bakhana in Lakshminarayana's Ghilamara grant of 1401, and an entire village in a North Lakhimpur grant of 1402.[85] Guha interprets such grants of inhabited villages and cultivable land in sparsely populated medieval Assam as a means of securing agricultural labour, involving the transfer to grantees of some royal rights over the inhabitants.[86]

Royal revenue was derived from several sources, including taxation on land, income from trade and natural resources, tribute from subordinate chiefs and rulers, and property acquired through warfare. Occupational groups exploiting natural resources were also subject to fiscal obligations; gold-washers and salt producers are described as rendering a portion of their production to the state.[87] Such obligations could also take the form of specialised service. The Buranjis record that a group of Miris living near the Dikrong River in present-day Lakhimpur district had formerly been subjects of the Chutia kingdom and were required under the Chutia kings to serve as Hatighahis, supplying grass for the royal elephants.[88] The importance of elephants within the royal establishment is also reflected in Chutia royal titulature: the Sadiya-Chepakhowa inscription uses the epithet Gajapati ("lord of elephants") for a ruler, which Neog (1977) interpreted as probably referring to the possession of a herd of elephants.[89] Royal provisioning also appears to have involved specialised storehouses; Buranjis record a Chutia-period bharal for storing dried meat under the charge of a Bharali official.[90]

The Chutia rulers also possessed both elephants and horses. The Buranjis record that, following the conquest of the kingdom, the Ahoms obtained elephants and horses among the possessions of the Chutia ruler.[91] Horses are additionally represented in the archaeological remains associated with the Tamreswari Temple, where one of the recovered terracotta plaques depicts a horse equipped with a saddle and bridle.[92]

The growth of specialised occupations also points to the development of rural industries: references to tanti (weavers), kamar (blacksmiths), sonari (goldsmiths),[93], kahar (bell-metal workers),[94] khanikar (artisans)[95], kumar (potter), barhoi (carpenters), etc. have been interpreted as evidence of craft specialisation within the kingdom.[96] The scale of ironworking is suggested by a tradition that, after the annexation of the kingdom, Suhungmung transferred about 3,000 blacksmiths from the former Chutia territories and settled them in different parts of the Ahom kingdom. They manufactured agricultural implements such as ploughshares, hoes and sickles, as well as axes, several forms of knives, needles, fish-hooks and other implements used in everyday life.[97] Gold-washing and precious-metal working were also practised; goldsmiths worked in gold and silver and manufactured ornaments and other objects.[98] Goldsmithing is directly attested in the Sadiya-Chepakhowa copper-plate grant of 1428, which names a goldsmith (svarṇakāra) called Krishna Sadhu as the skilled craftsman who inscribed the charter on the king's order.[99] Other crafts included the manufacture of metal vessels, pottery, leather making, stone carving and the production of household implements from wood, bamboo and cane.[100] Archaeological finds from Bhismaknagar and Tamreswari Temple provide material evidence for some of these industries: excavations have yielded large quantities of pottery and terracotta objects as well as copper artefacts.[101][102]

Salt and riverine gold were among the valuable extractive resources of the kingdom. Gold was washed from river sands, while the kingdom possessed several salt springs, including those at Sadiya and Borhat, which passed under Ahom control following the annexation.[103][104] The importance of gold is also reflected in royal possessions and diplomatic gifts; during the last Chutia king's reign, three gold piras were sent to the Ahom ruler, while the Chutia royal throne and several other objects are described as having been made of gold.[105] The wider Sadiya region also formed part of an old salt-producing zone extending along the Naga–Patkai foothills.[106] Weaving was another important household industry, with cotton as well as eri, muga and pat silk used for textile production.[107] As per the Naoboicha Phukanar Buranji, Ahom kings employed a thousand Muga producers and weavers from the Chutia community to weave royal garments in the capital.[108]

The geographical position of Sadiya at the eastern end of the Brahmaputra valley also gave the kingdom access to routes through the eastern Himalayas and the ranges separating Assam from Upper Burma. The Chutia rulers exercised power partly through the regulation of eastward trade and the movement of people between Assam, Tibet and southern China.[109][110] Rivers formed important channels of communication, transport and military movement. Several types of boats were manufactured in the kingdom and were probably employed both in internal transport and in trade westwards towards Kamrup-Kamata.[111] The importance of water transport is also reflected in the royal land grants: a copper-plate grant of Satyanarayana included, in addition to agricultural and homestead land, a separate tract of land specifically for keeping boats, indicating the maintenance of dedicated dockyards.[112] The Chutias also maintained armed riverboats. Among the booty recorded as having been obtained by the Ahoms following the conquest of the Chutia kingdom were hiloi-tula-chara-nao, or boats carrying mounted cannon.[113][114]

Archaeological evidence indicates that some of these eastern routes were strategically important during the period of Chutia rule. A fortified earthen enclosure at Tindolong near Tezu, assigned approximately to the fourteenth–fifteenth century, stood on the principal route leading from Sadiya and Bhismaknagar towards Parshuram Kund along the Lohit River. Its position and defensive features have been interpreted as indicating that it served as a post for maintaining vigilance along the route.[115] Archaeological finds at Bhismaknagar also point to wider eastern contacts. Kaolin (China clay) pottery recovered from the site has been interpreted as evidence of early cultural contact with China and the transmission of ceramic ideas into Northeast India.[116]

Sadiya was also connected southeastwards with Upper Burma and, through it, Yunnan. Pachuau records a route running from Sadiya through Bisa and across the Patkai range into the Hukawng Valley, proceeding to Munkong (Mogaung) and then towards Yunnan. The route was said to have been in use between the seventh and eighteenth centuries, although such connections did not develop into major commercial axes.[117] Laichen Sun similarly reconstructs the western extension of the Yunnan–Upper Burma route through Bhamo, Mogaung and the Hukawng Valley, across the Patkai to Bisa and Sadiya.[118] Trade through the eastern Himalayan uplands was probably conducted largely through intermediary communities rather than by merchants traversing the entire route; Hilaly describes these exchanges as a series of local and short-haul networks in which communities nearest the frontiers of Tibet, Burma and Assam acted as intermediaries.[119]

External contacts and downfall

With Bengal and Kamatapura

A tradition associated with Gharmora Satra links the Chutia royal family with Nabadwip in Bengal. According to the tradition, preserved by the custodians of the Satra, two Chutia princes received their education at Nabadwip, where they met Sankarshan, a Brahmin from Kannauj. After returning to Sadiya, the elder prince succeeded to the throne and brought Sankarshan, along with families of different occupational groups, to establish a religious institution on the bank of the Gharmora River; the king is also said to have granted it land, dependants and an image of Vishnu.[120]

Another western political connection with Kamatapura is also suggested by the Sadiya–Chepakhowa copper-plate grant of 1428, which describes Durlabhanarayana as the son of Dharmanarayana and grandson of Ratnanarayana, styled king of Kamatapura. Maheswar Neog proposed that Ratnanarayana was identical with Satyanarayana of the Sadhayapura grants, whose son is named Dharmanarayana in the Bormurtiya inscription. On this interpretation, the records indicate a dynastic link between Sadhaya and Kamatapura, although the identification and the nature of the connection is not known clearly.[121]

The grant includes a verse concerning Ratnanarayana, which was deciphered by Maheswar Neog with the assistance of Sanskrit scholars:[122]

Ekuha bhūt Kamatāpure narapati bhūpāla-varārcitaḥ
Kandarpa-pratipakṣa-lakṣa-vijayī Śrī Ratnanārāyaṇaḥ.

The Assamese translation published in Chutia Jatir Buranji (2007) renders the verse as: “There became a king in Kamatapura, one who was worshipped by kings, victorious over 1 lakh enemies of Kandarpa(another name for Kamdeva), Śrī Ratnanarayana.”[123]

During the Koch-Kamata campaign against the Ahom kingdom, some descendants of the former Chutia royalty sought Nara Narayan's protection. According to the Darrang Raj Vamsavali, the Chutia princes and their descendants who had fled following the Ahom conquest approached the Koch king, who granted them a settlement at a village called Bihbari[124] (identified as Basnbari in present-day Darrang). They subsequently became allies of Nara Narayan.[125] An apparently related tradition concerns the Chutia Kunwar estate in Darrang. Gogoi (1994) states that the estate originated when the Ahom king Suhungmung established the Chutia prince Sadhaknarayan in the Rowta–Pakariguri region following the conquest of the Chutia kingdom. The area subsequently came to be known after the Chutia prince, and its chief is said to have submitted to Nara Narayan during the Koch invasion of Assam. Gogoi identifies the medieval estate broadly with the present-day Dalgaon revenue circle.[126][b]

Shan incursions (14th century)

According to Tai and Shan chronicle traditions, Sam Long Hpa (Samlonhpha), ruler of Mong Kawng, led a westward campaign into Upper Assam, referred to in the chronicles as Mong Wehsali Long. One version preserved in the Mogaung chronicles states that he conquered much of the territory then under the sway of the Chutia (Sutya) kings, while another recounts the submission of Wehsali and the arrangement of tribute payments.[129][130] The chronicle account does not state whether the promised tribute was subsequently remitted. In a later episode of the Hsenwi chronicle tradition, Sam Long Hpa was said to have been poisoned after his return to Mong Kawng, although another version reported that he escaped to China.[131]

Although traditional chronologies place these events in the early 13th century, modern scholarship generally associates them with the mid-14th century, possibly around 1350 CE. Christian Daniels dates the emergence of Möng Mao (Mäng Maaw) and Mong Kawng under Sam Long Hpa, as major Tai political confederations, to the mid-14th century, and argues that these expansions are best understood in the context of the political transformations of the Yuan period.[132] Likewise, Sai Aung Tun, drawing upon Shan chronicles, places the zenith of Mao power under Hso Hkan Hpa and Sam Long Hpa in the 14th century and associates their expansion with campaigns extending westward into Assam.[133] Geoff Wade has further argued that the chronology preserved in later Shan chronicles is substantially inflated and that events attributed to Sam Long Hpa likely belong to a considerably later period than traditionally supposed.[134]

Möng Mao's early expansion did not result in a lasting hegemonic order. After Si Ke-fa's death, power seems to have passed to Mong Kawng (Mong Yang) for an interval from the 1370s to the 1390s.[135][136][137] Following the Ming conquest of Yunnan, Si Lun-fa of Möng Mao submitted to the Ming in 1382 and ruled thereafter under Ming patronage. By the end of the 14th century, the strength of Möng Mao waned, and principalities previously under its rule became independent. The Ming court took advantage of this situation by establishing 13 separate native jurisdictions under its authority, including Mengyang (the Chinese name for Mong Kawng[138][139])[140][141] Mong Mao, however, remained an important Tai power and renewed its expansion during the 1420s and 1430s. Its political centre was only decisively broken up after the Ming's Luchuan–Pingmian campaigns of 1438–1454, which dispersed its ruling elite and shifted the focus of Tai power westwards towards Mong Kawng.[142]

With Ahoms (14th century)

The Buranji contains an earlier tradition of contact between Sukaphaa's migrating group and local communities, including the Chutias. In this account, the migrating group captured villages during its movement into Assam, and among the people taken along the way were Chutias, Morans and Barahis, who were then assigned names according to the tasks they performed.[143][144]

The earliest mention of a Chutia king is found in the Buranjis that describe a friendly contact during the reign of Sutuphaa (1369–1379),[145] in which the Ahom king was killed. The Satsari Buranji states that the Ahoms maintained cordial relations with the Chutia kingdom from the time of Sukapha’s sons until Sutuphaa’s death.[146] Saikia (1997) argues that, facing political opposition from the Kacharis, the Ahoms in the early days, sought friendship with the Chutias, whose established royal court and commercial links with neighbouring regions made them an attractive ally. However, Sutuphaa’s death led to the failure of this early effort and contributed to a change in the Ahom attitude towards the Chutias.[147] To avenge the death, the next Ahom ruler Tyaokhamti (1380–1387) led an expedition against the Chutiya kingdom but returned with no success.[148]

Chutia-Ahom conflicts (1512–1523)

Suhungmung, the Ahom king, followed an expansionist policy and annexed Panbari of Habung[149] in 1512, which, according to Amalendu Guha, was a Chutia dependency.[150] In 1513 a border conflict triggered the Chutia king Dhirnarayan to advance to Dikhowmukh and build a stockade of banana trees (Posola-garh).[151][152] This fort was attacked by a force led by the Ahom king himself leading to a rout of the Chutia soldiers. This was followed by the Ahoms erecting a fort at Mungkhrang (located at the mouth of the Dihing river[153]), which fell within the Chutia territory.[152]

In 1520, the Chutias attacked the Ahom fort Mungkhrang twice and in the second killed the commander and occupied it. Towards the end of 1522,[154] the Ahoms, led by Phrasengmung Borgohain and King-lung Buragohain attacked it by land and water, recovered it and erected an offensive fort on the banks of the Dibru River. In 1523 the Chutia king attacked the fort at Dibru but was routed. The Ahom king hotly pursued the retreating Chutia king who sued for peace. The peace overtures failed and the king finally fell to Ahom forces, bringing an end to the Chutia kingdom.[155][156] Though some late spurious manuscripts mention the fallen king as Nitipal (or Chandranarayan) the extant records from the Buranjis such as the Ahom Buranji and the Deodhai Ahom Buranji do not mention him; rather they mention that the king and his son were killed.[157]

Legacy

The Ahoms took complete possession of the royal insignia and other assets of the erstwhile kingdom.[158][159] The former royal family was dispersed, its old noble establishment was disbanded, and the capital region was placed under the newly created office of the Sadiyakhowa Gohain.[160] At the same time, sections of the Chutia population, including nobles, commanders, warriors, professional groups and artisans, were incorporated into the expanding Ahom state. Many Brahmins, Kayasthas, Kalitas and Daivajnas/Ganaks (the caste Hindus), together with bell-metal workers, goldsmiths, blacksmiths and other artisans, were moved to the Ahom capital; this movement increased the admixture of Chutia and Ahom populations.[159] Guha argues that the incorporation of the Chutia kingdom made a wider range of artisan skills available to the Ahom state and enlarged the scope for division of labour within it.[42] Some Chutia groups were also resettled in other parts of Upper Assam, including towards the western limits of Darrang.[161][162]

The annexation of the Chutia kingdom marked a major stage in the expansion of the Ahom state. Laichen Sun characterises the conquest as a significant step in its territorial expansion, noting that Ahom territory and population had remained comparatively small until the end of the fifteenth century.[163] After the annexation, the Ahoms created or reorganised frontier offices for the newly acquired eastern regions, including 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).[164] The administrative reorganisation also involved institutional borrowing. In 1527, Suhungmung created the office of the Borpatrogohain, apparently deriving its designation from the Chutia Vrhat-patra of Habung[165] and Klangseng (previously posted as Bhatialia Gohain) was given charge.[166][167] The addition of a third Gohain counsellor strengthened the king's position relative to the older two Gohain offices while meeting the requirements of an enlarged administration.[168] The acquisition of the Chutia territories brought the Ahoms into direct contact with hill peoples such as the Miris, Abors, Mishmis and Daflas.[169] According to Laichen Sun, these connections provided access to metals such as copper and silver coming from China, while the conquest also brought the brine springs of Sadiya under Ahom control.[170] Sun further argues that the spoils obtained in the conquest enriched the Ahom treasury and strengthened its armed forces, which "was of immense help in their subsequent wars with the Muslims".[171]

The annexation of the Chutia kingdom had consequences beyond territorial acquisition. Saikia identifies the defeat of the Chutias as a turning point in the political evolution of the Ahoms, arguing that it supplied them with a more developed royal ceremonial order.[172] She further argues that the Ahoms appropriated from the Chutias a ready-made royal culture and personnel needed for a developing administrative system.[173][c] Saikia further argues that encounters and conflicts with other communities, particularly the Chutias, reshaped Ahom identity during this period. In her interpretation, food, dress and dwelling were used to present the Ahoms as a distinct and socially elevated ruling community of the riverine domain.[176] The conquest also marked an important stage in the Brahmanisation of the Ahom court. Although Brahmins had entered royal service under Sudangphaa, their role had remained limited for roughly a century; after the Chutia conquest they became more prominent as advisers in statecraft and officiants at royal installations, reservoir and dam consecrations, marriages, sacrifices and festivals.[177][178]

Firearms

The first specific mentions of extensive use of firearms in Ahom Buranjis are from the reign of Suhungmung;[179] leading some authors to suggest that the Ahoms acquired the art of using cannons from the Chutias, after the defeat of the Chutias by king Suhungmung.[180] Others have suggested that whereas other powers in Assam and Northeast India acquired gunpowder technology from Burma or China, the Chutias may have acquired gunpowder technology from mainland India[181] or Tibet as well,[182] though the Tibetans are known to have used matchlocks only from the beginning of the seventeenth century, a century after the end of the Chutia kingdom.[183] Some author speculate that the Ahom kingdom, who trace their roots to Tai people of Southeast Asia,[184] may have received Chinese gunpowder technology from that region;[185] and that it already had that technology before their confrontation with the Chutia royal house.[186] Besides the Chutias, Kacharis are also known to have possessed firearms at that time. There are occasional mentions of the Ahom state receiving firearms from the Kacharis at later periods.[187]

Nevertheless, it can be presumed that the Chutia's had the know-how and the materials required for their manufacture.[181] When the Ahoms annexed Sadiya, they recovered hand-cannons called Hiloi[188][189] as well as large cannons called Bor-top, Mithahulang being one of them.[190][191][192]The Mithahulung was the finest of the firearms brought from the Chutias; its exterior was brass-coated and decorated with enamel work and gold inlay.[193] As per Maniram Dewan, the Ahom king Suhungmung received around three thousand blacksmiths after defeating the Chutias. These people were settled in the Bosa (Doyang) and Ujoni regions and asked to build iron implements like knives, daggers, swords as well as guns and cannons.[194] Most of the Hiloi-Khanikars (gunmakers) in the Ahom khels belonged to the Chutia community.[195] There also existed a class of gunmen in the Ahom army called Sutiya-Hiloidari.[196]

Rulers

The copper-plate inscription of the 1522 land grant made by Dhirnarayan in Dhakuakhana. It contains the names of three kings: Yasamanarayana, Purandarnarayana and Dhirnarayana.

Only a few recently compiled Buranjis provide the history of the Chutia kingdom;[197] though some sections of these compilations are old, the sections that contain the list of Chutiya rulers cannot be traced to earlier than 19th century.[198] Some scholars, therefore, questioned the accuracy of the historical information in these accounts and showed great disdain for the related legends.[199]

Neog (1977) compiled a known list of rulers from epigraphic records based crucially on identifying the donor-ruler named Dharmanarayan, mentioned as the son of Satyanarayana in the Bormurtiya grant[200] with the Dharmanarayan, the father of the donor-ruler Durlabhnarayana of the Chepakhowa grant.[201] This effectively results in identifying Satyanarayana with Ratnanarayana.[202]

List of Rulers [203]
Name Other names Reign Period Reign in Progress
Nandi Nandisara or Nandisvara late 14th century[204]
Satyanarayana Ratnanarayana late 14th century[204] 1392[205]
Lakshminarayana Dharmanarayana early 15th century 1392;[206] 1401;[207]
Durlabhnarayana early 15th century 1428[208]
Muktadharmanarayana[209] mid 15th century 1442[210]
Pratyaksanarayana[211]
Yasanarayana[211]

A late discovery of an inscription, published in a 2002 souvenir of the All Assam Chutiya Sanmilan[212] seems to genealogically 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[213]
Purandarnarayana late 15th century
Dhirnarayana early 16th century 1522[214]

Though it is accepted that the rule of the Chutia rulers ended in 1523-24,[215] different sources give different accounts.[216] The extant Ahom Buranji and the Deodhai Asam Buranji mention that in the final battles and the aftermath both the king and his son;[217] whereas Ahom Buranji-Harakanta Barua mentions that the remnant of the royal family was deported to Pakariguri, Darrang.[218][219]

See also

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 "(T)he Chutiyas formed a state earlier than the Ahoms in the thirteenth century." (Nath 2013:25)
  2. ↑ Barua, Sarbeswar,Purvottar Prabandha, p. 212
  3. ↑ Kalita, Bharat Chandra, Military activities in Medieval Assam,p.23
  4. ↑ Saikia, Yasmin,In the Meadows of Gold, p. 190.
  5. ↑ Dutta 1985, p. 30.
  6. ↑ Saikia, Yasmin, In the Meadows of Gold, p. 190.
  7. ↑ Barua, Swarnalata, Chutia Jatir Buranji, p.139.
  8. 1 2 "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)
  9. ↑ "Their kingdom called Sadiya..." (Gogoi 2002:20)
  10. 1 2 "(T)he Chutiyas seem to have assumed political power in Sadiya and contiguous areas falling within modern Arunachal Pradesh." (Shin 2020:51)
  11. ↑ "..the Chutiya kingdom was bound by the Himalayas on the north, river Burhi Dihing on the south, Patkai ranges on the east and Bharali river in the west"(Dutta 1985:28)
  12. 1 2 "About 250 years ago the Dihing (present Burhi-Dihing) flowed westerly through Sivsagar district to meet the Brahmaputra at the extreme western point of Majuli island (Sarma and Goswami, 2007). Over the centuries, the river Dihing has changed its courses many times...We find the earliest historical records of the valley after the coming of the Ahoms as the Buranjis or the Ahom chronicles mention about the conflict between the Ahoms and the Chutiyas on the bank of the river Dihing. The Satsari Asom Buranji refers to the Ahom-Chutiya conflict over the matter of fishing rights in the river Dihing which ultimately led to the annexation of the entire Chutiya territory upto Sadiya by the Ahoms during the reign of Suhungmung (p.56). However, it was only in the second decade of the sixteenth century, the area was brought under the control of the Ahoms and before that the whole territory of present-day Dibrugarh was under the Chutiyas."(Bhuyan 2023:532)
  13. ↑ "The hills and the river Buri Dihing formed its northern and southern boundaries respectively." (Gogoi 2002:20–21)
  14. 1 2 "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)
  15. 1 2 (Shin 2020:57) "The ruins of two forts in Lohit district of Arunachal Pradesh is said to be the remains of Bhīṣmaka's city, viz. Bhismaknagar (sk. Bhīṣmakanagara): one ruin about 16 miles northwest of Sadiya at the foot of the hills between the rivers Dikrang and Dibang is known as the fort of Bhīṣmaka, and the other about 24 miles north of Sadiya between the gorges of those two rivers is believed to be the fort of Śiśupāla. Based on an inscribed brick with the name of Śrīśrī-Lakṣmīnārāyaṇa, discovered from the ruins of the forts in Bhismaknagar, it is assumed that Chutiya king Lakṣmīnārāyaṇa of the early fifteenth century had his capital in the area. The paleographical analysis of the inscription supports this dating."
  16. ↑ "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)
  17. ↑ "N.N Acharyya, are of the opinion that the Chutiya kingdom extended up to Viswanath in the present Darrang district of Assam." (Dutta 1985:28)
  18. ↑ (Nath 2013:27)
  19. ↑ "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, to the westernmost extent of which Ahom conquerors settled the vanquished Chutiyas in the early part of the sixteenth century." (Shin 2020:52–53)
  20. ↑ (Saikia 2004:8)
  21. ↑ Saikia, Yasmin (1997). In the Meadows of Gold: Telling Tales of the Swargadeos at the Crossroads of Assam. Guwahati: Spectrum Publications. p. 188. The eastern extremity of this kingdom opened into the mountains inhabited by the Abors, Mishimis, Bhutiyas, and others, and they controlled the trade that passed between the Assam valley and the hills of Bhutan and Tibet.
  22. ↑ "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)
  23. ↑ "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 formed a state earlier than the Ahoms in the thirteenth century."(Shin 2020:51)
  24. ↑ "It is more likely that if there was a Chutiya state at this time, it was of little significance until the second half of the fourteenth century." (Shin 2020:52)
  25. ↑ "The period from the 13th to the 16th century saw the emergence and development of a large number of tribal political formations in northeast 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)
  26. ↑ "The most developed of the tribes in the 15th century were the Chutiya." (Guha 1983:5)
  27. ↑ "Indeed it appears that of all the tribes of the Brahmaputra valley, the Chutiyas were the most advanced and had a well-developed civilization."(Dutta 1985:29)
  28. ↑ "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)
  29. ↑ "(T)he Chutias, who held power by regulating the easterly trade and migration of people to and from Tibet, Southern China, and Assam." (Saikia 2004:8)
  30. ↑ "(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)
  31. ↑ (At the time of annexation by the Ahoms) caste system had become prevalent in (the Chutiya) society." (Gogoi 2002:21)
  32. ↑ "It is not definitely known as to the system of agriculture adopted by them." (Gogoi 2002:22)
  33. ↑ "the word 'khā' of Tai-Ahom language, which is usually prefixed to names of non-Ahom people practicing shifting cultivation, does not appear for the Chutiyas, probably because they were neither stateless nor were they solely shifting cultivators in the early phase of Ahom rule. There seems no serious interaction between the Ahoms and old settled people of the neighborhood including the Chutiyas until the fourteenth century." (Shin 2020:51)
  34. ↑ (Baruah 1986:186)
  35. ↑ "The Ahoms accepted many Chutiyas to their fold and offered them responsible offices in the administration"(Dutta 1985:30)
  36. ↑ "[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)
  37. ↑ "The origin of the Chutiya state is obscure."(Buragohain 2013:120)
  38. ↑ "The Chutiyas belong to the Bodos, a linguistic group of the Brahmaputra valley, speaking a Tibeto-Burman language and having different cognate groups within them. 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)
  39. ↑ (Guha 1983:fn.16) "The prefix Kha does not appear in the Tai words for the Dimasa and the Chutiya, probably because they were neither stateless, nor-were they solely shifting cultivators."
  40. ↑ "The first confrontation between the Ahoms and the Chutiyas as a political power is mentioned in some chronicles such as the Deodhai Asam Buranji only during the reign of Ahom king Sutupha (1369–76), about a hundred years after the death of Sukapha. It is more likely that if there was a Chutiya state at this time, it was of little significance until the second half of the fourteenth century...There seems no serious interaction between the Ahoms and old settled people of the neighborhood including the Chutiyas until the fourteenth century as both the Ahom territory and its population remained precariously small."(Shin 2020:52)
  41. 1 2 "the word 'khā' of Tai-Ahom language, which is usually prefixed to names of non-Ahom people practicing shifting cultivation, does not appear for the Chutiyas, probably because they were neither stateless nor were they solely shifting cultivators in the early phase of Ahom rule. There seems no serious interaction between the Ahoms and old settled people of the neighborhood including the Chutiyas until the fourteenth century as both the Ahom territory and its population remained precariously small."(Shin 2020:52)
  42. 1 2 (Guha 1983:19)
  43. ↑ "After two years' stay at Song-Tak Sukapha turned back and came to Simaluguri (Tun Nyeu). Here he learned through spies of heavy concentration of population on the Namdang (Nam Deng, "red river") and considered it not worthwhile to make any attept (sic) to reduce them to submission." (Phukan 1992:53)
  44. ↑ "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)
  45. ↑ Neog, Maheswar, ed. (2008) [1974]. Prachya-Sasanavali (3rd ed.). Guwahati: Publication Board, Assam. p. 187.
  46. ↑ Barua, Swarnalata; Nath, Damburudhar, eds. (2007). চুতীয়া জাতিৰ বুৰঞ্জী [History of the Chutia Community] (in Assamese). Appendix A, Dhenukhana copper-plate inscription.
  47. ↑ "According to the Dhenukhana copper plate inscription of Satyanārāyaṇa and Pratyakṣanārāyaṇa, dated 1314 Śaka (1392 AD), king Nandin (or Nandi), a great hero of many virtues, was the lord of Sadhayāpurī (sadhayāpurīśa), and Daivakī, Nandin's wife, was continuously accomplishing good deeds. 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"(Shin 2020:53)
  48. ↑ "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 a maternal uncle (who was) given the name of Daitya'(daityanāmāttamāmāmatiḥ) can be seen as an indirect reference to his lineage." (Shin 2020:53)
  49. ↑ "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)
  50. ↑ "Ratnanãrãyana is called the king of Kamatãpura and his grandson Durlabhanãrãyana is described as giving lands under the administration of the Governor of Häbunga province." (Neog 1977:818)
  51. ↑ "The eastern region, whether it is called Sadhaya or Svadhaya as in the plates or Sadhiya or Sadiya as in Assamese chronicles and the western region of Kamatapura seems to be politically connected and the same Satyanarayana/Ratnanarayana might have held sway over both regions"(Neog 1977:818)
  52. ↑ "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)
  53. ↑ "These records suggest the penetration of Vaiṣṇava tradition in the eastern extremity of present Assam between the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries"(Shin 2020:55)
  54. ↑ "They had definitely come under Brahminical influence during the late fourteenth and early fifteenth century, as is borne out by the evidence of their landgrants in favour of Brahmana beneficiaries"(Momin 2006:47)
  55. ↑ Sharma, Mukunda Madhava (1978). Inscriptions of Ancient Assam. Gauhati: Department of Publication, Gauhati University. p. 287. "It might be presumed that the elephant mark of the seals of the earlier Kamrupa kings has been very conveniently converted into the figure of Ganesha. But this conversion assumes a greater significance when we find that some 43 years later, the Tezpur plates of Vallabha begins with a mangala verse addressed to Ganesa and the Dhenukhana CP inscription of 1392 and the Ghilamora CP inscription of 1401 also begin with salutations to Ganesa."
  56. ↑ "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)
  57. ↑ "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)
  58. ↑ "Most names of brahmin donees have Vaiṣṇava affiliation." (Shin 2020:55)
  59. ↑ " 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)
  60. ↑ (Gogoi 2011:235–236)
  61. ↑ '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)
  62. ↑ "There are various accounts and succession lists of the rulers of the Chutiyãs ... 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)
  63. ↑ "The legends relating to the origin of the Chutiyas is full of absurdities without any historical moorings."(Buragohain 2013:120)
  64. ↑ Brown, W. B. (1895). An Outline Grammar of the Deori Chutiya Language. Shillong: Assam Secretariat Printing Office. pp. 75, 84. "These traditions are preserved among the Miris, the Deoris, who were the Chutiya priests ... and by some few of the Chutiyas who now call themselves Hindu Chutiyas ... Probably enquiry would show that the other incidents of the chronicle are preserved as traditions among the Deoris in a similar modified form."
  65. 1 2 (Nath 2013:27)
  66. ↑ (Nath 2013:29–30)
  67. ↑ "[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 at the beginning of the 19th century (1805) or after the Ahom power was abolished." (Nath 2013:27)
  68. ↑ (Shin 2020:52, 58–59)
  69. ↑ (Shin 2020:59–61)
  70. ↑ "(T)he geographical extent of these rulers' power is not yet known in detail..." (Shin 2020:52)
  71. ↑ "..the Chutiya kingdom was bound by the Himalayas on the north,river Burhi Dihing on the south, Patkai ranges on the east and Bharali river in the west"(Dutta 1985:28)
  72. ↑ "The hills and the river Buri Dihing formed its northern and southern boundaries respectively." (Gogoi 2002:20–21)
  73. ↑ Acharya.N.N., The History of Medieval Assam, 1966, p.232
  74. ↑ "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, to the westernmost extent of which Ahom conquerors settled the vanquished Chutiyas in the early part of the sixteenth century." (Shin 2020:52–53)
  75. ↑ "N.N Acharyya are of the opinion that the Chutiya kingdom extended up to Viswanath in the present Darrang district of Assam."(Dutta 1985:28)
  76. ↑ "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)
  77. ↑ "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)
  78. ↑ "This shows that if there was any Chutiya state it was of little significance till at least mid 14th century." (Nath 2013:26)
  79. ↑ “Along the way, a number of people were captured and brought along with. They were either Chutias, Morans, Barahis—thus the migrating band expanded.”(Saikia 1997:4)
  80. ↑ “Along the way, a number of people were captured. They were either Chutias, Morans, [or] Barahis ... given names according to the task they performed.”(Saikia 2004:115–116)
  81. ↑ (Neog 1977:820)
  82. ↑ (Gogoi 2002:21–22)
  83. ↑ "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. The most developed of the tribes in the 15th century were the Chutiyas."(Guha 1983:5)
  84. ↑ (Baruah 2007:148–149)
  85. ↑ (Shin 2020:55)
  86. ↑ (Guha 1991:40–41)
  87. ↑ (Baruah 2007:145–146)
  88. ↑ Devi 1968, pp. 202–203.
  89. ↑ Neog 1977, p. 819.
  90. ↑ (Borboruah 1997:586)
  91. ↑ Baruah 2007, p. 139.
  92. ↑ Marshall, John (1909). Annual Report of the Archaeological Survey of India, 1906–07. Calcutta: Superintendent Government Printing, India. p. 27.
  93. ↑ "The chronicles mention that there were people of Daivajna, Tanti, Sonari, Brahman, Sutar and Kamar castes in the Chutiya kingdom ... at the time of its annexation by the Ahoms."(Gogoi 2002:22)
  94. ↑ "In the Bahgarhiya Buragohain’s Buranji, included in the Deodhai Asam Buranji, it is stated: Our king, after inspecting the city of the Chutia king, had whatever he found there loaded into boats and sent down the Dihing...Afterwards, a great many things were obtained: 30 elephants, 30 horses, 79 guns (hiloi), spears, ceremonial staffs and umbrellas, kekora-dola, aruwan, spittoons, cattle and buffaloes, and many other things. A large number of Brahmins, Kayasthas, Kalitas, Ganaks, Kahars, Sonaris, and people of other professions were also obtained.”(Baruah 2007:139)
  95. ↑ "For example, the Khanikar Khel (guild of engineers) was always manned by the Chutiyas."(Dutta 1985:30)
  96. ↑ "Further, as a result of the annexation of the Chutia kingdom, many families of Brahmanas, Kayasthas, Kalitas, Daivajnas etc. and a large number of artisans viz. bell-metal workers, goldsmiths, blacksmiths, oil-pressers, gardeners, washermen, and weavers were transferred to the Ahom capital" (Baruah 1986:230)
  97. ↑ (Baruah 2007:151)
  98. ↑ (Baruah 2007:151–152)
  99. ↑ (Baruah 2007:588)
  100. ↑ (Baruah 2007:151–152)
  101. ↑ (Tada 2011:111, 115)
  102. ↑ "Bhismaknagar". District Lower Dibang Valley, Government of Arunachal Pradesh. Retrieved 13 August 2026.
  103. ↑ (Baruah 2007:145–146, 151)
  104. ↑ (Dutta 1985:30)
  105. ↑ (Baruah 2007:161)
  106. ↑ Saikia, Raktim Ranjan; Amin, Nurul (2019). "A Study on the Salt Production of Ancient Assam". Indian Journal of History of Science. 54 (4). doi:10.16943/ijhs/2019/v54i4/49775.
  107. ↑ (Baruah 2007:152–153)
  108. ↑ Padmeswar Naoboicha Phukan, "Assam Buranji", p.30
  109. ↑ "In eastern Assam, toward the area of modern-day Arunachal Pradesh, was the famed kingdom of Sadiya, ruled by the Chutias, who held power by regulating the easterly trade and migration of people to and from Tibet, southern China, and Assam."(Saikia 2004:8)
  110. ↑ (Saikia 1997:188)
  111. ↑ (Baruah 2007:154)
  112. ↑ (Baruah 2007:146)
  113. ↑ Phukan, Kasinath Tamuli, Assam Buranji, pp. 17–18.
  114. ↑ Bhuyan, S. K., Satsari Assam Buranji, p. 135.
  115. ↑ Chattopadhyay, Subid (1984). History and Archaeology of Arunachal Pradesh (PhD thesis). University of Calcutta. p. 71.
  116. ↑ Sharma, Sukanya (2010). "Southeast Asian Elements in the Archaeological Evidence of Northeast India" (PDF). SPAFA Journal. 20 (3): 26–27.
  117. ↑ Pachuau, Joy L. K. (2022). "'Circulations' along the Indo-Burma Borderlands: Networks of Trade, Religion, and Identity". In Cederlöf, Gunnel; van Schendel, Willem (eds.). Flows and Frictions in Trans-Himalayan Spaces: Histories of Networking and Border Crossing. Amsterdam University Press. pp. 119–120. doi:10.1515/9789048555581-006.
  118. ↑ (Sun 2000:188-189)
  119. ↑ Hilaly, Sarah (2017). "Re-Examining the South-Western Silk Road in the Context of Arunachal Pradesh". Rajiv Gandhi University Research Journal. 16 (1): 79–80.
  120. ↑ Gogoi, Himadri; Dutta, Tarun (2021). "Gharmora Satra and Its Archive". Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry. 12 (8). p. 8019. During the 13th century two princes of Chutiya dynasty took education at Navadweep University of Bengal. There they met a Brahmin named Sankarshan of Kannauj (Kanyakubja).
  121. ↑ (Neog 1977:819–20)
  122. ↑ (Baruah 2007:41)
  123. ↑ "এজন হৈছিল (একোহভূৎ) কমতাপুৰৰ ৰজা (কমতাপুৰে নৰপতি), যি জন আছিল "ভূপাল সমূহৰদ্বাৰা অৰ্চিত"(ভূপাল-ৱাৰাৰ্চ্চিত) আৰু "কামদেৱৰ(আন এটা নাম কন্দৰ্প) শত্ৰুৰ বিৰুদ্ধে বিজয়ী" (কন্দৰ্প-প্ৰতিপক্ষ-লক্ষ-ৱিজয়ী) শ্ৰী ৰত্ননাৰায়ণ"(Baruah 2007:587)
  124. ↑ Baladev Suryakhari Daivajna (1973). Sarma, Nabin Chandra (ed.). Darrang Raj Vamsavali (in Assamese). Bani Prakash. vv. 372–373.
  125. ↑ Bapari, Parimal (2010). King Naranarayan and His Times (PhD thesis). University of North Bengal. p. 88.
  126. ↑ Gogoi, Nityananda (1994). Historical Geography of Medieval Assam (PhD thesis). Gauhati University. pp. 234–235.
  127. ↑ Wade, John Peter (1927). Sharma, Benudhar (ed.). An Account of Assam. R. Sarmah. "A Geographical Sketch of Assam", pp. 11–12.
  128. ↑ Gogoi, Nityananda (1994). Historical Geography of Medieval Assam (PhD thesis). Gauhati University. pp. 234–235.
  129. ↑ (Gogoi 1956:132–133)
  130. ↑ "He conquered the greater portion of the territory then under the sway of the Chutya or Sutya kings."(Saikia 2004:88)
  131. ↑ Scott, J. George (1900). Gazetteer of Upper Burma and the Shan States. Vol. 1. pp. 200–201.
  132. ↑ Daniels, Christian (2018). "The Mongol-Yuan in Yunnan and Proto-Tai/Tai Polities during the Thirteenth–Fourteenth Centuries". Journal of the Siam Society. 106: 201–243.
  133. ↑ Sai Aung Tun, Sai (2001). "The Tai Ethnic Migration and Settlement in Myanmar". Myanmar Historical Research Journal (7): 7–26.
  134. ↑ Wade, Geoff (1996). The Baiyi Zhuan and the History of the Tai Polities.
  135. ↑ "After Si Ke-fa's death, power seems to have passed to Mong Yang for an interval as evidenced by the frequent successions and disorder that reigned at the Mong Mao court and Mong Yang's attacks against Ava in the 1370s and 1390s."(Fernquest 2006:71)
  136. ↑ "Mingyiswasawke’s attempt to play Kale and Mong Yang off of one another and reduce their power was a failure, for with the power of Mong Mao in eclipse, Mong Yang rose to the position of new primus-inter-pares in the Tai Frontier. The source of Tai attacks on Ava switched to Mong Yang from Mong Mao..The most prominent Tai leader in Ming relations, Si Lun-fa, dominates the public transcript of Ming-Tai relations (c. 1382-1398) despite the fact that another Tai chieftainship Mong Yang played a more prominent role in conflicts with Burmese Ava to the south during this period."(Fernquest 2006:39–43)
  137. ↑ "The limited scale and duration of shifting political centers in the Tai Frontier indicates that there was a level of political integration not yet that of a fully developed state. A network of chieftainships that joined together occasionally for a common purpose in tenuous and changing confederations offers a better model. The centers within the Tai frontier zone that asserted themselves politically either through warfare or through building ties with the Ming and Burmese varied from period to period. Sometimes there were two major centers asserting themselves in different ways as there was from 1382 to 1400 when Mong Yang attacked Ava and Mong Mao built strong ties with the Ming."(Fernquest 2006:66)
  138. ↑ Wade, Geoff (2004). Ming China and Southeast Asia in the 15th Century: A Reappraisal (Report). Asia Research Institute Working Paper Series. National University of Singapore. p. 16. Meng-yang: A polity which the MSL records as a "prefecture" and later as a "pacification Superintendency" under Yun-nan. It is the polity known in Shan as Möng Yang or Möng Kawng and in Burmese as Mo-hnyin or Mogaung.
  139. ↑ "Ava discovered that Si Ren-fa had fled west across the Irrawaddy and established a power base at the Tai settlement of Mogaung near Mong Yang. These two Tai settlements are often confused, but the linguistics and historical geography behind the names are actually straightforward. The Burmese usually distinguished between the neighboring Tai chieftainships of Mong Yang, which they called Mohnyin, and Mong Kaung, which they called Mogaung (SLC 233). The Ming rarely made the distinction. It almost always referred to both chieftainships as Meng-yang and only rarely mentioned Meng-guang (Tai: Mong Kaung)."(Fernquest 2006:39–43)
  140. ↑ Fernquest 2006, pp. 49–50.
  141. ↑ Sun 2000, pp. 225–226.
  142. ↑ Fernquest 2006, pp. 44–45.
  143. ↑ "Along the way, a number of people were captured. They were either Chutias, Morans, [or] Barahis ... given names according to the task they performed."(Saikia 2004:8)
  144. ↑ “Along the way, a number of people were captured and brought along with. They were either Chutias, Morans, Barahis—thus the migrating band expanded.”(Saikia 1997:4)
  145. ↑ "The first confrontation between the Ahoms and the Chutiyas as a political power is mentioned in some chronicles such as the Deodhai Asam Buranji only during the reign of Ahom king Sutupha (1369–76), about a hundred years after the death of Sukapha." (Shin 2020:51)
  146. ↑ Bhuyan, S.K, Satsari Assam Buranji,p.9, "Previously, since the time of one of Sukapha’s sons, there was alliance and cordial relations with the Chutia king"
  147. ↑ "When the Tai Ahoms confronted the Chutias, they were a semi-Hinduised people with a glamorous royal court, to which was added commercial power from trade with neighbouring regions. This made the Chutia domain very attractive to the new settlers. Faced with significant political opposition from the Kacharis, the Tai-Ahoms sought the friendship of the Chutias. An early attempt, in the mid-fourteenth century, did not produce positive results, and there was a lull for nearly a century."(Saikia 1997:189)
  148. ↑ Dutta 1985, p. 29.
  149. ↑ "... Panbari in the Habung country on the north bank of the Brahmaputra."(Barpujari 1990:55)
  150. ↑ "He annexed Habung in 1512, a Chutiya dependency until then. Thereafter the whole of the Hinduized Chutiya Kingdom and parts of the present Nowgong district then ruled severally by baro-bhuyans and the Dimasa king,.."(Guha 1983:27)
  151. ↑ Baruah 1986, p. 227.
  152. 1 2 (Phukan 1992:55)
  153. ↑ Journal of the University of Gauhati. Vol. 7–8. Gauhati: Gauhati University. 1956. p. 48. The Chutiyas did not attempt any reprisal till 1520 AD, when they attacked the Ahom fort at Mungkhrang at the mouth of the Dihing river and came out victorious.
  154. ↑ Journal of the University of Gauhati. Vol. 7–8. Gauhati: Gauhati University. 1956. p. 48. It was the expedition of 1522 A.D sent by Ahoms under Phrasenmung Borgohain towards the end of the year(month of Kartik i.e. Nov-Dec)..
  155. ↑ Baruah 1986, pp. 228–229.
  156. ↑ (Phukan 1992:56)
  157. ↑ "...the Ahom Buranji and the (Deodhai Asam Buranji) do not mention the name of Nitipal alias Chandranarayan. These sources ascribe the event to the reign of Dhirnarayan and state that in the final clash both the Chutiya king (Dhirnarayan) and the prince (Sadhaknarayan) were killed." (Baruah 1986:229f)
  158. ↑ "Besides, the items of Chutiya aristocracy like the Danda-Chhatra (royal umbrella), Arwan, Kekura-dola (Palaquin), embroidered-japi, etc. were adopted by the Ahoms. The Chutiya kingdom had also several salt-springs at places like Borhat, which came under the Ahoms after its annexation"(Dutta 1985:30)
  159. 1 2 Baruah 1986, p. 230.
  160. ↑ Baruah 1986, p. 229.
  161. ↑ "(T)he 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 2020:53)
  162. ↑ (Sarma 1993:287) Dewanar Atla: "Suhungmung or Swarganarayan, after defeating Dhirnarayana and his minister Kasitora, received a number of Dola, Kali..Hiloi and gunpowder(Kalai-khar). Besides these, he also made a number of blacksmiths (Komar) prisoners and settled them either at Bosa (in present-day Jorhat district) or Ujjoni regions...It was only during the time of Suhungmung that the guild of blacksmiths and its trade started in Assam (Ahom kingdom). There were three thousand blacksmiths during this period."
  163. ↑ Sun 2000, pp. 269–270.
  164. ↑ (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.
  165. ↑ "It appears that the noble designation of Barpatragohain was borrowed from the civil list of Habung where the local ruler, a dependent of the Chutia king, had the title of Vrihatpatra".(Guha 1983:20)
  166. ↑ Thao-mung mungteu(Bhatialia Gohain) was made Chao-sheng-lung in Lakni Rungrao 1527.(p.61.)
  167. ↑ Klangseng is mentioned as Chao-sheng-lung in Lakni Dapplao 1531.(p.64)
  168. ↑ (Guha 1983:20–21)
  169. ↑ Gait, Edward A. (1926). A History of Assam. Calcutta: Thacker, Spink & Co. pp. 45–46.
  170. ↑ (Sun 2000:270)
  171. ↑ (Sun 2000:270)
  172. 1 2 (Saikia 1997:191)
  173. ↑ (Saikia 1997:207)
  174. ↑ (Saikia 1997:213)
  175. ↑ (Saikia 2004:132)
  176. ↑ (Saikia 1997:192)
  177. ↑ (Guha 1983:20–21, 28)
  178. ↑ (Saikia 1997:222)
  179. ↑ "Although no precise date about its introduction can be established, yet it is generally believed that extensive use of explosives began from the time of Ahom king Suhungmung alias Swarganarayan Dihingia Raja (reign 1497-1539 CE)." (Hazarika & Sharma 2016:88)
  180. ↑ "Barbarua points out that the Ahoms acquired the art of using cannons from the Chutias after the defeat of the Chutias by king Suhungmung who had acquired a cannon called the ‘mithaholong top’ from the Chutias and introduced it in Ahom territories.” (Hazarika & Sharma 2016:89)
  181. 1 2 ”Buranjis are also silent about the technology used. It can however be presumed that the Chutias, who were amongst the first to have trade ties with the imperial dominions i.e. the Indian Mainland, had the know-how and the materials required for its manufacture." (Hazarika & Sharma 2016:90)
  182. ↑ ”Northeastern India, primarily Assam, may also have received gunpowder technology from China via Burma. Some Ahom (Assamese) chronicles (buranji) suggest that firearms were employed before this time. In 1505 or 1523, after having subdued the Chutiya, who dwelled in the region between Tibet and Assam, the Ahoms acquired firearms from them. The Chutiya may have received gunpowder technology from Tibet as well."(Laichen 2003:504)
  183. ↑ "At present, as it is shown in Tashi Tsering Josayma’s contribution to this volume, the earliest documented references to firearms in Tibet may be ascribed to the first half of the seventeenth century, with 1618-19 being the earliest date confirmed through historical sources." (Travers & Venturi 2021:735)
  184. ↑ "However it is worth noting that the Tai people of Southeast Asia to whom the Ahoms trace their roots were known to use matchlocks since early times." (Hazarika & Sharma 2016:91)
  185. ↑ "Chinese gunpowder technology spread to Southeast Asia by the late 14th and early 15th centuries which had noteworthy impact on the warfare and territorial expansion in northern mainland South-east Asia. In this context, the advent of the Tai-Ahoms through the northern mainland South-east Asia to the upper Brahmaputra valley during the early part of 13th century may be scrutinised who may have brought with them the knowledge of gunpowder technology to this part of India." (Hazarika & Sharma 2016:87–88)
  186. ↑ "There seems to be no doubt that both the Ahoma and the Chutiyas knew about the use of fire arms. But probably because of tactical and circumstantial disadvantages, it was not used by the Ahoma prior to 1534." (Buragohain 1988:62f)
  187. ↑ "The Ahom Buranji mentions that the Kachari king was directed to surrender all the silver daggers and large cannons”(Hazarika & Sharma 2016:88)
  188. ↑ "...the Ahoms got 69 fire-arms from the Chutiyas whom they defeated in 1523." (Baruah 1986:397)
  189. ↑ Hiteswar Borborua in his book Ahomor Din mentions the firearms procured from Sadiya as Barud
  190. ↑ "(M)entions the capture of a large quantity of firearms from the Chutiyas. Hiteswar Barbarua, Ahomar Din, publication Board, Assam Guwahati 1981, p.450, mentions the capture of the best Chutiya cannon (Mitha Hulung Tup) after defeating them in 1523."(Buragohain 1988:62)
  191. ↑ Sharma, Benudhar, Maniram Dewan, p.289.
  192. ↑ Borboruah, Hiteswar (23 June 1997). "Ahomar Din Ed. 2nd" – via Internet Archive.
  193. ↑ (Baruah 2007:641)
  194. ↑ Sharma, Benudhar.Maniram Dewan, p.287. "After defeating the Chutia king and his minister Kasitora, Suhungmung or Dihingia Swarganarayan, apart from Dola, Kali,..., Cannons and Gunpowder, brought a great number of Blacksmiths as prisoners. These were settled at Bosha and the Ujoni regions; and smithies were set up where they were asked to build knives, daggers, swords, guns, and cannons. Saikias and Hazarikas were recruited among them to look after their work. It was only during this period that the work and trade of the blacksmith guild started in the kingdom. During the time of Dihingia raja, there were three thousand Blacksmiths."
  195. ↑ "The Chutiyas were engaged in all kinds of technical jobs of the Ahom kingdom. For example, the Khanikar Khel (guild of engineers) was always manned by the Chutiyas. The Jaapi-Hajiya Khel (guild for making Jaapis) was also monopolised by them. The Chutiyas being expert warrior knew the use of matchlocks. After their subjugation, the Chutiyas were, therefore engaged in manufacturing matchlocks and they became prominent in the Hiloidhari-Khel (guild for manufacturing matchlocks)"(Dutta 1985:30)
  196. ↑ Census of India 1891, p. 17
  197. ↑ "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 2020:52)
  198. ↑ "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)
  199. ↑ " 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)
  200. ↑ (Neog 1977:816)
  201. ↑ "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)
  202. ↑ "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 seems to have been assumed by the kings of this region. (Neog 1977:818)
  203. ↑ (Neog 1977:817)
  204. 1 2 "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)
  205. ↑ "Dhenukhanã copperplate grant of King Satyanãrãyana, son of Nandi, Nandisara or Nandivara, of Sadhayâpurï or Svadhayãpuri, dated 1392." (Neog 1977:813)
  206. ↑ "Barmurtiyã-bil copperplate inscription of King Dharmanãrãyana, son of Satyanãrãyana, dated 1392" (Neog 1977:813)
  207. ↑ "Ghilãmarã copperplate grant of King Laksmlnãrãyana, son of Satyanãrãyana, dated 1401." (Neog 1977:813)
  208. ↑ "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)
  209. ↑ "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)
  210. ↑ "Pãyã-Tãmresvari (Dikkaravãsini) temple wall inscription of King Dharmanãrãyana, son-regent of Brddharãja (Old King), dated 1364 Šaka/1442 AD" (Neog 1977:813)
  211. 1 2 "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)
  212. ↑ (Nath 2013:43ff)
  213. ↑ (Baruah 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."
  214. ↑ (Baruah 2007:590–591)
  215. ↑ "The most developed of the tribes in the 15th century were the Chutiyas. Their kingdom was annexed and absorbed by the Tai-Ahoms by 1523." (Guha 1983:5)
  216. ↑ "Regarding the fate of the Chutia prince Sadhaknarayan and the identity of the Chutia king killed by the Ahoms in 1523-24, opinions differ." (Baruah 1986:229ff)
  217. ↑ "The Ahom Buranji and the Deodhai Assam Buranji do not mention the name of Nitipal alias Chandranarayan. These sources ascribe the event to the reign of Dhirnarayan and state that in the final clash both the Chutia king and the prince were killed." (Baruah 1986:229f)
  218. ↑ "Suhunmung then deported the Chutiya nobles and the prince Sadhaknarayan to his kingdom and established the latter at Darrang with grants of land and labourers."(Gogoi 2002:21)
  219. ↑ "The descendants of the Chutia royals are still living in a place called Geruwapara in Rowta Mouza of Darrang district."(Baruah 2007:139)

Notes

  1. ↑ The damaged passage is also reproduced in Chutia Jatir Buranji, where the reference to Nandisvara's descent through the daughter of the preceding figure remains visible despite the lacuna in that person's name.[46]
  2. ↑ The estate appears to have remained identifiable as a geographical division into the late eighteenth century. In his geographical account of Assam, compiled in 1800, John Peter Wade records a north-bank district immediately east of Darrang under the forms Soontia and Soontiagown, situated near Kosarigaon and Pakariguri. Wade described it as approximately eight miles long and four miles broad and as generally high-lying.[127] Gogoi (1994) identifies Wade's district with the medieval Chutiya Kunwar estate and approximately with the present-day Dalgaon revenue circle.[128]
  3. ↑ Chutia royal symbols and articles were subsequently incorporated into Ahom royal tradition, contributing to the more sacral image of the Ahom ruler as Swargadeo.[174] Saikia also notes that the term Swargadeo is almost absent in the earliest portions of the Satsari Assam Buranji, but recurs after the Chutia defeat; Suhungmung is styled Maharaja, while his successor Suklengmung is called Swargaraja.[172] Immediately on creating this office (Swargadeo), barriers were set up between the high nobles and the commoners and the easy mixing of cultures and people that took place at the level of daily life was discouraged by royal mandate. One can read this as the beginning of "class consciousness" in the swargadeo’s domain.[175]

Bibliography

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chutia_kingdom&oldid=1375092975"