Reviews

Summary

The review critically examines Rai Babadur K. I Barua’s *Early History of Kamaripa* (1933), noting both strengths and discrepancies. While praising the work’s thorough research, the reviewer disputes several points: the identification of Dharmapala’s plates (arguing they belong to Ratnapala, not Dharmapala, based on the *Sandvaldi* and *Nidhanpur* inscriptions); the claim that the Khasa tribe is Nepalese; and the confusion between *Kamaripa Sadsongvaliy* and *Kamaripa Rajavali* in footnotes. The reviewer also challenges Barua’s interpretation of the Karatoyi River’s geography, citing the *Nalika Purana* and Renaissance maps, and questions the timeline of land grants by Bhativarman and Harsha. Additionally, the review reasserts Supratisthitavarman’s brief but valid reign in Kamaripa, supported by a Nalanda seal, and disputes the claim that Bhaskara transferred his capital to Karnasuvarna, emphasizing his likely temporary occupation during Harsha’s reign. The reviewer concludes that Bhaskara retained sovereignty over Kamaripa and only held Karnasuvarna until Harsha’s death, rejecting the vassalage theory. The analysis underscores the complexity of Kamaripa’s historical narrative and the need for careful source evaluation.