The name of some heroes has not been written with due respect in the world history despite their enormous contribution to humankind. They have appeared before the world as the forgotten heroes.Eventually, their all deeds sink into oblivion over the centuries. Undeniably, King Shashanka was such a great figure who emerged as the first independent king of Bengal but a little about him was exposed in the history of the Indian-subcontinent.
Different historical sources have claimed that Shasanka reigned in the seventh century AD or between 590 and 625ADalthough his family blood and early life was almost obscure in the history. He created the first separate political entity which covered Bangla, Bihar and Orissa. He was an ardent devotee of Lord Shiva.
The Gauda king Shashanka established his capital at Karnasuvarna situated at Murshidabad district in West Bengal. The facts came to the forefront about him were the accounts of Hiuen-Tsang, Banabhatta'sHarshacharita,TheGanjam and other inscriptions and Coins and the Buddhist work of Arjya Manjushree MulaKalpa.
Some scholars have argued that the secondary name of Shashanka was Narendra Gupta stating that he came of the Gupta family. According to R.D Banerjee, Professor of Ancient Indian History and Culture at the Banaras Hindu University claimed that Shashankahad a royal blood of the Later Guptas of Magadha; he may be a son or nephew of Mahasena Gupta, one of the rulers of the Gupta empire.
This claim was also reiterated by Padmanath Bhattacharya, an Indian historian who considered Shashanka to be a son of Mahasena Gupta. Again, it is found by many scholars that Shashanka's name is related to Moon in the Indian language.The inscription found in the Rohtasgarh Fort at present Bihar mentioned Shasanka as MahasamantaShasanka which states that before he rose to power as the king of Guada he was feudatory chief under Mahasena Gupta.
It is no denial that during the reign of the Gupta rulers the Indian Sub-continent experienced a golden age of the history. The Gupta empire existed from the early fourth century to early sixth century AD. It covered much of the Indian sub-continent. This dynasty produced some great kings and rulers. The name of Samudragupta can be cited as an instance, who is regarded the greatest ruler of India.
However, after the death of Skanda Gupta in 467 AD Gupta dynasty did not produce any powerful ruler. Besides, the continuous attack by the armies of the Alchon Hun from all fronts accelerated the decline of Gupta empire. Besides, they had to spend a huge to defend the vast empire resulting in weakening the kingdom financially. Although they became initially successful in driving the Huns but their royal pomp started ebbing.
Near the end of the sixth century Mahasena Gupta rose to power, who belonged to the Later Gupta dynasty. During his time the empire saw the disintegration and chaos as numerous local kings and rulers emerged and started taking control of many places of the Gupta empire. Shashanka was one of the monarchs who took the control over Gauda and its surrounding areas. With his courage and intelligence in no time he included most of the areas of India in his kingdom.
It is seen that with the emergence of those local kings and rulers there created bitter struggles as one wanted to supersede another one in terms of power and supremacyin the late sixth and early seventh century AD. However, in making a political balance Shashanka was far-sighted. He made a liaison with Malwa ruler Deva Gupta -- probably a son or relation of Mahasena Gupta to increase power and protect his kingdom from the attack of the rulers of other states.
Ancient historians gave much concentration to sketch the character of King Harshvardhan while Shashanka was sketched as if they wanted to defame Shashanka, hiding the facts. However, we hardly see any scope that Shashanka may be demeaned when compared with Harshvardhan. Again, it is evident that Harsha himself had never won a war against Shashanka.
Things have been more noticeable when we see that the facts about Shashanka disclosed before the world are in most cases the biased accounts Banabhatta ---the writer of Harshacharita. He was the court poet of King Harshavardhana and the Chinese Buddhist pilgrimHiun Tsang who was also patronized by Harshavardhana.
In their narration it is easily found that they are blaming Shashanka over the murder of Rajyavardhana. But how far they have gone on with a fair criticism? How far a fair criticism is possible when the detail information concerning the actual circumstances is absent? It is no denial that Bana Bhatta being shaken at the death of his patron created a story -a far away from facts. Similarly, Hiun Tsang with his pre-Buddhist medication may find it difficult to expose the real circumstances except tarnishing the image of shashanka.
HiunTsang narrated that Shashanka was a hater of Buddhist religion citing a few instances of Shashanka's anti-Buddhist activities. But we have hardly any scope to prove his allegation when we come to know the flourishing condition of Nalanda, a Buddhist university during the regime of Shashanka. Lastly, whether Shashanka remains forgotten or obscure in the history of the Indian sub-continent, we have no scope to question his identity-the first independent king of Bengal. Do we dare to see a great ruler of Bengal insignificant following the bias information about him in the history?
The writer teaches at Prime University and a Research Scholar at the IBS
