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).