View source for Prithu, Maharaja of Kamarupa

{| class="wikitable"
|-
|colspan="0"|<div style="font-size:100%">
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content.<br/>
Additional information may please be sent as messages to the Facebook <br/>community, [http://www.facebook.com/Indpaedia Indpaedia.com]. All information used will be gratefully <br/>acknowledged in your name. 
</div>
|}

[[Category:India |P ]]
[[Category:History |P ]]

=Briefly=
[https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-history/looking-for-prithu-assams-forgotten-hero-who-is-said-to-have-defeated-bakhtiyar-khilji-10217529/ Sukrita Baruah, Aug 29, 2025: ''The Indian Express'']

'' ‘’Maharaja Prithu of Kamarupa rose against Bakhtiyar Khilji in valour and struck him down’’ ''  

Bakhtiyar Khilji destroyed Nalanda, the symbol of our ancient civilisation, he believed India’s spirit could be broken. But in the sacred soil of Assam, Maharaja Prithu of Kamarupa rose in valour and struck him down, avenging that desecration,” he said.

Today, Prithu is being projected as an Assamese icon, much like Ahom general Lachit Borphukan, who is credited with defeating the Mughal Army in the 1671 Battle of Saraighat. But unlike Borphukan, who has long been central to Assam’s historical and cultural imagination, Prithu’s emergence as a historical figure of note is relatively recent.

''' Bakhtiyar Khilji in Assam '''

Bakhtiyar Khilji was a military general of the Muhammad of Ghor, the man credited with laying the foundations of Islamic rule in South Asia in the 12th century. Khilji led a series of conquests in eastern India; he is most remembered for sacking the Buddhist monastery in Nalanda, although his role in the institution’s decay is often overstated.

Historians agree that in 1206 CE, the first Turko-Afghan incursion through modern-day Assam was thwarted. But the identity of the local ruler who defeated Khilji’s armies is unclear due to the lack of solid archaeological or archival evidence.

The most direct local written reference to foiled incursion is a rock inscription in Kanai Barasi Bowa, an archaeological site on the river bank in North Guwahati, across the Brahmaputra river from the main city. The inscription states that the Turks who entered Kamrup were destroyed in the Saka area 1127 (1206 CE) but does not name any local ruler.

The Persian chronicle Tabaqat-i-Nasiri contains details of a military defeat at the hands of the ‘Rae of Kamrud [Kamrup]’ and refers to a ruler named Bartu.

Based on these two facts, and later material referring to a ruler called Prithu, historian Kanak Lal Barua in his 1933 book Early History of Kamrupa wrote that “it is very probable that this Prithu Raja was the king of Kamarupa who caused the destruction of Bukhtiyar’s forces in 1206 AD” and in 1227 “repulsed Ghiyasuddin Iwaz”, a deputy of Khilji who went on to rule Bengal for close to two decades.

“The capital of Prithu was North-Guwahati in the vicinity of which he repulsed both Bukhtiyar and Iwaz,” Barua wrote.
However, the broad consensus among scholars, as noted by historian Nirode Baruah in his 2011 paper ‘Kamarupa to Kamata: The political transition and the new geopolitical trends and spaces’ had been that “the identity of Prithu is very difficult to establish.”

''' Behind Prithu’s recent rise '''

The emergence of Prithu as a notable historical figure is, in no small part, due to the efforts of Raktim Patar, a historian from Assam associated with the R S S-affiliated Akhil Bhartiya Itihas Sankalan Yojana (ABISY), and his 2021 book Maharaja Prithu: The Unsung Warrior King Who Annihilated Bakhtiyar Khalji. Patar was appointed to Jawaharlal Nehru University’s Centre for Historical Studies last year.

“Many people have said many conflicting things. Some historians have grudgingly mentioned who the individual is, but it has been clouded by confusion. But the sources were there, they were overlooked,” Patar told The Indian Express.

These sources, he said, include references by 19th century Scottish surveyor Francis Buchanan-Hamilton of the remains of a fort in present-day Rangpur division (Bangladesh) and an oral tradition that this was the capital of King Prithu, multiple gazetteers, and discovered remains of a stone bridge that is believed to be instrumental in a battle between the Turko-Afghan and Kamrup armies.

Nilanjan De, the state secretary of the ABISY’s Assam chapter, said that his organisation is “working on aspects [of history] that have not been popularised because”.

“Raktim Patar took the initiative in this. In various parts of India, there have been seminars organised on the subject (Prithu) in universities like JNU or it has been added as a sub-theme in national-level seminars,” he told The Indian Express.

“There have also been pieces on the subject published in Organiser (the weekly magazine of the R S S). Now people are aware that there was this great ruler of Assam. But there is more work to be done, especially among younger children. Even primary school children know about Lachit Borphukan and we want the same in the case of King Prithu,” he said.

As such, the rise of Prithu as a notable historical figure is due to the concerted efforts of the Sangh.

“There have been a series of seminars held with attendance by senior R S S functionaries,” a historian from Assam who did not want to be identified said. “And the importance is understandable. The 12th century was a very important period for the rise of Islam in the Bengal frontier. In a similar context, a king in Assam successfully challenging Khilji is very important to Hindutva history writing.”

''' More research needed '''

Some historians of the period say they are still unsure of the status of the ruler who had defeated the Turko-Afghan army.

I S Mumtaza Khatun, who is retired from Gauhati University’s History department and focuses on medieval history, said, “The challenge is that there is no indigenous record from that time on this figure. The only writing from that period is in Persian texts, which describes the person as ‘rae’ which points more to a chieftain. The title of Maharaja could be a misnomer.”

Archaeologist Manjil Hazarika stated that “the absence of evidence should not be treated as evidence of absence”, and called for more research on this “transitional period”.

“This period of around 200 to 300 years comes at the end of three important dynasties of Pragjyotisha and Kamrup, and later we have the Ahoms and the Kochs… there were a lot of small principalities in the region, so this is a transitional, less researched period,” he told The Indian Express.

“So I think we should try to find more inscriptions and more texts on this person (Prithu), because it is also not enough to establish that someone has defeated someone. We ought to know more about the state and the society. More research on this period will be a contribution in the history of Assam, we should fill up the gaps,” he said.