Date of Accession of King Laksmanasena
Summary
The accession date of King Laksmanasena of the Bengal Sena dynasty remains uncertain, with two primary theories dominating scholarly debate. The first theory posits that he succeeded his father, Ballalasena, in 1119-20 A.D., marking the start of the La-sam era. However, this conflicts with evidence from Adéutasigara and Damasigare, who suggest Ballalasena ruled until 1165-60 A.D. The second theory, based on verses in manuscripts attributed to Ballalasena, places Laksmanasena’s accession sometime after 1168-69 A.D., though the exact date remains unclear. Definitive evidence comes from a colophon in Sridharadisa’s *Saduktikarnamrtam*, a contemporary text. The colophon, dated to Saka 1127 (1178-79 A.D.), references the 27th regnal year of Laksmanasena, placing his accession around 1100 Saka (1178 A.D.). This aligns with the disputed verses from Ballalasena’s works, indirectly supporting their authenticity. The colophon’s reliability, corroborated by multiple manuscripts, resolves the longstanding controversy, confirming Laksmanasena’s throne ascension in 1178 A.D.
AI-assisted summary, not yet checked. Consult the original PDF before citing.
Conclusion
The debate surrounding the accession date of King Laksmanasena of the Bengal Sena dynasty highlights the complexities of reconciling conflicting historical sources and interpretations. While earlier theories proposed dates ranging from 1119-20 A.D. to 1168-69 A.D., the discovery of the colophon from Sridharadisa's *Saduktikarnamrtam* provides the most definitive evidence, anchoring his reign to Saka year 1127 (1168-69 A.D.). This finding not only resolves longstanding discrepancies but also aligns with the contested dates mentioned in the *Adhutasigara* and *Dinasigara*, reinforcing the reliability of contemporary sources. The colophon's clarity and corroboration with existing records underscore the importance of manuscript evidence in resolving historical uncertainties, offering a precise anchor for Laksmanasena's accession and its implications for understanding the Sena dynasty's chronology and political transitions.