Vol. J, No. 3.) Pavana-ditam or Wind-Messenger. AQ 
[N. 8. ] 
are named Nanya, Raghava, Vardhana and Vira, as (kings) who 
were kept in prison.t- Presumably these names include the 
names of the defeated kings. Who was the defeated king of 
Kalinga? Is he Raghava? Such was undoubtedly the name of 
a Kalinga king who ruled between A.D. 1156-11712 The early 
years of Raghava (A.D. 1156-60) would fit in with the last years 
of Vijayasena, if the above view be adopted. 
According to Tabakat-i-Nasiri,* the news of the victories of 
Muhammad-i-Bakht-yar and of his conquest of Bihar reached the 
ears of Rae Lakhmaniah, when he had been on the throne for a 
period of eighty years; and the following year he invaded the 
Rae’s capital Nudiah and sacked it. Now, a rule of eighty years 
and more is not in itself credible, as I have already pointed out. 
But if the year be taken as Samvat 80 of the era during the reign 
of Laksmanasena, as Professor Kielhorn pointed out,* the incredi- 
bility disappears. This would make the inroad and the sack of 
Nidiah fall in Samvat 81 or A.D. 1199-1200. This date very 
nearly agrees with the date arrived at from Mussulman histories 
by Dr. Blochmann, as A.H. 594 or A.D, 1198.5 
No doubt Major Raverty held the date of inroad as A.H. 
990 or A.D. 1194,6 because Muhammad-i-Bakht-yar who died in 
A.H. 602 is said to have reigned 12 years. But this does not 
necessarily mean 12 years after his sacking of Nuidiah; it may 
as likely refer to the time of his first charge, when holding 
the fief of Kashmandi (or Bhugwat and Bhiuli).7 On the other 
hand, Dihli was occupied in A.H. 589, and Dr. Blochmann shewed 
that after this occupation various events occurred with respect to 
Muhammad-i-Bakht-yar which would have taken several years. 
*“Tt would, indeed, be a close computation if we allowed but five 
years for the above events, 7.e., if we fixed the conquest of Ben- 
gal as having taken place in 594 H., or A.D, 1198.8 
Laksmanasena’s reign came to an end shortly after Muham- 
mad-i-Bakht-yar’s inroad.? From the introduction to Sadikti- 
karnamyta, it does not appear that Gridharadasa was Mahamanda- 
lika under Laksmanasena, though he says his father had served 
him.!° Hvyidently therefore this king did not live at the time of 
composing that work in A.D. 1205-6. 1200 A.D. might accord- 
ingly be taken as the approximate termination of Laksmanasena’s 
rule. 
1 Bp. Ind. I, p. 309, lines 19-20. 
4 J. As. Soc. Beng., LXXII, p. 113. 
3 Transl. pp 554, 555, 557. 
4 Ind. Ant., XIX, p. 7. 
6 J.A.8.B., XLV, p. 276. 
6 Tab. Nas transl., note 4 below p. 559, note 8 below p. 573. 
1 % pp. 549-550. 
8 J.A.8.B., XLV, p. 276. 
9 Transl., p. 558. 
10 R. L. Mittra, Notices of Sanskrit MSS,, III, p. 141, 
