1896.] N.N. Vasu—Chronology of the Sena Kings of Bengal. 29 
there. But the old broken-hearted and depressed king appears to have 
gone to Jagannatha on pilgrimage. During my travels in Orissa in the 
year 1893, I was informed by the inhabitants of Kua-pala in the 
District of Katak, that Laksmana-séna had resided at that place and 
that he had built a temple there. 
In the extract given above from the Ghataka-karika by. Hari-migra 
it is plainly stated that the fear of a Musalman attack forced 
Kégava-séna, the son of Laksmana-séna to leave Gauda, and in Edi- 
micgra’s account, it is mentioned that Kécava-séna lived under the 
protection of a Raja. It may be inferred from this, that Kégava- 
séna ruled Gauda as regent or governor, when Laksmana was too old 
to rule, and that on hearing of an attack by the Musalmans he fled 
towards Vikramapura. Sixty years after the invasion of Nadiya, 
Minhaj wrote thus:—‘ His (Laksmana’s) descendants up to this time 
are rulers in the country of Bayga.’! From this we can draw the 
inference, that even at that time Banga (Hast Bengal of the present 
times) was not conquered by the Muhammadans. It is therefore 
probable that after leaving Gauda, Kegava-séna took the protection 
of some other Séna king. 
The accounts of the Ghataka-karika do not however state plainly 
who this king was. Iam of opinion that he was no other than Vicva- 
rupa-déva, who is mentioned in the newly-discovered copper-plate grant. 
The historical portion of the facsimile of the copper-plate published by 
Mr. Prinsep in the name of Kécava-séna agrees exactly with the newly- 
discovered plate. The Pandit who deciphered it made a mistake in 
taking Kécava-séna for Vieva-ripa. It is much to be regretted that 
Dr. Rajéndralala, Sir Alex. Cunningham, and other antiquarians en- 
dorsed Mr. Prinsep’s statement, so that the mistake made by him remains 
uncorrected. From what has been stated above, it is evident that the 
copper-plate discovered by Mr. Prinsep, bearing the year 3 Samvat, and, 
that lately discovered by me, bearing the year 14 Samvat, were granted 
by Vicgva-rupa.?* 
The copper-plate grant of Vicgva-ripa referred to above gives the 
name of Ballala-séna, the son of Vijaya-séna, that of his son Laksmana- 
séna, and that of his son Vi¢va-riipa; but the name of Madhava-séna or 
Kécava-séna does not appear init. It follows from this that Kécava- 
séna, after Laksmana-séna’s departure to Orissa, did not rule. And who 
can say that the Musalmans did not pursue Kécava-séna up to Vikrama- 
pura? It is likely that, at that time, Vicgva-rapa protected Hast Bengal 
from the attack of the Musalmaus. 
1 Raverty, Tabaqat-i-Na@siri, p. 558. 
2 Vide the facsimile of Vigva-ripa’s copper-plate grant of 14 Samyat, and the 
article on that subject. Ante pp. 6 and ff. 
