One of the more established 1st millennium narratives of Indian history is the tripartite struggle for power in The Kannauj Triangle during the period that’s sandwiched between the Arabian Horizon and the Heinsohn Horizon.
The Kannauj Triangle
Kannuaj remained a focal point for the three powerful dynasties, namely the Gurjara Pratiharas, Palas and Rashtrakutas, between the 8th and 10th centuries.
The conflict between the three dynasties has been referred to as the Tripartite struggle by many historians.
Unsurprisingly, in this long and convoluted tripartite tale, the mainstream never considers the possibility that this is also a story of survival as the human race battles the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune inflicted by Mother Nature.
There were initial struggles but ultimately the Gurjara Pratiharas succeeded in retaining the city.
The Gurjara-Pratiharas ruled Avanti (based at Ujjain), which was bounded to the South by the Rashtrakuta Empire, and the Pala dynasty to the East.
The Tripartite Struggle began with the defeat of Indrayudh at the hands of Gurjara-Pratihara ruler Vatsaraja.
The Pala ruler Dharampala was also keen to establish his authority at Kannauj, giving rise to a struggle between Vatsaraja and Dharampala. Dharampala was however defeated.
Taking advantage of the chaos, the Rastrakuta ruler Dhruva surged northwards, defeated Vatsaraja, and took Kannauj for himself, completing the furthest northern expansion by a South Indian ruler.
When the Rashtrakuta ruler advanced back to south, Dharampala was left in control of Kannauj for some time.
The struggle between the two northern dynasties continued: the Pala Chakrayudh was defeated by the Pratihara Nagabhata II, and Kannauj was again occupied by the Gurjara Pratiharas. Dharampala tried to take control of Kannauj but was defeated badly at Moongher by the Gurjara Pratiharas.
However, Nagabhata II was in turn soon defeated by the Rashtrakuta Govinda III, who had initiated a second northern surge.
An inscription states that Chakrayudh and Dharampala invited Govinda III to war against the Gurjara Pratiharas, but Dharampala and Chakrayudh both submitted to the Govinda III, in order to win his sympathy.
After this defeat Pratihara power degenarated for some time.
After the death of Dharampala, Nagabhata II regained hold over Kannuaj and made it the capital of the Gurjara Pratihara Empire.
During this period the Rashtrakutas were facing some internal conflicts, and so they, as well as the Palas, did not contest this.
Thus Gurjara Pratiharas became the greatest power in Northern India after occupying Kannauj.
The first clue indicating there are more than a few holes in the mainstream narrative comes from the Pala Empire which experienced “a period of decline” at the Heinsohn Horizon.
First period of decline
Following the death of Devapala, the Pala empire gradually started disintegrating.
Vigrahapala, who was Devapala’s nephew, abdicated the throne after a brief rule, and became an ascetic.
Vigrahapala’s son and successor Narayanapala proved to be a weak ruler.
During his reign, the Rashtrakuta king Amoghavarsha defeated the Palas.
Encouraged by the Pala decline, the King Harjara of Assam assumed imperial titles and the Sailodbhavas established their power in Orissa.
Narayanapala (9th-10th century CE) was the sixth emperor of the Pala dynasty of eastern India, mainly the Bengal and Bihar regions.
Based on the different interpretations of the various epigraphs and historical records, the different historians estimate Narayanapala’s reign as follows:Historian Estimate of reign RC Majumdar (1971) 854–908 CE AM Chowdhury (1967) 866–920 CE BP Sinha (1977) 865–920 CE DC Sircar (1975–76) 860–917 CE
The second clue that there are more than a few holes in the mainstream narrative comes from the Pratihara Empire which also experienced a “decline” at the Heinsohn Horizon.
Bhoj II (910–912) was overthrown by Mahipala I (912–944).
Several feudatories of the empire took advantage of the temporary weakness of the Gurjara-Pratiharas to declare their independence, notably the Paramaras of Malwa, the Chandelas of Bundelkhand, the Kalachuris of Mahakoshal, the Tomaras of Haryana, and the Chauhans of Rajputana.
The third clue that there are more than a few holes in the mainstream narrative comes from the Rashtrakuta Empire when Kannauj was “completely destroyed” at the Heinsohn Horizon.
Indra III (914–929 CE) was the grandson of Rashtrakuta Krishna II and son of Chedi princess Lakshmi.
He became the ruler of the empire due to the early demise of his father Jagattunga.
Immediately after coming to power, Indra III had to fight a Paramara ruler, a feudatory of Gurjara Prathihara and routed him out of Govardhana near Nasik.
Kannauj was “completely destroyed”, and the Pratihara ruler weakened.
The fourth clue that there are more than a few holes in the mainstream narrative comes from the tumultuous list of Eastern Chalukyas Rulers close to the Heinsohn Horizon.
In other words:
There is clear evidence embedded within the mainstream historical narrative that the outcome of the tripartite struggle for power in The Kannauj Triangle was finally determined by Mother Nature at the Heinsohn Horizon.
Furthermore, a few weeks ago serendipity delivered to my doorstep a fifth clue that suggests there is literally a huge gaping hole in the mainstream historical narrative.
The Dhala structure, Bundelkhand Craton, central India (Fig. 1) has been well documented (Patiet al., 2008).
Despite these convincing evidence for meteorite impact, Van Loon et al. (2016) neglected to consider the possibility of seismic shocks by impact events in the Chaibasa Fm.
Perhaps it’s time to dig a little deeper into this huge gaping hole…