Valmiki’s Ramayana explains that one of Kannauj’s names, Kanyakubja (the city of hunchback maidens), stands for a king whose hundred daughters turned into hunchbacks after rejecting advances by Vayu (the wind god). This story also tells us that before it came to be called Kanyakubja, it was called Mahodaya (full of prosperity). The city was also called Kusasthala, which means a place of kusa grass, a type of spindly reed found usually near rivers. The Mahabharat contains a reference to Kusasthala, when eldest Pandava Yuddhishtir talks with his arch-rival, Duryodhan, saying, “We are desirous of peace; give us a single province of the empire. Give us even Kusasthala, Vrikasthala, Mäkandi, Varanävata, and for the fifth any other that thou likest. Even this will end the quarrel”.

From a historical point of view, both these references indicate the remote antiquity of Kannauj.

Harshavardhan: The illustrious king of Kannauj

One of the first historically concrete references about Kannauj is from the reign of King Harshavardhan (606 CE- 647 CE), although the antecedents of his own Vardhana dynasty (also called Pushyabhuti) are not firmly established.

Harshacharita, written by Bana, a courtier of King Harshavardhan (also called Harsha), and the memoirs of Chinese traveller and Buddhist monk, Xuanzang are some of the key sources of Kannauj’s history in the latter half of the first millennium of the common era. Harsha came to fill the power vacuum in the wake of the decline of the Gupta empire. He took over the kingdom of Kannauj, whose Maukhari king (formerly a Gupta vassal family) was also his brother-in-law, who was killed in a war with the Palas of Bengal. Subsequently, Harsha — whose kingdom was Thanesar in present-day Haryana — avenged the Maukhari defeat and continued to manage the affairs of Kannauj.

Xuanzang writes, “…he invaded the states which had refused allegiance and waged incessant warfare until six years he fought the ‘Five Indias’”.

The Chinese traveller doesn’t tell us the names of the states Harsha conquered or what is meant by “five Indias”, presumably that they were the other kingdoms that arose after the disappearance of the imperial Guptas. Bana’s Harshacharita also doesn’t illuminate this dark patch in history other than to mention a string of titles for Harsh: “King of kings, sovereign of all continents, and Harsha, the king of kings, the lord of the four oceans, whose toe-nails are burnished by the crest gems of all other monarchs, the leader of emperors”. As RS Tripathi writes in History of Kannauj to the Muslim Conquest, “Far from urging that these pompous expressions argue Harsha's paramount status, we might say that these high-sounding titles were sometimes conventional among the courtly panegyrists, and were used in a very loose way.” Even now, we continue to see this tradition of glorification and deification of rulers which is often at odds with their actual appeal and power.

How syncretism and pluralism became the norm under Harshavardhan

Xuanzang’s 7th-century account of Harsha’s rule is particularly interesting as it depicts a syncretism and coexistence that India has been known for millennia. His biography, The Life of Hiuen-Tsiang records his account of a religious ceremony during Harsha’s reign and another of a massive congregation at Prayagraj, that uncannily resembles the Kumbh Mela held every twelve years.

Both accounts establish that Buddhism and its two sects, Hinayana and Mahayana, Hinduism, and Jainism were accorded royal patronage under King Harsha.

According to Xuanzang, at Harsha’s invitation, “...kings of eighteen countries of the Five Indias, three thousand priests thoroughly acquainted with the Great and Little vehicle (referring to the two earliest Buddhist sects, Mahayana and Hinyana respectively), besides about three thousand Brahmans and Nirgranthas (Jains) and about a thousand priests of the Nalanda monastery” reached Kannauj to participate in a days-long conference. Importantly, the conference began with the consecration of a three-foot-tall golden statue of the Buddha with Harsha, who was dressed to resemble Brahma, the Hindu god of creation. The account is long and detailed, however, it ends on a climatic note when there’s an assassination attempt on Harsha by Brahmins who were resentful of Harsha’s patronage of Xuanzang and the practice of Buddhism.

Even though Harsha favoured Buddhist ideas more, it appears he bore no hatred towards non-Buddhists as evidenced by his extending mercy to all but the main accused in the Brahmin conspiracy to kill him.

Another account of a quinquennial religious ceremony is set in Prayagraj. The ceremony lasted nearly a month and consisted of worship of Buddha, Aditya (the sun god), and the image of Isvara-deva (Siva) on the first three days following which Harsha would start a distribution ceremony that covered the estimated gathering of about “500,000 shramanas (ascetic), heretics, Nirgranthas, the poor, the orphans, and the bereaved of the Five Indias who had been summoned by imperial decree”, writes Tripathi.

Another proof of Harsha’s pluralism is Xuanzang’s reference to food arrangements being made for five hundred Brahmins and one thousand Buddhists at ‘royal lodges’ when he was travelling.

Harsha’s long and continuous reign lasting nearly half a century came to an end with his death in 648 CE. Without him, neither the centre of his empire nor outlying provinces could remain stable for long. According to, Mawtwan-lin, another Chinese writer, albeit from the 13th century, “one of the ministers of Harshavardhan, Arunasva or Arjuna usurped the deceased monarch’s throne”, and resorted to violent extortion from other kings. This was resisted by the kings and the aid of a Chinese general was also required to vanquish Arjun, and he was taken to China”.

A tripartite struggle in Kannauj's history

The ninth and tenth centuries witnessed a long struggle between the Rashtrakutas from the South, Gurjara Pratiharas from West and central India and the Pala kings of the East.

From historical sources, it can be discerned that the three-way struggle was won by Gurjara-Pratihara king Mihir Bhoja whose descendants, Mahendrapala I, his son Bhoja II and Mahipala I, ruled over Kannauj till early 910 CE. The syncretic ruling culture in Kannauj found new inheritors in the Pratiharas. Tripathi writes, “The eclectic tendencies of the times were remarkably reflected in the religious ideals of the royal family, for although the Pratihara kings were all officially Brahmanical Hindus, they did not confine their spiritual allegiance to one and the same deity”.

The period leading up to the Ghanavid raids starting in the early 11th century saw the rule of another dynasty that shot up to power from obscure origins. The Gahadvalas’ connection with Kannauj is based mainly on the Basahi inscription issued in 1104 CE under Madanpala Gahadvala which says that Kannauj (Kanyakubja in the inscription) had been the capital of his father Chandradeva Gahadvala. Most scholars agree that both Kannauj and Varanasi were Gahadvala capitals.

The last major Gahadvala king to be associated with Kannauj is Jayachandra who was defeated and killed in 1194 CE. Jayachand, king of Kannauj in Chand Bardai’s Prithviraj Raso is most likely not the historical Jayachandra Gahadval. However, in popular culture, Jaichand is used as an eponym for a traitor whose small-mindedness against Delhi’s ruler, Prithviraj Chauhan, enabled the establishment of Muslim rule in India.

Tripathi writes, “It is difficult to accept this romantic story as a historical fact, for at this time, svayamvaras (where a woman chooses her husband from a group of suitors) and rajasuyayagnas (ritual to mark the consecration of a king) had become obsolete, and if they had been performed they must have found mention in inscriptions. Moreover, even the Rambhamanjari, of which Jayacandra is the hero, is silent about these ceremonies. Lastly, the available evidence does not indicate that his conquests were so extensive as to justify him in holding a celebration indicative of paramount rank”.

In fact, the only evidence of Kannauj’s destruction and subsequent absorption into the Delhi sultanate is afforded by a single coin that tells us that during the rule of Sultan lltutmish (1211-1236 CE), the land revenue of Kannauj went to the royal coffers at Delhi, says Tripathi.

HistoriCity is a column by author Valay Singh that narrates the story of a city that is in the news, by going back to its documented history, mythology and archaeological digs. The views expressed are personal