Sutiya Kingdom

The Chutia Kingdom (also Sadiya) was a late medieval state that developed around Sadiya in present Assam and adjoining areas in Arunachal Pradesh."(T)he Chutiyas seem to have assumed political power in Sadiya and contiguous areas falling within modern Arunachal Pradesh." It extended over almost the entire region of present districts of Lakhimpur, Dhemaji, Tinsukia, and some parts of Dibrugarh in Assam,"Their kingdom called Sadiya extended in the north over the entire region from the Sisi in the west to the Brahmaputra in the east. The hills and the river Buri Dihing formed its northern and southern boundaries respectively. Thus the Chutiya territory extended over almost the entire region of present districts of Lakhimpur, Dhemaji, Tinsukia, and some parts of Dibrugarh." as well as the plains and foothills of Arunachal Pradesh. The kingdom fell in 1523-1524 to the Ahom Kingdom after a series of conflicts and the capital area ruled by the Chutia rulers became the administrative domain of the office of ''Sadia Khowa Gohain'' of the Ahom kingdom.

The Chutia kingdom came into prominence in the second half of the 14th century, and it was one among several rudimentary states ( Ahom, Dimasa, Koch, Jaintia etc.) that emerged from tribal political formations in the region, between the 13th and the 16th century. Among these, the Chutia state was the most advanced, with its rural industries, trade, surplus economy and advanced Sanskritisation. It is not exactly known as to the system of agriculture adopted by the Chutias, but it is believed that they were settled cultivators. After the Ahoms annexed the kingdom in 1523, the Chutia state was absorbed into the Ahom state — the nobility and the professional classes were given important positions in the Ahom officialdom and the land was resettled for wet rice cultivation.

Foundation and Polity

Though there is no doubt on the Chutia polity, the origins of this kingdom are obscure. It is generally held that the Chutias established a state around Sadiya and contiguous areas—though it is believed that the kingdom was established in the 13th century before the advent of the Ahoms in 1228, and Buranjis, the Ahom chronicles, indicate the presence of a Chutia state the evidence is scarce that it was of any significance before the second half of the 14th century.

The earliest Chutia king in the epigraphic records is Nandin or Nandisvara, from the latter half of the 14th century, mentioned in a grant by his son Satyanarayana who nevertheless draws his royal lineage from ''Asuras''. The mention of Satyanarayana as having the shape of his maternal uncle (which is also an indirect reference to the same Asura/Daitya lineage) may also constitute evidence of matrilineality of the Chutia ruling family, or that their system was not exclusively patrilineal. On the other hand, a later king Durlabhnarayana mentions that his grandfather Ratnanarayana (identified with Satyanarayana) was the king of Kamatapura which might indicate that the eastern region of Sadhaya was politically connected to the western region of Kamata.

In these early inscriptions, the kings are said to be seated in Sadhyapuri, identified with the present-day Sadiya; which is why the kingdom is also called ''Sadiya''. The Buranjis written in the Ahom language called the kingdom ''Tiora'' whereas those written in the Assamese language called it ''Chutia''."In the past, there was a kingdom in Upper Assam that the Ahom chronicles called Tiora and the Assamese chronicles called Chutiya."

Brahmanical influence in the form of Vaishnavism reached the Chutia polity in the eastern extremity of present-day Assam during the late fourteenth century. Vaishnava brahmins created lineages for the rulers with references to Krishna legends but placed them lower in the Brahminical social hierarchy because of their autochthonous origins. Though ''asura'' lineage of the Chutia rulers have similarities with the Narakasura lineage created for the three Kamarupa dynasties, the precise historical connection is not clear. Although a majority of the brahmin donees of the royal grants were Vaishnavas, the rulers patronized the non-brahmanised ''Dikkaravasini'' (also '' Tamresvari'' or ''Kechai-khati''), which was either a powerful tribal deity, or a form of the Buddhist deity Tara adopted for tribal worship. This deity, noticed in the 10th century Kalika Purana well before the establishment of the Chutia kingdom, continued to be presided by a Deori priesthood well into the Ahom rule and outside brahminical influence.

The royal family traced its descent from the line of ''Viyutsva''.

Spurious accounts

Unfortunately, there are many manuscript accounts of the origin and lineage that do not agree with each other or with the epigraphic records and therefore have no historical moorings. One such source is ''Chutiyar Rajar Vamsavali,'' first published in ''Orunodoi'' in 1850 and reprinted in ''Deodhai Asam Buranji''. Historians consider this document to have been composed in the early 19th century—to legitimize the '' Matak rajya'' around 1805—or after the end of Ahom rule in 1826. This document relates the legend of Birpal. Yet another Assamese document, retrieved by Ney Elias from Burmese sources, relates an alternative legend of Asambhinna. These different legends suggest that the genealogical claims of the Chutias have changed over time and that these are efforts to construct (and reconstruct) the past.

Rulers

Only a few recently compiled Buranjis provide the history of the Chutia kingdom; though some sections of these compilations are old, the sections that contain the list of Chutiya rulers cannot be traced to earlier than 19th century and scholars have shown great disdain for these accounts and legends.

compiled a list of rulers from epigraphic records based crucially on identifying the donor-ruler named Dharmanarayan, mentioned as the son of Satyanarayana in the Bormurtiya grant with the Dharmanarayan, the father of the donor-ruler Durlabhnarayana of the Chepakhowa grant. This effectively results in identifying Satyanarayana with Ratnanarayana.

A late discovery of an inscription, published in a 2002 ''souvenir'' of the ''All Assam Chutiya Sanmilan'' seems to genealogically connect the last historically known king, Dhirnarayan with Neog's list above.

Though it is accepted that the rule of the Chutia rulers ended in 1523-24, different sources give different accounts. The extant ''Ahom Buranji'' and the ''Deodhai Asam Buranji'' mention that in the final battles and the aftermath both the king and the heir-apparent were killed;"The ''Ahom Buranji'' and the ''Deodhai Assam Buranji'' do not mention the name of Nitipal alias Chandranarayan. These sources ascribe the event to the reign of Dhirnarayan and state that in the final clash both the Chutia king (Dhirnarayan) and the prince (Sadhaknarayan) were killed." whereas ''Ahom Buranji-Harakanta Barua'' mentions that the remnant of the royal family was deported to Pakariguri, Nagaon—a fact that is disputed by scholars.

Domain

The extent of the power of the kings of the Chutia kingdom is not known in detail. Nevertheless, it is estimated by most modern scholarship that Chutias held the areas on the north bank of Brahmaputra from Parshuram Kund (present-day Arunachal Pradesh) in the east and included the present districts of Lakhimpur, Dhemaji, Tinsukia and some parts of Dibrugarh in Assam. Between 1228 and 1253 when Sukaphaa, the founder of the Ahom kingdom, was searching for a place to settle in Upper Assam, he and his followers did not encounter any resistance from the Chutia state, implying that the Chutia state must have been of little significance till at least the mid 14th century, when the Ahom chronicles mention them for the first time. However, it is also known that the Ahoms themselves were a people with a precariously small territory and population, which may indicate this absence of serious interaction with the old settled people of the neighborhood until the 14th century. At its largest extent, the Chutia influence might have extended up to Viswanath in the present Darrang district of Assam, though the main control was confined to the river valleys of Subansiri, Brahmaputra, Lohit and Dihing and hardly extended to the hills even at its zenith.

Dibang Valley