I must next proceed to describe Nepal Proper, which is bounded on the east, south, and south-west, by the territory above mentioned. I have to regret, that various restraints, by which my inquiries were checked, while at Kathmandu, prevented me from obtaining much information that I was anxious to procure. In particular, I obtained little or no information concerning the history of the princes who governed Nepal at the time of the conquest; except that the Newars had been long subject to a family of their own nation, all the members of which assumed the name of Mal, and, for some time previous to the conquest, had separated into three lordships, Kathmandu or Kathmaro, Lalita Patan, and Bhatgang, which circumstance greatly facilitated the enterprise of the chief of Gorkha.
Nepal is a country celebrated in Hindu fable, and is said to be written thus in the Purans, attributed to Vyas; but in the country itself, it is commonly said, that its proper name is Niyampal, derived from a certain Niyam, a Muni, or very holy person, the Nymuni of Colonel Kirkpatrick. [187a] This, however, is probably some modern conceit, as the Brahmans of both south and north agree in writing the name Nepala, or Nepal, and as the fables on which this etymology is built, as Colonel Kirkpatrick justly observes, [187b] merit no attention.
As I myself procured little or no historical account of Nepal Proper, previous to its conquest by the Raja of Gorkha, I might altogether refer on the subject to Colonel Kirkpatrick’s account, contained in his eighth chapter; but for the sake of connection, and in order to communicate my opinions on the subject, I shall here give an abstract of Colonel Kirkpatrick’s account, referring to his own work for particulars.
Colonel Kirkpatrick [187c] quotes books, which he calls Hurrumunt Khund and Ooter Khund, probably portions of the Sri Bhagwat, for copious details concerning Nepal, during the time that it continued one of the favourite haunts of the Hindu deities, that is, during the Satya Yug, or Golden age; nor have we any reason to regret, that, instead of detailing such idle fables, he has contented himself with a mere reference to this work. Afterwards he goes on to give a series of princes, who are said to have governed Nepal in subsequent ages, commencing with Niyam Muni, or as he writes Nymuni. In this part of his work Colonel Kirkpatrick quotes no authority; but, as he brings the lists down to the termination of the Newar dynasty in 1767, his authorities are probably quite modern,
and, as he supports the doctrine of the Newars having come from Gar Samaran, which they deny, his authorities must be founded on the legends of the Brahmans, much of which probably may be inventions perfectly recent, but some foundation may have been taken from ancient works, mangled to suit them for modern systems of Hindu chronology.
However this may be, Niyam Muni and his eight descendants are said [188a] to have governed during the Treta and Dwapar Yugs, or the Silver and Brazen Ages, which, according to the present system, lasted for many hundred thousand years. The eight successors of Niyam Muni governed [188b] four hundred and ninety-one one-third years, which requires rather an unwarrantable stretch of faith to believe; but, even admitting this, what remains to Niyam Muni is altogether beyond measure. This, perhaps, is owing to the works originally consulted having been composed before the present system of chronology was invented. It is more to the purpose to observe, that these princes have Sangskrita names, and therefore probably came from the plains; and that, except Niyam and his immediate successor, all of them are called Gupt; which shows that they were of the cow-herd tribe.
This dynasty was deprived of power by Bhul Singh of the Rajput tribe, and descended of Mehip Gopal, who came from Semrounghur (Gar Samaran) and Jamnukpou, (Janakipur.) He and his two descendants both having Sangskrita names, governed a hundred and eleven seven-twelfth years. Gar Samaran, it must be observed, was not built for many ages after the time of this dynasty; but Bhul Singh may have come from Janakipur, which was in the vicinity of the place where Gar
Samaran was afterwards built. Whatever title these princes may have assumed, there is no reason to suppose that they were of the ancient Kshatriyas, descended of the sun, who resided at Janakipur, and governed Mithila, as no such name as Mehip Gopal appears in any list of the princes of Mithila that I have seen. Indeed, the title Gopal rather implies, that, like the former dynasty, the descendants of Mehip belonged to the low tribe of cow-herds.
This dynasty, whatever may have been its origin, was expelled by the Kerrats, (Kiratas,) of whom 27 princes governed 1630 years. The names of these princes, as might be expected, from what I have said of the tribe Kirata, are entirely barbarous.
The barbarian Kiratas were expelled by Nevesit, a Chetree (Kshatriya) of the Surejbunsi (Suryabangsi) race, of whose descendants 33 princes governed 1702 years. These princes had Sangskrita names, although Colonel Kirkpatrick, [189a] speaking of one of them, who built the temple of Sambhunath, says, that they were Thibetians, who, after having been expelled by the Newars, obtained the name of Khat Bhotiyas, which they preserve to this day. Many of them took the title of Burmah, [189b] on which account Colonel Kirkpatrick calls them Burmahs, probably meaning Varmas; and it is probable that these are the Varmas celebrated in the Purans, and had no connection with the Burmas of Ava, as Dr Leyden supposed. [189c] Both, indeed, were of the sect of Buddha, who are usually called Brahmas by the Hindus, and the word Burma, Burmah, or Birmah, is probably a corruption of that appellation.