The Buranji's contained within themselves the instinct of historiography. Nevertheless they were written for state purposes of the Ahom kingdom, and they served primarily the interests of the
Ahom dynasty followed by those of the courtiers and they were not the records of the people in general. Nevertheless, the practice of writing Buranjis in the older tradition survived the downfall of the Ahom kingdom and persisted till the 1890s. He wrote his report, and from his notes, published his work
Memories of the Reign of Swargee Deo Gowrinath Singh, Late Monarch of Assam some time after 1796. During his stay in Guwahati he encountered the king's scholar-bureaucrats and was shown a copy of an Ahom Buranji and he took the help of Ahom priests to translate the preamble into English. suggests that Wade eventually translated three discrete Assamese Buranjis, though it is not known which ones, or who his Assamese collaborators were.
Colonial The Ahom kingdom came under
East India Company rule in 1826 following the
First Anglo-Burmese War and the
Treaty of Yandaboo, in which the
invading Burmese military was pushed away. In 1833 the EIC established a protectorate under a past Ahom king,
Purandar Singha. Following his instructions Kashinath Tamuli-Phukan wrote
Assam Buranji in 1835 before the protectorate was dismantled. Buranji writing continued among remnant and scions of past Ahom officialdom, the chief among them was Harakanta Barua who expanded Kashinath Tamuli-Phukan's Buranji, and Padmeshwar Naobaisha Phukan who wrote
Assam Buranji the 1890s—the last Buranji written in the older tradition. but still were called Buranjis. In 1829 Haliram Dhekial Phukan, an erstwhile Ahom officer who successfully transitioned into British officialdom, published
Assam Desher Itihash yani ("or")
Assam Buranji—written in a hybrid Assamese,
Sanskrit, and
Bengali language, it drew deeply from the traditional Buranji material and format, but broke away from it by being mindful of early Indian historiographic traditions.
Gunabhiram Barua's work
Assam Buranji (1887) too departed significantly from the Buranji style though
Maniram Dewan's
Buranji-Bibekratna hewed much closer.
Gait's A History of Assam In 1894
Charles Lyall, the then Chief Commissioner of Assam and a keen ethnologist, charged
Edward Gait, a colonial officer and a keen historian, to research Assam's pre-colonial past. Gait implemented an elaborate plan to collect local historical sources: coins, inscriptions, historical documents, quasi-historical writings, religious works and traditions; and created a team of native collaborators from among his junior colonial officers—
Hemchandra Goswami, Golap Chandra Barua, Gunahash Goswami, Madhab Chandra Bordoloi, and
Rajanikanta Bordoloi among others. Among Buranjis, he collected six Ahom-language manuscripts and eleven Assamese-language manuscripts. He charged Golap Chandra Barua to learn the Ahom language from a team of Ahom priests who purportedly knew the language. Gait devised a method to check for historicity—he first convinced himself that Golap Barua did learn the language. He then checked for consistency within the Ahom and the Assamese Buranji manuscripts and with sources from Mughal sources that were available at that time. He further collated all the dates available in the Buranjis and checked them against those in the 70 Ahoms coins, 48 copper plates, 9 rock, 28 temple and 6 canon inscriptions that he had collected. Thus convinced with the historicity of the Buranjis,
A History of Assam was finally published in 1906. Gait's
A History of Assam did not follow the colonial mode of historiography—it used the Buranjis sympathetically, and it avoided the ancient/medieval/modern periodisation then common in Indian historiography. It elevated the stature of the Buranjis as trusted and reliable historical sources. The ready acceptance of the historicity of Buranjis, both by native and British researchers, was in sharp contrast to the reception of other pre-colonial documents, such as the
kulagranthas of Bengal.
Nationalist response—Kamarupa Anusandhan Samiti The Buranji-based
A History of Assam came under criticism from nationalists represented by the
Kamarupa Anusandhan Samiti (English: Assam Research Society), that emerged in 1912 amidst the annual convention of the
Uttar Bangia Sahitya Parishad (English: North Bengal Literary Society). The society consisted of mostly Sanskrit scholars interested in the study of old inscriptions, and a dominant section of it was Bengali. Foremost among these scholars was
Padmanath Bhattacharya, professor of Sanskrit and History at Cotton College, who critiqued Gait on coloniality, his basic flaws in the use of historical evidence, and his fundamental historical assumptions, primarily Gait's ignoring the pre-Ahom period. Bhattacharya's 1931 work
Kamarupa Sasanawali formed the standard for studying pre-Ahom
Kamarupa. This effort ultimately resulted in
Kanaklal Barua's
Early History of Kamarupa (1933) a seminal work that emerged as an authoritative alternative to Gait's historiography. Ignoring the tribal genealogy of Assam, this work focused on myths and legends from Sanskrit epics and inscriptions and Assam's Hindu past, departed strongly from Gait's work, and placed Assam in the cultural and political history of India. Padmanath Bhattacharya's 1931
Kamarupa Sasanavali itself became the target of criticism—from Assamese nationalists such as Laksminath Bezbaruah for failing to differentiate Assamese and Bengali. He was also criticised for correcting the Sanskrit while transcribing sources; and in 1978 Mukunda Madhav Sharma reported that the errors in Sanskrit in the inscriptions displayed that alongside Sanskrit there were Austroasiatic and
Tibeto-Burman languages being used in Kamarupa as well as a middle indo-Aryan local prakrit that was progressing towards the modern Assamese language. In 1981 the Assam Publication Board republished a
Kamarupa Sasanawvali, compiled and edited by Dimbeswar Sharma, without acknowledging the 1931 edition.
Sarkar—History of Aurangzib After Gait, Jadunath Sarkar made further critical use of Buranjis for historiography—in the volume III of his tome
History of Aurangzib (1916),
Jadunath Sarkar used the Buranjis, especially the
Buranji from Khunlung and Khunlai, to fill in details of the Koch-Mughal relations during the pre-
Mir Jumla II period and to crosscheck the facts given in the
Buranji and the Persian chronicles.
Department of Historical and Antiquarian Studies The
Department of Historical and Antiquarian Studies (DHAS) was established in 1928 for historical research following a government grant sanctioned by J R Cunningham. Among its many primary goals, one was to acquire and archive manuscripts and copies of original documents for further historical research. S K Bhuyan, who was earlier with the KAS, joined DHAS as an honorary assistant director; and under his leadership the DHAS began to systematically collect Buranjis. A team of DHAS office assistants either procured documents by correspondence, or toured local regions to collect, transcribe and archive manuscripts and documents. By 1978 the DHAS had collected 2000 original manuscripts and 300 transcripts.
Published Buranjis Though the Buranjis were originally un-printed manuscripts what is commonly understood as Buranjis are the printed ones available today. Many of these printed Buranjis today are reproductions of single manuscripts, while many others were compilations of individual manuscripts arranged in a particular order. The earliest Buranjis to be seen in print were those published serially in the
Orunodoi magazine in the middle of the 19th century; Bhuyan and others scholars in Assam regarded Buranjis as important historical elements and he attempted to bring them to the general population directly. Though Bhuyan edited a few single-sourced Buranjis, most of his works were editions of multiple-sources that have been compiled to form a single narrative. Though Bhuyan rearranged the texts in a linear fashion the published texts were true reproductions that maintained the original orthography and syntax with no attempt at interpretation; and he followed a consistent and transparent methodology of numbering paragraphs in all his Buranjis that enabled researchers to easily trace back any portion of the text to the original archived sources. Bhuyan's Buranji narratives could be classed into three themes: Ahom polity, Ahom-Mughal relations, and Ahom-Neighbour relations. Over time, especially in post-colonial Assam, the standard reference to Buranjis were to these easily accessible published Buranjis which came to represent the original manuscript Buranjis. Though Bhuyan's editorial methodology is known his
textual criticism is either superficial or not known very well; he filled gaps in the narrative by interpolations from different sources, but the inconsistencies were not addressed in his work.
Post-Colonial Following an assurance of financial support from the
ICSSR, New Delhi, the Publication Board, Assam, engaged H K Barpujari to edit a multi-volume comprehensive history of Assam covering the prehistoric times to 1947. Barpujari envisioned "that in a project of national importance the best talents of the country need be utilised, and that the volumes should represent the latest researchers on the subject on the model adopted in Indian historical series published by the Cambridge University Press." Subsequently, Barpujari engaged primarily
D C Sircar, among others, to write on the period when
Kamarupa was prevalent, which was of particular interest to the
Kamarupa Anusandhan Samiti historians; and primarily Jagadish Narayan Sarkar among others, to write on the medieval period. Sarkar had earlier used the Buranjis as source for a number of his past works, but the scope of the present work included a comprehensive historiography—and the choice fell on him because of his command over Persian, Assamese, Bengali etc. and his familiarity with sources in these languages.
Buranjis in Comprehensive History of Assam According to the
Ahom Buranji from Khunlung and Khunlai, the Buranji used in 1916 by Jadunath Sarkar, provides accurate details and chronology of the
Ahom-Mughal interactions and that they agree with the information found in the
Baharistan, Padshahnama, Alamgirnamah and
Fathiyyah; further it provides additional details on the quick changes in the Ahom and Mughal fortunes in the post Mir Jumla period which are not available in the Persian sources. The information in this manuscript is supplemented by those in the
Ahom Buranji which was edited, translated, and eventually published by G C Barua in 1930. These three Buranjis together provide exhaustive and minute details in the Ahom-Mughal relationship—that agree with each other and also with the Persian sources generally. Among other Buranjis, the
Asam Buranji from Khunlung to Gadadhar Simha follows the style of
Purani Asam Buranji but provides additional details and elaborations in certain sections. The Buranji obtained from Sukumar Mahanta (published 1945) has details on earlier invasions from Bengal—Turbak,
Alauddin Husain Shah, etc.—and specifically has information on social, religious, and administrative changes during the period this Buranji covered, which was from the earliest rulers to
Gadadhar Singha (). ==Textual relationships of some Buranjis==