Didda rules in her own name

Taking the throne in her own name

Didda’s formal reign began around 980 or 981 after more than two decades of exercising power as regent. She remained ruler until 1003. The distinction matters: her political influence began well before the date usually given for her accession.

Kalhana describes the death of Bhimagupta and Didda’s assumption of the throne in terms sharply critical of the queen. The allegation that she had him killed belongs to that narrative. Her position as sovereign is also supported by coin evidence, which can be examined independently of the chronicler’s judgments about her character.

What the coins establish

A copper-alloy coin in the British Museum, numbered IOLC.5006, names Didda Rani. Its two faces carry a seated goddess and a standing royal figure. The museum dates it approximately to 979–1003 and identifies Kashmir as its place of production.

This is evidence of authority expressed through coinage. The earlier beginning of the museum’s approximate range should not be turned into a precise alternative accession day. A coin catalogue and a reconstructed dynastic chronology may use different dating conventions.

The images also show why political representation should not be read too literally. A conventional standing king on a coin issued under a queen does not negate her rule. Coin designs can preserve established forms while inscriptions identify a different reigning authority.

Tunga and the struggle over influence

Tunga became a central figure in Didda’s government. Kalhana describes him as coming from the Parnotsa region, associated with Poonch, and emphasizes his comparatively humble origins. His rise to high office provoked opposition among established groups at court.

According to the chronicle, attempts to remove him included rebellions and pressure through Brahman fasts. Didda and Tunga survived through a mixture of political bargaining and force. The narrative therefore concerns more than the personality of a queen: it records conflict over who could hold office and command resources.

The chronicler’s language about social origins and intimate relationships reflects his own judgments. This article uses those passages to identify the shape of the dispute, without adopting contempt for a person’s background as an explanation of political legitimacy.

Relations with neighbouring rulers

Kalhana describes a successful expedition by Tunga against Rajapuri, associated with Rajauri. In this account, its ruler Prithvipala was compelled to pay tribute. This indicates an attempt to assert influence beyond the Valley, although it does not establish permanent direct administration over every neighbouring territory.

Such relationships were changeable. Tribute, court alliances and access through mountain routes could matter as much as modern-looking territorial borders. Kashmir’s monarchy operated among other ruling houses, including the family from which Didda herself came.

The succession of 1003

Didda selected Sangramaraja, the son of her brother Udayaraja of Lohara, as successor and granted him the status of heir during her lifetime. When she died in 1003, the succession passed to him. In Kalhana’s sequence, this begins the first Lohara dynasty.

The appointment is an important part of her political legacy. After years of contested rule and violent court struggles, she arranged a succession that the chronicle describes as taking place without a comparable convulsion. That outcome does not erase earlier violence, but it helps explain why the reign cannot be understood through a single moral label.