History is often accepted as an account of how good kings won battles, established empires and kept their subjects happy; and conversely, of how the bad ones oppressed the poor and ultimately lost both their wars and their kingdoms.
The greater part of Himalayan historiography has done little to dispel such simplistic notions. It tends to concentrate on elaborate, extended descriptions of petty boundary disputes between tiny mountain principalities. The chronological re-ordering of the reigns of kings and intricate etymological rationalisations for concocted royal lineages are, for many scholars, the goals of their research.
Significantly, the historiography of South Asia as a whole has seen considerable change in recent years. More rigorous methods and sophisticated scholarship are uncovering intricate historical processes of the past. Scholars aTe re-examining the nature of the state, economic organisation and social systems.
Research on Himalayanhistory, ho we v er, has not kept apace with the rest of the Subcontinent. Historians remain absorbed in unravelling political intrigues and court scandals. Art historians are content to follow the lofty achievements of Himalayan art and reluctant to soil their hands with earthy socio-economic realities.