The Sen, Kirat, and Tharu Relationship: An ancestral history that remains even as languages change

This article provides a comparative overview of the Syamohara of the Sena period, the research on the origin of Tharu, Kirat Mundhum and Limbu genealogies. The purpose of the research is to understand the genesis and geographical expansion of Sen, the connection with the Kirat leadership and the historic value of the presence of Tharu language. The study has been based on available documents, published research, and ancestral memory. Historically there is an opinion that associates Tharu to Kirat. There is also one study that indicates that the words which can be of Tibeto-Burman origin are still preserved in the family's Tharu language. It proves that the community does not have an ancient origin as determined by the present day language. As well as the growth of the Hindu culture, marriage, migration, trade and governance can have contributed to changes in language. The lineage claims of the Sen vary from each other. The Kirat rulers, however, seem to have had some significant influence on the expanding eastern kingdom. The hereditary Chautariya position, the right to sign orders, and military participation reinforce this. In Syamohar, the linguistic form, which is similar to the Tharu, shows a connection between the authority of the hills and the writing practices of the Terai. The genealogical records of Tungdunge Mundhum and Sen Chabegu, Yonghang and Lingden provide a basis for tracing the ancestral relationship between the Sen and the Limbu. These traditions indicate that some families or branches related to the Sen may have been incorporated or merged into the Limbu lineage through marriage, settlement and social acceptance. Whether such a merger also occurred with the Rai lineage must be examined separately from the related genealogical traditions and records. Merger in lineage does not mean the erasure of old ancestral ties. It also means that a branch adopts a new community identity while preserving the memory of old kinship. However, these materials do not establish a single origin for all Sen, Tharu, Rai, and Limbu. The study concludes that local communities actively participated in the creation and continuation of the Sen state. Sen history can only be appreciated within a context of its dynastic roots, language, authority, marriage, hereditary inclusion, and social acceptance. This offers guidance in the path to finding a common past.