Why were the kings ruling modern-day Assam called Danavas and Asuras?

Because every bit of the Continent outside Madhyadesha has been described as the abode of Mlecchas, Danavas, and Asuras at least once in the past four thousand years or so.

The reason for that is that Madhyadesha was the heartland of Arya thought, the realm of Peace, Virtue, Prosperity, Architecture, Music, in one word- Civilization- while the rest of the Continent and, beyond that, the unclean World labored to invent the Wheel. Do note that even Trigartadesha - let alone Kubha and Bahlika- lie far outside this sacred land, unlike what the intellectuals spout.

Even as late as the Iron Age, Karnatadesha was disunited and populated by five barely civilized tribes. By all accounts, early Classical Brahmaputra Valley was a forested wilderness punctuated by tiny towns that could've been swallowed a thousand times over by the great Metropolii of Prayaga and Mathura. Even at the height of their power, the great Empires of Pataliputra and Pratisthana and Badami could barely equal the millennia-old cities of Ayodhya and Kanyakubja. Ancient Ujjaini, holy even among Arya cities, still lay outside Madhyadesha and suffered accordingly.

If the ancient Assamese desired to have their lands and peoples given the high status accorded to those of Madhyadesha, they should've ensured their lands lay in Madhyadesha, failing which they could emulate them- like the peoples of Magadha and Avanti and Sindhudesha and Kalinga and Asmaka and Amravati did.

Since the Classical Assamese, unlike madern Endians, weren't Dharma-hating Mlecchas, they did what I've just suggested and thus acquired the status of an acknowledged, if not first rate Power, by the time of the Emperor Kumara I. If they'd instead formed unions and political parties and protested for Reservations and Azadi and Periyar Statues, some Arya Emperor or the other would've rightly ordered Cavalry charges, enforced the peace of the cemetery upon them and ordered colonists to do it in their stead.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments

Poster0: What exactly do you mean by “Madhyadesha”?

I googled it and it gave me related (but no clear answer) and unrelated results.

CAT:

UP, Haryana, and Northern MP in modern times, surrounded in all sides by barbarians like us. Lel.

Poster1: I think the guy is talking about narakasura who was son of bhumi devi and shri Vishnu. That's what assamese claim their king are decendant from, but the asuras and devas here are not racial neither are they black and white creatures, some danavas and asuras are good while some devas are bad, some asuras were progenitor of even Brahmin/kshatriya clans. Prahlad, bali all turned out to be good people.

CAT:

I'd assumed he was taking about the Mleccha dynasty. TBH I don't think there was any real difference between them and the preceeding line of Bhaskara.

Further I'm extremely skeptical of all this nativist nonsense peddled by known intellectuals such as Baruah and Thapar. There's zero proof anywhere of any nativist Jackshit and Varmana is a known Arya militaristic title, as common among the Mleccha kings as among any Lord of Ujjaini.

Poster1: Yes, the whole asuras worshipping by tribal nonsense is nauseating, I think they do not realize that asura is actually used as positive word too “asura” being of breath, “asura” Lord

The ahirs claiming asura decendants are nonsense, political puppets.

CAT:

Asura refers to “Lord” or “Mighty”, and though that usage fell into decline by the late Bronze Age, it lingered in many places until the Late Classical period. But that'd ancient history now. Anyone who worships- or more likely, pretends to worship- an Asura today is likely a communist or secessionist.