Ancient Indian Genealogies and Chronology

7/30/2019 Ancient Indian Genealogies and Chronology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/ancient-indian-genealogies-and-chronology 1/57

Ancient Indian Genealogies and ChronologyAuthor(s): F. E. PargiterReviewed work(s):Source: Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, (Jan., 1910), pp. 1-56Published by: Cambridge University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25189631 .

Accessed: 14/08/2012 10:49

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Cambridge University Press and Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland are collaborating with

JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup

http://www.jstor.org/stable/25189631?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/25189631?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup



JOURNALOF THE

ROYAL ASIATIC SOCIETY

1910

I

ANCIENT INDIAN GENEALOGIESAND CHRONOLOGY

By F. E. PARGITER, MA.

rilHE subject that I venture to discuss in this paper

is one that may seemsurprising and even fantastic,

and yet, if any orderliness can be introduced into the

earliest Indian ages, it canonly be attained by examining

and co-ordinating all the genealogical and (juasi-historical

data which have been handed down in Sanskrit books.

The subject has been before my mind for many years,

and it has been only after long consideration of all the

relevant information, which I have been able to collect out

of all those books, especially the Epics and Pur?nas, that

it has seemed to me some measure of order may be educed

out of the chaos of material. That information is con

densed in the

followingpages, and no statement is made

without citing the authorities that support it. I may say

that the conclusions set out here were not reached from

any preconceived ideas, except this one (if it merits that

description), that the ancient ksatriya literature deserves

to be r-xtf/niinwl from a common-sensepoint

of view on the

supposition that it may contain genuine tradition, however

much distorted in the course of time. It wasonly

after

investigating the subject piecemeal, following each detail

JRAS. 1010. 1



2 ANCIENT INDIAN GENEALOGIES AND CHRONOLOGY

into other details to which it led and continuallyre

arranging them as their number and mutual relations

developed, that something definite seemed at first to

emerge out of the chaos, and then gradually the subject

seemed to shape itself into somedegree of order. Even if

my views should not commend themselves to others, yet

the material collected here and the method of treatment

may, I hope, be of some service to others in elucidating the

subject. Hitherto ancient India has appeared rather like

a view in aphotograph, with the various distant objects

shown, it is true, yet somewhat flattened in perspective ;

and it has been my endeavour in this paper to apply

the stereoscopic process to it, so as to make the vista of

the past stand out in something like its true distances.

It is a commonplace that early history concerns itselfalmost entirely with celebrated men and their personal

(beds. Nothingmore than that can then be expected

in the accounts that have come down to us about ancient

India, and on the whole that is all that is ottered in

Sanskrit books, if we consider the matter that is primarily

genealogicalor

quasi-historical and the stories introduced

therein to explain or illustrate it.

fn ancient India there were two classes of celebrated

men, kings and rishis (this word may fairly be Anglicized),

and early Indian chronicles deal almost wholly with them.

A remarkable distinction must, however, be noted between

the genealogical accounts of kings and rishis. A king's

life was conditionedby

hisfamily,

hiscapital,

and his

territories. The rishi's life had no such bounds ; his youthwas

spent in the hermitage of some spiritual preceptor

whose teaching he desired, and after he had finished his

studies his life waspassed wherever he chose to fix his

hermitage, or in any capital where aking welcomed his

ministrations, or in any spot where he could best carry

out austerities (tajyas). The kings belonged to dynasties,and were

proud of and cherished the memory and fame of



ANCIENT INDIAN GENEALOGIES AND CHRONOLOGY 3

their ancestors. The rishis developedno similar priestly

succession ; they cared little about preserving particulars

of their lineage, thougha

patronymicor r/otra name

attested descent in most families. Kings hoped to transmit

their realm and lineage, enhanced by their own fame, to an

enduring posterity. The rishis sought eminence in sacred

erudition and the. power of austerities, and their successors

were their

spiritual

rather than their natural sons. With

kings the dynastywas the great idea, each king being

a link in its perpetuation and exaltation. With the rishis

sacred lore was the great idea, each rishi beinga link in its

transmission and glorification. Individual ambition existed

among both classes, but the main result ultimately was

this?among ksatriya? the royal dynasty formed the.

enduring memory, and among brahmans religious doctrineand priestly power constituted the permanent achievement.

It is clear, then, that genealogical accounts and stones of

royal exploitswere the essential features of the ksatriya

record, while genealogieswere but a collateral detail with

the ancient brahmans. Royal genealogies have been

handed down in many compositions ;*

brahmanical

genealogies can hardly be said to exist. The former

constituted one of the main subjects which every Purfina

wasexpected to set out ; the latter are nowhere mentioned

as a matter that required particular attention. Marriage

alliances weresubjects of great moment with kings; the

stories told about rishis indicate that their lineage wasby

no means unblemished. The threegreat ksatriya lines,

1Tho references to Mio various works ei led uro taken from the

following editions:?Mah?hh?rala and J lar iram An., (Jalo., 18.V?; Il?mn

yaint% Bomb. ;Kilnna, Mtlrkanth:yat ami Vfiyu. I'uratias, Bihlioth. Indica ;

A gui, Garufa, Li?ga, and MaUya Purfuuis, Jiv?nanda Vidy?s?gara'sCale, editions of 1882, 1800, 1885, and 1870 respectively ; Hh?t/nro/a

l'uraiia, Bomb. ; Brahma and l'adnia Puta?as, ?nand?sraina Bomb.

Series; Vimu Parana, Wilson's Translation. The chapter is quoted as

well as the verse in the M?h. and lfariv.y because the numbering of

the verses is not always correct. It is indicated throughout by italic

figures.




the Solar and Lunar and Yfidava dynasties, profess to

exhibit more than fifty well-remembered generations ;

among rishi families it is rare to find a list of five

continuous descents. The longest that I am aware of is

this?Vasistha, Saktri, Par?aara, Krsna Dvaip?yana Vy?sa,

Suka ?raneya and his sons1?yeteven in this line Vasistha

is probably onlya (jotra name. The most copious list of

brahman families of commonorigin

is that of the sons

and descendants of Visv?mitra,2 and the longest line of

brahmanical descent is that attributed to Vitahavya the

Haihaya;3 and both of them were ksatriyas by birth

who became brahmans.4 This marked difference can only

beexplained

on the ground that royal lineageswere not

the concern of rishis, but of court bards and court priests.

This ksatriya literature grew up in virtual independence

of brahmanical literature, and only when it had developed,

into animposing

mass and had attained great popular

appreciationwas it taken over by the brahmans as a not

unworthy branch of knowledge. It was then that it was

arranged and augmented with stories and discourses

fashioned after brahmanical ideas.

The desire of handing down their genealogies and royal

exploits existed thus among kings, and they had the

1M/Vi. i, 177, 6757-60 ; 17S, 6792-4 ; CO, 2208-9 ; xii, ,?.?/, 13642-3 ;

?31. 8483-5 ; ?7^, 1219.5-7. AV/rma, i, /.'>, 20-7. Jinriv. IS, 977-81.2

J/7JA. xii, 40, 1771-2 ; xiii, 4, 248-00. Bhilgar. ix, 7tf, 28-37.

Brahma, 10, 55-66. Fr?yit, ii, ;???, 93-9. 7/cmr. 27, 1460-74; 32,

1767-76.5MBh. xiii, ?0, 1997-2005.

4V?tnhavva gained brahmanhood {MBh. xiii, 30, 1983-97, 2005-6)

hecause aBh?rgava rislii falsely asserted by implication that he was

a brahman, and the assertion had to stand good.Visvumitra'fl difficulty

lay in the fact that he was of pure ksatriya lineage. Not a few royal

ksatriyas had no difficulty in becoming brahmans, because there had been

brahman paternity in their near ancestry ; thus among King Vitatha's

descendants (see p. 45) were Kiln va, Maudgalya, and other brahmans.

Brahmanpaternity

was sufficient in thosedtiyg.

Seep.

37 and p. 45,

n. 3. The mother might be of the lowest class, as was Vy?sa's mother,

or wa< unnecessary according to various stories.




means of doingso in bards and court priests.

There was

also a strong popular interest in the traditions and ballads

relating to famous kings, and a class of men existed who

learnt the old stories and genealogies,for nothing less

than this can be implied by the many terms used to

describe them, such aspnr?-vid, ?mrdna-j-?u, panrdnihi,

vmhAi-vid, variusa-purdHfi-jvu, ; and theywere both

brah inuns and others, for the words dviju, vipra, and

jana are often added to the description. Such men or

perhaps popular traditions are referred to in other

expressions, such as ity anu?usrumaht iti ?rutam, ud**

luirantis etc.

These old genealogies, therefore, with their incidental

stories are not to be looked upon aslegends

or fables

devoid of basis or

substance,but contain

genuinehistorical

tradition, and may well be considered and dealt with

from a common-sensepoint of view. They give

us an

opportunity of viewing ancient India from the ksatriya

standpoint. The ksatriyas playeda very great part in

those early days, and a consideration of the literature that

they originated is essential to aright understanding ol

those distant times. The reproach that there was nohistorical faculty in ancient India is true only

asregards

the brahmans. The ksatriyas did display almost as much

of that facultyas could be expected in such ages in the

appreciation bestowed on the dynastieul genealogies and

ballads of royal exploits. In Bal^Ionia and Kgypt

permanent records were made in inscriptions and on clay

tablets. In ancient India there was (as far as we know)

no such method of perpetuation, and ancient deeds could

be handed down only by memory. We have the results

in the Epics and Purfinas, together with a great quantity

of brahmanical accretions.

It is, moreover, a remarkable fact that the kingson

whom praise is bestowed in the brahmanical literature are

by no means those who arehighly extolled in the ksatriya



G ANCIENT INDIAN GENEALOGIES AND CHRONOLOGV

literature. The Rig- Veda contains hymns composed during

the ages that intervened between M?ndh?tr Yauvana?va*

and Dev?pi, who lived about acentury before the great

battle between the P?ndavas and Kauravas (see p. 53).

During that long period the most famous monarchs wrere

Arjuna, Marutta, Sagara, Bharata, Bhagiratha, Ambarisa,

Dilipa II, and Rama,2 besides famous kings such as

Hariscandra, Alarka, Ajamidha, Kuril, Brahmadatta, and

others,3 yet none of these are mentioned in the hymns

except Bharata,4 and apparently Ajamidha,5 and possibly

Ruma.6 The accounts, asthey stand now, generally extol

such great rulers as munificent sacrificers, yet the rishis

have preservedno

hymns composed in their honour, if

any werecomposed. It can

hardly be supposed that no

rishis capable of song existed during the reigns of allthose monarchs. On the other hand, the kings who are

lauded in the hymns, such as the Pa??cala kings, Divodasa,

Sudas, and others (see p. 21), are hardly known to

ksatrij-a fame. It would seem, first, that the really

famous kings, confident in themselves and their big

battalions, cared little about the divine assistance which

the rishis professed to bestow, or that the brahmanical

sacrificial rites were not fully elaborated in their time ;

and, secondly, that the rishis established their spiritual

ascendancy through the later, less powerful, but devout

minded kings of Central Madhyade?a, such as Bharata's

successors and the Paiic?la kings. Hence, probably, in

great

measure thespecial sanctity

and claims asserted

for that region.It is not to be expected that precision in genealogical

1See pp. 30 and 31. Big-V. x, 134y is attributed to him.

2 Sec p. 30. 3See Table of genealogical lists, p. 26.

4Biff-1*, vi, l?, 4, and other passages. Bharata is, I believe, the only

really great king who receives appropriate esteem in the brahmanical

literature, and he reigned in Central Madhyadesa. He ap|)ears to have

been decidedly brahmatiya.5

Biff-V. iv, 44, 6. 6Biff-r. x, 03, 14.



ANCIENT INDIAN GENEALOGIES AND CUKONOLOGV 7

details can be found, and for obvious reasons. In fact,

it is oftenfrankly

stated that, while the lists are

given"at length" and "in correct succession", vintarcnu and

unity) Cirvcmt,1 yet theyare not complete, and that the

names of those kings only are mentioned who were

famous or werespecially remembered.2 Sometimes it is

stated that along list is only

a succinct one, sanl'sPjtfiitKor sam?sena? Admittedly, then, the lists are not exhaustive,

and this conclusion is confirmed by three considerations.4

First, some of the lists omit even well-known names ;

thus, if we look at the Solar dynasty, the Agni and

Padma Pur?nas omit Sudfisa, father of Mitrasaha Kalnmsa

p?da, who was famed by his patronymic Saudiisa, and

the lih?gavata and K?rnia omit Ambarisa, who was

a celebrated king.Secondly,

little-

known names are

supplied bysome of the authorities ; thus, in the same

dynasty the K?rma, Liriga, Matsya, and Padma insert

Pramoda between Drdluisva and llaryasva, while the

other authorities ignore him. There is noground for

suspecting that Pramoda has been invented ; as an

insignificant king he has simply been dropped out of

the other lists. Thirdly, names occur which are obviouslyor

probably patronymics ; thus, in the Yiidava dynasty

Sat vat and his son S?tvata aregiven only by the G anula,

Liiiga, and V?yu, while the other Pur?nas omit one or

other of these names. A king who is remembered only

by his patronymic is on the verge of droppingout.

Notwithstanding such omissions, the lineage is generally

given as being continuous ; thus, in the Lunar dynasty some

authorities give from ten to thirteen generations between

1Brahma, 13, 2 ;Mataya, J3, 5 ; Vilyu, ii, 32, 1 ; 37, 115 ; JJarir. 31,

1653; 32, 1842.-

Brahma, 15, 831-2 ; Kfirma, i, #/, 00 ; ?tityci, i, <W,43 ; Padma, v, .9,

161-2 ; fiiyw, ii,,?6\ 211 ; Visnu, iv, >?; Jfariv. 15, 831.;{

Liitytt, i, 6V?, 1 ; Kftrma, i, 21, 60.4

See also

p.11, and the names in brackets in the Table of lists are

further instances of omissions.




Kuru and Pratipa, while others reduce them to five or six.

And it is generally said or implied that the successorafter a gap was son of the predecessor before the gap.

There are four ways in which the relationship between

two kings is expressed, and they may be explainedmost

easily by styling the predecessor A and the successor B ;

and A may be either named or referred to by the pronoun

tad. Tiny are these : (1) 13 was A's son, the relation

being defined by some word meaning son or begotten;1

(2) B was of A, norelationship being specified ;2

(3) B was from or after A, the ablative casebeing used

or the equivalent adverbial form;3 and (4) B wras heir

of A.4 These different ways no doubt often mean 011I3'

the samething, namely, sonship ; still, the first does not

alwaysmean immediate

sonship ;the second and fourth

mightcover cases where brothers, nephews,

or grandsons

succeeded ; and the third might imply simply that one

king followed another with little or norelationship

between them. Such being the conditions, the additional

names which some lists give may be genuinenames ;

and, if allowance must be made for omissions, such names

inajT show with some probability where gaps occur.

Exactitude, however, in these points is not indispensable

for the present purpose. All that is necessary is that

the genealogies should be set out Avith approximate

fullness, and synchronisms will introduce fixed points

among them, from which the generations may be reviewed

and adjusted either backwards or forwards.

As regards names, the kings who wereespecially

1e.g. Yijay?d Buruko jaj?c, Buruhlt tu Vykah nut ah. Garmfa. i,

7.;?s\ 28.-

e.g. DrdluMraxya PramodaA ca and JTaryasrasya Kiknmbho 'bhftf.

Matsyn, 12, 33.'-'

e.g. N?bh?g?d Andmriso ybhuf, Sindhudvtpo 'mbarlsatah. Garuda, i,

13$. 31. Ways (2) and (3) become indistinguishable where the abl. and

the gen. are alike, e.g. B?hos tu Sagarah smrtah. Ibid. 28.4e.g. Sa??dasya tu d?y?dah Kahttstho mima. Brahma, ix, 7, 51.



ANCIENT INDIAN GENEALOGIES AND CHRONOLOGY" ?)

celebrated are well known, and the names of the others

are mainly useful as marking steps in the descent, so that

aslong

as the stepsare labelled, it is not material whether

insignificantnames are

perfectly correct. Where a name

appears in several forms, I have taken that form which is

supported by most of the authorities or the best of them :

and if the variations are too many to render that possible,

I have adopted whatseems

the most likely form. Onlysuch names are included in the lists as are found in at

least two authorities.1

In these ways, though absolute accuracy is unattainable,

it may yet be possible to reach such anapproximation as

may be sufficient for working purposes.

The most salient feature that appears on acomparison

of the genealogies is the great length of the Solar dynasty

of Ayodhy?. It contains some ninety-three names, whereas

tins two next longest lists art? much shorter, namely, the

Y?dava line of Western India with somesixty-two naines,

and the Lunar or Paurava line with about fiftynames.

There aregood reasons for holding that the Solar list is

fairlycomplete

and that the latter two are far from

beingso.

India has often suffered from invading hosts from the

north-west, and there can be no doubt that similar

invasions occurred during the earliest ages. The Aryan

invasion is the first of which we have any evidence, and

there are indications that other racespoured into and

swept over North India afterwards. The most strikinginstance of this is the story of the struggle of Sagara.

1The Brahma 1'urfuia and the llnriraihsa (which is virtually a I'ursina)

cannotgenerally be regarded

as distinct authorities, for their lists has?:

such close and even verbal resemblance as to indicate that they arc little

more than two versions of oneauthority. The other J'ur?iias, while

showing much similarity in someplaces, differ considerably in other-.,

and do not readily fall into separate groups. The general expositionof the dynasties (pp. 1(1-25) will give

some idea of the connexion^

which they show with one another in some, though not in all, portions of

the genealogies.




king of Ayodhy?, against the Haihayas and T?lajanghas

(see p. 30, etc.) and hordes of Sakas, Pahlavas, Kfunbojas,etc. All the authorities which relate the story say this.1

Bfihu. king of Ayodhyfi,2 wra.s driven from his throne bythe invaders and died afterwards in the forest; his queen

gave birth to Sagara; Sagarawas

brought up in Aurva

Bh?rgava's hermitage, and onattaining manhood fought

against, and finally subjugated the invaders. If there is

any historical truth in this story, it can only mean that

the whole of North India had been overrunby those hordes,

that every kingdom in the north-west and Madhyade?a

had fallen, that Kosala, the most easterly kingdom of

Madhyadesa, which encountered the invaders last, went

down for a time, and that Sagara subdued them and

re-established the Solardynasty.

Those eventsimply

aperiod of some

thirty years at least in Kosala, and

indicate that North -Western and Western India and

Madhyadesa must have been submerged for half a century

at least.3 The Kosala line remained unbroken, but all

the dynasties west of it must have suffered seriously,

and if we cansynchronize this period with some

period

in the other dynasties, confusion or a material gap may

1MBh. iii, 106, 8831-2; Bh?gar. ix, <S\2-7 ;Brahma, S, 47-51 ; V?yn, ii,

,'G\ 121-42; Hariv. 13, im-14, 784; B?m?y. i, 70, 27-37; ?i, 110,

15-25 (imperfectly). The map published byme in this Journal for 1908,

p. 332, will help to elucidate this paper.2

The B?m?y. calls him Asi ta.3

During this period the invaders were in power and had probably

l>egun to settle down in the countries they had conquered ; and this

also seems implied by their appealing to Vasistha (that is, one of the

Vasistha family) and his taking them under his protection, for the

Vasisthas were the court-priests ofAyodhy? (as mentioned in p. 14), and

he as a brahman may have maintained his position ascourt-priest under

the Haihaya-T?lajangha rule. Sagara's repressive treatment of the

different peoples (as explained in the passages cited above), therefore,

means probably that the rules which he imposed on them applied to

those barbarians who had settled down and remained in the territories

which he ruled as cakravartin and not to the nations outside India. He

marked oil' and degraded them from the rest of his subjects, and the

distinctions naturally disappeared in the course of time.




be expected in them. That is what we do find. A great

gap occurs in the Lunar line ; the K?nyakubja dynasty

disappeared ; the K??i genealogy is confused ; and now

dynasties sprang up afterwards in Madhyadesa.

This story shows that Kosala from its eastward position

escaped various calamities that befell the morewesterly

kingdoms. Its dynastic list therefore remained continuous

and full, while the lists of other

dynasties

will be found

to have suffered breaks, and thus necessarily fall short

of it in their numbers. Further, other dynasties were

not sogreat and important continuously

as the Solar

monarchy, and their lists were not handed down with the

same veneration and fullness. Their lists aremanifestly

far from complete,as the Table of genealogies shows.

The length of the Solar line, therefore, is not to becorrected and reduced by a

comparison with the other

lines, but is a standard by which we may measure the

deficiencies and gaps in the other lists, and the Table of

genealogies will show how truly it serves this purpose.

Besides such vicissitudes, changes were also produced

by internal eou(|uests. Thus the dynasties of North and

South Pan cal a sprang from the Paurava Ajainidha of the

Lunar race. He or his sonsconquered those countries

and established separate thrones in them. Again,one of

the near descendants of Jyfunaghas son Vidarbha of the

Yftdava race was Cidi or Cedi, and he originated the

Caidya kings,1 that is, the kingdom of Cedi. That

dynasty, however,was

conqueredafterwards

bythe

Paurava Vasu, who was fifth in descent from Kuru, and

established himself asCaidya

-Uparicara. lie also

conquered theneighbouring countries as far as

Magadha,and established his five sons in ?vc kingdoms there, two

of which were Cedi and Magadha, and two others were

1A(/m,274> 17-18; f?h?yav. ix, ?4, 1-2; Matsya, 44, 35-8; Pad m a,

v, 13, 19-21 ; V?yu, ii, ?J, 36-8 ; Vistnt, iv, 7? ; ZiV///?, i, CS, 37-40 ;

Uarnda, i, itf.9, 29-30.



12 ANCIENT INDIAN GENEALOGIES AND CHRONOLOGY"

probably Kar usa and Kaus?mb?. His eldest son,

Brhadratha, obtained Magadha and founded the dynastywhich flourished under Jar?sandha in the P?ndavas' time.1

In dealing with these ancient genealogies synchronismsare the most important points to be considered. The

genealogiesare of little practical value by themselves.

It is only by co-ordinating them that they can be made

to furnish any chronological results which may possess

any value, and this can only be done by establishing

synchronisms between the various lines. Synchronisms,

therefore, are the essential facts in the present inquiry.

Now, stories and allusions exist in plenty connecting

various kings and rishis, but are obviously not equally

worthy of credence, and it is necessary to ascertain some

criteriaby

which their trustworthinessmay

be estimated.

The following distinctions arc put forward as likely to

help, with reasonable surencss, to eliminate what cannot

be genuine tradition :?

Passages which connect different kings and rishis

may be divided into four broad classes: (1) allusions or

comments, incidental orexplanatory, in the course of

a genealogy ; (2) incidental allusions elsewhere ; (3) stories

which areprimarily ksatriya stories ; and (4) stories which

areprimarily brahmanical.

The first class occur asprofessedly genuine details and

are introduced simply because they belong naturally to the

genealogical accounts. They are most trustworthy when

moderate in number and really explanatory, and they are

open to doubt the morethey show signs of amplification

and exaggeration.2 Passages of the second class are. met

with by way of explanationor

comparison, and are most

trustworthy when they are brief and are introduced

simply and naturally.

The third class comprisesa

great number of stories of

1 See MBh. \, (13, 2334-05, and passages cited for this dynasty, p. 22.-

The Ga?ida contains very little explanatory matter.




various kinds, and may be broadly divided into those that

describe some alleged occurrence and those that are mainly

laudatory. The latter kind aregenerally replete with

exaggeration, and often disregard conditions of time and

place. As an instance may be mentioned the long fight

between Bhisina and Kama Jiimadagnya in Mlih. v, 170,

etc., which isimpossible, because Rama lived many

centuries before Bhisina. This latter kind may be

discarded as worthless, but stories of the former kind

may afford useful information if they agree with other

stories, and this much is in their favour, that their ksatriyafeatures probably go back to early times, before the Epicand Pauranic literature was taken over and manipulated

by the brahmans.

The fourth class ofstories,

that areprincipally

brah

manical, bear their character unmistakably on their face.

They may be roughly divided into three kinds: (1) those

that exalt the dignity of some rishi, (2) those that

inculcate some doctrine, and (3) those that extol the

majesty of some god or the sanctity of somespot.

Probably only the first kind merit any attention, yet

there is always a doubt whether they represent the

original story. The other two kinds aregenerally

fabrications. As anexample of a

pious story blendingmoral delinquencies and chronological absurdities, it would

be difficult to match that of Cfilava in MBit, v, ]13, etc.1

It is not necessary for the present purpose to sift such

stories, and this circumspection is requisite in the stories

told in the Sfuiti-p. of the MBit., which cannot be acceptedwithout corroboration.

In these ways some discrimination is possible among*the great quantity of material, and a considerable number

of synchronisms can be collected which can claim some

degree of genuineness ; still, indrawing inferences from

them certain cautions must be borne in mind. These1

Strangely enough it finds an echo inMBit, iii, 107, 13301-2




cautions are more or less obvious and well known, and yet

it is wellto

state themso that the use

made ofthe

materials may not seemcapricious. They

are these.

First, patronymics do not always indicate the relation of

father and son, but often designatea descendant. Putting

aside such generic terms as Paurava, Y?dava, Bharata,

Atreya, Bh?rgava, etc., we find Visvamitra called Kausika1

after his grandfather, Rfuna Dfisarathi called Riighava2

after his great-grandfather, and Krsna called Mfidhava,

Sfitvata, Vfirsneya, and ?also Dfisfuha:* after distant

ancestors, as well as Sauri4 after a nearer ancestor. The

primary inference would be that apatronymic

means

a son or daughter, jretwe must be quite ready to take it

asmeaning

a descendant if the context or other considera

tions should so indicate.

Secondly and conversely, the simplename does not

always refer to the forefather of that name, but is also at

times applied to his descendants. This is a common use

collectively in the Pig-Veda, As an instance of its

application singlywe find Kuvalilsva of the Solar dynasty

styled Iksv?ku;5 but this use is rare asregards ksatriyas

in the Epics and Pur?nas. This caution applies with

special force to the names of rishis, and unless it is care

fully observed we may fall into all kinds of errors. Thus the

name Vasistha occurs at all periods of the Solar dynasty,6

and plainly refers to a long succession of members of the

Vasistha family ; in fact, that family appears to have held

the office of court-priests to that dynasty,as the Kasyapas

were hereditary priests of Jan ame ?aya Pari ksi ta.7

In the same way must be understood the frequent

1MBh. i, 175, 6095 ;M?rkavd. 9, 10 ; Jfarir. 13, 753.

2MBh. iii, 277, 10030.

3 ?/??. i, 222, 8078 ; ,??J, 8083-4 ; v, 77, 2581.

4MBh. i, :??i, 7989.

5MBh. iii, ?W, 13480, with 201, 13515-19.

0For instance, a Vasistha occurs with Trisaiiku (p. 33), with Sagara

(p. 10, n. 3), with Kalm?sap?da (p. 45, n. 3), and with Dasaratha

{Hamay. i, 7, 4, etc.). Other Vasisthas occur elsewhere, see p. 50.7 -i/Va?*. Bnlh. vii, 5, 27, and see viii, ^, 22.



ANCIENT INDIAN (GENEALOGIESAND CHRONOLOGY 15

mention of Bharadv?ja, Kan va, Ootaina, Bhrgu, Atri, etc.,

at different periods. In fact, the indifference whichcharacterized the rishis as

regards theirgenealogies (as

already mentioned) led them to neglect the personalname

of members of the great (jotras, and to mention them

simply by their gotra name, with the result that the

personality of the original bearer of the name and that

of his descendants have been often confused. This applieseven to the name Visvfimitra, as will be shown among the

synchronisms, for the first and great Visvfuiiitra\s

descendants were divided into two ?jotras, the Kausikas

and the Visvfunitras.1 The rivalry between him and the

great Vasistha, who was court -priest of

Ayodhyii in

Trisanku's time, wasperpetuated among their descendants :

and,as the

brahmanswere

indifferent about personalparticulars, the accounts, as

they stand now, often show

wild confusion, all the Vasisthas being described more or

less closely in terms of the great Vasistha, and all the

Visvfunitras in terms of the great Visvfimitra.- The only

method of unravelling the confusion and of distinguishing

the various Vasisthas and Visvfunitras is to get the royal

genealogies clear, and then assign those rishis to their

several periods by attaching them to the kings with whom

theywere associated.

Thirdly, it often happened that the same name was

borne by diff?rent individuals, so that it byno means

follows that the same name in different place'smeans the

same person. It is

expressly

said that

among kingsthere

were scores of Dhrtarfistras, Janamejayas, Brahmadattas,

Bhismas, Bhmias, Kfisas, Kusas, etc.," and that in the

Lunar dynasty there were two Itksiis, two I'ariksits, three

Bliiiiiaseiias, and two Janamejayas.4 In that dynasty,1

Bh?ffav. ?x, IC, 34 7.a

See Muir'? Sanskrit Texts, i, 75, etc.;?MBh. ii, ?S', 33 fi.

4Brahma, 13, 112-13 ; Jfarir. .V>, 1817-18. Yet the lists do not show

three Bh?masenas, and two have dropped out. There were three

Janamejayas, if we reckon the monarch who reigned after the great battle.



It) ANCIENT INDIAN GENEALOGIES AND CHRONOLOGY

moreover, we have the strange coincidence that the two

Pariksits and the two later Janamejayas were father andson

respectively.1 There wrere morekings than one that

bore the name Divod?sa, Sudfisa, orSriljaya. This caution

also must be considered in dealing with the names of

rishis, because similarity of names wasprobably just as

common among brahmans as among ksatriyas ; thus there

appear to have been two brahmans named Sunaka2

and

two named Suka.:* This even applies to such names as

Brhaspati4 and Usanas,5 with the result that personal and

mythologicalnames have probably been confused at times.

Such appears to be the proper nature and scope of an

examination of the genealogies. The next step is to state

the various dynasties, notice the authorities, and offer some

generalremarks on each

dynasty.All the lines are derived from Manu Vaivasvata : the

Solar and Videha lines from his son Iksvfiku, the Visala

dynasty from his son Dista or Nedistha, and all the rest

from his daughter Has son Purfiravas. Purflravas, line

was?yus, Nahusa, Yay?ti, and then Yayfiti's five soiis,

Vadu, Turvasu, Druhyu, Ann, and Puni.0

1 See the genealogical lists, infra. For the earlier Paiiksit and

.hinnmejayasee also Brahma, 1?, 9-11 ; V?yu, ii, 31, 21-2; J?ariv. 30,

1008-9, and cf. with MBh. xii, l'>0, 5595-0. The later are well known,

luring Ablrimanyu's son and grandson.-

One. son of Grtsamada, Bh?ijar. ix, 17, 3 ; Brahma, 11, 33 ; V?yu, ii,

.>", 4 :Harir. :J0, 1519 ; loss clearly Gartida, i, 130, 9; and Visnu, iv, 8 ;

perhaps Biff-V. ii, 1. The other, MBh. xiii. 30, 2005.:lOne was father-in-law of Anuha, king of South Paficfila, Bh?gav. ix,

Jl. 24-5 ;Mattya, 40, 50-7 ; V/cirir. 7cS\ 981 : :?0, 1039-40, 1005. See also

Ga?ida, i, 7.^), 13; fr<r?yM, ii, 37, 174-5; Visit?, iv, 2.fJ. The other was

Yvasa's son, see p. 4.4

See p. 44 infra.:*

There was aking Usanas in the Yadava line : see Table of lists.

KMBh. \, 75, 3140-01 ; On, 3700-3 ; v, 14S, 5042-52. Afftti, 27?, 5-7;

:13. 12 23. Bh?ffav. ix, 7, 11-35; 13, 1 ; 17, 1 ; IS, 1-33. Brahma, 7,

I 10 ; 10, 1-11 ; 11, 1-2 ; 1?, 1-0. Garttda, i, 7JS, 2-3 ; 7.W, 2, 7, 17, 18.

Kfirma, i. JW, 4-7; :?..', 1-11. Lihga, i, oV7, 17-24 ; 0Y>, 55-00. Matsya,

li. 40-1 ; 1?, 12-15 ; ?^, 32-4, 49 54. Padma, v, 5, 75-120 ; 12, 85-7,

103-7. Iwyw, ii, ?3, 1-17; ?.'>, 1-4, 48, 114 ; 30, 1-2 ; 31, 12-17. l'?riHf,

iv, 7, .?, tf-m 7/ffr/r. 7^, 013-30; ?C, 1303-73; ?8, 1475; 30, 1599-1004.




The Solar line of Ayodhy?, derived from Manu's son

Iksv?ku,is

given by manyPur?nas

1and

bythe R?m?

yana.2 All the Pur?nas agree, subject to minor variations,

but the B?in?yana givesa list twice over which is irre

concilable with them, though many of the names are the

same. It is unquestionably erroneous, when considered as

a whole or examined in detail. It is very improbable that

the lidmdyana alone should be right and all the other

authorities wrong, and the list is manifestly too short as

compared with other dynasties. As regards details, it

omits Purukutsa and his sonTrasadasyu,:{ Hariscandra

and his son Rohita,4 and Ittuparna,5 who were all well

known kings ; and it contradicts itself by saying that

Raghu'sson was

Kalm?sap?da who was famous as

Saud?sa (Sudfisa's son),0 and yet omits Sud?sa. In all

these points the Pur?nas areright, and as

regards the

early kings from Iksv?ku to ?rdh?sva the Mah?bh?rata1

corroborates them and disagrees with the ltdmayana.

Hariscandra or his son Rohita bought Hunahsephaas

a victim in Rohita's stead, so the Pur?nas say, and the

Altar. Brahmana* corroborates them against the different

version which the Rdnnly. narrates of King Ambar?sa/'The R?m?y. makes Ambarisa great

-grandfather of

N?bh?ga, but the MBh.10 agrees with the Pur?nas that

he was N?bh?gasson. The Pur?nas make Raghu father

of Aja, but the Rdmdy. makes him father of Kalm?sap?da

and places Aja twelve generations below Raghu ; the

1

Agni, 272, 18 39 ; Bh?gav. ix, O, 4-12, 9; Brahma, 7, 44

-

S,!J4

;Ga?ida, i, /.Jf.V, 17-44; Kftrnui, i, .?W, ?\-2?, 00; Liinja, i, /;.>, 31 -

'>/;, 45 ;MaUya, 12, 25-57 ; l'adma, v, ,V, 130-02 ; Kf/yi?, ii, ;?>;,0 211 ;

Tew?, iv, S-4 ; //rtr?w. 70, 013 ; //, O?iO 15, 832. I treat Uto //a>-iV.

as a 1'urfiiia, which is what it is realty.-

i, 70, 21-43; ii, 110, (i 35.:lMBh. iii, OS, 8000-8 ; Big- V. viii, /.'>, 30 ; and perhaps vii, 10, 3.

1Aiktr. Brdh. vii, 3, 13, 14.

aJ//M. iii, 00, 2027-9 ; 7", 2700.

?ii, i/o, 29.

7iii, ?Wi, 13515-19 ; 202, 13620-1.

8vii, .?, 14-11?. ?

i, 01 and 02.

10 iii, 7:^, 10154 ; vii, (?4, 2303 ; xii, 20, 993.

JRAS. 1910. 2




Raghuvam?a1

supports the Pur?nas. The Pur?nas give

two Dilipas, one father of Bhagiratha and the other fatheror

grandfather of Raghu, but the R?m?y. gives only one

Dil?paas father of Bhagiratha and great-grandfather of

Raghu ; the Raghuvariisa,2 so far as it states the genealogy,

makes aDilipa father of Raghu, thus supporting the

Pur?nas. Again, the R?m?y. places Kakutstha ten steps

below M?ndh?tr, whereas the Pur?nas place him seventeen

generations before M?ndh?tr; theBrluxddevat?3 corroborates

them that Kakutstha was before M?ndh?tr's grandson

Trasadasyu.

It appears, therefore, that, wherever it is possible to

check the twro lists by other authorities, they support the

Pur?nas and disagree writh the R?m?,yana, notwithstanding

its great fame. Its list, therefore, may be put asideas

confused and erroneous, and the Pur?na list must l>e

adopted.

The Pur?na lists are in general agreement except at two

stages, namely, between Kalm?sap?da and Vrddha?arman

Ailavila, and between Ahinagu and the last king Srut?yus

Brhadbala. For the former group the Agni, Brahma,

Matsya, Padma, and Harivamm give four kings, and all

the other authorities give three different kings beginning

with Asmaka. The difference is not important, and

I have followed the majority,as the MBh. corroborates

them about A?maka.4 For the second group, which

consists of twent3r kings, the Agni, Ktirma, Liiuga, Matsya,

and Padma substitute

only

five different names ; and

theyare clearly wrong for three reasons: (I) acomparison of

the other dynasties and the synchronisms shows that there

were a great many moregenerations; (2) what the MBh.

says about Pariksit and his sons5 agrees with P?rip?tra

1v, 35 0.

2iii, 13 21.

"

vi, 50-4.4MBh. i, 122, 4730-8 ; 777, 0777 91 ; xii, 234, ?004 ; xiii, 7,?7, 0202.

He was nicknamed Sarvakarmau, xii, y.), 1792-3.8

iii, 192, 13145-78, 13198.



ANCIENT INDIAN GENEALOGIES AND CHRONOLOGY 1!)

and his successors in the longer list ; and .(3) one of those

Pur?nas, the Matsya, contradicts its own list by stating

that Krta, king of Dvimidha's line, was adisciple of

Hiranyan?bhin Kausalya, which name occursonly in the

long list.1

The Videha line is derived from Iksv?ku's son Niini.

It is given in full by four Pur?nas,2 and down to

Siradhvaja-Janaka by the Hdmdyana:K The Vdyu omits

all the kings between Srut?yus and Su?ruta. The Garuda,

by the omission of a verse or two which terminated the

Solar line and introduced this dynasty, tacks the latter on

to the former by making the third king (Jd?vasu son of

Prasusruta of the former line. Otherwise all the lists are

in substantial agreement. Many of the kings bore the

name Janaka,4 which was not apersonal name, but either

a gotra name 6 or a royal title.

The Y?dava race, descended from Yay?ti'sson Yadu/5

is given by many Pur?nas. It divided into two lines, one

from Yadu's sonSahasrajit, which developed after King

Haihaya into the Haihayas and after his descendant

T?lajaiigha into the branch of the T?lajanghas,7 and the

other line from another son, Krostu, which formed an

1Matnya, 49, 75-0 ; see p. 52.

2Bh?gav. ix, 6', 4; 13, 1-27. Garxula, i, 138, 44-58. Kciyw, ii, ?C, 9 ;

27, 1-23. Vistiu, iv, 5.:l

i, 77, 3-13.4

It is given in the Pur?na lists to Mithi, Dharmadhvaja, S?radhvaja

(Sitas father), and Khfuidikya ; and in the MBh. to Dharmadhvaja (xii,

322, 11855), S?radhvaja (iii, 273, 15880), Janadeva (xii, 218, 7883; 321,

11839), Karala (xii, 304, 11220), Daivarati (xii, 312, 11545), and two

others (xii, :>92, 111099 ; 328, 12200).a

The M?rkaitdeya P. says Jaiuik?ii?ili knie (13, 11) ; see also R?m?y.

i, 77, 4.H

The different origin mentioned in Hariv. 94, 5142 -95, 5257, appears

to be an ancient calumny, for it acknowledges the descent from Yay?tiand Yadu in verse 5104. See p. 40.

7Agni, 274> 1-11. Bh?gav. ix, 23, 18-30. Brahma, 13, 153-207.

Garnda, i, 139, 19-24. Ktlrma, i, ??, 12-21 ; ,?J, 1-3. Litiga, i, t?S, 2-19.

Mat?ya, 43, 5-52. Padma, v, 7J, 110-49. Ir?y?, ii, ??, 1-34, 48-53.

Visim, iv, 77. 7/art?;. 33, 1843-.?.$, 1900.




enduring lineage.1 All the authorities are in substantial

agreement. The most noteworthy difference is that the

K?rma makes the seven Sa?avindava kings whose names

beganwith Prthu successive descendants instead of

brothers, and the exigencies of the list appear to show

that it is right. Satvat or S?tvata had several sons who

gave rise to different branches, among which there is much

confusion ; but all the authorities agreefairly

about the

branch that ended in Kaihsa, and that branch has been

adopted,Krsna being added at the end.

The Paurava (or Lunar) race was descended from

Yav?tis son Pfiru, and is given in the MBh.2 and many

of the Pur?nas.3 All the latter agree fairly well, subject

to considerable minor variations, but the former gives two

lists which present many differences and do not even agreewith each other. Both those lists leave out many of the

kings between Pfiru and Aharhy?ti ; the second then

inserts between Ahaihy?ti and Matinfira many of the

kings which the Pur?nas generally place between

Vid?ratha and Rksa II ; both fairly agree wTith the

Pur?nas from Matin?ra to Kuru, but reduce the number

of kings between Kuru and Prat?pa to five. The second

list is wrong in inserting the group of kings between

Ahaihy?ti and Matin?ra, because it is contrary to all the

other authorities, and because the synchronism of Matin?ra

with Prasenajit of the Solar race (see p. 31) proves that

the others areright. That group should be placed between

Agni, 274, 12-33. Bh?gnr. ix, 23, 30-9; 24, 1-0, 18 24. Brahma,

I U 1 15, 31, and 15, 45-59. Garnda, i, 130, 25 30, 43-8. Kfirma, i, &ft

34, 42 05. Litiga, i, ?AV, 21-49; t?!), 2, 32-40. Malnya, 44, 14-74.

Padma, v, 7./, 32, 45-00. Ti/y?, ii. .7.7, 14-

34, 2, and .??, 115-23. Visit it,

iv, 7J-7.7. llarir. 37, 1909-.?.S\ 2030.2

i, .'^, 3095 752; .9.5, 3704 827.:l

Jf;w#, .?77, 1-9, 15, 25-7, 31 40. Bh?gav. ix, 20, 1-21, 21 ; .V, 3-4,

9-29. Brahma, 13, 2-5, 50-02, 80-1, 102-23. Garnda, i, 140, 1-8, 24-5,

30-8. Ma/tya, 40, 1-44 ; ,W, 1-23, 34-50. V?yn, ii, 57, 115-55, 100-2,

200-13, 223-39. Visit?, iv, 10, 20. llarir. 31, 1053-9 ; 32, 1714-32,

1754-e, 1795-1802, 1813-28.




Vid?ratha and Rksa II, ?as the Pur?nas place it. The

majority of the authorities therefore establish the lineagedown to Rksa II, and after that all are in substantial

agreement.

The North Panc?la line, which reigned in Ahicchatra,1

was an offshoot from Ajamidha of the Lunar dynasty. It

is given by many Pur?nas,2 and all are in substantial

agreement, except that the Brahma and Hariv. mistakenly

derive Srfyaya directly from B?hy?sva (= Bhrmyasva).

Much of this genealogy from Bhrmyasva to Soinaka is

supported by the Rig-Veda* From Sr?jayacame the

family of the Sr?jayas, and from Soinaka that of the

Somakas,4 which play such alarge part in the Br?hmana

literature.

The South Paftc?laline,

whichreigned

inK?mpilya/'

was another offshoot from the same Ajamidha. It is

given by several Pur?nas,6 and all are in substantial

agreement.

Another line, which reigned somewhere in Madhyadesa

(though I have not been able to rind the name of its

capital)was descended from the same Ajamidha's brother

Dvimidha, and may be called Dvimidha's line. It is given

11 Tarin. 20, Uli 12.

2Agni, 277, 15, 18 25. Bh?gar. ix, 21, 21, 30-4 ; 23, 1-3. Brahma,

13, 81, 93-101. Garnda, i, 140, 17-24. V?yn, ii, .?7, 180 200. I7.v/m, iv,

7.9. 7/ariV. *?, 1755, 1770-95. Malaya (in part), .-70, 1-10.n

Mudgala, son of Bhrmyasva, x, 7(7,2. Vadhryasva, x, C9; vi, /;/, 1.

Divod?sa, vi, 61, 1 ; iv, 20, 3 ; vi, ^7, 22, and many other passages.

Sr??jaya, who is called son of Pevavata, iv, 7/7, 4 ; vi, 27, 7. Cyavana, x,

60, 5-0. Sudas (Sud?sa), vii, 18, 22-5, and other passages. Sahadevuand his son Somaka, iv, 15, 7-10. In vii, 7.9,25, 1)i vcxla.su is called father

of Sudas, but"

father"

clearly means*'

ancestor ", because Sudas*

patronymic was Paijavana (ibid.). This, therefore, harmonizes with the

genealogy, and his father Pijavana as aking of no note has drop|>eH

out. It is said Sahadeva's originalname was Suplan, Satajt. Br?h. II,

iv, 4, 3-4.4

Both families accompanied Drupada at the great battle.5

Harm. 20, 1002, 1005 ; V?yn, ii, 37, 171 ; Visim, iv, V.K0

Bhdgar. ix, 21,22 0

; Garnda, i, 140, 10-13; Mat.*ya, 40, 47-59:V?yn, ii, 37, 105 77 ; Visita, iv, 7.9 ; llarir. 20, 1052-72.




by some Pur?nas,1 and all are in close agreement, except

that the Bh?gavata, Ga?ida, and Vimm omit the four

kings between Drdhanemi and Sup?r?va, and the

Bh?gavata derives Ugr?yudha from Nipa of the South

Panc?la line. There is admittedlya gap between S?rva

bhauma and Mahat-Paurava.

Another dynastywas founded by Vasu, who was fifth

in descent from Kuru. He conquered the kingdom of

Cedi, which had been founded by the descendants of

Yidarbha of the Y?dava race, and took the nameCaidya

uparicara. He extended his conquests as far asMagadha,

and on his death his eldest son, Brhadratha, took that

kingdom and established adynasty there.2 This line may

therefore be called the Magadha line. It is given in some

of thePur?nas,3

and all are in substantialagreement.The line to which G?dhi and Vi?vamitra belonged reigned

in K?nyakubja.4 It is given in much the same form by

the various authorities, but is derived from two different

progenitors. All agree substantially from Jahnu down

wards, but above him four Pur?nas?

state the descent thus?

Pururavas, Am?vasu (or Vijaya), Bhuna, Kaneana, Suhotra

Jahnu: while the AgniQ gives it thus?Vitatha (of the

Lunar race), Brhat, Ajamidha, Jahnu. The MBh. gives

two lists,7 of which the first leaves the question of the

1Bh?gav. ix, 21, 21, 27-30; Ga?ida, i, 140, 8, 14-1?; Matsya, 41)%

70-9; Vfn/u, ii, 37, 1C0-2, 179 88 : Vistw, iv, 7.9; 7/aro'r. .'#>, 1075-85.-

MBh. i, tit?, 2334-05, and noxt noto. Uparieara probably meant

"he who overran'*, "conqueror", and afterwards was turned into4*

walking in the air". Cf. the later term vparika in inscriptions.

See p. 11.:l

Aim, 277, 20-30; Bh?gav. ix, 22, 4-0; Ga?ida, i, 140, 25 0 ;

Matfiya. 50, 20-34 ; luyu, ii, 37, 200-22 ; IVjrww, iv, 19 ; 77anV. ,/??,

1700-1813.4MBh. iii, i75, 10144 ; v, US, 4005. The B?m?y. calls its capital

M ah od aya (i, 32, 3, 6), which =K?nyakubja (see Gorr. ed., i, Sa, 35).

8Bh?gav. ix, 15, 1-16 ; Ganida, i, 7J?>, 2-7 ; F<r?yu, ?i, ?W, 48-09 ;

Vifnu, iv, 7.?

;??7, 16-18.7

One in xii, 49, 1717, etc. ; and the other in xiii, 4, 201, etc., with

i, 94, 3710-23.




progenitor untouched (as also the R?m?y.1), and the second

nameshim

asAjamidha, thus agreeing with the Agni.

The Brahma2 and Harivariisa* each give both versions,

thus supporting and neutralizing both. The majority of

the authorities derive the dynasty from Pur?ravas' son

Am?vasu, and theyare

right, because it will be seen from

the discussion of Vi?v?mitras contemporaries (p. 32) that

it is impossible to relegate this dynasty to a time

subsequent to Ajamidha. There is a conclusive argument

to show that the derivation from Bharata s successor

Vitatha is untenable, although the error is ancient.4

Vi?v?mitra was a descendant (bysome eight steps) from

Jahnu, and must, if Jahnu was descended from Bharata's

line, have been many (some sixteen) generations below

Bharata; but it is well known that Bharata's mother,

Sakuntala, wasdaughter of Vi?vamitra.6 Visv?mitra

cannot have been both an ancestor and a descendant of

Bharata. As the story of Sak?ntala is one of the best

alleged incidents in ancient Indian literature, Visv?mitra

was certainly prior to Bharata, and the genealogical

versions which make his ancestor Jahnu a descendant

of Bharata must be wrong. The error arose from con

founding Am?vasu's descendant Suhotra with Vitatha's

third successor Suhotra, and perhaps also Jahnus in

both lines.0

1i, 32, 1 -34, H.

-10, 11-60 ; 13, 80-02.

a27, 1413-63; J?, 1754-00.

4Visv?mitra is called

"best of the Bharatas" in Aitar. Brdh. vii, 3, 17.

8He was not the first Viiiv?mitra, but a near descendant, see p. 43.

This strengthens the antithesis.?

The Brahma (10, 63) and Ifariv. {27, 1468-9; 38, 1773) call Visvamitia

Panrava, which is a mistake (helj>edno doubt by the general confusion)

for Paurftrava, as the Vdyu shows in ii, %0, 98, where Panroravanya should

1msPaur?rantuya. Kuru had a son Jahnu (see authorities cited above for

the 1'aurava line). The passage in the Aitar. Brdh. may have originatedthe error. The author lived after the great battle, and many centuries

later than Bharata. The comjxiscrs of the Brahmanas were not learned

in ancient ksatriya genealogies,as indeed follows from the statement

thatVy?sa's disciples divided the literature

andspecialized each

inhis

own

department. S?yana rej>eats the error in his comment on Rig- V. ?ii, 53, 24.




The Ka?i line reigned at Benares. All the authorities

are in general agreement from Suhotra (or Sunahotra)

dowmvards, though they vary in fullness ; but they differ

regarding his ancestry. Three Pur?na? make him son of

Nahusa's son Ksatravrddha,1 and one makes him brother

of Nahusa ;2 but the Agni3 makes him son of Vitatha of

the Lunar race. The Brahimi* and Harivaiiisa* each

give both versions, thus supporting and neutralizing both.

Suhotra of the Lunar race, however, was not son of

Vitatha, but of Brhatksatra. The majority areright,

because, as will be seen from the discussion about Divod?sa

and Pratardana of this line (p. 38), it is impossible to

relegate the line to aperiod later than Suhotra of the

Lunar race. The error arose from confounding Nahusas

descendants Ksatravrddha and Suhotra with Suhotra and

Brhatksatra of the Lunar race.

The descendants of Yayati'sson Anu (it is said) branched

out in the north-west into the Paujab tribes of the Kekayas,

Sivis, etc., and in the east into the Anga dynasty.0 All

the authorities agree down to Jayadratha, king of Aiiga,

and from him there were two lines of descent, one the

royal linc,and the other a younger branch, to which Karna

belonged, who became king.7 It is not material which is

taken, and I have chosen the latter asbeing clearer and

fuller.

1Bh?gar. ix, 77, 1-10 ; Garnda, i, 139, 7-14 ; Visita, iv, 8.

2V?yn, ii, 30, 1-76.

a 277, 9-14 ; but it is confused.4

77, 1-2,27-60; 13, 62-70.5

39, 1517-98; 32, 1730-54.ft

Agni, 276, 5-16 ; Bh?gav. ix, 23, 1-14 ; Garnda, i, 7J0, 05-74 ;

Mat*ya, 48, 10-10S ; V?yn, ii, 57, 12-114 ; Visnu, iv, 7<<?. The Brahma

(13, 4-5, 14-49) and llarir. (31, 1058-9, 1668-1710) derive the line from

Kaudni?va's sonKakseyu of the Lunar race, but these two books are so

closelj" alike that they constitute onlyone authority. I have followed

the majority.

7 The former in the Agni and Brahma, the latter in the Bh?gar.,

Garnda, and Visit?, and both in the Matsya, V?yn, and Hariv.




Another line is derived from Manu's son Dista (or

Nedistha), in which Vis?la and the later kings, if not the

earlier also, constituted the dynasty of Vis?l? or Vais?li.1

It may be called Distas line. All the authorities are in

substantial agreement.2

Having offered these general remarks it remains to set

out the genealogical lists, explain the synchronisms, and

show their results in the Table of lists. In the following

Table the most important lines of descent arc shown, and

all start from Manu, because that is how the authorities

begin them. The three Bh?rgava rishis, ltcika, Jamadagni,

and Rama, are also included in order to bring out the

synchronisms at their periodmore

clearly. The lines of

descent have been placed according to geographical position

as nearly as is feasible, that is, dynasties that reigned inthe west are

placedon the left, those of Madhyadesa in the

middle, and those that reigned in the east on the right.

The names of all kings whose positionsare fixed by the

synchronismsare

printed in italics. Names added in

brackets are those of kings who are not mentioned in the

genealogies, but whose existence is disclosed in the

discussion of the synchronisms. Some lists it will be

seen are far less full than others, though they may start

from asynchronism and reach a

synchronism, that is,

the omissions are more numerous. It is not, however,

known where the omissions occur, consequently the

names in those lists have been simply spaced out, and

where there are no

synchronisms

the

position

of a name

is not to be taken as more than the best conjecture

possible.

1Mut ut ta, the greatest king, who preceded V?sala, is called the

?yogava king. Satajt. Br?h. XIII, v, 4> 0.2

Bh?gar. ix, 7, 12; 2, 22-3?; Garnda, i, l.iS, 2-13; V?yn, ii. 23. 3

24, 22 ; Visnu, iv, 7 ; M?rkaitd. (at great length to Rfijyavardhana),

113-36 and 100-10 \ Litiga (the beginning), i, tftf, 53; MBh. (fir>t

part partially), xiv, 4, 05-91 ; R?m?y. (from V?sala to the end), i, 4?,

11-18.




80

10II121314

151617IS19

20212223242526272S203031323334353637383940414243444.1

46

47

4?

49

50

I.

Y?DAVAS.

Manu

lia

Purflravas

?yusNaluisa

Vay?ti*

Y ad?

IL

Haihayas.

Krostu

Vrjin?vat

Sv?hi

Rusadgu

Citraratha

?Sa.sarindu*

PrthuyasasPit hu karman

Prthujaya

PfthiikirttiPrthud?ua

Prthusravas

Prthusattaina

Antara

Suyaj?aUsanas

SineyuMarutta

Kambalabarhis

Rukmakavaca

Par?vrt

Jydimujha

Vidarhha

Kratha

Kunti

Dhrsti

Nirvrti

Yidfiratha

Da-sdrha

Y yomanJ?m?ta

YikrtiBhlmamtha

Sahasrajit

Satajit

Haihaya

Dharma

Dharmanetra

Kunti

Saha?ji

Mahismat

Bhadrasrenya

Durdama

Kanaka

Krtav?ryaAr juna*

Jayadhvaja

T?taja?ghaV?tihotra

Vrsa

Mad ImVrsni

III.

Pauravas.

Manu

lia

Pur?ravas

IV.

K?NVAKUBJA.

?yusNahusa

Yay?ti*

P?ru

Janamcjaya I

Pracinvat

Prav?ra

Manasyu

AbhayadaSudhanvan

Bahugava

Sariryati

Ahaiiiy?tiRaudr?sva

Rceyu

M at ?mira

Tamsu

Ailina

DusyantaBharatn

*

Vitatha

BhfunanyuBrhatksatra

Suhotra

Hast in

Ain?vasu

Bhinia

K?ncana

prabha

Suhotra

Jahnn

Sumantu

AjakaBal?kt'iHva

Ku?a

Ku&LsvaKtiAika

G?dhi

Vi?xximitra

Astaka

Par?vusu

Bu?koava

?RAHMANS.

Rcika

Jamadagni

Rama




VI.

K?8I LINK.

Manu

liaPur?ravas

?yiiHNah usa

Ksatravrdha

Su(na)hotra

K?na

Kanipa

Dirghatapas

Dhanva

Dhan van tari

Ketumat

Bh?maratha

Dirod?na 1(Ast?ratha)

(Haryasva)

(Sudeva)

Divoddsa II

PralardanaVat*a

Alarka

Sannati

Sun?tha

Ksema

VIL

Solar line.

Manu

Iksv?ku

Sosada

Kaknt.it ha

Anenas

Prthu

Y?Hvaga?vaArdra

Y u vanas va 1

Sr? vasta

Brhadasva

Kuval?sva

Drdh?sva

PramodaHaryasva I

NikumbhaSaihhat?sva

K n?as va

PnismajitYutmn?.sra II

M?ndh?tr*

Pumkutsa

TrasadasyuSambh?ta

A nai any a

Prsadasva

Haryasva IIVasumanas

Tridhanvan

Trayy?runaTriAahku

llarUcandra

Bohita

Harita

Ca?en

VijayaRuruka

Vrka

B?hu

Sagara*A saman ja?Ar?iHumat

Dil?pa I

Bhagiratha*

Sruta

N?bh?gaAmbarisa

*

Sindhudv?pa

Aynt?yus

VIII.

VlDKIIA LINK.

Ni m ?

Mithi-Janaka

Ud?vasu

Nandivardhanaj

Suketu

Devar?ta

Brhaduktha

Mah?virya

Sudln ti

Dhrstaketu

Haryasva

Maru

Pratindhaka

Krtiratha

Devnmidha

Vibudha

IX.

DiSTa's LINE.

Manu

Dista

N?bh?ga

Bhalandana

Vatsapri

Pr?riisu

Praj?ni

Khanitra

Ksupa

Vimsa

Vivimsa

Khan?netra

Karandhama

A v?ksit

Marutta.*

Nari&yantaDama

R?jyavardhana|Sudhrti

Nara

Kevala

Band hu mat

Vegavat

Budha

Trnarindu

X.

Anu'S LINE.

Manu

na

Pur?ravas

AyusNah usa

Yay?ti*

Anu

Sahh?nara

K?l?nala

Srnjiiya

Pura?jaya

Janamejaya

Mah?sala

M aha mai las

Usinant

TitiksuSiri*

0

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1516

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

20

27

2829

Kekaya !30Rusadratha

Hema

Su tapas

Bali

A hga

Dadhiv?hana

I

31

!323334353037383940

41424344454647484950




I.

Y ADA VAS.

Navaratha

Dasaratha

SakuniKaramhha

Devar?ta

Devaksatra

Madbu

Kuru vasa

Ann

Purudvat

Ptiruhotra

Aiiisu

! atvatS?tvtita

A udhaka

Kukura

Vrsni

Dlirti

KajK)taronian

Y iloma n

TittiriTaittiri

Nala

Abhijit

Punarvasu

?buka

VgrantnaKath*a

Krsua

II.

Dvim?diias.

III.

Pauravas.

Vikunthana ?

Dvimldha

Yav?nara

Dhrtimat

Satyadhrti

Drdhanemi

Sudhauvan

S?rvabhauma

MahatPauraval

Hukmaratha

Supar?va

S urna ti

Sannati

Kr ta

Ugr?yudha

Kseniya

Suy?ra

Nrna?javaBahuratha

Ajamidha

IV.

N. Panc?la.

Bkm 1

Saihvarana

Kuru

Par?ksit IJa uamejaya II

Suratha

Vid?ratha

S?rvabhauma

Jayatsena?r?dhiMah?sattva

Ayut?yusAkrodhana

Dev?tithiUksa II

Bh?masena

Dilipaf'rafipa

{Rstisena)i?autauu

[Hhisma]

Vicitrav?ryaDhrfar?stra

Pandara?

Abhimavyn

NilaS?uti

Susfinti

Puruj?tiA rka

Bhrmya?va

Mudgala

Brahmi?tha

VadhryasvaDivod?sa

Mitrayu

(l)evav?ta)

Sriijaya

CyavanaSomadatta

(Pijavana)Suddsa

Sahadeva

Soinaka

Jan tu

V.

S. Pancala.

K?jmi \Klla)

Prsafa

Drujxida

DhrstadynmnaDhrstaketn

Brhadi?u

Brhadvosu

Brhaddhanus

Brhatkarmati

Jay ad rath a

Vi?vajit

Senajit

Rucir?ava

Prthusena

Para I

N?pa

Samara

Para II

Prthu

Sukrti

Vibhr?ja

Anuha

Rrahmadatta

V invaksetia

Udaksena

Bhall?ta

Janamejaya

THE BATTLE BETWEEN THE

Par?ksit II]

Janamejaj'a III

etc. I




VI.

K?SI LINE.

Keturaat

Suketii

Dharmaketu

Satyaketu

Vibhu

Suvibhu

Sukuimlra

I)b is take tuVeiiuhotra

Bharga

Mauadiia line

Knrn

Sudhanvaii

Suhotra

Cyavana

KrtaVaati Caidya

Brhaclratha

K usfigraKsabha

Puspavat

Satyahita

Orjtt.Jahnu

Samhhava

Jar?sandha

Sahadeva

VIL

Solar line.

Btuparna

Sarvak?ina

Sud?sa

Kalm?safmdaAsmaka

M?laka

Sataratha

Vrddhasarinan

Visvasaha I

DilipairDirghab?hu

Raghu

AjaDasarafha

Rama

*

Kma

AtithiNisadha

Nala

Nabhas

Pundarika

Ksemadhauvan

Dev?nika

Ahhiagu

IVnip?traDala

SalaUktha

Vajran?bhaSaiikhana

Vyusit?svaVisvasaha II

Il iraityan?hha

PusyaDhruvasandhi

Sudarsaua

Agnivarna

S?ghraMuni

PrasiiHi utaSiisiiiidhi

Amarsa

M alias va t

Visrutavat

Brliadhala

VIII.

Vl?EIIA LINE.

Mah?dhrti

Krtinita

M a haron?a n

Svariiaromaii

Hrasvaroman

S?radhvaja

Bh?numatSatadyumna?Sui

Urjavaha

Sanadv?jaKuni

Afijaua

KulajitAristanemi

Srut?yus

Su|MirHvaSan jayaK semai i

AnenasSamaratha

Satyaratha

S?tyarathi

Upaguru

Upagupta

Sv?gataSvanara

Suvareas

Subh?sa

Susruta

Jiiya

Vijayalita

Sunaya

VltahavyaDhrti

liuhul?sva

Krti

IX.

Dista's line.

V?sala

Hemacandra

Sucandra

Dh fin? ras va

Smjay

a

Sahadeva

Krs?s va

Somadatta

JanamejayaPramati

X.

Anu's link.

Anap?na 51

52

Di vitatha

Citraratlia

Lomap?da.

Catura?iga

f'rthul?ksa

Campa

Ha ry a ?iga

Bhadraratha

Brhatkaruian

Brhadratha

Brhadbh?nu

Brhanmanns

Jayadratha

Vijaya

Dhrti

Dhrtavrata

SatyakarinanAdhiratha

Kama

53

54

5S

59

00

01

02

03

04

0500

07

OH

00

70

71

72

73

7!

75

70

i t

78

79

80

81

?2

83

84

85

80

8788

80

90

91

92

93

94

115

90

PANDAVAS

Som?dhi

Srutasravas

etc.

AND KAURAVAS.

Brhalksana

Uiuksepaetc.




The accounts say there werekings from time to time

who establisheda

supremacyover

the kingdoms aroundthem, and so were called samr?j

or cakravartin. There is

noimprobability in that, and their conquests may have

resulted in the subversion of aneighbouring dynasty,

or

merely in its reduction to a kind of vassalage ; hence when

we consider the times of those kingswe majr find some

confusion in the lists of neighbouring dynasties. More

over, it is highly probable, and is indeed implied, that

those great monarchs had long reigns. The names of such

very famous monarchs aregiven,1 namely, in the Solar

race, M?ndh?tr Yauvan?avi, Sagara, Bhag?ratha, Ambarisa

N?bh?gi, Dilipa II Khatv??ga, and R?ma Da?arathi ; in

the Lunar dynasty, Bharata Dausyanti ; in the Y?dava line,

Sa?avindu Caitraratha and

Arjuna K?rtavirya; in Aim's

line, Sivi Au?inara ; in Distas line, Marutta ?v?ksita ; as

well as Yay?ti N?husa, and others also who belonged to

side-dynasties which developedno long genealogy and

which are unnecessary for the present purpose.2 Of these

monarchs, M?ndh?tr, Bhag?ratha, Arjuna, Bharata, and

Marutta werespecially called samr?j? The names of all

the cakravartins who occur in the Table are marked withan asterisk.

Dealingnow with the synchronisms in accordance with

the principles explained above, we may find not a few

which are deserving of consideration. The followingare

1MBh. vii, 55-70 ; xii, S, 238 : 29. The genealogies corroborate.2

Namely, Rantideva S??ikrti and Suhotra ?tithina of the Paurava

rare : Gaya ?m?rtarayasa ; and Paurava Vira Brhadratha, kingof

Aiiga ; and also Prthu Vainya, who belongedto the most ancient age.

There were many Suhotras, but none that I can identify as ?tithina ;

perhaps he is Suhotra, descendant of Vitatha of the Lunar dynasty.

Brhadratha ma}' be No. 78 in Anus line in the table, but the epithet

Paurava is perplexing.''MBh. ii, 14, 649-50. The remarks in Aitar. Br?h. viii, .7, 3, profess

to explain contemporary conditions and relate to a time later than the

great battle between the lYuidavas and Kauravas.




all the important instances that I have been able to

discover, and they are taken in chronological order as faras

possible.

The earliest synchronism is that Yay?ti's eldest brother,

Yati, married Go, daughter of Kakutstha, who canonly

be Kakutstha of the Solar dynasty.1 Yay?ti therefore

was onegeneration below Kakutstha.

There are clear connexions between the Solar, Lunar,

and Y?dava lines about the time of M?ndh?tr. (?aur?,

daughter of Matin?ra of the Lunar dynasty, married

either Prasenajit of the Solar dynasty2or his son

Yuvan?sva II,3 and was thus grandmother or mother of

M?ndh?tr. The latter connexion is the better supported,for she is called janani, or mother, of M?ndh?tr.4 The

difference is not material for the

present purpose;what is

material is that Matin?ra was acontemporary of Prasenajit.

M?ndh?tr married Vmdumati Caitrarathi, daughter of

Ha?avhidu,5 who canonly be the famous tSa?avindu, son

of Citraratha of the Y?davas.0 And this is corroborated

by the further statement that she was the eldest sister

of many brothers,7 because Sa?avindu had agreat number

of sons, who were called the Sasavindu or Sa?avindava

kings.8 oa?avindu, therefore, and Yuvan?sva II were

contemporaries.

Sivi, son of Usinant of Anus line, appears to have

originated the Sivis, and is said to have had four sons

who originated the Vrsadarbhas, Suviras, Kekayas (or

1 Brahma. 12, 3; V?yn, ii, 31, 14 ; llarir. 30, 1001.-

liruhmn, 7, 90 2 ; 7/?r>?. 7,?, 700 11.:t

K?ya, ?, 26, 05.4

Matsya, 4'.), 8; T?y//., i?, .77, 120; f tarin. :i2, 1710.5

Bh?gav. ix, tf, 38 ; Brahma, 7, 92 3 ; Kay?*, ii, 26, 70 ; Fmwm, ?v, 2 ;

Ilariv. 12, 712 13. Also Garnda, i, 7.?#, 22, where Vindiimahya is

a mistake for Vittdmtiat?.15

J//JA. xii, 20, 998; 4<7/u, #7?, 13-14 ; and other passages cited for

the Y?dava genealogy.7

Brahma, 7, 93 4 ; Vdyu, ii, 26, 71 ; 7/ariV?. 7,?, 713.8See passages cited for the Y?dava genealog}'.




Kaikeyas), and Madras in the Panjab.1 Tri?anku of the

Solar race married a Kaikeya princess,2 hence the Kaikeya

kingswere established before his time, and therefore Sivi

cannot be placed less than two or three generations before

Trisai?ku.3 Jy?magha the Y?dava, who was later, married

aSaivya princess.4

The next synchronism is that Jahnu of the K?nyakubjaline married K?ver?, daughter6

orgreat-granddaughter6 of

Yuvan?sva. This Yuvan??va would be Yuvan??va II of

the Solar line, because the bare mention of such a name

must imply that it wassufficiently well known, and the

first Yuvan??va was not famous. It is moreprobable she

was his daughter, because (it is said) she was cursed by

him ; yet perhapsas a safe medium we may take it she

was hisgranddaughter.

Jahnuwould thus be placed

alongside Purukutsa. Jahnu was a famous king (after

whom the Ganges is said to have been named J?hnav?),

and he could not have attained eminence till after the

death of Yuvan?ava's son M?ndh?tr, who was a cakravartin,

that is, he must be placeda

generation later than M?ndh?tr,

so that his wife wasprobably Yuvan?avas granddaughter.

We may next take Vi?vamitra and his contemporaries,

and here we must consider (having regard to the caution

mentioned above, p. 14) only the earliest person of that

name, for he had many descendants with the gotra name

Vi?vamitra. The earliest and greatest Viav?mitra was the

son of G?dhi, or G?thin, king of K?nyakubja,7 and his

1See passages cited for Ann's line.

- Brahma, 8, 24 ; Litiga, i, 66, 10 ; V?yn, ii, 26, 110 ; Visnu, iv, 3 ;

Hariv. 7.7, 754.:tM Bit. iii, 7.^^, 13249 is an obvious brahman anachronism.

1Agni, ?74, 17; Bh?gav. ix, 23, 35 ; Brahma, 15, 10 ; Litiga, i, 68,

37 :Padma, v, 7J, 15 ; h?yi?, ii, 3J, 32 ; rifmm, iv, 12 ; llarir. 37, 1984.5

Brahma, 10. 19-21 ; 7?, 87. /Jin-ir. 27, 1421-2 ; 32, 1701."

Pi?//?, ii, 20, 55.7

See authorities cited for this dynasty, p. 22. Brhaddcmf?, viii, 70 ;

Sarr?tinkramaii? on Big-V. iii, hymns 7, etc. I have to thank Professor

Macdoncll for corrections and suggestions regarding the references to

(he Riff-Veda.




ksatriyaname was Visvaratha.1 He was

closely connected

with the Solardynasty.

His father G?dhi's mother is

called Paurukuts? or Paurukutsi,2 and was therefore

adaughter

or descendant of Purukutsa, who canonly be

the famous king of Ayodhy?. Her patronymic would

ordinarilymean she was daughter of Purukutsa, but not

necessarily so, for (according to the first caution mentioned

above, p. 14) it may also mean she was a descendant of

even three or four generations. It is necessary to discuss

theserelationships at some

length, and the discussion will

illustrate theprinciples and cautions which have been

laid down.

If Paurukuts? was Purukutsa's daughter, Vi?vamitra

would be three generations below him, and if she was his

great

-

great

-

granddaughter

Vi?vamitra would be six

generations below him. One step more, however, must be

added, because Vi?vamitra ranks properly two steps below

G?dhi, for G?dhi had adaughter Satyavat?, and Vi?vamitra

was born at the same time as her sonJarnadagni (see

j). 35). On the above alternatives, then, Vi?vamitra would

he four or seven generations below Purukutsa. What

precise relationship, then, is meant by

"

Paurukuts?" must

dependon the other circumstances. Now Vi?vamitra is

closely connected in the stories with Purukutsa's ninth

successor, Satyavrata Tri?anku, and his heirs. The stories

may be summarized thus : '*Tri?anku was banished by his

father Trayy?runa, and the court-priest Vasistha (that is,

the then Vasistha) approved and enforced the order with

relentless severity. There was thus deep hatred between

Tri?anku and Vasistha. A terrible twelve-year droughtoccurred then, during which Vi?vamitra was away

1Brahma, 10, 55-7 ; V?yn, W, 20, 90 ; llarir. 27, 1459 ; 32, 1700.

-V?yn, ii, 20, 63 ; llariv. 27, 1430. The Brahma makes Paur? (or

Paurakuts?, as one MS. reads) wife of G?dhi.:)

Most of the authorities are cited in Muir's Sanskrit Texts, i, 82, etc.

Sec Rig-V. v, 2, 7, and Sadgurusisya's Vf.d?rthoxltpik? on i, 24? It isneedless to cite other passages.

jkas. 1910. 3




performing austerities.1 Tri?anku supported Vi?vamitra's

wife and children through it and earned his gratitude.Vi?vamitra therefore espoused Tri?a?ku's cause, opposed

Vasistha, and reinstated Tri?anku. Tri?ankus son

Hari?candra2 wasobliged to offer his own son Rohita as

a victim in a sacrifice, and after long procrastination saved

him by hiding Ajigartasson

Sunal.i?epha3as the victim

instead. Sunah?epha, though bound at the sacrifice, had

his life spared, and was adopted by Vi?vamitra as his

chief son with the name Devar?ta.

These stories areonly possible if Paurukuts? was not

Purukutsa's daughter, but was a descendant, and it follows

that she must have been his descendant of some four

generations, unless the eight Solar kings who intervened

between Purukutsa and Tri?anku were not descendants

in regular order, but were some of them brothers. Now

one or two of those kings may have been brothers, but it

is not probablethat the number of generations among

them was less than six, because Jahnu was, as shown,

contemporary with Purukutsa, and Vi?vamitra, who was

contemporary with Tri?anku, was Jahnu's eighth successor.4

1As to Visv?mitra's brahmanhood, see p. 4 ante.

2The Aitar. Brdh. says Hariscandra was son of Vedhas (vii, 8, 13 ; and

so also Sadgurusisj'aon Rig- V. i, 24). It is not necessary to discuss the

difference, because the synchronism stands good, but it may bo |x>iuted

out that the genealogies rest on the pnr?iia-rai'nAa-rids, and the author of

the Br?h. was more versed in philosophical speculation than in ksatriya

genealogical lore.:l

Sarv?nukraman? on Rig-V. i, hymns 24-30; Aitar. Br?h. vii, 3, 15 ;

Bh?gar. ix, 7, 8-23. But the V?yn (ii, 29, 89), Brahma (10, 54), and

llarir. (27, 1457) make him son or brother of Jamadagui. Thodifference

is not material here. Ajigarta's father Suyavasa (Aitar. Br?h., loe. cit.)

may have been a brother of Rcika or Jamadagui.4

The lists agreo in the number of steps down to Kusa, and then vari

as regards the next, whom theyname as Kusa?va, Ku?amba, and Kusika.

Gfidhi was certainlyson of Kusika, and the only doubtful point iswhether

a king named Kus?sva, or Kusfunba, preceded him. That there was such

an extra generationseems clear, because Isiratha, who is not named in

the genealogies,is mentioned as G?dhi's grandfather by Sadgurusisya

(introduction to Rig-V. iii), and by the Sarv?nukraman? (ibid.). Hence

the general result is that Vi?v?mitra waseighth in descent from Jahnu.




It is not probablea number of brothers succeeded in both

lines at the same time, so as to reduce the actual generationsto three

only,as would be necessary if Paurukuts? was

Purukutsa's owndaughter; and it is quite possible,

on

the other hand, that nine generations in the Solar line

might correspond to eight in the K?nyakubja line. For

all substantial results these minor differences arehardly

material, and it follows that Paurukuts? does not mean

"daughter

" of Purukutsa, and must mean his "descendant"

in about the fourth degree.1

Further, G?dhi's daughter Satyavati was married to the

rishi lleika Bh?rgava, and had a sonJamadagni, who

was born at the same time as Vi?vamitra.2 Jamadagni

had several sons, of whom the youngestwas R?ma.:?

It thus appearsthat

G?dhi's fatherwas

fouror

fivegenerations posterior to Purukutsa, that Vi?vamitra,

Tri?anku, Hari?candra, Jamadagni, and Ajigartawen?

contemporaries, and that Rohita, Suiiahaepha, and Rama

J?madagnyawere

contemporaries.

There are moresynchronisms with Jamadagni and his

son Rama. The stories about them and the allusions, if

treated as containing some truth, may be summarized thus:l

Krtavirya, king of the Haihayas, had the Bh?rgavasas

his priests, and endowed them with great wealth.5 His1

See a similar ease, where DdAdrhl wasapplied to several generations ;

\i. 42, u. 4.2MBh. iii, 115, 10144-33 ; v, 110, 3973 ; 118, 4005-7 ; xii, 4?, 1721-45.

Bh?gav. ix, 15, 4-13. Brahma, 10, 28-53. Ga?ida, i, 139, 0. l"dyu, ii.

29, 03-80. Im/iii, iv, 7."

MBh. iii, 7/6', 11074, 11080, and passages cited for the K?nyakubjaline. Jamadagni married Keimk?, daughter of King Rcnu of Iksvaku's

race {M Jih. iii, 110, 11072 ; v, 110, 3072; and the above passages), and

Prasenajit gave her to him (MBh. iii, ///;, 111)72), hut noking llenu is

mentioned in the genealogies, nor any Prasenajit at this period, so that.

they belonged probably to a junior branch of the Solar race.4

MBh. iii, 110, 11089 -11.7, 10204 (sic, thenumbering is erroneous) :

xii, 4U. Bh?gav. ix, 15, 14 30 ; 10, 8-27 ; 23, 24. Brahma, 13, 159-09.

Mattya, 43, 15 43; 44, 12-14. Padma, v, 12, 117-43. V?ya, ii, 32, 10-48.

Visnu, iv, //. J/ariv. 34, 1850-91.8MBh. i, 178, 0802-3.




son Arjuna reigned at Mfihismati (the modern Mandh?ta

on the River Narmad?), and extended his conquests everywhere. During his time the Haihaya princes tried to

recover the wealth from the Bhargavas, and being

unsuccessful killed many of them, and the Bhargavaswere scattered.1 In one of his expeditions Arjuna burnt

up A pa va Vasistha s hermitage and incurred?pa

vas

curse. The hostility against the Bhargavas brought him

into conflict with Kama, because he or his sons robbed

Jamadagui, who was aBh?rgava. Kama killed Arjuna,

and the hitter's sons then murdered Jamadagui. Kama

swore vengeance against the ksatriyas, and is said to have

destroyed all Arjunassons (except five) and thousands of

Haihayas. After an interval he renewed his hostilities

against all ksatriyas, and is said to have almost exterminatedthem. It thus appears that Arjuna was a

contemporary

of Jamadagui,2 so that he began to reign about the same

lime as Hariscandra, and, as the stories imply that his

reignwas a

long one, it probably overlapped the reigns of

Kohita and Harita also.

This story carries us further. iVrjuna's grandsonwas

Tfilajangha, and he is said to have had a numerous progeny,

which constituted tive tribes of Tfdajanghas among the

Haihayas. He would have been a younger contemporary

of Kama J?madagnya, and the T?laja?ighas would have

grown powerful towards the end of Kama's life, or soon

afterwards, in what is the modern Mahratta country. The

stories say R?ma exterminated the

ksatriyas twenty-onetimes. This statement is too fabulous to merit any

particle of credence, and is besides incompatible with the

remarkable rise of the Talajangha power in the period

that immediately followed, for (as already mentioned, p. 10)

1MBh. i, ?IS, 0804- 179, 0827.-

It is said Ahaihy?ti of the Lunar race married Krtavirya's daughter

(MBh. i. .'/.7,370S), but if the same Krtavirya is meant this statement is

incompatible with all the other indications.




the Haihayas and ??lajaiighasoverran the whole of North

India, and hordes from the countries to the north-west

also invaded India during that period. Their overthrow

of the kingdoms in North India and the destruction that

must have befallen the ksatriyas in the continual wars

may furnish anexplanation of the extermination attributed

to R?ma.

Rama is

always spoken

of as a

great

warrior

highlyskilled in weapons, and his successful contest with

Arjuna and his sonsimplies that the Bh?rgavas took to

arms.1 He certainly did not exterminate the Hailniyas

and T?lajanghas, but, on the contrary, they were rising

into great power at the close of his life. Some remarks

may be ottered in explanation of this. R?ma had no

real cause of enmity against ksatriyas generally, but the

T?lajangha- Hai hayas, being warlike ksatriyas bent on

conquest, would have naturally attacked every kingdom,

that is, all ksatriyas. The fact that the destruction

which they wrought is ascribed to R?ma suggests that

they and the Bh?rgavas had composed their quarrel

after Arjuna's death and wereacting together ; and

there are some incidents which support this suggestion.

If that were so, the destruction would naturally in brah

manical mouths be attributed to R?ma. The history of

the Mahratta power offers astriking parallel. Brahmans

and soldierywere combined. They did not make a

permanent conquest of the countries they invaded, but

made annual raids, and everyyear lighting

was renewed.

1 In later centuries brahuiaiis among the descendants of l>lnimaii\u and

Ajamidha of the Lunar race took to amis, ksatrojtt-td dvijdtayah, namely,

(?argas, Saiikrtis, K?vyas, Maudgalyas, M ai troyas, arid apparent h

K?nvas ; and during that period there were two military parties among

brahmans, the Aiigirasos and Bhargavas. Agni, 277, 21 ;Matsya, 4'1, 3S,

41; 50, 5, 14; V?yn, ii, 37, HiO, 177, 193 4, 201-2; Visnu, iv, 10 ;

Hariv. 32, 1781, 1790.2

e.g. Bhrgu, that is, a Bhrgu or Bh?rgava rishi, saved the Hai haya

king Vitaliavya from Pratardana's vengeance by a delilierate falsehood.

MBh. xiii, 30, 1983 97 (see p. 4).



:*8 ANCIENT INDIAN GENEALOGIES AND CHRONOLOGY

Such devastating raids continued for half a century (and

the T?laja?igha-Haihaya dominion lasted fully that time,see p. 10) might well be described as

twenty-one extermina

tions of the ksatriyas. The parallel goes even further,

for, just as the Persians under Nadir Shah invaded India

once, and the Afghans under Ahmad Shah made four

incursions during the prevalence of the Mahratta power,

so it is said Pahlavas, Paradas, K?mbojas, Sakas, q,nd

other hordes from the north-west poured into India during

the disorganization caused by the Haihaya conquests.

This leads to certain synchronisms between the kings

of K??i (Benares) and the Haihaya kings. There was

along contest between them, which began with

Bhadrasrenya and ended with Vitahavyaon the Haihaya

side.1 In the accountsone

king of Ka?i, named Divod?sa,is made contemporary with the former's sons, and he

or his son Pratardana2 with the latter. Now this is

impossibleif the same king Divod?sa is meant, and

for several reasons. Six generationsare

given from

Bhadrasrenya to T?lajangha, and King Vitahavya (or

rather the Vitahavya king3) appears to have belonged

to the T?lajaiighas, and therefore to have been three or

four steps later. The contest lasted a very long time.4

Such a contest and the successive Haihaya kings, six

at least,5 cannot with any probability be compressed into

the reign of asingle king Divod?sa. The Pur?na accounts

say it began with Divod?sa and ended with Pratardana,

1MBh. xiii, 30, 194(1-96. Brahma, 11, 40-54 ; 13, 66-75. llariv. 20,

1541-8, 1582-91 ; 32, 1736-49. V?yn, ii, 30, 23-8, 61-9. Also Padma.

v, 12, 114.'

Pratardana, son of Divod?sa, of K??i. KansU. Up. iii, 1.

:lThe name is generic rather than personal, MBh. loe. cit. V?tahavya

of the MBh. probably= V?tihotra of the Pur?nas.

4A thousand years. This; like most statements of time, is absurd 1}'

exaggerated, but all the references implya

long-continued struggle.5

These generationscannot be condensed on the supposition that many

of these kingswere brothers, as the whole of the circumstances indicate

the opposite.



ANCIENT INDIAN GENEALOGIES AND CHRONOLOGY ?J9

and the MBh. account describes the contest (and that not

the beginning of it, for it deals only with the Vitahavya

period of the Haihayas)as

occupying the reigns of four

kings of Ka?i, of whom the last two were Divod?sa and

Pratardana. Divod?sa was son of Bhimaratha according

to the Pur?nas, and son of Sudeva according to the MBh.1

He was called Hatrujit according to two of the Pur?nas,-'

and this name could not have been applied to the Divod?sa

of the MBh., as will appear from the narrative following.All these data are

impossibleon the supposition that

there was onlyone Divod?sa, and are quite intelligible

if we take it there were two Divod?sas, one son of

Bhimaratha and the other son of Sudeva.3 Hence there

would seem to have been two Divod?sas in the K?si line,

separated bysome six or seven

kings.That there were

intermediate kings is shown by the stray mention of

aking Ast?ratha, son of Bhimaratha,4 during the contest,

and the express insertion by the MBh. of two kings,

Haryasva and Sude va.r> Confusion was easy because of

the long dispossession of the K?si kings. Collating the

various accounts the story may be stated thus: Bhadrasrenya

conquered V?r?nas? (Benares), and Divod?sa I (son of

Bhimaratha, probably Hatrujit) recovered it from his

sons. Then followed along period, during which the

vity V?r?nasi was abandoned and wras (it is said) occupied

by R?ksasas. During that time Bhadra?renya'ssuccessor

Durdama reconquered the Ka?i territory, and it seems to

have remained under the Haihayas. The six or seven

K?si successors fought unsuccessfully with the Haihayas,1

See passages cited in p. 38, n. 1.*

Bh?gar. ix, 17, 6 ; Brahma, 13, 66-7 ; Markant/. 20, 21. Since

Pratardana is called Rtadhvaja and Kuvalay?sva, Visnn, iv, 8 (whichcalls him Satrujit also; and so also Garnda, i, 130, 10), and Mdrkand.,

loc. cit. ; but the point is not clear, and the confusion is natural if the

explanation offered is sound. The Mdrkand. account is largely fable.;l

There is nothing at all improbable in this (see p. 15).*

Brahma, 13,11; llarir. 32, 1744.5MBh. loc. cit.




and Divod?sa II (son of Sudeva) built a newcapital in

the extreme east of theterritory

at thejunction

of the

Ganges and Goinati. His successor Pratardana (Utadhvaja,

Kuvalay?sva) defeated the Vitahavya king and finally

recovered the kingdom ; he also conquered the R?ksasas

and regained the capital Vfu?nas?.

Divodasa I would therefore be just posterior to

Bhadrasrenya, and some further particulars will enable

us to fix the position of Pratardana in connexion withthe kings of Vidarbha and with Sagara.

Sa gara had two wives. Their names are given by

the authorities, though not quite in agreement; still, all

which give the parentage agree that one of them was

Vaidarbhi, or adaughter of Vidarbha,1 who must be

Vidarbha, son of Jy?magha of the Y?dava race. He was

therefore just prior to Sagara. In support of this it

may be noted further that Vidarbha's descendants reigned

in Vidarbha and Cedi,2 and that Bh?ma, king of Vidarbha,

and Virab?hus son Sub?hu, king of Cedi, were con

temporaries of Sagara's tenth successor, lltuparna,in

the story of Nala.3 That Bhima is no doubt Vidarbha's

tenth successor Bhimaratha in the genealogy, and shouldbe equated with lituparnas father. Hence also Vidarbha's

sixth successor Dasarha would be placed just after

Bhagiratha.

Alarka, king of K?si, appears to have been Pratardana's

grandson,4 and is said to have enjoyed very long life

through Lopfunudias favour/* She was daughter of

1MBh. iii, 100, 8833, 8843 7 ; Brahma, $, (?3 72 ; Pad ma, v, .S\ 144-7 ;

l\iyi/, ii, ?W, 154-8; Visyu, iv, ^; llariv. 15. 797.*

Jr/w, :-'?^, 17-20; Bh?gav. ix, ^, 14; Ga?ida, i, 7J.9, 29-32;

/. >'?*.</?. . o\?, 38-43; Malaya, 44, 35 41 ; Padma, v, /,?, 19-24; lay",

ii, ,?,?\ 30-41.3

jr/i?. iii, 6\?, 2570 ; 67, 2034-5 ; 6.9, 2705-8 ;Wf 2700 ; 73, 2852.4

The authorities are not all clear about the exact relationship.*

Brahma. 11, 53; 13. 74.Vdyu,

ii, 30, 08. //arir. 5P, 1590;

32, 1794.




a Vidarbha king and married Agastya.1 The kings nann

isgiven

as Niini.2 No Nimi is mentioned in the Vidarbha

genealogy, but the names after Vidarbha are not quite

clear, and he would seem to have been one of Vidarbha's

near successors, because after Das?rha the princesseswere

called D?sYirh?. Lop?mudr? may presumably be equated

with Kunti, king of Vidarbha/* and Alarka with Dhrsti.

Pratardana therefore would synchronize with Sagara, and

he and Sagara, as already mentioned, broke the power of

the T?lajangha-Hai hayas, and Sagara completed their

overthrow.

Something may be done towards fixing the position of

the eakravartin Marutta, son of Aviksit of Distas line.

and his descendant Trnavindu. It is said that Aviksit or

his father Karandhama lived at the beginning of the Treta

Age,4 and that Trnavindu lived "at the third mouth of tin*

Treta age "/ that is, apparently at the beginning of the

third quarter of that age. It is not clear at what stage in

the genealogies that age is supposed to have; begun. It is

said that R?ma J?madagnya lived in the Treta age, and

that R?ma D?sarathi lived in the interval l>etwccri the

Treta and Dv?para ages.0 The further statement thatVi?vamitra lived in that same interval7 is inconsistent

with these two, and perhapswe should read "in the

interval between the Krta and Treta ages". Such an

arrangement of the ages makes a fair division of tin*

genealogies, and without meriting any trust whatever it

1

MBh. iii, 06, 86G1-07, 8576; ?v, 21, 654-5; v, 116, ?071. Rig-Vi, /7/>.

2MBh. xiii, //?7, 0255. Confused with Nimi, first king of Videha.

ibid., .'-J^, 8000, who is genealogically ages apart ; and Vide.ha is an eas\

mistake for Vidarhha.:t

The synchronism of this A gasty u with kings Srutarvan, Bradhna-n i,

and Paurukutsa Trasadasyu (MBh. iii, OS, 8595 008) appears to he

a brahmanical addition.*

MBh. xiv, 4, 80; V?yn, ii, 24, 7.8

Tret?-yuga-mukho trt?ye, V?yn, ii, 24, 15.

" J//JA. xii, .rj/, 12?148-?. 7 MBh. xii, /,$/, 5331.




may serve as apossible working hypothesis. Marutta

then might be placed conjecturally in about the same age

as R?ma J?madagnya,1 and Trnavindu soon after Ambarisa

of the Solar line.

In the Lunar race Matinara's position has been fixed

(p. 31). We may next consider the position of Dusyanta2

and his son Bharata.

Dusyanta

married Visvfunitra's

daughterSakuntal?, as

is well known. If that Vi?viimitra be the first and great

Yi?vfunitra, Dusyanta must be placed alongside Hariscandra

or Rohita, and his son Bharata immediately afterwards ;but

there are arguments against that. There is no indication

that Bharata's successors were overthrown by the Haihayas,

asthey must have been in that case. Bharata had three

wives, Vaidarbhis,* and Vidarbha's position, as shown, waslater. Bharata's second successor, Bhfunanyu, married

adaughter (or descendant) of Da??rba,4 who was much

later. These three considerations settle the question, and

indeed the first statement is not necessarily in conflict

with them, because such names as Visv?mitra do not

always refer to the original rishis, but also denoted

their descendants, and producedsome confusion in the

personalities (see p. 15). The reasonable inferences there

fore are that Bhfunanyu married Da?arhas daughter,1

In Marutta's time lived two rishis, ?rhaspati and his younger brother

Sariivarta, who were rivals. The former declined to be Marutta's priest,so Marutta engaged Sariivarta. MBh. xii, 29, 910-13 ; xiv, 5, 95-.V, 218 ;

corroborated by vii, 55, 2170-1. Bh?gav. ix, 2, 27. V?yu, ii, 24, 9-11.

Aitar. Brdh. viii, 4, 21. ?ailgurunisya, on Rig-V. vi, 52, makes thesetwo risliis younger brothers of Ucathya (see p. 44) ; there may have been

some relation between these two rishis and the other two, Ucathya and

Hi Imsjmt i. who seem to have been later.-

Or Duhsanti, as he is sometimes called, e.g. Satap. Brdh. XIII,

v, 4, 11.:!

MBh. \, 94, 3710-11 ; Agni, 277, 34 ; Bh?gav. ix, 20, 34 ; V?yu, ?i,

37. 133. The Brahma- (13, 58), Vipm (iv, 7.9), and llariv. (32, 1727>

support. The single wife in MBh. i, 95, 3785, wasprobably wife of

Yit-atha,who is omitted there.

4MBh. i, 95. 3780. His fourth successor, Vikunthana, also married

a later D?s?rh? princes?, ibid., 3789.



ANCIENT INDIAN GENEALOGIES AND CHRONOLOGY 4.**

that Bharata must be placed three or four generations

after Vidarbha, and that Sakuntal?s father was a near

descendant of the great Visv?mitra.1 Bh?manyu must

then be placedsoon after Daa?rha and contemporary with

N?bh?ga of the Solar line, Bharata with Dilipa I, and

Dusyanta with Aih?innat.

This conclusion leaves an immense gap between Matinura

and Dusyanta, in which only two or three names occur,

but there are considerations which corroborate it, surprising

though it be at first sight.

The lists show little agreementas to the relation between

those two kings, and some of them leave it indefinite. It

is obvious that the genealogistswere

puzzled, and each

authority has taken its own method of bridgingover the

gap. A long period of confusion is what all the informationindicates, if it be noted that Pfiru had his kingdom

in the middle of Madhyadesa, and that that region has

been the battle-ground of contendingraces at all times.

Matinara's kingdom would have been conquered by the

cakravartin ?a?avindu from the south-west, and have then

undergonea

long eclipse under a scries of cakravartins,

M?ndh?tr of Ayodhy?, Sivi son of Usinara in the north

west, Arjuna K?rtavirya of M?hismati, Marutta son of

Aviksit of Distas line, the Haihaya dominion (with the

inroads of the hordes from the north-west), and, lastly,

Sagara of Ayodhy?. Dusyanta,as a

youth in Sagara's time,

might well have deemed his right to the Paurava kingdom

hopeless;

consequently

we

may

well believe another

statement that Marutta, son of Karandhama, in the lineageof Yay?ti's son Turvasu,2 had no son and adopted Dusyantathe Paurava, and that afterwards Dusyanta, desiring his

ownkingdom, reverted to his own race.3 He would have

1Even so she was still of ksatriya origin.

2Not given in the Table, because it is too brief, and is said to have

merged into the Paurava lino by this adoption.

3 Agni, 270, 2; Bhdgav. ix, 23, 17-18; Brahma, 13, 143-6; Matnya,

4S, 2-3 ; Vdyn, ii, 37, 2-4 ; Visnv, iv, 10 ; 1/ariv. 32, 1831-4.



44 ANCIENT INDIAN GENEALOGIES AND CUllOXOLOGV

had that opportunityon

Sagara's death, and so would be

contemporary with Ariisumat, for the authorities say that

Asamafijas did not succeed his father Sagara. To recover

his kingdom he had the help of his adoptive father s realm.

Dusyanta thus became in a very real sense what he is

called, namely, the varh&i-kara of the Pauravas,1 and

united the sovereignty of two kingdoms.

The story of Bharata opens out other connexions. There

wore two rishis of Angiras' race, Ucatlrya and his younger

brother Brhaspati. Ucathya's wife was Maniata, and their

son wasDirghatamas, who was born blind. Bharadv?ja

wasBrhaspati's son, begotten by him (it is said) of

the same Maniata.2 Dirghatamas, after he had grown

up, was set adrift in the Ganges/andwas carried down to

Bali's3

kingdom

in the east. There he was rescued and

begot of the queen, at Bali's desire, Aiiga and four other

sons.4 That there was such a blind rishi Dirghatamas,

who was son of Ucathya and Maniata, and was rescued

from perishing in the rivers, is clear from the Rig-Veda?

Bharadv?ja's personality is not quiteso clear, because on

the one hand Bharadv?ja, the eldest son of Brhaspati, is

made contemporary with Divod?sa II of K?ai,G and on the

other hand he is brought into connexion with Bharata at

1MBh. i, C8, '2801.

-He is called Dry?mnsy?yatia, Bh?gar. ix, 20, 38-0; Matsya, 40, 33 ;

V?yn. ii, 37, 153.:!

lie must bo distinguished from Bali, son of Virocann, the Daitya.:The story is told in various ways, and Ucatliya's

name is given as

Utathya. U?ija, Anija, and Asija.

'

M Bh. \. 104, 4170-221 ; ii, 20, 802;

xii, 3?3, 13177-84. Bh?gar. ix, 20, 30-0 ; 23, 4-5. Matsya, 48, 24-84 ;

40. 17 20. V?yn, ii, 37, 37-02, 137-411. Visit?% iv, 10. llarir. 31,

HiSO-03. Sadgurusisyaon Rig-V. vi, 52, and i. 110. Brhaddevaf?, iv,

11-15, 21-5. Cf. p. 42. 11. 1. Dirghatamas is said to have gained his

sight in later life {MBh. xii ;Matsya ; V?yn, ii, 37, loc. cit.). If a natural

explanation may be suggested, it is that he was not totallj' blind, but

purblind, orextremely short-sighted, when young, and that his sight

improved in old age, as often happens in such cases.5

i, 147, 3 ; 158, 3-6 ; iv, 4, 13 ; and perhaps, i, 152, 6.45MBh. xiii, 30, ]0(12-3; see also Sarr?nnkraman?, introduction to

Rig-V. vi, for his patronymic.



ANCIENT INDIAN <?ENEALOUIESAND CHRONOLOGY 45

the close of Bharata s life. Thus some accounts say that

Bharata lost all his sons, and Bharadv?ja was then broughtto him and became his son as

King Vitathal

; and other

accounts say Bharadv?ja sacrificed for Bharata, and then

a son Vitatha was born from Bharadv?ja.2 The latter

version is preferable, because (I) some of the former

authorities corroborate it, and discredit their own story

by adding that Bharata died when Vitatha was born:i

:

and (2) Dirghatamas inaugurated Bharata with the

iMihabhUeka* so that Bharadv?ja could not have been

a child at the end of Bharata's life.5 It is credible that

Dirghatamas and Bharadv?jawere brothers or cousins,J:

and if weaccept the above equation of -Bharadv?ja and

Divod?sa II, the inference would be that both those rishis

wereyounger contemporaries

of Divod?saII,

thatDirgha

tamas, who lived to a great age;,7 inaugurated Bharata,

1Agu?, 277, 7-8; Bh?gav. ix, ??, 34-9; MaUyn, p, 14-15, 27-32;

V?yu, ii, .77, 147-53; Visnu, iv, i.O. Sadgurusisyaon Rig-V. vi, */,

says Suhotra, etc., were Bharadv?ja's sous, but according to the

?genealogies they were his great-great-grandsons.-

Brahma, 13, 58 (Ml ; liariv. 32, 1720-31; MBh. i, 94, 3710-13,

which calls the souBhumanyu.

:lMatsya, j9, 34 ; V?yu, ii. 37, 154. The accounts and other state

ments leave no doubt that brahman paternitywas introduced at this

|>eriod. In fact, it is stated that Bharadv?ja's descendants comprised

both brahman* and ksatriyas, Matsya, 49, 33. Similar cases occurred :

thus a Vasistha begot King Asmaka of Kalm?saiM?da's queen in the

Solar dynasty. MBh. i, l.i.i, 4730-7 ; 177, (?787-01 ; Bh?gav. ix, .'/,

18, 38-9; K?rma, i, 21, 12 13; Lihga, i, 00, 27 8; V?yu, ii.

20, 17?.4

Aitar. Brdh. viii, 4, 23 ; and was his priest, Bh?gav. ix, 20, 25.

s The confusion of Bharadv?ja and Vitatha no doubt arose because

liliaiadvfija was called Vitluthin, Brhaddiv. v, 102 3.fl

The accounts aresupported to some extent by the Rig- V. because

Vaidathina (that is, Bluirailva jus sou or moreprobably descendant),

lijisvan (Rig-V. iv, 10, 13; and compare vi, 50, 15 und 51, 12 with the

Sarvduukramani, which attributes these hymns to Kji.svaii) is even

called Ausija (x, 99, \\), which was the metronymic of Kaksivat, son

of Dirghatamas (i, 13, 1 ; Sananukrumaul on i, 110). Kaks?vat i?.

mentioned in the ?wissages cited from MBh. i, Mat*ya, and V?yu in

p. 44, ii. 4.7Rig- V. i, 15S, ii.



4(? ANCIENT INDIAN GENEALOGIES AND CHRONOLOGY

and that that Bharadv?ja,1or his son, begot Vitatha at the

end of Bharata's life.

The position of Ajamidha of the Lunar race, from whom

sprang both the North and South Panc?la djniasties, is

important. I have not found any data to fix it directly,

but something is possible indirectly. If, using the more

complete Solar line as ameasuring scale, we reckon the

generationson from Bharata, Ajamidha should fall at or soon

after Rtuparna's time ; and if we continue the reckoningdown the North Panc?la line, Srftjaya should fall about

the time of Dasaratha and R?ma, and here we do reach

synchronisms which confirm the reckoning. There are

synchronisms between several lines at this stage.

With Dasaratha werecontemporary S?radhvaja Janaka

of Videha (the father of Sit?), Lomap?da of A?ga,2 and

Pramati, king of Vaisali.3

There is astory connecting Rama and his brother

iSatrughna with the Y?dava dynasty,4 and it is sostrange

at first sightas hardljr to merit attention, but other

allusions support incidents in it, and it explains certain

important territorial facts. Madhu, called king of the

D?navas in it, was clearly a descendant of Yay?tis sonYadu,r> and is obviously the Madhu in the Y?dava list.

According to the story, Madhu's kingdom, that )is, the

Y?dava territory, stretched from Gujarat to the forest

Madhuvana on the Yamuna ; his fourth descendant was

Sattvata, and Sattvata's son Bhima was reigning at the

same time as Rama ; Oatrughnakilled the local prince

La vana, felled the forest, and built Mathur? (the modern

Muttra) on its site ; after Rama's death Bhima recovered

1 **Bharndv?ja" was the longest-lived rishi, Aitar. Aran. I, ii, 2, 8.

2 MBh. iii, 110, 10008-0; R?m?y. i, 11, 13-20; Bh?gav. ix, 23, 7-10.n

R?m?y. i, ^7, 17, which calls him Sumati ; compared with the other

authorities for Dista's line, p. 25.4Hariv. 94, 5142 -95, 5257; and 55, 3060-3104. The Rdnuiy. tells

asimilar story (Uttara-k. 64, 68-70,108),

butamplifies

and brahmanizes it.

5llarir. 04, 5164 (see p. 19, n. 6).




the city and dwelt there, and his son Andhaka reigned

there when Rama's son Kusa wasreigning

in Kosala.

Now some of the Pur?nas also assert that Satrughna killed

the M?dhava Lavana, took Madhu vana, and established

Mathur? there, and they add that his sons Sub?hu and

Surasena guarded the city.1 Further, the story explains,

first, how the country, of which Mathur? was the

capital,was called Sfirascna, for both Sfnasenas nume

and also the name of the city Mathur? remained, though

the Y?davas recovered the .sovereigntysoon afterwards :

and, secondly, how it was that Kaihsa, a Y?dava and

descendant of Andhaka, reigned there in the P?ndavas'

time?a collocation of facts of which there is no other

explanation. The story appears, therefore, to contain

historical truth.

That king Bhima is not named in the genealogies, but

as son of Sattvata (Satvat) appears as S?tvata in them.

They and the storyconcur in making Andhaka grandson

of Satvat, and fairly agree in placing him six oreight

steps below Madhu. We may therefore equate the Y?dava

Satvat with Dasaratha, S?tvata with Rama, and Andhaka

with Kusa ; and Madhu then would be placed about equalwith Sataratha in the Solar line.

Further, another son of S?tvata, named Bhajant?na,

married one or two daughters of Srfijaya,2 who cannot well

be any other than the king of North Panc?la. Srfijayawas thus a

contemporary of S?tvata, and therefore of

Rama, and this confirms his positionas calculated above,

and consequently Ajamidha must be placed with, or just

after, lltuparna. In agreement with this is the statement

that King ttatadyumna (probably king No. 00 of Vidcha)

1Bh?gav. ix, //, 13 14 ; V?yu, ii, 20, 184-5; Visuu, iv, 4. The

Ganufa (i, 13S, 38) names the sons.-

Brahma, 15, 32 ; Linga, i, 09, 3 ; Malaya, 44, 49-50 ; Padma, v, /./,

33 ; V?yu, ii, 34, 3 ; 7/briV. 33, 2201 ; perhaps K?rma, i, &0, 37. The

Kaya (ibid. 4)adds that

BhajamFina'sson married two

daughters (granddaughters) of Sr?jaya, who were his cousins.




gave wealth to Mudgalaor (more probably) Maudgalya,1

thatis,

one of theMaudgalya

brahmansdescended from

Mudgala the Panc?la.2Sr?jaya's position

serves to fix

those of Divod?sa and Sud?sa (Sudas), who are so often

mentioned in the Rig-Veda?

Srfijaya placesus in the middle of the

"Pafic?las ".

Tliis namebegan,

as all the authorities say, with the

jocular boast of aking, whose name is given variously

as

Klmrniva, Bharmy?sva, B?hy?sva, etc., but was really

nhrinyasva. He had five sons, Mudgala, etc., and said,'My five (panca)

sons are sufficient (olam) for protecting

five kingdoms."4 The accounts imply that the words

?tunca + alam caught the fancy, and the new name

Panc?la gradually debased and superseded the name Krivi,

which was the old name of the

people

or

country.6

These

Pafic?las flourished till Somaka and his son Jantu, then

(the accounts sajr) there were great reverses and the

dynasty fell into insignificance (that is, there is a gap) till

Prsata's time,0 and that wras caused by the rise again of the

Lunar dynasty under Kuru, as will be explained.

The positions of Rksa 1, Saiiivarana, and Kuru may be

1 M?h. xii. 234, 800(1 ? xiii, 137, &2ft?.-

See passages cited for the genealogy, p. 21, n. 2.3

See p. 21, n. 3.4

Agni, 277. 19-20 ; Bh?gav. ix, 21, 31-4 ; 22, 3 ; Brahma, 13, 94-0 ;

Matsya, 50, 2 4 ; V?yu, ?i, 37, 190-3 ; Visnu, iv, 19 ; I/ariv. 32, 1778-80 ;

Sudgurusisyaon Rig-V. x, 102. Very mnny derivations or explanations

of minies in the literature are fanciful, but this explanation is such as may

I*? genuine, for the name Pa?c?la certainly superseded Krivi.5

Big-V. ii, 22, 2; ?atap. Brdh. XIII, v, 4, 7. It is implied in the

latter passage that both names were current for a time, Panc?la beinglbe ksatriya name and Krivi the vulgar one. In the Epics and Pur?nas,

tberefore, Panc?la is always used, and 1 have not met with Krivi there.

On the identity of Krivi and Pa?c?la, seeOldenberg, Buddha, 1st

l?erman ed., 409; Zimmer, Alt indische? Leben, 102 seq.,;

In the last part of this gap may be placed Dustaritii Pauiiis?yana,

king of the Sriijavas, because he was contemporary with Balhika Pr?tipiya,

the Kauravya king (Satap. Brdh. XII, ix, 3, 1-13), that is, the Kaurava

Vfihl?ka, son of Pratipa and brother of S?ntanu, who is often mentioned

in the MBh. (e.g. v, 14S, 5053-5; vii, 157, G931-4). See JRAS., 1908,

p. 320.




fixed approximately. Sariivarana was driven out of his

kingdom bythe

Pafic?las,and took

refugein a fastness

near the River Sindhu many years ; at length Vasistha

(that is, one of the Vasistha family)came to him and

became his priest, and encouraged by his aid Samvarana

recovered his kingdom.1 As the Pafic?las began with

Mudgala, the dispossessionwas

posterior to Mudgala, and

it seems, further, that event could not have taken place

before Divod?sa's time, because Indrota Atithigva (Divo

d?sa's sonpresumably)

wasapparently

onfriendly terms

with Rksa's son.2 Thus Rksa would be contemporary

with Divod?sa.

The dispossession would seem to have been effected bj*

Sudosa (Sudas). A hymn in the Rig-Veda shows he had

wars and extended his

territory.3

His

great

battle with

the ten kings4was

probably connected in some way with

the dispossession. It wrasfought

near the Parusni (the

modern Ravi),5 and he could not have got there from North

Panc?la without passingover the Lunar kingdom, and as

the Bharatas (that is, the Lunar dynasty0)wen;

against

him, he had presumably conquered it. His conquests

evidently stirred up the tribes to the west against him,

namely, the Y?dva (the Y?dava king of Mathur?, see p. 47),

the Sivas (Sivis) who were ?navas (see pp. 24,31), Druhyus

(G?ndh?ras, who were descended from Druhyu7), Matsyas

(to the west of Mathur?), Tur varia (souk; tribal king

1MBh. i, 94, 3727-37.

aRig-V. viii, OS [57], 15 17.

:???I?7-K. vii, SO, 2.

4Rig-V. vii, 18 ; 7?, 3, 0, 8.?

Rig-V. vii, 7?, 8 9. If wemight identify Srutarvan ?rksa with

Samvaraiia ?rksa, Rig-V. viii, 74 might have been comfmsed on the

Parusn? during the exile. That river was among the Madras orKaikeyas,

who were descended from Anu (see pp. 31-2), hence Agni there might well

be called ?nava (ibid. 4).0MBh. i. 95, 3785 ; or Blulratas, MBh. i, 94, 3709 ; Brahma, 13, 57 ;

Matsya, ^.9, 11. Sumvurana is called Bharata, MBh. i, 94, 3731.7

Agni, 276, 4 ;Bh?gav' ix, S3, 14-15 ; Brahma, 13, 146-51 ; Ga?ida,

i, 139,64 ;

Matsya, 48,6-7 ;

V?yu, ii,37, 7-9 ;

Vismi, iv,17 ; //?rii\

32, 1837-40.

JRAS. 1910. 4




descended from Turvasa, that is, Turvasu ; probablyon his

north-west), and other small clans. Further,

"

old Kavasa

"

was drowned at the battle.1 Now a rishi named Tura

inaugurated Janamejaya P?riksita (that is, Saihvarana's

great-grandson) with the mahdbhiseka, and his father wTas

Kavasa, who might well have been contemporary with

Samvarana.2 There need be no hesitation in identifyingthese two Ka vasas, for "old Kavasa" was on the side

opposed to Sud?s, that is, on Saihvarana's side, and

Kavasa s soninaugurated

Saiii varar?asgreat-grandson.

The dispossession would appear to have lasted through

Sahadeva's reign*

into Somaka's, for Soniaka performed

sacrifices on the Yamun?,4 and he could not have done that

unless his territory extended there. Saihvarana would

seem to haverecovered

hiskingdom

inthe early part

of Somaka's reign, for several reasons. First, this Panc?la

dynasty suffered serious reversesduring Somaka's and his

son Jantu's time (see p. 48). Secondly, all the hymns in

Sudas' praiseare

by Vasistha, that is, one of the Vasistha

family.5 There is only one cin praise of Somaka when he

was a young prince, and this fact deserves to be compared

with the statement (p. 49) that Vasistha went to

Saihvarana and helped him to regain his kingdom. It

would seem that some strong reason must have moved

Vasistha to forsake Soniaka and espouse Saihvarana's

cause. His behaviour suggests vengeance, and may be

ascribed to the statement that his sons were killed by

Sudas' descendants.7 Thirdly, this last inference helps to

1Rig-V. vii. 1S, 12.

-Aitar. Brdh. ii, 3, 19: vii, 5, 34 ; viii, 4,21.

:lHis race and kingdom were prosperous (Nafap. Brdh. II, iv, 4> 4-5).

4MRh. iii, 7J.7, 10421 2.

''He also inaugurated Sud?s (/bVrrr. /?n?A. viii, ?, 21).

,JA*/i/-T. iv, 15 :where Somaka is mentioned jus knmdrah. S?luidevyah

(verses 7 10), "the youth, the son of Sahadeva."7

Brhaddevatd, vi, 28 (which obviously refers to this Vasistha). The

word is Sand?saih, which means the sons or grandsons of Sud?s, and

thus undoubtedly includes Somaka. See other passages cited in Muir's




explain the story that Soniaka sacrificed his Krst son

.Iantu in order to obtain more sons,1 for the rtvij who

performed such a barbarous magical rite could not have

been Vasistha, nor had hisapproval.2

For all these reasons Saihvarana may be placed alongsideSudosa or Sahadeva, and Kuru beside Soniaka or Jantu.

Kuru had a numerous progeny. He gave his name

to Kuruksetra and pushed his rule beyond Pray?ga

(Allahabad),3 which implies he overcame Panc?la. His

waxing meant the waning of the Pafic?las.

These conclusions leave a considerable gap between

Ajamidha and Rksa, and between Rksa and Saihvarana.

That there was along combined gap is implied by some of

the authorities, for theyeven go so far as to say that

Ajamidhawas reborn as Soniaka and

begot Rksa,4 thusvirtually placing Rksa after Soniaka, and

implying that

the rise of the Kauravas and the decline; of the North

Pafic?las were connected. The gap from Ajamidha to

Saihvarana marks the eclipse of the Lunar dynasty duringthe dominance of North Panc?la, just as the gap from

Jantu to Prsata marks the reverse/'

Vasu Caidyoparicara founded new Cedi and Magadha

dynasties (see p. 22). He was fifth in descent from Kuru

according to the genealogies, and was later therefore than

Janamejaya II P?riksita. He may be placed three or four

Sanskrit Texts, i, 114, etc., where, however, this Sud?sa is classed with

a different and earlier king Sud?sa, No. 53 of the Solar line in the Table.

See also n. 2 below.

1MBh. iii, 127, 10486- 1SS, 10495 ; Mat?ya, 50, 10 ; V?yu, ii, 37, 204.2

It may have been this rtvij who culled this Vasistha a Y?tudh?na

(Rig-V. vii, 10/f, 15), and so moved him to compose that hymn.?

Agni, 277, 26 ; Bfohjav. ix, 22, 4 ; Brahma, 13, 106-7 ;Malaya, 5o,20-2 ; V?yu, ii, 37, 209-12 ; Visnn, iv, 19 ; //art*-. 5.?, 1800-1.

4Matsya, 50, 15-19; V?yu, ii, .77, 203-9; 7/ariw. 32, 1792, 1795-9.

See Brahma, 13, 99 100.5

The Kurus and both branches of the Pa?c?las were of the same stock

(see p. 21). They are not particularly linked together in the MBh. or

Pur?nas, and the double compound found in the Br?hmanas, etc., refersto a later period?after the great battle.




steps lower. This agrees with the story that Yay?tis

chariot which had belonged to Pfiru and his descendants

passed from that Janamejaya to Vasu.1

Ayutan?yin of the Lunar dynasty married adaughter

of Prthu?ravas.2 He seems(though misplaced in the MBh.)

to be the same asAyut?yus, and Prthu?ravas may perhaps

be Prthu of the South Paftcala line.

In the

concluding portion

of the Lunar and Panc?la

dynasties and Dvimidha's line are a number of syn

chronisms. Krta of Dvimidha's line was adisciple and

therefore a younger contemporary of Hiranyan?bha, king

of Kosala.n Brahmadatta of South Panc?la and Pratipa of

the Lunar dynastywere

contemporaries.4 Ugr?yudha,

whose name follows Krta's, killed Janamejaya Durbuddhi

and all the Nipa princes of South Panc?la,6 and alsoPrsata's father or

grandfather, Nipaor Nila, of North

Panc?la0; and Bhisma killed him after Santanu's death.7

Hence Ugr?yudhawas a younger contemporary of

Janamejaya and Santanu, and an earlier contemporary of

Bhisma. These synchronisms bring out some interesting

points. Ugr?yudha is called son of Krta, but it is plain

there is a gap of four or five steps between them.

Again, Pratipa's position contemporary with Brahmadatta,

and Santanu's position contemporary with Brahmadatta's

third successor, show there must be a small gap of one or

two steps between Pratipa and Santanu. No such gap is

1

Brahma, 12, 6-16; Vdyu. ii, 31, 18-27; Ilariv. 30, 1605-16. Thedescent of Santanu's queen, Satyavati, from Vasu is a mere fable, chrono

logically impossible.-

MBh. \, 95, 3774.1

Bh?gav. ix, 12, 3 4; 21, 28-9; Matsya, 49, 75-6; V?yu, ii, 20,

205-6 ; 37. 185-6 ; Ft>?m, iv, 4 and 7.9 ; /farm 20, 1080-1.

4 //rmV. 26>, 1047-8.5

Matsya, 49, 59 ; Kaym, ii, ,77, 177 ; Visnu, iv, 19 ; Ilarir. 20, 1071-2.,5Matsya, ?9, 77-8 ; Payi/, ii, 37, 186-7 ; Pwmi, iv, 7.9 ; Ilariv. SO,

1083, 1086.

7MBh. xii, 27, 808 /fori?. #>, 1073, 1085-1110. Santanu is generally

failed S?ntanu in the MBh. and Puranas.




hinted at anywhere in the MBh. or Paraiiax, yet it is

proved by the Rig-Veda, for all accounts agree that

Dev?piwas Santanu's eldest brother,1 and Dev?pi calls

himself Arstisena.2 Clearly, therefore, Rstisena must Vie

inserted.

The other contemporaries at the end are too well known

to need notice. Theyare discussed in my paper on

"The

Nations of India at the Battle between the Panda vas and

K aura vas ".:*

I have now dealt with all the material synchronismsthat I have been able to discover, and it will be seen that

they do not all come from one kind of authority,or even

from onepossible source, but have been collected out of all

kinds of books, from the Rig-Veda to the Rvughuvariiio.

and from various accounts and stories. Many of thenarratives noticed have so little in common that the pointsof agreement which they show in these details are

unquestionably undesigned coincidences. As a corrolxna

tion of these results it may be pointed out that the

positions of the cakravartins (see p. 30) in the Table turn

out to be such that they do not clash with one another.

Other allusions occur but have not been noticed (so as not

to encumber this article), because they are not clear enoughto be of any value, or

merely corroborate these conclusions,

or are stray and unsupported,or

belong to brahmanical

stories, which (as already explained, p. 13) cannot be

accepted without corroboration, even if theyare not

deemed pious fabrications.4 It may seem that the groundsfor the synchronisms are not conclusive. I may admit

1Nirnkla, ii, 10 ; Brhadd. vii, 156.

2Rig-V. x, 9S, 5, 6, 8.

sJRAS. 1908, p. 309.

4e.g. the account of the transmission of knowledge about soimi

(hinking from oneking to another in Aitar. Brdh. vii, 5, 34, is chrono

logically erroneous.Similarly the story of the descent of the sword in

MBh. xii, 100, 6192-6201 is hopelessly confused. The brahmans who

composed the theological and didactic literature knew little about

ancient ksatriya history, and no wonder, when all knowledge rested on

memory alone.




this, and add that conclusive proof for such ancient times

is generally impossible; indeed, certain inconsistent passageshave been referred to in the notes. All that is possible is

to collate the data regardinga

synchronism, and draw the

conclusions which satisfy them, or the greater number of

them. Each set of data must be dealt with by itself in

the tirst. instance, yet, as the genealogiesare not isolated

but have many points of connexion, the conclusion

regarding one synchronism must be tested and should

harmonize with those regarding others. The data may

be viewed in ways different from that in which they

have been nowpresented, and different inferences drawn ;

and, in fact, many such inferences were formed and

rejected, because further consideration showed that they

didnot

agreewith other conditions which were related

to them. The synchronisms must be considered both

singly and collectively, and if according to the conclusions

nowput forward all the genealogies tit in together and

corroborate one another, the resulting harmony supplies

cogent cumulative evidence in favour of the scheme pre

sented, both a? regards particulars and also generally.

Nearly all the genealogical lists terminate with the

great battle between the P?ndavas and Kauravas. Some

mention a few generationsmore in certain cases, or

give

lists of the kings who should reign in certain dynasties

after that event. But in all o-enealogical matters the

great battle constitutes a notable terminas ad quern, as

if aperiod of considerable prosperity, knowledge, and

refinement was succeeded by one of disorganization and

darkness. Whatever the cause may have been, that

event was an undoubted epoch, and may be taken as an

era, so that in dealing with these genealogies chrono

logicallywe may reckon backwards ante bellum.

The question suggests itself, what may be the chrono

logical import of these genealogies ? In formingan

estimate of time the average which may be taken for




the duration of reigns in India depends partlyon the

length of the dynasty. It may be twenty years (or even

more) in short dynasties, but toadopt

a lower average

would be prudent when the list of kings is very long,

because their length neutralizes special conditions that

may affect shortperiods.1 Hence fifteen years per reign

would be a safer estimate. It must be noted that any

such average ?applied to these lists means a smaller

average in reality, because we must allow for the fact

that the lists, and even the long Solar list, are not

exhaustive (see p. 7), and that the number of kings

should be increased somewhat to compensate for omissions.

If it besupposed there is only

one omission to every

sevenkings named in the lists (which is surely

a mod?r?t?

supposition),an 1 the

averagebe

adjusted accordingly,an

average of fifteen years becomes one of about thirteen

years. This appears to be a reasonable ratio, because

fifty-five early kings of Ceylon reigned altogether GO I

years, that is, with an average of eleven years2 ; but

that average is unduly lowered by the fact that the

number of insignificant kings is almost one in every

three. If that average be adopted for the present

purpose it would be proper to increase the number of

kings in the sameproportion. Taking then the lists

asthey stand, fifteen years per reign

seems a reasonable

and even moderate estimate. The only list which spansthe entire period is the Solar list, and that contains

ninety-three names from Iksv?ku to the great battle.

The entire duration then would lie not less than 1400

years. M?ndh?tr would be placed about eleven centuries

before that battle ; Sagara, Bharata, and Bhagiratha in

the eighth century ; Rama Dasarathi in the middle of

the fifth century ; and the Panc?la kings, Divod?sa to

1I have to thank Dr. Fleet and Dr. Hoernle for advice on thi.?

matter.2Dr. Fleet's list, Nos. 7 54, .IRAS., 1909, p. 350.




Somaka, during the fifth and fourth centuries before that

battle.

Duncker in his History of Antiquity (vol. iv, pp. 74-7)

gives four calculations for thebeginning of the Kali age,

that is, approximately for the date of the great battle, viz.,

1300, 1175, 1200, and 1418 u.c.They

areprobably

excessive, because his calculation amounts to the rate of

twenty-fiveyears per

reign.

If his calculations be

revised, allowing fifteen years per reign, and the average

date be taken, it becomes about 1100 B.c. It is no partof this paper to fix that date, but if we assume that

the battle occurred about 1000 B.c., ?yus, Nahusa, and

Yaya ti, who are alluded to in the Rig-Veda, would be

placed not later than some twenty-three centuries B.c.

The Aryan immigration would be earlier still. Thecivilization of Babylonia and Egypt goes back to

.1000 B.c., or earlier. Is it likely that India, which

was in no way inferior to those countries ingeographical

and climatic conditions, was a land of no account till

several thousands of years later ?

Documents

Ancient Indian Genealogies and Chronology