Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Ancient Indian Historical Tradition c14: Chapter IX. The Aila or Lunar Race

Ancient Indian Historical Tradition c14

Language
English

Contents

Chapter IX. The Aila or Lunar Race

c14.2

This stock gave rise, as mentioned in chapter VII, to two side branches, the Kānyakubja and Kāśi dynasties, and developed through Yayāti's five sons into five races. The genealogies of all these will now be considered in detail.

The Kānyakubja Dynasty

c14.s1.1

Two origins are alleged for the Kānyakubja dynasty. It was descended from Purūravas' son Amāvasu according to seven Puranas,¹ which give the first kings as Amāvasu, Bhīma, Kāñcanaprabha, Suhotra and Jahnu. The genealogy is also given by the Rāmāyaṇa, Agni and twice by the Mahābhārata.² The first Mahābhārata account and that in the Rāmāyaṇa leave the origin untouched, but the second account and the Agni derive Jahnu from the Paurava line, making him son of Ajamīḍha; and the Brahma and Harivaṃśa³ inconsistently give both versions. From Jahnu to Kuśa all the lists agree,⁴ there is variation as regards Kuśa's sons, and from Gādhi to Viśvāmitra and the end all agree generally.

c14.s1.2

¹ Bd iii, 66, 22-68, 75: Vā 91, 51-96, 103: Br 10, 13-60, 68: and Hv 27, 1413-31, 1457, 1473: which all agree. Viṣ iv, 7, 2-17, Gar i, 139, 2-7 and Bhāg ix, 15, 3 to 16, 36 (which calls Amāvasu Vijaya) concur with them.

c14.s1.3

² Rām i, 32, 1 to 34, 6. Ag 277, 16-18. MBh xii, 49, 1717-20, 1745; and xiii, 4, 201-5, 246 (with i, 94, 3722-3).

c14.s1.4

³ Second version, Br 13, 82-92; Hv 32, 1756-76.

c14.s1.5

⁴ Vedārth, introduction to Rigv iii, says Kuśika's father (Gāthin's grandfather) was Iṣīratha; this name does not occur in the genealogies. There is room for its insertion, see Table of genealogies, chap. XII.

c14.s1.6

The derivation from Ajamīḍha is certainly wrong. He was the seventh successor of Bharata. Viśvāmitra was the descendant of Jahnu by some eight steps, and must, if Jahnu was son of Ajamīḍha, have been some fifteen generations below Bharata; but it is well known that Bharata was son of king Duṣyanta and Śakuntalā⁵ who was daughter of Viśvāmitra;⁶ so that Viśvāmitra was an ancestor of Bharata. Viśvāmitra cannot have been both an ancestor and a descendant of Bharata. The story of Śakuntalā is one of the best alleged tales in ancient tradition, so that Viśvāmitra was certainly prior to Bharata and therefore to Ajamīḍha, and the versions which make his ancestor Jahnu son of Ajamīḍha are certainly wrong. Moreover it will be seen from the discussion of Jahnu, Viśvāmitra and their contemporaries in chapter XIII, that they belonged to the age of the early Aikṣvāku, Haihaya and Paurava kings, long anterior to Bharata and Ajamīḍha. The error appears also from the condition, that it makes this kingdom arise at the same time as N. and S. Pañcāla, though they comprised all its territory.

c14.s1.7

⁵ MBh i, 2, 371; 74, 2988, 3103-6; 95, 3782: vii, 68, 2387: xii, 29, 938: xiv, 3, 50: and Paurava genealogies.

c14.s1.8

⁶ MBh i, 72 (in fabulous form), 2945; 95, 3782.

c14.s1.9

The error probably arose out of Rigveda iii, 53, 12, which, referring to king Sudās, says ‘this prayer of Viśvāmitra safeguards the Bhārata folk’; and Aitareya Brāhmaṇa vii, 3, 5 and Śaṅkhāyana Śrauta Sūtra xv, 25, where Viśvāmitra is called Bharata-ṛṣabha, ‘leader of the Bharatas’. Sudās, or Sudāsa as he is called in the genealogy, was a king of the North Pañcāla dynasty, which was descended from Ajamīḍha and Bharata.¹ He and his dynasty were therefore Bharatas or Bhāratas, for the name Pañcāla (p. 75) had not come into approved use then.² One of Viśvāmitra’s descendants, called by his gotra name merely Viśvāmitra, was his priest, as the hymn shows, and therefore the religious guardian and leader of these Bharatas or Bhāratas. Afterwards misunderstanding began. That Viśvāmitra might, not inappropriately, be styled a Bharata-ṛṣabha, the term used in the Brāhmaṇa and Sūtra. These books however, through the brahmanical lack of the historical sense, confused him with his ancestor, the first Viśvāmitra, and applied this term to the first Viśvāmitra. It thus became wholly erroneous as mentioned above, and the Bharatas did not come into existence till after his time. Further, this term might be taken to imply that he was himself a Bhārata, and, as the brahmans were not learned in kṣatriya genealogies, or perhaps considered the above allusions as authoritative, it was so understood, with the result that Viśvāmitra was held to be a descendant of Bharata.³ Consequently it was necessary to introduce him and his well-known ancestor Jahnu into the Paurava genealogy somewhere after Bharata; and, as Ajamīḍha had three sons who ruled the separate kingdoms of Hastināpura and North and South Pañcāla, it was easy to assign Jahnu of the Kānyakubja kingdom¹ as another son to him, especially as Jahnu and Ajamīḍha had near ancestors named Suhotra. Connected with this mistake is the alteration which the Brahma and Harivaṃśa make in the ancestral name Paurorava (i.e. Paurūrava) applied rightly to Viśvāmitra in the Vāyu, namely, changing it to Paurava.²

c14.s1.10

¹ See Table of Royal Genealogies, chap. XII.

c14.s1.11

² JRAS, 1914, p. 284 : 1918, pp. 238-9.

c14.s1.12

³ So Sāyaṇa on Rigv iii, 53, 24.

c14.s1.13

¹ Oblivious of territorial confusion, as mentioned above.

c14.s1.14

² He was a descendant of Purūravas but not of Pūru, Vā 91, 102. Br 10, 63 and Hv 27, 1468; 32, 1773 wrongly; and Bḍ substitutes yogeśvara (iii, 66, 74).

Kāśi Dynasty

c14.s2.1

Two origins are alleged for the Kāśi (Benares) dynasty also. It was descended from Āyu's son Kṣatravṛddha according to seven Puranas,³ which give the first four kings as Kṣatravṛddha, Sunahotra (or Suhotra), Kāśa (or Kāśya) and Dīrghatapas. But the Brahma and Harivaṃśa give another account also, identifying Sunahotra or Suhotra with Suhotra of the Paurava line, whom they place as son of Vitatha (really son of Bṛhatkṣatra and great-grandson of Vitatha), and so, deriving this dynasty from Suhotra Paurava, give the early kings thus—Vitatha, Suhotra, Kāśika and Dīrghatapas. They thus inconsistently give both origins for the dynasty. The Agni follows this version, though confusedly and faultily.⁴ Both versions agree on the whole in their lists of the kings, except that the second has various omissions. The list is not a long one and reaches down only to king Bharga, but at what stage in the chronology he is to be placed is wholly uncertain. The kings in the Pāṇḍavas' time were Subāhu and Abhibhū.⁵

c14.s2.2

³ Bḍ iii, 67, 1-79. Vā 92, 1-75 (text corrupt). Br 11, 32-61. Hv 29, 1518-98. Viṣ iv, 8, 1-9. Gar i, 139, 8-14. Bhāg ix, 17, 2-10.

c14.s2.3

⁴ Br 13, 63-79. Hv 32, 1733-54. Ag 277, 9-14.

c14.s2.4

⁵ MBh ii, 29, 1080: and vii, 95, 3528; viii, 6, 173. Cf. v, 197, 7650.

c14.s2.5

The former version is clearly right and the latter is wrong, because Divodāsa and Pratardana of this dynasty, as will be seen from the discussion about the synchronisms in chapter XIII, were contemporaries of the Haihaya kings and lived anterior to Vitatha and Suhotra of the Paurava line. The origin of the error here is not so easily conjecturable as of that in the Kānyakubja genealogy, yet it appears to have arisen from confusing Kṣatravṛddha and his successor Sunahotra or Suhotra here with Bṛhatkṣatra and his successor Suhotra of the Paurava dynasty.

c14.s2.6

*The Haihayas.*

c14.s2.7

The genealogy of the Haihaya branch of the Yādavas is given by twelve Puranas.¹ They all agree generally, except that there are differences and some uncertainty in the account of Tālajaṅgha’s offspring, and there the best texts collated say this—Tālajaṅgha had many sons, called the Tālajaṅghas, of whom the eldest was king Vītihotra: the Haihayas comprised five families, the Vītihotras, Śāryātas,² Bhojas, Avantis and Tuṇḍikeras, who were all Tālajaṅghas:³ Vītihotra’s son was king Ananta, and his son was Durjaya Amitrakarśana. The Brahma and Harivaṃśa give, instead of the last two lines, six other lines,⁴ but these seem doubtful inasmuch as they assign to this branch persons and families who apparently belonged to the other branch.

c14.s2.8

¹ Bḍ iii, 69, 3-55. Vā 94, 3-54. Br 13, 154-207. Hv 33, 1844-98. Mat 43, 7-49. Pad v, 12, 110-49. Lg i, 68, 3-20. Kūr i, 22, 13-21; 23, 1-4, 45. Viṣ iv, 11, 3-7. Ag 274, 1-11. Gar i, 139, 19-24. Bhāg ix, 23, 21-30.

c14.s2.9

² So Mat, which appears to be right; all the other authorities corrupt the name. They were the remnant of the Śāryātas (*ante*). This appears to be the explanation of the incorrect statement in MBh xiii, 30, 1945-6, that Haihaya and Tālajaṅgha were descended from Śaryāti.

c14.s2.10

³ This seems to be the meaning, for the Vītihotras were certainly Tālajaṅghas.

c14.s2.11

⁴ Lg has five of them and Kūr three.

c14.s2.12

*The Yādavas.*

c14.s2.13

The genealogy of the other branch descended from Yadu’s son Kroṣṭu and known as the Yādavas proper may be conveniently noticed in two parts, the first from Kroṣṭu to Sātvata and the second the remainder.

c14.s2.14

The first part is given by twelve Puranas.⁵ They all agree generally, though with considerable variations in some of the names, down to Parāvṛt’s sons. Then they leave the further descent of the senior line from his eldest son, and follow the line of his younger son Jyāmagha, who (or whose son Vidarbha) carved out the kingdom of Vidarbha. This line soon divided into three sub-lines, the senior of which apparently continued there for a time, while the second descended from Kaiśika (who is often miscalled Kauśika) established itself in Cedi, and the third from Lomapāda reigned elsewhere. All the authorities agree in the main about these developments, and the Kūrma (i, 24, 6-10) gives Lomapāda’s sub-line for thirteen descents. The genealogies then follow the senior line of Vidarbha from Kratha, whom the Brahma and Harivaṃśa call Bhīma,¹ and all are in general agreement down to Devakṣatra, though with variations in some of the names. Then occur differences down to Sātvata, and the texts collated suggest the names set out in the Table of genealogies in chapter XII.

c14.s2.15

⁵ Bḍ iii, 70, 14-48. Vā 95, 14-47. Br 15, 1-30. Hv 37, 1969-99. Mat 44, 14-47. Pad v, 13, 1-30. Lg i, 68, 21-49. Kūr i, 24, 1-32. Viṣ iv, 12. Ag 274, 12-23. Gar i, 139, 25-35. Bhāg ix, 23, 30 to 24, 6. Partially, MBh xiii, 147, 6833-4; Hv 117, 6588-92.

c14.s2.16

¹ The same descendants are given to both.

c14.s2.17

Lomapāda’s sub-line is given thus—Lomapāda, Babhru, Āhṛti,² Śveta, Viśvasaha, Kauśika, Sumanta, Anala, Śveni, Dyutimant, Vapuṣmant, Bṛhanmedhas, Śrīdeva, and Vītaratha. Where they reigned is not stated.

c14.s2.18

² Much variation in these two names.

c14.s2.19

The second part begins with Sātvata’s sons, Bhajamāna, Devāvṛdha, Andhaka and Vṛṣṇi,³ and comprises the various families that developed from them. It is given by the same twelve Puranas, but the accounts are not all clear, for several reasons. Some of the pedigrees have become confused in some Puranas through mistakes in names, partly at least due to misreadings of old scripts; as where the Brahmāṇḍa and Vāyu misread Andhakāt as Satyakāt in giving Andhaka’s descendants; and the Brahma and Harivaṃśa misread Vṛṣṇer as Kroṣṭor in giving Vṛṣṇi’s descendants, and then seemingly regard him as Yadu’s son Kroṣṭu, so mentioning some of the lines of descent twice. Moreover some passages seem to have become misarranged, and lines have sometimes been lost. Some uncertainty was caused by the fact that there were several persons with the same names in these families, and thus it seems that Vṛṣṇi’s eldest son by one wife was Sumitra known also as Anamitra, and his youngest son by another wife was Anamitra too; while Vṛṣṇi was a favourite name. The difficulties can only be cleared up by collating the various passages in those Puranas, which are based on the same original metrical text more or less accurately.¹ That being done, the results are shown in the pedigrees set out infra.

c14.s2.20

³ The best texts, Bḍ iii, 71, 1-2; Vā 96, 1-2; Br 15, 30-31; Hv 38, 1999-2000; Mat 44, 47-8; Pad v, 13, 31-2; and Lg i, 69, 1-2; collated give this reading:— Sātvatāt sattva-sampannān Kausalyā suṣuve sutān bhajinam Bhajamānaṃ tu divyaṃ Devāvṛdhaṃ nṛpam Andhakaṃ ca mahā-Bhojaṃ Vṛṣṇiṃ ca Yadu-nandanam teṣāṃ hi sargāś catvāraḥ— Viṣ, Ag, and Bhāg multiply them by treating their epithets as separate names. Kūr is defective.

c14.s2.21

¹ Viṣ iv, 13, 1 f. Ag 274, 24 f. Gar i, 139, 36 f., and Bhāg ix, 24, 6 f. have recast the account and show much confusion, especially the last three, but are useful for comparison.

c14.s2.22

There is no difficulty about Bhajamāna, for only his sons are mentioned, and the texts, though partially corrupt, yet when collated make the account clear.²

c14.s2.23

² Bd iii, 71, 3–6a. Vā 96, 3–6a. Br 15, 32–4. Hv 38, 2001–3. Mat 44, 49–50. Pad v, 13, 33–35a. Lg i, 69, 3 and Kūr i, 24, 37 are incomplete. Cf. Viṣ iv, 13, 2: Ag 274, 25a: Gar i, 139, 37: Bhāg ix, 24, 7b–8.

c14.s2.24

Nor is there any difficulty about Devāvṛdha, because only his son Babhru is named, and the texts³ collated say his lineage were the Bhojas of Mārttikāvata as stated in the concluding half verse.⁴

c14.s2.25

³ Bd iii, 71, 6b–18a. Vā 96, 6b–17a. Br 15, 35–45a. Hv 38, 2004–14a. Mat 44, 51–60. Pad v, 13, 35b–45a. Lg i, 69, 4–9. Kūr i, 24, 35–6, 38a. Cf. Viṣ iv, 13, 3–6; Ag 274, 25b–27a; Gar i, 139, 38a; Bhāg ix, 24, 9–11.

c14.s2.26

⁴ It should run thus, but Mat, Pad and Kūr corrupt it and Lg varies it:—

c14.s2.27

The real difficulties occur with regard to Andhaka's and Vṛṣṇi's descendants, and these are elucidated in detail.

c14.s2.28

Andhaka had four sons, but only two are important, Kukura and Bhajamāna. From Kukura were descended the Kukuras,⁵ and Bhajamāna's descendants were specially styled the Andhakas.⁶ The genealogy of both as elucidated by collating the texts is given in the table opposite.

c14.s2.29

⁵ Bd iii, 71, 116–35a and Vā 96, 115–34, which misread the first word Andhakāt as Satyakāt. Br 15, 45b–62. Hv 38, 2014b–31. Mat 44, 61–76. Pad v, 13, 45b–62. Lg i, 69, 32–42. Kūr i, 24, 46b–65 has only the first five lines and then varies. The opening words should be Andhakāt Kāśya-duhitā. Cf. Viṣ iv, 14, 3–5; Ag 274, 27b–33; Gar i, 139, 43b–48a; Bhāg ix, 24, 19–25.

c14.s2.30

⁶ Bd iii, 71, 136b–44. Vā 96, 135–42. Br 16, 1–8. Hv 39, 2032–9. Mat 44, 77–85. Pad v, 13, 63–72a. Kūr i, 24, 66–7 is different. Lg nil. There is much variation in the unimportant names. Kūr wrongly makes Kṛṣṇa's father Vasudeva grandson of Kṛtavarman. Cf. Viṣ iv, 14, 6–7; Ag 274, 34–38a; Gar i, 139, 48b–50; Bhāg ix, 24, 26–27a.

c14.s2.31

Vṛṣṇi's progeny present the most difficulty, because he had at least four sons, two with the same name, and from them were descended various families, and because the accounts are not always compact.

c14.s2.32

tasyānvavāyaḥ sumahān Bhojā ye Mārttikāvatāḥ.

The Yādavas—The Sātvatas

c14.s3.1

[Figure: Sātvata

c14.s3.2

Bhajin- Devāvṛdha Andhaka Vṛṣṇi Bhajamāna | Mahā-Bhoja (see next table)

c14.s3.3

| Babhru
| | |

c14.s3.4

lineage not The Bhojas of Kukura Bhajamāna given Mārttikāvata (from whom (from whom were the were the Kukuras) Andhakas)

c14.s3.5

Vṛṣṇi (Dhṛṣṇu) Vidūratha

c14.s3.6

Kapotaroman Rājādhideva-Śūra

c14.s3.7

Viloman (Tittiri) Śoṇāśva

c14.s3.8

Nala (Nandanodaradundubhi) Śamin

c14.s3.9

Abhijit Pratikṣatra

c14.s3.10

Punarvasu Svayambhoja

c14.s3.11

Ahuka Hṛdika

c14.s3.12

Devaka Ugrasena Kṛtavarman Devārha other

c14.s3.13

| | sons

c14.s3.14

Kaṃsa and Kambalabarhiṣa other sons | Asamaujas]

c14.s3.15

Moreover the Brahma, Harivaṃśa and Padma misread his name as Kroṣṭu or Kroṣṭṛ, and appear to confuse him with his ancestor, Yadu’s son Kroṣṭu or Kroṣṭṛ, and that this is a mistake is shown by their reading Vṛṣṇi correctly in the first line about the family of the Śainyas.¹ There were three lines of descent of the Vṛṣṇis from Vṛṣṇi’s three sons Anamitra, Yudhājit and Devamīḍhuṣa;² and Anamitra there means the eldest son (by Gāndhārī), who was also called Sumitra. But there was also a fourth line from his youngest son Anamitra (by Mādrī) as will appear, whose descendants were called Śainyas. Vṛṣṇi’s lineage, so far as it can be made out from a collation of the important texts, is shown in the next table, and a comparison of its length with that of the Kukuras and Andhakas shows that it must omit several generations.

c14.s3.16

¹ See sixth note infra.

c14.s3.17

² Br 14, 2, 35. Hv 35, 1907, 1945.

c14.s3.18

Vṛṣṇi’s offspring begin with that of the eldest son (by Gāndhārī) Sumitra, called Anamitra by the Brahma and Harivaṃśa, down to Satrājit,¹ and Satrājit's children are mentioned separately.² Yudhājit's descendants divided into two families, those of Śvaphalka and Citraka.³ Devamīḍhuṣa's line is given extremely briefly, and some of the authorities wrongly invert him and his son Śūra.⁴ This was the family in which Kṛṣṇa was born.⁵ Vṛṣṇi's youngest son Anamitra had a son Śini, and their descendants were called the Śainyas.⁶ All these are shown in the table opposite.

c14.s3.19

¹ Bd iii, 71, 18b–21. Vā 96, 17b–20. Br 16, 9–11. Hv 39, 2040–2. Mat 45, 1–3. Pad v, 13, 72b–75a. Lg i, 69, 10–12. Also Br 14, 1–2 and Hv 35, 1906–7, which give only the first two lines. Kūr i, 24, 38b–39 is different. Cf. Viṣ iv, 13, 7–8; Ag 274, 38b–40; Gar i, 139, 39; Bhāg ix, 24, 12–13a.

c14.s3.20

² Bd iii, 71, 54–7. Vā 96, 53–5. Br 16, 45b–49a. Hv 39, 2076b–80a. Mat 45, 19–21. Pad v, 13, 93b–6. Lg and Kūr nil.

c14.s3.21

³ Bd iii, 71, 102–115. Vā 96, 101–114. Br 14, 3–13 (inaccurate); 16, 49b–59. Hv 35, 1908–21 (inaccurate); 39, 2080b–89. Mat 45, 25–33 and Pad v, 13, 98–105a (without Citraka's line). Lg i, 69, 18–31. Kūr i, 24, 42–46a partially agrees. There are considerable variations in the verses, especially in Mat and Pad where some lines are obviously corrupt. Cf. Viṣ iv, 14, 2; Ag 274, 46–7a; Gar i, 139, 41–3a; Bhāg ix, 24, 14b–18.

c14.s3.22

⁴ Bd iii, 71, 145–60a. Vā 96, 143–59a. Br 14, 14–24a, 25b f. Hv 35, 1922–34a, 1935b f. Mat 46, 1–10, 23–4. Pad v, 13, 108b–117. These collated show that Devamīḍhuṣa was the father (or ancestor) and Śūra the son (or descendant). So MBh says Śūra was son of Devamīḍha (vii, 144, 6030–1) and father of Vasudeva (ibid.: also i, 67, 2764; 111, 4382). MBh xiii, 147, 6834–5 says Śūra was son (descendant) of Citraratha, referring to his distant ancestor. Kūr i, 24, 67–70 confusedly joins this line on to Hṛdika in the Andhaka line. Cf. Viṣ iv, 14, 8–12; Ag 274, 47b–8; Gar i, 139, 50b–55; Bhāg ix, 24, 27b–44.

c14.s3.23

⁵ Vasudeva's and Kṛṣṇa's families, Bd iii, 71, 160b f. : Vā 96, 159b f. : Br 14, 36 f. : Hv 36: Mat 46, 11–22: Pad v, 13, 123b f. : Lg i, 69, 43 f. : Kūr i, 24, 68 f. Cf. Viṣ iv, 15, 11 f.; Ag 274, 49 f.; Gar i, 139, 56 f.; Bhāg ix, 24, 45 f.

c14.s3.24

⁶ Bd iii, 71, 100–1. Vā 96, 99–100. Mat 45, 22–4. Pad v, 13, 97. Hv 35, 1934b–5a (condensed). Lg i, 69, 15b–17. Kūr i, 24, 40–1. Br 14, 24b–5a. Cf. Viṣ iv, 14, 1; Ag 274, 45b–46a; Gar i, 139, 38b, 39b, 40; Bhāg ix, 24, 13b–14.

c14.s3.25

*Turvasu's lineage.*

c14.s3.26

Turvasu's line is given by nine Puranas,⁷ and all are in general agreement, except that there is great variation in some of the names, the Agni wrongly includes in it the Gāndhāras who were The *Yādavas* (*Sātvatas*) continued—The *Vṛṣṇis*.

c14.s3.27

⁷ Bd iii, 74, 1–6. Vā 99, 1–6. Br 13, 141–8. Hv 32, 1829–36. Mat 48, 1–5. Viṣ iv, 16. Ag 276, 1–3. Gar i, 139, 63–4. Bhāg ix, 23, 16–18. Turvasu is called Turvaśa in Vedic literature.

c14.s3.28

| | | Gāndhārī = Vṛṣṇi = Mādrī | | |
| | | \| | | |
| Sumitra or Anamitra I | Yudhājit | Devamīḍhuṣa | Anamitra II | Sini? |
| \| | \| | \| | \| |
| Nighna | Pṛśni | Śūra | Śini (whose descendants were Śainyas) | |
| \| | \| | \| | \| |
| Prasena | Satrājit | Śvaphalka | Citraka | Satyaka |
| \| | \| | \| | \| |
| Bhaṅgakāra | Akrūra | Pṛthu &c. | Yuyudhāna | |
| \| | \| | | \| |
| Sabhākṣa | Devavant and Upadeva | | | Asaṅga |
| | | | | \| |
| | | | | Yugandhara |
| | | Vasudeva | other sons | |
| | | \| | \| |
| | | Balarāma | Kṛṣṇa | |

c14.s3.29

Druhyus, and the Viṣṇu, Garuḍa and Bhāgavata omit the last part. Marutta the great king of this dynasty (whom the Matsya incorrectly calls Bharata) had no son and adopted Duṣyanta the Paurava, and thus this line is said to have merged into the Paurava line, as the Brahmāṇḍa, Vāyu, Brahma and Harivaṃśa declare. Yet it is added that from this line or from Duṣyanta there was a branch which founded the kingdoms of Pāṇḍya, Cola, Kerala, &c. in the south.¹ The line stands thus, greatly abbreviated—Turvasu, Vahni, Garbha, Gobhānu, Trisānu, Karandhama, Marutta, Duṣyanta, Śarūtha (or Varūtha), Aṇḍira; and Pāṇḍya, Kerala, Cola and Kulya (or Kola).

c14.s3.30

¹ Cf. Pad vi, 250, 1-2. This is not improbable. Turvasu princes may have carved out such kingdoms.

c14.s3.31

*Druhyu’s lineage.*

c14.s3.32

Druhyu’s line is given by nine Puranas,² and all are in general agreement, except that the Brahma and Harivaṃśa wrongly divide it into two, assigning to him the successors down to Gāndhāra, and Dharma and the remainder to Anu. This mistake of theirs is the cause or result of their erroneously making the Ānavas a branch growing out of the Paurava line, as will be explained in noticing the Ānava genealogy. The line stands thus—Druhyu with two sons Babhru and Setu, then Setu’s descendants, Aṅgāra-setu,³ Gāndhāra, Dharma, Dhṛta,³ Durdama,³ Pracetas, to whom the Brahma and Harivaṃśa add Sucetas. Four Puranas add that Pracetas’ offspring spread out into the mleccha countries to the north beyond India and founded kingdoms there.⁴

c14.s3.33

² Bḍ iii, 74, 7-12. Vā 99, 7-12. Br 13, 148-53. Hv 32, 1837-41. Mat 48, 6-9. Viṣ iv, 17. Gar i, 139, 64-5. Ag 276, 4-5a. Bhāg ix, 23, 14-16.

c14.s3.34

³ These names have variations. The name Aṅgāra is supported by MBh xii, 29, 981; cf. also id. iii, 126, 10465.

c14.s3.35

⁴ Bḍ, Vā, and Mat (loc. cit.) thus:—

c14.s3.36

*The Ānavas.*

c14.s3.37

The genealogy of Anu’s descendants, the Ānavas, is given by nine Puranas.⁵ All agree substantially, except that the Brahma and Harivaṃśa wrongly make Anu’s lineage descend from Kakṣeyu,

c14.s3.38

⁵ Bḍ iii, 74, 12 f. Vā 99, 12 f. Br 13, 14 f. Hv 31, 1669 f. Mat 48, 10 f. Viṣ iv, 18, 1. Ag 276, 5 f. Gar i, 139, 65 f. Bhāg ix, 23, 1 f

c14.s3.39

Pracetasaḥ putra-śataṃ rājānaḥ sarva eva te
mleccha-rāṣṭrādhipāḥ sarve hy udīcīṃ diśam āśritāḥ.

c14.s3.40

Viṣ more fully. Bhāg briefly. See JRAS, 1919, p. 361.

c14.s3.41

one of the sons of Raudrāśva of the Paurava line, and wrongly assign to Anu part of Druhyu’s progeny,¹ as mentioned above. The seventh king after Anu, Mahāmanas, had two sons, Uśīnara and Titikṣu, and under them the Ānavas divided into two great branches; Uśīnara and his descendants occupied the Panjab, and Titikṣu founded a new kingdom in the east, viz., in East Behar.

c14.s3.42

¹ Br 13, 152–3. Hv 32, 1840–1.

c14.s3.43

Uśīnara’s posterity is given by the same nine Puranas,² the fullest account being in the Brahmāṇḍa, Vāyu, Brahma and Harivaṃśa. It stands thus, with the kingdoms that his descendants founded:—

c14.s3.44

² Passages in continuation of those in second note above.

c14.s3.46

| Uśīnara | | | | |
| | | | | |
| Nrga³ | Nava | Kṛmi | Suvrata | Śivi Auśīnara |
| | | | | (whose descendants were the Śivis) |
| Audheyas | kings of Nava-rāṣṭra | lords of city Kṛmilā | Ambaṣṭhas | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | Vṛsadarbha⁴ Suvīra Kekaya Madraka |
| | | | | Vṛsadarbhas Sauvīras Kekayas or Kaikeyas Madras or Madrakas |

c14.s3.47

³ Probably referred to in MBh ix, 55, 3029–31.

c14.s3.48

⁴ Miscalled Bṛhadgarbha, MBh iii, 197, 13321. See xiii, 93, 4420, 4424.

c14.s3.49

Titikṣu’s lineage is given by the same nine Puranas.⁵ All agree substantially, except that the Brahmāṇḍa has lost all after Dharmaratha in a great lacuna, the Vāyu omits from Satyaratha to Campa, the Viṣṇu, Garuḍa and Bhāgavata omit Jayadratha’s descendants, and the Brahma and Agni omit Vijaya and his line. The best accounts are in the Matsya and Harivaṃśa. This ‘Kingdom in the East’ was divided among Bali’s five sons into five kingdoms, Aṅga, Vaṅga, Kaliṅga, Puṇḍra and Suhma. He was quite distinct from Bali son of Virocana, the Daitya (p. 64). This genealogy with the Aṅga line is given in the Table in chapter XII.

c14.s3.50

⁵ Bḍ iii, 74, 24–103. Vā 99, 24–119. Br 13, 27–49. Hv 31, 1681–1710. Mat 48, 21–108. Viṣ iv, 18, 1–7. Ag 276, 10–16. Gar i, 139, 68–74. Bhāg ix, 23, 4–14. Cf. MBh xiii, 42, 2351 (Citraratha).

c14.s3.51

*The Pauravas.*

c14.s3.52

The genealogy of Pūru’s descendants, the Pauravas, is found in eight Puranas and also twice in the Mahābhārata, and may be conveniently considered in three portions, only the more important features and differences being noticed; the first, from Pūru to Ajamīḍha, the second from Ajamīḍha to Kuru, and the third from Kuru to the Pāṇḍavas. The Brahmāṇḍa has lost all the Pauravas in a large lacuna.

c14.s3.53

In the first portion all the Puranas¹ agree more or less down to Matināra; but the two Mahābhārata accounts² differ, the first having many names as in the Puranas but being manifestly confused;³ and the second omitting Raudrāśva and Ṛceyu, but inserting a group of ten kings Sārvabhauma, Jayatsena, Avācīna, Ariha, Mahābhauma, Ayutanāyin, Akrodhana, Devātithi, Ariha and Ṛkṣa between Ahaṃyāti and Matināra. None of the other authorities know of this group in this position, and all the Puranas place it as a group of eight kings in the third portion between Vidūratha and Bhīmasena, except the Brahma, Harivaṃśa and Agni which omit all these kings except Ṛkṣa (who is Ṛkṣa II). The Mahābhārata has certainly misplaced this group, and for several reasons. Its own first account agrees with the Puranas in knowing nothing of this group here. The account says that two of these kings married princesses of Aṅga, one a princess of Kaliṅga, and two married princesses of Vidarbha, but those kingdoms were not founded till long after Matināra’s time, as will appear from the synchronisms in chapter XIII and Table of genealogies in chapter XII. That table and the synchronisms also show that it is impossible these ten kings could find room at this stage; and further that, if they could be inserted here, there would be an unaccountable gap in the third portion. The group must therefore be removed from here and put where the Puranas place it, in the third portion, and where it is thoroughly in position.

c14.s3.54

¹ Vā 99, 119–166. Br 13, 2–8, 50–63, 80–1. Hv 31, 1653–68; 32, 1714–32, 1754–5; with 20, 1053–5. Mat 49, 1–43. Viṣ iv, 19, 1–10. Ag 277, 1–9, 15. Gar i, 140, 1–8. Bhāg ix, 20, 1–39; 21, 1, 20–1.

c14.s3.55

² MBh (first) i, 94, 3695–3720; (second) i, 95, 3764–89.

c14.s3.56

³ It says Pūru’s son Pravīra married a Śaurasena princess (3696), and his son Manasyu married a Sauvīra princess (3697), but Śūrasena and Suvīra did not come into existence till later; see chap. XIV and Anavas ante.

c14.s3.57

From Tamsu to Duṣyanta there is great uncertainty. The chief texts, the Vāyu, Matsya, Brahma and Harivaṃśa, have a certain seeming agreement, yet really supply no intelligible pedigree, as will appear if we try to construct one from their statements. All that seems clear is that there was a remarkable woman Ilinā and that her grandson was Duṣyanta.¹ The Mahābhārata accounts turn her into a king Ilina. Queens were sometimes turned into kings mistakenly,² but I am not aware of any instance of the reverse; so that these accounts appear to be incorrect, and the genealogical verse quoted is not found in these Puranas. The other Puranas which are later have connected up a pedigree, but differ incompatibly and omit Ilinā altogether. The truth is, there is a serious gap in the genealogy here, as will appear from the discussion of the synchronisms in chapter XIII.

c14.s3.58

¹ Cf. also Vā 68, 23, 24; Bḍ iii, 6, 23, 25.

c14.s3.59

² As Mat 12, 37, Pad v, 8, 142 and Ag 272, 26 do with Satyavrata Triśaṅku's queen Satyarathā; as Gar i, 138, 22 does with Māndhātṛ's queen Bindumatī; and as Mat 50, 6 does with Vadhryaśva's mother Indrasenā.

c14.s3.60

From Duṣyanta to Hastin (or Bṛhat³), who founded or named Hastināpura, the lists fairly agree. Hastin had two sons Ajamīḍha and Dvimīḍha. Ajamīḍha continued the main Paurava line at Hastināpura, and Dvimīḍha founded a separate dynasty, which is not specially named and may be called the Dvimīḍha line, and which will be noticed infra. This portion is shown in the following table.

c14.s3.61

³ So Br, Ag, and Hv; but Hv 20, 1053-4 names Hastin.

c14.s3.62

The second portion from Ajamīḍha to Kuru is given by the same eight Puranas⁴ and the two Mahābhārata accounts.⁵ Ajamīḍha had three sons, and they originated separate dynasties. The eldest line from Ṛkṣa I continued the main line at Hastināpura, and here the lists agree down to Kuru, inserting only Saṃvaraṇa between them; but it will appear from the synchronisms and the Table of genealogies in chapters XIV and XII that there must have been more generations, and that not a few names have been lost here, probably both before and after Ṛkṣa. The two other sons, Nīla and Bṛhadvasu,¹ founded the dynasties of North and South Pañcāla respectively, which will be noticed separately. The Mahābhārata does not say anything about the origin of these two dynasties, except that its first account baldly declares that Ajamīḍha had two sons Duṣyanta and Parameṣṭhin, and from them came all the Pañcālas, which except in the names agrees with the Puranas. South Pañcāla was approximately the portion of Pañcāla south of the Ganges as far as the R. Carmanvatī (Chambal), and its capitals were Kāmpilya² and Mākandī. North Pañcāla was the portion north of the Ganges, with its capital at Ahicchatrā,³ whence it was called the Ahicchatra country.⁴

c14.s3.63

⁴ Vā 99, 211-17. Br 13, 102-7. Hv 32, 1795-1800. Mat 50, 17-21. Viṣ iv, 19, 18. Ag 277, 25-6. Gar i, 140, 24-5. Bhāg ix, 22, 3-4.

c14.s3.64

⁵ MBh (first) i, 94, 3721-2, 3724-39; (second) i, 95, 3790-1.

c14.s3.65

¹ So Vā. Mat Bṛhadanu. Hv, Viṣ, Gar, and Bhāg Bṛhadiṣu.

c14.s3.66

² MBh v, 193, 7500 : xii, 139, 5137.

c14.s3.67

³ Called also Chattravatī, MBh i, 166, 6348.

c14.s3.68

⁴ MBh i, 138, 5507–16.

c14.s3.69

Bharata’s descendants were called the Bharatas or Bhāratas;⁵ so all these dynasties, the main line at Hastināpura⁶ and those of the Dvimīḍhas and of North⁷ and South Pañcāla, were Bhāratas.

c14.s3.70

⁵ MBh i, 2, 371; 62, 2320–1; 74, 3123 : iv, 28, 912 : xiii, 76, 3690. Vā 99, 134. Mat 24, 71; 49, 11. Br 13, 57. Hv 32, 1723, &c. So also Śatapatha Brāhm (p. 65).

c14.s3.71

⁶ So habitually in the MBh. Sörensen (p. 123) treats Bhārata in iii, 106, 8847 as applying to Sagara, but it really refers to Janamejaya, to whom the MBh professes to have been recited.

c14.s3.72

⁷ Thus Dhṛṣṭadyumna, who belonged to this line, is called Bharatar-sabha, MBh vi, 50, 2066.

c14.s3.73

The third portion from Kuru to the Pāṇḍavas is given by the same authorities.⁸ There are some discrepancies among Kuru’s immediate descendants, but the text suggested by collating the chief accounts⁹ clears them up. It shows that Kuru had three

c14.s3.74

⁸ Vā 99, 217–18, 229–49. Br 13, 108–23. Hv 32, 1801–2, 1813–28. Mat 50, 23, 34–56. Viṣ iv, 19, 19; 20. Ag 277, 27, 31–40. Gar i, 140, 25, 30–40. Bhāg ix, 22, 4, 9–33. MBh (first) i, 94, 3740–51; (second) i, 95, 3792–3835. His ancestor Yayāti is called, by anticipation or through lack of the historical sense, ‘augmentor of the Kuru race,’ MBh i, 86, 3541–2; and so also Saṃvaraṇa, MBh i, 171, 6527; 172, 6562; 173, 6611.

c14.s3.75

⁹ > Kuros tu dayitāḥ putrāḥ Sudhanvā Jahnur eva ca

c14.s3.76

Parikṣito mahātejāḥ pravaraś cârimardanaḥ
* * *
Parikṣitasya dāyādo babhūva Janamejayaḥ
Janamejayasya putrās tu traya eva mahārathāḥ
ŚrutasenÔgrasenau ca Bhīmasenaś ca nāmataḥ
Jahnus tv ajanayat putram Suratham nāma bhūmipam
Surathasya tu dāyādo vīro rājā Vidūrathaḥ–&c.

c14.s3.77

sons, Parikṣit I¹ the eldest, Jahnu and Sudhanvan. The account deals first with Sudhanvan’s descendants, an offshoot, in which was Vasu who conquered and founded anew the kingdoms of Cedi and Magadha: its genealogy is noticed separately infra. The account then returns to the main line, to Parikṣit I’s lineage. His son was Janamejaya II, and his sons were Śrutasena, Ugrasena and Bhīmasena. Then the account drops them, passes to Jahnu, and gives his descendants who became the main Paurava line.² Śrutasena, Ugrasena and Bhīmasena are not described as kings, and the fact that their line stops and the account passes to Jahnu’s son Suratha as king shows that Janamejaya’s branch lost the sovereignty, which then vested in Suratha. The cause of this is explained by a story told earlier in the genealogy. Janamejaya II injured the rishi Gārgya’s son and was cursed by Gārgya; he was abandoned by his people, and was in great affliction; he sought help from the rishi Indrota Daivāpa Śaunaka, who purified him with a horse-sacrifice.³ He did not however recover the sovereignty, and so his three sons passed into oblivion.⁴

c14.s3.78

¹ Written indifferently as Parikṣit and Parikṣita.

c14.s3.79

² Viṣ, Gar and Ag agree with this *résumé*, except that Viṣ and Gar (unless its reading be amended) make Janamejaya’s three sons his brothers. Bhāg says Parikṣit I had no offspring. Ag follows Hv with one or two more mistakes. MBh i, 3, 661-2 and Bhāg ix, 22, 35 confuse this Janamejaya II with the later Parikṣit’s son Janamejaya III, who reigned after the Bhārata battle; and then make the same mistake as Viṣ and Gar. Var 193, 1-5 also confuses them. The Parikṣit who got Vāmadeva’s horses was a different person, a king of Ayodhyā (MBh iii, 192, 13145, 13179 f.), and probably the same as Pāripātra of that line.

c14.s3.80

³ Vā 93, 21-6. Bd iii, 68, 20-6. Hv 30, 1608-13. Br 12, 9-15. Lg i, 66, 71-7, Also MBh xii, 150 to 152, which amplifies and brahmanizes it.

c14.s3.81

⁴ This explains the allusions in the Śatapatha Brāhm (xiii, 5, 4, 1) and Śāṅkhāyana Śr Sūtra (xvi, 9, 7) to Janamejaya Pārikṣita and his three sons (not brothers), the Pārikṣitiyas, and also the question in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad (iii, 3), ‘Whither have the Pārikṣitas gone?’ if their extinction be implied: but the answer ‘Thither where aśvamedha sacrificers go’ suggests the opposite, because such sacrifices procured great blessings, as is declared in this story in MBh xii, 152, 5674. See Weber Hist. of Indian Lit., pp. 125-6, 135-6, 186: and Vedic Index, i, p. 520

c14.s3.82

The Mahābhārata’s two genealogies of the main line are different and mutually inconsistent, though if the group of kings, Sārvabhauma to Ṛkṣa II, be brought from the first portion into its proper place here, the second genealogy approximates to the Purana account. The Brahma, Harivaṃśa and Agni omit them all except Ṛkṣa II.

The Dvimīḍhas

c14.s4.1

The Dvimīḍha dynasty is given by six Puranas.¹ It is derived correctly by the Vāyu, Viṣṇu, Garuḍa and Bhāgavata, but is wrongly attributed to Ajamīḍha by the Matsya and Harivaṃśa; and the Viṣṇu by the loss of words, that closed the South Pañcāla dynasty with Bhallāṭa's son Janamejaya and opened this, says Dvimīḍha was Bhallāṭa's son and thus tacks it on to that line. This is clearly wrong, because it thus makes Ugrāyudha of this dynasty the tenth descendant from Bhallāṭa, but he killed Bhallāṭa's son Janamejaya, and both of them were contemporaries of Bhīṣma, as will be explained in chapter XIII.² As regards the kings the lists agree generally (the Vāyu and Matsya having the best texts), with however some mistakes. Thus the Viṣṇu, Garuḍa and Bhāgavata omit four kings, Sudharman to Rukmaratha; and the Bhāgavata, misunderstanding the relation of teacher and disciple between Hiraṇyanābha of Kosala and king Kṛta,³ wrongly introduces the former here as Kṛta's father, and also wrongly assigns the last five kings as Nīpa's descendants in the South Pañcāla line. The Vāyu, Matsya and Harivaṃśa declare that in Sārvabhauma's lineage was Mahant Paurava, thus indicating a gap between them. This line is set out in the Table of Genealogies in chapter XII.

c14.s4.2

¹ Vā 99, 184–93. Mat 49, 70–9. Hv 20, 1075–85. Viṣ iv, 19, 13–15. Gar i, 140, 14–16. Bhāg ix, 21, 27–30.

c14.s4.3

² Mat in a brahmanical fable says wrongly that Ugrāyudha, and so this dynasty, belonged to the Solar race (49, 61).

c14.s4.4

³ So Vā, Hv and Mat. Also Bḍ ii, 35, 38–40, 49 : Vā 61, 33, 35, 44; and Viṣ iii, 6, 4, 7.

North Pañcāla

c14.s5.1

This dynasty, which reigned in the portion of Pañcāla north of the Ganges, is given by eight Puranas.⁴ All are in substantial agreement (except that the Brahma is incomplete) down to Divodāsa's son Mitrayu. Then divergencies occur as regards Mitrayu's son and Sṛñjaya and Cyavana-Pañcajana, and the Brahma, Harivaṃśa and Agni call Sudāsa Somadatta. After that all agree. This

c14.s5.2

⁴ Vā 99, 194–211 and Mat 50, 1–16, which have the best text. Hv 32, 1777–94. Br 13, 93–101. Viṣ iv, 19, 15–18. Ag 277, 18–25. Gar i, 140, 17–24. Bhāg ix, 21, 30 to 22, 3.

North Pañcāla Dynasty

c14.s6.1

Ajamīḍha

c14.s6.2

Nila

c14.s6.3

Suśānti

c14.s6.4

Purujānu or Purujāti

c14.s6.5

Rkṣa

c14.s6.6

Bhṛmyaśva (who had five sons called the Pañcālas)

c14.s6.7

| . . . . .
| | | | |

c14.s6.8

Mudgala ¹ Sṛñjaya Bṛhadiṣu Yavīnara Kāmpilya

c14.s6.9

¹ From Mudgala were descended the Maudgalyas; see chap. XXIII. ² From him were the Maitreyas, brahmans.

c14.s6.10

| a king or Kapila,

c14.s6.11

Brahmiṣṭha = Indrasenā or Kṛmilāśva

c14.s6.12

Vadhryaśva = Menakā

c14.s6.13

| . . . . .
| |

c14.s6.14

Divodāsa (Atithigva) Ahalya = Śaradvant (Āṅgirasa)

c14.s6.15

Mitrayu |

c14.s6.16

Maitreya Soma ² Śatānanda (whose successor was, apparently his son,)

c14.s6.17

Sṛñjaya

c14.s6.18

Cyavana-Pañcajana (Pijavana)

c14.s6.19

Sudāsa (Sudās)-Somadatta

c14.s6.20

Sahadeva (Suplan) Satyadhṛti

c14.s6.21

Somaka-Ajamīḍha |

c14.s6.22

Jantu | (whose distant descendant was) |

c14.s6.23

Pṛṣata |

c14.s6.24

Drupada Kṛpa Kṛpī is a very noteworthy dynasty, because many of its kings play an important part in the Rigveda. Pañcajana appears to be a mistake for the Vedic Pijavana, and Sudāsa is the Vedic Sudās.¹ It stands with its incidental information as in the preceding table.

c14.s6.25

¹ This dynasty is considered in chap. X, and fully in JRAS, 1918, pp. 229 f.

c14.s6.26

Bhṛmyaśva’s territory was apparently subdivided among his five sons as petty rājās. The eldest branch soon rose to prominence under Vadhryaśva, Divodāsa, and Sudās. It decayed after Sudās’ death and was subdued by Saṃvaraṇa of the main Hastināpura line.² It then became insignificant, and so there is a large gap after Jantu until Pṛṣata revived the dynasty in Bhīṣma’s time. Droṇa with the aid of the Hastināpura princes conquered Pṛṣata’s son Drupada, retained North Pañcāla for himself, and transferred him to South Pañcāla,³ so that this family reigned over South Pañcāla in the period treated of in the Mahābhārata. From Sṛñjaya of the main branch here were descended the Sṛñjayas and from Somaka the Somakas, both of which families attended Drupada⁴ who was a Somaka.⁵ This dynasty is also noteworthy because it became brahmanic, as will be explained in chapter XXIII.

c14.s6.27

² See synchronisms in chap. XIV.

c14.s6.28

³ MBh i, 138, 5444–5513; 166, 6341–54.

c14.s6.29

⁴ Sṛñjayas, MBh i, 138, 5476: vi, 16, 631: &c. Somakas, i, 185, 6975; 193, 7174: vi, 75, 3288: &c. Both, vi, 89, 3889; 90, 3952.

c14.s6.30

⁵ Called Saumaki, MBh i, 131, 5192.

South Pañcāla

c14.s7.1

This dynasty, which reigned south of the Ganges and was descended from Ajamīḍha as mentioned above, is given by six Puranas.⁶ All these are in general agreement down to Nīpa except that there is much variation in the names of the first five kings. From Nīpa were descended the Nīpas. Then all agree substantially, except that the Matsya wrongly derives Nīpas chief son Samara and Samara’s successors from a younger son of Senajit by a misreading of Kāvyāc ca for Kāmpilye; the Bhāgavata omits most of these successors, and the Garuḍa the last three kings. The Viṣṇu omits the last king Jamamejaya and wrongly tacks the Dvimīḍha line on to this (see above).

c14.s7.2

⁶ Vā 99, 167, 170–182. Mat 49, 47–59. Hv 20, 1055–73. Viṣ iv, 19, 11–13. Gar i, 140, 10–13. Bhāg ix, 21, 22–26.

c14.s7.3

*Cedi, Magadha, &c.*

c14.s7.4

The dynasties in these countries were descended from Kuru’s son Sudhanvan (*ante*), and the genealogy is found in seven Puranas.¹ His fourth successor, Vasu, conquered the kingdom of Cedi,² which belonged to the Yādavas (*ante*), and obtained the title Caidyo-paricara, ‘the overcomer of the Caidyas’. ³ He also subdued and annexed the adjoining countries as far as Magadha. He had five sons, Bṛhadratha, Pratyagraha, Kuśa or Kuśāmba called Maṇivāhana, Yadu (or Lalittha), and a fifth Māvella, Māthailya or Māruta. He divided his territories and established them in separate kingdoms. They were the Vāsava kings, and occupied countries and towns named after themselves.⁴ Cedi and Magadha were two of those kingdoms, two others from their position must have been Kauśāmbī and Karūṣa,⁵ but the fifth is not clear.

c14.s7.5

¹ Vā 99, 217–28. Mat 50, 23–34. Hv 32, 1801–13. Viṣ iv, 19, 19. Ag 277, 27–31. Gar i, 140, 25–30. Bhāg ix, 22, 4–9. Also one MS. of Br, see Br 13, 109, note.

c14.s7.6

² MBh i, 63, 2334–5, 2342. Vā 93, 26–7. Bḍ iii, 68, 27. Hv 30, 1614–15. Br 12, 15–16.

c14.s7.7

³ This title was afterwards misunderstood as Caidya Uparicara, and uparicara was taken to mean ‘moving on high’, and so fable said he could soar through the air. So upari-cara, MBh i, 63, 2367 : Viṣ iv, 19, 19 : Gar i, 140, 26 : &c. Urdhva-cārin, Vā 57, 110 : Mat 143, 25–6 : Bḍ ii, 30, 31 : &c. Antarikṣa-ga, Vā 99, 220 : Mat 50, 26 : Hv 32, 1804 : cf. MBh xii, 339, 12834. He was also called rājoparicara, MBh xii, 338, 12754 : 339, 12838.

c14.s7.8

⁴ MBh i, 63, 2360–5; and genealogies above. Rām i, 32, 1–11 is wrong, a jumble of several dynasties.

c14.s7.9

⁵ Pad vi, 274, 16–17 says Dantavakra (king of Karūṣa) was of Caidya lineage.

c14.s7.10

The eldest son Bṛhadratha took Magadha and founded the famous Bārhadratha dynasty there.⁶ Kuśa or Kuśāmba obviously had Kauśāmbī, Pratyagraha may have taken Cedi, and Yadu Karūṣa. It seems probable the fifth kingdom⁷ was Matsya. The Matsyas existed before (probably as a Yādava tribe), because they were opponents of Sudās;⁸ and Vasu may have conquered this country also, which adjoined Cedi on the north-west. There is no account given anywhere about the Matsya dynasty, except that fable⁹ made Vasu the parent, through a fish, of two children, the fisher-maiden Kālī (p. 69) and a son named Matsya, who became a king. The genealogies in the Viṣṇu and Bhāgavata insert Matsya among Vasu’s sons, and those in the other Purāṇas add Kālī and Matsya to the above five. Thus tradition suggests that one of Vasu’s sons was king of Matsya, and except to account for this there was no reason for introducing him into that fable: possibly then the fifth son should be Matsya, and his kingdom Matsya.

c14.s7.11

⁶ Also Hv 117, 6598.

c14.s7.12

⁷ Māvellakas are mentioned, MBh vii, 91, 3255 : viii, 5, 138.

c14.s7.13

⁸ Rigv vii, 18, 6. See the positions of Sudāsa and Vasu in the Table of Genealogies in chap. XII.

c14.s7.14

⁹ MBh i, 63, 2371–98 : impossible even chronologically as regards Kālī.

c14.s7.15

After Vasu the genealogies give only the Magadha dynasty. All are in general agreement, subject to variations in names, except that the Brahma ends with Bṛhadratha’s grandson Ṛṣabha, and the Viṣṇu and Bhāgavata by abbreviation make Jarāsandha Bṛhadratha’s son. As regards the collateral dynasties we know only the kings who reigned in the Pāṇḍavas’ time, namely, Damaghoṣa, his son Śiśupāla Sunītha, and his son Dhṛṣṭaketu, kings of Cedi;¹ Vṛddhaśarman and his son Dantavakra, kings of Karūṣa;² Virāṭa, king of Matsya.³

c14.s7.16

¹ MBh i, 187, 7028-9: ii, 44, 1575-96: v, 79, 2857: &c. Vā 96, 157-8. Mat 46, 6. Hv 35, 1930; 117, 6599-6601. Br 14, 20. Bḍ iii, 71, 158-9. Viṣ iv, 14, 11.

c14.s7.17

² Vā 96, 255. Bḍ iii, 71, 156. Hv 35, 1931-2. Br 14, 21-2. MBh ii, 13, 575, 577. Viṣ iv, 14, 11.

c14.s7.18

³ MBh iv, 5, 245-7; 7, 225; 68, 2164.

Linked texts (19)