Ancient Indian Historical Tradition c16.6

c16.6

Variations in the structure of a genealogy may be due to one or other of six causes, and in illustrating them it will be convenient to choose mainly from the Ayodhyā line. First, a name may be left out by mere omission, probably accidental; thus the Bhāgavata and Kūrma omit Ambarīṣa, and the Harivaṃśa omits Hiraṇyanābha, both well-known kings. Secondly, little-known kings are omitted; thus the Matsya, Padma, Liṅga and Kūrma insert after Dṛḍhāśva a king Pramoda, whom the other Puranas omit, and they and the Agni and Garuḍa omit Prasenajit, father of Yuvanāśva I, whom all the others mention. There is no good reason to think that either Pramoda or Prasenajit has been invented, and the omission is no doubt due to their unimportance. Thirdly, names have been displaced; and thus the Matsya, Padma and Agni misplace Dilīpa II, Dīrghabāhu, Raghu and Aja as Raghu, Dilīpa, Aja and Dīrghabāhu. Fourthly, a name has been converted into an epithet; thus most Puranas make Dīrghabāhu and Raghu father and son, and the Matsya, Padma and Agni treat them as separate, but the Brahma, Harivaṃśa and Śiva treat Dīrghabāhu as an epithet of Raghu, the Raghuvaṃśa omits him accordingly, and the Garuḍa mentions him, omitting Raghu. Here the weight of authority is in favour of Dīrghabāhu as a separate king and not as an epithet of Raghu.¹ Fifthly, an epithet may conversely be turned into a king; thus the Viṣṇu, Agni and Bhāgavata coin new sons for Sātvata the Yādava out of the epithets applied to his genuine sons (chapter IX); and the epithet Kausalya belonging to Hiraṇyanābha as king of Kosala becomes a separate king Kauśalya, his son, in the Raghuvaṃśa (xviii, 27). Lastly, there may be a pure blunder, as where the Matsya, Padma and Agni turn Satyavrata Triśaṅku’s wife Satyarathā into a son Satyaratha, and where the Garuḍa changes Māndhātṛ’s wife Bindumatī into a son Bindumahya.