Ancient Indian Historical Tradition c18: Chapter XIII. Major Synchronisms Established

Ancient Indian Historical Tradition c18

Language: English

Chapter XIII. Major Synchronisms Established

c18.2

IN endeavouring to establish synchronisms, first may be noticed those kings and rishis about whom there are copious or very clear statements.

There is a very early group of synchronous kings. The Aikṣvāku genealogy of Ayodhyā states plainly that Prasenajit’s son Yuvanāśva married Gaurī and their son was Māndhātṛ. The Paurava genealogy says Matināra’s daughter Gaurī was mother of Māndhātṛ. Here there can be no doubt, for the statements are separate and explicit (chapter VI). Prasenajit therefore was contemporary with Matināra, Yuvanāśva was one generation below and Māndhātṛ two generations. Further, the Ayodhyā genealogy says that Māndhātṛ married Śaśabindu’s daughter Bindumatī Caitrarathī, who was the eldest of many brothers;¹ and the Yādava genealogy names Śaśabindu, son of Citraratha, as a famous king who had very many sons.² Here also there can be no doubt; hence Māndhātṛ was one generation below Śaśabindu. Next Jahnu of Kānyakubja married the granddaughter of Yauvanāśva,³ that is, Māndhātṛ; hence he was two generations below Māndhātṛ.⁴ From all these we have a clear set of synchronisms thus—

c18.4

¹ Vā 88, 70-1. Hv 12, 712-13. Br 7, 92-4. Bd iii, 63, 70-1. Viṣ iv, 2, 19. Bhāg ix, 6, 38. Śiv vii, 60, 76-7. Gar i, 138, 22, corrupt. ² Vā 95, 18-20. Hv 37, 1971-3. Bd iii, 70, 19-20, Mat 44, 18-20 Br 15, 4. Viṣ iv, 12, 1-2. Pad v, 13, 3-5. Ag 274, 13-14. Bhāg ix 23, 31-3. Also MBh vii, 65, 2321-4. ³ Vā 91, 58-9. Bd iii, 66, 28-9. Hv 27, 1421-3; 32, 1761-2. Br 10, 19-20; 13, 87. ⁴ A wrong synchronism of Jahnu, Bd iii, 56, 44-8.

c18.5

c18.6

The next group of synchronisms is that in which Viśvāmitra and his nephew Jamadagni are the central figures. King Kṛtavīrya of the Haihayas had the Bhārgavas as his priests and enriched them. His successors tried to recover the wealth, but the Bhārgavas resisted. The Haihayas maltreated them, and the Bhārgavas fled to other countries for safety.¹ Gādhi or Gāthi was then king of Kānyakubja and had a daughter Satyavatī. The Bhārgava rishi Ṛcika Aurva, son of Ūrva, married her and had a son Jamadagni, and about the same time Gādhi had a son² Viśvaratha.³ Viśvaratha, after succeeding to the kingdom,⁴ relinquished it, placed his family in a hermitage near Ayodhyā⁵ and gave himself up to austerities for twelve years, after which he became a brahman with the name Viśvāmitra. He returned and succoured prince Satyavrata Triśaṅku⁶ of Ayodhyā who had befriended his family, and restored him to the throne, overcoming the opposition of the then Vasiṣṭha,⁷ whose personal name was Devarāj.⁸ Jamadagni married Kāmalī Reṇukā, daughter of Reṇu, a minor king belonging to the Ikṣvāku race, and their son was Rāma Jāmadagnya.⁹ Triśaṅku was succeeded by his son Hariścandra, who had a son Rohita, and Viśvāmitra and Jamadagni attended as priests at the sacrifice at which Śunaḥśepa was substituted for Rohita.¹⁰ Kṛtavīrya was succeeded by his son Arjuna Kārtavīrya, who was a great king (p. 41). After a long reign he had dissension with Jamadagni, his sons killed Jamadagni, and Rāma killed him.¹ Here then we have these synchronisms:—

c18.7

¹ MBh i, 178, 6802 to 179, 6827. See chap. XVII for Ūrva.

c18.8

² MBh iii, 115, 11044–67: v, 118, 4005–7: xii, 49, 1721–46: xiii, 4, 205–47. Vā 91, 66–87. Bḍ iii, 66, 36–58. Hv 27, 1430–51; 32, 1765–7. Br 10, 28–49. Viṣ iv, 7, 5–16. Bhāg ix, 15, 5–11.

c18.9

³ Vā 91, 92–3. Bḍ iii, 66, 63–5. Hv 27, 1456–9. Br 10, 53–6.

c18.10

⁴ MBh ix, 41, 2299, 2300. Rām i, 51, 20. Bṛhadd iv, 95.

c18.11

⁵ He was connected with the Ayodhyā dynasty through marriage; see infra.

c18.12

⁶ Called Mataṅga, MBh i, 71, 2925.

c18.13

⁷ Vā 88, 78–116. Bḍ iii, 63, 77–114. Br 7, 97 to 8, 23. Hv 12, 717 to 13, 753. Śiv vii, 60, 81 to 61, 19. Lg i, 66, 3–10. Viṣ iv, 3, 13–14. Bhāg ix, 7, 5–6. All fully discussed, JRAS, 1913, pp. 888–900. See chap. XVIII.

c18.14

⁸ MBh xiii, 137, 6257: cf. xii, 234, 8601. JRAS, 1913, pp. 896, 903: 1917, pp. 39, 54, 63.

c18.15

⁹ MBh iii, 116, 11072–4: v, 116, 3972: xii, 49, 1746–7. Vā 91, 89–91. Bḍ iii, 66, 60–3. Hv 27, 1453–5. Br 10, 50–3.

c18.16

¹⁰ Aitar Brāhm vii, 3, 1 f. Śāṅkhāyana Śr Sūtra xv, 17–25. Bhāg ix, 7, 7–25. Br 104. MBh xiii, 3, 186–7. Rām i, 61, 62. All discussed, JRAS, 1917, pp. 40, 44 f.

c18.17

¹ MBh i, 104, 4172 : iii, 115, 11035 ; 116, 11089–98 ; 117, 10202–3 : vii, 70, 2429 : xii, 49, 1761–8. Vā 94, 38, 47. Bḍ iii, 69, 38, 48. Hv 34, 1890. Viṣ iv, 11, 7. Mat 43, 44. Br 13, 196–7 ; 213, 114. Cf. Lg i, 68, 10 : Kūr i, 22, 20 : Hv 42, 2314. Cf. MBh viii, 5, 144 : xii, 362, 13879–80 : xiv, 29, 824–31.

c18.18

c18.19

² It should be noted that a curious statement occurs in the Ayodhyā genealogy in six Puranas, which speak of Rāma at a much later time, in the reign of king Mūlaka (chap. VIII). Vā 88, 178–9 and Bḍ iii, 63, 178–9 say Mūlaka was in fear of Rāma and lived protected by a guard of women (nārī-kavaca). Lg i, 66, 29, Kūr i, 21, 14, Viṣ iv, 4, 38 and Bhāg ix, 9, 40 say much the same. This must be connected with the statement in MBh xii, 49, 1770–8, which says that a thousand years after Rāma had destroyed all the kṣatriyas, a fresh generation of them, including Pratardana and others, had grown up, and he destroyed them all again and again till twenty-one times; and with the further statement (ibid. 1792–3) that then Sarvakarman, who is placed as king of Ayodhyā at the same time as Mūlaka (chap. VIII), was brought up in secret. All this MBh account is brāhmanic and mostly fable; hence these two statements are of no chronological value, and the statement about Mūlaka would seem to be a reflex of the fable, incorporated in the Ayodhyā genealogy, while the secret bringing up would explain the phrase nārī-kavaca. This matter is further noticed in chap. XXV. A similar fanciful mistake, MBh v, 146, 4978–81.

c18.20

This group is connected with the preceding group by both the Ayodhyā and Kānyakubja genealogies, and also by the collateral statement that Kuśika, Gādhi’s father, married Paurukutsī, a ‘descendant of Purukutsa’, and she was Gādhi’s mother.³ Jahnu was a contemporary of Purukutsa’s son Trasadasyu (ante), and Viśvāmitra of Triśaṅku. The genealogies give seven descents from Jahnu to Viśvāmitra, and eight descents from Trasadasyu to Triśaṅku. They thus tally, and Paurukutsī was Purukutsa’s descendant in about the sixth degree.

c18.21

³ Vā 91, 63–6 ; Bḍ iii, 66, 33–6 ; Br 10, 24–8 ; and Hv 27, 1426–30 have the fullest text. Collated they suggest this reading:—

c18.22

Gādhir nāmâbhavat putraḥ Kauśikaḥ Pākaśāsanaḥ
Paurukutsy abhavad bhāryā Gādhis tasyām ajāyata.

c18.23

There is an extensive series of events which connect the Haihaya dynasty with those of Kāśi and Ayodhyā. The Haihaya dynasty rose to power under king Bhadraśreṇya, apparently in South Malwa, and extended its sway eastwards. His fourth successor, the great Arjuna Kārtavīrya mentioned above, reigned at Māhiṣmatī (the modern Mandhata in the R. Narbada¹), carried, it is said, his arms over the whole earth and came into conflict with Āpava Vasiṣṭha,² so that he overran all Madhyadeśa. Afterwards the Tālajaṅghas and other Haihayas, attended by hordes from beyond the north-west, attacked Ayodhyā and drove the king Bāhu from the throne. Bāhu begot a son Sagara, and Sagara defeated all those enemies, regained his kingdom and destroyed the Haihaya power.³ Arjuna’s contemporaries have been mentioned above, namely, Triśaṅku and Hariścandra of Ayodhyā. The genealogies give six more Haihaya kings, and Sagara was eighth in descent from Hariścandra. Thus the genealogies tally with the story of Sagara.

c18.24

¹ JRAS, 1910, pp. 441–6, 867–9. Also Pad vi, 115, 3–4; 179, 2.

c18.25

² Vā 94, 39–45; 95, 1–13. Bḍ iii, 69, 39–44; 70, 1–14. Mat 43, 41–3. Hv 33, 1881–6. Br 13, 189–94. MBh xii, 49, 1753–8, which says Āpava’s hermitage was near the Himalayas.

c18.26

³ Vā 88, 121–43. Bḍ iii, 63, 119–41. Br 8, 28–51. Hv 13, 760 to 14, 784. Śiv vii, 61, 22–43. Viṣ iv, 3, 15–21. Also Bḍ iii, 47, 74 to 48, 46, which appears to contain genuine tradition. MBh iii, 106, 8832. JRAS, 1919, pp. 354–8. Rām i, 70, 28–37; ii, 110, 15–24; these call Bāhu Asita. Also Pad vi, 21, 11–34.

c18.27

There are further synchronisms of certain Kāśi kings with Bhadraśreṇya and the Tālajaṅghas, which arise out of a story told in the Kāśi genealogy.⁴ It runs thus. Divodāsa, son of Bhīmaratha, was king of Kāśi and (in consequence of a curse, it is alleged) abandoned his capital Vārāṇasī, and established himself in another city on the river Gomatī in the extreme east of his territory. Bhadraśreṇya, the Haihaya king, seized the kingdom,⁵ and a Rākṣasa named Kṣemaka occupied the city. Divodāsa recovered the kingdom from Bhadraśreṇya’s sons, but afterwards Bhadraśreṇya’s son Durdama re-established himself in it. Divodāsa was succeeded by his brother Aṣṭāratha. Pratardana was the son of Divodāsa, and he recovered the kingdom and put an end to the strife with the Haihayas. His grandson Alarka killed the Rākṣasa Kṣemaka and regained the city. All these events occupied a thousand years, that is, a very long time.

c18.28

⁴ Vā 92, 23–8, 61–8 and Bḍ iii, 67, 26–31, 64–72, which are the best. Br 11, 40–54. Hv 29, 1541–8, 1582–91. Parts of it in Br 13, 66–75; Hv 32, 1736–49.

c18.29

⁵ Called king of Benares, Vā 94, 6; Bḍ iii, 69, 6; Mat 43, 11; Hv 33, 1848; Pad v, 12, 114.

c18.30

This story is supplemented by a further fragment of kṣatriya tradition.¹ The piece of genealogy prefixed to the latter is confused, but shows this much, that the tradition relates to the Haihayas after the time of Tālajaṅgha and in particular to the descendants of king Vītahavya among them.² Haryaśva king of the Kāśis fought with the Vītahavya-Haihayas at the confluence of the Ganges and Jumna. They killed him and returned to the city of the Vatsyas.³ His son was Sudeva and they defeated him. His son was Divodāsa, and he retreated and built a city, called Vārāṇasī also, at the confluence of the Ganges and Gomatī. They attacked, defeated and drove him from his city. He took refuge with his purohita Bharadvāja. His son Pratardana attacked and destroyed the Vaitahavyas, and the Vītahavya king found refuge with a Bhṛgu rishi, who saved him by declaring and making him a brahman.⁴ This is confirmed from brahmanic books, which say Bharadvāja was Divodāsa’s purohita and gave Pratardana the kingdom.⁵

c18.31

¹ MBh xiii, 30, 1949–96.

c18.32

² Ibid. 1946–53, 1958, 1965.

c18.33

³ Used here by anticipation.

c18.34

⁴ MBh xiii, 30, 1984, 1995 f. Pratardana’s conquest, xii, 96, 3576.

c18.35

⁵ Pañcaviṃśa Brāhm xv, 3, 7. Kāṭhaka Saṃhitā xxi, 10. Vedic Index ii, 98. These refer to this Divodāsa and not the Rigvedic Divodāsa of N. Pañcāla. Also MBh xiii, 34, 2126. It is doubtful which Divodāsa is meant in xii, 96, 3577. The allusion in xii, 99, 3664 seems spurious.

c18.36

Putting the two stories together, it is clear that the former gives the beginning and the end of the long contest between the Haihayas and Kāśis; that the latter narrates the latter part of it; that in the Kāśi dynasty there were two Divodāsas, one who was son of Bhīmaratha at the beginning and the other who was son of Sudeva at the end; that between them reigned at least three kings, Aṣṭāratha, Haryaśva and Sudeva; that the former story prima facie, but not necessarily, confuses the two Divodāsas;⁶ and that Pratardana⁷ was son of Divodāsa II. It is also plain that Vitahavya of the second story ¹ = Vitihotra of the genealogies (chapter IX), both being Haihaya kings subsequent to Talajaṅgha. The whole account thus becomes quite intelligible, the only uncertain point being, which Divodāsa built the second capital; he was probably Divodāsa I, but this point is not material here.

c18.37

⁶ This is what the brahmanical fable of Gālava does (MBh v, 116, 3960–77), calling Divodāsa son of Bhīmasena and father of Pratardana see chap. XII.

c18.38

⁷ MBh xii, 234, 8594, and xiii, 137, 6294 say, Pratardana king of Kāśi.

c18.39

¹ MBh xiii, 30, 1950-1.

c18.40

The first story makes Divodāsa I contemporary with Bhadraśreṇya and Durdama. The second makes Haryaśva contemporary with Vitahavya’s sons, so that he falls after Vitihotra of the genealogies. The intermediate kings have been lost, as would be natural in the confusion of the dispossession.² Hence Haryaśva’s great grandson Pratardana would fall just after Supratīka, the last Vitihotra-Haihaya king named in the genealogies, and this would be his natural position as the destroyer of the Vitahavya or Vitihotra family. Pratardana did not subdue all the Haihayas. It was Sagara who did that, hence Pratardana cannot be placed after Sagara. Sagara evidently completed what Pratardana began, hence he must be placed alongside Pratardana. These traditions then establish the following synchronisms, and these stories and the genealogies are in harmony :—

c18.41

² Similar blanks caused by the overthrow of a dynasty or its sinking into insignificance will be found between Tamsu and Duṣyanta, and between Somaka and Pṛṣata in the N. Pañcāla dynasty (chap. IX).

c18.42

c18.43

These results lead on to further synchronisms in and after Sagara’s time. The Haihayas, as mentioned, overran Madhyadeśa, so that the Paurava kingdom in the Ganges-Jumna doab was overthrown; and this conclusion is corroborated by the fact that the hordes from the north-west, who aided them in the conquest of Ayodhyā, could not have reached it without passing over the Paurava territory and also the Kānyakubja kingdom, which disappeared from this time, for its genealogy ceases with Viśvāmitra's grandson Lauhi. Sagara's destruction of the Haihaya power would naturally have carried him to the Narbadā and their capital there, Māhiṣmatī. South of that was the kingdom of Vidarbha, and there are notices which show that it had just come into existence then. An account of Sagara's expedition there says the Vidarbha king made peace with him by giving him his daughter Keśinī in marriage,¹ and the genealogies say clearly that Sagara had two wives, and the best of them name one as Keśinī daughter of Vidarbha himself,² who gave his name to the country. Vidarbha therefore was a generation earlier than Sagara.

c18.44

¹ Bd iii, 49, 1-3; 51, 31, 37.

c18.45

² Vā 88, 155; Bd iii, 63, 154; Br 8, 63; and Hv 15, 797. Rām i, 38, 3. Also Viṣ iv, 4, 1; Gar i, 138, 29; Bhāg ix, 8, 15; VN 8, 64; and MBh iii, 106, 8833, 8843. Mat 12, 39, 42 and Pad v, 8, 144, 147 give different names, one being Prabhā, a Yādava princess (Vidarbha was a Yādava): similarly Lg i, 66, 15; Kūr i, 21, 4; and Ag 272, 28.

c18.46

This synchronism may be combined with another. There were two kings named Marutta, one son of Avīkṣit and grandson of Karandhama of the Vaiśāla dynasty (p. 39), and the other, son of Karandhama of Turvasu's lineage; and they must be carefully distinguished. The latter had no son and adopted Duṣyanta the Paurava.³ Duṣyanta afterwards recovered the Paurava kingdom, revived the dynasty, and so is styled its vaṃśa-kara.⁴ The adoption could only have taken place before he gained that position, and this corroborates the conclusion that that kingdom was in abeyance, so that Duṣyanta, as the heir in exile, might naturally accept such adoption. He could only have restored the Paurava dynasty after the Haihaya power had been destroyed by Sagara and Sagara's empire had ended, so that he would be one or two generations later than this Marutta, and two later than Sagara. We have then these synchronisms:—

c18.47

³ Vā 99, 3-4 and Bd iii, 74, 3-4; both corrupting Duṣyanta's name. Mat 48, 2-3 (where read Pauravaś cāpi); also Br 13, 144-6; Hv 32, 1832-4; and Viṣ iv, 16, 2.

c18.48

⁴ MBh i, 68, 2801. Bhāg ix, 23, 17-18.

c18.49

c18.50

There are more synchronisms belonging to the same period, in which the Āṅgirasa rishis Bṛhaspati, Dīrghatamas and Bharadvāja are the central figures.

c18.51

First is a story about Bṛhaspati and Saṃvarta, which contains pieces of tradition, though largely marred by later extravagances.¹ Aṅgiras² was priest to king Karandhama of the Vaiśāla dynasty. Karandhama’s son was Avīkṣit, and his son the famous Marutta Āvikṣita.³ Aṅgiras had two sons, Bṛhaspati and Saṃvarta, who were thus Marutta’s hereditary priests⁴ and lived in his kingdom of Vaiśālī. They were at perpetual strife. Bṛhaspati declined to be Marutta’s priest, declaring that he was Indra’s priest,⁵ so Marutta chose Saṃvarta and by his aid performed magnificent sacrifices.⁶ This Marutta gave his daughter to Aṅgiras Saṃvarta (chapter XI).

c18.52

¹ MBh xiv, 4, 85 to 7, 179 (for putram in line 99 of Calcutta edition read pūrvam); 8, 214-17 : &c. Vā 86, 9-11. Bd iii, 61, 5-7. Bhāg ix, 2, 26-8.

c18.53

² This is merely a gotra name. Bṛhadd v, 102 identifies him with the primaeval mythical Aṅgiras. See chaps. XVI, XIX.

c18.54

³ MBh xiii, 137, 6260. Mārk 122, 7 to 133, 5 contains a long story about them. Śatapatha Brāhm xiii, 5, 4, 6 calls this Marutta the Ayogava king.

c18.55

⁴ MBh xiv, 4, 85; 6, 124, 126, 133; 7, 155.

c18.56

⁵ So also MBh i, 170, 6464. He seems to be confused, at least partially, with the mythical divine priest Bṛhaspati.

c18.57

⁶ Also MBh iii, 129, 10528-9 : vii, 55, 2170-3: xii, 29, 910-13. Mārk 130 (129), 11-18. Aitareya Brāhm viii, 4, 21 says he consecrated Marutta. Rām vii, 18 has a brahmanical fable: so also MBh xiv, 64; 65.

c18.58

Another story runs thus.⁷ There were two rishis, Bṛhaspati⁸ and his elder brother, who is called Ucathya in the Vedārthadīpikā and Bṛhaddevatā, Utathya in the Mahābhārata, Uśija in the Brahmāṇḍa and Matsya, and Aśija or Asija (but sometimes Uśija) in the Vāyu. Utathya is a very common variant for Ucathya,¹ and Aśija a mistake for Uśija. There are therefore two distinct names, Ucathya and Uśija, and it will be shown further on that Ucathya is the correct name of this rishi. He had a wife Mamatā, and their son was Dīrghatamas, who was born blind. Bṛhaspati is said to have consorted with her, and his son was Bharadvāja. That there was a rishi Dīrghatamas Aucathya Māmateya, ‘son of Ucathya and Mamatā’, who was blind, is proved by the Rigveda;² and that there was also a rishi Bharadvāja Bārhaspatya, ‘son of Bṛhaspati’, is asserted by the Sarvānukramaṇi in ascribing many hymns in book VI to him.³

c18.59

⁷ MBh i, 104, 4179-92: xii, 343, 13177-82. Bd iii, 74, 36-46. Bhāg ix, 20, 36-8. Twice narrated in Vā 99, 36-46, 141-50 and Mat 48, 32-42; 49, 17-26. Bṛhadd iv, 11-15. Vedārth on Rigv vi, 52. These versions have differences, and have received later touches, especially where the incidents are made to supply explanation of names.

c18.60

⁸ Vā confuses him with the mythical divine priest, Bṛhaspati.

c18.61

¹ He was an Āṅgirasa, MBh xii, 90, 3362 : xiii, 154, 7240, &c.

c18.62

² Rigv i, 147, 3; 152, 6; 158, 1, 4, 6. Hymns i, 140-64 are ascribed to him. Also Bṛhadd iii, 146.

c18.63

³ Also Bṛhadd v, 102. Vā 64, 26. Bḍ ii, 38. 27. MBh xiii, 30, 1963.

c18.64

This story continues with Dīrghatamas.⁴ He lived in his paternal cousin’s hermitage, whom the Puranas apparently call Śaradvant, but indulged in gross immorality or misbehaved towards the wife of the younger Utathya⁵ (Aucathya). Hence he was expelled and set adrift in the Ganges. He was carried downstream to the Eastern Ānava kingdom and was there welcomed by king Bali. This incident finds support in the Rigveda (i, 158, 3, 5), where he speaks of having been delivered from bodily hurt and from danger in the rivers; and it is not improbable, because these Āṅgirasa rishis were living, as mentioned above, in the kingdom of Vaiśālī, so that he might easily have been put on a raft in the Ganges there and have drifted some seventy miles down to the Monghyr and Bhāgalpur country, which was the Ānava realm, and was soon afterwards called the Aṅga kingdom. There Dīrghatamas married the queen’s śūdra nurse and had Kakṣīvant and other sons;⁶ and at Bali’s desire begot of the queen Sudeṣṇā five sons, Aṅga, Vaṅga, Kaliṅga, Puṇḍra and Suhma, who were called the Bāleya kṣatra and also Bāleya brahmans. This is strange yet not improbable, for brahmans did render such services.¹ Afterwards he gained his sight,² and assumed the name Gotama or Gautama.³

c18.65

⁴ Vā 99, 26-34, 47-97. Bḍ iii, 74, 25-34, 47-100. Mat 48, 23-9, 43-89. The last part in Hv 31, 1684-90; Br 13, 29-31; Viṣ iv, 18, 1; Bhāg ix, 23, 5. MBh i, 104, 4193-221, with variations: xii, 343, 13177-84. Bṛhadd iv, 21-5, where the sequel shows the word jīrṇa is a manifest mistake. Similarly Vedārth on Rigv i, 116.

c18.66

⁵ Mat says Gautama, but this seems a misreading, as the sequel shows. Vā 65, 101 and Bḍ iii, 1, 106 say Śaradvant was Utathya’s son.

c18.67

⁶ So also MBh ii, 20, 802, which calls her Auśinarī.

c18.68

¹ Thus, it is said, a Vasiṣṭha begot Aśmaka of king Kalmāṣapāda’s queen; MBh i, 122, 4736–7; 177, 6787–91: Vā 88, 177: Bd iii, 63, 177: Lg i, 66, 27–8: Kūr i, 21, 12–13: Bhāg ix, 9, 38–9. Vyāsa begot Dhṛtarāṣṭra and Pāṇḍu. See also MBh i, 64, 2460–4; 104, 4176–8. Brahmans with their ascetic habits escaped the enervating influences of courts.

c18.69

² He may not have been blind, but purblind, very shortsighted, and his sight may have improved in old age, as happens in such cases.

c18.70

³ Vā 99, 92. Bd iii, 74, 94. Mat 48, 83–4. Bṛhadd iv, 15.

c18.71

Next, there is a story about the famous Paurava king, Duṣyanta’s son Bharata, and Bharadvāja.⁴ Bharata had three wives and sons by them; they killed their sons because he was disappointed in them, and he was thus bereft of heirs. In order to obtain a son he performed many sacrifices and lastly made an offering to the Maruts; they gave him⁵ Bṛhaspati’s son Bharadvāja as an adopted son. Bharadvāja thus became a kṣatriya; he did not succeed Bharata, but begot a son named Vitatha; Bharata then died. Bharadvāja afterwards consecrated Vitatha as the successor, and then either died or departed to the forest.⁶ This is a very remarkable

c18.72

⁴ Vā 99, 137–40; Mat 49, 14–15; Hv 32, 1726–7; Br 13, 58. Ag 277, 7–8. Also MBh i, 94, 3710–12, which differs slightly. Fairly fully, Vedārth on Rigv vi, 52.

c18.73

⁵ For an explanation of this see infra.

c18.74

⁶ The fullest and best account is given by Mat 49, 27–34 and Vā 99, 152–8, which are closely alike. Also Hv 32, 1727–31 and Br 13, 59–61 (the former being fuller) which are based on the same original text. The texts collated suggest the following version:

c18.75

tasmin kāle tu Bharato bahubhiḥ kratubhir vibhuḥ
kāmya-naimittikair yajñair ayajat putra-lipsayā
yadā sa yajamāno vai putraṃ nāsādayat prabhuḥ
yajñaṃ tato Marut-somam putrārthe punar āharat
tena te Marutas tasya Marut-somena toṣitāḥ 5
upaninyur Bharadvājam putrārtham Bharatāya vai
dāyādo ’ṅgirasaḥ sūnor aurasas tu Bṛhaspateḥ
saṅkrāmito Bharadvājo Marudbhir Bharatam prati
Bharatas tu Bharadvājam putram prāpya vibhur bravīt
prajāyāṃ saṃhṛtāyāṃ vai kṛtārtho ’haṃ tvayā vibho 10
pūrvam tu vitathe tasya kṛte vai putra-janmani
tatas tu Vitatho nāma Bharadvājāt suto ’bhavat
tasmād divyo Bharadvājo brāhmaṇyāt kṣatriyo ’bhavat
dvyāmuṣyāyaṇa-nāmā sa smṛto dvi-pitaras tu vai
tato ’tha Vitathe jāte Bharataḥ sa divam yayau 15
Bharadvājo divam yāto hy abhiṣicya sutam ṛṣiḥ

c18.76

Note the Prakritism in the last words, for sutam ṛṣi, anusvāra giving the long syllable required. Br and Hv correct the irregularity by reading—Vitathaṃ cābhiṣicyātha Bharadvājo vanaṃ yayau.

c18.77

story and deserves careful consideration, because it throws much light on the traditional accounts of Bharata's successors, the Bharatas or Bhāratas.

c18.78

It is emphasized by the statement in the Vāyu that Bharadvāja by the adoption became a kṣatriya and had two fathers, and so was called dvyāmuṣyāyaṇa.¹ The Matsya varies this statement, but still says that from Bharadvāja were descended brahmans and kṣatriyas who were known as dvyāmuṣyāyaṇa-kaulīnas,² which also appears to be true.³ Of these two versions the Vāyu's is manifestly the earlier, for the statement that a distinguished brahman became a kṣatriya's son could never have come from a brahmanic source, and that in the Matsya is also plainly a softening down of it, as the retention of the word dvyāmuṣyāyaṇa shows, which otherwise was uncalled for.⁴ Neither version could have been composed by the brahmans after the Purana passed into their hands as described in chapter II. The Vāyu's statement is manifestly ancient kṣatriya tradition, which they found in the Purana and could not discard as false, but which was unpalatable and was therefore modified in the Matsya, and also in some copies of the Vāyu.⁵

c18.79

¹ Lines 13 and 14 are the Vā reading, except that it has dvimukhyāyana incorrectly. The adjective dvi-pitaraḥ is noteworthy as not good Sanskrit. Cf. Mat 196, 52.

c18.80

² Tasmād api Bharadvājād brāhmaṇāḥ kṣatriyā bhuvi dvyāmuṣyāyaṇa-kaulīnāḥ smṛtās te dvi-vidhena ca.

c18.81

³ But see Vedārth on Rigv vi, 52.

c18.82

⁴ Other brahmans begot kṣatriya sons without any such complication, as mentioned above.

c18.83

⁵ Thus some Vāyu MSS. read:— tasmād divo Bharadvājā brāhmaṇāḥ kṣatriyā viśaḥ dvyāmuṣyāyaṇa-nāmānaḥ smṛtā dvi-pitaras tu vai.

c18.84

According to the brahman vaṃśas there were two Āṅgirasa rishis, Ucathya and Uśija,⁶ and that the names are distinct is proved by the fact that Aucathya ⁷ occurs in Rigveda i, 158, 1, 4, and Auśija in i, 18, 1 and x, 99, 11. The former means Dīrghatamas by implication and he is so called in the Anukramaṇī as author of hymns i, 140-64. He is made son of Ucathya in the foregoing story by the Mahābhārata, Bṛhaddevatā and Vedārthadīpikā, but son of Uśija in the Purana version and called Auśija in the vamśas.¹ Presumably therefore both Ucathya and Uśija were his ancestors, and this is further corroborated. Auśija in the first passage above is Kakṣīvant, and in the second Ṛjiśvan. Kakṣīvant is called ‘born of Uśij’ by the Anukramaṇī and Vedārthadīpikā on Rigveda i, 116, and therefore Auśija ² in the latter, relying on the words Kakṣīvantam ya Auśijaḥ in i, 18, 1. This would be a metronymic, if the śūdra woman whom Dīrghatamas married was named Uśij.³ This may be true, yet seems rather to be a guess to explain the appellation, for it is unnecessary inasmuch as Kakṣīvant, being Dīrghatamas’s son, had the patronymic Auśija.⁴ Moreover, that derivation is not really a satisfactory explanation, for Ṛjiśvan was also Auśija as mentioned above, and it cannot hold good for him, because (1) he is called Vaidathina, ‘son (or descendant) of Vidathin’, in Rigveda iv. 16, 13, and Vidathin was the name of a Bharadvāja,⁵ and (2) it is said he was son of ‘Bharadvāja’.⁶ Thus Ṛjiśvan was descended from Vidathin Bharadvāja,⁷ and not from Dīrghatamas and that śūdra woman, and his appellation Auśija cannot be a metronymic, but is really a patronymic. It proves that his father or ancestor Vidathin Bharadvāja was descended from Uśija, and that there was an ancestor Uśija. ‘Uśij’ seems to have been invented to explain Auśija ⁸ through the lack of the historical sense. Uśija then was ancestor of both Dīrghatamas and Bharadvāja, and Dīrghatamas’s father was Ucathya. Uśija therefore must have been ancestor of their fathers,⁹ Ucathya and Bṛhaspati, who were thus not sons but descendants of Aṅgiras.¹ Ucathya and Bṛhaspati may have been brothers as stated above and Saṃvarta may have been their youngest brother;² and Uśija may well have been their father.³ The Puranas in the above story seem to have confused Uśija with his son or descendant Ucathya.

c18.85

⁶ Vā 59, 90, 93; 65, 100. Pḍ ii, 32, 99; iii, 1, 105-6. Mat 196, 4 (read Uśījam), 11.

c18.86

⁷ Vedic Index has accidentally omitted this name, but mentions it in i, 366.

c18.87

¹ Vā 65, 102 and Bḍ iii, 1, 106, where read athAuśijo probably. Anuvākānukramaṇī 21 appears to be confused. In Mat 48, 83 for Asito read Auśijo.

c18.88

² Also Pañcaviṃśa Brāhm xiv, 11, 16–17. Bṛhadd iii, 125.

c18.89

³ So Bṛhadd iv, 24–5: Śatapatha Brāhm ii, 3, 4, 35: and Vedārth on Rigv i, 116. Anukramaṇī implies it.

c18.90

⁴ In MBh xiii, 150, 7108 read Auśijaḥ.

c18.91

⁵ So Bṛhadd v, 102.

c18.92

⁶ So Vedārth on Rigv vi, 52, which assigns to ‘Bharadvāja’ four other ‘sons’, Suhotra, Śunahotra, Nara and Garga, all five being ‘grandsons’ of both Bṛhaspati and Bharata; and this Bharadvāja was Vidathin (see p. 163). It has however abbreviated the genealogy, for they were not sons but descendants, see Table of Pauravas (chap. IX) and chap. XXIII.

c18.93

⁷ The mention of Vaidathina as apparently distinct from Ṛjiśvan in Rigv v, 29, 11, does not invalidate this, for the preceding note shows there were other Vaidathinas.

c18.94

⁸ So Vedārth account rather suggests.

c18.95

⁹ Auśija Dīrghaśravas named with Kakṣīvant in Rigv i, 112, 11 may well have been one of this family who became a merchant.

c18.96

¹ Bṛhadd v, 102-3 has abbreviated the genealogy.

c18.97

² So Vedārth on Rigv vi, 52.

c18.98

³ The brahman vaṃśas are manifestly uncertain about their precise relationships, see chap. XIX.

c18.99

Vitatha was clearly Bharadvāja’s son, as the Brahma and Harivaṃśa say explicitly in line 12, which is their reading. The Vāyu⁴ and Matsya⁵ readings of this line make out that Bharadvāja was known as Vitatha, but line 15, which both of them and also the Brahma and Harivaṃśa have, stultifies that, for necessarily Bharadvāja was born before the adoption, and line 16, which the Matsya has and the Brahma and Harivaṃśa⁶ give more clearly, shows that Vitatha and Bharadvāja were different persons. The confusion of the two will be explained farther on. Consequently the reading of the Brahma and Harivaṃśa in line 12 is right, and those of the Vāyu and Matsya require only the simple emendation of Bharadvājaḥ to Bharadvājāt or Bhāradvājaḥ and would then agree. The fact that Bharata’s successors in the Paurava line were really of brahmanic origin is of the highest importance, and helps to elucidate many peculiar features in their history.

c18.100

⁴ Tataḥ sa Vitatho nāma Bharadvājas tathābhavat.

c18.101

⁵ Tatas tu Vitatho nāma Bharadvājo nṛpo ’bhavat.

c18.102

⁶ Vitathaṃ cābhiṣicyātha Bharadvājo vanaṃ yayau.

c18.103

The Aitareya Brāhmaṇa says Dīrghatamas consecrated Bharata with the mahābhiṣeka.⁷ He could not have done that until he had established his reputation, that is, not until he was old; and he certainly lived to a great age.⁸ He would therefore be two (or even possibly three) generations senior to Bharata. Hence the first Bharadvāja, who was his equal in age, could not have been taken as soon as born to Bharata as a son, as alleged.⁹ That both these rishis were some two generations older than Bharata is corroborated by the facts shown above that Bharadvāja was purohita to Divodāsa, king of Kāśī, and, if a young man then, would have been contemporary with Pratardana, who was contemporary with Sagara and one or two generations prior to Duṣyanta—that is, two or three prior to Bharata. The aged Dīrghatamas, and Bharadvāja also,¹ may thus have lived till the beginning of Bharata’s reign. Though that, the first, Bharadvāja could not have been given in adoption to Bharata, yet his grandson (or perhaps great grandson) may have been so given, and this was no doubt the Bharadvāja named Vidathin above, because the fact that the Vāyu, Brahmāṇḍa and Bhāgavata confuse the adopted Bharadvāja with his son Vitatha strongly suggests that it was Vidathin who was adopted. These Puranas have confused the two Bharadvājas as they have apparently confused the names Vidathin and Vitatha.²

c18.104

⁷ viii, 23 and 21. Bhāgavata ix, 20, 25 says Māmateya, i.e. Dīrghatamas, was his priest.

c18.105

⁸ Rigv i, 158, 6.

c18.106

⁹ Vā 99, 151 f. Mat 49, 26 f.

c18.107

¹ A ‘Bharadvāja’ knew most and lived longest, Aitareya Āraṇyaka i, 2, 8. SBE i, 169.

c18.108

² The derivation of Vitatha in lines 11-12 above may be an afterthought.

c18.109

The introduction of the Maruts into this story illustrates how mythology apparently grew out of a misunderstanding of names. Bṛhaspati lived in the kingdom of Marutta, as mentioned above, and was a preceptor among the Maruttas. The Bṛhaddevatā (v, 102-3), misunderstanding this name through the brahmanic lack of the historical sense, says he was a preceptor among the Maruts. His son Bharadvāja was born there, among the Maruttas, and so also would have been his grandson (or great grandson) Vidathin Bharadvāja. When king Bharata lost his sons, Dīrghatamas, if his priest then (or one of his family, if he was then dead), might naturally have suggested that his own relative, the young Bharadvāja, might be adopted. So the youth was brought from the Maruttas and given in adoption to the king; and this act, by the same misunderstanding, was mythologized into the statement that the Maruts gave Bharadvāja to Bharata.³

c18.110

³ Similar and further confusion appears in Śatapatha Brāhm xiii, 5, 4, 6, which says the Maruts were Marutta Āvikṣita’s guardsmen, Agni his chamberlain, and the Viśve Devās his counsellors: SBE, xliv, p. 397.

c18.111

From all these traditions then we get these synchronisms :---

c18.112

| Pauravas | Āṅgirasas (Aṅgiras) | | Vaiśālas | E. Anavus |
| | Uśija | | Karandhama | |
| | | | Avīkṣit | |
| | Ucathya | Bṛhaspati | Samvarta | Marutta | Bali |
| | Dīrghatamas | Bharadvāja | | | |
| | Kakṣivant | | | | |
| Duṣyanta | | | | | |
| Bharata | | | | | |
| Vidathin- | | { Vidathin- | | | |
| Bharadvāja } | | { Bharadvāja | | | |
| Vitatha | | | | | |

c18.113

Putting together these results and those established earlier and arrived at independently, we have these synchronisms :—

c18.114

c18.115

It thus appears that Bṛhaspati’s son Bharadvāja was a younger contemporary of Divodāsa II of Kāśi. This entirely agrees with what has been mentioned incidentally above, that Bharadvāja was Divodāsa’s purohita, a statement found both in the epic and in brahmanical books—thus confirming the two sets of synchronisms. Bṛhaspati and Bharadvāja belonged to the country of Vaiśālī, which was contiguous to the kingdom of Kāśi, and so Bharadvāja could quite naturally have become purohita in the latter; indeed the preceding remarks about all these Āṅgirasas show that they steadily migrated westwards.

c18.116

Another synchronism is that well known connecting Daśaratha, king of Ayodhyā (Rāma’s father), Sīradhvaja Janaka, king of Videha (Sītā’s father), Daśaratha-Lomapāda,¹ king of Aṅga, the rishi Ṛṣyaśṛṅga, and Pramati (or Sumati ²), king of Vaiśālī. This is declared in the Rāmāyaṇa and is alluded to elsewhere.³ That epic makes an Aśvapati, king of Kaikeya, also contemporary;⁴ and this may be true, though it is not supported elsewhere.⁵

c18.117

¹ He gave his daughter Śāntā to Ṛṣyaśṛṅga, Rām i, 9, 19 ; 10, 32-3 : Vā 99, 103 : Br 13, 40 : Hv 31, 1696-7 : Mat 48, 94-5.

c18.118

² So Rām i, 47, 17. Viṣ iv, 1, 18. Bhāg ix, 2, 36.

c18.119

³ e. g. MBh iii, 110, 10008-9 ; 273, 15880 ; Bhāg ix, 23, 7-8.

c18.120

⁴ Rām ii, 1, 2 ; 9, 22.

c18.121

⁵ If so, there was another of the same name, far later; Vedic Index, i, p. 44, and chap. XXVII.

c18.122

There are kṣatriya accounts of Brahmadatta and Bhīṣma, which lead to important synchronisms.

c18.123

Those about Brahmadatta say this.⁶ Aṇuha of the Nīpa family, who was king of S. Pañcāla and reigned at Kāmpilya, married Kṛtvī, daughter of Śuka,⁷ and their son was Brahmadatta, called Pitṛvartin. He was a contemporary and friend of Bhīṣma’s grandfather (really great grandfather, as will appear), Pratīpa, the Kaurava king. Brahmadatta married Sannati,¹ daughter of a Devala.² A Jaigīṣavya³ is said to have taught Brahmadatta, who by his instruction made a yoga-tantra.⁴ His sons were Śaṅkha and Likhita (p. 69)⁵ and his disciples are named.⁶ Brahmadatta gave wealth to Śaṅkha.⁷

c18.124

⁶ Hv 20, 1039-52, 1065-6 ; 23, 1241-63 ; 24, 1302-4. Mat 20, 21-6 ; 21, 11-16, 29-31. Pad v, 10, 67-71, 98-102, 115-17. MBh xii, 344, 13261-5. (Pad vi, 131, 93 speaks of a Brahmadatta of the Solar race in a fable, and Buddhist Jātakas of a Brahmadatta, king of Kāśi.)

c18.125

⁷ Not Vyāsa’s son Śuka, see p. 138.

c18.126

¹ Bhāg ix, 21, 25 calls her Go.

c18.127

² So Mat and Hv; and the latter (23, 1261) calls him Devala Asita, that is, Devala, son of Asita, see the Kāśyapas, chap. XX (Padma v, 10, 71 calls him Sudeva); but this seems a mistake.

c18.128

³ This is a patronymic: others are mentioned, e. g. Lg i, 92, 52–3; Pad vi, 250, 279. A Jaigīṣavya and Asita Devala in a brahmanical fable, MBh ix, 51; xii, 229, 8431–2.

c18.129

⁴ Bhāg ix, 21, 25–6; but this is a late statement.

c18.130

⁵ Mentioned, MBh xii, 23, 668–9: Var 197, 18.

c18.131

⁶ Kūr i, 48, 18–20.

c18.132

⁷ MBh xii, 234, 8603: xiii, 137, 6261 (but 6263 is a brahmanical anachronism).

c18.133

Pratīpa’s successor according to the genealogies was Śantanu,⁸ called Śantanu generally in the Mahābhārata and Puranas, and said to have been his son; but this is an instance of the omission of unimportant names, for both brahmanic and ordinary traditions assert that Śantanu had an elder brother Devāpi,⁹ who was well known and is often alluded to.¹⁰ This Devāpi is mentioned in Rigveda x, 98 and is there called Ārṣiṣeṇa,¹¹ ‘son of Ṛṣiṣeṇa’. It is clear therefore that Devāpi and Śantanu were not sons of Pratīpa but grandsons, Ṛṣiṣeṇa being father of Devāpi if not of Śantanu also, and that, as Devāpi declined the throne and Śantanu succeeded Pratīpa, Rṣiṣeṇa had probably died early and so is omitted in the genealogies.¹ Bhīṣma therefore as Śantanu’s son was great grandson of Pratīpa.²

c18.134

⁸ So called in Vā 99, 234, 237; Mat 50, 39, 42; Bhāg ix, 22, 12–13.

c18.135

⁹ So the genealogies. Also Nirukta ii, 10: Bṛhadd vii, 155 to viii, 9: MBh i, 94, 3750–1; 95, 3797–8: v, 148, 5056–66.

c18.136

¹⁰ Vā 32, 39–42; 99, 437, 439: Bḍ iii, 74, 250, 252: Mat 273, 56, 58: Viṣ iv, 24, 45, 48: Bhāg iv, 22, 12, 17–18: all of which say he still lives and will restore the Paurava race in the new Kṛta age.

c18.137

¹¹ The references to Ārṣiṣeṇa in Vedic Index i, 378 require modification. No Ārṣiṣeṇa is named in MBh i, 94, 3750–1. Ārṣiṣeṇa and Devāpi in MBh ix, 40, 2281–2, and 41, 2285–94 are manifestly different persons as those passages show, Devāpi being this prince; but that Ārṣiṣeṇa is there said to have lived in the Kṛta age (far earlier) and is no doubt the ancient prince Ārṣiṣeṇa who became a brahman, as stated in Vā 92, 5–6; Bḍ iii, 67, 6; and also Hv 29, 1520; Br 11, 34. That Ārṣiṣeṇa and Devāpi Ārṣiṣeṇa must therefore be distinguished. Ārṣiṣeṇa in Bḍ ii, 32, 105 and Vā 59, 97 (Adviṣeṇa) would as a mantra-reciter be probably Devāpi. Ārṣiṣeṇa in Vā 91, 116 and Bḍ iii, 66, 87 might be either.

c18.138

¹ So also if Aulāna in verse 11 is Śantanu’s patronymic (as suggested in Vedic Index i, 129, 378, and possibly rightly), for then Rṣiṣeṇa and Ulāna (?) would have been Pratīpa’s sons and have both died in his lifetime; thus Devāpi and Śantanu would have been first cousins, and practically brothers, their fathers being dead and omitted.

c18.139

² About Śantanu’s time may be placed Duṣṭarītu Paumsāyana, since he was a contemporary of Balhika Prātipīya (Śatapatha Brāhm xii, 9, 3, 1-3 and 13). He was king of the Sṛñjayas (Vedic Index ii, 371), i. e. of N. Pañcāla, and would fall in the gap between Jantu and Prṣata. Bālhika or Vāhlika, Prātipeya or Prātipīya son (descendant) of this Pratīpa, is often mentioned in the MBh; e. g. i, 95, 3797: v, 22, 693: vii, 157, 6932-4: xi, 22, 621.

c18.140

The story goes thus. Ugrāyudha, the Paurava king of Dvimiḍha’s line, killed Prṣata’s grandfather ³ (king of N. Pañcāla), and Prṣata took refuge at Kāmpilya in S. Pañcāla.⁴ Ugrāyudha then killed Brahmadatta’s great great grandson Janamejaya Durbuddhi,⁵ the last Nipa king of S. Pañcāla.⁶ He next menaced the Kaurava kingdom after Śantanu’s death, but Bhīṣma killed him and restored Prṣata to his kingdom of Ahicchatra (N. Pañcāla).

c18.141

³ Hv 20, 1083, which calls the latter Nipa; but it may perhaps have confused him with the kings of S. Pañcāla, who were the Nipas.

c18.142

⁴ Hv 20, 1111-12.

c18.143

⁵ He is probably Janamejaya of the Nipas who destroyed all his relatives and friends, MBh v, 73, 2727-9.

c18.144

⁶ Hv 20, 1066-72, 1085-1112. So also the genealogies of the two dynasties. Mat 49, 59-68 confuses the story, and wrongly says Ugrāyudha was of the Solar race. Also MBh xii, 27, 808.

c18.145

The foregoing data yield these synchronisms :—

c18.146

c18.147

There are many synchronisms in the story of the Pāṇḍavas in the Mahābhārata,⁷ comprising the Pauravas from Śantanu to Arjuna’s son Abhimanyu, grandson Parikṣit II and great grandson Janamejaya III; Vasudeva, Kṛṣṇa and all his relations; Damaghoṣa, king of Cedi, his son Śiśupāla-Sunītha and grandson Dhr̥ṣṭaketu; Vr̥ddhaśarman and his son Dantavakra, kings of Karūṣa;¹ Ugrasena and Kaṃsa, kings of Mathurā; Jarāsandha and his son Sahadeva, kings of Magadha; Drupada, king of S. Pañcāla, his son Dhr̥ṣṭadyumna and grandson Dhr̥ṣṭaketu; Br̥hadbala, king of Ayodhyā; Karṇa and his son Vr̥sasena, kings of Aṅga; and many others. These are exhibited so far as they come into the table above.

c18.148

⁷ Full references in Sörensen’s Index.

c18.149

¹ For the marriage connexions between these four groups, see Vā 96, 148–59, Bḍ iii, 71, 150–60, Mat 46, 3–9, Viṣ iv, 14, 10–13: less clearly, Br 14, 19–23, Hv 35, 1827–33. Kuntī’s story is in MBh i, 111 f. ² Vā 99, 270, 282, 300. Mat 50, 77; 271, 5, 23. Bḍ iii, 74, 113. ³ Br 12, 3, and Hv 30, 1601. ⁴ Vā 93, 14 and Bḍ iii, 68, 13. ⁵ So Vā 99, 7–8. Bḍ iii, 74, 7–8. Supported by Gar 139, 64; Viṣ iv, 17, 2; Bhāg ix, 23, 15; and Mat 48, 6. ⁶ So Hv 32, 1837–8. Br 13, 149–50. Also MBh xii, 29, 981–2; but in vii, 62, 2281–2, seemingly as Sudhanvan. ⁷ Referred to in MBh iii, 126, 10465, where he is called ‘king of Gāndhāra’ by anticipation. ⁸ Vā 99, 9. Bḍ iii, 74, 9. Hv 32, 1839. Br 13, 150–1. Mat 48, 7.

c18.150

Lastly, some time after the battle, there is the synchronism of the Paurava (Kuru) king Adhisīmakr̥ṣṇa, the Ayodhyā king Divākara and the Magadha king Senājit,² who will be noticed in chapter XV.

Linked texts (27)

Mahābhārata — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Matsyapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Bhāgavatapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Viṣṇupurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Ṛgvedasaṃhitā — Sanskrit
Liṅgapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Bṛhaddevatā — Śaunaka, Sanskrit
Padmapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Brahmāṇḍapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Brahmapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Kūrmapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Vālmīkirāmāyaṇa — Vālmīki, Sanskrit
Agnipurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Aitareyabrāhmaṇa — Mahidāsa Aitareya, Sanskrit
Śatapathabrāhmaṇa — Yājñavalkya & Śāṇḍilya (Vedic teacher), Sanskrit
Garuḍapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Śāṅkhāyanaśrautasūtra — Śāṅkhāyana, Sanskrit
Kāṭhakasaṃhitā — Sanskrit
Nirukta — Yāska, Sanskrit
Aitareyāraṇyaka — Sanskrit
Vāyupurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Śivapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Mārkaṇḍeyapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Sarvānukramaṇī (Ṛgveda) — Kātyāyana (Vājasaneyi sūtrakāra), Sanskrit
Pañcaviṃśabrāhmaṇa — Sanskrit
Harivaṃśa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Bṛhaddharmapurāṇa — Sanskrit