Ancient Indian Historical Tradition c18.99

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.