Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Ancient Indian Historical Tradition c29: Chapter XXIV. Ancient History from Tradition

Ancient Indian Historical Tradition c29

Language
English

Chapter XXIV. Ancient History from Tradition

c29.2

ALL the genealogical data have now been considered, synchronisms co-ordinating them have been established, and the resulting chronological scheme has been set out in the tables at pages 144–9 and 191–2. That is a skeleton, and an attempt may now be made to add thereto all the other particulars to be gathered from tradition, and to sketch in outline the course of history which all that information suggests. This is now offered here, based on what tradition actually says. It is impossible to avoid repeating a good deal of what has been narrated above in various connexions, but that has been reduced as much as possible, and this sketch should be read with the genealogical exposition in chapters VII to IX and with the discussions of synchronisms in chapters XII to XIV and elsewhere. The authorities for every statement are cited in the notes or by reference to preceding pages, and no statement is made without authority. In considering this outline we must put aside views formed from brahmanical literature, for to construct history from theological works and especially works with a strong priestly bias and lacking the historical sense is inadmissible (pp. 10, 14, 61). There is nothing in this account inconsistent with the Rigveda, as far as I am aware, if we do not read preconceived ideas into the Veda.

c29.3

Tradition naturally begins with myth, and the myth that seeks to explain the earliest conditions in India derives all the dynasties that reigned there (not the populace) from a primaeval king Manu Vaivasvata, son of Vivasvant (the sun), as briefly noticed above (p. 84). It is narrated in three forms, of which the second and third have more in common than the first. According to the first,¹ Manu had ten sons of whom the eldest was Ila, and Ila while on conquest entered Śiva’s grove Śaravana and became changed into a woman, Ilā, because Umā had laid a curse that any male creature which entered it should become female. Ilā consorted with Budha, son of Soma (p. 58), and Ila (sic) had by him a son Purūravas Aila. Then through Śiva’s favour Ilā became a Kimpuruṣa named Sudyumna, a man one month and a woman another month. According to the second form,¹ Manu had nine sons and offered a sacrifice to Mitra and Varuṇa to obtain a son, but a daughter Ilā was born therefrom. She met Budha and bore Purūravas. Then she became a man named Sudyumna but through the same curse² was turned into a woman. Finally, through Śiva’s favour she regained manhood as Sudyumna. The third form³ agrees generally in this version, but places the transformation into manhood and back again into womanhood before she met Budha. Other books condense or combine these versions.⁴

c29.4

¹ Mat 11, 40 to 12, 19. Pad v, 8, 75–124. Amplified into a brahmanical romance and connected with the Godāvarī, Br 108. King Ila mentioned, Pad ii, 64, 41.

c29.5

¹ Vā 85. Bḍ iii, 60. Br 7, 1–23. Hv 10, 613–40. Śiv vii, 60, 2–19. The last three omit the final transformation into womanhood and back into manhood. Cf. Śatapatha Brāhm i, 8, 1.

c29.6

² Vā 85, 27 and Bḍ iii, 60, 27 call the forest Umāvana.

c29.7

³ Viṣ iv, 1, 5–11. Mārk 111 Bhāg, fully, ix, 1, 11–40.

c29.8

⁴ Lg i, 65, 17–31 combines the first and second forms. Kūr i, 20, 4–10 combines all three. Ag 272, 5–10 aud Gar i, 138, 2–3 condense the story. Rām vii, 87 to 90 follows the first form but confusedly; and says Ila was king of Bālhi (87, 3; 90, 18) or Bālhika (87, 7). MBh says (i, 75, 3140–4; 95, 3760) Manu’s daughter was Ilā and her son was Purūravas, she being both his mother and his father. Cf. Br 226, 34.

c29.9

Purūravas was thus fabled to be the son of Ilā or Ila by Budha,⁵ and was well known as Aila.⁶ Sudyumna had three sons,⁷ two of whom were Utkala and Gaya, and the third is named Haritāśva⁸ or Vinatāśva⁹ or shortly Vinata.¹⁰

c29.10

⁵ Also Mat 24, 9–10. Viṣ iv, 6, 20. Vā 90, 45; 91, 1. Bḍ iii, 65, 45; 66, 1. Br 9, 33; 10, 1. Hv 25, 1357; 26, 1363. Gar i, 139, 2.

c29.11

⁶ Rigv x, 95, 7, 18: and passages cited above.

c29.12

⁷ Vā 85, 18–19. Bḍ iii, 60, 17–19. Br 7, 17–19. Hv 10, 631–2. Śiv vii, 60, 14–15. Lg i, 65, 26–7. Ag 272, 8–9. Mat 12, 16–18. Pad v, 8, 121–3.

c29.13

⁸ So Mat and Pad.

c29.14

⁹ So the others in second note above.

c29.15

¹⁰ So Viṣ iv, 1, 12: Kūr i, 20, 9: and Gar i, 138, 3. Mārk 111, 15–16 and Bhāg ix, 1, 41 vary.

c29.16

Manu had nine other sons (p. 84), and divided the earth, that is, India, into ten portions.¹¹ The distribution among the sons is not stated and some were excluded as Pṛṣadhra. Some Puranas imply that Sudyumna had a portion,¹² but others say he obtained none because he had been a woman.¹ Nevertheless the authorities generally declare, first, that he received the town Pratiṣṭhāna ² and gave it to Purūravas ³; and secondly, that his three sons had territories of their own,⁴ thus Utkala had the Utkala country,⁵ Vinatāśva had a western country,⁶ and Gaya had the city Gayā and the eastern region; but according to two Puranas,⁷ Gaya had only the city Gayā, and Haritāśva had the eastern region together with the Kurus, that is, the Northern Kurus. These three principalities may be designated here collectively the ‘Saudyumnas’, a name which is sometimes given to them.⁸

c29.17

¹¹ Vā 85, 20–1. Bḍ iii, 60, 20–1. Br 7, 20–1. Hv 10, 633–5. Śiv vii, 60, 16. Cf. Baudhāyana ii, 2, 3, 2.

c29.18

¹² Mat 12, 18–19 and Pad v, 8, 123–4.

c29.19

¹ So those in second note above (except Śiv); Viṣ iv, 1, 12; and Lg i, 65, 29.

c29.20

² The later Prayāga (Allahabad): see p. 85.

c29.21

³ Vā 85, 21-3; Bd iii, 60, 21-2; Br 7, 21-3; Hv 10, 635-6; Śiv vii, 60, 17-19; and Lg i, 65, 29-31; collated. Viṣ iv 1, 12-13, Ag 272, 9-10, and Bhāg ix, 1, 42 equivalently. Mārk 111, 17-18 varies.

c29.22

⁴ The passages cited in ninth note above suggest this text:— UtkalasyÔtkalaṃ rāṣṭraṃ Vinatāśvasya paścimam dik pūrvā tasya rājarṣer Gayasya tu Gayā purī. Bhāg ix, 1, 41, is late and wrong.

c29.23

⁵ The country west of Bengal and south of Gayā.

c29.24

⁶ Not particularized, and never alluded to afterwards.

c29.25

⁷ Mat 12, 18 and Pad v, 8, 123.

c29.26

⁸ e. g. Vā 99, 266.

c29.27

The nine sons assigned to Manu ⁹ were Ikṣvāku, Nābhāga ¹⁰ (or Nṛga ¹¹), Dhṛṣṭa, Śaryāti, Nariṣyanta, Prāmśu,¹² Nābhānediṣṭha,¹³ Karūṣa and Pṛṣadhra.

c29.28

⁹ P. 84. MBh i, 75, 3142-3 says he had 50 other sons, who perished through mutual dissension.

c29.29

¹⁰ More probably Nabhāga. Cf. Nabhāka in Rigv viii, 40, 5.

c29.30

¹¹ So Bd and Viṣ. Lg calls him Nābhāga and also Nṛga (i, 66, 45). Bhāg makes two sons of these names.

c29.31

¹² Kuśanābha in Mat and Pad. Śiv and Mārk differ.

c29.32

¹³ This name has been greatly corrupted (through the influence of the name Nābhāga), thus, Nābhāgodiṣṭa, Nābhāgāriṣṭa, &c., and then split up into two, Nābhāga and Diṣṭa, Ariṣṭa or Riṣṭa. It is the Nābhānediṣṭha (as Viṣ reading Nābhāganediṣṭa, iv, 1, 5, 15, shows) which occurs in Rigveda x, 61, 18, a hymn attributed to him.

c29.33

From Karūṣa were descended the numerous kṣatriya clans of the Kārūṣas, who were determined fighters.¹⁴ They occupied the Karūṣa country, the region round the modern Rewa and eastwards to the R. Sone.¹ From Dhṛṣṭa² came a number of clans called Dhārṣṭakas, who were reckoned kṣatriyas.³ Nothing further is said about them except that the Śiva says they occupied the Balhīka country,⁴ which may mean Balkh, but was more probably the Vāhlīka country in the Panjab.⁵ About Nariṣyanta’s offspring there is much confusion. Some Puranas say they were the Śakas.⁶ If so, they lay outside India. The late Bhāgavata gives a list of his descendants, and says they developed into the Āgniveśyāyana brahmans;⁷ but this, if true, more probably refers to Nariṣyanta, king of the Vaiśāla dynasty.⁸ Pṛṣadhra, it is said, became a śūdra, because he killed his guru’s cow and was cursed⁹: and two Puranas say the guru was Cyavana.¹⁰ Nābhāga¹¹ and his son Ambarīṣa (p. 98) probably reigned on the R. Jumna,¹² but their line played no part in traditional history. Nābhānediṣṭha’s line reigned in the country of Vaiśālī (p. 96);¹³ and Śaryāti, who is called Śaryāta in brahmanical books,¹ founded the dynasty of Ānarta (p. 97).

c29.34

¹⁴ Vā 86, 2-3. Bd iii, 61, 2-3. Br 7, 25, 42. Hv 11, 658. Mat 12, 24. Pad v, 8, 129. Śiv vii, 60, 31. Ag 272, 17. Mārk 113, 1. Lg i, 66, 51. Viṣ iv, 1, 14. Gar i, 138, 4. Bhāg ix, 2, 16, which says they protected N. India, i. e. from attacks from the south.

c29.35

¹ Mārk, my translation, p. 341.

c29.36

² Hv, Lg and Śiv, Dhṛṣṇu. Mat 12, 20-1; Pad v, 8, 125-6; and Lg i, 66, 46 give him three sons.

c29.37

³ Vā 88, 4-5. Bḍ iii, 63, 4-5. Br 7, 25. Hv 10, 642. Viṣ iv, 2, 2. Ag 272, 11. But Gar i, 138, 15 says these kṣatriyas became ‘vaiśyas’, and Bhāg ix, 2, 17 ‘chiefly brahmans’.

c29.38

⁴ Śiv vii, 60, 20—Vārṣṇeyo (read Dhārṣṇeya) Balhīkaṃ kṣetram āvasan.

c29.39

⁵ Mārk, my translation, p. 311.

c29.40

⁶ Br 7, 24; Hv 10, 641; Ag 272, 10; and Śiv vii, 60, 19, say—Nariṣyataḥ Śakāḥ putrāḥ. Mat 12, 20 and Pad v, 8, 125 give him instead a son Śuka; and Lg i, 66, 49 a son Jitātman.

c29.41

⁷ ix, 2, 19-22—ending with Agniveśya who was the great rishi Jātukarṇya famed as Kānīna; and from him sprang the Āgniveśyāyana family of brahmans. But see p. 217.

c29.42

⁸ Br 7, 27 is misplaced and refers to Nariṣyanta and Dama of the Vaiśāla dynasty; cf. Vā 86, 12: Bḍ iii, 61, 8: and p. 147.

c29.43

⁹ Br 7, 43. Hv 11, 659. Lg i, 66, 52. Śiv vii, 60, 32. Mat 12, 25. Ag 272, 18. Viṣ iv, 1, 13. Gar i, 138, 4. Pad v, 8, 130. Bhāg ix, 2, 3-14 amplifies the story with inventions.

c29.44

¹⁰ Vā 86, 1-2. Bḍ iii, 61, 1-2.

c29.45

¹¹ Nṛga is sometimes substituted for Nābhāga (ante), and Bhāg ix, 2, 17-18 provides Nṛga with descendants, but that genealogy seems to have been fashioned partly by mistakenly inverting the ancestry of king Nṛga and his grandfather Oghavant in MBh xiii, 2, 120-3. Lg i, 66, 45 is absurd. See eighth note below.

c29.46

¹² MBh iii, 129, 10514. It would have soon disappeared under the early Aila conquests.

c29.47

¹³ Vaiśālī is Basāṛ, JRAS, 1902, pp. 267 f.

c29.48

¹ See Vedic Index, ii, 364, 375.

c29.49

Ikṣvāku, the eldest and chief son, obtained Madhyadeśa,² and was the progenitor of the Solar race or dynasty,³ with its capital at Ayodhyā. There are two versions of the development of his descendants. One found in six Puranas⁴ says—Ikṣvāku had a hundred sons,⁵ chief of whom were the eldest Vikukṣi, and Nimi and Daṇḍa (or Daṇḍaka): of those sons fifty, chief of whom was Śakuni, were kings in Uttarāpatha (N. India) and forty-eight others, chief of whom was Vaśāti, were rulers in Dakṣiṇāpatha (the Dekhan).⁶ Vikukṣi (also named Śaśāda) succeeded Ikṣvāku and reigned at Ayodhyā, and his successor was Kakutstha (p. 93). The other version is given by four Puranas⁷ and runs thus:—Ikṣvāku had a hundred sons of whom the eldest was Vikukṣi⁸ (and, as the Padma says, two others were Nimi and Daṇḍaka). Vikukṣi had fifteen sons who were kings north of Meru, and the 114 others⁹ were kings south of Meru. The eldest (of Vikukṣi's sons) was Kakutstha. The Bhāgavata (ix, 6, 4-5) gives a third version, but it is too late to be worthy of notice. The other Puranas give no such information.

c29.50

² Br 7, 20. Hv 10, 634. Śiv vii, 60, 17. Lg i, 65, 28. Cf. Bḍ iii, 60, 20; Vā 85, 21.

c29.51

³ Mat 12, 15. Pad v, 8, 120. Other accounts imply it.

c29.52

⁴ Vā 88, 8-11, 20, 24; Bḍ iii, 63, 8-11, 21, 25; Br 7, 45-8, 51; Hv 11, 661-4, 667; and Śiv vii, 60, 33-5, 37; collated. Viṣ iv, 2, 3, 6 agrees.

c29.53

⁵ So also MBh xiii, 2, 88.

c29.54

⁶ Among them would be his tenth son Daśāśva, who reigned at Māhiṣmatī on the R. Narbadā and whose descendants are mentioned, according to MBh xiii, 2, 88-172. King Nṛga, who is mentioned, ibid. 120-3, and who appears to be the same as Nṛga who reigned on the R. Payoṣṇī (Tapti: MBh iii, 88, 8329-32; 120, 10290; 121, 10291), was probably of a different family. See infra.

c29.55

⁷ Mat 12, 26-8; Pad v, 8, 130-3; more briefly Lg i, 65, 31-2, and Kūr i, 20, 10-11; collated.

c29.56

⁸ These Puranas do not mention Śaśāda as his name.

c29.57

⁹ That is, apparently, the rest of Ikṣvāku's and Vikukṣi's sons.

c29.58

From Ikṣvāku's son Nimi (or Nemi) sprang the dynasty that reigned in Videha.¹⁰ He dwelt in a town famed as Jayanta (of which however nothing more seems to be known) and the capital was also Mithilā, which is said to have been named after his son Mithi.¹

c29.59

¹⁰ See pp. 84, 95-6, 215.

c29.60

¹ Vā 89, 1–2, 6. Bḍ iii, 64, 1–2, 6.

c29.61

Some of the Puranas, as just mentioned, assign to Ikṣvāku a third son called Daṇḍa or Daṇḍaka, and it is said that after him was named the great Daṇḍaka forest ² which more or less covered the Dekhan. This seems to be an eponym to account for the name of the forest, because it clashes with the other statements about the many kings that occupied the Dekhan. However that may be, the noteworthy point is that the original sovereignty in that region was attributed to the same stock or race which was dominant in Ayodhyā and Videha.³

c29.62

² Pad v, 34, 5, 14–59. Rām vii, 81, 18–19. The Daṇḍakas are mentioned, MBh ii, 30, 1169: their kingdom, xiii, 153, 7223.

c29.63

³ So even Bhāg says (ix, 1, 2–3)—Satyavrata, king of Draviḍa, became Vivasvant’s son Manu, and his sons were Ikṣvāku and others, kings.

c29.64

The kingdoms mentioned continued as they have been described, with the exception of the Aila dynasty at Pratiṣṭhāna. That quickly developed. Northward its expansion was limited by the kingdom of Ayodhyā and southward by the warlike Kāruṣas, hence its extension began north-westward and eastward along the Ganges. Purūravas was succeeded by Āyu at Pratiṣṭhāna, and another son Amāvasu founded another kingdom, the capital of which was then or afterwards Kānyakubja (Kanauj).⁴ Āyu was succeeded by Nahuṣa,⁵ and another son Kṣatravṛddha established himself at Kāśi (Benares).⁶ Nahuṣa was a famous king.⁷ His son and successor Yayāti was a renowned conqueror,⁸ extended his kingdom widely, and was reckoned a samrāj.⁹ He appears to have conquered not only all Madhyadeśa west of the Ayodhyā and Kānyakubja kingdoms, and north-west as far as the R. Sarasvatī,¹⁰ but also the country west, south, and south-east of his territory of Pratiṣṭhāna.¹ He had five sons, Yadu, Turvasu, Druhyu, Anu and Pūru (p. 87). After a long reign² he divided his territories among them.³ Pūru the youngest is said to have been the most dutiful⁴ and Yayāti installed him as his successor⁵ in the ancestral sovereignty in the middle region, that is, in the southern half of the Ganges-Jumna doab with the capital Pratiṣṭhāna, and gave the elder sons the outlying territories.⁶ The texts collated show that Yadu got the south-west, Turvasu the south-east, Druhyu the west and Anu the north.⁷ These directions are taken with reference to the ancestral kingdom that Pūru obtained; hence Yadu’s realm lay in the country watered by the rivers Chambal (Carmanvatī), Betwa (Vetravatī) and Ken (Śuktimatī); Druhyu’s kingdom in the country west of the Jumna and north of the Chambal; Anu’s realm comprised the northern portion of the Ganges-Jumna plain; and Turvasu’s kingdom the territory around Rewa, the Kārūṣas, who occupied it (ante) having been subdued, for nothing more is said

c29.65

⁴ First mentioned as the capital in Gādhi’s time, MBh v, 118, 4005.

c29.66

⁵ Fables about them in MBh, and Pad ii, 103, 101 to 117. Nahuṣa and Yayāti, Rām ii, 5, 10: iii, 66, 7.

c29.67

⁶ Kāśi capital, Vā 92, 6, 18, 21; Bḍ iii, 67, 7, 20, 23. Vārāṇasī, Vā 92, 23–68; Bḍ iii, 67, 26–72.

c29.68

⁷ He had a large kingdom, MBh i, 75, 3151–4.

c29.69

⁸ Vā 93, 90. Bḍ iii, 68, 19, 92. Mat 24, 55–6. Lg i, 67, 13. Br 12, 4, 18. Hv 30, 1602, 1616. MBh xii, 29, 987. Yayāti Nāhuṣa is often mentioned.

c29.70

⁹ MBh i, 75, 3156. Also sārvabhauma, 129, 10516.

c29.71

¹⁰ Rigv vii, 95, 2. MBh ix, 42, 2349–52. Cf. Bṛhadd vi, 20–4. Nābhāga’s line (ante) thus disappeared early.

c29.72

¹ MBh v, 113, 3905 rightly makes Pratiṣṭhāna his capital, but 114, 3918 is wrong, see p. 142.

c29.73

² He is fabled to have had extra life, because Pūru gave him his own youth in exchange for his old age for a time; Vā 93, 28–75; Bḍ iii, 68, 29–76; Br 12, 22–48; Hv 30, 1621–47. Mat 32 to 34; MBh i, 75, 3161–80; 83 to 85; Viṣ iv, 10, 3–8; Bṛ 146; Rām vii, 58; 59. The old age is made the result of Uśanas-Śukra’s curse in Mat, MBh, Rām and Viṣ.

c29.74

³ Vā 93, 90. Bḍ iii, 68, 92. Br 12, 18. Hv 30, 1617. Lg i, 67, 13 (incorrectly). So MBh vii, 63, 2296 speaking of the four sons other than Pūru: xii, 29, 990.

c29.75

⁴ See second note above.

c29.76

⁵ MBh i, 75, 3181; 85, 3531; v, 148, 5051: vii, 63, 2301.

c29.77

⁶ MBh i, 87, 3555: iii, 129, 10515–16: xii, 29, 991. Mat 36, 5, 12.

c29.78

⁷ Vā 93, 88–90. Bḍ iii, 68, 90–2. Kūr i, 22, 9–11. Lg i, 67, 11–12. These suggest the following text:—

c29.79

Abhiṣicya tataḥ Pūruṃ sva-rājye sutam ātmanaḥ
diśi dakṣiṇa-pūrvasyāṃ Turvasuṃ tu nyaveśayat
dakṣiṇāparato rājā Yaduṃ jyeṣṭhaṃ nyaveśayat
pratīcyāṃ uttarasyāṃ ca Druhyuṃ cānuṃ ca tāv ubhau.

c29.80

Viṣ iv, 10, 16–18 is similar, but corrupts dakṣiṇāparato to dakṣiṇāpathato. Hv 30, 1617–19 is similar, but misplaces Yadu in pūrvottarasyāṃ, which is impossible because there lay the Ayodhyā kingdom. Br 12, 19–20 is somewhat alike, but misplaces Yadu in pūrvasyāṃ, which is impossible because Kāśī lay there. The late Bhāg (ix, 19, 22–3) follows the Viṣṇu’s mistake, reading for dakṣiṇāpathato its equivalent dakṣiṇato, and interchanges Turvasu and Druhyu.

c29.81

about Karūṣa until Vasu king of Cedi conquered it long afterwards (p. 118).¹

c29.82

¹ MBh v, 148, 5046-52 says—Yadu was disobedient and dwelt in Nāgasāhvaya, so Yayāti cursed him and removed him to Gāndhāra: but this is wrong, because the Yādavas never were in Gāndhāra, and Nāgasāhvaya, i.e. Hastināpura, did not exist till built long afterwards, probably by Hastin. MBh i, 85, 3533, Mat 34, 30 (and Pad v, 12, 109 partially), give instead a wholly different account, thus:—

c29.83

At this time then the Aila race had dominated the whole of mid North India with the exception of the Ayodhyā kingdom, and had developed into seven kingdoms, those of Yayāti's five sons and the two earlier of Kānyakubja and Kāśi. It had subjugated Madhyadeśa and made it emphatically Aila. The other kingdoms mentioned above continued, except that the Karūṣas, and apparently the Nābhāgas, had been subdued. The Saudyumna stock remained unaffected. The Ayodhyā realm prospered,² and one of its early kings named Śrāvasta is said to have founded the city Śrāvastī.³ The chief development occurred among Yadu's descendants, who increased and divided at once into two great branches, the Haihayas and Yādavas (p. 87). Subsequent occurrences show that the Yādava branch occupied the northern portion of Yadu's territory and the Haihayas the southern part.

c29.84

³ So the genealogies, especially in Vā and Bḍ. Śrāvastī is identified with Saheṭh Maheṭh, JRAS, 1909, pp. 1066 f.

c29.85

There is some suggestion that the southern part of the Rajputana desert was still a very shallow sea⁴ in those times, for in the story of the rishi Utaṅka Śrāvasta's second successor Kuvalāśva is said to have killed a Rākṣasa, Daitya or asura, Dhundhu (whence he got the name Dhundhumāra), near a sand-filled sea called Ujjālaka in the desert plains, which mean that desert.⁵ Again, Viśvāmitra performed austerities and attained brahmanhood at Ruṣaṅgu's tīrtha on the R. Sarasvatī, in low lands near the sea (p. 205, note ²). The Sarasvatī would have flowed into that sea. Further, there

c29.86

² The statement in MBh i, 95, 3765 that Pūru's second successor Prācinvant conquered the east is coined out of his name wrongly.

c29.87

⁴ Imp. Gaz. of India (1907), i, p. 38.

c29.88

⁵ Vā 88, 28-60. Bḍ iii, 63, 31-62. Br 7, 54-86. Hv 11, 676-703. Viṣ iv, 2, 13. MBh iii, 200, 13489 to 203, 13625. Bhāg ix, 6, 21-3. The story, though in fabulous form, is worthy of note.

c29.89

Yados tu Yādavā jātās Turvasor Yavanāḥ smṛtāḥ
Druhyoḥ sutās tu vai Bhojā Anos tu mleccha-jātayaḥ

c29.90

which seems unintelligible compared with all other tradition, and is probably late and certainly very doubtful.

c29.91

is no mention (as far as I know) of any crossing the southern part of the desert even long afterwards.¹ If the sea did extend then over the southern part of that desert, that will throw some light on subsequent developments, and explain the fact that the southern part of the Indus region appears to have lain outside all early historical tradition.

c29.92

¹ The pilgrims’ itinerary (MBh iii, 82, 4097–5032) was from Arbuda (Mount Abu) south to Prabhāsa (Somnath), then north to the junction of the Sarasvatī with the sea, south to Dvāravatī (Dwārkā), then to the mouth of the Indus (which must have been partly by sea), and north up the Indus. There is absolutely nothing in historical tradition (which goes back far beyond the Rigveda) to support the conditions conjectured by Abinas Ch. Das in his *Rigvedic India* (map at p. 90), and the whole of tradition negatives them as this and the next two chapters show.

c29.93

The Yādava branch first developed a great kingdom under its king Śaśabindu, who was a famous cakravartin,² which means he extended his sway over neighbouring countries. The neighbouring countries were the Paurava realm on his east and the Druhyu territory on his north. He appears to have conquered the Pauravas, because there is a great gap in the Paurava genealogy from this point till Duṣyanta restored the dynasty long afterwards,³ which means that the dynasty underwent an eclipse. He also probably pressed on the Druhyus and forced them more into the Panjab, as will appear. He had many sons, who were known as the Śaśabindu or Śaśabindava princes;⁴ hence it would seem that they territories were divided among them into many small principalities, for none of his successors were of great note.

c29.94

² See p. 39. Also Vā 95, 19. Bḍ iii, 70, 19. Mat 44, 18. Pad v, 13, 3. Viṣ iv, 12, 1. Ag 274, 13. Bhāg ix, 23, 32.

c29.95

³ See pp. 144, 146, 156–7.

c29.96

⁴ See passages following those cited in second note above. Also MBh vii, 65, 2322–4: xii, 29, 999: Lg i, 68, 26: Gar i, 139, 26.

c29.97

The kingdom of Ayodhyā then rose to very great eminence under Yuvanāśva II⁵ and especially his son Māndhātṛ.⁶ The latter married Śaśabindu’s daughter Bindumatī (p. 150). He was a very famous king, a cakravartin and a samrāj, and extended his sway very widely⁷ (pp. 39, 40). He must have overrun the Kānyakubja kingdom and the prostrate Paurava realm,¹ because, pushing beyond them westwards, he had a long contest with and conquered the Druhyu king, who appears to have been then on the confines of the Panjab;² so that the next Druhyu king Gāndhāra retired to the north-west and gave his name to the Gāndhāra country (p. 167). These indications suggest that he also pressed on the Ānavas, who lay almost between him and the Druhyus. There is no allusion that he assailed the Yādavas, nor probability, because the Śāśabindavas were his brothers-in-law. He appears to have been a great sacrificer and a hymn-maker.³

c29.98

⁵ Wrongly called Saudyumni in an absurd fable, MBh iii, 126, 10432–5.

c29.99

⁶ Called *Mandhātṛ* in Rigveda. See the genealogies.

c29.100

⁷ MBh iii, 126, 10462. Kings are mentioned as conquered by him, MBh vii, 62, 2281–2: xii, 29, 981–2: but the names are uncertain. Gaya might be the king on the Payoṣṇī (p. 40), and Nṛga (if correct) the king in p. 257 note 6. For another later Nṛga, p. 109.

c29.101

¹ For he sacrificed on the R. Jumna (MBh iii, 125, 10421), which was in Paurava or Ānava territory.

c29.102

² He sacrificed in the country afterwards called Kurukṣetra (id. 126, 10467), which was Druhyu or Ānava land then.

c29.103

³ Chap. XXIII. Agni was Mandhātṛ’s chiefest Dasyu-slayer, Rigv viii, 39, 8. The Aśvins are said to have succoured him among the kṣetrapatyas, no doubt referring to his conquests; id. i, 112, 13.

c29.104

Māndhātṛ had three sons, Purukutsa, Ambariṣa and Mucukunda.⁴ Tradition suggests that Māndhātṛ or his sons carried their arms south to the river Narmadā.⁵ Purukutsa’s wife was named Narmadā;⁶ and a fable says that the Nāgas induced him through the river’s mediation to destroy the Mauneya Gandharvas, who had despoiled them.⁷ Moreover Mucukunda, who was a famous king (p. 93), appears to be the Mucukunda whom the Harivaṃśa describes in an erroneous setting. He built and fortified a town on the rocky bank of that river, at the foot of both the Vindhya and Ṛkṣa (Satpura) ranges, that is, at a place where the two ranges approach the river. It was Māhiṣmatī,⁸ the modern Māndhātā on an island in the river.⁹ He also built a spacious town named Purikā on the south bank near the Ṛkṣa range. They were his capitals. His kingdom did not survive long, as will appear.

c29.105

⁴ See chap. XXIII. The fable about his fifty daughters and the rishi Saubhari is discussed, p. 73.

c29.106

⁵ Purukutsa at the Narmadā, Viṣ i, 2, 9 ; vi, 8, 44.

c29.107

⁶ Page 69, and genealogies.

c29.108

⁷ Viṣ iv, 3, 6–12 (bis); and so identified, p. 69.

c29.109

⁸ Hv 95, 5218–28, the genealogy of which is wrong, as explained, see pp. 122, 170. His city Māhiṣmatī existed long before the time of Mādhava and Sattvata, who are made contemporaries of Mucukunda in this story (verses 5205–6, 5240–2). It was the capital also of Arjuna Kārtavīrya (see infra).

c29.110

⁹ The passages that show this are—Hv 33, 1870. Br 13, 176–8. Vā 94, 28 and Bd iii, 69, 28 (in both which for hema read phena). Raghuv vi, 43. Pad v, 12, 130–2. Mat 43, 29–31. Discussed in JRAS, 1910, pp. 444–7, 867–9.

c29.111

The supremacy of Ayodhyā soon waned, and the Kānyakubja kingdom rose into local prominence under its king Jahnu;¹ and shortly afterwards, and perhaps in consequence of the disturbances caused by Māndhātṛ’s conquests, three great movements occurred among the Haihayas, Ānavas and Druhyus.

c29.112

¹ After him the Ganges which flowed through his territory was named Jāhnavī. But a fable is told to explain it, Vā 91, 54–8 : Bḍ iii, 66, 25–8 : Br 10, 15–19; 13, 83–6 : Hv 27, 1417–21; 32, 1757–61 : Viṣ iv, 7, 2–3 : Bhāg ix, 15, 3 : MBh xiii, 4, 202. Bḍ iii, 56, 44–8 an anachronism.

c29.113

The Haihayas prospered in their region of South Malwa, and one of their kings Sāhañja is said to have founded a city called Sāhañjanī,² and his son Mahiṣmant also the town Māhiṣmatī ³ mentioned above. Their successor Bhadraśreṇya ⁴ carried his arms eastward, conquered the kingdom of Kāśī, took possession of Benares and reigned there, which means that he traversed the prostrate Paurava kingdom. The Kāśī king Divodāsa I recovered his territory and capital from Bhadraśreṇya’s sons, sparing one young son Durdama, but abandoned it afterwards ⁵ and built a new capital on the R. Gomatī at the eastern border of his land. The Rākṣasa Kṣemaka then took possession of Benares, and Durdama reconquered the kingdom. This occupation by Rākṣasas suggests that the country had been so devastated by war that rude tribes from the forests around occupied it; and in consonance with this it is said a conflict took place between Anaraṇya king of Ayodhyā, who reigned about this time, and a Rāvaṇa,⁶ who would be a king from the Dekhan.⁷ The Haihayas held the Kāśī territory and seem to have been mainly engaged in raiding N. India.

c29.114

² Only Br 13, 156 and Hv 33, 1845–6 say so. His name is given differently by Mat, Vā, &c.

c29.115

³ Only Hv 33, 1847 says this; and, if this is true, he probably captured the place from Mucukunda’s successors, and gave it his own name. Pad vi, 115, 4 says it was founded by Mahiṣa.

c29.116

⁴ All this account is discussed, p. 153.

c29.117

⁵ This is explained as the consequence of a curse by Nikumbha in a fable about Śiva and Pārvatī in connexion with Benares: Vā 92, 24–61 : Bḍ iii, 67, 27–64 and Hv 29, 1542–82, 15491. Br 11, 41–3, 54 and Hv 32, 1737–9 relate the curse briefly.

c29.118

⁶ Rāvaṇa killed him, so Bḍ iii, 63, 74; Lg i, 65, 44; Rām vi, 60, 8–10 and vii, 19 (amplified), both identifying him with the later Rāvaṇa killed by Rāma. Reversely, Vā 88, 75.

c29.119

⁷ Other Rāvaṇas will be mentioned. Bhāg ix, 6, 33 errs.

c29.120

The movements among the Ānavas and Druhyus seem to have been connected. The Ānavas (p. 108) rose to power about this time under two able kings, Mahāśala and Mahāmanas, and the latter appears to have encroached on the east of the Panjab, because he is styled a cakravartin and lord of the seven dvīpas.¹ Under his two sons, Uśīnara and Titikṣu, the Ānavas divided into two branches. One branch headed by Uśīnara² established separate kingdoms on the eastern border of the Panjab (p. 109), namely, those of the Yaudheyas, Ambaṣṭhas, Navarāṣṭra and the city Kṛmilā; and his famous son Śivi Auśīnara (pp. 39–41) originated the Śivis³ in Śivapura and, extending his conquests westwards, founded through his four sons the kingdoms of the Vṛṣadarbhas, Madras (or Madrakas), Kekayas (or Kaikeyas) and Suvīras (or Sauvīras), thus occupying the whole of the Panjab except the north-west corner. The Druhyus ruled in the Panjab at that time (ante), so that Śivi and his sons must have driven them back into that corner, which became known as Gāndhāra after the Druhyu king Gāndhāra. There the Druhyus maintained their position permanently, and it is said that five generations afterwards they began to multiply and in time founded many principalities in the mleccha countries in the northern region beyond India.⁴ They would have formed the dominant kṣatriya class there and have also carried their religion there.

c29.121

¹ Vā 99, 16–17. Bḍ iii, 74, 15–16. Mat 48, 14. If, as seems probable, dvīpa here means ‘doab’, he might well have been lord of the northern portions of the seven doabs from the R. Gomātī north-westwards.

c29.122

² Well known, MBh xiii, 67, 3689.

c29.123

³ Called Śivas in Rigv vii, 18, 7.

c29.124

⁴ See p. 108, notes ² and ⁴. The mention of a ‘hundred sons’ means here ‘near descendants’ as it does elsewhere.

c29.125

The other branch of the Ānavas under Titikṣu moved eastward and, passing beyond Videha and the Vaiśālī country, descended into East Bihar among the ruder Saudyumna stock. There they founded a kingdom, which was called the kingdom in the east (p. 109), and which afterwards developed into Aṅga and four other kingdoms as will be explained.

c29.126

About this time lived Kuśa, king of Kānyakubja, and his younger son Amūrtarayas⁵ (or Amūrtarayas' son Gaya) is said to have carved out for himself a kingdom from another portion of the Saudyumna stock in the country known afterwards as Magadha:¹ and this was quite possible, for the only intervening territory was Kāśi, which had been ravaged by the Haihayas. Gaya reigned in the Gayā district and was a king of note (pp. 39, 40). Nothing more is said of this dynasty, except that it was overthrown afterwards.² The genealogies give Amūrtarayas a younger brother Vasu;³ and it is said Vasu founded a kingdom at Girivraja,⁴ but this is very doubtful, for he seems to be confused with Vasu Caidya who conquered Magadha afterwards (p. 118).

c29.127

⁵ Vā 91, 62. Bḍ iii, 66, 32. Viṣ iv, 7, 3. Gar i, 139, 5. Hv 27, 1425 and Br 10, 23 call him Mūrtimant. Mat 49, 8 wrongly makes him son of the Paurava king Antināra (= Matināra).

c29.128

¹ Rām i, 32, 7 says in Dharmāraṇya; which was a wood near Gayā, MBh iii, 84, 8063–4; 87, 8304–8: xiii, 25, 1744; 165, 7655. The Rām genealogy, however, is full of errors, p. 118.

c29.129

² By Rākṣasas Rām i, 24, 25–31. But long afterwards the queen of Dilīpa II of Ayodhyā is said to have been a Māgadha princess; Pad vi, 198, 2–4: Raghuv i, 31, 57.

c29.130

³ First four passages, third note above.

c29.131

⁴ Rām i, 32, 2–3, 7–10, where Vaidarbhī is an anachronism.

c29.132

It was about this time apparently that the Sāryāta kingdom in Gujarat came to an end.⁵ The capital Kuśasthalī was captured by Puṇyajana Rākṣasas, and the Sāryātas fled inland to other countries where they developed into bands of noble kṣatriyas; and Sāryātas are mentioned as forming one of the five groups of the Haihaya-Tālajaṅghas (p. 102). The Harivaṃśa adds that ultimately they became merged with hill tribes,⁶ which would seem to mean that, after Sagara destroyed the Haihaya power, they became so merged.

c29.133

⁵ Vā 88, 1–4. Bd iii, 63, 1–4. Br 7, 37–41. Hv 11, 653–7. Śiv vii, 60, 28–30. Viṣ iv, 2, 1–2. Bhāg ix, 3, 36.

c29.134

⁶ So probably also Br reading, corruptly.

c29.135

The principal brahmans who dwelt in the lower region of the Narbadā were the Bhārgavas. They were ill-treated by the successors of the Haihaya king Kṛtavīrya and fled into Madhyadeśa. About that time or a little earlier was born the famous rishi Ṛcīka Aurva, who was chief among them.⁷ Kṛtavīrya’s son Arjuna⁸ then propitiated Datta the Ātreya and was favoured by him (p. 229). He was a great monarch and conqueror (p. 41), and continuing the successes mentioned above, raised the Haihaya power to pre-eminence during a long reign. He captured Māhiṣmatī from the Karkoṭaka Nāgas¹ and made it his fortress-capital. He extended his conquests from the mouth of the Narbadā² as far as the Himalayas (p. 206). He defeated a Rāvaṇa, who is called king of Laṅka (in Ceylon) and had apparently come northward on conquest, and imprisoned him in Māhiṣmatī but released him afterwards.³ The Bhārgavas were incensed against the Haihayas and sought to strengthen their position by alliances with kṣatriyas and the use of arms.⁴ Thus Ṛcīka Aurva married Satyavatī, daughter of Gādhi, king of Kānyakubja. Their son was Jamadagni, and Gādhi's son Viśvaratha became the brahman Viśvāmitra, and was succeeded by his son Aṣṭaka.⁵ Jamadagni married a princess of Ayodhyā.

c29.136

⁷ These events are fully noticed, pp. 68, 151, 197–9.

c29.137

⁸ For his doings, see the Haihaya genealogies (p. 102). He is highly extolled there (p. 41) and in MBh xii, 49, 1759: xiii, 152, 7188–9: Mārk 19, 21–31. But he is sometimes described as a bad king, especially in stories of his conflict with Rāma Jāmadagnya, e.g. MBh iii, 115, 11038–42: xii, 49, 1755–8: xiv, 29, 818 f: Pad vi, 268, 34f.

c29.138

¹ The Karkoṭakas were in the Dekhan, MBh viii, 44, 2066. Karkoṭaka was a Nāga chief, iii, 66, 2611: viii, 34, 1483: Hv 168, 9502: cf. Pad vi, 242, 2. They may have conquered Māhiṣmatī, see ante.

c29.139

² This region was Anūpa; cf. MBh iii, 116, 11089; 117, 10209.

c29.140

³ See p. 242. Noticed, Raghuv vi, 38-40.

c29.141

⁴ All this fully discussed, pp. 151, 197-9, 205-6.

c29.142

⁵ So Kānyakubja genealogies, p. 146. Acknowledged in the brahmanical fable of Gālava and its sequel (p. 73): MBh iii, 197, 13301-2; v, 118, 4019, 4024: Mat 37, 6.

c29.143

At that time the kingdom of Ayodhyā passed through a crisis. King Trayyāruṇa banished his only son Satyavrata Triśaṅku and handed the realm over to his priest Devarāj Vasiṣṭha, but after twelve years Viśvāmitra restored Satyavrata to the throne, overcoming Vasiṣṭha. Satyavrata was succeeded by his son Hariścandra; Rohita succeeded him and is said to have built a fortress-town Rohitapura.⁶

c29.144

⁶ Hv 13, 756.

c29.145

Arjuna had many sons.⁷ Chief among them was Jayadhvaja who reigned in Avanti; and others were Śūra and Śūrasena,⁸ who may have had territories of their own.⁹ Jayadhvaja's son was Tālajaṅgha, and he had many sons, chief of whom was Vītihotra. At the end of his long reign Arjuna came into collision with Jamadagni and his son Rāma. The genealogical accounts do not explain how that happened, except as the result of Āpava's curse (p. 206). The simplest stories say that Arjuna or his sons raided Jamadagni’s hermitage, ill-treated him and carried off his calf; Rāma in revenge killed Arjuna; Arjuna’s sons killed Jamadagni; and Rāma declared war against them and slew many of them and of the Haihayas.¹ These stories are largely brahmanical,² and there is no kṣatriya version,³ yet some incidental allusions suggest that Rāma and the Bhārgavas were supported by the princes of Ayodhyā and Kānyakubja, who were allied to them by marriage⁴ and who would naturally have opposed the dangerous raids of the Haihayas. Such a combination would explain how Rāma vanquished the Haihayas. Hostilities then ceased for a time.⁵ The Haihayas received a set-back,⁶ because it was not till later that they overcame Kānyakubja and Ayodhyā.

c29.146

⁷ For these particulars see the genealogies, p. 102.

c29.147

⁸ They are named in Bḍ. iii, 45, 1; 46, 21, 23.

c29.148

⁹ See p. 171. There is no clear mention of the Śūrasenas about this time except in Bḍ iii, 49, 5-6, but that seems to be an anachronism, for it speaks of their capital Madhurā (Mathurā) also, which was not founded till afterwards, as will be narrated.

c29.149

¹ MBh iii, 115, 11035; 116, 11089 to 117, 10203 : vii, 70, 2429–33 : xii, 49, 1760–70 : xiii, 34, 2126. See pp. 151, 199.

c29.150

² Wholly brahmanical fables are Bḍ iii, 21, 5 to 47, 61, which make it all turn on Jamadagni’s wonderful cow; and Pad vi, 268, which says she was the celestial cow Surabhi!

c29.151

³ Bḍ iii, 47, 64–87 contains the nearest approach to a kṣatriya account, and is noteworthy. It says nothing about the destruction of all kṣatriyas.

c29.152

⁴ This would account for the remark in id. 74, that many years afterwards the Tālajaṅgha ‘remembering the former hostility’ attacked Ayodhyā and drove out Sagara’s father. Pad vi, 268, 73–4 and 269, 158, though brahmanical, admit that Rāma acknowledged his kinship with the Ayodhyā princes and did not destroy them.

c29.153

⁵ MBh xii, 49, 1769–76.

c29.154

⁶ Bḍ iii, 47, 67–73, apparently exaggerating, says that Tālajaṅgha and the Haihaya princes then took refuge a long time at the Himalayas, and regained their kingdom only when Rāma turned from war to austerities.

c29.155

The Haihayas grew in power, and comprised five leading groups, the Vītihotras,⁷ Śāryātas,⁸ Bhojas,⁹ Avantis and Tuṇḍikeras, all of whom were Tālajaṅghas (p. 102). Their dominion stretched from the Gulf of Cambay to the Ganges-Jumna doab and thence to Benares.¹⁰ They continued their raids and there is no suggestion that they founded new kingdoms in the countries they overran. The Kānyakubja kingdom soon fell, for the dynasty ends with Aṣṭaka’s son Lauhi. The kingdom of Ayodhyā was open to assault, and the Haihayas attacked it with the co-operation of Śakas, Yavanas, Kāmbojas, Pāradas and Pahlavas from the north-west,¹ and this fact shows that all the kingdoms between the north-west and Ayodhyā must have been overthrown. In fact, the long-continued Haihaya devastations left North India a tempting prey to the hardy races of that frontier. Bāhu ² king of Ayodhyā was driven from his throne, took refuge in the forest and died near the hermitage of Aurva Bhārgava, whose personal name was Agni.³ His queen gave birth to a son Sagara there and Aurva educated him.

c29.156

⁷ Or Vītahotras or Vītahavyas, p. 155.

c29.157

⁸ See pp. 97, 98, 102, &c.

c29.158

⁹ This is the first appearance of this family, except the doubtful statement about Druhyu’s offspring, ante.

c29.159

¹⁰ MBh xiii, 30, 1946, 1950–4.

c29.160

¹ Narrated in the kṣatriya ballad in Vā 88, 122–43; Bḍ iii, 63, 120–41; Br 8, 29–51; Hv 13, 760 to 14, 784; and Śiv vii, 61, 23–43. Also in Viṣ iv, 3, 15–21 : Pad vi, 21, 12–34 : VN 7, 7 to 8, 63: Bḍ iii, 47, 74 to 48, 49: Bhāg ix, 8, 2–7 (late): Rām i, 70, 28–37 and ii, 110, 15–24 (partially). Discussed in JRAS, 1910, pp. 9–10; 1914, pp. 279–81; 1919, pp. 354–61.

c29.161

² Called Asita in Rām.

c29.162

³ Mat 12, 40. Pad v, 8, 144. Lg i, 66, 15. Synonyms, Vahni, Kūr i, 21, 5. Tejonidhi, VN 7, 60; 8, 8, 9.

c29.163

The Haihaya conquests had thus reached to the kingdoms of Vaiśālī and Videha. The Vaiśālī realm was then under the rule of Karandhama, his son Avīkṣit and his son Marutta, three noted kings (pp. 147, 157). It is said that Karandhama was besieged by a confederacy of kings and at length defeated them; that Avīkṣit had a great conflict with the king of Vidiśā (Besnagar) and others and was captured, but Karandhama and his allies beat them and rescued him; and that Marutta had a contest with Nāgas.⁴ There can be little doubt that those enemies were the Haihayas, for Vidiśā was in the Haihaya region, and that they were beaten off. There is no indication that the Haihayas conquered the Vaiśāla kings, and Marutta was a famous king and cakravartin.⁵ The Haihaya conquests eastwards must have been stopped by some kingdom, and tradition suggests that it was these Vaiśāla kings who did that.⁶

c29.164

⁴ Mārk 121 to 131, a long account with fanciful details, yet not brahmanical. It makes Avīkṣit’s conflict grow out of a svayaṃvara at Vidiśā.

c29.165

⁵ See pp. 39–41. MBh xii, 29, 981, which says that Māndhātṛ conquered Marutta, cannot mean this Marutta, for Māndhātṛ was long prior. The corresponding passage, id. vii, 62, 2281–2 does not name Marutta.

c29.166

⁶ But MBh iii, 129, 10528–9 perhaps goes too far in its enthusiasm in saying that Marutta sacrificed on the Jumna near Kurukṣetra.

c29.167

About the time of Karandhama was Parāvṛt, king of the Yādava branch. It is said¹ he placed his two youngest sons in Videha. This is improbable, for the Haihayas dominated all Madhyadeśa, and Videha is no doubt a mistake for Vidiśā.² His son Jyāmagha was expelled by his two elder brothers and sought his fortune southward in the hilly upper region of the Narbadā, at Mekalā,³ Mṛttikāvatī⁴ and in the Ṛkṣa hills (Satpura range), which country was wild and inhabited by Nāgas and other rude tribes. He established himself on the R. Śuktimatī (the Ken), in the hills near its source. There he led a predatory life. He or his son Vidarbha moved south and carved out a kingdom on the Tapti, and there Vidarbha reigned, the country being called Vidarbha (Berar), and the capital Vidarbhā and Kuṇḍina.⁵

c29.168

¹ All these occurrences in Vā 95, 27–36: Bḍ iii, 70, 28–37: Br 15, 11–21: Hv 37, 1979–88: Mat 44, 28–37: Pad v, 13, 11–20: Lg i, 68, 32–9.

c29.169

² So one MS of Br. reads.

c29.170

³ Mekala hills, north-west of Chhattisgarh: Mārk, my translation, p. 341.

c29.171

⁴ South of Vatsabhūmi, MBh iii, 253, 15245.

c29.172

⁵ Vidarbhā, MBh iii, 71, 2772: Hv 117, 6588, 6606. Kuṇḍina, MBh v, 157, 5363: Hv 104, 5804; 106, 5855; 118, 6662, 6693. Also Kuṇḍinagara, Hv 108, 6003. They were the same, MBh iii, 73, 2852–3: Hv 117, 6588–91. A later capital Bhojakaṭa was founded by Rukmin in Kṛṣṇa’s time, MBh v, 157, 5361–4: Hv 118, 6690–3.

c29.173

When Ayodhyā was conquered, the foreign tribes settled down in the country. They were kṣatriyas, had the ministrations of brahmans and observed brahmanic rites.⁶ Hence the then Vasiṣṭha, Atharvanidhi I Āpava (p. 207), maintained his position as the great priest of Ayodhyā among them. So the kingdom remained for more than twenty years till Sagara attained manhood.

c29.174

⁶ Implied in the first five passages in fifth note above; and particularly in Bḍ iii, 48, 29–47. JRAS, 1919, pp. 358–61.

c29.175

Meanwhile the Kāśi kings had been carrying on a long struggle from the eastern portion of their territory, which adjoined the Vaiśālī kingdom, against the Haihayas, and at length Pratardana, son of Divodāsa II, defeated the Vītahavyas (or Vītihotras, who were the chief Tālajaṅgha-Haihayas) and recovered his territory, though not Vārāṇasī itself, which was still occupied by Rākṣasas (pp. 153–5). He or his son Vatsa⁷ carried the victory farther, and annexed the country around Kauśāmbī, which was thence named the Vatsa country.¹

c29.176

⁷ Id. Hence Pratardana was called Śatrujit, and Vatsa’s other names were Ṛtadhvaja and Kuvalayāśva; Viṣ iv, 8, 5–7; Gar i, 139, 10–11. A fanciful tale about them, Mārk 20 to 26. Bhāg ix, 17, 6 confuses these names.

c29.177

¹ Vā 92, 65, 73. Bd iii, 67, 69, 78 (where for vaṃśau read Vatsyo). Br 11, 50, 60; 13, 68, 78. Hv 29, 1587, 1597; 32, 1741, 1753. Vatsa in MBh xiii, 30, 1946 is used by anticipation, meaning the country, and not a person as Sörensen (see Haihaya¹, p. 316) takes it; and so also Vatsya in id. 1951.

c29.178

Sagara had by this time reached manhood. He defeated the Tālajaṅgha-Haihayas and regained Ayodhyā.² He extended his campaign and subdued all the other enemies in N. India. He crushed the Haihayas in their own territories, and annihilated their dominion, and nothing more is said about them till long afterwards. He determined to destroy the foreign tribes, but at their entreaties Vasiṣṭha interposed; so Sagara spared their lives but reduced them to great religious and social degradation. Then he invaded Vidarbha and made peace by marrying the king’s daughter (p. 156), and was received with honour by the Śūrasena Yādavas, who were his mother’s brethren. He was a famous monarch (p. 39).

c29.179

² These events are described in the passages in fourteenth note above, and especially in Bd iii, 48 to 49, 10, which seems generally to have preserved something like genuine kṣatriya tradition. Noticed in MBh iii, 106, 8831-3.

c29.180

Vatsa’s son Alarka followed up Pratardana’s successes by driving the Rākṣasas out of Vārāṇasī, and re-establishing it as the Kāśi capital, during a long and prosperous reign.³

c29.181

³ See passages following those in p. 153, note ⁴; also p. 168. Mārk 27 to 44 has a long brahmanical and incorrect account of him.

c29.182

All these events may be summed up thus. Arjuna Kārtavīrya and the Haihayas maltreated the Bhārgavas and killed Jamadagni. Rāma and the Bhārgavas (with probably the help of Kānyakubja and Ayodhyā) killed Arjuna and punished the Haihayas, who were then checked in their career of conquests.⁴ There the enmity between them ended.⁵ After Rāma’s time the Haihayas recovered their power and extended their conquests into N. India, making continual raids, overthrowing kingdoms, founding none, and devastating the countries, which were then overrun by tribes from the northwest also. The kṣatriyas must have perished by thousands. The Haihayas overwhelmed Kānyakubja and Ayodhyā, but were arrested by the Vaiśālī kings, and afterwards Sagara destroyed all those enemies, rescued India from those evils and re-established peace.¹ The carnage and ruin must have continued nearly a century, and the deplorable condition to which North India was reduced² may be imagined by that caused by the Marāṭhas and the Persian and Afghan invasions in the eighteenth century, for the Haihayas occupied the same region as the Marāṭhas and the two periods are strictly comparable and remarkably alike.

c29.183

⁴ Cf. MBh v, 155, 5281-6.

c29.184

⁵ So a Bhṛgu rishi afterwards saved the Vītahavya king from Pratardana’s vengeance by turning him into a brahman, p. 200.

c29.185

¹ Peace described, though not in his name, MBh i, 64, 2467-80.

c29.186

² Fancifully described in MBh xii, 49, 1784-6.

c29.187

All these events were turned by the brahmans into the fable that Rāma destroyed all kṣatriyas off the earth twenty-one times, slaughtering each generation as it grew up.³ It seems to have arisen thus. The slaughter began with Rāma's killing the Haihayas, and their career was checked a while. The brahmans knew that the carnage began again and continued long, though through their lack of the historical sense they did not understand that it occurred after Rāma's time, first, through the Haihayas, and lastly through Sagara: but it was easy, since the Bhārgavas were no longer at enmity with the Haihayas, to imagine that Rāma was still at work and to attribute the Haihaya devastations to him; and finally it was quite simple to credit Sagara's final destruction of all the enemies to Rāma, who was an Aurva (pp. 198-9), because it was alleged that Sagara destroyed them with Rāma's magical fire-weapon, which Bhārgava Aurva who educated him gave him,⁴ and that the great Tālajaṅgha kṣatriya host was destroyed by Aurva single-handed.⁵

c29.188

³ See p. 200, note 1. It is sometimes alleged that the kṣatriyas were renewed by the kṣatriya ladies and brahmans, MBh i, 64, 2459-64; 104, 4176-8: xiv, 29, 833.

c29.189

⁴ See first seven passages in p. 268, note 1.

c29.190

⁵ MBh xii, 153, 7223, which suggests confusion of the two Aurvas. Similarly Pratardana's defeat of the Vaitahavyas is attributed to his priest Bharadvāja (p. 154), MBh xiii, 34, 2126; which also says the Bhṛgus conquered the Tālajaṅghas.

c29.191

Sagara had a long reign.⁶ He discarded his eldest son Asamañjas for cruelty to the citizens, and was succeeded by Asamañjas’s son Amśumat.¹

c29.192

⁶ Myth says Sagara had 60,000 sons by one of his wives (p. 19), while his other wife had only one son Asamañjas. They followed Sagara's sacrificial horse to the S.E. ocean, where it disappeared in the earth. They dug down in the ocean to the lower region, and all except four were burnt up by Kapila (who was Viṣṇu). By Kapila's favour the ocean (samudra) restored the horse to Sagara and became Sagara's son (sāgara). Vā 88, 144-63. MBh iii, 106, 8831 to 107, 9912. Hv 14, 785 to 15, 806. Rām i, 38 to 41. &c.

c29.193

¹ Vā 88, 167–9. Bḍ iii, 51, 51–69; 55, 22; 63, 164–5. MBh iii, 107, 8884–95. Rām i, 38, 20–3: ii, 36, 16, 19–26; 110, 26. VN 8, 71, 121. Br 8, 73; 78, 40–3. Hv 15, 807–8. His four sons were vaṃśa-karas, that is apparently, established minor dynasties, Vā 88, 148–9: Bḍ iii, 63, 146–7.

c29.194

When Sagara established his empire over North India, the only noticeable kingdoms that survived were the Videha, Vaiśālī and Ānava kingdoms in the east, Kāśi in Madhyadeśa, Turvasu’s line in the hilly country of Rewa, the new kingdom of Vidarbha, and apparently the Yādava branch on the R. Chambal. After his death, the overthrown dynasties appear to have generally recovered themselves, and the Yādavas of Vidarbha seem to have extended their authority northward over the Haihaya territory. Vidarbha had three sons, one Bhīma Kratha succeeded him; Cidi, the son of another son Kaiśika, founded the dynasty of Caidya kings in Cedi,² the country lying along the south of the Jumna;³ and the third Lomapāda founded a separate kingdom, the position of which is not defined (p. 103). Kaiśikas however still dwelt in Vidarbha with the Krathas.⁴ The Ānava kingdom in the east, the nucleus of which was Aṅga, became divided up into five kingdoms, said to have been named after king Bali’s sons (p. 158), Aṅga, Vaṅga, Kaliṅga, Puṇḍra and Suhma.⁵ The capital of Aṅga was Mālinī, and its name was changed afterwards to Campā or Campāvatī (Bhāgalpur) after king Campa.⁶

c29.195

² See passages following those cited in p. 269, note ¹. Also Hv 117, 6588–9. Cedi in the story of Nala, MBh iii, 65, 2578, &c.

c29.196

³ JASB, vol. lxiv (1895), Part I, no. 3.

c29.197

⁴ e.g. Hv 117, 6588–91.

c29.198

⁵ See p. 158, note ⁴. Vaṅga, central Bengal. Puṇḍra, NW Bengal. Suhma, Hooghly and Midnapur. Kaliṅga, the Orissa coast (except north part of Balasore) and Ganjam.

c29.199

⁶ MBh xii, 5, 134: xiii, 42, 2359. Vā 99, 105–6. Mat 48, 97. Br 13, 43. Hv 31, 1699, Viṣ iv, 18, 4. It was on the Bhāgīrathī, MBh iii, 84, 8141; and in Sūta-viṣaya, id. 307, 17151. Bhāg ix, 8, 1 is wrong.

c29.200

The Paurava claimant then was Duṣyanta, for the Paurava realm had been overthrown since Māndhātṛ’s time, and Duṣyanta had been adopted as heir by Marutta of Turvasu’s line, but after Sagara’s death he re-established the Paurava dynasty (pp. 108, 156). His son by Śakuntalā was the famous and pious Bharata.⁷ Their territory however appears to have been shifted to the northern portion of the Ganges-Jumna doab, for Pratiṣṭhāna is no longer mentioned and its district was included in the Vatsa realm. Some passages make Hastināpura¹ the capital of Duṣyanta and Bharata,² and say Bharata’s territory stretched from the R. Sarasvatī to the Ganges,³ and that is no doubt right, because he was a great monarch with a wide sway (pp. 39–41); but their fifth successor Hastin is distinctly stated to have founded that city.⁴ If those passages are right, Hastin may have enlarged it and given it his name. Bharata’s successors were the Bharatas or Bhāratas (p. 113), and how his line was continued has been explained above (pp. 159–61).

First 199 of 324 passages. Read on

Linked texts (27)