Political History of Ancient India, from the Accession of Parikshit to the Extinction of the Gupta Dynasty c17.s2.44

c17.s2.44

successor is distinctly referred to even in these Purāṇas as the son of a predecessor (*cf.* the cases not only of the first Śrī Sātakarṇi but also of Sātakarṇi II, Lambodara, and even Yajña Śrī—*DKA*, p. 39, fn. 40, 44; p. 42, fn. 12.). The use of the expression *tato* (*DKA*, 39) in the *Matsya Purāṇa* to indicate the relationship between Sātakarṇi I and Pūrṇotsaṅga when taken along with the words *tasyāpi Pūrṇotsaṅgaḥ* (*Viṣṇu* IV. 24. 12). and *Paurṇamāsastu tat sūtaḥ* (Bhāg. XII. 1. 21) leaves no room for doubt that Purāṇic evidence represents Pūrṇotsaṅga-Paurṇamāsa, as the son and immediate successor of Sātakarṇi I and not a 'distant' offspring or a remote offshoot of a 'cross-cousin marriage', who got the throne by the rule of matrilineal succession. There may be no valid reason as asserted by Mr. Chaṭṭopādhyāya for identifying him with Vediśrī of the Nānāghāṭ record. But the reading Vediśrī as pointed out by K. Sāstri is wrong. The proper reading is Khandasiri—Skandaśrī. This prince has been plausibly identified with Pūrṇotsaṅga's successor, the fifth king of the Purāṇic list. It is, therefore, difficult to agree with the view (JASB, 1939, 325) that the prince in question (the so-called Vediśrī) 'never came to the throne'. Pūrṇotsaṅga may have been some other '*kumāra*'. *Cf.*, the nameless prince (*kumāra*) 'Sātavāhana' of the Nānāghāṭ record who is mentioned along with 'Hakusiri' (Śaktiśrī). It is also to be noted that even the so-called older version of the *Matsya* speaks of only 19 kings in one passage.