History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c90.102
History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c90.102
- Language
- English
v7.c90.102.1
Vyāsa is said to have been alive when the Bhārata battle was fought at the end of the Dvāpara age and he is also held to be the author of the 18 Purāṇas. The kings before the Bhārata war, the Pāṇḍava heroes and a few descendants of them and of some contemporaries of them are treated by the Matsya, Vāyu, Brahmāṇḍa and others as past (*atīta*). Adhisomakṛṣṇa or Adhisīmakṛṣṇa, who¹³⁸⁰ was 6th in direct descent from Arjuna (excluding Arjuna) is said to have been alive when the Purānas were narrated to the sages at the *sattra*. Both Vāyu (99. 282) and Matsya (271. 5) state that in the Ikṣvāku line king Divākara, 6th (or 5th in Matsya) in descent from Bṛhadbala, was alive at the time when the Purānas were narrated. Then the same Purānas (Vāyu 99. 30, Matsya 271. 23 and Brahmāṇḍa III. 74. 113) state that in the line of Jarāsandha (ruler of Magadha), who was a contemporary of the Pāṇḍavas and whose son Sahadeva was killed in the Bhārata war, there was Senājit who was a contemporary of Adhisīma kṛṣṇa and Divākara and who was 7th in descent from Sahadeva Those three are described as *vartamāna* kings in the Purāṇas and all those that came after these three are described as *bhaviṣya*. Pargiter first (AIHT p. 180) takes the total of the kings of the three dynasties, Aikṣvāka, Paurava and Māgadha that are actually named (ignoring what the Purāṇas say viz.
v7.c90.102.2
that only the principal or important kings are named and *not all*) and the total of the reigns of all these (1408 years), finds that the average of the reign of each king in the three lines works out at such large figures as 47, 50, 31, which he regards as impossible when tested by real historical averages But he forgets that the Purānas say that in the Aikṣvāka, Magadha and Paurava lines and also generally only the prominent kings are mentioned and also that the extant Purānas are only fragments left of the originals, since in the Brahmāṇḍa (III. 74) all Paurava and Aikṣvāka kings are altogether lost. Then he takes the total number of kings in ten kingdoms up to Mahāpadma and arrives at the average of 26 kings for each kingdom (AIHT p 181). Then he says that the average of fourteen series of kings in Eastern and Western countries which he examined comes to 19 years for each reign and, holding that the average in eastern countries is less than in western countries, he arrives at the average of 18 years for each reign (pp. 181-182), which he regards as fair and rather liberal. He then multiplies the average 18 (of length of reigns) by 26 (the average number of kings in ten countries which he supposes to be the only kings in those ten) and arrives at the figure 468 years. He adds these to the date which he assigns to Mahāpadma Nanda 382 B. C. and thus arrives at 850 B. C.
v7.c90.102.3
as the mean date of the beginning of the reign of Adhisīmakṛṣṇa, Divākara and Senājit, who were *vartamāna* kings. Then he takes five as the average of the kings between the *vartamāna* kings and Yudhiṣṭhira and assigning about 100 years to these 5 kings, arrives at the date 950 B. C. for the Bhārata war. He discards (AIHT p. 180 n 3) the astronomical evidence contained in the Purāṇas (and the Mahābhārata) about Bhārata war in a single sentence viz. that astronomical statements can have no scientific precision and can only have been formed by estimate at the close. The probable date of the Mahābhārata war has been discussed by the author at some length on materials supplied by the Mahābhārata, the Purāṇas, Varāhamihira, Āryabhaṭa and Inscriptions in vol III. pp. 895-923 and therefore he does not go into that question here. But he strongly disapproves of the methods of Pargiter and the date he deduces. Later scholars like Kirfel have not accepted the conclusions of Pargiter about two separate traditions and about the Purāṇas being Sanskritizations of originals written in Prakrit and Kharosthī script (p. XVI. of Intro to 'Purāṇa Texts &c.'). The importance of another independent source has not been taken proper notice of by Pargiter and even by Kirfel. It appears that about 300 B. C. Megasthenes was supplied with a list of kings from Bacchus to Alexander's time (153 or 154 in number) covering by their reigns a period of 6451 years and three months.
v7.c90.102.4
Vide 'Ancient India as described by Megasthenes and Arrian' by McCrindle (1877) p. 115 and Cambridge History of Ancient India, vol. I. (1922, p. 409). Even supposing for argument that the account of kings is not trustworthy the fact remains that about 300 B. C Indians claimed that they had lists of kings that reigned before that date for thousands of years (and not for a few hundred years as Pargiter would have us believe).