History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c90.97.3

v7.c90.97.3

He brushes aside the statement of the period between Parīkṣit and Nanda as unreliable simply on the ground (which appears to me flimsy) that the figures (1015, 1050) are discrepant (A. I. H. T. p. 180). In almost all passages of the Purāṇas there is some discrepancy or other. Therefore, he should have made an endeavour to find out which one of the three periods (1015, 1050, 1500) is supported by the best and oldest mss. and should have stuck to them, particularly when the Sanskrit equivalents of the three periods (*pañcadaśa*, *pañcāśat* and *pañcaśata*) are so much alike that scribes might easily have been confused and made their own readings. Even taking the least period of (1015) years, the Mahābhārata War would have to be placed at about 1440 B. C. (adding 1015 to the date of Nanda's enthronement, viz. about 425 B. C.). Most Western writers and Prof. S. N. Pradhan (in 'Chronology of ancient India', Calcutta 1927, pp. 249ff) find fault with Paurāṇika statements and brush them aside as practically worthless. Prof. Pradhan takes the kings actually named in the three lines, holds that 28 years are the average reign period of each and multiplying the number of kings by 28 arrives at the conclusion that the Mahābhārata war was fought about 1150 B.C. It is not possible to deal at length with his arguments. But he ignores the express words of the Purāṇas that they enumerate only the *principal* or *important* kings.