^{page 3 note 1} The references to the various works cited are taken from the following editions:—Mahābhārata and Harivaṁśa, Calc., 1835; Rāmāyaṇa, Bomb.; Kūrma, Mārkaṇḍeya, and Vāyu Purāṇas, Biblioth. Indica; Agni, Garuḍa, Linga, and Matsya Purāṇas, Jīvānanda Vidyāsāgara's Calc. editions of 1882, 1890, 1885, and 1876 respectively; Bhāgavata Purāṇa, Bomb.; Brahma and Padma Purāṇas, Ānandāśrama Bomb. Series; Viṣṇu Purāṇa, Wilson's Translation. The chapter is quoted as well as the verse in the M Bh. and Hariv., because the numbering of the verses is not always correct. It is indicated throughout by italic figures.

^{page 4 note 1} M Bh. i, 177, 6757–60; 178, 6792–4; 60, 2208–9; xii, 351, 13642–3; 231, 8483–5; 326, 12195–7. Kūrma, i, 19, 20–7. Hariv. 18, 977–81.

^{page 4 note 2} M Bh. xii, 49, 1771–2; xiii, 4, 248–60. Bhāgav. ix, 16, 28–37. Brahma, 10, 55–66. Vāyu, ii, 29, 93–9. Hariv. 27, 1460–74; 32, 1767–76.

^{page 4 note 3} M Bh. xiii, 30, 1997–2005.

^{page 4 note 4} Vītahavya gained brahmanhood (M Bh. xiii, 30, 1983–97, 2005–6) because a Bhārgava rishi falsely asserted by implication that he was a brahman, and the assertion had to stand good. Viśvāmitra's difficulty lay in the fact that he was of pure kṣatriya lineage. Not a few royal kṣatriyas had no difficulty in becoming brahmans, because there had been brahman paternity in their near ancestry; thus among King Vitatha's descendants (see p. 45) were Kāṇva, Maudgalya, and other brahmans. Brahman paternity was sufficient in those days. See p. 37 and p. 45, n. 3. The mother might be of the lowest class, as was Vyāsa's mother, or was unnecessary according to various stories.

^{page 6 note 1} See pp. 30 and 31. Rig-V. x, 134, is attributed to him.

^{page 6 note 2} See p. 30.

^{page 6 note 3} See Table of genealogical lists, p. 26.

^{page 6 note 4} Rig- V. vi, 16, 4, and other passages. Bharata is, I believe, the only really great king who receives appropriate esteem in the brahmanical literature, and he reigned in Central Madhyadeśa. He appears to have been decidedly brdhmaṇya.

^{page 6 note 5} Rig-V. iv, 44, 6.

^{page 6 note 6} Rig-V. x, 93, 14.

^{page 7 note 1} Brahma, 13, 2; Matsya, 43, 5; Vāyu, ii, 32, 1; 37, 115; Hariv. 31, 1653; 32, 1842.

^{page 7 note 2} Brahma, 15, 831–2; Kūrma, i, 21, 60; Liṅga, i, 66, 43; Padma, v, 8, 161–2; Vāyu, ii, 26, 211; Viṣṇu, iv, 4; Hariv. 15, 831.

^{page 7 note 3} Liṅga, i, 68, 1; Kūrma, i, 21, 60.

^{page 7 note 4} See also p. 11, and the names in brackets in the Table of lists are further instances of omissions.

^{page 8 note 1} e.g. Vijayād Ruruko jajñe, Rurukāt tu Vṛkaḥ sutaḥ. Garuḍa, i, 138, 28.

^{page 8 note 2} e.g. Dṛḍhāśvasya Pramodaś ca and Haryaśvasya Nikcurnbho 'bhūt. Matsya, 12, 33.

^{page 8 note 3} e.g. Nābhāgād Ambarīṣo 'bhut, Sindhudvīpo 'mbarīṣataḥ. Garuḍa, i, 138, 31. Ways (2) and (3) become indistinguishable where the abl. and the gen. are alike, e.g. Bāhos tu Sagaraḥ smṛtaḥ. Ibid. 28.

^{page 8 note 4} e.g. Śaśādasya tu dāyādaḥ Kakcutstho nāma. Brahma, ix, 7, 51.

^{page 9 note 1} The Brahma Purāṇa and the Harivaṁśa (which is virtually a Purāṇa) cannot generally be regarded as distinct authorities, for their lists have such close and even verbal resemblance as to indicate that they are little more than two versions of one authority. The other Purāṇas, while showing much similarity in some places, differ considerably in others, and do not readily fall into separate groups. The general exposition of the dynasties (pp. 16–25) will give some idea of the connexions which they show with one another in some, though not in all, portions of the genealogies.

^{page 10 note 1} M Bh. iii, 106, 8831–2; Bhāgav. ix, 8, 2–7; Brahma, 8, 47–51; Vāyu, ii, 26, 121–42; Hariv. 13, 760 – 14, 784; Rāmāy. i, 70, 27–37; ii, 110, 15–25 (imperfectly). The map published by me in this Journal for 1908, p. 332, will help to elucidate this paper.

^{page 10 note 2} The Rāmāy. calls him Asita.

^{page 10 note 3} During this period the invaders were in power and had probably begun to settle down in the countries they had conquered; and this also seems implied by their appealing to Vasiṣṭha (that is, one of the Vasiṣṭha family) and his taking them under his protection, for the Vasiṣṭhas were the court-priests of Ayodhyā (as mentioned in p. 14), and he as a brahman may have maintained his position as court-priest under the Haihaya-Tālajaṅgha rule. Sagara's repressive treatment of the different peoples (as explained in the passages cited above), therefore, means probably that the rules which he imposed on them applied to those barbarians who had settled down and remained in the territories which he ruled as cakravartin and not to the nations outside India. He Marked off and degraded them from the rest of his subjects, and the distinctions naturally disappeared in the course of time.

^{page 11 note 1} Agni, 274, 17–18; Bhāgav. ix, 24, 1–2; Matsya, 44, 35–8; Padma, v, 13, 19–21; Vāyu, ii, 33, 36–8; Viṣṇu, iv, 12; Liṅga, i, 68, 37–40; Garuḍa, i, 139, 29–30.

^{page 12 note 1} See M Bh. i, 63, 2334–65, and passages cited for this dynasty, p. 22.

^{page 12 note 2} The Garuḍa contains very little explanatory matter.

^{page 13 note 1} Strangely enough it finds an echo in M Bh. iii, 197, 13301–2.

^{page 14 note 1} M Bh. i, 175, 6695; Mārkaṅḍ. 9, 10; Hariv. 13, 753.

^{page 14 note 2} M Bh. iii, 277, 16030.

^{page 14 note 3} M Bh. i, 222, 8078; 223, 8083–4; v, 71, 2581.

^{page 14 note 4} M Bh. i, 221, 7989.

^{page 14 note 5} M Bh. iii, 200, 13486, with 201, 13515–19.

^{page 14 note 6} For instance, a Vasiṣṭha occurs with Triśaṅku (p. 33), with Sagara (p. 10, n. 3), with Kalmāṣapāda (p. 45, n. 3), and with Daśaratha (Rāmāy. i, 7, 4, etc.). Other Vasiṣṭhas occur elsewhere, see p. 50.

^{page 14 note 7} Aitar. Brāh. vii, 5, 27, and see viii, 4, 22.

^{page 15 note 1} Bhāgav. ix, 16, 34–7.

^{page 15 note 2} See Muir's Sanskrit Texts, i, 75, etc.

^{page 15 note 3} M Bh. ii, 8, 333–6.

^{page 15 note 4} Brahma, 13, 112–13; Hariv. 32, 1817–18. Yet the lists do not show three Bhīmasenas, and two have dropped out. There were three Janamejayas, if we reckon the monarch who reigned after the great battle.

^{page 16 note 1} See the genealogical lists, infra. For the earlier Parīkṣit and Janamejaya see also Brahma, 12, 9–11; Vāyu, ii, 31, 21–2; Hariv. 30, 1608–9, and cf. with M Bh. xii, 150, 5595–6. The later are well known, being Abhimanyu's son and grandson.

^{page 16 note 2} One, son of Gṛtsamada, Bhāgav. ix, 17, 3; Brahma, 11, 33; Vāyu, ii, 30, 4; Hariv. 29, 1519; less clearly Garuḍa, i, 139, 9; and Viṣṇu, iv, 8; perhaps Rig- V. ii, 1. The other, M Bh. xiii, 30, 2005.

^{page 16 note 3} One was father-in-law of Aṇuha, king of South Pañcāla, Bhāgav. ix, 21, 24–5; Matsya, 49, 56–7; Hariv. 18, 981; 20, 1039–40, 1065. See also Garuḍa, i, 140, 13; Vāyu, ii, 37, 174–5; Viṣṇu, iv, 19. The other was Vyāsa's son, see p. 4.

^{page 16 note 4} See p. 44 infra.

^{page 16 note 5} There was a king Uśanas in the Yādava line; see Table of lists.

^{page 16 note 6} M Bh. i, 75, 3140–61; 95, 3760–3; v, 148 5042–52. Agni, 272, 5–7; 273, 12–23. Bhāgav. ix, 1, 11–35; 15, 1; 17, 1; 18, 1–33. Brahma, 7, 1–16; 10, 1–11; 11, 1–2; 12, 1–6. Garuḍa, i, 138, 2–3; 139, 2, 7, 17, 18. Kūrma, i, 20, 4–7; 22, 1–11. Liṅga, i, 65, 17–24; 66, 55–66. Matsya, 11, 40–1; 12, 12–15; 24, 32–4, 49–54. Padma, v, 8, 75–120; 12, 85–7, 103–7. Vāyu, ii, 23, 1–17; 29, 1–4, 48, 114; 30, 1–2; 31, 12–17. Viṣṇu, iv, 1, 3, 6–10. Hariv. 10, 613–30; 26, 1363–73; 28, 1475; 30, 1599–1604.

^{page 17 note 1} Agni, 272, 18–39; Bhāgav. ix, 6, 4–12, 9; Brahma, 7, 44–8, 94; Garuḍa, i, 138, 17–44; Kūrma, i, 20, 5–21, 60; Liṅga, i, 65, 31–66, 45; Matsya, 12, 25–57; Padma, v, 8, 130–62; Vāyu, ii, 26, 9–211; Viṣṇu, iv, 2–4; Hariv. 10, 613; 11, 660–15, 832. I treat the Hariv. as a Purāṅa, which is what it is really.

^{page 17 note 2} i, 70, 21–43; ii, 110, 6–35.

^{page 17 note 3} M Bh. iii, 98, 8606–8; Rig-V. viii, 19, 36; and perhaps vii, 19, 3.

^{page 17 note 4} Aitar. Brāh. vii, 3, 13, 14.

^{page 17 note 5} M Bh. iii, 66, 2627–9; 70, 2766.

^{page 17 note 6} ii, 110, 29.

^{page 17 note 7} iii, 201, 13515–19; 202, 13620–1.

^{page 17 note 8} vii, 3, 14–16.

^{page 17 note 9} i, 61 and 62.

^{page 17 note 10} iii, 129, 10154; vii, 64, 2303; xii, 29, 993.

^{page 18 note 1} v, 35–6.

^{page 18 note 2} iii, 13–21.

^{page 18 note 3} vi, 50–4.

^{page 18 note 4} M Bh. i, 122, 4736–8; 177, 6777–91; xii, 234, 8604; xiii, 137, 6262. He was nicknamed Sarvakarman, xii, 49, 1792–3.

^{page 18 note 5} iii, 192, 13145–78, 13198.

^{page 19 note 1} Matsya, 49, 75–6; see p. 52.

^{page 19 note 2} Bhāgav. ix, 6, 4; 13, 1–27. Garuḍa, i, 138, 44–58. Vāyu, ii, 26, 9; 27, 1–23. Viṣṇu, iv, 5.

^{page 19 note 3} i, 71, 3–13.

^{page 19 note 4} It is given in the Purāṇa lists to Mithi, Dharmadhvaja, Sīradhvaja (Sītā's father), and Khāṇḍikya; and in the M Bh. to Dharmadhvaja (xii, 322, 11855), Sīradhvaja (iii, 273, 15880), Janadeva (xii, 218, 7883; 321, 11839), Karāla (xii, 304, 11220), Daivarāti (xii, 312, 11545), and two others (xii, 292, 10699; 328, 12260).

^{page 19 note 5} The Mārkaṇḍeya P. says Janakānāṁ kule (13, 11); see also Rāmāy. i, 71, 4.

^{page 19 note 6} The different origin mentioned in Hariv. 94, 5142–95, 5257, appears to be an ancient calumny, for it acknowledges the descent from Yayāti and Yadu in verse 5164. See p. 46.

^{page 19 note 7} Agni, 274, 1–11. Bhāgav. ix, 23, 18–30. Brahma, 13, 153–207. Garuḍa, i, 139, 19–24. Kūrma, i, 22, 12–21; 23, 1–3. Liṅga, i, 68, 2–19. Matsya, 43, 5–52. Padma, v, 12, 110–49. Vāyu, ii, 32, 1–34, 48–53. Viṣṇu, iv, 11. Hariv. 33, 1843–34, 1900.

^{page 20 note 1} Agni, 274, 12–33. Bhāgav. ix, 23, 30–9; 24, 1–6, 18–24. Brahma, 14, 1–15, 31, and 15, 45–39. Garuḍa, i, 139, 25–36, 43–8. Kūrma, i, 24, 34, 42–65. Liṅga, i, 68, 21–49; 69, 2, 32–46. Matsya, 44, 14–74. Padma, v, 13, 32, 45–60. Vāyu, ii, 33, 14 – 34, 2, and 34, 115–23. Viṣṇu, iv, 12–15. Hariv. 37, 1969 – 38, 2030.

^{page 20 note 2} i, 94, 3695–752; 95, 3764–827.

^{page 20 note 3} Agni, 277, 1–9, 15, 25–7, 31–40. Bhāgav. ix, 20, 1 – 21, 21; 22, 3–4, 9–29. Brahma, 13, 2–5, 50–62, 80–1, 102–23. Garuḍa, i, 140, 1–8, 24–5, 30–8. Matsya, 49, 1–44; 50, 1–23, 34–50. Vāyu, ii, 37, 115–55, 160–2, 206–13, 223–39. Viṣṇu, iv, 19, 20. Hariv. 31, 1653–9; 32, 1714–32, 1754–6, 1795–1802, 1813–28.

^{page 21 note 1} Hariv. 20, 1111–12.

^{page 21 note 2} Agni, 1277, 15, 18–25. Bhāgav. ix, 21, 21, 30–4; 22, 1–3. Brahma, 13, 81, 93–101. Garuḍa, i, 140, 17–24. Vāyu, ii, 37, 189–206. Viṣṇu, iv, 19. Hariv. 32, 1755, 1776–95. Matsya (in part), 50, 1–16.

^{page 21 note 3} Mudgala, son of Bhṛmyaśva, x, 102. Vadhryaśva, x, 69; vi, 61, 1. Divodása, vi, 61, 1; iv, 26, 3; vi, 47, 22, and many other passages. Sṛñjaya, who is called son of Devavāta, iv, 15, 4; vi, 27, 7. Cyavana, x, 69, 5–6. Sudās (Sudāsa), vii, 18, 22–5, and other passages. Sahadeva and his son Somaka, iv, 15, 7–10. In vii, 18, 25, Divodāsa is called father of Sudās, but “father” clearly means “ancestor”, because Sudās' patronymic was Paijavana (ibid.). This, therefore, harmonizes with the genealogy, and his father Pijavana as a king of no note has dropped out. It is said Sahadeva's original name was Suplan, , Śatap. Brāh. II, iv, 4, 3–4Google Scholar.

^{page 21 note 4} Both families accompanied Drupada at the great battle.

^{page 21 note 5} Hariv. 20, 1062, 1065; Vāyu, ii, 37, 171; Viṣṇu, iv, 19.

^{page 21 note 6} Bhāgav. ix, 21, 22–6; Garuḍa, i, 140, 10–13; Matsya, 49, 47–59; Vāyu, ii, 37, 165–77; Viṣṇu, iv, 19; Hariv. 20, 1052–72.

^{page 22 note 1} Bhāgav. ix, 21, 21, 27–30; Garuḍa, i, 140, 8, 14–16; Matsya, 49, 70–9; Vāyu, ii, 37, 160–2, 179–88; Viṣṇu, iv, 19; Hariv. 20, 1075–85.

^{page 22 note 2} M Bh. i, 63, 2334–65, and next note. Uparicara probably meant “he who overran”, “conqueror”, and afterwards was turned into “walking in the air”. Cf. the later term uparika in inscriptions. See p. 11.

^{page 22 note 3} Agni, 277, 26–30; Bhāgav. ix, 22, 4–9; Garuḍa, i, 140, 25–9; Matsya, 50, 20–34; Vāyu, ii, 37, 209–22; Viṣṇu, iv, 19; Hariv. 32, 1799–1813.

^{page 22 note 4} M Bh. iii, 115, 10144; v, 118, 4005. The Rāmāy. calls its capital Mahodaya (i, 32, 3, 6), which = Kānyakubja (see Gorr. ed., i, 35, 35).

^{page 22 note 5} Bhāgav. ix, 15, 1–16; Garuḍa, i, 139, 2–7; Vāyu, ii, 29, 48–99; Viṣṇu, iv, 7.

^{page 22 note 6} 277, 16–18.

^{page 22 note 7} One in xii, 49, 1717, etc.; and the other in xiii, 4, 201, etc., with i, 94, 3719–23.

^{page 23 note 1} i, 32, 1 – 34, 6.

^{page 23 note 2} 10, 11–60; 13, 80–92.

^{page 23 note 3} 27, 1413–63; 32, 1754–69.

^{page 23 note 4} Viśvāmitra, is called “best of the Bharatas” in Aitar. Brāh. vii, 3, 17Google Scholar.

^{page 23 note 5} He was not the first Viśvāmitra, but a near descendant, see p. 43. This strengthens the antithesis.

^{page 23 note 6} The Brahma (10, 63) and Hariv. (27, 1468–9; 32, 1773) call Viśvāmitra Paurava, which is a mistake (helped no doubt by the general confusion) for Paurūrava, as the Vāyu shows in ii, 29, 98, where Pauroravasya should be Paurūravasya. Kuru had a son Jahnu (see authorities cited above for the Paurava line). The passage in the Aitar. Brāh. may have originated the error. The author lived after the great battle, and many centuries later than Bharata. The composers of the Brāhmaṇas were not learned in ancient kṣatriya genealogies, as indeed follows from the statement that Vyāsa's disciples divided the literature and specialized each in his own department. Sāyaṇa repeats the error in his comment on Rig-V. iii, 53, 24.

^{page 24 note 1} Bhāgav. ix, 17, 1–10; Garuḍa, i, 139, 7–14; Viṣṇu, iv, 8.

^{page 24 note 2} Vāyu, ii, 30, 1–76.

^{page 24 note 3} 277, 9–14; but it is confused.

^{page 24 note 4} 11, 1–2, 27–60; 13, 62–79.

^{page 24 note 5} 29, 1517–98; 32, 1730–54.

^{page 24 note 6} Agni, 276, 5–16; Bhāgav. ix, 23, 1–14; Garuḍa, i, 139, 65–74; Matsya, 48, 10–108; Vāyu, ii, 37, 12–114; Viṣṇu, iv, 18. The Brahma (13, 4–5, 14–49) and Hariv. (31, 1658–9, 1668–1710) derive the line from Raudrāśva's son Kakṣeyu of the Lunar race, but these two books are so closely alike that they constitute only one authority. I have followed the majority.

^{page 24 note 7} The former in the Agni and Brahma, the latter in the Bhāgav., Garuḍa, and Viṣṇu, and both in the Matsya, Vāyu, and Hariv.

^{page 25 note 1} Marutta, the greatest king, who preceded Viśāla, is called the Áyogava king. Śatap. Brāh. XIII, v, 4, 6.

^{page 25 note 2} Bhāgav. ix, 1, 12; 2, 22–36; Garuḍa, i, 138, 2–13; Vāyu, ii, 23, 3–24, 22; Viṣṇu, iv, 1; Mārkaṇḍ. (at great length to Rājyavardhana), 113–36 and 109–10; Liṅga (the beginning), i, 66, 53; M Bh. (first part partially), xiv, 4, 65–91; Rāmāy. (from Viśāla to the end), i, 47, 11–18.

^{page 30 note 1} M Bh. vii, 55–70; xii, 8, 238; 29. The genealogies corroborate.

^{page 30 note 2} Namely, Rantideva Sāṅkṛti and Suhotra Átithina of the Paurava race; Gaya Āmūrtarayasa; and Paurava Vīra Bṛhadratha, king of Aṅga; and also Pṛthu Vainya, who belonged to the most ancient age. There were many Suhotras, but none that I can identify as Ātithina; perhaps he is Suhotra, descendant of Vitatha of the Lunar dynasty. Bṛhadratha may be No. 78 in Anu's line in the table, but the epithet Paurava is perplexing.

^{page 30 note 3} M Bh. ii, 14, 649–50. The remarks in Aitar. Brāh. viii, 3, 3, profess to explain contemporary conditions and relate to a time later than the great battle between the Pāṇḍavas and Kauravas.

^{page 31 note 1} Brahma, 12, 3; Vāyu, ii, 31, 14; Hariv. 30, 1601.

^{page 31 note 2} Brahma, 7, 90–2; Hariv. 12, 709–11.

^{page 31 note 3} Vāyu, ii, 26, 65.

^{page 31 note 4} Matsya, 49, 8; Vāyu, ii, 37, 126; Hariv. 32, 1716.

^{page 31 note 5} Bhāgav. ix, 6, 38; Brahma, 7, 92–3; Vāyu, ii, 26, 70; Viṣṇu, iv, 2; Hariv. 12, 712–13. Also Garuḍa, i, 138, 22, where Vindumahya is a mistake for Vindumatī.

^{page 31 note 6} M Bh. xii, 29, 998; Agni, 274, 13–14; and other passages cited for the Yādava genealogy.

^{page 31 note 7} Brahma, 7, 93–4; Vāyu, ii, 26, 71; Hariv. 12, 713.

^{page 31 note 8} See passages cited for the Yādava genealogy.

^{page 32 note 1} See passages cited for Anu's line.

^{page 32 note 2} Brahma, 8, 24; Liṅga, i, 66, 10; Vāyu, ii, 26, 116; Viṣṇu, iv, 3; Hariv. 13, 754.

^{page 32 note 3} M Bh. iii, 194, 13249 is an obvious brahman anachronism.

^{page 32 note 4} Agni, 274, 17; Bhāgav. ix, 23, 35; Brahma, 15, 16; Liṅga, i, 68, 37; Padma, v, 13, 15; Vāyu, ii, 33, 32; Viṣṇu, iv, 12; Hariv. 37, 1984.

^{page 32 note 5} Brahma, 10, 19–21; 13, 87. Hariv. 27, 1421–2; 32, 1761.

^{page 32 note 6} Vāyu, ii, 29, 55.

^{page 32 note 7} See authorities cited for this dynasty, p. 22. Bṛhaddevatā, viii, 70; Sarvānukramaṇī on Rig-V. iii, hymns 1, etc. I have to thank Professor Macdonell for corrections and suggestions regarding the references to the Rig-Veda.

^{page 33 note 1} Brahma, 10, 55–7; Vāyn, ii, 29, 90; Hariv. 27, 1459; 32, 1766.

^{page 33 note 2} Vāyu, ii, 29, 63; Hariv. 27, 1430. The Brahma makes Paurā (or Paurakutsā, as one MS. reads) wife of Gādhi.

^{page 33 note 3} Most of the authorities are cited in Muir's Sanskrit Texts, i, 82, etc. See Rig-V. v, 2, 7, and Ṣaḍguruśiṣya's Vedārthadīpikā on i, 24. It is needless to cite other passages.

^{page 34 note 1} As to Viśvāmitra's brahmanhood, see p. 4 ante.

^{page 33 note 2} The Aitar. Brāh. says Hariścandra was son of Vedhas (vii, 3, 13; and so also Ṣaḍguruśiṣya on Rig-V. i, 24). It is not necessary to discuss the difference, because the synchronism stands good, but it may be pointed out that the genealogies rest on the purāṇa-vaṁśa-vids, and the author of the Brāh. was more versed in philosophical speculation than in kṣatriya genealogical lore.

^{page 33 note 3} Sarvānukramaṇī on Rig-V. i, hymns 24–30; Aitar. Brāh. vii, 3, 15; Bhāgav. ix, 7, 8–23. But the Vāyu (ii, 29, 89), Brahma (10, 54), and Hariv. (27, 1457) make him son or brother of Jamadagni. The difference is not material here. Ajīgarta's father Suyavasa (Aitar. Brāh., loc. cit.) may have been a brother of Ṛcīka or Jamadagni.

^{page 34 note 4} The lists agree in the number of steps down to Kuśa, and then vary as regards the next, whom they name as Kuśāśva, Kuśāmba, and Kuśika. Gādhi was certainly son of Kuśika, and the only doubtful point is whether a king named Kuśāśva, or Kuśāmba, preceded him. That there was such an extra generation seems clear, because Iṣīratha, who is not named in the genealogies, is mentioned as Gādhi's grandfather by Ṣaḍguruśiṣya (introduction to Rig-V. iii), and by the Sarvānukramaṇī (ibid.). Hence the general result is that Viśvāmitra was eighth in descent from Jahnu.

_{page 35 note 1} See a similar case, where Dāśārhī was applied to several generations; p. 42, n. 4.

^{page 35 note 2} M Bh. iii, 115, 10144–53; v, 116, 3973; 118, 4005–7; xii, 49, 1721–45. Bhāgav. ix, 15, 4–13. Brahma, 10, 28–53. Garuḍa, i, 139, 6. Vāyu, ii, 29, 63–89. Viṣṇu, iv, 7.

^{page 35 note 3} M Bh. iii, 116, 11074, 11080, and passages cited for the Kānyakubja line. Jamadagni married Reṇukā, daughter of King Reṇu of Ikṣvāku's race (M Bh. iii, 116, 11072; v, 116, 3972; and the above passages), and Prasenajit gave her to him (M Bh. iii, 116, 11072), but no king Reṇu is mentioned in the genealogies, nor any Prasenajit at this period, so that they belonged probably to a junior branch of the Solar race.

^{page 35 note 4} M Bh. iii, 116, 11089 – 117, 10204 (sic, the numbering is erroneous); xii, 49. Bhāgav. ix, 15, 14–36; 16, 8–27; 23, 24. Brahma, 13, 159–99. Matsya, 43, 15–43; 44, 12–14. Padma, v, 12, 117–43. Vāyu, ii, 32, 10–48. Viṣṇu, iv, 11. Hariv. 34, 1850–91.

^{page 35 note 5} M Bh. i, 178, 6802–3.

^{page 36 note 1} M Bh. i, 178, 6804–179, 6827.

^{page 36 note 2} It is said Ahaṁyāti of the Lunar race married Kṛtavīrya's daughter (M Bh. i, 95, 3768), but if the same Kṛtavīrya is meant this statement is incompatible with all the other indications.

^{page 37 note 1} In later centuries brahmans among the descendants of Bhūmanyu and Ajamīḍha of the Lunar race took to arms, kṣatropetā dvijātayaḥ, namely, Gargas, Saṅkṛtis, Kāvyas, Maudgalas, Maitreyas, and apparently Kāṇvas; and during that period there were two military parties among brahmans, the Aṅgirases and Bhārgavas. Agni, 277, 21; Matsya, 49, 38, 41; 50, 5, 14; Vāyu, ii, 37, 160, 177, 193–4, 201–2; Viṣṇi, iv, 19; Hariv. 32, 1781, 1790.

^{page 37 note 2} e.g. Bhṛgu, that is, a Bhṛgu or Bhārgava rishi, saved the Haihaya king Vītahavya from Pratardana's vengeance by a deliberate falsehood, M Bh. xiii, 30, 1983–97 (see p. 4).

^{page 38 note 1} M Bh. xiii, 30, 1946–96. Brahma, 11, 40–54; 13, 66–75. Hariv. 29, 1541–8, 1582–91; 32, 1736–49. Vāyu, ii, 30, 23–8, 61–9. Also Padma, v, 12, 114.

^{page 32 note 2} Pratardana, son of Divodāsa, of Kāśi. Kauṣīt. Up. iii, 1.

^{page 32 note 3} The name is generic rather than personal, M Bh. loc. cit. Vītahavya of the M Bh. probably = Vītihotra of the Purāṇas.

_{page 38 note 4} A thousand years. This, like most statements of time, is absurdly exaggerated, but all the references imply a long-continued struggle.

^{page 38 note 5} These generations cannot be condensed on the supposition that many of these kings were brothers, as the whole of the circumstances indicate the opposite.

^{page 39 note 1} See passages cited in p. 38, n. 1.

^{page 39 note 2} Bhāgav. ix, 17, 6; Brahma, 13, 66–7; Mārkaṇḍ. 20, 21. Since Pratardana is called Ṛtadhvaja and Kuvalayāśva, Viṣṇn, iv, 8 (which calls him Śatrujit also; and so also Garuḍa, i, 139, 10), and Mārkaṇḍ., loc. cit.; but the point is not clear, and the confusion is natural if the explanation offered is sound. The Mārkaṇḍ. account is largely fable.

^{page 39 note 3} There is nothing at all improbable in this (see p. 15).

^{page 39 note 4} Brahma, 13, 71; Hariv. 32, 1744.

^{page 39 note 5} M Bh. loc. cit.

^{page 40 note 1} M Bh. iii, 106, 8833, 8843–7; Brahma, 8, 63–72; Padma, v, 8, 144–7; Vāyu, ii, 26, 154–8; Viṣṇu, iv, 4; Hariv. 15, 797.

^{page 40 note 2} Agni, 274, 17–20; Bhāgav. ix, 24, 1–4; Garuḍa, i, 139, 29–32; Liṅga, i, 68, 38–43; Matsya, 44, 35–41; Padma, v, 13, 19–24; Vāyu, ii, 33, 36–41.

^{page 40 note 3} M Bh. iii, 65, 2576; 67, 2634–5; 69, 2705–8; 70, 2766; 73, 2852.

^{page 40 note 4} The authorities are not all clear about the exact relationship.

^{page 40 note 5} Brahma, 11, 53; 13, 74. Vāyn, ii, 30, 68. Hariv. 29, 1590; 32, 1794.

^{page 41 note 1} M Bh. iii, 96, 8561–97, 8576; iv, 21, 654–5; v, 116, 3971. Rig-V. i, 179.

^{page 41 note 2} M Bh. xiii, 137, 6255. Confused with Nimi, first king of Videha, ibid., 234, 8600, who is genealogically ages apart; and Videha is an easy mistake for Vidarbha.

^{page 41 note 3} The synchronism of this Agastya with kings Śrutarvan, Bradhnaśva, and Paurukutsa Trasadasyu (M Bh. iii, 98, 8595–608) appears to be a brahmanical addition.

^{page 41 note 4} M Bh. xiv, 4, 80; Vāyu, ii, 24, 7.

^{page 41 note 5} Tretā-yuga-mukhe tṛtīye, Vāyu, ii, 24, 15.

^{page 41 note 6} M Bh. xii, 341, 12948–9.

^{page 41 note 7} M Bh. xii, 141, 5331.

^{page 42 note 1} In Marutta's time lived two rishis, Bṛhaspati and his younger brother Saṁvarta, who were rivals. The former declined to be Marutta's priest, so Marutta engaged Saṁvarta. M Bh. xii, 29, 910–13; xiv, 5, 95–S, 218; corroborated by vii, 55, 2170–1. Bhāgav. ix, 2, 27. Vāyu, ii, 24, 9–11. Aitar. Brāh. viii, 4, 21. Ṣaḍguruśiṣya, on Rig-V. vi, 52, makes these two rishis younger brothers of Ucathya (see p. 44); there may have been some relation between these two rishis and the other two, Ucathya and Bṛhaspati, who seem to have been later.

^{page 42 note 2} Or Duḥṣanti, as he is. sometimes called, e.g. Śatap. Brāh. XIII, v. 4, 11.

^{page 42 note 3} M Bh. i, 94, 3710–11; Agni, 277, 34; Bhāgav. ix, 20, 34; Vāyu, ii, 37, 133. The Brahma (13, 58), Viṣṇu (iv, 19), and Hariv. (32, 1727) support. The single wife in M Bh. i, 95, 3785, was probably wife of Vitatha, who is omitted there.

^{page 42 note 4} M Bh. i, 95, 3786. His fourth successor, Vikuṇṭhana, also married a later Dāśārhī princess, ibid., 3789.

^{page 43 note 1} Even so she was still of kṣatriya origin.

^{page 43 note 2} Not given in the Table, because it is too brief, and is said to have merged into the Paurava line by this adoption.

^{page 43 note 3} Agni, 276, 2; Bhāgav. ix, 23, 17–18; Brahma, 13, 143–6; Matsya, 48, 2–3; Vāyu, ii, 37, 2–4; Viṣṇu, iv, 16; Hariv. 32, 1831–4.

^{page 44 note 1} M Bh. i, 68, 2801.

^{page 44 note 2} He is called Dvyāmuṣyāyaṇa, Bhāgav. ix, 20, 38–9; Matsya, 49, 33; Vāyu, ii, 37, 153.

^{page 44 note 3} He must be distinguished from Bali, son of Virocana, the Daitya.

^{page 44 note 4} The story is told in various ways, and Ucathya's name is given as Utathya, Uśija, Aśija, and Asija. M Bh. i, 104, 4179–221; ii, 20, 802; xii, 343, 13177–84. Bhāgav. ix, 20, 36–9; 23, 4–5. Matsya, 48, 24–84; 49, 17–26. Vāyu, ii, 37, 37–92, 137–46. Viṣṇu, iv, 19. Hariv. 31, 1689–93. Ṣaḍguruśiṣya on Rig-V. vi, 52, and i, 116. Bṛhaddevatā, iv, 11–15, 21–5. Cf. p. 42, n. 1. Dīrghatamas is said to have gained his sight in later life (M Bh. xii; Matsya; Vāyu, ii, 37, loc. cit.). If a natural explanation may be suggested, it is that he was not totally blind, but purblind, or extremely short-sighted, when young, and that his sight improved in old age, as often happens in such cases.

^{page 44 note 5} i, 147, 3; 158, 3–6; iv, 4, 13; and perhaps, i, 152, 6.

^{page 44 note 6} M Bh. xiii, 30, 1962–3; see also Sarvānukramaṇī, introduction to Rig-V. vi, for his patronymic.

^{page 45 note 1} Agni, 277, 7–8; Bhāgav. ix, 20, 34–9; Matsya, 49, 14–15, 27–32; Vāyu, ii, 37, 147–53; Viṣṇu, iv, 19. Ṣaḍguruśiṣya on Rig-V. vi, 52, says Suhotra, etc., were Bharadvāja's sons, but according to the genealogies they were his great-great-grandsons.

^{page 45 note 2} Brahma, 13, 58–60; Hariv. 32, 1729–31; M Bh. i, 94, 3710–13, which calls the son Bhūmanyu.

^{page 45 note 3} Matsya, 49, 34; Vāyu, ii, 37, 154. The accounts and other statements leave no doubt that brahman paternity was introduced at this period. In fact, it is stated that Bharadvāja's descendants comprised both brahmans and kṣatriyas, Matsya, 49, 33. Similar cases occurred: thus a Vasiṣṭha begot King Aśmaka of Kalmāṣapāda's queen in the Solar dynasty. M Bh. i, 122, 4736–7; 177, 6787–91; Bhāgav. ix, 9, 18, 38–9; Kūrma, i, 21, 12–13; Liṅga, i, 66, 27–8; Vāyu, ii, 26, 176.

^{page 45 note 4} Aitar. Brāh. viii, 4, 23; and was his priest, Bhāgav. ix, 20, 25.

^{page 45 note 5} The confusion of Bharadvāja and Vitatha no doubt arose because Bharadvāja was called Vidathin, Bṛhaddev. v, 102–3.

^{page 45 note 6} The accounts are supported to some extent by the Rig-V. because Vaidathina (that is, Bharadvāja's son or more probably descendant), Ṛjiśvan (Rig-V. iv, 16, 13; and compare vi, 50, 15 and 51, 12 with the Sarvānukramaṇī, which attributes these hymns to Ṛjiśvan) is even called Auśija (x, 99, 11), which was the metronymic of Kakṣīvat, son of Dīrghatamas (i, 18, 1;. Sarvāntikramaṇī on i, 116). Kakṣīvat is mentioned in the passages cited from M Bh. i, Matsya, and Vāyu in p. 44, n. 4.

^{page 45 note 7} Rig-V. i, 158, 6.

^{page 46 note 1} “Bharadvāja” was the longest-lived rishi, Aitar. Āraṇ. I, ii, 2, 8.

^{page 46 note 2} M Bh. iii, 110, 10008–9; Rāmāy. i, 11, 13–20; Bhāgav. ix, 23, 7–10.

^{page 46 note 3} Rāmāy. i, 47, 17, which calls him Sumati; compared with the other authorities for Diṣṭa's line, p. 25.

^{page 46 note 4} Hariv. 94, 5142–95, 5257; and 55, 3060–3104. The Rāmāy. tells a similar story (Uttara-k. 64, 68–70, 108), but amplifies and brahmanizes it.

^{page 46 note 5} Hariv. 94, 5164 (see p. 19, n. 6).

^{page 47 note 1} Bhāgav. ix, 11, 13–14; Vāyu, ii, 26, 184–5; Viṣṇu, iv, 4. The Garuḍa (i, 138, 38) names the sons.

^{page 47 note 2} Brahma, 15, 32; Liṅga, i, 69, 3; Malsya, 44, 49–50; Padma, v, 13, 33; Vāyu, ii, 34, 3; Hariv. 38, 2201; perhaps Kūrma, i, 24, 37. The Vāyu (ibid. 4) adds that Bhajamāna's son married two daughters (grand-daughters) of Sṛñjaya, who were his cousins.

^{page 48 note 1} M Bh. xii, 234, 8606; xiii, 137, 6265.

^{page 48 note 2} See passages cited for the genealogy, p. 21, n. 2.

^{page 48 note 3} See p. 21, n. 3.

^{page 48 note 4} Agni, 277, 19–20; Bhāgav. ix, 21, 31–4; 22, 3; Brahma, 13, 94–6; Matsya, 50, 2–4; Vāyu, ii, 37, 190–3; Viṣṇu, iv, 19; Hariv. 32, 1778–80; Ṣaḍguruśiṣya on Rig-V. x, 102. Very many derivations or explanations of names in the literature are fanciful, but this explanation is such as may be genuine, for the name Pañcāla certainly superseded Krivi.

^{page 48 note 5} Rig-V. ii, 22, 2; Śatap. Brāh XIII, v, 4, 7. It is implied in the latter passage that both names were current for a time, Pañcāla being the kṣatriya name and Krivi the vulgar one. In the Epics and Purāṇas, therefore, Pañcāla is always used, and I have not met with Krivi there. On the identity of Krivi and Pañcāla, see Oldenberg, , Buddha, 1st German ed., 409Google Scholar; Zimmer, Altindisches Leben, 102 seq.

^{page 48 note 6} In the last part of this gap may be placed Duṣṭarītu Pauṁsāyana, king of the Sṛñjayas, because he was contemporary with Balhika Prātipīya, the Kauravya king (Śatap. Brāh. XII, ix, 3, 1–13), that is, the Kaurava Vāhlīka, son of Pratīpa and brother of Śāntanu, who is often mentioned in the M Bh. (e.g. v, 148, 5053–5; vii, 157, 6931–4). See JRAS., 1908, p. 320.

^{page 49 note 1} M Bh. i, 94, 3727–37.

^{page 49 note 2} Rig-V. viii, 68 [67], 15–17.

^{page 49 note 3} Rig-V. vii, 20, 2.

^{page 49 note 4} Rig-V. vii, 18; 19, 3, 6, 8.

^{page 49 note 5} Rig-V. vii, 18, 8–9. If we might identify Śrutarvan Ārkṣa with Saṁvaraṇa Ārkṣa, Rig-V. viii, 74 might have been composed on the Paruṣṇīni during the exile. That river was among the Madras or Kaikeyas, who were descended from Anu (see pp. 31–2), hence Agni there might well be called Ānava (ibid. 4).

^{page 49 note 6} M Bh. i. 95, 3785; or Bhāratas, M Bh. i, 94, 3709; Brahma, 13, 57; Matsya, 49, 11. Saṁvaraṇa is called Bhārata, M Bh. i, 94, 3731.

^{page 49 note 7} Agni, 276, 1; Bhāgav. ix, 23, 14–15; Brahma, 13, 146–51; Garuḍa, i, 139, 64; Matsya, 48, 6–7; Vāyu, ii, 37, 7–9; Viṣṇu, iv, 17; Hariv. 32 1837–40.

^{page 50 note 1} Rig-V. vii, 18, 12.

^{page 50 note 2} Aitar. Brāh. ii, 3, 19; vii, 5, 34; viii, 4, 21.

^{page 50 note 3} His race and kingdom were prosperous (Śatap. Brāh. II, iv, 4, 4–5).

^{page 50 note 4} M Bh. iii, 125, 10421–2.

^{page 50 note 5} He also inaugurated Sudās (Aitar. Brāh. viii, 4 21).

^{page 50 note 6} Rig-V. iv, 15; where Somaka is mentioned as Kumāraḥ Sāhadevyaḥ (verses 7–10), “the youth, the son of Sahadeva.”

^{page 50 note 7} Bṛhaddevatā, vi, 28 (which obviously refers to this Vasiṣṭha). The word is Saudāsaiṛ, which means the sons or grándsons of Sudās, and thus undoubtedly includes Somaka. See other passages cited in Muir's Sanskrit Texts, i, 114, etc., where, however, this Sudāsa is classed with a different and earlier king Sudāsa, No. 53 of the Solar line in the Table. See also n. 2 below.

^{page 51 note 1} M Bh. iii, 127, 10486 – 128, 10495; Matsya, 50, 16; Vāyu, ii, 37, 204.

^{page 51 note 2} It may have been this ṛtvij who called this Vasiṣṭha a Yātudhāna (Rig-V. vii, 104, 15), and so moved him to compose that hymn.

^{page 51 note 3} Agni, 277, 26; Bhāgav. ix, 22, 4; Brahma, 13, 106–7; Matsya, 50, 20–2; Vāyu, ii, 37, 209–12; Viṣṇu, iv, 19; Hariv. 32, 1800–1.

^{page 51 note 4} Matsya, 50, 15–19; Vāyu, ii, 37, 203–9; Hariv. 32, 1792, 1795–9. See Brahma, 13, 99–100.

^{page 51 note 5} The Kurus and both branches of the Pañcālas were of the same stock (seep. 21). They are not particularly linked together in the M Bh. or Purāṇas, and the double compound found in the Brāhmaṇas, etc., refers to a later period-after the great battle.

^{page 52 note 1} Brahma, 12, 6–16; Vāyu, ii, 31, 18–27; Hariv. 30, 1605–16. The descent of Śantanu's queen, Satyavatī, from Vasu is a mere fable, chronologically impossible.

^{page 53 note 2} M Bh. i, 95, 3774.

^{page 53 note 3} Bhāgav. ix, 12, 3–4; 21, 28–9; Matsya, 49, 75–6; Vāyu, ii, 26, 205–6; 37, 185–6; Viṡṇu, iv, 4 and 19; Hariv. 20, 1080–1.

^{page 53 note 4} Hariv. 20, 1047–8.

^{page 53 noe 5} Matsya, 49, 59; Vāyu, ii, 37, 177; Viṣṇu, iv, 19; Hariv. 20, 1071–2.

^{page 53 noet 6} Matsya, 49, 77–8; Vāyu, ii, 37, 186–7; Viṣṇu, iv, 19; Hariv. 20, 1083, 1086.

^{page 53 note 7} M Bh. xii, 27, 808 Hariv. 20, 1073, 1085–1110. Śantanu is generally called Śāntanu in the M Bh. and Purāṇnas.

^{page 53 nnote 1} Nirukta, ii, 10; Bṛhadd. vii, 156.

^{page 53 note 2} Rig-V. x, 98, 5, 6, 8.

^{page 53 note 3} JRAS. 1908, p. 309.

^{page 53 note 4} e.g. the account of the transmission of knowledge about somadrinking from one king to another in Aitar. Brah. vii, 5, 34, is chronologically erroneous. Similarly the story of the descent of the sword in M Bh. xii, 166, 6192–6201 is hopelessly confused. The brahmans who composed the theological and didactic literature knew little about ancient kṣatriya history, and no wonder, when all knowledge rested on memory alone.

^{page 55 note 1} I have to thank Dr. Fleet and Dr. Hoernle for advice on this matter.

^{page 55 note 2} Dr. Fleet's list, Nos. 7–54, JRAS., 1909, p. 350.