Mahabharat historicity
1)Authenticity of Epic & Puranic records:-
Before Ashoka's rock edicts 3rd century BCE we have no proper material or inscriptions in Indian history. Even we know about Indus valley or Sindhu -Saraswati civilization dated from 3500BCE-1900BCE. But we unable to decipher their script so we don't know who lived there, what was their names. So pre-Ashoka history of India mostly rely on Literatures whether Buddhism, Jainism or Hinduism.
The work of archaeologists are to correlate the excavated things with literature, which is not an easy work, and have lot of interpretation problems.
Let's see Different renowned historians views regarding authenticity of Epic, Puranic & Vedic datas which we know from these texts & their value in Ancient Indian history.
RC Majumdar:-
HC Roychowdhury:-
Rc Majumdar:-"It is interesting to trace the gradual changes in the views of scholars regarding the historical value of these traditional royal lists preserved in the Puranas and epics. At first they were rejected wholesale without much ceremony. Later, the accounts of the dynasties ruling in the sixth century b.c. and later were accepted as fairly reliable, as they were partially corroborated by the Buddhist literature and archaeological evidence. Next, the preceding dynasties going back to the time of the Great War described in the Mahabharata, which event is approximately placed in round numbers between 1500 and 1000 b.c., were also regarded by some scholars as furnishing a secure basis for history, though they were loath to accept as correct all the details about names and dates."
"The traditions preserved in ancient Indian literature, notably the Puranas, thus form the main source of information for the history of the earliest period, and for the period before the sixth century bc they constitute our only source. The Buddhist and Jain literatures of the succeeding period form a valuable supplement and corrective to the
evidence of the Puranas, and isolated references in other literary works, even grammatical texts, have proved to be very important historical data."
Pargiter's views:-
So using Vedic texts as a source of history is well established. With the help of vedic informations and correlate those with Puranic datas will gives us valuable evidences regarding Mahabharat.
2) Views of different Historians regarding historicity & dating of Mahabharata:-
The Bharata War is the central landmark in Indian traditional history, and the fixing of the date of that event will give us a starting point in settling dates of events occurring before and after it.
RC Majumdar the vedic age pg 268
Here RC Majumdar mentioned about traditional date of Mahabharata based on pulskesin II inscription of 7th century CE & the dates presented by hindu astronomers like Aryabhata & Varahamihira, these two schools give conflicting views.
The Aihole inscription of Pulakeshin II, dated to Saka 556 = 634 CE, claims that 3,735 years have elapsed since the Bhārata battle, putting the date of Mahābhārata war at 3137BCE.
The late 4th-millennium date has a precedent in the calculation of the Kali Yuga epoch, based on planetary conjunctions, by Aryabhata (6th century CE). Aryabhata's date of 18 February 3102 BCE for Mahābhārata war has become widespread in Indian tradition. Some sources mark this as the disappearance of Krishna from the Earth.
According to Varāhamihira's Bṛhat Saṃhitā (6th century), Yudhishthara lived 2,526 years before the beginning of the Shaka era, which begins in the 78 CE. This places Yudhishthara (and therefore, the Mahabharata war) around 2448–2449 BCE (2526–78). Some scholars have attempted to identify the "Shaka" calendar era mentioned by Varāhamihira with other eras, but such identifications place Varāhamihira in the first century BCE, which is impossible as he refers to the 5th century astronomer Aryabhata.
Kalhana's Rajatarangini (11th century CE), apparently relying on Varāhamihira, also states that the Pandavas flourished 653 years after the beginning of the Kali Yuga; Kalhana adds that people who believe that the Bharata war was fought at the end of the Dvapara Yuga are foolish.
(Source:- A.M. Shastri (1991). Varāhamihira and His Times. Kusumanjali. pp. 31–33, 37.)
Here is RC Majumdar quoted various ancient sources along with Vedic era texts which confirm the historicity of the events as well as the antiquity of the epic as well.
'In discussing the dating question, historian A. L. Basham says: "According to the most popular later tradition the Mahabharata War took place in 3102 BCE, which in the light of all evidence, is quite impossible. More reasonable is another tradition, placing it in the 15th century BCE, but this is also several centuries too early in the light of our archaeological knowledge. Probably the war took place around the beginning of the 9th century BCE; such a date seems to fit well with the scanty archaeological remains of the period, and there is some evidence in the Brahmana literature itself to show that it cannot have been much earlier." (Source:- Basham, p. 40, citing HC Raychaudhuri, Political History of Ancient India, pp.27ff.)
Historian Upinder Singh have a skeptical stance:- "Whether a bitter war between the Pandavas and the Kauravas ever happened cannot be proved or disproved. It is possible that there was a small-scale conflict, transformed into a gigantic epic war by bards and poets. Some historians and archaeologists have argued that this conflict may have occurred in about 1000 BCE."
(Source:- Upinder Singh-History of Ancient and Early Medieval India_ From the Stone Age to the 12th Century-Pearson Education (2009), pg 73)
"The setting of the epic has a historical precedent in Iron Age (Vedic) India, where the Kuru kingdom was the center of political power during roughly 1200 to 800 BCE."
(Source:- M Witzel, Early Sanskritization: Origin and Development of the Kuru state, EJVS vol.1 no.4 (1995); also in B. Kölver (ed.), Recht, Staat und Verwaltung im klassischen Indien. The state, the Law, and Administration in Classical India, München, R. Oldenbourg, 1997, p.27-52)
Puranic literature presents genealogical lists associated with the Mahābhārata narrative. The evidence of the Puranas is of two kinds. Of the first kind, there is the direct statement that there were 1,015 (or 1,050) years between the birth of Parikshit (Arjuna's grandson) and the accession of Mahapadma Nanda (400–329 BCE), which would yield an estimate of about 1400 BCE for the Bharata battle.
(source:- A.D. Pusalker, History and Culture of the Indian People, Vol I, Chapter XIV, p.273)
B. B. Lal used the same approach like Pargiter with a more conservative assumption of the average reign to estimate a date of 836 BCE, and correlated this with archaeological evidence from Painted Grey Ware (PGW) sites, the association being strong between PGW artifacts and places mentioned in the epic.
(Source:- B. B. Lal, Mahabharata and Archaeology in Gupta and Ramachandran (1976), p.57-58)
John Keay confirms this and also gives 950 BCE for the Bharata battle.
(Source:- Keay, John (2000). India: A History. New York City: Grove Press. p. 42.)
However RC Majumdar not agree with Pargiter's approach he said :- "Pargiter’s date is contradicted by the statement in the Puranas and the Mahabharata that between the birth of Parikshit and the coronation of Mahapadma, there elapsed a period of 1,015 (or 1,050) years. This brings the date of the Bharata War to (1015 + 382 )= 1397 b.c. Though the number of kings mentioned in the Puranas during this period does not appear to be correct, as it gives an abnormally high average regnal period per generation, the figure mentioning the period (viz. 1015 or 1050) seems to represent a fairly reliable tradition, especially as the dale it gives for the Bharata War (c. 1400 b.c.) is corroborated by a consideration of the Vamsavali list of teachers. We may, therefore, take c. 1400B.c. as the provisional date for the Bharata War, and the event must have taken place between this date and 1000 b.c. in round numbers."
(Source:- The Vedic Age pg 269)
Based on Recent Archaeological evidences and Archaeologists also pointed towards an Early date of Mahabharata.
This date of around 1500 BCE also got it support from other modern Indologists.
Giacomo Benedetti:- "According to these sources, the year of the coronation of the first Nanda could be 422-412 BCE. Adding 1,050 years, we arrive at 1472-1462 BCE for the birth of Parikshita and the year of the battle; adding 1,015 years, we arrive at 1437-1427 BCE. In order to find a more precise date, we have to resort to Mahabharata itself, which gives us an interesting astronomic observation: the beginning of the battle is placed in the New Moon when the sun was in the asterism Jyestha–Rohini, and Bhisma dies 67 days later, in the winter solstice. Comparing this datum with the situation in CE 1900, T. Bhattacharya found that the same interval between Jyestha and the solstice has become of 20.8 days, and calculating seventy-two years for each degree of the precession of the equinoxes he arrived at 1428 BCE for the Battle, or, by a more precise calculation, he determined the first day of the war as 27 October 1432 BCE.10 We can observe that this date would correspond exactly to 1,015 years before 417, the date assigned to the coronation of Nanda in the Jaina chronology"
(Source:- The Chronology of Puranic Kings and Rigvedic Rishis in Comparison with the Phases of the Sindhu–Sarasvati Civilization)
Rc Majumdar views about the present date of Rig-veda 1500-1000BCE & connection with Mahabharata:-
"the Rik-Samhita seem to be identical with those mentioned in the royal genealogies and occupying a low place in the dynastic list. Further, as Pargiter has pointed out, “the Epic and Puranic tradition unanimously and repeatedly declares that the Veda was arranged byVyasa,” who flourished about the time of the Bharata War, which has
been dated between 1500 and 1000 B.c. by many scholars. Whatever we might think of this date, it is important to remember that along with the doctrine that "the Veda is eternal and everlasting,” there are also ancient traditions to the effect that it was compiled by Vyasa not long before the great Bharata War. The view that dates the Rik-Samhita, in its present form, to about 1000 b.c., cannot therefore be regarded as absolutely wide ot the mark and altogether without any basis of support in Indian tradition. But it must be remembered that although the Rik-Samhita might have received its final shape in about 1000 B.C., some of its contents are much older, and go back certainly to 1500 B.c,, and not improbably even to a much earlier date."
(Source:- The Vedic Age pg 28)
Taking Mahabharata war as an anchor point in Indian history RC Majumdar calculated other important figures in traditional history of India are as follows:-
Another issue is connection of Mahabharata which late Harrapan or post Harrapan period.
Scholars like Giacomo Benedetti pointed out In Mahabharata (12.139.13-24) which recounts of a terrible drought, lasting twelve years, at the connection of TretÀ and DvÀpara Yuga. The rivers shrank into streamlets, lakes, wells and springs appeared bereft of their splendour. Agriculture and keep of cattle were given up, markets and shops were abandoned. Skeletons were scattered , the greatest cities became empty of inhabitants, villages and hamlets were burnt down The earth was bereft of cattle and goats and sheep and buffaloes, and everyone took from the other. Herbs and plants were destroyed. In that period of terror, when righteousness was lost, men in hunger began to wander eating one another It is difficult to imagine a period better corresponding to this description than the end of the Indus valley civilization end phase. As per scholars primary reason for abandonment of Indus valley civilization is climate change, drought etc factors.
(Source:- The Chronology of Puranic Kings and Rigvedic Rishis in Comparison with the Phases of the Sindhu–Sarasvati Civilization)
Moreover Indus valley civilization/Harrapan civilization also known as Sindhu-saraswati civilization because of major it's sites are found around the region of Extinct Saraswati river(present day Ghagghar Hakra).
The extinction of Saraswati river also helps us to give a little clue regarding the date of Mahabharata period, because in the Shalya Parva narrating Balarama's pilgrimage on the banks of River Saraswati. Balarama traced the Saraswati river through its partially dried up course from the ocean near Prabhasa (close to Dwaraka) to its origin in the Himalayas. At that tine was partially dried up then. It disappeared into the desert and only the dried river bed can be seen after a place called Vinasana.
So as per the accounts the Sarasvati River dried up to a desert (at a place named Vinasana or Adarsana) and joins the sea "impetuously".
Mahabharata 3.81.115 locates the state of Kurupradesh or Kuru Kingdom to the south of the Sarasvati and north of the Drishadvati. The dried-up, seasonal Ghaggar River in Rajasthan and Haryana reflects the same geographical view described in the Mahabharata.
Now from Archaeological and other evidences we know Saraswati river dried around 1900-1500BCE
There was kingdom named Saraswat along the banks of Saraswati river, in Mahabharata Saraswata kings are mentioned as performing a sacrifice (3:129) at Plakshavatarana, a place on the banks of the Sarasvati at its origin from the Himalayas. This place is to the north of Kurukshetra in Haryana. The Saraswata sacrifice is mentioned again at (3:90) as being performed at Plakshavatarana. King Yayati had also constructed many sacrificial fire-altars here.
Interestingly if we look at Archaeological evidences from this region there is an important Indus valley site named Kalibangan, a town located on the left or southern banks of the Ghaggar (Ghaggar-Hakra River), identified with the Sarasvati river. At Kalibangan fire Vedi (altar)s have been discovered similar to those found at Lothal.
Also a terracotta cake discovered from Kalibangan near the fire altar depicts a man holding an animal with a noose tied in it's neck. In Vedic rituals, the animals were sacrificed by suffocated them with noose for example check Shatapatha Brahmana 3.7.4.1
Kalibangan is really a very important site not only Fire altars even a Shivlinga found there
Sangam era accounts migration of Vels(residents of Dwarka) in South India :-
Sangam era poets also record the number of generations lived by the Vels from Dwarka in the south. 49 generation comes to around 1200yrs average 25yrs/generation .Depending on the Sangam era dating, that would come to around ~1400-1000BCE. Snippets are from this 1908 article.
source:- The origin of Tamil velas
Certain weird claims:-
There are ofcourse some fringe theories as well regarding the historicity of Mahabharata. Such examples:-
Asko Parpola did accepted historicity of Mahabharata which he dated during the later phase of the Painted Grey Ware culture, c. 750-350 BCE. However he made the weird claim that the Pandavas were Iranic migrants, who came to south Asia around 800 BCE.
(Source:-Parpola, Asko (2015), The Roots of Hinduism. The Early Aryans and the Indus Civilization, Oxford University Press, p. 299-300.)
I don't know in what sense Pandavas were iranic migrants! There's not a single evidence in the epic to show such things. it is just is a product of his own imagination. Moreover the date he suggested is also too much late for Mahabharata, which cannot possible.
Michael Witzel said Battle of ten kings to be the probable archetype/prototype of the Kurukshetra War, narrated in the Mahabharata.
Witzel maintains the nucleus text of the Mahabharata to be in description of some event in the Late Vedic spans; it was since reshaped (and expanded) over centuries of transmission and recreation to (probably) reflect the Battle of the Ten Kings.
(Source:- Witzel, Michael (1995). "4. Early Indian history: Linguistic and textual parametres". In Erdosy, George (ed.). The Indo-Aryans of Ancient South Asia: Language, Material Culture and Ethnicity. Indian Philology and South Asian Studies. De Gruyter. pp. 85–125)
John Brockington takes a similar approach.
(Source:- Hiltebeitel, Alf (30 October 2001). "Introduction". Rethinking the Mahabharata: A Reader's Guide to the Education of the Dharma King. University of Chicago Press. p. 2.)
S. S. N. Murthy goes to the extent of proposing the battle of ten kings as the very "nucleus" of the Kurukshetra War; Walter Ruben adopts a similar stance.
(Source:- Murthy, S. S. N. (8 September 2016). "The Questionable Historicity of the Mahabharata". Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies. 10 (5): 1–15)
Here in this case Alf Hiltebeitel rejects Witzel's and Brockington's arguments as "baffling fancy" and notes a complete lack of means to connect the battle with the "fratricidal struggle" of the Mahabharata.
(Source:- Hiltebeitel, Alf (1 June 2000). "John Brockington, The Sanskrit Epics". Indo-Iranian Journal. 43 (2): 162.);
Also Hiltebeitel, Alf (30 October 2001). "Introduction". Rethinking the Mahabharata: A Reader's Guide to the Education of the Dharma King. University of Chicago Press. p. 2.)
3)Some early inscription about the epic:-
The Mahabharata consists of 18 Parvas (books) and has two main recensions—a northern and southern. The core story concerns a conflict between two sets of cousins—the Kauravas and the Pandavas—and a great war that was fought between them at Kurukshetra. But the text also contains a huge amount of material that has little or no connection with the main story.
A sermon from the 'Stri Parva' of Mahabharata is found in the pillar inscription of Heliodorus (2nd cen. BCE)
2nd inscription
त्रिनि अमुता पादानि इमे सुअनुथितानि
नियंति स्वगं दम-चाग-अप्रमाद।।
Translation :
Line 1 -
These three steps to immortality, when correctly followed,
Line 2 -
lead to heaven: Discipline, detachment, and attention
Now see MHB Stri parva 7.19
तस्मान्मैत्रं समास्थाय शीलमापद्य भारत।
दमस्त्यागोऽप्रमादश्च ते त्रयो ब्रह्मणो हयाः॥
- O descendant of Bharata! one should establish friendship & attain good character
Discipline, detachment & attention are the three horses that lead to Brahman
This sermon comes with slight differences in both the places but meaning remains the same
It gives importance to discipline, detachment & attention
Whoever acquires these 3 qualities will reach the supreme abode In Mahabharata this sermon is given by Vidura to Dhritrashtra
The copper-plate inscription of the Maharaja Sharvanatha (533–534 CE) from Khoh (Satna District, Madhya Pradesh) describes the Mahābhārata as a "collection of 100,000 verses" (śata-sahasri saṃhitā).
4)Foreign accounts:-
of 100,000 verses. Together with its appendix, the Harivamsa, the Epic does add up to
this total.
https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Dio_Chrysostom/Discourses/53*.html#6
2000 years old Spitzer manuscript is the earliest dateable table of content sequentially listing the parva (books) of the Mahabharata, along with numerals after each parva. This list does not include Anusasanaparvan and Virataparvan.
According to Indologist and Sanskrit scholar John Brockington, known for his Mahabharata-related publications, the table of contents in the Spitzer Manuscript includes book names not found in later versions, and it is possible that the parvas existed but were with different titles. The epic known to the scribe of Spitzer Manuscript may have been in the form of a different arrangement and titles.
(Check:- John Brockington (2010). "The Spitzer Manuscript and the Mahābhārata". In Eli Franco; Monica Zin (eds.). From Turfan to Ajanta. Lumbini International. pp. 75–86.)
*There is very important point cited by Dr. M.K. Dhavalikar while discussing the Mahabharata war at Kurukshetra and its lingering public memory in ancient times, the author cites Hieun-Tsang, who travelled India during 630-645 CE –“Hieun-Tsang, when he visited it (Kurukshetra) he was told by the local people that human bones often turn up while ploughing fields.”
(Source:- "Socio-Economic Archaeology of India” by Dr. M.K. Dhavalikar).
5) The discovery of Charriots of Sinauli:-
Sanauli site is 100km from kurukshetra, the site of Mahabharata war. Sanauli protochariot dated to 1900bce. Mahabharata era warrior culture lived around that time Major findings from 2018 trial excavations are dated to c. 2000 - 1800 BCE, and ascribed to the Ochre Coloured Pottery culture (OCP) & Copper Hoard Culture, which was contemporaneous with the Late Harappan culture. They include several wooden coffin burials, copper swords, helmets, and wooden carts, with solid disk wheels and protected by copper sheets.
The carts were presented by Sanjay Manjul, director of the excavations, as chariots, and he further notes that "the rituals relating to the Sinauli burials showed close affinity with Vedic rituals."
The finds have also been popularly associated with the Hindu Epics, as the carts evoke similarities with chariots in the Epic narratives, and local legends tell that Sinauli is one of the five villages that god Krishna unsuccessfully negotiated with the Kaurava princes to avoid the War at Kurukshetra.
Some however argue the Charriots were pulled by bulls not horses like Mahabharat, but Manjul disagree he said it was horse driven.
6) Charriots and warfare in Indian Rock arts :-
The last image is of special interest.
7)A tablet from Hong Kong:-
Jeremy Pine, a Hong Kong Based Art Dealer, bought this 9 CM wide clay Tablet from Nepal.
Curious to know more about it, he contacted Nandita krishna from CPR institute of Indological Research.
The tablet was verified through Thermoluminescence testing and given Oxford Authentication.
The Estimated Date: 3600-2300 yrs Ago Or, 1600 BCE-300 BCE
8) Was there any mention of Rishi Veda Vyasa in Vedic texts from which we can confirm hos historicity as well?
Parashara was the grandson of the sage Vasishtha and the son of the sage Shakti. Veda Vyasa was son of Rishi Parashara & Satyavati.
Rishi Parashara Sakteya(son of Sakti) was recorded as the seer of RV 1.65-73 and part of RV 9.97.
Vyasa Parasarya (‘ descendant of Parasara ’) is the name of a sage who in the Vedic period is found only as a pupil of Visvaksena in the Vamsa (list of teachers) at the end of the Samavidhana Brahmana and in the late Taittirlya Aranyaka.
9)Dasharajna war in Rig-veda :-
The ‘battle of ten kings’ (dasharajna), recounted in Book 7 of the Rig Veda Samhita was based on an actual historical incident. In this battle, the Bharata
chief Sudas, grandson of Divodasa, fought against a confederacy of 10 tribes may be more. The mention of the Purus, their former allies, as a part of this confederacy indicates that political alliances were fluid and shifting. Vishvamitra, the Bharata purohita, seems to have been replaced by Vasishtha before the battle, reflecting another sort of behind-the-scenes re-alignment. The great battle took place on
the banks of the river Parushni (Ravi). The Bharatas won by breaking a natural dam on the river. Marching on to the Yamuna, they defeated a local ruler named Bheda. Sudas eventually settled down along the Sarasvati and celebrated his
victory and position of political paramountcy by performing the ashvamedha sacrifice.
To know more about the historicity of Mahabharata we know about the clans as well as historical figures Associated with those clans, which not only help us to date Mahabharata war but also gives us strong irrefutable proof of Mahabharata. Let's see one by one:-
10)The legend of Pururavas & Urvashi:-
Pururavas Aila, Ila’s son through Budha or Soma, was the progenitor of the celebrated Lunar dynasty. Though the seat of the government of the Ailas and the scene of their later activities have been placed at Pratishthana, by the Puranas, the origin of the Ailas, according to these texts, seems to be connected with the Himalayan region. Pururavas was the contemporary of Ikshvaku of the Solar dynasty.
(Rishi Vishwamitra )
. Nahusa falling from heaven
cc:-@chronicle_watch
cc:- @Devasakha
Rc Majumdar Vedic age 246-247
Ajamidha had three sons, viz. Riksha(1),
(source:- Saklani, Dinesh Prasad (1998). Ancient Communities of the Himalaya. Indus Publishing. pg 53)
(source:- Upinder Singh-History of Ancient and Early Medieval India_ From the Stone Age to the 12th Century-Pearson Education (2009), pg 89-90)
[Aitereya Brahmana Tr by Haug, pg no.362]
[Kuru dynastical list]
[The Vedic Age, RC Majumdar, pg no. 310]
(Santanu & Satyavati)
(Santanu tried to convince Davapi for return)
He is mentioned as Balhika Pratipiya(descendant of Pratipa) in Satapatha Brahmana 12.9.3.1-3; 13
(Yudhisthira)
(source:- Upinder Singh-History of Ancient and Early Medieval India_ From the Stone Age to the 12th Century-Pearson Education (2009), pg 481)
here in the above verse it says Arjuna is the mystic name of Indra. We all know from Mahabharata Arjuna's association with Indra. However the verse is vague we can't conclude anything about it with certainty.
[North Panchala genealogy from Pargiter's book]
(King Drupada)
Coin of the Panchalas of Ahichhatra (75-50 BCE).
Coin of Achyuta, the last Panchala king, showing an 8-spoked wheel and the king's name: Achyu.
(Jarasandh ki baithak)
Yadu, the eldest son of Yayati, founded the Yadavas, the first Lunar dynasty to rise into prominence. They first destroyed the Rakshasa power in Gujarat-Kathiawar, who overthrew the Saryatas there. Yadu had five sons, name as Sahasrada(or Sahasrajit), Payoda, Kroshtu, Nila and Anjika.
As we said above Haihaya was a son of Yaduvanshi Kshatriya ruler Sahastrajit. He was the founder of Haihaya dynasty and Haihaya Kingdom.
cc:- Aryamsha
Lord Krsna is styled as Dasarha, Madhava, Satvata, Varsneya and Sauri after various ancestors as well as Vasudeva after his father.
But clearly most instances of the word krishna in the Rigveda, however, are simply in its meaning as the adjective ‘‘black.’’
(source:- Upinder Singh-History of Ancient and Early Medieval India_ From the Stone Age to the 12th Century-Pearson Education (2009) pg 489)
(source:- Upinder Singh pg 577)
(usinara family tree)
Mention in Vedic literature:-
Link:- https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/archaeological-survey-of-india-delhi-purana-qila-mahabharata-history-2387173-2023-06-01
According to puranic accounts Pururavas was born in Treta Yuga, as the son of Budha and Ila. Budha was the son of Chandra, the moon god, and thus Pururavas was the first Chandravamsha King. According to the Puranas, Pururavas reigned from Pratisthana (Prayaga).
"So powerful was that foremost of men the royal son of Ila. The greatly illustrious king Pururava reigned in the city of Pratishthana situate on the northern bank of the Ganges in the Province of Prayaga, so highly spoken of by the Rishis."~Harivamsa 1.28.48-49.
Their love story in short:-
Once, Pururavas, and Urvashi, an apsara, fell in love with each other. Pururavas asked her to become his wife, but she agreed on three or two conditions. The most retold conditions are that Pururavas would protect Urvashi's pet sheep and they would never see one another naked (apart from love making).
Pururavas agreed the conditions and they lived happily. Indra started missing Urvashi and he created circumstances where the conditions were broken. First he sent some gandharvas to kidnap the sheep, when the couple was making love. When Urvashi heard her pets' cries, she scolded Pururavas for not keeping his promise. Hearing her harsh words, Pururavas forgot that he was naked and ran after the sheep. Just then, Indra flashed lightning, and Urvashi saw her husband naked. After the events, Urvashi returned to heaven, and left Pururavas heartbroken. Urvashi descended upon the earth and bore Pururavas many children, but they were not completely reunited.
He had six (or seven or eight according to different accounts) sons. The names of these sons are: Ayu (or Ayus), Amavasu, Vishvayu, Shrutayu, Shatayu (or Satayu), and Dridhayu.
The earlier version of the narrative of Urvashi and Pururavas is found in the Rigveda (X.95.1–18) and the Śatapaṭha Brāhmaṇa (XI.5.1).
The Rig Veda (X.95.18) clearly states that he was a son of Ilā and was a pious ruler.
Interestingly as per puranic records he was the first who divided the fire into three.
"Having obtained the boon from the Gandharvas he placed Treta fire. The fire was at first one. The son of Ila divided it into three."~ Harivamsa 1.26.47
This account is also alluded in Rig Veda 1.31.4:-
त्वम॑ग्ने॒ मन॑वे॒ द्याम॑वाशयः पुरू॒रव॑से सु॒कृते॑ सु॒कृत्त॑रः ।
श्वा॒त्रेण॒ यत्पि॒त्रोर्मुच्य॑से॒ पर्या त्वा॒ पूर्व॑मनय॒न्नाप॑रं॒ पुन॑: ॥
त्वमग्ने मनवे द्यामवाशयः पुरूरवसे सुकृते सुकृत्तरः ।
श्वात्रेण यत्पित्रोर्मुच्यसे पर्या त्वा पूर्वमनयन्नापरं पुनः ॥
Whether this legend of Pururavas & Urvashi have anything historical core in it or not we can't assure, but one thing is clear that story was a very ancient tale goes back to Vedic era. Moreover the personality Puruavas was perhaps a real historical person, and looked upon as an Ancestral figure.
As per Mahabharata Pururavas had seven sons names are Ayu, Dhiman, Amavasu, the high-souled Vishvayu, Srutayu, Dridayu, Valayu, and Shatayu. They were all Urvashi’s sons.
It is said his expanded kingdom was divided among Pururavas’s two sons, Ayu and Amavasu
Ayu continued the main line at Pratishthana, and Amavasu, to whose share fell the northern territories in the mid-Gangetic Doab, founded the Kanyakubja dynasty.
Ayu had five sons, as per only two of whom were important. The eldest, Nahusha, succeeded Ayu in the main line at Pratishthana, while the second, Kshatravriddha, established himself at Kasi in the East.
Amavasu’s sons were Bhima and Nagnajit.
Bhima’s son was the king Kancanaprabha. Kancana’s son was the highly powerful and learned Suhotra/Hotraka who begat on Keshini a son by name Janhu who celebrated the great sacrifice Sarvamedha.
There is a legend associated with Janhu as per epics & puranas while he was performing a sacrifice the Gangā flowed through his yajñavāṭa; enraged at it he drank the waters; so Gangā became his daughter and came to be known as Jāhnavī.
His name and its association with Ganga is also recorded in Rigveda:-
In the lineage of Jahnu was born a son named Gādhi from him born Kausika(later became Vishwamitra).
Kuśika began tapas for a son who would be equal to Indra and could not be killed by others. Pleased with his tapas Indra voluntarily took birth as Kuśika’s son. Gādhi was that son; in fact he was an incarnation of Indra. (Mahabharata, Śānti Parva, Chapter 49).
This is further corroborated by vedic literature, According to Sâyana's commentary, the king Kusika desired to have a son equal to Indra, so the latter was born as Kusika's son Gâthin (Gâdhin). This is corroborated by the RV Verse 1.10.11 as well:-
Before going further something needs to be clear Scholars note there are certain discrepancies in Puranic genealogies the Purāṇa-s seem to have placed the names of various kings and princes of various branches or territories at one place, thus resulting in the mixed names and the confusion where some contemporaries have been made successors and collaterals as lineal descendants along with some important omissions like in dynastic lists. But careful analysis helps us to extract important information from it.
Another view point comes from Traditional understanding of Hindu scriptures, they explained these discrepancies due to Kalpa-bheda(events happening in different Kalpas). Anyway let's move on to our discussion.
11)Nahusa & Yayati:-
Nahusha was a famous king, a great conqueror, there is a very famous legend associated with him in various sources, the story of his securing the kingdom of Indra, and of his subsequent fall therefrom on account of his arrogance and ill-treatment towards sage Agastya.
His son and successor Yayati is mentioned in the Puranas and the Mahabhdrata as a Samrat (emperor) and a great conqueror who extended his kingdom far and wide. Pie reduced all Madhyadesa west of Ayodhya and Kanyakubja and north-west as far as the Sarasvati. He also brought under his sway countries towards the south, south-east, and west of his territory. The Puranas and the Mahabhdrata give a detailed account of Yayati’s marriage with Devayani, daughter of Usanas-Sukra, the great Bhargava rishi, and Warmishtha, daughter of king Vrishaparvan of the Asuras.
Mention of Nahusa in Vedic texts:-
Rigveda 10.80.6; Rigveda 7.6.5;
Rigveda 1.31.11:- “The gods formerly made you, Agni, the living genitive ral of the mortal Nahuṣa; they made Iḷā, the instrumental uctress of Manu, when the son of my father was born.”– Translation by HH Wilson
Rigveda 8.6.24;
Rigveda 10.63.1; Rigveda 8.46.27;
Rigveda 7.95.2:- “Sarasvatī, chief and pure of rivers, flowing from the mountains to the ocean, understood the request of Nahuṣa, and distributing riches among the many existing beings, milked for him butter and water.”
Inscription evidence:-
Two Mauryan inscriptions obtained from Ajgara in which the curse of Nahusha is mentioned. These inscriptions prove the prevalence of Mahabharata in Maurya time.
Mention of Yayati:-
Rig Veda 1.31.17; Rig Veda 1.54.6;
Rig Veda 4.30.17; Rig Veda 8.42.3;
Rig Veda 10.63.1(here he described as Nahusa's son)
Rig Veda 1.36.18(Sayana Bhasya); Rig Veda 1.108.8(sayana Bhasya)
Shalya Parva of the Mahabharata mentions a Tirtha named Yayata near Sarasvati river, it was a holy region where the king Yayati worshiped Sarasvati river and attained heaven by performing sacrifices.
This episode is reflected in Rig Veda as well (7.95.2) where Sarasvati granted her blessings to Yayati (spoken as son of Nahusha here).
a) Pauravas, Kurus, Bharatas:-
Yayati had five sons as we discussed. Devayani bore two, Yadu and Turvasu, and Sarmishtha three, Anu, Druhyu, and Puru. Yayati divided the kingdom among his five sons, placing the youngest son Puru to continue the main line, ruling over Madhyadesa, the southern half of the GangesJumna Doab, with its capital at Pratishthana. The main Lunar line hereafter came to be known as Puru VamSa or the Pauravas after Puru.
There is a great divergence in the Puranas regarding the territories assigned by Yayati to his sons. Pargiter’s collated texts suggests that Yadu, the eldest son, was given territories towards the south-west embracing the country watered by the rivers Charmanvati (Chambal), Yetravatl (Betwa) and Suktimati (Ken). Turvasu got the south-east territory (round Rewah). To Druhyu was assigned the west, i.e. the country west of the Yamuna and north of the Chambal. Anu received the north, i.e. the northern portion of the Ganges-Jumna Doab.
The Bharatas, Tritsus & purus formed the Kurus.
Here is a dynastic list of paurava Dynasty upto Janmajeya3:-
So, from Yayati's son Puru came Pauravas and from the above genealogy table notice there comes a King named Bharata, who was the successor of Dushyant. From this king Bharata his descendants were known as "Bharatas". Those were very famous tribe in Vedas, The battle of ten kings Sudas was the chieftain of that Bharata tribe on that period of time. As per Pargiter he belonged to North Panchala dynasty of Bharatas. Will discuss about Bharata in details later on this article.
King Bharata adopted a Son who was an illegitimate child of Brihaspati & Mamata.
The story goes like this Bharata had three wives and sons by them ; they killed their sons because he was disappointed in them, and he was thus bereft of heirs. In order to obtain a son he performed many sacrifices and lastly made an offering to the
Maruts ; they gave him Brhaspati & Mamata's illegitimate son Bharadvaja as an adopted son. Bharadvaja thus became a ksatriya ; he did not succeed Bharata, but begot a son named Vitatha; some accounts however suggested Vitatha was another name of Bharadvaja after his adoption by King Bharata.
When Bharata died, Bharadvaja afterwards consecrated Vitatha as the successor, and
then either died or departed to the forest.
Sage brother of Uthathya had a wife Mamata, and their son was Dirghatamas, who was born blind. Brhaspati is said to have consorted with her, and his son was Bharadvaja. That there was a rishi "Dirghatamas Aucathya Mamateya", ' son of Uthathya and Mamata, who was blind, is proved by the Rigveda & other Ancient texts itself.
Rigveda 1.147, 3 ; 152, 6 ; 158, 1, 4, 6. Hymns 1, 140-64 are ascribed to him.
Also in Brihaddevata iii, 146.
There was also a rishi Bharadvaja Barhaspatya, ' son of Brhaspati ', is asserted by the Sarvanukramani in ascribing many hymns in book VI of Rigveda to him and Also Brihaddevata v, 102
Other important figures in the list note there is a king by name Hastin in the list, he was the fifth successor from Bharata, after him the name Hastinapur came into existence. Which was the capital of Dhritarashtra during Mahabharata era. Hastin had three sons Ajamidha, Dvimidha & Purumidha.
Ajamidha and Dvimidha under whom the Paurava realm extended and fresh kingdoms were founded. Ajamidha, the elder, continued the main line at Hastinapura and Dvimidha founded the Dvimidha dynasty in the modern district of Bareilly.
Nila, and Rrihadvasu. On Ajamldlia’s death, the main Paurava realm was divided among these sons, Riksha(1) succeeding his father at Hastinapura in the main line, which remained the Paurava line, and Nila and Brihadvasu founded what later came to be known respectively as the north Panchala and south Panchala dynasties.
Another name do note a King named Kuru who was the successor of Samvarana. He is the founder of kuru dynasty, which is itself you can see was an offshoot of Pauravas & Bharatas, both the pandavas & Kauravas were came from this dynasty we all know. To know about historicity of Mahabharata we have to know about the historicity of this clans as well.
As per both Michael Witzel & HC Roychowdhury conjectures that Porus who fought against Alexander the great in the Battle of the Hydaspes around (326 BC) was a king of the Pūrus.
Witzel conjectures Porus was a king of the Pūrus, a Vedic tribe, who existed as a marginal power in Punjab after their defeat in the Battle of the Ten Kings.
(Source:- Brereton, Joel P.; Jamison, Stephanie W., eds. (2014). The Rigveda: The Earliest Religious Poetry of India. Vol. I. Oxford University Press. pp. 880, 902–905, 923–925, 1015–1016.)
Hem Chandra Raychaudhuri largely agreed with this identification.
(Source:- H. C. Raychaudhuri (1988) [1967]. "India in the Age of the Nandas". In K. A. Nilakanta Sastri (ed.). Age of the Nandas and Mauryas (Second ed.). Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. p. 147.)
Other scholars may have different opinions.
The Taleshwar copper plates, found in Almora, stated that Brahmapura Kingdom rulers belonged to the royal lineage of the Pauravas. However the statement were very vague nothing can be said conclusively.
Now let's move to the Kurus:-
Historicity of the Kuru clan:-
The Kuru Kingdom was the first recorded state-level society in the Indian subcontinent.
[source:- B. Kölver, ed. (1997). Recht, Staat und Verwaltung im klassischen Indien [Law, State and Administration in Classical India] (in German). München: R. Oldenbourg. pp. 27–52.]
The Kuru clan was formed in the Middle Vedic period as per Witzel and many other Indologists like Kenneth Pletcher.
It is generally dated (c. 1200 – c. 900 BCE) as a result of the alliance and merger between the Bharata and other puru clans, in the aftermath of the Battle of the Ten Kings. With their center of power in the Kurukshetra region, the Kurus formed the first political center of the Vedic period, and were dominant roughly from 1200 to 800 BCE. The first Kuru capital was at Āsandīvat, identified with modern Assandh in Haryana. The Atharvaveda (XX.127) praises Parikshit, the "King of the Kurus", as the great ruler of a thriving, prosperous realm.
(Source:- Witzel, Michael (1995), "Early Sanskritization: Origin and Development of the Kuru state")
Mention in Buddhist & Jain texts:-
This point also debunks the claims that Mahabharata was a post-Buddhist text.
From Buddhist & Jain sources therefore it is clear the Kuru kingdom was already existed at the time of Buddha & Mahavira. But although it losts it's glory, which once it had during Mahabharata era. Also note a chieftain called Koravya belonging to the Yuddhiṭṭhila (Yudhiṣṭhira) gotta.This established it's historicity & Mahabharata characters.
Kurukshetra:-
Geographical location:-
As per HC Roychowdhury:- "Roughly speaking. The Kuru kingdom corresponded to modern Thanesar, Delhi and the greater part of the Upper Gangctic Doab. Within the kingdom flowed the rivers Aruna (which joins the Sarasvati near Pehoa), Amiuniatl, HiranvatT, Apaya (Apaga. or OghavatT. a branch of the Chitang), Kausiki (a branch of die Rakslil), as well as the Sarajvati and the PrishadVati or the Rakshi"
(Source:- pg 21)
The earliest proper mention of the boundaries of Kurukshetra was in the Taittiriya Aranyaka as being
Khaodava on ihe south, the Tirghna on the north, and
the Parinah1 on the west (lit. hinder section, jaghaimrdhay).
(Source:- vedic index 1, pp. 169-70)
Archaeology:-
The area of Kurukshetra provides us very ancient sites like there is a famous Late Harrapan site called Jognakhera.
The find from this site belong to the mature Harappan phase as well as later-era PGW phase.
"The Painted Grey Ware culture (PGW) probably corresponds to the middle and late Vedic period, i.e., the Kuru-Panchala kingdom, the first large state in South Asia after the decline of the Indus Valley civilization (IVC)."
(Source:- Geoffrey Samuel, (2010) The Origins of Yoga and Tantra: Indic Religions to the Thirteenth Century, Cambridge University Press, pp. 45–51 & Michael Witzel (1989), Tracing the Vedic dialects in Dialectes dans les litteratures Indo-Aryennes ed. Caillat, Paris, 97–265.)
*Interestingly there are moats which were found Jognakhera and the site Kunal on the Saraswati river. The presence of moat shows these were chiefdom-based cultures. These cultures reach a peak in Ganga-Yamuna Doab before the rise of Mahajanapadas in the Northern Black Polished Ware period.
Giacomo Benedetti:- " In the late fifteenth century BCE in the area of Kuruksetra we still have Late Harappan settlements, and in one of them, Bhagwanpura, particularly close to the supposed site of the battle, we find Late Harappan pottery together with Painted Grey Ware (PGW), dating here from 1400 BCE. It is well known that according to B.B. Lal this ware is related to the Mahabharata period because it is found in many localities mentioned in the poem, like Indraprastha (the capital of the Pandavas, identified with Purana Qila in Delhi), Hastinapura (the capital of the Kauravas), Ahicchatra (the capital of North Pancala) and Kausambi (the capital of South Pancala). But we have another ware that is present in the area of the Kurus (Upper Doab) and in the same sites of Hastinapura, Ahicchatra and Kausambi in the second millennium BCE, namely the so-called Ochre Coloured Pottery (OCP), as already observed by S.P. Gupta. This is the pottery of the first level of the aforementioned sites, it is generally dated 2000–1500 BCE, but the thermoluminescence tests on sherds from Atranjikhera, Lal Qila, Jhinjhana and Nasirpur have given dates between 2650 and 1180 BCE."
Kuru capital Hastinapur & archaeology:-
In the Mahabharata, Hastinapur is portrayed as the capital of the Kuru Kingdom of the Kauravas. Many incidents in the Mahabharata were set in the city of Hastinapur. According to the Mahabharata, the 100 Kaurava brothers were born in this city to their mother, Queen Gandhari, the wife of King Dhritarashtra. On the bank of the Budhi Ganga, two places near Hastinapur (Draupadi Ghat and Karna Ghat).
Hastinapura in Meerut district is an important site for which there is a full, published report (BB Lal, 1954–55). In epic–Puranic tradition, the Kuru capital was located at Hastinapura until a flood led to its being shifted to Kaushambi.
the story goes that after the Mahabharata war, Parikshit ascended to the throne, and five generations after him when Nichakshu was ruling, there was a high flood as a result of which the life of the inhabitants was threatened, and therefore the capital was shifted to Kausambi.
BB Lal found convincing proof of the flood represented by a 2 m thick deposit overlying the PGW strata … Similarly the occurrence of PGW at Kausambi in period 2 (1100- 800 BCE) also supports the literary tradition.
Here is a short excerpt from the book of Upinder Singh:-
The shifting of kuru capital from Hastinapur to Kausambhi during Nichakshu's time also mentioned by HC Roychowdhury:-
He described:- "It is stated in the Puranas that when the city of Hastinapura was washed away hy the Ganges,,Nichaksu, the great-great grandson of janamejaya, abandoned It. and removed his residence to Kausambhi. We have already seen that the Puranic tradition about the Bharata or Kuru origin of the later kings of Kausambhi is confirmed by two plays attributed to Bhasa. Udayana, king of Kausambhi, is described in the Svapnavasavadatta and the Pratijna-Yaugandharayana as a scion of the Bharata-kula."
The early archaeological remains of the region belong to Ochre Coloured Pottery culture which was a Bronze Age culture of Ganga Yamuna doab.
Giacomo Benedetti:- "About Hastinapura and Kausambi, there is the important tradition that the fifth successor of Pariksit, Nicaksu, abandoned the first city, because it was carried away by the Ganges, and made the second one his capital. B.B. Lal has claimed that this is confirmed by the PGW levels of Hastinapura, where there are traces of a partial flood, and by the fact that we can find a similar PGW culture in Kausambi. But we can observe that also the first, OCP level, of Hastinapura was abandoned, and that also in Kausambi there are OCP levels which have been only hypothetically dated by Sharma in 1960."
[*The Ochre Coloured Pottery culture (OCP) is a Bronze Age culture of the Indo-Gangetic Plain "generally dated 2000–1500 BCE," extending from eastern Punjab to northeastern Rajasthan and western Uttar Pradesh. However recent Archaeological findings push back it's dates much earlier & make OCP culture was a contemporary neighbor to Harappan civilization, and between 2500 BC and 2000 BC. The OCP sites of Atranjikhera, Lal Qila, Jhinjhana and Nasirpur are dated to from 2600 to 1200 BC.(check Upinder Singh 2008, p. 218)]
Artefacts of this OCP culture show similarities with both the Late Harappan culture and the Vedic culture.
(cf Gupta, Vinay; Mani, B.R. (2017). "Painted Grey Ware Culture: Changing Perspectives". Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology: 377–378.; Parpola, Asko (2020). "Royal "Chariot" burials of Sanauli near Delhi and Archaeological correlates of Prehistoric Indo-Iranian languages". Studia Orientalia Electronica. 8: 176.)
Archaeologist Akinori Uesugi considers it as an archaeological continuity of the previous Harappan Bara style, while according to Parpola, the find of carts in this culture may reflect an Indo-Iranian migration into the India subcontinent, in contact with Late Harappans.
However early dates of Copper hoards(~2500BCE) and Sinauli chariot (even if it doesn't have spoked wheels)1900-2000BCE shows indigenous development in India, and all likely represent early Indo-Aryan culture & local development rather than any foreign origin.
"Unbaked bricks and one baked brick were found at Hastinapura. Large baked bricks, possibly used for ritualistic purposes, were found at Jakhera. At Bhagwanpura, there were remains of a large, 13-room house made of baked bricks, but it is not clear whether this was built in the PGW or preceding late
Harappan phase. There were artefacts made of stone, bone, and terracotta. Chert
and jasper weights were found at Hastinapur."
(Source:- Upinder Singh-History of Ancient and Early Medieval India_ From the Stone Age to the 12th Century-Pearson Education (2009), pg 569)
Indraprastha:-
Indraprastha, it is true that at Purana Qila the earliest remains found are PGW sherds, but a full PGW level has not been identified, and in the area of Delhi various sites have been found with Late Harappan material in their earliest level, like Bhorgah and MaõçolÁ, where such material can be dated about 1500–1200 BCE. Therefore, the archaeological excavations suggest that the first settlements in the area, like Khandavaprastha, which became the Indraprastha of the epic, belong to 1500 BCE, just before the age of the Pandavas, sent from HastinÀpura to that province as if it were a place newly colonized, bordered by the dense forest of Khandavavana, which was burnt by the Pandavas.
Buddhist text also mentioned Indrapray as the capital of Kuru kings.
Historicity of this Dynasty and some of It's historical figures:-
b)DUSHYANT, SAKUNTALA & BHARATA:-
Śakuntalā was a daughter born to Viśvāmitra of the Apsarā woman called Menakā. Once, Vishvamitra started to meditate to earn the status of a Brahmarshi. The intensity of his penance frightened Indra. He feared that Vishvamitra might want his throne. To end his penance, Indra sent Menaka, an apsara, to lure him and bring him out of his penance. Menaka reached Vishwamitra's meditating spot and started to seduce him. Vishvamitra could not control his lust and desire and his penance was broken. Vishvamitra and Menaka lived together for a few years and a daughter was born to them. Later, Vishvamitra realized that all those things were Indra's tricks. He realized that he needed to control his emotions. Vishvamitra left Menaka and Menaka left the baby near Rishi Kanva's hermitage before returning to heaven. The whole incident described in "The Mahabharata, Book 1: Adi Parva: Sambhava Parva: Section LXXII"
There are two different stories of Shakuntala's life. The first version is the one described in Mahabharata, & another is Kalidasa's Abhijanam sakuntala
Śakuntalā, later grown up as a maiden, was alone in the āśrama when King Duṣyanta of paurava lineage, out in the forest on a hunting expedition, came there. In the absence of her foster-father Kaṇva, Śakuntalā welcomed the King. They fell in love with each other and the King married Śakuntalā according to the Gāndharva way of marriage and lived with her for a few days. Śakuntalā became pregnant. The King returned to his palace.
Kaṇva returned to the āśrama and he was pleased that what had been destined to take place had happened. In due course of time Śakuntalā delivered a boy, who was named Sarvadamana(Bharata). When the child was grown up, Kaṇva sent his mother along with him to Duṣyanta’s palace. The King did not recognise them, but a celestial voice convinced him that the child was his own son. The King heartily welcomed his wife and son and Śakuntalā lived in the palace as his honoured wife.
Mention of Sakuntala, Bharata & Dushyant in vedic texts:-
Satapatha Brahmana 13.5.4.13:-
"And a third,—“At Nadapit, the Apsaras Shakuntala conceived Bharata, who, after conquering the whole earth, brought to Indra more than a thousand horses, meet for sacrifice."
(Satapatha-brahmana -by Julius Eggeling, verse 13, footnote)
[*NOTE:- Nadapit, according to commentator Harisvāmin, is the name of Kaṇva's hermitage. Cf. Leumann, Zeitsch. d. D. M. G., XLVIII, p. 81.]
Satapatha Brahmana 13.5.4.11:-
"Such like is Viṣṇu's striding,--it was therewith that Bharata Dauḥshanti once performed sacrifice, and attained that wide sway which now belongs to the Bharatas: it is of this that the Gāthā sings,--'Seventy-eight steeds did Bharata Dauḥshanti bind for the Vṛtra-slayer on the Yamunā, and fifty-five near the Gaṅgā."
Aitreya Brahmana 8.4.23 asserts that the royal consecration of Bharata the son of Dusyanta was done by Dirghatamas, the famous Angirasa Rsi reputed author of RigVeda 1.140-64.
This is also supported by puranic accounts Bhagavata purana ix, 20, 25 says Mamateya, i.e. Dirghatamas, was his priest.
Aitareya Brahmana 7.23 and Satapatha Brahmana 13.5.4.11 report about his great sacrifices on the Yamuna and the Ganges.
Bharata himself, in the only reference to him in RV VI.16.4, is said to have worshipped Agni in the past. Commentator Sāyaṇacharya also clarified further:-
It is interesting that this Mandala 6 of Rig-veda is the book of the Bharadvajas, and that, according to the tradition, a Bharadvaja was adopted by Bharata as son.
After adoption by Bharata, Bharadvaja((illicit son of Bṛhaspati and Manmatā) got another another name Vitatha. Because Bharadvāja was delivered (to Bharata) by the Marut demigods, he was known as Vitatha. However in some version vitatha was a Descendant of Bharadvaja. Anyway the name Vitatha probably used as an adjective of Bharadvaja in Rigveda as well
c)PARIKSHIT & JANMEJAYA:-
There is no doubt among historians that Parikshita & his son Janamejaya was a historical figure.
Michael Witzel said Parīkṣit was a Kuru king who reigned during the Middle Vedic period (12th–10th centuries BCE).
[ source:-Michael Witzel (1989), Tracing the Vedic dialects in Dialectes dans les litteratures Indo-Aryennes ed. Caillat, Paris, 97–265.]
Witzel also said Within the frame story of the Mahabharata, the historical kings Parikshit and Janamejaya are featured significantly as scions of the Kuru clan.
However In contrast, H.C. Raychaudhuri had dated him to ninth century BC. (Source:- Raychaudhuri, Hemchandra (2006), Political History of Ancient India, pg 29)
We all know from Mahabharata & puranas Parikshit is the son of Abhimanyu and Uttara, and grandson of Arjuna. His death story is one of the very famous puranic legend in India, how he died from snake(Takshaka)bite & On hearing of his father's death by Takshaka, Parikshit's son Janamejaya vowed to kill Takshaka within a week. He starts the Sarpasatra, a yagna, which forced each and every snake in the universe to fall in the havan kund.
According to the Mahabharata, Parikshita ruled for 60 years and died.
However there is a problem if we see puranic sources properly and the recorded king names in vamsavali, we will know that there were other Parikshita & Janamejaya in Kuru dynasty other than descendant of Pandavas. Here you will notice:-
Notice the above picture all Parikshita & Janamejaya in this Dynasty are in Red boxes. For understanding we make Parikshita(1), Parikshita(2), Janamejaya(1), Janamejaya(2), Janamejaya(3). So, basically there were 2 Parikshitas & 3 Janamejaya in the Kuru dynasty, which many historians even unaware of, Pargiter rightly bring this out.
Historian H. C. Raychaudhuri believes that the second Parikshit's( means Parikshit (2)) description better corresponds to the Vedic king, whereas the information available about the first is scanty and inconsistent, but Raychaudhuri questions whether there were actually two distinct kings. He suggests that the doubling was eventually "invented by genealogists to account for anachronisms" in the later parts of the Mahabharata, as "a bardic duplication of the same original individual regarding whose exact place in the Kuru genealogy no unanimous tradition had survived," and therefore there "is an intrusion into the genealogical texts" of the late, post-Vedic tradition, which also has two of Parikshit's son Janamejaya.[source:- Raychaudhuri (1996), pp.13-19]
Witzel (1995) only refers to one Parikshit and one Janamejaya.
However RC Majumdar disagree with HC Roychowdhury's views and refuted it, let me share such important points which RC Majumdar said to refute that view:-
♦ RC Majumdar points out in Aitareya and the Satapatha Brahmana enumerate Janamejaya as the performer of the Asvamedha sacrifice. The very fact that Bhishma narrates the story of Janamejaya’s Asvamedha to Yudhishthjra as an ancient legend clearly shows that the Asvamedha referred to was performed by the ancestor of the Pandavas, and proves that a Janamejaya Parikshita before the Pandavas' time was a real person and not a shadowy figure as Dr. Raychaudhuri would have us believe.
♦The descendant of the Pandavas is credited with the performance of the Sarpasatra and not an Asvamedha. The Asvamedha started by the later Janamejaya was not completed.
♦The Brahmanas further mention Tura Kavasheya as the priest who anointed Janamejaya with Aindra Mahabhisheka, and Tura Kavasheya can be proved to be contemporaneous with Janamejaya, the ancestor of the Pandavas. Kavasha Ailusha, father or grandfather of Tura, was drowned in the Dasarjana, so that he was a senior contemporary of Kuru, son of Samvarana, who lived during the Ddsardjna period. Janamejaya, who was the grandson of Kuru, was thus contemporaneous with Tura. This sacrifice, with Tura Kavasheya as priest, was performed for celebrating the attainment of imperial status by Janamejaya and not for atonement of any sin.
♦The Satapatha Brahmana refers to another sacrifice performed by Janamejaya Parikshita with the aid of Indrota Daivapa Saunaka for ridding himself of a grievous sin which is described as Brahmahatya (killing of a Brahmana). The Puranas and the Mahabhdraia do not associate Janamejaya, the descendant of the Pandavas, with any guilt. That the ancestor was the person alluded to is clear from the fact that the story of the sin of Janamejaya is told by Bhishma, and therein Janamejaya is accused of unwittingly killing a Brahmana. This also proves that Indrota Daivapa Saunaka flourished generations before the Bharata War. The Harivamsa refers to Janamejaya’s killing the son of Gargya for insulting him, as the result of which Gargya cursed him.
The Asvamedha performed by Indrota Daivapa Saunaka was to purge Janamejaya of this sin.
♦The Harivamsa clearly indicates that the Asvamedha story relates to the earlier Janamejaya by making Janamejaya (the descendant of the Pandavas) the auditor of the story which is told by Vaisampayana, who adds that there were two Janamejaya Parikshitas among the Pauravas.
"The Sarpasatra mentioned in the Panchavimsa Brahmana at which one Janamejaya is said to have officiated as a priest is quite distinct from the Sarpasatra. instituted by king Janamejaya, as it was for securing preservation and wellbeing of the serpents, whereas the epic Sarpasatra was for the destruction of he serpents (Panchavimsa Brahmana. By., XXV. 15. 3; Vedic Index, I, 274). Raychaudhuri regard the epic account of the Sarpasastra as having no historical basis, but accepts the conquest of Taxila by Janamejaya as a historical fact (PHAI, 30-31). But the Brahmana passages on which he relies for support (Ait. Br., VIII, 21; Sat. Br.,XIII. 5. 4. 1-3) relate to the universal conquests of Janamejaya, the predecessor of the Pandavas, and are stated in connection with his horsesacrifice. Janamejaya, the descendant of the Pandavas, also started a horse-sacrifice, but it was not completed on account of some technical difficulties (Harivamsa, III. 2. 5-6, 28-29; 5, 11-17), and hence Janamejaya who is said to have performed horsesacrifices must certainly he his ancestor."
(Source:- Rc Majumdar pg 328 footnote no.3)
(Ibid)
However we cannot deny the existence of Parikshita2 & Janamejaya 3 in Vedic texts if we look carefully as RC Majumdar pointed out:-
"Kakshasena, a brother of Janamejaya, seems to have established a separate kingdom. From the references in the Panchavimsa Brahmana which states that Driti, apparently priest of king Abhipratarin, son of Kakshasena, performed a sacrifice in Khandava, in which lay Indraprastha. It appears that the junior branch resided at Indraprastha. A further reference to the "Abhipratarinas” (i.e. descendants of Abhipratarin) in the same text as "the mightiest of all their relations” suggests that the junior branch excelled the other branches of the Kurus. The Kuru kings at Indraprastha continued to rule there long after the destruction of Hastinapura and the migration of the senior branch to Kaushambi."
(Source:- RC Majumdar The Vedic Age, pg 320)
So, basically if we carefully analysed Vedic texts both Parikshita 1, 2 & Janmajeya 2, 3 were possibly mentioned. I have no idea regarding the Janmejay 1.
From the book of RC Majumdar we further knows about the successors of Janmajeya(3):-
"Janamejaya was succeeded by his son Satanika, who married a princess from Videha. To Satanlka was born Asvamedhadatta who was succeeded
by his son Adhisimakrishna. None of these descendants have been definitely referred to in the Vedic texts and the exact relationship of some Kurus mentioned in the Vedic texts is not clear. It appears that Satanika was the contemporary of Ugrasena Janaka of Videha, and Asvamedhadatta of Pravahana Jaivali of the Panchalas, both of whom were philosopher kings. In the reign of Adhisimakrishna, when Divakara was ruling in Ayodhya and Senajit in Magadha, the Puranas are said to have been recited for the first time in the twelve-year sacrifice in the Naimisharanya forest on the river Gomatl in Ayodhya. Saunaka officiated as the head sacrificer and to him were recited the Mahabharata and the
Puranas as handed down by the Sutas. Thus there seems to have been a collection and edition of the traditional accounts for the first time, on the occasion of the Naimisha sacrifice. The lists of dynasties and kings that subsequently ruled were recorded in the future tense as if they were prophecies. The Matsya and Vayu begin their “future kings” after the time of Adhisimakrishna."
Rc Majumdar also pointed out :- "During the reign of Nichakshu, the son and successor of Adhisimakrishna, the Kuru kingdom appears to have passed through severe calamities. The capital Hastinapura was washed away by the Ganges.
The devastation of crops in the Kuru country by locusts (or hail-storms),
mentioned in the Chhdndogya Uftanishad,” is also possibly to be referred to this period. The famine brought on by locusts was probably followed
by heavy downpour flooding the country. Consequently not only Hastinapura but the whole of the northern Dodb was seriously affected. The Kuru people evacuated and migrated in a body over 300 miles down-stream and settled in Vatsabhumi, with Kausambi (modern Kosam on the Yamuna
near Allahabad) as their capital. This wholesale migration, according to Pargiter, was due to the pressure from the Punjab. But the explanation
given in traditional accounts, coupled with the locust menace, satisfactorily accounts for the migration."
(Source:- The Vedic Age pg 321)
If this interpretation of RC Majumdar is correct we can safely said after Pandavas even upto Nichaksu of Kuru lineage mentioned in Vedic texts.
Here is a list of Mention of name Parikshita in Vedic texts:-
Atharvaveda 20.127.7-10; khila 5.10;
Vaitana Sutra 34.9
Aitreya Brahmana 6.32.10
Kausitaki Brahmana 30.5
Gopatha Brahmana 2.6.12
Sankhyana Srauta-sutra 12.17
Brihadaranyak Upanishad 3.3.1
According to the Shatapatha Brahmana (XIII.5.4), Parikshita had four sons, Janamejaya, Bhimasena, Ugrasena and Śrutasena. All of them performed the Asvamedha Yajna
Mention of Janamejaya in Vedic texts:-
Satapatha Brahmana 11.5.5.13; 13.5.4.1-3; 5.4.3
Aitreya Brahmana 4.27; 8.21; 7.27; 7.34; 8.2; 8.2.21 Sankhyana Srauta Sutra 16.8.27; 16.9.1, 16.9.7
Jaimini Brahmana 3.40.1
Panchavimsa Brahmana 25.15.3;
Gopatha Brahmana 1.2.5-6; 2.6.12
Before going further let's see what happened after Nichaksu.
"The history of the Paurava kings of Kausambi is obscure. The Puranas give only a list of twenty-three kings after Nichakshu, up to Kshemaka, the last in the line. Among them Satanika and his son Udayana are interesting and important figures. Satanika, also styled Parantapa, is said to have attacked Champa, the capital of Anga, during the reign of Dadhivahana. Udayana succeeded his father on the Vatsa throne. According to Buddhist accounts, Udayana was born on the same day as the Buddha. Whether we accept it or not, there are good grounds to believe that Udayana was contemporaneous with the Buddha and also with Pradyota Mahasena of Avanti and AjataSatru of Magadha."
(Source:- pg 321)
d) DEVAPI, BAHLIKA & SANTANU:-
Santanu:-
We need introduction for king Santanu, He was a descendant of the Bharata race, a forebear of the lineage of the Chandravamsha, and the great-grandfather of the Pandavas and the Kauravas. His first wife was Ganga & later married to Satyavati. From Ganga he had Devavrata(later Bhisma) & from Satyavati he had two sons Chitrangada & Vichithravirya.
As per puranas the ruler was the youngest son of King Pratipa of Hastinapura and had been born during the latter's latter years. His eldest brother, Devapi, had leprosy, and had given up his inheritance to become a hermit. The middle son, Bahlika, (or Vahlika) abandoned his paternal kingdom, and had started living with his maternal uncle in Balkh, subsequently inheriting his kingdom. Shantanu, thus, ascended the throne of Hastinapura.
Sources clear that Devapi was the eldest son of king Pratipa, but who was the youngest son there is little controversy whether Santanu or Bahlika. Anyway it is not a serious issue but there is another problem regarding the father name of Santanu, Devapi & Bahlika, as per puranas & Mahabharat it was Pratipa, but as per Yaska's Nirukta 2.10 the father name of Devapi & Santanu was Rstiasena.
So , it was possible the puranas migh have forgot Rstiasena, who was probably the son of Pratipa and Rstiasena's son was Devapi & Santanu. Because from historical point of view Yaska's Nirukta is much more reliable source than Mahabharat & puranas because Yaska's Nirukta dated to be from 600-1000BCE and it was not re-edited throughout history like puranas.
Mention of Santanu :-
Santanu:- Rigveda 10.98; Brihaddevata, 7.155-7,
8.1-9;
Yaska's Nirukta 2.10
Brihaddevata 7.148
One can argue what's the proof the mention of Santanu in vedic literature was same person in Mahabharat & puranas.
If we check the references of Santanu in Rigveda10.98 there mentioned there was drought in Santanu's realm and Devapi conducted yajna for rain in his kingdom. Now if we cross-examine with other sources it clearly shows these were same person.
According to the Brihaddevata of Shaunaka, when Devapi abdicated the throne in favour of Shantanu and left for the forest, the realm of Kuru suffered from severe drought for twelve years, as Parjanya did not rain. Finally, Shantanu along with his subjects went to the forest and offered him the Kuru throne, which he declined. Instead, he agreed to become Shantanu's purohita (priest) and conduct a yajna (sacrifice) for him to produce rain.[Brihaddevata, vii,155-7, viii.1-9]
A later version of this narrative is found in the Vishnu Purana (IV.20) as well however here there's no mention of Devapi became purohit of Santanu.
Mention of Devapi:-
Same as Santanu Rigveda 10.98
Nirukta 2.10;
Brihaddevata 7.148
Now come to Bahlika another sibling of Devapi & Santanu. Bahlika, (or Vahlika) abandoned his paternal kingdom, and had started living with his maternal uncle in Balkh, subsequently inheriting his kingdom. All the western Indian kingdoms were known by the general name Bahlika (Vahika, Vahlika and Valhika are variations of the name) meaning outsider. However, the name Bahlika is sometimes used to denote a kingdom within the present Punjab, different from Madra, Sindhu, Kekeya, Gandhara or Kamboja.
Modern day the Balkh Province of Afghanistan, derive it's name from Bahlika
Bactria was the Greek name for the area of Bakhlo (modern Balkh), There was an ancient Bronze age civilization in Bronze age civilization in these regions known as BMAC(Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex) dated to c. 2200–1700 BCE, located in present-day Turkmenistan, northern Afghanistan, southern Uzbekistan and western Tajikistan, centered on the upper Amu Darya (Oxus). It had very close connection and similarities with Indian Harrapan civilization.
It is believe Bahlika pratipeya was the oldest warrior to fight in the Kurukshetra War. He had a son, Somadatta and a daughter Pauravi(probably she was one of the wife of Vasudeva) and grandsons, Bhurishravas, Bhuri and Shala by his son and Avagaha and Nandaka were the grandsons by his daughter, Somadatta had a daughter who married the Kashi king Abhibhu, who along with him fought on the side of the Kaurava army in the Kurukshetra War.
Bahlika was slain by Bhima Mahabharat (7,154). Somadatta (7,159) and Bhurisravas (7,140) were slain by Satyaki in the Kurukshetra War. The death of all these three in the war is mentioned together at (8,1), (9-2,24,32,63), (10,9), (15-29,32) At (8,5), the slain Bahlika is describeds as grandfather of Dhritarashtra. King Bahlika's funeral rites were performed by Dhritarashtra (15-11,14)
Bahlika Pratipeya
Recorded history in Vedas about Bahlika kingdom:-
The Bahlikas, mentioned along with the three foregoing peoples, were a contiguous northern tribe, their name also suggesting "the outsiders.” Roth and Weber were inclined to place this tribe in Iran, but there is no need to assume any Iranian influence, for we find that Bahlika is the name of a Kura prince (Sat. Br., XII. 9. 3. 3).
(Rc Majumdar the vedic age, pg 259)
Bahlika is applied in the Satapatha Brahmana to the people of the west, of the Panjab, Mababharata, viii. 2030 'where the Bahlkais are defined as the
people of the Panjab and the Indus. This coincides exactly with what seems to be meant by the Satapatha Brahmana which regards as the middle the land to the east of the Sarasvati.
e) DHRITARASHTRA & VICHITHRAVIRYA :-
We all Dhritarashtra was a Kuru king, and the father of the Kauravas in the Hindu epic Mahabharata. He was the King of the Kuru Kingdom, with its capital at Hastinapura. He was born to Vichitravirya's first wife, Ambika(through Niyoga with Veda Vyasa).
Dhritarashtra was born blind. He fathered one hundred sons and one daughter, Dushala, by his wife, Gandhari and a son, Yuyutsu, by his wife's maid. Regarding his historicity Indologist Michael Witzel said "A historical Kuru King named Dhr̥tarāṣṭra Vaicitravīrya is mentioned in the Kāṭhaka Saṃhitā of the Yajurveda (c. 1200–900 BCE) as a descendant of the Rigvedic-era King Sudas of the Bharatas. His cattle was reportedly destroyed as a result of the conflict with the vrātya ascetics; however, this Vedic mention does not provide corroboration for the accuracy of the Mahabharata's account of his reign. Dhritarashtra did not accept the vratyas into his territory, and with the aid of rituals, the vratyas destroyed his cattle. The group of vratyas were led by Vaka Dālbhi of Panchala."
(Source:- Witzel, Michael (1995). "Early Sanskritization: Origin and Development of the Kuru state";
Michael Witzel (1990), "On Indian Historical Writing", pg no.9)
He accepted the historicity of Dhritarashtra but still have a doubt regarding this very short description of Dhritarashtra in vedic texts with later Mahabharata's details account of his reign. Let clear this doubts as well. Let see whether this little vedic description of Dhritarashtra's conflict with vratya ascetics led by Vaka Dālbhi of Panchala have any mention in Mahabharat & Puranas which we can corroborate.
Yes this incident is mentioned in Vamana Purana chapter 39 & Mahabharat Salya parva 41.5
In Vamana Purana story of this sage is described how this sage once performed a homa and burnt Dhṛtarāṣṭra’s kingdom in the sacrificial fire.
Moreover in Yajurveda, Kathaka Samhita:- 10.6 he described as Dhr̥tarāṣṭra Vaicitravīrya, his last name suggests his father was Vichithravirya
which clearly corroborated with Mahabharat & Puranic accounts that his father name was Vichithravirya.
There are other Dhritarashtra mentioned in Vedic texts as well, like a king of Kasi & a snake those are different from this Kuru king Dhr̥tarāṣṭra Vaicitravīrya.
f) YUDHISTHIRA:-
A very important account comes from Buddhist texts regarding the historicity of Yudhisthira.
Here you can see the original:-
f)ARJUNA:-
Arjuna requires no further introduction, he was a Pandava & one of the heroes of the epic Mahabharata. However whether his mention exists in Vedic literatures is questionable. There is a verse of Satapatha Brahmana which is very vague to conclude anything.
Satapatha Brahmana 5.4.3.7:-
♦Panchala dynasties:-
Geographical location:-
Panchala Kingdom extended from Himalayas in the north to river Charmanwati in the south during the period of Mahabharata. It had Kuru, Surasena and Matsya kingdoms to the west and the forest Naimisha to the east. Later, Panchala was divided into Southern Panchala (Panchala proper ruled by King Drupada, the father of Draupadi) and Northern Panchala (Ruled by Ashwathama, the son of Drona).
HC Roychowdhury described the geographical location much precisely:- "The Pañcāla state was located to the west of the Gomti river, and the north of the Chambal River. Its western neighbours were the Sūrasenas and the Yakṛllomas, while in the north-west it was separated from the Gaṅgā and the Kurus by dense forests. The northern boundaries of Pañcāla were the forests around the region of the Gaṅgā's source. The territory of Pañcāla corresponded to the modern-day Bareilly, Budaun, and Farrukhabad districts, as well as the nearby parts of Rohilkhand and the Central Gaṅgā-Yamunā Doab in Uttar Pradesh."
(Source:- Raychaudhuri, Hemchandra (1953). Political History of Ancient India: From the Accession of Parikshit to the Extinction of Gupta Dynasty. University of Calcutta. pp. 70–74.)
"The kingdom of Panchala included the Rohilkhand area and part of the central doab region, and was divided into two parts by the Ganga. The capital of Uttara (north) Panchala was Ahichchhatra (identified with modern Ramnagar in Bareilly district, UP), and that of Dakshina (south) Panchala was Kampilya(identified with Kampil in Farukkhabad district, UP). The famous city of Kanyakubja or Kanauj was located in this kingdom. Several ancient texts mention a king named Chulani Brahmadatta. Going by the testimony of the Arthashastra, the Panchalas seem to have later switched to an oligarchic form of government."
(Source:- Upinder Singh pg 604)
Origin of Panchala:-
King Hastin of Kuru dynasty had three sons Ajamidha, Dvimidha & Purumidha. Ajamidha continued the main Paurava line at Hastinapura, and Dvimidha founded a separate dynasty, which is not specially named and may be called the Dvimidha line. There's no proper record regarding Purumidha.
Ajamidha had three sons, and they originated separate dynasties. The eldest line from Rksa(1) continued the main line at Hastinapura.
The two other sons, Nila and Brhadvasu founded the dynasties of North and South panchala respectively.
However The Mahabharata does not say anything about the origin of these two dynasties, except that its first account declares that Ajamidha had two sons Dusyanta and Paramesthin, and from them came all the Pancalas, which except in the names agrees with the Puranas.
South Pancala was approximately the portion of Pancala south of the Ganges as far as the R. Carmanvati (Chambal), and its capitals were Kampilya and Makandi.
According to the Great Epic, Northern Panchala had its capital at Ahichchhatra or Chhatravati, the modern Ramnagai near Aonla in the Bareilly District, while Southern Panchala had its capital at Kampilya, and stretched from the Ganges to the Chambal.
Parichakra, Kampilya (or Kampila) and Ahichchhatra are the important cities in Panchala that have been mentioned in both Vedic and Puranic texts.
After Rksa(1), Bhrmyasva's territory was apparently subdivided among his five sons as petty rajas those were also called Panchalas.
Mudgala, the eldest, founded an important branch. Vadhryasva, the grandson of Mudgala, extended the kingdom, and his son Divodasa further augmented it. Pargiter and other scholars identify this Divodasa and his descendant Somadatta-Sudasa with their Vedic namesakes, the latter of whom was the chief participant in the celebrated battle of ten kings described in the Rigveda.
From the above genealogy table you can determine the generation number of Divodasa & Sudasa from Mudgala.
RC Majumdar:- "Pargiter points out that Mudgala, VadhryaSva, Divodasa, and Srinjaya are mentioned in the Rigveda hymns. Chyavana is probably meant in one hymn and his other name Panchajana is no doubt a misreading of Pijavana. Sudasa is called Sudas Paijavana. The Aitareya Brahmana says that Sahadeva -was descended from Srinjaya, and one hymn (.RV IV. 15. 7-10) says that Somaka was his son. The hymns agree with the genealogies in all these particulars. Chyavana was a great warrior and
his son Sudasa extended his dominions. They probably conquered the Dvimidha dynasty and the south Panchalas, as there appear to be gaps
in the genealogical lists of these dynasties at this period."
Source:-
Vadhryasva, Divodasa, Srinjaya, Pijavana, Sudas, Sahadeva and Somaka all are mentioned in vedic texts.
To understand the chronology look the family lineage of the North Panchala genealogy
The North Panchala power rose into prominence during the reign of Sudasa who made extensive conquests. He defeated the Paurava king Samvarana and conquered his kingdom. Sudasa was succeeded by his son Sahadeva and grandson Somaka, but the fortunes of the Panchalas waned after the time of Sudasa. Samvarana, the Paurava king, had recovered his territory probably from Somaka, and later, king Ugrayudha of the Dvimidhas killed the North Pahchala king (probably the grandfather of Prishata) and annexed his realm. Prishata, the exiled North Panchala claimant, sought refuge in Kampilya of South Panchala, Ugrayudha then attacked the Pauravas after Santanu's death, but was defeated and killed by Bhishma, who restored Prishata to his ancestral kingdom of Ahichchhatra.
Drupada succeeded his father Prishata in North Panchala. Drona, & Drupada were friends, but Drupada had insulted Dronacharya, then Dronacharya defeated the latter with the aid of the young Pandavas who were his disciples. Out of both the North and South Panchalas which he thus conquered, Drona kept North Panchala for himself and gave South Panchala to Drupada.
Certain important figures from Panchala mentioned in Mahabharata :-
Panchali/Draupadi:- Wife of the Pandavas
Dhrishtadyumna :- Commander-in-Chief of the Pandavas in Kurukshetra War and brother of Panchali
Drupada :- Father of Panchali and Dhristadyumna
Shikhandi :- Another son of Drupada (He married from Dasarna
Prishata :- Father of Drupada (1,131)
Satyajit :- Commander-in-chief of Panchala army under king Drupada
Sage Dhaumya :- Priest of the Pandavas (1,185).
Aruni :- A Brahmin boy from Panchala and a disciple of sage Dhaumya (1,3). This is the famous sage Uddalaka Aruni who mentioned in Upanishads.
Try to find some of this figures in Vedas :-
Sikhandi Yajnasena:- We all familiar with the character of Sikhandi of Mahabharata. It was Amba who was reborn as Drupada's son as Sikhandi. We know how he played the role in Kurukshetra war to kill Bhisma. His father Drupad was also known by Yajnasena.
In Kaushitaki Brahmana 7.4 mention Sikhandi Yanasena
"In the Mahbharata Drupada Is also called Yajnasena and one of his sons is named Sikhandin. Yajnasena is mentioned in the Kaushitaki Brahmana but it is not clear whether we are to regard him as a
prince, or as a priest of kesin Dalbhya, King of the Panchalas."
(Source:- Raychaudhuri, H.C. (1972). Political History of Ancient India, Calcutta: University of Calcutta, pg 67)
Aruni:- The name Aruni appears in many of the Principal Upanishads, in numerous verses. For example:
In sections 3.7 and 6.2 of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, in a dialogue where Aruni is relatively a minor participant.
In sections 6.1–16 and 5.3 of the Chandogya Upanishad, as a major dialogue between Aruni and his son Svetaketu, a dialogue about Atman and Brahman
As per Mahabharata says that Uddahka, a prominent figure of Janaka’s court* and his
son Svetaketu attended the sarpa-sntra (snake-sacrifice) of janmajeya in Adi parva 53.7
Name of Panchāla:-
The Panchalas, thus, were a branch of the Bharatas as we see from above description. Also described in Mahabharata, Book 1, Chapter 94 which describes the Puru lineage of kings, shows the kinship of the Kurus and the Panchalas, both branched out from the same line. When Janamejaya wished to hear the history of kings who were descended from Puru. Vaisampayana narrated the lineage of kings in Puru’s line.
The name "Panchala" suggests an amalgamation of five tribes, and there has been some speculation as to which particular tribes went to form the Pahchalas.
H.C. Raychaudhuri theorized that those five clans were the Krivis, the Turvashas, the Keshins, the Srinjayas, and the Somakas. Each of these clans is known to be associated with one or more princes mentioned in the Vedic texts - the Krivis with Kravya Panchala, the Turvashas with Sona Satrasaha, the Keshins with Keshin Dalbhya, the Srinjayas with Sahadeva Sarnjaya, and the Somakas with Somaka Sahadevya. The names of the last two clans, the Somakas and the Srinjayas, are also mentioned in the Mahabharata and the Puranas.
(Source:- Raychaudhuri, Hemchandra (1953). Political History of Ancient India - From the Accession of Parikshit to the Extinction of the Gupta Dynasty (PDF) (Sixth ed.). Kolkata: Calcutta University Press. p. 71. )
Historical accounts regarding Panchalas:-
As like The Mahabharat, the jatakas and the Buddhist text Divyavadana(pg 435) refer to the division of this country into two parts, viz., Uttara or Northern Panchala and Pakshma or Southern Panchala. The Bhagirathi(Ganges) formed the dividing line.
"Ahichhatra has been identified with a ruined site of the same name near modern Ramnagar in the Bareilly district. The city was still considerable in extent when visited by the Chinese pilgrim Hiuen Tsang in the seventh century. The division of the Panchala into north and south during the reign of king Drupada. A Buddhist Jataka story seems to suggest that a Chedi prince went to the north and formed the Uttara Panchala kingdom with colonists from the Panchala and Chedi countries."
History from Vedic Literature & other sources:-
Let's see what we can extract from vedic literatures regarding Panchala.
The Satapatha Brahmana asserts that Krivi was the older name of the Panchalas (XIII. 5. 4. 7).
HC Roychowdhury:- "The Krivis appear in a Rigvedic hymn which also mentions the Sindhu (Indus) and the Asikni (Chenab). But their actual habitation is nowhere clearly indicated. They are identified with the Panchālas in the Satapatha Brahmand and connected with Parivakrā."
(Pg 65)
Satapatha Brahmana xiii, s, 4, 7:- Krivaya iti ha vai purā Paūchālān achakshate. Vedic Index, 1.198.
According to Kasten Rónnow, Acta Orientalia, XVI, iii, 1937. pg.165 Krivis were named after a dragon-demon who was their tribal divinity.
The Kesin's who are connected with the Panchalas in vedic literature probably dwelt on the Gumti. The Srinjayas are associated wiih the Panchalas in post-
Vedic tradition.. In the Mtihabharata Uttamaujas is called a Panchalya as well as a Srinjaya. The clan probably lived on the Jumna in epic times.(check
Mahabharata. 3.90- 7, with commentary)
As to the Somakas, their connection with the Panchalas is known throughout the great epic. They occupied Kampilya and its neighbourhood.
"The Panchalas, the close allies of the Kurus as indicated by their joint name, were also a composite tribe. The name does not appear in the Rigveda, but the Satapatha Brdhmana states that the older name for the Panchalas was Krivi which is found in the Rigveda. Weber and Geldner suggest that the Panchalas represent the five tribes of the Rigveda; but this is not very probable according to the authors of the Vedic Indexes We hear very little of the Panchalas alone apart from the Kurus. Their kings Kraivya and Sona Satrasalia are spoken of as having performed the Asvamedha, and another king Durmukha is said to have conqueredthe whole earth. One of their kings Pravahana Jaivali appears as a philosopher king in the Upanishads. The Vedic texts do not know of north Panchala and south Panchala which we come across in the Mahabharata and the Puranas; evidently the Panchalas had extended their country by conquests in post-Vedic times. "
(Source:- RC Majumdar The Vedic Age; pg 253)
Similarly HC Roychowdhury also said in vedic texts we don't see a proper distinction of North & South Panchala like later Puranas & Jatakas, however he elaborate certain things:-
"There is no clear trace in the Vedic literature of the Epic and Jātaka division of the Panchālas into northern (Uttara) and southern (Dakshina). But it knew an eastern division because the Samhit-opanishad Brahmana makes mention of the Prāchya (eastern) Panchalas! The existence of the other two may, however, be hinted at in the expression tryanika, “threefold”, occurring in the Vedic texts.
One of the ancient capitals of Panchala was Kampilya which has been identified with Kampil on the old Ganges between Budaun and Furrukhabad. Another Panchala town Parivakra or Parichakra is mentioned in the Satapatha Bráhmana. It is identified by Weber with Ekachakra of the Mahābhārata"
"The Aitareya Brahmana (VIII. 23) represents Durmukha as a universal monarch who made extensive conquests in every direction and was anointed by Brihaduktha. Probably the Durmukha (Dummukha) of the Brahmanical and Buddhist accounts is identical with Dvimukha of Panchala, who, according to Jain tradition, was a Pratyeka-Buddha. Some accounts associate the name of Brahmadatta, a legendary king, with Panchala."
(Source:- RC Majumdar The Vedic Age, pg 325)
HC Roychowdhury:- "Dummkha, the Panchala king, had a priest named Brihaduktha who was the son of Vamadeva. Vamadeva was a contemporary of Somaka, the son of Sahadeva. Somaka had close spiritual relationship with Bhima king of Vidarbha and Nagnajit king of Gandhrva' From this it seems very probable that Durmukha was a contemporary of Nagnajit. This is exactly what we find in the Kumbhakara Jataka and the Uttar Adhyayana Sutra."
(Pg 74)
".....even apart from Puranic traditions we have the evidence of the Vedic texts testifying to the amalgamation of early Rigvedic tribes into more powerful political units. The Purus and the Bharatas
became united under the name Kuru; the Turvasas and the Krivis became the Panchalas; and lastly there are clear hints about the amalgamation of these two into a Kuru-Panchala group."
(RC Majumdar The Vedic Age, pg 427)
"The Kuru-Panchalas are the people par excellence in the Brahmana period, and they are referred to as a united nation. At one time the Kuru-Panchalas are said to have had one king. The mode of sacrifice
of the Kuru-Panchalas is spoken of as the best, and their Brahmanas gained eminence and fame in the period of the Upanishads. The Kuru-Panchala kings, the models for others, performed Rajasuyas and set out on their victorious raids in autumn and returned in summer. Speech is said to have been best spoken there, and the Samhitas and Brahmanas seem to have taken their definite form among the Kuru- Panchalas."
(Source:- RC Majumdar The Vedic Age; pg 253)
"Brahmadatta seems to have been an important king among the South Panchalas. Tradition connects him with the revision and rearrangement of Vedic and exegetical texts. He fixed the Kramapatha of the Rigveda and of the Atharvaveda, and his minister -Kandarika of the Samaveda, Brahmadatta's great-grandson Janamejaya Durbuddhi, the last king,
was a tyrant and was killed by Ugrayudha of the Dvimidhas, and the dynasty came to an end."
(Source:- RC Majumdar The Vedic Age; pg 294)
Giacomo Benedetti mentioned According to Pargiter King Brahmadatta belongs to the generation 87 from Vaivasvat Manu, whom Benedetti assigned around 1584 BCE. At this age, then, it seems that Kandarika already mastered Samaveda (as shown by the epithet chandoga) and Yajurveda (the ritual branch proper of the adhvaryu), whereas Babhravya was expert in Rigveda (bahvrca means “knowing many Rigvedic stanzas”), so that he could be remembered as the author of the Krama (step by step) reading of the hymns, combining the normal continuous reading of the Samhitapath with the separated words of the Padapatha; this shows also his interest in the Siksa or phonetics."
(Pg 234)
Interesting point highlighted by Benedetti that the hymn of Devapi in Rigveda X.98, brother of Santanu, must be later than Brahmadatta’s ministers, and the hymns Rigveda IX.5-24 are attributed to Asita Devala, which appears as a contemporary of the Pandavas.
So even certain hymns of Rig-veda were contemporaous with Pandavas as well.
Witzel said During Late Vedic times (c. 1100–500 BCE), it was one of the most powerful states of ancient India, closely allied with the Kuru Kingdom.
(Source:- Witzel, Michael (1995), "Early Sanskritization: Origin and Development of the Kuru state", EJVS)
The king of Panchala, Keśin Dālbhya (approximately between 900 and 750 BCE, was the nephew of the Kuru king, who had died heirless; Keśin subsequently took over the leadership, establishing his kingdom as the new political and cultural center, and ensuring the continuation of the Vedic tradition. His dynasty remained in power for many generations; one of his later successors was the philosopher-king Pravahana Jaivali, who was the contemporary of King Janaka of Videha and the philosophers Uddalaka Aruni and Svetaketu (8th–7th centuries BCE).
kesin Dalbhya or Darbhya, king of the Panchalas, was sister's son to Uchaisravas, king of the Kurus.
Vedic index 1.84.187, 468 Uchaisravas occurs as the name of a kuru prince in the dynastic list of Mahabharata 1.94.53.
..."Of the famous kings of the Panchalas mentioned in the Vedic literature Pravaham Jaivali is known definitely to have been Janaka's contemporary. This prince appears in the Upanishads as engaged in philosophical discussions with Aruni, Svetaketu. Silaka Salavatya, and Chaikitayana Dalbhya. The fist two teachers are known to have niet the Vedic Janaka."
(Source:- Raychaudhuri, H.C. (1972). Political History of Ancient India, Calcutta: University of Calcutta, pg 68)
Panchala during 6-4th century BCE:-
The history of Panchala from the death of Pravahana Jaivala or Jaivali to the time of Bimbisara of Magadha is obscure.
The Buddhist text Anguttara Nikaya mentions Panchala as one of the sixteen mahajanapadas of the c. 6th century BCE.
The 4th century BCE text Arthashastra also attests to the Panchalas as following the Rajashabdopajivin (king consul) constitution. Panchala was annexed into the Magadha empire during the reign of Mahapadma Nanda in the mid-4th century BCE.
(Source:- Raychaudhuri, H.C. (1972). Political History of Ancient India, Calcutta: University of Calcutta, p.206)
Post-Mauryan time:-
Numismatic evidence reveals the existence of independent rulers of Panchala during the post-Mauryan period. Most of the coins issued by them are found at Ahichatra and adjoining areas. All the coins are round, made of a copper alloy and have a set pattern on the obverse-a deeply incised square punch consisting of a row of three symbols and the ruler's name placed in a single line below them.
The last independent ruler of Ahichatra was Achyuta, who was defeated by Samudragupta, after which Panchala was annexed into the Gupta Empire. The coins of Achyuta found from Ahichatra have a wheel of eight spokes on the reverse and the legend Achyu on the obverse.
(Lahiri, B. (1974). Indigenous States of Northern India (Circa 200 B.C. to 320 A.D.) , Calcutta: University of Calcutta, p.182)
Indra seated facing on pedestal, holding bifurcated object.
Magadha Dynasty:-
The most famous character from this dynasty in Mahabharat was King Jarasandha son of Brihadrath.
He was father in law of Kamsa.
His long rivalry with Yadavas(especially Sri Krishna) is Well known. He was killed by Bhima in wrestling match, later Sri Krishna coronated his son Sahadeva as a king of Magadha.
The dynasties in these countries were descended from Kuru's son Sudhanvan, and the genealogy is found in seven Puranas. His fourth successor, Vasu, conquered the kingdom of Cedi/ which
belonged to the Yadavas, and obtained the title Caidyo-paricara, ' the overcomer of the Caidyas '. He also subdued and annexed the adjoining countries as far as Magadha. He had five sons, Brhadratha, Pratyagraha, Kusa or Kusamba called Manivahana, Yadu (or Lalittha), and a fifth Mavella, Mathailya or Maruta.
He divided his territories and established them in separate kingdoms. They were the Vasava kings, and occupied countries and towns named after themselves.
His eldest son Brhadratha took Magadha, with Girivraja or Rajgriha as his capital (check Mahabharat ii, 13, 626-7; Harivamsa) and founded the famous Barhadratha dynasty there; and with it Magadha for the first time took a prominent place in traditional history.
Cedi and Magadha were two of those kingdoms, two others from their position must have been Kausambi and Karusa/ but the fifth is not clear.
The eldest son Brhadratha took Magadha and founded the famous Barhadratha dynasty there.' (Jarasandha belongs to this dynasty)
Kusa or Kusamba obviously had Kausambi,
Pratyagraha may have taken Cedi, and Yadu Karusa.
It was probable that the fifth kingdom was Matsya.
Recorded history in Vedas:-
The name of Brihadratha is found in the Rigveda (I.36.18, X.49.6), however we are not sure whether it was the same Brihadrath or not.
Some scholars have identified the Kīkaṭa tribe—mentioned in the Rigveda (3.53.14) with their ruler Pramaganda—as the forefathers of Magadhas because Kikata is used as synonym for Magadha in the later texts; even the name of the ruler "pra-Maganda" seems to be connected with later Magadha.
Like the Magadhas in the Atharvaveda, the Rigveda speaks of the Kikatas as a hostile tribe, living on the borders of Brahmanical India, who did not perform Vedic rituals.
There is another view Kikatas were also Vedic people but may have been conflict with other tribes.
The core of the kingdom was the area of Bihar south of the Ganges; its first capital was Rajagriha (modern day Rajgir), then Pataliputra (modern Patna). Rajagriha was initially known as 'Girivrijja' and later came to be known as Rajgir.
The name Magadha first appears in the Atharva Veda where fever is wished away to the Gandharis, Mujavats, Angas and Magadhas.
The bards of Magadha are, however, mentioned as early as the Yajur-Veda Vajesnayi Samhita 30.5
They are usually spoken of in the early Vedic literature in terms of contempt.
The Brahmanas of Magadha, are spoken of in a disparaging tone as "Brahmanabandhu". Vedic index 2.116
However the Sankhyana Aranyaka, the views of a Magadhavasi Brahtmna are quoted with respect.
HC Roychowdhury:- "With the exception of Pramaganda no king of Magadha appears to be mentioned in the Vedic literature. The earliest dynasty of Magadha according to the Mahdbharata and the Puranas that founded by Brihadratha the son of Vasu Chaidya-Uparichara, the father of Jarasandha. Ramayana makes Vasu himself the founder of Girivraja or Vasumath. A Brihadratha is mentioned twice in (he Rig-Veda/ but there is nothing to show that he is identical with the father of Jarasandha."
(Pg 102)
Ramayana 1.32.7
The Puranas give lists of the 'Brihadratha kings” from Jarasandha’s son Sahadeva to Ripunaya, and apparently make Senajit, seventh in descent from Sahadeva, the contemporary of Adhisima-Krishna of the Parikshita family and Divakara of the Ikshvaku line.
The Hindu Mahabharata calls Brihadratha the first ruler of Magadha. Ripunjaya, last king of Brihadratha dynasty, was killed by his minister Pulika, who established his son Pradyota as the new king. Pradyota dynasty was succeeded by Haryanka dynasty founded by Bimbisara. Bimbisara led an active and expansive policy, conquering the Kingdom of Anga in what is now West Bengal. King Bimbisara was killed by his son, Ajatashatru. Pasenadi, king of neighbouring Kosala and brother-in-law of Bimbisara, promptly reconquered the Kashi province.
Capital Rajgir or Grivaraja :-
Rajgir (ancient Rajagriha) is situated about 100 km to the south-east of Patna in the Nalanda district of Bihar State. The town of Bihar-State (District Headquarters) is situated about 21 km north-east, the famous site of Nalanda Mahavihara about 12 km north and the sacred sites of Gaya and Bodh Gaya about 80 km to the south-west of Rajgir.
Mahabharata (Sabhaparva, 21) mentions Rajgir in some detail during the episode of killing of Jarasandha, the mighty ruler of Magadha (Girivraja). The magnificence of the city and the defensive character of the five hills around it are described in this section of the epic.
Rajgir was the capital of Haryanka dynasty kings Bimbisara (558–491 BC) and Ajatashatru (492–460 BC). Ajatashatru kept his father Bimbisara in captivity here. The sources do not agree on which of the Buddha's royal contemporaries, Bimbisara and Ajatashatru, was responsible for its construction. It was the ancient capital city of the Magadha kings until the 5th century BC when Udayin (460–440 BC), son of Ajatashatru, moved the capital to Pataliputra (modern Patna).
A very important point regarding the historicity of Mahabharata we find from Buddhist texts:-
According to the Pabbajja Sutta and Jataka Atthakatha (Upadhyay 1961: 94), before attainment of the Great Enlightenment by the Buddha, King Bimbisara had once gone to meet him at Pandava Parvata in Rajagriha. It clearly indicates that there was some kind of pre-existing tradition of the Mahabharata story at Rajgir during the time of the Buddha as the name of the hill was linked with the Pandavas.
Besides, the five names of the hills mentioned in the Mahabharata, are Pandava, Vipula, Varahaka, Chaityaka and Matanga (Law 1938: 30). The Isigili Sutta of the Majjhima Nikaya provides the following names Vaibhara, Pandava, Vepulla, Gijjhakuta and Isigili (III: 68, cited by Law 1938: 3).
However we cannot say anything properly regarding this piece of, because I found it could be Pandara Mountain mentioned in Mahabharata later changed into Pandava in Buddhist text. In Mahabharat especially soutthern recension pandara is one of the 5 mountains of Rajgir. Therefore It maybe connected with pandara peoples and not Pandavas.
Another interesting thing the presiding deity of the town, the Goddess Jara is one of the popular matrikas who was worshipped during the Kushan period and is considered related to Hariti and matrika cult in India (Maheshwari 2009). She is even mentioned in the Mahabharata (Sabhaparva 16.38) as a Yakshini of Rajagriha who was fond of eating flesh and blood. Jara was responsible for joining two dead halves of the child of King Brihadratha and making it alive who later known as Jarasandha.
2)Yadavas:-
but only two are important, Sahasrajit (or Sahasmda) and Krostu (or Krostr). With them the Yadavas divided into two great branches. Sahasrajit's descendants were named after his grandson Haihaya and were well known as the Haihayas. Krostu's descendants had no special name, but were known particularly as the Yadavas.
Romila Thapar said, It can be inferred from the vamshanucharita (genealogy) sections of a number of major Puranas that, the Yadavas spread out over the Aravalli region, Gujarat, the Narmada valley, the northern Deccan and the eastern Ganges valley.[source:- Thapar, Romila (1978, reprint 1996). Ancient Indian Social History: Some Interpretations, New Delhi: Orient Longman, pp. 216–7]
The Yadus had a tribal union with the Turvasha tribe, and were frequently described together.
(Source:- Erdosy, George; Witzel, Michael (1995). Language, Material Culture and Ethnicity. The Indo-Aryans of Ancient South Asia: Rgvedic history: poets, chieftains and politics. De Gruyter. p. 204.)
By the time of the arrival of the Puru and Bharata tribes, the Yadu-Turvashas were settled in Punjab, with the Yadus possibly residing along the Yamuna River.
(Source:- Erdosy, George; Witzel, Michael (1995). Language, Material Culture and Ethnicity. The Indo-Aryans of Ancient South Asia: Rgvedic history: poets, chieftains and politics. De Gruyter. pg 262)
In Mandalas 4 and 5 of the Rigveda, the god Indra is stated to have saved the Yadu-Turvashas from drowning when they crossed rivers.
The Yadu-Turvashas are treated relatively positively in Rigveda Mandalas 5, 6, and 8, and are stated to be the occasional allies and enemies of the Puru-Bharatas.
( Source:- Erdosy & Witzel 1995, p. 235.)
In the Battle of the Ten Kings, the Yadus were defeated by Bharata chieftain Sudas.
(source :- Erdosy & Witzel 1995, p. 239)
Even during mediaeval period The political history of the Deccan between c. 753–975 CE was marked by the ascendancy of the Rashtrakutas. In certain copper plate grants, the Rashtrakutas claim descent from the lineage (vamsha) of Yadu. (In the epics, Yadu was the son of Yayati and the brother of Puru and Turvasu; Krishna was supposed to be a descendent of Yadu). Various inscriptions elaborate on this story of origin, stating that the Rashtrakutas belonged to the Satyaki branch of the Yaduvamsha, mentioning an eponymous ancestor.
a) Haihayas:-
According to the Harivamsha Purana (34.1898) Haihaya was the great grandson of Yadu and grandson of Sahasrajit.
In the Vishnu Purana (IV.11), all the five Haihaya clans are mentioned together as the Talajanghas. The five Haihaya clans were Vitihotra, Sharyata, Bhoja, Avanti and Tundikera.
As per HC Roychowdhury:- "The Haihayas were native to the present-day Malwa region of Western Madhya Pradesh. The Puranas style the Haihayas as the first ruling dynasty of Avanti."
(Source:- Raychaudhuri, H.C. (1972) Political History of Ancient India, Calcutta: University of Calcutta, pp.130-1.)
According to the Mahabharata and the Puranas, the most celebrated Haihaya king was Arjuna Kartavirya. His epithet was Sahasrabahu. Kartavirya was son of Kritavirya, king of the Haihayas.
He ultimately conquered Mahishmati city from Karkotaka Naga, a Naga chief, and made it his fortress-capital. According to the Vayu Purana, he invaded Lanka and took Ravana prisoner.
Kartaviryarjuna propitiated Dattatreya and was favoured by him. Arjuna's sons killed the sage Jamadagni. Jamadagni's son Parashurama in revenge killed Arjuna. Arjuna's son Jayadhvaja succeeded him to the throne. Jayadhvaja was succeeded by his son Talajangha.
[Source:- Pargiter, F.E. (1972) [1922]. Ancient Indian Historical Tradition, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, p.265-7]
Historicity of Parashuram, Jamadagni & Kartaviryarjuna :-
Although the name of Kartaviryarjuna was not mentioned in Vedas but lord Parashuram's name is mentioned as Rama Jamadagnya. Infact he was the Seer of Rig Veda X.110.
The last name Jamadagnya suggested descendant of Jamadagni. We all know that Parasuram was son of Rishi Jamadagni.
Even in the Buddhist Vinaya Pitaka section of the Mahavagga(I.245) the Buddha pays respect to Jamadagni by declaring that the Vedas (Shruti's) in their true form were revealed to the original Vedic rishis, including Jamadagni.
Rsi Jamadagni (son of a daughter of Gadhi with the Rsi Rcika Aurva) was a contemporary of Vishwamitra who was a king, son of Gadhi of Kanyakubja, that decided to become a brahmana through the ascetic practice (tapas).
After Parashuram killed Kartavirya Arjuna his son Jayadhvaja succeeded him to the throne. Jayadhvaja was succeeded by his son Talajangha.
[*Side fact:- There is a doubtful account regarding the origin of the famous Surasena kingdom, whose capital was Mathura. As per Linga purana i, 68, 19 suggests an account that it was named after Surasena, a son of the Haihaya Arjuna Kartavirya ; but no other authority supports this story.]
Arjuna had many sons of whom the chief was Jayadhvaja who reigned in Avanti. Surasena, another son, appears to have been associated with Mathura, while Sura, the third son, probably was connected with Surashtra. Jayadhvaja’s son Talajangha had many sons, of whom the chief was Vitihotra. The Puranas state that the Haihayas formed five groups, viz. Vitihotras, Saryatas, Bhojas, Avantis, and Kundikeras all of whom were collectively called
Talajanghas. Of these, Vitihotra and Tundikera or Kundikera were in the Vindhyan range; the Saryatas were in Western India, Bhojas near the Aravalli hills, and Avantis in Malwa.
Later, the Haihayas were also known by the name of the most dominant clan amongst them — the Vitihotras. According to the Puranas, Vitihotra was the great-grandson of Arjuna Kartavirya and the eldest son of Talajangha.
The Puranas also mention the names of two Vitihotra rulers: Ananta, son of Vitihotra and Durjaya Amitrakarshana, son of Ananta.
The Haihaya territory expanded northward to the mid-Ganges valley under the Vitihotra rulers until they were stopped by the Ikshvaku king Sagara.
(Source:- Thapar, Romila (1996). Ancient Indian Social History Some Interpretations, New Delhi: Orient Longman, ISBN 81-250-0808-X, p.299)
Ripunjaya, the last Vitihotra ruler of Ujjayini was overthrown by his amatya (minister) Pulika, who placed his son, Pradyota on the throne.
(Source:- Raychaudhuri, Hemchandra (1972). Political History of Ancient India, Calcutta: University of Calcutta, pp. 130–1.& Raizada, Ajit (1992). Ujjayini (in Hindi), Bhopal: Directorate of Archaeology & Museums, Government of Madhya Pradesh, p.21)
it may be recalled that the Avantis were one of the five branches of the Haihayas. According to some scholars the twenty Vitihotras who are mentioned in the Puranas as having ruled after the Bharata War, were kings of Avanti. But no
definite information is available regarding the history of Avanti after Vinda and Anuvinda, who flourished at the time of the Bharata War, When we next hear of Avanti, more than five centuries later, it was under the Pradyotas.
Historical mention of Haihayas:-
Kautilya in his Arthaśāstra mentioned about the Haihayas.
(Source:- Raychaudhuri, Hemchandra (1972). Political History of Ancient India, Calcutta: University of Calcutta, pp. 130–1.)
Buddhist text The Mahagovindasuttanta of the Dighanikaya mentions about an Avanti king Vessabhu (Vishvabhu) and his capital Mahissati (Mahishmati). Probably he was a Vitihotra ruler.
(Source:- Bhattacharyya, P. K. (1977). Historical Geography of Madhya Pradesh from Early Records. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. pp. 118–9.)
A number of early medieval dynasties, which include the Kalachuris and the Mushakavamsha Mushika Kingdom of Kerala, claimed their descent from the Haihayas.
(Source:- Thapar, Romila (1996). Ancient Indian Social History Some Interpretations, New Delhi: Orient Longman, p.282)
The Haihayas of eastern India fought against Islamist invaders in medieval times.
(Source:- Rajaguru, Satyanarayan. History of the Gaṅgas, p.59)
b)Chedi:-
The three sons of yadava king Vidarbha founded three sub-lines. Kratha or Bhima, the eldest, continued the main line of Vidarbha. The second son kaisika became king of Chedi and founded the Chedi line.
The kingdom chedi which fell roughly in the Bundelkhand division of Madhya Pradesh regions to the south of river Yamuna along the river Ken. Its capital city was called Suktimati in Sanskrit.
According to the Mahabharata, the Chedi Kingdom was ruled by Shishupala, an ally of Jarasandha of Magadha and Duryodhana of Kuru. He was a rival of Vasudeva Krishna who was his uncle's son. He was killed by Vasudeva Krishna during the Rajasuya sacrifice of the Pandava king Yudhishthira.
Yudhishthira later installed Shishupala's son in the throne of Chedi. (Mahabharat 2,44)
Kareṇumatī, wife of Pandava Nakula, was a princess of Cedi rājya. (Śloka 79, Chapter 95, Ādi Parva).
Mention in vedas:-
There's is mention of a king called Kasu Chaidya(from chedi or descendant of chedi) is mentioned in Rigveda.
Rig Veda 8.5.37:-
ता मे॑ अश्विना सनी॒नां वि॒द्यातं॒ नवा॑नाम् । यथा॑ चिच्चै॒द्यः क॒शुः श॒तमुष्ट्रा॑नां॒ दद॑त्स॒हस्रा॒ दश॒ गोना॑म् ॥
ता मे अश्विना सनीनां विद्यातं नवानाम् । यथा चिच्चैद्यः कशुः शतमुष्ट्रानां ददत्सहस्रा दश गोनाम् ॥
“Become appraised, Aśvins, of my recent gifts, how that Kaśu, the son of Cedi, has presented me with ahundred camels and ten thousand cows.”
Rig Veda 8.5.38
यो मे॒ हिर॑ण्यसंदृशो॒ दश॒ राज्ञो॒ अमं॑हत ।
अ॒ध॒स्प॒दा इच्चै॒द्यस्य॑ कृ॒ष्टय॑श्चर्म॒म्ना अ॒भितो॒ जना॑: ॥
यो मे हिरण्यसंदृशो दश राज्ञो अमंहत ।
अधस्पदा इच्चैद्यस्य कृष्टयश्चर्मम्ना अभितो जनाः ॥
“The son of Cedi, who has given me for servants ten Rājās, bright as gold, for all men are beneath hisfeet; all those around him wear cuirasses of leather.”
Rig Veda 8.5.39
माकि॑रे॒ना प॒था गा॒द्येने॒मे यन्ति॑ चे॒दय॑: ।
अ॒न्यो नेत्सू॒रिरोह॑ते भूरि॒दाव॑त्तरो॒ जन॑: ॥
माकिरेना पथा गाद्येनेमे यन्ति चेदयः ।
अन्यो नेत्सूरिरोहते भूरिदावत्तरो जनः ॥
“No one proceeds by that path which the Cedis follow, no other proud man as a more liberal benefactorconfers (favour on those who praise him).”
Rc Majumdar also pointed out these hymns in his book as well:- "The Chedis, who dwelt probably between the Yamuna and the Vindhyas, had a very powerful king named Kasu who is said in a Danastuti (VIII. 5. 37-39) to have made a gift of ten kings as slaves to his priest. The Puranic literature represents the Chedis as an offshoot of the Yadus."
Source:- The vedic Age pg 248
In central India, the ancient cities of Tripuri in the Narmada valley near Jabalpur and Airakina (Eran) near Sagar were probably part of the Chedi kingdom.
Other historical mentions:-
In the Pali Anguttaru-Nikaya (Vol. I, p. 213; IV, pp. 252, 256 and 260), chedi counted among the sixteen Mahajanapadas. The names of thise sixteen majhajanadas are: Anga, Magadha, Kasi, Kosala, Vajji, Malla, Cedi, Vanga, Kuru, Panchala, Machchha, Sursena, Assaka, Avanti, Gandhara and Kamboja.
The Janavasabha-Suttanta associates the Vamsas with the Chedis & mentions the powerful ruling peoples of the time in such groups as Kasi-Kosala, Vajji-Malla, Chedi-Vamsa, Kuru-Panchala, and Machchha-Surasena.
A Jataka story seems to suggest that a Chedi prince went to the north and formed the Uttara Panchala kingdom with colonists from the Panchala and Chedi countries.
(Source:- RC Majumdar The Vedic Age, pg 325)
Certain other issues:-
The region of Kalinga came under the rule of the Cedis after the disintegration of the Mauryan Empire of whom the only known King was Kharavela, who probably patronised Jainism. The Cedis were succeeded by Pitribhaktas and later by the Matharas of Pishtapura.
The Mahameghavahana dynasty (Mahā-Mēgha-Vāhana, 2nd or 1st century BC to early 4th century CE was an ancient ruling dynasty of Kalinga after the decline of the Maurya Empire. In the first century B.C., Mahameghavahana, a king of Chedirastra (or Cetarattha, i.e., kingdom of the Chedis) conquered Kalinga and Kosala.
During the reign of Kharavela, the third king of Mahameghavahana dynasty, South Kosala became an integral part of the kingdom. He patronised Jainism, but did not discriminate against other religions. He is known by his Hathigumpha inscription.
The first line of the Hathigumpha inscription calls Kharavela "Chetaraja-vasa-vadhanena" (चेतराज वस वधनेन, "the one who extended the family of the Cheta King"). R. D. Banerji and D. C. Sircar interpreted "Cheti" (चेति) to be referring to a dynasty from which Kharavela descended, namely Chedi mahajanapada. According to Sahu, this is incorrect and an artifact of a crack in the stone. The "Chetaraja", states Sahu, probably refers to Kharavela's father and his immediate predecessor.
according to one tradition, the city of Kaushambi was founded by prince Kushamba, the third son of the Chedi king Uparichara Vasu, while according to another tradition, it was founded by prince Kushamba, the eldest son of the righteous king Kusa of yore. In the Vishnu Parana (IV. 19) Uparichara Vasu figures as a Kaurava, i.e.; a scion of the family of the Kurus. The epic tradition of foundation of the city by prince Kushamba its first king, finds its echo in the Pali Jataka story relating that in the past king KosamHka reigned in Koshambi-in the territory of the Vachchhas.
C) VIDARBHA:-
According to the Puranas, the Vidarbhas or Vaidarbhas were descendants of Vidarbha, son of Jyamagha, a descendant of Kroshtu. Most well known Vidarbha king was Bhishmaka, father of Rukmin and Rukmini(wife of Lord Krishna)
In the Matsya Purana and the Vayu Purana, the Vaidarbhas are described as the inhabitants of Deccan (Dakshinapatha vasinah).
(Source:- Raychaudhuri, Hemchandra (1972). Political History of Ancient India, Calcutta: University of Calcutta, p.83)
Contemporaneous with king Sagara of Ayodhya was
Vidarbha of the Yadavas, who sought peace with the Ayodhya king, advancing south-westward, by offering his daughter Kesini in marriage to the latter. King Vidarbha then retired towards the Deccan into the country named after him, leaving the whole of northern India to acknowledge the suzerainty of Sagara. After Sagara’s death, the Yadavas of Vidarbha extended their authority northward over the Haihaya country.
The location of the territories of the youngest son Lomapada has not been given.
The kingdom of Vidarbha was situated in the region still known as Vidarbha in what is now Maharashtra in central India.
Certain important information regarding this kingdom:-
Damayanti, the wife of Nala was the princess of Vidarbha. Similarly Rukmini, the eldest wife of Vasudeva Krishna was from Vidarbha, she was daughter of Bhismaka.
Sage Agastya's wife Lopamudra, also was a princess from the country of Vidarbha as mentioned in the Mahabharata.
Indumati, the Grandmother of Lord Rama and mother of King Dasharatha was also a princess of Vidarbha kingdom. Kundinapuri was its capital, which is identified as Kaundinyapur in the eastern Maharashtra.
Rukmini's brother Rukmi founded another kingdom with capital Bhojakata, close to Vidarbha proper.
In Vedas:-
Bhima Vidarbha is mentioned in the Aitareya Brahmana (vii. 34) as having received instruction
regarding the substitute for the Soma juice, through a succession of teachers, from Parvata and Narada.
This King Bhima is mentioned as the ancient ruler of Vidarbha at many places in Mahabharata. (MBh 3:53 to 77). The famous princess Damayanti was his daughter.
The country is mentioned in the Jaiminiya Brahmana 2.440
It was famous for its Machalas, perhaps a species of dog, which killed tigers.
The Prasna Upanishad 1.1 & 2.1 mentions a sage of Vidarbha named Bhargava as a contemporary of Asvalayana.
Another sage called Vidarbhi Kaundiniya is mentioned in the Brihadaranyak Upanishad
(Vedic index, 2.297)
C) Shashabindus:-
In the Balakanda (70.28) of the Ramayana, the Shashabindus are mentioned along with the Haihayas and the Talajanghas. The Shashabindus or Shashabindavas are believed as the descendants of Shashabindu, a Chakravartin (universal ruler) and son of Chitraratha, great-great-grandson of Kroshtu.
The Yadava branch first developed a great kingdom under its king Sasabindu, who was a famous cakravartin, which means he / extended his sway over neighbouring countries.
He had many sons, who were known as the Sasabindu or Sasabindava princes ;
(MBhvii, 65, 2322-4 : xii, 29, 999 : Lg i, 68, 26 : Gar i, 139, 26)
Hence it would seem that his territories were divided among them into many small principalities, for none of his successors were of great note.
It is believed Shashabindu was father-in-law of the great Ikshvaku king Māndhātā. This makes him a contemporary of Māndhātā.
(Source:- 2) Brahmāṇḍa-purāṇa 3. 18. 1 and 3.63.69-72)
Pargiter also mentioned this when it is said that Mandhatr of Ayodhya married Sashabindu’s daughter Caitrarathi Bindumati. It may be safely inferred from the position and circumstances of both that Sasabindu was the famous Yadava king, son of Citraratha.
(Source:- Ancient Indian historical tradition, pg 141)
d) Satvatas:-
According to a tradition, found in the Harivamsa (95.5242-8), Satvata was a descendant of the Yadava king Madhu and Satvata's son Bhima Satvata was contemporary with lord Rama. Bhima recovered the city of Mathura from the Ikshvakus after the death of Rama and his brothers. Andhaka, son of Bhima Satvata was contemporary with Kusha, son of Rama. He succeeded his father to the throne of Mathura.
*Satvata's sons, Bhajamana, Devavrdha, Andhaka and vrsni comprises the various families that developed from them.
There is no difficulty about Bhajamana for only his sons are mentioned and the texts, though partially corrupt, yet when collated make the account clear.
Nor is there any difiiculty about Devavrdha, because only his son Babhru is named, and the texts collated say his lineage were the Bhojas of Marttikavata.
The real difficulties occur with regard to Andhaka's and Vrsni's descendants.
Andhaka had four sons, but only two are important, Kukura and Bhajamana.
From Kukura were descended the Kukuras, and Bhajamana's descendants were specially styled the Andhakas.
Vrsni's progeny present the most difficulty, because he had at least four sons, two with the same name,Vrsni's eldest son by one wife was Sumitra known also as Anamitra, and his youngest son by another wife was Anamitra too ; while vrsni was a favourite name. And from them were descended various families, and because the accounts are not always compact.
Therefore famous Andhakas, the Vrishnis, the Kukuras, the Bhojas and the Surasenas are believed to have descended from Satvata. These clans were also known as the Satvata clans.
Territories:-
The large Yadava kingdom appears to have been divided among Satvata's four sons, Bhajamana, Devavrdha, Andhaka and Vrsni.
Bhajamana's kingdom is not specified, and his descendants attained no distinction.
Devavrdha is connected with the R. Parnafe (the modern Banas in West Malwa), and he, his son Babhru and his descendants reigned at Marttikavata, which was apparently in the Salva country’’.around Mount. Abu.
Andhaka reigned at Mathura, the chief Yadava capital. He had two sons, Kukura and Bhajamana as we mentioned earlier , Kukura and his descendants, the Kukuras, formed the main dynasty there down to Kamsa, while this Bhajamana’s descendants, who were specially known as the Andhakas, formed a princely line somewhere there and Krtavarman
was their king in the Pandavas time mentioned in
(Mahabharata xi,11,309.)
Vrsni reigned probably at Dvaraka in Gujarat, because his descendant Akrura reigned there.
(Source:- Vayu Puran 96, 60. Brahmanda Purana iii, 71, 62. Brahma Puran 17, 5. Harivamsa 40, 2095.
Visnu Puran iv, 1.3, 35-70; 14, 2.)
Another interesting point mentioned by Pargiter:- "The Bhojas were a family among the Haihayas and yet the name Bhoja is used widely of many Yadavas.
Andhaka was the great Bhoja and Devavrdha's descendants were Bhojas. Ugrasena and his son Kamsa were Bhojas, and so was Krtavarman. So also Bhlsmaka and his son Rukmin of Vidarbha. In fact the Bhojas were widespread, and it would
almost seem as if the name belonged to the Yadavas generally, except perhaps the Vrsnis in Gujarat."
(Source:- pg 280)
Mention in Vedic literature:-
According to the Aitareya Brahmana (VIII.14), the Satvatas were a southern people held in subjection by the Bhojas.
Not only the Bhojas, but the Devavridha
branch of the Satvatas finds mention in the Vedic literature.
Babhru Daivavridha is mentioned in the Aitareya Brahmana'(7.34) as a contemporary of Bhima, king of Vidarbha, and of Nagnajit, king of Gandhara.
The Satapatha Brahmana (XIII.5.4.21) mentions that Bharata seized the sacrificial horse of the Satvatas.
*However Pargiter have an interesting opinion regarding this Bharata, as per him this was Rama's brother Bharata rather than Bharata Daushanti. As per him King Bharata was long prior to the Satvants or Satvatas, but Rama and Bharata of Ayodhya were their contemporaries, and this story is no doubt connected with the conquest of the Surasena territory from the Satvatas and its occupation by Rama's brother Satrughna.
(Source:- Ancient Indian historical tradition, pg 65)
If Pargiter's interpretation is correct this point will also play a crucial role in historicity of Ramayana.
Other historical mentions:-
Panini, in his Ashtadhyayi mentions the Satvatas also as being of the Kshatriya gotra, having a sangha (tribal oligarchy) form of government.
(Source:- Thapar, Romila (1978, reprint 1996). Ancient Indian Social History: Some Interpretations, New Delhi: Orient Longman, pp. 303–4)
the Manusmriti (X.23), the Satvatas are placed in the category of the Vratya Vaishyas.
e) Vrsni:-
As we discussed earlier Vrsni was one of the son of Satvat. From him the lineage of vrsni originated.
As per Pargiter Vrsni's progeny present the most difficulty, because he had at least four sons, two with the same name, and from them were descended various families, and because the accounts are not always compact. Moreover the Brahma purana, Harivamsa and Padma purana as per Pargiter misread his name as Krostu or Krostr, and appear to confuse him with his ancestor, Yadu's son Krostu or Krostr.
There were three lines of descent of the Vrsnis from Vrsni’s three sons Anamitra, Yudhajit and Devamidhusa ; But there was also a fourth line from his youngest son Anamitra (by Madri) as will appear, whose descendants were called Sainyas.
[*Side fact:- another account of the origin of Vrsni, As per few puranas Madhu was a son of Kārtavīryārjuna; he had a hundred sons of whom Vṛṣni was the eldest.(check Bhāgavata-purāṇa IX. 23. 27, 29; Viṣṇu-purāṇa IV. 11. 21.)]
Vrsni's offspring begin with that of the eldest son (by Gandhari)Sumitra, called Anamitra by the Brahma and Harivamsa, down to Satrajit and Satrajit's children are mentioned separately.
Yudhajit's descendants divided into two families those of Svaphalka and Citraka.
* line is given extremely briefly, and
some of the authorities wrongly invert him and his son Sura. This was the family in which lord Krishna was born.
[Pargiter pg 106]
As per Mahābhārata Anuśāsana Parva, Chapter 147, Verse 29) :- Devamīḍha/Devamidhusa, father of Śūrasena had another name, "Citraratha".
If ever you come across the name Citraratha instead of Devamidha in genealogies don't be confused.
That's why even in Bhagavad Gita 1.40. Arjuna described Krishna as a descendant of Vrshni.
"When irreligion is prominent in the family, O Krishna, the women of the family become polluted, and from the degradation of womanhood, O descendant of Vrshni, comes unwanted progeny."
In Bhagvatam 9.24.63-64:-
"Krishna, whose actions are praised by the descendants of Bhoja, Vrshni, Andhaka, Madhu, Sürasena, Dasärha, Kuru, Srïjaya Pändu, pleased his devotees by his pleasing, affectionate glances, his instructions and his heroic actions, using his body which was pleasing in all aspects."
Vrsni's youngest son Anamitra had a son Sini, and their descendants were called the Sainyas.
The Vṛsṇis constitute one of the most important groups in the saga of the Mahābhārata, and Vṛsni is the clan in which the most famous of the Mahābhārata characters, Vāsudeva-Kṛsṇa, was born. The Mahābhārata (II.22) mentions that the Vṛsṇis were part of the rulership of Mathurā, and the town seems to have been their ancestral place.
The kingdom of Surasena was an ancient Indian region corresponding to the present-day Braj region in Uttar Pradesh, with Mathura as its capital city. The Sura-sena Janapada was occupied by Vrishnis and Andhakas, branches of the Yadu tribe.
According to Puranas, Mādhavas were a royal Yadava family of descendants of Madhu, an important Yadava king who had a kingdom from Gujarat to Yamuna (Pargiter pp.275-6). It's interesting that the Harivamsa says that Mathura was built by Shatrughna after killing the Mādhava Lavana (Pargiter p.170).
The ancient Greek writers (e.g., Megasthenes) refer to the Sourasenoi and its cities, Methora and Cleisobra/Kleisobora .
Mention of Vrisnis in Vedic literature:-
As per the Vedic Index (Macdonell & Keith 1958: 289–90), the Vṛsṇis are already known in the later Vedic period; their descendants (i.e., Vārsṇa, Vārsṇeya, Vārsṇya) are mentioned in the Taittirīya Brāhmana (III.11.9.3; III.10.9.15), Śatapatha Brāhman ̣ a (I.1.1.10; III.1.1.4), Br ̣ hadāran ̣ yaka Upaniṣad (IV.1.8) and Jaiminīya Upaniṣad Brāhmana (I.6.1; I.5.4).
Other historical mentions:-
Kauṭilya in his Arthaśāstra (VI.12) mentions a war between the Vṛsṇis and Dvaipāyana, which means that various episodes related to the Vṛsṇis which were common in puranas were quite popular by the time of Kauṭilya as well.(c. 4th century BCE).
The Vrshni-Rajanya tribe of Punjab-Himachal Pradesh, Silver Drachm, 1st cent. BC.
Obv: Lion-Elephant standard in railing, Brahmi legend 'Vrshni Rajadnya Ganasya Tratarasya'
Rev: Wheel with Kharoshthi legend 'Vrshni Rajana Ganasa Tratarasa'
(BM - ex. Alexander Cunningham coll.)
Surasena kingdom & it's capital Mathura:-
the kingdom of surasena with its capital at Mathura on the Yamuna. Surasena (modern Muttra district including some of the territory still further south) before the period ol the Bharata War was
under the occupation of the scions of the Yadu family. The Puranas mention twenty-three Surasenas after the Bharata War up to the period of Nanda, but no dynastic lists are available. Mathura was the capital of the Surasena country ; the country appears to have obtained its name from Lord Rama's brother Satrughna’s son Surasena, and Andhaka’s descendants reigned there down to Ugrasena and Kamsa.
As per various sources This country called Surasena was originally ruled by Kings of the Solar dynasty long before Mahabharata period.
Devī Bhāgavata, 4th Skandha explains how the Yādava Kings came to rule over Mathurā:-
"There was a region called Madhuvanam in the Kālindī river valley. Madhu, the Asura, who lived in Madhuvana had a son named Lavaṇa. Lavaṇa who was a tyrant and an oppressor of the gods, was killed by Śatrughna who established his rule there. In course of time, the place came to be known as "Madhurā". After Śatrughna’s time his two sons ruled over the country. Thus the Solar dynasty came to an end and Mathurā purī came under the rule of Yadus. The first King of Yaduvaṃśa was Śūrasena. Vasudeva, father of Śrī Kṛṣṇa was the son of this Śūrasena. After the death of his father, since Vasudeva took up the occupation of tending cows, Ugrasena became King there. Kaṃsa was the son of this Ugrasena."
This account also there in Valmiki Ramayana where Rama's brother Satrughna killed the Yadava Lavana cut down the forest Madhuvana and built the city Mathura there; when Rama and his brothers died Bhima of Satvat recovered the city ; and Andhaka reigned there contemporary with Rama's son Kusa at Ayodhya. The genealogies say that Satrughna killed the Madhava Lavana, went to Madhuvana, built Mathura and reigned there with his two sons Subahu and Surasena.’
[this story is well recorded in various sources like Vayu Purana 88, 185-6. Brahmanda Purana iii, 63, 186-7. Valmiki Ramayana vii, 63, 6 and Vishnu Purana iv, 4, 46, here Lavana described as a Raksasa; and so also Bhagvatam ix, 11, 14.
Satrughna's killing Lavana also in Agni Puran 11, 6-7 ; Kalidasa's Raghuvamsa xv, 2-30 ; Padma Purana vi, 271, 9 ; Varaha Purana 178, 1.]
Hence don't confuse with the name of Surasena, both Satrughna's son, Yadava Andhaka's son as well as Haihaya king Kartaviryarjuna son were name Surasena. It's difficult to trace from whose name the name of the region came into existence.
However it seems from Satrughna's son the region's name came from as per number of sources .
The Buddhist texts refer to Avantiputta, the king of the Surasenas in the time of Maha Kachchana, one of the chief disciples of Gautama Buddha, who spread Buddhism in the Mathura region.
(Source:- Raychaudhuri, H.C. (1972), Political History of Ancient India: From the Accession of Parikshit to the Extinction of the Gupta Dynasty, Calcutta: University of Calcutta., p. 128)
According to the Buddhist text Anguttara Nikaya, Surasena was one of the sixteen Mahajanapadas (lit. 'great realms') in the 6th century BCE.
(Source:- Raychaudhuri 1972, p. 85)
The city of Mathura was so uniquely sacred in India that this fact was not lost even upon the Ancient Greeks. Megasthenes, fragment 23 "The Surasenians, an Indian tribe, with two great cities, Methora and Clisobora; the navigable river Iomanes flows through their territory" quoted in Arrian Indica 8.5. Also "The river Jomanes (Yamuna) flows through the Palibothri into the Ganges between the towns Methora and Carisobora." in FRAGM. LVI. Plin. Hist. Nat. VI. 21. 8–23. 11
Ptolemy in his Geographia in the 2nd century CE called Mathura "{The City*} of the Gods"
Below is a 1482 CE manuscript of Geographia (translated into Latin).
The Mora Well inscription of Mahakshatrapa Rajuvula, of the early decades of the first century CE, found in a village seven miles from Mathura, stated that images pratima(h) of the blessed (bhagavatam) five Vrishni heroes, were installed in a stone shrine of a person called Tosa. The heroes were identified from a passage in the Vayu Purana as Samkarsana, Vasudev, Pradyumna, Samba, and Aniruddha.
Archaeological excavations at Mathura show the gradual growth of a village into an important city. The earliest period belonged to the Painted Grey Ware culture (1100–500 BCE), followed by the Northern Black Polished Ware culture (700–200 BCE). Mathura derived its importance as a center of trade due to its location where the northern trade route of the Gangetic Plain met with the routes to Malwa (central India) and the west coast.
Period I of the Mathura cultural sequence has been identified at the Ambarish Tila, close to the Yamuna, north of Mathura city. It is marked by PGW and shows the gradual growth of a village settlement. At Sonkh, 25 km south-west of Mathura, Period I has PGW, along with a BRW and a coarse grey ware, and is dated c. 800–400 BCE. No structural remains were unearthed, but there were post-holes and a double ditch, which might have enclosed the settlement (Hartel, 1993).
Lord Krishna his life events & historicity:-
Ten sons called Vasudeva, Devabhāga, Devaśravas, Ānaka, Sṛñjaya, Kākānīka, Śyāmaka, Vatsa, Kāvūka and Vasu were born to King Śūrasena by his wife Māriṣā. Of those ten sons Vasudeva married Devakī, the sister of Kaṃsa. He had also a second wife called Rohiṇī and she was the mother of Balabhadrarāma.
A little description of Vasudeva's family from Harivamsa 1.35:-
Vasudeva ha fourteen beautiful wives Rohini, of Puru’s race, was the first Madira, the second, Vaishakhi the third, Bhadra the fourth, Sunama the fifth, Sahadeva the sixth, Devaki the seventh, Shantideva the eighth, Shrideva the ninth, Devarakshita the tenth, Vrikadevi the eleventh, Upadevi the twelfth, Sutanu the thirteenth, and Badarva the fourteenth. The last two were his female attendants.
Rohini, of Puru’s race, was the daughter of Valhika. O king, she was the first and most beloved wife of Anakadundhuvi(Vasudeva).
Vasudeva begat on Rohini his eldest son Rama(Balarama), Sharana, Shatha, Durdhama, Damana, Swabhra, Pindaraka, Ushinara, and a daughter by name Citra(Subhadra).
Bhagwan Krishna was the son Devaki and Vasudeva.
Is there really any mention of Krishna in Vedas ?
There is no obvious reference to Krishna in the Rigveda, the oldest Indic text, dated to circa 1500 BCE (could be much older than that) although the name does appear a handful of times in the hymns(a few scholars have unconvincingly tried to connect these instances with him, or with some proto-figure from whom he evolved).
For example:-There is a rishi-sage, the father of one Vishvaka, by the name of Krishna, who composed hymn 8.85 and dedicated it to the Ashvins.
Rigveda 1.101, there is a reference to krishnagarbha, which is understood by the commentator Sayana as ‘‘fetuses in the pregnant women of the asura [demon] Krishna,’’ and by the oldest commentator Skandasvamin, as ‘‘fortified places of the asura [demon] Krishna.’’ In hymn 2.20.7, a synonymous compound, krishnayoni, is used.
In hymn of Rigveda 8.96.13–15, there is a battle of Indra against an army of ten thousand led by Krishna Drapsa, this is misquoted by any propagandists. Here Krishna means black & there described 10000 demons. No connection of this with Lord Krishna.
Even from Sayanacharya commentary it is clear it was a demon whom Indra killed. Here is Rigveda 1.130.8:-
In Chandogya Upanishad, a philosophical text of around the 8th century BCE, that we find the first plausible—but still questionable—reference to the Puranic Krishna. This reference (3.17) has provoked considerable discussion as to whether or not it refers to an older portrayal of the Puranic Krishna, but this ultimately remains inconclusive.
The reference is plausible because it describes Krishna as Devakiputra, the son of Devaki, who is indeed Krishna’s mother in the later tradition, but the correspondence nonetheless remains questionable, because this Upanishadic Krishna is the recipient of some esoteric teachings from the sage Ghora Angirasa, and there are no stories connecting the later Puranic and epic Krishna with Ghora Angirasa, or with such teachings. Krishna’s boyhood teacher was Sandipani Muni, and his family guru was Garga Muni.
In traditional views I found except Madhava sampradaya other vaishnava traditions like Srivaishnava sampradaya and Gaudiyavaishnava sampradaya, took this reference as lord Krishna. In Madhava sampradaya it is someone else with the same name. Adi Shankara doesnot give any other info regarding this.
In my personal opinion I too believe it was lord Krishna because that identification seems more plausible because Krishna mentioned along with Devaki the coincidence of the two names appearing together in the same Upanishad verse cannot be dismissed easily. Moreover Since the section of that Upanishad is about meditation on Parabrahman as Purusha yajna and mentions mantras of Purusha sukta at the beginning then other mantras about Brahman ending with "this yajna is dedicated to Krishnadevakiputra" ...it seems appropriate that this is the same Bhagavan. Others might have other opinions
But Another counter claim is that as I said above sage Ghora Angirasa is said to be a teacher of Krishna Devakiputra in this Chandogya Upanishad, however there are no stories connecting the later Puranic and epic Krishna with Ghora Angirasa, or with such teachings. Krishna’s boyhood teacher was Sandipani Muni, and his family guru was Garga Muni, based on this some scholars argue it wasn't the same Krishna.
But wait here is the rebuttal from traditional acharyas for this claim. As per them the mantra is interpreted differently. Acharyas don't interpret it as Ghor Angirasa imparting some Vidya to Krishna Devakiputra...
Rangaramanuja Muni interprets it as:-
"The rishi Ghora Angirasa practiced this Purusha Yajna with the dedication as "This is sub-servient to Krishna, the Son of Devaki". That Ghora Angirasa had not thirst, as he came upon BrahmavidyA through this. At the last moment of ...his life, he said to Brahman, "you are eternal, you are full of auspicious qualities, you are the subtle truth enlivening this universe".
This kind of meaning is favoured by both Jiva Goswami and Vishvanatha Chakravarti pada. The latter even points out that this is similar to first considering Brahman as the various avataras like Adityamandalavarti Bhagavan, then their avatar(Purusha/Paramatma) and ultimately Svayam Bhagavan as Krishna Devakiputra in the Upanishad confirming "ete cāmsha kalAh(avataras) pumsaH(puruSha)" and then......"krishnastu bhagavān svayam" being said at last.
Less questionable references, however, emerge subsequent to this point in time. In Yaska’s Nirukta, an etymological dictionary of around the 8th century BCE., there is a reference to the Shyamantaka jewel in the possession of Akrura, a motif from a well-known Krishna story(See, for example, Bhagavata Purana 10.56–57.)
Other important references:-
There is a brief reference to Krishna under his patronymic of Vasudeva in the famous Sanskrit grammar, the Ashtadhyayi of Panini, dated around the fifth century BCE.
In Ashtadhyayi 4.3.98, the sutra (aphorism) ‘‘vasudevarjunabhyah vun’’ is presented, where ‘vun’ is given as a special affix to denote bhakti. for Vasudeva (a name of Krishna) and Arjuna. The fact that this aphorism referred to bhakti (devotion) provoked a debate among scholars as to whether the term bhakti had the same con-notations in this early period as it did later, and therefore whether it was evidence that Krishna was considered to be a divine being in the 4th century BCE Certainly Patanjali, Panini’s commentator in around the 2nd century BCE., accepts the reference in this sense when he says that Vasudeva, as mentioned in this verse, is ‘‘worshipful.’’ While some scholars felt that the matter was not incontrovertible, there are clearer references to Krishna’s divinity in contemporaneous texts, which add some support the view of those who consider Panini to be intending a divine being.
Panini also mentions the tribes associated with Krishna—the Andhakas and Vrishnis.
Historian Upinder Singh also mentioned this :-
In the Baudayana Dharma Sutra, also of there is an invocation to Vishnu using twelve names including Keshava, Govinda, and Damodara, which are names associated with Vishnu in the form of Krishna, thereby pointing to the latter’s divine status in this very period. These names also reveal an awareness of several stories that are fully developed in later texts, as do, in the same period, a number of references in the Arthashastra, a Machiavellian political treatise.
In the Mahanarayana Upanishad of the Taittiriya Aranyaka, around the third century b.c.e., a gayatri mantra associates Vasudeva with Narayana and Vishnu. The same mantra appears in the much earlier Yajur Veda without mentioning Vasudeva. Narayana is another name for Vishnu in traditional Vaishnavism.
Another significant source of references prior to the Common Era is Patanjali, the commentator on the famous grammar of Panini in the second century b.c.e. In his commentary (3.1.26), Patanjali mentions one of the most important episodes in Krishna’s life, Kamsavadha, the killing of Kamsa, as represented in tales and theatrical performances, adding that the events were considered to have taken place long ago.
Patanjali further makes a number of other clear references to Krishna and his associates as they are known in later texts. These include the fact that Krishna was an enemy of his maternal uncle Kamsa (2.3.36) and the fact that Vasudeva (a name of Krishna) killed Kamsa. There are also references to: Krishna and Sankarshana (2.2.24); Janardana (a name of Krishna, 6.3.6); a palace or temple of the lord of dhana, wealth (Kubera); Rama, and Keshava (a name of Krishna); followers of Akrura and of Vasudeva (a name of Krishna, 4.2.104); tribes associated with Krishna—the Andhakas, Vrishnis, and Kurus; as well as the names Ugrasena, Vasudeva, and Baladeva.
In terms of sources outside of the subcontinent prior to the Common Era, Megasthenes, a Seleucid ambassador to the court of the Indian emperor Chandragupta Maurya at the end of the 4th century b.c.e., provides interesting evidence from ancient Greek sources relevant to the early history of the divine Krishna. Megasthenes wrote a book called Indika, the original of which has not been preserved, but it was quoted extensively by other ancient classical writers whose works are extant.
According to Arrian, Diodorus, and Strabo, Mega-sthenes described an Indian tribe called the Sourasenoi, who especially worshiped Herakles in their land, and this land had two great cities, Methora and Kleisobora, and a navigable river, the Jobares. As was common in the ancient period, the Greeks sometimes described foreign gods in terms of their own divinities, and there is little doubt that the Sourasenoi refers to the Shurasenas, a branch of the Yadu dynasty to which Krishna belonged; Herakles to Krishna, or Hari-Krishna; Methora to Mathura, where Krishna was born; Kleisobora to Krishna pura, meaning ‘‘the city of Krishna’’; and the Jobares to the Yamuna, the famous river in the Krishna story.
Quintus Curtius also mentions that when Alexander the Great confronted Porus, Porus’s soldiers were carrying an image of Herakles in their vanguard.
Early Buddhist sources also provide evidence of the worship of Krishna prior to the Common Era. The Niddesa, one of the books of the Pali canon of the fourth century b.c.e., speaks somewhat derogatorily of those devoted to Vasudeva (Krishna) and Baladeva (Krishna’s brother).
The Buddhist Ghata Jataka text also mentions characters from the Krishna story, albeit in a somewhat garbled fashion, suggesting confused reminiscence of the legend.The text presents Vasudeva and his brothers as the sons of Kamsa’s sister Devagabbha (Devaki) who were handed over to a man called Andhakavenhu (which seems to be a compound of Andhaka and Vrishni, two kindred Yadava tribes) and his wife Nandagopa (a compound of Nanda and Gopa, or Yashoda) who were attendants of Devagabbha.
The Jatakas are stories about the Buddha’s previous lives. However, although The Buddhist Pitaka texts of the fourth c.b.e. contain Jataka legends, and bas-reliefs from the third century b.c.e. illustrate a number of Jataka stories, scholars do not consider all the Jatakas to have been written at the same time. In this jataka also Kamsa's death on the hands of Krishna is described.(check No.454)
That both early Buddhist and Jain sources saw fit to appropriate these legends in some form or fashionpoints to their presence and significance on the religious landscape of this period.
(Archaeological findings realted to Krishna worship):-
Excavation of the Vrishni Temple, with elliptic plan. The Heliodorus pillar appears in the immediate background.
Vrishni heroes" on the coinage of Agathocles of Bactria, circa 190-180 BCE: Samkarshana-Balarama, with Gada mace and plow, and Vāsudeva-Krishna, with Shankha (a pear-shaped case or conch) and Chakra wheel
The two major Vrishni heroes Saṃkarṣaṇa and Vāsudeva, still in their proper seniority order, are again mentioned in the Hathibada Ghosundi Inscriptions, dated to the 1st century BCE.
Vrishni triad shown in a rock painting at Tikla, Madhya Pradesh, 3rd-2nd century BCE. These would be Saṃkarṣaṇa (with plough and mace), Vāsudeva (with mace and wheel) and a female deity, probably Ekanamsha.
Vṛṣṇi triad from Berenike, Egypt. 2nd- 3rd c CE. The Vrishni heroes - Vasudeva Krishna with his Chakra, Samkarsana and Ekanamsha.
Mathura and archaeology :-
Archaeological excavations at Mathura show the gradual growth of a village into an important city during the Vedic age. The earliest period belonged to the Painted Grey Ware culture (1100–500 BCE), followed by the Northern Black Polished Ware culture (700–200 BCE). Mathura derived its importance as a center of trade due to its location where the northern trade route of the Indo-Gangetic Plain met with the routes to Malwa (central India) and the west coast.
Archaeologists have discovered a fragment of Mathura red sandstone from Rakhigarhi - a site of Indus Valley civilisation dated to third millennium BCE - which was used as a grindstone; red sandstone was also a popular material for historic period sculptures.
(Source:- S.gautam, Mantabya; Law, Randall; Garge, Tejas. "Initial Geologic Provenience Studies of Stone and Metal Artefacts from Rakhigarhi". Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology.)
Dwarka in inscriptions:-
Even the Dwarkadhish temple of Dwarka, Archaeological findings suggest that the original temple built in 200 BCE at the earliest. The temple was rebuilt and enlarged in the 15th–16th century.
"The Kharoshti inscription in the first floor of Sabhamandapa of Dwarkadhish Temple is assignable to 200 BC. [...] Excavation was done by the veteran archaeologist H.D. Sankalia some twenty years ago on the western side of the present Jagat-Mandir at Modern Dwarka and he declared that the present Dwarka was not earlier than about 200 BC."
Source:- S. R. Rao (1988). Marine Archaeology of Indian Ocean Countries. National Institute of Oceanography. pp. 18–25.)
"Inscription in brahmi found in the temple supports the fact of its construction during the Mauryan regime. Apart from this beginning, the pages of history of Dwarka and Dwarkadhish temple are full of accounts of its destruction and reconstruction in the last 2000 years."
(Source:- L. P. Vidyarthi (1974). Journal of Social Research,Volume 17. Council of Social and Cultural Research. p. 60.)
Dwarka the submerged city:-
In the Mahabharata, it was a city located in what is now Dwarka, formerly called Kushasthali, the fort of which had to be repaired by the Yadavas. In this epic, the city is described as a capital of the Anarta Kingdom.
The Kathiawar peninsula of Gujarat, we have another interesting archaeological clue: the ancient Dvaravati or Dvaraka, capital of Krishna, covered by the sea thirty-six years after the battle.
During 1983-1990, the Marine Archaeology Unit of India's National Institute of Oceanography (NIO) carried out underwater excavations at Dwarka and Bet Dwarka.
According to S. R. Rao "The available archaeological evidence from onshore and offshore excavations confirms the existence of a city-state with a couple of satellite towns in 1500 B.C." He considered it reasonable to conclude that this submerged city is the Dvaraka as described in the Mahabharata
S.R. Rao in the submerged town found next to the island of Bet Dwarka, dated to the mid-second millennium BCE. Also an inscribed shard has been found (here dated by thermoluminescence 3520 BP), in the same zone in which Lustrous Red Ware (generally dated up to 1400 BCE) and Kassite Ware (dated in Bahrain 1500–1200 BCE) were present. As said by S.R. Rao, “it is possible to postulate on structural, ceramic and inscriptional evidence that Dvaraka was built in the fifteenth century BCE when the sea level was lower than at present and was submerged within a hundred years."
"At Dwarka (Jamnagar district, Gujarat), marine archaeologists found the remains of a submerged settlement and identified its inner and outer walls,
bastions, and a large stone jetty. Stone anchors and lustrous red ware were found at the site. The island of Bet Dwarka also revealed a submerged site. The
settlement seems originally to have been 4 × 0.5 km, and there are remains of fortifications. A Harappan seal carved with a three-headed animal, lustrous red
ware, BRW, and a jar inscribed with Harappan writing were found. Other discoveries included a coppersmith’s stone mould and some shell bangles. There is a thermoluminescence date of 1570 BCE from Bet Dwarka, which is considered to be a late Harappan site."
(Source:- Singh, Upinder (2008). A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century, pg 222)
Another interesting point is :- "....a late Harappan seal found at Bet Dwarka. The latter has Harappan writing and a three-headed animal motif similar to that found on certain Persian Gulf seals."
(Source:- Singh, Upinder (2008). A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century, pg 402)
Dwarka is mentioned in the copper inscription dated 574 CE of Simhaditya, the Maitraka dynasty minister of Vallabhi. He was the son of Varahdas, the king of Dwarka.
Foreign accounts:-
The Greek writer of the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea referred to a place called Baraca, which has been interpreted as present-day Dwarka. A reference made in Ptolemy's Geography identified Barake as an island in the Gulf of Kanthils, which has also been inferred to mean Dwarka.
(Source:- Gaur, A. S.; Tripati, Sundaresh; Tripati, Sila (2004). "An ancient harbour at Dwarka: Study based on the recent underwater explorations)
According to Guy Beck, "most scholars of Hinduism and Indian history accept the historicity of Krishna – that he was a real male person, whether human or divine, who lived on Indian soil by at least 1000 BCE and interacted with many other historical persons within the cycles of the epic and puranic histories." Yet, Beck also notes that there is an "enormous number of contradictions and discrepancies surrounding the chronology of Krishna's life as depicted in the Sanskrit canon".
(Source:- Beck, Guy (2012). Alternative Krishnas: Regional And Vernacular Variations on a Hindu Deity. Suny Press. pp. 4–5.)
3) Turvashas :-
From Yayati's son descend Turvashas those became overlord of the Mlecchas in the western part of the kingdom. His son was Vahni. His line became merged with the Paurava line, during the time of Marutta.( check Brahmāṇḍa-purāṇa III. 68. 16, 40, 50; 73. 126; 74. 1 and 4; Matsya-purāṇa 33. 9-11; Vāyu-purāṇa 99. 1-4.)
Pargiter described:- Turvasu's line is given by nine Puranas, and all are in general agreement, except that there is great variation in some of the names, the Agni Purana wrongly includes in it the Gandharas who were Druhyus, and the Visnu, Garuda and Bhagavata omit the last part. Marutta the great king of this dynasty (whom the Matsya incorrectly calls Bharata) had no son and adopted Dusyanta the Paurava and thus this line is said to have merged into the Paurava line as the Brahmanda, Vayu, Brahma and Harivariisa declare. Yet it is added that from this line or from Dusyanta there was a branch which founded the kingdoms of Pandya, Cola, Kerala, etc. in the south.(check Padma Purana 6.250,1-2. This is not improbable. Turvasu princes may have carved out such kingdoms)
The line stands thus, greatly abbreviated—Turvasu,
Vahni, Garbha, Goblifinu, Trisanu, Karandhama, Marutta, Dusyanta, Sarntha (or Varntha), Andhra; and Pandya, Kerala, Cola and Kulya (or Kola).
Certain historians views regarding Turvashas :-
As per Witzel:- The Turvashas had a tribal union with the Yadu tribe, and were frequently described together. The Turvashas were a partly Indo-Aryan-acculturated Indus tribe.
By the time of the Shatapatha Brahmana (7th-6th centuries BCE), the Turvashas are linked to the Panchalas.( source:- Erdosy & Witzel 1995, p. 236)
The name Turvasa disappears from later Vedic literature, possibly because they became merged in the Panchala people.(source:- RC Majumdar The Vedic Age, pg 247)
3)Druhyus:-
Druhyus line is given by nine Puranas, and all are in general agreement, except that the Brahma and Harivamsa which divide it into two, assigning to him the successors down to Gandhara, and
Dharma and the remainder to Anu. The line stands thus—Druhyu with two sons Babhru and Setu, then Setu's descendants, Angiira-setu, Gandhara, Dharma, Dhrta, Durdama, Pracetas, to whom the Brahma purana and Harivamsa add Sucetas.
Probably Gandharvas & Anavas mixed in history both of these clans ruled in Northwest that's why we often see in texts intrusion of Anava lineage in Druhyu lineages.
The Druhyus held the Gandhara kingdom and the North West frontier,and are said to have spread out beyond that and established kingdoms in the mleccha countries outside in early times.
This outward India migrations of Aryan clans is also supported by RC Majumdar:-
"Lastly we come to the Druhyus. As the result of the successful campaigns of Sasabindu, Yuvanasva, Mandhatri, and Sibi, the Druhyus were pushed back from Rajputana and were cornered into the north-western portion of the Punjab. Mandhatri killed their king Angara, and the Druhyu settlements in the Punjab came to be known as Gandkara after the name of one of Angara’s successors. After a time, being over-populated, the Druhyus crossed the borders of India and founded many principalities in the Mlechchha territories in the north, and probably carried the Aryan culture beyond the frontiers of India."
(Source:- RC Majumdar the vedic age, pg 279)
The Druhyus occupied the Panjab, and Mandhatr of
Ayodhya had a long war with the Druhyu king Aruddha or Angara and killed him as we have seen from the about quotation. The latter's successor was Gandhara, who gave his name to the Gandhara country.(check Vayu Puran 99, 9. Brahmanda Purana iii, 74, 9. Harivamsa 32.1839.)
*Four Puranas add that Pracetas’ offspring spread out into the mleccha countries to the north beyond India and founded kingdoms there.
The account in (Vishnu Purana IV.17) The Druhyus were driven out of the land of the seven rivers, and their next king, Gandhara, settled in a north-western region which became known as Gandhāra. The sons of the later Druhyu king Pracetas too settle in the "northern" (udīcya) region (Bhagavata 9.23.15–16; Visnu 4.17.5; Vayu 99.11–12; Brahmanda 3.74.11–12 and Matsya 48.9.).
The Gandhara kingdom (western Gandhara) existed in modern day Kandahar province of Afghanistan. The eastern Gandhara was in modern Pakistan. Puskalavati, Takshasila (Taxila) and Purushapura (Peshawar) were cities in this Gandhara kingdom.
Takshasila was founded by Raghava Rama's brother Bharata. Bharata's descendants ruled this kingdom afterwards. During the time of Mahabharata period it was ruled by Sakuni's father Suvala, Sakuni and Sakuni's son.
Mention in Vedic texts:-
Druhyus (Rigveda, RV 1.108.8, RV 8.10.5)
Some scholars hypothesis The word Druid (Gallic Celtic druides), is partially derived from Proto-Indo-European vid "to see, to know'
Kingdom of Gandhara & Taxaxila:-
The kingdom of Gandhara comprised modern Peshawar and Rawalpindi districts of Pakistan and the Kashmir valley. Its capital Takshashila (Taxila) was a major centre of trade and learning.
As per Mahabharat Subala was a prince of Gāndhāra:- his daughter was Gāndhārī, and son Śakuni.
Archaeologically Gandhara's first recorded culture was the Grave Culture that emerged c. 1400 BCE and lasted until 800 BCE, and named for their distinct funerary practices. It was found along the Middle Swat River course, even though earlier research considered it to be expanded to the Valleys of Dir, Kunar, Chitral, and Peshawar
King Pukkusati or Pushkarasarin ruled over
Gandhara in the mid-6th century BCE. He had cordial relations with Magadha, and waged a successful war against Avanti. The Behistun inscription of the
Achaemenid emperor Darius indicates that Gandhara was conquered by the Persians in the later part of the 6th century BCE.
Ancient texts and inscriptions usually associate the kingdom of Kamboja with Gandhara. Kamboja included the area around Rajaori, including the Hazara district of the NorthWest Frontier Province of Pakistan, and probably extended.
The first mention of the Gandhārīs is attested once in the Ṛigveda as a tribe that has sheep with good wool. In the Atharvaveda, the Gandhārīs are mentioned alongside the Mūjavants, the Āṅgeyas and the Māgadhīs in a hymn asking fever to leave the body of the sick man and instead go those aforementioned tribes. The tribes listed were the furthermost border tribes known to those in Madhyadeśa, the Āṅgeyas and Māgadhīs in the east, and the Mūjavants and Gandhārīs in the north.
(Source:- Macdonell, Arthur Anthony; Keith, Arthur Berriedale (1912). Vedic Index of Names and Subjects. John Murray. pp. 218–219.)
the region is mentioned in the Zoroastrian Avesta as Vaēkərəta, the seventh most beautiful place on earth created by Ahura Mazda.
The Gāndhārī king Nagnajit and his son Svarajit are mentioned in the Brāhmaṇas, according to which they received Brahmanic consecration, but their family's attitude towards ritual is mentioned negatively. the royal family of Gandhāra during this period following non-Brahmanical religious traditions.
The name Nagnajit often appeared in Epics as well.
Rc Majumdar described:- "The Gandharis, referred to in the Rigveda, are mentioned also in the Atharvaveda (as already stated) and in the Srauta Sutras. They appear apparently as a despised people in the Atharvaveda. In later times, however, the angle of vision of the people of the Madliyadesa changed,
and Gandhara became the famous resort of scholars for instruction in the Vedas and Vidyas. The Aitareya Brahmana (VII. 34) mentions Nagnajit, a king of Gandhara, among Vedic teachers who propagated the Soma cult, which shows that Gandhara was not excluded from Vedic Aryans. From the various references to Gandhara in Indian literature it appears that the boundaries of the country varied at different periods in its history."
Source:- 258
According to the Jain Uttarādhyayana-sūtra, Nagnajit, or Naggaji, was a prominent king who had adopted Jainism and was comparable to Dvimukha of Pāñcāla, Nimi of Videha, Karakaṇḍu of Kaliṅga, and Bhīma of Vidarbha; Buddhist sources instead claim that he had achieved paccekabuddhayāna.
By the later Vedic period, the situation had changed, and the Gāndhārī capital of Takṣaśila had become an important centre of knowledge where the men of Madhya-desa went to learn the three Vedas and the eighteen branches of knowledge, with the Kauśītaki Brāhmaṇa recording that brāhmaṇas went north to study. According to the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa and the Uddālaka Jātaka, the famous Vedic philosopher Uddālaka Āruṇi was among the famous students of Takṣaśila, and the Setaketu Jātaka claims that his son Śvetaketu also studied there. In the Chāndogya Upaniṣad, Uddālaka Āruṇi himself favourably referred to Gāndhārī education to the Vaideha king Janaka.
During the 6th century BCE, Gandhāra was an important imperial power in north-west Iron Age South Asia, with the valley of Kaśmīra being part of the kingdom. Due to this important position, Buddhist texts listed the Gandhāra kingdom as one of the sixteen Mahājanapadas ("great realms") of Iron Age South Asia. It was the home of Gandhari, the princess of Gandhara kingdom.
Origin of Taxaxila & archaeology:-
Lord Rama’s younger brothers ruled over different provinces. Lakshmana had two sons, Angada and Chandraketu, and they were assigned two
countries in Karapatha-desa near the Himalayas, with their respective capitals at Angadlya and Chandrachakra.
Bharata apparently got the Kekaya kingdom which was the province of his mother, and also Sindhu, i.e. Upper Sind. His two sons, Taksha and Pushkara, conquered
Gandhara from the Gandharvas, and founded respectively Takshasila and Pushkaravati.
Archaeological excavations reveal The earliest settled occupation in Taxila Valley was found at Sarai Khola, located 2 km to the south-west of Taxila Museum, where three radiocarbon dates from Period I suggest the site was first occupied between the late 4th and early 3rd millennium BCE, with deposits of polished stone celts, chert blades and a distinctive type of highly burnished pottery that shows clear signs of the use of woven baskets in the manufacturing process and the application of a slurry to the exterior surface.
(Source:- Petrie, Cameron, (2013). "Taxila", in D. K. Chakrabarti and M. Lal (eds.), History of Ancient India III: The Texts, and Political History and Administration till c. 200 BC, Vivekananda International Foundation, Aryan Books International, Delhi, p. 654.)
Regarding Pushkaravati Bala Hisar site in this area was first inhabited in the 2nd-millennium BCE. The C14 dating of early deposits in Bala Hisar, bearing "Soapy red"/red burnished ware, is 1420-1160 BCE, and this early phase lasted from 1400 to 800 BCE.
(Source:- Petrie, Cameron, 2013. "Charsadda", in D.K. Chakrabarti and M. Lal (eds.), History of Ancient India III: The Texts, Political History and Administration til c. 200 BC, Vivekananda International Foundation, Aryan Books International, Delhi, pg. 515.)
Satrughna fought the Satvata-Yadavas on the west
of the Jumna and killed Madhava Lavana, son of Madhu. He established his capital at Madhupuri or Madhuri, re-naming it as Mathura, and his
son Subahu reigned there.
Rama had two sons, Kusa and Lava, born of
Sita in the hermitage of Valmiki. Kusa succeeded Rama in the Ayodhya kingdom, while Lava got the northern portion of Kosala with Sravasti as capital.
In Vedic texts such as the Shatapatha Brahmana, it is mentioned that the Vedic philosopher Uddalaka Aruni (c. 7th century BCE) had travelled to the region of Gandhara. In later Buddhist texts, the Jatakas, it is specified that Taxila was the city where Aruni and his son Shvetaketu each had received their education.
(Raychaudhuri, Hem Chandra (1923), Political history of ancient India, from the accession of Parikshit to the extinction of the Gupta dynasty, Calcutta, Univ. of Calcutta, pp. 17–18, 25–26)
According to Mahabharata, this was the place where
king Janamejaya(3) performed his great naga-yajna (snake sacrifice).
One of the earliest mentions of Taxila is in Pāṇini's Aṣṭādhyāyī, a Sanskrit grammar treatise dated to the 5th to 4th centuries BCE.
The first major settlement at Taxila, in Hathial mound, was established around 1000 BCE. By 900 BCE, the city was already involved in regional commerce, as the discovered pottery shards reveal trading ties between the city and Puṣkalāvatī.Later, Taxila was inhabited at Bhir Mound, dated to some time around the period 800-525 BCE with these early layers bearing grooved red burnished ware.
4)Anavas:-
The genealogy of Anu's descendants, the Anavas, is given by nine Puranas. All agree substantially, except that the Brahma and Harivamsa which make Anu's lineage descend from Kakseyu, one of the sons of Raudrasva of the Paurava line, and assign to Anu part of Druhyu’s progeny. The seventh king after Anu, Mahamanas had two sons Usinara
and Titiksu and under them the Anavas divided into two great branches; Usinara and his descendants occupied the Punjab and Titiksu 'founded a new kingdom in the east, viz., in East Behar.
Usinara’s posterity is given by the same nine Puranas the fullest account being in the Brahmanda, Vayu, Brahma and Harivamsa. It stands thus, with the kingdoms that his descendants founded :-
Titiksu's lineage is given by the same nine Puranas,' All agree substantially, except that the Brahmanda has lost all after Dharmaratha in a great lacuna, the Vayu omits from Satyaratha to Campa, the Visnu, Garuda and Bhagavata omit Jayadratha's
descendants, and the Brahma and Agni omit Vijaya and his line. The best accounts are in the Matsya and Harivamsa. This Kingdom in the East was divided among Bali’s five sons Into five kingdoms, Ahga, Vanga, Kalinga, Pundra and Suhma.
There is a Buddhist reference to one Usinara, said to be king of Benares who lived in the time of Kassapa Buddha. His story is related in the Maha-Kanha Jataka.[Jataka.iv.181ff]. It is however, not clear if this Usinara was from the Usinara clan or else it was his personal name only.
in the Rigveda, RV 1.108.8, RV 8.10.5 (both times listed together with the Druhyu) and, much later also in the Mahabharata.
In the late Vedic period, one of the Anu kings, King Anga, is mentioned as a "chakravartin" (Aitreya Brahmana 8.22). Ānava, the vrddhi derivation of Anu, is the name of a ruler in the Rigvedic account of the Battle of the Ten Kings (7.18.13) and at 8.4.1 with the Turvaśa (tribe).
Archaeology & Mahabharat in News:-
Images of the site:-
Comments
Post a Comment