From the Accession of Parikshit to the Coronation of Bimbisara

From the Accession of Parikshit to the Coronation of Bimbisara

Part I

Chapter 1. Introduction

Section I. Foreward

No historians like Thucydides or Tacitus have recorded a genuine history of Ancient India.
Scholars and archaeologists have uncovered rich materials to reconstruct Ancient Indian history.
Dr. Vincent Smith made the first significant attempt to organize this knowledge but ignored the period following the war between the Kurus and Pandavas, starting his history in the mid-7th century B.C.
The author aims to outline the dynastic history of Ancient India, including the neglected period immediately after the Bharata War.
The starting point for this history is the accession of Parikshit, which occurred shortly after the Bharata War according to Epic and Purāņic tradition.
Eminent scholars like Weber, Oldenberg, Macdonell, Keith, Rhys Davids, Pargiter, and Bhandarkar have provided valuable information on the Parikshita and post-Parikshita periods.
The author believes this is the first attempt to frame an outline of political history from Parikshit to Bimbisara using both Brahmanic and non-Brahmanic literature.

Section II. Sources

No inscriptions or coins definitively attributed to the post-Parikshita-pre-Bimbisarian period have been discovered.
South Indian plates purportedly from Janamejaya’s reign have been proven spurious.
Reliance must be placed on literary evidence, which is purely Indian and lacks foreign corroboration.
Indian literature useful for this historical period is divided into five classes:

Brahmanical literature of the post-Parikshita-pre-Bimbisarian period:
- This includes:
  - The last book of the Atharva Veda.
  - Ancient Brahmanas like Aitareya, Satapatha, and Taittiriya.
  - Classical Upanishads like Brihadaranyaka and Chhandogya.
- These works belong to the post-Parikshita period, indicated by references to Parikshit, Janamejaya, and Janaka of Videha.
- They are pre-Buddhistic and pre-Bimbisarian, as evidenced by critics like Dr. Rajendralal Mitra and Professor Macdonell.
Brahmanical works with indeterminate dates, but parts of which belong to the post-Bimbisarian period:
- Includes the Ramayana, Mahabharata, and the Puranas.
- The Ramayana mentions Buddha and conflicts with Yavanas and Sakas, indicating a later period.
- The Mahabharata contains references to Buddhist elements and foreign peoples, including Greeks and Romans.
- The Puranas mention kings of the Kali Age, suggesting a composition date no earlier than the third or fourth century A.D.
- Despite their later composition, these texts contain valuable older material and should be critically examined.
Brahmanical works of the post-Bimbisarian period with assignable dates:
- Examples include the Arthashastra of Kautilya and the Mahabhashya of Patanjali.
- These works are crucial for Indian chronology and, while less informative about the pre-Bimbisarian age, their known dates add credibility.
Buddhist literature:
- Includes Suttas, Vinaya texts, and the Jatakas, mostly from pre-Sunga times.
- These texts provide significant information about the period just before Bimbisara’s accession and offer Buddhist perspectives on ancient stories.
Jaina literature:
- The Jaina canon was written down in A.D. 454.
- These works provide valuable information about pre-Bimbisarian kings, though their late date makes their reliability questionable.

Chapter II. Kurus and Videos

Section I. The Age of the Parkshitas

The reign of Parikshit is taken as the starting point, traditionally shortly after the Bharata War.
Parikshit is mentioned in the Mahabharata and Puranas, but literary mention alone is not proof of historical existence without external evidence.
Parikshit appears in the Atharva Veda (A.V., XX. 127. 7-10) as a king of the Kurus, indicating a prosperous reign.
Roth and Bloomfield see Parikshit in the Atharva Veda as a divine being, while Zimmer and Oldenberg recognize him as a human king.
Parikshit is also referenced in the Aitareya and Satapatha Brahmanas, indicating his historical existence.
Macdonell and Keith note that the Epic references two Parikshits:
- Parikshit I, ancestor of Pratiśravas and Pratipa.
- Parikshit II, descendant of Pratipa and son of Abhimanyu.
The Vedic Parikshit had four sons: Janamejaya, Ugrasena, Bhimasena, and Śrutasena.
The Epic Parikshit I had one son (Bhimasena) or seven sons (Janamejaya, Kakshasena, Ugrasena, Chitrasena, Indrasena, Sushena, Bhimasena).
There is no king named Janamejaya immediately after Parikshit I in the Kuru-Pandu genealogy from the Choda inscription, raising doubts about the Epic’s account.
Parikshit II, son of Abhimanyu, had a son named Janamejaya, who succeeded him on the throne, supported by the Mahabharata and Puranas.
The Vedic and Epic accounts of Janamejaya agree on his performance of the Ashvamedha sacrifice:
- Satapatha Brahmana mentions Indrota Daivapa Saunaka as the priest.
- Aitareya Brahmana mentions Tura Kavasheya as the priest.
- The Bhagavata Purana also mentions Tura Kavasheya as the priest for Janamejaya, son of Parikshit II.
These accounts suggest Janamejaya performed two Ashvamedha sacrifices, supported by the Matsya Purana:
- The Matsya Purana states Janamejaya performed two Ashvamedha sacrifices and faced conflicts with Brahmins.
The quarrel with the Brahmanas mentioned in the Aitareya Brahmana (VII. 27).
Parikshit II has a stronger claim than Parikshit I to be the Vedic Parikshit.
Possible that Parikshit I and II are the same individual, with confusion over his genealogy.
Names of most sons are common to both Parikshit I and II in the Vishnu Purana.
Abhipratārin Kāśakshaseni, a Kuru prince, was an immediate successor of Vedic Janamejaya.
Kakshasena, appearing as Janamejaya’s brother in Mahabharata, suggests Vedic Parikshit is Parikshit I.
Other evidence favors identifying Vedic Parikshit with Parikshit II.
Epic and Puranic confusion possibly due to reconciling two traditions about Parikshit’s lineage.
Parikshit II, with a clear historical basis, ruled post-Bharata war.
Married Madravati, ruled for 24 years, died at 60.
Only historical facts: Kuru king, prosperous rule, many sons, eldest Janamejaya succeeded him.
Kuru kingdom spanned from Sarasvati to the Ganges.
- Divided into Kurujāngala, Kurus, and Kurukshetra.
- Kurujangala: wild region, possibly entire kingdom.
- Kurus: district around Hastinapura (near Mirat).
- Kurukshetra boundaries: Khandava (south), Türghna (north), Parinah (west).
- Descriptions in Mahabharata: heaven-like region between Taruntuka and Arantuka.
Modern Kuru kingdom: Thanesar, Delhi, upper Doab.
Rivers: Hiranvati, Kausiki, Aruņā, Apaya, Pastyä, Sarasvati, Drishadvatî.
Saryaņāvant, a lake mentioned in Vedic texts.
Capital city: Asandivant, likely identical with Hastinapura.
Hastinapura abandoned by Nichakshu for Kauśambi.
Epic tradition: Kings of Kurukshetra belonged to the Paurava-Bharata family.
Rigvedic hymn (X. 33) mentions “Kuru-śravana,” a descendant of Trasadasyu, indicating the Paurava connection of the Kurus.
Vedic evidence suggests Bharatas’ connection with the Kurus.
Oldenberg’s observation:
- Bharatas had a special connection with sacred points recognized in ancient Vedic culture.
- Agni is associated with the Bharatas.
- Bharati, a deity, is connected with the Bharatas.
- Sarasvati River, constantly named with Bharati, is likely the river of the Bharatas.
- Ode (III. 23) extols Bharatas, mentioning princes Devaçravas and Devavāta sacrificing on the Drishadvati and Sarasvati rivers.
- Land on the Drishadvati and Sarasvati later celebrated as Kurukshetra.
- Bharatas likely settled in regions around Sarasvati and Drishadvati.
- Bharatas achieved sacral hegemony and universal cult recognition.
- Formation of greater peoples in Brahmana period included Bharatas and Parus within the Kurus.
- Bharatas’ sacred land became Kurukshetra.
Vedic literature mentions ancestors and predecessors of Parikshit in the Mahabharata (Adi parva, Chapters 94 and 95):
- Purū-ravas Aila (Rig-Veda, X. 95; Sat-Br., XI. 5. 1. 1)
- Ayu (Rig-Veda I. 53. 10, II. 14. 7, etc.)
- Yayāti Nahushya (R. V., I. 31. 17; X. 68.1)
- Pürn (R. V., VII. 8. 4; 18.13)
- Bharata Dauhshanti Saudyumni (Sat. Br., XIII.5.4.11-12)
- Ajamídha (R. V., IV. 44. 6)
- Riksha (R. V., VIII. 68-15)
- Kuru (frequently mentioned in Brahmana literature, cf. Kuru-śravana, Rig-Veda, X. 33)
- Uchchaiḥśravas (Jaiminiya Upanishad Brahmana III. 29. 1-3)
- Pratipa Prātisatvana or Prätisutvana (Atharva Veda, XX. 129. 2)
- Balhika Pratipiya (Sat. Br., XII. 9. 3. 3)
- Samtanu (R. V., X. 93)
- Dhritarashtra Vaichitravirya (Kathaka Samhita, X. 6)
Occurrence of these names in Vedic texts suggests their historicity, though epic accounts of their relationships with Parikshit may be unreliable.
Some kings, like Samtanu, undoubtedly belonged to the same race (Kauravya) as Parikshit.
Purū-ravas Aila, the first king in the list, is said to be the son of a ruler who migrated from Bactria to India.
Tradition records Kurus as colonists from the trans-Himalayan region, Uttara Kuru.
Bharata, the fifth king in the list, established power in the “Middle country” (Doab between Ganges and Jumna) after defeating the Satvats.
Epic tradition aligns with Rig-Vedic evidence, connecting Bharatas with territory later known as Kurukshetra.
Kuru royal line becomes more definite from the time of Samtanu, fifth in ascending line from Parikshit.
Little reliable information on events of Parikshit’s reign, though prosperity is noted during his rule.
Date of Parikshit is uncertain; Vedic texts give no direct information.
Historical Purāņas place Parikshit’s birth 1050 (or 1015) years before Mahāpadma, the first Nanda king of Magadha.
Ceylonese chronology places the first Nanda twenty-two years before Chandragupta Maurya’s accession in 322 B.C., thus around 344 B.C.
Parikshit’s birth:
- According to the Ceylonese chronology: 1394 B.C. (1359 B.C. in the Vayu and Vishnu Puranas).
- According to the Vayu Purana: approximately 1412 B.C. (if Nanda’s reign is taken as 40 years).
Parikshit came to the throne 86 years later, around 1841 B.C. (or 1876 B.C. as per different sources).
Epic and Puranic tradition places Parikshit’s accession around the middle of the 14th century B.C.
Vedic evidence suggests a later date for Parikshit.
Vamsa (list of teachers) in Kaushitaki or Sankhayana Aranyaka:
- Guņākhya Sänkhayana learned from Kahola Kaushitaki, who learned from Uddalaka Aruņi.
- Sankhayana was two generations after Uddalaka, who was five or six generations after Janamejaya.
- Sankhayana thus lived seven or eight generations after Janamejaya, and eight or nine generations after Parikshit.
If Guņākhya Sänkhayana is the author of the Sänkhayana Grihya Sutra, he was contemporary with Aśvalāyana.
- Aśvalāyana was a contemporary of Kabandhi Kätyäyana and lived in the sixth century B.C.
- Identified with Assalāyana of Sävatthi, a contemporary of Gotama Buddha.
Assigning 240-270 years to the eight or nine generations from Parikshit to Sankhayana places Parikshit in the ninth century B.C.
Doubts about Guņākhya Sankhāyana’s identity with the Grihya Sutrakara, but references in his Aranyaka indicate a sixth-century B.C. date.
Parikshit was succeeded by his son Janamejaya.
- Mahabharata mentions Janamejaya’s great snake sacrifice.
- Janamejaya’s conquest of Taxila is considered historical due to references in the Brahmanas.
Aitareya Brahmana on Janamejaya:
- Describes Janamejaya as a great conqueror who performed a horse sacrifice.
- “Janamejaya Parikshita went around the earth, conquering on every side and offered the horse in sacrifice.”
- Sacrificial verse: “In Asandivat, Janamejaya bound for the gods a black-spotted, grain-eating horse, adorned with a golden ornament and yellow garlands.”
- Janamejaya’s aspiration to be a “Sarvabhūmi” (paramount sovereign) is mentioned in the Aitareya Brahmana.
  - He expressed his desire to conquer and rule all lands, invoking divine protection.
- Janamejaya’s possession of Taxila implies control over Madra or the Central Punjab, his mother Madravati’s homeland.
- A prince of the Paurava race ruled in the Rechna Doab until Alexander’s time, and Ptolemy mentions the Pandus as rulers of Sakala (Sialkot).
- After victorious campaigns, Janamejaya had Punarabhisheka and Aindramahābhisheka, performed two horse sacrifices, and had a dispute with Vaiśampayana and the Brahmans.
- Matsya version suggests Janamejaya made a stand against the Brahmans but later gave in and retired to the forest or perished.
- Puranic narrative is confirmed by Satapatha and Aitareya Brahmanas mentioning one of the horse sacrifices.
- Gopatha Brahmana narrates an anecdote about Janamejaya and two ganders, emphasizing the importance of Brahmacharya.
- Janamejaya is referred to as an ancient hero in the Gopatha Brahmana and the Ramayana.
- Janamejaya’s capital was Asandivant, likely identical with Hastinapura.
- Satapatha Brahmana mentions Janamejaya’s palace, where cups of fiery liquor were poured out.
- According to the Mahabharata, Janamejaya sometimes held court at Taxila, where Vaisampayana related the story of the Kurukshetra war.
- The Chhandogya Upanishad contains an obscure allusion to the Kurukshetra battle.
- The Pandus are not strangers but are scions of the Kurus, according to Hindu tradition and Patañjali.
- Pandavas’ connection with the Kuru race is emphasized in Hindu and Buddhist literature.
- Polyandrous marriage among the Pandavas doesn’t imply non-Kuru origin, as fraternal polyandry was prevalent among the Northern Kurus.
- Vaisampayana is mentioned in various Vedic texts, indicating his prominence even in ancient times.
- No evidence in Vedic literature contradicts the epic tradition regarding Vaisampayana’s association with Janamejaya.
References:
- Aitareya Brahmana
- Matsya version
- Puranic narratives
- Satapatha and Aitareya Brahmanas
- Gopatha Brahmana
- Ramayana
- Mahabharata
- Chhandogya Upanishad
- Hindu and Buddhist literature
- Vedic texts and mentions of Vaisampayana

Early Vedic texts do not reference the Mahabharata but mention “Itihasas,” with the story recited by Vaiśampāyana to Janamejaya initially called “Jaya.”
- “Jaya” signifies the victory of the Pandus, Janamejaya’s ancestors.
Janamejaya’s brothers, Bhimasena, Ugrasena, and Śrutasena, are noted in the Satapatha Brahmana and the Sänkhayana Śrauta Sütra as performers of the horse-sacrifice.
- Their lives and ends were discussed in philosophical circles during the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad’s time, indicating their earlier downfall.
A gatha in the Satapatha Brahmana states:
- “The righteous Pärikshitas, performing horse sacrifices, by their righteous work did away with sinful work one after another.”
Puranas state that Janamejaya was succeeded by:
- Satānika
- Satānika’s son, Aśvamedhadatta
- Aśvamedhadatta’s son, Adhisimakrishna (mentioned in Vayu and Matsya Puranas)
- Adhisimakrishna’s son, Nichakshu, moved the capital to Kaušambi after Hastinapura was carried away by the Ganges.
Vedic texts do not clearly mention these successors, but Rigveda mentions a Bharata king named Aśvamedha.
- A Satanika Sätrājita is noted in the Aitareya Brahmana and Satapatha Brahmana as a great king, likely a Bharata but different from Janamejaya’s son.
Kuru king Abhipratārin Käkshaseni is mentioned in several Brahmanas and Upanishads.
- He was a contemporary of Driti Aindrota, Janamejaya’s priest’s son.
- Abhipratārin was likely Janamejaya’s nephew.
Vriddhadyumna Abhipratāriņa, Abhipratārin’s son, is mentioned in the Aitareya Brahmana and Sankhayana Śrauta Sütra.
- His sacrificial error led to the Kurus’ expulsion from Kurukshetra.
Chhandogya Upanishad mentions the devastation of Kuru crops and the departure of Ushasti Chakrayaņa, a contemporary of Janaka of Videha.
Vedic and Purānic evidence suggests the Kuru kingdom split after Janamejaya’s death.
- One branch, direct descendants of Janamejaya, ruled from Hastinapura.
- The other, descendants of his brother Kakshasena, likely resided at Indraprastha or Indapatta.
During Janamejaya’s successors’ rule, great calamities befell the Kurus, leading to migration to eastern India.
- Bhasa’s work indicates the royal seat moved to Kausambi, with Udayana, king of Kausambi, described as a scion of the Bharata family.

Section II. The Age of the Great Janaka

The Kurus faced a series of calamities, leading to the king of Hastinapura leaving the country, and the Kurus playing a minor role in politics afterward.
Janaka of Videha emerged as the most notable figure in the succeeding age.
He was called “Samrat,” indicating higher dignity than a mere “rajan” as per the Satapatha Brahmana.
Janaka’s prominence suggests that he lived later than the Parikshitas, with evidence suggesting he was a contemporary of Nichakshu and Ushasti Chakrayaņa.
Philosophical discussions during Janaka’s reign referenced the decline and fall of the Parikshitas.
Although it’s challenging to determine the exact chronological relation between Janamejaya and Janaka, epic and Puranic tradition depict them as contemporaries.
Yet, Vedic texts provide evidence suggesting a different timeline.
The Mahabharata mentions Uddalaka and his son Svetaketu attending Janamejaya’s Sarpa-satra.
The Vishnupurana states that Satänika, Janamejaya’s successor, learned Vedas from Yajnavalkya.
The evidence from Vedic texts suggests that Janaka was separated by five or six generations from Janamejaya’s time.
This timeline places Janaka around 150 or 180 years after Janamejaya and two centuries after Parikshit.
Depending on whether Parikshit is placed in the 14th or 9th century B.C., Janaka’s era is estimated accordingly, suggesting the 12th or 7th century B.C. respectively.
The kingdom of Videha, ruled by Janaka, roughly corresponds to modern Tirhut in Bihar, separated from Kosala by the river Sadanirā, often identified with the Gandak or the Rapti.
Mithila, the capital of Videha, is frequently mentioned in the Jatakas and epics but not in Vedic texts. It’s identified with Janakpur near the Nepal border.
According to the Ramayana, the royal family of Mithila was founded by King Nimi, with his son Mithi being identified as Janaka I. The genealogy continues to Janaka II, the father of Sita, and his brother Kuśadhvaja.
Vedic texts mention a king of Videha named Nami Sapya, but he’s not depicted as the founder of Mithila’s dynasty. Instead, a story in the Satapatha Brahmana indicates that Videha was founded by Videgha Mathava, who came from the banks of the Sarasvati.
The Puranas identify Nimi or Nemi, son of Ikshvaku, as Videha and Mithi, equated with Janaka I. The dynasty continues to Siradhvaja, identified as Janaka II, and his lineage until Kriti, ending the Janaka Vamsa.
The name “Nimi” might refer to later kings, as suggested by Buddhist texts. Makhadeva is mentioned as the progenitor of Mithila’s kings, and Nimi is said to have been born later to complete the royal house.
Janaka’s identification with Stradhvaja, Sita’s father, is challenging due to the multiplicity of kings named Janaka. Additionally, identifying Janaka with any mentioned in Buddhist Jatakas is equally difficult.
Prof. Rhys Davids suggests identifying Janaka with Maha-Janaka of Jataka No. 559, known for the saying “Mithila’s palaces may burn, but naught of mine is burned thereby,” reminiscent of the philosopher-king depicted in the Mahabharata.
The Jaina Uttaradhyayana attributes the saying “Mithila’s palaces may burn, but naught of mine is burned thereby” to Nami, possibly identifying him with Mahā-Janaka II, son of Arittba.
Janaka is referred to as “Samrat” in the Satapatha Brahmana and the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, indicating his status as a greater authority than a mere “Rajan.”
Janaka’s fame lies not only in his role as a king and sacrificer but also in his patronage of culture and philosophy. His court attracted Brahmanas from Kosala and the Kuru-Panchala regions, fostering intellectual exchange and philosophical discourse.
Northern India during Janaka’s time comprised nine states of significance: Gandhara, Kekaya, Madra, Usinara, Matsya, Kuru, Panchala, Kasi, and Kosala.
Gandhara, part of Uttarapatha, included modern-day Rawalpindi and Peshawar districts. Notable cities were Takshashila and Pushkaravati, known for their educational institutions.
The Chhandogya Upanishad mentions Gandhara as illustrative of the importance of having a qualified teacher, comparing reaching Moksha to reaching Gandhara blindfolded.
Uddalaka Aruni, Janaka’s contemporary, is depicted as journeying to Takshashila to learn from a renowned teacher, emphasizing the region’s educational prestige.
The Kekayas inhabited the Punjab between Gandhara and the Beas river, with their capital likely at Rājagriha or Girivraja, identified with modern Girjak or Jalalpur.
There were multiple cities named Räjagriha-Girivraja across different regions: one in Magadha, another in Kekaya, and yet another mentioned by Hiuen Tsang in Balkh.
The Usinaras, Kekayas, and Madrakas were septs of the family of Anu, son of Yayāti, as per the Puranas. The Anu tribe is mentioned in the Rig Veda, and they resided in the central Panjab, later occupied by the Madrakas and Kekayas.
Aśvapati, the king of Kekaya during Janaka’s time, instructed numerous Brahmanas, including Uddalaka Aruņi and others, as per the Satapatha Brahmaņa and the Chhandogya Upanishad.
The Madra people were divided into northern and southern sections. The northern Madras lived beyond the Himavat Range, possibly in Kashmir, while the southern Madras were settled in the central Panjab, with their capital at Sakala or Sägalanagara (modern Sialkot).
The Usinaras likely inhabited the northernmost part of the Madhyadesa, and their capital was Bhojanagara. Their country is mentioned in various texts, including the Rig Veda, Mahabharata, and Jatakas.
Matsya, originally comprising parts of Alwar, Jaipur, and Bharatpur, was ruled by King Virāta, known from the Mahabharata. The Matsya capital has been identified with Bairat in Jaipur State, although there’s a debate regarding its exact location. The Matsyas are mentioned in the Rig Veda and the Satapatha Brahmana.
The Mahabharata mentions both a lake named Dvaitavana and a forest called Dvaitavana, which spread along the banks of the Sarasvati river.
In various texts like the Gopatha Brahmaņa and the Kaushitaki Upanishad, the Matsyas are mentioned in connection with different regions and peoples, including the Salvas, Kuru Pañchālas, Trigarttas, and Chedis.
The Matsyas, along with the Kurukshetra, Panchalas, and Sürasenakas, constitute the land of the Brahmaņa Rishis (Brahmarshi-deśa) as per the Manu-Samhita.
The ruler of the Matsya country during Janaka’s time is unknown, but the Matsya territory was significant during the age of Ajätasatru of Käsi and Janaka, as indicated in the Kaushitaki Upanishad.
Despite maintaining its reputation as a center of Brahmaņical culture, the Kuru country faced a great calamity during Janaka’s time, leading to the exodus of large sections of the Kuru people, including prominent figures like Ushasti Chakrayana.
If the Puranic list of Janamejaya’s successors is accepted as historical, Nichakshu likely ruled the Kuru kingdom during Janaka’s time. He is credited in the Puranas with moving the capital from Hastinapura to Kausambl, possibly due to reasons like the inroad of the river Ganges and the devastation caused by Matachi.
The city of Kausāmbi is believed to have existed around the time of Janaka and Nichakshu, as suggested by references in texts like the Satapatha Brahmaņa, where Proti Kausämbeya is mentioned as a contemporary of Uddālaka Aruņi.
After these events, the Kurus seemed to have lost their political importance and declined to a second-rate power, although the Bharata dynasty continued to wield influence down to the time of the Satapatha Brahmaņa.
Panchala, roughly corresponding to Bareilly, Budaun, Furrukhabad, and adjoining districts of the United Provinces, had its most ancient capital in Kampilya, identified with Kampil on the old Ganges between Budaun and Furrukhabad.
The Panchalas likely consisted of five tribes: the Krivis, Turvaśas, Kesins, Sriñjayas, and Somakas. The Krivis, mentioned in the Rig Veda, are identified with the Panchalas in the Satapatha Brāhmaņa, and the Turvaśas are associated with them as well.
The fusion of the Turvasas with the Panchalas is supported by the Puranic statement that the Turvasu line merged into the Paurava line, of which the Panchalas are considered an offshoot.
The Panchalas also included the Kesins and likely the Sriñjayas. In the Mahabharata, Uttamaujas is referred to both as a Pāñchāla and a Sriñjaya.
The royal family of the Panchalas is depicted in the Mahabharata as an offshoot of the Bharata dynasty. Divodāsa, Sudāsa, and Drupada are named among the kings of this branch.
The kingdom of Kasi, with its capital at Bārāņasî, was closely connected with the people of Kosala and Videha. Jala Jätükarnya is mentioned as having been the Purohita of Kasi, Videha, and Kosala during the time of Svetaketu, a contemporary of Janaka.
Little is known about the ancestors of Ajātaśatru, the king of Kasi. His name does not appear in Puranic lists of Kasi sovereigns, and the Puranas suggest the Kasi family was a branch of the house of Purüravas, ancestor of the Bharatas.
The Bharata dynasty of Kasi may have been supplanted by a new line of kings with the family name Brahmadatta, likely of Videhan origin. The Matsya Purāņa mentions a dynasty consisting of one hundred Brahmadattas.

Section III. The Later Vaidehas of Mithila

The Puranas provide extensive lists of successors to Sīradhvaja Janaka, a contemporary of Yājñavalkya.
Most kings in these lists cannot be satisfactorily identified with Videhan monarchs mentioned in Vedic, Buddhist, and Jaina literature.
The reliability of these lists is questionable.
Identification of kings in bardic chronicles with the Vedic Janaka is complex and uncertain.
Pradyota, a contemporary of Bimbisāra, is placed several generations before him by Puranic chroniclers.
Siddhartha, a contemporary of Prasenajit of Kosala, is represented as his grandfather in the lists.
Vishnu Puran suggests contemporaneous collateral lines of Janakas.
The problem of Siradhvaja’s identification remains unresolved.
The Jātakas suggest King Nimi ruled after the great Janaka.
Pargiter places the kings down to Bahulāśva before the Bharata war and identifies Kriti with Kritakshana of the Mahabharata.
Some Puranas state that Kriti was the last of the Janaka race, conflicting with the identification of Kriti with Kritakshana.
Kriti might be identified with Karala Janaka, who ended the Vaideha dynasty.
There may have been multiple kings named Nimi, and Bahulāśva might have been one of them.
Kriti and Karala could represent the last members of two collateral Janaka lines.
Vedic texts mention other Vaideha kings like Nami Sātya and Para Ahlāra.
Macdonell and Keith identify Para Ahlāra with Para Atṇāra, king of Kosala.
Nami Sātya is mentioned in the Panchavimsa Brahmana as a famous sacrificer.
Identification of Nami Sātya with King Nami of the Uttar-adhyayana Satra or Nimi of the Vishnu Purana is problematic.
The Nimi Jataka suggests Nimi was the penultimate sovereign of the Maithila family.
Nimi’s son Kalāra Janaka (Karala Janaka) ended the Vaideha dynasty.
Karala Janaka’s downfall is attributed to a crime, similar to the Tarquins’ expulsion from Rome.
The overthrow of the Vaideha monarchy led to the rise of the Vajjian Confederacy.
The Kasi people may have played a role in the overthrow of the Videhan monarchy.
The Mahabharata mentions a battle between Pratardana, king of Kasi, and Janaka, king of Mithila.
Lichchhavis, who succeeded Janaka’s dynasty, were believed to be offsprings of a queen of Kasi, indicating a connection between the royal families of Kasi and Videha.

SECTION IV. THE DECCAN IN THE AGE OF THE

“Dakshinabada” in the Rig Veda refers to a southern region beyond the recognized Aryan world.
“Dakshinātya” appears in Panini and “Dakshinapatha” in Baudhayana, but their exact meanings are unclear.
Early Pali literature sometimes pairs Dakshinapatha with Avanti (Malwa) and places it on the banks of the upper Godavari.
In the Nalopakhyana of the Mahabharata, Dakshinapatha is beyond Avanti and the Vindhyas, south of Vidarbhas and Southern Kosalas.
In Digvijaya-parva, Dakshinapatha is distinct from the Pandyan realm in the southernmost part of the Madras Presidency.
During the Gupta Age, Dakshinapatha stretched from the Kosalas to the kingdom of Kanchi and later included all of Trans-Vindhyan India.
By the time of later Vaidehas, Aryans had crossed the Vindhyas, establishing kingdoms from the Narmada to the Godavari.
Vidarbha, including modern Berar and parts of the Central Provinces, was an independent kingdom during Nimi’s time.
Vidarbha reached the Payoshni, a Tapu tributary, and was famous for its Machalas (a species of dog).
Vidarbha is mentioned in the Jaiminiya Brahmana and Praina Upanishad, indicating its location in the Deccan.
The Kumbhakara Jataka suggests Nimi, Nagnajit of Gandhara, and Bhima of Vidarbha were contemporaries of Karandu of Kalinga.
Kalinga existed as an independent kingdom during the Brahmana period, confirmed by Jataka and Uttaradhyayana Satra evidence.
The Mahagovinda Suttanta lists Sattabhu of Kalinga as a contemporary of Reņu of Mithila and Dhritarashtra of Kasi.
Panini and Baudhayana mention Kalinga, considered impure but visited by Aryans.
Kalinga traditionally included the coast from Vaitarani in Orissa to Andhra territory borders, with unclear southern boundaries.
Kalinga ranya references indicate large forested areas in Pali texts.
Ancient Kalinga capitals included Dantapura-nagara, Rajapura, Simhapura, and Kamchanapura.
Mahagovinda Suttanta refers to Assaka (Asmaka) on the Godavari, ruled by King Brahmadatta with the capital at Potana.
Aitareya Brahmana refers to southern princes called Bhojas and their subjects, the Satvats.
The Satapatha Brahmana mentions Bharata’s defeat of the Satvats near his realm (Ganges and Yamuna).
Satvats likely moved farther south according to the Aitareya Brahmana.
They lived beyond the “fixed middle region,” south of the Kurus and Panchalas.
Panchala extended as far south as the Chambal River.
Satvats of the southern region probably lived beyond the Chambal.
Their kings were called Bhojas, offshoots of the Yadu family from Mathura on the Yamuna.
Satvats and Bhojas were kindred to Vidarbha.
Bhojakața, included within Vidarbha by the Mahabharata and Harivamsha, is linked to ancient Vidarbha.
The Chammak grant shows Bhojakata included the Ilichpur district in Berar.
Bhojakata’s name implies it was named after a stronghold held by the Bhojas, mentioned in Ashoka’s edicts.
Kalidasa in Raghuvamsa refers to the king of Vidarbha as a Bhoja.
Aitareya Brahmana mentions several southern Bhoja kings.
A Bhoja line ruled Dandaka; Kauṭilya’s Arthashastra describes a Bhoja king named Dandaka.
Dandaka had its capital at Kumbhavati (Sarabhanga Jataka) or Madhumanta (Ramayana) or Govardhana (Mahavastu).
In the later Vaideha age, there were Aryan and non-Aryan kingdoms in the south, including Bhoja kingdoms, Vidarbha, Dandaka, Asmaka, and Kalinga.
Trans-Vindhyan India was mainly occupied by non-Aryan tribes: Andhras, Savaras, Pulindas, and probably Mutibas.
Andhras were a Dravidian people, now represented by Telugu speakers, in the deltas of the Godavari and Krishna.
The extension of Andhra power likely moved west to east down the Godavari and Krishna valleys.
Serivanij Jataka places Andhapura (Andhra capital) on the river Telavaha.
Mayidavolu plates show Andhra country included the lower Krishna valley with its center at Dhanyakada (Bezvada).
Yuan Chwang refers to Andhra district round Ping-ki-lo (Vengipura) near Ellore.
Andhra-Khanda extended from the Godavari to Kalinga, including Pithapuram.
Mahabharata places Andhras, Pulindas, and Savaras in the Deccan.
Savaras identified with Suari (Pliny) and Sabarae (Ptolemy), likely in Vizagapatam Hills and Gwalior territory.
Pulindas’ capital (Pulinda-nagara) was south-east of Dasarnas.
Mutibas (Modubae) mentioned in Aitareya Brahmana with unclear location, possibly related to the river Musi in the Deccan.

CHAPTER III. MAHAJANAPADAS AND KINGSHIP

SECTION 1. THE SIXTEEN MAHAJANAPADAS

Vedic texts provide limited information on the political condition from the fall of the Videhan monarchy to the rise of Kosala under Mahakosala.

The Buddhist Anguttara Nikāya mentions sixteen states known as the “Solasa Mahajanapada”:

Kasi (Kali)
Kosala (Kosala)
Anga
Magadha
Vajji (Vriji)
Malla
Chetiya (Chedi)
Varisa (Vatsa)
Kuru
Panchala
Machchha (Matsya)
Sūrasena
Assaka (Asmaka)
Avanti
Gandhara
Kamboja

The Jaina Bhagavati Sutra lists slightly different states:

Anga
Banga (Vanga)
Magaha (Magadha)
Malaya
Malava
Achchha
Vachchha (Vatsa)
Kochchha (Kachchha)
Padha (Pandya or Paundra)
Ladha (Lata or Radha)
Vajji (Vajji)
Moli (Malla)
Kasi (Kadi)
Avaha
Sambhuttara (Sumbottara?)

States common to both lists: Anga, Magadha, Vatsa, Vajji, Kasi, Kosala.
Malava likely identical to Avanti; Moli probably a corruption of Malla.
Kasi was once a powerful kingdom, superior to many neighbors including Kosala.
Benares, the capital of Kasi, was a prominent city mentioned in various Jatakas.
Kasi likely subjugated Kosala, Anga, and Magadha at times.
Jain texts highlight Kasi’s importance, with King Asvasena of Benares as the father of Tirthankara Parsva.
King Dhritarashtra of Kasi attempted a horse sacrifice but was defeated by Satānīka Sātrājita.
Kasi monarchs had imperial ambitions; some were more successful than others.
Kosala’s boundaries:
- West: Gumti River
- South: Sarpikā or Syandikā (Sai) River
- East: Sadantra River
- North: Nepal hills
Kosala included territories of the Kalamas (Kesaputta) and Sakyas (Kapilavastu).
Kosala’s significant cities: Ayodhya, Saketa, Sāvatthī (Srāvastī), Setavyā, and Ukkattha.
Ayodhya was on the Sarayū River, included in present-day Fyzabad district.
Saketa and Ayodhya were possibly adjoining cities.
Sāvatthī is identified with the ruins on the south bank of the Achiravati (Rapti) River.
Kosala’s royal family descended from King Ikshvāku, with branches ruling at Kusinārā, Mithila, and Visāla (Vaisali).

Ikshvāku and his descendants mentioned in various Vedic texts:

Mandhatri Yuvanāśva (Gopatha Brahmana)
Purukutsa (Rig Veda)
Trasadasyu (Rig Veda)
Tryarupa (Rig Veda, Panchavimsha Brahmana)
Triśanku (Taittiriya Upanishad)
Harischandra and his son Rohita (Aitareya Brahmana)
Bhagiratha (Jaiminiya Upanishad Brahmana, Rig Veda)
Ambarisha (Rig Veda)
Rituparna (Baudhāyana Srauta Sūtra)
Dasaratha and Rama (Rig Veda)
Vedic texts do not clearly connect certain figures with the Ikshvaku family or Kosala.
Hiranyanabha Kausalya is mentioned as a prince in the Prabna Upanishad.
Hiranyanabha and his son Hairanyanabha are noted in the Satapatha Brahmana and Sankhayana Srauta Sutra.
Hiranyanabha likely flourished in the sixth century B.C., contemporary with Kausalya Asvalayana and Sukela Bharadvaja.
Some later princes from the Puranic list, like Sakya, Suddhodana, Siddhartha, Rahula, and Prasenajit, are mentioned in Buddhist texts.
Puranic chroniclers often misrepresented the succession and relationships within the Ikshvaku dynasty.
Prasenajit was a contemporary of Siddhartha (Buddha) and not his descendant.
Tibetan sources depict Prasenajit as the son of Brahmadatta.
The exact relation of Hiranyanabha to Prasenajit is unclear.
Hiranyanabha and his son performed an Asvamedha sacrifice and were significant conquerors.
Possible identification of Hiranyanabha or his son with the “Great Kosalan” (Mahakosala) in Buddhist tradition.
The Puranic lists have several defects, such as mixing different branches and contemporaries.
Ikshvakus of various branches and some non-Ikshvaku princes are inaccurately represented in Puranic lists.
Kosala’s capital cities evolved over time: Ayodhya was the earliest, followed by Saketa, and finally Sravasti.
In the Buddha’s time, Ayodhya had declined, while Saketa and Sravasti remained prominent.
The chronology of ancient Kosala is confused and difficult to determine precisely.
Kosala evolved from a poor state to a powerful kingdom contending with Kasi and Magadha.
Anga was located east of Magadha and separated by the river Champa.
Anga’s dominions once included Magadha and extended to the sea.
Ancient texts describe Anga’s imperial glory and its capital, Rajagriha.
Songs of the Aitareya Brahmana describe the world conquest of an ancient king who took aristocratic girls as prizes.
Champa, the capital of Anga, was located at the confluence of the Champa River and the Ganges.
Villages near Bhagalpur, named Champanagara and Champapura, likely mark the ancient capital’s site.
Ancient texts like the Mahabharata, Puranas, and Harivamsa state that Champa’s earlier name was Malini.
Jataka stories also refer to the city as Kala Champa, mentioning its gates, watch tower, and walls.
By the time of Buddha’s death, Champa was one of the six great cities of India, alongside Rajagriha, Sravasti, Saketa, Kaushambi, and Benares.
Champa was known for its wealth and commerce, with traders sailing to Suvarnabhumi.
Hindu emigrants named settlements in southern Annam and Cochin China after Champa.
Other important cities in Anga included Assapura (Asvapura) and Bhaddiya (Bhadrika).
Anga first appears in the Atharva Veda, mentioned alongside the Gandharis, Mujavats, and Magadhas.
The Ramayana tells a mythological origin story for Anga involving the god of love, Madana or Ananga.
The Mahabharata and Puranas attribute Anga’s founding to a prince named Anga.
Anga Vairochana is mentioned in the Aitareya Brahmana among anointed kings.
Despite this, the Bodhayana Dharma Sutra groups Angas with mixed-origin peoples, and the Mahabharata describes an Anga prince as a Mlechchha (barbarian).
The Matsya Purana refers to the father of Anga’s eponymous hero as Danavarshobha (chief among demons).
Information on Anga’s dynastic history is limited.
The Mahagovinda Suttanta mentions King Dhatarattha of Anga.
Buddhist texts refer to Queen Gaggara of Anga, who gave her name to a famous lake in Champa.
The Puranas list early kings of Anga, including Dadhivahana, known to Jaina tradition.
Dadhivahana’s daughter, Chandana or Chandrabala, was the first woman to embrace Jainism.
King Satanika of Vatsa attacked Champa during Dadhivahana’s reign.
Between Vatsa and Anga lived the Magadhas, then a weak people engaged in a struggle with Anga.
The Vidhura Pandita Jataka describes Rajagriha, the Magadhan capital, as a city of Anga.
The Mahabharata mentions an Anga king performing a sacrifice at Gaya, indicating Anga’s dominance over Magadha at one point.
Anga’s frontier approached the Vatsa Kingdom, leading to conflict.
Anga’s king sought friendly relations with Kaushambi, likely due to threats from Magadha.
Sri Harsha mentions a ruler of Anga named Dridhavarman.
His daughter was given in marriage to Udayana, son of Šatanika, to regain his throne.
Anga’s success was short-lived.
In the mid-6th century B.C., Bimbisara of Magadha killed Brahmadatta, the last ruler of Anga.
Bimbisara took Champa and resided there as Viceroy, integrating Anga into Magadha’s empire.
Magadha roughly corresponds to present-day Patna and Gaya districts in South Bihar.
Magadha was bounded by the Ganges and Son rivers in the north and west, Vindhyan range in the south, and the Champa river in the east.
Girivraja (Rajagriha) was Magadha’s earliest capital.
Girivraja was also known as Rajagriha, Barhadrathapura, Magadhapura, Vasumati, Kusagrapura, and Bimbisarapuri.
The Rig-Veda mentions a territory called Kikata, ruled by Pramaganda.
Yaska described Kikata as a non-Aryan country.
Kikata included Gaya district but was considered impure.
Magadha first appears in the Atharva-Veda.
Vedic literature often spoke of Magadha in contemptuous terms.
Magadha was seen as non-Brahmanical and possibly mingled with sea invaders from the east.
The Mahabharata and Puranas cite Brihadratha as the founder of Magadha’s earliest dynasty.
Jarasandha was a prominent king of this dynasty.
Pradyota’s ascension marked the end of the Brihadratha dynasty around the 6th century B.C.
Jain texts mention early kings Samudra-vijaya and Gaya.
The Saisunaga dynasty succeeded the Brihadrathas, founded by Sisunaga.
Bimbisara is placed in this dynasty by some texts, but other sources suggest he belonged to the Haryanka dynasty.
Sisunaga reportedly established his capital in Vaisali, after Rajagriha’s prominence waned.
Puranas and other texts give conflicting accounts of Sisunaga’s timeline relative to Bimbisara.
Kalasoka, Sisunaga’s successor, ruled from Pataliputra, indicating a later date than Udayin, the city’s founder.
Kalasoka’s reign marked a second transfer of the capital to Pataliputra, indicating his predecessor had reverted to Girivraja as a refuge.
The origin of the Haryanka line, to which Bimbisara belonged, is obscure.
Bimbisara’s anointment by his father at age 15 and his conquests laid the foundation for Magadha’s expansion.
Vajji (Vriji) territory lay north of the Ganges, bordered by the Nepal hills, the Gandak river, and the forests near the Kosi and Mahananda rivers.
Vajji included eight confederate clans: Videhas, Lichchhavis, Jnatrikas, Vrijis, Ugras, Bhogas, Aikshvakas, and Kauravas.
Mithila, the old Videha capital, is identified with Janakpur in Nepal.
Lichchhavi capital was Vaisali (modern Besarh), encircled by triple walls with watch-towers.
Lichchhavi territory extended north to Nepal; Siddhartha (Mahavira) belonged to the Jnatrika clan based in Kunda pura or Kundagrama near Vaisali.
Vrijis are mentioned in Panini’s texts; Vaisali was their confederacy’s capital.
Vaisali’s founding dynasty claimed descent from Ikshvaku, but historical verification is lacking.
Vrijian confederation formed after the decline of Videha’s monarchy, transitioning to an aristocratic republic.
The transition from monarchy to republic in Vaisali is unclear.
Lichchhavis were considered Kshatriyas despite some scholars suggesting foreign origins (e.g., Tibetan or Persian).
Lichchhavis were not closely aligned with orthodox Hinduism and supported Jainism and Buddhism.
Manu described the Lichchhavis as heterodox Vratya Rajanyas, contrasting with medieval Rajput families
Lichchhavis were likely indigenous Kshatriyas degraded to Pratyas due to neglecting Brahmanic rites and favoring heretical doctrines.
Ramayana represents Vaisalika rulers as Ikshvakuids; Pali commentary links their origin to Benares.
Lichchhavis’ comparison to “Tavatithsa gods” contradicts theories of them being related to snub-nosed peoples beyond the Himalayas.
Lichchhavi authority was established in the sixth century B.C. and declined in the following century.
Notable Lichchhavis include prince Ahhaya, Otthaddha (Mahali), generals Stha and Ajita, Dummukha, and Sunakkhatta.
Lichchhavi ruling family traditionally numbered 7,707, indicating a large number of clan elders.
Real administrative power was held by nine Ganarajas or archons.
Jaina Kalpasutra mentions a league of nine Lichchhavis, nine Mallakis, and eighteen Kashi-Kosala clan-lords against Magadha.
Chetaka, a leader of the alliance, was related to Mahavira and Ajatashatru.
Malla territory, split into two parts with capitals at Kusinara and Pava, was along the Kakuttha river.
Kusinara’s site is debated, with Smith suggesting Nepal and Cunningham supporting the Kasia remains.
Pava’s identification varies, with Cunningham proposing Padaraona and Carlleyle suggesting Fazilpur.
Mallas, classed by Manu as Pratyakshatriyas, were proponents of Buddhism and had initial monarchical governance.
Mahabharata refers to Malla kings like Okkaka (Ikshvaku) and Mahasudassana, indicating an earlier monarchy.
Malla territory was annexed to Magadha and was part of the Maurya Empire by the third century B.C.
Chedi lay near the Jumna and was connected with Matsyas, Kasis, and Karushas.
Chedi’s capital was Suktimati, near the modern Ken river.
Rig Veda mentions Chedi people; Mahabharata lists kings like Damaghosha and Shishupala.
Vatsa territory, south of the Ganges, had Kausambi as its capital, linked to Chedi origins.
Puranas trace Vatsa lineage to Kashi; Hastinapura’s destruction led to Kausambi’s establishment by Nichakshu.
Puranic tradition and Bhasa’s plays confirm Bharata lineage of Kausambi’s kings.
Puranas list Nichakshu’s successors down to Kshemaka, highlighting the family’s divine and royal honors.
The Bharata dynasty of Kaulimbi has a complex chronology with potential contemporaries represented as successors and collaterals as lineal descendants. There is a lack of consensus on the names of immediate predecessors of Udayana.
The earliest known king of this line is Satantka II, with father Vasudana (according to Punktust) or Sahasranika (according to Bhasa). He attacked Champa during the reign of Dadhivälana.
Udayana, Satantka’s son, was contemporary with Buddha, Pradyota of Avanti, Bimbisira, and Ajitalatru of Magadha.
Bharga state of Suthisumaragiri was a dependency of Vatsa, located between the Jumna and another river, as per various texts.
The Kuru dynasty, with its capital at Indraprastha (near modern Delhi), extended over a vast region. Significant towns included Hatthini pura, Thullakotthita, Kammässadamma, Kundi, and Väranävata. The historicity of Kuru kings mentioned in texts is uncertain.
The Jaina Uttaradhyayana Sütra references a king named Ishukära in Kuru country, indicating the fragmentation of Kuru into smaller states after the decline of Abhipqtariņas.
Panchala, divided into Northern and Southern regions by the Ganges, had capitals at Ahichchhatra (Northern) and Kämilya (Southern). This region saw frequent conflicts with the Kurus.
Durmukha of Uttara Panchala, contemporary with Nimi, Karandu of Kalinga, Naggaji of Gandhara, and Nimi of Videha, conducted extensive conquests.
Chulani Brahmadatta of Panchala is mentioned in multiple texts, but his story is considered largely legendary.
Sañjaya of Kampilya, mentioned in the Uttar-adhyayana Sütra, adopted Jainism, indicating a potential shift towards Sangha governance.
Matsya, with its capital at Virăța-nagara, likely maintained a monarchical system until its absorption into the Magadhan Empire. Famous edicts of Aśoka have been found at Bairat.
A family of Matsyas settled in Vizagapatam, with records of Jayatsena of Utkala and his descendants ruling till 1269 A.D.
The Sûrasena country, with Mathură as its capital, is noted in various texts and Greek accounts. Mathura was connected to significant trade routes and cities.
The Yadava family ruled Mathura, with various sub-sects like Vitihotras, Satvatas, Andhakas, Maha-bhojas, and Vrishnis. Historical and epic texts link Yadu with Turvaśa, Druhyu, Anu, and Pûru.
Satvats, initially located near the Kuru-Panchala area, later moved southwards, indicating a historical migration due to pressure from Paurava and Kuru lines.
Avantipura, king of the Sürasenas during Buddha’s time, indicates a connection with Avanti’s royal house. The Sürasenas were significant till the time of Megasthenes, likely part of the Maurya Empire.
Assaka, situated on the banks of the Godavari with its capital at Potali (possibly modern Bodhan), aligns with its historical location.
Assaka, located on the banks of the Godavari, had its capital at Potali, Potana, or Podana, possibly Bodhan in modern-day Nizam’s dominions.
Pali texts and Jatakas suggest Assaka was associated with Avanti, indicating Assaka may have included Mülaka and approached Avanti’s southern frontier.
Asmaka and Mülaka were believed to be founded by Ikshvāku chiefs, similar to Vidarbha and Dandaka founded by Yadu lineage princes.
Mahāgovinda Suttanta mentions Brahmadatta, king of Assaka, as a contemporary of other regional kings, including those of Kalinga, Avanti, Sovira, Videha, Anga, and Käsi.
Potali was once part of Käsi’s kingdom, with Prince Assaka as a vassal.
The Chulla Kalinga Jataka mentions a victory by Assaka’s King Aruna over Kalinga’s king.
Avanti roughly corresponds to Ujjain and parts of the Narmada valley, including Mändhätä and Maheshwar.
Jain writers include Tumhavana within Avanti’s boundaries.
Avanti was divided by the Vindhyas, with Ujjain as the northern capital and Mähissati/Mähishmati in the south.
Avanti cities mentioned by Buddhist and Jain texts include Kuraraghara, Makkarakața, and Sudarśanapura.
The Mahabharata differentiates between Avanti and Mähishmatī but locates Vinda and Anuvinda near the Narmada.
The Puranas associate the foundation of Mähishmatī, Avanti, and Vidarbha with the Yadu family.
The first dynasty of Mähishmati was the Haihaya, known in the Shodaja-rajika and other epic episodes.
The Haihayas are said to have overthrown the Nagas, indigenous to the Narmada region.
Five branches of the Haihayas include Vitihotras, Bhojas, Avantis, Kundikeras or Tuydikeras, and Talajanghas.
Pulika (Puņika) killed his master, founding a new dynasty with his son Pradyota, integrating Avanti into the Magadhan Empire by the 4th century B.C.
Gandhara included Kashmir and Takshaśilā, attracting students from across provinces.
Gandhara princes descended from Druhyu, as mentioned in the Rig-Veda.
Nagnajit of Gandhara, a contemporary of various regional kings, possibly converted to Jainism.
Pukkusati of Gandhara engaged diplomatically and militarily with Magadha and Avanti.
Gandhara was conquered by Persia’s Darius around 520-518 B.C., as recorded in the Behistun inscription.
Kamboja, linked with Gandhara, located in North-West Indo-Pakistan, included regions like Rajapura.
The Mahabharata mentions Rajapura as a significant Kamboja city.
Kamboja was a center of Brahmaņic learning, with teachers like Kamboja Aupamanyava.
The Kambojas transitioned from a monarchy, as in the Mahabharata, to a Sangha or confederation of various socio-economic groups, as described in the Kauțiliya Arthashastra.

SECTION II. AN EPIC ACCOUNT OF THE MAHAJANAPADAS

The Mahabharata’s Karna Parva provides insights into the characteristics of the peoples of various Mahajanapadas.
The Kurus, Panchalas, Matsyas, Kosalas, Kāśis, Magadhas, Chedis, and Sürasenas are praised for their virtues.
Anga is included among these regions, indicating its people are also seen positively.
The Kauravas, Panchalas, Sälvas, Matsyas, Naimishas, Kosalas, Käsis, Angas, Kalingas, Magadhas, and Chedis are described as knowing the eternal Law of Righteousness.
The Pañchälas adhere to the Vedic code, the Kauravas to the law of right conduct, the Matsyas to truth, and the Sürasenas to sacrificial rites.
Magadhas are known for comprehending hints, Kosalas for understanding from observation, Kurus and Panchalas for grasping half-expressed words, and Sälvas for needing full instruction.
Angas, along with Madras and Gandhäras, face criticism and condemnation.
Angas are accused of abandoning the afflicted and selling wives and children.
Madrakas are described as losing all acts of friendship, Gandhärakas as losing purity, and sacrifices where the king is both sacrificer and priest are seen as ineffective.
The verses reflect the attitudes of poets from the western Madhyadeša towards the Mahajanapadas of Northern India.

SECTION III. THE FALL OF KASE AND THE ASCENDANCY OF KOSALA

The flourishing period of the sixteen Mahajanapadas ended in the 6th and 5th centuries B.C.
The succeeding age saw the absorption of these states into powerful kingdoms and eventually into the Magadha Empire.
Kāśi was one of the first kingdoms to fall.
The Mahavagga and the Jātakas describe conflicts between Kāśi and its neighbors, particularly Kosala.
Initially, Kāśi seemed successful in these conflicts, but Kosala eventually prevailed.
Legendary accounts in the Mahavagga and Kosambi Jataka mention Brahmadatta, king of Kāśi, defeating Dighati, king of Kosala.
The Kunala Jataka also tells of Brahmadatta conquering Kosala and making its queen his consort.
Despite early successes, Kāśi was eventually overpowered by Kosala.
King Malisilava of Kāśi lost his realm to Kosala, as mentioned in the Mahisilava Jataka.
Vanka and Dabbasena of Kosala won decisive victories over Kāśi.
King Kamsa of Kosala is often referred to as “seizer of Benares,” indicating his conquest of Kāśi.
The memory of Kāśi as an independent kingdom was still fresh during Buddha’s time and in the Anguttara Nikāya.
By the mid-6th century B.C., under Mahakosala, Kāśi was part of the Kosalan monarchy.
Mahakosala gave a Kāśi village to his daughter Kosalādevi when she married King Bimbisāra of Magadha.
During Pasenadi’s reign, Kāśi remained part of the Kosalan empire.
Pasenadi is mentioned as the head of a group of five Rājas, with one likely being his brother, the viceroy of Kāśi.
Other notable vassals of Kosala included the ruler of the Sākyas in Kapilavastu and the ruler of the Kālāmās of Kesaputta.
Bimbisāra’s coronation as king of Magadha marks the end of this period.

SECTION IV. KINGSHIP

Northern India and the Deccan experienced political changes from the accession of Parikshit to the coronation of Bimbisāra.
The major form of government during this period was monarchical.
Vedic texts and auxiliary treatises provide details on the rank and power of rulers, their social status, selection, and consecration methods.
Rulership forms varied across regions:
- Eastern kings were anointed for overlordship (Samrajya).
- Southern kings for paramount rule (Bhaujya).
- Western kings for self-rule (Svarajya).
- Northern kings beyond the Himalayas for sovereignty (Vairajya).
- Central kings of the Kuru-Panchalas for kingship (Rajya).
Terms Samrajya, Bhaujya, Svarajya, Vairajya, and Rajya indicated different forms of royal authority.
Rajya referred to kingship, while Samrajya referred to overlordship.
The king was usually a Kshatriya, though other caste kings, including Brahmans, are mentioned.
Kingship could be hereditary or elective.
The king was often chosen from the royal family, but sometimes outsiders were elected.
The monarch typically had four queens: Mahishi, Parivrikti, Vavata, and Palagali.
Polygamy was common, with kings having large harems.
The king’s consecration involved elaborate rituals described in the Brahmanas and Vedic Samhitas.
Persons aiding in the king’s consecration were called Rajakartas or Rajakrits.
Major royal inauguration ceremonies included Vajapeya, Rajasuya, Punar-abhisheka, and Aindra Mahabhisheka.
Vajapeya conferred superior kingship (Samrajya), while Rajasuya conferred ordinary monarchical dignity.
Punar-abhisheka made the king eligible for various royal dignities.
Aindra Mahabhisheka aimed to bestow supreme authority and extensive territorial control on the king.
The Vajapeya rites include a chariot race of 17 chariots, symbolizing a relic of an old national festival akin to the Indian Olympic games.
After the race, the sacrificer and his wife mount a pole with a wheaten ring at the top, paying homage to Mother Earth, symbolizing gaining a seat above others.
The sacrificer is then offered a throne-seat with a goatskin and addressed by the Adhvaryu priest, signifying rulership and prosperity.
The Rajasüya rites spread over a period of more than two years, starting from the first day of Phalguna.
Popular features of the Rajasüya include:
Ratninam havimshi: Presents to divinities in the houses of chief members of the royal household and officials.
Abhishechaniya: The besprinkling ceremony.
Dig vyasthapana: The king’s symbolic walking to indicate universal rule.
Treading upon a tiger skin for strength and pre-eminence.
Narration of the story of Sunahsepa by the hotri priest.
A mimic cow raid or sham fight.
Enthronement and a game of dice where the king is made the victor.
The Ratninam havimshi recipients included various royal household and service officials, such as the Commander of the army, Royal Chaplain, Chief Queen, and others.
The Abhisheka or besprinkling is a crucial part of the Rajasüya, involving offerings to multiple deities and the use of consecration water made from seventeen kinds of liquid.
The Punar-abhisheka is intended for conquering monarchs, involving the king’s ascent to a special throne and a ceremony emphasizing his supreme rule.
The Aindra Mahābhisheka consists of five ceremonies, including an oath to the king-elect and his enthronement.
The king is proclaimed with attributes like sovereign lord of all beings, devourer of the people, and protector of the Brahmanas and law.
The Aindra Mahābhisheka is closely linked to the Agvamedha or horse-sacrifice, where kings conquer and perform the rite as a symbol of their supremacy.
The kingship in Vedic texts is not just patriarchal; the king is extolled as a divine figure and supreme ruler.
Despite his power, the king’s authority is checked by the Brahmanas, ministers, village headmen, and the royal council.
The king had to maintain good relations with Brahmanas and other influential figures in society.
The existence of a Royal Council is suggested, where key figures like the Süta and the Gramani played significant roles in governance.
Ministers and headmen had a recognized right to be consulted, evident from Pali texts up to the time of Bimbisara.
King Brahmadatta of Kasi convened his ministers to discuss young Dighavu.
The Maha Assaroha Jataka describes a king gathering his councillors by drumbeat.
The Chulla Sutasoma Jataka mentions a king with eighty thousand councillors led by his general.
Councillors (amatyas) had the power to depose and elect princes, as seen in the Padanjali, Sarvara, and Sonaka Jatakas.
Special assemblies of village headmen are documented.
King Bimbisara held an assembly of eighty thousand village headmen.
General assemblies of the people (Jana, Mahajana) were distinct from ministers and village headmen.
The Aitareya Brahmana distinguishes between people (Janah) and royal functionaries (Rajakartarah).
The Samiti or Parishad was an assembly of the entire populace.
The Chhandogya Upanishad mentions a Samiti of the Panchala people led by King Pravahana Jaivali.
The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad uses “Parishad” for such assemblies.
The Lichchhavi Parisha and similar assemblies had functions beyond philosophical discussions.
The Jaiminiya Upanishad Brahmana references debates and witnesses in popular assemblies.
People’s participation in royal inauguration ceremonies is noted.
The Dummedha Jataka describes a joint assembly of various social groups.
The Atharva-Veda states that concord between king and assembly was crucial for prosperity.
Evidence shows people sometimes expelled or executed unpopular kings and officials.
The Satapatha Brahmana and Aitareya Brahmana recount expulsions of kings from their kingdoms.
The Vessantara Jataka mentions the king of the Sivis banishing Prince Vessantara due to public demand.
The Padakusalamānava Jataka tells of people killing an unjust king and priest and anointing a good man as king.
Similar stories appear in the Sachchamkira Jataka and Khandakala Jataka, where people killed or deposed unjust rulers.
Fick notes a king of Takshashila in the Telapatta Jataka claiming no power over his subjects, indicating a decline in royal authority in some northwestern regions since Janaka’s time.