Chronology of Bharatam - Manu To Mahabharata Part 1
Chronology of Bharatam - Manu To Mahabharata Part 1
Chronology of Bharatam - Manu To Mahabharata Part 1
VEDVEER ARYA
ARYABHATA PUBLICATIONS
Hyderabad
Published by
Aryabhata Publications
Hyderabad
Email: [email protected]
Sponsored by :
ITIHASA
(International True Indian History Association with Scientific Approach)
Email: [email protected]
www.itihasa.org
v a vk ā b i bZ ī
m u Å ū _ ṛ _` ṝ
, e ,s ai v¨ o v© au
va ṁ v% ḥ
Feb 6778 BCE, leading to the conclusive and accurate fixing of the epoch of the
beginning of the 28th Tretā Yuga as 6777 BCE.
Arguably, the duration of the Tretā Yuga was only 1200 years because
the duration of a Yuga was extended from 5 years to 1200 years in 6777 BCE.
After the end of the 28th Tretā Yuga, the differential duration of four Yugas was
introduced; therefore, the duration of the 28th Dvāpara Yuga was 2400 years.
As the duration of a Yuga, before 6777 BCE, was only five years, I was able to
establish the epoch of the early Vedic Yuga calendar as being around 15962
BCE. In this manner, I reconstructed and reconciled the chronology, in this
book, from the time of Svāyambhuva Manu to the Mahābhārata era based on the
verifiable archaeo-astronomical references found in Vedic literature, Post-Vedic
literature, the Rāmāyaṇa, the Mahābhārata and the Purāṇas. I hope Indologists
and historians of the world may review and evaluate my research work on the
chronology without bias or prejudice.
This book would not have been possible without the erudite inputs from
numerous research papers, articles and books on this very significant subject.
During the writing of this book, I have, quite often, borrowed and reproduced
some of the relevant content from these sources. I acknowledge my deep
indebtedness to the scholarly authors of these articles and books.
I express my profound gratitude to respected K.N. Govindacharya ji for his
inspirational guidance. My sincere thanks to Dr G. Satheesh Reddy, Secretary,
Department of Defence R&D and Chairman, DRDO for being a constant source
of great motivation. My special thanks to Sh. Raj Vedam, Sh. Ravindranath Kaul,
Sh. Sudhir Nathan, Sh. Vutukur Srinivas Rao, Sh. Sandeep Sarkar and Ms. Dipti
Mohil Chawla for their valuable suggestions and sustained encouragement. I
also thank Sh. Sanjay Sharma, Sh. Shamit Khemka and Sh. Paritosh Agrawal
for extending all support in design of cover page and publication of this book.
I thank Ms. Kalyani Prashar for her efforts in editing the manuscript. I also
thank Sh. Vinod Yadav for his creative contribution in the type-setting, design
and printing of this book. Finally, I thank my wife Sandhya for her support,
encouragement and patience during the time of writing of this book.
Ancient Indian history begins with Brahma, the founder of Vedic sciences,
and his son Svāyambhuva Manu, the first king of the Brahmāvarta
kingdom. A few kings and kingdoms may have existed before the lifetime
of Brahma but the official recordkeeping of the genealogy of Indian
kings and their history commenced from Brahma and his son Manu.
Traditionally, the Sūtas and the Magadhas were entrusted with the task of
maintaining this multigenerational chronological genealogy of the Manu
and the Puru dynasties, charting their lineages since the early Rigvedic
period. Though the two communities pursued their ancestral duty with
utmost dedication, it was never a feasible expectation to maintain this
continuity for thousands of years, which is perhaps why there are some
gaps in the chronological genealogy of various dynasties. These historical
records had been formally compiled into Purāṇa-Itihāsa Saṁhitās
for the first time by Veda Vyāsa’s pupil Romaharṣaṇa Sūta, during the
later Rigvedic period. After this, the subject of Purāṇa-Itihāsa formally
became a part of Vedic education and the pupils of Romaharṣaṇa Sūta
also compiled Purāṇa Saṁhitās. The tradition of periodic compilation
of Bhaviṣyat Purāṇa was introduced in the post-Vedic period. Then, the
same Purāṇa Saṁhitās were recompiled in Laukika Sanskrit later, and
came to be known as Purāṇas.
It seems that the tradition of historical recordkeeping declined after
the reign of the Ikśvāku King Agnivarṇa, the 25th descendant of Sri Rāma.
Kālidāsa abruptly ended his Raghuvaṁśa Mahākāvya after the reign of
Agnivarṇa, probably due to a long interregnum in genealogical continuity
of the Raghu dynasty. Evidently, the Ikśvāku dynasty had declined after the
2 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Abhijit as the northern pole star. Taittirīya Āraṇyaka gives the complete
description of Śiśumāra constellation which clearly indicates the star
“Kaśyapa” to be Gamma Draconis. Gamma Draconis was the northern
pole star around 10500-8500 BCE. Bhīṣma Parva of the Mahābhārata
refers to an ancient astronomical observation that Arundhatī (star Alcor)
walked ahead of her husband Vasiṣṭha (star Mizar). This Arundhatī-
Vasiṣṭha observation clearly indicates that ancient Indians might have
observed this event around 11000-10000 BCE because Arundhatī used to
walk behind Vasiṣṭha before 11000 BCE.
Numerous references of post-Vedic literature mention the shifting
of winter solstice from Mṛgaśirā Nakśatra to Rohiṇī. The Vedic legend
of Prajāpati Dakśa and his 27 daughters clearly indicates the Mṛgaśirādi
list of 28 Nakśatras, in turn indicating the beginning of Vaivasvata
Manvantara around 11200 BCE. The winter solstice was at Mṛgaśirā
Nakśatra around 11200-10200 BCE and at Rohiṇī Nakśatra around 10200-
9200 BCE. The same was at Kṛttikā Nakśatra around 9200-8200 BCE. The
Nakśatra Sūkta of Atharvaveda was recompiled around 9200-9000 BCE
and the list of Nakśatras had been reset starting from Kṛttikā Nakśatra.
Most of the Saṁhitās, Brāhmānas and Āraṇyakas were finally compiled
when the winter solstice was at Kṛttikā Nakśatra. Vedāṅga Jyotiṣa and
Maitrāyaṇī Upaniṣad were written around 8500-8000 BCE when the
vernal equinox was at Āśleṣā Nakśatra and the autumnal equinox was
at Śraviṣṭhā Nakśatra. The list of Nakśatras was again reset starting from
Aśvinī Nakśatra when winter solstice had shifted to Aśvinī Nakśatra
around 7200 BCE. Purāṇas mention that the northern pole star was
located in the tail of the Śiśumāra constellation. The star Thuban or Alpha
Draconis of Śiśumāra constellation was the northern pole star around
3900-1800 BCE. Based on scientific analysis of the archaeo-astronomical
data, I have arrived at the following chronology of ancient India from the
time of Svāyambhuva Manu to the Mahābhārata era:
• Toba Supervolcanic Eruption (~72000 BCE)
• Early Agriculture in India (~16000 BCE)
• Proto-Vedic Period (16000-14500 BCE)
• Vedic Period (14500-10500 BCE)
10 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
years (or 11985 years). If we ignore the overestimation of the reign of gods
and demigods, the chronology of Egypt might have commenced around
13000-11000 BCE. The Sumerian kings list indicates that eight or eleven
kings of the Antediluvian Era and more than 135 kings of the Postdiluvian
Era reigned before the reign of the first dynasty of Babylon (2720-2421
BCE). Assyrian sources also record the history of many Antediluvian
and Postdiluvian kings. According to ancient Greek and Persian sources,
Zoroaster I flourished around 7200 BCE and Zoroaster II lived around
1310-1230 BCE. Zoroastrian and Persian sources relate that Ahur Mazda’s
son Gayomart and his dynasty reigned for 3070 years and many kings
reigned before the time of Zoroaster I (7200 BCE). Thus, Zoroastrian
sources also give the history beyond 11000 BCE.
Interestingly, ancient Tamil Sangam sources refer to the date of
Rishi Agastya and the first Sangam around 11226 BCE, which perfectly
reconciles with the archaeo-astronomical dating of Vedic and post-Vedic
literature. The ancient history of Indonesia (Java and Bali) is clearly linked
with the chronology of ancient India, too. According to Javanese sources,
Śiva, Brahma and Vishnu made the island of Java habitable for human
beings. Dānavas were the earliest rulers of Java. Prince Aji Śaka came
from Jambūdvīpa (India) and defeated the Dānava King Dewatacengkar.
He became the first king of Java. Aji Śaka’s son Jaka Linglung was a Nāga.
Seemingly, Aji Śaka, a prince of Naga lineage, migrated to Java from east
Bengal (Bangladesh) or the Manipur-Nagaland region of India during the
post-Vedic period.
Besides the ancient literary sources of the world, the archaeological
evidence also indicates the timeline of several thousand years before
2500 BCE. The history of ancient Indian agriculture dates back to at
least 16000 BCE. The archaeological findings of early agriculture on the
banks of Lahuradewa Lake in eastern UP have been carbon dated from
13000 BCE to 7300 BCE. Evidence of the early cultivation of barley and
oats has been found from 15500 BCE in southern Sri Lanka. According
to some scientific studies, Indian subcontinent had experienced a semi-
arid climate around 22000-16500 BCE and the climate gradually became
favourable for agriculture after 16500 BCE. In all probability, ancient
The Introduction | 13
Indians had struggled for survival and mastered agriculture and cattle
herding during the period of a semi-arid climate around 22000-16500
BCE. They might have also evolved a basic seasonal calendar (from Varṣā
Ritu (summer solstice) to Varṣā Ritu) for the purpose of agriculture. Thus,
agriculture and astronomy had been evolved to an advanced stage around
16000 BCE. Ancient Indians invented a basic lunisolar calendar of 5-year
Yuga cycle around 15962 BCE, which became an epochal date for the
beginning of the early Vedic era. So, the multigenerational recordkeeping
of the elapsed 5-year Yugas arguably commenced at least four thousand
years before Holocene or Meltwater Pulse 1A (12500-11500 BCE).
The strong evidence from the sunken city of Kuśasthalī and Dvāravatī
in the Gulf of Khambat supports the presence of human settlements
from at least 29000 BCE. The ancient Indians of the Gujarat coastline
were making pottery and initially drying it in the sun but succeeded in
making fired pottery from about 18000 BCE. This sunken ancient city
was built before 11000 BCE and probably submerged into sea around
9400-9300 BCE – at the end of Meltwater Pulse 1B (10200-9400 BCE).
A piece of carbonized wooden sample has been dated around 7500 BCE.
The archaeological site of Bhirrana in Hisar, Haryana has also been dated
around 7500 BCE. A submerged structure of the ancient Poompuhar city
found close to Kaveripattinam, Tamil Nadu has been dated around 9500
BCE.
The Jomon pottery of ancient Japan is the oldest pottery in the world.
Recently found 46 fragments of Jomon pottery have been dated as early as
14500 BCE. The liner relief pottery found in Fukui cave Layer III is dated
around 13850-12250 BCE and the same found at Torihama Shell mound
has been dated around 12000-11000 BCE. Incipient Jomon pottery has
been found in more than 80 archaeological sites. The chronology of
Jomon culture of ancient Japan has been divided into six periods: Incipient
Jomon (10500-8000 BCE), Earliest Jomon (8000-5000 BCE), Early Jomon
(5000-2500 BCE), Middle Jomon (2500-1500 BCE), Late Jomon (1500-
1000 BCE) and Final Jomon (1000-300 BCE).
Human settlements have continuously existed at Tell es-Sultan, near
Jericho, north of Dead Sea since 12500 BCE. Recently, evidence of bread
14 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
being baked around 12500 BCE in a stone fireplace close to the same
archaeological site has been found. Interestingly, this site also has the
evidence of seismic shaking event around 11000 BCE. The archaeological
findings at Gobekle Tepe and Nevali Cori in South-eastern Turkey have
been dated around 12000-8000 BCE. Dr. BG Siddhartha, the Director of
the BM Birla Science Centre, Hyderabad has studied these archaeological
sites of Turkey and pointed out that the early Vedic civilization extended
up to Anatolia.6 Among the many artefacts that were unearthed in
Gobekle Tepe, there is, amazingly, the head of a Vedic priest, complete
with the Śikhā. There are also several pillars and structures embellished
with all the astronomical motifs that clearly indicate the early settlement
of Asuras who had migrated from India during the Vedic period.
Robert Bauval and Graham Hancock have dated the Great Sphinx
of Giza, Egypt around 10500 BCE based on Orion correlation theory.
Graham Hancock explains: “We have demonstrated with a substantial
body of evidence that the pattern of stars that is “frozen” on the ground
at Giza in the form of the three pyramids and the Sphinx represents the
disposition of the constellations of Orion and Leo as they looked at the
moment of sunrise on the spring equinox during the astronomical “Age of
Leo” (i.e., the epoch in which the Sun was “housed” by Leo on the spring
equinox.) Like all precessional ages this was a 2,160-year period. It is
generally calculated to have fallen between the Gregorian calendar dates
of 10,970 and 8810 BC.” Based on the studies of water erosion marks on
the Great Sphinx, Robert M Schoch opined that the Sphinx’s construction
must date to the 6th or 5th millennium BCE.
The Yellow River and Yangtze civilisations of ancient China have
flourished from 9500 BCE to 3300 BCE before the reign of Huangdi
(Yellow Emperor), the first king of China. Chinese millet agriculture also
dates to around 7000 BCE. The Tartaria tablets found in Romania date
to the period 5500-5300 BCE; the Cucuteni-Trypilla culture of Romania
and Ukraine flourished around 5200-3500 BCE; and the pottery of
the Danubian culture is also dated at 5500 BCE. A burial site of Varna
Necropolis of Bulgaria has been carbon dated around 4569-4340 BCE.
The Vinca culture of Serbia is dated at the period 5700-4500 BCE. The Las
The Introduction | 15
vvv
2
The Age of Manu Dynasty : From
Svāyambhuva Manu to Vaivasvata Manu
(14500-11200 BCE)
Śukla Pratipadā but the last intercalary month of the 20th year consisted
of only 15 days and ended on Adhika Pauṣa Pūrṇimā. The second cycle of
20 years had the Pūrṇimānta scheme and commenced on Māgha Krishna
Pratipadā but the last intercalary month of the 20th year consisted of only
15 days and ended on Adhika Pauṣa Amāvāsyā. Thus, the 40-year cycle
had 14 intercalary months and two Ardhamāsa intercalations. However,
this 40-year cycle used to accumulate an extra 7.5 days and hence a
concept of Kśayamāsa (dropping of one intercalary month) might have
been introduced over a cycle of 160 years (eight cycles of 20 years). This
160-year cycle had a total number of 58,441 days and the average length
of the Vedic sidereal year was 365.25625 days.
It is likely that the debate on the accurate intercalation method,
Kśayamāsa and Kśayatithis, led to the evolution of various schools of Vedic
astronomy. Rishi Yājñavalkya of Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa indicated a cycle of
95 years (34698.5 days).2 He described the 95-year “Agnichayana” in the 6th
Kānda of Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa. Interestingly, the 95-year cycle consisted
of five cycles of 19 years. Thus, the cycle of 95 years was as accurate as the
so-called Metonic cycle of 19 years. In fact, the cycle of 19 years had been
derived from the cycle of 95 years. Though the Yājñavalkya-cycle of 95
years was established in the post-Vedic era, it appears that the traditional
reference of the four Yugas (Kṛta, Tretā, Dvāpara and Kali) continued to
remain popular.
In the period between 7500 and 6800 BCE, Indian astronomers
might have reviewed and corrected traditional astronomical data based on
fresh astronomical observations. They had realised the importance of the
Jovian cycle of 12 years and enlarged the Yuga cycle from 5 years to 1200
years (in multiples of 12) around 6800 BCE. Sūrya Siddhānta introduced
the 60-year cycle in 6778 BCE (when Jupiter was in Aries) whereas a new
school of Paitāmaha (Brahma) Siddhānta had also started following the
Jovian cycle of 12 years and the 60-year cycle at the same time, as indicated
by Āryabhaṭa. However, the traditional Paitāmaha Siddhānta continued
to follow the Vedic calendar of 5-year Yugas and the intercalation method
of 95 years but it realised the requirement of additional intercalary month
at the end of a cycle of 2700 years to reconcile the sidereal year. Thus, the
Saptarṣi cycle of 2700 years was introduced around 6777 BCE considering
20 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Evidently, the epoch of 6777 BCE was assumed as the epoch of the
Kritayugānta of the 28th Chaturyuga of Vaivasvata Manvantara. Thus, the
beginning of the 28th Tretā Yuga can be conclusively established on 3rd Dec
6777 BCE, Māgha Śukla Pratipadā, based on the Māgha Śuklādi calendar
of Vedāṅga Jyotiṣa; and on 1st Feb 6776 BCE, Chaitra Śukla Pratipadā,
based on the Chaitra Śuklādi calendar.
So the astronomers of the post-Rāmāyaṇa era had introduced a Yuga
of 432000 years (multiplying 1200 by 360), a Chaturyuga of 4320000 years
(multiplying 12000 by 360) and a Kalpa of 4320000000 years (multiplying
4320000 by 1000) because the concepts of longer Yuga, Chaturyuga and
Kalpa cycles facilitated the accurate astronomical calculations in whole
numbers. These Yugas and Chaturyugas of millions of years gradually
became popular and people started believing these timelines of millions
of years as historical.
In reality, the Yuga of Vedic times was only five years. Rigveda says
that Rishi Dīrghatamā Māmateya became old in his 10th Yuga, which
indicates that Dīrghatamā became an old man when he attained the age
of 49 or 50 years.4
nh?kZrek ekers;ks tqtqokZUn”kes ;qxsA
vikeFkaZ ;rhuka czãk Hkofr lkjfFk%AA
The entire Vedic corpus referred to the 5-year Yuga cycle and had no
knowledge of the cycles of 1200 or 12000 years. Therefore, the 1837 elapsed
Yugas up to the end of Kṛta Yuga of 28th Chaturyuga of the 7th Manvantara
must be multiplied by five to arrive at the epoch of the first Yuga or Ādiyuga.
Thus, a total of 9185 years had elapsed up to 6777 BCE and the first cycle of
the 5-year Yuga had probably commenced in 15962 BCE.
From above, we can roughly fix the lifetime of Brahma I around 14500
BCE considering the occurrence of summer solstice at Dhaniṣṭhā Nakśatra.
At the same time, the early Vedic period had formally commenced. The
period of 16000-14500 BCE can be referred to as proto-Vedic period
because Vedic history before Brahma I had not been recorded. Brahma I
had many sons. Some of them followed the path of knowledge and came
to be known as Brāhmaṇas. Gradually, all rishis came to be collectively
known as Brāhmaṇas (sons of Brahma). Svāyambhuva Manu became
Kśatriya and founded the Manu dynasty in the Brahmāvarta kingdom.
leaders of society starting from the reign of King Manu I, Uttānapāda and
Dhruva. They came to be known as Saptarṣis. They were also called as
mānasa-putras of Brahma because they were the great pupils of Brahma
I. This may be the reason why the Saptarṣis and their descendants
were generally referred to as Brāhmanas. These Saptarṣis laid a strong
foundation for evolution of various Vedic sciences. The seven stars of Big
Dipper constellation were named after these seven rishis around 14300-
14000 BCE.
Interestingly, Rishi Viśvāmitra was the first Vedic rishi who observed the
precession of equinox. Gopatha Brāhmaṇa attributes the credit of the first
observation of Sampātas (precession) to Rishi Viśvāmitra (rkUok ,rku~
lEikrku~ fo“okfe=% çFkeei“;Rk~).22
The Date of Rishi Vasiṣṭha II (~13500 BCE)
Rishi Vasiṣṭha I was one of the earliest Saptarṣis. Vasiṣṭha II, the descendant
of Rishi Vasiṣṭha gotra was the contemporary of Rishi Viśvāmitra. The
Aśvinī hymns of the 7th Mandala compiled by Vasiṣṭha Maitrāvaruṇi, a
later descendant of Vasiṣṭha II, indicate that the autumnal equinox was in
Aśvinī Nakśatra during the lifetime of Vasiṣṭha II.23 Legends also inform
us that Vasiṣṭha was the contemporary of Viśvāmitra I. Interestingly, the
summer solstice at Śravaṇa Nakśatra establishes the date of Viśvāmitra
around 13500 BCE whereas the autumnal equinox at Aśvinī Nakśatra
establishes the date of Vasiṣṭha around 13500 BCE.
The Age of Manu Dynasty : From Svāyambhuva Manu to Vaivasvata Manu | 29
Puru I, the grandson of Soma was the founder of the Puru dynasty.
The Purus established their kingdom in the Sapta-Sindhu region and were
the patrons of Vedic Rishis. They also performed Yajñas. Rigveda refers
to Agni as Purupriyā24 and Puruhūtā.25 Seemingly, the word “Purohita”
is also derived from the word “Puru”. Purukutsa I was the celebrated
Puru king of the Rigvedic era. He married off his daughter Paurukutsī
to Kuśanābha, the grandfather of Viśvāmitra. Trasadasyu was the son
of Purukutsa. The Puru King Kuruśravaṇa, son of Trasadasyu, was the
senior contemporary of Rishi Kavaṣa Ailūṣa, who eulogized him in his
Sūkta.26 Kavaṣa Ailūṣa was a junior contemporary of rishis like Vasiṣṭha
II, Viśvāmitra I and Gritsamada I.
In CE
Nediṣṭha (son of Manu) 14000 BCE
1. Nābhāga 14000-13950 BCE
2. Bhalandana 13950-13910 BCE
3. Vatsapri 13910-13870 BCE
4. Prānśu 13870-13830 BCE
5. Khanitra 13830-13790 BCE
6. Chakśupa 13790-13750 BCE
7. Viṁśa 13750-13710 BCE
8. Viviṁśati 13710-13670 BCE
9. Khaninetra 13670-13630 BCE
10. Karandhama 13630-13590 BCE
11. Āvīkśita 13590-13550 BCE
12. Marutta Āvīkśita 13550-13500 BCE
32 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
In CE
1. Kuśa 13650-13600 BCE
2. Kuśanābha 13600-13550 BCE
3. Gādhi 13550-13500 BCE
4. Viśvāmitra I 13500-13450 BCE
The Age of Manu Dynasty : From Svāyambhuva Manu to Vaivasvata Manu | 35
In CE
1. Trivriṣṇa 13550-13530 BCE
2. Tryāruṇa 13530-13500 BCE
3. Satyavrata Triśaṅku 13500-13450 BCE
4. Hariśchandra 13450-13425 BCE
In CE
1. Chyavana I 13600-13560 BCE
2. Urva 13560-13530 BCE
3. Richīka 13530-13500 BCE
4. Jamadagni I 13500-13450 BCE
1. Gritsamada
2. Sutejas
3. Varchas
4. Vihavya
5. Vitathya
6. Satya
7. Śānta
The Age of Manu Dynasty : From Svāyambhuva Manu to Vaivasvata Manu | 37
in Rigveda, but it refers to Manu and Dhruva several times. Uttama was
the brother of Dhruva. All 14 Manus were historical persons though
Purāṇas mention seven future Manus. Seven Manus, from Svāyambhuva
to Vaivasvata, lived around 14500-11200 BCE. Seven later Manus, from
Sāvarṇi to Indra Sāvarṇi, were probably the descendants of Vaivasvata
Manu and they might have lived around 11200-11000 BCE. Most
probably, Sāvarṇi Manu had six sons, namely Dakśa, Brahma, Dharma,
Rudra, Deva and Indra.
beginning of New Year with Revatī Nakśatra during the time of Raivata
Manu.43 Rishi Vasiṣṭha introduced the beginning of New Year from
autumnal equinox, or Śarad season. The Aśvinī hymns of the 7th Mandala
indicate that autumnal equinox was at Aśvinī Nakśatra during the time
of Vasiṣṭha (13500 BCE). Autumnal equinox shifted to Revatī Nakśatra
during the time of Raivata Manu (12500 BCE).
vvv
3
The Age of the Compilation of Vedas
(11500-10500 BCE)
Devas and Asuras were the cousins and descendants of Ādityas. They
became bitter political rivals and were regularly in conflict starting from
the time of Indra I and Vishnu I – around 14000 BCE. Devāsura Saṅgrām,
or the war between Devas and Asuras, reached its zenith before the time of
Vaivasvata Manu. During the time of Chākśuṣa Manvantara (12000-11200
BCE), Asuras defeated Devas and took over the control of more than 100
cities belonging to Devas. Asura King Śambara and his descendants posed
a great challenge to King Indra around 11325 BCE. Finally, Indra defeated
Śambara and re-established the supremacy of Devas around 11300 BCE.
Kāshi Kings In CE
1. Haryāśva 11400-11350 BCE
2. Sudeva 11350-11325 BCE
3. Divodāsa 11325-11300 BCE
4. Pratardana 11300-11275 BCE
5. Vatsa or Ritadhvaja 11275- 11250 BCE
6. Alarka (Subāhu was his brother) 11250-11200 BCE
7. Sannati (son of Alarka) 11200-11175 BCE
Śakra (Indra), Śachī, Divodāsa Atithigva and Asura King Śambara, the
Son of Kulītara (11325 BCE)
Indra married Śachī, daughter of Asura King Puloman. Asura King
Śambara, the son of Kulitara, was occupying more than 100 cities. Indra
defeated and killed Śambara. Divodāsa Atithigva supported Indra in
his expedition against Śambara. Rigveda refers to Indra, Śambara and
Divodāsa Athithigva.3
King Kritavīrya (11225 BCE) and His Son Arjuna Kārtavīrya (11200 BCE)
Haihaya King Kritavīrya married Sugaṅdhā, daughter of King
The Age of the Compilation of Vedas | 43
during the reign of Ukkiraperu Valudi around 1276 BCE. Thus, we can
roughly fix the date of the beginning of the first Sangam era around 11226
BCE and the lifetime of Rishi Agastya around 11290-11200 BCE. I have
discussed the chronology of Tamil Sangam era in detail in my book titled
“ The Chronology of India : From Mahabharata to Medieval Era”.
Rishi Agastya married Lopāmudrā, the daughter of the king of
Vidarbha. Lopāmudrā was the contemporary of Kāshi King Alarka
(11250-11200 BCE), who was imparted spiritual knowledge by Datta
Ātreya and Madālasā. Lopāmudrā composed two mantras of the 179th
hymn of the first Mandala of Rigveda. The mantras of Lopāmudrā indicate
the beginning of New Year (Saṁvatsara) from the autumnal equinox
(Śarad Ritu).
When the winter solstice was shifted from Mrigaśirā to Rohiṇī (also
known as Uṣas) around 10250 BCE, Vedic astronomers metaphorically
narrated that Prajāpati lusted after his own daughter Uṣas, or Rohiṇī.
Therefore, Prajāpati was killed by Rudra. These Vedic astronomical
legends of Prajāpati’s Yajña and Prajāpati’s lust for Uṣas clearly indicate
the precession of winter solstice from Ārdrā to Mrigaśirā around 11250
BCE and from Mrigaśirā to Rohiṇī around 10250 BCE.
After the death of Satī, Śiva married Pārvatī, also known as Umā. Śiva also
married to Kāmākśī, the sister of Vishnu and Mīnākśī, the daughter of
Pāndya King Malayadhvaja. Nandi, a son of Surabhi and Rishi Kaśyapa,
became Mahādeva Śiva’s Vāhana and the Dvārapāla of Kailash.
(Baramulla) pass was holding the melted waters of glaciers. Around 11200
BCE, a massive earthquake might have opened up Baramulla pass and the
water of Satīsar had flown out of Kashmir Valley which caused a great
flood in Madra, Śālva, Sindh and Gujarat areas.
Manu Vaivasvata composed five hymns of Rigveda.7 He had nine
sons: Ikśvāku, Nābhāga, Dhriṣṭa, Śaryāti, Nāriṣyanta, Pramashu, Rishta,
Karūṣa and Priśadhra. His only daughter Ilā was married to Budha, the
son of Chandra and the grandson of Atri. His brother Yama composed the
14th hymn of the tenth Mandala of Rigveda.
The Great Flood During the Time of Vaivasvata Manu (11200 BCE)
The earliest account of the great flood is found in Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa.18
During the period 14000-11200 BCE, melting glaciers caused Kashmir
Valley to become a massive glacial lake. The period 11500-11000 BCE
also coincided with peak monsoonal rains over India. The heavy rainfall
for a long duration might have also resulted in a massive inflow of water
into the rivers Sindhu and Sarasvati. Seemingly, a massive earthquake
that occurred around 11200 BCE had opened up Baramulla Pass, which
resulted in flash flood in the regions of Pakistan, Rajasthan and Gujarat.
The kingdom of Vaivasvata Manu was located in Gujarat and south-
western Rajasthan. It appears that two major rivers of the Sapta-Sindhu
region, Marudvridha and Ārjikīyā, Paruṣṇi (a tributary of Śutudrī) and
Asiknī (a tributary of Marudvridha) originated from the glacial lake of
Kashmir Valley. These rivers and tributaries gradually vanished after
the great flood. Possibly, a channel of Yamuna which was a tributary of
Sarasvati, also changed the course during this period. The rapid rise of sea
level around 12500-11800 BCE also submerged the coastal areas (the city
of Kuśasthalī) of Gujarat.
It seems Vaivasvata Manu had supported his neighbour King Matsya,
who eventually established the Mastya Kingdom or Matsya janapada.
Probably, King Matsya also received support from Vishnu III. King Matsya
helped Vaivasvata Manu during the great flood. Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa
poetically narrated this story. The same has been mythologised by Puranic
authors. It may also be noted that Satyavatī, wife of King Śāntanu of the
The Age of the Compilation of Vedas | 49
Nahuṣas. One Nahuṣa belonged to the lunar dynasty and was the father of
Yayāti.25 Another Nahuṣa belonged to the lineage of Manu.26
King Daśaratha
There is a reference of “Daśaratha” in Rigveda but Sāyaṇa clearly
explains that Daśaratha means “Ten Rathas” in this hymn.32 Traditional
commentary of Rigveda clearly indicates that Daśaratha of Rigveda
cannot be identified with King Daśaratha, father of Rāma. There was also
an ancient Yadu king named Daśaratha, son of Navaratha, who probably
lived around 11900 BCE. Sahasrabāhu (Kārtavīryārjuna) was also known
as Daśaratha in the Khotanese traditional sources.
of the Rishi, Devatā and Cḥandas of every Sūkta. Devatā is the deity, or
subject, and Cḥandas is the meter. So, Rishis were the authors of Sūktas.
Yaska’s Nirukta indicates the same (;L; okD;a l _f’k% ;k rsuksP;rs lk
nsork). The oldest hymns of Rigveda were written by the families of Atri,
Aṅgiras, Vasiṣṭha, Viśvāmitra, Gritsamada, Vāmadeva Gautama, Kaṇva,
Agastya, Bharata and Bhrigu.
According to Rigvedic Anukramaṇīs, more than 160 Rishis composed
their hymns. It may not be possible to arrive at the accurate chronology
of all Rigvedic Rishis but we can roughly fix their chronological order.
Aṅgiras, Marīchi and his son Kaśyapa, Bhrigu, Kratu, Pulaha and Pulastya
were the earliest Rigvedic Rishis. The descendants of Pulaha, Pulastya and
Kratu could not follow the discipline of Vedic Rishis, which is why there
are no hymns of Pulaha, Pulastya and Kratu in Rigveda. Some hymns of
Kratu II have been included in the appendix (Bālakhilya Sūktas) but he
was a later descendant of Kratu and a contemporary of Agastya. Thus,
Aṅgiras, Kaśyapa and Bhrigu were the early composers of Rigvedic hymns.
Purāṇas clearly indicate that the chronological history of Rigvedic
Rishis begins from the time of Svāyambhuva Manu but, seemingly, the later
updaters of Purāṇas have inadvertently mixed up the historical account
of early Rigvedic Rishis of pre-Vaivasvata Manvantara and the Rigvedic
Rishis of Vaivasvata Manvantara. Let us discuss the chronological and
genealogical account of Rigvedic Rishis.
Brahma
Brahma I (14500 BCE) was the earliest Rishi who laid the foundation for
research in Vedic sciences. His son, Svāyambhuva Manu, founded the
Manu dynasty. Most probably, Saptarṣis were either the disciples or the
followers of Brahma. Therefore, Saptarṣis were called Brāhmaṇas, i.e.,
Mānasaputras of Brahma. There were many Brahmas. One Brahma was
the father of Sanaka, Sanatkumāra, Sanātana and Sanandana. Another
Brahma (11260-11180 BCE) was a junior contemporary of Śiva (11280-
11200 BCE) and Vishnu II (11250-11180 BCE). Parameṣṭhi and Prajāpati
were the disciples of Brahma. Cḥāndogya Upaniṣad informs us that
Prajāpati was the teacher of Indra and Virochana, the son of Prahlāda and
the grandson of Hiraṇyakaśipu.
56 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Bhrigu
Bhrigu was the Mānasaputra of Brahma I, the first Rishi. According
to Matsya Purāṇa, Bhuvana, Bhauvana, Sujanya, Sujana, Kratu, Vasu,
Mūrdha, Tyajya, Vasuda, Prabhava, Avyaya and Dakśa were the twelve
sons of Bhrigu.41 Seemingly, they were the descendants of Bhrigu. Matsya
Purāṇa says that Bhrigu married Divya, daughter of Puloma, but another
account informs us that Bhrigu also married Khyāti, daughter of Prajāpati
Dakśa. Indra married Śachī, the daughter of Asura King Pulomā, in the
beginning of Vaivasvata Manvantara. Therefore, Bhrigu, the husband of
Divyā and Khyāti, was a later descendant of Bhrigu. He had two sons,
Dhātā and Vidhātā, and a daughter, Śri (Lakśmī), from Khyāti. Vishnu
married Śri (or Lakśmī).
Now the question is if Bhrigu was the son-in-law of Dakśa, how can
Dakśa also be the son of Bhrigu? Evidently, Bhrigu I of Svāyambhuva
Manvantara was the progenitor of Dakśas. Bhrigus existed before
Viśvāmitra (13500 BCE). Chyavana I was the descendant of Bhrigu clan
and the contemporary of Aśvinī Kumāras. He married Sukanyā, daughter
of King Śaryāti I. Śaryāti I was the son of King Vītahavya, whereas Śaryāti
II was the son of Manu Vaivasvata. Chyavana’s son was Urva. Urva’s
son, Richīka, married Satyavatī, daughter of King Gādhi and sister of
Viśvāmitra. Jamadagni I was the son of Richīka. The chronology of the
early Bhrigus:
In CE
Bhrigu and his descendants 14500-13600 BCE
1. Chyavana I 13600-13560 BCE
2. Urva 13560-13530 BCE
3. Richīka 13530-13500 BCE
4. Jamadagni I 13500-13450 BCE
Paraśurāma
(11177 BCE)
Aṅgiras
Aṅgiras was also the Mānasaputra of Brahma I, the first Rishi, and the
contemporary of Svāyambhuva Manu. Brihaspati I of Āṅgirasa gotra
lived around 14000 BCE. Purāṇas give the detailed genealogy of Āṅgirasa
family from Atharva Āṅgirasa II (13550 BCE). Brahmānda Purāṇa gives
the genealogical account of Rishi Atharva Āṅgirasa.48 Atharva had three
wives: Surūpā (daughter of Rishi Marīchi), Svarāt (daughter of Rishi
Kardama) and Pathyā (a descendant of Manu dynasty). Brihaspati II
was born to Surupā, and Gautama, Ajasya, Vāmadeva I, Utathya and
Uśija were born to Svarāt. Dhriṣṇi, Samvarta and Mānasa were born to
Pathyā. Dīrghatamas I was the son of Utathya and Mamatā. Kitava was
the son of Ayāsya I. Brihaduktha was the son of Vāmadeva I. Dhriṣṇi’s
son was Sudhanvā. Riṣabha was the son of Sudhanvā. The Ribhus, known
as Rathakāras (chariot makers), were the descendants of Sudhanvā.
Bhāradwāja I was the son of Brihaspati II.
60 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Gabhastinī married Dadhīchi II and Rishi Pippalāda was their son. There
were two Dadhīchis. Dadhīchi I of the Bhrigu gotra (13650 BCE) lived in
Gujarat (on the banks of Sābarmati River). Rigveda refers to Dadhīchi I
in several hymns.51 Dadhīchi II of the Āṅgirasa gotra (10870 BCE) lived
in Naimiṣāraṇya, on the banks of Gomati River. Matsya Purāṇa tells us
that a total of thirty-three Āṅgirasa Rishis – Āṅgirasa, Trita, Bharadwāja,
Lakśmaṇa, Kritavacha, Garga, Smriti, Sankriti, Guruvīta, Māndhātā,
Ambarīṣa, Yuvanāśva, Purukutsa, Svaśrava, Sadasyavan, Ajamīḍha,
Asvahārya, Utkala, Kavi, Priṣadaśva, Virūpa, Kāvya, Mudgala, Uchathya,
Śaradvān, Vājiśravā, Apasauṣa, Suchitti, Vāmadeva, Rishija, Brihaccḥukla,
Dīrghatamas and Kakśīvān – were the authors of Veda Mantras.
Kaṇva (Aṅgirasa)
There were three different lineages of Kaṇvas. The earliest lineage of
Kaṇvas originated from Apratiratha, the son of Rantināva of the Puru
dynasty. King Kaṇva was the son of Puru king Apratiratha. Medhātithi
I was the son of Kaṇva. Seemingly, Kaṇva, the son of Medhātithi, was
the contemporary of King Duṣyanta. The second lineage of Kaṇvas
originated from King Ajamīḍha, the great grandson of King Bharata
(13450 BCE). Ajamīḍha’s son was Kaṇva II. Medhātithi II was the son of
Kaṇva II. Kānvāyanas were the descendants of Medhātithi II. Kānvāyanas
were Kśatriyas and occupied the kingdom of Gādhipura or Kānyakubja.
Jahnu, a son of Ajamīḍha II of the Kuru dynasty, became the king of
the Kānyakubja kingdom. Most probably, ancient Kāṇvāyanas were the
progenitors of the Kaṇva dynasty of Magadha.
The third lineage of Kaṇvas originated from Ghora Āṅgirasa, who
was the Guru of Vāsudeva Devakīputra Krishna. Pragātha Ghaura Kaṇva
was the son of Ghora Āṅgirasa (11150 BCE).
Sobhari Kaṇva was a junior contemporary of King Māndhātā.
Priyamedha was the descendant of Ajamīḍha II.52 Priṣadhra Kaṇva,
Praskaṇva, Devātithi Kaṇva, Vatsa Kaṇva, Sadhvamsa Kaṇva, and
Medhātithi II Kaṇva, were the later Kaṇvas. Parvata Kaṇva and Nārada
Kaṇva (11200 BCE) were the contemporaries of King Yudhāśrauṣṭi, the
son of Ugrasena, Kuru King Somaka, the son of Sahadeva, Sahadeva,
62 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
the son of Sriñjaya, Babhru, the son of Devavridha, Bhima, the son of
Vidarbha, and Nagnajit, the son of Gāndhāra.
Bharadwāja (Āṅgirasa)
Bharadwāja was the son of Brihaspati II (13520 BCE) and the grandson of
Atharva Āṅgirasa (13550 BCE). Pāyu Bharadwāja (11350 BCE) was the
contemporary of King Prastoka Sārñjaya, King Abhyāvartin Chāyamāna
and King Divodāsa. Bharadwāja II was the son of Śaṁyu Brihaspati.
King Bharata II adopted Bharadwāja II. Later, Bharadwāja II became the
Purohita of King Divodāsa of Kāshi. His son was Vidatha I. Vidatha I had
five sons, Suhotra, Śunahotra, Nara, Garga and Rijiśvān.
Atri
Atri I was also the Mānasaputra of Brahma I and a contemporary of
Svāyambhuva Manu. Kūrma Purāṇa mentions that Agni was the son of
Atri I. Atri II lived around 14000 BCE and married Anasūyā. Their son was
Soma I. He abducted Tārā, wife of Brihaspati I. Soma I had a son, Budha I.
Budha’s son Puru I (13950 BCE) founded the early Paurava dynasty. Atri III
or Ātreya, also known as Prabhākara, married ten daughters of Raudrāśva
(Bhadrāśva or Kriṣāśva). Raudrāśva (13625-13600 BCE) married Apsarā
Ghritāchī. Prabhākara had ten sons called the Svastyātreyas. Durvāsa
was the son of Svastyātreya. Rishi Durvāsa, a senior contemporary of
King Duṣyanta, visited the Ashrama of Kaṇva. Ātreya Rishis were the
contemporaries of Tryāruṇa, Trasadasyu and Aśvamedha.
The Age of the Compilation of Vedas | 63
Nārada
There were many Nāradas. Nārada I was the son of Brahma II. Nārada II
was the son of Dakśa Prajāpati. Nārada III was the son of Kaśyapa, while
Nārada IV and Parvata belonged to the Kaṇva family.
Vasiṣṭha
Vasiṣṭha I was also the Mānasaputra of Brahma I and contemporary of
Svāyambhuva Manu. The descendants of Vasiṣṭha were the traditional
priests of the kings of Ayodhyā. Vasiṣṭha II (also known as Devarāja)
was the contemporary of Ayodhyā King Tryāruna and his son Satyavrata
Triśaṅku. He married Arundhatī, daughter of Kardama Rishi. During the
reign of King Triśaṅku, Vasiṣṭha and Viśvāmitra became bitter rivals. It
appears that Vasiṣṭha was following Brahma, or Paitāmaha Siddhanta,
considering Dhaniṣṭhā as the first Nakśatra. Viśvāmitra proved it wrong
and propounded that Śravaṇa must be the first Nakśatra. The summer
solstice was at Śravaṇa around 13500 BCE. King Triśaṅku appointed
Viśvāmitra as his priest in place of Vasiṣṭha. Vasiṣṭha was deeply hurt and
determined to do more research on the subject. Finally, Vasiṣṭha discovered
the importance of the beginning of New Year from the equinox instead of
the solstice. He founded his Siddhānta of beginning of New Year from
Śarad Ritu or autumnal equinox. During his times, the autumnal equinox
was at Aśvinī Nakśatra. Vasiṣṭha resumed his priesthood during the reign
of King Hariśchandra, the son of Triśaṅku.
The descendants of Vasiṣṭha were also generally known as Vasiṣṭhas.
Therefore, we have no information about the genealogy of Vasiṣṭhas
before Vaivasvata Manvantara. Āpava Vasiṣṭha was the contemporary
of Haihaya King Arjuna Kārtavīrya. Arjuna Kārtavīrya killed the sons
of Āpava Vasiṣṭha and also burnt his Ashrama. Most probably, Āpava
Vasiṣṭha adopted a son of Varuṇa who came to be known as Vasiṣṭha
Vāruṇi. Ayodhyā King Kalmāṣapāda, son of Sudāsa Paijavana, was the
contemporary of Vasiṣṭha Vāruṇi. Śakti was the son of Vasiṣṭha Vāruṇi.
Saudāsa Kalmāṣapāda killed 100 sons of Vasiṣṭha, including Śakti. Parāśara
I was the son of Śakti and Adriśyantī. Later, Kalmāṣapāda reconciled his
differences with Vasiṣṭha Vāruṇi and requested Vasiṣṭha for a son from
his queen. Thus, Vasiṣṭha begot a son named Aśmaka from Kalmāṣapāda’s
The Age of the Compilation of Vedas | 65
Viśvāmitra
Viśvāmitra I (also known as Viśvaratha), son of Gādhi, was the king
of Gādhipura or Kānyakubja. He renounced the throne and became a
Brāhmaṇa. Indra I and his descendants had a special status in society.
Indra I did penance and performed 100 Yajñas. Therefore, Indra was
called “Śatakratu”. Seemingly, Viśvāmitra’s penance threatened the status
of Indra. Indra asked Menakā to seduce Viśvāmitra I. Śakuntalā was born
to Viśvāmitra and Menakā.
Viśvāmitra II was the contemporary of Divodāsa, the father of
Pratardana. He had three sons: Gālava, Raibhya and Iṣiratha. He also had
a son named Aṣtaka, from the daughter of Yayāti of the Manu dynasty.
Raibhya had two sons, Arvāvasu and Parāvasu, who were contemporaries
of Paraśurāma, Bharadwāja and his son Yavakri, and a king Brihadyumna
and Vasu king of Chedi. Viśvāmitra III was a contemporary of King
Hariśchandra II of Ayodhyā. He had many sons, mainly Madhuccḥandas,
Kata, Riṣabha and Reṇu etc.
66 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Agastya
Agastya I (11290-11200 BCE) was one of the greatest Rishis of the later
Rigvedic era. He was the contemporary of Dakśa Prajāpati and Śiva. He
married Lopāmudrā, daughter of the King of Vidarbha. Lopāmudrā was
the contemporary of King Alarka, grandson of the Kāshi King Pratardana.
Driḍhāsya, Driḍhachyuta and Idamvaha were the sons of Agastya.
According to Matsya Purāṇa, Agastya, Karambha, Kauśalyas, Śakatas,
Gāndhārakāyanas, Paulastyas, Paulahas and the descendants of Kratu
belonged to the clan of Agastya.56 Interestingly, Gāndhārakāyanas or
Gāndhāras (Śaka, Pahlava and Kāmboja and others), also followed Agastya.
Mastya Purāṇa also mentions that Mahendra, Mayobhuva, Paurṇamāsa
and Pāraṇa were the descendants of Agastya. Mahendragiri in Tirunelveli
district of Tamil Nadu is named after Mahendra, a descendant of Agastya.
Pulastya
Pulastya was also a contemporary of Svāyambhuva Manu but some of
his descendants came to be known as Rākśasas. Pulastya II (11280 BCE)
was a junior contemporary of Dakśa Prajāpati and the disciple of Agastya.
He married Ilavilā, daughter of King Triṇabindu. His son was Viśravas
Ailavila. Viśravas married Devavarṇinī, daughter of Brihaspati III. They
had a son, Vaiśravaṇa, also known as Kubera, who became the king or the
progenitor of Yakśas. Viśravas had three more wives. Rāvaṇa I was the
son of Viśravas and a junior contemporary of Kārtavīrya Arjuna. Matsya
Purāṇa says that Pulastya adopted a son of Agastya.57
The Age of the Compilation of Vedas | 67
Pulaha
Pulaha I was also a contemporary of Svāyambhuva Manu. Mārkandeya
Purāṇa mentions that Rishi Kardama, Arvavira and Sahiṣṇu were the
descendants of Pulaha I.58 Pulaha II was the contemporary of Agastya.
Matsya Purāṇa tells us Pulaha II adopted Driḍhāsya, a son of Agastya.59
Kratu
Kratu I was also a contemporary of Svāyambhuva Manu. Kratu II was a
contemporary of Agastya. Matsya Purāṇa says that he adopted Agastya’s
son Idhamvaha.60 Mārkandeya Purāṇa mentions that Sannati married to
Kratu II.61 She gave birth to Bālakhilyas.
Sūktas In CE
1. Madhuccḥandas Vaiśvāmitra [He was the middle 1-10 11175 BCE
son of Viśvāmitra III (11200 BCE). He refers to
Śakra Indra (10.5-6) who lived around 11300 BCE.]
2. Jetā Mādhuccḥandasaḥ [Son of Madhuccḥandas 11 11150 BCE
Vaiśvāmitra]
3. Medhātithi Kāṇva [He refers to Kakśīvant Auśija 12-23 11000 BCE
(9.1). Kakśīvant was the son of Dīrghatamas
Auchathya (11125 BCE). Most probably, he was
the later descendant of Kaṇvas.]
4. Śunaḥśepa Ajīgarti [He was the contemporary of 24-30 11180 BCE
Ikśvāku King Hariśchandra (11250 BCE) and his
son Rohita (11200 BCE).]
5. Hiraṅyastūpa Āṅgirasa [He refers to Vivasvān 31-35 11100 BCE
(31.3), Purūravā (31.4), Nahuṣa (31.11), Yayāti
(31.17).]
68 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Sūktas In CE
1. Gritsamada Bhārgava Śaunaka [He refers 1-3, 11125 BCE
to Asura King Śambara (12.11), Kutsa, Ayu, 8-26,
Atithigva Divodāsa (14.7), Divodāsa (19.6), 30-43
Gritsamadas (19.8). Seemingly, he was the
son of King Śunahotra. He was a Kśatriya
Brāhmaṇa and joined Śaunaka Bhārgavas.]
The genealogy of King Śunahotra
1. Purūravā (11240 BCE)
2. Ayu (11220 BCE)
3. Nahuṣa (11200 BCE)
4. Kśatravriddha (11180 BCE)
5. Śunahotra (11150 BCE)
2. Somahūti Bhārgava [He refers to Gritsamadas 4-7 11100 BCE
(4.9) and Bharatas (7.1 & 5).]
3. Kūrma Gārtsamada [He was the son of 27-29 11100 BCE
Gritasamada Bhārgava.]
Sūktas In CE
1. Viśvāmitra Gāthina [He refers to 1-12, 11200 BCE
Viśvāmitras (1.21), Kuśikas (26.1), King 24-30,
Sudāsa Paijavana (53.11) and Saudhanvana 32-53,
Ribhus (60.4). He was a contemporary of 57-62
King Hariśchandra (11250 BCE).]
2. Riṣabha Vaiśvāmitra [He was the son of 13-14 11175 BCE
Viśvāmitra. Kauśika Viśvāmitras belonged
to the Bharata dynasty.]
3. Utkila Kātya [He was the son of Kata, son 15-16 11150 BCE
of Viśvāmitra Gāthina.]
4. Kata Vaiśvāmitra [He was the son of 17-18 11175 BCE
Viśvāmitra.]
The Age of the Compilation of Vedas | 71
5. Gāthi Kauśika [He was the son of Kuśika 19-22 11225 BCE
and the father of Viśvāmitra Gāthina.
Most probably, Kuśika was born in the
Bharata dynasty.]
The genealogy:
1. Kuśika
2. Gāthi
3. Viśvāmitra
4. Madhuccḥandas, Riṣabha & Kata
5. Utkila
6. Devaśravā & Devavāta [Both were the 23 11350 BCE
kings of Bharata dynasty. Devavāta was
the father of Sriñjaya and the grandfather
of Divodāsa.]
7. Kuśika Aiṣirathi [He was the great 31 11325 BCE
grandfather of Viśvāmitra Gāthina (11200
BCE).]
8. Prajāpati Vaiśvāmitra or Prajāpati 55-56 11175 BCE
Vāchya [Most probably, he was the son of
Viśvāmitra (11200 BCE).]
Sūktas In CE
1. Vāmadeva Gautama [He refers to King 1-41, 11150 BCE
Sriñjaya, the son of Devavāta and King 45-58
Somaka, the son of Sahadeva (11200 BCE)
(15.4 & 9), Dīrghatamas Māmateya (4.130),
Auśija (21.6) and Rijiśva Vaidathina
(16.13). He indicates the beginning of New
Year from autumnal equinox (18.4).]
72 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Sūktas In CE
1. King Budha Ātreya and Rishi Gaviṣṭhara 1 11270 BCE
Ātreya [Budha and Gaviṣṭhara were the
descendants of Rishi Atri. Budha was the
son of Chandra or Soma III.]
2. Kumāra Ātreya [He refers to Rishi 2 11100 BCE
Śunaḥśepa (11180 BCE) (2.7).]
3. Vasuśruta Ātreya [He refers to Ilā, wife of 3-6 11100 BCE
Budha.]
4. Isha Ātreya 7-8 11100 BCE
5. Gaya Ātreya 9-10 11100 BCE
6. Sutambhara Ātreya [He refers to Vivasvān 11-14 11100 BCE
(11.3), Nahuṣa (12.6).]
7. Dharuna Ātreya 15 11100 BCE
8. Puru Ātreya [He was the son of Budha 16-17 11240 BCE
and Ilā.]
9. Dvita Muktavāha Ātreya [He was a 18 11000 BCE
contemporary of Trita.]
10. Vavri Ātreya 19 11100 BCE
11. Prayasvantaḥ Ātreya 20 11100 BCE
12. Śaśa Ātreya 21 11100 BCE
13. Viśvasāma Ātreya 22 11100 BCE
14. Dyumna Viśvacharṣaṇi Ātreya 23 11100 BCE
The Age of the Compilation of Vedas | 73
32. Svasti Ātreya [He was the father of 50-51 11290 BCE
Datta Ātreya, a contemporary of Arjuna
Kārtavīrya.]
33. Śyāvāśva Ātreya [Archanānas and his son 52-61, 11050 BCE
Śyāvāśva were the contemporaries of King 81-82
Rathavīti Dārbhya (61.17-19). Śyāvāśva
loved the daughter of King Rathavīti but
the Queen of Rathavīti rejected Śyāvāśva
because he was not a Rishi (author of
hymns). King Taranta, Śaśiyasī, the Queen
of Taranta and King Purumīḍha were also
the contemporaries of Śyāvāśva. Taranta
and Purumīḍha were the sons of Vidadaśva.
The kingdom of Rathavīti was located on
the banks of Gomati River. Śyāvāśva now
determined to write hymns and authored
hymns 52-61 of the 5th Mandala.
King Rathavīti came along with his
daughter to the hermitage of Archanānas
and appologised for rejecting the offer
of marriage alliance earlier. Thus, Rishi
Śyāvāśva married the daughter of King
Rathavīti.]
34. Śrutavit Ātreya 62 11000 BCE
35. Archanānas Ātreya [He was the father of 63-64 11050 BCE
Śyāvāśva.]
36. Rātahavya Ātreya 65-66 10950 BCE
37. Yajata Ātreya 67-68 10950 BCE
38. Uruchakri Ātreya 69-70 10950 BCE
39. Bāhuvrikta Ātreya 71-72 10950 BCE
40. Paura Ātreya [He refers to Nahuṣa (73.3).] 73-74 10900 BCE
41. Saptavadhri Ātreya 78 10900 BCE
42. Satyaśravāḥ Ātreya 79-80 10900 BCE
43. Evayāmarut Ātreya 87 10900 BCE
The Age of the Compilation of Vedas | 75
Sūktas In CE
1. Bharadwāja Bārhaspatya [He refers to 1-30, 10700 BCE
Bharadwājas (10.7), Bharata King Divodāsa 37-43,
(11300 BCE) (16.19 & 26.5), Śambara (18.8 53-74
& 26.5), King Abhyāvarti Chāyamāna (27.8).
He was the son of Brihaspati. He also
indicates the beginning of New Year from
autumnal equinox (38.4). He also refers to
Videha King Nami Sāpya (20.6)]
2. Suhotra Bhāradwāja [He refers to Divodāsa 31-32 10900 BCE
(31.4).]
3. Śunahotra Bhāradwāja [Sons of King 33-34 10850 BCE
Suhotra, the grandson of King Bharata.]
4. Nara Bhāradwāja 35-36 10800 BCE
5. Śaṁyu Bārhaspatya [He refers to Yadu, 44-46, 11100 BCE
Turvaśa (45.1).] 48
6. Garga Bhāradwāja [He refers to Divodāsa 47 11200 BCE
Atithigva, Śambara (47.22).]
7. Rijiśvā Bhāradwāja [He was the son of 49-52 11200 BCE
Vidatha.]
8. Pāyu Bhāradwāja [He was the contemporary 75 11325 BCE
of King Abhyāvartin Chāyamāna and King
Divodāsa (11325 BCE).]
Sūktas In CE
1. Vasiṣṭha Maitrāvaruṇi [He refers to King 1-100, 103- 11150 BCE
Sudāsa Paijavana and Dāśarājña War (7.18, 104
7.33 & 7.83). He refers to Rishi Agastya. He
claims himself to be the son of Urvaśī and
blessed by Mitra and Varuṇa (RV 7.33 10-11).]
Purāṇas give the list of seven Vasiṣṭhas:
76 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Sūktas In CE
1. Pragātha Ghaura Kāṇva [He refers to 1, 48, 11125 BCE
Śachīpati Indra (62.8). He was probably the 62
son of Ghora Āṅgirasa.]
2. Medhātithi and Medhyātithi Kāṇva 1 (3-29), 11000 BCE
[Medhātithi III and Medhyātithi were 3, 33
probably the sons of Pragātha Ghaura Kaṇva.]
3. Plāyogi Āsaṅga 1 (30-33) 11000 BCE
4. Śaśvatī Āṅgirasī (Rishikā) 1 (34) 11000 BCE
5. Medhātithi Kāṇva Āṅgirasa 2,32 11000 BCE
6. Prayamedha Kaṇva Medhātithi [Priyamedha 2 (41-42) 10950 BCE
was the son of Medhātithi III Kaṇva
Āṅgirasa.]
The Age of the Compilation of Vedas | 77
18. Sobhari Kāṇva [He refers to King Trasadasyu 19-22, 11125 BCE
Paurukutsya, grandson of Māndhātā (19.36- 103
37). He married to the daughters of King
Māndhātā.]
19. Viśvamanā Vaiyaśva 23-26 11000 BCE
20. Manu Vaivasvata [He was the son of 27-31 11275 BCE
Vivasvān.]
21. Nīpātithi Kāṇva 34 11100 BCE
22. Śyāvāśva Ātreya [He also wrote Sūktas of the 35-38 11000 BCE
5th Mandala.]
23. Nābhāka Kāṇva 39-42 11100 BCE
24. Virūpa Āṅgirasa 43-44 11000 BCE
25. Triśoka Kāṇva 45 11000 BCE
26. Vaśa Aśvya 46 11000 BCE
27. Trita Āptya [He also wrote Sūktas of the 1st 47 11150 BCE
Mandala.]
28. Bālakhilya Sūktas [Hymns 49-59 are
attributed to Bālakhilyas. Mārkandeya
Purāṇa relates that Bālakhilyas were the sons
of Rishi Kratu and Sannati.]
29. Praskaṇva Kāṇva 49 11200-
30. Puṣṭigu Kāṇva 50 10900 BCE
31. Śruṣṭigu Kāṇva 51
32. Āyu Kāṇva 52
33. Medhya Kāṇva 53
34. Mātariśvā Kāṇva 54
35. Kriśa Kāṇva 55
36. Priṣadhra Kāṇva 56
37. Medhya Kāṇva 57-58
38. Suparṇa Kāṇva 59
39. Bharga Prāgātha [He was a descendant of 60-61 10900 BCE
Pragātha.]
40. Kali Prāgātha [He was a descendant of 66 10900 BCE
Pragātha.]
The Age of the Compilation of Vedas | 79
57. Apālā Ātreyi (Rishikā) [She was the daughter 91 11000 BCE
of an Atri Rishi. She refers to Rishikā Romaśā
(91.6) (11050 BCE).]
58. Śrutakakśa Āṅgirasa 92 10900 BCE
59. Sukakśa Āṅgirasa 93 10900 BCE
60. Vindu or Pūtakakśa Āṅgirasa 94 10900 BCE
61. Tiraśchī Āṅgirasa 95-96 11000 BCE
62. Rebha Kāśyapa [He was the son of Kāśyapa.] 97 11260 BCE
63. Nrimedha Āṅgirasa 98-99 11100 BCE
64. Nema Bhārgava 100 11100 BCE
65. Jamadagni Bhārgava [He was the father of 101 11200 BCE
Paraśurāma and the contemporary of Arjuna
Kārtavīrya (11200 BCE).]
66. Bhārgava 102 11225 BCE
Sūktas In CE
1. Madhuccḥandas Vaiśvāmitra [He was 1 11180 BCE
the middle son of Viśvāmitra and the
contemporary of Śunaḥśepa.]
2. Medhātithi Kāṇva 2 11000 BCE
3. Śunaḥśepa Ajīgarti [A junior contemporary 3 11180 BCE
of King Hariśchandra.]
4. Hiraṇyastūpa Āṅgirasa 4, 69 11250 BCE
5. Asita Kāśyapa or Devala [Asita and Devala 5-24 11200 BCE
were the grandsons of Kāśyapa Rishi. They
refer to Rebha Kaśyapa (7.6).]
6. Driḍhachyuta Agastya [He was the son of 25 11225 BCE
Agastya.]
7. Idhmavāha Dārḍḥachyuta [He was the 26 11200 BCE
son of Driḍhachyuta and the grandson of
Agastya.]
The Age of the Compilation of Vedas | 81
Sūktas In CE
1. Trita Āptya 1-7 11150 BCE
2. Tvāṣṭra Triśira [A contemporary of King 8 11090 BCE
Māndhātā.]
3. Sindhudvīpa Āmbarīṣa [Sindhudvīpa was 9 (1-4,6) 11200 BCE
the son of King Ambarīṣa.]
4. Yama Vaivasvata and Yami Vaivasvatī [A 10 11250 BCE
dialogue between Yama and his sister Yami.
Yama was the son of King Vivasvān.
84 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
into twenty Kāndas but it consists of 759 hymns and 5987 mantras.
Śaunaka Saṁhitā has more than 900 mantras of Rigveda. Thus, Paippalāda
Saṁhitā has 2900 more mantras than Śaunaka Saṁhitā. Unfortunately,
no Anukramaṇī of Paippalāda Samhitā is available. The Anukramaṇī of
Śaunaka Saṁhitā gives the following names of Rishis who authored the
hymns of Atharvaveda. The chronology of the Rishis of Atharvaveda
(Śaunaka Saṁhitā) can be arrived as attempted below.
Rishis of Atharvaveda in CE
1. Agastya [He was also the author of many Rigvedic hymns.] 11290-
11200 BCE
2. Aṅgirasa 11300 BCE
3. Apratiratha [Sāyaṇa refers to Apratiratha as the son of 11300 BCE
Indra (Trayodaśārcham chaturtham sūktam Indraputrasya
Apratirathanāmnā Ārsham, RV 10.103).]
4. Aṣṭaka [He was the son of Viśvāmitra.] 11300 BCE
5. Atharva Āṅgirasa [He was the father of Dadhīchi II. He 10900 BCE
was also an Ayurvedic physician.]
6. Atharva [Most probably, Rishi Pippalāda was also known 10850 BCE
as Atharva because he was the grandson of Atharva
Āṅgirasa. Patanjali mentions that the first mantra of the 6th
Sūkta (1st Kanda) of Atharvaveda was written by Pippalāda
but the Anukramaṇī names the Rishi as Atharva.]
7. Atharvāchārya [See No. 6.] 10850 BCE
8. Atri 11300 BCE
9. Ayāsya Āṅgirasa [He was a junior contemporary of King 11250 BCE
Hariśchandra. He was the Udgātā in the Yajña related to
Śunaḥśepa.]
10. Āyu [He was the son of Purūravā and Urvaśī.] 11220 BCE
11. Babhru or Babhrupiṅgala [He was the son of Devavridha.] 11200 BCE
12. Bādarāyaṇi [Bādarāyaṇi was the son of Bādarāyaṇa Vyāsa 10850 BCE
who was the founder of Vedānta philosophy.]
13. Bhaga 11000 BCE
14. Bhāgali 11000 BCE
15. Bharadwāja 11100 BCE
96 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
16. Bharga [Bharga was the son of Pragātha Kaṇva as stated by 11000 BCE
Sāyaṇa (Pragāthaputrasya Bhargasya… RV 8.60).]
17. Bhārgava [See No. 18.] 11000 BCE
18. Bhārgava Vaidarbhi [Generally, Bhārgavas were the 11000 BCE
descendants of Maharshi Bhrigu. But there was a Bhrigu in
Āṅgirasa gotra. Vaidarbhi indicates that he belonged to the
Vidarbha kingdom.]
19. Bhrigu [See No. 20.] 11100 BCE
20. Bhrigu Ātharvaṇa [He was a descendant of Atharva 11100 BCE
Āṅgirasa.]
21. Bhuvana Sādhana [Rishi Sādhana was the son of Bhuvana. 11200 BCE
Bhuvana was also the father of Viśvakarmā.]
22. Brahma [Jaiminīya Brāhmaṇa says that Indra was himself 11250 BCE
a Brahma (Indra eva Brahmā āsīt. 3.374). He was the
teacher of Prajāpati Parameṣṭhin.]
23. Brahmāskanda 10900 BCE
24. Brigvaṅgirasa [See No. 20. He refers to Bāhlīkas, 10700 BCE
Mahāvriṣas, Mūjavats, Gandhāris, Aṅgas and Magadhas.]
25. Brihaddiva and Atharva [They were the descendants of 10700 BCE
Atharva Āṅgirasa.]
26. Brihaspati [Father of Bharadwāja and grandfather of 10900 BCE
Vidatha.]
27. Brihat Śukra 10700 BCE
28. Budha [He was the son of Soma.] 11270 BCE
29. Chātana 10900 BCE
30. Devajāmi (Rishikā) [Devajāmis were the mothers of 11000 BCE
Indras (Devajāmaya Indramātaraḥ – as stated by Sāyaṇa
RV 10.153).]
31. Devātithi 10800 BCE
32. Draviṇodā 10900 BCE
33. Druhvana 11000 BCE
34. Dyutāna [He was the descendant of Marutas (Sāyaṇa – 11150 BCE
Dyutānākhyo Marutam putra Rishiḥ… RV 8.96). He was
probably a contemporary of Tiraśchir Āṅgirasa.]
The Age of the Compilation of Vedas | 97
35. Gārgya [The sūkta of Gārgya gives the list of Nakśatras 11200 BCE
starting from Krittikā. Winter solstice used to occur at &
Krittikā Nakśatra around 9250-8300 BCE. Seemingly, this 9000 BCE
sūkta was finally edited around 9000 BCE.]
36. Garutmān 11200 BCE
37. Gopatha 10800 BCE
38. Gośukti and Aśvaśukti [They belonged to Kaṇva gotra 11100 BCE
as indicated by Sāyaṇa. Tāndya Brāhmaṇa also mentions
these Rishis.]
39. Gotama Rāhūgaṇa [He was the son of Rāhūgaṇa. Śatapatha 10950 BCE
Brāhmaṇa indicates that he was the contemporary of King
Janaka Vaideha and Rishi Yājñavalkya.]
40. Gritsamada 11100 BCE
41. Indrāṇī [Rishikā] 11200 BCE
42. Iriṁbiṣṭhi [He belonged to Kaṇva gotra.] 11000 BCE
43. Jagadbīja Puruṣa 10900 BCE
44. Jamadagni 11200 BCE
45. Jātikāyana 10700 BCE
46. Kabandha 10600 BCE
47. Kali [Kali was also the son of Pragātha.] 11000 BCE
48. Kāṅkāyana 10900 BCE
49. Kāṇva 11100 BCE
50. Kapiñjala 10800 BCE
51. Kaśyapa 11290 BCE
52. Kaurupathi 11000 BCE
53. Kauśika [Gāthi Kauśika] 11200 BCE
54. Krishna 11100 BCE
55. Kriti [He was the contemporary of King Sindhudvīpa, son 11150 BCE
of Ambarīṣa.]
56. Kurustuti or Kurusuti [He belonged to the Kāṇva lineage.] 10900 BCE
57. Kutsa [Kutsa was the son of Arjuna and the grandson of 11150 BCE
Indra. He was probably the disciple of Prajāpati.]
58. Madhuccḥandas [Son of Viśvāmitra.] 11150 BCE
98 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
100. Śunaḥśepa [He was adopted by Viśvāmitra and came to be 11180 BCE
known as Devarāta.]
101. Sindhudvīpa [Vriṣagira had five Rajarshi sons, Rijrāśva, 11200 BCE
Ambarīṣa, Sahadeva, Bhayamāna and Sirādhas (RV 1.100).
Sindhudvīpa was the son of King Ambarīṣa. Brihaddevatā
(6.152-153) tells us that Sindhudvīpa wrote a hymn (RV
10.9) for Indra who killed Viśvarūpa.]
102. Sobhari [See No. 87] 11125 BCE
103. Suditi Purumīḍha 10700 BCE
104. Sukīrti 10900 BCE
105. Suryā Sāvitrī [Sāvitrī was the daughter of Sūrya. Her sister 11500 BCE
Tāptī married King Saṁvarṇa (11520 BCE). King Kuru,
the founder of Kuru dynasty was born to Tāptī.]
106. Tiraśchir Āṅgirasa 11000 BCE
107. Triśoka [He was a contemporary of King Indra as indicated 11000 BCE
in Brihaddevatā (6.89).]
108. Uccḥochana 10800 BCE
109. Uddālaka [Uddālaka was the famous disciple of Rishi 11170 BCE
Ayoda Dhaumya. Rishi Asita-Devala was the elder
brother of Rishi Dhaumya. Most probably, Devala
was the disciple of Vyāsa I (11180-11050 BCE), son of
Parāśara. Devala married the daughter of Rishi Kunḍina.
He had a daughter named Suvarchalā. She was married
to the son of Uddālaka Āruṇi. Mahābhārata’s Śāntiparva
(275th chapter) indicates that Rishi Asita-Devala was the
founder of Sāṅkhya philosophy. Rishi Jaigīṣavya was the
contemporary of Asita-Devala. Interestingly, Śāṅkhāyana
Āraṇyaka indicates that there were two Uddālakas and it
differentiates between Uddālaka and Uddālaka Āruṇi.]
110. Unmochana 11000 BCE
111. Uparibabhrava 10900 BCE
112. Vāmadeva 11200 BCE
113. Varu [He belonged to Āṅgirasa gotra. He was one of the 11000 BCE
sons of Indra. Jaya, Varu, Vasukra, Vimada, Vriṣākapi and
Sarvahāri were the sons of Indra.]
The Age of the Compilation of Vedas | 101
114. Varuṇa [Varuṇa married Charṣaṇī. They had two sons, 11150 BCE
Brigu and Satyadhriti. Bhāgavata Purāṇa names Satyadhriti
as Vālmiki. Most probably, Varuṇa was the 9th successor of
Prachetas. Brigu Vāruṇi and Satyadhriti Vāruṇi authored
the Rigvedic hymns 9.65 and 10.185 respectively. There
was another Varuṇa (14000 BCE), son of Aditi.]
115. Vasiṣṭha 11200 BCE
116. Vasukra [He was the son of Indra.] 11000 BCE
117. Vatsa [He belonged to Kaṇva Gotra.] 10800 BCE
118. Vena [He was the father of Prithu and belonged to Bhrigu 11270 BCE
gotra. Probably, a senior contemporary of Paraśurāma.]
119. Vihavya [He was probably the contemporary of Jamadagni.] 11200 BCE
120. Virūpa [He belonged to Āṅgirasa Gotra.] 10900 BCE
121. Viśvamanā [He was the descendant of Vaiyāśva and a 11300 BCE
friend of Indra (Pañchaviṁśa Brāhmaṇa-15.5.20).]
122. Viśvāmitra 11200 BCE
123. Vītahavya [He was Vītahavya II and belonged to 11100 BCE
Bharadwāja gotra.]
124. Vriṣākapi [He was the son of Indra.] 11100 BCE
125. Yama 11250 BCE
126. Yayāti 11180 BCE
Some of the hymns or mantras of Atharvaveda are dedicated to
Devatas, which are not found in Rigveda like Agnāvishnu (7.30), Ekāṣtakā
[Māgha Krishna Aṣṭamī] (3.10.5), Kāma Deva (3.29.7), Amāvāsyā (7.84),
Tisro Devyaḥ [Idā, Bhāratī and Sarasvati] (5.27.9), Dhanvantari (2.3),
Parāśara (6.65), Sapta-Sindhu (4.6.2), Arbudi (11.11) and more.
vvv
4
The Age of the Compilation of
Saṁhitās, Brāhmaṇas, Āraṇyakas and
Upaniṣads (10500 - 6777 BCE)
The Nāsadīya Sūkta of Rishi Parameṣṭhi, and the Puruṣa Sūkta of Rishi
Nārāyaṇa, laid strong foundations for the evolution of various schools
of Indian philosophy.1 These two important Sūktas were composed
around 11200 BCE. Since the Sūktas of all four Vedas had been originally
composed around 14000-10500 BCE, we can roughly fix the date of the
commencement of post-Vedic era around 10500 BCE. Veda Vyāsa, a
disciple of Jātūkarṇya and a contemporary of Devakīputra Krishna, had
formally compiled the four Vedas and taught them to his four disciples:
Paila, Vaiśampāyana, Jaimini and Sumantu.
The Traditions of Rigveda After Veda Vyāsa and His Disciple Paila
Śaunaka’s Charaṇa Vyūha Sūtra tells us that Rigveda has eight branches,
namely, Śākala, Bāṣkala, Aitareya Brāhmaṇa, Aitareya Āraṇyaka,
Śāṅkhāyana (also known as Sāṅkhya), Mānḍūka, Kauṣītakī Brāhmaṇa and
110 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Sh. K Chandra Hari explained in his article titled “Date of The Solar
Orbit of Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa” that the 189/176 days division of the year
was possible in the past only in either 4000 BC or 1000 AD. However,
the same was also possible around 8800-8700 BCE; therefore, the date of
Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa can be fixed around 8800-8700 BCE.
Dr. Subhash Kak has also explained that “the apparent motion of
the Sun is the greatest when the Earth is at perihelion and the least when
the Earth is at aphelion. Currently, this speed is greatest in January. The
interval between successive perihelia, the anomalistic year, is 365.25964
days, which is 0.01845 days longer than the tropical year on which our
calendar is based. In 2000 calendar years, the date of the perihelion
advances almost 35 days; in 10000 years, it advances almost a half-year
(175 days). This means that the perihelion movement has a cycle of about
20000 years.”
All Vedas clearly indicate the beginning of Saṁvatsara from Śarad
season (autumn) during later Vedic period. Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa also
follows the same tradition. Brāhmaṇa texts refer to Viṣuvat (equinox) but
many scholars mistakenly interpreted it as solstice. The sum of the bricks
in the fourth layer (forty-seven) and the fifth layer (138) of Yajñavedi as
given in Śatapatha refer to the 185 or 186 (together with the one space
filling) tithis in the half year. Therefore, the following data of number of
days in half years clearly validates the date of Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa to be
around 8800-8700 BCE.
In CE AE to VE VE to AE WS to SS SS to WS
1000 CE 179.35 185.87 182.92 182.33
0 CE 178.84 186.42 184.11 181.14
1000 BCE 179.37 185.88 185.21 180.04
2000 BCE 180.19 185.04 186.08 179.17
3000 BCE 181.29 183.96 186.71 178.54
4000 BCE 182.51 182.73 186.98 178.26
5000 BCE 182.17 183.08 186.48 178.76
6000 BCE 183.09 182.15 186.48 178.75
7000 BCE 184.00 181.25 186.25 179.00
122 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
fifteen years one reverted to the Amānta months by dropping one Śukla
pakśa. In this way one had eleven intercalary months in a period of thirty
years, which was fairly accurate.”20
Most probably, Yājñavalkya Vājasaneya found that the cycle of thirty
years is not accurate enough because it falls short of one intercalary
month in a period of 570 years. Therefore, Yājñavalkya introduced a cycle
of ninety-five years. This cycle had total thirty-five intercalary months.
Thus, six cycles of ninety-five years, or 570 years, had 210 intercalary
months whereas nineteen cycles of thirty years, or 570 years, had only 209
intercalary months. Interestingly, the cycle of ninety-five years consisted
of five cycles of nineteen years. Thus, Yājñavalkya III (10930-10830 BCE)
invented a perfect lunisolar calendar of ninety-five-year cycle (with a
residual small error).
This Yājñavalkya cycle of ninety-five years consisted of one cycle of
five years with two intercalary months and three cycles of thirty years
with thirty-three intercalary months. Since the ninety-five-year cycle had
a residual small error, ancient Lomaśa (Romaka) Siddhānta had probably
proposed the intercalation of one additional month after completion
of 2850 years. Seventeen astronomical Siddhāntas (Paitāmaha, Vyāsa,
Vasiṣṭha, Atri, Pārāśara, Kaśyapa, Nārada, Gārgya, Marīchi, Manu,
Aṅgiras, Lomaśa (Romaśa or Romaka), Pulaha, Pulastya, Chyavana,
Brigu and Śaunaka) came into existence mainly due to the difference of
opinion in the methodology of intercalation and Kśayamāsas.
I have attempted to reconstruct the Vedic calendar based on the
Yājñavalkya cycle of ninety-five years (5+30+30+30) starting from the
beginning of Vaivasvata Manvantara (11300-11200 BCE) up to the epoch
of the Kaliyuga of Lātadeva’s Sūrya Siddhānta (3101 BCE). It is difficult
to explain whether the cycle of ninety-five years had followed three sub
cycles in order of 35+30+30 or 30+30+35 but I have assumed the order of
35+30+30. I have also incorporated an additional intercalary month at the
end of the cycle of 2850 years of Romaka Siddhānta. Later Vedic New Year
had commenced from Śarad season (autumnal equinox) but the first day
of the New Year continued to commence on Māgha Śukla Pratipadā and
Śraviṣṭhā (Dhaniṣṭhā) Nakśatra. Initially, autumnal equinox took place in
124 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
the first month of New Year but, later, winter solstice occurred in the first
month of New Year starting from 4392 BCE onwards.
New year day Year From To No of Days
of the cycle (Julian Day) (Julian Day)
23 Nov 11327 BCE -2415802 -2381105 34698
22 Nov 11232 BCE -2381104 -2346407 34698
22 Nov 11137 BCE -2346406 -2311708 34699
22 Nov 11042 BCE -2311707 -2277009 34699
22 Nov 10947 BCE -2277008 -2242311 34698
21 Nov 10852 BCE -2242310 -2207613 34698
21 Nov 10757 BCE -2207612 -2172914 34699
21 Nov 10662 BCE -2172913 -2138215 34699
21 Nov 10567 BCE -2138214 -2103517 34698
20 Nov 10472 BCE -2103516 -2068819 34698
20 Nov 10377 BCE -2068818 -2034120 34699
20 Nov 10282 BCE -2034119 -1999421 34699
20 Nov 10187 BCE -1999420 -1964723 34698
19 Nov 10092 BCE -1964722 -1930025 34698
19 Nov 9997 BCE -1930024 -1895326 34699
19 Nov 9902 BCE -1895325 -1860628 34698
18 Nov 9807 BCE -1860627 -1825929 34699
18 Nov 9712 BCE -1825928 -1791231 34698
18 Nov 9617 BCE -1791230 -1756532 34699
18 Nov 9522 BCE -1756531 -1721834 34698
17 Nov 9427 BCE -1721833 -1687135 34699
17 Nov 9332 BCE -1687134 -1652437 34698
17 Nov 9237 BCE -1652436 -1617738 34699
17 Nov 9142 BCE -1617737 -1583040 34698
16 Nov 9047 BCE -1583039 -1548341 34699
16 Nov 8952 BCE -1548340 -1513643 34698
16 Nov 8857 BCE -1513642 -1478944 34699
16 Nov 8762 BCE -1478943 -1444246 34698
The Age of the Compilation of Saṁhitās, Brāhmaṇas, Āraṇyakas and Upaniṣads | 125
cycle corresponds to the tropical year being equal to 365.247368 days and
the cycle of 2850 years corresponds to the tropical year being equal to
365.246667 days. If we add an additional intercalary month at the end of
the cycle of 2850 years, the total number of days would be 1040983, which
corresponds to the sidereal year being equal to 365.257193 days.
The Date of Old Lomaśa (Romaka) Siddhānta (7300-6800 BCE) and the
Saptarṣi Cycle (6777 BCE) of Paitāmaha Siddhānta
Rishi Lomaśa (Romaśa) was the founder of Lomaśa, Romaśa or Romaka
Siddhānta. Seemingly, the word “Romaśa” was also pronounced as
Romaka. The Mahābhārata indicates that Rishi Lomaśa was born in the
beginning of Vaivasvata Manvantara and he was the contemporary of
Arjuna (11125 BCE) of the Jaiminīya Aśvamedha era. Most probably,
his descendants were also known as Lomaśas. There was also a Lomaśa
Rishi during the Mahābhārata era who escorted the Pandavas on the great
pilgrimage. Barabar Hills near to Gaya in Magadha have two caves known
as Lomaśa and Sudāma caves. Apparently, these two caves belong to the
Mahābhārata era. It appears that the disciples of Lomaśa Rishi came to be
known as Ajīvikas in the post-Mahābhārata era.
Rāmāyaṇa and Yoga Vāsiṣṭha also refer to Lomaśa Rishi. According to
legends, Riṣyaśriṅga cursed Vedic King Parīkśit (11050 BCE) for his sinful
conduct against Rishi Lomaśa. The legends of Kākabhuśunḍī also refer to
Lomaśa Rishi. Evidently, the descendants of Lomaśa, known as Lomaśa or
Romaśa, flourished from the beginning of Vaivasvata Manvantara (11200
BCE) to the Mahābhārata era (3162 BCE). The Romaśa who introduced
the cycle of 2850 years was a later descendant of Romaśa lineage and he
might have lived around 7300-6800 BCE. The necessity of an additional
intercalary month in the cycle of ninety-five years was envisaged around
7300-6800 BCE after 2850 years starting from 10200-10100 BCE. It seems
the Vedic list of Nakśatras was reset, starting from Rohiṇī around 10200
BCE, because winter solstice was shifted from Mrigaśirā to Rohiṇī.
Evidently, the cycle of 2850 years and the Saptarṣi cycle of 2700 years
were introduced before the evolution of the concept of Mahāyuga of
4320000 years. Though the cycle of 2850 years is older than the Saptarṣi
cycle of 2700 years, the Saptarṣi cycle became more popular because it can
128 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
was below on the other side (avastāt Śroṇāyai).29 This event occurred
around 12000 BCE when Abhijit (Vega) was a pole star. Purāṇas
indicate that the perennial battle between Devas and Asuras began
in Chākśuṣa Manvantara and ended in the beginning of Vaivasvata
Manvantara. I have already explained the timelines of Chākśuṣa
Manvantara (12000-11200 BCE). Abhijit was above Uttara Āṣāḍhā
around 12000 BCE. Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa also mentions that Abhijit
was named so because Devas conquered the territories of Asuras and
achieved a great victory over Asuras when Abhijit Nakśatra was still
a pole star. Abhijit moved away from North Pole after 11000 BCE.
9. Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa indicates that during the conflict between the
Devas and the Asuras, the Devas offered oblation to Sarpas, or Āśleṣā
Nakśatra, and successfully subdued the perpetual hatred of their
cousin brothers (Dviṣantam Bhrātrivyamupanayati).30 Taittirīya
Brāhmaṇa refers to Asuras as Sarpas and Dandaśūkas. Vritrāsura
was well known as Ahi in the Rigvedic era. Sarpa (Ahi) is the deity
of Āśleṣā Nakśatra. Seemingly, the Devas followed a calendar that
commenced from the summer solstice at Dhaniṣṭhā Nakśatra
whereas the Asuras followed a calendar that commenced from the
winter solstice at Aśleṣā Nakśatra during the early Vedic period
around 14500-14000 BCE. This may be the reason why Sarpa – or
Ahi or Vritrāsura – became the deity of Aśleṣā Nakśatra. Gradually,
the reckoning of the calendar of Devas had shifted to the Śarad Ritu,
or autumnal equinox, and the reckoning of the calendar of Asuras
had shifted to the Vasant Ritu, i.e. vernal equinox.
10. Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa also discussed Nakśatras, from Krittikā to
Bharaṇī. Interestingly, it referred to the following numerous
astronomical observations.
;L; HkkfUr j”e;ks ;L; dsro%A It indicates the occurrence
;L;sek fo”ok Hkqoukfu lokZA l of Winter solstice at Krittikā
—fÙkdkfHkjfHk laolku%A vfXuuksZ Nakśatra. Winter solstice shifted
nso% lqfors n/kkrqAA ¼3-1-1-1½ from Rohiṇī to Krittikā around
9250-9200 BCE.
The Age of the Compilation of Saṁhitās, Brāhmaṇas, Āraṇyakas and Upaniṣads | 135
11. Taittirīya Kāthakam mentions that Śarad Ritu is the Uttara Pakśa
and Grīṣma Ritu is the Dakśiṇa Pakśa. It also refers to King Vaideha
Janaka (10950 BCE) and Rishi Gautama.31
çi|s ijho`rks ojho`rks czã.kk oeZ.kk·ga rstlk d”;iL;] ;LeS ueLrfPNjks /keksZ
ew/kkZua czãksÙkjk guq;qZKks· /kjk fo’.kqâZn;¡ laoRlj% çtuuef”oukS iwoZiknkof=eZ/;a
fe=ko#.kkoijiknkofXu% iqPNL; çFkea dk.Ma rr bUæLrr% çtkifrjHk;a prqFkZ]
bfr A l ok ,’k fnO;% ”kkDoj% f”k”kqekjLr¡g] bfr A ; ,oa osnki ique`ZR;qa t;fr
t;fr LoxaZ yksda uk/ofu çeh;rs ukXukS çeh;rs ukIlq çeh;rs ukuiR;% çeh;rs
y?okUuks Hkofr]&bfr A /kzqoLRoefl /kqzoL; f{krefl Roa Hkwrkukef/kifrjfl Roa
Hkwrkuk¡ Js’Bks·fl Roka HkwrkU;qii;kZorZUrs ueLrs ue% loaZ rs uks ue% f”k”kqdqekjk;
ue%AA
Sāyaṇa indicates that this mantra begins with “Hkw% çi|s d”;iL; Þ
¼vFkok lk;adkyhu lU/;koUnuknw/kZ~oe~ /kzqoe.Mys ijczãksiLFkkukFkZe~ eU=ekg ÞHkw%
çi|s d”;iL;Þ bfr½. The phrase “rstlk d”;iL;” in this passage indirectly
indicates that Kaśyapa is the brightest star in the Śiśumāra constellation.
The star Kaśyapa of the Śiśumāra constellation was at celestial pole
starting from 11000 BCE. It was still a pole star around 8800-8700 BCE.
The head of Śiśumāra was at celestial pole during this period.
Śiśumāra or Draco Constellation
Southern Star of the head is Vishnu. Saṁvatsara is the genital organ. Rishi
Atri is the middle portion of body. Two Aśvins are its front feet whereas
Mitra-Varuṇas are its back feet. Agni, Indra, Prajāpati and Abhaya are
located in the tail of Śiśumāra. Taittirīya Āraṇyaka clearly refers to the
Śiśumāra constellation as Dhruva and also states that the Kaśyapa star of
this constellation does not depart from the celestial pole. This description
unambiguously indicates the position of the head of Śiśumāra was in
the North Pole direction. Kaśyapa was the brightest star of Śiśumāra
(Draco) constellation: Therefore, the star ‘Kaśyapa’ was undoubtedly
Gamma Draconis.
Dr. Subhash Kak and Sh. David Frawley identified Alpha Draconis
(Thuban) as Kaśyapa since they fixed the date of Taittirīya Āraṇyaka
around 3000 BCE. However, the tail of the Śiśumāra constellation was in
the North Pole direction around 3000 BCE and not the head. Taittirīya
Āraṇyaka refers to Alpha Draconis as Abhaya. Thus, Kaśyapa must be
identified with Gamma Draconis.
and flowed from Hisar, Sambhar Lake, Pushkar and Jodhpur to Great Rann
of Kachch and Gulf of Kachch. Post Vedic Sarasvati River changed the
course at Kurukshetra region and started flowing westwards. The map of
Sarasvati Palaeochannel course given below clearly indicates the Channel
II to be the course of Vedic Sarasvati River and the palaeochannels shown
Simplified
as “Sarasvati Palaeochannel
course” Map Course
belonged to Post-Vedic of NW
Sarasvati Rajasthan
River.
Sutlej
incised vally
IITK has dated the end of Sarasvati River around 12000 years ago
(10000 BCE). Considering the error margin of 10%, Sarasvati might have
been lost at Vinaśana around 11100-10900 BCE. Pañchaviṁśa Brāhmaṇa
and Lātyāyana Śrautasūtra indicate that Driṣadvatī was still a tributary of
Sarasvati River. Manusmriti mentions that Driṣadvatī flowed to the south
of Kurukshetra.
In CE
1. Prajāpati 11225 BCE
2. Brihaspati 11210 BCE
3. Nārada 11200 BCE
4. Viśvaksena 11180 BCE
5. Vyāsa Pārāśarya 11160 BCE
6. Jaimini 11100 BCE
7. Pauṣpinḍya 11050 BCE
8. Pārāśaryāyaṇa 11000 BCE
9. Bādarāyaṇa 10950 BCE
10. Tānḍi and Śātyāyani 10900 BCE
In CE
1. Brahma
2. Prajāpati
3. Mrityu
14000-13600 BCE
4. Vāyu
5. Indra
6. Agni
7. Kāśyapa
8. Riṣyaśriṅga Kāśyapa
9. Vibhanḍka Kāśyapa
10. Mitrabhū Kāśyapa
11. Indrabhū Kāśyapa
12. Agnibhū Kāśyapa
13. Śavas
14. Devatara Śāvasāyana
15. Pratithi Devataratha
16. Nikothaka Bhāyajātya
17. Vruṣaśuṣṇa Vātāvata
18. Indrota Śaunaka
19. Driti Indrota Śaunaka 11250-10000 BCE
20. Arāla Dārteya Śaunaka
21. Śūṣa Vāhneya Bhāradwāja
22. Sumantra Bhābhrava Gautama
23. Vāsiṣṭha Āraihaṇya Rājanya
24. Vāsiṣṭha Chaikitāyana
25. Sthiraka Gārgya
26. Maśaka Gārgya
27. Śaunaka
28. Udaraśānḍilya Atidhanvan
29. Gardabhimukha Śānḍilyāyana
30. Vichkśaṇa Tānḍya
31. Śākadāsa Bāditāyana
158 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Kaplasūtras of Rigveda
Kauṣītaka and Śāṅkhāyana were the earliest āchāryas of Rigveda. Kauṣītaka
(10900 BCE) was the pupil of Uddālaka Āruṇi (10920 BCE). Kahola
(10850 BCE), the pupil of Kauṣītaka, was the teacher of Śāṅkhāyana
(10800 BCE). Kauṣītaka and Śāṅkhāyana were the progenitors of the
Kauṣītaka -Śāṅkhāyana branch of Rigveda.
168 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
The date of Āśvalāyana is closely linked with the date of Rishi Śaunaka.
There were many Śaunakas. Āśvalāyana’s reference to the rishis of Rigveda
indicates the knowledge of Anukramaṇīs of Rishi Śaunaka. Evidently,
Āśvalāyana was the pupil of Śaunaka who authored six Anukramanis as
well as Charaṇa Vyūha, Brihaddevatā and Rikprātiśākhya. Śaunaka also
united the Bāṣkala and Śākala branches of Rigveda. Kātyāyana was also
the pupil of Śaunaka. Kātyāyana Śulbasūtra indicates a date around 6500
BCE. Thus, we can fix the date of Śaunaka, Āśvalāyana and Kātyāyana
around 6500 BCE.
that Udagayana (from winter solstice to summer solstice) had six months
and nine days.
vFkk’Vkn”kfHkT;kZ;kukfnR;laoRlj ,o rS;x;fudks HkofrA vkfnR;%
[kyq ”k”onsdnk ’k.eklkuqn³~xsfr uo pkgkfuA rFkk nf{k.kkAA
Considering average 29.5 days per month, the half year of Udagayana
(from winter solstice to summer solstice) consisted of six months (29.5
x 6 = 177 days) and nine days, i.e., a total 186 days. The following data
indicates that Nidānasūtra was written after 7500-7000 BCE.
WS to SS SS to WS
1000 BCE 185.21 180.04
2000 BCE 186.08 179.17
3000 BCE 186.71 178.54
4000 BCE 186.98 178.26
5000 BCE 186.48 178.76
6000 BCE 186.48 178.75
7000 BCE 186.25 179.00
8000 BCE 185.84 179.41
Nidānasūtra also refers to the twenty-year cycle of four Yugas (Kali,
Dvāpara, Tretā and Krita).111 The concept of Mahāyuga and Manvantara
was introduced after 6777 BCE. Therefore, Nidānasūtra must be dated
before 6777 BCE.
Upavedas
Śaunaka’s Charaṇa Vyūha (6500 BCE) mentions that according to Veda
Vyāsa or Skanda, Āyurveda of Rigveda, Dhanurveda of Yajurveda,
Gāndharva Veda of Sāmaveda and Arthaśāstra of Atharvaveda
were known as Upavedas. Cḥāndogyopaniṣad refers to Āyurveda as
Bhūtavidyā, Dhanurveda as Kśatravidyā and Arthaśāstra as Nidhi.
Sāmagāna (singing of Sāmaveda verses) was an integral part of Vedic
The Age of the Compilation of Saṁhitās, Brāhmaṇas, Āraṇyakas and Upaniṣads | 177
rituals since the early Vedic period. Probably, Gāndharvas had better
skills and knowledge of music. Therefore, the music theory of Vedic
times came to be known as Gāndharvaveda.
Atri, Dhanvantari, Kaśyapa and Atharvan were the founders
of Ayurvedic science in India. The work of Rishi Atharvan and his
disciples is limited to Atharvaveda. Atri was the first teacher of Ātreya or
Charaka Saṁhitā, Kaśyapa was the first teacher of Kāśyapa Saṁhitā and
Dhanvantari was the first teacher of Dhanvantari or Suśruta Saṁhitā. It is
difficult to pinpoint the exact authorship and the time of these Saṁhitās
because they were periodically updated.
Gāndharva Veda
Classical music and dance is the subject of Gāndharva Veda. Brahma and
Nārada were the founders of the science of Gāndharva Veda. According
to tradition, Śiva was also the originator of Nāṭya (Dance), Gīta (Music)
and Vāditra (musical instruments), as also stated in the Mahābhārata’s
Śānti Parva (Gītavāditratattvajño Gītavādanakapriyaḥ).115 Gāndharva
Veda is associated with Sāmaveda. Seemingly, Gāndharvas were the first
who mastered the art of music and established it as an important subject
of study. Therefore, the science of music and dance came to be known as
Gāndharva Veda.
Naṭasūtras of Śilālin and Kriṣāśva were the earliest texts of Gāndharva
Veda as referred to by Pāṇini. Nārada, Bharata, Dattila, Nandikeśvara and
Mātaṅga were the early āchāryas of Gāndharva Veda.
Rākśasas and Dānavas declined after the Rāmāyaṇa era (5677-5577 BCE).
iwoaZ —r;qxs foçk o`Ùks Lok;aHkqos·Urjs A
=srk;qxs·Fk lEçkIrs euksoSZoLorL; rqAA
xzkE;/keZço`Ùks rq dkeyksHko”ka xrs A
bZ’;kZØks/kkfnlaew<s yksds lqf[krnq%f[krsAA
nsonkuoxU/koZ;{kj{kksegksjxS% A
tEcq}his lekØkUrs yksdikyçfrf’BrsAA
egsUæçeq[kSnsZoS#ä% fdy firkeg%A
ØhMuh;dfePNkeks –”;a JO;a p ;n~Hkosr~AA
Seemingly, the available Bharata Nāṭyaśāstra had been recompiled
and added some verses related to 100 sons of Bharata Muni by the
descendant of Bharata Muni around 6000 BCE. It is stated in Nātyaśāstra
that Bharata received the knowledge (revelation) of Nāṭyaveda from
Pitāmaha Brahma and taught it to more than 100 sons. Undoubtedly, the
100 sons were the disciples of Bharata Muni, which is evident from the
different gotra names of disciples. The names of 105 disciples of Bharata
Muni as mentioned in Bharata Nātyaśāstra:
“Śānḍilya, Vātsya, Kohala, Dattila, Jatila, Āmbaṣṭa, Tanḍu,
Agniśikhā, Saindhava, Pulomā, Śādvali, Vipula, Kapiñjali, Bādari, Yama,
Dhūmrāyaṇa, Jambūdhvaja, Kākajaṅgha, Svarṇaka, Tāpasa, Kaidāri,
Śālikarṇa, Dīrghagātra, Śālika, Kautsa, Tānḍāyani, Piṅgala, Chitraka,
Vandhula, Bhallaka, Muṣṭhika, Saindhavāyana, Taitila, Bhārgava, Śuchi,
Bahula, Abudha, Budhasena, Pāndukarṇa, Sukerala, Rijuka, Mandaka,
Śambara, Vanjala, Māgadha, Sarala, Kartā, Ugra, Tuṣāra, Pārṣada,
Gautama, Bādarāyaṇa, Viśāla, Śabala, Sunāma, Meṣa, Kāliya, Bhramara,
Pithamukha, Muni, Nakhakutta, Aśmakutta, Ṣatpada, Uttama, Pāduka,
Upānaha, Śruti, Chāśasvara, Agnikunda, Ajyakunda, Vitandya, Tānḍya,
Kartarākśa, Hiraṇyākśa, Kuśala, Dussaha, Lāja, Bhayānaka, Bībhatsa,
Vichakśaṇa, Pundrākśa, Pundranāsa, Asita, Sita, Vidyujjihva, Mahājihva,
Śālaṅkāyana, Śyāmāyana, Māṭhara, Lohitāṅga, Samvartaka, Pañchaśikha,
Triśikha, Śikha, Śaṅkhavarṇamukha, Ṣanda, Śaṅkukarṇa, Śakranemi,
Gabhasti, Aṅśumāli, Śaṭha, Vidyuta, Śātajaṅgha, Raudra and Vīra.”
There were many Bharatas. The earliest Bharata was the son of
Riṣabhadeva. The genealogy of Bharata I as given in Purāṇas (Svāyambhuva
The Age of the Compilation of Saṁhitās, Brāhmaṇas, Āraṇyakas and Upaniṣads | 183
Arthaśāstra of Viśālākśa
Śaunaka’s Charaṇa Vyūha associates Arthaśāstra with Atharvaveda.
According to tradition, Bhāradwāja and Viśālākśa were the earliest
Āchāryas of Arthaśāstra. Viśālākśa Danḍanīti or Bahudanḍaka was the
earliest text on Arthaśāstra. Mudrārākśasam of Viśākhadatta referred
to Auśanasī Danḍanīti. Kāmandaka Nītisāra, Yājñavalkya Smriti,
Mahābhārata’s Śāntiparva, and Vātsyāyana Kāmasūtra refer to the
Arthaśāstra of Brihaspati.122 Many verses from Nāradīya Arthaśāstra
have been quoted in Vālmiki Rāmāyaṇa and Mahābhārata. Kautilya
Arthaśāstra refers to Bārhaspatya, Auśanasa, Mānava, Parāśara and
Ambhīya Arthaśāstras. It also quotes Bhāradwāja, Viśālākśa, Piśuna,
Kaunapadanta, Vathavyadhi and Bahupadantiputra.
The Age of the Compilation of Saṁhitās, Brāhmaṇas, Āraṇyakas and Upaniṣads | 185
Dharmaśāstras
Dharmaśāstras originated from Dharmasūtras of Kalpa. All Smriti
treatises are collectively known as Dharmaśāstras. Seemingly, traditional
Dharmasūtras have been recompiled and rewritten in ślokas during
Tretā Yuga (6777-5577 BCE), Dvāpara Yuga (5777-3177 BCE) and the
beginning of Kaliyuga (3177-2500 BCE). According to Yājñavalkya
Smriti, Manu, Atri, Vishnu, Yājñavalkya, Hārīta, Uśanas, Āṅgiras, Yama,
Āpastamba, Saṁvarta, Kātyāyana, Brihaspati, Parāśara, Vyāsa, Śaṅkha,
Likhita, Dakśa, Śātātapa, Gautama and Vasiṣṭha are the promulgators of
Dharmasūtras.
A total of thirty-two Smriti treatises – Āṅgirasa, Veda Vyāsa,
Āpastamba, Dakśa, Vishnu, Yājñavalkya, Śaṅkha, Likhita, Brihaspati, Atri,
Kātyāyana, Parāśara, Manu, Auśanasa, Hārīta, Gautama, Yama, Saṁvartta,
Kaśyapa, Pulastya, Viśvāmitra, Mārkandeya, Āśvalāyana, Nārāyaṇa,
Bhāradwāja, Vyāghrapāda, Dālbhya, Prajāpati, Śātātapa, Baudhāyana,
Lohita and Riṣyaśriṅga – are available today. We have already discussed
the dates of these rishis except Śaṅkha, Likhita, Mārkanḍeya, Śātātapa
and Lohita.
of a Yuga cycle of 1200 years evolved after 6777 BCE and the concept of
divine Yuga of 12000 years evolved after the Rāmāyaṇa era (5677-5577
BCE). Manusmriti refers to the Liccḥavis. The progenitor of the Liccḥavi
was the eighth descendant of Sri Rāma. Evidently, the extant Manusmriti
was finally recompiled after the Rāmāyaṇa era around 5000-4500 BCE.
In CE
1. Riktantra by Śākatāyana or Audavraji
2. Laghu Riktantra
3. Pratijñāsūtra by Kātyāyana
4. Bhāṣikasūtra by Kātyāyana 7200-6000 BCE
5. Sāmatantra by Audavraji or Gārgya
6. Akśaratantra by Āpiśali
7. Atharva-Chaturadhyāyī
1. Śiva Maheśvara
2. Brihaspati
3. Indra
4. Vāyu
5. Bhāradwāja
6. Bhāguri (the author of Saṁhitā Brāhmaṇa of Sāmaveda)
7. Pauṣkarasādi
8. Chārāyaṇa
9. Kāśakritsna
10. Śāntanu (the author of Phitsūtras)
11. Vaiyāghrapadya
12. Mādhyandini
13. Rauḍhi
14. Śaunaki
15. Gautama
16 Vyādi I
The Age of the Compilation of Saṁhitās, Brāhmaṇas, Āraṇyakas and Upaniṣads | 191
Pāṇini I lived before Śākaṭāyana II around 7000 BCE who was the founder
of his Pravara gotra. Venkata Mādhava, a commentator on Rigveda,
mentions that Śākalya, Pānini and Yāska were the three scholars of the
meaning of Rigveda (Śākalyaḥ Pāṇiniryāska ityrigarthaparāstrayaḥ).
Seemingly, Pānini I flourished before Yāska (6500 BCE). Patañjali’s
Mahābhāṣya indicates that Kautsa was the pupil of Pāṇini (Upasedivān
Kautsaḥ Pāṇinim).133 Rigveda indicates that Kutsa was the son of Arjuna
and the grandson of Indra. Kutsa was the founder of Kautsa gotra
(tryārṣeya pravara gotra) of Āṅgirasa lineage. Yāska’s Nirukta quotes
Kautsa. Seemingly, the Kautsa mentioned in Nirukta was the pupil of
Pāṇini I. According to tradition, one Kautsa was the disciple of Rishi
Varatantu and the contemporary of Ikśvāku King Raghu. Aṣṭādhyāyī
refers to Varatantu (Varatantu-Khadikokāccḥaṇ). Pāṇini II, the author of
Aṣṭādhāyī lived during the time of Nanda Dynasty (1664-1596 BCE).
Pāṇini II (1670-1590 BCE): According to Puruṣottamadeva of
Trikāndaśeṣa, Pāṇina, Pāṇini, Dākśiputra, Śālāturīya, Śālaṅki and Āhika
are the names of Pāṇini. Yaśastilakachampū mentions Pāṇini as Paṇiputra.
Pāṇini’s mother was Dākśī. Therefore, he was referred to as Dākśīputra.
Pāṇini’s native place was Śalātura. A village named Śalātula is still existing
close to the city of Attock in Punjab Province of Pakistan. Hiuen Tsang
also indicates that Śālātura village existed close to Takśaśilā. Seemingly,
Śālaṅki and Āhika were the names of Pāṇini I. None of the āchāryas of
post-Pāṇinian period used these names for Pāṇini II. The “Śālaṅki” word
is also found in the Pailādi gaṇa of Aṣṭādhyāyī.134
According to Kathāsaritsāgara, Varṣa of Pātaliputra was the teacher
of Pāṇini II. Seemingly, Vararuchi Kātyāyana, Vyādi and Indradatta were
junior contemporaries of Pāṇini II. Kātyāyana refers to Pānini as Bhagavān
Pāṇini Āchārya in his Vārtikas.135
çkfrifndfoKkukPp Hkxor% ikf.kusjkpk;ZL; fl)Ek~A
Āryamañjuśrimūlakalpa mentions that Māṇava Pāṇini was a
friend of King Nanda (Tasyāpyanyatamaḥ sakhyaḥ Pāṇinirnāma
Māṇavaḥ). Kathāsaritsāgara also indicates that Pāṇini II was the
contemporary of Nanda Kings Yogananda and Satyananda. Śakaṭāla
was the minister of King Satyananda and Yogananda. Brihatkathā
194 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Vāyu Purāṇa indicates that Soma Sharma’s sons Akśapāda, Kaṇāda and
Ulūka lived in the twenty-eighth Dvāpara Yuga, i.e., after the Rāmāyaṇa
era.150 Thus, we can roughly fix the date of Vaiśeṣika sūtras around 4500-
4000 BCE.
Kāmaśāstras
Kāmaśāstra was also part of education in ancient India. It is difficult
to say when it became a formal subject of education but the subject of
Kāmaśāstra was well established before the Rāmāyaṇa era. According
to tradition, Nandi (11250-11200 BCE), a contemporary of Śiva, wrote
the earliest text on Kāmaśāstra. Śvetaketu, son of Uddālaka Āruṇi, had
abridged the Kāmaśāstra written by Nandi. The Mahābhārata’s Śānti
Parva relates that Śvetaketu (10890 BCE) married Suvarchalā, a daughter
of Rishi Devala. There were two Suvarchalas. Suvarchalā I was the wife
of Sūrya, as indicated in the Rāmāyaṇa153 and Suvarchalā II was the wife
of Śvetaketu. Later, Gālava Bābhravya also abridged the text of Nandi’s
Kāmaśāstra. Thus, Kāmaśāstra also originated in later Rigvedic period.
Many āchāryas, like Chārāyaṇa, Suvarṇanābha, Ghoṭakamukha,
Gonardīya, Goṇikaputra, Dattaka and Kuchumāra, wrote treatises on
Kāmaśāstra. The famous Vātsyāyana Kamasūtra was originally written
by Mallanāga Vātsyāyana. Later, Vātsyāyana II of the 11th century BCE
wrote Kāmasūtra based on Mallanāga’s treatise as indicated by Yaśodhara,
the author of Jayamaṅgalā commentary on Vātsyāyayana’s Kāmasūtra.
Most probably, Mallanāga Vātsyāyana flourished before the Rāmāyaṇa
era. Vātsyāyana Kāmasūtra gives an abridged version of the treatises of
202 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
fresh latitudinal data and updated the Paitāmaha and Vasiṣṭha Siddhāntas.
Maya, the great Asura obtained the same latitudinal data and invented the
concept of epicycle that revolutionized Indian astronomy. Maya was the
first to introduce the epicycle method in astronomical calculations.
Mayāsura was the founder of the sixty-year cycle consisting of five
twelve-year cycles of Jupiter. All cycles of sixty years or twelve years in
the world follow the epoch of Tretā Yuga, i.e., 6777-6776 BCE. Abul Fazal
mentions that an ancient Turkish era calendar, also known as Aighuri, was
based on a twelve-year cycle. Although the commencement of this era is
not known, yet the year of the cycle can be easily found if we add seven
years to the imperfect years of the Maliki era and divide it by twelve. Abu
Rayhan says that the Turks add nine to the incomplete Syro-Macedonean
years and divide it by twelve. According to Jesuit records, the first sixty-
year cycle began in February 3058 BC. Ancient China and Tibet also used
the cycle of sixty years. The first year of current Chinese cycle was 1984
CE; whereas the first year of current Tibetan cycle was 1987 CE.
Seemingly, Ancient Brahma Siddhānta introduced the cycle of
twelve years and sixty years in 6773 BCE. The tradition of Simhastha
Kumbha (Jupiter in Leo) of Ujjain and Nasik is the oldest because the first
twelve-year cycle commenced when Jupiter entered Kanyā Rāśi (Virgo)
and ended when Jupiter was in Simha Rāśi (Leo). Thus, 6773 BCE was
the Prabhava Saṁvatsara in Brahma Siddhānta, whereas 6778 BCE was
the Prabhava Saṁvatsara in Mayāsura’s Sūrya Siddhānta. Āryabhaṭa refers
to the epoch of 6773 BCE and says that sixty cycles of sixty years elapsed
in 3173 BCE. Though Lāṭadeva, a disciple of Āryabhaṭa introduced the
concept of expunging of one year in every cycle in his version of Sūrya
Siddhānta written in 3101 BCE, common people generally followed the
tradition of Brahma Siddhānta. This is the reason why 1987 CE was the
Prabhava Saṁvatsara in the current sixty-year cycle in India. Evidently,
Tibetans also followed the cycle of Brahma Siddhānta.
Seemingly, the Turkish and Chinese traditions followed the epoch of
6777-6776 BCE. If we add nine years to the epoch of Syro-Macedonian
era (972 BCE), the first year of the twelve-year cycle was 981 BCE, as
204 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
indicated by Abu Rayhan. If we add seven years to the epoch of the Maliki
era (417 CE), the first year of the sixty-year cycle was 424 CE. The first
year of the current Chinese cycle was 1984 CE. Evidently, the Turkish
twelve-year cycle, the sixty-year cycle of the Maliki era, and the ancient
Chinese cycle of sixty-years are based on the epoch of 6777-6776 BCE.
Therefore, Māyasura was the founder of the cycle of twelve years and the
cycle of sixty years.
vvv
5
Tretā Yuga (6777-5577 BCE)
and
The Age of Rāmāyaṇa (5677-5577 BCE)
and the Yuga of 1200 years were introduced in 6777 BCE. Thus, we can
roughly fix the period of Tretā Yuga around 6777-5577 BCE and the date
of the Rāmāyaṇa around 5677-5577 BCE, i.e., in the last century of Tretā
Yuga. Seemingly, the concept of differential duration of Yugas had been
introduced in the Dvāpara Yuga. The Mahabharata, the epic written in the
beginning of Kaliyuga, refers to 2400 years of Dvāpara Yuga. Therefore,
we have to consider the Dvāpara Yuga of 2400 years and fix its period
around 5577-3177 BCE. Thus, traditional evidence indicates the date of
the Rāmāyaṇa to be around 5677-5577 BCE – at the end of Tretā Yuga.
Purāṇas speculate Vālmiki to be the 24th Vyāsa who lived in the 24th
Dvāpara Yuga, and mention that Sri Rāma flourished at the end of the
24th Tretā Yuga. Historically, there were many Vyāsas but the imaginary
concept of twenty-eight Vyāsas was introduced only in the Gupta period.
It is illogical to believe that Parāśara, the father of Vyāsa, lived in the 26th
Dvāpara Yuga; Jātūkarṇya, the teacher of Vyāsa, lived in the 27th Dvāpara
Yuga; and Vyāsa himself lived in the 28th Dvāpara Yuga. Ironically, Purānas
did not explain how Vālmiki, a contemporary of Sri Rāma of the 24th
Tretā Yuga lived in the 24th Dvāpara Yuga. Thus, there is no traditional or
literary evidence to support the date of Vālmiki in the 24th Dvāpara Yuga.
Therefore, we can ignore the speculative concept of twenty-eight Vyāsas.
A Comet in Mūla Nakśatra: The Sheet Anchor for Dating of the Events
of the Rāmāyaṇa Era
In Yuddha Kānda of the Rāmāyaṇa, Lakśmaṇa describes the position of
a comet in Mūla Nakśatra when the Vānara army was ready to march
towards Lanka.5
uS_Zra uS_Zrkuka p u{k=e~ vfHkihMîrs A
ewya ewyork Li`’Va /kwE;rs /kwedsrqukAA
lkje~ p ,rn~ fouk”kk; jk{klkuke~ mifLFkre~ A
dkys dkyx`ghrkuka u{k=a xzgihfMre~AA
“The Mūla Nakśatra is badly aspected, in that it is touched by a
comet risen with a tail of light and tormented by it. It has arrived for the
destruction of Rākśasas, for, the star seized by death is oppressed by a
planet in its last hour.”
This amazing astronomical observation recorded in Vālmiki
Rāmāyaṇa is indeed verifiable, and establishes a sheet anchor date for
212 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
was abducted in the beginning of Hemanta season, i.e., in the first fortnight
of Māgha month. Seemingly, Rāma and Lakśmaṇa met Hanuman and
Sugriva and Rāma eliminated Vāli by the end of Phālguna month. Sugriva
was coronated in the Chaitra month and he sent Vānara groups in all
directions to find Sītā in the beginning of Vaiśākha month. It is stated
in Kishkindha Kānda that Vānara groups could see Vasanta season after
one month (rs’kke~ eklks O;frØkUrks ;ks jkKk le;% —r%A rr% iq’ikfrHkkjkxzku~
yrk”krleko`rku~A æqeku~ oklfUrdku~ –’V~ok cHkwoq% Hk;”kfUdrk%AA).9 During
the Rāmāyaṇa era, Vasanta season was probably in Jyeṣṭha and Āṣāḍha
months (Pūrṇimānta). Hanuman also saw Vasanta season in Lanka
(l rq lEâ’V lokZ³~x% çkdkjLFkks egkdfi%A iqf’irkxzku~ olUrknkS nn”kZ
fofo/kku~ æqeku~AA).10
There are some contradictions in the available text of the Rāmāyaṇa
due to the errors committed by the Maithili historians. For instance,
if Vānara groups could see Vasanta season after one month of their
departure, then how come Rāma referred to the Vasanta season at Pampā
Lake before his first meeting with Hanuman?
v;e~ olUr% lkSfe=s ukuk fogxukfnr%A
lhr;k foçgh.kL; ”kksd lUnhiuks eeAA
iwoksZ v;e~ okf’kZdks ekl% Jko.k% lfyykxe%A
ço`Ùkk% lkSE; pRokjks eklk okf’kZd lafKrk%AA
pRokjks okf’kZdk eklk xrk o’kZ”krksiek%A
ee ”kksdkfHkrIrL; rFkk lhrke~ vi”;r%AA
o’kkZle;dkye~ rq çfrKk; gjh”oj%A
O;rhrku~ prqjks eklku~ fogju~ ukocq/;rsAA
o;e~ vk”o;qts ekfl dkyla[;kO;ofLFkrk%A
çfLFkrk% lks·fi pkrhr% fder% dk;ZeqÙkje~AA11
It is stated that Śrāvaṇa was the first month of the rainy season
but Indra Dhvaja (an indication of the beginning of rainy season) used
to be hoisted on the full moon day of Āśvayuja month (bUæ/ot bo
m)wr ikS.kZekL;ke~ eghrys A v”o;qd~ le;s ekfl xr lÙoks fopsru%AA).12 Thus,
Āśvayuja was the first month of the rainy season and not Śrāvaṇa. It is
evident that the Maithili historians mistakenly considered Śrāvaṇa as the
first month of the rainy season because they followed Vaiśākhādi calendar
during their lifetime.
216 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
her 13th year when she married Rāma. There was no tradition of child
marriage in ancient India. Ayodhyā Kānda clearly indicates that Sītā
had already attained the age of menstruation before her marriage (ifr
lE;ksxlqyHke~ o;ks –’V~ok rq es firkA fpUrke~ vH;xen~ nhuks foÙkuk”kkn~ bo
v/ku%AA).15 Anasūyā, the wife of Rishi Atri, gives her instructions to Sītā on
the responsibilities of a devoted wife, which also indicates that Sītā was a
teenager who can understand her responsibilities. Considering a gap of
seven years between the age of Rāma and Sītā, it can be concluded that
Rāma was 25 years old when he left Ayodhyā for Vanavāsa and he killed
Rāvaṇa when he was 39 years old. As already explained, Rāma-Rāvaṇa
Yuddha took place in 5635 BCE. Therefore, Sri Rāma was born on Chaitra
Śukla Navamī, i.e., 3rd Feb 5674 BCE. Interestingly, Saturn was in deep
exaltation (Libra 26o52’) on 3rd Feb 5674 BCE.
which is not consistent with the evidence of the Rāmāyaṇa. During the
Rāmāyaṇa era (5677-5577 BCE), the Śukla Pañchamī tithi of Mārgaśīrṣa,
Puṣya, Māgha and Phālguna months used to occur in Dhaniṣṭhā,
Uttarabhadrā, Aśvinī and Krittikā Nakśatras respectively. According to
Baudhāyana Sūtras, Rohiṇī, Mrigaśirā, Uttara Phālgunī and Svāti were the
best Nakśatras for marriage. Therefore, it is certain that the wedding of
Rāma and Sītā took place in between Pūrva Phālgunī and Uttara Phālgunī
Nakśatras, and the tithi was Pañchamī because the Rāmāyaṇa refers to
Maghā on the third day.
Seemingly, Ayodhyā-Mithilā region followed Pūrṇimānta Vedic
calendar during the Rāmāyaṇa era. It appears that when Vaiśākhādi
Amānta calendar (Tihuta Pañchāṅg or Maithili calendar) was introduced,
the date of Vivāha Pañchamī had been erroneously fixed in Śukla Pakśa
instead of Krishna Pakśa. Due to precession, the date of Vivāha Pañchamī
shifted from Chaitra month to Mārgaśīrṣa month in modern times. In all
probability, the wedding of Rāma and Sītā took place on Chaitra Krishna
Pañchamī in Pūrṇimānta calendar and Phālguna Krishna Pañchamī in
Amānta calendar, i.e., 2nd Jan 5654 BCE. Thus, Rāma was 19 years and
11 months old and Sītā was 12 years 10 months old on the day of their
marriage. Probably, Daśaratha stated “Åufo”kfro’kksZ es jkeks jkthoykspu%”
instead of “Åu’kksM”ko’kksZ es jkeks jkthoykspu%” in Bālakānda.
given by the court astrologers. As Rāhu is well known to destroy the results
of the planets it is sitting with, it is also important to establish the positive
part of the conjunction of Sun and Mars in Janma Nakśatra of Daśaratha.
If Rāhu is sitting with the positive conjunction of Sun and Mars, it destroys
the positive results, which indicates a major disaster or the imminent death
of the king. If Rāhu is sitting with the negative conjunction of Sun and
Mars, it destroys the negative results, which indicates a positive outcome
in the future. Since Daśaratha was referring to a disastrous omen, it is
certain that the Sun and Mars were in the positive conjunction.
Though Sun and Mars are fast moving planets, they do not commonly
conjunct in horoscope. Generally, the conjunction of Sun and Mars
occurs roughly after every two years and few days. When Mars is holding
the lowest degree and Sun has the highest degree, then Mars controls the
conjunction and gives negative results. When Sun is holding the lowest
degree and Mars has the highest degree, then Sun controls the conjunction
and gives positive results. Evidently, Sun should be positioned in the
lowest pāda (quarter) whereas Mars should be positioned in the highest
pāda of Daśaratha’s Janma Nakśatra.
Considering the occurrence of this astronomical event in the recent
past, the conjunction of Sun, Mars and Rāhu took place in Chitrā Nakśatra
around 18th Aug - 21st Aug 5649 BCE, and Rāma’s coronation was planned
on 24th/25th Nov 5649 BCE in Puṣya Nakśatra [Pauṣa Pūrṇimā / Māgha
Krishna Pratipadā in Pūrṇimānta calendar and Pauṣa Pūrṇimā / Pauṣa
Krishna Pratipadā in Amānta calendar]. Sun and Rāhu were in the
fourth pāda of Chitrā Nakśatra and Mars was in the first pāda of Chitrā
Nakśatra. Thus, Sun and Mars were in the positive conjunction. Since
Rahu was sitting with the Sun in the fourth pada of Chitrā Nakśatra, it was
a disastrous omen. Thus, we can conclusively establish Chitrā Nakśatra as
the Janma Nakśatra of Daśaratha. This was the reason why Daśaratha was
getting fearful and inauspicious dreams.
Interestingly, the astronomical observation of a comet and a planet
in Mūla Nakśatra in the year of Rāma-Rāvaṇa War, and the astrological
conjunction of Sun, Mars and Rāhu in the year when Rāma left Ayodhyā for
Vanavāsa, lead to the most accurate dating of the events of the Rāmāyaṇa
Tretā Yuga (6777-5577 BCE) and the Age of Rāmāyaṇa (5677-5577 BCE) | 221
era. The astrological conjunction of Sun, Mars and Rāhu is not only very
rare but also to be observed at least a few months before the commen-
cement of Rāma’s Vanavāsa. As explained above, Halley’s Comet along
with Venus was visible to naked eye in Mūla Nakśatra around 21st/23rd
Aug - 3rd Sep 5635 BCE in the fourteenth year of Rāma’s Vanavāsa, and
the disastrous conjunction of Sun, Mars and Rahu took place in Chitrā
Nakśatra around 18th Aug - 21 Aug 5649 BCE, before Rāma left Ayodhyā
for Vanavāsa on 25th Nov 5649 BCE. There is also a speculation that
Rāma left for Vanavāsa on his birthday (Chaitra Śukla Navamī), based on
one additional line of a śloka (lagne Karkaṭake prāpte, Janma Rāmasya
cha sthite). It is certainly an interpolation or a note written by the later
updaters because there was no tradition of writing verses in half or one
and a half meter.
Though the scheme of the exaltation of planets during the Rāmāyaṇa
era is not known, Saturn was in Libra (26o52’) when Rāma was born,
on 3rd Feb 5674 BCE, and Jupiter was in Cancer (12o04’) when Rāma’s
coronation was planned, on 24th / 25th Nov 5649 BCE.
Vālmiki mentioned that Triśaṅku (Acrux), Lohintāṅga (Mars),
Brihaspati (Jupiter), as also Budha (Mercury) and all other planets
assumed a menacing aspect and got stayed with the Moon, and stars
ceased to twinkle. Planets were deprived of their splendour. The stars of
Viśākhā constellation appeared in Heaven, veiled in a mist when Rāma
left Ayodhyā (f=”kUdqykZsfgrk³~x% p c`gLifrcq/kkofiA nk#.kk% lksee~ vH;sR;
xzgk% losZ O;ofLFkrk%AA u{k=kf.k xrkph±f’k xzgk% p xrrstl%A fo”kk[kk% p
l/kwek% p uHkfl çpdkf”kjsAA).23 Vālmiki was describing the sky of the night
on the day Rāma left Ayodhyā. He clearly indicated that Triśaṅku, all
planets, Moon and Viśākhā constellation were visible in the sky. Since
Rāma left Ayodhyā on 24th/25th Nov 5649 BCE, Vālmiki was describing
the night sky of 25th /26th Nov 5649 BCE. Triśaṅku, all planets, Moon
and Viśākhā constellation were visible on 25th /26th Nov 5649 BCE before
the dawn. Sh. Nilesh Oak could not establish this simple astronomical
observation on the date proposed by him therefore he has assumed it
to be extremely generic, but the Rāmāyaṇa unambiguously tells us that
Triśaṅku, all planets, Moon and Viśākhā constellation were visible in the
222 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
East), Venus was above the western horizon and it appeared to be hanging
behind Rāma. Venus was exactly in the West on 6th Sep 5635 BCE.
that Pūrṇimā tithi of coronation has been shifted to Amāvāsyā tithi due to
the introduction of Amānta calendar. This is the reason why we celebrate
Deepāvali on Amāvāsyā.
The Summary of the Chronology of the Rāmāyaṇa Era:
In CE
1. The Birth Date of Rāma (Rāma 3rd February 5674 BCE
Navami)
2. The Birth Date of Sītā (Jānakī 15th / 16th March 5667 BCE
Navami)
3. The Marriage of Rāma-Sītā (Vivāha 2nd January 5654 BCE
Pañchamī)
4. Sri Rāma left Ayodhyā for Vanavāsa 24th / 25th November 5649 BCE
5. Hanuman returned from Lanka 3rd August 5635 BCE
6. Rāma ordered Vānara Sena to march 2nd September 5635 BCE
towards Lanka
7. Rāma killed Rāvaṇa (Vijaya Daśamī) 28th November 5635 BCE
8. Rāma arrived at Bhāradwāja Ashram 16th December 5635 BCE
9. Rāma met Bharata 17th December 5635 BCE
10. Rāma arrived in Ayodhyā 18th December 5635 BCE
11. Rāma was coronated 19th December 5635 BCE
the śloka had the words as “fo”kq)e~ czãjkf”kEk~” (Dvitīyā Vibhakti), then the
translation of Sh. Nilesh Oak would have been correct but the śloka used
“fo”kq)% czãjkf”k%” in Prathamā Vibhakti as Kartā of “çdk”kUrs” . Therefore,
the translation, “Seven rishis are making Parikramā around Brahmarāśi
(Abhijit), the Dhruva, i.e., the pole star” does not follow the basic rules of
Sanskrit grammar. Moreover, Rāśi means ‘a group’ in Sanskrit. Therefore,
Brahmarāśi may refer to a group of stars (a constellation) and not one star
(Abhijit).
This śloka also used an epithet “Viśuddha” for Brahmarāśi. A
constellation or a group of stars can only be referred to as Śuddha or
Viśuddha. Therefore, Viśuddha word would be meaningless if Brahmarāśi
means a particular Nakśatra (Abhijit). In fact, this śloka unambiguously
tells us that some stars of Brahmarāśi are making Parikramā around
Dhruva. The verb “Prakāśante” is in present tense. Therefore, it
indicates the circumpolar nature of the stars of Brahmarāśi and Saptarṣi
constellations. The Rāmāyaṇa also refers to Abhijit Nakśatra by name
in Kishkindha Kānda and indicates that Brahmarāśi and Abhijit are
two different celestial bodies. Therefore, the Rāmāyaṇa has no internal
evidence to establish that Brahmarāśi and Abhijit are identical.
vFk iou leku foØek% Iyox ojk% çfryC/k ikS#’kk%A
vfHkftr~ vfHkeq[kka fn”ka ;;q% tudlqrk ifjekxZ.kksUeq[kk%AA32
“vfHkftr~ vfHkeq[kka fn”ka” means the direction that’s facing towards
Abhijit Nakśatra. Since Abhijit Nakśatra, the brightest star, is stationed in
the North direction, the South direction has been referred to as “vfHkftr~
vfHkeq[kka fn”ka” in the Rāmāyaṇa. It is also argued that since Brahma is
the deity of Abhijit, Brahmarāśi and Abhijit are the same. Abhijit is well
known as Brāhma Nakśatra but Parāśaratantra unambiguously mentions
Brāhma Nakśatra and Brahmarāśi as two separate entities in the context
of the comet Chalaketu.
“i¥~pn”ko’kZ”kra çks’;ksfnr% if”pesukaxqfyioZek=ka f”k[kka nf{k.kkfHkurka
—Rok dfydsrks”pkjkUrs uHkfL=Hkkxeuqpju~ ;Fkk ;Fkk pksÙkjs.k oztfr rFkk rFkk
”kwykxzdkjka f”k[kka n”kZ;u~ czkãu{k=eqil`T;kReuk /kzqoa czãjkf”ke~ lIr’khZu~ Li`”ku~
uHkl% v/kZek=a nf{k.keuqØE;kLra oztfrAA”
230 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
“Comet Chalaketu, having risen 115 years after Kaliketu in the West,
with a crown of the size of a finger joint, bent southwards, following
one-third of the sky, as it travels North, exhibiting a head like the tip of
a trident, it moves close to the star of Brāhma (Abhijit), touches Dhruva
Brahmarāśi, Saptarṣi and returns half the sky to set in the South.”33
Sh. RN Iyengar comments; “Mention of both Brāhma-Nakśatram
and Brahma-Rāśi brings in difficulties in interpretation. From the context,
these should be indicating two different stations of the comet. Brahmarāśi
most probably refers to constellation Lyra.”
Parāśaratantra clearly refers to Brāhma-Nakśatra, Dhruva,
Brahmarāśi and Saptarṣis as four different stations of the comet Chalaketu.
Evidently, Brahmarāśi cannot be identified with Brāhma-Nakśatra, i.e.,
Abhijit. Sh. RN Iyengar has identified Brahmarāśi with the constellation
Lyra but the Mahābhārata indirectly indicates the constellation Cygnus to
be Brahmarāśi.
oØkuqoØa —Rok p Jo.ks ikodçHk%A
czãjkf”ka leko`R; yksfgrk³~xks O;ofLFkr%AA34
This śloka of the Mahabharata mentions that Mars executed a
retrograde motion and entered into Śravaṇa Nakśatra and positioned
in Brahmarāśi. Evidently, the Mahābhārata indicates the position of
constellation Śravaṇa and constellation Brahmarāśi on the same ecliptic
longitude. Therefore, Brahmarāśi must be identified with constellation
Cygnus.
Traditionally, Vedāṅga Jyotiṣa and ancient Paitāmaha Siddhānta
considered Dhaniṣṭhā as the first Nakśatra of Saṁvatsara. The Mahabharata
also mentions that Brahma introduced the calendar starting from
Dhaniṣṭhā Nakśatra (Dhaniṣṭhādis tadā kālo Brahmaṇā parinirmitaḥ…).
The summer solstice was at Dhaniṣṭhā Nakśatra around 14500 BCE when
Brahma I had introduced the Dhaniṣṭhādi (Māgha Śukla Pratipadā in
Dhaniṣṭhā) calendar. The constellation Cygnus was at North Pole around
14500 BCE. Seemingly, the station of Dhaniṣṭhā Nakśatra had been fixed
considering the position of constellation Cygnus. Thus, Cygnus came to
be known as Brahmarāśi. Later, star Abhijit of constellation Lyra became
the North Pole star around 12000-10000 BCE. The list of Nakśatras was
Tretā Yuga (6777-5577 BCE) and the Age of Rāmāyaṇa (5677-5577 BCE) | 231
Internal Evidence: the Upper Limit and the Lower Limit on Estimating
of the Date of the Rāmāyaṇa
As explained above, there is no absolute internal or external evidence
that establishes a particular date of the Rāmāyaṇa. We also have no other
option but to reject certain interpolated verses. Since pinpointing the
interpolated verses cannot be arbitrary, it is pertinent to establish an
upper limit and lower limit on estimating of the date of the Rāmāyaṇa.
1. The oceanographic studies may certainly lead to establish an upper
limit on estimating of the date of the Rāmāyaṇa. According to the
studies of post-glacial sea level rise, Sri Lanka had been connected
with India through land route at least up to 6200 BCE.
234 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
The last pulse “Melt Water Pulse 1C” (MWP 1C) took place around
6200-5600 BCE, which produced a rise of 6.5 meters in less than 140
years.38 Evidently, the area of Rāmasetu was submerged by sea during
MWP 1C. Currently, the area of Rāmasetu is only one to ten meters
deep in places. Nala of the Rāmāyaṇa era might have raised the
ground level maximum up to two meters. Considering the area was
two meters deep in some places before the construction of Rāmasetu,
the sea level of some places between Dhanushkodi and Talaimanar
must be at least fourteen meters below the current level. Since the
Rāmasetu was almost walkable around 900 CE, Nala might have
built the setu at the end of MWP 1C. Therefore, the upper limit on
estimating the date of the Rāmāyaṇa cannot be established beyond
6000 BCE and the lower limit cannot be established after 5000 BCE.
the height of 100 Yojanas whereas Āryabhaṭa says that the height
is only one Yojana. Aṅgula and Danḍa were the standard units of
measurement since the Vedic period. One Aṅgula was equal to 1.763
centimeters. One Danḍa was equal to ninety-six Aṅgulas (169.25
centimeters). Most probably, Yojana of the Rāmāyaṇa era was equal
to 100 Danḍas (169.25 meters). Thus, Nalasetu had roughly the
length of 16.92 km and the width of 1.69 km. This Setubandha was
strategically important to ensure smooth transportation of the army,
regular food supply and logistics during the war between Rāma and
Rāvaṇa. Evidently, Sri Lanka was an island and the submerged area
between Dhanushkodi and Talaimanar was extended up to 16.90
km during the Rāmāyaṇa era. Today, the submerged area between
Dhanushkodi to Talaimanar is extended up to 30 miles or 48 km.
Based on the studies on post-glacial sea level rise, we can fix the
upper limit of the Rāmāyaṇa era around 6500 BCE and the lower
limit around 5000 BCE. Interestingly, the Greek measurement unit
“Stade” also had similar length of the Yojana of the Rāmāyaṇa era.
Herodotus mentions that the Stadion was equal to 600 ft. Most
probably, the Yavanas (Ionians) of post-Rāmāyaṇa era had migrated
from Afghanistan to Greece and introduced the measurement unit
of Yojana that came to be known as “Stadion”.
Vālmiki Rāmāyaṇa also mentions that the length of Ayodhyā city
was twelve Yojanas and the breadth was three Yojanas. Considering
the Yojana unit of 169.25 meters, Ayodhyā city had a length of
2031 meters (two km) and the breadth of 507.75 meters (0.5 km)
[vk;rk n”k p }s p ;kstukfu egkiqjhA Jherh =hf.k foLrh.kkZ lqfoHkäk egk
iFkkAA].40 It may also be noted that none of the Saṁhitā, Brāhmaṇa and
Upaniṣad texts mentioned the unit of Yojana. Ṣadviṁśa Brāhmaṇa
referred to the unit of Aśvīna. The word ‘Yojana’ was used in Sūtra
texts for the first time. Evidently, the Rāmāyaṇa cannot be dated
before the era of Saṁhitās, Brāhmaṇas and Upaniṣads.
3. The Rāmāyaṇa refers Taittirīyas (vkpk;Z% rSfÙkjh;k.kke~ vfHk:i% p
osnfor~AA).41 Tittiris were the disciples of Vaiśampāyana who was the
pupil of Veda Vyāsa, and lived around 11100 BCE.
236 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Nātyaśāstra, which was written in the Tretā Yuga. Vālmiki has also
used a vocabulary similar to that of Bharata’s Nātyaśāstra. Therefore,
Bharata Muni and Mātaṅga Muni flourished before the lifetime of
Rāma.
9. The Rāmāyaṇa refers to Kavāṭapuram as the capital of Pāndya kings. The
Sangam literature relates that Kavātapuram was the capital of Pāndya
kings during the period of second Sangam era (6826-3126 BCE).
External Evidence
Manu Smriti (5000 BCE) is the earliest text that indirectly refers to the
Rāmāyaṇa. It refers to Liccḥavis who were the descendants of Rāma.
Śukra Nīti (after 5000 BCE) also refers to the Rāmāyaṇa. Later texts like
Kātyāyana Smriti and Garga Saṁhitā of the pre-Mahābhārata era also
have the references of the Rāmāyaṇa. Evidently, none of the texts written
in Vedic or Post-Vedic Sanskrit language and the Sūtra texts of Vedāṅgas
and Upāṅgas refer to the Rāmāyaṇa. Thus, the external evidence also
validates the upper and lower limits of the Rāmāyaṇa timelines to be
around 6000-5000 BCE.
Puṣpaka Vimāna
The ancestors of Rāvaṇa had politically dominated in South India and
Sri Lanka during pre-Rāmāyaṇa era. Vālmiki Rāmāyaṇa informs us that
Rāvaṇa and Vaiśravaṇa were the sons of Viśravas and Kaikeśi. Seemingly,
Vaiśravaṇa became the king of Sri Lanka and Rāvaṇa inherited the
kingdom of his father in South India. The golden city of Lankapuri was
designed and built by Viśvakarmā. Lankāpurī was the most beautiful
Tretā Yuga (6777-5577 BCE) and the Age of Rāmāyaṇa (5677-5577 BCE) | 239
city of the world during the Rāmāyaṇa era. Rāvaṇa forcibly took over
the city of Lankāpurī and Puṣpaka Vimāna from his brother. Vaiśravaṇa
had no other option but to emigrate northwards and became the King of
Alakāpurī of Yakśas.
Viśvakarmā was the earliest civil engineer of the Rigvedic period.
His descendants were also known as Viśvakarmā. They pursued the
profession of their forefathers. Viśvakarmā, the contemporary of
Vaiśravaṇa and Rāvaṇa, made a flying chariot named as Puṣpaka Vimāna.
Interestingly, King Śālva of Saubha (11150-11050 BCE) was the first to use
Vimāna when he attacked the city of Dvāravatī of Devakīputra Krishna.47
In all probability, Vimāna or Puṣpaka Vimāna was like a hot air balloon
carrying a specially designed chariot. Rāma, along with Sītā, Lakśmaṇa
and Hanuman, boarded the Puṣpaka Vimāna and returned to Ayodhyā
from Sri Lanka in just eighteen days. The Rāmāyaṇa describes Puṣpaka
Vimāna resembling a summit of mount Meru (tam Meruśikharākāram
nirmitam Viśvakarmaṇā) that indicates the size of a huge air balloon.
The description of the take-off of Puṣpaka Vimāna in the Rāmāyaṇa
as “Utpapāta Vihāyasam” also indicates the ride of a hot air balloon.
Interestingly, selected natural silk with appropriate coatings can be
excellent balloon material. Viśvakarmā of the Rāmāyaṇa era might have
used natural silk to make the fabric of hot air balloon. According to
Zoroastrian history, the Kayanian King Kai Khusrow also travelled in an
aerial vehicle (hot air balloon) from Iran to China (Xinxiang).
script near sea. He hung it in a public place so that someone having the
knowledge of this extinct script may decipher it. Finally, Kālidāsa himself
deciphered it and found only one pāda of a śloka written by Hanuman.
Thus, Kālidāsa was the first epigraphist of the world. Most probably,
Kālidāsa I, the author of Meghadūtam, found the clay tablet of Hanuman
near Rameshvaram. He lived around 780-709 BCE.
vvv
6
Dvāpara Yuga (5577-3176 BCE) and
the Epoch of
Mahābhārata War (3162 BCE)
Many scholars have attempted to arrive at the date of the Mahābhārata War
as starting from 5561 BCE to 1100 BCE, based on internal astronomical
evidence. But they have ignored the epigraphic, literary and traditional
evidence in the last 100 years of Indological research. Modern historians
have either viewed the Mahābhārata as a fiction, or roughly fixed the
date of the Mahābhārata War around 1000-800 BCE, ignoring internal,
epigraphic, literary and traditional evidence. Thus, a divergence of opinion
still exists today. The real problem is that the historians and Indologists
have neither verified nor falsified the traditional date of the Mahābhārata
recorded in epigraphic and literary sources.
I would insist that we need to correct our methodology. There
is an unbroken and continuous chronological history starting from
the Mahābhārata War to the post-Gupta period recorded in Purāṇas,
inscriptions and other literary sources. It would lead to numerous
chronological inconsistencies if we ignore the traditional evidence.
Therefore, it is extremely important to arrive at the traditional date of the
Mahābhārata War validated by the sheet anchors of Indian chronology.
Thereafter, we must critically examine the internal evidence to arrive at
the accurate dates of the events of the Mahābhārata era.
Aihole Inscription and the Date of the Mahābhārata War (3162 BCE)
Epigraphic evidence also supports the date of the Mahābhārata War given
in the literary sources. The Nidhanpur copper plates of Bhāskaravarman
(5th century BCE) record that the lineage of Naraka ruled for 3000 years in
Pragjyotiṣa and thereafter, Puṣyavarman ascended the throne in 7th century
BCE.11 Bhagadatta, the descendant of Naraka Dynasty, participated in the
Mahābhārata War and supported Pāndavas. Bhāskaravarman, the author
of Nidhanpur plates, was the descendant of Bhagadatta and reigned over
Kāmarūpa (Assam and northern parts of Bangladesh) in the 5th century
BCE. Thus, the Nidhanpur plates indirectly indicate the traditional date of
the Mahābhārata to be around the 32nd century BCE.
The Aihole inscription of the early Chālukya King Pulakeśin II dated
in Śaka 556 elapsed (27 BCE) explicitly mentions that 30 + 3000 + 100 +
5 = 3135 years elapsed up to 27 BCE from the year of the Mahābhārata
War; that means 3135 + 27 = 3162 BCE was the year of the Mahābhārata
War.12 Western historians distorted the statement of Aihole inscription
“Sahābda- śata-yukteṣu” into “Saptābda- śata-yukteṣu” and calculated that
30 + 3000 + 700 + 5 = 3735 years elapsed and not 3135 years. Considering
the epoch of the Śakānta era (78 CE) as the epoch of the Śaka era (583
BCE), historians have arrived the year 3102 BCE [3735-(556 +78) = 3102]
and concluded that Ravikirti, the author of the Aihole inscription, referred
to the epoch of the Kaliyuga as the epoch of the Mahābhārata War. None
of the Indian literary sources refer to the epochal year of Kaliyuga as the
year of the Mahābhārata War.
Therefore, the reading “Sahābda-śata-yukteṣu” must be the correct
version. Thus, the Aihole inscription tells us that 3135 years elapsed from
“Bhāratāt Āhavāt”, meaning “the war of Bharatas”, i.e., the Mahābhārata
War. Thus, the year of the Mahābhārata War was 3162 BCE as recorded in
the Aihole inscription.
gradually forgot the epoch of the Yudhiṣṭhira era and regularly referred to
the epoch of 3102 BCE as the epoch of Kaliyuga.
çkIrk pk| {k;k; u%AA).16 A lunar eclipse occurred on 9th Jan 3126 BCE
and a solar eclipse occurred on 24th Jan 3126 BCE.
6. Sh. Narahari Achar mistakenly assumed that Saturn was near Rohiṇī
and Mars executed a retrograde motion before reaching Jyeṣṭhā
Nakśatra in the same year. Thus, he fixed the date of the Mahābhārata
War around 3067 BCE. In fact, the Mahābhārata does not indicate
that these two events occurred in the same year. The Mahābhārata
clearly mentions that Mars executed a retrograde motion close
to Jyeṣṭhā Nakśatra in the year of the Mahābhārata War. But the
Mahābhārata makes only a general statement about the regular
occultation of Rohiṇī (ε Tauri) by Saturn.
Arundhati-Vasiṣṭha Observation
Vyāsa tells Dhritarāṣṭra that the sky used to burn during sunrise and
sunset. It used to rain blood and bones. Arundhati also used to walk
ahead of Vasiṣṭha (mHks la/;s çdk”ksrs fn”kka nkglefUors । vklhn~ #f/kjo’kaZ p
vfLFko’kaZ p HkkjrAA ;k pkS’kk foJqrk jktaL=SyksD;s lk/kqlaerk । v#U/krh r;kI;s’k
ofl’B% i`’Br% —r%AA).26 Evidently, Vyāsa referred to these bad omens as
the events of the past because he used the verb “vklhRk~” in past tense. He
also indirectly cautioned Dhritarāṣṭra that the same can repeat again. At
the end of the Chapter Three of Udyoga Parva, it is stated: “After carefully
listening to the words of his father (Vyāsa), Dhritarāṣṭra says, I agree that
such events (bad omens) occurred in the past (iqjk) and undoubtedly these
events may occur again (firqoZpks fu”kE;Srn~ /k`rjk’Vªks·czohfnne~। fn’Ve~ ,rr~
iqjk eU;s Hkfo’;fr u la”k;%AA).27 Thus, Vyāsa referred to the astronomical
event of Arundhati walking ahead of Vasiṣṭha that occurred in the
past.
256 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Kārttika, the Last Month of Śarad Ritu, During the Mahābhārata Era
Udyoga Parva unambiguously indicates Kārttika month to be the last
month of Śarad Ritu (dkSeqns ekfl jsoR;ka ”kjnUrs fgekxes।).28 In Sanskrit
literature, Kārttika Māsa is well known as Kaumuda Māsa. In Simhalese
language, Kārttika month is also known as Kaumuda month.29 Sh.
Nilesh Oak argues that Mārgaśīrṣa month was the first month of Śarad
Ritu during the Mahābhārata era. He quotes “eklkuka ekxZ”kh’kksZfLe” from
the Bhagavad Gitā but it simply indicates that Mārgaśīrṣa has been
traditionally considered to be a sacred month since the post-Vedic era.
There is no credible evidence to establish that Mārgaśīrṣa was the first
month of Śarad season during the Mahābhārata era.
vvv
7
Devakīputra Vāsudeva Krishna
of the Rigvedic Era and
Krishna of the Mahābhārata Era
The evolution of ancient Indian calendric Yuga system – from the five-
year Yuga and the twenty-year Chaturyuga of Vedic and post-Vedic era, to
the Chaturyuga of 4320000 years of the post-Rāmāyaṇa era – had posed a
great challenge to the Sūtas (Puranic updaters) of the post-Mahābhārata
era. Unfortunately, the original texts of Purāṇas of the pre-Mahābhārata
era and Purāṇas compiled by Vyāsa of the Mahābhārata era are not
extant today. Seemingly, the available texts of Purāṇas and Itihasa (the
Rāmāyaṇa, the Mahābhārata, the Yogavāsiṣṭha and more) have been
recompiled from the Maurya period to the post-Gupta period. The main
objective of the periodic recompilation was to document more and more
ancient Upākhyānas (historical legends) and mythological narratives of
Devas, and also to update the genealogical chronology of various kings.
The Puranic ślokas related to Upākhyānas were periodic additions to the
original Purāṇa texts compiled by Vyāsa, whereas the ślokas related to the
genealogies had been periodically updated.
It appears that Itihasa texts like the Rāmāyaṇa and the Mahābhārata
were also recompiled during the Maurya and the post-Maurya eras. The
popularity of Adhbuta Rasa led to the evolution of the mythological
narrative of Itihasa. Since, the ancient Sanskrit words “Kapi”, “Garuḍa”
and “Rikśa” became synonymous to monkey, vulture and bear respectively
in Laukika Sanskrit, Sanskrit poets started imagining them as monkeys,
vultures and bears to induce “Adbhuta Rasa”. Interestingly, the vāhanas of
Devatas (deities) like Mūṣaka, Vyāghra, Simha, Mayūra, Nandi, Garuda,
264 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Śunaka, Haṁsa, Makara, Śuka, Ulūka, were actually human beings who
were either the Sārathis of the chariots of Devatas or carried Devatas on
their back. Gradually, these ancient Sanskrit names became synonymous
with names of animal and bird species in Laukika Sanskrit. Travelling on
the back of a strong man was practiced even during the Colonial era in
India. The following photograph of a British merchant being carried by a
lady on her back in Bengal has been taken in 1903.
the village got its name from the Jambunatheshvar temple but this Śiva
temple itself is named after Jambunath. Evidently, Jambunath was none
other than Jāmbavān, the father of Jāmbavatī. Since the Velir or Satyaputra
kings were the progeny of Jāmbavatī, the Śiva Temple of Jambai village
was named after Jambunath or Jāmbavān. Thus, we can conclusively
establish that the ancestors of the Velir kings had migrated from the city
of Dvāravatī and they were the progeny of Devakīputra Krishna and
Jāmbavatī.
Bhāgavata Purāṇa relates that Devakīputra Krishna married
Jāmbavatī, daughter of King Jāmbavān. Jāmbavatī was the mother of
Sāmba, Sumitra, Purujit, Śatajit, Sahasrajit, Vijaya, Chitraketu, Vasuman,
Dravida and Kratu. Thus, Dravida was the son of Krishna I and Jāmbavatī.
These Velir kings, or the descendants of Dravida, migrated to South India
and established their kingdom in the region between Tondaimandalam
and the Chola Kingdom. Manusmriti mentions that the Dravidas were
the Vrātya Kśatriyas because Jāmbavatī, mother of Dravida, was probably
a non-Kśatriya princess.
According to Kapilar, forty-eight generations or forty-eight ancestors
of ancient Irunko kings or ancient Velir kings reigned at Dvāravatī. He
mentioned the title of “Settirunko” which means “Jyeṣṭha Irunko” or
Irunkovel I. There were many Velir kings who had the title of “Irunkovel”.
Some Tamil inscriptions refer to the Velir kings as Irunko Muttaraisar,
i.e., ancient Irunko kings. Therefore, Kapilar refers to the first Irunkovel
as “Settirunko”. Most probably, Irunkovel I was the forty-ninth Velir king
who reigned at Dvāravatī.
Seemingly, forty-nine descendants of King Dravida reigned at
Dvāravatī approximately for 1650 years, from 11050 BCE to 9400 BCE,
considering the average reign of 33 years for each king. Dvāravatī was
submerged by the sea around 9400-9300 BCE, during the reign of
Irunkovel I, the forty-ninth king.
According to oceanographic studies, sea level suddenly rose 28m
in 500 years, about 12000-11500 years ago. This accelerated sea level of
10000-9400 BCE has been named Meltwater Pulse 1B. Many Yādava
families had to migrate eastwards and southwards. It appears that Indian
Devakīputra Vāsudeva Krishna of the Rigvedic Era and Krishna of the... | 273
1. There was an ancient city which was built on the two islands in the
Gulf of Khambat. The fortress found is situated 131 ft (40m) below
the current sea level.
2. The Southern Metropolis (the first Dwārakā) was dated at the end of
the Second Ice Age, around 11000 BCE.
3. Sh. Badrinarayan of NIOT found that a couple of palaeochannels of
old rivers were discovered in the middle of the Cambay area, under
20-40m underwater, at a distance of about 20 km from the present
day coast: One over a length of 9.2 km and the other 9 km. Evidently,
the southern palaeochannel was indeed Mahānadī, as recorded in
Harivaṁśa, flowing through the city of Dvāravatī.
4. To the south of this township, in the Gulf of Cambay, side scan sonar
picked up a drowned dead coral colony 400m long, about 200m wide,
and at 40m deep under water, substantiated later by sampling. It is a
well-known fact that these corals live in hardly 2 to 3m water depth,
very near coastal areas. They require a clean environment and good
sunlight. Obviously, the southern metropolis appears to have been
near a sea coast at a particular point of time, when the metropolis
itself stood on dry land with a good free-flowing river, and was a
major bustling city.
5. It is seen that these features are 5m x 4m size on the eastern side,
whereas the westernmost part had dimensions of 16m x 15m. The
habitation sites are all seen to be laid in a tight grid-like pattern
indicating a good sense of town planning by Viśvakarmā.
6. There is a rectangular (41m x 25m) shaped depression wherein one
can see steps gradually going down to reach a depth of about 7m.
Surrounding this depression there is a wall-like projection on all sides.
This looks like a tank or bathing facility under 40m of sea water.
7. A black alluvium that somewhat semi-consolidated and collected
above the river conglomerate gave an age of 19000 BP. Obviously the
river has been flowing at least between 19000 years BP, prior to Glacial
Maxima, and up to 3000 BP. This shows that the palaeochannel in the
north was active and a riverine regime existed at least from about
19000 BP.
Devakīputra Vāsudeva Krishna of the Rigvedic Era and Krishna of the... | 277
Sri Krishna and Arjuna reach Hastinapura and narrate their victories
over various kingdoms to Dharmarāja.
Dharmarāja of Hastinapura now prepares to perform final rituals
of Aśvamedha. Vyāsa suggests that sixty-four men should go to
Ganga accompanied by their wives to fetch water for Aśvamedha. Sri
Krishna was accompanied by Rukmiṇī, Satyabhāmā and Jāmbavatī.
Finally, Dharmarāja’s Aśvamedha concludes successfully. However,
a few days later, one Nakula (a mongoose?) comes to the court of
Dharmarāja and says that his Aśvamedha is nothing compared to that
of Ucchavritti of Saktuprastha. Brāhmaṇa Ucchavritti was a resident
of Kurukshetra (läqçLFksu oks uk;a ;KLrqY;ks ujkf/ki। mPpo`ÙksoZnkU;L;
dq#{ks=fuokfluAA ).
2. According to Tamil legends of the Sangam era, Alli Arasani was the
only child of the Pāndya king. She learnt Yuddhavidyā in a Gurukula.
Once Neenmughan (Nilamukha) usurped Pāndyan Kingdom but
Alli Arasani led the Pāndyan army and killed Neenmughan. Thus,
she succeeded her father and became the queen of Then Madurai
(ancient Madurai that was submerged by the sea). She reigned over
the Pāndya Kingdom, extended up to Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka was well
connected through land route and Tāmraparṇi River of the Pāndya
Kingdom used to flow into Sri Lanka before 7000 BCE. Arjuna came
to Madurai following the Aśvamedha horse. He wanted to marry Alli
Arasani but she sent the Nāgas to kill him. Arjuna somehow entered
the palace of Alli Arasani in the guise of a Nāga and slept with her.
He also tied Tāli on her. Finally, Arjuna succeeded in marrying Alli
Arasani. Alli Arasani was also considered to be an incarnation of
Mīnākśī.
3. Jaiminiya Aśvamedha also relates the story of Nala and Damayanti
and Kuśa and Lava, the sons of Rāma. Evidently, the available text of
Jaiminīya Aśvamedha was written after the Rāmāyaṇa era.
4. The story of Jaiminīya Aśvamedha indicates that Dharmarāja,
Bhima, Arjuna (Phalguna), Sri Krishna Vriṣadhvaja and Meghavarṇa
were all contemporaries of the Ikśvāku king Māndhātā and his
son Muchukunda. Māndhātā had performed 100 Aśvamedhas.
284 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
vvv
8
The Date of Āryabhaṭa, Lāṭadeva,
Vriddhāryabhaṭa and Parāśara
Three Āryabhaṭas
There were three Āryabhaṭas in the tradition of Indian astronomy.
Historians generally agree that there were only two Āryabhaṭas. One was
the author of Āryabhaṭīyam and another was the author of Mahārya-
Siddhānta. But the author of Mahārya-Siddhānta clearly mentions that
Parāśara and Vriddhāryabhaṭa Siddhāntas had been established after very
little time had elapsed from the epoch of Kaliyuga (,rr~ fl)kar};a bZ’kn~
;krs dykS ;qxs tkrEk~).1
Parāśara was the father of Vyāsa and lived before the Mahābhārata
War. Vriddhāryabhaṭa flourished before Āryabhaṭa. Therefore, we can
conclude that Vriddhāryabhaṭa also lived before the Mahābhārata War
(3162 BCE). The author of Mahārya-Siddhānta also records that he has
recompiled the Siddhānta of Vriddhāryabhaṭa in his words (o`)k;ZHkVçksäkr~
fl)karkr~ ;Uegkdkykr~ A ikBxreqPNsna fo”ksf’kra e;k Loksä~;k-----).2 Historians
have speculated that Āryabhaṭa might have written another book
called “Āryabhaṭa-Siddhānta”, which is now lost. In reality, the text of
Vriddhāryabhaṭa Siddhānta was available in ancient times. Later, another
Āryabhaṭa has recompiled the ancient Vriddhāryabhaṭa Siddhānta in his
treatise “Mahārya-Siddhānta”.
Thus, there were three Āryabhaṭas. Vriddhāryabhaṭa (Āryabhaṭa
I), the founder of Ārya-Siddhānta, lived before the Mahābhārata War
(3162 BCE). Āryabhaṭa (Āryabhaṭa II), the author of Āryabhaṭīyam, lived
after Vriddhāryabhaṭa. Al Beruni also records that a senior Āryabhaṭa
lived before the Āryabhaṭa of Āryabhaṭīyam. Āryabhaṭa III, the author
of Mahārya-Siddhānta lived after Brahmagupta. Let us discuss the
birthplace and the date of Āryabhaṭa II. Evidently, Vriddhāryabhata must
The Date of Āryabhaṭa, Lāṭadeva, Vriddhāryabhaṭa and Parāśara | 289
we must fix the date of Bhāskara I based on the internal evidence of his
available works “Mahābhāskarīyam” and “Laghubhāskarīyam”.
Interestingly, Sh. Bibhutibhushan Datta wrote an article titled “The
Two Bhāskaras” in 1930.11 He obtained two copies of “Laghubhāskarīyam”
from Government Oriental Manuscripts Library, Madras. He says that
there is a verse containing Śakābda correction in these manuscripts.
The epoch used in that verse is the year 444 (139 BCE) of the Śaka era
(583 BCE). Evidently, Bhāskara I must be dated after Śaka 444 (139
BCE). It may be noted that Śaṅkaranārāyaṇa places Bhāskara I after
Varāhamihira and Bhāskara II (Śaka 1036-1105 = 453-522 CE) places
him before Brahmagupta. Brahmagupta himself records that he was born
in Śaka 520 (63 BCE) and wrote “Brahmasphuṭasiddhānta” in Śaka 550
(33 BCE). Brahmagupta also wrote “Khandakhadyaka” in Śaka 587 (3
BCE). Therefore, we can fix the date of Brahmagupta around 63 BCE-
17 CE. Thus, Bhāskara I was a junior contemporary of Varāhamihira and
senior contemporary of Brahmagupta. Accordingly, we can fix the date of
Bhāskara I around 100-20 BCE.
It may be noted that ancient Indian astronomers have reset the
epoch of Śaka era (583 BCE) and fixed the epoch in 78 CE considering
the rare conjunction of Sun, Moon and Jupiter in Aries on 1st Apr 78
CE. Indian astronomers have introduced the concept of Ayanāṁśa in
78 CE for accurate astronomical calculations. Many astronomers like,
Varāhamihira, Bhāskara, Kālidāsa, Mañjula, Brahmagupta and Haridatta
proposed different epochs like Śaka 427 (156 BCE), Śaka 420 (163 BCE),
Śaka 434 (149 BCE) Śaka 444 (139 BCE), Śaka 445 (138 BCE) and Śaka
587 (4 CE). Indian astronomers were in the quest for a unanimous epoch
like 3101 BCE. Thus, they reset the epoch in Kali 3179, or 78 CE. It is
evident that Indian astronomers of Bhāskara tradition of the 2nd century
CE may have inserted a verse referring the epoch of Kaliyuga 3179 in
Mahābhāskarīyam and Laghubhāskarīyam with an objective to make
these works in line with the epoch of Kaliyuga 3179. This is the reason
why we find the reference of Kaliyuga 3179 in Mahābhāskarīyam and
Laghubhāskarīyam, even though Bhāskara I flourished before Kaliyuga
3179.
The Date of Āryabhaṭa, Lāṭadeva, Vriddhāryabhaṭa and Parāśara | 295
In fact, Āryabhaṭa simply says that 3600 years and three Yugapādas
had elapsed just before the Mahābhārata War (“Bharatāt purvam”).
Evidently, Āryabhaṭa considers an ancient epoch of 6773-6772 BCE
for “Ahargaṇa”. Seemingly, Ancient Brahma Siddhānta introduced
the cycle of twelve years or sixty years in 6773 BCE. The tradition of
Simhastha Kumbha (Jupiter in Leo) of Ujjain and Nasik is the oldest
because the first twelve-year cycle commenced when Jupiter entered
Kanyā Rāśi (Virgo) and ended when Jupiter was in Simha Rāśi (Leo).
Thus, 6773 BCE was the Prabhava Saṁvatsara in Brahma Siddhānta,
whereas 6777 BCE was the Prabhava Saṁvatsara in Mayāsura’s Sūrya
Siddhānta. Āryabhaṭa refers to the epoch of 6773 BCE and says that
sixty cycles of sixty years have elapsed in 3173 BCE. Āryabhaṭa indicates
the commencement of the Kaliyuga at midnight on 5th Mar 3173 BCE,
Chaitra Śukla Pratipadā, Guruvāra, in the 1st year of the sixty-year cycle,
i.e., Prabhava Saṁvatsara, when Jupiter was in Aries. I have already
established, based on the Aihole inscription, that the Mahābhārata War
took place in 3162 BCE. Thus, Āryabhaṭa says that he was born in 3173-
3172 BCE (when 3600 years elapsed from the epoch of 6773-6772 BCE)
and wrote Āryabhaṭīyam in 3150-3149 BCE (when he was 23 years old).
According to Āryabhaṭa, the first year of sixty-year cycle commences
when Jupiter enters Aries. Jupiter was in Aries in the year 3173-3172
BCE. Thus, Āryabhaṭa indicates that the fourth Yugapāda commenced
on Chaitra Śukla Pratipadā, Guruvāra, at midnight on 5th Mar 3173
BCE. The day of 5th Mar 3173 BCE was Thursday considering the epoch
of Mayāsura’s Sūrya Siddhānta, i.e., 22nd Feb 6778 BCE, Sunday.
The Chronology:
Earth’s Obliquity
6778 BCE 24.13 degrees
5000 BCE 24.10 degrees
4000 BCE 24.06 degrees
3162 BCE 24.02 degrees
2800 BCE 24 degrees
2000 BCE 23.55 degrees
1000 BCE 23.49 degrees
0 CE 23.41 degrees
1000 CE 23.34 degrees
1500 CE 23.30 degrees
lengths had been increased in multiples of 432000 years. But it was clearly
stated in the Mahābhārata that the Dvāpara Yuga had 2400 years and the
Tretā Yuga ended with the death of Rāma. Thus, we have clear indications
of the end of Dvāpara Yuga and the beginning of Tretā Yuga. Since the
Dvāpara Yuga had the duration of 2400 years, most probably, the Tretā
Yuga ended around 5577 BCE. Thus, Tretā Yuga had only 1200 years.
There was a divergence of opinion regarding the beginning of Kaliyuga
but all indicate the beginning of Kaliyuga in the 32nd century BCE (from
3176 BCE to 3101 BCE). When the Yudhiṣṭhira era or the epoch of the
Mahābhārata War (3162 BCE) was discontinued around 118 BCE (3044th
year), as indicated by Kālidāsa in his Jyotirvidābharaṇam, the epoch of
Kaliyuga (3101 BCE) of Sūrya Siddhānta became popular among Indian
astronomers.
Most probably, Vriddhāryabhaṭa lived before 3176 BCE. Another
Āryabhaṭa (Āryabhaṭa III) recompiled the ancient Vriddhāryabhaṭa
Siddhānta in his treatise “Mahārya-Siddhānta” around 100-500 CE.
Pārāśara Siddhānta
There were many Pārāśaras. Parāśara I, the son of Śakti and the grandson
of Vasiṣṭha, lived around 11200 BCE. He was the author of Rigvedic
hymns18 and the founder of the Pravara gotra of Pārāśara. Parāśara I was
the father of Veda Vyāsa (11180-11050 BCE). Pārāshara II was the father
of Vyāsa of the Mahābhārata era and lived around 3280-3200 BCE. He
was the author of Pārāśara Siddhānta. A manuscript of Pārāśara Siddhānta
is available in the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune. This
manuscript is incomplete and only first two chapters are available. It starts
with the definition of Kalpa period (4320000000 years) and gives the
revolutions of planets in a Kalpa. Evidently, this manuscript of Pārāśara
Siddhānta clearly follows the tradition of Siddhantic astronomy. Most
probably, Pārāśara of the Mahābhārata era, a senior contemporary of
Vriddhāryabhaṭa, was the author of Pārāśara Siddhānta. Mahāryabhaṭa
Siddhānta mentions that Pārāśara and Vriddhāryabhaṭa Siddhāntas
became popular in the beginning of Kaliyuga. Most probably, Pārāśara III
also composed Pārāśara Smriti, which became popular in the beginning
The Date of Āryabhaṭa, Lāṭadeva, Vriddhāryabhaṭa and Parāśara | 305
of Kaliyuga.
Sh. RN Iyengar painstakingly collected the quotations and fragments
of Pārāśaratantra from various astronomical texts and claimed that
Pārāśaratantra was the original treatise of Pārāśara of the Mahābhārata
era. He established the date of Pārāśaratantra around 1350-1130 BCE. In
all probability, a descendant of Pārāśara gotra or a disciple of Pārāśara
Siddhānta composed Pārāśaratantra around 1350-1130 BCE. Thus,
Pārāśara Siddhānta was written around 3280-3200 BCE, whereas
Pārāśaratantra was composed around 1350-1130 BCE. Therefore, Pārāśara
of the Mahābhārata era was not the author of Pārāśaratantra.
There is another text called “Brihat Pārāśara Horāśāstra” on
astrology. It refers to Rāma, Krishna and Buddha incarnations of Vishnu.
Interestingly, this Horāśāstra predicts that a great king named Śālivāhana
(7th century BCE) will be born.19 Varāhamihira (146-72 BCE) quotes
Pārāśara’s astrological statements in his Brihat Saṁhitā. It is possible that
Pārāśara III of the Mahābhārata era was the original author of Brihat
Pārāśara Horāśāstra but it was recompiled and enlarged by a descendant of
Pārāśara gotra, after the reign of King Śālivāhana, and before the lifetime
of Varāhamihira, around 600-300 BCE.
Seemingly, the Pārāśara Siddhānta became popular after the
Mahābhārata era. Gradually, Indian astronomers understood the accuracy
of Sūrya Siddhānta and started following the Sūrya Siddhānta around the
2nd century BCE. This may be the reason why the epoch of Yudhiṣṭhira
was abandoned in the 3044th year, as mentioned in Jyotirvidābharaṇam
of Kālidāsa. Evidently, the epoch of Yudhiṣṭhira era (3162 BCE) was
replaced by the epoch of the Kaliyuga era (3101 BCE) in the 2nd and
1st centuries BCE. Kalidāsa gives the date of Jyotirvidābharaṇam in the
epoch of Kaliyuga era. Indian astronomers of the first century introduced
the epoch of Śakānta (78 CE), considering the perfect conjunction of Sun,
Moon and Jupiter on 1st Apr 78 CE, Chaitra Śukla Pratipadā.
vvv
9
The Chronology of Ancient Indian
Dynasties and Kingdoms
(14500-3162 BCE)
evolution of these rituals and early Vedic calendar might have taken
place in a period of 1500 years. Therefore, the early Vedic period from
16000 BCE to 14500 BCE may be named as “Proto-Vedic Period”.
The marine archaeological research in the Gulf of Khambat finds
strong evidence that supports the presence of human settlements in
ancient India from at least 30000 BCE. The ancient Indians of the Gulf of
Khambat region were making potteries and drying them in the sun around
30000-18000 BCE. From about 18000 BCE onwards, they appear to have
succeeded in making fired pottery. According to scientific studies, Indian
subcontinent had experienced semi-arid climate between 22000-16500
BCE. Monsoons became normal around 16500 BCE. The carbonised rice
grains found in Sant Kabir Nagar district of Uttar Pradesh clearly indicate
that rice was eaten on the eastern Ganga plains at least from 11000 BCE
and the history of agriculture in India dates back to 16000 BCE.1 The
domestication of cattle also started almost at the same time. Interestingly,
there was a strong connection between domestication of cattle, cultivation
of crops and the evolution of a basic seasonal calendar. Thus, the ancient
Indians had already learnt the basics of agriculture, cattle-rearing and the
seasonal calendar by 16000 BCE, which laid strong foundations for the
relatively advanced civilisation of Proto-Vedic Period.
Indra I, the son of Rishi Kaśyapa and Aditi, performed 100 Aśvamedha
Yajñas and became the King of Devas. Brihaspati I (14025 BCE) was the
Purohita of King Indra I.
The Aiḍa Dynasty: The Progeny of Manu and Iḍā (14050 BCE)
King Manu, a descendant of early Manu dynasty married Iḍā around 14050
BCE and their progeny was called Mānava or the Aiḍa Vaṁśa. Maitrāyaṇī
Saṁhitā tells us that Manu offered ghee to the gods in Vedic Yajña. There
appeared a marriageable beautiful girl named Iḍā.10 Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa
also gives a similar narrative and mentions that Iḍā was claimed by Mitra
and Varuṇa but she preferred to live with King Manu. Interestingly,
Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa states that Iḍā established three Agnis, Āhavanīya,
Gārhaspatya and Anvāhāryapachana, for Manu.11
314 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Evidently, Iḍā was the founder of the Vedic rituals around 14000
BCE. She was also known as Ghritapadī. Purāṇas mistakenly identified
Iḍā and Ilā as identical. In fact, Iḍā was the wife of Manu, whereas Ilā was
the daughter of Vaivasvata Manu. Vāyu Purāṇa mentions that the kings of
Ikśvāku dynasty originated from the Aiḍa dynasty.12
,sMfe{okdqoa”kL; ç—fra ifjp{krsA
,sMoa”ks·Fk lEHkwrk% rFkk ps{okdoks u`ik%AA
Therefore, Iḍā cannot be identified with Ilā. The Manu dynasty also
came to be known as the Aiḍa dynasty after 14000 BCE. The progeny of
Iḍā was known as Aida.
In CE
1. Bharata Aśvamedha 13450-13400 BCE
2. Bhārata Āśvamedha 13400-13380 BCE
3. Suhotra 13380-13340 BCE
4. Ajamīḍha I 13340-13300 BCE
5. Kaṇva, Medhātithi and Kaṇvāyanas 13300 BCE
onwards
Indian civilization. Rigveda gives the names of the seven rivers as Ganga,
Yamuna, Sarasvati, Śutudrī, Marudvridhā, Ārjikīyā and Sindhu. Rigveda
also tells us that Paruṣṇī was a tributary of Śutudrī (Satlej), Asiknī was
a tributary of Marudvridhā, and Vitastā and Suṣomā were tributaries of
Ārjikīyā. Kubhā (Kabul River), Triṣṭāma, Gomatī, Krumu (Kurram River)
and Mehatnu were the tributaries of Sindhu River.
bea es x³~xs ;equs ljLofr ”kqrqfæ lrsea lprk i#’.;kA
vflDU;k e#}~/ksZ forLr;kthZdh;s ”k.kqZáklq’kkse;kAA
r’VkZe;k ijFkea ;kros ltw% llrZ~ok jl;k”osR;k r;kA
roa flU/kks dqHk;k xkserha d#eqEesgRUok ljFka ;kfHkjh;ls AA
Historians mistakenly identified Asiknī as Chandrabhāgā. If Asiknī
was Chandrabhāgā (Chinab), how was it a tributary of Marudvridhā (not
yet identified)? How was Vitastā a tributary of Ārjikīyā? Evidently, the
course of the rivers of Vedic era had changed after the Rigvedic era. Some
of the rivers, like Marudvridhā, Asiknī, Ārjikīyā, and Paruṣṇī, gradually
became extinct after the great flood around 11200 BCE. Probably, the
glacial lake of Kashmir Valley was the origin of Asiknī, Marudvridhā and
Ārjikīyā rivers. The entire Vedic literature clearly indicates that Vedic
culture originally evolved in this Sapta-Sindhu region. Seemingly, the
people of Sapta-Sindhu region had periodically migrated in all directions,
starting from 14000 BCE to the post-Rāmāyaṇa era (5577-3177 BCE).
Therefore, Sapta-Sindhu region was the true cradle of human civilization.
the early kings of Kāshi around 11350-11300 BCE. Most probably, they
belonged to a branch of the Bharata Dynasty. Dāśarājña War took place
around 11250 BCE, during the reign of King Sudāsa Paijavana.
There were many Śivis. Somavaṁśī King Śivi I was the son of Uśīnara I
and Driṣdvatī, a descendant of Anu I. Śivi II was the son of Uśīnara II and
a descendant of the Manu dynasty. Dānava King Hiraṇyakaśipu also had a
son named Śivi III. There was another Śivi IV of the Chandra dynasty who
was a contemporary of Ikśvāku King Anaraṇya.
In CE
1. Chayamāna 11350-11325 BCE
2. Abhāvartin Chāyamāna 11325-11300 BCE
10. Muni
11. Viśvā
12. Tāmrā
13. Surabhi
was Vikukśi but the Rāmāyaṇa tells us that Ikśvāku’s son was Kukśi and
Vikukśi was the son of Kukśi. The legend of Danḍa and Śukrāchārya given
in Uttarakānda indicates that Danḍa, or Danḍaka, was the youngest son of
Ikśvāku. The genealogy of the early descendants given in the inscriptions
of Cholas is different from the genealogy given in Purāṇas. Seemingly,
there were some gaps in the genealogical and chronological account of the
kings of Ikśvāku dynasty. Later updaters of Purāṇas, who were ignorant
of the true chronology, had created a continuous list of the kings of
Ikśvāku dynasty. Therefore, it may be chronologically incorrect to follow
the genealogical lists as given in the Rāmāyaṇa, Mahābhārata, Purāṇas
and Chola inscriptions. We have to critically examine these genealogical
lists with reference to various legends in which other contemporary kings
have been mentioned.
According to historical legends, Māndhātā, son of Yuvanāśva
married the daughter of Chandravaṁśi King Śaśabindu. Kuvalayāśva,
father of Yuvanāśva, was a contemporary of Rishi Uttaṅka. Saubhari refers
to Trasadasyu, son of Purukutsa and grandson of Māndhātā in his hymn
of Rigveda. He married fifty daughters of Māndhātā. Rishi Aṣṭāvakra was
a contemporary of King Janaka and Bhagīratha. We can reconstruct the
following chronological list of early Ikśvāku kings.
also became a rishi. His son Asita lost his ancestral kingdom. Haihayas,
Talajaṅghas and Śaśabindus became enemies of King Asita and they drove
him away from Madhyadesha. Probably, King Bāhu, or Bāhuka, was the
son of Asita. King Bāhu’s son Sagara established his kingdom in Ayodhyā
or Kosala. Thus, the history of Ikśvāku kings of Ayodhyā probably begins
from King Sagara. Seemingly, King Sagara had many sons who killed
Rishi Kapila. Kapila II, son of Rishi Kapila, killed all sons of Sagara except
Barhiketu, Suketu, Dharmaratha and Pañchajana or Pañchananda. Śiva
Purāṇa and Harivaṁśa refer to Pañchajana as the son of Sagara.
Ikśvāku kings of Ayodhyā In CE
Bāhu or Bāhuka
1. Sagara I 11000-10950 BCE
2. Barhiketu, Suketu, Dharmaratha and 10950-10900 BCE
Pañchajana or Pañchananda
3. Bhajeratha or Bhagīratha I 10900-10850 BCE
King Hiraṇyanābha Kauśalya and His Son Para Atnāra (10900 BCE)
Praśnopaniṣad refers to a prince named Hiraṇyanābha of Kosala janapada,
a contemporary of Rishi Pippalāda (10900 BCE). Most probably,
Hiraṇyanābha belonged to the Ikśvāku dynasty. He was the guru of Krita
who had introduced twenty-four new branches of Sāmaveda. Śatapatha
Brāhmaṇa mentions that Para Atnāra (10850 BCE) was the son of
Hiraṇyanābha.
Kālidāsa ends his historical narrative of Raghu Vaṁśa after the death
of Agnivarṇa. Seemingly, the kingdom of Ikśvākus had been gradually
split into many branches after the reign of Agnivarṇa’s wife and also lost
its political dominance in north India. The Rāmāyaṇa gives the following
names of Ikśvāku kings before Aja and Daśaratha but Puranic historians
ignored them for unknown reasons. Garuḍa Purāṇa indicates that the
Videha King Udāvasu was the son of Ayodhyā King Prasuśruta and the
grandson of King Maru.31
In CE
1. Raghu
2. Pravriddha
3. Śaṅkhana
4. Agnivarṇa 6600-6400 BCE
5. Padmavarṇa
6. Śīghra
7. Maru
8. Prasuśruta or Prasuśravā 6400-6350 BCE
9. Aṁbarīṣa 6350-6250 BCE
10. Nahuṣa
11. Nābhāga
that Ikśvāku king Brihadbala died in the Mahābhārata War (3162 BCE).
Kosala and Ayodhyā were two different kingdoms during the Mahābhārata
era. Dīrghayajña was the king of Ayodhyā and Brihadbala was the king of
Kosala. Brihadbala supported Kauravas and was killed by Abhimanyu.
In CE
1. Śīghra II 3450-3400 BCE
2. Maru II 3400-3370 BCE
3. Prasuśruta II 3370-3330 BCE
4. Susandhi 3330-3300 BCE
5. Amarṣa 3300-3260 BCE
6. Mahāsvat 3260-3230 BCE
7. Viśrutavat 3230-3200 BCE
8. Brihadbala 3200-3162 BCE
In CE
1. Brihatkśaya 3162-3100 BCE
2. Urukriya 3100-3050 BCE
3. Vatsavyūha 3050-3000 BCE
4. Prativyoma 3000-2950 BCE
5. Bhānu 2950-2900 BCE
6. Divākara 2900-2850 BCE
7. Sahadeva 2850-2810 BCE
8. Brihadaśva 2810-2770 BCE
9. Bhānuratha 2770-2720 BCE
10. Pratitasya 2720-2680 BCE
11. Supratīka 2680-2650 BCE
12. Marudeva 2650-2610 BCE
342 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
In CE
1. Riṣabhanātha (father of Bharata I and Bāhubali) 14310 BCE
2. Ajitanātha (contemporary of Bhagīratha I, 10900 BCE
grandson of Sagara)
3. Sambhavanātha
4. Abhinandananātha
5. Sumatinātha
(Vālmiki Rāmāyaṇa refers to Sumati)
6. Padmaprabha
7. Supārśvanātha
8. Chandraprabha
9. Puṣpadanta
10. Śītalanātha Before
11. Śreyaṅsanātha Rāmāyana era
12. Vasupūjya
13. Vimalanātha
14. Anantanātha
15. Dharmanātha
16. Śāntinātha
17. Kunthunātha
18. Aranātha
19. Mallinātha
20. Munisuvrata (He was a contemporary of the 5600 BCE
Rāmāyaṇa era but he did not belong to the
Ikśvāku dynasty.)
21. Naminātha 4500 BCE
22. Neminātha (He was a cousin brother of Sri 3200-3100 BCE
Krishna of the Mahābhārata era.)
23. Pārśvanātha 1539-1439 BCE
24 Mahāvira 1261-1189 BCE
Kingdom. King Mithi was the son of Nimi. The name of Mithilā has been
derived from Mithi. We have no information of the names of the sons of
Mithi. Though Purāṇas speculate Videha as another name of Nimi but it
seems King Videha Mādhava, son of Madhu, migrated from the banks of
Sarasvati River to the banks of Sadānirā River (Gandaki) and established
his kingdom. Taittirīya Kāṭhakam refers to King Janaka Vaideha and Rishi
Gautama.32 Evidently, King Janaka was the son of King Videha. Thus,
“Videha” and “Janaka” became the royal titles of later kings of Videha
Kingdom. Rishi Bhāradwāja Bārhaspatya refers to King Nami, son of
Sāpya, in his hymn of Rigveda.33
We have to arrive at the dates of Bhāradwāja Bārhaspatya and
Gautama Rāhūgaṇa to reconstruct the chronology of early Videha kings.
Bhāradwāja, son of Brihaspati was adopted by King Bharata III. The
genealogy of Bharata III of the Puru dynasty:
In CE
1. Richeyu 11220 BCE
2. Atināra (His daughter Gauri married 11200 BCE
Ikśvāku king Yuvanāśva)
3. Tansu 11150 BCE
4. Surodha or Malina 11100 BCE
5. Dushmanta 11070 BCE
6. Bharata III 11050 BCE
7. Bhāradwāja Bārhaspatya 11000 BCE
Karāla was probably the son of Nami or Nemi. He might have forcibly
carried off a Brāhmaṇa’s daughter and married her as mentioned in
Kautilya Arthaśāstra and Buddha Charita. Kautilya Arthaśāstra mentions
that Bhoja Dānḍakya, son of Danḍaka (Ikśvāku’s youngest son) and
Karāla Janaka, forcibly married a Brāhamaṇa’s daughter and lost his status
as a king. The Mahābhārata mentions the names of ancient Videha kings
like Aindradyumni and Daivarāti. Bālakānda of the Rāmāyaṇa (66.8)
indicates that Devarāta was the eldest son of Nimi. Here is the chronology
of Videha Kings:
In CE
Nimi 11250 BCE
1. Devarāta & Mithi 11225 BCE
2. Daivarāti 11200 BCE
3. Indradyumna 11175 BCE
4. Aindradyumni 11150 BCE
……………….
5. Devamīḍha 11100-11050 BCE
……………….
6. Madhu 11000-10970 BCE
7. Videha Mādhava 10970-10920 BCE
8. Janaka Vaideha 10920-10870 BCE
9. Kratuvid Jānaka 10870-10830 BCE
10. Dharmadhvaja 10830-10800 BCE
11. Mitadhvaja 10800-10770 BCE
12. Khānḍikya 10770-10730 BCE
13. Sapya 10730-10700 BCE
14. Nami or Nemi 10700-10670 BCE
15. Karāla 10670-10630 BCE
Six Purāṇas mention that Nāriṣyanta was the son of King Marutta
Āvīkśita. There was another Nāriṣyanta who was a son of Manu.
Triṇavindu, a descendant of Nāriṣyanta, lived around 11300-11250 BCE
and his daughter Ilavilā married Rishi Pulastya. King Viśāla was the son of
Triṇavindu and Apsarā Ālambuṣā. Thus, Nāriṣyanta was the son of a later
king, named Marutta, and not Marutta Āvīkśita. Brahmānḍa Purāṇa gives
the genealogy of Triṇavindu and Viśāla.40
In CE
Diṣṭa or Nediṣṭa 11950-11900 BCE
(Son of Manu (Chākśuṣa Manu?))
1. Nābhāga 11900-11850 BCE
2. Bhālandana 11850-11800 BCE
3. Vatsaprī 11800-11750 BCE
4. Prāṅśu 11750-11700 BCE
5. Marutta II 11700-11650 BCE
6. Nāriṣyanta 11650-11600 BCE
7. Dama 11600-11550 BCE
8. Rāṣtravardhana 11550-11500 BCE
9. Sudhriti 11500-11470 BCE
10. Nara 11470-11430 BCE
11. Kevala 11430-11400 BCE
12. Bandhumat 11400-11370 BCE
13. Vegavat 11370-11330 BCE
14. Budha 11330-11300 BCE
15. Triṇavindu 11300-11250 BCE
The Chronology of Ancient Indian Dynasties and Kingdoms | 351
around 11200 BCE. Gradually, the Nagas gained the support of Piśāchas
and emerged as political rivals to Kurus and Pāñchālas. According to
legends, Babhruvāhana, son of Arjuna (Phalguna) and Nāga Princess
Chitrāṅgadā of Jaiminīya Aśvamedha era (11050 BCE), came to Jammu
region and founded the city of Babhrupura (known as Babor). Kalhaṇa
refers to Babhrupura as Babbapura.
The legend of Sarpa Satra Yajña states that King Parīkśit was killed
by the Nāga king Takśaka. Parīkśit’s son Janamejaya performed Sarpa
Satra Yajña and determined to kill Takśaka. Rishi Āstika, son of Jaratkaru
and Mānasā, persuaded Janamejaya to set Takśaka free. Rishi Jaratkaru
was a Yāyāvara Brāhmaṇa and married Mānasā, sister of Vāsuki (son of
Rishi Kaśyapa and Kadru). Thus, Rishi Āstika was a junior contemporary
of Kuru King Janamejaya of Āsandīvat. Most probably, the Sarpa Satra
Yajña took place around 11225 BCE. Purāṇas mistakenly identified
King Janamejaya of the Rigvedic era as the son of King Parīkśit of
the Mahābhārata era.
Seemingly, the Nāga kings reigned over Jammu-Kashmir after
11000 BCE. We have no information of Nāga kings who reigned over
Kashmir from 11000 BCE to 5000 BCE. We have also no information of
the descendants of Babhruvāhana who reigned over Jammu region from
11050 BCE to 5000 BCE. According to the traditional history of Jammu,
Ayodhyā king Sudarśan (4800 BCE) had two sons, Agnivarṇa and
Agnigira. The younger brother Agnigira migrated to Shivalik Hills and
settled in the region of present Kathua. He defeated the local kings and
reigned at Bupanagari. He built the cities of Puṣpāvati. Kālidāsa abruptly
ends the history of Raghu Vaṁśa after the death of Agnivarṇa (4800-4780
BCE). Seemingly, Ayodhyā Kingdom became politically vulnerable due
to internal conflicts for succession after the death of Agnivarṇa. Kālidāsa
states that Agnivarṇa’s pregnant wife ascended the throne as the regent of
unborn son of Agnivarṇa. This may be the reason why Agnigira had to
immigrate to Jammu region. Vayusharb, son of Agnigira, succeeded him.
Muni Uttamāchārya was his contemporary who lived in a Śiva temple at
Airwan. He built the city of Airavati (known as Airwan today). Probably,
Airavati was the wife of Vayusharb. After Vayusharb, Parmetra, Puran
The Chronology of Ancient Indian Dynasties and Kingdoms | 355
King Śiva Prakash, a descendant of King Śakti Karan, was ruling over
Jammu during the Mahābhārata era. King Śalya of Madra Kingdom, the
maternal uncle of Nakula and Sahadeva invaded Jambupura and annexed
it. King Śiva Prakash took shelter in inner mountains. Many generations
of King Śiva Prakash lived in mountains.
city came to be known as Mohenjo Daro (mound of the dead men). Thus,
the glorious Roruka dynasty declined abruptly after 3000 BCE.
Seemingly, some of the descendants of Roruka dynasty survived and
migrated to Gujarat or Rajasthan. The legendary King Rai Diyach (2500
BCE?), a descendant of Roruka dynasty built the new city of Roruka
on the banks of Indus River. A historic Hindu temple is situated in the
middle of the Indus River on an island. Śarkarā janapada (known as
Sukkur today) was located close to the new Roruka city. Pāṇini refers to
Śarkarā Janapada.42
only two sons, Ayu and Amāvasu. Viśvāyu, Śrutāyu, Śatāyu and Driḍhāyu
were probably the sons of Puru I.
In CE
1. Ayu 11220 BCE
2. Kśatravriddha 11180 BCE
3. Śunahotra 11150 BCE
4. Kāśa, Kuśa or Śala and Gritsamada 11110 BCE
362 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
In CE
1. Atithi 11650 BCE
2. Suhotra II 11600 BCE
3. Brihat 11580 BCE
4. Ajamīḍha II-Keśinī 11560 BCE
5. Jahnu I 11520 BCE
6. Ajaka 11480 BCE
7. Balākāśva 11440 BCE
8. Kuśika I 11380 BCE
9. Iṣiratha 11350 BCE
10. Kuśika Aiṣirathi (Viśvāmitra II) 11325 BCE
11. Gālava and Aṣṭaka 11300 BCE
12. Lauhi 11275 BCE
13. Kuśika II 11250 BCE
14. Gāthi 11225 BCE
15. Viśvāmitra III 11200 BCE
Gādhi was the father of Viśvāmitra I whereas Gāthi was the father
of Viśvāmitra III. Many Puranic historians erroneously assumed them
to be the same person. Sāyaṇa mentions another Viśvāmitra who was
the son of Iṣiratha. Most probably, Viśvāmitra II was the son of Iṣiratha
who was the father of Gālava and Aṣṭaka. The genealogy given Agni
Purāṇa clearly indicates that Viśvāmitra II was the descendant of Bharata
dynasty. This is the reason why Aitareya Brāhmaṇa44 and Śāṅkhāyana
Śrautasūtra45 refer to Viśvāmitra II as “Bharatarṣabha” (a great leader
of the Bharata dynasty). It is well known that Viśvāmitra I was the
maternal grandfather of King Bharata. Viśvāmitra III Gāthina, the
author of Rigvedic hymn, refers to Kuśikas, Viśvāmitras and Bharatas.46
Evidently, Viśvāmitra Gāthina was a later descendant of Viśvāmitra I,
son of Gādhi. Amāvasu, the brother of Ayu, established his kingdom in
Kānyakubja. King Jahnu II married the granddaughter of Ikśvāku King
Yuvanāśva (daughter of King Māndhātā).
364 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
In CE
1. Amāvasu 11200 BCE
2. Bhima 11180 BCE
3. Kanchana 11150 BCE
4. Suhotra 11120 BCE
5. Jahnu II 11100 BCE
In CE
1. Gāndhāra I 11250 BCE
2. Nagnajit and Druhyu II 11220 BCE
3. Babhru and Setu 11200 BCE
4. Angārasetu (Son of Setu) 11180 BCE
5. Ānarta or Aruddha 11150 BCE
366 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Sriñjaya Pāñchālas:
In CE
1. Sriñjaya II 11350 BCE
2. Pañchajana 11300 BCE
3. Somadatta 11275 BCE
4. Suśānti 11250 BCE
5. Sahadeva 11220 BCE
6. Somaka 11200 BCE
7. Jantu (he had 100 sons) 11170 BCE
Brihanmanā had two wives, Yaśodevi and Satyā. Jayaratha was the
son of Yaśodevi and Vijaya was the son of Satyā.
In CE
1. Brihanmanā 11270 BCE
2. Vijaya 11250 BCE
3. Dhriti 11230 BCE
4. Dhritavrata 11210 BCE
5. Satyakarma 11190 BCE
6. Adhiratha (He was a Sūta.) 11170 BCE
7. Karṇa (Sūtaputra) 11150 BCE
8. Vriṣasena and Meghavarṇa 11120 BCE
9. Vriṣa 11080 BCE
380 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
sources tell us that the Velir kings (Satyaputras or Draviḍas) came from
the city of “Tuvarai” or Dvāravatī (Dwārakā) under the leadership of
Rishi Agastya (a descendant of Maharshi Agastya). As already discussed,
Dvāravatī was submerged by sea around 9400-9300 BCE. According to
the Mahābhārata, Sahadeva subjugated Draviḍas. Draviḍa kings also
supported Pāndavas in the Mahābhārata War.
The chronology of Velirs or Draviḍas:
In CE
1. Devakīputra Krishna 11150-11050 BCE
2. Draviḍa – The progenitor of Draviḍas 11100 BCE
3. 49 Velir or Draviḍa kings reigned at Dwārakā 11050-9400 BCE
4. Migration of the Velir Kings 9400-9300 BCE
5. Irunkovel Lineage of Velirs 9300-3200 BCE
6. 18 lineages of Velirs came into existence 3200 BCE
…………………………………………………………
In CE
1. Tiru Neelakanta Nayanar
2. Iyarpahai Nayanar
3. Ilayankudi Mara Nayanar
4. Maiporul Nayanar
5. Viralminda Nayanar
6. Amaraneedi Nayanar
7. Eripatha Nayanar
8. Enadinatha Nayanar
9. Kannappa Nayanar
10. Kungiliya Kalaya Nayanar 7000-3000 BCE
11. Manakanchara Nayanar
12. Arivattaya Nayanar
13. Anaya Nayanar
14. Murthi Nayanar
15. Muruga Nayanar
16. Rudra Pasupathi Nayanar
17. Tiru Nalai Povar Nayanar
18. Tiru Kurippu Thonda Nayanar
19. Chandesvara Nayanar
Appar or Tirunavukkarasar (20th) was a contemporary of Thirujñana
Sambandar (27th). Sambandar was a contemporary of Ninraseer
Nedumaran (48th). Ninraseer Nedumaran was a Pāndya King also
known as Koon Pāndyan. He succeeded Ukkiraperu Valudi (1276 BCE),
the last Pāndya king of the third Sangam period. He became Buddhist
but Sambandharar persuaded him to become Śaiva. King Ninraseer
Nedumaran or Koon Pāndyan became Śaiva and came to be known as
Sundara Pāndya. Thus, we can roughly date Appar, Sambandar and
Ninraseer Nedumaran around 1300-1200 BCE.
20. Appar or Tiru-Navukkarasar Nayanar 1300-1200 BCE
21. Kulacchirai Nayanar 1200-1100 BCE
(He was a minister of King Guna Pāndyan.
Nakkirar II was his junior contemporary)
392 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
In CE
1. King Prithu Vainya (Vena and his son Prithu 14050 BCE
belonged to the lineage of Dhruva, grandson of
Manu I.)
2. King Marutta Āvīkśita (He was the son of 13550 BCE
Avīkśita. He reigned over a vast kingdom located
on eastern side of Sarasvati River. Viśvedevas
were in his court. Viśvedevas were the devatā of
many Rigvedic hymns.)
3. King Śivi Auśīnara (He was the son of Uśīnara 13550 BCE
and Driṣdvatī. The River Driṣdvatī was named
after the mother of Śivi. He reigned over a vast
kingdom located on western side of Sarasvati
River. His sons founded Sauvīra, Kekaya and
Madra janapadas.)
4. King Gaya Amūrtarāyasa (He was the grandson 13500 BCE
of Kuśa and the son of Amūrtarāyasa. He was a
cousin brother of Gādhi, father of Viśvāmitra I.
He founded the city of Gaya.)
5. King Bharata Dauṣyanti (He was the son of 13450 BCE
Duṣyanta and Śakuntalā.)
6. King Suhotra Atithina (He was the son of Atithi. 11650 BCE
His grandson Ajamīḍha II was the progenitor of
Kānyakubja Kings, Pāñchālas and Kurus.)
7. King Brihadratha Aṅga (He belonged to the 11230 BCE
lineage of King Aṅga.)
8. King Ambarīṣa Nābhāgi (He was the son of 11200 BCE
Nābhāga and the grandson of Vaivasvata Manu.)
9. King Yayāti Nāhuṣa (Son of Nahuṣa and grandson 11180 BCE
of Ayu.)
10. King Śaśabindu Chaitraratha (He was the son of 11180 BCE
Chitraratha. King Māndhātā married a daughter
of Śaśabindu.)
11. King Māndhātri Yauvanāśva (He was the son of 11150 BCE
Ikśvāku king Yuvanāśva.)
The Chronology of Ancient Indian Dynasties and Kingdoms | 395
vvv
10
The Chronological History of Indic
Languages and Scripts
and the rules of Cḥandas (meters). Thus, Vedic Sanskrit was an artificially
structured language, like computer programming languages, and it
evolved out of the Proto-Sanskrit language. Undoubtedly, a basic phonetic
script (Proto Brahmi) had also been developed concurrently because the
concept of conjunctions cannot be evolved without a phonetic script.
Early Vedic rishis of the period 14000-10500 BCE wrote mantras
and sūktas in Vedic Sanskrit. During the period 11500-10500 BCE, Vedic
Sanskrit, also known as Cḥāndasa Sanskrit, was evolved to an advanced
stage. Rishi Gālava, a classmate of King Brahmadatta II (11130 BCE),
was the first who introduced Padapātha and Kramapātha of Vedic hymns
and formally founded the science of Vedic grammar. A basic science of
Cḥandaśāstra had also been developed at the same time. Seemingly, all
hymns of Vedas have undergone editing – with an objective to correct
the language grammatically – around 11500-10500 BCE. Thus, Vedic
Sanskrit attained a status of a sacred language for rituals. It was insisted
that all pupils must learn Vedas by listening to their teachers to avoid
mispronunciation of Vedic mantras. This was the reason why Vedas were
referred to as “Śruti”. Colonial historians have speculated the absence
of a script during Vedic period because of their gross ignorance of the
evolution of Vedic Sanskrit.
Historians propounded a false theory that the Vedic people did not
have the knowledge of writing because the Vedas are known as “Śruti”,
meaning the texts learnt by listening. This theory can easily be rejected by
the study of the Vedic Sanskrit language in which the Vedas were written.
Vedic Sanskrit follows the rules of Sanskrit grammar substantially. This
means the majority of the rules of Sanskrit grammar evolved, and were
well established, during the later Rigvedic period. It is grossly incorrect
to say that the entire grammar of Sanskrit evolved after Vedic literature
came into existence. Some provisions of Sanskrit grammar, like Sandhi
(conjunctions) and context-free grammar for instance, were artificially
introduced into the Vedic Sanskrit language to ensure the continuity of
the musical rhythm of the human voice, and the freedom of using words
anywhere in the sentences, because Vedic hymns were written in verses.
No language in the world except Sanskrit or other Indian languages derived
The Chronological History of Indic Languages and Scripts | 407
There was a long break in the continuity of writing mantras and sūktas
in Vedic Sanskrit. This was the reason that none of the post-Vedic rishis
had attempted to write Vedic Mantras. In modern times, though we may
learn and understand the old Hindi language of Tulasi’s Ramacharit
Manas and Jayasi’s Padmāvat, we cannot create new literature in the
archaic Hindi language because nobody speaks or understands archaic
Hindi today. Similarly, Vedic Sanskrit took a backseat when Post-Vedic
Sanskrit had evolved out of it. Thus, Post-Vedic Sanskrit became the
medium of education due to the advancement of Sanskrit grammar and
Vedic Sanskrit remained limited to Vedic hymns only.
Gradually, Post-Vedic Sanskrit evolved into Laukika Sanskrit, around
8000-7500 BCE, due to further advancement of Sanskrit grammar. During
the 28th Tretā Yuga (6777-5577 BCE), Bharata’s Nātyaśāstra, Dattilam,
Nandikeśvara’s Abhinaya Darpaṇa and Bharatārṇava and Mātaṅga Muni’s
Brihaddeśī brought a revolution in the entertainment for all sections of
society. Vālmiki, the Ādikavi, wrote the Rāmāyaṇa around 5625 BCE.
Vālmiki Rāmāyaṇa had inspired many scholars to write Driśya (Nātya)
and Śrāvya Kāvyas in Laukika Sanskrit. Public performances of the
Rāmāyaṇa and Purāṇas became the main source of the entertainment of
society. The demand for innovations in performances led to the evolution
of various Rāmāyaṇas like Adbhuta Rāmāyaṇa, Ānanda Rāmāyaṇa and
more. During the post- Rāmāyaṇa era, the performance of Adbhuta Rasa
became immensely popular, which led to mythologisation of historical
legends of the Rāmāyaṇa and Purāṇas – for instance, Śukāchārya was
depicted as parrot-faced, Gajānana as elephant-faced, Narasimha as lion-
faced, Vāmana as a midget, Kapi as monkey, King Mastya as fish, Varāha
as boar, Rikśa as bear, Nāga as serpent, Garuḍa as vulture and so on.
Interestingly, the public performances of Sanskrit kāvyas and nāṭakas
brought a paradigm shift in the spoken languages of Indian society. The
mass migrations of Vedic families from Sapta-Sindhu region to other
regions at the end of Rigvedic era led to the evolution of numerous
dialects of Proto-Sanskrit in India. Before the 28th Tretā Yuga (before 6777
BCE), the knowledge of Sanskrit language was limited to rishis, āchāryas
and their students because Vedic education was imparted strictly in the
medium of Sanskrit. It was also expected that the speakers of Sanskrit
410 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Vedic Sanskrit
(14500-10500 BCE
Post-Vedic Sanskrit
(10500-7500 BCE)
Laukika Sanskrit
(7500 BCE onwards)
412 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
opinion, the so-called Indus seals were probably written in the Paiśāchī
language and its logosyllabic script. The script of logosyllabic became
extinct around 3500 BCE but the language might have survived up to
the lifetime of Vararuchi Kātyāyana (17th century BCE). It may be noted
that though ancient Indian kings had the knowledge of Sanskrit, they
preferred to communicate with common people in their own language.
The Indian kings of the period 1765-500 BCE generally used Prakrit as
the language of communication because it was the language of masses.
Evidently, the Indian kings of the pre-Mahābhārata era used Paiśāchī and
its script as the official language and script for effective communication
with the common people. This is the reason we find Indus seals of the pre-
Mahābhārata era written in the so-called Indus script instead of Brahmi
or Kharoshthi.
Ekaśriṅga or Hiraṇyaśriṅga
Seemingly, Ekaśriṅga or the unicorn (a type of horse), was found in ancient
India. This rare species of unicorn became completely extinct during the
The Chronological History of Indic Languages and Scripts | 417
long drought around 4000 BCE. This animal is depicted in many Indus
seals. Rishi Riṣyaśriṅga was also known as Ekaśriṅga as mentioned in the
Rāmāyaṇa. Ekaśriṇga Avadāna of Buddhism also relates the legend of
Rishi Riṣyaśriṅga. According to ancient Greek sources, the unicorn used
to be found only in India. Evidently, the unicorn still existed in India when
the descendants of Turvaśa migrated to Anatolia and Greece. This may be
the reason why the unicorn finds mention in the legends of ancient Greek.
The unicorn is also found in ancient Sumerian sources. Unicorn is the
national animal of Scotland.
It appears that Ekaśriṅga, or the unicorn, was used for performing
Aśvamedha Yajña in the Rigvedic period. Jaiminīya Aśvamedha indicates
that the suitable horse for Aśvamedha was available only with King
Yauvanāśva. Bhima, Vriṣadhvaja (son of Karṇa) and Meghavarṇa (son of
Ghatotkacha) had to steal the horse from Bhadrāvatī, the capital of King
Yauvanāśva (Māndhātā). Evidently, the Yajñāśva for Aśvamedha was a
rare species of horse. It is certain that the Yajñāśva for Aśvamedha was
carefully selected in the Vedic period. Though there is no explicit reference
of Ekaśriṅga Aśva in Vedic literature, Rigveda refers to Hiraṇyaśriṅga
Aśva (a horse with a golden horn) and also mentions “tava śriṅgāni” (the
horns of horses).8 Interestingly, Aśva (unicorn) is the devata of the 163rd
sūkta of the first Mandala. Since the horses have no horns today, Sāyaṇa
speculates about Śriṅgas as hair on the head of a horse (“Śiraso nirgatāḥ
Śriṅgasthānīyāḥ keśāḥ”).
Brahmavaivarta Purāṇa forbids the performance of Aśvamedha
in Kaliyuga, which indirectly indicates the extinction of suitable horses
required for Aśvamedha. It was Puṣyamitra Śuṅga who revived the
performance of Aśvamedha around 1450 BCE and he might have used the
available horse as Yajñāśva in absence of Ekaśriṅga. Later, Samudragupta
(330-279 BCE) also performed Aśvamedha. The Chālukya and Chola
kings also performed Aśmavedha. Sh. Mrigendra Vinod ji has identified
the cult object depicted on Indus seals having the image of the unicorn
as Yupa with Chaṣāla and Svaru. Undoubtedly, the unicorn depicted on
Indus seals was a horse. An artefact of the unicorn with a saddle found in
the Indus-Sarasvati region clearly indicates a tamed or domestic unicorn.
418 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Faridun
Naudar Turak
Agaimashvak Zadsham
Zav Athrat
Garshasp
Nariman
Sam
Zal
Rustam
Sohrab
around 6900 BCE. The Aratta kings reigned over Airan from 6900 BCE to
3000 BCE. According to Iranian legends, King In-Su-Kush-Siranna had
celebrated Navroz 2000 years before the reign of King Cyrus (1198 BCE).
It appears that the Assyrian and the Babylonian kings dominated over
Airan around 3000-1300 BCE. Zoroaster II (1307-1230 BCE) was born
in the Magha region and revived the Zoroastrianism. King Cyrus (1198-
1188 BCE) of the Achaemenid Dynasty had declared Zoroastrianism
as the state religion. Most probably, the later descendants of Kayanian
Dynasty were ruling over Persia before the invasion of Alexander.
Regnal Years In CE
1. Bahman 22 1064-1042 BCE
2. Humāe, the daughter of Bahman 30 1042-1012 BCE
3. Darab-i-Akbar or Darab Kiani 12 1012-1000 BCE
4. Dara-i-Asghar (During his reign, 14 1000-986 BCE
Alexander conquered Persia.)
the date of Navroz from the time of Jamshed but spring season shifted
from Leo to Aries during the time of Achaemanid King Cyrus. According
to legends, King In-Su-Kush-Siranna had also celebrated Navroz 2000
years before Cyrus. He was the king of Aratta Kingdom. Most probably,
he flourished during the era of the Mahābhārata. The Mahābhārata refers
to the Aratta Kingdom.
Though Navroz is the celebration of the arrival of spring season,
Zoroastrians traditionally preserved the date of King Jamshed’s coronation.
This may be the reason why traditionalists still celebrate the Jamshed-i-
Navroz when Sun is in Simha Rāśi whereas others celebrate Navroz on
the date of sun’s entry into Aries. It is generally speculated that the Parsi
immigrants of India did not account for leap years but the Zoroastrian
solar calendar religiously followed the intercalation of a month after every
120 years since the time of Zoroaster II (1307-1230 BCE) and King Cyrus
(1198 BCE), which perfectly reconciles with the Julian calendar. Prior to
that, ancient Zoroastrians followed a lunisolar calendar that was almost
similar to the Babylonian lunisolar calendar.
Interestingly, King Bali, the grandson of Prahlāda, also flourished
around 11150-11100 BCE. He also belonged to the tradition of Asuras.
Therefore, Kerala used to celebrate the arrival of New Year from spring
season. During 11150 BCE, spring season commenced when Sun was
in Simha Rāśi. This is the reason why Onam festival is celebrated in the
solar month of Chingham. The word “Onam” is derived from Śroṇam,
i.e. Śrāvaṇa. The month of Śrāvaṇa was the first month of spring season
around 11150 BCE. Thus, Śrāvaṇa Utsav came to be known as Onam.
The Onam festival is celebrated for thirteen days from Hasta Nakśatra
to Śatabhiṣaj Nakśatra. Seemingly, Onam festival had commenced when
Abhijit still existed in the list of Nakśatras. Interestingly, Jamshed-i-Navroz
is also celebrated for thirteen days from Farvardin 1 to 13. Evidently, Indian
Asura tradition and Zoroastrian Asura tradition shared a common origin.
vvv
11
Ancient Indian Historical Tradition:
A Rejoinder to Frederick
Eden Pargiter
F.E. Pargiter, a British civil servant of India, was the author of “Ancient
Indian Historical Tradition”, published in 1922. In his book, he
has concluded that Brahmanic tales (Indian historical legends) are
untrustworthy for traditional history because of the lack of historical
sense. He also alleged that Kśatriya stories were often tampered with to
subserve Brahmanical interests and it is mainly Brahmanical mistakes
and absurdities that have discredited the Purāṇas. According to him, the
legend of Uttaṅka is a farrago of absurdities and chronological errors,
plainly Brahmanical. He has chronologically analyzed numerous Indian
historical legends narrated in various sources to justify his conclusions.
Unfortunately, none of the Indian historians have ever attempted to write a
rejoinder to counter the arguments of Pargiter since 1922. I have decided to
take upon this task, and write a rejoinder to Pargiter’s misunderstandings
and mischievous assumptions, based on my chronological studies.
At the outset, the so-called distinction between Brahmanic tales and
Kśatriya stories is nothing but a figment of imagination of the divisive and
casteist mind-set of colonial historians. These Christian and Eurocentric
historians had a dubious agenda to defame Sanskrit literature by declaring
it as Brahmanic. They also projected Hinduism as Brahmanism and
attempted to provoke other varnas against Brāhmaṇas (indirectly against
Hinduism) so that the Christian missionaries in India could flourish.
Therefore, the idea of Brahmanism is nothing but an intellectual fraud
committed by colonial historians. Unfortunately, this fraudulent theory
430 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
greater than those of any other king. King Bharata was born long prior
to the birth of Sātvatas.
There were three Bharatas. Bharata I (14275 BCE) was the son of
Riṣabha. Bharata II (13450-13400 BCE) was the son of Duṣyanta
of the Puru dynasty. Bharata III (11080 BCE) was a descendant of
Puru II, a son of Yayāti. Seemingly, Puranic updaters mixed up the
historical account of Bharata II and Bharata III but Pargiter blames
Vedas and Brāhmaṇas for not following the genealogical chronology
of Purāṇas. Actually, Bharata II was the progenitor of Bharata
dynasty, whereas Bharata III seized the sacrificial horse of Sātvatas.
Thus, there is no chronological inconsistency.
3. The legends like Soma’s abduction of Brihaspati’s wife Tārā and the
birth of their son Budha, the birth of Ilā from Manu’s sacrifice and the
marriage of Śiva and Pārvatī are mythological, not historical.
Rigveda (10.109.2) also indicates Soma’s abduction of Brihaspati’s
wife Tārā. Budha I was the son of Soma I and Tara and Budha II was
the son of Soma II and Rohiṇī, a daughter of Dakśa Prajāpati. Iḍā
was the wife of Manu, whereas Ilā was the daughter of Vaivasvata
Manu. Budha II married Ilā. Taittirīya Āraṇyaka indicates that Iḍā
introduced the Vedic ritual of three Agnis. This is the reason why the
mythical story of the birth of Iḍā from Manu’s sacrifice had evolved
later. Śiva was a historical figure and lived around 11300-11200 BCE.
4. Tapati, wife of the Paurava king Saṁvarṇa, was the daughter of Saura,
Sūrya or Tapana. Saṁvarṅa’s priest Vasiṣṭha went to Sūrya and
obtained Tapati for him. But Tapati’s father being confused with the
Sun, she became the Sun’s daughter and accordingly she is foisted into
the myth of the Sun and his wives as his daughter along with his sons
Manu Vaivasvata, Yama and the Aśvins, confusing historical tradition
with mythology and all with an utter disregard of chronological
consistency.
Pargiter mistakenly considers Sūrya, Tapana Sūrya and Vaivasvata as
identical and blames Brāhmaṇas for the chronological inconsistency.
I have already explained that Sūrya I, the father of Aśvins, lived
around 13600 BCE and Vivasvān, the father of Vaivasvata Manu
flourished around 11300 BCE. Tapana or Sūrya II, the father of Tapati
434 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
She says that even some Devas (Amritasah) had casual sex with
their sisters but Yama tries to convince his sister why such act would
be immoral. In this context, there is no reference that Devas ever
married their sisters. Possibly, there might have been some rare
incidents of having casual or forced sex among brothers and sisters
but it does not mean that marriage between brothers and sisters was
socially acceptable. Moreover, Rigvedic hymn of Yama and Yami
unambiguously tells us that sexual relationship between brothers
and sisters was considered to be a sin. Therefore, Pitri-kanyā cannot
be interpreted as a sister.
The following chronological inconsistencies flagged by Pargiter are
related to the Mahābhārata era. In fact, Puranic updaters had mixed
up the historical account given in Jaiminīya Aśvamedha and Vyāsa’s
Mahābhārata, considering Veda Vyāsa of the Rigvedic era and
Vyāsa of the Mahābhārata era as the same person. Unfortunately,
we do not have the original texts of Jaiminīya Aśvamedha and
Vyāsa’s Mahābhārata. We have no other option but to rectify these
inconsistencies based on internal evidence of Vedic and post-Vedic
texts.
16. The chronological ignorance produces at times the most absurd
positions, as where persons are made to describe events long posterior
to their time; thus King Dilīpa of Ayodhyā is instructed by his priest
Vasiṣṭha about Kamsa’s tyranny and Krishna’s birth.
I have already established that Devakīputra Krishna, disciple of Rishi
Ghora Āṅgirasa, lived around 11150-11050 BCE who built the city
of Dvāravatī and killed Narakāsura. Purāṇas mistakenly considered
Krishna of the Rigvedic era and Krishna of the Mahābhārata era as
the same person. Ayodhyā King Dilīpa was the great grandfather of
Rāma and lived around 5800 BCE.
17. The Brahmanic versions are a farrago of absurdities and impossibilities,
utterly distorting all the incidents. For example, the story of Bhishma
and Ugrāyudha in Harivaṁśa. From Brahmadatta’s grandfather
Śuka down to Vyāsa’s son Śuka, there were some six generations.
The Kśatriya genealogies and traditions keep the two Śukas distinct
but the Brahmanical Vaṁśas in their attempt to construct Vyāsa’s
440 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
family identify the two, give Vyāsa’s son Śuka a daughter Krītimatī,
say she was Anūha’s queen and Brahmadatta’s mother, and so make
Brahmadatta great grandson of Vyāsa, thus misplacing Anūha and
Brahmadatta from their true position to one some six generations later.
Kśatriya tradition is right, and the Brahmanical lack of the historical
sense produces the absurdity that Anūha or Brahmadatta would have
been king of Pāñchāla at the time of the Bharata battle when, as the
Mahābhārata shows, Drupada was reigning there.
There were two Brahmadattas. Brahmadatta I was a son of Rishi Chūli
as mentioned in the Rāmāyaṇa. He became the King of Kāmpilya
and reigned around 13550 BCE. Brahmadatta II was the son of Puru
king Anūha and Kīrtimatī, daughter of Rishi Śuka I. He was a senior
contemporary of Kuru King Pratīpa. Rishi Gālava II, the founder of
Śikśā and Krama-Pātha of Vedas, was a classmate of Brahmadatta II
(11325 BCE).
Harivaṁśa indicates that Ugrāyudha (11150 BCE) was a
contemporary of Devavrata Bhishma. He sent a messenger to the Kuru
Kingdom and proposed to marry Gandhakāli, mother of Devavrāta
Bhishma with an intention to insult him. Devavrāta Bhishma killed
Ugrāyudha in a battle. As I have explained earlier, some of the Vedic
kings also had names like Vichitravīrya, Dhritarāṣṭra, Bhishma,
Bhimasena, Dharmarāja, Karṇa (Radheya), Parīkśit, Janamejaya and
so on. These kings flourished around 11200-11000 BCE. Seemingly,
Puranic historians erroneously mixed up the historical account of
these Vedic kings with that of the Mahābhārata era, which led to
numerous chronological inconsistencies.
Suka II was the son of Veda Vyāsa. Harivaṁśa says that Brahmadatta II
married Kīrtimatī, daughter of Śuka I. Ugrāyudha lived at least eighty
years later than Brahmadatta II. Actually, Devavrāta or Bhishma I
of the Vedic era was the son of Gandhakāli, whereas Bhishma II of
the Mahābhārata era was the son of Śāntanu III. Ugrāyudha was a
contemporary of Bhishma I and not Bhishma II.
It may also be noted that Suka II was the son of Vyāsa of the Rigvedic
era and not the son of Vyāsa of the Mahābhārata era. Bhishma II tells
the story of the birth of Śukāchārya to Yudhiṣṭhira in Mokśa Dharma
Ancient Indian Historical Tradition: A Rejoinder to Frederick Eden Pargiter | 441
vvv
References
Chapter 1
1. Indian Antiquary, Vol. V, 1876, pp.70 ff.
2. Epigraphia Carnatica, Vol. VIII, Tirthahalli, No. 157 and Epigraphia
Carnatica, Vol. VII, Shikarpur, No. 45.
3. http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674725232
4. Sūrya Siddhānta, 1.57-58.
5. Mahābhārata, Vana Parva, Adhyāya 219.
Chapter 2
1. Atharvaveda 8.2.21
2. “Astronomy of Vedic Altars” by Subhash Kak, Vistas in Astronomy, Vol. 36,
pp.117-140, 1993.
3. Sūrya Siddhānta, 1.57-58 (Asmin Kritayugasyānte Sarve Madhyagatāḥ
grahāḥ, Vinā tu pātamandocchān Meṣādau Tulyatāmitāḥ).
4. Rigveda, 1.158.6.
5. Vedānga Jyotisha 5-6. (LojkØesrs lksekdkSZ ;nk lkda loklokSA L;kÙknkfn;qxa
ek?kLri% ”kqDyks·;ua áqnd~AA çi|rs Jfo’BknkS lw;kZpUæelkoqnd~A lkikZ/ksZ
nf{k.kkdZLrq ek?kJko.k;ks% lnkAA)
6. Rigveda, 7.103.
7. Rigveda, 3.23.4.
8. Rigveda, 1.73, 4.5, 6.52, 7.88, and 10.173.
9. Mahābhārata, Aśvamedha Parva 44.2 (Śraviṣṭhādīni Rikśāni).
10. Rigveda, 10.191.12.
11. Rigveda, 10.85.13.
12. Rigveda, 10.85.13.
13. Rigveda, 10.19.1.
444 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Chapter 3
1. Rigveda, 9.96.
2. Rigveda, 10.179.
3. Rigveda, 4.30.
mr nkla dkSfyrja c`gr% ioZrknf/kA vokgfUuUæ ”kEcje~ AA14AA
”kre”eUe;huka iqjkfeUæks O;kL;r~A fnoksnklk; nk”kq’ksAA20AA
4. Rigveda, 8.96.13-15.
5. Rigveda, 8.45.26-27.
6. “The Chronology of India: From Mahābhārata to Medieval Era” by Vedveer
Arya, Aryabhata Publications, Hyderabad, 2019, Chapter 21.
7. Rigveda, 8.27-31.
8. Rigveda, 10.90.
9. Taittirīya Āraṇyaka, Prapāthaka 10, Anuvāka 13.
10. Rigveda, 7.33.10-11.
fo|qrks T;ksfr% ifj laftgkua fe=ko#.kk ;ni’;rka RokA
rÙks tUeksrSda ofl’BkxLR;ks ;Ùok fo”k vktHkkj AA10AA
mrkfl eS=ko#.kks ofl’BksoZ”;k czãUeulks·f/k tkr%A
æIla LdUua czã.kk nSO;su fo”os nsok% iq’djs RoknnUr AA11AA
11. Rigveda 10.19.1
References | 447
Chapter 4
1. Rigveda, 10.129 & 10.90.
2. Brahmanda Purāṇa, 1.35.116-125.
3. Cḥāndogya Upaniṣad, 3.16.7 and Jaiminīya Upaniṣad, 4.2.11.
,r) Le oS rf}}kukg efgnkl ,srjs;% l fda e ,rnqirifl ;ks·geusu
u çs’;kehfr l g ’kksM”ka o’kZ”krethoRç g ’kksM”ka o’kZ”kra thofr ; ,oa
osnAA
4. Aitareya Brāhmaṇa, 6.5.27.
5. Aitareya Brāhmaṇa, 8.14.
6. Aitareya Brāhmaṇa, 8.21-23.
7. Aitareya Brāhmaṇa, 7.34.
8. Aitareya Brāhmaṇa, 3.3.
dfy% ”k;kuks Hkofr laftgkuLrq }kij%A
mfÙk’BL=srk Hkofr —ra laik|rs pja’pjSosfrAA
9. Śāṅkhāyana Āraṇyaka, 15th Adhyāya.
10. Kauṣītakī Brāhmaṇa, 19.3.
l oS ek?kL;kekokL;k;keqiolR;qn³~xkorZ~L;Uuqises olfUr çk;.kh;s.kkfrjk=s.k
11. Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa, 4th Brāhmaṇa
12. Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa 13.9.3.1
13. Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa 2.1.2.3
,rk g oS çkP;S fn”kks u P;oUrs lokZf.k g ok vU;kfu u{k=kf.k çkP;S
fn”k”P;oUrs rRçkP;kesokL;Srfí”;kfgrkS HkorLrLekR—fÙkdkLokn/khr-----
14. Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa, 2.1.2.4. (Amī hyuttarā hi Saptarṣayaḥ udayanti purā
etāḥ…)
15. Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa, 11.1.1.7.
References | 451
apogees, epicycles and nodes, and these referring to the true motions of the
planets; and thus---‘
Here we are confronted by the latter half of line 9, which seems to state
that thus the Romaka (Siddhanta) was composed (kritaḥ) by Srishena.
But this would leave unexplained the last word of the line which three
Manuscripts give in the form ‘kanthā’. Keeping therefore this latter reading,
and substituting (with the Berlin and Bom. MSS.), ‘ratnochchayo’ for
the four aksharas preceding ‘Romakah’. I translate ‘and thus the Romaka
(Siddhanta) which was (or ‘is’) a heap of jewels (as it were) has, by Srishena,
been made into a patched rag (as it were).’
22. Pañchasiddhāntikā, 1.3.
23. Taittirīya Saṁhitā, 4.4.10.1-3.
—fÙkdk u{k=e~ vfXuZnsork·Xus #p% LFk çtkirsZ/kkrq% lkseL;psZ Rok #ps Rok
|qrs Rok Hkkls Rok T;ksfr’ks Rok jksfg.kh u{k=e~ çtkifrZnsork e`x”kh’kaZ u{k=Ek~
lkseks nsork··nZzk u{k=Ek~ #æks nsork iquoZlw u{k=e~ vfnfrZnsork fr’;ks
u{k=e~ c`gLifrZnsork··Js’kk u{k=Ek likZ nsork e?kk u{k=e~ firjks nsork
QYxquh u{k=e~ A1A
v;Zek nsork QYxquh u{k=e~ Hkxks nsork gLrks u{k=a lfork nsork fp=k
u{k=e~ bUæks nsork Lokrh u{k=a ok;qZnsork fo”kk[ks u{k=e~ bUækXuh nsork
vuwjk/kk u{k=e~ fe=ks nsork jksfg.kh u{k=e~ bUæks nsork fop`rkS u{k=e~
firjks nsork·’kk<k u{k=e~ vkiks nsork·’kk<k u{k=a fo”os nsok nsork Jks.kk
u{k=aj~ fo’.kqZnsork Jfo’Bk u{k=a olo% A2A
nsork ”krfHk’k³~ u{k=e~ bUæks nsork çks’Bink u{k=e~ vt ,dikn~ nsork
çks’Bink u{k=e~ vfgZcqf/u;ks nsork jsorh u{k=e~ iw’kk nsork·”o;qtkS u{k=e~
vf”oukS nsork·iHkj.khZu{k=a ;eks nsork iw.kkZ i”pkn~ ;r~ rs nsok vn/kq%A3A
24. Taittirīya Saṁhitā, 4.4.11.1.
e/kq”k~ p ek/ko”k~ p oklfUrdko~ _rw ”kqØ”k~ p ”kqfp”k~ p xzh’eko~
_rw uHk”k~ p uHkL;”k~ p okf’kZdko~ _rw b’k”k~ pkstZ”k~ p ”kkjnko~ _rw
lg”k~ p lgL;”k~ p gSefUrdko~ _rw ri”k~ p riL;”k~ p ”kSf”kjko~ _rw
vXusZj~vUr%”ys’kks ·fl dYisrka |koki`fFkoh dYiUrke~ vki vks’k/kh% dYiUrke~
vXu;% i`Fk³~ ee T;S’Bîk; lozrk% A1A
25. Taittirīya Saṁhitā, 7.5.6.1.
’kMgSj~eklkUr~ lEik|kgj~mr~ l`tfUr ’kMgSj~fg eklkUr~ lEi”;fUrA v/kZek
lSZeklkUr~ lEik|kgZmr~ l`tfUrA v/kZeklSZfg eklkUr~ lEi”;fUrA vekokL;;k
eklkUr~ lEik|kgZmr~ l`tfUrA vekokL;;k fg eklkUr~ lEi”;fUr
ikS.kZekL;k eklkUr~ lEik|kgZmr~ l`tfUr ikS.kZekL;k fg eklkUr~ lEi”;fUr
;ks oS iw.kZ vkfl¥~pfr ijk l fl¥~pfr ;% iw.kkZn~ mnpfr A1A
References | 453
48. The world of heaven is as far removed from this world, they say, as a
thousand earths stacked one above the other.
49. Pañchaviṁśa Brāhmaṇa, 8.2.10.
çtkifr#’kle/;Sr~ Loka nqfgrja rL; jsr% ijkirr~ rnL;ka U;f’kP;r
rnJh.kkfnna es ek nq’kfnfr rr~ lndjksr~ i”kwuso ;PNªk;Urh;a czãlke
Hkofr Jh.kkfr pSosua lPp djksfr A
50. Ṣaḍviṁśa Brāhmaṇa, 2.5.6.
51. Pañchaviṁśa Brāhmaṇa, 25.10.10.
52. Ṣaḍviṁśa Brāhmaṇa
;k iwokZ ikS.kZeklh lkuqefr ;ksÙkjk lk jkdk ;k iwokZekokL;k lk fluhoyh
;ksÙkjk lk dqgw;ksZuqi”;UR;UR;a u i”;fr rfUeFkquesokL; Hkofr iq’;s
pkuqefrtZ~¥s;k fluhoyh rq }kijs [kkokZ;ka rq Hkosækdk —riosZ dqgwHkZosn~ A
53. Rigveda, 2.32.7-8, 10.184.
54. Pañchaviṁśa Brāhmaṇa, 25.10.
ljLoR;k fou”kus nh{kUrs A1A ljLorh uke unh çR;DJksrk çogfr rL;k%
çkxijHkkxkS loZyksdçR;{kkS e/;eLrq Hkkxks HkqE;keUrfuZeXu% çogfr uklkS
dsufpn~ –”;rs rf}u”kufeR;qP;rs rL;ksiØes nf{k.ks rhjs nh{kUrsA
55. Pañchaviṁśa Brāhmaṇa, 25.10.11.
ljLoR;k oS nsok vkfnR;eLrHuqou~ lk uk;PNr~ lkH;Oyh;r rLekr~ lk
dqfCterho ra c`gR;kLrHuqou~ lk;PNr~ rLekn~c`grh NUnlka oh;ZoÙkekfnR;a
fg r;kLrHuqou~ A
56. Rigveda, 6.61.10.
b;ennkæHkle`.kP;qra fnoksnkla o/;Z”ok; nk”kq’ks A
;k ”k”oUrekp[kknkola if.ka rk rs nk=kf.k rfo’kk ljLofrAA
b;a ”kq’esfHkfcZl[kk bok#tRlkuq fxjh.kka rfo’ksfHk:feZfHk% A
ikjkor?uheols lqo`fäfHk% ljLorhek fooklse /khfrfHk% AA
ljLofr nsofunks fu cgZ; çtka fo’oL; c`l;L; ekf;u% A
mr f{kfrH;ks·ouhjfoUnks fo’kesH;ks vlzoks okftuhofrAA
ç .kks nsoh ljLorh oktsfHkokZftuhorhA
/khukefo+™;Zorq AA
;LRok nsfo ljLoR;qicqzrs /kus fgrsA
bUæa u o`=rw;sZ AA
Roa nsfo ljLoR;ok okts’kq okftfuA
jnk iw’kso u% lfue~AA
mr L;k u% ljLorh ?kksjk fgj.;orZfu%A
o`=?uh of’V lq’Vqfre~AA
References | 457
rns’k ”yksdks u i”;ks e`R;qa i”;fr u jksxa uksr nq%[krk¡ lo¡Z g i”;%
i”;fr loZekIuksfr loZ”k bfrA l ,d/kk Hkofr f=/kk Hkofr i¥~p/kk
lIr/kk uo/kk pkSo iqu”pSdkn”k% Le`r% ”kra p n”k pSd”p lglzkf.k p
fo¡”kfrjkgkj”kq)kS lÙo”kq)kS /kzqok Le`fr% Le`fryEHks loZxzUFkhuka foçeks{kLrLeS
e`fnrd’kk;k; relLikja n”kZ;fr HkxokUluRdqekjLr¡ LdUn bR;kp{krs r¡
LdUn bR;kp{krsA
70. Cḥāndogya Upaniṣad, 7.1.1-4.
v/khfg Hkxo bfr gksillkn luRdqekja ukjnLr¡ gksokp ;}sRFk rsu eksilhn
rrLr Å/kZ~oa o{;kehfr l gksokp A1A
_Xosna Hkxoks·/;sfe ;tqosZn¡ lkeosnekFkoZ.ka prqFkZfefrgkliqjk.ka i¥~pea
osnkuka osna fiR;¡Z jkf”ka nSoa fuf/ka okdksokD;esdk;ua nsofo|ka czãfo|ka
Hkwrfo|ka {k=fo|ka u{k=fo|k¡ liZnsotufo|kesrn~Hkxoks·/;sfe A2A
lks·ga Hkxoks eU=fonsokfLe ukRefoPNªqr¡ áso es Hkxon~–”ksH;Lrjfr
”kksdekRefofnfr lks·ga Hkxo% ”kkspkfe ra ek Hkxok¥~NksdL; ikja rkj;fRofr
r¡ gksokp ;}S fd¥~pSrn/;xh’Bk ukeSoSrr~ A3A
uke ok _Xosnks ;tqosZn% lkeosn vkFkoZ.k“prqFkZ bfrgkliqjk.k% i¥~peks
osnkuka osn% fiR;ksZ jkf”knSZoks fuf/kokZdksokD;esdk;ua nsofo|k czãfo|k
Hkwrfo|k {k=fo|k u{k=fo|k liZnsotufo|k ukeSoSrUukeksikLLosfr A4A
71. Sāmavidhāna Brāhmaṇa, 3.9.
72. Sāmavidhāna Brāhmaṇa, 1.1.7.
73. Sāmavidhāna Brāhmaṇa, 1.4.19-20.
uke lafgrSrka ç;q¥~tu~ fouk;da çh.kf;Rok----- ,’kk LdUnL; lafgrSrka
ç;q¥~tu~ LdUna çh.kkfr A
74. Sāmavidhāna Brāhmaṇa, 1.3.6.
75. Sāmavidhāna Brāhmaṇa, 2.2.
osn”kkL=kf/kdkfj.kks czkã.kkfnoSZof.kZdk vk;kZ%] rnfrfjäk% vuk;kZ%
”kwæifrrkn;%----
76. Sāmavidhāna Brāhmaṇa, 3.7.
i¥~p gkL; dk’kkZi.kk% HkofUr O;;—rk”p iqujk;fUr-----
77. Atharvaveda, 19.7-8.
78. Atharvaveda, 6.128.1.
79. “The Orion” by Balagangadhar Tilak, pp.24.
80. Gopatha Brāhmaṇa, 1.4.18.
vFk gS’k egklqi.kZl~ rL; ;ku~ iqjLrkn~ fo’kqor% ’k’eklku~ mi;fUr l
nf{k.k% i{k% vFk ;ku~ vko`Ùkku~ mifj’Vkr~ ’kM~ mi;fUr l mÙkj% i{k% vkRek
oS laoRljL; fo’kqoku~ v³~xkfu i{kkS ;= ok vkRek rr~ i{kkS ;= oS i{kkS
References | 459
¼dFkk egke~ vo`/kr~ dL; gksrq% [_- †-„…-ƒ]½ bfr rku~ fo”okfe=s.k –’Vku~
okensoks ·l`tr l gs{kka pØs fo”okfe=ks ;ku~ ok vga laikrku~ vn”kaZ rku~
okensoks ·l`tr dkfu Uo~ vga fg lwäkfu laikrkal~ rr~ çfrekUr~ l`ts;e~
bfr l ,rkfu lwäkfu laikrkal~ rr~ çfreku~ vl`tr ¼l|ks g tkrks o`’kHk%
duhu% [_- …-†Š-ƒ]½] ¼mn~ m czãk.;~ ,sjr JoL;k [_- ‰-„…-ƒ] ”kkS-la-
„å-ƒ„-ƒ]½] ¼vfHk r’Vso nh/k;k euh’kke~ [_- …-…Š-ƒ]½ bfr fo”ofe=% ¼bUæ%
iwfHkZn~ vkfrjn~ nkle~ vdSZ% [_- …-…†-ƒ] ”kkS-la- „å-ƒƒ-ƒ]½] ¼; ,d bn~
/kO;”k~ p’kZ.khuke~ [_- ˆ-„„-ƒ] ”kkS-la- „å-…ˆ-ƒ]½] ¼;l~ frXe”k`³~xks o`’kHkks
u Hkhe% [_- ‰-ƒ‹-ƒ] ”kkS-la- „å-…‰-ƒ]½ bfr ofl’B% ¼beke~ Å ’kq çHk`fra
lkr;s /kk% [_- …-…ˆ-ƒ]½] ¼bPNfUr Rok lksE;kl% l[kk;% [_- …-…å-ƒ]½
¼”kkln~ ofàZnqfgrqZuIR;a xkr~ [_- …-…ƒ-ƒ]½ bfr Hkj}kt% ,rSZoS laikrSZ,r
_’k; bekay~ yksdkUr~ leiru~ rn~ ;r~ leiral~ rLekr~ laikrkl~ rr~
laikrkuka laikrRoe~ rrks ok ,rkal~ =hu~ laikrku~ eS=ko#.kks foi;kZle~
,dSde~ vgjg% ”kalR;~ ¼,ok Roke~ bUæ oftzUu~ v= [_- †-ƒ‹-ƒ]½ bfr
çFkes ·gfu ¼;u~ u bUæks tqtq’ks ;p~ p of’V [_- †-„„-ƒ]½ bfr f}rh;s
¼dFkk egke~ vo`/kr~ dL; gksrq% [_- †-„…-ƒ]½ bfr r`rh;s =hu~ ,o laikrku~
czkã.kkPNalh foi;kZle~ ,dSde~ vgjg% ”kalfr ¼bUæ% iwfHkZn~ vkfrjn~ nkle~
vdSZ% [_- …-…†-ƒ] ”kkS-la- „å-ƒƒ-ƒ]½ bfr çFkes·gfu ¼; ,d bn~ /kO;”k~
p’kZ.khuke~ [_- ˆ-„„-ƒ] ”kkS-la- „å-…ˆ-ƒ]½ bfr f}rh;s ¼;l~ frXe”k`³~xks
o`’kHkks u Hkhe% [_- ‰-ƒ‹-ƒ] ”kkS-la- „å-…‰-ƒ]½ bfr r`rh;s =hu~ ,o laikrku~
vPNkokdks foi;kZle~ ,dSde~ vgjg% ”kalfr ¼beke~ Å “kq çHk`fra lkr;s
/kk% [_- …-…ˆ-ƒ]½ bfr çFkes ·gfu ¼bPNfUr Rok lksE;kl% l[kk;% [_-
…-…å-ƒ]½ bfr f}rh;s ¼”kkln~ ofàZnqfgrqZuIR;a xkr~ [_- …-…ƒ-ƒ]½ bfr r`rh;s
rkfu ok ,rkfu uo =hf.k pkgjg%”kaL;kfu rkfu }kn”k HkofUr }kn”k g oS
eklk% laoRlj% laoRlj% çtkifr% çtkifrZ;Kl~ rr~ laoRlja çtkifra ;Ke~
vkIuksfr rfLeUr~ laoRljs çtkirkS ;Ks·gjg% çfrfr’BUrks ;fUr çfrfr’BUrs]
bna loZe~ vuq çfrfr’Bfr çfrfr’Bfr çt;k i”kqfHkZ; ,oa osn rkU;~ vUrjs.
kkokie~ vkoisju~ vU;w³~[kk fojkt”k~ prqFksZ·gfu oSenh”k~ p i³~äh% i¥~pes
ik#PNsih% ’k’Bs vFk ;kU;~ vU;kfu egkLrks=k.;~ v’VpkZU;~ vkoisju~ A1A
83. Gopatha Brāhmaṇa, 2.1.19.
vFkkr”k~ pkrqekZL;kuka ç;ksx% QkYxqU;ka ikS.kZekL;ka pkrqekZL;kfu ç;q¥~thr
eq[ka ok ,rr~ laoRljL; ;r~ QkYxquh ikS.kZeklh eq[ke~ mÙkjs QkYxqU;kS
iqPNa iwosZ rn~ ;Fkk ço`ÙkL;kUrkS lesrkS L;krke~ ,oe~ ,oSrr~ laoRljL;kUrkS
lesrkS Hkorl~ rn~ ;r~ QkYxqU;ka ikS.kZekL;ka pkrqekZL;SZ;trs eq[kr ,oSrr~
laoRlja ç;q³~äs vFkks HkS’kT;;Kk ok ,rs ;p~ pkrqekZL;kfu rLekn~ _
rqlaf/k’kq ç;qT;Urs _rqlaf/k’kq oS O;kf/kZtk;rs rkU;~ ,rkU;~ v’VkS gohaf’k
HkofUr v’VkS oS prl`.kka ikS.kZeklhuka gohaf’k HkofUr prl`.kka oS ikS.kZeklhuka
oS”onsoa lekl% vFk ;n~ vfXua eUFkfUr çtkifrZoS oS”onsoe~ çtkR;k ,o
References | 461
vFkSra nSoa xHkaZ çtu;fr vFk ;r~ lIrn”k lkfe/ksU;% lIrn”kks oS çtkifr%
çtkirsZvkIR;S vFk ;r~ l}Urko~ vkT;Hkkxko~ vfllarhfr oS l}UrkS Hkor%
vFk ;n~ fojktkS la;kT;s vUua oS JhZfojkM~ vUuk|L; fJ;ks ·o#)~;S [,n~-
·o#)~;k ·Fk] vFk ;u~ uo ç;ktk uokuq;ktk v’VkS gohaf’k okftua uoea
ru~ u{k=h;ka fojkte~ vkIuksfr vFkks vkgqZn”kuha fojkte~ bfr ç;ktkuq;ktk
goha’;~ vk?kkjko~ vkT;Hkkxko~ bfr A19A
84. Gopatha Brāhmaṇa, 1.1.21 & 1.2.9.
rL; edkjJqR;sfrgkliqjk.ka okdksokD;a xkFkk ukjk”kalhZmifu’knks
·uq”kklukuhfr o`/kr~ djn~ #gu~ egr~ rp~ Ne~ vkse~ bfr A1-1-21A
fopkjh g oS dkcfU/k% dcU/kL;kFkoZ.kL; iq=ks es/kkoh ehekaldks ·uwpku
vkl l g Losukfrekusu ekuq’ka foÙka us;k; ra ekrksokp r ,oSrn~ vUue~
vokspal~ r be ,’kq dq#i¥~pkys’o~ v³~xex/ks’kq dkf”kdkS”kys’kq ”kkYoeRL;s’kq
lo”kks”khujs’kwnhP;s”o~ vUue~ vnUrhfr vFk o;a roSokfrekusukuk|k% Le%
oRl okgue~ vfUoPNsfr l ekU/kkrqZ;kSouk”oL; lkoZHkkSeL; jkK% lksea çlwre~
vktxke l lnks ·uqçfo”;frZ~ot”k~ p ;tekua pkeU=;ke~ vkl rn~ ;k%
çkP;ks u|ks ogfUr ;k”k~ p nf{k.kkP;ks ;k”k~ p çrhP;ks ;k”k~ pksnhP;l~ rk%
lokZ% i`Fk³~uke/ks;k bR;~ vkp{krs rklka leqæe~ vfHki|ekukuka fN|rs uke/ks;a
leqæ bR;~ vkp{krs ,oe~ bes losZ osnk fufeZrk% ldYik% ljgL;k% lczkã.kk%
lksifu’kRdk% lsfrgklk% lkUok[;kuk% liqjk.kk% lLojk% llaLdkjk% lfu#äk%
lkuq”kkluk% lkuqektZuk% lokdksokD;kl~ rs’kka ;Ke~ vfHki|ekukuka fN|rs
uke/ks;a ;K bR;~ ,okp{krs A1-2-9A
85. Gopatha Brāhmaṇa, 1.1.10.
l fn”kks·UoS{kr çkpha nf{k.kka çrhphe~ mnhpha /kzqoke~ Å/kZ~oke~ bfr rkl~
r=SokH;JkE;n~ vH;rir~ lerir~ rkH;% JkUrkH;l~ rIrkH;% larIrkH;%
i¥~p osnku~ fujfeehr liZosna fi”kkposne~ vlqjosne~ bfrgklosna iqjk.kosne~
bfr l [kyq çkP;k ,o fn”k% liZosna fujfeehr nf{k.kL;k% fi”kkposne~
çrhP;k vlqjosne~ mnhP;k bfrgklosne~ /kzqok;k”k~ pks/kZ~ok;k”k~ p iqjk.kosne~
l rku~ i¥~p osnku~ vH;JkE;n~ vH;rir~ lerir~ rsH;% JkUrsH;l~ rIrsH;%
larIrsH;% i¥~p egkO;kârhZfujfeehr o`/kr~ djn~ #gu~ egr~ rn~ bfr
o`/kn~ bfr liZosnkr~ djn~ bfr fi”kkposnkr~ #gn~ bR;~ vlqjosnkr~ egn~
brhfrgklosnkr~ rn~ bfr iqjk.kosnkr~ l ; bPNsr~ loSj~ ,rS% i¥~pfHkZosnS%
dqohZ;sR;~ ,rkfHkZ,o ru~ egkO;kâfrfHk% dqohZr loSZg ok vL;SrS% i¥~pfHkZosnS%
—ra Hkofr ; ,oa osn ;’k~ pkSoafo}ku~ ,oe~ ,rkfHkZegkO;kâfrfHk% dq#rs A10A
86. Gopatha Brāhmaṇa, 1.1.24.
vksadkja i`PNke% dks /kkrq% fda çkfrifnde~ fda ukek[;kre~ fda fy³~xe~ fda
opue~ dk foHkfä% d% çR;;% d% Loj milxksZ fuikr% fda oS O;kdj.ke~
dks fodkj% dks fodkjh dfrek=% dfro.kZ% dR;{kj% dfrin% d% la;ksx%
fda LFkkukuqçnkudj.ka f”k{kqdk% fde~ mPpkj;fUr fda NUn% dks o.kZ bfr
462 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
iwosZ çJk% vFkksÙkjs eU=% dYiks czkã.ke~ _x~ ;tq% lke dLekn~ czãokfnu
vksadkje~ vkfnr% dqoZfUr fda nSore~ fda T;ksfr’ke~ fda fu#äe~ fda
LFkkue~ dk ç—fr% fde/;kRee~ bfr ’kV~f=a”kr~ ç”uks% iwoksZÙkjk.kka =;ks oxkZ
}kn”kdk% ,rSj~vksadkja O;k[;kL;ke% A24A
87. Gopatha Brāhmaṇa, 1.3.6.
88. Gopatha Brāhmaṇa, 1.3.3.
89. Gopatha Brāhmaṇa, 1.4.24.
90. Gopatha Brāhmaṇa, 1.3.11.
91. Gopatha Brāhmaṇa, 1.3.15.
92. Gopatha Brāhmaṇa, 1.1.31.
93. Gopatha Brāhmaṇa, 1.4.13.
94. Gopatha Brāhmaṇa, 1.2.9.
95. Gopatha Brāhmaṇa, 1.1.14.
96. Gopatha Brāhmaṇa, 2.2.5.
rn~ vfi ”yksdk%
fNUufHkUuks·i/oLrks foJqrks cgq/kk e[k%A
b’VkiwrZæfo.kax`á ;tekuL;kokirr~A
_fRotka p fouk”kk; jkKks tuinL; pA
laoRljfofj’Va rn~ ;= ;Kks fofj’;rsA
nf{k.kkço.khHkwrks ;Kks nf{k.kr% Le`r%A
ghuk³~xks j{klka Hkkxks czãosnkn~ vlaL—r%A
prq’ikr~ ldyks ;K”k~ pkrqgkSj~=fofufeZr%A
prqfoZ/kS fLFkrks eU=Sj~_fRofXHkZosnikjxS%A
çk;f”pÙkSj~vuq/;kuSj~kuqKkukuqeU=.kS%A
gkseS”k~ p ;KfoHkza”ka loaZ czãk çiwj;sn~A bfr
rLekn~ ;tekuks Hk`Xof³~xjksfone~ ,o r= czãk.ka o`.kh;kRk
l fg ;Ka rkj;rhfr czkã.ke~ A2-2-5A
97. Chāndogya Upaniṣad, 3.4.1-2.
98. Brahmanda Purāṇa, 1.2.35.63-69.
[kM~x% —Rok e;k ;qäa iqjk.ke`f’klÙkek% A
vk=s;% lqefr/khZekUdk”;iks á—roz.k% AA
Hkkj}ktks·fXuopkZ”p okfl’Bk fe=;q”p ;% A
lkof.kZ% lksenfÙk’p lq”kekZ ”kka”kik;u% AA
,rs f”k’;k ee çksäk% iqjk.ks’kq /k`rozrk%A
f=fHkLr= —rkfLrlz% lafgrk% iqujso fgAA
References | 463
Chapter 5
1. Vālmiki Rāmāyaṇa, 1.18.8-11.
2. Inscriptions of Ancient Nepal, Vol III by D R Regmi, Abhinav Publications,
New Delhi, 1983, pp. 268.
3. Ibid, pp.269.
4. Vālmiki Rāmāyaṇa, 6.128.113, 114, 117, 121 and 123.
5. Ibid, 6.4.52-53.
6. Ibid, 2.3.4.
7. Ibid, 3.56.24.
8. Ibid, 6.12.18.
9. Ibid, 4.53.2 & 4.
10. Ibid, 5.14.2.
11. Ibid, 4.1.22, 4.26.14, 4.30.64, 4.30.78 & 4.53.9.
12. Ibid, 4.16.37
13. Ibid, Uttara Kānda, 42nd Sarga.
14. Ibid, 3.47.10.
15. Ibid, 2.118.34.
16. Ibid, 1.71.24.
17. Ibid, 1.72.13.
18. Ibid, 2.15.3.
19. Ibid, 2.14.21-22.
20. Ibid, 2.4.12.
21. Ibid, 2.4.17.
22. Ibid, 2.4.18.
23. Ibid, 2.41.11-12.
24. Ibid, 2.99.41.
25. Ibid, 5.57.1-2.
26. Ibid, 6.4.3-5.
References | 469
Chapter 6
1. South Indian Inscriptions, Vol. VI, No. 202, pp. 95-98.
2. “The Chronology of India: From Mahābhārata to Medieval Era” by Vedveer
Arya, Aryabhata Publications, 2019, Chapter 2.
3. Mahābhārata, Udyoga Parva, 81.7.
4. Ibid, 151.21.
470 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Chapter 7
1. Cḥāndogyopaniṣad, 3.17.6.
2. Rigveda, 3.36.10.
3. Rāmāyaṇa, Uttara Kānda, 53rd Sarga.
4. Mahābhārata, 3.191.
5. Mahābhārata, Droṇa Parva, 10.22.
6. Padma Purāṇa, 4.13.8-19.
fnyhisu iqjk i`’Vks ofl’Bks eqfulÙke% A
rPN`.kq’o egkçkK loZikrduk”kue~ A
fnyhi mokp&
Hkkæs ekL;flrk’VE;ka ;L;ka tkrks tuknZ~nu%A
rnga JksrqfePNkfe dFk;Lo egkequs A
dFka ok HkxokUtkr% ”ka[kpØxnk/kj%A
nsodhtBjs fo’.kq% fda drqaZ dsu gsrquk A
ofl’B mokp&
”k`.kq jktUço{;kfe dLekTtkrks tuknZ~nu%A
i`fFkO;ka f=fnoa R;ä~ok Hkors dFk;kE;ge~ A
iqjk olqa/kjk áklhRdalkfnu`iihfMrkA
Lokf/kdkjçeÙksu dalnwrsu rkfMrkA
Øanrh Øanrh lk rq ;;kS ?kwf.kZrykspukA
;= fr’Bfr nsos”k mekdkarks o`’k/ot%A
dalsu rkfMrk ukFk bfr rLeS fuosfnrqe~A
ck’iokjhf.k o’kaZfr foo.kkZ lkfoekfurkA
Øanarha rka lekyksD; dksisu LQqfjrk/kj%A
me;klfgr% loSZnsZoo`anSjuqozr%A
vktxke egknsoks fo/kkr`Hkoua #’kkA
xRok pksokp czãk.ka dal/oalugsrosA
mik;% l`T;rka czãUHkork fo’.kquk lgA
,s”oja r}p% JqRok xarqa çkg —rkReHkw%A
{khjksns ;= oSdqaB% lqIrks·fLr HkqtxksifjA
gali`’Ba lek#á gjsjafrdek;;kSA
r= xRok p ra /kkrk nsoo`anSgZjkfnfHk%A
la;qä% Lrw;rs okfXHk% dkseya okfXonkaoj%A
7. Mahābhārata, Udyoga Parva, Adhyāya 48.
8. Harivaṁśa, 2.98.15.
472 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Chapter 8
1. Mahāryabhaṭa Siddhānta, 2.2.
2. Mahāryabhaṭa Siddhānta
3. Matsya Purāṇa, Chapter 272.
4. Āryabhaṭīyam, 2.1.
5. “Aryabhatiya of Aryabhata” by Kripa Shankar Shukla, Indian National
Science Academy, New Delhi, 1976, Introduction, pp. XVIII.
6. Laghubhāskarīya-Vivaraṇa of Śaṅkaranārāyaṇa.
vFk çFkeLrkonk;ZHkVL; xf.krdkyfØ;kxksyy{k.k”kkL=L; Hkk’;a —Rok
iquxZzgdeZfucU/kua c`gn~HkkLdjh;e~ uke —Rok iqujfi la{ksis.k v’Vkf/k
dkjdfFkrxzgdeZfucU/kua eUncq)hukeuqxzgcq)~;k xq#j;a HkkLdj% Louke
lEcU/keqifnfn{kq% rf}?uksi”keukFkaZ Hkxors HkkLdjk; ueLdrqZeknfonekg A
7. Āryabhaṭīyam, 3.10.
8. “The Chronology of India: From Mahābhārata to Medieval Era” by Vedveer
Arya, Aryabhata Publications, Hyderabad, 2019, Chapter 2.
9. Pañchasiddhāntikā, 1.10.
10. Pañchasiddhāntikā, 15.20.
11. Indian History Quarterly, Vol 6, pp, 726-736.
12. Laghubhāskarīya-Vivaraṇa of Śaṅkaranārāyaṇa.
vkpk;kZ;ZHkVa ojkgfefgje~ Jhen~xq#a HkkLdje~ A
xksfoUna gfjnÙke= f”kjlk o{;s ç.kE; Øekr~ A
13. Laghubhāskarīyam, 2nd Śloka.
dkys egfr ns”ks ok LQqVkFkaZ ;L; n”kZue~ A
References | 473
t;R;k;ZHkV% lks·fC/kçkUrçksYyf³~?kl|”kk%A
14. Āryabhaṭīyam, Golapāda, 14th Śloka.
15. Brahmasphuṭa Siddhānta, 21.9.
16. Āryabhaṭīyam, Gītikāpāda, 8.
17. Sūrya Siddhānta, 12.43-44.
esjks#Hk;rkseZ/;s /kzqorkjs uHk%fLFkrs A
fuj{kns”kl¡LFkkukeqHk;s f{kfrtkJ;sAA
vrks uk{kksPNª;Lrklq /kzqo;ks% f{kfrtLFk;ks% A
uofryZEcdk¡”kkLrq esjko{kk¡”kdkLrFkkAA
18. Rigveda, 1.65-73, 9.97.31-44.
19. Brihat Pārāśara Horāśāstra, 41.32.
orZeku;qxs tkrLrFkk jktk ;qf/kf’Bj% A
Hkfork ”kkfyokgk|LrFkSo f}tlÙkeAA
Chapter 9
1. “How old is Indian Agriculture?” by Sh. Anil Suri, published at http://
indiafacts.org/how-old-is-indian-agriculture/
2. Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa, 3.5.4.
3. Rigveda, 9.85 & 10.123.
4. Rigveda, 10.123.
5. Rigveda, 10.72.8-9.
v’VkS iq=klks vfnrs;sZ tkrkLrUoLifj A
nsok¡ mi çSRlIrfHk% ijk ekrkZ.MekL;r~AA
lIrfHk% iq=Sjfnfr#i çSRiwoZ~;a ;qxe~ A
çtk;S e`R;os RoRiquekZrkZ.MekHkjr~AA
6. Taittirīya Āraṇyaka, 1.13.3.
ijk ekrkZ.MekL;Rk~] bfrA lIrfHk% iq=Sjfnfr%A miçSRiwoZ~;a ;qxe~A çtk;S
e`R;os rr~A ijk ekrkZ.MekHkjfnfr] bfrA rkuuqØfe’;ke%] bfrA fe=”p
o#.k”pA /kkrk pk;Zek pA v”k”p Hkx”pA bUæ”p fooLok ”psR;srs] bfrA
fgj.;xHkksZ g¡ l% ”kqfp”kr~A czãtKkua rfnRinfefr] bfrA xHkZ% çktkiR;%A
vFk iq#’k% lIriq#’k%] bfrAA vewa fno lIrfHkjsrs pRokfj pAA
7. Brihadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad, 3.9.1.
8. Rigveda, 2.33.1.
9. Taittirīya Āraṇyaka, 1.10.1.
10. Maitrāyaṇī Saṁhitā, 1.6.13.
474 | The Chronology of India : From Manu to Mahabharata
Chapter 10
1. Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa, 3.2.22-24
rs nsok bZ{kkapfØjsA ;ks’kk ok b;a okX;nsua u ;qforsgSo ek fr’BUreH;sghfr
Ckzwfg rka rq u vkxrka çfrçCkzwrkfnfr lk gSua rnso fr’BUreH;s;k; rLeknq L=h
iqekala laL—rs fr’BUreH;Sfr rka gSH; vkxrka çfrçksokps;a ok vkxkfnfrA22A
rka nsok%A vlqjsH;ks·Urjk;aLrka Loh—R;kXukoso ifjx`á loZgqretqgoqjkgqfrfgZ
nsokuka l ;kesokeweuq’VqHkk tqgoqLrnsoSuka rísok% LO;dqoZr rs·lqjk vkÙkoplks
gs·yoks gs·yo bfr onUr% ijkcHkwoq%A23A
r=Srkefi okpewnq%A miftKkL;ka l EysPNLrLekUu czkã.kks EysPNsnlq;kZ
gS’kk okd~A ,oesoS’k f}’krka liRukukeknÙks okpa rs·L;kÙkopl% ijkHkofUr ;
,oesr}snA24A
2. Bharata Nātyaśāstra, 17.26-28.
3. Bharata Nātyaśāstra 17.29-30
4. Brihaddeśī, 302-308.
5. Vālmiki Rāmāyaṇa, 5.30.17-18.
6. Vālmiki Rāmāyaṇa, 5.30.19.
7. Manusmriti, 10.45.
8. Rigveda, 1.163.9 & 11.
9. Gopatha Brāhmaṇa, 1.1.10.
10. Brahmāṇḍa 2.74.11, Brahma 13.152, Harivaṁśa 1841, Matsya 48.9, Vāyu
99.11, cf. also Viṣṇu 4.17.5, Bhāgavata 9.23.15.
vvv
Select Bibliography
vvv