102 ESSAY ON" 



or tribe of the Axd'hras, but a spurious branch of 

 it. The third is that of the And'hra-bhrityas, of 

 servants of the And'hka sovereigns; wlio, after the 

 death of Puloma, seized upon the kingdom, and 

 divided it among themselves. Sipraca, or Suracca, 

 was the first of the And'hraj'aticas ; and the vene- 

 rable Puloma was the last. In the Puran'as no- 

 place is assigned, in the chronological lists of the 

 kings of Magadlia^ to the first dynasty of the ge- 

 nuine And'hras: except in one, in which they are 

 placed immediately after Puloma', who, it is well 

 known, was succeeded by the servants of the An- 

 d'hras, not by tlie seven genuine And'hras. In 

 the Bhagat'ata^ we read only, that the seven Ax- 

 d'hras would reign over the land. In the Vhknu- 

 Jmran'a they are not mentioned, unless they be the 

 same with the Cos'alas or Causalas. In \\\tJ^rah- 

 vuinda, thev are introduced between Puloma' and 

 the And"hra-ehrityas in an obscure manner; and 

 there the nine And'hras with the And'hra-ja'ticas 

 are joined together in an immediate order of succes- 

 ,sion ; and it is added, that there were thirty-six of 

 them, nine genuine And'hras, and twenty-seven 

 belonging to a spurious branch of the same family; 

 but it is not said which of them ruled first. Now,, 

 it is universally acknowledged, that the And'hra- 

 BHRiTYAS succeeded Puloma' ; and the fact being 

 testified by the annals of Chilian no doubt can re- 

 main concernimi' this circumstance; and the seven 

 gr nine genuine Atv^d'hras must of course be 

 placed before the spurious branch, and immediately 

 after the Cau'xca dynasty. Thus we shall have either 

 13 or 15 kings, to (ill up a space of 246 years. The 

 occasion of tliis omission is, I believe, that the first 

 kings of the And'hra and And'hra-ja'tica dy- 

 nasties, were prime ministers, and both put their 

 masters to death, and usurped their throne. That 

 SisuMAN, the last o^ i\iQ.Canwa dynasty, wa§ put tt* 



