‘254 
F. E. Pargiter —Ancient Cedi, Matsya, and Karicsa . [No. 3, 
(Vana-p., xxii. 898), or as it was also called by way of variety pukti- 
sahvaya (A 9 va-medh.-p, lxxxiii. 2466-7). It was situated on the 
It. pukti-mati, for it is said the river flowed towards the city, and a 
legend was told that Mount Koliiliala, being in love with the river, ob¬ 
structed her, but king Vasu gave the mountain a kick and the river 
flowed out through the passage made by the blow (Adi-p,, lxiii. 
2367-70). Cunningham’s identification of the river and city has been 
quoted above, and Mr. Beglar has proposed another solution (Arch. Surv. 
llepts., VIII. pp. 123-125), but they do not agree with the position 
now found for Cedi, nor with the further data which I now proceed to 
discuss. 
The pukti-mati river is said in the Puranas to rise in the Vindliya 
range, and not in the Rksa range as Cunningham says. There is some 
confusion between the two ranges in the Puranas, largely through 
errors of transmission, and partly also because the two ranges form a 
kind of knot at Amara-kantaka, where the Narmada, Sone and Malia- 
nadi in its Seonatli branch (which was formerly considered the main 
stream) rise, and these rivers were held to rise in the Vindliya Moun¬ 
tains ; but looking at the other rivers assigned to these two watersheds, 
the pukti-mati is grouped with the Da^rna (Dasan), Citra-kuta (near 
Mount Citra-kuta), Vipa^a (Bias, a tributary of the Ken), Tamasa 
(Tons) and Vilalii (at Gaya), all of which unquestionably rise in the 
long Vindliya chain ; and not with the Tapi (upper part of the Tapti), 
Payosnl (Purna and lower part of the Tapti), Vena or Venya (Wain-ganga) 
and VaitaranI (Bytarni) which unquestionably rise in the Rksa range. 
The actual grouping decides this matter, and not the mere text of the 
Puranas which may be and is full of mistakes; thus the Matsya 
Purana (cxiii. 25-28) and the Kurma (xlvii. 30-33) wrongly interchange 
the names of the two ranges, making the former group of rivers rise in 
the Rksa Mountains and the latter in the Vindliya ; while the Markan- 
deya Purana (lvii. 21-25) makes the same mistake as to the second group 
and declares the first group rise in the Skandlia range, when there are no 
such Mountains ! These errors and the not infrequent jumble of names 
are no doubt due to the ignorance of transcribers; for it is a remarkable 
fact that the early Sanskrit writers had a much better knowledge of 
the Geography of India than their successors; the Ramayana and 
Maha-bharata contain a considerable quantity of fairly accurate inform¬ 
ation, while the Raghu-va 1119 a, p^upala-badha and modern poems are 
singularly barren in this respect. 
The R. pukti-mati then rises in the Vindliya Mts. ; and it must 
be noted that iu the Purana lists this, name includes the hills about 
as far west only as Saugor where the Da^arna, rises, for the next im- 
