Some Problems of Pre‑Buddhist History and Chronology
Summary
Responding to criticism of his earlier work on the chronology of pre‑Buddhist India, the author defends his thesis that Janamejaya, Tura Kāvasheya and Indrota preceded King Janaka of Videha by several generations. He reviews Vedic passages cited to support alternative chronologies and argues that reliance on Purāṇa lists without corroboration is dangerous. The article refutes the identification of Āśvalāyana with Assalayana of Buddhist texts and challenges attempts to link Kabandhī and Kakudhī Kātyāyana on the basis of name similarity. It also addresses the problem of interpreting the Vedic verb lā in the Brāhmaṇas and the use of emendations to force fit conjectures. The author maintains that the Vedānga and Kalpa literature exhibit layers of composition and that some portions may be late additions. He calls for greater caution and linguistic rigour in reconstructing the chronology of early Indian teachers.
AI-generated summary, automatically checked against the article text.
Conclusion
After re‑examining textual evidence, the author concludes that his earlier chronology still stands: Janamejaya and his priests lived several generations before Janaka and Yājñavalkya. Misidentifications based on name similarity and conjectural emendations undermine the reliability of rival theories. The paper underscores the need for careful philological study rather than reliance on legendary lists when reconstructing ancient chronology.