369:3 The words of the text are ###, and the commentator explains the phrase, 'the Angirasa Brahmans, of whom the Hárita family was the chief.' The Linga reads, 'Harita was the son of Yuvanáśwa, whose sons were the Háritas; they were on the part (or followers) of Angiras, and were Brahmans with the properties of Kshatriyas.' The Váyu has, 'Harita was the son of Yuvanáśwa, from whom were many called p. 370 Háritas; they were sons of Angiras, and Brahmans with the properties of Kshatriyas.' The Bhágavata has only, These (Ambarísha, Purukutsa, and Harita) were, according to Śridhara Swámi's comment, the chiefs of Mándhátri's descendants, being founders of three several branches: or it may mean, he says, merely that they had Mándhátri for their progenitor, Mándhátri being by some also named Angiras, according to Aśwaláyana. It may be questioned if the compilers of the Puráńas, or their annotators, knew exactly what to make of this and similar phrases, although they were probably intended to intimate that some persons of Kshatriya origin became the. disciples of certain Brahmans, particularly of Angiras, and afterwards founders of schools of religious instruction themselves. Mándhátri himself is the author of a hymn in the Rig-veda. As. Res. VIII. 385. Hárita is the name of an individual sage, considered as the son of Chyavana, and to whom a work on law is attributed. It is probably rather that of a school, however, than of an individual.

370:4 Narmadá, the personified Nerbudda river, was, according to the Bhágavata, the sister of the Nágas.

371:5 We have some varieties here. Instead of Trasadasyu the Matsya has Dussaha, whom it makes the husband of Narmadá, and father of Sambhúti, the father of Tridhanwan. The Bhágavata omits Sambhúti; the Linga makes him the brother of Trasadasyu; and the Agni has in his place Sudhanwan.

371:6 Vrishadaśwa: Váyu. The Matsya, Agni, and Bráhma omit all between Sambhúta and Tridhanwan. The Bhágavata has a rather different series, or Anarańya, Haryyaśwa, Aruńa, Tribandhana, Triśanku. As Anarańya is famous in Hindu story, and Trayyáruńa is a contributor to the Rig-veda, their omission shews careless compilation.

371:7 The Váyu states he was banished by his father for his wickedness (Adharma). The Bráhma P. and Hari Vanśa detail his iniquity at length; and it is told more concisely in the Linga. He carried off the betrothed wife of another man, one of the citizens according to the two former, of Vidarbha according to the latter: for this, his father, by the advice of Vaśisht́ha, banished him, and he took refuge with Śwapákas. The Rámáyańa has a different story, and ascribes Triśanku's degradation to the curse of the sons of Vaśisht́ha, to whom the king had applied to conduct his sacrifice, after their father had refused to do so. Before that, he is described as a pious prince, and the object of his sacrifice was to ascend to heaven.