There is very little difference between Sir William Jones’s and Colonel Wilford’s lists, in that main branch of the Lunar race, of which Puru, Hastin, Ajamidha, Kuru, Santanu, and Yudhishthira are the most distinguished links. The coincidence is so near as to warrant a supposition of identity of source; but close inspection shows Wilford to have had a fuller supply, for he produces new branches, both of Hastin’s and Kuru’s progeny. He has also one name (Bhimasena) towards the close, which is in my lists, but not in Sir William Jones’s; and immediately following Bhimasena, both these lists exhibit Dilipa, wanting in my copy of the Bhagavat, though contained in the Agni Purana: proofs of the diversity of the sources of supply, and highly gratifying when the remoteness of those sources is considered. There is also in my lists Tansu, the nineteenth from Budha, who is not in the lists either of Sir William Jones or Wilford. Again; Wilford has a Suhotra preceding Hastin, who is not in Sir William Jones’s genealogies.[2.3.11] Again; Jahnu is made the successor to Kuru; whereas the Purana (whence my extracts) makes Parikshit the successor, who adopts the son of Jahnu. This son is Viduratha, who has a place in all three. Other variations are merely orthographical. A comparison of Sir William Jones’s Solar genealogies with my tables will yield nearly the same satisfactory result as to original authenticity. I say Sir William Jones’s list, because there is no other efficient one. We first differ at the fourth from Ikshwaku. In my list this is Am-Prithu, of which he makes two names, Anenas and Prithu. Thence to Purukutsa, the eighteenth, the difference is only in orthography. To Irisuaka, the twenty-third in mine, the twenty-sixth in Sir William Jones’s list, one name is above accounted for; but here are two wanting in mine, Trasadasyu and Haryaswa. There is, also, considerable difference in the orthography of those names which we have in common. Again; we differ as to the successors of Champa, the twenty-seventh, the founder of Champapur in Bihar. In Sir William’s, Sadeva succeeds, and he is followed by Vijaya; but my authorities state these both to be sons of Champa, and that Vijaya, the [35] younger, was his successor, as the elder, Sadeva, took to religious austerity. The thirty-third and thirty-sixth, Kesi and Dilipa, are not noticed by Sir William Jones; but there is a much more important person than either of these omitted, who is a grand link of connexion, and affording a good synchronism of the earliest history. This is Ambarisha, the fortieth, the contemporary of Gadhi, who was the founder of Gadhipura or Kanauj. Nala, Sarura, and Dilipa (Nos. 44, 45, 54 of my lists) are all omitted by Sir William Jones.