Budha, made his appearance about a thousand years before the birth of Christ. And the pundits of Cashmir very correctly place the birth of the postdiluvian Buddha two centuries before A. M. 2638, or in the year 1564. We must be careful not to confound Buddha with Budha. The first denotes a prophet, and is, I believe, exclusively applied to the descendants of the Sun: Buddha the son of Máyá, celebrated by the astronomers at Varanes was Enoch: Buddha the son of Jina who was born in the 156th year of the Cali age was Noah, who was born in the 1056th year of the world. For 900+150 1056. We may certainly consider the fourth year of any century as the commencement thereof; and 156 years are to 5100, as 3 years and 21 days are to a century. Budha, the contemporary of Icshwacu was a sage, or philosopher of the Lunar race: whether he ever succeeded to the government of the world appears doubtful; as Yayati of the same generation, is admitted by all the pundits to have succeeded to the supreme rule. If Budha ever became a Menu, his reign commenced about the fifty-seventh year of the Cali age or year B. c. 3045.

Having endeavoured to refute the foregoing arguments, brought forward against the Hindu Chronology, and to point out the absurdities and contradictions attending the postdiluvian system,

it remains to place the genealogy of the two dynasties in a less questionable form. That they did exist is most certain: that the names and dates, with one exception, are correct, I have no doubt. In the division which I am about to offer, it will appear that the children of the Sun, denote the race of Seth, and those of the Moon, the race of Cain. That these dynasties are considered by the Hindus as antediluvian has never, I believe, been disputed. All their sacred records so inform us. When history is transmitted in allegory, we must in general be at the trouble of searching for truth. But, in this instance, we are not only informed from whom Icshwacu and Budha descended, but of the year in which the Antara of their great sire, the general father of mankind commenced. That epoch is fixed at the first year of the first age; and it is added, that this Menu had two distinguished sons, from whom the Solar and Lunar dynasties descended. We We may always draw valuable inferences from Hindu records. For instance, we learn that the princes in the two dynasties were antediluvian, because in the Veda, where the futility of all sublunary happiness is enforced, the deaths of the kings in each dynasty are recorded prior to the deluge. One passage is as follows:

"What relish can there be for enjoyment in

this world? Surely we see the universe tending to decay; even as the biting gnats and other insects; even as the grass of the field, and the trees of the forest, which spring up and then perish.

“But what are they? Others far greater have been destroyed, archers mighty in battle, and some who have been kings of the whole earth: Sudhumna, Buridhumna, Indradhumna, Cuvalayaswa, Barishsha, Nahusha, Suryati, Yayati, Vicrava, Acshayasena, Pryavrata, and the rest.

66

Maratta, likewise, and Bharatta, who enjoyed all corporeal delights, yet left their boundless prosperity, and passed from this world to the next.

"But what are they? Others, yet greater, Gandevas, Asuras, Rashasas, companies of spirits, Pisachas, Uragas, and Grahas have, we see, been destroyed.

“But what are they? Others greater still have been changed, vast rivers dried, mountains torn up; the pole itself turned from its place; the cords of the stars rent asunder, the earth itself deluged with water, even the Suses, or angels, hurled from their stations.

"In such a world, then what relish can there be for enjoyment? Thou alone, O God, art able to raise up Thou only, O Lord, art my refuge."

* Vide Appendix (C).

In the foregoing we trace the death of the greatest heroes. And those, who in the Lunar dynasty became sovereigns of the whole world, Yayati and Bharata are particularized; but even greater than them, the seven Menus, well versed in the Scripture, commencing with the Gandevas, or patriarchs, paid the death of nature. All this took place prior to the destruction of the world by the deluge. It is evident, then, that the princes previously destroyed were antediluvian. In the new world, Noah only was sovereign of the whole earth; for on the division of the world three several rulers were appointed, independent of the patriarch: which again proves that the kings of the whole world were antediluvian. The Puranas then proceed to inform us, that Icshwacu, was descended from Marisha, or Light, who was the son of the Sun. In the Scripture we read, "And to Seth there was born a son, and he called his name Enos (or Enosh); then began men to call upon name of the Lord." In the Hebrew, to call themselves by the name of the Lord. Thus Icshwacu, of the third generation from Swayambhuva, was termed the son of Light, or righteous* race, the lesser light, the Moon; and the other to distinguish

the

* Righteousness, at the same period that Enos of the third generation from Adam, was called by the name of the Lord: the more to distinguish the righteous race from the less righteous.

the children of the true believers, from the children of the unbelievers, or idolaters. Agreeably to this, the dynasties commence at the period, when the two descendants, or eldest sons respectively of Seth and Cain, were of an age to become rulers, under the monarchical rule of their general father Adam. The Mahabharat places this period after 400 years; the Metsya Avatar at A. M. 419; Berosus at A. M. 413. But these three dates, denote the return of the race of Atri. For the commencement of the rule of the race of Atri, at Sipora, or Chaldea is specifically placed at A. M. 474, (as will be explained hereafter*.) In dividing the dynasties, I have followed the Hindus. Supposing them the descendants of six generations only, commencing with Enos, and ending with Mathuselah, placing with them their brothers as their contemporaries; that is, admitting Icshwacu to denote Enos, I imagine the twenty-four names (that follow to be equally the sons of Seth and rulers over provinces during the same period; placing the twenty-fifth prince Satyavatar, at the head of the fourth generation, as Icshwacu is admitted to be of the third.

I am far from presuming that the division is absolutely correct. The system that governs it,

* Vide Letter IV.