Janamejaya Pariksits
By Nityadhan Bhattacharya
Summary
This genealogical study addresses confusion in Puranic and epic literature regarding multiple kings named Parikṣit and their sons Janamejaya. Some modern scholars, notably H. C. Roy Choudhuri, have argued that there was only one Parikṣit and one Janamejaya, thereby conflating distinct figures. The author challenges this view by systematically examining genealogical lists in texts such as the Mahābhārata, Harivaṃśa and various Purāṇas. He shows that the name Parikṣit appears for at least two post‑Kurukṣetra‑war kings and that their sons, both named Janamejaya, ruled in different eras. The paper traces the succession from the Bhārata war survivor Parikṣit, his son Janamejaya II, and a later Parikṣit who fathered Janamejaya III. It discusses discrepancies in the lists, noting that duplications of names are common in dynastic traditions and pointing to analogous examples in other royal houses. The author argues that forcing the evidence into a single lineage ignores textual variations and creates more problems than it solves. He concludes that accepting three distinct Janamejayas provides a more coherent reconstruction of the Kuru lineage and aligns better with chronological data derived from Puranic regnal years.
Conclusion
The article concludes that maintaining the distinction between multiple Parikṣits and Janamejayas respects the diversity of sources and avoids unwarranted harmonisation. The author asserts that dynastic duplication of names was not unusual and should not be dismissed as a textual error. Recognising separate kings clarifies the chronology of the Kurus after the Mahābhārata war and has implications for dating later Vedic rituals and political developments.