[Footnote 370:  Especially the Besnagar column.  See Rapson, Ancient India, p. 156 and various articles in J.R.A.S. 1909-10.]

[Footnote 371:  X. i, vi.]

[Footnote 372:  III. i. 23, Ularo so Kanho isi ahosi.  But this may refer to the Rishi mentioned in R.V. VIII. 74 who has not necessarily anything to do with the god Krishna.]

[Footnote 373:  See Hemacandra Abhidhanacintamani, Ed. Boehtlingk and Rien, p. 128, and Barnett’s translation of the Antagada Dasao, pp. 13-15 and 67-82.]

[Footnote 374:  Apparently the same as the Vrishnis.]

[Footnote 375:  III.  XV.]

[Footnote 376:  It would seem that the temple of Dvaraka was built between the composition of the narrative in the Mahabharata and of the Vishnu Purana, for while the former says the whole town was destroyed by the sea, the latter excepts the temple and says that whoever visits it is freed from all his sins.  See Wilson, Vishnu Purana, V. p. 155.]

[Footnote 377:  A most curious chapter of the Vishnu Purana (IV. 13) contains a vindication of Krishna’s character and a picture of old tribal life.]

[Footnote 378:  Neither can I agree with some scholars that Krishna is mainly and primarily a deity of vegetation.  All Indian ideas about the Universe and God emphasize the interaction of life and death, growth and decay, spring and winter.  Krishna is undoubtedly associated with life, growth and generation, but so is Siva the destroyer, or rather the transmuter.  The account in the Mahabhashya (on Pan.  III. 1. 26) of the masque representing the slaughter of Kamsa by Krishna is surely a slight foundation for the theory that Krishna was a nature god.  It might be easily argued that Christ is a vegetation spirit, for not only is Easter a spring festival but there are numerous allusions to sowing and harvest in the Gospels and Paul illustrates the resurrection by the germination of corn.  It is a mistake to seek for uniformity in the history of religion.  There were in ancient times different types of mind which invented different kinds of gods, just as now professors invent different theories about gods.]

[Footnote 379:  The Krishna of the Chandogya Upanishad receives instruction but it is not said that he was himself a teacher.]

[Footnote 380:  Hopkins, India Old and New, p. 105.]

[Footnote 381:  Bhandarkar.  Allusions to Krishna in Mahabhashya, Ind.  Ant. 1874, p. 14.  For the pastoral Krishna see Bhandarkar, Vaishnavism and Saivism, chap.  IX.]

[Footnote 382:  The divinity of Radha is taught specially in the Brahma-vaivarta Purana and the Narada pancaratra, also called Jnanamritasara.  She is also described in the Gopala-tapaniya Upanishad of unknown date.]

[Footnote 383:  But Kamsa appears in both series of legends, i.e., in the Ghata-Jataka which contains no hint of the pastoral legends but is a variant of the story of the warlike Krishna.]