above statement of Buddhaghoso, in the fact, that no mention whatever is made of Indian affairs after the advent of Mahendra. This proves, in my opinion, that all the knowledge of Indian history which the Singhalese possessed had been derived from Mahendra: a conclusion which is supported by the direct testimony of Buddhagoso. The 14. The fourth objection, urged by Professor Wilson against the identity of Asoka and Priyadarsi, is the non-occurrence of the name of Asoka or Dharmasoka in any of the inscriptions. same objection might be offered to the identity of Prince Salim and Jahangir, and of Prince Kurram and Shah-Jehán. In fact, it is a common practice in the East for a prince to assume a new name upon his accession to the throne; and such we know was the custom in Asoka's own family. His grandfather had three names,-1st, a birth name, which is not given, but which was perhaps Vrishala; 2nd, a local name, Palibrothes, or lord of Pátaliputra; and 3rd, a royal name, Chandra Gupta, which he assumed on his accession to the throne.* Asoka's brother, named Vitásoka, was also called Tishya; his son Kunála had a second name, Dharma-Varddhana ;† and his daughter, Sanghamitra, was also named Sumitra. At that period it was therefore the common custom, for a prince at least, to have two * Megasthenes in Strabo, xv. names; and if Asoka, as the Dipawanso explicitly states, bore also the title of Priyadarsi, it is evident that the inscriptions which gave him this title would omit all mention of his original name of Asoka. In the edicts promulgated by himself, he is mentioned by the name which he had assumed; but in the annals written by others he is called by that name which he had always borne, and by which he was best known to the people. An almost similar case is that of the Roman Emperor Elagabalus, or Bassianus, who assumed the name of Antoninus, by which he is always mentioned on coins and inscriptions; while the historians and annalists invariably call him Elagabalus. 15. But the statement of the Dipawanso is most happily confirmed by the Bhabra edict, from which we learn that Priyadarsi, the worshipper of Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha, was the Raja of Magadha at the period of the Third Synod.* Now we know, from the Buddhist annals, that this synod took place in the reign of Asoka Maurya, the Buddhist King of Magadha. The statement is further confirmed by a fact mentioned by the Chinese pilgrim Fa-Hian; • Jour. As. Soc. Bengal, ix. 618. The opening words are "Piyadasi-rája Magadha-sangham abhiváde-mánam cha," or "Raja Priyadarsi, saluting the Synod of Magadha, declareth." This most valuable document should be translated critically; for the version already published renders the above passage as follows: -"Piadasa Raja, unto the multitude assembled in Magadha saluting him, speaks (thus). who, writing in A.D. 400, attributes the erection of a Lion-pillar at Samkissa to Asoka.* "The king (Ayu or Asoka) felt sensible of a great increase of his faith and veneration. He caused therefore a chapel to be built. Behind the chapel The interior was erected a pillar, 30 cubits high. Thereon was placed a Lion. and the exterior were polished and resplendent as crystal." Now, it is remarkable that the pillars which bear Priyadarsi's inscriptions have all polished shafts, about 30 cubits in height, of which some are still surmounted by Lions. The chain of evidence is therefore complete; and there can no longer be any doubt of the identity of Asoka Maurya with the Priyadarsi of the inscriptions. 16. The minor difficulties of chronology, which form Professor Wilson's last objection, are easily disposed of; for they seem to me to have arisen solely from the erroneous assumption that Priyadarsi must have been a contemporary of Antiochus the Great. In the Girnar and Kapurdigiri rock inscriptions, King Priyadarsi mentions the names of five Greek princes who were contemporary with himself. Of these, four have been read with certainty-Antiochus, Ptolemy, Antigonus, and Magas; and the fifth has been conjectured to be Alexander. James Prinsep, who first read these names, assigned them to the following princes : and with these identifications the learned of Europe have generally agreed. 17.The fifth name has been read by Mr. Norris as Alexander; and if this reading is correct, we may identify this prince with Alexander II. of Epeiros, who reigned from B. C. 272-254. But the two copies of this name, published by Mr. Norris, from fac similes by Masson and Court, appear to me to read Alibhasunari, which may be intended for Ariobarzanes III., King of Pontus, who reigned from B. C. 266-240. But in either case the date of Priyadarsi's inscription will be about B. C. 260-258, shortly preceding the death of Magas. 18. As the last-fitting pieces of a child's puzzlemap test the accuracy of the previous arrangements, so do these identifications prove the correctness of Sir William Jones's happy conjecture of the identity of Chandra Gupta and Sandrakottos. The facts are undeniable. Asoka, or Priyadarsi, the Indian King of Magadha, was the contemporary of five Greek princes, all of whom began to reign a little before the middle of the third century B. C. The nature of the relations which Asoka established with these princes, has been lost by the abrasion of the rock-inscription; but * See Plate of Inscription in Journal Roy. As. Soc. xii. we may conjecture that the chief point was the propagation of the Buddhist religion, and the toleration of Buddhist missionaries. To some it may seem difficult to understand how any relations should exist between the Indian Asoka and the Greek princes of Europe and Africa; but to me it appears natural and obvious. Asoka's kingdom on the west was bounded by that of Antiochus; his father, Bindusára, had received missions from Antiochus, Soter, and Ptolemy Philadelphus; and as Asoka was forty-five years of age when he was inaugurated, in B. C. 259, he might have conversed with both of the Greek ambassadors, Daimachos and Dionysios. He had been governor of Ujain for many years in the lifetime of his father, during which the Egyptian fleet had anchored annually at Barygaza, while the merchants proceeded to the viceroy's court at Ozene, with choice specimens of their valuables-wines, gold and silver plate, and female slaves. Asoka had known the Greeks before he became king; he had seen their ambassadors and their merchants; and he knew that his grandfather had given five hundred elephants to Seleukos Nikator in exchange for a barren and mountainous territory, and a Grecian wife. 19. But there is another fatal objection to Professor Wilson's identification of Antiochus the Great with the Antiochus of Priyadarsi's inscriptions, in the omission of any of the Greek princes of Kabul and of the native princes of Parthia; for we know that Artabanus I. and Euthydemus were the contempo |