________________
165
and it appears most probable that he is to be identified with the Satakarni of the Nanaghata inscription. (Op.cit. pp. 481, 482).
Thus, by taking 322 B.C., the date of Candragupta's accession, as the year of beginning of Maurya Era, Kharavela's accession should fall in 170 B.C., and the fifth year of his reign in 166 B.C. Consequently, Nanda - raja's (i. e. Nandivardhana's) attack on Kalinga must have taken place in 466 B.C. This Nanda-king is again mention ed in the 12th line of the inscription, which means, "In the twelfth year of his reign, Kharavela produced consternation among the king of Uttarapatha, created fear in the people of Magadha, made his elephants to enter into "Suganageya", humbled Brihaspatimitra, the king of Magadha and brought back to Kalinga the Jain statue which had been carried away by the Nanda-king, and also gained some Jewels fromAnga and Magadha as an evidence of victory" (Cf. Journal of Bihar and Orissa Research Society, Vol. IV. p. 401, Vol. XII, p.732). This line also confirms the date of Kharavela, decided above. For, 'Brihaspatimitra' mentioned in the inscription is identified with Pus yamitra, the Sunaga - king, who flourished in 185150 B.C. according to the Puranic chronology, and the 12th year of Kharavela's reign falls in 159 B.C. which synchronis es with the reign of Pusyamitra. (Cf. Chiman Lal Jee Chand Shah, M. A. Jainism in North India, (Gujarati Translation), pp. 159-162; Dr. V. A. Smith, Journal of Royal Asiatic Society, 1918, p. 554; Dr. K.P.Jayaswal, op. cit. Vol. III, p. 447, Dr. Shanti Lal Shah, op. cit, pp. 53-55).
Our view that this Nanda - raja was no other than Nandivardhana. is supported by some famous historians. Dr. V. A. Smith observes, "The Nanda-Raja referred to appears to be Nandivardhana, the ninth Sisunaga king of the Puranas. It seems to be necessary to treat him and his successor Mahanandin, No. 10 as Nandas distinct from the nine Nandas who come between No. 10 and Can gupta. In the third edition of Early History of India (1914) I placed the accession of Nandivardhana about 418 B.C. He must now go back to c. 470 B.C. or possibly to an earlier date". (Journal of Royal Asiatic Society, 1918, p. 547). E. J. Rapson, the editor of Cambridge History of India (Vol. 1), concludes: "If tivasa-sata in
