________________
142
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[VOL. XIV.
transmitted by Augustus, together with his own title, to his successors. And undoubtedly it was a very leading designation, along with Augustus and Imperator, of all the Roman emperors down to & certain time, and was probably the particular appellation by which they were most generally known and spoken of in popular usage in the western parts of the empire, though we may doubt whether the same was the case in the eastern parts. But there was an important change in the time of Hadrian (A.D. 117-38). He dropped the name Cæsar as a title of the emperor, and gave to it the application which it continued to bear after his time : namely, he transferred it to the second person in the state, the intended successor to the throne And, though he did not make a Cæsar till A.D. 136, when he adopted and appointed L. Aelius Verus, his coins show that he abandoned the use of the title by himself in A.D. 125. Thus, from A.D. 135 the name Cæsar was no longer a title of the emperors, but had only a subordinate value. We are thus confronted by the position that the name Cæsar was taken up by a Kushan king as an imperial title in imitation of the Roman emperors when it had Deased to be a title of those emperors themselves. And this is sufficient in itself, I think, to apset Professor Lüders' application of the Kushan record."
I have consulted an eminent classical epigrapbist, Professor E. Ziebarth, about this question. He informs me that all Roman emperors, with the exception of Vitellius (15-69 A.D.), nised the title Cesar. After Hadrian the use of the title was no more allowed to every prince but only to the emperor himself and his successor and co-regent. The title is used in inscriptions, in Europe and in Asia, at all times, and it is impossible to draw any chronological conclusions.
It is therefore quite allowable to assume that the Roman title could be adopted by an Indian ruler as late as A.D. 170. The Romans were repeatedly victorious in their wars in Mesopotamia and against the Parthians during the latter half of the second century; and there is nothing unlikely in the supposition that an Indian ruler in the North-Western Frontier districts should havo adopted the Roman imperial title at that time. But soon the Roman power began to melt away in Asia; and there is nothing extraordinary in the fact that the title was not used in India any more.
In support of Professor Lüders' dating I have drawn attention to the traditional tales abont Khotan handed down by the Tibetans. We learn from them that "the king Kanika aud the king of Guzan and king Vijayakirti, lord of Li (Khotan) and others, having led an army into India and overthrown the city of Soked (Sakēta), king Vijayakirti, obtaining many sariras, then bestowed them in that stôpa of Phru-ño." This can only mean that the Khotan king Vijayakarti joined the Kushana king Kanishka in da expedition against Säkēta. I have compared this traditional account with the statement made by Tärsnäths and in the Chinese biography of Agvaghosha, according to which the Yüe-ohi king attacked Magadha in order to get hold of Asvaghosha, Säkēta being one of the towns which tradition mentions as the home of that saint. Vijayakirti would accordingly be a contemporary of Kanishka. Now Vijayakarti was the successor of Vijayasimha, whose queen helped to propagate Buddhism in Kashgar. Professor Franke has shown that the introduction of Buddhism in Kashgar apparently took place about A.D. 120. Vijayakirti most accordingly have ascended the throne after that date. and be may roughly be assigaed to the middle of the second century A.D. I have proved that the Tibetan traditional tales about Khotan are at least in part based on fact and that they should not be disregarded as fictitious.
It is in my opinion & remarkable fact that both the Chinese remark about Po-tino and Tibetan tradition lead to the same conclusion, that Kanishka I belongs to the middle of the second century A.D. More definite information may reasonably be expected from excavations.
Sitangaberiete, 1916, p. 820. Silenageberichte, 1908, p. 740. JR48., 1914, PP. 899 L
