________________
AUGUST, 1883.]
MISCELLANEA.
233
(A-la-na-shun) ruling in his stead. So small a his brother had been educated by Bhandi. Their difference, however, in Indian chronology, is sister, Rajyasri, was married to Grahavarman, really to be considered as a confirmation rather who was killed by the king of Mâlavaon the than as a difficulty; and so is Ma Tuan-lin's same day that Prabhakara was defeated. This account of the wars between silâditya and his king of Mâlava was afterwards slain by Rajyavar. great opponent Pulakésin" of Kalyana (whom dhana, and when Råjyavardhana succumbed to he does not name), which he places in 618- Gupta, king of Gauda, Harsha (Harsha Dôva or 627.95
Harsha Malla) succeeded. While Bhandi defeated The father of this Siladitya was Prabhakara the M&lavas, and Rajyasri was recovered, Harsha (or Prabhakaravardhana), and his elder brother. made an alliance with Bhaskaravarman, of Prag. Rajyavardhana. Both had been reigning before jyotisha, the same as Bhaskaravarman, the king
The elder brother had been defeated and killed of Kâmarupa, whom Hiouen-thsang visited, his by Sasanka (moon) of Karnasuvarna," an enemy title being Kumara (Hiouen-thsang, tome III, of the Buddhists, and it was then that Siladitya p. 77), like that of Harsha. 30 was proclaimed king, though he declined the title The duration of the reigns of Rajyavardhana of Maharaja, preferring that of Kumârarija. In and Prabhakara is not given, but as it is stated six years he conquered the five Indies,' but peace that about 640 Siladitya had reigned thirty years, was not restored during thirty years. Being a and that, about sixty years before that time, the strict Buddhist, he forbad the eating of meat. throne was occupied by Siliditya Pratápaśila, Mr. His minister was Po-ni (Bhandi). This aocdunt Fergusson proposes to fix the end of Siladitya of Siladitya of Kanyakubja, the supreme ruler of Pratâpabila's reign in 580, which leaves about Northern India, and his two predecessors, coming thirty years, 580-610 for Prabh&karavardhana from an eye-witness, the Chinese pilgrim Hiouen- and Rajyavardhana. Siladitya Pratâpasila ruled thsang, is confirmed by a well-known Sanskrit fifty years, 530—580," and was preceded by author Bâņa, in his Harshacharita. This text was Vikramaditya (at Sravasti"), whose reiga would discovered by Dr. F. Hall, and its great import- accordingly have ended in 530. From what ance pointed out in his preface to the Vdeavadatta. Hiouen-thsang tells us of Vikrama's treatment of It has since been published at Calcutta. In this the Buddhist Manoratha," the king seems for a work, again the work of an eye-witness, the same time to have favoured the Brahmans, while his Harsha or Harshavardhana Silâditya is represented successor Siladitya favoured Vasubandhu and the as the son of Pratâpasila and Yasovati, his elder Buddhists, though it is easy to see that, during brother being Rajyavardhana. Prabhakaravar. most of these reigns, all sects enjoyed equal freedhana is said to have been a worshipper of the dom and peace. One king is a Buddhist, the next sun, while his father Pushpabhati had been a wor. a Brihmanist. Sometimes the same king favoura shipper of Siva. Prabhakaravardhana's spiritual both systems, or favours one at one time, the other guide was called Madhavagupta, his astrologer at another. We hear of fathers turning Bud. Taraka, his physician Sushena. Both he and dhists, and their children remaining Brahmaniste,**
The inscriptio rival of Hate Society, FOL
. IV, (1870),
reira scriptions binterests as some XX, the name in title
» The inscriptions are supposed to give a different date for Palakësin, the rival of Haraha. 'Bhao Daji, Journal of the Bombay Br. Royal Asiatic Society, vol. VIII, p. 250; and Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, vol. IV, (1870), pp. 92-95. See, howeyor, Fergusson, Indian Antiquary, vol. II, (1873), p. 94, and Fleet, in Indian Antiquary, vol. y, (1876) p. 67 (also vol. VIII, p. 241). At p. 91, Prof. Mar Müller refers the Manuti inscription to S. 507 instead of $. 557 or A.D. 635, below he gives A.D. 635; below he give A.D. 634.-ED.).
* See Stan. Julien, 1. c. p. 162. ** Hiouen-thsang, tome I, p. 112. 35 Hiouen-thsang, tome I, p. 112.
* L. o. tome II, p. 250. He was the same who destroyed the Bodhi-tree dans ces derniers temps, 1. o. tome II, p. 463, but different from Shasanks, whose life was written by Maheávara, and by the later Harsha ; see Hall, Vasavadattá, pref. p. 18.
"See Dr. Fitz-Edward Hall's important Introduction to his edition of Vasaradatta, p. 17, note. Harshavardhana, mentioned in the inscriptions, was vanquished by Pula. kosin II, Saty fáraya, whose reign began in 609 A.D. (Ind. Ant. vol. II, 1873, p. 94), while his great-grandson reigned 700-705, according to inscriptions. See Journal of the Bombay Br. R. Asiat. Soc. vol. III, pt. ii. Jan.(1851) Pp. 206, 207, 211; vol. II, Oct. (1844) p. 5. Bhao Daji, vol. VI, On Kalidása, p. 20.
* The author of the Romaka-siddhanta is onlled Srtshepa, but its date, 505 A.D., is too early to allow us to identify Sushena and Srishena.
20 A son of the king of MÁlava was a guest at Harsha's court (Vdsavad. Pref. p. 12), and a hostage (p. 50).
30 It is to be hoped that the researches carried on with so much success by M. A. Barth and M. A. Ber. gaigne will bring to light some contemporaneous sovereigns in the inscriptions of Kamboja. Unfortunately the inscriptions hitherto deciphered are deficient at the very time which interests us most, namely, the seventh century (Journal Asiatique, tome XX, 1882, p. 188). But the many names, ending in varman, the name of Narendra, and the title of Kumara (for, I think, it is a title on p. 227, 1. 11) all give the impression that the govereignty of the kings of Kimaropa may have extended to the valley of the Iravati. Conf. Ind. Ant. vol. XII, pp. 113, 114.
31 Ferishtah, who calls him Bhoja, assigns fifty years to him. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, vol. XII, (1880) p. 278 note.
sa Hiouen-theang, tome II, p. 115.
» Manorhita, which would only be Mano'rhita, seems to be meant for Manoratha (Jou-i, in Chinese), 300 Hiouen-theang, tome I, p. 405.
3. M. M., Introduction to the Science of Religion, p. 173. Journal Asiatique, 1882, p. 163.
