________________
APRIL, 1884.)
THE BURNING OF THE ALEXANDRIAN LIBRARY.
103
from the fact brought to notice by him. But in view of the various points which have been discussed, and which have already led us to the conclusion that Sankaracharya must have flourished about the latter half of the sixth century A.D., the particular piece of evidence for which we are indebted to Mr. Beal is a most valuable one, and, on the whole, I think, there can now be little reasonable doubt that we must assign Sankara to about this date.
It would take us too far afield if we attempted to do more than indicate the directions in which this date of Sankaracharya must affect hitherto prevalent notions regarding the ancient and medieval history of our country. It is plain that neither Sankaracharya nor Kumarila can have taken part in any persecution of the Buddhists. And Hiuen Tsiang's omission to name either of them is explained without resort to the argument adopted by Dr. Burnell. Further, if the allegation about Kumarila's and Sankara's share in this persecution is thus discredited, the whole story about the per- secution must also be discredited, especially
because it is generally related rather as an incident in the careers of those two philosophers, than as a historical event in which they took part. And independently of this, the evidence for the story is such, that Dr. Kern has already classed it with the story of "My mother, the goose." Dr. Fergusson, it is true, seems to believe in the alleged persecution, and dates it from the period commencing with the death of Harshavardhana. But the sudden change from a time of tolerance and even patronage, to one of persecution, which that theory involves, must always present historical difficulties. And, on the other haud, the evidence scattered through Dr. Fergusson's own work, and elsewhere, indicates that that marvellous toleration, of which Dr. Fergusson himself has so truly spoken, did not cease in 650 A.D., but was continued quite down to the thirteenth centary, if not even to later times. On the view that there was no persecution properly 80 called-Ma-Twan-lin's account of the condition of India is easily understood. On the traditional theory it is almost inexplicable.
THE BURNING OF THE ALEXANDRIAN LIBRARY
BY THE REV. J. D. BATE, M.R.A.S. The manner in which this catastrophe oc- of Muslim to Christian literati, and the form curred serves well to shew the indebtedness which Muslim appreciation and gratitude
See this opinion quoted in M. Barth's Religions of India, p. 134, note.
** See, inter alia, Fergusson's Indian and Eastn. Architecture, pp. 18, 209, 219.
Vide 6.6, Indian Architecture, pp. 60, 127, 132, 161, 163, 318, 440, 454; Conf. also Burnell's 8. Ind. Palæography., PP. 46, 111, 114; and the references to Dr. Burgess's Reports given above. See also on this point Cunningham's Bhilsa Topes, pp. 165-167; and Bharhut Stapa, p. 4. On the present evidence, my impression is that the Bauddhas got absorbed into either the Hindu or the Jainis communities. The latter were kindred to them (100 previous note and Conf. Ferguson's Indian Architecture, p. 233); and the former had since, at latest the seventh century A.D., absorbed Buddha into their own system as an Avatara of Vishnu. See as to this Fergus son's Indian Architecture, p. 444 (citing Dr. Burger's Archeological Survey Report), and Dr. Bühler's account of his Kamir Tour, p. 41n, in Jour. Bom. Branch R. Asiat. Society (Extra part). For the absorptive power of Hinduism, reference may be made inter alia to Lyall's Beay on Non-missionery religions, and to the follow ing :-J. R. A. 8. vol. VI, p. 403, vol. XVII, pp. 129f.; Ceylon A. Soc. Jour. (1858-9) pp. 10, 29, 37; Cunningham's Arch. Sur. Reports, vol. XVI, pp. 24, 26, 124; Elliot's Bibliographical Index to the Historians of India, Part I, P. 218. The existence of Buddhists who in Hinen Tsiang's time could scarcely be distinguished from heretios (J.R.A. 8. vol. IX, p. 201), seems to indicate that the gradual assimilation or absorption had then.commenced. I am aware that many other scholars agree with Dr. Forgusson, Dr. R. Mitra, for instance, speaks of
the "suppression" of Buddhism (J.A.S.B., vol. XXXIII, p. 192) and Mr. Sherring of its "departure or rather expulsion" (J.4. 8. B., vol. XXXV, p. 67: and vol. XXXIV p. 11). See also J. R. A. 8. vol. II, pp. 292, 302, 428 : vol. XVI, pp. 252-9. But the existing Buddhist buildings and records appear to indicate a very different conelysion. See on this point Cunningham's Geog., p. 80; J. A. S. B., vol. XL, pp. 24, 249 ; vol. XLI, pp. 253-4, 297 311; And J. Bom. Br. R. 4.8., vol. XIII, p. 10 : vol. XIV, pp. 30, 43, 48, 53. The various instances of the Musal mans appropriating the materials of Buddhist buildings (as to which see among many authorities, J. A. S. B., vol. XXXIV, pp. 3, 9; or vol. XLI, pp. 251, 296, 294), point to something like what is expressed in Cunningham's Blarhut Stipa already cited, though it is not impossible that the materials belonged to buildings fallen into disuse. It must suffice to indicate my view. Prof. Bhindarkar also draws my attention to Ind. Ant., vol. X, p. 185: J. Bom. Br. R. A. 8, vol. XIII, p. 10; Cunningham's Arch. Suru. Report, vol. VIII, p. 45, M bearing on this topic.
* As to the existence of Buddhism down to late period conf. in addition to the authorities mentioned in the last note J. A.8. R. vol. XVII, pp. 59, 498, 499, Cunning. ham, Arch. Sur. Report, vol. XVI, p. 49. Thelinformation from foreign writers is of great value on this point. Conf. Ibn Batuta, by Lee, pp. 111, 152, Yule's Cathay, vol. II, pp. 410, 433; Dowson and Elliot's Hist. vol. 1, PP. 68,87 Yule's Marco Polo, vol. I, pp. 157, 159, 161. The doubts exprossed by the editor of Marco Polo at p. 159, though justified by hitherto received notions, will themselves require reconsideration in view of freab evidence, come of which has been now indicated.
im to din ser algo dira. 2. A.S:1. VIII,
