________________
HISTORY OF NEPAL.
DECEMBER, 1884.]
Samvat 528, or 1408 A.D., falls in the times of Jayasthitimalla, whose earliest date in the MSS. is 1385, while the Vaméávali mentions an inscription of his dated Nepâla Samvat 512 or 1392 A.D. Even in the portion referring to the successors of Jayasth itimalla, where the author of the Vamsavalí constantly quotes inscriptions, his work is not free from serious errors. More than once, e.g., in the case of Jyôtimalla, the son of Jay asthitimalla (Inscr. No. 16), a reign has been omitted. In other cases, kings have been displaced, and sometimes there are palpable mistakes in the dates given.
These remarks will suffice to substantiate the correctness of the assertion made above, that the Vamśávali is not fit to be used as a whole, and that no single one of its several portions is free from the most serious errors. It is, therefore, impossible to adopt for the reconstruction of the earlier history of Nepal the favourite expedient of historians who have to deal with untrustworthy chronicles and, while cutting down the duration of the several reigns to apparently reasonable lengths, to count backwards from the beginning of the Nepalese era in 880, which has usually been considered as most safely established. For, however safe that date itself may be, it has been shown above that the author of the Vamśávali knew nothing regarding the events which occurred at the time when the era was established. A much firmer basis must be looked for, and this may be found in the reign of A i suvarman, whose name occurs in the Vamśávali, the inscriptions, and Hiuen Thsang's Mémoires, while his date is fixed, though in different ways, by the two latter sources. In his account of Nepal, Hiuen Thsang states that the reigning king belongs to the Lichchhavi family, and adds according to M. Stanislas Julien's translation, the following description of Améuvarman, "Dans ces derniers temps, il y avait un roi appelé Yang-chou-fa-mo qui se distinguait par la solidité de son savoir et la sagacité de son esprit. Il avait composé lui-même un traité sur la connaissance des sons (Sabdavidyásástra);
33 Mr. Beal, who has kindly furnished me with his version of the passage, renders it as follows: "Lately there was a king called An-shu-fa-mo who was distinguished for his learning and ingenuity. He himself had composed a work on 'sounds' (abdavidya); he esteemed learning and respected virtue, and his reputation was spread everywhere." [G. B.-See Beal's Bud. Rec. of W.
419
as
il estimait la science et respectait la vertu. Sa réputation s'était répandue en tous lieux." 3133 Now it cannot be doubtful that the king referred to by Hiuen Thsang is the prince of this name whom the Vamśávali places in Kaliyuga 3000, or 101 B.C., and whose inscriptions are dated Samvat 34, 39 and 45 (?). For the Vamsávali and the inscriptions know of one A m é uvarman only. Moreover the account which he gives of himself in his inscription of Samvat 39 agrees fully with Hiuen Thsang's description. He asserts there" "that he destroyed his (former) false opinions by pondering day and night over the meaning of various Sástras" and that "he considers the proper establishment of courts of justice his greatest pleasure." Again, while the Vamsávali describes A má uvarman "very clever, dreadful, passionate, and always untired in pursuing the objects of human life," the undated inscription of Siv a dêva (No. 5) praises "the great feudal baron Aménvarman, as having destroyed the power of all (the king's) enemies through his heroic majesty, obtained by victories in numerous hand-to-hand fights" and as "possessing brilliant fame gained by the trouble of properly protecting (the king's) subjects." Finally the Vameávali (Wright's Nepal, p. 134) correctly places the inscription of Vibhuvarman (No. 8) in the reign of Amsuvarman. As the date of Hiuen Thsang's travels in India is fixed beyond doubt, and as his visit to Northern India most probably falls in the year 637 A.D., it follows that Amsuvarman must have reigned in the first half of the seventh century of our era, and it must be noted that the characters of his inscriptions can belong to this period only. The author of the Vahéávalt has, therefore, antedated his reign by more than seven hundred years. The causes of this error probably lie partly in the fact that Amsuvar. man's inscriptions are dated Samvat' which term the compiler of the Vamédvali erroneously referred to the so-called Vikrama era of 57 B.C., and partly in the circumstance that the chronological system of the Vannéávali, which makes the earliest kings of Nepal contem
36
Countries, vol. II, p. 81; conf. Julien, Mém. tome I, p. 408. 3. Insor. No. 7, 11. 1-3, Ind. Ant., vol. IX, p. 170. 38 The Parvatiya text runs as follows: raja vado chanchal bhayankar tamasamurti thulo purushårtht bhayoko thio. Compare also Wright, Nepal, p. 133. 3 Cunningham, Geography, p. 565.
