________________
JULY, 1914.)
THE DATE OF MAHAVIRA
125
THE DATE OF MAHAVIRA BY JARL CHARPENTIER, PH.D., UPSALA.
(Continued from page 123) O much concerning Gardabhilla. As to Saka, to whom is attributed a reign of four years
ere he was overthrown by Vikramaditya, there are without doubt some hints of very great interest and perhaps of real historical value included in the confused legend of Kalaka. For the text states that Kalaka, after having sworn to Gardabhilla to be revenged, roamed about till he came to the country Sakakúla (Z.D. M. G. 34, 262), and in v. 63 of the Kalakacâryakathânalca it is said of the royal dynasty of Saka :
Sagakülao jenam samägaya tena le Saga jaya. Because of coming from Sakakala they were called Sakas.
Moreover, we learn from the same source that the governors of provinces in Sakakala were called sáhi and the king of the country, this crown-jewel in the crowd of princes' was styled Sahanusdhi. Now, I think Professor Jacobi21 was right in making Sakaküla-Sakasthâna, Zaknotiv, and moreover reminding us of the name Sakápaulot, metioned by Strabo XI 8, 2,25 which really presents a remarkable likeness to the Sanskrit word Sakakula. And there cannot be the slightest doubt, that the title Sahanus dhi is only a modified transcription of the well-known legend on the coins of the Kushân kings, Shaonano shao. So there must be some foundation for the legend told concerning Kalaka and the invasion of Scythians which he provoked ; and as I deem it rather improbable from the whole shape of the legend26 that it relates to the great conquest of North-western India by Ooema Kadphises, it may in fact contain a faint remembrance of some battle between Saka satraps and a Greek (?) prince (Gardabhila), which has later been localized in Ujjayini. A full account of the Saka princes who seem to have flourished in the first century B. o. may be seen in Duff Chronology of India, p. 17 sq., and it does not at all invalidate the possibility of this suggestion. The theory that the invaders were Persians and that Sâhânusâhi represents the king of kings' ruling that country cannot be upheld, as it is expressly stated that the invaders were Sakas, and not Persians or Bactrians. As for the title Shaonano shao, which I find in the Sahanusáhi of the text, it is true that it does not occur on coins before Kaniska; but this is not material, as the legend arose apparently at a far later date, and in that time the earlier Sakas and the Kushans might very easily be confused. However, it is interesting and certainly a proof of the text not being wholly valueless, that it has preserved these rather minute reminiscences of the Saka dynasties.
I have tried to show, that the chronological list, on which the Jains found their assumption of a period of 470 years between the death of Mahavira and the commencement of the Vikrama era is almost entirely valueless. The line of rulers composed in order to fill up this time is wholly unhistorical and can by no means be trusted; for it assigns the first 60 years after the Nirvana to a certain king' of Ujjain, who had absolutely nothing to do with Mahavira, and for whose introduction into the list I have tried to find out reasons as above.
24 1. c. p. 256.
25 Μάλιστα δε γνώριμοι γεγόνασι των νομάδων οι τους Έλληνας αφελόμενοι την Βακτριανήν, Ασιοι, και πασιανοί, και τόχαροι, και Σακάραυλοι, και όρμηυέντες από της περαίας του Ιαξάρτου, της κατά Σάκας και Σογδιανουέ, ήν κατείχον Σάκαι.
26 In the Kalaka legend it is not the king of kings' (sdhanushi) but only his satraps (edhi) who invade India, and not with his consent, but to escape his rage against them.
