________________
NOVEMBER, 1917 ]
THE DATE OF KANISHKA
265
three routes that lead from China to western countries, he mentions, in connection with the southern route, that it passes along the kingdoms of Kipin (Kashmir ?), Ta-hia (Bactria), Kao-fu (Kabul) and T'ien-tchou (India) all of which are subordinate to the Yue-chi.11 There cannot be the slightest doubt that this state of things was true of the period with which Wei-lio concluded. This has been recognised by the French translator of the work, M. Ed. Chavannes, who remarks on the above passage: "So at the middle of the third century of our era, the power of the Kushan kings was at its height."12
It is evident that the conquests of the Yue-chi, as described by Fan-Ye, entirely agree with the above account. Both the works speak of Kao-fu, Kipin and T'ien-tchou being conquered by the Yue-chi. But this agreement is brought out more fully in connection with another kingdom, called Tong-li by Fan-Ye and Kiu-li, Li-wei-t'o or P'ei-li-wang by Yu-Houan.13 That both the authors mean the same country is placed beyond all doubt by the almost identical descriptions which they give. Thus both place the country at a little more than 3000 li to the South-east of T'ienchu, and both name Cha-Ki' as the capital of the country. Indeed no doubt has been entertained on this point.14 Now Fan-Ye says in regard to this country that "the Yue-chi attacked this kingdom and made themselves masters of it."15 Yu Houan tells us about the people of the same country, "Now the Yue-chi have conquered them and imposed taxes upon them."16
4
The two works thus speak in the same strain about the Yue-chi and the facts they relate about them perfectly agree with each other. Now one of these works describes the events which took place about the year 239, and about this no doubt has hitherto been entertained. The other work also covers the period down to A.D. 220 and naturally enough the accounts in the two works perfectly agree. And yet we are asked to suppose that this latter work describes events which took place 100 years earlier. If proof were needed, that Fan-Ye really recorded events down to the year A.D. 220 as he professes to have done, the Wei-lio furnishes it, and even scepticism itself can no longer refuse to believe that the natural interpretation of Fan-Ye is the true one.
But even the Wei-lio has not been spared the hands of critics who are determined to make the Chinese texts fit in with preconceived theories of their own. According to Mr. Kennedy. the Yue-chi, referred to in the Wei-lio, mean the later Kushans.17 But what are these later Kushans of whom so much has been made by him? The only definite evidence of their existence is furnished by a number of coins, mostly debased imitations of the early coins of Kanishka and Vâsudeva and mechanically repeating these illustrious names. Of the earlier class of these coins the greater number were found in the Punjab, and only a few gold coins have been discovered in stupas in the Kabul valley; while the coins of the later class
"La route du sud, en allant vers l'ouest, passe par... (Cachemire), le royaume de Ta-hia (Bactriane) le royaume de Kao-fu (Kabul, le Inde) qui tous dépendent des Ta-Yue-tche." Toung Pao, 1905, pp. 535, 539-9.
"Ainsi, au milieu du troisième siècle de notre ere, la puissance des rois Kouchàns ètait à son apagèe." T'oung Pao, 1905, p. 539, F. N. 1.
15 For Fan-Ye's account, see T'oung Pao, 1917, pp. 194-195. For that in Wei-lio, see Toung Pao, 1905, p. 551.
Thus in a footnote to Fan-Ye's account of Tong-li, Ed. Chavannes remarks: "In the Wei-lio the kingdom is called Kiu-li, or Li Wei-to or pèi-li-Wang." Toung Pao, 194, F. N. 5.
15 "Les Ta-Yue-tehe attaquèrent ce royaume et se l'asservi:ent." (Op. cit.)
16 Maintenant des Yue-tche les ont asservis et leur ont impose' des taxes." (Or. cit) 17 JRAS., 1913, pp. 1054-1064.
·
le royaume de Kipin royaume de T'ienchou
