In regard to the second part of the proposition, the answer can only be made inferentially and hypothetically. Judging from what has already been effected, by the collateral evidence of the history of other countries, and the decyphering of inscriptions and coins, I am sanguine enough to believe that such a number of authentic dates will in time be verified, as will leave intervals of but comparatively short duration in the ancient Indian dynasties between any two of those authentic dates; thereby rescuing hindu history in some degree from the prejudice under which it has been brought by the superstitions of the native priesthood.

One of the most important services rendered to the cause of oriental research of late years, is, perhaps, "the restoration and decyphering of the Allahabad inscription, No. 2," achieved by Doctor Mill, and published in the Asiatic Journal of June, 1834.

In reference to this historical inscription, the learned Principal observes, "Were there any regular chronological history of this part of Northern India, we could hardly fail in the circumstances of this inscription, even if it were without names, to determine the person and the age to which it belongs. We have here a prince who restores the fallen fortunes of a royal race that had been dispossessed and degraded by the kings of a hostile family-who removes this misfortune from himself and his kindred by means of an able guardian or minister, who contrives to raise armies in his cause; succeeding at last in spite of vigorous warlike opposition, including that of some haughty independent princesses, whose daughters, when vanquished, become the wives of the conqueror-who pushes his conquests on the east to Assam, as well as to Nepal and the more western countries-and performs many other magnificent and liberal exploits, constructing roads and bridges, encouraging commerce, &c. &c.—in all which, allowing fully for oriental flattery and extravagance, we could scarcely expect to find more than one sovereign, to whom the whole would apply. But the inscription gives us the names also of the prince and his immediate progenitors: and in accordance with the above mentioned account, while we find his dethroned ancestors, his grandfather and great grandfather, designated only by the honorific epithet Mahá-rája, which would characterize their royal descent and rights-the king himself (SAMUDRAGUPTA) and his father are distinguished by the title of Máha-rájá-Adhi-rája, which indicates actual sovereignty. And the last mentioned circumstance might lead some to conjecture, that the restoration of royalty in the house began with the father, named CHANDRAGUPTA, whose exploits might be supposed to be related in the first part of the inscription, to add lustre to those of the son.

"Undoubtedly we should be strongly inclined, if it were possible, to identify the king thus named(though the name is far from being an uncommon one) with a celebrated prince so called, the only one in whom the Puranic and the Greek histories meet, the CHANDRAGUPTA or SANDRACOPTUS, to whom SELEUCUS NICATOR sent the able ambassador, from whom STRABO, ARRIAN, and others derived the principal part of their information respecting India. This would fix the inscription to an age which its character (disused as it has been in India for much more than a thousand years), might seem to make sufficiently probable, viz. the third century before the christian era. And a critic, who chose to maintain this identity, might find abundance of plausible arguments in the inscription: he might imagine he read there the restoration of the asserted genuine line of NANDA in the person of CHANDRAGUPTA, and the destruction of the nine usurpers of his throne and in what the inscription, line 16, tells of the guardian GIRI-KALKA'RAKA-SVAMI, he might trace the exploits of CHANDRAGUPTA's wily brahman counsellor CHANAKYA, so graphically described in the historical play called the Mudra-Ráxasa, in levying troops for his master, and counterplotting all the schemes of his adversaries

'able minister RA'xASA, until he recovered the throne: nay the assistance of that RA'XASA himself, who from an enemy was turned to a faithful friend, might be supposed to be given with his name in line 10 of the inscription. And the discrepancy of all the other names besides these two, viz. of CHANDRAGUPTa's son, father, grandfather, and guardian minister, to none of whom do the known Puranic histories of that prince assign the several names of the inscription, might be overcome by the expedient—usual among historical and chronological theorists in similar cases,―of supposing several different names of the same persons.

"But there is a more serious objection to this hypothesis than any arising from the discrepancy of even so many names-and one which I cannot but think fatal to it. In the two great divisions of the Xattriya Rajas of India, the CHANDRAGUPTA of the inscription is distinctly assigned to the Solar racehis son being styled child of the Sun. On the other hand, the celebrated founder of the Maurya dynasty, if reckoned at all among Xattriyas, (being, like the family of the NANDAS, of the inferior caste of Sudras, as the Greek accounts unite with the Puránas in respecting him,) would rather find his place among the high-born princes of Magadha whose throne he occupied, who were children of the moon : and so he is in fact enumerated, together with all the rest who reigned at Pátaliputra or Palibothra, in the royal genealogies of the Ilindus. It is not therefore among the descendants or successors of CURU, whether reigning (like those Magadha princes) at Patna, or at Dehli, that we must look for the subject of the Allahabad inscription; but if I mistake not, in a much nearer kingdom, that of Canyácubja or Canouje.” Laudable as is the caution with which Dr. Mill abandons this important identification, the annals of Páli literature appear to afford several interesting notices, well worthy of his consideration, tending both to remove some of these doubts, and to aid in elucidating this valuable inscription. It will be found in the ensuing extracts from the commentary on the Mahawanso, that the Móriyan was a branch of the Sákyan dynasty, who were the descendants of Ixkswaku, of the solar line: though the name of Chandragupta's father is not given in the particular work under consideration, to admit of its being compared with the inscription, it is specifically stated that he was the last sovereign of Móriya of that family, and lost his life with his kingdom: his queen, who was then pregnant, fled with her brothers to Pataliputta (where Chandragupta was born) to seek protection from their relations the Nandos, whose grandfather, Susunágo, was the issue of a Lichchawi rája, by a "nagarasóbhiní,"one of the Aspasias of Rájagaha: he married the daughter of the eldest of these maternal uncles, who were of the LicпCHAWI line: the issue of that princess would hence appropriately enough be termed "maternal grandson of Lichhawi:" and he and his son, the subject of this inscription, as the supreme monarchs of India could alone be entitled, of all the rájás whose names are inscribed, to the title Mahá rájá Adhi rájá." Dr. Mill thus translates the 26th line of the inscription.

"Of him who is also maternal grandson of LICHCHAWI, conceived in the great goddess-like CUMARADEWI, the great king, the supreme monarch SAMUDRA GUPTA, illustrious for having filled the whole earth with the revenues arising from his universal conquest, (equal) to INDRA, chief of the gods ;"—

If, under these multiplied coincidences and similarities, and this apparent removal of the Reverend Principal's objections, the identity of Chandragupta may be considered to be established, Samudragupta would be the Bindusáro of Páli history, to whom, as one of the supreme monarchs of India, the designation would not be inappropriate. And indeed, in the Mahawanso, in describing the completion of the buddhistical edifices in the reign of his son and successor, Dhammásóko, a similar epithet is applied to his empire.

G

Sammuddapariyantań só Jambúdípan samantató passi sabbé wihárécha náná, pujá wibhúsité.

"He saw (by the power of a miracle) all the wiháros, situated in every direction through the ocean-bound Jambudípo, resplendent with offerings."

Also within a few months, another orientalist, the Rev. Mr. Stevenson of Poonah,, "through the aid afforded by the Allahabad inscription, and assistance from other sources," has been enabled to decypher some of the inscriptions at the caves of Carli; which will probably prove the key to the inscriptions in the stupendous temples at Ellora. Mr. Stevenson adds, "many important duties prevent me from allotting much time to studies of this nature, and the time I can spare for such a purpose will be better spent in endeavouring to elucidate the history of the Dakhan (Dekan) from the numerous inscriptions, in this and other ancient characters, which are to be found up and down the country; assured that the learned in Calcutta will soon reveal to us whatever mysteries the Allahabad and Delhi columns conceal." The Journal of September last, contains the translation of the inscriptions upon two sets of copper plates found "several years since" in the western part of Gujerat, which Mr. Secretary Wathen has now been enabled to translate; and by means of those two inscriptions alone, to fix the period of the reigns of no less than eighteen sovereigns of the Valabhi or Balhavi dynasty, between the years A. D. 144 and 559.

Contemporaneously with this decyphering of inscriptions, the pages of the Asiatic Journal have displayed the successful labors of Mr. Prinsep, its editor and the secretary of the society, in identifying and classifying various ancient coins, equally conducive to the supply of the grand desideratum in oriental literature,-CHRONOLOGY.

In the midst of this interesting and triumphant career of oriental research, I have undertaken the task of inviting the attention of orientalists to the Páli buddhistical literature of India, the examination of which is not within my own reach. If they are found to approximate, in any degree, to the authenticity of the Páli historical annals of Ceylon, we shall not only be able to unveil the history of India from the 6th century before Christ, to the period to which those annals may have been continued in India; but they will also serve to elucidate there, as they have done here, the intent and import of the buddhistical portion of the inscriptions now in progress of being decyphered.

To do justice, however, to the important question under consideration, I must briefly sketch the history of the Mágadhi or Páli language, and the scheme of buddhism in reference to history, as each is understood in Ceylon.

Buddhists are impressed with the conviction that their sacred and classical language, the Magadhi or Páli, is of greater antiquity than the Sanscrit; and that it had attained also a higher state of refinement than its rival tongue had acquired. In support of this belief they adduce various arguments, which, in their judgment, are quite conclusive. They observe, that the very word "Páli" signifies, original, text, regularity; and there is scarcely a buddhist Páli scholar in Ceylon, who, in the discussion of this question, will not quote, with an air of triumph, their favorite verse,

Sá Mágadhi; múla bhásá, naráyéyádi kappiká, brahmánóchassutt álápá, Sambuddháchápi bhásaré. "There is a language which is the root (of all languages); men and bráhmans at the commencement of the creation, who never before heard nor uttered an human accent, and even the supreme Buddhos, spoke it: it is Mágadhi."

This verse is a quotation from Kachcháyano's grammar, the oldest referred to in the Páli literatureof Ceylon. The original work is not extant in this island. I shall have to advert to it hereafter.

Into this disputed question, as to the relative antiquity of these two ancient languages, it is not my intention to enter. With no other acquaintance with the Sanscrit, than what is afforded by its affinity

to Páli, I could offer no opinion which would be entitled to any weight. In abstaining, however, from engaging in this discussion, I must run no risk of being considered a participator in the views entertained by the Ceylon buddhists; nor of being consequently regarded in the light of a prejudiced advocate in the cause of buddhistical literature. Let me, therefore, at once avow, that, exclusive of all philological considerations, I am inclined, on primâ facie evidence-external as well as internal-to entertain an opinion adverse to the claims of the buddhists on this particular point. The general results of the researches hitherto made by Europeans, both historical and philological, unquestionably converge to prove the greater antiquity of the Sanscrit. Even in this island, all works on astronomy, medicine, and (such as they are) on chemistry and mathematics, are exclusively written in Sanscrit. While the books on buddhism, the histories subsequent to the advent of Gótamo Buddho, and certain philological works, alone, are composed in the Páli language.

*

The earliest notice taken of the Mágadhi or Páli by our countrymen, is contained, I believe, in Mr. Colebrooke's essay on the Sanscrit and Prácrit languages, which commences in these words :"In a treatise on rhetoric, compiled for the use of Maʼnicya Chandra, Rája of Tirabhucti or Tirhút, a brief enumeration of languages, used by hindu poets, is quoted from two writers on the art of poetry. The following is a literal translation of both passages.

'Sanscrita, Prácrita, Paisachí, and Mágad'hi, are in short the four paths of poetry. The gods, &c. speak Sanscrita ; benevolent genii, Prácrita; wicked demons, Paisáchí; and men of low tribes and the rest Mágad'hi. But sages deem Sanscrita the chief of these four languages. It is used three ways, in prose, in verse, and in a mixture of both.”

'Language, again, the virtuous have declared to be fourfold: Sanscrita (or the polished dialect,) Prácrita (or the vulgar dialect), Apabhransá (or jargon), and Mis'ra (or mixed). Sanscrita is the speech of the celestials, framed in grammatical institutes. Prácrita is similar to it, but manifold as a provincial dialect, and otherwise; and those languages which are ungrammatical, are spoken in their respective districts." "

"The Paisáchí seems to be gibberish, which dramatic poets make the demons speak, when they bring these fantastic beings on the stage. The mixture of languages, noticed in the second quotation, is that which is employed in dramas, as is expressly said by the same author in a subsequent verse. It is not then a compound language, but a mixed dialogue, in which different persons of the drama employ different idioms. Both the passages above quoted are therefore easily reconciled. They in fact notice only three tongues: 1, Sanscrit, a polished dialect, the inflections of which, with all its numerous anomalies, are taught in grammatical institutes. This the dramatic poets put into the mouths of gods and of holy personages. 2, Prácrit, consisting of provincial dialects, which are less refined, and have a more imperfect grammar. In dramas it is spoken by women, benevolent genii, &c. 3, Mágadhi, or Apabhrans'a, a jargon destitute of regular grammar. It is used by the vulgar, and varies in different districts: the poets, accordingly, introduce it into the dialogue of plays as a provincial jargon spoken by the lowest persons of the drama.

Pánini, the father of Sanscrit grammar, lived in so remote an age, that he ranks among those ancient sages whose fabulous history occupies a conspicious place in the puránas, or Indian theogonies.

It must not be hence inferred, that Panini was unaided by the labours of earlier grammarians; in many of his precepts he cites the authority of his predecessors, sometimes for a deviation from a general rule, often for a grammatical canon which has universal cogency. He has even employed some technical terms without defining them, because, as his commentators remark: Those terms were already introduced by earlier grammarians. None of the more ancient works, however, secm to be now extant; being superseded by his, they have probably been disused for ages, and are now perhaps totally lost.

A performance such as the Pániniya grammar must inevitably contain many errors. The task of correcting its inaccuracies has been executed by Cátyáyana, an inspired saint and lawgiver, whose history, like that of all the Indian sages, is involved in the impenetrable darkness of mythology. His annotations, entitled Várticas, restrict those among the Paniniya rules which are too vague, enlarge others which are too limited, and mark numerous exceptions which had escaped the notice of Panini himself.

* A. R. vol. vi. p. 199.

The amended rules of grammar have been formed into memorial verses by Bhartri-hári, whose metrical aphorisms, entitled Caricá, have almost equal authority with the precepts of Panini, and emendations of Cátyáyana. If the popular traditions concerning Bhartri-hári be well founded, he lived in the century preceding the Christian era; for he is supposed to be the same with the brother of Vicramaditya, and the period when this prince reigned at Ujjayini is determined by the date of the samvat era."

It can be no matter of surprize, when so eminent a scholar as Mr. Colebrooke was led by prejudiced hindu authorities to confound Mágadhi with Apabhransʼa, and to describe it as a jargon destitute of regular grammar, used by the vulgar, and spoken by the lowest persons of the drama;" that that language, and the literature recorded in it, should not have attracted the attention of subsequent orientalists. With the exception of the notice it has received in Ceylon, and from scholars on the continent of Europe, I apprehend, I may safely say, that it is not otherwise known, than as one of the several minor dialects emanating from the Sanscrit, and occasionally introduced into hindu works, avowedly for the purpose of marking the inferiority, or provinciality, of the characters who speak, or inscribe those Prácrit passages.

To an attentive observer of the progress made in oriental philological research, various literary notices will suggest themselves, subsequent to the publication of Mr. Colebrooke's essay, which must have the tendency of raising a doubt in his mind as to the justice of the criticisms of the hindu philologists, which imputes this inferiority to the Mágadhi language. Without any acknowledged advocacy of its cause, professor Wilson, by the notes appended to his translations of the Hindu Plays, has done much towards rescuing Mágadhi from its unmerited degradation. Although in his introductory essay on "the Dramatic System of the Hindus" he expresses himself with great caution, in discussing the merits of the Prácrit generally, and the Mágadhi in particular; yet, in his introduction to "the Drama of Vikrama and Urvasi, one of the three plays attributed to Kálidás" he bears the following decided testimony in its favour:"The richness of the Prácrit in this play, both in structure and in its metrical code, is very remarkable. A very great portion, especially of the fourth act, is in this language; and in that act also a considerable variety of metre is introduced : it is clear, therefore, that this form of Sanscrit must have been highly cultivated long before the play was written, and this might leall us to doubt whether the composition can bear so remote a date as the reign of Vicramaditya (56 B. C.) It is yet rather uncertain whether the classical language of hindu literature had at that time received so high a polish as appears in the present drama; and still less, therefore, could the descendants have been exquisitely refined, if the parent was comparatively rude. We can scarcely conceive that the cultivation of Prácrit preceded that of Sanscrit, when we advert to the principles on which the former seems to be evolved from the latter; but it must be confessed that the relation between Sanscrit and Prácrit has been hitherto very imperfectly investigated, and is yet far from being understood.”

What the extent of the progress made may be by the savans of Europe, in attaining a proficiency in the Magadhi language, I have had no other opportunities of ascertaining in this remote quarter of the globe, than by the occasional allusions made to their labours in the proceedings of our societies connected with Asiatic literature; and considering that so recently as 1827, the members of the Asiatic Society of Paris were so totally destitute of all acquaintance of the language, as not to have possessed themselves of a single elementary work connected with it, and that they were actually forming a grammar for themselves, the advancement made in the attainment of Páli on the continent of Europe surpasses the most sanguine expectation which could have been formed. In proof of this assertion, I cite a passage from an essay on the Páli language, published by Messieurs Burnouf and Lassen, members of the Asiatic Society of Paris in 1827.

“Et d'abord on peut se demander quel est le caractére de la langue pálie ? Jusqu'a quel point s'éloigne-t-elle, ou se rapproche-t-elle du sanskrit ? Dans quelle contrée a-t-elle pris la forme que nous lui voyons maintenant dans l'Inde, ou dans