Vaisáli and Rájagriha, which were the principal scenes of Sákya's labours. A work of this kind would be of more real value for the ancient history of India (the territory of the Great Company) than the most critical and elaborate edition of the eighteen Puránas.

I would also venture to recommend that the two fallen gateways of the Sánchi Tope should be removed to the British Museum, where they would form the most striking objects in a Hall of Indian Antiquities. The value of these sculptured gateways will, I feel confident, be highly appreciated after the perusal of the brief account of them contained in this work; while their removal to England would ensure their preservation. For a most admirable view of one of these gateways I refer the reader to the frontispiece of Mr. Fergusson's beautiful and artistic illustrations of ancient Indian architecture.

Before parting, may I beg to draw the particular attention of the reader to my identification of the different classes of Pramna and Germanæ, as recorded by Kleitarchos and Megasthenes, with the different orders of Buddhist Srámanas. I do so because some of our most eminent scholars have doubted the prevalence and extension of the Buddhist religion before the beginning of the Christian era. Now the Pramnæ of Kleitarchos, and the Germana of Megasthenes, are both stated to have been the opponents of the Brah

mans. Were this the case they can only be the Srámanas, which was a title common to all the orders of the Bauddha community; even Sákya himself being styled Maha Srámana, or the " Great Devotee." The identity of the Germanæ of Megasthenes is placed beyond all doubt by his mention that "women were allowed to join them on taking vows of chastity," for the Buddhists alone had nuns.

It will not, I trust, be out of place in a Preface to observe that the several orders of Pramna, mentioned by Kleitarchos, are,—

1. Opɛivot, or "mountaineers," a Greek corruption of Arhan (or Aran, as it is sometimes spelt), which was a common title of the Bodhisatwas, or second class of the Bauddha community, who usually dwelt on hills.

2. Tuμvnraι, the "naked," or rather the "halfclad," a descriptive title of the Bodhisatwas, who, during their devotions, wore only the Sanghúti, or kilt. Fuμvns, or Tuuvnrns, was applied to a light-armed soldier,-not to an unarmed one; and, therefore, also, to a lightly-clad person.

3. Пoriko, the "townsmen," I only take to be Πολιτικοι, a corrupted transcript of the Sanscrit Pratyeka, the third class of the Bauddha community, whose duty it was to mingle with the people, and frequent the

towns.

*

Megasthenes in Strabo, v.—Συμφιλοσοφεῖν δ ̓ ἐνίοις καὶ γυναῖκας ἀεχομένας καὶ αυτὰς ἀφροδισίων.

4. Пporxwpio; the "rural," which I take to be an alteration by some copyist, for the sake of the antithesis of "town and country," with the last. The original term used by Kleitarchos was, I see reason to believe, Пporexwpio, the "listeners," a literal translation of the Sanscrit Sráwaka, the fourth class of the Bauddha community.

It is my belief that I have identified both the Ορεινοι and the Γυμνηται with the Bodhisatwa of the Buddhists. For, though there were four classes of Buddhists, yet, the superior grade being those who had attained the rank of Buddha, they had, of course, no representatives on earth. Kleitarchos, therefore, who had heard that there were four orders, has created one out of the Tuμvnrat. Megasthenes, who resided for some years in India, states more correctly that there were only three classes of Γερμαναι; viz.,

1. Yoßio, from the Sanscrit alobhiya, "without desire;" that is, the Bodhisatwa, who had suppressed all human passions.

2. Iarpiko, the "physicians," which I take to be a slight corruption of Пparikot, for Pratyeka, the third class of Buddhists, who, as they mixed much with the people, would no doubt have generally acted as physicians, as the Christian monks have done in later days.

3. Emairaι, or "beggars," equivalent to the BhikΕπαιται, shu, or mendicant monk of the Buddhists.

Now Kleitarchos was one of the companions of Alexander; and, as he did not advance into India beyond the Hyphasis, or Byâs River, his distinct mention of the different classes of the Bauddha community seems to me (at least) conclusive, that the religion of Sákya had not only become prevalent in Gangetic India, but that it had reached the Punjaub at the period of the Macedonian invasion, B.C. 330.

Let me add that a still earlier mention of the Buddhists may, I think, be found in Herodotus, who, writing about B.C. 420, shortly after the assembly of the second Synod says, "There are other Indians, who, differing in manners from those before mentioned, put no animal to death, sow no grain, have no fixed habitations, and live solely upon vegetables." The name of this class of Indians is not given by Herodotus ; but it is preserved by Nicolaus Damascenus, who calls them Aritonii, the same, I believe, as the Sanskrit Arhanta. Now Arhanta is a title of the Bodhisatwa, one of the classes of the Bauddha community, which observed all the peculiarities attributed by Herodotus to the Aritonii. They were pro hibited from taking life; they sowed no grain, bu begged their daily bread; they had no fixed habita tions, and lived wholly upon vegetables.

ALEXANDER CUNNINGHAM.

Simla, 1853.