time being thus occupied, the matter is deferred to another day, when the like occurrence takes place, till all the thirty-two images have severally narrated the illustrious deeds of Vicramaditya; many of the circumstances being excessively puerile, and others, monstrously ridiculous. As the last of the statues had finished its tale, and the fortunate hour was gone by, Boja-rajah looked on to see what wonder would follow, when suddenly the thirty-two images became animated, and appeared as females. They addressed the king, and told him that they were originally attendants on Parvati, in Kailasa; and that one day when Siva danced, they could not help laughing, at which Parvati was incensed, and she condemned them to become statues in Indra's throne. On their supplicating her for mitigation of punishment, she said, that after some time the throne would be given to Vicramaditya; would be buried; and subsequently come into the possession of Boja-rajah, to whom it would be their duty, from their own observation, to narrate the illustrious actions of Vicramaditya, and this duty being performed, they would then be restored to their own proper form. Saying this, they disappeared; and the throne also vanished. "The end," says the book, (in words almost wholly Sanscrit,) " of the tale of the thirty-two statues;" and thus terminates the history of the life and actions of Vicramaditya, as collated, digested, and recorded, by Ravipati-gurumurti.*

We may note, in addition, that some traditionary accounts make Salivahana to be the son of a Bramin; and others narrate that his army, after the defeat of Vicramaditya, on passing through the river Nerbuddah, dissolved in the water, as being made of clay. Nothing further is particularly mentioned of Salivahana, that we have been able from our own sources of information to discover.

We shall now claim permission to draw our own inferences from the narrative briefly abstracted. We deem it possible that the king of Ujayin may have bestowed his daughter in marriage on a Bramin, in consequence of wanting male offspring. It is possible that, under the influence of his father's instructions, Vieramaditya may have been half-king, half-devotee. The worship of the sanguinary goddess Kali, (now so prevalent in the northern provinces of Hindustan proper,) appears to have been firmly established at that time in Gujerat and Malwa The contrivance of Batti, though tolerably ingenious as a pun, we discard from serious history. The remaining thousand years, we lessen by cutting off the poetical cypher on the right, and consider the years of Vicramaditya's reign to be the same with the years of his life, a mode of reckoning not unfrequent with Hindus; and since every source of induction would give to Vicramaditya unusual length of days, we may even consider the hundred years as his reign, properly speaking; seeing that the difference between the eras of Vicramaditya and Salivahana is, by one reckoning 145 years, and by another reckoning 135 years. The era of Vicramaditya we presume to be computed from his birth, and that of Salivahana, from his defeat of the former; though if counted from his birth also, the difference is immaterial, Salivahana being represented as an infant of some four or five years

* We believe that this tale, or one on the same topic, was translated by R. A. Clarke, Esq. late of the Madras Civil Service, and printed in the Transactions of the Royal Asiatic Society, under the title of Vedala Cadai. We once caught only a glance at it in the rooms of the Literary Society; but our own abstract has been entirely made from the work in Telugu.

of age. The account of the Sanniyasi and Vedalam we regard as mere poetical embellishment, the original Sanscrit work being a poem; and the object is to account for the extraordinary talents and success of Vicramaditya. We learn from Ferishta's history of the Deccan, that Vicramaditya (or Bikramajit, according to the Persian orthography) was conquered by Sapores, king of Persia: not, as we infer from contemporary dates, the Sapores who took prisoner Valerius, emperor of Rome, but his predecessor, the second* of the Sassanian dynasty. This plain historical fact gives us at once a simple and sufficient clue to the whole of the fables connected with Salivahana. That he is represented as of supernatural birth, a child merely, commanding an army made up of animated clay figures, and that we hear nothing of him as a reigning sovereign in India; all becomes intelligibly resolvable into national pride, and a dislike of narrating unpalatable truth without disguise; while, in a poem intended to magnify the deeds of Vicramaditya, to represent him as yielding only to supernatural power, and to the decrees of fate, as announced by Kali the destroying goddess, is all just as might be expected. The visit of Vicramaditya to the paradise of Indren is mere poetical machinery; and a copy possibly of a similar circumstance recorded, in the Baratham, of Arjunen. In the account of Vicramaditya's throne, there is nothing that we perceive unusual to Hindu invention; though if any thing foreign in idea be borrowed, we should infer it to have come through a Persian medium; but we think it purely native.

We infer, also, that the burying of the throne of Vicramaditya, and the impediment to the succession of his son, were alike occasioned by the foreign conqueror. We suspect Dara-puram to have been a town founded by the Persians; Dara, or, as we have it, Darius, being a frequent name of Persian monarchs. After the Persian rule had departed, a descendant possibly of Vicramaditya, named Boja, (the Bas-deo of Ferishta,) might have reigned in this town, as his capital; and might have been guided by tradition, known to his minister of state, so as to recover the ancient throne itself, as well as a portion of the power of which it was the emblem. All beyond is fable. We conclude that Boja flourished in or about the third century of the Christian era. The commencement of the era of Salivahana corresponds with A. D. 77 and 78; and the beginning of the era of Vicramaditya is 58 B, C. by one account, and 48 B. C. by another. It follows, that Vicramaditya was contemporary with Julius Cæsar, with Herod the Great, and with Augustus; while Salivahana was contemporary with Vespasian.

Such is our view of all circumstances connected with Vicramaditya and Salivahana. The locality is fixed to the neighbourhood of Ougein, and must not be altered; at least by mere fancy. An event of sufficient consequence to account for what is said of Salivahana is pointed out. The reader may compare the whole, if he pleases, with the strange medley of times and places, persons and circumstances, provided by Colonel Wilford; and, with regret we add, unhappily printed in the tenth volume of the Asiatic Researches.

There are some things in his statements about Salivahana, which it has been impossible

Shapour, the son of Ardeshir, his surname was Tirdeh; he reigned thirty-one years. Of his works are, KourehShapour, in Fars; Nishapour, in Khorassan; Shad-i-Shapour, in Cosvin; and Jondi-i-Shapour, in Khusistan. Ouseley's Tarikh Jehan Ara, p. 43. The other Shapour, the eighth of the dynasty, reigned seventy-two years; and built TourehShapour; but he was posterior in date to Vicramaditya.

for us to read without an inward feeling of pity, mingled with aversion. Unknowing whether any exposure of their fallacy has been made, or whether Colonel Wilford has been deemed such a colossus of Indian literature as not to be contradicted, except indeed by Colonel Vans Kennedy, his equal at least in this point, we feel it a duty. the subject being fairly before us, to do something, in our humble measure, towards neutralizing the poison contained in the passages adverted to. We quite agree with Colonel Vans Kennedy in opinion; but then our affectionate regard for the Christian religion is somewhat greater than that gentleman has at least allowed to appear; and while he seems to consider Colonel Wilford as a weak friend, we rather regard him, and that too after all exertion of Christian charity, as a covert enemy: especially when we consider what was the day, and what were the prevailing opinions, when his essays were published in Calcutta. We regret to see the following notice in the Appendix to Dr. Buchanan's Memoir; from which we more than question whether the venerable and well-meaning writer had read the essay in question; or had done more than believe, with too great readiness, what was told him by others concerning its contents. The notice is headed, "Sanscrit Testimonies of Christ;" and is the following:

"The learned Wilford, who has resided for many years at Benares, the fountain of "Sanscrit literature, and has devoted himself entirely to researches into Hindoo mythology “and Oriental history, has just finished a work which will be received with much satis"faction by the public. It is a record of the testimonies contained in the Sanscrit writings "of the truth of the Christian religion.

"This work, which is yet in manuscript, is now in circulation (January, 1805) with the "members of the Asiatic Society, previously to its publication in the Asiatic Researches. "It is entitled, Salivahana; the Son of the Tacshaca, or Carpenter; or Introduction of the "Christian Religion into India; its Progress and Decline.'

"From these evidences it appears, that the prophecies of the Old Testament were "recorded in the Sanscrit Puranas of India, as in the Sibylline books of Rome; that the "rumour of the universal dominion of the Messiah had alarmed the emperors of the East as "well as the emperors of Rome; and that holy men journeyed from the East, directed by a “miraculous star, to see the heavenly child. It further appears, that many of the Sanscrit writings to which had been attributed a vast antiquity, were not only composed after the "Christian æra, but contain particulars of the advent, birth, life, miracles, death, resurrec❝tion, and ascension of our Saviour.

"To establish fully the authenticity of these important records, and to invite investigation, Captain Wilford has deposited his authorities and vouchers in the library of the "College of Fort William, and among the archives of the Asiatic Society.

"At the conclusion of the work the learned author thus expresses himself; 'I have << written this account of the Christian religion with the impartiality of an historian; fully “persuaded that our holy religion cannot possibly receive any additional lustre from it.””

Wonderfully candid indeed! but did not Colonel Wilford doubt, or feel some inward misgiving, that our holy religion might receive some tarnish from his lucubrations? The day is past indeed when their influence could be of much consequence; yet the Asiatic

Researches still circulate, and are read by most persons who take any interest in Asiatie affairs and we consequently think that a few remarks cannot be superfluous.

Our most serious objection relates to that passage in which Colonel Wilford labors hard to draw a parallel between the birth of Jesus Christ and of Salivahana, playing upon the word Tacshasa; which, while in the case of Salivahana, it refers to a serpent, also means a carpenter: he might have added a stone-mason also. In a most singular manner he wrests the mere typical emblem, of the serpent in the wilderness-an emblem applying only as to the lifting up, and the healing virtue-into a proof of the foul comparison of the Son of Mary with the offspring of a serpent; and, in deficiency of better materials, alludes to a spurious gospel of the infancy of Jesus, and to the notions of the Ophiites, as adding strength to the position. The spurious gospel, and its story of the child Jesus amusing itself with figures of clay, they who choose to value may do so: forged and spurious gospels, from the earliest period of the Christian Church, were rejected by the good sense of Christians, as known to be false; and will not now be received in evidence. As to the notions of the Ophiites, a position must be desperate to seek aid from them. The Ophiites (according to Mosheim, one fully versed in such points) were a sect who existed before the rise of Christianity, who venerated the serpent; and, after the introduction of Christianity, a part were called Christians, and a part Anti-Christians. They considered the serpent spoken of in the book of Genesis as Jesus Christ; and offered a sort of divine worship to serpents. They are ranked by Mosheim* in a lower than the lowest place among the Egyptian Gnostics. In a word, they were heathens; and in so far as veneration and a sort of worship of serpents consists, India always has had, and still has, numbers of Ophiites amidst its population. Such a comparison as one point in the labored, but erroneous, parallel between Salivahana and Jesus Christ, is calculated to excite yearning emotions of the deepest sympathy. The Christian will know what is the nature of such an effort, if only knowledge, malice, and obstinacy in approved error, were mingled. We trust they were not; and hope that Colonel Wilford lived to repent of, and to deplore, the perhaps unintentional outrage done to truth: we wish we knew of his own public contradiction.

The prophecies and the prodigies of which he speaks as preceding the birth of Salivahana, and of Christ, require to be treated with discrimination. That some prodigies were noticed at Rome, may be admitted, without affecting the question materially either way. Some portents were referred to the death of Julius Cæsar; some to the birth of Augustus. Prophecies of an expected deliverer, it may be noted, had got into the ancient world by means of the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Prophets, made by order of Ptolemy Philadelphus, at Alexandria. But Hindu prophecies, applied by Colonel Wilford to Salivahana, are of a different description. Colonel Vans Kennedy has most justly observed that they related to Krishna; and we may add, that they were histories written in the shape of prophecies, according to the very common custom of the Hindus. Their manner uniformly is, when they record such predictions, to trace up the origin of the principal matter to some interview of inferior gods with Vishnu, or with Siva, from whom a promise is given of help

Cent. 2, chap. 5, sec. 19.

and deliverance; generally by the one or the other becoming incarnate to rid the inferior gods and men of their oppressors. Colonel Wilford equivocally speaks of the promised deliverer as one who was to rescue mankind from trouble and misery. Such a mode of expression tends to aid the parallel with the Christian Saviour; but it is utterly inadmissible as applicable, either to Salivahana, or to any other Hindu predictions of deliverance, such as those relating to Krishna. In the latter case, the one in point, Vishnu promises to become incarnate, and fulfils his promise as Krishna; in order to rid the earth of superfluous inhabitants, and to punish the wickedness of men by their destruction. On the contrary, Christ came "not to destroy men's lives, but to save them." Some circumstances concerning the infancy of Krishna, seem closer in parallel with a few things narrated of the birth of Jesus, than what is recorded of Salivahana. But we would account for such resemblances otherwise than by supposing that copies of spurious gospels had early travelled to India; of which there is no direct evidence, and gratuitous inferences are not sufficient evidence. We, and at least some others with us, admit and believe in a two-fold, and mutually opposite, inspiration. And to the inferior inspiration we trace resemblances calculated to depreciate, and bring into ridicule, the true one. There are some such resemblances in the tale of Vicramaditya and of Salivuhana; but they differ essentially in important particulars; and Colonel Wilford's narration of particulars is not a correct one.

If any resemblance between Vieramaditya and Solomon can be made out, we think they came through the medium of Persian tales about Solomon. The two kings certainly ruled in very different times and places; and might each have been skilful in solving difficulties, without any necessity for their being identified. The term Simmasanam, applied to the throne of Vicramaditya, does not necessarily imply that it was supported by lions; for Simmasanam, or lion-seat, is the general name for a king's throne; and is applied to the thrones of all king's without exception. The statues that supported the fabulous throne of Vicramaditya were figures of females; which, in the end, became animated. But if we forbear being positive about Vicramaditya and Solomon, what shall we say to the making SHILOH and Salivahana the same individuals! and, anon, turning both Shiloh and Salivahana into Salem; because it seems that Salivahana founded a city, afterwards named Saileya-dhara-pura. We believe that he did so, and that Boja-rajah afterwards ruled there. Moreover, take away the compound rahana, and then Sali is idiomatically compounded into Saileya-dhara-pur, or the town Dhara of Sali. We have intimated our impression that Sapores founded a town, and called it Dara, after a name of Persian monarchs; but then this town was certainly in India, and Jerusalem, or the city of the Jebusites, certainly was in Judea: the name will not sanction such an application, even though Saileya-dharapura may be, by torture, made to mean "the city which has its foundation on a rock," and old Salem certainly was built on a mountain, yet still such a mode of building has been common in India, and still Salem simply means peace: and, moreover, no etymological straining can identify it with Shiloh, which, geographically considered, was a town built on a hill, fifteen miles distant from Salem. Indeed, so rapid and so dazzling are the transformations of meaning and reference made by Colonel Wilford, that whatever other opinions we may be induced to form of them, we, at all events, cannot consider such things as serious