Page:Asoka - the Buddhist Emperor of India.djvu/19

This page has been validated.

HIS HISTORY

17

huge total of 600,000 men of all arms, a number not incredible in the light of our knowledge of the unwieldy size of the hosts employed by Indian princes in later ages. With this overwhelming and well-equipped force Chandragupta, as Plutarch tells us, 'overran and subdued the whole of India,' that is to say, at least all the country to the north of the Narbadâ. His empire, therefore, extended from that river to the Himalaya and Hindû Kush^[1].

↑ The chief authority for the history of Chandragupta is Megasthenes. His work has been lost, but the pith of it is preserved in extracts or allusions by Arrian, Anabasis, Bk. v. ch. 6; Indika, various passages; Q. Curtius, Bk. viii. ch. 9; Plutarch, Life of Alexander, ch. 62; Justin, Bk. xv. ch. 4; Appian, Syriakê, ch. 55; Strabo, i. 53, 57; ii. 1. 9; xv. i. 36; Athenaios, Deipnosophists, ch. 18 d; and Pliny, Hist. Nat. vi. 19, &c. The testimony of Megasthenes concerning all matters which came under his personal observation is trustworthy, and Arrian rightly described him as 'a worthy man' (δόκιμος). Strabo and some other ancient writers censure him unjustly on account of the 'travellers' tales' which he repeated. The passages above cited and most of the other references in Greek and Roman authors to India have been carefully translated in Mr. McCrindle's works (Ancient India as described by Megasthenes and Arrian, Trübner, 1877; Invasion of India by Alexander the Great, 2nd ed., 1896; and Ancient India as described in Classical Literature, 1901). Interesting traditional details are given in the Mudrâ-Râkshasa drama, which is now believed by some scholars to date from the fifth or sixth century A. D. But Mr. Keith places it in either the seventh or the ninth century (J. R. A. .S., 1909, p. 149). The Arthaśâstra of Kautilya or Chânakya, discovered in 1904, and completely translated in 1915 by R. Shamasastry (Bangalore Government Press) is the best commentary on the Asoka inscriptions and on his institutions. The Purâṇas and the chronicles of Ceylon also give

[p17-1] The chief authority for the history of Chandragupta is Megasthenes. His work has been lost, but the pith of it is preserved in extracts or allusions by Arrian, Anabasis, Bk. v. ch. 6; Indika, various passages; Q. Curtius, Bk. viii. ch. 9; Plutarch, Life of Alexander, ch. 62; Justin, Bk. xv. ch. 4; Appian, Syriakê, ch. 55; Strabo, i. 53, 57; ii. 1. 9; xv. i. 36; Athenaios, Deipnosophists, ch. 18 d; and Pliny, Hist. Nat. vi. 19, &c. The testimony of Megasthenes concerning all matters which came under his personal observation is trustworthy, and Arrian rightly described him as 'a worthy man' (δόκιμος). Strabo and some other ancient writers censure him unjustly on account of the 'travellers' tales' which he repeated. The passages above cited and most of the other references in Greek and Roman authors to India have been carefully translated in Mr. McCrindle's works (Ancient India as described by Megasthenes and Arrian, Trübner, 1877; Invasion of India by Alexander the Great, 2nd ed., 1896; and Ancient India as described in Classical Literature, 1901). Interesting traditional details are given in the Mudrâ-Râkshasa drama, which is now believed by some scholars to date from the fifth or sixth century A. D. But Mr. Keith places it in either the seventh or the ninth century (J. R. A. .S., 1909, p. 149). The Arthaśâstra of Kautilya or Chânakya, discovered in 1904, and completely translated in 1915 by R. Shamasastry (Bangalore Government Press) is the best commentary on the Asoka inscriptions and on his institutions. The Purâṇas and the chronicles of Ceylon also give

[1]