94 On the History of the Burma Race. [No. 2, 



possess the holy tooth relic which was in the province of Can-da-la-rit 

 in China. He therefore marched with a vast army, accompanied by 

 Kyan-tsit tha and Shwe-by-in-gyi and Shwe-by-in-nge. The em- 

 peror of China shut himself up in his city, and not being aware of 

 the greatness of A-nau-ra-hta, took no notice of him. At length by 

 means of an artifice accomplished by Shwe-by-in-gye and Shwe-by-in- 

 nge, and by the boldness of Kyan-tsit-tha the emperor became alarmed. 

 The two sovereigns had a friendly meeting. The king, however, fail- 

 ed to procure the holy tooth relic. He brought away, however, an 

 emerald studded image, which had been sanctified by contact with the 

 holy relic ; and in a divine communication from Tha-gya Meng, was 

 informed that he might have a forehead bone relic which king Dwot- 

 ta-bung had formerly brought to Tha-ye-khet-ta-ra from the country 

 of the Kam-ram. A-nau-ra-hta then returned, taking with him the 

 emerald image. While passing through Shan, a Chinese province of 

 Mau, he married Tsau-mwun-hla, the daughter of the prince of the 

 province. This marriage and the subsequent adventures of the prin- 

 cess, have been made the subject of one of the most popular dramas 

 in Burma. 



After this the king went to Tha-re-khet-ta-ra, and pulled down the 

 pagoda in which king Dwot-ta-bung had enshrined the forehead 

 bone relic. In the histories of Arakan, it is said, he brought this relic 

 from that country ;* but that is not true. It had indeed originally 

 been brought from thence by king Dwot-ta-bung. A-nau-ra-hta, 

 fearing that the city of Tha-re-khet-ta-ra might fall into the hands of 

 enemies, destroyed it. When he arrived at Pu-gan, he built the 

 Shwe-zi-gun pagoda for the holy relic to repose. But although 



* In the history of Arakan which I have consulted, it is stated that A-nau- 

 ra-hta invaded that country to carry away a celebrated brazen image of Gau- 

 da-ma, which was in the temple of Maha-mu-ni. He did not succeed in doing 

 so, The Arakanese history represents this first invasion as occurring in the 

 year 994 A. D., but records that the same king invaded Arakan twenty -four 

 years later, when the Arakanese kiug was killed. As A-nau-ra-hta, according 

 to Burmese history, did not succeed to the throne until the year 1017 A. D., or 

 1010 A. D., more correctly reckoned, the two statements cannot be reconciled. 

 But the date of A-nau-ra-hta' s succession varies in different copies of the Maha- 

 Radza-Weng. In the appendix to Crawfurd's embassy to the Court of Ava, 

 that author gives a list of the kings of Burma from manuscripts procured by 

 him in the country. The accession to the throne of A-nau-ra-hta is stated to 

 be in 997 A. D. This agrees better with the dates in the Arakanese history. 

 Considering that the father of A-nau ra-hta was still alive when the son ascended 

 the throne, there may have been doubts as to the proper date. 



