90 ROYAL ASIATIC SOCIETY, (CEYLON BRANCH.; 



subject by a learned Buddhist priest of Siam named Kan- 

 sisuriya-bandhu. He agrees with us that Gotama was an 

 ordinary, or a middle-size man of his age, and cites much of the 

 very circumstantial evidence which we have been at great 

 pains to collect in proof of the fact. He does not, however, 

 understand by sugata vidatthi an imperial measure, but 

 takes it for granted, that by it Buddha's span was meant. 

 He ridicules the idea of a sugata vidatthi having been, as 

 stated by Buddhaghosa, three times the length of the span 

 of an ordinary man of his age, And, though he holds the 

 ancients in high esteem, and acknowledges that to them we 

 are greatly indebted for much of what we know ; he never- 

 theless affirms that in this respect Buddhaghosa's account 

 cannot be accepted, and concludes that part of the subject 

 by — not calling the ancients, as Lord Brougham did, if chil- 

 dren" as compared with the age of moderns,— but, boldly 

 asserting, that " we are not the slaves of the ancients." 



In fixing Buddha's height, he says 1 — " Buddha was by 

 one-fourth taller than an ordinary man of his age. That is, 

 when you divide such an ordinary man's height into three, 

 three such parts, plus one more, constituted Buddha's 

 height, 2 Buddha's height, he adds, was, by the carpenter's 

 cubit of the present day, 129 inches. 3 His fathom was of 

 the same length. 4 The height of man in Buddha's age was 

 ninety-two angulas 5 and one kala. 6 Their fathom ninety- 

 seven afigulas. 



" Now that twenty-three centuries have elapsed since the 

 death of Buddha, and we are in the twenty-fourth century. 



1 Free translation from the Pali. 



2 Le., He was taller by one-third the height of an ordinary man. 



3 i. e , ten and three-quarter feet. 



4 He agrees here that the height was four times the hastha. 



5 i.e., little more than seven and two-third feet. 



6 And yet he says Buddha was an ordinary man, 



