1892.] 
W. Hoey —Set Mahet. 
13 
penetrated to tlieir park on a hunting expedition. The insult referred 
to his maternity, his mother being a Brahman, who had been a servant 
in a Sakya household, while his father was a Kshatriya. His first 
attempt was foiled by the entreaty of Buddha, himself a Sakya, who 
met him outside the city and induced him to return. His second ex¬ 
pedition was unopposed by Buddha, and he not only slaughtered the 
Sakyas but ho endeavoured to force some Sakya maidens into his 
harem. With this, we may compare also Devadatta’s attempt to 
coerce Yasodhara on the palace terrace at Kapilavastu, and his 
death at Sravasti. In both cases the would-be ravishers were re¬ 
sisted and perished. Virudhaka’s death was foretold by Buddha, 
and there is a marvellous resemblance between the record of the 
events attending it and the modern legend. Again, if we bear 
in mind that the Sakyas were of the Solar race of Kshatriyas, when we 
consider the lady’s appeal (the lady being Mallika, Yirudhaka’s mother, 
or some other person interested in the Sakyas) made to the sun, and 
the destruction of the wicked king by the sun, we can readily see in 
this story the probable appeal of the Sakyas, whose daughters had been 
murdered, made through some one to a neighbouring potentate of Solar 
stock, who marched to Sravasti and avenged their cause. Buddha’s 
prophecy of the death of Virudhaka was probably a forewarning of 
the advent of the ally summoned by his kinsmen to their aid, of 
which Buddha cannot but have known. Who the avenger was we do 
not know, but he was probably Ajatasatru, the monarch of Magadha. 
On the whole, I think, we may fairly claim this legend, still lingering 
with the ignorant dwellers about Mahet, as a confused memory of the 
fall of Virudhaka, which is detailed with some degree of historical 
accuracy in the Tibetan records. However this may be, with Viru- 
dhaka’s death the curtain falls on Sravasti, and does not rise again 
for close on nine hundred years. 
What do we know and what can we surmise as to the interval 
between 477 B. C and 410 A. D. ? 
To this we must answer that we know nothing as to Sravasti itself, 
but there are certain historical data from which we can infer probabi¬ 
lities. 
First of all, Sravasti no longer appears as the capital of an indepen¬ 
dent kingdom. In the next place, the kingdom of Magadha continued to 
maintain its independence and individuality and to advance in prosperity 
until the zenith of its greatness under Asoka, who reigned ten 
generations after Ajatasatru. Again, the Tibetan record that a son of 
Prasenajit became the first king of Tibet, possibly covers a mi oration 
northward of the family of the Sravasti kings after Yirudhaka’s death. 
