The kingdom of Magadha. Chronological clews for Megasthenes. The first
part of the Magadha list preserved to us (Lassen, xxxi.) from Kuru to
Sahadeva is an unchronological list of collateral lines of the third
period, therefore of no value for the computation of time. The Kali list
of Magadha begins with Somâpi to Ripun_g_aya, 20 kings. The numbers are
cooked in so stupid a way that they neither agree with each other nor are
possible. One can only find the right number from lower down.
_Restoration of the Chronology._
Kali II. Pradyota, five 138 years.
kings with
Kali III. Saisunâga, ten 360 years.
kings with
Kali IV. Nanda, father 22 years.
with eight or nine sons
——
Kali V. Kandragupta king 317 B. C.
——
837 years.
If one deducts these 837 years from 1182, the first year of the Kali age,
there remain 345 years for the twenty kings from Somâpi to Ripun_g_aya
(First Dynasty), averaging 17-1/2 years. (That will do!) I adopt 1182
years, because 1354 is _impossible_, but 1181 is the historical
chronological beginning of a kingdom in Kashmir. Semiramis invaded India
under a _Sthavirapati_ (probably only a title), about 1250. This time must
therefore fall in the interregnum (120 years, after Megasthenes). The
history of the war with Assyria (Asura?) is smothered by pushing forward
the Abhîra, that is, the Naval War on the Indus (Diodorus).
I pass over the approximate restoration of the first three periods. I have
given you a scanty abstract of my treatise, which I naturally only look
upon as a _frame-work_. But if the _frame-work_ be right, and of this I
feel convinced, if I have discovered the true grooves and the system—then
the unfalsified remains of traditions in the Vedas must afford further
confirmation. The Kali can be fixed for about 1150/1190 by powerful
synchronisms. The three earlier ages can be approximately restored. One
thus arrives, by adding 200 + 300 + 120 (=620) to each of the earlier and
thus separated periods, to the beginning of the Tretâ (foundation of the
_Bharata kingdom_ beginning with Puru). This leads to the following
computation.
I. Anarchy before Puru 200 years.
II. From Puru to 200 years.
Bharata’s father, 10
reigns of 20 years
From Bharata to 120 years.
A_g_amîdha’s son, 6
reigns
End of II. 300 years.
——
III. From Kuru to Bahlika 200 years.
(migration towards
Bactria?) 10 reigns
(Parikshit) apparently 120 years.
6-7 reigns
——
End of the oldest Indian 1340 years.
kingdom, before Kali
1182 years.
——
Beginning of Tretâ = 1100 years.
2522 B. C. (2234
Zoroaster invaded Babylon
from Media) Second
dynasties in Babylon
——
3622 years.
We have still to account for the time of the _settlement in the Punjab_
and formation of kingdoms there. This gives as the beginning approximately
= 4339 B. C.
And now I am very anxious to hear what you have made out, or whether you
have let the whole matter rest as it is. I have postponed everything, in
order to clear up the way as far as I can. I shall try to induce Weber to
visit me in the Whitsun holidays, to look into the details for me, that I
may not lay myself open to attack. Before that I shall have received
Haug’s _entirely_ new _translation of the first Fargard_, which I shall
print as an Appendix, with his annotations. My _Chinese_ restoration has
turned out _most_ satisfactory.
I may now look forward to telling them: (1.) The rabbinical chronology is
false, it is impossible; it has every tradition opposed to it, most of all
so the biblical—therefore away with it! (2.) Science has not to _turn
back_, but now first to press really forward, and to restore: the question
is not the fixing of abstract speculative formulas, but the employing of
speculation and philology for the _reconstruction of the history of
humanity_, of which revelation is only a portion, though certainly the
centre if we believe in our moral consciousness of God.
This is about what I shall say, as my last word, in the Preface to the
sixth volume of “Egypt.” Volumes IV. and V. _are_ printed. _Deo soli
gloria._
[73.]