Age of the Nandas and Mauryas c11.38

c11.38

Greek and Latin writers frequently corrupt the name of Chandragupta. It was Sir William Jones who solved the puzzle and found in the appellations used by the classical historians and geographers variant forms of the name of the first Maurya as known from Indian sources. Writers of our own country, too, sometimes use epithets which require a few words of comment. As is well known the name of Chandragupta does not find a place in the epigraphs of his descendants. It, however, is distinctly referred to in the Junāgaḍh Rock Inscription of Rudradāman I. It is also known to Patañjali and a host of Indian bards and chroniclers, playwrights, poets and even philosophers. Among classical writers the nearest approximation to the correct name (Sandrokoptos) is made by Phylarchus, who is quoted by Athenaeus⁴. Strabo, Arrian and Justin have Sandrocottus. Appian and Plutarch corrupt it into Androcottus. In the Mudrārākshasa we have the cognomens Chanda-Siri (Chandraśrī), Piadaṁsaṇa (Priyadarśana) and Vṛishala⁵. Chandraśrī is of course the shortened form of the name Chandragupta with the addition of the honorific Śrī⁶. The attribution to Chandragupta of the appellation Piadamsana, if based on correct tradition, is of great interest as it is generally known as an epithet of his famous grandson, Aśoka, and his common designation in inscriptions. As a title of royalty it finds mention in the *Viṣṇudharmottara* as quoted in the *Rājadharmakaustubha* of Anantadeva¹. But its use does not appear to have been so common in early times as that of Devānāmpiya. Vṛishala is taken by some to hint at Chandragupta's extraction from the Śūdra line of the Nandas. But the cognomen is used in the epic and law books also of Kshatriyas and others who deviated from orthodoxy. An ingenious suggestion has been made in recent times that the expression really stands for *basileus*², the Greek word for king. There is, however, no suggestion in Indian literature that Vṛishala is a royal epithet. The word has a social and no political significance, and is often applied to non-royal personages, particularly wandering teachers and ascetics like the Buddha³.