mposed the Jnanodaya and
Atthasalini at this time before starting for Ceylon.]

[Footnote 77: Fa-Hsien is chary of mentioning contemporary celebrities
but he refers to a Well-known monk called Ta-mo-kiu-ti (? Dhammakathi
) and had Buddhaghosa been already celebrated he would hardly have
omitted him.]

[Footnote 78: In the Coms. on the Digha and Dhammasangani.]

[Footnote 79: See Rhys Davids and Carpenter's introduction to
_Sumangalavi_, I. p. x.]

[Footnote 80: In the _Journal of Pali Text Soc._ 1891, pp. 76-164.
Since the above was written the first volume of the text of the
Visuddhi magga, edited by Mrs. Rhys Davids, has been published by the
Pali Text Society, 1920.]

[Footnote 81: Bhagavato Sasanam. See Buddhaghosuppatti, chap. I.]

[Footnote 82: It appears to be unknown to the Chinese Tripitaka. For
some further remarks on the Sinhalese Canon see Book III. chap. XIII.
Para. 3.]

[Footnote 83: That is according to Geiger 386-416 A.D. Perhaps he was
the Ta-mo-kiu-ti mentioned by Fa-Hsien.]

[Footnote 84: The tendency seems odd but it can be paralleled in India
where it is not uncommon to rewrite vernacular works in Sanskrit. See
Grierson, _J.R.A.S._ 1913, p. 133. Even in England in the seventeenth
century Bacon seems to have been doubtful of the immortality of his
works in English and prepared a Latin translation of his _Essays._]

[Footnote 85: It is reported with some emphasis as the tradition of
the Ancients in Buddhaghosuppatti, chap. VII. If the works were merely
those which Buddhaghosa himself had translated the procedure seems
somewhat drastic.]

[Footnote 86: Mahav. XXXIII. Dhammasokova so kasi Pitakattaye
Sangahan. Dhatusena reigned from 459-477 according to the common
chronology or 509-527 according to Geiger.]

[Footnote 87: Mahav. XLII. 35 ff.]

[Footnote 88: Mahav. LXXVIII. 21-23.]

[Footnote 89: Mahav. XXXVIII. Akasi patimagehe bahumangalacetiye
boddhisatte ca tathasun. Cf. Fa-Hsien, chap. XXVIII. _ad fin._]

[Footnote 90: Or Parakkama Bahu. Probably 1153-1186.]

[Footnote 91: Mahavamsa LX. 4-7.]

[Footnote 92: Mahavamsa LXXVIII. 21-27.]

[Footnote 93: Mahav. LXXXIV. If this means the region of Madras, the
obvious question is what learned Buddhist can there have been there at
this period.]

[Footnote 94: _J. Ant_. 1893, pp. 40, 41.]

[Footnote 95: I take this statement from Tennent who gives
references.]

[Footnote 96: See _Ceylon Antiquary_, I. 3, pp. 148, 197.]

[Footnote