“When the king saw them he was glad at heart and thought: ‘My friend Dhammasoka and nobody else is worthy to have these priceless treasures; I will send them to him as a gift.’ For the two monarchs, Devanampiyatissa and Dhammasoka already had been friends a long time, though they had never seen each other” (Chapter 11)
The first part of Mahavamsa was written around the 6th century CE by Mahanama Thera (Inspired by Dipavamsa). The second part of the Mahavamsa (Culavamsa) was written in the 13th century CE. The third and final part was written over many years, concluding in the year 1815 (the British occupied the whole of Lanka).
The Mahavamsa holds significant historical and cultural value, with its first printed edition and English translation being published in 1837 by George Turnour, a historian and officer of the Ceylon Civil Service. Additionally, Wilhelm Geiger completed the official German translation of Mahavamsa in 1912, followed by the translation of Culavamsa in 1930. Mabel Haynes Bode later translated these works into English, with Geiger himself revising the English translation. This journey of translation and publication has played a crucial role in making the Mahavamsa accessible to a wider audience, contributing to a deeper understanding of Sri Lankan history and culture.
The significance of the Mahavamsa lies in its historical and cultural value, shedding light on the rich heritage of Sri Lanka. The mention of Devanampiyatissa and Dhammasoka as separate individuals in chapter 11 contradicts the theory associating Devanampiyatissa with King Ashoka, undermining the traditional understanding propagated by James Prinsep and the purported deciphering of Brahmi Script. This aspect of the Mahavamsa challenges established historical interpretations, prompting a reevaluation of its narrative and its implications for ancient Indian history and archaeology.
The Mahavamsa, attributed to Mahanama Thera and first edited in the 6th century based on the Dipavamsa, has been subject to historical and interpretational scrutiny. Critics argue that Mahanama Thera, not having visited India to verify historical facts, may have depicted inaccurate representations of Indian history, particularly during the Maurya period.
The book’s construction during the Buddhist decline in India raises concerns about the reliability of its historical accounts. Some assert that the depiction of Maurya history in the Mahavamsa may contain discrepancies or fictional elements, potentially distorting the actual historical narrative.
Furthermore, the association of Devanampiyatissa with Ashoka and the Brahmi script theory proposed by James Prinsep have been contested. It’s argued that presuming Devanampiyatissa as the author of Ashoka’s inscriptions in Brahmi script, based solely on the mention of Brahmi script in the Lalita-Vistara, is speculative and lacks concrete evidence.
In conclusion, the integrity and historical accuracy of the Mahavamsa, especially regarding its portrayal of Indian history, remain a subject of debate and critical examination.
Mahavamsa
01: Visit of The Tathagata
02: Race of Mahasammata
03: The First Council
04: Second Council
05: Third Council
06: Coming of Vijaya
07: Consecrating of Vijaya
08: King Panduvasudeva
09: Consecrating of Abhaya
10: Consecrating of Pandukabhaya
11: King Devanampiyatissa
12: Converting of Countries
13: The Coming of Mahinda
14: The Entry into the Capital
15: Acceptance of The Mahavihara
16: Cetiyapabbata Vihara
17: The Arrival of the Relics
18: Receiving of the Bodhi Tree
19: Coming of the Bodhi Tree
20: The Nibbana of the Thera
21: The Five Kings
22: The Birth of Prince Gamani
23: The Levying of the Warriors
24: The War of the Two Brothers
25: The Victory of Duttha Gamani
26: Maricavatti-vihara
27: Lohapasada
28: Build the Great Thupa
29: Beginning of the Great Thupa
30: Relic Chamber
31: The Enshrining of the Relics
32: Tusita-Heaven
33: The Ten Kings
34: The Eleven Kings
35: The Twelve Kings
36: The Thirteen Kings
37: King Mahasena
