[18] For the credibility of the Sinhalese traditions see Geiger introd. to translation of Mahâvaṃsa 1912 and Norman in J.R.A.S. 1908, pp. 1 ff. and on the other side R.O. Franke in W.Z.K.M. 21, pp. 203 ff., 317 ff. and Z.D.M.G. 63, pp. 540 ff.
[19] Grünwedel, Buddhist art in India, pp. 69-72. Rhys Davids, Buddhist India, p. 302.
[20] The Jâtaka-nidâna-kathâ is also closely allied to these works in those parts where the subject matter is the same.
[21] This section was probably called Mahâvaṃsa in a general sense long before the name was specially applied to the work which now bears it.
[22] See introduction to Oldenburg's edition, pp. 8, 9.
[23] Perhaps this is alluded to at the beginning of the Mahâvaṃsa itself, "The book made by the ancients (porvâṇehi kato) was in some places too diffuse and in others too condensed and contained many repetitions."
[24] The Mahâvaṃsa was continued by later writers and brought down to about 1780 A.D.
[25] The Mahâvaṃsatîkâ, a commentary written between 1000 and 1250 A.D., has also some independent value because the old Aṭṭhakathâ-Mahâvaṃsa was still extant and used by the writer.
[26] Son according to the Sinhalese sources but according to Hsüan Chuang and others, younger brother. In favour of the latter it may be said that the younger brothers of kings often became monks in order to avoid political complications.
[27] The modern Mahintale.