[217] 2357 and 2255 before Christ.
[218] Penal Code, Introduction, p. xxviii.
[219] Vol. XVI., 1810.
[220] Chinese Repository, Vol. IV., pp. 24-29.
[221] Chinese Repository, Vol. IV., p. 12; Chinese Chrestomathy, p. 558.
[222] The attributes ascribed to a chakrawartti in the Buddhist mythology have many points of resemblance to the hwangtí, and Hardy’s Manual of Buddhism (p. 126) furnishes an instructive comparison between the two characters, one fanciful and the other real.
[223] The remark of Heeren (Asiatic Nations, Vol. I., p. 57), that the names by which the early Persian monarchs, Darius, Xerxes, and others, were called, were really titles or surnames, and not their own personal names, suggests the further comparison whether those renowned names were not like the kwoh hao of the Chinese emperors, whose adoption of the custom was after the extinction of the Persian monarchy. Herodotus (Book VI., 98) seems to have been familiar with these names, not so much as being arbitrary and meaningless terms as epithets whose significations were associated with the kings. The new names given to the last two sons of Josiah, who became kings of Judah by their conquerors (2 Kings, 23: 34, and 24: 17), indicate even an earlier adoption of this custom.
[224] Chinese Repository, Vol. X., pp. 87-98. Indo-Chinese Gleaner, February, 1821.
[225] Staunton’s Embassy, 8vo edition, London, 1797, Vol. III., p. 63.
[226] Chinese Repository, Vol. XIV., p. 521; N. C. Br. R. As. Soc. Journal, No. XI.