I noticed that it seems that Agamas was known before.
In my current study of the Chinese Sinhala commentary it was noticed by the translator that Agamas is used as word. Author says probably the translator of China choosed the word Agamas. But I don’t believe that. It seems they had Agamas in Sri Lanka.
And in Divyavadana it also mentioned the Agamas of Sthavira.
So two times mentioned. What if later Nikayas was the Revised Agamas.
Because I noticed also in Chinese Sinhala vinaya commentary that some quotes of Dhammapada words are not the same as we have it fully. Still close. But that makes you wonder if there was Agamas in the beginning in Sri Lanka. And what if Mahavihara went to make a new version of Agamas because they didn’t want to have the same as the Abhayagiri Vihāra?
They had once probably the same. But maybe as noticed each tradition had different discourses of Buddha @ 5 CE
As notice in the debates of commentaries. They mention a sutra that doesn’t agree with what the other has as tradition. So that’s why the concern that what if Mahavihara did also make a new revised Agama according to their tradition acceptance of doctrine of Buddha