JOURNAL OF THE ASIATIC SOCIETY Vol. IV, 1962, No. 1 {Pages 1-32 ) ISIRWILL! AM JONES MDGCXLV I - NVDCCXCM ASIATIC SOCIETY 1 PARK STREET, CALCUTTA 10 Issued Match, 1963 CONTENTS Page 1. Schoutedenia bougainvitteae (Theobald) : Redescrip- tion and its Synonyms . . * . . 1 By Sri A. K. Ghosh and Dr. D. N. Bat ChAUDHURT 2. Gopala 111 . . . . . . . . 5 By Dr. D. C. Sircar - 3. The M adaldpdnj l and Jivadeva’s Bhakti bhagavata . . 9 By Dr. D. C. Siroar 4. The Kesari Dynasty of the Mddaldpdhji . . 17 By Sri P. Acharya 5. Reviews of Books : (а) Early Sculpture of Bengal . . . . 29 By Dr. R. C. Majumdar (б) Rdmesvarer & ivasahkirttan vd feivdyan . . 30 By Dr. Sukumar Sen (c) Oarydgltikosa of Buddhist Siddhas . . 30 By Dr. Sukumar Sen ( Vol. XXXIII, p. 266, text line 29; p. 268, text line 66, * There are numerous such oases. For a Y&dava kmgJA.D. 1271-1311) called R&ma, Ramadeya and R&ma^andradeva, see Ep. Vol. XXV, pp. 199n. ,* Vol. XXXV, pp, 8m. The word deva is an honorific suffixed to royal names. ' ( • ) - 10 D. C. SIRCAR [VOL. IV, have obviously a bearing on the tradition of Kesari rule over the Purl region before the Ganga conquest of the area, as recorded in the Mddaldpdnji and the Bhaktibhagavata. The Kesari dynasty is referred to in the Bhaktibhagavata composed in A.D. 1510 by Kavidindima Jlvadev-acarya who was the preceptor of the SuryavamSl Gajapati king Prataparudra (A.D. 1497-1539). While describing his ancestry, etc., in thirty-six stanzas at the end of the work, Jivadeva of the Vatsa-gotra states that his forefathers were the spiritual guides of the kings of Utkala belonging to the Bhoja famift, the Kesari dynasty, the Ganga family and the Surya-vamSa. In this Hot, the earliest name Bhoja seems to be a mistake for Bhauma (i.e. Bhauma-Kara) since the kings of the Bhoja-vamSa are described as V iraja-pada-padma-bhakta (devotees of the lotus feet of Viraja) and this Viraja, called the &akti (i.e. the Mother-goddess) worshipped in that land (tad-deda-dakti), is no doubt tho celebrated goddess of the same name installed in a temple at Jajpur which is known to have been the capital of the Bhauma-Kara kings of Orissa. 1 The change of Bhauma to Bhoja in the tradition of Jivadeva ’s family may be due to a confusion with the name of the great Param&ra king Bhoja (c. A.D. 1000-55) of Malwa. It is interesting to note in this connection that the name of king Bhoja occurs, along with that of Vikramaditya of Indian folklore, among the early rulers of Orissa as known from the Mddald- pdnji. 2 Of course, Vikramaditya, the traditional founder of the Vikrama Samvat of 58 B.C., is mentioned as the successor of Bhoja and both are assigned to the period before tho foundation of the Kesari dynasty, in the latter half of the fifth century A.D., by Yayatikesari whose name re- minds us of the fact that Candlhara MahaSivagupta Yayati III (c. A.D. 1025-55), the father of Uddyotakesari, was the first ruler to have consoli- dated SomavamSi authority in the Puri-Cuttack region. 3 It has to be noticed that, while the Bhaktibhagavata mentions the Bhoja family before the Kesaris or Later SomavamSfs, the Mddaldpdnji refers to a king named Bhoja having flourished before the Kesaris. Thus, though neither of the sources is accurate, the priestly tradition of the Mddaldpdnji looks worse confounded than the Vatsa family tradition in the Bhaktibhagavata . Again, the Mddaldpdnji does not mention Uddyotakesari, while the Bhaktibhagavata speaks not of Yayatikesari but of Uddyotakesari - kula , though it may be regarded as doubtful whether the author meant ‘Uddyotakesari’s family 5 or ‘the glorious Kesari dynasty 5 . In any case, if the Mddaldpdnji borrowed the reference to Kesari dynasty from the Bhaktibhagavata , as Mr. P. Acharya suggests, 4 it is inexplicable whence the priest compilers got the name of Yayatikesari and why they mention king Bhoja instead of the Bhoja dynasty, even if the absence of Uddyotakesari known from the supposed source of their chronicle may be explained away. It is therefore difficult to subscribe to the view that the Mddaldpdnji borrowed the name of the Kesari family from Jlvadeva’s Bhaktibhagavata . Both the Mddaldpdnji and the Bhaktibhagavata apparently drew upon traditions in their own way, the former depending on the tradition prevalent among the priests of the Puri temple and the latter on that current in the author’s family. This is also suggested by other facts, e.g. (1) the great 1 Ep. Ind., Vol. xxvm, p. 180. 8 Ed. A. B. Mahanti, p, 4. * Cf. The Struggle far Empire, ed. Majumdar, pp. 209ff. 4 See his article elsewhere in this issue, 19&2] THE At ADA LAP A ft jl AND JIVADEVA ’S BHAKTIBHACA VA TA 11. importance attached in the chronicle to Gfanga Anangabhlma {i.e. the Eastern Qanga monarch Anahgabhima III, A.D. 121i*§9), but his total omission from Jivadeva’s account; (2) the issue of gold coins bearing the figure of Gop&la (i.e. Kj§na identified with the god Purusottama- Jagann&tha) by Gajapati Prat&parudra (A.D. 1497-1539), the most famous Vaignava .king of Orissa, in the BhakUbhdgavata> but not in the M&daldpdrlji , even though the latter is especially concerned with the god; etc. As we have suggested elsewhere, 1 the Mddaldpdnji was compiled when the memory of even the SfiryavamSi Gajapatis had become dim, that is to say, long after the composition of the Bhaktibhdgavata. But the priest compilers of the chronicle apparently had no inclination to gather material from literary sources, but merely depended on hearsay and imagination. Most of the stanzas at the end of Jivadeva’s Bhaktibhdgavata were translated by H. P. Shastri 2 and have been discussed recently by K. K. Kar in two little-known publications. 3 We are inclined to analyse the contents of these stanzas here since we are not in agreement with all the views of Shastri and Kar. But, before taking up that subject, it is neces- sary to say a few words about the literary merit of the Bhaktibhdgavata. Jlvadeva calls his poem a mahd-kdvya, while Kar describes it as a ‘great work’ and observes, ‘the epic is a very fine piece of literature and can well compare with Nai§adha , the masterpiece of poet Sriharsa. Its style is lucid and fascinating and its descriptions are true to life.’ 4 A study of the thirty-six stanzas quoted by Kar has, however, led us to believe that, even if Jivadeva was a great bhakta deserving a title like Bhaktadindima and even if his work may be called * great * because it deals with bhakti which is regarded by some as a great subject, the Bhaktibhdgavata is devoid of any literary merit. The author’s poor style is demonstrated by many defects including frequent repetition of the same expressions, e.g. (1) Ke&ari- kula in verses 0, 7 and 9; (2) Gang-anvaye in verses 11, 13 and 16; (3) Kavi- rajaraja in verses 23 and 30; (4) Vi§nupadi in verses 27 and 34; and (5) Sri- Jivadeva- Kavidindima -panditendra in verses 30 and 36. Indeed, passages like Gang-dnvaye samabhavan = prathita nrpdld Vats-dnvaye hi guravo viditd hi te$am are mere prose versified with difficulty and scarcely suit ‘a fine piece of literature’. It is a pity that the Kavidindima, also called Kavirdjardja and Panditendra , was so miserably short of suitable words that he had to employ the meaningless hi twice in a single foot of a stanza in Vasantatilaka which is the metre of all the thirty-six verses without exception. It is difficult to believe that the poverty of the style is a characteristic only of these verses and not of the entire work. Verse 1 speaks of ‘the husband of LaksmI 5 (i.e. the god Visnu identified with Puru§ottama- J agannatha of Pur!) who is worshipped in the triple form on the slope of the Nil&cala (the blue mountain) on the shore of ‘the salt sea’ (i.e. the Bay of Bengal). There are many ‘blue mountains’ in different parts of India ; but the reference here is to the low range of sand- hills on winch the Pur! temple is situated. Verse 2 mentions the land of Utkala as the home of Varavas devoted to the said god. » Joum. Ind. Hist., Vol. XXXI, pp. 233ff. * Report on the Search for Sanskrit Manuscripts, 1901-1906, pp. 14-16. * Nam BhdraU (Oriya), Vol. VI, pp. 22 Iff., 293ff; Utkal University Souvenir, 1948, pp. 108ff. 4 Cf. Utkal University Souvenir, p. 108. 12 D. O. SIROAR [VOL. IV, Verse 3 states that, in the above-mentioned country, there were once kings belonging to the Bhoja (sic — Bhauma, i.e. Bhauma-Kara) dynasty, who were devoted to Viraja, an aspect of the Mother-goddess ( Sakti ) worshipped there. As already indicated, Viraja is the goddess of Jajpur on the Vaitaraoi river, which is called Viraja-tirtha, the land stretching for ten miles around the locality being known as Viraja-ksetra. 1 The same stanza also says that there was a family of Brahmanas belonging to the Vatsa-gotra, who were the spiritual guides of the said rulers and were honoured by them. It is not impossible that the Br&hmaneP family hailed from J&jpur. * Verses 4-5 introduce Mrtyunjaya, one of the above-mentioned Vatsa-gotra Brahmanas, as a great teacher and an expert in the agamas . He is stated to have brought back to life a dead (or, nearly dead) son of a king apparently of the Bhoja (sic — Bhauma) family. Unfortunately the name of the king is not mentioned. It is, however, not impossible that Mrtyunjaya was accepted by the king as the latter’s preceptor as a result of the said miracle. This seems to be supported by the following stanza stating that the Vatsa-gotra Brahmanas, who increased Mrtyuiijaya’s family, became the spiritual guides of the kings of the Bhoja (sic — Bhauma) dynasty. It further says that the said Brahmanas were devotees of ‘the half of Hara’s body’ (i.e. the Mother-goddess, probably meaning Viraja of Jajpur) and were adepts in incantations and in the performance of magic. These Brahmanas appear to have been Sakta Tantrikas. Verse 6 states that the Bhojas (sic — Bhaumas) lost their throne, as if owing to their rude behaviour towards those Brahmanas, and the Kesari family came to adorn it. The Vatsa-gotra Brahmanas, honoured by the Bhojas ( sic — Bhaumas) [as their preceptors], became in the same way now the spiritual guides [of the Kesari dynasty]. Verse 7. Bhavadeva, one of the Vatsa-gotra Brahmanas, became the preceptor of Uddyotakesarl’s family (or, the glorious Kesari dynasty). The author may have really intended to say that, among the Later SomavamSIs, Uddyotakesari first became the disciple of Bhavadeva. The latter half of the verse mentions SomeSvara as responsible for the glorification of the family, probably meaning the Kesari dynasty, though the relationship be- tween Bhavadeva and SomeSvara is not indicated. H. P. Shastri translates the verse as follows: ‘One Bhavadeva, with great spiritual powers, was the spiritual guide of Uddyota-kesari, , who consecrated the phallic emblem of 6iva named Somegvara, which -was a Vanalinga and which was worshipped by all kings.’ This can be regarded as an inaccurate rough translation of the stanza if the word vam&ify at. the beginning of the last foot is read as lingah. In case the reading lingah is supported by any manuscript, it may be regarded as better since it absolves the poet from the charge of introducing SomcSvara without disclosing his relation with Bhavadeva and suggests that Bhavadeva installed a Sivalinga called SomeSvara apparently for his royal disciples (cf. nrpa-kulasya samarcaniyo ). But we do not understand whence Shastri got the reference to a Vanalinga consecrated by Uddyotakesari. Verse 5. The first half of the stanza seems to state that the Brahmana Bhavadeva (if the last word of the previous verse is liiigah) or Some&vara (if the said word is varhiafo) wrote a popular Tantra text entitled Tantrdrnava , while the latter half says that the same Br&hmana installed 1 Seo N. L. Doy, Geographical Dictionary , p, 38; Sircar, The S'&kia Pffha#,'pp> 19, 21 , 33 , 45 , 99 . 1962] THE MAD A LAP A ft jJ AND JiVADEVA’s BHAKTIBHAQA V4 TA 13 many ileities at Kjttivasa-ksetra, i.e. modern Bhubaneswar. Shastri failed to note the reference to Bhubaneswar in the stanza, Verse 9 % When the kings of the Kesari dynasty were destroyed by the fire of injustice done to the Brahmaijas [of the Vatsa-gotra], members of the Ganga family, who were devoted to the gods and Brahmanas, became kings. Verse 10 introduces Codagahga as an adept in spells and a favourite of the Mother-goddess (Sakti, probably meaning Viraja)* and rightly as the first of the Ganga rulers since it was he who annexed the Puri-Cuttack region to the Ganga empire before A.D. 1112. It is also stated that the Vatsa-gotra Brahmana Gauriguru was the preceptor of the said Ganga king. In this connection, it requires to be noted that Codaganga is repre- sented in his earlier records as a devotee of MaheSvara (Siva) and in his later epigraphs as a votary of Visnu (Puruijottama- J agann&tha) . It seems that the capital of Utkala remained at Jajpur for some time even after the Ganga conquest, though the Ganga capital was later trans- ferred to Cuttack on the foundation of Abhinava-VaranasI-kataka at the site by Anangabhlma III. 1 That Jajpur (Yayatipura) was the capital of the Later SomavamSls in Utkala is not only indicated by its name coined after Yayati (no doubt Yayati III) but also by the fact that the Ratnagiri plates of Karua were issued from Yayatinagara = Yayatipura = Jajpur, called Abhinava- Yayatinagara in the Madaldpanji . 2 * * Verse 11 suggests that the god Nrsimha was born in the Ganga family as Jagadekamalla, the destroyer of Bhilll (sic — Dilli, i.e. Delhi). The reference is to Narasimha I (A.D. 1139-64) since his epithet languid - cumbita-tanu , probably suggesting that his sectarian mark looked like the figure of a tail, reminds us of his epithet Languid or Languda as found in the Madaldpanji . His epithet or secondary name Jagadekamalla and the claim of his success against the Delhi Sultan are not met with elsewhere, though the latter may be due to a confusion with the well-known story of his success against the Muslim ruler of Lak§manavatl (Bengal). 8 Shastri’s translation has, 'In the Ganga dynasty was born Languliya Nrsimha whose body had a tail.* Verse 12 states that the preceptor of the said Ganga king was the Vatsa-gotra Brahmana Acaryaraja whose descendants had been settled by the king at Kafii where they were still continuing when the Bhakti - bhdgavata was composed in A.D. 1510. Verse 13 introduces another Ganga king named Nrsimha (appa- rently Narasimha II, A.D. 1278-1305) who is described as an adept in composing poems and as the builder of the lofty temple of Ko$arka. Since the celebrated Sun-temple at Kon&rka (Kon&rak) is known to have been built by Ganga Narasimha I, the ascription of the achievement to Nara- simha II is no doubt due to a confusion. Verse 14. The first half of the stanza states that the preceptor of the second Narasimha was the Brahmana Vamadeva who was devoted to V&madeva (Siva). The latter half says that Vfimadeva’s younger brother Hari was the Praharddhirdja [of the king]. H* P. Shastri thinks that Hari was the king’s * commander of the guards \ But Praharddhirdja is the same as the Oriya Brahmanical family name Prahardja, which was originally a title probably conferred on the 1 Sae Sircar, Geography of Ancient and Medieval India* pp. 147-48; Ep. Ind. t Vpl. &XVIH, pp. 247-48. * Gf. J&p. lnd tt Val XXXni, pp. 27L72. a Ray, V.H.N.I.* Vol. I, pp, 4S0ff. D. 0. SIRCAR 14 [VOL. IV, astronomer-cum-astrologer at the royal court who calculated the auspi- cious and inauspicious character of the divisions of a day. 1 Verse 15 states that Vamadeva renounced his palatial buildings, temples, tanks, numerous rent-free holdings as well as his poetical composi- tions and obtained siddhi. Verse 16 speaks of a Qanga king named Bhanu who died as the result of excessive drinking. Although it is difficult to determine whether he is identical with any of the earlier kings named Bhanu or is the same as Bhanu IV mentioned in the following stanza, we do not •understand why Shastri translates the latter half of the verse as: ‘Bhar&i was their last king who, being addicted to women, perished/ Verse 17 speaks of Nib^anka Bhanu (i.e. Bhanu IV, who was ousted by Kapilendra, the founder of the SuryavamSI Gajapati family, in A.D. 1435) as intoxicated with pride and says that the Ganga dynasty having declined owing to the fickleness of that king, the solar family reappeared (i.e. the SuryavamSl Gajapatis, claiming descent from the ancient solar dynasty of Kosala, obtained the kingdom). Shastri speaks of the solar race being supported by the nobility of the land. But kula-purusa in the stanza seems to mean ‘the progenitors of the family*. Verses 18-19. The first stanza introduces Gajapati Kapilendra (KapileSvara) as the conqueror of the earth, while the following verse states that Gopaladeva having renounced the world, his younger brother Vasudeva of the Vatsa family became the preceptor of the Gajapati king. Verse 20 states that the king bestowed land and money to the Brahmanas and jewels to the temple on the Nllagiri (i.e. Puri temple) and died on the bank of the VenI (i.e. the KrsnavenI or Krsna) after having ruled for thirty-two years (A.D. 1435-67). Shastri wrongly regards the VenI as identical with Triveru. Verse 21 introduces Purusottama as the son of Kapilendra and refers to his enjoyment of the goddesses of both fortune and learning. Verse 22 states that Purusottama conquered Vidyapuri (i.e. Vijaya- nagara) and bestowed jewels and gold to the Brahmanas. A similar tradi- tion about Purusottama’s conquest of Vidyanagara (Vijayanagara) is noticed in certain Bengali Vaisnava works. The stanza also refers to Puru- sottama *s poetical compositions. Verse 23. King Purusottama’s preceptor was Kavirdjardja Trilocana, the son of the above-mentioned Gopala whom Shastri wrongly regards as an ancestor of Trilocana. Verses 24-25 speak of the death of the king and his preceptor. ' The king obtained the world of Visnu near the Citrotpala (i.e. the Mahanadl) after a rule of thirty years (A.D. 1467-97), while Trilocana went to the world of the god Purusottama by means of yoga practised on the mukti-Sila. Shastri wrongly translates the passage a dhyasya muktikara-muktiMldm as * ‘lived on mukti-iild , the giver of salvation*. Verse 26 states that on Puru$ottama’s death his son Virarudra (i.e. Prataparudra) became king. The last foot of the stanza suggests that Virarudra (Prataparudra) ascended the throne when he was seventeen years old. The teal name of the king was Rudra (cf. verse 31), though he was often called Virarudra and Prataparudra which are shortened forms of V iraprataparudra or Pratapavlrarudra. Verse 27 says that the king, having defeated the ruler of Gau£a (i.e. the Sultan of Laksmaoavati) shortly after his coronation, performed the water-offering ceremony for his deceased father in the river Vi$uupadl a ' ' ' * i. - m i. ■ » ■ J '" '' 1 See An. Ithand . Or. Res . Inst., Vol. XXXIII, pp. 219-20. 1962] the madalapaRji and jIvade vVs bua ktibhaga va ta 15 (i.e. the Ganges — in West Bengal) within three fortnights [of his father’s death]. This seems to suggest that Prataparudra ’s encounter with the Bengal Sulfc&n was earlier than his expeditions against the Vijayanagara kingdom. This has escaped the notice of recent writers on Gajapati history. 1 Shastri wrongly translates the latter part of the stanza as ‘at the end of the sixth week of his father’s death, he offered handfuls of Ganges water for the benefit of his father Verse 28 states that, although the king’s soul was purified by the theory of non-dualism, he preached dualism in respect of the incarnation of Vasudeva’s son (i.e. Krsna). Shastri speaks of ‘the dual doctrine at the incarnation of Kysjia (Caitanya)’. Verses 29-30 . These two stanzas have been treated by Shastri as verses 30 and 29. The first of these verses states that new gold coins bearing the figure of Gopala (i.e. Krs$a) and the king’s name, issued by Vlrarudra (Prataparudra), were circulated in the countries on all sides, while the king’s compositions were read by all scholars. No coin of the king has, however, so far been discovered. The second stanza says that Kavidindima Jivadeva, also called Kavirdjaraja and the prince among scholars, who was the son of the above-mentioned Trilocana from the latter’s wife Ratnavatl and was extremely devoted to the god Krsija, became the spiritual guide of the Gajapati king. Verses 31-32 The first of the two stanzas states that when king Rudradeva (Prataparudra or Vlrarudra) was staying at Venkat-adri (prob- ably the same as Venkata-giri in the Nellore District and not Tirupati in the Chittur District of Andhra Pradesh) for the conquest of the Karnata country (i.e. the Vijayanagara kingdom), the work (i.e. the Bhaklibhdgavata) was composed by the &ighra-kavi (i.e. Jivadeva). The next stanza says that the great work ( maha -prabhandha) was composed in the month of Makara in the seventeenth Anka (i.e. fourteenth regnal year = A.D. 1510) of the king when the poet was just in his thirty-fifth year and was staying near the Godavari. There is difference of opinion on the question whether king Krsua- devaraya of Vijayanagara became involved in war with the Gajapati im- mediately after his accession in A.D. 1509 or shortly after A.D. 1512. 2 The presence of Prataparudra at Vchkat-adri in connection with a war with Karuata in A.D. 1510 seems to go in support of the former view. Verses 33-36. These are not of any historical importance. In the ladt of these stanzas, Kavidindima Jivadeva, the prince among scholars, claims to have been capable of composing a work in one prahara (three hours) and of refuting six different philosophical views, though such boasts do not quite suit the traditional modesty of a Vaisuava. The verses discussed above are followed by a passage in prose recording the completion of the maha-kfivya entitled Bkaktibkdgavata by Vyavaharir- Mahdpatra Kavidindima Oajardjardjagum Jivadev-acarya who was the son of Vyavahartf-Mahdpdtra Kavirdja JRdjaguru Trilocan-Sc&rya, In conclusion, it may be pointed out that some scholars speak of Jivadeva having received the title Kavidindima from the Gajapati king on account of his Bhaktibhdgavata . 8 This is not supported by the stanzas dis- cussed above* which seem to suggest, on the other hand, that Jivadeva en- joyed the title before he completed the work at a place near the God&vari 1 See, e.g., Mukherjee, The Gajapati Kings of Orissa , pp. 72ff.; Mahtab, The History of Orissa, p. 325. Cf, also Subrahmanyam, The SuryavathH Qajapatis of Orissa, pp»90ff. ' . ' * See Mukherjee, Qp.cit., pp. 77-78. Cf. Subrahmanyam, op. c it., p. 94. * Mukherjee, op. eit., p. 5. 16 D. C. SIBCAH [VOL. IV, 1962] when the Gajapati was far away at Venkat-adri. The title Kavidin#i/ma is known to have been previously enjoyed by R&janStha who wrote the SaluvabhyuAaya at the court of the Vijayanagara monarch Narasithha I (A.D. 1486-93). Sr! 0. Chakravarti has recently drawn my attention to another work of Jlvadeva. It is the Sanskrit drama entitled Bhaktivaibhava, a manuscript of which is preserved in the Asiatic Society’s library and has been noticed by H. P. Shastri in A Descriptive Catalogue of the Sanskrit Manuscrij ts in the Collections of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, Vol. *VII, pp. 274-78 (No. 5347). I am writing on the manuscript separately, f Journal of the Asiatic Society. Vol. IF, No. 1, 1962. THE KESARl DYNASTY OF THE MADALAPlSjl 1 * By P. Acharya In 1825, Andrew Stirling published an historical account of Orissa 2 entirely based on the Rajacaritra of the Madalapanji , the chronicle of the Jagannatha temple at Purl. In this account, he dealt with 36 generations of the Kesarl kings beginning with Yayatikesari. As the date of Yayftti- kesari was given in the Saka era, Stirling placed the beginning of Kesarl rule in A.D. 473, from which date he counted ‘the commencement of the real history of the province’ 8 . But, as the &aka era was not current in Orissa before the tenth century A.D., its use in the Mddaldpdnji in the above context cannot be accepted as genuine. In 1843, Bhabani Charan Bandyopadhyaya published his Puru$ottama- candrikd which is a poetical work in Bengali based on the Mddaldpdnji, and, in 1872, W. W. Hunter in his Orissa , Vol. I, pp. 198-99, paid high tribute to Bandyopadhyaya for his researches. Hunter chiefly derived his material from the Purupottamacandrikd, the account in which he considered fuller and more carefully prepared than Stirling’s. He sayB, ‘It contains, however, rather germs of history than an historical narrative. It furnishes a list of a hundred and seven kings of Orissa from 3101 B.C. to the British accession in A.D. 1803 with the exact dates of their reigns.’ It is un- fortunate that Hunter totally disregarded the views of the then Secretary of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, who rightly pointed out that the inclusion of king Bhoja of known date in the Madalapanji and his ascription to an age earlier than Vikramaditya and the inclusion also of Vikramaditya in it are both against history and chronology 4 . Of the five Somakull copperplate grants discovered at or near Cuttack between 1874 and 1884, two were edited by Rangalal Banerji 6 and one by Rajendralal Mitra, 0 while Volumes I and II of Mitra’s Antiquities of Orissa were published in 1875 and 1880 respectively. Both Banerji and Mitra identified Yayati of the copperplates with Yayatikesari, the founder of the Kesarl dynasty of the Mddalapdriji , who was regarded as a feudatory of the later Gupta kings of Magadha. M. M. Chakravarti read a paper on two copperplate inscriptions of Ganga Narasimha IV at a meeting of the Asiatic Society in 1891, though the paper was published in its Journal in 1895. While referring to the evidence of the Madalapanji , he clearly states that ‘unless corroborated, its statements cannot be fully relied upon ’ 7 . In another paper read by Chakra- varti at a meeting held on the 6th of July, 1892, an abstract of which was published in the Society’s Proceedings , 1892, pp. 140-41, the learned author observed that the Mddaldpdnji, being based on unsatisfactory, imperfectly reported and contradictory traditions, was a very unsafe and confusing The article has been edited for the Journal by Professor D. C. Sircar. A. Stirling, Asiatic Researches, Vol. XV, 1825, pp. 163-388. Ibid., p. 264. Ibid., p. 262. Ind. Ant., Vol. TL, 1876, pp, 55ff.; Vol. XLVI, 1877, pp. 149*. A.R.B Proc., 1882, p» 11. * J.A.S.B., VoL MLHI, 1895, p. 128. ( 17 ) 2 ■ T. AOHABYA 18 [VOL. IV, guide. * The work*, he says, ‘should be deposed from the high pedestal which it now occupies and placed in the proper rank.* Credit thus goes to Chakravarti for his bold evaluation of the evidence of the Madaldpanji , the unreliability of which he also demonstrated in his papers on the Eastern Gangas 1 and the Suryavam&s 2 . Six Somakuli copperplate grants were published by J. F. Fleet in the Epigraphia Indica , Vol. Ill, 1894-95, pp. 323-59. Fleet regarded the donors of the charters as ‘ Kings of Kataka apparently because Rangalal Banerji had translated Vi jay a- Kataka occurring in the description of the place of their issue as ‘the great and glorious Kataka ’, though it really means ‘the Victorious Camp’. But a distinct service to the cause of his- torical research was rendered by Fleet by elaborately discussing the palaeo- graphic peculiarities of the inscriptions in order to determine their date as well as the date of the compilation of the Madaldpanji and the historical value of the tradition regarding the kings of the Kesarl dynasty. Fleet showed that the inscriptions should be assigned on palaeo- graphical grounds to a date later than A.D. 900, preferably to the eleventh century, so that the kings who issued them may have flourished between A.D. 1000 and 1100 3 . He compared the Madaldpanji with the Kongudeia- rajdvali and Rdjavalikatha of South India and pointed out that ‘these annals are in reality absolutely worthless for any purpose of ancient history’, 4 * and, while expressing doubts about the historicity of the majority of the names in the list, 6 further observed that ‘everything relating to ancient times which has been written on the unsupported authority of these annals has to be expunged bodily from the pages of history’ 6 . Finally, Fleet drew attention to the reference to the Yavana invasion and pointed out that the Madaldpanji could not have been reduced to its present form before the sixteenth century A.D. 7 . While generally agreeing with Fleet’s observations, M. M. Chakravarti disagrees with the statement that the names of the Kesarl kings ‘may be possibly real names of the later rulers, misplaced in order to make out a consecutive chronological series’, 8 and refers to the BrahmeSvara temple inscription at Bhubaneswar, which is not later than the tenth century A.D., but mentions Udyotakesari and his ancestors Janamejaya, Vichitravlra, Candlhara and Kolavatl, of whom the names of Janamejaya and Kolavatl are found in the Madaldpanji. Chakravarti therefore concludes that the Kesarl kings need not be considered as mythical or later rulers as suggested by Fleet.® 4 # In the Brahmegvara inscription, however, no ancestor of Udyotakesari bears a kesarl-v nding name and, in the Madaldpanji , there is no mention of Udyotakesari at all. The latter mentions Vasukalpakesari and his queen Kolavatl (according to Chakravarti’s reading) who, according to the Brahmefivara inscription, was the queen of Candlhara and the mother of Udyotakesari. There is no mention of Vasukalpakesari in the BrahmeSvara inscription. The Mddaldpdnjl account is thus distorted and cannot be satisfactorily reconciled with the evidence of the Brahmedvara inscription. 1 J.A.8.B., Vol. LXXII, 1903, pp. 07-148. a Ibid ., Vol. LX, 1900, pp. 180-89. a Op. tit., p. 333. * Ibid., p. 335. 6 Ibid., p. 336. 6 Ibid., p. 338. 7 Ibid., p.340. a Ibid., p. 336. • JJU3.B., Vol. LXVn, 1898, pp. 332ff. 1962] THE KBSARl DYNASTY Off THE MADALAPAftfi 19 It should also be noted that the printed Oriya text of the Mddatdpdnji 1 mentions the queen of Vasukalpakesari as Tuldvatl and not as Kotdvatl. Since the text of the BrahmeSvara inscription 2 as published in 1838 was defective, Chakravarti took it to be a Kesarl record and the mention of Udyotakesari in it was regarded by him to be a strong evidence against Fleet’s remarks. As the name of Karuakesari was traced in Sandhya- karanandl’s Rdmacarita 3 and that of Udyotakesari in the Bhaktibhdgavata - mahdkdvya 4 by Kavidiodima Jlvadevacarya, Chakravarti now found no difficulty in supporting the existence of the Kesarl dynasty in the historical chapter in the Gazetteers of the Cuttack 6 and Balasore® Districts. Thus the tradition regarding the rule of the Kesarl dynasty, being supposed to be corroborated by epigraphic and literary evidence, came to be regarded as historical. R. D. Banerji’s History of Orissa , Vol. I, published in 1930, accepts the Mddaldpdnjl tradition of the Kesarl dynasty as partly true. Banerji draws our attention to the kesari-v nding name of the Bhauma-Kara king Unmatta-kesari and those of kings Udyotakesari and Kargakesari and also to Sylvain Levi’s reference to the Chinese mention of an early Orissan ruler with name ending in a word meaning ‘the lion’ 7 . He thought that Udyotakesari did not belong to the Bhauma-Kara family and expressed his doubt whether Karuakesarl should be assigned to the Bhauma-Kara or Somakull dynasty 8 . This uncertain position was solved by the publication of the Balijhari (Narsinghpur) copperplate grant 9 of Udyotakesari in 1931, as it definitely proved that the BrahmeSvara inscription is a Somakull record. In the light of the Balijhari inscription, I re-edited the BrahmeSvara inscription 10 . In 1930 was published the first plate of the Ratnagiri grant, 11 which con- tains the same text as the earlier part of the Balijhari grant and was there- fore supposed to be another record of Udyotakesari. The recent publication of the second and third plates of the Ratnagiri inscription has shown that it is a charter of the Somakull king Kama 12 who was the younger brother of Purandara, the son of Janamejaya and the grandson of Udyotakesari. The genealogy of the Somakull kings is given on the next page. Among these Somakull kings, only the name of Udyotakesari ends in the word kesarl . When none of the names of Udyotakesari’ s predecessors and successors ends in kesarl , it is sufficient proof that the name-ending of that king has no special dynastic significance. It is well known that the SAns&it words kesarl and simha , meaning ‘a lion’, are often used as suffixes to personal names. As regards Chakravarti’s reliance on the mention of Karriakesari, king of Utkala, in the Rdmacarita , we feel that, since the name of Karuadeva of the Ratnagiri copperplate grant does not end in kesarl, he is certainly 1 Published by the Prftohl Samiti in 1940. * J.A.S.B., Vol. VII, pp. 557-62. 6 Mem. A.S.B., Vol. in, p. 36. 4 H, P. Sastri t Report on the Search of Sanskrit Manuscripts , 1901 to 1906, pp, 14-1 6^ 6 Op . cit p. 22. 6 Op. cit., p. 21. 7 Op: cit., p. 150. 2 Ibid., pp. 157-58* • JJB.0M.8., Vol. xvn, 1981, pp. 1-24 ; Vol. XXII, pp. SOOff., Vol. XXXV, pp. 93ff. »* J.AJS.B., Letters, Vol. XIII, 1947, pp. 93-74. U J.B.OJ8J3,, Vol. XVI. 1930, pp. 200-10. » Bp. Ind., Vol. XXXIII, pp. 26Sff. 20 P. ACUARYA [VOL. IV, different from Karuakesarl of the Bamacarita 1 . I tried formerly to prove that Karnakesarl was the immediate successor of Udyotakesarl. But notr I think that the identification of Karnakesarl of the Ramacarita should be deferred until further light is forthcoming. Codaganga, mentioned in the Madaldpdnji, is known from inscriptions to have conquered Utkala before A.D. 1112. The defeated Utkala king 6ivagupta 1. Janamejaya I Mahabhavagupta I (e. A.D. 500) 2. Yayati I MahaSivagupta I Vicitravira (c. A.D. 975) 3. Bhimaratha Mahabhavagupta II (c. A.D. 1000) 4. Dharmaratha MahaSivagupta II Abhimanyu (c. A.D. 1015) 5. Indraratha Mahabhavagupta III (killed by Rajendracola’s army shortly b efore A.D. 1025) 6. Naghusa Mahabhavagupta IV 2 7. Caudihara Yayati II MahaSivagupta II (c. A.D. 1030-55) 8. Udyotakesarl Mahabhavagupta V (c. A.D. 1055-75) 9. Janamejaya II Mahaiivagupta IV (c. A.D. 1075-85) 10. Purandara Mahabhavagupta VI 11. Kar$a MahaSivagupta (c. A.D. 1085-1100) (c. A.D. 1100-11) 1 [It is difficult to agree with this view since there are numerous instances, e.g., of a king named SaAgr&masimha being mentioned as Sangrama, SaAgramadeva, Sangramaraja, etc. There is little doubt that some of the later SomavamS! kings (e.g., Udyotakesafm and Karnakesarin) had names ending in kesarin and that tnis fact was responsible for their being popularly known as belonging to the Kesarl dynasty. It has to be noticed that it was Uddyotakesarin’s father who was the first Somavam£T king of the Puri-Cuttaok region with which only the Mddal&parlji is concerned — D. 0. Sjbcab] 2 [Naghusa (Nahu$a), probably styled Mahabhavagupta III, was the younger brother of Dliarmaratha while Candlhara Yay&ti Mah&6ivagupta III was the son of Abhimanyu and a younger cousin of Naghusa. The adoption of the names Mah&» bhavagupta and Mah&Sivagupta by the kings of this family alternately would suggest that Indraratha, whose name is mentioned in the records of other dynasties, wasjuit another name of Naghusa Mahabhavagupta HI. See The Stn^gte for Empire, ed. Majumdar, pp. 209-10. — D. 0. Siroab] 1962} THE KBSABl DYNASTY Of THE mIdAIApaHjI 21 ms certainly a Somakull, though we are not sore whether he was Kama* deva or his successor. The name of Suvarnakesaif, given in the Mfirfkdd- pdnji, is entirely imaginary. Bandyopadhyaya and Hunter mention Snvamakesarl whereas the printed text of the MSdcUOpSHjf gives the name as ^Qnyakesari. The role of the Kesarl dynasty, according to the MSdaltip&fLjl, covers the long period of over 660 years from A.D. 474 to 1132. But, daring this period, a large number of inscriptions belonging to the Vigraha, M&na, Gauda, Bhauma and Somakull dynasties, which flourished froin the middle of the sixth century A.D., have been discovered. These epigraphie records do not allow any scope for the rise of the Kesarl dynasty in the fifth century A.D. and their uninterrupted rule up to the beginning of the twelfth century A.D.*. Chakravarti’s third argument in favour of the existence of the Kesarl dynasty is the Bhaktibhagavata , composed in A.D. 1610 by Jtvadev&c&rya, the minister and spiritual guide of the Suryavam&i Gajapati king PratS - parudra who ruled from A.D. 1496-97 to 1633-34. This work specifically mentions the Kesarl-kula and Udyotakesari 2 . Thirty-six verses at the close of the Bhaktibhagavata give an aocount of the author’s ancestors who were the spiritual guides of the ruling dynasties of Orissa, namely the Bhojas, Kesarls, Gangas and Suryavam&a. In these verses, Jlvadeva claims that his forefathers were at first the spiritual guides of the Bhojas who were devotees of VirajadevI at J&jpur. Next they became the spiritual guides of the kings of the Kesarl-kula (Kesarl dynasty) that constructed the temple of Bhubaneswar®. Then they also served the Gahga and Suryavamdi kings of Orissa as their preceptors. H. P. Sastri first reported the discovery of a manuscript of the Bhakti- bhdgavata, as already indicated above, and published only an English translation of the stanzas at the end of the work. Some years ago, K. K. Kar published a paper entitled ‘Gajapati Prataprudrahka Guru Kavi- dipdima Jlvadeva ’ in the Oriya monthly journal, Navabh&rata , 4 in which he published the full text of the verses with their Oriya translation. The praiasli verses of Jivadeva are reproduced in the Appendix below. H. P. Sastri’s translation of verses 6, 7, 9, 10, 11 and 13 runs as follows : 6. ‘When the Bhojas were dethroned for their misbehaviour, the Kesarls became supreme in the country ’ e . [ Kesari-kula of the text has been translated as ‘ the Kesarls ’.] 7. ‘One Bhavadeva with great spiritual powers was the spiritual guide of Udyotakesari ’®. [Uddyotakesari-kulasya gurur s» babhuva tegu prasiddha-mahima Bhavadeva-ndmd .] 9. ‘The kings of the Kesarl dynasty having perished by the fire of inflicting injuries to Br&hmanas, some kings belonging to Ganga-vautto, devoted to gods and Br&hmanas, came to the power.’ 10. * The first king of this dynasty was Go^agahga, practised in mantras and great in the favour of &akti. He had for his spiritual guide Gaurfguru, versed in Tantras like Bfhaspati, belonging to the V&tsa-gotra.' 1 [For a detailed examination of this question, see our paper entitled ‘ The MSdati- p&fift and the Pre-8uryavamAl History of Orissa’ published in the Journal of Indian History, Vol, XXXI, December, 1863, pp. 233-46. — D. 0. SracAa] * |rh? °*l >?e88 * on teUddyotokeiori-hdasya . — D. C. Sjbcab]^ Phis appears to be based on a wrong interpretation of one of the stanzas.— D. 0. * Ed. Pandit NUakanthe Das, Vol. VI, pp. 221-26, 8»»-W- _ „ * [This is Sasfti’a translation of only the first half of the stanza.' — D. O. SmOABj 22 P. ACHABYA [VOL. IV, 11. ‘In the Ganga dynasty was bom Languliya 1 Nrsimha whose body had a tail, who was the hero of the world, who was celebrated for the favour he enjoyed of gods, and who destroyed the army of the king of Delhi.’ 13. ‘ In course of time, a king named Nrsimha (another king) rose in the Gahga-vam£a, a ready poet, who built the temple of Konarka, the banner of the steeple of which struck the heaven.’ It is not possible to say as to how Jivadeva came to know the name of the Kesari-kula which he mentions before Udyotakesari and Codaganga of the Ganga dynasty. Jivadeva does not mention the king from whom Codaganga got the kingdom, but only that the kings of the J^esarl dynasty perished by the fire of inflicting injuries to the Brahma^as. After Coda- ganga, he mentions Narasimha I omitting his predecessor Anangabhima who is credited with the construction of the Jagannatha temple in the Madaldpdnji. He does not say that Codaganga built the Jagannatha temple. Although, according to the copperplate grants of Narasimha II, the Kogarka temple was built by his grandfather Narasimha I, Jivadeva states that the said temple was built by Narasimha II. He has attributed the epithet Languliya to Narasimha I in whose body there was a tail, a fact also mentioned in the Madaldpdnji. All this considered together raises a serious doubt about the authenticity of the account of Jivadeva though it has some historical basis. Whatever that may be, it seems that the Bhaktibhagavata-mahakavya is the source of the account of the Kesari dynasty in the Madalapanji . Jivadeva mentions the Kesari dynasty for the first time. There is no corroborative evidence in its support; but his reference to Udyotakesari, Codaganga, Narasimha I and II, NibSanka Bhanu, Gajapati Kapilendra, Gajapati Purusottama and Gajapati Prataparudra are corroborated by inscriptions. Thus the tradition recorded by Jivadeva is trustworthy with the exception of his reference to the Kesari-kula. In our opinion, M. M. Chakra varti’s argument is not valid and the Kesari dynasty should be considered as mythical as suggested by Fleet. As has been stated above, Fleet suggested that the Madaldpdnji was compiled in the sixteenth century A.D. Eama Prasad Chanda also came to the same conclusion and referred the compilation of the work after the Mughal occupation of Orissa 2 . The Madaldpdnji mentions the name of Bhoja and his descendants and then refers to the Yavana (Mughal) rule, Yayatikesari of the Kesari dynasty being assigned to A.D. 474, 146 years after the foreign conquest. After the Kesari family, the Ganga dynasty* is stated to have ruled. We are not concerned with the kings of the legendary period from Yudhisthira, whose names were perhaps borrowed from the Purauas, especi- ally the Bhdgavata Purana of which an Oriya translation was available in the sixteenth century. It is certain that no textbook on history was available to the compiler of the Madaldpdnji. What was then the source from which he derived material for the history of the Kesari dynasty, the founder of which is credited with the re-establishment of the worship of Jagannatha ? The work is primarily^ an account of Jagannatha and his worshippers. In the latter part of the sixteenth century, some traditions may have been current about the Jagannatha temple which was built by Codaganga ; but the Mddalapdnji gives the credit of building the temple to Anangabhima. The 1 [It is not found in the text of the verse. — D. C. Sibcab] * [Chanda’s paper on the subject was published in. the Journal qf the Bihar and Oriam Research Society, Vol. XIII, 1027, pp, 10-27.— D. C. Sn&OAB) 1962] THU KESAEI DYNASTY OF THE MibAlZPZ&jJ 23 account of the Koo&rka temple as given in the work, however, finds corro- boration. But the story of 1$ generations, namely six successive kings called Deva, six Narsiihhas and six Bh&nus, is not corroborated by the genealogy found in the grants of the family. During the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, a large number of local Mah&tmyas in Sanskrit (e.g., Kapilasamhitd, Virajamdhdtmya , Ekdmra- eandritca, Ekdmra Parana and Svarnddrimahodaya) were written in Orissa. It is strange that, although these works deal with the temples ascribed in the Mddaldpanjl to the Kesari dynasty, 1 they do not at all refer to the Kesari dynasty. These works prove the late origin of the tradition regard- ing the Kesari dynasty. I have therefore come to the conclusion that the Bhaktibhagavata is the source of the Mddaldpanjl . The compiler has bor- rowed the list of Puranic kings from the Bhdgavata Parana and that of the kings of the historical period from the BhaUibhagavata which mentions the Bhojas followed by the Kesaris and, in order to fill up the gap in the chronology, he brought in names either from the Puranas or local tradition 2 . Thus it is clear that the tradition of the Kesari dynasty is not earlier than the sixteenth century A.D., when Jivadeva wrote, and found its place with much elaboration in the Mddaldpanjl towards the end of that century. One interesting fact needs mention about the increase in the number of the kings in the Mddaldpanjl . In 1822 or 1825, Stirling gave a list of 36 kings. In 1872, Hunter quoted a list of 63 kings with exact dates of their periods of rule 8 . In 1940, the Pr&chl Samiti of Cuttack published the text of the Mddaldpanjl which contains a list of 65 kings. In conclusion, I have no hesitation to say that the whole traditional account of the Kesari dynasty as recorded in the Mddaldpanjl lacks corro- boration from contemporary records and hence it is entirely unauthentic. I agree now with Fleet that the whole account should be expunged bodily from the pages of history. Appendix [Navabhdrata (Oriya), Vol. VI, Nos. 5 and 6, pp. 221-25, 293-96; Utkal University Souvenir , 1948, pp. 108ff.] ‘<4 «W1 : I ^T: H tffacT: 'TfaaTT II ^ arfanjm: ^#in- Pw ft <*i mw wrr: i * [See above, p. 21, note 8. — D. 0. Sxbcab] 2 [It is diffioult to accept the suggestion. See our views elsewhere in this volume. — *D. 0. SraoABl 2 Ori*m» Vol. I, p. 237. Jagabandhu Sinha published a book entitled Prd&tna Utkafa in which it is stated that Hunter's list omitted the names of many kings of the Kesari dynasty, 24 r. ACHABVA [VOfc. W, ^RTT fawmyw rffi: 1 %IVl^MIW|<4: srfaRTT fl^NfT: II ? ij^spf « ^pnrwwfw: *r for- t rrep M^i : tfwnnrcr: i *r: q^rryr»Rf -hhi^ *jc*t fafarer ^t 5 ^TTf^rnr n v *IKWI i£TW 8 d , JWI il l 1 K r«4^ r : wnrmnftqf^f^TT i ^rwiferftnFtf »rc*: Tfr^T qgfoqm « re r >jfa n ^ *rt% fr^ftHqifed < i vs i *fl&i« « > ^ T f Tg f« r ?R^r«FR I #Tf%T farsRTT WTcTT ^mrJTf^Rc^Tftfr^ II % 'd^dfolPtfriW TOff srlwrffRT WhrTFTT I i fTf^PR 5RT: *t g t nr fire : II vs rF T m H^fd *Ph5fa: I q^sTTfq^mr^ftf 4 ^f stj dfe^sid+KH n ^IPifW^dl fa srfa *lfa i ^ PjM I fdMjtt fanr ^fmr: n ^ ^rPtd^RTO> ijfa fPd^< T ddK fawrerffaft vfinrr%fw$ : i ^^^HddffafajHIW: II \\ ‘[sr^srr:. — d. c. snout ] »[ ijt^wpr:. — D. C. SiaoAa ] »[ ffa°. — D. c. Snout } * [ Better fffaTtf 0 .— -D. O. Snout ] 1082} THE KBSABl DTtUBUT OF THB MADAlAPAfi/7 26 wwpkw ifr gft a ^ fa : qraiwmww tw: i STOT fr *T 5 f 55 >TTT fSmfar VTOt «^^f^n»nw^nr Rinsi : n ^ wrat 'jf^rrfa: vfnfPjd’T: i +>n+^pP^: f^WRT- ijfasf*PT 4«Hl: II ?« ft: n ?y «ft*rfa 1 * * 4 gTtW|^f^FT TT5ft q m Mrunr fafq^rfq ^trrtOt i 3?«qnPT ^r«w+<^Pwftirti' *r qW: ^FfrwnTT s^tt 1 1 ^ JWtrT^ i *rdforar*[fa?ft 8 %§: ii d^sfwp*rfa£: wruU^ ^ft T?? ^iV< i *i« T i tot fTOTrofaro tt faujjqgr wtq?r«rEm: fwt faw n ^ ^'^qrr^q^|q«ql tts: i Id ddtfd »T $frflflWdft II 1 [ «ft*Tf^ST°. — D. 0. Siboab ] * [ dWc*M :. — D. C. Siboab ] »[ *R*T. — D. C. Siboab ] 4 [ — D. 0. Siboab ] 1962] THE KESABl DYNASTY OF THE UiDAlifSSfl 27 qrof^: gf^nrt wsfar \\^\ : II 3° PT*T I fcnW sfrERtff^T 3T^SPT WT^(- I nra^r w% *np^r n ^ ^rnfr ^fttr^r 3Tc^RTtsfr ffeSFT sqiwr ^nftre 5r«r*f vrRnr n ^ qqr ffa: pfafwr tffaftar Tvmxr. ?f>% n *rf% rrarfa sh: ^frnr fcrcfa frwptft finrf# n ?v 8npfr jprtssj ^rfTf^^M^- #5yM*fTOTfsROT7T^«T: I fOTffir < m X X This is a list of the Armenian characters of the fifth century. The table shows which are the Armenian letters that have been adopted from the Greek alphabet. teaching the newly invented alphabet, as also translating the Bible and other religious books into Armenian. 36 ASSADOUR GUZELIAN [VOL. XV, All these activities took place in Eastern Armenia, where at the time there existed comparatively favourable conditions because of the internal disturbances of the Sassanian Empire. Mesrop’s next effort was to establish Armenian schools in Western Armenia. The Roman authorities refused to let him do so at first. It took Mashtots quite a time to achieve his aim as he was obliged to go all the way to Constantinople to get the Emperor’s permission. Koriun mentions that Mesrop also invented alphabets for both the Georgians and Aghvans or Caucasian Albanians and translated the Bible into their languages. # The great illuminator of Armenia and neighbouring countries passed away at a ripe old age in the year 440 and was buried at Oshakan, where his grave remains up to this date. (B) The Question of the Existence of Armenian Literature prior to the Fifth Century A.D. Of the many problems connected with the invention of the Armenian alphabet, I shall only dwell upon the above-mentioned. Did there exist any form of Armenian literature before the fifth century ? This question has dwelt in the minds of many scholars, who are basically divided into two groups defending opposite views. Amongst those who refuse to accept the existence of any form of Armenian literature prior to Mesrop are Academicians Hrachia Adjarian, Stephan Malkhassiants, Hacob Manandian, Manook Abeghian and others, all of them renowned scholars. Their view is a simple one. They insist that there is not enough material evidence in support of a positive answer to the question. Suppositions, no matter how truthful they may sound, cannot be considered as proofs. If really there existed an Armenian literature, at least a few fragments would have survived. ‘Therefore’, concludes H. Adjarian, ‘ to defend the view that there was an Armenian literature before the fifth century, which was supposed to have been destroyed by (Gregory) the Illuminator, is a meaningless tale.’ The second group, which consists of equally great scholars, such as Academicians N. Marr, J. Orbeli, Professors M. Emin, Ashot Abrahamian and others, though differing in their approach to solve the question, all agree upon the existence of Armenian literature prior to Mesrop. Some of their important viewpoints, which in my opinion deserve every consideration, are in an outlined form as follows : — 1. The language of a newly-born literature is poor in its expression and therefore unable to interpret the thoughts and ideas expressed in a developed and flourishing literature with a long tradition. The case was not the same with the Armenian language of the fifth century, which, as every student of Armenology will agree, was a perfect one, so much so that the Armenian version of the Bible has been called by non- Armenian scholars ‘the Queen of Versions’. How could a new-born literary language interpret to perfection the Old Testament, which is a kind of encyclopaedia containing history, poetry, philosophy, religious canon, theology, etc. ? 2. According to Agathangelos, the Armenian historian who wrote the history of the conversion of Armenians into Christianity, pre-Christian Armenians had many deities. These had their corresponding temples in various parts of the country, which were destroyed in the year 301 by the order of King Trdat or Tiridates III who with an edict declared Christianity as the State religion of Armenia. 1962] SOMB NOTBS ON ANCIENT ARMENIA 37 Since, during that period, temples in neighbouring countries were centres of literature and culture, it stands to reason that Armenia could not have been an exception , Therefore, it would not be wrong to assume that there existed at least a temple-literature in pre-Christian Armenia « 3. Amongst the pre-Christian Armenian deities there was one called Tir, the god of Art and Literature, and a sort of scribe or secretary to Arajnazd, the Chief God. In ancient times, deities were invented to present various aspects of life. If art and literature were non-existent in Armenia, then why would Armenians introduce the god Tir ? Academician M. Abeghian argues this point by stating that Tir did not originate from Armenia but was brought over from Iran. Though this view is a disputable one, nevertheless Armenians must have had need of the same to have introduced him in Armenia. 4. Movses Khorenatsi, the Armenian historian of the fifth century A.D., refers in his work to a Syrian scholar, Bardazan, who in the second century A.D. has come to the fortress of Ani, the seat of Armenian Kings in those years, and translated from the archives of the temples an historical book into Syriac which later was also translated into Greek. At the time, the two dominating languages in Armenia were Greek and Syriac, and if the said book was not written in either of these languages then most probably it was written in Armenian. 5. Hippolytus, a Greek author of the third century A.D., in his ‘ Chronicle ’ refers to the nations who possess literature, and amongst others he mentions the Armenians as well. 1 All these lead us to conclude that there existed an Armenian literature prior to the fifth century A.D. (C) The Armenian Pictographic Writing and the Pictograms of the Indus Valley If there existed an Armenian pre-Christian literature, what characters were used in writing down that literature ? Here, too, scholars’ views vary. Of the different opinions expressed on the subject, I shall only refer to one, which intends to solve the question through Armenian pictograms. A fairly large number of Armenian pictograms are found in various Armenian manuscripts kept at the State Library in Erevan and elsewhere. Professor M. Emin was the first scholar who expressed the view that there existed Armenian pictographic literature in pre-Christian Armenia. His paper on this subject was first published in Russian in the year 1868. Later, the same was translated into French and appeared in 1865 in ‘Revue d’Orient*. Professor H. Adjarian, after many years of study, opposed M. Emin's view and stated that Armenian pictograms could not have been invented earlier than the fourteenth century A.D. H # Adjarian’s view dominated in Armenology for a long time. In recent years, Professor Ashot Abrahamian, the eminent Soviet-Armenian scholar, once again took up the said question. He discovered at the State Library in Erevan many new manuscripts containing Armenian picto- grams; some of these were up to then unknown to Armenological circles. A. Abrahamian’s research revealed that a good many of these pictograms 1 ‘ The History of Armenian Letters and the Art of Writing*— -A. G. Abr ahamian , Erevan, 1050. A89ADOUR QVZELIAtf 38 [VOL. IV, were invented after the fifth century A.D. but some two hundred of them came from remote antiquity. To establish this fact, Professor A. Abrahamian has compared the said Armenian piotograms with the Egyptian and Hittite ones. The result of his findings was rather disappointing. He then concentrated his attention on the Indian pictograms discovered in the Indus Valley. ‘When I com- pared Armenian pictograms with those found in India at Mohenjo-Daro, the similarity was astounding. Every pictogram discovered there had its double amongst the Armenian ones. Their resemblance was literal. There is no doubt that such a coincidence is impossible/ 1 There is no doubt that this is a question of great importance, which needs detailed study. If scholars succeed in establishing the fact that Armenian pictograms have originated from the Indian ones, then two very important problems will be solved : 1. It will be proved that the Armenians had a pictographic literature long before the fifth century A.D. 2. Through the help of the Armenian pictograms, the meanings of which are preserved, scholars will be able to decipher those discovered at the Indus Valley. Historical evidences indicate that these pictograms were brought into Armenia from India, and did not originally belong to the Armenians or any other nation in Asia Minor. I am sure it will interest Indian scholars to know as to how and when were the Indian pictograms brought into Armenia. (D) India and Armenia in Ancient Times A close tie has existed between India and Armenia perhaps even before the Aryans established themselves in Armenia during the seventh century B.C. The first written reference to Indo-Armenian relationship is found in the ancient Greek writer Xenophon’s ‘ Cyropaedia’ (fifth century B.C.). According to that information, Armenians often travelled to India and entered military service there. Professor G. Bongard-Levin of the U.S.S.R. Academy of Sciences writes: ‘(Armenia) maintained close relations not only with neighbouring Parthia and tho Roman Empire, but also with India and China. In order to promote relations with these countries, Armenian kings founded new cities on the trade routes passing through Armenia and leading from Parthia and Bactria to India and China.’ 2 Valuable information on Indo-Armenian relations is preserved in the works of ancient Armenian historians Zenob Glak, 3 Agathangelos, Anania Shirakatsi and Hetoom the Historian, fourth, fifth, seventh and twelfth centuries A.D. respectively. As far as my subject is concerned, the most valuable of the above- mentioned authors is Zenob Glak who refers in detail to an Indian settle- ment in Armenia at the middle of the second century B.C. Some Armeno- logists do not agree upon this date and suggest the middle of the first century A.D. as the correct period of the beginning of an Indian colony in Armenia. 1 ‘Seven Lectures’ — A. G. Abrahamian, 1956, Lebanon. ’ 2 * Indians in Ancient Armenia ’ — Article by Professor G. Bongard-Levin. 2 A group of Armenian philologists have expressed the view that Zenob *8 ‘The History of Taron * is written by Ohan Mamikonian of the seventh century A.D. Others insist that Zenob was the author of the said book, which was written in Syriac during the fourth century and later was translated into Armenian. 1962] SOME NOTES ON ANCIENT ARMENIA However, the important fact is that there existed an settlement in Armenia at least three centuries earlier than the triumph of Christianity in the country. Here is a r£sum6 of the information preserved in 'The History of Taron ' l concerning the Indian settlement in Armenia : Gissaneh and Demeter, two Indian princes, conspired against Dinakspall, their king. The plot being unsuccessful, they fled to Armenia, where they were welcomed by King Volarsaces who allotted them the Province of Taron. Here they built themselves a city and named it Veeshap, which means ‘dragon* in Armenian. Mr. M. J. Seth assumed from this that Gissaneh and Demeter belonged to Takshaka House. They then went to the city of Ashtishat, noted for its temples of national deities, and there they set up the gods that were worshipped by them in India. After some fifteen years, for reasons unknown to Zenob, they were put to death by the King, who divided the lands between their three sons. Prom Zenob’s information it appears that Gissaneh and Demeter came to Armenia with their families and followers, as he states that during a short space of time the Indians built twenty towns — all of them having their temples. Some of the towns mentioned by Zenob retained their names till the middle of the last century. The Indian community in Armenia was a fairly large one consisting of over 15,000 members. After Christianity was declared a State religion of Armenia, the Indians fought bravely against the King’s regular army in order to defend the faith of their forefathers. 2 Until lately, one of the villages in Taron was called Hendkastan. The names Hendubek, Hendu, Hendukhannum were often used by Armenians of Taron. Historical events narrated by Zenob Glak solve the question as to how the Indian pictograms were brought into Armenia. The fact cannot be disputed that Indians, whilst fleeing to Armenia, took with them not only their movable wealth, but also their deities and cultural heritage, which greatly influenced the Armenians who adopted the writing system of the new-comers. The history of Indo- Armenian ancient cultural and trade relationship has not yet been studied in detail. I am certain that in the near future many Indo- Armenian historical and cultural problems — mainly that of the Lfdus Valley pictograms — will be solved through the combined efforts of Indian and Armenian scholars. 1 Taron is a large province in historical Armenia. ‘The History of Taron* has been translated into French and published twice — (a) by E. Prudhommo — ‘Histoire de Taron, par Zenob de GIag\ Paris, 1864 ; ( b ) by V. Langlois — ‘Zenob de Glag, Histoire de Darori*, Paris, 1867. 2 For further details see : — (a) ‘Armenians in India*, by Mr. M. J. Seth, Calcutta, 1937. (b) ‘Histoire de Daron’, translated by V. Langlois, Paris, 1867. (c) ‘Indians in Ancient Armenia*, by G. Bongard-Levin. Journal of the Asiatic Society, Vd. IV , No. 2 , 1962 . MORE SCULPTURES OF SlVA-LE&GIN By R. Sengupta In an article published in the pages of one of the previous issues of this Journal 1 the writer had reported two sculptures of &iva-Lingin from Ellora of the same nature as was found at Aihole. He has since been able to locate another piece of Uma-MaheSvara, the latter as Lingin, similar to the one on the gopuram. This one is to be found immediately above the principal SulcamLsd of the sabhamandapa of the Kailasa temple. It was thought that since Badami, 1 2 Aihole 3 and Ellora have produced these sculptures, it is quite likely that the other Chalukya temples at Pattadakal (District Bijapur, Mysore) may also bear such images. Accordingly, when the writer of this article visited last the temples at Pattadakal (eighth century A.D.), they were carefully searched by him for sculptures of j§iva-Lingin, and his search was successful, for as many as nine such of both the varieties, viz. 6iva alone and in the company of Uma, were found. In two instances, however, unlike the usual representations, 6iva-Lingin has been shown as playing on vtnd ( Vmddhara) t and as engaged in a game of dice with his consort. The writer also took care to examine the sculptures on the Pallava temples at Kanchipuram, and he was able to discover two sculptures of this type in the MukteSvara temple (c. ninth century A.D.). The sculptures at Pattadakal are distributed over the three temples of Virupaksa, Mallikarjuna and SangameSvara. Of them the last-named has only one as Vinddhara (PI. IA) on the outer face of the south wall in /a, miniature devakostha set in a panjara at the roof level. In fact, out of the nine specimens six are found in that position on one of the walls, except- ing on the west side, set in panjaras. Sitting sideways to the left in lalitdsana , this image holds the vlna with the proper hands, back right hand touching the liriga supported on the right shoulder and the back left hand turned to left. The Mallikarjuna temple has two sculptures. The one on the north face of the wall shows the god sitting in padmdsana with the lihga on the left shoulder held by the left hand, his other left hand resting on the left knee ; the back right hand holds a ndga , while the proper right hand is in the kataka pose. The other image (PI. II) marks a refreshing departure from the usual mode, for it depicts the Umdsahita-akga-kridd 4 aspect. This 1 R. Sengupta : * Two Sculptures of $iva as LiAgin from the Kail&sa Temple at Ellora’, J.A.S., Vol. I, No. 1, 1959, pp. 41-45. » P. Thomas : ‘ Kama Kalpa PI. XCI, No. 206. The linga has unwittingly been left out but the posture of the back left hand of Siva is suggestive enough of its being on the left shoulder. a S.l/ Chakravarti — P.W. Museum : * A Guide to the Antiquities of the Historic Period \ PI. Xa. 4 For such representations usually described by some simply as Um&-Mahe4vara or ‘P&rvati as M&ninl* the writer has suggested the term U mdsahita-akfa’kriddmurti tr^ indicate the particular aspect. See R. Sengupta : 4 A Plea for Um&8ahita-akfa-krt$&- murti in the Journal of the Ganganatha Jha Research Institute , Vol. XVI, pts. 1*2, pp. 155-58. ( 41 ) 42 E. SENGUPTA [VOL. IV, theme gained considerable popularity to be sculptured one panel each at Aihole, Elephanta and Jogesvari, and at Ellora it has been represented as many as six times. The Mallikarjuna panel, however, unlike the Ele- phanta and Ellora panels, is depicted on one plane, in the same way as the panel on the outer face of the back wall of a small shrine in the Jyotirlinga group of temples at Aihole is shown. In it while 6iva and Parvati are shown engaged in a game of dice in the left half, the Oanas are seen in the other half amusing themselves by teasing the placid Nandi as usual. Sitting on a cushion in utkufikdsana , Siva, with the linga on the right shoulder held with the back right hand, is evidently arguing with Uma oljbr the game. His proper right hand is raised in argument and the back left hand carries an indistinct object. The force of diva’s argument does not appear to have affected Parvati in the least. As sitting opposite to her consort, half-turned with the right hand raised showing the palm towards Siva and the left resting on the left knee, she seems peremptorily to dismiss his contentions. The sculptor has indeed been successful in giving a dramatic touch to the whole theme. The temple of Virupaksa, constructed by the queen of Vikramaditya II, bears the remaining six sculptures, three being on the outer face of the walls, one on the east and one on the north walls and one inside above the lintel of the doorway of the shrine. In the sculpture on the east wall to the left, above the Lingodbhavamurti , two-armed Siva, with the linga on the right shoulder, holds a snake in the right hand embracing Parvati seated on his lap with the left. It is only in this sculpture that Siva does not hold the linga. Another two-armed sculpture of Siva is to be found on the south side but here the linga is held by the left hand while he leans on the right hand placed on the ground. The other two sculptures of Siva also on the south wall are above the sculptured panels of Uma-Mahe6vara and Sita-haraua by Havana respectively. Siva, in the sculpture above the latter relief, sits in lalitdsana and leaning comfortably on a pillow holds the linga on the left shoulder with the proper left hand, as in the Mallikarjuna temple relief. The sculpture of Siva-Parvati (Pi. IB), in utkutikasana on the north wall, is found at a lower level just above the image of Visnu-Astabhu- jasvaml, on a pilaster under a makaratorana. Siva with the linga on the right shoulder held with the back right hand leans on the proper right hand placed on the right knee while with the proper left hand he embraces Parvati. The last image (PI. IIIA) to be noticed in this series is on the lintel of the entrance to the shrine, set in the iukanasi of the iala flanked by two flying males. Sitting in utkufikdsana he carries the linga on the right shoulder held by the back right hand and a snake in the back left hand resting on the left knee. In the proper right hand kept on the right leg is perhaps a mdtvlunga while the proper left hand is in the kafaka pose. He is adorned with the usual ornaments like karnakundalas , hdra, upavita , udara-vandha , ahgadas, valayas , etc. It may be noted here that depiction of this image at such a conspicuous and important place was duly taken note of by the architect of the RS^trakflta king Krisuaraja I, who had put instead Uma-Mahedvara right on the gopuram of the great Kailasa temple at Ellora, in the iukanasi of the iala facing the temple. The sculptures in the MukteSvara temple at Kanchipuram are on the side walls of the sabJidmarufapa , The panel on the left wall depicts a scene known as Rdvandniigrahamurti where Siva carrying the linga is shown as sitting on the Kail&sa with Parvati, and R&vana below trying to lift the mountain. The sculptures seem to be lifeless and suffer badly in comparison to those well-known ones at Ellora. In the process of covering these reliefs with coats of plaster in the time of the N&yakas, the linga on 1962] MOBB SCULP TUBBS OF £lVA>LINGIN 43 the right shoulder of 6iva came to be shown with a human head with turban (PI. IIIB). In this image, too, Siva does not hold the linga as seen in one of the sculptures on the Virupaksa temple at Pattadakal noted above. Pacing this panel on the corresponding wall to right is another panel showing apparently the denouement of the theme. The humiliated Ravapa here shorn of his superhuman attributes appears as a humble devotee, with one head and two arms, in the act of praising the god. Here also the late plaster- coating of the linga on the left shoulder of 6iva, held by the extra left hand, shows a human head with the Saiva caste mark (PI. IVA). In another article on this topic published in a previous issue of this Journal , the writer had mentioned the GudimalJam-Linga and the Mathura stone sculpture, the latter first noticed by Coomaraswamy. 1 * The Mathura sculpture, ‘formerly in possession of M. Leonce Rosenberg’, is useful for the study of evolution of the ^iva-Lingin image and does not appear to have been described in a proper manner. Its correct description which will throw light on the present topic is this : Standing in sama - bhanga against a towering linga , 6iva with four arms shows the proper right hand in abhaya , has the proper left hand in katydvalambita and with the back hands raised above the head holds the jatd 2 wound twice around the linga at the level of its neck. The entwining jatd evidently forms part of the kaparda type of jafa-makuta worn by him (one of his epithets is Kapardin). As the characteristic of the early images, this one is also sparsely ornamented; the feet are missing. Stylistically the sculpture may be attributed to the Kusana period. The device of Siva’s carrying the linga by tying it with the jatd is worthy of note for its likely association with the act of the BharaSivas carrying the linga as a load mentioned as ‘ amdabhdra sannivesita diva lingodvahana 9 in the subsequent Vakataka epigraphs. The sculpture noticed above is not the only one from Mathura depict- ing the linga being carried. For, while 6iva in the earlier representations carries the linga by tying it with the jatd, Parvati in a later representation (No. 882, PI. VA) 3 carries it with the extra pair of hands over the head. Besides the Haveri sculpture of MahalaksmI, 4 * the famous Kolhapur image of the goddess 6 also carries the linga on the head. In another image (No. 239, PI. VB) of the eight-armed Devi in the same museum, the object the two flying celestials carry over her head is not the linga as described by Prof. Agrawala 6 but a crown as is seen in the Oaj endramok§a-murti of Visnu on the Gupta temple at Deogarh. 7 A Buddhist sculpture may, however, be cited more appropriately, having a comparable significance wherein a Buddha is being carried over the head of a standing Buddha (PI. VIA) in cave LXVII at Kanheri. While in the Mathura sculptures both Siva and Parvati are depicted as carrying the linga independently, they do so jointly at Ellora in the sculptures on the Kailasa temple, one of which 1 A. K. Coomaraswamy : History of Indian and Indonesian Art , p. 67, PI. XVIII, fig. 68. * J. N. Banerjea also observes that the extra hands are raised and placed on his jafds, p. 46b, Development of Hindu Iconography (1966). 3 V. S. Agrawala: Op. cit. t p. 63. 4 R. Sengupta: *Surya, Visnu and Mah&lak^ml from Haveri* in Jr. of Oriental Res., Vol. XXVIIT, pts. I-IV, pp. 21-28. ^ 6 G. H. Khare : Murtivijfidn (in Marathi), p. 176. 4 V. S. Agrawala : Op. p. 62. 7 M. S. Vats: The Gupta Temple of Deogarh (M.A. 8,1. No. 70), PL Xa. 44 R. SENGUPTA [vol. nr, has already been illustrated. Another sculpture of the same type (PI. VIB) is to be found on the adhi§(hana of the prakdra to the north. The treatment of this sculpture is better. In it Siva carries the linga on a pedestal with the left hand, while Parvati embraces it with her right hand, as 6iva does when he carries it on his shoulder. The representation of Siva as the Lirigin has a deeper significance. The nature of 6iva and his emblem, the linga , has been sought to be explained variously by the Saivites, as the Upanisads did to define the nature of the Absolute. One section who prefers to worship the symbol ^ould equate it with Skambha of the Vedas or the 4 Primordial Substance’, w ete hy — api gandh paUca Haihay -drthe pardkraman || a HarivamSa, I, 14, 5ff.; cf. Vdyu Purdna , 88, 129ff. ; S'iva Purdna } VI, 61, 3 Iff. 3 Harivarh&a , I, 14, 8ff. ; cf. Vdyu Purdna , 88, 133ff. ; S'iva Purdna, VI, 61, 34ff, 4 Harivarh&a, I, 14, 12ff. (cf. Vdyu Purdna, 88, 136ff.; S'iva Purdna, VI, 61, 38ff.) : tatah S'akdn = aa-Yavanan = Kdmbojdn = Pdraddrhs = tada | Pahlavdm& = c — aiva nih&esan = kartum vyavasitae = tadd || te vadhyamdnd virena Sagarena mahdtmand <| Va8t8fham&aranarh gatvd pranipetur = manisinam || *** Sagararh vdraydmdsa tesdrh dattv = dbhayarh tadd |j 6 Harivarh&a, I, 14, 15ff. (cf. Vdyu Purdna, 88, 139ff.; S'iva Purdna, VI, 61, 40ff.): Sagarah svdrh pratijrldrh ca guror — vakyarh ni&amya ca | dharmarh jaghdna tesdrh vai ves-anyatvarh cakara ha || ardharh S'akdndrh &iraso muntfarh kftvd vyaaarjayat | Yavandndm &ira]i earvarh Pahlavdndrh tath = aiva ca |J Pdradd mukta-ke&d& = ca Pahlavah &ma&rudhdrinah | ' nih -avddhydya-vasapkdrdh kftds — tena mahdtmand || • Harivarh&a, I, 14, 18ff. (cf. Vdyu Purdna , 88, 142-43) : Stokd Yavandh Kdmbojah Pdradd& — ca vi&dmpate | Kaulisarpdh ia-Mahiqd Ddrdydi *= Coldh sa-Keraldh || sarve te Kaatriyds = tdta dharmas = tesdrh nirdkftah | ( Vasi8pha-vacandd = rdjan as Sagarena mahdtmand j| 2B 1962] sagara’s adversaries 51 historical basis. But it is not easy to accept B&hu and Sagara as historical personages. Moreover, even if we believe in the historicity of the said [k§vaku kings and of their struggle with the Haihayas and T&Iajahghas, [he attempt to bring in the Greeks and Scythians has to be regarded as a clear case of anachronism. Known facts of history indicate beyond doubt that the Greeks and Scythians had nothing to do with India in the hoary antiquity, to which mythology ascribes Bahu and Sagara. The Puranic tradition regards Sagara as twenty-four generations in ascent from DaSara- tha, father of Rama of the Ramdyana fame. 1 It may be that the original tradition referred to the subjugation of the Haihayas and Talajanghas, as in the Mahabharata, and that the story of their allies was later added to it, Among these allies, five foreign peoples are first spoken of and later the non- Aryan Khasas of India and still later some other similar non- Aryan tribes are added to the list. There is a reason why the Haihayas and Talajanghas have been* so intimate in the story with the foreign and non- Aryan peoples. According to a well-known tradition, king Yayati of the lunar race cursed his four elder sons, viz. Yadu, Turvasu, Druhyu and Anu, and gave his throne to his youngest son, Puru. As a result of the curse, the descendants of the four brothers came to be the Yadavas, Yavanas, Bhojas and Mlecchas respec- tively. 2 Of these, the Bhojas were often regarded as a branch of the Yadava people. 3 Originally the Yadavas must have been looked down upon appa- rently because of their non- Aryan associations. Later, however, the Yadu- varii^a came to be regarded as aristocratic like the solar and lunar races. This was no doubt due to the Yadava hero, Vasudeva Krsna, who was deified and was soon identified with the Vedic god Visnu. 4 The Haihayas and Talajanghas were subclans of the Yadavas. But there are a few other interesting aspects of the story, one of which is the ascription of the peculiarities of the &akas and other peoples to their subjugation by Sagara. Indeed, the half-shaven head of the 6akas, the fully-shaven head of the Yavanas and Kambojas, the long hanging hair of the Paradas and the long beard of the Pahlavas were the respective traits of the peoples. In Sanskrit literature, there are some other instances of the tribal or national characteristics of a people being ascribed to their dis- comfiture at the hands of an enemy. 6 While describing the victories of the Kashmirian king Lalitaditya Muktaplda (c. A.D. 724-60), Kalhana’s Rajatarangini (IV, 178ff.), composed \about A.D. 1150, says, ‘ This mighty [king] made the [conquered] rulers, in order to indicate their defeat, adopt various characteristic marks which they [and their people] wear humbly even at the present day. Clearly it is by his command, to display the mark of their bondage, that the Turuskas carry their arms at their back r and shave half their head. In the kaujnna (waist-cloth) of the Dak^atyas, he made the tail sweeping the ground, to 1 See, e.g., Vdyu Purdna, 88; Vifnu Purdna , IV, 4. 8 Mahdbhdrata, I, 85, 34; Matsya Purdna, 34, 30 : Yados = tu Yddavd jdt&s = Turvasor = Y avandh smrtah j Druhyoh sutds = tu vai Bhojd Anos = tu Mleccha-ydtayah |j 8 Cf. Sircayk Studies in the Geography of Ancient and Medieval India, p. 35, note 4. * 4 See The Age of Imperial Unity , ed. Majumdar, pp. 432-33, 435. 5 Another interesting literary motif in the story is the birth of a great hero in the abode of a JBr&hmana after his father*® death. There is a similar story in the epigraphio record£i*nhe Eastern C&Jukyas. King Vijayaditya died in a struggle with king Trilo- cam^SaUava and hfo widowed queen gave birth to Vi$puvardhana, the. progenitor of the d&HUftya royal house, at the place of the ascetic V i^pubhatta-somay & jin at the agrahdra of Mu Vanapphara > Bandphar ; and the final form is still retained as the mmfr&Ta Rajput elan in Bihar — the Ban&phar Rajputs. t Scythians remained in India for a considerable period, as a ruling people, minted coins (they were themselves mentioned in Darius’ inscrip- tions) and left a lasting impression on Indian culture, history and religion ( 55 ) 56 STTKtJMABI BJIATTACHARJI [VOL. IV, 1962] in various ways; although evidently the principal association was their cart-dwelling character. Indian Gypsies settled in Europe are still in the habit of living in wagons (‘caravans’ as they are called in England). They probably carried the tradition from North-Western India where Scythian influence was strong. (2) &emu8i : The AmarakoSa commentary on the word Aemufi (meaning buddhi , intelligence or understanding) is Aete Aermohastam rnusndt Iti Aemufi. The Mahabh&rata , the HarivamAa , the Matsya°> Vi$nu°, and £ther Puranas , on the other hand, give us an episode of Vivasvat (the Sun-god) marrying Samjnd (consciousness), the daughter of Tvastr. feemum and Samjnd are almost synonymous, as far as their meanings are concerned. Now in Babylonia the Sun-god was called Shamash or Shemsha. The word Shemsha would easily yield a feminine form &emu§ f, and Puranic mythology would fill it out with the concept of ‘Intelligence’, because, according to this mythological story, the Sun married Samjnd ; so the new word, feminine from Shemsha , would mean intelligence or consciousness. (3) A few other likely borrowings from Semitic: Besides &emusi, we have among the names of the seven Krttikas or the constellation of the Pleiades (as given in the Taittiriya Samhitd) a word dula which evidently comes from a Semitic source (compare Hebrew dili, meaning ‘a pot for pouring water’, also Arab data ‘to pour’). It is also to be noted that the Krttik&s have come to mean ‘ water-pourers’. Kenipa is the name of a r$i in RV x.44.4. Kenipata means ‘a rudder’ or ‘a helm’. The word keni- pata has a variant form, kelipata , meaning ‘an oar', which is also preserved in new Indo- Aryan: cf. Hindi kenoal, Middlo Bengali keroal , ker’al . The words are apparently associated with Hebrew Kanpa which means ‘a steersman Mana means ‘ measure ’ both in Hebrew (mandh) and Sanskrit. 1 All this goes to show that some elements of Babylonian life, institutions and thought had percolated into India through channels of trade, as Sir Mortimer Wheeler shows clearly in his latest book on the subject, Early India and Pakistan (Bombay, 1959). This trade connection was kept up from the Sargonid dynasty of Akkad (c. 2350 B.C.) through the third dynasty of Ur (c. 2100 B.C.) until its decline under the Larsa dynasty. It is no wonder therefore that from the Indus civilization down to the Vedic and still later phases, India should present words which were either taken over from or influenced by Babylonian vocables. 1 Arische Urzeit : by Dr. Oottliob Hermann Brunnhofer, Berne (Verlog von A. Franeke, 1910). J ournal of the Astatic Society . Vol. IV, No. 2 , 1962. HOKTAS IN MEWAR By Adris Banerji While visiting Pathar, Uparmal and the elevated granite valley of Hadavati the question of the survival of Hupas, in the hill tracts of Mewar, attracted my notice. Hupas, a people of mixed mongoloid origin, earned the credit of striking death-blows at three great empires of the anoient world— the Roman empire in the West, Sassanian empire in the Middle East and Gupta empire in India, all due to quarrels over grazing grounds in the steppe countries. The Cimmerians and the Scythians were their fore- runners. They have a long history in Central Asia, which is not very well known. 1 We know that, after centuries of rule by the Bactrian Greeks (Yavanas), Parthians (Pahlavas), Sakas (Scythians) and lastly by Kushapas, the Guptas of Magadha established an empire over portions of India, and ushered in an age of renaissance, reorganization and integration. In India, there are evidences to believe that coming through Khyber Pass, the Hupas devastated Kabul valley, Swat, Buner, N.W.F. Province and the Punjab and penetrated up to Malwa and Central India. Some, however, believe that they reached up to Kau6ambl. Sir John Marshall while describing the exhumation of the lintel containing Kshantivddvn Jdtaka of Sarnath Museum felt that charred remains in which it was found was possibly due to Huna invasion. Professor G. R. Sharma, who has dedi- cated himself to revealing the past glories of KausambI, has found a seal there bearing the name of Toramapa. This seal by itself is no evidence of Huna occupation of ancient Vatsa country. For Malwa, we have the Eran inscription of the time of Toramapa. Like the empire of Harsha, the Huna empire was short-lived. Ya£odharman was able to inflict a crushing defeat on the Hu pas. In his Mandasor inscription, he claims to have ruled over territories, which were enjoyed neither by the Guptas, nor by the Hunas, and to whose feet obeisance was made even by the famous Hupa King Mihirakula. 2 It has been assumed that after this they retreated to Kashmir and continued to rule in contiguous districts. But the possibility that they might have survived in Rajasthan has never been mooted, not- withstanding the fact that evidence in support of this theory exists. While the main body of the Hupas retreated through Cis-Sutlej states, 2 a remnant possibly found a safe refuge in Haraoti and the hill tracts of Mewar. The few mountain passes, through the Aravallis, the Chambal ravines and the series of hill ranges from Chitorgarh area to Bhilwara, did not seem to have escaped the notice of these hardy barbarians. No one who has visited Badoli, with its three ranges of hills, or travelled either from Kota or Bhil- wara to Bijholya, can imagine the security of these places before the days of ire-arms, cars and aeroplanes. If the pebble-chopper industry of the Sohan valley of West Punjab, he so-called Black and Red ware of megalithic culture of South India, Saurashtra and Gujerat could successfully migrate to Mewar, if the Para- naras, the Gurjara Pratih&ras could garrison Chitor, why could not bodies >f defeated aliens find shelter in the gorges and tableland of Aravallis, to #1 B3. Ghirshman; Lea Chiomtes-JSepihalites, 1948. * Corpus Ineeriptionum Indicarum, Vol. HI, No. 33. 3 In the time of Renjit Singh, Sikhs of this area were called Malwai Sikhs. ( 57 ) 58 ADRIS BANERJI [VOL. IV, survive and multiply, and finally to become Indianized? Later Rajput tradition includes the Hupas as one of the 36 Rajput clans. The Uparmal, or the highest tableland called Pathar, is even now a secure place, extending up to Jahazpur in the south and in the north up to Menal, Bijholya and Mandalgarh, rich in the relics of the past dynasties. In fact, every nook and comer of this prehistoric area 1 requires to be intensely explored, in order to reveal its ancient lore, which is likely to fill up many gaps not merely in the prehistoric and protohistoric periods; but also that of the ‘Dark Age’ between the downfall of the Guptas and advent of the Ch&ha- manas. The evidences of the Huija survival in Mewar are fourfold : tradi- tional, literary, epigraphic and numismatic. Evidence of Tradition In the nineteenth century, when modem methods of historical research had not enlightened the despots of Rajasthan, there was a belief, widespread amongst the masses, that the Huna kings were the paramount sovereigns from Kota to Chitorgarh. Feudal strongholds like Kota (anc. Kottahaka), Bundi, Bijohlya, Menal, Bhainsrorgarh and Badoli were founded by the Hunas. These comprise the most inaccessible portions of Bhilwara and Chitorgarh districts, including the high tableland of Hadavati, constituting the present Bundi and Kota districts. It is quite possible that the heights of Chitor- garh might have been defended by the Hinduized descendants of Toramaija, Mihiragula and Kinkhila (?). 2 Kota is only 36 miles from Bhainsrorgarh, to reach which three separate but picturesque ridges with valleys have to be crossed. Bundi is now 20 miles from Kota and Bijholya which is 77 miles from district headquarters of Bhilwara, is only 32 miles from Kota. Ortho- doxy, clan rivalries, dynastic interests, as well as the fear that acceptance of the Huna question may stamp the alleged Agnikulas as not of pure Aryan (?) stock, have led the word Hu^a being pronounced as Anna. Even our archaeological Chowkidar at Badoli, when questioned regarding the tradi- tion in respect of the sabhamandapa of the GhateSvara temple, popularly called &ringara chaurl , pronounced it as Anna, recalling to my mind the report of A. C. L. Carllyle. But with the dawn of a new age an unbiased and unprejudiced assessment of the demographic contents of Mewar has become imperative when, in the twentieth century, the collapse of colonial type of imperialism brought to an end the Faustian generations. But tradition, by itself, is valueless, unless and until it is supported by other reliable evidence which, however, is available in the case of the Hunas in Mewar. Literary Evidence The earliest reference to the Hu$as in India, after their Waterloo at the hands of YaSodharman, is to be met with in B&nabhatta’s Harshacharita. Prabh&karavardhana is referred to as Huiw-harina-Keiari. But the whole sentence, I feel, is poetical euphemism. Describing Rajyavardhana’s ex- pedition against the Hu&as, the author states: Atha kadachid Rdjyavar - dhanarh HUndnhanturh aparimitam mlanuyftiam^ chirantanair am&tyair anuruktai-Scha Tmhdsdrmntaih Uttar dpatham prShimt .* This, however, has no relevancy on our topic, since a journey to north from 1 Tools of Series I (Early Palaeolithic) have been found near Menal. a Acoording to Somadeva, the Hunas had reached as far as Chtirakuta, modem 11 Chitorgarh. E. Q. Bhandarkar Commemoration Volume, p. 216. 8 A. Fuhrer ; Hareha Charita (Bombay Sanskrit Senes), Vol. LXVI, p. 211. 1962] HtfNAS IN MBWAR 69 Srlkantha could not have brought Prince R&jyavardhana to Rajasthan. The next is Padmagupta’s Navasahasdnka^harita. According to it Slyaka II (c. A.D. 949) carried on a war with Hunas (Sarga XI, verse 90), and having slaughtered Hu$a princes turned their seraglios (antafypura) into refuge homes of widows. Sindhuraja also fought the Hildas ( Sarga X, verse 14). Balachandra Suri in his Vasantavildsa mentions that Vfighela Lavaoaprasada fought with the Huoas. Some of the countries, such as Radha, Kerala, Ranchi, Andhra, mentioned as other states conquered by the Vaghela chief, seem to have no historical basis. According to Hema- chandra Suri, a Hu$a King attended the svayamvara-sabha of the sister of Mahendra, King of Nadol. I agree, however, with Dr. A. K. Majumdar that it is fictitious. 1 These are few instances chosen by me to illustrate my point. Numismatic Evidence An analysis of coin types of the early Huna Kings demonstrates that they continued the coin types of two eastern empires they clashed with. The Sassanian empire and their satraps in Afghanistan and the Punjab 2 * and the Gupta empire. The Kushano- Sassanian type of ‘bust of helmeted king ’ on the obverse and the fire altar with debased Greek legend on the reverse was the most popular type occurring on numerous coins. 8 Late E. Herzfeld has discussed them admirably including the palaeography of the Greek script in his Kushano- Sassanian Coins , published as Memoir of the Archaeological Survey of India, No. 38. Later on, early mediaeval Nagarl replaced the debased Greek alphabet, now quite meaningless, and the head of the King is found with the altar. 4 * 6 The Huna coins found in Marwar were imitations of coins of Firoz who was killed in battle with the Huoas in c. A.D. 488.® The older school of numismatists like A. F. R. Hoernle, E. J. Rapson, V. A. Smith were of opinion that they were issues of Tora- maua.® This type was continued in the succeeding centuries by the rulers of Gujerat, Rajasthan and Doab. 7 They are known as Oadhiya coins. How can a coin type bo copied in states, which had no political or cultural contact with a dynasty, which introduced them in India ? The circulation of Roman coins and their imitation by some minor dynasties are totally different from the circumstances that led to the issue of Oadhiya coins. They were due to extensive Indo -Roman commerce both by sea and land. The best proof of this is furnished by a find of Roman pottery at Arikamedu. By no stretch of imagination can we place the Hunas on the same level with the Romans. The so-called Vigrahapala drammas were continuation of Gurjara-Pratih&ra issues which were imitations of Hiina coins. The coins of Toramana, found in Malwa, however, have a totally different type. These are small, resembling hemidrachms, and bear a king’s head on the obverse and a peacock with expanded tail on the reverse. The king’s face is turned exactly in the opposite direction to that occurring on the Gupta coins. In front of the face are numerals such as 52. 8 The small copper coins, attributed to Toram&na, have been found in West Pakistan, 1 Dvyair&yakdvya, verses 79-142, quoted by A. K. Majumdar — Chaulukyas of Gujarat , p. 41, 1956. 8 Sidelights on Later Kusha^as— I.H.Q., Vol. XIII, p. 894. 8 Numismatic Chronicle, 1894, pp. 276-77. J. Rapson ; Indian Coins, p. 29. 6 Cat. of Coins in Indian Museum, Vol. I, p. 233. 8 JP.A.&2L, 1889, p. 228; Ind. Coins, p. 29; Smith, op. c it., p. 237# 7 Ind. Coins, p. 29# 8 Cuxmiugham : Coins of Mediaeval India, 1893, p. 85. 60 ADRIS BANERJI [VOL. IV, East Punjab, Malwa, etc. Tliey boar on ilie obverse the bead of Sassanian monarch with the word Bra in Gupta characters; and on the reverse solar symbol (spoked wheel surrounded by dots) beiow which is the legend Tom. 1 The coin types of his son and successor, Mihiragula, are numerous. The silver eoins, which are imitations of the Sassanian coins, bear on the obverse the king’s head and on the reverse the legend Jayatu Mihiragula or Mihira - hula in Indian characters. To the left, occurs a standard, with fillet hanging down, surmounted by a couchant bull facing right. The reverse has a caricature of fire altar flanked by attendants. 2 The copper coin# of Mihira- feula, found in Rajputana and East Punjab, have the king’s head with the name of the king in Indian characters and on the reverse the humped byill with the legend Jayatu Vrisha . 3 The middle-sized copper coins are copies of previous Kushaua issues, with standing king holding a spear and pouring oblations in fire altar, while the reverse depicts goddess, seated on a throne, 4 holding cornucopias. The large copper coins show the king riding on a horse with the legend Mihirakula in Indian characters; and on the reverse occurs the goddess Lakshml — evidently an imitation of Gupta horse rider type. Some coins of Toramana were restruck by Mihirakula. One hundred and seventy-five silver coins, said to have been discovered in Marwar, were brought to our notice by A. F. R. Hoernle. These coins bore a striking resemblance to the genuine coins of Firoz (A.D. 459-86). The only remarkable absentee is the Pahlavi legend. Hoernle was of opinion that the coins were issued by the Hunas. Epigraphio Evidence The Huna occupation of Malwa is proved by two inscriptions : an inscribed boar image found at Eran in Sagar district, dedicated in the first regnal year of Toramana, 6 and a second inscription found by Cunningham fixed on the walls of Surajkund, at Gwalior. The latter records the erection of a Sun temple, by Matricheta, in the fifteenth regnal year of Mihirakula.® After that, for long centuries, we have no information. Suddenly, in the ninth century of the Christian era, we meet with the Hunas in description of the digvijaya of the Pala Kings of Eastern India. Thus the Badal Pillar inscrip- tion of Guravami^ra clearly tells us that Devapala ruled for a long period the earth girt by the sea, having defeated the Utkalas, humbled the pride of the Huoas and scattered the conceit of the rulers of Dravida and Gurjara.* In many of the Pala grants the Hunas are mentioned as one of the principal races of the empire, 'along with the Khasas . 8 The Khairha plate of Yafiah- karna, dated K.E. 823, states that Karna, the Chedi Emperor, married a Huna princess, named Avalladevi, by whom he had a son, named Yafiab- kar#a ( HUna-nvaya -jala - nidhi - lakshyam ) . 0 The Bheraghat 10 inscription of Narasimha credits Karna for having held in check Kira, Huna and other princes. Where did he meet the Hunas, who waited upon him? V. V. Mirashi was also faced with the same problem. ‘Hun® princes are known Num. Chron. (Til series), 1894, p. 85. Ibid., p. 88. Cat. of Coin a in Ind. Mu*., Vol. I, p. 230, Nos. 1- 9. Ibid., p. 237, No. 10. Fleet : C.I.I . , Vol. Ill, pp. 239.40. Ibid., pp. 159-60. Epigraphio Indica , Vol. II, pp. 160££. Journal of the R.A.S.B., Letters, Vol. VI, pp. Iff. C.I.I., Vol. IV, Part I, pp. 290ff. 10 Ibid., Introduction, p. eii. 1962) HttyAS IK MEW Aft 61 from records of several kings. They appear to have been ruling somewhere in Central India; for there are occasional references to defeats infiioted on them by Pratihftra, Paramara, Pala and Kalachuri Kings or their feuda- tories. But the exact location of their kingdom has not yet been fuced.’ The Una copperplate tells us that Balavarman, the ChSlukya, and father of Avanlvarman II, surnamed Toga, by killing Jajjapa and other king s of the Hupa race, cleansed the earth. Jajjapa therefore belonged to the ninth century A.D. Unless the Hupas were somewhere between Malwa and Saurftsh$ra, Ch&lukya-Balavarman II could not have fought with them. 1 According to the Kherda plates, Amoghavarsha (c. A.D. 972) fought the lords of the Hupas. 2 The Paramara Utpala took away the life of the Hupas. 2 In the Udayapur inscription Sindhuraja, the Param&ra King, is credited with having defeated the king of the Hupas. 4 It is quite clear, therefore, that Hupas went on fighting bitter struggles for their very existence, against Rashtrakutas, Chalukyas, Pratiharas, Pa ramSr as and Kalaohuris. Therefore their territories must have been somewhere near Gujerat, Saurashtra and Malwa. More direct evidence is available from two records of the Guhilas of Medapata. The first is the Sarpesvara-Varaha (Ahar) temple inscription, dated in 1010 V.S. (= A.D. 953-54). It was originally in a temple at Ahar, but now kept in the temple mentioned above. It records the erection of a temple, dedicated to the Varaha incarnation of Vishpu, during the reign of Guhila King Allata of Mewar. In verse 8 occurs the term 1 Hupa ’ whose meaning, with reference to the context, is not clear due to damage. 2 But the second, the Aitpur inscription, dated in 1034 V.S. (= A.D. 977-78),® commemorating the dedication of a temple to god NanigasvamI (verse 5), states that Allata had a queen named HariyadevI, who was a Hupa princess ( Huna-Kshaunlia - vaihsaja) whose fame shone in Harshapura. Here, therefore, we have a ‘full confession’ of the existence of a Hupa princely family, somewhere in Rajasthan, one of whose princesses married a Hindu prince of the Guhila family, belonging to Agnikula. Therefore, by the second half of the tenth century A.D., they were completely Hinduized. Indeed, the Ouhilaputras, notwithstanding everything, were not pure Aryan Kshatriyas, but, by passing that moot point, we may proceed to evaluate the meagre evidence available. Kama’s campaigns were somewhat different from other similar expeditions. He had undoubtedly reached Malwa, which according to K. M. Munshi, extended from Kota to the Narmadi, from the mouth of the Mahi to Bhilsa. 7 From Malwa, Chitorgarh valley wifh Gambhira and Berach rivers and Bhilwara district were only few days’ march, either from Marwar via Bari Sadri and Mavli or via Nagari. Pre- historic tools of series I, H and III, the Black and Red, Black on Red, Black on Cream wares found in Mewar have affinities with those of Central India. Once he (Karpa) reached the Uparmal or plateau of Kota via Ratlam and Jhalawar he dominated the hill tracts of Mewar. Chitorgarh district has been repeatedly referred to, because it was not in possession of the early kings of Mewar. The early Guhilots ruled from Ahar (ancient Agh&fcapura or Atpur). When this city, now overbuilt with the chatris, temples and tourist bungalow, was devastated by Param&ra 1 i K ./., Vol. IX, p. 3, verse 17. * I.A., Vd. XII, p. 26S, line 32. * Ibid,, Vol. XVI, p. 28, line 41. JaMJ., VoL I, p. 285. * I.A., Vd. LVm, p. 161. ** Ibid Vd. XXXIX, pp. I8«ff. _ 7 The (doty that vat Ourjarodtaa, Part III, p. 145. 02 ADBIS BANERJI [VOL. IV, IW2] Mufija, they shifted to Nagda or NSgahrada. Chitor became capital after N&gd& had been sacked by Sultan Shamsuddin Iltutmish . The next impor- tant point to bear in mind is that by the time of Kar$a they had become Hinduized, due to which, AvalladevI, a Hu$a princess, married Karima. This is quite consistent with our knowledge of Chedi diplomatic policy. During his eastern campaigns, Karna claims to have defeated Vigrahapala III and JStavarman of East Bengal. They also claim victories over him. . But two of his daughters, Yauvana-^rl and Vira-6rl, were married to them. We know that Karna failed to annex permanently any of the territories he claimed to have conquered. His conquests were in nature of raids like that of YaSovarman of Kanauj. So it is possible that when ne reached southern Rajasthan and defeated a Hu$a king, Kama married his daughter, AvalladevI, mother of Yasahkarna. There is another important point. Whatever might have been their extent, there was more than one Huna kingdom. Thus several Hu$a princes are referred to in NavastihasdnJca-Charita (sarga XI, verse 90) in connection with Siyaka II. The Kauthem grant refers to them in plural. 1 So it is quite possible that large or tiny Hu^a states existed at least from c. ninth century onwards in the present districts of Bhilwara, Chitorgarh, Bundi, Kota and Jhalawar. The evidence of SarneSvara and Aitpur inscriptions clearly testify to the existence of a powerful Huna kingdom, whose princess married a descendant of Guhila and Bappa. Even the name HariyadevI is a sanskritized name. The dominions of Allata were not so extensive as to enable him to reach the Punjab or Kashmir. This fact, combined with the evidence furnished by the Jaina author, Somadeva, shows that her paternal state must have been in South-Eastern Rajasthan. It is true that Kadamba Kakusthavarman married his daughters to the Gupta and Vakataka kings, though their dominions were at great distance from each other. But the political position of Kakusthavarman was totally different from that of Allata, who was a minor prince of Rajasthan. While, therefore, the possibility of matrimonial relation between distant mon- archies is undeniable, equally irrefutable is the theory of marriage alliances between neighbouring states, such as Rudradaman’s daughter and a Sata- vahana-prince, Grahavarman and Rajyagri. i I.A., Vol. XVI, p. 23, lines 41-42. Journal of the Asiatic Society . Vol IV , No . 2, 7002. SOME POST-MUSLIM TEMPLES OP BIHAR By Adris Banerji Islam gained a foothold in India in the eighth century A.D., when Muhammad ibn al Kasim conquered Sindhu and Sauvira countries (Sindh and Baluchistan). Next stage was reached in c. A.D. 998, when Turki Mahmud occupied Ghazna (Sk. Gharjjana) ; and in c. A.D. 1000, led the first of his celebrated raids. The climax was reached in c. A.D. 1193. The end of the twelfth century A.D. was indeed a most tragic age for India, when Turkish converts to Islam crashed the gates and entered the middle country ; and Islam once for all found a permanent place in the heart of India. Prom this date, artistic activities in India had two clear-cut divisions. The reasons were political. There is a mass of evidence to show that the Turco-Afghans were compelled to utilize the services of Indian technicians in the erection of their buildings. The evidence is furnished by Quwwat- ul-Islam, the Minar, 1 the Alai Darwaza and the screen put up by Alauddin Khalji, Dhai dinka jhompra at Ajmere; Jami, Lai Darwaza and AtaladevI masjids at Jaunpur; Ganj-i-sahidan masjid near Kashi station; 2 Dhai- K&ngura 3 mosque near it, the Ukha masjid in Bayana, etc. In Delhi monuments, a gradual evolution of a pure Islamic type is noticeable, in the course of the centuries. In areas still under Indian occupation, in remote corners of Muslim-occupied territories, like Umga Deo, Fatehpur, Cheon, eight miles north-east of Umga, and Sanchail, four miles north-west of Umga, all in the Aurangabad subdivision of Gaya district, are monuments erected after A.D. 1193. Kharagpur, in Munghyr district of Bihar, has twin temples known as R&ja and Raul, demonstrating that the ancient arts and culture survived and were practised. Umga or Munga is, in reality, the name of a single range of hill, near Madanpur, about 16 miles from Sherghati, in Gaya district. The piice de resistance here is a Rekha temple, on a knoll, on the western slope of the hill (Fig. 1). There are, however, other extensive antiquarian remains on the hill itself, containing ruined fanes, shrines, images, pavilions, which I saw with my friend Sri P. C. Singh, then Magistrate of Gaya. These have neither been adequately described nor surveyed. Markham, Kittoe and J. D. Beglar have noticed the temple and the tank below. 4 * This temple can be objectively dated by the chlorite stone inscription of Bhairavendra, a king belonging to a lunar dynasty, dated in V.S. 1500 (= c. A.D. 1443-44). 6 Umga is supposed to be the site of his capital. It is quite possible that secure in the fastness of the former hill tracts of Gaya, covered with jungle and bordering on Palamau and Hazaribag districts, this chief ruled autonomously. The temple consists of a sarhvftta as well as gutfha (attached but closed) mandtapa* (27 / x25£ / ), garbhagrha 1 Called Khttiatambha of M&kika dina in an inscription. “ ® Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal , Vol. XXXV (1866), Pt. I, pp. 64ff. and pi, vii(a). « JWd., pp. 76-77. 4 1847, Pfc. II, pp. 030ff. and 221ff. ; Cunningham : A*SM*> Vol. VUI, p, 63; Vol. IX, p. 140* ^ • 4 Op. cif., 1606, Vol. H>Pi. I, pp. 28ff. • D, N, ShukL : Vastu mtm.fol. I, p. 464. ( 63 ) 64 AVBIS BAREBJI fVOLi IV, and a gundi of the Rekha type, about 60' in height, all facing east. On the north and south sides are alindas (balconies). 1 2 * Inside the sanotum are the images of Jagann&tha, Subhadrft and Balar&ma. The terminus ad quern is easily fixed by the defaced Arabic inscription carved on them. It is probably to be credited either to Sher Shah (c. A.D. 1640-45), who constructed the Grand Trunk Road up to Banaras, or to Daud Khan Qureshi, who conquered Palamau from Chero-Rajas (A.D. 1559-64) and founded the neighbouring town of Daudnagar. 8 This agrees with the history of the family of the Deo Jtajas, whose first member was adopted by the widow of Bhairavendra, or ^>f one of his successors, who soon made himself master of the area. He \vas followed by two members of his family, after which the fort was given up and the family removed itself to 'Deo’, a village, more inaccessible from Grand Trunk Road. Therefore allowing 30 years for each reign we arrive at the commencement of the sixteenth century. The local tradition that the adopting queen was a consort of Bhairavendra has no basis; because the Deo annals do not mention him and the U mga-mdhdtmya composed by a &al kadvijpi Brahmin is only a few years old, written years after Parameswari Dayal edited the inscription. 8 The temple at Deo consisting of a samvrtta - mandapa, an antardla and a garbhcigrha is built of earlier materials and is dedicated to the Sun. The images belong to c. sixteenth century A.D. Fragments of reliefs of the ‘Eastern School’ may be seen in the white- washed compound wall. The technique is not monolithic but the temple was made of stone masonry kept in position by metal clamps. 4 * * * We have now to transfer our attention to eastern Bihar. Three and a half miles from Kharagpur, a big village in the headquarters subdivision of Munghyr district, on the road to Tarapur, there are two temples built of brick. They are of hut-shaped style of Bengal. These also belong to post-Muslim period, probably c. fifteenth to sixteenth century A.D. Kharagpur, now a desolate straggling village, was in an area included in the Mudgagiri vishaya , on the borders of Kajangala country, with its capital of the same name (modem Kankjol). It is possible that, while the land on the other side of the Kharagpur hills and Jamui subdivision formed a part of ancient Anga country, these hill tracts including those of Gidhaur and Chakia were probably known as Kajangala, mentioned in the Rdmacharitam of Sandhyakaranandln. The land is the epitome of its history. Palaeolithic and Neolithic artefacts have been found all over Santal Parganas and Munghyr. 8 In historical times, foundations of Magadhan imperialism led to the annexa- tion of Anga. Red sandstone image of Buddha, a sure indication of Kushana occupation, has been found as far as Kiul-Birdavan. Imperial Gupta rule extended over this area. There are reasons to believe that Sad&hka, King of Kargasuvarua, having been defeated by the armies of Harsha and Bhaskaravarman of K&marupa, probably found a safe refuge here. Yuan- Chawang clearly testifies that he died a natural death. When the Maukharis were ruling over southern Bihar, according to Kharagpur annals, 1 P. K. Acharya : Dictionary of Hindu Architecture, p. 64. 2 The historical evidence is too complicated to be discussed herd. Of., however, K. R. Qanungo : Sher Shah. 2 J. and P. t A.S.B. (NS), Vol. II (1906), pp. 23ff. 4 It is a pity that in an authoritative work like Bihar Through the Ages these important temples at Umga and Deo have not been mentioned. 8 H. C. Das Gupta s Bibliography of Prehistoric Indian Antiquities- t/ot/nm/ j Proceedings of the Asiatic Society of Bengal (NS), Vol. XXVII, No. 1. Man in iVr Vol, 40 (1960), pp. 68ff,; and Indian Archaeology-— A Review, 1960*61, p. 5. 1962] SOME POST-MUSLIM TEMPLES OP BIHAR 65 a small kingdom ruled over by a prince existed here. He was primus inter pares of 52 confederate chiefs of these hill tracts. His name is given as &a6anka. There is another hill fort on a hill known as Kheri, near Akbarpur, in Bhagalpur district, which is also associated with 6a3anka. The earliest mention of Kheri was by Dr. Francis Buchanan, that indefatigable physician who arrived at Kharagpur from Kheri. 1 Annals further assert that the last king of Sa&Iiika’s dynasty had threo Rajput brothers in his service, who successfully carried out a coup . Fio. 4. General view of the group of temples at Pandara, district Dhanbad, r. A.D. 1200-130 There is a modern Bengali inscription beside tho staircase, later than that of Ta JAB, IV, 1962. Km. 8. Mediaeval temple of Somrath, district Mirzapur, showing the use of clonic, r«narv>(l arches. etc., c. A.D. J400-1500. Journal of the Asiatic Society. Vol. IV, No. 2, 1962. REVIEWS OP BOOKS Tl NItivAkyImbta di Somadeva StJRi. By Oscar Botto. Published by G. Giappichelli. Turin. 1962. Pp. 227. Price 2,400 lire. Somadeva Sfiri belongs to the line of Jaina monks of the post-Gupta period who combined zeal for their own faith with extensive knowledge of the branches of Brahmanical sacred and secular literature, the line which reached its climax in the person of the great twelfth- century monk Hema- candra whose prodigious learning earned for him the title of Kalikdla - sarvajna or the omniscient one of the Iron Age. In an earlier volume entitled Saggi dal ‘ Nitivdkydmrta ’ di Somadeva Suri (1953), Professor Botto has tackled various problems relating to this particular work. These investigations have now been brought to a head in the present monograph which consists of a translation in the author’s native Italian of the whole work with a learned Introduction and copious notes. A perusal of this work convinces one of the astonishing range and completeness of Dr. Botto’s studies. Among the primary sources utilized by him are included not only Kautilya’s Artha&astra (which is admittedly the main source of the author’s inspiration) but also the literature of niti and popular tales as well as animal fables, of Smrtis (both aphoristic and metrical), of the Puranas, of the epics and Jcdvyas, and so forth. Along with these have been brought under contribution some relevant inscriptions. The secondary sources include a very large number of works and papers bearing even remotely on the subject, which have appeared from the pen of previous (mostly Indian) writers. A notable aspect of Dr. Botto’s performance is that he not only makes an intelligent and critical use of his sources, but gives page-references in every case to the works of recent authors, thus prfsenting a model of scholarly honesty. The translation of the Nitivdkydmrta is preceded by an Introduction, both portions being treated with remarkable thoroughness. The Introduction, comprising two parts which are entitled The Author and The Work , deals critically and exhaustively with numerous points of detail. Among the points coming under the head of The Author may be mentioned the following : (a) identi- fication of the Rashtrakuta feudatory under whose patronage Somadeva wrote his earlier work YaSastilaka , (b) credibility of the statement in an anonymous commentary of the Nitivdkydmrta about »the composition of this work at the request of a king called Mahendrapala of Kanauj, (c) identifi- cation of the Gau^asamgha of the Jaina faith to which Somadeva belonged and of a king called Dharmavaloka mentioned by the same author in his Y a&astilaka . Under the head The Work Dr. Botto ‘deals principally with the following points : (a) successive editions of the Nitivdkydmrta in the Grantharatnamdld , the M dnikachandra Digambar Jaina , and the Mysore Sanskrit Series (and the value of these editions), (6) the style of the Niti- vdkydmrta (wjiich, unlike that of the ArthaJastra of Kautilya or the Nitisdra pi Kfimandaka, is singularly delioate and elegant), (c) the relationship of N° to Kau^ilya’s Arthaidstra (notwithstanding numerous concordances it cannot be accused of plagiarism but on the contrary belongs to the literacy type of rdjaniti with the term niti meaning not merely politics but general morals), (d) traces of religious moderation and moral equilibrium in N° reflecting the extraordinary religious tolerance of the epoch, (e) Somadeva’s ( 71 ) 72 REVIEWS OF BOOKS [VOL. IV, acceptance of the Brahmanical doctrine of the authority of l§ruti and Smrti, of the institution of varnas , and so forth, and his rejection of the Jaina post- canonical antithesis between dharma and rdjya as well as his conception of law as a matter of universal conscience or else as a human patrimony* defined as the just and the good, (/) analysis of Somadeva’s polity (the State as a feudal* unit of limited importance, the officials en- trusted with different charges and subject to constant and careful control, the monarch being no absolute ruler), (g) the analysis of internal and ex- ternal administration in Somadeva’s polity (unreserved acceptance of Kautilya’s Machiavellian policy; disapproval of the aggressive policy of the vijigishu and in its stead advocacy of alliance, of negotiation ana, in short, of normal and pacific diplomatic relations of States; simultaneous profession of common ethics and ethics of the State ; goal not of the personal good or the king or the subjects but of the equilibrium of moral and religious duties of welfare and of life affecting all). The translation is based upon the edition in the Mdnikachandra Dig - ambar Series with frequent references to the better readings of the two other editions. Parallel passages are quoted in the original Sanskrit with accom- panying Italian translations not only from Kautilya’s Arthaiastra but also from the Smrti and the Smrti commentaries, from works of mti 9 from the collection of popular tales like the HifopadeAa and from the Puranas like the Agnipurana. References are made to and quotations are given from the translations of select terms by other scholars, instances of such terms being lancha or luncha (p. 108n) and karaya (p. J17n). It will appear from the above brief survey that the present work marks a distinct addition to our knowledge of the niii literature of Ancient India. Nevertheless we may be permitted to make a few remarks for Dr. Botto’s consideration in the event of a new edition being called for. For the purpose of comparison and contrast with the passages of the iV° he occasionally mentions the HitopadeAa , but he is silent about the more important work, viz. the Panchatantra , in its original version (as recon- structed by Edgerton) which is its principal source. Reference is made similarly to the Kathasaritsdgara, but no mention is made of the more ancient and important collection of the Jdtaka stories. Dr. Botto again quotes no authority for attributing the authorship of the Brhadarhanniti to Kumarapala of Gujerat, although this work is said to be a composition of Hemacandra himself under the patronage of that king by another authority (Wintcrnitz in his History of Indian Literature , Vol. Ill, p. 530). Further- more, the case for making the monarchy in the N° represent a kind of 'democratic- constitutional government’ does not appear to be sufficiently strong. For, firstly, as in the Arthaiastra- Nitk tradition the admitted refer- ence to the necessity of the king’s consultation with his ministers does not involve their control of the royal authority in any way; secondly, the prescription of the objectivity of justice without reference to the personal preferences of the king which is inculcated in the N° is not accompanied (as in Kautily’s Arthaidstra and the Dharmasutras) by sanctions in the sense of making the king liable to legal penalties and the law of penance. The book is remarkably free from mistakes in transliteration of the numerous Sanskrit words, one of the few exceptions noticed by us bemg\addatufy on p. 107, n. 14. In view of the fact that the existing editions of the N° are out of print and they are vitiated more or less by corrupt readings, we earnestly trust that a new critical edition will be undertaken in the near future by this scholar who has given so much attention to its study during the last ten years. • • U. N. Ghoshal 1962] TAGORE’S EDUCATIONAL PHILOSOPHY AND EXPERIMENT 73 Tagore'S Educational Philosophy and Experiment. By Sri Sunil Chandra Sarker. Published by the Visva-Bharati, Santiniketan, May, 1961. Pages 199 with five illustrations. Price Rs.7.50. The book presents the special features of Rabindranath Tagore's (educational theory on which was based his great experiment at Santiniketan. In doing so the author briefly explains Tagore’s philosophy, as he feels that his theory of education stems from it. In bringing out its characteristic features, he compares him with other theorists like Dewey and also refers to the Gandhian concept of education. It appears that the author has performed his difficult task fairly satis- factorily. He has successfully traced the essential features of Tagore’s theory of education. He rightly points out that Tagore took on the role of an educator to satisfy his own personal urge and that Tagore aimed at bringing about all-round development of the individual and in doing so he attached as much importance to the, imaginative, aesthetic and emotional faculties of the student as to the intellect. He also brings out the virtue of the old Tayovana system of education which Tagore adopted at Santiniketan in that it creates an environment which spontaneously evokes the pupil’s imaginative and emotional faculties. In dealing with different aspects of Tagore’s philosophy, however, it appears that the author has failed to appreciate the difference in the mean- ing of certain expressions used by Tagore in explaining his concept of the religion of man. Thus he identifies Tagore’s concept of ‘Universal Man’ with his concept of the ‘Supreme Person’ (vide pp. 37 and 154). Again, lie identifies ‘Universal Man’ with ‘Viswakarma’ (vide p. 49). . According to him, therefore, these are synonymous terms. Tin's is not, however, borne out by Tagore’s own writings. The ‘Supreme Person’ is, according to Tagore, that manifestation of God which is a transcendental presence in man and is synonymous with his concept of ‘ Universal Man ’ (vide Religion of Man, pp. 165 and 181). The term ‘Viswakarma’ or ‘World Worker’ is applied by Tagore to an individual who works for all, that is for the general welfare of mankind (vide Religion of Man , p. 69). Hiranmay Banerji Jl. As. Soc., Vol. IV, No. 2, 1962. BIBLIOGRAPHICAL SUPPLEMENT BIBLIOGRAPHY OF TIBETAN STUDIES Being a record of printed publications mainly in European Languages By SIBADAS GHAUDHURI [Continued from Jl. As. Soc., Vol. IV, No. 1, 1962. Supplement, page 136] TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY 137 StaSl -Holstein (A. von). 1652. Kien-oh’ui-fan-tsan (Gaodlstotrag&thS ), 1014. Bibliotheca Buddhica, XV, St. Petersburg. 1653. Remarks on an eighteenth century Lamaist document, 1923. Kuo-hsiieh Chl-ksan (Peking), I, 401. 1654. Notes sur un decret du Pan-chen Lama date de 1734, 1925. Poli- tique de Pekin, XIV. 1655. The Kaiyapaparivarta. A mahayinasutra of the Ratnakuta class. Edited from the original Sanskrit in Tibetan and in Chinese. Shanghai, 1926. 1656. On two Tibetan pictures representing some of the spiritual ances- tors of the Dalai Lama and of the Panchen Lama, 1932. Bull. National Library of Peiping, VI, 150; and Jour. American Oriental Society, LII, 338. 1657. On a Tibetan text translated into Sanskrit under Ch'ien Lung (18th Cent.) and into Chinese under Tao Kunag (19th Cent.), 1932. Bull. National Library of Peiping, VI, 508. 1658. A commentary to the Kacyapapari varta . Edited in Chinese and Tibetan. Peking, 1933. 1659. On a Peking edition of the Tibetan Kanjur which seems to be unknown in the West, 1934. Harvard Sino-Indian Series, III. 1660. On the sexagenary Cycle "of the Tibetans, 1935. Monuments Serica, I, 277. 1661. On a Peking edition of the Tibetan Kanjur. Peiping, 1935. Starr (L. A.). 1662. Tales of Tirah and Lesser Tibet. London, 1924. Stcherbatsky (Th.) and Obermiller (E.). See also Nos. 1541-42. 1663. Indices Verborum Sanscrit-Tibetan and Tibetan-Sanscrit to the Nyayabindu of Dharmakirti and the Nyayabindu tika of Dharmottara, 1928. Bibliotheca Buddhica, XXV. 1664. Abhisamayalankara-prajfiSpSramitS-upadeSa-SSstra. Edited, ex- plained and translated. Introduction, Sanskrit text and Tibetan translation. Fasc. (1), 1929. Bibliotheca Buddhica, XXIII. 1665. Buddhist Logic. 2 Vols., 1930. Bibliotheca Buddhica, XXVI. 1666. Tibetskil perevod AbhidharmakoSakSrikah i Abhidharmako$a- bhasyam SoSinenni Vasubandhu, 1930. Bibliotheca Bud- . dhica, XX, faso. 2. Stein (Aurel). 1667. A third journey of exploration in Central Asia (1913-16), 1917. Indian Antiquary, XL VI, 109, 137, 165, 193, 221, 249; Geographical Journal, XLVII (2), 97, 1916. 138 TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY 1668. A Chinese expedition across the Pamirs and Hindu Kush, A.D. 747, 1922. Geographical Journal, LIX, 112; Indian Antiquary, LII (1923), 98, 139, 173. 1669. Innermost Asia. 4 Vols. Oxford, 1928. Stein (Bole A.). 1670. Trente-trois fiches de divination tibAtaines, 1939. H.J.AfS., X, 296. » 1671. Notes d’Atymologie tib6taine, 1942. B.E.F.E.O., XLI, 202. 1671(a). Mythes et concepts religieux relatifs & l’habitation en Chine du Nord et en — Haute-Asie. Annuaire de l’Ecole pratique des Hautes Etudes (Sec. des Sciences religienses, 1950-1951, pp. 81-3. 1671(5). Si-hia et Mi-hag, geographic historique et 16gendes ancestrales, 1951. B.E.F.E.O., XLIV, 42 pp. 1671(c). R4centes etudes tibetaines, chronique bibliographique, 1952. Journal Asiatique, CCXL, 79-106. 1671(d). L’epopee tibetaine de Gesar dans sa version lamaique de Ling. Annales MusAe Guimet, BibliothAque d’Atudes, LXI ; Presses universitaires de France. Paris, 1956. 1671(e). Le linga des danses masquees lamaiques et la theorie des ames 1957. Sino-Indlan Studies, V (3-4), 36 pp. 1*671 (/). Les K’iang des marches sino-tibetaines, exemple de continuite de la tradition, in Annuaire, 1957-1958 de l’Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, Section Sciences religieuses, 28 pp. 1671 (gr). L’habitat, le monde et le corpe humain en Extreme-Orient et en Haute Asie, 1957. Journal Asiatique, CCXLV, 37 pp. 1671(A). Architecture et pens6e religieuse en Extreme-Orient, 1957. Arts Aslatiques, IV (3), 23 pp. 1671(i). Recherches sur l’4pop4e et le barde au Tibet. Paris, 1959. Institut des Hautes Etudes Chinoises). 167 l(j). Les tribus anciennes des marches sino-tibetaines, 14gendes, classifications et histoire, h paraltre, Paris, 1959. [in Melanges de LTnstitut des Hautes Etudes chinoises, Sorbonne.] 1671(A). Peintures tibetaines de la vie de Gesar, 1958. Arts Aslatiques, V (4), 26 pp. 1671(2). Les religious de la chine. Encyclopedic Fran$aise, XIX, (Philosophie Religion). Paris, 1957. Stevens (H.). 1672. Through deep defiles to Tibetan Uplands. The travels of a naturalist from the Irrawaddy to the Yangtse. London, 1934. TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY 13d Stewart (J. L.). 1673. Notes of a botanical tour in Ladak or Western Tibet, 1868*69. Trans. Edlnb. Bot. Soc., X, 207. Stoetzner (W.). 1674. Ins underforschte Tibet. Tagebuch der dentschen Expedition Stotzner 1914. Leipzig, 1924. Stoner (Charles), 1674(a). The Sherpa and the snowman. London, 1966. Strachey (Richard). 1676. Narrative of a journey to the Lakes Cho Lagan, or R&kas Tal, and Cho Mapan, or Manasrowar, and the valley of Pruang, in Tibet, in September and October, 1846, 1848. J.A.S.B., 103. 1676. On the physical geography of the provinces of Kumaon and Garhwal in the Himalaya mountains, and of the adjoining parts of Tibet, 1851. J.R.G.S., XXI, 57. 1677. Physical geography of Western Tibet. With a map, 1853. J.R.G.S., XXIII, 1. 1678. Connection between Manasarowar and Rakas-tal, 1898*99. Nature, LIX, 76. 1679. Narrative of a journey to the Lakes Raks-tal and Manasarowar,' in Western Tibet, undertaken in September, 1848, 1900. Geographical Journal, XV, 150, 243 and 394. Stramigioli (G.). 1679(a). Bhavasahkranti, 1936. Rivista degli Studl Oriental! , XVI, 294-306. Stutterheim (W. F.). 168*0. De Tibetaansche Afdeeling in ’s Rijks Ethnographisch Museum te Leiden. Elsevier’s Gelll. Maandschrift, Mei 1922, pp. 314r-18, ills. Suvirov (N. I.). 1681. Tibet. Opisanie strany i otnofienie K nej kitaja i Anglii do pos* 14dnjago vrenemi. St. Petersburg, 1905. Suzuki (D. T.). 1681(a). Tibetan Tripitaka. Now being reprinted under the supervision * of the Otani University, Kyoto, and edited by D. T. Suzuki, 1957-68.1 1 A reprint of the Peking 1737 revision of the 1684 edition which was in turn reprint'd from the Yung-lo edition Of 1410. Published in 162 volumes* 4to, leather- bound, on fine paper with many illustrations. The volumes comprise i Bhgyar (46 volumes), Bstanhgyur (106 volumes) and Appendix (12 volumes). 140 TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY T T’ao Szu-tseng. 1082. Cbersatzung des Tagebucha einer Raise nach Tibet. Asien, IX, 146, 163. Tachibana (S.). 1683. To Ban ryokoku bukkyo no kosho. (The relations between Tibetan and Chinese Buddhism under the T’agg dynasty), 1934. Shukyo Kenkyu, XI, 4. Tafel (Albert). 1684. Lebrang Gomba. t)ber land u. Meer: Cl/612, 1909. 1686. Reise in China mid Tibet, 1906-08. Kartographische Ergeb- nisse. Berlin. Gesellschaft fur Erdkunde, 1912. 1686. Meine Tibetreise. Eine studienfahrt durch das nordwestliche China und durch die innere Mongolei in das ostliche Tibet. 2 Vols. Berlin. Meine mehrjahrige reise im Chinesischen Reiche, 1914. Korr. Bl. D. Ges. f. Anthr., XXXIX, 118. Takacs (Z. von). 1687. Das Franz Hopp Museum in Budapest, 1928. Mitt. Ges. Ostas. Kunst, No. Ill, 6. Takeda (Y.). 1687 (o). Chibetto-Bun ‘Abidatsuma-kusha-ron’, II. [Abhidharmakosa- Sastra, Chap. II (Indriya). Tibetan Version.] Kyoto Chojiya, 1937. Takakusu (J. A.). 1688. Tales of the wise man and the fool, in Tibetan and Chinese, 1901. J.R.A.S., 447. 1689. A comparative study of the Tri-pitaka and the Tibetan Dsan-lun, the wise man and the fool. Actes XII. Congr. Int. des Or., II, 11. Tang (Kai-ping). 1689(a). Hsi-tsang yu-chi (A trip to Tibet). Shanghai, 1931. Tanner (H. C. B.). 1690. Our present knowledge of the Himalayas, 1891. P.R.G.S., XIII, 403. 1691 . A few lines on Mount Everest. Calcutta Great Trigonometrical Survey, 1900. TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY 141 Tao-ts’iuan (Yu). 1691(a)..' Chelchou Ming Toh’eng-tsou tsien che tchao Tsong-k’o pa ki- • che ki Tsong-k’o pa fou Tch’eng-tson dhou (Explanation and commentary of the narrative of the Envoy of a mission from the emperor Yong-lo of the Ming dynasty for summoning 2feong-kha-pa, and the reply of Tsong-kha-pa to Yong-lo). 1933-36. Melanges Ts’ai yuan P’ei, II, pp. 939-66, 1 pi. (PGkin). * Tashi Wongdl. 1692. Tibetan-English-Hindi guide. Calcutta, 1909. Taylor (Annie R.). 1693. An English woman in Tibet, 1893. National Review, September. 1694. My experiences in Tibet, 1894. Scottish Geographical Maga- zine, X (1), 1. 1695. Pioneering in Tibet. London, 1899. 1696. The only English woman in Tibet, 1904. Wide World Maga- zine, August. Taube (M.). 1697. Die Wiedergabe sanskritischer Verbformen im tibetischen Texte des BodhicarySvatara ; Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Karl Marx Universitat, Leipzig, 1953-54, IV, pp. 393-412. 1698. Miss Taylor’s recent journey in Tibet, described by W. W. Rockhill, 1894. Geographical Journal, III, 423-24. Teichman (Eric). 1699. Travels of a Consular Officer in Eastern Tibet. 1 Cambridge, 1922. 1700. Journeys through Kam (Eastern Tibet), 1922. Geographical Journal, LIX, 1. Temple (R. C.). 1701. Outlines of Indo-Chinese history (Repr. from Hutchinson’s History of the Nations, 1914-16, pp. 1810-30), 1916. Indian Antiquary, XLV, 37. 1702. Scraps of Tibeto-Burman folk-lore, 1930-31. Indian Antiquary, LIX, 184; LX, 30, 116, 156, 183, 224. Temple (R. C.) and Tranche (A. H.). 1703. Remarks on a photograph, near Ating, taken by Eric Upton, during a tour in Zanfskar in 1907. Indian Antiquary, XXXVII, 332. • 1 1 Together with a history of the relations between China, Tibet and India. 142 TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY Teramoto (E.). 1704. Ramakyo Kyori gaisetsu G6n6ral (Exposition of the doctrine of Lamaism). Osakl-gukub6, XI, 22. 1705. Zemmui Sanzo no meigi wa Tobango no onyaku Ka (The Chinese of &ubhakara-sirp ha-chan- won- wei-eat-it in transcription Tibe- tan phonetique),' 1931. Shukyo-gaku, VII, 93. 1705(a). Chibetto-bun ‘Abidatsuma-kusha-ron’, I (Kai-hon) [Abhi- dharmako6a-6astra. Chapter I (Dhatu). Tibetan Version]. Kyoto, Chojiya, 1936. * 1705(6). Chibetto-bun Ryuju Zo * Chu-ron-mui-sho * (NSgarjuna’s Mula- madhayamakavrtty-akuto-bhay&. Tibetan Version). Kyoto, Mokudosha, 1936. Terrlen de la Couperie (A.). 1706. The silver coinage of Tibet, 1882. Numismatic Chronicle, Ser. 3, 1, 340. Terzorio (Fr. Clemente da). 1706(a). In India e nel Tibet, Missionari Italiani nel paese dei lama, Rome, 1932. Thevenot (Molohisedeo), Kircherus (Athanasius) and others. 1707. Travels through Tibet, Western Tartary, Karazn, and Bukharlas. 1 (J. H. Moore’s New complete collection of voyages, pp. 609). Thtebault-Sisson . 1708. Le Calice du Grand-Lama, 1903. T’oung Pao, Ser. 2, IV, 261. Thlenen (F. W. S. von) — ed. 1708(a). Exotische Kunst, De Kunst von China, Japan, de Indische- gebieden, Afrika. Utrecht, 1951. Thiselton-Dyer (W. T.). 1709. The sacred tree of Kum-Bum, 1896. Nature, LIII, 412. Thomas (F. W.). 1710. Matpiceta and the Maharajakanikalekha, 1903. Indian Antiquary, XXXII, 345; XXXIII, 31. 1711. Note on Maharaja Kanika. International Congress Oriental- ists, XIII, 40. 1712. Notes from the Tanjur, 1903. J.R.A.S., 345, 686, 703, 785. , 1713. Deux collections sanscrites et tib£taines de sadhanas. Muslon, NS, IV, I. 1 duj Thevenot, Kircher, Du Halde, Grueber, Dorvile, etc. TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY 143 1714. The works of AryaSflra, Triratnadasa and DhArmika-Subhflti, Album Kern, 405. 1715. Desiderata for the extension of the collections of Tibetan books in the India Office Library. London, 1904. 1716. Notes from the Tanjur, 1904. J.R.A.S., 733. 1717. > The Varnanarhavamana of Matrceta. Tibetan text from the Tanjur (India Office, and Asiatic Museum in St. Peters- burg) and translated. First half, 1905. Indian Antiquary, XXXIV, 145. 1718. Tibetan documents concerning Chinese Turkestan. J.R.A.S., 1927-34. 1— The Ha-Za (1927, 51). 2 — The Sa-Cu region (1927, 807). 3— The Nob-region (1928, 565). 4 — The Khotan region (1930, 47 and 251). 5 — (a) The Drug-gu, (6) the Hor, (c) the Phod-Kar (1931, 807). 6 — The Tibetan army (1933, 379 and 537). 7 — Government and social conditions (1934, 85, 249 and 457). 1719. The 2an-£uh language, 1933. J.R.A.S., 405. 1720. Glimpses of life under Tibetan rule in Chinese Turkestan, 1 1933. Man, XXXIII, 101. 1721. Tibetan literary texts and documents concerning Chinese Turkes- tan. Part 1. Literary texts. Part 2. Plates. London, 1935 and 1951 2 . Oriental Translation Fund, NS, 32 and 37. 1721(a). Indianism and its expansion. University of Calcutta, 1942. [Chapter VI.] 1722. The early population of Lou-Lan-Shan-Shan, 1944. Journal Greater India Society, XI, 45. 1723. Nam: An ancient language of the Sino-Tibetan borderland. Oxford, 1948. (Philological Society, 14.) 1723(a). The Tibetan alphabet. Festschrift zur Feier des zweihundert jahrigen Bestehens der Akademie der Wissenschaften in • Gottingen. Berlin-Gottingen-Heidelberg, 1951, pp. 146-05. 1723(6). Ancient folk-literature from North-Eastern Tibet. (Intro- duction, texts, translations and notes.) Berlin, 1957. [Abh. Deut. AJkad. Wiss, Kl. Sprachen, Lit. u. Kunst, 1952, 3.] 1723(c). Buddhism in Khotan: its decline according to two Tibetan accounts. Asutosh Mukherji Jubilee, Vol. Ill (Orientalia), Pt. 3, pp. 30-62. 1 — Prophecy of the Arhat Sanghavardhana : Dgra-bcom-pa-Dge-hdun-hphel-gyis-lun-bstan-pa. 2 — Propheoy of Li-yul : Li-Ni-yul-Luh-Bstan-pa. 1 In the eighth century A.D. * Parte 3-4. Addenda and corrigenda, with Tibetan vocabulary, concordance of dooument numbers and plates. 1958, 1962. Q.T.F., NS, 40*41. 144 TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY Thomas (F. W.) and Clauson (G. L. M.). 1724. A Chinese-Buddhist text in Tibetan writing, 1926. J.R.A.S., 608. 1725. A second Chinese-Buddhist text in Tibetan characters, 1927. J«R»^L.S., 281. Thomas (F. W.) and Giles (L.). # 1726. A Tibeto-Chinese word-and-phrase book, 1948. B.S.O.A.S., XII, 763-69. Thomas (F. W.) and Konow (Stbn). 1727. Two mediaeval documents from Tun-Huang. Oslo, 1929. Thomas (F. W.), Miyamoto (S.) and Clauson (G. L. M.). 1728. A Chinese MahaySna catechism in Tibetan and Chinese characters, 1929. J.R.A.S., 37. Thomas (Lowell Jackson). 1728(a). Out of this world, across the Himalayas to Forbidden Tibet. New York, 1960. Thompson (H. G.). 1729. From Yunnan-Fu to Peking along the Tibetan and Mongolian borders, including the last journey of Brig.-Gen. G. E. Pereira, 1926. Geographical Journal, LXVII, 2. Thomson (Thomas). 1730. Western Himalaya and Tibet; a narrative of a journey through the mountains of Northern India, during the years 1847-48. London, 1852. I Thonml Sambhota 1731. Une grammaire tibetaine du tibetaine classique. Les Slokas gram- maticause de Thonmi Sambhota avec leurs commentaires. Tibetan and French, 1928. Annales Mus6e Guimet: Biblioth6que Etudes, XXXVII. Thungik Phunchok Wangden. 1732. Poi Kyi Ka pe Dafipe. Tibetan first reading book. Darjeeling, 1889. Tibetan Pioneer Mission. 1733. Origin of the. Tibetan Pioneer Mission, together with some, faots about Tibet, London, 1894. TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY 14S Tichy (Herbert). 1734. Zum heiligsten Berg der Welt. 1 Anf Landstrassen u. Pilgerp- faden in Afghanistan, Indien n. Tibet. Geleitw. von 8. Hedin. Wien, 1949. Toeplite Mrozowska (E.). 1735. Visioni Oriental!. Milano, 1930. Tohoku Imperial University and Salto Gratitude Foundation. # 1736. A catalogue-index of the Tibetan-Buddhist canons. 2 Vols. Sendai, 1934. Tokarskij (A.). 1737. Zaklinanija so strel boj tibetakich lam. Voprosy Filosofl I Psichologii, V, 182. Tokushi (Y.). 1738. Sentai-butsu to Suri-butsu (Thousand Buddhas and the terracotta Buddhas), 1929. Shukyo KenkyO, Nov., 10. Toledo (Ohio) Museum of Art. 1739. Northeastern Asiatio Art, Korea, Manchuria, Mongolia, and Tibet ; catalogue of an exhibition .... 1942. Tolstoy (I.). 1739(a). Across Tibet from India to China, 1946. National Geographic Magazine, XG, 169-222. Torrens (I/t.-Col.). 1740. Travels in Ladak, Tartary, and Kashmir. 2nd ed. London, 1863. Tqscano (Giuseppe M.). 1741. La prima missions cattolica nel Tibet. Parma' — Hongkong, 1951. Tous8aint (Gustavb-Charles). 1742. Le Padma Than-Yig; tr. of Chapters 1 and 12 to 22, 1920. B.E.F.E.O., XX (4), 13-66. 1743. Le Diet de Padma. Padma Than Yig, Ms. de Lithang, traduit du Thibdtain, 1933. Blbl. de LTnstitut des Hautes Etudes Ghlnoises (Paris), III, 540 pp. ’Trevlsanl (P.). 1744. Sven Hedin nel Tibet inesplorato. Torino, 1933. 4 English translation (title, Tibetan Adventure) by Ian V. D. Morrow and L. M. Sieveking. London, 1988. 146 TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY Trinkler (Emu.). 1745. Tibet, sein geographisohes Bild und seine stellung in Asiatiachen Kontinent. Miinchen, 1922. 1746. The ice-age on the Tibetan plateau and in the adjacent regions, 1930. Geographical Journal, LXXV, 225. 1747. Im land der sturme. Berlin, 1930. 1748. Das land des Dalai-Lama. Berlin, 1930. Tronnler (Richard). 1749. Die Durchquerung Tibets seitens der Jesuiten Johannes Grueber u. Albert de Dorville im J. 1661. Eine Studie iib. das Leben u. die Beise der beiden Veter, 1904. Z. Ges. f. Erdk. Blirra, 328. 1760. Jesuiten Johannes Grueber and journey across Tibet (English summary of No. 1749), 1904. Geographical Journal, XXIV, 663. Trotter (H.). 1751. Account of the Pundit’s journey in Great Tibet from Leh in Ladakh to Lhasa, and of his return to India via Assam, 1877. J.R.G.S., XL VII, 86; and P.R.G.S., XXI, 325. Tsibikoff and Narzunoff. 1762. Views of Lhasa. Illustrations, 1905. National Geographic Magazine, XVI, 27. Tsibikoff (G. T. S.). 1753. A Russian explorer in Lhasa (Zybikoff), 1903. Scottish Geog. Magazine, XIX, 491. 1754. The forbidden city of Lhasa, 1904'. Strand Magazine, February. 1755. Lhasa and Central Tibet, 1904. Trad, des lzviestiya de la tSoc. Imp. Russe de Geographic, 1903, XXXIX/187. Annual Report of the Smithsonian Inst, for 1903, pp. 727-46. 1756. Journey to Lhasa, 1904. Geographical Journal, XXIII, 92. 1757. Buddhist Polomnik u Svyatin Tibeta: A Buddhist pilgrim at the Tibetan Sanotities. A diary kept in the years 1899-1902; ed. by B. A. Grigorieff, C. F. Oldenburg, F. J. Stcherbatsky and K. A. Grogorieff. Petrograd, 1919. Tsuchida (C.). See under Wogihara (U.), jt. author. Ts’Sn (Chi-txtno). 1758(a). Wei-tsang t’ung-ehih (Gazetteer of Tibet), 1896. 1758(6). ’gtsug-lag T46s-kyi Snan ba si-tui sum-rtags, 1743. (Repripted. Bengal Secretariat Press, 1895.) TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY W7 1758(c). Ryuju no Sanhokkai-jo to Hyakusen-judaijikky5jiz5boaatsus homonhosshin-san to Zobun-Dhamadhatustotra. (A com- parison of three texts attributed to N&garjttna: Dharma- dhatustotra (Taisho, No. 1457), Kgitigarbha paripracohS dharmakftyastotra (?) (Taisho, No. 413) in Chinese transla- tion, and Dharmadh&tu-atotra in Tibetan translation), 1933. - Ryukoku daigaku ronso, 306, 307, July. 1758(d). ‘Sho-dai jokengo-jinshin-bon-kyo ’ no Kaidai narabini Wayaus (Arya-sthiradhyaSaya-pari-varta-nama-mah&ySna-sutra, trans- lated into Japanese from the Tibetan Version, with an introduction), 1939. Ryukoku Gakuho (326), 31 pp. 1758(e). Chibettobun’ Jakusho-jimben-samajikyd* Shi-yaku (Japanese translation of the Aryapra£anta-vini6caya-pratiharya-n&ma- samadhi-Mahayana-sutra from Tibetan Version), 1949. Bukkyo-gaku Kenkyu, I (January), 19-4>4. Tucci (Giuseppe). 1769. The Nyayamukha of Dignaga, the oldest Buddhist text on logic after Chinese and Tibetan materials, 1930. Quinzieme cahier des Materialien de M. Walleser, 1930. 1760. A fragment from the Pratitya-samutpadavyakhya of Vasu- bandhu, 1930. J.R.A.S., 611. 1761. Notes on the Nyaya-praveSa by ^ankarasvamin, 1931. J.R.A.S., . 381. 1762. Two hymns of the Catuh-stava of Nagarjuna, 1932. J.R.A.S., 309. 1763. Indo-Tibetica : I. Mc’od rten e ts’a ts’a nel Tibet Indiano ed ocoi- dentale. Rome, 1932. 1764. Travels of Ippolito Desideri, 1932. J.R.A.S., 353. 1765. Indo-Tibetica: II. Rin e’en Bzan Po e la rinascata del Buddhis- mo nel Tibet intorno al Mille. Roma, 1933. 1766. The Ratnavall of N&garjuna. From the Tibetan MS., Ostan Agyur, mDo agrel, Vol. E, fol. 124, 1934. J.R.A.S., 307. 1767. Indo-Tibetica: III. I templi del Tibet. Occidental© ed il loro simbolismo artistoco Parte I-II. Roma, 1935-36. 1768. Hitherto unknown in Tibet: Paintings recalling the art of Ajanta, 1936. Illustrated London News, January, 18, 81. 1768(o). Some glosses upon the Guhyasamaja, 1934-35. Melanges chlnois et bouddhlques, III, 339-53. 1768(6). Santi e briganti nel Tibet ignoto. Diario della spedizione nel Tibet oocidentale, 1935. Milano, 1937. 1768(c). Recent Italian explorations in Tibet, 1939. New Asia, I (1), 10-5. 17Qj$(d). Un principato indipendente nel cuore del Tibet : Sachia, 1940. Aslatlca (Rome), VI (6), 353-60, 7 ill. 148 TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY 1768(c). La mia spedizione uel Tibet, 1940. Asiatic**, VI (1), 1-13, 13 ill. 1769. Travels of Tibetan pilgrims in the Swat Valley. Caloutta, 1940. 1770. Forme dello spirito asiatico. Milano, 1940. 1771. Indo-Tibetica: IV. Gyantse ed i Suoi Monasteri. 3 Vols. Roma, 1941. 1772. Tibetan book covers, 1947. Art and Thought, 63. # 1773. The validity of Tibetan historical tradition, 1947. t India An- tique, 309-22. 1774. On sone bronze objects discovered in Western Tibet. Artibus Asiae, V, 105. 1775. Indian paintings in Western Tibetan temples. Artibus Asiae, VII, 191. > 1776. Unknown monasteries of mysterious Tibet visited during a recent journey of exploration. Illustrated London News, February, 17, 246. 1777. Tibetan folk-songs, from the district of Gyantse, 1949. Artibus Asiae : Supplement VII. 1778. II libro tibetano dei morti. 1 Milano, 1949. 1779. Teoria e pratica del mandala conparticolare riguardo alia moder- na psicologia del profonda, 1949. Psiche e conscienza, XII. Roma. 1780. Tibetan notes, 1949. Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, XII, 477. 1781. Tibetan painted scrolls. 2 3 Vols. Roma, 1949. 1782. To Lhasa and beyond, 1950. Annali Lateranensi, XXIV (1), 35-41. 1783. The tombs of the Tibetan Kings. Roma, 1950. (Serie Orientale Roma.) 1784. The Jatinirakrti of Jitari. A.B.O.R.I., XI, 54. 1785. A Lhasa e oltre. Diario della spedizione nel Tibet, 1948. Roma, 1950.® 1785(a). Buddhist notes. I. Apropos Avalokitefivara. H. On the Tibetan cycle of Arhats, 1951. Melanges chinois et bouddhiques, IX, 173-220. 1786(6). Earth in India and Tibet, 1953. Eranos, XXII, 323-64. 1 II libro della salvazione dall* esistenza intermedia. 8 Tibetan Painted Scrolls. An artistio and symbolic illustration of 172 Tibetan paintings preceded by a survey of the historical, artistio, literary and religious development of Tibetan oulture. With an artiole of P. Pelliot on a Mongol edict, the translation of historioal documents and an appendix on pre-Buddhistio ideas of Tibet. Text in 2 vols, 4 to, with plates in folio, portfolio, together 3 vols., with 256 plates, 26 of them in colour. * Con un'appendioe sulla medioina e Tigine nel Tibet di B. Moise. TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY 140 1786(c). The secret characters of kings of ancient Tibet, 1055*66. Bast and West, VI, 107-205. 1785(4). To Lhasa and beyond. Diary of the expedition to Tibet in the year 1047. With an appendix on Tibetan medioine and hygiene, by It. Moise. Translated from the Italian by M. Carelli, 1956. 1785(e). The Fifth Dalai Lama as a Sanskrit scholar, 1057. Sino- Indian Studies, V (3-4), 235-40. Tucci (G.) and Ghbrsi (E.). 1786. Tucci nel Tibet Occidentale. Roma, 1933. 1787. Cronaca della Missions scientifica Tucci nel Tibet occidentale, 1933. Roma, 1934. 1788. Secrets of Tibet; being the chronicle of the Tucci scientific expedi- tion to Western Tibet (1933). Translated from the Italian by M. A. Johnston. London, 1935. Tung Tso-pin. 1789. New evidence concerning the genealogy of Tibeto-Burman people, 1940. Bull. Ethnological Studies, II, 181. Turner (C. H. P.). 1790. The colloquial language of Tibet. 1 Darjeeling, 1897. Turner (Samuel). 1791. Ambassade au Thibet et au Boutan, Contenant des d6tails tres — curieux sur les Moeurs, la Religion, les Productions et le Commerce du Thibet, du Boutan et des etats voisins, et une Notice sur les evenemens qui s’y sont passes jusqu’en 1793; traduit de l’anglais aveo des notes, par J. Cast6ra. 2 Vols. Paris, 1800. 1792. Narrative of the particulars of the journey of Teshoo Lama, and his suite, from Tibet to China, from the verbal report of Poorungheer Gosein. (Extracted from Mr. Turner’s Embassy to Tibet), 1800. Asiatic Annual Register (Misc. Tracts), 58. 1793. Translation of a letter from Kien Long, Emperor of China, to Dalai Lama, the Grand Lama of Tibet. (Extracted from Mr. Turner’s Embassy to Tibet), 1800. Asiatic Annual Register (Misc. Tracts), 69. 1794. Samuel Turner’s, Captains in Diensten der ostind. Compagnie. Gesandtschaftseise an den Hof des Teshoo Lama durch Bootan und einen Theil von Tibet. Aus dem Englischen Obersetzt. Berlin, 1801. 1 Lhasa pronunciation. ISO 1795. TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY Turner’s Reisen nach Butan und Tibet. Ana dem Engl, von Sprengel. Weimar, 1801. 1796. An account of an Embassy to the Court of the Teshoo Lama in Tibet. Containing a narrative of a journey through Bhootan, and part of Tibet. To which are added views taken on the spot, by S. Davis; and observations botanical, mineralogical, and medical by B. Saunders. 2nd ed., London. 1806. 1797. An account of a journey to Tibet to the Hon’ble Johnjdacpherson, Esq. Governor-General, etc., etc., Fort Wifiiam, 1788. Asiatick Research, I (8), 207-21. French tran. by M. Parraud. 1798. Ambascieria al Tibet e al Batan. 3 Vols., Milano. 1817. Turrettini (Francois). 1799. Voyage et aventures do M. et Mme Rijnhart, m6decms-miaaion - naires, dans le Thibet Oriental, . 1899. B.S.G. Genfeve, XXXVIII, 122. U Uchtomsklj (Esper). 1800. Lz oblasti lamaizma. K Pokhodu anglifian na Tibet. St. Peters- burg, 1904. Ui (H.). 1801. On the author of the Mahayanasutralamkara, 1928. Zeit. fOr Indologie und Iranlstlk, VI, 215. 1801(a). Miroku-bosatsu to Miroku-ronji (Maitreya the Bodhisattva and Maitreya the Master of Sastras), 1952. IBK, I (1), 96-102. Ular (Alexander). 1802. England, Russia and Tibet, 1 1902. Contemporary Review, LXXXII, 843. 1803. The solution of the Tibetan problem, 1904. Contemporary Review, LXXXV, 640. 1804. Au ‘Royaume des neiges’. Le Monde Moderne, XIX, 215. 1805. La papaute bouddhique. La Revue, LI, 169. Uljanov (Dambo). 1806. “Dsohe-du-nin-nov”, Kap. 91 u. “Chlan-tab”, Kap. 30: Ueber die Behandlung der Pest, der Cholera u. des Aussatzes nach tibetaniachen Grundsatzen. St. Petersburg, 1902. Unkrig (W. A.). 1807. Aus din letzten fahzfehnten des Lamaismus in Russ land. Mu- enchen, 1926. 1 Extract in Belgique Coloniale, 21 Dleembre, 1002, p. 604, tinder the title 1’ Angleterre, la Bueeie et le Thibet. TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY Ml 1808. Ein moderner buddhistischer Katechismua fur borjatische Kinder 1928. Anthropos, XXIII, 475. 1809. Lamaistische Selbst Versenkung, 1930. Der Erdball, IV, 324. 1809(a). Kosmetika in Tibet und der Mongolei. Ein Ausflug ins Beieh asiatischer Drogen, 1954. Oriens, VII, 265-89. Upcraft (Wm.). 1810. Notes of a journey on the Tibetan Frontier, 1899. Chin. Rec., XXX, May, 232. Uray (G£za). 1811. A Tibetan diminutive suffix, 1 1952. Acta Orientalia Hung- arica, II (2-3), 183-220. 1812. Some problems of the ancient Tibetan verbal morphology, methodological observations in recent studies, 1953. Acta Lingulstica Academlae Scientiarum Hungariae, III (1-2), 37-62. 1812(a). The Suffix -e in Tibetan, 1953. Acta Orientalia Hungarica, III (3), 229-44. 1812(6). Duplication, gemination and triplication in Tibetan, 1955. Acta Orientalia Hungarica, IV, 177-244. 1812(c). On the Tibetan letters ba and wa. Contribution to the origin and history of the Tibetan alphabet. Acta Orientalia Hunga- rica, 1955, V, 101. Valiahmetov (G. M.). 1813. Vnutrennee ustrojstov Tibeta. (The internal structure of Tibet), 1956. Sov. Gos. Pravo., VII, 113-18. Vasileva (V.). 1814. Geografija Tibeta. Perevod iz tibetakago soSinenija MMCiul- * Chutukty, 1895. St. Petersburg- Aka., IV, 8. Vekerdi (J6 zsef). 1814(a). Some remarks on Tibetan prosody, 1952. Acta Orientalia Hungarica, II (2-3), 221-33. Venske (O.). 1815. Die erdmagnetischen Beobachtungen von Dr. Filchner. auf seiner Boise in China und Tibet in den Jahren 1926-28. Ver- offentl. d. Freuss. Meteorol. Inst. Potsdam, Nr. 79, Bd. IX, Nr. 7. Berlin, 1931. Verneau (R.). 1816. Les “ myst^res” a Lhassa. L’Anthropologie, XV, 485. 1 With Russian summary. 152 TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY Veuillot (Eugene). 1817. Le Thibet et lea Missions franfaises dans la Hanll-Asie. Moeurs Chinoises et thib£taines; Voyage de M.M. Auc et Gabet. Reme des Deux-Mondes, XV. Juin, 1850. Vidyabhusana (Satisohandra). 1818. On certain Tibetan scrolls and images, 1 1905. Mem. A.S.B., I. 1. t 1819. Gyantse rock inscription of Chos-rgyal-gnis-pa, a ruler under the Sakyapa hierarch in the fourteenth century A.D., 1906. J. A.S.B., NS, II, 95. 1820. A Tibetan almanac for 1906-7, 1906. J.A.S.B., NS, II, 455. 1821. Hetu-cacra-hamaru, or Dignaga’s Wheel of Reasons; recovered from Lebrang in Sikkim, 1907. J.A.S.B., NS, III, 627. 1822. Indian logic as preserved in Tibet, 1907. J.A.S.B., NS, III, 95, 241 and 541. 1823. Ny5ya-prave$a, or the earliest work extant on Buddhist logic by Dignaga, 1907. J.A.S.B., NS, III, 609. 1824. The Samkhya philosophy in the Land of the Lamas, 1907. J.A.S.B., NS, 111,571. 1825. Sanskrit works on literature, grammar, rhetorio and a lexico- graphy as preserved in Tibet, 1907. J.A.S.B., NS, III, 121 . 1826. A descriptive list of works on the Madhyamika philosophy (No. 1), 1908. J.A.S.B..NS, IV, 367. 1827. Two Tibetan charms obtained by Lt.-Col. S. H. Godfrey in Ladakh, one for chasing away evil spirits and the other for compelling fortune, 1908. J.A.S.B., NS, IV, 253. 1828. Persian affinities of the Licchavis, 1908. Indian Antiquary, XXXVII, 78. 1829. Srid-pa-ho. A Tibeto-Chinese tortoise chart of divination, 1913. Mem. A.S.B., V, 1. 1830. MaharS j a -Kanika-lekha . J.A.S.B., NS, VI, 477. 1831. Bya-chos or the religion of birds. Caloutta. Vigne (G. T.). 1832. Travels in Kashmir, Ladak, Iskardo, etc. 2 Vols. London, 1842. 1 Lately brought from Gyantse. ' ofCouucfl ASIA'ttO SOCIETY 1962 President Dr, O. H, Ghoehal, M.A., Ph.D., F.A.S. Vice-Presidents Dr. A. 0, Uka»M.B.. Jf.S.P.B., F.S.M.F.B., P.A.8. A Dr. N. Dutt, M.A., B.L., Bh.D., D.Lifc. (Land.). P.A.8. Dp. K. N. Baftohj, B.So., M.B., D.T.l*., F.N.I., F.R.I.C. Sri K. P, Khaitan, Barrister ab-Law. Secretaries and Treasurer General Secretary : — Sri S. K. Saraswati, M.A., F.A.S. Treasurer Jnstioa Sri A. 3ST. Ray, M.A. (Cal.), 0.A. (0*0*.), Barrister- at-Law. Philological Secretary : — Professor Chintaharun Chakra varti, HA., JCavyafeiirtlMi. Jte Philological Secretary : — Dr M. Saber Khan* M.A., Ajtf. (Michigan), IXPbil. (O^on.y. f {Physical Science) Pt> XT* p. Bast** (Bioiogie^ Scfenoe) Dr, J, L. BWtori, D.So.* F.A.8., F.Z.8.I, Anthropological Secretary : — Dr. Bajra Ku*na* Chatterjbe, XMfa* (Paris). Historical and Archaeological Secretary rj>r. N, Baoerjea, M.A., f.4,8. * * Medical Secretary -D*. Ranes OhakravArty, M.BJ3.S., P (Sfog.J* a». Other Members af Gaunqil AXjlfeij M^m%_ -. -■ .?i- w*# x . ■ ,■■ ^ ... ., «sum.w. Si&fait ^ Bhat1&ch«ryy». Royal 8vo, 268 ' pjy*j 1957 •••’, -..*. .. ■»*' ^8.16 .00 && S&te^ipgaJka, m a important Canonical Pali .text. ' E& by j^.Ram&pras&d Chandhuri andSriDeva Prasad Doha. vRoykl 8vo, 348 pp., 1067 ... , -JEjfc».JMS.0p! ; j. / ■££*£{'' j« - * ' . . \. Ascribed to Wk XXVIII-XXXVI). Original Ssinskrit ^it edited with introduction and variohe readings from MSS. and '^ringed texts by Dr. M.- Ghosh. Royal 8vo, 218 .. 1068 * . . . .'. . . ibjyi?0(i fc ' % i itodhicary&vatdra. Tibetan text with Sanskrit ye^AGqoL Ed. by Mia. Pfe. Vidhusekhar Bliattaoharyya. Roy*! 8vo, H 7pp.il»60 V- ;=/’ • • . Rs.26.00 jgfipsj tEjfofcPar&tera. Ed. and tr, by .$Nr» G. P. MaJumdLar add 2>^ S. O. Banerji. Ro^l Syd. l^^ loeO Rs.i.60 '% ■■ tThe. NOfyoAfotra. SaSjf^^tfaw .on Hindu Dmmkttrfgy and - . Histrionics aedf&ect to Rjsuwsata • Muni, Voi.~ ,H (Gh. : first tithe from the original Sanskrit with an in^oduotion and yttriona notek by Dr. M.Ghoeh, Royal 8y0, 208, pp., 1961 ■■-"■'■ ‘ ’■'■ -■i^bara, ftft' Journal of (he Asiatic Society. Vol IV, Nos. 3 &4, 1962 . JOSEPH TIEFFENTHALER AND HIS GEOGRAPHY OF HINDUSTAN By S. N. Sun In the seventeenth and the eighteenth centuries the Jesuit missionaries in India played an important role in the advancement of secular learning — in astronomy and geography, natural history, history and oriental studies. In the seventeenth century we hear of Father Antonio Ceschi, a learned mathe- matician, who was also interested in the Sanskritic studies. The Bavarian Father Henry Roth was one of the early Europeans to have introduced the Sanskrit characters to the notice of the literati of Europe. Fathers Johann Grueber and Albert d’ Orville, belonging to the team of Jesuit astronomers working in China, travelled from Pekin to Agra via the difficult route through Lhasa and Nepal and determined the latitudes of a number of places in northern India, including Patna. In the coastal and peninsular India, a good many Jesuit missionaries, skilled in astronomy, were engaged throughout the seventeenth and the eighteenth centuries in determining the latitudes and occasionally the longitudes of places. Of them the most conspicuous were Fathers Bouchet, Mandeslo and Noel, whose valuable ob- servations enabled D’Anville to prepare a reliable map of peninsular India. Father Claude Boudier of Chanderhagore rendered signal service to the cause of Indian geography by his remarkably accurate latitude and longitude determinations. No less significant in the history of the eighteenth- century astronomy in India is the part played by the Jesuit astronomers, Fathers Figuerado, Gabelsperger, Strobl and others associated at one time or other with the astronomical observatories set up by Raja Jai Singh Sawai. To such a group of Jesuit astronomers, mathematicians and geographers belonged Father Joseph Tieffenthaler, probably the most remarkable of them all. Joseph Tieffenthaler was bom at Bolzano (also known as Botzen or Bozen) in the old Austrian Tyrol on 24th July, 1710. 1 Practically nothing is known about his early career except that he joined the Society of Jesus on 9th October, 1729, left Austria for Spain in 1740, where he spent two years in the service of the Society of Spain, and in 1743 sailed from Portugal for India, by way of the Philippines, to spend, as it came to pass, the rest of his life in the vast sub-continent. It is certain that Father Tieffenthaler had a good education in the religious schools of Tyrol and, along with his ecclesiastical and humanistic studies, acquired sufficient proficiency, according to the standards of the day, in mathematics, astronomy, geography and natural sciences, with a good grounding in the languages. Before leaving the shores of Europe he had become a trained mathematician and astronomer, skilled in the use of astronomical and philosophical instruments, including the quadrant, the armillary astrolabe and the magnetio compass, for the determination of geographical latitudes and longitudes, for observing such astronomical phenomena as the eclipses, the transits of inferior planets, the sun-spots aud the like and for keeping meteorological records concerning the variation of temperatures and wind. In biological sciences, although he wrote a treatise, reported to be lost, on the natural history of India, describing the - — *- - ■ - . - ■ . - - . ■ - - - 1 Phillimore, I, 388. Maolagaa (137) mentions the year of his birth as 1715. ( 76 ) 76 8. N. SEN [VOL. IV, flora and the fauna, 1 he does not appear from what can be gleaned from his extant Geography, to have either gone very far or kept touch with the progress that had been taking place in Europe in these sciences. 2 His linguistic equipment on which the Jesuit Order had always laid great emphasis was extraordinary even by the standard of the said Order; for, besides German, his own tongue, he had a good knowledge of Latin, Italian, Spanish and French, to which he added, during his long stay in India, a good working knowledge of Persian, Arabic, Hindustani, Sanskrit and possibly other languages. 3 From the fact that he composed njost of his writings in good Latin it is open to question whether he attained an equally good literary standard in other European languages besides his native German. The encyclopaedic work he undertook of composing an historical and geographical description of Hindustan, conceived on such a wide plan as to include the physical and natural features, resources and products of the vast sub-continent, the manners, customs, occupations, religious beliefs of a multitude of races inhabiting the land, and their arts, sculpture, monuments and buildings, called for a close familiarity with works of a diverse nature written in the languages of the country for which purpose Tieffenthaler ‘ n’avoit pas n6glig6 de se familiariser avec les langues les plus usit^es dans le pays, le Persan, le Maure ou Indoustan, & d’autres \ 4 Of all these languages he acquired the most perfect knowledge of the Persian in which he composed at least two treatises. 5 We have Tieffenthaler’ s own words that ‘ j’ai lu dans les livres Persans qui traitent de la Geographic & de l’Histoire de l’lnde \° Regarding his Persian writings, he informs us that he utilized his leisure hours, during his stay in Narwar, in writing in Persian various tracts refuting the Mahomedan sect and a number of other booklets aimed at explaining the mysteries of Christianity and arousing piety in the reader. 7 He was certainly not a Sanskrit scholar, but that he knew enough Sanskrit may be assumed from his reported compilation of a Sanskrit- Persian dictionary which, like many of his writings, had long since ceased to be extant. It is not known definitely whether Tieffenthaler was sent to India as one of the many Jesuit missionaries for the general intention of furthering the interests and objects of the Society or whether he had originally been intended, as both Noti and Maclagan have supposed, for astronomical work in one of Raja Jai Singh’s observatories. 8 Jai Singh’s interest in having European astronomers work in his famous observatory at his capital city and, more particularly, the arrival in 1740 in Jaipur of two Bavarian Jesuit missionaries, Fathers Gabelsperger and Strobl, arranged at the Raja’s request by the Society’s headquarters in Rome, 9 make such an assumption very plausible indeed. Father Gabelsperger, it may further be noted, died the following year, in 1741. What we know more definitely is the death of Raja Jai Singh Sawai in 1743, the very year Tieffenthaler sailed from Portugal for India, and, with the passing of this great patron 1 Phillimore, I, 388; Sommervogel, S. J.: BiblioMque de la Soctiti de J6m$, Paris, 1932; Bernoulli, I, 6; II, 421-24. 2 Bernoulli, Preface, X. 3 Maclagan, 138. Noti, 146. Bernoulli, Preface, IX. 4 Bernoulli, Zoc. cit. 6 Noti, loc . cit. 6 I» 3. 7 I, 5. 8 Noti, 146. Maclagan, 137. 2 Maclagan, 134. IB 1 962] JOSEPH TFEFFE NTHALER AND HIS GEOGRAPHY OP HINDUSTAN 77 of science and learning, the end of a brief but brilliant interlude in obser- vational astronomy of which we have few instances, if any, in India. Whatever the original intention, any hope of being engaged solely in astronomical observations and research had been lost for good before Tieffenthaler set his foot on the soil of India. He was ordered by the Jesuits authorities of Goa to proceed to Agra to take up apostolic work in the famous Jesuit College there. Since the days of Akbar it had always remained the focal point of the Mission. His journey from Goa to Agra shortly after his arrival in 1743 marked the beginning of a life of restless travels and wanderings which took him through the greater part of India and of which he himself has left an account to be reviewed in what follows. His work at the Agra College was short, for in 1747, while still a young man — a 4 wackerer und eiffervoller Missionarius’ — he was appointed as a priest to the Bourbon Colony at Narwar, and carried on the duties of his assignment till 1765, a period of about eighteen years, undertaking frequent travels, making observations and measurements, taking copious notes of whatever he observed, and thus continuously collecting materials for his proposed Description Tieffenthaler’ s activities fell during the declining phase of the Jesuit Mission. By a decree of July, 1759, from King Joseph of Portugal, the Mission was closed from all Portuguese territories and all Jesuit missionaries of Portuguese and other nationalities were packed home as prisoners and subjected to many atrocities. 1 Although Tieffenthaler was fortunate to escape such an ordeal, he felt the pinch before long. This was further aggravated by the death of the Armenian Governor of Narwar. By 1765 his congregation dwindled to such an extent and had reached such financial straits that he had no alternative other than to abandon Narwar in search of work and subsistence elsewhere. Overnight he became, as it were, ‘a pastor without a flock; worse yet, he was a penniless man, without even the necessaries of life’. 2 In such distressing circumstances he thought of approaching the authorities of the English Company in Bengal for financial assistance and journeyed to Calcutta by taking the land route through Datia, Jhansi, Mahoba, Kalinjar, Allahabad, Lucknow, Fyzabad, Jaunpur, Banaras and the river route down the Ganges, visiting such places as Patna, Monghyr, Bajmahal, Murshidabad, Hughli, Chandernagore. Bernoulli’s translation of Tieffenthaler’s description, inserted in the author’s preface, of his own plight on the eve of his quitting Narwar is reproduced below: • 4 Mais vers le commencement de 1765, me trouvant embarrass^ pour ma subsistance, je fus oblige de quitter Narvar, & je pris la resolution de me transporter dans le Bengale, persuade que l’illustre nation Angloise, qui se distingue par son humanity, par sa liberality, & par sa charity envers les indigens, ne me laisseroit pas sans secours.’ 8 The much-needed financial assistance Tieffenthaler must have got without difficulty, for in the month of October of the same year we find him leisurely proceeding up the Ganges, with compass and possibly other instruments in hand, following the meandering course of the great river, carefully tracing the same on paper as well as the mouths of the various tributaries falling into it and marking down the places on either side of the river. This ushered in a new phase of his activity, namely a thorough exploration of the course of the Ganges and of the hitherto little-known Gogra basin. For five years, beginning 1766, he travelled all over the 1 275. 2 Noti, 270. 3 1 , 5 . 78 S. N. SEN [VOL. IV, province of Oudh, with Lucknow as his headquarters, visiting innumerable places and exploring the principal rivers and their tributaries flowing through this province. A detailed description of his observations is recorded in his geography of the province of Oudh 1 and in the paper, ‘La Description du cours du Gauge & du Gagra, avec une tres grande carte’, which the learned French orientalist, M. Anquetil du Perron, first published on the basis of Tieffenthaler’s manuscript and drawings in the Journal des Sgavans in December, 1776. Later on, the paper was enlarged and incorporated in the second volume, part two, of Bernoulli’s Description. The appearance of Anquetil’s paper and maps immediately established the Gfcgra as a major river extending over a length of 500 cosses and having no less than 29 affluents and Father Tieffenthaler as a pioneering geographer among the European savants of the time. Little information is available of Tieffenthaler’s activities from 1771 or 1772, by which time he had finished his survey of the rivers of Oudh, till his death in 1785. On finishing his Oudh survey he in all probability settled down to arrange and give final shape to his manuscripts and drawings which must have by this time grown to voluminous proportions. The suppression of the Jesuit Mission left him with no hope of publishing his materials through ecclesiastical channels; the only course open to him, therefore, was to interest some influential scholars in Europe in his endeavours in order that his works might see the light of day or might at least escape destruction. As early as 1759, while still in Narwar, he had picked up by correspondence the acquaintance of Anquetil du Perron, the weird pioneer of oriental scholarship, during the latter’s stay in Surat. To Anquetil, who had meanwhile settled in Paris as a member of l’Acad6mie Royale des Inscriptions & Belles-Lettres and interpreter to the King for Oriental Languages, he sent from Fyzabad in 1776 his three large maps, representing the entire course of the Ganges and the upper and the lower courses of the Gogra and 21 detached drawings of the confluents of the various tributaries of these two rivers. 2 His geographical and other manuscripts, all written in Latin, were sent to Dr. Kratzenstein, a renowned professor of medicine and physic in Copenhagen, through a mutual friend, Mr. Flohr, a medical practitioner in the Danish colonies, whom Tieffenthaler had intimately known. 2 Tieffenthaler must have felt quite happy in being thus able to send his maps, manuscripts and drawings to safe hands in Europe. In the Preface of his Geography , he writes : *1 have despatched to Europe, with my Description of India, the drawings of a large number of cities, castles and fortresses in order that those who had not visited these countries may, while looking at these drawings, see these multitudes of cities and fortresses as if in a mirror and in spite of their immense distances have them, so to speak, before their eyes.’ 4 We hear of his stay in Agra in 1778 when he was already old and in failing health, ‘vecchio cadente’. 5 It appears that he was in Agra up to 1781, in which year he handed over the Agra Mission to the Carmelites and transferred his quarters to Lucknow. 6 In 1784, Col. F. Wilford, the learned orientalist, met the old Father at Lucknow one year before his 1 1, 250-307. 2 Bernoulli, Preface, I, X; II, 266. Noti, 410. 8 Ibid., Mr. Flohr had died in Patna a few years before Bernoulli undertook to edit, translate and publish Tieffenthaler’s Geography. *1,7. * VI, 637, 1910. 6 Maolagan, 137. 1962] JOSEPH TIBFYENTHALER AND HIS/ GEOGRAPHY OP HINDUSTAN 79 death and several years later referred to his visit as follows: *1 saw the good old man at I/ucbnow, in the year 1784, He was a man of austere manners, and incapable of deceit.’ 1 There is hardly any doubt that Wilford made good use of his acquaintance and meeting with Tieffenthaler, to whose geographical and historical descriptions he frequently referred. He obtained from the old Father extracts from Otter’s works which Tieffenthaler had procured from Europe. These circumstances have been utilized by Father Hosten in suggesting that Tieffenthaler probably had in his possession the original manuscript, supposed to be lost for over three hundred years, of Father Monserrate’s Mongolicae Legation is Commentarius , if not the whole MS. at least his Book II dealing with the geography and natural history of India intra Oangem , the customs of the ancient aborigines and the present-day natives, and that Wilford who made use of much of Monserrate’s geographical materials obtained the MS. from the old man at Lucknow. 2 Tieffenthaler died in 1785 at Lucknow, but his body was interred at the Padri Tolla Cemetery at Agra. 3 Tieffenthaler’s Travels in India In the Preface to his Descriptio Indiae, Tieffenthaler recorded, inter alia, a brief but valuable diary of his travels in India, in the course of which he covered a large number of districts and visited innumerable cities, principalities and villages, largo and small. 4 Some dates and details of his astronomical and other observations may also be gleaned from the mass of information given in the Description . His itineraries in India during 1743-1770 are shown in a map prepared for this purpose. In the month of December, 1743, he arrived by boat at the Portuguese colony of Daman, and from there went by sea to Surat, a very famous commercial city. Here he spent some time in making astronomical obser- vations, such as the determination of the latitude and longitude of Surat, and correcting its longitude by observing the occultation of Jupiter by the moon on 2nd February, 1744. 5 Possibly he went to Daman from Salsette, where we find him busy in finding the latitude by the sun’s meridian altitude and observing on 4th November, 1743, the Transit of Mercury across the sun’s disc ‘ comme un charbon ardent’. 6 Unfortunately, Tieffenthaler was unable to take advantage of the phenomenon for any useful astronomical purpose, due to his failure to observe, in the absence of proper instruments, the ingress and egress of the transit. In March, 1744, he returned to Daman, observing on the way the comet, and stayed here till the end of September. He observed a lunar eclipse on 26th April and calculated the difference of longitudes between Paris and Daman to be 4 lir. 20 min. 7 The same year he went back to Surat and from there travelled by road to Broach, Baroda, Godhra, Lunavada, Sagwara, Udaipur, up to the newly-built and magnificent city of Jaipur, also known as Jainagar. At Broach he observed the declination or variation of the 1 Asiatick Researches, IX, 212, 1807. . 2 Hosten, 527-28. 3 Blunt, 51-62. * I, 3-7. ® I, 404. • I, 501. Bernoulli corrects the date of the Transit of Mercury to 4th November; the rppnth is not mentioned in the text through oversight and the date is put wrongly as 5. 7 I, 407. 80 S. N. SEN [VOL. IV, magnetic compass as 3° 30' 1 on 2nd November, 1744, and measured the latitude of the place about the same time. 2 By 23rd November he was in Udaipur, where he determined its latitude as 25°. From Jaipur, he took the route leading towards east and visited Dig, the royal residential city of the prince of the Jats. From there he arrived at Agra, either towards the end of 1744 or at the beginning of the following year; for on 2nd and 3rd May we find him occupied with latitude determina- tion of the city. 3 For the next few years the Jesuit College of Agra was to be the place of his work. On 7th March, 1740, he used an eclipse ol^the moon for determining the longitude of Agra. From Agra he mad% frequent excursions in 1745 to Muttra, Brindaban and other neighbouring places sacred to the Hindus, particularly to those believing in the Krsna cult, and collected information about the Krsna legend and the religious beliefs and practices of the Vaisnavas and the Vairagls. In Muttra he did not fail to visit Jai Singh’s astronomical observatory on the summit of a hill. In May, 1747, he visited Delhi, ‘capitale actuelle de l’lnde’ and the residence of the Mogol Emperors. On 16th and 17th May he determined the latitude of the capital with an astrolabe. 4 His stay in Delhi was brief, for in July of the same year he proceeded to Narwar to join his apostolic duties to the Christian community there. Narwar, Tieffenthaler informs us, was then under the governorship of a Christian of Armenian descent, who served under a Hindu Raja and at the same time commanded honours and favours from the Mogol Emperor. 5 * He built a chapel for his Christian community which was apparently in a flourishing state and Father Tieffenthaler’s duty it was to minister to their spiritual needs. For the next 18 years this picturesque city on the summit of a mountain in Central India remained the place of his evangelistic and literary activities — a centre from where he planned and executed several travels. In 1750 he set out on a journey to Goa. Following a southemly route, he at first went over a number of places in the province of Malwa, and visited important cities such as Sironj, Sarangpur and Ujjain. He observed the latitude of Sarangpur on 3rd March and that of Ujjain on 6th March, 175O. 0 At Ujjain he visited the astronomical observatory built by late Raja Jai Singh Sawai of which he has given a description in his Geography. 7 Proceeding further south he crossed the river Narbada, penetrated with difficulty into the district of Newar, and reached the city of Burhanpur ( Brahmpour or Borhanpour ), the capital and seat of govern- ment of the province of Chandess. Thereafter he moved through the territory of Concon and proceeded to Goa by way of Thana, Bombay and Sifardan halting, among other places, at Nasik and Kalyan for determining the latitudes of these two places on 1st and 6th April respectively. He arrived in Goa on 20th April and stayed there for six months. His return trip to Narwar was through the province of Gujarat and Ajmer. Towards the end of October, 1750, he left Goa for Surat, from where he took the route through Broach, Cambay, Gujarat (modem Ahmadabad) and Radhanpur. This was his second visit to Broach. Although he does not mention Baroda after Broach in his Preface in this 1 Noti insufficiently interprets ‘la d6clinaison de la boussole’ as ‘the dip of the magnetic needle*, 149. 2 I, 391. » I, 165. 4 I, 125. 5 I, 175-76. • I, 351, 347. 7 I, 347. 1962] JOSEPH TIEFFENTHALER AND HIS GEOGRAPHY OF HINDUSTAN 81 particular journey, he appears to have passed through this city for the second time, for he determined the latitude of Baroda on 10th January, 1751. 1 In Cambay, he measured the latitude of the place on 14th January, 1751. 2 and one week later that of Ahmadabad. 3 He arrived at Radhanpur in the month of February and observed the latitude of the city. From there he travelled through the province of Marwar and visited among others Jalor, Jodhpur and Merta. It may be' noted that in this journey from Gujarat to Jalor, Tieffenthaler took the longer route tlirough Cari, Sami, Radhanpur, Babhar, Tharad, Sanchor and Bhinmal, a large part of which passes over arid tracts, instead of following the shorter route through Mehsana, Palanpur and Bhinmal. 4 He was in Jalor on 1st March and determined on this date its latitude and in Jodhpur on 6th March, whose latitude was likewise observed. From Merta, he entered the province of Ajmer and reached the city around 14th March on which date he observed and determined the latitude of the place. 6 He also calculated Ajmer’s longitude from route mileage, but was not satisfied with the result and stressed the need for further examination by the more dependable astrono- mical methods. He visited the famous Salt Lake of Sambhar near Ajmer and left a valuable account of the manufacture of salt from its saline waters and its importance in the State’s economy. 0 At Sambhar he measured the latitude with the help of an astronomical quadrant made of copper and also calculated its longitude. From Ajmer he visited Jaipur for the second time and from there proceeded to see the famous fortress of Ranthambhor. On the last lap of his journey from Ranthambhor to Narwar, he crossed the Chambal and took the route towards the south-east through Sopor or Sopour, modern Sheopur, Carail (or Carael) and Porim (or Pori), modem Pauri, arriving at Narwar in the month of April, 1751. He did not stay long at Narwar and was again out after a few months on a tour which took him through Gwalior, Gohad, Atter, and Bhind to Agra. Towards the end of November of the same year he returned to Narwar from Agra by way of Sikandra, Fatehpur, Bayana, Karauli, Mandrael, Bijaipur and Gopalpur. During the next twelve years Tieffenthaler passed most of his time in Narwar. Nevertheless he undertook three or four journeys to Agra and Delhi for visiting in particular Father Andre Strobl, who had come to India from Germany at the invitation of Raja Jai Singh, curious astronomer, accompanied by another missionary (Father Gabelsperger, d. 1741) to work in his Jaipur observatory. He also made other exploratory excursions to nearby places, as is evident from his observations of the latitudes of Kotta and Sheopur on 8th and 31st March, 1759, respectively. 7 Some of his Persian works refuting Islam and a number of small tracts propounding the mysteries of Christianity were written in his leisure time during this period. From towards the beginning of 1766, following the suppression of the Jesuit mission, the death of Narwar’s Armenian Governor and the decline of its Christian community, Father Tieffenthaler was again on the move at first in search of financial assistance and patronage from the English East India Company in Bengal and thereafter in quest of exploration. of 1 1, 394. * I, 381. * I, 376. «■ I, 332-33. i I* 311. * I, 312-13. 7 I, 322, 324. 82 S. N. SEN [VOL. IV, the river basins of the Ganges and the Gogra in the province of Oudh. Leaving Narwar he took the route through Datia, Jhansi and Urcha, obser- ving the latitude of Datia on 2nd February, 1765, 1 and entered the district of Dangaya in Bundelkhand. He visited Mahoba (Mahobba), Kalinjar, Chitrakut, a sacred place of the Hindus, Chhatarpur, Jima, Paraa, noted for its diamond mines, and Ajaigarh, and arrived at Thoroa . The dates of his visits to some of these places can be ascertained from his records of observing latitudes, e.g. Mohoba in February; Rassein, a big village, seven miles north-east of Kalinjar, on 1st March; Thoroa on 3rd Mai$h, 1765. 2 After Thoroa he crossed the Jamna and arrived at Allahabad. * About the beginning of April, he left Allahabad for Lucknow where he determined its latitude on 7th April. 3 After Lucknow, he visited Bangla or Fyzabad, Jaunpur and Banaras, where he took to the river route down the Ganges by boat, visiting successively Patna, Monghyr, Rajmahal, Murshidabad, Cassembazar, Hughli, Chandemagore and finally Calcutta, In this part of the country, Tieffenthaler did not waste time over latitude determinations in view of excellent values already obtained by Father Boudier of Chandemagore, 4 a very skilled and competent astronomer, and accepted and utilized by all geographers from d’Anville to Rennell. From Calcutta he returned to Allahabad in a small boat about the end of October, 1765. In his journeys down and up tho Ganges, as has already been said, he carefully observed with a compass the course of the Ganges, sketched the manifold windings and the junction of rivers dis- charging into tho Ganges as well as jotted down a large number of places situated on either side of the river bank. In his own words (Bernoulli's translation): ‘Vers la fin d'October de la meme ann6e, je me mis dans un petit bateau, & retoumai k Elahbad. En allant & en revenant j’ai observe & suivi avec la boussole le cours du Gauge , le plus grand des fleuves de l’lnde; j’ai tracd sur le papier ses differens detours; j’ai marque les endroits situ^s sur l un & l’autre bord, & j’ai dessin6 l’embouchure, des rivieres qui se jettent dans le Gauge' In February, 1766, he left the Company’s camp at Corra and returned to Allahabad at the end of April. On 3rd February before leaving for Corra, he had carried out a latitude determination of Allahabad and obtained the value of 25° 9' as against 25° 25' by Claude Boudier. 5 From Allahabad he moved to Lucknow and, making this city his headquarters, travelled over a period of five years throughout the length and breadth of the province of Oudh, visiting a large number of cities £jnd villages which he meticulously described or just referred to, with a few details of their geographical location in his Geography. His geography of the province of Oudh makes tedious reading on account of what appears to be unnecessary and avoidable details of unimportant places. In this he indulged purposely, it appears, with a view to describing accurately the passages, endless windings and curves of a large number of rivers and rivulets flowing through this province — five large rivers, the Gogra, the Sarju, the Gumti, the Chauka and the Rapti, and about seventeen smaller ones noticed by Tieffenthaler himself. 6 In fact, the main object of his 1 1, 183. * I, 244, 247, 248. * I, 257. 4 Father Claude Boudier (b. 16-10-1686 in France and d. 1757 in Chandemagore) arrived in Bengal about 1718-19, established himself at the French colony of Chandemagore as a skilled astronomer and visited the Jaipur observatory at Kaja Jai Singh’s invitation in 1734. 5 I, 227. « I, 261 . 1962 ] JOSEPH TIEFFENTHALER AND HIS GEOGRAPHY OF HINDUSTAN 83 travels in Oudh was to explore the courses of these various rivers from their mouths up to their sources in the northern mountains, for which purpose, as he himself informs us, he not only moved about from place to place himself, but equipped a person trained in geography with a compass and sent him to the Camaun mountains up to the cataract of the Gogra, one of the largest rivers judged by the volume of waters it discharges, and even up to Pethana and the defiles of Deucara, in order to measure the distance of the places and determine from them their relative positions. ‘Non seulement je parcourus en personne ces differentes contrdes; mais j’ai encore muni d’une boussole un homme vers6 dans la geographic & je l’ai envoy6 jusque sur les monts de Camaoun & aux cataractes du Gogra , un des fleuves le plus considerables par le volume de ses eaux; jusqu’it Pethana & aux defiles de Deucara (Saltus Deucaranos) pour mea- surer les distances des lieux & en determiner les situations respectives.’ 1 In addition to his riverine exploration, Tieffenthaler did not neglect to ascertain with an astronomical quadrant the latitudes of several places in this province, previously inadequately served, if at all, by such determi- nations. These places include Lucknow (7th April, 1765), 2 Gorakhpur (11th March, 1770), 3 Bahraich (Beraiz), 4 Khairabad ( Gherabad ), 6 Balrampur (4th March, 1770), 6 Pethana , 7 Nanamao , 8 Mouhcmmadi (11th April, 1769), 9 Poulhar (lake), 10 Cacrela (6th December, 1767) 11 and Dorania (12th Decem- ber, 1767). 12 At Balrampur and Nanamao, he was unsuccessful with his quadrant, due to clouds covering the sky, but calculated the latitudes on tho basis of route mileage. The latitude of Pethana, 53 miles north of Balrampur, from which one mile was rejected to account for detours of tho route over mountainous tracts, was determined solely from considerations of route mileage. The object of such great care and trouble as he took throughout his travels in India in determining the latitudes of places was to be able to prepare without difficulty, whenever he wanted to, a geographical map of India — ‘afin que si jamais je voulois dresser une carte geographiquo de lTnde, ce travail difficile me devint plus ais 6 \ It is doubtful and indeed a matter of great disappointment if Tieffenthaler could ever settle down to carry out his cherished desire of producing a map of India, which, apart from being an important contribution to Indian cartography, would have immensely facilitated the study of his Descriptio India*,. Bernoulli had to make good this deficiency as well as possible with the help of Renneirs map of Hindoostan. Tieffenthaler’s Works Tieffenthaler’s magnum opus is without doubt his Descriptio India*, the original title given by the author himself to his work in Latin, which * 1 . 2 I, 257. 3 I, 259. 4 I, 259. « I, 261. « I, 262. * I, 264. ‘ ® I, 271. • I, 280. I, 281. 11 L 289. 12 I, 289. Bennell criticized Tieffenthaler for not measuring the latitudes of a still larger dumber of plaoes, particularly those near and at the source of the Gogra, and for not visiting the source himself ( Memoir , 308). 84 S. N. SEN [VOL. IV, Bernoulli in bis French version renamed, not without justification, 1 La Geographic de VIndoustan. A general title such as ‘ Description of India ’ implies much more than the author envisaged. True it is, Tieffenthaler, in his encyclopaedic efforts to give as full a description of India as possible, touched practically on all possible subjects such as chronology, religion, history, manners and customs, revenues, natural history, natural products and mineral resources, art, architecture, monuments, buildings, town plan- ning, etc., and gave for provinces, sometimes even for districts and cantons, long and interesting lists of their past rulers. But the centraj purpose, as is abundantly manifest throughout the work, was to give a geographical description of the country. Tieffenthaler himself was not unaware of this, as otherwise what could be the reason of his writing separate and more comprehensive treatises on other subjects, such as the Natural History of India, the Religion of the Brahmins ? As to the word ‘ lTndoustan ’, the scope of his geography did not include the whole of India but was limited to the territory over which the Mogol power at its highest extended but which never comprised the whole of India. This territory was generally known by the name of ‘Hindustan', in the Persian works in particular, to which Tieffenthaler has himself called attention: ‘ Les Persans disent Hindoustan, et cette denomination n’est pas ignore de ceux qui poss^dent les langues Indienne, Persane et Arab©.’ 2 For the same reason, Bernoulli objects to Rennell’s calling his work Memoir of a Map of Hindoostan as it covered the whole of India and has preferred to entitle his translation of the Memoir (Volume III) as La Carte gbnbrale de VInde , etc. Viewed in the background of the eighteenth century interest in historical and geographical researches concerning South and South-East Asia and India in particular, and of Tieffenthaler’ s own training and proficiency in astronomy, sciences, history and languages, it is not unlikely that he had conceived of such a project before leaving Europe. Significantly enough from the moment of his setting foot in India, ho busied himself in the collection of materials either by proper observations, or by studies or through information from knowledgeable persons, for a complete and detailed description and a good geographical map of India — a task which absorbed all his time and energies outside his normal apostolic duties, for a span of thirty years. 3 ‘Much has been written *and many scholarly works have appeared on India, her grandeur, her religion and on the manners and customs of her inhabitants.’ Writes Tieffenthaler: ‘Nevertheless this very vast country offers yet an abundance of materials to write. is precisely what I have been busy in assembling in this volume — such things as I have observed with my own eyes during a span of thirty years, things I have read in Persian books treating of the geography and the history of India and what I have learned in the course of conversation with persons informed in these matters. In Europe, one greedily awaits the precious merchandise from India ; in sending this treatise I flatter myself to believe that it will be received with the same eagerness by the curious who will appreciate my work.’ Such sustained labours produced not just one but several works, maps and drawings. Reference has already been made to the three extra- ordinarily large maps on the course of the Ganges and the Gogra, 21 detached drawings of confluents of the various tributaries and related explanatory materials, put to good use by Anquetil and preserved for posterity by that 1 Bernoulli, Preface, XIII-XIV. 2 I, 30. 8 Bernoulli, Preface, X; I, 3. 1962] JOSEPH TIEFFENTHALER AND HIS GEOGRAPHY OF HINDUSTAN 85 learned orientalist. As to his other writings, all in Latin, and sketches of which no trace could be made shortly after their arrival in Europe and by the time Bernoulli got interested in his works, we have only Tieffenthaler’s own statements, notices of Anquetil and Bernoulli and Sommer vogel’s recent bibliography. 1 These include: (1) A treatise on the Religion of the Brahmins , their ceremonies and manners and the much- vaunted wisdom of their philosophers ; this work contains such things as deserve to be reported, taken from Indian works, to which were added as illustrations drawings of idols, temples and other objects. (2) A Natural History of India dealing with animals, birds, trees, plants and flowers, with a pencil sketch in each case. (3) A book containing remarks and observations on the varia- tions of the air and such other natural phenomena as the eclipses, the sun-spots, and the zodiacal light. (4) A catalogue of places of which geographical latitudes were observed. (5) A paper entitled ‘ De Longitude et Latitudine Indiae \ (6) Indian astronomy and astrology. (7) The course of the Ganges, together with a description of the villages and cities lying on both banks. (8) The course of the Ganges from Priaga or Chlabado (Allahabad) to Calcutta, explored with the aid of a magnetic needle. (9) The course of the Jamna, which is numbered among the great rivers. (10) Geographical maps showing various coasts of India. To these Sommervogel also adds his drawings of cities and forts, temples, idols and mountains which appear to form part of his Geography and his Religion of the Brahmins . Some of the drawings attached to his Geography are reproduced in Plates I-IV. Phillimore has located among Orme MSS. a letter Tieffenthaler wrote to General Richard Smith and a review of D’Anville’s maps with the remark: ‘Pour connoitre le Latitude et Longitude, la grandeur des villes considerables de l’lnde, leur situations, et autres choses r6marquables de cette vaste Empire, on consultera la description latin faite par le P.J.T.S. (Orme MSS. 23 (51)). Thomas Call received some of his papers, probably through Wilford. Of these the first two, e.g. the Religion of the Brahmins and the Natural History of India, were among his major works. But as far as their merit can be guessed from occasional observations and statements concerning these subjects, incorporated in his Geography , their loss, Bernoulli was inclined to think, did not appear regrettable. Abraham Roger and Messrs. Dow and Hollwell had already done much useful work on the former subject, 2 and although the scope of further work was by no means exhausted, there were enough materials for the purpose available to a scholar in Europe at that time. Moreover, Tieffenthaler was handicapped by his inadequacy in Sanskrit to make much use of original Indian sources. But a more serious factor was his incapacity as a missionary charged with the duty of spreading Christianity among the idolators to approach the subject of Hindu religion and philosophy with sympathy and understanding and above all with a scholarly and scientific detachment such as generally 1 Bernoulli, Preface, IX; I, 6-7; II, 421-24; Sommervogel, BibliotMqtie de la Socteti de J&sus, Paris, 1932; Phillimore, I, 388. * Roger, Abraham, Vita db Moeura des Bromines. 86 S. N. SEN [VOL. IV, characterizes his astronomical and geographical studies. He spoke con* temptuously of the manners and customs of the Vairdgis (Beragiens & de Beragiennes), a Vais^ava sect, he observed at Muttra and found nothing but superstition and obscenity in the cult of Krsoa and Radha whom he described as the former’s concubine. 1 Likewise, the good missionary was always repelled at the sight of the image of Mahadeva ( Mahadeo ) for which his appellations were sometimes ‘la figure obscene de Mahadeo ’ 2 at others T infame figure de Mahadeo \ 3 Some of his Persian tracts, as already noticed, were directed against Islam and a number of others written to glorify Christianity. * Bernoulli suspected that Tieffenthaler’s Natural History , even if found, would have hardly satisfied the connoisseur. Granting that he had picked up enough knowledge in these sciences as a Jesuit from Tyrol would most probably have done, he became fast out-of-date, particularly in view of new and radical developments in tho system of classification and nomen- clature at the hands of such eminent naturalists as Bauhin, Tournefort and Carl von LinnA This is evident from a few notices relating to natural history, botany in particular, contained in his Geography, which are not only poor and weak in their descriptions but use outmoded designations of plants from which it is difficult to guess their synonyms according to the new nomen- clature then widely in use in Europe, or to ascertain whether he was referring to an unknown plant. It is also doubtful if the sketches he says he attached to his Natural History would have added much, as these were probably drawn, like those of his Geography , by a non-professional artist unskilled in biological drawings. In marked contrast to Tieffenthaler’s efforts, foundations of the science of natural history in India wore being laid through- out the eighteenth century by a set of professional men well grounded in the new system, such as Petrus Artedi, Henry Ruysch, Mark Eliezer Bloch and others in Europe 4 and Rheed (Hortus malabaricus), the Tranquobar missionaries J. G. Koenig, K. G. Klein, Benjamin Heyne and others, Patrick Russell, William Roxburgh and James Anderson, all working princi- pally in the coastal areas of peninsular India. 5 Tho same cannot be said of his astronomical and geographical tracts, and thoir discovery if ever should merit closer attention. Bernoulli’s Contribution The importance of Tieffenthaler’s Geography , apart from other consi- derations, may be judged from the fact that it found an editor and translator from the original Latin into two major European languages in no less a person than Jean Bernoulli, a distinguished mathematician, Astronomer Royal and ordinary member of the Academy of Sciences and Belles-Lettres at Berlin, and associated with all the major scientific academies and societies in Europe at the time, such as those of St. Petersburg, Stockholm, Uppsala, Copenhagen, Lyon, Bologne, and several others. Bernoulli first came to know of Tieffenthaler’s works from Anquetil du Perron’s paper ‘La Descrip- tion du cours du Gange & du Gagra, etc.’ in the Journal des Sgavans, Paris, December, 1776 (Ed. of Holl, January, 1777) and further that his geographical manuscripts were lying somewhere in Denmark. He started making 1 1, 204. * I, 224. 3 I, 335. 4 Chaudhuri : ‘ On the History of the Study of Ichthyology \ 5 Larwood, 62-70. 1962] JOSEPH TIEFFENTHALER AND HIS GEOGRAPHY OF HINDUSTAN 87 enquiries and soon succeeded in locating them — he does not say how — with M. Kratzenstein to whom Tieffenthaler had sent his manuscripts. In fact, Anquetil’s intention in drawing the attention of scholars to this work was to secure its publication. Bernoulli now reinforced his efforts by publishing notices in the NouveUea liUtraires , Books II and III, as well as by other means. In Copenhagen Kratzenstein had also tried to find an editor* but without success, because it was impossible to find one there for a Latin manuscript, full of foreign words, defective in composition at places and accompanied by a large number of badly- executed drawings in most part of such disproportionately large size as rendered their use impracticable without reduction. Moreover, no one would wish to undertake the task without first looking at the manuscript, and Kratzenstein would not run the risk of parting with it. In the circumstances Bernoulli decided to take up the work himself under the condition given by the author and save from menacing oblivion a work he believed curious and important. 1 The manuscript passed into his possession on 9 th October, 1781. Consultation with, and advice of, Anquetil became urgently necessary, for the French scholar had received the maps and explanatory notes closely bearing on the subject of the manuscript in question. Anquetil responded with rare warmth and generosity to Bernoulli’s ideas and plans. The maps were then no longer in his possession as he had shortly after his work deposited them with the Map Section of the Department of Foreign Affairs (D6pot des Cartes du Departement des affaires 6trangeres) in Paris. He interested the Count of Vergonnes, Chief of the Department and great lover of science and learning in Bernoulli’s project, obtained the maps forming an atlas of 30 leaves of exceptionally large format and took full responsibility of reducing them himself and having them engraved by a competent engraver before his very eyes and at his own expense. All this trouble he took, first to avoid exposing the precious originals to the accidents of transport and inevitable degradation at the hands of artists, and secondly because of the impossibility of entrusting to a distant artist the work of engraving a set of drawings complicated by multiplicity of objects, foreign characters and imperceptible strokes. Moreover, to explain the maps, Anquetil prepared for Bernoulli a new memoir much more extended than what had appeared in the Journal des Sgavans . All this, to say the least, is a splendid instance of co-operation between scholars with a common interest, namely the advancement of knowledge of a land and people imperfectly known, in a century otherwise tom with strife, jealousy and rivalry, territorial conquests and enslavement of people all over the world. Bernoulli’s original intention was to produce the work in two volumes: the first to contain a translation of Tieffenthaler’s Geography, and the second Anquetil’s memoirs referred to above and additions and notes made from RenneU’s Memoir 2 and other works. Incorporation of a map indis- pensable for following the book with ease was dictated first by the author’s failure to supply one himself and, second, by the recent appearance of RennelTs Memoir which received wide attention and appreciation. Matter remained at this stage when he first went to the press. But delay in ' 1 1, Preface, XI. 8 Rennell, James : Memoir of a Map of Hindoostan ; or the Mogul Empire with an Introduction, illustrative of the geography and present division of that country and a map of the countries situated between the heads of the Indian rivers, and the Caspian Sea; with an appendix containing an acoount of the Ganges and Burrampootar rivers* (added in the 2nd edition). First map of two sheets — 1st edition, 1783 ; 2nd edition, 1785. Second map of four sheets — 1st edition, 1788; 2nd edition, 1791, and 3rd edition, 1793. 88 S. N. SEN [VOL. IV, printing and appearance in the meantime of further researches of Anquetil on the history and geography of India led Bernoulli to alter his plans; to leave undisturbed the first volume containing his translation of Tieffenthaler ’s Geography of Hindustan , to devote the second volume entirely to Anquetil’s writings in two parts : Part I, Des Becherches historiques db chronologiques sur VInde and Part II La Description du Cours du Gange & du Gagra , avec une tris grande Carte , and add a third volume containing translation in its entirety of Rennell’s Memoir with appendices, and a map of navigation in the interior of Bengal, extracted from his B Aigal- Atlas. In this way Bernoulli filled up the gaps existing in Tietfenthaler’s Geography . Anquetil’s dissertation constituting Part I of the second volume supplied nearly entirely what Tieffenthaler had omitted on the history and the rulers of the peninsula; Rennell’s Memoir, Part I, third volume, threw a flood of light on the geography of the entire country; to these add Bernoulli’s own copious notes and the scholarship he brought to bear on the work. Collectively the three volumes to which he appropriately gave the general title Description historique & geographique de VInde 1 thus emerged as an entirely new work, far surpassing the one he undertook to edit and translate. The German edition appeared in Berlin under the title of Das Pater Joseph Tiejfenthalers . . . historisch-geographische Besck - reibung von Hindustan between the years 1785 and 1787 and the French edition also in Berlin under the title mentioned above between the years 1786 and 1789. The Geography of Hindustan Tieffenthaler’s Geography is divided into two broad sections: (a) Dis- sertation and Preliminary Researches, and (6) Geographical Description of the Provinces of Hindustan. Under (a) he discussed in 14 separate chapters the following matters: (1) the extension of India (9-11); (2) the longitude and the latitude of India, after the Indian geographers (corographes) (12-18); (3) longitude and latitude of India, with distances between places, as given in the Persian work entitled Ayn Alcbari or The Method of Akbar (18-23); (4) the Indian miles (or cosses) (23-25) ; (5) the inequality of Indian miles (25-28) ; (6) area of India in square measures (28-29); (7) the name of India (29-30); (8) refer- ences to India in the religious books (31—38) ; (9) the origin of the Indians (38-40); (10) the survival of Christianity in India since the arrival of the Portuguese (40-43); (11) ancient India (43-60) 2 ; (12) the mountains of India (60-62); (13) division of Hindustan in Provinces (62-64); and (14) the revenues of Hindustan (64-66). Under (6) Tieffenthaler adhered to the division of India into the following twenty-three provinces as existed in the times of the Mogol Empire : Kaboul (67-74), Kandahar (74-76), Cachemire (76-100), Labor (100-114), Moulton (115-120), Tatta (120-124), Dehli (124-159), Agra (159-220), Elohbad (220-250), Oude (or Avad) (250-307), Adjmer (307-342), Malva (342-358), Barar (358-363), Chandess (364-370), Gnzarate (370-415), Behar (415-437), Bengcde (437-460), Oressa (460-476), Aurengabad (476-489)* Bhalagate (or Ahmadnagar) (489-492), Bedor (or Safarabad) (492-494), Hederabad (or Golconde) (494-496) and Bedjapur (496-516), with digressions 1 Bernoulli, Preface, XIV. 2 Pages * 58 ' and * 59 ’ are misprinted as * 38 ' and * 39 \ 1962] JOSEPH TIEFFENTHALER AND HIS GEOGRAPHY OP HINDUSTAN 89 on the countries of Caschgar and Tibet. 1 The description for each province includes the boundary; the area generally by length and breadth in miles between extreme limits and seldom by area in square measure; division of the province into districts and parganas with a long list of place names under each district or pargana ; revenues, both according to Manouzzi 2 and register of the empire mentioning the largest and the smallest sum in most cakes; a fairly- detailed description of the capital and succinct description of a number of important places; itineraries; succession list of kings and rulers, sometimes mentioning the length of government of the ruler in years, months and days but not in strict chronological order according to one era. Interspersed with this general pattern of description will be found notices of rivers, their tributaries and distributaries traversing the province, with their names, sources, mouths, courses determined by a large number of places, large and small, on their banks, and several other characteristics such as seasonal variations in the discharge of waters, tides in rivers in the deltaic region, 8 shift of river beds, 4 irrigation canal systems fed from certain rivers, 6 and the like. The river systems in the Ganges and the Gogra basins, especially those irrigating the province of Oudh, have been noticed with the greatest detail, as may be expected from one who spent long years in surveying these areas. Rennell utilized much of Tieffenthaler ’s findings in revising his map and the second edition of his Memoir . ‘ The upper part of the course of the Ganges,' he writes, ‘ to the Cow’s mouth, or cavern through which the Ganges passes; and the course of the Gogra river to its fountains; are both inserted from the work of M. Bernoulli/ 6 In another passage he records his acknowledgement to the discoveries concerning the Ganges and the Gogra as follows: ‘A late publication by M. Bernoulli (who has done me too much honour in the course of it) contains, among a variety of other matters, a map of the courses of the Ganges and Gogra rivers; drawn by M. Anquetil du Perron, from the materials of tho late P. Tiefentaller. This map is highly interesting, on the score of its containing the course of the Ganges, as high up as the Oangoutra , or cavern, styled by the Hindoos, the Cow’s mouth ; and which is near 300 miles above tho place where the Ganges enters Hindoostan: as well as the course of the Gogra river, to its source, in the western part of Thibet.’ 7 Rennell, however, criticized Tieffenthaler for stopping short at a place not far within \ Names of provinces are here spelt after Bernoulli’s French version, Vol. I, and further printed in italics to differentiate them from modern spellings in English, which the reader must have noticed already. Figures within parentheses indicate page references to Vol. I. 2 Tieffenthaler in his manuscript spelt the name as ‘ Manucoi \ also a very common form of spelling in English (vide W. Irvine’s English translation of Storia do Mogor , John Murray, 1907-8). In French, the name is. written as ‘Manouchi* as may be seen from the French version of his work, Histoire ginirale de V Empire du Mogol depuis sa fondation. Sur les mlmoires portugais de M. Manouchi , venitien, d la Haye, 1708. But the physician, as Bernoulli has pointed out, was known in his homeland of Venice, Italy, as * Manouzzi ’ and referred to as such in Italian biblio- graphies (1, 15, footnote). 3 I, 456. 4 J, 291-292. The river Sardjou near Bozpur where it falls into the Qhagra . , 6 I, 138-214. 0 Memoir , iii. Rennell generally mentioned Bernoulli’s name and occasionally Tieffenthaler ’s for reference to the Geography . 7 Ibid., 307-8. Mark Rennell ’s spelling of Tieffenthaler; Bernoulli informed us that Tieffenthaler himself spelt his name as ‘Tieffentaller’, although his family name should be correctly spelt as ‘ Tieffenthaler*. Following the pronunciation in vogue in Austrian Tyrol, his name could also be written as * Tiefentoller ’, but he never wrote so (Bernoulli, Preface, XVT). 90 S. N. SEN [VOL. IV the Kumaun mountains, and not visiting the source of the Gogra himself as he did the Gangotrl, as also for neglecting to take observations for the purpose of determining the latitudes of either of the sources of these two rivers, e which, on a course approaching to meridional, would have furnished a rule for correcting the distances Regarding the accuracy of Tieffenthaler’s survey, it may be noted that Rennell compared the course of the Jumna above Delhi and other positions in that part of the Doab, as determined by Col. Polier’s map, with the details given in tlje Geography and found that ‘ they accord generally with the notices in Bernoulli \ 1 Another noticeable feature of the Geography is the details df itineraries and routes, given province by province, making it possible to reconstruct an excellent route map of eighteenth- century India. These routes are extremely detailed for those provinces over which he travelled, e.g. Delhi, Agra, Allahabad, Oudh, Ajmer, and Gujarat, oftentimes noting places even three or four miles apart. Bengal and Bihar are poorly served by itineraries by road duo probably to his travels by inland waterways. Regarding other provinces, details were drawn from the accounts of other travellers as well as from Persian treatises. There is little difficulty in believing that Tieffenthaler’s Geography served as an excellent guide-book for travellers in the last decade of the eighteenth and the first few of the nineteenth century. Rennell found Tieffenthaler’s itineraries very useful in checking and correcting distances between places in his map and comparing the values derived from other sources. * And what, moreover, I consider as an irrefragable proof of the general accuracy of the position/ writes Rennell concerning the bearing of Sirhind from Delhi, e is that Mustaphabad, which stands in Col. Polier’s map at 42 cosses , from Sirhind towards Hurdwar, is by Bernoulli’s account (Vol. I, pp. 146, 147) 46 cosses from Hurdwar, by which the interval between Sirhind and Hurdwar should be 88 cosses : and it is actually 90 by the construction/ 2 Tieffenthaler’s itineraries of the Punjab province also proved very valuable among the various materials Rennell used for filling up much of the detail of this province; e.g. the distance of Rahoon (Rahan) from Sirhind (, Sarhind ), 3 the position of Kullanore ( Calanor ) 4 on the Ravi, and so on. The itinerary from Matschivara to Zoudlamouki (I, 112-113) enabled Rennell to fix up the positions of Bejwara (Bezvdra), Rajapour (Radjpour), Hureepour (Haripor) and Jellamooky. 'Bejwara, called also Hoshearpour, is 3 journeys (perhaps 36 cosses) from Sirhind (Bernoulli); ...Hureepour is 11 cosses beyond Rajapour, on the same road; Jellamooky 6 or 7 farther. All these particulars are from Bernoulli: and we collect from them that Hureepour is 21 cosses ; or about 30 G. miles from Bejwara; 84 from Sirhind/ 5 6 For arriving at the conclusion that ‘Moultan cannot be lower than the parallel of 30£°’, and for fixing its latitude at 30° 34', Rennell consulted, among other authorities, Bernoulli's opinion that by the itineraries, 'Moultan cannot be much lower than that parallel’. 0 Bernoulli translated Tieffenthaler’s findings as follows: 'La hauteur du pole boreal est ici de 29° 51'; . . . Des Auteurs plus au fait font 1 Memoir, 69. * Ibid., 68. Rennell obviously consulted Bernoulli’s French edition, where the distance between Mastabad (Mustaphabad) and Saharanpour is given as 22 Indian miles (coww) and that between Saharanpour and Hardouar ( Hurdwar > as 24 Indian miles (1, 146, 147). * Ibid,, 79. * Ibid., 106. « Ibid,, 106-107. 6 Ibid., 90-93. 1962] JOSEPH TIEFFENTHALHB AND HIS GEOGBAPHY OF HINDUSTAN 91 la Latitude de Movltan , de 30 degree ; mais on fera encore mieux do lui en donner 31 ; car les itinSraires preuvent qu611e ne peut 6tre plus petite/ 1 Unlike Rennell, who usually avoided describing Indian cities on the ground that ‘the description of one Indian city is a description of all ; they being all built on one plan, with exceeding narrow, confined, and crooked streets; with an incredible number of reservoirs and ponds, and a great many** gardens, interspersed’, 2 Tieffenthaler described a large number of capital as well as fortified cities, carefully recording architectural details of palaces, forts and citadels with their ramparts and towers, mausoleums, brick buildings of the rich, the thatched and mud houses of the poor, market- places, etc., thus bringing out an impressive variety despite a common pattern and uniformity of plan. In general, the Indian cities were inferior to those of Europe in regard to magnificence, height and symmetry of the buildings and the uniformity of the streets. 15 To this a remarkable exception was Jaipur, the new city built in 1725 by Jai Singh, the curious astronomer king. Contrary to the unequal and narrow streets and antique buildings of old cities, the city was provided with large, long and straight roads, and buildings and shops for the display of merchandise, all equally spaced from one another, giving it a brilliant modem look. 4 The principal road extend- ing from the gate of Sangener to that in the south was so spacious that six or seven carriages could easily run side by side without either touohing or the necessity of one carriage moving in front of the other. In Delhi, the houses of the rich were outwardly unimpressive, though not indicative of negligence; but their interiors were magnificent and profusely decorated according to the style of the country and the taste of its people. 5 Tieffenthaler also refers to the skill of Indian engineers in building stone bridges over rivers. He noticed and described such a bridge over the river Sindh near Narwar (Plate I) ; it was supported by 24 high and spacious arches. 0 Other stone bridges noticed by him include one of 16 large arches spanning a torrential river near Dholpur in Agra province, 7 one built on the Gumti, 8 and a small one built on the rivulet Rend near Corra.® At Mohan in the province of Oudli, the river Sei was spanned by a bridge built of brick and lime upon 15 supporting arches, and provided with balus- trades and two towers at either extremity to serve as ornament. 10 The cave-paintings of Ellora did not fail to attract his notice or extract eloquent appreciation from his pen; but the omission of Ajanta is baffling. He was full of admiration for ‘une variety de figures d’hommes & de Dieux, taill6es avec un art ytonnant’, and further writes: ‘Cette scene si artistement represents est ouverte aux yeux de ceux qui traversent ces cavernes memes ; elle reste cachee k ceux qui se trouvent en dehors. Qui pourroit n’etre pas stupyfait des travaux de l’ancien terns, de la prodigality des hommes, de l’abondance des richesses & de l’ardeur avide de transmettre son nom k la posterity ! >u (Those who walk inside the caves themselves can see this scene so artistically represented; it remains hidden to those who are outside. Who 1 1, 116. 1 Memoir, 58. » I, 120. , * I, 315. ' * I, 125. • 1, 178. 7 1, 188. 8 I, 280. • I,«236. 18 X 270. 11 1, 480-87. 92 S. N. SEN [VOL. IV, could fail to be stupefied by such works of ancient times, by the prodigality of men, by the abundance of their richness, and by the ardent earnestness to transmit their name to posterity !) Mention should also be made of Tieffenthaler’s description of the astronomical observatories set up by Raja Jai Singh at Delhi , 1 Muttra , 2 Jaipur 8 and Ujjain . 4 Banaras observatory built by Raja Man Singh of Amber at the beginning of the seventeenth century and further extended and equipped by Raja Jai Singh 6 was strangely enough not noticed by Father Tieffenthaler in his Geography . • Other matters of scientific interest in which the book abounds concern soil, vegetation, food and agriculture, climate, flora and fauna and mineral resources. Tieffenthaler’s classification of soil does not go beyond such generalized statements and phrases as ‘ fertile’, ‘sandy ’, ‘ waterless ’, ‘ black ’, 4 uniform ’ , ‘ sterile ’ , etc. He records the soil of Lahor as very fertile, producing all kinds of fruits in great quantity; the canton extending from Lahor to Attock produces millet and other legumes . 8 The soil of the canton of Beluchistan is ‘sandy and devoid of water’ and produces nothing except millet during the season of scanty rain; wheat, however, grows on the river bord of the Sindh and on irrigated fields . 7 The quality of soil between After and Agra is sandy, but it nevertheless produces in abundance wheat, diverse species of fruits and vegetables. Soil between Agra and Jaipur is fertile and ‘ produit du froment, des lentils, des pois, du sucre & du millet ’. 8 Fertile black soil is noticed near Scheupori south of Narwar in the Agra province . 9 In the district of Tourhot, Bihar, the soil produces all kinds of foodstuff, e.g. fruits, wheat, rice, pear and other provisions unknown in Europe . 10 The great fertility of the plains of Bengal is expressed thus: ‘ This province is extremely vast, and abounds in everything producing wheat, rice and many other kinds of provisions as well as Indian pears, ananas, jackfruits ( Kateles , probably a corrupt form of the Bengali name Kanthdl), and long figs .’ 11 Tieffenthaler notices European climate in the province of Kabul where ‘ in winter it snows and water freezes 5 . 12 The country between Kabul and Attock often misses rainfall. The climate of Agra with seasonal changes all the year round is described in great detail, including its dust- storm which sometimes ‘ hides the sky from view and covers everything with a thick (layer of) dust \ 13 In Calcutta, a breeze from the south ordinarily prevails since the month of April up to October; during the rest of the year the wind blows from the north; the eastern wind is pestilential . 14 As to the references to various kinds of trees, here is a typical passage describing trees of the region between Balrampour and Pethcma in the prov- ince of Oudh. 4 Among the trees of large species which this wooded and 1 X, 128. 2 I, 201-202. 8 I, 316-18. An English translation of the Jaipur observatory as described by Tieffenthaler was given by G. ft. Kaye: A Guide to the Old Observatories at Delhi } Jaipur, Ujjain, Benares. Calcutta, 1920, pp. 48-60. 4 I, 346-47. 6 Kaye, oU-57. « I, 102. ’ I, 119. 8 I, 208. 9 I# 17U. l° I, 421. I. 438. 1* I, 68. 13 I, 166. 14 I, 468. 2B 1962 ] JOSEPH TIE7PENTHALEH AND HIS GEOGRAPHY OP HINDUSTAN mountainous country produces may be mentioned the Larch-tree (Mdleses) and those known as Sdl or Sakou and Gorou . The smaller trees include, among others, the Tschischoum, the Bel, whioh produces a ball-like fruit full of soft marrow enclosed in a hard shell. Moreover, one finds fruit trees such as Am, the Tamarind, the Bel or the Carambolier ( Mains indica ), and the ]V|yrobalan trees .’ 1 Notice the absence of proper botanical nomen- clature of which Bernoulli complained. Tieffenthaler has given fairly detailed description of the salines of the Behat district in Lahor province, with an interesting note on the Khocares or Gacares, a class of people engaged in salt-mining operations . 2 Notices to salines in other regions include those of Nasirabad 2 in Allahabad province, and of Cambay in Gujarat and details of salt manufacture from the Salt Lake of Sambhar* and in the Cambay area. The Geography mentions deposits of iron ores in the country of Savad 6 (Swat), west of Kashmir; magnetic iron ores in the district of Narwar 0 , at Dhoa 7 and on the route between Anteri and Gwalior 8 , copper and silver near the village of Dariba 9 in the Udaipur district; copper in Tachenpour 10 in the Mandel district in Ajmer province and in Tambacdni 11 on the route from Bithia to Kathmandu; gold in Assam 12 ; diamonds in Parna , 13 in Bundel- khand, in Sommelpour , 14 in Bihar, and in the province of Orissa . 16 Agate occurs in the mountainous country on the route between Surat and Broach and other neighbouring places . 30 The adjacent mountains of Ajmer are mentioned as sources for the best quality of marble , 17 and places like Singauli and Rubas, five leagues south of Fatehpur, as good sources of red and white stones . 18 References to mineral resources are brief and inade- quate; one wishes the geographer would have given as much attention to the occurrences of mineral ores, marble, stone and other building materials as he had given to the saline rocks and salt manufacture. In the same manner Tieffenthaler’s scattered references to the crafts and manufacture and centres of commerce and industry left much to be desired. Like other travellers and geographical writers before or contem- poraneous with him, he noticed the artistic excellence of the shawl (schdl) makers and woodworkers of Kashmir , 19 the centres noted for the manu- facture of cotton piece-goods, e.g. Rahori 22 in the Lahor province, Colares 21 1 I, 204 : The Larch — Larix griffithii ; the S'uL — Shorea robusta ; the Tschischoum — Dalbergia Sissoo ; the B61 — Aegle marmelos ; the Am — Mangifera indica ; the Tamarind — Tamarindus indica ; the carambolier — Averrhoea carambola ; the Myro- balan — TmninaUa chebula . . 2 I, 104, 100. 3 I, 238. 4 I, 312-13. 6 I, 78. 8 I, 177. 7 I, 180. 8 I, 187. 9 I, 327. 10 I, 308. 11 I, 425. 12 I, 400. 13 T, 240. i 14 I, 433. 16 I, 400. I, 389, 391-92. 17 I, 311. 18 I, 170. 19 JTS2. 20 I, 112. 21 1, 179. 94 S. N. SEN [VOL. IV, in Narwar district, Sironj 1 in Malwa province, Baroda 2 * in Gujarat, Bhagalpur 8 in Bihar, Katwa 4 * and Dacca 6 in Bengal, and the sericulture in Bengal, 6 but hardly any detail is given. Of particular interest is his reference to Beana , Hindon and Cunberi in the Agra province as flourishing centres in previous times for indigo (nil) cultivation, in which the Dutch and the Armenian merchants used to conduct a very lucrative trade and export a huge quantity of this dyestuff from Agra to Surat. 7 Arol, a city seven miles from Schamschernagar in the Bihar province, was a centre for paper manufacturing. 8 Of the European factories noticed mention may be made of Dutch factories in Ahmadabad, Broach, Su$at, Patna, Chhapra, Murshidabad, Calcapour in Cossimbazar, and Chinsura; French factories at Surat, Chhapra, Cossimbazar and Chandemagore; the English factories at Cambay, Surat, Patna, Cossimbazar (a fortress was built here) and, of course, Calcutta. Daman and Diu on the Indian coast and Mozambique on the African used to participate in a Portuguese Indo-African trade in the course of which Indian merchandise were exchanged for African ivory and gold. 9 Tieffenthaler's Sources Bernoulli has reproached Tieffenthaler for neglecting to indicate the sources and references to such of the matters of his Geography as he did not observe himself. 10 It is true, remarks Bernoulli, that he named some European authors such as Pinhero, de Laet, Bernier and others and some oriental ones, e.g. Ferishta, Abul Fazl (or his work), Heder, whom he quoted or consulted. As to the former he should have named also Father Philippe, Thevenot and others and regarding the latter one wished he had given more particulars than merely mentioning the name or simply stating 4 one reads in a Persian book ’, 4 in an Indian work *, etc., as he frequently did. Although this remark is generally correct, a fairly good idea as to his European sources can be obtained without difficulty from his statements in the course of which he sometimes quoted chapter and verse. But his silence on the inadequately known oriental sources about which his European readers would have welcomed his valuable bibliography is regrettable. Tieffcntlialor’s sources and authorities clearly referred to by himself and amplified by the researches of both Anquetil and Bernoulli are given below : Aristotle: Referred to in Ch. XI on ‘Ancient India’ in connection with the Indus and its source, e.g. * Suivant Aristote \ Reference to be found in 1 Edit, (jpi Val , 1654. T. I. : Meteorol , p. 768. (A) 11 Arrian: Referred to in Ch. XI: 4 Arrien fait mention de Peuoeliotis a city on the Indus, known by the name of Acora in Tieffenthaler’ s time, 12 miles from Attock. 12 1 I, 349. 2 I, 393. 8 I, 435. 4 I, 453. 6 I, 458. • I, 438. 7 I, 172. 8 I, 434. 8 I, 396, 406. 10 Bernoulli, Preface, XIX. , 11 I, 44. (A) indicates Anquetil du Perron who located the source. « I, 48. 1962] JOSEPH TIEFFENTHALER AND HIS GEOGRAPHY OF HINDUSTAN 96 ‘Ain-i-Akbari : Described as 4 Ouvrage Persan qui a pour titre : Ayn Akbari ou la method© d’Akbar*. 1 Details of latitudes and longitudes of places in India, route mileage, etc., as observed or recorded by Persian geographers were taken from this work. Also an important source book for much of his materials given in his description of provinces. Rarely did he either refer to the work or quote from it in marked contrast to his treatment of other sources like the Bible or Quintus Curtius. Such a rare example is: 'On lit dans l’ouvrage Persan qui a pour titre Ayn Acbari, que les Rajahs d'Odbpour tirent leur origin© de Noschervdn sumomm6 le juste , Roi de Perfe’. 2 At the time of Bernoulli’s editing and translating Tieffenthaler’s Geography , the ‘ Ain was known to European scholars through a notice of Anquetil in the Legislation Orientale, Amst., 1778, and Gladwin’s translation of a portion only (concerning descriptions of the subahs of Bengal and Orissa) of the Persian text, published in London, 1777 (Gladwin’s translation of the whole ‘im was published in Calcutta in 1783-86). Bernoulli was unable to obtain a copy of the transla- tion, but learnt from a Gottingen journalist who had compared his German translation of Tioffentjialer’s Geography with Gladwin’s translation of 'Ain that there were considerable enough differences despite many similarities in passages. 3 It is now known that Tieffenthaler drew heavily upon the 'Ain, bodily incorporating details concerning ‘the subdivisions of Sarkars into Mahals and succession list of rulers and giving verbatim translation of several passages. For example, compare the following passage from Bernoulli : ‘ Thorabhim est une ville. A 3 milles de \k est une fosse, dont le fond rempli d’eau ne peut se sonder. Dans cet endroit est aussi une mine de cuivre ; & on y trouve de petits morceaux de turquoise ’, 4 with the following from the 'Ain, ' Todah Bhim is a place at a distance of three Kos, from which is a pit full of water, the depth of which none has sounded. Mines of copper and turquoise are said to exist, but the expense of working them exceeds their income.’ 5 Bernier: Referred to in connection with his description of Kashmir, e.g. ‘ Bernier, savant 6crivain qui parcourut le Cachemire sous le regne d’Aurengzeb’; and also in connection with the origin of the Kashmirians. 6 The Bible: Referred to in Ch. VIII on 4 References to India in the religious books’ in connection with the discussion on Ophir ; detailed references to book, chapter and verse are given, and sometimes passages quoted; e.g. ‘ Le nom de VInde se trouve encore dans le 1 1 , 18 . 2 I, 340. 8 Bernoulli, Preface, XX, 4 I, 171. 6 ‘Ain-i-AJcbari of Abul Fazl-i-‘Allami, Vol. II. Translated into English by Col. H. 8. Jarrett. Second edition corrected and annotated by Sir Jadu Nath Sarkar, Bibtiotheca Indica, Calcutta, 1949, p. 192. Hereinafter referred to as ‘Ain. See also the Editor’s note on page 123 and footnotes elsewhere, according to which Tieffenthaler had a more correct and legible MS. of the ‘Ain before him from which he transcribed the pl^Tnameg in Roman letters without a mistake affording comparison and check- up in modern studies. • I, 80, 82. 96 S. N. SEN [VOL. IV, Livre d* Esther , chap. 1, ou on lit au terns d’Ahassuerus qui regna depuis Tlnde jusqu’A l’Ethiopie sur vingt et sept provinces Boudier, Claude: Quoted extensively in connection with his latitudes and longitudes. Curce, Quinte or Curtius Rufus, Quintus : Roman historian and biographer of Alexander the Great. Frequently referred to in Ch. XI, and also quoted; e.g. ‘ voici ce que Quinte Curce dit du Dyerdenes, Liv VIII (Ch. 9) : etc.’, followed by a quotation. Edit . Ij^einshemii. 1640.2 Danet: French geographer, whose values of latitudes and longitudes are quoted ; as neither his full name nor his work was quoted, Bernoulli had difficulty in locating this source, the name being little known. i * 3 De Barros, lean : Portuguese historian whose account of India and the East Indies is contained in L' Asia de lean de Barros , Diego de Couto et autres , an extremely rare book which enjoyed a great reputation for its historical veracity and for its narration. Bernoulli notes that the book was divided into ten parts, of which the first appeared in Lisbon in 1552, and a sufficiently complete copy, in 15 volumes, wAs in existence in France. Tieffenthaler referred to De Barros in Ch. X on the survival of the traces of Christianity in India since the Portuguese times. 4 De Laet, Jean : Described as c Jean de Laet d’ Anvers, Historien soigneux autant qu’516gant 5 and referred to in Ch. XIII on the division of Hindustan into provinces. Author of De Imperio Magni Mogolis sive India Vera. Lugd. Batav., 1631, in 24°. 5 Do Sousa, Frangois : Jesuit historian on India and author of Oriente conquistado a Jesu Christo pe loi P . P. da Campan de lesu , da Provinc. de Qoa. Lisboa , 1710. 6 Heider Maler : The list of sovereigns of Kashmir was taken from Heider’s (also spelt as H6dar) History of Kashmir. 7 The list agrees closely with the one given in the ‘ik 8 Homann, I. B. : Tieffenthaler refers to his work once as ‘ suivant la carte plus modem ’, and again as * Les cartes g^ographiques de Homann, publics & Nuremberg en 1733 ’. The title of his map as given by Bernoulli is: Imperii Persici in Omnes Provincial Tam veteribus quam modernis earundem nominibus signatas exacte divisi , nova Tabula geographical Manucci (spelt also as Manouzzi) : Much used for the values of revenues given by him; and there is a critical discussion of the values of latitudes and longitudes given in his book. Tieffenthaler used the French translation prepared by the Jesuit Father Francis Catrou under the title: Histoire ginirale de V Empire chi Mogol i I, 31, 32, 35. » I, 53. » I, 16, 16. 4 I, 40. * I, 62. « I, 40. 7 T ACl Q7 « 'Ain\nl 370-85. • I, 60, 63, 511. 1962] JOSEPH TIEFFENTHALER AND HIS GEOGRAPHY OP HINDUSTAN 07 depute sa fondation . Sur lea mimoirea portugate de if. Manouchi, Venitien, k la Haye, 1708. First Paris edition, in two volumes, appeared in 1706, and the second, in four volumes, along with an account of Aurengzebe’s reign, in 1716. Mela, Pomponius : Referred to in Ch. XI on * Ancient India * in connection with the time taken by a vessel to execute a voyage to and from India. Text used, as per Anquetil’s note, was ‘De situ orbis libri III, edit. Oronov . Lugd . Bat., 1722 ’- 1 Pinnero, Manuel: Portuguese Jesuit missionary resident in Cambay, who visited Lahor in 1694 and left letters about his travels. Jarrich refers to 40 such letters in his Histoire de VInde. Tieffenthaler cites Pinnero in connection with his discussion of Patala, a city on the Indus. 2 Pliny : Referred to in Ch. XI at several places. Hist, natur. Edit., Harduini, Paris, 1723. 2 Polyaenus : Referred to in Ch. XI in connection with his discussion on Meros or Nysa, as called by Pliny. Author of Stratag. edit., var , 1691.4 Pomp6e, Trogne : Referred to in connection with Meros, etc., as stated above. Ptolemy, Claudius : Referred to in Ch. XI at several places. Edit, prim , Baail, 1633. Libri VII. Also used for his historical discussion on latitudes and longitudes. Shah Jah&n, History of: Tieffenthaler refers to the work by Mohammed Said of Lahor, sometimes as ‘ on lit dans l’histoire de Schah Djehan sometimes as ‘suivant l’Historien de Schah Djehan' , in connection with the extension of India in latitude and longitude and itineraries in the provinces of Kashmir, Multan, eto.s Strabon : Referred in Ch. XI. Edit. Casaubon. Libri XV, Paris, 1620. In addition to the above, Tieffenthaler has referred to a large number of authors and works not by name but under such vague statements as ‘following a Latin geographical dictionary’, ‘following a general map of Asia recently published in England’, ‘Oriental geographers’, and so on. In this category of references the following works or authors appear indicated according to the researches of Anquetil and Bernoulli : (i) ‘Un Dictionnaire g^ographique latin ’ (1, 10): Lexicon geographicum of Philippe Ferrari (Ferrarius); published in Milan in 4°, 1627. The work is further mentioned on p. 60. (ii) ‘la Carte g6n6rale de l’Asia publi6e denierement en Ang^ene* (i, 11): This probably refers to a map by Th. Jefferys. (iii) ‘Une Carte particuliere qui represent© lTnde seule’ (I, 11): This probably refers to the map, the East-Indies with the Roads , by Jefferys, 2nd edition in four leaves, 1768. (i,v) ‘Une Carte publi6e k Amsterdam’ (I, 11): It probably refers to the maps published by Pierre Schenk or Witte. Elsewhere (I, 74), Tieffenthaler refers to maps published at Amsterdam by Schenk and Valk. # 1 1, 44. * I, 51-52. IUU45. I, 46. *1, 22, 68, 118, 08 S. N. SEN [VOL. IV, (v) ‘Une autre carte publi6e k Nuremberg* (I, 11): The reference appears to be to the maps entitled Indes Orientates, in two leaves, edited by Tob. Mayer after M. d’Apres Mannevilette, and published by Homann in 1748. (vi) ‘Geographes Orientaux* (I, 13): Eminent Arab astronomers and geographers Ulugh Beg and Naslr al-dln al-Tusi were meant. Tieffenthaler quoted the values of latitudes and longitudes as given by these authors but never mentioned them by name in marked contrast to other contemporary writers* such as D’Anville 1 and Rennell. t (vii) ‘[& qui residoit probablement a Kanoz (ou Kanoudj) ville grande & ancienne, & non k Tschitor , comme Thomas Rhoe Chevalier Anglois l*a cru] ’ : Anquetil notes that this reference was from Thevenot: Recueil de voyages par Thevenot . t. I. Mem de Th. Rhoe , p. 70. (viii) ‘On lit dans des Annales Persannes qui traitent des Faits des Oasnavides , que Soumvath est un lieu tres fameux’ (I, 401): This account was without doubt taken from Ferishta ; the details given by Tieffenthaler can be compared with those contained in the History of Hindostan by Dow, I, 66-71, 1st edition. The above list is only illustrative but not exhaustive. I conclude the account with the following remarks of Anquetil: ‘Whilst two leading European nations are contending in the Carnatic and elsewhere for the supremacy over India in many bloody encounters, a modest mis- sionary quietly and perse veringly pushes his way through pathless jungles and over arid plains, measuring in all thousands of miles, in order to make purely pacific conquest, and benefit thereby humanity — whilst Bengal, the East Coast, the Deccan and Gujarat are the scenes of bloody strifes which the greed of European nations has, if not originated, at least fostered, it is consoling to see th&t there are still men of science who are untouched by avarice and free from the thirst of gold. We sincerely desire the examples of intelligent travellers like Tieffenthaler might be imitated by some of the Europeans settled in those vast regions. Of what use are the endless armed squadrons, sent thither to uphold material interests, and bring Asia’s treasures to Europe whilst all means of advancing human knowledge are neglected ? Prompted by the love of science, and filled with the zeal for the cause of humanity, I hope my wishes will be realized, and the public — I am sure — anxiously watch the efforts of this savant (Tieffenthaler) in the North of Bengal, and will receive with pleasure the results of his exploration in those hitherto little-known regions of Asia.’ 2 I take this opportunity to thank the authorities of St. Xavier’s College, Calcutta, for kindly permitting me to use their Goethals Indian Library. Refeeenoes 4 Ain . . . . ‘Ain-i-Akbari of Abul FazI-i-*AIlami, Vol. II, translated into English by Col. H. 8. Jarre tt. Second Edition corrected and annotated by Sir Jadu Nath Sarkar. Bibliotheca Indica , Calcutta, 1949. I . . . . Bernoulli, Jean : Description Historique et G&ographique de Vlnds, Vol. I: La Geographic de l’lndoustan, eScrite en Latin,' - le pays m6me par le Pere Joseph Tieffenthaler, J^suifo & Missionnaire apostolique dans l’lnde. Berlin, 1786. f - 1 tjclaircissemms , 17, 18, 20, 30, 38, 57, 76, 82. * II. The English version quoted is from Noti, 411-12. 1962] JOSEPH TIEFFENTHALER AND HIS GEOGRAPHY OF HINDUSTAN 99 n Bernoulli, Preface Blunt . . Chaudhuri Eclnircissemcns Hosten Kaye . . Larwood Maclagan Memoir Noti Phillimore Sommervogel Bernoulli, Jean s Description Historique et QSograpkique de VInde. Vol. II : Dob Recherehes Historiques & chronologiques sur Tlnde Sc la Description du cours du Gauge & du Gagra, aveo une tr£s grande carte — par M. Anquetil du Perron, de l'Acad, R. dos Inso. & B. L. & Interpr&te du Roi pour les langues orientates, & Paris. Ibid. ‘Preface de L’fiditeur’ in Vol. I. Blunt : Christian Tombs and Monuments in the U.P., 1011. Chaudhuri, B. L. : ‘On the History of the Study of Ichthyology’: Presidential Address for the Section ‘ Zoology and Ethnography*, Indian Science Congress, 1918. D’Anville: ftclaircissemens G6ographiques sur la carte de VInde. Paris, 1753. Hosten, Father H. : ‘Mongolicae Legationis Commentarius or the First Jesuit Mission to Akbar by Fr. Anthony Monseratte, S.J,\ Introductory Note. Memoirs of the Asiatic Society of Bengal , III, No. 9, 513-704, 1914. Kaye, G. R. : A Guide to the Old Observatories at Delhi, Jaipur , Ujjain, Benaras. Calcutta, 1920. Larwood, H. J. C. : * Western Science in India bofore 1850 \ Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , 1902. Maclagan, Sir Edward : The Jesuits of the Great Mogul . Burns, Oates and Washbourne Ltd., London, 1932. Rennell, James: Memoir of a Map of Hindoostan , 2nd Edition, 1791. Noti, Father S.c ‘Joseph Tieffentailer, S.J. — a Forgotten Geo- grapher of India’, East and West , V, 142-62, 269-77, 406-13, 1906. Phillimore, Col. R. H. : Historical Records of the Survey of India. Vol. I: eighteenth century, Dehra Dun, 1945. Sommervogel, S. J. : BiblioMque de la SocUtS de Jisus, Paris, 1932. >. rv, 1902. Plate f Top : The bridge of Xarwar on the Sindh. Top : Agra Gate. The French caption is in TieffenthalerV Bottom : The Ranthambhor Fort in. the Province of Ajmer. handwriting. Bottom : Palace and eardens within the Delhi Fort. JAS, IV, 1962. Platk If Top : Dig. The palace of tho Riiju of the Juts is shown. Bottom : Bharat pur. Another palace of the Raja of the Juts. Top : The palace recently constructed at Bangla or Fyzabad, a modern and one of th^argest cities in the Province of Oudh, on the Gogra, / Bottom : Tho palace in Lucknow oil the bank of the Gumti. JAS, TV, 1962. Plate ITI Top * Banaras, one of thn most famous cities in Judin, Holton* Agra, capital of the Proving' of Agra. Journal of the Asiatic Society. Vol. IV, Noe. 3 a 0-78 III: IV: V: VI-042 Antenna Length of the siphunculus . . 1-63 016 0-33: 0-28: (013+ 0-38) Breadth »> 99 »> • • 008 Locality and host plant: Tocklai (18.1.60) from Camellia sinensis. Total number of specimen ; 1 alata. Note : The specimen was collected along with Toxoptera aurantii from undersurface of the leaves of host plant. It appears to be closely allied to gossypii group; but it differs from the typical gossypii in having a median row of sclerites. (3) Aleuroidaphis blumae v. d. Goot (additional description) Takahashi, R., Aphididae of Formosa, Pt. 3, p. 98. Morphological characters — Apterous nymph : Head and prothorax fused and almost equal to the fused meso- and meta-thoracic region. Last antennal segment subequal to segment III; processus terminalis .2*8-3 times as long as the base of the segment. Apex of rostrum stellate-shaped, *■ reaching almost the middle of the abdomen; ultimate rostral segment 2-2*1 times as long as the second joint of hind tarsi. Knobbed hair oi l the second joint of hind tarsi, 1*8-2 times as long as the middle of the* segment (Kg. 2). 1962] BIONOMICS AND TAXONOMY OF APHIDS FROM ASSAM — II 103 Fig. 2. Aleuroidaphia blumae v. d. Goot : second joint of hind tarsus. X 235. Measurement of one specimen in mm . : Length of the body .. ii Breadth ,, ,, ,, . . 0-56 Antenna . . 0-33 Second joint of hind tarsi . . 0 06 Rostral segmont 4+5 . . 013 Locality and host plant: Khasya and Jayantia Hills (4.6.61) from Cynoglossum wallich i . Total number of specimens : 4 apterous nymphs. The specimens were collected from apical young shoots and buds. (4) Dactynotus sp. Morphological characters — Apterous viviparous female : Body yellowish, elongate oval. Head with well- developed frontal tubercles. Abdominal dorsum with irregularly scattered brownish sclerites of various shapes. Hairs on the dorsum of the abdomen placed on small sclerites, mostly with acuminate apices ; longest hair may be up to § the basal diameter of the segment. First antennal sogmont blackish brown with a few wax plates on the ventral side; segment IT of same colour, faintly spinulose ventrally; segment III pale brown at base, rest brownish black, excepting £ part near the apex, with about 66 circular, very small and rather big rhinaria, distri- buted almost over the entire length, except basal T V and apical f portions; the longest hair on III, -f the basal diameter of the segment. Rostrum reaches third coxae; rostrum with acuminate apex which may be up to If times the length jof the second joint of hind tarsi. Siphunculi black, long, gradually tapering from base to apex, imbricated, apically £-+ reticulated, at base 6-6 times as long as the width at the middle of the hind tibia, at apex 2*6 times as long as the width at the middle of the hind tibia. Cauaa pale, elongate, with 11-13 hairs, 3-3£ times as long as the width at base, about | the length of the body, the length of the siphunculi. Femora stout, smooth, pale brown, excepting distal J part which is black. Tibiae pale brown, except the very base and apical i part which are black. First tarsal chaetotaxy 5.5.5. Measurement of one specimen in mm . : Length of the body . . 4-2 Breadth „ ,, „ . . 2-0 Antenna . . broken Length of the siphunculus . . 1*5 Antennal segments: III — 1-2 (rest broken) • Locality and host plant : Khasya and Jayantia Hills (5.6.61), host plant not identified. 104 A. K. GHOSH & D. N. RAY CHATTDHURI [VOL. IV, Total number of specimens: 2 apterae, 10 nymphs. The specimens were collected from the undersurface of leaves of a shrub. Note: The specific identification is not possible at the present stage because of the scanty matorials (with broken IVth antennal segment) in our collection and the lack of literature dealing with tropical and sub- tropical Dactynotus species. The available key to the European species starts with presenco or absence of secondary rhinaria on the IVth antennal segment. So it is not possible to proceed with that key in viewiof the IVth antennal segment being broken. * Genus Chaetomyzus nov. gen. Typus generis Chaetomyzus rhododendri nov. spec. This species belongs to the tribe Macrosiphini but it cannot be placed in any of the known genera under the tribe and hence the erection of a new genus is imperative. The new genus is characterized by the following characters: (1) Prominent diverging antennal tubercles and low-rounded frontal tubercles; (2) In alatae, a number of tuberculate rhinaria all over the III antennal segment and a few on segment IV ; (3) Presenco of a number of pleural and spinal tubercles on the dorsum of the abdomen with acute or acuminate hairs ; (4) Siphunculi swollen on both sides (Fig. 9B) and with a few spinulose striae at apex ; (5) Presence of spinules in transverse rows in apical portion of tibiae and also over the tarsi ; (6) First tarsal chaetotaxy 3.3.3. (5) Chaetomyzus rhododendri nov. spec. Morphological characters: Alate viviparous female (Plate I, fig. 1): Body elongate. Head and prothorax separate, both blackish brown. Head with low-rounded frontal tubercles (Fig. 3). Prominent diverging antennal tubercles present. Mesothoracic lobes well developed, dark brown. Dorsum of the head with a number of short and long hairs, with slightly acuminate apices. Antennae coloured like the body, and half as long as the body; basal | of segment III smooth, apical | very faintly imbricated, rest of the segments gradually more distinctly imbricated from base to apex; segment III with 43-^46 small and large tuberculate rhinaria, distributed on all sides of the segment and over its Qntire length (Fig. 4) ; segment IV with 6-7 rhinaria of similar nature as on III (Fig. 5), but mostly present on its margin, the basal one being very small; segment V and apical portion of base of segment VI with usual primary rhinaria with hairy fringes. Hairs on segment III, present on all sides, those on the inner"* and outer margins short, with acute apices, rest stout and spiny; hairs on the rest of the segments arranged mostly on the outer and inner sides; longest hair on III, half as long as the basal diameter of the segment; processus terminalis f to slightly less than £ the length of segment III, and 1£ times as long as the base of the segment (Fig. 6). Apex of the rostrum blunt, reaching little beyond the third coxae, with about 12 fine, long hairs; ultimate rostral segment twice as long as the second joint of the hind tarsi (Fig. 7). Dorsum of the abdomen with a number of spinal and pleural tubercles (number not clearly discernible) and with scattered, irregular pale brown patches. Hairs on the dorsum of abdomen mostly with acute or acuminate apices. Siphunculi slightly lighter in colour than the antennae, swollen, from basal £ towards apex (Fig. 96), constricted at the very apex, 1962] BIONOMICS AND TAXONOMY OF APHIDS FROM ASSAM — II 105 times as long as its maximum width, and 1^ times as long as oauda, smooth, excepting apical J part which is with 2-3 spinulose striae (Fig. 8) ; width at base equal to the width at the middle of the hind tibia, at middle If times the width at the middle of the hind tibia and at apex 1J times the width at the middle of the hind tibia. Cauda elongate, with 4 hairs. Femora and basal £ portion of tibiae coloured like the siphunculus, rest of the tibiae and tarsi darker ; first and second joints of hind tarsi with transverse rows of spinules (Fig. 9o). First tarsal chaetotaxy 3.3.3. Fore wings broken, hind wings with two obliques. q ra Iq'oV q^> Fig. 3. Chaetomyzuo rhododendri nov. spec. : Head with frontal tubercles, x 69. Fig. 4. O. rhododendri nov. spec. : III antennal segment (without hairs). X 126. Fig. 6. O. rhododendri nov. spec. : IV antennal segment (without hairs), x 126. Fig. 0. O, rhododendri nov. spec. : VI antennal segment (without hairs), x 126. Fig. 7. (7. rhododendri no v. spec. : Rostral segments 4+ 6. X 236. Fig. 8. O. rhododendri nov. spec. : Apical portion of the siphunculus. X 236. Fig. 9a, (7. rhododendri nov. spec. : Hind tarsus (spinules not shown on first joint). X 236. Fig. 96. * C . rhododendri nov. spec. : Posterior portion of the abdomen. X 69. 106 A. K. GHOSH & D. N. RAY OHAUDHURI [VOL. IV, Measurement of one specimen in mm . ; Length of the body .. 1-8 Antennal segments : Breadth „ „ „ . . 0-64 III : IV : V : VI— 0-43 : 0-20 : 0*16 : (0-12+0-20) Antenna . . 0-9 Length of the siphunoulus . . 0*31 Locality and host plant: Khasya and Jayantia Hills (8.6.61) from Rhododendron arbor earn. * Total number of specimens : 1 alata and 2 apterous nymph*. The specimens were collected from undersurface of a young leaf. Apterous nymph: Body elongated oval. Head and prothorax fused. Abdominal segments not clearly discernible. Head with slightly diverging low frontal tubercles. Antennal tubercles prominent. Dorsum of the head with a number of long and short hairs with acuminate apices, longest of which is equal to the basal diameter of III antennal segment. Hairs on the dorsum of the abdomen very sparse, short and arranged in rows on tubercles. Meso- and meta-thoracic and abdominal tergites with a row of pleural tubercles on either side and two rows of paired spinal tubercles (PI. I, fig. 2). Antennae six jointod, coloured like the body f the length of the body ; segment III smooth, rest of the segments gradually becoming more distinctly imbricated from base to apex; hairs on the segment III half the basal diameter of the segment; distribution of hairs similar to alata; processus terminalis about £ the length of the III and twice the base of the segmont. Apex of the rostrum blunt, reaching at least the middle of the abdomen, with about 12 long hairs, and twice as long as the second joint of the hind tarsi. Siphunculi slightly darker than the body, swollen as in alata, 4$ times as long as the cauda, smooth, with faint striations near the apex; width at base 1*2 times the width at tho middle of the hind tibia, at middle 1-5 times the width at the middle of the hind tibia, and at apex equal to the width at the middle of hind tibia. Spinal tuborcles on seventh abdominal tergite prominent, 1£ times as long as the cauda. Cauda short, with 3-4 hairs. Femora pale like the body, and smooth. Tibiae darker than the femora, spinulose on the distal half, but densely so more towards tho apices. Tarsi with rows of spinules; first tarsal chae- totaxy 3.3.3, with a median stout hair. Empodial hair stout, and rather long with acute apices. Measurement of one specimen in mm. : Length of the body .. 1-3 Antennal segments: Breadth „ „ „ .. 0-64 III: IV: V: VI— 0-26: ! 0*8 : 0-8 : (0-8+0-16) Antenna . . 0-77 Length of the siphunculus . . 0-27 * Dr. V. F. Eastop (British Museum) writes to us : ‘ It sounds that your Rhododendron aphid may turn out to be a new species or even a new genus * (personal communication 4.4.62). Macrosiphum (Sitobion) avanae subsp. miscanthi Takahashi This species has been described by us as Macrosiphum (Sitobion) fragar- iae (Walker) previously (1962). (6) Myzus ornatus Laing Eastop, V. F. (1968). Aph. East Africa , p. 64. Morphological characters — Apterous viviparous female: Longest hair on the III antennal segment may be up to § the basal diameter of the 1962] BIONOMICS AND TAXONOMY OF APHIDS frROM ASSAM — II 107 segment. Antennae imbricated, the length of the body; processus terminalis 2$ times as long as the base of VI. Rostrum reaching beyond the second coxae. Hairs on the dorsum of the abdomen very short, with acuminate apices, and may be up to f the basal diameter of the III antennal sogment. Siphunculi long, imbricated, swollen on the outer side near the base. Cauda with 4-6 hairs. Measurement of one specime?i in mm. : Length of the body . . 1-7 Antennal segments : Siphunculus (length) . . 0-38 III : IV : V : VI— 0-30 : 016:014: (0*07+0-18) Breadth of the siphunculus at base 0-06 Breadth ,, ,, ,, ,, middle . 0 05 Breadth apex 0-03 Locality and host plant: Shillong (7.1.60) from Duranta plumeiri. Total number of specimens : 12 apterae. The specimens were collected from undersurface of the loaves of the jhost plant along with Myzus persicae (Sulz.). / (7) Nippolachnus pyri Mats. Matsumara, S. (1917). J. Coll. Agric . Sapporo ., Vol. 7, p. 382. Morphological characters — Apterous viviparous female : Longest hair on III antennal segment, 2£-2f times as long as the basal diameter of the segment. Antennae smooth, £ the length of the body; processus terminalis | the base of the segment VI. Rostrum reaching beyond the second coxae. Hairs on the dorsum of the abdomen very long with acute apices. Siphunculi on hairy cone. Cauda semicircular, with many long acute hairs. Measurement of one specimen in mm. : Length of the body . . 2 5 Antennal segments: Diameter of the siphunculus . . 0-06 III : IV : V : VI — 0*14 : 0-06 : 0-09 : (0-08+0-06) Locality and host plant: Shillong (12.160) from Pyrus khasyana. Total number of specimens : 2 apterae and 24 nymphs. The insects were collected from young growing portions of stem. (8) Genus Paratrichosiphum Takahashi, 1931. Neoparatrichosiphum nov. subgen. Typus subgeneris Neoparatrichosiphum khasyanum nov. spec. The specimens collected from the host plant Quercus sp. belong to the genus Paratrichosiphum Takahashi, in not having spinulosity on the dorsum. It also agrees with Holotrichosiphon Ray Chaudhuri in having long and short siphuncular hairs with different apices. Since in other major characters it agrees with Paratrichosiphum Takahashi, it is in the fitness of things that a subgenus Neoparatrichosiphum is erected with N. khasyanum sp. nov. as the type, in view of the siphunculus having mixed hairs at least near the bases. The key will read as follows : Dorsum not spinulose — Genus Paratrichosiphum Takahashi s.l. A. (B) Siphuncular hairs all long and with acute apices — Paratri- chosiphum subgen. s.s. 108 A. K. GHOSH & D. N. RAY CHATJDJTOBI [VOL. IV, B. (A) Siphuncular hairs of different lengths, with various types of apices, at least near the base — Neoparatrichosiphurn nov. subgen. typus subgeneris Neoparatrichosiphurn khasyanum 4iov. spec. Paratrichosiphum ( Neoparatrichosiphurn ) khasyanum nov. spec. Morphological characters — Apterous viviparous female (PI. I, fig. 3): Body pear-shaped, about 1*86-2-0 mm. long with 0-92-1-0 mm. as maximum width. Tergum sclerotized, yellowish brown to dark brown* cephalic and thoracic tergites paler. Hoad and thorax locally spinulose, jest spinulose all over, more densely on the margin. Numerous long and* rather short dorsal hairs occur intermingled, those on the dorsum of the abdomen mostly broken, tho longer ones with acuminate or slightly furcated apices (Fig. 12); t Fig. 10. Neoparatrichosiphurn khasyanum nov. spec. : III antennal segment. X 1175. rather short hairs on the dorsum of the abdomen may be up to about 3-1 times tho basal diameter of III antennal segment; shortest hair up to about 0*84 times as long as the mentioned diameter. Seventh abdominal torgite with two rather short hairs of more or less similar length, with acu- minate apices, up to about 3 times as long as the basal diameter of III antennal segment; eighth tergito with two hairs with acute apices, up to about 3-1 times the mentioned diameter. Antennae pale, 0-55 times as long as the body, with segments I and II slightly darker ; basal half of segment III faintly imbricated, rest of the flagellum gradually more distinctly imbricated; processus terminalis about 1-1 times as long as the base of VI, and about 0-66 times as long as III antennal segment; long and short hairs occur intermingled (Fig. 10), longer ii Fig. 11. Neoparatrichosiphurn khasyanum nov. spec. : Rostral segments 4 + 6 (without hairs), x 156-7. ones on the inner margin and shorter ones on the outer; long hairs with acute or slightly acuminate apices and short ones with acute apices ; longest hair on segment III about 3-4 times as long as the basal diameter of the segment. Apex of the rostrum reaching beyond the hind coxae; segments 4+5 long and acute (Fig. 11), about 2-7 to 3 times as long as the second joint of the hind tarsi ; segment IV about 5-9 to 6 times as long as the segment V, with about 10 fine hairs. Siphunculi pale brown, with slightly darker apices, about 0-25-0-27 times as long as the body (Fig- 13a), constricted at base and apex, curved outwards and with no trace of reticulation even at the base, about 5-1-5-5 times as long as. their maximum widths, which are nearly at the middle; at base 2-6-2*8 times as thick as the middle of the hind tibia, at middle 3*5-4«4 times as thick as the middle of the hind tibia, 3» 1962] BIONOMICS AND TAXONOMY OF APHIDS FROM ASSAM— II 109 and at apex l'7-l-8 times as thick as the middle of the hind tibia; long and short hairs occur intermingled; long hairs with acute apices while short Flo. 12. N eoparatrichosiphum khasyanum nov. spec. : Two hairs on the dorsum of the abdomen, x 23$. Fio. 13a. N eoparatrichosiphum khasyanum nov. spec. : Siphunculi. X 69. ones with acuminate or slightly furcated apices, at least near the bases (Fig. 13 b); longest hair about 2-2-1 times as long as the basal diameter of Fig. 136. N eoparatrichosiphum khasyanum nov. spec. : A few hairs on the basal part of the siphunoulus. x 235. 110 A. X. GHOSH & D. K. HAY CHAUDHUBI [VOL. IV, the siphunculus, shortest hair about 1*3 times as long as the basal diameter of siphunculus; acute spinules present, in distinct transverse rows on about apical £ part and more dispersed over the rest of the surface. Cauda obtuse, no stylus, with about nine hairs. Legs pale, yellowish brown ; femora faintly spinulose, with transverse striae on the ventral side; tibiae smooth, without any apical tuft of spines. Measurement of one specimen in mm . . Length of the body 20 Antennal segments : in.-IV. T: VI— 0-38: Breadth ,, ,, ,, 10 Antenna Length of the siphunculus 111 0-56 014 : 017 : (0*17 + 0-20) Locality and host plant: Khasya and Jayantia Hills (10.6.61) from Quercus sp. Total number of specimens : 2 apterae. The specimens were collected from the undersurface of hairy leaves of the host plant. (9) Paratrichosiphum sp. Morphological characters — Alate nymph: Body elongated, pale, about 1*6-21 mm. long, with 0*55-0-99 mm. as maximum width. Tergum pale. Dorsum of the abdomen with very long and rather short hairs intermingled, long hairs with acuminate or furcated apices, shorter ones also with similar apices; longest hair on anterior abdominal tergites up to about 2*5 times as long as the basal diameter of III antennal segment; shortost hair up to about 14 times the basal diameter of III antennal segment ; seventh abdom- inal tergite with two hairs, with acuminate or furcated apices (Fig. 14), up to Fig. 14. Paratrichosiphum sp. : Hairs on seventh abdominal segment, x 235. about 1 *9-2*2 times as long as the basal diameter of III antennal segment; eighth tergite with two long hairs' with acute apices, about 2*4-2*8 times as long as the mentioned diameter. Antennae six jointed, flagellum gradually more distinctly imbricated from base to apex, excepting basal £ of III, which is almost smooth; processus terminalis, 1*6-1 -7 times as long as the base of VI, about 0*74-0*76 times as long as segment III. Hairs on the antonnao of variable lengths, longer ones with acuminate or acute apices, shorter ones with acute apices; longest hair on segment III, 2-1-2-3 times as long as the basal diameter of this segment. Rostrum reaching middle pf the body; segments IV+ V slender, acute, about 2*2-2*3 times as long as second 1962] BIONOMICS AND TAXONOMY OF APHIDS FROM ASSAM — II 111 joint of hind tarsi; segment IV, 5* 8-6*6 times as long as the segment V (Fig. 15), with about 8-12 hairs. Siphunculi pale, the length of the body (Fig. 16), 6*6-7*2 times as long as their maximum width; at base 2-2*2 Fio. 15. Paratricho8iphum sp. : Bostral segments IV+V. x 236. times as thick as the middle of the hind tibia, at middle 2*8 times as thick as the middle of hind tibia, and at apex 1*1-1 *5 times as thick as the middle, of hind tibia; hairs on the siphunculi numerous, very long and rather short hairs occur intormingled basad, those apicad of uniform length; rather short hairs with acuminate or acute apices, the longer ones mostly with acute Fig. 16. Paratrichosiphum sp. ; Siphunculi (without hairs). X 69. apices, while a few towards the base with slightly acuminate apices ; longest hair may be up to 2-1-2-3 times as long as the basal diameter of the siphun- culi; spinules present over the entire length, densest on apical J part. Cauda semi-oval with 8-10 long, fine hairs. Femora smooth, with spinulose striae on the ventral side on apical half. Tibiae smooth. Measurement of one specimen in mm . Length of the body 19 Antennal segments: Breadth ,, „ 0-82 III: IV: V: VI— 0-33: 013 ; 0-23 : (016+ 0-26) Antenna 1-2 Length of the siphunculus 0-79 Locality and host plant: Khasya and Jayantia Hills (12.6.61) from Rhododendron sp. Total number of specimens : 4 alate nymphs. These insects were all collected from the undersurface of leaves of the host plant. The specific identification will be possible only when the adult materials will be available. A. K. GHOSH & D. N. RAY OHAUDHURI 112 [VOL. IV, (10) Paratricho8iphum tattakanum (Takahashi) nov. subspeo. assamensis. Takahashi, R. (1931). Aphididae of Formosa, Pt. 6, p. 31. The subspecies agrees in most of the characters with P. tattakanum Takahashi, but differs from it in having a much shorter processus ter- minalis (1-2 to 1-3 times as long as the base of the segment), a much longer fourth segment of the rostrum (5 5 to 7*8 times as long as the V segment) and a much slenderer siphunculi (31 to 4-4 times &s long as their maximum widths) besides, the venter of the abdomen is not evenly spinul#se as in the original species (Figs. 17, 18, 19, 20, 21). # 77 ' i^rr'' 17 18 Fia. 17 . Paratrichosiphum tattakanum (Takahashi) nov. subspec. assamensis: III antennal segment. X 117*5. Fig. 18. P. tattakanum (Tak.) nov. subspec. assamensis : VI antennal segment. X 117-5. Fig. 19. P. tattakanum (Tak.) nov. subspec. assamensis : Rostral segments 4+6. X 235. Fig. 20. P. tattakanum (Tak ) nov. subspec. assamensis : Siphunculus. X 69. Fig. 21. P. tattakanum (Tak.) nov. subspec. assamensis : Hairs on siphunculus. X 235. Measurement of one specimen Length of the body Breadth „ ,, „ Antenna Length of the siphunculus in mm . : 2*2 Antennal segments : .. 0-84 111:1V: V: VI-0-35: 0*15: 019: (0-15+0-20) . . 1*20 . . 0*58 Locality and host plant: Khasya and Jayantia Hills (7.6.61) from Quercvs sp. Total number of specimens : 8 apterae. The specimens were seen to infest young leaves of the host plant, especially the undersurfaces. Acknowledgements The authors are thankful to Prof. J. L. Bhaduri, Head of the Depart- ment of Zoology, Calcutta University, for laboratory facilities, to Dr. V. F. Eastop, British Museum (Nat. Hist.), London, for helping in identification of 1902] BIONOMICS AND TAXONOMY OP APHIDS PROM ASSAM — II 113 some of the species, and to the Superintendent, Indian Botanic Garden, Sibpur, for identifying a few host plants. References Eastop, V. F. (1958). A Study of the Aphididae of East Africa. Colonial Research Publication, London, 1-126. Ghosh, A. K., and Ray Chaudhuri, D. N. (1962). A preliminary account of bionomics and taxonomy of Aphids from Assam. J. Bomb. Nat. Hist. Soc. f 59 (1), 238-253. Hille Ris Lambers, D. (1939). Contribution to a monograph of Aphididae of Europe — II. Temminckia , 4, 1-134. Ray Chaudhuri, D. N. (1956). Revision of Greenidea and related genera (Homoptera: Aphididae). Zool . Ver. t 31, 91-97. Takahashi, R. (1931). Aphididae of Formosa, Pt. 6, 1-127. Journal of the Asiatic Society. Vol. IV, Nos. 3 dk 4, 1962. THE STONE OP SANGGURAN (MINTO-STONE), JAVA, 860 6 AKA By HiMANStx Bhusan Sarkar The findspot of this colossal stone inscription is not known. Most probably it was found from Ngendat in the north-west of Malang. 1 So far as our present informations go, it was received from Surabaya. Now it stands at the Minto House in Scotland, and was mentioned by Baffles in his History of Java , II, p. 59, with a 4 * mysterious translation’ in the Appendix. Von Humboldt in his Ka'ici sprache , II, pi. XT, gave a facsimile of a part of the inscription which was transcribed by Cohen Stuart in his KO under No. XXIX. The legible portion of the full inscription has, however, been published in OJO where it bears No. XXXI. In 1915, Prof. Kern 2 offered a translation of the opening Sanskrit verses of this inscription, and later on Prof. Krom suggested some improvement in the reading of the text in some of his writings. I offer below a fresh edition of the text accompanied by translation, notes, etc. Cohen Stuart 3 mentions that the stone measures 5 ft. 3-4 inches in height; 4 ft. 1 inch in breadth; and 1 foot 1 inch in thickness. 4 The inscription, written in Old- Javanese language, records the favour of the illustrious great king, rakai Pangkaja Ayah Vava firl Vijayaloka- namottungga, to the village of Sangguran under Vaharu which was marked out into a freehold for the deity (bhatara) of the kabhaktyan-temple in the freehold of the united body of the Juru gusali( s) of Manafijung. In Old- Javanese inscriptions, temples of various kinds have been mentioned, for example, dharma prasada in copperplates of Kaficana (VO, VII, p. 17 f), parhyangan in the copperplates of Ba Tavun I (KO, XIV), stone of Kayu Ara Hivang (OJO, XXII), dharma pangasthulan in copperplates of Copen- hagen (OJO, XXIV), Prasada in the copperplates of Mamali (BEFEO, 47, p. 34), copperplate of Kvak (OJO, XII), etc. Dharmas are apparently funerary temples of deified beings; others relate to deities. The above- mentioned references have been quoted at random and can be easily multiplied. In the following transcription, I have drawn upon the reading of Brandes with corrections suggested mainly by Prof. Krom. I have dis- cussed in footnotes some proper names and other words which also occur in the records of contemporary Java. The 6aka year of the inscription was read doubtfully by Brandes as 846, but Damais 6 reads it as 850. The exact date, according to him, is 2nd August, A.D. 928. The italics in the transcription indicate that the reading is provisional; illegible portion between words is indicated by vacant space. Text 1. (||0|| avighnamastu) 6 rfwam(wtu sarwa jagatab parahitaniratah 7 - bhavantu 8 bhuta(gan)ab 9 1 Krom in BKI, 73 (1917), p. 30 ff. 2 BKI, 70 (1915). It has been reprinted in Kern, VO, VII, pp. 223-226. « KO, p. XVII. 4 For earlier literature. Bee references in Verbeek, Oudheden, pp. 224-225. * See BEFEO , 45 (1951), pp. 28-29; ibid., 46 (1952), p. 56, fTn. 1. * This is filled up with the help of OJO, XXX. 7 Read : °ta(b). 8 Read i °vantu. 8 This is filled up with the help of OJO, XXX. ( 115 ) 116 HIMANSU BHUSAN SARKAR [VOL. IV, 2. do$a*praghatandidt 1 2 sarwatra sukhi bhavatu lokab (|| 0 1|) 3 . 3. svasti 6akavarsatita 850 6ravanamasa 4 * tithi caturdafii 6 fiuklapaksa, vu, ka, 6a, vara, hastanaksatra, vis$u devata, so&Aagya 6 4. yoga , irika divasa ni djna 6rl maharaja rakai pangkaja 7 dyah vava 6ri vijayalokanamottungga 8 tinadah rakry&n, mapatib i hino 5. in ^amvikrama, umingsor i samgat momahumah kalih madafldfcr pu padma, anggehan pu kuiidala kumonakan ikanang | vanua m 6. i sangguran vat 8 k vaharu, gavai 9 han tajmk mas su haliman susukan de nikanang punta i manafijung mangaran dang aryya | 7. kya , mamang yanggu i, slpU dapu jambang, kisik (k§ ?) dapu bhairava, vasya, Inking, bhanda, tamblang, ha ang , viglr , dapu sat | 8. sari s, a ( )i bhatara i sang hyang prasada kabhaktyan ing slma kajuru gusalyan i manawji/ng paknanya simangun pa | 9. utxiELng&ksa ing samadana i sang hyang dharmma ngkdnani Siva caturnivedya 10 i bhatara pratidina mang- kana ista prayojana Sri maha | 10. raja muang rakrydn mapatib rikanang vanua i sangguran inarpan- nakan 11 i bhatara i sang hyang prasada kabhaktyan ing sima kajuru gusalyan ing manafijung | 11. rnd i vaharu parnnahanya svatantr& tan katamana dening patib vahuta muang saprakara ning mangilala dravya haji ing dangu, 12 * miSra paramiSra vuluvulu | 12. prakara , pangurang kring, padam, manimpiki, paranakan, limus galuh, pangaruhan, taji, vatu tajam, sukun, halu varak, rakadut\ 13. pinilai katanggaran , tapahaji, air haji, malandang, l£va, 18 16blab, kalangkang, kutak, tangkil, trSpan, salvit, tuha dagang, juru gusali, | 14. tuh&namvi, tuhan unjaman , tuhan judi, juru jalir, pamanikan, miSra hino, vli hapu ; vli vadung, vli tambang, vli pafijut, vli harSng, pavisar, palamak, | 15. pakalangkang, urutan dampulan , tpung kavung, sungsung pangurang, pasuk alas, payungan, sipat vilut panginangin, pamavaSya, pulung pa | 16. di, skar tahun, panrdngan , panusuh , hopan , sambal sumbul, hulun haji pamrGsi vatak i jro ityaivamadi tan tamA irikanang va| 17. nua iima i sangguran kevala bhatara i sang hyang prasada kabhak- tyan ing sima kajuru gusalyan i manafijung, atah pramaua i sadrfcvya hajinya kabaih | 18. samangkana ikanang sukha dukha kadyangganing mayang tan pawah, valu rumambat ing natar, vipati vangkai kabunan, rah kasavur ing da 1 Read:°sah. 2 Read : pray&ntu n&Sa(ip). 3 The verse is written in the Aryft metre. 4 The correct Skt. form is : Sra°. 6 The correct Skt. form is ; caturdaAl. • The corresponding Skt. form is : saubha°. 7 Brandos read (pha) ng°, but see Krom, Geschiedenis, 2 p. 199. 8 Brandos read °mosfu , but see Krom, op. cit. 2 For this reading, see Krom, op. cit., p. 201, f.n, 4. 10 Read : °nai°. 21 Here also the consonant has been duplicated. 38 Elsewhere, ring dangu. » 10ca? 1962] THE STONE OF SANGGURAN (MINTO-STONE) 117 19. Ian, vak capafa, duhilafcm, hidu kasirat, hasta capalft mamijilakan turuh ning kikir, mamuk mamumpang, ludan, tuta | 20. n, danda kudanda, bhaydihaladi , bhatara i sang hyang pr&s&da kabhak- tyan atah parana ni dravya hajinya, kunang ikanang mi&ra, mafiam- bul| ^ 21. marianffVTmg mangldka , manguvar, matarub, mangapus, manula vungkudu, manggula, mangdyun, manghapu, mamubut, malurung, magavai | 22. runggi, 1 payung vlu mo( )yi , 2 a( )javg, z magavai kisl mangapaman- am, manavang, ma,na(ng)Jctb , mamisandvng man k, makalakala| 23. u( )uHri(bhdgd)n& dravya hajinya , saduman umarb i 6%atara, saduman umara i sang makmitan* slma, saduman maparaha i sang mangilala dravya haji | 24. kapva ikanang masambyavahara ngk&na ( ) i ( ) hingan 6 iveAanya anvng tan kna de sang mangilala dravya haji, thing tuhan ing sasambyavahara ing sasi | (ma) 25. yan pangulang kbo 40 , vdus 80 aydah savantayan, mawgr?/langan tlung pasang, mangarah tlung lumpang, paydai sobuban, (°vuv 0 ?), padahi tlung tang | 26. k$ban titih saka( )ti, nda havi sa tuhan, macadar patang pacadaran, 7 parahu 1 ma( )uhara 8 ( ) 9 tanpatundana, yapvan pinikul dagangnya ka | 27. d^hyanggd 10 ning ma 11 mangunjal, mangavari , kapas, vung- kudu f vsi, tambaga, gangsa, vi§ a, 12 pangat 18 pamaja, vayang, Inga, bras, galu 14 1 28. han , Tcasumba , saprakdra ning , t sinPmbal l5 kalima mntaling satuhan. pikulpikulananya ing sasima (i)kanang samangkana tan knana de sang mangilala | 29. dravya haji, nya sa( )ianya , 16 nddn makmitana tulis. mang- ka i lviranya, yapwan lbih sangkfi, rikanang sapanghing iriyang, knana ^ita 17 lbihnya de sang mangilala | 30. irikanang kala mangasBakan ing kanang 18 punta i raananjung pasak pasak. i 6rl maharaja pirak ka 1 vdihan. ta| 1 Read: °ki. 2 In some inscriptions, we find here: mopih. 3 This appears to be a misreading for a(rna)hang. 4 Tn other inscriptions, we find here: kapua ya. 6 Filled up with the help of other inscription, e.g. the V anagiri inscription in TBG, 74, p. 288. 6 In an inscription of Balitung, we find here: hanangkana hinghlngana. See Aanv>. Kol. Inst,, 1934, Bijl. A. 7 Braudes misread the text as: mavadar palang pavadaran. The above reading is supported by many records. The palang of Brandes is evidently a printing mistake. 8 Read: ma(s)u(ng)hara. 9 Usually we find here the numeral 3. 10 Read: dya°. 11 We usually find here mabasana. 12 Here might have stood tim&(h) or w8as which we have in other inscriptions. 18 This appears to be a misreading for pacjat. 14 This appears to be a mistake for trula. See Singasari inscription in TBG , 65, p. 237. 15 In other inscriptions (TBG, 66, p. 237; 74, p. 288; Aanw„ op . cit,, p. 137), we read ( after saprakara ning): dual pinikul kalima . , . We have doubtless to read this in the text. 16 In OJO, XXX, we read (after mangilala drabya haji): sapar&nanya sadeSanya, and this should fill up the above blanks. 17 In other records we find here: ikana. 18 Read: ikanang. HIMANSTJ BHTTSAN SARKAE 118 [VOL. IV, 31. pis yu 1 rakry&n mapatiih i hino 6rT !65,navikrama inangsSan pasak pasak pirak ka 1 vdihan tapis yu 1 rakai sirikan pu amarendra 1 | 32. lyang 2 samgat momahumah kalih madandSr, anggShan inangsSan jpasak pasak pirak ka 5 vdihan yu 1 sovang sovang 33. tiruan dapunta taritip amrati 3 havang vicaksana 4 pulu vatu 5 pu pandamuan, halaran pu gu^ottama, manghuri pu manguvil vadihati | 31. pu dinakara, 6 hujung inangs an pasak pasak pirak dh& 1 ma 6 vdihan yu 1 sovang, vaharu rikang kalang pu variga inangse | 35. &nr pasakpasak pirak vdihan yu l samgat analyn dha 7 ma 8 kain vlah 1 sang tuhan i vaharu vinaih pasakpasak [ 36. pirak dha 8 tuhan i vadihati pu miramirah halapa 7 sang saddhya tuhan i makudur[ 37. i 8 vadihati sang ravangu , 9 manangga 10 sang hovangia, pangurang i makudur sang rakvel, 11 ma nungkul 12 38. pirak pasakpasak vdihan ranya Verso 1. 2 . 3. mpung , vinaih pasakpasak ma 1 vdihan yu 1 sovang sovang, sang tuhan i pakaranan makabaihan juru kanayakan | 4. i hino samgat ganxmgan pu buntut, 13 juru vadva 14 rarai, sang raguy u, juru kalula pu vali, 16 kandamuhi sang gasta, 1 ® parujar i siri 5. kan 17 hujung galuli i vka viridih, i kanuruhan sa ( )kat , 18 i sda sang vipala, i vavang sang lang, i ma dander sang cakraryyang- g2han l9 sang tu 20 1 1 Brandes doubtfully read manira. For the above correction, see TBG, 55, p. 591; OV % 1919, pp. 66-67; Krom, QcscMedenl't* p. 202, f.n. 2. 2 We can read the name as rakai wka dyah balyang with the help of OJO t XXXIV (before 851 Saka). 3 For this filling up of the blank, comparo OJO, XXXVII: v°. 4; Krom, Geschiedenis, p. 202, f.n. 2. 4 Brandes doubtfully read vi vailcana, but the above correction is suggested by OJO, XXXVIT (861 $aka). 5 Brandes doubtfully read pa\u vatu, but the above reading is given in OJO , XXXVII. e Brandos doubtfully read pu dara , but it has been corrected as above by Krom. See also OJO, XXXVII. 7 In OJO, XXXVIII (851 Saka), we find here halang paluh. 8 Bofore this word we have to read : pangurang. 9 For this doubtful reading of Brandes, we have vungu in OJO, XXXVIII. 10 OJO, XXXVIIT, reads here: (m)anunggu. 11 Brandes doubtfully road raPlfel, but this is undoubtedly a misreading for the above. Compare OJO, XXXVIII, v°. 9. 12 This appears to be a doubtful reading for manunggu akul(umpang). See ibid. 18 Brandes read pu tun tun, but the above name appears in OJO, XLIII: v°. 1 (852 Saka). The confusion between t and b is possible. 14 Brandes doubtfully read pa flea, but the misreading appears evident from OJO, XLIII: v°. 1. 15 In OJO , XLIII: v°. 1, his name appears as Bala. 18 In OJO, XLIII: v°. 1, his name appears as Gesta. * 7 Brandes misread it os si{ )ran, but the above correction may be supported by KO, 1:1, 14; OJO, XXXVIII: v°. 11; XLIII, v°. 1-2. 18 The name appears as Bokat in OJO, XXXVIIT, v°. 11 and as Rakat in OJO, XLIII, v°. 2. 19 From OJO, XXXVTII, v°. 12 and XLIII, v°. 2, the reading appears to be correct. ' 20 In OJO, XXXVTII, v°. 12, his name appears as Vidya. 1962] THE STONE OF SANGGURAN (MINTO-STONE) 119 6. han i tiruan sumudan dapunta sanggama, i frvjung sang pavadukan vinaih pasakpasak pirak dha 4 ma 8 kinabaihanya, sang citra la 1 1 7 . i hino pasak pasak dha 3 mg, 8 kinabaiAa%ya patih kilih vasah sang kulumpang, kuci sang rakavil pasakpasak dha 1 ma 4 sovang so ] 8. vang, parujarnya pingsor hyang paskaran pasak pasak priak sovang sovang lumaku manusuk i vadihati sang kamala, lumakn manusuk i makudur sang tama | 9. i su han sang ngastuti sang bate (bapra ?), i tapahaji sang padntan vinaih pasakpasak dha 1 vdihan yu 1 sovang sovang, patih i kanuruhan ta 10. patih i hujung sang kahyunan, patih vaharu sang nila, patih i tuga- ran sang mala, patih samgat i vaharu sang gambo, patih pangkur sang mangga sa(ng) rangga vinaih pasakpasak dha 1 vdi | 11. han yu 1 sovang sovang, patih lama ran sang prasama; pasakpasak pirak ma 8 vdihan hlai 1 parujar patih si manohara pasak pasak dha 1 vdihan yu J parujar patih i ka | 12. nuruhan si ja si rambfct, parujar patih i vaharu si ml si tan]ak si caca, pasakpasak pirak ma 8 vdihan hlai 1 sovang sovang, vahuta i vaharu si ba | 13. lu syag si Atfndul, tuha kalang, vinaih pasakpasak dhd 1 vdihan yu 1 sovang sovang, pilunggah si raji, si vawtan, pmda ti vdihan hlai 1 | 14. sovang sovang, rama tpi siring milu pinakasaksi ning manusuk sima i tugaran gusti si lak^ita, tuha kalang si yogya, vinaih pasakpasak pirak | 15. ma 8 vdihan yu 1 sovang sovang, i kaja tan i paeangkuan si sura, i kdikdi si paha(ng ?) i ftwngkalingan si tin jo, i kapatihan si pingul | 16. i da si tambas vinaik 2 pasakpasak pirak ma 3 sovang sovang, patih i vungavunga pirak ma ri papanahan vinkas si mang- javat , i ka r, kulamati si | 17. kax^di i tampur si dede ran vinaih pasakpasak pirak ma ? sovang, si mak si kes6k si vudalxi si kudi, mat£tfc( )n si luluk vinaih pasak- pasak pirak | 18. ma 4 vdihan hlai 1 sovang, amkol si lulut, si sat , si hiring, vinaih vdihan hlai ? sovang, vayang si rahina pirak ma 4 vdihan yu 1 sang boddhi, sang raargga, vi | 19. naih vdihan yu 1 sovang, i tlas ning mavaih pasakpasak muang vdihan i sira kabaih pinarnnah ikanang saji i sang makudur i sor ning vitana, mangargha ta sang pinakaviku | 20. sumangaskara ikanang susuk muang kulumpang, mandiri 3 ta sang makudur mangafijali i sang hyang t$as malungguh i sor ning vitana, man dlan pada, humarfcppakan 4 sang hyang t& | 21. as, masinghal vdihan yu 1 tumut sang vadihati, lumkas sang makudur manggayut 5 manStSk gulu ning hayam, linaudSssakan 4 ing kulum- pang mamantinga | 22. kan hantlu ing watu sima mamangmang manapathe saminangmang nira dangu, i katguhakna sang hyang vatu sima, ikana ling nira, indah ta kita kamung hyang i vaprakeSvara a | 1 Probably stands here: oitralekha. * Head: °naih. 8 Head: mangd 0 . 4# Hero also the consonant has been doubled. 8 Head: °uyut. 120 HIMANST7 BHtJSAN SABKAB [VOL. iv, 23. ^»flti 1 11 mahSr©si 2 purrva daksi^a pagcimottara maddhya 8 flrddha- madhah ravi 6a6ik 4 sitij alapa^ara, 6 huta^ana 6 yajamanakaia dharm- ma ahoratra sa | 24. ndhyfk hr&daya , 7 yaksa raksasa pisaca 8 pretasura garuda gandharwa catv&ri lokapala, yama varuna kuvera vaSava, 9 muang patra 10 deva| 25. ta u pafica kuAika, nand!6vara, mahakala sadvinayaka 12 nagaraja durg- gadeiw 13 caturaira, 14 ananta 1 6 surendra ananta. hyang kala-mr&tyu 16 1 26. gana bhuta kita prasiddha mangraksa kadatvan 6ri mal^raja i mtfang i bhumi mataram. kita umilu mararira 17 umasuk ing sajwa | 27. aarfm y 18 kita sakala saksl-bhfita tumon madoh lavan ‘mapare, ring rahiwa, ring vngi at r6ng kan. 19 ka ike samaya sapatha 20 sumpah pamangmang ma { 28. mi ri kita hiyang 21 kabaih, yavat ikanang vang duracAra taw magum- 22 tan makmit. irikeng sapatha 20 sinra^akan sang vahwta byang kudur, hadyan hulun matuha ra | 29. rai lakilaki vadwan, viku grrahastha muang patih vahuta rama asing umulahulah ikeng vanua i sangguran, sima inarpa^akan. nikanang punta i mana | 30. njung i bhatara, i sang hyang prasada kabhaktyan ing sTma kajuru- gusalyan, i dlaha ni dlaha vavv> kataya wgrioiivaih yan davata 23 sang hyang vatu sima tasmat ka | 31. bvat fcarraaknanya, paty ananta taya kamung hyang deyantat patlya, tattanollha 24 i vuntat, ta(t)tinghala i likuran, ta(r)ung ingadOgraw tampya | 32. 1. i virangan, tutuh tupdunya vlah kapalanya, sbitakan. vtangnya rantannususnya 25 vtuakan dalmanya, duduh. 26 hatinya pangan dagin- gnya inum. rahnya t6h6r p£p& j 33. da kan. vkasakan. pranantika, yan para ring alas panganan ring mong, patuk ning ula pulirakna ning devamanyu, yan para ring tgal. alappan 27 ning glap. sampalan ing raksasa, J 1 Read: Agastya. 2 The correct Skt. form is: mahargi. 3 The correct Skt. form is : madhya. 4 Read: Sasi. The reading of saci by Brandes is evidently a printing mistake. 6 Read: °pavana. 6 Read: hu°. 7 The correct Skt. form is: hrd°. 8 The correct Skt. form is: °6a°. 9 Read: °sa°. 10 Read: pu°. 11 Read: °ta. 12 Read: gad 0 . 13 Read: °rga°. 14 CaturaSrama ? 16 Here stands anakta in KO, VII: 6a. 1. 16 The corresponding Skt. form is: mrt°. 17 Read: manarira. 18 Read: 6a°. 19 Or: gokan. 20 Read: 6a°. 21 Read: hya°. 22 Read: g8m ? 23 In a corresponding place of OJO , LXXXIII: 10a, we have ( pang)dahuta . 24 Read: ta tanoliha . The last t in tat appears to be due to its contamination with the initial t of tanoliha . 26 Here also the consonant has been duplicated. 28 In some inscriptions, we find here duduk. v 27 Here also the consonant has been duplicated. 1962] THE STONE OP SANGGURAN (MINTO-STONE) 121 34. dening vunggal si pamungguan, rbigl Ua kita kamung hyang kuSika gargga metri kuru$ya p&tanjala, 2 suvuk lor suvuk kidul suvuk kuluan. vai | 35 . tan, fewangakan ring akaSa, salambitakan i hyang kabaih, tibakan ring mahasamudra, klammakan 3 ing davahan 4 alappan 8 sang dalammer - 3 £u\ 36. dutan i iece of cloth. The parvjar of the patih (viz.) Si Manohara (received) in ample measure (silver) 1 dharana (and) 1 set of cloth. The parvjar( s) of the patih of| 12. Kanuruhan (viz.) Si . . . (and) Si RambSt, the parvjar( s) of the patih of Vaharu (viz.) Si Val, Si Tanjak, Si Caca (received) in ample measure silver 8 mdsa (and) 1 piece of cloth, each in particular. The Vahuta( s) of Vaharu (viz.) Si 13. . . . Si KSndul, the tuha kalang , received in ample measure (silver) 1 dharana (and) 1 set of cloth, each in particular. The pilunggah( s) (viz.) Si Raji, Si Vantan, total . . (received) 1 piece of cloth | 14. each in particular. The rdma( s) of neighbouring places who went to be witnesses in the marking out of the freehold: (the) rdma( s) of Tugaran, (to wit), the gusti (viz.) Si Laksita, the tuha kalang (viz.) Si Yogya, received in ample measure silver | 15. 8 ma§a (and) 1 set of cloth, each in particular; (the rdma) of Kajatan in Pacangkuan (viz.) Si Sura, (the rdma) of Kdikdi (viz.) Si Paha- (ng?), (the rdma) of Bungkalingan (viz.) Si Tifijo, (the rdma) of Kapatihan (viz.) Si Pingul, | 16. (the rdma) of . . . (viz.) Si Tambas received in ample measure silver 3 ma$a, each in particular. The patih of Vungavunga (received) silver . . of Papanahan, the vinkas (viz.) Si Mangjavat, . . . | 17. ... of Tampur (viz.) Si Dederan received in ample measure silver? mdsa , each. Si Mak, Si K8s8k, Si Vudalu, Si Kudi ... Si Luluk received in ample measure silver | 18. 4 md§a (and) 1 piece of cloth, each ... Si Lulut, Si Sat, Si Hiring received ? piece of cloth, each. The vayang 1 (viz.) Si Rahina (received) silver 4 ma§a (and) 1 set of cloth. Sang Boddhi, sang Margga received 19. 1 set of cloth, each. After the completion of presenting different sums of money and clothes to all, the saji- offerings for sang makudur were laid out under the festal tent. The combined body of the bhik#u(&) with offerings (in their hands) I 20. consecrated the foundation and the Kulumpang , 2 * * * * (Thereupon) stood up sang makudur. He folded palms of hands towards sang hyang T&as, sat under the festal tent, fixed his feet (and) faced sang hyang T8as| 21. with a skirt (and) one set of clothes. Sang Vadihati joined him. (Then) sang makudur (and) manguyut 8 began to separate the neck of the hen which was smashed on the kulumpang , threw down) 1 He may be a person showing shadow-plays. The line may also be translated as: the vayonp.player of day-time. * a For an analogy, see the copperplate of king Vava in Kern, VO, VU f p. 182. 1 The imprecatory formulae are usually uttered by the makudur. Here we find both the makudur ana the manguyut in the same role. In OJO, OXII, 116, We find simply the manguyut in uttering ourses. 1962] THE STONE OF SANGGUBAN (MINTO-STONE) 129 22. the egg on the watu sima, uttered oaths and curses which were sworn in earlier times* for the fixity of the vatu sima . The words of them were: ‘Be gracious, you all deities of Vaprake^vara(B) y | 23. the great seer Agastya, east, south, west, north, centre, zenith, nether- world, sun, moon, earth, water, wind, fire, the sacrificing host, ether, laws, day and night, twilight, 24. heart, yak$a( s), rak$asa( s), pi4dca{ s), preta( s), asura{ s), Garuda, Qan - dharva( s), the four guardians of quarters, Yama, Varu^a, Kuvera, V&sava, and the sons of deities, | 26. the five Kufikas, Nandisvara, MahakSla, Sadvinayaka, 1 the king of serpents, Goddess Durga, Caturd&ra , 2 3 sons of the king of gods, 8 Ananta, the deities of Time and Death, ) 26. Gana(B), bhuta(s) (and) you who are known to protect the kraton of the illustrious great king at Mdang in the country of MatarSm ! You (spirits) who go to incarnate by penetrating into all| 27. bodies, you (spirits) who see far and near, by day and by night ! • Listen to this utterance of oaths, swearings and curses of | 28. mine to you, all gods ! If any unrighteous person does not maintain and take care of the curses which have been uttered by sang vahvta hyang (and the?) kudur , 4 * * * (be he) a nobleman (or) a slave, old (or)| 29. young, man (or) woman, mendicant (or) a householder, and patih( s), vahuta( s), rdma( s) — whoever disturbs the village at Sangguran, a freehold that has been given by the punta of Manafijung | 30. to the deity ( bhafdra ) of the sacred prasada Kabhaktyan in the free- hold of the united body of the chiefs of smiths, for the remotest future, he may be brought to destruction! Moreover, when (he disturbs) the boundaries of sang hyang vatu sima , as the result of his | 31. deeds, may he be killed by you! He may be killed by all gods in such a way that he may not (find time to) turn behind, he may not (find time to) look behind: he may be pushed on the front-side, struck | 32. on the left side, his mouth may be struck, his forehead may be bat- tered, his belly may be ripped open, his intestines may be rooted out, his entrails may be drawn out, his heart may be plucked out, his flesh may be eaten up, his blood may be drunk up, then he may be trampled | 33. upon, lastly he may be killed. If he goes to the forest, he may be eaten up by the tiger, bitten by the snake (and) whirled round and round by the anger of gods ! If he goes to the fields, he may be struck by lightning, tom into pieces by the rak§asa( s), | 34. . . .* Listen, you all gods (:) KuSika, Garga, Maitri Kurusya, Patafijala, guardians (?) of the north, guardians (?) of the south, guardians (?) of the west (and) | 35. east I He may be thrown off from the firmament, he may be strangled (?) by all gods, he may be dashed into the great ocean, he may be dipped into the (waters of the) dam, he may be dragged into the depth of the water to bej 1 This is a name of Gai^oSa. See Kern, VO, VI, p. 311. 2 Probably the four aJrama(8) have been invoked here. 3 Brandos doubtfully reads an&nta , but as this has been repeated after the follow- ing word, it is possible that the word is anakta , as we have in KO, VII. 4 That vamita hyang is an officer under makudur appears from OJO f XII : A. 9-10. As makudur and manguyut are cursing together, can it be a fact that vahuta tyang^mangttyutl * Here might have stood : panganUn dening vuil . If so, the translation of the whole passage should be : eaten up by the titan while he stands on. 130 HIMANStT BHUSAN SARKAR [VOL. iv, 36. torn into pieces by the tanghiran and caught by the crocodile ! Thus dies the unrighteous person who destroys the region of the freehold at Sangguran under Sangguran. (Even if anybody) creates troubles for the deity . . . | 37. ... he may turn towards hell and be thrown into the maharaurava* hel’ to be cooked by the servants of Yama and struok by the servants of Yama! Seven times may be destroyed the images of his father . . . | # 38. As long as he lives, he may have sorrows, he may experience all sorts of sorrows, he may suffer all sorts of sorrows ! He ma^ be abhorred . . . His position may be (such that) he may be furiously attacked without experiencing tranquillity . . . (his) ashes may be blown away.’ Such) 39. is the fate of the unrighteous person who destroys the freehold of Sangguran after sang makudur marked out . . . all ... sat after coming in loose batches; (then), according to rank, 1 all 40. the patih( s), vahuta( s,) rama( s), kabayan( s) 2 and all the raraa(s) of neigh- bouring places, the old and the young, males and females, of the lowest, mediocre (and) highest position, without anybody remaining behind, went to take food in a circle, | 41. ... received cooked rice. Dakdannan 3 (and) linirusan 3 were cooked with spices and were sufficiently taken in. Grain-powders (litlit) were much relished. After that (they ate) excellently roasted aranak 4 (and) cooked meat (?), kneaded 42. tetis (?), tumpuktumpuk, . . . salted . . . bilunglung- fish kadivas- fish . . . cray-fish, layar-layar, hala-hala, vigang . . . 43. . . . , and so forth. All of them ate these according to (their heart’s desire). They drank rum (and) cinca- wine . . . | 44. ... betel-leaves were given in abundance . . . made toilette with flowers . . . 45. ... Margin 1 - 12 . . . .5 13. (Such is) the procedure of marking out the freehold at Sangguran. | 14. Henceforward, (this is) permanently regulated. (This is) written by 15. the designer to Hino (viz.) Laksaija. 1 tumut krama appears to be the same as ( 8a)yatJmkrama wherever Van Naerssen speaks in BKI , 90, pp. 247-248. 2 Or : rdma kabayan( s). 3 The words are not known to me. 4 If we consider that the phrases aranak and dryya refer to children and adult people (or, noblemen), other interpretations may be possible, but some grammatical objections may also be raised. 3 As the text is very mutilated, no decent translation is at all possible. 1962] 131 THE STONE OP SANGGURAN (MINTO-STONB) Appendix A. Abbreviations jiJSVEO • • Bulletin de l’Ecole Francaise d’Extreme— Orient. MCI Bijdragen tot de Taal-Land en Volken kunde, uitgegeven door het Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal, Land-en Volkenkunde te 's— Graven- hage. KBWdb . . Kawi-Balineesch-Nederlandsch woordenboek door H.N. van der Tuuk, 4 vols. KO . . Kawi Oorkonden, Inleiding en Transcrip ties, door Dr. A. B. Cohen Stuart. Ltjst . . Oudjavaansch-Nederland&ehe Woordenlijst door Dr. H., H. Juynboll. OJO . . Oudjavaansche Oorkonden, Brandes-Krom, in Verhandelingen van het Bataviaasch oenootschap van Kunsten en Witenschappen, vol. 00, 1913. OV Oudheidkundig Verslag, uitgegeven door (Koninklijk) Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschappen. TBQ . . Tijdschrift voor Indischo Taal, Land-en Volkenkunde, uitgegeven het (koninklijk) Bataviaasch Genootschap von Kunsten en Witenschappen. VQ . . Verspriede Geschriften door Dr. H. Kern. B. Official Titles and. Honorific s Air haji AnggShan Amrati Citralekha pampulam Pang Aryu Papu Dyah Halaran Halu Varak Hopan Hujung Hujung Galuh Hulun Haji Juru Juru gusali Juru jalir Kabayon Kalang Kajuru gusalyan Kalangkang Kandamuhi Katanggaran Kring Kudur Kutak L&bl&b L0va Limus galuh Lumaku manusuk Madand^r Makudur Malandang Manghuri Manguyut Manfinpiki Mapatih i hino Miramirah Mlira Mi£ra hino Kay aka Pa dated the 30th June, 1962 (15th Asadh, 1369 B.S.), p. 883, as an illustration in an article entitled ‘Rani Bhavanir Dalir (A Document of Rani Bhavftni) by Shri Chittapriya Mitra at pp. 883-87. In spite of the title of Mitra’s article, it really contains very little about the record itself — neither its text nor any interpretation thereof. As regards the text, Mitra quotes only five words from the document, in which also there are errors of both reading and interpretation. But he has correctly read the date and the name of the addressee. The records begin with the passage which is modified from Persian ydd kund on ydd bald hard and means ‘Be it remembered*. The language of the following section is seemingly Sanskrit, though it abounds in Bengali and Perso-Arabic passages. Often words of different origin have been joined in samdsa and sandhi as in (in which from Arabic qarz , ‘a loan*, is joined in samdsa with Sanskrit patram, ‘a deed’) and (in which Sanskrit kdryari = ca is joined in sandhi with used in Bengali, etc., to mean ‘ahead, below, afterwards’, the word kdrya indicating ‘the object or subject-matter of a document’). The rest of the records is written in Bengali abounding in Arabic and Persian words used in some cases in modified senses, as indicated above. Thus or (from Arabic sadr generally meaning ‘principal’) has been used in the sense of ‘current’ with reference to a year, in one case with the Bengali locative suffix <^5 added to it. For the Bengali verb (I am giving), Document I has fifap T and and Document II f^rl\3 and ffcr, the forms fifSTfa and f^rt\3 representing different pronunciations of the same word. As regards orthography, the sibilants are often used indisoriminately without reference to the sound concerned as in for Persian ffspiTO (from* hand to hand), for Arabic sikkah (a current coin), f§rfSre f° r Persian jalUst (the year reckoned from the date of the king’s accession), ( 141 ) 142 X>. 0. SIBCAR [VOL. IV, for Arabio hd$il (revenue), for Arabic khali&dh sharifa (the royal exchequer, revenue department), Jffftc-j for Arabic shdmil (included), in the geographical name Tppteffoff for Arabic shams (the sun), »ttcT for Arabio sal (the year), etc. The reason is that all the sibilants are pronounced as palatal by the people of Bengal. The representation of the sound of English w in c^q] (Persian bewa, ‘a widow 1 ) and the geograph- ical name qt'Ql is in the Perso-Arabic fashion, in which the letter wdw stands for w as well as u and o. It may be noticed that the modern Bengali way of writing these words as c^qi n and is even more unscientific. The Assamese alphabet has a separate consonant for the sound which should have been borrowed in Bengali. Arabic Idyaq (fit) has been written as 5^35- and not in the modern Bengali way as Document I uses for cf in all cases while both the records often use medial i for medial % and vice versa not only in foreign but also in Sanskritic words ; cf. f etc. Document II uses Bengali -s>ff\£ (Sanskrit pataka, ‘bank') in the form of which normally means 'a hill\ The palaeography of the documents, which use the Nagarl type of anusvdra and the Assamese type of 3 in a few cases where it is distinguished from ^ is characterized by the use of (1) different forms of the same letters and signs, (2) the same or similar form of different letters, and (3) forms of letters and signs which became gradually obsolete after the introduction of the printing press. These three categories are illustrated below from Document I. (1) Cf. $ in (line 1) and (line 11) with the same letter in (line 9) and (line 12) ; op in °3tsn and f^Q (line 2), 353^ (lines 3 and 12), (line 4), *rtf*t?TW (line 9), etc. ; medial i in (line 1), firs (line 2), (line 3), (line 9) ; in (line 1), ?TWt| , as found in Document II, is noticed here. In the same context, we have often the word ^<(| i ® fafasi. 146 D. 0. SIRCAR [VOL. IV, 0. ‘ 'Q CTtrsr ’rfftsf mw 7. >»i 6 Correctly a Correctly 7 As indicated above, originally was written. It was later changed to / 8 But ultimately was rubbed off. 8 9 Correctly 10 This is written in slanting lines at the space to the right of lines 1-5 and has to be read from the angle of the right side of the upper part of the sheet. 11 # This is written in the upper right space to be read keeping the writing of the document at the left-hand side. 150 D. 0. SIRCAR [VOL. IV, 1902] Translation 6ri Durga. Be it remembered — To 6ri ParameSvari Bew& who is virtuous. This is a deed written in San eleven hundred ninety-two — in figures 1192. The object is [narrated] in the sequel. Taraf RSypur, Mugcifat Kalyanpur, Pargana PatikabSdl — in the above- mentioned Muzafat, you should excavate a tank. For tfiat purpose, I am giving you 1 — one — bigha (later corrected to ‘4 — foifr — bighas’) of fallow land wliich is property detached from the rental of the Estate, lying to the north of the house of Bairagidas Bihara [and] to the south — adjoining the border — of Tehattagram which is a part of Shamskhali. You should excavate the tank. Dedicate the water [in the name] of God. The four embankments [of the tank] will be in your [exclusive] possession. Plant trees, eto., [on them] and enjoy [their produce]. The revenue is exempted for all years. To this effect, I am giving [you this] document [during] the curreht year. [This is] the end. Jyaistha 20. I The concluding part of the current year. n [This is the signature] of Sri Maharani BhavanI Devi. vS. IV. 1002 Plate I JIW ^MBlVtUTOw ^app? Pvf l p^a ^ Document T. A'. mJ]; V *v-. .'.hi. .;/ 4 : ■ ,.v • ?n> ' c- . H £'”■'■ S' l ■ty; * 1 4&1 southern ex- tremity of the Aravalli, where it branches to the south-east and east towards Ratangarh, Bijholiya, etc. Here it has converted itself into a huge and wide rolling tableland, precipitous on one side only. Since the location of Candravati is well known, we may assume that, after the defeat of the ruler of Jhalawar, there was, possibly, a battle between the Gujarat army under Tribhuvanapala and that led by Raval Jaitrasimha near about the modem city of Kota, then known as Kottahaka, in which Bala fell. Either the Guhilot army was besieging a Gujrat garrison at Kota (cf. grahane) or they were besieged. Ksema, the fourth son of Yogaraja, secured the post of taldraksaka of Chitrakuta (Chitor) from Raval Jaitrasimha. So, he happens to be one of the earliest -known historical lords {durgasvamin or killdhddr) of the celebrated fortress (v. 22). He had a son named Rerina.who lost his life, along with Bhlmasimha, in a battle, which took place at the foot (talaffi) of the rock (v. 26). The praiastikara, however, does not clarify the nature or the parties involved in the battle. There are several alter- natives. It is possibly the incident referred to as Meqtapdfa-prithvi-vilalala mandalam Jayatalam, mentioned in the Hammiramadamardana . Bhlma- simha, mentioned as a casualty, is probably simdntamani mentioned in the Hammiramadamardana and Sukrtakirttikallolini quoted by Majumdar 2 . The second alternative possibility was an invasion by the Sultan of Delhi. The contemporaries of Jaitrasimha were: Htutmish, Ruknuddin Flruz Shah, Rfiziyah, Muizuddln Bahram Shah, Alauddin Masud Shah and Nfisiruddln Mahmud Shah. In A.H. 647 (c. A.D. 1247) Jalaluddin, brother of Nasiruddin, who had been sent as the Viceroy of Kanauj, was recalled. But that intelligent prince, suspecting danger, ‘fled to the hills of Chitor’, where his elder brother, after eight months of futile search, failed to apprehend him 3 . In A.H. 653 (c. A.D. 1256), another raid on Chitor by Saifuddln Qutlugh Khan, who had married a queen of Iltutmish, took place. The Turco-Afghan baron revolted at Bharaich and escaped to Chitor, pursued by Wdzir Ulugh Khan. The Wdzir is reported to have destroyed the fort but failed to secure the person of the renegade 4 . In one of these, if our first hypothesis is incorrect and Bhlmasimha was not a Caulukya General hailing from Marusthali (Marwar), Ratna, son of Ksema, like B&dal, Jaimal and Patta, probably lost his life. His brother, Madana, distinguished himself in the battle of Utthunaka (modem Arthuna) while fighting the Pancdlagudika Jaitramalla in the- service of king Jesala alias Jaitrasimha. Jaitramalla is evidently Para- mara Jaitugudeva (c. A.D. 1243-56) 6 . He was appointed taldraksaka of Citrakuta (Chitor) by RSval Samarasimha and worshipped Siva in the temple erected by Bhoja and known as Tribhuvana-NarSyana (w. 30- 31) and identified with AdvadjI or Mokaljfs temple by Sri R. R. Haidar 1 Modern T&lheti or Prat&pnagar. 2 Majumdar, op. 156. 3 Briggs : Feriethah , Vol. I, p. 238. 4 IbidT, p. 242. 1962] A LITHIO EPIC OF SOUTH-EAST RAJASTHAN— A FRESH STUDY 167 on the authority of Mm. 6. H. Ojha. But this identification cannot stand. The present MokaljI’s temple belongs to two epochs of Mewar history. The portions from bhitta to vasantapaftikd , viz. jagati, plfha and vedtbandha , belong to Caulukya or SolankI period, say, c. twelfth century A.D., its applied sculpture relating to tirthankara-charitra , while the rest was redirected in the reign of Maharana Mokala and belongs to the classic phase of Guhila art. An inscription found on the temple informs us that Kumarapala worshipped the god and granted it a village. This point had not been sufficiently evaluated in previous discussions. Nowhere in the epigraph is there any reference to any earlier benefaction which had lapsed like that recorded in the Dhanop inscription 1 . If it had existed, then the Hindu prince in whose territory it was erected must have granted some lands or villages for its maintenance. In the second place, the in- scription was set up in its present position in the reign of Mokala, after it had been violated by Alauddin Khalji. It is not the temple erected by king Bhoja of the Paramara dynasty. The styles of architecture and sculptures are not Paramara (Plate I). In my opinion, Tribhuvana-Naray ana , or Bhojasvamijagatt , is to be identified with Adbhutanatha’s temple which is now deserted and contains an image of Mahe^amurti, just like MokaljI’s temple. Stylistically, both the images are similar. The present structure, to judge by the contents of the applied sculptures, was erected about fifteenth century A.D. and desecrated by the Gujarat Sultan. The proof of the existence of an earlier fane is furnished by the lower level of the sanctum, which is at a depth of 4' 8" from that of the floor of the mandapa, similar to the southern chapel of the main shrine (Mulagandhafaifi’rnaMvihdra) at Samath, the U ndeS vara-Mahade va temple at Bijholiya and the P&taleSvara temple before the top-khana at Chitor. The third part of the epigraph commences from verse 30 ending in verse 40 and concerns itself with the village of Cirakupa which was granted as a fief to Yogaraja by Raval Padmasimha. It was situated in the out- skirts of Nagahrada, in the neighbourhood ( sannidhane ) of the foothills (pade pade) .of Prajyala 2 * . The description is correct. As a traveller, proceeding from Udaipur, reaches the summit of the pass which provides access to the NagdS valley, closed by a medieval gate labelled on top as Chirawa gate’, the village bursts on one’s vision, situated at the centre of an amphitheatre of hills. Its houses and temples are erected on mounds of ochre-coloured earth, containing possibly the ruins of medieval Cirakupa, if not still earlier remains. Beyond it, lie the ruined and deserted shrines of Nagda, its causgjyay, and perched on an eminence above them are the walls of a fort ascribed to ‘ Chitrang Mori 9 or CitrangadS, the Mori King, by the local people. On a separate conical hill can be seen the temple of Rathasena (Rasfrasena). The calm and peaceful valley, with the evi- dences of vandalism perpetrated in bygone ages, smiled serenely under an autumnal sun, surrounded by the Aravalli range. Yogar&ja erected here the temples of YogeSvara and Yogefivari which, in course of time, fell into ruins and were repaired by Madana who granted some land near the lake called K&l&ya (KalelS) which is probably the lake near N&gdA, over which ruins of a causeway can still be seen. Uddhara^a also built a temple called UddharauasvSmin. The fourth portion deals with the Paiupata and Jaina dear y as. Verse i Ind. Ant., Vol. XL (1911). p. 174. 9 This must be the hill, because the temple of Ekaliftga was built on the hill known as A6vagrfcna in the reign of Alla^a according to the Ekalihga inscription. 168 ADBIS BANEBJI [VOL. IV, 1962] 44 tells us that there was a Pafiupata dcdrya , devoted to Ekalihga 1 * 3 , named Sivar&di. Most regrettably the record does not clarify whether he stayed at Chitor or Ekalihga. The latter is the possibility. D. R. Bhandarkar states that the suffix * rdii 9 was generally used by &aiva monks of the Lakuliga sect 8 . He drew our attention to the fact that the Karapakas 3 bore the name Supujitaraii, Sadyarfiii and ViniScitaraii 4 * . The Cintra prainsti, now in Portugal, refers to KlrttiraSi, and Valmikirahi. Dharma- raSi, a disciple of Uttamaraii, rebuilt a temple of 6iva at Shotan in the Banner district. A Chitorgarh inscription mentions Haritara^i, MaheSvara- rahi and 6ivara6i 6 . At that time Kavirdja 6yamaladasa failed to identify 6ivaraii who was one of the successors of Haritaraii. Not merely that, but all the three inscriptions, the Ekalingaji inscription of the time of Alla^a, the Chitorgarh inscription already referred to and Chirava inscription, throw interesting sidelights on the mystic personalities of Haritara£i anti Bappa or Bappaka or Bappa Raval and the sectarian history of the Ekalihga shrine from c. eighth to c. tenth centuries A.D. Haritaradi, the preceptor of Bappa, whatever might have been his real name and identity, was residing at or near Ekalihga, the modern Kailasapurl, in whose neighbourhood in a hill village between Ekalihga and Delvada, Bappa was alleged to have been born. The Chitorgarh inscription proves that he was a devotee of Ekalihga and a PaSupata dcdrya . HarltaraSi was a PaSupata as well as a leading devotee of the Lakuli£a cult, enun- ciated by KuSika, etc., who were conversant with the Paiupata yoga and who besmeared their bodies with ashes, had matted hair and used barks. According to Mewar annals, it was this ascetic who inspired Bappa to ascend the throne of Medapata, HaritaraSi was succeeded by MaheS- vararaSi 6 and 6ivaraii who were attached to the temple of Ekalihga. But they could not have been his immediate successors. Since Haritara6i was a senior contemporary of Bappa who is supposed to have abdicated in c. A.D. 753 and since Sivaraii was living in V.S. 1330 (c. A.D. 1273-74), the gap of 577 years could not have been filled up by two persons. There must have been other pontiffs of Ekalihga, whose names are not known to us. All of them, however, belonged to the Pa6upata-Lakuli6a sect. The other interesting point is that the annals of Mewar credits Bappa of having acquired Chitor from the Mori kings who were in all probability of Huna origin. But after visiting the area, a doubt has arisen in my mind, whether the coup d’itat , if it can be called that, took place at Nagda or Chitor. If the tradition relating to the ruined fortifications on the hill below, and by the side of which the road from Nhgda to Ekalihga passes, belonged to 6 Chitrang Mori ’ as. related by a priest of Ekalinga, standing on the bank of the lake at the back of the Ekalinga shrine, is correct, then we have to assume that the Moris were first overthrown at Nagda. But traditions are often unreliable. Therefore, a mass of evidence requires to be garnered before the genesis of Guhila dynasty can be clarified. The concluding portion of the inscription concerns itself with Jaina dc&ryas of the Caitra-gaccha sect who were residents of Citraku^a. These were: Devabhadrasuri, Siddhasenasuri, JineSvarasuri, with his pupil Vijayasenasuri, and Bhuvanacandrasuri, with his disciple Ratnaprabh&suri. 1 Long before V.S. 1330 (A.D. 1273-74), the shrine of Ekalihga existed. It existed even before A.D. 971, as the Ekalihga inscription tells us. 8 Marshall, A.R . , 1906-7, pp. 188-89. 3 Those who erected the temple. 4 J. of the Bombay Branch Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. XXII, p. 152. * J. of the Asiatic Society of Bengal , Vol. LV, Pt. 1, pp. 40-48. 3 Ibid,, p. 48. TAN. IV, 1<><>2 I’l.VI'K f U’opyri'ght Archaeological Survey] Journal of the Asiatic Society. Vdl. IV, Nos. 3 327 of 1916. 6 A.R.E., 355 of 1916. 1A.R.E., 361 of 1916 *A,R,E. t 364 of 1916. 1962 ] THE VILI$VABA TEMPLE AT TIRUVlLlSVARAM 177 F. Conclusion Thus, this temple built early in the tenth century far into the interior of the Paijdya country is reminiscent of the glories of the Chojas, and the records inscribed on it provide ample information about the contemporary political, social, cultural and economic life. By itself, it is an excellent piecfc of art with well-proportioned architectural members and a profusion of delightful sculptures representing various forms of &iva and legends connected with the Great Lord. JAS, IV, 1962. Plate Jl. K M3. I. Second storey oJ‘ / nmtnu % Tn u\ filisvnni Kin. 2. Sculptures on tlio southern side, first storey, Tiruviil Is varum JAS, IV, H H>2, Plate ITT. Fin. I. l\incN of" (jiih1 firt twlrfft «//, mid ( J tn< 7 mid S'im on Mitillimi sul<\ Tirn\ fdTsvmMin Fin. 2. Nafaraja on southern side, T i ruv fills varum Km.'k of Jlal-.s-H, ani) Art),,,,,,!, Panels of Dakfayajiia and Ardhandnacora , on southern *ide, Tiruvallsvaram .TAN, TV' - , 1002 Plate V[, Panels of S'ica Trii.vtiintnkrt and Kalari, respect ively, on wo^tern^ide. Tn uvalKvaram AS, IV, IM2. Plate VII. Liwjodbhava -m art i, Tiruvalisviiriim JAS, TV, 1902. Plate VI TT. Fiu. 2. Pdrvail in penance and marriage, respec tively, Tiruvalisvaram JAS, IV, 19 « 2 . Pr.ATE X Journal of the Asiatic Society. Vol. IV, Nos. 3d! 4, 1962. YADAVAPRAKA&A AND HIS COMMENTARY ON THE CHANDAHSUTRA OF PIN GAIA By Sivaprasad Bhattacharyya In modem days the Chandahsutra of Pihgala (the Vedanga chandas), as distinct from the later apocryphal Prdkrta-Pirlgala , has been a little read work. 1 The Aastraic and scientific manner of presentation, which from its inception, like that in the sister science, vyakarana , it could not afford to leave out, the large proportion of the sutras relating to the Vedic metres (a little more than one- third, or to be preciso 107 out of the 288 sutras in YadavaprakaSa’s text) and the incidental attention to the pratyayas (like prastdra , the multiplication of metrical specimens by the processes of per- jnutation and combination, as woll as nasfa and uddi$ta ), which, though per- taining essentially to the classic metres, appeared like riddlos and at their best were catechized in later treatises on the subject, if not given the go-by, Lave served as hard nuts to crack and as avoidable impediments to the later easy-going student, especially becauso he had to devote his energies to other important topics. From early times of memorable antiquity, devices were set on foot to shorten this course and the treatises 2 of Jayadeva, a Jaina systematizer of Pin gal a, who, however, leaves no item out of Pingala’s original work, the synopses (sara) in the Agnipurdna and the Oaruda - purdna , 3 both, especially the latter, highly valued particularly by the late writer Bhaskara-raya, author of the foremost and most voluminous works on •the subject, as well as the Prdkrata-Piiigala, which brought metres of the Vridanga chandas into a line with its ramifications in Prakrit apabhramAa and dialectal metres, have served in their own wa$! to make a business- like practical approach to the subject available within the reach of later- day students. The mediaeval standard works like the Vrttaratndkara and the later ea#y manuals like the Chandomanjarl of the Orisean poet, Gangadasa, and the ferutabodha , often, though wrongly, attributed to the prince of poets, Kalidasa, showed which way the wind was blowing. In such cir- cumstances the attention of the average scholar in literature could not be diverted to commentaries 4 on the Vedanga chandas of Pingala, which, as 1 The confusion of the Prdk . Ping, with tho PiU. Ch. Sut . has been responsible for wrong entries in several Des. Cat . of MSS. by counting commentaries on the former as commentaries on tho latter. Krishnamachariyar in his History of Classical Sanskrit Literature (p. 891) has followed these Des. Cat. and has given a wrong account; e.£. commentaries by Vaninatha and Srlharsa which are available in the Calcutta Sanskrit College MSS. collection ( Chandas , Nos. 9 and 8) are on the Prdk . Ping, and not on Pitigala’s Chandahsutra. 2 Jayadeva-Chandas (pp. 1-40) in the Jayaddman ed. H. D. Velankar, Bombay, 1950. 3 Agnipur., Ch. 328-335 (Anand edn., Poona), Qartujlapur., Ch. 211—216 (Vangav&sl edn., Calcutta). 4 Over and above the three commentaries discussed here are those referred to by the popular commentator, Halayudha, in the Mft. Safij. (under IV. 52 : , vi. is : • viii. 34 : vtb faffar - ) those by a sfvrSHj ( Y. P. and this agree in their views in very many oases). On f. 101a (regarding noted by Bh&akarar&ya, f. 111a regarding him fycrfi p q T f;f?r $B:) m the Bhdfyardja; and a ( 179 ) 180 SIVAPBASAD BHATTACHARYY A [VOL. IV, extant in MSS., or known from other commentaries that survived, are not more than ten at the best computation. YadavaprakaSa is one of such commentators, certainly not the earliest but one of the very earliest that are known. As a commentator on metrics he is not well known. About seventy years ago Professor Gustav Oppert mentioned Yadavapraka6a’s commentary, in his edition of tho lexicon Vaijayantl , which is hold in higli esteem throughout South India. The Catalogue Catalogormn doos not enter this work under YadavaprakaSa, though it was compiled long after this edition. Tho absence a|f any recorded MSS. was the ostensible reason for this omission. The Des. Cat . of MSS . in the Oriental Library, Madras, of 1905 and later, the Triennial Cat . compiled under the same auspices note four MSS., 1 three of which are in Telugu script and one in Devanagri script, which latter may not unlikely have been a transcript prepared on the basis of the throe Telugu MSS. The Adyar Library MSS. collection has got a MSS. in Devanagri script. 2 The Sanskrit College, Calcutta, 8 also has got a MSS. in Devanagri. All these MSS., as described and known, are more or less defective, full of lacunae, because of the wide gap of time and of the mode of approach by tho scribes, who' copied the text from MSS. known to them. Fortunately for the modern scholar, who has access to the source- books used Jby YadavaprakaSa in his treatment of the Vedic metres, and to the Concordance of passages from the Vedas (where almost all of these are noticed), the vedic portion, which presented tho greatest difficulty to the scribe, is restorablo with a high degree of proficiency. We cannot be so sure of the classical portion, where the illustrations, of which we shall speak in a subsequent section, and the supplementary metrical extracts supplied by Yadavaprakaia present considerable difficulty. Sometimes we have to resort to emendations, commonsurato with tho presented text for, the purpose of hitting at the desired reading. The well-known Yadavaprakaia was the blessed (bhagavat) Y. P., the teacher of tho vi&istadvaita philosopher, Ramanuja, to whom according to the tradition current, the latter resorted in Kanci for instruction in Vedic and philosophic loro in tho oarly part of the latter’s life as a student. He is known to have been tho author of two works, the Vaijayantl , the most popular lexicon in South India of the mediaeval period, as the numerous references thereto by commentators on lcavyas go to show, and the Yati- dharmasamuccaya , a digest in eloven sections (parvans) dealing with the raison d’itre of the institution and the code of conduct of the yatis , or san- nydsins, people in the fourth stage of life according to tho time-honoured divisions of the stages of life of a varnd&ramin. While the former work is available in print, tho latter is known in MSS. 4 only and is often confused with a later manual, the Yatidharmasangraha by the monk ViSveSvara Sarasvatl — a work which, in its sectional colophons and in some catalogues bh&eya-k&ra different from himself noted occasionally in the Vrttacandrodaya , vide reference to the readings and expositions of the others, notably western, eastern and northern writers (Bhd^yardja, f. 1016, f. 108a, f. 129a), and Kaustubha different from his own work, Chandah-KausUibha frequently referred to in the latter work (e.g. f. 276, f. 326, f. 666, f. 696, f. 88a). This Ch. Kates, seems to have been an exposition of the views of Fihgala as in the Pingala-Chandah-Sutra. } D 906, D 900 and R 4271, all in Telugu script and D 15094 in Devanagari script. 8 Adyar : Catalogue of MSS., Part II, p. 39, 9 I, 22. 8 MSS. C hand as. No. 22, * MSS. D 2949, D 2950, D 2951, D 2952, D 2953, T> 2954, . . . D 16207 as well as R 3190(g) and R 4957(a) of Mad . Or. Oov. MSS. Library . 1962] YlDAVAPBAKlSA AND HIS OOMMBNTABY ON CHANDA HS &TRA 181 of MSS. including that in the Asiatic Society, Calcutta, is also named Yati- dTmrmaBamucmya. Y adavaprakaSa’ s work is widely known and is used as an authoritative exposition by digest writers like Kamalikara Bhatta in his Nirnayasindhu and has been summarized for the school as a handy practical manual. 1 It is almost certain that Y. P. wrote other works 2 * including a fow on the philosophy of the Upanisads and on its bearing on the advaita system, as references to, and refutation of, his views appear in the Veddrtha - sangraha* of Ramanuja, and as worthy commentators like Sudardana Sun would expect one to hold. There is a pointed mention in such references to his difference in approach and in the final view (siddhanta) from Ramanuja, as well marked as those from his famous opponents, Sankara and Bhaskara. Tradition records that out of such differences, as well as of the two other recorded examples of the exposition of the Taitt. Upani$adic passage (IT. 1) Satyamjndnam anantam brahma and of the phrase Kapydsam pnndarikam in the Chdndogya Upanisad (I. 6. 7) delivered in course of his first lessons from that guru, thcro sprang up a deadly hostility between the two, the curtain on which was drawn after some years of persecution aimed at the latter, by his acceptance of the religious tutelage of his erstwhile pupil Ramanuja. The commentary on Pingala’s Chandahsutra at the end of the colophons in all the chapters calls itself throughout as tho work of the blessed Yadava- prakaSa ( bhagavato YadavaprakcUasya krtau Pingakindgacchandoviciti- bhd§ye . . . ad hy ay ah). At the end of the work there is a verse, 4 evidently of the commentator’s composition, which states that the rules of metrics ( vrttavidhi ) have been extracted (ujjahre) from the ChandaMastra of Pingala, to define metres, the favourite (vehicles) of poets, by the good and wise YadavaprakaSa, just as the code of conduct (vrttavidhi), a word used with a double entendre , had been extracted for tho self- controlled ones (vaMn), and put into a formal manual, by the same author from the recorded instructions of the eminent yati (yativara). This yativara in the above verso is compared to the PiUgala Ch . idstra, i.e. to Pingala. In our land every form of instruction, especially that bearing, on dharma, must have to originate from a groat teacher or a figure well known therefor in the Puranic tradition appearing as the systematizer of a Rostra (course of disci- plinary instruction). Taking recourse to the first alternative sense, as a personal reference, one would like to regard him as the great Yamun&carya, Alavandar, his guru and the praedrya of Ramanuja, who is known by that 1 R 1634(a), Mad. Or. Oov. MSS. Library. 2 The Vimusmrtipikd assigned to him by some scholars may be a wrong ascription due to confusion in nomenclature. The commentary on Visnusmfti by N andapanqlita is named os Vaijayanti, the name of the celebrated lexicon by Y. P. 8 e.g. in p. 2 (in- the commentary . . . fWWpfKfo ^TwrfaW), p. 16 . . . Tfw vide commentary, p. 99: sfftsfir TT% vide commentary : The page references are to the Calcutta edn. as financed by Magniram Bangur, Cal. Vik. Sam., 1998. * xfh qfimuffonf ipr i ftoraurranpiftfir- The Adyar MSS. reads the verse a bit differently, ijrg = wise (qq W) and gentle or noble. In the Vaijayanti it is stated at the end : ffif SIVAFRASAJD BHATEACKABYYA tbm 1?0L, name as the great muni (yatidmm ) 1 in the school The more probable explanation, considered from the relevance of the simile, lies in choosing the second alternative sense, by which, from references in the prevalent works on the subject, yativara becomes equated with the great Dattatreya, who in Upanigadic 2 and Pauraoic accounts 3 is described as the yati, who gave form and expression to this Sastra, in a manner available in the Dattatreyasamhita 4 which has presumably been the model for Y. P.’s work and other allied works. The number of citations from him in such works and the appositeness of comparing a iastia with the established canons of long continuity would rule out perforce the other explanation and vindicate such an interpretation of the verso as the just one. The other work, ascribed to Y. P., the Vaijayanti , compared with later lexicons, contains a fairly large number of words which are peculiar 6 to Vedic literaturo, evincing the inherent bias of the author in that line, which would serve to connect the bhasya on Pirigala’s work in a kinship. (intro, ver. 2 cd). On© * 8 found in the list of Vi§i$tadvaita teachers noted in that work {vide the Pandit edn., 1924, reprint, *p. 154): *mT*rsTT4 ^ ^ ^reit I V. 8 : ^TWt W STfSTni fvUTW^Vf I (This is also the view of the Janadr. Ch. Vic. (II. 3-6) ; VIII. 6 : \ wfW *T*ni finr wKmrcwi w[ i*'- jrrorev* i * 3a jayati pihgalandgafr Mvaprasadddvi&uddhamatih, and Vf. Can. Ud., f. 4906 : granthah Qo^yambdprcuddatah pilrnah and Bhasyardja, f. 1326: iti Miaradopdstu labdhddfdiksitdmicit . . . chhandojUdncmtdam bhavddbhagavato lebhe surdndmgy.ru- 6ta8mdddu4cycwana8tat68uragurvrmdnfavy* SIVAPBASAD BHATTAOHARYYA [VOL. IV, which, as in Pihgala’s work, unlike what has been the practice of later writers, are not composed in the metres concerned, and follow closely the technology of the Pingala system. The one work, which certainly is older than Y. P. but not very much older, the Jdndirayi Chandoviciti follows the Pingala pattern of sutras — rather overdoes it, but it uses a different and a more complex technology. This would serve to draw our attention to the fact of the lamentable loss of early works on metrics, a point which other works (e.g. Jayaklrti’s Chandonuiasana towards the end) suggest. Some of the names of metres 1 2 * in Y. P.'s additional list agree with^hose of Hema- candra which are deducible from his sutras. A few agree with those in the Jdndirayi. Y. P. has done yeoman service in furnishing such a list, which includes metres cultivated in later fashionable literary circles. Halayudha’s resort to dmndya or sampraddya 2 in his Mrtasanjlvanl has a minor and limited objective, viz. of referring exclusively to the valid division of the verse and of its feet. In this treatment of the classical ( laukika ) metres, unlike Halayudha and others, Y. P. starts with their twofold 4 division accepting the varnas . (syllables) and mdtras (syllabic instants)* the former of which he labels as varnajatis , the latter as mdtrdjdtis. His treatment of the latter is on the lines of Pingala himself — ho sticks to this subdivision as far as they are divisible again into ganas (as in the dryd class) or not (which he styles as nirganajdtis , e.g. as in the vaitdllya). Ho avails himself of the opportunity of recording that instances 6 of the former are met with in the Vedic litera- ture, too. Both of these set classes are well represented in early Prakrit literature, early mediaeval Prakrit poets (of the fifth to the ninth century) having expanded 6 and enriched their scope, so much so that mdtra chandas 1 Vide The Jdnderayi and its A uthor ( J.O.I . , Baroda, Vol. IX) and Further Light on* the JdndSrayi Chandoviciti ( Baroda) by the present author. 2 e.g. W^pTT under VI. 3 (Jdnd&rayi Chandoviciti, IV, 17, and Hem., II. 50) ; WWfJW under VI. 8 (Hem., H. 93 ) ; wftl under VI. 8 (Hem., II. 90) ; under VI. 14 (Hem., II. 117) ; WnftV under VI. 27 (Hem., II. 132) ; WWtWTPrfw under VI. 34 (Jan., IV. 62) ; under VII. 3 (Jan., IV. 65) ; under VII. 13 (Hem., II. 266). 8 Vide also ref. to II in the Vf. Cand. Ud. (f. 80-81o) of Bh&akarar&ya. As under (VI. 6) ,• WSiwftTOHm under VI. 7 ; VI. 8} VVT VI. H; trrn VI. 13 ; ^rfanrr VI. 14. Y. P. admits their authoritativeness. * Y. P. under IV. 12 : I W’frWHV 'smtrawT Twnra! i . . . wwnwtipi: . . . i JiwrfiifiTW- ■rrfirtlfiii • Y. P. under VI. 12 : ’flT I *HT nTWWfWP ’SfWJUlW'ft- wim i P w— yffiwrl fir 1 | ^ | I ^ v?nijTOf*|ira| «m*T|»wrT|w|#lwt •JorWWITm Kaiidftsa, Viler. Ur., IV. 66 (N.S. edn., p. 112): ffprj v«rftnT|»rw^( 5 >|^ (23)1 (23)1 | | fsrairo | | fam »r | ft (23)— | wnfV | v vti< 3) |*hwt | WT (28) | The verse is designated flfidWW in the text in whioh them is a five-more gaga in each quarter as indioated. It is according to the Jdndirayi, IV. 46, and of the WWW eub-olasB according to Hemaoandra (IV. 49). KoneSwara (should we read his name as Kole&wara ?), the Bengali annotator (whose work as in the Asiatic Society Manuscript Govt. Collection is written in proto-Bengali whioh may be of the twelfth century A.D.), and Hanganatha admit this Sanskrit verse in the text. The views of S. Pandit (Bombay S.S. edn.) and his followers, who reject the Prakrit passa g e s as 1962] YlDAVAPKAKiSA AND HIS COMMENTARY on CHANDAtiSVTRA *"191 becani©, p|f zmq) = Y. P.. VII. 19 1 (*«WT W* ft « ft ^ I ® Under Vr. Rat. I. 9 : (* 3 * ft* #ni) = Y. P. Intro., Verae 4 ; Vf. Rat. II. 8 : = Y - P., iv. 14 : (iflu I* I . . . nm Wiar: UTOT Yr. Rat. under III. 1 extra tttra ; (f*TK«fi*Hi . . . ** ^TMlf wflrf l) “ Y - p - under Yl- 3 ! ; Vr. Rat. under V : (%W*IT U M*f*»l » Y - p - under v - , 10 ; (%** njjf^fHVT wf*0 | 1962] Y AD AV APRAKiS A AND HIS COMMENTARY ON CHANDAHSUTRA 197 in Snpadapiijya, Devanandin, Piabhusena and others and oi 'which, the treatises of Virahanka and Svayambhu are landmarks, served also to attract students away and to damp the enthusiasm of students engaging themselves to its orthodox Vedio form associated with Y&ska, Saitava, Pingala, etc. In their own way, however, they sought to enrich the science by investigations into the potentialities of the mdtrdvfitas and of their musical counterparts which had their repercussions on late mediaeval literature on the subject. This was followed both in North and South India vigorously throughout during the Middle Ages in the works of the Jaina master, Hemacandra (twelfth century), and studiously pursued, as the Kavidarpana and the Ratnamanju§d, to mention the prominent ones, go to show. The prime achievement of this movement took shape in the classical Prdkftapingala which was fathered on the ndgardja Pingala. This work provided an adequate and easy account of classical Sanskrit metres as well with all its paraphernalia of prastara and engrossed the attention of writers and students alike. One tangible result of this has been the lightening of the discipline of old metrics, as is indicated by the opening pages 1 of this last work where irregularities and violations of the fundamental axioms of the iastra are condoned, if not directly encouraged. In the midst of such diversionary activities it is idle to expect a just response to the spirit and manner of study envisaged in commentaries like those of YadavaprakaSa which, whilo keeping note of and being susceptible to the tendencies of the Mstrantaras that had sprung up, would not forego their old iastric leaven. The general provision of alternative forms of approach, which was nothing more than a regularization of anomalies, born of a spirit of adjustment like the Paninean rule chandasi bahulam in the realm of grammar, it would appear, had come •to stay and paralyze the Gastric stamina of old metrics. Bhaskararaya, the last important writer on the Pingala-chandas ( veddnga ), has tried his best to stem the tide, of which he was too conscious, though, like a practical politician , 2 ho, too, has had to concede to a good number of lapses and violations. A clever and vastly-read scholar as he was, he exploited his acquaintance with old literature including the Vedas and the Agama&astra , his favourite diversion, to uphold his position in such cases often with the help of the Mlmansa doctrines of interpretation and on the analogy of uses in grammar. Like the general run of writers on metrics, he did not fall an easy prey, however, to the cheap and popular practice which i Prd. Pin., 14: (fPjfa YWIYt TO Yt* YYYY TOT I YfilTOY PfTifVwi fY*TW II Sar. Kan . dbh., I. 123 : YYT St***** 1 *Vy*H I * TO^tTOfTOTYTO YW ||) ; Prd. Pin I. 7 : (TO YY*f YY YTOT TOft tow i w to TOfa toyt to toto ii) ; Pra. Pih i. 8 : (to fhft YW TO WT ttt ft fk TO I YYt f* jjfYY Yftrwfr fwfa fk VY *HYYl)l 8 Vf. Can . Ud., f. 476 : (tqTTOYTYTfYY YT^flYTYTTYfa Ylf^TOlfa®%Y TOtY- YYYYT I) 5 Vr. Cand . Ud., f. 7 5a : YYl YftvftY T TOS^W YTOftYT! l); Ff. Cand . Ud., f. 76a : Y « ftY Y ^Y r Y1 Y f YYT TOTO . . . TOltTOTOTYTTOTTY YTYTOT:|) } Bhdfyar., f. 1036: (TO Y YYTYTY* Yttf* TOY**’ TWfk YTO IM T Y Y% Y YfifTOYYft;- Ya$Yft* TOfiffir TOWfirTOTVTTO 3TOYYYTTOT*Yt*fcY ftfTOY ywH | While ex- piating the Bdtra YTfJWfTJM'W**: I of. YYTYTTO, Verse I. 6 ( Jiv. ed.) : YTY TOY$**f, etc., which is an YTOlfif formed of and YTOT metres. ) I SIVAPBASAD BHATTAOHABYYA [VOL. iv, bad become ibe rule from about the fifteenth century onwards in writing ao-ca\\ed independent treatises. What he did was an attempt to tread the lines of what they regarded as foolhardiness to write commentaries on the accredited classics of the subject like Pingala’s work and the popular Vrtta - ratndkara, on both of which he tried his hands in the old iastric manner. While he was a young boy of seventeen 1 he wrote his first work on metrics, Chandahkaustubha (not to be confused with an earlier work of the same name, presumably an exposition of Pingala’s work, which he mercilessly attacks in tho Vrttacandrodaya off and on, and with a Inter handbook much in favour amongst the Bengal Vaisnavas). In this early venture ( Chanddh kaustubha ) even he had strictly adhered 2 to the idstric manner and standpoint, a mode of approach vigorously followed in his two mature works on the subject already mentioned, and aggressively put forward in the metrics sections of his polemic, the Vadakutuhala . At the same time, like Sarapadeva, the Bengali expert on Paninean grammar of the twelfth century, the author of the Durghafa-vrtti , a work 8 which he seems to have cited on more occasions than one, he has amassed a vast amount of materials from all departments of literature, but mostly from literature proper , 4 which are lapses from the standpoint of the dicta of metrics and has sought often to justify them and incidentally to amend the interpretations followed in scholarly circles bearing on certain controversial issues concerned. Though not directly voicing the view, which ends at the root of all Sdstras, as in tho paribhdsd-dgamdnuidsanamanityam , he has em- phasized the basic feature of the dastra, viz. that as prayogaMstrg, it is i Vr. Gand. Ud.,f. 490 6 : ^ *??!- wrsw far fa*: II Then Bhdfijardja was written when he was 67. 3*' faf^f^finrfawim fa s) . . . i t^rirw^^^T^prfwfaf f . 132a. As. MSS. No. Ill, A 76 Society Collection. The Vf. Cand. Ud. was written in Saka 1662 (fol. 4906), i.o. exactly seven years earlier. * Vr. Cand. Ud., f. lb : *f faffa^iffa JT'Hf WTCWfa iRlfal Verse 60 : a Ibid., cited in the Bhdfyaraja, f. 22a : sefa: wfa i ^iffa snfrjnfafai?! i . . . wwt *i» fantT- ^■*rrfa W’rffa WNT ; I TO-TOH I 31 | Vr. Can. Ud., f. 74a : (?) I The first citation is not found in the present printed edition of the VurghafavfUi (TSS.). The J Ourghafavrtti notes under I. 4.20 : 8 Pt Jf*f : vfa i wfa Tfa vra; ^tv: i fa*W*J Jjwfafa *fan social facts which are very important but they have not been treated and discussed at length. Among the Gallongs taboo on the woman to use the ladder meant for men to go in or come out of the house is one such and the use of folding ladder by the bride among the Karko Gallong is the other. Apart from belief and superstition, these two phenomena may be correlated to the social and economic structures. Bundles of confusions as to the form of family may crop up from the loose statements (pp. 59-60) below : ‘ the combined monogamous and polyandrous family is the basic unit'; a few combined polyandrous and polygynous families can also be seen; and that in a family which is basically polyandrous . . . The correlation be- tween the absence of dormitory and the uniclan village system and polyandry is a good attempt but details are lacking in respect of the practice of polyandry. With regard to the second book, The Akas, important arid interesting features are the rigidity of food taboo on women alone, co-existence of clan and village exogamy, status and roles of Rani, Nichulere-Nuggo and Gaon Burah of a village in the socio-political structure and, lastly, the inter-marriage relations with the Mijis. The author does not give us any- thing more than mythological, geographical and economical factors as to the cause of inter-marriage with the Mijis. The authors had all the advantages of staying in the tribal areas for tliree years and of knowing them fully. B. K. ClIATTERJEE Jl. Aa. i Soo., Vol. IV, Noa. 3 de 4, 1962. BIBLIOGRAPHICAL. SUPPLEMENT BIBLIOGRAPHY OF TIBETAN STUDIES Being a record of printed publications mainly in European Languages By SIBADAS CHAUDHURI [Continued from Jl. Aa. Soc., Vol. IV, No. 2, 1962. Supplement, page 162 ] tibbtau bibliography 188 Vlllaret and Codbinoton (0.). * 1833. On some silver ooins of Tibet,* 1895. Numismatic Circular. February, col. 1052-1056. Vladlmlrtsov (Bobis 1.). 1834. O Tibotsko -mongo 1’ skonn slovare Li-sihi gur khan, 1926. Doklady Akademtt Nauk S.S.S.R. Ser Br 27. Vogel (J. Ph.). 1836. Gegevens betreffende eene handels verbinding tusschen Indie en China over Tibet gedurende de ondheid, 1899. Bijd. Taal, L., Volk. Ned. Ind., 87. 1835(a). Dr. A. H. Francke’s Researches in Indian Tibet, 1912. Journal Punjab Historical Society, I (1), 175. Vorobjov-Des’atovskij (V. S.). 1835(6). Kollekcija tibetskich dokumentov na derve sobrannaja C. E. Malovym (Collection of Tibetan documents on wood, brought by C. E. M.) ; 1953. Uchenye Zapiski Instituta Vostokovedennia (Acad6mie des science < de I’URSS), IV, 167-75. 1835(c). Tibetskije dokumenty na derve iz rajona ozera Lob-Nor, I-III. . (Tibetan documents on wood in the region of Lob-Nor). Epigrafika Vostoka, 1953, VII, 70-85; 1955, X, 68ff. Vosberg-Rekow. 1836. Die weltpolitische Bedeutung der englischen Invasion in Tibet, , 1904. Asien, II, 17. Vostrikov (Andrew). 1837. Some corrections and critical remarks on Dr. Johan Van Manen's contribution to the Bibliography of Tibet. Bull. School of Oriental and African Studies, VIII, 51. 1838. Nyayavartika of Udyotakara and the V adanyaya of Dharmakirti, 1935. I.H.Q., XI, 1. W Waddell (L. A.). 1839. The * Tsam-chho-dung ’ (rtsa-mchhog-grong) of the Lamas, and their very erroneous identification of the site of Buddha’s t Death, 1891. J.A.S.B., LXI (1), 33. 1840. The Buddha’s pictorial wheel of life. 3 plates, 1892. J.A.S.B., LXI (1), 133. 1841. Lam&io rosaries; their kinds and uses, 1892. J.A.S.B., LXI (1), 24. 9 * With extract from the article of Terrien de La Cotlporie. 164 TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY 1842. Tibetan folk-lore, 1892. Indian Antiquary, XXI, 376. 1843. Indian Buddhist manuscripts in Tibet, 1894. J.R.A.S., 386. 1844. The Indian Buddhist cultr of Avalokita and his consort Tara. Illustrated from remains in Magadha, 1894. J.R.A.S., 61. 1846. LSmaist graces before meat, 1894. J.R.A.S., 265. 1846. A trilingual list" of Naga-Rajas, from the 'ftbetan, 1894. J.R.A.S., 91. ' 1847. Buddha’s seoret from a sixth-century pictorial commentary and Tibetan tradition, 1894. J JR.A.S., 367. 1848. The so-called Eucharist of the Lamas, 1894. Imperial and Asiatic Quarterly Review, NS, VII, 379. 1849. Demonolatry in Sikhim Lamaism, 1894. Indian Antiquary, XXIII, 197. 1860. The refuge-formula of the Lamas, 1894. Indian Antiquary, XXIII, 73. 1861. The motive of the mystery-play of Tibet, 1894. International Congress of Orientalists, X, Sec. 5, 169. 1862. Lamaism and its sects, 1894. Imperial and Asiatic Quarterly Review, VII, 13. 1863. Hairy savages in Tibet, 1894. Imperial and Asiatic Quarterly Review, NS, VII, 209. 1864. The Tibetan house-demon, 1896. Jl. Anthropological Institute G.B.I., XXIV, 39. 1866. Description of Lhasa Cathedral, translated from the Tibetan, 1896. J.A.S.B., LXIV (1), 269. 1866. The Buddhism of Tibet or Lamaism with its mystic cults, sym- bolism and mythology, and in its relation to Indian Buddhism. London, 1896. (2nd ed. 1934 ; reprint 1939 ; 1968). 1866(a). Some ancient charms from the Tibetan, 1896. Jl. Anthropo- logical Institute G.B.I., XXIV, 41-44. 1867. A Tibetan guide book to the lost sites of the Buddha’s Birth and Death, 1896. J.A.S.B., LXV (1), 276. 1858. The recluse and the rat. A Tibetan tale, 1896. Indian Anti- quary, XXV, 106. 1859. The Buddhist Goddess Tara, 1897. J.R.A.S., 117. 1860. Buddha’s diadem or usnisa : its origin, nature and functions. A study of Buddhist origins. 1861. An historical basis for the questions of king ' Menander from the Tibetan, etc., 1897. J.RA.S., 227. 1862. The environs and native names of Mount Everest, 1898. Geo- graphical Journal, XII, 664. TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY 155 1863. Ancient anatomical drawings preserved in Tibet. Asiatic Quarterly Review, XXX, 336. 1864. Atiea (or Dipankara). Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, II, 194. 1865. Buddhism in Bhutan. Ibid., II, 561. 1866. Celibacy (Tibetan). Ibid., Ill, 277. 1867. Charms and amulets (Tibetan). Ibid., Ill, 467. 1868. Chorten (Tibetan name for the solid funeral monuments ereoted over the relics of Buddha and his saints). Ibid., Ill, 569. 1869. Among the Himalayas. London, 1899. 1870. Ancient historical edicts at Lhasa, 1909-11. J.R.A.S., 1909, 962; 1910, 1282; 1911, 389. 1871. The Chinese Imperial Edict of A.D. 1808 on, the origin and trans- migrations of the Grand Lamas of Tibet, 1910. J.R.A.S., 69. 1872. Tibetan invasion of India in A.D. 747, 1911. J.R.A.S., 203; and Asiatic Quarterly Review, January. 1873. Ancient Indian anatomical drawings from Tibet, 1911. J.R.A.S., 207. 1874. Dalai Lama’s seal, 1911. J.R.A.S., 204. 1874(a). Tibetan manuscripts and books, etc., collected during the Young- * husband Mission to Lhasa. Asiatic Quarterly Review, July, 1912, p. 19. 1876. Lhasa and its mysteries. With a record of expedition of 1903-4. 4th ed. London, 1930. Cheap 3rd ed. 1905 (original ed. 1905). 1876. Tibet. Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, XII, 331. 1877. Abbot (Tibetan). Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, I, 9. 1878. Amitayus or Aparimit&yus (Tibetan Ts’e-dpag-med). Encyclo- pedia of Religion and Ethics, I, 386. 1879. The falls of the Tsang-po (San-pu), and identity of that river with the Brahmaputra. Geographical Journal, V, 258. 1880. Lamaism as a demonolatry. Academy, XLV, 56. 1881. Tibetan ‘trees of the law’ and Asoka Pillars. Academy, XLY, 59 . 1$S2. The Lepchas or Bongs and their songs, Int. Arch. f. Ethnogr., XII, 41. 166 TtBBTAH BIBLIOGRAPHY Wade (0. M.). 1882(a). "Notes taken by Captain C. M. Wade, Political Agent at Ludhiana in 1829, relative to the Territory and Government of Iskardoh from information given by Charagh Ali, an agent who was deputed to him in that year by Ahmed Shah, the Gelpoo ruler of that country, 1835. J.A.S.B., IV, 589. Wager (L. R.). t 1883. The Arun river drainage pattern and the rise of the Himalaya, 1937. Geographical Journal, LXXXIX, 238. Waldschmidt (Ernst). 1884. Das Mahapari nirvanas utra: Text in Sanskrit und tibetisch, Verg- lishen mit dem Pali, nebst einer iibersetzung der Chinesi- schen entsprechung im Vinaya der Mulasarvastivadins, auf Grund von Turfan-Handschriften herausgegeben und bear- beitet. Abhandlungen der Deutschen Akademie der Wissens- chaften zu Berlin, Philosophisch — historische Klasse, Jahr- gang, 1949-51, Nrs. 1-3, Berlin, 1950-52. 3 Vols. 1884(a). Das Catuspari^atsiitra. Eine kanonisehe Lehrschrift iiber die Begrundung der buddhistischen Gemeinde. Text in Sanskrit und Tibetisch. Teil Ii. Ibid. Klasse f. Sprachen, Litera- tur, u. Kunst, Jahrgang, 1952, Nr. 2, Berlin, 1952. Walker (James Thomas). 1885. Exploration of the great Sanpo River of Tibet during 1877, in connection with the operations of the Survey of India, 1879. P.A.S.B., August. 1886. Return of a party of explorers from Tibet, 1882. P.A.S.B., 159. 1887. Four years’ journeyings through Great Tibet, by one of the Trans- Himalayan Explorers of the Survey of India, 1885. P.R.G.S., VII, 65. 1888. Notes on Mount Everest, 1886. P.R.G.S., VIII, 88. 1889. A last note on Mount Everest, 1886. P.R.G.S., VIII, 257. 1890. The Lu River of Tibet; is it the source of the Irawadi or Sal win, 1887. P.R.G.S., IX, June. 1891. The hydrography of South-Eastern Tibet, 1888. P.R.G.S., X, 577, 612. 1892. Note on the R.G.S. map of Tibet, 1894. Geographical Journal, IV, 52. Walleser (Max). 1893. The life of Nagarjuna from Tibetan and Chinese sources, 1923. Hirth Anniversary Volume. 1894. Zur Aussprache des Sanskrit und Tibetischen. Heidelberg, 1926. TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY 157 Walsh (E. H. C.). 1896. The Tibetan language and recent dictionaries, 1903. J.A.S.B.. LXX11 (1), 65. 1896. A list of Tibetan books brought from Lhasa by the Japanese monk, Ekai Kawa Goohi, 1904. J.A.S.B., LXXIII (1), 118. 1897. A cup-mark inscription in the Chumbi Valley, 1905. Mem. A.S.B., I, 271. 1898. A vocabulary of the Tromowa dialect of Tibetan spoken in the Chumbi Valley together with a corresponding vocabulary of Sikkimese and of Central Tibetan. Calcutta, 1906. 1899. An old form of elective Government in Chumbi Valley, 1906. J.A.S.B., NS, II, 303. 1900. The coinage of Tibet, 1907. Mem. A.S.B., II, 2. 1901. Tibetan anatomical system, 1910. J.R.A.S., 1215. 1902. Seal of the Dalai Lama* 1911. J.R.A.S., 206. 1903. Examples of Tibetan seals, 1915. J.R.A.S., 1 and 465. 1904. The image of Buddha in the Jo-wo-Khang temple at Lhasa, 1938. J.R.A.S., 535. 1904(a). Tables of reference to Tibetan dictionaries, 1946. J.R.A.S., 87-89. 1905. Lhasa, 1946. J.R.A.S., 23. Wang Ghing-Ju. 1906. Notes on Chinese and Tibetan transcriptions of the Shishiah (Tangutan) language (in Chinese), 1930. Bull. National Research Inst, of History and Philosophy (Peiping), II (2), 171. 1907. Hsi-Hsia studies (in Chinese), 1932-33. Monograph of National ' Research Inst., Ser. A, No. 8 (1932), and No. 11 (1933). 1907(a). Fo-mou ta K’ong-tsio king Longwang Ta-sien Tchong-cheng- tchou minghao Hia Fan Tsang Han ho-pi kiaoche (Collation names in si-hia, Sanskrit, tibetan and Chinese of Nagaraja, Maharsi and the memoirs of their lives described in Maha- mayuri-vidya-rajfil). Melanges Ts’ai Yuan P’ei, II, 737-76. Wangdan (Lama). 1908. Tibetan primer. Transcribed in Roman characters and translated into Fin g liah by S. C. Vidyabhusana. Nos. 1-2. Calcutta, 1902. Ward (F. K.). 1909. The land of the blue poppy. Travels of a Naturalist in Eastern Tibet. Cambridge, 1913. 158 TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY 1910. Geological notea on the * Land of deep corrosions 1913. Geol. Mag., X, 148. 1911. Glacial phenomena on the Yun-nun-Tibet Frontier, 1916. Geographical Journal, XL VIII, 55, 437. 1912. Further notes on the land of deep corrosions, 1916. Geol. Mag., Ill, 209. 1913. On the possible prolongation of the Himalayan axfs beyond the Dihang, 1919. Geographical Journal, LIV, 231. 1914. In Farthest Burma. The record of a journey through the Frontier Territory of Burma and Tibet. London, 1921. 1915. The glaciation of Chinese Tibet, 1922. Geographical Journal, LIX, 363. 1916. The mystery rivers of Tibet. London, 1923. 1917. Note on a new expedition in Tibet, 1924. Geographical Journal, LXIV, 495. 1917(o). Yunan and Eastern Tibet, 1924.* Jl. Central Asian Society, XI (2), 124-35. 1918. The riddle of the Tsangpo Gorges. London, 1926. 1919. Explorations in South-Eastern Tibet, 1926. Geographical Journal, LXVII.97. 1920. The Seinghku and Delei Valleys, North-East Frontier of India, 1930. Geographical Journal, LXXV, 412. 1921. Explorations on the Burma-Tibet Frontier, 1932. Geographical Journal, LXXX, 465. 1922. A plant hunter in Tibet. London, 1934. 1923. Journey in Bhutan and Tibet, 1936. Geographical Journal, LXXXVII, 185. 1924. Botanical and geographical explorations in Tibet, 1935, 1936. Geographical Journal, LXXXVIII, 385. 1925. Assam adventure. Travels in Tsari and Kongbu provinces. London, 1941. 1926. Tibet as a grazing land, 1947. Geographical Journal, CX, 60. Ware (Jahes B.). 1927. Studies in the DivyavadSna. J.A.O.S., XLVIII, 159. 1928. D&nadhikara Mahayanasutra. J.A.O.S., XLIX, 40. 1929. The preamble to the Samgkarak?it&vadana, 1938. H.J.A.S., III (1), 47-67. Waterhouse (J.). 1930. Hydrography of South-Eastern Tibet, 1889. P.A.S.B., 83. TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY 159 1931. Tibetan publications of the Society, 1889. P.A.S.B., 03. 1932. Tibet, 1890. P.A.S.B., 82. Watt (A.). & 1932(a). Tibetan painting at the Musee Guimet, 1939. Apollo (New York), XXIX, 303. Wayman (A.). 1932(6). Introduction to Tsori Kha pa’s Lam rim chen mo. Phi Theta Annual, 3, July 1952, pp. 51-82. Weber (A.). 1933. Deber eine magische Gebetsformel aus Tibet. Berlin, 1884. Sitz. K. preuss. Ak. Wiss. (Berlin), 77. Weber (J.). 1934. Ober den besuch eines lamaistichen Klosters in Tibet (gekurzt). Verh. II. Kongr. f. allg. Religionsgesch, 80 Wecker (Otto). % 1935. Lamaismus u. Katholizismus. Rottenburg, 1910. Wegener (Georg). * 1936. Nord-Tibet und Lob-nur-Gebiet in dor Darstellung des Ta-thting I Thuruj Yu Thu (erschienen zu Wu-thsang-fu, 1863) unter Mitwirkung des Herrn Karl Himly in Wiesbaden. Mit einer Tafel, 1893. Sondorabdruck aus der Zeitschrift der Gesellschaft fttr Erdkunde zu Berlin, XXVIII, 201. 1937. Die Entschleierung der unbekanntesten Teile von Tibet und die tibetisehe Centralkette, 1893. Festschrift Ferdinand Frei- herra von Richthofen (Berlin), pp. 385-418. 1937(a). Das Hochland von Tibet, Lhassa und englische Expedition, 1903-05. Jahresber. Frankfurter ver. f. Geog. u. Stat, LXVIII-LXIX, 159-61. 1938. Lhassa, 1904. Globus, LXXXV, 269. 1939. Tibet, Lhassa und die Wege dahin, 1904. Asien, III, 113, 133. 1940. Lhassa u. der Dalai -Lama. Velhagen u. Khalings Mb., XVIII ( 2 ), 101 . 1941. Lhassa. Ein Mahnwort in Letzter Stunde. . Ostas, Lloyd, XVIII (1), 1014. 1942. Tibet und die englische Expedition. Halle, 1904. Wei (Yihg-Pang). 1942(a). Les relations diplomatiques entre la chine et la Russie de 1881 & 1924. Univ. de Paris (1946) Thesis. 160 TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY Weigold (H.). 1943. Zoologische Ergebnisse der Walter Stotznersehen Expeditionen nach Szetschwan, Osttibet und Berichte des Zoologischen und anthropologisch-ethnographischen Museums ze Dres- den. Band 15. Leipzig, 1922. Welnstock (Alexander). 1944. Kakie puti Vedut v Tibet, 1903. St. Peterbu'rgskya V6do- mostl. No. 296. Weir (Mrs. Leslie). 1945. The impression of an English woman in Lhasa, 1932 J.R.A.S., 239. Wellby (M. S.). 1946. From Leh to Peking across Tibet. With map, 1897. J. United Service I., India, XXVI, 177. 1947. Through unknown Tibet. London, 1898. 1948. Through Tibet to China, 1898. Geographical Journal, XII, 262. Wellby (M. S.) and Malcolm (N.). 1949. Road report of route across Tibet and China. With maps, Simla, 1897. 1950. Journey across Tibet, 1897-98. Geographical Journal, IX, 215; X, 295. 1951. A detailed report on the route across Tibet . . . , accompanied by route-maps on the scale of 16 miles to an inch, has been issued by the Intelligence Branch at Simla, 1898. Geographical Journal, XI, March, 295. Weller (Friedrich). 1952. Zu Buddhaearita I, 26. Tibetischer Ausgale, 1926. Asia Major, III, 538. 1963. Beschreibung eines Bildes vom Auszuge Buddhas. Artibus Asiae, V, 54. 1954. Das Leben des Buddha von Asvaghosa, tibetisch und deutsch herausgegeben von Fr. Weller. In — 8 br., xi — 147 pp. de texte tibltain, 74 pages de trad, Leipzig, 1926. 1965. Tibetisch-Sanskritischer Index zum Bodhicaryavatara. I (iv, 304 pp.), 1952, Berlin. Abb. Schs. Ak. Wiss., Phil. -Hist., Kl., 46, 3. 1956. Tausend Buddhanamen des Bhadrakalpa. Leipzig, 1928. 1957. Index to the Tibetan translation of the K&£yapap&rivarta. Harvard, 1933. Sino-Indian Series, 1. TIBETAN BIBLIOOBAPHY 161 1958. tJber das Brahmaj&lasutra. I. Teil. Der Tibetiaohe Text 1933. A .M., IX, 195. ’ 1958(a). Brahmajalasutra. Tibetischer und Mongolischer Text. Her- ausgegeben von . . . ; Leipzig, 1934. 1969. Das Tibetische Brahmajalasutra, 1935. Zeit. fur Indologie und Iranistik, X, 1. 1960. Zum Kanjur und Tanjur von Derge, 1936. Orlentalische Literaturzeitung, 201-18. 1961. Der gedruckte mongolische Kanjur und die Leningrader Hand- schrift, 1936. Z.D.M.G., XC, 399-131. 1962. Zum Mongolischen Tanjur, 1949. Berichte iiber die Verhand- lungen der Sachsischen Akademie der Wissenchaften zu Leipzig. Philologisch-Historlsche Klasse, XCVII ( 2 ). Wen yu 1962(a). Superadded and prefixed letters in ancient Tibetan in the Lhasa inscriptions, A.D. 822. 1945. Bull. China Studies, V, 19. (In Chinese). 1962(6). Phonetic changes of the superadded and prefixed letter in Eastern Tibetan dialects, 1946. Studia Serica, V, 1. Wenzel (H.). 1963. List of the Tibetan MSS. and Printed Books in the Library of tho Asiatic Society, 1892. J.R.A.S., 570. Weasels. (C.). 1964. Antonio de Andrade, S. J., Eon ontdekingsreiziger in de Himalaya en in Tibet (1624r-1630), 1912. Overgedrukt nit de Studien Tijdschrift voor Godsdienst Wetenschap en Letteren (Antwerp), LXXVII, Afi. 4. 1965. Early Jesuit travellers in Central Asia. The Hague, 1924. White (J. C.). 1966. Tibet and Lhasa photographs. 2 Vols. Calcutta, 1908. 1967. Journeys in Bhutan. Geographical Journal, XXXV, 18. 1968. Sikkim and Bhutan. Twenty-one years on the North-East Frontier, 1887-1908. London, 1909. 1969. The arts and crafts of Tibet and the Eastern Himalayas. Journal Society of Arts, LVIII, 584. Wichmann (H.). 1970. Raise des Punditen A. K. duroh das ostliche Tibet, 1878-82. Petermann's Mittheilungen, XXXVII, 1. 162 TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY Wignall (S). 1970(a). Prisoner in Red Tibet, 1957. WUford (F.). 1971. An essay on the sacred Isles in the West, with other essays con- nected with the work, 1805-7. Asiatick Research, VIII, 272; IX, 63. Wille (N.). 1972. Algen aus dem nordlichen Tibet, von Dr. S. Hedin im Jahre 1896 gesammelt, 1900. Petermann’s Geographische Mittei- lungen, ErgSnzungsheft nr. 131/370. Williams (E. T.). 1972(a). Tibet and her neighbours. Berkeley, 1937. Wilson (Andrew). 1973. The abode of snow. Observations on a journey from Chinese Tibet to the Indian Caucasus, through the upper valleys of the Himalaya. London, 1875 (2nd ed. 1876). Wilson (Harriet). 1973(a). Fantastic designs by Tibetan folk, 1934. Design (Columbus), XXXV, 16. 1973(6). Fantastic designs from Tibet ; images carved in yak butter and paper masks, 1952. Design, LIII, March, 131. Wilson (Horace Hayman). 1974. Notes on the literature of Tibet, 1831. Gleanings in Science, III, 243. 1976. Abstraot of the contents of the Dul-va, or first portion of the Kah-gyur, from the analysis of Mr. A. Csoma de Karos, 1832. J.A.S.B., I, 1 and 375. 1976. Travels in the Himalayan Provinces of Hindustan and the Panjab; in Ladakh and Cashmir; in Peshawar, Kabul, Kunduz and Bokhara, by Mr. William Moorcroft and Mr. George Trebebk from 1819-26. Edited. 2 Vols. London, 1841. Winkler (C.). 1977. Diagnoses compositarum Novarum Asiaticarum, 1893-98. Acta Horti Petropolltani, XIII et XVI. Wirth (Albrecht). 1978. Die Flucht des Dalailama. Das frele Wort, IX, 958. TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY 163 Wlrz (P.). 1979. Aberglauben und Heilkunde in Tibet und Ladakh. Prisma (Switzerland), III (3). Woglhara (U.). 1980. Abhisamayalaryi karaloka pr a j n ap aramitIL vy 8,khy ii (commentary on Astasahasrika Pra j n aparamita ) , the work of Haribhadra, together with the text commented on. 1932-35. Tokyo, Tyo Bunko Publication, Ser. D., Vol. 2. Woglhara (U.), Kawaguchi (E.), Max Muller, Takakusu (J.). 1981. Bon z6-wa-ei gappeki Jodo sambukyS (Edition aynoptique of Three sutras of Terre-Pure in Sanskrit, Tibetan, Japanese and English). Tokyo, 1932. Woglhara (U.) and Tsuchida (C.). 1982. Saddliarmapundarikasutram, romanized and revised text of the Bibliotheca Buddhica publication by consulting a Sanskrit MS. and Tibetan and .Chinese translations. 3 fasc. Tokyo, 1933-36. Wolfenden (Stuart N.). 1983. Significance of early Tibetan word forms, 1928. J.R.A.S., 896. 1984. The prefix m- with certain substantives in Tibetan, 1928, Language, IV, 277. 1985. Outlines of Tibeto-Burman linguistic morphology. London, 1929. 1986. On the Tibetan transcriptions of Sa-Hia words, 1931. J.R.A.S., 47. 1987. On the prefixes and consonantal finals of Sa-Hia as evidenced by their Chinese and Tibetan transcriptions, 1934. J.R.A.S., 745. 1988. Concerning the origins of Tibetan brgiad and Chinese pw&t << eighty, 1934. J.R.A.S., 165. 1989. On certain alternations between dental finals in Tibetan and Chinese, 1936. J.R.A.S., 402. 1990. Notes on the Jyarung dialect of Eastern Tibet, 1936. T f oung Pao, XXXII, 167. 1991. Concerning the variation of final consonants in word families of Tibetan, Kachin and Chinese, 1937. J«R.A.S., 625. Wolff (Ebio). 1992. Zur Lehre vom Bewusstsein (Vijfianavada) bei den sp&teren Buddhist en. Unter besonderer Beiiioksichtigung des Laftkft- vatarasfitra. Heidelberg, 1930. TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY 164 Wollaston (A. F. R.). 1993. The natural history of South-Western Tibet, 1922. Geographical Journal, LX, 5. Wood (H.). 1994. Report on the identification and nomenclature of*the Himalayan peaks as seen from Katmandu, Nepal. Calcutta, 1904. Workman (F. B.). • 1995. A first ascent of the Nun Kun, middle Himalaya. Independent, LXIV, 1263. 1996. Exploration and climbing in the Nun Kun Himalaya. Scottish Geographical Magazine, XXIV, 1. ' 1997. L’exploration du Nun-Kun. La G&ogr., XV, 93. Workman (F. B.) and (W. H.). 1998. In the ice world of Himalaya. Among the peaks and passes of Ladakh, Nubra, Sura and Baltistan. London, 1901. 1999. Ice-bound heights of the Mustagh. An account of two seasons of , pioneer explorations of high climbing in the Baltistan Himalaya. London, 1908. ■ Workman (W. H.). 2000. An exploration of the Nun Kun mountain group and its glaciers. Geographical Journal, XXXI, 12. Wright (A. R ). 2001. Tibetan charms. Folk-lore, XV, 95. 2002. Tibetan prayer-wheels. Tibetan drumpet. Folk-lore, XV, 332. Wryland (John). 2003. The travels of John Wryland : being an account of his journey to Tibet, of his founding a kingdom on the Island of Palti, and of his war against the Ne-ar-biana. Allentown, 1903. Wylly (H. 0.). 2004. British relations with Thibet, 1904. The Monthly Review, May, 41. Y Yamada (R.). 2004(a). Shinsho-shojo-ron. Bon-bun, Hoyaku, Zobun (Cittaviluddhi- prakarapa. Sanskrit and Tibetan versions, with Japanese translation), 1936. Bunka, III (8), 65 pp. TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY 166 Yamaguchl (Stjbttmu). 2005. Dign&ga. Examen de l’object de la connaissance ( Alambanapariksa ) . Textes tibetain et chinois et traduction des stances et do commentaire; 6claircissements et notes d’aprds le common- taire tibetain de Vinitadeva— en collaboration aveo Hen- rietta Meyer, 1929. Journal Asiatique, CCXIV (1), 1-66. 2006. Traits de Nagarjuna. Four ^carter les vaines disoussions (Vlgraha-VySvartanl), 1929. Ibid., CCXV, 1929, 1-86. 2007. Satakgaradastra. Otanl-gakuhl, XI (2). 2007(a). Konponchuronshomuiron yakuchu to Churon-ge no shohon taisho kenkyu, 1933. Shogo Kenkyu. [A review of C. Ikeda’s translation of the M ulamadhyamakd- kutobhayalxkd into Japanese from Tibetan, and a comparative study of its Chinese and Tibetan texts]. 2007(6). Miroku zb ' Ho-liosshofumbetsu-ron ’ Kanken (Essay on the Dharmadharmataviblianga of Maitreya), 1933. M61anges Tokiva, 535-561. 2007(c). Chuhen-funbotsu-ron Shakusho (The Japanese translation of the Sanskrit text of Sthiramati’s Madhyanta-vibliaga-tlkS, with the explanatory notes). Nagoya, Hakinjaku, 1935. 2007(d). Seshin no Jogo-ron (The Karmasiddhiprakarapa of Vasubandhu) ; Kydto, Hdzokan, 1951. 2007(e). Furansu ni okeru Shoki no ‘ Bukkyo-chibettogaku ’ o meguritl. (On the early Buddhist Tibetology in France), 1954. Tozae Gakujutsu Kenkyu-jo Ronso, IV, March, 1-27. Yamagucjii (S.) and Nozawa (J.). 2007(/). Seshin Yuishiki no Genten Kaimei (Textual explanations of Vasubandhu’s Vijfiaptimatrata theory). Kyoto, Hozokan, 1953. Yamamoto (Uruzwashi). 2007(g). Tobu chibetto jiten (Dictionary of Eastern Tibetan). Peiping, 1944. Yang (TsEno-wbi). 2007(A). Chjn-Shih hsi-yang hsiieh-che tui-yO Hsi-tsang ti-hsueh chih tan-ch’a (Modern western scholars’ geographical expedition in Tibet), 1930. Ch’ing-hua Weekly, XXXIII (May), 11. Yazakl (S.). 2007(»). Chibetto ni okeru Indo Shina Ryfi Bukkyo Kosho no Rito-koma- Te-son-de-tsen 0 no chi-ka ni okeru Ryo Koku S6ryo no Horon ni tsuite (On the discussion between Indian and Chinese Buddhist priests at the Court of the Tibetan King), 1953. Osaki Gakuho, C, 300-26. 166 TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY Yin (Fu-i). 2007 ( j). Hsi-tsang chi-yao (A short account of Tibet). Nanking, 1930. Yongden (Lama). 2008. Le lama aux cinq sagesses. Paris, 1936. Yoshimura (Shyttki). 2009. The Denkar-Ma, the oldest catalogue of the Tibetan canon. Kyoto, 1950. 2009(a). Atiaha no Rekishi-teki Ichi (The historical position of Atifia’s doctrine), 1950. Bukkyo Shigaku, II, 16-32. 2009(6). Kantyu-ha no Fukaku (The Bkah-rgyud school and its charac-. teristics in Tibetan Buddhism), 1950. Bukkyo-gaku Ken- kyu, III, 59-73. 2009(c). Tibetan Buddhistologu ; the basic original texts of historical Lamaism : Bhavanakrama by Kamala&ila with illustrations and an introductory note. Kyoto, Research Society for the Eastern Sacred Books in Ryukoku University, 1953. Young (G. M.). 2009(d). A journey to Toling and TBaparang in Western Tibet, 1918.* Journal Punjab Historical Society, VII (1), 177. Younghusband (Francis). 2009(c). Among the Celestials. A narrative of travels in Manchuria across the Gobi Desert, through the Hamalayas to India. London, 1898. (Abridged from ‘ The Heart of a Continent’). 2010. Geographical results of the Tibet(an) Mission. 1 * Smithsonian Report for 1905, 265, 1905. Geographical Journal, XXV, 481.2 2011. India and Tibet. A history of the relations which have subsisted between the two countries from the time of Warren Hastings to 1910. London. 1910. 3 2012. Our position in Tibet, 1910. Proc. Central Asian Society. 2013. Lamaism in Tibet, 1911. Sociological Review (Manchester), IV, 98. 2014. Peking to Lhasa. The narrative of journeys in the Chinese Empire made by the late Brig.-Qenl. George Pereira. London. ^925. 4 l Also in Scottish Oeog. Mag., XXI, 229-45. * With remarks by Thomas Holdioh, Thomas Gordon, Douglas Freshfield, Henry Howroth. s See also T'Pao, XI, 1910. Time • weekly edn. 6th and 12th August, 1910. • 4 Compiled from notes and diaries. TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY 167 Yu (Dawohyttm). Tao-oh’iuan. 2016. Love songs of the sixth Dalai Lama Tshangs-dbyangs-rgya-mtsho; translated into Chinese and English, with notes and intro- duction by D. Yu, and transcribed by Jaw Yuanrsnn. 1 1930. Peking, Chinese Institute of History and Philology, Vol. 2, 204. 2016. Chetchou Ming Tch'eng-tsou tsien che tohao Tsong-K’o pa Ki-ohe Ki Tsong-K’o pa fou Toh’eng-tson chou. (Explanation and commentary of the account of the envoy of a commission from the Emperor Yong-lo of the Ming for calling Tsong- kha-pa and the reply of the latter to Yong-lo. Tibetan text, Chinese tran. and notes.) Melanges, Ts'ai Yuan P’ei, II, 939. 2017. Ta-lai La-ma yu Ken touen tchou pa yi ts’ien tche tohouan Cheng (Former reincarnation of the Dalai Lama before d Ge- Hdun-grub-pa), 1930. Bull. National Library (Peiping), IV, 17-32. Yule (Henry). 2018. A narrative of the mission sent by the Governor-General of India to the Court of Ava in 1856, with notices of the country, government and people. London, 1858. 2019. The book of Ser Marco Polo the Venetian; ed. H. Cordier. 3rd ed. 3 Vols. London, 1903-20. 2 2020. Cathay and the Way Thither. Being a collection of Medieval notices of China. New edition by H. Cordier. 4 Vols. London, 1916-16. Z Zach (E. Von). 2021. Tibtische Oro-und Hydrographic. Lexicographische Beitr&ge, III, 108. 2022. Tibetische Ortsnamen, 1902. Lexicographische Beitr&ge, I, 83. 2023. Tibetica. China Review, XXIV (6), 256-68. Zachariae (Theodor). 2024. Das Indisohe Original von Bharatae Reponsa. Nr. 6. Wiener Zeit. f. die Kunde des Morgenlandes, XV, 72. Zeitlin (Ida). 2024(a). Gessar-Khan, a legend of Tibet. New York, 1927. •* Besides text, a phonetic notation of the Tibetan pronunciation is also given. * Original edition, London, 1871. 168 TIBETAN BIBLIOGRAPHY Zla-Ba Bsam Grub. 2026. An English-Tibetan dictionary. Calcutta, 1919. Zo-Kan-Wa Gappeki. 2026(a). Shomangyo, Hogatsudoji-shomonkyo ( Sri-maladevl-simhanada- sutra and Ratnacandra-pariprcchasutra ; VTibetan, Chinese and Japanese translation contrasted ; with {introductions and notes by Prof. K. Tsukinowa). Comp, by Hodd-Kai, Ky5to, Kokyoshoin, 19-10. Zondervan (Henbi). 2026. Deutsche in Lhassa, der Hauptotadt Tibets. Ostas. Lloyd, XVII, 643. Zugmayer (Erich). 2027. Eine osterreichische Expedition nach Tibet. Ostas. Lloyd, XXI (2), 486. 2028. Im Westlichen Tibet. Umschau, XI, 964, 981. 2029. Meine Reise im Westlichen Tibet (1906). Vorlaufiger Bericht. Mitt. Ggr. Ges. W., L, 359. 2030. Eine Reise durch Ostturkestan und Westtibet, 1907. Globus, XCI, 133. 2031. Bericht iiber eine Reise in Westtibet, 1909. P.M., LV, 146. 2032. Dr. E. Zugmayers Reise weg in Nordwest-Tibet, Juni bis September, 1906. Scale 1: 1,000,000 or 1' to 15-8 stat. miles. Gotha, 1909. Petermanns Mitt., Jahr. Taf., XVII. Officers find Members of Cwndl ASIATIC SOCIETY 196a President Dr. U. K. Ghoshal, M.A., Ph.D., F.A.8. ‘ Vice-Presidents Dr. A. 0. Ukil, M.B., M.S.FJE., F.S.M.F.B., F.A.S. Dr. IT. thitt, M.A., B.L., Fh.D. f D.Lit. (Bond), F.A.S, Dr. K. IT. Bagchi, B.So., M.B., D.T.lt, F.N.I., F.BXC, Sri K. F. Shaitan, Barrister-at-Law. Secretaries and Treasurer General Secretary ; — Sri S. K. Saraarwati, M.A., F.A.S. Treasurer : — Justice Sri A. NT. Bay, H.A. (Cal.), B,A. (OxonJ, Batfrieter- at-Law. Philological Secretary .—Professor Cfaintaharan Chakravarti, M.A., Kavyatirtha. *7*. philological Secretary Dr. M. Saber K h an, M.A., A.M. (Mic higan) , D.Fhil. (Oxon.). t (Physioal Science) Dr* tJ* /F, Baeu, Natural History Secretaries } (sSo^Snoe) Dr. J. L. Bhaduri, C D.So., F.N.I., F.A.S., F.ZBX Anthropological Secretary .—Dr. Bajra Kumar Ghatterjee, M.A,, D.So. (Faria). . v j *.'< - .;v* Historical and Archaeological Secretary Dr. Jf, IT. Banerjea, M.A., FbJ> #f , ' F.A.S. . • ' ,* . Medical Secretary ;■ — Dr. Banes, Ghakravarty, M.B.B.8., F.R.O.S, (Eng.). ; Library Secretary ; — Dr. Snknxoar Bay, M.A., DJEbil. ,■ Publication Secretary Anil Chandra Banatjse, SLA., BftO. •, ' - 8ri H. Banerjee, 1,0.8. „ ' Dr, A. *. Banerji^e^iiMiA., I*DB„ Ph.D. (Oxon.). Dr. P. 0, GjuWajjJtf A** P^>D>> pfyA*S» firl Sunpr . ^ * Nammeee of the Go ve r nm e n t qf india, Aiew ueun . 1 , j£ff(^fajHrilA-Pragfl6g6r&wiit&. HingB^i tav-bjp. ^ * bonze. Royal 8vo> 225 pp. f 1958 . . * 2 . Origin and BevdoptneM <4 Bhqjpuri by pt.ym. ^naa Tiwari. Royal 8vp, 282 pp., and 1 ifcap. Series. Vot. X, I960 -- . ' * - ' %•*>•#> 3. The N&tyaiOatra. A Treatise on Hindu Dramaturgy and Histrionics ascribed to Bharata Muni. VOL H (Oh. . XX VIH- XXXV1). Completely translated for the first rime from the original Sanskrit ’with .an introduction and various notes by Dr. M. Ghosh. Royal 8 ro, 298 pp., -1961 . : •• ,*• *•-' Ite * i600 4 The Early Annate cf the English in Bengal. Vol. IX, Pt; 33, Surman Embassy. Ed. by 0. R, Wilson (Reprint), 422 pp., 1963 .. •• • -• Rs-86.00 5. TtMvacinMmani-Didkiti.Prama. Vol. H by M. M. Kalipada Tarkachary a . ; Royal 8vo, 370 pp., 1963 • • Rs.20.00 ft. Sehaenbhodaya by Dr. Sukumar Sen. Royal 8vo, 278 pp., 1963 ,. .. .. ♦* Rs.30.00 t > ' 7. Baft-Ialim. Vol. H by Dr. M. labaque, Royal 8to, 404 pp., i oa% • .. •• •* Rs.80.00