JOURNAL

OF THE

ASIATIC SOCIETY OF BENGAL.

— <p

Part I.—HISTORY, LITERATURE, &e.

No. 1.—1889.

Ooins of the Muhammadan Kings of Gujarat.—By E. . Ourver, Esq.

(With 3 Plates.)

Looking over a large number of coins belonging to Mr. Furdoonjee,

an enthusiastic numismatist of Bombay—in which Presidency he had

exceptional opportunities for collecting the coins of the old Muhamma-

nan dynasty of Gujarat—I find a good number that do not appear in the

British Museum Catalogue, nor in the list given by Thomas, and that,

so far as I am aware, have not yet been described. Supplemented with

some from my own cabinet, I have filled two or three plates, which may

be interesting in continuation of those described by Mr. Poole from the

National Collection. ;

It is unnecessary to attempt any sketch of the dynasty, that for

over a century and a half, ruled the destinies of Gujarat. One of the

principal of those Muhammadan States that sprung from the ruins of

Muhammad ibn Tughlaq’s declining empire; and maintained more or

less of splendour and of power, till they were once again reduced to

provinces of Dehli by Akbar. A useful general outline of the leading

events is given in Mr. Stanley Lane Poole’s introduction to the volume

in the British Museum series above referred to, treating of the minor

Muhammadan States; and the late Sir Hdward Clive Bayley in his

volume on the history of Gujarat, has brought together the more inter-

2 E.E. Oliver—Coins of the Muhammadan Kings of Gujardt. [No.1,

esting particulars as told by the native historians in the Mirdt-1-Ahmadi

and the Mirdt-i-Sikandart.

In both, however, there is a little blank between the assassination of

Mahmiid III., and the final incorporation of the State into the Mughal

Empire. This is a period regarding which most historians are silent ;

probably for the very excellent reasons, that there are no very accurate

materials, and the accounts of native writers are somewhat conflicting,

while it is perfectly accurate and more easy to sum up the whole, as

being “thirty years of anarchy.”

Briefly, the outline of those thirty years of anarchy is somewhat

as follows: Mahmud III was murdered by a slave named Burhan in

Mahmidabad, on the 12th Rabi’u-lawwal, 961 H. (the eve of the 13th

according to the Mirat-i-Sikandari), which slave in addition entrapped

and killed some twelve of the chief Gujarat nobles. Among those saga-

cious enough not to fall into Burhén’s trap was one I’timad Khan.

Originally a Hindt servant, this ’timad, whose name may be taken to

signify “ trusted,” had risen under Mahmiid to a most confidential posi-

tion. His master even allowed him to enter the harem, and had put

him in charge of the women. He had been made an Amir, and is spoken

of as “prime minister.” The morning after the murder, Ttimad

collected a few followers, killed Burhdn, managed to pacify the city and

restore order. It was to him that the court of Mahmiidabad instinctively

looked, to act as regent and to set about finding a successor to the

throne. There seems little doubt, however, that whoever might be the

nominal successor, I’timéd determined to retain the substance of power

in his own hands; and for the whole thirty years he was really the “ king-

maker” in the back-ground.

The accounts as to the actual arrangements made by him vary some-

what. According to the Ain-i-Akbari, he raised Raziu-l-Mulk, “a son

of Sultén Ahmad, the founder of Ahmadabad,” to the throne. But

Sultan Ahmad the first died in 846 H., 115 years before; and Razi is

spoken of as ‘“‘ very young !”? The more probable version is given $i the

Mirdt-i-Sikandaré, the author of which, Sikandari ibn Muhammad, was

born in 961 H.; and relates that the nobles having concerted to-

gether, asked I’timad Khan, who was acquainted with the Sultan’s do-

mestic affairs, whether the Sultan had left any son, or if any of the

Sultdn’s wives were expecting a child: if so, they would wait till the

child’s birth before deciding on any arrangements regarding the king-

dom. I’timad said no; the Sultan had not left any son, nor were any

of his wives expecting a child, As he was well acquainted with the

Sultdn’s affairs, and denied the possibility of any direct heir, they then

asked bim if there was any relative of the late Sultén who was fit to

1839.] HE. EH. Oliver—Ooins of the Muhammadan Kings of Gujarat. 3

succeed to the throne, whom they might select. Ttimad Khan replied

that there was a relative of the Sultan at Ahmadabad, whose name was

Ahmad Khin; they might send for him, Accordingly they sent Amir

Raziu-lmulk to fetch the boy. When Razi came to Ahmad Khan’s

house, the boy was standing at a grain-dealer’s shop close by his own door,

and was bringing away in the skirt of his dress some grain which he

had bought for his pigeons. Raziu-l-mulk recognised him, got ont of

the cart, carried him off, and placing him in it, turned it round, and

drove off, with very fast horses, to Mahmtdabid. The Khin’s nurse

wept, and made a disturbance, saying: ‘ What is thisP Where are you

going to take him ?” Raziu-l-Mulk called out: “ [am going to take him

to a place where all the world will to-morrow crowd round his house,

and where he will not find one friend.”

The Amir’s prophecy proved true. The boy king’s career was a

short and a sad one. He was placed on the throne on the 15th Rabi’u-l-

awwal 961 H. as Ahmad II.; the affairs of state meanwhile remaining

entirely in I’timaéd’s hands. On the coins he calls himself “ Qutbu-d-din,

the son of Mahmid,” titles also adopted by the succeeding puppet. Five

years later Ahmad is described as flying from his capital for refuge with

one of his courtiers, but as brought back defeated. On another occasion

he tried other means to get rid of his powerful minister, when the latter,

beginning to feel insecure, decided to get rid of the king. One account

says I’timdd killed him, another that Ahmad was found murdered out-

side the Palace walls on the 5th Sha’ban 968 H.

Having got rid of Ahmad, I’timad now raised a child named Nathi

to the throne, “ who did not belong to the line of kings,” but who he

swore was ason of Mahmid’s. The mother, when pregnant, had been

handed over to him to make her miscarry, but, the child being fiye months

old, he had not carried out the order. The nobles had to swallow this

new variety of the story, and Nathia was placed on the throne as

Mugaffar LIT.

It was the old story of a nominal king under a powerful minister,

who was the real head of the Government, and who, though several of the

Amirs had secured portions of the country and declined to recognise

his authority, had become practically independent. In the account of

the divisions and revenues of Gujarat, given in the Mirdt-i-Ahmadi,

T’timéd’s establishment and income is shown in 979 H. as all but equal

to the nominal kings; he haying 9,000 horse and 30 krors of “ tank-

chahs,” against Muzaffar’s 10,000 horse and 33 krors of tankchahs; the

remainder of a total of 30,000 horse and 90 hkrors of tankchahs, being

divided amongst some half dozen nobles. The result was incessant

feuds. In 980 Akbar was invited _by T'timad to occupy Gujarat, and

4 4. E, Oliver—Coins of the Muhammadan Kings of Gujarat. [No. I,

took possession of the capital on the 14th Rajab of that year. From

then both the minister and king figure frequently in the accounts of

campaigns under both Akbar and his generals. Itimad and other

Gujarat nobles proclaimed Akbar’s accession from the pulpits of the

mosques, and struck coin in his name, for which loyalty Baroda, Cham-

pinir, and Strat, were given to the former as tuyzl, but subsequently

he fell into disgrace and was made a prisoner. In 982 H. he had been

released and was in charge of the imperial jewels. Two years after he

went to Makkah, and on his return obtained Patan as a jdgir. In 990 H.

he was put in charge of Gujarat as governor, in succession to Shihabu-

d-din, but the latter’s forces rebelled, and went over to Muzaffar, who

in I’timdd’s absence took Ahmadabad, and set up as ruler again in

991 H. Shortly after 1’timad went to Patan, where he died in 995 H.

Muzaffar abdicated in favour of Akbar in 980 H., when he was in

the first instance sent to Agrd, but subsequently remanded to close

confinement. Some nine years after he escaped, and returning to Guja-

rat, collected a respectable force, defeated and slew Akbar’s general

Qutbu-d-din Khan, and reascended the throne 991 H. (1583 A. D.).

Akbar then deputed Mirza Khan Khanan, the son of Bairam, to retake

Gujarat. Muzaffar was defeated the same year in a couple of pitched

battles, and fled to Jimdgarh in Kattywdr. There he was pursued by

another of Alkbar’s generals Mirzi Khan-i-'A’zam, who hunted him

down and captured him in Kachh in 999 H. No sooner was Mngaffar

hauded over to the Mirza than he asked permission to retire for a minute,

and took the opportunity to cut his throat with a razor. With him

terminated the dynasty of the Muhammadan kings of Gujarat, the

kingdom then becoming a province of Dehli. The coin No. XXXT is

especially interesting as haying been struck during the year in which,

for a brief period, Muzaffar managed to re-establish himself in Gujarat.

In the British Museum Catalogue there is a coin of 963, ascribed

to Muhammad, a pretender, and No. XXVIII of the series now published

would seem to have somewhat similar titles and dates and also claim to be

struck by ason of Mahmud, viz. on the Rev, Qufbu-d-din Mukammad Shah,

(bin) as-Sultdn « 63, and on the Obv. Nagstru-d-dunyd-wa-d-din Abu-l-

Fath Makmid Shah. On the other hand it is very similar in character

to No. TX of Mahmitd Shah LI, the son of Muhammad, and the reading

might be reversed, x being 8 instead of 9, but Muhammad I. called

himself Ghyisu-d-din and not Qutbu-d-din I have not been able to trace

any historical reference to the so-called ‘‘ Pretender.”

In order to facilitate comparison of dates, descent, or contemporary

rulers, I add a genealogical tree of the Gujarat kings, and a table shew-

ing the contemporary rules in Malwa, Jaunpur, Kandaish, the Dekkan

1889.] HE. E. Oliver—Coins of the Muhammadan Kings of Gujarat. 5

and Dehli, taken from Poole’s very handy graphic scheme of the Mu-

hammadan dynasties of India.

(See Plates I—II1I.)

Of Ahmad Shah 1. I noticed in Mr. Furdoonjee’s collection similar

eoins to the British Museum No. 408, but with the mint Ahma-

dabad for the years 832, 6, 842, 3*, and similar to No, 411 also with

mint Ahmadabad, years 830-1-7. Of Ghiydsu-d-din Muhammad Karfm

Shah the Museum list gives no dated specimens. Thomas records 849,

850 and (?) 856. The three now figured read 852, 3 and 5, the last

named having the same inscription as in Thomas. The Museum cata-

logues no silver representative of Mahmid Shah Bigard, the famous

Sultan of the moustachios. Thomas refers to three, of 891, 903and 911.

Neither give any mints: in fact, with one doubtful exception, none of

the Gujarat series in the Museum catalogue are minted. In the list now

given are silver coins of 864-7 (8)70, 909 ; Ahmadabad, 900, 903, and 911.

In some cases the date is in words. The Museum list has two gold coins

of Muzaffar Shah II. Thomas’s copper coins are dated 922-3-4 and

8. The one now figured is dated 929. Two others have no name but

may perhaps be put down to him (?), Ahmadnagar (9)17 and 922.

The inscription on No. XVIII of Bahadur Shah appears to agree

with No. 427 of the Museum, but I note the years 988 and 939.

Mahmiid Shih III. bin Latif is unrepresented in the Museum cata-

logue. Thomas gives the years 946, 7 and 9. Among these now figured

are the years 945,7 and 960. The suppositious king Ahmad II. is

represented in the Museum catalogue by one copper coin; Thomas gives

the dates 961—8. In the present list are the dates 961, in silver, x x 2,

963 and 8. Muzaffar Shah III. in the Museum and in Thomas is

represented by the dates 969, 971-7-8-9 and 930. The present list adds

991;

It is also worth while adding that among Mr, Furdoonjee’s dated

Bahmani coins, I notice, Ahmad Shah I. like the Museum No. 454, the

years, 836 and 828. Like the Museum No. 461, the years 843-5-6, 850-2-6.

Like No. 467, the years 839, 842-3 and 850. Muhammad Shah II. like

No. 474, the years 863, 877 and 875, and a fine silver coin of (?) Ahsan-

abad of x 77 figured in the present list as No. XXXIV. A coin of

his, figured as No. XX XV, also appears a novelty.

* The above dates are all A, H,

E. BE. Oliver—Ooins of the Muhammadan Kings of Gujarat. [No. 1,

Genealogical tree of the Muhammadan Dynasties of Gujarat.

Zararn Kun. Appointed Governor from Dehli 791. Assumed

independence at Anhalwarad 799 as Mugaffar

Shah I. Died 814.

Tatar Khan.

Auman I, NaAsiru-d-din, 814 to 846. Founded Ahmadabad

and extended his dominions considerably.

Munammap, I. Ghiydgu-d-din, Karim 5. ia reigned 7

| Shah, 846 to 855. Given up days in 863.

to pleasure and ease.

Qureu-p-pin, Ahmad Shah, 6. Mauwtn I., Bigara, 863 to 917.

855 to 863. | The most famous of the

line, founded Mahmu-

dabad, took Jandgarh

and Champanir.

7. Muzarrar II., 917 to 932.

| | | | |

8. Srxanpar, 9. Maumdp IL, 10. Bandnur, daughter ’Adil Latif Khan

932, murdered : 982, a child 932 to 943. married to

after a reign called Khan of

of 46 days. Nasir Khan. Kandaish.

11. Mirdén Munamman Fartdi originally called Asiri, 943.

12. Maumtp III., 944 to 961.

13. Aumap SHA II., 961 to 968.

14. Muzarrar Safa IIL, 969 to 980, when Gujarat submitted to

Akbar, but Muzaffar ruled for a short time again in 991.*

Contemporary Rulers in

A.H.| Gujarat. Malwa. Jaunpur. | Kandaish.| Dekkan. Dehli.

795 ee sare ae Mahmad II.

796 ones een Khwajah i ae

Jahan.

797 gio msaete featae piers at Nasrat.

799 | Muzaffar I. wee it Ae Ghiviasu-d- “de

| din.

* The above dates are all A. H.

1889.] HE. E. Otiver—Ooins of the Muhammadan Kings of Gujardt. 7

A. HJ) Gujarat. Malwa. Jauupur, | Kandaish.| Dekkan. Dehli.

799 ao cial eens eons Shamsu-d- oney

din.

800 yey Mead Seat sate Taju-d-din hee

Firiz.

802 wiles ae Mubdrak.| Nasir. RAR Mahmud IT.

803 a: west Ibrahim. ates rads sees

804 pole Dilawar oe hs diane cove eee

808 eaatg Hushang. ee ae. OF a eek

814 | Ahmad I. seem vewe eats sees sigeiage

815 tee woes eee soils doris Daulat Khan

Lodi.

817 eee eee ante acne Khizr Khan.

824 Ses Bat Ne A ele Mubarak II,

825 cece nae seus Ahmad I. er

837 Gare cone weds Ane Muhammad

838 eee Muhammad. wees wee Ahmad II. cose

839 coos Mahmad I. ones reek eas eee

841 eee eoee eave Adil. Pare aoee

844. eine fe 58 Mahmid. scua age sees

845 eon cece cates Mubarak I. Aadio eree

846 |Mhd. Karim. owe ore. ia eae eees

847 vase St As diac rn Ae: *Alim.

855 |Qutbu-d-din. Aes Mes eit RAS Bahlol Lodf.

861 oeee eee Muham- Ghani. eevee tees

mad,

862 eeee eeoe raat eoee Humayitn. eovee

863 Daad. asee Shon Husain. Reyes sen

863 | Mahmid I. as seen cree oe oeae eove

865 Rats see see teies Nizdm. eee

867 Sock ACh Marte Anite Mihammad eee

Il,

880 eee Ghiyas Shah. sees tees coos sees

881 eee voce Becomes sees veee oto

part of

Dehli.

887 oeee ates eee Mahmid II. mare

894 eee eas «ees |Becomes split] Sikandar II.

up into small

provinces.

906 oeoe Nasir Shah. Hibke: aoe

909 ceee arate David eae

916 SAE Mahmid II. A’zam Hu- oo eee

mayan.

917 | Muzaffar IT. mornin Acai sone

923 ners tas eek Ibrahim II.

926 068 eves Muham- ooee

mad I,

930 tee pt es ane, Babar.

932 | Sikandar. ee ate tees aoe

932 | Mahmid II. varie eee a

932 | Bahadur. nao eee eee

937 AR Becomes part Sone cone

of Gujarat. ae

938 a heteca Humayun.

942 RA «f Mubarak eoce

Lint

8 KE. E. Oliver— Coins of the Muhammadan Kings of Gujarat. [No. 1,

A. H.} Gujarat. Malwa. Jaunpur. | Kandaish. Dekkan. Dehli.

943 | Muhammad uve eee

Fariqi.

944 | Mahmud III. ere Shi

946 ooo tees Sher Shah.

952 reich Sean Islam Shah.

960 ee A Soa *Ndil Shah.

961 | Ahmad TI. mate Ibrahim Sir.

962 Poses veer Humay tin.

963 ASS sees Akbar.

969 |Muzaffar IIT. Ware as tt

974 sieves Muham-

mad IT.

980 | Becomes a Hen .

province of

Dehli.

Ghidsu-d-din Muhammad Karim Shah.

I. A °65 64 grains. No mint. 855 H.

wrt» || Wot obs Ad || wlbled || sbd oom” .,,

Compare Thomas, page 353.

II. A:70 140 grains. 8(5) 2 H.

Waele || @Bsdt tele ,,, wlbalt || ab dus owls nt,

HAs |] Afelr

III. A) °65 72 grains. 853 H.

ext, | iodt Gas Ad || BLE pw dose? || wllale

Mahmiid Shah I.

IV. A °80 165 grains: (P) Ahmadabad. 9110H:

SO oo | peed || weld In square des” || 3% xla |] bl}

ely ood} pel || dace psd

margin ,. 76083 || veto .. Il

tt l| @oeeve ll

V. M65 88 grains.

The same as No. IV, but without margin.

VI. A&-:70 87 grains. Ahmadabad. 900 H.

Oby. same as No. IV. In lozenge 3l& ygee? |] Wendy

margin ob} dwa-rcyhe ,,

gee Siw [ dlvay,e ]

1889.] E. E. Oliver—Coins of the Muhammadan Kings of Gujarat.

VII. £®-70 85 grains,

Oby. same as No. IV.

VIII. M®-70 88 grains.

Obv. as No. IV, with 909 H.

Ditto. A -50 42 grains.

IX. A -70 146 grains:

At IL gt wiry || Gol cb

X. M-70 173 grains,

Oby. as No. IX.

XI.

wht wlisll || cle Us,i,,

CE Wesreyed See

XIT. Al‘85 245 grains.

ove aot [aut] tyra oho) oe

CS ee: lad, ee ll

XIII. Al-75 160 grains,

St oe EU, Io. hed,

XIV. Al°65 140 grains.

Lin old |, Bedi lela)

Cis J Il

Ai *85 250 grains.

Ahmadabad. 903 H.

In lozenge sl& y=” || lolS}

margin wy? [5*.. 7°]

qr [ Aibula y5¢ ] oltt Oem

909 H.

Rey., variety of No. IV.

No date or mint Mr. Furdoonjee.

No mint. [8]64, [8]67 H. Ditto.

I] BUS doe.) || Bld opese®

[A] ote bladed

No mint. (8)70 H. Ditto.

In circle 8l® gyee? | lolol

margin — Las led 'y Gyan 4, 9

Ditto.

BLS Ke Esy) || gl Soon”?

vlbln Vif

oom? 905" |] bled, |] AU als

Muzaffar Shah II.

XV. Ai'70 169 grains.

voy MOM yi! I q44 I ooo bios eee +3

*XVI. 4:75 160 grains.

Kino |] QF Il ye 69

929 H. Mr. Furdoonjee

wr! || 8 oges* ff ylblend)

ghd evo

922 H.

++ eee a> oe

* Doubtful coins.

10 HE. E. Oliver—Ooins of the Muhammadan Kings of Gujarat. [No. 1,

*XVIT. 4l‘65 148 grains, (?) Ahmadnagar (9)17 H.

[9] 1 |] abe | seas [bout || othe.

Bahadur Shah.

XVIII. 4:75 175 grains. 939 H.

9 lo. Fy, Wid |e ., 334! I wy? |] 818,820 |] wlohe

| ss

Compare No. 427, British Museum Catalogue.

Mahmiid Shah III,

XIX. Al :80 180 grains. Mr. Furdoonjee.

we A LM] & Sotyt [ os? J]. Ba [ ylbld} |]

tee wet Hl atest || hab

XX. 1°70 142 erains. Ditto.

vveree Lat ly | Lye... colebet || ald abd || oy ager”

XXI. Al ‘80 159 grains. 945 H. Ditto.

KEM 1 | dt, biotobs ..., [3b] ope? |] glo gly lead}

aire dab] oy

XXII. '70 1387 grains. 960 H. Ditto.

oie Oe Ey eta) ae oe dyes? |] gl gl 1] VIbLdS ,,

ot cot 5 ied || g18 ib) L

XXII. “°55 69 grains.

eee ce | hell Mil Girt wt apes? |] alsld |] olbLJSt

Aree ey, habs

XXIV. AH'55 71 grains. 957 H.

wo ol] qav | luo , 0” oro dps” || gl

Ahmad Shah II.

XXV. AM ‘85 164 grains. 961 H.

porcinedl ovolst yt 1] AU Cymer yt In double dge |] sl ald qT wlalendt

Glas |] Exot» bio} 1] lozenge dee” Cyd Oo! 1] 944

* Doubtful coins,

1889.] HE. E. Oliver—Coins of the Muhammadan Kings of Gujarat. 11

968 H. Mr. Furdoonjee.

XXVI. Al‘55 73 grains.

bs oo Il eee WOR vices @* oe BI Coe a3 ewe =” 3s I wlale,,,

eeeel wits eee “on” (Oy

XXVII. A:70 140 grains. E27, *63. Ditto.

coe ll ethogell ret |) aisle @ sees Ot CO» I] 6 OU bs

r., GUS wlbbe ,, ||

Muhammad Shah (?) Pretender.

XXVIII. A°‘70 144 grains. *63. Ditto.

et ot err 7 I 2 Lol pels {| sls Or ll eee abs ( wt Are

al... ds ie ll “ wilblJ}

Compare copper coins 437—9 in B. M. Catalogue.

Muzaffar Shah III.

XXIX. M60 73. grains. 978

I] bo sl | ald qva |] gl Jt

ante

XXX. M70 73 grains. ; 97*.

Oby. Inscription as No. XXIX. I] 31% be |] lbw,

ARIUS

tee Me ll oon weal, duet

‘50 36 grains. Ditto.

XXXI. A-85 175 grains.

In square d#=*|| SUN} ay

al a ||

MATPIN segves lover! oe Kee-

sl vee HH ove hE oe Il

XXXIL Ai *75 179 grains.

CH 5 |] Bost prot

Mr. Furdoonjee.

SEE. Ditto.

In square 240 |] xl dye” .,3f

wlblee 444 |] ss

margin yt ll se... lessee

eee BO

Of (able

xls abo || ayy

Muhammad Shah II., Bahmani, [doonjee.

XXXIII. A :95 166 grains. (?)Ahsanabad. x77. Mr. Fur-

woe ll [AUG] ,,, abel In square -Aigglem || ,,,-8 dos, ,

CPM Ih soa ceed halts MR 1S lela 0,

MATZID 944 VV ov oyy I [t Lov]

Asutosh Gupta—Ruins and Antiquities of Rampal. [No.

Mahmitd Shéh II., Bahmani.

XXXIV. A) ‘70 146 erains. :

wry || Syyelt rd! Il one rt" Il ones

eae sss.

| Ruins and Antiquities of Rémpai.*—By Asurosn Gupra, Esq., C. S.

| Unlike Upper India, studded with monuments of ancient history,

1 the Delta of the Ganges presents few places of interest to the antiquarian. i

| Lower Bengal is generally as devoid of picturesque scenery as of objects :

| of antiquarian interest. We have all heard of Saptagrima and Suvarna-

| karagrama and their once flourishing commerce with the West, but what

remains to show their ancient greatness P No Colossus, no Forum, not ,

even a Hindi temple. Still there are a few places here and there, such \

as Gaur and Nadiya, which cannot fail to be of interest to the diligent

antiquarian or the student of history, and Rampal is one of them. It ;

| is not so widely known as it deserves to be. It is now a straggling

hamlet, situated approximately in Lat. 23° 88’ and Long. 90° 32’ 10",

being about four miles to the west of Munshiganj, the head-quarters

of the subdivision of that name in the district of Dacca (Dhaka), corres- .

ponding with the old fiscal division of Vikrampur. It was the seat of the j

old Sen kings of Bengal, and notably of Ballél Sen, whose name has

been handed down to posterity as the founder of Kulinism in Bengal.

Such is the case with Rampal and the dynasty that reigned

here. The ruins, as the sequel will show, are not so important and

interesting as in Gaur and a few other places in Bengal. But there

is abundant evidence to show that Rampal was once a royal city. The

large Rampal Dighi or the artificial lake of Rampal, the huge mound,

to which tradition points as the Bari or the palace of Ball4l Sen, the

very broad roads and the existence of innumerable bricks which can {

be found buried under the earth wherever you dig in Rampal and

its environs, are unmistakeable indications of a ruined city of palaces.

Old bricks of small size were found in such abundance in and around

Rampal, that they were carried in vast quantities to Dacca for build-

* [Compare with this paper General Sir A. Cunningham’s account of the same

sites and legends, in his Archwological Survey Reports, vol. XV, pp. 1382—135, The

two accounts differ in some minor details, Ep. |

1889.] Asutosh Gupta—Ruins and Antiquities of Rémpdl. 13

ing purposes. Such is still the case with Gaur, Many stone idols

of Hindi gods and goddesses have been found buried under the earth,

There is a huge stone idol of Vishnu near the temple of Siva in Atpard,

about a mile west of Rampal, and I have seen many smaller idols col-

lected by a Vaishnava in ’Abdulléhpur.

Rampal appears to have been the only seat of the Sen kings up

to the death of Ballél Sen, but the later kings of the dynasty lived

at Suvarnakdéragrdma, Gaur and Nadiyd. Suvarnakdragrdéma, locally

called Shondrgdon, is also in the district of Dacca, being about four

miles from the existing Bandar of Baidya Bazar on the river Meghna,

Lachhinan Sen, son of Ballal Sen, generally lived at Gaur, which,

according to the Muhammadan historians, he greatly embellished, and

called after his name Lakhnanti or Lakshmanavati. Nadiyd4 was the

seat of the last Sen king of Bengal, when the Muhammadans conquered

the country. It was in his time that Rampal attained the highest

pinnacle of its glory. The principal works, the ruins of which still exist

in some form or other, are attributed to him. Rampal seems to have

been neglected, if not altogetber abandoned, after the death of Balldl

Sen. Lachhman Sen, his son and heir, lived principally at Gaur.

I now approach the solution of a problem which hag already

evoked much animated discussion. I mean the question of the caste of

the Sen Rajés of Bengal. Before submitting my own opinion on the

subject, I will briefly examine the different theories that have been

advanced, and the evidence on which they are based. I have obtained

much assistance from the two articles of Raja Rajendraldla Mitra on the

Sen Rajds of Bengal, and the Bengali work on the same subject by

Kailish Chandra Sinha, to which Mr. Beveridge, one of the honoured

members of the Asiatic Society, very kindly referred me, and also from

the Bengali book by Mahimd Chandra Majumdar called ‘Gaude Brih-

man’, Three theories have been advanced about the caste of the Sen

Rajis:—(1) that they were Kayasthas, (2) that they were Vaidyas

or of the medical caste and (3) that they were Kshatriyas. The first

theory is that of Abu-l-Fazl and the Muhammadan historians, It is

not supported by any evidence other than the statement of the Muham-

madans, who are likely to hold erroneous views on the subject of Hindi

castes. It was never seriously entertained by the Hindis and may be

summarily rejected. The second theory is supported by tradition handed

down from generation to generation not only in Vikrampur, the old

seat of the Sen Rajis, but throughout Bengal, and was universally

believed, till Raja Rajendraldla Mitra in 1865 tried to establish that the

Senas were Kshatriyas. This third theory is the most recent one.

Tt was first propounded by Rajé Rajendralila Mitra, a very high

14 Asutosh Gupta—Rwins and Antiquities of Rampdl. [No. 1,

authority in matters antiquarian and supported by others. It is based

on some epithets of the Sen kings found in the inscriptions discovered

in Rajshahi, Dindjpur and Baqarganj, and also in the Sanskrit work

Danasdgara of which Ball&l Sen himself is the reputed author. These

I will consider in the two following paragraphs.

Tradition must give place to reliable material evidence if the

one is really inconsistent with the other ; but before discarding a uni-

versal belief, the evidence should be most carefully interpreted. The

evidence on which the theory of the Sen Rajis being Kshatriyas is

based is the following. In the inscriptions, found in the districts of

Dindjpur, Rajshahi and Baqarganj, the Sen Rajds are described as

descendants of the lunar race, and as only the Kshatriyas have a

right to trace their descent from that race, it is held that the Senas

must be Kshatriyas. In the inscription discovered by Mr. Metcalfe in

Rajshahi, Sdmanta Sen is described as a Brahma-Kshatriya. The

original Sanskrit is # agufamumsata gefaciem waatay | Dr.

Mitra’s rendering of s@afaatat gwiwtiera is ‘a garland for the

head of the noblest Kshatriyas.’ According to him, the word 7@

therefore here means ‘noble’ or ‘exalted.’ With due deference to

so great an authority, I am of opinion that this meaning is not the cor-

rect one here. We have various Sanskrit words compounded with

wa such as AMI, TAIT, TWAM, AWTS, AWE, and so forth,

and in in all of these the word #@ retains its original radical meaning

of Brahmad or Brahmana, I therefore see no reason why it should

not haye the same or a similar meaning in the present instance. Dr.

Mitra has not assigned any reason why he takes 3q@ to mean ‘noble,’

which is certainly not the commonly accepted meaning of the term, and

cannot be found in the ordinary Sankrit dictionaries. Atany rate this

meaning would be a far-fetched one. The word H@aa occurs in the

Yajur Veda, and is explained by the annotator as meaning agHIa-

aang or ‘knowledge of the Brahmanas or the Vedas and heroism

of the Kshatriyas.’ Itis therefore not a caste epithet, and following

the analogy, we can take sqafaaq to mean ‘a person who has the

knowledge of the Bréhmanas or the Vedas and the heroism of the

Kshatriyas,’ that is, one who combines both these qualifications ; and

the clause in question may mean ‘a garland for the head of those who

have the wisdom of the Brahmanas and the heroism of the Kshatriyas,’

without any reference to race or caste. The word saa also occurs

in Adhyaya 21, part IV, of the Vishnu Purana, and is explained by the

annotator Sridhara Swamin to mean ‘ that race from which Brahmanas

and Kshatriyas sprung’. The meaning seems to be obscure. The word

probably means a mixed race of Brahmanas and Kshatriyas—a race

1889.] Asutosh Gupta—Ruins and Antignities of Rampal. 15

sprung from Brdhmanas on the father’s side and Kshatriyas on the

mother’s. We have it from the Mahabharata that when the Kshatriya

race was being exterminated by Paragurima, the women of that caste

began to marry Brahmanas, and Vasishtha himself is credited with

having married Kshatriya women, From that time the race of pure

Kshatriyas is said to have become extinct. In Adhyaya 24, part IV,

of the Vishnu Purana, Mahainandi is said to be the last king of the

Kshatriya race. His son Mahipadménanda was born of a Sidra mother,

and from him began the reign of Varnasankara kings or ‘kings of

mixed castes.’

The above will I think be sufficient to show that Dr. Mitra’s

interpretation of the word Brahma-kshatriya is most probably not the

correct one. I have now to consider the description of the Sen Rajis

as descendants of the lunar race. It is a well-known fact that all the

princes of India, whether real Kshatriyas or not, have tried to trace

their descent from the solar or lunar race of that caste. Even the

Rajas of Chutiyé Nagpur, whom Colonel Dalton very rightly thinks to be

of the aboriginal Cole or Munda origin, claim to be real Rajptits, and

following their lead, the inferior landholders, who are undoubtedly

aboriginal Mundas, are gradually setting up claims to be Hindi Rajptits.

I found this process in full operation when I was in Chutiyé Nagpur

three years ago. If the Sen kings belonged to the Sankara race or

any of the mixed castes, is it not very likely that they would aspire to

be Kshatriyas and trace their descent from the lunar race, and their

panegyrist Umapati Dhar, a poet and a famous adept in the art of ex-

aggeration, would exalt them into members of the race of the moon ?

Hiven now the Stdras of Bengal are looking up. Some time ago there

‘was a movement among the Kayasthas for taking the yajnropavita or * the

sacred thread,’ on the assertion that they were originally Kshatriyas;

and at the present moment there is a similar movement among the

Suvarnavarnikas, who now claim to have been originally Vaigyas.

In the Bagarganj plate, found by Mr. Prinsep, the title of

Sankara GaudeSwara is repeatedly applied to the Sen Rajds. The

word Gaudegwara, no doubt, means the king of Gaur or Bengal, but it

is not easy to explain the real meaning of the word sankara here. It

is said to be written with palatal ¢ Dr. Mitra takes it to mean

‘excellent,’ but he has not shown any reason for assuming this

meaning, which cannot be found in the ordinary Sanskrit dictionaries

and is certainly not the commonly accepted import of the term, Ac-

cording to the dictionaries and the common usage of the word, it is,

when a substantive, a synonym for Siva or Mahddeva, and when an

adjective, it means ‘auspicious,’ I find Mr, Prinsep translating the

16 Asutosh Gupta—Ruins and Antiquities of Rémpal. —_[No. 1,

phrase as ‘ the auspicious lord of Gour.’ It is well known that the

Sen Rajis, at least some of them, were Swivas, or worshippers of Siva,

and the phrase may mean ‘the lord of Gaur, a worshipper of Siva

(Sankaia).’ Bnt none of these interpretations seem to me to be appro-

priate. Lam of opinion that the word Sankara here is an euphuism for

sankara, with a dental s, and then it must mean a mixed race, a sug-

gestion which has been noticed in Dr. Mitra’s paper This meaning

will be a very appropriate one. Mistakes of a palatal s for a dental one

and vice versd are not uncommon in the old inscriptions, and when we

remember that the inscription in question was written in the Tirhtit or

Gaur type, which represents an intermediate stage of orthography

between the Kutila and the modern Bengali character, the commission

of such an error is all the more likely. Sridhara Swamin, the annotator

of the Bhagayata, mentions the commencement of kings of the Varna-

sankara or the mixed castes in India in his time.

In his own work the Danasdgara,* Ballil Sen does not call the

Sen dynasty Kshatriya, but applies the epithet waaifcaqay, which

means ‘following the practices of Kshatriyas’. So in the 6th stanza of

the inser iption in the copper-plate found in the Sundarbans, the epithet

of TSN, which virtually means the same thing as wayiftaqay,

is applied to Lachhman Sen. It therefore appears that the Sen Rajas

are never distinctly described as Kshatriyas. Does not this show

that they were not pure Kshatriyas but belonged to a mixed caste ?

If they were Kshatriyas, why is it not so stated in unequivocal terms ?

There is a legend current in Vikrimpur that Ballil Sen was born of

a Brahmana father, the rivyer-god Brahmaputra, who visited his mother in

a dream in the form of a Brihmana. Does not this indicate the mixed

nature of the Sen race P

I will now briefly consider the evidence on which the theory

that the Sen Rajiés were Vaidyas is based. In the various Kulapanjikas

or genealogies of the Ghataks as well as in the Laghubharata, Adisir,

Ballal Sen, and other Rajas of the Sen family have been distinctly

described as members of the Vaidya caste. It is very likely that Devati-

vra Ghataka, Kavikanthahdra and other Ghatakas of the Varendra

Braéhmanas, who lived about four centuries ago and composed the

genealogies, knew the true caste of the Sen Rajis.

My contention is that the inscriptions of the Sen Rajdés are not

* [In his Book of Indian Eras, p.77, General Sir A. Cunningham ascribes this

work to ‘‘ Halayudha, the spiritual adviser of Lakshmana Sena,” referring as his

authority to Rajaé Rajendraldla Mitra, in his paper on the Sena king's, in the

Journal A. §, B., vol. XXXIV (1865), p.187. But this is an error, Dr, Mitra thore

quotes a Sanskrit verse, ascribing the work to Ballil Sen. Ep. ]

1889, ] Asutosh Gupta—Ruins and Antiquities of Rampal: 17

inconsistent with the genealogies of the Ghatakas and are therefore

not opposed to tradition. I think the inscriptions support the view that

the Senas were of the Varna Sankara or mixed caste. Manu recognises

three classes of mixed castes: (1) Mdérdhdvasikta, or those born of Brih-

mana fathers and Kshatriya mothers, (2) Ambashtha, those of Brahmana

fathers and Vaisya mothers, who are identical with the modern Vaidyas,

and (3) Méhishya, born of Kshatriya fathers and Vaisya mothers. There

was no practical difference between the Ambashthas and Mahishyas,

and Vidyabhiishana, the author of Laghubharata, called the Mahishyas

Vaidyas. He calls Vira Sen or Adistira, the founder of the Sen family,

a Mahishya. Remembering that they were Kshatriyas on the father’s

side, the Mahishya or Sen Rajds of Bengal naturally traced their descent

from the lunar race of Kshatriyas, and this explains the epithets in the

inscriptions recently discovered. Probably the Mahishyas and Vaidyas

became gradually amalgamated, and the Sen Rajas came to be regarded

as Vaidyas. I am finally of opinion that the Sen Rajas were never pure

Kshatriyas, nor originally Vaidyas, but were Murdhavasiktas or Ma-

hishyas, who were both allied to the Vaidyas. The distinction afterwards

wore away, and the Senas became gradually amalgamated with the

Vaidyas.

I will now proceed to describe briefly the principal ruins aud

objects of interest in Rampal. I have visited them several times during

my incumbency as subdivisional officer of Munshiganj, and carefully

collected all the traditions and legends by which they are enlivened.

First of all, I will take the Masjid of Ba-Adam* or the mosque conse-

crated to the Muhammadan fagir of that name. Itis a pretty large,

strong, brick-built mosque with a high arched dome. The bricks are

of the same small size which characterize old Muhammadan architecture,

The mosque has two massive stone pillars which are apparently snatched

from a Hindi temple, and which tradition identifies as the gadds or

clubs of Ball4l Sen. It is in a dilapidated state, but is worth pre-

serving. It has a stone tablet in front which bears an Arabic inserip-

tion, a reduced facsimile of which is herewith published (see Plate V).

Tt will be observed that it states that the mosque was built by Badshah

Fath Shah bin Sultén Mahmud in 880 Hijri or 1475 A. D, It is there-

fore 414 years old, The faqir to whose memory it is dedicated died,

however, in 1106 A. D., (supposing Balldl Sen to have died after a

reign of forty years) or 369 years before the mosque was erected.+

* [The real name of the faqir is Babi’ Adam, of which Ba-Adam is a mere

vulgar corruption; another corruption, Babardam, is mentioned in Arch. Survey

Rep., vol. XV, p. 134, Eo.]

* There is a similar mosque with a somewhat similar inseription in Qazi Qay-

18 Asutosh Gupta—Ruins and Antiquities of Rampal. [No. 1,

There is the following legend about the death of the faqir and the

fate of Ballél Sen, There lived a Muhammadan family in Kanai Chang,

a village south of ’Abdull4hpur and not far from Rampal. The master

of the house had no children. One day a faqir came and begged alms

of him, but he refused alms, saying, “ I will give no alms, when Allah

has not given me the boon (child) for which I am praying so long.” The

faqir predicted that he would beget a child and asked him to sacrifice a

bull to the altar of Allth when his desire was fulfilled. He then went

away without any alms. In course of time the man had a son born to

him, but the Hindts would not allow him to sacrifice a bull. He there-

fore repaired to the lonely jungle, south of Kanai Chang, and secretly

sacrificed a bull, Taking as much meat of the bull as he and the

members of his family would be able to consume, he buried the re-

mainder under the ground and returned home. A kite, however, snatch-

ed a morsel of the flesh from him, and another kite trying to snatch it

the morsel fell down in front of Raja Ballal Sen’s palace. On enquiry

the king learned the whole story and ordered the child, to comme-

morate whose birth the bull was sacrificed, to be brought before him

and killed the next day. The Muhammadan learned the king’s decree

and at night escaped with his wife and child and as much property

as he could carry. He fled to Arabia and, meeting Hazrat Adam, a

faqir, at Mecca, told him all that had happened. Learning that there was

a country in which there was no religious toleration, and people were

not at liberty to practise their own religious rites, Hazrat Adam came

to Rimpal with six or seven thousand followers, Ba-Adam is only

another name for Hazrat Adam. He began to sacrifice bulls and cows

on the spot where the mosque dedicated to him now stands. Raja

Ballél Sen sent his ultimatum, asking him either to leave the country

or fight with him. The faqir chose the latter alternative, and aprotracted

warfare took place between his followers and the king’s army. The

battles were indecisive for many days, and the loss of men on both sides

was heavy. At last the faqir’s followers were reduced to only one

hundred men. One day Raja Ballal Sen’s men, while going to the mar-

ket, saw the faqir alone reading Namaj (saying his prayers). The king

marched to kill the faqir at this juncture, but as he was diffident of

success, he constructed, before leaving his palace, a large agnikunda or

funeral pyre (literally ‘a pit of fire’), which still exists in the form of a

large pit,- and asked the women of his household to kill themselves by

throwing themselves into the fire, if he was vanquished and killed. He

bah, two miles from Rimpal. It isdescribedin page 76 of Blochmann’s Contributions

to the Geography and History of Bengal, (Jour. A, 8. B., vol. XLII, p. 284.)

[See the note at the end of this article, Hp.]

1889. ] Asutosh Gupta—Ruins and Antiquities of Rampal. 19

took a pigeon in his coat and proclaimed that the bird’s return to the palace

without him would mean his death and serve as a signal for the females of

the house to perish in the flames to save their caste and chastity. Ballal

Sen came to the faqir and struck him with the sword, but the faqir was

invulnerable and the sword would not cut his skin. After concluding

his prayers, the faqir asked Ballal what brought him there. ‘To kill

you,” replied the king. The faqir asked him whether he would embrace

the Muhammadan faith or not. The king of course answered in the ne-

gative. The fagir said: ‘It is so ordained that I shall die at your

hands. But no sword other than my own will cut me. So take this

sword and kill me.” Ballal took the sword thus offered and killed the

faqir at one stroke. His body was cut into two parts. His head flew

to Chittagong, where there is still a prayer-house consecrated to him.

His body was buried at Rampal, and the mosque was subsequently

erected over his remains by the Badshéh after the Muhammadan con-

quest of Bengal. After the death of the faqir, Ballél went to the tank

to bathe and purify himself. As he left, his gory clothes on the bank,

the pigeon, unobserved, flew to the palace, and at this signal the females

of the royal household threw themselves into the fire and perished. Soon

finding that the pigeon had flown away, Ballal rode to his palace, but

it was too late. Finding that all his family was killed and life was not

worth living, he threw himself into the fire and perished in the flames,

Such is the legendary account of the death of Ballil Sen and the

fall of Rampal. The city appears to have been abandoned after his

death, and I think there is a substratum of truth in the legend. It is

a. historical fact that the Arabs were the first race of Muhammadans

who invaded Hindtstan, and it is not unlikely that their missionary

expeditions penetrated as far as Bengal in the eleventh century and

fought the Sen kings who had no standing army. The Pal kings re-

gained their ascendancy in this part of Bengal after the death of Ballal,

It has been asserted, and not without some show of reason, that Laksh-

maniya, after his flight from Nadiyé, took refuge in old Vikr4ampur,

and he and some of his descendants lived in Rampal or Sundrgdon,

and maintained their sway in this part of Bengal during the early years

of Muhammadan rule. It is mentioned in the Bengali book on the Sen

Rajis of Bengal by Kailash Chandra Sinha, that probably there was a

second Ballal Sen who reigned after the Muhammadan conquest, It

first struck me that if there was a second Ballél Sen, he must be the

prince who reigned at Rampdl and killed the faqir Ba-Adam and atfter-

wards himself perished in the funeral pyre, thereby putting an end to

the Sen dynasty. But the theory is not based on any reliable evidence,

while tradition distinctly says that the Balldl Sen who killed the faqir

20 Asutosh Gupta—Ruins and Antiquities of Rampal. [No. 1,

was the founder of Kulinism and the most distinguished prince of the

Sen dynasty.

The next object of importance is the Rampal Dighi* or the artificial

lake of Rampal. Formerly it was about a mile long and about 500

yards broad. It is now fast silting up and remains dry for nearly half

the year. Cultivators have now broken up parts of the lake and

grow boro paddy init. The following is the traditional account of the

origin of the lake. Raja’ Ballal Sen once promised to excavate a lake,

as long as his mother would be able to walk in one direction without

stopping, and this he undertook to do in one night, namely, the night

immediately following the pedestrian performance of his mother. So

one afternoon the queen-mother walked out of the palace and proceeded

towardsthe south. After she had walked some distance, the idea suddenly

crossed the king’s mind, that if she walked much further, he would be

unable to cut such a large lake in one night and keep his word, and if

he once broke the promise he made to his mother, he would be doomed

to eternal hell. After a short reflection he hit upon a dexterous device.

He asked his servants to suddenly touch his mother’s feet and paint

them with red pigment (alaktuka), giving out that a leech bit her

and was sucking blood. The servants did so, and the stratagem had the

desired effect. The queen-mother stopped, and the point whence she re-

turned homewards became the southernmost boundary of the lake. On

that very night the king collected innumerable men and excavated the

whole lake. It was so large that one bank was not visible from the

other, But for a long time the lake remained dry. Guided by a dream,

Rampal, an intimate friend and, according to another account, maternal

uncle of Ballal Sen, one day rode into the lake, and assembling a large

number of men on its banks, asked them to call it after his name, when

it was filled with water. As soon as he entered into the lake, water

streamed up from beneath and filled it in a moment. But Rampal

vanished. Hverybody cried: ‘Rampal, Rampal,’ but he could no more

be seen. Since that time the lake is called Rampal Dighi.

This explanation of the genesis of the lake’s name never satisfied

me. Rampal is also the name of Balldl Sen’s city. Is it not very

strange that Ballal’s city and the largest lake he excavated should be

named after an obscure person unknown to history? Rampal is certain-

ly the name of a person and is analogous to the names of Bhim PAl

and other Pal kings of Bengal. I conjecture that he was a king of the

Pal dynasty which reigned at Rampal after the death of Ballal Sen,

and that it was he and not Ballal who excavated the lake, and the city

and the lake have been named after him. To the north of the Birhi-

* Rampal Dighi or the artificial lake of Rampal.

1889. ] Asutosh Gupta—Ruins and Antiquities of Rémpal. oT

Ganga there are still many ruins to show that the Pal kings reigned in

that part of Bengal, and it is a historical fact that they flourished both

before and after the Sen dynasty. But as they were Buddhists ruling

oyer a population, the mass of which were Hindus, their names have not

been handed down to posterity with that halo of glory which surrounds the

Sen kings, who were orthodox Hindiis and great patrons of Br4hmang

and Brahmanical learning. Again, it is a well known fact that one of

the characteristics of the Pal kings was to excavate large lakes and tanks

wherever they lived. The Mahipal Dighi, still existing in Dindjpnr,

is perhaps the largest lake they cut in Bengal. For all these reasons I

am of opinion that the prince who gave his name to the city and lake

of Rampal was a king of the Pal dynasty.

There is another but smaller lake in Rampal. It is called the

Kodal-dhoa (the spade-washing) Dighi. It is about 700 cubits by 500

cubits, and is still very deep. Tradition has it that when the excavation

of the Rimpdl Dighi was over, each digger scooped out a spadeful of

earth from a place close by, and thus the Kodal-dhoa Dighi was made.

The story of course is fiction pure and simple, invented to show that

myriads of men were engaged to excavate the Rampal Dighi.

The next object of interest is Bari Ballél Sen or Ballél Sen’s

palace. It isa very large and high mound of earth, surrounded by

a deep moat, about 400 yards by 400 yards. No architectural re-

mains are visible. The cicerones point to a large black pit inside

the ruins as the Agnikunda or funeral pyre in which perished Ballal

Sen and his family.

Another object of interest in Rampal is the everlasting Gajariya tree,

Tt is a large living tree standing on the north bank of Rémpél Dighi,

It is about 100 cubits high and has two large straight stems. Trees of

this species abound in this part of Bengal, and there is nothing’ peculiar

in its appearance: only it shows no signs of age or decay, though it ig

undoubtedly very old. It is said to be immortal and existing from the

time of Ballil Sen. Respectable men of seventy and eighty years of

age, whose testimony I am unable to disbelieve, have told me that they

saw the tree in its present state of growth from their very boyhood,

The tree is certainly a botanical curiosity. It is held in high veneration

by the Hindis, and various stories are current about its virtues and

sanctity. It is worshipped by the women, particularly by the barren

ones, who besmear it witlr oil and vermilion in hopes of being cured of

barrenness, A faqir is said to have violated its sanctity by cutting a

root, but he instantly vomited blood and died. No one would now ven-

ture to tear a leaf or lop off a branch. A. small fair is annually held

under the sacred tree on the eighth day of the moon in the month of

22 Asutosh Gupta—Ruins and Antiquities of Rdmpal. [No. 1,

Chaitra, when it is worshipped by pilgrims from various parts of the

subdivision.

The following legend explains the origin of the Gajariya tree’s im-

mortality, It was at first in a decayed state and was used for tying

Ballal Sen’s elephants. One morning some hermits (Rishis) presented

themselves before Ballal Sen’s gate to confer a boon on the king as a

reward for his piety. They sent their message to the king by his door-

keeper. The man went in and returning said that the king was smoking

and was unable to come out that instant. After awhile he was again

sent in. This time he returned with the news that the king was

besmearing his body with oil. The door-keeper was sent in again and

again, but he always returned with some excuse or other for the king’s

inability to come out and receive them. Once the man found the king

bathing, and again taking his noontide meal, and the third time taking

his siesta. He never communicated the message to the king, but only

went in to observe whether he had leisure to come out. Disgusted with

the king, the hermits left the palace, but at the time of departure they

blessed the Gajariya tree and conferred on it the boon of immortality

which was originally intended for the king. Instantly the tree showed

signs of vitality. Leaves and blossoms sprouted forth in every direction,

and the people were struck with awe. The king came out shortly

afterwards and, being apprised of the news, immediately sent for the

hermits. But it was too late. The hermits had vanished.

There is a comparatively small tank in the south-west part of

Rampal, which deserves a passing notice, It is called Raja Haris

Chandra’s Dighi, It is overgrown with trees and shrubs which are

flooded over with water for a week once a year at the time of the full

moon in the month of Magh, Before and after this period the tank is

dry. I have as yet received no. satisfactory explanation of the pheno-

menon. The tank is said to have been excavated by Raja Haris Chandra,

probably one of the kings of the Pal dynasty.

There is a mosque called Qazi’s Masjid not far from Ba-Adam’s,

Tt is an ordinary plain-looking prayer mosque, which was certainly

erected after that of Ba-Adam: It boasts of no inscription, but has

several stone idols of Hindi gods and goddesses in its verandah, which

the proprietors have evidently preserved as trophies of Islim. The

present Qazi of the mosque showed me a firman of the Kmperor ’Alameir,

granting lands for the benefit of the institution; but I cannot vouch for

its genuineness.

There are two roads the construction of which is attributed to

Ballal Sen. The one connects the river Dhaleswari on the north with

the Padma on the south, and the other goes in a different direction from

1889. | Editor—Luins and Antiquities of Rampal. 23

Rampél right up to the Padma. The latter is called Kachki Dwarja.

The roads are now overgrown with trees and shrubs, and have in many

places been broken up by the cultivators’ plough, but what still remains

clearly shows that they were once spacious roads as wide as thirty cubits.

I once proposed to utilize the first mentioned road in constructiug one

from Munshiganj to the Police outpost at Rajabari, a distance of about

twelve miles, but it was found impracticable. The Kachki Dwarja is

named after the fish of that name, The astrologers had predicted, so

the story runs, that Raja Ballal Sen would die of bones of fish sticking

in his throat. To avoid such an unnatural and painful death, the

king refrained from eating any fish, except the kachki which was devoid

of bones. He therefore constructed the road to the Padma, to enable

fishermen to supply his table daily with the boneless fish.

[Norn sy THE Eprror.—The inscription, of which a reduced facsi-

mile, based on three ink impressions, is published in Plate V, reads as

follows:

Line 1: Sancho eS) JG fos pe on Ms - ale “ry UL Jj a) Je

ne Ge Mail tS aaies ; 3

oss) jbo Gb di!) Us tyes a au Ui ueh.s jogo i wr prlssy Arle al}

- Zz 7 y) MI is =

Tine 2:—Jile pyle cyt pallu W}59 y931F Ello praeel} Elle} gol’)

x bwos! ee eg cylaledt 8l so? Grp! leben} slid pbsttyt eel 5 ld)

alain! wails 3 led Kies a)

Tt is dated “in the middle of the month of Rajab in the year

888 A. H., during the reign of Jaldlu-d-din Fath Shah,” Mr. Gupta

reads the date as “the 2nd day of Rajab 880,” on the authority of a

Maulawi of Dacca, who deciphered the inscription for him. But this is

certainly wrong. The date can be quite clearly read. It is expressed

in words : above 4 sanat there is samd; by the side of sanat, to the

left, there is Gwhs samdnin; above samdnin again is &44) samanamiyat

(sic); below the latter word is one » waw, and below samdnén is the

other » waw of the date. Thus the whole reads sanat samé wa samdnin

wa samdnamiyat, t. e., eight and eighty and eight hundred. Nor does the

date specify “ the 2nd day,” but simply says 5s! ausat or “ the middle.”

On comparing this inscription with that published by Blochmann

in this Journal for 1873, Vol. XLII, p. 284, there can be no doubt that

the two inscriptions are identical. There are, indeed, three slight

diver gences. In the date Mr. Blochmann reads ws but the inscription

has only Ls (without the final nim). This is apparently a mere blunder

24 Editor—Ruins and Antiquities of Rampal. [No. 1,

of the engraver, who seems to have forgotten to incise it. Possibly the

wrong reading of the date as 880 may have been caused by this faulty

legend. He also reads 4jlil whereas in the inser iption the word is

really spelt &yleiss (without the first alif). Again Mr. Blechmann reads

S? ale af ay whereas the inscription really has s? 3 | was a) al, But

there can be no doubt that these three divergences are the mere result

of an oversight. As may be seen by referring to the numerous similar

inscriptions, published by Blochmann in vol. XLII of the Journal, it is

the word yas (not lic) that is uniformly used in them; and there is

no difficulty in recognising it on the facsimile of the present inscriptiou,

Mr. Gupta, in his footnote (pp. 17, 18) says: “There is a similar

mosque with a somewhat similar inscription in Qazi Qasbah, two miles

from Rampal,” and he is disposed to identify this inscription with that

published by Blochmann. This identification is quite untenable. I

have obtained four impressions of this second inscription, three through

Mr. Gupta, and one through Maulawi Abul Khair Muhammad Siddiq,

the Superintendent of the Dacca Madrasah. Unfortunately the inserip-

tion is too badly preserved to be wholly read, but luckily the date is

sufficiently legible to show that the month is Zi-l-Qa’dah, and and that

the year is expressed in figures as well as in words. The figures are 976.

This is quite sufficient to preclude the identification of this inscription

with that published by Blochmann. Moreover this inscription is incised

in three lines, while that of the Adam Shahid mosque, published by

Blochmann and now republished by Mr. Gupta, occupies only two lines.

In fact, Mr. Gupta was misled by an error in Blochmann’s account, or

rather by an error of Dr. Wise, whose account Blochmann quotes. Dr,

Wise says that “the Masjid of Adam Shahid is in Bikrampur, at a

village, called Qazi Qasbah, within two miles of Balilbari, the residence

of Ballal Sen.” But this is quite wrong ; the mosque is not “ two miles

from the Balalbari,” but only “ about half a mile to the north of it,”

as General Sir A. Cunningham, from whom Blochmann received the

inscription, distinctly states (see his Arch. Surv. Rep., Vol. XV, p. 184),

It, therefore, ocenpies the precise position described by Mr. Gupta.

Dr. Wise, in his account,—it is clear,—confused two mosques, one of

Adam Shahid at Rampal, and another placed by him and Mr. Gupta

at Qazi Qasbah. The exact locality of the latter mosque, however,

would seem to be the Rikabi Bazar, to judge from Maulawi Abul Khair’s

letter, quoted below. There are four mosques in or near Qazi Qasbah,

and these four mosques seem to haye been more or less confused by

the several writers on the subject: and the confusion probably arose

from the circumstance that Qazi Qagbah is a name applied to a large

area, apparently including the localities of all four mosques.

1889.] Editor—Ruins and Antiquities of Rampil. 25

In order to clear up the matter as much as possible, Maulawi Abul

Khair, at my request, was good enough personally to visit the different

localities and himself procure impressions of the two inscriptions. I

subjoin the substance of his interesting letter.

“‘ As arranged I went yesterday to Munshiganj to see the mosque at

Qazi Qasbah. I took with me as my guide a man who proved to be not so

well acquainted with the locality as T expected. He had informed me

that there was another old mosque at Rikaébibazir [No. I] which was

close to the ghét where we were to land from the steamer. We landed

at about 110’Cl. and proceeded to the latter mosque. We found it to be in

a dilapidated condition, though there were signs of its being used as a

prayer-house. It appeared to have been an edifice of elegant structure

with a floor, 15 cubits square,andone dome. Lhe bricks are all polished

and carved, and the cornera and edges are so neat that from a distance

they seem to be stones. The cement used is a whitish substance, not

ordinary stirkhi and lime, but perhaps powdered stone and lime, or

something else. There was no inscription in the mosque, but on

enquiry we learnt that the stone was removed and placed in another

mosque [No. II] in the neighbourhood recently built. There we repaired

and found the inscription. The stone not being good many of the

letters are corroded, and are not decipherable. I have taken an impres-

sion, however, which I send to you in a separate cover for whatever use

you may think fit to make of it, It is dated seven hundred and odd,

which I could not read. The name of the month is Zi-1-Qa’dah.

“We then proceeded towards Qazi Qasbah,and after a tedious journey

reached the mosque [No. III]. My disappointment was preat when

found that the mosque, though old, did not present any interesting feature,

the construction being of an ordinary type, no ornamentation or elegance

having been attempted. Besides there was no inscription; the stone [I

was informed had been removed by the Collector of Dacca, during the

proceeding of a lawsuit between rival claimants to some land belonging

to the mosque. The only interesting thing that we fouud there was a

Hindu idol, carved out of a block of stone, lying with the face down-

ward and forming a step to the verandah of the mosque. I had

become so fatigued that I feared I would not be able to return to the

ghat without some sort of conveyance. But none was available. I was,

however, informed that the route we had taken was a circuitous one, and

that the ghat would not be very far from that place by a short-cut

through Rampal. I further learnt that we would pass by the mosque of

Baba Adam [No. TV]. This news somewhat enlivened me, and I was

on my legs again. We passed by the famous Ballalbari, of which I saw

the ditch about a hundred yards wide, The Ballalbirt or palace of

26 Editor—Ruins and Antiquities of Rampal. [No, 1,

Ballél Sen seems to have been an entrenched fortress of which only

the trench and some ruins now remain as a memorial. Not far from

this [found the tomb of Adam Shahid or Baéb&é Adam and the mosque

[No.1V]. This edifice is also in ruins, but presents an interesting

view to the archwologist or antiquary. The structure is of the some

style as that of the mosque at Rikdbibazdr [No. I], but more exquisite

and ornamental. The cement is of the same nature, the bricks polished

and carved. The roof consists of six domes supported by two stone

pillars in the middle of the hall. One of the domes does not exist, and

another has partly fallen down. The pillars are monoliths of a whitish

stone, which always “ perspire,” and lead ignorant people to associate

superstitious ideas with them, as they see water flow down on their

surface, and feel them very cold. I saw marks of red pigment on the

pillars, which I heard were put there by Hindi women, (and I believe by

Musalmin women too, though the IKhddim denied this) on making:

vows for the attainment of some object. The stone bearing the inscrip-

tion is placed very high, so that it could not be distinctly read, I dis-

covered, however, that the copy I have sent to you was only of one line,

there being another line above it of which no impression was sent to me,

As it was already very late in the afternoon and I could not wait for a

scaffolding being put up, I could not obtain animpression. The inscrip-

tion published by Blochmann is, I believe, of this mosque, and he was not

very wrong in giving the name of the place as Qazi Qagbah ; for Qazi

Qasbah extends over a large area, and the place where this mosque stands

is also included within it, This fact decides the dispute as to the name

of the place being given by Blochmann as Qizi Qagbah and by Baba

Asutosh Gupta as Rampal. It may be called by four different names,

viz., Qazi Qasbah, Rampal, Ballalbéri and Durgébari. The inscription

is quite legible, no letters have been destroyed or mutilated, the stone

being jet black and well polished, not liable tocorrosion. The Khadims

showed me twelve places in the interior of the mosque, where, they said,

lay twelve stones of great value which were removed by Mags during an in-

ceursion into Bengal in remote ages. These stones, they said, shone in the

darkness of the night and illuminated the hall! Some things have been

dug out of the walls, no doubt, but whether they were stones of great

value which shone in darkness I cannot vouch, This mosque at any

rate is an object of interest to the antiquarian,”

From another letter of his, I may quote the following passages ;

“The mosque at Qazi Qasbah [No. IIT] is not known as the mosque

of Baba Adam or Adam Shahid. It is called Qazi Bari mosque. Ballal.

bari is situated near the mosque [No. IT] of Adam Shahid and not near

Qazi Qasbah ; and Ballal Bari and Rampal are only two names of the

1889. ] Bditor—Ruins and Antiquities of Rampal. 27

same place. There is no one’s tomb near the mosque of Qazi Qasbah.

As for the inseription, no one can say what it contained. The other

mosque, of course, is called after Baba Adam or Adam Shahid and is

situated in Durgdbdri, which is close to Rampal or Ballalbari, ata

distance of about half a mile. And Ballalbdéri and Duredbéri both stand

at a distance of a mile from Qazi Qasbah. The tomb and the mosque

are lying unrepaired. Some religious man has the charge of the mosque,

and prayers are said therein, The mosque has two domes between

which there are two stone pillars one on each side. There is no court-

yard outside the mosque, The mosque of Qazi Qasbah [ No. IIT] also

has two domes but no courtyard and pillars. There are stones at the

threshold carved into images and placed overturned.”

I have numbered the mosques in the above quoted extracts by

corresponding numerals.

No. I, Mosque of Rikaébi Bazar; a beautiful structure, similar to

the mosque of Adam Shahid at Rampal (No. IV); with only one

dome ; its inscription, dated in the month Zi-l-Qa’dah 976 A, H.,

removed to mosque No. II. It is the mosque referred to in Mr. Gupta’s

footnote (p. 17), as situated “in Q4ézi Qasbah, two miles from Ram-

pal;” it is also apparently the mosque, said by Dr. White to be

“within two miles of Ballalbari at a village called Qazi Qasbah” and

erroneously called by him the Adam Shahid mosque (No. IV).

No. II. A mosque recently built near mosque No. I; contains the

inscription belonging to No. I.

No. III, An ordinary plain mosque, with domes, but with no

pillars, also with Hindi carved images in the floor of the verandah; its

inscription removed to Dacca; referred to by Mr. Gupta towards the end

of his paper (p. 22).

No. 1V. Mosque of Adam Shahid, close to Rampal, at the dis-

tance of about half a mile; a highly ornamental structure, resembling

the Rikabi Baz4r mosque (No. 1) ; with the inscription (Plate V) dated

“in the middle of Rajab, 888 A. H., in the reign of Jaldlu-d-din Fath

Shah ;” described by Dr. White (quoted by Blochmann) in Journal

A. §. B., Vol. XLII, p. 285, General Sir A. Cunningham in Arch.

Survey Reports, Vol. XV, p. 135, and Maulawi Abul Khair, as possessing

siz domes, of which,according to Dr.White, three, but according to Maulawi

Abul Khair only fwo have fallen in, while General Sir A. Cunningham

does not notice the destruction of any of them. On the other hand,

Mr. Gupta, who describes it as a “ brick built mosque witha high arched

dome,” would seem to allow it only one dome. In that case, he would

seem to have confused it with the mosque (No. I) at Rikabi Bazar,

which Manlawi Abul Khair states to have only one dome. |

28 Charles R. Lanman—The Namuchi-myth. [No. 1,

The Namuchi-myth ; or an attempt to explain the teat of Rigveda viii.

14, 13.—By Cuarnus R. Lanmay, Professor in Harvard College,

Cambridge, Mass., U. 8. A.

The fact has been recognized, ever since the earliest days of Vedic

study, that the myths of the Veda are the poetic outgrowth of certain

natural phenomena. The fact appears, for example, from the work of

Yaska, when he quotes the opinion of his predecessors. And the na-

tural basis of any given myth is usually not difficult to ascertain. Such,

however, is not the case with the one now in question. The text cited

above reads :

Bat Waa aay:

fax sgizaas: |

fag qesry Gy: ti

It is commonly understood and rendered as follows: ‘With the

foam of the waters, Namuchi’s head, O Indra, thou didst cut off, when

thou wast conquering all thy foes.’

There is no doubt about the incorrectness of this interpretation.

Nevertheless it is an exceedingly ancient one, as appears from the

legends into which this brief allusion of the Vedic Samhita is expanded

in the Bréhmanas. From the Bréhmana-passages* and from the ex-

plicit language of Sayanat, it is clear that the water-foam was conceived

as the actual weapon with which Indra cut off the demon’s head. The

fable says that Indra used this most remarkable weapon because he had

sworn to Namuchi, saying, “Neither by day nor by night will I slay

thee, neither with the mace nor with the bow, ... neither with the dry

nor with the wet.” And go, in order to slay him, without perjuring

himself, Indra smote the demon at twilight, which was neither day nor

night, and with the foam of the water, which was neither dry nor wet.

‘He cast the water-foam into (the shape of) a thunderbolt ’—syt $a

aaataaa—literally, ‘The water-foam he made by pouring or founding

(as molten metal) to be a bolt.’

All this is quite in keeping with the style of the Brdhmanas; and

it follows naturally enough from the text of the Samhita, provided we

misunderstand it as did the authors of the Brahmanas. But to my mind

there is no conceivable natural phenomenon of which this may be re-

* See Catapatha Br., xii. 7.3; Taittirfya Br.,i.7.1. These passages, with one

from the Mahabharata, are conveniently assembled by Muir, in his Sanskrit Teats,

iv’. 261.

+ oie ce fiche, sot Bq aaa

—~y

1889. | Charles R. Lanman—The Namuchi-myth. 29

earded as the mythical reflex, We are therefore led to inquire, did not

the words of the sacred text mean something different from what even

the ancients themselves supposed them to mean? I believe that they

did and that the misunderstanding can be accounted for.

I suggest that the Vedic text be translated: ‘With water-foam

Namuchi’s head, O Indra, thou didst cause to fly asunder, when thou

wast conquering all thy foes.’ This appears to me intelligible if we

assume that the natural phenomenon to which it refers is a waterspout

(‘trombe’) on an inland lake. How, now, does this view accord with

the natural facts in question and with a strict verbal exegesis of the

text?

Major Sherwill has given a description of Bengal waterspouts in the

Journal of this Society for 1860, volume XXIX., p. 366 f., along with

some excellent pictures. And in a German work of Th. Reye, entitled

Die Wirbelstiirme, p. 17 £., further information and pictorial illustration

may be found. The waterspout is of course an object of terror, and

it is most natural that it should be personified as a demon. The verb

aatagqa means ‘ cause to rotate,’ and the motion is qualified as upward

and outward motion by the preposition ve. The compound weane:

means accordingly, ‘thou didst cause to move upward and outward or

to fly asunder with a gyratory or centrifugal motion.’ It is not possible

to express by one simple English phrase the ideas involved in the com-

pound; but they seem to me to be quite simple in themselves and to

follow unforced from the Sanskrit and to be thoroughly suitable for the

not infrequent phenomenon of a waterspout as seen by unscientific

eyes. The head of the column is twisted and made to burst asunder and

scatter itself ‘ with foam’ (4, as an instrumental of accompaniment),

i.e, in abundant foamy masses. Then, with the dispersion of the

column, often comes (see Sherwill, p. 370, Reye, p. 32) a heavy rain.

This is all in entire accord with the usual representations of gracious

Indra’s deeds of prowess.

In particular, also, it accords most strikingly with the quite differ-

ently expressed idea of Rigveda v. 30, 8b (= vi. 20. 6b), where Indra is

spoken of as ‘ twirling (like a stick of attrition or like a churning-stick)

the head of the demon Namuchi,’

fad eee AHF AaT IT \

and that, immediately after the couplet in stanza 7,

sar say was: fact ae

waa al HAs nga \

This explanation of the stanza in question, moreover, harmonizes well

with the sueceeding stanza, Rigveda, vill. 14. 14,

30 Dr, Hoernle—New or rare Muhammadan and Hindi: Coins. [ No. 1,

wagers

Le GARI AA: |

WT SACHFT It

in which Indra is praised for hurling down the demons that were striy-

ing with magie wiles to creep up and to scale the heights of heaven.

To the poetic fancy, nothing would suggest more naturally the idea of

demons trying to scale the heavens than the sight of this strange magi-

cal ladder betwixt earth and sky.

In this connection, the discussion of Bergaigne, La religion védique,

ii, 846-7, should be compared. The language of the gloka at Maha.

bharata, v. 10, 37 = 328 seems also to favor my view. The whole epic

passage is a reminiscence of the Namuchi-story.

The false interpretation of the ancients, finally, rests simply upon

the ambiguity of the instrumental case form @##. The case might

denote the relation of accompaniment—as it really does here; or it

might denote the relation of means—as the authors of the Brahmanas

supposed it to do.

~——~~ —_

On some new or rare Muhammadan and Hindi Coins.—By

Dr. A. F. Rupotr Horrnur.

In July and September last I received from the Deputy Commis-

sioner of Hoshangabad, in two instalments, a hoard of 477 gold coins,

which had been found in a field in the Sohdgpur Tahsil of the Hoshan-

gibid District, by some ploughmen while ploughing their field.

This hoard was carefully examined by me, and a detailed report

published in the Proceedings of the Society for December 1887.

Among the 477 coins, there were 451 belonging to different (so-called)

‘“Pathin ? emperors of Dehli; 4 belonging to the Mughal emperors

Aurangzib and Farrukh Siyar, 1 belonging to the Bengal king Sikandar

bin Ilyas, and 21 silver-gilt forgeries.

The “ Pathin” emperors of whom there were coins, are Ghiyagu-d-

din Balban (1 specimen), Muizzu-d-din Kaiqobad (1), Jaldlu-d-din Firiz

(1), ’Aléu-d-dfn Muhammad (391), Ghiydgu-d-Tughlag I. (3), Muhammad

bin Tughlaq (24), Firiz Shh (19), Firtiz Shah and Fath Khan (2),

Firtz Shah and Zafar (2), Ghiydgu-d-din Tughlaq II. (2), Abi Bakr bin

Zafar (1), Muhammad bin Firiz (1), Mahmtid bin Muhammad bin Firtz

(1), and Mahmtd bin Muhammad bin Tughlaq (1).

Most of these coins belong to more or less well-known types, which

have been already published in Thomas’ Chronicles of the Pathan Kings

1889.] Dr, Hoernle—New or rare Muhammadan and Hindi: Coins. 81

of Dehli. See details in the report above referred to. It will be seen

from that report, that in the present hoard there are several types of

coins which were still noted as “unique” in Thomas’ book; e, g., the

coin of Jalilu-d-din Firtz (Chron. No. 120), several of Muhammad bin

Tughlaq (Chron. Nos. 172, 179), one of Firfiz Shah (Chron. No 226),

one of Firiz Shah and Zafar (Chron. No. 245). There are in it also

some coins, which are not to be found in Thomas’ Chronicles, though

they have been published elsewhere: thus two of Mahmiid bin Muham-

mad bin Firtz (with Abu-l-Mugaffar, as published by myself, in this

Journal, vol. LII, p. 213, for 1883), and one of Mahmid bin Muham-

mad bin Tughlaq (published by Mr. Delmerick in this Journal, vol.

XLII, p. 97, for 1874).

The most important in this collection of ‘‘ Pathdn ” coins, however,

are five, which, to the best of my knowledge, are unique, or at least have

never been noticed or published. These are the following (see Plate

IV):

1, One coin of Muhammad bin Tughlaq (Plate IV, No 1). It

reads as follows :

Oby. Rey.

A) oly Sle deat Culinll gi!

The reverse seems to bear a date, consisting of two numerals.

One of them, 5, is distinctly seen by the side of abé&; but the other

above the s of ’Abbds is obscure. As the Khalif Abu-l-Abbds Ahmad

reigned from 741-753, the date of the coin can only be 745. This coin

has some similarity with Muhammad bin Tughlaq’s copper coin, No. 218

in Thomas’ Chronicles.

2, Two coins of Ghiydsu-d-din Tughlaq II. He is mentioned in

Thomas’ Chronicles, as the twenty-first king (A. H. 790-791— A. D.

1388). He reigned only a few months, as the rival of Muhammad bin

Virtiz and Abu Bakr. Thomas’ Chronicles only notice “silver and

copper” coins of his (p. 302). The present collection contains two gold

coins of his, of two different types. The first (Plate IV, No. 2) reads

as follows :

Oby. Rey.

bed wihledh obey we} Y)

wit} s Giott &ls wphayad pat

Bld gas aione coi

illaledt aE Wald

Margin: on reverse: [ ¥ | 41 gsite Andy he:

32 Dr. Hoernle—New or rare Muhammadan and Hindi: Coins. [No. 1,

Tt was struck at Delhi, in the year 791. The mint is distinct on

the margin, but the date is only partially preserved. There can be no

doubt, however, of its being a coin of Tughlag IT., and not of Tughlag L.,

on account of the mention of the Khalif Abi ’Abdull4h. This Khalif

only ascended the throne in 763 A. H., while Tughlaq I. died already

in 725 A. H. Abi ’Abdulléh’s Khalifat lasted, with interruptions, down

to 808 A. H. This identification I owe to Mr. Chas. J. Rodgers, of

the Archeological Survey, to whom I showed the coin.

The second (Pl. IV, No. 8) reads as follows :

Oby. Rey.

lial abe ele Syialt

ye wir 9 hha ot kJ

wrdd<gell_ vot xls oss

Margin, on reverse : illegible.

This coin is also shown to be one of Tughlaq II., by the mention

of the Khalif Al Mutawakkal ’Ali All4h, who is the same as the above

mentioned Abi ’Abdullih. The execution of this coin is rather crude,

especially of the word Abu-l-Muzaffar.

3, One coin of Abi Bakr, the son of Zafar Khan and grandson

of Firtiz Shah. He succeeded Tughlag II., but only reigned for a little

more than a year, from 791 to 792 A. H. In Thomas’ Chronicles

(p. 303) he is noticed as the twenty-second king, but only copper or

silver copper coins of his are described. The present collection contains

one gold coin, which reads as follows (Plate IV, No. 4) :

Obv. Rey.

peedt wlblJ} ced wos 3

it w? Bld Sy oat wae} _yvol

BLS Sarah wy? AV ioe ct

cgilblens} aod wold

There are faint traces of a margin on the reverse, which probably

gave the mint and date.

4, One coin of Sikandar bin Ilyas, one of the independent kings

of Bengal. For some account of him, see this Journal, vol. XXXVI,

p. 58, and vol. XLII, p. 256. So faras I am aware, only silver coins

of his have hitherto been discovered; they have been described and

figured by EH. Thomas, in vol. XXXVI. The coin in the present collec-

tion is of gold, and reads as follows (Plate IV, No. 5):

1889.] Dr. Hoernle——New or rare Muhammadan and Hindd Coins. 33

Obv. Rev.

Lo St KOS wes

ot peed atl pol allt

yas salae ] MA Choad |

USE pyat glad JA als

US han Gh Fa {

wlbledt xls ass

There was a margin on the reverse, which probably contained the

mint and date, but it is quite mutilated. The readings are identical,

and their arrangement nearly identical, with those on Thomas’ type

No. 4 (or coin, No, 22) in vol. XXXVI, p. 64. The mint, accordingly,

would seem to have been Firtizibad.

To these five coins I add another which is not new, as it hag been

already described by Thomas in his Ohronicles, p. 298. But I am not

aware that it has ever been figured ; and the present specimen has the

further advantage of haying preserved a portion of the margin on the

reverse, giving the mint and date. It is a coin bearing the joint names

of Firiz Shah and his son Fath Khan, and reads as follows (Plate IV,

No. 6):

Oby. Rey.

ek Saba | pmb 4

Say38 ws=” crberalt sacl

dle &U} ov ALI Sadie! | Uy

aS Bd wld

Margin : om reverse: ..... Sa] dw gs? ae ESP eee.

Fath Khan was made co-regent in 760 A. H., and the Khalif Abu-l

-Fath whose name appears on the reverse, reigned from 753-763 A, H.

Tt follows that the date of the coin, of which only the numeral 1 ig

preserved, must be 761. The name of the mint I am unable to read,

I take this opportunity to publish figures of two copper coins of

Saifu-d-din al Hasan Qurlagh. They belong to the well-known “ Bull

and Horseman” type, already noticed by Thomas in his Chronicles,

p. 96 (No. 82). They show on the obverse a horseman with the legend, in

Nagari characters, 3t watt: S'r% Hamirak ; and on the reverse a humped

bull, also with a Nagari legend. The latter, as given by Thomas, is

R eau Area S’ri Hasana Kurala; and this is, no doubt, the style in

which it is met with in by far the greater majority of specimens, But

occasionally the name is found in full @xea Kurlaka. Among a number

of 100 of these coins, discovered not long ago in Shahpitr in the Panjab,

and examined by me, I found about a dozen giving the full name (see

34 Dr. Hoernle—New or rare Muhammadan and Hindi Coins. [No. 1,

Proceedings for December 1888). On Plate IV, I give the reverses of

four specimens (Nos. 7—10). No. 7 shows the usual form gtw kurala,

but No. 8 has distinctly qxwa kuralaka (the @ 1 is slightly injured);

No. 9 reads 3} wa a S’ré Hasana Ku, and No, 10 has a} Saw Ace Sré

Hasana Kurala.

I also take this opportunity to publish two-gold coins (Plate IV,

fig. 11, 12) which I found among a lot of 506 coins collected by Babi

P. C. Mukherji, on special duty with Archeological Survey, and for-

warded to the Indian Museum in Calcutta. They belong to the class

commonly known as ‘ Kanauj coins.’ Coins of this description were

issued by the Kulachuri kings of Chedi, the Gaharwdr (Rathor) kings

of Kanauj and the Chandel kings of Khajuraha. As the two coins,

here published, are said to have been found in Khajuraha, I think it

most probable that they are Chandel coins, though I feel uncertain as

to their exact attribution,

No. 11—I propose to read.

at ay Sit Mat Pa-

wafe ramarddt

aq Deva

No. 12—may be read,

ay Hat Sré Mat Vi- or Baal Sri Mat Bé-

way. ra Farmma* waaq* la Varmma*

* Sat * Devi * 2ay * Devt

The final long 7¢ of dev? seems clear ; but it is puzzling.

The king to whom No, 12 belongs, I take to be the 20th of General

Sir A. Cunningham’s list of Chandel kings (Archeological Survey Ite-

ports, Vol. XXI, p. 80), viz. Vira Varmma, who reigned from about

1240—1280 A. D. Or it might be Béla Varmma, mentioned by Mr.

VY. A. Smith in his paper on the “ History of Bundelkhand” (Journal,

B. A. 8., Vol. L, p. 19); but he appears to have been only one of the

younger scions of the regal house, and would not have been entitled

to issue coins in his name.

No. 11 I take to belong to the well-known Paramarddi Deva (the

18th of Gen. Sir A. Cunningham’s list), who reigned from about

1165—1203 A. D., and fought with the famous Prithvi Raj and Qutbu-d-

din Aibak,

If my attributions are correct, both the coins now published would

appear to be unique. For the only Chandel coins hitherto known and

published, so far as I am aware, are those noticed by Gen. Sir A. Cun-

ningham in his Archeological Survey Reports, Vol. X, pp. 25—27 (see his

Plate X). They belong to the following five Chandel princes: Kirti

Varma (12th of the list), Hallakshana Varma (13th), Jaya Varma

1889.] Dr. Hoernle—New or rare Muhammadan and Hindi Coins. 35

(14th), Prithvi Varma (16th), Madana Varma (17th). Then follows

Paramarddi Varma (18th), a coin of whom is now published for the

first time. I may note, however, that Gen. Sir A. Cunningham’s coins,

Nos. 15 and 16 on his Plate X (Vol. X), appear to show some resem-

blance to my No. 12. They too seem to read devi. They are marked

on his Plate as “ unknown.”

eee ae eee

—

No.

No. 2.—O liver, The Safwi Dynasty of Persia.

No.

CONTENTS

OF THE

JOURNAL, Pr. I, ror 1888.

1.—D as, A brief account of Tibet from “ Dsam Ling Gyeshe,”

the well-known geographical work of Lama Tsan-po Nomankhan of

Amdo. Cockburn, Sita’s Window or Buddha’s Shadow Cave.

Das, Antiquities

at Nagari. Yate, notes on the City of Herét. Fihrer,

Three new copper-plates grants of Govindachandra Deva of Kanayj.

3.—Knowles, Kashmiri Riddles. Rajendralal& Mitra,

Notes on a Donative Inscription of Vidyadhara Bhanja, belonging

to C. T. Metcalfe, Esq. Garwood, Notes onthe ancient mounds

in the Quetta District. Beyverid ge, The Mother of Jahangir.

Rodgers, Notes on the coins mentioned by Major Raverty in

his notes to his Translation of the Tabaqat-i-Nasiri.

SNR ARAN

PUBLICATIONS

FOR SALE AT THE

ASIATIG SOCIETY OF BENGAL,

No. 57, Park Street, Caleutta.

Journal, Asiatic Society, Bengal, from Vols. XII to XVII (1843

to 1848) ; Vols. XIX to XXII (1850 to 1852) ; Vols. XX VI,

XXVII (1857, 1858), and Vols. XX XIII to XLVI, (1864

to 1881).

Asiatic is iparatbig from Vols. VI to XI, and Vols. XVII to XX,

each at.. Beene eshas Re.

Ditto ditto, Tae x

The Ain-i-Akbari, Wiehe ‘Ti: eraistatod ato English, eel Metee aod

indexes, by H, Blochmann, M. A., ..

The Tabaqat- Ss Translated ts Major ERGGS | Raverty,

MOSAIC sescleves sais

ROP ILI eee

ceilidh Dh kis:

NEW SERIES, “\. / ‘WOL. LYVIII. — CCxXCIl,

— — eee eee ews

JOURNAL

OF THE

ASIATIC SOCIETY OF BENGAL,

Vol. LVIII, Part I, No. iil.—1889.

EDITED BY

JHE PHILOLOGICAL p ECRETARY,

< ea

“The bounds of its investigation will be the geographical limits of Asia : and

within these limits its inquiries will be extended to whatever is performed by

man or produced by nature.’—Sir WitL1Am Jonzs.

*,* Communications should be sent under cover to the Secretaries, Asiat. Soc.,

to whom all orders for the work are to be addressed in India; or in Lon-

don, care of Messrs. Triibner and Co., 57 and 59, Ludgate Hill.

og CALCUTTA:

PRINTED BY fe. fi. Rouse, ar THE ParrisT Mission PREss,

AND PUBLISHED BY THE

PSIATIC SOCIETY, 57, PARK STREET.

1889.

Price (exclusive of postage) to Subscribers, Re. 1.—To Non-Subsoribers Rs 1-8,

if Price in England, 2 Shillings and six pence

CONTENTS.

Life of Sum-pa Khan-po, also styled Yesos- Dpa'-hbyor, the author

of the Rehumig (Chronological Table).—By Bast Sarat-

cHanpra Dds, C.1. HE. ... tea

Inscribed Seal of Kuméra Gupta.—By v. we SmirH, eae Casi,

Remarks on the above. (With a synchronistic table).—By Dr, A.

FF, Ruvonr HoKRRNLE ooo are ae asa

Page

JOURNAL

OF THE

ASIATIC SOCIETY OF BENGAL.

Part I.—HISTORY, LITERATURE, &ce.

No. II.—1889.

eee

Life of Sum-pa Khan-po, also styled Yeses-Dpal-hbyor, the author of the

Ltehumig (Chronological Table.\—By B&G Saray Cuanpra DAs,

C. I. #.

This great Lama was born in the year 1702 A. D. (Tree-monkey of

the 12th cycle of 60 years) at a place in the neighbourhood of the Dgon-lui

monastery of Amdo in ulterior Tibet. He is better known by his family

name of Sum-pa, which means one from the country of Sum, a province

in Western Tibet. In his infancy he is said to have given indications of

his identifying himself with the spirit of his predecessor, While very

young he learnt to read and write with extraordinary facility. He became

well known by the name of Sumpa-Shabs-drufi, He was admitted into the

monastery of Dgon-lufi in the 9th year of his age. He received instruction

in the sacred literature of the Buddhists under Lchan skya Rinpo-chhe

Nag-Dyafi_ chhos idan) and Thu Kwan chhos kyirzya-mtsho and other

great Lamas. From JZchai-skya he received the vows of monkhood,

who gave him the name Yeses Dpal hbyor. He studied metaphysics,

logic, rhetoric, poetry, Buddhist liturgy, ritual, and the dogmatical and

theoretical differences of the various Buddhist schools. He algo learnt

arithmetic, medicine, the science of vocal music, the works on Stitras and

Tantras, and the art of sacred painting. With the acquisition of all

this learning he was occupied till the twentieth year of his age. In addi.

tion to acquiring all the virtues and talents of his predecessor, he

gained the highest proficiency in astronomy, astrology and the science

38 8, C. Das—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po, [No. 2,

of figures. His fame of learning surpassed that of all other Lamas

of his age in Tibet, China, and Mongolia, In the twentieth year of

his age he visited Tibet proper, and took his admission as a student

in the monastery of Hbras-sPii (Daptii). In the year 1725 ho visited

Gtsan, where he took the final vows of monkhood from Panchhen Blo-

issaii Yeses. In the 22nd year of his age he went on a pilgrimage to

Lhokha with a view to yisit Sam-yea, and the famous sanctuaries of Yar-

lui, where he was very much pleased with an interview with Reya Isras

Rinpochhe (Nag Dvai Hjigs med). Rgyal-sras is said to have explained

to him in a prophetic manner what he was destined to achieve and how

he should proceed to Amdo, for the purpose of founding monasteries and

temples there, and also for diffusing Buddhism in China. In his 23rd year

he was appointed MKhanpo (abbot) of Sgo Mai in Hbras spui. In the

following year, when a dispute arose between the two provinces Dvus and

Gtsan, he persistently declined to allow the monks of his college to

take up arms against their enemies, as it was an act prohibited by the

laws of Buddhism. The monks of other colleges followed his example and

desisted from fighting. He filled the chair of Sgo-mai for a period of

five years, after which he returned to Amdo, In the 30th year of his

age, in pursuance of the prediction of Reyal-sras, he founded the monas-

tery of Bshad Sgrub-gliit with about eighty monks. He brought the

recluse hermitage of Bsam.gtan-glii ri-khrod with fifteen monks, which

was founded by DpallDan hod sser, under his own monastery, and

afterwards called it by the name of Sum-pa rikrod. At the age

of thirty-four, at the command of the emperor Chhin-luf (divine pro-

tector), and in the 2nd year of his reign, he visited China. Both Lchan

skya Rol-pahi rDorje and he were presented to the emperor, who asked

them many questions on religious matters. Sumpa Khanpo is said to

have answered all of them without any difficulty whatever. Pleased with

him the emperor commanded that he be appointed the spiritual guide of all

the chiefs of Mongolia, and he also conferred on him a high sacerdotal rank

by letters patent, and authorized him to bear the title of Huthogtu (saint),

The Lama respectfully accepted all the imperial favours, with the excep-

tion of the title of Huthogtu which honour he respectfully declined, accord-

ing to him it being intended for those who aspired to worldly glory. The

emperor was struck with the Lama’s indifference to such a high

honour, and remarked that within his vast empire he did not know

one who like him could look with indifference at such an exalted distinc-

tion, Henceforth he rose high in the esteem of the emperor and was

declared to be areal Lama. He resided in China for nine years. The

emperor occasionally used to call him to his presence. The Zchan

skya, who presided at the head of Labrang (church), commanded that all

1889. ] 8. C. Dis—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po. 39

the Tibetan books on Buddhism extant in China should be revised by

Sumpa, which he did to the great satisfaction of all. He therefore gave

him the clerical title of Hrtené (precious) Pandita. He presented him

with a diploma inscribed on a yellow scarf. Once on every month the

emperor used to give him audience and converse with him on religious

matters for several hours. He resided for five years in Peking, during

which time he enjoyed the esteem and the veneration of the Manchu and

the Mongol residents and the pilgrims of Peking. At the time of his re-

turn to Amdo, which he performed vid Dolonor and Khar shonpo he re-

ceived considerable presents from the emperor, Lchai-skya and the great

Wangs (chiefs) of China and Mongolia, At Rivo-rtse Jia (Woo-tha1)

he stayed one year in order to perform religious worship in the great

sanctuary of Manju Ghosha. In his northward journey he visited Alak-

sha, receiving immense presents from the Mongols, whence he proceed -

edto Dgon-lui. Being indifferent'to worldly comforts, he did not like

much ostentation, and consequently -kept few retainers and servants.

In the 48rd year of his age he was appointed to the headship of Dgon-lun

monastery. Out of the immense wealth he had acquired im China and

Mongolia he used to send large presents to the Panchhen and Dalai

Lamas, to the great monasteries of Sera, Hbras-spun, Dgah Idan,

Bkyra Sis lhunpo, &e. He also set up innumerable Buddhist images,

inscriptions and chhortens &c. His works are voluminous and many.

Being dissatisfied with the existing works on astronomy, astrology

and chronology of Tibet, he wrote a dissertation on them after

collating 20 works by different authors. He found the works of

Mkhas-grub vje and Bu-stoi to be more correct than others. He died

at the age of 73. The following are his principal works:

Kun-gsal melon (on arithmetic, astronomy and astrology) a large

volume written in very small characters.

Bdud rtsi thig-pa (drops of nectar) on medicine.

Lag-len (practice) of medicine, d&e.

Sel-dkar melofi (crystal mirror) on diagnosis.

Gso-dpyad.

Sku-gsrui thug-rtan dkyil thig tshad (structure, proportion and

form of images, diagrams, symbols, &c.).

Sgra, Siian-fiag and sslos gar (rhetoric and poetry and drama).

Reya-Bod and Hor Chhos hbyuti (Ljon-bssan), 7. e. the his-

tory of Buddhism (rise and progress of Buddhism) in India, China

and Tibet. This work was completed in the year 1747 A. D.,

and also contains the “Rehumig (chronological table).

A work on Buddhist charms to enable men to work miracles.

Hdsameglii Spyi béad (general account of the world) on the geogra-

phy of the world.

8. C. Das—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po.

A work on Yoga.

A work on fortune telling and divination.

A work on meditation,

REHUMIG.*

(Translation.)

Crcoint—I

A. D. 1026,

The twelfth Kulika emperor, called Strya, ascended the

throne of Sambhala. Dge bses Potova Rinchhen gsal was

born. Gyi-jo Lo-chava translated the Kdla-chakra system of

astronomy for introducing it into Tibet. The year of the Bud-

dha’s Nirvina being fixed in the year called Fire-hare, this

year (1026)was the 86lst year of the period of Adhi-drishtt.

According to the calculation of those who place the Buddha’s

death in the year Iron-dragon, this was the 408th year of Adhi-

drishti.

According to some writers the work, called Dus-hkhor

herel-chhen, was translated in Tibet by Gyi-jo Lochava in the

year

Se-ston Kun-rigs, the spiritual teacher of Ma-chig Sha-ma

Icham Srif and pupil of hBrog-mi Lo-chava, was born.

Phu chhuii-yva gshon-rgyan was born.

Rinchhen siif-po of Stod lui, the pupil of Spyan-sfia-va

was born.

Spyan Sha-tshul khrims kbar was born.

Hkhon Dkon-mchhog rgyal-po of Sa-skya was born.

La-chhen (bLama Chhenpo) DGoigs-pa rab gsal proceeded

to the mansion of purity (died).

Riiog Chhos-rDorje, the disciple of Marpa, was born.

Jovo rje Dpal Idan Atigsa arrived at MNah rigs.

Rje-btsun Milaras-pa was born. Bari Lo-chava Rinchhen-

grags was born. The Shalu monastery was founded. Ndro

Pan-chhen died.

Ye-ses Abar of Snehu ssur, the eldest son of Dgonpa-pa

was born. Mnar sgom brison herus hbar of Smyug rum, who

was the pupil of Spyan sna-pa, was born. Atiga visited great

Tibet (according to some) in the 61st year of his age.

* The italics in the proper nouns are not pronounced.

+ The Vribaspati Cycle of 60 years was introduced into Tibet by the Indian

Pandit Chandra Natha in the year 1025 A, D,

A.D.

1026

1027

1028

1038

1031

1032

1033

1034

1035

1038

1039

1041

1889. | 8. OC. Das—TZife of Sum-pa Khan-po.

The monastery of Myu-gu lui was founded by Hbrogmi Lo-

chiva.

Machig Sha-ma’s husband was born, ma-Lo-chava Chhos

hbar of La-stod was born. HBrom met Atisa in the 41st year

of his age,

Hbrii Ston of Reyal was born. Ssla-va grags-pa, the son

of che dal sgafipa, was born.

Chhag-khri mehhog met Atiga,

Regya-hdul hdsin dwai phyug tshul-khrims hbar was born.

Atiga miraculously witnessed the religious service performed by

Maitreya (Byams-pa) and Manjusri (Hjam-dwyaiis) at sNe-thai.

Mu-dra-va founded the monastery of H-dgon.

Giial chhos kbar was born. Hbrom made his first pre-

sents to Atiga.

Atiga wrote his work on the Buddhist chronology.

Machig Lab sgron of Kham-pa Lui was born. Machig yumo

became the pupil of Sba-sgom ye-byafi and others of the later

Riif-ma school. Dharma Bodhi was born.

Sdit-po snubs Chhos-hbar was born.

Rdorje Senge of Glan-ri thai (Potova’s disciple) was born.

Lama gshen, the pupil of Ronssom Lochava Chhos-Ddssah,

‘was born.

Atiga died at the age of 73.

Pd-tsha-va Lochava called Nima Grags-pa was born. Rma-

sgom chhos gges of the Shi-byed school was born. Shit ston

chhos fbar was born. The celebrated Machig Lab-Seron was

born. Rinchhen bssaiipo the great Lochava died.

Trepo mchhogs, the spiritual teacher and Mkhanpo of Riog

legs, was born,

Sher-hod of Shaig Kama was born. The monastery of

Rva sgrei was founded by Hbrom ston-pa.

Chhag-khri-mchhog, one of the disciples of Atiga, died.

Riog Blo-ldan ges-rab was born. Dol bu Ser-rg'ya-ma

was born. Rog-dmar-shur was born.

Rma-bya Itna-ra-ya of rGyal was born. Sna-nam rdor

dwan of Shan died.

Machig receives spiritual instruction from A-ston.

Skhor-chhun of Phyag chhen school was born. Ma-chig

Shama, the pupil of Se-ston Kun-rigs, was born. So-chhun Dge-

hdun hbar of the Shi-byed school was born. Kun-dgah, the

second of the Shi-byed school, was born.

Se-mkhar-chhunpa (of Lam-hbras-pa) held the monastery of

Liogmn-khar-chuhi. Hbrom ston died.

1043

1044

1046

1048

1049

1050

1051

1052

1053

1061

1063

8. C, Das—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po.

Rnal-hbyor Ame held the headship of Rwa-Sgren.

Rey-agar Phyag-na visited the Ye-rai monastery in Nepal.

Padma byan-chhub of S’a-po sgaf, the pupil of Phu-

chhuii-pa, was born. Byaii-chhub yeses of Rgyal-tsha was born.

HJam-Dpal and Skyi khui-pa Hab-jo, the two dis-

ciples of the Grub thob Yumo, were born. Hdsad Dharma met

Pha-dampa Sans rgyas. Dche-Sgom Naji-pa unearthed the

concealed scriptural treasures of Lche-b tsun, the Anin-ma

Lama.

Chhos kyi Rgyal-po of Hkhon-phu, the brother of Machig

S'ama, was born.

Sarava Yontan Grags, the disciple of Potova, was born.

Hkhon founded the grand monastery of Sa-skya, and

Riog legs ges founded the monastery of Gsafi-phu. Jima-

Chhos ses met Pha-dampa.

Sero-phug-pa, the pupil of Ssur-chhun and disciple of

Dkah-bshi, was born. /{brog-mi Lochava died, Ser-grags,

the Riif-ma Lama of Ssur-chhuf, died.

Sprul-sku Gshon-hod of Bya-yul, the disciple of Spyan-

sha, was born. Ses-rab Brtson of Khu was born, SBrtson gyuh

Khu-chhen died.

The great religious institution of king Miah bdag rtse sde

was founded. dog Lochava visited Kasmir.

Gtsan-pa Rin-po chhe, the disciple of Bya-yul-pa, was born.

Nam kha rdorje was born Pa-tshab sgompa, the disciple of

Kun dgah of the Shi byed school was born. Milaraspa pro-

ceeded to study under Marpa Lochava.

Hbrom-ston of Rgyal was born. Sgro-chhos brtson, the

pupil of Sgom of the Shi-byed-pa school, was born.

After the death of Ames, Mdsod dgon-pa became the abbot

of Rva-sgren.

Blo-gros grags Lha-rje sgampopa of Dwag-po was born.

Rgya-hdul hdsin practised the ascetic vows of vinaya ab

the monastery of Dgah-va-gdon.

The foundation of the monastery of Gra-than was laid by

Gra-pa mion ges chan (a certain monk who was possessed of

foreknowledge).

Potova Rinchhen gsal died, after discharging the functions

of abbot at the religious seat of Rwa-serefii for one year or

(according to some) three years. Mdsod dgon-pa died.

Henceforth for many years there prevailed a religious

anarchy at Ry-sgren.

[No. 2,

Del DE

1064:

1065

1072

1076

1081

1082

A»

1889. ] 8. C, Das—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po.

Byan chhub dge-mdses, the pupil of Sne-hu ssur-pa, was

born. Ras chhufi rdor grags, the pupil of Milaras-pa, was

born at Gui than. Milaras-pa performed asceticism to attain A. D.

sainthood,

Sami sgom-pa Smon lam hbar, the pupil of So-chhui-pa,

was born.

CYCLE—II.

Sarava attended on Potova as his pupil.

Ma Lochava Chhos-hbar died of poison.

Degyer Sgom chhenpo Gshon-grags, the pupil of Bya-Yul,

was born, Jtnog-mdo-sde, the spiritual son of Rfiog Chhos-

rdor, was born. Tshul-hphags-dan lapa, the Buddhist scholar,

was born. Rog ses-rab blama, the spiritual successor of Rgyal-

wa rten-nas, was born. Gra-pa miion ses-rab chan died.

Brtson hgrus hbar, known as Bya-hdul-va hdsin-pa (the

Vinayic priest of Bya), was born.

Sa-chhen Kun shin, the son of Sa-skya Dkon rgyal, recog~

nised as the 9th spiritual emanation of Chanrassig, was born.

The saint Pha-dampa visited Tibet. tog Lo-chéva returned

to Tibet.

The Glai-thah monastery was founded by Gilai-ri-that-pa.

Milaraspa, after the completion of his ascetical propitiations

(attainment of sainthood), proceeded towards Tesi &ec.

Nii phug-pa Chhos grags, the saint of Shai who was the

pupil of Byai-sems Ssla rgyan, was born.

The #iin Lama, called Rgya-nag-pa (the Chinese), was born.

Ras-chhufi-pa met Milaras-pa.

The monastery of Lodgon was founded.

Tshul-khrims dpal, the red cap Lama, was born.

Bkra sis rdorje of Shai Ston,a Riii-ma Lama, was born.

Marpa Chhos blo was born.

Hod sser se-ge, the disciple of Bya-yul-pa, was born. Dva

gs-po Chhos gyun, the chief spiritual son of Sgampo, was born.

Ye-rdor of Hchhad kha, the disciple of S’arava, was born.

Pha-dampa visited China.

On the demise of Hkhon-ston Dkon-mChhog rgyal-po,

Bari Lochayva ascended the throne of Sa-skya.

On the death of Glan-tshul byan, Hbrii ston succeeded to

the headship of RGyal (became abbot of Rgyal).

Riog Chhos rdor died.

Stab ka-va Darma grags, the disciple of Saraya, was born.

1083

1084:

1086

1088

1089

1090

1091

1092

1093

1094:

1095

1096

1099

1100

1101

4.3

44, S. C. Das—Life of Sum-pa Khan-pa.

Khyuf tshafi Thod-dmar-va was born, Stod luf-pa founded

the monastery of Btson-grodGonpa. Spyan snatshul hbar died

ab Siug-rim. Sgrol Sgom, the pupil of Sgampo, was born.

Sgam-po-va received the final vows of monkhood.

Potova rinchhen gsal died.

Gtum-ston Blo gros grags, the pupil of Sarava, was born,

Phu-Chhii-va died at the monastery of Poto dgon.

Stefi-pa Lo chéva who brought the Kasmirian Pandit Al-

anka Deva was born,

Chhos-seA of Phya-pa was born. After the death of Iénog

Lochava Shai-Tghe srif Chhos kyi blama held the headship of

Gsafi-phu for thirty-two years, A succession of twelve lamas

occupied a period of 159 years. Siug-rum-pa chhenpo died.

Rdorje rgyad-po (Phagmo-grub-pa) was born. Karma dus

gsum mkhyanpa was born, Sgampo served Milaras-pa as his

pupil.

Kun-siit' ascended the throne of Sa-skya. The Gva-gor-

dgon-pa was founded by Ghal Chhos hbar,

At Chhu-bar Milaras-pa triumphed over a troop of demons.

Sgampo performed ascetic propitiations at Hol kha. Gilal

Chhos hbar died.

The final visit of Pha-dampa'to Tibet. The incarnations

of Las chhen Kun-rgyal, &c., founded monasteries in Bya-yul.

Khyuf tshai yeses blama, the disciple of Ras chhun, was

born. Jo-tshul Ses, the spiritual son of Rhog mdo-sde, was

borne Kham lufipa Chhenpo, the pupil of Hgrom, died.

Sgompa tshul Khrims of Dvyag-po was born. Jtgyal-va

ye-grags dmar-va was born. Stod Lutpa Chhenpo died. Se-

ston Kun rigs died.

HChhus dar brtson, the disciple of Sgro (of the Shi byed

school), was born, Some of the Gter-ston of the Siin ma sect

discovered hidden books. Pha dampa died.

Ma Khro-phu Igyal-tsha, the disciple of Panchhen Sakya

éri, Riog-mdo-sde and Phag-gru, &c., was born. Yeses hbar of

Snehu Ssur died.

Degyer sgom founded the monastery of Rgya-ma Rin-chhen

sgan-7iin.

Hbrii-ston died. Skam ye-reyan of the Shi-byed school-

died.

Thog-med grags, the spiritual son of Rhog mdo-sde, was

born, Rma Rna-ra-va became the abbot of Rgyal. The

age of Samadhi commenced.

[No.

1102

1103

1104

1105

1106

1108

1109

1110

1111

1112

1114

1116

1117

1118

1119

1889. ] S. C. Das—Life of Sui-pa Khan-po.

Chhos rgyan of Se-skyilbu, the disciple of Hehhad k4, was

born.

The monastery of Sgampoi dgonpa was founded by Dvags

po Lha-rJe.

Thogs med Hod of Riog was born. Brtson-grags of Shai

was born. When Skor-chhun died, his body received animation.

The resurrection was due to the Indian saint Nirupa having

entered it in a miraculous manner,

Ssla-hod, the spiritual son of Hkhon-phu-pa, was born.

Gyubrag pa was born. Gshon-brtson of Glafi-lua, the pupil of

Bya-yul Lochava, was born. Jje Milaras chhen died. ‘

Ido-rje seige of Glan thafi died.

Jo Hbum, the father of Rta-ston Jo-ye and Jo-bsod of the

Tihih-ma school, was born The later Kun-dgah of the Shi-byed

school died.

Karma dus mkhyen was admited into the order of monk-

hood by Tre-po mchhog blama. Acharya Abhayakara died.

Mal Kapa chan, the disciple of Sama, was born, Zche-

ston yon-tan gssuns of Se-brag was born.

The Kasmirian Pandit Sakya Sri was born.

Hjig-rten Grags-pa Reya-va rten, who became the dis-

ciple of Pa-tshab sgom-pa of the Shi-byed school, was born.

Hod hjo gshon-nu yontan was born.

The 13th Rigs-/dan (Kulika), called Sna-tshogs gssugs

(Visva-rupa), a:cended the throne of Sambhala.

Dege-bses glan of Rgyal was born. Padma-rdorje Ras-pa

(he with locks) of the Hbrug-pa school, was born.

Karma dus mkhyen visited Dvus. So-chhua dge hbar died.

Sbal-te Dgra bchom-pa, the saint of Balti, was born. Jo

hod gchuh, also called Riog jo va-son, was born. Rma Narava

died.

Ses rab Byan-chhub, also called Dvags po Sgom-Chhui,

of Dyags-po was born.

Reyal tsha Byatt yeses became abbot of Reyal gdansa.

Snubs chhos hbar died.

Karmapa Ses-rab hod of Shai died. Reya-hdul hdsin-pa

died. Sa-vo-sgafi-pa died. Ses rab rgyam of Dol died,

The red cap Lama Tshul khrims kbar died.

Nam-mkhah hod of the red cap school, who was the re-emho-

diment of Shva rmar Tshul dpal, was born.

Dus mkhyen received the final vows of monkhood from

Mal hdul hdsin.

1120

1126

1129

1130

1131

1132

8. C. Das—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po.

Sgampo hdul hdsin was born. Sgro-phugpa died.

Miah bdag Naaral, king of Tibet (recognised as the 11th

incarnation of Chanrassig’), was born.

Hod sser Seige founded the monastery of Khrom Kam

dgonpa at Khrom Gsher,

Satis rgyas dpon-pa, the younger brother of Reyama deyer

sgom, was born. Shon-kbyui was born. Rog bkra grags, the

spiritual son of Rog S‘es-rab blama, was born. Gshon-hod of

Bya-yul died.

Dus Mkhyen visited Sgampo at Dvagpo. Khyui-po died.

Rgyal-tshab Byan yeses died.

Hhbrom ston of Rgyal became abbot of Reyal gdansa.

Sarava yontan grags died.

Bsod nams rtse-mo, the spiritual son of Sa-skya Kun-siia,

‘was born.

Bkrasis dpal of Than-pa chhenpo in Stag-luf was born.

A jig-rten gsum mgon Rin bssah the governor of Hbri-gof,

was born. After the death of Hbrom-ston of Rgyal, the abbot-

ship of Gdansa remained vacant for nine years. Ar spent his

summer recess at Gdansa. Khu-ser brtson died.

Degyer sgom tshul sei, the disciple of Mal Ka-va chan and

Phag-gru, was born.

Gsan ston spyipa chaspa, one of the Pan chhen of Sa-skya,

was born.

Hihonphu-pa, the brother of Ma chig Sama, died.

Riiog jo bsod died.

Fgyal Chharmo, the spiritual son of Rhog thog med, was

born. nogjo Hod died.

CYCLE III.

Aje-btsun Grags-pa rgyal-mtshan, the spiritual son of Sa-

chhen, was born.

Kun-/dan Ras Chhua, the younger brother of Khro-phu

reyal-tsha, was born,

Rhii-ma Lgya-nag-pa, the disciple of Sgro-phug RAif-ma

Lama, died.

Shig-pa bdud rtsi, the disciple of Riii ma Se-brag, was

born. Machig Sama died.

Rog Ses-rab blama, the religious and ministerial successor

of Rgyal-va-rten-na, was born.

Dvagpo sgom-tshul held the abbotship of Sgampo. Dpal-

chhen Hodpo chhe, the son of Sa-chhen, was born.

[No. 2,

1133

1134

1136

1137

1138

1139

1140

1141

1142

1143

1144

1145

1146

1147

1148

1149

1889.] 8. 0. Das—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po.

Phagmo grub-pa interviewed Rje-Seampo-va.

Rdor-sen, the younger brother of Riog Chharmo, was born.

Servo chhos brtson died.

Chhag Lochava, also called Dgra-bchom Rtehu rava, the

disciple of Stef-pa Lochava, was born.

Gro-bdud-rtsi grags of Snarthafi was born. Gtum-ston

founded the monastery of sNar thafi. Dag-pa ses tsul Pha-

gs-paof Nan lam became abbot of Rgyal gdansa.

Dvagspo Sgampo-va died.

Rdorje tshul khrims of Hbri gofi was born. Dvags-po Szom-

tshul founded the monastery of Mtshur-lha lufi at Stod-lun.

Dus mkhan pa founded the Karmapa monastery of Gshu

mtshur Lha lui at Gshuhi gru bshi Lha lua.

Thogs med grags of Riog died.

Kun dgah rdorje, the spiritual son of Rhog jo-tshul, was

born,

Dvat-phyug byafi rin of Lha luf, who was the disciple of

Se-spyil-pa, was born. M#ssaii mo, the spiritual son of Sans rgyas

dpon ston, was born,

Nia fbum, the gon of Riif-ma shafi-ston, was born. Pa-

tshab scompa died, Sa-chhen Kun-siii died. fog jo-tshul

died. Phag gru-pa founded the monastery of Gdansa mthil.

Bsod nams rtse mo became the grand hierarch of Sa-skya.

Dee-bses Nanlampa died. Dus mkyen founded the monastery

of Mtshur-phu.

Sans-reyas seompa rdor gshon of Bya-yul was born. Dge-

bées Ichaf rib was born.

Rma Lochava and Yah dnenpa, the immanations of Machig

Sama, were born.

Yeges rdorje (also called gtsaf-pa Rgya ras pa), the dis-

ciple of Hbrug-pa glif raspa, was born, Gtsan rinpochhe Nam

rdorje died, Ras-chhunpa died.

Chhifgis Khan, the conqueror, who turned the wheel of

might, was born.

Skor Nirtipa tava died.

Rta ston jo yeges, the Riifi ma Lama, was born.

Giios Reyul-va lha nafiva Sais rin, the disciple of Skyob-pa,

was born.

Dus mkhyen founded the monastery of lower Kam-po gnas

nan. The monastery of Hchhad-ka gsarma was founded by Se-

skyil-pa, Khyufi-tshait Thod dmar became abbot of Rgyal-

edansa. Hab jo Sras, the disciple of Yumo, died.

1150

1151

1152

1153

1154

1155

1156

1157

1160

1161

1162

1163

48 8. C. Das—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po.

Bya-hkchhan-kha-pa founded the monastery of Malgro Bya-

hehhat kha. The two Glifras-pa of Stagluf interviewed Phag-

gru.

Ser-hod, the son of Rog bkra-grags, was born.

Gtum-ston died at Chhos-lui. dor-ston. Ser grags be-

came abbot of SNarthan.

Riog mdo-sde died. Ser hod, the spiritual son of Rog-bkra

Grags, was born.

Maahri dge-mdsas died. Shafi ston bkra rdor, the Aiii-

ma lama, died. The abbot of Hbri-goi became the disciple of

Phag-gru,

Jo-bsod of Dyus, who was the younger brother of Rta-ston-

jozye (Raif-ma Lama), was born.

Hadsed Dharmabodhi died.

vyam bssafi Chhos smon lam, the diseiple of Ssva-ra-va

Skal-ye, the son of Phag-gru, was born.

The Kashmirian Pandit Sakya Sri took the final vows of

monkhood. The monastery of Hdod spai phug was founded

by Dus-mkhyen. The monastery of Skyor lui was founded by

Spal-te. Dvagspo sgom-tshul died, after which the abbotship

remained vacant for two years. Phya-pa Chhos sef died.

Bsod rdor of Sbom-brag, the disciple of Karma sans rgyas

Ras-chhen, was born.

Rgyal died at Phag-gru, and the abbotship of Sdan-sa re-

mained vacant for six years.

Khrom gger died at Kam kam.

Rin-chhen Sesrab, the younger brother of Rog Serab

hod, was born.

Sami smon lam hbar died.

Grags rgyan-pa ascended the throne of the Sa-skya hierarchy.

Ser bya was appointed to the abbotship left vacant by Sgampo,

Khro-phu Lo-chava Tshul-Ses byams dpal, who was a

nephew of the Khro-phu Reyal tsha brothers, was born. Rog

S’esrab lama died.

Darma grags pa of Stabs-ka died. Jo-hbum, the RAinma

lama, died.

Rinehhen Hod, the disciple of Phag-gru, was born. The

monastery of Tshal was founded. Bya-hchhad kapa died.

Chhos rje Sgai-pa was born, Khyuf tshan yes’es Lama

died.

DPon ras dar sen of the middle Hbrug school was born.

The Skyob-pa (hierarch) of Hbri-goh received the final vows of

[No. 2,

1164,

1165

1166

1167

1169

1170

1171

1172

1173

1174

i ss

—y-

1889. ] 8. C. Das— Life of Sum-pa Khan-po.

monkhood. Shafi Lo-chava grub-dpal died. Dyags-po Chhos

gyun died.

Sans rgyas sgompa of Snarthah was born. Ye-grags dmar

became the abbot of Rgyal-gdan sa.

Gshon rdor of Mgar dampa Chhos sdii, the disciple of Sky-

ob-pa, was born. Hbom dgon Sesrab dpal, the disciple of Stag

lnfi-pa, was born. The monastery of Stag lui dgon was found-

ed by Lama Stag lun-thai-pa.

Sa-skya Panchhen, the son of Dpal-hod sros, was born,

Bsod rgyan of Ko-brag was born. ;

The monastery of Itgyama Rin sgan was rebuilt by Sans

rgyas dyon-ston.

Rsod nams rtshe of Sa-skya died, Lha-btsun gsla Hod of

Hkhon-phu died.

Riiog Chharmo died.

Ssatis tsha bsod rgyan, the younger brother of Sa-skya Pan-

chhen Kun dgah rgyal-mtshan, was born.

The monastery of Karma lha sdei was founded by Dus

mkhyen-pa.

Rdo ston ser grags died at Snarthafi and was succeeded by

Shafi btsum rdor hod who was born in the year tron-horse.

The venerable Hgro-vahi mgonpo dyvai phyug Hod Lha-

Inf dpon sras was korn,

Grags rgyal, of Kharagpa, who was the spiritual son of

Rgod-tshai the Hbrug-pa Lama and disciple of Bhuriba, was

born. Nif phug-pa died. Rog Bkra gis grags died.

Dyon Ser hbyui, the disciple of Skyob-pa, was born.

Bloras dvai brtsoh of lower Hbrug, who was the disciple of

Glsafi rgyara, was born. The monastery of Tshal gun than was

founded by Lama Shan Obrtson grags. The image Lhachhen

was constructed. igyal-va yeses died at Grags dmar,

Hbrug-pa glin ras pa Padma-dorje was born.

Bsam glii-pa, the disciple of Gan-ba and spiritual son of

Karma dus mkhyen, was born,

Rgos tshan mgon-po rdorje of upper Hbrug, who became

the disciple of Reya ras, was born,

Dee-bscs Glan rgyal became the head of Gdan-sa (chief

seat of the hierarchy).

The monastery of Mtshur-phu was founded by Dus

mkhyen-pa.

Hor Chhifi-gis became king of the Mongols. Se-spyil

len-pa died,

1176

1178

1179

1180

1181

1183

1185

1186

1187

1188

50 8. C. Das—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po.

The king of upper Mo-rtse Rgyal-po presented the Lord

Buddha’s image with a golden crown.

Hehhad-ka monastery was governed by Lhalun dvan

phyug of Se-spyil.

King Chhifgis conquered Man-churia. Stefi-ba Lo-chava

(Tshul-khrim hhyuf gnas) died.

Ssim rinpochhe of Bya-yul (Sans-rgyas Ston-pa grags) was

born. Rin mgon sku yal-va of Stag Ini dvon kar was born.

Glan died and was succeeded by Dge-bses dri-hdul at Rgyal

Gdansa.

King Shhif-gis conquered Solon country. Mchhus dar

brtson died.

Skysa-ston byan rin pochhe held the abbotship of Reyab-

gdansa. Lama shan died at Gun thai. Karma Dus gsum

mkhyen-pa died. Gshon-un brtson kgrus of Glah-lun died.

Dvyus-pa died.

Henceforth Chhii gis became emperor of China. Snas-

thai Shan btsun-died and was succeeded by Groms chhe-be

who was born in the year water-bird.

Bya-skyun-pa (mdo-sde mgon of Phorog), who was kobrag-

pas disciple, was born. Khro-Lo-chava visited Nepal. Chhin

gis conquered Tartary. Khro-phu rgyal-tsha died. Yon-tan

gssafis (iifma Lama) died.

Jo hbar, the son of Nima-hbum (Riii-ma Lama), was

born. Chifigis subdued the Danmag.

The latter Chhos rje dpal Chhag was born.

Skyob-pa and Stag lin-ba built temples at Phag-gru.

Khro Lo-chava invited Mitrapa to Tibet who after a staying

there for 18 months returned to India. Chhif-gis conquered

Kheran. Jobsod (Itiifi-ma Lama) died.

Dvags-po grol-soom died. Shva-dmar nam hod died.

Riin-ma-pa Shig-po died.

Seam-po shi sgam-chhen-po was born, Bkra-Grags, the

re-embodiment of the red-cap Lama called Nam-hod who was

a disciple ef Dus mkhyen, was born. Gshon-sen of the middle

Hbrug-pa school was born. Khro-Lo-chaya, brought Buddha

Sri to Tibet. Chhif-gis subjugated Nahimanpa Ta-ge.

Dege-bshes Ichan-ri held the abbotship of Rgyal gdan-sa.

Sans rgyas scom-pa protected the Lo-chava of Bya yul. Gssi

brjid Grags, the spiritual son of Rnog kun rdor was born.

Spyan sia Rinchhen Ldan, the disciple of Ko-brag-pa and

Yuh dgonpa, was born. Chhif-gis conquered the whole of Hor.

[No. 2,

1189

1190

1191

1192

1193

1194

1195

1196

1197

1198

1199

1889. ] 8. C. Das—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po.

Rgva Lo-chava (nam rgyal Rdorje) of Roi was born.

Phag-gru Thog-rdug pa was born. Sans rgyas yar byon

Ses rab blama of Stag lui was born.

Sans rgyas ras pa Rinchhen smonlam, the disciple of Shi-

byed pa Rog shig-po, was born,

Sa-skya dpal-chhen Hod died.

Karma Bakshi Chhos hdsin, the disciple of Sbom-brag-pa

and pupil of Karma Ras chhen, was born. Khro Tio-chava

brought the Kashmirian Pandit Sakya Sri to Tibet.

Chhif-gfs subjugated Harilig. Deyer-tshul Sef died.

Reyal-po dgah, the younger brother of Riog Gssi-brjid,

was born. The monastery of Bde-va-chan at Siie-than was

founded by Rgya-hchhii rupa, the disciple of Giial shai.

His nephews, Sans rgyas dpal and others, managed the

monastery after his death.

The monastery of Gyam bssan dgon-pa was founded by

Chhos Smon lam of Gyam bssaii.

Chhiigis visited Tibet and subjugated all its provinces

with the exception of Mi-flag.

CYCLE IV.

Ssvara-yesen, the pupil of Phag-gru, died.

Spyan-sna grags hbyunh became the abbot of Phag-gru

Gdansa which dignity he held for twenty-seven years. Saskya

Pandita received the final vows of monkhood from Sakya Sri

Pandita.

Dyon dkarva occupied the abbotship vacated in con-

sequence of the death of Stag lun thai-pa. Rgya-ma Sans rgyas

dvon ston died.

Tilla rdor grags, the younger brother of Hbri-goi-pa, was

born.

Dyon-po Dar sei became abbot of Hbrug Ralui after

the death of Gtsaii-pa rgya-ras. Mal-ka-pa-chan died.

Heuru Chhos dyaii, a Riifi-ma gter-ston was born. Khro-

Lochiva constructed a gigantic image of Maitreya, eighty

cubits high, which he also consecrated.

Rgyalva, the eldest spiritual son of Hbrug-pa Rgod-tshan-

pa, Yah dgon-pa and Reyal-mtshan dpal were born.

The Kashmirian Pandita Sakya Sri returned to Recher

The monastery of Glaftthai Chhos-sde was founded.

Gshon-nu yon-tan of Hod jo-va died. iitma Nima

hbum died.

1203

1204

1205

1206

1207

1209

1210

1211

1212

8. C. Das—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po.

The pupil of Hjam-gser called Chhos Sku-hod sser, who be-

came the disciple of Semo-chhe the professor of Dus hkhor, was

born.

Khublai (emperor Se-chhen) Khan of Hor was born.

SPal-te Dgra-bchom died.

Shya-dmar-tshul dpal, the disciple of Karma Bakshi, was

born. Siie-mdo thams chad mkhyen-pa, the eldest son of Smar-

sefige, was born. Chhag dgra-bchom died.

Grags rgyan of Sa-sky died.

Rdorje tshul-khrims became the heirarch of Hbri-goh.

Skyob-pa Hjig-rten mgon-po died.

Khro-phu kun-ldan-ras-pa died. Yah-dven-pa died.

Regyal-va Eten nas-pa died.

Rin-chhen rdorje his younger brother, who was the 12th

(in succession), was born.

Dege-bées Icha riba died. Sgampo hdul hdsin-pa died.

Glafi ston gesrab Sen became abbot of Igyal-gdan sa.

Riog rdorsef died.

Rdorje tshul Khrims of Hbri-goh died.

Dvyon Sesrab byufi became hierarch of Hbri-goi’, Bud-

dhism was first introduced in Hor (Mongolia). Chhif-gis an-

nexed Sar-tha-gva-chhen.

Rdorje yeses (Chhos go-ba of Hbri-guh) was born. HAkhrul

Shig Darma sefige, the disciple of Rog-mchhad gsun, was born.

Dvyon dkar commenced building the grand hall of wor-

ship at Stag Inn.

Gnos Lha naf-va died.

Bde-legs rgyal-mtshan of Nerai, who became the pupil of

Orgyan Rinchhen dpal, was born. Shai ston htshem-pa be-

came abbot of Rgyal-va gdansa.

The monastery of Dge-hdun sgaii was founded by the two

disciples of Sakya Sri Pandita named Byah and dor. They

algo founded the monastery of Siiemo tshag-mig.

Sakya sefge founded the monastery of Namrifi in Byaft

(north) after which he died. Sakya Sri died in Kashmir.

Rin Sef of Thog-kha of Hbrigoh was born. The

fourteenth Kulika ascended the throne of Sambhala, Chhif-

gis subjugated Mifag in Tibet, after which he died.

Ogoti, the son of Chhifigis, who was born in the year fire-

sheep, assumed the sceptre of the Mongol-China kingdom.

Sgampo Siiepa jo sras was born, Sans rgyas sgom-pa

died.

1889. | and his Chronology of Tibet.

Orgyan Senge rinchhen dpal, the pupil of Rgod tshan-pa of

Stod Hbrug, was born.

Rta-ston jo-ye, the Rain-ma Lama, died.

Bkragis blama of Stag lui was born. Jo-hbed, the Riiima

Lama, died.

Rin-sefit of Kham luf in Bya-yul was born Sans rgya jo-vo

dvai phyug gshon-nu of Bya-yul was born. Gromo-chhe of

SNar than died. Lha-lufi dvafi phyug died.

Chhos smon lam of Gyam-bssafi died. Rog Sesrab blama

was born.

Ogoti died. Guru Chhos dvaii recovered concealed

religious books from the rock of Gnam-skas brag,

Sans ston tshul mgon of the Sans-pa school was born. WSer-

hbyun died at Hbrigoi. Gotan, who was born in the fire-tiger

year, ascended the throne of Hor. Riog kun-rdor and Rtogs

Idan bssai died.

Phags-pa, the son of Sa-skya Ssans-tsha, was born. Sefige-

sgra, the son of Riog reyal-dgah, was born.

Dyon dkar skuyalma of Stag lui died. Sgam-po Sii

sgom-chhen died.

Dar Sen, the disciple of Rgya ras of Gtsai, died at Hbrug

ra lun. Gshon-sah succeeded him.

Rin-rgyan and Ye-hbyuf, the sons of Ssais tsha of Sa-

skya, were born.

Phyagna rdorje, the younger brother of Hphags-pa of Sa-

skya, was born.

Ssaiis tsha Bsod rgyan of Saskya died.

Grags-pa yese’s of Phag-gru was born. Grags bsod

(Hisham behad-pa) of Hbri gui was born. The Mongol chief

Chhigya dorta, with his troops overrun Dyu (U) and Gtsaf,

and killed So-ston and five hundred monks of Sa-skya, after

which he burnt Rva-sgren and Reyal-khan monasteries,

Chhos kyi blama died at Snarthafi. Dvon-Ser-hbyuti

died.

Rin bssai, the younger brother of Riog Sef ge sera, was

born, Melof Rdorje, the pupil of Riiima jo hbad and disciple

of Sen-ge rgyab-pa, was born. Jonafi kun-spai Thugs drtson-

hgrus rje, the pupil of Chhos sku hod sser, was born.

Hphags-pa and Phyagna, the two nephews of Sa-skya

Pandita, proceeded to Mongolia. Rog-ger hod died. Hbom

dgon-pa of Stag lun died.

Rog-shigpo Rin-chhen Sesrab died.

1242

1243

54: 8. C. Das—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po.

Chhos kyi rdorje, the younger brother of nog Rin-chhen

bssan-po, was born.

Sa-skya Pandita arrived at Lan-ju (Lan-chau).

Sa-skya Pandita interviewed the Mongol king Gotan.

Sne-mdo smar sen died.

Sa-skya Pandita’s saintly powers were tested. Having

found him to be a sage and saint, the king imbibed faith in him.

King Gotan sent a proclamation to Tibet making a pre-

sent of the provinces of U and Tsaf to the Sa-skya hierarch.

Gya-pa gafis-pa, the disciple of Dus-mkhyen, died. Sbom-

grags-pa died. '

Grags rin gitis mchhod-pa of Phag-gru was born. Se-

Spyil Kha-va yeses of Lhobrag was born.

Shaft dkon dpal was born. Lo-chdva Ras died at the capital

of the Hbrug-pa hierarchy. Sans-Sgom of Siias than died.

Sans rgyasdvon grags dpal of Stag uf was born. Ses-

rab Sef-ge of Rofi, the spiritual son of Reva Lo-chava, was

born. Nima sefige of middle Hbrug was born.

MChhim nam grags became abbot of Snarthai. Sa-skya

Pandita died at Sprul-sde in Mongolia. King Gotan died.

Muf-khe, who was born in the year jire-hare, ascended

the throne of Mongol-China. The Mongolian army suppressed

Mon mkhar mgonpo gdoi in Tibet.

HPhags-pa of Sa-skya became prince Khublai’s spiritual

guide. The Saskya-pa hierarch took possession of the

thirteen provinces of Tibet, called Khri-skor bchu-gsum.

The Mongolian king went at the head of an army to

Gara Jjai yal and returned to his capital in the following year.

Grags sen of Mun-mebrag kha-wa, the pupil of Jonan kun

spah, was born.

Spyan sna grags hbyuii died.

Bakshi became the spiritual guide of the Mongol king Mun-

khe. Ssem grags seh of Bya-yul died. Guru Chhos dvan

unearthed the six Riin ma scriptures.

Sans-rgyas dpal bssaf (Stag lui dvon-po) was born. Phorog

mdo-sde died.

Sefge rinchhen of Spadi-skya and of the middle Hbrug-

pa school was born.

Kun dgah bssai-po of Sie-mdo, an incarnation of Rgod-

tshans-pa, was born.

Rgyal-va yah dgonpa, the son of Thams chas mkhyenpa,

died. Rgod tshah mgon rdor of Stod Hbrug died.

1246

1247

“aml

"ah

1889. ] and his Chronology of Tibet.

Bde-legs vgyal mtshan founded the monastery of Ssan ssai

neran. Lha kgro mgon dvafi phyug died.

Muii-khe, the Mongol king, died.

Yon rgyam, the pupil of Jonai kun spa, was born. Karma

Bsam-glii Rinchhen died,

Reyal mtshan hbum of Hjag, who became a leader of

the Safspa school, was born.

Karma Bakshi, during the years fire-serpent, tron-monkey

and ton-bird, made miraculous religious demonstrations. Bsod

rgyan of Go-brag died.

Bdag-chhen bssaiipo dpal, the son of Sa-skya Ye-hbyui,

was born,

Sakya bssafipo, well-known by his other name Stag lufi

Lo-chava, was born.

Ssur-phu-va, the pupil of Spyan-sna rin /dan, was born.

The great shrine of Mtshur-phu was built by Bakshi Ne

Idan sgom,

Sans rgyas ston tshul Khrims Sefge of Bya-yul was born.

Chhag chhos je dpal died.

H Phags-pa of Sa-skya returned to Tibet from Mongolia.

Kumara, the son of Melofi rdorje (of the Ritiima school),

was born.

Gshon-sen died at Hbrug-Ralun,

CYCLE V.

Thog rdug-pa died at Phag-gru. Phyagna of Sa-skya

died.

Dharmapala Rakshita, son of Phyagna of Sa-skya, was

born.

Hphags-pa again returned to Hor (Mongolia).

Emperor Sa-chhen (Khublai), the grand son of Chhii-

gis was engaged in building Peking and three other cities,

from the year wood-mouse up to this year.

Kharag grags rgyal of Hbrug died.

Gshon-nu Smon lam of Bya-yul and Spyi-ther paki Dyonpor

Grags-pa of Dvagpo were born.

Sans rgyas yar-byon of Stag Iun died.

Guru chhos dvafi died,

The monastery of Tharpaglin was founded in the confines

of Nepal and Tibet.

Ye-hbyunh of Sa-skya died in Ljan-yul.

1258

1259

1260

1261

1266

1267

1268

1269

1270

1271

1272

1273

56 8. OC. Dis—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po.

Sakya bssaii-po of Sa-skya became the viceroy of the thir-

teen provinces of Tibet, called Khri-skor bchu gsum.

Hjam-dyyahs don-rgyan of Sa-skya and Dyai-bo brtan

Blama of Bsos rgyan were bora.

Sans reyas dyon grags dpal of Stag-luhi founded the monas-

tery of Byams rinpo-chhe,

Ssur-khaf-pa dvah ye of Se-spyil was born. Grags-pa

bsod dpal of the Bkah-brgyud school was born. Siie-mdo Thams

chad mkhyen-pa died.

Rdorje rinchen of Hbrigon was born.

Yesges blama of Stag Iufit was born. Sgampo chhos

brgyan was born.

Rinchhen rgyal mtshan of Sa-skya died. Bchut Tilli died

at Hbrigcnh.

Rinchhen Chhos rgyal of the Shi-byed school, who was the

grandson of Hphrul shig-dar seh, was born. Hphags-pa of Sa-

skya died. The twelveth Gchun died.

Sansrgyas Ras-pa of the Shi-byed school died.

Dharmapala became hierarch of Sa-skya. Bya-rog Rdson

(jong) was captured. Riog Gssi-brjid Grags died.

Bya-yul Khams Inii-pa died. Rga-Lo-chiva of Mitlagag

died. DBkra-grags, the red-cap Lama, died.

Chhos rgyan, the son of latter Riag Chhos rdor, was born.

Shva dmar Gragr se, the first incarnation of Bkra-grags

the red-cap Lama, was born.

Rdor rgyan of Roi, the first disciple of Ser sei, was born.

Karma Bakshi died,

Sans rgyas Sgompa of Bya-yul and Tshul khims Sesrab

were born.

The third Karma-pa hierarch Ran byun rdorje, an incarna-

tion of Karma Bakshi, was born.

Rdor-rgyal, the 28th hierarch of Hbrigoh, was born. Rfiog

reyal po dgah died.

Lha-blo hod of Se-spyil was born. The Hbrigot-pa

authorities burnt Bya-yul.

Sais rgyas Gchui Ston died, and the abbotship remained

vacant for five years.

Thog kha-va died at Hbrigon.

Lha brag kha-va died.

Gyut-ston Rdor dpal, the pupil of Ssur-byams senge (the

Riii-ma Lama), who was Karma Rai byui’s spiritual cuide,

was born.

1275

1283

1889. ] and his Chronology of Tibet.

Dharmapala died at Sa-skya, and S’ara-va Hjam dvyats

succeeded him in the hierarchy. Ne-sefi of Hbrug Ralua died

Ratna guru of Stag lui was born. Htsham bchadpa died

at Hbrigoi. Phag-gru Grags-ye died.

Sefige rgyal-po of middle Hbrug was born. Mchhim nams

grags of Snarthan died.

Bu-ston Rin-chhen grub was born. Riifima Lama Legs-

idan was born.

The Sa-skya-pa authorities sacked Hbrigoi.

Tshul-mgon of Bya-yul was born,

Gser-gliit bkra sis dpal, a follower of Sans-pa, was born.

Dol bu Ser-rgyan, a disciple of Jona yon-rgyan, was born.

Kun-mkhyen chhos sku Hodsser died.

Grags rgyal of Phag-gru, who had acquired the fourfold

Fitifima perfections, was born.

Urgyan mgonpo ger dpal of Stag Inf died,

Mkhan-chhen Jiidna Prajfi4 was born, Sa-chhen’s (Khub-

Jai’s) grandson Olchahithu, who was born in the year wood-ox,

became the emperor of Mongol China.

Rgyal-sras Thogmed bssan po dpal was born. The Riiiima

Lama Gyui-ston Ssla-va Hjam dvyafs bsam-hgrub rdor je

was born.

Mchhuim karma klofi-chhen-pa was born. Sgam-po Sfi-va

Jo-sras died.

Sans rgyas dpon-grags of Stag-lufi died. Emperor Khublai

died.

Bkragis blama died at Stag-luh,.

Karma Riifii Lama Gyui-ston visited Hor.

Tisri Kun-blo, son of Dpal bssai of Sa-skya, was born.

Gyag-sde Panchhen (Brtson-hgrus Dar rgyas), the pupil

of Shya-dmar Grags-sef, was born.

Ratnikara of Stag-lun was born,

Tiki situ Byah rgyan of the Phag-gru dynasty was born.

Dyan lo-chiva Byafi-chhub rtsemo, also called Blo-brtan

dpon-po, was born.

The monastery of Lha-stefi was founded by Rai-byuA rdorje.

Hkhrul shig Darsefi of the Shi-byed school died. The

Liii-ma Lama Melon rdorje died.

The venerable nun Legs blo rgyan, a disciple of Bssaf

dpal of Sa-skya, was born.

Jonan Phyogs las rnam rgyal, a native of Mnah ris, who was

the pupil of Dol-bu ger rgyan, was born,

1302

1304

1305

S. C. Dés—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po.

Emperor Olchahithu of Hor died.

Kloa Chhenpa, the disciple of Kumara (the Riin-ma Lama),

was born. Another grandson of the emperor Sa-chhen, named

Khulug who was born in the year iron-serpent, became emperor.

The Sage Satis ston Tshul mgon died.

The saint Orgyan pa sefige died.

Tisri kun rgyan, the son of Bssan dpal of Sa-skya, and

Hjam-dvyans don rgyan were born.

Regyal-mtshan Dpal bssaii of Siafis hbah-ra, who became

the disciple of Ssur-phuva, was born, Gsar-ma Grags-Ses, the

twelveth Phag gru hierarch, was born. Hjag-chhen Byams

dpal of the Safspa school was born.

Gitis-mchhod died at Phag-gru. Dpal-bssafi of Stag-lun

died.

@shon nu rgyal-mtshan of Ri-pa, the disciple of Ssur-phuva,

was born. Rfog chhos rdor phyi ma died.

Emperor Khulug died. Blama Dampa bsod nams rgyal

mtshan, the son of Bssai dpal of Sa-skya, was born. Sais rgyas

jovo of Bya-yul died.

In Hor, Pauyanthu (born in the year wood-bird), the

youngest brother of the emperor Khulug, ascended the throne.

Yesées Lama of Stag-luf died in India.

Sans-rgyas Rin-chen died at Hbrug Ralui. Jona Kun

spafi died. The metaphysical theory of “Lun thig” was in-

culeated by Tshul rdor, an incarnate Riii-ma Lama,

The sage Hjam dpal yeses was born. Hjam dyans Kun

dgah seige of middle Hbrug was born.

After the death of Rdorje Rinchhen, Rdorje rgyal-po be-

came abbot of Hbrigoi and built the grand shrine of Hbrigof.

Sesrab Sefige of Roi died.

Kun-dgah bssafi-po of Siie-mdo died.

Dkon-mehhog dpal of Shai died.

The (astrological and astronomical) work, called Rtsi Kun

bsdus, was composed by Rati-byun-pa.

Sgampo Sats-rggas Chhos Sei was born. The sage

Gshon-nu Grub, the disciple of Safs-rggas ston of Saiis, died.

Riog Rin-bssaii died.

Orgyan mgon-po of Stag-lui erected a large shrine and

furnished it with images and religious books, Emperor Pau-

yan-thu died.

Gegen khan, the son of Pau-yanthu, who was born in the

year water-hare, ascended the throne,

1309

1310

1311

1312

1313

1314

1315

1316

1317

1318

1319

1320

~“e

1889. ] and his Chronology of Tibet.

Blo gros Rnam dag was born in Bya-yul. Bu-ston wrote

the historical work called Chhos Ahyui rin mdsod. Bssafi dpal

of Sa-skya died. Emperor Gegen Khan died in Hor.

Ye-sun-the-mur, the great-grandson of Sa-chhen (Khublai),

who was born in the year water-serpent, became emperor.

Rdorgyan of Ron died. Saris-rgyas-ston of Bya-Yul died.

Sei-rgyal died at Hbrug Ralun.

Nam mkhah rgyal-mtshhn of Lho-brag, who was Tsof-

khapa’s tutor, was born.

Mthah-yas (Ananta), the fifteenth Kulika, ascended the

throne of Sambhala. Kun-blo of Sa-skya died. Yon-rgyam,

the Jonan Lama, died.

Emperor Ye-sun-the-mur died.

The two sons of the emperor Khulug, namely Rinchhen

Hphags (born in the year tvon-mouse) and Kaus’ali (born in the

year water-tiger), successively became’emperors, and each died

after a few months’ reign, Pau-yanthu’s son Chi-yé-thu (born

in the year wood-dragon) became emperor.

The abbot Yeses bsod nam rgya-mtsho was born.

Don-grub dpal, the son of Senge-hbum, the spiritual son of

Riiog Chhos rdor, was born.

Ran-hbyun Rdorje visited Hor.

Ta-dven blo-rgyan and Ta-dven Chhos reyan, the sons of

Tisri Kun-rgyan of Saskya, were born. Hmperor Chi-ya-thu

died, Ratna Sri, the son of Kausali, born in the year fire-tiger,

became emperor. After one month’s reign he died.

Nam-mkhah dpal of Stag-lui was born. The monastery of

Gnas nai was founded by Mtshur. Tho-gwan themur the son

of Chi-ya-thu, born in the year earth-horse, became emperor.

Rgyan hbum of S/afs jag was born.

Hpbri gon Chhos rgyal, who became Tsonkhapa’s tutor, was

born. Se-spyil-pa Rinehhen Sef was born.

Sgampo Chhos rgyan died.

Se-spyil Lha of Ssur-khan died.

Sans-rgyas Sgom Phyi-ma died in Bya-yul.

Ratna Guru of Stag-luni died. Karma Ran byun rdorje

died in Hor.

The fourth Karma hierarch Rolpahi rdorje Dharma Kirti

was born in Kon-po.

Bsod nam bssan of Smyui-gnas was born.

Bsod nams rgyal-mtshan (Kun-span chhenpo) was born.

Se-spyil-pa Sakya bsod was born.

1328

1329

60 S. 0. Dis— Life of Sum-pa Khan-po.

On the death of Nam legs-pa, Blama Dampa became the

Saskya hierarch. Gshon-smon of Drag-po died. Kumara, the

Riif-ma Lama, died. Dpal-blo-brtan died.

Mun-Me brag Kha-va, the J ‘onan abbot, died.

According to the chronology of Rgya-Ston the Sutranta

vydkarana was introduced.

Sakya bssai the Lo-chava of Stag-Iuf died.

Blo gros Seige of the middle Hbrug-Raluh school was born.

Lho-rin-pochhe Grags you of the Bkahrgyud school was

born. Kun Sef died at Hbrug-Ralun.

Rje-btsun raf hdah-pa Gshon was born. Thee-chhen chhos

rgyal kun bkra, the son of Chhos rgyan of Sa-skya, was born.

Tahki Situ Byafi-chhub Rgyan became the ruler of the entire

Dvyus (or central Tibet). Shva-dmar Grags sen died. The

Shi-byed-pa abbot Rinchhen Chhos rgyal died.

Rin rgyan Dus hkor-va, the pupil of Hj’am-dvyais Chhos

mgon Dolbus, was born. Gyag-phrug Sans was born.

Mkha-spyod dvaf-po Ye-dpal, the second red-cap hier-

arch, an incarnation of Grags-sen, was born. Sans rgyas rin-

rayan, the disciple of Hjam-dvyais bssam grub the Miin-ma

abbot, was born. Se-spyil-pa Lha blo hod died.

Chhos kbyufi rin-chhen, the disciple of Hjag-chhen Byams-

dpal, was born, The town of Rtse-thafi (also called Mtsis-than)

was founded by Tahi Situ. Rdor-rgyal died at Ibri-gon.

Bsod nams lhun-grub of Se-spyil was born. The sage

Jiidna-prajiia died.

Karma Rol pahi rdorje entered monkhood. A great earth-

quake took place in Tibet.

Sar-rin-pochhe (of the Bkah rgyud school) of Khams was

born.

Byan-pa Tahi dven, with the permission of Ser-rgyan, re-

paired the monastry of Nam rin. Tahi Situ brought the whole

of Gtsan under his power.

Blogros Sei ge of Rgyal-lha khai and others commenced

the Mnon-pa (Abhidharma.)

Hjam dpal rgya-mtsho, the adept, was born. Chhos bshi

gsarma Grags byan of Phag-gru, who became T'sonkhapa’s

spiritual guide, was born.

Tsof-khapa was born at Tsof-kha. His disciple Sakya

bsod was born. Spyan sha-va Bsod nams Grags was born.

Grub-pa Sesrab of Snar-thafi was born. Karma Rol-pahi

rdorje received the final vows of monkhood,

1341

1342

1343

1344,

1345

1346

1348

1355

1889, ] and his Chronology of Tibet.

Tahi Sri Kun-rgyan of Sa-skya died.

Bsodnam Grags of Phag-gru was born. Bkra-sis dpal

br tsegs of Stag-lui was born. Gyag-sde pan chhen founded

the monastery of E-bam. Rhog chhos rgyan died.

Blo-gros bssafi-po of Gtsan, the pupil of Hbahri, was born.

Byan dpal, the son of Itiog don-dpal, was born, Chhos bshi

iin ma died at Phag-gru.

Ratnakara, the abbot of Stag lui, died,

Jona Lo-chiva Ser-reyan died.

Rimi hbab-pa was born. Rje Tsoikhapa received abhigeka

from Don-rin-pochhe.

Rgod phrug ras-pa Grags hbyun of the Bkah brgyud school,

a native of Ninu, was born. Tije-blama (Tsonikhapa) became a

(Sramanera) neophite monk under Don rinpa. Tshul mgon of

Bya-yul died. Riiitma Klof-chhen died.

Darma Rinchhen (Khri-chhen~ rgyal-tshab) was born.

Yeses rinchhen of middle Hbrug was born. Bu-ston Thams

chas mkhyen-pa retired to the mansion of purity (died).

Gser-glif-pa bkra-dpal of Sans died.

Byan-Sems kun bssaf, a pupil of Rje (Tsof-khapa), was

born. Orgyan mgon-po of Stag lufi died. Bsam-gtan dpal of

the Bkah-rgyud school died.

Ston Sakya rgyan of Khams rgyal-mo roi was born. The

monastery of Ron-Byams chhen was founded by Sems-dpah

gshon rgyal.

The Mongol emperor Tho kwan themur, having lost the

throne, fled to Mongolia which he ruled over, Huf-Wnu, the

founder of the Tamifi dynasty, became emperor of China. Gyuh

slon, the predecessor of Mkhas grub, died.

' The great Tai Min invited the sage (sthavira) Chhu-

hgram-pa to China.

Reyal sras thog med was born.

The twelveth Gsarma died.

Sgom-po chhos dvaii phyug was born. Ser-sen of middle

Hbrug was born.

Rje-blama (Tson-khapa) proceeded to Dyns and Gtsai

(Tibet proper).

Hor stonnam mkhah dpal, the abbot of the Byan-rtse

division of Deahldan, was born,

Ltje-blama (Tsoh-khapa) visited Hbri-gon and Bde-va chan.

The Vinaya teacher Grags-pa rgyal-mtshan was born,

Sha-lu Legs rgyan (Khri-chhen) was born. Bo-don chhos

1358

1363

1364

1365

1366

1367

1568

1369

62 S. C. Das—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po

rgyan Phyogs las mnam rgyal was born. Blo grags died at

Snar-thai. Blama Dampa bsod rgyan was born.

Rje-blama collected the first series of his religious dis-

courses. jam bsam rdorje, the Riii-ma Lama, died.

Grags don-pa of Snarthai was born.

The monastery of Stag-rtse mam rgyal sgaii was founded

by Mkhah spyod dvai-po (a red-cap Lama). Gyag-sde Pan-

chhen died.

Hjam-dvyais chhos rje bkrasis dpal Idan was born.

Stag lui Nam dpal died.

Spyan sia bsod bssah of Phag-gru was born. Mkhan-po

Yeéges bsod rgyam died. Dvah Lo-chava Byaii-rtse died.

Dpal Idan Don grub, also called Stag-phru-gu Sri, a disciple

of Rje (Tsoi-khapa), was born. Chog-ro Nor-pa Kun-bssati

of Sa-skya was born. Kun-rgyan of Sa-skya rdsoni was born.

Byams chhen-chos rje of Sera was born. Spyan sna dpal

dgsai of Phag-gru was born. Guf Ru rgyan dssati of Sera was

born.

Karma Rol rdorje died.

The Indian Pandit Pan-chhen Nags Rin was born, De-

bshin gs’egs-pa, the fifth Karma hierarch, was born. Sakya

rgyal-po, the Riiima Lama, who was the abbot of Yai rtse-ra,

was born.

The red congregation hall of Stag lun was erected by Dpal

rtsegs.

Dge legs dpal bssafi (Khri-chhen mkhas grub-thams chad

mkhyenpa) was born. (He was the first of the line of Pan-

chhen Rinpo-chhes of Tasi-lhunpo). Thant-ston rgyal-po, the

physician, was born.

Ku-jo rtogs Idan was born. Karma Smras sei rtog /dan

was born. Bsod rgyan, the twenty-second Phag-gru hierarch,

was born.

The shrine of Mamo in Dgah /dan was founded by Mkhah

spyod-pa. The Bshipa gsar-ma of Phag-gru died. Jonati Phyogs

legs rnam rgyal died.

CYCLE VII.

The monastery of Se-pyil was governed by the earlier

Sakya Usod nams.

Mus-chhen kun mehhog rgyan, the disciple of Dorpa Kun

bssai, was born.

Khri Blogros chhos skyon was born.

1375

1376

1377

1378

1379

1381

1382

1383

1384 .

1387

1889, ] and his Chronology of Tibet.

Mihan chhen Hjam-ye died. Blo sei died at Hbrug Ra-

lui. Ripa gshon-nu rgyal mtshan died.

Dge-hdun grub, the first of the line of the (Rgyal-va

Rinpo-chhe) Talai Lamas, was born. Bsod nam rgyal-mtshan

of Se-spyil-bu was born.

Hjag-chhen Byams dpal of Sai died. Sani Hbah-ra, the

pupil of Ssur-phu and disciple of Spyan-siia Rin Idan, died.

Byaii-sems blo rgyan, the disciple of Rje dlama (Tsoi-

Kkhapa), was born. /[gos Lo-chava (yid dssati rtse gshon-nu

dpal), the Karma-Rnii abbot, was born. je dlama, after be-

ing miraculously visited by I[jam-dvyans, proceeded to Bya-

bral in Holkha. S‘er sen died at Hbrug Ralui.

Rdsifi-phyi was repaired by Aje-blama Tson-khapa chenpo.

He was miraculously visited by Hjigs-byed at Itgya sog phu.

Fshon-nu yeses died in Bya-yul.

Byafi-sems ger dssai of Smad was born. je blama

(Tsof-khapa) met Lho-brag-pa.

Rje blama founded the educational college of Gaal.

Rin-sen of Se-spyil-bu died.

Nam-mkhah dpal of middle of Hbrug was born,

Bsod nams mchhog grub of Snarthah, who became Mkha-

egrub’s disciple, and Mkhan-chhen grub ger’s nephew were born.

The second Mii emperor Huf-wu tsha ascended the

throne of China.

Grags-pa dpal Idan of Spas and Hdul-Adsin Blo-gras, the

disciple of Dge-hdun grub, were born.

Bssod-pa dpal grub of Snarthafi was born. Bsod nams

mam rgyal of Byams glii, who taught asceticism to Rje blama

Tsof-khapa, was born. Lama kun died at the monastery of

Snarthai. Nam-mkhah rgyal mtshan of Lho-brag died.

Baso chhos kyi rgyal mtshan, the younger brother of Mihas

grub rje, was born, Khri Blo gros brtan-pa was born. Spyan

sha blo-gros rgyal mtshan was born. Dpal Idan dssafi-po of Hdul

nag was born. Sans rgyas chhos kyi sef-ge of Sgampo died.

Byaf-chhub rgya-mtsho of Stag-lufi, the red-cap Lama,

was born. Ratna glifi pa of the Riifi-ma school was born.

Yunglo became emperor of China.

Chhos dvafi grags-pa of Shai Shi was born.

Ser-abs Rin chhen, called Stag Lo-chava, was born. Mkhas

grub rje took the final vows of monkhood. Dge-hdun grub

entered monkhood. Mkhah Spyod dvai-po, the Shya-mar (red-

cap) Lama, died.

1389

1390

1391

1392

1394

1395

1396

1397

1398

1399

1400

1401

1402

1403

1404

64 8. C, Das—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po

Chhos dpal yes’es, the third Shva dmar Lama and incarna-

tion of Mkhah dvanh, was born.

Mkhas grub Thams chad mkhyan-pa became a disciple of

Rje Tsonkhapa. The fifth Karma-pa Lama proceeded to China.

Spyan sha dpal bssah of Phag-gru died.

Bkra-sis dpal hod of Stag-luni was born. Emperor Tai

Ming (Yunglo) invited Byams chen chhos rje, abbot of Sera, to

China. Grags dsod nams died at Phag-gru. Chhos hbyuf

Rinchhen, the saint, died.

Dpal bssati of Se-spyil-bu was born. ‘T'sofkhapa founded

the grand prayer meeting of Lhasa, called Monlam chhenpo, and

founded the great monastery of Rivo Dgah Idan rnampar reyal

vahi glint. Kunsranh bsod rgyan died.

Panchhen dssanpo bkra sis of Bkra gis lhun-po was born.

Sakya Sri of Tsafi was born. Dge-hdun grub took the final

vows of monkhood. Sakya bsod nams of Se-spyil-bu died.

Sans rgyas hphe/, the Rab hbyams-pa (doctor of divinity)

of Byams chhen, was born.

Rje-btsun Ren hdah-va died at Shit shun,

Ye-ses rinchhen died at Hbrug-Ralun.

Khri Smon Dpal legs blo was born. Gyag phrug safs dpal

of Sa-skya died. Lho Rin-po chhe grags yon died.

Khri Yes’es bssanpo was born. Karma De-dshin géegs-

pa died.

Mthof-va don-/dan, the sixth Karma hierarch, was born.

Hjam dyyans Chhos rje dpal founded the great monastery of

Hbras spui. Da-pun Psod bssan of Phag-gru died.

Dge hdun bssanpo of Gtsai gi khyui-po bya-bral, the

pupil of Baso, was born. The twenty-second hierarch of Phag-

gru succeeded his predecessor. The historical work, called

Chhos hbyuh bstan-pa Gsal byed, was written by Don grub

dpal of Kamkam. nin-ma Rin glii recovered some concealed

religious works from underneath the rock of Khyuf tshaf brag.

Nag dvai grags of Stag-lufi was born.

Kun dgah don-kgrub, who founded Reyud stod, was born.

The monastery of Sera theg chhen gli was founded by

Sakya yeses. Dharma Rinchhen became Tsofkhapa’s succes-

sor on the grand hierarchical throne of Dgah Idan. Rije

Tsonkhapa returned to the presence of Maitreya Bodhisattva.

Ser rgyan of Snarthan was born. The monastery of

Gsan shags mkhar was founded,

Rje-nor bssah rgya-mtsho was born. Rgyan-Bde founded

the monasteries of Gnas thai and Ssun-man of Me-rtog /dan,

[No. 2,

1405

1406

1407

1408

1409

1410

1411

1412

1413

1414

1415

1416

1417

1418

1420

1421

1889 ] and his Chronology of Tibet.

Gtsan blo-gros, the pupil of Dpah ra, died. Grub Serabs

of Snarthan died.

Chhos dvai-phyug of Sgampo died.

Grags ger (the second) of Snarthai was born.

Lo-chiva Bsod nams rgyam was born. He wrote thirteen

volumes. Dkra sis dpal rtsegs died at Stag Inf.

Mkhan-chhen Dus Hkhor-va Rin rgyan was born. Karma

Mtshur-phu-pa composed Byed rtsis and Sa-byar Sgrub rtsis

and Gssah gnas drug,

Hufshi, the fourth Ming emperor, ascended the throne of

China. Nam dpal of Hbrug Raluf died.

Panchhen nags kyi Rinchhen first visited Tibet. Bsson-te

became the fifth Ming emperor of China.

Dpal-hbyor Ihun grub of Sera (a native of Gfial-ston) was

born. The sixteenth Kulika, named Bhtipala, ascended the

throne of Sambhala. Dpal Idan blo-gros of Sera was born.

Sar Rinpochhe died,

Sakya mchhog Idan was born. gyal dvafi chhos rje dpal

of middle Hbrug wag born. Rtogs Idan Hjam dpal rgya-mtsho

died.

Blo bssaii grags-pa of Hdar-ston was born,

Hjam dyyats Dgah blo (Legs-pa chhos hbyor) was born.

Ser dssan of Byafi-rtse was born. Mchhog lha of Rya stod

was born. Goram ésod sei was born. Rtogs Jdanpa’s incarna-

tion, Rgya sras ges rab hphel, was born. Bssai dor kun-

bssah of Saskya founded the monastery of H-bam. Se-spyil

bsod lhun died.

Bkyra sis dpal hod-pa became abbot of Staglui. Bsod rgyan

of Se-spyil-bu died.

Mkhas grub rje became the grand hierarch of Dgah Idan.

Saiis rgyas rinchhen rgyal mtshan, the Ritii-ma Lama of Ye-rtse,

died.

Kun-dgah rnam rgyal of Thon-mi, the disciple of Panchhen

Byams glif, was born, Hbum phrag gsum-pa of Saskya and

Kun-dgah chhos dssan were born.

Panchhen Ye-rtse of Bkrasis lhunpo was born. Se-spyil-

pa Sian grags was born. The monastery of Reyud smad was

founded by Rje-sei. Bsod dssai of Smyuh Gnas died,

Mkhas grub rje wrote a commentary of the Kalachakra

system. dul hdsin grags rgyan died.

The monastery of Nalendra was founded by Ron-ston.

The possession of Gtsan passed to Rin-spui from the

hands of Phag-gru,

14.23

1424

1430

1431

1432

1438

1434

66 8. C. Das—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po

The monastery of Stag mo glii was founded by Muschhen

Dkon mchhog rgyan. The sixth Ming emperor Ting-thtn

ascended the throne. Kun rgyan of Saskya Jong died.

The monastery of Byams-pa glii in Chhab mdo in Khams

was founded by Smad S’es rab bssan, the disciple of Tson-

khapa.

The monastery of Mdo Siags glii was founded by Byan

Sems kun dgah. Mkhasgrub Chhos sje died.

Blo bssat Nima, the Dyon-po (disciple) of Tsofi-khapa,

was born, The first Hphag-pa-lha of Khams was born, je

Nag dvafi of Phag-gru was born. The great chhorten of Dpal

hkhor chhos-sde of Gyat-tse was built.

Chhos skyon bssaf-po (Shvalu Lo-chava) was born.

Byant Sems S’akya bsod nams of Rya-sgren died.

Yon tan rgya-mtsho of Thon-pa was born.

Bdag-chen Blo Rgyan of Saskya was born. Byai sems

kun dgah bssai died.

Don yod dpal Idan of Sera was born.

S’esrab senge of Snarthaf, who founded the Igyud grva

tshaf of Gtsaf and Dyus, died. Gu-jo rtogs Idan died.

Kun dgah bde legs rgyan bssaf of Gnas riiii, who became

Baso’s disciple, was born. Lhariba of Rgyud stod was born.

Lha dvai dpal hbyor was born. hog byan dpal died.

CYCLE VIII.

Rinchhen Chhos rgyen (Chhog Lo-chava) was born. The

monastery of Bkra-sis Lhun-po in Gtsan was founded. Nam

mkhah dpal (Hor-ston, the Lama of the Mongols) died.

Byan Chhub rgya-mtsho (of the red-cap school) of Stag

luf died.

Chhos rgyal bstanpa (Rab hbyams-pa or doctor of divi-

nity) of Dyagspo, who was S‘ans rgyas hphel’s disciple, was

born. Kun hssaii Chhos filam of Rdo-rai was born. The

monastery of Skyid tshul of Hbras-yul in Sa-skya was founded

by Sans hphel, the Rab hbyams-pa. Hjam dvyahs chhos rje

died. ;

Rofiston died.

Khri Sis dar legs blo was born. The seventh Ming emperor

Tsing-the ascended the throne. Legs rgyan of Shvalu died.

Guaru rgyen bssai died. Bodofi phyogs las nam rgyal died.

Grags rgyan Sgam Smyon of Sgampo died.

Bsod nams mChhog grub of Snarthah died, Shva dmar

Chhos dpal yeges died.

1435

1436

1437

1438

1439

1441

1442

1443

14.44,

1445

1446

14.47

1448

1449

1450

1451

—{

1889. ] and his Ohronology of Tibet.

Khri-pa Chhos dses was born. Khri-pa Rin hod was born.

Chho Grags Yeges, the fourth Shva-dmar Lama, was born.

Patchhen Nags rin visited Tibet. Karma Mthof-va Don /dan

died. Rimi hbab-pa died.

Sgampo bsod rgyan was born. The seventh Karma hier-

arch Chhos Grags rgya-mtsho was born.

Phyogs las mam rgyal and Chhos dvafi Lhun-grub were

born.

Kun-Jssafi of Nor was born,

Grub Chhos rdorje was born.

Bkra-sis dpal, the Tantrik saint of the Karma school, was

born. The eighth Ming emperor T’hen-srun ascended the

throne of China. Byan sems ger bssah of Smad died.

Chhos /dan blo gros of Rgyud stod was born. Panchhen

Nag dyan grags-pa was born at Sfiun.

The second Sakya dsod nams of Se-spyil was born. Bkra

sis dpal of Stag lun died.

' The second Bkra dpal of Stag lufi was born. Sfian grags

of Se-spyil died.

Baso Chhos rgyan became the grand hierarch of Dgah-

Idan. Khri Blo gros Chhos skyon died.

The monastery of Gonikar Rdorje Gdan was founded by

Thon-me kun dgah.

The monastery of Skyo mdah dgonpa was founded by Hero

mgon Blo gros bssaipo of Skyo mdah in the eighth year of his

age. The nineth Ming emperor Hwa ascended the throne of

China.

Blogros rgyal-mtshan founded the monastery of Ni-stia.

Stag Phrugu Sri died. Lo-chhufi Dkah dshi-va died.

Grags don of Snarthaf died.

Panchhen Nags rin died at Palpo in Nepal.

Btsun-pa Chhos rgyan of Sera was born. Rnam reyal

Grags-pa of Stag-lufi was born. The monastery of ('ser-mdog

chan was founded by Sakya mchhog. Mus-chhen Dkon reyan

died.

ftje drut Chhos dvan Grags of Shafshun died,

Bssafi dpal died at Snarthaf. Blo rgyan (Sems-Dpah

chhen-po) of Bdemo thai died.

Smon lam blo gros, the first embodiment of Sems dpah of

Bdemo than, was born.

Bsod nams dpal bssah of Staglui was born, The monastery

of Grva Byams glin was founded by Thumi Lhan dbkras. Spyan

Sna blo rgya-mtsho died.

1468

68 8. ©. Das—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po

Khri Chhos Skyon rgya-mtsho was born. Lha Chhos dssan

of Se-spyil was born, Blo brtan became the grand hierarch of

Degah Idan. The monastery of Thub-dstan rnam-rgyal was

founded by Karam-pa. Bago Chhos rgyan died, Hdul nag-pa

of Snar than died.

Dge hdun grub died, and Panchhen Bssaii-po' bkra Sis

became abbot of Bkra gis Ihunpo. Riifi-ma S’akya rgyal died.

Dege hdun reya-mtsho, the second embodiment of the Rgyal-

va Rin-po-chhe, was born.

Blo gros Grags dpal (Hdul hdsin) died. Byams pa Gilin-

pa died.

Ssla-va rgyal mtshan of Stof skor, an incarnation of Hdul

hdsin grags reyan, was born, Kun dpal of Hbrug-pa school died.

Kun dgah legs blo of Sgom-rum was born.

Khri-pa Panchhen ésod Grags, an incarnation of Bu-ston, was

born. Bssafi Jbkra having died, Lui rig rgya-mtsho became

abbot of Bkragis Ihunpo. Ko-ram bsod Seige founded the

monastery of Thub-bstan rnam rgyal glin. Khri Blo dbrtan

died.

Ssur-manh Bya dtafi-pa was born. At the sixty-first anniver-

sary of Tsonkhapa, a religious controversy took place at [tse-

sar.

The Rtse gar controversy having terminated, Smon lam

dpal became the grand hierarch of Dgah Idan.

The Lama Shva dmar led the Tsai army to Dyus. Hgos

Lo-chava Gshon-dpal died at Yid rtse.

Nag-dvafi Hjigs med Grags of Rin spufi was born, Lo-

chaya bsod rgyam was born.

In the sacred chronology of Nor éssafii rgya-mtsho the

712th year of the second age expired.

Byams Chhen Rab Abyams died.

Talai Lama Dge-hdun rgya-mtsho entered monkhood.

Grags ses rab became abbot of Snarthai. Kungrul of Jigyud

stod died.

Dpal bssai of Se-spyil died. Hphags-pa lha of Khams

died.

Sgam-po bsod lhun died. Hunti, the tenth Ming emperor,

ascended the throne of China. Sgam-po bsod rgyan died.

Lo-chava Rinchhen éssan of Shvalu was born. The mo-

nastery of Nan yod gafis chhos sde of Sa-skya was founded by

Hbum phrag gsum-pa. Gor rampa Bsod Sen of Sa-skya died.

Blo bssah Nima became grand hierarch of Dgah Idan. The

[No. 2,

1472

1473

1474

14:75

14:76

14.77

14.88

1889, | and his Ohronoloyy of Tibet.

monastery of Thub-dstan Yasis-pa-chan was founded by Rab

hbyams-pa Thug-rje dpal of Mus.

Khri Mi fiag rdorje dssafi-po was born. Khri Smon lam

dpal died.

Khri-pa Dvon-po Blo bssafi Nima died.

Khri Chhos grags dssafipo was born. Khri Dge-hdun

bstan-dar was born.

The work, called Bkah gdams Chhos hbyut Gsal seron, was

written by Las Chhen kun dgah rgyal mtshan.

Kun dgah Grol mchhog, the head of the Jonafi school, was

born.

Thonmi Kundgah rnam rgyal died. Kundgah bde legs of

Gnas rhii died. Nag Grags of Stag-lufi died.

Khri rgyan dssafi was born.

Rinchhen’ Spufipa of Gtsan, after taking Snehu rdson, took

possession of Spyid S’ai.—At the grand annual prayer meet-

ing (Monlam Chhenpo) of Lhasa the Lamas of the Gsan-phu

and Karma schools humiliated those of the Sa-skya-pa and

Hbras spui schools. Khri ve dssari died.

Karma Grub thob Bkra dpal of Giian founded the hermit-

age of Orgyan Rikrod.

Hdarston became grand hierarch of Dgah Idan. Panchhen

mehhog Lhapa died.

Khri hag dvafi Chhos Grags was born.

Blo gsal rgya-mtsho of Tshar-chhen was born. Sgom-

smyon died.

Hjam dgah blo died. Kun dgah Chhos éssaf, the abbot of

Skyid tshal, died. Dpak-po Chhos dvaii Chun Grub died.

The second Dpah-po Gitsug-lag phrei-pa, the astrologer and

chronologist, was born, Hbum phrag, Gsum-pa of Sa-skya,

died.

Khri Dge-legs dpal of Hol dgah was born.

The third incarnation of the Panchhen Rin-po chhe, named

Blo bssai don grub, was born.

The sage Phyogs las rnam rgyal was born. Tifi-te, the

eleventh Ming emperor, ascended the throne,

Karma Chhos Grags rgya-mtsho died.

CYCLE IX.

Mi éskyod rdorje, the eighth Karma hierarch, was born.

Satis reyas dpal, the second incarnation of I phags-pa lha Khams,

was born,

14.89

1490

1491

1492

1493

1494.

1495

1496

1497

1498

1499

1500

1501

1502

1503

1504

1505

70 8. C. Das—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po

Ser-bssai died at Byafi rtse. Sakya mchhog of Sa-skya

died.

The second Bkra dpal of Stag-lui died.

Dge-hdun rgya-mtsho founded the monastery of Chhos

hkhor-rgyal in the plain of Rgyal Metog than,

Chos Idan blo gros of Reyud stod died. Khri Hdar Ston

blo dssan grags-pa died.

Blama rinpochhe Dge-hdun rgya-mtsho became the grand

hierarch of Bkra gis Ihunpo.

Panchhen Bkra sis nam reyal of Seampo was born.

Mkhas grub Nor éssaii rgya mtsho was born.

Dpal blo of Sera died.

The Panchhen died at Siug.

Khri Byams-pa rgya-mtsho was born, Bsodnams Dvan

rgyal of Sgampo was born. Lharipa of Rgyud stod died.

The grand Lama Dge-hdun rgya-mtsho became abbot of

Hbras spuiis.

Khri Rin hod-pa wrote a treatise on the chronology of

the Buddhists.

The power of Gtsaf-pa, having waned since the year fire-

mouse, the monasteries of Sera and Hbras spun recovered their

place in the Monlam Chhenpo, the grand prayer assembly

of Lhasa.

Thub dvah bstan hdsin of Sgampo was born. Kun-dgah

dpal of Nai, who was born in the year fire-ow, became abbot of

Chhab-mdo.

Khri Tshe-brtan rgya-mtsho was born. sod dpal of Stag

luni died.

Grub-chhen Chhos rdorje made over the book of miraculous

revelations of Tsoh khapa to the Talai Lama Blo-bssai Don

grub, Thon-pa Yon-rgya-mtsho died. Grub thob of Gian,

having died, was re-born in the same year.

Kya-Jin, the twelveth Ming emperor ascended the throne

of China.

Khri dam Chhos dpal hbar was born.

Hjam dvyans mkhyen brtse dyvan phyug was born.

Rnam rgyal bkra sis of Stag lui was born. Don yod dpal

Idan of Sera died. Chhos kyi Nima of Rdo-rof died. Rab

bbyams-pa of Dvags-po died. Chhos Grags Yeses of the Shva-

dmar school died.

Mkhas grub Sans rgyas Yeses was born. Dkon mchhog

yanlag, the fifth Shva dmar hierarch, was born.

1516

1528

1889.] and his Chronology of Tibet.

Khri Dpal hbyor rgya mtsho was born. Metri Dongrub

rgyal mtshan of Bod mkhar was born.

Bsod nams Chhos hphel of Dgon Gsar was born. Hbrug-

pa Padma dkarpo, the great antagonist of Tsofkhapa, was born.

The sixteenth Kulika (fabulous emperor), named Dpal skyon

(Sri-pala), ascended the throne of Sambhala, The great Shalu

Lo-chava was born.

Bsod Grags-pa became the grand hierarch of Dgah Idan, and

wrote the Buddhist historical work called Bkah gdan Chhos

hbyun.

Khri Sesrab legs dlo died. Rnam rgyal Grags-pa of Stag

lun died.

The foundation of the monastery of Phan dde dgon was

laid by Sans rgyas bkra sis, the father of Hphags-pa lha the

second.

Khri Dge hdun rgyal mtshan was born. Sgom /de mam

reyan of Rgyud stod Sar-va was born.

Rigyal mtshan bssai-po became abbot of Reyud-smad.

Span dkar Rinpochhe was born,

Tharpahi rgyal mtshan, also called Naga grub-chhen, was

born. !

Chhos rgya-mtsho became the grand hierarch of Dgah Idan.

Kun-bkra of Stag lui was born. The work on astrology

and astronomy, called Rtsis gshufi, was composed by Gtsugla

phre-va.

Rje-drufii Lha dyaii Chhos rgyan, the incarnation of Baso

Chhos rgyan, was born. The abbotship of Sera was filled by

Iije btsun-pa. The Hbrigufi authorities dispossessed the Dge

Idan-pa hierarch of eighteen communities, Hod sna &e.

Ador bssai of Mifiag became the grand hierarch of Degah

idan, Khri Chhos skyon 7gya-mtsho died. Karma Hphrin las

pa died.

Khri Sans-rgyas Rinchhen was born. Khri-pa Chhos

bses died. Khri-pa Rin hod died. Bya btaf of Ssur man died.

fnam rgyal Dpal bssafii of Reyud Smad was born. Mkhan

chhen nam rgyam was born. The monastery of Miah ris Grva-

tshan was built on a hill near Rtse-than.

The Talai Lama Dge-hdun rgya-mtsho died.

The third Talai Lama Bsod nams rgya-mtsho was born.

The monastery of Phan bde Glii was founded. Kun legs

of Sgom rum died.

Khri Chhos fier Grags was born. Khri Blo rgyam of Stag

1525

1526

1528

1529

72 8. C. Dais—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po

lui Brag was born. Khri Damchhos dpal was born. Rje

btsun-pa died. The monasteries of Tshal Guithan and Stag

Iu Ilha kha were destroyed by fire.

Rje-drun Ser dvan founded the monastery of Dar rgyas in

Khams. Nag dvafi Chhos Grags became grand hierarch of

Dgah Idan.

Rje bsod nams rgya mtsho entered monkhood.

The monastery of Bshad sgrub gli in Khams was founded

by Baso sprul sku. 2nam rgyal Phun-tsho became abbot of

Stag Ini.

Khri Nag-dvai Chhos Grags died.

Chhos Grags bssai-po became grand hierarch of Dgah

Idan. Sgampo Bsod lhun died.

Mi Gyo Snif-po (Aje-druf tsha-wa-pa), who was born in

the year jire-serpent, was appointed to the abbotship of Chhab-

mdo. Sems dpah Smon lam Blo gros died. Sgam-po bsod

nams Dvaii-rgyal died.

The second incarnation of Sems-Dpah, named Nag dvai

Grags rgyan, was born. Khri Bsod nams Grags-pa died. Khri

Mifiag Rdor bssaf died. Karma Mi bskyos rdorje died.

Khri-pa Grags-pa rgya-mtsho was born.

Khri-pa Grags-pa rgya-mtsho was born. Kun-bkra Lo-

chava filled the abbotship of Stag-lui. His father Sans bkra

died.

The ninth Karma incarnation, named Dvai-phyug-rdorje,

was born. The first incarnation of Bsod nams Grags-pa, named.

Bsod nams ye dvah, was born. Ston skor Ssla rgyan died.

Yontan rgya-mtsho of Stofi-skor was born.

Dge-hdun bstan rgyam, the incarnation of Rje-drui Shags

ram-pa (Dge-Bkrasis), was born.

Dge-legs dpal of Hol dgah became grand hierarch of Dgah

Idan. Dvah phyug rab-drtan of Gnas gsar was born. Bsod

nams rgyamtsho became the abbot of the Sera monastery.

Dkon-mchhog rgya-mtsho of Sre (Hre) rgyud monastery

was born. Bdag Chhen Bsod dvai was born. Khri-pa Chhos

Grags bssaii-po died.

Rje drui Sesrab dvai-po of Rgyan Sod held the abbot-

ship of Chhab-mdo.

Khri-pa Tshul Khrims Chhos Aphel was born.

Thub-dvan bstan hdsin of Sgampo died.

Shva Ju Lochava Rif-bssah died. Inam Bkra of Stag lun

died.

1552

1553

1556

1557

1558

1559

1560

1561

1889.] and his Chronology of Tibet.

The incarnate Lama Sans rgya chhos hésin was born.

Bsod nams rgya-mtsho took the final vows of monkhood. Dge-

Adrun bstan dar became the grand hierarch of Dgah Idan.

Tshe brtan Rdorje pha gus of Gitsah became master of

the province of Gtsai. Panchhen Blo-bssai Don Grub died.

Sesrab Phun-tshogs of Rgyara was born. Gtsug-lag hphrefi-

va died. Kun dgah Grol Chog died. Hphags-pa Sans rgyas

died.

Panchhen #nam tharma Blo-bssan Don Grub died.

CYCLE X,

The third incarnation of-Hphags-pa Lha, named Mthofiva

don /dan bsod nams rnam rgyal dvafi po hi sde, was born. The

eighteenth Ming emperor Hwaf-ti ling Chhing ascended the

throne of China. Khri Dge legs dpal died. Tshar-Chhen 6lo

gsal died.

The third Dpak-vo Karma Stsug lag reya-mtsho was born.

Tshe-rten rgya mtsho became grand hierarch of Dgah Idan.

Khri Dge hdun bstan dar died.

Chhos rgyan of the Gnas ritii monastery became abbot of

Bkra sis lhunpo.

The fourth Panchhen (Tagi Lama) Blo dssafi Chhos kyi

rgyal mtshan was born Ser dvani became abbot of Chhah mdo

for the second time. A dispute between Hbri Gun and Stag

lun took place.

According to his biography Panchhen Blo bssai Chhos

rgyal mtshan was born in this year.

i Sgampo Khri-pa Bkra Sis kun Grags was born. M khanpo

Nag dvan Chhos Grags was born. At Skyid Soa the Phag-oru

dispute took place. Sems dpah sprul sku Grags rgyan died,

Kbri Dkon mchhog Chhos kphel of Glii Smad was born.

The third embodiment of Sems dpal sprul sku Nag dvat Chhos

rgya mtsho was born.

The fourteenth Ming emperor Wan li Sif kya ascended

the throne of China.

Sar-va nam rgyan-pa governed Reyud stod. Talai Lama

Bsod nams rgya-mtsho founded on Potala the monastery of

Rnam rgyal Grva-tshah which afterwards was converted into a

Aiii ma institution.

Gsal kha sprul sku Chhos rgyan, who was an incarnation

of Khri Diag-dvah Chhos Grags, was born. Lama Taérdndtha

Kun Shiii of the Jonaf school was born, Byam-rgyam became

1563

1564

1565

1566

1567

1568

1569

1570

1571

1572

1573

74 8. C. Das—Life of Swm-pa Khan-po [No. 2,

the grand hierarch of Dgah idan. The armies of Rin spun,

after invading Dyus, returned to Gtsan. 1574

Khri Tshe brtan rgya-mtsho died. Talai Lama Bsod nams

rgya-mtsho proceeded to Mongolia. 1576

Bstan hdsin phun tshogs of Mgar dam was born. The

monastery of Sku-kbum (Kumbum) was founded at the birth-

place of Tsof-khapa. Althan Khan received the Talai Lama

| Bsod nams rgya-mtsho, who in the following year founded the

monastery of Theg Chhen Chhos Akhor glif. 1577

Baso Lha dvaf became abbot of Chhab mdo. According to

the directions of the Talai Lama Bsod nams rgya-mtsho, the in-

carnate Lama Bsod nams ye dvafi founded the monastery of

—~t

Thub-chhen Chhos hkhor of Sbom hbor in Lithan. 1579

Talai Lama Bsod nams rgya-mtsho visited Chhab mdo.

Internal disputes raged at Hbrigun. 1580

Sans rgyas yeses gave the vows of monkhood to Panchhen

Rinpochhe. Dpal hbyor rgya-mtsho became the grand hierarch

i of Dgah Idan. Gusri Khan of Hor was born. 1581

Dkon mchhog yan lag the Shva-dmar Lama died. 1582

| The sixth Shya-dmar Lama, named Gar dvan Chhos kyi dvan

| phyug, was born. 3 1583

| The abbot of Stag lui, named Nag dvai rnam reya, became

| abbot in the 15th year of his age. 1584

| Mkhas grub Hphags-pa Sakya lha dvafi was born. 1585

| Sgam-po Bkrasis rnam rgyal died. Bod mkhar Don-grub

died. 1586

| Hjam dvyats rgya-mtsho and Kgyal-va rgya-mtsho of

Stod skor were born. Talai Lama Bsod nams reya-mtsho died. 1587

The fourth Talai Lama Yon-tan rgya-mtsho was born in

Mongolia. The Dgah ldan abbotship was held by Dam-chhos

\ of Dpal hbar, and the Rgyud smad hierarchical chair was filled

by Anam rgyal dpal bssafi. 1588

Blo bssai rgya-mtsho, the physician of Glii Stod in Gsan-

phu, was born, Khri Byams rgya-mtsho died. Mkhas Grub

Sans rgyas Yeses of Dven-sa died. 1589

Dege-hdun bssah rgya-mtsho, the incarnation of Khri Byams,

| was born. Blo bssai Nag dvafi of Sgo-maf was born at Bsam

grub sgan.

The Panchhen Rinpochhe took the final vows of monkhood. 1590

Yeses rgya-mtsho, the first incarnation of Sans rgyas Yeses

of Dven-sa, was born. Sar-va Nam rgyan of Reyud Stod died.

The incarnate Lama Bsod nams ye dyan died. 5

1889.] and his Chronology of Tibet.

The Hbrug-pa Lama Dpag bsam dvafi-po was born,

Bsod nams dge-legs, the second incarnation of Bsod nams

Grags-pa, was born. Hphags-pa mthof-va-don Idan held

the abbotship of Chhab-mdo. Gusri of Hor overrun Mgo dkar.

Blo mChhog rdorje of Sman laf was born. Dpon (Gover-

nor) Bsod nams Chhos hphel, also called Rab brtan, was born.

Da-yan Khan, son of Gugri Khan, was born. Sans reyas

Rinchhen filled the grand hierarchical throne of Deah Idan.

Kun dgah bsod nams the Bdag chhen (hierarch) of Saskya

was born.

Khri Dpal hbyor rgya-mtsho died. Khri Dam chhos dpal

kbar died. The abbot of Sgampo, Bkra gis Kun grags, died,

Kun bkra of Stag lua died.

The Panchhen ascended the throne of Bkra sis-lhunpo.

Mkhan chhen nam reyan died.

Chhos hbyor rgya-mtsho, the incarnation of Khri dpal

rgyam, was born at Thaf-rii. Karma Dyaf phyug rdorje died.

Khri Nam dag rdorje blo bssai don yod was born. Dkon

mchhog yar hphel of the Sre rgyud-pa monastery was born.

Bsod nams mchhog grub of Shvalu was born. Rnam reyal

dpal bssah of Reyud smad died.

Mkhan-po Bsod nams mchhog grub was born. N ag reyan

became grand hierarch of Dgah Idan. The Talai Lama Yontan

rgya-mtsho was brought to Tibet from Hor, and being given the

vows of monkhood by the retired hierarch of Dgah-ldan, pre-

sided over the monasteries of Hbras spuf and Sera.

The tenth Karma hierarch Chhos dyyins rdorje was born.

Chhos dyyins rai Grol, the Riii-ma Lama, was born.

figyal sras Don rgyan-pa founded the Dgon-lua monastery of

Amdo. Sems dpah Nag dvai Grags rgyan died. Yeées rgya-

mtsho, the incarnate Lama of Dven-sa, died. Baso Lha-dvah died.

Hphags-pa mthon-va don Idan died.

Nag dvati phun-tshogs nam rgyal, the incarnation of Sems

dpah, was born.

Blo bssan bstan hdsin reya-mtsho, the sevond incarnation

of Dven-sa, was born, Chhos kyi reyal-po nam Reyal rgya-

mtsho, the fourth incarnate Hphags-pa of Khams, was born.

Baso-fje-drui (Lha-dvai chhos dvan phyug) died. The fort of

Skyi-sod sgar was destroyed by the Karma armies. Chhos

rgyan, the incarnate Sems dpah, died.

Gusri Khan effected a reconciliation between the Oe-loth

and Khalkha Mongols, who were quarrelling on account of a

1592

1593

1594

1595

1596

1598

1599

1600

1601

1602

1603

1604

76 S. C. Das—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po

question of precedence between the grand hierarchs of Dgah

Idan and of Stoi skor shabs drui named #je-bisun dam-pa.

For this service he received the title of Gusri.

The fourth incarnation of Sems dpah Nag dvai phun-

tshogs rnam rgyal was born. The grand hierarchical throne

of Dgah idan was filled by Chhos ier, also called ses gien

grags. Khri Dee-rgyan died.

T4randtha wrote his Reya-gar chhos hbyun “ Rise and

progress of Buddhism in India.”

Span dkar Rinpochhe died.

Dkon-mchhog rgyal mtshan, of the monastery of Sre-rgyud

near Bkragis Ihunpo, was born. Dam chhos reya-mtsho of

Pa-chhe, the teacher of Sumpa, became abbot of Stag-Ini. Nag

dvan mam rgyal of Stag Ini wrote the work, called Chhos-

hbyun (history of Buddhism).

Bkra-sis grags rgyam of Sgampo was born. Don yod

chhos kyi rgya mtsho, the incarnation of Rgyal sras, returned

to Dvus. The armies of Gtsai invaded Dvus and withdrew.

The Grva-tshafi monastery of Amdo was founded by Likya

Ser mchhog.

Hawl-va chhos rje hod rgyam-pa reduced the monastery

of Sku-kbum into a Gtsaf institution. The Karma hierarch

Phun-tshog nam rgyal became the lord temporal and spiritual

of Gtsaf. Khri Sans rin died.

The Panchhen Rinpo-chhe presided over the Monlam

chhenpo (prayer congregation) of Lhasa between this and the

year earth-horse.

Talai Lama Yonton rgya-mtsho took the final vows of

monkhood from the Panchhen Rinpo-chhe.

Blo rgya-mtsho of Stag brag filled the grand hierarch’s

chair of Dgah Idan. Phun-tshogs mnam rgyal of Gro-tshah ka

rif became abbot of Dgon lui Byams gli. The incarnate Lama

Bsod nams dge legs dpal died.

Talai Lama Yonton rgya-mtsho died.

Talai Lama Nag dvaf blo bssah rgya-mtsho was born.

The Panchhen Rinpo-chhe became abbot of Hbrags spun.

Bkra-sis Phun-tshogs, also called Lha-pa chhos rje, held

the abbotship of Dgon lui. Yap Sans rgyas chhos /dsin died.

Khri Byams bkra was born. The incarnate Yap Lama Sans

ye was born. Dam chhos dpal filled the grand hierarch’s chair

at Dgah Idan. The G'tsaf army beseiged Sera and Hbras spuf,

and killed many thousand monks. Khrichhos fier grags died.

Khri Blo-rgya-mtsho died,

1605

1606

1607

1608

1609

1610

1611

1612

1613

1614

1615

1617

1889. ] and his Chronology of Tibet.

The third incarnation of Bsod grags, called Grags rgyan

of Gssims khaii gofi-ma, was born. Chhos hbyor rgya-mtsho,

the incarnate Lama of Thaf-rif, died.

Bsod nams chhos hphel filled the grand hierarch’s chair at

Degah-Idan.

The Mongol and G'tsan armies fought with each other at

Ztkyai thai sean, where many Tibetans fell.

Khri Dam chhos dpal died.

Sumpa slo-dpon-pa chhe-va a second time held the

abbotship of Dgon lun. The fifteenth Ming emperor Then-chhi

ascended the throne of China. The Mongols defeated the

Gtsah armies at Rkyai thai sgai, and thereby restored lost

territories to Dge-grags-pa.

The Mongol #phrin las lhun-grub, also called Smin grol

Nomen khan, was born. Talai Lama Blo bssafi rgya-mtsho

became abbot of Abras spun.

The Panchhen Rinpochhe erected the golden spire of the

shrine of Bchug-chig-shal. Grags rgya-mtsho became the grand

hierarch of Dgah Idan. After his death the hierarchical chair

was nominally filled by Nag dvafi chhos reyan,

Khri-Tshul Khrims chhos-hphel died.

Talai Lama Slo bssah rgya mtsho took the final vows of

monkhood.

Dkon mchhog chhos hphel became the grand hierarch of

Dgah Idan, Panchhen became the abbot of the Byan rtse

college.

CYCLE XI.

The eighteenth Kulika emperor ascended the throne of

Sambhala, Mjam-pa chhos rje (Chhos rgya-mtsho-va) became

abbot of Dgon lun.

This year a little decrease was observed in the solar bright-

ness, and there being an entire eclipse of the moon, the whole

phenomenon was considered as ominous by Dpal Ihun of Pha

bon kha. The sixteenth Ming emperor Khuh-tin ascended the

throne of China. Dkon-mchhog rgya-mtsho of the Sre rgyud

monastery died.

Panchhen chhos rgyan built a gilt dome on the monastery

of Dgah Idan.

Lchait skya Chhos rje grags-pa hod sser became abbot of

Dgon-lun.

The monastery of Rofi-po was founded by Skal Idan rgya-

1618

1622

1623

1625

1626

78 8. C. Das—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po

mtsho, also called Rof-po grub chhen of Amdo. The Shva

dmar Lama Gar-dyah died. Dpah-vo Gtsug lag rgya-mtsho

died.

The seventh Shva-dmar hierarch was born.

Khri Chonas-pa was born. Rgya-ra S’esrab Phun-tshogs

died.

Sumpa Slo-dpon-pa Dam-chhos gyal mtshan became abbot

of Dgon-lun,

The incarnation of Sgampo, called Nor rgyan, died.

Khri Blo gros rgya-mtsho was born. Blo bssah bstanpahi

rgyal mtshan was born.

Sgampo Bkra sis grags reyam died.

Ldan-ma smon lam rab Abyor-pa (Tshul-khrims rgya-

mtsho) became abbot of Dgon-luf. Gusri chhos rgyal entered

Kokonur, and defeating the armies of the Khalkha tribes who

were inimical to the Dgelug-pa school, proceeded towards Dvus,

from which place he returned to Kokonur.

Hkhon-ston dpal lhun died.

Bstan hdsin legs bsad of Kofh-po became hierarch of Dgah

Idan, but he could not long hold the office and was obliged to

resign it. 2je-Dge rin succeeded him. The Talai Lama and

the incarnation of Gssim khan Goma took the special vows of

Smad hdul dge slot from Panchhen thams chad mkhyen-pa.

Nag-dvati bstan Hdsin Hphrin las (Skyid gof shabs druf)

was born. nam rgyal dpal hbyor (Chhos-bssafi sku gofi-ma)

became abbot of Dgon-luf. Gusri chhos rgyal subdued Beri,

the chief of Khams, and annexed his possessions.

S’akya lha dvai wrote the historical work, called Chhos

HAlbyun. King Beri of Khams, being a follower of the Bon

religion, was declared a common enemy of the Buddhist reli-

gion. He was thrown into prison and punished with death.

Mkhan-po Nag dvaf chhos grags died.

Lehafi skya Nag dyai chhos Idan dpal bssaf-po was born.

Hphags shi-va bssafi-po, in the 44th year of his age, became

abbot of Chhab mdo. Gusri khan entered Gtsah and captured

the king of Gtsaii and annexed G'tsai koi to his dominions.

He was proclaimed king of Tibet. The governor Bsod nams

chhos phel became regent,

Bilo-bssan bstan hdsin Hphrin-las of Khalkha was born.

Bstan-pa rgyal-mtshan of Dyags-po became hierarch of

Dgah-/dan.

Hphags-pi chhos rgyal died.

[No. 2,

1629

1630

1631

1632

1634

1635

1636

1637

1638

1639

1640

1641

1642

1889. ] and his Chronology of Tibet.

Rgyal-va rgya-mtsho, the fifth incarnate Hphags-pa of

Khams, was born. Six great nobles of China conspired against

the emperor Khrufi tin, and their leader usurped the imperial

authority for a fortnight, after which the Manchu chief Sun-t/i

Chhi-the tsui took possession of the imperial crown.

The famous palace of Potala was built.

The monastery of Ma-mgur in Amdo was founded by

Lamo sprul sku Blo-gros rgya-mtsho and Hod sser bkra is.

Khri dkon mchhog-chhos kphel died.

Khri Dvags po died.

The spiritual teacher of the author (Sumpa mkhanpo),

named Hjam-dvyais-bshad-pa (Nag-dvai brtson grus), was born,

Dkon-mchhog chhos bssari filled the hierarchical throne of Dgah

Idan. Hor Don grub rgya-mtsho became abbot of Deon-lnh.

The abbot of Sgo-maf, named Bsam grub Sgasi-pa Nag

dvah blo bssaf dvyiii chhos, became abbot of Dgon-lui. He

afterwards accepted the abbotship of Rva-sgrei in Dvus, in

consequence of which Don yod rgyal mtshan of Hor dui

succeeded him in the Dgon lufi abbotship.

Legs rgya-mtsho established a Tantrik school in the

monastery of Sku-kbum. The monastery of Dgah Idan Dam

chhos glii of Btsan-po was founded by the retired abbot of

Degon lui at Sser khog.

The Talai Lama visited China (Peking), and was there de-

corated with the insignia of Tai Sri by the emperor Shun-t/i,

The Sde-srid (viceroy) Sansrgyas rgya-mtsho was born.

Hod Sser Bkra sis held the abbotship of Dgon luf. The Talai

Lama, on his return journey from China, visited the monasteries

of Dgon-lun, &e.

Dpal Idan rgyal mtshan filled the chair of the grand hierarch

at Dgah Idan.

Gusri khan died.

Kmperor Khang-shi (Bde-skyid), known to the Tibetans

as an incarnation of Grags rgyal mtshan, was born. S'akya Lha

Dyan died,

Tharpa Chhos rje (Bkra gis reyal mtshan) became abbot of

Dgon-lun.

The Riii-ma Lama (Ssur-chhos dyyifis Rat-grol) died.

Gusri’s son Ta-yan khan became king of Tibet. Hphrin

las rgya-mtsho became Sde-srid (viceroy).

Don-yod chhos grags of Lu-hukya became abbot of Dgon-

lun.

1643

1644

1645

1646

1647

1649

1650

1651

1652

8. C. Das—Life of Sum-pa Khan-po

Blo-bssan reyal-mtshan filled the throne of Dgah Idan.

The second Manchu emperor Kang-shi (Shifi-tsu) ascended

the throne of China. Panchhen Blo-bssai chhos rgyan died at

Nag-ssla.

The fifth Panchhen Rinpochhe (Blo-bssan yeses dpal bssan),

who was Sumpa mkhanpdés spiritual guide, was born. Sgo-

mah Bsam grub sgai-pa died.

The incarnation of Reyal sres, named Blo bssah bstan hdsin,

arrived at Dgon-lun, The abbotship of Dgon-lui was held by

Dpal Idan rgya-mtsho of Bde rgyu-chha-va. Hor Dkah behu,

being invested with the title of No-men khan, returned to Btsan

dgon from Dvyus and established Hchhad flan. The period of

Tshul khrim (sila) commenced.

Nag dvafi Hphrin las, who was born in the flre-sheep year,

and who had previously filled the abbotship of Chhab-mdo, died

this year. Sprul sku grags rgyan died.

Blo-bssah Don yod filled the hierarch’s chair at Dgah Idan.

Ta-yan khan died. The Sde srid (viceroy) Hphrin las died.

Mchhod dpon sde-ba became Sde-srid (viceroy).

Talai khan Ratna became king of Tibet. Blo-mchhog of

Sman-luf died.

Thu-bkwan chhos-rje (Blo-bssafi rab brtan) became abbot

of Dgon-lufi. Khri Blo-bssah rgyal mtshan died.

Khri-dkon-mchhog chhos bssaii died.

Karma chhos Dyyins rdorje died.

Byams pa Bkra sis filled the hierarch’s chair of Dgah Idan.

Likya Dpon slob Blo-bssah rgyal mtshan became abbot of

Degon-lun, Blo-bssai sbyin-pa became viceroy of Tibet.

Nag dvafi Blo-bssafi rgya-mtsho took the vows of the Stod

hdul Deeslon of Tibet for individual emancipation.

Khri Blo-bssaft of Don yod died.

The layman Sais rgya-mtsho, who was born in Grof-smad,

became viceroy of Tibet.

The abbotship of Dgon-lui was held by Rinpochhe Bstan

pahi rgyal mtshan (chhu-bssafi sprul sku). The monastery of

amo Bde-chhen was founded by Chha-kwan Nomen-khan.

A long tailed comet was seen from Miah ri. Shvalu Bsod

nams died.

Klu-hbum rgya-mtsho became hierarch of Dgah-Idan, A

fearful earthquake took place in Tibet. The Talai Lama died.

Dkon-mchhog yar hphel of Sre-rgyud died. Bstan hdsin

hphrin las of Skyid shod died,

1661

1662

1664

1666

1667

1668

1670

1671

1672

1673

1680

1681

—-

1889. ] and his Chronology of Tibet.

The Talai Lama Tshafs dvyans rgya-mtsho was born.

The astronomical work of Sde-srid, called Baidurya dkarpo, was

compiled.

Khri Byams-pa bkra sis died.

After the return of Blo gros rgya mtsho to China, Tshul

khrims dar rgyas of Chones became hierarch of Deah Idan.

Lama Rinpochhe Pad dkar hdsin-pa Yeses rgya-mtsho was

born. The left branch of the Oeloth Mongols and the Khalkhas,

being on the verge of going to war with each other, Khri Blo-

rgya mbtsho reconciled them to each other.

CYCLE XII.

Khri chhen Blo-bssai rgya mtsho of Lamo of Dgah Idan

proceeded to Peking.

Lchai skya Takau Sri Nag dvafi Blo bssafi became abbot of

Dgon-lun. Bla-ma Dlo-gros rgya-mtsho died at Hbog khog.

Bstan pahi Nima (the Rdorje slo-dpon of Sumpa mkhanpo),

who was an incarnation of Khri Blo-rgyam, was born.

Rdo-pa Rab Byams-pa (Dpal Idan rgya-mtsho) became

abbot of Dgon lui.

Bsam-blo sbyin-pa rgya-mtsho of Bkah hgyur became hier-

arch of Dgah-/dan.

The Bde-rgyu chhuf-va, named Kun-dgah rgya-mtsho,

became abbot of Dgon-lun.

The Sde-srid (viceroy) Sans rgya rgya-mtsho built the

nine storeyed palace of worship (Pho drai-dmarpo) of Potala.

The annual prayer cougregation called Tshogs-mchhod Smon

lam was established by the Sde-srid to commemorate the anniyer-

sary of the accession of the Talai Lama Nag dvaf blo bssaa.

Chone Tshul-dar became hierarch of Dgah-/dan.

Blo-bssai Nag-dvah Hjigs med, an incarnation of Rgyal

sras Rinpochhe, was born.

The Sde-srid (viceroy) Sans rgyas rgya-mtsho wrote the

work, called Boiser shva ser chhos hbyuh, 7. e., history of the

rise of the yelloweap school,

Lama Rinpochhe Ye-rgyam of Mon arrived at Hbras-

spuh. Chhu bssai Rinpochhe became abbot of Btsan Dgon

monastery. Btsan-po Nomen khan died.

Hjam dvyais bshad rdor became abbot of Sgo-maii.

Don-yod rgya-mtsho became hierarch Dgah Idan.

Stag-lufi shabs drut Chhos kyi Nima became abbot of

Dgon-lun.

1682

1683

1684

1685

1697

1698

1699

1700

82 8. C. Dés—Life of Swin-pa Khan-po

Talai Lama Tshafi dvyats rgya-mtsho renounced the vows

of celibacy and monkhood at Bkra sis lhunpo.

The Sde-srid (viceroy) Satis rgyas rgya-mtsho resigned his

office. The Mongol prince Lha-bssai became king of Tibet.

Sumpa mkhanpo was born.

Pad dkar hdsin-pa was identified as the real incar-

nation of the Talai Lama, Lha-bssaf, the son of Raha rgyal-po,

fought with the Sde-srid (viceroy) Satis rgyas rgya-mtsho. The

latter was killed, and with him four hundred Tibetans were slain.

Lha-bssaii declared himself the absolute monarch of Tibet.

The Talai Lama Tshaf-dvyais rgya-mtsho was ordered to China.

He died near lake Khokonur.

Pad dkar hdsin-pa Yeses rgya-mtsho was placed on the

throne of Potala.

The Talai Lama Skal bssaii rgya-mtsho was born.

A great earthquake took place in Tibet.

The new Talai Lama and Hjam-dvyans bshad rdor were in-

vested with the insignia of an imperial order. Hjam dvyans

bshad-pa founded the monastery of Bkra sis hkhyil in Amdo.

At Dgon-lufi the Dampa gstim (three incarnate Lamas) estab-

lished the Reyud Grva (Tantrik school).

Chhu-bssai Rinpo-chhe, a second time, held the abbotship

of Dgon-lui. Sumpa mkhanpo became a monk of Dgon-lun.

Hyjam-dvyans bshad-pa wrote the work called Hjig-byed

chhos hbyuf. Lchati skya Nag dvai chhos /dan died.

Hjam dvyans bshad pa established a Tantrik class at Bkra

sis hkhyil, and wrote a chronology of Buddhist events.

The incarnation of Lchatskya Yeses bstan-pa Seron-me

was born.

The armies of Chufgar, or the left branch of the Mongols,

slew king Lha-bssan.

The Chufgar armies sacked the Riifi monasteries of Rnam

rgyal glin, Rdorje brag, Smin grol glin, &c., and made the

Dge-lugs-pa church predominant all over Tibet.

Under the command of the emperor of China the Talai

Lama Bkal-bssah rgya-mtsho was brought to Tibet from Sku-

hbun by Thu-bkwan Rinpo-chhe chhos rgya-mtsho and placed

on the throne of Potala.

Hhbyin rgan became abbot of Bkra sis hkhyil. Hjam-

dvyans bshad rdor died. The emperor Khang-shi died. The

third of the Manchu line, called Shif-tsu yuf-ting, became

emperor.

[No. 2,

1701

1702

1703

1704

1706

1707

1708

1709

1711

1713

1715

1716

1717

1889. ] and ais Chronology of Tibet.

The Ocloth Mongols of Khokonur fought with the imperial

forces and were defeated. The Chinese killed upwards of seven

hundred monks of all classes, including the abbot of Gser khog

dgon, called Chhu-bssaf rinpochhe, and destroyed many religicus

objects, and burnt down several shrines and congregation halls.

They also demolished three great monasteries of Shva-vo khog

as well as many hermitages. Many aged monks of Sku-hbum

were also killed. Sumpa mkhanpo proceeded to Tibet.

The Chinese, under their generals King and Yo-u the-ii,

destroyed the temples and grand congregation halls of the

Dgon-luh monastery, and burnt thirteen sets of Bkah-heyur, and

killed many monks. The monasteries of the Hju-lag Sem-fi

dgon schools, recluses cells, &c., were destroyed by them. In

the autumn the three hermitages of Dgon-lufiand Shyva-vo khog,

and the monasteries of Hju-lag were rebuilt.

Sumpa mkhanpa was appointed abbot of Seo man.

The nineteenth Kulika Rnam-gnon sei (Vikrama Simha)

became emperor of Sambhala. When the demon like ministers

(Bkah blon) killed the viceroy (Sde-srid) Shaft kha chhenpo

who was a devout advocate of Buddhism, Phola Theje Bsod

nams Stobs rgyas (king Mivah) returned to Dyus from upper

Tibet with troops of Ladag, Miakri, and Gtsan. He slew up-

wards of one thousand troops of Dvus and Kof-po, &e., and

entirely suppressed the enemies of the Government.

When the Dyus people rose in rebellion, Phola Theje, being

reinforced by the Chinese troops, killed the three rebel ministers

and removed the Talai Lama to Hkah-dag. Rgyal sres sprul

sku became abbot of Hbras spufi Blo-gsal glif. Phola Theje

became viceroy of Tibet, and was also invested with the title of

Chun-van.

Dgon lun, Bisan dgon and other monasteries having been

restored to their former condition, the author’s predecessor

Sum-pa chhos rje Phun-tshogs nam rgyal and Rbu-chhos

rje Blo-bssah dpal became abbots of Dgon lui and Btsan-dgon

respectively.

The author (Sumpa mkhanpo) returned to Amdo from

Dvyus in Tibet.

The author founded the monastery of Bshad sgrub glin.

The author accepted the abbotship of Bsam-gtan glin.

Van chhos rje-grags-pa dpal hbyor became abbot of Dgon

lun.

At the command of the emperor of China the Lchafskya

1726

1727

1728

1730

1732

1733

84, V. A. Smith—Inseribed Seal of Kumara Gupta.

i Rinpo-chhe brought back the Talai Lama from Heah dag to

Dyus, and restored peace and prosperity to Tibet and Khams.

i Lchafi skya Rinpo-chhe became famous for his excellent

i exposition of the work called Jitan- hbrel stod-pa. 1734

i} Emperor Yung-ting died and was succeeded by his son

i | Chhin-lung. 1735

The incarnate Tha-kwan of Dgon-lufi, named Blo-bssan

chhos kyi Nima, was born. At the command of the emperor

the author proceeded to China. Nag dyai rnam rgyal, also

| called Khyui tsha shabs druf, became abbot of Dgon-luh. 1736

| A great earthquake took place at the walled city of Nif-

Hi éa mkhar, near the mountain called Gilai-ru, and destroyed the

| city. ae

i] Panchhen Blo-bssafi yeses died. 1738

The sixth incarnate Panchhen Dpal Idan yeses was born.

i Bde-rgyu shabs drufi (Dge-legs rgyal mtshan) held the abbot-

ship of Dgon lui.

i Reyal sras ye grags died. 1739

| Blo-bssah dpal, Idan the incarnation of Rgyal sras, was

i born. 17-40

ii! Regyal tig Rab-hbyams-pa (Blo-bssah don-grub) became

i abbot of Dgon-lun. 1741

i] A very long comet was observed in Tibet. 1742

ii The author (Yeges Dpal hbyor), in the forty-third year of

his age, was called upon to fill the abbotship of the Dgon-lun

monastery. 1745

Inscribed Seal of Kuméra Gupta.—By V. A. Suita, Hsq., C. 8.

(With a Plate.)

The first announcement of the discovery of the seal, which forms

li the subject of this paper, was made by an article entitled “‘ An Archeo-

il logical Find” in the Pioneer newspaper of the 18th May, 1889. The

i article attracted my attention, and I published certain remarks on it in

the issue of the same newspaper for the 28th May, 1889. A few days

later Mr. G. J. Nicholls, C. S., Judge of Cawnpore, entered into corre-

i spondence with me, and informed me that he was the owner of the

i seal. He has very kindly allowed me to examine and describe the

original,

1889. ] V. A. Smith—Inseribed Seal of Kuméra Gupta IT. 85

The seal (see Plate VI) is oval in shape, slightly pointed at each

end, and is 5¢ inches long by 41 wide. The edge varies slightly in thick-

ness, but is generally about 3ths of an inch thick, The surface is pro-

tected by the rim being raised above the face of the plate about =,th of

aninch. The metal is whitish grey, and is thought by Mr. Nicholls to

be base silver. The back of the plate is fitted with two solid buttons,

each more than half an inch in diameter, by which it could be at-

tached to another object. It probably was attached to an inscription

engraved on metal,

The upper section of the face of the seal, being slightly less than

one half of the surface, is oceupied by a quaint figure of the mythical

monster Garuda, executed in tolerably high relief. He is represented

standing on a base composed of two parallel lines, facing front, with

outspread wings. His face is that of a man, broad and full, with thick

lips. His hair is arranged exactly like the wig of an English Judge.

A snake is twined round his neck, its head projecting above his left

shoulder.

A circle, intended doubtless for the discus of Vishnu, who rides on

Garuda, is faintly indicated iu the field to the proper right of the figure,

and a corresponding dim mark on the proper left is probably intended

for the conch shell of the god.

A space an inch in length is left blank at the bottom of the plate.

The interval between this space and the parallel lines on which Garuda

stands is occupied with eight lines of prose inscription. The alphabet

is that used by the Gupta kings both for coin legends and inscriptions

on stone in Northern India. The letters, though minute, are well and

clearly cut in moderately high relief, the vowel marks being fully ex-

pressed. Most of the inscription is easily legible, but it is damaged in

places, especially in the middle of the second and third lines,

The seal was presented to Mr, Nicholls (who accepted it on behalf

of Government) by a member of a very old and respectable Muhammadan

family residing at Bhitari near Sayyidpur in the Ghazipur District,

N. W. P. It was found at some date previous to 1886, when the founda-

tions for a new building were being dug. It is certainly genuine.

The fact that the tablet is a seal is readily proved by comparison of

it with similar objects,

The only other known seal of the Harly or Imperial Gupta Dynasty

is that which is fused on to the spurious copper plate grant from Gayd,

purporting to have been made by Samudragupta. That seal is of copper,

and is described as follows by Mr. Fleet :—‘ On to the proper right side

of the plate, there is fused a seal, oval in shape, about 22" by 32", It

has, in relief on a countersunk surface—at the top, Garuda, represented

86 V. A. Smith—Inseribed Seal of Kuméra Gupta IT. [No. 2,

as a bird, standing to the front, with outstretched wings ; and, below

this, a legend in five lines, which, being also in relief, is so worn that

nothing of it can be read except a few disconnected letters here and

there, and Sam[w]drag[uv]p[tah], very faintly, at the end of line 5,

Tt must have contained a succinct recital of the genealogy, after the

fashion of the Agirgadh seal of S'arvavarman, No. 47 above, page 219,

and the Sonpat seal of Harshavardhana, No. 52 above, page DBE sta tvasncers

The legend on the seal of this grant is in characters which present a

very different appearance to those of the body of the inscription ; as also

does the copper of the seal, as compared with the substance of the plate ;

and the seal is in all probability a genuine one of Samudragupta, detached

from some other plate.’”’*

The copper seal of Harshavardhana, above referred to, is even larger

than the one now under examination, measuring 52” by 6%. It weighs

three pounds six ounces. “ All round it there runs a rim, about 7”

broad ; and inside this thore are, in rather shallow relief on a slightly

countersunk surface,—at the top, a bull, recumbent to the proper right ;

and below this the inscription,’’+ in thirteen lines.

The Garuda device recurs on the seal of the copper plate inscription

of Raja Tivara Deva (circa A, D. 800), found at Rajim in the Central

Provinces. “The top of the seal is circular, about 33%,” in diameter. It

has, in relief on a rather deep countersunk surface, across the centre,

a legend, in two lines; ...... in the upper part a figure of Garuda, facing

full front, depicted with the head of a man, and the body of a bird, with

his wings expanded, with, apparently, human arms hanging down between

the wings and the feet, and with a serpent with expanded hood, standing

up in front of and over each shoulder; on the proper right of this, a

chakra or discus, the emblem of Vishnu; and on the proper left a

Sankha or conch shell; in the lower part, a floral device.”’f

The device on the upper portion of a royal seal was invariably the

emblem used by the dynasty concerned as its special cognizance. The

seal under discussion and the Gayd one of Samudra Gupta settle definitely

that the image of Garuda was the family cognizance of the Karly Guptas,

and so explain the phrase Garwmad-anka in the posthumous inscription of

Samudra Gupta at Allahabad, the bird-headed standard of the Gupta

gold coins, and the reverse device of the copper coins. No doubt can

now be felt that in all these cases the mythological significance of the

bird-like figure is the monster Garuda, the vehicle of Vishnu. The

* Pleet, Corpus Inseriptionum Indicarum, Vol. IIT, p. 255.

+ Fleet, ibid., Vol. III, p. 281.

{ Fleet, ibid., Vol, IIT, p. 292.

1889.] V. A. Smith—Inseribed Seal of Kumara Gupta II. 87

form of the Garuda-headed standard on the gold coins was, Iam con-

fident, borrowed from the Roman eagle, aud the form of the device of the

copper coins may have been imitated from a Greek original, that is to

say, from the owl of Athene, especially as represented on coins of

Pergamon.*

Sometimes Garuda is represented with human arms, as on the

Rajim seal, and sometimes without them, as on the seal of Kuméra-

gupta. The same variation of detail is observable in the case of the

copper coins.}

The inscription on Kumdéragupta’s seals, is, as usual with seal le-

gends, purely genealogical ; and the greater part of the record gives tho

particulars of the Gupta genealogy in the standard form of words em-

ployed in the Bhitari pillar inscription and other Gupta inscriptions.t

In the beginning the seal omits, between the words apratirathasya

and mahidrdja-s'rt-Gupita, a string of epithets given in the pillar inscrip-

tion, but, from the words mahdrdja-s‘ri-Gupta down to the name of

Kumaragupta in the fifth line, the record is identical (except by omit-

ting Kumiara’s title of paramabhdgavato), word for word, with that in-

cised on the Bhitari pillar. The rest of the newly discovered inscrip-

tion does not seem to be quite identical with the wording of any known

record. A son of Kumaragupta is certainly mentioned, and the name

of Kumara’s queen, Anattadevi (P), is stated, but I am doubtful whethor

the name Skanda occurs or not. I can read only partially the 6th and

7th lines. The first four characters of the concluding 8th line are in«

distinct, but the remainder is easily legible, and shows that the seal he-

longs to the reign of Kuméragupta, circa A, D. 414~-452.§

The antiquities at Bhitari, near Sayyidpur at the eastern extremity

of the Ghazipur District in the North-Western Provinces, about half

way between Benares and Ghazipur, have long been known to archmolo-

gists. ‘The site was carefully explored more than fifty years ago by Sir

Alexander Cunningham and his friend Mr. Vincent Tregear. The latter

became the possessor of a valuable collections of coins, many of which are

now in the Bodleian cabinet.

The most notable relic is the monolith pillar bearing an inscription

of the reign of Skandagupta. A translation of this record, made from

Sir A. Cunningham’s copy, was published by Dr. Mill in the Journal of this

Society in 1837. Certain minor corrections in this translation were

* Smith, Coinage of the Rarly Gupta Dynasty in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic

Society, for Jan. 1889, p. 24; see also Fleet, ibid., Vol, III, p. 14, note 8,

¥ Smith, ibid., Plate LV, figures 8—15,

{ Fleet, ibid., Vol. III, p, 53, etc,

§ Smith, ibid., p. 6.

88 A. F. R. Hoernle—Inscribed Seal of Kumdra Gupta I. [No. 2,

subsequently made, but the inscription was never edited properly until

it came into the hands of Mr. Fleet, That scholar has now published

(No. 13 in volume III of the Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum) an accurate

facsimile, transliteration, and translation of the document, which I have

made use of in writing the above notes.

“‘The inscription,” observes Mr. Fleet, ‘is one of the Karly Gupta

king Skanda Gupta. It is not dated. It belongs to the Vaishnava

form of religion; and the object of it is to record the installation of an

image of the god Vishnu, under the name of Sérngin or ‘the wielder of

the bow of horn named Srnga,’ and the allotment, to the idol, of the

village, not mentioned by name, in which the column stands.’”*

The site is marked by large brick mounds, and numerous bricks

inscribed with the name of Sri Kumaragupta were found in the fields

by Sir A. Cunningham, who also describes certain sculptures which

seem to belong to the Gupta period.

The presence of Indo-Sassanian coins of the 8th or 9th century

A. D. is an indication that the site continued to be occupied after the

fall of the Gupta dynasty.

There can be no doubt that it was a place of importance in the

reigns of Kumdragupta and Skandagupta, circa A, D. 414—480.

Remarks on the above. (With a chronological table).—

By Dr. A. F, Rupoty Horrntez.

The seal is a far more important one than would appear from Mr.

Smith’s statement of its contents. The fact is that it is not a seal of

Kumira Gupta I., but of a Kum&ra Gupta II.; and that we have in the

inscription of the seal, for the first time, a genealogy of the Harly Gupta

dynasty that enumerates nine generations, instead of only the seven

hitherto known,

The last three lines of the inscription which Mr. Smith failed to

read really contain the most important portion of the record, and contain

entirely new information. Nor are these lines more doubtful to

read than any of the preceding ones; and most fortunately the names

of the kings occurring in them are very fairly distinct. The following is

a complete transcript of the record, in Nagari and Roman. In the

latter transcript the less legible portions are enclosed in round, and the

illegible portions in straight brackets. It should be remembered, how-

ever, that on account of the stereotyped formulas employed in such

records, the reading even of these portions is perfectly certain.

* See Fleet, ibid., Vol. IIL, p. 53.

+ Archwol. Survey Rep., Vol. I, pp. 96—108, Pls. XXIX, XXX.

-r

1889.]

OND

A. F. R. Hoernle—Inseribed Seal of Kuméra Gupta TT. 89

Nagaré Transeript.*

TAT Nt araTacaEY ALISA AY AISA TS TT

Ute aeI-

usitisitsg@e feaieteae aetat PANS

aes fytisz-

TaaITE Faas FURAN BATT

Wiw-

Fal AVIS PHT NRA ATT VAM Aeat yaga-

HUA ARITI-

SPT HATTA TTT TAA yaya AVIRA AS THT aeT-

uI-

SPT TACUAG HA Heat Naaqearaas wT

crs facie tere fea rer FAA ATal HeTaat TAAe-

MAMA AMATA ASAT S TSN RATT: It

Roman Transcript.+

[Sar] (vva)-réjochchhettuh prithivy4m aprathirathasya Mahd(rd-

ja-Sti-Gupta-prapauttra) sya Mahardja-Sri-Ghatotkacha-

pauttrasya Ma(ha)-

[r4ja]dhiraja-Sri-Chandragupta-puttrasya ( Lichchha) [ vi-dau-

hittra](sya Mahddevyém) [Kumé]ra-pnyydu utpannasya

Maharajadhiraja-

[Sri]-(Sa)mudraguptasya puttras (tat-parigrihito Ma)[hdde-

vydn Da](rra-pevy4)m utpannas syayam ch (’4)pratirathah

paramabhaga-

[vato Mahé |r4jadhirdja-Sri-Chan(dragup) [tas talsya pu[ttras

tat]-(padanuddhydto) Mahddevy4[m] Durvva-pryyéu utpan-

no Ma(har4)-

[jédhi]raja-Sri-Kumérag[u]ptas tasya pu(ttra)s tat-padanud-

dhyéto Mahad(e)vyém Awanra-pevy4m utpanno Ma(ha) [ra]-

[j4] (dhiraja)-Sri-Purag[u]p[ta]s tasya pu(ttra)s tat-pdddnud-

dhyato Mahddevydm S’rfva(vsa)-puvy4m utpann(o) Ma[ha]-

(réjadhiraja-Sri-Na)ras(im)haguptas tasya (pu)ttras (tat-pa-

dinuddhyato Mahddevydm Srfmarf-pn)-

v[y<]m u(tpannah parama-bh4)gavat(o) Mahara (jadhiraja-

Sri-Kumaragu) [ptah].

* From the original seal; see Plate VI.

+ The portions enclosed within straight brackets are entirely rubbed away ;

those within round brackets are more or less damaged, but sufficiently legible, The

upadhmdntya is represented by fh.

90 A. BF. R. Hoernle—Inseribed Seal of Kuméra Gupta II. [No. 2,

Translation.*

(Lines 1 and 2.)—The son of the Mahérajadhiraja, the glorious

Samudra-Gupta, who was the exterminator of all kings; who had no

antagonist (of equal power) in the world; who was the son of the son’s

son of the Maharaja the illustrious Gupta ; who was the son’s son of the

Mahfrdja, the illustrious Ghototkacha ; (and) who was the son of the

Maharajadhirdja, the glorious Chandragupta (1.), (and) the daughter’s

son of Lichchhavi, begotten on the Mahadevi Kumérapevi,

(Line 8.)—(was) the most devout worshipper of the Divine One,

the Mahardjadhiraja, the glorious Chandragupta (I!.), who was accepted.

by him (¢. e, Samudragupta); who was begotten on the Mahadevi

Darrapsyf; and who was himself without an antagonist (of equal

power).

(Line 4.) —His son (was) the Maharajadhiraja, the glorious Kumara-

gupta (I.), who meditated on his feet, (and) who was begotten on the

Mahddevi Duruvapevi.

(Line 5.)—His son (was) the Mahdrajadhirdja, the glorious Pura-

gupta, who meditated on his feet, (and) who was begotten on the

Mahddevi AnanTApnvi.

(Line 6.)—His son (was) the Maharajadhirdja, the glorious Nara-

simhagupta, who meditated on his feet, (and) who was begotten on the

Mahadevi Srivarsapnvi.

(Lines 7 and 8.)—His son (was) the most devout worshipper of the

Divine One, the Mahdrajadhiraja, the glorious Kumaragupta (11.), who

meditated on his feet, (and) who was begotten on the Mahadevi S’ri-

MAT{DEVI.

All the names of the kings are quite legible on the original seal :

quite sufficiently so, to identify them satisfactorily.[ Ofthe names of

the two last queens, Srévatsa and S'r/mati, the two first syllables respec-

tively (Sriva and Sr/ma) are legible; but the terminal ones (tsa and #2)

can only be faintly seen.

Before discussing the information of this record, some of its techni-

* I follow Mr, Fleet’s translation (Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, Vol, III, p.

54) as far as it goes.

+ Or, “who was himself an antagonist (of equal power to all his enemies),

read svayam cha pratirathah ; see below. :

{ The photographic plate unfortunately is not quite as distinct, as one would

wish. The original plate requires to be held in various lights, and to be examined

with a large magnifying glass ; but with these helps there is really not much difficulty

in reading the whole of the record, with the exception of those small and unimportant

portions (in straight brackets) that are entirely rubbed away (apparently during the

process of cleaning the plate.)

if we

1889.] A. F. R. Hoernle—Inseribed Seal of Kuméra Gupta IT. SI

calities may be briefly noted. Firstly, the uniform use of the upadhmdntya,

in 1.1, rdjochchhettuh prithivyém ; 1. 3, apratirathah parama® ; 1. 8, ut-

pannak parama° ; and secondly, of the doubling of ¢ and dh when follow-

ed by r and y respectively, as inl. 1, prapauttrasya and pauttrassya ;

1. 2, puttrasya and dauhittrasya; 1. 3, 4, 5, 6, %, puttras; 1. 4, 5, 6,

7, paddnuddhydto ; thirdly, the assimilation of the visarga to a fol-

lowing s, in 1, 3, utpannas-svayam; fourthly, the reading svayam

ch’dprativathah in 1. 3. The same phrase is read by Mr. Fleet* in the

Bhitari stone inscription (1. 4) svayam apratirathasya. The phrase also

occurs in Kuméragupta I.’s Bilsad stone inscription and in Skanda-

gupta’s Bihar stone inscription* but in the former it is illegible, and

in the latter it is cut away and lost. There are, therefore, only two

records (the seal and the stone of Bhitari) to establish the reading ;

and the exact point is whether the akshara that follows svaya should be

read ma or cha. Now in the Bhitari stone inscription (at least, as

shown in Mr. Fleet’s plate) the akshara is too indistinct to be definitely

identified; while on the Bhitarf seal it is quite distinctly cha. Moreover

the seal has a distinct anuswdéra over the ya of svaya, which anuswdra ig

apparently also present on the Bhitari stone ; and the anuswdéra only

agrees with the reading cha or rather chd. The vowel mark over cha is

hardly distinguishable in the present state of the seal ; and the reading

cha pratiratha would also give sense, but a sense not quite so suitable to

the context (see the translation, above). It is preferable, therefore, to

read svayam ch'dpratirathah.

The record gives the names of nine kings, viz., 1, Gupta, 2, Ghatot-

kacha, 3, Chandragupta I., 4, Samudragupta, 5, Chandragupta IT., 6,

Kumiaragupta L, 7, Puragupta, 8, Narasimhagupta, and 9, Kumara-

gupta II.; and it states distinctly that each of these kings stood in the

relation of son to the preceding one. It further gives the names of six

queens, viz., 1, Kumaradeyvi, the wife of Chandragupta I. and mother of

Samudragupta ; 2, Dattadevi, the wife of Samudragupta and mother of

Chandragupta IT. ; 3, Dhruvadevi, the wife of Chandragupta IT. and

mother of Kumadragupta L.; 4, Anantadevi,.the wife of Kumaragupta I.

and mother of Puragupta ; 5, Srivatsadevi, the wife of Puragupta and

mother of Narasimhagupta ; and 6, Srimatidevi, the wife of Narasimha-

gupta and mother of Kuméragupta IT.

The two longest genealogies of the Harly Guptas, hitherto known,

are those on two stone pillar inscriptions, both of Skandagupta,+ one at

Bhitari, the other at Bihdr. That at Bihar is greatly mutilated and

* Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, Vol. TI, p. 58; also pp. 48, 50.

+ They aro given by Fleet in Corpus Inscriptionwn Indicarum, Vol, II, pp. 47

and 52,

92 A. F. R. Hoernle—Inscribed Seal of Kuméra Gupta II. [WNo. 2,

of subordinate value. They mention only the following seven kings:

1, Gupta, 2, Ghatotkacha, 3, Chandragupta I., 4, Samudragupta, 5,

Chandragupta IL, 6, Kuméragupta, 7, Skandagupta. Here again each

king is expressly stated to have been the son of his predecessor. They

further name the following three queens: 1, Kumaradevi, wife of

Chandragupta I. and mother of Samudragupta ; 2, Dattadevi, wife of

Samudragupta and mother of Chandragupta II.; 3, Dhruvadeyi, wite

of Chandragupta II. and mother of Kuméragupta I.

Tn the main these two records agree with that of the seal; and this

proves that the seal is that of a member of the great Harly (or Imperial)

Gupta family. This is shown also by the use of the imperial title Maha-

rajédhirdja. But there are two important differences. The first is that

the seal calls the seventh member of the line Puragupta, while the other

two records call him Skandagupta. The second is thatthe seal carries the

line down to the ninth generation, to another Kumaragupta, and traces it

through Puragupta, instead of through Skandagupta, This proves two

things: 1, that the Harly Gupta dynasty did not terminate, as it has

been hitherto believed, with Skandagupta, but that it lasted for, at least,

two generations longer (i, ¢., down to about 550 A. D.); and secondly

that there was a second Kumdragupta among the Harly Guptas. The

latter discovery may possibly necessitate a reconsideration of all those

chronological and other speculations which were based on the (hitherto

uncontradicted) belief, that there was but one Kuméragupta in the

dynasty.

The chief difficulty is that with respect to the relation of Puragupta

to Skandagupta, Are they but different names of the same person, or

was one the (younger) brother of the other P

One point may be noted with regard to these two kings. The inserip-

tion on the seal states that Puragupta’s mother, and, therefore, Kumira-

gupta I.’s queen, was named Anantadevi. The two stone inscriptions do

not name Skandagupta’s mother or Kumaragupta’s queen, though they

speak of her. In the Bhitari inscription it is related, how Skanda restored

the imperial power of the Guptas, which appears to have suffered a

serious reverse during his father Kumaragupta’s time; and how he

afterwards visited his mother to report to her his victories; but the

mother is not named. In the Bihar inscription, it is stated that Kumara-

gupta married the sister of some person, whose name, however, as well

as that of his sister are unfortunately lost in the mutilated record. But

from a subsequent equally fragmentary portion of the record (see lL. 13 in

Fleet’s transcript) it would seem that the brother’s name may have been

Anantasena. In that case, his sister would probably have been named

Anantadevi ; and this would agree with the recordon the seal. In that case,

further, Skandagupta and Puragupta would haye had not only the same

“f

——7 ~—):

— ——9) :

1889.] A. F. R. Hoernle—Inscribed Seal of Kuméra Gupta II. 93

father Kumaragupta, but alsothe same mother Anantadeyi. It may be

further noted, that while the seal names Srivatsadevi as the queen of Pu-

ragupta, the queen of Skandagupta is nowhere either named or even

mentioned, So far as his records are concerned, he might not have

been married at all.

The question still remains, are Skandagupta and Puragupta the

same persons, or are they brothers? It seems hardly probable that in

such genealogies the same person would be called by different names,

The probability, as I shall show further on, would seem to be, that

Puragupta is a (younger) brother of Skandagupta, and succeeded the

latter, who died without issue. There would still be a difficulty in the

fact, that Skandagupta is entirely omitted from the list on the seal.

But such omissions are not without precedent in lists which are rather

intended to record the line of descent than the line of succession.* The

term pdddnudhydta, however, no doubt, properly indicates Pu ragiupta as

having been the immediate successor of his father rather than a remoter

successor of him after his brother Skandagupta.

The discovery of this seal solves another mystery. Among the gold

coinage of the Harly Guptas, certain coins haye been found, bearing the

name of Nara (or Naragupta) and the title Baladitya.+ That they

belong to the proper Gupta class of coins, has never been seriously

doubted ; their resemblance to them is too thorough, But the difficulty

was, where to place them; as no member of the Gupta family, called

Nava, was known to have existed. It can hardly be doubtful now, to

whom these Nara-coins belong. They are clearly issues of the Nara-

simhagupta of the new seal.

This, however, suggests a further consequence. Mr. Smith, in his

Coinage of the Darly Gupta Dynasty, has shown (pp. 40) that certain

specimens of the Gupta coinage show an exceptionally heavy weight.

Some of these coins belong to Nara (simhagupta) ; others to a king of

an unknown name who has the title of PrakaSdéditya ; others again to a

certain Kumaragupta. The obverse of the Prakdsdditya coins would

(as usual) give the proper name of the king; but unfortunately in all

the specimens hitherto found the name is lost. It may now be suggested

* A very curious, though not quite analogous, case of a similar omission

occurs in one of the Valabhi grants (No. IX, in Indian Antiquary, Vol. VII, p. 66),

where Guhasena’s father Dharapatta is omitted, and he is placed immediately after

his uncle Dhruvasenal. It is not impossible, that Dharapatta never reigned ; if so,

the record is one of the line of succession rather than of the line of descent.

+ Mr. Smith denies the occurrence of Gupta ; see his Coinage of the Barly Gupta

Dynasty, p. 118. But see fig, 22, on Pl, XVIII of the Ariana Antiqua, The fact, how-

ever, whether the coins do or do not bear the word Gupta, does not affect the argument.

94 A. F. R. Hoernle—Inseribed Seal of Kumdra Gupta IT. [No. 2,

that these coins perhaps belong to Puragupta. The heavy coins of

Kuméragupta, with the special title of Kramdditya, should probably

now be ascribed to Kuméragupta IL, the last of the list on the seal,

and not to the Kumdragupta who is numbered the fourth in the list of

the Later Gupta dynasty of Magadha.*

It is impossible to identify the Kumiaragupta I. of the Bhitari seal

with the Kumdragupta of the Later Guptas, although their periods

probably coincide. For all the other names do not agree. ‘The later

Kuméaragupta was the fourth of his line and was preceded by three

princes, viz., Krishnagupta, Harshagupta, and Jivitagupta L., standing

in the relation of father to son. It would, then, be necessary to assume

that Jivitagupta L, Harshagupta and Krishnagupta were identical

respectively with Narasimhagupta, Puragupta and Kumagupta I., which

is clearly inadmissible. Or supposing Krishnagupta to have immediately

followed Skandagupta of the early dynasty, and even assuming Puragupta

and Narasimhagupta to be identical with Krishnagupta and Harshagupta,

there would Jivitagupta still remain to be accounted for, and the

Kumdragupta II. of the seal would fall one generation earlier than the

KSumaragupta of the later dynasty. Further, the Kumaragupta II. of

the seal bears the well-known imperial titles equally with his pre-

decessors of the early dynasty; while the Kumaragupta of the later

dynasty, as shown in the Aphsad stone inscription,+ lays, equally with

his predecessors, no claim even to the subordinate title of Maharaja.

They designate themselves merely nripa or bhitpati. It was only the

fourth of Kumara’s successors, Adityasena (preceded by Damodaragupta,

Mahasenagupta and Madhayagupta), who was the first to lay again

claim to the imperial title of Maharajadhirdja.t The seal, thus, decides

a hitherto open question and proves that the Later Guptas of Magadha

were not direct descendants of the Harly Guptas. For the first three

members of the Later Gupta line, Krishna, Harsha and Jivita I, must

practically have been contemporaries of the three last members of the

Harly Gupta line, Pura, Narasimha and Kimara IT, And as Narasimha

Balaiditya is also called a king of Magadha (e. g., by Hiuen Tsiang, see

below), it is clear that Krishna and his immediate successors can only

have been small princes or chiefs in Magadha, by the side of their

imperial relatives. Similar remarks apply to the Later Guptas of Hastern

Malava, Budhagupta and Bhanugupta.

There are two other references to Narasimhagupta, under his title of

Baladitya, in two inscriptions of much later times. The first is the

* Seo the list in Fleet’s volume III, of the Corpus Inser. Ind., p. 205.

t+ See thid., pp. 202, 208,

f See ibid., p, 212,

1889.] A. F. R. Hoernle—Inscribed Seal of Kumdra Gupta II. 95

Deo-Baranark inscription of Jivitagupta IT. of the Later Gupta dynasty.

In this inscription Narasimhagupta is referred to as an emperor (par-

mesvara) who ruled long previously. The distance in time between

Jivitagupta II, and Narasimhagupta would be about 200 years. The

second is the Sérndth inscription of a certain king, Prakatdditya of

Benares, of the end of the seventh century A. D. Here Narasimhagupta

is referred to as one of Prakataditya’s early ancestors, and as the ruler of

Madhyadega or the central portion of Northern India. This description

would not be unsuitable to the ancestral portion of the dominions of the

Harly Guptas.

The historic truth of the new seal is also proved by the inscriptions

on the copper-plate grants of the so-called Parivrajaka Maharajas, which

were all issued during “the enjoyment of sovereignty by the Gupta

kings.”’ The seal shows that the line of the Early Guptas was continued

down to Kumiaragupta II, The latter must be placed about A. D.

530-550, and the latest of the Parivrajaka grants is dated in A. D.

528. The earliest is dated in A. D. 475; therefore already in the reign

of Puragupta (see below). They all fall within the period of the great

decadence of the Gupta power ; and this fact may possibly account for

the circumstance, that in those grants the Guptas are simply designated

by the vague term nyipa ‘king.’ At the same time, Mr. Fleet’s observa-

tion,* that “they show that ............ the Gupta dominion still continued,

and the name of the Gupta kings was still recognised as a power, down

to A. D. 528,” is fully borne out by the new seal.

T add to these remarks, for ready reference, a synchronistic Table

of the probable reigns of the Harly Guptas and their contemporaries or

immediate successors. The numbers within angular brackets give the

known dates, derived from inscriptions and other sources. Various

observations suggest themselves by this table.

For an approximate determination of the period of Puragupta and

Narasimhagupta we have the following data, Hinen Tsiang relates, how

Mihirakula was defeated and taken prisoner by king Baldditya of

Magadha.+ This reference,—there can hardly be a doubt—is to Mihiva-

kula’s final overthrow in India; for, on being released by Baladitya,

he is said to have retired to Kashmir. The eredit of this great over-

throw, however, is ascribed to a king Yasodharman in one of the latter’s

Mandasor stone pillar inscriptions.{ In it it is stated that, at some time

previous to the setting up of the pillar, Yasodharman had subdued and

extended his dominion over countries which even the Guptas and Htnas

* See Corpus Inscr. Ind., Vol. II, p. 8.

+ See Beal’s Buddhist Records of the Western World, Vol. I, pp. 168-170.

{ No. 33, in Fleet’s Corp, Inser, Ind., Vol. Ill, p. 142.

96 A, F. R. Hoernle—Inseribed Seal of Kumdra Gt upta II, [No. 2,

had not possessed. This inscription is not dated, but its date cannot

have been very different from that of another Mandasor stone inscription

of Yasodharman,* dated in A, D. 533-534, because they were both en-

graved by the same person Govinda. In this inscription, it is stated

that Yasodharman, who was originally only a tribal chieftain ( jinendra

or narddhipati), succeeded in conquering the countries around him and

thas founding an empire, after which he took the name of Vishnuvar-

dhana and the imperial titles of réjddhirdja and paramesvara. Of these

two inscriptions, the latter would seem to be—if anything—the later

in date. In any case Mihirakula’s overthrow would fall some time pre-

viously to A. D. 533; and it may be set down in A. D. 530, or perhaps

even a little earlier. It follows, that Béladitya, in whose reign Mihira-

kula’s overthrow took place, must have reigned down to about A. D. 530.

The circumstance, that the overthrow is ascribed to both Baladitya

and Yasodharman, would seem to be best explained thus, that Baladitya

was, ab least nominally, the paramount ruler or Emperor (Méhdraja-

dhirdja), and that Yasodharman, at that time a mere ‘tribal chieftain,’

was one of his feudatories or lieutenants, who actually accomplished

the defeat of Mihirakula, but thereupon took advantage of his great

success to found an empire for himself. In fact, it was probably

Yasodharman (rather than the Hiinas) that supplanted Kumiaragupta IT,

some time after 530 A. D., thus finally breaking up the Harly Gupta

empire, and building up his own empire on its ruins.

On the other hand Skandagupta’s earliest recorded date is A, D.

455. From this date down to A. D. 580 there are 75 years ; and for

this interval we have three names Skandagupta, Puragupta and Nara-

simhagupta. The interval can be more easily filled up by two gencra-

tions including three reigns, than by two generations including only two

reigns; t. é@., by assuming that Skandaeupta and Puragupta were bro-

thers, succeeding one another and being themselves succeeded by Nara-

simhagupta. Skandagupta is known to haye been still reigning in A. D,

466 or 468. He may have been succeeded by his (younger) brother

Puraguptac. A. D. 470, and the latter, c. A. D. 485, by his son Narasimha-

gupta, This would give to Narasimhagupta the long reign of about 45

* No, 85, ibid., Vol, III, p. 150,

} In these calculations I follow, in the main, Myr. Fleet’s remarks, in Corp,

Inser. Ind., Vol. III, pp. 10-12 (Indrod.), 146, 152. But I do not agree with his view

about Vishnuvardhana, ibid., p. 151. (See Proceedings for August, 1889.) It seems

to me better to accept the words, in 1. 5 of the inscription, in their obvious senge

that Yasodharman is identical with Vishnuvardhana, and to suppose that Yasodhar-

man assumed the title Vishnuvardhana after (and perhaps in commemoration) of hig

ereat victory. It is most improbable that the imperial titles of réjdédhird ja and

paramesvara should be ascribed to a mere feudatory,

1889.] <A. F. R. Hoernle—Inseribed Seal of Kwmara Gupta IT. 97

years, if he was still reigning in A. D. 530. There is, however, nothing

at all improbable in this supposition.

Further, Narasimhagupta calls himself Baladitya on his coins.

We have seen that the Baladitya of Hiuen Tsiang’s account reigned

down to c. 580 A. D.; and that it is quite possible that the Narasimha-

gupta of the seal reigned down to that date. It may, therefore, be con-

cluded as most probable that the Narasimhagupta of the seal is identical

with the Nara Baliditya of the coins as well as the Baladitya of Magadha,

by whom, or rather in whose reign Mihirakula was overthrown by

Yasodharman.

A curious glimpse of Narasimhagupta is afforded in a passing allu-

sion, in connection with the Valabhi king Dronasimha, to his suzerain

power, the Early Guptas. The early Valabhi rulers, as is well known,

were vassals of the Harly Guptas. The third of the Valabhi line was

Dronasimha, a younger son of the founder of that line, Bhatarka

Sendpati. Regarding this Dronasimha it is mentioned in the Valabhi

genealogies that he ‘‘ was anointed in the kingship by the paramount

master (parama-svanin) in person” Mr. Fleet* has suggested that this

“ paramount master” was Yasodharman, who defeated Mihirakula c. 530

A.D. Now Dhruvasena I. was reigning in 526, as shown by his in-

scription. Dronasimha was his predecessor; and his accession must,

therefore, be placed c. 520 A. D. It is not probable that Yasodharman

was already in 520 A. D. an ‘emperor’ whose sway extended over the

Valabhis. In fact, as I have tried to show, it is more probable, that in

A. D. 530 he was stilla mere ‘tribal chieftain’ and lieutenant of the

emperor Narasimhagupta, and that his great power only dated from that

victory over Mihirakula. On the other hand, about A. D. 520, Nara-

simhagupta must have still enjoyed the imperial dignity of the Guptas ;

and however much it may have been shorn of its ancient splendour, it

was clearly still so much recognised by the Valabhis, that Dronasimha

got himself “anointed” by the still existing representative of that power.

It may be added that the simple reference to the parama-svaniin or

“‘ paramount master” is more easily explainable if applied to the old ac-

customed suzerain power of the Guptas, than to a new emperor like

Yasodharman.

That notice about Dronasimha’s ‘‘ being anointed by his paramount

master” is a rather curious one. His two predecessors enjoyed only the

title of sendpati; he was the first of his house who bore the title of

mahdrija (equal to mahdsendpati). The notice about his ‘ anointment’

would seem to refer to his elevation to the higher rank of a Maharaja.

*® See Indian Antiquary, Vol. XV, p. 187, note; also Corpus Inser, Ind., Vol. III,

p. 168.

98 A. F. R. Hoernle—Inscribed Seal of Kumdra Gupta IT. [No. 2,

The special occasion or reason for this elevation by the paramount

power we are not told. But putting together the scattered historical

indications of that period, it would seem that the distinction was due

to a striking recovery in the fortunes of the Imperial Gupta dynasty

which was mainly brought about by the exertions of the Valabhi

feudatories. The circumstances are these. There are three inscrip-

tions at Hran in Eastern Malava,* referring themselves respectively

to the times of Budhagupta, Toramana and Bhdnugupta. Budha-

gupta and Bhanugupta were mere second rate rulers of Hastern

Malava; but Toramina possessed Hastern Milava as a portion of his

imperial dominions; and his inscription is dated in the first year of

his imperial power.t It may be concluded, that in that year neither

Budhagupta nor Bhanugupta possessed Hastern Malava. The dates of

the inscriptions of these two Mahardjas are 484 A. D. and 510 A. D.

The first year of Toramana cannot well fall after 510 A. D.; for it can be

shown{ that Toramana was already succeeded by his son Mihirakula

c. A. D. 515, and possibly even a little earlier. Again it cannot fall

before 484 A. D., because in that year there were living two princes

Matrivishnu and his younger brother Dhanyavishnu, the former of

whom was dead in the first year of Toramina. Nor can it fall before

494 A. D., because that is the last recorded date (on his coins) of

Budhagupla, It follows that not only the first year of Toraména’s

imperial power, but also his loss of that power (so far, at least, as

Hastern Malava was concerned) must fall within the period A, D,

494-510. Now thisis just about the period of the Sendpati Bhatdrka, the

first of the Valabhi dynasty, who must have ruled from ec. 495-515

A. D. With regard to him it is expressly stated, in the Valabhi genealo-

gical records,$ that he fought with and defeated the “Maitrakas,” that

is, the Mihiras (a tribal designation of the Hiinas) to whom Toramana

belonged. It may be concluded, therefore, that it was mainly owing to

the Valabhi victories that Toraména was beaten back and lost his im-

perial power. The immediate consequence of this success of the Valabhis

would naturally have been the revival of the imperial power of the Guptas,

that is, of Narasimhagupta who was on the throne of the Guptas at that

time. The first year of Toramana, say A. D. 495, would be the date of

* See Fleet, Corp. Inser. Ind., Vol. III, pp. 88, 91, 158.

} See Fleet, ibid., Vol. ITI, p. 158. The first year, named in the inscription,

is not the first year of Toramina’s accession to rule over the Hina tribe, but of his

assumption of the imperial dignity (mahdrdjddhirdja) after his Indian conquests.

See Fleet, ibid., Introd., pp. 10-12.

{ See Fleet, ibid., Vol. III, Introd., p. 12; also Indian Antiquary, Vol. XV,

p. 252.

§ See Fleet, ibid., Vol. ITI, p, 167.

1889.] A. F. R. Hoernle—Inscribed Seal of Kuméra Gupta IT. 99

the temporary subjection of the emperor Narasimhagupta, and of the

assumption of the imperial dignity by Toramana; and A. D. 510 may be

taken as approximately the date of the liberation, by the Valabhi senapati

Bhatarka, of Narasimhagupta and the resumption by the latter of the im-

perial crown. And I would suggest, that the subsequent elevation, by

Narasimhagupta, of the Valabhi Dronasimha, c. A. D, 520, to the rank of

Maharaja, was in some way an acknowledgment of the signal service ren-

dered by the Valabhi family to the imperial house of the Guptas. Tora-

mana must have died soon after the great reverse he suffered at the hands

of the Valabhis. He was succeeded, c. A. D. 515, by his son Mihirakula,

who undertook to recover his father’s conquests, or, as Hiuen Tsiang

puts it in his account, “to punish the rebellion” of Narasimhagupta.

For fifteen years, as shown by the Gwalior inscription,* he was successful

in his operations, till at last, c. A. D. 530, he was totally defeated by the

emperor Narasimhagupta’s great vassal Yasodharman. According to

Hiuen Tsiang, Mihirakula was taken prisoner in the battle and brought

to Narasimhagupta. On the advice of the latter’s mother, he was

restored to liberty, but finding his chances in India utterly gone, he re-

tired to Kashmir, This seems to me to have been the course of events

in that troubled period of the irruption of the Hinas into India.}

I should like to throw out another suggestion. In the list of kings

of the Rajatarangini, there are five reigus enumerated between Matri-

gupta and Durlabha I., if we omit the fabulous king Randditya with his

reign of 300 years. Durlabha I.’s accession may be placed in 626 A, D.,

allowing a probable adjustment of 30 years in the calculations of the

Rijatarangini.t Calculating a reign at the usual average of abont 18

years, we obtain for the accession of Matrigupta about the year 530

A. D., 7. e., the probable year of Mihirakula’s retirement into Kashmir,

I would suggest the identity of Matrigupta and Mihirakula. There are

many points in favour of the suggestion: 1, the epochs of the two kings

* protected by the mother,”

and according to Hinen Tsiang, Mihirakula owed his life to the inter-

fe)

coincide; 2, the name Matrigupta means

> 7 oO

cession and protection of (Narasimhagupta) Baladitya’s mother; the

name, therefore, would fit him admirably ; 3, Matrigupta is said to have

* See Fleet, Corpus Inser. Ind., Vol. III, p, 161.

+ It may be worth noting in connection with the irruption of the Huns into

India in the 5th century, that it followed, by nearly a century, their irruption

into Hurope. The latter is said to have begun in 375 A. D., under their leader

Balamir, and it was most successful under their leader Attila, A, D, 445-453, Their

power was finally broken in the great battle on the Catalaunian fields, A. D. 451;

corresponding to the great victory of Yasodharman (or Yasoyarman) in A. D. 5380.

{ See Sir A. Cunningham, Ancient Geography of India, p. 923; also Jacobi in

Gittingische Gelehrte Anzeigen for 1888, No. 2, p. 70,

100 A. F. R. Hoernle—Inseribed Seal of Kuméra Gupta TI. [No 2,

been a stranger to Kashmir; so was Mihirakula; he is said to have

been imposed on Kashmir by a king Vikramaditya, also called Harsha,

of Ujjain, who is said to have been a powerful king who subdued the

whole world and destroyed the Sakas, a Mlechchha tribe. This I take

to be a confused version of the fact, that during the time of Narasimha-

gupta Baladitya, who afterwards allowed Mihirakula to proceed to

Kashmir, the Hina (a Saka tribe) were defeated by Yasovyarman, who

afterwards made himself an “emperor,” Vikraméaditya was a common

title in the Gupta family; Chandragupta Il. and Skandagupta bore

it; and the similar title Kramdditya was born by Skaudagupta and

Kumaragupta II, In the Rajatarangini either Baldditya or Kumiara-

gupta IT, Kramaditya is referred to by Vikraméditya; and this Vi-

kramaditya is said to have died before Matrigupta’s resignation of his

kingdom. As Matrigupta is said to have resigned after a reign of abont

four years, and as on the assumption of his identity with Mihirakula, he

became king of Kashmir about A, D. 530, Baldditya must haye died

yevy soon after that year. According to the Rajatarangini, Vikramaditya

had ason, Pratdpasila Siliditya, who was expelled by the people of

Malaya, but reinstated by king Pravarasena of Kashmir. Here, again,

there is a confused version of certain facts. I take this Siladitya to be

identical with the king Sildditya of Malava, who, according to Hinen

Tsiang, had lived 60 years before his own time, and who had reigned

for 50 years.* As Hiuen Tsiang was in Malava in A. D. 640, the period

of Siliditya’s reign is fixed as from about A. D. 530-580. He is com-

monly identified with the unnamed ‘ monarch’ who is, by Hiuen Tsiang,

said to have succeeded Vikramaditya of Sravasti; and this Vikramaditya

himself is commonly identified with the Vikramaditya of Malava, above

mentioned.t According to Hiuen T'siang, Vikramaditya “lost his

kingdom” and was succeeded by the unnamed “ monarch”, 7. e, by

Siladitya. I would suggest that Kumaragupta II. Kraméditya is

intended by Vikramaditya, who lost his kingdom by the usurpation of

Yagodharman ; and that Siladitya is one of the surnames of Yago-

dharman. The latter, in his inscription (see above) is called, at

first, only a narddhipati, which would agree with the “ monarch” of

Hiuen Tsiang. ‘he times also agree ; Yasodharman Siildditya must have

usurped the imperial dignity soon after A. D, 530, He would then have

reigned about 50 years, down to about A. D.580, Throughout the whole

of his reign (compare columns 5 and 8 of the synchronistic table), he had

riva)s for his claim of the imperial dignity in the Maukhari Varmans,

till the dignity was finally secured by Prabhakara Vardhana who had

* See Beal’s Buddhist Records of the Western World, Vol. III, p. 261,

+ See ibidem, Vol, I, pp. 106, 108,

1889.] A. F. R. Hoernle—Inscribed Seal of Kuméra Gupta IT, 101

the surname of Pratapasila. According to Hiuen Tsiang the Valabhi

king Dhruvasena II. (or Dhruvapata),* who became king about A. D.

625, was his nephew (7. e., probably sister’s son). All this agrees well

enough, That Vikramaditya (7. ¢,, Kumaragupta II.) is described as

“king of Sravasti”? need be no difficulty. Kuméaragupta’s seal was

found at Bhitari, in the Ghaztpur District of the N.-W. Provinces; and

Sravasti may well have been the favourite residence of that emperor.

Of course, if my suggestions are accepted, the narrative in the Raja-

tarangini is a confused, and even grotesque, perversion of the real facts.

Siladitya is said to have been a son of Vikramaditya; this is a confused

reminiscence of the fact, that Baladitya (7. e, Navrasimhagupta) had a

son Kumaragupta IIT. Kramaditya ;—Siladitya is said to have been ex-

pelled by the people of Malaya; but it was Kumfraeupta that was

“expelled,” 4. e., rebelled against by Yasodharman (Sildditya) ;—Sifladitya

is called Pratapasila ; but the latter was the surname of Sildditya’s rival,

Prabhakara Vardhana;—Siladitya Pratdpagila is said to have been

seven times subdued by the king of Kashmir; very possibly the king of

Kashmir had to carry on several campaigns against both Siladitya

(Yasodharman) and Pratdipagila (Prabhikara Vardhana), both of whom

“emperors” or “rulers of the whole world.” The Raja-

tarangini’s account of Matrigupta is still more grotesque. It makes

Matrigupta to be a poor “ poet,”* and finally resign his kingdom and

retire to Benaves, like a good Hindi! But it hardly needs an excuse for

charging the “history” of the Rajatarangini with grotesqueness. The

utter untrustworthiness of it down to the time of the Karkota dynasty

(Durlabha Vardhana I.), is, I believe, now generally acknowledged. Itg

treatment of Mihirakula, who under that name is placed at B. C. 707,

and of Toramana and Hiranyakula, is the most glaring evidence of it,

Tadd a sketch of what seems to me to have been the fortunes of the

imperial dignity during the periods immediately before and after the

Hina troubles, I have shown them in the synchronistic table by printing

in red the names of those princes that bore the imperial title of Maha-

rajadhiraja. From Chandragupta I. down to Kumaragupta IL, c. A. D.

360-583, the imperial dignity remained with the house of the Harly

Guptas. Under Narasimhagupta, c. A, D, 495, it was disputed by the

Hina chief Toramana. About 533 A.D., under Kumaragupta II., it

passed away to Yasodharman.§ From him, it passed, fora period of four

aspired to be

* See ibid., Vol. II, p. 267.

} Perhaps a confusion with the poot Mentha (or Matrimentha?) who is said to

have lived at his court.

t See Shanker P. Pandit’s Gatidavaho, Introd., p. Ixxy.

§ Evidence of YaSodharman’s or YaSovarman’s imperial power are his coins

102 =A. F. R. Hoernle—Inscribed Seal of Kuwmndra Gupta IT. [No. 2,

reigns, from c. A. D. 540 to 585, to the Maukhari dynasty, under I’sana-

yvarman, Sarvavarman, Susthitavarman and Avantivarman. Three of

these Varmans, Vé4na, Sarva and Avanti, receive the imperial titles,

mahdrdjddhirdja or paramesvara in two inscriptions.* Susthita is named

in an inscription of the Later Guptas without any particular title ;? but

if he is not identical with Avantivarman—which is quite possible —, he

must, in all probability, have been a Mahdrajadhiraja, as the intermediate

ruler between two Mahdraijadhirdjas (see column 8). That Susthita does

not receive that title in the Gupta inscription is no objection; for

neither does [Sana receive it; the inscription, being one of the Later

Guptas, who were a rival family, probably denied the imperial title to

the Maukharis as usurpers.{

From the Maukhavris the imperial dignity passed to the Vardhana

dynasty of Thanesar and Kananj, for three reigns, under Prabhakara,

Rajya and the great Harsha, from c. A. D. 585 to 648, though at some

time between A. D. 615 and 634 it was disputed by the Harly Chalukya

king Pulikesin I1.€ After Harsha Vardhana the imperial dignity

appears to have been held simultaneously in the West by the Valabhis of

Gujarat (commencing with DharasenalV., c. A. D. 645) and in the Hast

by the Later Guptas of Magadha (commencing with Adityasena, c. A. D.

648). In the case of the Valabhis, the assumption of the imperial

dignity would seem, at first, to have been a temporary one. Tor after

Dharasena TV., who enjoyed it from c. A, D. 645-650, it lapsed again,

for about 20 years, during the two following reigns of Dhruvasena IIT.

and Kharagraha II., neither of whom seem to have borne any imperial

titles, perhaps owing to the rival emperor’s, Adityasena’s, ascendancy.

About A. D. 670, however, Siladitya III. again became emperor of the

West; and henceforth the imperial dignity remained with these two

with the legend of kida (see Proceedings for August, 1888). Kida would appear

to be a tribal designation of the Hiinas.

* See Mleet, in Corp. Inscr. Ind,, Vol. III, pp. 218, 221,

+ See ibid., p. 206.

{ It may be a question whether Yagovarman or Yagodharman did not himself

belong to a branch of the Maukhari family of Varmans. There is nothing in Yago-

dharman’s inscriptions to proye that he belonged to the Malaya tribes. His relation

to the four imperial Mankharis requires further elucidation. If, as above suggested,

he is identical with the S’iliditya, who according to Hinen Tsiang reigned 50 years,

he must have been a contemporary and rival of the four imperial Maukharis. The

contemporary inscription of Asphad would certainly seem to show, that the latter

did not enjoy an undisputed title to the imperial dignity.

§ He assumed the imperial title paramesgvara after a thorough defeat of Harsha

Vardhana; see Indian Antiquary, Vol. VII, p. 164. He had not done so before A. D.

618, nor was it after A. D. 684; see ibid., Vol. VIII, p. 240,

1889.] A. F. R. Hoernle—Inseribed Seal of Kumara Gupta IT. 103

dynasties of the Later Guptas and the Valabhis, apparently, till their

respective extinction. Perhaps the coincidence of Jivita Gupta II., the

last of the Later Imperial Guptas, with the Nepalese king Siiva Deva IL.,

who assumed the imperial titles, may have a deeper significance. For it

may be noted, that about A. D. 648, at the time of the disruption of

Harsha’s empire, the Nepalese king, Amsnvarman, also laid claim to the

imperial dignity in the North.

The Devagupta, placed in the third column of the synchronistic

table, under the Later Guptas of Malava, is mentioned in the ecopper-

plate grant of Harshavardhana,* as having been conquered by that

king’s brother and predecessor, Rajyavardhana II. He cannot be the

Devagupta of the Later Gupta dynasty of Magadha (2nd column), as

Harshavardhana himself was a contemporary of Madhavacupta, the

grandfather of that Devagupta, Moreover it is distinctly stated in the

Harsha-charita of Bana, that the prince whom Réjyavardhana conquer-

ed, was a king of Malava.t

In the seyenth column of the Uchchakalpa Maharajas it will be seen,

that Sarvanitha reigned up to A. D. 5383. His line, including himself,

consists of six members; and the founder of the line, Oghadeva, was

married to a queen Kumaradevi. Six reigns at an average of 18 years,

would make Oghadeva (c. A. D, 425-445) a contemporary of Kumira-

gupta I. of the Harly Gupta dynasty. It appears, probable, therefore,

that Oghadeva’s queen, Kumavradevi, was a sister or daughter of Kumira-

gupta I.t

* See Lpigraphia Indica, Part II, p. 74.

} Seo Sh. P, Pandit’s edition of the Gaiidwaho, Introd., p. exxx.

{ Mr. Fleet in the Corpus Inser. Ind., Introd. pp. 9, 10, suggests that the Uchcha-

kalpa dates may have to be referred to the Kalachuri era. I do not understand how

this could wellbe. Mr. Fleet says: “ifthe Uchchakalpa dates were reforred to the

Kalachuri era, with General Cunningham’s epoch of A. D. 249-50, S’arvandtha’s

latest date, the year 214, would be equivalent to A. D. 463-64, or Gupta Samvat 144;

and we should have to add on twenty-one years at the end of his known period, in

order to make him the contemporary of Hastin in Gupta Samvat 165.’ But the ern-

cial year appears to me to be not Gupta Samvat 165, but Gupta Samvat 189 (see ibid.,

p. 110). Por the joint-grant of Hastin and S’arvandtha was issued in the Jatter year. It

follows, therefore, that we should have to add on, not twenty-one, but forty-five

years; or if the epoch of the Kalachuri era be A. D. 248-49, even forty-six years.

On the other hand, if the Kalachuri epoch be placed, as Mr. Fleet suggests, about

25 years later, let us say at A. D. 273-74 (i. ¢., 248-49+25), then S’arvandtha’s latest

date 214 Kalachuri Samvat will be equivalent to 168 Gupta Samvat; and in that

case we should havo to add on twenty-one years, in order to make S’arvandtha con-

temporary with Hastin in the year 189 Gupta Samvat. I assume, that when Mr.

Fleet (ibid., p. 111) says: “the choice lies only between Gupta Samvat 189 and

201,” he means, that the only two years within the known period of Hastin’s rule

104 A. F. R. Hoornle—Inseribed Seal of Kumdra Gupta IT. [No. 2,

The question may arise whether the Kuméragupta referred to in

the Mandasor stone inscription of Bandhuvarman,* may not be the

Kumiaragupta II. of the Bhitari seal, rather than the Kumaragupta L.,

the only Gupta emperor of that name hitherto known. If it be Kumara-

guptall., the three Varmans, Nara, Visva and Bandhu, would have to

be brought down nearly a century, so that Bandhuyarman would be the

immediate predecessor of Yasodharman (or Yagovarman). I am dis-

posed to think, however, that it is really Kumdragupta I. who is referred

to in that inscription,

The metal of the seal has been tested by Dr. Scully of the Calcutta

Mint. His analysis shows that it consists of

Copper « 62.970 per cent.

Silver wee 36,225 op

Gold w= 0.405 F

Tron one trace.

In spite of its whitish grey colour, therefore, it is rather a copper than a

silver seal.

The weight and dimensions of the seal have been determined by the

(i, e., between G. S. 156 and 191 or A, D. 475 and 510), with which the data of the

joint-grant (7, e., the 19th day of the month K4rttika, in the Maha-Mégha Samvatsara)

can be made to harmonise, are G. 8. 189 and 201 or A. D. 508 and 520. If this is

so, the date of the joint-grant is practically certain: it is either A. D. 508-9 or A. D.

520-21, whether these years be stated in terms of the Gupta Samvat (189 or 201) or

in terms of the Kalachuri Samvat (260 and 272). Upon these premises, there are

these two alternatives: firstly, if we accept the year A. D. 248-49 (or 249-50) as the

Kalachuri epoch, the known period of S’arvandtha begins with Kalachuri Samvat

193, equivalent to A. D. 441-42, and he must have reigned not less than 67 years,

to bring him down to A. D. 508 (= K. 8. 260 or G. §. 189) to join Hastin in the

issue of the grant; and he must have reigned even 79 years, to bring him down to

A. D. 520 (=K. 8. 272 or G. 8. 201), if the latter be the year of the joint-grant,

Neither of these two cases will be considered admissible. Secondly, if, as Mr. Fleet

suggests, the Kalachuri epoch be placed about 25 years later, say A. D. 473-74, the

beginning of S’arvanitha’s known period will be A. D. 466-67, and he must have

reigned either 42 or 54 years, according as we place the joint-grant in A. D. 508 or

in A, D. 520. Hither of these two latter cases is possible, especially the former, requir-

ing arule of (at least) 42 years. But there is no real evidence whatever for the assion-

ment of the Kalachuri epoch to the year A. D. 478-74 or thereabouts. The result

is, that the probability of the Uchchakalpa grants being dated in years of the

Kalachuri era appears to be nil. My premises may be founded on a misunderstand.

ing; if so, Mr Fleet will be able to explain the real facts of the case. But I thought

it well to state my doubts, which may have occurred to others beside myself,

#* See Meet, in Corpus Inser. Ind., Vol. II, p. 79.

1889.] A. F. R. Hoernle—Inscribed Seal of Kumdéra Gupta II. 105

same gentleman, The weight is 10,696 grains. The measurements

are ;

Greatest length are w. 0.74 inches,

* Greatest breadth ite soe “AOR

Breadth of rim ae poy OPA pp

Height of rim above surface of plate ... 0.11 ;;

Thickness of seal (including rim) Od os

CONTENTS .

OF THE

JOURNAL, Pr. I, ror 1888.

No. 1.—D 4s, A brief account of Tibet from “ Dsam Ling Gyeshe,”

the well-known geographical work of Lama Tsan-po Nomankhan of

Amdo. Cockburn, Sité’s Window or Buddha’s Shadow Cave.

No. 2.—O liver, The Safwi Dynasty of Persia. Syamal Dds,

Antiquities at Nagari. Yate, notes on the City of Herat.

Fihrer, Three new copper-plates grants of Govindachandra

Deva of Kanauj.

No. 3.—K now les, Kashmiri Riddles. R&jendralal& Mitra,

Notes on a Donative Inscription of Vidyédhara Bhanja, belonging

to C. T. Metcalfe, sq. Garwood, Notes on the ancient mounds

in the Quetta District. Beveridge, The Mother of Jahangir.

Rodgers, Notes on.the coins mentioned by Major Raverty in

his notes to his Translation of the Tabaqdt-i-Nasiri.

INLINE T

PUBLICATIONS

FOR SALE AT THE

ASIATIG SOCIETY OF BENGAL, ©

Wo. 57, Park Street, Calcutta.

RS. AS.

Journal, Asiatic Society, Bengal, from Vols. XII to XVII (1843 >

to 1848) ; Vols. XIX to XXII (1850 to 1852) ; Vols. XXVI,

XXVII (1857, 1858), and Vols. XX XIII to XLVIII, (1864

to 1881).

Asiatic Researches, from

CACM Bticscccccctesest es

Ditts ditto) Indey,.1::..

The Ain-i-Akbari, Vol. I. Translated into English, with notes and

indexes, by H. Blochmann, M. A., a a tea ire ars rn eee a

The Tabagét-i-Ndciri. Translated by Major H. G. Raverty,

VOHAGC ss tess veresesrsees Gooey tp eee oebc naam NO cntnrerais

Vols. VI to XI, and Vols. XVII to XX,

Rs. 10

o Fr oS

, MAR: 19 1891

NEW SERIES.

JOURNAL

OF THE

ASIATIC SOCIETY OF BENGAL,

Vol. LVIII, Part I, No. I11—1889.

EDITED BY

JHE PHILOLOGICAL s ECRETARY.

eee.

‘The bounds of its investigation will be the geographical limits of Asia : and

within these limits its inquiries will be extended to whatever is performed by

man or produced by nature,”’—S1k WiLL1am JONES,

#,* Communications should be sent under cover to the Secretaries, Asiat. Soc.,

to whom all orders for the work are to be addressed in India; or in Lon-

don, care of Messrs. Tritbner and Oo., 57 and 59, Ludgate Hil.

— AH

1, CALCUTTA :

PRINTED AT THE PaprTist MISSION PRESS,

AND PUBLISHED BY THE

pestatic SocIETY, 57, PARK STREET.

1890.

Ras

Sed

Price (exclusive of postage) to Subscribers, Re.1.—To Non-Subscribers Bs 1-8.

Price in England, 2 Shillings and six pence,

CONTENTS.

——___

Page

Greco-Roman Influence on the Civilization of Ancient India,—By

Vincent A. Smitu, Bengal Civil Service. (With four

Plates.) she 109

JOURNAL

OF THE

ASIATIC SOCIETY OF BENGAL.

=O @et-

Part I.—HISTORY, LITERATURE, &ce.

ar ee ne

No. III.—1889.

Greco-Roman Influence on the Civilization of Ancient India.—By VINCENT

A. Sire, Bengal Civil Service. (With several Plates.)

Section I. IntRODUCTION.

When the wearied veterans of “the great Hmathian conqueror”,

laden with plunder and sated with conquest, refused to cross the

Hyphasis and to try the fortune of war in the valley of the Ganges, the

exclusive, conservative Hast won a victory over the intruding, progres-

sive West, which must have appeared to the actors on the scene as final

and decisive.

But it was neither final nor decisive, for, though the obstacles op-

posed by hostile man and nature could stop the onward march of the

Macedonian phalanx, nothing could arrest the sure and world-wide

progress of the ideas and culture, which constituted the real strength of

Hellas and were but rudely expressed by the disciplined array of

Alexander’s armies.

India has not willingly sought the treasures of foreign wisdom, and,

guarded by her encircling seas and mountains, she has tried, throughout

the long course of ages, to work out her own salvation. She has tried,

but has not succeeded. Again and again, both before and after Alexan-

der, the barriers have been broken through, and her children, who would

108 V. A, Smith— Greco-Roman Influence [No. 3,

fain believe that all light comes from the east, h

admit the rays of the western sun.

In the dim mist of prehistoric ages we can discern faint indications

that India, in common with all regions of Asiatic and Huropean civiliza-

tion, drew supplies from those stores of Egyptian, Assyrian and Baby-

lonian antique lore, which were, so far as we know or probably ever can

know, the ultimate sources of the knowl

lized man from the savage.

The history of those long past times is lost, and, save perhaps in

some faintly sketched and dubious outlines, can never be recovered.

The Indian expedition of Alexander the Great in B. C. 827—326

was, so far as our definite knowledge extends, the first occasion of close,

conscious contact between Hast and West. The arms of the conqueror,

it is true, subdued no more than a mere corner of India, and that only

for a moment, but the Hellenic culture, to the diffusion of which Alexan-

der devoted attention, as great as that bestowed by him on his material

corquests, long survived his transitory empire in Asia, and, ev

secluded India, made its presence felt in many and different

I shall not attempt to penetrate the thick darkness which conceals

the relations between India and the western world in the ages before

Alexander, but propose to consider the kind and degree of post-Alexan-

drian influence on the ancient civilization of

readers’ attention to an obscure and little

interesting history of Greek ideas,

The working of these ideas on Indian soil, a

the fields of religion, poetry, science

ave been compelled to

edge which distinguishes civi-

en in

directions.

India, and to invite my

known chapter in the ever-

Ithough discernible in

and philosophy, is most obvious in

the domain of architecture and plastic art, and I shall devote the greater

part of this essay to the consideration of Indo-Hellenie architecture

sculpture.

No Indian example in stone either of archi

lier than the reign of Agoka (circa B. CO. 260

covered, and the well-known theory of Mr. Fergusson, that the sudden

introduction of the use of stone instead of wood for the purposes both of

architecture and sculpture in India was the result of

between the empire of Alexander and his successors, and that of the

Mauryan dynasty of Chandra Gupta and Agoka, is, in my opinion, cer-

tainly correct. The change from wood to stone indubit

and no other explanation has ever been suggested,

I shall not, however, now discuss Mr. Fergusson’s theory, but shall

proceed to examine particular cases of undoubted and incontestable

Hellenistic, including Roman, influence on the Indian development of

the arts of architecture and sculpture,

and.

tecture or sculpture, ear-

—223), has yet been dis-

communication

ably took place,

—_

—

1889. | on the Owilization of Ancient India. 109

A brief discussion of the more prominent effects of the contact

between the Greco-Roman and Indian civilizations on other depart-

ments of human activity in India will follow, and will enable the reader

to form a conception as a whole of the impression made by the West

upon the Hast during a period of seven or eight centuries. That im-

pression was not sufficiently deep to stamp Indian art, literature and

science with an obviously Huropean character, although it was much

deeper than is commonly supposed.

Section II. Invo-Hetientc ARCHITECTURE.

The style of architecture, appropriately named Indo-Persian by Sir

Alexander Cunningham, and obviously derived from that employed in

the Achzemenian palaces of Susa and Persepolis, was extensively used

throughout Northern and Western India for several centuries both

before and after the Christian era. With this style of western, though

not Hellenic, origin the history of Indian architecture begins. It would

be more strictly accurate to say that with this style the history of Indian

architectural decoration begins, for no buildings in it exist, and we know

its character only from pillars and miniature representations in sculp-

tured reliefs.

The pillars are characterized by “a bell-shaped lower capital, sur-

mounted by an upper member formed of recumbent animals, back to

back.”’* The series of examples in Northern India, of pillars more or less

fully corresponding to this definition, begins with the monoliths of Asoka

(circa B. C. 250), and ends with the pillar of Budha Gupta at Hran in the

Sdgar District of the Central Provinces, which bears an inscription

dated in the year A. D. 435. The caves of Western India offer examples

apparently rather later, and specimens of intermediate dates have been

found at Bharhut, Buddha Gaydé, Sanchi, Bedsa, and Mathura, as well as

in the Gandhara or Yiisufzai country. But there is no evidence as yet

forthcoming that Indo-Persian pillars were used structurally in Gandha-

va. In miniature, as architectural decorations, they were a favourite

ornament in that region.

The Indo-Persian pillar underwent gradual modifications in India

Proper, with which I am not at present concerned. On the north-west

frontier of India, that is to say, in the western districts of the Panjab,

in the valley of the Kabul River, including Géndhara or the Yiusufzai

country, and in Kashmir, it was supplanted by pillars imitated from

* Cunningham, Arecheol. Rep., Vol. V, p. 185. [For a convenient synopsis of

specimen pillars of the Persian, Indo-Persian, Indo-Hellenie (Corinthian) and Indo-

Doric styles, see ibid., Plates XX VII, and XLV to L. Hp. |

+ All the Gupta dates are determined in Mr, Pleet’s work on the Gupta In-

criptions, Corpus Inscrip. Indicarwm, Vol. ITE.

110 V, A. Smith—@rreo-Roman Influence [No, 3,

Greek models. Isolated examples of Indo-Hellenic pillars probably

existed in other regions also, associated with the specimens of Hellenized

sculpture which occur at Mathura and some other localities remote from

the Panjab frontier, but, as yet, none such have been discovered, and,

speaking generally, the Hydaspes or Jhelam river may be assigned as

the eastern boundary of Indo-Hellenic architectural forms.

The evidence does not, to my mind, warrant the use of the term

“Indo-Grecian styles of architecture,” which is employed by Sir A.

Cunningham. So far as I can perceive, the published plans of Indian

buildings show no distinct traces of Greek ideas, and there is no evidence

of the employment of the characteristic Greek pediment or entablatures.

The known facts prove only that the Indians used, in buildings planned

after their own fashion, pillars copied, with modifications, from Greek

prototypes.

In the outlying province of Kashmir and the dependent region of

the Salt Range a modified form of the Doric pillar was employed. The

earliest example of the use of this form is found in the temple of the

sun at Martand, which was erected not earlier than A. D. 400, and

perhaps should be dated two or three centuries later. Temples in a

style similar to that of Martand appear to have continued to be erected

in Kashmir down to the time of the Muhammadan conquest of the

valley. They are characterized by trefoiled arches, and pyramidal roofs,

and were frequently, if not always, built in the centre of shallow tanks.

These peculiarities are in no wise Greek. The pillars undoubtedly, as

Sir A, Cunningham observes, resemble the Grecian Doric in * the ereat

ovolo of the capital, and in the hollow flutes of the shaft.” It is difficult

to believe that the agreement in these respects between the Greek and

Indian work is accidental, but it is also difficult to imagine the existence

of a channel through which the Kashmirians borrowed the Doric form

of pillar at a time when every other manifestation of Hellenic ideas had

already disappeared, or was on the point of disappearing, from India.

I cannot yenture to deny the Greek origin of the semi-Doric pillars

of the temples in Kashmir, although I am not satisfied that it is fully

established. Myen if it be admitted, the admission is hardly sufficient

to warrant the assertion that the Kashmirian buildings are examples of

an Indo-Doric style. The most that can be correctly affirmed is, that

these buildings contain pillars which may fairly be described as Indo-

Doric. These Indo-Dorie pillars, if there be indeed anything Doric

about them, are never associated with Indo-Hellenic sculpture, or any-

thing else which gives the slightest indication of Greek influence.

The Kashmir style stands apart, and the study of it throws little light

either on the history of Indian architecture, or on that of the diffusion

of Greek ideas. I shall, therefore, exclude it from consideration, and

a —

1889. | on the Civilization of Ancient India. 111

refer readers who may care for further information on the subject to

the discussion of it by Mr. Fergusson and Sir A, Cunningham, and to

the fine series of plates prepared under the supervision of Major Cole.*

But, whether the pillars of the Kashmir temples be really derived

from Doric prototypes or not, there is no doubt whatever that pillars,

the designs of which are modifications of the Ionic and Corinthian types,

were common on the north-west frontier of India during the early cen-

turies of the Christian era.

These Greek architectural forms have as yet been found only in a

very limited area, which may be conveniently referred to under the

name of Gandhara.t

The boundaries of the kingdom of Gandhara, as it existed in ancient

times, are known with approximate accuracy. Hinen T'siang, who

travelled between A. D, 629 and 645, describes the kingdom as extending

about 166 miles (1000 li) from east to west, and 133 miles (800 77) from

north to south, with the Indus as its eastern boundary: The great city

of Purushapura, now known as Peshawar, was then the capital.t The

earlier Chinese traveller, Fa Hian (A. D. 400—405), assigns the same

position to the kingdom of Gandhara, though he describes its boundaries

with less parbicularity.§

The region referred to by both Chinese pilgrims may be described

in general terms as the lower valley of the Kabul river. It is very

nearly identical with the territory tothe north-east of Peshawar, now

inhabited by the Afghan clan, known as the Yusufzai or Sons of Joseph,

which comprises the independent hilly districts of Swat and Buhner, as

well as the plain bounded on the east by the Indus, on the north by the

hills, and on the south and west respectively by the Kabul and Swat

rivers. This plain, which is attached to the Peshawar District, and ad-

ministered by British officers, corresponds to the tract known to the

Greeks as Peukeloaitis (Sanskrit Pushkaldwat’), the capital of which

occupied the site of the modern Hashtnagar, eighteen miles north of

Peshawar. ||

* Major Cole’s book is entitled Illustrations of Ancient Buildings in Kdshmtr,

(London, India Museum, 1869). His plates are good, but his remarks on the dates

of the buildings illustrated would have been better omitted. Mr. Fergusson discuss-

es the style in his History of Indian and Hastern Architecture. Sir A. Cunningham

described itin the Journal, Asiatic Society, Bengal, for 1848, and recurs to the subject

in Archwol, Reps., Vol. V, pp. 84-90, Plates XX VI, XXVIT; Vol. XIV, p. 35, Pl. XV.

+ Sanskrit authority warrants either a long or short vowel in the first syllable

of the name.

+ Beal, Buddhist Records of the Western World, Vol. I, p. 97.

§ Fa Hian, Travels, Chapter X, in either Beal’s or Legge’s translation.

|| Cunningham, Archwol. Rep. Vol. V, p. 1, Hashtnagar is described ibid,,

Vol. 11, p, 90, and Vol, XIX, pp, 96—110,

112 V. A. Smith—Grreco-Roman Influence [No. 3,

Strictly speaking, therefore, the name Gaéndhara is applicable only

to a small territory west of the Indus.

But the great city of Taxila, (Takkhasila, or Takshasild, the

modern Shih ki Dheri), situated three marches, or about thirty miles,

east of the Indus, was undoubtedly, in the time of Alexander the Great,

the chief city on the north-western frontier of India, and must have been

then, as it subsequently was in the reigns of Asoka and Kanishka,

included in the dominions of the government which ruled Gandhara.

Kanishka is expressly called the king of Gandhara.*

The vast Buddhist religious establishments at Manikydla, about

thirty miles south-east of Taxila, belonged to the same jurisdiction, and.

at both places remains are found of that Indo-Hellenic school of art,

which attained its chief development in Gandhara west of the Indus.

The name of Géandhara, as indicating an artistic and architectural

province, may, therefore, be extended, as it was by Mr. Fergusson, so as

to comprise the modern districts of Peshawar and Rawalpindi, including

Taxila and Manikyala, as far east as the Hydaspes or Jhelam river.

When speaking of the art of Gandhdra I must be understood as employ-

ing the name in its wider sense.

The upper valley of the Kabul river was full of Buddhist buildings,

many of which have been explored by Masson and others, and was includ-

ed in the dominions of Kanishka and his successors. But, so far as the

published accounts show, this region was only slightly affected by

Hellenic influences, and it must, for the present at all events, be con-

sidered as outside the artistic province of Gandhara,

The Gandhara territory, the situation of which has thus been defined,

was the principal seat of Hellenic culture in India, and from one or other

part of it nearly all the known examples of Indo-Hellenie art in its most

characteristic forms have been obtained. Traces of Greek and Roman

teaching may be detected in the remains at many localities in northern

and western India, but nowhere with such distinctness as in the lower

valley of the Kabulriver. The Gandhara school of art obviously deserves,

though it has uot yet obtained, a place in the general history of Greek

architecture and sculpture, and this cannot be said of the other early

Indian schools.

At Bharhut, Sanchi, Buddha Gaya, Ajanta, and Amaravati proofs

may be given that the local style of art was modified by contact with

* A full account of the ruins of Taxila will be found in Cunningham, Archwol.

Rep., Vol. Il, pp. 112, segg.; Vol. V, pp. 66, seqg., and Vol. XLV, pp. 9, seqq. Fa

Hian states that Dharma Vardhana (or Vivardhana, as Dr. Legge writes the name),

son of Agoka, ruled in Gandhira, and, according to another legend, the stiipa in

memory of Agoka’s son Kunila was situated sonth-cast of Taxila, (Ounningham,

Archwol. Rep., Vol. II, p. 149.)

il |

1889, ] on the Oivilization of Ancient India. 113

that of the western world, but the evidence does not lie upon the surface.

In the remains of the buildings and sculptures of Gandhara the merest

- tyro can perceive at a glance that the style of art is in the main Greek

or Roman, not Indian.*

* Tho principal references to published notices of the Gandhara school of art

are as follows ;—

(1) Notes on some sculptures found in the District of Peshdwar. By H.C. Bayley.

With several rude lithographs. (Jownal As. Soc., Bengal, Vol. XXI (1852), pp.

606—621). The sculptures described in this paper were collected at Jamalgarhi by

Messrs. Lumsden and Stokes, and were destroyed by the fire at the Crystal Palace,

(2) Indian Antiquary, (Bombay), Vol. III, pp. 143, 159,

(3) History of Indian and Eastern Architecture. By James Fergusson.

(4) Reports of the Archwological Survey of India, Vol. V. By Sir A. Ounning-

ham. VolumeII of the same series gives information concerning Taxila. See also

Vol. XIV, p. 31, Pl. XIV.

(5) Descriptive List of the Principal Buddhist Sculptures in the Lahore Museum,

p. 11. This list, kindly supplied to me by the Curator, contains brief particulars

of 95 specimens, of which 32 are marked with an asterisk, as being either “in excep-

tionally good preservation, or interesting from their subjects.” The list is signed by

Sir A. Cunningham, but is not dated. Two specimens are noted as coming from

Sahri Bahlol, and one is stated to have been obtained in the fortress of Ranigat,

but no other indication is given of the localities from which the sculptures were

obtained.

I have not been able to procure a “ Memorandum by Mr. Baden-Powell on the

sculptures in the Lahore Museum,” which is referred to by Sir A. Cunningham,

Archeol. Rep., Vol. V, p. 55, note 1.

(6) Catalogue and Handbook of the Archwological Collections in the Indian

Museum. By John Anderson, M. D., F. R.8., otc. Part I, Calcutta, 1883. 201

Indo-Hellenic objects are described, viz., 177 arranged under the heading Gandhira,

18 under Peshiwar, two under Mathura, and one each under Hazara, Kabul, miscel-

laneous, and Bihar.

(7) Memorandum on Ancient Monuments in Husufzai (sic) By Major Cole ;

being part of the Second Report of the Curator of Ancient Monuments in India, pp.

CXIV, seqqg. This document was separately reprinted at the Government Central

Branch Press, Simla, 1883. It is illustrated by rough lithographic plates, compris-

ing all the subjects subsequently treated by the heliograyure process, as well as by a

map of the Yusufzai country, and eleven other plans and sketches.

(8) Preservation of National Monwments, India, Graco-Buddhist Sculptures from

Yisufzai. By Major H. H. Cole, R. EH. Published by order of the Governor-

General in Council for the office of Curator of Ancient Monuments in India. Large

folio, p. 7, with 30 very fine heliogravure plates, 1885,

(9) The Buddhist Stiipas of Amardvatt and Jaggayapeta. By James Burgess,

CG. 1. E., ete, Archeological Survey of Southern India, Triibner, London, 1887.

This work does not describe the sculptures, but some good specimens of them are

figured in woodcuts Nos. 1, 4, 11, 14, 21, 28, 24, and 26, which are copied from the

illustrated edition of Sir E, Arnold’s Light of Asia.

(10) Alt. und Neu-Indische Kuwnstgegenstinde aus Professor Leitners jiingster

114

V. A, Smith—Grceco-Roman Influence [No. 3,

No indication of a knowledge of the Doric order of architecture can

be detected in the remains of the buildings of Gdndhdéra. With two

exceptions, the only Greek architectural form used is a modification of

the Corinthian pillar and pilaster,

The two exceptions both occur to the east of the Indus, outside

the limits of Gandhara proper.

On the site of Taxila Sir A. Cunningham disinterred the remains of

a Buddhist temple, the portico of which was supported on four massive

sandstone pillars of the Ionic order. Similar, though smaller, pillars

were found in the interior of the building. No part of the larger pillars

was discovered, except their bases. The mouldings of these bases ave

said to correspond exactly with those of the pure Attic base, as seen in

the Krechtheum at Athens, the only difference being the greater projec-

tion of the fillet below the upper torus in the Indian example.

Portions of the shafts and capitals of the smaller pillars were found.

The shafts are civeular in section and plain, The capitals were made of

nodular limestone, and appear to have been plastered and gilded. They

agree generally in form with Greek, not Roman, models, but are ruder

and more primitive in style, and are specially distinguished from all

Sammlung, ausgestellt in K, K, Osterr. Museum fiir Kunst und Industrie, Stuben-

ring 5, Verlag des K. K. Osterr. Museum’s Wien, 1883.

The specimens of, the Gandhara school of art preserved in museums are very

numerous. ‘The principal collection is that in the Lahore Museum. It is very

extensive, numbering many hundred objects, but seems to be badly arranged. I

have not seen it, The collection next in importance is that in the Indian Museum,

Calcutta. Dr. Anderson’s carefully compiled Catalogue gives a good idea of its con-

tents. Major Cole intended to send spare specimens to the museums at Bombay,

Madras, and some other places, which were, I suppose, sent.

In London the best collection, though not an extensive one, is that which oceu-

pies cases Nos 1—7 in the Asiatic Saloon of the British Museum, The South Ken-

sington collection is officially described as comprising 24 sculptures in stone, and 49

plaster casts from originals in the Lahore Museum, presented by Sir R. Egerton in

1882. When I examined the specimens in 1888, they were exhibited partly in a glass

case, partly on a detached screen, and the rest on a wall screen. Dr. Leitner’s

collection at Woking comprises some original sculptures and a considerable number

of casts from the works in the Lahore Museum. It is described in the printed

Catalogue above cited,

The Museum at Vienna contains some specimens presented by Dr. Leitner, and

many examples of the work of the school are believed to exist in private hands both

in Hurope and India, Sir A. Cunningham possesses a valuable series of photographs

of the more remarkable sculptures, Mr. Kipling, Curator of the Lahore Museum,

informs me that he intends to arrange for the publication of a set of photographs of

Indo-Hellenic art. The specimens in the possession of Mr, L. White King, B.C. 8.

will be noticed subsequently,

“he

—:

“ye

1889.] on the Civilization of Ancient India. 115

known Greek examples by the excessive weight and height of the

abacus.*

The employment of stucco to conceal the roughness of the limestone

and to facilitate the execution of the moulding reminds us of the temple

of Fortuna Virilis at Rome, where the same expedient was used to com-

plete the decorative work on Ionic capitals made of rugged travertine,t

Sir A. Cunningham subsequently discovered among the ruins of

Taxila in another temple the bases and portions of the drums of two

Tonic pillars, differing slightly in detail from those above described.

These two buildings are the only known examples of the use of the

Ionic form of pillar in India.

The rude style of the capitals in the building first discovered—the

only ones yet found—might suggest the fancy that the Taxilan temples

preserve specimens of the primitive Ionic order in its Asiatic form,

before it was developed by Greek skill, But the evidence of the com-

paratively late date of the temple adorned by these rude capitals is too

clear to allow indulgence in such a notion. The building cannot, ap-

parently, be earlier than B. C. 20 or 30, the approximate date of king

Azes, twelve of whose coins were lifted out by Sir A. Cunningham with

his own hand from their undisturbed resting place below the floor of the

sanctum, and under the corner of a platform which had supported a

number of plaster Buddhist statues.§ The date of the temple may

therefore be assigned roughly to the beginning of the Christian era, at

which time, it need not be said, the Ionic order had long been fully

developed. The question of date will be considered more fully in a later

section,

The Taxilan temples with Ionic pillars were, like all the known

examples of Indo-Hellenic architecture, dedicated to the service of the

Buddhist religion. Sir A. Cunningham gives a plan of the one first

discovered, from which it appears that the whole edifice was 91 feet

long by 64 feet broad, standing on a platform, which projected about 15

feet beyond the walls on all sides except the east, forming a terrace

adorned with plaster statues. It is supposed that this terrace was roofed.

in as a cloister. The entrance was on the east, in the centre of one of

the larger sides, through a portico supported on four Ionic columns.

This portico led into an entrance hall, 395 feet long from north to south,

by 152 feet broad from east to west. The sanctum or cella of the

temple lay behind this, with a length of 79 feet from north to south,

* Cunningham, Archwol. Rep., Vol. II, p. 129; Vol. V, pp. 69, 190.

+ Burn, Roman Literature and Art, p. 204,

t Cunningham, Archeol. Rep,, Vol. XIV, p. 9, Pl. VII.

§ Cunningham, ibid., Vol. V, pp 72, 190,

116 V. A. Smith— Greco-Roman Tnjfluence [No. 8,

anda breadth of 233 feet from east to west. This room, except at the

wide doorway, was surrounded by a bench 4 feet 83 inches broad, and 2

feet high, which supported plaster statues of Buddha, with his hands

either resting on his lap or raised in the attitude of teaching. It is

remarkable that the hair of these figures was rendered by the conven-

tional curls, which are so commonly associated in later times with

Buddhist and Jain art. Unluckily no drawings or photographs of these

plaster figures have been published, and it is impossible to say whether

they were coeval with the Ionic pillars or not. I should not have ex-

pected to find plaster statues at the beginning of the Christian era, and

T suspect that the images are of considerably later date than the pillars.

Sir A. Cunningham believes that the roof was constructed mainly

of wood, and that the chambers were lighted by windows in the upper

part of the walls, which projected above the roof of the surrounding

cloister. He conjectures that the four portico pillars ‘‘must have been

intended to support a vaulted roof presenting a pointed arch gable to

the front, as in the smaller chapels across the Indus.” A small room,

20 feet 15 inch long by 15% feet broad, communicated with each end of

the entrance hall.

The reader will not fail to observe that the plan and elevation of

this temple have little in common with those of Greek temples.

Lagree with Sir A. Cunningham and Mr. Fergusson in regarding

the building's with Ionic pillars at Taxila as the oldest architectural

remains yet discovered in the Gandhara province, and I shall subsequent-

ly attempt to show that a considerable interval separates them from the

numerous edifices characterized by a lavish use of Corinthian pillars and

pilasters.

The fact that the Corinthian pillars and pilasters were used, much

in the same way as they are in many modern European buildings, for

decorative purposes applied to buildings of native design, and not as

members of an “order” in the technical sense, is clearly proved by

the manner in which Indo-Persian and Indo-Corinthian forms are

employed together. No styles can be more diverse than these, and yet

the Gandhira architects felt no scruples about employing them both in

the one building, or even in the one sculpture. The first plate in Major

Cole’s set of beautiful heliogravures affords a good illustration of thig

purely decorative use of two diverse styles. The subject of the plate is

an alto-rilievo of the seated Buddha embellished by numerous minor

figures and architectural decorations. ‘I'he latter chiefly consist of com-

binations of Indo-Persian pillars with plain “ Buddhist railings” and

ogee-shaped fagades, while the pilasters at the lower corners of the slab

have acanthus leaf capitals in the Indo-Corinthian style. This sculpture

was probably executed in the third century A. D,

1889, ] on the Oiviligation of Ancient India. 117

Although there is no reason to suppose that the Gandhara buildings

adorned with Corinthian pillars were Greek or Roman in plan or eleva-

tion, the remains excavated, especially those at Jamalgarhi, prove that

such pillars, both circular and square in section, were used for structural

support, as well as for sculptural decoration.

No piece of Corinthian shaft has yet been discovered. The testi-

mony of the sculptures is not conclusive, but, so far as we can judge

from the miniature pillars and pilasters in the reliefs, the shafts were

plain, not fluted.

The incomplete lower parts of the bases of two structural pillars

have been found, and a comparison of their dimensions with those of the

pillars in the famous choragic monument of Lysicrates at Athens (B. C.

334) has satisfied Sir A. Cunningham that the Indian examples differ

from the Greek standard “ solely in giving an inward slope to the per-

pendicular narrow fillet which separates the scotia and torus,

“Tn both the Indian examples it will also be observed that the torus,

or round projecting moulding, is thickly foliated, like that of most of

the Corinthian bases. Of the upper part of the base not even a fragment

has yet been found; and the representations in the bas-reliefs do not

offer any assistance, as they show only one large and one small torus,

separated by an astragal, and altogether want the deeply marked scotia

which forms the leading characteristic of the Corimthian base, and which

is carefully preserved in both of the full-sized Indian specimens.”

The foliation referred to is not found on the bases of the pillars of

the monument of Lysicrates, and is, I think, purely Roman decoration.

T shall subsequently give reasons for dating the Gandhara pillars be-

tween A, D, 250 and 350, and for holding that all the Indian buildings

adorned with Corinthian pillars were constructed under the influence of

Roman art. The remains of structural Indo-Corinthian capitals, found

chiefly at Jamalgarhi and Takht-i-Bahi, are numerous, but unfortunately

are never perfect, owing to the brittleness of the clay slate in which they

were carved, and to the practice of constructing each capital from many

pieces bound together by iron cramps. The lower portion of the larger

capitals, some of which measure about three feet in diameter, was made

in from two to four pieces; the upper portion always consisted of four

segments.

The British Musenm possesses some fine examples of these capitals

collected by Sir A. Cunningham at Jamalgayhi, and smaller specimens

may be seen in the collection at South Kensington. Others are preserved

in the Indian Museum, Calcutta, and in the Lahore Museum.*

* Plates XLVII—L of Cunningham’s Archeol. Rep., Vol. VY, are devoted to the

illustration of Indo-Corinthian pillars. The restoration of elephants on the top of a

118 V. A. Smith — Greco-Roman Influence [No. 3,

Sir A. Cunningham, who was unwilling to recognize Roman in-

fluence on the art of Gandhara, compares the Indo-Corinthian capitals

with those of “ the pure Corinthian order of Greece ”’ as follows :—

“The chief points of similarity are :—

Ist, The three rows of acanthus leaves, eight in each row, which

are arranged round the drum or bell of the capital.

2nd. The broad, but not deep, volutes at the four corners.

3rd. The four pointed abacus with a curved recess in the middle

of each side.

The most marked points of difference are the following :—

Ist. The wide spread of the abacus, which is equal to 23 heights

of the whole capital, that of the Greek examples being little more than

1} height.

Qnd. The retention of the points at the four corners of the abacus,

which in all the Greek examples have been cut off.

8rd. The insertion of a fourth row of acanthus leaves which is

projected forward to the line joining the horns of the abacus. The

abacus is thus formed from a square having a curved recess on each side

of the central projection.

4th, The placing of flowers on the abacus which are supported on

twisted stems springing from the roots of the volutes. In a single

instance fabulous animals are added to the flowers on the horns of the

abacus.

5th. The insertion of human figures amongst the acanthus leaves,

whose overhanging tufts form canopies for the figures.”

I have quoted this passage in full, not because I attach much value

to the comparison made in it, but because it gives an authoritative

description of the characteristic features of the Indo-Corinthian capitals.

Sir A, Cunningham cannot help admitting the resemblance between

those specimens which exhibit human figures among the foliage and

Roman capitals found in the ruins of the baths of Caracalla, but avoids

the natural conclusion, and boldly declares that, if the design for these

capitals with human figures was suggested by any earlier works, “the

suggestion must have come from the creative Greeks of Ariana, and not

from the imitative Romans.”* On the other hand, I am fully convinced,

as I shall try presently to prove, that the design in question did come

“from the imitative Romans,” and that the art of Gandhara is essen-

capital shown in Pl. XLVIII is conjectural, and not supported by adequate evidence.

Two of the Jamélgarhi capitals are figured in Fergusson’s History of Indian and

astern Architecture, and a rough sketch of one specimen from the same place is

given in Indian Antiquary, Vol. III, p. 142.

* Cunningham, Archwol. Rep., Vol. V, pp. 192—194,

1889. ] on the Civilization of Ancient India. 119

tially Roman in style, The Jamalgarhi carvings date, I believe, from

about the middle of the third century A. D., and can be usefully com-

pared in detail only with the similar work in contemporary, or nearly

contemporary, Roman buildings. It is waste of trouble to make elabo-

rate comparison of their details with those of the monument of Lysi-

crates, which was erected about six hundred years previously, but I am

not sufficiently acquainted with the minutiae of architectural criticism

to pursue the subject further, and must leave to others the task of

accurately verifying the various differences and resemblances between

the Indo-Corinthian and Romano-Corinthian styles. Probably, how-

ever, the task would not justify the labour bestowed upon it. If the

Roman origin of the Indo-Corinthian style be admitted, very minute

study of variations in detail may be deemed superfluous, great variation

in the embellishment of Corinthian capitals being everywhere allowed

and practised.

Section ITT.

Tau GAnypufra oR Pususwar Scuoon or Scurrrurz Dascrisep.

A specimen of sculpture, apparently Indo-Hellenic in style, and

closely related to the work of the Gandhara school, was discovered at

Kabul in 1833,* but the first distinct announcement of the existence of

a school of Hellenic art in India was made in 1836 by James Prinsep,

the founder of scientific Indian archmology, who published in that year

at Calcutta a description, illustrated by rude plates, of the so-called

Silenus group procured by Colonel Stacy at Mathurd. This group,

though undoubtedly Indo-Hellenic in style, is not the work of the

Gandhara school. It will be discussed in the next following section.

The ruins of the monastery at Jamalgarhi, north-east of Peshawar,

were discovered by Sir A, Cunningham in 1848, but he did not publish

any account of his discovery till many years later,

The first published account of the Gandhara sculptures is that

written by the late Sir H. C. Bayley, who printed in the Journal of the

Asiatic Society of Bengal for the year 1852 an account, illustrated by

* Journal Asiatic Society of Bengal, Vol. III, p. 362, Pl. XXVI, fir, 1;

Anderson’s Catalogue, Part I, p. 261(K.1). The sculpture ig cirenlar, 154 inches

in diameter, and represents the seated meditating Buddha with flames proceeding

from his shoulders, and surrounded by subordinate figures. It was discovered in

November, 1833, in ruins two miles south-east of the city of Kabul, enclosed ina

large and beautifully roofed square masonry cell, “handsomely gilt, and coloured

by lapis lazuli, which is found in considerable quantities in the mines of Badakshan,

twelve days’ journey from Kabul.” Lapis lazuli has also been found on the site of

Taxila, and at Baoti Pind in the Rawalpindi District. (Cunningham, Archeol, Rep.,

Vol. II, pp. 117, 141).

120 V. A. Smith—Grwco-Roman Influence {No. 3,

the roughest possible sketches, of some remarkable sculptures found

at Jamalgarhi. The works, thus imperfectly illustrated, were subse-

quently brought to England, and exhibited in the Crystal Palace, where

they were destroyed by the disastrous fire which also consumed Major

Gill’s copies of the paintings on the walls and ceilings of the Ajanta

caves.

Prinsep’s and Bayley’s description of the works of Indo-Greek

sculptors failed to attract general attention, probably owing to the

extreme rudeness of the illustrative plates. Dr. Leitner, who brought to

Europe in 1870 a considerable collection of works of art, to which be

gave the name of Greco-Buddhist, is entitled to the credit of being the

first to interest the learned world in the existence of a school of Indo-

Hellenic architecture and sculptare.

Though the Greek influence on the style of the works exhibited by

Dr. Leitner, and on the many similar objects since discovered, is now

universally admitted, itis remarkable that, so late as the year 1875, at

least one writer of repute denied its existence.

“Tt has become a fashion recently,” wrote the late Mr. W. Vaux,

F.R.S., ‘to extend a Greek influence to districts east of Bactria, for

which I venture to think there is really but little evidence. Thus, we

are told that certain Buddhistic figures, chiefly in slate, procured by

Dr. Leitner and others to the north-east of Peshawar, exhibit on them

manifest traces of Greek art. Iam sorry to say that T cannot perceive

anything of the kind.’’*

The Greek influence on the Gandhara sculptures, which Mr. Vaux

could not perceive, is so obvious to other critics, that a formal refutation

of his ill-founded scepticism would now be superfluous. Professor Cur-

tius has rightly observed that the discoveries of Dr. Leitner, Sir A.

Cunningham, and other explorers in the Kabul valley, “open a new

page in the history of Greek art.”’+

The new page thus opened has as yet been little read, and I ven-

ture to hope that the following description of a few of the most note-

worthy examples of Indo-Hellenic art, and discussion of the sources

from which it was derived, may attract both classical and Oriental

scholars to the further exploration of a field hitherto very imperfectly

worked,

The present section will be devoted to the description of some of

the more remarkable and characteristic specimens of the work of the

* Numismatic Chronicle, Vol. XV, N.S§., p. 12, note.

+ Abhandlung iiber die Griechische Kunst, as quoted in Dr. Leitner’s Catalogne,

I believe the paper was published in the Archwologische Zeitung for 1875, but I

have not seen it.

1889.] on the Civilizution of Aneient India. * 121

very prolific sculptors belonging to the Gandhara school. The chrono-

logy and artistic relations of the school will be separately discussed in a

subsequent section ; at present I shall refer only very briefly to these

topics.

The oldest known example of Indo-Hellenic sculpture in the Panjab

probably is the statuette in purely Greek style of Pallas Athéné, the

original of which is in the Lahore Museum, Dr. Leitner has a good

cast of this work in his museum at Woking, and Sir A. Cunningham

possesses a photograph of it. It is shown in Plate VII.

The attitude of the goddess is that represented on certain coins of

Azes, which show her helmeted, standing, facing front, crowning herself

with her right hand, and holding in her left hand a spear obliquely

across her body. The goddess of the coins carries a shield also on her

left arm, but the statuette is imperfect, and the shield has been lost.*

The close relation of this seulpture to the coins of Azes proves that

it must be approximately contemporary with that prince, that is to say,

that it dates from the beginning of the Christian era, or possibly a few

years earlier. It therefore belongs to the same period as do the Ionic

pillars of the Taxilan temples. The statuette is said to have been found

somewhere in the Yusufzai country, but the exact locality where it was

discovered does not seem to be known.

T shall explain subsequently my reasons for thinking that this

statuette of Pallas is a relic of Indo-Hellenic sculpture properly so called,

as distinguished from the Indo-Roman school to which all, or almost all,

the other examples of Gandhara art belong.

The effigy of the virgin goddess of Athens cannot be certainly

connected with any Indian religious system, and we cannot say whether

the statuette above described formed part of the decoration of a Bud-

dhist temple or not. But in all probability it did, for every specimen

of Indo-Hellenic sculpture from Gdéndhdra, the find-spot of which is

known, belonged to a Buddhist building of one sort or another.

Most of the sculptures are evidently Buddhist in subject, but some

of them, notably the figures supposed to represent kings, deal with

secular subjects, though used to decorate edifices consecrated to the

service of religion.

* Gardner, Catalogue of Coins of Greek Kings of Bactria and India, Plate

XVIII, 4. Cunningham, in his Descriptive List (No. 21), observes, ‘‘ The lower right

arm, which probably bore the wgis with the head of Medusa, has been lost.” This

remark is evidently erroneous, The goddess on the coins carries, as might be

expected, the shield on her left arm, and grasps the spear with her left hand. Her

right arm is raised, with the hand to her head, as for the purpose of crowning

herself,

122

V. A. Smith— Greco-Roman Influence [No. 3

Dr. Leitner and Sir A. Cunningham both consider that the most

striking piece in the extensive collection at the Lahore Museum is the

figure of a throned king, resting his left foot on a footstool, and grasping

a spear in his left hand. See Plate VIII. The upper part of the body

is naked, the head-dress is rich, and the squarely cut eyes are remarkably

prominent. The work is in good preservation, the right arm alone being

wanting, The king’s attitude is easy, his expression is dignified, and the

outlines of his figure are boldly drawn, Small figures, which have been

conjectured to represent conquered aborigines, are attached to the right

and left. The identity of the attitude of the principal figure of this fine

group with the attitude of the Indo-Scythian kings as shown on their

coins naturally suggests that the sculpture represents one of these

sovereigns. I do not know where the sculpture was found.*

Sir A. Cunningham found at Jamdlgarhi fifteen or sixteen statues,

some seated, and some standing, which he supposes to be those of kings,

and observes that ‘these royal statues are known by their moustaches,

and the numerous strings of gems worked into their head-dresses, Tho

arrangement of the hair is different in each separate specimen, and, as

the features also differ, there seems little doubt that they are portrait

statues.’’>

In the case of one statue in the Lahore Museum, (No 6 of Descrip-

ive List, and No. 63 of Dr, Leitner’s Catalogue), which Professor Cur-

tins compares with the Greek ideal type of Apollo, the royal character

of the person portrayed is unmistakeably indicated by the presence of

the regal fillet, the ends of which float loosely behind his head, in the

same way as they are shown on the coins of Greek princes both of

Europe and Asia.

It is hardly possible that all these so-called royal statues can be

intended as ideal representations of Buddha as Prince Siddhactha,

before he adopted the religious life, though some of them probably

should be so interpreted. Mr. Fergusson suggested that they should be

regarded as images of Buddhist saints, and the presence of the nimbus

behind the head in many cases supports this suggestion. t

The presence or absence of moustaches proves nothing, for Buddha

is frequently represented as wearing moustaches in the works of the

Gandhara school. If the images in question were portrait statues, as

suggested by Sir A. Cunningham, they would probably be inseribed.

It seems hardly credible that sculptors would execute numerous por-

traits of Kanishka and other kings without taking the trouble of indi-

* Cunningham, Descriptive List, No. 2; Leitner, Catalogue, No, 73.

+ Cunningham, Archeol. Rep., Vol. V, pp. 197, 202.

f History of Indian and Bastern Architecture, p. 179,

1889. ] on the Oivilization of Aneient India. 123

cating for whom the portraits were intended. I think it more likely

that these so-called royal figures are not portraits of individuals, but

that they are ideal representations, in some cases of kings, and in some

cases of saints.

The museums in London and Calcutta possess several examples of

sculptures of this class. Two from the upper monastery at Nuttu are

depicted in Major Cole’s heliogravure plates Nos, 24 and 25. The

statue or statuette shown in the latter plate represents a man of dwarf-

ish figure, standing, as if preaching, with a nimbus behind his head.

The legs are thick and badly executed, and the work seems to me to be

of comparatively late date, probably subsequent to A. D. 300. This

figure, in spite of the ornaments and moustaches, appears intended to

represent a preaching saint rather than a king.

The works above described were all, so far as is known, associated

with Buddhist buildings, though in themselves not obviously Buddhist

in subject. I shall now proceed to describe sculptures, the subjects of

which are taken from the rich stores of Buddhist mythology.

The birth-scene of Gautama, or Prince Siddhartha, who in after

days won the honourable title of the Buddha, or the Hnlightened, is a

favourite subject with Buddhist artists, and recurs in their works almost

as frequently as representations of the Nativity are met with in Chris-

tian art.

Sir A, Cunningham, in the catalogue of sculptures excavated,

chiefly at Jamalgarhi, under his supervision, enumerates four examples

of this favourite subject, two of which are now in the Indian Museum,

(G. 1 and 2).* See Plate IX, fig. 1. Major Cole gives a plate of a

tolerably well-preserved specimen discovered at the upper monastery of

Nuttu during subsequent explorations in the Yisufzai country.t

According to Buddhist belief, Maya Devi, the Buddhist Madonna,

was standing under a sdl tree, when she gave birth to the holy infant,

who sprang from her right side, and was received in a golden net by

Brahma, attended by the devas, or angels. This legend appears to be,

like the sculptures which express it, descended from a Greek original.

Mr. Beal has pointed out that, in several respects, it closely resembles

the Greek myth of the birth of Apollo in Delos.{

The details of the scene vary considerably in different sculptures,

but the traditional grouping of the principal figures is never materially

changed. The description of one specimen will, therefore, suffice for all.

* Dy. Anderson’s Catalogue, Part I, pp. 199, 202.

+ Seven examples of sculptures of the nativity of Buddha preserved in the

Lahore Museum are enumerated in Cunningham’s Descriptive List, which, as usual,

gives no indication of the localities where they were discovered.

f Indian Antiquary, Vol. IX, p. 68.

124 V. A. Smith—Greco- Roman influence [No. 3,

On the slab photographed by Major Cole (Plate 11) Maya is shown,

standing, facing the spectator, with her head slightly inclined, and the

weight of her body thrown on the right foot. Her left leg is crossed in

front, with the toes resting lightly on the ground. In her right hand

she grasps a branch of the over-shadowing tree, and her left arm is

thrown round the neck of her half-sister Prajipati, who supports her.

The figure of the sister is turned in a singularly awkward posture, so as

to show most of her back.* The infant Buddha, springing with out-

stretched arms from his mother’s side, is recognizable, though much

mutilated; the figure of Brahma is almost completely destroyed. The

other attendants, who are introduced in some examples, are here want-

ing. A harp in the upper corner of the composition indicates the

heavenly music which heralded the advent of him whose mission it was

to still the discords of millions of human hearts.

In this work the pose of Maya is tolerably graceful, her figure is free

from the usual Indian exaggeration, and her expression, in conformity

with the belief that the Buddha cost his mother none of the pangs of

travail, is perfectly calm. Her hair is richly braided, and arranged in

the form of a crown or tiara,

A very finely executed statuette of Maya Devi, standing alone, which

was obtained at the same monastery, (Cole, Plate 15, figure 2), shows her

in nearly the same attitude as in the birth scene, holding above her head

the branch of a conventional tree, more or less resembling a palm.

The drapery of this figure is specially elegant. The principal gar-

ment is a tunie (chiton) reaching to the knees, and confined at the

waist, by a rich girdle of four strings, adorned with clasp and vine-leaf

pendant. <A scarf is thrown lightly over the shoulders, and the legs are

clad in loosely fitting trousers of thin material The dress of Maya in

the nativity group is simpler, and consists of an inner tunic or vest, and

a robe wound gracefully round the body, and looped up at the waist.

Single figures like that above described are not uncommon. The

slight variations in different examples indicate that they were arranged

in pairs.

Religious artists found in the deathbed of Buddha a subject scarce-

ly less fascinating than the scene of his birth.

* See post, for a parallel from the Catacombs.

+ So, at Cave XX, Ajanté. ‘ Cave XX is a small Vihara with two pillars and

two pilasters in front of the verandah, One pillar is broken, but on each side of

the capitals there is a pretty statuette of a female under a canopy of foliage.”

(Bureess, Notes on the Bauddha Rock-Temples of Ajantd, being No. 9, Archeol. Survey

of W. India, Bombay, 1879). This valuable book is out of print.

{ The Descriptive List mentions only one example of this subject in the Lahore

Museum, bnt the collection there probably includes other specimens. The Indian

1889.] on the Civilization of Ancient India. 125

According to the Buddhist scriptures, he passed away at the age of

eighty, surrounded by his chief disciples, shaded by the sdl trees in a

grove at a place called Kusinagara, which has been fully identified as

the modern Kasi&é in the Gorakhpur District of the North-Western

Provinces.*

All representations of the scene agree in showing the master lying

on his right side, in a posture of perfect repose, with his head resting on

his hand. The number of attendants varies in different sculptures.

Plates Nos. 16 and 22 of Major Cole’s volume give illustrations of

two well-preserved reliefs, obtained respectively at the upper and lower

monasteries of Nuttu, which vividly depict the peaceful departure of the

great teacher from this troublous world,

The work from the upper monastery (Plate 16) is a sculptured

panel bounded by two good examples of the Indo-Corinthian pilaster.

The dying master, fully robed, reclines on a low bedstead furnished

with mattress and pillow, by the side of which a tripod is placed, sup-

porting a vessel of cool water. A figure, identified as Devadatta, the

malignant cousin, who had pursued Buddha throughout his life with

unrelenting hostility, stands at the head of the couch, with an evil ex-

pression of satisfied malice.

A form, apparently that of a female, with her back to the spectator,

sits crouching on the ground, and six mourning attendants in various

attitudes complete the group. Above the whole hang the boughs of the

sél tree, the forest king which witnessed alike the advent and departure

of the teacher,

The work from the lower Nuttu monastery, reproduced in Plate

No. 22, represents the same scene, though with considerable variation

in the treatment of details. In this group the total number of

figures is increased to thirteen, the most remarkable addition being that

of a shaven-headed monk, crawling on hands and feet, and being pulled

from under the bed by another monk, who has grasped him by the wrist.

Museum, Calcutta, contains at least one (@. 27). In later Buddhist art, as seen at

Kasid and elsewhere, the subject was frequently treated. The death-bed scene

has often been incorrectly referred to as the Nirvana of Buddha, but the term

parinirvdna may be correctly applied to it.

* Cunningham, Archeol. Rep., Vol. I, pp. 76—85; XVIII, p. 55.

+ The figure is that of a man holding a dumb-bell-shaped object, like a club or

conventional thunderbolt, and this figure in other reliefs, for example, in that re-

presenting the scene of the elephant doing homage, must certainly be identified as

Devadatta. But the appearance of Devadatta at the death-bed of Buddha appears

to be inconsistent with the legend referred to in Fa-hian’s Travels, which relates

that Devadatta attempted to poison Gautama, and haying failed to accomplish the

crime, ‘‘ went down to hell.”

VY. A. Smith— Greco-Roman influence

[ No, 3,

Both the compositions above described are admirably balanced, and

the attitudes and expressions of all the persons concerned are rendered

with vigour and truth to nature. The drapery, as usual, is Greek, or

Greco-Roman, in style.

The design of these death-bed scenes is certainly an importation

from the west. The recumbent figure on the bed surrounded by morn-

ing’ attendants is clearly copied from Greek banqueting reliefs of a

sepulchral character, as imitated on Roman sarcophagi. A sculpture in

the Towneley collection in the British Museum bears a very close re-

semblance to the reliefs from the Nuttu manastery above described.*

I have no doubt that the Gandhara sculptures were copied from Greco-

Roman, and not pure Greek, models.

The figure of the founder of their religion was the decorative ele-

ment most largely used by the Buddhist artists in all their works, with

the exception of the earliest buildings in Bihar, Central, and Western

India, where symbols occupy the place afterwards taken by images. In

the countries on the north-west frontier of India, the image of the per-

sonal Buddha had become an object of worship at least as early as the

latter part of the first century A. D., when it was stamped on coins of

Kanishka.}

There is, therefore, no reason to be surprised at the fact that

hundreds of sculptures from Gandhara, in various sizes, represent the

seated or standing Buddha, posed in one or other of the conventional

attitudes (mudré), either buried in meditation, or engaged in exhorta-

tion. Such figures are often executed in large numbers on the face of a

single slab. Multitudes of specimens present the founder of Buddhism

engaged with other persons in one or other incident of his ministry or

the preparation for it.

A deeply-cut relief, found at the village of Mohammad Nari, and

reproduced in the first plate of Major Cole’s book, is a good illustration

of the oft-repeated figure of the teaching Buddha, who is here shown

seated cross-legged on an open lotus-flower, with his feet draped in a

gracefully disposed robe. His right shoulder is bare, and his hair is

arranged in formal conventional curls, a style which in later times be-

came the only orthodox arrangement for the hair both of Buddhist and

Jain statues.

* Dngravings from the ancient marbles in the British Museum, Part V, Plate III,

fig. 6, London. 1826). 1n this work the Towneley relief is described as being of Ro-

man origin, but it may be Greek. Prof. Gardner informs me that the Greek works

of this class are referred to the period extending from B. C. 300 to A. D, 1.

+ Gardner, Catalogue of Coins of Greek and Scythic Kings of Bactria and India,

pp. 180, 133, 175, Pl. XXVI, 8; XXVII,2; XXXII, 14.

—

1889. ] on the Civilization of Ancient India. 127

The central image of the composition, the lotus-throned Buddha,

occupies a niche formed by a dentilled cornice resting on Indo-Persian

pillars. The rest of the slab is oceupied by a profusion of “ Buddhist

railings” and other architectural details, as well as by a multitude of

small human figures, which it would be tedious to describe at length.

The bare right shoulder and formal hair might be supposed to

suggest a late date, but the style of the architectural ornaments and

the fine execution of the work indicate, in my judgment, that it should

be reforred to the first half of the third century A. D. I have already

noted that this slab is adorned with Indo-Corinthian pilasters as well

as Indo-Persian pillars.

One of the most elegant images of the standing, preaching Buddha

is the small statuette from the Mian Khan monastery depicted in figure

3 of Major Cole’s Plate 27, The expression of the face is sweet and

calm, and the drapery is rendered in the best style. Both shoulders

are covered, and the hair, coiled in a top-knot, is artistically and truth-

fully sculptured. This work seems to me to be of earlier date than the

Mohammad Nari specimen, and is probably not later than A. D. 200.

The fine sculpture from the upper monastery at Nuttu (Cole, Plate

12) shows Buddha, wearing moustaches, and with both shoulders

covered, seated cross-legged on a low stool under a sdl tree, addressing

a company of adoring disciples of both sexes.

The balanced grouping of this composition is as skilful as that of

the death-bed scenes.

The three sculptures above described belong to the best period of

the Gandhara school of art.

A statuette of the seated Buddha, about 13 inches in height, exe-

cuted in blue slate, is shown in Plate IX, fig. 2, and is an example of the

school in its decadence. A similar statuette was obtained at Ranigat,*

and is fairly good work, though not of the best style.

Another statuette of the seated Buddha, found at Shah ki dheri,

the ancient Taxila by Mv. L. White King, seems to be of comparatively

late date, having a Hindd, rather than a Buddhist appearance.

* The great fortress of Raénigat, (also known by the names of Nogrém, or

Navagrim, and Bagrim), is situated sixteen miles north of Ohind, and just beyond

the British frontier. Tribal feuds render the place difficult of access, and, when

Mr. King visited it, he required the protection of a strong escort. The ruins have,

consequently, never been thoroughly explored. Sir A. Cunningham gives weighty

reasons for identifying the site with Aornos, the stronghold which resisted

Alexander. The surface of the various courtyards is covered with fragments of

“ statues of all sizes, and in all positions.’ (Arch@ol Rep., Vol. II, pp. 96—111;

V, p. 55). Major Cole in his Second Report notes the existence of seven topes ‘or

stipus within the limits of the fortress, and gives a rough plan on a very small scale.

128

V. A. Smith— Greco-Roman influence [No. 3,

The foregoing descriptions prove that during the most flourishing

period of Gandhara art, which I assign to the years between A. D, 200

and 350, the conventional representation of Buddha had not been finally

determined, and that it was legitimate to make his image either with

or without moustaches, and with the right shoulder either bare or

draped. The figure of Buddha on the Amardvati slab No. 11 exhibited

on the British Museum staircase has both shoulders draped, but in

Buddhist art, as a rule, the founder of the religion is represented with

the right shoulder uncovered, and without moustaches.

It has also been shown that the artists of Gandhdra were at liberty

to give Buddha either the formally curled hair, which in later times)

became an indispensable attribute, or to carve his hair artistically in

accordance with nature.

The treatment of the hair both of Bnddha and other personages in

most of the good sculptures from Gandhara is so artistic, and so far

superior to the feeble conventionalism of ordinary Indian art, that it may

be well to dwell on the subject for a moment.

I agree with Dr. Anderson, in the opinion expressed by him that

the woolly hair like that of a negro, arranged in stiff, formal, little curls

which is characteristic of the Jain images executed in the tenth and

subsequent centuries, and of many Buddhist statues of earlier date, does

not indicate, as has been supposed, any racial peculiarity of the Jain

and Buddhist saints, but is purely conventional.

Dr, Anderson suggests that this mode of representing the hair is

merely an archaistic survival, and that “the hair of the Blessed One

having once been carved in this depraved fashion, it was slavishly

followed after, with a few exceptions, among which were the sculptors

of Gandhara.’”’*

The exact origin of this archaistic treatment of the hair does not

at present appear to be traceable, but, whether it be ever discovered or

not, it is probable that the explanation suggested above, is, in general

terms, the correct one, and that there is no occasion for holding with

Mr. Fergusson, that “it has ever been one of the puzzles of Buddhism

that the founder of the religion should always have been represented in

sculpture with woolly hair like that of a negro.’

As a matter of fact he is not always so represented, nor is the

woolly hair peculiar to his images. The puzzle, if it be a puzzle, is one

in the history of art, not in the history of religion.

The archaic ‘wiry’ style of representing the hair was maintained

* Anderson’s Oatalogue, Part I, p, 259, Cf. ibid., p.175; and Indian Antiquary,

Vol. IX, p. 116.

+ Tree and Serpent Worship, 2nd ed., p. 135.

~*~

1889. ] on the Civilization of Ancient India. 129

by Greek artists in bronze longer than in marble,* and this observa-

tion may possibly serve as the explanation of the woolly-haired Buddhas,

which may be conjectured to have been derived from a bronze prototype.

I cannot venture on trying the patience of my readers by describing

even a few of the many friezes and panels which vividly present inci-

dents of Buddha's life and preaching, such as his visits to ascetics and

Naga kings, and his miraculous escapes from the snares laid by Deva-

datta. The compositions are like most Roman work, generally crowded

with fieures, which it would be tedious to describe in detail. Good

illustrations of several are given in Major Cole’s Plates.

A blue slate panel, about 13 inches in height, representing in high

relief a chaitya front filled with small figures of Buddha and worship-

pers, the original of which is in the Lahore Museum, a cast being in

Calcutta, is reproduced in Plate IX, fig. 3, and is a fair example of a

very numerous class of works.

The seulptors of Gandhara were not restricted in their choice of

religious subjects to the birth, death, meditation, miracles, and preach-

ing of Gautama.

At.the time when they flourished, Buddhist literature had attained

vast dimensions, and offered, in the collections of Jdtakas, or Birth-

stories relating to the adventures of the Buddha in his previous births,

an inexhaustible treasury of subjects for the art of the painter and the

sculptor,

That subjects of this class frequently formed the theme of the

Greco-Buddhist artists can be perceived from the mutilated extant

fragments of their compositions, though the brittleness of the stone in

which their works were generally executed is such that few of the in-

numerable friezes which decorated the buildings of Gandhara have been

preserved in a condition sufficiently perfect to permit of their story

being clearly read,

The best preserved connected series of story-telling sculptures is

that which adorned the risers of the sixteen steps leading to the central

stépa of the monastery at Jamalgarhi, excavated by Lieut. Crompton

and Sir A. Cunningham.t

* Perry, Greek and Roman Sculpture, p. 351.

+ Lieutenant Crompton’s report has not, so far as Iam aware, been printed in

full. Its substance is given in the Indian Antiquary, Vol. III, p.148. The friezes

of the risers are the only sculptures found in their original position at Jamalgarhi,

All the others had been thrown down, and “in many cases large and heavy frag-

ments of the same sculpture were found far apart.” Lieut. Crompton hence con-

cluded that the buildings had been ‘destroyed by design, and not by natural

decay.’ Sir A. Cunningham’s catalogue of the sculptures of the risers arranged in

the order of the steps is given in Archwol. Rep., Vol. V, p. 199.

130 V. A. Smith—Greco-Roman influence [No. 35

These reliefs excited the warm admiration of Mr. Fergusson, and

are certainly deserving of high praise.* Unfortunately they are far

from complete, The surviving portions, however, are of considerable

extent, and are available for study in Cases 1—8 of the Asiatic Saloon in

the British Museum. The arrangement in the museum is arbitrary, and

determined rather by the dimensions of the cases than by the order of

the steps, or the subject of the sculptures.

When first discovered the series was more nearly perfect, and the

discoverer was able to recognize two Jdtakas or Birth-stories, the Wes-

santara and the Séma.

The latter may be read pretty clearly from the remains in the British

Museum (Cases 1—3, tier No. 4). The recognizable scenes are briefly

described by Sir A, Cunningham as follows :—

“‘1.—The young lad, son of blind parents, filling a vessel with water

from a lake frequented by deer.

2.—The youth, shot accidentally by the R4ja of Benares, who aimed

at the deer, is lying on the ground with an arrow sticking in his side.

3.—The Raja in a pensive attitude, his head resting on his hand,

promises to take care of the lad’s parents.

4,—The Raja presents a vessel of water to the blind parents.

5.—The Raja leads the two blind people by the hand to the spot

where their child’s body is lying.

6.—The youth restored to life.”

This story occupied the eighth step of the staircase. The Wes-

santara Jétaka, which adorned the fourth step, is exhibited on the fifth

tier from the top of the British Museum arrangement.

The extremely small scale of these sculptures, which are only about

eight inches high, interferes with the correct proportional rendering of

the several parts. The trees, for instance, are altogether out of scale.

But, when allowance is made for this defect, which is unavoidable in the

execution of complicated designs crowded into a space so limited, these

reliefs may rightly be held to deserve much praise for their vigour of

execution, and for their realistic fidelity to nature.

An exhaustive description of the various scenes and multitudinous

figures in the alfi-relievt of the Jamalgarhi staircase would task too

severcly the patience of the most conscientious reader, but a brief dis-

cussion of some of their more interesting features may not be unwel-

come.

The uppermost tier in the museum arrangement comprises ten

small panels, divided one from the other by broad Corinthian pilasters.

* History of Indian and Eastern Architecture, p. 173.

1889. ] on the Civilization of Ancient India. 13i

Six of these panels, (from the third step of the staircase), are

occupied by female busts with the arms raised, and haying acanthus

leaves extended like wings from the waist on each side. These little

ficures at once remind the spectator of the angels with which he is

familiar in Christian art. It is quite possible that the sculptors of

Gandhara may have picked up some hints from artists connected with

the churches of Asia Minor and Syria, and Ihave a suspicion that they

did so, though I cannot offer any decisive proof of the supposed fact. I

have no doubt that a real connection exists between early Christian art

and the Gdndhara school. The four remaining panels (from the fif-

teenth step) contain each a grotesque bust terminating in two scaly

tails.

Above these panels nine remarkable Atlantean statuettes are ex-

hibited, which form, apparently, part of a set of twenty-three obtained

at Jamalgarhi by Sir A, Cunningham. He supposes that they “ filled

the spaces between the large dentils which supported the heavy mould-

ings of the stvpas,’’* or, as he elsewhere expresses himself, that ‘‘ they

were arranged in rows to support the lowermost moulding of a building.

The figures were generally separated by pilasters.’’+

Numbers of similar figures have been found. Most commonly they

are about eight inches high, but they vary in height from four to

eighteen inches.

The British Museum specimens range in height from about seven to

nine inches. All the figures are in a sitting posture, though the attitude

varies. One figure crouches like Atlas, as if oppressed under the burden

of a heavy load, while the attitudes of the others seem to express repose

rather than the endurance of crushing pressure. Some of the faces are

bearded, and some are not. The facial expression is freely varied, and

rendered with great spirit and vigour. The muscles of the chest and

abdomen are fully and truthfully displayed, with a tendency to exag-

geration, and a pair of expanded wings is attached to the shoulders of

each statuette.

A group of wrestlers (G. 82 Calcutta), and a composition (G. 89

Calcutta), catalogued by Sir A. Cunningham as “ Herakles fighting

with a snake-legged giant,” both of which were found at Jamalgarhi,

are executed in the same style. The latter work (Plate IX, fig. 4) is

* Archeol. Rep., Vol. V, p. 198.

+ Descriptive List, p. 2.

{ Descriptive List, and Indian Antiquary, Vol. IIT, p. 144 Sixteen statuettes

of this class are in the Caleutta Museum (G@. 81 and 83). A feeble terracotta imita-

tion of the design has been found far away eastward in the Bogra (Bagraha) District

of Lower Bengal. (Mn., 1, in Anderson’s Catalogue).

132 V. A. Smith—Grweco-Roman influence [No. 3,

thus described by Dr. Anderson in his Catalogue (Part T, p. 240) :—

“A triangular fragment, with two figures in relief, one lying on the

ground with its back towards the spectator, the upper portion being

the body of a human being, but the legs terminate from the hips

downward in two snake-like coils; the other figure, which is quite

nude, has grasped the end of the left coil with his right hand, while

with his left hand he has seized the head of the monster, which swings

a heavy club to destroy his foe.”

[ think that it is impossible to doubt that the group last described

is a Buddhist adaptation of the Greek myth of the Gigantomachia, the

battle of the gods and giants, which continued for centuries to be a

favourite subject of Greek and Roman sculptors and eem-engravers.

In Greek and Roman art the giants are represented as winged, and

snake-legged, and their figures are generally characterized by exag-

gerated development of the muscles.

No Indian example appears to reproduce exactly the conventional

form of the Greek giant, but the characteristics of that form are all

found in the Jamalgarhi carvings, though not all combined in a single

figure.

The action of the group which Sir A. Cunningham rather rashly

entitles “ Herakles fighting with a snake-legged giant” is obviously

the same as that of the Greek representations of the Gigantomachia,

and the very peculiar conception of the snake-legeed giant cannot have -

been independently invented by the Jamalgarhi sculptors. In this case

the wings seem to be wanting, but the Atlantean statuettes, which have

not the snake legs, are fitted with wings, and display the exaggerated

muscular development of the pattern Greck giant, The little figures

with tails, from the fifteenth step, appear related rather to the Tritous

than the Giants. Their tails seem to be intended rather for those of

fishes than to represent snakes,

The Gigantomachia was so frequently the subject of Greek and

Roman works of art that it is impossible to name the precise channel

by which a knowledge of it reached India. One of the finest examples

of the treatment of the subject is the principal frieze of the great altar

of Pergamon, the giants of which are winged, snake-legeed, and pro-

vided with enormously developed muscles.* It is quite possible that

the fame of this great composition may have spread through Asia, and

stimulated the imitative faculties of a host of minor artists, including

those of Gandhara, but the Gigantomachia was such a hackneyed sub-

ject that we cannot venture to name any particular example of its

* Casts of the Pergamene frieze are at South Kensington. Hngravines of it

will be found in many recent books, e. g. Perry’s History of Greek and Roman

Sculpture,

1889. ] on the Civilization of Ancient India. 133

treatment as the model of the miniature, and comparatively feeble,

adaptations of it by the Indian sculptors. ‘The influence of Rome on

the sculptures at Jamalgarhi, and the other works of the Gdndhara

school, belonging to the same period, is so strongly marked that the

most probable conclusion is that the Indians derived their knowledge

of the artistic use of the Gigantomachia from Roman copies of Greek

works,

I strongly suspect that the Indians borrowed from the Greeks the

giants themselves as well as the sculptured representations of their

battles. The Asuras of Hind& post-Vedic mythology are described as

fierce demons, enemies of the gods, and correspond closely with the

Greek giants. Recent research has proved, or at least rendered pro-

bable, the existence of so much Greek, and even Christian, influence on

the development of Hindi mythology that the borrowing of the con-

ception of giants, enemies of the gods, offers no improbability.

Whether the Buddhist sculptors of the Kabul valley intended their

snake-legged or winged monsters to be images of Asuras, or merely

used them as conventional imitative decoration I cannot undertake to

determine.

A group, frequently recurring in Gandhara art, of which four ex-

amples have been photographed by Major Cole (Plates 1, 2, 4, and 17),

and one is in the Woking Museum, can be demonstrated to be an adap-

tation of a famous composition by a known Greek artist. Another of

the ultimate Greek sources from which the sculptors of Gdandhara

derived their inspiration is thus determined with certainty. I shall dis-

cuss this case with some fulness of detail.

The group referred to represents a plump young woman, fully

draped, standing, held in the grasp of an eagle with expanded wings,

and is reasonably conjectured to represent the translation to heaven of

Mayda Devi, the mother of Buddha, in order that she might be born

again, as related in the Buddhist scriptures. However this may be, it is

quite impossible to doubt the correctness of Sir A. Cunningham’s opinion,

as quoted by Major Cole, that the composition in question is an

adaptation of the Rape of Ganymede, a favourite subject of the later

Greek artists, and of their Roman imitators,

The bronze work on this theme by Leochares (B. C. 372-330) was

considered a masterpicce of that famous artist of the later Attic school,

and was praised with enthusiasm by Pliny.

The original has unfortunately perished, but several copies or

imitations of it, belonging to various periods, some executed in marble,

and some engraved on gems, are extant, and have been figured in many

well-known works on the history of art,

134 V. A. Smith—@rweo-Roman influence [No, 3,

One of the marble copies is in the British Museum, another is at

Thessalonica, a third at Venice, and a fourth, the finest of all, is pre-

served in the Museo Pio Clementino at the Vatican.*

In this composition, which most nearly corresponds with Pliny’s

description of the original, the eagle is represented as supported by the

trunk of a tree behind it, with its wings expanded, and neck stretched

upwards, and grasping firmly, though tenderly, in its talons the beauti-

ful youth, whose feet have just ceased to touch the receding earth.

The robe of Ganymede is dexterously disposed behind his back so as to

protect his body from the sharp claws of the great bird, and yet to

exhibit the full beauty of the nude figure. A dog, seated below, howls

piteously for his departing master.

Critics point out that the addition of the dog to this group, and the

insertion of the tree, are not only in accordance with the myth as re-

lated by Virgil, but are of artistic importance as an aid to the imagi-

nation by rendering more perceptible the soaring movement of the

principal figures, and thns minimizing the objections to a plastic pre-

sentation of a pictorial subject.

The Buddhist adaptations omit the dog, and in this respect agree

with the groups preserved at Venice, Thessalonica, and in the British

Museum, but, in the pose of the eagle, and the introduction of the trunk

of the tree, they resemble the Vatican group more closely than any other.

Three of the examples of these adaptations figured by Major Cole

(Plates 2, 3, and 4) were found in the ruins at Sanghao. His fourth

example (Plate 17) was obtained at the upper monastery of Nuttn,

which is situated close to Sanghao. The Sanghao specimens figured in

Plates 8 and 4 are duplicates, whereas the Nuttu specimen agrees with

the Sanghao sculpture illustrated in Plate 2.

* Overbeck (Mythologie der Kunst) has pointed out that tho extant Rape of

Ganymede groups fall into two distinct classes, The first represents the eagle as

the messenger of Zens; the second presents the god himself transformed into the

shape of an eagle. The Vatican group is the best example of the first and earlier,

the Venetian sculpture is the best example of the second and later type. Engravings

of the Vatican group will be found in Visconti’s Museo Pio-Clementino, Vol. IIT, p-

149, and in the histories of sculpture by Winckelmann, Liibke, and Perry. A fioure

of the Venetian specimen is given in Zanetti’s work on San Marco. The Thes-

salonican group is described and engraved in Stuart’s Athens, II], ch. 9, Pl. Il and

TX, The Indian adaptations seem to combine the characteristics of both types.

t+ “‘Puer .... quem prepes ab Ida

Sublimem pedibus rapuit Jovis armiger uncis;

Longwvi palmas nequidquam ad sidera tendunt

Custodes, seevitque canum latratus in auras.” (A‘neid, V, 252-257).

$ Major Cole says that Sir A. Cunningham found an example of the woman

and eagle subject in a knob or plume of a royal statue at Jamilgarhi, which is now

1889. | on the Oivilization of Ancient India. 135

Both the Buddhist variations show a general agreement with one

another, though differing considerably in detail. The posture of Maya

in the specimens figured in Plates 2 and 17 is singularly ungraceful and

constrained. As some compensation for this defect her feet are so

treated as to suggest the notion that she is really being lifted from the

ground, and in this respect these examples are superior to the other

two, which altogether fail to convey the idea of upward motion. In

both varieties the female figure is fully draped.

The substitution of a fat, round-cheeked, young Indian woman,

swathed in heavy drapery, for the nude form of Ganymede instinct with

the beauty of Greek youth, destroys all the wsthetic value of the com-

position, which is, in its Buddhist forms, devoid of life or elegance, and

far inferior to the worst Greco-Roman example. The conversion of a

Greek theme to their own uses by the Gandhéra sculptors is more

readily demonstrated in the case of the Rape of Ganymede than im any

other, but, unfortunately for their reputation, they were less successful

in dealing with this subject than almost any other which they attempted.

Probably it would be correct to say that a purely ideal subject was be-

yond their powers, ;

A very curious panel in the Lahore Museum, of which a cast is

exhibited at South Kensington, has been differently interpreted by Sir

A, Cunningham and Dr. Leitner.

The former describes it as a “ portion of a large sculpture, contain-

ing eleven figures. The three lower ones are soldiers armed with spears

and shields; but the rest, with their animal’s heads, large mouths, and

sharp teeth, are probably intended for demons. As such they may have

formed part of the army which Mara brought to frighten Buddha during

his ascetic meditation under the Bodhi tree.” (Descriptive List, 538.)

The three soldiers in the lower compartment, marching one behind

the other, are certainly not Indian in style or equipment. They are

Greek, not Roman warriors. Two of them carry long oval shields, the

shield of the third differs in shape, haying a rectangular body, and

circular head, with narrow neck. Sir A, Cunningham’s conjecture as

to the meaning of the composition fails to explain the presence of these

soldiers.

Dr. Leitner, who has seen Buddhist masquerade processions in

Ladakh, informs me that he regards the monstrous forms in the upper

part of the panel as intended to represent the masks of the Vices in a

in the Calentta Museum, but the Catalogue does not mention any such specimen.

G. 40, a seulpture ten inches high, scems to deal with the same subject, although

Dr. Anderson does not recognize it. So large an object can hardly have formed part

of a knob or plume,

136 V. A. Smith— Greco-Roman injflunce [No. 3,

procession of Vices and Virtues, and that the soldiers may be inter-

preted as the escort. In his Catalogue he gives a somewhat different

explanation.

Whatever be the correct interpretation of this strange composition,

it is certainly one of the best, and presumably among the earliest,

works of the Gandhara school. All the figures are well executed, and

the aged and monstrous heads in the upper compartment are carved

with great cleverness and spirit. It probably, like the Athéné, belongs

to the pre-Roman period.

Inasmuch as my object in this paper is not the publication of an

exhaustive monograph on the Gandhira school of sculpture, but the

presentation of a general view of the modes of Greco-Roman influence

on India, though with special reference to the Géndhara sculptures, I

shall not proceed further in the detailed description of works from the

Kabul valley, which deal with subjects obviously belonging to the

domain of Buddhist mythology.

Certain decorative elements, which are not peculiar to the Gandhara

school, but also occur in the earlier sculptures at Bhirhut and Buddha

Gaya in the interior of India, are mythological, but not in themselves,

so far as appears, specially connected with Buddhist mythology. I

allude to the hippocamps, centaurs, tritons, and various winged and

other monsters, which are frequently met with. These forms, which

are certainly of Graeco-Roman origin, so far as India is concerned, were

probably used by the Buddhist artists for purely decorative purposes,

without any definite symbolical meaning. Such monsters were common

in Greek art, and are supposed especially to characterize the works of

the followers of Scopas.

The comic friezes in which boys are shown pulling cattle by the

tails, ridimg on lions, and disporting themselves in sundry fantastic ways,

are obviously not Indian in design. Major Cole’s plate 26 illustrates a

tolerably good specimen from the Midn Khin monastery of such a comic

frieze, the figures in which are boys mounted on lions.

The direct model for these works was probably found in Roman art.

Their ultimate source is to be traced to the Alexandrian compositions

depicting the “ erotopeegnia (love-sports, amatory poems) of the Ana-

ereontic school, in which Eros becomes a boy, and rides all sorts of

wild animals and monsters, lions, panthers, boars, centaurs, hippocamps,

dolphins, dogs, and deer.’’*

Among the remains of the Gandhara sculptor’s work an extra-

ordinary abundance of detached human heads, chiefly exeeuted in

stucco, is met with.

* Perry, History of Greek and Roman Seulpture, p. 629.

—:

——,

1889. ] on the Owilization of Ancient India. 137

The cases in the British Museum contain a series of about forty

such heads, varying from life-size to very small dimensions. Most of

these were obtained in the Peshiwar District. and purchased in 1861

through the late Mr. Thomas.* They are as varied in character as in

size, and comprise old and young, male and female, serious and comic.

Almost all are good, but I was particularly struck by the head, five or

six inches in height, of an aged, emaciated, and bearded man, and the

very remarkable life-size head of a laughing youth, with large straight

nose, big projecting ears, and a curl of hair on his forehead.

Dr. Leitner has a considerable number of similar heads in his

collection, and, as he observes, it is impossible not to notice the resem-

blance between them and the heads found in Cyprus, specimens of

which may be seen in the British, South Kensington, and Woking

Museums.

The specimens from the Peshawar District, in the Indian Museum,

Calcutta, marked P 1—18, are similar, and some particularly good ex-

amples of such heads, found in the Miin Khén monastery, are figured in

Major Cole’s Plate 28.

Two plaster heads of this class are figured in plate IX, fig. 5,

a@ and 6. They are about each six inches in height, The head

reproduced in fig. a is very Greek in feature, though Indian in orna-

ment, The photograph, in consequence of foreshortening, does not do

the face full justice.

The great abundance of such detached stucco heads is probably to

be explained, at least in part, by the following observation of Masson,

who notes that at the village of Hidda, near Jalalabid in the upper

Kabul valley, “idols in great numbers are to be found. They are

small, of one and the same kind, about six or eight inches in height, and

consist of a strong cast head fixed on a body of earth, whence the heads

only can be brought away. They are seated and clothed in folds of

drapery, and the hair is woven into rows of curls. The bodies are

sometimes painted with red lead, and rarely covered with leaf-gold ;

they appear to have been interred in apartments, of which fragments

are also found.’’+

Section IV. Hetnenistic Scuneturn 1n Inp1a Prorgr,

An exhaustive examination of all the known remains of early

Buddhist sculpture which exhibit traces, more or less distinct, of teach-

ing derived from Greek sources would, I fear, be extremely tedious,

* Information kindly supplied by A. Franks, Esq., F. R. 8.

+ Ariana Antiqua, p. 1138.

138 V. A. Smith—Greco-Roman influence [ No. 3,

and would certainly extend this paper far beyond the limits to which

I desire to confine it. The Hellenistic influence on India Proper was

slight, and no site in the interior of India contains the remains of a

distinct, well-established Greek, or Greco-Roman, school of art, such

as existed in Gandhara. I shall, therefore, content myself with a mere

passing reference to most of the Indian cases in which the marks of

western art teaching have been detected, and shall describe in detail

only a few specially interesting works.

The honeysuckle ornament on the capitals of some of the monoliths

of Asoka (B. C, 250) is the earliest example of a Greek form of decora-

tion applied to Indian work. Mr, Fergusson has suggested that Agoka

borrowed this ornament direct from its Assyrian or Babylonian birth-

place, and not from the Grecks,* but, considering the fact that, even

in Agoka’s time, Assyrian and Babylonian art belonged to a distant

past, it seems much more natural to suppose that the Ionic honeysuckle

ornament was introduced into India from the Greek kingdoms of Asia

with which Asoka was in communication.

I have already alluded to the tritons, hippocamps, and other marine

monsters which formed part of the ordinary Greek decorative stock-in-

trade, and passed into Indian art.

The centaur, another characteristic Greek form, is found among

the sculptures at Bharhut, dating from about B. C. 150, and among

those at Buddha Gay4é, which are somewhat earlier.+

The chariot of the sun, in Indian mythology, is drawn by seven

steeds. At Buddha Gayd in Bihar, and again at Bhaja in the Bombay

Presidency, we find it represented drawn by four steeds, as in Greek art.

Mr. Fergusson also draws attention to the Greek look of “the figure

of the spear-bearer” in the Bhajé cave temple.§ The same writer

detects the presence of a distinctly Greek element in the well-known

sculptures of Amaravati on the Krishna river, and such an element may

certainly be traced in them, though its presence is not very obvious on

casual inspection. ||

* Cave Temples, p. 521.

+ For a full descriptive account of the sculptures at Bhiarhut, see Sir A. Cun-

ningham’s special work on the subject. Centaurs at Buddha Gaya and Bhirhut are

described in Anderson’s Catalogue, Part I, p. 129, where further references are

given,

{ For the Buddha Gay4 sun chariot, sce Cunningham, Archeol. Rep., Vol. III,

p- 97; Buddha Gaydé by Rajendralél Mitra, Plate L; Fergusson and Burgess, Cave

Temples, p. 521. For the Bhaja example of the same design see Archeol. Survey

of W. India, Vol. IV, p. 5, Pl. VI,

§ Cave Temples, p. 521, Pl. XCVI, 5.

|| See Tree and Serpent Worship, 2nd ed., pp. 106, 172,

1889.] on the Civilization of Ancient India. 139

The most distinct and conspicuous remains of Indo-Hellenic art

in the interior of India are those which have been discovered at the

ancient city of Mathura, situated on the Jamuna about thirty-five miles

from Agra.

A group in sandstone, found at or near Mathura, was described

and figured more than fifty years ago by James Prinsep as representing

Silenus with his attendants, and a second corresponding, though not iden-

tical, group has since been discovered by Mr. Growse in the neighbour-

hood of the same city.

The block first found is three feet broad, and three feet eight inches

high, hollowed on the top into a shallow basin, perfectly smooth, and

originally nearly circular, and is sculptured back and front with figures

in high relief.

“In the front group the principal figure is a stout, half-naked man,

resting on a low seat, with wig or vine-crowned brow, out-stretched

arms, which appear to be supported’ by the figures, male and female,

standing one on each side. The dress of the female is certainly not

Indian, and is almost as certainly Greek. * * ™ Prinsep agrees

with Stacey in considering the principal figure to be Silenus:—‘ His

portly carcass, drunken lassitude, and vine-wreathed forehead, stamp

the individual, while the drapery of his attendants pronounce them at

least to be foreign to India, whatever may be thought of Silenus’ own

costume, which is certainly highly orthodox and Brahmanical. If the

sculptor were a Greek, his taste had been somewhat tainted by the

Indian bean-ideal of female beauty. In other respects his proportions

and attitudes are good; nay, superior to any specimen of pure Hindu

sculpture we possess; and, considering the object of the group, to sup-

port a sacrificial vase (probably of the juice of the grape), it is excel-

lent.’ ”’*

Prinsep’s account of the purpose of the block described by him, and

his interpretation of the sculptures have both been disputed. I shall

not enter into the controversy on the subject, which may be read in the

works cited in the note. Personally, I am of opinion, that the drunken

man ig an Indian adaptation of Silenus.

A third work, much in the same style, and still more obviously

* Cunningham, Archeol. Rep, Vol I, p. 248. Prinsep’s original account will

be found in Journal As. Soc. of Bengal, Vol. V, (1836), pp. 517, 567, Pl. XXXT.

The sculpture described by Prinsep and its subsequently discovered companions are

discussed by Mr. Growse, and illustrated by good plates, in the same Journal, Vol.

XLIV, Part I (1875), p. 212, Pls. XII, XIII, and are further commented on by

the same writer in Mathurd, a District Memoir, See also Anderson’s Catalogue,

Part I, pp. 170—176.

140 V. A. Smith—Greco-Roman influence [No. 3,

Greek in subject and treatment, was discovered in 1882 by Sir A.

Cunningham, also at Mathurd, where it served an humble purpose as the

side of a cattle-trough. This unique specimen now adorns the Indian

Museum, Calcutta. Dr, Anderson’s careful, though rather awkwardly

worded, description of it is as follows :—

“M. 17.—A figure of Hercules in alto-rilieyo, 2 feet 5 inches

high, strangling the Nemean lion. The latter is represented standing

erect on its hind feet, but grasped round the neck by the left arm of

Hercules, who is pressing the neck against his shoulder. The right

arm of the statuette is broken off, but, as the axilla is exposed, the arm

had been represented raised and bent on itself at the elbow, so that

the hand had been brought down close to the shoulder, but hidden in

the foliage behind the figure, the tree being the same as occurs in the

Silenus group. The greater portion of the knotted club is seen behind

the right side of the figure. The action, therefore, is not only that of

strangling, but of clubbing the lion as well. The head of Hercules

has been lost, and the front part also of the head of the lion. He

(scil. Hercules) is represented as haying worn the skin of an animal

over his back, as the front limbs are tied before his chest in a loop-

knot, the free ends being the paws. The beard of the lion is indi-

cated by parallel pendants, and, on the full rounded left cheek, there

is a somewhat stellate figure with wavy arms, probably a rude Swas-

tika. he fore-limbs of the lion are raised to the front of its neck,

grasping the left hand of Hercules, but they are very feebly executed.

The general art characters of the figure are essentially Grecian, but,

in the attitude in which Hercules is placed towards the lion, and

the consequent position of his right-arm, it would be extremely difficult

to deal any but the most feeble blow. Although there is considerable

anatomical accuracy in delineating the position of the various muscles

brought into play in Hercules, the lion is devoid of action and badly

shaped.’’*

These Mathura sculptures have very little in common with those

of Gandhara, and seem to be the work of a different school. They have

not the Roman impress which is so plainly stamped on the art of Gin-

dhara, and are apparently the result of Greek teaching conveyed through

other than Roman channels. It is difficult to fix their date with pre-

cision. It cannot well be later than A. D. 300, and the style is not

good enough to justify the suggestion of a very carly date, Perhaps

A. D, 200 may be taken as an approximate date for these works, but at

present their chronological position cannot be definitely determined,

* Catalogue, Part I, p. 190,

1889.] on the Civilization of Ancient India. 141

They are by no means, in my opinion, equal in merit to the best of the

GAndhira Indo-Roman sculptures, which I assign to the third cen-

tury A. D.

The Mathuré group of Herakles and the lion may be contrasted

with the widely different representation of the same subject recently

found at Quetta in Balichistin. A much corroded copper or bronze

statuette, two and a quarter feet high, discovered at that place, shows

the hero standing, and holding under his left arm either the skin or

dead body of the slain lion, the right arm being wanting.* This work,

to judge from the published plate, has an archaic look, and bears a

curiously close resemblance to the colossal figure found at Khorsabad

in Assyria, fancifully named Nimrod by Bonomi, and designated the

Assyrian Hercules by other writers. ‘“ He is represented strangling a

young lion, which he presses against his chest with his left arm, while

he is clutching in his hand the fore-paw of the animal, which seems

convulsed in the agony of his grasp. In his right hand he holds an

instrument which we infer to be analogous to the boomerang of the

Australians,” ete.+

T cannot venture to assign even an approximate date for the Quetta

statuette, and can only say that it is certainly an early work.

Section V. Tur Onronotoay anp APFrInttius or THE GANDHARA OR

Prspswar ScHoon or SCULPTURE.

It is impossible to determine the affinities of a school of art until

its chronological position is known at least with approximate accuracy.

Apparent resemblances between the works of different schools are apt

to be delusive and misleading unless checked by chronological dates inde-

pendent of the idiosyncrasies of the critic. On the other hand, the style

of the works of art, the date of which is in question, is in itself, when

used with due caution, an essential element for the determination of the

chronology, if conclusive external proof is not forthcoming. In the case

of the Gdndhira school its chronology and affinities are both still to a

large extent undetermined. I shall quote subsequently the divergent

judgments of the principal authorities on the subject. For the present

I shall confine myself to the examination of the external evidence for

the chronology of the Gandhara sculptures. This evidence falls chiefly

under three heads, namely, (1) Epigraphic, (2) Numismatic, and (3) the

records of the Chinese pilgrims. The pilgrims’ testimony, supplemented

* Journal As. Soc. of Bengal, Vol. LVI, p. 163, Pl. X.

+ Bonomi, Nineveh and its Palaces, 2nd ed., p. 163, Plate X.

142 V. A. Smith—Greco-Roman influence [No. 3,

by scanty historical data from Indian sources, will be more conveniently

dealt with in connection with the internal evidence derived from style.

The other two heads may here be considered.

The epigraphic material in the Gandhara region is unfortunately

meagre in quantity, and the little that exists gives but a small amount

of information,

The local inscriptions, known in 1875, are enumerated by Sir A,

Cunningham,* and comprise the following records, namely, from

(1.) Jamalgarht. (a) Certain mason’s marks;

(8) The Indian names of a weekday and a

month on a pilaster;

(y) Sevenunintelligible letters, read as Saphaé

danamukha, incised on the back of the

nimbus of one of the statues suppos-

ed to be those of kings,

(2.) Kharkai. (a) Masons’ marks ;

(8) Three characters, read as a, ra, and de,

on the sides of a small stone relic-

chamber.

(3.) Zeda. Inscription of Kanishka dated in the year

11.

(4.) Ohind. A fragment dated in the month Chaitra of

the year 61,

(5.) Takht-i-Bahi. Inscription dated in the 26th year of Maha-

raja Guduphara, in the year 103 of

an undetermined era.

(6.) Panjtar, Inscription of a Maharaja of Gushdn or

Kushan tribe, dated in the year 122,

(7.) Saddo. The Indian name of a month on a rock.

(8.) Sahri-Bahlol. The Indian name of a month on a fragment

of pottery.

Inasmuch as Taxila may be included for the purposes of the his-

tory of art in Gandhira, the Taxila inscription of the Satrap Liako

Kusulako, dated in the 78th year of the great king Moga, should be

added to the above list.

Ihave lately obtained an inscription on the pedestal of a statuette of

Buddha dated in the year 274,

All the inscriptions above referred to are in the alphabet variously

designated as Arian, Ario or Ariano-Pali, or Bactrio-Pali, which is

written from right to left, and was employed by Agoka (B. C. 250) in

* Archwol. Rep., Vol. V, pp. 57—64,

”

1889. ] on the Civilization of Ancient India. 143

his edict inscription engraved on the rock at Shahbizgarhi (Kapurda-

giri) in the Gandhdra country. The use of this alphabet never became

general in the interior of India, and certainly died out there altogether

at an early date, not much subsequent to the Christian era.

These facts have been utilized by Sir A. Cunningham as an argu-

ment for the early date of the Géndhara sculptures, but the argument

seems to me devoid of all force. When he wrote his Report the latest

known date for an Arian inscription was the year 122, recorded in the

Panjtér document, and this date was then believed to refer to the era

known by the name of Vikrama, B. 0.57. Sir A, Cunningham, therefore,

areued “As no indian letters have been found on any of them, I con-

elude that the whole of the sculptures must belong to the two centuries

before and after the Christian era, as the Arian characters are known to

have fallen into disuse about A. D. 100 or a little later.”

No one uow believes that the Indo-Scythian era is the same as that

of Vikrama, and most archeologists hold, though conclusive proof is still

wanting, that the Indo-Scythian inscriptions are dated in the Saka era

of A. D. 78. Tf this correction be applied, Sir A, Cunningham’s argu-

ment will mean that all the Gandhdra sculptures must be prior to

A. D. 250.

One premise of this argument has been destroyed hy the discovery

of an Arian inscription dated 274, equivalent to A. D. 352, if referred

to the Saka era, That inscription at the present moment happens to

be the latest known, but there is no reason why one still later should

not be found. The absence of Indian letters on the Gandhara sculp-

tures simply proves that the Indian alphabet was not used in that part

of the country, which fact was known already for an earlier period from

the existence of Agoka’s Shahbazgarhi inscription.

The Arian chavacter never took root in India Proper, and its early

total disuse there gives no indication as to the date of its disuse in its

original home in the countries on the north-west frontier. I should

not be surprised, if an Arian inscription dated as late as A, D. 500 should

be discovered in Afghanistan or the Western Panjab.

The Gandhara sculptures can be proved, on other grounds, to be

earlier than A. D. 500, up to which date the Arian character may well

have continued in use in the country where they occur, The fact,

therefore, that the Gandhara inscriptions are all in the Arian character,

does not help in any way to fix the date of the sculptures, much less

does it prove that they are earlier either than A. D. 100 or A. D. 250.

Among the inscriptions in Sir A. Cunningham’s list those from

Zeda, Ohind, Takht-i-Bahi, Panjtdr, Saddo, and Sahri-Bahlol, are not

closely associated with Greeco-Buddhist sculptures, The valueless Saddo

144 V. A. Smith—Greco-Roman influence [No. 3,

fragment inscribed on a rock is the only one among these records found

in its original position. These inscriptions consequently give no warrant

for the assumption that the Graco-Buddhist sculptures are contem-

porary with Kanishka or Gondophares, who are mentioned in some of

the documents.

The Arian inscriptions at Kharkai and Jamalgarhi are incised on

works of the Graco-Buddhist or Gdndhdra school, but are too frag-

mentary to be of any use. Sir A. Cunningham wishes to read the

characters a, ra, de, on the Kharkai relic-chamber as Arya Deva, the

name of a Buddhist patriarch who flourished late in the first century

A. D, but this interpretation is purely conjectural, and cannot be

admitted.

The result of all the foregoing discussion is the negative conclusion

that, with the exception of the image of Buddha dated 274, no epigraphic

evidence to prove the date of the Gadndhira sculptures has yet been

discovered.

This unique dated inscription is of sufficient interest to deserve a

particular description. Iam indebted to the kindness of Mr. L. White

King, B. C. 8., for permission to publish it.*

In or about the year 1883, at Hashtnagar, the site of the ancient

Pushkalavati (Peukeloaitis), Mr. King came across a statue of the

standing Buddha, which was ignorantly worshipped by the Hindtis as an

orthodox deity. He could not carry away the statue, but was allowed

to remove its inscribed pedestal, a photograph of which is reproduced

in Plate X.

The pedestal, like most of the Géndhira sculptures, is composed of

blue slate, and is 14? long by 8” high. Its front is adorned by an alto-

rilievo, enclosed between two Indo-Corinthian pilasters, and represent-

ing Buddha seated, attended by disciples, who seem to be presenting

offerings to him,

An Arian inscription, consisting of a single line of character, deeply

and clearly cut, and in great part excellently preserved, occupies a

smooth band below the relief. This band was evidently prepared for the

inscription, which must have been executed at the same time as the

sculpture, The record is incomplete at the end, and the lost portion,

which is of very small extent, may have contained the name of the

person who dedicated the image.

The extant portion was read by Sir A. Cunningham, for Mr. King,

as follows :—

* IT have already printed a brief notice of this inscription, accompanied by a

lithograph taken from a rubbing, in Indian Antiquary, Vol. XVIII, (1889), p. 257:

The photograph is now published for the first time.

—,.

1889, | on the Civilization of Ancient India. 145

“ Sam 274 emborasmasa masasa mi panchami 5—” The record, as

it stands, consists of a date, and nothing more. The month is stated to

be intercalary, but is not further named. The numerals are distinct,

and their interpretation seems to be free from doubt. The notation is

clumsy, and may be rendered thus in Roman numerals, II C XX XX

XX X IV, = 274,

The main question suggested by this very scanty record is that of

the identity of the era referred to.

The locality in which the inscription was found suggests that the

date might be expressed either in the era of Gondophares, as used in

the Takht-i-Bahi inscription, or the era of the great king Moga referred

to in the Taxila record of Liako Kusulako, or in the era, generally

identified with the Saka era, which was employed by Kanishka. These

are the only three eras, in which Arian inscriptions from the Gandhara

region are known to be dated, and it is reasonable to assume, in the

absence of evidence to the contrary, that the number 274 refers to one

or other of these epochs. The initial point of no one of the three has

yet been ascertained, and consequently an exact date for the new

inscription cannot be fixed in any case. But the approximate beginnings

of all three eras can be determined by numismatic evidence, and one of

two approximate dates can be selected for the inscription,

The coins indicate that the eras used both by Moga and Gondophares

must have their starting points about the middle of the first century

B. C., and, so far as appears at present, the two may have been identi-

cal. For the purpose of selecting an approximate date for the inscrip-

tion they may be treated as one, and as equivalent to the era B. C. 57,

known to the later ages as the Vikrama Samvat.*

* Assuming that the Maharaja Guduphara of the Takht-i-Bahi inscription is iden-

tical with the sovereign whose name is variously given on coins, in the genitive case,

as Undopherrou, Gondopharou, Gudapharasa, Gudaphanasa, and Gadapharasa, or,

in the nominative case, as Undophares; and assuming further that all the coins

alluded to were struck by one king, then the numismatie evidence indicates that he

flourished in the first half of the first century B.C. (See Gardner’s Catalogue of the

Coins of the Greek and Scythie Kings, pp. XLIV, 103—108, Plates XXIJ, XXII,

XXXII). The year 103 of Gondophares would therefore fall about the middle of

the first century A. D., and, for rough approximations, hig era may be regarded as

identical with that of Vikrama,

Assuming that Moga of the Taxilan inscription is identical with Maues, who ig

known from coins, his date must be fixed as about 60 or 70 B, C., which, again, is

nearly synchronous with the era of Vikrama (Seo Gardner, pp. XXXTIT, XLIX. For

the Taxilan inscription see Cunningham, Archeol. Rep., Vol. LI, p. 182, Pl. LIX, and

Vol. V, p. 67).

I must not, of course, be understood to suggest that as a matter of fact either

Moga or Gondophares used the era afterwards known as the Vikrama Samyat, I use

146

V. A. Smith— Greco-Roman influence [No. 3,

If then the Hashtnagar inscription is dated in the era either of Moga

or Gondophares its approximate date is 274 — 57 = A. D. 214.

Though demonstration that Kanishka used the Saka era is still

wanting, there is no doubt that the era of his inscriptions does not differ,

at the most, more than about twenty years from the Saka, and for the

present purpose the era of Kanishka may be taken as identical with the

Saka, A. D. 78. Assuming that this era was used in the Hashtnagar

record, its date is A. D. 352. The alternative approximate dates, there-

fore, are A. D. 214 and 352.

The style of the Hashtnagar alto-relievo appears to me to be de-

cidedly inferior to that of most of the Miin Khan, Jamalgarhi, Nuttu,

and Sanghao sculptures. The figures in it are not undercut, as they

are in the best specimens of Greco-Buddhist art, and the execution,

on the whole, is poor. So far as I can judge, the work cannot well be

older than the middle of the fourth century.

This dubious conclusion is the only assistance given by epigraphic

evidence for determining the problem of the age of the Gandhara

sculptures.

The numismatic testimony is nearly as scanty and weak as the

epigraphic.

The undisturbed hoard of the coins of Azes buried below the

Taxila temple with the Ionic pillars indicates, as argued above (p. 115),

that that edifice is to be dated from about the beginning of the Chris-

tian era, and this inference is in harmony with the reasoning based on

considerations of architectural style. It is, as I have already observed,

impossible to decide whether the plaster statues found in the Taxilan

temple are contemporary with it or not, for no information concerning

their style has been published. The coins of Azes found at Taxila,

therefore, give no clue to the chronological position of the Gandhira

school of sculpture, excepting afew of the earliest works, especially

the Pallas, already discussed (p. 121). The only localities, so far as I

can ascertain, where coins have been discovered in close association

with remains of Greeco-Buddhist, or Romano-Buddhist, sculpture, are

Jamialgarhi and Sanghao.

Lieutenant Crompton in his report on excavations at the former

site says nothing about coins beyond the unsatisfactory remark that “a

few silver and copper coins were turned up ;”* but Sir A. Cunningham

the epoch B. C, 57 merely as a short expression for any era which began somewhere

about the middle of the first century B. C., and about which more accurate know-

ledge is wanting. The Arian inscriptions from the Gandhara country have not yet

been properly edited, and the published translations are quoted with reserve,

* Indian Antiquary, Vol. II, p. 144,

1889. ] on the Civilization of Ancient Tndia. 14,7

is a little more explicit, and records that, during the progress of the

explorations, eight coins are discovered, seven of which bore the name

of Bazo Deo, or Vasu Deva.*

Unfortunately no more particular account of these coins has been

published. We do not know either the circumstances of their discovery,

or their numismatic type, and consequently can draw no positive infer-

ence from the fact that they were found. Coins bearing the name of

Bazo Deo or Vasu Deva continued to be struck for a long period, but

none of them are earlier than abont A. D, 150,+ and all we can say is

that the discovery of Bazo Deo coins at Jamalgarhi is perfectly con-

sistent with the inferences to be drawn from the style of the sculptures

found in that locality, even if it be assumed, which is not proved, that

the coins are contemporary with the sculptures. The coins, for all that

appears to the contrary, may have been struck in the third century.

The only other locality where the discovery of coins can be held to

afford evidence for fixine the chronology of Gandhdra sculpture is

Sanghao. The discovery is reported by Major Cole, a good explorer and

photographer, but a bad archeologist, as follows :—

“The site where the sculptures were dug is perched on a steep

spur, and was the first excavation done under my superintendence in

January, 1883. The building revealed two distinet periods, and consists

of a basement containing small topes, and of a superstructure of plain

apartments, built obliquely over the basement, apparently without re-

ference to its plan.

“The sculptures were found in the basement, and belong to the

older period; coins of Kanishka, A. D. 80 to 120, were found in the

superstructure, and belong to the more modern period.” f

The Kanishka coins were found along with a brass ring in the so-

called ‘treasury,’ “in earthen ware jars embedded in the floors at

the corners A and B,” as shown in the plan.§

The sculptures referred to were sent to the Lahore Museum, and

form the subject of Plate II of Major Cole’s volume of heliogravures.

A coin of Gondophares was also found somewhere in the same group

of buildings.|| Gondophares reigned about A. D. 30, but the mere fact

that a coin of his was found at Jam4lgarhi would, at the most, prove

* Archeol. Rep., Vol. V, p. 194, The date assigned to Bazo Deo in this passage

is admittedly erroneous.

+ Gardner, Catalogue of Coins of Greek and Scythie Kings, pp. lii, 159—161

Pl, XXIX.

t Cole, Third Report of the Curator of Ancient Monuments in India, for the

year 1883-84, p. cx.

§ Cole, Second Report, for 1882-83, p. exx, Pl. 3,

|| Cole, Third Report, p. ex.

148 V. A. Smith-—Grwco-Roman influence [No. 3,

an early occupation of the site. It is no evidence of the date of a parti-

cular set of sculptures

The discovery of coins of Kanishka in the superstructure of the

Jamalgarhi monastery, above the basement containing the sculptures,

is a much more weighty fact, and undoubtedly seems to warrant Major

Cole’s inference that the sculptures are earlier than A. D.100. Neverthe-

less, I am convinced that the inference is a mistaken one, I fully

accept Major Cole’s account of what he saw, but it is quite possible

that he did not see all that ought to have been observed. He isa

strong believer in Sir A. Cunningham’s theory of the early date of the

Gandhara sculptures, and may, like many other people, have been

unconsciously biassed by a prepossession. It is impossible for any one

who has not minute local knowledge to check the details of an observa-

tion as reported, but, while I cannot pretend to point out the seat

of the error, I am fully persuaded that the discovery of the coins in

question is not to be explained by the theory that the sculptures photo-

graphed are earlier than the reign of Kanishka, but should be inter-

preted in some other way.

My reasons for thus refusing to accept apparently clear external

evidence of date will, I hope, be sufficiently established by the discus-

sion of the internal evidence on which I am about to enter. For the

present, it will suffice to say that Major Cole’s plate refutes his text.

The Sanghao sculptures belong to the same school as those of Nuttu,

though they may be a little later, and they bear throughout distinet

marks of the influence of Roman art of the third or fourth centnry.

They cannot possibly be anterior to A. D, 100, no matter what coins

were found above or below them.

The problem demanding solution may be conveniently stated by

placing in juxtaposition and contrast the opinions expressed by the two

scholars who have attacked it.

Mr. Fergusson, after giving many reasons, some strong, and some

the reverse, for his opinion, came to the conclusion “ that, though some

of these Gandhara sculptures probably are as early as the first century

of the Christian Era, the bulk of them at Jamaleiri, and more especially

those at Takht-i-Bahi, are subsequent to the third and fourth [centuries ls

and that the series extends duwn to the eighth [century]; till, in fact,

the time when Buddhism was obliterated in these countries,’’*

Sir Alexander Cunningham expresses his views as follows :—

‘What I have called the Indo-Grecian style must have been intro-

duced by the Greeks who ruled the country ; but the earliest Specimens,

so far as can be proved, belong to the time of Azes, I saw myself twelve

* Indian and Hastern Architecture, p. 182.

1889. ] on the Civilization of Ancient India. 14.9

coins of Azes exhumed from under the temple of Malidr-hi-mora (Shah-

dheri), from which the Indo-Ionic capitals and bases were extracted.

The Indo-Corinthian examples should be equally old, at least all

the fine examples. But the oldest that can be proved, belongs to the

time of the Antonines, and is certainly older than Constantine.”

[Here follow detailed references to the stépas at Manikyaéla and

elsewhere, and to the use of the Arian alphabet, which has been sufii-

ciently discussed above. |

“‘T would, therefore, ascribe all the greater works, both of sculpture

and architecture, to the flourishing period of Kushan sway under

Kanishka, Huvishka, and Vasu Deva—, or from 80 to 200 A. D.

Doubtless many sfiépas were erected after A. D. 200; but they were

comparatively small, and their decorations rough and coarse.”

[Reference is then made to the Sahri Bahlol image, and the Hidda

and Baoti Pind topes, which will be discussed subsequently. ]

“ T notice that none of the sculptured head-dresses show any affinity

with Sassanian costume, whereas the coins (Indo-Sassanian) show it

unmistakeably, from about the time of Bahrim Gor. From this I infer

that the sculptures are older than 400 A. D,

“TI believe that the strong Sassanian government from A. D, 230 to

450 formed a very effectual barrier to intercourse between Rome and

N.-W. India. Roman geld coins are plentiful down to the time of

Severus and Caracalla [A. D. 217]. They then disappear until the

time of Justin [A. D. 526], Marcian [A. D. 450], Leo [A. D, 474], and

Anastasius.” [A. D. 491-518].*

I am not able to agree altogether with either Mr. Fergusson or Sir

A, Cunningham, and shall now proceed to state the reasons which seem

to me suflicient to justify me in venturing to differ from such eminent

authorities.

Tt will be convenient to attempt in the first place to fix possible

limiting dates, and, when that has been done, to determine, so far as

may be, the approximate actual dates of the sculptures. The chronolo-

gical enquiry involves the determination of their aesthetic affinities.

As to the initial date there is practically no dispute. It is impos-

sible to be certain that ‘“ the Indo-Grecian style” was really “introduced

* My quotations are from a letter dated 8th January 1889, with which Sir A,

Cunningham favoured me in answer to enquiries, and whieh consequently, express

his latest and deliberate opinion on the subject. In the Introduction to Volume V

of the Archaological Reports he had long ago expressed the same opinion as to the

relation between the Kushén dynasty and the Gandhara sculptures, but the theory

which he then held as to the Kushin chronology obliged him to fix the date of the

sculptures nearly a century and a half earlier than he now does.

150 V. A, Smith—Greco-Roman influence [No. 3,

by the Greeks who ruled the country,” as Sir A. Cunningham affirms

that it must have been, because, with the exception of coins, not a

vestige of Bactrian art is known to exist, and we know nothing almost

about the Greeks who ruled the country beyond the names of some of

them.

But, whoever introduced Greek art into India, so far as our present

knowledge extends, the Taxilan Ionic temples are certainly our oldest

specimens of Indo-Greek architecture, and the statuette of Athene, in

the same posture in which she is shown on the coins of Azes, is our

oldest Indo-Greek sculpture from the Gandhira region. Both the

temples and statuette must date approximately from the beginning of

the Christian era.

It has been shown above (p. 112) that Greek art influenced Indian

sculpture and architectural decoration from the time of Asoka B. C.

250, and that more or less distinct traces of its influence may be traced

in the interior of India for several centuries afterwards. Greek ideas

reached India by at least two routes, namely, overland through Bactria,

and by sea through the ports of the western coast.

The Athene and the Taxilan Ionic pillars are, I think, to be classed

among the results of this old and long-continued Hellenistic influence.

The bases of the Ionic pillars at Taxila, according to the measure-

ments of their discoverer, correspond exactly with the pure Attic model,

as seen in the Hrectheum. ‘ The capitals differ from the usual Greek

forms very considerably, and more especia!ly in the extreme height of

the abacus. The volutes also differ, but they present the same side

views of a baluster, which is common to all the Greek forms of the

Ionic order.”* In other words, the pillars, though with peculiarities of

their own, are Greck, not Roman. The Roman modification of the

Tonic order was characterized by corner yolutes.

At the beginning of the Christian era Roman art, as will be explain-

ed presently, had not affected India, and the fact that the Taxilan Ionic

pillars are Greek, not Roman, in style, harmonizes perfectly with the

numismatic evidence that they were erected soon after B. C. 30.

So far, then, as the Athene and the Ionic pillars are concerned, it

must be admitted that the Gandhara seulptures go back to the be-

ginning of the Christian era, and A. D. 1 may be taken as the anterior

limiting date. Nothing older is known in the Gandhira region. IT

shall endeavour to prove subsequently that nothing else which has been

found there is nearly so old.

{ shall now try to fix the posterior limiting date, which Mr, Fergus-

* Archeol, Rep, Vol, V, p. 71, Pl. XVIII.

—

1889.] on the Oivilization of Ancient India. 151

son places in the eighth century, and Sir A. Cunningham at the be-

ginning of the fifth.

The extension of the Graco-Buddhist series of sculptures down to

the eighth century A. D. by Mr. Fergusson was suggested by the pub-

lished accounts of the opening of the great tope at Manikyéla many years

ago by General Ventura.

The undisturbed deposit which was found in the lower portion of

that building included coins of Kanishka and Huvishka, and none

later, and is legitimately interpreted as signifying that the structure

in its original form cannot be older than A. D. 110, nor much later than

A. D. 150.

The upper deposits, about the exact position of which there is

some doubt, contained various coins ranging in date from A. D. 632 to

about A. D. 730, and undoubtedly show that the top of the building must

have been opened in the eighth century, and a deposit then made. But

they prove nothing more.

We are altogether ignorant of the circumstances under which these

upper deposits were made, and it is very unsafe to build any historical

theories on their existence. The great tope at Manikyala is adorned

with Indo-Corinthian pilasters, the existing capitals of which are exe-

cuted in kankar, or nodular limestone. Sir A. Cunningham supposes

that all the original work of the tope was in sandstone, and that the

kankar mouldings date from the eighth century.* No other example

of Indo-Corinthian work of that date is known, and, if the existing

capitals were executed in the eighth century, I feel certain that they

were mere restorations. As a matter of fact their date is quite uncer-

tain, The attempt to connect the coin of Yaso Varma, A. D. 730,

which was found in the upper deposit, with supposed repairs of the

tope in the eighth century is purely conjectural. All we really know

is that somebody for some reason unknown opened the building at the

top and put ina coin of Ydéso Varma. Such an adventitious supple-

mentary deposit is no substantial basis for an argument that Buddhism

and Indo-Hellenie art still flourished in the Gandhara region in the

eighth century, and, except Yaso Varma’s coin, no evidence whatever,

so far as I am aware, exists to support the inference that the Gandhara

school of art continued to exist so late as the eighth century.

In another place, Mr. Fergusson, still relying on the same poor

little coin, has given an unwarrantable extension to the duration

* The ereat Minikydla tope is discussed by Cunningham at considerable length

in Archwol Rep., Vol. II, p. 139, and Vol. V, pp. 76—78.

+ [It is more probable that the coin is of the 6th century, of a Yaso Varman

about

582 A. D. This would admirably fit in with “ the limiting date” given on

p. 153, See Proceedings for August 1888, Ep.],

152 V. A. Smith—Grweco-Roman influence [No. 3,

of Buddhism asa dominant faith in Gandhadra. “There were,’ he

writes, “ probably no great Buddhist establishments in Gandhara before

Kanishka, and as few, if any, after Ydso Varma, yet we learn that

between these dates [%. e. circa A. D, 78 to 730], this province was as

essentially Buddhist as any part of India.*

In support of the last clause of this sentence the Chinese travellers

Fa Hian and Hiuen T'siang are appealed to, but their testimony does not

support the conclusion drawn from it. After the middle of the seventh

“* essen-

century, when Hiuen Tsiang wrote, very few parts of India were

tially Buddhist,” and Gandhara certainly was not. In A, D. 730 very

little Buddhism can have been left in it.

Mr. Fergusson’s language is correct wheu it is confined to the be-

ginning of the fifth century. Fa Hian who travelled in India in the

years A. D, 400—405, found Buddhism vigorous and flourishing in

Gandhara, as in a large part of India. But, at the time of the travels of

Hiuen Tsiang, A. D. 629—642, a very great change had taken place, and

Gandhara was very far from being “ essentially Buddhist.”

The capital city of Gandhara, the modern Peshawar, is, he notes

“about 40 i [= 6 to 7 miles] in circuit. The royal family is extinct,

and the kingdom is governed by deputies from Kapisa [N. of Kabul].

The town and villages are deserted, and there are but few inhabitants.

At one corner of the royal residence there are about 1,000 families

* * * ‘There are about 1,000 sanghdrémas [monasteries], which are

deserted and in ruins. They are filled with wild shrubs, and solitary to

the last degree. The stvipas are mostly decayed. The heretical temples,

to the number of about 100, are occupied pell-mell by heretics.”

At Pushkalavati, the modern Hashtnagar, the pilerim found a

large population, but not of the congregation of the faithful, for the

Buddhist buildings, like those of the capital, were in ruins.

Taxila, east of the Indus, was dependent on Kashmir, the royal

family here also being extinct. The monasteries are described as

‘ruinous and deserted, and there are very few priests; those that there

are, study the Great Vehicle.’’>

The graphic and emphatic words of Hiuen Tsiang prove with abso-

lute certainty that at the time of his visits (A. D. 629—642) the Buddhist

religion in Gandhara was nearly extinct. The utter decay of which he

gives such clear testimony must have been in progress for a considerable

time. Itis not possible that the Buddhist edifices of Peshawar could have

become “ deserted and in ruins, filled with wild shrubs, and solitary to

the last degree”’ in a day.

* History of Indian and Eastern Architecture, p. 76.

+ Beal, Buddhist Records of the Western World, Vol. I, pp. 100, 109, 187.

1889.] on the Civilization of Ancient India. 153

It is quite safe to assume that Buddhism had ceased to be an active

force in the Gandhara region, including Taxila, by the year A. D. 600;

and it is inconceivable that new religious edifices on any corsiderable

scale should have been erected, or works of art deserving of the name,

executed in that region subsequent to that date by the scattered, poverty-

stricken, and necessarily dispirited adherents of a decaying religion.

It follows, therefore, that the series of Greco-Buddhist works in

Gandhara does not extend, as Mr. Fergusson supposed, to the eighth

century, but, on the contrary, was closed by the end of the sixth

century.

As amatter of fact, the closing date must, I believe, be pushed

back considerably farther, but in any ease, A. D. 600 must be taken as the

extreme possible limiting posterior date for any work of the Gandhdra school

in the Lower Kabul Valley. The dates of which we are in search lie,

therefore, between A. D. 1 and A. D. 600,

The above argument, based on the testimony of Hiuen Tsiang,

appears to me unanswerable, but it may be well to supplement it by

other arguments, in themselves of less force, which reduce the closing

date to still narrower bounds. I have already quoted Sir A Cunniue-

ham’s remark that the head dresses of the Gandhara sculptures show no

affinity with the Sassanian costume, and that the sculptures may there-

fore be regarded as prior, not only to A. D. 600, but to A. D. 400,

Another observation of Sir A. Cunningham’s leads to nearly the

same conclusion. He observes that ‘all, or nearly all, Buddhist build-

ing must have been stopped after the occupation of Peshawar by

Kitolo’s son in the latter part of the fifth century.” The Chinese ac-

count show that “the last king of the Yuchi [Yueh-ti] mentioned in

history is Kitolo, who took possession of Gandhara, but was obliged to

return to the west to oppose the white Huns, leaving his son in charge

of the new province. The son established his capital in Fo-lu-she,

or Parshawaér [Peshawar]; and the name of the founder of the Little

Yuchi, as they were afterwards called, still survives in the title of Shah

Kator, the Chief of Chitral.”’*

The coins of the kings of the Little Yuchi are described as bearing

Saiva emblems,t and the kings themselves, therefore, were presumably

Brahmanists. It is going too far to assume with Sir A. Cunningham

that the rule of a Saiva king must necessarily have put a stop to all,

or nearly all, Buddhist buildings, but it must certainly have been un-

* My first quotation is from a private letter. The second is from Archeol.

Rep., Vol. II, p. 63. I have not verified the reference to Chinese authors, which

is not given in detail,

+ Archaeol Rep., Vol. V, p.7. I have not seen any of these coins.

V. A. Smith—Greco-Roman influence [No. 3,

favourable to their erection, In another place Sir A. Cunnincham

speaks of “the first persecution of Buddhism by the Saiva kings of

the Little Yuchi,’”* but I do not know what evidence exists for this

alleged persecution, Whatever may have been the precise attitude of

the Little Yuchi kings towards Buddhism, it is certain that the latter

years of the fifth century were times of conflict and turmoil throughout

Northern India. The Bhitari pillar inscription records the struggles be-

tween the Guptadynasty and the Huns (Hinas), and in or about A. D.

480, on the death of Skanda Gupta, the Gupta empire broke up.- <A

few years later the stormy career of the Htma chief Mibhirukula dis-

turbed the whole of Northern India from Bengal to K4shmir.t In such

a period of anarchy and confused struggles for dominion the arts of peace

are perforce neglected, and it would be strange indeed if Géndhara in

those days was the scene of the peaceful development of a considerable

school of sculpture, as Mr, Fergusson supposed it to have been.

I doubt also if the Greco-Roman impulse retained any consider-

able force after A. D. 450, even on the north-west frontier. By that

time it had certainly spent itself in India Proper, both in the North

and West. The last faint traces of Greek skill in design are observable

in the Gupta gold coinage of Chandra Gupta II, which was minted in

Northern India about A. D. 400,—the later Hindi coinage is all barba-

rous in style. Corrupt and unmeaning Greek letters linger on the

silver coins of Kumara Gupta and Skanda Gupta struck in Western

India up to about A. D. 480, but the fact that these letters are corrupt

and unmeaning shows that Hellenistic culture had then dwindled down

to a dead tradition, even in Gujardt, which had been for centuries in

communication with Alexandria and Rome.

In short, all that is known of early Indian history indicates the great

improbability of the existence of a flourishing Hellenistic school of

sculpture on the north-west frontier later than A. D. 450.

Before proceeding to the discussion of the artistic relations of the

Gandhara sculptures, which will render the chronology more definite,

one other piece of external evidence may be cited to prove that the good

sculptures are much earlier than A. D. 600.

* Archeol. Rep. Vol V, p. 42.

+ [See, however, on the dissolution of the Gupta empire, the paper!On an In-

scribed seal of Kuméra Gupta, ante, p. 85. Ep. |

{ For the history of the Gupta period see Mr. Flect?s work on tho Gupta inserip-

tions, Vol. III. of the Corpus Inseriptionum Indicarwm. I have given a vory brief

outline of it in my essay on the Gupta Coinage in the Journal Royal Asiatic Society

for January 1889, to which reference may be made for the

proof of the remarks in

the next paragraph.

—

1889, ] on the Civilization of Ancient Inia, 155

A statuette, Indo-Greek or Indo-Roman in style, wanting the hands

and feet, was discovered by Dr. Bellew in the Gandhara country, care-

fully enclosed in a sepulchral chamber at the level of the ground in the

centre of a stupa. ‘The statuette represents the standing Buddha, and

is characterized by Dr. Bellew as “ better carved than the generality of

figures met with,” and by Sir A. Cuuningham as “ fine.”*

The style of the statuette shows that it was executed during the

flourishing period of the Gandhara school, and its mutilated condition

proves that it was already old when deposited in the stupa. The form

of that building indicates that it was created not later than A. D. 600,

nor much earlier than A. D, 500.

It is thus evident, remarks Sir A. Cunningham, that the statuette

was utilized at a time ‘when the zeal of first converts had long since

died away, and the growing indifference of the people no longer required

the manufacture of new statues. Under such circumstances, I can

readily suppose that that the builders of the tope may have deposited

any piece of Buddhist sculpture that came to hand, just as Brahmans at

the present day will set up and worship any statue which may be found,

caring little for its state of mutilation, and still less for its possible

connexion with Jainism or Buddhism.”

This curious discovery thus confirms the evidence already adduced

to prove the propositions that the period A. D. 500—600 was one of

decay for Buddhism in Gandhara, that few new religious edifices were

erected. doing that period, though their construction did not altogether

cease, and that the vigorous, local school of Indo-Hellenie art belongs

to an earlier time.

My contention that the history of the Géandhara school of Indo-

Hellenic art, consecrated to the service of Buddhism, was practically at

an end by A. D. 450, may be met by the observation that Buddhist

monuments of later date are known to exist in the upper Kabul Valley

and elsewhere in the neighbouring countries.

One of the latest stvipas, to which a date at all definite can be assign-

ed, is that knownas No. 10, at Hidda near Jalalabad. This building con-

tained a deposit of coins consisting of five gold solidi of the Byzantine

emperors Theodosius, Marcian and Leo (A. D. 407—474), two very

debased imitations of the Indo-Scythian coinage, which may be assigned

to the sixth century, and no less than 202 Sassanian coins of various

reigus, but all agreeing in the absence of any trace of Muhammadan

influence.

Masson and Wilson, arguing from these facts, reasonably came to

* Cunningham, Descriptive List, No. 165; and Archwol. Rep. Vol. V, p. 42, with

quotations from Dr, Bellew’s Report on Yitisufzai, the original of which I have not seen.

156 V. A. Smith—Greco-Roman influence | No. 3,

the conclusion that the stépa must have been constructed between the

years A. D. 474 and 690, at which latter date the Muhammadan incur-

sions had begun, and Kabul was governed by Brahman kings.*

The Sassanian coins indicate that the monument was erected about

A. D. 600.

A stipa belonging to approximately the same period, with an undis-

turbed deposit of coins, was opened by Sir A. Cunningham at Baoti Pind

in the Rawal-Pindi District, east of the Indus.+

No stéipa of later date than those at Hidda and Baoti Pind is, I

believe, known either in Afghanistan or the Panjab, though I should be

sorry to affirm that none such exist.

These examples prove, as we had already learned from Hiuen Tsiang,

that Buddhism, though sadly weakened at the beginning of the seventh

century, was still alive, and show, which was hardly to be expected, that

occasionally persons conld still be found willing to spend much time and

money on works dedicated to the religion of Buddha.

But these examples prove nothing in favour of the late continuance

of the Gandhara school of sculpture.

I do not think that any Indo-Hellenic sculpture was found associat-

ed with the ruins of the Baoti Pind stiipa. The published information

concerning the architectural and sculptured decorations of the stipas near

Jalalabad is very meagre. So far as it goes, it indicates that, whatever

may be the reason of the difference, the monuments in the upper Kabul

valley do not display such manifest traces of Gresco-Roman influence as

do those situate in the lower Kabul valley or Gandhara. Wilson speaks

more than once of “plain mouldings” on the pilasters, and does not,

T think, note any example of the Indo-Corinthian capital among the ruins

of the Jalalabad topes. The date of these topes has, consequently,

little bearing on the question concerning the chronology of the Gandhara

sculptures.

It is probable that these sculptures are the work of a special local

school, working on the lines of Roman art under the patronage of

the sovereigns who resided at the city now known as Peshdwar. It

seems clear that the head quarters of the school were at Peshawar, and

that the special modification of Roman art, worked out by the artists of

that city, never spread beyond the bounds of a comparatively small region

in the vicinity of the capital. The connection between the Peshawar

school and the architects and sculptors of interior India was, I believe,

very slight, if it existed at all.

I have ventured to assert positively that the Gandhara or Peshawar

* Ariana Antiqua, pp. 44, 110, Pl, XVI, XVIII,

+ Archwol, Rep., Vol. II, p. 141.

1889. ] on the Otvilization of Ancient India. 157

local school of sculpture followed the lines of Roman art, and is not the

direct descendant of pure Greek art. This proposition of course is to

be taken strictly as applying only to the Peshawar school. It does not

apply to the case of the Ionic pillars at Taxila, nor to the sculptures

at Buddha Gay or Bharhut. The Sanchi work too is probably free

from Roman influence, and I cannot perceive any very clear traces of

such influence at Amaravati, though I am not certain that it is alto-

gether absent. The art work in some of the caves in Western India,

on the other hand, was in all probability influenced by the specially

Roman developments of Greek art.

I pass by on the present occasion the wider questions suggested by

an examination of the entire field of early Indian art, and confine

myself to the discussion of the nature and degree of Roman influence

on the local Gandhara or Peshawar school of sculpture, which is special-

ly characterized bv the use for decorative purposes of the Indo-Corin-

thian capital.

A brief outline of some of the most material facts in the history

of the intercourse between Rome and India will help my readers to

appreciate more accurately the value of comparisons between Indian

and Roman works, and to understand the bearing of such comparisons

on the chronology of the Gandhara school.

Roman influence was not felt by India until after the establishment

of the empire of the Casars, and the subjugation of Egypt by Augustus ;

and even during the reign of Augustus, the maritie commerce be-

tween Rome and India appears to have been conducted by Arab ships,

The discovery or re-discovery of the course of the monsoon by

Hippalos, about the middle of the first century A. D., first rendered

it possible for Roman ships to reach the Indian shores.

The overland trade between India and the Roman empire appears

to have first attained large dimensions at about the same time. Pliny,

who died A. D. 79, laments, in a well-known and often quoted passage,

the heavy drain of gold from the capital towards the east, and his evi-

dence is confirmed by the large number of coins of the early Roman

empire which have been found in India.

The overthrow of the Nabatean kingdom of Petra in A. D. 105

secured for Palymra the commercial preeminence on the principal

land route between the Roman empire on one side and India and China

on the other, and that city retained the preeminence thus gained until

it was sacked by Aurelian in A, D. 273. Palymra was visited by the

emperor Hadrian about the year A. D. 130, and about A. D. 200, in the

reign either of Septimus Severus, or of his son Caracalla, was made a

Roman colony.

V. A, Smith—Grweo- Roman influence No. 3

“ ?

Active communication between the Roman empire and the far east

was maintained during the third century, not only by the peaceful

methods of commerce, but by the frequent oriental expeditions of the

emperors. The disastrous war of Valerian with the king of Persia,

A. D, 254—260, brought the armies of Rome into almost direct contact

with India,

The period of Palmyra’s commercial greatness, A. D. 105—273, coin-

cided with the period of Roman military activity in the east, and in part

with the prosperity of Alexandria, the emporium of the Indian sea-borne

trade. This period, accordingly, is that during which Roman intercourse

with India attained its maximum. “Tt was during the reigns of Severus

[A. D, 194—211], his son Caracalla [A. D. 211—217], and the Pseudo-

Antonines that Alexandria and Palmyra were most prosperous, and

that Roman intercourse with India attained its height. The Roman

literature gave more of its attention to Indian matters, and did not, as

of old, confine itself to quotations from the historians of Alexander, or

the narratives of the Seleucidan ambassadors, but drew its information

from other and independent sources.”

The existence of such independent sources of information is ap-

parent from the works of Clemens Alexandrinus, (who mentions Buddha

and stiépas), Philostratus, A‘lian, and other writers.*

It so happened that at the date, A. D. 273, of the cruel destruction

of Palmyra, Alexandria too had fallen into comparative decay. “ It

would,” of course, as Prianlx observes, ‘be absurd to suppose that

the destruction of Palmyra, however much it affected, put an end to

the Indian trade through the Persian Gulf.” The trade continued, and

part of it passed for a time to Batné near the Euphrates, a day’s

journey from Edessa.f But the Indo-Roman trade, though not stopped,

was necessarily very much diminished in volume by the destruction of

its overland, and the decay of its maritime emporium, and the intercourse

between Rome and the far east became much more difficult and inter-

mittent than it had been for about two centuries previously.

The Alexandrian trade about this time seems to have been aban-

doned by Roman ships, and to have depended on Arab vessels, as in the

days of Augustus. In the reign of Constantine (A. D. 306—337) com-

merce with the east revived, but the Roman ships seem to have rarely,

if ever, ventured, beyond the Arabian Gulf of the Red Sea.

* Priaulx, Apollonius of Tyana and Indian Embassies to Rome, pp. 182, seqq.

My remarks on the course of Roman trade with India are chiefly drawn from this

valnable little book and Prof. Robertson Smith’s article on Palymra, in the ninth

edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica.

¢ Priaulx, Apollonius of Tyana, ete., pp. 178, 233,

1889. ] on the Civilization of Ancient India. 159

The known facts of the external relations between the Roman

empire and India, therefore, apart from all esthetic criticism, suggest

that, if Indian art was influenced by Roman art, the influence would have

been most active during the period which may be defined, in round num-

bers, asextending from A. D, 100 to 350, It would hardly be reasonable

to expect that the partial interruption of intercourse between A. D. 273

and.306 should be traceable in Indian art history, and it is not trace-

able.

T have named A. D. 100 as the approximate earliest possible

anterior limit for Roman influence on Indian art, but, as a matter of fact,

that date is too early. The name of Rome must of course have been

long known to a greater or less extent in India, but I doubt if the

Oriental would know much about the Roman empire, before the reign

of Hadrian (A. D. 117—188), whose expeditions to Syria (circa A. D.

130), and passion for building great edifices must have spread the fame

of his power among the merchants of the east. I consider it impro-

bable that Roman models could have affected Indian art before A. D.

150. On the other hand, Roman influence continued to be felt by the

arts of India after A. D. 350, and may not have completely disappeared

for a century later.

The ground has now been cleared for an examination in some detail

of the Roman elements in the art of the Gandhara or Peshawar school.

The general aspect of the figure sculptures and architectural decora-

tions of that school is, as Mr. Fergusson perceived, distinctly Roman,

but a vague assertion to that effect cannot convince anybody who has

not acquired some familiarity with the art both of Rome and Gandhara.

Detailed proofs are necessary to carry conviction to the mind of the

ordinary reader. I shall now proceed to give some.

“ Roman architecture, as we know it, dates only from about the

Christian era, and the rapidity with which it spread from that time is

something marvellous. Through nearly the whole extent of the Roman

empire, through Asia Minor, Sicily, Britain, France, Syria, Afvica,—

with one great exception, Egypt,—all was Roman in moulding, orna-

ment, details, the very style of carving, and the construction. No

matter what the country of the architect, all seem to have lost their

nationality when the Roman came, and to have adopted implicitly his

system of design and decoration.........++

“Tt is not uncommon to find examples of Roman architecture

completely overdone with ornament, every moulding carved, and every

straight surface, whether vertical or horizontal, sculptured with foliage

or characteristic subjects in relief.”*

* Lewis and Street, article Architecture in Encyclopmdia Britannica, 9th edi-

tion, pp. 418, 421.

160 V. A, Smith—Graco-Roman influence [No. 3,

To the list of countries above enumerated as having adopted the

Roman system of design and decoration, the Lower Kabul Valley,

though it never formed part of the Roman empire, must be added.

So far as I understand the published plans and elevations, the

Gandhara buildings show little Roman influence in their construction,

though I should not venture to affirm that careful study might not

reyeal the existence of Roman elements in their plan and construction.

However this may be, these buildings, like those of the provinces of

the empire, were “ Roman in moulding, ornament, details, and the very

style of carving,” and were characterized, like better known examples

of Roman work, by excess of ornament, and by the lavish use for

decorative purposes of crowded realistic compositions in high and low

relief.

Almost every frieze or panel from Gandhara is decorated with florid

Corinthian pilasters, and numerous fragments of similar Corinthian

capitals belonging to structural pillars have been found. No one can

give the most cursory glance at a collection of Gandhara sculptures

without being struck by the free employment of the Corinthian capital

as anornament. No other Greco-Roman form of capital is used, though

for a time the Indo-Persian form continued to dispute the field with its

newly introduced rival.

Such extensive and exclusive use of the Corinthian form of pillar is

in itself decisive proof that the school characterized by it was dominated

by Roman influence, and was not a direct descendant of Greek art.

The case of Palmyra offers an exact parallel to what we see in

Gandhara. ‘It is remarkable,” observes Wood, “that, except four Ionic

half-columns in the temple of the sun, and two in one of the mausoleums,

the whole is Corinthian, richly ornamented, with some striking beauties,

and some as visible faults.””*

We find the same state of facts at the other great Syrian city of

Baalbee, or Heliopolis, “‘ which, so far as it has been known to modern

travellers, is a Roman city of the second century A. D. The Corinthian

order of architecture—the favourite order of the Romans—prevails

with few exceptions in its edifices. A Doric column, the supposed

clepsydra, is, indeed, mentioned by Wood and Dawkins, and the Ionic

style is found in the interior of the circular temple ;” but all else is

Corinthian.

The style of the great temples at Palmyra is later and more debased

than that of the corresponding edifices at Baalbee. No building of impor-

tance was erected at Palmyra after the sack of the city by Aurelian in

A. D. 273, and the temples may be referred to the third century A. D.,

* Wood, Palmyra, p. 15.

1889 ] on the Owvilization of Ancient India. 161

having probably been erected during the reigns of Odenathus and

Yenobia (A. D, 260—273.)

During the period A. D. 105—273 Palmyra was the principal depét

of the overland trade between India and the west, and the caravans

which were constantly passing and re-passing through it must have af-

fected some exchange of ideas as well as of more material wares. It is,

therefore, reasonable to believe that the example of Palmyra was one of

the factors which influenced the Gandhara architects and sculptors in

their adoption of the universally diffused Corinthian style.*

The peculiarities of the Indo-Corinthian pillars have been briefly

described in a previous page (pp. 117, 118).

Sir A. Cunningham holds that “at least all the fine examples ”

of the Indo-Corinthian style, such as the capitals found at Jamalgarhi,

which are the finest known, should be ascribed to the same age as the

temples with Ionic pillars at Taxila.

This view appears to me altogether erroneous, and inconsistent with

the observed facts. The Taxilan temples date from the beginning of the

Christian era, and show no trace of the domination of Roman ideas of

art.

The Indo-Corinthian remains, on the other hand, bear on their face

the most obvious resemblance to Roman work, and must consequently

be later than the time when India and Rome came into contact. On

historical grounds I have fixed the approximate date at which Roman

forms of architectural decoration reached India as not earlier than A. D.

150, and an examination of the Indo-Corinthian works fully confirms

this inference drawn from the known facts of external history.

It is, I venture +o affirm, impossible that a florid adaptation of

the Corinthian order, such as is universally employed in the buildings

of Géndhara Proper, could have attained such favour except under

Roman influence,

Pure Greek examples of the Corinthian order are extremely rare,

while Roman examples are numbered by thousands. The Corinthian

pillar, modified so freely, that no two specimens exactly agree, was the

favourite architectural decoration employed by the builders of imperial

Rome, and by those of the subject provinces, who followed the fashion set

at the seat of government.

T think | am perfectly accurate in asserting that Corinthian capitals,

at all like those at Jamdlgarhi, were not produced anywhere in the world

as early as the beginning of the Christian era, whereas plenty of capitals,

* Prof. Robertson Smith’s articles in the Encyclopedia Britannica, 9th edition,

give excellent summaries of the present state of knowledge respecting Palmyra and

Baalbec,

162 V. A, Smith—Geco-Roman influence [No. 3,

very like these, though differing in detail, were executed in various parts

of the Roman world during the third and fourth centuries.

The fact, (according to Sir A. Cunningham’s measurements), that

the only two Indo-Corinthian bases of columns yet discovered do not

differ widely from the bases of the pillars in the Choragic monument of

Lysicrates, which was erected in B. C. 334, does not render credible the

supposition that capitals similar to Roman work of the Antonine period

were executed at the beginning of the Christian era.

Mr. Fergusson described the Jamalgarhi capitals as being “* more

Greek than Roman in the character of their foliage, but more Roman

than Greek in the form of their volutes and general design. Perhaps,”

he added, “it would be correct to say they are more Byzantine than

either, but, till we have detailed drawings, and know more of their

surroundings, it is difficult to give a positive opinion as to their age.” *

The great critic, with the imperfect materials at his command,

might have felt a difficulty in deciding whether a given specimen was

to be dated from A. D. 200 or 400, but he had no difficulty in seeing

the strong Roman element which exists in all the specimens. Mr.

Freeman has more than once called attention to the remarkable cir-

cumstance that human figures are inserted among the acanthus foliage of

the Corinthian capitals in the ruins of the Baths of Caracalla abt Rome.

“The artist,” he observes, ‘“‘has been so far from confining him-

self to one prescribed pattern, either of volutes or acanthus leaves, that

he has ventured to employ vigorously carved human or divine figures as

parts of the enrichment of his capitals.” +

Similar figures, employed just in the same way, occur in some of

the Indo-Corinthian capitals from Jamalgarhi,and are described by their

discoverer as follows :—

“The human figures, which are introduced in the spaces between

the acanthus leaves, are all small, and do not interfere in the least

degree with the treatment of the foliage. When there is only one

figure, it is always that of Buddha, either sitting or standing, and, when

there are three figures, the middle one is af Buddha, and the others are

attendant Arhans, These figures are never obtrusive, and they are

always so placed that, to my eye, they harmonize most agreeably with

the surrounding and overhanging foliage.”

* History of Indian and Lastern Architecture, p. 174.

} The quotation is copied from Cunningham, Arch@ol Rep., Vol. V, p. 193,

where the original is said to be in an essay by Mr. Freeman published in Macmillan’s

Magazine; but no exact reference is given. Mr. Freeman alludes briefly to the

subject in his separately published essays on Italian architecture.

} Cunningham, Archeol Rep., Vol, V, p. 193. On the same page the anthor

makes an unfortunate slip, and places Caracalla “ in the beginning of the first century

1889. ] on the Oivilization of Ancient India. 163

Whatever be the esthetic merits or demerits of the practice of

introducing human figures into the Corinthian capital, it was a Roman

practice. No one will contend that the capitals in the Baths of Cara-

valla ave imitations of those in the Gandhéra monasteries, It follows

that the Géndhdra capitals are imitated either from those in the Baths

of Caracalla, or others of similar design of the same period. The reign

of Caracalla extended from A. D. 211 to 217; and the necessary infer-

ence is that the Jamalgarhi capitals with human figures are later than

A. D. 217,

This inference as to the date of the Jamdlgarhi sculptures derived

from the character of the capitals is in complete accordance with the

conclusions deducible from an examination of the style of the sculptures

in relief,

Before quitting the topic of the Indo-Corinthian capitals, it is only

just that I should complete the account of Mr. Fergusson’s views as to

their date. He argues that their form argues a date later than the reign

of Constantine (A. D. 306—837), after which time “the design of the

capitals went wild, if the expression may be used. The practice of

springing arches from them, instead of supporting horizontal architraves,

required a total change, and in the West it produced exactly the same

effects that we find in Gandh4ra.* ‘The capitals for instance, in the

churches of St. Demetrius and that now known as the Hski Jouma of

Jouma at Salonica, both built in theearly part of the 5th century, are

almost identical in design with these, and many of the churches in Asia

Minor and Syria show the same ‘abandon’ in design, through frequent-

ly in another direction.”

I have no doubt that Mr. Fergusson is right in comparing the

Géndhara capitals with those of the two Syrian churches belonging to

the early part of the fifth century which he names, and that a general

resemblance exists between the objects compared. Such a general re-

semblance is quite natural, even if there be an interval of fifty or a hun-

dred years between the Syrian and the Indian pillars. But, if Mr.

Fergusson intended to suggest that the Jamalgarhi pillars were exe-

of the Christian era,” and thence argues for the early date of the sculptures. Mr-

Fergusson, in correcting this accidental error, allowed himself to fall into a similax

one, and dated the baths of Caracalla in the reign of Constantine.

* Indian and Eastern Architecture, p. 178, with references to Texier and

Pullan’s Byzantine Architecture, and De Vogiié’s Syrie Centrale. The Syrian

pillars figured by De Vogiié display certainly a great ‘abandon’ of design, but they

have no resemblance whatever to the Géndhéra forms. I except, of course, the

comparatively regular Corinthian capitals at Palmyra and Baalbec, which are not

much dissimilar from the Gandhdra varieties.

164 V. A. Smith— Greco-Roman influence [No. 3,

cuted subsequent to the reign of Constantine, I cannot agree with him.

They belong rather to the Antonine period, and may be referred with

approximate correctness to A. D. 250, the Indian development being

necessarily a little later than its Roman original.

I do not know whether true structural arches, carried on Corin-

thian pillars, were employed in the construction of the Gandhara monas-

teries or not, but it is probable that they were; for the reliefs show

numerous examples of arches carried on such pillars, and used as deco-

ration.

Mr. Fergusson’s hint that it would perhaps be more accurate to

call the Indo-Corinthian capitals Byzantine than either Greek or Roman

does not seem to me a fruitful one. The term Byzantine may, of course,

be used with reference to any Roman art of the fourth century,* to

which period some of the Gandhara sculptures must be referred, but

it generally connotes the formal, hieratic, and long stationary style of

later date, The good Gandhara works do not seem to me to be charac-

terized by the hieratic stiffness which isthe special note of Byzantine

art, although some of them are closely related to works executed in

the reign of Constantine ; and when the school began to decay, the art

of Gandhara passed, not into Byzantine formalism, but into Hindi

barbarism.

When Mr. Fergusson wrote, the erroneous date which he assumed

for the Amardvati rails, and the inferences which he drew from the

discovery of the coin of Yago Varman in the great tope at Manikydlé

predisposed him to assign an unduly late date to the Gandhara school.

Mr. Fergusson rightly observed that some of the Gandhira sculp-

tures might be mistaken for early Christian works, but he did not

follow out the hint thus given, and the remark, though perfectly true,

has not attracted much attention. He supported the observation by a

cursory reference to the early Christian sarcophagi and ivories. I have

examined the fine collection of ivories, original and casts, in the South

Kensington Museum, and, while admitting that some have really an

artistic relation with the Gandhdra work, I venture to think that the

relation is not very close.

The representation of Christ standing under a small arch, support-

ed on fluted columns, with florid capitals of a modified Corinthian form,

as seen on the front of the Brescia casket, dating from the fifth or sixth

century, is undoubtedly akin to the Gandhara representations of Buddha ;

and the procession of Joseph and his brethren on the Rayenna chair

recalls, though less vividly, some of the processional scenes of the

* Constantinople was formally consecrated as the New Rome in A. D, 330.

1889. ] on the Oivilizatian of Ancient India. 15@

Indian reliefs.* But the ivories do not seem to me to be exactly con-

temporary with the Indian work.

The closest parallels to the Gandhara sculptures in relief are to be

found among the remains of early Christian art, though not among the

ivory carvings. These parallels are to be found in a place where we

should hardly expect them, the Catacombs of Rome.

It would be impossible by any number of pages of mere description

to bring home to the reader’s mind the reality of the likeness here

asserted, but a comparison of the heliogravure plates of the Gandhara

sculptures edited by Major Cole with the similar plates of the sculptures

in the Catacombs in Roller’s work will convince any one who takes

the trouble to make it that the connection between the two, however

it came to pass, is very close indeed.+

I shall merely give references to the plates in M. Roller’s book

which closely resemble Major Cole’s.

Pl. XLII, A sarcophagus, “a demi-paien, 4 demi-chrétion,” from

the cemetery of Callixtus, and probably dating from the third century.

The arrangement of the whole composition much resembles that of

many of the Gdndhara reliefs, and the posture of the figure of Psyche

is nearly identical with that of Prajdpati in the Nativity group from the

upper monastery at Nuttu, described ante, p. 124.

Pil. XLIV. Sarcophagus of St. Constantia, with vintage scenes

and genii; 4th century.

Pl. XLV. Sarcophagus from the Basilica of St. Paul, with various

scenes of the life of Christ and His disciples, sculptured in high relief;

4th century, The scenes in this composition are not separated by

columns. The resemblance in general effect to some of the best Gdn-

dhara sculptures is very strong.

* Westwood, Descriptive Catalogue of the Fictile Tvovies tn the South Kensington

Museum (1876), Pl. II, III. Compare the large Catalogue of Original Iyories in the

same Museum by Maskell (1872), and the little hand-book by the same writer,

entitled Ivories, Ancient and Mediwval. Other references are giyen by Fergusson in

I. and BH. Architecture, p. 182.

t+ Les Catacombes de Rome, Histoire de ? Art et des Croyances Religieuses

pendant les premiers Siécles du COhristianisme, par Théophile Roller, Paris, Vve. A.

Morel et Cie.; 2 vols. large folio n. d., with 100 heliograyure plates. Readers who

cannot obtain access to this work or De Rossi’s publications may verify the compari-

son made by reference to ‘Roma Sotterranea, or an Account of the Roman Cata-

combs especially of the Cemetery of St. Callixtus; compiled from the works of

Commendatore De Rossi, with the consent of the author. New edition, rewritten

and greatly enlarged, by Rev. J. Spencer Northcote, D. D., Canon of Birmingham,

and Rey. W. R. Brownlow, M. A., Canon of Plymouth ;” 2 volumes, 8vo., London,

Longman’s, Green and Co., 1879, with numerous engravings,

166 V. A. Smith—Greco-Roman influence [No. 3,

Pl. XLVILI. Resurrection of Lazarus, and other incidents ; Ath,

or possibly, 5th century. The thick, stumpy ficures much resemble

some of those in reliefs from Nuttu and Sanghao.

Pl. XLIX. Sarcophagus of 4th or 5th century, with a long row

of worshippers.

Pl. LIV. Representation of an agapé feast; 5th century. The

winged genii and other figures much resemble those seen in Gdndhara

art.

Pl. LVII. Sarcophagus of Constantine in the Lateran Museum;

4th century. Relief sculptures with intercolumniations and architrave.

Christ is seated in the centre compartment, like Buddha in the Gan-

dhara compositions.

Pl. LIX. The celebrated sarcophagus of Junius Bassus, dated

A. D. 359. Various scenes are represented in panels divided by

columns. The style is very similar to that of good Gandhara work.

Pl. LX. Five sarcophagi of the 4th century ; various subjects.

Pl. DXVIII. Adoration of the magi; 4th century, compare the

Gandhara representation of the four kings offering the precious bowls to

Buddha. One example of this is in the Lahore Museum, No. 405 of

Cunningham’s Descriptive List, and another, (or possibly the same

work), is figured by Major Cole.

Pl. LDXIX. The Epiphany; 4th century.

Pl. LXXVI. Elijah ascending to heayen in a four-horsed chariot ;

4th, or possibly 3rd, century.

Pl. LXXXI. Sarcophagus, probably of about 5th century.

Pl. UXXXIT. Sarcophagus of 5th century.

Pl, LXXXVIL Worship of the labarum symbol, the cross enclosed

in a circle, elevated in the centre compartment of an intercolumniated

relief ; 5th century.

This composition has a very strong resemblance to the representation

of the worship of the Trisil, the emblem of the Buddhist faith, in

Major Cole’s volume.

It is, as I have said, impossible by means of mere verbal description

to express the intimate relation which exists between the art of

Géndhira, and these Christian sculptures from the Catacombs, which

range in date from about A. D. 250 to 450; butit is equally impossible for

any person to compare photographs of the two sets of objects, and to fail in

perceiving the likeness, in some cases almost amounting to identity, of

style and treatment. The evident analogy, too, between the representa-

tions of the Buddha and the Christ shows that there is a substantial

identity of subject, veiled under difference of name, as well as in treat-

ment. The facts invite speculation as to the possibility and probability

’ ee

—_—_—_—_—————--

1889.] on the Civilization of Ancient India. 167

of an appreciable amount of Christian influence on the later development

of Buddhism, but I cannot venture at present to embark on the tempt-

ing, though perilous, sea of conjecture to which such speculation would

lead me.

I have shown above that no difficulty exists in supposing that Indian

art may have been affected by the Palmyrene variety of the cosmopolitan

Roman style. Inasmuch as that style was cosmopolitan, it is impossible

to say that any given Indian adaptation of a Roman model was bor-

rowed from the art of Palmyra or any other particular locality. Tf we

find an Indian sculpture nearly identical with one at Palmyra, all that

can be safely asserted is, that both have a common origin, and date

from approximately the one period, while there is no reason why the

Indian imitation should not have been copied directly from a Palmyrene

model.

Bearing in mind these explanations, it is interesting to observe that

a frieze from the upper monastery at Nuttu, reproduced in Major Cole’s

Plate 16, figure 1, is substantially identical with the Palmyrene frieze

engraved in Wood’s Plate 41,

The latter adorns a building which bears an inscription recording

the execution of repairs during the reign of Diocletian (A. D. 284— 305),

who kept a garrison at Palmyra, but the building, and the frieze with

which it is decorated, probably were erected about the middle of the

third century.

The Nuttu design consists of a vine stem, knotted into five circles,

forming small panels; the first of which, to the left, contains leaves only,

the second is occupied by a boy or Genius plucking grapes, the third

exhibits two boys playing with a goat, the fourth displays a rudely

executed goat sitting up and nibbling the vine, and the fifth represents

a boy plucking grapes.

At Palmyra, the figures of the boys and goats are wanting, but the

design of the knotted vine is absolutely identical with that in the frieze

from Nuttu, and the two works cannot be far apart in date. Somewhat

similar scroll patterns are common in Roman art, and occur occasionally

in other works of the Gandhara school.

The porphyry sarcophagus of St. Constantia, executed in the reign

of Constantine (A. D. 306—337), to which I have already referred

(ante, p. 165), is adorned with a relief exhibiting the pressing of grapes

by winged cupids, set in scrolls of vine-stems, bearing a general resem-

blance to the design of the Nuttu frieze. The subsidiary garland,

acauthus leaf, and animal decorations of St. Constantia’s sarcophagus

all have a strong likeness to the Nuttu sculptures and other works of

the Gandhara school.

168 V. A. Smith—Greeco-Roman influence [No. 3,

I venture to maintain with some confidence that I cannot be far

wrong in assuming A. D. 300 as an approximate mean date for the

remains of the upper monastery at Nuttu. This chronological determi-

nation is of special value because the sculptures from this site, though

extremely various in subject, are probably all contemporaneous, or

nearly so. The whole site occupied an area measuring only about 80 by

60 feet, and 79 objects were found within this small space. Most of

these are stone sculptures, which lay round two small stdpas, each ten

feet in diameter, that occupied the centre of the building, Fragments

of plaster figures were found at a distance of a few feet from the minia-

ture stupas.*

The varied collection of sculptures obtained within this small space

comprises the Nativity scene, (ante, p. 123), the very elegant figure

ofa woman standing under a conventional palm-tree, (ante, p. 124),

a specimen of the adaptation of the Rape of Ganymede, (ante, p. 184),

two examples of the death-bed scene or parinirvdna, (ante, p. 125), and

numerous figures of Buddha associated with his disciples, the master

being sometimes represented with both shoulders draped, and wearing

moustaches, (ante, p. 127).

It seems reasonable to suppose that sculptures obtained within such

a very limited area, and belonging to one school of art, cannot be very

widely separated from one another in date. It is not likely that they

were all executed in a single year, but, for the purposes of art history,

they may be safely regarded as contemporaneous.

If then I am right in fixing A. D. 300 as the approximate date for

this group of subjects, a valuable standard for the chronology of the

whole school has been rendered available, and we learn that, at the date

specified, all the subjects named had been adopted by Buddhist artists

as proper themes for the exercise of their skill,

I cannot attempt to indicate every instance in which the art of

Gandhara appears to be an echo of that of imperial Rome, and shall

quote but few more such instances. The representation of a long roll

or undulated garland carried by boys is one of the commonest subjects

treated in the Gandhara friezes. A specimen is thus described by Dr.

Anderson ;—“ G. 94, a to d—Four portions of a frieze. Children

supporting on their shoulders a long undulated garland, on which are

tied bunches of grapes, and other ornaments; in the drooping folds

above which, in some, appear the busts and heads of winged human

figures, and, in one, a bird of prey with extended wings, while, in

others, the intervals are filled with floral devices.’’+

* Cole, Second Report, p. exxiii, Pl, 6 (plan and elevation).

y+ Anderson’s Catalogue, Part I, p. 241. Cf, Cole’s heliogravure plate 7, figures

2, 3.

1889. ] on the Oivilization of Ancient India. 169

Numerous illustrations might be quoted in proof of the proposition

that designs of this class are Roman in origin, but I shall content my-

self with referring to one, a frieze found in the Palestrina territory,

probably dating from the time of Constantine, which represents a very

large garland carried by boys.*

The same subject occurs repeatedly in the sculptures of Amard-

vati, though treated in more Indian style. A notable distinction be-

tween the methods of treatment in Gandhara and at Amaravati is that

the Gandhara artists always give the roll an imbricated surface, such as

is commonly seen in Roman art, whereas the Amardvati sculptors mark

the surface with lines in a manner of their own. But I suspect that at

Amaravati, as well as in Gadndhd4ra, the motive was borrowed from

Roman art.

The Buddhist artists, following the usual Indian practice, con-

verted the foreign motive to the purposes of their own ceremonial, and,

as Sir A. Cunningham has pointed out, used the Roman garland to re-

present the light serpentine frame of bamboo covered with tinsel, which

was carried in procession at Buddhist festivals, as it is to this day in

Burma.

I have already referred to the fact that the conventional re-

presentation of the parinirvana or death-bed of Buddha is borrowed from

the sculptures of Roman sarcophagi or Greco-Roman sepulchral reliefs

(ante, p. 126).

I have also mentioned (ante, p. 136) that the representations of

winged animals, and marine monsters, and the comic friezes of boys

riding on lions and other beasts, so common in the early Buddhist

sculptures both of Gandhara and India Proper, are ultimately derived

from the works of the Alexandrian schools of Greek art, which are

supposed to trace their parentage to Scopas.

The early examples of this class of subjects which occur in the

interior of India, and are prior in date to the establishment of the

Roman empire, must be imitations of Greek models. In all probability

the artists of Buddha Gayd and Bharhut obtained their knowledge of

these foreign forms by means of the sea commerce conducted with

Alexandria through the inland depot of Ozene (Ujjain), and the port

of Barygaza (Bharoch).f At Amardvati it is possible that the channel

of communication was Roman.

The Gandhara compositions dealing with similar subjects should be

compared, not with Greek art, but with the representations of the

* Visconti, Museo Pio-Clementino, Vol. VII, pl. XXXV.

+ See the Introduction to McOrindle’s translation of the Periplus of the

Hrythraan Sea,

170 V.A, Smith— Greco-Roman influence [No. 3,

Triumph of Bacchus, and of processions of the Genii Bacchici and

Genii Circenses, many examples of which may be seen in Visconti’s

plates, and in other illustrated works on Roman art.

It is not easy to determine the chronological sequence of the vari-

ous remains in the Yusufzai country.

“The principal groups of ruins,” remarks Sir A, Cunningham,

‘are at Shahbdzgarhi, SAwaldher, and Sahri Bahlol in the plain ; and

at Radnigat, Jamalgarhi, Takht-i-Bahi, and Kharkai in the hills.

There are similar remains at many other places, as at Topi, Ohind,

and Zeda in Utmanzai; at Tirli, Bakshali, and Gharyali in Stidam ;

and at Matta and Sanghao in Linkhor.’”’*

To this list must be added the ruins of the monasteries at Miin

Khan and Nuttu, which lie close to those at Sanghao, and were ex-

plored by Major Cole.

The buildings and sculptures of JamAlgarhi were the first described,

and are the best known. It is very unfortunate that no accurate record

has been kept in many cases of the exact site where certain sculptures

were found, and the consequent uncertainty greatly hinders satisfactory

discussion. But it is certain that by far the largest proportion of the

specimens of Gandhara art in the Indian Museum at Calcutta came from

Jamilgarhi, and that some of the best specimens in the British Museum

came from the same locality, The Gaéndhara school was in its prime when

the Jamdlgarhi sculptures were executed. I have shown (ante, p. 163)

that the Indo-Corinthian capitals found there are later than A D. 217.

So far as I can see at present, the Jamalgarhi remains do not vary much

in style, and their execution cannot be extended over a very long period.

The best may be dated A. D, 250, and the latest A. D. 300. Of course,

all such dates must be regarded as mere approximations in round

numbers.

I have adduced (ante, p. 168) reasons for believing that the sculp-

tures from the upper monastery at Nuttu are slightly later, dating

from about A. D. 300. Those from the lower monastery at the same

site belong to the same period.

The Sanghao sculptures, which are fully illustrated by Major Cole,

are in general contemporaneous with those at Nuttu, but some of the

Sanghao works look a little later.

Many of the sculptures from Mian Khan, which ave illustrated by

Major Cole’s heliogravures Nos. 23 to 30 inclusive, seem to me superior

in execution to, and more Greek in style than, those from other

sites. But very little difference can be discerned between the work at

* Archmwol. Rep., Vol. V, p. Os

1889. ] on the Oivilization of Ancient India. 171

Min Khan and the best at Jamdlgarhi. Some of the Mién Khan

specimens may be as old as A. D. 200, though none, I should think,

are older.

As to Kharkai no detailed information is available. Sir A. Cun-

ningham merely notes that he saw a large collection of sculptures from

this locality in the possession of Mr. Beckett, and that he obtained a

considerable number himself “similar in all respects to the sculptures

that have been dug up at other places.’* Inasmuch as Sir A, Cunning-

ham’s criticisms are chiefly concerned with the objects obtained at Jamal-

garhi, it may be assumed that the Kharkai sculptures are not remote

in date from those procured at that locality.

“The remains at Sdwaldher, 2} miles to the east of Jamalgarht,

are mostly covered by the houses of the village, and are, therefore,

inaccessible. It is believed, however, that some of the finest specimens

in the Lahore Museum were obtained at this place by Dr. Bellew.”

If this belief be correct, the Sawaldher ruins must be as old as those at

Miin Khan, and it is possible that some of the buildings may have boon

older, and contained works tracing their parentage directly to Greek

art. It is a great pity that the objects in the Lahore Museum were not

properly labelled.

The excavations at Sahri Bahlol proved that the site had been

occupied in very ancient times, perhaps as early as B. C. 2,000,$ and

the existence of the st%pas, containing the broken statue imbedded in it,

proves that Buddhist votaries occupied the place as late as A. D. 500

or 600 (A. D. ante, p. 155). The broken statue was particularly well

executed, and presumably may be referred to the third century.

The information respecting the sculpture at Takht-i-Bahi is very

scanty. Mr. Fergusson, from examination of photographs, judged that

the remains at this place are of considerably later date than those at

Jamalgarhi, and his judgment on a question of relative date is entitled

to the greatest respect.

At Takht-i-Bahi, a court was excavated, surrounded on three sides

by lofty chapels, each of which seems to have enshrined a colossal

plaster statue of Buddha, some twenty feet, or more, in height. Such

colossal plaster images do not appear to belong to a very early stage of

Buddhist art, and their presence confirms Mr. Fergusson’s suggestion

that the remains at Takht-i-Bahi should be placed late in the series.

Perhaps A. D. 400 to 450 may be assigned as a tentative date.

To sum up, I accept the numismatic evidence, agreeing as it

* Archeol. Rep,, Vol. V, p. 54.

¥ Lbid., ibid.

fT Ibid., p. 38.

172 V. A. Smith—Greco-Roman influence [No. 3,

does with the architectural, that the Ionic pillars found in two temples

at Taxila, east of the Indus, date from about the beginning of the

Christian era, and are, with the exception of a very few sculptures of

the same period, the earliest known examples of Indo-Hellenie work

in the Panjib. These pillars I regard as results of the operation

of Hellenistic, as distinguished from Roman, influence. Hellenistic

ideas can also be traced in the early Buddhist sculptures, which were

executed prior to the establishment of the empire of the Cesars,

at Bharhut, Buddha Gay4, and other places in the interior of India.

The sculptures from the Yisufzai country, the kingdom of Gan-

dhara properly so called, which lies west of the Indus, in the immediate

neighbourhood of Peshéwar, are, I believe, the work of a local school,

probably founded by a foreign colony, which drew its inspiration directly

from Roman, and only remotely from Greek art. This local school

may be conveniently designated either as the Gdndhara or Peshawar

school. The name Greco-Buddhist proposed by Dr. Leitner cannot be

asserted to be incorrect, all Roman being only a modification of Greek

art, but the term Romano-Buddhist would be much more appropriate.

I cannot say what circumstances caused the establishment at Pesha-

war of this peculiar local school, but I do not agree with Sir A. Cun-

ningham in associating it with Kanishka and his immediate successors

of the Kushan dynasty, A. D. 80 to 200. On the contrary, Iam of

opinion that the earliest works of the Romano-Buddhist school of Pesha-

war date from about A. D. 200, and that all the sculptures of any con-

siderable degree of artistic merit were executed between that date and

A. D. 350. The style probably lingered in decay as late as A. D. 450,

but not later,

It follows that I hold that there is a wide interval, at present

unbridged, between the scanty remains of early Indo-Hellenic work

in the Panjab, and the abundant specimens of later Indo-Roman work,

The style of the Romano-Buddhist sculpture and architectural

decoration shows some affinity with the style of the great temples at

Palymra and Baalbec, belonging to the second and third centuries A. D.,

but its closest relationship, (and the connection is very close indeed),

is with the Roman Christian sculpture of the period A. D. 250-450, as

seen in the catacombs,

Tam well aware that the opinions above expressed are open to

dispute, and that Iam liable to be thought over-venturesome for express-

ing them in such positive language, They are, however, the result of

a careful and prolonged study of the subject, and 1 submit them for

discussion in the confidence that a distinct expression of definite opinions

will bring out clearly the issues to be decided, and prepare the way for

final judgment,

1889.] on the Civilization of Ancient India. 173

Section VI. Tur Invtan Sonoons or PAINTING.

The mention of an Indian school of painting must seem absurd to

a reader acquainted only with modern India, where no trace of the

existence of pictorial art can be discerned, unless the pretty, though

conventional, miniatures which a few craftsmen at Delhi are still able

to execute, be counted as an exception.

The paintings exhibited in the show rooms of Rajas’ palaces, and

the decorations of modern temples and private houses are scarcely more

deserving of the name of art than the caricatures scribbled by boys on

the wall of their schoolroom. In the India of to-day painting and

sculpture are both lost arts, The little feeling for beauty that sur-

vives is almost confined to small bodies of skilled artizans, and is with

them rather the inherited aptitude of the members of a guild for the

work of their trade, than a genuine artistic taste. This statement may

seem very shocking to the amiable gentlemen who, of late years, have

bestowed unmeasured praise upon the wsthetic merits of Indian carpets,

shawls, vases, and so forth, but ’tis true ’tis pity, and pity ’tis “tis true,

My concern, however, is with the past rather than the present, and

T must not tilt against South Kensington windmills. Whatever be the

merits of modern productions, ancient India cortainly produced paint-

ines which deserve to be ranked as works of art. They do not, I

believe, deserve a very high rank, when compared with the world’s

masterpieces—no Indian art work does—but they are entitled to a re-

spectable place among the second or third class. The utter inability

of the modern Hindt to express anything human or divine with either

brush or chisel produces in the mind of the European observer in India

a feeling of surprise when he finds a sculpture or painting which can

be described as the work of an artist, and admits of comparison with

the productions of Europe, and inclines him to exaggerate the merit

of his treasure trove. The Gindhara or Peshawar sculptures, which

have formed the principal subject of this paper, would be admitted by

most persons competent to form an opinion, to be the best specimens of

the plastic art ever known to exist in India. Yet even these are only

echoes of the second rate Roman art of the third and fourth centuries.

In the elaboration of minute, intricate, and often extremely pretty,

ornamentation on stone, it is true, the Indian artists are second to none.

The stone-cutters in Gandhdra and at Amardvati display the same skill

in drawing elaborate patterns, and the same skill in executing them,

which we now admire in the work of the modern carpet-weavers and

vase-makers, But in the expression of human passions and emotions

Indian art has completely failed, except during the time when it was

held in Greco-Roman leading strings, and it has scarcely at any time

essayed an attempt to give visible form -to any divine ideal.

174.

V. A, Smith—Greco-Roman influence [No. 3,

Such being the deficiencies of Indian sculpture, the same may be

looked for in Indian painting.

The sculptures of Gandhara, Amardvati, and the Western Caves

frequently show traces of paint, from which it appears that the Indians

adopted the common Greek practice of using colour to heighten the

effect of sculpture. No Indian coloured sculpture, however, has suffi-

ciently retained the pigment to allow modern critics to judge of the

effect produced. In Gandhdra the gilder’s art was freely employed,

in addition to that of the painter, in order to add to the magnificence

of sculpture. Such extraneous aids, whether employed by Greeks or

Indians, seem to our modern taste derogatory rather than helpful to

the dignity of sculpture, and, this being so, we need not regret the loss

of the pigment and gilding, which would in our eyes have vulgarized

sculptures, which we can honestly admire as they stand in naked stone.

But, besides these questionable expedients, the artists of ancient

India knew how to supplement sculpture by the art of painting in forms

recognized by all to be legitimate. Mr. Fergusson expresses the con-

fident belief that paintings, such as are commonly called frescoes, con-

tributed to the decoration of the Gdndhdra monasteries. It is very

probable that his belief was well founded, but no scrap of any such

painting has yet been found, and at present a Gdndh4ra school of paint-

ing has only a hypothetical existence,

In Western India the destroying hand of time has beon a little

more merciful, and has spared enough of the ancient paintings to show

that during the first five centuries of the Christian era India possessed,

artists who could paint pictures of, at least, respectable merit.

Fragments of paintings on walls and ceilings can be detected in the

cave temples of the Bombay Presidency at several sites, but the only

localities where intelligible pictures have survived, so far as is known

at present, are Ajanta in the Nizam’s dominions and Bagh in the district

of Rath in the south of Malwa. The paintings at the latter place are

known only from brief descriptions in Messrs. Fergusson and Burgess’

works, which are not sufficient to form the basis for critical dis-

cussion.*

Our knowledge of ancient Indian painting ig practically restricted

to the pictures on the walls and ceilings of the celebrated caves at Ajanta.

No attempt has yet been made to discuss methodically these interesting

* Cave Temples of India, pp. 363-366; and Notes on Bauddha Rock Temples of

Ajantd, pp. 94, 95. Recently a series of remarkable Jain paintings has been dis-

covered at Tirumalai, 80 miles south of Vellore in the Madras Presidency. The

paintings belong to two distinct periods, but their dates have not yot been deter-

mined, (Proc. Govt. of Madras, No. 803, Public, dated 11th June, 1887.)

1889.] on the Civilization of Ancient India. 175

paintings, or to determine definitely their place in the history of art.*

I think that any qualified critic who undertakes the study of these

works will find that they are well worth attentive examination, from

the points of view both of the archeologist and the artist, but such

qualified critic, competent to grasp alike archeological and artistic

problems, has not yet come forward.

I cannot pretend to write a criticism on the Ajanté paintings. I

have not had time to study them minutely, nor have I the technical

knowledge requisite to enable me to determine their ssthetic value,

But I am fully persuaded that they are to be numbered among the fruits

of foreign teaching, either by Greeks, or Roman pupils of Greek masters,

and, holding this opinion, I cannot omit all notice of them from an

essay which aims at giving a general, though imperfect, view of the

manner and degree of Greco-Roman influence on the art and other

elements of the civilization of ancient India.

At Ajanta fragments of painting exist in thirteen caves, but the

principal remains are found in seven, “The Ajanté pictures are not

frescoes in the true acceptation of the term, The painting was executed

on a coat of thin, smooth plaster, the thickness of an egg-shell, which

was laid on a groundwork composed of a mixture of cowdung and pul-

verized trap, rice-husks being sometimes added to increase the binding

properties of the mixture.”

As regards the style of the pictures Mr. Griffiths’ general criticism

is to the effect that there is “ little attention paid to the science of art—

a general crowding of figures into a subject, regard being had more to

* The most competent account of the Ajanta paintings yet published is that given

in the second work referred to in the preceding note. The full title of the book is

of Ajantd, their Paintings and Sculptures, and on the Puintings of the Bagh Caves,

Modern Bauddha Mythology, ete. By J. Burgess, M. R. A.S., ete., Bombay, 4to. ,

Printed by order of Government at the Government Central Press, 1879.” This

work is now out of print, and sells at double its original price. Té is illustrated

by twenty-nine plates, uncolonred, fifteen of which are deyoted to the paintings.

Four pretty good uncoloured plates illustrate Dr, Rajendralila Mitra’s paper

on the paintings in Vol. XLVII (1878) of the Journal of the Asiatic Society of

Bengal.

The architecture and sculpture of the Ajanta caves are discussed with great

fulness in Vol. IV of the Reports of the Archeological Survey of Western India,

and are there illustrated by splendid autotype plates, but the paintings are scarcely

noticed in that volume.

The volume of Notes, tho full title of which has been given aboye, belongs to

a series of minor treatises in paper covers, issued by the Bombay Government

preliminary to the publication of the costly and elaborate series of Reports.

+ Indian Antiquary, Vol. II, p. 162.

176

V. A. Smith—Greco-Roman influence [No. 3,

the truthful rendering of a story than to a beautiful rendering of it:—

not that they discarded beauty, but they did not make it the primary

motive of representation.’*

The range of date of the Ajanté paintings is very nearly the same

as that of the Gdndhdra sculptures, though some of the former are

earlier, and some may be a hundred years, or even more, later than any

of the latter. The earliest paintings at Ajanta, those on the side walls of

Cave No, X, are referred by Mr. Burgess to the latter part of the second

century A. D. To a large extent the Gandhdra and Ajanté works are

certainly contemporary, and it is primd facie probable that, if the sceulp-

tures echo the ideas of the art of imperial Rome, paintings of the same

period should not have escaped the influence of the cosmopolitan canons

of taste which then determined the forms of art. Iam not prepared to

prove in detail the Greek or Roman parentage of the Ajant& paintings,

but I have little doubt that critical study will prove them to be more

Roman than Greek. Their realism, on which Mr. Griffiths comments,

is one of the most characteristic features of the Géndhéra sculptures,

and is thoroughly Roman. Some of the panels, too, filled with elegant

floral decorations are extremely like Roman work in appearance,

The Gandhéra sculptures are so closely related to the Christian

sculptures in the Catacombs of Rome, that I venture to suggest that

it would be worth while to compare the paintings in the Catacombs

with those in the Ajantd caves. A hasty comparison of copies of both

led me to suppose that they might be related, but I am not in a position

to offer a definite opinion on the subject.

The neglect of years has, it is understood, in great part destroyed

the original paintings at Ajanta, and, unfortunately, the fine copies in

oils, on which Major Gill spent many years, were mostly consumed by

the fire at the Crystal Palace in 1860. A few of his copies then escaped,

but, I believe, perished in a later fire at South Kensington. Mr. Griffiths,

of the Bombay School of Art, has since made a fresh set of copies

of a portion of the paintings, and these copies are now exhibited in

the Indian Museum at South Kensington, The ordinary visitor, how

ever, can be little impressed by them, in the absence of descriptive

labels or catalogue to indicate the history, meaning, or artistic value of the

paintings. I should add that, notwithstanding his remarks on the subor-

dinate place given to beauty as compared with realism in the Ajanta paint-

ings generally, Mr. Griffiths bestows very high praise on particular compo-

sitions, and his judgment is supported by the great authority of Mr.

* Indian Antiquary, Vol. ITT, pp. 25-28. So far as I am aware, Mr. Griffiths’

report has not been published in full. Considerable extracts from it are given in the

Indian Antiquary, and in My. Burgess’ Notes,

1889. ] on the Civilization of Ancient India. 177

Fergusson. One of the most remarkable paintings is in the hall of Cave

No. XVI, and is supposed to date from the sixth century. The subject

ig the death of a lady, apparently a princess. The treatment of it has

elicited from Mr. Fergusson the comment that “Mr, Griffiths very

justly remarks on this picture that ‘for pathos and sentiment and the

unmistakeable way of telling its story this picture, I consider, cannot be

surpassed in the history of art. The Florentines could have put better

drawing, and the Venetians better colour, but neither could have thrown

greater expression into in ®

Mr. Fergusson also quotes with approval the criticism of Mr.

Griffiths on a painting depicting flying figures in the so-called Zodiac

Cave, No, XVII :—

“ Whether we look at its purity of outline, or the elegance of the

grouping, it is one of the most pleasing of the smaller paintings at

Ajanta, and more nearly approaches the form of art found in Italy in the

thirteenth and fourteenth centuries than any other example there. The

easy upward motion of the whole group is rendered in a manner that

could not easily be surpassed.” >

Whether these panegyrics are overstrained or not I shall not

attempt to decide, but I am fully persuaded that no art at all deserving

of such praise was ever born on Indian soil,

“ India, meditated, brooded, elaborated, but the originating imagina-

tion is not found in the dream-life.”}

Whoever seriously undertakes the critical study of the paintings

at Ajanta and Bagh will find, I have no doubt, that the artists drew

their inspiration from the West, and, I think, he will also find that their

style is a local development of the cosmopolitan art of the contemporary

Roman Empire.

Section VII. Tur Arr or Cornacn i Invi.

The opinion expressed by Lenormant that the mechanical process

of coining money, properly so called, was unknown to the Indians until

they learned it from the Greeks after the invasion of Alexander, was

vigorously combated by the late Mr. Thomas on several occasions, and,

in my judgment, with success.§

* Cave Temples of India, p. 807.

+ Cave Temples of India, p. 311.

t This quotation is taken from a letter of my friend Dr. R. Atkinson, the learn-

ed Professor of Sanskrit in the University of Dublin.

§ The question is discursively treated in Mr. Thomas’ papers on the Harliest

Indian Coinage and on Ancient Indian Weights in the Numismatic Chronicle for

1884, and in his revised edition of the latter paper in the first volume of the Jnter-

national Numismata Orientalia,

178

The truth seems to be that, though all ancient Indian coinages with

the slightest pretensions to artistic merit are ultimately of Greek origin,

yet the idea of coining money, and a knowledge of the simple mechanical

processes necessary for the production of rude coins originated inde-

pendently in India, or, at the least, were not borrowed from the Greeks.

Although I agree with Mr. Thomas and Sir A. Cunningham in

rejecting the theory of the Greek descent of all Indian coins without

exception, it must be admitted that it would be extremely difficult, if

not impossible, to prove that any particular ancient Indian coin now

extant is older than the time of Alexander the Great. Sir A. Cunning-

ham has ventured more than once on the bold assertion respecting the

so-called ‘ punch-marked’ coins, that ‘ many of them are as old as

1000 B. C., and perhaps even older,’*

When it is remembered that no stone building, sculpture, or in-

scription anywhere in India is known to exist which is older than the

reign of Asoka, some Seventy years after the inyasion of Alexander the

Great, it is clear that a claim on behalf of a coin to an antiquity of 1000

B. C. is very difficult to substantiate, Nothing in India exists, which

can be compared with it, that is not seven and a half centuries later in

date. The supposition that any Indian coins are to be dated 1000 B. C.

is &@ mere guess, unsupported by a single fact. I cannot venture to

name any other date for the beginnings of Indian coinage, for the reason

that nothing really is known on the subject. It is possible that certain

coins may be very old, but they cannot be proved to be so, and the

independent origin of Indian coinage cannot be demonstrated by showing

that any given extant piece is older than Alexander, I do not know of

the existence of any Indian coin which may not possibly be later than

his time.

The really valid reason for denying the Greek origin of the art of

of coinage in India is that several classes of early Indian coins do not

exhibit a single clear trace of Greek influence, whereas they are plainly

marked by special Indian characteristicg.

The coinage of India in its most primitive form consisted of small,

oblong, roughly rectangular plates of silver, withont any impression on

the surface, but struck to a definite standard of weight, namely, 82 ratds,

or 583 grains. A slight improyement was made when these little plates

of silver were stamped with rough devices of stars, trees, and so forth.

These devices were impressed by means of small punches, not covering

the face of the coin, and sometimes it appears that all the various

patterns on the surface of a single piece, were not executed at once, but

were impressed successively at different times by the aid of several

* Archeol. Rep., Vol. I, p. 70; II, pp. 229, 264, 288,

V. A. Smith—Graco-Roman influence [No. 8,

“-

1889. ] on the Civilization of Ancient India. 179

punches. Coins of this kind, which were struck both in silver and

copper, are, therefore, known to Indian numismatists as ‘ punch-

marked’ coins. Like the blanks, which presumably preceded them,

they are struck to the Indian standard of 32 ratis. This standard

cannot, I believe, be in any way connected with the Greek metric

system. The punch-marked coins are destitute of legends, but the

purely Indian character of their devices and their Indian standard of

weight render it incredible that they should be the result of Greek

influence.

Other early Indian coins with a general resemblance to the punch-

marked pieces were either cast in a mould or struck with a die covering

the face of the coin, and some few of the oldest of such cast and die-

struck coins, which follow Indian standards of weight, are inscribed

with characters of the form current in the days of Asoka. The devices

of these coins are as indigenous as those of the punch-marked class.*

Tt is, I venture to suggest, by no means unlikely that the use of

legends on coins was suggested by Greek example. The earliest in-

seribed Indian coins are proved by the characters used in their brief

legends to belong approximately to the period of Asoka, whose inscrip-

tions are the earliest examples of the use of the alphabet, afterwards

known as Devanagari. The history of that alphabet has not yet been

satisfactorily traced, and the sudden appearance of long and complicated

records inscribed in its characters during the reign of Asoka is an un-

explained mystery. The simultaneous first appearance on Indian soil

of stone architecture and stone sculpture in the same reign is another

mystery. But, however mysterious be the exact origin of all these

sudden innovations, it is tolerably clear that they were in some way the

result of the foreign, especially the Greek, influences which certainly

affected the policy both of Agoka and his grandfather. It seems to be a

plausible conjecture that the introduction of coin legends about the same

time was another effect of the same potent foreign forces.

However this may be, the various kinds of early coins, to which

I have alluded above, bear no other mark whatever of foreign origin.

It is, therefore, reasonable to conclude that the art of manufacturing

¥ For discussion of these early Indian coins see the above quoted essays by

Mr. Thomas. In Cunningham’s Archeol. Rep., Vol. VI, pp. 213-220, Mr. Carlleyle

has attempted a classification of the punch-marked coins, the weights of which are

discussed by Sir A, Cunningham in ibid., Vol. XIV, p. 16. The classes of early

coins found at Eran are discussed and figured in ibid., Vol. X, p. 77, Pl. XXIV.

See also ibid., Vol. II, p. 10; V, p. 154, Pl. XXXI, and VI, p. 167. But the numis-

matie history of India remains to be written. I assume 1825 grain as the best

established value for the ratf, for the reasons stated in Jowrnnl As, Soc. of Bengal

Vol, LITL, part I, p. 146,

180 V. A Smith—Greeco-Roman influence [No. 3,

such rude coins was invented in India independently of Greek teaching.

But this conclusion does not prove that any such coins should be assign-

ed to a very remote period. It is quite impossible to say when the use

of blank or punch-marked rectangular pieces of silver or copper of definite

weight began, and it is difficult to say when it ended. I suspect that in

out-of-the-way corners of India the old-fashioned punch-marked pieces

continued to be struck centuries after coins of more regular fabric had

become familiar in the more advanced parts of the country, and that

specimens of the ancient, indigenous coinage long continued in circula-

tion side by side with pieces struck in imitation of foreign models. At

the present day the people of the districts between Fyzabad and Patna

obstinately cling to the custom of using the clumsy, mis-shapen lumps

of copper, known as ‘dumpy’ or ‘ Gorakhpuri pice,’ and refuse to cir-

culate the well-executed, and, to Huropean notions, convenient copper

coinage issued from the British mints. During the past year the

Government of India has found itself compelled to make an effort to

suppress by law the currency of the unauthorized ‘dumpy pice.’ The

mere form, then, of any given punch-marked or other rude uninscribed

coin is a very imperfect test of its age.

So far as I can learn, no definite evidence is producible to show

that any Indian coin now extant is of earlier date than B, C. 300. The

complete absence of all traces of foreign influence on the Indian coins

of the most primitive form renders probable the hypothesis that some

of them were struck before India entered into at all intimate relations

with the peoples of the West, but that is the most that can at present

be said in favour of the alleged extreme antiquity of some Indian coins.

The arguments of Mr. Thomas, so far as they are based on the references to

coins in the Code of Manu and other early Sanskrit books, cannot be

regarded as valid, when viewed in the light of modern research into the

chronology of Sanskrit literature.

The rare, but now well-known coins of Sophytes, a prince in the

Panjab, who was contemporary with Alexander the Great, are rather

earlier than any indigenous Indian coins can be proved to be, and are

altogether Greek in device and legend, though perhaps not in weight-

standard. They are modelled on the pattern of coins of the Seleucid

kings of Syria.*

The extensive mintages of the Greco-Bactrian kings (from B. C.

246 to circa B. C. 25) were mostly issued in countries beyond the limits

of India, but long circulated freely in the Panjab, the valley of the

Ganges, and the ports of the western coast.

#* Gardner, Catalogue of Coins of Greek and Scythic kings of Bactria and India,

p. xx.

‘p

1889.] on the Owvilization of Ancient India. 181

No known coin can be determined to have been issued by the great

Asoka or any member of his dynasty. The few legends found on coins

of the period give no clue to the name of the reigning sovereign. Asoka

must have struck coin to a large extent during his long reign, and, as

not a single piece bearing his name has been found, the only possible

conclusion is, that the bulk of his coinage consisted of the rude, unin-

scribed pieces above referred to. These coins were struck, as we have

seen, to the Indian standard, and they circulated side by side with the

Greco-Bactrian issues, specimens of which are found in large numbers

all over Northern India,

The general adaptation in India of Greek or Greco-Roman types

of coinage was the result of the Indo-Seythian invasions about the be-

ginning of the Christian era. The indigenous Indian coinage consisted

of silver and copper. I cannot undertake to say that gold coins were

absolutely unknown in India before the Indo-Scythian invasions, but, if

they existed, they were insignificant in quantity, for not a single speci-

men of them has ever been discovered. The earliest gold coins struck

in India, which follow the indigenous scale of weights, are the heavy

coins of Chandra Gupta II of the Gupta dynasty, and these are not

earlier than A, D, 400. All coins of the Gupta dynasty are die-struck,

and their outward form, whether they follow the Indian or the Greek

weight-standard, is ultimately derived from Greek originals.*

The Indo-Scythian kings introduced a regular gold currency into

India and struck vast quantities of gold coins, as well as of copper.

Their gold coins combine various foreign elements, but are essentially

Roman aurei, equivalent to Greek staters. The Gupta coinage is related

to the Indo-Scythian, and its devices exhibit faint traces of Greek

artistic power as late as A. D. 400. After the break-up of the Gupta

empire about A. D. 480, the coinage of India became utterly barbarous,

and lost all marks of Hellenic influence on design, legend, or standard.

As regards the origin of coinage in India my opinion, in short, is

that the. art of coinage in rude forms arose in India quite independently

of Greek teaching. Neither the invasion of Alexander the Great, nor

the example of his Bactrian successors sufficed to induce the princes of

India to abandon their indigenous style of coinage. One petty chiof

in the Panjab, Sophytes by name, struck coins after the Greek fashion,

but found no imitators in the interior of India. Asoka and the other

sovereigns of the Maurya dynasty continued to issue coins of the old

native pattern, on which they did not even inscribe their names.

* Wor information in detail about the Gupta coinage I must refer to my paper

on the Harly or Imperial Gupta Dynasty of Northern India in the Journal of the

Royal Asiatic Society for 1889, pp. 1-158, with five plates,

182 V. A. Smith—Greco- Roman influence [No. 3,

The general (though not universal) adaptation of Greek numismatic

forms copied from Roman coins was the work of the Indo-Scythian

dynasties, whose rule in the Panjab began a little before the Chris-

tian era, and spread over all Northern India during the three follow-

ing centuries. The introduction of coins of Greek type was synchron-

ous with the development of an extensive gold currency, which partly

replaced, and partly supplemented the existing issues in other metals.

The Gupta coinage A. D. 350 to 480 is a development of the Indo-

Scythian.

From the fall of the Gupta empire to the establishment of the

Muhammadan power all Indian coinages are barbarous and chaotic, and

completely destitute of artistic merit.*

The die-cutters of India never attained any high degree of excel-

lence in their art. Those of Bactria, as distinguished from India,

produced coins, not, indeed, approaching in beauty those of Syracuse,

but possessing characteristics which entitle them to respectful con-

sideration as works of art.

Professor Gardner observes ;—‘‘ In the types used by Greek kings

we find great variety, and they open to us quite a new chapter of Greek

art, affording fresh proof of the remarkable originality of the artists of

the Hellenistic age.

“In regard to the style we may note two points: (1). The extra-

ordinary realism of their portraiture. The portraits of Demetrins

(pl. II, 9), of Antimachus, (V, 1), and of Hucratides, (V, 7), are among

the most remarkable which have come down to us from antiquity, and

the effect of them is heightened in each case by the introduction of a

peculiar and strongly characteristic head- dress, which is rendered with

scrupulous exactness of detail.

(2). The decidedly Praxitelean character of the full length on

the reverses. The figures of Herakles (pl. II, 9; UI, 3),of Zeus (IV,

4; VII, 2), of Poseidon, (V, 1), of Apollo (V, 4; IX, 10), are all in

their attitudes characteristic of the school of Praxiteles.”+

Some of the Bactrian coins were struck within the limits of the

territories now known as India, but most of them were minted beyond

the border, and the Bactrian coinage, as a whole, is foreign to India.

* My remarks must be understood as applying only to Northern India in the

widest sense. The system of coinage in Southern India has always been quite

distinct, and I do not profess to have studied its history. The Peninsula was never

brought into really close political relations with Northern India until the es-

tablishment of the British supremacy. Hven Aurangzib’s protracted campaigns did

little to bridge over the gulf between the two regions,

+ Catalogue of Coins of Greek and Scylhic kings of Bactria and India, p. lviii,

1889,] on the Cwilization of Ancient India. 183

I do not propose to discuss its relations with the general course of

Greek art, and refer to its peculiarities only to enquire how far they

affected the art of coinage in India.

The realistic portraits executed by the Bactrian artists were be-

yond the powers of the Indian die-cutters. The Indo-Seythian coins,

except the very latest, are well executed pieces of metal work, but,

without exception, almost totally wanting in artistic merit. The effigies

of the kings are conventional, and the whole design is stiff and formal,

Some of the Gupta coins display more freedom and originality in design,

but not a single example of a recognizable portrait can be found, I believe,

either in the Indo-Scythian or Gupta series,

The influence of the second peculiarity of the Bactrian coinage

noted by Professor Gardner can be discerned in the Gupta series,

though not, I think, in the Indo-Scythian. The peculiar attitude of the

standing statues of the school of Praxiteles consists in this that the

weight of the body is thrown on one leg, the figure being inclined to

one side, and bent in a graceful curve so that the hip on the other side

is arched outwards. This peculiarity, which in the hands of a good

Greek artist, added grace to the representation of the human form,

was imitated by the Graeco-Bactrian mint masters with considerable

success. It caught the Indian taste, but, in the hands of clumsy imi-

tators, was converted into a hideous deformity. An inartistic exageera-

tion of the Praxitelean attitude is characteristic of many of the Gupta

coins ef the fifth century, and of much Indian sculpture from an early

date until the present day.

Unhappily the history of Indian art, is, as observed by Mr. Fereus-

son, a history of decay, and the criticism, passed by Sir A. Cunningham

on Indian sculpture, applies, mutatis mutandis, to other arts :-—

“Tt is a fact, which receives fresh proofs every day, that the art

of sculpture, or certainly of good sculpture, appeared suddenly in India

at the very time that the Greeks were masters of the Kabul valley, that

it retained its superiority during the Greek and half-Greek rule of the

Indo-Seythians, and that it deteriorated more and more the further it

receded from the Greek age, until the degradation culminated in the

wooden inanities and bestial obscenities of the Brahmanical temples,’’*

The employment of fairly well-executed Greek legends on the coins

of the Indo-Seythian kings of the first two centuries of our era proves

that the epithet ‘half-Greek ’ applied to their rule by Sir A. Cunning.

ham is not unsuitable. Kanishka and his successors would not have im-

pressed Greek legends on their coins, unless the Greck language had

considerable currency among their subjects. Ido not, of course, mean

* Archaol. Rep. Vol. L11, p, 100

— oo _

184 V. A. Smith—Greco-Roman influence [No. 3,

to suggest that Greek was ever commonly spoken or read in India, but

it must certainly have been understood by many of the court officials.

The language in the time of Kanishka and Huvishka probably occupied

a position similar to that of the English language in India forty or fifty

years ago, previous to the development of the existing system of public

instruction.

The knowledge of Greek seems to have lingered longest in Gujarat.

Corrupt Greek letters are found on the silver coins of Skanda Gupta

struck in that region as late as A, D. 450, and they also occur on similar

coins of his father and grandfather. The letters on these coins are

unmistakeably Greek in form, but meaningless, and are evidently imi-

tations of legends, which were once significant, executed by men unable

to read Greek. It is plain, therefore, that even on the western coast,

where the agency of maritime commerce had for centuries maintained

an active intercourse with the Hellenistic world, all knowledge of the

Greek language had died out by A. D. 400, In Northern India such

knowledge seems to have been lost two centuries earlier.

Tt is curious that not a single Greek inscription, other than coin-

legends, has yet been discovered either in India or in Afghanistan.

The numismatic facts, to which I have briefly referred, help to

render credible and intelligible the alleged Greek influence on Indian

literature, science, and philosophy, to the consideration of which I shall

now devote a few pages.

Section VIIZ. Tur Origin or tap Inp1An Drama.

The existence of a considerable ancient dramatic literature in the

Sanskrit language was made known to Huropean readers at the cloge

of the last century by Sir William Jones’ translation of Sakuntald, a

charming pastoral play, which is, perhaps, the only Sanskrit work that

has taken a place among the literary classics of the world.

Since Sir William Jones’ time the Sanskrit plays have attracted

many students and translators, notably Horace Hayman Wilson, whose

well-known work, Specimens of the Theatre of the Hindus, is still the

leading authority on the subject.

The question of the origin and affinities of the ancient Indian

drama has excited the curiosity of scholars, from the time of its dis-

covery until the present day, and various attempts have been made to

solve the problem.

The circumstance that the Sanskrit name for a dramatic composi-

tion is derived from a root which conveys the idea of dancing naturally

suggested the theory, which readily found favour, that “ the Indian

drama arose, after the manner of our modern drama in the Middle Ages,

——-e

——?

1889. ] on the Civilization of Ancient India. 185

out of religious solemnities and spectacles (so-called ‘ mysteries’), and

also that dancing originally subserved religious purposes.’”*

But this plausible theory has, unfortunately, very little historical

basis, and a rival theory that the dramatic literature of India is a direct

descendant of the epic seems not to rest on any more solid foundation.t

It is not improbable that rude pantomimic representations of the

incidents of sacred stories, resembling the modern Ramlila, may have

been as popular in ancient times as they are now, but even if they were,

they could hardly be regarded as the parent of the Indian drama. Such

exhibitions in their modern form, of which alone anything is known,

remain unchanged from year to year, and appear quite incapable of

literary development. Their ancient predecessors, if any existed, can-

not be credited with any greater power of generating literature. The

Sanskrit drama includes pastorals, elaborate comedies of real life, com-

plex pictures of political intrigue, and other varieties of highly artificial

composition, The gap between such compositions and a clumsy ‘ mys-

tery’ like the Ramlila is vast and unbridged, and the interval between

them and displays of sacred dancing or formal recitations of epic episodes

is equally wide.

The Indian drama, as Professor Weber remarks, “ meets us in an

already finished form, and with its best productions.” Whence came

this finished form ; was the ripe fruit not preceded by seed or flower ?

It is impossible to believe that the “ finished form” sprang, Minerva

like, from the head of Kalidasa. The dramatic literature of India, like

all other ripe productions of art in all countries and ages, must be

either the result of an independent, and therefore slow, process of

evolution worked out on native soil, or be the more sudden effect of the

fertilization of an indigenous germ by a potent foreign influence.

The latter solution of the problem, is, I have no doubt, the true

one. Itis not easy to disentangle the life history of the indigenous

germ, concerning the true affinities of which opinions may well differ,t

* Weber, History of Indian Literature. (Triibner), p. 197. This theory is well

expressed in the brilliant article on Sanskrit Poetry and the Hindu Drama by Dean

Milman, which appeared in the Quarterly Review for 1831. Dean Milman considered

that the Indian plays more closely resembled the Spanish than those of any other

European country.

+ Brockhaus, who denies all Greek influence on the Indian drama, maintains

the epic theory. I have not seen his writings.

{ Windisch himself (p. 6) admits that the Epics contain a dramatic element,

and that the Indian drama was indebted to some extent, as the Greek also was, to

the epos for help. He is of opinion (p. 8) that dramatic representations, based on

epic stories, existed in India before foreign influences were felt, such representations

being simply due to the natural desire to see, as well as hear, the stories. This

186

V. A. Smith— Greco-Roman inflnence [No. 3,

but the vivifying foreign influence can be isolated, and subjected to

microscopic investigation.

That foreign influence which gave India her noble dramatic litera-

ture is the same which bestowed upon her the arts of the painter,

sculptor, and engraver—the undying spirit of Hellas. India received

this, her spiritual guest, but for a little while and grudgingly. When he

took wing and fled to more congenial dwelling places the arts soon

followed in his train.

Professor Weber was the first to suggest that the representation

of Greek dramas at the courts of the Hellenistic kings in Bactria, the

Panjab, and Gujarat awakened the Hindi faculty of imitation, and thus

led to the birth of the Indian drama; but the suggestion was qualified,

and almost negatived, by the remarks appended to it that the hypo-

thesis does not admit of direct verification, and that no internal con-

nection between the Greek and Indian dramatic literature can be

proved.

The Danish scholar, KE. Brandes, accepted the hypothesis thus

doubtingly propounded, and, rejecting the limitations imposed by its

author, boldly undertook to prove the reality of an internal connection

between the ancient Indian plays and the New Attic Comedy, as chiefly

preserved in the Roman adaptations by Plautus and Terence. I have

not seen Dr. Brandes’ treatise, nor could I read it if I had, but, fortu-

nately for that large class of persons who are ignorant of Danish, sub-

stantially the same thesis has been ably argued by Dr. Windisch in a

language more generally intelligible.*

Tt would be impossible to do full justice to Dr. Windisch’s argu-

ment otherwise than by a complete translation of his essay. I shall mere-

ly attempt to indicate in general terms the nature of some of the leading

proofs on which he relies in support of the proposition that the Sanskrit

drama is of Greeco-Roman parentage.

The general probabilities in favour of the theory that the Indian

plays are derivatives of the New Attic Comedy of the school of Menander

rest chiefly on the evidence which proves an active and long-continued

intercourse between the east and west. Some of this evidence has

already been considered (ante, p. 157). A special agency for the diffu-

sion of knowledge of the forms of Greek drama among Oriental popu-

opinion seems to be pure conjecture, and is not shared by my learned friend Pro-

fessor Atkinson. Windisch also holds (p. 10) that epic recitation, and not a lyrical

performance associated with music and dancing, was the germ of the Indian drama.

* Der Griechische Einfluss im Indischen Drama. Von Ernst Windisch. Aus

den Abhandlungen des Berliner Orientalisten-Congresses. 8vo, pp. 106. Berlin,

A, Asher and Co., Weidinannsche Buchhandlung, 1882.

1889.] on the Oivilization of Ancient India. 187

lations was furnished by the travelling companies of players, who are

known to have traversed the Hellenistic kingdoms; and the poets, as

well as the players, were not averse to travelling. Menander and

Philemon were both invited to the court of Ptolemy Soter.

Greek ideas entered India chiefly by two routes, one overland

through Palmyra and Bactria, the other maritime through Alexandria

and the ports of the western coast, especially Barygaza, the modern

Bharoch. We know from the anonymous Periplus of the Hrythrean

Sea, which was written between A. D. 80 and 89,* that a very active

commerce was then carried on between Barygaza and the inland city

Ozéné (the modern Ujjain in Sindia’s territory), where Asoka had once

been Viceroy, and which, in the time of the author of the Periplus, was

the great depét of the foreign trade.

The scene of the ‘ Toy-Cart,’ the most ancient Indian drama extant,

is laid at Ujjain, and several considerations lead Dr. Windisch to con-

clude that the Indian drama was first developed at that city, asa

direct consequence of intercourse with Alexandria. The few known

facts in the history of the Bactrian king Menander, who flourished about

B. C. 110,+ indicate that the overland communication between India

and the West must have been briskly maintained in his time. The

importance of Palmyra as a commercial depdt (ante, p. 157) was of

later date. Before the Christian era the Western communications of

India were with the Hellenized kingdoms of Asia and Egypt. In the

first century after the Christian era they were extended to Rome and

the Roman provinces. Itis,in my opinion, not at all unlikely that

the New Attic Comedy was known to learned men in India through

the Latin adaptations of Plautus and Terence as well as in the original

Greek.

Whether it be admitted or not that the Indian drama is of foreign

origin, no one, I suppose, will venture to deny that ample opportunities

existed during several centuries for the importation of all sorts of Greek

ideas, dramatic or other.

In the opinion of Dr. Windisch the cumulative effect of the evidence

of resemblance in particular points between the Indian and Grmco-

Roman dramas is so great that “ we must recognize either a wonderful

case of pre-established harmony, or the existence of Greek influence on

the Indian drama.” The dilemma appears to me to be expressed with

perfect accuracy, and I am fully convinced of the reality of the Greek

* The proof is given in the Introduction to McCrindle’s translation.

+ This is the date adopted by Professor Gardner in his Catalogue of Coins of

the Greek and Scythic kings of Bactria and India,

188 V. A. Smith—Greeco- Roman influence [No. 3,

infinence on the Sanskrit drama, and further, that without that influence

the dramatic literature of India would never have come into existence.

| The formal structure of the Sanskrit dramas closely resembles that

with which we are familiar in Plantus aud Terence. Like the Greco-

Roman, the Indian plays are divided into acts and scenes, and each

piece is preceded by a prologue. The mere fact of the existence of the

prologue in the Indian, as in the European plays, is in itself surprising,

and can hardly be regarded as a merely casual coincidence. The im-

probability that it is such becomes much greater when we observe that

in both cases the prologue is devoted to the same purposes, the an-

nouncement of the names of the poet and the play, the gaining favour

of the spectators, and the preparation of their minds for the piece

itself,

Again, it cannot well be the result of accident that the love-story

of the Indian drama is in plot, development, and dénouement essentially

of the same kind as that of Greco-Roman comedy. The plot of the

‘Toy-cart,’ the most ancient Indian play extant, may be accurately

described in the words applied by Rost to the Cureulio of Plautus :—

“The subject of this comedy is very simple, and depends, as usual, on

a secret intrigue, the lover’s want of money, and the supplanting of a

rival.”

The fair Perditas of Plautus and Terence, who eventually prove to

be high-born daughters of Athenian citizens, find their parallel in the

maid-servants of the Indian plays (Milavikdgnimitra and Ratndévalé), who

turn out to be princesses in disguise; and the dvayvwpipds, or recog-

nition of the disguised young lady, which is a critical incident in nearly

every Greco-Roman play, is repeated, merely with variations of detail,

in the Indian adaptations.

Other stock characters of the Terentian comedy have algo been

imported into the Sanskrit drama,

The parasitus edax, the miles gloriosus, and the servus currens, so

familar to all readers of the Greco-Roman comedies, are reproduced

respectively as the vita, sakdra, and vidiishaka of the earliest Indian

drama. The external origin of these strongly marked characters, is

clearly indicated by the facts that the three personages are found to-

gether only in the ‘Toy-cart,’ the oldest drama, which was composed

while India was still in communication with the Hellenistic world, and

that all three were discarded by Bhavabhiti, who lived about A. D. 700,

when Greek influence had ceased to directly affect India. Dr, Win-

disch’s detailed analysis of these characters is very interesting, but is too

long for reproduction.

One striking argument, however, must not be omitted. The Sans-

1889. ] on the Civilization of Ancient India. 189

krit author Bharata, who wrote a technical treatise (ndtyasastra) on

dramatic art, lays down the rule that the players should be five in num-

ber, namely, the sztradhdra, his assistant, the pdripdrswaka, the vifa,

sakdra, and vidishaka. This enumeration, Dr. Windisch points out, is

equivalent to a list of the regular male personnel of a Graeco-Roman play,

but does not apply to any extant Indian play, except in so far that all

the five personages named appear in the ‘ Toy-cart,’ in which alone the

Sakdra is found. The vita is met with in only one other piece (Nagd-

nanda). It is therefore difficult to understand why Bharata should

have laid down this rule, unless pieces were extant in his time which

conformed to it, and these pieces must have resembled the Greek models

at least as closely as the ‘ Toy-cart’ does.

Tho repulsive character of the lena, or pacrpomes, the go-between

and corrupter of maiden virtue, is faithfully reproduced in the character

of the mother of Vasantasend in the ‘ Toy-cart,’ and the elevation of

Vasantasena herself to a respectable position by the foree of unselfish

love may be compared with the story of Silenium in the Cistellaria of

Plautus. The very name of the ‘ Toy-cart’ (mrichchhakatika) recalls

the names of Plautine plays such as Aulularia and Cistellaria.

The essay by Dr. Windisch, from which I have quoted, does not

exhaust all the arguments which might be adduced in support of his

thesis, and the partial analysis of his reasoning given above is far from

presenting the case, as stated by him, in its full force. Yet, even what

has been advanced in the foregoing pages should, I venture to think,

suffice to shake the faith of those who believe in the indigenous origin

of the Sanskrit drama, and to prove that strong reasons exist for hold-

ing the opinion that India is indebted for the existence of the most

generally attractive department in the vast circle of her literature to

contact with the artistic Hellenic mind.

It is, perhaps, necessary to observe that no one contends that any

extant Indian play is a translation or free adaptation of a given Greek

piece. That certainly is not the case. The best Indian plays are the

work of native genius of high order, employing native materials in its

own way, and for its own ends, but first set in motion by a powerful

impulse received from abroad. The case of the drama is analogous to

that of the Amaravati sculptures. I agree with Mr. Fergusson in think-

ing that those sculptures would never have come into existence, if the

latent powers of Indian artists had not been aroused and stimulated by

the example and teaching of Greek, or at least of Hellenistic, sculptors,

but no one would maintain that the carvings now on the staircase of the

British Muscum should be classed among the remains of Greek art.

They are thoroughly Indian in subject and style, and skilled criticism

190

V. A. Smith—Gireco-Roman influence [No. 3,

is needed to discern the hidden foreign element. So it is with the

drama. The plays are Indian, but the idea of composing such plays is

Greek,

The case of the sculptures of the Gandhara or Peshawar school,

which I have discussed at such length, is on the contrary, analogous

rather to an Indian free translation or adaptation of a Greek play.

Those sculptures are close imitations of the contemporary, especially

the Christian, art of the Roman empire in the third and fourth centuries,

and this fact lies on the surface, visible to any commonly attentive

observer. The Roman or Christian subjects have been made to serve

Buddhist purposes, but haye been transferred bodily to India with

little change, save that of name.

Section IX. Graco-RoMAN INFLUENCE ON ‘tHE Reticion, Myrnonocy,

Scrmncu, AnD Puinosopuy or Inp1a. Conexusron,

A smile will, I fear, pass over the gentle reader’s countenance

when he compares the promise of the title with the performance of the

few pages of this section of my essay. A discussion, in any degree

adequate, of the topics mentioned in the heading would require the

ample room of an octavo to itself, the writer of which should be equipped

with a store of varied knowledge to the possession of which IT can mako

no pretension. So far as I am aware, no one has yet attempted such a

survey of the religion, mythology, science, and philosophy of India as

would give a general view of the boundaries which divide the indi-

genous components from the foreign. <A slight, rough sketch ofa survey

of the kind will be found in Weber’s History of Indian Literature, but

& map drawn in more distinct colours is much wanted. TI cannot

attempt to draw it. The preceding pages will, perhaps, have succeeded

in convincing at least some readers that the best elements in the plastic,

pictorial, numismatic, and dramatic arts of ancient India are of foreign,

chiefly Graeco-Roman, origin. In these concluding pages I merely wish

to point out that the foreign influence was not confined to those fields,

where I have traced its workings in some detail, but extended also to

other regions of thought. Iam not prepared to follow in detail its opera-

tions within those regions, nor to catalogue the instances where its

presence may be discerned, and can only offer some unsystematic ob-

servations,

The Indo-Seythian coin series affords obvious and conclusive evi-

dence that about the beginning of the Christian era the religions of India

and those of the neighbouring countries to the west were acting and

re-acting upon each other.

The worship of Siva was certainly then cstablished among

—\--

1889. ] on the Civilization of Ancient India. 191

other cults, in India, and the figure of the god, armed with his trident,

and standing beside his sacred bull, is, perhaps, the commonest mytho-

logical device of the Indo-Scythian coins. But he is not exactly

the Siva of the medieval Puranas, a Hinduized aboriginal demon.

Sometimes he is hardly to be distinguished from the Greek Poseidon,

and the Greek writers on India themselves perceived that he was akin

to Dionysus. Dr. Windisch shows that all the Sanskrit plays are

associated with the worship either of Siva or his consort Gauri, and

that they were generally performed, like the Greek dramas, at the

spring festival. It seems probable that the Hellenistic settlers in India

transferred to Siva some of the honour due to Dionysus, and the idea

of the Indian deity must have been influenced by the Greek conception

of those gods in the Olympic pantheon who most nearly resembled him.

Some rare coins of the great Indo-Scythian emperor, Kanishka,

bear the name of Buddha, BOVAO in Greek characters, and afford us

the earliest known examples of the conventional effigy of the teacher.

Other Indo-Scythian coins, again, present figures of the personified

Sun and Moon, as Greek deities, with their Greek names Helios and

Seléne, while many others represent a pantheon of Iranian deities, bear-

ing such strange names as Oksho (Okro), Ardethro, and so forth, the

meaning of which is only now beginning to be understood. I cannot

here pursue this topic further, and only allude to it for the purpose of

indicating that both a little before, and a little after, the Christian era

Hellenic and Asiatic forms of religion were interacting, and that both

Buddhism and Hinduism must have been modified by the contact with

other modes of religious belief.

Even so late as A. D. 400 the devices of the Gupta coins show

that the conceptions of Hindi divinities were partly based on Graco-

Roman ideas. Lakshmi, the goddess of plenty and good fortune, is

invested with attributes plainly borrowed from the rixyn, Abundantia,

and other personifications of abstract ideas current in the west. The

conception of Lakshmi, the consort of Vishnu, glides imperceptibly into

that of Parvati, Durga, or Gauri, the consort of Siva, and is related to

some of the forms both of Venus and Cybelé.*

The apparent resemblances between the Puranic legend of Krishna

and the Gospel accounts of Christ are well known, and have formed

the subject of much discussion, I am inclined to believe that the

Krishna myth is really indebted to the Gospels for some of its incidents:

* Por the Indo-Scythian coins sce Gardner’s Catalogue, and articles by Stein,

Cunningham, West, and Rapson in the Babylonian and Oriental Record for 1888 and

1889, and Indian Antiquary for April 1888. For the Gupta coinage see Journal

R. As. Soc. for 1889, p. 25, etc.

192 V. A. Smith—Graco- Roman wiflwence [No. 3,

In the early centuries of the Christian eva the religion of Christ in one

or other of its forms extended over many parts of Asia where it is now

extinct, and it must have modified the ideas and beliefs of the peoples

among whom it flourished. The Gnostic variety or corruption of Chris-

tianity was especially popular in the Hast, and strong reasons exist

for believing in Gnostic influence on the Vedantist philosophy of India.

The Bhagavad-Gité certainly seems to have much in common with the

Gospels.*

The extraordinarily close resemblance between many of the sculp-

tures of the Gandhara or Peshawar school, and the monuments of early

Christian art at Rome, which was first observed by Mr. Fergusson, has

been discussed at some length in an earlier section of this paper (ante,

p. 164). The resemblance is certainly real, and, however it may be

explained, proves with equal certainty that the Christian and the Bud-

dhist artists had many ideasin common. The Buddhism of Gandhara

beyond doubt borrowed Christian forms of artistic expression ; it would

be strange if the Buddhist teachers did not assimilate, along with the

forms, some Christian doctrine. But any attempt to follow this specu-

lation further would carry me beyond my depth.

The Gaéndhdra adaptation of Leochares’ group representing the Rape

of Ganymede (ante, p. 133) shows clearly how easy it was for the

ancient Indians to adopt a Greek myth, and convert it to the use of

their own religions.

Weber maintains that a substratum of Homeric legend underlies

the Raméyana, and gives good reasons for his opinion. The mere fact

that such a suggestion can be supported by plausible arguments indi-

cates that the student of comparative mythology must be careful not

to assume the Indian origin of every myth which may have on the sur-

face a purely Indian appearance. ;

Lhave shown above (ante, p. 183) that the Asuras of Puranic mytho-

logy are probably Hinduized adaptations of the Greek giants, who

warred with the gods.

The remarkable fact that no images of Buddha are found among

sculptures at Bhérhut (B. C. 150), and Sanchi (A. D. 80), while they

ave numerous at Amardyati (A. D. 180),f suggested to Mr. Fergusson

* See the translation of Dr. Lorimer’s ‘ Appendix to the Bhagavad-Gité’ in

Indian Antiquary, Vol. II, p. 288. That author quotes St. Chrysostom, who died

A. D. 407, to prove that a translation of the New Testament into some Indian

language existed in his time.

+ This is the approximate date of the outer rail. The inner rail is later, and

some sculptures date from before the Christian era. The remains at Amaravati illus-

trate the period from about B. CG. 100 to A. D, 250 (Burgess, Buddhist stupas of

Amaravaté and Jaggayapeta, p. 112).

1889. ] on the Ciwilization of Ancient India. 193

the bold speculation that the multiform idolatry of modern India is due

to contact with the image-worshipping Greeks. Mr. Fergusson thus

expresses this daring hypothesis in his latest work :—

“1 suspect that when the matter comes to be carefully investigated,

+4 will be found that the Indians borrowed from the Greeks some things

far more important than stone architecture or chronological eras, It

is nearly certain that the Indians were not idolators before they first

came in contact with the Western nations. The Vedas make no mention

of images, nor, so far as I can learn, [do] any of the ancient scriptures

of the Hindus.

“Buddhism is absolutely free from any taint of idolatry till after

the Christian era. So far as we can at present see, it was in the

Buddhist monasteries of the Gdéndhdra country, where the influence of

Greeco-Bactrian art is so manifestly displayed, that the disease broke

out, which was afterwards so completely to transform and pervade the

outward forms, at least, of all the ancient religions throughout India,”*

The propositions thus stated with Mr. Fergusson’s customary direct-

ness cannot be implicitly accepted, although they embody a considerable

amount of truth. It is not safe to affirm that Buddhism before the

Christian era was absolutely free from idolatry, for the Taxilan Buddhist

temples, adorned with plaster images, were probably erected at the close

of the first century B. C. and we do not know, though we may reason-

ably suspect, that the images are of later date. Statues found at

Mathurd, and certain coins of Kanishka (cirea A. D. 78 to 110) prove

conclusively that images of the teaching Buddha im his conventional

attitudes, both seated and standing, were well known at the close of the

first century A. D.f It is rash to affirm that they were unknown a

hundred years earlier. A colossal statue of the standing Buddha dis-

covered by Sir A. Cunningham at Sravasti (Sahet-Mahet) in Oudh

seems to be slightly older than the Mathura images.{

It is, however, quite true that in Bihar, Central and Western India,

no image of Buddha earlier than the Christian era, or perhaps than

A. D. 150, is known, and Mr. Fergusson appears to have been right in

holding that the worship of images of the founder of Buddhism was

introduced from the North West; and it is probable that the develop-

meut of sculpture, which was undoubtedly stimulated by Hellenic

influence, gave encouragement to idolatrous practices.

Among all the departments of Sanskrit literature the elaborate

* Archeology im India (London, Tritbner and Co., 1884),

+ Cunningham, Archwol, Reports, Vol. V;, p. vii; and Gardner’s Cataloyue,

pp. 180, 175.

t{ Cunningham, Archwol. Rep., ut supra, and Vol, T, p. 839

194, V. A. Smith—Greco- Roman. influence [No. 3,

system of Hindt logic, and the marvellous, almost miraculous, structure

of grammar erected by Panini and his successors have the greatest

appearance of absolute originality. Yet some competent scholars are

disposed to seek a western origin even for these. The true position of

the Sanskrit logicians and grammarians in relation to the teachers of

other countries cannot be satisfactorily determined until the main out-

lines of the chronology of Sanskrit literature are settled definitely within

narrow limits of possible error. The radius of error is gradually being

reduced, but a long time must elapse before it is brought within an

approximation of zero.

In one branch of Indian science the operation of direct and potent

Greek influence, however it may once have been doubted, has been fully

demonstrated, and is now admitted by all writers competent to form an

opinion on the subject. Indian astronomy, in its exacter form, as

taught in the Sanskrit text-books is essentially the astronomy of the

Alexandrian schools, and its technical nomenclature is toa large extent

Greek in a slight disguise. An earlier, inexact astronomy, probably of

Babylonian origin, had been known in India long before the works of

Alexandrian professors reached her shores, but all Indian astronomy

with any claim to scientific precision is Greek. This scientific astronomy

was taught by Aryabhaté in A. D. 500, and by Varaha Mihira abont

half a century later, but it was probably known to some persons in

India at a considerable earlier date.*

It is obvious that highly abstruse and technical works like the

treatises of the Alexandrian astronomers could not have been mastered

by the Indian astronomers except by textual study at a time when the

Greek language was still intelligible to learned men in India. The

extensive importation of Greek technical terms into the vocabulary of

Hindt astronomy shows that the Greek works themselves mnst have

been read in India, and also proves that the ideas expressed by those

terms were unfamiliar to the native scholars. If the ideas had been

familiar, Sanskrit words to express them would have existed, and, if

such words had existed, they would have been used, and the foreign

terms would not have been imported. The necessity under which the

Hindi astronomers lay of borrowing Greek scientific terms by the score

* Pandit Shankar Balkrishna Dikshit observes that there are two distinct and

separate astronomical works, each bearing the name of Aryabhatdé as its author,

The first (to which reference is made in the text), known as A’ryabhattyd, or A’rya

Siddhdnta, bears the date 8’aka-samvat 421 expired, = A. D. 499-500. It has been

published by Dr. Kern. The second work, known as the Laghw-A’rya-Siddhdnta,

was composed at some time between A, D. 628 and 1150, and appears never to have

been printed, These two distinct works are said to have been sometimes confound-

ed by European writers, (Indian Antiquary, Vol. XVII (Noy. 1888), p. 312),

1889. | on the Civilization of Ancient India. 19h

is very strong evidence that their native astronomy was, from the

purely scientific point of view, extremely imperfect.

The knowledge of actual Greek books displayed by the Indian

astronomers also shows that there is no improbability in supposing that

a limited class of readers in India had studied the texts of Greek plays.

Dr. Windisch is content to believe that the Greek elements in the

Sanskrit drama, the existence of which he demonstrates, were assimi-

lated by the Indian authors through the agency of performances of

Greek plays on the stage. It is not necessary, he says, to assume that the

texts were known in India. It seems to me impossible that the resenr-

blances between the Greek and Indian dramas should have been brought

about in this casual way. It would be nearly as easy to believe that

Aryabhata learned the signs of the zodiac and the term ‘ diameter’ from

chatting with ship-captains on the quays of Barygaza, I can see no

reason whatever to feel sceptical about the reality of the diffusion to a

limited extent of Greek books in Greek among the learned classes of

India during the early certuries of our era.

The coins and the manuals of astronomy are incontrovertible evi-

dence that some people there could read Greek, and why it should be

supposed incredible that Kalidasa could read the plays of Menander

I cannot imagine.

We are not bound to accept as literal statements of fact the

rhetorically expressed assertions of Plutarch and Dio Chrysostom that

the Indians sang the poems of Homer, and that the children of the

Gedrosians recited the tragedies of Huripides and Sophocles, and may

yet feel full assurance that Indian scholars who studied and assimilated

Alexandrian manuals of astronomy cannot have been altogether un-

acquainted with the classic literature of Greece.

T have now reached the bounds to which a general survey of the

action of Hellenic influence on ancient India can be conveniently ex-

tended at present. The adequate discussion of the Gandhara sculptures

alone would fill a goodly volume. The imperfect account of them given

above is only intended to stimulate curiosity, and to indicate the direc-

tions in which more exhaustive investigation will reward the student.

I do not desire to exaggerate the intrinsic merit of these sculptures,

though I feel assured that it is amply sufficient to justify their critical

study, and that, even if it were much less than it is, the historical

interest attaching to the productions of a school which links together

Hellenic and Indian art gives them a right to claim the attention both

of Orientalists and of classical scholars.

The discovery of the linguistic and literary treasures of Sanskrii

so charmed the imagination of the earlier Orientalists that they lent

196 V. A. Smith— Greco-Roman influence [No. 3,

a ready ear to the extravagant tales of the pandits, and were willing

to attribute the most venerable antiquity and almost absolute origi-

nality to the strange civilization and vast literature suddenly brought

within their ken.

Modern historical and literary criticism has been steadily engaged

in the task of exposing the falsity of Brahmanical tradition or pseudo-

tradition, the “lying gabble of Brahmans,” as it has been well called,

and of moving up, so to speak, all dates in the early history of India,

Panini, the grammarian, Manu, the lawgiver, Kalidisa, the poet and

dramatist, and many other names famed in Indian story, have already

been moved up from remote prehistoric, or pre-Christian, times to post-

Alexandrian, or post-Christian, dates.*

This process still continues, and simultaneously with the demonstra-

tion of the comparatively modern date of all Sanskrit, other than Vedic,

literature, the conviction has forced itself upon scholars that the civiliza-

tion of ancient India was not so indigenous and self-contained as, at

first sight, it seemed to be.

India may, apparently, claim with justice to have given birth inde-

pendently to the mechanical process of coinage, but her weakly numis-

matic child never attained maturity, and was soon compelled to make

way fora stranger of more vigorous growth. The other products of

civilization claimed from time to time as independent Indian discoveries

are now either proved to be foreign importations, or shown to be, at the

best, of doubtful parentage.

I do not know any historical problem more startling at first sight

than that propounded by the sudden and simultaneous first appearance

in India during the third century B. C. of long documents in two

diverse highly developed alphabets, of stone architecture, stone sculpture,

chronological eras, inscrived. coins, and a missionary state religion.

The problem has not yet been completely solved, and perhaps never

can be, but it is certain that the phenomena referred to were largely due

to a rapid development of intercourse between India and Western

nations in the time of the Mauryan dynasty of Chandra Gupta and

Asoka (B. C. 315 to 222). A further development, or renewal, of that

intercourse in the first century before, and the four centuries following,

the Christian era, conducted through Bactrian, Alexandrian, and Pal-

myrene channels, produced new schools of architectural, plastic, and

pictorial art, introduced novel types and standards of coinage, taught

Science in its exacter forms, and gave birth to a dramatic literature of

great variety and merit.

* For a convenient summary of much of the recent discussion on the chronology

of Indian Literature, see Max Miiller’s “ India, What can it Teach Us P”

1889. | on the Civilization of Ancient India. 197

The same occidental influences left enduring marks on the religion

and mythology of India, modified her epic poetry, and in the opinion of

some competent judges, affected even the grammar, logic, and philo-

sophy which are the most characteristic and original products of Indian

thought.

The investigation of the relations between the early civilization of

India and that of Western nations is still very incomplete, but it has

proceeded sufficiently far to warrant the belief that further research will

magnify rather than diminish the debt due by India to Assyria, Baby-

lonia, Persia, Greece, and Rome. : 7

ADDENDUM.

When compiling the Bibliographical List (ante, page 118) I

omitted to notice the following papers :—

(1.) Indo-Grecian Sculptures from the N.-W. Frontier, by Major

J. Abbott (with a Plate). Proc. As. Soc. of Bengal for 1854, page 394.

This communication briefly notices a large box of sculptures pre-

sented to the Society which were “dug from the site of a temple on

the left bank of the Indus, called Kala, close below Ghazi Huzara.

The winged female is from another old site at present called Shah ke

Tere in Quatur. They are very inferior in grace and execution to

those from Trans-Indus...... Those at Kala seem to have belonged

to a Buddhist temple of small size, but very richly and eleborately

sculptured, the material being black clay-slate.’ The plate represents

a head from Rawalpindi.

(2.) Note ona small Indo-Greek Sculpture, by the same, ibid, for

1888, page 261. The figure described and presented to the Society is

one of the Atlantean class, purchased from a native, who had found

it in an old fort of the Yusufzai at the foot of the mountains.

(3.) Account of some of the Sculptures in the Peshawar Museum,

by Rev. W. Loewenthal, ibid. for 1861, page 411.

The account given is, unfortunately, extremely meagre. It men-

tions Buddhas almost innumerable, kings of various sizes, a lady sitting

on a lion, playing the lute, reliefs, and elaborate figures of warriors in

198 V. A. Smith—Addendum. i

all kinds of dresses, sometimes purely Greek, sometimes purely Orien-

tal, sometimes a mixture of the two.

The only work described in detail is the panel with the three

Greek soldiers below, and grotesque figures above, which has been

noticed in the text (Section III, page 135) Mr. Loewenthal states

that this slab was “lately brought from Nagram in Yiisufzai by Lieut.

Short.” He observes that “some pieces of pottery have also been

found in the cantonment [scil. Peshdwar], stamped with figures of pure

Greek designs.” I have not seen any such pottery.

LDS 1B a SH.

JOURNAL, ASIATIC SOCIETY OF BENGAL, Vor, LVIIT, Parr I,

Lee BAKR, unique coin of, p. 32.

Ahmad IT, of Gujarat, pp. 3, 10.

Antiquities at Rampal, pp. 12, 17.

at Bhitari, p. 87.

-— at Sdwaldher, p. 171.

Athene, statuette of, pp. 121, 150.

Atlantean statuettes, p. 131.

Architecture, Indo-Hellenic, pp. 109, 119,

121, 139, 150.

, Indo-Persian, p. 109.

, Indo-Corinthian, pp, 116,

130, 149, 161, 164,

Ba-xvam, mosque of, pp. 17, 24, 26,

27.

, legend of, p. 18.

Bahmani coins, pp. 11, 12.

Baliditya, a Gupta title, p. 93.

Ballal-bari, p. 26.

Ballal Sen, of Bengal, pp. 12, 16—19.

Bhitari, antiquities at, pp. 87, 154.

Birthscene of Buddha, p. 123.

Birthstories of Buddha, p. 130.

Buddha, statues of, pp. 122, 126.

-, with moustaches, p. 122.

——-, birthscene of, p. 123.

-, deathbed scene, p. 124.

-, hair of, p. 128.

Buddha Gaya, sculptures at, p. 188.

Caannen coins, p. 34,

Christian art, resembling that of Gén-

dhira, pp. 164—166, 176.

Chronologisal Tables of Tibet, p. 40,

Chronology of Géndhara school of sculp-

ture, p. 141,

Civilization of India,

influence on, p. 107.

Coinage, art of, in India, p. 177,

Grzeco-Roman

Coins of the Muhammadan

Gujarat, p. 1.

Ghiyasu-d-din Karim Shah, p. 8.

—— Mahmid Shah J, p. 8.

— Muraffar Shah II, p. 9.

— Bahmant, pp. 11, 12.

— Bahadur Shah, p. 10.

— Mahmad Shah III, p. 10,

— Ahmad Shah II, p. 10

— Muhammad Shah, the

Kings of

pretender,

jer hl

— Mugaffar Shah III, p. 11.

—- Muhammad Shih II, Bahmani,

p; bi.

Mahmid Shah II, Bahmani, p. 12.

— from Hoshangabad, p. 30.

of Muhammad bin Tughlaq, p. 31.

—— Ghiyasu-d-din Tughlag II, p. 31.

— Aba Bakr, p. 32.

—— Sikandar bin Ily4s, p. 32.

— Firtz Shah and Fath Khan, p. 33.

— Saifu-d-din Qurlagh, p. 33.

— Paramarddi Deya, p. 34.

— Vira Varma, p. 34.

— Bala Varma, p. 84.

——- Gondophares, pp. 145, 147,

— Kanishka, pp. 147, 148.

— Kumara Gupta, p. 154.

— of Hashtanagar, p. 144.

date of Indian, p. 178.

Comic friezes, in Gandhara, pp. 136, 169.

Cycle, of Vrihaspati or 60 years, p. 40,

Das, Babu 8. Ch., Life of Sum-pa

Khan-po, author of the Rehumig,

p- 37.

Death-bed scene of Buddha, p. 124,

Dehli, rulers of, pp. 6—8.

Dekkan, rulers of, p. 6—8.

Devagupta, p. 103

Drama, origin of Indian, p. 184.

Dronasimha, the Valabhi King, p. 97.

EK RA, Kalachnri, p. 1038.

Para Khan, coin of, p. 33.

Firtiz Shah, coin of, p. 33.

Friezes, comic, in Gindhara, pp. 136,

169.

Gasarrys tree, in Rampal, p. 21.

Gandhara, boundaries of, p. 111.

; notices of School of Art in,

p. 118.

—— —, school of sculpture described,

Pp. 119:

——_—, date of art, pp. 128, 150, 153.

, Subjects of its art, p. 129.

———-, chronology of school of seulp-

ture, p. 141.

, inscriptions in, p. 142.

Ganymede, rapo of, in Gandhara, p. 133.

Garuda device on seals, pp. 85, 86.

Genealogical table of Kings of Gujarat,

p: 6.

Genealogy of the early Gupta Dynasty,

p. 91.

Ghiyasu-d-din Tughlaq II, unique coins

of, p. 31,

Gigantomachia in Gandhira, p. 132.

Gondophares, coins of, pp. 148, 147,

Greco-Roman influence on the Civili-

zation of India, p. LOZ,

Gujarat, coins of, p. 1.

, kings of, pp. 2—8,

Gupta, Asutosh, Ruins and Antiquities

of Rampal, p. 12.

Guptas, early, genealogy of, p. 91.

, history of, p. 95.

, coinage of, p. 98.

, relation of Later Guptas

to, p,. 94.

Hise of Buddha, form of, p. 128.

Hashtanagar, p. 152 ; inscription, p. 144.

Hellenistic sculpture in Géandhara,

p. 119.

—— in India Proper, p. 137,

Hoernle, Dr. A. F. Rudolf, on some new

or rare Hindi and Muhammadan

coins, No. I, p. 30.

Remarks on an inscribed seal of

Kumara Gupta, p. 88.

Tuna, invasion of India, pp. 99, 101.

Tupnrtan dignity, in India, fortunes

of, p. 101.

Indo-Corinthian architecture, pp, 116,

130, 161, 164,

209 Index.

Indo-Corinthian points of similarity with

pure Corinthian, p. 118.

——-——— date of its capitals, p.

163.

Indo- Hellenic architecture, p. 109.

Indo-Persian architecture, p. 109.

Inscription of Jaldélu-d-din Fath Shah,

pp. 17, 23.

——- — in Qazi Qasbah mosque, pp.

24, 25,

in Géndhara, p. 142.

J anxtu-p-prn Fath Shah, of Bengal,

Rolie

——-, inscription of, pp. 17,

23.

Jamalgarhi, remains of architecture, pp.

117, 119, 122, 129, 180, 131, 148, 162,

170.

, date of, p. 119,

Jatakas or birthstories, p. 180.

Jaunpur, rulers of, pp. 6—8.

K ACHKY Dwarja, name of a road,

pp. 22, 23,

Kalachuri era, p. 103.

Kandaish, rulers of, pp. 6—8.

Kashmir, Doric pillars in, p. 110. [88.

Kumara Gupta, inscribed seal of, pp. 84,

Laxmay, Prof. R., the Namuchi-

myth, p. 28.

Masiun IIT, of Gujarat, pp. 2, 10.

Malwa, rulers, of, pp. 6—8.

Manikyala, pp. 112, 151.

Masjid of Ba-Adam, pp. 17, 24, 26, 27,

of Qazi, p. 22.

—— of Qazi Qasbah, pp. 17, rie

—— of Rikabi Bazér, pp. 24, 25, 27,

Mathura, sculptures at, pp. 139, 140,

Maukhari, rulers in India, p. 102.

Mihirakula, p. 95.

Moustaches, on Buddha, p, 122.

Muhammad bin Tughlaq, unique coin of,

p. 31,

Muzaftar III, of Gujarat, pp. 3, 11.

Mythology, Graeco-Roman influence on

Indian, p, 190,

Nasvont Myth, p. 28.

Naragupta, coins of, p. 93,

Narasimha Gupta, p. 95.

Nathu, see Muzaffar ITI,

Nuttu Monastery, sculptures at, pp. 125,

127, 167, 170.

Index.

Oxter, BH. E., Coins of the Muham-

madan Kings of Gujarat, p. 1.

Parone, Indian Schools of, p. 178.

, date of Ajanta, p. 176.

Peshdwer or Géndhara school of sculp-

ture, pp. 119, 141.

Philosophy, Graeco-Roman influence on

Indian, p. 190.

Pillars, Indo-Persian, p. 109.

, Corinthian, p. 116.

; Doric, p. 110.

, Ionic, pp. 115, 150.

Puragupta, pp. 92, 95.

Qszr, mosque of, p. 22.

Qazi Qasbah, mosque of, pp. 17, 24, 25.

Rasararancrr, errors in, p. 99.

Rampal, ruins and antiquities of, pp. 12,

ites

— , dighi or lake of, pp. 20, 21, 22.

—— , Gajariyd tree in, p. 21.

Ranigat, fortress of, p. 127.

Rape of Ganymede, in Gandhara, p. 183.

Rehumig, Chronology of Tibet, p. 40.

Religion, Greco-Roman influence on

Indian, p. 190.

Rikabi Bazéir mosque, pp. 24, 25, 27.

Rome, its intercourse with India, p. 157.

, date of the influence of its art on

India, p. 159.

Sarv.p.prw Qurlagh, coins of, p. 33

Sama Jataka, p. 130.

Sanghao, sculptures in, pp. 147, 148, 170.

SAwaldher, remains at, p. 171.

Science, Greco-Roman influence on

Indian, p. 190.

Sculpture, art of, in Gaéndhara, p. 119.

4 , in India proper, p. 137.

. , chronology of, pp. 141,

150, 153.

, Christian, resembling that of

Géndhira, p. 166.

201

Seal, inscribed, of Kumara Gupta, pp.

84, 88.

—, ——,, of Harsha Vardhana, p.

86.

Sen kings of Bengal, p. 12,

their caste, p. 13.

Sikandar bin [ayas, unique gold coin of,

p. 82.

Smyth, V. A., Inscribed Seal of Kumara

Gupta, p. 84.

— , Greco-Roman influence

on Civilization of India, p. 107.

Statuette of Athene, p. 121.

of Buddha, p. 127.

Atlantean, p 131.

Sum-po Khan-po, author of a Tibetan

chronology, p. 87.

Synchronistic table of the early Guptas

and others, p. 101.

of the

Gujarat, etc., pp. 6—8.

rulers of

Taste, genealogical of kings of

Gujarat, p. 6.

, synchronistic of rulers of Gujarat,

ete., pp. 6—8.

, chronological, of Tibet, p. 40.

Takht-i-Bahi, remains of architecture,

pp. 117, 171.

, inscription at, p. 145.

Taxila, p. 112.

, buddhist temple at, pp. 114, 115.

—, Ionic pillars at, pp. 115, 150.

, statuette at, p. 127.

, inscriptions at, p. 142.

Tibet, chronology of, p. 40.

Toramana, p. 98.

Uc HCHAKALPA Mahfrajas p. 103.

Vamaspatt cycle, p. 40.

W arurspours, pp. 27, 28.

Wessantara jataka, p. 180,

SE EOEOEEeESeeEeeeer

Journal, As. Soc. Bengal, Vol, LVIII. Pt, I. 188, PLATE T,

Corns OF THE MUHAMMADAN Kiyas oF GuZARAT,

LITHOGRAPHED BY A. L, PAIN, CALCUTTA, JANUARY, 1889.

” ie

Cons OF THE MUHAMMADAN KinGs oF GUZARAT.

LITHOGRAPHED BY A. L. PAIN, CALCUTTA, JANUARY, 1889.

PLATE I. |

Journal, As. Soe. Bengal, Vol. LVIII, Pt, 1. 1889, PLATE TIL

Corss oF THE MUHAMMADAN KINGS OF GuZARAT.

Journal, As. Soc. Bengal, Vol, LVIIL, Pt I. 1989. PLATE Iv.

Somm New of Rare Hinpv anD Munammapan Corns,

LITHOGRAPHED BY A, lL, PAIN, CALCUTTA, 1889.

*Oggr ‘VLLOQOIVO ‘NIVa “1 ‘¥Y A@ QHHd4YUDOHITT

“Tydnvy dVaNn ‘CIHVHS WYCY dO Mndsoy{ AHL NI

4 4

“H VY S88 Galye ‘HYHS LV NIG-G-OTVIV( AO NOILdIYOSNT

4 4

‘A GLY Td “Oggt “T4d “IITAT ‘TOA ‘Te8ueg “00g “sy ‘peurnor

“Ty

Journal, As. Soc., Bengal, Vol. LVITI, Pt. 1, 1889

COPPER-SILVER SEAL OF KUMARA GUPTA.

Pull size.

Photo-Collotype, Survey of India Offices, Calcutta, August 1889

PLATE VI.

JOURNAL As. Soc. BeNnG,Vol. LVIII. Pr. 1.1890

Tune 1830

Journac As, Soc, Beno.Vor, LVII|, Pr, |.1889 PLATE Vil

‘aleutta,June 1890

UVOVNLHSVH “IVLSHCad CHHINOSNI

Furynra-owyg

dbs

688) ‘| td IIA} 70, °9N2g “90S Sy T¥NUNOF

345

360

460

470

475

480

485

490

495

500

505

510

515

540

545

550

591

595

600

605

606

610

Early Guptas

Imperial.

GupPTA

GHATOTKACHA

Cuanpra Gurral.

SamcupRa Guera

CuanpRra Gupta II.

[400—414 |

Komsra Gupta I.

[415—454]

SKANDA GuPpTA

[455—468 ]

Pora Mena

NARASIMHA GUPTA

(Baldditya)

KoumAga Guprall.

(Kings of Benares)

Baladitya IT.

Béladitya III.

Prakataditya

(Son-in-law of Lichchhavi

Later Guptas

of Magadha.

Krishna Gupta

(Corp., III, 14}

Harsha Gupta

(Contemp. Aditya

Varman)

Jivita, Gupta I.

Kumara Gupta

Damodara Gupta

(Contemp. Sarva

Varman)

Mahasena Gupta

(Contemp A'ditya

Varman)

Madhava Gupta

(Contemp. Harsha

Vardhana)

Adityasena

[672]

Deva Gupta

(Father-in-law of

Rudrasena IT.)

Li Gupta

Jivita Gupta I.

Later Guptas «

Eastern Malava.

Hina Kings,

Varmans of West-

ern Malava.

Uchchakalpa

Maharajas.

Budha Gupta

| [484494]

Bhanu Gupta

[510]

Deva Gupta

(Contemp. Graha

Varman and

(Rajya Vardhana)

Toramiéna

Mihirakula

(Contemp. of Narasimha-

| gupta and Yagodharman)

(See column 18)

Nara Varman

Visva Varman

[424]

| Bandhu Varman

[437]

YaSodharman

(S‘dldditya, uncle

lof Dhruvasena IL.)

[533]

Devadhya

Prabhafijana

Démodara

Hastin

[475—510]

Sankshobha

[528]

Notes :—1, The names printed in red indicate the kings that bore imperial titles (mahdrdjddhirdja, paramesvara, paramabhattaraka, etc.).

2, The information in columns 1—11, 16, 17 is based mainly on Fleet’s volume III of the Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarwm ; columns 10, 12—15 on the Indian Antiquary, also on Professor Bhandark

Ogha Deva

(m. Kumara Devi |

Kumara Deva

Jaya Svamin

Vyéghra

Yarvanatha

[508—533 |

(Contemp. Hastin)

FRom THE BEGINNING OF THE 4TH To THE END OF THE 8TH CENTURY, A. D.

Hari Varman

Aditya Varman

(Brother-in-law of

Harshagupta)

Vévara Varman

Yé4ne Varman

[564]

(Contemp. Kumara

Gupta of Magadha)

S’arva Varman

(Contemp. Démodara

Gupta)

Susthita Varmar

(Contemp. Mahdsena

Gupta)

Avanti Varman

(Contemp. Prabhdkara

Vardhana)

Graha Varman

(Son-in-law of Prabhd-

kara Vardhana and

contemp. Deva Gupta)

Bhoga Varman

(Son-in-law of

A dityasena)

Yaso Varman

(733 ]

(Contemp. Lalitéditya)

Vardhanas of

Thanesar.

Nara Vardhana

Rajya Vardhana TI.

Aditya Vardhana

(Brother-in-law of Mahd-

sena Gwpta)

Prabhaékara Vardhana

(Father-in-law of Graha

fee

Rajya Vardhana II.

[606—648]

Harsha Vardhana |

(Contemp. Pulikesin II.) )

Valabhis of

Gujarat.

Bhatarka

(Sendpat?)

Dharasenal.

Dronasimha

(Contemp.Narasimha-

gupta)

Dhruvasena I,

[526]

Dharapatta y

Guhasena

[559—567]

Dharagsena IT.

[571—589 |

S‘léditya I. >

[605—609 | |

Kharagraha I.

Dharagena IIT. . Hy)

Dhruvasena IT.

(620) |

(Contemp. Harsha-

Vardhana, nephew of

Siladitya Yasodhar-

man)

Dharasena IV,

[645—64,9 |

Ill

Dhruvasena III.

[651]

I |

Kharagraha II.

[656] MY,

S'iléditya IIT.

[671]

Biléditya IV.

[691]

Siiladitya V.

[722]

S‘iliditya VI.

[760]

Siliditys VO

[766]

Prithiv

Vindhyasakti.

Pravarasena I,

Rudrasena I,

Rudrasena, IT.

(Son-in-law of

Deva Gupta)

Pravarasena IT.

Rudrasena III,

Anonymous.

Harishena.

Mahérajas of

Mahodaya

SYNCHRONISTIC TABLE OF THE REIGNS OF THE EARLY GUPTAS AND THEIR CONTEMPORARIES AND IMMEDIATE SUCCESSORS.

Gurjara Prince

of Bharochh.

ishena

Vindyaka Péla |

[794] J

Devaégakti

Vatsaraja

Nagabhata

Rémabhadra

aah sm

Mahendra Pala

[760]

Bhoja II. >)

Dadda I.

Jayabhata I

Dadda II.

[478— 495]

Anonymous.

Anonymous

Dadda IIT.

Jayabhata IT.

Dadda IV.

[628—633]

(Contemp. Harsha

¥ Dhruvasena IT}

Jayabhata III,

Dadda V.

Jayabhata IV.

[706—734 |

Early Chalukya.

Jayasimha

Ranaraga

Pulikesin I.

Kirtti Varman I. -

Mangaligsa J

Pulikesin II,

(Contemp. Harsha

Vardhana and Govinda)

Vikramaditya I.

Vinayaditya

Vijayaditya

Vikramaditya II.

Kirtti Varman II.

(deposed by Dantidurga)

vol. III, p. 41; for column 15, see Ind. Ant., vol. VII, p. 72; for colnmn 11, see Ind. Ant., vol. XII, p. 242; for column 12, see Ind. Ant., vol. XV, p. 110; for column 13, see nd. Ant., vol. XVII, p. 191. a

Jacobi in Géttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen, for 1888, No. 2,; on Is4na Varman’s date see Sir A. Cunningham’s Arch. Rep., vol. IX, p. 27, Ind. Ant., vol. XIV, p. 68, Smith’s Coinage of the Early Guptas, p. 186; I read

» vol. III, Introd., p. 177, 187 ;—column 10, on Dhrnvasena II., see Ind. Ant., vol. XVII, p. 196; for other particulars see my Remarks on the Seal of Kumara Gupta II. in the Journal, As. Soc. Beng., for 1889.

3, Column 3, on Devagupta see Epigraphia Indica, for 1889, No. 11, also Shankar P. Pandit’s Gaiidavaho, Introd., Note I ;-—column 4, on YaSovarman, see

the date as 245 Gupta Samvat ;—column 8, on Bhoga Varman, see Corp, Inser. Ind

One connecting line signifies a son or length of reign, two signify a brother, three signify a nep

1ew, cousin, etc.

A bracket signifies a generation.

165

Rashtrakitas.

Se REAP REA SES NN SEE”

Nepal.

Thakkuris.

Dantivarman

Indra I.

Govinda I.

(Contemp. Puli-

kesin II.)

Karka I,

Indra IT.

Dantidurga

[753 |

Krishna I,

Govinda II.

Eleven anonymous kings, at 25 years each, between A. D. 845 and 620.

Siva Deva I.

Dhruva Deva

Sankara Deva

Dharma Deva

Vasanta Deva

Ag Snvarman

[635 — 650 |

Jishnueupta

(653 }

Udaya Deva

Narenda Deva

bai

“qemu: Esa

Kings of Kashmir,

Mihirakula,

(retired to Kashmtyr)

Durlabha Vardhana

(Prajindditya)

Durlabhaka

(Pratipdditya)

S‘iva Deva IT.

[725—748]

(Son-in-law of

Bhoga Varman)

Jaya Deva II.

[750 —758]

en eS ee ee Ee eT

Chandrapida >)

Térdpida

Lalitaditya I. J

(Contemp. YasoVarman)

Kuvalaydpida *)

Lalitéditya II. _)

Prithivy4pfda I. °)

| |

Sangramapida II.

Jayapida J

etc.

360

510

610

615

620

625

626

630

640

650

655

662

665

680

685

697

725

733

~—T

Bracketed numbers under the names signify known dates.

kar’s Harly History of the Dekkan ; for column 8, see Sir A. Cunningham’s Archwological Survey Reports, vol. XV, p. 164—166 ; for column 10, see Corpus Inser. Ind.,

CONTENTS

OF THE

JOURNAL, Pr. I, ror 1888.

No. 1.—D 4s, A brief account of Tibet from “ Dsam Ling Gyeshe,”

the well-known geographical work of Lama Tsan-po Nomankhan of

Amdo. Gockburn, Sité’s Window or Buddha’s Shadow Cave.

No. 2.—O liver, The Safwi Dynasty of Persia. Syamal D as,

Antiquities at Nagari. Yate, notes on the City of Herat.

Fihrer, Three new copper-plates grants of Govindachandra

Deva of Kananj.

.3—Knowles, Kashmiri Riddles. R&jendralala Mitra,

Notes on a Donative Inscription of Vidyédhara Bhanja, belonging

in the Quetta District. Beveridge, the Mother of Jahangir.

Rodgers, Notes on the coins mentioned by Major Raverty in

his notes to his Translation of the Tabaqit-i-Nasiri,

PUBLICATIONS

FOR SALE AT THE

ASIATIC SOCIETY OF BENGAL, |

No. 57, Park Street, Calcutta.

Journal, Asiatic Society, Bengal, from Vols. XII to XVII (1843

to 1848) ; Vols. XIX to XXII (1850 to 1852) ; Vols. XXVI,

XXVII (1857, 1858), and Vols. XX XIII to XLVIII, (1864

to 1881).

Asiatic petegretiess t from Vols. VI to XI, and Vols. XVII to XX,

each at... : ee

Ditto ditto, Tada.

The Ain-i-Akbari, "Vol. I. Translated into English, ‘with notes and

indexes, by H. Blochmann, M. A.,

The Une pales Translated L by ‘Major nies G. - Ravorty,

10 fase., .....05

———— — eee

RS. AS,

pe OE ey en

I OO OO ees

- Price (exclusive of postage) to Subscribers, Re. 1 —To Non-Subscribers Rs 1-8.

ete)

eee eee

“NEW SERIES. VOL, LVII. Lf. 1GGxcre

Ne aad

ee ee eee

JOURNAL

OF THE

ASIATIC SOCIETY OF BENGAL,

Vol. LVIII, Part I, Supplement,

1889.

EDITED BY

JHE PHILOLOGICAL PECRETARY.

eee

DEED ASOT O_O A CREATAS

mye

AATHTA el zi

Se aa

Sa ee

“The bounds of its investigation will be the geographical limits of Asia : and

within these limits its inquiries will be extended to whatever is performed by

man or produced by nature.”—Sir WILLIAM Jongs.

*_* Communications should be sent under cover to the Secretartes, Asiat, Soc.,

to whom all orders for the work are to be addressed in India; or in Lon-

don, care of Messrs. Triitbner and Oo., 57 and 59, Ludgate Hull.

eee

.@ CALCUTTA:

PRINTED AT THE Baptist Mission PRESS,

AND PUBLISHED BY THE

PESIATIC pPOCIETY, 57 ARK pTREET.

? ?

1890.

See

Price in England, 2 Shillings and six pence.

CONTENTS.

Page

Catalogue of the Central Asiatic Coins, collected by Captain A. F.

De Leessoe, in the Indian Musewm, Caleutta.—By Dr. A. F.

Ropotr HorrniE at A

JOURNAL

OF THE

ASIATIC SOCIETY OF BENGAL.

Part I—HISTORY, LITERATURE, &e.

Supplement, for No. 1V.—1889.

Catalogue of the Central Asiatic Coins, collected by Oaptain A. F. De

Lessoe, in the Indian Museum, Calcutta.—By Dr. A. F. Rupour

Honrrnue.

(With two plates.)

The coins which are described in the subjoined catalogue were

collected by Captain A. F. de Leessoe on the northern frontier of Afghan-

istdn, in the years 1884 to 1886, during the time of the Afghan Boundary

Commission, on which he was employed as Assistant Political Officer.

The coins were, under the orders of the Government of India,

made over by him to Mr. Chas. J. Rodgers of the Archeological

Survey, for a preliminary examination and report. They were after-

wards presented by the Government of India to the Indian Museum,

with a request that duplicates, when available, should be given to the

Museum in Lahore and to the British Museum in London,

At the request of the Trustees of the Indian Museum, the coins

were carefully examined by me and catalogued. Mr. Rodgers’ prelimi-

nary list proved of great advantage in this work, and most of his

readings and many of nis remarks are embodied in the following pages.

A large number of duplicates were presented to the Lahore Mu-

seum, and a somewhat smaller number to the British Museum. The

numbers from which presentations could be made, are indicated by the

marks + and {.

A. F, R. Hoernle—Oatalogue of [Supplement,

The collection will be found to be one of considerable interest. A

large number of coins, especially of ’Alau-d-din Khwarizmi are either

entirely new or, at least, have hitherto not been published. The most

representative ones of these have been figured in the accompanying

plates.

Abbreviations.

Ar, Ant. = Dr. Wilson’s Ariana Antiqua; B. M. 0. = British

Museum Catalague ; Chron. = EH. Thomas’ Chronicles of the Pathan

kings of Delhi; Ind, Ant. = Prinsep’s Indian Antiquities (ed. Thomas) ;

Int. Num. Or. = International Numismata Orientalia; J. A. S. B. =

Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal; J. R. A.

Royal Asiatic Society of England; Num. Chron. = the Numismatic

Chronicle and Journal of the Numismatic Society of England; Num.

Or. = Marsden’s Numismata Orientalia; Or. = Oriental; Sass. = E.

Thomas’ Sassanians in Persia.

Heplanation.

* prefixed, signifies that the coin is not noted in the existing British

Museum Catalogue; + signifies that specimens of the coin have

been sent to the British Museum ; signifies that specimens have

been sent to the Lahore Museum; g signifies that the coin is in

good condition, f, ¢, ¢, that it ig in fair, tolerable or indifferent con-

dition respectively.

——y

1889.]

Captain De Leessoe’s Central Asiatic Coins. 3

CATALOGUE.

| a SR a A

Serial Number.

Number of Coins.

Gold.

ilver.

Mixed.

.| 183,92

| 263,77

Weight in grains.

60,92

Description.

ROMAN.

Antoninus Pius. Obv., head of em-

perors) 24. NIDUS cA... Rev., draped

female seated on ground, to left. (7)

Constantius II. Obv., head of emperor:

CONSTANTIUS AUG. Rev., standard

between two armed soldiers: GLORIA

EXERCITUS; in exergue SMANZ. (¢)

GREEK.

Alexander. Drachm. Obv., head of

king. ev., seated Zeus with eagle. (¢)

Antiochus. Drachm. Obv., head of

king toright. Rev., Heracles seated ; to left

[A]NTIOXOLY], to right [BA ]3ILE[O3}.

A barbarous copy or forgery with a hole

for suspension. (t)

BACTRIAN.

Eukratides. Drachm. Obov., head of

king; border of dots. Rev., Dioscuri mount-

ed; legend BASIABOS EYKPATIAOY.

Type like B. M. C., vol. V, 6. Rare.

This specimen is probably a forgery ; the

legend is smudged and “ basileos” is double-

struck. None in B. M. C. of 1886, but a

specimen lately obtained from Gen. Sir A.

Cunningham.

Soter Megas. Obdv., bust of king. Rev.,

horseman. Type like Ar. Ant., pl. IX, 12

(with.no fillet to lance, and legend BASIAEY

for BactAevs.) (f)

INDO-SCYTHIAN.

Kanishka. Qev., OKPO. Type like Ar.

Ant., pl. XII, 17. (¢)

4 A. F, R. Hoernle—COatalogue of [Supplement,

j :

5 8 Monrat. 3

a | bp

fs a . A Description.

o Pa ey e

ale p/S/Als] &

ala olla] &

INDO-SCYTHIAN—Oonid.

Si als, 1}...] 225,55 Oerki (Oorr). Obv., elephant-rider.

Rev., MILOPO (?) Type like B. M. C., No.

158 (p. 155). (@)

aL) ae 1}...| 168,05 Do. A crude variety of No. 8. Type

like Ar, Ant., pl. XIII, 20. (¢)

PARTHIAN.

Oe TLR Lh 53,69 Mithridates I (Arsacus VI). Type a

in Int. Num. Or,, vol. I, pl. 1,26 (Gardner).

()

1 ES RO eee MF 56,94 t Sinatroces (Arsacus X). Type as

in Int. Num. Or., vol. I, pl. IIT, 2. (g)

2/4 oa eae AS 54,99} Orodes I (Arsaces XII). Obv. with-

out crescent, as in Int. Num. Or., vol. I,

pl. Ill, 20. (f)

VB) Wee) ie. 59,22 t Do. Obv. with crescent, as in Int.

Num. Or., vol. I, pl. IT, 28. (f)

14, 1...] 1p. 59,87 Do. Obv. with star and crescent, as in

Int. Num. Or., vol. I, pl. III, 26. (f/f)

oh e Bee Wels, 58,10 t Phraates IV (Arsaces XII1). Obv.

with eagle only, asin Int. Num. Or., vol. I,

pl. IV, 6. One has a loop attached to the

middle of the oby., to turn the coin into a

button, and weighs 59, 85 grains. (¢)

LG MU ele 60,86 Do. Obv. with eagle, crescent and star,

as in Int. Num. Or., vol. I, pl. IV, 12. (#)

Acie BIS. 2| 58,93 t Do. Obv. with Nike, crescent and

star, as in Int. Num. Or., vol. I, pl. IV, 11.

Apparently a mixture of silver and_ copper.

One is perforated for wearing, and weighs

57,46 grains. (7%)

18 ale 1, 56,30 Do. Obv. with eagle and crescent. Rev.

with eagle. Not in Int. Num. Or.; but cf.

vol. I, pl. IV, 6. Apparently a mixture of

silver and copper. New. (%)

Ug URS ll eg 50,74 t Vonones I (Arsacrs XVIT). As in

Int. Num. Or., vol. I, pl. V, 4. (f)

—_y)

-——

—————————

Captain De Leessoe’s Central Asiatic Coins. 5

Description.

a a

3 |. | Murat. A

a|5 £

ire Bp

A 3° A

A 3 Pas aa Be

a) a lglg]

nm | % ede o\S|

770) at eres ba 56,44

PAN ed | Ree 55,14

22 Tl eatiet| 54,66

215} Usillesed aba 44.10

24) 1)...|...| 1]---| 85,02

95} 1)...| 1). 63,20

96 11...|...{ 1]--.| 162,18

27; 1J...|...| 1]--.| 192,54

28 Deal Mess 61,95

29 1 (eeu aie be 49,54

30 Cees | ib 62,42

Sue 1 Pea aed 62,26

PARTHIAN—Oontd.

t Goterzes (Arsacrs XX). As in Int.

Num. Or, vol. I, pl. V, 20. (f)

t Artabanus IV (Arsaces XXVI) or

Mithridates IV (Arsacus XXVII). As in

Int. Num. Or., vol. I, pl. VI, 5, 22, 24, 25.

Two are perforated for wearing, weighing

55,14 (small hole) and 51,66 (big hole) ; the

third is entire, weighing 52,25 grains. (f, 4,

The entire one has on the rev. a trace of

Mongol over-striking.

Vologeses IV (Arsacus XXXII). As

in Int. Num, Or., vol. I, pl. VII, 10. (4)

Artabanus V (Arsaces XXXIV). As

in Int. Num. Or., vol. I, pl. VII, 19. (2)

SUB-PARTHIAN,

Anonymous. Obv., head of king, to

right, with torquis, as in the coins of Ar-

saces X XIX (Chosroes) in Int, Num. Or., vol.

I, pl. VI, 17. Rev., fire-altar as on the early

Sassanian coins in Sass., pl. I, 2, Unpub-

lished. (#)

SASSANTAN.

SaporI. Asin Sass., pl. IT, 2-6. With

a perforation for wearing. (¢)

Do. As in Sass., pl. I, 8, 9. (4)

t Ardeshir and Sapor I. As in Sass., pl.

1,12. (4)

+ Sapor II. As in Sass., pl. IV, 2, 3. (f)

Do. Another variety. As in Saass., pl.

IV, 4. @

{ FirtzI. As in Sass., pl. V, 8,9. (f)

Khusrtii I, NavsufrvSy. As in Sas.,

pl. VI, 9% (g)

Serial Number.

Number of Coins.

Gold.

Silver.

Copper.

Mixed.

A. F. R. Hoernle—Catalogue of

Weight in grains.

34,

386

—

62,44.

51,44

27,61

43,87

96,12

37,34

45,72

29,50

54,38

[Supplement,

Description.

SASSANTAN—Contd

t Khusrti II, Parwiz. Asin Sass., pl.

VI. 14. The less perfect one weighs only

53,01 grains. (q)

Do. Of Arab mintage with bismillah

on margin; Sass., p. 93. Perforated for

wearing. (f)

Yezdegird ITI. Small sized coin; not

in Sass.

A very small piece broken away ; otherwise

in good condition.

ABBASIDE.

Al Manstir, 2np Aszasipp. Dirham

struck in Madinatu-s-Salim, 152 A. H.

Asin B. M. C., vol. I, 72 (p. 48). (g)

Do. Legends of oby. and rey. areas,

asin B. M. C., vol. I, 91 and 104 (p. 196,

201). Obv. margin not inscribed, but di-

vided into three sections by three ringlets.

Rev. marginal legend, indistinctly visible

read by Mr. Rodgers 9 @» div Qe

alam » uml, 7. e., struck in Sijistin, 147

AE, (4)

Harun ar Rashid, 5ra Appastpr. Dir-

ham struck at Ma’adinu-sh-Shash, 190

A. H. The same as B. M.C., vol. I, 228,

(p. 84). With a loop for suspending. (¢)

Al Amin, 67H Abspastpr. Dirham,

struck at Madinat Balkh, 195 A. H. Gene-

ral type of coin exactly as B. M. C., vol.

I, 246, (p. 90), except that there are six

ringlets instead of five. (f)

Al Mutawakkil, 10rn Aspasipr. Frag-

ment (about §) of a dirham of 24* A. H.

Mint lost. General type like B. M.C., vol.

I, 317, (plate VI).

* Al Muti’a, 23rd Appasipp. Dinar

struck at Hirdt, 369 A. H.(f) Plate I, fig. 1.

1889. ]

R w

§ | -& | Moran.

i=)

r= ie)

Beles

Als tlhe

a | \a[slig

as A ISIE] ele

eS) 5 9 |r| 0 tg

3 ND | A jOlR\OlA

f. 4] a WA RH ie Be

Captain De Leessoe’s Central Asiatic Coins. 7

ght in grains.

Wei

36,87

Description.

ABBASIDE—Oortd.

Obv., small area within single circle,

surrounded by double marginal inscrip-

tions.

Area: Mat ¥

Bday alt

a Slyyd 4

Inner legend : bot ders alt eo

dled ers 9 en Kino 8h yg?

Outer legend : 9 Usd oye [ oUt ] al)

Wye wyhogt [ c ytt droge 9 OH Wr? J

Rev., area within single circle, sur-

rounded by one marginal inscription.

Area: a)

aut Js) oo”

oes? ein!

Margin: — govl aleoyt BU} Jpn dom?

aS og [oS enolt cle syeby 5-1 waa]

wy95 pared}

SHAH OF KHWARIZM.

* Aldu-d-din Muhammad bin Ta-

kash. J'ype : on both sides, round areas sur-

rounded by a marginal inscription between

single-lined circles. Both margins defec-

tive: but on obv., mint Nisabur legible ;

date lost. (¢) Plate I, fig. 2.

A. F. R. Hoernle—Catalogue of

Serial Number.

Number of Coins.

Weight in grains.

[Supplement,

Description.

g\>

9 |r |

oS |Q |} =

SHAH OF KHWARIZM.— Contd.

Obv. Rev.

airy’ ast

vt al peed! cyledadt

9 ex”? alt eS Cnty iat dle

at Jysy SS shalt of

ends} sles A oH

alt airy

Margins: fragmentary ; obv. yy} mah voces

Ne aes

Do. Duplicate of No. 41, but double

struck on both sides. Obverse margin é

fragmentary, showing only date 5**; re-

verse margin gone. (i)

Obv. margin : S300 Cpr sirceccseeee Hl em

Do. Duplicate of No. 41; but struck

on rey. side only, margin entirely ‘gone.

t* Do. Type: same as No. 41; but

| different reverse legend; and no ringlets

on oby. Margins nearly gone. (¢)

Rev. at

pest stbloS}

wits Lot} (le

oom”? ealtpit

Ss ytaben!t ws |

Sary 4

Do. Duplicate of No. 44; but double

struck on reverse side. Margins defective

and illegible, (7)

t Do. Duplicate of No. 44; but struck

on reverse side only. Margin nearly gone.

(%)

1889.]

Captain De Leessoe’s Oentral Asiatic Coins. 9

Serial Number.

Number of Coins

|G old.

MetAu,

Copper.

Mixed.

Weight in grains

Silver.

Description.

Ta Mees COO arto

1},..]...|...{ 64,07

SHAH OF KHWARIZM—Oontd.

Do. Duplicate of No. 44; but double

struck on rev. side, and struck on that side

only. Margin gone. (ft)

t Do. Duplicate of No. 44; but struck

on oby. side only, on which there are no

ringlets. One perforated specimen weighs

25,06; two others weigh 20,91 and 18,49

erains respectively. Margins defective and

illegible. (2)

Do. Type: similar to No. 41, with

reverse legend similar to No. 44; and on

oby. side letters in place of ringlets. Both

legends much blundered. Margins gone. (%)

Obv. Rev.

Sead lis

Mt ad ¥ pasy [Llet (sic)

46 daa” wy wot 9 bios} de

al yas) (sic) dos” eu ot

Mo) clit (sic) S»~6 (broken).

o Wi (broken).

Mr. Rodgers reads eSMI on rev.

* Do. Two round areas with marginal

inscriptions within single-lined circles, as

in No. 41; but legends different, also cha-

racters different, 7. e., nasta’liq, as in the

early Pathén coins of India, not Kufic.

One half of the coin is broken away. Re-

verse margin shows 6**. (7)

Obv. Rev.

og: at oyet Bale ciesenes ine:

Rev. margin :

Obv. margin : eters Gt ee Beer

A. F. R. Hoernle— Catalogue of

[ Supplement,

Serial Number.

Number of Coins.

Gold.

Silver.

Weight in grains.

Description.

nay

LG rlaes as

35,58

34,44

37,89

SHAH OF KHWARIZM—Contd.

*++ Do. Typel, obv., saddled horse

with mint, within single-lined circle ; some-

times three dots under horse; rev. in-

scription within singled-lined circle. One

specimen was assayed by Dr. Scully with

the result : copper 80°9 per cent., lead 13:5,

silver 5°6. (¢) Plate I, fig. 3. The mint is

read by Mr. Rodgers Baliéqan or Taluqan.

Obv. Rev.

wl yy f wlelJ}

Horse } de pbs Y

ee de” wir liod

wlaledt oy

*Do. Type I, similar to No. 51, same

mint, but rev. legend differently arranged.

Rev. wba}

| dle poy!

des”? wits latoJ

wtb ww

* Do. Typel, similar to No. 51; same

mint, but rev. legend differently arranged.

Rev. MI telus}

ol} de phe

dee” wall 5

wlbladt (e)

* Do. Typel. Apparently similar to

No. 51, but double-struck on both sides. (¢)

*+ + Do. Type II. Obv., horseman with

lance at charge; Variety 1, semicircle over

head of rider; some dots here and there;

name of mint above right of rider. Rev.,

inscription only. Both oby. and rev. en-

Captain De Lessoe’s Central Asiatic Coins. 11

1889.]

ese Meran. a

o ° fos]

a 4

ce, bi

H/o 4

4] 8 nas =

a |g slSle/s|

On} A jOlnlojs| &

56) i... 4) 39,74

57 14 1; 41,00

58 2 .| 2} 39,78

59 Dh. 2} 33,60

36,37

Description.

SHAH OF KHWARIZM—Oontd.

closed within double circle, the inner lined,

the outer dotted. Mint Téliqdn both on

oby. and rev. (¢) Plate I, fig. 4.

Obv. Rev.

wl, wWJlb (in minute letters).

1 wtoled} slabs}

att Us paced ; OE mS rale pbs Mt

des” Gyodf y bs

Occasionally the rev. legend is aranged,

as on No. 51.

*+t Do. Type II, Variety 2, in all

respects like No. 55, except that there is

a bird to right below horse, instead of the

dots. (¢)

*Do. Type II, Variety 3, similar to No.

55, but without semicircular corona, and a

trefoil in the place of the bird. Inscriptions

on oby. and rev. exactly as on No. 55. (#)

*+t Do. Type I, Variety 4, bow-like

canopy over head of rider; crescent above

over left side, and mint above over right

side of rider. Rev., inscription. Both oby.

and rey. enclosed within double circle, the

inner lined, the outer dotted. Mint »%«

(Shafurqan ?) or gs P(t)

Rev. wile}

dlc posd!

one} y) (od}

weld} Gy des”?

* Do. Type II, Variety 5, similar to

No. 53, but bare head; crescent with dot

to left and dot to right of it. Rev., inserip-

tion exactly as on No. 58. Both oby. and

rey. enclosed, within a single-lined circle.

Mint ph» ors P (7)

Serial Number.

A. ¥F, R. Hoernle—Oatalogue of

Weight in grains

| Merat. |

je)

(ae

Aq Seley

i=} Olt | ord

% lO Mmiols

60 1 ah

61 Sas 8

62) 2)... 2

Oph meen: 2g

64 fey 2

65) 16}, .. 16

66 Qheas 2

[Supplement,

Description.

SHAH OF KHWARIZM—-Oontd.

* Do. Type Il, Variety 6, similar to

No. 59, but without crescent and dots, and

with some indistinct object below horse.

Rev. inscription as on No. 58. (7)

*+i Do. Type II, Variety 7, similar to

No. 58, but only with bow-like canopy.

Rey., inscription as on No. 58, but below

it an illegible mint-name. Both obv. and

rev. either within a single serrated circle,

or within a double circle, the inner lined,

the outer dotted. (7)

* Do. Type III. Obv., horseman with

waving arms, without lance. Variety 1, bird

sitting to left below horse. Rev., inscrip-

tion, nearly obliterated. Oby. and rey. with-

in double lined circle. (b)

*+t Do. Type III, Variety 2, like No.

62, but bird turned to right. Mint Téligdn,

visible on oby. over right side of horse. (7)

*+t Do. Type III, Variety 8, a beetle-

like mark under horse; mint over right

side of horse. Rev., inscription. Both obv.

and rev. enclosed within double-lined cir-

eles. Mint Yaliqin both on obv. and rev.

Legends, on both sides, read and are ar-

ranged exactly as on No. 55. (¢

*+t Do. Type Ill, Variety 4, a star, 5

or 6 rayed, under horse; mint over right

of horse. Rev., inscription. Obvy. enclosed

within double circle, the inner lined, the out-

er dotted; rev. within single-lined circle.

Mint Téliqan both on oby. and rev. Legends

as on Nos. 55 and 63. Plate I, fig. 5. (Some ¢)

* Do. Type III, Variety 5, in all re-

spects like No. 65, except the rev. legend

which reads as follows: (¢

wlJlb (in minute letters.)

add

)

dus” abe Vt

cstedad tx

1889. ] Captain De Leessoe’s Oentral Asiatic Coins. 13

a a

a |-2 | Merman. | 3

om G) BS

A | | + te

w |e A Description.

Oo oe Se ae ~

= 2 ,| | 2 ls a

3 gq Io} 2/}alo op

q A fale lei) -o

S| 5 \SkaiSis| &

n|\| A |Ojmols| &

SHAH OF KHWARIZM—Oontd.

67) —-Qj...|...|...| 2] 34,55 * Do. Type III, Variety 6, like No. 64

in all respects, except the mark under the

horse which looks like an anvil (?). (7%, 6)

68| 1... |...]...| 1] 41,28 * Do. Type III, Variety 7, like No. 65

except that the mark under the horse is a

snake, and the rev. legend arranged as on

No. 52. (¢)

69) Q}...|...|...] 2) 36,52 *++ Do. Type III, Variety 8, like

No. 62, except that there is no mark under

the horse. (b)

710) eA PS ie Nn * Do. Type III, Variety 9, no mark

under horse, which is gallopping. Both

oby. and rev. enclosed within double circle,

the inner lined, the outer dotted. Rev.

legend as follows: (¢)

[ wleldt ] (cut away.)

eo ot! cbs yt

telat wy os”

71 Fi ees leet ade citi pemesia Low * Do. Type TV. Obv., horseman with

leafed branch in left hand. Mint doubtful

over left side of horse, and bird under horse.

Both oby. and rev. enclosed within double

circle, the inner lined, the outer dotted.

Plate I, fig. 6. (¢)

Obv. Rev.

patodse} (?) wlaldtt

yt pbs Mt

uy os” ean

cleat

72) Bl.ase]--.| 5} 47,205 * +t Do. Type V, horseman with

shouldered sword. Variety 1, bare head ;

mint over right side of horse ; below it a

flower. Rey., inscription. Mint Hirat.

Both obv. and rey. within three circles, a

dotted one between two lined ones. Plate

I, fig. 7. (é)

A. F. R. Hoernle—Catalogue of [Supplement,

Number of Coins.

Weight in grains.

Serial Number.

Gold.

Silver.

Copper.

Mixed.

Description.

SHAH OF KHWARIZM—Oontd,

Obv. Rev.

Btyd wilt or lal

Wy Oa”? pbs Mt vare- =” pes Mt

wlblJ} ly tabendt Cyt

*+t Do. Type V, Variety 2, like

No. 72, except that there is no flower below

the horse. (¢)

*+ +t Do. Type V, Variety 3, like

No. 73, but the mark under horse indistin-

euishable ; canopy over head of rider and

mint Balkh rag (?) (2)

* +t Do. Type VI, Obv., horseman

with shouldered flag; bare head; no mint,

Rev., inscription in Kufie characters. Both

obv. and rev. enclosed within three circles,

a dotted one being between two lined ones.

Plate I, fig. 8. One specimen was assayed

by Dr. Scully with the result: copper 22

per cent., silver 7.4, lead 854. (¢)

Rev. uy w=”?

alot

*++ Do. Type VII, bare elephant to

left. Variety 1, Obv., a saw-like mark be-

low, and a mint-name above elephant.

Rey., inscription. Both oby. and rev. within

double circle, the outer dotted, the inner

lined. One specimen was assayed by Dr.

Scully with the result: per cent. copper

39-2, silver 8:0, lead 52°7. (7)

Obv. Rev.

Bye (?) as on No. 58.

*+t Do. Type VIL, Variety 2, simi-

lar to No. 76, but no mark below elephant,

and mint and inscription different. (¢)

1889. | Captain De Lessoe’s Central Asiatic Coins. 15

a a

§ 8 Mert. | -3

Bis : ie

mw | & ss a Description.

ra |g lg/S/SIE| ce

2 | 8 SIIB] 3

nie ol~aols| -

SHAH OF KHWARIZM—Contd.

Obv. Rev.

wlyla (?) as on No. 66,

(but without the mint).

TS\) alles 1) 34,50 * Do. Type VII, Variety 3, similar

to No. 77, but different mint and inscrip-

tion. (7)

Obv. Rev.

wtaytyS (P) apparently as in No. 58.

Vi PIES a | 81 34.50 * Do. Type VII, Variety 4, similar to

*|No. 77, but different mint and inscrip-

tion. (7)

Obv. Rev.

Fy 988 as on No. 52.

[Shufirgqan.]

SO SES ROI aol eodent *++ Do. Type VII, Variety 5, similar

to Nos. 77, 79, but different mint and in-

scription (2 2, If). Plate, fig. 9.

Obv. Rev.

YG yglae (P) ybltt

Me whe St

en] 9 liad}

(statue os

a Gi eked ea) ep SPR} *+tDo. Type VII, Variety 6, similar

to No. 76; but the mark below is an arabes-

que; the mint above is the same without

the final ¥; rev. inscription different. (¢)

Obv. Rev.

ye or yee Lal}

(Samargand ?) dc poe MW uy,

wlble w? oo”

N. B. What looks like a mint name,

may be only an arabesque ornamental mark.

(o>)

A. F. R. Hoernle—Catalogue of

Number of Coins.

Weight in grains.

Serial Number.

Gold.

Silver.

Copper.

[Supplement,

Description.

oe)

icy)

SHAH OF KHWARIZM—Oontd.

*+t Do. Type VII, Variety 7, similar

to No. 81, but arabesque mark above and

three dots in line below elephant. Rev.

inscription different; viz., (¢)

Uden

pbs My

od} dc

cits

*+t Do. Type VII, Variety 8, exact-

ly as No. 82, but a different rey. inscrip-

tion. (3 f)

Rev.

wae b lhl J

dls pes it or dc pbs 4

Het, Wott (on one) wer ty Wot

tele Gy Oe” ula. Gp des”?

* +f Do. Type VIII, bare elephant

to right. Variety 1, obv., mint above ele-

phant; rev., inscription. Both obv. and rev.

within double circle, outer dotted, inner

lined. (7 or 6) ~

Obv. (both in Kufic) Rev.

wlay'yS yibldt

(similar to No. 78) ds plas YI

ot, Laat

Ww Oe? Ut

pytblae

* Do. Type VIII, Variety 2, exactly as

No. 84, but style of letters of obv. mint

somewhat different. (1 ¢). Plate I, fig.

10.

* Do. Type VIII, Variety 3, exactly as

No. 84, but style of letters of obv. mint

slightly indifferent. (7)

1890.]

Captain De Leessoe’s Central Asiatic Coins. 17

ee Z|

§ 3 Mert. :: |

A |< E> |

o 5 | ale 5 Description.

‘a |g giS/B/8]

B |B oleae] 38

a|4 aoe Fe | ;

| | SHAH OF KHWARIZM—Oontd.

To rohael sal Psy 38,91) * Do. Type IX, bare elephant to right,

| | with fettered legs. Variety 1, obv., mint

| over elephant ; rev., inscription. Both obv.

| and rev. within double circle, the outer dot-

| ted, the inner lined. (1f). Plate I, fig.

ile

| Obv. Rev.

wlapyS wlhl..J}

(as on No. 85) Us phe yy

endl bod}

ww og=”

| | wlble

gs} 12.....,..j12} 38911 *+t Do. Type IX, Variety 2, exactl

| 74) a yp q y

| | | | as No. 87, but style of letters of oby. mint

| al slightly different. (7, some t)

| | | | Obv. Rev.

| clays (as on No. 87).

| | | (as on No. 85.)

go, 19...) 12) § *+t Do. Type IX, Variety 3, similar

| | | i eye to No. 88, but inscription different. (7,

| one ¢)

Obv. Rev.

wlaysS (as on No. 84.)

lie 4 | (as on Nos. 89, 84.)

90; 2), 2; 38,91 * Do. Type IX, Variety 4, exactly as

| | | No. 89, but style of letters of oby. mint

oh | slightly different. (7)

Obv. Rev.

| wl ayy (as on Nos. 84, 89).

(as on Nos. 85, 87).

18 A. F. R. Heernle—Catalogue of (Supplement,

EA dll el SE

a | 2 | Mera. | #

E\8 ze

“he sare bo |

- = \aeecna Description.

= ® Seley: |

a — .|H/Olo] SG

S | |O| a on

$\2 S2l5g) 2

a\A Salcial F |

| SHAH OF KHWARIZM—Contd.

91; 1...| 1) 42,81 * Do. Type X, elephant-rider with

ell lance at charge, to left. Variety 1, obv.,

| mint below elephant; rider bare-headed.

| | Reyv., inscription. Both oby. and rev. with-

in double circle, outer dotted, inner lined.

| | (t) Plate I, fig. 12.

| | Obv. Rev.

| lgytya ? add}

dlc peed re)

| erty Liod

| | Uadew (oy) dese”?

| | S)

Sh altel ee | 1) 38,43 *++ Do. Type X, Variety 2, similar to

| No. 91, but on oby. no mint; bow-like cano-

| oy over rider’s head; dot over elephant’s

PY : i

| head; rev. legend different. (7) Plate I,

| fig. 13.

| Rev. legend, as on No. 83.

GBis PO ashes 20)...| 47,58 +t Do. Type XI, lettered surfaces,

45,11) within circles. Variety 1, as in B. M.

| C., vol. II, Nos. 596—600 (see Plate VII,

| | fig. 599). (¢, some f)

94, Ne, lj...) 34,92 Do. Type XI, Variety 2, as in B.

at M. C.. vol. II, No. 594. (#)

95, 3)...}...] 3)...] 48,25) *t Do. Type XI, Variety 3. Obv. and

rey. within double circle, outer dotted,

inner lined. On oby., two annulets on each

side of the inscription; also on rev. in

diverse places. (7%)

| Obv. Rev.

| °° 00 O

3 bs Ite ulbledt

<i ws

——

1889, ] Captain De Leessoe’s Central Asiatic Coins. 19

a a

E ‘+A | Mera. z|

cae Bb

ets ] E Description.

o |e

2|2 ielg/ig) &

S| 8 /slS/s.q| 2

n|sa Smlojs| &

SHAH OF KHWARIZM.—Oontd.

96) 1)...)...] 1}...] 42,42 Do. Type XI, Variety 4. Obv., kali-

mah; rev. illegible. (7)

97| = 2...}...] Q)...] 41,11 *£ Do. Type XII, small inner cir-

37,00} cular area on oby.; lettered surface on rev. ;

both rev. and obv. within double circle,

outer dotted, inner lined. Variety, 1,

Muhammad in Kufic in area, with dot

above. Plate I, fig. 14. (4)

Obv. Rev.

Area: oes” YM globo}

Margin: J} St dt Y above vt Mc pbs

1yoWt left do wy Ls

(sic) 4} gy) below ylbbdSt os

Wi wu right.

cote HR a PANIC TAWAN| Phgobisy * Do. Type XII, Variety 2, inner area

*| formed by a double circle ; within, an illegi-

ble mint name. (7)

Obv. Rev.

Are@: emia at

Margin: dos”? eu

pect latent wlebdt oy

WAM, lyiod} Me es

99) 3)...|...| 3)... 44,88 * Do. Type XII, Variety 3, inner area

formed of three circles, a dotted between

two lined; within, a sexagonal rose or star.

Published by W. Rodgers in J. A. S. B.

vol. LIT (1883), p. 57, No. 15 on Plate IV.

(©

100) —Ij...}...} 1}...{ 47,60 : * Do. Type XII, Variety 4, like No.

99 in every respect, except that rev. legend

differently arranged. (7)

Hoernle—Catalogue of [Supplement,

Descriptien.

20 PA Ee ahs

# | .2 | Murat. a

21d s

B | ri

4| 8 Ae

2/2 igiay| =

8 | 8 fsislok|

n\ yz ole ola|

101] 3)...[... 8h...| 48,37

102} 11...|...| 1)...). 38,60

103) i...|...] Ql... 41,99

104 TY Spec ee Walle,

SHAH OF KHWARIZM.—Oontd.

Rev. rae

wlblJ ow

[ HS ] (Lost)

*+ Do. Type XIII, a small inner cir-

cular area on both obv. and rev. ; the latter

are both surrounded by a double circle,

outer dotted, inner lined. Variety 1, both

inner areas formed by three circles, a dot-

ted between two lined ; within, mint Zamin-

déwar. (¢) Plate I, fig. 15 a and b.

Obv. Rev.

Margin : de abe Mt lolol! Margin: or eet

witty uot SS ylbld}

Area: gle Area: 3

* Do. Type XIII, Variety 2, like No.

100 in every respect, except that the cir-

cles forming the inner area are wider apart

from one another, thus causing the mar-

gin to be narrower. Legends as in No.

101. (4)

* Do. Type XIII, Variety 3, obv.

area formed by two lined circles ; rev. area

by three circles, a dotted between two

lined ; within both areas a boss. (¢)

Obv. Rev.

Marg.: pbs Mt gland} Marg. : ud tot

ES VBL

Area: boss Area: boss

erty (bod de

52,08) * Do. Type XIV, two-lined square

areas occupying whole of obv. and rev.

faces; segments inscribed. Almost illegi-

ble. (2)

ane ene en ail

1889. | Captain De Leessoe’s Oentral Asiatic Coins. 21

5 % Moran. 4

a) se ey Th

s f - Description.

oO A |e) .

a |e fel/Slals| ‘e

DN) A |Omols|

SHAH OF KHWARIZM.—OContd.

Obw. Rev.

Area: Mac Hy ] Area: [3 wlbbJt]

ay [ Sey J Cxly Liod}

105) )...]...] 2)...] 44,23) *£ Do. Type XV, on the obv. and

39,98) rev., square areas enclosed within double

circle, the outer dotted, the inner lined.

Variety 1, ornamental scrolls in the sec-

tions, between the squares and circles.

Published by W. Rodgers in J. A. 8. Bs;

vol. LIT, p, 57, on Plate IV, fig. 14. The

last line of the oby. legend, wanting in

his specimen, was doubtfully supplied as

being ’Aldu-d-din, but it is really Abu-

l-Fath, as shown clearly on the present

Specimens. (f)

Obv. Rev.

wield} Gy de?

q pbs dD q wiht l)

raat ues

w —

106). 1)...|...} 1)...) 43,36) . * £ Do. Type XV, Variety, 2, inscrip-

tions in sections ; on rev., date 61* in words;

on obv., illegible mint (?). Plate I, fig.

16. (2d)

Obv. Rev.

2 aio

lal} Gy oa?

: pbs Mt : : wlblnd} 2

: eos : > oes ;

eae al

A. F, R. Hoernle—Oatalogue of [Supplement,

Number of Coins.

Weight in :

Serial Number.

Gold.

Silver.

Mixed.

Description.

SHAH OF KHWARIZM.—Contd.

* Do. Type XVI, on both oby. and

rey., two hexagonal areas intercrossing,

with three dots in each section. Mint

Farwin. Published by W. Rodgers in

J. A. 8. B., vol. LII, p. 57, on Plate IV,

fig. 12.

Do. Type XVII, obv., lettered surface

within double circle, outer dotted, inner

lined. Rev., small double-lined square

inner area; within, figure of horseman,

outside inscription. As in B. M.C. of Or.

Coins, vol. Il, p. 186, onPlate VII, fig.

603. (%)

* + Do. Type XVIII, large thin piece

oby., circular area; rev., double-lined

square area. In marginal sections, apa-

rently, mint Ghaznah. Plate I, fig. 17. (¢)

Obv. Rev.

Area: Yi glaledt Area: yt ylbledt

dc pbs gel wlbleo

a) oily Iiout wbxeyedt

Margin: Orna- Sections : ornmt., r.

ments. and 1,

wy? above.

&5¢ below.

* Do. Doubtful. Type XIX; obv.,

horseman to right, with lance at charge,

within double circle, outer dotted, inner

lined. Reyv., inscription within single dotted

circle; nearly illegible. Mr. Rodgers ob-

serves: “This is the only coin out of

about 3,000, which has the horseman to

the right.”

1889.]

Serial Number.

Number of Coins.

Gold.

Oaptain De Lessoe’s Central Asiatic Coins. 23

Mora.

Copper.

Mixed.

Silver.

Weight in grains

Description.

—

112

113

114

116

34,85

58,63

82,70

41,55

SHAH OF KHWARIZM.—Oontd.

* Do. doubtful. Type XX; obv.,

maned lion standing to left, below a dot,

above mint Shaférgdn. Rev., inscription

within lined circle, nearly obliterated.

Obv. wFygR Rev. sevecceve

ible

GHAZNAWYTS anp GHORIS, are.

Masa’ud I. Two circular areas and

margins, asin B. M. C. of Or. Coins, vol. II,

No. 524 (p. 157), but barely legible. (4)

* Farukhzad ibn Masa’tid. Similar

to No. 546 in B. M. C. of Or. Coins,

vol. II, p. 166; but star ‘six-rayed) at top

of rev. area, and zafar (,%6, so W. Rodgers)

at top of obv. area; date 448; the remain-

der identical. The outer marginal legend

of obv. is nearly gone; that on reverse

much cut and obliterated.

Ibrahim ibn Masa’tid ; with Bull rey.,

and lettered surface on oby., as in B. M.

C. of Or. Coins, vol. IT, No. 561 (p. 172),

and in Proceedings, A. 8. B., for 1881, p. 6.

(t)

Undetermined. Probably Ghaznawi.

Legends illegible; but on right hand side

of the legend in the area, there is a perpen-

dicular mark, which is indistinguishable on

the oby., but clearly ‘ on the rey. Com-

pare similar marks on Mahmid’s coin, PI.

V, No 458 in B. M. C., vol. IL, p. 181.

* Ghiydsu-d-din Muhammad biu,

Sam. Two circular areas; both margins

entirely obliterated.

Serial Number.

Number of Coins.

Gold.

Silver.

Mertat.

Mixed.

A. F. R. Hoernle— Catalogue of

Weight in grains.

| [Supplement,

a ELE SE TA

Description.

117

118

119

120

121

122

,| 267,35

.| 232,80

.|134,73

| 181,51

.| 122,76

43,86

42,78

GHAZNAWIS ann GHORIS.—Contd.

Ob». Rev.

pee MW leben ‘cin’

CHM! 4 dod} Ee yp apy

oes” 2b,J} ot ous” allt

(2) shea ple oy al} Soaey

tenes (illegible) — eyt_polit

Mr. Rodgers reads on the obv. doubtfully

giwm or ohi5. Plate II, fig. 18.

Do. Same type, but much heavier,

than No. 6 in J. A. S. B., vol. LIT, p. 56

(Pl. IV, fig. 6). Without mint; but ~

date 600 A. H. The rev. margin, as Mr.

Rodgers observes, gives a quotation from

the Quran, Surah IX, 33,

Seb) =I ew» eral tye, Chat (ig

[ enSstell 55 2%5} als wd! le

the concluding portion of which, wiz.

that within brackets, is never given on

these gold coins. (q)

* Do. Very similar to No. 117, but

with mint Ghaznah, and same date 600

A. H. (9)

* Do. Thesame as No. 117, except in

the matter of weight; also without mint.

Its date is 600 A. H. (f)

Do. Same type, as No. 117, but of

smaller size; date 603 A. H., mint obli- a

terated (Ghaznah?). (¢) ‘<

Do. Same as No. 120, except in the |

matter of weight. Mint Ghaznah; date

obliterated (600 ?).

Do. Type: Turki horseman, exactly

as published, by Mr. Rodgers, in J. A. S. {

B., vol. LIT, p. 55 (Pl. IV, fig. 1.) (1 #4)

1889. | Captain De Leessoe’s Central Asiatic Coins. 25

A a]

Bi 5 | Merat. 4e

3 a

alee bp

Bales A Description.

a | 8 Hl| 3

ma] 2] JH) os]

SUL psueeliescd) eee

B | 8 felalsts| &

MD | A |O|R|O|Aa E

GHAZNAWTS AND GHORIS—Oontd.

LES) 92les.|..els.0] 02), SEE Do. Doubtful. Inscribed circular areas.

45,45 Obv. Rev.

[wla]e pbcl wlble vet

124) Ly I )...J.+e/e.s| LL613 * Ghiydsu-d-din and Muizzu-d-din

bin Sam. Type the same asin No. 117.

A silver coin of this type has been publish-

ed by Dr. Stiilpnagel in J. A. S. B,,

VOL. ERS ip. orl CPS eleven NCova lest) amet

shows no mint, but bears the date 599 A. H.

(f)

125) 1) 1/...|...]...] 45,72 * Do. Type, four concentric circles,

exactly asin the silver dirhem, published

by Dr. Stilpnagel, in J. A. S. B., vol.

XUIX, p. 30 (PI.IV, No. II). No mint;

but date 599 on the rev. with Muizz’ name.

(é)

126) Bl... linn |e] 2) 40,90 Muizzu-d-din and Taju-d-dia Tdaz.

42,52) Published by Mr. Rodgers, in J. A. 8. B,

vol. XLIX, p. 210 (Pl. XVIII, No. 17).

See also Ar. Ant. Pl. XX, fie. 18. «¢)

127) Veet ate,| DL} 60,96 { Muizzu-d-din bin Sam. Type, Tur-

ki horseman ; exactly as in Chron.,, p. 15,

No. 6 (PL. I, fig. 5). @

128) = 1)...|...}...] 1} 48,19) Do. Type, Rajpit horseman; exactly

as in Chron., p.15, No. 5, (Pl. I, fig. 4).

(¢)

129} 7|...|...]...{ 7] 55,06 t Do. Type, bull and horseman, ex-

actly as in Chron., p. 15, No. 10, (Pl. I,

fig). (t)

130) = 1)...|...| Jj...] 37,44 * Do. Type, on both obv. and rev., an

inscribed hexagon formed by two inter-

lacing equilateral triangles. (¢)

Obv. Rev.

weld} (?) Gy oes”

A. F. R. Hoernle—Catalogue of

[Supplement,

8 3 Merat. 3

Bla PONE

Bhi aS Description.

A| 8 Jed ss

fa |S lolslsis| ‘&

18 Eee] 3

ni} |Salole| &

GHAZNAWIS AND GHORIS—Oontd.

131 1}),..| 43,51 Do. Type, circular areas, enclosed in

dotted ring, exactly as published, by Mr.

Rodgers, in J. A. S. B., vol. XLIX, p. 81,

af (Pl. V, fig. 6). (é)

Obv. Rev.

Jos 580

132 1) 47,85 t Ghiydsu-d-din Mahmud bin Mu-

hammad bin Sam. Type, RAjpit horseman,

exactly as in Chron. p. 32, No. 25, and

Journal R. A. S., vol. LX, p. 177.

133 1} 40,59 *+t Do. Type, elephant rider to left.

Variety 1, similar to No. 91, but without

lance at charge; with goad (ankus) in

right hand. Plate I, fig. 19. (f)

Rev. wlblJ}

n= ent

Los due” oy 9

134 1]... 38,85 * Do. Variety 2, the same as No. 133

in all respects, except slightly different ar-

rangement of rev. inscription. (7)

Rev. wlbloJ}

She pbs Mt

wits Wott

eee)

ae i <A lost.

pee ae 3

135 .| 1}...] 42,06 * Do. Variety 3, similar to No, 133;

but bow-like canopy over rider, and slight-

ly different rev. inscription. (t)

Rev. (Land)

le pee St w

CHOY 4 Lust} &

WH dpa?

polse ex” ¢ much worn.

am ee

Serial Number.

Number of Coins.

Gold.

Captain De Leessoe’s Central Asiatié Coins. 27

Merat.

Silver.

Copper.

Mixed

Weight in grains.

Description.

136

137

138)

139

140

141|

142)

37,10

GHAZNAWIS AND GHORIS—Conid.

* +t Do. Variety 4, similar to No.

133, but with lance at charge, and some-

what different rev. inscription. (f/f)

Rev. wlblJt

ap) pbs MI

dyes” ee

ple dee? (oy)

T4ju-d-din Ildaz. Type, Turki horse-

man, as published by Mr. Rodgers, in

\J. A. 8. B, vol. LIL p. 55 (PITY, fig.

2). (é)

t{ Do. Type: Rajpit horseman, as in

Ar. Ant., Pl. XX, fig. 9. (¢)

NISABURI AMIRS.

t¢ Tughdan Shah. Circular areas with

inscribed margins, as in B. M. C. of Or.

Coins, vol. III, No. 313 (PI. VI, fig. 313).

| Mint obliterated, date 57*. (¢)

Obv. margin: Balm PRM 9c cerees all} festa

t Do. Same type as No. 139, but

otherwise as in B. M. C. of Or. Coins, vol.

III, No. 314. Mint and date lost. (¢)

BENY ZENG’ ATABEGS OF MOSIL.

87,23; * Badru-d-din Luli, Mint Mosil,

date 650 ; in every respect like No. CLXXX

in Num. Or., p. 170, (Pl. X). It differs

from B. M. C., vol. III, No. 574 (Pl. X) only

in the omission of the word prio» in the

second line of the rey. area inscription,

and in the date. (9)

GREAT SELJVQIS.

48,36} Muhammad. Lettered surfaces, en-

closed within double lined circles. The

obv. is marked with fath, the rev. with

Serial Number.

Number of Coins

Gold.

Silver.

Mixed.

A. F. R. Hoernle—Catalogue of

Weight in grains

[Supplement,

Description.

144,

145

146

ee ge

Shen

42,58

27,20

29,01

51,81

43,66

GREAT SELJUQIS—Oonid.

‘adl, as in B. M. C., vol. III, No. 67, p. 34,

35. (4)

Obv. e Rev. fos

Meat y Rest illegible.

des” all}

[ Y Ups J

RUMY SELJUQIS.

Ghiydsu-d-din Kai-Khusru II. Type:

obv., sun over lion to right; rev. inscrip-

tion, exactly as in B. M. C. of Or. Coins,

vol. III, No. 225. With a small hole

near the margin for wearing. (g).

MALIKS OF SIJISTAN.

N. B. On these Matliks, see Major

Raverty’s translation of the Tabagat-i-Ndsiré,

pp. 183-202.

{ Ahmad bin Muhammad. As de-

scribed and figured in B. M. C. of Or. Coins,

vol. ITI, No. 34, (1 f, another broken in

fragments).

*t Khalaf ibn Ahmad. Type: cir-

cular areas with inscribed margins, on both

oby. and rey. The coin is in indifferent

condition, and the legends difficult to read.

Mr. Rodgers remarks as follows :

“ Obv.: GIS under at wy! in tughra.

Rev. : etc. ram git rot a3 y0} Lo

__ Margins not quite legible, but the mint

Sijistdn is quite plain.”

+f Taju-d-din Harab, sixth in de-

scent from Khalaf. Type: obv., quarter-

foil within double-lined circle; one pel-

let in each segment ; rey., lettered sur-

face within three circles, the inner and

Serial Number.

Number of Coins

Gold.

Captain De Leessoe’s Central Asiatic Coins. 29

MerTAL.

Silver.

Copper.

“Mixed

Weight in grains

Description.

147

148

LG) o}e0. LG 2

59,40

52,46

59,90, Sha

MALIKS OF SIJISTAN—(Oontd.

outermost lined, the central dotted. Plate

IT, fig. 20. (f)

Obv. Rev.

ra al!

Sos? Oy ym Oe”?

wir BU! Syasy

iM tpolit

oes”?

The obv. reads: Vdju-d-din Harb bin

Muhammad.

¢* Ruknu-d-din Bahrém Shah,

grandson of Taju-d-din. Type, obv. and rev.,

lettered surfaces within double circles,

inner dotted, outer lined. Plate II, fig.

21. (é)

Obv. Rev.

CHO OS; al)

G2 920 gat Sail

slbvet yes BV Jovy

WHO rol}

+} Taju-d-din Nasar bin Bahram

h. Type, same as No. 146.

Obv. Rev.

au The same as on

ye No. 146, but omitting

Blavof ry) final =*?,

wot

Apparently identical with Nasratu-d-

din, another grandson of Téju-d-din.

A. F. R. Hoernle—Catalogue of [Supplement,

Description.

3 A

FA = MeTAt. 3

BES Bb

els 1

) ae 3

a " lS) S/3 "ep

B18 [Sle|e.s| 2

n|e olniols| &

149} 3 3|...| 51,66

51,22

44,72

150| 61...|...| 6)...| 39,14

151} 1...[...| 1f..| 40,82

152} 1] I...ffe.| 50,21

MALIKS OF SIJISTAN—Oontd.

* +t Asadu-d-din bin Harab. Type,

same as No. 146. (¢)

Obv. Rev.

wes al

realty! das”

we wt aU} Syasy

CH} HOE pol]

Not mentioned in Major Raverty’s list.

*+t+ Undetermined. Obv., circular

area with marginal inscription ; rev. letter-

ed surface within lined circle. (one ¢)

Plate II, fig. 22.

Obv. Rev.

mpceaes ane eee, (illegible.)

Sy alt Mt al

Margin: illegible. BUT Sync doce?

al} cndtyoli}

gets

* Undetermined. Obv. worn blank;

rev. shows only li, and traces of =*,

over it. (b)

MONGOL IL-KHANS OF PERSIA.

* Undetermined. Circular areas with

inscribed margins, on both oby. and rev.

The margins are nearly gone, and the areas

are much worn. Date *77, The legends

as read by Mr. Rodgers, are as follows:

Obv. Rev.

la al!

WwW

Jota) 52 Mat Y

saieee' pee dt des” aU

Shite erases ese ay Joy

wih s Weeoe Urtelmed} plist

Reda hale (tS Saborae a Ly eta ee ee Ieee |

1889. ] Captain De Leessoe’s Central Asiatic Coins. $k

Merat.

Description.

Serial Number

Number of Coins.

Weight in grains.

Copper.

Mixed

MONGOL IL-KHANS OF PERSIA.

Ho UL eee veel res pe t Jingis Khan. Type: lettered sur-

faces within double circle, the outer dotted,

the inner lined, on both oby. and rey. (¢)

Obv. Rev.

Jos tol}

wise aly eno

pee Mt sell

wae

154 1)...| 1...}...] 46,15 * Hulagu Il-Khan. Type, as describ-

ed and figured in B. M. C., vol. VI, Nos.

21, 25, and Num. Or., No. CCLXXI. But

at the bottom of the obv. area is the mint

Isfardin centydect, Both margins are entirely

cut away.

LBS SUR tes! Aevou * Abaga Il-Khan, Obv. has inscrip-

tion in Mongol characters, giving the name

Abdgdin ; rev. has the devise of the Sel-

jaqi coins (lion with kalimah), as on No.

143. (¢)

156) SU) le las) Adee * Do. Size and type like B. M. C. of Or.

Coins, vol. VI, No. 48; but the legend on

the obv. square area is as on ibid. No. 51.

Obv. Rev.

Square area: Sf as ¥ Mongol

J Sy3Y soa, legend.

Al} ow) dus”

Marginal sections :...¢g%>I dw,

Lod) Dea ee Ml G2e74 *+% Do. Small size; lettered sur-

faces. Plate II, fig. 23. The legends as

read by Mr. Rodgers are :

Obv. Rev.

(3 fat} ol}

sl of b] da?

| | Jes... Joy

is)

LNs}

Number of Coins

Serial Number.

Gold.

Silver.

A. F. R. Hoernle—Catalogue of

Weight in grains

[Supplement,

63,55

66,84

63,29

42,52

41,19

41,49

42.43

42,87| 2

41,97

42,61

MONGOL IL-KHANS OF PERSIA.

There are four minute crude letters in

the space between aU} and o=° which

may possibly be Abagha in Mongol charac-

surrounded by parabee within circle ;

rey. legend within circle. Plate IT, fig. 24,

Similar to No.

ae but hes legend diferent.

t Do. Type, asin B. M. C., vol.

VI, Pl. II, No. 41, but instead of stars

there is an arabesque between the first and

second lines of the legend in the square

The segments contain arabesques,

ead one, which has the mint Marv ( 35)

In all respects like No. 160,

except that the mint is Isfardin ( Crt ydvo! iy

Similar type to No. 160, but

Racicaipitacs different ;

marginal segments being in Mongol charac-

Only the legend Khaghanu

Great Khan’s) in the top-segment is logi-

those in the

1889. ] Oaptain De Leessoe’s Central Asiatic Ooins. 33

mM nm

s | .8 | Morat, 4

o j=) is]

a | Eb

| 6 FI

w| 8 lees Description.

aia lslssie|

Ac)

q 5s IS 1 | 41,4 o

i) 2 jf | 9 ig te

Ml! A Omiols| &

MONGOL IL-KHANS OF PERSIA-Oontd.

ble ; the name which would probably have

been in the bottom segment is entirely

rubbed off. This is most unfortunate, as it

has been impossible hitherto to determine

the coins of this type with certainty. (¢)

Obv. Rev.

Area: aly it St ots

[a 2b,%7 Y goa, Jobst

pau) Jo) a] =” in ornamented

hexagram.

Segment on top: Khaghanu.

163) 1)...| 1)...}..., 49,87 +*t Do. Type: obv., circular area

with inscribed margin; rev., scolloped cir-

cular area with inscribed margin. Both

area legends as in No. 162; rev. marginal

legend was in Mongol character, of which

only traces of last word (luk sen) visible.

Oby. margin entirely rubbed away. (7)

Obv. area: Rev. area:

As in No. 162. wl By

Margin : illegible. Jobat

Margin :...... luk sen.

164] | 1 42.56 * Do. Type: circular areas with in-

seelees seefeee aye) . + f

scribed margins on both sides. Obv. mar-

gin entirely rubbed away; on the rev.

margin there was the date. (2)

Obv. area: Rev. area:

As in No. 162. [ dt) ett

Margin : illegible. Jo's} pbs

Margin dhe tee

VSH5y HE ella eejlegd) Eee! *Do. Type: circular area with in-

scribed margins. Oby., creed in area, with

date on margin; rev., a bow with 2 dots

within it, under the titles. Plate II, fig. 26.

a SOIT nnn EEE!

A. F. R. Hoernle—Catalogue of

[ Supplement,

eae Hime od a

oH 3 METAL. re |

2 cy x

ee op ‘

Sel ex | A Description.

4 | 8 les 2

2 |e lgl8 SIE]

| ERE Be] 3

n |e omole| E 4

MONGOL IL-KHANS OF PERSIA—Contd.

Obv. area: Rev. area:

ali} wll

| Mt att ¥ Jolsst

Secs? all} “wor

al} Joy

Margin...... dd pda eye

T66)" “Weak Tl, 39,89 * Do. Type: similar to No. 165; but

date on rev. margin, and no dots in the

bow.

Obv. area: Rev. area:

al} wills

Mt y Jolt

ys” See

J) Margin : eyed... ye

Margin : illegible.

167 nee) Re 43,60 *Do. Type: obv., square area within

| circle ; rev., similar area with a bow below

titles. Mint Marv, date 6**. Plate II,

fig. 27.

Obv. area: Rev. area:

Mot Y ay SUS

ws” aly Jolt wl

a yy 4° oS

Segment at bottom : dslgine y See

others illegible.

168 eel ls, 39,88 Arghun. As described and figured in

B. M.C., vol. VI, No. 60. Mint Baghdad,

date 68*. Mr. Rodgers read the mint Qazan,

which he supposes to be in Persia. There

is no star either on the obvy. or rev. g)

169 le al ole 38,23 *+t Do. Similar to No. 168; but

37,67| segments on oby. read as follows :

top : gy

1889. ] Captain De Lessoe’s Central Asiatic Coins. 35

METAL.

Description.

Serial Number

Number of Coins

Weight in grains

Gold

Silver.

Copper.

Mixed

MONGOL IL-KHANS OF PERSIA-Contd.

left sleivo (?)

bottom : 9,0

right : qygle}

giving the mint Marw apparently twice,

and the date 68* incomplete.

170} 1z...| 1...}...| 34,98 * Do. Similar to No. 168, but in obv.

area, over 4Jl, a quarter-foil instead of the

star of B. M.C., vol. VI, No. 60. Seg-

ments illegible, except on the left side

ae os? (4)

171) 11...) Eels! 88,16 * Do. Similar to Nos. 168 and 170,

but in obv. area, over 4}!, a pyramid in-

stead of a star. Segments, above...... mye

right hand cred » ; other two illegible.

Date *8*. (#)

172} 1i...] 1l.../...} 38,39 *++ Do. Similar to No. 168; but

' | right hand segment contains a bow; the

three others are illegible. (%)

173 9\.,.| 2}...1...} 38,83 *++t Do. Similar to No. 169, but

36,84| there is a bow within the rey. area, to the

right of the Mongol legend. The segments

read as in No. 169, but in different order :

top: 9°

left : wildy Mint: Marw.

bottom : 35 Date: 68%.

right: dyleiw,.,

The right hand segment shows traces

of some more letters; and it may possibly

have contained the unit figure. Plate II,

fio. 28.

40,70} *++ Do. Same general type as in

38,55] No. 168, but the Mongol legend on rev.

is enclosed within a double circle, the outer

dotted, the inner lined. The oby. area is

Sek at

174

Serial Number.

Number of Coins.

Weight in grains.

A. F. R. Hoernle—Catalogue of [Supplement,

Description.

175

176

eas,

MONGOL IL-KHANS OF PERSIA-Oontd.

marked by a quarter-foil as in No. 166.

The segments read as follows:

39,43

39,37

top: gts Rev.

left: ale St be

bottom : 95 sh in minute letters

ete tens between 2nd and

right: sol} a8 (?) 3rd lines.

Mr. Rodgers remarks on this coin:

“This was struck apparently by Ghazén or

Qazan, the son of Arghun, at the Bazar of

the Camp.” Plate II, fig. 29.

*+ Do. Same general type as in No.

168, but the square area in oby. is formed

by dots, instead of lines. The obv. area is

marked by an arabesque. The oby. seg-

ments read as follows. Mint Nisdbiur, date

#84,

Obv.

top: yojlmas Rev.

left: Qt dhe pln’

bottom : wzbs in minute letterg

right: illegible between 2nd and

3rd lines.

37,83 * Do. Same general type as in No.

a Ye EARN ASA a ren!) oer ese a er

168, but the Mongol legend on rev. is en-

closed in three circles, the exterior ones

lined, the middle one dotted. The segments

read as on No. 174, but in a different

order. Mint Bazér Urdi. (i)

top: gs! hb Rev.

left [wh] 4 illegible, except

bottom)... Ist line.

right } illegible. deta

1889.] Oaptain De Leessoe’s Central Asiatic Coins. 37

Metau.

Description.

Gold.

Serial Number

Number of Coins

Weight in grains

Mixed.

MONGOL IL-KHANS OF PHRSIA—Oontd.

* Do. A similar type to No. 168, but

on oby. double-lined square area within a

lined circle, with arabesques in the seg-

ments; on the rev. the Mongol legend in a

double-lined quarter-foil area enclosed with-

in a double circle, the outer dotted, the

inner lined. Mint Jurjén. Plate II, fig.

EV7\e* sli

le}

30. (f)

Obv. Rev.

Area: alt St at ¥ Area:

age .

aa at Mongol

at Jyasy Legend

wlaye Gye

Segments : Arabesques.

* Do. A new type. Obv., circular lined

area, with inscribed margin within dotted

circle; rev., circular dotted area, with in-

scribed margin within lined circle. Plate

II, fig. 81. (¢)

178} 1J...| 1...|...| 60,27

Obv. Rev.

Area: Mt My at Area: fs

ol Sy) das” wae Mt

w9yt cy eden} Sultdén Arghtn (in Mongol).

* pe Mt

Margin : illegible. Margin: cs) Sled,

vreee lid yo SUL

AGE AL a ieee, 59,33 *+ Do. Type: similar to No. 163; but

on rev. a plain circular area, with marginal

legend in Mongol characters of which only

luksen legible. Oby. margin worn off;

and the illegible scrawls in the last line

of obv. area may have given the mint, as

in No. 177. (4)

(Jt)

io 6]

A. F. R. Hoernle—Catalogue of

[Supplement,

Serial Number.

Number of Coins.

Gold.

Merat.

silver.

Weight in grains.

Description.

180

181

37,40

42,66

MONGOL IL-KHANS OF PERSIA-Oonid.

Obv. Rev.

Area: st Mt ast Area: pee dt WIG

at Jowy des” Bldol yoy

illegible scrawls ols fale

Margin: illegible. Margin: ......... luksen.

* Do. Type, obv., square area, the seg-

ments apparently only filled with dots;

rev., small circular area formed by three

circles, one dotted between two lined ones ;

with inscribed margin; mint Astardbdd,

date [68]5. Plate Il, fig. 32. (f)

Obv. Rev.

Area: &U as} ¥ Area: wile

AU} Jyaey dos? wt

aU ly le «= Margin: yga% cbtpbet ..,

Segments: dots. = anno red ine

Mr. Rodgers read the date gies and.

observes: “I believe this is the first coin

on which appears the formula &} (3, Js.”

* Do. Type: same as in No. 156. Obv.

legends same as in No. 152; segments,

which probably contained the mint and

date, illegible. Rev., Mongol legend with

Arghunu. (t)

* Do. <A beautiful coin with a compli-

cated design. Obv., small double-lined

square area, within an ornamental margin ;

the segments between square and marginal

circle filled with arabesques. Revy., small

double-scolloped circular area, within a

margin filled with dots. Plate II, fig. 33.

(f)

1889.]

Captain De Lossoe’s Central Asiatic Coins. 39

Serial Number.

Number of Coins.

Gold.

Silver.

| Copper.

Mera.

Mixed.

Weight in grains.

Description.

183

184

185

186

42,67

18,89

19,36

42,24,

41,20

42,55

MONGOL IL-KHANS OF PERSIA—Contd.

Obv. Rev.

Area: yay Area: Khaganu

ds? al} Arbad

at Synsy Arghunu

Margin: §§§§§§ 00

Margin: eeeeee

* Do. Type: similar to No. 156, and

to B. M C., vol. VI, Pl. Il, No. 48.

The obv. legend as on the latter, and as on

No. 182. Both sides are almost illegible ;

the left hand segment on the obv. is read

by Mr. Rodgers yjjyia, mint?” (Z)

* Do. Type: same asin No. 168, with

oby. marked by star, but the whole of

margin, and partially sides of areas clipped

away, to reduce size. Mint Shirwan

( wl 3% ) or Sabzwar ( yy 5s) in minute

Persian letters between the 2nd and 38rd

lines of rev. Mongol inscription. (9)

* Do. Type and legends, in all re-

spects, as in No. 174, but exceedingly clipped

to reduce size, as in No. 184. Of the oby.

segments only remain, top wf!5, and left

[J]os ; of the mint on rev. only ss) y [ 54]

(g)

* Do. Type: similar to No. 177, obv.,

square area, within double circle, the inner

dotted, the outer lined; segment partly

inscribed, partly filled with arabesques.

Rev., scollopped area, within ornamental

border. Mint Isfardin. (7)

A. F. R. Hoernle—Catalogue of

[Supplement,

Number of Coins.

Weight in grains.

Serial Number.

Gold.

Silver.

Copper.

Mixed.

Description.

78,07

MONGOL IL-KHANS OF PERSIA-Conitd.

Obv. Rev.

Area: al} St ay Y Khaghanu

Saiae Arbad

See Arghunu

ay Soy Deledkeksen

Segments : top ert ydort Manghu

left

bottom se aed

right : arabesque.

The fourth line of the Mongol legend seems

to read as in B. M. C., vol. VI, Pl. IT,

No. 85. The word in the fifth line is new,

either manghu or maghnu.

* Do. Type: similar to No. 168, but

oby. legend as in No. 186, and the whole

exceedingly clipped, to reduce size. Mint

Nisdbir. Obv. segments as follows :

Top ppl) ; left and bottom cut away ;

right: wos?

BUKHARA HOUSE OF TIMUR.

Shah Rukh. As in B. M. C. of

Or. Coins, vol. VII, Pl. II, No. 61. Date

828, but no mint. (f)

79,06 Do. Same type as No. 188, except

that the corners of the oby. square form

small ringlets. Mint Sabzawdr ( jls 3 )

between 3rd and 4th lines of rev. legend.

No date, unless worn away below last line.

(f)

74,41 Do. Same type as No. 188, but a ro-

sette inserted in rev. between ¢) and joe.

Mint Salténdyah (&lble), date * 47. The

obv. is nearly effaced by being double struck

1889. | Captain De Leessoe’s Central Asiatic Coins. 41

METAL.

Description.

Serial Number

Number of Coins.

Weight in grains.

Copper.

Mixed.

Gold.

Silver

BUKHARA HOUSE OF TIMUR—Oontd.

with o%, In B. M. C., vol. VII, No.

59, the date occupies the place of the ro-

sette. (¢)

19] 1 lal cal #7298 Do. Obv., square area divided into

| three compartments, with one line of creed

in each; inscribed segments, entirely gone.

Rev., circular area with illegible mint and

el date 848; inscribed margin, nearly gone.

| Rey. area is counterstruck with Abu

| Sa’id’s name.

Obv. Rev. Counter.

Matty

Area:

oes” ally

al} Soo

aeeeee

| Segments: illegible. Margin: illegible.

Mr. Rodgers reads the date 848. This

is doubtful, however ; it may be 868.

192} 1)...| 1I...]...{ 70,70 Do. Doubtful. Counterstruck with

898 Khan (ava w); original legends

illegible.

TOS ss Tole Usa s|eiros00) Husain Baikara, Governor of Khoré-

sin (?). Compare B. M. C., vol. VII, No.

123, 126. Counterstruck in lozenge, on obv.

sltyhee! 992 & (Astardbdd) ; on rev. in small-

er lozenge 8ty> ox & (Hirdt). Ascription

of original coin unknown.

LINE OF SHAIBAN.

Ay J...)...{| 69,54 Abdulléh II. Too illegible to be de-

a : a termined with certainty. Oby. area has

the creed; the rev. area seems to read as

in B. M. C., vol. VII, No. 150.

ond

A. F. R. Hoernle—Oatalogue of [Supplement,

Serial Number.

195

196

197

198

199

200

Ea = ee ee ee See

Number of Coins

Gold

Silver.

Description.

Weight in grains

LINE OF SHAIBAN—Contd.

w ai}

okie

(a sole

Mr. Rodgers ascribes it to Iskandar Shah

(as ibid. No. 145).

Jj...) 40,47 Undetermined. On obv., in scolloped

area, e! eye mint Balkh. (7)

1),..| 48,58 Undetermined. Two circular areas.

(7)

Obv. Rev.

pgsorety, tee 2?

peed... ay (2)

Hts...

MANGIT DYNASTY.

Te lsctas| 70:00) { Muzaffaru-d-din. A modern tilla ;

similar in type to B. M, C., vol. VII, Pl. Vv,

No. 179. Mint Bukhérd, date 1297. Le-

gends as zbid., No. 179. (9)

Heel’ AS 2b Do. Haidari type, as in B. M. C., vol.

VII, Pl. V, No. 212. Mint Bukhara, date

1278. (t)

1)...]...] 48,20) Do. A variety of No. 198; but with

date 1283 on reverse. Mint Bukhérd.

(t)

Obv. Rev.

c By dyes” [s

Ile? Gye cer ee

aap re cs

1)...| 83,66 Undetermined. Broad thin piece,

about 13 inches in diameter ; bilingual, Per-

sian and Chinese. Oby., small circular area

With })l=? &%« (money of Bukhérd) ; broad

1889. ] Captain De Lessoe’s Central Asiatic Ooins. - 48

m2 m

x | 2 | Muran, | .8

a 1s FS

a3 ey a

me ce oe Description.

Fi o @/Hlo| 3&

a] IglS/S)5| “a0

g | 8 SlEleel 3

oD Ola |S leg

mie ldsiplols|

MANGIT DYNASTY—Oontd.

ornamental margin, apparently with traces

of Persian inscription. Rev., small octa-

gonal area with Chinese legend; broad

ornamental margin, apparently with Arabic

inscription,

SAFAWY DYNASTY OF PERSIA.

201) 1}...} 1)...)...] 40,01 Ismail I, As described and figured

by Mr. Oliver in J. A. S. B., vol. LVI,

Pl. I, No. IV. Mint Nimroz, date 929,

| About one-third is broken off.

202) = 1)...} 1)...]...] 79,48) { Husain bin Sulaimdn. As in J.

(cA. SOB. vol. TLE, «PU, Ic, Xacti

Mint Isfahdn, date 1130. With a brass

loop for suspension. (y)

203 Vel Lesh! POG Do. The same, but mint Tabriz, date

1131. (g) With a brass loop for suspen-

sion.

204. Re fe aes ey ame Fa ia? Do. A variety of No. 202; the oby.

only, but not the rev., has a marginal circle

of pellets. Mint Isfahdn, date 1120. With

a brass loop for suspension. (9)

205 Jj...| H...1...] 82,16] t Do. Another variety of No. 202; as

in J. A. S. B., vol. LVI, Pl. II, No. XXI.

The oby. margin is inscribed, the rev. mar-

gin is studded with pellets; the areas are

formed by dotted circles. Mint Qazwin,

date 1131. With a brass loop for suspen-

sion; also pierced near margin. (g)

206 1}...} 1j...]...{ 80,40 Do. Another variety of No. 202; as

in J. A. 8. B. vol. LVI, Pl. I, No. XXII.

The obv. margin inscribed, the reverse

ornamented with floral design. Mint Tijlis,

date 1132. With brass loop for suspension.

)

207) Da] Ua.) 76390 “4 * Mahmud. Type the same as No.

204; obv., circular arew with margin stud-

ded with pellets; rev., lettered surface

without margin. No mint or date. With a

brass loop for suspension. Plate IT, fig, 34.

A. F. R. Hoernle—Catalogue of

[Supplement,

Gold.

Weight in grains.

Serial Number.

Number of Coins.

Mixed.

Copper.

SS ee ee a ed

Description.

SAFAWTI DYNASTY OF PERSTA-Oonitd.

Obv. Rev.

at Yt ay J fyirabe an»

o—.— =” 1 She gael a} oe)...

9 le all} Jo) sevalenw gy? all

aly oJ (only partially legi-

ple.)

Ashraf. Type the same as No. 204;

like No. 200, p. 67, in B. M.C., of Shahs of

Persia. Mint Isfahin, date 1137. With

brass loop for suspension. (gq)

t Tahmasp II. Type similar to No.

202, but the areas are formed by dotted cir-

cles, as in Num. Or., No. DLXXI, Mint

Isfahan, date 1147. With a brass loop for

suspension. (9)

Do. A variety of No. 209, oby. mar-

gin inscribed, as in J. A. S. B., vol. LVI.

Pl. II, No. XXIX. See also No. 150,

p. 56 of B. M. C., of Shadhs of Persia.

Mint Tabriz, date 1134. With a brass loop

and perforation for suspension. (q)

Do. Thesame as No. 210, but mint

Mashhad Mugqaddas, date 1137. The mar-

gins are entirely cut away, with the excep-

tion of one trace at the side with oss on the

obv. With a brass loop for suspension. (7)

Nadir. As described and figured by

Mr. Oliver, in J. A. S. B., vol. LVI, Pl. III,

No. XXXV, and B. M. C. of Shahs of

Persia, No. 1, p. 72. Mint Mashhad, date

1150. In one specimen the date is nearly

rubbed out. With brass loop for suspen-

sion. (/)

Do. As figured in Num. Or., No.

DLXXXYV, and described on p. 472. The

margins are nearly rubbed away, hence mint

and date almost illegible, but probably

Mashhad 1150. See also J. A. S. B., vol.

1889. | Captain De Leessoe’s Central Asiatic Coins. 45

na 44

& |-2 | Moras. | -2

2 O Bb

H | ag AeA

5 st | Description.

4 | & HI] eS

ra | -O | fees)

s q ao| e/a) o mel)

qi 5 laie| Sk )

o Plt oka! 1

D|)A |Oojmioas| &

SAFAWY DYNASTY OF PERSIA-Contd.

LVI, Pl. IV, No. XXXVII. With brass

loop for suspension.

214 1)...| 1)...|... 74,51 Karim Khan (?). Mr. Rodgers ob-

serves: ‘‘no name on the coin; obv., the

distich as on Karim Khan’s coins in B. M.

C. of Shahs of Persia, Introduction, p.

Ixxxvii. Rev. wl wsepstio cys. Mint

Kashan; no date. With brass loop for

suspension. (¢)

215) Ue.) De. 40357 Undetermined. Obv., quarter-foil area

with Shi’ah creed, and inscribed margin,

nearly illegible. Rev., two scolloped areas,

one within the other, and dotted margin.

Legend in inner area illegible; outer ......

| oe eats sone)

916 1... 1.../...| 22,34). Undetermined. Mint Isfahan. Mr.

| Rodgers reads as follows :

| “Obv. wierel ure Rev. in lozenge $)!0,

BLS So (P) Margin lost.”

Biv else Neelew| @bS56 Medal or Token of brass. Obv., the

Persian rayed and faced sun in middle of

wreath of oak-leaves and acorns. Rev.,

crescent and stars in middle of ditto.

AFGHANISTAN.

hyd Mahmud Durrani. A-rupee as figured

ay Da sia hs aaa in Num. Chron., IIId Series for 1888, Pt

XIII, fig. 12, p. 352. Mint Hirat, date

1230. Legends on both sides almost en-

tirely worn off.

Obv. Rev.

(ris

dyes” yline a} 5%

ia eye

ony

A. F. R. Hoernle—Catalogue of [Supplement,

a a

| -2 | Murar. | -§

3 a

rQ a2) Fi,

Ao] ew 4 Fit

5 : 4 ie Description.

o My .

2 |e isisike| &

8] 2 losis} 2

DN} A |O|R|\ola| &

AFGHANISTAN—Contd.

a Oe Rat Fes! ol: 41,44 Do. A quater Rupee. Mint gone;

date 1241. Most of the legend gone.

Obv. Rev.

2742” line rue

ee, sib,

220) = L...| T...|...| 141565 ’Abdu-r-Rahmdn. A rupee. Mint K4-

bul, date 1298. Very imperfectly struck,

showing portion only of legends; edges

much hacked about.

Obv. Rev.

pe eye

(Coa 5 n)

Ode PIVEN Oe

PSA yt [ ls]

EPI il ge tee 1, Do. Arupee. Another Variety. Mint

and date cut away. In the same condition .

as No. 220.

Obv. Rev.

oye re

ertaylt Ay a .) fo

[ ose | ae We eat ree

222) —5J...| 5)...]...] 142,17] Undetermined. All Rupees. Mint

141,52) Kabul; dates, only visible on three, ** 97,

141,21) *** 4, **** 4. In the same general condi-

138,41} tion, as Nos. 220 and 221.

137,75 Obv. Rev.

S) gle Gy

a ly

LosJ} L Sib lewd}

os [12]97

1889. ] Captain De Leessoe’s Central Astatie Coins. 47

—

-| 48] we A

# | -8 | Mora. |

= i &b

5 3 q D oti

me ia 5 escription.

|g islsiks| &

S|, (slele.| 2

n|e ialcla| &

AFGH ANISTAN—(Oonid.

223 1)...|...] 143,18 Undetermined. A rupee, with an

incomplete and unread Persian distich on

the oby.; and with mint Daru-s-Saltanat

Kabul and date 1250 on rev.

224, 1)...| 46,72 Undetermined. Obv., square area with

arabesque in segments; rev., round area

with ornamental margin. No mint, date

we CD

Obv. Rev.

Area: Eine oye

we ala

225 1j...| 43,60 Undetermined. Obv, lozenge area

within ornamental margin ; rey., floral geo-

metric figure.

Obv. eye

std

sob

226 1\...) 38,57... Undetermined. A variety of No. 224.

Mint Hirat on oby., and date 887 or 878 on

rev.

Rev. 5% Obv. AA

x! dh

227 1...) 47,16 Undetermined. A variety of No. 224,

but obv. scollopped area, rev. square area.

Mint Hirat, uo date.

Obv. eo) Rev. wy?

a St a}

t. 5 < es

228 lj...| 36,68 Undetermined. Mint Hirat; date **55.

Oby., lotus shaped design; the centre has

Serial Number.

229

230

231

232

233

234,

Number of Coins.

A. F. R. Hoernle—Catalogue of

Weight in grains.

77,26

46,82!

34,24

52,02

53,23

51,97

51,45

50,74

[Supplement,

Description.

AFGHANISTAN—Contd.

tty>5 on two of the pedals Joc; the rest

illegible. Rev., in round area: _ ?

Undetermined. Another variety of

No. 225, but of much larger size. Mint

Hirat, date 919.

Obv. 9449

Shi

Bip

tered

Undetermined. Another variety of

No. 225; mint Hirdt (?), date gone.

Obv. yd

diblodSt ty

sl (2)

Undetermined. Another variety of

No. 225. Obv....uy2; Rev. illegible.

RAJPUTS OF INDIA.

Prithvi Raja. As in Ar. Ant.,Pl. XTX,

fig. 18; Ind. Ant., vol. I, pl. XXV, fig. 21,

pl. XXVI, fig. 30; also Chron. p. 64,

No. 38. (4)

Chahada Deva. With legend Saman-

tadeva; asin Ar. Ant., Pl. XIX, fig. 16;

also Chron., No. 39, p. 70. (¢)

Do. With legend Samasarola; as in

Chron., No. 40, p. 70, pl. I, fig. 15, also Ar.

Ant., Pl. XTX, fig. 31, 34, 37; Ind. Ant.,

Pl. XXVI, fig. 31. (¢)

1889.] Captain De Lessoe’s Central Asiatic Ooins. 49

Description.

a a

f =| |

aren ares Merat. es

o = Ss

2 |o aa

Piam| ReSaae pe fe

2 ox a

~)3 1 Jelsle! 3

|g |g 3 |e o| ,o0

ete || | >| el is)

a) Nz | 9 |e bones =

A|)G |Oljajoje| &

7 { | | )

235} 3 | 3

| |

236 a ae il

238) 1)...|...|

oe,

| | |

nn |

intl |

| |

etl lea

239| )...|...| J...

| |

240| 361...|...|36)...

| |

RAJPUTS OF INDIA.—(contd)

50,16! Madana Pala. As in Ar. Ant., Pl:

49,07; XIX, fig. 19, 23, Ind. Ant., Pl. XXV, fic. 16,

47,10) Pl. XXVI, fio. 27, J. R. A. S., vol. IX,

fig. 13; also Chron., p: 62, No. 34, (t)

50,03 Sallakshana Deva. Asin J. R.A. S.,

vol. IX, fig. 11, 12; also Chron., p. 62,

| No. 33. (4)

MUGHALS OF INDIA,

175,25 Farrokh Siyar. A rupee. As in

Num. Or., No. DCCCCXII, but mint Daru-

| ]-Saltanat Lahor, date 1126, regnal 2. (/)

| SOUTH INDIAN.

47,62) Qutbu-d-din Firtiz. Doubtful, but see

| Madras Journal of Literature and Science,

for 1888-89, fig. 4, p.56. Lettered surfaces

enclosed eabtein ‘donble circle, the inner

lined, the outer dotted. (7)

Obv. Rev.

Lid} Obs i 9 gl (P)

ent y 3a

UNDETERMINED.

104,80 Unknown. Circular areas with in-

| scribed margins. Each area contains the

|exceedingly crude figure of an animal,

| which cannot be identified. The marginal

|legends are almost entirely worn off and

| quite illegible. (¢)

39,09 Unknown. Mere copper-drops of varying

23,29) sizes and weights. Mr. Rodgers observes:

13, 66, “No king’s name on them. Some are very

12 09] small, weighing only 4 grains of copper.

11,59) They were all made of drops of copper which

7,70, were stamped on both sides by dies bearing

7,52 J Kufie inseriptions. The edges are still con-

A. F. R, Hoernle—Oatalogue of Central Asiatic Coins. [Supp.

= | cs | Merat. dep | 4

o | oO Bo

4st | 4 +a

5 5 a Description.

ta oO Pi taee: |

@ 1 bg/Sla/S| &

eS A ls] e] al ey

oO B |olm|o "|

n|e oSlaloj| &

UNDETERMINED.—Oontd.

| vex. Some weigh over 50 grains. The

| | | all agree in not being prepared for the die

| by cutting or hammering. No definite de-

scription has yet been deciphered. Some of

them have jos ('adl) on one side; some

have a geometric device. There is not

sufficient inscription on any coin to enable

me to assign them to any king.” The

weights on the margin are those of seven

of the best selected specimens.

N. B. Of the following Numbers there are a number of spare

specimens, all being much inferior to those selected for the Indian

Museum and noticed. in the Catalogue.

Nos. 51—54, 224 specimens.

Nos. 60—70, 48 do.

No. 75, 11 do.

Nos. 76—83, 107 do.

Nos. 84—86, 47 do.

No. 146 , 148 do.

No. 240 , 210 do.

1889. |: Captain De Lessoe’s Central Asiatic Corns. 51

Posrscripr.

The foregoing pages had already passed through the press, when

I received from Professor W. Tiesenhausen of Petersburg a copy of his

paper on the Oriental Coins of Mr. Linévitch, published in the Trans-

actions of the Oriental Section of the Russian Archeological Society,

Vol. IV, pp. 289—320. Among the coins described in this paper, I find

several which appear to be identical with some in the Museum Collec-

tion. Thus Prof. Tiesenhausen’s No. 6 shown in his Pl. I, figs. 2, 3 is the

same as Ind. Mus. Cat. No. 77. The mint is read by the Professor as

wie. His No. 7 seems to be the same as Ind. Mus. Cat. No. 51, but

in the woodeut, accompanying No. 7, the horse is shown without a

saddle. His No. 8 (with a woodcut) is the same or nearly the same as

Ind. Mus. Cat. No. 101. Others are: No. 1 = Ind. Mus. Cat. No. 149 ;

No. 3 = Ind. Mus. Cat. No. 95 or No. 105. Prof. Tiesenhausen’s No. 29,

which is dated 798 A. H. in Timtr’s reign, very much resembles Ind.

Mus. Cat. No. 230; and the latter, therefore, is probably to be attri-

buted to Timir. So are, in all probability, Ind. Mus. Cat. Nos. 224,

225, 226, which in design have much resemblance with No. 230. In

fact, the date of No. 226 is probably to be read 788 in Timir’s reign.

No. 229 of the Ind. Mus. Cat., to judge from its date 919 A. H., may

be a coin of Ismé’il I, the first king of the Safawi dynasty of Persia

(905-932 A. H.).