[173] There is a very faithful drawing of this bas-relief by Kittoe in
the ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. vii. plate 44.
But casts of all these sculptures were taken some three years ago by
Mr. Locke, of the School of Design, Calcutta, and photographs of these
casts, with others of the caves, are now before me. Reduced copies of
some of these were published on plate 100, ‘Tree and Serpent Worship,’
2nd edition, 1873.
[174] That there were Yavanas in Orissa about this time is abundantly
evident, from the native authorities quoted by Stirling--‘Asiatic
Researches,’ vol. xv. p. 258, _et seqq._ These represent them as
coming from Kashmir, and Babul Des, or Persia, and one account
names the invader as Hangsha Deo, which looks very like Hushka, or
Huvishka (the brother of Kanishka), whose inscriptions are found at
Muttra.--Cunningham, ‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. ii. p. 32, _et seqq._
[175] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. vii. plate 42.
‘Tree and Serpent Worship,’ plate 100.
[176] ‘Tree and Serpent Worship,’ plate 100, p. 105.
[177] There may have been a structural dagoba attached to the series,
which may have disappeared.
[178] Wilson, ‘Ariana Antiqua,’ plate 10.
[179] These inscriptions were first published by Lieut. Brett, with
translations by Dr. Stevenson, in the fifth volume of the ‘Journal
Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ p. 39, _et seqq._, plates
1 to 16. They were afterwards revised by Messrs. E. W. and A. A. West
in the eighth volume of the same journal, p. 37, _et seqq._, and
translated by Professor Bhandarkar in a paper not yet published, but to
which I have had access. I have also been assisted by manuscript plans
and notes by Mr. Burgess; and, though I have not seen the caves myself,
I fancy that I can realise all their main features without difficulty.
[180] Professor Bhandarkar, in his paper on these inscriptions, passes
over the inscriptions in the interior of the chaitya, without alluding
to them in any way. Is it that there is any mistake about them? and
that the cave is a century more modern than they would lead us to
suppose? The answer is probably to be obtained on the spot, and there
only.
[181] ‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. viii.
p. 40.
[182] _Ante_, p. 129. See also plate 11 of my folio work on the
‘Rock-cut Temples,’ where the pillars of the two caves are contrasted
as here.
[183] ‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. ix. p.
16.
[184] ‘Journal Bombay Branch Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. viii. p. 42.
[185] Ib., vol. v. p. 49.
[186] ‘Tree and Serpent Worship,’ woodcut 12, p. 92.
[187] Ibid., plates 81, 91, 97, _et passim_.
[188] ‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. v. p.
55.
[189] ‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. viii.
p. 56.
[190] The caves, it may be explained, were numbered consecutively, like
houses in a street, beginning at the north end, the first cave there
being No. 1, the last accessible cave at the southern end being No. 26.
[191] ‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. viii.
p. 56. See also, ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. v. p.
726.
[192] Curiously enough, on the roof of this cave there are four square
compartments representing the same scene, in different manners--a
king, or very important personage, drinking out of a cup with male and
female attendants. What the story is, is not known, but the persons
represented are not Indians, but Persians, and the costumes those of
the Sassanian period. Copies of these pictures by Mr. Griffith are now
exhibited in the India Museum at Kensington.
[193] ‘Rock cut Temples,’ pl. 8.
[194] Eight large lithographic plates illustrating these caves will
be found in my work on the ‘Rock-cut Temples of India,’ 1843. In
1864 I published a small volume containing fifty-eight photographic
illustrations of the same series. Reductions of some of the more
important frescoes, copied by Major Gill, were fortunately published
by Mrs. Speir in her ‘Life in Ancient India,’ in 1856; and since then
Mr. Griffith, of the School of Arts at Bombay, has been employed to
recover, as far as it can now be done, the frescoes destroyed in the
Crystal Palace fire. If he is successful, these curious paintings
may still be made available for the history of art in India. It is
feared, however, that the means taken by Major Gill to heighten their
colour before copying them, and the destructive tendencies of British
tourists, have rendered the task to a great extent a hopeless one.
[195] _Ante_, p. 59.
[196] I possess a large collection of MS. drawings of these caves, made
for Daniell by his assistants in 1795-6.
[197] ‘Voyage en Arabie et d’autres pays circonvoisins,’ 1776-80. Most
of the plates referring to these caves were reproduced by Langles in
his ‘Monuments d’Hindostan,’ vol. ii., plates 77, _et seqq._
[198] Schlagintweit, ‘Buddhismus in Thibet,’ plate 3.
[199] Plans of these caves, with descriptions and some architectural
details, will be found in Gen. Cunningham’s ‘Archæological Reports,’
vol. ii. pp. 270-288, plates 77-84. Those of Dhumnar I have seen
myself, but till those of Kholvi are photographed we shall not be able
to speak positively regarding them; the General’s drawings are on too
small a scale for that purpose.
[200] The Kholvi group is situated more than sixty miles north of
Ujjain, that of Dhumnar about twenty-five further north, and deeper
into the Central Indian jungles.
[201] ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. iv. pp. 287-291.
[202] There is a representation of this cave in Dr. Bird’s book, plate
16, but so badly done that it requires being told what is intended in
order to find it out.
[203] I have for some time possessed photographs of about one hundred
objects obtained in these excavations, principally those in the Lahore
Museum; and latterly I have received from Gen. Cunningham twenty
large photographic plates, representing 165 separate objects recently
obtained in a more methodical manner by himself, principally from
Jamalgiri. These plates are, as I understand, to form part of the
illustrations of a work he intends publishing on the subject. When it
is in the hands of the public there will be some data to reason upon.
At present there is scarcely anything to which a reference can be made.
[204] When Gen. Cunningham was selecting specimens in the Lahore
Museum, to be photographed for the Vienna Exhibition, he complains
that he could only ascertain the “find spot” of five or six out of the
whole number--500 or 600. It is therefore to be regretted that, when
publishing a list with descriptions of the 165 objects discovered by
himself (‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. v. pp. 197-202), he does not
mention where they came from, and gives the dimensions of a few only.
[205] The mode in which the excavations have recently been conducted by
Government has been to send out a party of sappers in the cold weather
to dig, but the officer in charge of the party has been the subaltern
who happened to be in command of the company at the time. A new
officer is consequently appointed every year, and no one has ever been
selected because he had any experience in such matters or any taste
for such pursuits. What has been done has been done wonderfully well,
considering the circumstances under which it was undertaken; but the
result on the whole is, as might be expected, painfully disappointing.
Quite recently, however, it is understood that Gen. Cunningham has
taken charge of the excavations, and we may consequently hope that in
future these defects of arrangement will be remedied.
[206] In the fifth volume of his ‘Archæological Reports’ just
received, Gen. Cunningham assumes that both these were stupas of the
ordinary character. They may have been so, but both having steps up
to them would seem to militate against that assumption. The circular
one is only 22 ft., the square one 15 ft. in diameter, and there is
consequently no room on either for a procession-path round the dome, if
it existed; and, if this is so, of what use could the steps be? Lieut.
Crompton, who excavated the Jamalgiri monastery, is clearly of opinion
that it was a platform--see page 2 of his report, published in the
‘Lahore Gazette,’ 30th August, 1873. To prevent misunderstanding, I may
mention that Gen. Cunningham, in his plate No. 14, by mistake, ascribes
the plan to Sergt. Wilcher, instead of to Lieut. Crompton.
[207] ‘Embassy to Thibet,’ p. 317.
[208] ‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. vii.,
No. 21, p. 116, _et seqq._
[209] These have been removed, and are now in Gen. Cunningham’s
possession at Simla, I believe. He has sent me photographs of twelve of
them.
[210] ‘Tree and Serpent Worship,’ plates 24 (fig. 3) and 36 (fig. 1).
[211] The modillion cornice, though placed on the capital in the
photograph, belongs in reality to another part of the building.
[212] ‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. v. pp. 49 and 196.
[213] ‘The Palaces of Nineveh and Persepolis Restored.’ By the Author.
Part II. sect. i., _et passim_.
[214] One curious peculiarity of these Gandhara sculptures is that they
generally retain the sloping jamb on each side of their openings. In
India and in a structural building this peculiarity would certainly
fix their age as anterior to the Christian Era. In Gandhara it is
only found in decorative sculpture, and retained apparently from
association. It does not, at all events, appear as if any argument
could be based on its use as there employed.
[215] Assuming that his age has been correctly ascertained, which I am
beginning, however, to doubt exceedingly.
[216] I possess photographs of about 300 objects from the Lahore and
other museums, and have had access to about as many actual examples--of
an inferior class, however--in collections in this country, but even
they barely suffice for the purpose.
[217] ‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. v., Introduction, p. vi. See also
Appendix to the same volume, pp. 193-4.
[218] Texier and Pullan, ‘Byzantine Architecture,’ London, 1864, pls.
22-25 and pl. 44.
[219] De Voguë, ‘Syrie Centrale,’ _passim_.
[220] By a curious slip of the pen General Cunningham (‘Archæological
Reports,’ vol. v. p. 193) places “These Roman examples in the baths of
Caracalla in the beginning of the first century of the Christian Era,
almost contemporary,” he adds, “with that which I assign to the finest
Indo-Corinthian examples just described, namely, the latter half
of the first century B.C.” This is so evidently a mere slip
that I would not allude to it were it not that much of his argument for
the early age of these sculptures is based upon this coincidence.
[221] There is a capital at Siah, in Syria, on which a bust is
introduced, which may be as early as the Christian Era, but it is a
solitary example not repeated afterwards, so far as I know. See ‘Syrie
Centrale,’ by De Voguë, plate 3.
[222] In Beal’s introduction to ‘Fa Hian,’ p. 18, he mentions, on
Chinese authority, which is much more reliable than Indian, that a
statue of Buddha was brought to China from Kartchou (?) in B.C. 121. On
asking Mr. Beal to look carefully into the authorities for this
statement, he reports them to be hazy in the extreme, and not to be
relied upon.
[223] I believe it is generally admitted that the _rédaction_ of the
‘Mahawanso,’ and other Ceylonese scriptures made in Buddhaghosha’s time,
A.D. 408-420, is the oldest authentic Buddhist work we now possess.
They, like the ‘Lalita Vistara,’ and other works, are founded on older
works of course, but the earlier forms have been lost, and what we have
is what the writers of the 5th and subsequent centuries thought they
ought to be.
[224] Unfortunately no Indian list of these patriarchs has yet come
to light. Those we have are derived from Japanese or Chinese sources,
and are all tainted with the falsification which the Chinese made
in Buddhist chronology by putting Buddha’s date back to
about 1000 B.C., in order that he might have precedence of
Confucius in antiquity! for so it is that history is written in the
East. For a list of the twenty-eight known patriarchs, see Lassen,
‘Indische Alterthumskunde,’ vol. ii., Beilage ii. p. 1004.
[225] The capitals of these pillars are so ruined that it is difficult
to speak very confidently about them. I have drawings of them by Col.
Yule and by Mr. W. Simpson, and latterly Gen. Cunningham has published
drawings of them, ‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. v. pl. 24. None of them
are quite satisfactory, but this must arise from the difficulty of the
task.
[226] No complete history of the ivories has been published which is
sufficient for reference on this subject. Gori’s are too badly engraved
for this purpose; but the first twelve plates in Labarte’s ‘Histoire de
l’Art’ are perfect as far as they go. So are the plates in Maskell’s
‘Catalogue of the South Kensington Museum,’ and those published by
the Arundel Society; but it is to the collection of casts in these
two last-named institutions that the reader should refer for fuller
information on the subject.
[227] I purchased from his artist, Mr. Nicholl, and possess all the
original sketches from which the illustrations of his book were
engraved.
[228] When the present governor was appointed hopes ran high that this
unsatisfactory state of our knowledge would be cleared away. The stars,
however, in their courses have warred against archæology in Ceylon
ever since he assumed sway over the island, and the only residuum of
his exertions seems to be that a thoroughly competent German scholar,
Herr Goldsmidt, is occupied now in copying the inscriptions, which
are numerous, in the island. These, however, are just what is least
wanted at present. In India, where we have no history and no dates,
inscriptions are invaluable, and are, in fact, our only sources of
correct information. In Ceylon, however, they are, for archæological
purposes, comparatively unimportant. What is there wanted are plans and
architectural details, and these, accompanied by general descriptions
and dimensions, would, with the photographs we possess, supply all we
now want. Any qualified person accustomed to such work could supply
nearly all that is wanted in twelve months, for the two principal
cities at least; but I despair of seeing it done in my day.
[229] Beal’s translation, p. 157.
[230] The artist who made the drawings for Sir E. Tennent’s book, not
knowing what a serpent-hood was, has in almost all instances so drawn
it as to be unrecognisable. The photographs, however, make it quite
clear that all had serpent-hoods.
[231] The cubit of Ceylon is nearly 2 ft. 3 in.
[232] In the photographs it is called an altar, which it certainly was
not.
[233] ‘Tree and Serpent Worship,’ pl. 19. In some respects it resembles
the Woodcuts Nos. 34 and 35.
[234] Since the drawing was made from which this cut is taken, it has
been thoroughly repaired and made as unlike what it was as can well be
conceived.
[235] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal’ for March, 1847, p.
218.
[236] ‘Transactions of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. iii. p. 474,
and ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. xiii. p. 168.
[237] I am afraid this is no longer true. From what I learn, I fear it
has been repaired.
[238] ‘Mahawanso,’ Turnour’s translation, p. 163.
[239] Loc. cit., p. 235.
[240] At Amravati the Zoophorus (Woodcut No. 36) consisted of the same
animals, I believe, but it is not complete, no fragment of the horse
having been brought home, and generally, it seems that this limited
menagerie is to be found in all Buddhist works.
[241] Any architect of ordinary ability could in a week easily make the
plans and drawings requisite to give us all the information required
respecting these halls in Anuradhapura. I am not sure that Capt.
Hogg has not already done all that is wanted, but he was sent off so
suddenly to St. Helena that no time was allowed him to communicate his
information to others, even if he had it.
[242] Singularly enough, the natives of Behar ascribe the planting of
their Bo-tree to Duttagaimuni, the pious king of Ceylon.--See Buchanan
Hamilton’s ‘Statistics of Behar,’ p. 76, Montgomery Martin’s edition.
[243] According to Mr. Rhys Davids, the proper name of the city is
Pulastipura (‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. vii. (N.S.)
p. 156), and its modern name Topawœwa or Topawa. As, however, that here
given is the only one by which it is known in English literature, it is
retained.
[244] ‘Christianity in Ceylon,’ Murray, 1850; ‘An Account of the Island
of Ceylon,’ 2 vols., Longmans, 1859. Since then Mr. Lawton’s and Capt.
Hogg’s photographs have added considerably to the precision but not
to the extent of our knowledge. Not one plan or dimension, and no
description, so far as I know, have reached this country.
[245] Among Capt. Hogg’s photographs are two colossal statues of
Buddha, one at Seperawa, described as 41 ft. high, the other at a place
called Aukana, 40 ft. high; but where these places are there is nothing
to show. They are extremely similar to one another, and, except in
dimensions, to that at the Gal Vihara.
[246] They occur also on Asoka’s pillars in the earliest known
sculptures in India (Woodcut No. 6). It was the cackling of these
sacred geese which is said to have saved the Capitol at Rome from being
surprised by the Gauls.
[247] The preceding woodcut, from Sir E. Tennent’s book, is far from
doing justice to the building or to Mr. Nicholl’s drawings, which
are before me; but among the half dozen photographs I possess of it
not one is sufficiently explanatory to convey a correct idea of its
peculiarities, and, after all, without plans or dimensions, it is in
vain to attempt to convey a correct idea of it to others.
[248] ‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. iii. p. 31, _et seqq._, plates 13
and 15. As neither photographs nor even drawings of these figures are
yet available, we are still unable to speak of their style of art, or
to feel sure of their authenticity; nor has the era from which these
dates are to be calculated been fixed with anything like certainty. The
evidence, however, as it now stands, is strongly in favour of their
being what they are represented to be.
[249] Vol. i. p. 359, Woodcut No. 241.
[250] The antiquities of Java will probably, to some extent at least,
supply this deficiency, as will be pointed out in a subsequent chapter.
[251] Vol. i. p. 212, _et seqq._
[252] Vol. i. p. 213.
[253] Ibid., p. 334.
[254] Fully illustrated in vol. ii. of the Dilettanti Society’s
‘Antiquities of Ionia.’
[255] ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. iv. p. 1, _et
seqq._; ‘Madras Journal,’ vol. xx. p. 78, _et seqq._; ‘Journal Bombay
Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. iii. p. 206, _et seqq._
[256] ‘Archæological Reports,’ 1874, pp. 41 and 42.
[257] Loc. cit., plate 54.
[258] ‘Asiatic Researches,’ vol. ix. p. 270, vol. xvii. p. 285.
[259] ‘Hiouen Thsang, Vie et Voyages,’ vol. i. p. 253, _et seqq._
[260] See Woodcuts Nos. 99, 112, 122, 124, 127, 172, 177 and 178 of
vol. i. of this work.
[261] In his work on the ‘Antiquities of Orissa,’ Babu Rajendra Lalâ
Mittra suggests at page 31 something of this sort, but if his diagram
were all that is to be said in favour of the hypothesis, I would feel
inclined to reject it.
[262] No really satisfactory translation of these Asoka edicts has yet
been published. The best is that of Professor Wilson, in vol. xii.
‘Journal of Royal Asiatic Society.’ Mr. Burgess has, however, recently
re-copied that at Girnar, and General Cunningham those in the north of
India. When these are published it may be possible to make a better
translation than has yet appeared.
[263] ‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. viii.
p. 120.
[264] Ibid., vol. vii. p. 124.
[265] Lieut. Postans’ ‘Journey to Girnar,’ ‘Journal of the Asiatic
Society of Bengal,’ vol. vii. p. 865, _et seqq._ This, with most of the
facts here recorded, is taken either from Mr. Burgess’s descriptions of
the photographs in his ‘Visit to Somnath, Girnar, and other places in
Kathiawar,’ or Lieut. Postans’ ‘Journey,’ just referred to. Col. Tod’s
facts are too much mixed up with poetry to admit of their being quoted.
[266] Mr. Burgess visited this place during the spring of the present
year, and has brought away plans and sections, from which it appears
these caves are old, but till his materials are published it is
impossible to state exactly how old they may be. I am afraid this work
will be published long before his Report.
[267] Ram Raj, ‘Architecture of the Hindus,’ p. 49.
[268] Burgess, ‘Visit to Girnar,’ &c., p. 3.
[269] ‘Ferishta,’ translated by General Briggs, vol. i. p. 72.
Wilson, however (‘Asiatic Researches,’ vol. xvii. p. 194), is clearly
of opinion that it was a lingam. One slight circumstance mentioned
incidentally by Ferishta (p. 74) convinces me as clearly it was Jaina.
After describing the destruction of the great idol, he goes on to say,
“There were in the temple some thousands of small images, wrought
in gold and silver, of various shapes and dimensions.” I know of no
religion except that of the Jains--and the very late Buddhists--who
indulged in this excessive reduplication of images.
[270] A view of this temple, not very correct but fairly illustrative
of the style, forms the title-page to Col. Tod’s ‘Travels in Western
India.’
[271] See ‘Illustrations of Indian Architecture,’ by the Author, p. 30,
from which work the plan and view are taken.
[272] See _ante_, p. 221.
[273] ‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. ii. p. 357.
[274] Ibid., plate 90.
[275] The only person who has described these temples in any detail is
Gen. Cunningham, ‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. ii. p. 412, _et seqq._,
from which consequently all that is here said is taken. I am also
indebted to the General for a very complete set of photographs of these
temples, which enables me to speak of their appearance with confidence.
[276] General Cunningham hesitates to adopt its extreme simplicity
and rudeness as a test of its age, because it is built of granite,
the other in the exquisite stone of the neighbourhood. Its plan,
however, and the forms of its sikras, induce me to believe it to be
exceptionally old.
[277] For plans of similar Jaina temples, see Mr. Burgess’s Report on
Belgâm and Kuladgi, pls. 2, 10 and 45. These, however, are more modern
than this one.
[278] ‘Picturesque Illustrations of Indian Architecture,’ by the
Author, plate 5.
[279] Impey, ‘Views in Delhi, Agra, and Rajpootana,’ London, 1865,
frontispiece and plate 60.
[280] Sri Allat, to whom the erection of this tower is ascribed, is the
12th king, mentioned in Tod’s Aitpore inscriptions (‘Rajastan,’ vol. i.
p. 802).
[281] ‘Picturesque Illustrations of Ancient Architecture in Hindostan,’
by the Author, pl. 8, p. 38.
[282] The dome that now crowns this tower was substituted for the old
dome since I sketched it in 1839.
[283] Burgess, ‘Sutrunjya,’ p. 20. A plan of this temple is given by
him and several photographs.
[284] Burgess, loc. cit., p. 25.
[285] Tod’s ‘Travels in Western India,’ pp. 280, 281.
[286] L. Rousselet, in ‘L’Inde des Rajahs,’ devotes three plates, pp.
396-8, to these temples. I possess several photographs of them.
[287] ‘Picturesque Illustrations of Indian Architecture,’ pl. 17.
[288] Burgess, ‘Report on Belgâm and Kuladji Districts,’ 1875, p. 25,
plates 36 and 37.
[289] ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. iv. p. 7; ‘Madras
Journal,’ vol. xx. p. 78, _et seqq._
[290] Tod’s ‘Rajastan,’ vol. i. p. 778, and plate facing it.
[291] Unfortunately the census of 1872 did not extend to the Mysore,
where the principal Jaina establishments are situated, nor to any of
the native states of southern India. The figures thus given do not
consequently at all represent the facts of the case.
[292] ‘Vie et Voyages,’ vol. i. p. 201, _et seqq._, vol. iii. p. 146,
_et seqq._
[293] Sir Walter Elliot and others have told me there are Buddhist
remains in the south, and I know the general opinion is that this is
so. I have never myself seen any, nor been able to obtain photographs
or detailed information regarding them. When they are brought forward
these assertions may be modified. They, however, express in the
meanwhile our present knowledge of the subject.
[294] ‘Asiatic Researches,’ vol. ix. p. 285.
[295] These three were engraved in ‘Moor’s Pantheon,’ plates 73 and 74,
in 1810. I have photographs of them, but not of any others, nor have I
been able to hear of any but these three.
[296] ‘Asiatic Researches,’ vol. ix. p. 285; ‘Indian Antiquary,’ vol.
ii. p. 353.
[297] Moor’s ‘Pantheon,’ plate 73.
[298] Burgess, ‘Archæological Reports,’ 1875, p. xxxvii., plate 25.
[299] The artist who drew the lithographs for the ‘Indian Antiquary,’
vol. ii. plate on p. 353, not knowing that serpents were intended, has
supplied their place with an ornamentation of his own design.
[300] Among the photographs of the ‘Architecture of Dharwar and
Mysore,’ plates 74 and 75, there labelled Hirpouhully. When writing
the descriptions of these plates, I was struck with, and pointed out,
the curiously exceptional nature of the style of that temple, and its
affinities with the style of Nepal; but I had no idea then that it was
below, and not above, the Ghâts, and far from being exceptional in the
country where it was situated. In fact, one of the great difficulties
in writing a book like the present is to avoid making mistakes of this
sort. Photographers are frequently so careless in naming the views they
are making, and mounters frequently more so, in transferring the right
names to the mounts, that in very many instances photographs come to me
with names that have no connexion with the subjects; and it is only by
careful comparison, aided with extraneous knowledge, that grave errors
can be avoided.
[301] ‘Travels in the Himalayan Provinces and in Ladakh and Kashmir,’
London, Murray, 1841.
[302] ‘Travels in Kashmir, Ladak,’ &c., two vols. 8vo., London,
Colburn, 1842.
[303] ‘Travels in Kashmir and the Punjab.’ Translated by Major Jervis,
London, 1845.
[304] ‘Illustrations of the Ancient Buildings in Kashmir,’ &c.,
prepared, under the authority of the Secretary of State for India in
Council, by Lieut. H. H. Cole, R.E., quarto, Allen and Co., London,
1869.
[305] I cannot make out the span of this arch. According to the rods
laid across the photograph, it appears to be 15 feet; according to the
scale on the plan, only half that amount.
[306] Lieut. Cole’s plates, 1-68 to 4-68.
[307] See drawing of mosque by Vigne, vol. i. p. 269; and also ‘Journal
of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ 1848, p. 253, containing General A.
Cunningham’s paper on the subject, from which this woodcut is taken.
[308] On the Toran attached to the rail at Bharhut are elevations of
chaitya halls, shown in section, which represent this trefoil form with
great exactness.
[309] Josephus, ‘Bell. Jud.,’ v. v. 4, Middoth, iv. 6. I have written a
work I hope one day to publish, ‘On the temples of the Jews,’ in which
all these dimensions will be drawn to scale.
[310] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ Sept. 1848, p. 267.
[311] Cunningham in the ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’
Sept. 1848, p. 269.
[312] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ Sept. 1848, p. 273.
[313] Cunningham, loc. cit., p. 263; Vigne, ‘Travels in Kashmir,’ vol.
i. p. 384.
[314] It is not a little singular, however, that the only temple I know
of in India that resembles this one, either in plan or arrangement, is
the smaller temple of Conjeveram in the Chola country, near Madras; and
it is curious that both the ‘Raja Tarangini,’ the Kashmiri history, and
that of the Chola country, mention that Ranaditya of Kashmir married a
daughter of the Chola king, and assisted in forming an aqueduct from
the Cauvery--showing at least an intimacy which may have arisen from
that affinity of race and religion, which, overleaping the intruded
Aryans, united the two extremities of India in one common bond. True,
the style of the two temples is different; but when I saw the one I did
not know of the existence of the other, and did not, as I now should,
examine the details with that care which alone would enable any one to
pronounce definitely regarding their affinities.
[315] Troyer’s ‘Translation,’ lib. iii., v. 462.
[316] Troyer’s ‘Translation,’ lib. iv., v. 126-371.
[317] ‘Asiatic Researches,’ vol. xv. p. 49.
[318] ‘Tree and Serpent Worship,’ p. 47.
[319] ‘Asiatic Researches,’ vol. xv. p. 61. Troyer’s ‘Translation,’
lib. v., c. 128.
[320] Plans of these temples with details are given by Cunningham,
plates 17 and 18, and by Lieut. Cole with photographs, plates 20 to
27, and 2 to 5 for details. Mr. Cowie also adds considerably to our
information on the subject. The dimensions quoted in the text are from
Lieut. Cole, and are in excess of those given by General Cunningham.
[321] Lieut. Cole, ‘Illustrations of Ancient Buildings in Kashmir,’ p.
23, plates 37 and 38.
[322] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ 1866, p. 101, _et
seqq._
[323] ‘Illustrations of Ancient Buildings in Kashmir,’ p. 11, plates 6
to 11.
[324] Cunningham, ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ Sept.
1848, p. 256.
[325] ‘Raja Tarangini,’ vol. i. verse 170.
[326] ‘Vie et Voyages,’ vol. i. p. 96.
[327] Nepal is fortunate in having possessed in Mr. Brian H. Hodgson
one of the most acute observers that ever graced the Bengal Civil
Service. At the time, however, when he was Resident in the valley, none
of the questions mooted in this work can be said to have been started;
and he was mainly engrossed in exploring and communicating to others
the unsuspected wealth of Buddhist learning which he found in Nepal,
and the services he rendered to this cause are incalculably great. Nor
did he neglect the architecture. I have before me a short manuscript
essay on the subject, only four sheets foolscap, with about one hundred
illustrations, which, if fully worked out, would be nearly all that is
required. Unfortunately there are neither dates nor dimensions, and the
essay is so short, and the drawings, made by natives, so incomplete,
that it does not supply what is wanted; but, if worked out on the spot
and supplemented by photographs, it might be all that is required.
[328] A curious mistake occurs in Buchanan Hamilton’s ‘Account of the
Kingdom of Nepal.’ At page 57 he says: “Gautama, according to the best
authorities, lived in the sixth century B.C., and Sakya
in the first century A.D. The doctrines of Sakya Singha
differ most essentially from those of Gautama.” In the writings of any
other man this would be put down as a stupid mistake, but he was so
careful an observer that it is evident that his informers confounded
the founder of the Saka era--whether he was Kanishka or not--with the
founder of the religion, though they seem to be perfectly aware of
the novelty of the doctrines introduced by Nagárjuna and the fourth
convocation. He adds, page 190, that Buddhism was introduced into Nepal
A.D. 33, which is probably, however, fifty years too early--if, at
least, it was consequent on the fourth convocation.
[329] Buchanan Hamilton, ‘Account of the Kingdom of Nepal,’ p. 12.
[330] Ibid., p. 49.
[331] Buchanan Hamilton, ‘Account of the Kingdom of Nepal,’ p. 190.
[332] Ibid., p. 22.
[333] Ibid., pp. 35 and 211.
[334] A view of this temple from the frontispiece of Buchanan
Hamilton’s volume.
[335] ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. v. (N.S.) p. 18.
[336] ‘Nepaul,’ p. 187.
[337] Buchanan Hamilton, ‘Account of the Kingdom of Nepal,’ pp. 29, 42,
51, &c.
[338] The following particulars are taken from a paper by Major Austen
in the ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. xliii. part i.,
1874.
[339] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. xxiv. p. 1. _et
seqq._
[340] Ibid., vol. xx. p. 291, _et seqq._
[341] Capt. Turner, it is true, who was sent to Teeshoo Lomboo by
Warren Hastings, has published with his interesting narrative a number
of very faithful views of what he saw, but they are not selected from
that class of monuments which is the subject of our present inquiry.
[342] ‘Voyage dans le Thibet,’ vol. ii. p. 289. The monastery referred
to is that of Séra, in the neighbourhood of Lassa, the capital.
[343] It is found currently employed in the decorative sculpture of the
Gandhara monasteries, but never as a constructive feature.
[344] Cunningham, ‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. v. p. 178, _et seqq._,
from which the following particulars are abstracted.
[345] I hope no one will mistake the elevation, pl. 44, vol. v. of
Cunningham’s ‘Archæological Reports’ for a representation of this
temple. It does not in the least resemble it.
[346] Cunningham, ‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. v. p. 183.
[347] ‘Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian Languages,’ London, second
edition, 1875, p. 42.
[348] ‘Grammar,’ p. 44.
[349] The best account of the Pandyan kingdom--the Regio Pandionis of
the classical authors--is Wilson’s historical sketch in the ‘Journal of
the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. iii. p. 199, _et seqq._ 1736.
[350] Besides the account of this state given by Professor Wilson, in
vol. iii. of the ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ there are many
scattered notices found in Taylor’s ‘Analysis of the Mackenzie MSS.,’
and elsewhere.
[351] ‘Asiatic Researches,’ vol. xv. p. 40.
[352] ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. viii. p. 5.
[353] Ibid.
[354] Ibid., vol. iv. p. 10.
[355] The particulars are abstracted from Sir Walter Elliot’s paper in
the fourth, and Mr. Dowson’s paper on the Cheras in the eighth, volume
of the ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society.’
[356] The documents collected by Colonel Mackenzie are full of the
disputes which ended in the persecution, and these extended apparently
from the 5th to the 7th century.
[357] See Dr. Babington, Plate 4, vol. ii. of ‘Transactions of the
Royal Asiatic Society,’ for the sculpture at Maha Balipuram.
[358] ‘Asiatic Researches,’ vol. ix. p. 270, and vol. xvii. p. 285.
[359] Burgess, ‘Report on Belgam and Kaladgi,’ 1875, plates 39, 40.
[360] Most of these were copied by Dr. Babington, and published with
the papers above referred to, but others are given in the volume on the
Mackenzie collection in the India Office.
[361] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. vii. plate 13.
[362] Sir Walter Elliot in Lieut. Carr’s compilation, p. 127.
[363] Ibid.
[364] Among the recently discovered ruins at Bharhut is a bas-relief
representing a building so exactly like the long rath here, that there
can be no doubt that such buildings were used in the north of India two
centuries at least before Christ, but to what purpose they were applied
is not so clear. The one at Bharhut seems to have contained the thrones
or altars of the four last Buddhas.
[365] Among the sculptures of the Gandhara monasteries are several
representing façades of buildings. They may be cells or chaitya halls,
but, at all events, they are almost exact reproductions of the façade
of this rath. Being used as frameworks for sculpture, the northern
examples are, of course, conventionalised; but it is impossible to
mistake the identity of intention. They may probably be of about the
same age.
[366] Burgess, ‘Report on Belgam,’ &c., p. 24.
[367] ‘Tree and Serpent Worship,’ p. 73.
[368] If it were possible to rouse the Madras Government to take any
interest in such matters, it might be hoped they would replace the head
of the great Naga on his body before it is destroyed by being made a
cockshy for idle Britishers.
[369] In Daniell’s plates, No. 16, the upper part of this is shown.
Being cut in the rock no addition or alteration could afterwards have
been intended.
[370] ‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. ix. p.
314, _et seqq._
[371] ‘Report on Belgam and Kaladji,’ 1874, p. 31, _et seqq._
[372] There are four photographs of this temple in the ‘Architectural
Antiquities of Dharwar and Mysore,’ plates 54-57. One of these is
repeated in Mr. Burgess’s book, plate 38.
[373] Several photographs of it will be found in Capt. Lyon’s
collection.
[374] Capt. Lyon was employed by Government for this purpose, and made
276 photographs of these temples. Fourteen sets were furnished to
Government, but, owing to difficulties which occurred in bringing them
out, they can hardly be said to be published--in this country at least.
[375] As the plan is only an eye-sketch, and the dimensions obtained by
pacing, it must not be too much relied on. It is sufficient to explain
the text, and that is all that is at present required.
[376] Inscription on gateway.
[377] The dimensions of this image are 16 ft. from muzzle to rump, by
above 7 ft. across, 12 ft. 2 in. to top of head, 10 ft. 4 in. to top
of hump, and 7 ft. 5 in. to top of back. It is composed of a single
block of stone, I believe granite, but it has been so frequently and so
thoroughly coated with oil, which is daily applied to it, that it looks
like bronze. I tried to remove a portion of this epidermis in order to
ascertain what was beneath, but was not successful. No other kind of
stone, however, is used in any other part of the temple.
[378] Though so very important in Dravidian history, we have not even
now a correct list of the Chola kings from the year 1000 downwards.
There certainly is not one among the Mackenzie MSS. The late Mr.
Ellis, it is said, had one, but he determined not to publish anything
before he was forty years of age, and before that time he swallowed a
bottleful of laudanum by mistake, and was found dead in his bed one
morning. His papers served his successor’s cook to light fires for some
years afterwards.
[379] Except this dimension, which is from a survey, and those of the
gopuras, the dimensions above quoted must be taken _cum grano_. They
were obtained only by pacing and eye-sketching.
[380] A drawing of it was published in my ‘Picturesque Illustrations of
Indian Architecture.’ It has since been frequently photographed.
[381] ‘Picturesque Illustrations of Ancient Architecture in Hindustan,’
p. 60.
[382] ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. viii. p. 7.
[383] ‘Madras Journal,’ No. 20, p. 15.
[384] Its dimensions, as nearly as can be ascertained from my paces,
and Admiral Paris’ plans, are 340 ft. by 180 ft.
[385] The plan of this temple (Woodcut No. 200) is taken from one in
the ‘Journal of the Geographical Society of Bombay,’ vol. vii., and may
be depended upon in so far as dimensions and general arrangements are
concerned. The officers who made it were surveyors, but, unfortunately,
not architects, and photographs since made reveal certain discrepancies
of detail which prove it to require revision by some one on the spot.
[386] There is a view of it in the Atlas of plates that accompanies
Lord Valentia’s travels; not very correct, but conveying a fair idea of
its proportions.
[387] ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. iii. p. 202.
[388] ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. iii. p. 230, _et
seqq._
[389] Fortunately this choultrie is also one of the best known of
Indian buildings. It was drawn by Daniell in the end of the last
century, and his drawings have been repeated by Langles and others. It
was described by Mr. Blackadder in the ‘Archæologia,’ vol. x. p. 457;
and by Wilson, ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. iii. p.
232. Volumes of native drawings exist in some collections containing
representations of every pillar. A model in bronze of a porch exists at
South Kensington Museum, and it has been abundantly photographed.
[390] In the description of Tripe’s photograph this dimension is given
as 117 ft.
[391] Most of these particulars, with those that follow regarding the
temples, are taken from Capt. Lyon’s description of his photographs of
the places. He devotes twenty-six photos. to this temple alone.
[392] The view in this temple in my ‘Picturesque Illustrations of
Indian Architecture,’ No. 21, is taken from the corner of this tank.
[393] There is a native plan of this temple in the India Museum, which
makes it very much more extensive than my inspection of the part I was
allowed access to would have led me to suppose. I do not know, however,
how far the plan can be depended upon.
[394] It is supposed, erroneously, I believe (‘Journal of the Royal
Asiatic Society,’ (N.S.) vol. vi. p. 265), to be the Kanchipuram
visited by Hiouen Thsang in 640. Nagapatam was more probably the place
he indicated.
[395] I was too unwell when I visited Conjeveram to make so careful a
survey of its temples as I would have wished to have done.
[396] I have never been able to ascertain even approximately its
dimensions. Hundreds visit it, many have photographed, some written
descriptions, but to measure dimensions and make even a sketch plan
seems beyond the educational capacity of our countrymen.
[397] When I was in Madras, and indeed up to the present year, the
temple on the hill of Tripetty or Tirupetty was reputed to be the
richest, the most magnificent, as it was certainly the most sacred
of all those in the Presidency. So sacred, indeed, was it, that no
unbelieving foreigner had ever been allowed to climb the holy hill
(2500 ft. high) or profane its sacred precincts. In 1870, a party of
police forced their way in, in pursuit of a murderer who had taken
refuge there, and a Mr. Gribble, who accompanied them, published this
year (1875) an account of what they saw in the ‘Calcutta Review.’ As he
exclaims, “Another of the illusions of my youth destroyed.” The temple
is neither remarkable for its size nor its magnificence. In these
respects it is inferior to Conjeveram, Seringham, and many others; and
whatever may be done with its immense revenues, they certainly are not
applied to its adornment. It is a fair specimen of a Dravidian temple
of the second class, but in a sad state of dilapidation and disrepair.
[398] What I know on this subject I have already said in my work on
‘Rude Stone Monuments,’ p. 455, _et seqq._
[399] Some money was, I believe, expended during Lord Napier’s
administration on the repairs of this court and its appurtenances, but
it was quite beyond the purview of an Anglo-Saxon to make a plan of the
place. It is, consequently, very difficult to describe it.
[400] Description attached to Tripe’s Photographs.
[401] Vol. i. (N.S.) p. 247, _et seqq._
[402] Professor Eggeling tells me he has great reason for suspecting
the date 411 for Palakesi I. (‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’
vol. iv. p. 8) to be a forgery. There is something certainly wrong
about it, but how the error arose is not yet clear. It seems at least a
century too early. See the ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol.
iv. p. 12; ibid., vol. iv. (N.S.) p. 93.
[403] ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. iv. p. 10, _et seqq._
[404] Prinsep’s ‘Useful Tables,’ re-edited by Thomas, pp. 267-268.
[405] If all the quadrants of this portico were equal the numbers ought
to be 300, or 75 in each, but I fancy a considerable portion of two
of them was cut off by the site of the temple. As I have nothing but
photographs to go by, and they only show the exterior, even this is
uncertain, and the dimensions I cannot even guess at. They are very
large, however, for a Hindu temple.
[406] These dates are taken from a list of this dynasty among the
Mackenzie MSS., quoted by Prinsep, ‘Useful Tables,’ xli., and are
confirmed by the architectural evidence and other indications.
[407] I regret that I have been unable to get a plan of this temple or,
indeed, of any triple temple. That at Girnar (Woodcut No. 127) belongs
to another religion, and is too far distant in locality to assist us
here. An imperfect one might be compiled from the photographs, but I
have not even an approximate dimension.
[408] In a very few years this building will be entirely destroyed by
the trees, which have fastened their roots in the joints of the stones.
In a drawing in the Mackenzie collection in the India Office, made in
the early part of this century, the building is shown entire. Twenty
years ago it was as shown at p. 398. A subsequent photograph shows it
almost hidden; a few years more, if some steps are not taken to save
it, it will have perished entirely. A very small sum would save it;
and, as the country is in our charge, it is hoped that the expenditure
will not be grudged.
[409] Plates 1 and 32-40. Published by Murray, 1864.
[410] In 1848 Gen. Cunningham applied the term Aryan to the
architecture of Kashmir, apparently on the strength of a pun (‘Journal
of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ September, 1848, p. 242). This,
however, was limiting a term that belongs to two continents to an
insignificant valley, in one of them. It was, besides, wholly uncalled
for. The term Kashmiri was amply sufficient, and all that was wanted
for so strictly local a style.
[411] ‘Historical Sketch of Tahsil Fyzabad,’ by P. Carnegy, Lucknow,
1870. Gen. Cunningham attempts to identify the various mounds
at this place with those described as existing in Saketu by the
Buddhist Pilgrims (‘Ancient Geography of India,’ p. 401, _et seqq._;
‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. i. p. 293, _et seqq._) The truth of the
matter, however, is, that neither Fa Hian nor Hiouen Thsang were ever
near the place. The city they visited, and where the Toothbrush-tree
grew, was the present city of Lucknow, which was the capital of the
kingdom in Sakya Muni’s time.
[412] ‘Sacred City of the Hindus,’ London, 1868, p. 271, _et seqq._;
‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. xxxiv. p. 1, _et seqq._
[413] Curiously enough they make their appearance on the stage about
the same time, and both then complete and perfect in all their details.
[414] ‘Hunter’s Orissa,’ vol. i. p. 233.
[415] I regret very much being obliged to send this chapter to press
before the receipt of the second volume of Babu Rajendra Lala Mittra’s
‘Antiquities of Orissa.’ He accompanied a Government expedition to
that province in 1868 as archæologist, and being a Brahman and an
excellent Sanscrit scholar, he has had opportunities of ascertaining
facts such as no one else ever had. Orissa was the first province
I visited in India for the purposes of antiquarian research, and
like every one else, I was then quite unfamiliar with the forms and
affinities of Hindu architecture. Photographs have enabled me to supply
to some extent the deficiency of my knowledge at that time; but unless
photographs are taken by a scientific man for scientific purposes,
they do not supply the place of local experience. I feel confident
that, on the spot, I could now ascertain the sequence of the temples
with perfect certainty; but whether the Babu has sufficient knowledge
for that purpose remains to be seen. His first volume is very learned,
and may be very interesting, but it adds little or nothing to what we
already knew of the history of Orissan architecture.
I have seen two plates of plans of temples intended for the second
volume. They are arranged without reference either to style or dates,
so they convey very little information, and the photographs prove them
to be so incorrect that no great dependence can be placed upon them.
The text, which I have not seen, may remedy all this, and I hope will,
but if he had made any great discoveries, such as the error in the date
of the Black Pagoda, they most probably would have been hinted at in
the first volume, or have leaked out in some of the Babu’s numerous
publications during the last seven or eight years.
Mr. Hunter, who was in constant communication with the Babu, adds
very little in his work on Orissa to what we learnt long ago from
Stirling’s, which up to this hour remains the classical work on the
province and its antiquities.
[416] These particulars are taken, of course, from Stirling, ‘Asiatic
Researches,’ vol. xv. pp. 263, 264. The whole evidence was embodied in
a paper on the Amravati tope, ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’
vol. iii. (N.S.), p. 149, _et seqq._
[417] Hunter’s ‘Orissa,’ vol. i. p. 238.
[418] This dimension is from Babu Rajendra’s ‘Orissan Antiquities,’
vol. i. p. 41, but I don’t like it.
[419] This and the dimensions in plan generally are taken from a
table in Babu Rajendra’s work, p. 41. I am afraid they are only round
numbers, and certainly incorrect, but they suffice for comparison.
[420] ‘Tree and Serpent Worship,’ plates 48-98.
[421] Hunter’s ‘Orissa,’ vol. i. p. 237.
[422] It is to be hoped that Babu Rajendra’s book may to some extent
remedy this deficiency. In the part, however, now published, he does
not promise that this will be the case.
[423] Cunningham’s ‘Reports,’ vol. ii. p. 416.
[424] ‘Asiatic Researches,’ vol. xv. p. 327.
[425] Myself included in the number! but, as explained above, I had no
knowledge of the style when I visited Orissa, and had no photographs to
illustrate the architecture of temples to which I was not then allowed
access.
[426] When I visited Orissa in 1837 and sketched this temple, a great
part of the tower was still standing. See ‘Picturesque Illustrations
of Indian Architecture,’ part iii. It has since fallen entirely,
but whether from stress of weather or by aid from the Public Works
Department is by no means clear.
[427] ‘Ayeen Akbery,’ Gladwin’s translation, vol. ii. p. 16.
[428] Hunter’s ‘Orissa,’ Appendix vii. p. 187, _et seqq._
[429] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. vii. p. 557.
[430] ‘Asiatic Researches,’ vol. xvi. p. 25.
[431] In his ‘Antiquities of Orissa’ (p. 151), Babu Rajendra sums up
exhaustively the argument for and against Vishnu being considered the
same as the Sun in the Vedas, and, on the whole, makes out a strong
case in favour of the identification. Even, however, if the case were
much less strong than it appears to be, it by no means follows that
what was only dimly shadowed forth in the Vedas may not have become an
accepted fact in the Puranas, and an established dogma in Orissa in the
9th century, when this temple was erected.
[432] ‘Asiatic Researches,’ vol. xv. p. 330.
[433] These discrepancies arise from the fact that the beams lie on the
floor buried under the ruins of the stone roof they once supported,
and it is extremely difficult to get at them so as to obtain correct
measurements.
[434] ‘Asiatic Researches,’ vol. xv. p. 316.
[435] Loc. cit., p. 265.
[436] Tournour’s abstract of the Dalawanso in the ‘Journal of the
Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. vi. p. 856, _et seqq._
[437] ‘Asiatic Researches,’ v. 1. xv. p. 320.
[438] ‘Asiatic Researches,’ vol. xv. p. 315.
[439] The plan is reduced from one to a scale of 40 feet to 1 in., made
by an intelligent native assistant to the Public Works Department,
named Radhica Pursâd Mukerji, and is the only plan I ever found done by
a native sufficiently correct to be used, except as a diagram, or after
serious doctoring.
[440] Hunter, ‘Orissa,’ vol. i. p. 128.
[441] News has just reached this country of a curious accident having
happened in this temple. Just after the gods had been removed from
their Sinhasan to take their annual excursion to the Gundicha Nûr, some
stones of the roof fell in, and would have killed any attendants and
smashed the gods had they not fortunately all been absent. Assuming
the interior of the Bara Dewul to be as represented (Woodcut No. 124),
it is not easy to see how this could have happened. But in the same
woodcut the porch or Jagamohan of the Kanaruc pagoda is represented
with a flat false roof, which has fallen, and now encumbers the floor
of the apartment. That roof, however, was formed of stone laid on iron
beams, and looked as if it could only have been shaken down by an
earthquake. I have little doubt that a similar false roof was formed
someway up the tower over the altar at Puri, but formed probably of
stone laid on wooden beams and either decay or the white ants having
destroyed the timber, the stones have fallen as narrated.
A similar roof so supported on wooden beams still exists in the
structural temple on the shore at Mahavellipore, and, I have no doubt,
elsewhere, but it is almost impossible to get access to these cells
when the gods are at home, and the places are so dark it is equally
impossible to see, except when in ruins, how they were roofed.
[442] ‘Asiatic Researches,’ vol. xv. p. 367.
[443] Ibid., p. 335; Hunter’s ‘Orissa,’ vol. i. p. 266.
[444] ‘Ayeen Akbery,’ Gladwin’s translation, vol. ii. p. 13.
[445] These dimensions, except those of Kanaruc, are taken from a table
in Babu Rajendra’s ‘Antiquities of Orissa,’ vol. i. p. 41, and are
sufficient to give an idea of the relative size of the building. So far
as I can make out they are taken from angle to angle of the towers, but
as they all have projections on their faces, when cubed, as is done
in the table referred to, they are much too small. I may also observe
that I know of no instance in which the two dimensions differ. The four
faces are always, I believe, alike. The dates are my own; none are
given, except for the great temple, in the Babu’s first volume.
[446] The two works on this subject are the ‘Architectural History of
Dharwar and Mysore,’ fol., 100 plates, Murray, 1866, and Burgess’s
‘Report on the Belgam and Kuladgi Districts,’ 1874. Considering the
time available and the means at his disposal, Mr. Burgess did wonders,
but it is no dispraise to say that he has not, nor could any man in his
place, exhaust so vast a subject.
[447] For architectural purposes the three places may be considered
as one. Aiwulli is five or six miles north of Badami, and Purudkul or
Pittadkul as far south. Ten miles covers the whole, which must have
been in the 6th or 7th century a place of great importance--possibly
Watipipura, the capital of the Chalukyas in the 5th or 6th century. See
‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. iv. p. 9.
[448] ‘Histoire de Hiouen Thsang,’ p. 255; ‘Vie et Voyages,’ vol. i. p.
280.
[449] ‘Report on the District of Belgam and Kuladgi.’ 1874.
[450] When I originally wrote on the subject I thought I had the 9th
and 10th centuries at my disposal. It now appears they must be blotted
out as non-existent for any historical or artistic purpose.
[451] This is the date given by Mr. Burgess in his description in ‘The
Caves at Elephanta,’ Bombay, 1871, p. 5.
[452] ‘Transactions of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. ii. pl. 4.
[453] Loc. cit., pl. 6.
[454] Burgess, ‘Report on Belgam,’ &c. pl. 31.
[455] Loc. cit., pls. 20, 23, 40.
[456] ‘Tree and Serpent Worship,’ pl. 76.
[457] Burgess, ‘Report on Belgam and Kuladji,’ pl. 31.
[458] A view of this was published in my ‘Picturesque Illustrations of
Indian Architecture,’ pl. 5.
[459] Tod’s ‘Annals of Rajastan,’ vol. ii. p. 734.
[460] ‘Picturesque Illustrations of Ancient Architecture in Hindostan,’
pl. 6, with description. Gen. Cunningham (‘Archæological Reports,’ vol.
ii. p. 264) agrees with me as to the date, but inadvertently adds a
scale to his plan which makes the building ten times larger than I made
it, or than it really is.
[461] Tod (loc. cit.) gives several plates of the details of the porch
by a native artist--fairly well drawn, but wanting shadow to render
them intelligible.
[462] Tod’s ‘Annals of Rajastan,’ vol. ii. p. 712.
[463] A view of this temple will be found in my ‘Picturesque
Illustrations of Indian Architecture,’ pl. 4.
[464] We are indebted to Gen. Cunningham for almost all we know about
this place, and it is from his ‘Reports’ and photographs that the
following account has been compiled.
[465] Cunningham, ‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. ii. p 420.
[466] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. ix. p. 548.
The date is given from four different epochs, so that there can be no
mistake about it.
[467] A portion of the casts are in the South Kensington Museum.
Transcripts from the drawings were published in the ‘Indian Antiquary,’
vol. iii. p. 316.
[468] ‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. ix. p.
219.
[469] Ibid., vol. ix. p. 221.
[470] Both these temples are illustrated to a considerable extent in
Lieut. H. H. Cole’s illustrations of buildings near Muttra and Agra,
published by the India Office, 1873, to which the reader is referred
for further information.
[471] Buchanan Hamilton, ‘Eastern India,’ edited by Montgomery Martin,
1837, vol. ii. p. 628.
[472] Frontispiece to Buchanan Hamilton’s ‘Eastern India.’
[473] A view of this temple is given in my ‘Picturesque Illustrations
of Ancient Architecture in Hindostan,’ pl. 14.
[474] _Ante_, vol. i., Woodcut No. 241.
[475] A view of it is given in Tod’s ‘Rajastan,’ vol. i. p. 267. Some
parts have been misunderstood by the engraver, but on the whole it
represents the building fairly.
[476] A view of one of these is given in my ‘Illustrations of Ancient
Architecture in India,’ plate 15. Other illustrations will be found in
‘L’Inde des Rajahs,’ p. 187, _et seqq._
[477] Erskine’s ‘Memoirs of Baber,’ p. 384.
[478] These particulars are taken from Cunningham’s ‘Archæological
Reports,’ vol. ii. p. 346, _et seqq._, plates 87 and 88.
[479] How far anything of all this now exists is by no means clear. We
occupied the fort during the mutiny, and have retained it ever since.
The first thing done was to occupy the Barradurri as a mess-room: to
fit up portions of the palace for military occupation; then to build a
range of barracks, and clear away a lot of antiquarian rubbish to make
a parade ground. What all this means is only too easily understood.
M. Rousselet--no unfriendly critic--observes:--“Les Anglais sont
très-activement occupés à simplifier la besogne de l’archéologue, et
à faire disparaître ce précieux document de l’histoire de l’Inde;
déjà toutes les constructions à la gauche de la porte de l’est sont
livrées à la pioche et le même sort est réservé au reste” (‘L’Inde des
Rajahs,’ p. 362). And, again: “Mais, hélas! l’Ourwahaï lui aussi a
vécu. Quand j’y revins en Décembre, 1867, les arbres étaient coupés,
les statues volaient en éclats, sous les pics des travailleurs, et le
ravin se remplissait des talus d’une nouvelle route construite par les
Anglais--talus dans lesquels dorment les palais des Chandelas et des
Tomars, les idoles des Bouddhistes et des Jainas.”--Loc. cit. p. 366.
[480] A plan of it is given in Lieut. Cole’s ‘Report on the Buildings
near Agra’--correct as far as it goes, but not complete.
[481] Egypt showed little taste for architectural display till she fell
under the sway of the Memlook Sultans, and Saracenic architecture in
Persia practically commences with the Seljukians.
[482] ‘Architecture of Beejapore. Photographed from Drawings by Capt.
Hart and A. Cumming, C.E., and on the spot by Col. Biggs and Major
Loch, with text by Col. Meadows Taylor and J. Fergusson.’ Folio,
Murray, 1866.
[483] ‘Architecture of Ahmedabad. 120 Photographs by Col. Biggs, with
Text by T. C. Hope, B.C.S., and Jas. Fergusson.’ Small folio, Murray,
1866.
[484] Brigg’s translation, vol. i. p. 61.
[485] It is very much to be regretted that not a single officer
accompanied our armies, when they passed and repassed through Ghazni,
able or willing to appreciate the interest of these ruins; and it is to
be hoped, if an opportunity should again occur, that their importance
to the history of art in the East will not be overlooked.
[486] The sketch of the tomb published by Mr. Vigne in his ‘Travels in
Afghanistan,’ gives too confined a portion of it to enable us to judge
either of its form or detail. The gate in front is probably modern, and
the foiled arches in the background appear to be the only parts that
belong to the 11th century.
[487] The tradition that these gates were of sandal-wood, and brought
from Somnath, is entirely disproved by the fact of their being of the
local pine-wood, as well as by the style of decoration, which has no
resemblance to Hindu work.
[488] An excellent representation of the gates will be found in the
second edition of ‘Marco Polo’s Travels,’ by Col. Yule, vol. ii. p. 390.
[489] See translation of the inscription on these minars, ‘Journal of
the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ No. 134, for 1843.
[490] Two are represented by Dubois de Montpéreux, ‘Voyage autour du
Caucase.’
[491] _Vide ante_, vol. ii. p. 444, _et seqq._
[492] _Vide ante_, vol. i. p. 387, _et seqq._
[493] I do not know why Gen. Cunningham should go out of his
way to prove that the Ajmir mosque is larger than that at Delhi
(‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. ii. p. 260). His remarks apply only
to the inner court at Delhi, which may have been the whole mosque as
originally designed; but before the death of Altumsh, who was the real
builder of both, the screen of arches at Delhi had been extended to 380
ft. as compared with the 200 ft. at Ajmir, and the courtyards of the
two mosques are nearly in the same proportion, their whole superficial
area being 72,000 ft. at Ajmir, as compared with 152,000 ft. at Delhi.
[494] Gen. Cunningham found an inscription on the wall recording that
twenty-seven temples of the Hindus had been pulled down to provide
materials for this mosque (‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. i. p. 176).
This, however, proves little, unless we know what the temples were like
which were destroyed for this purpose. Twenty-seven temples like those
at Khajurâho, excepting the Ganthai, would not provide pillars for one
half the inner court. One temple like that at Sadri would supply a
sufficiency for the whole mosque, and though the latter is more modern,
we have no reason for supposing that similar temples may not have
existed before Mahomedan times.
[495] This mode of construction is only feasible when much larger
stones are used than were here employed. The consequence was that
the arch had become seriously crippled when I saw and sketched it.
It has since been carefully restored by Government under efficient
superintendence, and is now as sound and complete as when first
erected. The two great side arches either were never completed, or have
fallen down in consequence of the false mode of construction.
[496] ‘Asiatic Researches,’ vol. iv. p. 313. Its present height,
according to Gen. Cunningham, is (after the removal of the modern
pavilion) 238 ft. 1 in. (‘Archæological Reports,’ vol i. p. 196).
[497] Translated by Walter Ewer, ‘Asiatic Researches,’ vol. xiv. p.
480. See also Cunningham, ‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. i. p. 132, _et
seqq._
[498] It is a curious illustration how difficult it sometimes is
to obtain correct information in India, that when Gen. Cunningham
published his ‘Reports’ in 1871, he stated, apparently on the authority
of Mr. Cooper, Deputy Commissioner, that an excavation had been carried
down to a depth of 26 ft., but without reaching the bottom. “The man
in charge, however”--_témoin oculaire_--“assured him that the actual
depth reached was 35 ft.”--Vol. i. p. 169. He consequently estimated
the whole length at 60 ft., but fortunately ordered a new excavation,
determined to reach the bottom--_coûte qui coûte_--and found it at
20 inches below the surface.--Vol. iv. p. 28, pl. 5. At a distance
of a few inches below the surface it expands in a bulbous form to a
diameter of 2 ft. 4 in., and rests on a gridiron of iron bars, which
are fastened with lead into the stone pavement.
[499] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. vii. p. 629.
[500] ‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. x. p.
64. These two translations are painfully discrepant in detail, though
agreeing sufficiently as to the main facts. On the whole, I am inclined
to think Bhau Daji’s the most correct, though I agree with Prinsep in
believing that the more archaic form of the letters is owing to their
being punched with a cold chisel on the iron, instead of being engraved
as those on stone always were.
[501] There is no mistake about the pillar being of pure iron. Gen.
Cunningham had a bit of it analysed in India by Dr. Murray, and another
portion was analysed in the School of Mines here by Dr. Percy. Both
found it pure malleable iron without any alloy.
[502] Can these Balhikas be the dynasty we have hitherto known as the
Sah kings of Saurastra? They certainly were settled on the lower Indus
from about the year A.D. 79, and were expelled, according to their own
dates, A.D. 264 or 371. (See ‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic
Society,’ vol. viii. p. 28.) My impression is, that this may ultimately
prove to be the true solution of the riddle.
[503] The same form of pendentive is found at Serbistan (Woodcut No.
946, vol. ii.), nearly ten centuries before this time.
[504] Cunningham, ‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. ii. p. 261.
[505] I am sorry to differ from Gen. Cunningham on this matter. He has
seen the mosque--I have not; but I have photographs and drawings of it,
and directed Mr. Burgess’s attention especially to this point when he
visited it, and the result is a conviction on my mind that the pillars
now standing are unaltered in arrangement.
Tod, in his ‘Annals,’ treats it simply as a Jaina temple, without
referring to any possible alterations, except additions made by Moslem
architects, vol. i. p. 779, see also his plate, which is singularly
correct.
[506] Owing to the Hindu part being undisturbed, and the Mahomedan part
better built and with larger materials, the mosque is not in the same
ruinous condition as that at the Kutub was before the late repairs.
It is, however, in a filthy and neglected state, and might at a very
slight outlay be preserved from further dilapidation, and its beauties
very much enhanced. There is, so far as I can judge, no building in
India more worthy of the attention of Government than this. The kind
of care, however, that is bestowed upon it may be gathered from the
following extract from a private letter from a gentleman high in the
Government service in India, and one perfectly well informed as to
what he was writing about: “Have you ever heard that some of the Hindu
pillars of the great mosque at Ajmir were dragged from their places (I
presume they were fallen pillars), and set up as a triumphal arch on
the occasion of Lord Mayo’s visit? and have you heard that they were so
insecurely converted that nobody dared to go under them, and that Lord
Mayo and the inspired---- of architects went round it?” This is more
than confirmed in a public letter by Sir John Strachey, Lieut.-Governor
of the North-West Provinces, addressed to Lord Northbrook, on 25th
August last. In this he speaks of “an over zealous district officer
who, not long ago, actually pulled down the sculptured columns of a
well-known temple of great antiquity”--the Arhai din ka Jhompra--“with
the object of decorating a temporary triumphal arch through which the
Viceroy was to pass.” He then proceeds to quote what Rousselet says
regarding our neglect of such monuments, which is not one whit too
severe.
[507] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. xxxiv. p. 1, _et
seqq._, pls. 1-8. It is to me inconceivable that any one looking at
these plates, especially the plans, pls. 7 and 8, can see anything in
them but the usual tomb of a Mahomedan noble of the 15th century with
its accompanying mosque.
[508] These dimensions are taken from the text and a plan of the
building in Montgomery Martin’s edition of Buchanan Hamilton’s
‘Statistical Account of Shahabad,’ vol. i. p. 425. The plan is,
however, so badly drawn that it can hardly be reproduced.
[509] The first to suggest this was the Baron Hügel, though his
knowledge of the subject was so slight that his opinion would not have
had much weight. The idea was, however, taken up afterwards and warmly
advocated by the late Mr. Horne, B.C.S., and the Rev. Mr. Sherring, in
a series of papers in the ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’
vol. xxxiv. p. 1, _et seqq._, and by the latter in his work on ‘The
sacred city of the Hindus,’ p. 283, and elsewhere. They have hitherto
failed to adduce a single example of similar pillars existing in any
authentic Buddhist or Jaina building--they mean Jaina, though they say
Buddhist--or any historical or other evidence that will bear a moment’s
examination. There may have been some Jaina or Hindu buildings at
Jaunpore of the 13th or 14th centuries that may have been utilised by
the Mahomedans, but certainly nine-tenths at least of the pillars in
these mosques were made at the time they were required for the places
they now occupy.
[510] A view of this mosque will be found in Kittoe’s ‘Indian
Architecture,’ but, unfortunately, no plan or dimensions. That quoted
in the text is from memory.
[511] A view of it, but not a good one, is given in Daniell’s plates.
It is partially seen in Woodcut No. 291.
[512] If the buildings of the Bakaraya Kund had been found within
twenty miles of Ahmedabad, where there are dozens exactly like them,
they would hardly have deserved a passing remark. Any one familiar
with the style would have assigned them a date--A.D. 1450,
or thereabouts--and would hardly have troubled himself to inquire who
built them, they are so like all others of the same age.
[513] General Cunningham’s ‘Reports’ for 1862-63, vol. i. p. 287. From
this I learn that the pillars surrounding the court on three sides have
been removed since I saw them in 1836--this time, however, not by the
English.
[514] See plate in Forbes’ ‘Oriental Memoirs,’ vol. iii. ch. xxx.
[515] As it is impossible by a woodcut to convey an impression of the
beauty of these mosques, the reader is referred to the photographs of
‘Architecture of Ahmedabad,’ &c.
[516] Described further on, p. 538, Woodcuts Nos. 306 and 307.
[517] I understand from Mr. Burgess that, during his recent visit
to Ahmedabad, he copied a number of inscriptions from the mosques
there which prove that some of the names given to the buildings are
erroneous. When these are published new names and dates must in some
instances be given to several of the buildings, but the alterations, as
I understand it, are not very important.
[518] All the particulars above quoted regarding that mosque are
derived from a work published in Bombay in 1868, entitled, ‘Surat,
Baroach, and other old Cities of Goojerat.’ By T. C. Hope, B.C.S.
Illustrated by photographs, plans, and with descriptive text.
[519] Plans of these are in Mr. Hope’s work.
[520] There is a very good view of the tomb in Mr. Grindlay’s ‘Views
of the East’; but the plan and details here given are from Mr. Hope’s
work, sup. cit.
[521] A view of this palace, but not from the best point of view, will
be found in Elliot’s ‘Views in the East.’
[522] In this respect it is something like the curvilinear pediments
which Roman and Italian architects employed as window heads. Though
detestable in themselves, yet we use and admire them because we are
accustomed to them.
[523] These particulars are taken principally from Buchanan Hamilton’s
‘Statistics of Dinajepore,’ published by Montgomery Martin in his
‘Eastern India,’ 1838, vol. ii. p. 649, _et seqq._
[524] Page 347, _et seqq._
[525] Initial coinage of Bengal, by Edward Thomas, B.C.S. 1866.
[526] In the woodcut, though not so clearly as in the photograph, will
be observed the long pendent root of the tree which has been planted by
some bird in the upper gallery. In another year or two it will reach
the ground, and then down comes the minar. Any one with a pocket-knife
might save it by five minutes’ work. But _Cui bono?_ says the Saxon.
[527] _Ante_, p. 393.
[528] Elphinstone’s ‘India,’ vol. ii. p. 57.
[529] For the plan and section of this mosque, and all indeed I know
about it, I am indebted to my friend the Hon. Sir Arthur Gordon, at
present governor of the Fiji Islands. He made the plans himself, and
most liberally placed them at my disposal.
[530] I have photographs, but no measurements, of this street.
[531] Brigg’s translation of Ferishta, vol. ii. p. 510.
[532] There is a view of it from a sketch by Col. Meadows Taylor, in
the ‘Oriental Annual’ for 1840.
[533] Bijapur has been singularly fortunate, not only in the
extent, but in the mode in which it has been illustrated. A set
of drawings--plans, elevations, and details--were made by a Mr.
A. Cumming, C.E., under the superintendence of Capt. Hart, Bombay
Engineers, which, for beauty of drawing and accuracy of detail, are
unsurpassed by any architectural drawings yet made in India. These
were reduced by photography, and published by me at the expense of
the Government in 1859, in a folio volume with seventy-four plates,
and afterwards in 1866 at the expense of the Committee for the
Publication of the Antiquities of Western India, illustrated further by
photographic views taken on the spot by Col. Biggs, R.A.
[534] _Ante_, vol. ii. p. 553.
[535] Adopting the numerical scale described in the introduction to the
‘True Principles of Beauty in Art,’ p. 140, I estimated the Parthenon
as possessing 4 parts of technic value, 4 of æsthetic, and 4 phonetic,
or 24 as its index number, being the highest known. The Taje I should
on the contrary estimate as possessing 4 technic, 5 æsthetic, and 2
phonetic, not that it has any direct phonetic mode of utterance, but
from the singular and pathetic distinctness with which every part of it
gives utterance to the sorrow and affection it was erected to express.
Its index number would consequently be 20, which is certainly as high
as it can be brought, and near enough to the Parthenon for comparison
at least.
[536] ‘Memoirs,’ translated by Erskine, p. 334.
[537] Loc. cit., pp. 341-2.
[538] Brigg’s translation, vol. ii. p. 71.
[539] Cunningham, ‘Reports,’ vol. i. p. 222.
[540] A description of this mosque is given in Mr. Carllyle’s ‘Report
on the Buildings of Delhi,’ forming part of Cunningham’s fourth
volume, but like everything else most unsatisfactory. Neither plan nor
dimensions are given, mere verbiage conveying no distinct meaning.
[541] As I cannot find any trace of this building in Keene’s
description of the fort in his third book on Agra, I presume it must
have been utilised since my day. Unless it is the building he calls
the Nobut Khana of Akbar’s palace (26). I have never seen it in any
photograph of the place.
[542] It is not quite clear how much Rhotasgur owes its magnificence
to Shere Shah, how much to Akbar; both certainly built there, and
on the spot it might easily be ascertained how much belongs to
each. Unfortunately, the part that belongs to the British is too
easily ascertained. “They converted the beautiful Dewan Khand,
of which Daniell published a drawing, into a stable for breeding
horses.”--Hamilton’s ‘Gazetteer,’ _sub voce_.
[543] I have mislaid the measurements and plan I made of this building;
and, as neither Gen. Cunningham nor his assistants give either plan or
dimensions, I am unable to quote any figures in the text.
[544] The plan is taken from one by Gen. Cunningham (‘Reports,’ vol.
ii., plate 91). He omits, however, these square projections. I have
added them from the photographs.
[545] An attempt has lately been made by Gen. Cunningham and his
assistants (‘Reports,’ vol. iv. p. 124), to ascribe this palace to
Jehangir. On what authority is not stated; but unless it is very clear
and distinct, I must decline to admit it. The whole evidence, so far as
I can judge, is directly opposed to such an hypothesis. There is a plan
of this palace, in his ‘Reports,’ vol. iv., plate 8.
[546] A cast of this throne is in the South Kensington Museum.
[547] Photographs of this palace are now common, and can be obtained
anywhere; and recently Lieut. Cole’s ‘Report on Buildings in the
Neighbourhood of Agra’ supplies some very interesting new ones with
plans, from which the dimensions in the text are quoted.
[548] No plan or section of this tomb has ever, so far as I know, been
published, though it has been in our possession for nearly a century.
Those here given are from my own measurements, and, though they may
be correct as far as they go, are not so detailed as those of such a
monument ought to be, and would have been, had it been in the hands of
any other European nation.
[549] The diagram is probably sufficient to explain the text, but must
not be taken as pretending to be a correct architectural drawing.
There were parts, such as the height of the lower dome and upper angle
kiosks, I had no means of measuring, and after all, I was merely making
memoranda for my own satisfaction.
[550] After the above was written, and the diagram drawn (Woodcut No.
334), I was not a little pleased to find the following entry in Mr.
Finch’s journal. He resided in Agra for some years, and visited the
tomb for the last time apparently in 1609, and after describing most
faithfully all its peculiarities up to the upper floor, as it now
stands, adds: “At my last sight thereof there was only overhead a rich
tent with a Semaine over the tomb. But it is to be _inarched_ over with
the most curious white and speckled marble, and to be seeled all within
with pure sheet gold richly inwrought.”--‘Purchas, his Pilgrims,’ vol.
i. p. 440.
[551] Although the fact seems hardly now to be doubted, no very
direct evidence has yet been adduced to prove that it was to
foreign--Florentine--artists that the Indians owe the art of inlaying
in precious stones generally known as work in “pietro duro.” Austin
or Augustin de Bordeaux, is the only European artist whose name can
positively be identified with any works of the class. He certainly was
employed by Shah Jehan at Delhi, and executed that mosaic of Orpheus
or Apollo playing to the beasts, after Raphael’s picture, which once
adorned the throne there, and is now in the Indian Museum at South
Kensington.
It is, however, hardly to be expected that natives should record the
names of those who surpassed them in their own arts; and needy Italian
adventurers were even less likely to have an opportunity of recording
the works they executed in a strange and foreign country. Had any
Italian who lived at the courts of Jehangir or Shah Jehan written a
book, he might have recorded the artistic prowess of his countrymen,
but none such, so far as I am aware, has yet seen light.
The internal evidence, however, seems complete. Up to the erection of
the gates to Akbar’s tomb at Secundra in the first ten years of
Jehangir’s reign, A.D. 1605-1615, we have infinite mosaics of coloured
marble, but no specimen of “inlay.” In Eti-mad-Doulah’s tomb, A.D.
1615-1628, we have both systems in great perfection. In the Taje and
palaces at Agra and Delhi, built by Shah Jehan, A.D. 1628-1668, the
mosaic has disappeared, being entirely supplanted by the “inlay.” It was
just before that time that the system of inlaying called “pietro duro”
was invented, and became the rage at Florence and, in fact, all
throughout Europe; and we know that during the reign of the two
last-named monarchs many Italian artists were in their service quite
capable of giving instruction in the new art.
[552] Something of the same sort occurred when the Turks occupied
Constantinople. They adapted the architecture of the Christians to
their own purposes, but without copying. _Vide ante_, vol. ii. p. 528,
_et seqq._
[553] The great bath was torn up by the Marquis of Hastings with the
intention of presenting it to George IV., an intention apparently never
carried out; but it is difficult to ascertain the facts now, as the
whole of the marble flooring with what remained of the bath was sold by
auction by Lord William Bentinck, and fetched probably 1 per cent. of
its original cost; but it helped to eke out the revenues of India in a
manner most congenial to the spirit of its governors.
[554] Since the appointment of Sir John Strachey, the present
enlightened Governor of the North West Provinces, I understand that
this state of affairs is entirely altered. Both care and money are
now expended liberally for the protection and maintenance of such old
buildings that remain in the province.
[555] Perfect plans of this palace exist in the War Department of
India. It is a great pity the Government cannot afford the very few
rupees it would require to lithograph and publish them. Without such
plans it is very difficult to make any description intelligible. That
in Keene’s ‘Handbook of Agra,’ though useful as far as it goes, is
on too small a scale and not sufficiently detailed for purposes of
architectural illustration.
[556] When we took possession of the palace every one seems to have
looted after the most independent fashion. Among others, a Captain
(afterwards Sir John) Jones tore up a great part of this platform, but
had the happy idea to get his loot set in marble as table tops. Two of
these he brought home and sold to the Government for £500, and they
are now in the India Museum. No one can doubt that the one with the
birds was executed by Florentine, or at least Italian artists; while
the other, which was apparently at the back of the platform, is a bad
copy from Raphael’s picture of Orpheus charming the beasts. As is well
known, that again was a copy of a picture in the Catacombs. There
Orpheus is playing on a lyre, in Raphael’s picture on a violin, and
that is the instrument represented in the Delhi mosaic. Even if other
evidence were wanting, this would be sufficient to set the question at
rest. It certainly was not put there by the bigot Aurungzebe, nor by
any of his successors.
[557] It ought in fairness to be added that, since they have been in
our possession, considerable sums have been expended on the repair of
these fragments.
[558] The excuse for this deliberate act of Vandalism was, of course,
the military one, that it was necessary to place the garrison of Delhi
in security in the event of any sudden emergency. Had it been correct
it would have been a valid one, but this is not the case. Without
touching a single building of Shah Jehan’s there was ample space within
the walls for all the stores and matériel of the garrison of Delhi,
and in the palace and Selim Ghur ample space for a garrison, more than
doubly ample to man their walls in the event of an émeute. There was
ample space for larger and better ventilated barracks just outside
the palace walls, where the Sepoy lines now are, for the rest of the
garrison, who could easily have gained the shelter of the palace walls
in the event of any sudden rising of the citizens. It is, however,
ridiculous to fancy that the diminished and unarmed population of the
city could ever dream of such an attempt, while any foreign enemy with
artillery strong enough to force the bastioned enceinte that surrounds
the town would in a very few hours knock the palace walls about the
ears of any garrison that might be caught in such a trap.
The truth of the matter appears to be this: the engineers perceived
that by gutting the palace they could provide at no trouble or expense
a wall round their barrack-yard, and one that no drunken soldier could
scale without detection, and for this or some such wretched motive of
economy the palace was sacrificed!
The only modern act to be compared with this is the destruction of the
summer palace at Pekin. That, however, was an act of red-handed war,
and may have been a political necessity. This was a deliberate act of
unnecessary Vandalism--most discreditable to all concerned in it.
[559] A plan of this garden, with the Taje and all the surrounding
buildings, will be found in the ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’
vol. vii. p. 42.
[560] From its design I cannot help fancying that this screen was
erected after Shah Jehan’s death. It certainly looks more modern.
[561] There are eight photographs of it in Capt. Lyon’s collection, and
many also by others.
[562] Page 478, _et seqq._
[563] If Lieut. Cole, instead of repeating plans and details of
buildings which had already been published by Gen. Cunningham, had
given us a plan and details of this unknown building, he might have
rendered a service all would have been grateful for. What I know of it
is principally derived from verbal communication with Col. Montgomerie,
R.E.
[564] ‘Embassy to Ava in 1795.’ London, 1800, 4to., 27 plates.
[565] ‘Journal of Embassy to Court of Ava,’ 1827. 4to., plates.
[566] ‘Mission to Court of Ava in 1855.’ 4to., numerous illustrations.
[567] If any of our 1001 idle young men who do not know what to do with
themselves or their money would only qualify themselves for, and carry
out such a mission, it is wonderful how easily and how pleasantly they
might add to our stores of knowledge. I am afraid it is not in the
nature of the Anglo-Saxon to think of such a thing. Fox-hunting and
pheasant-shooting are more congenial pursuits.
[568] ‘Mahawanso,’ p. 71.
[569] R. F. St. John, in the ‘Phœnix,’ vol. ii. p. 204, _et seqq._ Sir
Arthur Phayre, in ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol.
xlii. p. 23, _et seqq._
[570] Sir A. Phayre, loc. cit.
[571] Crawfurd’s ‘Embassy to Ava,’ vol. ii. p. 277.
[572] It has recently become the fashion to doubt the holding of this
convocation 100 years after the death of Buddha; but this very pointed
allusion to it, in the early Burmese annals, so completely confirms
what is said in the ‘Mahawanso,’ that the fact of its being held does
not appear to me doubtful.
[573] Yule, ‘Mission to Ava,’ p. 30.
[574] Loc. cit., p. 32.
[575] Yule’s ‘Marco Polo,’ vol. ii. p. 84, _et seqq._
[576] Yule, ‘Mission to Ava,’ p. 36. As almost all the particulars here
mentioned are taken from this work as the latest and best, it will not
be necessary to repeat references on every page.
[577] I of course except the arches in the tower at Buddh Gaya, which,
I believe, were introduced by these very Burmese in 1305. See _ante_,
p. 69.
[578] ‘Mission to Ava,’ p. 65.
[579] Literally “Golden great god.” Madu is the Burmese for Maha Deva.
[580] See p. 58.
[581] See account of the Great Bell at Rangûn, by the Rev. G. H. Hough,
‘Asiatic Researches,’ vol. xiv. p. 270.
[582] The above particulars are abstracted from a paper by Col. Sladen
in the ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. iv. (N.S.) p. 406,
with remarks by Col. Yule and others. It is curious that there is a
discrepancy between the native and the European authorities as to the
number of storeys--not mechanical, of course, but symbolical; whether,
in fact, the basement should be counted as a storey, or not. The above
I believe to be the correct enumeration. We shall presently meet with
the same difficulty in describing Boro Buddor in Java.
[583] ‘Mission to the Court of Ava,’ p. 169.
[584] A view of this ruin will be found in Yule’s ‘Mission to Ava,’
plate 23.
[585] Yule’s ‘Mission to Ava,’ p. 163.
[586] The Siamese invariably change the Indian _d_ into _th_.
[587] For the particulars of this desiccation of the Valley of the
Ganges, see the ‘Journal of the Geological Society,’ April, 1863.
[588] This form is interesting to us as it is that adopted for the
Albert Memorial in Hyde Park, the style of decoration of which is also
much more like that employed in Siam than anything yet attempted out of
doors in Europe.
[589] “As for the Indian kings none of them ever led an army out of
India to attempt the conquest of any other country, lest they should be
deemed guilty of injustice.”--Arrian, ‘Indica,’ ch. ix.
[590] ‘Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschappen.’ They
have done me the honour of electing me an honorary member of their
Society--an honour I feel all the more as it was quite unsolicited and
unexpected.
[591] There are twelve plates illustrating the same monument in Sir
Stamford Raffles’ ‘History of Java.’
[592] Sir S. Raffles’ ‘History of Java,’ pl. 24; text, vol. i. p. 465,
8vo. edition.
[593] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. xvii. pp. 86, 87.
[594] Bastian, ‘Die Völker der Oestlichen Asien,’ vol. i. p. 393.
[595] Sir S. Raffles, vol. ii. p. 73.
[596] ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society’ (N.S.), vol. iii. p. 153.
[597] There is little doubt that if the South Sea Islanders had at some
distant epoch become civilized without European assistance, Captain
Cook and the early explorers would have figured in their annals as
English or French princes.
[598] Sir S. Raffles’ ‘History of Java,’ vol. ii., 8vo. edition, p. 87,
_et seqq._
[599] I am perfectly aware that this is not borne out by the
translation of this inscription given by Dr. Friederich in vol. xxvi.
of the ‘Verhandelingen;’ but being dissatisfied with its unmeaningness,
I took it to my friend, Professor Eggeling, who is perhaps a better
Sanscrit scholar than Friederich, and he fully confirms my view as
above expressed.
[600] Yule’s ‘Marco Polo,’ vol. ii. p. 264, _et seqq._
[601] Beal’s translation, p. 169.
[602] Raffles, vol. ii. p. 77, _et seqq._
[603] About half of the photographs of the Batavian Society are filled
with representations of these rude deities, which resemble more the
images of Easter Island than anything Indian.
[604] Raffles, ‘History of Java,’ vol. ii. p. 93.
[605] The compilers of the catalogue of the photographs of the Batavian
Society use 53 instead of 78 or 79 as the factor for converting Saka
dates into those of the Christian Era. As, however, they give no reason
for this, and Brumund, Leemans and all the best modern authors use the
Indian index, it is here adhered to throughout.
[606] These latter dates are taken from Raffles and Crawfurd, but as
they are perfectly well ascertained, no reference seems needful.
[607] ‘History of Java,’ vol. ii. p. 85.
[608] ‘Dictionary of Indian Archipelago,’ p. 66.
[609] ‘Boro Boudour,’ par Dr. C. Leemans. Leyden, 1874, p. 536. I quote
from the French translation, having lent my original Dutch copy to Dr.
Mayo of New College, Oxford. It was inadvertently packed among his
baggage when he went to Fiji.
[610] _Ante_, p. 641. Also ‘Verhandelingen,’ &c., vol. xxvi. p. 31, _et
seqq._ One of his inscriptions--the fourth--was found in Java proper.
[611] All these, or nearly all, have been identified by Dr. Leemans in
the text that accompanies the plates.
[612] If Brian Hodgson would attempt it, he perhaps alone could
explain all this vast and bewildering mythology. At present our means
of identification is almost wholly confined to his representation in
the second volume of the ‘Transactions’ of the Royal Asiatic Society,
plates 1-4, and to the very inferior work of Schlagintweit, ‘Buddhismus
in Thibet.’
[613] ‘Indische Alterthumskunde,’ vol. iv. p. 467.
[614] General Cunningham’s drawings, though nearly sufficient for
anyone as familiar with all the styles as I have become, are not enough
for anyone who is a stranger to the subject. I do not, indeed, know any
Englishman who has the knowledge, combined with the powers of drawing,
to be entrusted with this task. A Frenchman might be found who could do
it, if he would be content to restrain his imagination.
[615] Col. Yule, from whose account most of these particulars are taken
(‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ 1862), calls it “nearly
naked;” but a drawing by Wilsen (‘Verhandelingen,’ vol. xix. p. 166) I
think settles the question, that he is intended to be represented as
clothed.
[616] An imperfect representation of this sculpture will be found in
the ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. vi. plate 53.
[617] Sir S. Raffles’ ‘History of Java,’ vol. ii. plate 32.
[618] The information here given is taken from Sir Stamford Raffles’
‘History of Java,’ second edition, vol. ii. p. 17, _et seqq._ His
plans, however, do not quite agree with the measurements in the
text, a mistake arising, I believe, from the scales in the original
drawings--now before me--being in Rheinland roods, which are not always
converted into English feet.
[619] ‘History of Java,’ vol. ii. p. 85. Crawfurd makes it 1266 to
1296; but no confidence can be placed on his dates for buildings.
[620] ‘Boro Boeddoer,’ p. 433.
[621] ‘Verhandelingen,’ &c., vol. xxxiii. p. 222.
[622] ‘Boro Boeddoer,’ p. 439. ‘Verhandelingen,’ vol. xxxiii. p. 222.
[623] ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. xiii. p. 166.
[624] ‘Boro Boeddoer,’ pp. 433-439.
[625] This is by no means so certain; but till some one capable of
observing visits the place, we must assume it.
[626] Not however, of the more modern class of temples, inasmuch as
when John Crawfurd visited Ava in 1826, he describes (p. 162, 2nd ed.)
his visit to a temple just finished by the reigning monarch, which was
adorned with a series of paintings on plaster representing scenes from
the life of Buddha. Each of these had a legend in the modern Burmese
character written over it; and it is curious to observe how nearly
identical the descriptions are with those which might be written over
any Buddhist series. All the scenes there depicted are not perhaps to
be found at Bharhut or Sanchi, but all are at Amravati, and in the
Gandhara monasteries, or are to be found among the sculptures at Boro
Buddor.
[627] ‘Boro Boeddoer,’ p. 433.
[628] Col. Yule’s visit to Java, ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of
Bengal,’ 1861-1862, p. 3.
[629] Sir S. Raffles’ ‘History of Java,’ plates 31 and 61, vol. ii. p.
49, _et seqq._
[630] Crawfurd, ‘Dict. Indian Archipelago,’ _sub voce_.
[631] Both Sir S. Raffles and Crawfurd seem to be mistaken in ascribing
them to the Saivites; they seem to have been misled by the appearance
of a Phallus, but there is no lingam.
[632] In the first three volumes of the photographs published by the
Batavian Society are numerous examples of rude sculptures, which are
indistinguishable from those of Easter Island. Crawfurd and other
ethnologists do not seem to feel the least difficulty in extending
the Malay race from Easter Island to Madagascar; and if this is so,
it diminishes the improbabilities of another nearly allied family,
extending through the Pacific Islands from Java to the American
continent.
[633] ‘Travels in Indo-China, Cambodia, and Laos,’ by Henri Mouhot. 2
vols. 8vo. Murray, 1864.
[634] ‘Die Völker der Oestlichen Asien,’ von Dr. A. Bastian. Leipzig,
1866.
[635] ‘Voyage d’Exploration en Indo-Chine,’ 2 vols. quarto and folio,
Atlas of plates. Paris, 1873.
[636] Few things are more humiliating to an Englishman than to compare
the intelligent interest and liberality the French display in these
researches, contrasted with the stolid indifference and parsimony of
the English in like matters. Had we exercised a tithe of the energy and
intelligence in the investigation of Indian antiquities or history,
during the 100 years we have possessed the country, that the French
displayed in Egypt during their short occupation of the valley of the
Nile, or now in Cambodia, which they do not possess at all, we should
long ago have known all that can be known regarding that country.
Something, it is true, has been done of late years to make up for past
neglect. General Cunningham’s appointment to the post of Archæological
Surveyor of India, and that of Mr. Burgess to a similar office in
the Bombay Presidency, are steps in the right direction, which, if
persevered in, may lead to most satisfactory results. Many years must,
however, elapse before the good work can be brought up to the position
in which it ought to have been long ago, and meanwhile much that was
most important for the purpose has perished, and no record of it now
remains.
[637] The work is translated _in extenso_ in Abel Rémusat’s ‘Nouveaux
Mélanges Asiatiques,’ vol. i. p. 78, _et seqq._
[638] Bastian, _loc cit._, vol. i. p. 393.
[639] Bastian, vol. i. p. 429.
[640] Nakhon is only the Siamese pronunciation of the Indian Nagara,
Nuggur. Thom means “great.”
[641] The French have navigated the lake in a large steamer, and
published detailed charts of the river. Maps are also found in Mouhot’s
‘Travels;’ but the best are those which are found in the Atlas of
Lieut. Garnier’s work above referred to.
[642] Bastian, vol. i. p. 402.
[643] Mr. Thomson was informed that during the rains the whole was
flooded, and the temple could be reached in boats.
[644] Outside the temple the sides of the causeways are in places
ornamented with dwarf columns of circular form. They seem to simulate a
bundle of eight reeds, and have tall capitals.
[645] Garnier, loc. cit., vol. i. p. 120. Bastian, vol. i. pp. 400,
415, 438, &c.
[646] In the extracts from the ‘Chinese Annals,’ translated by Abel
Rémusat, in the first volume of the ‘Nouveaux Mélanges Asiatiques,’ he
finds the earliest mention of the Cambodian kingdom in A.D. 616. From
that period the accounts are tolerably consecutive to A.D. 1295, but
before that nothing.
[647] ‘Nouveaux Mélanges Asiatiques,’ vol. i. p. 103.
[648] Bastian, vol. i. p. 404.
[649] Garnier, ‘Voyage,’ &c., vol. i. p. 74.
[650] ‘L’Art Khmer,’ p. 38.
[651] It would be interesting if among these we could identify that one
of which the Chinese traveller gives the following description:--“A
l’est de la ville est un autre temple de l’esprit nommé _Pho-to-li_,
auquel on sacrifie des hommes. Chaque année le roi va dans ce temple
faire lui-même un sacrifice humain pendant la nuit.”--‘Nouveaux
Mélanges Asiatiques,’ vol. i. p. 83.
[652] At Buribun, on the other side of the lake, Dr. Bastian informs
me there is a complete copy of the Nakhon Wat sculptures, carved in
wood in the 16th century. The place was the residence of the kings of
Cambodia after the fall of the capital, and as original art had then
perished, they took this mode of adorning their palace. What a prize
for any European museum!
[653] ‘Nouveaux Mélanges Asiatiques,’ vol. i. p. 103. Garnier, woodcuts
pp. 61 and 62.
[654] ‘Journal of the Royal Geographical Society,’ vol. xxxv. p. 75.
[655] The population of China is generally estimated at 400 millions of
souls. This I believe to be a gross exaggeration, and would feel very
much more inclined to put it at 300 millions, and of that number to
estimate the Buddhists at 100 millions of souls. This, however, in the
present state of our knowledge, is, and must be, mere guess-work. If we
put down 50 millions for the Buddhist population of Thibet, Manchuria,
Burmah, Siam, Cambodia, and Ceylon, we shall probably not err on the
side of underestimating them, making 150 millions the total number
of followers of this religion in the whole world, or one-eighth or
one-tenth of the human race--not one-third or one-fourth, at which they
are usually estimated.
[656] The following description is abridged from that by Mr. A. Michie
in his work entitled ‘The Siberian Overland Route,’ Murray, 1864. It
is by far the most distinct I have met with. The larger woodcuts in
this chapter are generally borrowed from his work. It must, however, be
observed that his descriptions differ sometimes essentially from those
hitherto current in European books, which were generally derived from
the accounts of the Jesuits, who probably obtained their information
from Chinese sources. It is generally safer to trust to the account of
an educated gentleman describing what he saw, than to the essay of a
mere scholar compiling from information conveyed in a foreign tongue.
[657] ‘Nouveaux Mélanges Asiatiques,’ vol. i. p. 110.
[658] The tower was destroyed in the recent Taeping rebellion.
[659] ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. vii. p. 331 (N.S.),
vol. v. p. 14, _et. seqq._
[660] In the year 1870 I published in the ‘Journal of the Royal
Asiatic Society’ (N.S.), vol. iv. p. 81, _et seqq._, an article on
Indian chronology, in which my views on the subject were stated at
greater length and more detail than it is proposed to do here. Being
addressed to those who were supposed to be more or less familiar with
the subject, the paper took the form of an argument, rather than of a
statement, and is, consequently, difficult to follow by those to whom
the subject is new. The following is an abstract of that paper, with
such corrections as have occurred to me in the meanwhile, and stated in
a consecutive form, and with only those details that seem necessary to
render it intelligible. For further particulars on special points the
reader is referred to the article itself.
[661] The lists used for this statement of pre-Buddhist chronology are
those compiled by James Prinsep, and published in his ‘Useful Tables’
in 1836. They were afterwards revised and republished by Ed. Thomas,
in his edition of Prinsep’s works, in 1858. In a regular treatise
on chronology it would be indispensable to refer to the Puranas
themselves; in a mere statement of results these tables are amply
sufficient.
[662] Crawfurd’s ‘Embassy to Ava,’ vol. ii. p. 274.
[663] Bigandet’s ‘Life of Gaudama,’ p. 323.
[664] ‘Embassy to Ava,’ loc. cit.
[665] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. vi. p. 715.
[666] Unfortunately the Chinese annals, to which we generally look for
assistance in our difficulties, are not likely to afford us any in this.
Confucius was born 551 B.C., and died 478; he was consequently only
eight years old when Buddha died, and in order to give Buddha the
necessary precedence in date, the Buddhists boldly added five centuries
to this, placing him about 1000 B.C. This struggle between truth and
falsehood led to such confusion that in the 7th century Hiouen Thsang
wrote: “Depuis le Nirvana jusqu’aujourd’hui les uns comptent 1200 ans,
les autres 1500 ans: il y en a qui affirment qu’il s’est écoulé plus de
900, mais que le nombre de 1000 n’est pas encore complet.” (‘Histoire,’
p. 131. ‘Vie et Voyages,’ i. 335.) The first is the nearest, according
to our ideas. He was writing apparently in 1190 A.B. It may be 1200, if
it was written after his return to China; but from this confusion it is
evident no reliance can be placed on any dates he may quote from the
Nirvana.
[667] ‘Embassy to Ava.’ Appendix.
[668] Vishnu Purana, p. 463.
[669] ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. iv. (N.S.) p. 85.
[670] Crawfurd’s ‘Embassy to Ava,’ vol. ii. p. 277.
[671] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. vii. p. 261;
‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. xii. p. 232; Cunningham’s
‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. v. p. 20, &c., &c.
[672] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. vi. p. 714.
[673] Wilson’s ‘Vishnu Purana,’ Second Edition, vol. iv. p. 200; see
also p. 232.
[674] ‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. v. p.
42 and 47.
[675] As the commencement of this era is not coincident with the years
we employ, but about half-way between 78 and 79, either of these
figures may be employed in converting years of the Christian Era into
those of the Saka or Ballabhi, or Gupta Samvats. Throughout this work I
have used the latter figure as that more generally in use.
[676] This list is abstracted principally from one in vol. viii. p. 27,
‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ quoting only such
dates as appear certain. The earlier names are taken from a paper by
Bhau Daji, vol. ix. p. 243 of the same journal.
[677] ‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. v. p.
49.
[678] ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. iv. (N.S.) p. 129.
[679] ‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. viii.
p. 119.
[680] Ibid.
[681] Ibid., vol. ix. p. 238; see also Bhandarkar, MS. translation.
[682] ‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. viii.
p. 28.
[683] Essay on the Sah Kings of Saurastra, ‘Journal of the Royal
Asiatic Society,’ vol. xii. p. 16; and ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society
of Bengal,’ vol. xxiv. p. 503; see also Thomas’s ‘Prinsep,’ vol. ii. p.
95.
[684] Thomas’s edition of ‘Prinsep,’ vol. i. p. 242, _et seqq._; see
also p. 365, _et seqq._
[685] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. vii. p. 634.
[686] The Vishnu Purana has Maunas, the Vayu and Matsya, Hunas.
Wilson’s ‘Vishnu Purana,’ vol. iv. p. 209.
[687] Wilson’s ‘Vishnu Purana,’ vol. iv. pp. 201-218.
[688] I need hardly say that this is not universally admitted by Indian
archæologists. Some indeed of the most eminent among them place the
Guptas considerably earlier. My conviction, however, is that they
never would have done so, had it not been that they place a mistaken
confidence on a passage in a foreign author of the 11th century,
translated by Rémusat to the following effect: “Quant au Goupta Kala
(ère des Gouptas), on entend par le mot Goupta des gens qui, dit-on,
étaient méchants et puissants, et l’ère qui porte leur nom est l’époque
de leur extermination. Apparemment Ballabha suivit immédiatement les
Gouptas, car l’ère des Gouptas commence aussi l’an 241 de l’ère de
Saca.” (‘Journal Asiatique,’ 4me série, tom. iv. p. 286.)
Albiruni, from whom this passage is taken, lived at the court of Mahmúd
of Ghazni, in the 11th century, and was learned beyond his compeers in
the learning of the Hindus. He collected facts and dates with industry,
and recorded them faithfully. But he would have been a magician if he
could have unravelled the tangled meshes with which the Hindus had
purposely obscured their chronology, and could have seen through all
the falsifications invented six centuries earlier. We could not do
so now without the aid of coins, dated inscriptions, and buildings.
None of these were available in his day, and without their aid, the
wonder is, not that he blundered in his inductions, but that he went
so near the truth as he did. His facts and figures are valuable, and
may generally be relied upon. His mode of putting them together and his
inductions are, as generally, worthless--not from any fault of his, but
because they had been purposely falsified by those who presented them
to him.
[689] ‘Indian Antiquary,’ vol. ii. p. 312.
[690] ‘Journal Asiatique,’ series iv. vol. iv. p. 285.
[691] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. vii. p. 634.
[692] Thomas’s ‘Prinsep,’ i. p. 250.
[693] This date is from an unpublished copper-plate grant, in the
possession of Gen. Cunningham, and is in addition to the three others
of the same reign quoted in my previous paper, p. 112.
[694] ‘Indian Antiquary,’ vol. ii. p. 312; see also vol. iii. p. 344.
[695] ‘Topographia Christiana,’ lib. xi. p. 338, edit. Paris, 1707.
[696] ‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. x. p.
60.
[697] ‘Histoire des Huns,’ vol. i. part ii. lib. iv. pp. 325, _et seqq._
[698] Malcolm’s ‘Persia,’ vol. i. p. 118. Briggs’s translation of
Ferishta, introd. lxxvii. _et seqq._; Dow’s translation, p. 13.
[699] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. vi. 1837, p.
963; also Thomas’s ‘Prinsep,’ vol. i. p. 234.
[700] Ibid., vol. v. plates 36 and 37; also Thomas’s ‘Prinsep,’ vol. i.
p. 277, plate 23.
[701] Thomas’s ‘Prinsep,’ vol. i. p. 407, _et passim_.
[702] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ 1866, p. 273. See
also Cunningham’s ‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. iii. p. 136.
[703] ‘Journal Asiatique,’ 4me série, tom. iv. p. 286.
[704] Tod’s ‘Annals of Rajputana,’ vol. i. p. 801.
[705] Lassen’s ‘Ind. Alt.’, vol. ii. p. 752, _et seqq._ to 987;
Dowson, ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society’ (N.S.), vol. i. p.
247, _et seqq._; Thomas’s ‘Prinsep,’ vol. i. p. 270-276; Cunningham’s
‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. iii. p. 56; Babu Rajendra Mittra,
‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. xliii. p. 372, &c., &c.
[706] ‘Annals,’ vol. i. p. 216, _et seqq._ At p. 230 he quotes another
account, which places the destruction of the Ballabhi era at 305,
instead of 205, as in the previous statement. These are evidently
clerical errors. If he had found another 405, it would probably have
been correct within a year or so--405+319=724.
[707] ‘Vie et Voyages,’ pp. 206, 254, 260; ‘Relations,’ &c., vol. ii.
p. 163.
[708] ‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. viii.
p. 245.
[709] Ibid., vol. viii. p. 245.
[710] Forbes’ ‘Ras Mala,’ vol. i. p. 18; Tod, ‘Annals,’ vol. i. p. 230.
[711] Elliot, ‘Historians of India,’ vol. i. p. 417.
[712] Loc. cit., 432, _et seqq._
[713] Loc. cit., 441-42.
[714] ‘Ras Mala,’ vol. i. p. 24; Tod’s ‘Travels,’ p. 149.
[715] ‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. x. p.
70.
[716] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. vii. p. 972.
[717] These lists were republished by Professor Dowson in the new
series of the ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. i. p. 253,
_et seqq._, but with chronological additions that are by no means
improvements.
[718] The advantage of their publication was to strongly felt by the
Council of the Royal Asiatic Society that in 1873 they, backed by a
letter from Sir Walter, appealed to Her Majesty’s Secretary of State
for India in Council, to sanction an expenditure not exceeding £200
for the purpose. It seems, however, that the finances of India could
not bear the strain, for in August last a reply was received to the
effect that “His Lordship regrets that he cannot consent to charge the
public revenues of India with the cost of such an undertaking.” As the
Indian Council are responsible, and know best what should be done and
what refused, there is no more to be said about the matter, though to
outsiders this seems slightly inconsistent with their grant of £2000 to
Max Müller for doing nothing that he had not been well paid for doing
beforehand. As no other means are available in this country, it is to
be hoped that either the French or German Governments will take it up.
They have always abundance of funds for such purposes; and had these
inscriptions been collected by one of their countrymen, they would have
been published without a year’s delay after having been brought home,
although they have no interest in India that can for one moment be
compared with ours.
[719] ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. iv. p. 12.
[720] ‘Report on Belgam and Kuladgi.’ p. 24.
[721] ‘Mémoires des Contrées,’ &c., vol. ii. p. 150.
[722] ‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. iii.
p. 206, _et seqq._
[723] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. vi. p. 68.
[724] ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. iv. p. 9.
[725] ‘Vie et Voyages,’ p. 188.
[726] ‘Vie et Voyages,’ p. 215.
[727] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. vi. p. 69.
[728] ‘Vie et Voyages,’ p. 204.
[729] ‘Relations,’ &c., vol. ii. p. 156.
[730] Loc. cit., vol. ii. p. 42.
[731] When I wrote last on the subject (‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic
Society,’ vol. iv. N.S.) I assumed the figures as they stand, as it
did not then appear to me of much importance, and as this is the only
arbitrary adjustment I have had occasion to make in the chronology,
I have let this stand in the text, leaving the correction to be made
when authority is found for it. The twenty years, more or less, do not
affect any architectural question mooted in the preceding pages.
[732] ‘Asiatic Researches,’ vol. xv. p. 87.
[733] ‘Asiatic Researches,’ vol. ix. p. 150.
[734] Loc. cit. p. 161.
[735] General Cunningham hesitates between 17 and 24
A.D. for his death (‘Numis. Chron.,’ vol. viii. p. 175);
Lassen brings him down to 40 A.D. (‘Ind. Alt.,’ vol. ii.
p. xxiv).
[736] ‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. iii. p. 29, _et seqq._ Ed. Thomas’s
Introduction to ‘Marsden,’ p. 46, _et seqq._
[737] ‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. ix. p.
242.
[738] ‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. ii. p. 266.
[739] Loc. cit. p. 68.
[740] They are all given in Thomas’s edition of ‘Prinsep,’ vol. ii. p.
173, _et seqq._, to which the reader is referred.
[741] ‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. v. p. 59.
[742] ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. vii. (N.S.) p. 376,
_et seqq._
[743] Beal’s ‘Life of Fa Hian,’ Introduction, p. xx.
[744] ‘Relations des Contrées,’ &c., vol. i. p. 190, _et seqq._
[745] I am indebted for this to Cunningham’s ‘Geography of India,’ p.
91.
[746] Cunningham’s ‘Ancient Geography of India,’ p. 92.
[747] One of the most useful manuals ever published for the use of
students of Indian history and chronology was Prinsep’s ‘Useful
Tables of Indian Dynasties, &c.’ They were republished by Mr. Thomas
in his edition of ‘Prinsep,’ with considerable additions and many
improvements by himself, but the edition is exhausted. There could
hardly be any better service done for the cause, than if he or some
one would republish them in a separate form, so as to render them
generally available. It is a pity Government has no funds available for
such a purpose, for I am afraid it would hardly pay as a bookseller’s
speculation.
[748] ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. iv. (N.S.) p. 131,
_et seqq._
[749] ‘Journal Asiatique,’ 4me série, tom. iv. p. 282.
[750] Troyer’s translation of the ‘Raja Tarangini,’ vol. ii. p. 43.
In Wilson’s translation it is said, “A different monarch from the
Saccari Vicramaditya, though sometimes erroneously identified with that
prince.”--‘Asiatic Researches’, vol. xv. p. 32.
[751] Loc. cit. p. 76.
[752] From Introduction to Turnour’s ‘Mahawanso,’ p. xxxiii., where the
names, places of birth, and Bo-trees of the whole twenty-four are given.