We have given such a lengthy account, th_Alberuni's India (Volume 1 of 2)

in order that the reader may see for himself the example of an

accumulation of laghus, which shows that laghu means a consonant

followed by a short vowel, not a consonant without a vowel. Further, he

will thereby learn the way in which they represent a metre and the

method of their scanning a verse. Lastly, he will learn that Alkhalîl

Ibn Aḥmad exclusively drew from his own genius when he invented the

Arabic metrics, though, possibly, he may have heard, as some people

think, that the Hindus use certain metres in their poetry. If we here

take so much trouble with Indian metrics, we do it for the purpose of

fixing the laws of the Śloka, since most of their books are composed in

it.

[Theory of the Śloka.] The Śloka belongs to the four-pâda metres. Each

pâda has eight syllables, which are different in all four pâdas. The

last syllable of each of the four pâdas must be the same, viz. a guru.

Further, the fifth syllable in each pâda must always be laghu, the

sixth syllable guru. The seventh syllable must be laghu in the second

and fourth pâda, guru in the first and third pâdas. The other syllables

are entirely dependent upon accident or the writer’s fancy.

[Quotation from Brahmagupta.] In order to show in what way the Hindus

use arithmetic in their metrical system, we give in the following a

quotation from Brahmagupta: “The first kind of poetry is gâyatrî, a

metre consisting of two pâdas. If we now suppose that the number of the

syllables of this metre may be 24, and that the smallest number of the

syllables of one pâda is 4, we describe the two pâdas by 4 + 4,

representing their smallest possible number of syllables. As, however,

their largest possible number is 24, we add the difference between

these 4 + 4 and 24, i.e. 16, to the right-side number, and get 4 + 20.

If the metre had three pâdas, it would be represented by 4 + 4 + 16.

The right-side pâda is always distinguished from the others and called

by a separate name; but the preceding pâdas also are connected, so as

to form one whole, and likewise called by a separate name. If the metre

had four pâdas, it would be represented by 4 + 4 + 4 + 12.

“If, however, the poet does not use the pâdas of 4, i.e. the smallest

possible number of syllables, and if we [Page 72.] want to know the

number of combinations of the 24 syllables which may occur in a

two-pâda metre, we write 4 to the left and 20 to the right; we add 1 to

4, again 1 to the sum, &c.; we subtract 1 from 20, again 1 from the

remainder, &c.; and this we continue until we get both the same numbers

with which we commenced, the small number in the line which commenced

with the greater number, and the greater number in the line which

commenced with the small number. See the following scheme:—

+----+----+

| 4 | 20 |

| 5 | 19 |

| 6 | 18 |

| 7 | 17 |

| 8 | 16 |

| 9 | 15 |

| 10 | 14 |

| 11 | 13 |

| 12 | 12 |

| 13 | 11 |

| 14 | 10 |

| 15 | 9 |

| 16 | 8 |

| 17 | 7 |

| 18 | 6 |

| 19 | 5 |

| 20 | 4 |

+----+----+

The number of these combinations is 17, i.e. the difference between 4

and 20 plus 1.

“As regards the three-pâda metre with the presupposed number of

syllables, i.e. 24, its first species is that in which all three pâdas

have the smallest possible number of syllables, i.e. 4 + 4 + 16.

“The right-side number and the middle number we write down as we have

done with the pâdas of the two-pâda metre, and we make with them the

same calculation as we have done above. Besides, we add the left-side

number in a separate column, but do not make it undergo any changes.

See the following scheme:—

+---+----+----+

| 4 | 4 | 16 |

| 4 | 5 | 15 |

| 4 | 6 | 14 |

| 4 | 7 | 13 |

| 4 | 8 | 12 |

| 4 | 9 | 11 |

| 4 | 10 | 10 |

| 4 | 11 | 9 |

| 4 | 12 | 8 |

| 4 | 13 | 7 |

| 4 | 14 | 6 |

| 4 | 15 | 5 |

| 4 | 16 | 4 |

+---+----+----+

“This gives the number of 13 permutations, but by changing the places

of the numbers forwards and backwards in the following method, the

number may be increased sixfold, i.e. to 78:—

“I. The right-side number keeps its place; the two other numbers

exchange their places, so that the middle number stands at the left

side; the left-side number occupies the middle:—

+---+---+-------+

| 4 | 4 | 16 |

| 5 | 4 | 15 |

| 6 | 4 | 14 |

| 7 | 4 | 13 &c.|

+---+---+-------+

“II.–III. The right-side number is placed in the middle between the

other two numbers, which first keep their original places, and then

exchange them with each other:—

II.

+---+----+------+

| 4 | 16 | 4 |

| 4 | 15 | 5 |

| 4 | 14 | 6 |

| 4 | 13 | 7 &c.|

+---+----+------+

III.

+---+----+------+

| 4 | 16 | 4 |

| 5 | 15 | 4 |

| 6 | 14 | 4 |

| 7 | 13 | 4 &c.|

+---+----+------+

“IV.–V. The right-side number is placed to the left, and the other two

numbers first keep their original places, and then exchange them with

each other:—

IV.

+----+---+------+

| 16 | 4 | 4 |

| 15 | 4 | 5 |

| 14 | 4 | 6 |

| 13 | 4 | 7 &c.|

+----+---+------+

| 16 | 4 | 4 |

| 15 | 5 | 4 |

| 14 | 6 | 4 |

| 13 | 7 | 4 &c.|

+----+---+------+

“Because, further, the numbers of the syllables of a pâda rise like the

square of 2, for after 4 follows 8, we may represent the syllables of

the three pâdas in this way: 8 + 8 + 8 (= 4 + 4 + 16). However, their

arithmetical peculiarities follow another rule. The four-pâda metre

follows the analogy of the three-pâda metre.”

Of the above-mentioned treatise of Brahmagupta I have only seen a

single leaf: it contains, no doubt, important elements of arithmetic.

God affords help and sustains by his mercy, i.e. I hope one day to

learn those things. As far as I can guess with regard to the literature

of the Greeks, they used in their poetry similar feet to the Hindus;

for Galenus says in his book [Page 73.] κατὰ γένη: “The medicine

prepared with saliva discovered by Menecrates has been described by

Damocrates in a poem composed in a metre consisting of three parts.”

CHAPTER XIV.

HINDU LITERATURE IN THE OTHER SCIENCES, ASTRONOMY, ASTROLOGY, ETC.

[Times unfavourable to the progress of science.] The number of sciences

is great, and it may be still greater if the public mind is directed

towards them at such times as they are in the ascendancy and in general

favour with all, when people not only honour science itself, but also

its representatives. To do this is, in the first instance, the duty of

those who rule over them, of kings and princes. For they alone could

free the minds of scholars from the daily anxieties for the necessities

of life, and stimulate their energies to earn more fame and favour, the

yearning for which is the pith and marrow of human nature.

The present times, however, are not of this kind. They are the very

opposite, and therefore it is quite impossible that a new science or

any new kind of research should arise in our days. What we have of

sciences is nothing but the scanty remains of bygone better times.

If a science or an idea has once conquered the whole earth, every

nation appropriates part of it. So do also the Hindus. Their belief

about the cyclical revolutions of times is nothing very special, but is

simply in accordance with the results of scientific observation.

[On the Siddhântas.] The science of astronomy is the most famous among

them, since the affairs of their religion are in various ways connected

with it. If a man wants to gain the title of an astronomer, he must not

only know scientific or mathematical astronomy, but also astrology. The

book known among Muslims as Sindhind is called by them Siddhânta, i.e.

straight, not crooked nor changing. By this name they call every

standard book on astronomy, even such books as, according to our

opinion, do not come up to the mark of our so-called Zîj, i.e.

handbooks of mathematical astronomy. They have five Siddhântas:—

I. Sûrya-siddhânta, i.e. the Siddhânta of the sun, composed by Lâṭa.

II. Vasishṭha-siddhânta, so called from one of the stars of the Great

Bear, composed by Vishṇucandra.

III. Pulisa-siddhânta, so called from Paulisa, the Greek, from the city

of Saintra, which I suppose to be Alexandria, composed by Pulisa.

IV. Romaka-siddhânta, so called from the Rûm, i.e. the subjects of the

Roman Empire, composed by Śrîsheṇa.

V. Brahma-siddhânta, so called from Brahman, composed by Brahmagupta,

the son of Jishṇu, from the town of Bhillamâla between Multân and

Anhilwâra, 16 yojana from the latter place (?).

The authors of these books draw from one and the same source, the Book

Paithâmaha, so called from the first father, i.e. Brahman.

Varâhamihira has composed an astronomical handbook of small compass

called Pañca-siddhântikâ, which name ought to mean that it contains the

pith and marrow of the preceding five Siddhântas. But this is not the

case, nor is it so much better than they as to be called the most

correct one of the five. So the name does not indicate anything but the

fact that the number of Siddhântas is five.

Brahmagupta says: “Many of the Siddhântas are Sûrya, others Indu,

Pulisa, Romaka, Vasishṭha, and Yavana, i.e. the Greeks; and though the

Siddhântas are many, they differ only in words, not in the

subject-matter. He who studies them properly will find that they agree

with each other.”

Up to the present time I have not been able to procure any of these

books save those of Pulisa and of Brahmagupta. I have commenced

translating them, but have not yet finished my work. Meanwhile I shall

[Page 74.] give here a table of contents of the Brahma-siddhânta, which

in any case will be useful and instructive.

[Contents of the Brahma-siddhânta.] Contents of the twenty-four

chapters of the Brahma-siddhânta—

1. On the nature of the globe and the figure of heaven and earth.

2. On the revolutions of the planets; on the calculation of time, i.e.

how to find the time for different longitudes and latitudes; how to

find the mean places of the planets; how to find the sine of an arc.

3. On the correction of the places of the planets.

4. On three problems: how to find the shadow, the bygone portion of the

day and the ascendens, and how to derive one from the other.

5. On the planets becoming visible when they leave the rays of the sun,

and their becoming invisible when entering them.

6. On the first appearance of the moon, and about her two cusps.

7. On the lunar eclipse.

8. On the solar eclipse.

9. On the shadow of the moon.

10. On the meeting and conjunction of the planets.

11. On the latitudes of the planets.

12. A critical investigation for the purpose of distinguishing between

correct and corrupt passages in the texts of astronomical treatises and

handbooks.

13. On arithmetic; on plane measure and cognate subjects.

14. Scientific calculation of the mean places of the planets.

15. Scientific calculation of the correction of the places of the

planets.

16. Scientific calculation of the three problems (v. chap. 4).

17. On the deflection of eclipses.

18. Scientific calculation of the appearance of the new moon and her

two cusps.

19. On Kuṭṭaka, i.e. the pounding of a thing. The pounding of

oil-producing substances is here compared with the most minute and

detailed research. This chapter treats of algebra and related subjects,

and besides it contains other valuable remarks of a more or less

arithmetical nature.

20. On the shadow.

21. On the calculation of the measures of poetry and on metrics.

22. On cycles and instruments of observation.

23. On time and the four measures of time, the solar, the civil, the

lunar, and the sidereal.

24. About numeral notation in the metrical books of this kind.

These, now, are twenty-four chapters, according to his own statement,

but there is a twenty-fifth one, called Dhyâna-graha-adhyâya, in which

he tries to solve the problems by speculation, not by mathematical

calculation. I have not enumerated it in this list, because the

pretensions which he brings forward in this chapter are repudiated by

mathematics. I am rather inclined to think that that which he produces

is meant to be the ratio metaphysica of all astronomical methods,

otherwise how could any problem of this science be solved by anything

save by mathematics?

[On the literature of Tantras and Karaṇas.] Such books as do not reach

the standard of a Siddhânta are mostly called Tantra or Karaṇa. The

former means ruling under a governor, the latter means following, i.e.

following behind the Siddhânta. Under governors they understand the

Âcâryas, i.e. the sages, anchorites, the followers of Brahman.

There are two famous Tantras by Âryabhaṭa and Balabhadra, besides the

Rasâyana-tantra by Bhânuyaśas (?). About what Rasâyana means we shall

give a separate chapter (chap. xvii.).

As for Karaṇas, there is one (lacuna) called by his name, besides the

Karaṇa-khaṇḍa-khâdyaka by Brahmagupta. The last word, khâdyaka, means a

kind of their sweetmeats. With regard to the reason why he gave his

book this title, I have been told the following:—

Sugrîva, the Buddhist, had composed an astronomical handbook which he

called Dadhi-sâgara, i.e. the sea of sour-milk; and a pupil of his

composed a book of the same kind which he called Kûra-babayâ (?), i.e.

a mountain of rice. Afterwards he composed another book which he called

Lavaṇa-mushṭi, i.e. a handful of salt. Therefore Brahmagupta called his

book the Sweetmeat—khâdyaka—in order that all kinds of victuals

(sour-milk, rice, salt, &c.) should occur in the titles of the books on

this science.

The contents of the book Karaṇa-khaṇḍa-khâdyaka [Page 75.] represent

the doctrine of Âryabhaṭa. Therefore Brahmagupta afterwards composed a

second book, which he called Uttara-khaṇḍa-khâdyaka, i.e. the

explanation of the Khaṇḍa-khâdyaka. And this book is again followed by

another one called Khaṇḍa-khâdyaka-tippâ (sic), of which I do not know

whether it is composed by Brahmagupta or somebody else. It explains the

reasons and the nature of the calculations employed in the

Khaṇḍa-khâdyaka. I suppose it is a work of Balabhadra’s.

Further, there is an astronomical handbook composed by Vijayanandin,

the commentator, in the city of Benares, entitled Karaṇa-tilaka, i.e.

the blaze on the front of the Karaṇas; another one by Vitteśvara the

son of Bhadatta (? Mihdatta), of the city of Nâgarapura, called

Karaṇa-sâra, i.e. that which has been derived from the Karaṇa; another

one, by Bhânuyaśas (?), is called Karaṇa-para-tilaka, which shows, as I

am told, how the corrected places of the stars are derived from one

another.

There is a book by Utpala the Kashmirian called Râhunrâkaraṇa (?), i.e.

breaking the Karaṇas; and another called Karaṇa-pâta, i.e. killing the

Karaṇas. Besides there is a book called Karaṇa-cûḍâmaṇi of which I do

not know the author.

There are more books of the same kind with other titles, e.g. the great

Mânasa, composed by Manu, and the commentary by Utpala; the small

Mânasa, an epitome of the former by Puñcala (?), from the southern

country; Daśagîtikâ, by Âryabhaṭa; Âryâshṭaśata, by the same;

Lokânanda, so called from the name of the author; Bhaṭṭilâ (?), so

called from its author, the Brahman Bhaṭṭila. The books of this kind

are nearly innumerable.

[On astrological literature, the so-called Saṁhitâs.] As for

astrological literature, each one of the following authors has composed

a so-called Saṁhitâ, viz.:—

Mâṇḍavya.

Parâśara.

Garga.

Brahman.

Balabhadra.

Divyatattva.

Varâhamihira.

Saṁhitâ means that which is collected, books containing something of

everything, e.g. forewarnings relating to a journey derived from

meteorological occurrences; prophecies regarding the fate of dynasties;

the knowledge of lucky and unlucky things; prophesying from the lines

of the hand; interpretation of dreams, and taking auguries from the

flight or cries of birds. For Hindu scholars believe in such things. It

is the custom of their astronomers to propound in their Saṁhitâs also

the whole science of meteorology and cosmology.

[The Jâtakas, i.e. books on nativities.] Each one of the following

authors has composed a book, Jâtaka, i.e. book of nativities, viz.:—

Parâśara.

Satya.

Maṇittha.

Jîvaśarman.

Mau, the Greek.

Varâhamihira has composed two Jâtakas, a small and a large one. The

latter of these has been explained by Balabhadra, and the former I have

translated into Arabic. Further, the Hindus have a large book on the

science of the astrology of nativities called Sârâvalî, i.e. the chosen

one, similar to the Vazîdaj (= Persian guzîda?), composed by

Kalyâṇa-Varman, who gained high credit for his scientific works. But

there is another book still larger than this, which comprehends the

whole of astrological sciences, called Yavana, i.e. belonging to the

Greeks.

Of Varâhamihira there are several small books, e.g. Shaṭ-pañcâśikâ,

fifty-six chapters on astrology; Horâ-pañca-hotṛiya (?), on the same

subject.

Travelling is treated of in the book Yogayâtrâ and the book

Tikanî(?)-yâtrâ, marriage and marrying in the book Vivâha-paṭala,

architecture in the book (lacuna).

The art of taking auguries from the flight or cries of birds, and of

the foretelling by means of piercing a needle into a book, is

propounded in the work called Srudhava (? śrotavya), which exists in

three different copies. Mahâdeva is said to be the author of the first,

Vimalabuddhi the author of the second, and Baṅgâla the author of the

third. Similar subjects are treated in the book Gûḍhâmana (?), i.e. the

knowledge of the unknown, composed by Buddha, the originator of the

sect of the red robe-wearers, the Shamanians; and in the book Praśna

Gûḍhâmana (?), i.e. questions of the science of the unknown, composed

by Utpala.

Besides, there are Hindu scholars of whom we know [Page 76.] the names,

but not the title of any book of theirs, viz.:—

Pradyumna.

Saṅgahila (Śṛiṅkhala?).

Divâkara.

Parêśvara.

Sârasvata.

Piruvâna (?).

Devakîrtti.

Prithûdaka-svâmin.

[Medical literature.] Medicine belongs to the same class of sciences as

astronomy, but there is this difference, that the latter stands in

close relation to the religion of the Hindus. They have a book called

by the name of its author, i.e. Caraka, which they consider as the best

of their whole literature on medicine. According to their belief,

Caraka was a Ṛishi in the last Dvâpara-yuga, when his name was

Agniveśa, but afterwards he was called Caraka, i.e. the intelligent

one, after the first elements of medicine had been laid down by certain

Ṛishis, the children of Sûtra. These latter had received them from

Indra, Indra from Aśvin, one of the two physicians of the Devas, and

Aśvin had received them from Prajâpati, i.e. Brahman, the first father.

This book has been translated into Arabic for the princes of the house

of the Barmecides.

[On Pañcatantra.] The Hindus cultivate numerous other branches of

science and literature, and have a nearly boundless literature. I,

however, could not comprehend it with my knowledge. I wish I could

translate the book Pañcatantra, known among us as the book of Kalîla

and Dimna. It is far spread in various languages, in Persian, Hindî,

and Arabic—in translations of people who are not free from the

suspicion of having altered the text. For instance, ʿAbdallâh Ibn

Almuḳaffaʿ has added in his Arabic version the chapter about Barzôya,

with the intention of raising doubts in the minds of people of feeble

religious belief, and to gain and prepare them for the propagation of

the doctrines of the Manichæans. And if he is open to suspicion in so

far as he has added something to the text which he had simply to

translate, he is hardly free from suspicion in his capacity as

translator.

CHAPTER XV.

NOTES ON HINDU METROLOGY, INTENDED TO FACILITATE THE UNDERSTANDING OF

ALL KINDS OF MEASUREMENTS WHICH OCCUR IN THIS BOOK.

[The Hindu system of weights.] Counting is innate to man. The measure

of a thing becomes known by its being compared with another thing which

belongs to the same species and is assumed as a unit by general

consent. Thereby the difference between the object and this standard

becomes known.

By weighing, people determine the amount of gravity of heavy bodies,

when the tongue of the scales stands at right angles on the horizontal

plane. Hindus want the scales very little, because their dirhams are

determined by number, not by weight, and their fractions, too, are

simply counted as so-and-so many fulûs. The coinage of both dirhams and

fulûs is different according to towns and districts. They weigh gold

with the scales only when it is in its natural state or such as has

been worked, e.g. for ornaments, but not coined. They use as a weight

of gold the suvarṇa = 1⅓ tola. They use the tola as frequently as we

use the mithḳâl. According to what I have been able to learn from them,

it corresponds to three of our dirhams, of which 10 equal 7 mithḳâl.

Therefore 1 tola = 21⁄10 of our mithḳâl.

The greatest fraction of a tola is 1⁄12, called mâsha. Therefore 16

mâsha = 1 suvarṇa.

Further,

1 mâsha = 4 anḍî (eraṇḍa), i.e. the seed

of a tree called Gaura.

1 anḍî = 4 yava.

1 yava = 6 kalâ.

1 kalâ = 4 pâda.

1 pâda = 4 mdrî (?).

Arranged differently we have—

1 suvarṇa = 16 mâsha = 64 anḍî = 256 yava = 1600 kalâ = 6400 pâda =

25,600 mdrî (?).

Six mâshas are called 1 draṅkshaṇa. If you ask them about this weight,

they will tell you that 2 draṅkshaṇa = 1 mithḳâl. But this is a

mistake; for 1 mithḳâl = 55⁄7 mâsha. The relation between a draṅkshaṇa

and a mithḳâl is as 20 to 21, and therefore 1 draṅkshaṇa = 11⁄20

mithḳâl. If, therefore, a man gives the answer which we have just

mentioned, he seems to have in mind the notion of a mithḳâl as a weight

which does not much differ from a draṅkshaṇa; but by doubling the

amount, saying 2 draṅkshaṇas instead of 1, he entirely spoils the

comparison.

[Page 77.] Since the unit of measure is not a natural unit, but a

conventional one assumed by general consent, it admits of both

practical and imaginary division. Its subdivisions or fractions are

different in different places at one and the same time, and at

different periods in one and the same country. Their names, too, are

different according to places and times; changes which are produced

either by the organic development of languages or by accident.

A man from the neighbourhood of Somanâth told me that their mithḳâl is

equal to ours; that

1 mithḳâl = 8 ruvu.

1 ruvu = 2 pâli.

1 pâli = 16 yava, i.e. barley-corn.

Accordingly 1 mithḳâl = 8 ruvu = 16 pâli = 256 yava.

This comparison shows that the man was mistaken in comparing the two

mithḳâls; that what he called mithḳâls is in reality the tola, and that

he calls the mâsha by a different name, viz. ruvu.

[Varâhamihira on weights.] If the Hindus wish to be particularly

painstaking in these things, they give the following scale, based on

the measurements which Varâhamihira prescribes for the construction of

idols:—

1 reṇu or particle of dust = 1 raja.

8 raja = 1 bâlâgra, i.e. the end of a hair.

8 bâlâgra = 1 likhyâ, i.e. the egg of a louse.

8 likhyâ = 1 yûkâ, i.e. a louse.

8 yûkâ = 1 yava, i.e. a barley-corn.

Hence, Varâhamihira goes on to enumerate the measures for distances.

His measures of weight are the same as those which we have already

mentioned. He says:

4 yava = 1 anḍî.

4 anḍî = 1 mâsha.

16 mâsha = 1 suvarṇa, i.e. gold.

4 suvarṇa = 1 pala.

The measures of dry substances are the following:—

4 pala = 1 kuḍava.

4 kuḍava = 1 prastha.

4 prastha = 1 âḍhaka.

The measures of liquid substances are the following:—

8 pala = 1 kuḍava.

8 kuḍava = 1 prastha.

4 prastha = 1 âḍhaka.

4 âḍhaka = 1 droṇa.

[Weights according to the book Caraka.] The following weights occur in

the book Caraka. I give them here according to the Arabic translation,

as I have not received them from the Hindus vivâ voce. The Arabic copy

seems to be corrupt, like all other books of this kind which I know.

Such corruption must of necessity occur in our Arabic writing, more

particularly at a period like ours, when people care so little about

the correctness of what they copy. “Âtreya says:

6 particles of dust = 1 marîci.

6 marîci = 1 mustard-seed (râjikâ).

8 mustard-seeds = 1 red rice-corn.

2 red rice-corns = 1 pea.

2 peas = 1 anḍî.

And 1 anḍî is equal to ⅛ dânak, according to the scale by which 7 dânak

are equal to one dirham. Further:

4 anḍî = 1 mâsha.

8 mâsha = 1 caṇa (?).

2 caṇa = 1 karsha or suvarṇa of the

weight of 2 dirhams.

4 suvarṇa = 1 pala.

4 pala = 1 kuḍava.

4 kuḍava = 1 prastha.

4 prastha = 1 âḍhaka.

4 âḍhaka = 1 droṇa.

2 droṇa = 1 śûrpa.

2 śûrpa = 1 janâ (?).”

The weight pala is much used in all the business dealings of the

Hindus, but it is different for different wares and in different

provinces. According to some, 1 pala = 1⁄15 manâ; according to others,

1 pala = 14 mithḳâl; but the manâ is not equal to 210 mithḳâl.

According to others, 1 pala = 16 mithḳâl, but the manâ is not equal to

240 mithḳâl. According to others, 1 pala = 15 dirham, but the manâ is

not equal to 225 dirham. In reality, however, the relation between the

pala and the manâ is different.

[Page 78.] Further, Âtreya says: “1 âḍhaka = 64 pala = 128 dirham = 1

raṭl. But if the anḍî is equal to ⅛ dânak, one suvarṇa contains 64

anḍî, and then a dirham has 32 anḍî, which, as each anḍî is equal to ⅛

dânak, are equal to 4 dânak. The double amount of it is 1⅓ dirham”

(sic).

Such are the results when people, instead of translating, indulge in

wild conjecture and mingle together different theories in an uncritical

manner.

As regards the first theory, resting on the assumption of one suvarṇa

being equal to three of our dirhams, people in general agree in

this—that

1 suvarṇa = ¼ pala.

1 pala = 12 dirham.

1 pala = 1⁄15 manâ.

1 manâ = 180 dirham.

This leads me to think that 1 suvarṇa is equal to 3 of our mithḳâl, not

to 3 of our dirham.

[Various authors on weights.] Varâhamihira says in another place of his

Saṁhitâ:

“Make a round vase of the diameter and height of one yard, and then

expose it to the rain until it ceases. All the water that has been

collected in it of the weight of 200 dirham is, if taken fourfold,

equal to 1 âḍhaka.”

This, however, is only an approximate statement, because, as we have

above mentioned in his own words, 1 âḍhaka is equal to 768 either

dirham, as they say, or mithḳâl, as I suppose.

Śrîpâla relates, on the authority of Varâhamihira, that 50 pala = 256

dirham = 1 âḍhaka. But he is mistaken, for here the number 256 does not

mean dirhams, but the number of the suvarṇa contained in one âḍhaka.

And the number of pala contained in 1 âḍhaka is 64, not 50.

As I have been told, Jîvaśarman gives the following detailed account of

these weights:

4 pala = 1 kuḍava.

4 kuḍava = 1 prastha.

4 prastha = 1 âḍhaka.

4 âḍhaka = 1 droṇa.

20 droṇa = 1 khârî.

The reader must know that 16 mâsha are 1 suvarṇa, but in weighing wheat

or barley they reckon 4 suvarṇa = 1 pala, and in weighing water and oil

they reckon 8 suvarṇa = 1 pala.

[The Hindu balance.] The balances with which the Hindus weigh things

are χαριστίωνες, of which the weights are immovable, whilst the scales

move on certain marks and lines. Therefore the balance is called tulâ.

The first lines mean the units of the weight from 1 to 5, and farther

on to 10; the following lines mean the tenths, 10, 20, 30, &c. With

regard to the cause of this arrangement they relate the following

saying of Vâsudeva:—

“I will not kill Śiśupâla, the son of my aunt, if he has not committed

a crime, but will pardon him until ten, and then I shall call him to

account.”

We shall relate this story on a later opportunity.

Alfazârî uses in his astronomical handbook the word pala for

day-minutes (i.e. sixtieth parts of a day). I have not found this use

anywhere in Hindu literature, but they use the word to denote a

correction in a mathematical sense.

The Hindus have a weight called bhâra, which is mentioned in the books

about the conquest of Sindh. It is equal to 2000 pala; for they explain

it by 100 × 20 pala, and as nearly equal to the weight of an ox.

This is all I have lighted on as regards Hindu weights.

[Dry measures.] By measuring (with dry measures) people determine the

body and the bulk of a thing, if it fills up a certain measure which

has been gauged as containing a certain quantity of it, it being

understood that the way in [Page 79.] which the things are laid out in

the measure, the way in which their surface is determined, and the way

in which, on the whole, they are arranged within the measure, are in

every case identical. If two objects which are to be weighed belong to

the same species, they then prove to be equal, not only in bulk, but

also in weight; but if they do not belong to the same species, their

bodily extent is equal, but not their weight.

They have a measure called bîsî (? sibî), which is mentioned by every

man from Kanauj and Somanâth. According to the people of Kanauj—

4 bîsî = 1 prastha.

¼ bîsî = 1 kuḍava.

According to the people of Somanâth—

16 bîsî = 1 pantî.

12 pantî = 1 mora.

According to another theory—

12 bîsî = 1 kalasî.

¼ bîsî = 1 mâna.

From the same source I learnt that a mâna of wheat is nearly equal to 5

manâ. Therefore 1 bîsî (?) is equal to 20 manâ. The bîsî corresponds to

the Khwârizmian measure sukhkh, according to old style, whilst the

kalasî corresponds to the Khwârizmian ghûr, for 1 ghûr = 12 sukhkh.

[Measures of distances.] Mensuration is the determination of distances

by lines and of superficies by planes. A plane ought to be measured by

part of a plane, but the mensuration by means of lines effects the same

purpose, as lines determine the limits of planes. When, in quoting

Varâhamihira, we had come so far as to determine the weight of a

barley-corn (p. 162), we made a digression into an exposition of

weights, where we used his authority about gravity, and now we shall

return to him and consult him about distances. He says—

8 barley-corns put

together = 1 aṅgula, i.e. finger.

4 fingers = 1 râma (?), i.e. the fist.

24 fingers = 1 haṭṭha, i.e. yard, also called

dasta.

4 yards = 1 dhanu, i.e. arc = a fathom.

40 arcs = 1 nalva.

25 nalva = 1 krośa.

Hence it follows that 1 kroh = 4000 yards; and as our mile has just so

many yards, 1 mile = 1 kroh. Pulisa the Greek also mentions in his

Siddhânta that 1 kroh = 4000 yards.

The yard is equal to 2 miḳyâs or 24 fingers; for the Hindus determine

the śaṅku, i.e. miḳyâs, by idol-fingers. They do not call the twelfth

part of a miḳyâs a finger in general, as we do, but their miḳyâs is

always a span. The span, i.e. the distance between the ends of the

thumb and the small finger at their widest possible stretching, is

called vitasti and also kishku.

The distance between the ends of the fourth or ring-finger and the

thumb, both being stretched out, is called gokarṇa.

The distance between the ends of the index-finger and of the thumb is

called karabha, and is reckoned as equal to two-thirds of a span.

The distance between the tops of the middle finger and of the thumb is

called tâla. The Hindus maintain that the height of a man is eight

times his tâla, whether he be tall or small; as people say with regard

to the foot, that it is one-seventh of the height of a man.

Regarding the construction of idols, the book Saṁhitâ says:—

“The breadth of the palm has been determined as 6, the length as 7; the

length of the middle finger as 5, that of the fourth finger as the

same; that of the index-finger as the same minus ⅙ (i.e. 4⅙); that of

the small finger as the same minus ⅓ (i.e. 3⅓); that of the thumb as

equal to two-thirds of the length of the middle finger (i.e. 3⅓), so

that the two last fingers are of equal length.”

[Page 80.] By the measurements and numbers of this passage, the author

means idol-fingers.

[The relation between yojana, mile, and farsakh.] After the measure of

the krośa has been fixed and found to be equal to our mile, the reader

must learn that they have a measure of distances, called yojana, which

is equal to 8 miles or to 32,000 yards. Perhaps somebody might believe

that 1 kroh is = ¼ farsakh, and maintain that the farsakhs of the

Hindus are 16,000 yards long. But such is not the case. On the

contrary, 1 kroh = ½ yojana. In the terms of this measure, Alfazârî has

determined the circumference of the earth in his astronomical handbook.

He calls it jûn, in the plural ʾajwân.

[Relation between circumference and diameter.] The elements of the

calculations of the Hindus on the circumference of the circle rest on

the assumption that it is thrice its diameter. So the Matsya-Purâṇa

says, after it has mentioned the diameters of the sun and moon in

yojanas: “The circumference is thrice the diameter.”

The Âditya-Purâṇa says, after it has mentioned the breadth of the

Dvîpas, i.e. the islands and of their surrounding seas: “The

circumference is thrice the diameter.”

The same occurs also in the Vâyu-Purâṇa. In later times, however,

Hindus have become aware of the fraction following after the three

wholes. According to Brahmagupta, the circumference is 31⁄7 times the

diameter; but he finds this number by a method peculiar to himself. He

says: “As the root of 10 is nearly 31⁄7, the relation between the

diameter and its circumference is like the relation between 1 and the

root of 10.” Then he multiplies the diameter by itself, the product by

10, and of this product he takes the root. Then the circumference is

solid, i.e. consists of integers, in the same way as the root of ten.

This calculation, however, makes the fraction larger than it really is.

Archimedes defined it to be something between 10⁄70 and 11⁄70.

Brahmagupta relates with regard to Âryabhaṭa, criticising him, that he

fixed the circumference as 3393; that he fixed the diameter in one

place as 1080, in another place as 1050. According to the first

statement, the relation between diameter and circumference would be

like 1 : 317⁄120. This fraction (17⁄120) is by 1⁄17 smaller than 1⁄7.

However, as regards the second statement, it contains no doubt a

blunder in the text, not of the author; for according to the text, the

relation would be like 1 : 3¼ and something over.

Pulisa employs this relation in his calculations in the proportion of 1

: 3177⁄1250.

This fraction is here by so much smaller than one-seventh as it is

according to Âryabhaṭa, i.e. by 1⁄17.

The same relation is derived from the old theory, which Yaʿḳûb Ibn

Ṭâriḳ mentions in his book, Compositio Sphærarum, on the authority of

his Hindu informant, viz. that the circumference of the zodiac is

1,256,640,000 yojana, and that its diameter is 400,000,000 yojana.

These numbers presuppose the relation between circumference and

diameter to be as 1 : 356,640,000/400,000,000. These two numbers may be

reduced by the common divisor of 360,000. Thereby we get 177 as

numerator and 1250 as denominator. And this is the fraction (177⁄1250)

which Pulisa has adopted.

CHAPTER XVI.

NOTES ON THE WRITING OF THE HINDUS, ON THEIR ARITHMETIC AND RELATED

SUBJECTS, AND ON CERTAIN [Page 81.] STRANGE MANNERS AND CUSTOMS OF

THEIRS.

[On various kinds of writing material.] The tongue communicates the

thought of the speaker to the hearer. Its action has therefore, as it

were, a momentary life only, and it would have been impossible to

deliver by oral tradition the accounts of the events of the past to

later generations, more particularly if they are separated from them by

long periods of time. This has become possible only by a new discovery

of the human mind, by the art of writing, which spreads news over space

as the winds spread, and over time as the spirits of the deceased

spread. Praise therefore be unto Him who has arranged creation and

created everything for the best!

The Hindus are not in the habit of writing on hides, like the Greeks in

ancient times. Socrates, on being asked why he did not compose books,

gave this reply: “I do not transfer knowledge from the living hearts of

men to the dead hides of sheep.” Muslims, too, used in the early times

of Islam to write on hides, e.g. the treaty between the Prophet and the

Jews of Khaibar and his letter to Kisrâ. The copies of the Koran were

written on the hides of gazelles, as are still nowadays the copies of

the Thora. There occurs this passage in the Koran (Sûra vi. 91): “They

make it karâṭîs,” i.e. τομάρια. The kirṭâs (or charta) is made in

Egypt, being cut out of the papyrus stalk. Written on this material,

the orders of the Khalifs went out into all the world until shortly

before our time. Papyrus has this advantage over vellum, that you can

neither rub out nor change anything on it, because thereby it would be

destroyed. It was in China that paper was first manufactured. Chinese

prisoners introduced the fabrication of paper into Samarḳand, and

thereupon it was made in various places, so as to meet the existing

want.

The Hindus have in the south of their country a slender tree like the

date and cocoa-nut palms, bearing edible fruits and leaves of the

length of one yard, and as broad as three fingers one put beside the

other. They call these leaves târî (tâla or tâṛ = Borassus

flabelliformis), and write on them. They bind a book of these leaves

together by a cord on which they are arranged, the cord going through

all the leaves by a hole in the middle of each.

In Central and Northern India people use the bark of the tûz tree, one

kind of which is used as a cover for bows. It is called bhûrja. They

take a piece one yard long and as broad as the outstretched fingers of

the hand, or somewhat less, and prepare it in various ways. They oil

and polish it so as to make it hard and smooth, and then they write on

it. The proper order of the single leaves is marked by numbers. The

whole book is wrapped up in a piece of cloth and fastened between two

tablets of the same size. Such a book is called pûthî (cf. pusta,

pustaka). Their letters, and whatever else they have to write, they

write on the bark of the tûz tree.

[On the Hindu alphabet.] As to the writing or alphabet of the Hindus,

we have already mentioned that it once had been lost and forgotten;

that nobody cared for it, and that in consequence people became

illiterate, sunken into gross ignorance, and entirely estranged from

science. But then Vyâsa, the son of Parâśara, rediscovered their

alphabet of fifty letters by an inspiration of God. A letter is called

akshara.

Some people say that originally the number of their letters was less,

and that it increased only by degrees. This is possible, or I should

even say necessary. As for the Greek alphabet, a certain Asîdhas (sic)

had formed sixteen characters to perpetuate science about the time when

the Israelites ruled over Egypt. Thereupon Kîmush (sic) and Agenon

(sic) brought them to the Greeks. By adding four new signs they

obtained an alphabet of twenty letters. Later on, about the time when

Socrates was poisoned, Simonides added four [Page 82.] other signs, and

so the Athenians at last had a complete alphabet of twenty-four

letters, which happened during the reign of Artaxerxes, the son of

Darius, the son of Artaxerxes, the son of Cyrus, according to the

chronographers of the West.

The great number of the letters of the Hindu alphabet is explained,

firstly, by the fact that they express every letter by a separate sign

if it is followed by a vowel or a diphthong or a hamza (visarga), or a

small extension of the sound beyond the measure of the vowel; and,

secondly, by the fact that they have consonants which are not found

together in any other language, though they may be found scattered

through different languages—sounds of such a nature that our tongues,

not being familiar with them, can scarcely pronounce them, and that our

ears are frequently not able to distinguish between many a cognate pair

of them.

The Hindus write from the left to the right like the Greeks. They do

not write on the basis of a line, above which the heads of the letters

rise whilst their tails go down below, as in Arabic writing. On the

contrary, their ground-line is above, a straight line above every

single character, and from this line the letter hangs down and is

written under it. Any sign above the line is nothing but a grammatical

mark to denote the pronunciation of the character above which it

stands.

[On the local alphabets of the Hindus.] The most generally known

alphabet is called Siddhamâtṛikâ, which is by some considered as

originating from Kashmîr, for the people of Kashmîr use it. But it is

also used in Varânaṣî. This town and Kashmîr are the high schools of

Hindu sciences. The same writing is used in Madhyadeśa, i.e. the middle

country, the country all around Kanauj, which is also called Âryâvarta.

In Mâlava there is another alphabet called Nâgara, which differs from

the former only in the shape of the characters.

Next comes an alphabet called Ardhanâgarî, i.e. half-nâgara, so called

because it is compounded of the former two. It is used in Bhâtiya and

some parts of Sindh.

Other alphabets are the Malwârî, used in Malwashau, in Southern Sind,

towards the sea-coast; the Saindhava, used in Bahmanwâ or Almanṣûra;

the Karnâṭa, used in Karnâṭadeśa, whence those troops come which in the

armies are known as Kannara; the Andhrî, used in Andhradeśa; the

Dirwarî (Drâviḍî), used in Dirwaradeśa (Draviḍadeśa); the Lârî, used in

Lâradeśa (Lâṭadeśa); the Gaurî (Gauḍî), used in Pûrvadeśa, i.e. the

Eastern country; the Bhaikshukî, used in Uduṇpûr in Pûrvadeśa. This

last is the writing of Buddha.

[On the word Om.] The Hindus begin their books with Om, the word of

creation, as we begin them with “In the name of God.” The figure of the

word om is ऽ. This figure does not consist of letters; it is simply an

image invented to represent this word, which people use, believing that

it will bring them a blessing, and meaning thereby a confession of the

unity of God. Similar to this is the manner in which the Jews write the

name of God, viz. by three Hebrew yods. In the Thora the word is

written YHVH and pronounced Adonai; sometimes they also say Yah. The

word Adonai, which they pronounce, is not expressed in writing.

[On their numeral signs.] The Hindus do not use the letters of their

alphabet for numerical notation, as we use the Arabic letters in the

order of the Hebrew alphabet. As in different parts of India the

letters have different shapes, the numeral signs, too, which are called

aṅka, differ. The numeral [Page 83.] signs which we use are derived

from the finest forms of the Hindu signs. Signs and figures are of no

use if people do not know what they mean, but the people of Kashmîr

mark the single leaves of their books with figures which look like

drawings or like the Chinese characters, the meaning of which can only

be learned by a very long practice. However, they do not use them when

reckoning in the sand.

In arithmetic all nations agree that all the orders of numbers (e.g.

one, ten, hundred, thousand) stand in a certain relation to the ten;

that each order is the tenth part of the following and the tenfold of

the preceding. I have studied the names of the orders of the numbers in

various languages with all kinds of people with whom I have been in

contact, and have found that no nation goes beyond the thousand. The

Arabs, too, stop with the thousand, which is certainly the most correct

and the most natural thing to do. I have written a separate treatise on

this subject.

Those, however, who go beyond the thousand in their numeral system are

the Hindus, at least in their arithmetical technical terms, which have

been either freely invented or derived according to certain

etymologies, whilst in others both methods are blended together. They

extend the names of the orders of numbers until the 18th order for

religious reasons, the mathematicians being assisted by the grammarians

with all kinds of etymologies.

The 18th order is called Parârdha, i.e. the half of heaven, or, more

accurately, the half of that which is above. For if the Hindus

construct periods of time out of Kalpas, the unit of this order is a

day of God (i.e. a half nychthemeron). And as we do not know any body

larger than heaven, half of it (parârdha), as a half of the greatest

body, has been compared with a half of the greatest day. By doubling

it, by uniting night to day, we get the whole of the greatest day.

There can be no doubt that the name Parârdha is accounted for in this

way, and that parâr means the whole of heaven.

[The eighteen orders of numeration.] The following are the names of the

eighteen orders of numbers:—

1. Ekaṁ.

2. Daśaṁ.

3. Śataṁ.

4. Sahasraṁ.

5. Ayuta.

6. Laksha.

7. Prayuta.

8. Koṭi.

9. Nyarbuda.

10. Padma.

11. Kharva.

12. Nikharva.

13. Mahâpadma.

14. Śaṅku.

15. Samudra.

16. Madhya.

17. Antya.

18. Parârdha.

I shall now mention some of their differences of opinion relating to

this system.

[Variations occurring in the eighteen orders.] Some Hindus maintain

that there is a 19th order beyond the Parârdha, called Bhûri, and that

this is the limit of reckoning. But in reality reckoning is unlimited;

it has only a technical limit, which is conventionally adopted as the

last of the orders of numbers. By the word reckoning in the sentence

above they seem to mean nomenclature, as if they meant to say that the

language has no name for any reckoning beyond the 19th order. It is

known that the unit of this order, i.e. one bhûri, is equal to

one-fifth of the greatest day, but on this subject they have no

tradition. In their tradition there are only traces of combinations of

the greatest day, as we shall hereafter explain. Therefore this 19th

order is an addition of an artificial and hyper-accurate nature.

[Page 84.] According to others, the limit of reckoning is koṭi; and

starting from koṭi the succession of the orders of numbers would be

koṭi, thousands, hundreds, tenths; for the number of Devas is expressed

in koṭis. According to their belief there are thirty-three koṭis of

Devas, eleven of which belong to each of the three beings, Brahman,

Nârâyaṇa, and Mahâdeva.

The names of the orders beyond that of the 18th have been invented by

the grammarians, as we have said already (p. 174).

Further, we observe that the popular name of the 5th order is Daśa

sahasra, that of the 7th order, Daśa laksha; for the two names which we

have mentioned in the list above (Ayuta and Prayuta) are rarely used.

The book of Âryabhaṭa of Kusumapura gives the following names of the

orders from the ten till 10 koṭi:—

Ayutaṁ.

Niyutaṁ.

Prayutaṁ.

Koṭi padma.

Parapadma.

Further, it is noteworthy that some people establish a kind of

etymological relationship between the different names; so they call the

6th order Niyuta, according to the analogy of the 5th, which is called

Ayuta. Further, they call the 8th order Arbuda, according to the

analogy of the 9th, which is called Nyarbuda.

There is a similar relation between Nikharva and Kharva, the names of

the 12th and 11th orders, and between Śaṅku and Mahâśaṅku, the names of

the 13th and 14th orders. According to this analogy Mahâpadma ought to

follow immediately after Padma, but this latter is the name of the

10th, the former the name of the 13th order.

These are differences of theirs which can be traced back to certain

reasons; but besides, there are many differences without any reason,

which simply arise from people dictating these names without observing

any fixed order, or from the fact that they hate to avow their

ignorance by a frank I do not know,—a word which is difficult to them

in any connection whatsoever.

The Pulisa-siddhânta gives the following list of the orders of the

numbers:—

4. Sahasraṁ.

5. Ayutaṁ.

6. Niyutaṁ.

7. Prayutaṁ.

8. Koṭi.

9. Arbudaṁ.

10. Kharva.

The following orders, from the 11th till the 18th, are the same as

those of the above-mentioned list.

[Numeral notation.] The Hindus use the numeral signs in arithmetic in

the same way as we do. I have composed a treatise showing how far,

possibly, the Hindus are ahead of us in this subject. We have already

explained that the Hindus compose their books in Ślokas. If, now, they

wish, in their astronomical handbooks, to express some numbers of the

various orders, they express them by words used to denote certain

numbers either in one order alone or at the same time in two orders

(e.g. a word meaning either 20 or both 20 and 200). For each number

they have appropriated quite a great quantity of words. Hence, if one

word does not suit the metre, you may easily exchange it for a synonym

which suits. Brahmagupta says: “If you want to write one, express it by

everything which is unique, as the earth, the moon; two by everything

which is double, as, e.g. black and white; three by everything which is

threefold; the nought by heaven, the twelve by the names of the sun.”

I have united in the following table all the expressions for the

numbers which I used to hear from them; for the knowledge of these

things is most essential for deciphering their astronomical handbooks.

Whenever I shall come to know all the meanings of [Page 85.] these

words, I will add them, if God permits!

0 = śûnya and kha, both meaning point.

gagana, i.e. heaven.

viyat, i.e. heaven.

âkâśa, i.e. heaven.

ambara, i.e. heaven.

abhra, i.e. heaven.

[Page 86.]

1 = âdi, i.e. the beginning.

śaśin.

indu.

śîtâ.

urvarâ, dharaṇî.

pitâmaha, i.e. the first father.

candra, i.e. the moon.

śîtâṁśu, i.e. the moon.

rûpa.

raśmi.

2 = yama.

aśvin.

ravicandra.

locana, i.e. the two eyes.

akshi.

yamala.

dasra.

paksha, i.e. the two halves of a month.

netra, i.e. the two eyes.

3 = trikâla, i.e. the three parts of time.

trijagat.

trayaṁ.

pâvaka, vaiśvânara, dahana, tapana, hutâśana, jvalana, agni,

i.e. fire.

[triguṇa,] i.e. the three first forces.

loka, i.e. the worlds, earth, heaven and hell.

trikaṭu.

4 = veda, i.e. their sacred code, [Page 87.] because it has four

parts.

samudra, sâgara, i.e. the sea.

abdhi.

dadhi.

diś, i.e. the four cardinal points.

jalâśaya.

kṛita.

5 = śara.

artha.

indriya, i.e. the five senses.

sâyaka.

اِخُونُ‎

vâṇa.

bhûta.

ishu.

Pâṇḍava, i.e. the five royal brothers.

pattrin, mârgaṇa.

6 = rasa.

aṅga.

shaṭ.

الںرم‎ ‎(?) i.e. the year.

ṛitu (?).

mâsârdhaṁ.

7 = aga.

mahîdhara.

parvata, i.e. the mountains.

saptan.

naga, i.e. the mountains.

adri.

muni.

8 = vasu, ashṭa.

dhî, maṅgala.

gaja, nâga.

dantin.

9 = go, chidra.

nanda, pavana.

randhra, antara.

navan = 9.

10 = diś, khendu.

âśâ, Râvaṇa-śiras.

11 = Rudra, the destroyer of the world.

Mahâdeva, i.e. the prince of the angels.

îśvara.

akshauhiṇî, i.e. the army Kuru had.

12 = sûrya, because there are twelve suns.

âditya.

arka, i.e. the sun.

mâsa, bhânu.

sahaśrâṁśu.

13 = viśva.

14 = manu, the lords of the fourteen manvantaras.

15 = tithi, i.e. the lunar days in each half month.

16 = ashṭi, nṛipa, bhûpa.

17 = atyashṭi.

[Page 88.]

18 = dhṛiti.

19 = atidhṛiti.

20 = nakha, kṛiti.

21 = utkṛiti.

22 =

23 =

24 =

25 = tattva, i.e. the twenty-five things, through the knowledge of

which liberation is obtained.

As far as I have seen and heard of the Hindus, they do not usually go

beyond twenty-five with this kind of numerical notation.

[Strange manners and customs of the Hindus.] We shall now speak of

certain strange manners and customs of the Hindus. The strangeness of a

thing evidently rests on the fact that it occurs but rarely, and [Page

89.] that we seldom have the opportunity of witnessing it. If such

strangeness reaches a high degree, the thing becomes a curiosity, or

even something like a miracle, which is no longer in accordance with

the ordinary laws of nature, and which seems chimerical as long as it

has not been witnessed. Many Hindu customs differ from those of our

country and of our time to such a degree as to appear to us simply

monstrous. One might almost think that they had intentionally changed

them into the opposite, for our customs do not resemble theirs, but are

the very reverse; and if ever a custom of theirs resembles one of ours,

it has certainly just the opposite meaning.

They do not cut any of the hair of the body. Originally they went naked

in consequence of the heat, and by not cutting the hair of the head

they intended to prevent sunstroke.

They divide the moustache into single plaits in order to preserve it.

As regards their not cutting the hair of the genitals, they try to make

people believe that the cutting of it incites to lust and increases

carnal desire. Therefore such of them as feel a strong desire for

cohabitation never cut the hair of the genitals.

They let the nails grow long, glorying in their idleness, since they do

not use them for any business or work, but only, while living a dolce

far niente life, they scratch their heads with them and examine the

hair for lice.

The Hindus eat singly, one by one, on a tablecloth of dung. They do not

make use of the remainder of a meal, and the plates from which they

have eaten are thrown away if they are earthen.

They have red teeth in consequence of chewing areca-nuts with

betel-leaves and chalk.

They drink wine before having eaten anything, then they take their

meal. They sip the stall of cows, but they do not eat their meat.

They beat the cymbals with a stick.

They use turbans for trousers. Those who want little dress are content

to dress in a rag of two fingers’ breadth, which they bind over their

loins with two cords; but those who like much dress, wear trousers

lined with so much cotton as would suffice to make a number of

counterpanes and saddle-rugs. These trousers have no (visible)

openings, and they are so huge that the feet are not visible. The

string by which the trousers are fastened is at the back.

Their ṣidâr (a piece of dress covering the head and the upper part of

breast and neck) is similar to the trousers, being also fastened at the

back by buttons.

The lappets of the ḳurṭaḳas (short shirts from the shoulders to the

middle of the body with sleeves, a female dress) have slashes both on

the right and left sides.

They keep the shoes tight till they begin to put them on. They are

turned down from the calf before walking (?).

In washing they begin with the feet, and then wash the face. They wash

themselves before cohabiting with their wives.

Cœunt stantes velut palus vitis, dum mulieres ab imo sursum moventur

velut occupatæ in arando, maritus vero plane otiosus manet.

On festive days they besmear their bodies with dung instead of

perfumes.

The men wear articles of female dress; they use cosmetics, wear

earrings, arm-rings, golden seal-rings on the ring-finger as well as on

the toes of the feet.

Miseret eos catamiti et viri qui rebus venereis frui non potest

pushaṇḍila dicti, qui penem bucca devorans semen elicit sorbendum.

In cacando faciem vertunt versus murum retegentes pudenda ut videantur

a prætereuntibus.

Sacra faciunt virilibus liṅga dictis, quæ est imago veretri Mahadevæ.

They ride without a saddle, but if they put on a saddle, they mount the

horse from its right side. In travelling they like to have somebody

riding behind them.

They fasten the kuṭhâra, i.e. the dagger, at the waist on the right

side.

They wear a girdle called yajñopavîta, passing from the left shoulder

to the right side of the waist.

[Page 90.] In all consultations and emergencies they take the advice of

the women.

When a child is born people show particular attention to the man, not

to the woman.

Of two children they give the preference to the younger, particularly

in the eastern parts of the country; for they maintain that the elder

owes his birth to predominant lust, whilst the younger owes his origin

to mature reflection and a calm proceeding.

In shaking hands they grasp the hand of a man from the convex side.

They do not ask permission to enter a house, but when they leave it

they ask permission to do so.

In their meetings they sit cross-legged.

They spit out and blow their noses without any respect for the elder

ones present, and they crack their lice before them. They consider the

crepitus ventris as a good omen, sneezing as a bad omen.

They consider as unclean the weaver, but as clean the cupper and the

flayer, who kills dying animals for money either by drowning or by

burning.

They use black tablets for the children in the schools, and write upon

them along the long side, not the broad side, writing with a white

material from the left to the right. One would think that the author of

the following verses had meant the Hindus:—

“How many a writer uses paper as black as charcoal,

Whilst his pen writes on it with white colour.

By writing he places a bright day in a dark night,

Weaving like a weaver, but without adding a woof.”

They write the title of a book at the end of it, not at the beginning.

They magnify the nouns of their language by giving them the feminine

gender, as the Arabs magnify them by the diminutive form.

If one of them hands over a thing to another, he expects that it should

be thrown to him as we throw a thing to the dogs.

If two men play at Nard (backgammon), a third one throws the dice

between them.

They like the juice which flows over the cheeks of the rutting

elephant, which in reality has the most horrid smell.

[On the Indian chess.] In playing chess they move the elephant straight

on, not to the other sides, one square at a time, like the pawn, and to

the four corners also one square at a time, like the queen (firzân).

They say that these five squares (i.e. the one straight forward and the

others at the corners) are the places occupied by the trunk and the

four feet of the elephant.

They play chess—four persons at a time—with a pair of dice. Their

arrangement of the figures on the chess-board is the following:—

+----------+--------+-----------+-------+-------+----------+-------+----------+