« PreviousContinue »
is stated to have graced the court of Vikramaditya in addition to the “nine gems," it is clear that the author of the Jyotirvidábharaṇa is sufficiently modern to have confounded Harsha Vikramaditya of Ujjayiní, in the 6th century, with the founder of the Samvat Era.
The“ memorial verse” so often quoted by learned men in proof of the existence of the “ nine gems,” at the court of Vikrama, thus loses completely its value as an authority. Besides, it is very doubtful whether there was any poet with the appellation of Ghatakharpara, the Kávya bearing that title in many manuscripts being attributed to Kálidása.
Another writer, who assumes the title of Kálidása, is the author of S'atruparábhava Grantha, an astrological work treating of favourable opportunities for action, by determining the predominance of “svara" or breath, through the right or left nostril. The first and last verses are as follows:
नत्वा सुरासुरशिरोमणिरलरश्मि चित्रीकृतांघियुगलं हरिमादिदेवं ॥ श्रीकालिदासगणकः स्वरशास्त्रसारं वक्ष्याम्यहं प्रबलशत्रुपराभवाख्यं ॥ १ ॥
आसीत् कश्यपवंशजोर्कतनयातीराधिवासीद्विजः श्रौतस्मातविचारसारचतुरः श्रीभानुभट्टस्सुधीः ॥ तत्पुत्रोहरिभक्तिनिर्मलतनुर्कोतिर्विदामग्रणीः शास्त्रंशत्रुपराभवाख्यमकरोत् श्रीकालिदासः कविः ॥ २ ॥
Translation.-“I, Kálidása Gaņaka, after making obeisance to Hari, the Adi Deva, whose joint feet are resplendent with the rays of the jewels in the crowns of the Gods and Demons, proceed to give the substance of Svara S'astra, called S'atruparábhava Grantha.
“Deeply versed in the knowledge of the S'ritis and Smritis, and born in the race of Kas’yapa, there lived on the banks of the Arkatanaya (Jumna), the talented Bhanubhatta brahmaņa. His son, whose body has been purified by devotion to Hari, is the poet Kálidása, the first among astrologers. He composed the S'astra, called S'atruparàbhava.”
In the following (30th) verse, he says :-"To the current Saka year add 12 and divide the sum by 60, the remainder is the year of the human cycle and the eleventh from it is the order of the Barhaspatya cycle," (i. e. the cycle of Jupiter).
शकेसाहतेखांगः शेषेब्दः प्रभवादिकः
passed, Brahmagupta, the son of Jishnu, at the age of thirty, composed the Brahmagupta Siddhanta for the edification of mathematicians and astronoiders." Chap. 24. Arya 7-8.
Ile invokes Ganpati and then Vishnu. It is clear that he lived long after S'alivàhana ; and the style shows that he is not the author of the S'akuntala and Raghuvans'a.
Colonel Wilford, in an elaborate essay on Vikramaditya and S'áliyáhana, gives a large collection of ill-digested facts, with his usual proportion of the wildest speculations on them; but it is not necessary to point out here all the mistakes that are patent to us, so that we shall deal only with those that relate immediately to the subject under consideration. Thus he writes :-“In the Satrunjaya Mahátmya we read that after 466 years of the era are elapsed, then would appear the great and famous Vikramaditya ; and then, 477 years after him, Sailaditya or Bhoja would reign.
“In the Ayeen Akbari, the various dates from the era of Vikramaditya are to be reckoned from the accession to the throne, in the middle ages of the Christian Era.'
The S'atrunjaya Mahátmya is a Jain work, an abstract of which in the original Sanskrit, with a German translation, has been published by Weber (Leipzig, 1858). It professes to be the composition of Dhanes' wara Súri, at the request of a S'iladitya of Valabhí, glorifying the S'atrunjaya mountain, which is the same as the hill of Palitána in Kattiawar. The original passage is as follows:
अस्मनिर्वाणतोवर्षेस्त्रिभिः साढेषु मासकैः ॥ धर्मविप्लावकः शक्रः पंचमारो भविष्यति ॥ १ ॥ ततः शतैश्चतुर्भिः षट्षष्टिभिर्वत्सरैर्दिनैः ।। पंचचत्वारिंशतापि विक्रमार्कोमही मिमां ॥ २ ॥ सिद्धसेनोपदेशेनानृणीकृत्यजिनोक्तवत् ॥ अस्मसंवत्सरंलुप्त्वा स्वीयमाविष्करिष्यति ॥ ३ ॥ इति शत्रुजयमाहाल्ये १४ सर्ग:
Vira, i. e. Mahávíra or Vardhamana, the last of the Jain Tirthan
Trans.—"Three years and five months and a half after my
nirváņa (death) there will be produced an Indra, a destroyer of religion. He will be called a fifth Mára (killer). Four hundred and sixty-six years and forty-five days after him, Vikramárka Raja, honouring the advice of Siddhasena Sùri as the words of Jina, will free the earth from debt, and, setting aside the current era, will establish his own.”
It is clear then from this text, which we have collated with three old MSS. in our possession, that the Samvat Era replaced that of Var
Asiatic Researches, vol. ix. p. 142. The same opinions are repeated at p. 156.
Ueber das Satrunjaya Máhátmyam von Albrecht Weber, Leipzig, 1858. p. 92. Weber's text has Arit Area: which would make a difference of three months. The text we have quoted is from two admirable manuscripts in our possession.
dhamána or Mahávíra after 470 years. The same statement is made in several Jain works of the Swetárnbara sect which are in our possession. Colonel Wilford and his Pandits (the latter probably on purpose) confounded Víra with Vikramaditya, who is also called Víra Vikrama, Víra, signifying valorous : and further, by ignoring the first three and a half or four years, they have at one stroke thrown into their calculations a mistake of 470 years.
The 477 years after Vikrama, i. e. A. D. 420, is the date when, according to the S’átrunjaya Mahátmya, S'iladitya, king of Valabhí, expelled the Buddhists from Saurashtra, recovered S'atrunjaya and other places of pilgrimage from them, and erected many Jain temples.*
Few Orientalists now a days rely upon the speculations of Colonel Wilford; but some of his errors are still supported and perpetuated by distinguished writers on Indian Antiquities.
Professor H. H. Wilson meets with difficulties in reconciling the statements of the Rája Tarangiņí or History of Cashmir, on the assumption of Vikrama's existence at Ujjayiní in the 5th century (Asiatic Researches, vol. xv., p. 39); but he observes (p. 87): “It seems likely that the VIKRAMADITYA, who put the Brahman MATRIGUPTA on the throne of Cashmir, was the prince of that name who lived in the 5th century, or in 441.”
“ The VIKRAMADITYA of the 5th century reigned, it is said, 100 years, dying in A. D. 541, but according to the Satrunjaya Mahátmya, Siladitya was king in 447.” Here, besides admitting Colonel Wilford's erroneous data in regard to Vikrama, a second incorrect assumption is made of the identity of the Siladitya of the Satrunjaya Mahátmya, with Siladitya, the son and successor of Harsha Vikramaditya. The Siladityas have become as great a source of confusion in Indian chronology as the various Vikramadityas and Chandraguptas; and, to prevent repetition, we shall here remark that the oldest Siladitya we read of in the Jain records is the son of Subhaga, daughter of Deváditya Bráhmaņa, of the village of Khatá in Gurjardesá.
* Weber, ibid p. 109, verse 286:
सप्तसप्ततिमब्दांतामतिक्रम्यचतुःशतीम् विक्रमार्काच्छिलादित्योभविताधर्मवृद्धि- कृत्॥ सर्ग १४ श्लोक २८६
[To be continued.]
Art. IV.-Further Observations on the Structure of Foramini
fera and on the Lurger Fossilized Forms of Sind, &c., including a new Genus and Species. By H. J. Carter, Esq., F.R.S.
Presented 11th April 1861.
Since my observations on the structure of Operculina Arabica, and my description of some of the larger forms of Fossilized Foraminifera in Sind were published, in 1852* and 18537 respectively, many valuable contributions have been made to the structure and species of the Foraminifera, amongst which, and those that I shall have to refer to most here, are MM. le Vicomte d'Archiac and J Haime's “ Monograph on the Nummulites,” I and Dr. Carpenter's "Memoirs ” respectively, on the structure of Orbitolites, Orbiculina, Cycloclypeus, Heterostegina, § and Operculina, || because they have enabled me most to correct, add to, and explain what I have already stated respecting the Foraminifera ; it being easily conceived that, in a branch of know
; ledge like this, which is still in its infancy, every contribution that is worth anything will probably more or less revolutionize that which has preceded it, at the same time that it will claim for its author that consideration for his errors and omissions which such progressive knowledge demands.
It might be asked, why I do not write complete editions of my
Papers" instead of giving simply corrections, additions, &c. ? My reply is, that "I have not time to do this now, and therefore record
* Annals and Mag. of Nat. Hist. vol. x. p. 161.
+ Id. vol. xi. p. 425. These were also published in the IVth and Vth vols. of the Society's Journal, pp. 430 and 124 respectively, where they may be consulted as well as in the “ Annals.”
# Description des Animaux Poss. du Groupe Nummulitique de l'Inde.-Paris, 1853.
§ Phil. Trans. part 1, p. 181, and pt. 2, p. 549.—1856. || Id. p. 1.-1859.
N.B.-As I shall have to refer to these “ works” frequently, I shall only use “Ann.” for the first; “ D'Arch. et Haime" for the second ; and “Dr. Carp.” for the third ; with the number of the page, plate, or figure that may be necessary.
what I have to offer for the use of others for this purpose, or for my own use on some future occasion, as the case may be.”
Needing no other introduction than this then, I will only further premise, (as much of what I have already stated has been denied), that, in my “ Paper" of 1852, on the structure of Operculina Arabica, to which was added an illustration of an infiltrated Nummulite (N. acuta), showing that the canal-system was the same in both, I observed, that the former would "elucidate all that has hitherto been stated of, and leave little to be added to, the general structure of foraminiferous shells both recent and fossil," and I am glad to be able to add now, viz. ten years since this observation and my description of the structure of Operculina were written, that I have not stated in either anything which I wish to recall. Since then, however, Ehrenberg has confirmed what I have described and illustrated respectively, of the canal-system in Operculina and Nummulites, viz. in Nummulites striata, in 1855 ;* and lately, I have been able to repeat this myself most satisfactorily in another of the “Striata,” viz. in N. Ramondi (mihi), as I shall show hereafter.
I would also mention here my regret, that in my “Paper” on the structure of Operculina Arabica, I did not observe that Professor Williamson had previously pointed out the existence of the canal-system in part, viz. in the marginal cord of Nonionina.t This arose from ignorance of the fact, for I never could, and never have been able even up to this day, to obtain the volume of the Transactions of the Microscopical Society of London, (1st Ser. vol. iii.), in which it was published. While that on Faujasina by the same author, which points out the "intra-septal canals” of this system, although read in 1851, was not published by that Society until 1853 (2nd Ser. vol. i.), that
my Paper” on Operculina Arabica appeared in the “ Annals and Magazine of Natural History,” and hence the reasons for Professor Williamson's discovery having been omitted.
is a year
Further Observations on the Structure of Foraminifera.
OPERCULINA, d'Orbigny. In Dr. Carpenter's elaborate and valuable “ Paper” on the structure of this genus, taken from specimens of Operculina Arabica originally obtained from the Philippine Islands, he has made an important addition to what I have stated on the subject in one respect, and anything
* Ap. Dr. Carp. Phil. Trans.-1859, p. 28.
+ Id. id.