292

Chapter 5 Discovering India's Past

In ancient times there existed diplomatic, commercial and cultural relations between India and Hellenic and the Hellenistic Worlds. After the rise of Islam and with that the expansion of Islamic political power there existed little or no direct communication between India and Europe. With the arrival of Vasco da Gama in Calicut in 1498, there came to be discovered the direct sea route between India and Europe. The Portuguese were followed by the other European trading companies namely the Dutch, the French, the Danish and the British. The European colonial powers put an end to the Turkish Supremacy on the Indian Ocean and the Arab monopoly of trade between Asia and Europe. In the end, in the struggle between European colonial powers, for establishing political supremacy in India, the British emerged as victorious.

During the period of three centuries from the end of the fifteenth century to the end of the eighteenth century, there were merchants, envoys, physicians, soldiers, sailors, adventurers, missionaries and fortune seekers, who came from different countries of Europe to India. Some of them wrote their observations about India: its people and society; some of them attempted to study Indian languages and literature. For instance Thomas Stephens or Stevens (1549-1619) an Englishman was one of the fzrst Europeans in modem times to study Indian languages seriously.^ ' He studied Konkani, a dialect of Marathi and published a Konkani grammar and composed a remarkable poem entitled Kristana Purana. But most of them had inadequate knowledge of the geography of India, of its customs, traditions and of its literature and languages. They recorded their hurried 293

and superficial observations and obviously their accounts contain stereotype information about India. The prejudiced ones made fantastic and unrealistic presentations. For instance, Abbe Dubois in presenting Hindus as degraded and superstitious, described exclusively the dark side of Hinduism.^^ In conclusion, until the second half of the eighteenth century, few Europeans made serious attempt to understand Indian Society in its proper historical perspective.

Thomas R. Trautmann described orientalism after the arrival of Sir William Jones in India in 1783 as 'the new orientalism'.^^ However, there were a few orientalists, who came before Jones arrived in India, who were the first practitioners of the new orientalism. Trautmann explained certain characteristics of the first practitioners of the new orientalism.^ ^ In the first place, the earlier writings on India that had been considered as authoritative* came to be replaced by the works of new orientalists. Secondly the first practitioners of orientalism approached to India's past through Persian; their works were mostly translations fi^omPersian . Thirdly, they based their knowledge of India on direct interchange with the pandits in India, who were either teachers of language or scholarly interlocutors to them or experts on the Hindu law. They were sympathetic in their attitude towards understanding India's past and its culture. And lastly, they drew authority from their knowledge of the languages of India as opposed to those of the travelers and missionaries. 'The command of language'^ ^

* These works were such as : "the Dutch missionary Abraham Roger's Open door to heathendom, widely known through the French translation of 1670, La Porte Ouverte, Pour parvenir a la connoissance du paganisme cache'; Henry Lord's A display of two forraigne sects in the East Indies (1630); the letters edifiantes et Curieuses of the Jesuits (1702-77); the writings of the travelers especially Francois Bemier (1968)[1698]; and those of the Savants. Trautmann, Thomas R., Aryans and British India (New Delhi, Vistar Publications, 1997), p. 30 294

as the phrase coined by Bernard Cohn, enabled them to go 'to the deeper meaning of things, to intentionaHty of those',*- ^ whom they were trying to understand and describe.

The French were the first to take interest in Indian learning. They started a systematic investigation by the beginning of the eighteenth century.* The first practitioner of the new orientalism was Anque'til Duperron. He with the help of Parsi scholars in India discovered the Avesta and published it in three volumes in 1771. Interestingly, his next achievement was his translation of the Upanishads. It was in 1636, the Persian translation of the Upanishads under the title Sirr-ul-Akbar was made by Dara Shukoh 'in order to discover any Wahdat-al-wujud doctrines hidden in them, and not as a linguistic exercise'.^ ^ The Persian manuscript of this work was secured by Duperron and from this he prepared the first European translation of the fifty Upanishads in Latin. His French translation was never published but the Latin version known as "Oupnek'hat" was published in 1801-02.^ It is significant that Duperron recommended to treat the Indian classics on a par with those

* Bignan, the librarian of the French king made an appeal in 1718 asking travellers 'to purchase or make a copy of every book of note, as well as grammars and dictionaries, available in India or in regions where Indian culture prevailed'. Accordingly, many French officials, residents, missionaries and visitors started collecting Indian Texts. For instance, the missionary Calmette, obtained copies of the first three Vedas. Pere Pons collected many works in the different branches of classical Sanskrit literature. His efforts resulted in the publication of the first printed catalogue of Sanskrit literature in Paris in 1739. Sihghal, D.P., India and Worid Civilization (Calcutta, Rupa and Co., 1993), p. 209.

^ Friedrich Majer's book on Hindu thought Published in 1819 introduced Schopenhauer to Indian Philosophy. One of the books which Schopenhauer had read earlier included the name of the Oupnekhat. When he read it, he wrote , "it has been the solace of my life and will be the solace of my death" Das, Sisir Kumar, Western Sailors Estem Seas German Response to Indian Culture (New Delhi, Thomson Press (India) ltd., 1971), p. 17. 295

of Greece and Rome ^^ He emphatically stated the need to go beyond the mere antiquarian interest and to study the philosophy of the Oupnek'hat seriously.^ •'

John Zephaniah Holwell's account of "The Religious Tenets of the Gentoos", appeared in his 'Interesting Historical Events' relative to the provinces of Bengal and the Empire of Indostan (1767). This is an account of a body of written laws by Brahma, which Holwell describes it as the Chatah Bhade Shastah. Holwell explicitly stated his view-point that not to rely earlier accounts about India by authors in almost all ages.# Quite contrary to the views expressed by his predecessors, who depicted the Hindus as " a race of stupid and gross idolaters",^ ^ Holwell went to the extent of suggesting that Homer, Virgil, Lucretius, Ovid, Lucian availed themselves of the simple cosmology of Brahma and derived their myths of creation from the Hindus. He further wrote that "from these our Mitton copied".^^^^ Holwell was of the view that the Egyptians, Greeks, Romans borrowed their mythology and cosmology from the doctrines of the

* Edmund Burke who was keenly interested in the affairs in India described Holwell's account in the Annual Ragister as "a very curious and important acquisition to the general stock of literature in Europe"(a) Voltaire called Halwell's shastah 'the oldest homage to God on earth.' (b) Annual Register (1766), II, p. 307 Quoted in Singh, C.S., Theory of Literature (New Delhi, Anmol Publications, 1998), p. 19 b) Oeuvres xxix, p. 167 Quoted in Singh, C.S., op. cit., p. 20.

^ Holwell in his Preliminary Discourse to the Religious Tenets of the Gentoos said : "Having sediously perused all that has been written of the empire of Indostan, both as to its ancient as well as more modem state; as also the various accounts transmitted to us, by authors in almost all ages ... I venture to pronounce them all very defective, fallacious and unsatisfactory to an inquisitive searcher after tmth; and only tending to convey a very imperfect and injurious resemblance of a people, who from the earliest times have been an ornament to the creation if so much can with propriety be said of any known people upon earth". Kejariwal, O.P., The Asiatic Society of Bengal and the Discovery of India's Past. (Delhi, O.U.P., 1988), p. 19. 296

Brahmins/ ^ Holwell on the basis of the existence of an early connection between India, Persia and Egypt expressed that 'Pythagoras came to India and borrowed the doctrines of the unity of Godhead, ... from the Brahmins of India'/ ' What Holwell was trying to do was to establish the great antiquity of the Indian people and their literature. He, expressing himself against superficial studies, emphasized the need for a new orientation to Indian studies. In this context he told not to depend only on the application of European standards to the study of India's past.^ -*

Alexander Dow (1735-79) published his History of Hindustan in three volumes between 1768 and 1772. Dow was primarily a Persian scholar and his 'History of Hindustan' is mainly a translation of the portions of Tarikh-i-Firishta and the work came to be regarded as 'the first general history of Muslim India to have been written in Great Briton'.^ ^ His work deals with the rise, expansion and decline of the Islamic powers in India from the eleventh to the eighteenth century. It remained the standard work until the publication of John Brigg's 'History of the Rise of the Mohammedan Power in India' in 1829.^ ^ The first volume of his 'History of Hindostan' contains the dissertation on the customs, manners, language, religion and philosophy of the Hindus and a catalogue of the Gods of the Hindus. Dow was one of the earliest writers in modem times to mention the four Vedas and to describe them as the principal tenets of Brahmins. His observation led him to conclude that 'the authentic history of the Hindus went back farther than that of any other nation'.^ ^

Before the publication of Dow's work, the British historical knowledge about Mughal India remained, limited to the memoirs of European travellers to India, some articles in D'Herbelot's Bibliotheque Orientale and the introductory pages of James Fraser's History of Nadir Shah (London, 1742). Grewal, J.S., Muslim Rule in India The Assessment of British Historians (London, O.U.P., 1970), p. 6. 297

Warren Hastings, the first Governor General of Bengal, rightly understood the necessity of the study of Indian languages, laws, religion and culture in order to consolidate the British rule in India. In accordance with his theory that 'Indians should be governed by Indian principles, particularly in relation to law',^ ^ Warren Hastings appointed a committee of eleven 'professors' of Sanskrit under the supervision of Nathaniel Halhed, the grammarian of Bengali- 'Grammar of the Bengal Language' (1778). Halhed printed his digest under title 'A code of Gentoo Laws, or Ordinations of the Pundits' in London in 1776. This being a private edition, the copies of the code were not for sale. The non-availability of the code led Bentham to complain bitterly that the book was so rare.^ ^ Anquetil Dupperon tried in vain to procure a copy.^ ^ The code demonstrated that Hindus had a well-developed system of laws. The publication of the code challenged the European nation that the Hindus have no written laws whatever. The code and Halhed's learned preface made an important contribution to the process of familiarizing Europe with Indian civilization. Charles Butler appreciated it as ' the most valuable present which Europe ever received from Asia'^ ^ The historian Robertson viewed the code as comparable 'with the celebrated digest of Justinian, or with the systems of Jurisprudence in nations most highly civilized'.' ^

* The pandits compiled in Sanskrit a compendium of Hindu law under the title Vivadamavasetu, "a Causeway through the sea of litigations." This Sanskrit text was translated into Persian via a Begali oral version, by a Sanskrit knowing Muslim scholar Zain ud-Din 'Ali Rasa'i. Halhed was entrusted with the task of translating it into English. Warren Hastings who knew Persian well closely followed the translating work and checked parts of the English translation against the Persian copy. In this way the Sanskrit text came to be translated into English under the supervision of Halhed. Rocher, Rosane, Orientalism, Poetry, and the Millennium : The Checkered Life of Nathaniel Brassey Halhed 1751-1830 (Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass, 1983), pp. 49-52 298

Halhed described the structure of Sanskrit as "the grand source of Indian literature, the parent of almost every dialect from the Persian Gulph to the China Seas"' ^ He dealt with the Hindu concept of four Yugas of world ages and then concluded that 'the doctrines of the Hindu's travelled into Egypt and thus became familiar to Moses whose laws bear a close resemblance to those of Manu'A ' He unhesitatingly wrote that ' the world does not now contain Annals of more indisputable Antiquity than those delivered down by the ancient Brahmins"/ ^

The most prominent member of the early group of the practitioners of the new orientalists was Charles Wilkins (1750-1836). He learned Sanskrit at Varanasi and became the first Englishman to acquire knowledge of Sanskrit. He later published a Sanskrit grammar. He became known more for his English translation of the Bhagvad Gita, which was published in London in 1785.^ This is the first Sanskrit work rendered directly into

* Before the publication of Wilkin's Sanskrit 'Grammar' following attempts were made by different scholars Heinrich Roth, a Jesuit father and missionary at the Mughal Court in Agra, learned Sanskrit and also wrote a Sanskrit grammar in Latin between 1660-62 But the manuscript remained unpublished. Johann Ernst Hanxleden, a German Jesuit, also compiled a Sanskrit grammar in Latin. But, it also remained unpublished. Johann's unpublished Sanskrit grammar was used by Fra Paolino de st. Bartholomeo (Whose real name was Johannes Philipus Wessdin) who wrote two Sanskrit grammars in Rome in 1790 Stache-Rosen, Valentina, German Indeologists Biographies of Scholars in Indian Studies Writing in German (New Delhi, Max Mueller Bhavan, 1981), p. 1 Singhal, D. P., op. cit., p. 203.

# Later, Wilkins with a view to familiarizing European intellectuals translated the Hitopadesa (1787) and the Sakuntala episode from the Mahabharaita (1795). When Sanskrit was all but unknown to Europeans Wilkins produced a Grammar of the Sanskrit Language in London in 1808. The students of the Haileybury were required to study Sanskrit compulsorily and Wilkins primarily wrote for them. He also 'looked over each sheet of a new edition of Richardson's "Dictionary of the (contd.) 299

a European language i.e. English. Wilkins himself called the Bhagvad-Gita 'one of the greatest curiosities ever presented to the literary world'.^^ Warren Hasting appreciated Wilkin's translation and described the Gita as "a very curious specimen of the Literature, the mythology, and morality of the ancient Hindoos'.^ ^ Hastings understood the significance of the translation, against the backdrop of the European attitude of considering Indians as ' creatures scarce elevated above the degree of savage life',^ ^ in believing that the translation would be of help in revealing the civilization of the ancient Indians from an age ' preceding even the first efforts of civilization in our own quarter of the globe'.^ ^ Wilkins was the first European to study Sanskrit inscriptions. He discovered and deciphered the Monghyr copper-plate and reported it to the Asiatic Society of Bengal. He also succeeded in deciphering some other ancient inscriptions on copper-plates and stone pillars. E.g. the Budal Stone pillar inscription. This certainly entitles him to a claim as a pioneer in Indian Epigraphy.^ ^

Persian, Arabic and English Languages" before it was finally printed off. He also published Sri Dhatu Manjiri - "the Radicals of the Sanskrit Language" i) Singhal, D.P., op. cit., p. 205. ii) Dey, Shumbhao Chander, Sir Charles Wilkins' in Eminent Orientalists (Madras, G.A. Nateson and Co., P' ed. 1922), pp. 40-43

* Warren Hastings, the architect of the formulation of the policy of new orientalism, while recommending the publication of Wilkin's work, wrote to the Director of the East India Company : "I hesitate not to pronounce the gita a performance of great originality, of a sublimity of conception, reasoning and diction almost unequalled and a single exception, amongst all the known religions of mankind, of a theology accurately corresponding with that of the Christian disposition, and most powerfully illustrating its fundamental doctrines .... I should not fear to place in opposition to the best French version of the most admired passages of the Iliad or Odyssey, or of the first and sixth books of our own Milton ... the English translation of the Mahabharat." Keay, John, India Discovered the Recovery of a Lost Civilization (London, Harper Collins, 2001), p. 25. 300

However, the project of the new orientaHsts to unearth India's past received its impetus when the Asiatic society of Bengal was established under the Presidentship of Sir William Jones on 15 January 1784.* Sir William Jones in his very learned and suggestive discourse explained the vastness of the field of enquiry. As to the objects of inquiry he explained that: "you will investigate whatever is rare in the stupendous fabric of nature, will correct the geography of Asia, ... will trace the annals and traditions of those nations who have peopled or desolated it; you will examine their methods in arithmetic and geometry, in trigonometry, mensuration, mechanics, optics, astronomy, and general physics; ... in morality, grammar, rhetoric, and dialectic; in medicine ... anatomy and chemistry. To this you will add researches into their agriculture, manufacture and trade ... music, architecture and poetry ... if now it be asked what are the intended objects of our enquiries within these spacious limits, we answer Man and Nature; whatever is performed by the one or the produced by the other".^ ^ The Asiatic Society embarked upon a systematic and comprehensive study of all aspects of India's past and its culture. Jones himself learned Sanskrit primarily with the object of gaining mastery over Hindu Dharmashastra. In appreciation of the Sanskrit language he wrote: " The Sanskrit language, whatever be its antiquity, is of a wonderful structure, more perfect than the Greek, more copious than the Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either..."^ ^ Jones was not the first scholar to discern linguisfic similarities between Sanskrit, Greek

Before the foundation of the Asiatic Society in 1784 there was one learned body in the world called 'Konink Lijk Bataviaasch Gentootschap Van Kunsten witten- Schappen' This learned body was founded by a group of Dutch scholars at Batavia in Jawa in 1778 for the promotion of oriental learning Dey, Amalendu, Introduction to Early correspondence of the Asiatic Society (1766- 1825) in the Journal of the Asiatic Society, Vol, XLIV, No. 1, (Kolkata, The Asiatic Society, Nov. 2002), p. 51. 301

and Latin." He extended this genealogical connection possibly to include Persian, German and Celtic. He founded the method of comparative philology and employed it to identify the concept of the Indo-European family of languages. He indicated that they had a common lost origin. He wrote: "... Yet bearing to both of them a stronger affinity, both in the roots of verbs and in the forms of grammar, than could possibly have been produced by accident; so strong indeed, than no philosopher could examine them all three without believing them to have sprung from some common source which, perhaps no longer exists: there is a similar reason, though not quite so forcible, for supposing that both the Gothic and the Celtick, though blended with a very different idiom, had the same origin with the Sanskrit, and the old Persian might be added to the same family...."^ ^ After this epoch-making statement scholars on the basis of comparative philological studies endeavoured to open up the secrets of many ancient civilizations.

Jones succeeded in identifying an Indian king named Sandracottos in the Greek and Latin histories of Alexander with Chandragupta Maurya

A Florentine merchant Filippo Sassetti was perhaps the first person to declare that there existed some relationship between 'Sanskrit and the principal languages of Europe' Pe're coeurdoux's text though written in about 1768 was not published until 1808 by Anquetil. He in his discussion gave a thought to the similarities between Sanskrit, Latin and Greek 'refuting the earlier suggestion that they are due to commerce or the Indian expedition of Alexander.' He reached this conclusion with the help of Maridas Filial of Pondicherry. It is notable that Nathaniel Halhed in his preface to the Bengali grammar Published in 1776 considered Sanskrit to be more ancient than Greek and drew attention to the similarity between Sanskrit and European languages. 1. Singhal, D.P., op.cit., pp. 199,203 2. Trautmann, Thomas R., op.cit., p.54 3. Rocher, Rosane, op.cit., p.78 302

of the Sanskrit sources, founder of the Mauryan dynasty in about 324 B.C.* He also identified Chandragupta's capital Pataliputra with the Paliobothra as mentioned in Greek and Latin sources. Jones considered truth as the 'very soul and essence of history'^ ' and thus emphasized the importance of empirical component in reconstructing history. This led him to separate fables and myths from history with a view to establishing a historical chronology of the Indian past. Thus, Jones succeeded in discovering ' a sheet-anchor for ancient Indian chronology',^ ^ thereby bringing the historical part of India's past 'into the grid of world chronology.'' -^ One may not exaggerate it when one says that, in doing so Jones 'invented Indian history.'^^^^

Jones translated the drama Sakuntal (or the Fatal Ring) by Kalidas first into Latin and then into English and published it from Calcutta in 1789.^ He also published a translation of the 'Geet-Govind', a collection

Joseph Deguignes, a sinologist, received from Maridas Pillai, the chief interpreter to the supreme council of Pondicherry, his translation of the Bagavatam even before its publication. This manuscript 'contained the dynastic lists of the Suryavamsa and the Somavamsa kings who had reigned since Parikshit, including Chandragupta.'(i) Deguignes found no difficulty in identifying Chandragupta with Sandrakottos of the Greeks. This synchronism was published in the 'M'emoires de 1.' Academic des Inscriptions et Belles lettres. The same synchronism was rediscovered by Sir William Jones 'which became part of Indian history.' No one can deny this fact. i) Singhal, D.P., op.cit., pp.209-210. ii) Kejariwal, O.P., op.cit., p.71.

The notion of the European Intelligentsia that India possessed inferior civilization made it difficult for them to digest the fact when Jones in his preface called Kalidasa 'the Shakespeare of India' to which Blackwoods's Edinburgh Magazine objected and wrote: " To call [Kalidasa] the Shakespeare of India - not perhaps a very philosophical opinion, for neither the human mind nor human life did ever so exist in India, as to create such kind of faculties as those of Shakespeare, or to furnish field for their inspiration." 303

of poems by Jayadeva, the celebrated author of Bengal, in 1792. Jones' 'The Institute of Hindu Law or the Ordinances of Menu', came to be published posthumously in 1794. He also translated various Indian hymns and parts of the Vedas. These translations became popular with intellectuals of the west bringing India's cultural attainments to their notice. In a way Jones was interpreting ancient Indian culture to the west. All this was certainly against the European notion that ' savages could not have real literature, philosophy and piety'.' * Jones was replying to this European belief in western cultural superiority. Thus Jones contributed a lot to create an entirely new awareness of ancient Indian culture.

After the death of Sir William Jones in April 1794, Henry Thomas Colebrooke the most outstanding Sanskrit scholar of his day, became the President of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. He devoted to the cause of Sanskrit learning and Indian studies.^ He, instead of dealing with political

* George Forster published the first German translation of Shakuntala in 1791. George Forster the translator, sent a copy to Johann Gottfried Herder who described it as 'the essence of perfection'. Herder sent a copy of Shakuntala to Goethe who wrote a poem on the drama which is now famous - 'the first tribute to Kalidasa from a great European poet.' Not only that Goethe also modelled his drama - Faust - on that of Shakuntala.(I) It is reported that 'by the end of the nineteenth centuary it had run into over eighty translations in addition to twenty-one editions of the text and eighteen critical studies'(II) It is interesting to note that Thomas Jefferson presented a copy of Jone's Shakuntala to his daughter in 1791.(iii) Emerson included Shakuntala in his reading list. Thoreau copied several passages from Jone's translation into his private notebook.'(iv) i) Das, Sisir Kumar, op.cit., pp.4-5 ii) Kejariwal, O.P., op.cit., p.61 iii) Kennedy, Kenneth A.R., 'The Legacy of Sir William Jones: Natural History, Anthropology, Archaeology' in Bulletin of the Deccan College vol. 54-55 (1994- 95), p.29 iv) Kejariwal, O.P., op.cit., p.61. Henry Thomas Colebrooke was professor of Snaskrit, in the college established 304

aspects, gave more importance to the study of intellectual and social aspects of India's ancient past. He studied the ancient Indian texts and inquired into the origins of the customs, rites and rituals for studying contemporary Indian society. His account of the various minor sects in India came to be considered as 'standards of reference on matters to which they relate'^^^^. His essay on the Vedas published in 1805 made Europeans acquainted for the first time with this most ancient work of the Hindus.^ for civil servants at fort William in Calcutta. He completed the work undertaken by Sir William Jones of preparing a digest of Hindu Law on contracts and Successions. He published his Sanskrit Grammar in 1805. He edited Hitopadesa in 1804 and published a critical edition of a Sanskrit Dictionary, Amarakos'a in 1808. In his observations on the sect of the Jains (1807) he established its origin in the remotest ages of antiquity and thus established the priority of Jainism over Buddhism. He published translations of the two celebrated treatises on the Hindu Law of Inheritance in 1810. He was a keen mathematician and he published his dissertation on the algebra of the Hindus (1817). His learned articles on Indian and Arabian division of Zodiac and Hindu astronomy appeared in the Asiatic Researches. He took interest in the study of the question of the height of the Himalayas and finally established the claim as the highest mountains in the world. i) Iyengar, M.S. Ramaswami, Henry Thomas Colebrooke in Eminent Orientalists, Indian, European, American (op.cit., 1922), pp.47-61 ii) Singhal, D.P., op.cit., pp. 207-208 iii) Keay, John, op.cit., p. 190

* Colebrooke in his introduction to the 'Indian and Arabian Divisions of the Zodiac' wrote: " that the dynasties of princes who have reigned paramount in India, or the line of Chieftains, who have ruled over particular tracks, will be verified; or that the events of war or the effects of policy, during a series of ages, will be developed; is an expectation, which I neither entertain, nor wish to excite .... But the state of manners, and the prevalence of particular doctrines, at different periods may be deduced from a diligent perusal of the writings of authors, whose age is ascertained: and the contrast of different results, for various and distant periods, any furnish a distance outline of the progress of opinions. A brief history of the nation itself, rather than of its government, will be thus sketched"(Italics by researcher) Kejariwal, O.P. op.cit., p. 109

William Jones and Charles Wilkins were aware of the existence of the Vedic texts. Jones had even translated some passages of the Atharva Veda. However, they 2m

His other contributions included papers on the Hindu schools of law, Indian weights and measures, the origin of caste, a supplementary law digest the Indian system of grammar, etc. He further extended Jones' thesis that the Indo-European family of languages had a common lost origin by making extensive notes 'not only on Sanskrit, Greek, Latin and the languages sprung from them, but also on the groups connected with German and Slavonic'.^ ^ His natural bent towards mathematics and astronomy motivated him to inquire into the works by Aryabhatta, Varahamihira, Brahmagupta and Bhaskaracharya. Regarding the knowledge of mathematical science of Hindus he wrote: " The Hindus had certainly made distinguished progress in the science so early as the century immediately following that in which the Grecians taught the rudiments of it."^ ^ His study of India's ancient past convinced him that "the Hindu is the most ancient nation of which we have valuable remains and has been surpassed by none in refinement and civilization". ^ ^

After Colebrooke's return to England in 1815, it was Horace Hayman Wilson who became known as the leading oriental scholar in India. His knowledge of Sanskrit was of a high order. He translated in verse, Kalidasa's the Maghdutt of the ' Cloud Messenger,' in 1813 which came to be described as 'one of the most perfect translations that adorns the literature of the nation.'^ ' He compiled the Sanskrit English Dictionary in 1819, 'comprehending all the radicals of the language, and between 30 and 40,000 derivatives with their etymological development hardly knew at all of the Rgveda. Although col. Poller succeeded in procuring the complete text of these scriptures from the Maharaja of Jaipur and Sir Robert collected fragments at Benaras. But no European scholar ever studied them. The credit for obtaining the complete texts and the commentary of Sayanacharya on Rgveda and studying them closely goes to Colebrooke. Kejariwal, O.P., op.cit., pp. 98-99. 306

and characteristic grammatical inflections.'^ ^ Wilson organized and published a catalogue of the papers from the Mackenzie collection with excerpts in two volumes in 1828. He published his 'Hindu Theatre' consisting of entire translations of six dramas. In this, 'monumental work,'^ ^ he discussed the Hindu dramatic system and in an appendix to it, gave an analytical description of twenty-three other dramatic compositions. His treatise on 'the Religious sects of the Hindus' based on Sanskrit, Persian and Hindustani sources and also on oral reporting gave varied information about the 'history, rituals, religious beliefs, and peculiarities, traditions and religious literature of twenty schools of Vaishnavas, nine schools of the Saivas, four of the Saktas and ten miscellaneous sects including seven classes of the Nanak Shahis'.^ ^ It was in 1848 that Wilson critically edited Mill's work giving elaborate foot notes.^ Wilson was fundamentally opposed to Mill's condemnation of Hindu civilization. In his preface to the fourth edition Wilson severely criticizing Mill wrote: "with every imperfect knowledge, with materials

Governor General Lord Wellesley made systematic efforts to gather information about the natural sources, the arts and manufactures, and the social and economic conditions by establishing one such survey of the Mysore territories under the direction of Colonel Colin Mackenzie. Subsequent to Mackenzie's death in 1821 H.H. Wilson worked on the Mackenzie collection and published a scholarly catalogue which included '1586 manuscripts in 13 languages in 19 scripts ... 264 volumes of what Mackenzie labeled "Local Tracts ... related to the history of particular temples, kingdoms, families and castes .. 77 volumes of copies of inscriptions rcorded from temples, copper-plate and various grants, 75 volumes of translations, 79 plans, 2630 drawings, 6218 coins, 106 images and 40 antiquities'. Cohn, Bernard S., op. cit., p. 83

p. 36, It has been expressed that Elphinstone's 'History'of Hindu and Mahammadan India' published in 1840 had failed to replace Mill's work and 'this failure was signalized by the appearance of Hayman Wilson's edition of Mill'. Philips, C.H., James Mill, Mount Stuart Elphinstone and the History of India in Philips, C.H. (ed.). Historians of India, Pakistan and Ceylon (London, O.U.P.), 1961), p. 224. 3i)7

exceedingly defective, with an implicit faith in all testimony hostile to Hindu pretensions, he has elaborated a portrait of the Hindus which was no resemblance whatsoever to the original and which almost outrages humanity."^ ^ Wilson, in appreciation of progress made by the ancient Hindus in the various fields of science wrote: "That in medicine, or the astronomy and metaphysics, the Hindus have kept pace with the most enlightened nations of the world; and that they attained as thorough a proficiency in medicine and surgery, as any people whose acquisitions are recorded." ^'^'^^

With Wilson's article entitled 'Analytical Summary of the Contents of the Vishnu Puran' there began the critical study of the Pumans. He employed the new method of studying the Puranas which made him realize the value of Puranas as historical sources. In the first place, he asked the pundits to procure contents 'not only of chapters and sections but of almost every Sloka on every page'' \ Secondly, he asked young Indian scholars 'to translate the indexes into English'.^ ^ And lastly, after-going through the indexes and translations he selected useful passages and got them translated completely.^ ^

Wilson examined all the forty books of the Dionysiacs and came to the conclusion that 'his work had, in spite of some resemblances in names of persons and places, nothing in common with the Indian epics,'^(5 1 '^' * Wilson prepared the rough draft of the translation of the Wilson's Contribution is important in the light of following hasty and fanciful accounts :- Sir William though had never read than half this poem - The Dionysiacs, tried to establish the identity between Greek and Indian Gods, drawing a parallel between the Dionysiacs and the Ramayana.In the end, he concluded that 'an accurate comparison of the two poems would establish the identity of Dionysos as the elder Rama'. (contd.) 3Q8

Rgveda which was based on the commemtary Sayancharya. It came to be published in 1850. The translation came to be regarded as 'a splendid performance' and it secured for Wilson 'a high place among orientalists'.^ ^

Wilson in his 'Essay on 'The Hindu History of Kashmir' made known the first six cantos of Kalhan's Rajatarangini. On the basis of Kalhan's work Wilson drew up a chronological table of the reigns of various kings. He correctly understood the significance of the work as 'the only Sanskrit composition yet discovered, to which the title of History can with any propriety be applied, is the Raja Tarangini, a history of cashmir.'^ ^ The verdict given by Wilson was endorsed later by Stein, R. C. Majumdar and A.L. Basham.

Francis Wilford in his exaggerated account wrote that a certain Dionysiacs 'wrote also a history of the Mahabharat in Greek, which is lost; but from the few fragments remaining, it appears, that it was nearly the same with that of Nonnus, and he entitled the work Bassarica'. Kejariwal, O.P., op. cit., pp. 156-157

A.L. Basham agreed with Wilson's remark and expressed that 'The work is unique as the only attempt at true history in the whole of surviving Sanskrit literature ...' (c) Stein, M. A., Kalhan's Rajatarangini, Vol. 1, (London, Contable, rpt., 1900, Delhi, Motialal Banarsidass, 1979), p. viii cited in a) Kejariwal, O.P., op. cit., p. 128 b) Majumdar, R.C., Ideas of History in Sanskrit Literture in Philips, C. H., (ed.), Historians of India, Pakistan and Ceylon (London, O.U.P., 1961), p. 13 c) Basham, A.L., The Kashmir Chronical in Philips, C.H., (ed.), op.cit., p. 58 Stein, in the preface to his excellent translation of Kalhan's Raja Tarangini into English concurred with the view expressed by Wilson when he called it 'practically the sole extant product of a Sanskrit literature possessing the character of true chronicle', (a) R.C. Majumdar endorsing the same view-point wrote : "It is a well-known fact that with the single exception of the Rajatarangini (History of Kashmir) there is no historical text in Sanskrit dealing with the whole or even parts of India." (b) (Italics by researcher) 309

Wilson on the basis of the collection of forty-three inscriptions on Mount Abu by Captain Speirs, political agent at Sirohi, for the first time drew up the genealogy of such important dynasties as the Chalukya, Paramars, and the Guhila Rajputs.^ ^ He also drew up nearly accurate genealogy of the Kanoj dynasty - the last great Hindu dynasty of northern India prior to the Muslim conquest. Wilson, realizing the importance of a study of coins found in India, for studying the history of ancient Europe, presented his study of coins preserved in the collection .of the Asiatic society.

His article on 'Description of select coins from original drawings in the possession of the Asiatic society' based on the examination of 120 coins, marked the beginning of numismatic studies in India.^^

Wilson left India in 1832 to occupy the Boden Chair of Sanskrit at the University of Oxford. James Prinsep became the secretary of the Asiatic Society in 1832. Hitherto, Jones and his successors in their endeavour to discover India's past, continued to depend mainly upon the study of ancient literature to the neglect of inscriptional and archaeological studies. Prinsep approached the study of coins, epigraphs and archaeological sites in a scientific spirit. Cunningham described this change as one from the era of what he called 'closet scholastic scholarship' to that of 'field archaeologists', or 'traveling anfiquarians.'^ ^ Prinsep received every kind of assistance from an army of enthusiasts - officers, engineers, explorers, political agents and administrators who worked informally for

A number of persons were engaged in helping Prinsep. Colonel Stacy at Chi tor, Udaipur and Delhi, Lieutenant A. Connolly at Jaipur, Captain Wade at Ludhiana, Captain Cautley at Saharanpur, Lieutenant Cunningham at Benaras, Colonel Smith at Patna, Mr. Tregear at Jounpur, and above all Cunningham (then a Lieutenant) at Samath and Banaras)" There were many others. Kejariwal, O.P., op. cit., p. 187. 310

him by way of collecting information that he asked for.

There was a great obstacle that scholars found it difficult to decipher the alphabets used in the oldest inscriptions on stone and copper­ plates or coins. As early as in 1616 it was Thomas Coryat who saw a plain circular pillar in Delhi and believed that the inscription on the pillar was in Greek characters. He also conjectured that the pillar must have been erected by Alexander the Great, probably, in token of his victory over the Indian King Porus in 326 B.C. But it was doubted that whether Alexander ever had reach Delhi.^ ^

Now it is recognized that the alphabets of modem Devnagari are derived from 'Indian Pali' i.e. Brahmi, the script of which has passed through three distinct stages^ ^ : first, 'the pin-men script' (Asoka Brahmi, ca. 250 B.C.); second, 'a more ornate, chunky script' (Gupta Brahmi, fourth and fifth centuries A.D.); and third, 'a more curved and rounded script' (Kutila, from about the ninth Century A.D., the resemblance to the modem form of the Devanagari script is closer).

The Buddal pillar was Kutila and Wilkins had succeeded in translating the Buddal inscription thereby establishing connection with Devanagari. He also made a breakthrough in reading the Gaya cave inscription of the Gupta period.^ *

Sir William Jones on receiving a copy of the writings on the Delhi pillar had believed them 'to be Ethiopian'.^ ^ The Allahabad pillar displayed a long inscription in each of the two older scripts - Asoka Brahmi and Gupta Brahmi. T. S. Burt sent drawings of the pillar together with facsimiles of all the inscriptions to Prinsep. Both Burt and Prinsep stated that inscriptions on the pillar were of three distinct types.' ' Of the 311

One, which Burt characterized as No, 2, resembled the Devanagari one, facsimiles of which were sent to Captain A. Troyer, a great Sanskrit scholar and Secretary of the Sanskrit College. Troyer read many portions of it, identifying Chadragupta as the great-grandfather of Samudragupta/ ^ Troyer tried to connect this Chandragupta with Chandragupta of the Maurya dynasty whose identity had already been established by Jones. At the same, Troyer also expressed serious doubts about this conyecture. The Rev. W.H. Mill, eminent Sanskrit scholar re-read correctly as 'the great King Gupta in place of Chandragupta'.^ ^ He also took into account the fact that the Chandragupta of the inscription distinctly belonged to solar race, whereas the founder of the Maurya dynasty belonged to the lunar race. W.H. mill on the basis of the studies of the legends on the ancient Hindu coins made by Col. Tod and Wilson and his own retranslation of the entire portion of the inscription for the first time threw light on a dynasty now known as the Gupta dynasty and drew up the genealogy of the Gupta kings.^^^^

Brian Houghton Hodgson, the British resident at the Court of Nepal, sent a description of a pillar found at Bettiah (Lauriya Nandangarh) in northern Bihar, along with a copy of the inscription on the pillar. In this communication he referred to details he had sent in about two more inscribed pillars. In the same communication he also conjectured that 'could they then have been erected as boundary markers?'^ '

Prinsep compared the copy of the inscription on this pillar with the copies of the Delhi and Allahabad inscriptions and arrived at the conclusion that 'all three inscriptions were identically the same'.^ ^

J. Stevenson in his communication on the 'Restoration and Translation of some inscriptions at the Caves of Carli' tried to decipher 312

the Karle inscriptions. He compaired the Karle inscriptions and the Allahabad pillar inscription and read a protion of the Allahabad inscription. He came close to the actual value of the letters in the first part of the inscription. His reading : 'Dvedharam piye piya dwamobharjamegavam' came extremely close to the actual text : 'Davanam piya piyadassi'.' ^ But this line of inquiry was not pursued further.

Prinsep received from Captain Edward Smith facsimiles of inscriptions from stupa at Sanchi, which provided Prinsep with the key to the Asokan inscriptions. Then, Prinsep turned to the first line of the Delhi pillar inscriptions and compared it with other inscriptions and found that it was repeated in the Gimar inscription, the Dhauli inscription and the pillars found in northern India. He determined the sentence to be: "Devanampiya Piyadasi laja hevam aha".^ ^ But the question now was, who was this king, Devanampiya piyadasi? Prinsep on the basis of George Tumour's 'An Epitome of the History of Ceylon' concluded that Devanampiya was Ceylonese king. But now the question was what was a king of Ceylon doing scattering inscription all over northern India ?^ ^ What was his interest in planting trees along the Ganges ? But then Turner on the basis of 'Dipawamso' discovered that king piyadasi of the inscription was none else but king Asoka himself. Indeed the discovery proved a 'turning point of Indain historical research'.^ ^ The deciphering of the Asokan script and its application to read such type of inscriptions, made it possible to assess the full importance of this discovery. All these

Thus, Prinsep succeeded in deciphering the Ashoka Brahmi Script. In order to assess the full importance of this discovery, he applied himself to the task of reading other inscriptions. i) Prinsep's reading of the Saurashtrarian coins revealed the existence of the eastern Kshatrapas. (contd.) 313

efforts gave to India its most glorious chapters the era of Asoka and Buddhism.

Prinsep's two more achievements are equally significant. The first is that he, with the help of two engraved plates showed 'the development of each letter of the modem Devanagari script from its origin in the Ashoka Brahma'.^ ^ He prepared a table illustrating nine distinct stages and giving a date to each and thus gave to scholars 'a ready reckoner'^ ^ for studying Indian scripts. 'The table furnishes a curious species of palaegraphic chronometer by which any ancient inscription may be consigned with considerable accuracy to the period at which it was written, even though it possesses no actual date'.^ ^

Scholars expressed differently as to the exact nature of 'the other alphabet, once known as Bactrian pali and now called Kharoshthi', assigning it to 'corrupt Greek, corrupt Brahmi and the Pahlavi or ancient perisian script.'' ^ In its initial stages of research the script had no universally accepted name. Terrien de Lacouperie and G. Buhler proposed

ii) He deciphered the Hastigumpha inscription and made known 'one of the most important characters of Indian history - king Kharavela of Kaling'. It also brought to light the name of satkami of the Satavahanas iii) He studied the Nagarjuni cave inscriptions at Gaya bringing to light the Maukhari dynasty - the dynasty named after Sardula Varman's Queen Maukhari iv) He re-examined the Allahabad pillar inscription and determined the extent of Samudragupta's empire. v) He compared the facsimiles of the Gimar inscriptions with those of the Dhauli inscriptions and discovered in both of them the recurrence of name Antiochus, the young raja, revealing the existence of connections between Asoka and the Greek kings. vi) On re-reading the Gimar rock inscription, there revealed the names of three Egyptian kings - Ptolemy, Gongakenos and Megas, obviously the contemporaries of Asoka. Thus the application of the discovery to these inscriptions revealed a wealth of material on Asoka. Kejariwal, O.P., op. cit., pp. 209-216 314

the name of the script as Kharoshthiy^ The script was in regular use in northwestern India from c. 6"" or rather 3"^^ century B.C. to c. 4"" or 5"" century A.D. The coins of the Bactrian Greeks and Kushans used the script on one side of the coins and Greek legend on the other side. Prinsep succeeded in reading two royal names in Kharoshti script on the coins of two Indo-Greek kings, Agathocles and pantaleon (c. P' cetitury B.C. - c. P' century A.D.).^ ^ Prinsep read these names from right to left instead of from left to right as in Brahmi.^ The decipherment of two ancient scripts paved the way for rapid progress in the fields of epigraphical and numismatic studies.

The Asiatic Society brought together scholars making them participate in an endeavour to gain knowledge of 'Man and Nature'. It

* Scholars offered various suggestions to name the script but there was no universally acceptable name till the last quarter of the 19* century. G. Buhler observed that 'in a list of scripts in the Lalitvistar, the first two, ... alphabets ... were referred as Brahmi and Kharoshthri' The script in which most of the Asokan edicts have been written came to be called as brahmi. Terrien de Lacouperie and G. Buhler on the basis of a script called Kia-lu or Kia-lu-she- ain, given in a Chinese Encyclopaedia of the 7* century A.D. proposed its name as Kharothi Mukherjee, B.N., 'Some Reflections on the Kharoshti Script' in The Quarterly Review of Historical Studies, Vol. Xxxix, No. 3 and 4, Oct., 1999 to March 2000, pp. 1-2

^ Charles Mason made extensive tours in Baluchistan, Afghanistan and the Punjab during the years 1826 to 1838. An account of these tours was published in four volumes. He collected a large number of coins and explored ancient mounds. He divided his collection of Beghram coins into five categories : 'Greek, Indo-Scythic, Parthian, and Guebre, Brahmanical and Muhammadan' (a) In his communication to the society in 1835, he pointed out to Prinsep the groups of symbols on the coins which he thought represented the namesof Greek rulers, recorded in Greek on the obverse side of the coins'(b) which gave a clue to Prinsep to read the names from right to left. a) Kejariwal, O.P., op. cit., p. 177 b) Chatterjee, Atul and Bum, Richard, op. cit., p. 24 315

inspired the foundation of many similar societies in India and abroad.* It also started its Journal for publishing essays and reports.^ The Society's collection included old books, manuscripts antiquities and specimens of various kinds, which it preserved in its Museum and made it available to scholars for the purpose of study. Scholars searched for ancient texts and brought out their critical editions. They studied contemporary social customs and rituals in the light of what was said about them in the ancient texts. They examined the mythological literature for historical material. They laid the foundation of comparative philosophy and comparative mythology. They began studying social history of India. They visited

* Following the Asiatic Society, a number of Societies came to be founded with a view to giving Impetus to oriental studies. These were : the Literary Society of Bombay (1804), the Madras Literary Society (1812), The Society Asiatique (1822), the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain (1823), the American Oriental Society (1842), the Deutsche Morgenlandische Gesellschaft (1845). Trautmann, Thomas R., The lives of Sir William Jones in Murray, Alexander, (ed.), op. cit., p. 100 A number other Societies also originated from the Asiatic Society. These were : Indian Museum (1814), Trigonometrical Survey of India (1851), Indian Meteorological Department (1875), Zoological Survey of India (1911), Botanical Survey of India, Indian Science congress and the National Institute of Sciences (1934). There were those academic institutions which also originated from the Asiatic Society. These were : The Indian Botanic Garden of Suburb (1875), the Calcutta Medical College (1835), School of Tropical Medicine (1921) and the University of Calcutta (1857). The Archaeological Survey of India (1861), the Anthropological Survey of India (9145), and the Linguistic Survey of India (1894) also owe their origin to the Asiatic Society. Roychaudhari, Chandan, 'Sir WilUam Jones (1746-1794) : A Harbinger of India's Renaissance' in Bulletin of the Deccan College, Vol. 54-55, (1994-95), p. 75. f^ Francis Gladwin, a founder member of the society brought out the first Volume of the Asiatik Miscellany in Calcutta in 1785 and the Second in 1786. The Society's Transactions entitled Asiatic Researches came to be published in Calcutta in 1789. Kejariwal, O.P., op. cit., p. 54. 316

archaeological sites, excavated them, took facsimiles of inscriptions on copper-plates, rocks and pillars. They collected coins and contributed to numismatic studies. They successfully deciphered the ancient scripts viz. Brahmi and Kharoshthi and threw light on several dynasties of ancient and medieval India. Thus the Society succeeded in laying the firm of the study of India's past. It made the scholars of the West aware of the rich cultural attainments of India and altered the European conception of the oriental world and brought India into the main stream of world history. It also made India conscious of its rich cultural heritage and added another aspect to the study of Indian history - that of greater Indian history.

In Western India it was Sir James Mackintosh, who being guided by his own inquisitive mind and his experience of literary and philosophical societies at home'^ ' desired to establish something similar to the Asiatic

James Mackintosh was bom in 1765. He studied at Aberdeen and Edinburgh Universities. He was a close friend of Robert Hall whose 'pure and noble spirit made him the loftiest of English's pulpit orators'. Mackintosh studied ancient classics and discussed the modem philosophy with Robert Hall. Robert Hall described that Mackintosh 'had the most baconian mind of recent times'. Fellow students described Hall and Mackintosh as Plato and Herodotus respectively. Mackintosh began studying medicine but gave it up and took to the study of Law. Although, Mackintosh acknowledged Edmund Bruke as his intellectual master, he entered into controversy against Burke challenging his position on the course of the French Revolution. In 1804 he was appointed Recorder of Bombay. He played a key-role in the foundation of the Literary Society of Bombay. He did his utmost to spread among the Anglo-Indians a knowledge of 'the general maxim of historical criticism'. William Erksine, Mark Wilks, John Briggs, Vans Kennedy came under Mackintosh's influence. Afterwards he became a member of Parliament and also obtained office in the Reform Ministry of Earl Grey. He died in 1832. 1) Cannon, John, Davis, R.H.C., Doyle, William, Green, Jack P., (ed.). The Blackwell Dictionary of Historians (Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1988), p. 263 2) Grewal, J.S., Muslim Rule in India The Assessment of British Historians (Oxford, Calcutta, OUP., 1970), pp. 100, 111-114. 3) The Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, Extra number. The centenary Memorial Volume (Bombay, BBRAS, 1915), pp. 15-16. 317

of Bengal. With the object of bringing together the English intellectuals in Bombay, he convened a meeting of them on the 26"^ November 1804, which was attended by seventeen persons. The members present at the meeting organized themselves into a society under the name of the "Literary Society of Bombay", of which Sir James Macintosh was elected President and William Erskine, Secretary and Charles Forbes, Treasurer. The members decided to meet on the last Monday of each month.

In his inaugural address he explained that the idea on the intellectual side was "to investigate and bring together what could be discovered of the East, so as to form a contribution to the thought and learning of the West."' ' He divided the subjects of inquiries to be

1) Jonathan Duncan, Governor of Bombay 2) James Mackintosh, Knight, Recorder of Bombay 3) Viscount Valentia 4) Oliver Nicolls c-in-c- at Bombay 5) Helenus Scott, first member of Medical Board 6) George Keir, Garrison, Surgeon and Secretary to the Medical Board 7) Robert Drummond, Residency Surgeon, Baroda 8) Stuart Moncrieff Threiplond, Advocate General 9) William Dowdeswell, Bar-at-law 10) Henry Salt, Consul - General in Egypt 11) Brooks, Military Accountant General at Bombay 12) Joseph Boden, Quarter-master - General at Bombay, Founder of the Boden Professorship of Sanskrit at Oxford 13) Thomas Charlton Harris 14) Jasper Nicolls 15) Edward Moor, author of the Hindu Pantheon 16) Charles Forbes and 17) William Erskine, a distinguished oriental scholar. These were the members who attended the meeting held on 26"' of November 1804. It was decided to found the "Literary Society of Bombay" Tivarekar, Ganpatrao Krishna, Index to the Transaction of the Literary Society of Bombay Vol. I-III and Journals of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vols. I-XVII (1841-1887) with historical Sketch of the Society (Bombay, BBRAS, -), pp. 1-2. 318

pursued by the Society, into two classes, physical and Moral pertaining to Nature or to Man respectively/ ^

The former class would include the geography, the geology, the botany, the zoology, the mineralogy, and the meteorology of this continent and the adjacent countries or seas. The latter class would chiefly understand the past and present conditions of the people of this land. This would include all that concerned its peoples - their races and languages, their history and antiquities, their religions and customs - in short their life and thought. It would also remain related to the subjects of political arithmetic and statistics and of the science of political economy.

Mackintosh believed in the concept of progress. He believed that the stock of human knowledge is constantly increasing. He expressed the hope that, 'knowledge is destined one day to visit the whole earth.'^ ^ He explained that the members of the Literary society of Bombay came together by their love of knowledge and that their efforts would 'illuminate and humanize the whole race of man'.^^

There were two objects for which the society was founded^^^) : i) The promotion of literary and scientific investigations more immediately connected with India, ii) The study of the literature, the antiquities, the arts and the sciences of the East generally.

The society decided to adopt the following means for the attainment of the above mentioned objects. They were:^ ' 1) The reading and discussion of papers by the members of the society.

2) The establishment of a comprehensive library.*

It is interesting to mark that the foundation of a library was the first important achievement of the Literary Society of Bombay. The Medical and Literary Library which had been established in 1789 came to be incorporated with the Literary (contd.) 319

The society at its second meeting held on 3P' December 1804 adopted the rule for regulating the admission of members, fixing the rate of subscription at Rs. 60 per annum. This rate was raised to Rs. 100 in September 1811. India the Year 1812 it was decided to increase the usefulness of the Library by admitting persons not members of the Society. This arrangement remained in force till 1874. The Society also provided for the election of honorary members. The Society also allowed persons engaged in literary researches to make free use of the Library for a period of one year. For many years membership of the Society was confined to Europeans. Sir John Malcalm, the president of the Society in a letter to his predecessor in office M. Elphinstone had given a thought to the admission of Indians to the Society. Manekji Cursetji was the first native to seek membership of the Society. Robert Money, Persian secretary to Society of Bombay in 1805. The Society owed the establishment of Library to James Mackintosh. John Malcolm in his speech delivered on 13* January, 1812 gave expression to this fact when he said : "There is no part of that plan upon which this institution is founded, which merits more admiration than that which provides for the establishment of a select and large library. This step was taken at the suggestion of the honorary president, and he looked forward with the most sanguine expectation to the effects it would produce : In this he cannot be mistaken : a spirit of curiosity and investigation will arise in proportion to the means provided for its gratification; and your most active and able members will proceed with more confidence in themselves, when they have ready reference to all that has been published on the subject which occupied their attention ...." At the end of his speech the resolution was moved in which it was stated 'That Sir James Mackintosh be requested to sit for a bust to be placed in the Library of Literary Society of Bombay, as a token of the respect and regard in which he is held by that body." Transactions of the Literary Society of Bombay, Vol. II, (London, -, 1819), Appendix 'C, p. 315 (Hereinafter referred to as Transactions)

Sir John Malcolm, President of the Society. Wrote a letter to Muntstuart Elphinstone on the 5"' of December 1827, appreciating the work done by Elphinstone vis-a-vis the inhabitants of this land. Malcolm in this letter wrote : " ... our interest and reputation will hereafter be greatly promoted by the gradual (contd.) 320

the Government of Bombay, proposed his name in 1833 and Col. Vans Kennedy supported his candidature. Col. Vans Kennedy proposed, "that all natives entitled to sit on grand juries should be eligible to the Literary Society."^ ^ Dr. Wilson took objection to it on the ground that 'it would give a preference over their countrymen of the highest literary attainments to those whose only literature was the acquaintance with the English language'.^ ^ Although Manekji Cursetji did not get the membership of the Society, he was, soon afterwards elected a member of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Then, on the 29"" January 1840, Manekji Cursetji was also elected a member of the Bombay Branch which the Literary Society had then become and thus the doors of the Society were opened to natives. Jagannath Shankar Sheth, Sir Jamsetji Jijibhai and others soon followed him and became members of the Society.

Right from its foundation the Society showed its readiness to do everything that was possible towards the advancement of oriental literature, the study of antiquities and the promotion of the objects of science, arts, and literature in general. Soon after the establishment of the Society it was decided that the Society would publicly announce subjects and would invite essays on them. The Society declared its intention to offer annually a gold medal as a prize for the best essay on such subjects. The Society announced the subject for the first year : "to illustrate as for as possible from personal observation that part of the periplus of the Erythrean Sea diffusion of science and useful knowledge through the means of the institutions that have been recently founded for the instruction of the natives in this quarter of India. The attainments these must acquire in such meminaries cannot but lead to that happy association between them and their European fellow subjects, which will essentially aid and facilitate the future labours and researches of the Literary Society of Bombay." (Italics by Researcher) Tivarekar, Ganpatrao Krishna, op. cit., p. 12 321

which contains the description of the coast from the Indus to Cape Comorin"/ ^ However, the Society was compelled to abandon its plan since it received no essays. In 1805 it was decided to prepare a statistical Account of Bombay for which James Mackintosh drew up a list of questions the answers to which would be contributions towards such an account.' ^ India 1806, the Society with a view to translating the oriental classics such as the two great epics Ramayana and Mahabharat, celebrated dramatic pieces, works on speculative philosophy, ethics, and etc. made a proposal to the Asiatic Society of Bengal and sought its help.^ ^ The A foot-note to the queries appeared in the 'Transactions' , clarified that they received no answer to the queries therefore they reprinted them 'merely to suggest topics of inquiry to the Residents at Bombay'. It is interesting to note that there are queries related to earlier History. They are : "Is there anything in the ancient languages or traditions of this country, which could have any relation to the Grecized word Seiseicreinian, by which the Periplus seems to denote this cluster of islands ? Have the environs of Callian been ever diligently explored ? Have any Grecian coins or medals been found at or near Callian or any where else in this neighbourhood ? What are the most ancient traditions or accounts of a Hindu government here ? Was the island ever subject or tributary to any of the Mussulamn princes who reigned on the opposite continent ? From what power, in what manner, and what times, was Bombay conquered by Portuguese ? What remarkable events occurred during the Portuguese government, which seems to have lasted about 130 years (i.e. from about 1530 to 1661)?" Transactions, Vol. li, op. cit.. Appendix A, p. 307-308

Mackintosh was a man of ideas. In a letter dated 24"^ of February, 1806 to the president of the Asiatic Society Mackintosh after explaining the difficulties involved in the publication of the English translations of the works like Ramayan or the Mahabharat, he emphasized the need of patronizing such projects. In this letter he proposed that the Asiatic Society should make an appeal to the British inhabitants of India to contribute to a fund. For the utilization of the fund thus raised he further proposed that 'the money when collected should be vested in a body of whom your society would naturally furnish the majority who would be trustees of the fund and judges of the works to be translated of the qualifications of those who are appointed to translate, and of the merit of their version'. Transactions, Vol. II, op. cit.. Appendix B, p. 310 322

Asiatic Society of Bengal responded favourably and resolved to publish from time to time in volumes distinct from the publication of Asiatic Researches. James Mackintosh found Pallas's celebrated two volumes work on a comparative vocabulary of all languages incomplete particularly in relation to India and therefore he wished to remedy that defect. Mackintosh presented a paper entitled 'Plan of a Comparative Vocabulary of Indian Languages'^ ^ at a meeting of the Society on the 26'^ May 1806. In this paper Mackintosh discussed his scheme regarding the compilation of a comparative vocabulary of the various languages, dialects and forms of speech in India.

Here a reference may be made to the foundation of the museum in 1813. Captain Basil Hall, of the Royal Navy, who was also an explorer and a writer of many books of Travel, took initiative in the foundation of the museum by himself presenting a collection in mineralogy. The museum was opened in 1816 for the collection and preservation of antiquities, specimens in natural history, the arts and mythology of the East. The committee comprised of Archdeacon G. Barnes, John Wedderburn, Benjamin Noton, John Hawkins and Stephen Babington as secretary made arrangement for the establishment of the museum.^ ^ The collection of the museum was comprised of fossils, geological specimens, minerals, shells, rock specimens, snakes, images of Hindu gods and goddesses, Buddhist and Jain images, Buddhist relics, inscription stones and slabs, and copperplate grants.^ ^ Most of these were presentations from individuals and Government.

The next important achievement of the Society was the erection of an astronomical observatory in 1815.^ Mt was in the same year that the Society received a gift of transit telescope from W.T. Money (the 323

retiring president). The Society also received assistance of Rs. 2000 from Government. Scholars of astronomy made their observations at the Bombay Observatory on the basis of which they prepared their papers and read before the Society.

In the absence of a Journal of its own, the papers read by the scholars before the Society were in a danger of being entirely lost. Many of these papers were brought together and sent to England for publication. In 1819 these papers were published in three volumes, under the title of "Transactions". Some of the contributions appeared in the 'Transactions' may be mentioned here. William Erskine the Secretary of the Society contributed five papers on subjects such as Elephants, Zoroastrianism, and Buddhism.^ ^ Captain Vans Kennedy became president of the Society in 1831 and retired in 1835. And After his retirement he was declared honorary president. James Mackintosh the first president and Dr. Wilson were the two other honorary presidents. Kennedy contributed six papers, which are mainly on Persian literature and history. Kennedy's paper entitled 'Remarks on the Sixth and Seventh Chapters of Mill's history of British India'' ^ criticized Mill's interpretation of the ancient Hindu civilization. It is to be noted here that this article in particular influenced the intellectuals in Bombay who in turn appreciated Elphinstone's sympathetic treatment of the history of India. Dr. Wilson took active interest in the activities of the Society. John Briggs, the translator of Ferishta also

The three-volume work of the publication of the Transactions was supervised by Sir James Mackintosh, Sir John Malcolm and W.T. Money. Later in 1877 Vishvanth Narayan Mandlik, one of the Vice-Presidents of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society re-edited the original 'Transactions'. After the amalgamation of the Literary Society of Bombay with the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland in 1829 ceased to publish its Transactions. Tivarekar, Ganpatrao Krishna, op. cit., p 22 324

contributed to the 'Transactions'. Captain McMurdo wrote on Cutch, Kathiawar and Sind on an earthquake^ \ Colonel Sykes contributed papers on Antiquities. Captain Camac contributed a paper on the famine in Gujarat in 1812 and 1813.^ ^ C. Bellino wrote a learned article under the title 'Account of the Progress Made in Deciphering Cuniform Inscription'.^ ^ Thomas Coats contributed his paper entitled 'Notes Respecting the Trial by Panchaiet and the Administration of Justice, at Poona, under the Late Peshwa'.^^^^

In the year 1823, the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland was founded. The Royal Asiatic Society approached the Literary Society of Bombay in 1827 for a union between the two institutions. The Literary Society of Bombay 'in order to give greater efficiency to the literary and scientific pursuit of this Society, and in the hope of contributing by such an alliance to the common cause in which the two associations are engaged'^ ^ appointed a special committee to report on the best method of accomplishing such a union. On the submission of the special committee's report the society adopted resolutions at its meeting held on 3"* January 1829 effecting the union of the institutions. With this resolution of the 3"^ January The Literary Society of Bombay became an integral part of the Royal Asiatic Society, under the appellation of "the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society". In regard to the local administration and the control of its funds the Bombay Branch continued to fijnction independently. The Society functioned in a two-fold way^ ^ : 1) The reading and discussion of papers by the members of the Society at its meetings and the publication of such papers and of the 325

proceedings of the Society in the Society' Journal.*

2) The estabhshment of a library and museum.

What Sir William Jones said of the Bengal Society was applicable to the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society in regard to the general objects of the research of the Society : 'The bounds of its investigation will be the geographical limits of Asia; and within these limits its inquiries will be extended to whatsoever is performed by man and produced by nature'.^ ^ Dr. Wilson explained this point very elaborately and clearly at a special meeting of the Society held on 20"" July 1839.^

The association of a number of Orientalists with the Society led to the establishment of the Society's Journal. In February, 1841 the Society passed a unanimous resolution regarding the publication of its Joumal. The Resolution said : "that a quarterly Joumal, in connection with the Society, on the plan of those published under the auspices of the Asiatic Society of Bengal and the Madras Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, be established and that Mr. Orlebar, the secretary, be requested to undertake the duty of the editor. And that the Society take upon itself the pecuniary responsibility for one year and fumish a copy to each of its members in India." Tivarekar, Ganpatrao Krishna, op. cit., pp. 22-23 About the Joumal it was remarked that 'The Journal never was what it was originally intended to be a Quarterly Joumal, but in the last 20 years, six volumes of some 4 to 500 pages each have been published, and if we may judge from the applications made for copies of it by societies and individuals, not only in England, but on the continent and in America, we have no reason to be ashamed of our work.' JBBRAS, Vol. VIII, for 1863-64 and 1864-65 (Bombay, 1867), p. Appendix, xxxviii

Dr. Wilson, in his speech delivered at a special meeting of the Society called on 20"' July 1839, discussed the general objects of the research of the Society. In this speech, Dr. Wilson elaborately explained them. He said : "... The field is so extensive that it will not be successfully trodden and surveyed in our day ... What are the physical aspect, capabilities and actual productions of this vast country which providence has placed under our care ? What monuments and records does it contain which testify to its past greatness; and illustrate its chequered history ? What is intellectual, moral and economical condition of the numerous and (contd.) 326

In 1831 the Oriental Translation Committee was established in London for the purpose of publishing translations of oriental works. In accordance with the proposal made by the committee to the Earl of Clave, then Governor of Bombay, the Society appointed a committee under the name of the "Oriental Translation Committee of the Bombay. Branch, Royal Asiatic Society".

Lieut. Col. Vans Kennedy, W. H. Wathen, Major Taylor, R.C. Money, Capt. G. R. Jervis, Capt. S. Hennell, James Bird, John McLennan, Dr. Law, Rev. J. Wilson, L. R. Reid with Lieut. Geo were the members of the Bombay based committee. Pope and Bal Gangadhar Shastri were its secretaries. The Bombay based committee in order to carry out the scheme of procuring translations from the orient languages into English, French or Latin and of selecting them for transmission to London proposed a three-point programme^ ^ : 1) to ask oriental scholars to contribute translations of works of their interest, 2) to prepare a list of the works the translation of which was desirable, and 3) to request persons to inform the committee about the valuable original oriental works that they possess. The committee succeeded only in procuring a translation of "Mirat Ahmedi", a history of Gujarat by James Bird, Esq. This was the only work that the diversified tribes which inhabit its oceanic plains, its gigantic mountains, and exhaustless forests ?' What are its numerous languages in reference to derivation, grammatical structure and analogy, and power and beauty of expression ? What are its various religious, in their fundamental principles, established observances and actual developments in practical worship, and the regulation of life and manners ? What are the principles of its civil and criminal jurisprudence, and What modification have they undergone in consequence of the instruction of experience, and the mutations in the government and community, and how, with a due regard to the present frame-work of native society, can they be rendered consistent with that justice and benevolence which are the foundation and support of Britain's sway ? These are a few among the many inquiries which we are called to make." Tivarekar, Ganpatrao Krishna, op. cit., pp. 19-20 327

committee selected and sent to England for publication A ^

In the light of correspondence between the Court of Directors and the Supreme Government of India, the Government of Bombay referred the matter regarding antiquarian researches within its territories to the Society. The Government of Bombay on suggestion from the Society appointed a commission comprising Rev. Dr. Wilson, Rev. Dr. Stevenson, C.J. Erskine, Esq., Captain Lynch, John Harkness, Esq., Vinayak Ganghadhar Shastri, Esq., and the secretary of the Society.' ^ The commission conducted an enquiry into the character and extent of the cave temples, monasteries and other ancient Buddhist, Brahminical and Jain remains of Western India. Dr. Wilson visited most of the caves in order to secure information about them and thus completed his first memoir on the caves and monasteries of Western India. The copies of this memoir were also sent to principal district officers asking them to send descriptions of any caves that might have been omitted. The Government on the recommendation of the commission sanctioned the employment of an artist and of an agent to copy accurately and take impressions of inscriptions engraved on the rocks and in the caves of Western India, under the supervision of the commission. Under the supervision of the president, the Rev. Dr. Stevenson, the Society's agent took all the impressions of cave temple inscriptions which were then reduced and lithographed. The entire collection with Dr. Stevenson's translations and remarks on part of them came to be printed in the 18"^ and the 19"^ numbers of the Society's Journal. ^^^^^

The Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society made efforts to increase the stock of books by way of purchasing standard new works, in all branches of literature and science published in England and on the continent. The Society also subscribed to standard literary, scientific and 328

political magazines, reviews etc., from England and the continent of Europe. The Society obtained presentation of books, pamphlets, public reports, transactions, maps and etc., from^ ^ : a) The secretary of State, the Bombay Government, the Government of India, the Government of Madras, and other administrations b) The learned societies of Europe, Asia, and America. C) Individual authors or publishers.

The Society also preserved manuscripts in Sanskrit, Persian and Prakrit and a number of illustrated works, maps and very valuable set of Admiralty charts, views and plans. This rich collection of the Library led Dr. Wilson to describe the Library at the special meeting of the society held in 1839, in these words : "It is unequalled, it is supposed, in the British possessions in the East. At any rate, Priccipal Mill, late of Bishop's College ... remarked to me, after a close survey of it, and a careful inspection of its catalogue, 'We have got nothing like this in the city of palaces - nothing like this on the banks of the Gauge' ...."^ ^

* In 1820 Mountstuaart Elphinstone presented a number of books in foreign languages to the Society. In 1837 the received a valuable collection of the volumes of Parliamentary reports and other important public records. A splendid supply of works on natural history, geology, &c., was made to the Society from the Malclmson Testimonial Fund. The Society obtained donations from : i) Jagannath Shankar Sheth of Rs. 5000, for the purchase of works on natural history, in 1863 ii) Cawasji Jehangir of Rs. 3000 for the purchase of works on oriental literature ; iii) Premchand Roychand of Rs. 10,000 Tivarekar, Ganpatrao Krishna, op. cit., pp. 36-37

^ W.E. Frere the Secretary of the Society was of the opinion that all parties should get library facilities. He in his address while emphasizing this point categorically said "The Society professes, and I believe, acts upto its profession to allow all indigent students occupied in the pursuit of any study, free access to its library; and I am sure I only echo the feelings of all members of the Society that the day may never come when it can be said that a single honest and deserving student, was ever on any plea refused the free use of the library. " (Italics by Researcher) JBBRAS, Vol. VIII for the year 1863-64, 1864-65, p. Appendix xiv 329

A reference should be made to the coin-cabinet which formed a part of the museum. The original collection commenced with presentations from Government, private individuals also made presentations of coins to the Society. The rich collection consisted of Syrian, Parthian, Sassanian, Roman, Greek and Arabian coins, was a presentation made by Captain Bruce, Resident at Bushire and by Captain Grant of the H.C. Marine. ' ^ William Frere took pains to arrange and catalogue all the coins collected by the Society. In 1864 he donated his collection of Bactrian, Parthian Sassanian, Cufic Gupta and Sah coins, to the Society. His collection also consisted of modem European, American coins and of the coins of Mughal and Pathan dynasties of India. A complete collection of rupees current in Western India also formed a part of the collection.^ ^

The work of the Asiatic Society of Bengal and of the Literary Society of Bombay which later became the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society influenced the intellectuals in Maharashtra to make their every endeavour to contribute to the process of discovering India's past. The first antiquarian scholar among the intellectuals in Maharashtra to contribute to this process of research was Balshastri Jambhekar.

Balshastri was a brilliant linguist. Marathi was his own mother- tongue; he for the first time brought out the lithographed edition of Jnaneshwari which constitutes a 'a great land-mark in the history of modem Marathi literature'.^ ' He was a distinguished Sanskrit scholar as he showed his bility in discussing the various aspects of the Dharma-shastras with the shastris of the opposite party in the Sripat Sheshadri reconversion case. His proficiency in English enabled him to edit the columns of Bombay Darpan with distinction. He was also acquainted with Gujarathi, Bengalee, Persian, Arabic, Latin, Greek, Kannad, Telgu, Hindi and French. 330

Balshastri himself being well versed in various Shastras he knew well the ancient Indian tradition in the compilation of dictionaries (i.e. Nighantus, Dhatupathas and Ganapathas) He well knew that the work of lexicography involves much detailed and thorough research. Thus his knowledge of various languages and the grasp of the subject enabled him to note competently his observations on 'Flynn's proposed Goojaratee And English Dictionary'. It is interesting to go through the certificate given by Vans Kennedy to Flynn for his compilation work. Vans Kennedy certified that '... after a careful examination ... it appears to me that the Gujaratee words are well-selected and that their explanations in English are clear, concise and accurate. It seems to me therefore that Mr. Flynn is well- qualified by his conversancy with Gujaratee for the compilation of a dictionary of that language ...'^ ^ It is on this background that one may find Balshastri's omments on Flynn's proposed dictionary interesting ones. He noticed following imperfections in the proposed 'Dictionary Work' : 1) He insisted on copiousness of a Dictionary and stated that efforts must be made to collect all the words of a language. In this context he made mention of the efforts made by Molseworth in collecting words, phrases and proverbs by employing 'Brahmins in the several quarters of the Maratha territory'.^ -' Then he remarked that Flynn did not state the means he adopted to make a collection of Gujaratee works and expressed his fear that 'the vocabulary he has made, is very scanty'.' -'

2) Balshastri observed that the greater portion of Flynn's work contains either Sanskrit words or words which are common to the Marathi and Gujaratee and thus the insertion of pure Gujaratee words 'is seldom more than one third, and frequently as small as one-twentieth'.^ '

3) Balshastri further criticized that Flynn attempted nothing beyond 331

copying Sanskrit, Persian, Hindoostanee and other words from Molseworth and then remarked that 'a dictionary compiled in this manner must be very defective'/^ ^"^^

4) Balshastri severely criticized Flynn for being 'very careless in his orthography'.^ ^ In support of this statement he gave a list of mis­ spelled Sanskrit words.

Among the European intellectuals in Bombay the leading lights were the distinguished orientalists like Lt. Col. Vans Kennedy, W.H. Wathen, Esq., and Rev. John Wilson. Balshastri came in contact with them when he was introduced to them by Robert Money.^ ^ Balshastri was made the Native secretary to the Oriental Translation Committee of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society. Balshastri's association with Lt. Col. Vans Kennedy must have influenced his understanding of India's past. Balshastri must have read Vans Kennedy's review article on the Sixth and Seventh chapters of Mill's 'History of British India' respecting the religion and manners of the Hindus appeared in the third volume of the 'Transactions' . In this article Kennedy rejected Mill on two important scores^ ^ : The first score is related to the basic principles of research in history. Vans Kennedy criticized Mill for his failure to weigh and consider the different authorities which according to him, led to a gross misrepresentation of facts of Indian history rendering Mill's condemnation of the Hindu civilization worthless.

Vans Kennedy's second score was related to Mill's lack of

* Robert C. Money, Persian Secretary to the Govemment of Bombay, succeeded Captain Jervis as Secretary to the Bombay Native Education Society. It is to be noted that Balshastri under the advice of Robert C. Money translated Goldsmith's 'History of England' which was recognized as a text-book in the schools. Balshastri Jambhekar, Memoirs and Writings, Vol. II, op. cit., pp. xii-xiii 332

understanding of the Hindu notion of morality. He felt that Mill's 'folly and absurdity' became evident in his applications of a general set of universal principles of morality to the particular case of Hindu civilization. Vans Kennedy criticized the English colonial mentality and at the same time stressed the need for a sympathetic understanding of the Hindus. He wrote : "As long as we retain the rank of masters and have only to command, all that can be requisite is a conversancy with the prominent religious tenets and prejudices of the natives : were we indeed, to descend from that high station, and to live with them as equals, when every object must be attained by persuasion, intrigue, or ability, it might then be necessary that we should become intimate with their domestic habits and with every feeling and passion of their hearts".^ ^ Vans Kennedy also criticized Mill for supposing that the Institutes of Menu contain a correct description of the actual state of Hindu Society. He expressed the view that the Institutes of Menu should not be taken as an authority.on the present state of Hindu society. He rejected Mill's contention that the Hindus have scarcely advanced beyond a state of barbarism and pointed out that 'almost every science was cultivated among them'.' ' Thus, Kennedy's defense of the ancient civilization of the Hindus must have influenced Balshastri, and this became clearly noticeable in an article on Vans Kennedy in the issue of the Mumbai Darpan dated February 3, 1832. In the article Balshastri reviewed the work of Kennedy entitled "Researches into the Nature and Affinity of Ancient and Hindu Mythology". Balshastri wrote

While commenting on Vans Kennedy's 'Researches into the nature and affinity of Ancient and Hindoo Mythology', Balshastri wrote : "On the whole, it is a work of great merit, evincing the author's thorough acquaintance with his subject, indefatigable labour and research, and much critical acumen - in it the high reputation which Lt. Col. Kennedy enjoys as a scholar and orientalist is ably maintained - (The Bombay Darpan) - February 3, 1832" in Balshastri Jambhekar, Memoirs and Writings, Vol. II, op. cit., p. 24 333

: "It is scarcely necessary for us to observe that colonel Kennedy has long been known to the literary world as an oriental scholar and philologist"/ ^ According to Balshastri Col. Kennedy faithfully represented the Hindu religion as it was found in the Shastras. Col. Kennedy did not introduce his own ideas in the shape of Hindu doctrines.^ ^ Here, perhaps reference may be to James Mill. Balshastri also referred to Bentley's writings on ancient period of Indian history. He criticized Bentely's view-point that 'the Sacred Books of the Hindus contain internal evidence of their having been composed within the last seven or eight hundred years'. In this respect Balshastri pointed out to Kennedy's criticism in which he successfully exposed the groundlessness of the assertion of Bentley and others. Kennedy, on the basis of evidence, opined that their existence may be traced back to at least a period of 3000 years. This may well explain why Balshastri rejected Mill and brought out an abridged Marathi translation of Elphinstone's 'History of India'.

Gleig was the first after James Mill to write a general history of India. Geig's 'History of the British Empire in India' was published in four volumes during 1830-1835. His work was meant for the general reader. Geig did not approve of Mill's condemnation of Hindu civilization. On the contrary Gleig appreciated the advancement made by the Hindus in various fields viz., technology, commerce, architecture, sculpture, astronomy and literature.^ ^ It isto be noted that Balshastri made use of Geig's 'History'. Geig's 'History' must have helped him in strengthening his view-point vis­ a-vis Mill's History of British India.

A mere rejection of Mill's point of view, however, would not be a substitute for Mill's 'History'. Balshastri had already become aware of the fact that a connected and comprehensive account of the ancient period 334

of Indian history was lacking for want of historical evidence. This awareness led him to contribute positively in the field of historical research. His appointment as the Educational Superintendent of the Third Division gave him an opportunity to visit several places in the Southern Maratha Country and Konkan for four years from 1841 to 1845. During this period he collected copper plates and studied them.

Balshastri could not present his papers before the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society as the doors of the Society were then closed to the natives. * But then he contributed a few articles to the Journal of

the Society. His contribution related to copper-plates included papers on 'Description of a copper-plate Grant Found at Kharepatan on the Viziadurga River', 'Two Ancient Inscriptions in the cave character and Sanskrit Language Engraved on Copper-plates', 'A Sanskrit Copper-plate Inscription Found at the Fort of Samangarh, in the Kolhapur Country'. He submitted his papers related to stone inscriptions which were found at 'Palitana', 'Gimar', 'Nagpore', and in the vicinity of 'Kolhapur'. All these copper-plates and stone inscriptions were read and translated into English by Balshastri himself One can notice from the paper published in the Journal that he was well acquainted with the method of research in history and epigraphy. He was very careful about the reading of stone-inscriptions and copper-plates. He valued honesty in the work of historical research,

Balshastri Jambhekar in his note on the Monthly Meeting of the Asiatic Society did not forget to express that the natives should get membership of the Society. He wrote : "We should be glad to see many of our country-men ass much interested in the antiquities of India, as the strangers, who have come to Sojourn among us, and whose curiosity, industry and research, are worthy of the highest commendation. As there cannot be a doubt that membership in the Branch Asiatic Society would not now be denied to any intelligent and well instructed natives, (and of such the number is considerable we should indulge the hope that some will make it a matter of solicitation." Balshastri Jambhekar, Memoirs and Writings, Vol. II, op. cit., p. 124 335

as it is evident from foot-notes given to the paper on the Kharepatan Copper-plate. There he expressed his doubt about the correctness of his reading and plainly stated his inability 'to give any other interpretation to the passage'.^ ^ It may be pointed out that Balshastri in translating an inscription of a copper-plate grant, belonging to a Thakur of the name of Narsu Bhala, of Nandgam in the Northern Konkan made use of Prinsep's table of the Indian Alphabets and expressed that he succeeded 'in reading the whole of the inscription without much difficulty'/^ He concluded that the character of this grant bears a close resemblance to that of the Allahabad pillar. It also becomes clear that he was not hasty in arriving at conclusions since he understood the importance of corroborative

•4c evidence. He made the comparison on fourteen points between the Kharepatan-plate and the Kardala-plate and displayed both his analytical as well as synthetical abilities. He was also well informed about the research activity going on elsewhere, related with the topic concerned. For example, while establishing the genealogy of the Yadavas he referred to the remarks of Prof. H. Wilson on Wathen's article.^ ' He would not base his remarks on mere conjecture. At one place he wrote : "It is with great diffidence that I offer the preceding remarks, the truth of which can be established or disproved only by future discoveries."^ ^ After a careful study of inscriptions Balshastri would conclude by establishing points of some importance. Balshastri translated into English seven ancient * Balshastri in his paper entitled 'Description of a copper-plate Grant found at Kharepatan, on the viziadurga river; with a fac-simile, a transcript in Balbodh and an English translation' explained that the records of the Chalukya and Yadav dynasties, 'have generally corroborated each other; and the names as well as the order of succession of the kings of those families, have been made out on the concurrent testimony of a mass of inscriptions collected by Mr. W.EIIiot of the Madras Civil Service, and Mr. W.H. Wathen, the late Chief Secretary to the Government of Bombay.' Balshastri Jambhekar, Memoirs and Writings, Vol. II, op. cit., p. 175. 336 inscriptions in the Devanagari and Hala-kanari characters and noted his observations about them and in conclusion expressed that the Buddhist influence in the eleventh century, over the provinces round Kolhapur was predominant and in the succeeding centuries it considerably diminished. Added to this he also observed that the followers of Buddhism 'offered reverence and worship to the local deities of the Hindus'.^ ^

Thus, Balshastri was the first native to make a beginning in the field of research in Indian Antiquities. He was the first Indian research scholar whose papers appeared in the journal of the Society. He was the first native to apply his vast linguistic ability to the field of Historical research. A keen and logical mind, a sympathetic understanding of his subject, a spirit of scientific inquiry, a profound linguistic ability were some of the qualities that mark Balshastri as 'the father of the Indian historical research in this country.' ^ ^

Vishvanath Narayan Mandlik's interest in history began to develop with his increasing association particularly with his 'Guru' Dr. Harkness who used to bring books for him from the Library of the Society.' ^ He was encouraged by LeGrand Jacob, the Resident at Kutch who allowed him to make use of his personal library.^ ' Mandlik, thus cultivated his interest in the study of antiquities. Bhau Daji Lad, a contemporary distinguished scholar was always ready to help Mandlik in his historical research.^ ^ Mandlik himself was a linguist. Besides English and Marathi, he was proficient in Gujarathi, Sindhi, Persian and Latin.^^^"^) He

It is interesting to note that Mandlik thought of translating Elphinstone's 'History of India' into Gujarathi. With this purpose in mind Mandlik started learning Gujarathi and later completed the Gujarathi translation of Elphinstone's 'History of India' and published it. Havaldar, Ganesh Ramkrishna, Shri Raosaheb Vishvanath Narayan Mandlik Yanche Charitra, Part II (Mumbai, Mumbaivaibhav Press, 1927), pp. 1122-1123 337

possessed a working knowledge of Bengalee.' ^ He was a Sanskrit scholar and his reading in Sanskrit included Vedic literature, Manusmriti and Sidhantarahasya etcA ^ He was a student of Law and had read Warren and Blackstone and Norton's 'Law of Evidence'A ^ Montesque's 'The Spirit of the Laws' influenced him much. He expressed that 'the work is a fundamental work on law.'^ ^

Following the foot-steps of Balshastri Jambhekar and Bhau Daji, Mandlik too began to contribute to the Journal of Bombay Branch of Royal Asiatic Society. By this time Indians were allowed to present their papers before the meetings of the Society.

Mandlik presented his paper entitled 'Serpent Worship-in Western India' before the meeting of the Society on 13"^ May 1869.^^^^^ In this paper he gave a detailed account of the serpent worship in different parts of India with the variations in the mode of performing the worship. He concluded that the description of the serpent-worship given in the writings of Hemadri appears to have belonged to the post-puranic period. He identified the place in the story where the serpent was killed as Manipur, in Assam rather hesitatingly.' ^ He then submitted a few observations on the Nagas and serpent on the basis of Amerkosh, Mahahbharat, Medinikosha and concluded that the actual observance of the Nagapanchami festival shows no difference between the two classes. This was followed by his account of how the original spiritual worship of the sarpa-devatas of the Vedas descended into an idolatrous worship of snakes and serpents. He emphasized that the present form of the serpent-worship was not altogether Brahminical, but partakes of another form of worship 338

observed by those with whom the Vedic Hindus came into contact.* It is in this context that he interpreted the term Naga to mean mountain and Naga a mountain dweller/ ' According to him, by the time when the Amarkosh and the Medinikosh were written, the use of the word Naga, seems to have acquired a derogatory meaning as a wicked mountaineer, or an outcaste, which was not the case earlier/ ^ He synthesized the whole account of the serpent worship as : "The present worship of serpents as idols appears to be a mixture of the Puranic ceremonies and the practices of the Lingayatas and the followers of other non-Vedic creeds. It is intimately connected with the worship of Linga, and has acted and been acted upon by that mode of worship to a great extent. The principal seats of Linga-worship are situated on the mountains and the origin of serpent- worship can also be traced there, although the ceremonial has doubtless been altered and amplified upon in the plains."^ -'

Although, Mandlik, in this paper mainly concentrated on discussing the regional and national aspects of the serpent-worship, he in the end moved towards a universal approach. He stressed the need to critically examine in detail, all other ceremonials in connection with sarpas and Nagas and to compare the results of these inquiries with similar researchers into the history of serpent-worship amongst other nations, both of ancient and modem times.^ ^

Prof. H. M. Bhadkamkar in his Remarks on papers on Sanskrit Literature appreciated Mandlik's paper on Serpent Worship. He wrote : The paper on serpent -worship is especially interesting as much for an almost exhaustive collection of quotations from Vedic and post-Vedic sources as for the interesting history of this worship and the superstitions connected with it. The paper also makes it evident that the time of this worship is not the same all over India." JBBRAS, Extra number, The Centenary Memorial Volume (Bombay, 1905), p. 49 (Hereinafter referred to as JBBRAS, Extra No.) 339

Mandlik read another paper entitled 'The Shrine of the River Krishna at the Village of Mahabaleshwar' before the members of the Society on 14*^ July 1870> -* In this paper he gave an account of the temple over the source of the river Krishna at Mahabaleshwar. This was followed by the narration of the story of Gokama Mahabaleshwar. In the end he arrived at the conclusion that the temple of Mahabaleshwar is of a more modem date, established after the model of the undoubtably very ancient shrine of Mahabaleshwar at Gokama in North Canara.^ ^ He wrote about the Gokama tradition : "... (it) points out to the origin of the places of Linga worship by the influence of, if not amongst, the wild tribes of the mountains of whom Rawana is a fair representative"^ ^ He further asserted that the actual position of the Kolis at the temple of Krishna and also of Mahabaleshwar bore confirmation to the above drawn conclusion. He also emphasized that the serpent connection with both these temples particularly with that of the Linga temples appeared to be quite inseparable.

Mandlik presented another paper before the Society on 12"" January 1871, in which he gave an account of the Shrine of Mahabaleshwar.^ ^

In continuation with his theme Mandlik presented a paper under the title 'Sangameshwar Mahatmya and Ling Worship' before the Society on 13"" Febmary, 1873.^ ^ He based his account of Sangameshwar on 'Sangameshwar Mahatmya' which seems to have composed by a poet named Sasha, in the service of one of the Chalukya kings named Kama. He presented the paper with the English translation of 'Sangameshwar

* It was remarked that Mandlik in presenting his paper on the Shrine of "Mahabaleshwar" brought to the notice of the Society the importance of collecting the local Mahatmyas 'as a means of preventing the concoction of modem stories, of which an example was produced (being a copy of Nirmala Mahatmya in Marathi).' JBBRAS, Vol. X, for 1871-74, p. Appendix Ixi. 340

Mahtmya'. In the end he concluded that "Linga-worship appears to have clearly become a national institution amongst all classes in Western India prior to the 7"" century of the Christian era, if not in the 2"'' century of that of Salivahana."^ ^ His enhanced view of history became distinct when he opined that the publication and translation of all the Tamil literature of the pre-Christian era would throw light not only on the history of the Chalukyas but also on the spread of Linga-worship and the progress of Saivism. He also observed that researches into the history of South India, if connected with that of the history of Western India would enable one to understand how the Chalukyas prospered and brought with them a more elaborate form of Ling-worship.

Mandlik presented his paper entitled 'Salivahana and the Salivahana Saptasati' before the Society on 19'*' March 1873^^^^^ He assumed that Salivahana sometimes called Satavahana or Satavahan was the name of the king after whom the present Saka era current in Maharashtra was named. He discussed the sixty years' cycles of the Shaka and also gave an account of the life and times of Salivahan on the basis

After the paper was read Prof. R.G. Bhandarkar raised many questions. He raised questioned Mandlik's supposition that ' the era now called Salivaha was really founded by a king of that name'. He expressing doubt pointed out that in all copper-plate and stone inscriptions and other documents upto a very late period wherever the date is given in that era it is called Saka Nripa Kala i.e. "the era of the Saka King" or simplify Sak Kala, "the era of the Saka". He further explained that Saka was a name of a foreign tribe and the era very probably originated from a king of that tribe. He argued that if Salivahan was a Hindu king, then the era could not have originated with him. He made Mandlik cautious saying that the matter is not quite so settled as the Raosaheb takes it to be.' Bhandarkar further emphasized the need to discuss the question 'whether Salivahan was the name of a dynasty or an individual'. Bhandarkar in the end expressed that Mandlik's assumption that the Salivahan mentioned by Bana 'was the same as the supposed founder of the era' was not supposed by evidence. JBBRAS, Vol. X, 1870-74, Proceedings, pp. xlii-xliv 341

of the Jain account namely 'Kalpapradipa' by Jinprabhusuri of the M"" century of the Samvant era. There are various conflicting theories regarding the origin of the Shaka era and there is no universally accepted version of it. The earliest reference to the Shaka era is found in the endowment letter of Bukka of Vijayanagar of the year 1276 Shaka. Prof. G.H. Khare's contention is that Kshatrap and Mahakshatrap were Shaka but they were not sovereign kings; whereas the Kushan kings were sovereign and the number inscribed on the inscriptions indicated the years of the era. Prof. Khare concluded that the present Shaka era current in Maharashtra must have been started by Kanishka, the Kushan King.

Mandlik procured a copy of the Salivahan-Saptasati (the seven hundred verses of Salivahana) and made its linguistic analysis comparing the words of Maharashtri-prakrit with those of current Marathi words emphasizing that this study would enable one to judge the age of prior lingual formations. He concluded that this work was not composed by Salivahana alone and stated clearly that six other poets contributed to jt (152) Y[Q also pointed out that the mention of a king called Satavahan in the Kathasaritsagara of Bhattasomesvara was evidently quite different from the Satavahana the founder of the era and the author of the Saptasati.' ^ And, lastly he tried to remove the confusion by stating that one should not confound this Salivahana with the Vikramaditya Sakari.^ ^

Mandlik presented his paper entitled 'Preliminary observations on a Document Giving an Account of the Establishment of a New Village Named Muruda in Southern Konkan' before a meeting of BBRAS on 9"" February 1805.^ ^ With this paper he also presented the English translation of a Document.

Mandalik realized the importance of writing history of village life 342

and institutions of Western India. He well knew that old private records do exist in different villages, and with many of the oldest families. But the problem lay in procuring those documents. Mandlik observed that since the days of the Inam Commission people became more suspicious to such an extent that they would not show 'even their pothis (or religious books) for any consideration, for fear they might be deprived of them'.^ ^ Mandlik in presenting this paper before the Society wanted to indicate that 'in what direction information may be sought'.' ^ Mandlik succeeded in procuring a Modi document from a Brahmin family surnamed Vaishampayan, the dharmadhikari of Murud. The document describes various stages in bringing about the settlement of Murud Village. Gangadharabhatta and Padmakarbhatta with Vaisampayan came to Asuda and they together formed a plan of founding a new village. The stages according to the plan were' ^ : i) with the permission of the people of Asuda, the Jungle was cleared; ii) The "perfect man" or sage submitted an application to the neighbouring king of the Sekara dynasty named Jalandara; iii) From the king they obtained a grant of land; iv) The different parts of the village were assigned to the first families of settlers; v) Thirteen families of Chittapavama Brahmans were given lands and offices in the village; vi) The duties of the several village officers were laid down, chiefly in social and religious matters; vii) The boundaries of the several properties were marked off, and kshetrapalas or tutelary deities guarded stones fixed in the soil; viii) several inferior shrines were set up for the more ignorant classes. And ix) The principal temple of the village was built, the image of Durga was installed. Mandlik concluded that 'the settlement of the place was planned and carried out after Allaudin Khilji's invasion of the Dekkan, and probably about the time the Bahamani kingdom was founded.'^ ' 343

Mandlik's paper is perhaps the first of its kind dealing with the process of colonization in Maharashtra. The Marathi documents describe this process as the process of 'human habitation (Pandhari) raised on the cultivable soil (Kali)/ ^ The Rev. Dr. Wilson, Honorary President of the Society appreciated Mandlik's this article as 'an interesting one'.^ ^

It would be instructive to present certain elements of Mandlik's method of research in history. He opens the topic with the description of a place or of a festival or of a shrine which is the focal point of his discussion. For instance, he wrote about Mahabaleshwar : "The village of Mahabaleshwar is situated on the Sahyadri range of mountains ... The village Hes in lat 11° 55'N; and Long 1^ 41' E. It is about 75 miles S.E. of Bombay, and about 40 miles distant from the Western sea-coast".^ ^ He honestly quotes the sources of his documents. While writing about the document related to Sangameshwar Mahatmya he wrote : "The copy with which I have been favoured by my friend Mr. Vishnu Moreshwar Kelkar, the subordinate judge of Sangameshwar, was made in sake 1713, and is therefore 83 years old".^ ' He writes also about the language and style of a document as he fiarther wrote : "The language is simple, like that of other Puranas ..." He presents the translation of document with a view to enable the reader to know its content. He presented the translation of 'Sangameshwar Mahtmya' or 'The Greatness of Sangameshwar'. He was very keen about the accuracy of the reading of a document and about the corroborative evidence. While writing about the Sangameshwar inscription he confessed that 'there is little or no evidence before me to support this

* The Society in its report Specifically mentioned Mandlik's paper on the foundation of Village Muruda. The report said : "The number of the Journal which had been publishing during the past year was a valuable one, both in its interesting articles ... and on the village of Muruda by Mr. Mandlik ..." JBBRAS, Vol. IX, Part I, 1867, 1868, p. Appendix, xxxi 344

reading of the few lines that are now very nearly obliterated'.^ ' He refers to the research already done in regard to the topic concerned. For instance, he referred to the researches of Major George LeGrand Jacob, of Bal Gangadhar Shastri, of Wathen, of Dr. Bhau Daji in relation to the Chalukya grants.' ^ He does not forget to record the local tradition current at Mahabaleshwar. He wrote : "The priest at both the shrines are primarily the wild or at least non-Vedic tribes. Some of these were the Linga, and these do not partake of food prepared by a Brahmin; and Brahmins are prohibited from becoming officiating priests at Siva's temples, and cannot partake of any offerings there made."^ ' He also realizes the limitations of the local traditions. For instance, he wrote about the spots shown to the visitor at Mahabaleshwar where the Gods of the olden times are said to have performed their religious sacrifices. 'But, beyond local traditions there is nothing to support these accounts.'^ '' His articles are full of foot-notes and they are given methodically. He makes use of stories or Kahanis to understand the popular culture.^ ^

Dr. Bhau Daji Lad made the mission of his life to study the source material for reconstructing the history of ancient India. He received encouragement for his antiquarian studies from Sir Erskine Perry, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.^ ^ He became the member of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society in 1852. He was made a member of the committee of management of the Society in 1859. He was honored with the Vice-precidenship and he worked in that capacity till his death in 1874. He travelled in various parts of India visiting places such as Madras, Culcutta, Burdwan, Prayag, Patna etc. He went on his first Journey to Ajantha in 1845 in association with Sir Erskine Perry and in later travels he remained in the company of Justice Newton, Alexander Grant, Prof 345

Wordsworth, C.N. Cama, A.F. Moos, D.H. Carter his friend and others.^ ^ During his travels he always remained in search of temples, images and caves, of coins and Sanskrit and Prakrit manuscripts and of copper-plates. During his travels, he also remained engaged in copying inscriptions on rocks and pillars. These travels made him convinced that 'every one of the inscriptions on rocks and almost every copper-plate grant published years ago require thorough revision' for it would throw a flood of light on the ancient Indian past.^ His collection of oriental books and manuscripts was large and valuable. It became the practice with European

* Here is an example to show how Bhau Daji remained engaged in studying inscriptions. During the tour in Rajputana Bhau Daji noticed on a rock at Eklingji, a town some 10 miles north of Udaypur, an inscription in the old cave character. He read it as : "of the God Sri Dhyanya" (fortunate or God). Bhau Daji believed that 'no other inscription in the cave character had been found nearly as far to the north West. He opined that the characters indicated an age of about a thousand years at least, and the inscription bore the marks of long exposure and of great age'. JBBRAS, Vol. IX, Part I, No. XXV, 1867, 1868, p. Appendix, xvi.

^ Once Bhau Daji remarked : "My travels in various parts of India have enabled me personally to examine and copy many valuable inscriptions on stones and rocks and / am convinced that every one of the inscriptions on rocks, and almost every copper-plate grant published years ago, require through revision, whilst I know hundreds if not thousands of inscriptions on temples &c. which if carefully copies by a competent person like Bhagawanlal, a flood of light could be thrown on the history and antiquities of India far beyond the expectations of the most zealous Orientalists, who don't conceal their disappointment at the results of Indian Historical Researches" (Italics by Researcher) JBBRAS, Vol. IX, Pat II, p. Appendix, cxcvii

5 It was reported that Dr. Bhau Daji exhibited to the meeting several Sanskrit and other manuscripts which he had received from, Kathiawad,. and other parts of India. It was also recorded that at the time of exhibition he even delivered a lecture on the character of a portion of them. JBBRAS, Vol. IX, Part II, 1867-70, p. Appendix, ccvii The Rev. Prof Scott in his reviewed article entitled 'History of the Society' wrote : "The Bhau Daji's collection of MSS is one of our treasured possessions". JBBRAS, Extra No. p. 23 346

scholars to ask for the loan of Sanskrit manuscripts which were in his collection. In the preparation of his paper he always took the care to take into account the writings of earlier epigraphists and the translations of the Greek and Chines accounts of ancient India. His research did not remain dependent on the English works only. It became the practice with him to prepare for himself MS translations of some of the most important French and German works, for instance Bumoufs 'Introduction a 1' histoire du Boudhisme, the appendices to the Lotus de la bonne loi; st. Julien's Life and Travels of Hiven Tsiang and Lassens' Indian Antiquities. Thus, he kept himself abreast of the progress made in his time by Europe and America in the department of antiquarian research.^ '

Western scholars were in admission of the fact that the ancient Indians were advanced in the field of science. Reuben Burrow was the first European to point out that the mathematical sciences were highly developed in Ancient India (1804). Edward Stratchey read his paper on the early history of Algebra before the Meeting of the Asiatic Society of Bengal in 1810. H.T. Colebrooke in his treatise on Indian Algebra (1817) which consisted of translations of the works of Bhaskar and Brahmagupta, asserted that 'Diophantus was a later Greek writer who himself borrowed the knowledge from Indian sources and that the Indians showed a far greater knowledge of the science than Diophantus'.^ ^ Shortly after the publication of Colebrooke's treatise, James Mill's 'History' appeared who criticized Colebrooke for advocating the antiquity of Indian science. It is in this context one should understand the importance of Bhau Daji's contribution in proving that Stratchey and Colebrook were right. It was the general experience of Western scholars in regard to the date and authenticity of ancient works that 'in the history of Indian literature, dates 347

are mostly so precarious, that a confirmation, even within a century or two, is not to be despised.'^ ^ In the light of this comment one may understand why Max Muller came to regard the date of Chandragupta 'as the sheet anchor of Indian chronology'/ ' Therefore establishing date and authenticity of ancient works became one of the major concerns of Bhau Daji's studies. Bhau Daji's essay entitled 'Brief Notes on the Age and Authenticity of the Works of Aryabhatta, Varahamihira, Bhattotpala and Bhaskaracharya' appeared in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, in 1865.' ^ In the field of Sanskrit literature he tried to estimate the age of the Sanskrit poet, Kalidasa. As early as 1860 he had offered, through leading newspapers, rewards 'for the best and most reliable information on Kalidas and Vikramaditya.'' ^ He himself presented a paper entitled 'On the Sanskrit Poet, Kalidasa' before the Meeting of the Society on 11"" October 1860. There he concluded that 'if the identity of Matrigupta and Kalidas be established, the exact age of the great Sanskrit poet ... would be fixed in the middle of the sixth century of the Christian era'.^ ^ However later scholars did not support this view. One may note here that Dr. D. R. Bhandarkar tried to show that 'the account of Matrigupta given in the third Taranga of Rajatarangini has a substratum of truth'. Again V. V. Mirashi challenged D.R. Bhandarkar's comtention saying that 'D. R. Bhandarkar's attempt to boost Kalidas-Matrigupta identification has not succeeded'. Thus all matters such as his date, birthplace, and works about Kalidas came to be much debated without reaching unanimity on any.

Dr. Bhau Daji published his 'Notes on the Age and Works of Hemadry' - the minister of the Yadav King, Mahadeva and of his

* For the discussion of Kalidas se : Mirashi, V.V., Dr. D.R. Bhandarkar's Researches About Kahdas in Annals, BORI, LXIV, Part I-IV, (Pune, 1983), pp. 197-203 348

successors. In this paper he conckided that 'Hemadri flourished at the end of the twelfth and commencement of the thirteenth century of the Christian era.'^ ' This he concluded on the basis of the study of both the literary and inscriptional evidence. After the paper was read Bhau Daji was suggested to continue his inquiries about the age of the Maratha poet Mukundraj. Dr. Buhler stressed the need to fix the chronology of the Medieval Hindu writers, 'to settle the extent of the various law-schools, and to prepare in this manner the way for a history of the Hindu law which up to this time had never been attempted.'^ ' Buhler in his comments on the paper drew the attention of Bhau Daji to the Oxford and Berlin catalogues for information about some of Hemadri's works. He suggested Bhau Daji to procure the works of 'Visvaraj', 'Jayant', and 'Apararka'.^ -^

Bhau Daji presented his next paper on Mukundaraja. In his 'Note' he opined that Mukundaraja flourished about the end of the 12"" century of the Christian era'.^^^^^

Bhau Daji, gleaning the materials from the Kumar-pal Charitra, Kumar-pal Prabandha, Prabandha Chintamani, Rishi Mandal Vritti of Jain Bhadra Suri and other Jain works presented a paper entitled 'Brief Notes on Hemachandra or Hemacharya' on 12"' January 1869. Bhau Daji described that in the galaxy of learned and pious Jain names, 'Hemachandra may truly be said to shine as the most brilliant star.'' ^ About Hemachandra he stated following three facts^ ^ : 1) He was bom in Kartik, Samvat 1145 (A.C. 1088); 2) He was initiated into the priesfly orders in 1166 (A.C. 1109); and 3) He obtained the tifle of 'Suri' and died in Samvat 1229 (A.C. 1172) at the age of 84.

In the same meeting Bhau Daji presented his paper 'Brief Notes on Madhava and Sayana'. After gleaning information from literary sources 349

of the life of Madhav, he compared it with the one contained in the copper­ plate grant published in the Society's Journal of the Year 1852. But in the end he expressed grave doubts about the real existence or genuineness of the copper-plate. ' Justice Newton the President of the Society, described these notes as interesting ones.^ '

Bhau Daji presented a paper entitled 'Merutunga's Theravali; or Genealogical and Succession Tables by Merutunga, a Jain Pundit'. Merutunga, a Jain scholar flourished in the fifteen century. This Merutuanga composed the Prabandha Chintamani in Samvat 1367, i.e. A. D. 1423 at Vardhamanpur or Vadvana, in Kathiawad. He observed that since 'the Jain dates differ a good deal from those of the Buddhists and Brahmans,^ ^ he proposed to review the age of Buddha and the history of India before the Christian era. He gave a comparative table from the Prabandha Chintamani, the Kumar-pal Prabandha anonymous Patavali raising a pertinent question "whether the Merutunga of the Theravali is not different from the author of the Prabandha Chintamani".*^ ^ He made a significant remark that 'the Vikram Samvat is coeval with the defeat of the Sakas by Vikramaditya, but the Saka Nripa Kal, identical with the Salivaha era, is coeval with the conquest of Malwa and the Deccan by the Sakas."^ ^ This Statement is significant because Saka-Kala or the era of the Sakas confounded scholars sometimes with Vikram Samvat or sometimes with the Saka Nripa Kal leading to a mistake of 135 years in their calculation.

Dr. Bhau Daji became well acquainted with the method of copying and studying inscriptions. He employed Bhagvanlal Indraji in his service,^ ^ who received a good training in the method of treating inscription from Kinloch Forbes, the political Agent at Bhuj in Kathiawad. Bhagvanlal Indraji who also possessed a moderate knowledge of Sanskrit 350

and of the cave character, received encouragement from Dr. Bhau Daji to * study the character well. The general practice was that Dr. Bhau Daji would send Bhagvanlal to copy inscriptions and take out transcripts sometimes with the assistance of a colleague but often without him. Bhagvanlal then would bring those copies to Dr. Bhau Daji, who in turn would study the text carefully with the assistance of his Sanskrit pandit named Gopal Pandurang Padhye. If these copies did not satisfy Dr. Bhau Daji, then he would again send Bhagvanlal and another person to the site to copy inscriptions,^ independent of each other and then afterwards would take facsimiles on paper and on cloth. The copies made by hand in small letters would be sent to Dr. Bhau Daji in Bombay, whilst the copyist would stay at the site to receive suggestions from Dr. Bhau Daji. The copies would be revised again on the spot, and Dr. Bhau Daji in the light of information available from different sources would carefiilly consider them

* It was reported that Bhagawanlal Indraji who was in Dr. Bhau Daji's service for some years and had made himself intimately acquainted with the ancient alphabets of India, proceeded two years ago to visit ancient Hindu shrines, and brought copies of thirty-five ancient inscriptions, made leisurely and carefully. It further reported that although most of the copies were published in Prinsep's Journal, the copies brought were vastly superior to any taken before. The report remarked that the copy of the inscription was so good 'as o make it quite a different inscription' from what was published in Prinsep's Journal. JBBRAS, Vol. IX, Part II, 1867-70, p. Appendix, p. cxcvii

^ The Govt, asked a Lieutenant Postans to take impression of the Gimar inscription for Prinsep. Postans described in detail the method of taking Impression as given below : "As my first plan, the letters were carefully filled with a red pigment (vermilion and oil), every attention being paid to the inflexions and other minute though important points. A thin and perfect transparent cloth was then rightly glued over the whole of one division, and the letters as seen plainly through the cloth, traced upon it in black; in this way all the edicts were transcribed and the cloth being removed, the copy was carefully revised letter by letter with the original ...." Keay, John, India Discovered The Recovery of A Lost Civilization, (London, Harper Collins, paperback, 1988), pp. 60-61 351

with all possible variations and finally would present the paper before the meeting of the Society.' ^ He considered photography as a good method of copying the inscriptions for the purpose of decipherment, still he preferred correct copies made on the spot by some person competent to read the original. As if he stated a rule that 'almost every one of the originals of the photographs must be examined on the spot'.^ ^

It was in the year 1862 that Jacob and Westergaard for the first time published a copy of the inscription of Rudradaman, the third of the Kshatrapad or Mahakshatrapas (belong to the Shaka race). The inscription recorded the repair of a dam to the Sudarshan lake near Junagad in the year 72 Shaka corresponding to 150 A.D.^ ^ Dr. Bhau Daji published a better copy with a transcript and translation in 1862. Bhau Daji knew that Kathiawas contained the oldest inscriptions and therefore a most promising field for exploration and research. He published an inscription, dated 127 Saka, of the Mahakshatrapa Swami Rudrasena, existing on a pillar at Jadsan in Kathiawad.^ •' The inscription supplied the names of Sah kings. He expressed that this inscription would be of help to fill up a large gap in the history of Kathiawad, and would throw light on the history of Central India provinces adjoining.^ ' Justice Newton was the first to

* Dr. Bhau Daji realized the importance of Kathiawar from an historical and ethnological point of view for it offers greater variety in regard to the composition of it population. He said : We have there in addition to Arians common to other provinces of India, the descendants of Scythians, Parthians, Persians, Beloochees, Yaudheyas, Jews, Circassians, Georgians, Arabs, Abyssinians, and other African tribes, together with those of Coles, Bhils, Ahirs and Gurjaras. The origin of the last was supposed by the Rev. Doctor Glasgow to be from Kurdistan, or Georgia, the natives of which are called Gurji. He thought that the manners and customs and vocabulary of the Kattis alone would furnish abundant material for a volume. He believed that Gurjaras or Gurjars are, descendants of the people of that name who are found in the Punjab, and in the neighbourhood of Delhi, Mathura, and Hardwar." JBBRAS, Vol. IX, Part I, xxv, 1867, 1868, p. Appendix, xxiv 352

publish a coin of Rudrasimha, son of Rudradaman when he presented his paper before the Society in 1861. To Bhau Daji the most important part of the inscription was the date 127, the era in which Rudrasena or his officers wrote this inscription. Justice Newton had stated that the Kshatrapa coins are dated according to the Vikram era.^ ' Bhau Daji replaced this theory. He expressed his opinion 'that the era was that of Kshaharata or Prahates, one of the Arsacidae, and that it corresponded to the Hindu Sakanripakal, or era of the Saka king'.^ '

In 1837 James Prinsep published an article on the 'Ancient Sanskrit Numerals', Prinsep was perfectly currect in assuming the symbols to be numarals but in regard to the value of them he was completely mistaken and thus for a long time the value of ancient Sanskrit numerals remained unknown.^ ' E. Thomas came very close, in his article on the 'Dynasty of the Sah Kings of Saurashtra', to discovering the true value of a certain symbol however he could make no fiarther progress in this regard.^ '' Dr. Stevenson succeeded in giving the correct value for 10, for 20, and for 8 and there his progress stopped.' ' Dr. Bhau Daji made a careful examination of the inscription in the caves of Nasik, Karle and Kanheri but especially the first enabled him to ascertain the true value of the various numerical symbols beyond doubt.^ *'

Justice Newton discovered new coins and deciphered them

* Justice Newton, President of the Society in his paper entitled "On Recent Additions to Our Knowledge of the Ancient dynasties of Western India' in appreciation wrote : "The Society is indebted to our accomplished and indefatigable associate read ... brought to light through his exertions; and having thus ascertained that the Sah kings availed themselves of this mode of recording their exploits, we may now hope to hear of other inscribed pillars within imperfectly examined territories once embraced in Saurashtran rule". Newton, Justice, 'On Our Knowledge of the Ancient dynasties of Western India,' JBBRAS, Vol. IX, No. XXV, 1867, 1868, p. 2 353

correctly. He also endeavoured to place the various kings of the Sah dynasty which ruled over Malva and Kathiawad, in their chronological order. He made out from the study of coins the entire dynasty of 'Saha' or 'Sena' kings to the extent of 25 kings. After Bhau Daji discovered the true value of the ancient Sanskrit numerals in the cave inscriptions and on the coins, he gave his collection of the Sah coins to Justice Newton. Newton's examination of those coins proved two things.^ ^ In the first place, it confirmed completely the correctness of Newton's previous arrangement of the series. And, secondly it verified the correctness of Dr. Bhau Daji's discovery of the true value of the numerical symbols. Bhau Daji discovered the coins of Nahapan and Chastana while studying the coins fi-om Sauroshta or Kathiawad. He pronounced Nahpana to be the king himself and not a Satrap of phrahates as Dr. Stevenson supposed. Bhau Daji dated from the king called Kshaharat or Khagarat in the inscriptions, the prevalence of the Saka or Salivahan era. He identified Chastana with "Taistanus" king of "Ozene", i.e. Ujjayini mentioned by Ptolemy.^ -^ He further mentioned that Chastana and his successors ruled over Malwa and Kathiawad. He pointed out that in the time of Rudra-Dama their power was extended over other provinces and Gautami Satkami of the Deccan was his contemporary and rival. Bhau Daji from the Rura-Dama inscription showed that Chastana was the grandfather of Rudra-Dama and not the father as Prinsep had supposed.' ^ This was confirmed by Justice Newton's discovery of the coin of Jayadam the father of Rudra Dama and the son of Chastana. Bhau Daji's translation of the Jusdan inscription gave same fact and confirmed his reading.

Dr Bhau Daji submitted a revised Facsimile, Transcript and Translation of Samudragupta's Inscription on the Allahabad Lat or Column with remarks-to the Society on 13"^ April ISVL^^^"^^ It was in 1837 that 354

Captain Smith made fresh copies of the inscriptions on the pillar on cloth and paper. James Prinsep succeeded in giving a translation of the Allahabad pillar inscription with his critical remarks. Dr. Bhau Daji during his tour in the NWP in 1863, inspected the pillar. Under instructions from Dr. Bhau Daji, Pandit Bhagwanlal Indraji brought amongst other thirty-five ancient inscriptions, the copy of the inscription on the Bithari Lat. Report that the copy of the inscription was 'so good as to make it quite a different inscription'^ ^ from what was published in Prinsep's Journal. From this new copy Bhau Daji showed that the line supposed by Prinsep to be the second is the fifth, the first four Unes, however, with the exception of a few isolated letters are lost. Bhau Daji found the word 'pushpavhya', which he thought referred to Patliputra. He made out better the names of Samudragupta's contemporaries. Amongst the new names is Swamidatta of Pishtapura, Mahendragiri and Kudura. He gave a list of the names of Samudragupta. He particularly examined the word 'Daiva-putra-shahi' and found other readings suggested by Prinsep as untenable.^ ^

Dr. Bhau Daji discovered two Kanheri inscriptions.^ ^ He made out the word 'Swati' and the date '799 saka' in figure and words from the inscription in the cave. He also read the name of 'Maharajadhiraj Kokalla'. He observed that the other Darbar cave inscription is larger and also read the same date and the name 'Kokalla' in the inscription. He observed that the name 'Kokalla' was the king of that name who belonged to the Sahasrarjana or Kalachuri race mentioned in some of the copper­ plate grants.' * This was the first discovery of historic names and date in the Kanheri cave inscriptions.

W.H. Wathen and Walter Elliot noticed that the Kadambas ruled over Goa and Malbar. Dr. Bhau Daji found a good deal of confusion in 355

their notices. Bhau Daji presented a paper on a copper-plate grant dated 4328 of the KaHyaga i.e. A.D. 1247 found in Goa, in the old Devanagari character.^^^^^ The copper-plate inscription traced the Kadmba dynasty to Jayanta, an incarnation of Siva. It recorded that the last prince of this dynasty named Kama deva, made a grant of the village Bhatta in Gokapura (Goa), to the Brahmin Vishnu Dixit in the year stated, viz., in the 5"" of his reign.^ '

Dr. Bhau Daji presented a paper on a Facsimile, Transcript, and Translation of an Inscription in a Hindu temple at Iwullee in Dharwad Collectorate". From the translation of the inscription Bhau Daji made two things clear '} ^ In the first place the temple was dedicated to Jinendra (Rishabha Deva, the first of the Jain Tirthankars). Secondly it was constructed by Ravikirti, who Dr. Bhau Daji supposed was a Jain of Digambara Sect, in the reign of the Chalukyan king Pulkesi II. While pointing out the importance of the inscription Bhau Daji said that inscriptional account of the Chalukya tallied with what had hitherto been discovered in copper-plate grants and inscriptions in temples. It is important to note that this Inscription states that Pulakesi conquered the Lats, Malavas, Gurjaras, the Pallavas and defeated king Harsh, the Siladitya, who patronized Hioeun Thsang. The Inscription also mentions Vatapipuri as the capital of Pulakesi's kingdom.' ^

Dr. Bhau Daji read the paper entitled 'Facsimile, Transcript and Translation of an Inscription Discovered by Mr. G.W. Terry in the Temple of Amra-Natha, near Kalyan; with Remarks' before the meeting of Society on 8"" July 1869.^ ^ John Sutherland, an excellent Sanskrit scholar and collector of Thana, first brought the Temple of Amaranath to the notice of Dr. Wilson.^ -^ This led to the visits by Sir E. Perry, John Smith, and 356

David M'culloch of Bombay, and General W. Lang from Kathiawad. However it was G.W. Terry who the inscription in the temple/ ^ Dr. Bhau Daji examined the original and copied from it. He made two things clear : in the first place he stated that the inscription clearly shows that the correct name of the temple, or rather the Linga worshipped in it is, Amra-nath, evidently derived from Amra, a mongo. And secondly from the form of the letters he opined that 'they are about a century older than the present inscription.'' ^ He read the date as 782 Saka. After the reading of the paper Burgess made a few remarks on it. He in the first place clarified that he did not wish to challenge the correctness of the reading of the inscription. However, he initially observed that the temple belonged to a period not earlier than the tenth nor later than the twelfth Christian century but after examination, he further thought that 'it could not be so early as the 10"^ century though in the notice referred to by Dr. Bhau Daji, which I contributed to the Times of India, I allowed that it might date as far back as the 11* century.^ ^ Further Burgess sent a photograph of the temple to Fergusson, 'the well known critic on the Indian architecture', who associated it in style and age with the old Temple at Oudepur near Bhilsa, built about 1060 A.D. Fergusson told him, "it is so marvellously like it in style, I cannot admit more than a century of difference of date - if so much - unless you have some evidence to the contrary."^ ^ Fergusson's observations helped Burgess to confirm him in his opinion drawn from architectural considerations. From the study of the inscription Burgess arrived at the conclusion that it (the temple) was not so old as the Kutila inscription of the 10* century. He further explained that, 'if the date had been from the Valabhi Samvat, it would have corresponded with A.D. 1043.^^^^)

He observed that on the plaster cast the word 'shak' was perfectly 357

plain though he had not noticed it in the stone. Then in the end he raised a very interesting question : 'Is there then no way of reconcihng the date with the style by supposing that this inscription was partly a copy, in a modernized alphabet, made from an original one in the temple which it speaks of as having been restored ?"v220)

In order to get the idea of the level of academic discussion on should know Fergusson's contribution to the history of Indian Architecture. Fergusson brought out his 'History of Indian Architecture' in 1876, 'devoting the third volume of it exclusively to Indian and Eastern Architecture'. While stating the importance of his work Burgess himself wrote: "When he began to write on Indian Architecture in 1845, no one knew anything definite about it, but now to quote in his own words, "the date of every building and every cave in India can be determined with almost absolute certainty to within fifty or at the outside one hundred years; the sequence is everywhere certain, and all can be referred to the race and religion that practiced that particular style."^ '

In reply to Burgess, Bhau Daji asserted that he had no doubt about the correct age of the inscription, judging the character of the letters and the date. He explained that the Samvat was distinctly called Saka, and it could not possibly be interpreted as Valadava from any other Samvat. Bhau Daji differed from Fergusson's opinion as he based it on the style of architecture and stated the age of the temple made from the date to be A.D. 860. Interestingly, Bhau Daji further explained that he had personally visited many of the older Orissa temples, with inscriptions in many of them. He also pointed out that he had also examined almost every cave in the Presidency, as well as many in Bihar and Eastern India. Then he expressed that he sometimes found Fergusson in error 'to the extent of one 358

to three centuries in respect to the age of the temples and caves'. ^ In the end he strongly asserted his position in relation to the Amamath temple and said : "If therefore, the Amra-Natha temple be considered from its style to be later than the date shows, the so called error is in keeping with the general scheme."^ '

Then Dr. Wilson intervened in the discussion and clarified that Fergusson's chronological deductions from the temples of Southern India were certainly very remarkable, but he (Dr. Wilson) thought that the temple of Amaranath was executed by northern and not by Southern artisans.

Burgess while stating his position said that he did not put forward Fergusson's dates as always infallible.

He too believed that Fergusson erred widely in some of his first estimates of the ages of the Buddhist caves. In the end he too had to state that 'with regard to the alphabet of the inscription I make no pretensions to such a knowledge as Dr. Bhau Daji has, and I observed from the first that some of the letters, as he says, have not modem forms, - the vowel I especially being formed as in the Kutila inscription'.^ ^ Thus, the discussion on the paper showed the academic level of it as well as Dr. Bhau Daji's competence in reading inscriptions.

Dr. Bhau Daji read/submitted his paper entitled 'Report on Photographic copies of Inscriptions in Dharear and Mysore' before the Meeting of the Society on 10"^ Nov. 1870.^^^^^* He experienced the * The report stated that in 1866, a large folio volume of Inscriptions in Dharwad and Mysore, photographed by the late Dr. Pigon and Col. Biggs, Late of the Royal Artillery and edited by T.C. Hope, Esq., was printed by the committee of Architectural Antiquities of Western India, of which Bhau Daji was Honorary Secretary. This report of Inscriptions contains 59 photographs. One of these photographs is celebrated Aihole Inscription of Pulkesi II, dated 556 saka corresponding to 634 A.D. JBBRAS, Vol. X, 1871-74, p. Appendix, cxcviii. 359

difficulty in reading these inscriptions for he could not get the assistance of good Canarese scholars competent in reading and studying the old Canarese works in order to properly decipher the inscriptions/ ^ These inscriptions range from the sixth to the fourteenth century of the Christian era. With the study of these inscriptions Bhau Daji threw considerable light on the chronology and history of Southern India. These Inscriptions relate to the Chalukya, Yadava, Kulachuri, Kadamba, Gupta, Ratta and Sinha dynasties. From the study of the inscriptions related to the Guptas he concluded that 'the Guptas continued to rule at Ujjayani till the twelfth century of the Christian era and their sway seems to have extended as far as Vanavasi in the South-West, which I may here remark was the capital of the Kadamba dynasties.^ ^ Bhau Daji referred to the inscription related to the prince Kakkala of the Rashtrakuta dynasty, who was vanquished and dethroned by Tailapa. This Tailapa of the Chalukya family became the founder of the dynasty known by the name of the Later Chalukyas.^ ^

Bhau Daji was the first to describe the coins of Krishnarajan, an early member of the Rashtrakuta house from a find in Nasik district; however, the inscription came to be correctly read only afl:er the specimen from Kalbadevi in Bombay were obtained.^ ^

Thus taking into consideration of Dr. Bhau Daji in constructing India's past the late professor Max-MuUer found no hesitation in saying that T always look upon Bhau Daji as a man who has done excellent work in his life - and though he has written little, the little he has written is worth thousands of pages written by others'.^ ^ Sir R.G. Bhandarkar very rightly assesed the significance of his contribution to the field of historical research when he said : "No one who wishes to write a paper on the antiquities of the last two thousand years can do so without referring to 360

Dr. Bhau's writing".' ' This was the reputation of Dr. Bhau Daji an as eminent antiquarian. He was requested to accompany when the Duck of Edinborough visited the Elephanta Caves to see the inscriptions and to guide him.^ ^ Dr. Bhau Daji, at the instance of Sir Salar Jung, the Chief Minister of the Hyderabad State, also accompanied Lord Northbrook as a guide on his visit to Verul to see the caves.^ '

Being benefited by University education Shankar Pandurang Pandit, K.T. Telang and R.G. Bhandarkar made a beginning to contribute to discovering India's past. However, their major contributions came only after 1874, therefore beyond the scope of this dissertation.

Shankar Pandurang Pandit passed the Matriculation examination in 1861. Then he joined the Elphinstone College and then studied in Deccan College, Pune. In 1863 he passed first examination in Arts. He was appointed Junior Duxina Fellow and taught during Nov. 1863 to Dec. 1865 to the students of Matriculation and of First Year in Arts. He obtained his B.A. Degree in 1865, then he was appointed Senior Duxina Fellow. In Deccan College he taught English, Sanskrit and Latin. He obtained his M.A. Degree in 1868 with English and Latin as his subjects. He was appointed Secretary to the Duxina Prize Committee after the retirement of Krishnashastri Chiplonkar in 1866. He worked in that capacity till 1869. When Dr. Kielhom went on leave Pandit was appointed as a Professor of Sanskrit and there he taught till 1873. In 1874 the Government sent him to London to attend the World Congress of Orientlists.' ^

Pandit, besides Marathi, which was his mother tongue, acquired proficiency in English, Sanskrit, Latin, German, French, Persian, Kannad and Gujarathi. 361

Pandit wrote an account of Marathi classics in the issue of Elphinstone School paper in 1863. Pandit well explained the difficulty in understanding the compositions of classical Marathi poets. He clearly stated that these masterpieces could by no means be understood by 'an ordinary student or reader of Marathi poetry, much less of Marathi prose.'^ ' For understanding these masterpieces Pandit placed emphasis on the acquisition of some knowledge of Sanskrit and on the availability of a large vocabulary of Sanskrit words. It is in this light one can understand the importance of the study of Sanskrit with a view to understanding classical marathi compositions. In this endeavour he was helped by Vishnushastri Pandit the well-known advocate of the cause of widow re-marriage and Janardan Sakharam Gadgil. Gadgil wrote a biographical work of Tukaram in English which was added to this work by Pandit. This Pandit's work came to be regarded as an authoritative work. In 1869, Pandit after critically examining eight various manuscripts, brought out the edition of the play 'Vikramorvashiya' by Kalidasa. Again in the same year, after making a critical examination of various manuscripts he brought out the critical edition of 'Brihaddasham' or Krishn-Vijaya in the same year. Pandit wrote : "And with the intention of removing such a desideratum as far as individual efforts can do, an edition of Moropant's Krishnavijaya has lately been brought out by the writer of this article'.' ^ Pandit considered this Moropant's work as 'the master-piece of its author's genius'. It is interesting to note that Pandit dedicated his work to Dr. Bhau Daji.* In 1869 Pandit published Tukarama's

* In that dedication note Pandit wrote : "To Bhau Daji, Esq., G.G.M.C., J.P., Fellow of the University of Bombay. This Humble attempt at the promotion of the study of Marathi poetry is now respectfully dedicated as a token of approbation of his zeal and labours in the cultivation of Marathi literature." Kamataki, S.N., Ravbaddur Shankar Pandurang Pandit Yanche Charitra (Mumbai, V. Prabha and Co., 1935), p. 41 362

'Gatha'. Pandit examined seven various manuscripts and published the edition of KaHdasa's 'Malavikagnimitra' with a learned intro-duction. In that introductionpt Pandit challenged H. H. Wilson's contention. Wilson had opined that Kalidas himself was not the author of the work 'Malavikagnimitra' and the work might have been written sometime in the tenth or eleventh century of the Christian era. Pandit disapproved of Wilson's contention on the basis of comparison between Malavikagnimitra and other plays by Kalidasa and concluded that tradition, literary qualities, the beginning of the play and the modest attitude of Kalidas as reflected in all his literary works, support the view that Kalidas himself wrote this work. Moreover Pandit highlighted people's regard for Buddhism and opined : "The probability is that the play was written not at a time when Buddhism was despised and had already been driven out of India, but when it was still regarded with favour and was looked upon with reverence, and this must refer us to a time several ceturies prior to the tenth or eleventh century after Christ."^^^"^^

Pandit's two articles appeared in 'The India Antiquary'.* The first- one was published in its issue of 1872. He published this paper under the title 'Translation And Remarks on a Copper-plate Grant Discovered at

* Burgess made a strong request to the Society to bring out more frequent publication of its Journal. He even explained 'how ample material might be obtained for four or six issues yearly'. He even asserted that 'the Government grant was really intended for publication and not for general revenue'. However, he received no positive response from the Society. In the Meeting he stated that 'to occupy the field I had described there was room and want of a Joumal, and if the Society declined to supply the want, I was disposed to try to do so otherwise'. Soon after, he published the first number of the monthly Joumal called "Indian Antiquary" in January 1872, with the intention of creating and sustaining a wider interest in very field of research in anitiquity giving much attention to epigraphy. Burgess, Jas, 'Sketch of Archaeological Research in India During Haifa Century' in JBBRAS, Extra No., p. 141 363

Tidgundi in the Kaladgi Zilla'/ ^ The possessor of the copper-plate showed this to Pandit in hopes that after its decipherment he would get information about a hidden treasure. The story tells the general attitude of the people towards the use of the documents of the past. They being illiterate, were least concerned of its use in reconstructing the past. He stated the date of the document i.e. 30'^ of September 51, B.C. (N.S.). For the accuracy of these calculations he was assured by Keru Lakshman Chhatre the well-known contemporary mathematician and astronomer. He stated that the king of the Chalukya dynasty in whose reign this grant was made, belonged to the branch of that dynasty which ruled from Kalyan from about the end of the tenth to near the end of the twelfth century of the Christian era.^ ' The inscription records a grant of twelve villages made by Munja Mahipati or King Munja to Kanna Samant. In the end he concluded that the grantor was more than a mere chief and the grantee Kanna Samanta no more than a petty chief ^ ^

Pandit's second paper entitled 'An Inscription at Salotgi in the Kaladgi District, dated Saka 867 or A.D. 945, with Remarks appeared in its issue of July 5, 1872.^^'*^^ It records that in the year Saka 867 (A.D. 945) king Krishnaraja called Akalavarsha Deva, the son of Amoghavarsha was reigning at Manyakheta. Chakrayadha, the assistant to the minister by name Narayana of the king established a college and assigned lands for the maintenance of its inmates and preceptor. It was at pavittage that the college was established and Pandit stated that the Pavittage of the inscription is the same as Salotgi, the village where the inscription was found.^ ^ He further observed the repetition of the word 'Manya' in the inscription. He asserted Manya Kheta as the capital of Krishnaraja. Pandit compared this pillar inscription with the Kharepatan copper-plate inscription. The Kharepatan inscription gives the whole genealogy of the 364

Rashtrakutas from the first prince Dantidurga to the last Kakkala. Bhandarkar considered this inscription 'as a valuable document'.' ^ Pandit in his analysis found Wilson's theory of "two collateral branches untenable and asserted that 'the series of fourteen princes given in the- Karda copper­ plate grant is made up of kings of one and the same family who reigned one after another at Manya-Kheta.

Pandit published the edition of Kalidas's Raghuvamsha in three parts, the first in 1869, the second in 1872 and the third in 1874. He gave learned explanatory notes to the end of each part. Pandit read the paper entitled, 'Who wrote the Raghuvamsha and When?" in the World Congress of Orientalists.

The first Congress of Orientalists was held at Paris in 1872 which was presided over by Men. de Rosny. The second Congress' of Orientalists was held at London in 1874 and it was presided over by Dr. Samuel Birch. The Aryan section was presided over by Max MuUer. In that section Pandit presented his paper : "Who wrote the Raghuvamsha and when?"^ ' There was a statement made by Prof Albrecht Weber in his paper on Ramayana : "There is at least some doubt whether we are right in ascribing it (Raghuvamsha) to the author of the dramas and the Meghaduta."^ ^ Pandit in the preparation of his paper studied various criticisms on Kalidas's Raghuvamsha but Weber's criticism was the first of its kind to deny authorship to Kalidasa. Pandit in his paper referred to the critique Mallinath who clearly stated that Kalidasa authored the works such as Raghuvamsha, Kumarsambhava and Meghdoot. In the end Pandit concluded following points^ ^ : He found nothing contrary in Raghuvamsha to the legend that Kalidas was the contemporary of Shak- karta Vikramaditya. Secondly, on the basis of Kalidas's knowledge of 365

astronomy he concluded that Kahdasa flourished in the first century B.C. Thirdly, Kalidasa the author of Shakuntal, Vikramorvashiya and Malvikagnimitra was the same one who authored Raghuvamsha, Kumarsambhava and Meghdoot. Fourthly, Kalidasa might have been the contemporary of Vikramaditya one who ruled from Ujjain. Fifthly, he found all stories regarding Kalidas and Dhara-based Bhoja Raja of the tenth century Christian era, baseless. Sixthly, the composition of Ramayana must be traced to a period several centuries before Kalidasa. And in the end he categorically stated that Weber's contention was totally wrong.

It was worth mentioning of what Max Muller said in appreciation of Bhadarkar and Pandit : "The editions of Sanskrit texts published at Bombay by Professor Bhandarkar and Mr. S.P. Pandit and others need not fear comparison with the best works of European scholars."^ '

Kashinath Trimbak Telang studied at the Elphinstone High School. Telang there learned to appreciate Marathi poetry. His interest in Sanskrit too received encouragement. He passed the Matriculation in 1864 with Sanskrit for his second language. When Telang left the school he got from Principal Jefferson, as a prize, a copy of Max Muller's 'History of Sanskrit Literature' 'as the European's appreciation of Telang's Sanskrit Scholarship'.^ ^ He obtained the Junior Scholarship in 1865 and Senior Scholarship in English and Sanskrit in April 1866, and in the third year, in 1867 secuered one another scholarship and receive the Raja of Dhar Prize and 'Ganpatrao Vithal Prize in English'.^ ' He passed his F.A. examination in Nov. 1866, took his B.A. degree in Jan. 1868, passed his M.A. examination with Sanskrit and English in 1869. He did his L.L.B. in 1870.

Telang read his paper entitled 'Life of Sankaracharya' on 2"^^ 366

January 1871 before Students' Literary and Scientific Society. In this paper he gave an epitome of Madhavacharya's Life of Shankar supplemented with his other readings which included the life of Shankar by Anandagiri/^^^)

Telang's paper on the 'Date of Nyayakusumanjali' appeared in the October issue of the year 1872 of Indian Antiquary. Prof. E. B. Cowell, in the preface to his edition of the 'Nyayakusumanjali', endeavoured to fix the age of Udayanacharya, the author of the work and he fixed Udayanacharya in the twelfth century. But then Telang posed a very pertinent question : "what proof have we that Udayana who commented on Vachaspati Mishra is the same with the Udayan who wrote the Kusumanjali ?"^ ^ Telang found this date unacceptable and then confirming fi^om other sources he concluded that 'Udayanacharya flourished about the eleventh century, and that, four aught that appears to the contrary, he may have flourished even at an earlier date.'^ ^

Telang's article 'On Gomutra' appeared in the first volume of the Indian Antiquary. At the outset of this article he referred to the remarks made by Babu Rajebdralal Mitra with regard to the use of beef among the Hindus of ancient days. These remarks led him to inquire about the period at which the cow came to be regarded as a sacred animal in this country. Telang observed that 'one of the "products of the cow" appears to have been held sacred in the days of Patanjali'.' ^ Goldstucker fixed the date of Patanjali in the middle of the second century B.C., and Bhandarkar too confirmed it. On the basis of this date of Patanjali, Telang concluded that 'Cow must have been revered at as early a period at least as the second century B.C.'^^^"^^

There appeared Telang's short note on 'The Ramayana Older than 367

Patanjali' in the third volume of The Indian Antiquary. Telang referred to the line cited by Patanjali from Valmiki's Ramayan. Telang then pointed out that it may be seen in the Bombay edition, Gorresio's edition and in the Adhyatma Ramayana. Thus, Telang succeeded in finally settling the question that the Ramayana was older than Patanjali A ^

Telang in his article on 'Parvatiparinaya of Bana', which appeared in the second volume of 'The Indian Antiquary', referred to an edition of Parvatiparinaya whith a translation into Marathi by Parashurampant Godbole. Godbole comparing description of Bana whith the description of the author of the Kadambari argued that 'the two Banas must really have been one and the same person'.'^ ^ Then, Telang referred to few of the more important coincidences occurring in Parvatiparinaya and Kumarsambhava. But then he referred Fitz Edward Hall's principle that 'Hindu poets not infrequently repeat themselves; but downright plagiarism among them of one respectable author from another is unknown'*^ ' and expressed his difficulty to act on Hall's principle in this particular case. Again, Telang pointed to the absence of any tradition connecting the play with the poet Kalidasa. He also found dearth of collateral circumstances to justify the application of the principle in this particular case. In the end he expressed his inability to come to a final judgment and thus kept the question open-ended.

There appeared Telang's article on 'Kalidasa, Shri Harsha, and Chand' in the first volume of The Indian Antiquary. In this paper Telang referring to a passage from Khandanakhandakhadya placed Kalidasa chronologically before Harsha, and hence Chanda. However, he refused to be in concurrence with the views expressed by Babu Ram Das regarding his statement that Harsha and Chanda were comtemporaries. In this context 368

he clearly stated that Rajashekhar could not be implicitly trusted. This led to strengthen Growse's note that 'Shri Harsha was a writer of considerable antiquity.'(^^^^

There appeared an article on The Ramayana by Prof. Albrecht Weber(Berlin) in three issues of the year 1872 of The Indian Antiquary. Weber in the end of his article concluded following points^ ^ : 1) The earliest indigenous testimonies to the existence of a Ramayana date from about the third or fourth century of the Christian era. 2) In the existing condition of the text he found 'unmistakable indications' that the influence of Greece upon India was already firmly established 3) He found absemce of the story of the abduction of Sita by Ravana or of the Siege of Lanka in the Buddhist legend, later Valmiki made these additins. In this context he suggested to recognize the influence of an acquaintance with the Homeric saga-cycle. 4) He expressed doubt about the Vaishnava bias of the Ramayana whether it belonged to the poem originally. Later on Valmiki made use of this in the interest of the Brahminical theology, as an antidote to Buddhism. 5) He justified Wheeler who referred the conflict with the Rakshasas in Ceylon to anti-Buddhist tendencies. 6) He found no satisfactory explanation for the story of Ram and Sita as contained in its earlier form in the Dasaratha-Jatak 7) He expressed that Valmiki inheriting from the Buddhist legend depicted Ram's character with the extreme mildness. And in continuation with this he suggested the possibility that in the course of time 'Christian elements may have found their way into the representation (Sabari, Sambuka & c. ) 8) He pointed out that Valmiki appears to have belonged to a school of the Yajurveda and.his birth-place was probably somewhere in the neighbourhood of Ayodhya. 369

Telang in reply to Weber's theory that the Ramayana was copied from Homer, read the paper entitled 'Was the Ramayana copied from Homer?' before the Students' Literary and Scientific Society on 2"'' Sept. 1872. In this paper Telang conclusively argued to prove that the Ramayana was not based on the Homeric story of the Trojan War. Although he empathized with his Hindu brethren he considered the scientific attitude as 'the only proper attitude in such an inquiry.'^ ^ To Weber's contention that the Buddhist book is the original of which the Ramayana is the copy, Telang replied that Webwer made no inquiry concerning the age of the Busddhistic stories themselves. Telang expressed difficulty in comprehending how a Buddhist hero could be metamorphosed into a Brahminical hero?"^ ^

Regarding Weber's contention of the 'unmistakeable influence' of Greece in general, and of Homer in particular on the Ramayana, Telang found the analogy supposed to exist between some of the characters in the Ramayana and some in Homer incorrect. In this regard Telang asked : "what comparision can there be between the very feminine Paris, who was the ravisher of Helen, and the conqueror of the world, the dreaded enemy of the Gods themselves, who was the ravisher of Sita? ..."^ ' He insisted

* Telang, before writing his paper in reply to Weber's article On The Ramayana appeared in The Indian Antiquary, went through a course of study in Biblical criticism and also studied works on the "Proofs of Historical Criticism" Naik, V. N., 'Kashinath Trimbak Telang' in Eminent Orientalists, op. cit., p. 122

The revised paper first appeared in 'Native Opinion' newspaper. In this paper he made a few alterations and added foot-notes to it. Then again in the course of the revision Telang added a few appendices to it and published it in Native Opinion. He stated that while revising his paper he kept the original draft intact. Telang's paper : Was the Ramayana Copied from Homer ?', p. Introduction dated 15-1-1873 in Telang, K.T, Select Writings and Speeches (Bombay, Manoranjan Press, 1916) 370

that the principal characters are essentially distinct. Telang further pointed out not only translation of Homer but also adoptation too was not there, He further asserted that it was a mere vague impression of resemblance that led to Weber's erroneous supposition of the two Greek writers. Thus Weber based his assumption on the very questionable coincidences 'that have been traced in sundry particulars'.' ' And then further asked : "And what after all do these coincidences come to ?"^ '' Telang answered that 'these two instances are not from the Ramayana but from the Mahavanso and Buddhaghosha' commentary on the Dhammapada, of the 15"" century of the Christian era.

Telang told that, 'Weber's assumption that the Ramayana was composed by more than one poet proves nothing about the age of the old Ramayana of Valmiki.'

Weber understood the occurrence of the term 'Yavana' in the Ramayana as suggestive of Bactrian Greeks as the successors of various people mentioned therein. Weber called this as "the decisive circumstance in the matter". To challenge this contention Telang cited Lassen Who said, "Yavana is not the exclusive name of the Greeks or lonians".^ ^ Lassen further stated that it had a much wider meaning, and that it was even used of Semitic nations'.^ ^ Max Muller too accepted this explanation. Thus Telang proved that Weber's 'decisive' evidence was without any basis in fact.

Then Telang discussed the other points such as the development of Sanskrit literature since the days of the Vedas, the ancientness of the Krishna-worship, and the consideration of astronomical matters ever since the days of the Vedas. Telang positively asserted that the Ramayana was older than Patanjali.^^^^^ 371

Lastly Weber referred to the passage in the Ayodhyakand in which reference is made to Buddha by name. Telang pointed out that Schlegel considered that the passage was an interpolation. In this regard Telang drew attention to other points' .1) Buddha is never again mentioned in the whole of the Ramayana. 2) The very mentioning of Buddha in the passage under discussion is out of context. 3) The passage does not occur at all in Goressio's edition.

In the context of this whole discussion, it would be apt to quote Sir Raymond West who said : "The legendary atmosphere and the whole mental tone of the Ramayana are so different from those of the Homeric poems that no substantial influence of the latter can be traced in the Indian epic."^ ^ This is well reflected in Telang's whole argument. In developing his argument, Telang, nowhere made any slightest deviation from maintining that proper scientific spirit throughout. Dinsha Wachha considered this Telang's reply to some fantastic theories of Weber as 'a marked evidence of the analytical cast of mind and the historical spirit of the young scholar.'^^^^^*

* Sir Raymond West in appreciation of this paper wrote : "The theory of the latter (Prof Weber) has not been generally accepted and the criticism of the young Hindu scholar have been confirmed by subsequent investigations both in India and in Europe". The prestigious magazine 'The Academy' in its remarks on Telang's paper wrote : " The author seemed to possess an excellent knowledge of Sanskrit and had thrown considerable light on the history of Sanskrit literature." Kamataki, S.N., Namdar Nyayamurti Kashinath Trimbak Telang Yanche Charitra (Mumbai, Kulkami M.N. - Bharat Gaurav Granth Mala, 1929), p. 65

^ Dr. F. Lomser's article 'Die Bhagvadgita' came to be translated into English for the Indian Antiquary In that article Lorinser made following propositions " 1) He expressed his certainty that Bhagvadgita was dated after the Buddha, 2) He attributed its composition to period terminating several centuries after the commencement of the Christian era, 3) He stated that the composer of the (contd.) 372

Telang read his paper entitled 'A new Chalukya copper-plate with Remarks' before the meeting of the Society on 10* Oct. 1874. Telang made preliminary remarks about the copper-plate inscription and then started making an historical inquiry into the problem concerning the Chalukya dynasty. Telang found that the available information of the early Chalukyas was in a great measure imperfect. Telang observed the difficulties in reconciling the statements contained in the several copper-plates. Earlier this difficulty was realized by scholars and they spoke of it. Sir Walter Eliot spoke of it in terms of "difficulties and improbabilities", Fergusson described it as a "violent adjustment", and Prof Dowson described it as "deficiencies", "discrepancies". Telang's whole endeavour in this paper remained not one of reconciling all the published statements of copper­ plates and inscriptions regarding the Chalukyas but 'to evolve some order out of at least one part of the chaos'.' ^

The earliest known copper-plate grant, of Samvatsar 394 was deciphered and translated by Prof. Dowson. Telang observed in Captain Jervis's copper-plate inscription of Saka year 411 nor mention of Vijayaditya but that of one additional name - Pulkesi. Then Telang discussed the position of this Pulakesi according to Sir W. Elliot, Prof Dowson and Prof Balshastri Jambhekar. Telang then proceeded fLirther to explain the conflict of authorities in regard to the date of Satyasraya.

Bhagvadgita knew and used the New Testament; 4) He expressed that till the fmalization of the date of Shankarcharya, the date of the composition of the Gita be left an open question. Telang refuted these arguments and asserted that the Gita was earlier in date than the Buddha. Telang first read his paper before the Students' Society in which he challenged Lorinser's above mentioned propositions in 1874. This essay was afterwards embodied as am introduction to the material translation of the 'Divine Lay' published in 1873. i) Telang's Writings and Speeches, Vol. II, GSBMM, pp. 1-2 ii) Keny, L.B., Kashinat Trimbak Telang, Sen, S.P., (ed.), op. cit., p. 192. 373

Telang then dealt with the theory put forth by Bhau Daji and others that there were two Pulkesis. Telang expressed doubt asking whether two kings who came after Satyasraya reigned at all. Then Telang explained how authorities differed about the date of Vikramaditya. Telang pointed out that Elliot and Jacob's lists contained the name of Vinayaditya but the same name did not occur in Wathen's list. This whole exercise did not satisfy Telang. But then it well expressed the 'inadequacy of the materials for a history of the Chalukya dynasty.' Thereupon, impressed by these facts, Fergusson expressed the view that 'Some at least of the documents on which we place so much reliance are probably intentionally incorrect.'^ ^ To quote Fergusson in this regard, if true, "renders inscriptions per se nearly useless for the purpose of fixing the dates of buildings or events." Although realized the importance of copper-plates and inscriptions as sources of information about the history of India for several centuries after the commencement of the Christian era and some centuries before it, Telang refused to be in concurrence with the view expressed by Fergusson. Telang asked : "If Mr. Fergusson is right, what guarantee have we that any individual inscription or copper-plate on which we may rely is entitled to that reliance ?"^ ^ Thus Telang emphasized the importance of a fresh examination of the above mentioned documents by competent men conversant with the Sanskrit language and with the ancient alphabets with a view to reading inscriptions accurately. Bhandarkar too observed in several cases in which either the original plates or facsimiles of them were written, errors committed by previous decipherers and translators. He too expressed that such errors might be found to exist in other plates also. He stated that it was impossible to say positively, without a look at the originals as to the date of Satyasraya and thus emphasized the necessity 374

of publishing facsimiles of copper-plates. Not only that, he also began to entertain similar doubts in consequences of what he had seen of the chronology of the Valabhi kings/ ^ The Rev. J.S.S. Robertson too supported Bhandarkar's proposition that copies of inscriptions should be prepared and compared by Savans.' ' The Rev. Dr. Wilson too spoke of the difficulties involved in fixing dates and the names of eras, and urged the desirableness of having a corpus inscriptionum.^ ^ In all this exercise Telang showed his competency in understanding intricacies of the work of reading and interpreting inscriptions.

Telang presented his paper entitled 'A Note on the Age of Madhusudana Sarasvati' before the Meeting of the Society on 12''' of Dec. 1874. Madhusudana Sarasvati, one of the commentators on the Bhagavadgita, belonged to the Adwait School of the Vedanta philosophy. The well-known catalogues of Fitz-Edward Hall and Aufrecht contain some information about Madhusudan Sarasvati and his works. But Bhau Daji found no information in these catalogues about the age of Madhusudana Sarasvati.

Lassen, in the preface to his edition of Schlegel's Bhagavadgita referred to an opinion of Bumouf. Bumouf who identified Madhusudan, the author of Gitagudharthadipika, with a certain Madhusudan, the one mentioned by Madhavacharya in his Dhatuvritti. However, Bumouf himself was not satisfied with this identification. Lassen too was not quite prepared to accept it. However Lassen assigned Madhusudan to the middle of the fourteenth century, placing Madhavacharya at the close of that century. Telang refuted this conclusion. Expressing his dissent from them, Telang confidently stated that, T think 1 have the support of something of much grater strength than a mere conjectural identification based on a similarity 375

of names.'' ^ On the basis of internal evidence furnished by the Gitagudharthadipika that Madhusudana must have flourished, not before, but sometime after, Madhavacharya.' Telang expressed that Madhusudana 'must be later in age than Madhavacharya'A ^ In the end Telang after examining yet another source of information giving a complete list of the several occupants of the Sringeri Gadi, concluded that "Madhusudana Sarasvati probably flourished about the end of the fifteenth or the beginning of the Sixteenth century of the Christian era.'^ ^

In the presentation of all his papers Telang attempted to protest against "the frame of mind" and "foregone conclusions" of Western scholars working on Indian history.^ ' Telang particularly in his paper on the Ramayana' laid bare 'the basic European bias of European Indologists, which was covered up by the employment of the critical method.'^ ^ In doing so Telang was challenging the 'hegemony' of western scholars which they had established in the field of historical research pertaining to ancient India. Telang's contribution to discovering India's past was recognized by no less a person than Prof. Max Muller himself who wrote : "In the Indian Antiquary' we meet with contribution from several learned natives, among them ... from Mr. Kashinath Trimbak Telang ... which are read with the greatest interest and advantage by European scholars."' '

Ramkrishna Gopal Bhandarkar completed his elementary education in a traditional Marathi school.^ '' In 1847 he joined the English school at Ratnagiri. Later he studied at the Elphinstone Institute in Mumbai and passed the High School Examination in 1854. In 1858 he passed the final examination of the College section of Elphinstone Institute. He was appointed a Daxina Fellow in Jan. 1859. In that capacity he served for 376

some time in Mumbai and then in Pune for four years. After the estabHshment of the University of Bombay in 1857, he was required to pass the various examinations of that University. He obtained his B.A. degree in 1862 and his M.A. in 1863, both in English and Sanskrit. In 1868 on the advice of Dr. Buhler, Col. Waddigton, then the Acting D.P.I. appointed Bhandarkar temporarily to the Sanskrit chair at Elphinstone College. It was only in 1882 that he was appointed a permanent professor of Sanskrit at Deccan College, Pune.

Here two things may be noted about Bhandarkar : Howard, the then D.P.I, encouraged him to take to Sanskrit studies. He himself took serious interest in the study of Sanskrit. He studied Sanskrit under the guidance of Pandit Govind Shastri Lele and Appa Shastri Khadilkar of Bombay and thereafter at Poona with the eminent Balshastri Deva and Anant Shastri Pendharkar. He realized the need of studying Sanskrit by following the method of critical inquiry in place of the traditional one.

Secondly at the Elphinstone College, his teacher Sydney Owen made a deep impression on him. Sydney Owen used to engage the class on the French Revolution. There he would explain how a particular historian presented a bias view of that great event and would insist on studying history objectively and critically. This made him realize 'that a correct understanding of the political, social and religious history of a country was a basic condition for its renaissance.'' ^

Bhandarkar's paper entitled 'A Review of Martin Haug's Aitareya- Brahman' appeared in the Native Opinion, (Bombay), in 1864. This he wrote in order to enable the reader to form a correct estimate of this work. He made it clear that for a translation of the Aitareya Brahmana one requires to understand a general knowledge of the complicated sacrificial 377

ritual of the Brahmans. Dr. Haug's residence in India and his association with two srotriyas made him possible to understand a good deal of original information about sacrificial ritual. About the translation itself Bhandarkar wrote : "the translation upon the whole is well executed, as might be expected. Copious notes illustrative of the text are given . They are chiefly based upon oral information and the prayogas, and now and then upon the sutras of Asvalayan and Hiranyakesin, and the Kausitaki and Tandya Brahmanas." In appreciation of Haug's work Bhandarkar further commented : "No ordinary degree of perse verance [perseverance] must have been required to collect and bring together this mass of information. The Germans are known to be patient scholars, and Dr. Haug seems to be a favourable specimen of their class."^^ Then he pointed out that it was not a blemish-free work. He expressed that the edition of the Sanskrit text 'seems to have been hastily gone through'.*^ ' He found punctuation in many places wrong and gave a few instances. Then in the end he requested not to misunderstand the point of his criticism. He categorically stated the necessity of free discussion 'for the advancement of truth'.' ' This review article impressed A. Weber of Berlin and he reproduced it in his famous Journal "Indische Studien'.' ^

Bhandarkar read his paper before the meeting of the Society entitled, 'Transcript and Translation of a copper-plate Grant of the Fifth Century of the Christian Era, found in Gujerath by Manekji Aderji, Esq., G.G.M.C., with Remarks'. The inscription records a grant of a village named Rachhchhavam, in the district of Ankulesvara, in Gujerat to one Narayan residing in Abhichchhatra. The king who granted it belonged to the Gurjar dynasty and was named Dadda. It may be referred to Bhandarkar's remarks on Prinsep's Essays edited by Thomas that, 'the dates of all these documents require accurate re-examination and revision, 378

and that the geographical questions involved demand even in a degree an exact and formal definition'.' ^ And in respect of this particular copper­ plate he remarked, the present copper-plate grant throws, 'I think, much light on these questions'.^ ^ In this context it is interesting as well as instructive to note that later it came to be treated as one of the forged inscriptions.^ '

It goes to the credit of W. H. Wathen, the Persian secretary to the Government of Bombay to bring to light the dynasty of the Valabhis by discovering two copper-plates. Earlier only Tod was aware of the existence of this dynasty, in a vague way. Wathen's communication to the Asiatic Society of Bengal in which he drew up a genealogy of the Valabhi kings made a significant contribution to the discovery of this dynasty.^ ^ The third copper-plate was discovered by Dr. Bum of Kaira. Once Bhau Daji made mention of the dates of five copper-plate grants of this dynasty but without giving information about who discovered these, and who deciphered and translated them. Bhandarkar published the copper-plate inscription with its translation in the Indian Antiquary under the title 'A Tambapatra or Ancient Copper-plate Grant From Kathiawad'.' ^ It is interesting to note that Bhandarkar observed that the genealogy of the Valabhi kings gathered from this grant differs from that given by all the writers on the Valabhi dynasty in relation to the successors of Shiladitya I.

Bhandarkar read his paper entitled 'A Devnagari Transcript and Date of a new Valabhi Copper-plate and a new Interpretation of the figured dates on the published Grants of the Valabhi Dynasty', before the Meeting of the Society. In this paper Bhandarkar applied Bhau.Daji's theory regarding the value of numerals and he found tmth in it. Accordingly he 379

fixed dates but then the question remained, 'To what era are these dates to be referred?'(294) ^j^^^.^ were some who referred them to Vikrama's and some to that of the Valabhi dynasty itself Thomas gave his opinion in favour of the Saka. This was exactly the position that Bhau Daji had maintained for many years. Bhandarkar too, after the study of this inscription, arrived at the same conclusion. Bhandarkar observed that in Saurashtra the Satrapas came to be replaced by the Valabhis Bhandarkar put forth the hypothesis that even after the liquidation of the Satraps, the people being accustomed for about three centuries 'must have continued in use' i.e. Saka-nripa-kala, or the era of the Saka king.^ ^ In the end he concluded that 'the date of the grant Dharasena II discovered by Mr. Wathen is 272 Saka, corresponding to 350 A.D. that of the present grant is 326 Saka or 404 A.D., and that those of Siladitya II is 356 Saka, i.e. 434 A.D.'(2^^) Bhandarkar read his paper entitled 'Consideration of the Date of Mahabharat, in Connection with the Correspondence from Col. Ellis', on 12"" Sept. 1872, before the Meeting of the Society. Col. Ellis considering an inscription on copper-plate purporting to be a grant of land by Janamejaya, the son of Parikshit, of the race of the Pandavas, as genuine, determined the date of composition of the Mahabharata to a period subsequent to its execution i.e. 7"" of April 1521.^ ^ In reply to Ellis Bhandarkar pointed out following points : In the first place Krishnaraya and not Janamejaya of the Pandavas race was on the throne of Vijayanagar, or Anagundi, about 1521. And then, both could not have been kings at the same time. Secondly, if the grant is genuine and the Mahabharat was written after 1521 one should certainly expect a picture of the sixteen- century society in it. Thirdly, Bhandarkar described it.as a spurious 380

document. Fourthly, if considered Ellis's view correct then 'the greater of the existing classical literature must be supposed to have been written after 1521 A.D. In this regard he cited principal testimonies to the existence of the Mahabharat, in chronological order. For instance, Panini must have preceded Patanjali, the author of the Mahabhashya. Goldstucker placed Patanjali in the second century before Christ. In Patanjali's work one finds the names of Bhimsena, Sehadeva and Nakula. From this he concluded that, 'there was in Patanjali's time a work describing the war of the Kurus ... and that it was regarded as ancient'.^ ^ Further Bhandarkar referred to Nasik Cave inscriptions, Kalidas, Bana, Shankaracharya, Hemadri, Jnaneshwari and other Marathi works. This was Bhandarkar's reply to Ellis, moreover he was criticizing the tendency of most European Scholars to modernize everything Hindu.' ^

Bhandarkar's article on 'Panini and the Geography of Afghanistan and the Panjab' appeared in the first volume of the Indian Antiquary. In this article, besides the Puranas and the Itihasas he emphasized the importance of Panini and his commentators as the authorities for ancient Indian geography. He observed that in the works of Panini and his commentators there occurs a large number of names of towns, villages, rivers, mountains and warlike tribes. In this paper he confind his discussion with the Ancient Geography of Afghanistan and the Punjab.^ '

Bhandarkar's article 'On the Date of Patanjali and the King in Whose Reign He lived' appeared in the first volume of the Indian Antiquary. In this article he concluded that Patanjali lived in the reign of Puspamitra and that he probably wrote the third chapter of his Bhasya between 144 B.C. and 142 B.C.^'^^^ In conclusion he agreed with Goldstucker who on the basis of Matsya Purana fixed the limits between 381

140 and 120 B.C. Bhandarkar cited another passage in Patanjali which was not noticed by Goldstucker. One must take into account that in this case Bhandarkar found no reason to distrust the chronology of the Puranas. But at the same time he found confirmation of it from the evidence of coins. Thus he realized the importance of corroborative evidence in order to arrive at facts instead of solely relying on the Puranas. Further Bhandarkar in his Note on the Weber's Letter, emphatically stated that he brought forward new facts.^^ Bhandarkar in his article on 'Mahabhasya of Patanjali', stated the native place of Patanjali and of Katyayana. He on the basis of tradition, (tradition refers to Gonard) MatsyaPuran and two passages from Patanjall's Mahabhasya concluded that, 'Patanjall's native place therefore, must have been somewhere to the north-west by West of Oudh'.^ ' This was contrary to what was suggested by Weber. Weber thought he lived to the east of Pataliputra. Weber was of the view that Katyayana was one of the eastern grammarians and Dr. Goldstucker too supported this vie- point. However, Bhandarkar on the basis of Patanjali's explanation of two Vartikas concluded that he was a Dakshinatya.^ ^ In his note on the Interpretation of Patanjali, Bhandarkar differed his differences on the interpretation of certain words such as 'Vartika', 'Acaryadesiya' etc. from Weber and Dr. Goldstucker.' ^ Here again he expressed his belief that Patanjali and Katyayana did not belong to the same country.^ ^ In his reply to Prof. Weber, Bhandarkar reiterated his position on the issues related to Patanjali and Katyayana.^^

In the volume III of the Indian Antiquary there appeared Bhandarkar's article on 'Allusions to Krishna in Patanjali's Mahabhasya'. He cited seven passages from the Mahabhasya and discussed elaborately the root-meanings of words establishing the proposition that 'the stories about Krishna and his worship as a God are not so recent as European 382

scholars would make them'/ ' and thus directed the attention of those 'who find in Christ a prototype of Krishna, and in the Bible, the original of the Bhagvadgita, and who believe our Puranic literature to be merely a later growth.'^^^^^

Bhandarkar's article 'The Veda in India' appeared in the Vol. Ill of the Indian Antiquary.'' ^ He in this article gave an account of the study of the Veda by the Brahminical families explaining the manner in which the Vaidikas learn to recite the Mantra portions of their Veda. He also referred to Srotriyas and their acquaintance with the art of performing the great sacrifices. Here he emphasized the importance of the services rendered to the cause of Sanskrit learning by the Vedic reciters.

In one place Bhandarkar explained the methodology he followed. He wrote: " The comparative and historical methods correspond to the inductive method used in the physical and experimental sciences ... The inductive method began to be used in Europe about the end of the 16'^ century ... The critical, comparative, historical methods began to be employed about the end of the 18* century ... this critical and comparative method is necessary not only for increasing our knowledge of the world and of historical man, but also for arriving at correct views of things ... criticism and comparison are of use not only in enabling us to arrive at a knowledge of what is true but also of what is good and rational".'^ ^ Here one can understand that Bhandarkar belonged to the Ranke School of historiography. Bhandarkar has actually compared the critical method of research to the method pursued by a judge by strictly adhering to impartiality in coming to a decision. Here one is reminded of Collingwood's 'Idea of history' for considering history as a science of criminology. Dandekar has regarded Bhandarkar as a pioneer of modem 383

historiography in India/ ^ Bhandarkar in one place emphasized the importance of unprejudiced mind in examining the manner's, customs and institutions of his country and character of his people with a view to fearlessly exposing the abuses or evils he may find therein.^ ^ He basically remained concerned with the truth in history.

To sum up, by following the foot-steps of great orientalists, Jambhekar, Mandlik, Telang, Pandit and Bhandarkar made contributions to discovering India's past. They searched and collected various types of documents - literary, epigraphic and numismatic sources. They copied inscriptions, read them and threw light on India's past. They identified places and persons mentioned in various documents. They critically examined genealogy and chronology of the families of various dynasties. They critically edited texts, for that they acquired proficiency in various languages. At times they challenged the European attitude of undermining India's rich past and its culture. Thus, they significantly contributed to reconstructing India's past. 384 References

1. Singhal, D. P., India and World Civilization (Culcutta, Rupa and Co. 1993), p. 199. 2. Ibid., p. 201. 3. Trautmann, Thomas, R., Aryans and British India (New Delhi, Vistar Publications, 1997), p. 30 see also : Trautmann, Thomas, R., The Lives of Sir William Jones in Murray, Alexander (ed.). Sir William Jones 1794 A Commemoration (Oxford, O.U.P., 1998), p. 96. 4. Tautmann, Thomas R., op. cit., pp. 30-37 see also : Trautmann, Thomas, R., 'The Lives of Sir William Jones' in Murray, Alexander (ed.), op. cit., pp. 96-99. 5. Cohn, Bernard S., Colonialism and its Forms of Knowedge The British in India (Delhi, O.U.P., 1997), p. 16. 6. Trautmaim, Thomas, R., op. cit., p. 34. 7. Rizvi, S. A. A., The Wonder that Was India Part II (New Delhi, Rupa and Co., 1987), p. 254. 8. Clarke, J. J., Oriental Enlightenment (London, Routledge rpt., 1997) p. 57. 9. Ibid. 10. Cohn, Bernard S., op. cit., p. 25. 11. Singh, C.S., Theory of Literature, Vol. 1 (New Delhi, Aimiol Publications, 1998), p. 13. 12. Ibid. 13. Ibid. 14. Kejariwal, O.P., The Asiatic Society of Bengal and the Discovery of India's Past (Delhi, O.U.P., 1988), p. 18. 15. Grewal, J. S., Muslim Rule in India The Assessment of British Historians (Culcutta, O.U.P., 1970), p. 7. 16. Ibid., p. 22. 17. Singhal, D. P., op. cit., p. 204. 18. Cohn, Bernard S., op. cit., p. 26. 19. Rocher, Rosane, Orientalism, Poetry, and the Millennium : The Checkered Life of Nathaniel Brassey Halhed 1751-1830 (Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass, 385

1983), p. 55. 20. Ibid., p. 54. 21. Ibid., p. 55. 22. Trautmann, Thomas, R., op. cit., p. 31. 23. Singh, C.S., op. cit., p. 16 for original quote see: Rocher, Rosane, op. cit., p. 37. 24. Trautmann, Thomas, R., op. cit., p. 73. 25. Singh, C.S., op. cit., p. 17. 26. Ibid. 27. Keay, John, India Discovered The Recovery of a Lost Civilization (London, Harper Collins, 2001), p. 25. 28. Ibid. 29. Dey, Shumbhoo Chander, Sir Charles Wilkins in Eminent Orientalists Indian, European, American (Madras, G.A. Natesan and Co., P' ed.), p. 45 30. Keay, John, op. cit., p. 26. 31. Roychaudhari, Chandan, Sir Wilham Jones (1746-1794) : A Harbinger of India's Renaissance in Bulletin of the Deccan College, Vol. 54-55 (Pune, Deccan College, 1994-95), pp. 73-79. 32. Ibid. 33. Paddayya, K., Sir William Jones : A Tribute in Bulletin of the Deccan College, Vol. 54-55 (1994-95), p. xx. 34. Fynes, Richard, Sir William Jones and the Alexander (ed.), Sir William Jones (1746-1794), A Commemoration (Oxford, O.U.P., 1998), p. 63 35. Trautmann, Thomas, R., The Lives of Murray Alexznder (ed.), op. cit., p. 111. 36. Ibid. 37. Cannon, Garland, 'Oriental Jones : Scholarship, Literature, Multiculturalism and Human Kind 'in Bulletin of the Deccan College, Vol. 54-55, (1994-95), p. 14. 38. Iyengar, M.S. Ramaswami, 'Henry T. Colebrook' in Eminent Orientalists, Indian European, American ( Madras, G.A. Natesan and Co., 1922), 386

p. 57. 39. Chatterjee, Atul and Bum, Richard, British Contribution to Indian Studies (London, Longmans, Green and Co., 1943), p. 15. 40. Iyengar, M.S. Ramaswami, op. cit., pp. 58-59. 41. Catterjee, Atul and Bum, Richard, op. cit., p. 13. 42. Kejariwal, O.P., op. cit., p.l 18. 43. Ibid., p. 119. 44. Dey, Shanboo Chunder, 'Horace Hayman Wilson' in Eminent Orientalists, Indian European, American (Madras, G.A. Natesan and Co., 1922), p. 69. 45. Kejariwal, O.P., op. cit., p. 130. 46. Mill, James, The History of British India Vol. I (London, James Madden, Fourthed., 1848),p. VII-VIII. 47. Dey, Shamboo Chunder, Horace Hayman Wilson, op. cit., p. 77. 48. Kejariwal, O.P., op. cit., pp. 143, 146. 49. Ibid., p. 146. 50. Ibid. 51. Kejariwal, O.P., op. cit., p. 157. 52. Dey, Shanboo Chunder, Horace Hayman Wilson, op. cit., p. 79 53. Wilson, H.H., The Hindu History of Kashmir (Calcutta, Susil Gupta (India) Pvt. Ltd., First ed., 1960), p. 1. 54. Kejariwal, O.P., op. cit., p. 142. 55. Ibid., p. 158. 56. Cunningham, A., Archaeological Survey of India Reports, Vol. 1, pp. xviii-xix cited in Kejariwal, O.P., op. cit., p. 164. 57. Keay, John, op. cit., pp. 43-44. 58. Ibid., p. 44 see also : Chaterjee, Atul and Bum, Richard, op. cit., p. 23. 59. Keay, John, op. cit., p. 45. 60. Ibid., p. 46. 61. Kejariwal, O.P., op. cit., p. 170. 62. Ibid. 63. Ibid., p. 172. 387

64. Ibid. 65. Keay, John, op. cit., p. 49. 66. (quoted in) Ibid. 67. Kejariwal, O.P., op. cit., p. 179. 68. Keay, John, op. cit., p. 53. 69. Dictionary of National Biography Article on George Tumour quoted in Kejariwal, O.P., op. cit., p. 208. 70. Keay, John, op. cit., p. 61. 71. Ibid., p. 62. 72. Ibid. 73. Chaterjee, Atul and Bum, Richard, op. cit., p. 24. 74. Mukherjee, B. N., 'Some Reflections on the Kharoshti Script, in The Quarterly Review of Historical Studies,' Vol. xxix, Nos. 3 and 4 (October 1999 to March 2000), p. 1. 75. Chakrabarti, Dilip K., India An Archaeological History, Paleolithic Beginnings to Early Historic Foundations (New Delhi, O.U.P., rpt., 2001), p. 7. 76. The Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society Extra Number, The Centenary Memorial Volume (Bombay, printed at the Times Press, 1905), p. 17 (Hereinafter referred to as JBBRAS, Extra Number) 77. Ibid. 78. Mackintosh, James, 'A Discourse at the Opening of the Literary Society of Bombay' in Transactions of the Literary Society of Bombay, Vol. I, (London, 1819), pp. xvi-xx (Hereinafter referred to as Transactions) see also: BBRAS, Extra Number, op. cit., p. 17. 79. Mackintosh, James, A Discourse, op. cit., p. xi. 80. Ibid. 81. Tivarekar, Ganpatrao Krishna, Index to the Transactions of the Literary Society of Bombay Vols. I-III and the Joumals of the Bombay Branch, Royal Asiatic Society, Vols. I-XVIl (1841-1887) with Historical Sketch of the Society (Bombay, BBRAS, -), p. 7. 82. Ibid. 388

83. Ibid, pp. 12-13. 84. Ibid., p. 13. 85. Ibid., p. 29. 86. Mackintosh, James, Transactions, Vol. II, Appendix A, pp. 305-308. 87. Ibid., Appendix B, pp. 309-312. 88. Ibid., pp. 297-311. 89. Tivarekar, Ganpatrao Krishna, op. cit., p. 40. 90. Ibid., pp. 40-41. 91. Ibid., pp. 30-31. 92. JBBRAS, Extra number, p. 19. 93. Kermedy, Vans, 'Remarks on the Sixth and Seventh Chapters of Mill's 'History of British India', in Transactions, Vol. Ill (London, 1823), pp. 117-171. 94. BBRAS, Extra Number, p. 19. 95. Ibid. 96. Bellino, C, 'Account of the progress made in deciphering Cuneiform inscriptions', in Transactions, Vol. II, pp. 170-193. 97. Coats, Thomas, 'Notes respecting the trial by panchiet and the administration of Justice at Poona, under the late Peshwa' in Transactions, Vol. II, pp. 273-280. 98. Tivarekar, Ganpatrao Krishna, op. cit., p. 16. 99. Ibid., p. 19. 100. Ibid. 101. Ibid., p. 31. 102. Ibid. 103. Ibid., p. 34. 104. Ibid., p. 35. 105. Ibid., p. 36. 106. Ibid., p. 39. 107. Ibid., p. 42. 108. Ibid. 109. Jambhekar, Ganesh Gangadhar (ed. & Com.), Memoirs and Writings of 389

Acharya Bal Gangadhar Shastri Jambhekar Vol. I (Poona, Lokshishana Karyalaya, 1950), p. xxxii (Hereinafter referred to as Balshastri Jambhekar Memoirs and Writings') 110. Balshastri Jambhekar Memoirs and Writings, Vol. Ill, op. cit., p. 612. 111. Ibid., p. 609. 112. Ibid. 113. Ibid. 114. Ibid., p. 610. 115. Ibid., p. 611. 116. Balshastri Jambhekar Memoirs and Writings, Vol. I, op. cit., p. xiii. 117. Grewal, J.S. op. cit., pp. 107-09. 118. Kenned Vans, Remarks on the Sixth and Seventh Chapters of Mill's 'History of British India' in Transactions, Vol. Ill, op. cit., p. 119. 119. Ibid., p. 158. 120. Balshastri Jambhekar Memoirs and Writings, Vol. I, op. cit., p. 22. 121. Ibid. 122. Ibid. 123. Ibid. 124. Grewal, J.S. op. cit., pp. 121-122. 125. Balshastri Jambhekar Memoirs and Writings, Vol. II, op. cit., p. 187. 126. Journal of Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. II, July 1844 to July 1847, p. (Hereinafter referred to as JBBRAS). 127. Balshastri Jambhekar Memoirs and Writings, Vol. II, op. cit., p. 178. 128. Ibid., p. 179. 129. JBBRAS, Vol. II (1844-47), p. 267. 130. Balshastri Jambhekar Memoirs and Writings, Vol. I, op. cit., p. xxxiv. 131. Havaldar, Ganesh Ramkrishna, Shri Raosaheb Vishvanath Naraya Mandalik Yanche Charitra, Part I, (Mumbai, Mumbaivaibhav Press, 1927), p. 25. 132. Ibid., p. 32. 133. Ibid., p. 100. 134. Ibid., Part II, p. 1123. 390

135. Ibid. 136. Ibid., Part I, pp. 70, 86, 92, 100. 137. Ibid., pp. 86, 92. 138. Ibid., p. 86. 139. Mandlik, V. N. 'Serpent Worship in Western India' in Mandlik, Narayan Vishvanath, (ed.), Writings and Speeches of the Late Vishvanath Narayan Mandlik (Bombay, 'Native Opinion, Press, 1896), pp. 235-267 .(Hereinafter referred to as Mandlik V.N., with the title of the paper and its date when the paper was read) 140. Ibid., p. 259. 141. Ibid., pp. 263-64. 142. Ibid., p. 266. 143. Ibid., p. 267. 144. Ibid. 145. Mandlik, V.N., 'The Shrine of the River Krishna at the Village of Mahabaleshwar', 14'" July 1870, pp. 268-285. 146. Ibid., p. 274. 147. Ibid., p. 278. 148. Mandlik, V.N., 'The Shrine of the River Krishna at the Village of Mahabaleshwar', 12* January 1871, pp. 281-285. 149. Mandlik, V.N., 'Sangameshwar Mahatmya and Linga Worship', February, 13* 1875, pp. 300-312. 150. Ibid., p. 307 151. Mandlik, V.N., Salivahana and the Salivahan Saptasati, 19* March 1873, pp. 286-299. 152. Ibid., p. 297. 153. Ibid., p. 298. 154. Ibid., p. 299. 155. Mandlik, V.N., 'Preliminary Observations on a Document Giving an Account of the Establishment of a New Village named Muruda in Southern Konkan', 9 * February 1865, pp. 201-234. 156. Ibid., 211. 391

157. Ibid., 210. 158. Ibid., pp. 204-205. 159. Ibid., p. 206. 160. Rajwade, V. K. Marathyanchya Itihasachi Sadhane, Vol. XX (Dhule, 1915), p. 242, cited in Kulkami, A. R., The Indian Village with special Reference to Medieval Deccan (Maratha Country), General Presidential Address, 52"" Session (Pune, 1992), p. 23. 161. JBBRAS, Vol. IX, No. XXV, Part I, 1867, 1868, p. Appendix, xxxi. 162. Mandlik, V.N., 'The Shrine of the River Krishna at the Village of Mahabaleshwar', 12"' January 1871, pp. 268. 163. Mandlik, V.N., 'Sangameshwar Mahatmya and Linga Worship, February', 13'M875,pp. 300. 164. Ibid., p. 302. 165. Ibid., pp. 305-306. 166. Mandlik, V.N., 'The Shrine of the River Krishna at the Village of Mahabaleshwar', 12* January 1871, pp. 278. 167. Ibid., p. 274. 168. Mandlik, V. N., 'Serpent Worship in Western India in Mandlik', 13* May 1869, pp. 236-237. 169. Priyolkar, A. K., Dr. Bhau Daji Vyakti, Kal Va Karttatva (Mumabi, Mumbai Marathi satitya Sangha, 1971), p. 249. 170. Ibid., p. 257. 171. Ibid., p. 265. 172. Kejariwal, O.P., op. cit., p. 113. 173. Dr. Bhau Daji, 'A Brief Survey of Indian Chronology from the First Century of the Christian era to the twelfth', paper read 11"' Auguest 1864 in JBBRAS, Vol. VIII, 1864-66, p. 236. 174. Ibid. 175. Bhau Daji, 'Brief Notes on the Age and Authenticity of the works of Aryabhatta, Varahamihira, Bhattopal and Bhaskaracharya' in The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, New Series, Vol 1, London, 1865, pp. 392- 418, Title of the paper cited in Priyolkar, A.K., op. cit., p. 268. 392

176. Keer, Dhananjay, 'Dr. Bhau Daji Lad', G. G. M.C. in JASB, Vol. No. 38, New Series (London, 1964), p.l 1. 177. Bhau Daji, 'On the Sanskrit poet Kalidas', paper read 11"' Oct. 1860, JBBRAS, Vol. Vi, 1861, p. 230. 178. Bhau Daji, 'Notes on the Age and works of Hemadri', Paper read 12"' Nov. 1868, JBBRAS, Vol. IX, part I, 1867, 1868, p. 165. 179. JBBRAS, Vol. IX, Part I, Appendix, p. xxvii. 180. Ibid. 181. Bhau Daji, 'Notes on Mukund Raja, the Oldest Maratha Author', paper read 12"' Nov. 1868, Vol. IX, part I, 1867, 1868, p. 167. 182. Bhau Daji, 'Brief Notes on Hemachandra or Hemacharya', paper read Jan. 12"', 1869, JBBRAS, Vol. IX, Part II, 1867-70, p. 224. 183. Ibid. 184. Bhau Daji, 'Brief Notes on Madhav and Sayana', paper read Jan. 12"' 1869, JBBRAS, Vol. IX, Part II, 1867-70, p. 228. 185. JBBRAS, Vol. IX, Part II, 1867-70, p. Appendix, ex. 186. Bhau Daji, 'Merutunga's Theravali, or Genealogical and Succession Tables, by Merutunga, a Jain Pandit', paper Read 12'" Dec. 1867, 1868, JBBRAS, Vol. IX, part I, 1867, p. 156. 187. Ibid., p. 157. 188. Ibid., p. 156. 189. Priyalkar, A.K., op.cit., pp. 253-256. 190. Ibid., pp. 254-255. 191. Bhau Daji, 'Report on Photographic Copies of Inscriptions in Dharwar and Mysore', Paper read 10* Nov. 1870, JBBRAS, Vol. IX, Part II, 1867- 70, p. 332. 192. Bhandarkar, R.G., Sanskrit Section : 'Elucidation of Indian History', JBBRAS, Extra No. p. 34. 193. Bhau Daji, 'Fascimile Transcrip and Translation, with Remarks of an Inscription on a Stone-pillar at Jusdan, in Kathiawar', Paper Read 14"' July, 1862, JBBRAS, Vol. VIII, 1864-66, pp. 234-25. • 194. JBBRAS, Vol. VIII, 1864-66, p. Appendix, p. xvi. 393

195. JBBRAS, ExtraNo. p. 408. 196. JBBRAS, Vol. VIII, p. 235. 197. Bhau Daji, 'The Ancient Sanskrit Numerals in the Cave Inscriptions and on the Sah-coins, Correct;y made out; with Remarks on the Era of SaUvahan and Vikramaditya', Paper Read 12* Dec. 1862, Vol. VIII, 1864- 65, p. 225. 198. Ibid., p. 226. 199. Ibid., p. 227. 200. Ibid., p. 231. 201. Ibid., p. 232 see also, JBBRAS, Vol. IX, Part II, 1869-70, p. Appendix, cxxiv. 202. JBBRAS, Vol. IX, Part I, p. Appendix, xxiv. 203. Ibid., p. XXV. 204. Bhau Daji, 'Revised Translation of the Inscription on the Bhitari Lat', JBBRAS, Vol. X, 1871-74, pp. 59-62. 205. JBBRAS, Vol. X, 1871-74, p. Appendix, cxcvii. 206. Ibid., p. Appendix, cxcviii. 207. JBBRAS, Vol. 6, 1856-61, p. Appendix, ixvi. 208. Ibid. 209. Ibid., pp. Ixvi-lxvii. 210. Ibid. 211. JBBRAS, Vol. IX, Part II, 1867-70, p. Appendix, cxcviii. 212. Ibid., p. cxcix. 213. Bhau Daji, 'Facsimile, Transcript, and Translation of an Inscription Discovered by Mr. G. W. Terry in the Temple of Amra-Nath, near Kalyan, with Remarks', JBBRAS, Vol. IX, Part II, 1867-70, pp. 219-221. (Hereinafter Referred to as Bhau Daji, Temple Amra-Nath) with op.cit. 214. JBBRAS, Vol. IX, Part II, 1867-70, p. Appendix, cxxviii. 215. Bhau Daji, Temple Amra-Nath, op. cit., p. 220 216. Ibid. 217. JBBRAS, Vol. IX, Part 11, 1867-71, p. Appendix, cxxxix. 218. Ibid. 394

219. Ibid. 220. Ibid. 221. Burgess, Jas, 'Sketch of Archaeological Research in India during Haifa Century', Archaeology Section, JBBRAS, Extra No. p. 136. 222. JBBRAS, Vol. IX, Part II, 1867-70, p. Appendix, cxxxix. 223. Ibid., p. Appendix, cxi. 224. Ibid. 225. Bhau Daji, 'Report on Photographic copies of Inscriptions in Dharwar and Mysore', Paper Read 10* Nov. 1870, JBBRAS, Vol. IX, Part II, 1867- 70, pp. 314-333. 226. Ibid., p. 314. 227. Ibid., p. 333. 228. Bhandarkar, R.G., Sanskrit Section, Elucidation of Indian History, JBBRAS, Extra No. pp. 38-39. 229. Jackson, A.M.T., Numismatics, Summary of the Numismatic Researches of the BBRAS, JBBRAS, Vol. Extra No. p. 409. 230. Iyengar, M.S. Ramaswami, 'Bhau Daji and Indraji' in Eminent Orientalisits Indian, European, American (Madras, G.A. Nateson & Co., 1922),p. 128f. 231. Ibid. 232. Keer, Dhananjay, Dr. Bhau Daji Lad, JASB, Vol. 38, 1963 New Series, p. 13. 233. Ibid. 234. Kamatiki, S.N., Raobahaddur Shankar Pandurang Pandit Yanche Charitra (Mumbai, V. Prabha and Co., 1935) 235. Ibid., p. 40. 236. Ibid. 237. Ibid., pp. 21-22. 238. Pandit, S. P., 'Translation and Remarks on a Copper-plate Grant Discovered at Tidgundi in Kaladgi Zilla', The Indian Antiquary, March, 1, 1872, pp. 80-84 (Hereinafter Referred to as lA with date) 239. Ibid., p. 82. 395

240. Ibid., p. 84. 241. Pandit. S.p., 'An Inscription at Salotgi in the Kaldgi District, dated Saka 867 or A.D. 945, with Remarks', lA, July 5, 1872, pp. 205-211. 242. Ibid., p. 206. 243. Bhandarkar, R.G., Sanskrit Section, 'Elucidation of Indian History', JBBRAS, ExtraNo.,p. 38. 244. Kamataki, S.N., op. cit., p. 30. 245. Ibid. 246. Ibid., pp. 25, 33. 247. Ibid., p. 29. 248. Keny, L. B., 'Kashinath Trimbak Telang' in Sen, S.P., Historians and Historiography in Modem India (Calcutta, Institute of Historical Studies, 1973), p. 185. 249. Naik, V. N., 'Kashinath Trimbak Telang' in Eminent Orientalists Indian, European, American (Madras, G.A. Nateson and Co., 1922), p. 112. 250. Telang, K.T., 'Life of Shankaracharya', Read on 2"" Jan. 1871 before Students' Literary and Scientific Society in Writings and Speeches (Bombay, The Gaudi Saraswat Brahmin Mitra Mandal, - ), p. 237. (Hereinafter Referred to as Telang, K.T., GSBMM, the name of the paper) 251. Telang, K.T., GSBMM, 'The Date of NyayakusumanjaU', p. 310. 252. Ibid., p. 314. 253. Telang, K.T., GSBMM, 'On Gomutra', p. 437. 254. Ibid. 255. Telang, K.T., GSBMM, 'Note on the Ramayana', p. 384. 256. Telang, K.T., GSBMM, 'Parvati-Parinaya of Bana', p. 438. 257. Ibid., p. 440. 258. Telang, K.T., GSBMM, 'Kahdasa, Shri Harsha, and Chand', p. 445. 259. Weber, A. 'On The Ramayana', Boyd, D.C., (trans.), in the Indian Antiquary [Part I, 15* April 1872, pp. 120-124; Part II, 7"^ July 1872, pp. 172-182; Part III, 2"'' August 1872, pp. 239-253] for this particular reference see pp. 252-253. 260. Telang, K. T., 'Was the Ramayana copied from Homer ?' Select Writings 396

and Speeches, Vol. 1 (Bombay, GSBMM, 1916), p. 5. 261. Ibid., p. 12. 262. Ibid., p. 14. 263. Ibid., p. 16. 264. Ibid. 265. Ibid., p. 27. 266. Ibid. 267. Ibid., pp. 30-34, 34-37, & 39-41. 268. Ibid., p. 53. 269. West, Raymond, 'K.T. Telang' in 'Speeches & Writings, Vo;. II, op. cit., p. 554. 270. Telang, K.T., Select Speeches & Writings, Vol. I, GSBMM, p. Introduction by D.E. Wacha, V. 271. Telang, K.T., 'A New Chalukya Copper-plate with Remarks', JBBRAS, Vol. X, 1871-1874, p. 351. 272. Ibid., p. 364. 273. Ibid. 274. Ibid., p. Appendix, Ixiii-lxiv. 275. Ibid., p. ixiv. 276. Ibid. 277. Telang, K. T., 'A Note on the Age of Madhusudana Saraswati' Paper read 12* Dec. 1874, JBBRAS, Vol. X, 1871-74, p. 371. 278. Ibid. 279. Ibid., p. 375. 280. Voigt, J.H., 'Historical Writing in Western India with Special Reference to the Influence of Nationalism' (1870-1930), in QRHS, Vol. VI, No. 1 (1966-67), p. 38. 281. Ibid. 282. Kamatak, S.N., Raobahaddur Shankar Pandurang Yanche Charitra op. cit., p. 30. 283. For Biographical details regarding Bhandarkar's Life see : 1) Iyengar, M.S. Ramaswami, 'Dr. Bhandarkar' in Eminent Orientalisits, op. cit., pp. 397

346-368 2) Kamatak, S. N., Dr. Sir Rankrishna Gopal Bhandarkar Yanche Charitra (Mumbai, S.N. Kamataki (Laxmi Narayan Press), 1927). 284. Dandekar, R.N., 'Ramkrishna Gopal Bhandarkar and the Academic Renaissance in Maharashtra in Wagle', N. K., (ed.), Writers, Editors and R.efomiers Social and Political transformations of Maharashtra 1830-1930 (Delhi, Mnohar, 1999), p. 136. 285. Utgikar, N.B., and Paranjape, V.G., (ed.), Collected Works of Sir R.G. Bhandarkar, Vol. I (Pune, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 1933), p. 482. (Hereinafter Referred to as Bhandarkar, R.G., CW Vol. 1 with the article). 286. Ibid. 287. Ibid., p. 495. 288. lA, February, 1873, p. 59 see also Naik, J.V., 'Ramkrishna Gopal Bhandarkar (1837-1925) : The Man and His Mission' in Nayeem, M.A., Ray, Anirudha, and Mathew K.S., (ed.), Studies in History of the Deccan, Prof. A.R. Kulkami Felicitation Volume (Delhi, Pragati, 2002), p. 304. 289. JBBRAS, Vol. X, 1871-74, p. 23. 290. Ibid. 291. Pusalkar, A.D., 'R.G. Bhandarkar' in S.P. Sen (ed.), op. cit., p. 32. 292. Kejariwal, O.P., op. cit., pp. 191-92. 293. lA, January 5, 1872, pp. 14-18. 294. JBBRAS, Vol. X, 1871-74, p. 72. 295. Ibid., p. 73. 296. Ibid., p. 75. 297. JBBRAS,Vol.X, 1871-74, p. 81. 298. Ibid., p. 85. 299. Ibid., p. 82. 300. lA, January 5, 1872, p. 22. 301. lA, Oct. 4, 1872, p. 302 see also for Weber 'on the Date of Patanjali', lA, February, 1873, p. 61. 302. lA, Vol II, February, 1873, p. 59. 303. lA, Vol II, March, 1873, p. 70. 398

304. Ibid., p. 71. 305. lA, Vol II, pp. 94-96. 306. Ibid., p. 96. 307. lA, Vol II, August, 1873, pp. 238-240 308. lA, Vol III, January, 1874, p. 16 309. Ibid. 310. lA, Vol III, May, 1874, pp. 132-35. 311. Bedekar, V.M., 'Research Methodology' in Dandekar, R.N., (ed.), Ramkrishna Gopal Bhandarkar as an Indologist (Poona, BORI, 1976), pp. 183-184 see also : Bhandarkar, R.G., C.W. Vol. 1, pp. 362-64 312. Dandekar, R.N., Recent Trends in Indology (Poona, BORI, 1978), pp. 29-30. 313. Pusalkar, A.D., op. cit., p. 43.