There are something like two pillars standing behind the central image. The whole place is filled with slabs of stones, big and small, and it is more than probable that a temple stood there as the abode of the images. Besides these we found one head and an arm in all likelihood belonging to the same body, the other limbs of which (and possibly other figures too) are now lying under the heap of stones there. The head is of the same blackish stone as that of the central figure, highly polished and glossy. It is about 9 seers in weight and covered with vermilion which proves that the body with the head must have been an object of worship to the villagers and that not very long ago. But it is apparently a head of Buddha. The whole face is distinguished by an exquisite purity of sentiment. At a distance of about 20 yards from the above-mentioned main ruins there lies a lion fover a goddess. It is imbedded in the ground in an oblique position and must originally have belonged to the principal heap but was probably carried thither and left by posterior hands. The lion is of special interest. The fine curves of the mane and the face have suffered severely from the effects of time and the goddess below with her eight hands holding a sword and other weapons has become almost indiscernible. The suggestive mien and forceful proportions together with the majestic posture of the lion are very impressive. The sculpture of this lion belongs to the class of the bull at Mamallapuran (see Havell's The Ideals of Indian Art, p. 158) and the elephants at Konāraka (see Havell's The Ideals of Indian Art, plate XXIII). The lion is of the same black stone as the other figures. The sculptor who carved the fine features, the wavy mane, the magnificent chest and the life-like legs seems to have belonged to the school to which the other sculptors who created the above images belonged. An inscription was found carved on a slab half-buried there. It is a very simple one and reads Sri Danapati Sādhokasya. They The letters are Nagari of the proto-Bengali type. closely resemble those of the Deo pārā Prasasti of about A.D. 1080-90 and of the land grant of Vaidyadeva A.D. 1142.2 It gives us the name of the douor (Danapati). To come to an approximate date of the ruins. We get two definite landmarks: from the similarity with the Borobudur sculpture― eighth or ninth century A.D., and on the other hand the fourteenth century A.D., when Jain sculpture began to be scarce, so much so that we read in Mr. Barodia's History and Literature of Jainism that about the fifteenth century A.D. the worship of images was forbidden by several Jaina religious teachers. So we arrive at the approximate period from the ninth century to the fourteenth century. The palæography of the short inscription also points to about the tenth century or a little later. We might obtain many new pieces of evidence if the site were excavated and we have published this note with the hope of inducing people to undertake the task of unearthing these buried and forgotten remains, by which much interesting light might be thrown on an obscure page of the history of Manbhum. It would, moreover, be of interest to lovers of Indian Art to study these remains. 1 George Bühler, Indian Palæography, Pl. V., Col. XVIII. Ibid., Pl. V., Col. XIX. C. D. Barodia, History and Literature of Jainism, p. 131. II.-Identification of Three Monuments at Sarnath. By Brindavan C. Bhattacharya, M. A. A great diversity of opinion prevails among antiquarians with regard to three monuments discovered at Sarnath. No finality of conclusion having been attained, they have only been content with a partial solution of the problem. A fresh discussion of the subject, as a whole, therefore, needs to be started which would possibly be of some service to future researches. At the outset the nature of the problem should be made clear after having explained what the three monuments just mentioned are. They may be taken to be: (1) The Aśoka Pillar, (2) Jagat Singh Stupa and (3) the "Main Shrine”. About these three we possess two ancient accounts of two different ages. One is Hiuen-tsiang's description of Sarnath, another is the Mahipala Inscription. In Hiuen-tsiang's travels these monuments are mentioned as intact, whereas the Mahipala Inscription mentions repairs of their ruined condition. A complicated problem was likely to have arisen from the attempt to compare the newly discovered monuments with those described by Hiuen-tsiang. But none the less, no endeavour has hitherto been made to establish the equation between Hiuen-tsiang's account with the Mahipala Inscription, and between these two and the topography of the newly discovered monuments. We shall presently attempt such an identification in the light of our up-to-date knowledge of the ruins at Sārnāth. As the monuments seen by Hiuen-tsiang have come down to us, they certainly existed in the time when the Pala officers were engaged in the repairs of the Sarnath monastery in general. Let us now understand the Chinese Pilgrim's account in so far as it concerns our discussion, He writes:"To the north-east of the river Varana, about 10 li or so, we come to the Sanghārama of Luye. Its precincts are divided into eight portions (sections) connected by a surrounding wall *** In the great enclosure is a Vihāra about 200 feet high, above the roof is a golden-covered figure of the Amra fruit. The foundations of the building are of stone, and the stairs also, but the towers and niches are of brick. In the middle of the Vihara is a figure of Buddha made of (native copper) **, he is represented as turning the wheel of the law. To the southwest of the Vihāra is a stone stupa built by Aśoka-rāja. Although the foundations have given way, there are still 100 feet, or more of the wall remaining. In front of the building is a stone pillar about 700 feet high. The stone is altogether as bright as jade. It is glistening, and sparkles like light; *****"1 Next we may examine now how far the present remains can be identified with the monuments mentioned in the above extract; we propose the following identifications: A." A Vihara 200 ft. high "the Main Shrine and its original foundations. B." A stone stupa "the Jagat Singh stupa (according to Sir John Marshall's conclusion). C." A stone pillar "the Asoka Pillar. Assuming the above equations to be true, the actual progress of the pilgrim round the sacred precincts might have been something like this: Entering the site where the "Main Shrine" now stands and where the old shrine facing the east stood and contained an image of the "Divine One", the Chinese pilgrim would retire keeping the shrine on his right hand (Pradakṣinena) and moving to the south he would 1 Beal's" Buddhist Record of the Western World" (Popular Edition), Bk. VII., pp. 45,46. Also Watter's " On Yuan Chwang's Travels", Vol. II, p. 50; Beal's "Life of Hiuen-tsiang", p. 99. The height of the Vihāra, as given here, is 100 feet instead of 200 fet of other ersions. then come to "Jagat Singh Stupa" and moving round, keeping it also to the right, he would finally look on the Asoka Pillar to the true north from where he stood and to the west of the "Main Shrine ". A.-Anybody examining the present main shrine carefully will come to the conclusion that its erection is rather of a comparatively recent time and its original site was a much larger one as it can be inferred from the pavement extending towards the east, which was undoubtedly the direction of its main gate. 1 As to who built the room of the present main shrine (we shall discuss presently. B.-Sir John Marshall, upon close examination of the structure, has ascribed the Jagat Singh Stupa to the Aśokan period.2 Therefore, we may have no hesitation in asserting that that was the stupa which the Chinese pilgrim noticed to the southwest of the main building. C.-The description left by Hiuen-tsiang of the pillar having a "dazzling brightness" exactly fits in with the Aśoka pillar now standing, now under a shade, to the west of the Main Shrine. Sir John Marshall, however, questioned this identity. But nearly all his questions Dr. Vogel has tried to answer. We have Mr. V. A. Smith's opinion in his " Asoka "accepting the same identity. We quote here the passage :-" Only two of the ten inscribed pillars known, namely, those at Rummindei and Sarnath, can be identified certainly with the monuments noticed by Hiuen-tsiang. ** 3 Again, turning to the Mahipala inscriptions we note that many years after Hiuen-tsiang's visit to Sarnath, an inscription was engraved in Mahipal's reign to the effect that some repairs have been made of the ruins of Sarnath (1026 a.d.), * * * * 4 1 Hiuen-tsiang speaks of Sanghārāma generally as having the "doors open towards the east." Beal's "Record of the Western World" (Popular edition) p. 74. 2 "Guide to the Buddhist Ruins of Sårnath " by D. R. Sahni, p. 9. Asoka (Second Edition), p. 124. Indian Antiquary, Vol. XIV, p. 139; J.A.S.B. (N.S.), Vol. II, 1906, pp. 445-7; Epi, Ind., Vol. IX, 1907-8, pp. 291-3, |