________________
SEPTEMBER, 1878.]
CORRESPONDENCE AND MISCELLANEA.
227
left shoulder only, and not from both as in ours. The left hand, also, is held up, instead of pointing downwards. In all other respects they are identical.
It is probable that these three (figs. 5, 6, 7) have been 'deposited in the Academy of St. Quentin, and that the one retained by the Fathers is that which was given to Lord Napier.
No. 5 represents Buddha, seated in the usual attitude under the sacred tree. No. 7 appears to be a female devotee, of very rude workmanship. Copies of the three are introduced into our plate.
The discovery of these relics places tho Buddhist origin of the tower beyond dispute.
Note by Dr. Burnell. As I several times in 1866 visited the ruin referred to, I may be permitted to say that it had become merely & shapeless mags of bricks. I havo no doubt that it was originally a vimana or shrine of some temple; there are some of precisely the same construction in parts of the Chingleput district.
Sir Walter Elliot's remarks about the destruction of ancient monuments in the Madras Presidency must be a source of great satisfaction to all interested in South Indian antiquities : for my own part, I am confident that, if something be not soon done, there will not be anything left in a few more years that has the least historical inter
est. I may mention a lamentable instance of the destruction of a relic of much interest which occurred some four years ago : I refer to the blowing up of the flagstaff tower at Cochin. This was the tower of the old Church of the Cross (afterwards the Cathedral of Cochin), where St. Francis Xavier preached, and was the last known building that could be connected with the history of a man whose name will always survive in South India. The cathedral was once a very fine church (see the view in Baldæus); the Dutch used it as a storehouse, but it remained for the English to destroy the body of the church early in this century, and then (in 1874) to remove the still remaining tower. (See, as regards the first, Mr. Anstey's indignant remarks in Lord Stanley's Three Voyages of Vasco da Gama, Hakl. Soc. 1869, p. 429).
I have searched, and had search made, to ascer. tain if Agamapandita can possibly be a Buddhist or Jain title used in South India, but cannot find the least trace of such use. It is tolerably cortain that the image is that of a Saiva devotee, and it certainly was the practice to dedicate such images in temples (see, e.g., the great inscription at Tanjor). I may remark that the Saiva monks (Tambirdn) in this district are hardly to be distinguished from Buddhist monks, except by the ashes they smear on their foreheads and by their matted hair.
Tanjor, 27th June 1878.
CORRESPONDENCE AND MISCELLANEA. PÅRSI FUNERAL AND INITIATORY BITES. likely to be better informed than I am. If I now
I am glad my paper on the above subject bas at criticize some of his criticisms, it is not so much length elicited a little criticism. My intention with a view of vindicating my own accuracy as of was to give a lecture or lectures on the Pârst re- stimulating further discussion, that the real truth ligion before the University of Oxford immediately may be ascertained in regard to certain points after my return from ay second Indian journey. which evidently admit of some difference of But on referring to my notes I found that so opinion. many different opinions existed on various knotty For in the course of my inquiries into the requestions that I felt obliged to postpone the ful- ligions of India few things surprised. me more filment of my design till I had gained further than the difficulty of obtaining a satisfactory er. information, or, at least, cleared up some of my planation of many ambiguities in the creed and chief doubts.
practice of modern Indo-Zoroastrians. Though Of course, I know that the researches of German no class of Indians can boast better educated or scholars are at my command, but I am most more cultivated and enlightened men than the Paraf desirous to examine the PÅrsi religion from the community, very few have studied their own point of view of the Parsts themselves, and to as- religion in the original documents, and even those certain the opinions of their most learned men in learned men to whom I appealed.confessed their regard to all controverted points.
inability to answer some of my queries. While, My article in the Indian Antiquary was intended therefore, I willingly defer to Mr. Khambata's to provoke criticism. Of course, therefore, I feel superior knowledge of his own religion, I feel grateful to Mr. Sorabji Kavasji Khambat&. for bound to suspend my judgment in regard to ques setting me right in matters about which he is tions still at issue among the PÅrsis themselves.
· Vide vol. VI. pp. 811-816, and rol. VII. p. 179.
