________________
SEPTEMBER, 1882.]
BOOK NOTICE.
271
that some of your correspondents who possess local knowledge may be able to help me :
Nicolo Conti, who wrote in the 15th century, mentions Albenigaras 15 days' journey north of Bizengulia (=Bisnagar) as a diamond locality.
Lewes Vertomannus (1503) refers to a diamond mine e miles distant from the city of Dechan (=Bisnagar ?).
Garcias ab Horto (1565) mentions besides lo. calities in Bisnagar another not far from Imadixa, (Imad Shah) or Imad Moluco or Madre
maluco. A mart, where dinmonds were sold, is called Lispor in the Deccan.
John Ogilvy (1673), states that diamonds are found by Deccan on the mountain called Rocca Velha, or the old rock, by the Portuguese.
Dutens (1777). This authority on precious stones besides Tavernier's localities, mentions Latawar, can this be intended for Kathiâvâd P It is not referred to by any other authority so far as I know, and Kathiâvad is not likely to have produced diamonds.
V. BALI..
BOOK NOTICE. CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES for Southern India, from the he describes as "constituting the most critically
Bixth Century A.D., by Robert Sewell, Madras Civil Service. (Printed by Authority.) Madras :
accurate information yet published on the sub1881.
ject,"-for if we compare say the dtes for lat These Tables, the author informs us, "are Muharram with the corresponding ones in any published in order to enable those at work on the trustworthy Table, we find these dates in the inscriptions of Southern India readily to ascer- following cases wrongly given :-page iii, after tain the date of any document, or record on A. H. 19, we should have 'Jan. 2, 640' instead of stone." They give the years of the Kaliyuga, "Dec. 31, 639"; so on p. ix read. 256. Dec. 9, 869'; Cycle of Bệihaspati and OLristian Era, corre. on p. xi, -321. Jan. 1, 933;' and '338. July 1, sponding to each Saka year from S. 500 to 1822919'; on p. xvi,- 503. July 31, 1109'; and 530. (A.D. 1900), the Kollam Åndu or Quilon era from Oct. 11, 1135'; p. xviii,- 612. May 2, 1215'; p. A.D. 825, and the commencement of each Hijra xix,-625. Dec. 12, 1227'; p. xx,-662. Nov. 4, year from the epoch. With the already existing 1263': p. xxi,-698. Oct. 9, 1298'; p. xxii, - 743. Tables of Warren, Jervis, Prinsep, Brown, Play. June 6, 1342'; p. XXV,-876. June 20, 1471'; and fair, Gumpach, Wüstenfeld, Cowasjee Pabell, &c., on p. xxix, — 1020. March 1, 1611'. Between A.D. we should hardly have thought there was a call for 1752 and 1862 (pp. xxxiii-xxxv) there are 53 errors another publication of the kind, unless to supply of the above sort, several of them amounting to ampler details than any of these. And, if we mis- several days, e. g. for the commencement of A.H. take not, Indian scholars find it easier to use the 1184 he gives " April 21, 1770," while the correct well known constants for the mere conversion of date was 27th April, and for A. H. 1200 he gives the Hindu and Christian dates in years, than to "Nov. 1, 1785" instead of Nov. 4; and on p. xxxvi, refer to any such Tables. For the determination of --read 1292. Feb. 7, 1875. These errors occur the samvatsara date in the 60 year cycle, if a table elsewhere only in Cowasjee Patell's Tables, and we is wanted, Brown's Cyclic Tables in his Carnatic must infer that Mr. Sewell simply copied this Chronology (1863) are much more convenient from column from the Parsi's book without verification the column containing a complete cycle, whereas or comparison with other and trustworthy tables. Mr. Sewell's contains only 38 years and without the A more serious error has been made by Mr. Sewell numeral order of the cycle names. But even in the Kollam Åndu dates, which are one year in here some will prefer adding 11 to the Saka year error throughout; thus Saka 748 corresponds to or 12 to the Kaliyuga and dividing by 60, when the latter half of the 1st and first half of the 2nd the remainder gives the expired year of the cycle, year of the Kollam era, and should have been according to the Southern system, here employed, marked 1-2 and not 2-3 as he has it, and so and reckoned from Prabhava.
$. 938 corresponds to 191-192, and not to 192-193. Mr. Sewell does not give the initial day of any The Kollam era began 25th August 825 A.D., that of the Hindu years, nor any means by which to is in the Saka year 747, and not in 824. compute the corresponding month and day for In the names of the years of Jupiter's cycle he has any date, which ought to be an essential feature generally copied from Brown, but gives Bhava, Prain any Tables of the sort.
madhi, and Manmadha, instead of the proper forms For the Hijra years he gives the European dates Bhdva, Pramathi or Pramadi, and Manmatha; of commencement, but unfortunately he does not while he follows Brown in Vishu (Tamil), Vikriti, seem to have followed Prinsep's Tables, which Hévilambi, Sárvari (Tamil). Vir dhikrit, Pramadt.
Dr. Burnell, 8. I. Palmography, p. 73, is in error when he says "it began in September 824,"' but he gives the equation rightly enough a + 8247. Cawasjoe Patell's
Tables are correct for this era except in the initia day.-J. B.
