________________
MARCH, 1921 ]
MISCELLANEA
basket and asked him what he wanted to do with it. "For my house," "for my house, was the only reply; but I told him that no grown-up cat will ever remain in a new house. It is sure to return to its original haunts. My interpreter, a convert of the half patriotic half anti-Heathenism type, would not open his lips. He thought it derogatory to talk of idolatrous faiths, but luckily for me I met a communicative Burman who spoke Hindi, and who to my great astonishment explained that the flesh of the cat is much prized because it produces cat-like agility in the limbs! Here we are from actual flesh-eating to symbolical representations producing "like from like."
It is interesting to compare the figures on the paper-flag with the signs in the Chinese zodiac. The following list is taken from Kemfer as quoted by W. Brennand in his Hindu Astronomy at page 15:
(1) Mouse, (2) Ox or Cow, (3) Tiger, (4) Hare, (5) Dragon, (6) Serpent, (7) Horse, (8) Sheep, (9) Archer, (10) Cock, (11) Dog, (12) Boar.
MISCELLANEA.
AURTHI GHYRETTY, GHIRETI:
A CORRECTED IDENTIFICATION.
In my article, Side-Lights on Omichund (ante, vol. XLVII, pp. 265 ff.). I surmised for reasons therein given (p. 273) that Gaurthi, the Armenian form of the name of the place from which Omichund wrote his important letter to Khwaja Petros, was a corruption of chauthri and indicated a pavilion near Plassey in the camp of Rai
Durlabh.
Mr. S. Charles Hill has since pointed out that there is strong evidence for identifying Gaurthi with Ghyretty (Ghirêti) where the French Gar dens near Chandernagore (Chandarnagar) were situated. After a careful re-examination of the dates of the occurrences connected with Omichund's letter, I am of opinion that I was in error and that Mr. Hill is right in his conclusions. The mistake arose from the assumption that Clive was at Calcutta when he wrote to Watts on the 5th June (p. 269), whereas he was really at the French Gardens! (Ghireti) from the 18th May until the 12th June 1757.
95
As Clive's letter, written on the 5th June (pp. 269-270) reached Watts in time for him to reply on the 8th, the journey between Murshidabad and Ghirêti must have been covered by runner (sid) in about 2 days. Therefore, assuming Omichund's letter to be dated from the French Gardens, it would have been written about the 3rd or 4th June (not during the night of the 30th31st May as stated in the former article, p. 273)
and would have reached Petros on the 6th or 7th.
Mr. Hill has also drawn my attention to a sentence in the second paragraph of Omichund's letter." He says that they have written to Wach from here that so long as we do not write no one is to come," obviously referring to Clive's letter to Watts, dated French Gardens, 2nd June 1757,3
which contains also the following instructions:"Having settled a plan of operations and the articles being sent to me by Mirza Omar Bey (Mirza "Umar Beg), you will please to await my appointing the time for you to secure yourself and the gentlemen of Cossim buzar." The same letter adds-" Mr. Scrafton is just arrived." Therefore, if Omichund remained in Scrafton's company after rejoining him on the 31st May, it is clear that he reached the French Gardens on the 2nd June. Details of Clive's letter to Watts were undoubtedly communicated to Omichund on his arrival by his agents, some of whom were probably among Clive's clerks.
Admitting the error, I now take it that the sequence of events was as follows. Omichund's suspicions of the false treaty were roused during his interview with Rai Durlabh at Plassey on the night of the 30th-31st May. He rejoined Scrafton in the early hours of the 31st and proceeded with him to the French Gardens, and not to Calcutta as stated on p. 269. Here, in the neighbourhood of the former French Settlement he found many opponents of the English, and these no doubt furnished him with further confirmation of the fact that he was no longer trusted by Clive.
1 Bengal Select Committee Consultations, 1757.
Mr. Hill has further pointed out to me that the fact that Watts did not mention the letter to Petros until the 8th June (p. 270) seems to show that he had only just received it. Had it come to his hands earlier, he would assuredly have forwarded it at once to Clive as evidence of the 2 Hill, Bengal in 1756-57, II. 396.
