dha excavations. The other caves are more or less in a ruin ous state the third of them bears marks of most elaborate decoration. "The whole of the walls, roof, and columns, have been covered with a fine stucco, and ornamented with paintings in distemper of considerable taste and elegance."

Appended to this paper is a short notice of some interesting remains at Wone, near Kurgoond, which evidently merit further examination. They are probably, as supposed by Capt. Dangerfield, Jaina remains. The Samvat 13, which he states to occur on one of the inscriptions, is, if correct, the year of the king's reign, Samvat, for Samvatsara, implying simply "year.'

From the caves of India, entombing the rites of religion or the dreams of devotion, we may direct our attention to some curious circumstances, connected with the disposal of the dead. A short paper by Mr. Erskine gives us an account of some urns found in the vicinity of Bushire, containing fragments of bones. Sarcophagi with similar substances have been discovered in the same site; and as they and the urns differ from every thing classical or Mohammedan, it is but natural to conclude that they are the reliques of native usage, and that the Persians formerly buried their dead. That this is no longer the case, that the Parsis scruple to violate the elements by any of the usual modes of sepulture, and, therefore, expose the corpse to be devoured by the birds, is well known; and it is an interesting subject of enquiry to ascertain how long this has been the case, as it may lead us to the period at which the Magian religion was introduced into Iran. Croesus was condemned by a Persian monarch to the flames. Cyrus and Darius were buried, if we may credit Ctesias. Herodotus and Strabo limit the practice of exposing the body to the Magi; and some of the books, considered sacred by the Parsis, authorize various modes of getting rid of the body, amongst which its corrosion by aqua fortis is preferred. This subject has not yet been sufficiently examined, for us to pronounce a confident opinion; but we are very much inclined to suppose, that the introduction of the religion of Zerdusht into Persia took place not earlier, than the reign of Darius Hystaspis, and that its final prevalence was considerably posterior to the invasion of Alexander. It may be observed, however, that if at any time the practice

of inhumation was common in Persia, urns and sarcophagi may be expected in other places than merely in the neighbourhood of Bushire. Sir Wm. Ouseley thinks it probable "that future researches may bring some to light amongst the ruins of ancient Ctesiphon," some indications of them having been noted there by Mr. Jackson on his journey from India overland in 1797.

Another very curious subject, which may be classed with the foregoing, but of which the site is exclusively southern India, is the occurrence of the remains denominated Pandu Kulis, of which an account is given by Mr. J. Babington in the third volume. These are of two kinds: one is an inclosure of stones, topped by a circular stone of an umbrella-shape, and is then called a Topi Kul. The other sort is formed of a pit below the surface, in which a large jar is placed: the mouth of the pit is covered over with a large circular stone, the earth and grass of which give it the appearance of a tumulus, or barrow. The Topi Kuls seem to be of the description of cairns, being merely piled up, perhaps, as memorials, having never yet been found to contain any thing. Kodey Kuls, on the contrary, invariably yield human bones, in a more or less perfect state, besides urns, arms, implements, and beads of different shapes, colours, and materials. The history of these monuments is quite unknown, and tradition so ridiculous, as evidently to hang not by the slightest hair from truth. There can be no question, therefore, of the antiquity of the monuments. It is not necessary to refer, however, to a period anterior to the introduction of the Hindu religion for their origin, unless it should appear that the bones have never been in part calcined; the collection and burial of the bones forming part of the ceremony, particularly in situations, where no sacred stream was at hand, to which the ashes of the deceased could be committed. "Using a branch of Sami, and another of Palasa, instead of tongs, the son, or the nearest relation, first draws out from the ashes the bones of the head, and afterwards the other bones successively, sprinkles them with perfumed liquids, and with clarified butter made of cow's milk, and puts them into a casket made of the leaves of the Palasa. This he places in a new earthen vessel, covers it with a lid, and

d

ties it up with thread. Choosing some clear spot, where encroachments of the river are not to be apprehended, he digs a very deep hole, and spreads the Cusa grass at the bottom of it, and over the grass a piece of yellow cloth. He places thereon the earthen vessel containing the bones of the deceased, covers it with a lump of mud, moss, and thorns, and plants a tree in the excavation, or raises a mound of masonry, &c.” This is in fact the Kodey Kul. The same authority (Colebrooke, on the Religious Ceremonies of the Brahmans, A. R. vii. 256, helps us to an explanation of the Topi Kul. "To cover the spot where the funeral pile stood, a tree should be planted, or a mound of masonry he raised.” The one, therefore, commemorates the cremation, and is consequently nothing more than a pile of stones: the other inurns the ashes of the dead,' frail and crumbling reliques of mortality. Vast numbers of these monuments are found in the Dekhin.

and consequently contains the

Before taking our leave of Hindu Antiquities, we must notice a short, but interesting paper by Lieut. Macmurdo in the first volume, an account of a Jaina image, a form of Parsvanath, named Gowricha, in the possession of a Rajput family in the desert of Parkur. The sanctity of the image is such as annually to attract the pious Sravaks of Guzerat and Marwar, who are as regularly fleeced by the marauders of the desert: the whole legend of the image being an obvious device, by which fraud has levied a tax upon credulity. A very important passage of this paper is the notice of Heema Chaarge Juttee, (Hemacharya Jeti,) who is said to have resided at Puttur in Neherwalla, then governed by Goonmur Palla, (Kumara Pala-our Bombay Orientalists make sad work with names,) in A. D. 1174. The Juttee, it is said, converted the Raja to the Shravuk (Sravaka) religion. The cotemporary existence of Hemacharya and Kumara Pala is affirmed by himself in the Mahavira Cheritra; he adds, that his date is 1669 years from Mahavira's disappearance: consequently, from the authority cited by Lieut. Macmurdo, Mahavira is placed about 495 years before the Christian era. The ordinary computation is 660 A. C.; the difference is not very important. We have considerable doubts regarding the accuracy of either, although, conceiving that the Jainas have at

tempted to confound some of their chief periods with those of the Bauddhas, we are disposed to imagine, that it in reality refers to the origin of the latter: at any rate, however, it appears that the Jaina faith was not the predominant form in Guzerat earlier than the end of the twelfth century. We regret to find, from the Appendix to the last volume of the Bombay Transactions, which contains a memoir of him, that the Society has lost the intelligent author of this and other tracts, which do credit to its pages.

We shall finish this part of our subject with adverting to the only ancient inscription, which has yet appeared in the Bombay Transactions: this is the translation of a Sanscrit grant by Dr. Taylor, another highly valuable member, of whom death has recently deprived the Society. The grant was made by Bhoja Deva in 1113. The translation does not specify the era; but the original has Saka vershesu, and it is therefore the Salivahana period, or A. D. 1191. Bhoja Deva is the sixteenth in succession from Jatiga; but as several of these are collateral or fraternal successions, we cannot assign more than twelve years to each, bringing the first of the dynasty mentioned to the middle of the eleventh century. These princes are said to belong to the family of Silahara, lords of Tagara; and a series of princes of the same family, ending with Arikesari Deva in 1018, appear to have been petty Rajas in the Konkan: consequently this Bhoja Deva must not be confounded with the celebrated Bhoja, who reigned at Dhar. From the grant, published in the As. Res. (vol. i. 357,) the two inscriptions seem therefore to be connected, and form a respectable genealogical list. Bhoja Deva's capital or fort, is called Padma Nala; and he is described as Mahamandaleswara, lord of a large district, which perhaps implies his being but a petty or predatory prince. Mr. Grant, who forwards the inscription to the Society, impugns the conclusion of Colonel Wilford as to the identity of Tagara with Deogur, or Dauletabad. He admits the accuracy of regarding Phulthamba and Pyetun as the ancient Pluthana and Paithana; but argues, that Tagara is stated to lie to the eastward of Pluthana, whilst Deogur is due north of Pyetun, which is south east of Phulthamba. It is not unlikely that the situation of Tagara did not correspond exactly with that

of Devagiri; but we are not satisfied that Mr. Grant's argument is conclusive. Arrian does not mention Paithana at all: he merely says, that Tagara is ten days from Plithana, or Phulthamba, towards the east, by which the general relation only is understood, as he had before said of Ujayin, or Ozene, that it lay east of Baroach. The seeming perplexity arising from a reference to Pyetun, is the attempt to verify the Plithana of Ptolemy, which might be the same with Puttun, and which Wilford says is about half way between Plithana and Tagara. He no where mentions their respective bearings, however; and as we have no reason to suppose he placed the latter eastward from the former, there is no necessity to correct his conjectures.

The remains of Hindu and Mohammedan architecture in the south are treated of in two papers, one describing the hill fort of Chapaneer, or Pavanghur, by Capt. Miles in the first volume, and one by Capt. Sykes, descriptive of the ruins of Bijapur in the third. The first is a good and clear description of a hill fort of great natural strength: the second treats of the chief buildings of a capital of great celebrity. Capt. Sykes is evidently more at home here than amongst Hindu antiquities, and we read his paper with interest, although a fuller account is given in the thirteenth volume of the Asiatic Researches by Capt. Sydenham.

From Indian antiquities we pass to those of miscellaneous origin, respecting which we have three communications. The present, compared with the past state of Babylon, by Capt. Frederick; a description of Buro Bodor on Java, by Mr. Craufurd; and a report on the progress of decyphering Cuneiform inscriptions, by Mr. Bellino.

We do not think that Capt. Frederick's account of Babylon has added much to our means of verifying the details of the Greek historians; and the subsequent labours of the late Mr. Rich, prosecuted under the most favourable circumstances, and by the most accomplished talents, have superceded all prior investigations. The paper of Captain Frederick, however, merits perusal, and conveys a tolerably precise knowledge of the localities of the spot, as well as some interesting notices of the existence of ancient usages.