[INDOLOGY] Date and place of a manuscript

Fri Sep 11 08:12:24 UTC 2026

References on bhūtasaṃkhyā from a 2016 post on the list:

"For the specific words used in bhūtasaṃkhyā-s, see Bühler's Indian Paleography (pp.84-86) [rather pp. 103-106<https://archive.org/details/in.gov.ignca.18230/page/103/mode/2up>] or Kale's History of Dharmaśāstra vol. 5.1 (pp. 701-703<https://archive.org/details/KhistoryOfDharmasastraancientAndMediaevalReligiousAndCivilLaw/page/700/mode/2up>).  See also a blog by Péter Szántó (http://tibetica.blogspot.hu/2008/02/bhtasakhy.html) [who uses Subbarayappa and Sarma 1985]"

Le 10 sept. 2026 à 22:49, Martin Gansten via INDOLOGY <indology at list.indology.info> a écrit :

Thanks for the link, Dominik. There's another useful list in Indian Astronomy: A Source Book by Subbarayappa and Sarma (1985, also available on Archive), which includes nṛpa, bhūpa and bhūpati for the number 16.

The most important thing to understand when it comes to bhūtasaṃkhyā is that it's the concept that matters, not the choice of terms. Because there is a traditional list (or several lists?) of 16 celebrated kings, any word for king can be used to mean 16, just as any word for moon can mean 1, any word for eye can mean 2, etc. The precise word doesn't need to be attested in a pre-existing text in order to be valid.

Best wishes,
Martin

Den 2026-09-10 kl. 22:12, skrev Dominik Wujastyk:
I've found Rangacarya's list<https://archive.org/details/dli.csl.7173/page/287/mode/1up> helpful in the past.  He doesn't have bhūpa or bhūpāla, though.

Best wishes,
Dominik

--
Dominik Wujastyk, Professor Emeritus, Classical Indian History
University of Alberta

"The University of Alberta is committed to the pursuit of truth,
the advancement of learning, and the dissemination of knowledge
through teaching, research and other scholarly and creative activities and service."
-- Collective Agreement<https://www.ualberta.ca/human-resources-health-safety-environment/media-library/my-employment/agreements/2020-2024-collective-agreement---working-version.pdf> 3.01

Current research: The Suśruta Project<http://sushrutaproject.github.io/>
Journal: History of Science in South Asia<http://hssa-journal.org/>
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0216-6381

On Thu, 3 Sept 2026 at 04:29, Roland Steiner via INDOLOGY <indology at list.indology.info<mailto:indology at list.indology.info>> wrote:

Dear Martin,

MW is a little erratic when it comes to bhūtasaṃkhyā: no value is given for bhūpāla, but 'a term for the number sixteen' is found under bhūpa

Here, as in most cases, MW relies on the Petersburg dictionaries. When using these dictionaries, it's important to note that Böhtlingk only lists meanings for which he had evidence in the literature. For bhūpa, meaning “the number sixteen”, he had such evidence, namely “Gaṇit. Bhagaṇ. 9” (cf. MW s.v. bhūpa: “a term for the number sixteen, Gaṇit.”), but apparently not for bhūpāla. There's nothing more to it than that. It then goes without saying that in such cases bhūpāla can also refer to the number, which is why it's advisable to also check the Petersburg dictionaries for similarly formed words or synonyms, such as nṛpa, as you've already pointed out.

MW gives 'the numbers one and nine', but I have never seen it mean anything but 9 in a bhūtasaṃkhyā context.

MW's source is pw s.v. aṅka: "7) die Zahlen eins und neun." In the large PW (Volume 5, "Verbesserungen und Nachträge (= Improvements and Additions)", p. 951, s.v. aṅka), the following is given as evidence for the designation of the number "one": "9) auch Bez. der Zahl Eins, Ind. St. 8,208, N."

Kind regards, Roland

Am Donnerstag, 03. September 2026 08:33 CEST, schrieb Martin Gansten via INDOLOGY <indology at list.indology.info<mailto:indology at list.indology.info>>:

No, MW is a little erratic when it comes to bhūtasaṃkhyā: no value is given for bhūpāla, but 'a term for the number sixteen' is found under bhūpa (and 'N. of the numeral 16' under nṛpa; other synonyms of 'king' may include it too). For aṅka MW gives 'the numbers one and nine', but I have never seen it mean anything but 9 in a bhūtasaṃkhyā context.

Best wishes,
Martin

Den 2026-09-02 kl. 23:03, skrev Jean Michel DELIRE:

Thanks to Martin and Priya for their precise answers about the location and scribe of the manuscript.

I had no idea that it could have been written in Tukoji Rao's camp or residence, and didn't imagine that rāmāṃkabhūpāla could be a bhūtasaṃkhyā. Actually, Monier-Williams Dictionary gives 3 for rāma and there are 9 āṃka (without the 0), but I don't find in MW the value 16 for bhūpāla.
The fact that the scribe uses a śloka, as in the traditional Sanskrit mathematical texts, and that the author recommends to use the letters ka, kha, ga, etc. to name the geometrical points, instead of the abjad notation used in the Jaipur's rekhāgaṇita and its Arabic model,  also points to a more traditional and Hindu context.

Thanks again,

Jean Michel Delire, Brussels

Le mer. 2 sept. 2026 à 19:09, Martin Gansten via INDOLOGY <indology at list.indology.info<mailto:indology at list.indology.info>> a écrit :

Apologies to the list for my many posts today, but naturally the solution is to eliminate the superfluous ṃ at the end of daśamyāṃ. This will give daśamyām alikhad bālakṛṣṇo. Mystery solved, verb restored, and the verse does seem to refer to the scribe after all (since the author has already been identified in the colophon).

Martin

Den 2026-09-02 kl. 19:01, skrev Martin Gansten:

I'll have to correct that: as was just pointed out to me off-list, what I read in haste as an 'e' stroke in fact belongs to a ha from the line above, and the semi-legible letter after kṛ is more probably ṣṇo, giving malikhadvālakṛṣṇo. A personal rather than place name? No verb, though, if this reading is correct.

Martin

Den 2026-09-02 kl. 17:21, skrev Martin Gansten:

Dear Priya and all,

I agree that this is intriguing, and it did occur to me that tu might properly be a part of what followed rather than a separate particle, but I didn't have the background knowledge to identify Tukoji Rao. I imagine, though, that this short prose phrase (dillīnagare tukorāvakaṭake) refers to the copying of the manuscript, whereas the verse dating speaks of the book itself being completed (kṛto gaṇitapustakam [sic]), so the date and the Tukoji reference don't necessarily go together. In fact, malikhadvāle in the verse looks like a possible place name and could refer to where the work itself was written, although I have no idea of what or where that is.

Best wishes,
Martin

Den 2026-09-02 kl. 16:12, skrev Priyamvada Nambrath via INDOLOGY:

It appears to me that the location sentence parses as 'dillīnagare tukorāva-kaṭake' - translating to 'in the military camp/ residence of Tuko Rao in the city of Delhi.'

Śaka 1693 translates, as you note, to 1771-72 CE, which aligns very nicely with Tukoji Rao Holkar I. In this exact period, Tukoji Rao was involved in a successful Maratha campaign against the Mughal Emperor, Shah Alam, in Delhi, and won some significant concessions. He is known more for his military accomplishments; so if it is the same person that is referred to here, the fact that a geometry textbook was being written inside his garrison while he was engaged in a battle with Delhi is fascinating.

All best,
Priya

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY at list.indology.info<mailto:INDOLOGY at list.indology.info>
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY at list.indology.info<mailto:INDOLOGY at list.indology.info>
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology

–––––––––––––––––––
Christophe Vielle<https://www.uclouvain.be/en/people/christophe.vielle>
Louvain-la-Neuve

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20260911/46cc1447/attachment.htm>