Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 March 2011
At the conclusion of a paper dealing with the possible identity of the site of Kasiā with Veṭhadīpa, I expressed the hope that a continuation of my explorations on that site would lead to a final solution of the topographical problem. Owing to unforeseen circumstances, this hope has not been fulfilled. Last winter's excavations, however, have had the result of settling another question no less important for the ancient geography of India—that of the position of Śrāvastī.
page 971 note 1 J.R.A.S., 1907, pp. 1049–53.Google Scholar
page 971 note 2 A.S.R., vol. i, pp. 330–48, and xi, pp. 78–100.Google Scholar
page 972 note 1 Bloch, , J.A.S.B., vol. lxvii (1898), pt. i, pp. 274–90Google Scholar, and Ep. Ind., vol. viii, pp. 179–82.Google Scholar
page 972 note 2 J.R.A.S., 1898, pp. 520–31, and 1900, pp. 1–24.Google Scholar
page 973 note 1 J.A.S.B., vol. lxi (1892), pt. i, Extra No.Google Scholar
page 974 note 1 [23rd June, A.D. 1130.—ED.]
page 975 note 1 Journal des Savants, Février, 1897, p. 65.Google Scholar
page 975 note 2 [Attention may be invited to an article by Professor Terrien de Lacouperie, entitled “The Shifted Cardinal Points: from Elam to Early China,” published in the Babylonian and Oriental Record, vol. ii, pp. 25–31. Further examination in that line might perhaps throw a light on the point that the bearings given by Fa-hian and Hiuen-tsiang seem so often to be erroneous.—ED.]Google Scholar