Page:Madras Journal of Literature and Science, series 1, volume 6 (1837).djvu/167

dered the specific country "Oude" was set aside, and the term Pandyan made an appellative (as it is truly is) and not a proper name. I was not then so perfectly conscious that the appellative pándyan should be translated "an ancient:" it was the Telugu language in which pánta as an adjective for old is familiarly common, which first brought the circumstance to my notice. In Tamil that word is now obsolete, though formerly in common use. I must add my conviction that the manuscript in question, as a compilation by a Christian servant of Colonel Mackenzie, has no claims to be regarded as an authority; but as the proof of this position could only arise from a translation of this MS. and also of the Chola Déva Púrvika Cherura, by the same writer, I must rest that position for the present only on my own assertion. I regret that my very innocent use of the word "information" should have been construed into an "assumption—implying it is to be inferred verbal information:" it is properly the inference that is "gratuitous and mistaken," seeing that the assumption was never made. I had attentively read the Introduction to the Descriptive Catalogue, and could not but be aware of the statements contained p. xviii—xxi, quite sufficient to prevent any idea of the author's depending on mere verbal statements. I have yet to learn that the word "information" used in the Prefatory Notice to the 2d vol. O. H. MSS. is limited to verbal information; but if the inference were in any measure founded on what appears in vol. 2. p. 63., then I can appeal to that whole paragraph; borne out as it can be shewn to be by the Introduction and Catalogue: and, conscious of inward rectitude, and outward substantial accuracy, would solicit the Professor not to be needlessly annoyed by differences of opinion, which in the fair fields of literature when candidly and openly stated, are never considered to be censurable; but I expressly recall the words "verbal accounts of natives" in p. 63. because, without any allusion to that page, Professor Wilson has contradicted it indirectly, as if implied by the word "information" in the Introduction. That "the translations were the work as frequently of European as of native scholars as specified in the list attached to the sketch," is, most candidly speaking, not borne out by that list, wherein out of twenty-eight documents, the names of only one European translator is given, that is to say the name of R. Clarke, Esq. I readily add Mr. Wheatley as a second (though a slight inaccuracy is involved); for the rest either no names, or the names of natives, strictly such, appear. Now I trust the Professor will consider me not uncandid, when I make no comment on this discrepancy; but I must further add that in the Introduction to the Des: Cat: p. xxi, it is stated—"with a very few exceptions the translations are the work of natives alone." I bow with extreme deference to the name and authority of R. Clarke, Esq. who was here one of the best Tamil