国立情報学研究所 - ディジタル・シルクロード・プロジェクト
『東洋文庫所蔵』貴重書デジタルアーカイブ

285
reality is meant to be the source of the Indus, though not nearly so carefully and
correctly represented as the sources of the Satlej and the Tsangpo. But in spite of
this, Anquetil du Perron finds the identity of the names, the sources, and the courses
of the rivers surprising, and owing to the very meagre knowledge of these regions
in his time it is easy to understand his mistake.
He remarks that in the opinion of the natives the Brahmaputra begins from
the Manasarovar. On the map of the Lamas (d'Anville) he finds that a great river
starts from the mountains situated near lake Mapama, turns to the east, S.E. and
south and discharges at Ava. It is called Tsanpou. On the Indian map, again,
the Manasarovar is the source of a great river running to the east, north of Nepal.
›Le Tsanpou de la Carte Chinoise, & le Brahmapoutren de la Carte Indienne . . .
sont donc un seul & même fleuve.‹
Having proceeded so far, Anquetil du Perron goes on to examine ›whether
it is really the Ganges that issues from Lake Lanken as the Chinese map re-
marks‹ and one hopes that he will prove that the Chinese (d'Anville's) Ganges is
in reality the Satlej; but, hélas, he proves that it is the Gagra, a mistake for which,
of course, only Tieffenthaler is responsible.
In a detailed way he shows how and why the Lama explorers are incorrect.
And he thinks it is quite sufficient to relate the way in which the map was made
in order to be justified in the conclusion: ›that the discovery of the source of the
Ganges by the Chinese Lamas is nothing less than certain‹. The imperial explorers
had just arrived at the source, — or what they wished should be the source of the
Ganges, when their fright of Tseringdondob cut short their work and hindered
them from taking the necessary observations on the place. They asked the natives
with the result that the same errors that made the map of 1711 insufficient re-
turned once more. ¹ Anquetil du Perron's opinion is, that a map such as d'An-
ville's which was based on no other authority than that of the Lamas cannot be
compared with an original map made on the place by the people of the country.
Here comes in the great mistake of Anquetil du Perron: that he has greater
confidence in the maps sent to him by Tieffenthaler, than in the Lamas' map,
sent to d'Anville by the Jesuits. And still he finds a good deal of accordance
between the Chinese and Indian maps. The most important exception is that while
the Chinese map makes the Ganges issue from the Lanken, the Indian map makes
the Gagra issue from that lake. Instead of one mistake another is introduced.
Anquetil du Perron believes that the exploring Lamas obtained their information
from the village and monastery at the southern shore of Mansaroar (i. e. Tugu-
gompa). And Tieffenthaler knew that pilgrims came from Hindustan to Man-