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

The last statement was again confirmed in 1812 by Moorcroft himself, who,
although he specially searched for it, could not find any channel at all, not even a
dry bed. This proves that the Ladaki Traveller must have been right in saying
that the bed was filled, and thus hidden by sand.

During his journey in 1814 HAMILTON met a certain Hariballabh who had
been at the lakes in 1796. He said that the Rakas-tal received the water going
out from the Manasarovar, and asserted that each lake had an issuing river. As this
man is obviously the same as Moorcroft's Harballabh, we do not need to consider
him further. In the table lower down I have put a note of interrogation regarding
the effluence from the Rakas-tal, which indeed is more than doubtful.

In 1816, Captain WEBB was told by the Deba of Taklakot that the Manasarovar
had only one effluence to the Rakas-tal, a channel, which, however, was often dry.
As it is specially pointed out that the channel was often dry, it may be regarded
as pretty certain that it really was dry in 1816.

In 1817—1818 Alexander Gerard inquired of more than one hundred people
who had been up the Satlej. All the accounts agree that the largest stream issues
from the western corner of Rawun Rudd or Langa, and, even close to that lake, it
is stated to be 30 feet broad and 1¹⁄₄ deep in the dry season, and very rapid.
Gerard also states that in the hot weather this river is very considerable.

The following statement of HERBERT, in 1819, seems to corroborate the above.
He heard from the Lama of Dabling that in the rainy season the two lakes com-
municate. The Lama also asserted that the Satlej originates from the Manasarovar and
goes through the Rakas-tal. If this statement were to be relied upon, it would prove
that there may be effluence from the Rakas-tal, even when the channel from the
Manasarovar carries water only in the rainy season.

Lieut. J. D. CUNNINGHAM, who wrote in 1843, could not satisfy himself that
the two lakes communicated, although according to tradition this had been the case.
He received information that the Rakas-tal gave rise to no river. He calculates
the rise and fall of the Manasarovar at 6 or 7 feet, and under such conditions
there cannot be any egress of water from the lake. It is not said in which
year he got his information, which only a few years later was proved to be
quite wrong.

From October 5th, 1846, we have one of the best statements existing. That
day HENRY STRACHEY found an effluent, 100 feet broad and 3 feet deep, from
the Manasarovar to the Rakas-tal. On the other hand he found no visible or super-
ficial outflow from the Rakas-tal, and the only effluence was by filtration through the
porous soil; but he thinks that at times of extreme flood there may be an overflow.
This is an interesting case, showing that in spite of so much water streaming to
the Rakas-tal even at a rather late season, no water left this lake.

In 1848, RICHARD STRACHEY visited the channel and found a stream running
from the Manasarovar to the Rakas-tal.