Southern Tibet : vol.3 / 310 ページ（カラー画像）

0310	Southern Tibet : vol.3
南チベット : vol.3

I would also mention in this connection that Professor ALEX. SUPAN of Breslau
in a letter to me proposed the name Anti-Himalaya and that Major LEONARD DARWIN
found this term perfectly correct and not open to such objection as Trans-Himalaya.

It may be interesting to consider the views of Colonel Sir. S. G. BURRARD
regarding the orographical position of his Ladak range, as set forth in his and HAY-
DEN'S admirable work.¹ He obviously does not reckon the Ladak range to Hima-
laya, for he says: »The ranges of the Himalaya may be classified as follows: The
Great Himalaya, the Lesser Himalaya, the Siwalik ranges.» But he alludes to the pre-
liminary character of this classification, saying: »We shall not be in a position to define
the limits of the Himalaya, until the geology of their extremities has been studied.»

Of the Ladak range he communicates:² »The western portion of this range
was called by Sir Alexander Cunningham the Kailas range, on the supposition that
the peaks of Kailas rose from its easterly continuation. But the Kailas peaks stand
north of the Manasarowar lakes, and the continuation of Cunningham's Kailas range
has been found to pass south of Manasarowar. Many writers have followed Cunning-
ham, but Drew adopted the name 'Leh' range. Godwin-Austen called it the 'Ladak'
range, because it was the principal feature of Ladak. We have accepted the name
Ladak, and have applied it to the whole range from Assam to Baltistan. We are
not, however, in a position to certify that a continuous range stretches in rear of the
Great Himalayan range throughout the whole length of the latter from east to west.»

The following comparison is of interest:³ »The Kashgar and Sarikol ranges
thus constitute a system similar to that of the Hindu Kush and to that of the Great
Himalaya. The Great Himalaya is higher than the Ladak range, but the latter is the
water-parting, and its drainage cuts across the former through deep gorges.» Exactly
the same is the case with the Hindu-kush and the Sarikol-Kashgar ranges. If now
the Kashgar range and the Sarikol range together constitute a system, the Great
Himalaya and the Ladak range should in a still higher degree constitute a system,
as they are generally more intimately grown together.

The following words may also serve to clear up the question:⁴ »The Ladak
range forms the water-parting between the Ganges of Bengal and the Brahmaputra
throughout the areas N, P, R and S, all of which are drained by rivers which pierce
the Great Himalayan range and flow southwards: but near Chumalhari occurs the
solitary exception; here the Nyang river pierces the Ladak range and flows north-
wards into the Brahmaputra.» From this point of view again, the two ranges must
be regarded as belonging to one and the same system. And if the Ladak range
were really a separate system, one could not easily talk of a Transhimalaya north
of it, for it ought to be a Trans-Ladak system, which would, of course, be absurd.

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

引用情報

OCR読み取り結果

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

引用情報

OCR読み取り結果

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