Southern Tibet : vol.7 / 55 ページ（カラー画像）

0055	Southern Tibet : vol.7
南チベット : vol.7

0055

Southern Tibet : vol.7

南チベット : vol.7

had no knowledge of the great extent of Tibet, though, of course, »Indvstan» also
covers only a very small part of Akbar's India.

Of the greatest interest is perhaps the way in which Monserrate has drawn the
relations between the Sacred Lake and the sources of the four great rivers; a problem
which has been discussed and disputed for centuries afterwards. Though he very
much exaggerates the size of the lake making it 170 km. instead of 22 from west
to east, and 85 km. instead of 27 from north to south, he does not believe it capable
of giving birth to a single river. He calls it Masarvor Lacus, and has, just north
of it, written in red ink: Hic dicätur christiani habitare — in accordance with the
rumours he had heard about the temples on the shores.

The source of the Indus f. is placed in the higher regions of Imavs west of the
lake. S. W. of the lake the Satanulge (Satlej), Zaradrus f., has its origin. S. E. of
the lake, and at greater distance, is the source of the Ganges, Fontes gágis. There
is no sign of a Tsangpo-Brahmaputra. Rev. Hosten says:¹ »To the right of the
lake appears twice the letter f., which should mean: fluvius. These two rivers are
neither the Satlej, nor the Indus, nor the Ganges, according to Monserrate. They
are nowhere mentioned in the text. I thought I could read near the lower f. the
name Adris (= the Raoy or Ravi, otherwise not named in the map); but, this
supposition is negatived by the longitude 116° 7½′, assigned to the source of the
Raoy: hence, I propose to read (Mansar) auris f. It is impossible to guess what
the other river might be.»

I do not pretend to approach the solution of this question any nearer than
Rev. Hosten, but I cannot accept his second reading. Monserrate calls the lake
Mansarvor, both on the map and in the text, not Mansaraur; and it is quite
impossible that he could call the great lake a fluvius, especially as he has Masarvor
Lacus on the map.

It could, perhaps, be possible to think that a Mansarauris fluvius were meant
as a river entering the lake or issuing from it, and thus simply called the River of
Manasarovar, which could perhaps be the Brahmaputra. But this is not at all likely.
The first reading, Adris, or adris as it is on the map, must be the right one. Now,
this adris seems, so far as one may judge from the reproduction of the map, to
be the latter half of a name, the first half of which has been covered by the colour
or ink representing the lake itself. If the first part of the name has been Zar, we
get the name Zaradris f. or the River Satlej, where an i has been miswritten instead
of a u. If this interpretation is correct, one has to imagine that Monserrate has
first heard that the Satlej came from the lake, but that he, in consequence of some
later information which seemed to be more likely, rejected the first representation,

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