392 The "'Oriental Sore'' as observed in India. [part ii. 



pi-ecis of the observations which were conducted by ourselves in accordance with the 

 instructions which we received from the Grovernment of India. We may, however, 

 mention that a short but very accurate description of the sore has recently been 

 published by Sir Joseph Fayrer,* but which seems to have appeared too late to be 

 referred to by the authors of the above work. Though occupying a few pages only, 

 it expresses pretty nearly all of value that has been written regarding the matter. 



One of the chief results of the many contributions to the literature of the subject 

 has been the identification of this sore with sores occurring in other districts and 

 cities of India — cities and districts which have likewise given it a local signification 

 by lending it special names. The consequence has been that Scinde, Mooltan, 

 Eoorkee, Meerut, Lahore, Lucknow, and other places have all been credited with the 

 prevalence of a peculiar sore or boil. These, again, have all been pretty conclusively 

 identified with similar affections very prevalent in parts of Syria, Egypt, Arabia and 

 other Oriental countries, where they have received such designations as the ^^Boutons" 

 of Aleppo, Biskra, Bagdad, Bussorah, and so forth. 



Additional importance has been attached to the prevalence of the disease at Delhi 

 from the circumstance of its being associated with the name of the celebrated 

 Emperor Aurangzeb, who, it is popularly believed, suffered from the affection. Some 

 even go so far as to say that it was the immediate cause of his death. In Delhi 

 itself the affection is commonly described as " Aurangzeb " without any further 

 qualification. 



Having failed to trace any definite reason for this general belief in the works 

 of Tavernier, who wrote minutely regarding Aurangzeb's times, or in the works of 

 Bernier (the latter writer was for many years physician at the Court of Aurangzeb 

 at Delhi, and nevertheless makes no mention of the Emperor having suffered from 

 any such complaint), we consulted Professor Blochmann, the well known Oriental 

 scholar, and he very kindly favoured us with the accompanying note,t from which 

 it will be seen that, even according to all the original independent historians of this 

 Emperor's reign, there exists no foundation for the general belief that the Emperor 

 suffered from any special cutaneous affection. 



In another communication to us Mr. Blochmann makes a suggestion as to 



* "The Practitioner," October 1875, pages 264—267. 



•)• " Muhammadan historians do not state that the Emperor Aurangzeb (or Alamglr, as natives call him) 

 died of Delhi sores. For his reign we have only three independent historical works, viz., the Ma4sir-i- 

 Alamglri. Kh4fi Kh4n, and the Tabsirat-un Nazirin ; and of these Khdfi Khan only gives a more detailed 

 account of the Emperor's ilhiess and death. He says (Edit. Bibl. Indica, II. page 539) : — 



"'At this time (a short time before Kamazan 1117, or January 1705) His Majesty fell seriously ill. He 

 felt an extraordinary and most acute pain in all joints, which extended to every limb. Although he tried 

 to keep down the sickness and continued to decide Government matters, in order not to dishearten the 

 people, his illness continued, and when one or two fainting fits supervened, a great commotion took place 

 among the soldiers and the camp-followers. At last, however (the Maasir-i-Alamglri says, after ten or 

 twelve days), His Majesty's health again improved. ... On the recommendation of Hakim SAdik Khan, 

 His Majesty took doses of ohohcJuni (China root), and continued doing so for three or four weeks. Every 

 day during the treatment, sums of money were given to the poor ; and, when the cure was effected, the 



