XXVHi _ Annual Address. (February, 1908. 
notation are spurious; he further contends’ that the ‘rule of 
Aryyabhatta applies to all possible notations, and is really algebraic 
in character. His theory is, with regard to this last pointy 
that. there is absolutely nothing. in the rule to indicate - that 
values and a zero, In another paper which was communicated 
later on, Mr. Kaye maintains that Aryyabhatta was indebted in the 
matter of arithmetical notation to the Greek astronomers of 
fission It may be pointed out, however, that our knowledge 
of ea arly Indian mathematics i is some ewha t limited and fragmentary: 
astronomy and arithmetic, and the works which have: been 
publi-hed or rendered into English form a very small pr oportion 
of what is known to have existed at one time. Under such cir- 
concerned, will be flirown a the brilliant lectures of Dr. Thibant, 
which are now in the course of we tg 5 Dr. Thibaut has es 
lished in his classical paper on the Sulvasutras the antiquity of 
Indian mathematics, and, even if it be assumed that t Aryyabhatta 
was indebted to the Alexandrian astronomers, he gave bac 
the world the light he borrowed from Alexandria in a brighter 
and more useful form, for as one of our great Sanskrit poets 
WEge * “The sparkling gem gives back the glorious hea so 
: It drinks from other light, but the dull earth 
Absorbs the blaze and yields no om again.” 
~ Amongst the historical papers “which have been contr ibuted 
pe the Society during the last year, those of Prof, Jadunath Sarkar 
n the “ Conquest of Chatgaon by Sayestha Khan” and on. the 
history. ey are founded on translations from the “ Alamgir rs 
namah ” and indicate amply that a version of other portions of 
that great work would be sues usefu 
Mention must also be made of the papers of Mr. Yazdani, in 
which he deals with the ancient eee of the town and buildings of 
Narnaul, south of Delhi. Our enthusiastic Secretary, Col. Phillott, 
has given us a number of papers, someof them, conjointly with! Mr. 
Azoo, which are of considerable interest—not only from the: point 
of view of history but of anthropology as well; and the paper 
by Mr. Ho on Mundari poetry, music and dances, give us 
valuable sn tormation as to the habits, gaan and manners, as 
also the language of that interesting tri 
Rai Sarat Chandra Das, Bahadur, that distinguished "Tortan, 
traveller, holds, in his paper on “ A written language in Mongolia,” 
that. the Mongolian character was designed after the Tibetan 
ia the 13th century. About the same time, we had a paper from 
Mr, Walsh on “ The Coinage of Tibet,” in which he urges the con- 
clusion that the Uigur form of the Mongohan character, which 
