138 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. (March, 1908. 
“— divisor (35/19=1+ 16/19) and the remainder 16 is a value 
sought. 
Multiplying this remainder by the larger first denominator 
and adding the a first remainder we obtain 16 x 28+ 10=458 
as a value for 
Although  hecuiatal s rule is by no means unambiguous in 
parts, yet the working of the above problem agrees so closely 
with it that there is no doubt that the rule is intended for similar 
examples. 
Br pta gives numerous examples of Soir wes 
equations ‘of the first degree, Atone time it was even thonght 
that he was the inventor of the method he employs in solving 
them, but that is now known to have been impossible. Like 
Aryabhata he does not establish pee rules he uses, but unlike his 
predecessor he gives numerous examples and exhibits the working 
of them. After having gone through all his examples and checked 
all the workings, the impression gained is that he was_not quite 
master of this part of his subject. On one occasion a gives a 
correct rule (XVI, iv., Bhs but imamppintely discards it saying, 
hat occasion is there for it? . « . er of one un. 
known put arbitrary Binoy for the rest, » and the commentator 
remarks: ‘“ The author here delivers his own (incorrect) method 
with a censure on the other (correct method). He makes no 
pretence of being the original discoverer of the rules he gives. He 
calls bis work an ‘ interpretation ‘ 
shown further on” (§70—72)}. Finally, it may be remarked that 
the first Sasso on n behalf of the Hindus as the inventors of this 
indeterminate analysis appears in the nineteenth century of our 
era, and that claim was based on a very inadequate knowledge 
of the true state of affairs. 
