24 



JOURNAL, R.A.S. (CEYLON). [VOL. XVI. 



VII.— Mr. F. H. de Vos to Mr. G. A. Joseph. 



I have read uncorrected proof of correspondence relative to the 

 Portuguese Arms engraved on the rock recently discovered in the Fort 

 of Colombo, and should like to offer the following remarks :— 



As regards the symbols, 



(which are, by the way, not correctly reproduced in the lithograph), it 

 will appear that the first two are dotted with a small cross and the third 

 with a round dot, and the fourth has no dot at all. If these symbols 

 stand for 1501 the first and fourth symbols should be similarly written, 

 but they are not. Then, why should, the first two symbols be dotted 

 with a cross unless they stand for " Jesus Salvator " ? If the fourth 

 symbol be taken to be the ninth letter of the alphabet, this will explain 

 why it differs from the first symbol. 



Again, was it customary in those days {circa 1500) to dot numerals ? 

 This can be answered by an expert on manuscript and handwriting of 

 that age. 



VIII.— Mr. A. E. Buultjens to Mr. G. A. Joseph. 



I have since carefully examined the stone on the spot more than 

 once. It seems quite clear that on the right of the coat of arms what 

 we find is the date 1501, and not the letters IS O I, nor the date 1561. 

 True, there is a dot over the left of the 0, but this cannot be a part of 

 the figure 6, because there is clearly no line joining the dot to the O, 

 and the surface between the dot and the O is level and intact. The 

 conjecture that these are the letters I S O I, meaning ''Jesus Salvador 

 Orientalium Indicorum," is certainly most ingenious ; but Mr. de Vos 

 has not given us any authority to corroborate his opinion and to show 

 that the initial letters of the Latin phrase were used at any period of 

 Portuguese history in connection with missions or discoveries. To me 

 the second figure is clearly a 5, which was undoubtedly written in that 

 way two or three centuries ago. For proof I would refer to the pages 

 of Valentyn's Ceylon, p. 68, 73, &c, and to De Barros and Knox for 

 several examples of 5 written like the one on the stone. 



In the absence of any other evidence than what I have produced 

 from De Barros, the conclusion is irresistible that the discovery is the 

 identical padrao of Don Lourenco mentioned by the contemporary 

 writer De Barros, whose first decade was published in 1553. His 

 Excellency the Delegate Apostolic, to whom our thanks are due for 

 having invited public attention to the discovery, is of opinion that the 



