( 2 ) 
?hose scholars who made the first steps in that 
rather dark field will fully agree with me on this 
point. The “ Epigraphia Ceylonica ” must, there- 
fore, be accessible to everybody who might be able 
to contribute to the elucidation of Sinhalese in- 
scriptions in the West as well as in the East. 
For by common labour only, and particularly by the 
common labour of European and of Oriental scholars, 
can satisfactory results be attained. 
But there is still one important point which cannot 
be passed over in silence. It is quite indispensa- 
ble that each inscription to be published or newly 
explained in the Epigraphia ” should be reproduced 
in a c/ood facsimile. Mere transliterations are cf com- 
paratively small value, and would be sufficient only 
in quite exceptional cases. We cannot accept state- 
ments without having the opportunity of controlling 
them, for even the most trustworthy and most 
careful scholar may make a mistake in reading 
Sinhalese inscriptions, and a misreading may lead 
him to conclusions which are totally wrong. 
The edition of the “ Epigraphia Ceylonica ” must, 
of course, be entrusted to a man who combines 
practical knowledge with scientific method; and I 
am sure that the Ceylon Government has at its 
disposal more than one scholar who possesses 
those qualities. But I hope that nobody will find 
in this remark anything like a reproach against the 
present editor of the Archaeological Beports. We are 
all so much obliged to him for the invaluable service 
he has rendered to the science, even risking his 
health and his life, that any reproach would be equal 
to ingratitude. My suggestions touch only the form 
of the publications of the Archasological Survey ; 
and 1 should be glad if they would be approved by Mr. 
Bell himself. For the edition and translation of 
inscriptions discovered by him, Mr. Bell always made 
use of the assistance of some native scholars, and 
he has repeatedly mentioned this useful service 
with the warmest acknowlegement, although it 
unfortunately does not appear in each case who is 
responsible for the particular piece of work. 
The epigraphical inquiry, however, must be supple- 
mented, 1 think, by a systematic study of the lite- 
rary sources of the Sinhalese history. The chief 
part has already been done in this respect by the 
edition and translation of the Mahavamsa, which 
we really may call a standard work. But I believe 
that it is now time to publish also the secondary 
sources in their original text, together with an English 
translation, as for instance the Pujavaliya, Attanagala- 
vamsaya, Rajaratnakaraya, Kajayaliya, etc. I am fully 
aware that some of these books have already been 
edited in Ceylon itself. But it is sometimes not 
very easy to get these editions ; the Rajavaliya 
is not yet printed at all. Besides, I think that a 
translation of these works is hardly superfluous, 
because many scholars will make use of them as 
historical sources, who are not able, to read Sinha- 
lese books in the original language. As to the form 
of these publications, I would propose to print them, 
just like the inscipticus, periodically in separate parts, 
but with one general title, as “Monumenta Historiee 
Ceylonicae” these “Monumenta” would include 
even interesting passages about Ceylon and its people, 
taken from Greek and Latin, Arabic and Chinese, 
and even from older Portuguese and Dutch authors, 
together with a historical and geographical com- 
mentary. Papers of that kind used to appear some- 
times in the J.R. A. S., Ceylon Branch; but I think 
it better to reserve the Journal for what we call 
scientific inquiries. Even such a treatise as Appendix 
I (Constitution of the Kandyan Kingdom) in Bell’s Re- 
port, already quoted, would be in the right place in the 
“Monumenta,” and would be studied by many 
more scholars, no doubt, than can now be the 
case. In fact, I hope it will be possible, in the 
course of time, to collect in the “Monumenta,” all 
the materials on which our knowledge of Sinhalese 
history is based. 
I took the liberty to express a few wishes, felt, I 
suppose, by all the European scholars who are engaged 
in Sinhalese studies, regarding the publications 
the Archasological Survey of Ceylon. My purpose was 
only to make its excellent works more fruitful and 
more accessible to the scientific world. Nobody will 
say, I hope, that my suggestions are merely utopian 
ideas which never can be realized, because the ex- 
penses required by them would be extraordinary. 
They chiefly touch, as I have already said, the outer 
form of the publications. I wish to separate on one 
side those materiais which are somewhat different, 
and on the other, I wish to concentrate the diver- 
gent labours of such scholars as are really working 
in the same field. The “ Monumenta ” would of 
course, appear as sufficient material was collected 
and Government funds were available for the pub- 
lication, and the same would be the case with the 
“Epigraphia.” I admit that some more money would 
be required by the proposal to add good plates to 
each of the inscriptions published therein. But it 
would be sufficient to publish the work quite slowly, 
provided it is published in a perfect and entirely 
satisfactory manner. I believe also that it will be 
necessary to print a greater number of copies of each 
report than has been done till now. But I am sure 
that at least a part of the money spent thereon 
will be recoupied by the greater publicity, and by tbe 
better sale of the publications in Europe, according 
to the arrangement which I propose above. 
To summarise, finally, all I have said, I beg to suggest 
quite respectfully that the Government of Ceylon might 
resolve to separate the Reports of the Archseological 
Survey into three different publications ; 
(1) Archaelogical Reports, containing the archw- 
ological and sculptural results of the excavations ; 
(2) Epigraphia Ceylonica, containing the newly 
discovered inscriptions, or new interpretations of such 
inscriptions as are already known ; 
(3) Monumenta Sistoriae Ceylonicae, a kind of 
“ Quellenkunde,” containing Sinhalese historical books 
and other literary sources belonging to tbe history 
of Ceylon in the original text, with translation and 
commentary. — Royal Asiatic Society’s Journal. 
“ Sigiriya Frescoes.” 
TO THE EDITOR [“ CEYLON STANDARD.”] 
Sra, — Some one has been good enough to send me 
copy of your issue of the 20th instant, containing a 
letter by Mr. C. M. Fernando, and a short editorial 
paragraph, relating to the “ Sigiriya Frescoes.” 
I note that Mr. Fernando has returned to the charge, 
in defence of his theory of Sinhalese authorship for 
the paintings at Sigiriya. 
I do not propose to enter here fully into the disputed 
question of their execution by native, or foreign. artists; 
this I hope to do later in my Archseological Report on 
Sigiriya.” I desire now merely to correct one or two 
inaccuracies into which Mr. Fernando has slipped. 
It may be assumed once for all that the frescoes 
at Ajanta in India, and those on the Sigiriya Rock, 
were executed, if not by the same hands, at least by 
artists trained in the same school. 
Mr. Fernando’s arguments against the importation 
of “exotic talent” for the painting the Sigiriya frescoes 
may best be quoted, and briefly touched on seriatim : — 
(I.) “ Ccefcns parfSiis, the credit of painting fres- 
coes found in Ceylon must, prima facie, rest with the 
Sinhalese.” 
Admitted ; but “ other things are” not “equal”; 
little Ceylon is not giant India ; the field of selection 
for competent artists is as 1 to 60 (25,000 square miles 
to one-and-half millions.) 
II. “ Two of the frescoes at Ajanta, as pointed 
out by Fergusson and Manning, depict scenes from the 
Mahawansa, the ancient chronicle of Lanka.” 
The scenes referred to are — ( a), the supposed land- 
ing of Vijaya in Ceylon; and (6) the, supposed introduc- 
tion of Buddhism into the Island — given by Mrs. Speir 
in her “Life in Ancient India.” 
