326 
[No. 4, 
H. Beveridge — The Site of Karna Suvarna. 
NOTE ON DR, WADDELL’S PAPER* 
I did not know of or see Dr. Waddell’s paper until I had nearly finisli- 
ed my own. He proposes to identify Karna Suvarna with Kanchannagar, 
near Burdwan. He has taken pains with the subject and his article 
contains some valuable information, but I think that his identification is 
quite untenable. It seems to me unfortunate that when Dr. Fergusson f 
and he had the clue in their hands they should have let it slip. Both of 
them refer to Rahgamati, in Murshidabad ; but both of them put it aside. 
Fergusson thought that the capital might afterwards have been trans- 
ferred to Rahgamati, and that in this way it got the name of Karna 
Suvarna, but he would not accept it as the place visited by Hiueu 
Tsiang, because he thought Hwui-li’s account of the route to it incorrect. 
Apparently, too, he failed to notice that Rahgamati was equivalent to the 
name of the monastery mentioned by Hiuen Tsiang. He choose Nagar in 
Birbhum, a place which I have seen and which I think, has no claim to be 
Karna Suvarna. But a writer who refused to believe that the Tamra- 
lipti of Hiuen Tsiang was Tamluk cannot be regarded as a safe guide. 
Dr. Waddell has rejected Rahgamati partly, as I conceive, because he 
has never seen it, and so does not know the evidence of ancient great- 
ness which it exhibits. His words are as follows The proposed 
identification with the fort of Kuru, near the village of Rahgamati, in 
Murshidabad district, about 130 miles to the north-east of Tamluk, is 
quite untenable, as it is so out of keeping with the pilgrim’s text, and 
possesses nothing suggestive of the site, except the local name of Rahga- 
m.iti, and having proceeded so far northwards, the subsequent journey of 
700 li to the south-west could not carry the pilgrim to the frontier, 
much less to the capital of Orissa, his next stage. J 
I do not know what is meant by the phrase “ proposed identifica- 
tion” iu this extract. So far as I know, Rahgamati has never been 
proposed before. Perhaps Colonel Tule made such a proposal, but if 
so, the reference given by him, J. R. A. S. XVIII. 395, is wrong. The 
only reference given by Dr. Waddell is to Captain Layard’s paper, but 
certainly that says nothing about Hiuen Tsiang. It was hardly possible, 
if not quite impossible, that it should, for Layard’s paper was published 
in our Society’s Journal in 1853, and M. Julien’s translation of the bio- 
graphy only appeared in that year, and this translation of the Si-yu-ki 
not till 1858. Nor do I know what is meant by the “ fort of Kuru.” 
Nobody has ever used that name or spoken about the Kurus in connec- 
* Published by the Government of Bengal last year, as an Appendix to a paper 
on Pataliputra. 
t J- B. A. S., VI. 248. 
t P- 25. 
