1897.] 
Central Asian Manuscripts. 
225 
II. The Godfrey Manuscripts. 
(Plates VIII-XIV and XXVII-XXX.). 
A short preliminary notice of these Manuscripts will be found in 
Mr. A. Pedler’s Presidential Address of 1896. They were forwarded 
to me, in the manner already explained, towards the end of November, 
1895. They were secured by Captain S. H. Godfrey, at that time 
British Joint-Commissioner of Ladak, now Political Agent at Gilgit, 
and, for that reason, they have been named by me “ the Godfrey Manu¬ 
scripts.” 
Captain Godfrey has been good enough to supply me, in a letter, 
dated the 27th June, 1897, with the following information regarding 
the circumstances in which the Manuscripts came into his possession: — 
“In 1895, when British Joint-Commissioner of Ladak, I was 
telegraphed to from Kargil that the Leh trade route had been 
broken down by disastrous floods, and that the traffic valuing 
lakhs of rupees was consequently at a standstill. On my arrival 
at Kargil in July, I found the sarais blocked with merchants and 
their wares, unable to proceed to Central Asia, and unwilling to 
lose their whole venture by a return to India. For a month I was 
camped with a party of officers on the banks of the Shayok endeav¬ 
ouring to throw a cantilever bridge across the flooded river. At 
last we got up wires from Kashmir and succeeded in passing over 
the traffic. A party of Pathan merchants, bound for Yarkand 
with a valuable consignment of coral, asked me how they could 
mark their sense of obligation for being saved from heavy loss, if 
not ruin, by the success of our measures. I said that if they could 
procure me some of the old manuscripts found in the sand-buried 
cities of Tibet or Central Asia, I should consider the debt to be on 
my side. I returned from Ladak in the autumn, having forgotten 
the incident. But while at Sialkot, I received a parcel done up 
like caraSy containing the MSS. now in your hands.” 
In Captain Godfrey’s Report, forwarding the manuscripts to the 
Resident in KaQmir, they were, on the authority of the merchants, 
from whom he had received them, stated to be “ very ancient Tibetan 
Manuscripts.” This, as will be shown presently, is a misdescription. 
It appears to be a very common idea in those parts of the country to 
look upon old manuscripts, procured from Central Asia, as Tibetan. 
The Weber MSS. which also came to me from Leh in Ladak, were also 
originally described to me as Tibetan. In explanation of the possible 
