147 
1891.] Dr. Hoernle— -An instalment of the Bower Manuscript. 
in the earlier period, but that its existence is traceable back to (at 
least) the fifth century A. D. ; and this fact lends very strong support to 
the commonly held opinion that the Kitab-i-Susrud men¬ 
tioned by Ibn Abi Usaibi’ah (8th century A. D.), is really a ‘ book 
Susruta But what particular Susruta it may have been, it would be, 
at present, impossible to say. 
Our manuscript,—at least in the portion, now published—shows 
some affinities to both the Susruta and the Charaka. I have not yet been 
able to subject these two works to a very careful examination with a view 
to discover resemblances or identities. This, of course, is very desirable ; 
and I hope to do so, as soon as I have more leisure. In the meantime 
I may note here a few coincidences that I have noticed in the course 
of a cursory glance through them. My references are to Pandit Jiva- 
nanda’s editions ;* I regret, that no better editions are, at present, 
available to me. For the English translation of Susruta I refer to 
that by Doctors Uday Chand Dutt and Aughore Chunder Chatto- 
padhya in the Bibliotheca Indica. 
The only striking coincidence that I have noticed with regard t > 
the Susruta is the prescription given in verses 60-66. It refers to ten 
purgative pills (modaha ), one of which is te be taken daily on ten con¬ 
secutive days. A prescription, practically identical, occurs in Susruta’s 
Sutrasthana, Chapt. 44, slokas 50, 51 (p. 166, and transl. p. 211). The 
number of ingredients differs, but the principal ingredients are the same, 
and the number of pills and days is also the same. Moreover the place in 
the system where the prescription is introduced has some similarity. 1 
have not been able to discover this particular prescription in the Charaka, 
though perhaps it may be found in it. 
With regard to the Charaka I have noticed the following coinci- 
dences. In verses 121 and 122 there is a prescription against cough. The 
first portion of this prescription exhibits a very close resemblance to 
the first portion of a prescription occurring in the Chikitsita Sthana of 
the Charaka, in its 20th chapter which deals with the treatment of 
cough. It is at the bottom of page 735. I have not found this prescrip¬ 
tion in the Susruta. Another coincidence occurs in verse 66. Here we 
have the direction that a certain medicine “ should not be adminis¬ 
tered to any one who has no sou nor disciple, nor should it be given to 
an enemy of the king, nor to any other sinful liver.” A very similar 
direction occurs in the Charaka, in the 8th chapter of the Vimana Sthana 
(p. 296) :f “ medicines should never be administered to the king’s 
* Also Dallana Mishra’s Commentary, the Nibandha Sangraha, published by 
Jivananda Yidyasagara. 
f Also quoted by Prof, von Roth in Journal, German Oriental Society, Vol. 
XXVI, p. 418. 
