286 
G. Tliibaiit —Vardha Mihiras Fancliasiddhdntihd. [No. 2. 
do, as is well-known, not speak of revolutions of the moon’s anomaly 
but of revolutions of the uchcha, i. e., the apogee or the apsis, while the 
Greeks combined the motion of the apogee and that of the moon herself 
in the so-called restitution of the anomaly (dTroKaTacrracrts dvco/xaXttts) 
which corresponds to the modern anomalistic month and which we here 
meet with in the Romaka as the revolution of the kendra. I am aware 
that Hindu Astronomers occasionally calculate the position of the kendra 
in the same way, i. e., without having recourse to the separate revolutions 
of the uchcha, and moreover it might be said that Varaha Mihira who 
reproduces the systems of his predecessors in a greatly condensed shape 
may have modified the rules of the Romaka Siddhanta in this special 
point, merely aiming at giving rules the results of which would be 
identical or nearly identical with those of the Romaka. But against 
this it is to be urged that in the next following chapter which treats of 
the calculation of eclipses according to the Surya Siddhanta we meet 
with a rule for calculating the place of the uchcha which exactly agrees 
with the Surya Siddhanta as known to us, and that therefore Varaha 
Mihira who faitlifully reports the doctrine of one Siddhanta regarding 
this particular point may be expected to have done the same with regard 
to the other. Remembering therefore that in other points also, as shown 
above, the Romaka Siddhanta evinces more unmistakeable traces of 
Greek influence than the remainder of the Siddhantas, we shall most 
probably not err in considering its peculiar method of calculating the 
moon’s mean anomaly as due to Greek models, while on the other hand 
the employment of separate revolutions of the uchcha as exhibited in 
the Surya Siddhanta, etc. has to be viewed as an Indian innovation. 
The rates of mean motion of the moon and her uchcha can of 
course be deduced from the rules extracted and translated in the above ; 
they are, however, specially stated in another verse of the same chapter : 
“ The (mean daily) motion of the moon is 790 (minutes) ; of the 
moon’s anomaly 784 (minutes).” 
These are of course mere “ sthula ” values, of sufficient accuracy, 
however, for ordinary purposes. 
The value of the anomalistic month which results from Hipparchus’s 
lunisolar periods is 27*^ 13^^ 18' 34‘7". The small difference between this 
value and the one adopted by the author of the Romaka Siddhanta may 
be owing to the latter’s wish to establish a not over long period con¬ 
taining integral numbers of revolutions of the kendra and of civil days. 
We finally have to consider a verse which contains the rule for 
calculating the mean place of the moon’s node. The latter part of the 
text of the verse is very corrupt : 
