CHAPTER II.
Biographical sources—English and French authorities—Baron Hügel’s data examined—First news of Csoma in India—His appearance at the frontier—Detained at Sabathú—Csoma’s first letter to Captain Kennedy—Moorcroft’s introduction.
We have two main sources on which to rely for data referring to the details of our traveller’s career, after he started for the East, apart from what he wrote himself on the subject.
The first source of information comprises the notices published by his English friends and by Monsieur Pavie in the “Revue des deux Mondes” for 1849. The most important among them is doubtless that, which we owe to Dr. Horace Hayman Wilson. It appeared in the “Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society” in 1834, and consists of an abridgment of the letter which Csoma addressed to Captain Kennedy in January 1825. This communication was frequently cited by his own countrymen as the earliest authentic source of information from India, concerning the Tibetan scholar, and has again recently been noticed (conjointly with Dr. Archibald Campbell’s report of 1842) in one of the leading weekly journals, “The Vasárnapi Ujság” of Budapest, when reviewing Mr. Ralston’s “Tibetan Tales.”[1] The preface of this book contains a letter from the celebrated orientalist, Professor Arminius Vámbéry, dated 20th February 1882, addressed to that author, to which we shall have occasion to refer at a later period. [[16]]
With regard to Dr. Wilson’s above-quoted article in the “Royal Asiatic Society’s Journal,” Dr. Archibald Campbell wrote in 1843 as follows:—
“The autobiographical sketch of the deceased which appeared in the ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society’ many years ago, was corrected by the subject of it shortly before his death. The number of the journal containing the sketch, with the author’s manuscript corrections, was made over to me, according to the intentions of the deceased, as expressed previous to his illness.” The volume referred to, we regret to say, is no longer available, but we shall give the original letter of Csoma, from which that sketch was compiled, without abbreviations.
The second source of information is of a more recent date, and originates from the celebrated Austrian traveller, Baron Charles Hügel, who, starting from Calcutta for Mussurie, arrived at the latter place on the 21st of June 1835. On the 25th of September the Baron visited Simla, where, on the 6th of the following month, the Maharajah Ranjit Singh’s permission to travel in the Panjab reached him. We find that a reference is made on three different occasions to the Tibetan scholar, in connection with Baron Hügel’s name, from which it appears, that Csoma and the Baron were in Calcutta at the same time; but we have no record stating how often they met, if at all. Hügel mentions Csoma’s name twice in his book which he wrote on Kashmir, and we also find the Baron’s name appear in a speech on Csoma, delivered by Baron Eötvös before the Scientific Society of Hungary, in Pest, in 1843. Judging from these it seems, that Hügel possessed but a very imperfect knowledge of Csoma’s life, circumstances and labours; and owing to the erroneous and imperfect information furnished by Baron Hügel, mistaken conclusions have been arrived at regarding Csoma. For the sake of the latter’s memory, therefore, we propose to examine those records as they are presented to us, hoping for the reader’s indulgence, if we [[17]]appear to dwell longer on this particular subject than would otherwise seem to be necessary. We shall quote Baron Hügel’s data seriatim.[2]
First, in the original German edition of his book, published at Stuttgart, 1848, part ii. p. 165, that author writes as follows:—
“Czoma de Körös, a Transylvanian, who spent eleven years in a Buddhist monastery, in the province of Kanaur, in the Himalaya, with the view of learning Tibetan, in which he perfectly succeeded. But when, later, he arrived in Calcutta, and then became aware that he had studied a dialect only (untergeordnete Sprache), he afterwards devoted himself to its primary source (Ursprache), the Sanskrit.” (!!)
Secondly, the following quotation from Baron Eötvös’s speech contains the second allegation made by Baron Hügel:—
“After finishing these works (the Tibetan Grammar and Dictionary), in order to publish them, and also that he might consult other savants, Csoma left at last his sombre abode in the Monastery, and commenced his journey to Calcutta via Simla and Sabathú. This is the period,” remarks Eötvös, “from which I have some more details of information of our Fellow; although scanty still, the perfect authenticity thereof is guaranteed by the celebrated traveller, Baron Charles Hügel, who, having travelled in India, was well acquainted with Csoma, and has been kind enough to communicate these data to me.”
Eötvös goes on to explain how Csoma, on his first arrival in British India, was detained at Sabathú, but afterwards received permission to continue his travels; that the “Governor had put him up in his own house, and at his host’s request, Csoma discarded the Indian dress he wore, and appeared instead in the costume of his native country, namely, with Hungarian trousers, waistcoat, and a tailcoat, [[18]]which costume he wore at Sabathú, and ever afterwards, the hot Indian sun notwithstanding.”
Eötvös continues to communicate other details on the strength of his information, and concludes:
“A great trial, however, was in store for Csoma in his new sphere of action at Calcutta. After having communicated the result of his labours to others, and heard from them that the Tibetan language, to the study of which he had sacrificed the best part of his life, was but a corrupt dialect of the Sanskrit, his heart was filled with undescribable anguish, and the strong man, who suffered so many privations cheerfully and without complaining, was prostrated on a bed of sickness by this new discovery.”
It will be our duty to show that these allegations have no foundation whatever in fact. The same must be said of what we read further on in Eötvös’s speech, namely, “that Csoma had prepared his extracts from Tibetan works in Latin.”
Baron Hügel, we know, was in Calcutta in 1835. Csoma’s Dictionary and Grammar were published in 1834; if, therefore, Baron Hügel had thought of it, he might easily have gathered correct information regarding the progress of Oriental literature. Csoma’s merits were then fully acknowledged by the Government and by the learned world.
The statement that Csoma spent eleven years in a Buddhistic monastery at Kanaur is quite inaccurate, as appears from the following data:—
In the monastery at Yangla in Zanskar, Csoma lived from 20th June 1823 to 22d October 1824.
In the monastery at Pukdal or Pukhtar, also in Zanskar, he remained from 12th August 1825 to November 1826.
At Kanum, in Upper Besarh, also written Bussahir, Besahir, from August 1827 to October 1830.
It is also an error to say that Tibetan is a subordinate dialect of Sanskrit. It belongs to the Chinese group of languages. This has been pointed out already by Giorgi, [[19]]about the middle of the last century, in his work the “Alphabetum Tibetanum,”[3] and this was precisely the book which Moorcroft gave into the hands of the Hungarian traveller in 1823, from which Csoma obtained his first glimpses of that language.
Csoma arrived in Calcutta at the end of April 1831. In his letter to Captain Kennedy, which will be found further on, dated 25th January 1825, para. 17, we find in regard to the Tibetan works and literature the following remark: “They ALL are taken from Indian Sanskrit, and were translated into Tibetan.” This disposes of the charge against Csoma and his alleged ignorance as to the linguistic relationship between Tibetan and Sanskrit, the discovery of which, eight years later, is said to have caused him a “dangerous illness in Calcutta.”
The mere mention of Csoma’s dressing himself up at Sabathú, at the “Governor’s” request, in his national costume, will elicit a smile, and we may well ask how a poor wanderer through the immense distances of Central Asia and Tibet was able to carry with him on a journey, already of five years’ duration, his Hungarian costume, in which to appear on festive occasions?
But on the matter of Csoma’s dress we have the following statements:—
In the oft-quoted letter to Captain Kennedy, para. 7, he writes, “From Teheran I travelled as an Armenian” (in 1821). Moorcroft, in his Diary, edited by Dr. Wilson, mentions on the 16th July 1823, “On my journey to Dras, I was met by Alexander Csoma de Körös, an European, in the garb of an Armenian, who had travelled from Hungary to Tibet.” Dr. Gerard, writing from Kanum in September 1829, says, “Csoma is poor and humbly clad, and dresses in the coarse blanket of the country.” See also letter from Captain Stacy to Dr. Wilson, dated 3d August 1829. In Dr. Campbell’s report on Csoma’s [[20]]death, we read that he had “a suit of blue clothes, which he always wore, and in which he died.” Dr. Malan writes as follows, dated 8th December 1883: “I remember Csoma’s dress quite well. I never saw him in his best (if he had one), but I always met him in the Library of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, of which I was Secretary during my stay in Calcutta. He wore a jacket very much like a loose shooting-jacket with outside pockets, of the common blue cotton cloth of India; he wore a waistcoat of figured red, brown, black, or yellow stuff of Indian manufacture, and trousers of a kind of light-brown stuff, cotton stockings, and shoes.”
This disposes of the question of Csoma’s dress.
Now as regards his studies. The reason which induced Csoma to devote his best talents for so many years to Tibetan will become evident in due course, but it was certainly not the mistaken fancy attributed to him of having discovered a resemblance between it and the Magyar tongue.
Thirdly, we have the statement contained in Part II. of Baron Hügel’s work, p. 165, where we find Csoma’s name mentioned in a foot-note. Hügel calls him there his “friend;” but if we understand the Baron rightly, his remark will be taken rather as a reproach against Csoma for not furnishing the Baron with information regarding the names of the two Tibetan mountains Mer and Ser, which Csoma, always ready to impart all he knew, must have found himself unable to supply.
There is an incident described in Baron Hügel’s work (vol. i. p. 303) which appears to us strange. It refers to the occurrence of the 18th of November 1835, when the Baron was at Srinaggur and met two Englishmen there. The Baron writes thus:—
“I proposed to my English friends that we should erect something like a monument in memory of the travellers who preceded us in Kashmir.… The following inscription was proposed by me:—
“ ‘Three travellers in Kashmir, the Baron Charles [[21]]Hügel, T. G. Vigne, and Dr. Henderson, have caused the names of all the travellers who preceded them in Kashmir to be engraved on this black stone, namely, Bernier, 1663; Forster, 1786; Moorcroft, Trebeck, Guthrie, 1823; Victor Jacquemont, 1831; Joseph Wolff, 1832.’ ”
Csoma’s name is not mentioned here; yet we have proofs that Csoma travelled in and through Kashmir on three different occasions before Hügel: first, immediately after he overcame the dangerous route through Central Asia and Afghanistan to the Punjab, namely, in 1822, in April and May; and again, on returning from Leh in July; and, for the third time, in the winter of 1822–23. Csoma reports in the letter to Captain Kennedy (para. 12), “I left Kashmir on the 2d May 1823, after I had passed five months and six days with Mr. Moorcroft.”
These details give an account of Csoma’s travels in 1822 and 1823, showing that he spent very much more time in Kashmir than the Baron ever did, who devoted three months only to his journey in that country, twelve years after Csoma. Yet Csoma’s name does not appear in Baron Hügel’s list. We bring this forward for no other reason but that of adding another proof of the defective nature of Baron Hügel’s data.
We have, therefore, been compelled to treat with suspicion the statements made by this author, there being much evidence to show that they are not made with the necessary exactitude. Corroborated statements, which happen to be found in the Baron’s notices of Csoma, including those contained in the Spicker’sche Zeitung, cited by the “Chronick der gebildeten Welt,” Band. III. (Carlsruhe, 1842), have been taken from the original English, and probably also French sources, by which alone we have been guided in this part of the biography.
Critics do not omit to mention, that Csoma was quite ignorant of Sanskrit whilst engaged in his Tibetan studies. It is quite true that when, in 1822, he travelled through Kashmir, and reached Leh, intending to penetrate by way [[22]]of Yarkand to the borders of China, and there to become acquainted with the Mongolian languages, he thought that these latter would serve his purpose better than any other. He certainly was not then a master of Sanskrit, his original or final aim of research not being India, but China, especially Mongolia. But when he seriously commenced the study of Tibetan, and had also come across numerous elementary Sanskrit and Tibetan works, of which we find special mention in his writings, can it be reasonably supposed, that the ever-eager and indefatigable student, would have neglected such opportunities as presented themselves to him, and have remained entirely ignorant of the Sanskrit language for so many years, which, as he tells us at the outset of his new study, was the basis of all Tibetan learning? So far from this being the case, his letters to Captain Kennedy furnish ample proofs to the contrary. For instance, in his second letter to Captain Kennedy, para. 12, we read as follows:—“Besides the vocabulary which I have now by me, … I have another large collection of words in Sanskrit and Tibetan.” This clearly establishes our surmise, that long before 1825 Csoma devoted serious attention to Sanskrit; indeed, how otherwise could he have written his report of 1825 to Government, through Captain Kennedy?
Csoma’s principal trait of character was his regrettable diffidence—almost, we might say, an overstrained vaunting of ignorance—and his own too modest estimate of himself. This has often served as justification for disparaging his unique accomplishments. Of this, Prinsep, Gerard, and Campbell bear frequent testimony; and even Henry Torrens, who knew him less than those just mentioned, notices that “Csoma’s exceeding diffidence, on subjects on which he might have dictated to the learned world of Europe and Asia, was the most surprising trait in him.”[4] Under these circumstances, to avoid misunderstanding [[23]]and to correct false impressions which have prevailed, it seems necessary that, instead of mere extracts, we should lay before our readers some of the correspondence and other documents without curtailment.
In November 1824, our traveller appeared on the north-west frontier of the British possessions, and reported his arrival to Captain Kennedy, the commanding officer at Sabathú. The correspondence which passed at that time between the authorities and the traveller is of much interest.
Captain Kennedy wrote to the Assistant Political Agent at Umbála, on the 28th of November, reporting that “an European traveller, who gives his name as Alexander Csoma de Körös, a subject of Hungary, has arrived at this post. He is particularly introduced to my notice by Mr. Moorcroft, whose letter I herewith enclose. Mr. Csoma de Körös remains here at present, and waits the arrival of a Lama, whom he expects in a few days, to proceed with him towards Tibet. I request your instructions regarding this gentleman’s movements.”
To this the following answer was received the next day:—
“Be good enough to detain the European traveller at Sabathú until instructions of the agent to the Governor-General at Delhi can be received regarding him.”
From the following it will appear that Lord Amherst gave orders that Csoma be requested to give a complete account of himself and of his plans, and to submit the same through Captain Kennedy.
Csoma’s letter, dated Sabathú, 28th January 1825, will be found below; it is the same as that which, in an abridged form and in a different shape, was published in the first number of the “Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of London” in 1834, to which allusion has already been made: [[24]]
“To Captain C. P. Kennedy, Assistant Political Agent and Commanding Subathoo.
“Sir,—I beg leave to acknowledge your communication of the Secretary to Government’s answer to your letter reporting my arrival at Subathoo, through the Governor-General’s agent at Delhi, dated Fort William, 24th December 1824; and since, by the Government’s order, it is required from me to give in writing a full and intelligible account of my history and past proceedings, and of my objects and plans for the future, as also of the length to which I propose to carry my Travels and Researches, I have the honour to state, for the information of the Governor-General of India, as follows:—
2. “I am a native of the Siculian[5] nation (a tribe of those Hungarians who settled in ancient Dacia in the fourth century of the Christian era) in the great principality of Transylvania, subject to his Majesty the Emperor of Austria.
3. “Having finished my philological and theological studies in the Bethlen College at N. Enyed in the course of three years, from 1st August 1815 to 5th September 1818, I visited Germany, and by his Imperial Majesty’s permission, at the University of Göttingen in Hanover, I frequented several lectures from 11th April 1816 to the last of July 1818; and on my request to the Government of Hanover, I was also for one year favoured there with Libera mensa regia.
4. “As in Transylvania there are no Sclavonick people, and the learned men of that country are generally unacquainted with that language, although it would be necessary for consulting Sclavonian authors on the ancient history of the Hungarians that are surrounded from all parts by nations of Sclavonick extraction—after being acquainted with several ancient and modern languages, I was desirous to learn the Sclavonick also. For this purpose, after my return from Germany, I went to Temeswár, [[25]]in Lower Hungary; where, from 20th February to 1st November 1819, I was occupied with this language, making also a journey to Agram, in Croatia, for the acquirement of the different dialects.
5. “Among other liberal disciplines, my favourite studies were philology, geography, and history. Although my ecclesiastical studies had prepared me for an honourable employment in my native country, yet my inclinations for the studies mentioned above, induced me to seek for a wider field for their further cultivation. As my parents were dead, and my only brother did not want my assistance, I resolved to leave my native country and to come towards the East, and by some means or other procuring subsistence, to devote my whole life to researches which may be afterwards useful to the learned world of Europe in general, and, in particular, may illustrate some obscure facts in our own history. But as I could not hope to obtain, for this purpose, an Imperial passport, I did also not beg for it. I took a printed Hungarian passport at N. Enyed to come on some pretended business to Bucharest, in Wallachia, and having caused it to be signed by the General Commandant in Hermanstadt, in the last days of November 1819, passing the frontier mountains, entered Wallachia. My intention in going to Bucharest was, after some acquaintance with the Turkish language, to proceed to Constantinople. There was no opportunity for my instruction, nor could I procure any mode, to go directly to Constantinople, therefore:
6. “The 1st of January, 1820, I left Bucharest, and on the 3d, passing the Danube by Rustchuk, I travelled with some Bulgarians, who having brought cotton from Macedonia to that place, returned with unladen horses. After travelling for eight days in rapid marches, we reached Sophia, the capital of Bulgaria, whence, with other Bulgarians, I came in five days to Philippopolis, in Roumelia, or Thrace. I wished now to proceed by Adrianople to Constantinople, but the plague in that place forced me to [[26]]descend to Enos, on the coast of the Archipelago. Leaving that place on the 7th of February, I passed in a Greek ship by Chios and Rhodes, and on the last day of February I arrived at Alexandria, in Egypt. My plan was to stop for a certain time either at Alexandria or in Cairo, and to improve myself in the Arabic, with which I was already acquainted in Europe, but on a sudden eruption of the plague I left Egypt, and proceeding on a Syrian ship I came to Larnica, in Cyprus, thence to Sidon, Beyruth, and then, on another vessel, to Tripoli and Latakia, whence, travelling on foot, on the 13th of April I reached Aleppo in Syria. I left that place on the 19th of May, and travelling with various caravans in a simple Asiatic dress, on foot, by Orfa, Merdin, and Mosul, whence by water on a raft. On the 22d July I reached Baghdad. Thence, in August, I addressed a letter, written in Latin, to Mr. Rich, the English resident, who was at that time in Kurdistan, about eight days’ journey from Baghdad, giving him intelligence of my arrival and design, and begging his protection. His secretary, Mr. Bellino, assisted me with a dress and with some money, through his friend, Mr. Swoboda, a native of Hungary, with whom I was then lodging, and to whom I was recommended from Aleppo. I left Baghdad on 4th September, and travelling in European costume, on horseback, with a caravan, passing by Kermanshah (where, in the service of Mahomed Ali Mirza, the eldest son of Fateh Ali Shah, king of Persia, were several European military officers), by Hamadan, on 14th October 1820, I arrived at Teheran, the present capital of Persia.
7. “On my arrival I found no Europeans in Teheran, but in the English residence a Persian servant received me with kindness, gave me lodging and some other things that I required. On the 3d of November 1820, in a letter, written in English, addressed to Mr., afterwards Sir Henry Willock, on his return from Tauris, or Tebriz, I represented to him my situation, and acquainted him with my circumstances and intentions. I begged him also for assistance. I am infinitely [[27]]indebted to Messrs. Henry and George Willock for their kind reception and generosity at my departure (and to them I beg to refer for my character). Through their complaisance I sojourned four months in the capital of Persia, became acquainted grammatically with the Persian, improved myself a little in English, perused several treatises for my purpose, examined many ancient silver coins of the Parthian dynasty. When I left Teheran I left also the European dress, and took the Persian. I deposited there all my books and papers, among others, my testimonial from the University of Göttingen, my passport from Transylvania, and a certificate in Sclavonick on my progress in that language. I gave also to those gentlemen a letter written in Hungarian, addressed to N. Enyed, in Transylvania, for Mr. Joseph Kováts, Professor of Mathematics and Physics, with my humblest request, in case I should die or perish on my road to Bokhara, to be transmitted. Mr. Willock favoured me with Johnson’s Dictionary in miniature, and I travelled hereafter as an Armenian.
8. “The 1st of March 1821, I bid adieu to my noble benefactors, and the 18th of April arrived at Meshed, in Khorassan. On account of warlike disturbances in the neighbouring countries, it was the 20th of October ere I could leave that place to proceed in safety, and on the 18th of November I reached safely Bokhara, but, affrighted by frequent exaggerated reports of the approach of a numerous Russian army, after a residence of five days I left Bokhara, where I intended to pass the winter, and with a caravan I came to Balk, Kulm, and thence by Bamian; on 6th of January, 1822, I arrived at Kabool.
9. “As that was not a place for my purpose, and being informed by the Armenians that two European gentlemen were with Mahomed Azim Khan, between Kabool and Peshawur, and in the same time finding an opportunity to travel securely with a caravan, I left Kabool 19th January, and came towards Peshawur. At Daka, the 26th January, I met two French gentlemen, Messrs. Allard and Ventura, [[28]]whom afterwards I accompanied to Lahore, because it was not the proper season to go to Kashmir and to cross the mountains into Tibet. We arrived at Lahore the 11th of March 1822, and on the 23d of the same I left it, and going by Amritsir, Jamoo, I reached Kashmir the 17th of April, where I stopped, waiting for proper season and companions, till 9th May; when leaving that place, and travelling with four other persons, on the 9th June I arrived at Leh, the capital of Ladak; but I ascertained the road to go to Yarkand was very difficult, expensive, and dangerous for a Christian. After a sojourn of twenty-five days I resolved to return to Lahore.
10. “I was, on my return, near the frontier of Cashmere when, on the 16th of July 1822, I was agreeably surprised to find Mr. Moorcroft at Himbabs. He was alone. I acquainted him with all my circumstances and designs, and by his permission remained with him. I accompanied him on his return to Leh, where we arrived on the 26th August. In September, after Mr. Trebeck’s arrival from Piti, Mr. Moorcroft gave me to peruse the large volume of the Alphabetum Tibetanum, wherein I found much respecting Tibet and the Tibetan literature, and being desirous to be acquainted with the structure of that curious tongue, at the departure of Mr. Moorcroft from Leh to proceed to Cashmere, in the last days of September, I begged leave to remain with Mr. Trebeck, who obtained for me the conversation and instruction of an intelligent person, who was well acquainted with the Tibetan and Persian languages; and by this medium I obtained considerable insight in the Tibetan.
11. “At Mr. Moorcroft’s request, before his departure from Leh, I translated into Latin a letter written in Russian characters and language, procured by Meer Izzut Oollah of Delhi, the companion of Mr. Moorcroft, dated Petersburgh, 17th January 1820, and addressed to the chief prince of the Panjab (Runjeet Singh), which, as Mr. Moorcroft informed me after his arrival at Kashmir, he sent to Calcutta.” [[29]]
N.B.—This was the letter of Count Nesselrode; sent through the Russian Emissary, Aga Mahdi Rafael.
12. “During the winter in Kashmir, after my return with Mr. Trebeck, considering what I had read and learned on the Tibetan language, I became desirous to apply myself, if assisted to it, to learn it grammatically, so as to penetrate into the contents of those numerous and highly interesting volumes which are to be found in every large monastery. I communicated my ideas respecting this matter to Mr. Moorcroft, who, after a mature consideration, gave me his approbation, favoured me with money for my necessary subsistence, and permitted me to return to Ladak; nay, he recommended me to the chief officer at Leh, and to the Lama of Yangla, in Zanskar. Being prepared for the journey, I left Kashmir on the 2d May 1823, after I had passed five months and six days with Mr. Moorcroft.
13. “After my return to Ladak I arrived at Leh on the 1st of June 1823, delivered Mr. Moorcroft’s and Meer Izzut Oollah’s letters and presents to the Khalon. This Prime Minister recommended me in a letter to the Lama of Yangla; gave me a passport, and favoured me with about eight pounds of tea. From Leh, travelling in a south-westerly direction, on the ninth day I arrived at Yangla, and from 20th June 1823 to 22d October 1824 I sojourned in Zanskar (the most south-western province of Ladak), where I applied myself to the Tibetan literature, assisted by the Lama.
14. “During my residence in Zanskar, by the able assistance of that intelligent man, I learned grammatically the language, and became acquainted with many literary treasures shut up in 320 large printed volumes, which are the basis of all Tibetan learning and religion. These volumes, divided in two classes, and each class containing other subdivisions, are all taken from Indian Sanskrit, and were translated into Tibetan. I caused to be copied the contents of these immense works and [[30]]treatises in the same order as they stand in the printed indexes. Each work or treatise begins with the title in Sanskrit and Tibetan, and ends with the names of the author, translators, and place wherein the author has written or the translation was performed. As there are several collections of Sanskrit and Tibetan words among my other Tibetan writings, I brought with me a copy of the largest, taken out of one of the above-mentioned volumes, consisting of 154 leaves, every page of six lines.
15. “As I could not remain longer in that country with advantage to myself I left it, having agreed with the Lama to pass the winter, 1824–25, with him at Sultanpore, in Coolloo[6] (whereto his relations, also the wives of two chiefs of Lahool, commonly descend for every winter, and whom he was desirous to visit there), and to arrange the collected materials for a vocabulary in Tibetan and English. The Lama was detained by some business, and prevented for some days leaving Zanskar.
16. “As the winter was daily approaching, by his counsel I continued my march to pass the snowy mountains before the passage would be obstructed by the fall of any heavy snow. I arrived at Sultanpore, in Coolloo, without any danger, and from thence, passing to Mendee, Suketee, Belaspore, on the 26th of November of the last year I reached Subathoo. On my arrival I expected the Lama would follow me in about ten days. He came not, and at present I have no hope he will join me, as the pass in the Himalaya is now closed against him.
17. “At my first entrance to the British Indian territory I was fully persuaded that I should be received as a friend by the Government, because I supposed that my name, my purpose, and my engagement for searching after Tibetan literature, were well known in consequence of Mr. Moorcroft’s introductions, to whom, before my return to Tibet in the last half of April 1823, when I was in Cashmere, on his writing and recommending me to the secretary [[31]]of the Asiatic Society in Calcutta, and requesting him also to forward me some compendious works on the stated subjects, I promised by my hand-writing in the same letter, which I beg to refer to, that I would stand faithful to my engagements, to study and to be diligent in my researches.
18. “I think I have given, as it was required from me, an intelligible account of my history and past proceedings. For the future, as also the length to which I propose to carry my travels and researches, I beg leave to add, the civilised and learned world is indebted to Great Britain in many respects for useful discoveries, inventions, and improvements in arts and sciences. There is yet in Asia a vast terra incognita for oriental literature. If the Asiatic Society in Calcutta would engage for the illuminating the map of this terra incognita, as in the last four years of my travelling in Asia I depended for my necessary subsistence entirely upon British generosity, I shall be happy if I can serve that honourable Society with the first sketches of my researches. If this should not meet with the approbation of Government, I beg to be allowed to return to Mr. Moorcroft, to whose liberality and kindness I am at present entirely indebted for my subsistence; or, if it pleases the Governor-General of India, that I shall be permitted to remain under your protection until my patron’s return from his present tour to Bokhara.
19. “After my arrival at this place, notwithstanding the kind reception and civil treatment with which I was honoured, I passed my time, although in much doubt as to a favourable answer from Government to your report, yet with great tranquillity, till 23d inst., when, on your communication of the Government’s resolution on the report of my arrival, I was deeply affected, and not little troubled in mind, fearing that I was likely to be frustrated in my expectations. However, recollecting myself, I have arranged my ideas as well as my knowledge of the English language will admit, and I humbly beseech you to receive these sincere accounts of my circumstances, and if you [[32]]will be pleased to forward them for the better information’s sake and satisfaction of His Excellency the Governor-General in Council, and with my humblest acknowledgments for his lordship’s regard respecting the manner in which I should be treated.
20. “I beg leave for my tardiness in writing, for the rudeness of my characters, and for my unpolite expressions, if sometimes I used not the proper terms.—I have, &c.
(Sd.) “Alexander Csoma de Körös.
“Subathoo, 28th January 1825.”
From the above we gather that our traveller started from Transylvania on November 1, 1819, and at the end of that month crossed the frontier into Wallachia, the present Roumania, and reached Bucharest.
1820, on the 1st of January, he left that capital, and on the
3d of January, crossed the Danube into Macedonia.
11th January, he arrived at Sophia.
16th January, he reached Philippopolis, and thence proceeded to Enos.
February 7th. Left Enos in a Greek ship, and sailing by Chios and Rhodes, on
February 28th, he arrived at Alexandria, in Egypt.
In March, he took passage in a Syrian ship to Cyprus, thence to Sidon and Beyrut, and thence on another raft by way of Tripolis he arrived in Latakia.
In April, at the beginning, he left on foot for Aleppo, where he arrived on the 13th of that month.
On May 19th, he left Aleppo, again on foot, and travelled by way of Orfa, Mardin, Mosul, arriving on July 22d at Baghdad.
September 4th, he left Baghdad, travelling on horseback through Kermanshah and Hamadan, reaching on
October 14th Teheran.
1821, March 1st, left Teheran, and arrived April 18th [[33]]at Meshed, in Khorassan, whence, owing to rumours of war, he started on October 20th, and reached Bokhara on November 18th.
November 23d, he left Bokhara, and, travelling viâ Balkh, Kulum, and the Bamian Pass, arrived
1822, January 6th, at Kabul, the capital of Afghanistan.
January 19th, he left Kabul.
January 20th, at Daka, met Generals Allard and Ventura, French officers in the service of Ranjit Singh.
March 12th, he arrived at Lahore.
March 23d, he started viâ Amritsir and Jamu, and on April 14th arrived at Kashmir.
May 19th, he left Kashmir, and on June 9th arrived at Leh, the capital of Ladak.
July 3d, he left Leh on a return journey to Kashmir.
On July 16th, he met Mr. Moorcroft on the banks of the river Himbabs, in the Dras Valley, and retraced his steps towards Leh with Mr. Moorcroft.
On August 26th, he reached Leh a second time. At the end of September Moorcroft returned to Kashmir, and Csoma remained at Leh with Mr. Trebeck, whom he afterwards accompanied to Srinaggur, where they arrived on November 26th, and Csoma joined Moorcroft and remained with him for five months and six days.
1823, May 22d, he took leave of Moorcroft in Kashmir, and on June 1st he arrived at Leh for the third time.
June 17th, he left Leh, and
On June 26th, he arrived at the Monastery of Yangla, in the province of Zanskar, where he spent sixteen months. This is the place where, as we shall find more fully described later on, Csoma laid the foundation of his acquaintance with the language and literature of Tibet; it was here that he resided, being confined (with the Lama, his teacher, and an attendant) to an apartment nine feet square. For more than four months they were precluded from stirring out by the state of the weather. Here he read from morning till night, sitting enveloped in a sheep-skin [[34]]cloak, with his arms folded, and without a fire. After dark he was without a light; the ground forming his bed, and the walls of the building his protection against the rigours of the climate. He was exposed here to “privations such as have been seldom endured” without complaining.
1824, October 22d, he left Yangla, and on November 20th arrived at Sabathú.
If we glance at the map we shall find that Csoma’s route was the same which, forty-two years later, was followed as far as Bokhara by his famous and enterprising countryman, Arminius Vámbéry. Csoma left no record of the hardships which he necessarily had to overcome in Central Asia; but if we scan the interesting pages of Vámbéry’s autobiography, we may surmise in some degree what sufferings, dangers, and hairbreadth escapes were the accompaniments of travelling in those inhospitable regions. Csoma’s lamentable reticence on the subject of his exploits and of what he experienced, deprives his biography of much that would have been most attractive. The still available correspondence, and the casual remarks of his friends and admirers, give us sufficient information as to the character of the man; but the full details, which otherwise make up the charm of the story of a life like his, are lost, and can never be made good.
In his letter to the political agent at Umbála, dated the 28th of November, quoted above, we find Captain Kennedy stating that a special introduction was brought by Csoma from Mr. Moorcroft. That letter was forwarded to the Government, and is dated Kashmir, the 21st of April 1823. This letter is worthy of being preserved, if only as a memento of the ill-fated writer. Mr. Moorcroft writes thus:—
“To the Commandant at Sabathú.
“Sir,—The object of this address is to bespeak your good offices for Mr. Alexander Csoma, or Sekunder Beg, of Transylvania, whom I now take the liberty to introduce. [[35]]
“2. I have known this gentleman for five months most intimately, and can give the strongest testimony to his integrity, prudence, and devotedness to the cause of science, which, if fully explained, might, in the opinion of many, be conceived to border on enthusiasm.
“3. As well in pursuance of original plans of his own for the development of some obscure points of Asiatic and of European history, as of some suggestions stated by me, Mr. Csoma will endeavour to remain in Tibet until he shall have become master of the language of that country, and be completely acquainted with the subjects its literature contains, which is likely, on many accounts, to prove interesting to the European world.
“4. Although no substantial grounds exist for suspecting that he will not succeed in accomplishing the object above stated, the recent date of European intercourse with the country of Ladakh may justify the adoption of substituting other measures, should the result of the plans contemplated not meet the present sanguine expectations of success.
“5. If, therefore, events should arise to prevent Mr. Csoma continuing in Ladakh until he may have effected the matter alluded to, I beg leave respectfully to request that you will so far oblige me as to afford him such assistance as may be required to facilitate the prosecution of his studies, along with some well-informed Lama in the northern part of Besarh, as the Superior of the Gompa or Monastery of Palso, near Leh.
“6. It is possible that the contingency of my death, or of delay of the present expedition beyond a certain period mentioned to Mr. Csoma, may induce the Government to desire him to proceed to Calcutta, in which case I shall feel myself personally obliged if you will be kind enough to furnish him with two hundred rupees, to meet which I now enclose my draft at sight on my agents at Calcutta.”
This letter furnishes very important information in [[36]]respect to circumstances which matured into a formal compact between these two travellers. Csoma makes mention of the first meeting between them in his letter to Captain Kennedy (para. 10). Mr. Moorcroft refers to it in his journal, and adds,[7] “Csoma remained with me some time, and after I had quitted Ladakh, I obtained permission from the Khalon for him to reside in the Monastery of Yangla, in Zanskar, for the purpose of acquiring a knowledge of the Tibetan language,” &c.
The two preceding letters settle, therefore, those points regarding which so much uncertainty and so many mistaken ideas have prevailed.
We know now that Csoma’s original plan “for the development of some obscure points of Asiatic and European history,” conceived in Hungary, was to proceed through the northern regions of Central Asia, as Hegedüs pointedly remarks, towards the “borders of the Chinese Empire and towards Mongolia;” and we can trace his steps from Persia to Khorassan and Bokhara, through Balkh, Kulm, Bamian, across the Hindu Kush, in that direction, till he reached Kabul on the 6th of January 1822. Thence, viâ Lahore, he travelled into Kashmir, where he arrived on the 14th of April. The journey towards China led viâ Turkestan, and he travelled as far as Leh on his way thither; but having ascertained, when at Leh, that the road to Yarkand was “very difficult, expensive, and very dangerous for a Christian,” as he did not attempt to travel in disguise, he resolved to return towards Lahore. On this journey he met Moorcroft, who entertained him hospitably, and lent him Giorgi’s “Alphabetum Tibetanum.” This book Csoma studied through, and was thus induced to propose to Moorcroft that he would thoroughly master that language, if, during his studies, his daily wants could be provided for. The supposed reason, therefore, that Csoma devoted himself to Tibetan merely because he had observed a similarity between the Magyar [[37]]and the Tibetan languages, is not supported by any proofs. At the time we speak of, the British power was feeling its way slowly and extending its influence towards Central Asia: doubtless the Government officers on the frontier perceived the advantages that could be gained by a thorough acquaintance with the language of Tibet, which then indeed was a real terra incognita to Europeans. Dr. H. H. Wilson points out clearly this aim when he says: “To establish an accurate knowledge of the nations around us, and to promote a friendly intercourse with them. This will not only promote the commercial and political prosperity of Great Britain and her Indian possessions, but may effect the still more important end of teaching to yet semi-barbarous tribes the advantages of industry and civilisation.”[8]
Csoma was ready to become a pioneer on this difficult road, IF his terms were accepted. A solemn agreement, therefore, was entered into between Moorcroft and Csoma: the former supplied the requisite funds, of which he gave an account to the Government,[9] and Csoma promised, by “his own handwriting,” that he would faithfully abide by his engagement. No proof whatever exists in corroboration of the opinion that, previous to his meeting with Moorcroft, Csoma ever contemplated making Tibetan the study of his life. Nor is there any authentic proof to warrant the assertion that Csoma ever declared himself to be a believer in any special affinity between his mother-tongue and the Tibetan.
The concluding paragraphs of Csoma’s letter will be read with sympathy even at this distant time; great was his anxiety as to how his fate would be decided by Government. The power of Ranjit Singh was still paramount in the Punjab. Csoma’s detention at Sabathú was but a natural precaution on the part of the English that any European stranger should, as a matter of prudence, be [[38]]watched; especially after the proof the Indian Government had in their hands of the intrigues of the Russian Government, through emissaries like Aga Mahdi Rafael.[10]
Csoma’s pride and highly honourable feelings were nevertheless deeply touched on finding that he had been suspected, which to the end of his life he never forgot. He had to wait for three long months before an answer reached him, as will be seen from his second letter, written in May. That letter touches on some points now out of date, but its general contents will doubtless be read with much interest. It furnishes proofs also in several passages of the fact, that Csoma was not altogether ignorant of the Sanskrit tongue when, in accordance with the order of the Governor-General, he wrote his second letter, addressed to Captain Kennedy. [[39]]
[1] “Tibetan Tales,” by W. R. S. Ralston, M.A. Trübner & Co., London, 1882. [↑]
[2] An abridged English edition of B. Hügel’s works, with Major Jervis’s annotations, appeared in 1845. [↑]
[3] See “Alphabetum Tibetanum, studio et labore, Fr. Augustini Antonii Georgii.” Romæ, 1762, pag. 820. [↑]
[4] “Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,” vol. ii., 1844, note to Dr. Campbell’s paper. [↑]
[5] Székler, military nobles. [↑]
[7] Moorcroft’s “Travels,” edited by H. H. Wilson, vol. i. p. 338. [↑]
[8] Preface to Moorcroft’s “Travels,” edited by H. H. Wilson. [↑]
[9] See Prinsep’s Report, dated 5th January 1834, in chap. ix. [↑]