So No. 82 = No. 104.
So No. 99 = No. 101.
So No. 134 = No. 135.
So No. 195 = No. 225.
So No. 294 = No. 295.
Compare the two stories Nos. 23 and 24 translated below.
[104] Translated below, pp. 278-290.
[105] Billy (1535-1577) was Abbot of St. Michael’s, in Brittany. Another edition of his Latin version, by Rosweyd, is also reprinted in Migne, ‘Series Latina,’ tom. lxxiii; and several separate editions have appeared besides (Antwerp, 1602; Cologne, 1624, etc.).
[106] The British Museum copy of the first, undated, edition has the date 1539 written, in ink, on the title-page. Rosweyd, in Note 4 to his edition of Billius (Migne, vol. lxxiii, p. 606), mentions an edition bearing the date 1548. In the British Museum there is a third, dated 1575 (on the last page).
[107] These two Jatakas also form the contents of a separate MS. in the Royal Asiatic Society’s Library (Catalogue, p 14).
[108] Translated below, pp. 205, and foll. This is one of those which General Cunningham was unable to identify.
[109] General Cunningham says (p. 52): “The former [Nāga Jātaka, i.e. Elephant Jātaka] is the correct name, as in the legend here represented Buddha is the King of the Elephants, and therefore the Jātaka, or Birth, must of necessity have been named after him.” As I have above pointed out (p. xli), the title of each Jātaka, or Birth Story, is chosen, not by any means from the character which the Bodisat fills in it, but indifferently from a variety of other reasons. General Cunningham himself gives the story called Isī-singga Jātaka (No. 7 in the above list), in which the ascetic after whom the Jātaka is named is not the Bodisat.
[110] Not as yet found in the Jātaka Book; but Dr. Bühler has shown in the ‘Indian Antiquary,’ vol. i. p. 305, that it is the first tale in the ‘Vrihat Kathā’ or Kshemendra (Table I. No. 34), and in the ‘Kathā Sarit Sāgara’ of Somadeva (Table I. No. 33), and was therefore probably included in the ‘Vrihat Kathā’ of Guṇadhya (Table I. No. 32).