Page:The Indian Antiquary Vol 2.djvu/15

Rh its peculiar modus operandi, work a change for the better on those who come under its influence.

Two more hymns on the same subject follow, and in No. 5 Râdhâ herself breaks silence.

"In the kadamba grove what man is (that) standing? What sort of word coming is this: the plough of whose meaning has penetrated startlingly the path of hearing? With a hint of union, with its manner of penetrating making one well-nigh mad: My mind is agitated, it cannot be still, streams flow from my eyes: I know not what manner of man it is who utters such words: I see him not, my heart is perturbed, I cannot stay in the house: My soul rests not, it flutters to and fro in hope of seeing him: When she sees him, she will find her soul, quoth Urdhab Dâs."

I have left myself no space to finish this Pallab, or to make remarks on the peculiarities of the language, which in the older masters would more properly be called old Maithila than Bengali. It is nearly identical with the language still spoken in Tirhut, the ancient Mithili, and in Munger and Bhâgalpur, the ancient Magadha, than modern Bengali. As the Aryan race grew and multiplied it naturally poured out its surplus population in Bengal, and it is not only philologically obvious that Bengali is nothing more than a further, and very modern development of the extreme eastern dialect of Hindi. All these considerations, however, I hope still further to develope at some future time.

there, everywhere are to be found scattered throughout the district the remains of ancient races. Before describing these, however, I would wish to point out what to me appears a grave defect in all reports of such remains. Everybody who has read the interesting papers from time to time printed in the journals of different societies must have observed that the words n,  n,  h,  e,  n, are employed by different writers in different senses. The difficulty this gives rise to, in trying to generalize the results of the many examinations made, can only be appreciated by those who have made the attempt. In the October number of the Journal of the Ethnological Society of London 1869, we have a paper by Major Pearse on the raised "Stone Circle" or "Barrow." Here then we have stone circle or barrow as convertible terms. Sir W. Denison in his paper on "Permanence of Type," published in the same journal, calls similar remains tumuli; other writers when describing them use the word cairn. In his Prehistoric Times, Sir John Lubbock has "cromlechs" or stone "circles," while Dr. Lukis applies the word cromlech to all elaborate megalithic structures of one or more chambers. It is needless to multiply examples. The time has arrived when the annals of prehistoric research should be purged of this evil.

With a view of making some sort of a beginning the following suggestions are made:—

—(A. S. beorg, beorh, hill mound, sepulchral mound, from beorgan, to shelter.—Webster): All mounds raised above the level of the ground without any circle of stones to mark the edge.

—Similar mounds having a circle of stones either on the top or round the bottom.

—Circles of stones where the enclosed area is on a level with the surrounding ground. The size of the stones which mark the circumference being immaterial.

—Stone structures above or partially above ground and which are surrounded by a circle of stones.

—Similar structures but without the circle of stones.

—Heaps of small stones whether surrounded by a circle or not.