Manasara Series (I. A Dictionary of Hindu Architecture; II. Indian Architecture according to Manasara-Shilpashastra; III. Manasara on Architecture and Sculpture: Sanskrit Text; IV. Architecture of Manasara: Translation; V. Architecture of Manasara: Illustrations; VI. Hindu Architecture in India and Abroad; VII. An Encyclopaedia of Hindu Architecture) v2.c16.205

v2.c16.205

In all items of comparison between the *Mānasāra* and the cognate works, we have seen⁴ that the *Mānasāra* contains fuller lists. In the present instance also there are more than thirty-two authorities mentioned in the *Mānasāra*, while the *Matsya-purāṇa* is content with a list of eighteen, and the *Brihat-saṁhitā* has specified only seven. But none of these three treatises has admitted the authority of either of the other two. From this it would appear as if they were quite ignorant of the existence of one another, being separated by an insuperable gap in time or space. But such a relation is untenable, I should say improbable, between the *Matsya-purāṇa*, the *Bhavishya-purāṇa* and the *Brihat-saṁhitā* in any case, unless however we choose to suppose that there might have been an unknown authority or some floating tradition, by which these treatises have been influenced in the same way even to the extent of chapter and verse, but without any knowledge of one another. But I have failed to satisfy myself with such a hypothesis. For we have seen identical passages in these works.⁵ All these three contain the same list of twenty types of buildings bearing the same technical names, and identical in other details.⁶ Buildings are described under certain types in all the architectural works. Their technical names have no signification. Unless one list is copied from the other, these names need not be identical. In fact such is the case with regard to the fuller list in the *Mānasāra*. Therein we have seen ninety-eight types of buildings described under more architectural divisions and with fuller architectural details