On Yuan Chwang's Travels in India, 629–645 A.D. v1.c11.s3: Rājapura
On Yuan Chwang's Travels in India, 629–645 A.D. v1.c11.s3
- Language
- English
Rājapura
v1.c11.s3.1
Our pilgrim goes on to relate that from Punach a journey south-east of above 400 *li* brought him to the *Ho-lo-she-pu-lo* (Rājapura) country. This he describes as being above 4000 *li* in circuit its capital being above ten *li* in circuit. It was a difficult country to travel in as it was very hilly with narrow valleys; it was not fertile and it resembled Punach in products and climate, and like that country it had no sovereign of its own and was subject to Kashmir. There were ten Buddhist monasteries and the Brethren were few in number; there was one Deva-Temple, but the non-Buddhists were very numerous.
v1.c11.s3.2
The native annotator to our text here makes Rājapura to be in “North India”, but the annotator to the Fang-chih represents it as a state outside of India. The country has been identified by Cunningham with “the petty chiefship of Rajaori, to the south of Kashmir”.² In some texts of the Life the direction of Rājapura from Punach is south instead of the south-east of our text.
v1.c11.s3.3
² A. G. I. p. 129.
v1.c11.s3.4
Here our pilgrim inserts the following interesting general observation about the countries through which he had lately been passing—
v1.c11.s3.5
“From Lampa to Rājapura the inhabitants are coarse and plain in personal appearance, of rude violent dispositions, with vulgar dialects, and of scant courtesy and little fairness; they do not belong to India proper but are inferior peoples of frontier (i. e. barbarian) stocks.”
v1.c11.s3.6
As to this statement we may observe that the native editor of the Records has referred all these countries from Lampa to Rājapura to "North India". Moreover our pilgrim's remarks at the beginning of *Chuan II* seem to indicate that he regarded all these countries as being included in the great region called India. There, however, he was writing as a foreigner, and here he is writing from the point of view of a Indian. The summary character which he here gives of the inhabitants of these countries is not to be fully accepted, and it does not seem to agree with his own descriptions in the preceding pages.