Studies in the Medicine of Ancient India, Part I: Osteology, or the Bones of the Human Body c6.s1.t6.10

c6.s1.t6.10

2. On three points, however, Gaṅgādhar is undoubtedly right in his reconstruction. One of these refers to No. 16, *aṃsa*, shoulder. The traditional text of the statement of Charaka had erroneously duplicated that item (§ 6). The recension of Gaṅgādhar corrects that error; though, curiously enough, it does so by omitting the more accurate term *aṃsa-phalaka*, shoulder-blade. This curious circumstance clearly points to the use, by Gaṅgādhar, of the existing traditional text of Suśruta’s Compendium in the preparation of his recension of the statement of Charaka. For in that traditional text the term *aṃsa* is employed (though erroneously, as shown in §§ 30, 55, 56) in the sense of *aṃsa-phalaka* to denote the shoulder-blade. The second point refers to No. 8, where the recension of Gaṅgādhar reads ‘four wrist-bones’ instead of the ‘two wrist-bones’ of the traditional recension. Here, too, in all probability, his emendation is right (see § 52). The third point refers to the position of No. 23, *jatru*. As pointed out in § 5, this item is misplaced in the traditional list. The recension of Gangādhar, though it misinterprets the term, assigns to the item its correct place immediately after No. 22, *grīvā*, neck-bones. In doing so—it may be noted again—Gangādhar simply follows the guidance of Yājñavalkya's Law-book and the Agni Purāṇa (§ 16, No. 20).