Part i. 101).

Footnote 4.1.20:

Ahar, or Ar, is in the valley of the present capital, Udaipur.

Footnote 4.1.21:

The origin of this name is from the trivial occurrence of the expelled prince of Chitor having erected a town to commemorate the spot, where after an extraordinarily hard chase he killed a hare (_sasu_).

Footnote 4.1.22:

The wild fable which envelops or adorns the cradle of every illustrious family is not easily disentangled. The bards weave the web with skill, and it clings like ivy round each modern branch, obscuring the aged stem, in the time-worn branches of which monsters and demi-gods are perched, whose claims of affinity are held in high estimation by these ‘children of the sun,’ who would deem it criminal to doubt that the loin-robe (_dhoti_) of their great founder, Bapa Rawal, was less than five hundred cubits in circumference, that his two-edged sword (_khanda_), the gift of the Hindu Proserpine, weighed an ounce less than sixty-four pounds, or that he was an inch under twenty feet in height.

Footnote 4.1.23:

[Vijayapur has been doubtfully identified with Bījapur in the Ahmadābād district (_BG_, i. Part i. 110).]

Footnote 4.1.24:

Presented to the Royal Asiatic Society of London.

Footnote 4.1.25:

Sorath or Saurashtra.

Footnote 4.1.26:

The ‘lord of Bal.’

Footnote 4.1.27:

Mārwār.

Footnote 4.1.28:

[The date of the fall of Valabhi is very uncertain (Smith, _EHI_, 315, note). It is said to have been destroyed in the reign of Sīlāditya VI., the last of the dynasty, about A.D. 776 (Duff, _Chronology of India_, 31, 67, 308).]

Footnote 4.1.29:

[There is possibly a confusion with the Soras of Aelian (xv. 8) which has been identified by Caldwell (_Dravidian Grammar_, 17) with the Σῶραι of Ptolemy, and with the Chola kingdom of Southern India. Surāshtra or Saurāshtra, ‘land of the Sus,’ was afterwards Sanskritized into ‘goodly country’ (Monier Williams, _Skt. Dict._ s.v.; _BG_, i. Part i. 6).]

Footnote 4.1.30:

Gaini, or Gajni, is one of the ancient names of Cambay (the port of Valabhipura), the ruins of which are about three miles from the modern city. Other sources indicate that these princes held possessions in the southern continent of India, as well as in the Saurashtra peninsula. Talatalpur Patan, on the Godavari, is mentioned, which tradition asserts to be the city of Deogir; but which, after many years’ research, I discovered in Saurashtra, it being one of the ancient names of Kandala. In after times, when succeeding dynasties held the title of Balakarae, though the capital was removed inland to Anhilwara Patan, they still held possession of the western shore, and Cambay continued the chief port. [For the identification of Gajni with Cambay see _IA_, iv. 147; _BG_, vi. 213 note. The site of Devagiri has been identified with Daulatābād (_BG_, i. Part ii. 136; Beal, _Buddhist Records of the Western World_, ii. 255, note).]

Footnote 4.1.31:

The position of Minnagara has occupied the attention of geographers from D’Anville to Pottinger. Sind being conquered by Omar, general of the caliph Al-Mansur (Abbasi), the name of Minnagara was changed to Mansura, “une ville célèbre sur le rivage droit du Sind ou Mehran.” “Ptolémée fait aussi mention de cette ville; mais en la déplaçant,” etc. D’Anville places it about 26°, but not so high as Ulug Bég, whose tables make it 26° 40´. I have said elsewhere that I had little doubt that Minnagara, handed down to us by the author of the _Periplus_ as the μετρόπολις τῆς Σκυθίας, was the Saminagara of the Yadu Jarejas, whose chronicles claim Seistān as their ancient possession, and in all probability was the stronghold (_nagara_) of Sambos, the opponent of Alexander. On every consideration, I am inclined to place it on the site of Sehwan. The learned Vincent, in his translation of the _Periplus_, enters fully and with great judgment upon this point, citing every authority, Arrian, Ptolemy, Al-Biruni, Edrisi, D’Anville, and De la Rochette. He has a note (26, p. 386, vol. i.) which is conclusive, could he have applied it: “Al-Birun [equi-distant] between Debeil and Mansura.” D’Anville also says: “de Mansora à la ville nommée Birun, la distance est indiquée de quinze parasanges dans Abulféda,” who fixes it, on the authority of Abu-Rehan (surnamed Al-Biruni from his birthplace), at 26° 40´. The ancient name of Haidarabad, the present capital of Sind, was Nerun (نيرون;) or Nirun, and is almost equi-distant, as Abulfeda says, between Debal (Dewal or Tatta) and Mansura, Sehwan, or Minnagara, the latitude of which, according to my construction, is 26° 11´. Those who wish to pursue this may examine the _Éclaircissemens sur la Carte de l’Inde_, p. 37 _et seq._, and Dr. Vincent’s estimable translation, p. 386. [The site of Minnagara, like those of all the cities in the delta of the Indus, owing to changes in the course of the river, is very uncertain. Jhajhpur or Mungrapur has been suggested (McCrindle, _Ptolemy_, 72, _Periplus_, 1086 f.). Nīrūn has been identified with Helāi, a little below Jarak, on the high road from Tatta to Haidarābād (Elliot-Dowson i. 400).]

Footnote 4.1.32:

See _History of the Tribes_, p. 107, and translation of Inscription No. I. _Vide_ Appendix.

Footnote 4.1.33:

Considerable intercourse was carried on between the princes of India and China from the earliest periods; but particularly during the dynasties of Sum, Leam and Tam, from the fourth to the seventh centuries, when the princes from Bengal and Malabar to the Panjab sent embassies to the Chinese monarchs. The dominions of these Hindu princes may yet be identified. [Cosmas flourished in the sixth century A.D., and never reached India proper (_EB_, vii. 214).]

Footnote 4.1.34:

[Gollas was Mihiragula (Smith, _EHI_, 317).]

Footnote 4.1.35:

[_Ibid._ 230 f.]

Footnote 4.1.36:

D’Herbelot (vol. i. p. 179) calls them the Haiathelah or Indoscythae, and says that they were apparently from Thibet, between India and China. De Guignes (tome i. p. 325) is offended with this explanation, and says: “Cette conjecture ne peut avoir lieu, les Euthélites n’ayant jamais demeuré dans le Thibet.” A branch of the Huns, however, did most assuredly dwell in that quarter, though we will not positively assert that they were the Abtelites. The Haihaya was a great branch of the Lunar race of Yayati, and appears early to have left India for the northern regions, and would afford a more plausible etymology for the Haiathelah than the Te-le, who dwelt on the waters (_ab_) of the Oxus. This branch of the Hunnish race has also been termed Nephthalite, and fancied one of the lost tribes of Israel [?].

Footnote 4.1.37:

Ferishta, in the early part of his history [i. Introd. lxviii f.], observes that, some centuries prior to Vikramaditya, the Hindus abandoned the simple religion of their ancestors, made idols, and worshipped the host of heaven, which faith they had from Kashmir, the foundry of magic superstition.

Footnote 4.1.38:

Divested of allegory, it means simply that the supply of water was rendered impure, and consequently useless to the Hindus, which compelled them to abandon their defences and meet death in the open field. Alau-d-din practised the same _ruse_ against the celebrated Achal, the Khichi prince of Gagraun, which caused the surrender of this impregnable fortress. “It matters not,” observes an historian whose name I do not recollect, “whether such things are true, it is sufficient that they were believed. We may smile at the mention of the ghost, the evil genius of Brutus, appearing to him before the battle of Pharsalia; yet it never would have been stated, had it not assimilated with the opinions and prejudices of the age.” And we may deduce a simple moral from “the parent orb refusing the aid of his steed to his terrestrial offspring,” viz. that he was deserted by the deity. Fountains sacred to the sun and other deities were common to the Persians, Scythians, and Hindus, and both the last offered steeds to him in sacrifice. Vide _History of the Tribes_, article ‘Aswamedha,’ p. 91.

Footnote 4.1.39:

The Baldan, or sacrifice of the bull to Balnath, is on record, though now discontinued amongst the Hindus. [_Baldān_ = _balidāna_, ‘a general offering to the gods.’]

Footnote 4.1.40:

Pinkerton, who is most happy to strengthen his aversion for the Celt, seizes on a passage in Strabo, who describes him as having recourse to the same mode of purification as the Guebre. Unconscious that it may have had a religious origin, he adduces it as a strong proof of the uncleanliness of their habits.