^{page 54 note 1} Bomb. Gaz., 1896, vol. i, pt. i, pp. 1–5Google Scholar; A. M. T. Jackson, “Bhinmāl,” ibid., App. iii, pp. 449–88, esp. pp. 463–9; Bhandarkar, D. R., Epigraphic Notes and Questions, iii,Google Scholar Dighwā-Dubaulī plate of Mahendrapāla and Bengal As. Soc. plate of Vināyakapāla, , in J. Bo. Br. R.A.S., vol. xx;Google Scholar “Gūrjaras,” ibid., vol. xxi; Hoernle, , Problems of Ancient Indian History, JRAS., 1904, p. 639; 1905, p. 1;Google ScholarHoernle, & Stark, , History of India, 1904, pp. 62, 64;Google ScholarSmith, V. A., Early History of India, 1908, 2nd ed., pp. 303, 347–53, 373–81.Google Scholar The spelling Gurjara is preferable to Gūrjara or Gurjjara.

^{page 54 note 2} Cowell & Thomas, transl., p. 101.

^{page 55 note 1} Ind. Ant., viii, 244.Google Scholar

^{page 55 note 2} Watters, , On Yuan chwang's Travels, ii, 249;Google Scholar “a name like Guchala or Guchara.”

^{page 55 note 3} The identity of Bhīlmāl (Bhīnmāl, Bhīnamāla, Bhillamāla, also called śrīmāl) with the Pi-lo-mo-lo of Hiuen Tsang seems to me to be fully proved, and I agree with Mr. Jackson that the objections raised by Mr, Bhandarkar are of little weight. Bhīlmāl lies to the north-west, and not to the west of Mount Ābū, as erroneously stated in Bomb. Gaz., 1896, vol. i, pt. i, p. 449.Google Scholar

^{page 58 note 1} The Pāranagar inscription has the spelling Pratīhāra.

^{page 59 note 1} The Sāgar Tāl inscription has been edited by Hīrānanda in Archśol. Survey Annual Report for 1903–1904, pp. 277Google Scholar seqq., and discussed by Professor Kielhorn in “Epigraphic Notes, No. 17, Gwālior Inscription of Mihira Bhoja”, Nachr. der k. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Gottingen, Philol. -hist. Klasse, 1905.Google Scholar

^{page 59 note 2} See my papers, “White Hun (Ephthalite) Coins from the Panjāb” and “‘White Hun’ Coin of Vyāghramukha”, JRAS., 1907, pp. 91, 923.Google Scholar

^{page 60 note 1} Early History of India, 2nd ed., p. 290.Google Scholar

^{page 60 note 2} Ibid., p. 300.

^{page 60 note 3} For the Indo-Sassanian Coinage, see Catal. Coins in Indian Museum, vol. i,Google Scholar sec. xiii, and the authorities there cited.

^{page 61 note 1} Bomb. Gaz., 1896, vol. i, pt. i, p. 3 n.Google Scholar

^{page 62 note 1} In addition to works already cited, see the Census Reports (1901)Google Scholar for the Panjāb, United Provinces, and India; Sir Denzil Ibbetson's Panjāb Ethnography; and Crooke's works on the castes of Northern India. Most Rājpūts, Jāts, and Gūjars are, I believe, “long-headed.” Sir Herbert Risley, rashly assuming that the so-called “Scythian” invaders of India must have been “broad-headed” people, comes to the conclusion that the reasons for believing in the “Scythian” origin of the Jāts and Rājpūts are “of the flimsiest description” (Indian Empire, 1907, vol. i, p. 306Google Scholar). But he did not know the evidence which is summarized in this essay, and the assumption that the invaders must necessarily have been “broad-headed” would be difficult to justify. While it is true that some of the arguments used by the older writers in favour of the “Scythian” hypothesis do not bear criticism, the foreign or “Scythian” origin of many of the long-headed tribes and castes of Upper India is now, in my opinion, definitely proved. I do not believe in Sir H. Risley's theory of the “Scythian” ancestry of the Marāthās. Tod, I think, was the first author to suggest the “Scythian”, or nomad, origin of the Rājpūts.

^{page 63 note 1} Bomb. Gaz., 1896, vol. i, pt. i, p. 2.Google Scholar

^{page 420 note 1} Ibid., pp. 107, 113–17; pt. ii, pp. 312–16.