Page:The Indian Antiquary Vol 2.djvu/410

 370 THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY. rence afford all we wish ? Whither such fanciful theories must lead, will be Been best from Prof. Hoernle’s fourth essay, which has just reached me. That the M&rathi kardvem has sprung from the Pr&kritic causative kardvemi (Vararuchi, VII. 27) Prof. Lassen saw forty years ago. R. Pischel. London, August 27, 1873. Sir,—In re-reading Professor Weber’s Essay on the R&mayana in your journal, I find that he twice (pp. 123,176) touches the question whether ** So- peithes, king of the KrjKtoi, who entered into friendly personal relations with Alexander the Great, may be identified with Asvapati, king of the Kekaya, who is mentioned in the Ram&yana.” As Prof. Weber quotes Lassen (I. 300, II. 161), it is possible that he allowed Lassen’s words to supersede his own recollection of the original au¬ thorities about Alexander. (I. 300.) Lassen’s first note, in which he identifies the Kijkcoi with the Kekaya, both with the people of Sopeithes, and Sopeithes with Asvapati, is too long for extract. In the second passage he says: “ Alexander went northward from Sangala with the main body of his army, into the land of the Kekaya, whose king was called Sopeithes. This would not, however, be his proper names, but rather his title, for already in epic story there is a king of that people called Asvapati” There is nothing in the world so easy as to be mistaken, but I have twice carefully searched Arrian, Diodorus, Strabo, and Curtius, without being able to find a word to indicate that Sopei¬ thes was king of the KrjKeot, or in any way con¬ nected with them. That name seems to occur only once anywhere, and then in a doubtful read, ing. It is where Arrian (Indica, cap. vi.) speaks of Hydrastes as receiving a tributary called Sa- ranges en Kq/ceW, or « Krjveav, or c*k MrjKeav. Nor is there anything in the four authors just named to the effect that Alexander went [northward from Sangala. I notice this matter because it bears on General Cunningham’s identification of Sangala with the site in the Rechna Doab still so called, an identi¬ fication which seems to me, if I may presume to say so, eminently satisfactory. According to that view, Alexander, after his destruction of tho city, did go north into tho country of Sopeithes, but instead of being in tho sub-Himal *ya, this country apparently lay a cheval on tho Hydaspes and Ac- esines, and included the Salt Range or a part of it. This is confirmed by Arrian’s statement (Exp. [December, 1873. Alex. vi. 2) that Alexander, when about to descend the Hydaspes, sent in advance two divisions of his army under Craterus and Hephaestion, one on each bank, appointing the rendezvous, where his arrival with the fleet was to be awaited, at the Residence of Sopeithes* This rendezvous was reached by the king after a voyage of three days down-stream from Buccphalia. Strabo says that in the territory of Sopeithes there was a mountain of fossil salt sufficient for all India. This is a reasonable hyperbole if ap¬ plied to the salt-mines of Kheora, near Pind Da- dan Kh&n. It is true there are said to be salt¬ mines also in Mandi, where Lassen places the Ke¬ kaya, KrjKfoi, Asvapati and Sopeithes, but they must be comparatively insignificant. Certainly they are very little known. For the rest of the argument 1 refer to Gen. Cunningham’s book. My present object is only to bar what seems an unproved assumption on the other side, to which such high sanction has been lent incidentally. H. Yule. Dear Sir,—In reply to a query in the last number of the I. A., I send a line to state that we have many villages here where the P&til’s vatan is divided into two holdings or bans, each enjoyed by a family entirely distinct from the other, and usually of a different caste. Thus, for instance, one family will be Linga- yats, and the other Mar&th&s, or Kanarese Brah¬ mans. The same is often the case with Kulkarni vaians. Yours faithfully, H. B. Boswell. Belgaum District, 13th November 1873. Calcutta is a place known from remote anti¬ quity. The ancient Hindus called it by the name of Kalikshetr a.+ It extended from B a h u 1 a to Dakhinashar. Bahula is modern Ba- hala, and the site of D akh in a s h ar still exists. According to the Purdnas a portion of the mangled corpse of Sati or Kali fell somewhere within that boundary; whence the place was called K a - likshetra. Calcutta is a corruption of K a - likshetra. In the time of Baldl Sen it was assigned to the descendants of Sera. PUDMA NAV GHOSAL. Calcutta, July 1873. f “ Dakhinashar maravya yabacha Bahoola pooree Kalikshetr am beejaneeyath, fyc”
 * I cannot find any recognition of this passage in Lassen.