^{page 503 note 1} In the paper on “The Birthplace of Gautama Buddha” in this Journal for July, 1897, p. 615.

^{page 504 note 1} Cunningham, , “Reports,” i, 303Google Scholar; Epigraphia Indica, ii, 244.

^{page 504 note 2} Epigraphia Indica, ii, p. 244.

^{page 504 note 3} “Monumental Antiquities and Inscriptions in the N.W.P. and Oudh,” p. 142.

^{page 504 note 4} The legend of Bakkula in Hardy's, “Manual of Buddhism,” p. 520, 2nd ed. Cunningham quotes page 501, referring perhaps to the first editionGoogle Scholar.

^{page 504 note 5} Dr. Führer has made an astounding blunder in asserting (“Mon. Antiq. and Inscr.,” p. 144) that Kauśāmbī was visited by Sung-yun in A.D. 519. I need hardly observe that Sung-yun's travels in India extended no further than Peshāwar.

^{page 505 note 1} “Mon. Ant.,” pp. 140, 143. The distances as stated by Cunningham do not exactly agree with the figures given by Führer. The Epigraphia uses the spellings Pabhosā and Pābhosā.

^{page 505 note 2} Chs. xxxiv, xxxv in Legge's translation. The versions of Remusat (Laidlay), Beal, and Giles all substantially agree with Dr. Legge's version in this passage.

^{page 505 note 3} “The Pilgrimage of Fa Hian” (Laidlay), Calcutta, 1848, p. 317Google Scholar. Giles (p. 86) gives the Chinese form of the name as Chü-shan-mi. The various systems for transliterating Chinese vary more widely even than the systems for transliterating Indian languages.

^{page 507 note 1} Beal, i, pp. 234–240. The punctuation of the passage relating to the great forest is erroneous in Beal's printed text, and is corrected in the Errata. I have quoted the passage in its correct form. Julien's version of this important phrase is as follows: “Après avoir fait environ sept cents li dans une vaste forêt, qui était située au nord-est de la caverne du dragon, il passa le Gange, et se dirigeant au nord, il arriva à la ville de Kia-che-pou-lo (Kāśapura).”—i, 287. Julien makes the first vowel in Kāśapura long. There is no doubt that the pilgrim means that the distance from Kauśāmbī to the place where he crossed the Ganges was 700 li.

^{page 507 note 2} Beal, , “Life of Hiuen Tsiang,” p. 90Google Scholar.

^{page 508 note 1} The “heavenly ladder” was located at the capital of Kapitha (Beal, , “Records,” i, 202Google Scholar; Julien, i, 237). Cunningham (“Reports,” i, 271; xi, 22) identifies this place with the Sanskrit Sankāśya and the modern Sankisa in the Farru khābād District. Like so many of Cunningham's identifications, this has been accepted without criticism, though quite at variance with the facts. By this allegation I mean that the details given by Hiuen Tsiang are irreconcilable with the local facts of Sankisa. The Sankāśya of Fa-hian is the same as the capital of Kapitha. The sacred buildings of the “heavenly ladder” were situated 20 li, or about three miles, east of the city of Sankāśya. No city is shown to be traceable three miles west of the Sankisa ruins. Moreover, the standing elephant on the pillar at Sankisa cannot be the sitting or couchant lion seen by Hiuen Tsiang at the capital of Kapitha. Pi-lo-na-na of the “Life” is the Pi-lo-shan-na of the “Records.” The transliteration Vīrasana is doubtful (note in Errata, Julien, , vol. ii, 573)Google Scholar.

^{page 509 note 1} An unlucky note in Beal's, “Records,” ii, 234Google Scholar, that the distance between Prayāga and Kauśāmbī “is properly 50 li as stated by Hwui-lih,” the biographer of Hiuen Tsiang, misled Cunningham. The blunder is corrected in the “Lite,” p. 91, note 1. Both Hiuen Tsiang and his biographer state the distance as 500 li, and the statement is emphasized by the explanation that the journey occupied seven days. 500 li of Hiuen Tsiang commonly correspond to 12 yojanas of Fa-hian, and either expression is roughly equivalent to from 81–90 English miles.

^{page 510 note 1} “Monum. Ant. and Inscr.,” p. 321. Dr. Führer wrongly uses the spelling Dâlmâu. The first vowel is short. I know the place well.

^{page 510 note 2} Ibid., p. 268.

^{page 510 note 3} Ibid., p. 160.

^{page 511 note 1} Cunningham's work on the “Stûpa of Bharhut” opens with the extraordinarily erroneous assertion that Bharhut “is exactly 120 miles to the south-west of Allahabad.” According to the scale of his map in the same volume the distance is about 98 miles. The map in vol. vii of the “Reports” makes the distance to be about 90 miles. Other maps which I have used indicate the distance as about 92 miles.

^{page 511 note 2} Cunningham, , “Reports,” ix, 7Google Scholar.

^{page 512 note 1} Beal, , “Records,” i, 236Google Scholar. I am not responsible for the vagaries in spelling of the name Goṣira.

^{page 512 note 2} “Sacred Books of the East,” xix, p. 245.

^{page 513 note 1} I have assumed throughout that the Chinese names given by Fa-hian and Hiuen Tsiang are correctly represented by the name Kauśāmbī. Julien gives the Chinese as Kiu-chen-mi, and explains as “faute pour Kiao-chang-mi (Kauśāmbī)” (Liste des Mots abrégés, vol. ii, p. 559). Beal adopts the form Kiau-shang-mi, as if it really stood in the text of Hiuen Tsiang (“Records,” i, 235). Legge gives no transliteration. Giles transliterates Chü-shan-mi, and says that the second character is shan, not chang. The form chang used by Julien for French readers should of course be read as shang in English. Inasmuch as both the Buddhist and Brahman legends associate Kauśāmbī with King Udāyana, they must both refer to the same place, and it appears necessary to transliterate the Chinese names as Kauśāmbī.

^{page 513 note 2} “Stūpa of Bharhut,” p. 1.

^{page 515 note 1} The phrase translated “not far from” in Hiuen Tsiang's; book means always, so far as I have been able to test it, “adjacent,” or “quite quite close to.”

^{page 517 note 1} These inscriptions had previously been brought to notice by Mr. Cockburn, who viewed them with a telescope from a distance.

^{page 519 note 1} Führer, , Epigraphia Indica, ii, 240Google Scholar; Cunningham, , “Reports,” xxi, pp. 1–3, and pi. iiGoogle Scholar.

^{page 519 note 2} Cunningham, , “Reports,” xvii, 95Google Scholar, quoting Prinsep in J.A.S.B., v, 731.

^{page 519 note 3} “Reports,” xxi, 3.

^{page 520 note 1} Fa-hian, ch. xviii. The name is variously spelt—Ā-le (Legge), A-li (Giles), A-lo (Beal), and Ho-li (Laidlay). The Corean text used by Legge calls the place a “village”; the Chinese texts used by the other translators call it a “forest.” As there were stūpas at Ā-le, it is clear that the place was not merely a forest. The town of Āḷavī, mentioned in Buddhist works, and described as “a city near a large forest” (āṭavī), is probably the same as Alow mentioned in the “Manual of Buddhism,” the country of Ālaweï referred to in Yale's “Cathay,” and the town called Ālabhiyā or Ālabhī by the Jains. Dr. Hoernle's suggestion that these various names all correspond to the Ā-le of Fa-hian seems plausible (“Monumental Antiquities and Inscriptions,” pp. 89, 271). The legend of the king of Alow will be found in Hardy's, “Manual,” 2nd ed., p. 269Google Scholar.

^{page 520 note 2} “To the south-east of the capital, going about 100 li, we come to the town of Na-po-ti-po-kulo (Navadevakula). It is situated on the eastern bank of the Ganges, and is about 20 li in circuit.” (Beal, , “Records,” i, 223.)Google Scholar

The mound of ruins at Newal covers a space of about 15 acres, and is situated on the high bank of the old Ganges now known as the Kalyānī Nadī. According to tradition Newal represents a city older than Bāngarmāu, which is said to date from Muhammadan times. The ancient remains at Newal consist of five mounds, one of which is only a mile from the mounds of Bāngarmāu.

^{page 520 note 3} Jogī Kot is “perched on a large ancient kherā [scil, mound]. A statue of Pārvatī, locally called Phulmatī Devī, bears a short dedicatory inscription in characters of the fifth century,” that is to say, about contemporary with Fa-hian. (“Monumental Antiquities and Inscriptions,” p. 271.)

^{page 521 note 1} These places will be found on Sheet 5 of the Map of Oudh. Dataulī, being situated at a point where five roads meet, one of which comes from Dalmāu Ghāṭ and another from Baksar Ghāṭ, was probably in ancient times a place of some importance. It is now only a Village. Bahāī, which lies between Dataulī and Dalmāu, has two large mounds strewn with bricks. There are ruins also at Sāthanpur and other places in the neighbourhood. Dalmāu, which I have visited, is a very ancient place. A considerable fair is held there annually.

^{page 522 note 1} Pariār is noticed by Führer in “Monumental Antiquities and Inscriptions,” p. 272. For the information that remains exist at Mākhī and Rāo I am indebted to Dr. Hoey. Ūnwan is situated in about lat. 26° 11′ N., long. 80° 27′ E., and about 15 miles a little east of north from Cawnpore.

^{page 522 note 2} The tooth-brush legend was attached to many widely separated places, and does not help to fix the position of Shā-che. In using the spelling Shā-che I follow Legge. The name is spelled Sha-chi and Sha-chili by other translators.

^{page 524 note 1} “Monumental Antiquities and Inscriptions,” p. 267. In this work the compiler persistently has used the mis-spellings Bhâr for Bhar and Sa'îd for Sayyid.

Mohanlālganj will be found on Sheet 3 of the Surveyor General's Map of Oudh (four miles to the inch). One of the four roads which meet there comes from Baksar Ghāṭ. Nagram is about 11 miles south-east of Mohanlālganj. Pahārnagar is about seven and a half miles a little east of north from the same centre, and Siris about seven miles a little east of south from the same. Of course, I cannot pretend to say which of the numerous mounds actually represent Kāśapura. I do not know whether or not there is authority for giving Nalagrāma as the Sanskrit equivalent of Nagrām.

^{page 525 note 1} “Monumental Antiquities and Inscriptions,” p. 264. Kursī will be fouud on the same sheet of the map as Mohanlālganj.

^{page 525 note 2} Mahonā, lat. 27° 5′ N., long. 80° 55′ E., situated 15 miles north of Lucknow, is another possible site for Viśākhā. Several mounds of ruins are in the neighbourhood (Führer, p. 267).

^{page 526 note 1} I visited the site of the Lumbinī Garden in October, 1897, and Niglīva (Kanakamuni) and Kapilavastu in January, 1898. Kapilavastu is on the east or left bank of the Bāngangā river, about 11 miles from the frontier, 17 miles north from Mr. Peppé's house at Birdpur, and 31 miles in a north-westerly direction from Uśkā railway station. Dr. Führer erroneously states the distance from Uśkā as 38 miles. The ruins of Kapilavastu extend for several miles east and west in the forest. Their breadth from north to south is comparatively small. My visit was confined to the western extremity of the city, near the Bāngangā. Dr. Führer was then engaged in excavating a series of small square stūpas, which seem to be those commemorating the slaughter of the Śākyas. The bricks at Kapilavastu are only 12″ x 7′. The bricks of the Aśoka period are 16″ x 9″ in the Piprāhwa stūpa excavated by Mr. Peppé, and those at Pāṭaliputra are often much larger. I visited the excavations at Pāṭaliputra in November, 1897.

^{page 527 note 1} Cunningham, , “Reports,” i, 330Google Scholar; xi, 96. Seṭ Mahet is too near Kapilavastu and is in the wrong direction.

^{page 527 note 2} Dr. Vost, Civil Surgeon of Gonda in Gonḍā, is known to the numismatic world as a learned and accurate student of Indian Muhammadan coins. His native agents collected some preliminary information, which, though not accurate, was of much service in guiding our local inquiries.

^{page 529 note 1} There are indications of old river beds near Bālāpur and Kamdī which may possibly mean that at some remote period the river flowed further west than it now does. It is now moving westwards.

^{page 530 note 1} “After Fa-hian set out from Ch'ang-gan, it took him six years to reach Central India; stoppages then extended over (other) six years; and on his return it took him three years to reach Ts'ing-chow.” (Ch. xl; Legge, p. 115.)

Fa-hian started on his journey “in the second year of the period Hwᾰng-che, being the Kehâe year of the cycle.” Legge interprets this to mean a.d. 399 (p. 9). Giles (p. x) points out that there may be an error of a year. “The reason is that at the above period the various States were separated from and contending with each other, and the style of the reign was recklessly changed, sometimes annually, sometimes even oftener, without there being any fixed rule.” Fa-hian, therefore, started in either a.d. 399 or 400, and reached the valley of the Ganges, which he calls Central or Mid-India, six years later. His journey to Śrāvastī must have occupied a considerable time. He cannot have arrived there earlier than a.d. 405 or 406.

^{page 531 note 1} Weber, , “Ueber das Daçakumāra-Caritam,” in Indische Streifen, Berlin, 1868Google Scholar. I am indebted to Dr. Hoey for this reference.

^{page 531 note 2} Indian Antiquary, vol. xv (1886), p. 107Google Scholar.