I have already expressed my agreement with General Sir A. Cunningham's theory that the emperors of Kanauj were Tomaras. For the evidence, such as it is, I must refer to his Arch. Surv. Reports, vol. i, p. 132 ff. From this theory, in combination with that of Mr. Bhandarkar, it follows, of course, that the Tomaras were a clan of the Gūrjara tribe. It is curious that the Tomaras are hardly ever mentioned in older records. There are, so far as I am aware, only two old inscriptions that name them. One is the Pehewa inscription (E.I. i, 244) of the time of Mahendrapāla (c. 885–910 a.d.), and the other is the Harsha inscription (E.I. ii, 116) of the Chohan Vigraharāja, dated 973 a.d., which would fall into the reign of Vijayapāla (c. 950–975 a.d.). Vigraharāja's great – grandfather Chandana is said to have defeated or slain (hatvā) a Tomara lord (īśa and bhūpa) named Rudrena, and to have been a cause of terror (bhaya-da) to the sovereign (Kṣ itipati). Seeing that Chandana's date would coincide with that of Kshitipāla (alias Mahīpāla, c. 913–945 a.d.), it suggests itself that the term Kṣ itipati may have been chosen on purpose in allusion to Kshitipāla's name, and that the Chohan Chandana may have been one of the chiefs who gave assistance to the Rāshṭ rakūṭa Indra III in his great war with Mahīpāla.

Paramārtha (a.d. 499–569), or Kula-nātha as he was sometimes called, was a Brahmin of the Bhāradvāja family of Ujjayinī, West India. In 539 a.d. the Emperor of China, Wu-ti (502–549), sent a mission to Magadha, North India, in search of a learned Buddhist and the original Mahā-yāna texts. The Indian Court despatched Paramārtha, who was then staying at Magadha, with 240 bundles of palm-leaf texts, besides 64 works which he afterwards translated.

Isacrifice to Aūharmazd the holy lord of Aša (as the ritual Law) [whose is the ritual chieftainship in accordance with exact regularity (frārūnīh)] ; and I sacrifice to the Bountiful Immortals, the well-ruling, the well-giving.

In his notice of the philosopher Abū Bishr, of Dair Ḳunnā, Ibn al-Ḳiftī mentions that he had a public discussion with the grammarian Abū Sa‘īd al-Ḥasan al-Sīrāfī, famous for his commentaries on Sībawaihi's grammar. This discussion is reported at length by Yāḳūt in his invaluable Mu‘jam al-udabā, on the authority of Abū Ḥayyān, from whose works Yāḳūt derives much that is interesting, though he accuses Abū Ḥayyān of habitually romancing. Abū Ḥayyān, whose full name was ‘Alī Ibn Muḥammad al-Tauḥīdī, was an eminent writer of the fourth century of Islam, of whose works only three (to the best of my knowledge) have as yet been published: his treatises on Friendship and the Sciences, printed at the Jawā‘ib press in 1301 a.h.—without the very important treatise on the lives of the two viziers Ibn al-‘Amīd and Ibn ‘Abbād, which had been promised in advertisements, but which is said to be a book that brings ill-luck; and a work lithographed in India called Muḳābasāt. A brief account of him is given by Ibn Khillikān in his life of Ibn al-‘Amīd (translated by De Slane, iii, 264) ; a lengthier one by Ṣafadī, which Mr. Amedroz has kindly copied for me, and which is given in a note; and a very lengthy one by Yāḳūt, in the fifth volume of his dictionary. An extract from one of his works, which occurs in al-Ḳiftī's dictionary, is translated into German by Dieterici (“ Philosophie der Araber,” i, 144).

At Jaunpur, in the United Provinces of Agrah and Oudh, there are two unpublished inscriptions. One is of āham Beg, at first a page of Humāyūn, and afterwards the notorious favourite of ‘Alī Qulī ān, ān Zamān, a governor of Jaunpur during the reign of Akbar, who was killed in 974 h., when in rebellion against his sovereign, The other inscription is of āham Beg's father, named Ḥaidar.

On reading Professor Hilprecht's remarks upon the names in Professor Clay's “Business Documents of Murašû Sons of Nippur,” those upon the element îlu seemed to be especially interesting, and certain lists of gods in the British Museum occurred to me as possibly illustrating the point whether, in Assyro-Babylonian, the word îlu, ‘god,’ was ever used before the name of a deity, and pronounced with it. The inscription printed on the next page is from one of the tablets bearing upon the question.