The Chandálbhor Phúr, or Púr, in some copies of the Yamíní, the ruler of Ásí, may, perhaps, indicate that the Rájá was a Chandel Rájpút, for Ásí is close to the spot where we find that clan now established. The name Phúr may have some connection with the legendary Fúr, or Porus, who opposed Alexander; for, be it observed, his capital is represented by Indian geographers to have been in the neighbourhood of Allahabad; and the Rájás of Kumáún, who are themselves Chandels, represent themselves to be descended from this Fúr, the ruler of Kanauj and Prayág. So addicted are the Asiatics to ascribe this name to Indian potentates that some Arabic authors name even Ráí Pithaurá as Puras. On this name and the analogies which it suggests, much might be added, but it would lead us beyond the immediate purport of this Note to discuss them.*

Chand Ráí, perhaps, also indicates the same lineage, for his dominions must have adjoined Bundelkhand, in which province are included Mahoba and Chanderí, the original seats from which the Chandels emigrated.

Thirteenth Expedition.—Battle of the Ráhib. A.H. 412.—'Utbí mentions no year for this expedition. Nizámu-d dín Ahmad attri­butes it to 410; Firishta to 412. The latter is the most probable. Mírkhond and Khondamír make no mention of it. 'Utbí places the scene on the Ráhib, which we know from Al Bírúní to be on the other side of the Ganges, and is either the Rámgangá, or the Sye— apparently the latter in the present instance.

The other authors place the scene on the Jumna, and we might consider their account to refer to some other expedition, were not Purú Jaipál mentioned in both, as well as the circumstance of the surprise by eight men swimming over the river. It is also worthy of remark that Al Bírúní gives the death of Púr Jaipál in 412 A.H., which makes it highly probable that he was slain in this very action, though that fact is not expressly mentioned in the Taríkh Yamíní.

Dr. Bird doubts this expedition altogether, because another expe­dition occurs against Kálinjar, and the two appear to have been in reality one. But here not even Firishta represents that Mahmúd went to Kálinjar, though he was engaged with the Rája of that place. 'Utbí's statement must be received as conclusive respecting a movement as far as the Ráhib; though he mentions nothing about Kálinjar or Nandá Rája. Indeed, in that author we nowhere find mention of that submission to the Sultán, on account of which the Ráí of Kanauj was sacrificed to the vengeance of the Hindú confederacy.

That Purú Jaipál should be found on the other side of the Ráhib, as 'Utbí says, or come to the aid of Nandá Rájá, according to Nizámu-d dín and Firishta, is confirmative of the probability pre­viously noticed, that he had then established himself far to the eastward of Lahore.

The following is the statement of Nizámu-d dín:—

“It is said that when Sultán Mahmúd heard that a Rája named Nandá* had slain the Ráí of Kanauj, for having recognized and sub­mitted to the Sultán, he resolved to invade his territory. So, in A.H. 410, he marched again towards Hindústán. When he reached the banks of the Jumna, Púr Jaipál,* who had so often fled before his troops, and who had now come to assist Nandá, encamped in face of the Sultán; but there was a deep river between them, and no one passed over without the Sultán's permission. But it so happened that eight of the royal guards of Mahmúd's army having crossed the river together, they threw the whole army of Púr Jaipál into confu­sion, and defeated it. Púr Jaipál, with a few infidels, escaped. The eight men* not returning to the Sultán, advanced against the city of Bárí,* which lay in the vicinity. Having found it defence­less, they plundered it, and pulled down the heathen temples.

The Sultán advanced from hence to the territory of Nandá, who, resolving on battle, collected a large army, which is said to have con­sisted of thirty-six thousand horse, one hundred and five thousand foot,* and six hundred and forty elephants. When the Sultán approached his camp, he first sent an ambassador, calling upon him to acknowledge fealty, and embrace the Muhammadan faith. Nandá refused these conditions, and prepared to fight. Upon this, the Sultán reconnoitred Nandá's army from an eminence, and observing its vast numbers, he regretted his having come thither. Prostrating himself before God, he prayed for success and victory. When night came on, great fear and alarm entered the mind of Nandá, and he fled with some of his personal attendants, leaving all his baggage and equipments. The next day the Sultán, being apprized of this, rode out on horseback without any escort, and carefully examined the ground. When he was satisfied that there was no ambush or strate­gical device, he stretched out his hands for plunder and devastation. Immense booty fell into the hands of the Musulmáns, and five hundred and eighty of Nandá's elephants, which were in the neigh­bouring woods, were taken. The Sultán, loaded with victory and success, returned to Ghaznín.”* —Tabakát-i Akbarí.

Fourteenth Expedition.—Kírát, Núr, Lohkot, and Láhore.* A.H. 413. We now lose the guidance of 'Utbí, and are compelled to follow the more uncertain authority of later writers. It has been questioned whether this expedition ever took place. Elphinstone and Reinaud take no notice of it, and Bird says that it is a mere repetition of the previous one to Bálnát; and “the narratives evidently refer to the same places and transactions.” Even if they did refer to the same places, there is no reason why the transactions should not have been different. As Firishta asserts that Kuriat* and Nardein lie apparently between Turkistán and Hindústán, it is evident that he thought he was dealing with places which had not yet been mentioned. His authority for assigning this position to the tract is not the Tabakát-i Akbarí, in which it is merely stated that the country has mountain passes, is very cold, abounds with fruit, and that its inhabitants worship lions. This latter, no doubt, alludes to the worship of Sákya Sinha (lion) the Buddha. But, though Firishta had little authority for his assertion, it is evident that he was correct in making it Kuriat. First, we must restore the true reading of Nardein. The latter, in the Tabakát-i Akbarí and Kanzu-l Mahpúr is correctly given as “Núr;” and “Kuriat” in the same works, in the original of Firishta, is correctly given as “Kírát.” Now, the posi­tion of Kírát and Núr is ascertained by referring to Al Bírúní's account of the Kábul river, which is thus described by him: “This body of water—the Kábul river—passes through the country of Lam-ghán, near the fort of Dirúna, and is then joined by the waters of Núr and Kírát.* When it reaches opposite Pesháwar, it forms a consider­able stream,” etc. Here, then, we must look for the waters of Núr and Kírát, between the towns of Jalálábád and Pesháwar, and we shall find that the country alluded to is that drained by the Kuner and Landye rivers—that is, Swát, Bajaur, and part of Káfiristán. This tract exactly corresponds with the description given in the Tabakát-i Akbarí; and plenty of Buddhist remains survive to explain the allusion to the worship of lions.

On the supposition that Núr and Kírát were in the neighbourhood of Bajaur, there is no difficulty in tracing the progress of the con­queror during this invasion. On his way from Ghaznín, he makes an incursion across the Kábul river, and while his general is engaged in capturing Núr and building the fort, to overawe the wild inhabi­tants, he himself proceeds to the impregnable Lohkot, by the same road which he had previously travelled; and then returned to Ghaznín after visiting Lahore.

As the Habíbu-s Siyar gives no account of this expedition, the following narrative is taken from Nizámu-d dín Ahmad. Firishta adds to it that the king of Lahore fled to Ajmír, and that Mahmúd, before returning to Ghazní, nominated commanders to the conquered provinces of Hindustán, and left troops for their protection. This author is mistaken in speaking of the stone which was found at Nárdín, and was represented to be four thousand years old. He has in this respect, from similarity of name, confounded this expedi­tion with that against Ninduna or Nárdín, in the Bálnát hills.