[23] The best and most accepted account of these events is found in Vivien de St. Martin’s ‘Les Huns blancs,’ Paris, 1849.
[24] Cunningham’s ‘Numismatic Chron.,’ viii. 175; ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vii. 704; Lassen’s ‘Indische Alterth.,’ ii. p. 24.
[25] I wrote a paper stating the evidence in favour of this last view, which I intended should appear in the ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society.’ The evidence being, however, incomplete, it has only been printed for private circulation.
[26] ‘Journal Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. viii. p. 28.
[27] Ibid., vol. v. p. 42.
[28] The argument on which these assertions are founded is stated at length in the privately printed pamphlet alluded to on preceding page. It is too long to insert here, but, if not published before this work is complete, an abstract will be inserted in the Appendix.
[29] ‘Journal of the Koyal Asiatic Society,’ vol. iii. p. 202.
[30] For an exhaustive description of this subject see Priaulx, ‘India and Rome,’ London, 1873. My own impressions are, I confess, entirely in favour of the northern origin of the embassy. We are now in a position to prove an intimate connection between the north of India and Rome at that time. With the south it seems to have been only trade, but of this hereafter.
[31] ‘Dravidian Grammar,’ second edition, London, 1875, p. 129, et seqq.
[32] Sir Walter Elliot and others frequently speak of Buddhist monuments in the south. I have never, however, been able to see a photograph or drawing of any one except at Amravati and its neighbourhood.