kshattriya jatayah Vrishalatvam parigatah Brahmananam adarsana.  Dravidas cha Kalindas cha Pulindas chapy Usinarah Kalisarpa Mahishakas tastah kshattriya jatayah,” &c. &c.  The same reference may be found in verses 2158-9.  The Mahabharata shows the Yavanas descended from Turvasu—­once upon a time Kshatriya, subsequently degraded into Vrishala.  Harivamsa shows when and how the Yavanas were excommunicated.  It may be inferred from the account therein contained of the expedition against Ayodhya by the Yavanas, and the subsequent proceedings of Sagara, that the Yavanas were, previous to the date of the expedition, Kshatriyas subject to the government of the powerful monarchs who reigned at Ayodhya.  But on account of their having rebelled against their sovereign, and attacked his capital, they were excommunicated by Sagara who successfully drove them out of Ayodhya, at the suggestion of Vasishtha who was the chief minister and guru of Sagara’s father.  The only trouble in connecting the Pelasgians with, and tracing their origin to, the Kshatriyas of Rajputana, is created by the Orientalist who constructs a fanciful chronology, based on no proof, and showing only unfamiliarity with the world’s real history, and with Indian history even within historical periods.

The value of that chronology—­which places virtually the “primitive Indo-Germanic-period” before the ancient Vedic period (!)—­may, in conclusion, be illustrated by an example.  Rough as may be the calculations offered, it is impossible to go deeper into any subject of this class within the narrow limits prescribed, and without recourse to data not generally accessible.  In the words of Prof.  Max Muller:—­“The Code of Manu is almost the only work in Sanskrit literature which, as yet, has not been assailed by those who doubt the antiquity of everything Indian.  No historian has disputed its claim to that early date which had from the first been assigned to it by Sir William Jones” ("Hist.  Sans, Lit.” p. 61).  And now, pray, what is this extremely “early date?” “From 880 to 1200 B.C.,” we are told.  We will then, for the present purpose, accept this authoritative conclusion.  Several facts, easily verifiable, have to be first of all noticed:—­(1) Manu in his many enumerations of Indian races, kingdoms and places, never once mentions Bengal; the Aryan Brahmans had not yet reached, in the days when his Code was compiled, the banks of the Ganges nor the plains of Bengal.  It was Arjuna who went first to Banga (Bengal) with his sacrificial horse. [Yavanas are mentioned in Rajdharma Anasasanika Parva as part of the tribes peopling it.] (2) In the Ayun a list of the Hindu kings of Bengal is given.  Though the date of the first king who reigned over Banga cannot be ascertained, owing to the great gaps between the various dynasties; it is yet known that Bengal ceased to be an independent Hindu kingdom from 1203 after Christ.  Now if, disregarding these gaps, which are wide and many, we make up the sum of only those chronological periods of the reign of the several dynasties that are preserved by history, we find the following:—­