206 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. [N.S , XV, 
with two exeaynes iF instances quoted 4 Sir 
i. Elliott 2 are not taken from any of the old kingdoms in or 
around Chhattisgarh. The Slowing may therefore serve se 
in some measure, a ie 79 to the list given in the Glossary. 
Among the “36 forts” given in para. 7 above, it will 
be noticed that no fewer than 21 are groups of 84 villages. 
On page 117 of the Bilaspur Gazetteer there is reference to a 
Chaurasi at Loharsi held by a Brahmin family. 
n Major Roughsedge’s Report of 1818 on the State of 
arena and its oe five Chaurasis are mentione 
In Appendix B of Sir R. Temple’s Report on the Zamindaris ' 
of the Central acres dated 31/10/1863 Sahaspur and Suar- 
mar Zamindaris are said each to contain 84 villages, and 
reference is also made to 84 villages, i taken from Phuljhar 
and included in the Borasambar Estat 
In Vol. XVII of Sir W. Hanter’a ‘Statistical Account of 
Bengal two Chaurasis are mentioned as existing in the Korea 
State (op. cit., p. 216) and one in the Gangpur State (op. 
cit., p. 193). In a printed report on the Mandla District by 
Captain olen written in 1860 two Chaurasis are mentioned 
on pages 29 a 
In the Chhattisgarh leudatory States Gazetteer, published 
in 1909, where one might have looked for more frequent — 
of these territorial divisions, I can ut a single Cha 
noted as having existed formerly i in the Sarangarh State hace 
Gazetteer, p. 205). 
time of sated Ajit Singh (1761 ‘AD. in which nine 
parganas of 84 villages are mentioned, and a marginal note 
records that ‘ Chaurasi was the most common convention of 
naming Parganas 
R 
e 
are all territories ae to Ratanpur and Rai ur. The use 
widely prevalent and, as I have shown, was particularly well 
known in Chhattisgarh. 
lv. As to the identity of the Garh and na “pte there 
the Satgarh of the Bilaspur District. Blunt in 1795 calls it 
the Khas Parganah of Matin and describes it as one of ‘‘ seven 
small Districts called Chaurasis ’»—evidently referring to what 
are more commonly a as the Satga arh. In 1864 Matin 
was still described as a “ Parganah.” We may take an even 
more striking instance. In Mr. Hewitt’s Settlement Report 
(page 18) he quotes from an old account of the Haihaibansi 
