218 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. [N.S., XV, 
‘“said he thought he had made a little mistake. The number 
“he fancied was ninety-four. Lord Saltire, from the card 
‘Table, said that made the matter clearer than before. For 
“if you placed the Ten Commandments to the previous result 
i i t 
‘foolish virgins and pitched Tobit’s dog, neck and heels, into 
“the result you would find yourself much about where you 
‘* started.” 
In a foot-note to the passage above quoted Kingsley certi- 
fies to this indefinite use of the number 84 by a “certain tribe” 
(presumably Australian) as actually employed “ to the author’s 
frequent confusion.” 
36. Personally I think, there is little profit in pursuing any 
d 84 cam 
to form some faint 
idea of how the territory of Chhattisgarh was organized in 
CHAPTER VI. 
THE SAMBALPUR ATHARAHGARH. 
d 
recorded, these Sambalpur Garhs were not, as in Chhattisgarh 
and elsewhere, interior subdivisions of the kingdom itself, but 
constituted (it is said) the units in a cluster of 18 independent 
States (of which Sambalpur was only one) in feudal subordina- 
tion to or confederation with the Rajas of Sambalpur and 
Patna. 
al or indepen 
“* Haihaibansi dynasty of Ratanpur in the Chhattisgarh plateau 
“which was formerly the capital of Chhattisgarh. Enquiry 
“on this point has failed to establish it one way or another 
“But it may have some foundation. The Chieftainships 
