444 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. {November, 1913. 
the same case with regard to Manrique’s catalogue, the 
Bhiiiyas of Chandekan, Jassor, Bacala, and Bulva suggesting 
Hindu Zamindars, and it does not follow that Manrique or Dr. 
Wise is wrong for the period each refers to. 
Dr. Wise’s list has the disadvantage of relegating to a 
enumeration takes in the whole of Bengal. Dr. Wise objected 
to it because Orissa, ‘* Jagannath,’ and Midinipir could not have 
had separate rulers, and the name of Bengala seemed to recall 
the fabulous city on which so much was written by the travel- 
lers of the XVIth and XVIIth centuries. (J.4.8.B. 1875, 9. 
o a town, can never 
have created any difficulty to the travellers visiting Bengal in 
the XVIth and XVIIth centuries, Unfortunately, so little 
attention has been paid to the accounts of Bengal written 
Satgaon, Chittagong, and even such places as Higli an 
time. It is easy to understand why ‘‘ Bengala’’ should have 
been placed at Chittagong by Portuguese cartographers. The 
first Portuguese settlement was at Chittagong from about 1534, 
and, till the time when they founded Hiigli (1578), ‘to go to 
Bengala, placed it at Chittagong, on the Cosmi (Bassein) 
tiver, too. We have letters from Chandernagar dated ‘‘ A 
a - But, this is no reason why we should get impatient 
and speak of Bengala as a mythical city, or fancy that it was 
somewhere in the Sundarbans and has long since been swept 
Antonio do Rozario. Set free, he vai is rya 
Fv0 : ’ prevailed on many of his ryats to 
come Christians. The descendants isti w mostly 
; * Ps ge of these Christians are now most 
