192 Report of the Archoeological Savvey. [No. 3, 



Its highest point is 44 feet 9 inches, which, if my identification is 

 correct, should he the ruins of the great Stupa of Asoka, upwards of 

 100 feet in height, as this lofty tower is said to have heen situated 

 inside a monastery in the middle of the town. Outside the town there 

 were two other monasteries, inhabited by 300 monks. These may 

 perhaps he represented by two small mounds which still exist on the 

 east side of the Grreat Khera. To the south there is a third mound, 

 165 feet in length by 105 feet in breadth, which may possibly be the 

 remains of one or more of the five Brahmanical temples described by 

 Hwen Thsang. 



232. Atranji-Khera had two gates, one to the east, towards the Kali 

 Nadi, and the other to the south. The foundation of the place is attri- 

 buted to Raja Vena Chahravartti. The mound is covered with broken 

 bricks of large size and fragments of statues, and old coins are said to 

 be frequently found. All the existing fragments of statues are said to 

 be Brahmanical. There is a temple of Mahadeo on the mound, and 

 there are five lingams in different places, of which one is 6 feet in height. 

 The principal statue is that of a four-armed female called Debt, but 

 which, as she is represented treading upon a prostrate figure, is most 

 probably Durgd. 



233. The only objection to the identification of Atranji with Pi- 

 loshanna is the difference between the distance of 200 li, or 33 miles, 

 as stated by Hwen Thsang, and the actual distance of 43 miles direct, 

 or about 48 or 50 miles by road. I have already suggested the pos- 

 sibility of there being some mistake in the recorded distance of Hwen 

 Thsang, but perhaps an equally probable explanation may be found in 

 the difference of the length of the yojana. Hwen Thsang states that 

 he allowed 40 Chinese li to the Yojana ; but if the old yojana of 

 Kohilkhand differed from that of the Central Doab as much as the Jcos 

 of these districts now differ, his distances would have varied by half a 

 mile in every Iws, or by two miles in very yojana, as the Rohilkhand 

 Jcos is only If mile, while that of the Doab is two miles ; the latter 

 being one-third greater. Now, if we apply this difference to Hwen 

 Thsang's measurement of 200 li, or 33 miles, we increase the distance 

 at once to 44 miles, which agrees with the direct measured distance on 

 the map. I confess, however, that I am rather inclined to believe in 

 the possibility of there being a mistake in Hwen Thsang's recorded 



