1890.] 
CLASSICAL NOTICES. 
9 
Abisare.s. These names clearly represent ethnic appellations derived 
from Uras'd (Ptolemy’s Ovapcra ) and Abhisdrci. 1 
The only certain reference to Kasmir which classical literature has 
, , T _ . . preserved for us, is found in Ptolemy’s Geo- 
Ptolemy’s Kaspema. There can be nQ donbt that D . Anvi]le 
was right in recognizing its name in that of the region of Kacr7rapia 
situated ‘below the sources of the Bidaspes (Vitasta) and of the 
Sandabal (Candrabhaga) and of the Adris (Iravati)’. 2 Ptolemy men¬ 
tions this territory correctly enough between that of the Daradrai or 
Dards on the Indus and Kylindrine or the land of the Kulindas on the 
Hyphasis (Bias) and eastwards. In his subsequent detailed description 
of Indian territories, however, he makes the region ‘held by the 
Kaspeiraaans ’ extend eastwards from the land of the Pandoouoi on the 
Bidaspes as far as Mount Ooindion or the Vindhya. 3 
It is clear that the limits here indicated which would embrace 
a great portion of the present Panjab with parts of the North-West 
Provinces and Central India, can have nothing to do with Kasmir. 
It has been suggested that Ptolemy’s statement refers to a period when 
the power of the dynasty ruling over Kasmir actually extended over 
the wide territories above indicated. 4 The assumption, put into a form 
more in keeping with historical probability, would be that Kasmir was 
then subject to a great foreign dominion the rulers of which, for one 
reason or the other, were in Ptolemy’s source designated from this part 
of their realm. 
However this may be, it is curious to note that we meet with the 
name Kdo-7retpa also in the long list of cities located within the region 
belonging to the Kaspeirseans. The geographical position assigned to 
it by Ptolemy’s table (or map) would bring Kaspeira close to the junc¬ 
tion of the Hydaspes and Zaradros (Satlej), i.e., the neighbourhood of 
Multan. 5 Yet it seems difficult to believe that the information origin¬ 
ally underlying this entry referred to any other locality but Kasmir. 6 
1 See Lassen, Ind. Alt., ii. p. 174 ; Wilson, Essay, p. 116 ; also my notes on 
Rajatar. i. 180 ; v. 217. 
2 See Ptolemy vn. i. 42 and pp. 21, 40 sq. in Antiqnite Geographique de Vlnde , 
par 41. D' Anvil le, Premier Geographe du Roi, etc , Paris, 1775.—The accuracy and 
sound judgment displayed in this work fully justify the great fame it has enjoyed. 
3 Ptolemy, vn. i. 47. 
4 Compare, e.g., Lassen, Ind. Alt. ii. p. 898 ; Y. de St. Martin, Memoires de 
VAcademie des Inscriptions, Sav. etrang., Ire Serie, t. v., p. 880. 
6 See the old map reproduced in Dr. McCrindle’s Ancient India as described 
by Ptolemy, Bombay, 18S5. 
6 This had been rightly seen already by D’Anville. He points out, p. 40, 
that the error in latitude implied by Ptolemy’s position of Kaspeira (if STmagar 
J. i. 2 
