_Janam_, ‘birth’; _es_, ‘lord’ or ‘man.’ [See p. 24 above.] Footnote 3.3.30: “La loi des Lombards oppose les bénéfices à la propriété. Les historiens, les formules, les codes des différens peuples barbares, tous les monumens qui nous restent, sont unanimes. Enfin, ceux qui ont écrit le livre des fiefs, nous apprennent, que d’abord les Seigneurs purent les ôter à leur volonté, qu’ensuite ils les assurèrent pour un an, et après les donnèrent pour la vie” (_L’Esprit des Loix_, chap. xvi. livre 30). Footnote 3.3.31: A.D. 1766. Footnote 3.3.32: Contemporary and opponent of Sultan Babur. Footnote 3.3.33: Many of them taking wives from the degraded but aboriginal races in their neighbouring retreats, have begot a mixed progeny, who, in describing themselves, unite the tribes of father and mother. Footnote 3.3.34: Literally, ‘a belly-full.’ Footnote 3.3.35: Allodial property is defined (Hallam, vol. i. p. 144) as “land which had descended by inheritance, subject to no burthen but public defence. It passed to all the children equally; in failure of children, to the nearest kindred.” Thus it is strictly the _Miras_ or _Bhum_ of the Rajputs: inheritance, patrimony. In Mewar it is divisible to a certain extent; but in Cutch, to infinity: and is liable only to local defence. The holder of bham calls it his _Adyapi_, _i.e._ of old, by prescriptive right; not by written deed. Montesquieu, describing the conversion of allodial estates into fiefs, says, “These lands were held by Romans or Franks (_i.e._ freemen) not the king’s vassals,” viz. lands exterior and anterior to the monarchy. We have Rathor, Solanki, and other tribes, now holding bhum in various districts, whose ancestors were conquered by the Sesodias, but left in possession of small portions insufficient to cause jealousy. Some of these may be said to have converted their lands into fiefs, as the Chauhan lord of ——, who served the Salumbar chief. Footnote 3.3.36: Amidst ruins overgrown with forest, I discovered on two tables of stone the genealogical history of this branch, which was of considerable use in elucidating that of Anhilwara, and which corresponded so well with the genealogies of a decayed bard of the family, who travelled the country for a subsistence, that I feel assured they formerly made good use of these marble records. Footnote 3.3.37: See Appendix, Nos. XVI. and XVII. Footnote 3.3.38: