The Dor and Chandel were well-known tribes; the latter contended with Prithiraj, who deprived them of Mahoba and Kalanjar, and all modern Bundelkhand. Footnote 10.1.55: The renowned Dahima was lord of Bayana; also called Druinadhar. [The ancient name was Srīpathā (_IGI_, vii. 137). This catalogue of the chiefs is the work of the Chauhān bard, desirous of exalting the dignity of his tribe, and is not historical.] Footnote 10.1.56: [These statements regarding the Chauhān dynasty are inconsistent with the Bijolli inscription, and Cunningham (_ASR_, i. 157) finds it impossible to make any satisfactory arrangement, either of the names of the princes, or of the length of their reigns. The facts, as far as they can be ascertained, are given by Smith (_EHI_, 386 ff.). Cunningham (_op. cit._ ii. 256) points out the author twice ignores the date of A.D. 1163 of Vīsaladeva on the Delhi pillar, to make him an opponent of Mahmūd in the beginning of the eleventh century. “In one place he gives to Hansrāj, whom the Hāra bard assigns to the year A.D. 770, the honour of conquering Sabuktigīn, which in another place he gives to his successor Dujgandeo.” He concludes that the chief cause of error is the identification of two different princes of the name of Vīsaladeva as one person. For his discussion see _ASR_, ii. 256 f.] Footnote 10.1.57: See _Asiatic Researches_, vol. i. p. 379, vol. vii. p. 180, and vol. ix. p. 453. [Nigambhod Ghāt is immediately outside the north wall of Shāhjahānābād, and above, not below, the city of Delhi (_ASR_, i. 136, 161, 164).] Footnote 10.1.58: I brought away an inscription of this, the last Chauhan emperor, from the ruins of his palace at Hasi or Hansi, dated S. 1224. See comments thereon, _Transactions of the Royal Asiatic Society_, vol. i. p. 133. Footnote 10.1.59: