(39) Ships did not go up to it but remained at +Barbarikon+, their cargoes being conveyed up the river in small boats. In Ptolemy (VII. i. 61) the form of the name is +Binagara+, which is less correct since the word is composed of _Min_, the Indian name for the Skythians, and _nagar_, a city. Ritter considers that +Ṭhaṭha+ is its modern representative, since it is called +Saminagar+ by the Jâḍejâ Rajputs who, though settled in Kachh, derive their origin from that city. To this view it is objected that Ṭhaṭha is not near the position which Ptolemy assigns to his +Binagara+. Mannert places it at +Bakkar+, D’Anville at +Mansura+, and Vincent at +Menhabery+ mentioned by Edrisi (I. p. 164) as distant two stations or 60 miles from +Dabil+, which again was three stations or 90 miles from the mouth of the Indus, that is it lay at the head of the Delta. Our author informs us that in his time +Minagar+ was ruled by Parthian princes. The Parthians (the Parada of Sanskrit writers) must therefore have subverted a Skythian dynasty which must have been that which (as Benfey has shown) was founded by +Yeukaotschin+ between the years 30 and 20 B.C., or about 30 years only after the famous Indian Æra called _Śâkâbda_ (the year of the Śâka) being that in which Vikramâditya expelled the Skythians from Indian soil. The statement of the _Periplûs_ that Parthian rulers succeeded the Skythian is confirmed by Parthian coins found everywhere in this part of the country. These sovereigns must have been of consequence, or the trade of their country very lucrative to the merchant as appears by the presents necessary to ensure his protection—plate, musical instruments, handsome girls for the Harem, the best wine, plain cloth of high price, and the finest perfumes. The profits of the trade must therefore have been great, but if Pliny’s account be true, that every pound laid out in India produced a hundred at Rome, greater exactions than these might easily have been supported.