Sir E. H. Bunbury, referring to the uncertainty of the identifications of the tribes and cities of the Panjâb mentioned by Alexander’s historians, says: “While the general course of his march must have followed approximately the same line of route that has been frequented in all ages from the banks of the Indus to those of the Beas, his expeditions against the various warlike tribes that refused submission to his arms led him into frequent excursions to the right and left of his main direction. And with regard to these localities we have a general clue to guide us. The most important of these sites to determine would be that of Sangala, the capital of the Cathaeans, which, according to the narrative of Arrian, was situated between the Hydraotes and the Hyphasis. Hence it was placed by Burnes at Lahore, and by others at Umritsir. But on the other hand there are not wanting strong reasons for identifying Sangala with the Sakala of Indian writers, and this was certainly situated to the west of the Hydraotes, between that river and the Acesines” (_Hist. of Anc. Geog._ pp. 444, 445). This was the view of General Cunningham, who, taking _Śâkala_ or _Sâkala_ (the _Sagala_ of Ptolemy’s _Geography_) to be the name in Sanskrit of the place which the Greeks called _Sangala_, found a site for it at Sânglawâla-Tiba, a small rocky hill with ruins upon it and with a large swamp at its base, and situated between the Râvi (Hydraôtês) and the Chenâb (Akesinês) at a distance of about sixty miles to the west of Lahore. This was no doubt the site of the Śâkala of Sanskrit writers and of the She-kie-lo of the Chinese pilgrim Hwen Thsiang, who visited the place in 630 A.D. But it cannot have been the site of the Sangala of the Greeks, for, in the first place, according to the testimony of all the historians, that city lay between the Hydraôtês and the Hyphasis, and was attacked by Alexander after he had crossed the former river. To meet this objection Cunningham assumes that Alexander must have recrossed the Hydraôtês on hearing that the Kathaians had risen in his rear. His thus turning aside from the direction of his march to make his rear secure is quite consistent with his usual practice, but the historians say nothing from which it can possibly be inferred that on this occasion he made any retrograde movement. But again philology as well as history is adverse to this identification, for, as has lately been shown by M. Sylvain Lévi (_Journal Asiatique_, series viii. vol. xv. pp. 237-239), _Sangala_, in accordance with the rules of transcription, must be taken to represent not _Sâkala_, but _Sâmkala_. Now, just as in Diodôros and Curtius we find Sangala mentioned in connection with a king called Sôphytês, so in an Appendix to Pânini’s _Grammar_, called the Gana-pâtha, _Sâmkala_ is mentioned in connection with _Saubhuta_, which, in accordance with the rules of transcription and the Greek practice of