The _Tsiganologue_ claims, as has been seen, “a still earlier priority” in the identification of Gypsy and Jat; and he proposes to “establish exactly the share belonging to each of us.” This is the normal process of the cabinet savant, who is ever appearing, like the _deus ex machinâ_, to snatch from the explorer’s hand the meed of originality. The former borrows from his books a dozen different theories; and when one happens to be proved true by the labours of the man of action, he straightway sets himself up as the “theoretical discoverer” of the sources of the Nile, or of any other matter which engages popular attention. But in the present case I deny that my rival has any claim whatever. My personal acquaintance with the Jats began in 1845, and my Grammar and Vocabulary were sent to the Royal Asiatic Society in 1848 before my departure from India. On the other hand, M. Paul Bataillard, I understand, knew nothing of the Indine Jats when he wrote his first paper _De l’apparition, etc._, in 1844. He honestly owns that he is no Orientalist; and that he required the assistance of the late M. Reinaud, who _was_ a scholar, to identify the _Zuth_ of _Hamza Ispahani_ (tenth century), the _Luri_ musicians of the _Shahnameh_ (eleventh century), and the _Zoth_ or _Zutt_ of the _Kamûz_ dictionary (fourteenth century) with the Zatt or Dyatt of India. This was in 1849. His _exposé étendu_ was accepted by Professor Pott in the same year, and appeared in the _Nachtrag_ before mentioned, which completed the _grand travail--Die Zigeuner_. Such was the extent of my claimant’s discovery. He had even to learn from Professor Fleischer, of Leipzig, that “the Zigeuner descend from the _G’at_ or _G’et_, the most ancient inhabitants of North-Western India,”[113] a second-hand opinion, derived from “Gypsy Borrow,” Colonel Sleeman, and other Englishmen. I need hardly say that Professor Pott, the distinguished member of that heroic band which founded comparative philology, knew nothing practically or personally about either the Gypsies or the Jats. And it is evident that Professor de Goeje is in outer darkness when he speaks of “the view _propounded by Pott_ as early as 1853.”