6. Concerning the origin of the Gypsy article (_o--os_, _a--as_, etc.), which is unknown to both Sanskrit and Prakrit, the suit is still pending. Possibly it is original and peculiar to the dialect; more probably it is an European and especially a Greek innovation. Briefly, until we have grammatical and vocabularian sketches of the Central Asian and the Turkoman-Gypsy tongues, we are not in a position to draw conclusions. I propose to discuss the Indian affinities of the Gypsies. I begin with a detailed critique of the various reviews proceeding from the prolific pen of M. Paul Bataillard, who claims the merit, such as it is, of having first identified the Gypsies and the Jats. I end with topographical notes on both tribes throughout their extension from the Indus to Morocco and even to the Brazil. Part I NOTES ON MODERN STUDIES OF “CHINGANOLOGY” CHAPTER I THE INDIAN AFFINITIES OF THE GYPSIES The following letter to the _Academy_ (March 27, 1875), which opened the discussion between M. Paul Bataillard and its author, speaks for itself[85]: “In the _Academy_ of February 27, 1875, I had these words: “‘Professor de Goeje, of Leyden, has printed some interesting _Contributions to the History of the Gipsies_ (sic). He accepts the view propounded by Pott,[86] as early as 1853, that the Gipsies are closely related to the Indian Jatt (a name which the Arab historians transform into Zott).... Dr. Trumpp[87] has already pointed out the close resemblance between the European Gipsies and the Jatt of the banks of the Indus.’ “I venture to hope that you will permit me to show the part taken by myself in this question.[88] _Sindh and the Races that inhabit the Valley of the Indus_ (London: Allen), my volume written between 1845 and 1849, and published in 1851, thus treats of the peoples of the plains: “‘The Jat, or as others write the word, Jath, Juth, or Jutt, was, in the time of the Kalhorá dynasty, one of the ruling classes in Sindh. It was probably for this reason that the author of the Tohfat el Kirám (a well-known book of Sindhi Annals) made them of kindred origin with the Belochis, who now repudiate such an idea with disdain. The Jat’s account of his own descent gives to Ukayl, the companion of Muhammad, the high honour of being his progenitor; but what class of Muslim people, however vile, do not claim some equally high origin?