fact,
all local traces of the industry being now extinct, still the
cumulative evidence which can be brought forward is such that I do not
anticipate that any serious objections can be urged to the natural
conclusions derivable from that evidence.
Gibbon, in the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, for some reason which he does not give, arrived at the conclusion that it was the mines described by Tavernier at Soumelpour l on
the Gouel (i. e. Sema or Semulpur on the Koel, in the Sub-Division of
Palämau), rather than any of the localities in Southern India, which
supplied Rome with diamonds.
Ptolemy mentions Sambalaka 2
as a city in the country of the Mandalai which produced the finest
diamonds in the world. Now, although it is possible that he may have
referred to Sambalpur on the Mahanâdï, where diamonds are known to
occur, I prefer to identify it with Tavernier's Soumelpour, as above,
because it was situated in the country generally recognized as that of
the Mandali or Mundas, while Sambalpur is beyond its limits.
Further,
it may be conveniently remarked here that Ptolemy's Adamas river,
although he clearly indicates its origin in Chota Nägpur (Kokkonage or
Kokra), has by some authors been identified with the Mahanâdï, while
others have with greater probability identified it with one or other of
the rivers rising in Chota Nägpur, namely, the Dâmudâ, Subanrikhä or
Brahmani, with its tributaries the Sänkh and Southern Koel, to which we
shall presently again refer. The Mahanâdï is probably Ptolemy's Manada,3 rising in the country of the Sabarae or Savaras, where diamonds were also obtained.
Our
next reference to this locality is a very definite and explicit one ;
it is separated by a long period of time from Ptolemy. In Professor
Blochmann's translation * of the Tuzuk-i-Jahângïrï, we find that ' On
the 3d Isfandiârmuz of the 10th year of my reign (a.d. 1616)
it was reported to me (Jahângïr) that Ibrahim Khan (governor of Bihar)
had overrun Kokrah and taken possession of its diamond washings.
1 By a misprint given as Jumelpur, in Bengal, Decline and Fall, ii. 281, noie.
2 See Indian Antiquary, vol. xiii, 1884, p. 364, where it is identified with Sambalpur. J. W. MeCrindle (Ancient India as described hy Ptolemy, 133)
writes : ' Sxmbalaka is Sambhal, a town in Rohilkhand. Sambalaka or
Sambhala is the name of several countries in India, but there is only
one town of the name that is met with in the Eastern parts. It is a
very ancient town and on the same parallel as Delhi.' (See Imperial Gazetteer, xx. 18 f.)
3 So MeCrindle, op. cit., 71.
4 Journ. As. Hoc. Bengal, xl. 113: Àïn-i-Akbarï, 480 η.
