Pilgrims from ancient Chin have left their accounts of the ancient world but their deep study is yet to be done through eyes and ears of Ptolemy’s maps. Fa-hian, who belonged to the fan tribe of ancient world,  visited places like Khotan, Ki-pin, Tseu-ho, Yu-hwui, Kie-sha, To-li, Wu-chang, We-chang, Su-ho-to, Kien-to-wei, Chu-cha-shi-lo, Fo-lu-sha, Nagarahara, Lo-i, Po-na, Pi-tu, Mo-tu-lo, Madhyadesha, Samkasya, Ki-jou-i, Sha-chi, Kiu-sa-lo, Na-pi-ka, Kapilavastu, Lumbini, Ramagama, Kusinagara, Hiranyavati, Lichchhavis, Vaisali, Ananda’s Samadhi, Pataliputra, Na-lo, Rajagriha, Gridharakuta, Kalandakavenuvana, Gaya, Kasi, Kausambi, Ta-thsin,, Pataliputra, Champa, Tamralipta, and Simhala, Same description of places are noticed in Fa-hian’s account like that of Hiouen Tsiang’s which show that these wandering monks were visiting the same place again and again from different sides.

This 5^th c A.D. visitor stayed in the Middle Country, same as Madhyadesha or the ‘centre of the earth’ for six years.

He visited most of the sacred places attached to the then sacred religion of his time; Sa-chi of his account has been restored as ‘Saketa’ which is as same as Eschate of Alexander’s historians, and Eschaton of Hebr. During his visit to this place he found ruins of monuments previously raised in the memory of ‘four Buddhas’. Immediately after it, the translator of Fa-hian’s accounts describes his visit to Kiu-sa-lo restored as Kosala, which is name of a country. But in reality this would be Kesuria or Caesarea near Sa-chi. Here we find descriptions on Loi or Lu or Liu-li country connected with history of ancient Rome.

Historians have failed to see Sa-chi as identical with Sanchi and Shanxi. Most of the historians agree that Hiouen Tsiang did not visit Sa-chi and also noted that descriptions on Simhala of the two pilgrims do not match. This trouble arises because ancient Magadha and ancient Pataliputra are not represented by the present Bihar and the present Patna.