Page images

examination of Pliny's itinerary, is intended rather to thew his .
great accuracy in geographical subjects, than as a proof of the
above position ; although it may serve that purpose also. To use
the words of a celebrated author, “ Pliny's natural history is one
“ of the greatest monuments of universal knowledge, and unwearied

application, now extant in the world *.” That part of the itinerary, applicable to my purpose, is as follows:


From Taxila or Tapila, on the Indus (probably near the site of
Attock) + to the river Hydaspes (the modern Chelum), 120 Roman
To the Hyphasis (Beyah)

390 Roman miles.
To the Hefudrus, probably the Setlege river 168
To the Jomanes (Yumna)

To the Ganges
To Rhodopa

To Calinapaxa (a city)

To the conflux # of the Jomanes (Jumna)
and Ganges

To Palibothra

425 To the mouth of the Ganges


I 12

It must first be observed, of this itinerary, that it furnishes no means of comparing the whole distance between the Indus and the mouth of the Ganges, as shewn here, with that on the map; because the second article, namely, the distance from the Hydaspes to the Hyphasis, is obviously wrong, even if the text (which is very obscure) is to be taken at 390 : for it cannot be more than 220 of Pliny's miles, unless the surveyor of. Alexander's marches threw

Blackwall. + Taxila or Tapila, and the Indus, are mentioned as one and the same place by Pliny: Ad flumen Indum et oppidum Taxila. Book VI.

Here we may remark, by the way, that if any capital city had food at the conflux of these rivers, it is likely that Pliny would have taken notice of it.




into the account, the circuitous route to the city of Sangala, &c. after the Catheri or Cathei. So that the account, as far as it regards the whole distance, is vitiated ; and we must therefore have recourse to parts.

Taking therefore for granted, that the Beyah river is meant by the Hyphafis (or rather Hypasis) as I hope to prove satisfactorily in my observations on Alexander's march; and measuring on the map, along the line of the great road from the Panjab country to the mouth of the Ganges, the distance will be about 1140 G. miles : and as the itinerary in question gives the length of the same interval at 2022 Roman miles, the proportion of one of Pliny's miles to a geographic mile, will be as 56 to 100, in horizontal distance ; or about of a British mile in road distance. This is certainly too short for the Roman mile of 1000 paces but the question in the present case, is not the actual distance, but the proportions of the intermediate parts of the road. The conflux of the Ganges and Jumna, on the map,

of Pliny's miles from the Beyah, and 1032 above the mouth of the Ganges : and the itinerary makes the length of the first interval 959, the other 1063; that is, Pliny's account places the conflux too far down by 31 of his miles, or about 17 G. miles. Nor is this difference at all to be regarded in the general question : for our ideas of the distance were much wider of the truth, 20 years ago.

Palibothra, he places 425 miles, or so many parts in 1063, of the distance from the conflux of the Jumna to the mouth of the Ganges : and this is the point we are to attend to. Patna indeed, is only 345 of Pliny's miles below the present conflux; and this difference of 8o of Pliny's, or about 44 G. miles, however considerable it may appear to those who expect nice coincidences in such matters as these ; does not, in my idea, lessen the general authority of the itinerary: because if we admit only what is literally proved,

is. 990

• M. D'Anville is of opinion that Pliny turned the Greek ftades into miles, at the rate of 8 to a mile; and thus accounts for their shortness. M. D'Anville, who has gone deeply into the fubje&, thinks' that it requires 1050 itinerary stades (of horizontal measure, I apprehend) o make a degree of a great circle. See his Eclaircissemens, page 5 ;.



Palibothra must still have been situated within 44 miles of Patna. And as the people there have a tradition that Patna stands on, or near, the site of Patelpoot-her, it rather proves to me either that there is an error crept into the copies of the itinerary; which notwithstanding, proves in generals as much as is required ;, or that the point of conflux of the Jumna with the Ganges, has undergone a change. For although the point of conflux is not found in the very position in which it ought to be by the itinerary, yet Patna is nearer to the position assigned to Palibothra. It

It may appear to some, a violent way of reconciling disagreements, but it is no new thing for the rivers of India to change their course and place of confluence. I have in another place * taken occasion to observe that the Cosa river changed its place of confluence with the Ganges, which is now 45 miles higher up, than it was.

The Burrampooter has varied its course still more. And to come nearer to the site of Patna, the change in the conflux of the Soane, just now remarked. It would be unnecessary to enter so far into a discussion of these differences, had not Pliny assured us that the distances were measured, and that by order of Seleucus Nicator. We may

observe that Arrian does not mention the name Jomanes in his book, although he does that of Sonus. And if we had no other authority than that passage in Pliny, which expressly says that the Jomanes, a river which passes by Methora (probably Matura) runs into the Ganges by Palibothra, we must have supposed that this city was seated at the conflux of the two rivers. But the itinerary says that Palibothra was 425 miles below this conflux. Pliny 'must therefore have meant another river, different from the Jomanes.

Strabo gives the distance of Palibothra above the mouth of the Ganges at 6ooo stadia ; and though we cannot fix the exact length of the stade, we can collect enough to understand that 6000 stades

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

laid off from the mouth of the Ganges would not reach far, if at all, beyond Patna *. Nor must we forget the paffage of Arrian (in Indicis) in which Palibothra, the chief city of the Indians

upon the Ganges, .is said to lie towards the mouths of that river. But we ought not to omit, on the other hand, that Arrian quotes from Eratosthenes, the distance of Palibothra from the western extreme of India, which is said to be 10,000 ftades, only : and that Ptolemy gives its latitude at 27°; both which particulars apply better to Canoge than to Patna. It is possible that both places may have been occasionally used as capitals of the Prafii, as we have known both Agra and Delhi to have been of Hindooftan in general, during the two last centuries.

Pliny's Palibothra, however, is clearly Patna : and it is probable that Strabo meant the same place, by the distance from the mouth of the Ganges.

Canoge t, the ruins of which are at present of great extent, was, in an early part of the christian æra, the capital of Hindoo. ftan ; or rather, of the principal kingdom along the Ganges. It is now reduced to the size of a middling town. It is situated on the right bank of the Ganges, near the place where the Calini river (or Callynuddi) joins it; and is possibly the place meant by Pliny for Calinipaxa. It is said to have been built more than a 1000 years before our æra :. and is mentioned in Ferishta as the capital: of all Hindooftan, under the predecessor of Phoor, or Porus, who fought against Alexander. In point of extent and magnificence,, Canoge answers perfectly to the description given of Palibothra ; and in some respects to the local position of it given by Ptolemy and Eratosthenes, did not the above authorities aflign it in a pofitive manner to Patna. The Indian histories are full of the accounts of its grandeur and populousness. In the sixth century it was faid:

* See page 52 where 1050 to a degree is the proportion fixed on by M. D'Anville.
+ Latitude 27° 3', Longitude 80° 136
| Before Christ 326 years.


to contain 30,000 shops, in which betelnut was sold (which the Indians, almost universally, chew, as some Europeans do tobacco). In A. D. 1018, it was seized on, by the Gaznian Emperors : at which time, it gave its name to the kingdom, of which it was the capital.

Gour, called also Lucknouti, the ancient capital of Bengal, and fuppofed to be the Gangia regia of Ptolemy, stood on the left bank of the Ganges, about 25 miles below Rajemal *. It was the capital of Bengal 730 years before Christ t, and was repaired and beautified by Acbar I, who gave it the name of Jennuteabad which name, a part of the circar in which it was situated, still bears. According to Ferifhta's account, the unwholesomeness of its air, occafioned it to be deserted soon after §; and the seat of government was removed to Tanda, or Tanrah, a few miles higher up the river. No

part of the site of ancient Gour is nearer to the present bank of the Ganges than four miles and a half; and some parts of it, which were originally washed by that river, are now 12 miles from it. However, a small stream that communicates with the Ganges, now runs by its west lide, and is navigable during the rainy season. On the east side, and in some places within two miles, it has the Mahanada river; which is always navigable, and communicates also with the Ganges.

Taking the extent of the ruins of Gour at the most reasonable calculation, it is not less than 15 miles in length (extending along the old bank of the Ganges) and from 2 to 3 in breadth. Several villages stand on part of its fite: the remainder is either covered with thick forests, the habitations of tygers and other beasts of prey; or become arable land, whose foil is chiefly composed of brick-dult. The principal ruins are a mosque lined with black marble, elaborately wrought ; and two gates of the citadel, which are strikingly


• Latitude 24° 53', longitude 88° 14'. + Dow ift. 6. I A. D. 1575

Ś This is Ferishta's account ; but some of its present inhabitants told me that it was deserted in consequence of a pestilence.


« PreviousContinue »