Tal; a kind of palm. 14. The Banian (or Burr trees) and the We may preceive, however, on a reference to Arrian, that in many of the above particulars, he had either been indistinctly informed, or else mis-informed; as in the case of the Tal tree; the account of the white ants (which he discredits, at the time he relates it); and the manner in which the people daub their faces. The wooden houses, are, as far as I know, peculiar to the side of the Indus; and are remarked to be so, in the Ayin Acbaree. Arrian informs us, that he took his account of India from Nearchus and Megasthenes. In the account of the wooden houses, it may be perceived that he followed Nearchus; who seeing them on the side of the Indus, concluded they were in use every where else. As to Megasthenes, Arrian thought he had not travelled far over India; although farther than Alexander's followers. This opinion may serve partly to explain, why Arrian did not preserve the Journal of Megasthenes, by inserting it in his history of Alexander; or in his account of India. His geography of India relates chiefly to the northern parts, or those seen by Alexander and Megasthenes. And his catalogue of rivers, most of which are also to be found in Pliny, and among which we can trace many of the modern names, contain only those that discharge themselves into the Ganges or Indus: such as Cainas, the Cane; Cofsoanus Cosa, or Cofs; Sonus, Soane; Condochates, Gunduck; Sambus, Sumbul, or Chumbul; Agoramis, Gogra; Commenases, Caramnassa, &c. &c. Of the different histories of Alexander that have travelled down to us, that by Arrian appears to be the most consistent; and especially in the geography of Alexander's marches, and voyage in the Panjab; which country, by the nature of its rivers, and by their mode of confluence, is particularly favourable to the task of tracing his progrefs. Diodorus and Curtius, had, or ought to have had the same materials before them, as Arrian: that is, the journals or relations of Ptolemy and Aristobulus; who as friends and companions of Alexander, had opportunities of being well informed. We may conclude also, that there were among the followers of Alexander, journalists of a very different stamp; and indeed, the experience of our own days furnishes us with examples enough of that kind, to make it probable: and there are also to be found; compilers, who according to their tastes and dispositions, prefer the relation of the marvellous, to those of the sober and rational kind. Such as these, we may conceive Diodorus and Quintius Curtius to be; the latter particularly, under whose hand, every incident grows into a miracle or wonder. Arrian too, relates hiswonders; but in such a manner as not to commit himself: or, as if he meant rather not to withhold what he thought himself bound to communicate, than as if he believed them himself, or wished to inculcate a belief of them in others. It is to be regretted that Arrian did not preserve the journal of Megasthenes, as well as that of Nearchus. The lofs of Bæton's, or Biton's book, which contained the geography of Alexander's marches, is also to be regretted. It existed in the time of Pliny, who quotes him: but I think, if Arrian had seen it, he would have been more particular in his geography, in certain places; as he ordinarily studies to be. Certainly, Arrian had not read Herodotus attentively: otherwise he would not have passed over in silence, the voyage of Scylax down the Indus; nor represented his hero as being ignorant of so curious a fact as the tides must have appeared, to those who read the same book. But that he had read part of Herodotus, is evident by his quoting his opinion respecting the delta of the Nile; and by an allusion to his account of the ants that dug up gold, in India, &c. There is no reason to doubt that the Hindoo or Braminical religion was universal over Hindoostan and the Deccan, before the time of Alexander's conquest, if we regard the notices afforded by Herodotus and Arrian. Nor is it more extraordinary that one religion should prevail over India, although composed of distinct governments, than that the Christian religion should prevail over a larger tract in Europe; or the Mohamedan over a still larger tract in Europe, Asia, and Africa. But although there might be an universality of religion, there were, as the learned well know, many distinct languages; and history, both ancient and modern, gives us the most positive assurances, that India was divided into a number of kingdoms or states, from the time of Herodotus, down to that of Acbar. Not only Herodotus, Diodorus, Pliny, and Arrian, are positive as to this point, but even Abul Fazil, who composed a history of the Indian provinces, in the reign of Acbar, in the 16th century. It is probable, that the almost universality of religion, and the union of so large a portion of this vast region, under the family of Tamerlane (particularly under Aurungzebe) has occasioned an idea, though a very erroneous one, that the Mogul empire, so called from the Mogul (or Mongul) dynasty, or that of Tamerlane, was always under one head. But whatever kind of division may have taken place in the rest of Hindoostan, there appears to have been, generally, a large empire or kingdom, which occupied the principal part of that immense valley or plain, through which the Ganges takes its course: the capital of which has fluctuated between Delhi and Patna, as the limits of the empire have varied. That such a one does not exist at present, is probably owing to the Bengal provinces being in the hands of foreigners: but if we consider the union of interests between Bengal and Oude, the case is not efsentially altered. Leave matters to their natural course, the whole valley will form one state again. The kingdom I speak of, was that of the PRASII and GANGARIDÆ, in the times of Alexander and Megasthenes: and which was very powerful, as appears by the strength of its armies, and the number of elephants trained to war. It seems to have extended westward to the Panjab country: and if Palibothra stood on the site of Patna, as late accounts seem to render probable (see page 50 of the Memoir), we may suppose that it included at least part of Bengal. In effect, the kingdom of the Prasii could not well be of lefs dimensions than France: and the state of it (according to Arrian) was rich, the inhabitants good husbandmen, and excellent soldiers: governed by nobility, and living peaceably; their rulers imposing nothing harsh, or unjust, upon them. Those who are fonder of contemplating the silent happiness of a whole people, than of tracing the steps of a conqueror, will be gratified on reflecting that Alexander stopt short, on the borders of the country above described. The trade from the western world to India, which has ever enriched those who have carried it on, has often changed hands, and been turned into different channels. A passion for Indian manufactures and products, has actuated the people of every age, in lower Asia, as well as in the civilized parts of Europe: the delicate and unrivalled, as well as the coarser and more useful, fabrics of cotton, of that country, particularly suiting the inhabitants of the temperate regions along the Mediterranean and Euxine seas. To this trade, the Persian and Arabian gulfs opened an easy passage; the latter particularly, as the land carriage between the Red Sea and the Nile, and between the Red Sea and the Mediterranean, took up only a few days. It is highly probable, and tradition in India warrants the belief of it, that there was, from time immemorial, an intercourse between Egypt and Hindoostan: similarity of customs in many instances (as related of the ancient Egyptians, by Herodotus, and which can hardly be referred to physical causes) existing in the two countries. The intercourse, we may conclude, was carried on by sea; if we consider the nature of the intervening countries, and the seat of the manufactures: and it might, moreover, be expected, that a nation so enterprizing as to undertake the circumnavigation of Africa (as, there can be no doubt, the Egyptians did, under the Pharaohs), would scarcely leave unexplored the coasts of a sea so much nearer; and which, from the regularity of the periodical winds, was so easy of access. Whether Solomon's profitable traffic included that of India, there are, I believe, no means of determining; but it appears highly probable that it did: as also that the voyages of three years, made by the ships that arrived at Tarshish, were to the remote parts of Africa. Solomon's fleets were dispatched from the ports of the Red Sea; David's conquest of Idumea (Edom) giving him possession of the ports in the north-eastern branch of that sea. Tyre was founded about two centuries and a half before this period: and from the very flourishing state she was in, under Hiram, the cotemporary of Solomon, it may be concluded that her merchants pofsefsed the greatest part of the trade of the known world, at that time; and the trade of the east among the rest, in all probability. Commerce being so ready a way to riches, it is no wonder that so enlightened a prince as Solomon, should profit by the example of his neighbours, and avail himself of his situation, from the enlarged state of his kingdom, which extended from the Euphrates to the Red Sea, and to the borders of Egypt (1 Kings, chap. iv. ver. 24); and which opened to him two of the great avenues to the east, by way of the Red Sea, and the Persian Gulf. M. Volney's idea, respecting the object that Solomon had in view, when he took pofsefsion of Palmyra, is, in my opinion, no less probable than ingenious; namely, to use it as an emporium of the East-India trade, by way of the Persian Gulf, and the course of the Euphrates. This was about 1000 years before our æra. But Solomon's trade, notwithstanding, was merely temporary; and reminds us of some feeble efforts, made in our own days, by an inland prince, who was constrained to borrow the mariners of the modern Tyre, as Solomon did those of the ancient. It was, no doubt, unsuitable to the genius of a commercial state, to aid a rival power: but either the same genius in individuals might lead them to embark in lucrative schemes, that were detrimental to their country; or it might be a temporizing policy on the part of |