Ancient India.

It is impossible to say at how early a period the commerce of India assumed a civilized form, and from the rude barter of the savage became a regular system of exchange and account. The opinion of ancient as well as of modern writers, is almost unanimous in considering the Hindus as one of the oldest civilized nations in the world; but their most ancient records are so blended with fables, that it would be a waste of time to attempt to separate fact from fiction. Nor shall we do more than allude to the supposed conquests of Sesostris and Semiramis, as these are now generally held to have no historical foundation. That the civilization of India may reach back two or three thousand years before the Christian era is, however, not improbable, as the oldest of the Indian sacred writings, the Vêdas, are believed by the best Sanscrit scholars to have been handed down by tradition from about B.C. 1500.[245]

The historian who attempts to trace the operations of men in their commercial pursuits during very remote ages, and to mark the various steps of their progress, will soon have the mortification of finding that the period of authentic history is limited to the time assigned to it in Holy Writ; and that all the speculations about the high civilization of the Hindus before the period usually assigned to the Deluge are mere dreams of antiquarian enthusiasm. There is no reason to doubt that the narrative usually attributed to Moses is the most ancient we can now obtain, whatever modern philosophers may say to the contrary; and it is on the whole, unquestionably, the most in conformity with the facts now deducible from antiquarian or linguistic research. Many centuries must have intervened before the first heathen historian, Herodotus, wrote; and it is simply idle to attempt to write a consecutive record of commercial enterprise for any period preceding written history, as even the sculptured monuments of Egypt and Nineveh add scarcely anything to the pages of the Bible. Dr. Robertson, who wrote before anything was known of the meaning of the hieroglyphic writing of Egypt, expresses grave doubts about the Indian expedition of Sesostris, resting as this story does on the unsupported testimony of Diodorus Siculus; but, though portions of it may be fabulous, others may be true.

Expedition of Sesostris.

Doubts of Dr. Robertson with regard to it.

“Credulity and scepticism,” he says,[246] “are two opposite extremes into which men are apt to run, in examining the events which are said to have happened in the early ages of antiquity. Without incurring any suspicion of a propensity to the latter of these, I may be allowed to entertain doubts concerning the expedition of Sesostris into India, and his conquest of that country. Few facts in ancient history seem to be better established than that of the early aversion of the Egyptians to a seafaring life. Even the power of despotism cannot at once change the ideas and manners of a nation, especially when they have been confirmed by long habit, and rendered sacred by the sanction of religion. That Sesostris, in the course of a few years, should have so entirely overcome the prejudices of a superstitious people, as to be able to fit out four hundred ships of war in the Arabian Gulf, besides another fleet which he had in the Mediterranean, appears to be extremely improbable. Armaments of such magnitude would require the utmost efforts of a great and long established maritime power.”[247]

On the other hand, we may remark that, though the extent of his fleet, especially of vessels large enough to undertake so distant a voyage as that to India, is, under any circumstances, very questionable, the aversion of the Egyptians to a sea-faring life, would not in itself be an insuperable objection against the probability of great and distant expeditions, since, as we have already shown, the Phœnicians must have had considerable fleets at an early period; and Sesostris (or whoever he may be supposed to represent), is said to have employed Phœnician ships and sailors. Nor does Herodotus’s omission of the expedition attributed to the Egyptian monarch, prove that no such undertaking could have been carried into effect. We must, in fact, be wary of rejecting the possibility of some conquest or of some expedition, while we reject unhesitatingly what is on the face of it fabulous, as the story of the seventeen hundred associates of Sesostris, who were born on the same day as the king, and were still alive: moreover, with regard to Strabo, it should be remembered, that he, like Herodotus, has doubted more than one story, which there is, nevertheless, sound reason for believing. The first duty of an historian is to separate, to the best of his judgment, fact from fiction, and especially, not to reject what may have taken place, because the account of it is mixed up with questionable or exaggerated anecdotes.

Hindustan, its early commerce, and the probability, from its great value, of its having attracted Sesostris.

There are many reasons for supposing that Hindustan, to this day famous for its riches, was at a very early period the seat of a lucrative commerce and of much accumulated wealth. As such it would be the envy of other nations, and more especially of ambitious monarchs. The narrative of Arrian shows that this commerce was then regulated by sounder principles, and carried on in a more civilized manner, than it was fifteen centuries afterwards when Vasco de Gama first visited the shores of India. As numerous elements of wealth and luxury, usually found scattered over various regions of the earth, were the natural products of Hindustan, it might be expected that a country so highly favoured should, through the mists which over-hang the dawn of history, have loomed forth imposingly in very ancient times as the special abode of luxury and refinement.

But while not admitting the extravagant descriptions in the Hindu poets and historians of the glory and wealth of their country, any more than the whole of the Egyptian story of Sesostris, there is no reason to doubt that the civilization of India dates from a period as early as that of Egypt, and that the fame of its riches may have led to more than one attempt to achieve its conquest. The Râmâyana, one of the most ancient Hindu books, where it informs us, in the glowing language of its poetry, that Ayodhya[248] (Oude), one of the leading commercial cities of India, was “filled with merchants and artificers of all kinds”; that “gold, precious stones, and jewels were there found in great abundance”; that “every one wore costly garments, bracelets, and necklaces”; that “the town always resounded with the noise and bustle of men and women, like the shouts of contending armies”; that “the great men were ever going to and fro upon chariots, elephants, and prancing steeds”; and that “the gardens of pleasure were always crowded with eager inquirers after their friends and lovers,” may have furnished an exaggerated description of its wealth, but far from a fabulous one, as the fame of that great city seems to rest on satisfactory evidence.