CONCERNING ANCIENT INDIA.

4 i

fb

it

ur

It

a:t

rJt

(&

ipo

ltd

lira

IgE

01 ),

tli

ee»

11 ",

ibs

ucb

/ith

MS

ritil

idii

:ed,

ileJ

:dly

Tii,

were circumfcribed within very narrow limits, sectand that under the Ptolemies no confiderable pro- 1.grefs was made in the difcovery of India * 4 .

From this monopoly of the commerce by feabetween the eaft and weft, which Egvpt long 'enjoyed, it derived that extraordinary degree ofopulence and power for which it was confpicuous.

In modern tunes, acquainted with the vigilantand enterprifmg activity of commercial rivalflup,there is hardly any circumftance in ancient ftorywhich appears more furprding, than that the fove-reigris of Egypt fliould have been permitted toengrofs this lucrative trade without competition,or any attempt to wreft it out of their hands;efpeciaily as the powerful monarchs of Syria might,from the Perfian Gulf, have carried on an inter-courfe with the fame parts of India , by a lhorterand fafer courfe of navigation. Different confider-ations feem to have-induced them fo tamely torelinquifli all the obvious advantages of this com-merce. The kings of Egypt , by their attentionto maritime affairs, had formed a powerful fleet,which gave them fuch decided command of thefea, that they could have cruflied with eafe anyrival in trade. No commercial intercourfe feemsever to have been carried on by fea betweenPerfia and India . The Perfians had fuch an infu-perable averfion to that element, or were fo muchafraid of foreign invafion , that their monarchs(as I have already obferved) obftruded the navi-gation of the great rivers, which gave accefs to

** See NOTE XVII.