dent to the establishment of their system and usurped authority; and as the sacerdotal order in India, as well as in Egypt and several other countries, very probably engrossed all the learning, and possessed all the libraries, such a scheme was not very difficult to carry into effect. The copious Birman library already mentioned, might perhaps afford documents for the elucidation of these dark subjects.* M. Rennell, however, says, the Hindoo, or Braminical religion was, without doubt, "universal over Hindostan and the Deccan before the time of Alexander's conquest. If we regard the notices of Herodotus and Arrian." It appears indeed from these authors, that one religion prevailed throughout India, as far at least as it was known to the ancients; but it cannot, from any thing that they have left on record, be determined whether it was that of Boodha, or Brama. From them, indeed, it is evident that the separation of tribes, or casts; their mode of living on vegetable food; and, in fine, most of the leading features of the Hindoo manners, were the same at the earliest period of Grecian intelligence concerning this country as at the present day. These, and other circumstances, induced Dr. Robertson to say, that "what now is in India always was there," and to form his opinion of the ancient and high civilization of the Hindoos. It is not here a place to enter into an examination of his ingenious and elaborate work; but it may not be amiss to remark, that the hypothesis of that illustrious writer, as well as of other eminent literati, begin to be exploded, and the illusion is likely soon to be expelled.§ The universality of religion and manners among the Hin doos, has given rise to an erroneous idea that India, before its dismemberment by foreigners, constituted one vast and united monarchy. But, as M. Rennell rightly observes, the uniformity of religion throughout India, could not, at any period whatever, imply unity of empire, as both Christianity and Mahomedanism are known to be extensively diffused over different countries which are under distinct governments. * See an account of the Birman Empire from Symes. Rennell's Mem. Introd. p. 31. Robertson's Disquisitions, p. 257. § See his hypothesis overturned by Mr. Bentley. Asiatic Res. p. 6. Notwithstanding the uniformity of religion, it is well known that many different languages were spoken, and that many distinct political systems existed in this extensive region In this situation the Hindoos were found at the time of Alexander's invasion: and in this state they have always remained: nor does it appear in the least probable that India was ever, at any other period, so much united under one government as it was in the reign of Aurengzebe. A large empire, that of the Prasii, however, appears to have long occupied the princi pal part of that immense plain through which the Ganges takes its course. This state appears, from the strength of its armies and the number of its war elephants, to have been very powerful and rich. Rennell supposes it to have extended westward as far as the Panjab, and to have equalled the kingdom of France in dimensions.* In the time of Seleucus Nicator, the immediate successor of Alexander, the capital of this state was Palibothra, to which Megasthenes was sent by that prince in quality of ambassador. According to Arrian, the people were good husbandmen and excellent soldiers: and the government was a mild feudal system. The first invasion of India recorded in history, is that of Darius Hystaspes, who reduced the provinces bordering on both shores of the Indus, about 470 years A. C. Those Indian provinces constituted one of his richest satrapies. M. Rennell thinks, that from this conquest the Persians first acquired some knowledge of India, which from them was communicated to the Greeks; but he supposes that from time immemorial an intercourse by sea had existed between that country and Egypt,§ although it is generally imagined that, before the reign of Pharaoh Psamneticus, the Egyptians paid little attention to maritime affairs. From the expedition of Darius Hystaspes to that of Alexander, about 328 years before Christ, there are no notices of India in any ancient writer; and the Macedonians found it divided into a number of petty states, like Gaul and Britain in the time of Cæsar. The Grecian kingdom of the Seleucidæ appears to have kept up, during only a short space of time, * Rennell's Mem. p. 33. † Arrian Exped. Alexandri. § Rennell's Mem. Introd. p. 33. an intercourse with India, which was annihilated by the rise of the Parthian power, when a hostile barrier was placed between that country and Syria. The subsequent intercourse between the eastern and western parts of our hemisphere was afterwards purely commercial, and kept up through the medium of Alexandria; and the Romans do not appear to have ever had any immediate intercourse with, or knowledge of India. The Mahomedan conquests, which date their commencement from about A. D. 1000, form a new epoch in Indian history, previous to which all is impenetrable darkness. Notwithstanding, however, the eulogiums which modern philosophy has bestowed upon the mild and gentle manners of the Hindoos, it is highly probable that wars and revolutions had taken place in that country prior to the invasions of foreigners. The conquests of Mahmood, or Mahomed, sultan of Guisni, have already been mentioned. His first invasion of India was in the year of the Christian æra 1000. In eight campaigns, however, he advanced no farther than Moultan, the people of which province seem on this occasion to have been animated by the same spirit which they displayed in the time of Alexander. At last all the Hindoo princes, from the borders of Thibet to the river Nerbudda, which bounds the Deccan, united for the defence not only of their country, but of their religion, the extirpation of which was, to this furious enthusiast, an object of not less importance than the aggrandizement of his power, and the acquisition of territory. The confederate Hindoos were defeated. Delhi, and afterwards Canoge, which had succeeded Falibothra as the capital of the Gangetic kingdom, fell under the power of the conqueror; and his last campaign reduced the province of Guzerat under his obedience. During the whole career of his conquests, the destruction of the Hindoo temples, with their priests and votaries, was the favourite object of this sanguinary bigot. Nothing appears more horrible than the progress of destruction, See Historical View of the Turks. All our knowledge of Indian history is derived from Persian writers, particularly Ferishta, of whose work that of Colonel Dow is a translation, or rather a paraphrase. urged by intolerant zeal, which, exciting men to suppose them. selves agents of the Deity, engages conscience on the side of cruelty, and removes the checks that interfere with the perpetration of ordinary crimes. At the death of Mahomed, the Ghaznian empire extended over the eastern, and by much the largest portion of Persia, and nominally over all the western part of India to the peninsula of Guzerat, although the Panjab alone was reduced under a regular government. The Rajpoots of Agimere had been repeatedly attacked, but their resolute bravery amidst their rugged mountains and valleys, had preserved their independence. The Ghaznian empire was, in 1158, separated into two distinct monarchies: the western and most considerable part still retained the ancient name, while the Indian conquests composed the kingdom of Lahore, of which the city of that name was the capital, and the first seat of the Mahomedan power in India. Their empire was gradually extended towards the east. Benares, the chief Hindoo university, was destroyed, and the bloody scenes of the first conquests were repeated in this celebrated seat of Braminical learning. About the end of the twelfth century, the vernacular tongue of Hindostan, like that of the Romans at an early period, being corrupted by an admixture of foreign words, the Sanscrit, like the Latin, became a dead language. year 1205 the Patan dynasty ascended the throne of Lahore; and the extension of the empire eastward induced the removal of the seat of government to Delhi. Genghis, or Zinghis Khan, amongst his extensive conquests, accomplished that of Ghazni, but left Hindostan undisturbed; and although his successors made several irruptions into the country, they formed no permanent establishment. During these calamitous times, the history of Hindostan relates only barbarous conquests, rebellions, and massacres, of which the details, if clearly authenticated, would be disgusting to humanity. It is sufficient to mark the principal revolutions that have fixed the destiny of this extensive and populous region. Till nearly the end of the thirteenth century, the Deccan had escaped the depredations of the Mahomedan conquerors. But in 1293, this southern division of India was invaded by Alla, the general of Ferose II. Deogire, the present Dowlatabad, was conquered: In the the booty was immense; and the treasures acquired by the commander of this expedition were so great, as to enable him to depose and murder the emperor. Alla pushed forwards his conquests; and from the year 1306 to 13:2, Casoor, his general, ravaged almost the whole of the Deccan as far as the Carnatic, which, with several other provinces, were rendered tributary. At the death of Alla in 1316, all Hindostan Proper was comprehended in the Patan empire, which had now attained to the zenith of its greatness, and soon after began to decline. In the reign of Mahomed III. the princes of the Deccan resuming courage, united for the common defence, and gradually expelled the Patans from the whole of that southern division of India. The Mahomedan empire was also greatly curtailed by the revolt of the Panjab, Guzerat, and Bengal; and at last restricted to the central parts of Hindostan. Ferose III. who ascended the throne A. D. 1351, endeavoured rather to improve the remains of his empire by the peaceful arts, than to extend it by arms. He took every measure for the advancement of agriculture; caused canals to be cut for the purposes of irrigation and inland commerce; and formed a project, already mentioned, of uniting the Indus with the Ganges. After his death in 1388, rebellions and civil wars, during the course of ten years, prepared the empire for foreign subjection. In 1398, Timur, or Tamerlane, invaded Hindostan, took Delhi, ravaged the whole country, and, in imitation of Mahmood of Ghizni, or Gazna, poured destruction and vengeance on the Hindoo temples and priests, whose religion and votaries the bigotry of this destroying monster prompted him to extirpate. Timur, however, overran, rather than conquered Hindostan; and his views on Turkey recalling him from the east, he retained possession only of the Panjab. If Hindostan was in a state of confusion before, it may well be supposed that the anarchy increased after this invasion. Revolutions followed one after another in rapid succession. The Patan dynasty ended in 1413, and the throne of Delhi was filled by Chizer, a Seid, or descendant of the prophet Mahomed. His posterity reigned till 1450, when Belloli, an Afghan, usurped the sovereignty. Hindostan was now split into sepa See article Indus. |