No More Learning

The exterior sides (of this peninsula), which is of a
triangular shape, are unequal. Of these, one extends from Cilicia to
Chelidoniæ, (islands,) another thence to the mouth of the Euxine, and
the third from the mouth of the Euxine to Sinope.

The assertion that the allies were only those who occupied the peninsula
may be proved to be erroneous by the same arguments by which we before
showed that those who lived within the Halys were not the only allies.
For the places about Pharnacia, where we said the Halizoni lived, are
situated without the Halys, and also without the isthmus, for they
[CAS. 677] are without the line drawn from Sinope to Issus;[274] and
not only without this line, but also without the true line of the
isthmus drawn from Amisus to Issus; for Apollodorus incorrectly
describes the isthmus and the line of its direction, substituting one
line for another (the line drawn from Sinope to Issus for the line drawn
from Amisus to Issus).

But the greatest absurdity is this, that after having said that the
peninsula was of a triangular shape, he speaks of three _exterior_
sides. For in speaking of _exterior_ sides, he seems to except the line
of the isthmus itself, considering it still a side, although not an
_exterior_ side, from its not being upon the sea. But if this line were
so shortened that the extremities of the (_exterior_) sides falling upon
Issus and Sinope nearly coincided, the peninsula might in that case be
said to be of a triangular shape; but as his own line (from Sinope to
Issus) is 3000 stadia in length, it would be ignorance, and not a
knowledge of chorography, to call such a four-sided figure a triangle.
Yet he published a work on Chorography, in the metre of comedy, (Iambic
metre,) entitled “The Circuit of the Earth. ”

He is still liable to the same charge of ignorance, even if we should
suppose the isthmus to be contracted to its least dimensions, and follow
writers who erroneously estimate the distance at one-half of the sum,
namely 1500 stadia, to which it is reduced by Artemidorus; but even this
would not by any means reduce the thus contracted space to the figure of
a triangle.

Besides, Artemidorus has not correctly described the exterior sides; one
side, he says, extends from Issus to the Chelidoniæ islands, although
the whole Lycian coast, and the country opposite to Rhodes as far as
Physcus, lies in a straight line with, and is a continuation of it; the
continent then makes a bend at Physcus, and forms the commencement of
the second or western side, extending to the Propontis and Byzantium.

23. Ephorus had said that this peninsula was inhabited by sixteen
tribes, three of which were Grecian, and the rest barbarous, with the
exception of the mixed nations; he placed on the sea-coast Cilicians,
Pamphylians, Lycians, Bithynians, Paphlagonians, Mariandyni, Troes, and
Carians; and in the interior, Pisidians, Mysians, Chalybes, Phrygians,
and Milyæ. [275] Apollodorus, when discussing this position, says there
is a seventeenth tribe, the Galatians, who are more recent than the time
of Ephorus; that of the sixteen tribes mentioned, the Greeks were not
settled (in the peninsula) at the period of the Trojan war, and that
time has produced great intermixture and confusion among the barbarous
nations. Homer, he continues, recites in his Catalogue the Troes, and
those now called Paphlagonians, Mysians, Phrygians, Carians, Lycians,
Meionians, instead of Lydians and other unknown people, as Halizoni and
Caucones; nations besides not mentioned in the Catalogue but elsewhere,
as Ceteii, Solymi, the Cilicians from the plain of Thebe, and Leleges.
But the Pamphylians, Bithynians, Mariandyni, Pisidians, and Chalybes,
Milyæ, and Cappadocians are nowhere mentioned by the poet; some because
they did not then inhabit these places, and some because they were
surrounded by other tribes, as Idrieis and Termilæ by Carians, Doliones
and Bebryces by Phrygians.

24. But Apollodorus does not seem to have carefully examined the
statements of Ephorus, for he confounds and misrepresents the words of
Homer. He ought first to have inquired of Ephorus why he placed the
Chalybes within the peninsula, who were situated at a great distance
from Sinope, and Amisus towards the east. Those who describe the isthmus
of this peninsula to be on the line drawn from Issus to the Euxine, lay
down this line as a sort of meridian line, which some suppose to pass
through Sinope, others through Amisus; but no one through the Chalybes,
for such a line would be altogether an oblique line. For the meridian
passing through the Chalybes, drawn through the Lesser Armenia, and the
Euphrates, would comprise (on the east) the whole of Cappadocia,
Commagene, Mount Amanus, and the Bay of Issus. [CAS. 678] But if we
should grant (to Ephorus) that this oblique line is the direction of the
isthmus, most of these places, Cappadocia in particular, would be
included, and (the kingdom of) Pontus, properly so called, which is a
part of Cappadocia on the Euxine; so that if we were to admit the
Chalybes to be a part of the peninsula, with more reason we ought to
admit the Cataonians, the two nations of Cappadocians, and the
Lycaonians, whom even he himself has omitted. But why has he placed in
the interior the Chalybes, whom the poet, as we have shown, calls
Halizoni? It would have been better to divide them, and to place one
portion of them on the sea-coast, and another in the inland parts. The
same division ought to be made of the Cappadocians and Cilicians. But
Ephorus does not even mention the former, and speaks only of the
Cilicians on the sea-coast. The subjects, then, of Antipater of Derbe,
the Homonadeis, and many other tribes contiguous to the Pisidians,

“men, who know not the sea, nor have ever eaten food seasoned
with salt,”[276]

where are they to be placed? Nor does he say whether the Lydians and the
Meonians are two nations or the same nation, or whether they live
separately by themselves or are comprehended in another tribe. For it
was impossible for Ephorus to be ignorant of so celebrated a nation, and
does he not, by passing it over in silence, appear to omit a most
important fact?

25. But who are “the mixed nations”? For we cannot say that he either
named or omitted others, besides those already mentioned, whom we should
call mixed nations. Nor, indeed, should we say that they were a part of
those nations whom he has either mentioned or omitted. For if they were
a mixed people, still the majority constituted them either Greeks or
Barbarians. We know nothing of a third mixed people.

26. But how (according to Ephorus) are there three tribes of Greeks who
inhabit the peninsula? Is it because anciently the Athenians and Ionians
were the same people? In that case the Dorians and the Æolians should be
considered as the same nation, and then there would be (only) two tribes
(and not three, inhabiting the peninsula). But if, following modern
practice, we are to distinguish nations according to dialects, there
will be four nations, as there are four dialects. But this peninsula is
inhabited, especially if we adopt the division by Ephorus, not only by
Ionians, but also by Athenians, as we have shown in the account of each
particular place.

It was worth while to controvert the positions of Ephorus, Apollodorus
however disregards all this, and adds a seventeenth to the sixteen
nations, namely, the Galatians; although it is well to mention this, yet
it is not required in a discussion of what Ephorus relates or omits;
Apollodorus has assigned as the reason of the omission, that all these
nations settled in the peninsula subsequently to the time of Ephorus.

27. Passing then to Homer, Apollodorus is correct in saying that there
was a great intermixture and confusion among the barbarous nations, from
the Trojan war to the present time, on account of the changes which had
taken place; for some nations had an accession of others, some were
extinct or dispersed, or had coalesced together.

But he is mistaken in assigning two reasons why the poet does not
mention some nations, namely, either because the place was not then
occupied by the particular people, or because they were comprehended in
another tribe. Neither of these reasons could induce him to be silent
respecting Cappadocia or Cataonia, or Lycaonia itself, for we have
nothing of the kind in history relating to these countries. It is
ridiculous to be anxious to find excuses why Homer has omitted to speak
of Cappadocia [Cataonia] and Lycaonia, and not to inform us why Ephorus
omitted them, particularly as the proposed object of Apollodorus was to
examine and discuss the opinions of Ephorus; and to tell us why Homer
mentions Mæonians instead of Lydians, and also not to remark that
Ephorus has not omitted to mention either Lydians or Mæonians. [277]

28. Apollodorus remarks, that Homer mentions certain unknown nations,
and he is right in specifying Caucones, Solymi, Ceteii, Leleges, and the
Cilicians from the plain of Thebe; but the Halizones are a fiction of
his own, or rather of those who, not knowing who the Halizones were,
frequently altered the mode of writing the name, and invented the
existence of [CAS. 680] mines of silver and of many other mines, all of
which are abandoned.

With this vain intention they collected the stories related by the
Scepsian, (Demetrius,) and taken from Callisthenes and other writers,
who did not clear them from false notions respecting the Halizones; for
example, the wealth of Tantalus and of the Pelopidæ was derived, it is
said, from the mines about Phrygia and Sipylus; that of Cadmus from the
mines about Thrace and Mount Pangæum; that of Priam from the gold mines
at Astyra, near Abydos (of which at present there are small remains, yet
there is a large quantity of matter ejected, and the excavations are
proofs of former workings); that of Midas from the mines about Mount
Bermium; that of Gyges, Alyattes, and Crœsus, from the mines in Lydia
and the small deserted city between Atarneus and Pergamum, where are the
sites of exhausted mines. [278]

29. We may impute another fault to Apollodorus, that although he
frequently censures modern writers for introducing new readings at
variance with the meaning of Homer, yet in this instance he not only
neglects his own advice, but actually unites together places which are
not so represented (by Homer).

(For example), Xanthus the Lydian says, that after the Trojan times the
Phrygians came from Europe (into Asia) and the left (western) side of
the Euxine, and that their leader Scamandrius conducted them from the
Berecynti and Ascania. Apollodorus adds, that Homer mentions the same
Ascania as Xanthus,

“Phorcys and the divine Ascanius led the Phrygians from the
distant Ascania. ”[279]

If this be so, the migration (from Europe to Asia) must be later than
the Trojan war; but in the Trojan war the auxiliaries mentioned by the
poet came from the opposite continent, from the Berecynti and Ascania.
Who then were the Phrygians,

“who were then encamped on the banks of the Sangarius,”

when Priam says,

“And I joined them with these troops as an auxiliary”? [280]

And how came Priam to send for the Phrygians from among the Berecynti,
between whom and himself no compact existed, and pass over the people
who were contiguous to him, and whose ally he formerly had been?

Apollodorus, after having spoken of the Phrygians in this manner,
introduces an account concerning the Mysians which contradicts this. He
says that there is a village of Mysia called Ascania, near a lake of the
same name,[281] out of which issues the river Ascanius, mentioned by
Euphorion:[282]

“near the waters of the Mysian Ascanius;”

and by Alexander of Ætolia:

“they who dwell on the stream of Ascanius, on the brink of the
Ascanian lake, where lived Dolion, the son of Silenus and
Melia. ”

The district, he says, about Cyzicus, on the road to Miletopolis, is
called Dolionis and Mysia.

If this is the case, and if it is confirmed by existing places and by
the poets, what prevented Homer, when he mentioned this Ascania, from
mentioning the Ascania also of which Xanthus speaks?

I have already spoken of these places in the description of Mysia and
Phrygia, and shall here conclude the discussion.




CHAPTER VI.


1. It remains for me to describe the island Cyprus, which adjoins this
peninsula on the south. I have already said, that the sea comprised
between Egypt, Phœnice, Syria, and the remainder of the coast as far as
that opposite to Rhodes, consists, [CAS. 681] so to say, of the
Egyptian and Pamphylian seas and the sea along the Bay of Issus.

In this sea lies the island Cyprus, having its northern side approaching
to Cilicia Tracheia, and here also it approaches nearest to the
continent; on the east it is washed by the Bay of Issus, on the west by
the Pamphylian sea, and on the south by that of Egypt. The latter sea is
confluent on the west with the Libyan and Carpathian seas. On its
southern and eastern parts is Egypt, and the succeeding tract of coast
as far as Seleucia and Issus. On the north is Cyprus, and the Pamphylian
sea.

The Pamphylian sea is bounded on the north by the extremities of Cilicia
Tracheia, of Pamphylia, and of Lycia as far as the territory opposite to
Rhodes; on the west, by the island of Rhodes; on the east, by the part
of Cyprus near Paphos, and the Acamas; on the south, it unites with the
Egyptian sea.

2. The circumference of Cyprus is 3420 stadia, including the winding of
the bays. Its length from Cleides[283] to the Acamas,[284] to a
traveller on land proceeding from east to west, is 1400 stadia.

The Cleides are two small islands lying in front of Cyprus on the
eastern side, at the distance of 700 stadia from the Pyramus. [285]

The Acamas is a promontory with two paps, and upon it is a large forest.
It is situated at the western part of the island, but extends towards
the north, approaching very near Selinus in Cilicia Tracheia, for the
passage across is only 1000 stadia; to Side in Pamphylia the passage is
1600 stadia, and to the Chelidoniæ (islands) 1900 stadia.

The figure of the whole island is oblong, and in some places on the
sides, which define its breadth, there are isthmuses.

We shall describe the several parts of the island briefly, beginning
from the point nearest to the continent.

3. We have said before, that opposite to Anemyrium, a promontory of
Cilicia Tracheia, is the extremity of Cyprus, namely, the promontory of
Crommyon,[286] at the distance of 350 stadia.

From the cape, keeping the island on the right hand, and continent on
the left, the voyage to the Cleides in a straight line towards north and
east is a distance of 700 stadia.

In the interval is the city Lapathus,[287] with a harbour and dockyards;
it was founded by Laconians and Praxander. Opposite to it was Nagidus.
Then follows Aphrodisium;[288] here the island is narrow, for over the
mountains to Salamis[289] are 70 stadia. Next is the sea-beach of the
Achæans; here Teucer, the founder of Salamis in Cyprus, being it is said
banished by his father Telamon, first disembarked. Then follows the city
Carpasia,[290] with a harbour. It is situated opposite to the promontory
Sarpedon. [291] From Carpasia there is a transit across the isthmus of 30
stadia to the Carpasian islands and the southern sea; next are a
promontory and a mountain. The name of the promontory is Olympus, and
upon it is a temple of Venus Acræa, not to be approached nor seen by
women.

Near and in front lie the Cleides, and many other islands; next are the
Carpasian islands, and after these Salamis, the birth-place of Aristus
the historian; then Arsinoë, a city with a harbour; next Leucolla,
another harbour; then the promontory Pedalium, above which is a hill,
rugged, lofty, and table-shaped, sacred to Venus; to this hill from
Cleides are 680 stadia. Then to Citium[292] the navigation along the
coast is for the greater part difficult and among bays. Citium has a
close harbour. It is the birth-place of Zeno, the chief of the Stoic
sect, and of Apollonius the physician. Thence to Berytus are 1500
stadia. Next is the city Amathus,[293] and between Citium and Berytus, a
small city called Palæa, and a pap-shaped mountain, Olympus; then
follows Curias,[294] a promontory of a peninsular form, to which from
Throni[295] are 700 stadia; then the city Curium,[296] with a harbour,
founded by Argives.

Here we may observe the negligence of the author, whether Hedylus, or
whoever he was, of the elegiac lines which begin,

“We hinds, sacred to Phœbus, hither came in our swift course;
we traversed the broad sea, to avoid the arrows of our
pursuers. ”

He says, that the hinds ran down from the Corycian heights, [CAS. 683]
and swam across from the Cilician coast to the beach near Curias, and
adds,

“That it was a cause of vast surprise to men to think how we
scoured the trackless waves, aided by the vernal Zephyrs. ”

For it is possible (by doubling the cape) to sail round from Corycus to
the beach of Curias, but not with the assistance of the west wind, nor
by keeping the island on the right, but on the left hand; and there is
no (direct) passage across.

At Curium is the commencement of the voyage towards the west in the
direction of Rhodes; then immediately follows a promontory, whence those
who touch with their hands the altar of Apollo are precipitated. Next
are Treta,[297] Boosura,[298] and Palæpaphus, situated about 10 stadia
from the sea, with a harbour and an ancient temple of the Paphian Venus;
then follows Zephyria,[299] a promontory with an anchorage, and another
Arsinoë, which also has an anchorage, a temple, and a grove. At a little
distance from the sea is Hierocepis. [300] Next is Paphos, founded by
Agapenor, with a harbour and temples, which are fine buildings. It is
distant from Palæpaphus 60 stadia by land. Along this road the annual
sacred processions are conducted, when a great concourse both of men and
women resort thither from other cities. Some writers say, that from
Paphos to Alexandreia are 3600 stadia. Next after Paphos is the Acamas;
then after the Acamas the voyage is easterly to Arsinoë a city, and to
the grove of Jupiter; then Soli[301] a city, where there is a harbour, a
river, and a temple of Venus and Isis. It was founded by Phalerus and
Acamas, who were Athenians. The inhabitants are called Solii. Stasanor,
one of the companions of Alexander, was a native of Soli, and was
honoured with a chief command. Above Soli in the interior is Limenia a
city, then follows the promontory of Crommyon.

4. But why should we be surprised at poets, and those particularly who
study modes of expression only, when we compare them with Damastes? The
latter gives the length of the island from north to south, from
Hierocepia, as he says, to Cleides.

Nor does even Eratosthenes give it exactly. For, when he censures
Damastes, he says that Hierocepia is not on the north, but on the south.
Yet neither is it on the south, but the west, since it lies on the
western side, where are situated Paphos and Acamas.

Such then is the position of Cyprus.

5. It is not inferior in fertility to any one of the islands, for it
produces good wine and oil, and sufficient corn to supply the wants of
the inhabitants. At Tamassus there are abundant mines of copper, in
which the calcanthus is found, and rust of copper, useful for its
medicinal properties.

Eratosthenes says, that anciently the plains abounded with timber, and
were covered with forests, which prevented cultivation; the mines were
of some service towards clearing the surface, for trees were cut down to
smelt the copper and silver. Besides this, timber was required for the
construction of fleets, as the sea was now navigated with security and
by a large naval force; but when even these means were insufficient to
check the growth of timber in the forests, permission was given to such
as were able and inclined, to cut down the trees and to hold the land
thus cleared as their own property, free from all payments.

6. Formerly the Cyprian cities were governed by tyrants, but from the
time that the Ptolemaïc kings were masters of Egypt, Cyprus also came
into their power, the Romans frequently affording them assistance. But
when the last Ptolemy that was king, brother of the father of Cleopatra,
the queen of Egypt in our time, had conducted himself in a disorderly
manner, and was ungrateful to his benefactors, he was deposed, and the
Romans took possession of the island, which became a Prætorian province
by itself.

The chief author of the deposition of the king was Pub. Claudius
Pulcher, who having fallen into the hands of the Cilician pirates, at
that time at the height of their power, and a ransom being demanded of
him, despatched a message to the king, entreating him to send it for his
release. The king sent a ransom, but of so small an amount, that the
pirates disdained to accept it, and returned it, but they dismissed
Pulcher without any payment. After his escape, he remembered what he
owed to both parties; and when he became tribune of the people, he had
sufficient influence to have Marcus [CAS. 684] Cato sent to deprive the
king of the possession of Cyprus. The latter put himself to death before
the arrival of Cato, who, coming soon afterwards, took possession of
Cyprus, sold the king’s property, and conveyed the money to the public
treasury of the Romans.

From this time the island became, as it is at present, a Prætorian
province. During a short intervening period Antony had given it to
Cleopatra and her sister Arsinoë, but upon his death all his
arrangements were annulled.




BOOK XV.

SUMMARY.


The Fifteenth Book contains India and Persia.




CHAPTER I.


1. The parts of Asia which remain to be described are those without the
Taurus, except Cilicia, Pamphylia, and Lycia; extending from India to
the Nile, and situated between the Taurus and the exterior Southern
Sea. [302]

Next to Asia is Africa, which I shall describe hereafter. At present I
shall begin from India, the first and the largest country situated
towards the east.

2. The reader must receive the account of this country with indulgence,
for it lies at a very great distance, and few persons of our nation have
seen it; those also who have visited it have seen only some portions of
it; the greater part of what they relate is from report, and even what
they saw, they became acquainted with during their passage through the
country with an army, and in great haste. For this reason they do not
agree in their accounts of the same things, although they write about
them as if they had examined them with the greatest care and attention.
Some of these writers were fellow-soldiers and fellow-travellers, as
those who belonged to the army which, under the command of Alexander,
conquered Asia; yet they frequently contradict each other. If, then,
they differ so much respecting things which they had seen, what must we
think of what they relate from report?

3. Nor do the writers who, many ages since Alexander’s time, have given
an account of these countries, nor even those who at present make
voyages thither, afford any precise information.

Apollodorus, for instance, author of the Parthian History, when he
mentions the Greeks who occasioned the revolt of Bactriana from the
Syrian kings, who were the successors of [CAS. 686] Seleucus Nicator,
says, that when they became powerful they invaded India. He adds no
discoveries to what was previously known, and even asserts, in
contradiction to others, that the Bactrians had subjected to their
dominion a larger portion of India than the Macedonians; for Eucratidas
(one of these kings) had a thousand cities subject to his authority. But
other writers affirm that the Macedonians conquered nine nations
situated between the Hydaspes[303] and the Hypanis,[304] and obtained
possession of five hundred cities, not one of which was less than Cos
Meropis,[305] and that Alexander, after having conquered all this
country, delivered it up to Porus.

4. Very few of the merchants who now sail from Egypt by the Nile and the
Arabian Gulf to India have proceeded as far as the Ganges; and, being
ignorant persons, were not qualified to give an account of places they
have visited. From one place in India, and from one king, namely,
Pandion, or, according to others,[306] Porus, presents and embassies
were sent to Augustus Cæsar. With the ambassadors came the Indian
Gymno-Sophist, who committed himself to the flames at Athens,[307] like
Calanus, who exhibited the same spectacle in the presence of Alexander.

5. If, then, we set aside these stories, and direct our attention to
accounts of the country prior to the expedition of Alexander, we shall
find them still more obscure. It is probable that Alexander, elated by
his extraordinary good fortune, believed these accounts.

According to Nearchus, Alexander was ambitious of conducting his army
through Gedrosia,[308] when he heard that Semiramis and Cyrus had
undertaken expeditions against India (through this country), although
both had abandoned the enterprise, the former escaping with twenty, and
Cyrus with seven men only. For he considered that it would be a glorious
achievement for him to lead a conquering army safe through the same
nations and countries where Semiramis and Cyrus had suffered such
disasters. Alexander, therefore, believed these stories.

6. But how can we place any just confidence in the accounts of India
derived from such expeditions as those of Cyrus and Semiramis?
Megasthenes concurs in this opinion; he advises persons not to credit
the ancient histories of India, for, except the expeditions of Hercules,
of Bacchus, and the later invasion of Alexander, no army was ever sent
out of their country by the Indians, nor did any foreign enemy ever
invade or conquer it. Sesostris the Egyptian (he says), and Tearco the
Ethiopian, advanced as far as Europe; and Nabocodrosor, who was more
celebrated among the Chaldæans than Hercules among the Greeks,
penetrated even as far as the Pillars,[309] which Tearco also reached;
Sesostris conducted an army from Iberia to Thrace and Pontus;
Idanthyrsus the Scythian overran Asia as far as Egypt; but not one of
these persons proceeded as far as India, and Semiramis died before her
intended enterprise was undertaken. The Persians had sent for the
Hydraces[310] from India, a body of mercenary troops; but they did not
lead an army into that country, and only approached it when Cyrus was
marching against the Massagetæ.

7. Megasthenes, and a few others, think the stories respecting Hercules
and Bacchus to be credible, but the majority of writers, among whom is
Eratosthenes, regard them as incredible and fabulous, like the Grecian
stories. Dionysus, in the Bacchæ of Euripides, makes this boasting
speech:

[CAS. 687] “But now from Lydia’s field, With gold abounding, from the
Phrygian realm And that of Persia scorch’d by torrid suns, Pressing
through Bactrian gates, the frozen land Of Media, and through Araby the
Blest, With Asia’s wide extended continent——”[311]

In Sophocles, also, a person is introduced speaking the praises of
Nysa,[312] as being a mountain sacred to Bacchus:

“whence I beheld the famed Nysa, the resort of the
Bacchanalian bands, which the horned Iacchus makes his most
pleasant and beloved retreat, where no bird’s clang is heard,”

and so on. [He is called also Merotraphes. ][313]

Homer also mentions Lycurgus the Edonian in these words,

“who formerly pursued the nurses of the infuriate Bacchus
along the sacred mountain Nysa. ”[314]

So much respecting Bacchus. But with regard to Hercules, some persons
say, that he penetrated to the opposite extremities on the west only,
while others maintain that he also advanced to those of the east.

8. From such stories as those related above, they gave the name of
Nysæans to some imaginary nation, and called their city Nysa, founded by
Bacchus; a mountain above the city they called Meron, alleging as a
reason for imposing these names that the ivy and vine grow there,
although the latter does not perfect its fruit; for the bunches of
grapes, in consequence of excessive rains, drop off before they arrive
at maturity.

They say, also, that the Sydracæ (Oxydracæ) are descendants of Bacchus,
because the vine grows in their country, and because their kings display
great pomp in setting out on their warlike expeditions, after the
Bacchic manner; whenever they appear in public, it is with beating of
drums, and are dressed in flowered robes, which is the common custom
among the other Indians.

When Alexander took, on the first assault, Aornos,[315] a fortress on a
rock, the foot of which is washed by the Indus near its source, his
flatterers exaggerated this act, and said that Hercules thrice assailed
this rock and was thrice repulsed.

They pretended that the Sibæ[316] were descended from the people who
accompanied Hercules in his expedition, and that they retained badges of
their descent; that they wore skins like Hercules, and carried clubs,
and branded with the mark of a club their oxen and mules. They confirm
this fable with stories about Caucasus[317] and Prometheus, for they
transferred hither from Pontus these tales, on the slight pretence that
they had seen a sacred cave among the Paropamisadæ. [318] This they
alleged was the prison of Prometheus, that Hercules came hither to
release Prometheus, and that this mountain was the Caucasus, to which
the Greeks represent Prometheus as having been bound.

9. That these are the inventions of the flatterers of Alexander is
evident, first, because the writers do not agree with one another, some
of whom speak of these things; others make no mention of them whatever.
For it is not probable, that actions so illustrious, and calculated to
foster pride and vanity, should be unknown, or if known, that they
should not be thought worthy of record, especially by writers of the
greatest credit.

Besides, the intervening people, through whose country the armies of
Bacchus and Hercules must have marched in their [CAS. 688] way to
India, do not exhibit any proofs of their passage through the country.
The kind of dress, too, of Hercules is much more recent than the
memorials of Troy, an invention of those who composed the Heracleia (or
exploits of Hercules,) whether it were Peisander or some one else who
composed it. But the ancient wooden statues do not represent Hercules in
that attire.

10. Under such circumstances, therefore, we must receive everything that
approaches nearest to probability. I have already discussed this subject
to the extent of my ability at the beginning of this work;[319] I shall
now assume those opinions as clearly proved, and shall add whatever may
seem to be required for the sake of perspicuity.

It appeared from the former discussion, that in the summary given by
Eratosthenes, in the third book of his Geography, is contained the most
credible account of the country considered as India at the time of its
invasion by Alexander.

At that period the Indus was the boundary of India and of Ariana,[320]
situated towards the west, and in the possession of the Persians, for
afterwards the Indians occupied a larger portion of Ariana, which they
had received from the Macedonians.

The account of Eratosthenes is as follows:—

11.
The boundaries of India, on the north, from Ariana to the Eastern
Sea,[321] are the extremities of Taurus, to the several parts of which
the natives give, besides others, the names of Paropamisus, Emodus, and
Imaus,[322] but the Macedonians call them Caucasus; on the west, the
river Indus; the southern and eastern sides, which are much larger than
the others, project towards the Atlantic Sea, and the figure of the
country becomes rhomboïdal,[323] each of the greater sides exceeding
the opposite by 3000 stadia; and this is the extent of the extremity,
common to the eastern and southern coast, and which projects beyond the
rest of that coast equally on the east and south.

The western side, from the Caucasian mountains to the Southern Sea, is
estimated at 13,000 stadia, along the river Indus to its mouth;
wherefore the eastern side opposite, with the addition of the 3000
stadia of the promontory, will be 16,000 stadia in extent. This is both
the smallest and greatest breadth of India. [324] The length is reckoned
from west to east. The part of this extending (from the Indus) as far as
Palibothra[325] we may describe more confidently; for it has been
measured by Schœni,[326] and is a royal road of 10,000 stadia. The
extent of the parts beyond depends upon conjecture derived from the
ascent of vessels from the sea by the Ganges to Palibothra. This may be
estimated at 6000 stadia.

The whole, on the shortest computation, will amount to 16,000 stadia,
according to Eratosthenes, who says that he took it from the register of
the Stathmi (or the several stages from place to place),[327] which was
received as authentic, and Megasthenes agrees with him. But Patrocles
says, that the sum of the whole is less by 1000 stadia. If again we add
to this [CAS. 689] distance the extent of the extremity which advances
far towards the east, the greatest length of India will be 3000 stadia;
this length is reckoned from the mouths of the river Indus along the
coast, in a line with the mouths to the above-mentioned extremity and
its eastern limits. Here the people called Coniaci[328] live.

12. From what has been said, we may perceive how the opinions of the
other writers differ from one another. Ctesias says that India is not
less than the rest of Asia; Onesicritus regards it as the third part of
the habitable world; Nearchus says that it is a march of four months
through the plain only. The computations of Megasthenes and Deïmachus
are more moderate, for they estimate the distance from the Southern Sea
to Caucasus[329] at above 20,000 stadia. Deïmachus says that in some
places it exceeds 30,000 stadia.

We have replied to these writers in the early part of this work. [330] At
present it is sufficient to say that these opinions are in favour of the
writers who, in describing India, solicit indulgence if they do not
advance anything with confidence.

13. The whole of India is watered by rivers, some of which empty
themselves into the two largest, the Indus and the Ganges; others
discharge themselves into the sea by their own mouths. But all of them
have their sources in the Caucasus. At their commencement their course
is towards the south; some of them continue to flow in the same
direction, particularly those which unite with the Indus; others turn to
the east, as the Ganges. This, the largest of the Indian rivers,
descends from the mountainous country, and when it reaches the plains,
turns to the east, then flowing past Palibothra, a very large city,
proceeds onwards to the sea in that quarter, and discharges its waters
by a single mouth. The Indus falls into the Southern Sea, and empties
itself by two mouths, encompassing the country called Patalene, which
resembles the Delta of Egypt.

By the exhalation of vapours from such vast rivers, and by the Etesian
winds, India, as Eratosthenes affirms, is watered by summer rains, and
the plains are overflowed. During the rainy season flax,[331] millet,
sesamum, rice, and bosmorum[332] are sowed; and in the winter season,
wheat, barley, pulse, and other esculent fruits of the earth with which
we are not acquainted. Nearly the same animals are bred in India as in
Ethiopia and Egypt, and the rivers of India produce all the animals of
those countries, except the hippopotamus, although Onesicritus asserts
that even this animal is found in them.

The inhabitants of the south resemble the Ethiopians in colour, but
their countenances and hair are like those of other people. Their hair
does not curl, on account of the humidity of the atmosphere. The
inhabitants of the north resemble the Egyptians.

14. Taprobane[333] is said to be an island, lying out at sea, distant
from the most southerly parts of India, which are opposite the Coniaci,
seven days’[334] sail towards the south. Its length is about 8000 stadia
in the direction of Ethiopia. [335] It produces elephants.

This is the account of Eratosthenes. The accounts of other writers, in
addition to this, whenever they convey exact information, will
contribute to form the description[336] (of India).

15. Onesicritus, for example, says of Taprobane, that its magnitude is
5000 stadia, without distinction of length or breadth, and that it is
distant twenty days’ sail from the continent, but that it was a voyage
performed with difficulty and danger by vessels with sails ill
constructed, and built with prows at each end, but without holds and
keels;[337] that there are other islands between this and India, but
that Taprobane lies farthest to the south; that there are found in the
sea, about the island, animals of the cetaceous kind, in form like oxen,
horses, and other land-animals.

16. Nearchus, speaking of the accretion of earth formed [CAS. 691] by
the rivers, adduces these instances. The plains of Hermes, Caÿster,
Mæander, and Caïcus have these names, because they have been formed by
the soil which has been carried over the plains by the rivers; or rather
they were produced by the fine and soft soil brought down from the
mountains; whence the plains are, as it were, the offspring of the
rivers, and it is rightly said, that the plains belong to the rivers.
What is said by Herodotus[338] of the Nile, and of the land about it,
may be applied to this country, namely, that it is the gift of the Nile.
Hence Nearchus thinks that the Nile had properly the synonym of Egypt.

17. Aristobulus, however, says, that rain and snow fall only on the
mountains and the country immediately below them, and that the plains
experience neither one nor the other, but are overflowed only by the
rise of the waters of the rivers; that the mountains are covered with
snow in the winter; that the rains set in at the commencement of spring,
and continue to increase; that at the time of the blowing of the Etesian
winds they pour down impetuously, without intermission, night and day
till the rising of Arcturus,[339] and that the rivers, filled by the
melting of the snow and by the rains, irrigate the flat grounds.

These things, he says, were observed by himself and by others on their
journey into India from the Paropamisadæ. This was after the setting of
the Pleiades,[340] and during their stay in the mountainous country in
the territory of the Hypasii, and in that of Assacanus during the
winter. At the beginning of spring they descended into the plains to a
large city called Taxila,[341] thence they proceeded to the Hydaspes and
the country of Porus. During the winter they saw no rain, but only snow.
The first rain which fell was at Taxila. After their descent to the
Hydaspes and the conquest of Porus, their progress was eastwards to the
Hypanis, and thence again to the Hydaspes. At this time it rained
continually, and particularly during the blowing of the Etesian winds,
but at the rising of Arcturus the rains ceased. They remained at the
Hydaspes while the ships were constructing, and began their voyage not
many days before the setting of the Pleiades, and were occupied during
the whole autumn, winter, and the ensuing spring and summer, in sailing
down the river, and arrived at Patalene[342] about the rising of the
Dog-Star;[343] during the passage down the river, which lasted ten
months, they did not experience rain at any place, not even when the
Etesian winds were at their height, when the rivers were full and the
plains overflowed; the sea could not be navigated on account of the
blowing of contrary winds, but no land breezes succeeded.

18. Nearchus gives the same account, but does not agree with Aristobulus
respecting the rains in summer, but says that the plains are watered by
rain in the summer, and that they are without rain in winter. Both
writers, however, speak of the rise of the rivers. Nearchus says, that
the men encamped upon the Acesines[344] were obliged to change their
situation for another more elevated, and that this was at the time of
the rise of the river, and of the summer solstice.

Aristobulus gives even the measure of the height to which the river
rises, namely, forty cubits, of which twenty would fill the channel
beyond its previous depth up to the margin, and the other twenty are the
measure of the water when it overflows the plains.

They agree also in saying that the cities placed upon mounds become
islands, as in Egypt and Ethiopia, and that the inundation ceases after
the rising of Arcturus, when the waters recede. They add, that the
ground when half dried is sowed, after having been prepared by the
commonest labourer, yet the plant comes to perfection, and the produce
is good. The rice, according to Aristobulus, stands in water in an
enclosure. It is sowed in beds. The plant is four cubits in height, with
many ears, and yields a large produce. The harvest is about the time of
the setting of the Pleiades, and the grain is beaten out like barley. It
grows in Bactriana, Babylonia, Susis, and in the Lower Syria. Megillus
says that it is sowed before the rains, but does not require irrigation
or transplantation, being supplied with water from tanks.

The bosmorum, according to Onesicritus, is a kind of corn smaller than
wheat, and grows in places situated between [CAS. 692] rivers. After it
is threshed out, it is roasted; the threshers being previously bound by
an oath not to carry it away unroasted from the threshing floor; a
precaution to prevent the exportation of the seed.

19. Aristobulus, when comparing the circumstances in which this country
resembles, and those in which it differs from, Egypt and Ethiopia, and
observing that the swelling of the Nile is occasioned by rains in the
south, and of the Indian rivers by rains from the north, inquires why
the intermediate places have no rain; for it does not rain in the
Thebaïs as far as Syene, nor at the places near Meroë, nor in the parts
of India from Patalene to the Hydaspes. But the country situated above
these parts,[345] in which both rain and snow occur, is cultivated by
the husbandman in the same manner as the country without India; for the
rain and the snow supply the ground with moisture.

It is probable from what he relates that the country is subject to
shocks of earthquakes, that the ground is loose and hollow by excess of
moisture, and easily splits into fissures, whence even the course of
rivers is altered.

He says that when he was despatched upon some business into the country,
he saw a tract of land deserted, which contained more than a thousand
cities with their dependent villages; the Indus, having left its proper
channel, was diverted into another, on the left hand, much deeper, and
precipitated itself into it like a cataract, so that it no longer
watered the country by the (usual) inundation on the right hand, from
which it had receded, and this was elevated above the level, not only of
the new channel of the river, but above that of the (new) inundation.

20. The account of Onesicritus confirms the facts of the rising of the
rivers and of the absence of land breezes. He says that the sea-shore is
swampy, particularly near the mouths of rivers, on account of the mud,
tides, and the force of the winds blowing from the sea.

Megasthenes also indicates the fertility of India by the circumstance of
the soil producing fruits and grain twice a year. Eratosthenes relates
the same facts, for he speaks of a winter and a summer sowing, and of
the rain at the same seasons. For there is no year, according to him,
which is without rain at both those periods, whence ensues great
abundance, the ground never failing to bear crops.

An abundance of fruit is produced by trees; and the roots of plants,
particularly of large reeds, possess a sweetness, which they have by
nature and by coction; for the water, both from rains and rivers, is
warmed by the sun’s rays. The meaning of Eratosthenes seems to be this,
that what among other nations is called the ripening of fruits and
juices, is called among these _coction_, and which contributes as much
to produce an agreeable flavour as the coction by fire. To this is
attributed the flexibility of the branches of trees, from which wheels
of carriages are made, and to the same cause is imputed the growth upon
some trees of wool. [346] Nearchus says that their fine clothes were made
of this wool, and that the Macedonians used it for mattresses and the
stuffing of saddles. The Serica[347] also are of a similar kind, and are
made of dry byssus, which is obtained from some sort of bark of plants.
He says that reeds[348] yield honey, although there are no bees, and
that there is a tree from the fruit of which honey is procured, but that
the fruit eaten fresh causes intoxication.

21. India produces many singular trees. There is one whose branches
incline downwards, and whose leaves are not less in size than a shield.
Onesicritus, describing minutely the country of Musicanus, which he says
is the most southerly part[349] of India, relates, that there are some
large trees the branches of which extend to the length even of twelve
cubits. They then grow downwards, as though bent (by force), till they
touch the earth, where they penetrate and take root like layers. They
next shoot upwards and form a trunk. They again grow as we have
described, bending downwards, and implanting one layer after another,
and in the above order, so that one tree forms a long shady roof, like a
tent, supported by many pillars. In speaking of the size of the trees,
he says their trunks could scarcely be clasped by five men. [350]

Aristobulus also, where he mentions the Acesines, and its confluence
with the Hyarotis, speaks of trees with their boughs bent downwards and
of a size that fifty, but, according [CAS. 694] to Onesicritus, four
hundred horsemen might take shelter at mid-day beneath the shade of a
single tree.

Aristobulus mentions another tree, not large, bearing great pods, like
the bean, ten fingers in length, full of honey,[351] and says that those
who eat it do not easily escape with life. But the accounts of all these
writers about the size of the trees have been exceeded by those who
assert that there has been seen, beyond the Hyarotis,[352] a tree which
casts a shade at noon of five stadia.

Aristobulus says of the wool-bearing trees, that the flower pod contains
a kernel, which is taken out, and the remainder is combed like wool.

22. In the country of Musicanus there grows, he says, spontaneously
grain resembling wheat, and a vine that produces wine, whereas other
authors affirm that there is no wine in India. Hence, according to
Anacharsis, they had no pipes, nor any musical instruments, except
cymbals, drums, and crotala, which were used by jugglers.

Both Aristobulus and other writers relate that India produces many
medicinal plants and roots, both of a salutary and noxious quality, and
plants yielding a variety of colours. He adds, that, by a law, any
person discovering a deadly substance is punished with death unless he
also discover an antidote; in case he discovers an antidote, he is
rewarded by the king.

Southern India, like Arabia and Ethiopia, produces cinnamon, nard, and
other aromatics. It resembles these countries as regards the effect of
the sun’s rays, but it surpasses them in having a copious supply of
water, whence the atmosphere is humid, and on this account more
conducive to fertility and fecundity; and this applies to the earth and
to the water, hence those animals which inhabit both one and the other
are of a larger size than are found in other countries. The Nile
contributes to fecundity more than other rivers, and among other animals
of large bulk, produces the amphibious kind. The Egyptian women also
sometimes have four children at a birth, and Aristotle says that one
woman had seven children at one birth. [353] He calls the Nile most
fecundating and nutritive, on account of the moderate coction effected
by the sun’s rays, which leave behind the nutritious part of substances,
and evaporate that which is superfluous.

23. It is perhaps owing to this cause that the water of the Nile boils,
as he says, with one half of the heat which other water requires. In
proportion however, he says, as the water of the Nile traverses in a
straight line, a long and narrow tract of country, passing through a
variety of climates and of atmosphere, while the Indian rivers are
poured forth into wider and more extensive plains, their course being
delayed a long time in the same climate, in the same degree the waters
of India are more nutritious than those of the Nile; they produce larger
animals of the cetaceous kind, and in greater number (than the Nile),
and the water which descends from the clouds has already undergone the
process of coction.

24. This would not be admitted by the followers of Aristobulus, who say
that the plains are not watered by rain. Onesicritus, however, thinks
that rain-water is the cause of the peculiar properties of animals, and
alleges in proof, that the colour of foreign herds which drink of it is
changed to that of the native animals.

This is a just remark; but it is not proper to attribute to the power of
the water merely the cause of the black complexion and the woolly hair
of the Ethiopians, and yet he censures Theodectes, who refers these
peculiarities to the effects of the sun, in these words,

“Near these approaching with his radiant car,
The sun their skins with dusky tint doth dye,
And sooty hue; and with unvarying forms
Of fire, crisps their tufted hair. ”

There may be reason in this, for he says that the sun does not approach
nearer to the Ethiopians than to other nations, but shines more
perpendicularly, and that on this account the heat is greater; indeed,
it cannot be correctly said that the sun approaches near to the
Ethiopians, for he is at an equal distance from all nations. Nor is the
heat the cause of the black complexion, particularly of children in the
womb, who are out of the reach of the sun. Their opinion is to be
preferred, who attribute these effects to the sun and to intense solar
heat, causing a great deficiency of moisture on the surface [CAS. 696]
of the skin. Hence we say it is that the Indians have not woolly hair,
nor is their colour so intensely[354] dark, because they live in a humid
atmosphere.

With respect to children in the womb, they resemble their parents (in
colour) according to a seminal disposition and constitution, on the same
principle that hereditary diseases, and other likenesses, are explained.

The equal distance of the sun from all nations (according to
Onesicritus) is an argument addressed to the senses, and not to reason.
But it is not an argument addressed to the senses generally, but in the
meaning that the earth bears the proportion of a point to the sun, for
we may understand such a meaning of an argument addressed to the senses,
by which we estimate heat to be more or less, as it is near or at a
distance, in which cases it is not the same; and in this meaning, not in
that of Onesicritus, the sun is said to be near the Ethiopians.

25. It is admitted by those who maintain the resemblance of India to
Egypt and Ethiopia, that the plains which are not overflowed do not
produce anything for want of water.

Nearchus says, that the old question respecting the rise of the Nile is
answered by the case of the Indian rivers, namely, that it is the effect
of summer rains; when Alexander saw crocodiles in the Hydaspes, and
Egyptian beans in the Acesines, he thought that he had discovered the
sources of the Nile, and was about to equip a fleet with the intention
of sailing by this river to Egypt; but he found out shortly afterwards
that his design could not be accomplished,

“for in midway were vast rivers, fearful waters, and first
the ocean,”[355]

into which all the Indian rivers discharge themselves; then Ariana, the
Persian and Arabian Gulfs, all Arabia and Troglodytica.

The above is what has been said on the subject of winds and rains, the
rising of rivers, and the inundation of plains.

26. We must describe these rivers in detail, with the particulars, which
are useful for the purposes of geography, and which have been handed
down to us by historians.

Besides this, rivers, being a kind of physical boundaries of the size
and figures of countries, are of the greatest use in every part of the
present work. But the Nile and the rivers in India have a superiority
above the rest, because the country could not be inhabited without them.
By means of the rivers it is open to navigation and capable of
cultivation, when otherwise it would not be accessible, nor could it be
occupied by inhabitants.

We shall speak of the rivers deserving notice, which flow into the
Indus, and of the countries which they traverse; with regard to the rest
we know some particulars, but are ignorant of more. Alexander, who
discovered the greatest portion of this country, first of all resolved
it to be more expedient to pursue and destroy those who had
treacherously killed Darius, and were meditating the revolt of
Bactriana. He approached India therefore through Ariana, which he left
on the right hand, and crossed the Paropamisus to the northern parts,
and to Bactriana. [356] Having conquered all the country subject to the
Persians, and many other places besides, he then entertained the desire
of possessing India, of which he had received many, although indistinct,
accounts.

He therefore returned, crossing over the same mountains by other and
shorter roads, having India on the left hand; he then immediately turned
towards it, and towards its western boundaries and the rivers Cophes and
Choaspes. [357] The latter river empties itself into the Cophes,[358]
near Plemyrium, after passing by another city Gorys, in its course
through Bandobene and Gandaritis. [359]

He was informed that the mountainous and northern parts were the most
habitable and fertile, but that the southern part was either without
water, or liable to be overflowed by rivers at one time, or entirely
burnt up at another, more fit to be the haunts of wild beasts than the
dwellings of men. He resolved therefore to get possession of that part
of India first which had been well spoken of, considering at the same
time that the rivers which it was necessary to pass, and which flowed
[CAS. 697] transversely through the country which he intended to
attack, would be crossed with more facility near their sources. He heard
also that many of the rivers united and formed one stream, and that this
more frequently occurred the farther they advanced into the country, so
that from want of boats it would be more difficult to traverse. Being
apprehensive of this obstruction, he crossed the Cophes, and conquered
the whole of the mountainous country situated towards the east.

27. Next to the Cophes was the Indus, then the Hydaspes, the Acesines,
the Hyarotis, and last, the Hypanis. He was prevented from proceeding
farther, partly from regard to some oracles, and partly compelled by his
army, which was exhausted by toil and fatigue, but whose principal
distress arose from their constant exposure to rain. Hence we became
acquainted with the eastern parts of India on this side the Hypanis, and
whatever parts besides which have been described by those who, after
Alexander, advanced beyond the Hypanis to the Ganges and Palibothra.

After the river Cophes, follows the Indus. The country lying between
these two rivers is occupied by Astaceni, Masiani, Nysæi, and
Hypasii. [360] Next is the territory of Assacanus, where is the city
Masoga (Massaga? ), the royal residence of the country. Near the Indus is
another city, Peucolaïtis. [361] At this place a bridge which was
constructed afforded a passage for the army.

28. Between the Indus and the Hydaspes is Taxila, a large city, and
governed by good laws. The neighbouring country is crowded with
inhabitants and very fertile, and here unites with the plains. The
people and their king Taxiles received Alexander with kindness, and
obtained in return more presents than they had offered to Alexander; so
that the Macedonians became jealous, and observed, that it seemed as if
Alexander had found none on whom he could confer favours before he
passed the Indus. Some writers say that this country is larger than
Egypt.

Above this country among the mountains is the territory of
Abisarus,[362] who, as the ambassadors that came from him reported,
kept two serpents, one of 80, and the other, according to Onesicritus,
of 140 cubits in length. This writer may as well be called the master
fabulist as the master pilot of Alexander. For all those who accompanied
Alexander preferred the marvellous to the true, but this writer seems to
have surpassed all in his description of prodigies. Some things,
however, he relates which are probable and worthy of record, and will
not be passed over in silence even by one who does not believe their
correctness.

Other writers also mention the hunting of serpents in the Emodi
mountains,[363] and the keeping and feeding of them in caves.

29. Between the Hydaspes and Acesines is the country of Porus,[364] an
extensive and fertile district, containing nearly three hundred cities.
Here also is the forest in the neighbourhood of the Emodi mountains in
which Alexander cut down a large quantity of fir, pine, cedar, and a
variety of other trees fit for ship-building, and brought the timber
down the Hydaspes. With this he constructed a fleet on the Hydaspes,
near the cities, which he built on each side of the river where he had
crossed it and conquered Porus. One of these cities he called
Bucephalia,[365] from the horse Bucephalus, which was [CAS. 699] killed
in the battle with Porus. The name Bucephalus[366] was given to it from
the breadth of its forehead. He was an excellent war-horse, and
Alexander constantly rode him in battle.

The other city he called Nicæa from the victory, ΝΙΚΗ
(Nice), which he had obtained.

In the forest before mentioned it is said there is a vast number of
monkeys,[367] and as large as they are numerous. On one occasion the
Macedonians, seeing a body of them standing in array opposite to them,
on some bare eminences, (for this animal is not less intelligent than
the elephant,) and presenting the appearance of an army, prepared to
attack them as real enemies, but being informed by Taxiles, who was then
with the king, of the real fact, they desisted.

The chase of this animal is conducted in two different manners. It is an
imitative creature, and takes refuge up among the trees. The hunters,
when they perceive a monkey seated on a tree, place in sight a basin
containing water, with which they wash their own eyes; then, instead of
water, they put a basin of bird-lime, go away, and lie in wait at a
distance. The animal leaps down, and besmears itself with the bird-lime,
and when it winks, the eyelids are fastened together; the hunters then
come upon it, and take it.

The other method of capturing them is as follows: the hunters dress
themselves in bags like trowsers, and go away, leaving behind them
others which are downy, with the inside smeared over with bird-lime.
The monkeys put them on, and are easily taken.

30. Some writers place Cathaia[368] and the country of Sopeithes, one of
the nomarchs, in the tract between the rivers (Hydaspes and Acesines);
some, on the other side of the Acesines and of the Hyarotis, on the
confines of the territory of the other Porus, the nephew of Porus who
was taken prisoner by Alexander, and call the country subject to him
Grandaris.

A very singular usage is related of the high estimation in which the
inhabitants of Cathaia hold the quality of beauty, which they extend to
horses and dogs. According to Onesicritus, they elect the handsomest
person as king. The child (selected), two months after birth, undergoes
a public inspection, and is examined. They determine whether it has the
amount of beauty required by law, and whether it is worthy to be
permitted to live. The presiding magistrate then pronounces whether it
is to be allowed to live, or whether it is to be put to death.

They dye their heads with various and the most florid colours, for the
purpose of improving their appearance. This custom prevails elsewhere
among many of the Indians, who pay great attention to their hair and
dress; and the country produces colours of great beauty. In other
respects the people are frugal, but are fond of ornament.

A peculiar custom is related of the Cathæi. The bride and the husband
are respectively the choice of each other, and the wives burn themselves
with their deceased husbands. The reason assigned for this practice is,
that the women sometimes fell in love with young men, and deserted or
poisoned their husbands. This law was therefore established in order to
check the practice of administering poison; but neither the existence
nor the origin of the law are probable facts.

It is said, that in the territory of Sopeithes there is a mountain
composed of fossile salt, sufficient for the whole of India. Valuable
mines also both of gold and silver are situated, it is said, not far off
among other mountains, according to the testimony of Gorgus, the miner
(of Alexander). The Indians, unacquainted with mining and smelting, are
ignorant of their own wealth, and therefore traffic with greater
simplicity.

31.