00 INTRODUCTION. 



India, as charioteers and riders; and in Greece, 

 Palestine, and Egypt, as charioteers only. 



Although no people could be conversant with 

 horses, or accustomed to mount asses, without learn- 

 ing the practicability of sitting on horseback, these 

 differences are distinguishable in written authorities, 

 and visible on fictile vases, bas-reliefs, and Egyptian 

 painted outlines : they are a general result of the 

 apposite manners of nations, according to the cli- 

 mates they inhabit; intensely cold, or relaxingly 

 warm. As they reside among marshy rugged steppes, 

 or dry hard plains, they adopt short dresses of 

 peltry or long encumbering clothes; they ride or 

 they drive, but necessity, fashion, and habit change 

 their inclinations ; they fight from chariots, because 

 more convenient to carry heavy darts and shield, 

 till they experience the superiority of mounted 

 opponents, and then modify their own customs. 



Now, if we compare these considerations with the 

 claims in favour of Africa set up by late writers, 

 who consider the domesticJiorse was first brought 

 from thence to be subdued in Egypt, we find no 

 true indigenous wild horse in that quarter of the 

 globe, unless the puny koomrah deserves that name ; 

 and we appeal to the current of human civilization, 

 which most certainly did not set in from Central 

 Africa towards the north-east. Although Numi- 

 dian horsemen occur, they are not charioteers, nor 

 noticed until Carthage and Greek Cyrenaica flou- 

 rished, or had already lost their independence, and 

 then they were naked riders, little acquainted with 



