284 REV. J. MAGENS MELLO, M.A., F.G.S., BTC. 
the tin was derived which was employed in the bronze 
manufacture? M. Germain Bapst observes that philology and 
geography may aid us in replying to this question.* He remarks 
that it has been said that the Chaldeans and Keyptians, and, at 
a later period, the Phoenicians or some other maritime people, 
brought the tin from the Caucasus, but that, unfortunately 
for this hypothesis, it has been ascertained that this metal is 
not found in the Caucasus. Mr. V. Baer considers that the 
neighbourhood of Mesched, in Khorassan, may have produced 
it. M. Ogorodnikoff has. stated that the inhabitants of that 
place had told him there were mines of tin as well as of 
copper and iron, &c., near to their city, and that he himself 
had actually seen many vessels of tin which the owners said 
had been made of the tin of that locality. But M. Bapst 
doubts the truthfulness of the Tartars as to this; he says 
that all the tin they use is imported in bars from England, 
and considers it beyond question that there are no tin mines 
near to the Caspian Sea, and that if there were any at 
Mesched that metal would certainly not be imported from so 
distant a place as England. 
Another hypothesis makes India the source of the tin used 
in antiquity, and the Hindoo Kush and the Malacca peninsula 
are said to be localities whence it may have been derived. 
M. Lenormant is in favour of the Hindoo Kush, as is also 
M. Bapst. It is a fact that tin is found in that mountainous 
region which separates the Chinese empire from India and 
Central Asia, and the valley of Hilmend may have been, at 
any rate, one of the original sources of that metal, which, in 
the prehistoric ages and down to a far later period, was dis- 
tributed far and wide in all directions. According to M. 
Bapst, philology supports the views thus advocated ; he says 
that Humboldt and Burnouf have observed that the word 
“‘xaootrepoc”’ bears a resemblance to Arab, Illyrian, and 
other words used for tin, all of which find a common root in 
the Sanscrit ‘‘Kastira”; but it has lately been shown that 
Sanscrit may not be such an ancient language as it has” 
hitherto been reckoned, and, according to Mr. Sayce, . 
“ Kastira”’ is not the original root: he suggests the word ~ 
“ Kasduru,”’ which is found in the primitive Accadian of 
Babylonia; it is right, however, to say that M. Oppert and — 
some others dispute this. But there is yet another region, 
* “T)Etain dans lAntiquitd,” Revue des Questions Sctentifiques. Brussels, 
1888, 
