1849.] Brahmans and Buddhists. 95 



that the ancestors of all of the civilized people who inhabited India 

 at Buddha's advent, were in fact all emigrants from Persia, or from some 

 country allied to it in religion, then we might easily infer that if the Bud- 

 dhists really separated themselves from the brahmans, the schism must 

 have begun about the time when they had but just arrived, if not before 

 it, in the Punjab, that the Buddhists preserved the gods and genii 

 which they had mutually worshipped in Persia, while the brahmans, 

 although retaining also these deites, were on the other hand diverging into 

 polytheism — and that these Buddhists engrafted hero or man worship on 

 their own original faith, having either become acquainted with it before 

 their emigration or obtained it from more early emigrants then settled in 

 India — or perhaps from subsequent emigrants from Asia west of India. 



Again, how are we to account for the peculiar style of architecture of 

 the Buddhists, and their various emblems. 



The former could not, one might suppose, have been based on types 

 handed down by the brahmans, nor have all at once sprung into exist- 

 ance. The Dagobahs too, or Chaityas of the third Buddha Kassapo, 

 belonged therefore to a former age — and their shape was transmitted to 

 the followers of Sakya Buddha. 



That the idea of a tomb, gradually expanded into a magnificent Chait- 

 ya or relic fane, might have been the natural result of man-worship 

 established for centuries, may be readily admitted. But if the original 

 man or hero worshippers, came from the west, then we can be in no 

 difficulty for precedents. 



This course is apparently much more reasonable than that which 

 traces the architectural types from the east to the west. 



If indeed the Buddhism of India was to be deemed the parent, as it 

 has been by many, of western Buddhism, then it must truly have been 

 of a much greater antiquity than has been claimed for it by its modern 

 advocates, at least it would in such case reach beyond the historical 

 period. 



If India, as some writers have supposed, gave a religion — Hinduism 

 in its present acceptation, it could not have been — to the western nations, 

 or to one or more of them, then it would be difficult for us to accord 

 with their etymological inductions, since the radicals in such a case 

 would necessarily have appertained to an Indian language, not to San- 

 scrit or its derivatives, which came with the Indian races and brahmans, 



