The Difcovery, Settlement, and Commerce 
Book L 
g. There are, however, fome Objedions that will natu- 
rally occur to the intelligent Reader, and ought not to be 
pahed over in Silence, becaufe if they cannot be fully an- 
fwered, they have a dired Tendency to overturn the beft 
Part of what we have delivered, and therefore it is requifite 
that we fliould confider them more at large. The firft is, 
that if we fuppofe the Ancients to have been acquainted 
with China , and the Chhefe , it abfolutely contradicts what 
has been before afferted of their knowing little or nothing 
of the Countries beyond the Ganges , and extends their 
Knowledge of the Eaft to fuch a Degree, as is abfolutely 
incompatible with the Sentiments of the mold learned Wri- 
ters upon this Subject, as well as with the foregoing Part 
of our own Work; fo that inftead of clearing this Matter, 
we fhould only perplex it the more, and be fo far from 
making it perfpicuous to the Englifj Reader, that on the 
contrary we fliould entangle him in new Doubts, and leave 
him upon the whole in at leak as great Obfcurity as we found 
him. That this, notwithftanding, is very far from our In- 
tention, appears plainly from the Pains already taken, and 
from our Hating this Objection fully and fairly ; and it ought 
like wife to pafs for a ftrong Teftimony of our aiming at 
Satisfaction in this Point, that we fo freely mention the Dif- 
ficulties that occur in the Execution of this Undertaking. 
In order to the clear Solution of this Point, it is neceffary 
to remember, that in this Sedion we do not handle the ac- 
tual Difcoveries of the Ancients, but the Accounts given 
by their Geographers, which are very different things. We 
fuppofe, agreeable to the beft Lights that Antiquity affords, 
that the Ancients never actually failed farther than the 
Mouths of the Ganges , and that they might do by coafting 
round Cape Comorin , and fo along the Coaft of Coromandel ; 
neither is it very probable that they made many Voyages fo 
far, but rather that the beft Part of their Knowledge was 
derived from Travels made by Land through the Countries 
that lie between the Rivers Indus and Ganges *. 
Upon this Suppofition, all that they have written may 
be very well accounted for, and the feeming Differences 
between what is related in the foregoing Sections and this 
very eafily reconciled. To make this Matter clearer, v/e 
will examine in their natural Order the Seas mentioned by 
ancient Writers, which will in a great meafure enable us to 
extricate ourfelves from thefe Doubts. In the firft place 
then they navigated the Mare Erythraim , which lies between 
the Arabian Gulph, and the oppofite Side of India ; and 
having in their Commerce often heard of Taprobana , they 
were led into many Miftakes about that Ifland, till by de- 
grees their V effels failing on the Coaft of Malabar in doub- 
ling Cape Comorin , difeovered Ceylon, which is the true 
Taprobana. The Gulph of Bengal was their Mare Eonm , 
and the upper Part of it towards the Continent Sinus Gan- 
geticus , or the Bay of the Ganges , bccaufe the Mouths of 
that River fell into this Bay. The Gulph of Siam was their 
Sinus Magnus , or Great Bay •, but this they knew by Hear- 
fay only, their Navigation never extending thither. _ 
But it may be demanded what Proof there is of this ? To 
which I anfwer, all that the Nature of the Subject will admit 
affirmative and negative. As to the firft, it is plain they 
never were thoroughly acquainted with the Ifland of Tapro- 
bana. Strabo makes it of the Size of Britain , and writes 
no doubt from Information only pretty near the Truth ; 
but Ptolemy extends it much beyond its real Bounds, by 
fuppoftng (at leaft this is the only way of accounting for it) 
the Maldives belonging thereto, or dependent thereon. 
Yet the Situation of the principal Places he mentions therein 
are not repugnant to Truth, fo that the Weft and North 
Parts of it were tolerably known in his Time, but not the 
South. The Maldives very imperfedly, if at all ; and 
therefore the Romans and Alexandrians had not puftied their 
Commerce very far on this Side, much lefs into the Sinus 
Magnus , or Bay of Siam. This appears from the very 
Name, which undoubtedly was given it from a Notion that 
it was a very wide fpreading Sea, whereas in Fad it is much 
narrower than the Sinus Gangeticus. 
As to the negative Proofs, they are ftronger and more in 
Number : For in order to have failed into the Sinus Mag- 
nus , they muft have paffed through the Streights of Malacca , * 
which had opened to their View all the Indies that are now 
known, and of which there is not a Word in Ptolemy , or 
even in Ammianus Marcellinus , and confequently no Colour 
for believing they had any other Knowledge of that Bay 
than from the Relation of the Indians , with whom they 
traded. Their actual Difcoveries therefore went no farther 
than we before mentioned ; but by the Help of thefe Dif- 
coveries, the Report of Travellers, and his own Sagacity, 
Ptolemy formed his Tables, which feem to extend the 
Knowledge of the Ancients fo much farther. We might, 
to verify this Matter, mention a Multitude of Errors in thofe 
Tables, and in other Accounts of thofe Times, which could 
arife from no other Caufe than their Authors fetting down 
the Names and Situation of Places from very indifferent 
Memoirs, and yet from the beft they had but that this is 
unneceffary, ftnee Ptolemy himfelf ingenuoufiy owns that 
beyond the Country of the Sin#, or Thin a, which is cer- 
tainly the Kingdom of Siam, they knew nothing to the Eaft 
at all. 
It is moft evident from thefe Obfervations, that we have 
done the ftrideft Juftice to the Ancients, both with refped 
to the Voyages made by them, and the Ufes they made of 
the Knowledge derived from thence and have fhewn, that 
inftead of treating their Geographical Defcriptions with Con- 
tempt, as fome have done on Account of the many Mif- 
takes in them, we ought rather to applaud their Diligence 
in making the beft Ufe of the Materials in their Power, 
and thereby furnifhing to fuch as are their profeffed Admi- 
rers very plaufible Arguments for maintaining, that the An- 
cients knew almoft as much of thefe Countries as ourfelves. 
Indeed, while they fpeak in general Terms only, they feem 
to juftify this Opinion ; for they affure us, that this Eaftern 
Part of the World is inhabited by the Indians , the Seres, 
and the Scythians ; that is, in the Language of the Mo- 
derns, by the Indians, the Chinefe, and the Tartars, which 
is very true ; but when they endeavoured to affign the 
Bounds of the feveral Countries which thofe Nations inha- 
bit, they fhew us plainly, that they did not underftand 
what they themfelves faid, by their bringing the Chinefe 
almoft as far as the Ganges , and placing beyond them a 
Race of Man-eaters in China properly fo called. To lum 
up all, and anfwer the Objection in few Words, the Ac- 
counts left us by the Ancients do not prove that they viftted 
any Part of the Indies beyond the Ganges, though the In- 
formations they received in their Commerce enabled their 
Geographers to lay down Tables of a few other Countries, 
about which, however, they were much miftaken in their 
Conjedures. 
7. It may very poflibly happen, as it very often does, 
in the difeuffing fuch perplexed Subjeds, that by removing 
one Objedion the Means is afforded of railing another ; 
and that perhaps no lefs fpecious than the former. It may 
in fhort be faid, that from the Account we give of the 
Knowledge the Ancients had of the Seres, which we allow 
to be the Chinefe, we admit that they had extended their 
Dominions very much beyond what they poffefs at this 
Day ; and, as great Conquefts are evident Proofs of extraor- 
dinary Power, it follows, that the Seres could not have 
been fuch a difperfed People as they are reprefented, but 
muft have poffeffed a very large and flourilhing Empire, 
which, if they had done, it muft have been famous through 
the Eaft, as the other Empires raifed in that Part of the 
World were. The Force of this Objedion, therefore, 
confifts in making the Defcription given us by the Ancients 
inconfiftent with itfelf, and by overturning that, our An- \ 
fwer to the former Objedion will be overturned alfo. 
Now to this I anfwer, that the Matter of Fad, which is, 
that the Chinefe were known to the Ancients by the Name 
of the Seres, has been clearly made out ; and therefore there 
is no receding from that, let its Confequences be what they 
will. But it fo falls out, that we have not only the Au- 
thority of the ancient Writers before cited, to prove that I 
the Seres or Chinefe extended themfelves very far on this 
Side, but alfo the Accounts of the Chinefe themfelves, 1 
which aiTert, that they were Mafters of Cochin-China , and 
* The Reader will naturally call to mind on this Occafion what we have already laid 
Indian Princes, gave the Ancients not only the firft, but the beft Lights they had into 
Inhabitant’s. 
4 
of Megafihenes and other Perfons, whole Negotiations with the 
the Situation of thofe Countries, and the Manners of their 
Pegu ; 
/ 
