Errors of the Oriental Tables. 83' 
from the Connoissance des Temps, and the other by the observations 
of Beauchamp. But for that of Samarcand, we have only the sole 
observation of Ulugh Beigh, founded on routes ; and we have the: 
authority of Fraser for saying that all the longitudes between Cas- 
bin and Mesched are wrong, being all too far west, as Nishapore, 
Mesched, and Heraut ; and we may be pretty confident that those 
from Heraut to Samarcand are in a similar state. Mr. Wadding- 
ton has been compelled to place Samarcand a full degree farther 
E. of Casbin than either Ulugh Beigh or Rennel ; and what de- 
pendence therefore can we have on the accuracy of Oriental Tables, 
when Ulugh Beigh was mistaken in the very longitude of his own 
residence. ‘Till we have farther evidence for the longitude of Sa- 
marcand than that of Ulugh Beigh, or any other oriental -geogra- 
pher whomsoever, even though given by a Rennel or a Wadding- 
ton, I can place no dependence on its assumed longitude. 
Further, Cashgar is placed by Nasroddin-al-Toosi, and most of 
the oriental geographers, in 44° N. lat. and 107° 26’ E. of the Ca- 
naries, or 8° 10’ E. of Samarcand. Now its true position, as fixed 
in the great Chinese map, constructed at Peking in 1765, by orders 
of the emperor Kien-long, by fathers Allerstein, D’Arocha, and 
Espinha, is 39° 25’ N. lat. and 76° E. long. of Greenwich, 94° 2/ 
E. of Ferro, or 4° 35’ S. and 13° 24’ W. of its position in these 
boasted tables, and 3° farther E. of Samarcand than as given by 
Nasroddin or Ulugh Beigh. Cashgar, consequently, is between 4 
and 500 miles out of its true position in respect of Samarcand. 
Even Rennel, seduced by their authority, places it in 42° 45’ N. 
lat. or more than 200 miles N. of its real site, and 4° too far W. 
Strahlenberg and De la Croix placed it in 43° N. lat. By the same 
authority, namely Nasroddin, Yarkund is placed in 44° N. lat. in- 
stead of 38° 19’, its true latitude in the great Chinese map above- 
mentioned, or 5° 41’ S. of its position in Nasroddin, or nigh 400 
British miles. By the same tables, Khotan in eastern Toorkistaun 
is placed in 42° N. lat. or 4° too far N. It must be remarked, how- 
ever, in justice to the illustrious D’Anville, that he came very near 
the true latitude of Cashgar, placing it in 40° N. lat. or only 35’ 
toomuch. De Lisle, on the other hand, placed Cashgar in 37° 30’ 
N. lat. or nigh two degrees too far S. and placed Yarkund to the 
N. E. of Cashgar, in 40° N. lat. whereas it is tothe S. E. of that 
place. In the Jesuits’ map of Tibet in Du Halde, Cashgar is placed 
in 39° 33’ N. lat. or only 8’ too far N. and Yarkund in 38° 17’; 
yet they have erred in the longitude of Cashgar not less than 6° 17’, 
placing it in 82° 17’, instead of 76°, its true longitude, E. of Green- 
wich. The Oriental Tables have also erred 4° in the longitude of 
Tashkunt, placing it so far toomuch W. Now, if the tables of 
Nasroddin and. Ulugh Beigh have erred so grievously, not to say in 
longitudes merely, but even in the latitudes above specified, how can 
we be sure of the positions of the cities of Toorkistaun and Maw- 
lanahar, as laid down in these tables, on which, till verified, no 
more dependence can be placed than on those of Ptolemy ; for no 
