Dherma. So that this epithet like that of Buddha is not confined to any individual, or any race. On the contrary, we learn from the institutes of Menu, that "the very birth of Brahmans is a constant incarnation of Dherma, God of Justice: For the Brahman is born to promote justice and to procure ultimate happiness."

You have now the Solar and Lunar dynasties before you, and will be enabled to judge how far I am correct, in representing them as the two great lines of Seth and Cain which descended from Adam. Should my researches prove instrumental in affording you either instruction, or amusement, I shall be abundantly gratified.

In a future Letter I will give you the antediluvian dynasties of the Chaldeans, as they are taken from Berosus; which equally agree with the Hindu and Hebrew Scripture; evincing the truth of all three.

I remain, with unalterable regard,

LETTER III.

MY DEAR SIR,

As inferences equally injurious to truth and Christianity, have been drawn from a paper which appeared some years back in the Asiatic Researches, I shall endeavour to explain some of those truths, which have been termed "monstrous absurdities," before I proceed to the antediluvian dynasties of the Chaldeans, as they are recorded by Berosus; to which I have frequently had occasion to refer in my two former Letters.

For the genealogical table of the Solar and Lunar princes, we are exclusively indebted to Sir William Jones. And, although he appears to have mistaken their real import, he is, in general, a very faithful narrator. Since the series of these dynasties were published, as organized by him, those who have written on the subject, generally give them, prefaced with an assurance that the theory is originally their own. And the author of the paper, I have just alluded to, informs us, that the one he presents "is the only genuine chronology

recorded of Indian history." Whereas it appears subject to more objections, than any which I have elsewhere met with. Neither am I very sure, that the whole is not intended as a satire. For he presents us with an elaborate table, containing the pedigree of Noah from the year B. c. 3044, to the time of Alexander, or the year B. c. 300. Mr. Wilford not only gives the genealogical table of the patriarch, but the intermarriages, &c. for more than two thousand years. It is a pity that these discoveries had not been brought forward a few centuries further. We might then, by ascertaining the degree of affinity each sovereign of the present day, bears to the first king of the new world, have determined the question relative to territorial right, without having recourse to force of arms. This pedigree will be found in vol. V. of the Asiatic Researches. (p. 241. Bengal edit.) On a supposition that the above was seriously meant, we will examine it. To avoid the incongruities others had been guilty of, in placing too many generations in a too limited period, this author chooses the Samaritan text of Scripture, which carries the deluge 935 years further back than the Septuagint, and 349 further back than the Hebrew text. But this not exactly suiting his system, he forms a new epoch for the deluge, fixing it at the year B. c. 3044, making the time

of Shem to correspond with the year B. c. 2800, and that of Icshwacu and Buddha, one year later. Thus 1791 years are allotted for the rule of the descendants of Noah, in the race of Shem, until the usurpation of Pradyato; the beginning of whose reign he places at A. M. 3402, or the year B. c. 600; which is just fifteen hundred years later than it is placed in every Hindu record. From this pedigree I have extracted a few dates, sufficient to evince the absurdity of the system, without a repetition of Hindu names.

After much fabulous matter, we are informed by Mr. Wilford, that, long subsequent to the original creation, after innumerable destructions and creations, Brahma found it necessary to give two sons to Adima, or Adam, from whom the earth was filled with inhabitants. He then furnishes a list of the patriarchs in the race of Cain, contrasting them with the same race, as given by Sanchoniatho; as follows:

3 Agnidhra .....Phos, (light, fire, flame.)

4 Cimparache, &c... Cassuis, &c. (mountains.)

The above table is tolerably correct. My principal reason for introducing it, is to shew, that this author, who spent so much time in endeavouring to prove that Bharatta* descended from Noah and was born A. M. 2002, or in the year B. C. 2000, produces, what he terms an authentic document, to prove him of the sixth generation from Adam, and born A. M. 461, or in the year B. c. 3541. His note on the third generation is likewise very erroneous; wherein he supposes Auttama, Tamasa, and Raivata, all of whom became Menus, to have been the sons of Agnid'hra. Had they been of the race of Cain, they would, of course, have appeared in the foregoing table. But, in the institutes of Menu, they are all three said to be of the other line, three of the six Menus in the race of

* See the foregoing Tables.