the Vedic settlers encountered and called Dasyus ; that if they did settle in the south from outside, they did so by the sea and not by land and through mountain ranges, and that they came from Assyria and Asia-Minor, the oldest seat of ancient civilisation. I further think, that once they entered India by the Western sea-gate they spread themselves rapidly over the whole of South India up to the Dandakaranya and the Vindhya, which at that time must have been impassable, and that they developed their letters, and arts, and sciences, and law, and government which at the time they came in contact with the Northern settlers must have been in a sense perfect'.
If the above theory be correct, the migration must have taken place earlier than the twelfth century B. C.; and to accomplish such a huge undertaking the Dravidian Tamils must have had an immense navy. But we know of no ancient nation who had it at this remote period.[1] The Egyptians were an agricultural race; the Assyrians were mountaineers; the Hebrews were shepherds and the Phænicians alone, but of later date, were a maritime race of merchants. As a matter of fact we know that these last, the Ionians and the Romans and very lately
- ↑ Prof. Sayce believes he has proved the existence of commerce by sea between India and Babylon so early as 3000 B.C. by the finding of Indian teak in the ruins of Ur. But this conclusion is not accepted by all scholars. Mr. J. Kennedy has decisively shown in a very learned paper that he can find no archæological or literary evidence for a maritime trade between India and Babylon prior to the seventh century B. C.
