Ancient India as described by Megasthenês and Arrian / being a translation of the fragments of the Indika of Megasthenês collected by Dr. Schwanbeck, and of the first part of the Indika of Arrian, by J.W. McCrindle ; with introduction, notes, and map of ancient India.
- Megasthenes
- Date:
- 1877
Licence: Public Domain Mark
Credit: Ancient India as described by Megasthenês and Arrian / being a translation of the fragments of the Indika of Megasthenês collected by Dr. Schwanbeck, and of the first part of the Indika of Arrian, by J.W. McCrindle ; with introduction, notes, and map of ancient India. Source: Wellcome Collection.
37/246 (page 19)
![la ted by Megasthenes, sufficiently show that they discredit that part of his narrative.^] Regarding the manner in which Strabo, Arrianus, Diodorus, and Plinius used the IndiTca of Megasthenes, Schwanbeck remarks :—“ Strabo, and—not unlike to Strabo—Arrianus, who, however, gave a much less carefully considered account of India, abridged the descriptions of Megasthenes, yet in such a way that they wrote at once in an agreeable style and with strict regard to accuracy. But when Strabo designed not merely to instruct but also to delight his readers, he omitted whatever would be out of place in an entertaining narrative or picturesque descrip- tion, and avoided above all things aught that would look like a dry list of names. Now though this may not be a fault, still it is not to be denied that those particulars which he has omitted would have very greatly helped our knowledge of Ancient India. Nay, Strabo, in his eager- ness to be interesting, has gone so far that the topography of India is almost entirely a blank in his pages. “ Diodorus, however, in applying this principle of composi- tion has exceeded all bounds. For as he did not aim at writing learnedly for the instruction of others, but in a light, amusing style, so as to be read with delight by the multitude, he selected for extract such parts as best suited this purpose. He has therefore omitted not only the most accurate narrations of fact, but also the fables which his readers might consider as incredible, and has been best pleased to describe instead that part of Indian life which to the Greeks would appear singular and diverting. . . . Nevertheless his epitome is not without its value; for although we do not learn much that is new from its contents, still it has the advantage over all the others of being the most coherent, while at the same time it enables us to attribute with certainty an occasional passage to Megasthenes, which without its help we could but conjecture proceeded from his pen. “ Since Strabo, Arrianus, and Diodorus have directed their attention to relate nearly the same things, it has resulted that the greatest part of the Indiha has been completely lost, and that of many passages, singularly enough, three epitomes are extant, to which occasionally a fourth is added by Plinius. “ At a great distance from these writers, and especially from Diodorus, stands Plinius: whence it happens that he both differs most from that writer, and also best supplements his epitome. Where the narrative of Strabo and Arrianus is at once pleasing and instructive, and Diodorus charms us with a lively sketch, Pliny gives instead, in the baldest lan-](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b29352290_0037.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
