RESEARCHES

INTO

THE NATURE AND AFFINITY

OF

ANCIENT AND HINDU MYTHOLOGY.

BY

LIEUTENANT COLONEL VANS KENNEDY,

OF THE BOMBAY MILITARY ESTABLISHMENT.

Η, ετι βελτιον οιμαι, τον μεν λεγοντα αφες, είτε χειρων είτε αμεινων ειη τα δε λεγόμενα σκόπει,
είτε αληθη είτε ψευδή λέγεται, προθυμως ανεγειρας την διανοιαν.

Vel potius mitte, quis sit qui loquatur, inferiorne an præstantior; quæ autem dicuntur, et vere
an falso affirmentur, prompto et experrecto ingenio considera.

Jamblichus de Mysterüs, sect i. chap. 1.

LONDON:

PRINTED FOR LONGMAN, REES, ORME, BROWN, AND GREEN,

PATERNOSter-row.

Great respect is certainly due to men of learning, and a proper regard should be paid to their
memory; but they forfeit much of this esteem when they misapply their talents, and put them-
selves to these shifts to support an hypothesis. They may smile at their reveries, and plume
themselves upon their ingenuity in finding out such expedients, but no good can possibly arise from
it, for the whole is a fallacy and imposition.

Bryant's Anal. of Anc. Myth., vol. iv. p. 180

LONDON:

Printed by A. & R. Spottiswoode,
New-Street-Square.

PREFACE.

In composing my former work on the Origin and Affinity of Languages it naturally occurred to me that the argument which I maintained in it would have been greatly corroborated, could I have at the same time evinced that the original seat of the mythology which prevails in India at the present day was Babylonia; and that it had been thence communicated to Asia Minor, from which country the Pelasgi had, in the course of their migrations, introduced it into Thracia, Greece, Latium, and Etruria. But, when I considered this subject, it appeared to me, that it was of much too extensive a nature to admit of its being treated incidentally; and that, even for discussing it satisfactorily, the requisite materials were not available. For, though much has been written on ancient mythology, authors have been so fond of hypothesis, that it becomes impossible to ascertain from their works what is the precise nature of the information respecting it, that is really entitled to credit; while, on the contrary, so little has been published respecting the Hindu religion, and that so erroneously, that it was necessary, in order to exhibit a correct view of it, to depend solely on Sanscrit authority. Having, however, at length examined both these subjects in such a manner as will, in their discussion, prevent me, I believe, from falling into any mistakes of importance, I now venture to lay the following RESEARCHES before the public.

The affinity which appears to exist amongst the polytheisms of India, Egypt, Greece, and Italy, has already attracted considerable attention: but it will perhaps be admitted, that no correct opinion can be formed on this point, unless just notions, with respect to the principles upon which ancient mythology was founded, have been previously acquired. Unfortunately, however, all authors, whether ancient or modern, who have attempted to explain these principles,