roch. It appears in Ptolemy in
the form _Larike_. The sea to the west of that coast was in the early
Mahomedan times called the Sea of Lar, and the language spoken on its
shores is called by Mas'udi _Lari_. Abulfeda's authority, Ibn Said, speaks
of Lar and Guzerat as identical. That position would certainly be very ill
described as lying west of Madras. The kingdom most nearly answering to
that description in Polo's age would be that of the Bellal Rajas of Dwara
Samudra, which corresponded in a general way to modern Mysore. (_Mas'udi_,
I. 330, 381; II. 85; _Gildem._ 185; _Elliot_, I. 66.)

That Polo's ideas on this subject were incorrect seems clear from his
conception of the Brahmans as a class of _merchants_. Occasionally they
may have acted as such, and especially as agents; but the only case I can
find of Brahmans as a class adopting trade is that of the Konkani
Brahmans, and they are said to have taken this step when expelled from
Goa, which was their chief seat, by the Portuguese. Marsden supposes that
there has been confusion between Brahmans and Banyans; and, as Guzerat or
Lar was the country from which the latter chiefly came, there is much
probability in this.

The high virtues ascribed to the Brahmans and Indian merchants were
perhaps in part matter of tradition, come down from the stories of
Palladius and the like; but the eulogy is so constant among mediaeval
travellers that it must have had a solid foundation. In fact it would not
be difficult to trace a chain of similar testimony from ancient times down
to our own. Arrian says no Indian was ever accused of falsehood. Hiuen
Tsang ascribes to the people of India eminent uprightness, honesty, and
disinterestedness. Friar Jordanus (circa 1330) says the people of Lesser
India (Sind and Western India) were true in speech and eminent in justice;
and we may also refer to the high character given to the Hindus by Abul
Fazl. After 150 years of European trade indeed we find a sad
deterioration. Padre Vincenzo (1672) speaks of fraud as greatly prevalent
among the Hindu traders. It was then commonly said at Surat that it took
three Jews to make a Chinaman, and three Chinamen to make a Banyan. Yet
Pallas, in the last century, noticing the Banyan colony at Astrakhan, says
its members were notable for an upright dealing that made them greatly
preferable to Armenians. And that wise and admirable public servant, the
late Sir William Sleeman, in our own time, has said that