the most congenial for the introduction of the art. But her lingering civilization has not allowed her to acquire that hoary antiquity or to inspire that respect for her old attainments which are secured alone by the extinction of the civilization itself. Her claim has therefore been set aside in favour of Chaldæa, or Egypt or Phoenicia, the last being generally given credit for the introduction of the alphabet. It is doubtful, though, if any of these countries could show records of a more ancient civilization than India. The Phoenicians were a commercial people who carried on trade between countries in the west and east, and India was one of them. All accounts show that when Babylon or Chaldæa was great India was a populous and wealthy country. Her cloth and other productions were greatly in want in the courts of Babylonian kings. Diodorus Siculus gives an account of an invasion of India by the old Egyptian king Sesostris. The authenticity of this is, however, doubtful as no mention of the invasion has been made by the earlier historian Herodotus.

Two astronomical facts are mentioned as bearing on the antiquity of Chaldæa and Egypt. Chaldæa started its year with the sign Taurus (Bull, Sanskrit Vrisha) showing that the vernal equinox used to take place in that sign of the Zodiac instead of pisces (fish, Sanskrit Mína) as at present. A shaft in the Great pyramid of Egypt was made at an inclination to the horizon which allows the inference that the star alpha draconis was taken as the pole star when the Great Pyramid was built.

The axis of the earth has a motion which constantly shifts the position of the pole in the heavens. The star which happens to be nearest to the position of the pole is taken to be the pole star for the time being, and for centuries after it, until attention of the astronomers is drawn to the fact, and another star nearest to the correct position of the pole is selected as the new pole star. The star alpha draconis was nearest to a position of the pole in 3440 B. C., and was taken to be the pole star from a little before that date to several centuries after it, until the present pole star was selected. The axis of the earth, in this motion, makes a complete revolution in about 25868 years. The same motion of the earth's axis goes constantly shifting the equinoctial points (the intersection of the equatorial plane with the plane of the ecliptic) the entry of the sun in one of which (the vernal equinox) marks

the beginning of a solar year. The great circle of the heavens being divided into twelve parts or signs of the Zodiac, these equinoctial points remain in each of the signs for about 2155 years. The vernal equinoctial point came, to the sign pisces (Mina) in 522 A. D., according to the Hindu astronomy, and consequently it was in Aries (Mesha) from 1633 B. C. to 522 A. D., and in Taurus (Vrisha) from 3788 B. C. to 1633 B.C.

Now India also witnesssd these ancient astronomical phenomena, while in possession of a high state of civilization. Even the great Indian War, Mahábhárata, which event took place long after the development of arts and sciences, was sufficiently ancient in this respect. For at the time this war was fought the vernal equinox took place in the sign Taurus, and alpha draconis was taken as the pole star. The former could be shown simply by mentioning the name of the father of Rádhá, the playmate of Krishna, which was Vrishabhánu (meaning the sun in the sign Taurus), which name could have no meaning unless the sun in Taurus had some real significance. It will probably be said that the name Rádhá or Vrishabhánu does not occur in the Mahábhárata but in Harivansha, but it does not concern us whether these personages existed or not. All that we are concerned with is the nama Vrishabhánu, which must have been coined when the sun in the sign Vrisha had some importance. (1) A more scientific proof is obtained from the death of Bhíşma occuring as men. tioned in the Mahábhárata on the full-moon day of Mágha at a winter solstice which shows that winter solstice used to take place in the sign aquarius (Sanskrit Kumbha). This brings the vernal equinox to sign Taurus.

The other thing, viz., the star alpha draconis being taken as the pole star, is established by the fact mentioned in Vishnu Parána that the constellation Ursæ majoris or Great bear (Sanskrit Suptarshi) was in Parikshita's time in the asterism Maghà, which is not the case at present, and could never have been unless alpha

(1) A lot of information can sometimes be obtained from commonplace things. For instance, a Hindustani idiom for throwing obstacles" is "min mekh lagana." As the signs of the Zodiac are at present ordinarily counted from Mesha, Mina being the last, the word Mina preceding Mesha in the idiom has some significance. We know the vernal equinox now takes place in Mina, and the idiom quite innocently supplies this information.

draconis were taken as pole star. The line joining the middle star of the great Bear with this star passes through the group Maghá. It appears that shortly after Parikshita's time there was a controversy as to which star, the present pole star or alpha draconis, was to be reckoned as the pole star and the final decision was in favour of the former, being closer to the real pole. This has given rise to the beautiful story of Dhruva mentioned in the Purànas. This young boy of 5 years tried, the story says, to sit in the lap of his father but was not allowed to do so by his step-mother who said that the father's lap was for her son and not for Dhruva. At this disappointment he left the house and sat for austere devotion, with firm determination so that nobody could persuade him to come back. As a result of this, he was given by God a position which was immovable, although the whole universe about him moved. After sometime the origin of the story was forgotten, as also the fact of alpha draconis having been once the pole star, and long after Parikshit's time when the Great Bear was found to be in another asterism, due to the change of the pole star, the Indian astronomers concluded that the constellation Great Bear had itself a motion, completing the circle in about 2700 years.

I have digressed, I am afraid, too far from the main point which was merely to show that the Indian civilization was coeval with any of the ancient civilizations known, and that there was commercial intercourse, both by land and sea, between India and other countries from very early times. Constant references to this are found in the Old Testament and writings of the Greeks.

To say, therefore, that while the other ancient nations, Egyptians, Phoenicians, etc., knew writing, the Indians were quite ignorant of it, does not stand to reason. They must have borrowed the alphabet much earlier than 300 B. C., if they were themselves not the inventors of it, which, as will be shown later, they

were.

Bühler, to whom we owe the collection and assorting of the old Indian alphabets as found in inscriptions of the different periods, has shown from literary evidence in Brahmanical, Buddhistic and Greek literature, that writing was in common use in India in the 5th and possibly 6th century B. C., and we have, since Bühler

wrote, found inscriptions belonging to the 5th century B. C. It has also been now established beyond doubt, chiefly by the learned discussion of the subject by T. Goldstücker, that writing was wellknown in India in the time of the grammarian Pànini. The alphabet with which the Panini's grammar started was therefore not a mere verbal alphabet, as Professor M. Müller would take it to be, but one which used to be written.

It is therefore important to determine the approximate date when Pánini lived, as that will give us a basis to go further into the reaches of time.

II.-Date of Panini.

The date of Pánini has itself been a subject of great discussion. There are some who would put him at about the beginning of the Christian Era; while there are others, on the other hand, who would make him the author of the Vyákarana Vedánga, i.e., a Rishi of the Vedic times. Among the former, the first and foremost stands Dr. Weber, as may be expected from his inveterate tendency to make everything Indian look as quite recent and borrowed. He tries to show Pánini as a man of 150 A. D., but finds no supporters. Dr. Böhtlingk and Professor Max Müller, depending on some stories in the book called "Katha SaritaSágara " (an ocean of the rivers of stories) take Páņini and Kátyáyana as being contemporaries belonging to the time of the King Nanda who was succeeded by Chandragupta, and thus put him in 350 B. C. The mistake lies in assuming the two grammarians as contemporaries. There is evidence to show that several words and grammatical constructions of Pánini's time had undergone a change when Kátyáyana wrote his Vártikas and this means a fairly good interval must have elapsed between their times.

Language is a thing which goes on changing constantly in adapting itself to the habits and customs, thoughts, ideas and faith of the people speaking it, as these are ever varying either in the natural course or under outside influence. It may well be likened to a flowing river which changes its shape almost at every step according to the configuration of its banks. And as the shape of a river is affected by the junction of another

stream, so does a language feel the influence of intrusion from outside. Further, as a river branches off into several streams when in the plains, so does a language branch off into several dialects, when the people speaking it spread far and wide and are differently influenced according to their evironments. Grammars and lexicons merely represent the stage of development reached by the language at the time they were written. They are, to continue the simile, like the gauging of a river which shows its section and quantity of water going at the particular point, although it cannot check its onward flow.

Pánini's grammar, we know, is a full and complete record of the Indo-Aryan langauge of his time, so that if any construction found in an older book, say, for instance, the Rámáyaņa, is not recorded by Páņini, we can safely conclude that that construction had become obsolete in his time; and, similarly, if we find in later books the use of any word in an altered sense, or a construction not warranted by Pánini, it is sure the altered use or construction came into vogue later as the language developed in its usual course.

The arguments preferred by the other school are based on the assumption that Pátanjali, the author of the great commentary (Mahábháśya) of Páṇini's grammar, was identical with Pátanjali, the author of the "Yoga," one of the six philosophies or Darangas. As "Yoga" has been commented on by Vyása, the author of the Mahábhárata, Páņini, it is concluded, must have lived before the days of the great war. The argument, however, falls to the ground when we find the Mahábhásaya referring to an event which shows that its author must have lived sometime about 150 A. D.

T. Goldstücker proves from a lot of internal evidence in the Pánini's book itself, that it could not have been written later than the 6th century B. C. A few centuries earlier will not be an incorrect date.

Let us then put down the whole of the evidence together and examine it :

:

(1) "Kathá-Sarita Ságara" says, Pánini and Kátyáyana were contemporaries, and there was a controversy