es al ion ee 
Is pica: 


‘ 
Vol. IV, No. 6.] The Age of Kalidasa. 333 
N.S-] 
diffuseness and long compounds is characteristic. It is natural 
rose. Now and then it reminds us of the santa of the 
prose pieces of the Mahabharata. The preference for the 
ura @ where it is usual with others to have ura az, the ue of 
aqaaara words as attributives in ie Tes with the gender of 
the sieliading substantive, Kalidasa has in common with 
Patanjali. Whether these are emai an or characteristic of his 
age it is difficult to say. But it a to be noted that as we go back 
to older and older writers, the prose comes up more and more to 
this standard of natural as Aistingaished from artificial prose, 
Thus Bana, Subandhu, Dandin are less and less artificial in order. 
Prof. Macdonell notes ar tificiality of style in an inscription com- 
posed by Harishena in the 4th century. But of the Girnar and 
Nasik inscriptions of the 2nd century, the learned professor says 
at “they are altogether less artificial than the prose parts of 
arishena’s Kavya and a fortiori? than the works of Dandin, 
bandhu and Bana.” 
These considerations oem the inference that the on the 
writer the less artificial he is. e are, however, concerned wit 
the converse menage viz., the less artificial the writer tlie older 
he is. If the converse is allowed then Kalidasa is older ny the 
Girnar and Nasik inscriptions, As a rule, in such cases, the 
converse comes out to be true. Yet ‘oaatd we shall not take te for 
granted without further proof. 
t 
Ha 
Su 
EVIDENCE OF LANGUAGE. 
When a language is in the stage of formation, fresh words are 
imported ; sometimes old words fall into disuse or change meaning. 
vhange of m eaning may imply that the Sie is growing ; it is 
certainly a sign that the language is not dead yet 
Now take the word yafgai This word is she sanctioned by 
arta te | Katyavana allows it, Amara Simgha, in the sixth 
century at the latest, declares it as a €9r of #q@ai But Kalidasa 
does not treat it as a #HTMeE! He speaks of Vishnu “ 
at a wate: acafga:” | Of Rama as Vishnu he makes ua 
say “sifeat safaqaaists & gig ea q<afsar a@ar’) Referring to 
a@a he says “feaware wearq wafea:” | Ifit were a Sa 
at his time, he would not have used it promiscuously for A@a as 
well as frau | The lexicographer records usage, he does not 
invent meanings. Hence long before — i~ the word had 
aequired the character of a #91! This ould not have been 
possible if the language were dead at the time of Kalidasa. 
Again Vamana, the rhetorician, writes in the 8th century 
that tea is a word that involves an obscene idea (W@teTy ) and 
