306 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. [July, 1910. 



In the interest of truth, therefore, the theory requires a 



last 



activity m 



givm 



pei 



relating to India and its literature, a period more of accurate 

 knowledge than of theories and sweeping generalizations. 



Do the facts stated in the first paragraph about the language 

 of inscriptions justify the sweeping conclusion that Sanskrit went 

 sleep for seven centuries ? No one would say they do. The 



to 



•wn 



scription writers preferred contemporary vernaculars to Sanskrit , 

 that is, the clerks employed by the various non-Brahminic 

 Governments were vernacularists and not Sanskritists ; and 

 that, from 350 A.D. Sanskritists began to be employed as 

 clerks and Inscription writers by Brahminic Governments. 

 Beyond this they prove nothing ; and the theory of the 

 Renaissance of Sanskrit literature is not justified from these 

 facts. 



Another question may be asked to the supporters of this 

 theory. "Where did the Brahmanas go during all these cen- 

 turies ? ' ' Did they also go to sleep with their favourite lan- 

 guage ? Sanskrit was pre-eminently their language. All 

 their writings were in this language. They were very active 

 before this period, and they were also very active after this 

 period. And was all their activity gone between the two periods 

 of great activity ? This is impossible to suppose. It is useless 

 to oppose arguments to arguments. The best course would 

 be to oppose this theory by facts. If it could be shewn that 

 many great Sanskrit works were written during these seven 

 hundred years the theory would clearly be disproved. All 

 controversial dates will be excluded and only such works will 

 be mentioned whose dates have been approximately ascertained. 

 Panini's great work is said to have been compiled in the 

 fourth century B.C. But this a controversial matter ; and it 



theory. 



will 



3 first work that we know of, which was composed during 

 these seven hundred years, is Kautilya's Artha-Sastra. It is a 

 compilation from ten previous works on the subject. The 

 author quotes earlier authorities sometimes to refute them, and 

 sometimes, again, to support his own views. The extent of the 

 work is 6,000 slokas. So it may be regarded as a tolerably 

 large work. The author Kautilya is the same person who is 

 known in the Indian tradition as Canakya, the Brahmana 

 politician who destroyed the Nanda dynasty and raised Candra 

 Gupta to the throne of Magadha. He belonged to the latter 

 end of the fourth century B.C. An examination of the book 



Will show thai, if. rAolKr Vml^nr*« 4-^ 4-u«4- l „ •_ j 



