1689.] on the Civilization of Anciad India. 189 



krit author Bharata, wlio wrote a technical treatise (n&tyasdstra) on 

 dramatic art, lays down the rule that the players should be five in num- 

 ber, namely, the siitradhdra, his assistant, the pdriparswaka, the vi{a, 

 mkdra, and vidmhalca. This enumeration, Dr. Windisch points out, is 

 equivalent to a list of the regular male personnel of a Grseco-Roman piny, 

 but does not apply to any extant Indian play, except in so far that all 

 the fivo personages named appear in the ' Toy-cart,' in which alone the 

 saUra is fouud. The vita is met with in only one other piece (Nd</d- 

 nanda). It is therefore difficult to understand why Bharata should 

 have laid down this rule, unless pieces were extant in his time which 

 conformed to it, and these pieces must have resembled the Greek models 

 at loast as closely as the ' Toy-cart ' docs. 



Tho repulsive character of the lena, or /uaorpoirds, the go-between 

 and corrupter of maiden virtue, is faithfully reproduced in the character 

 of the mother of Vasantasona in the ' Toy-cart,' and the elevation of 

 Vasantaseiia herself to a respectable position by the force of unselfish 

 love may be compared with the story of Silonium in the Cistellaria of 

 Plautus. Tho very name of the ' Toy-cart ' {mrichchhalatikd) recalls 

 the names of Plautine plays such as Aulularia and Cistellaria. 



Tho essay by Dr. Wiudisch, from which I have quoted, docs not 

 exhaust all the arguments which might be adduced in support of his 

 thesis, and the partial analysis of his reasoning given above is far from 

 presenting tho case, as stated by him, in its full force. Yet, even what 

 has been advanced in the foregoing pages should, I venture to think, 

 suffice to shako the faith of those who believe in the indigenous origin 

 of the Sanskrit drama, and to prove that strong reasons exist for hold- 

 ing tho opinion that India is indebted for the existence of the most 

 generally attractive department in tho vast circle of her literature to 

 contact with the artistic Hellenic mind. 



It is, perhaps, necessary to observe that no one contends that any 

 extant Indian play is a translation or free adaptation of a given Grock 

 piece. That certainly is not the case. Tho best Indian plays are the 

 work of native genius of high order, employing native materials in its 

 own way, and for its own ends, but tirst set in motion by a powerful 

 impulse received from abroad. The ease of the drama is analogous to 

 that of the Auiaravati sculptures. 1 agree with Mr. Fergusson in think- 

 ing that those sculptures would never have come into existence, if the 

 latent powers of Indian artists had not been aroused and stimulated by 

 the example and teaching of Greek, or at least of Hellenistic, sculptors, 

 but no one would maintain that tho carvings now on tho staircase of the 

 British Museum should bo classed among tho remains of Greek art. 

 They are thoroughly Indian in subject, and style, and skilled criticism 



