138
cance he has not understood, not one style of prose-writing: which he has not inaugurated and lastly not one mode of narration which he has not invented. Whatever may be the-refine,d developments of later prose-writers, none of these car* lay claim to an original style of composition. Subandhu may be said to have given a well-set form to prose-romances-"What with the comprehensive range of his hagiology," says-Dr. Hall " Ms familiarity with the bye-paths of elder days, his matchless command of Sanskrit vocabulary and his mastery over the anamolies of its grammar, he is indeed not seldom an» enigma to his scholiasts."
Hail's criticism. It is a matter of regret to note that this masterpiece of Subandhu should have occasioned a criticism of the learned doctor : " Natural scenery, though boundless in variety is to the Hindu an object of impassive incuriosity and unconcern. Herein Subandhu offers no exception to his countymen as a race in every age and low-indeed must be that type of humanity to which that imputation can fairly be brought home." This remark passed in a fit of pre-prejudiced contempt cannot find internal evidence to-back it up. The judgment clearly lacks demonstrative scrutiny. The inherent prejudice ttte learned doctor entertained against punsters had better been a little more curtailed in its expres-sion. He does not seem to have grasped Subandhu's position in the field of literature. The course of nature cannot be gone against. Sanskrit knew not of anything like a romance till a few years before Subandhu's time, A beginner cannot be perfect* Nor does his work display a lack of fanciful imagery or, defiqiiptive luxuriance. This is a point which must necessarily exfipt: a compassionate review from any critic—which our dott^doispcxt seein to have recognised. , _