XXX11
%ut Kalhana's Kanishka can by no means be assigned to that date. The Rajatarangini gives after Kanishka a long •line of kings whose reigns make up more than 2330 years to the date of its own composition. If Kanishka were placed in 78 A. D., then Kalhana will go up to 2408 A. D. -and we are only in the beginning of the 20th century, The History of the Advaitacharyas invariably furnishes us -with the exact dates of birth and death of a long succession -of priests and so do ithe Guruparampara stones of the .Dravidian saints of Southern India. It is unfortunate, therefore, that if an ancient record conflicts with oui • conclusions, the record comes to be misinterpreted or discredited, rather than our conclusions are altered by a scrutinising demonstration.
Apart from the plausibility of these arguments, Indian tradition is not free from all taint of mythologica uncertainty. It requires time before the elements of traditional chronology can be sifted and arranged to keep correspondence with the accepted system of literary dates To the eye of a rationalistic observer, the data of the Yuga calculation cannot be acceptable. ,A scholar of Madras lias recently proved that the historical Kaliyuga could no' be traced further back than 1500 B.C. In this unsettlec pondition of literary opiiiion, we leave the question again -iopen for a scientific and, critical examination.
."  > »	" '	'      a.        .
. •   •    * V   r
.    TJhese ji'efi|tQry pages will now introduce th$ reader to
-a study^t&Hbe Clas|kal;Saii5krit literature.'   Amidst otfee
work of a,student's' life, f had bet a short leisure for this