12
(i) Polyandry never found any place in the Brahminical Code or in the habits of the Hindu and if in spite of its thorough offensiveness it was imputed to the very heroes of the great Epos, there seems to have been no alternative but to admit it as a historic fact. If this marriage was a real event, it throws at once the fight of the Pandavas to such a remote antiquity as co leave behind, not only Manu, but even those Vedic writings of Aswalayana and others on whose writings the ancient law of India is based,
•(ii) The institution of caste did not exist in the Vedic period. It was however fully recognised by Manu's time. During the Vedic age a warrior like Viswa-mitra could aspire to be a Brahmin or a brahmin like Vasista could be a warrior, but Manu does not allow such a confusion of occupations. It recurs only at the latest period of Hinduism. The " disguise of the Pandavas " must have been highly objectionable after the foundation of caste. " False boasting of a higher caste," is an offence according to Manu, ranked along with the murder of a brahmin.
iii) The Law of Marriage and Inheritance. There are passages where their contents and the law-book differ considerably. It is impossible to assume the occurrences mentioned are innovations on Manu : —
(a) Vichitra-virya died childless and Vyasa begot two sons on his widows. Manu allows it only in the case of Sudras. Even there the procreation is limited to a single offspring. Both these must have been
. • unknown to Vyasa, for this other was a Kshatriya and Vyasa being a Brahmin procreated not only |