>'??'
I
1

24
of the JRamayana, on the other hand, worked up as it is by one-author, presents a uniform simplicity of style and metre. " The antiquity is proved by the absence of studied elaboration of diction."
(ii) As to their relative priority.—Professor Weber has advanced the theory that the composition of the Mahabharata must have preceded that of the Ramayana. So also Mr. Dutt: " We must premise even as a picture of life the Ramayana is-long posterior to the Mahabharata. We miss in the Ramayanai the fiery valour and the proud self-assertion of the Kshatriyas-of the Mahabharata and the subordination of the people to* the priestly caste is, more complete."
The traditional belief of the orthodox Hindus as to the-decided priority of Valmiki's poem is apparently shaken by the-Acceptance of these theories* Tradition as it is of unhistorical people, still it is not so undefended as it may at first sight seem to be. External and internal evidence there is ample to falsify the modern theory and corroborate Indian tradition. In some cases the very words and arguments of the-theorists weaken their basis. We thus sum up our defensive^ arguments:—
I. Clear references to the story of the Ramayana occur in the sister epic. Sringiberapura is considered a place of sanctity and pilgrimage because of Rama's visit thereto. Not one of the heroes named in the Mahabharata Occur in the Ramayana, whereas the story of Rama is very frequently referred to in the other. In Mahabharata Book VII, two lines of Valmild Book VI are quoted unaltered in diction. In Maha-|>harata Book III, a Ramopakhyano. based on the larger epicred by Indra* Hanumat, the chief of the monkeys and Rama's ally in the recovery of Sita, is the son of the wind-god wit& the patronymic Maruti and is described as flying hundreds o£ ? The later Puranas tell us he was an incarnation, of Vlshnu-^bmt Vishnu himself had not risen to prominence;