53
creates an artificial immortality and embalms for the bewilderment of future generations the still-born efforjts of an infant muse." The invention of the Indian dramatic entertainments is usually ascribed to BJiarata Muni, but according to others they had a still more elevated origin and the art having beep gathered from the Vedas by Brahma was by him comimmi-ca^ed to the ;Mu?ni. This is on its face a legend. Three -theories have been advanced as to the origin of the Sanskrit Pramg ;—^
1. It had its origin in religious solemnities and spectacles, But as the most ancient of the dramas treat of civil life and never speak of religious ceremonies and as allegorical dramas after the manner of the English moralities were iof very late growth in the Sanskrit theatre, we -must premise that this
• theory can have no foundation.
2. Professor Weber supposes that the Sanskrit .drama had its .beginnings >" in the influence of the Greeks wielded on the Hijidus" This is a mere conjecture and the statement -proves
mo settled opinion an the part of the learned theorist, \fsrho in the very next sentence writes "no internal connection, how* -ever, with the Greek drama .exists."
The Sanskrit drama had unmistakably an ii\6\igenptt£ origin. It had begun to fee cultivated from the sixth qe$tury?B» C. anfl 'passed into lethargy iby the fourteenth century tA. D, No historical recorcls jpoinj: to any relations between the Greeks apd the Hindus prior to Alexander's invasion. The few traditions that have come down to us regarding the matter are too vague and uncertain to warrant us in drawing any sound .conclusion. The very fact that the Indian drama but the language not so stiff or obscure. He has a greater grace and melody about his verse. " •/:-'.. . • ' ' . : .; .". <