xxiv PREFACE
Some of the evidence adduced is clearly inconclusive. The Artkafdstra knows (ii. 7) an elaborate system of keeping accounts, but its date cannot be assumed as the fourth century B. c, nor does in any case the keeping of accounts imply any definite system of the use of numerals similar to that attested for the sixth century A. D. 1 References to boys learning reckoning {smhkhyanri) 2 are equally inconclusive, and the date of the Lali- tavistara is very uncertain. But the use of fiinya in the Chandas- sutra of Pingala 3 must be accorded due weight, and the Indian hypothesis has gained strength from the new investigations accorded to it. But certainty is unattainable, and it may be observed that, while the identification of Pulica with Paulus of Alexandria is merely conjectural, it is not sufficient to dispose of it by pointing out that Pulica was an authority on astronomy, Paulus on astrology, for we have nothing to show that the latter did not deal with astronomy, as would be natural enough in a professed astrologer. 4
On the question of the origin of Sanskrit no conclusive evidence has been recently adduced. Professor Hertel's conviction of the late date of the Rgveda and of Zoroaster is not likely to secure general acceptance, despite its ingenuity, 6 nor is a recent and not less ingenious effort ° to show that the Aryans lived for a time together under strong Mitanni influences and only turned definitely east, to break up into Indians and Iranians, after the Mitanni dib&cle in the middle of the fourteenth century B. c. The deductions drawn from certain terms, and from the similarity of Qiva to the Himmcls-und Wettergott of Asia Minor, whose name in Mitanni was Tesup, and of Parvati to the Great Mother of Asia Minor, Hepa in Mitanni, and from the syllabic Brahmi script, are all suggestive, biit without probative force. Very interesting and worthy of serious consideration in the field of
1 The Sumeiians {c. 3000 B. c.) and the Egyptians had elaborate systems of account- keeping ; see D. E. Smith, Hist, of Math., i. 37 ff. J Arthafastra, 1. 5 ; Lalitavistara, x. 15.
3 viii. 29). ; Weber, IS. vm. 169, 444 ff. It must be noted that this part is not probably early, and is not to be assigned to the and cent. B. C. (IHQ. hi. 374).
4 On the ketus and their influence on men's fates, see Ballalasena's Adbhutasagara (12th cent.), and J. von Negelein, JFesigabe Jacobi, pp. 440 ff. ; Festgabe Garde, pp. 47-
53-
8 Oa Zoroaster's date ci. Keith, IHQ. iii. 683-9. • W. Porzig, ZII. v. 265-80.
