The origin of the INDIAN drama may unhesitatingly be described as purely native.

The Mahometans when they overran India brought no drama with them ; the Persians, the Arabs, and the Egyptians were without a national theatre. . It would be absurd to suppose the Indian drama to have owed anything to the Chinese or its offshoots. On the other hand, there is no real evidence for assuming any influence of Greek examples upon the Indian drama at any stage of its progress. Finally, it had passed into its decline before the dramatic literature of modern Europe had sprung into being.

The Hindu writers ascribe the invention of dramatic entertainments to an inspired sage Bharata, or to the communications made to him by the god Brahma himself concerning an art gathered from the Vedas. As the word Bharata signifies an actor, we have clearly here a mere personification of the invention of the drama. Three kinds of entertainments, of which the ntya (defined as a dance combined with gesticulation and speech) comes nearest to the drama, were said to have exhibited the gods by the spirits and nymphs of Indras heaven, and to these the god Siva added two new styles of dancing.

The origin of the Indian drama was thus doubtless religious ; it sprang from the union of song and dance in the festivals of the gods, to which were afterwards added narrative recitation, and first sung, then spoken, dialogue. Such scenes and stories from the mythology of Vishnu are still occasionally enacted by pantomime or spoken dialogue in India (jtras of the Bengalis ; rsas of the Western Provinces); and the most ancient Indian play was said to have treated an episode from the history of that deity,the choice of him as a consort by Laxmi,a favourite kind of subject in the Indian drama.

The tradition connecting its earliest themes with the native mythology of Vishnu agrees with that ascribing the origin of a particular kind of dramatic performancethe sangtato Krishna and the shepherdesses. The authors later poem, the Gtagovinda, has been conjectured to be suggestive of the earliest species of Hindu dramas. But while the epic poetry of the Hindus gradually approached the dramatic in the way of dialogue, their drama developed itself independently out of the union of the lyric and the epic forms.

Their dramatic poetry arose later than their epos, whose works, the Mahbhrata and the Rmya_a, had again been long preceded by the hymnody of the Vedasjust as the Greek drama followed upon the Homeric poems, and these had been preceded by the early hymns. The beginnings of the Indian drama may accordingly belong to the 3d century B. C., or to a rather earlier date. But by the time it produced the first specimens with which we are acquainted, it had already reached its zenith ; and it was therefore looked upon as having sprung into being as a perfect art. We know it only in its glory, in its decline, and in its decay.

The history of Indian dramatic literature may be roughly divided into the following periods :

I. From the 1st century B.C. to the 10th century A.D.This period belongs to the pre-Mahometan age of Indian history, but to that second division of it in which Buddhism had already become a powerful factor in the social, as well as in the moral and intellectual, life of the land. It is the classical period of the Hindu drama, and includes the works of its two indisputably greatest masters. Of these Klidsa was by far the earlier, who lived at the court of King Vikramditya of Avanti (died 56 B.C.), being accounted the brightest of its "nine gems" of genius. He is the author of Skuntal,the work Sir William Joness translation of which first revealed to the Western world of letters the existence of an Indian drama.

It is a dramatic love-idyll of surpassing beauty, and, in the opinion of the highest authorities, one of the master-pieces of the poetic literature of the world. Klidsas other drama, Vikrama and Urva_ (The Hero and the Nymph), though unequal as a whole to Skuntal, contains one act of incomparable loveliness ; and its enduring effect upon Indian dramatic literature is shown by a imitations of it in later plays. To Klidsa has likewise been attributed a third playthe Mlavikgnimitra ; but it is doubtful whether this comedy, though held to be of ancient date, was not composed by a different poet of the same name.

II. Another work of high merit, the pathetic Mrichchhakat (The Toy-Cart), a domestic drama with a public underplot, may possibly belong to the close of the 2d century A.D., and seems certainly of an earlier date than the 10th. It is attributed (as it not uncommon with Indian plays) to a royal author named Sdraka. The palm of pre-eminence is disputed with Klidsa by the great dramatic poet Babhavti (called rika__ha, or he in whose throat is fortune), who flourished in the earlier part of the 8th century. While he is considered more artificial in language than his rival, and in general more bound by rules, he can hardly be deemed his inferior in dramatic genius.

Of his three extant plays, Mahvra-Charitra and Uttara-Rma-Charitra are heroic dramas concerned with the adventures of Rma (the seventh incarnation of Vish_u) ; the third, the powerful Mlat and Mdhava, has love for its theme, and has been called (with more aptitude than such comparisons usually possess) the Romeo and Juliet of the Hindus. It is considered by their critical authorities the best example of the prakarana, or drama of domestic life.

Among the remaining chief works of Indian dramatic literature, the Ve_i-Samhara is thought probably to date from about the 8th or 9th century. Its authors name seems doubtful ; the play is described as one in which both pathos and horror are exaggerated, and which in the violence of its action recalls the manner of Shakespeares predecessors. The next series of plays forms a transition between the first period of Indian dramatic literature and

III. the period of decline, which may be reckoned from about the 11th to about the 14th century of our era, and of which the beginning roughly coincides with that of a continuous series of Mahometan invasions of India. Hanmantinuous series of Mahometan invasions of India. Hanman Nataka, or "the great Nataka" (for this play, the work of several hands, surpasses all other Indian dramas in length, extending over not less than fourteen acts0, dates from the 10th or 11th century.

Its story is taken from the Rmacycle, and a prominent character in it is the mythical monkeychief Hanmat, to whom, indeed, tradition ascribed the original authorship of the play. Krishnamicras "theosophic mystery," as it has been called, of Prabodha-Chandrodaya (The Rise of the Moon of Insight, i.e., the victory of true doctrine over error), is ascribed by one authority to the middle of the 11th century, by another to about the end of the 12th. The dates of the famous to about the end of the 12th.

The dates of the famous Ratnavali (The Necklace), a court-comedy of love and intrigue, with a halfTerentian plot, and of the interesting Buddhist drama Ngnanda, which begins as an erotic play Buddhist drama Ngnanda, which begins as an erotic play but passes into a most impressive exemplification of the supreme virtue of self-sacrifice, depend on the disputed question of their respective authorship. One of them belongs to first quarter of the 12th century, the other to an earlier time.

Finally, Vinkhadattas interesting drama of political intrigue, Mudr-Rakshasa (The Signet of the Minister), in which prince Cnandragupta, presumably identifiable with Sandrocottus, makes his appearance, was probably composed later than the end of the 12th century. This is the only Indian play known to us with an essentially historical fablea noteworthy circumstance, if (as is most likely) it was produced at a time when the Mahometan invasions had already begun.

IV. The remaining plays of which it has been possible to conjecture the dates range in the time of their composition from the end of the 11th to the 14th century, and belong to the period of decline. Of this period, as compared with the first the general characteristics seem to be an undue preponderance of narrative and description, and an affected and over-elaborated style.

As a striking instance of this class is mentioned a play on the adventures of Rma, the Anargha-Rghava, which in spite, or by reason, of the commonplace character of its sentiments, the extravagance of its diction, and the obscurity of its mythology, is started to enjoy a higher reputation with the pandits of present age than the master-pieces of Klidsa and Babhvuti.

To the close of this period, the 14thc century, has likewise (but without any pretension to certainty0 been ascribed the only Tamil drama of which we possess in English version. Arichandra (The Martyr of Truth) exemplifieswith a strange likeness in the contrivance of its plot to the Book of Job and Faustin the trials of a heroically enduring king the maxim "Better die than lie."

V. Isolated plays remains from centuries later than the 14th ; but these, which chiefly turn on the legends of Krishna (the last incarnation of Vishnu), may be regarded as a mere aftergrowth, and exhibit the Indian drama in its decay. Indeed, the latest of them, Chitra-Yajna, which was composed about the beginning of the present century, and still serves as a model for Bengali dramatic performances, is improvised comedy) it is left to the actors to supplement. Besides these there are farces or farcical entertainment, more or less indelicate, of uncertain dates.

VI. The number of the plays which have descended to us from so vast an expanse of time is both relatively and absolutely small. Wilson doubts whether all the plays to be found, and those mentioned by Hindu writers on the drama, amount to many more than 60 ; and it has been seen that not more than three are ascribed to either of the two great masters. To these should be, however, added the plays in Tamil, stated to be about 100 in number, and to have been composed by poets who enjoyed the patronage of the Pandian kings of Madura.

On the other hand, there is among the Hindus no dearth of dramatic theory. The sage Bharata, the reputed inventor of dramatic entertainments, was likewise revered as the father of dramatic criticisma combination of function to which the latter days of the English theatre might perhaps furnish an occasional parallel. The commentators (possibly under the influence of inspiration rather than as a strict matter of memory) constantly cite his stras, or aphorisms.

. (From sutra, thread, was named the sutra-dhra, thread-holder, carpenter, a term applied to the architect and general manager of sacrificial solemnities, then to the director of theatrical performances). By the 11th century, when the drama was already approaching its decline, dramatic criticism had reached an advanced point ; and the Dasa Rupaka (of which the text belongs to that age) distinctly defines the ten several kinds of dramatic composition. Other critical works followed at alter dates, exhibiting a rage for subdivision unsurpassed by the efforts of Western theorists, ancient or modern ; the misfortune is that there should not be examples remaining (if they ever existed) to illustrate all the branches of so elaborate a dramatic system.

. "What," inquires the manager of an actor in the induction tone of the most famous of Indian plays, "are those qualities which the virtuous, the wise, the venerable, the learned, and the Brahmans, require in a drama?" "Profound exposition of the various passions," is the reply, "pleasing interchange of mutual affection, loftiness of character, delicate expression of desire, a surprising story, and elegant language.

"Then," says the manager (for the Indian dramatists, though not, like Ben Jonson, wont to "rail" the public "into approbation," are unaffected by mauvaise honte) "I recollect one." And he proceeds to state that "Babhavti has given us a drama composed by him, replete with all qualities, to which indeed this sentence is applicable: How little do they know who speak of us with censure! This entertainment is not for them. Possibly some one exists, or will exist, of similar tastes with myself ; for time is boundless, and the world is wide.

" This self-possessed disregard of popularity, springing from an imperturbable consciousness of lofty aims, accounts for much that is characteristic of the higher class of Indian plays. It explains both their paucity and their length, renders intelligible the chief peculiarity in their diction, and furnishes the key to their most striking ethical as well as literary qualities. Connected in their origin with religious worship, they were only performed on solemn occasions, chiefly of a public nature, and more especially at seasons sacred to some divinity.

" This self-possessed disregard of popularity, springing from an imperturbable consciousness of lofty aims, accounts for much that is characteristic of the higher class of Indian plays. It explains both their paucity and their length, renders intelligible the chief peculiarity in their diction, and furnishes the key to their most striking ethical as well as literary qualities. Connected in their origin with religious worship, they were only performed on solemn occasions, chiefly of a public nature, and more especially at seasons sacred to some divinity.

" This self-possessed disregard of popularity, springing from an imperturbable consciousness of lofty aims, accounts for much that is characteristic of the higher class of Indian plays. It explains both their paucity and their length, renders intelligible the chief peculiarity in their diction, and furnishes the key to their most striking ethical as well as literary qualities. Connected in their origin with religious worship, they were only performed on solemn occasions, chiefly of a public nature, and more especially at seasons sacred to some divinity.