Buddhist Evidence for the Early Existence of Drama

Wijesekera, O.H. De. A.
Indian History Quarterly
Vol.17 No.2
June 1941
P.196-206


P.196 In his masterly survey of the evolution of the Sanskrit drama, Professor Berriedale Keith summarily disposes of the relevant Buddhist evidence with the unequivocal statement that " The extreme dubiety of the date of the Buddhist Suttas renders it impossible to come to any satisfactory decision regarding the existence of drama at an early date, while the terms employed, such as Visuukadassana, Nacca and Pekkhaa, and reference to Samajjas leave us wholly without any ground for belief in an actual drama."(1) But a critical examination of the Paali Nikaayas shows us that the evidence afforded by these collections of dialogues throws much more light on this obscure problem than may be implied in a cursory allusion to the occurrence of such terms as Visuukadassana etc., and, that the available facts establish, with an appreciable degree of certainty, for the beginnings of dramatic spectacles in India, if not for the Sanskrit drama in a primitive form, a dare that anticipated the one assigned to it by Keith at least by a century, if not more. Professor Keith bases his main argument for the conclusion that "....the Sanskrit drama came into being shortly after, if not before, the middle of the second century B.C.",(2) on the criticism of Kaatyaayana's rule regarding the use of the imperfect tense and the occurrence and import of the words Na.ta, 'Sobhanika (or 'Saubhika) and kathaka etc,. as found in the Mahaabha.sya of Pata~njali whom he places "with reasonable assurance" about 140 "B.C.(3) For him, Indian literature before the time of Pata~njali contains no positive evidence for the existence of drama even in a primitive form. Referring to the mention of `Na.tasuutras' in Paa.nini (iv.3. 110 f.) whom he places in the fourth century B.C., he remarks: "But we unfortunately are here as ever in no position to establish the meaning of Na.ta, which may mean no more than a pantomime." (4) It is regarded as significant that na.ta does not occur in the Yajurveda list of " persons of every kind covering every possible sort of occupations." In the Mahabhaa.sya, however, he sees more certain evidence; "We seem in fact to have in the Mahabhaa.sya evidence of a stage in which all the elements of drama were present; we have acting in wwwwwwwwwwww 1. Sanskrit Drama, p.43. 2. Ibid., p.45. 3. ibid., p.31. 4. Ibid., p.31. p.197 dumb show, if not with words also; we have recitations divided between two parties.Morever, we hear of Na.tas who not only recite but also sing...We cannot absolutely prove that in Pata~njali's time the drama in its full form of action allied to speech was present, but we know that all its elements existed, and we may legitimately and properly accept its existence in a primitive form."(5) Now,it is difficult to understand how the impor- tant word Na.ta which occurs a number of times in the Pali literature has escaped the notice of Prof. Keith. in the Nikaayas there are references to Na.tas and even Na.tagaama.nis who were not merely mimes or dancers, but were clearly ` comedians' who by mimicry and words delighted audiences at fairs and shows. In the Gaama.ni Sa.myutta we meet with the following: w "Ekamanta.m nisinno kho Taalapa.to Na.tagaama.ni Bhagavantam etad avoca: Sutam me ta.m bhante pubbakaana.m aacariyapaacariyaana.m Na.taana.m bhaasamaanaana.m : Yo so na.to ra^ngamajjhe samajja- majjhe saccaalikena jana.m haaseti rameti so kaayassa bhedaa param mara.naa Pahaasaana.m devaana.m sahavyata.m upapajjatiiti. Idha Bhagavaa ki.m aahaati." (6) " Then taalapu.ta, the chief of the village of dancers, came to the Exalted One, saluted him and sat down at one side. So seated taalapu.ta said to the Exalted One: `I have heard, lord, traditional teachers of old who were actors speaking (in this wise): "A player who on the stage or in the arena makes people laugh and delights them with truth and falsehood, on the dissolution of the body after death, is reborn in the company of the Laughing Devas." What does the Exalted say regarding this matter?.' It goes without saying that the above passage is of great importance for the subject, origin of dramas, in that it contains not only the important word Na.ta, but also refers to a number of other facts. One important fact that emerges from a careful scrutiny of the above quotation is that the Na.ta was originally a figure of mirth (haaseti, rameti), thereby supporting the contention in favour of an at least partly secular origin for the drama. Let us take the important terms one by one. First of all, the name of the interlocutor itself is highly suggestive of the source of the main inspiration of comedy. The name taalapu.ta (not Talapu.ta, Taala w being supported by two Burmese Mss. and Cy.; cp. also Th.1. 1145, p.103) alludes to the custom quite common in ancient India wwwwwwwwwwww 5. Sanskrit Drama, pp.36, 37. 6. S.IV. p.306 3. p.198 of using nicknames for reputed persons (cp. `Ka.naada,' name of the author of the Vai'se.sika Suutras, which literally means `atom-eater'). Here `taala-' must mean `musical rhythm' or `beating time' as found in the ancient texts on musical theory. The second member of the compound viz. `-pu.ta'means `the hollow of the folded palm.'(7) The reference is no doubt to the practice prevalent even today among Indian musicians of beating time by clapping in either leading an orchestra or teaching pupils the rudiments of rhythm. this sense agrees perfectly well with the connotation of the word Na.tagaama.ni or `leader of Na.tas,' a term that later obtained vogue in dramatic theory as a designation for Suutradhara or Naa.tyaacaarya.(8) This identification of Na.tagaama.ni and Suutradhara leaves no room for doubt as to the former's connection with drama proper. Moreover, we may dismiss the suggestion of the commentator Buddhaghosa as unwarranted, though highly amusing, when he explains taalapu.ta as referring to the person's "bright complexion which was like the colour of a ripe palmyra nut severed from the stalk" ( bandhanaa-mutta-taala-paka-va.n.no viya mukha-va.n.no vippasanno ahosi,Saarattbappakaasinii, III. 102). Woodward's " basket of woven palm-leaves" for ` Taalapu.ta' is clearly beside the point.(9) Next, the phrase `pubbakaana.m aacariyapaacariy- aana.m Na.taana.m, ' despite its stereotyped phraseology, must be taken in this context to refer to a genuine tradition regarding generations of such `Na.ta-preceptors' of the past, w a fact that cannot be ignored in discussing the nature of the Na.ta-suutras mentioned by Paa.nini. As for the key-word Na.ta itself, the succeeding sentence proves without a shadow of doubt that the persons referred to here were at least comedians if not actors of comedies, who entered the stage (ra^nga) to delight and make people laugh, with w and this is the most important fact w truth and lies (sacaalikena; Buddhaghosa: `saccena ca alikena ca,' Saaratth., III. 193, which also shows that Woodward's " counterfeiting of the truth " falls far short of the actual significance). So these Na.tas were much more than mere mimes or dumb actors. Furthermore, we may suggest with some plausibility that the word `alika' here might contain an implicit reference to 'fiction,' that is to say, fabricated anecdotes which form part of the stock-in-trade of comedians everywhere in the world. Important also is the word `ra^nga' (10) inasmuch as it must needs refer in wwwwwwwwwwww 7. Cp. Miln. p.87, `hatha-puta'. 8. Vide Keith, ibid., p.360. 9. Book of Kindred Sayings, p.214, fn. 1. 10.Cp. Vinaya, II. 10, 12. P.199 the context either to an arena in general or to a play-house or theatre. The term is found in Paa.nini (vi.4.27) and the Petersburg Dictionary has (s.v.) " Theater, Schaubhne, Schauplatz, Arena"; in the technical literature ra^nga is universally used for `stage.' (11) Similarly, this passage makes it certain that the word `samajja' denotes a concourse of people come together for amusement, a `show' where the Na.tas took a leading rle. In this connection we may observe that the Raamaaya.na in one of its genuine portions (ii. 67. 15) refers to `samaajas' where Na.tas and Nartakas, comedians and dancers, delight themselves. (12) According to Prof. Winternitz, (13) this part must have been composed earlier than the third century B.C., and as we shall see later the Buddhist reference is equally old, if not older, from which it may be inferred that at this time the samaajas or samajjas were a recognized institution. It may be mentioned that ` Na.ta- nartakaa.h' occurs in the Anu'saasana Parvan of the Mahabhaarata (xiii. 33. 12) , and that the commentator Nilaka.n.tha takes the compound to mean `comedians and dancers' a sense that may not seem so imporobable as Kieth supposes (p.28) when taken in the light of the Sa.myutta passage. We may suggest, enpassant, that the older root n.rt (vide na.ta, Petersburg Dict.) with its derivatives nartaka, n.rtya etc. in Sanskrit, and na.t.taka, na.t.takii (Th. I. 267), nacca, naccaka etc. in Paali referred to dancing, whereas its later dialectical form na.t which gives Na.ta, Na.tanka, na.tii (also naa.tya in Skt.) etc. signified gesticulation and in course of time came to be applied to the art of the `comedian' and thence to `acting' proper. As for Paali, the distinction seems to have been preserved at least in pre-Christian times, (14) though the commentators often confuse the two (VvA. 210 Na.tari = naccati). In the face of the above facts the conclusion is irresistible that the Na.tans were originally a class of comedians who performed on the stage or at assemblies using words to delight their audiences, and that Paa.nini's Na.tasuutras may, therefore, legitimately be taken to refer to something more than mere rules regulating the mode of gesticulation of the pantomime. Another important passage bearing on the sub- ject is found in the Brahmajaala Suttanta of the Diigha Nikaaya, containing as it does a list of terms denoting various amusements and shows (visuukadassana): w wwwwwwwwwwww 11. Vide Keith, p.359; cp.Manu, iv,215 `ra^ngaava- taraka, " "stage-player" according to Bhler. 12. Keith, p. 29. 13. History of Indian Literature, vol. 1, p.516. 14. Miln., p. 359 `Na.ta-naccaka'. P.200 " Yathaa vaa pan'eke bhonto sama.na-braahma.naa saddhaa-deyyaani bhojanaani bhu~njitvaa te evaruupa.m visuukadassana.m anuyuttaaviharanti- seyyathiida.m nacca.m giita.m vaadita.m pekkha.m akkhaana.m paa.nissara.m vetaala.m kumbha- thuuna.m Sobha-nagaraka.m...iti vaa iti evaruupaa visuukadassanaa pa.tivirato Sama.no Gotamo ti" (D.I., p.6, 13). Professor Rhys Davids rendered this passage as follows: w " Or he might say: `Whereas some recluses and Braahma.nas, while living on food provided by the faithful, continue addicted to visiting shows; that is to say, nautch dances, singing of songs, instrumental music, shows at fairs, ballad recitations, hand-music, the chanting of bards, tam-tam playing, fairy scenes,...Gotama the recluse holds aloof from visiting such shows. " (15) Here `nacca.m giita.m vaadita.m' refer to the old conception of `sa.mgiita' or `triple symphony', via., dancing, singing and instrumental music. Such entertainments are said to have been held at public assemblies such as those already referred to, concourses or fairs, samajjas (16) and at the so-called mountain-fairs or giragga-samajjas (17) said to be frequented even by ministers and other high personages. (18) The word `nacca' may refer to the dancing of both sexes; female dances are specifically called `laasa' (19) and the four are sometimes mentioned togther. (20) The last no doubt refers to an old practice and it is of significance for the later division into taa.n.dava and laasya types attributed to 'Siva and Paarvatii respectively. (21) Of doubtful, but not negligible, importance is the word `pekkha.m' which is clearly a collective-abstract formation with the suffix `a' from `pekkhaa' (Skt. prek.saa> * praik.sa.m)as most words in the list are (cp. paa.nissara.m < pa.nissaro). The Sanskrit is not found in any work earlier than Manusm.rti (22) and Hariva.m'sa. (23) Rhys Davids refuses to agree with Weber, Neumann, Burnouf and others who saw in the Pali `pekkhaa' "theatrical representations", and remarks: "But it is most unlikely that the theatre was already known in the fifth century B.C." (24) It is significant though that Buddhaghosa equates the word to `Na.ta-samajja.m' (25) a gloss that estab wwwwwwwwwwww 15. Dialogues of the Buddha. Pt. I, pp. 7,8. 16. Vide D. III, 183. 17. Vin. II, 107. 18. Vin. II, 150. 19. Skt. laasah; cp. Miln. p.331, `laaska' =female dancer. 20. Vin. II, 10 "naccanti pi gaayanti pi vaadenti pi laasenti pi." 21. Naatya'saastra, 1. 2; Keith, p.12. 22. `Prek.saa-samaaja.m' ix. 84; ix. 264. 23. `Prek.saasu tu subahvi.su' 8702, 8685. 24. Dial. I.7.fn.4. 25. Sum. 1,84; cp. III. 946. P.201 lishes the connection, at least in tradition, between `pekkhaa' and `samaaja' as evidenced by the quotations from the Sanskrit sources, and also connects these shows with the activity of the Na.tas who, as seen from the Sa.myutta passage, performed also at samajjas. Commenting on `akkaana.m' the exegetist says that it refers to "recitations of Bhaarata and Raamaaya.na" (`Bhaarata-Raamaayanaadi, ta.m yasmi.m thaane kathiiyarti...' Sum. I.84) ; the word `kathiiyati' no doubt refers to the work of the Kathakas mentioned by Pata~njali. But, if these recitations were of any "epics", it is clear on chronological grounds that the reference is not the Mahabhaarata and Raamaaya.na as we now have them but to the original "ballad" from of these legends. In the case of the former, Winternitz calls it " the old heroic poem" which he believes (26) is contained in the so-called "nucleus" of the Mahabhaarata. The latter, according to him,"....was composed in the third century B.C. by Vaalmiiki on the basis of ancient ballads" (27) The word `vetaala.m' meaning `the chanting of bards, ' (28) also alludes to similar recitations of wandering minstrels. the occurrence of these two terms in the list is of considerable importance for the subject of the origin of drama for, as Keith himself points out, " while the epics cannot be said to know the drama, there is abundant evidence of the strong influence on the development of the drama exercised by the recitation of the epics" (p.29) . The Sigaala Sutta(29) gives `akkhaana.m' as one of the six features of the samajjas where, as we have already seen, the Na.tas took a leading part, and, thereby establishes the contact between the `comedians' and the `ballad reciters.' Moreover, our passage proves that these ballad recitations, from which probably developed in the course of time the vocation of the Kathakas, were at least as old as the oldest dialogues of the Paali Canon, if they were not already popular in the time of the Buddha. Consequently, the imspiration for the origin of drama from this source must be admitted to be much older than the middle of the second century B.C. as has been supposed by Keith (p.45). But the most important word in the list is undoubtedly the term `Sobhanagaraka.m' w a term that has intrigued both the old and the new commentators. The reading itself is far from settled. The Sinhalese Mss wwwwwwwwwwww 26. Sum, I. p.459. 27. Ibid., p.517. 28. Rhys Davids ; cp. " na.tavaitaalika - stotra nartakaah suutamaagadhaa.h" M.Bh. i. 940, Hariv. 8575, referred to sub Na.ta in the Petersburg Dict. 29. D. III. 183. P.202 read `Sobhanagaraka.m, ' `Sobhanakaaraka.m' and `Sobhanagarana.m,' whereas a Burmese MS. of the text has `Sobha.naka.m.' The Sinhalese MS. of the commentary gives the reading `Sobhanagaraka.m,' a Burmese MS. of the same having a variant `Sobha.naga.m.' It may be observed that the Burmese MSS. of text and commentary do actually agree, for the -g- of the latter can easily be explained as phonetic variation of -k- in the former, the presence of the cerebralized -.n- in both (as opposed to the dental in all Sinh. MSS.) supporting the identification. These variants may point to two main traditions: `Sobhanagaraka.m' among the Sinhalese, and `Sobha.naka.m' among the Burmese. Now what is important is that both these forms can be satisfactorily explained, though the latter is by far the more likely historical one as we shall presently see. If the reading is taken to be `Sob.hanagaraka.m' the allusion may be to the city of Sobha which, as Weber discovered,(30) may refer to the city of the Gandharvas by that name. He quotes from a commentary on 'Satarudriya: `Sobha iti gandharva-nagaram; referred to also by Rhys Davids. (31) So this compound viz. `Sobha-nagaraka.m' may mean `a collection of Sobha-denizens,' i.e., `a troupe of Gandharvas,' with a probable reference to the traditional connection of these celestial musicians with the drama. On the other hand Rhys Davids' translation 'fairy scenes' is only a surmise based on the gloss `patibhaana-citta' of the commentary, which as we shall see below is not what Buddhaghosa considered as the more probable sense. Now to take the other reading viz. `Sobhanaka.m,' this is grammatically to be explained as a collective formation, of the same order as `pekkha.m' discussed above, from a Paali masculine noun `Sobhanaka.' This brings us to the most important observation that this is no other than the paali counterpart of Sanskrit `Sobhanika' as found in the Mahabhaa.sya of Pata~njali, the suffixes -aka and -ika being syntactically interchangeable. Now, Pata~njali, in justification of the use of the present tense for deeds of the remote past as found in such sentences as ` He causes the death of Ka.msa' etc., says that the present is permissible "because the sense is, not that they are being actually done, but that they are being described." (32) He then sets out three such modes of description of which the first refers to the profession of the 'Sobhanikas: `ye taavad ete 'sobhanikaa (v.i. 'saubhikaa) naamaite pratyaksa.m Ka.msa.m ghaatayanti pratyaksa.m Bali.m bandhayanti' (iii. 1. 26). Here Keith argues that these were pantomimists: "The obvious view, that of wwwwwwwwwwww 30. Indische Studien, II. 38. 31. D.I, 6 fn.1. 32. Keith, p.32 P.203 Weber, that we have a reference to a pantomimic killing and binding, seems irresistible" (p.33). The only doubt according to him is whether the 'Sobhanikas used words (p.34). Anyway he leaves the question open whether the reference is to `actors' in the proper sense. Whatever the real sense of the term may be, the fact is clear that the Paali word `Sobhanaka' also refers to the same, or at least a similar, class of performers. Once this identification is regarded as plausible the word `Sobhanaka.m' in the Diigha passage must be taken to mean `a troupe of 'Sobhanikas,' and, this is exactly how Buddhaghosa seems to have understood it, for he comments: `Sobhanagaraka.m (v. 1. Sobha.naga.m) ti Na.taana.m abbhokira.na.m, Sobhanagaraka.m (v.1.Sobha.nakara.m) vaa pa.tibhaana-cittan ti vutta.m hoti.' (33) the hesitancy of the editors regarding the reading and syntactical considerations incline one to the view that what probably Buddhaghosa meant to say was: `Sobha.nagan ti Na.taana.m abbhokira.na.m Sobhanagaraka.m vaa (sci. ti pi paa.tho), pa.tibhaana-cittan ti vutta.m hoti,' the first word `Sobha.naga.m' occuring in the Burmese MS. of the commentary being only the phonetic variant of `Sobha.naka.m' found as Burmese variant for the text. In any case, the important fact is that Buddhaghosa was more inclined to favour the meaning na.taana.m abbhokira.na.m; than the sense `patibhaana-citta.m;' hence he places the former phrase at the beginning and gives the latter only as a possible alternative introduced by `vaa.' As for the exact significance of `Na.taana.m abbhokira.na.n' it seems fairly likely that what is meant here is 'a troupe (lit. crowd, concourse) of actors.' The verbal noun `abbhokira.na.m' is formed from the root k.r, to scatter, with the prefixes abhi- and ava-. Syntactically we may regard this as equal in sense to aa-kira.na (cp. aaki.n.na, crowded), for it is observed that the use of the compound prefix`abhi + ava' corresponds, probably with slightly more intensive sense, to that of (34) Hence we may conclude that the term `Sobhanagaraka.m' or `Sobha.naka.m' of the Digha Nikaaya alludes, as is impled in the gloss of Buddhaghosa, to some class of Na.tas w an interpretation that has the support of Indian tradition as recorded by kaiya.ta in his comment on the word `Sobhanika' of the Mahabhaa.sya(35) and, that these Na.tas were either the same persons as referred to by Pata~njali's `Sobhanikaa.h' or at least were their precursors in the art. wwwwwwwwwwww 33. Sum. I, p.84. 34. Cp. Paali abbhokaasa, open space, = aakaasa, space; Skt. abhyavaskandana = aaskandana, attacking; abhyavahaara = aahaara, food, etc. 35. `Ka.msaadyanukaari.naa.m Na.taanaa.m vyaakhya- anopaadhyaaya, vide Keith, p.33, fn.ii. P.204 We have seen that Prof, Keith's reluctance to discuss the Buddhist evidence is based on two presuppositions: first, to use his own words, " the extreme dubiety of the date of the Buddhist Suttas," and sceond, the supposed paucity of information contained in the Paali literature w he refers only to Nacca, Pekkhaa and Visuukadassana w concerning the question of dramatic origns (p.42). We hope that the second point has been somewhat satisfatorily answered by the foregoing discussion. Now it remains to be seen how far the expression " extreme dubiety of the Buddhist Suttas" is historically justified. It is admitted on all sides that the Paali Canon en masse is a growth of considerable duration and that the last word is yet to be said on the question of chronology. But this or any such consideration must not blind us to the important fact that, so far as the early Nikaayas and the Vinaya are concerned, there is enough evidence to prove that in substance, apart from their literary form, they go back to a period considerably anterior to the third century B.C. with certain reservations and limitations, we may say with Winternitz " that our Paali Tipi.taka, at least the Vinaya and Sutta Pitaka, does, on the whole, correspond to the Maagadhii Canon of the third century B.C." (36) This is proved by the edicts of A'soka, particularly the Bairaat or Bhaabhruu Edict (249 B.C.) which shows, in the opinion of the same authority, that the Paali Canon on the whole is pre-A'sokan (p.25) . Now this `Maagadhii Canon' must have taken at least a century to have evolved into the hypothetical form in which we conceive it, and the language itself must have closely resembled the canonical Paali. Indeed we must not, as is usually done, unduly exaggerate this linguistic, properly dialectical, difference because, as Winternitz himself admits, the `Canon of the Vibhajjavaadins', a century after the Buddha's demise, was probably in an older form of Paali (p.130. Furthermore, we may now accept as a historical fact that Moggaliputta Tissa, 236 years after the demise of the Master, convened an assembly of monks at Patna "with the object of compiling a Canon of texts of the true religion or the Theravaada" (p.6) , and that the Kathaa-vatthu, ascribed to Tissa himself who presided at the Council, presupposes not only the texts of the Vinaya Pi.taka and of all the Nikaayas of the Sutta Pitaka but the other books of the Abhidhamma Pi.taka as well. " It would be quite feasible," says Winternitz, " to assume that the book (Kathaavatthu) was not written until the time of the compilation of the Canon by Tissa wwwwwwwwwwww 36. History of Indian Literature, II, p. 5; cp. p. 608. P.205 himself....''(pp.11, 12). These considerations would suffice to show that Bhler was not far wrong, when, in the last work he published, he expressed the opinion that the Nikaayas as we have them in the Paali " are good evidence, certainly for the fifth, probably for the sixth, century B.C.," a conclusion that was endorsed by Prof. Rhys Davids who added: "....that will probably become, more and more, the accepted opinion. And it is this which gives to all they tell us, either directly or by implication, of the social, political, and religious life of India, so great a value." (37) It is, of course, true that these statements must necessarily be modified in the light of later research, but no such consideration, we believe, can invalidate the main proposition that the early Nikaayas, at least the Diigha, Majjhima and Sa.myutta, do, on the whole, contain "good evidence," if not for the period of Buddha's own activity (c. 535-485 B.C.), at leaset for that of his very early disciples to whom must be ascribed the creation of the original tradition embedded in these works. As for the genuineness of the particular passages forming the subject-matter of our present investigation, we may without hesitation observe that neither the Brahmajaala Sutta nor the Gaama.ni Sa.myutta, from which we have quoted, bettrays any evidence whatsoever, whether linguistic or otherwise, of latness or spuriousness of composition; on the other hand, the Na.tagaama.ni dialogue shows every sign of being a record of an actual event both by the tone of naturalness running through the whole narrative and also in point of style and method, while the Brahmajaala Sutta, though obviously a resume of the existing philosophical and religio-social institutions of the time, contains material that is proved to be old by the very obscurity of its terminology and the close resemblance of doctrines discussed to the ideas of the ancient Upani.sads.(38) Now to sum up:We hope we have succeeded in prov- ing that the evidence afforded by the Niikaayas is of considerable importance for the problem of the evolution of drama in India, particularly for the history of the key-word Na.ta and also of 'Sobhanika, and, that the available evidence would take back its origin to at least the third or fourth century B.C., if they do not conclusively prove that there were dramatic spectacles of some kind probably comedy in nuce, in the time of the Buddha himself. This conclusion is supported by the further consideration that if, as Prof.Keith himself admits, " the Vedic ritual contained within itself the germs of drama' wwwwwwwwwwww 37. Dial. 1, p.xx. 38. Cp. Rhys Davids, Dial. 1.p.xxvi. P.206 (p.23), and if, as Winternitz has shown with great plausibility, the beginning of the Vedic literature was nearer to 2500 or 2000 B.C. than to 1500 or 1200 B.C. as generally held (39) then it makes the belief well-nigh impossible that, with such materials as present in the Vedic culture, the ballad recitations which seem to be pre-Buddhistic, as shown above, and other tendencies reflected both in Sanskrit and Paali literature, the drama, at least in some crude form, could not have come into being all throughout the course of a whole millennium. The fact that the Na.ta of the Sa.myutta is a `comedian' shows that in its origin the secular influence on the drama was also considerable and that it was not evoked solely " by the combination of epic recitations with the dramatic moment of the K.r.s.na legend," (40) a contention that gains strength by the fact that the earliest dramas we possess, viz., those of A'svagho.sa, have very little in common with the epics or the K.r.s.na legend in point of theme and subject-matter. wwwwwwwwwwww 39. Calcutta Review, Nov. 1923. 40. Keith, p.45.