58 Post-Vedic Literature his postures and gestures emotions of varied kinds, or, in the terminology of the Greek and Roman stage, a pantomime. But he insists on the distinction between the dramatization of the epic material suggested by the Mahabhäşya, and the features of the classical form of the drama. The subject-matter differs, heroic and mythic figures are presented in the relations of every- day life, the chief theme is a comedy of love, the plot is artistically developed and the action divided into scenes, character types are developed, the epic element recedes before the development of dialogue, verse is mingled with prose, Sanskrit with Prakrit. The change is remarkable; was it aided by the influence of the Greek drama? Admittedly on any theory we must allow for powerful causes to produce so splendid a develop- ment, and it would be idle to ignore the possibility of such influence. Since Windisch wrote, the extent of Greek influence on India before and after the Christian era has been the subject of much investigation, which has yielded its richest fruits in the sphere of art. That India borrowed the incitement to the art of Gandhāra from Greece as its ultimate source is undeniable, and it is equally clear that the Buddhist adoption of the practice of depicting the human form of the Buddha, in lieu of merely indicating his presence by some symbol such as his seat, was due to Greek artistic influences. The extent to which the rise of the Mahāyāna school of Buddhism was furthered by the influx of religious and philosophical ideas from the west is still uncertain; but it is noteworthy that Professor Lévi,¹ who most strongly opposed the theory of Windisch, has himself attributed to western influences the development of the new spirit in Buddhism which he traces in Açvaghoṣa, whom he places in the entourage of Kaniska, dating the former in the first century B. C. If this were the case, there would be decided difficulties in maintaining any chrono- logical objections such as Professor Lévi 2 originally urged to the theory of Windisch; when he attacked that theory he could place the earliest Sanskrit dramas preserved, those of Kalidasa in his view, five or six centuries A. D. But now we have dramas of about A.D. 100 which are certainly not the earliest of their 1 Mahāyānasūtralamkāra, ii. 16 f. Cf. Keith, Buddhist Philosophy, p. 217. 2 TI. i. 345-
