so constantly to violate them. Neither ancient nor modern metricians had, as far as we know, any evidence to go upon besides the hymns of the Rig-veda; and the philosophical speculations as to the origin of metres in which some of them indulge, and from which they would fain derive some of their unbending rules, are, as need hardly be said, of no consequence whatever. I cannot understand what definite idea even modern writers connect with such statements as that, for instance, the Trishtubh metre sprang from the Gagatî metre, that the eleven syllables of the former are an abbreviation of the twelve syllables of the latter. Surely, metres are not made artificially, and by addition or subtraction. Metres have a natural origin in the rhythmic sentiment of different people, and they become artificial and arithmetical in the same way as language with its innate principles of law and analogy becomes in course of time grammatical and artificial. To derive one metre from another is like deriving a genitive from a nominative, which we may do indeed for grammatical purposes, but which no one would venture to do who is at all acquainted with the natural and independent production of grammatical forms. Were we to arrange the Trishtubh and Gagatî metres in chronological order, I should decidedly place the Trishtubh first, for we see, as it were before our eyes, how sometimes one foot, sometimes two and three feet in a Trishtubh verse admit an additional syllable at the end, particularly in set phrases which would not i

VOL. I.

submit to a Trishtubh ending. The phrase sam no bhava dvipade sam katushpade is evidently a solemn phrase, and we see it brought in without hesitation, even though every other line of the same strophe or hymn is Trishtubh, i. e. hendecasyllabic, not dodecasyllabic. See, for instance, vi. 74, 1; vii. 54, 1; X. 85, 44; 165, 1. However, I maintain by no means that this was the actual origin of Gagati metres ; I only refer to it in order to show the groundlessness of metrical theories which represent the component elements, a foot of one or two or four syllables as given first, and as afterwards compounded into systems of two, three or four such feet, and who therefore would wish us to look upon the hendecasyllabic Trishtubh as originally a dodecasyllabic Gagatî, only deprived of its tail. If my explanation of the name of Trishtubh, i. e. Three-step, is right, its origin must be ascribed to a far more natural process than that of artificial amputation. It was to accompany a choros, i. e. a dance, which after advancing freely for eight steps in one direction, turned back (vritta) with three steps, the second of which was strongly marked, and would therefore, whether in song or recitation, be naturally accompanied by a long syllable. It certainly is so in the vast majority of Trishtubhs which have been handed down to us. But if among these verses we find a small number in which this simple and palpable rhythm is violated, and which nevertheless were preserved from the first in that imperfect form, although the temptation

to set them right must have been as great to the ancient as it has proved to be to the modern students of the Veda, are we to say that nearly all, if not all, the rules that determine the length and shortness of syllables, and which alone give character to every verse, are to be suspended? Or, ought we not rather to consider, whether the ancient choregic poets may not have indulged occasionally in an irregular movement? We see that this was so with regard to Gayatrî verses. We see the greater freedom of the first and second pâdas occasionally extend to the third; and it will be impossible, without intolerable violence, to remove all the varieties of the last pâda of a Gâyatrî of which I have given examples above, pages cxv seq.

It is, of course, impossible to give here all the evidence that might be brought forward in support of similar freedom in Trishtubh verses, and I admit that the number of real varieties with them is smaller than with the Gâyatrîs. In order to make the evidence which I have to bring forward in support of these varieties as unassailable as possible, I have excluded nearly every pâda that occurs only in the first, second, or third line of a strophe, and have restricted myself, with few exceptions, and those chiefly referring to pâdas that had been quoted by other scholars in support of their own theories, to the final pâdas of Trishtubh verses. Yet even with this limited evidence, I think I shall be able to establish at least three varieties of Trishtubh.

Preserving the same classification which I adopted before for the Gâyatris, so as to include the important eighth syllable of the Trishtubh, which does not properly belong to the vritta, I maintain that class 4. uu class 5. and class 8. must be recognized as legitimate endings in the hymns of the Veda, and that by recognizing them we are relieved from nearly all, if not all, the most violent prosodial licences which Professor Kuhn felt himself obliged to admit in his theory of Vedic metres.

§ 4.

The verses which fall under § 4 are so numerous that after those of the first Mandala, mentioned above, they need not be given here in full. They are simply cases where the eighth syllable is not lengthened, and they cannot be supposed to run counter to any rule of the Prâtisâkhya, for the simple reason that the Prâtisâkhya never gave such a rule as that the eighth syllable must be lengthened if the ninth is short. Examples will be found in the final pâda of Trishtubhs: ii. 30, 6; iii. 36, 4; 53, 15; 54, 12; iv. 1, 16; 2, 7; 9; 11; 4, 12; 6, 1; 2; 4; 7, 7; II, 5; 17, 3; 23, 6; 24, 2; 27, 1; 28, 5; 55, 5; 57, 2; V. 1, 2; vi. 17, 10; 21, 8; 23, 7; 25, 5; 29, 6; 33, 1; 62, 1; 63, 7; vii. 21, 5; 28, 3; 42, 4; 56, 15; 60, 10; 84, 2; 92, 4; viii. 1, 33; 96, 9; ix. 92, 5; x. 61, 12;. 13; 74, 3; 117, 7.

smaller, but it should be remembered that it might

be considerably increased if I had not restricted myself to the final pâda of each Trishtubh, while the first, second, and third pâdas would have yielded a much larger harvest:

§ 5.

i. 89, 9. mâ no madhyâ rîrishatayur gantoh.

i.

92,

6. supratîkâ saumanasâyâgīgah.

i. 114, 5. sarma varma khardir asmabhyam yamsat. i. 117, 2. tena narâ vartir asmabhyam yatam. i. 122, 1. ishudhyeva maruto rodasyoh (or rodasyoh). i. 122, 8. asvavato rathino mahyam surih. i. 186, 3. ishas ka parshad arigûrtah surih. ii. 4, 2. devânâm agnir aratir gîrâsvah. iii. 49, 2. prithugrayâ aminâd ayur dasyoh. iv. 3, 9. gâmaryena payasa pīpâya. iv. 26, 6. divo amushmâd uttarad âdâya. V. 41, 14. udâ vardhantâm abhishata(h) arnah. vi. 25, 2. âryâya viso (a) va tarîr dâsîh. vi. 66, 11. girayo nâpa ugra aspridhran. vii. 8, 6. dyumad amîvakâtanām rakshohā. vii. 28, 4. ava dvitâ varuno mayî nah sât. vii. 68, 1. havyâni ka pratibhrita vītam nah. vii. 71, 2. divâ naktam mâdhvî trâsîthẫm nah. vii. 78, 1. gyotishmatâ vâmam asmābhyām vākshi. vii. 93, 7o. akkhâ mitram varunam indram vokeh. ix. 90, 4. sam kikrado maho asmabhyam vāgan. X. 11, 8. bhagam no atra vasumantam vītāt.