[ 35 1 for India as for Egypt or Greece. When one learns a science from another, it is natural to expect to find him copying note only the theory but also the practice; right or wrong. Dr. Thibaut repeats the suggestion made by Biot, that the early Hindus learnt their astronomical theories probably from Greek astrologers, and, the Doctor adds, also from. almanac-makers, whose knowledge was as limited as that of their proto-types in the present day. This is certainly an ingenious hypothesis ;- but as has been already remarked, having regard to our ignot mnce respecting the growth and development of the science in India as well as in Egypt, we cannot but regard the hyper thesis as not proven. I am inclined to believe that our know- ledge of the source of Hindu astronomy has not advanced bo- yond the point where Colebrooke found it. All that can be safely asserted is what the illustrious oriental scholar said, thate
- the Hindus have certainly received and welcomed communi-
cations from other nations on topics of astrology," and we add, that their indebtedness to Greece for the knowledge of scientifia astronomy is still an open question. + But this is a digression. We have said that Chandra Sekhara had made a real advance upon existing Hindu astronomy. But the best test of a theory lies in facts. For . See Iatrodaction to Paccha-Siddhéatikk by Dr. Thibaat and M. M. Sudhákara Drivedt. It is much to be desired that some competent scholar would collect the arguments for and against the theory of indebtedness, and let us know hon. far, and in what direction, Greek influence on Hindu astronomy extended Digitized by Google
