fault or exhibit shortcomings only, but to take stock of what has been satisfactorily established and what cannot equally satisfactorily be so regarded. Without such an examination it would be assuming too much to proceed further in research work. It is in that view that the work was undertaken, and I had not the slightest doubt, nor do I cherish the least touch of it now, that Sir R.G. Bhandarkar himself would welcome such a re-examination. It is not want of respect for him that prompted the work; but much rather. the wish to complete the work that he his done in a subject in which such work as he had done had to be done by him at a great disadvantage. I have no doubt whatsoever that this investigation will be received in the spirit in which it is offered, as a critical study of an interesting question, by Sir R. G.Bhandarkar himself. I would appeal to other friends who may chance to read the book to consider any criticism in the book in the spirit of the most friendly investigation of the position of other scholars with no further object than the evaluation of actual achievement. I cannot conclude this prefatory note better than by making an extract from one of the most eminent recent authorities on the subject of History, Lord Acton :—
