Vedic Metre in its Historical Development c4.19

c4.19

I am aware that in postulating original long quantity for many of these vowels, objections may also be raised by the writers on comparative grammar. But these objections seem in no way entitled to a hearing. In treating of the metre of Plautus or Virgil we deduce our facts directly from the usage of these writers, and the theories of comparative grammar must follow. There are numerous instances in which the forms used by Plautus are, from the broad standpoint of comparative grammar, of later date than the forms used by Virgil: but from the special standpoint of Latin literature the forms peculiar to Plautus are the archaic forms. If therefore it is urged that the verb-forms bharā (2 sing. imperative) and bharatā (2 plur.) are not, in the view of comparative grammarians, older than the forms bhara, bharata, it must be remembered, first, that this theory is to some extent founded upon the incorrect postulate of the Sanskrit grammarians that bhara, bharata are the true Vedic forms; and secondly, that even if the short vowel is really more primitive (and Benfey at least doubted this), the long vowel may, and indeed as the facts shew, must have established itself in the interval between the primitive period referred to and the times of classical Sanskrit.