Can the grounds for this unanimity among modern scholars be vividly set forth? We believe they can. Here, as in our first chapter, we shall not attempt to fix a definite chronology, but shall simply aim at reaching _the relative age_ of the great books we are dealing with; and we shall not deal with the meaning of disputed passages, but shall rest the case altogether on the clear and prominent features of history which every one can appreciate. There is, then, first of all the great broad fact that the Sūtras depend on the Brāhmanas, and are, in general, posterior to them, and that _the language and style of Pānini’s Sūtras show that he belongs to about the middle of the Sūtra period_.[296] All the detailed study of the last forty years _has gone to strengthen this stable conclusion_. But there is another and still more conclusive proof that Pānini comes long after the early Brāhmanas. _These ancient books are written in Vedic Sanskrit._[297] The early Upanishads are more modern in character, but even they belong to a stage of the language a good deal earlier than the Sūtras: Professor Macdonell’s words are, “the oldest Upanishads occupying a position linguistically midway between the Brāhmanas and the Sūtras.”[298] Thus the Brāhmanas were composed while Vedic Sanskrit was still the language of the Indo-Aryans. Now Pānini’s grammar _deals with classical Sanskrit_, not the Vedic speech. He deals with many points of Vedic grammar, it is true, but he deals with them as exceptions; his subject is classical Sanskrit. He laid down the law, which has ruled Sanskrit throughout the centuries since his day. Thus he arose at a time, _when the language of the Brāhmanas had become archaic_, and modern Sanskrit had taken its place.[299] It is thus absolutely impossible to believe that Pānini lived and wrote before the Brāhmanas were composed: to propose to put him back before their composition is much the same as proposing to push Johnson’s Dictionary back before Chaucer. Another line of proof may also be indicated. Careful study of the early Brāhmanas has made it plain that they were composed after the collection of the hymns of the _Rigveda_, but before[300] the formation of the _Sanhitā_ text (_i.e._, the text in which the words are joined according to the rules of _Sandhi_) and the _Pada_[301] text (_i.e._ the word by word text). The author of the _Pada_ text is Sākalya.[302] Now Yāska refers to Sākalya as a predecessor;[303] and Yāska himself is earlier than Pānini.[304] Thus the historical order is the early Brāhmanas, the _Sanhitā_ text, Sākalya, Yāska, Pānini. Bunkim Babu’s date for Pānini being thus altogether untenable, his whole argument for the historicity of the _Pāndava Mahābhārata_ and Krishna’s character as therein pourtrayed tumbles in ruins, and brings down with it all the rest of this Krishna literature.