only Siddhanta he could procure for himself (Reinaud, p. 334). The name of its author Puliga 1 points clearly to a foreigner, a Greek or Roman; Albïrünl calls him Paules the Greek and gives die name of the Greek's birthplace in a form which seems corrupt. His testimony is, of course, the testimony of the Hindu astronomers at his time, and there is not the slightest reason to doubt its accuracy. Weber has made the suggestion that Puliga the Greek may be identical with Paulus Alexandrinus, the author of an astrological work of the title of Eisagoge. In this Eisagoge, so he argues (Ind. Stud. II. 260), there is a passage which agrees «almost literally» with one found in a modern Hindu book on Nativity, the Hayana-ratna, by a certain Ralabhadra, not to be confounded with his much more ancient namesake. Weber's surmise is scarcely admissible; for the passage alluded to will be found in all works on Nativity almost literally the same, because it is a simple enumeration of the mansions and their lords; two lists, if their contents are the same, cannot differ in form, nor can they be said to bear greater resemblance to each other than to other lists containing the same. Besides, there is no indication that Balabhadra has taken this passage from Puliga, which must be established before any conclusion can be drawn. The strongest argument, however, against the supposition is the fact that the Pauliga-Siddhanta is no work on Nativity, but an astronomical work, in which the original of the passage in Balabhadra could not find place. It may be that, besides the Pauli^a-Siddhanta, there existed another work of Puliga's on Nativity, but nobody has met with any notice of it, and unless Paulus Alexandrinus has written, besides his Eisagoge, a book on astronomy, which again is unknown, we have no right whatever to infer that he and Puliga are one and the same, for identity of name is too slender a ground, especially when the name happens to be a common one. On the other hand, that Puli?a was a Greek, I do not doubt for a moment, notwithstanding that the Pauliga-Siddhanta, judging from quotations, and rather numerous ones, is so thoroughly Hinduised that few or no traces of its Greek origin are left. It may be deemed a tracé of foreign origin thatPuliga calls «solar» (saura) time, whatotherwise isalways called «civil» (savana) time, or as Utpala puts and exemplifies it: «what with us is 'civil time' is with Puliga-acarya 'solar time', a solar day being with him the interval from midnight till midnight, or from sunrise till sunrise». We should meet,
1 In a MS. of the Comm. on Brhat-Samhita it has been corrected by some lepidum caput into Pulastya; such quasi-corrections are very common, Romaka becomes Romaka, or Somaka, and Sphujidhvaja, as Utpala calls Yavanei'vara, is «translated», in the manner of Bottom, into Qucidhvaja. I confess that I cannot see what Sphujidhvaja represents. It is Aphrodisius?