Among the so-called Dravidian languages of Southern India none can boast of a higher antiquity in the cultivation of its literature than the Kannaḍa or Karṇâṭaka, commonly called Canarese by Europeans. And yet, while the sister languages Tamil and Telugu have their votaries, Kannaḍa has received attention from but few, if any, among Oriental scholars. This neglect is no doubt partly due to its being principally spoken in Native States, whence it has come less into contact with Europeans, while the other languages form the media of official business through a large extent of British territory. An erroneous impression has, besides, been fostered by some writers, whose acquaintance with South Indian languages was probably chiefly confined to Tamil or Telugu, that these were in some way superior either in structure or in the contents of their literature to Kannaḍa, a statement for which there is not the least foundation, and originating in the want of accurate information regarding the latter.

That the Proverbs of Ben-Sira were written in some kind of Hebrew has never been seriously questioned, and the number of sources in which clues to the original have been preserved would be sufficient to silence any doubts that might be raised. It would be natural to suppose that the Book of Wisdom, which bears so close a relation to those Proverbs, which enlarges on so much that Ben-Sira suggests, and endeavours to be deep where he is shallow, appealed to the same public, and was composed in the same language. But although this theory would receive a primâ facie plausibility from the Hebraisms with which the pseudo-Solomon's style abounds, his affectation of Greek eloquence, noticed by very early critics, his allusions to Greek customs, and his reminiscences of Greek authors, have seemed to put it out of court; and the best editors of this century only mention this theory to reject it. In the last century, however, it was supported by some eminent names; and early in this found an advocate in Bretschneider, the author of three dissertations on the Book of Wisdom, who had an adherent in Engelbreth.

It is only lately that the Trisula, or Trident, has attracted attention as a symbol. It so chances that for many years back I have collected matter connected with this subject, and have often wished to put it in form for publication, but want of time has always stood in the way of realizing this desire. Lately contributions dealing with the Trisula have appeared in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society from Mr. Sewell and Mr. Pincott, and I feel urged to add some additional material to what they have given. I shall not be able to reproduce everything that I have gathered up, but my endeavour will be to give what seems to be important, or may throw light on the subject. As to a theory of origin, I have one: it has long been formed in my mind, and up to the present I see no reason to reject it; or it might be expressed, that no better theory has as yet, so far as I know, been proposed.

In the previous papers of this series I have tried to trace in outline a truthful sketch of the general course of early Indian History. The evidence I have consulted and set forth has led me to believe that the government, social institutions, and the fundamental principles of the religion of the country all originated among tribes for the most part of Dravidian race, who came into India from the Euphrates valley. In dealing with this evidence I have tried to trace the origin of the tribes who successively and simultaneously ruled India, the races to which they belonged, and the religious beliefs they held. In doing this I have also adduced proofs to show that the same races who introduced civilized and stable government into India performed the same task in the countries of Western Asia, in Egypt, Greece, and Italy. In the course of my argument I have laid stress on the value of early religious and astronomical history as a guide, not only to the social history of India, but to that of all countries ruled by immigrant tribes of Akkadian race. My conclusions as to Indian history were formed chiefly from a study of the Mahābhārata and Rigveda, and these authorities were largely supplemented by references to Greek and Latin historians, to Akkadian and Assyrian history, and by information derived from the present state of the country, its religious movements and social institutions.