This subject was first mooted by Sir William Jones in the Asiatic Researches. Some of the most distinguished Scholars have at different times expressed opinions, totally irreconcileable with each other. New direct or indirect fragments of evidence have been contributed, sometimes narrowing, sometimes widening, the arena of the controversy. Last year Mr. Isaac Taylor summarised the facts of the case in his Book on “The Alphabet.” I myself contributed a paper on the subject to the Indian Section of the Sixth Oriental Congress at Leyden, in September 1883, which led to a lively discussion, occupying the best part of two days of the Session. In January of this year I again, brought the subject before this Society, and I now place the whole case before the Members of the Society in the pages of our Journal.

An important point in the study of the Yi king is the recognition of its existence before Wen wang's time. The elements of main difference between the Yi king of the early dynasties and that of Wen wang was in the order of the Kwa. The same names were current, and probably the admonitory remarks were, many of them, the same also. These remarks are all anonymous, and we are at liberty to guess who wrote them. The appendices are anonymous also, and they may have mainly been written by men before the time of Confucius. The three sages, Wen wang, Cheu kung, and Confucius, were all editors, and Fu hi the original author.

The supreme importance of the Rig-veda in all questions bearing on the history of the Aryan mind, and on the development of the religious idea in man, gives interest to every attempt to throw light on that priceless heir-loom of India. Much has already been done by able scholars, in many ways, to investigate the language and ideas enshrined in the Rig-veda-sanhitâ; but no one has yet discovered the principle on which the hymns are arranged among themselves, or has advanced beyond the mere consciousness expressed by Prof. Max Müller in his History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, that “there is some system,” “some priestly influence,” “traces of one superintending spirit,” and such-like generalities. The object of the following paper is to show the principle which regulated the formation of the Sanhitâ, the aggregation of hymns into Maṇḍalas, the reason for the positions assigned to the Maṇḍalas, and the method followed in placing each particular hymn. If my deductions prove accurate, it is evident that a fresh impetus will be given to the study of these remarkable documents, for the clue to the labyrinth will be in the hands of future investigators.