reader that in scenery and scenic apparatus the Hindú drama, must have
been very defective. No directions as to changes of scene are given in
the original text of the play. This is the more curious, as there are
numerous stage directions, which prove that in respect of dresses and
decorations the resources of the Indian theatre were sufficiently
ample.

It is probable that a curtain suspended across the stage, and divided
in the centre, answered all the purposes of scenes. Behind the curtain
was the space or room called _nepathya_, where the decorations were
kept, where the actors attired themselves, and remained in readiness
before entering the stage, and whither they withdrew on leaving it.
When an actor was to enter hurriedly, he was directed to do so 'with a
toss of the curtain.'

The machinery and paraphernalia of the Indian theatre were also very
limited, contrasting in this respect unfavourably with the ancient
Greek theatre, which appears to have comprehended nearly all that
modern ingenuity has devised. Nevertheless, seats, thrones, weapons,
and chariots, were certainly introduced, and as the intercourse
between the inhabitants of heaven and earth was very frequent, it is
not improbable that there may have been aërial contrivances to
represent the chariots of celestial beings, as on the Greek stage. It
is plain, however, from the frequent occurrence of the word
_nátayitwá_, 'gesticulating,' 'acting,' that much had to be supplied
by the imagination of the spectator, assisted by the gesticulations of
the actors.

For further information relative to the dramatic system of the Hindús,
the reader is referred to the notes appended to the present