1. The earliest schools of Sanskritists in Europe entered into the study
of Sanskrit with more imagination than critical ability.
A. Then, in those days even, such vagaries as the estimation of Shakuntala as forming the high watermark of Indian philosophy were not altogether unknown!
B. They knew a little, expected much from that little, and often tried to make too much of what little they knew.
C. While criticizing the unsound imaginativeness of the early school
to whom everything in Indian literature was rose and musk, these, in
their turn, went into speculations, which were equally highly unsound
and indeed very venturesome.
D. These were naturally followed by a reactionary band of superficial
critics who knew little or nothing of Sanskrit, expected nothing from
Sanskrit studies, and ridiculed everything from the East.
6. And their boldness was very naturally helped by the fact that these
over-hasty and unsympathetic scholars and critics were addressing an
audience whose entire qualification for pronouncing any judgment in the
matter was their absolute ignorance of Sanskrit.