From about 300 B.C. to 100 A.D. we find inscriptions, buildings and statues testifying to the piety of Buddhist and Jain donors but hardly any indications of a similar liberality to Brahmans.  In the second and third centuries A.D. grants of land to Brahmans and their temples begin to be recorded and in the fourth century (that is with the rise of the Gupta Dynasty) such grants become frequent.  These facts can hardly be interpreted otherwise than as meaning that from 300 B.C. to 100 A.D. the upper classes of India favoured Buddhism and Jainism and did not favour the Brahmans in the same way or to the same extent.  But it must be remembered that the religion of the Brahmans continued throughout this period and produced a copious literature, and also that the absence of works of art may be due to the fact that their worship was performed in sacrificial enclosures and that they had not yet begun to use temples and statues.  After the first century A.D. we have first a gradual and then a rapid rise in Brahmanic influence.  Inscriptions as well as books indicate that a linguistic change occurred in the same period.  At first popular dialects were regarded as sufficiently dignified and current to be the medium for both scripture and official records.  Sanskrit remained a thing apart—­the peculiar possession of the Brahman literati.  Then the popular language was Sanskritized, the rules of Sanskrit grammar being accepted as the standard to which it ought to conform, though perfect conformity was impracticable.  In much the same way the modern Greeks try to bring Romaic into line with classical Greek.  Finally Sanskrit was recognized as the proper language for literature, government and religion.  The earliest inscriptions[176] in correct Sanskrit seem to date from the second century A.D.  Further, the invaders who entered India from the north-west favoured Buddhism on the whole.  Coins indicate that some of them worshipped Siva[177] but the number and beauty of Buddhist monuments erected under their rule can hardly be interpreted except as a sign of their patronage.  And their conversion was natural for they had no strong religious convictions of their own and the Brahmans with their pride of caste shrank from foreigners.  But Buddhism had no prejudice of race or class:  it was animated by a missionary spirit and it was probably the stronger creed at this period.  It not only met the invaders on their entry into India but it sent missionaries to them in Bactria and Afghanistan, so that to some extent they brought Buddhism with them.  But it was a Buddhism combined with the most varied elements.  Hellenic art and religion had made the figures of Apollo, Herakles and Helios familiar in Bactria, and both Bactria and northern India were in touch with Zoroastrians.  The mixed cults of these borderlands readily professed allegiance to the Buddha but, not understanding Indian ideas, simply made him into a deity and having done this were not likely to repudiate other Indian deities.