Introduction to Indian culture and civilization will remain incomplete until and unless the readers/students are acquainted with the Sanskrit Language which gave birth to all the languages of the world directly or indirectly.
Sir. W. Jones the most intellectual of the European critics of Sanskrit literature, pronounced the Sanskrit language to be “of a wonderful structure, more perfect than the Greek, more copious than the Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either.”  
Professor Bopp (Edinburgh Review, 1820:43) also says that “Sanskrit is more perfect and copious than the Greek and the Latin and more exquisite and eloquent than either.”
Professor Max Mueller (1866:203) calls Sanskrit “language of languages,” and remarks that “it has been truly said that Sanskrit is to the Science of language what Mathematics is to Astronomy.”
Professor Wilson (1858:232-233) says, “The Hindus had a copious and a cultivated language.” “The Sanskrit” says Professor Heeren (1833:109-110), “we can safely assert to be one of the richest and most refined of any. It has, moreover, reached a high degree of cultivation, and the richness of its philosophy is no way inferior to its poetic beauties, as it presents us with an abundance of technical terms to express the most abstract ideas.” Here James Mill's perverted taste and inveterate prejudice against everything Hindu may be cited. When Le Pere Paolino says that ‘Sanskrit is more copious than Latin. It has several words to express the samething. The sun has more than 30 names,  the moon more than 20; a house has 20, a stone 6 or 7, a least 5, an ape 10, and a crow 9.’ Mr. James Mill, thereupon says that ‘the highest metit of language would consist in having one name for everything which required a name and no more than one.’ On this Prof. Wilson (1858:91) exclaims, ‘what would become of poetry, of eloquence, of literature of intellect, if language was thus shorn of all that gives it beauty, variety, grace and
The distinguished German critic, Schlegel (1818:117), says, “Justly it is called Sanskrit, i.e., perfect, finished. In its structure and grammar, it closely resembles the Greek, but is infinitely more regular and therefore more simple, though not less rich. It combines the artistic fulness indicative of Greek development, the brevity and nice accuracy of Latin; whilst having a near affinity to the Persian and German roots, it is distinguished by expression as enthusiastic and forcible as theirs.” He (1818:105) again says, “The Sanskrit combines these various qualities, possessed separately by other tongues: Grecian copiousness, deep-toned Roman force, the divine afflatus characterising the Hebrew tongue.” He (1818:106) also says, “Judged by an organic standard of the principal elements of language, the Sanskrit excels in grammatical structure, and is, indeed, the most perfectly-developed of all idioms, not excepting Greek and Latin.”
The importance of this “language of languages” is clearly  recognized when we consider, with Sir W.W. Hunter (1881:264), the fact that “the modern philology dates from the study of Sanskrit by the Europeans.” In fact, the foundation of the science of comparative philology was laid by the publication of Bopp’s Comparative Grammar in 1848 A.D.
Sir W. Jones’ (1788:423) assertion that “Devanāgarī is the original source whence the alphabets of Western Asia were derived” not only proves the great antiquity of the Sanskrit literature but points out the channel through which Sanskrit philosophy and learning flowed towards the west, and, working in the new and fresh materials available there, produced Homer, Hesiod, Pythagoras Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Zeno, Cicero, Scarvola, Varoo, Virgil and others to divide the laurels of literary reputation with Vyasa, Kapila, Gautama, Patañjali, Kaṇāda, Jaiminī, Nārada, Pāṇini, Maricī and Vālmīki. The study of comparative philology, in so far as it has advanced, tends to show that Sans¬krit is the mother of all Indo-European languages. From the Sanskrit were derived the original roots and those essentially necessary words which form the basis of all these languages. In other words, the part that is common to all or most of the languages of this group is supplied to each language by the Sanskrit.
Mr. Pococke (Ravi Prakash, 2003: 23-24) says, “The Greek language is a derivation from the Sanskrit.”  The learned Dr. Prichard (1813:502) says, “The affinity between the Greek language, and the old Parsi and Sanskrit is certain and essential. The use of cognate idioms proves the nations who used them to have descended from one stock. That the religion of the Greeks emanated from an Eastern source no one will deny. We must therefore suppose the religion as well as the language of Greece to have been derived in great part immediately from the East.”
Sir W. Jones (1788:82-83) says, “I was not a little surprised to find that out of ten words in Du Perron’s Zend Dictionary six or seven were pure Sanskrit.”
Professor Heeren (1833:220) says, “In point of fact, the Zend is derived from the Sanskrit.”
As the Devanāgarī is the source from which the alphabets of Western Asia are derived, so are the Sanskrit names of the figures 1 to 10 the source from which most languages have derived their names of the said figures.
The scale of calculatoin is common to all nations, and owes its origin to India. Sanskrit is the mother of all languages. The below give chart shows how the numerals in all languages of the world travelled from India.
The scale of calculatoin is common to all nations, and owes its origin to the Hindus. Dr. Ballantyne is inclined to support the theory that Sanskrit is the mother of all Aryan (Indo European) languages. (See Tables )

Table 1: Ordinal Numerals Across Indo‑European Languages

Ordinals: Sanskrit → Zend → Greek → Latin → Gothic → English

📗 Table 2: Cardinal Numerals Across Indo‑European Languages

Cardinals: Sanskrit → Latin → Greek → Lithuanian → Welsh → English

📙 Table 3: Analogy of Verbs — “To Give”

Present Tense: Sanskrit → Zend → Greek → Latin → English

Singular

Plural

📕 Table 4: General View of Verb Persons

First Person

Second Person

Second Person Plural

Third Person

Third Person Plural

📒 Table 5: Future Tense of “To Give” (DIDOMI)

📓 Table 6: Supines & Infinitives

The founder of comparative philology, Mr. Boop (1845, says that at one time Sanskrit was the one language spoken all over the world.
Louis Jacoliot (Ravi Prakash Arya, 2016:27) considers  Sanskrit as the original source of all the European languages of the present day. He also provides proof thereof.
Miss Carpenter (Ravi Prakash Arya, 2007:192) says that though the original home of Sanskrit is Āryāvartta, yet it has now been proved to have been the language of most of the countries of modern Europe in ancient times.
A German critic says that “Sanskrit is the mother of Greek, Latin and German languages, and that it has no other relation to them: this is the reason why Max Mñller calls it the ancient language of the Aryas.”
The great antiquity of Indian civilization is unquestionably beyond comparison; and the antiquarians are unanimous as to the incomparable antiquity of the Sanskrit literature also. Professor Heeren (1833:201-202) says that Sanskrit Literature is not only very rich but also extremely ancient.
The oldest writings of the oldest nations except the Indians are, according to some Orientalists, the records of various developments of Buddhism which took its rise in India after the decline of the Vedic religion. Count Bjornstjerna (1844:110) says, “The so-called Hermes Scriptures (the names of all the sacred writings of the Egyptians) contain metaphysical treatises in the form of dialogue between Hermes (Spiritual wisdom) and Todh, Bodh, Buddh (earthly wisdom), which throughout exhibit the doctrines of Buddhism.” Again, “the early Egyptian writing which in the translation is called Pimander’s Hermes Trismegistus, and forms a dialogue between Pimander (the high¬est intelligence) and Thodt, (Bodh, Buddha) which develops the metaphysics of the Buddhists touching the trinity.”
Mr. Weber (1878:5) says, “And while the claims of the written records of Indian literature to a high antiquity are thus indisputa¬bly proved by external geographical testimony, the internal evidence in the same direction, which may be gathered from their contents is no less conclusive.”