________________
[10]
disres
worthy of note that Jayanta did not even once show any pect to his patron. It is said that Jayanta was an exceptionally good person; so much so that he refrained from referring to the vices of his patron and remained indifferent. But, even then it is not understood why and how he incurred the displeasure of the King to such an extent that the latter could throw him in confinement to pass his days in utter reclusion. Furthermore, it is to be investigated how far the modern amenities accorded to prisoners in jail could have been made available to them in medieval days when the conditions of life in imprisonment were so very different from what they are now One of our much esteemed and beloved professors reminds us in this context of Lokamānya Balagangadhara Tilak who wrote his masterly work, Gītārahasya, while serving out a term of imprisonment. He writes further to mention that it was most unfortunate that Jayantabhaṭṭa was the victim of the cruel tyrrany of a royal despot but he does not appear to offer any satisfactory explanation of how this could at all happen particularly when Jayanta was full of admiration for his master and seemed to have enjoyed his confidence too.1
Under the circumstances, we propose to review the situation and see whether some new light could be thrown on the interpretation of the verse in question. Stein in one of his notes on the Rajatarangini writes as follows: It is certain that the passes leading into Kashmir were under the charge of high officers designated as 'dvārādhipa,' 'dvārapati',
1. Calcutta Review, Vol. XL, No. 2, Agu. 1931
