________________
196
Prakrit and Apabhramsa Studies
adiyā etc. mentioned here are wellknown structural units that play a basic role in the construction of the Apabhraṁsa Sandhi bandha.6 The obvious conclusion is, Caturmukha was the pioneer in evolving the Sandhi form and his works served as models for Svayambhu's epics.
4. Additional support for this comes from another direction too. In the Apabhramśa section of the Svayambhūcchandas (further here abbreviated as Sc.) the chapter dealing with the metres of the Sandhibandha gives illustrative citations exclusively from Caturmukha, aside from the anonymous ones which include passages
m Svayambhu's own work. This could have not been the case if Caturmukha had been mediocre or one among several.
5. Such a pioneer and prominent poet could not but have several extensive compositions to his credit. As we have already Seen, the Abdhimathana was a well-known Apabhramsa epic from Caturmukha's pen. But regarding its form and contents we ha not one jot more information than what has been noted above.?
6. Regarding another epic of Caturmukha, which occupied itself with the narrative of Rāma, we are slightly more fortunare. Evidence for Caturmukha's Apabhramsa Rāmāyaṇa is quite conclusive. In the opening Kadavaka of the sixtyninth Sandhi of his Mahāpurāna with which begins the Rāma-story, Puspadanta pays his compliments to Caturmukha and Svayambhū. As Svayambhū has actually a Rāma-epic, the Paūmacariu, to his credit, Caturmnkha too is to be supposed to have composed one. Otherwise there would be no point in Puspadanta's remembering and eulogizing Caturmukha in that context. Similarly in the introductory portion of his Bahubalicarita or Vāhuvalicaria (1398) in Apabhramśa, Dhanapāla mentions Caturmukha, Drona, Svayambhū and Vira as authors of works narrating the life-history of Padma (i.e. Rama).9 From among the several citations given in the Sc. under the name of Caumuha only VI 54.1 has a positive reference to the Rāma-story. And even this looses most of its value because in this ascription of authorship, the Manuscript turns out to be quite wrong. Actu