________________
REVIEWS
155
possibly, an attempt to displace their authority. Finally, I take a look at the statue of the poet.' It is, of course, hardly possible to deal adequately with all these things in less than fifty pages. For instance, the picture given of the activities of the king is definitely one-sided. David Smith remarks that, since the kingdom was run by Brahman ministers, the king should be left entirely free to please himself. If one consults other sources such as the epic, not to mention Kautilya's Arthaśāstra (cf. the chapter on the duties of the king 1.19), one obtains an entirely different picture of the activities and duties of the king. For instance, as Hopkins points out, one of his most important duties was to act as judge. It is difficult to obtain an accurate idea of the activities of kings, but I believe that even from purely literary texts it is obvious that the king was not left entirely free to please himself. Although it is not possible always to accept Smith's statements in this chapter, one encounters many remarks which one would like to quote. For instance, Smith writes: 'Virtually all the images employed in kavya are strikingly stereotyped and the general tendency of kávya is towards celebration, confirmation and consolidation. The irregular and shifting world is fixed, is given ballast by the orderliness of kavya'. Smith devotes only a few pages to the poet. Perhaps he could have given more emphasis to the relationship of the poet with his audience. Kavya was undoubtedly written and not orally composed as was most of the older Sanskrit literature. Its audience was restricted to a small circle of connoisseurs capable of appreciating the technical skill of the poet. It is interesting to compare the function of kavya at the Indian court with that of Latin poetry in imperial Rome.
The first three chapters take up the first third of David Smith's book. The remaining chapters examine different aspects of Ratnākara's Haravijaya. In his introduction he remarks that his 'procedure has been principally that of reading and re-reading the poetry, "living with it" in F. R. Levis' words, until the Haravijaya has taken on for me a definite shape and character which further readings serve only to strengthen'. It is undoubtedly superfluous to analyse these chapters and it must be left to the reader to follow the author in his voyage of exploration. One of the pleasures of reading these chapters is the skill with which David Smith translates the many verses which he quotes. It would be too much to ask him to translate the entire Haravijaya, but a translation of several cantos would be very welcome. In his final chapter David Smith writes: "The Haravijaya is great in scope. Its symbolism, given weight by Ratnākara's emphatic joy in images and conventions used only sparingly by other poets, and increased by his original ("ad hoc") symbols, provides depth of meaning.' However, he is not without reservations: 'It cannot be denied that the poem is too long, but it is good
