________________
INTRODUCTION
Xxvii
century' In his Early History of India, p. 308, Vincent Smith mentions 733 as the year of Lalitāditya's coronation, and adds This prince, who is said to have reigned for thirty-six years, extended the power of Kashmir far beyond its normal mountain limits, and about the year 740 inflicted a crushing defeat upon Yasovarman, king of Kanauj'
But in his Bhavabhūtr and his place in Sanskrit Literature, p 28, Anundoram Borooah, when discussing the date of our poet, says that he 'cannot place him later than the fifth century A.D.' His conclusion is based on the following arguments
1 As we know from his Malatı Madhava that he was not a popular writer in his time, more than 100 years must have elapsed before his plays spread to the farthest extremities of India and his reputation became indissolubly tied with the immortal language of our ancestors In the days of the Bala Ramayana he had already become a revered writer. It appears not only from the verse already quoted [Bāl. I 16], but from its again introducing Bhavabhuti as a pupıl in the beginning of the fourth act I have already shown that there is very good evidence to show that this 18 a play of the seventh century. I cannot therefore place Bhavabhuti later than the fifth century A D.' (p 22.)
2 The Raja Tarangını makes Bhavabhuti a courtier of Yashovarman ---king of Canou). The 114th [? 144th] verse of the fourth Taranga runs thus kavir vākpatirāja-sri-bhavabhūtyādr-sevitah gato yayau yasovarmā tad-guna-stutz-vandrtām This would make Bhavabhuti live in the eighth century But there is nothing in the verse to show that our Bhavabhuti is referied to in it Secondly the expression vākpaturāja before śrī-bhavabhūti clearly shows that this was, according to this authority, the title of Yashovarman's Bhavabhutı, if he at all had a Bhavabhuti in his court But we do not know either from Bhavabhuti's writings or from independent evidence that Srikantha Bhavabhuti was ever known as the Vākpatı Rāja.' (p. 24)
3. Bhavabhutz preceded Amara Sinha but succeeded Kalidasa' I cannot, however, see my way to agree with him His first argument falls to the ground through the results of the later research which place Rājasekhara, the author of Būlarāmāyana, about 900 A D3 His second is based on the wrong interpretation of the verse from the Rājatarangini, which mentions two distinct poets, Vakpatırāja (author of Gaudavaho) and Bhavabhūtı, and not Vākpatırāja-bhavabhūti. The third argument, too, is
1 Oxford, latest edition ? Calcutta, 1878 3 Soe Sten Konow's Essay on Rajasekhara's Life and Writings in his edition of the Karn
pūra-mañari Cambridge, Mass, 1901, VS Apte's Rājasekhara his life and Writings, Poona, 1886.
