________________
(Kathā-Sarit-Sagara the verbatim version of Brliatkathā) referring to Canakya as well as Brhiaspati, 18 Nai välanadutta son of Udayana 1), Sūdraka referring to Gopa laka, Palaku and Gopaladáraka Āryala; Gunādhya also referring to Avanti-vardhana son of Palaka 20; Sūdi aku referring to Canakya (1-39-p-44 and VIII 35-p 288) and Kautilya referring to the restoration of the last Kingoin of Suyatra (Nala) and Udayana during their life time obviously referuing to the thenics of Pratijñāyaugandharayana and Svapnavāsavadattam, in Aithašāsta IX-7
36 p-230 R.P. Kangle edition, University of Bombay 1960) amply dem ai cate tlie serial chonology of the three writers Bhāsa, Gmadhya, and Śūdraka considerably on formal giounds
Bhāsa dating prior to Kautilya and Gunādhya and Sūdraka after him, Vināvāsavadattam is considered to be the genuine work of Sannilla or Saumillaka 21 referring exclusively to Brbaspati22 may also be placed between Bhāsa and Gunāļliya before Cänakya and aftei Brhaspati referred to so frequently by Cānakya The introductory verses of Mrcchakatika carrying expressions --
"dvijamukhyatamah Kavirbabhūva2 3 piathitah Sūdraka ityagādhasattvah," "rājānam vīksya putram paramasamudayeuāśvamedhenestvā, labdhvā cāyuh Satābdam dasa-24 dinasalitam Sūdrako' gnim pravistah" samaravyasani pramādasünyah25 kakudam vcdavidām tapodhans ca paravārañabahuyuddhalubdhaḥ
kşitipatih kila Südrako babhūva Such as these compared with 'Bhāsakaviputia Saumillakādinām"
Or
"BhāsaSaumillakaviputrādinām of Kalidasa make it convenient to presume that Kavi as Sūdraka could liave a 'putra' whose name deserves an examination of the two readings..."BhäsaKaviputraSaumillakad inām" and "Bhåsa Saumilla Kaviputrādinām"if the first is construed as reasonable the interpretation would be "Blāsa and Kavi (i.e. Śūdraka) and his Putra Saumilla ka and others " The other reading if deemed correct the interpretation would be - "Bhasa, Saumilla, Kavi and his putra and others i.e.
