45. *
(0 No genuine edition of the Sarasvati-kantabharana quotes any of Harsha's verses. .
\«) Rajasekhara, the younger, assigns the composition of the poem to somewhere about 1174 A, D., for Jayachandra's minflter's pilgrimage to Somnathwas later than Harsha's return from Kashmir.
{iii) Chanda's Pnthivlraja-rasau, which has been under-stood as describing Harsha as a predecessor of Kalidasa, must have been composed far later than the Prabandhakosa, perhaps in the I4th century. The interpretation put on Chanda's wording is not at alt acceptable.
(iv) Rajasekhara's account of Jayantachandra closely tallies
with Harsha's hints and references.
(v) The Naishadha-dipika, a commentary by Chandu, is dated A. D. 1296 and calls the poem' navam' or new.
The NaishadhiyacharitamisaMahakavya of the highest •renown in all India. It describes the story of Nala, the king of 2tfUfaadba; his love to Damayanti, *the Vidarbha princess; his •message through a swan; Damayantfs marriage by self-choice *with all it6ivicissitudes; and her happy company at the royal palace. The extant work contains twenty-two cantos, whore it seems to be complete* Tradition carries it fiirther to the length of 60 or 120 cantos* It is hoped that the rest of the "work is still hidden in some of the unransacked libraries. The work is a masterpiece of Harsha. His ideas, though at •times far-fetched, are yet fine and imaginative. All mythology i$ at his fingers! ends. Rhetoric he rides over. He sees no e$d to the flow of his description. Still we cannot see in him that ease or felicity of expression that is characteristic of Sudraka or Kalidasa, To the best learned pandit his languagence? besides this amply justifies this conclusion:— 1 » , ^exactly in most of their minute particulars. Of course it must be admitted that their present form. Quite the, ^