93
Ti ne story keeps close pace with the episode in the Siva-purana
"an<l likewise the version of Kalidasa. As a drama, it cannot command good appreciation. The ideas are at times urisuited \
to the occasion* With all this, there is a sort of music in * ?
the verse and the style shows a simple grace. In the words I
of a modern critic : " ^ ^cr
Visakhadatta was the son of Prithu and grandson of Vatesvaradatta. He leaves us no more hints as to bis life and only one work of his we have known—the Mudramkshasa. The accompanying data go to fix the author's age approxi-tnately :~
(i) The country is described " when the Pathan princes were pressing on the Hindu sovereignties" ( Wilson.) This would indicate not so much a permanent establishment of sovereignty or any continuous oppression, as a more or less constant series of annoyances and harassments — alluding to the whole century from 711 A. D. and 812 A. D.
{ii) The Dasarupa alludes to our drama in three places and in one of them sets out in full an extract for illustration and the Dasarupa itself is assigned to the loth century.
•(Hi) Some MSS. read Avantivarman instead of Chandra-gupta, in the last line of the drama. u He must have been a king of Behar and if our author was art inhabitant of that part of the country, it is notadition, may suffice to-establish a case. Such then are the obstacles in its way. But still these are only obstacles which we wish to maker ' clear to a closer observer. The fact that old tradition never spoke of a drama of this name as Bana's goes to a great extent in its favour. These circumstances must only leave the deci--stem dubious, until some stronger historical evidence comes* forth. Proceeding from the imainatgion of a sound scholarr. the theory has high merits and deserves all congratulation*