94
impossible that this play was written by him it> the reign of Avantivarman and so his name came to-be substituted for Chandragupta." This date would • be somewhere about seventh century A. D.
(iv) The geography of our Pataliputra is probably as-
it, existed when the work was composed. A
Chinese account of India says ; "At: the close of the,
year Kan-Yuen (756 A. D.J.the bank of the river
' Holung' (Ganges) gave way and disappeared." If
:! !.•'.-• the distraction then of Pataliputra is referred to*
our work must fall about first half of the eighth
century.
(v) The conduct of Chandanadasa in sacrificing his life-for his friend Rakshasa is stated to have transcended the nubility even of the Ruddhas. This allusion** ; to Buddhism belongs to a period long prior to the V, decay and ultimate disappearance of Buddhism* from India*
Looking back at the various lines of investigation, all these run pretty closely towards the conclusion that "our drama belongs to somewhere about the 8th century A. D."
The drama is in sundry respects a very unique work h> Sanskrit literature. Its plot is not a pure invention^ ancl has no female among its prominent dmmctth perswiae and the-bty3Uiess of the play is accordingly diplomacy and politics to-t^te entire exclusion of love. The style does not lay much jGtait& t0 sweitaess aif beauty, but it is-always btasiness-like and'Ofb&k ^vi^wii®, The iatrigues of Chac^akya to bring away «1
fo tft^ddft of Chandragupta, his own nominee, from, fav^omc lo tfae^depoaed NamM, form the thread of narrative.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*