The Sanskrit drama : $b in its origin, development, theory and practiceKeith, Arthur Berriedale
History
The Sanskrit drama : $b in its origin, development, theory and practice
Keith, Arthur Berriedale
Sanskrit drama -- History and criticism
As little can any conclusion be derived from the allusion in Vāmana to
a son of Candragupta in connexion with Vasubandhu, which has led to
varied efforts at identification, based largely on the fifth century as
the date of Vasubandhu. But it is far more probable that Vasubandhu
dates from the early part of the fourth century, and nothing can be
derived hence to aid in determining the period of Kālidāsa. [307]
More solid evidence must be sought in the astronomical or astrological
data which are found in Kālidāsa. Professor Jacobi has seen in the
equalization of the midday with the sixth Kāla in the Vikramorvaçī a
proof of Kālidāsa’s having lived in the period immediately subsequent
to the introduction from the west of the system of reckoning for
ordinary purposes the day by 12 Horās, Kāla being evidently used as
Horā. The passage has been interpreted by Huth as referring to a
sixteenfold division, and the argument to be derived from it is not
established, but Huth, on the other hand, manifestly errs by making
Kālidāsa posterior to Āryabhaṭa (A.D. 499) on the score that in the
Raghuvaṅça he refers to eclipses as caused by the shadow of the earth,
the reference being plainly to the old doctrine of the spots on the
moon. It is, however, probable that Kālidāsa in the Vikramorvaçī refers
to the figure of the lion in the zodiac, borrowed from the west, and it
is certain that he was familiar with the system of judicial astrology,
which India owes to the west, for he alludes both in the Raghuvaṅça and
the Kumārasambhava to the influence of the planets, and above all uses
technical terms like ucca and even jāmitra, borrowed from Greece. A
date not probably prior to A.D. 350 is indicated by such passages.
[308]
Similar evidence can be derived from Kālidāsa’s Prākrit, which is
plainly more advanced than that of Bhāsa, while his Māhārāṣṭrī can be
placed with reasonable assurance after that of the earlier Māhārāṣṭrī
lyric, which may have flourished in the third and fourth centuries A.D.
He is also earlier than the Aihole inscription of A.D. 634, where he is
celebrated, than Bāṇa (A.D. 620), and above all than Vatsabhaṭṭi’s
Mandasor Praçasti of A.D. 473. It is, therefore, most probable that he
flourished under Candragupta II of Ujjayinī, who ruled up to about A.D.
413 with the style of Vikramāditya, which is perhaps alluded to in the
name Vikramorvaçī, while the Kumārasambhava’s title may well hint a
compliment on the birth of young Kumāragupta, his son and successor.
[309] The Mālavikāgnimitra with its marked insistence on the horse
sacrifice of the drama seems to suggest a period in Kālidāsa’s early
activity when the memory of the first horse sacrifice for long
performed by an Indian king, that of Samudragupta, was fresh in men’s
minds. Moreover the poems of Kālidāsa are essentially those of the
Gupta period, when the Brahmanical and Indian tendencies of the dynasty
were in full strength and the menace of foreign attack was for the time
evanescent.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account