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
The play has come down in two recensions, one preserved in Bengālī and
Devanāgarī manuscripts and commented on by Ran̄ganātha in A.D. 1656, and
the other in South Indian manuscripts, commented on by Kāṭayavema,
minister of the Reḍḍi prince, Kumāragiri of Koṇḍavīḍu about A.D. 1400.
The most important among many differences is the fact that in Act IV
the northern manuscripts give a series of Apabhraṅça verses, with
directions as to the mode of singing and accompanying them, which are
ignored in the southern manuscripts. The northern text calls the play a
Troṭaka, apparently from the dance which accompanied the verses, the
southern a Nāṭaka which it in essentials is. The arguments against the
authenticity of the verses are partly the silence of the theorists, the
fact that the existence in Kālidāsa’s time of Apabhraṅça of the type
found is more than dubious, [316] that there is sometimes a degree of
discrepancy between the verses and the prose of the drama, and that in
the many imitations of the scene (Mālatīmādhava, Act IX, Bālarāmāyaṇa,
Act V, Prasannarāghava, Act VI, and Mahānāṭaka, Act IV) there are no
similar verses. These reasons are on the whole conclusive, and the
problematic fact that the Prākrit of the northern recension is better
is not of importance.
The Çakuntalā [317] certainly represents the perfection of Kālidāsa’s
art, and may justly be assumed to belong to his latest period of work.
The prologue with his usual skill leads us up to the picture of the
king in swift pursuit of an antelope entering the outskirts of the
hermitage; warned of the sacred character of the spot, the king alights
from his chariot and decides to pay his respects to the holy man whose
hermitage it is; he is absent, but Çakuntalā, his foster-daughter, is
there with her friends; pursued by a bee she calls for help; they reply
that Duḥṣanta the king should aid as the hermitage is under his
protection, and the king gallantly comes forward to help. From the
maidens he elicits the tale of Çakuntalā’s birth; she is daughter of
Viçvāmitra and Menakā, and is being reared not for the religious life
but for marriage to some worthy one. The king loves and the maiden
begins to reciprocate his affection, when the news that a wild elephant
is menacing the hermitage takes him away. Act II reveals his Vidūṣaka
groaning over the toils of the king’s hunting. But the king gives order
for the hunt to end, not to please the Vidūṣaka but for Çakuntalā’s
sake, and, while he recounts his feelings to his unsympathetic friend,
receives with keen satisfaction the request of the young hermits to
protect the hermitage against the attacks of demons. The Vidūṣaka he
gets rid of by sending him back to the capital to take part in a
festival there, assuring him, in order to prevent domestic trouble,
that his remarks about Çakuntalā were not serious. In the entr’acte
before Act III a young Brahmin praises the deeds of Duḥṣanta, and we
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