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
We learn also from the Çāstra and from Mārkaṇḍeya in special of a
number of Vibhāṣās, [715] which seem to be modified forms of the more
normal Prākrits, as stereotyped for use by certain characters in the
drama. Thus the Çāstra attributes Çākārī to the Çakas, Çabaras, and
others, while the Sāhityadarpaṇa accords Çābarī to these persons. The
Çāstra ascribes Çābarī to charcoal-burners, hunters, wood-workers, and
partly also to forest dwellers in general, and Ābhīrī is ascribed with
the option of Çābarī to herdsmen, Cāṇḍālī to Caṇḍālas, and Drāviḍī to
Draviḍas, while Oḍri, mentioned by the Çāstra, is left unascribed;
presumably it was assigned to men of Orissa. Something of this is seen
in the Mṛcchakaṭikā, where Çākārī, Cāṇḍālī, and a further speech Ḍhakkī
or Ṭākkī appear. They all have nothing very marked as to their
characteristics; the first two may be allied to Māgadhī, the last is
more dubious.
The addition of Chāyās or translations in Sanskrit to explain the
Prākrit is normal in the manuscripts of the dramas, and it is certain
that it is old, for it is alluded to by Rājaçekhara in his
Bālarāmāyaṇa. Evidently, even so early as A.D. 900, there was no public
which cared for Prākrit without a Sanskrit explanation.
On the subject of the use of stanzas, as opposed to prose, the
text-books are curiously and unexpectedly silent. [716] This indicates
how entirely empirical they are in these matters. The use of Prākrits
in the dramas obviously varied, and something had to be said regarding
this point, but the alternation of prose and verse is accepted as
something established, on which comment is unnecessary. The fact is
recognized, but its implications and purpose remain unexplored. In the
stanzas themselves, it is clear, we must distinguish between those
which were sung and those which were simply recited; recitation must
clearly have been the normal form of use, and as sung we have normally
at any rate only some of the stanzas in Māhārāṣṭrī which are placed in
the mouths of women. Çaurasenī stanzas, on the other hand, we may
assume to have been recited, but the distinction has practically
vanished from the texts preserved.
7. THE DANCE, SONG, AND MUSIC
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