365bet娱乐

100
the sociological conditions of the Sunga period and of the
period of these plays.
Then remain two claimants to the title 'R膩jasinha',
viz., Candragupta and Nanda. The reign of Candragupta
would suit the description of the Bharatav膩kyas; but
from the fact of the Kau峁璱liya Artha艣膩stra containing a
quotation from Bh膩sa, we are inclined to place Bh膩sa as
the senior contemporary of Kautilya, and hence of
Candragupta. The reign of Mah膩padma also answers
the territorial limits as he was the first to bring the whole
of Northern India under his sovereignty. The choice,
therefore, remains to be made between Mah膩padma and
Candragupta and we would vote in favour of the former.*
Thus, Bhasa was the court poet of Ugrasena Mah膩padma,
as the description of the Bharatav膩kyas suits him and the
sociological conditions depicted in these plays fit in very
well with the Mauryan epoch.
vii. ANACHRONISMS.
Late date was assigned to these plays on account of
the mention of statue-houses and Ny膩ya艣膩stra of Medh膩tithi
in the Prat, deification of Rama and K峁涐梗峁嘺 in the Abh and
B膩l, mention of Kharapata in the Car, naming of a
Br膩hma峁嘺 as Ke艣avad膩sa in the Mv, and the use of
metronyms in some of the plays." All of these can be
shown not to be real anachronisms.
2.
i. We have already shown that there is historical
evidence for the existence of statue-houses since very long
in India, and that the so-called South Indian statue-
houses are quite different from those mentioned in the
Prat. There is no sense in identifying Medh膩tithi's
1 Contra, Dhruva, Svapnani Sundari, Intr., p. 12. But Candragupta had
to contend with Seleucus Nicator, There is further, a close correspondence between
the sociological conditions as depicted by Bhasa and those of the Mauryan period.
The famous Greek invasion led by Alexander, the Great, took place in the reign of
Ugrasena Mah膩padma, who was "the sole king," ruling the whole earth under one
umbrella,, (MR, Octr. 1930, p. 438). It cannot be said that Bhasa could not have
praised a S奴dra king (Mrcch, Ed. by Mehta and Dave, Intr., p. VI) since the divine
origin of kings (f) is an ancient Indian dictum. 2 For Mah膩-
padma's history, Cf. Smith, EHI, p. 51; Rapson, CHI, pp. 313-314; Roy
Chaudhuri, Political History of Ancient India, 1927, pp. 140-145. Bh膩sa's works
show slight priority to Candragupta, and Kautilya quotes from Bh膩sa, hence our
preference for Ugrasena Mah膩padma. 3 Cf. Pisharoti, BSOS, 3, p. 108 n2;
Winternitz, Problems, p. 123; Kane, VJV, 1920, pp. 100-102; Devdhar, Plays etc.
pp. 36-37 Sankar, AMV, 2, pp. 56, 62-64. 4 Chapter II Supra. Cf. G. Sastri,
Critical Study, pp. 99-100; BSOS, 3, pp. 629-630; Haraprasad Sastri, OC, V. pp.
97-98 Jayaswal, JBORS, 5, pp. 98-99.