Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Rashtrakutas and their Times c23: Chapter XVI. Education and Literature

The Rāṣṭrakūṭas and their Times c23

Language
English

Contents

Chapter XVI. Education and Literature

Section A: Education

c23.s1.1

The theory that the compulsory education of the masses is a duty of the state is a very modern one, and we must banish it from our minds while examining the educational arrangements in the medieval or ancient times, whether in the west or in the east. The knowledge of the 3 R's was not regarded as a necessary part of the equipment of every citizen; members of the industrial classes paid more attention to the initiation of their boys in the mysteries of their professions than in those of the 3 R's. The village communities of the Deccan had arranged for the services of a permanent residential staff to meet their normal public needs by the grain-share system; the carpenter, the smith etc., whose services were required by every villager were assigned a grain share which was paid to them annually at the time of the harvest by all the villagers. The teacher does not figure among the grain sharing servants of the community, a fact which shows that the community at large did not regard the primary teacher as essentially necessary for the ordinary villager. It is very probable that only the children of the Brahmanas and the trading classes cared to be literate, and the arrangements for educating them could not be obviously made at the cost of the whole community, by assigning the village teacher a grain share from every villager.

c23.s1.2

Our epigraphical materials do not throw any light on the arrangements made in the ordinary village for the primary education. Nor do the Smritis or the foreign travellers help us in the matter. It would seem that the village priest, or accountant, or some members of their families were undertaking the task of giving primary education to such village boys as cared to have it. The guardians were very probably paying the fees annually at the time of the harvest, according to their means, rather than according to a fixed scale. The teacher could supplement his income by the customary gifts in kind or cash that he used to receive on festivals like Dasara, or at the times of the thread or marriage ceremonies in the houses of his pupils. In many cases the teacher probably possessed some elementary knowledge of medicine and was also employed for writing letters, bonds and leases. Some such system prevailed in the Deccan at the advent of the British rule as I have learnt from many an octogenarian, and it is very likely that the state of affairs may have been similar in our period.

c23.s1.3

We have ample evidence to enlighten us as to the arrangements for higher education that were made during our period. Higher education in our age meant Sanskrit education, and Veda, Vyākaraṇa (grammar), Jyotisha (astronomy and astrology), Sāhitya (literature), Mīmāṃsā, Dharmaśāstra, Purāṇas and Nyāya (logic) were the main branches thereof. The donee of the Dhulia plates of Dhruva, dated 779 A.D., ¹ is described as well versed in Vedas, Vedangas, history, Puranas, grammar, Mīmāṃsā, logic, Nirukta, and liturgy. Of these grammar is still the most extensively studied branch; Alberuni informs us that it was held in the highest estimation in his days, and curiously enough, the only place where epigraphs of our period specify the subject of a teacher is one where he happens to be the expounder of Kaumāra grammar. ² Grammar was the key subject to the knowledge of the rest of the sciences and, therefore, we may well presume that it was held in high estimation and extensively studied in the Deccan as in the north.

c23.s1.4

¹ E. I. VIII p. 182.

c23.s1.5

² E. I. V. p. 22.

c23.s1.6

The Dharmaśāstra literature no doubt lays down that the whole of the Veda was to be studied for 12 years by the first three castes, but it is fairly clear that the society of our period did not pay much attention to this injunction. The Vaishyas of our period had already lost their privilege of the Vedic studies as has been already shown in the last chapter, ³ and the Kshatriyas too, though permitted to study the Vedas, were largely following the Pauranic ritual. ⁴ The normal Kshatriya youth, who intended to follow the hereditary profession of his caste, must have devoted the largest part of his time to the military training. Even in the epic period he had only a smattering of the Vedic knowledge, and we may, therefore, well conclude that in our period the cases of the Kshatriyas taking seriously to Vedic education may have been very rare. Among the Brahmanas themselves, only the professional priests must have concentrated on the study of the sacred lore; the average Brahmana who intended to take up to government service, trade or agriculture would hardly have troubled himself much about remembering the exact accent of the Vedic Mantras. Vedic sacrifices too had gone out of vogue and epigraphical evidence shows that the Puranas and the later Smritis were exercising a remarkable hold on the society as shown already in Chapter XIII. Proficiency in the Dharmaśāstra must have been regarded as a passport to government service in the judicial branch, and we may, therefore, presume that the study of this subject was more popular in our period than the study of the Vedas. It may be pointed out that the term Vedic study in our period did not mean only the cramming of the Vedic Mantras; in some centres the meaning was also studied as the title Vedārthada occurring in one of our records would show.⁵ Astrology was wielding great influence on the popular mind as shown in the last chapter; royal courts used to maintain astrologers⁶ and a number of works on astronomy and astrology were composed in our period. We may, therefore, well presume that this subject was fairly popular in the Sanskrit schools and colleges of our time as is still the case to some extent. One record slightly falling outside our period records an endowment to found a College where the work of the famous Bhāskara alone were to be studied.⁷

c23.s1.7

³ Ante, page 332.

c23.s1.8

⁴ Ante, p. 332.

c23.s1.9

⁵ I. A., XIV, p. 69.

c23.s1.10

⁶ Kavi plates, I. A., V., p. 145.

c23.s1.11

⁷ E. I., I. p. 30.

c23.s1.12

Arrangement for the higher education was made in three places, (i) Mathas associated with temples endowed by the state or private charity, (ii) agrahāra villages granted to Brahmana settlements, and (iii) special educational institutions conducted by private individuals or village communities with the help of the public and the state. At Hebbal in Dharwar district there existed a Matha in the Bhujjabes'vara temple; an inscription, dated 975 A.D., records the grant of 50 *mattars* ( probably equal to 200 acres ) of land for the Matha, where students were fed and taught.(8) Two 12th century inscriptions, one from Managoli dated 1161 A.D.,(9) and the other from Belgamve dated 1183 A.D.,(10) show that there existed Sanskrit schools in these villages associated with the local temples; at the latter place the temple authorities of the Dakshines'vara temple, where the school was located, were enabled by private charity to provide for the boarding of the scholars free of charge. An inscription at Jatiga Rames'vara hill in Chitaldurg district, dated 1064 A.D., records a grant of 50 *mattars* of land to the Rames'varam temple for defraying the expenses of the temple worship, and for imparting education.(11) Part of the donation of Bhadravishnu, given to the Buddhist Vihara at Kanheri, in the reign of Amoghavarsha I, was for purchasing books. The Buddhist monastery at Kanheri like the one at Valabhi(12) was obviously maintaining a library which was very probably required for the school connected with it. We learn from the Chinese travellers that the Buddhist monasteries used to attend to the training not only of the monks but also of the children of the laity.(13) Indirect help to the cause of education was given by some of the temples, which used to give free food to the students in the feeding houses attached to them.(14) Some of the records mentioned above fall just outside our period, but they may be well utilised to illustrate further the state of affairs in our age.

c23.s1.13

The Kalas inscription(15) from Dharwar district shows that Kalas, which was an *agrahara* in our period, was maintaining a Sanskrit College. All its 200 Brahmana householders are described in v. 30 of the record as well versed in grammar, works on polity, the science of literary composition, the legendary lore and the great logic of Ekākshara sage and writing of interpretations i. e. commentaries. V. 25 observes that Kalas can pride itself, inter alia, on its brilliant dispensation of lore. The main purpose of the grant is to record an endowment, part of which was reserved for the salaries of professors. It is, therefore, quite clear that this agrahāra village was maintaining a college where grammar, Puranas, Nyāya, literature and works on polity were taught. The students must have flocked to the place from distant places. The inscription, which gives information about this college is dated in the reign of Govinda IV, but it is likely that this institution may have been flourishing throughout the 10th century.

c23.s1.14

⁸ E. I., IV, p. 358.

c23.s1.15

⁹ E. I., V, p. 22.

c23.s1.16

¹⁰ *Mysore Inscriptions*, No. 45.

c23.s1.17

¹¹ E. I., IV, p. 214.

c23.s1.18

¹² I. A., VII, p. 67.

c23.s1.19

¹³ I-tsing, p. 155.

c23.s1.20

¹⁴ Kharepatan grant, E. I., III, p. 360.

c23.s1.21

The small village of Salotgi in Bijapur district was another agrahāra village, that is known to have been maintaining a big college in the reign of Kṛṣṇa III. The college must have been flourishing for a fairly long time, for it has transformed the original name of the village Paviṭṭage into Salotgi, which is a combination of the words S'ālā and Paviṭṭage. From one of the inscriptions from this locality¹⁶ we learn that the college was located in a big hall attached to the temple of Trayī-purusha, which was built by Nārāyaṇa, a minister of Kṛṣṇa III, in 945 A.D. The record expressly states that the college attracted students from far and near, and 27 boarding houses were necessary to accommodate them. An endowment of 12 Nivartanas ( probably equal to 60 acres ) was necessary to defray merely the lighting charges of the institution. The pay of the principal of the college was the income of 50 Nivartanas of land i. e. about 250 acres. The institute had received a magnificent endowment from a local magnate, and the inhabitants of the village had agreed to pay 5, 2½, and 1¼ coins on the occasion of marriages, thread ceremonies, and tonsures respectively, besides agreeing to feed as many students and teachers as possible, at the dinners that may be given on these and similar occasions. A later inscription from the same place informs (17) us that when the college hall built in 945 A.D. crumbled down, it was built again by a local feudatory in the next century.

c23.s1.22

¹⁶ E. I., IV, p. 60.

c23.s1.23

There existed scores of agrahāra villages in our period given to Brahmana donees, who in many cases are expressly described as engaged in the six scriptural duties consisting of learning, teaching etc. (18) It is, therefore, fairly likely that many of these villages must have been maintaining educational institutions, more or less similar to those at Kalas and Salotgi.

c23.s1.24

Ordinary villages also had sometimes their own schools and colleges. One institution for Sanskrit education existed at Belur in Bijapur district in 1022 A.D., (19) another at Soratur in Dharwar district in c. 950 A.D., (20) a third one at Bijapur during c. 975-1075 A.D., (21) a fourth one at Yewoor in 1077 A.D. (22) and so on. These are the institutions the memory of which has been accidentally preserved in records, that have withstood the ravages of time; there may have probably existed many more. We may, therefore, fairly conclude that the facilities for higher education during our period can compare fairly well with those afforded in the present age.

c23.s1.25

These institutions were financed partly by state aid and partly by private charity. The agrahāra village institutions can well be regarded as being indirectly financed by the.

c23.s1.26

¹⁷ E. I., IV, p. 64.

c23.s1.27

¹⁸ E. g., Chittarājadeva's grant, 1024 A.D., I. A., V, p. 278.

c23.s1.28

¹⁹ I. A., XVIII, p. 273.

c23.s1.29

²⁰ I. A., XII, p. 253.

c23.s1.30

²¹ I. A., X, p. 229.

c23.s1.31

²² I. A., VIII, p. 21.

c23.s1.32

state, since it was the state that used to alienate the village revenues to Brahmanas, who, being freed from the anxiety of their maintenance, could devote their energies to the cause of education. The *iṣṭāpūrta* theory was inducing a number of private individuals to endow educational institutions. We have seen already how a minister of Kṛṣṇa III had built the college hall at Salotgi; when it crumbled down it was re-erected by a local chief. A record from Soratur, (23) dated 951 A.D., records the gift of 12 *mattars* of land made by the officer of the division for the Maṭha and education. The Mahājans of Belur had granted in 1022 A.D., 12 *mattars* for the purpose of feeding and clothing the local students. (24) At Salotgi, as shown already, a local magnate had endowed the college and the inhabitants had levied a voluntary cess as their contribution. At Habale in Dharwar district a private individual had given five *mattars* of land for education in 1084 A.D.

c23.s1.33

The guild at Dambal, which owned 18 cities, is described in a record from the place as maintaining a college. (25) It is, therefore, not unlikely that some of the big guilds of our period may have been either maintaining or supporting educational institutions. The state also used to sanction grants specially and directly for education, in addition to its indirect help given by the creation of the *agrahāras*. The Bahur plates of Nṛpatuṅgavarman record a grant of three villages for the maintenance of a college, made by the king at the request of his minister. (26)

Section B : Literature

c23.s2.1

A detailed discussion about the dates of the various authors of our period, or an enquiry into the problem connected with the authorship of some of the works composed in it, is obviously not within the scope of the present work. The reader will have to consult the standard works on literary history for that purpose. The general condition of the literature of our period, its main features, the principal writers of the age and their contributions, and how far they were influenced by the spirit of the age would be the main points that will engage the attention of a general historian, and these only will be discussed in the present section.

c23.s2.2

²³ I. A., XII, p. 253.

c23.s2.3

²⁴ *Ibid*, X, p. 129.

c23.s2.4

²⁵ I. A., VIII, p. 185.

c23.s2.5

²⁶ E. I., IV, p. 180.

c23.s2.6

The main energy of the schools and colleges described in the last section was devoted to the study and cultivation of Sankrit; the Canarese literature had begun to flourish in Karnatak, but it is doubtful whether it had reached the stage when it could be recognised as a subject of study in secondary schools and colleges. As to Maharashtra, the Marathi language itself does not make its appearance in epigraphical records till the end of our period:(27) there could hardly have existed much literature in it. Even the late Mr. V. K. Rajwade has admitted that there was hardly any cultured literature in it till the end of the 10th century A.D. (28)

c23.s2.7

A glance at the inscriptions of our period is sufficient to indicate the firm hold of the kāvya or classical style of writing upon the Deccan of our period. All the merits and defects of that style are reflected in our epigraphs. The composers of our grants were no doubt poets of mediocre ability, but they had carefully studied standard works of the classical Sanskrit literature. Kielhorn has shown how the poets, who have composed the s'āsanas of the Rāṣṭrakūṭas were greatly indebted for their expressions to works like the Vāsavadattā of Subandhu and Kādambarī and Harshacharit of Bāṇa. (29)

c23.s2.8

27. Rajwade's contention that the language existed in the 5th century A.D., is untenable; the inscriptions he refers to are either forged or do not contain any Marathi passages.
28. Rajwade, Jnyanes'vari', Introduction, p. 62.

c23.s2.9

The author of the Kadba plates of Govinda III (30) imitates in the prose portion of the record the style of Bāṇa. The general impression left on our mind after a perusal of the epigraphical poetry is that if it is not of the first order, the reason is rather the lack of Pratibhā or poetic genius than that of abhyāsa or practice according to approved model. It is further interesting to note that most of our epigraphical poetry is in the Vaidarbhī style, the Gauḍī hardly makes its appearance. The significant fact would show that the names like Vaidarbhī, Gauḍī and Pāñchālī, that were given to various poetic styles owed their origin to actual literary fashions of the provinces concerned.

c23.s2.10

Modern research has succeeded in determining the dates of several writers in Sanskrit literature, but it has not been equally successful in discovering their home provinces. Kumārila, Śankara, Sarvajnātman and Vāchaspati in the realm of philosophy, Lalla and his pupil Āryabhaṭṭa II in the sphere of astronomy, and Kāmandaka, and probably Śukra (31) in the domain of the political science flourished in our period. But some of these certainly did not belong to our province, and the home of others is not known; so a discussion about them is hardly relevant in the present work. The same is the case with most of the later Smritis and Puranas. It has been already shown in several places in chapter XIII how the theories and practices recommended in these works had a remarkable hold on the Deccan of our period. It is clear that the Smritis and Puranas of our age were in close sympathy with it, and that the two were mutually influencing each other.

c23.s2.11

³⁰ E. I., IV, p. 340.

c23.s2.12

³¹ The reference to guns and gun-powder in this book may only show that some portions in it are interpolations. The book as a whole seems to be not much later than our age.

c23.s2.13

It was during our period that the literature on poetics flourished luxuriantly in the beautiful valley of Kashmir. The rugged Deccan had, however, hardly any contribution to make to that department. The *Sarasvatīkaṇṭhābharaṇa* of Bhoja and the *Kāvyānuśāsana* of Hemachandra belong to a later period and are besides mere compilations. The *Kavirājamārga* of Amoghavarsha shows that works of poetics were studied in the Deccan during our period, for the work is mainly based on the *Kāvyādarśa* of Daṇḍin;³² but no Deccanese writer came forward with any distinctive contribution of his own to that science.

c23.s2.14

³² E. I., IX, p. 28.

c23.s2.15

Hindu Sanskrit writers, having any compositions of permanent value to their credit, are indeed few in our period. The colophon of the Benares edition of the *Karpūramañjarī* of Rājaśekhara describes the author as the crest jewel of Mahārāṣṭra, but this province can hardly claim that poet since he spent most of his life at Kanauj or Tripuri. Dr. D. R. Bhandarkar has shown that Trivikrama, the author of the *Nalachampū*, is identical with the Trivikrama, who has composed the Begumra plate of Indra III, dated 915 A.D.³³ The *Nalachampū* is the earliest of the extant champūs, and therefore, the Deccan may perhaps claim to be the first in that field. The *Kavirahasya* of Halāyudha was composed in the reign of Kṛṣṇa III. The poem is really a *dhātupāṭha* explaining the conjugational peculiarities of roots having the same form, but the verses also contain a eulogy of the Rāṣṭrakūṭa emperor Kṛṣṇa III.³³ The work, therefore, belongs to the class of *Bhaṭṭikāvya* and *Rāvaṇārjunīya*. The *Udayasundarīkathā* of Soḍhala, a Kāyastha from Valabhi, was composed towards the close of our period under the patronage of Mummunirāja, a king of Konkan.³⁴ These are the only Hindu Sanskrit works that can be undisputedly ascribed to the Deccan of our period. The output is indeed poor both in quantity and quality.

c23.s2.16

³³ Winternitz, *Geschichte*, III, p. 72; B. G. I., ii, p. 208.

c23.s2.17

³⁴ Keith, *History of Sanskrit Literature*, p. 136.

c23.s2.18

Many Rāṣṭrakūṭa emperors like Amoghavarṣa I, Kṛṣṇa and Indra III were either themselves Jains or patrons of that religion; the same was the case with many of their feudatories and officers as shown in chapter XIII.³⁵ It is, therefore, no wonder that the contribution of Jainism to literature should have been considerable. Haribhadra flourished by the middle of the 8th century A.D., but his works cannot be considered here as his province is not known. Samantabhadra, the author of the Āptamīmānsā, which contains a most interesting exposition of the Syādvāda, flourished before our period, but several commentaries were written on his work in the Deccan from the middle of the 8th century A.D. onwards. Akalankadeva's commentary Aṣṭas'ati was written early in the Rāṣṭrakūṭa period. S'ravana-Belgola inscription No. 67 refers to Akalankadeva as describing his own greatness to Sāhasatunga who, it is conjectured, may have been Dantidurga. There is a tradition to the effect that Akalankadeva himself was a son of Kṛṣṇa I,³⁶ but more evidence would be required to accept it as historical. Vidyānanda, the author of Aṣṭasahasrī, which is a more exhaustive commentary on the Āptamīmānsā, flourished a little later. He is mentioned in S'ravana Belgola inscriptions.³⁷

c23.s2.19

³⁵ Ante, pp. 310-4.

c23.s2.20

³⁶ Peterson's Report, No. 2, p. 79.

c23.s2.21

³⁷ E. C., II, No. 254.

c23.s2.22

The Jain contribution to logic in our period is not inconsiderable. Māṇikyanandin, who flourished in the latter half of the 8th century is the author of a work on logic called Parīkṣāmukhasūtra,³⁸ which was commented upon by Prabhācandra in the first half of the 9th century. Besides writing this commentary which is named as Prameyakāmalamārtaṇḍa this writer has also written *Nyāyakumudachandrodaya*. Another Jain writer on logic of this period is Mallavādin, who was probably the founder of a Jain Digambara monastery at Naosari which is no longer in existence. The Surat plates of Karkka Suvarṇavarsha which I am editing, (E. I., XXI), record a grant to his des ciple’s des ciple given in 821 A.D. This author wrote a commentary called *Dharmottaratippaṇaka* on the *Nyāyabinduṭīkā* of Dharmottarāchārya.³⁹ That a book on logic written by a Buddhist should have been commented upon by a Jain is quite in consonance with the spirit of harmony that prevailed in our period.

c23.s2.23

³⁸ Vidyabhushna, A History of Indian Logic, p. 179.

c23.s2.24

³⁹ Ibid, pp. 194-5.

c23.s2.25

Quite a galaxy of Jain writers flourished in the court of the Jain emperor Amoghavarsha I, who was well known for several centuries as a great patron of literature.⁴⁰ Jinasena, his spiritual preceptor, is the author of *Harivans'a*, which was finished in 783 A.D. He has placed the workers in the field of Ancient Indian history under great obligation by mentioning the contemporary kings that flourished in that year in the colophon of this work. He did not live to finish his *Adipurāṇa*, which had to be completed by his des ciple Guṇachandra, who was the spiritual preceptor of Lokāditya, the governor of Banavasi 12000.⁴¹ The *Adipurāṇa* is a Jain work dealing with the lives of Jain Tīrthankaras and saints. In his *Pārs'vābhyudaya* Jinasena has performed the wonderful feat of utilising each line of the love-poem *Meghadūta* for narrating the life of the Jain saint Pārśva. The concluding line of each verse in Jinasena’s poem has been borrowed from the successive stanzas of the *Meghadūta*. The *Amoghavṛtti* of S'ākaṭāyāna,⁴² a work on grammar, and the *Gaṇitasārasangraha* of Vīrāchārya,⁴³ a work on mathematics, were also composed in the reign of Amoghavarsha I. The *Kavirājamārga*, the first work in the Canarese on poetics, has been attributed to this emperor, but whether he was himself its author or merely its inspirer, is still a matter of controversy.⁴⁴ The authorship of the *Pras'nottaramālā* is also in dispute, as it has been variously attributed to S'ankarāchārya, Vimala, and Amoghavarsha I. The colophon of the Tibetan translation of this booklet shows, as Dr. F. W. Thomas has pointed out, that Amoghavarsha was believed to be its author at the time it was rendered into the Tibetan.⁴⁵ It is, therefore, very likely that he was its real author.

c23.s2.26

⁴⁰ I. A., 1904, p. 197.

c23.s2.27

⁴¹ I. A., XII, p. 216.

c23.s2.28

⁴² I. A., 1914, pp. 205 ff.

c23.s2.29

⁴³ Winternitz, Geschichte, III, p. 575.

c23.s2.30

⁴⁴ I. A., 1904, pp. 199.

c23.s2.31

⁴⁵ J. B. B. R. A. S., XXII, pp. 80 ff.

c23.s2.32

Gangadhāra, the capital of a feudatory Chālukya house in southern Karnatak, was a centre of considerable literary activity by the middle of the 10th century. It was there that Somadeva flourished and wrote his works *Yasastilaka* and *Nitivākyāmṛta*⁴⁶. The first of these works, though sectarian in purpose is of no inconsiderable literary merit; it belongs to the variety of the *Champū* and its author shows considerable skill in the treatment of his theme. The second work is on the science of politics; it has, however, hardly much independent value as it is largely based on the *Artha-s'āstra* of Kauṭalya. The work is, however, almost entirely free from any sectarian tinge and is written from a much higher moral point than the *Arthas'astra* of Kauṭalya.

c23.s2.33

⁴⁶ *Yas'astilakachampū*, p. 419.

c23.s2.34

Karnatak was a great stronghold of Jainism in our period and the Jain authors had not forgotten that the founder of their religion had preached in the vernacular. We, therefore, find a number of Canarese authors in the 10th century, most of whom were Jains. The earliest and foremost among these is Pampa, who was born in 902 A.D. Though a native of Āndhrades'a he became the *ādikavi* of the Canarese literature. His *Ādipurāṇa*, which was finished in 941 A.D., is a Jain work, but his *Vikramārjunavijaya* is a more or less historical work, where he glorifies his patron Arikesarin II as Arjuna.⁴⁷ It is from this work that we get valuable information about the northern campaigns of Indra III in which his feudatory, Arikesarin II, had participated. Asaṅga and Jinachandra are other Canarese writers of this period, who are referred to by Ponna, but whose works are not yet forthcoming. Ponna himself flourished in the third quarter of the 10th century and is said to have been given the title of 'Ubhayakavichakravartin' 'Supreme among the poets of both (i. e. Sanskrit and Canarese) the languages' by Kṛṣṇa III, on account of his proficiency as a poet both in Sanskrit and Canarese. *S'antipurāṇa* is his principal work.⁴⁸ Chāmuṇḍarāya, a Jain general and minister of the Jain ruler Mārasimha II, was the author of the *Chāmuṇḍapurāṇa* which was composed in the 3rd quarter of the 10th century.⁴⁹ Raṇṇa, another Canarese writer of the 10th century, was born in 949 A.D. His *Ajitatīrthankapurāṇa* was finished in 993 A.D.⁵⁰ That Jain religious works of our period should have been mostly composed in the form of Puranas shows the immense influence and popularity of these works in the Deccan of our period.

c23.s2.35

⁴⁷ Karṇātakabhāṣābhūṣaṇa, Introduction, pp. XIII-XIV.

c23.s2.36

⁴⁸ Ibid, p. XV.

c23.s2.37

⁴⁹ E. I., V, P. 175.

c23.s2.38

⁵⁰ E. I., VI p., 72.

c23.s2.39

It is interesting to note that there is hardly any output of Prakrit or Marathi literature during our period. Dhanapāla's Prakrit dictionary, *Paīyalachchhī*, was composed in our period but the author lived in Dhārā, and not in the Deccan, and his work being a dictionary, can hardly come within the category of literature. The Marathi language existed in our period, for the earliest composition in it seems to go back to the 3rd quarter of the 10th century A.D.⁵¹ There is, however, no Marathi literature belonging to our age.⁵² Marathi was not the mother tongue of the Rāṣṭrakūṭas and Jainism, which had given an impetus to Canarese literature, was not very strong in Maharashtra. It is, therefore, no surprise that there should have been no output of the Marathi literature during our period.

c23.s2.40

⁵¹ See Bhave: Mahārāṣṭra-sahitya, Chap. I. It may be, however, pointed out that the inscription 'Śrī-chāmuṇḍarāye karaviyale' on the Gommatesvara statue may not be contemporary with Chāmuṇḍarāya.

c23.s2.41

⁵² The Marathi translation of the *Panchatantra* seems to be slightly more archaic than the *Dnanes'vari*, but it cannot go back to our period. See Joshi, *Marāthi Bhāshechī Ghaṭanā*, p. 58.

Linked texts (47)