A History of Sanskrit Literature c25.s4.8

c25.s4.8

Other authors remained outside the sphere of the influence of the new doctrine. Thus the section on poetics of the *Agni Purāṇa*,² which is of uncertain date, and Bhoja's large *Sarasvatīkaṇṭhābharaṇa*³ show that other theories were prevalent, though their scope extended to minor issues. The Purāṇa adopts the ordinary definition of poetry as possessing qualities and figures and being free from defects, while Bhoja requires it to possess sentiment, but neither has any effective discussion of the vital character of poetry. The Purāṇa, however, recognizes the doctrine of styles, making four as in Rudraṭa, and combining their marks of distinction so as to include the kinds of letters used, the length of compounds, and the use of metaphor. Bhoja adds two more styles, Āvantikā, intermediate between Vaidarbhī and Pāñcālī, and Māgadhī, which is a defective style (*khaṇḍarīti*). The Purāṇa introduces a new complication in the shape of distinguishing particular and general qualities; the latter are given as seven of sound, six of sense, and six of both, while figures are classed as of sound, of sense, and of both. Bhoja accepts this and gives absurdly twenty-four of each. His extensive citations and authority lent him some popularity without affecting substantially poetic theory. His treatment of sentiment in the *Sarasvatīkaṇṭhābharaṇa* is supplemented by the *Çrṅgāraprakāça* where, as in Rudra Bhaṭṭa's *Çrṅgāratilaka*, the erotic sentiment is made the chief feature.