The History of Indian Literature c9.76

c9.76

²¹² The date of Śrí-Harsha, of whom Dhávaka is stated in the Kávya-prakáśa to have been the protégé—Kashmír is not here in question—has since been fixed by Hall (Introd. to the Vásavadattá) for the seventh century, rather. Hall, moreover, questions the existence of Dhávaka altogether (p. 17), and is of opinion that he "never enjoyed any more substantial existence than that of a various reading."—This conjecture of Hall's as to the name of the author of the Ratnávalí, in which Bühler also concurred, has since been brilliantly verified. According to Bühler's letter from Śrínagara (publ. in *I. St.*, xiv. 402 ff.), all the Kashmír MSS. of the Kávya-prakáśa read, in the passage in question, *Báṇa*, not Dhávaka, the latter name being altogether unknown to the Paṇḍits there: "As Mammaṭa was a native of Kashmír, this reading is undoubtedly the correct one."—Comp. note 218 below.