Studies in the Medicine of Ancient India, Part I: Osteology, or the Bones of the Human Body c5.s1.16

c5.s1.16

7. *Mādhava, Dṛḍhabala, and Vāgbhaṭa II.* With regard to the chronological position of the three authors, Mādhava, Dṛḍhabala, and Vāgbhaṭa II, two points are quite certain. In the first place, all three are posterior to Vāgbhaṭa I. This, to start with, is a necessary inference from their attitude, as above explained (clause 6), towards anatomy. But there is positive proof. Mādhava cites Vāgbhaṭa I by name, and also quotes from him anonymously.¹ Dṛḍhabala, though he does not name Vāgbhaṭa I as his authority, quotes from him very frequently.² Also his total of ninety-six diseases of the eye is based on Vāgbhaṭa I’s total of ninety-four (see p. 13). As to Vāgbhaṭa II, according to his own statement,³ his Compendium (Aṣṭāṅga Hṛdaya Saṃhitā) is based on the Summary (Aṣṭāṅga Saṃgraha) of Vāgbhaṭa I, and reproduces it copiously. In the second place, all three are anterior to Chakrapāṇidatta, whose date is about 1060 A. D. The latter names Dṛḍhabala, and expressly specifies the extent of his contribution to Charaka’s Compendium.⁴ He also frequently quotes Dṛḍhabala as the author of the last section (Siddhi Sthāna) of that Compendium.⁵ As to Vāgbhaṭa II, quotations from him, by name, are very numerous in Chakrapāṇidatta’s Commentary on Charaka’s Compendium.⁶ Mādhava’s anteriority to Chakrapāṇidatta necessarily follows from the fact of his preceding (see p. 13) both Dṛḍhabala and Vāgbhaṭa II. These three medical authors, accordingly, must have their place somewhere between the seventh and eleventh centuries A. D.