DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.53502#0037
Introduction
29
(6th cent.) who in two chapters oi his Byhatsamhita,
especially in Ch. 78 on Pumstrlsamayoga, shows him-
self acquainted with the contents of the Ka. The
Paficatantra refers to V. in two passages, according to
some editions, but the Tantrakhyayika, the earliest
version of the Paficatantra, does not contain the name
of V. Nor is the well-known ^passage of the Ka.
about the Andhra king Kuntala Satakari^i Satavahana
having killed his queen Malayavati in an amourous
sport by a stroke at her head (not by a pair of scissors)
capable of furnishing us with a more exact date of the
Ka., because we do not know how long he may
have lived before the composition of the Ka. Chakladar
thinks that from the mention in the Ka. of the Abhiras
and the later Andharas as ruling side by side in the S.
West of India we arrive at the time subsequent to 225
A. D. as the period when V. flourished, this being the
time when the later Andhra kings and the Abhiras ru-
led simultaneously over different parts of W. India.
However, the mere absence of a reference to the posi-
tion of the Andhras as sovereigns exercising suzerain
sway is not sufficient to characterise them as later
Andhras. It will be necessary, therefore, to confine
oneself to the literary data in fixing the age of the
Ka. and these dates, as mentioned before, point to the
fourth century or so.
The A., considering its close alliance with the
Ka., is not likely to have been composed more than
a century earlier at most. If, then, the fourth century
A. D. be taken as the probable date of the Ka., the
A. might have been composed in the third century.
This date of course is not final but may be used as a
working hypothesis and does not differ much from the
29
(6th cent.) who in two chapters oi his Byhatsamhita,
especially in Ch. 78 on Pumstrlsamayoga, shows him-
self acquainted with the contents of the Ka. The
Paficatantra refers to V. in two passages, according to
some editions, but the Tantrakhyayika, the earliest
version of the Paficatantra, does not contain the name
of V. Nor is the well-known ^passage of the Ka.
about the Andhra king Kuntala Satakari^i Satavahana
having killed his queen Malayavati in an amourous
sport by a stroke at her head (not by a pair of scissors)
capable of furnishing us with a more exact date of the
Ka., because we do not know how long he may
have lived before the composition of the Ka. Chakladar
thinks that from the mention in the Ka. of the Abhiras
and the later Andharas as ruling side by side in the S.
West of India we arrive at the time subsequent to 225
A. D. as the period when V. flourished, this being the
time when the later Andhra kings and the Abhiras ru-
led simultaneously over different parts of W. India.
However, the mere absence of a reference to the posi-
tion of the Andhras as sovereigns exercising suzerain
sway is not sufficient to characterise them as later
Andhras. It will be necessary, therefore, to confine
oneself to the literary data in fixing the age of the
Ka. and these dates, as mentioned before, point to the
fourth century or so.
The A., considering its close alliance with the
Ka., is not likely to have been composed more than
a century earlier at most. If, then, the fourth century
A. D. be taken as the probable date of the Ka., the
A. might have been composed in the third century.
This date of course is not final but may be used as a
working hypothesis and does not differ much from the