127. 124 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

124 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

occurs the following "तथा विवचितान्यपरवाच्यस्यैव शब्दशकत्युद्धवानुरणन- रूपव्यक्ञयप्रकारसमाश्रयेष नवत्वम्। यथा 'धरणीधारणायाधुना स्वं शेष:' (हर्षचरित IV. para 15 of my edition) इत्यादी 'शेषो हिमगिरिस्त्वं च महान्तो गुरवः स्थिरा:। यदलद्वितमर्यांदाश्वलन्ती बिभ्रते क्ितिम् ॥' (भामह III. 28) इत्यादिषु सरस्वपि तस्थैवार्थशक्त्युद्धवानुरणरूपव्यक्ञयसमाश्रयेष नवत्वम्". In my desire to be fair to the opponents of the theory that Bhmaha was posterior to Dandin I put forward their possible defence on this question for the first time. But I had indicated my own view in such matters by scouting the idea that Dandin's y लक्ष्मी तनोतीति cited above under (w) is taken from the शाकुन्तल. I had not, however, stated my position as clearly and empha- tically as I could and should have done. The purpose of several verses cited by the ध्वन्यालोक in IV. 2-7 is to show that the underlying idea may be one and the same in several verses; but if the poet has pratibha, he can body forth the same idea in such a striking manner that the product of his imagina- tion appears to be new and distinct from that of another. His object is not to declare that a certain poet is earlier or later than another. On IV. 4 the धवन्यालोक (p. 297) cites the verse एवंवादिनि from the कुमारसम्भव (IV. 84) and says that in spite of similar verses such as 'कृते वरकथालापे' the verse of Kalidasa sheds new charm. No one has proved that the verse a वरकथालापे is earlier than कालिदास's. It should further be noticed that almost everywhere on pp. 294-298 the author of the ध्वन्यालोक uses the plural सत्स्वपि. For example, his words on the verse एवंवादिनि are : यथा एवंवादिनि देवर्षो इत्यादि श्रोकस्य 'कृते वरकथा- लापे कुमार्यः पुलकोद्रमः। सूचयन्ति स्पृहामन्तलजजावनताननाः ॥' इत्यादिष सत्स्वपि अर्थशक्त्युद्धवानुरनरूपव्यङ्ग्यस्य कविप्रौढोक्तिनिर्मितशरीरत्वेन नवत्वम् (p.297). These words show that he has several verses in mind that are as charming and striking as एवंवादिनि, but he does not mean that they were all composed prior to Kalidasa's verse. Besides, there is another important consideration. The verse 'arfuyw हत्थिदन्ता occurs in हाल's गाथासप्तशती (Weber's ed. p. 500 verse 668) and is cited on p. 297 of ea-Tro and is said to have ideas similar to the verse करिणीवेहव्वकरो० (and others). But करिणीवेहव्वकरो itself occurs in गाथासप्तशती with the reading गभरव [वेहव्वकरो (गजवधू- वैधव्यकरो) as No.632 on p. 309 of Weber's ed. of 1881) No. question can arise in this case about priority of one verse to another. The same remark holds good in the case of the citations from वाख and भामह and we cannot presume that the