XXII INTRODUCTION tolerably full threatment of rhetoric. He says that he only improves upon what other Acharyas blhat preceded him had . laid down *.. Dandin asserts that a profusion of compounds • is the very life of prosct. This dictum has been followed by later prose-writers only too well Bhatti devotes four sargas of his Bhattikavya to the illustra tion of •subjects that properly fall to be treated under rhetoric. He exemplifies more than thirty figures of speech, He wrote in Valabhi nnder a king named Dharasena Pour kings of the Valabhi dynasty bore the name Dharasena. The dates of the four kings fall between about 500 A. D. and 651 A. D. So Bhatti was a predecessor or at least a contemporary of Bhua. In Subandhus Vasavadabt we meet with a number of allusions to rhetoric Subandhu boasts of his skill in composing a work full of Paronomasia on each syllablct. He refers to Srinkhalabandha (a peculiar arrangement of words) and mentions the figures of speecla Upreksha and Akshepak. Bana refers to such puzzles and conundrums as Pradelika and mentions in the introduction to the Harshacharita a few figures of speech scch as Jati (Svabhavokti ), Utpreksha and Sleshan. In the introduc tion to the Kadambar are mentioned the figures Dipaka, Upama, Slesha and Jati. In this brief respe we have shown that, before Bana flourished, Rhetoric had made great progress, though it had not reached perfection .
- ‘किं तु बीजं विकल्पानां पूर्वाचार्येः प्रकल्पितम् । तदेव परिसंस्कर्तुमयमस
त्परिश्रमः । काव्यादर्श II. 2. समासभूयस्त्वमेतद्द्यस्य जीवितम् । काव्यादी . 80,
- सरस्वतदत्तवरप्रसादश्चक्रे सुबन्धुः सुजनैकबन्धुः। प्रत्यक्षरश्लेषमयप्रबन्धविः-
न्यासंवैदग्ध्यनिधिर्नबन्धम् ॥ ई हुलाबन्धो वर्णग्रथनासु उपेक्षाक्षेपौ काव्यालंकारेषु’ वासवदत्ता p. 126. ( Hall). | ‘अक्षरच्युतकमात्राच्युतकबिन्दुमतीगूढचतुर्थपादप्रहेलिकाप्रदानादिभिरे p. 3. of कादम्बरी ( Peterson ); ‘बिन्दुमतीं चिन्तयता प्रहेलिकां भावयता' p. 88. of कादम्बरी.
