how we are to read their names. Dr. Tullberg chose to read, according to one MS, which is identical with that used by Professor Wilson, and which Professor Weber calls bad in many ways,” धावकसौमिल्लकविपुत्रादीनां in the prologue. Professor Weber is right in his guess that the reading Dhavak in place of Bhasa[ka], found as it is in one single *bad MS, is a correction coming from a scribe who knew Dhavaka, and not Bhasa[ka]," the lectio difficilior, and must therefore, as is often the case, have substituted it for the latter. Dr Hall (Vâsaudattâ, preface, page 15,) believes that he has come to the conclusion " that the poets whom it [the play] names with Bhâsaka are Râmila and Saumilla." None of the seven MSS., however, which I have collated give either Dhâvaka, as hinted at by Professor Wilson, and adopted by Dr. Tullberg, nor Râmila as added by Dr. Hall. They all unanimously read Saumilla for the second, Bhâsa for the first, and except one (G.) they read simply the honorific मिश्र for the third. Now nothing is known of any of these two or three poets referred to in the prologue. Bhâsaka is nowhere mentioned as a poet. It is a mere gratuitous conjecture that Bhâsaka may be the same as the Bhâsa so much applauded in the introduction‡ of the Harshacharita, and mentioned by Râjaśekhara in the verses quoted from the Śârngadhara-paddhati†
‡सूत्रधारकृतारम्भैर्नाटकैर्बहुभूमिकैः । सपताकैर्यशो लेभे भासो देवकुलैरिव, as quoted by Dr. Hall, Vasavdatta preface, page 14.
†भासो रामिलसोमिलौ वररुचिः श्रीसाहसाङ्कः कविमेंपो भारविकालिदासतरला- स्कन्ध: सुबन्धुश्च यः। &c., Ibid. ppage 20.
