III.-The Lost Ring of Sakuntala-is it a Greek reminiscence ? By Prof. Surendra Nath Majumdar Sastri, M. A. The plot of Sakuntala, like those of the other dramas of Kâlidâsa, Vikramorvasí and Málavīkágnimitra, is not wholly the creation of the dramatist. Bharata, the son of Duḥshanta. (the old form of Dushyanta), is mentioned in a Brahmana which refers to his coronation and Śakuntalâ is mentioned in another as a nymph. (1) Thus it may safely be conjectured that, like the plot of Vikramorvasî, the tale of the love of Sakuntalâ and Duḥshanta dates as far back as the Vedic age. But the Vedic texts do not give any connected account of their love, for which we have to turn to the Mahabharata which narrates the story in the Adi-Parvan (chap. 69-73). The story is there a simple one, Dushyanta goes on a hunting excursion to the hermitage of Kanva, sees Sakuntalâ, falls in love with her at first sight, marries her secretly and returns to his capital. Sakuntalâ gives birth to a child, and after some six years comes to the court of the king to be openly accepted by her royal lover as his legally married queen. But the King now reviews, in his mind, the whole situation and comes to the conclusion that there will be a public scandal if he accepts the lady, the mother of a six-years-old child, as his consort, and feigns not to recognize her. The lady is naturally angry, calls him a scoundrel, curses him and is about to depart, when a divine voice is heard which declares her to be the lawfully married wife of the king and enjoins upon him the duty of taking her back. This is the old (1) Bharata Dauhshanti is mentioned in the Satapatha Brāhmaṇa XIII, 5, 4 and in the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa VIII, 23, 21. Śakuntalâ, an apsaras, the mother of Bharata, is mentioned in the former work at the place cited. (Macdonell and Keith's Vedic Index, s.v. Bharata.) tale which probably was handed down orally from the later Vedic age and which is, doubtless, the source of the Buddhist Birth-story "Katthahari Játaka”. (3) Let us now see how Kâlidâsa has moulded this old tale (3) to develop the plot of his immortal drama. His hero does not feign to forget his sweetheart, but forgets her on account of a curse. And the ever-angry Durvâsas, reputed to have cursed even the Goddess of Fortune, is introduced to curse Sakuntalâ for inattention to her duty on account of her absent-mindedness while under the influence of love. And what is the antidote to this forgetfulness on the part of the hero? Certainly, it is to be a keepsake. And thus is introduced the charming episode of the ring. The hero gave his signet-ring as a memento, and the friends of the heroine reminded her that if he did not recognize her, she should show the ring to him. But the ring was lost, and so Śakuntala could not give any proof that she was the king's lawfully wedded wife. Dushyanta could not recall any thing to his memory on account of the curse of Durvâ- sas. The idea of a ring as a keepsake sent by a lover to authenticate a message is to be found in the Ramayana, Hanumat, the messenger of Râma, brought the latter's signet-ring to Sitâ imprisoned in the 'Asoka-grove' of Ravana and took her crestjewel to Râma. [Kishkindhya, xliv. 12-13, Sundara, xxxvi. 2-3.] And Kâlidâsa might have borrowed the idea from the Rámáyana. But the lost ring of Śakuntala, its being dropped into the water, and its being swallowed up by a fish caught by a fisher-man from whom it would pass, through police officers, into the hands of the hero, have got a peculiar charm. And critics have searched, in vain, for the base metal of an old tale which the alchemy of the supreme poetic genius of Kâlidâsa turned into the (2) Játaka, Vol I, No. 7. (3) The Padmapuráņa and Sivapurâna (which treat of Puranic legends, not as done in other Purânas, but just as narrated in Kâlidâsa's works) are considered by the majroity of the critics of Kalidasa to be later works. Hence no notice of them has been taken here. But an old tale is to be found purest gold of his 'Lost ring. ' in a strange quarter. Herodotus, the father of Greek History, (484-431 B.C.) narrates a similar story in connection with Polycrates (B.C. 532), the king of Samos, one of the principal islands of the Aegean Sea off the cost of Ionia. The story runs thus: Polycrates, King of Samos, concluded with Amasis, King of Egypt, a treaty of friendship, which the two Kings cemented by mutual presents. His power and prosperity increased suddenly and he made Samos the mistress of the Aegean Sea. Being informed of the great prosperity of Polycrates, Amasis felt uneasy on that account and informed his royal friend that too much prosperity was a thing which did not always have a happy end, and advised him to test his lot by throwing away his most valuable possession. Polycrates, following the advice of his friend, searched, amongst all his rarities, for something the loss of which would be felt most by him. He fixed upon the emerald on his gold ring which he was in the habit of always wearing and which served for his seal. Having resolved to get rid of it, he embarked in a vessel. When he was far out, into the sea, from his island-home, he took the ring off his finger and threw it into the deep sea before the ship's crew and returned to his city. As soon as he reached the palace he felt uneasy on account of the loss. After some five or six days, a fisherman having caught a very large fish, thought it to be a worthy present for the king. He brought it to the palace of Polycrates and presented it to him. The king was much pleased with the discourse of the fisherman and invited him to dinner. The fisherman returned to his house being pleased with the reception. Meantime the officers of the kitchen opened the fish, found within it the ring of Polycrates, and hastened to inform the king of it. Polycrates thought it to be a divine miracle and informed Amasis of everything. (4) Here we find an old legend of a king's signet-ring being dropped into water, to be swallowed up by a fish, to be caught by a fisherman and the king's recovery of the lost ring. And (*) Herodotus, Chapter III, 39, 54,120. this legend has been recorded by Herodotus (fifth century B.C.) in connection with a king who flourished a century earlier and was an earlier contemporary of Lord Buddha himself one of whose Birth-stories is the Katthaharî Jâtaka evidently based on the epic form of the tale of Sakuntalâ. Thus we have found a lost ring legend which may be the source from which Kâlidâsa drew his inspiration, and there is no chronological difficulty in accepting the theory. But how was it that the Aegean Sea legend reached far-off India? The clue to the solution of this question has been suggested by Kâlidâsa himself by his introducing Yavanis-or Greek ladies from Ionia off the coast of Samos of Polycrates-as waiting upon king Dushyanta while on his hunting excursion. Kâlidâsa must have introduced them because he actually knew Yavanîs as waiting maids in Indian courts, not, of course, in the time of Dushyanta, but in his own age. And there is independent testimony also. The Periplus of the Erythraan Sea' (1st century A. D.) contains the best account of the commerce carried on from the Red Sea (Erythra) and the coast of Africa to the East time that Egypt was a Roman Province. articles to be presented to the rulers of the different countries to be visited by merchants; and we find, in his list, (*) that the ruler of Barygaza (Skt. Bhṛgukachchha, modern Broach), the greatest port of Western India in those days, is to be satisfied with all articles of luxury, with fine foreign wine, singing boys and beautiful maidens for the harem. (6) This was the case because the country was then not under the sway of any Hindu King. Its rulers at that time were the Saka Satraps who seem to have favoured this importation of white slaves. And these Yavanîs would be the fit persons to introduce folk-tales of Ionia and the Aegean Sea into India. However, it is for scholars to judge whether the legend of the Lost Ring of Śakuntala is a Greek reminiscence or not. (5) Periplus, Schöff's edition, pages 284-88. (*) Ibid, page 42. Indies during the IV.-Kingship in the Jatakas. By Prof. Shivanath Basu, M, A. Early Buddhist records reveal the interesting fact that side by side with monarchical governments there existed in those days republics with more or less modified independence. But what is not generally known is that even in those places where monarchical institutions flourished the kingly power was not absolute. On the contrary the powers and prerogatives of the king were strictly limited in practice, if not by law. The Jātakas contain numerous references which clearly establish this. In the Telapatta Jātaka [. 1. No. 96] we are told that the king of Takkasilā was ensnared by the loveliness of a transformed ogress and took possession of her. She prayed to the king to give her power and authority over the whole kingdom so that nobody might dare to annoy her with taunts. The king replied, "Sweetheart, I have no power over those that dwell throughout my kingdom; I am not their lord and master. I have only jurisdiction over those who revolt or do iniquity. So, I cannot give you power and authority over the whole kingdom." Here we have in a nutshell the powers and privileges of a king: the people were never regarded as his chattels or property; he was not their lord and master. The position of the king was simply that of the first magistrate. His chief duty consisted in the maintenance of peace and order. Instances of deposition and banishment of kings and princes were not rare in the days of the Jātakas. We read in the Saccaṁkira Jātaka that when Brahmadatta the king of Benares died and his son Prince Wicked became king, the Bodhisatta who had once saved the life of the prince went to Benares to put his generosity to the test. Now, the king who was very wicked and cruel, ordered the Bodhisatta to be flogged at every street corner and subsequently to impale |