365bet娱乐

may be found in the case of the K膩mas奴tra of V盲tsy膩yana, a work that was originally written for the Devadasis of P膩峁璦liputra during the reign of the Mauryas. Similarly the NS of Bharata was also probably written in this period with the help of earlier materials. In the meanwhile, i.e. between the 2nd century B.C. to the 2nd century A.D., no books were produced and, even though the NS was studied and there were commentaries and notes on them, none of them were available then. Thus a great work of the ancient period has to be studied without any help by way of commentary written by either a contemporary or any one who came soon after the writer of the NS. The absence of the commentaries makes a study of Bharata very difficult. The dramatic theory is also discussed in the books like Dasarupaka, Natyadarpa峁嘺, Sahityadarpa峁嘺 and such later works but they belong to a later period. There are several arguments about the origin of the NS. The argument of M.M. Ghosh is remarkable. His conclusion is based on the following observations. 1. Its vocabulary of Sanskrit points to a period between 500 and 300 B.C.. Quite a large number of words used in it became totally forgotten or are found only in very old works. 2. Metres used in the NS lack in many cases sandhis and allow hiatus in places of internal yati, show the Vedic tradition carried on. 3. Consideration of the figures of speech shows it to be earlier than A艣vagh艒峁�a (100 A. D.). 36