The author of the Ramabhudaya—his date and identity
Summary
Sunil Chandra Ray’s note investigates the authorship of the Sanskrit drama Rāmābhūdaya, which Anandavardhana, the ninth‑century Kashmiri rhetorician, mentions in his treatise Dhvanyāloka. Anandavardhana attributes the work to a poet named Yaśvārman. However, multiple historical figures bore this name, and Ray seeks to determine which Yaśvārman composed the drama. He notes that Anandavardhana flourished during the reign of Avantivarman of Kashmir (c. 855‑883) and could have known the author personally. Ray dismisses later Yaśvārmans and focuses on earlier candidates: Yaśvārman of Kānyakubja (Kanauj), a 7th‑century king renowned for patronising poets; a Yaśvārman known from a Nalanda inscription; and a Yaśvārman mentioned in Kalhaṇa’s Rājataraṇgiṇī. He argues that the king of Kanauj, while celebrated in the Gāḍhavāho poem, lacks evidence of being a poet himself and is unlikely to have written a sophisticated drama. The Nalanda and Kashmir candidates also lack convincing proof. Ray therefore turns to a lesser‑known Yaşvārman whose verses appear in anthologies like the Kavindravacanasamuccaya and Subhāṣitāvali. This Yaşvārman, possibly identical with the Kashmiri king Śaṇkaravarman (r. 883‑902), may have used Yaşvārman as an alias; Jayanta Bhaṭḍa, a contemporary dramatist, refers to him in the Agamadambara. Ray concludes that the Rāmābhūdaya was likely composed by this poetic Yaśvārman in the late ninth century. He situates the drama within a tradition of Rāmāyana‑themed plays, noting that Bhavabhūti’s Uttarārāmacarita and Abhinanda’s Rāmacarita predate it. The article underscores the challenges of attributing authorship in early Indian literature and illustrates how textual references, inscriptions and anthologies can be combined to identify obscure writers.
AI-generated summary, automatically checked against the article text.
Conclusion
Ray’s investigation suggests that the Rāmābhūdaya was likely composed by a poetic Yaśvārman—probably synonymous with the Kashmiri king Śaṇkaravarman—during the late ninth century. By evaluating competing candidates and analysing literary references, he underscores the complexities of author attribution in early Indian literature. The study illustrates how historical, epigraphic and anthological evidence can converge to illuminate the provenance of little‑known works.