quently Vatsya
must have lived after him. On the other hand, Virahamihira, in the
eighteenth chapter of his 'Brihatsanhita,' treats of the science of
love, and appears to have borrowed largely from Vatsyayana on the
subject. Now Virahamihira is said to have lived during the sixth century
A.D., and as Vatsya must have written his works previously, therefore
not earlier than the first century, A.C., and not later than the sixth
century A.D., must be considered as the approximate date of his
existence.

On the text of the 'Aphorisms on Love,' by Vatsyayana, only two
commentaries have been found. One called 'Jayamangla' or 'Sutrabashya,'
and the other 'Sutra vritti.' The date of the 'Jayamangla' is fixed
between the tenth and thirteenth centuries A.D., because while treating
of the sixty-four arts an example is taken from the 'Kavyaprakasha,'
which was written about the tenth century A.D. Again, the copy of the
commentary procured was evidently a transcript of a manuscript which
once had a place in the library of a Chaulukyan king named Vishaladeva,
a fact elicited from the following sentence at the end of it:--

"Here ends the part relating to the art of love in the commentary on the
'Vatsyayana Kama Sutra,' a copy from the library of the king of kings,
Vishaladeva, who was a powerful hero, as it were a second Arjuna, and
head jewel of the Chaulukya family."

Now it is well known that this king ruled in Guzerat from 1244 to 1262
A.D., and founded a city called Visalnagur. The date, therefore, of the
commentary is taken to be not earlier than the tenth and not later than
the thirteenth century. The author of it is supposed to be one
Yashodhara, the name given him by his preceptor being Indrapada. He
seems to have written it during the time of affliction caused by his
separation from a clever and shrewd woman, at least that is what he
himself says at the end of each chapter. It is presumed that he called
his work after the name of his absent mistress, or the word may have
some connection with the meaning of her name.

This commentary was most useful in explaining the true meaning of
Vatsyayana, for the commentator appears to have had a considerable
knowledge of the times of the older author, and gives in some places
very minute information. This cannot be said of the other commentary,
called "Sutra vritti," which was written about A.D., by Narsing Shastri,
a pupil of a Sarveshwar Shastri; the latter was a descendant of B