The influence of Medhatithi on the development of Indian Law is evident
in the subsequent commentaries on Manu, viz., those of Dharanidhara,
Govindaraja and Kuallukabhatta. Kullaka's references, too, prove that Medhatithi was an older authority
The work of Govindaraja is posterior to that of Bhojaraja and belongs
to the vicinity of the 11th century. The Dayabhaga quotes, Govindaraja
Manu-Tika, and Narayana commentary has references to his works; hence he was prior to these writers.
These books cannot be placed later than the 15th century.2
Narayana is a commentator from Western India, and is known for his
Manvarthanibandha or Manvarthavivrti. He differs in many respects from his predecessors.
Narayana is later than Govindaraja, as he alludes to the works of the latter in his book.
His date has been fixed as earlier than 1497 A.D.3
The Manvartha-Muktavali of Kuallukabhatta is the most renowned
commentary on the Laws of Manu. He states in his preface that it was compiled at Benares,
and that Bengal was his native country. Raghunandana is the earliest of the Bengal group
of commentators to quote Kulluka and Jimutavahana, and is believed to be prior to
There is, besides a Kasmirian commentary ; Nandini or
Nandanacharya's commentary is a valuable work, composed by a South Indian author. Thus a
continuous series of commentaries on Manu have been produced from the 8th or 9th century.
Next to Manu, the Smriti that engrossed the attention of the mediaeval
lawgivers is the, Yajnavalkya Smriti. The famous commentary on his work is called Riju
Mitakshara Tika or Riju Sam Mitakshara or Pramitakshara. '