2023-02-16 14:49:04 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
70
INTRODUCTION
797=$98, and 633=V96, in spite of which the total falls short of 300.
Finally, Ham 1836 dated A. D. 1844 follows Bik 3277 closely enough to compel
the shifting of 165 to group II.
Utilizing this information, I could now emend my groups as follows:
besides 130, 149, 165 and 161, no. 132* should be shifted to group II, which
might as well receive 74*, 180*; and 38* (also omitted in the lacunary
Mehidpur MS). In view of the fact that I believe C to be a proper version,
nos. 99*, 135*, 139* could go to group II, though 145* might be missing
because of some lacuna at the end. Similarly, as BORI 329 and Punjab 2101
constitute a version, one can relegate 179, 180*, 181* 182*, to the second
group though the sequence suggests another lacuna in the source; this does not
apply to 174*, 175*, 176*, which might be so transferred. Finally, of the
stanzas shown with a star in group II, no. 230 may safely lose its asterisk, and
the Bikaner 3277 evidence helps us with Ham 1836 to remove the star also
from 226 and 324. Stanza 82 must at least be starred.
It might seem that an increase of MS evidence can only lead to the
total erasure of group I, and a corresponding inflation of II, as perhaps of
III, seeing that omissions are bound to increase for the nuclear ślokas whereas
strays will continue to flock in. However, it should be emphasized once again
that this is a superficial conclusion; with more MSS, one can better determine
the number of versions as well as their interrelationship, which would
eliminate asterisks completely from the numbers, and might even enable us
to restore some like 229*, 251* to group I, with the certainty that all those
which then remained in II and III were definitely later additions.
3.7. Testimonia. The secondary evidence in the way of citations in
anthologies is of little direct use in the critical problem. The anthologies, as
well as translations, do give valuable support in locating versions
geographically. The procedure in my case was simple. It was out of the
question to index every work where subhāṣitas occur, and Aufrecht's MS
pratika index, received from the India Office after the war, is so badly
out of date as to be useless. So, I went through all the printed works
generally available by the simple procedure of glancing over the stanzas where
the work itself was not indexed. Incidentally, an index can be misleading, as
for example with manusi vacasi kaye, which is a sloka in the Mahănāṭaka
entirely different from our 19. An unexpected delay of two months after
sending my text to the press allowed a similar examination of several MS
anthologies, mostly at the BORI. These were helpful in culling additions
to group III, and emending corrupt stanzas from isolated MSS.
It is
understood that group III stanzas may occur in other works, but as their
number increased with the number of MSS examined, it was impossible
to trace most of them in the MS anthologies, and even in printed works
except the larger standard collections like BIS., SRB., SRK., SRH., SDK.,
SKM., etc. Comparatively fewer citations can have been missed for the first
two groups.
Among Marathi translations, that of Tuka Brahmānanda, associated
with our X, has yet to be edited property. Kavi Bala's versions, represented
by NS3 and Anandāśrama 624 has never been published. The best known
INTRODUCTION
797=$98, and 633=V96, in spite of which the total falls short of 300.
Finally, Ham 1836 dated A. D. 1844 follows Bik 3277 closely enough to compel
the shifting of 165 to group II.
Utilizing this information, I could now emend my groups as follows:
besides 130, 149, 165 and 161, no. 132* should be shifted to group II, which
might as well receive 74*, 180*; and 38* (also omitted in the lacunary
Mehidpur MS). In view of the fact that I believe C to be a proper version,
nos. 99*, 135*, 139* could go to group II, though 145* might be missing
because of some lacuna at the end. Similarly, as BORI 329 and Punjab 2101
constitute a version, one can relegate 179, 180*, 181* 182*, to the second
group though the sequence suggests another lacuna in the source; this does not
apply to 174*, 175*, 176*, which might be so transferred. Finally, of the
stanzas shown with a star in group II, no. 230 may safely lose its asterisk, and
the Bikaner 3277 evidence helps us with Ham 1836 to remove the star also
from 226 and 324. Stanza 82 must at least be starred.
It might seem that an increase of MS evidence can only lead to the
total erasure of group I, and a corresponding inflation of II, as perhaps of
III, seeing that omissions are bound to increase for the nuclear ślokas whereas
strays will continue to flock in. However, it should be emphasized once again
that this is a superficial conclusion; with more MSS, one can better determine
the number of versions as well as their interrelationship, which would
eliminate asterisks completely from the numbers, and might even enable us
to restore some like 229*, 251* to group I, with the certainty that all those
which then remained in II and III were definitely later additions.
3.7. Testimonia. The secondary evidence in the way of citations in
anthologies is of little direct use in the critical problem. The anthologies, as
well as translations, do give valuable support in locating versions
geographically. The procedure in my case was simple. It was out of the
question to index every work where subhāṣitas occur, and Aufrecht's MS
pratika index, received from the India Office after the war, is so badly
out of date as to be useless. So, I went through all the printed works
generally available by the simple procedure of glancing over the stanzas where
the work itself was not indexed. Incidentally, an index can be misleading, as
for example with manusi vacasi kaye, which is a sloka in the Mahănāṭaka
entirely different from our 19. An unexpected delay of two months after
sending my text to the press allowed a similar examination of several MS
anthologies, mostly at the BORI. These were helpful in culling additions
to group III, and emending corrupt stanzas from isolated MSS.
It is
understood that group III stanzas may occur in other works, but as their
number increased with the number of MSS examined, it was impossible
to trace most of them in the MS anthologies, and even in printed works
except the larger standard collections like BIS., SRB., SRK., SRH., SDK.,
SKM., etc. Comparatively fewer citations can have been missed for the first
two groups.
Among Marathi translations, that of Tuka Brahmānanda, associated
with our X, has yet to be edited property. Kavi Bala's versions, represented
by NS3 and Anandāśrama 624 has never been published. The best known