Introduction To Indian Textual Criticism, by S. M. Katre (1941)

INTRODUCTION TO
INDIAN TEXTUAL
CRITICISM
B,
S. M. KA TRE, M.A, Ph.D (London).
PROFESSOR OF INDO-EUROPf;AN PHILOLOGY,
DECCAN COLLEGE POST-GRADUATE AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE, P O O N A ~
EDITOR, NEW INDIAN ANTTQUAR\
WITH
APPENDIX II
B1
P. K. GODE, M.A.,
CURATOR, BHANDARKAR ORIENTAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE, P O O N A ~
JOINT-EDITOR, NEW INDIAN ANTIQUARY
K,j,RN ATAK PUBLISHING HOUSE
BOMBAY
1941
Pnnted by M N KULKARNI, at the KARNATAIC PUN'nHG PUll, Chua Bezu.
Bombay and PubJubed by \um at the K.uHATAK PuBLl8HJNC HoUR,
a. .. a Bazar, JIomba7 2
TO
MY WIFE
.
CONTENTS
CHAP.
Preface
I. Introduction
II Kmds of Texts
III Some Fundamental Aspects of Textual CntlCJsm
IV The Problem of Cntlcal RecenSIon
V Causes of Corruption 10 a Tran9lll1tted Text
VI Emendation
VII Some Canons of Textual CntlCJsm
VIII Practical Hmts OIl the Edltmg of Texts
ApptndJx I
AppendIX II
AppendJ" III
Select BIbliography
Index
PAGES
VlI-X1I1
1-18
19-29
30-34
35-53
54-62
es-:-71
72-77
78-88
89-98
99-128
129-139
139-141
143-148
PREFACE
It was m the year 1937, when Mr P. K. GODE and
I were engaged on founding two monthly Journals m
the Oriental field (the Ortental Ltterary and the
New I ndtan A nttquary ) that we repeatedly requested
Dr. V. S. SUKTHANKAR to enlarge hiS Prolegomena to
the critical editiOn of the Adlparvan of the Maha-
bharata into a full-fledged IntroductiOn to Indian
Textual Criticism. We were deeply consciOUS of the
paucity of critical editiOns of Indian claSSical texts, and
the large number of texts which were bemg pubhshed
everywhere m India shoVi cd very httle acquamtance with
the modern critical methods of edltmg them It was
natural for us to approach one who, by hiS hfe-Iong
labours as well as by hiS critical traimng under one of
the most dlstmgUlshed scholars of Europe, had esta-
bhshed for and Indian textual criticism a unique
reputatiOn m the world of scholarship, and won recog-
mtiOn for the SCientific prmclples of Indian textual
critiCism which he had patiently worked out m the cause
of the Great EpIC Little did I dream at the time that
that task would ultimately fall to my share, and I here
PIa(e on record my regret that the book which should
have been written by Dr SUKTHANKAR With hiS unrival-
led kppwledge of Indian texts IS now bemg substituted
by the present work,-I hope temporardy. I still w\sh
that Dr. SUKTHANKAR would find some leisure from hiS
..
PREFACE
arduous task of editing the Great Epic and bring out a
standard Handbook of Textual Criticism for Indian
classical texts, giving us the advantage of his unique
experience and unrivalled knowledge. In the meantime
the present Introduction is meant as a ' stop-gap'.
With the mcreasing mterest shown by Indian
lIcholars 10 edltmg their ancient claSSICS from manuscripts
preserved in India or abroad, be they 10 Sanskrit,
Prakrit or modern Indian languages, the need of a short
manual giving the main prinCiples of textual criticism
and showmg the proper methods of critical editing IS
greatly felt. With very few exceptlOns the crltlcal editing
of texts in India is lagging behind, and the editors have
neither the trammg nor the proper gUidance to qualify
them for their task.
Some of the European books on textual Criticism
glVe a few hmts, but they take mto account only Euro-
pean condltlOns where the hterary traditlOn has been
better preserved The crItIcal edltlOn of our Great EpIC,
the Mahabharata, by the Bhandark?r Oriental Research
Institute has shown that the sCience ot textual criticism
cl.S developed by Europeans does not solve all our Indian
problems and that certain adaptatIOns are necessary for
our conditions.
The aIm of the present IntroductIon IS to show
With reference to Indian conditions the principal features.
of the sCience of textual criticism, 10 so' far as it cart be
a science, and thus enable future editors to master the
modern method::. of critical edltmg. It is hope j that
when our Umversltles raise the level of Indian claSSical
lItudles to that of classical studies 10 Europe, the subject
PREFACE ix
of textual criticism Will form part and parcel of the
equipment of every scholar In this subject passing
through the portals of the Universities.
In this manner the vast store-house of unpublished
manuscripts still reposing In the archives and llbraries of
India may find the light of day in a critical garb and
Integrate the efforts, both of indIVIduals and of institu-
tions, In bringing the masterpieces of ancient and
medieval India to all scholars In the modern world.
It IS a matter of coincidence that while writing this
short Introduction I am holdmg the chair of Indo-
European Philology In the Deccan College Research
Institute. It IS too well-known to need specific mention
here that the Deccan College became the repository of
the manuscripts collected by the Government of Bombay,
chiefly through the agency of the Professors of San'lkrlt
10 this college, and with the estabhshlng of the Bhandar-
kar Oriental Research Institute the entire Government
Collection was transferred to that Institute. The work
of collection spcead over half a century, and part of
these Mss. have been critically or otherWise edited; but
the large number of Mss. which are sttll unedited demand
the co.:certed labours of generations of scholars I hope
and pray that this short may induce some
of our promising young scholars to edit critically a few
df the important texts which otherwise Will remain
unnoticed for the simple reason that they are not avail-
able In rellable editions. If thiS Introduction serves that
bttle purpose my object in writing it Will be served, and
a beginning made to appreciate the great labours of loch
eminent scholars like the late Sir Ramakrishna Gopal
x PREFACE
BHANDARKAR and Professors BUEHLER and KIELHORN,
to mention a few only. In this sense I consider the
present work as a small offermg to their memory.
There IS no claim to origmahty in this work ; the
labours of my predecessors have amply provided mc
With all the material I needed, and I have mdicated the
major works which I have constantly referred to In the
sectIOn on blbhography But to SUKTHANKAR'S Prole-
gomena, POSTGATE's two brillIant articles on textual
cnttcI!tm contnbuted to the Encyclopaedta Bntanmca and
the Companton to Latin Stud,es and JEBB'S article on
the same subject m the Compamon to Greek Studtes and
finally to HALL'S Compamon to Classtcal Studtes I am
partIcularly mdebted The extent, of my mdebtednes ..
cannot be measured m terms of references to these works
m the footnotes ; and I have read and consulted them
so often that much of their thoughts and expres:Jlons and
even sentences have crept In unconscIOusly m my own
wrItmg. It IS meet, therefore, that I should render my
special thanks to these authors at this juncture.
There is much work to be done 'vlth reference to
textual criticism m IndIa The eXlstmg DescrIptive
Catalogues give us a good deal of mformatIon about the
Mss, but we have no hIstory of Mss., or even an
attempt towards lmkmg up the different exemplars of a
~ I v e n text One of the most urgent needs of the sCience
IS thIS aspect of a cntIcal catalogue of Mss. givmb
stemmata codicum of all the texts, a work whIch requires
the co-operatIOn of a large body of scholars working
under a central orgamsation. Perhaps the permanent
body of the AlI-India OrIental Conference may at some
future date undertake this responsibility In the mean-
PREFACE XI
time I would hke to appeal to readers of this book to
commence the work and publish their papers 10 the
various Oriental Journals now 10 eXistence, side by side
With their editorial activities.
There are many thmgs lacking 10 the present work.
One of the Important aspects IS concerned With palaeo-
graphy, and parttcularly With the characters in each
script which are hable to more than one mterpretatton
10 the scribe's proneness to errors of a Visual nature
But as I have reserved this study of Historical Palaeo-
graphy of Indian Manuscrtpts for a separate treatise, I
have eschewed It from the present work. If ever a
~ e c o n d editIon becomes necessary I hope to revise till!>
work 10 the hght of further suggestIOns, and make It
even more useful than It IS at present.
There no" remains to me the pleasant duty of
acknowledging the help I have received 10 the executIOn
of thiS work First and foremost I have to thank Dr. V.
S. SUKTHANKAR ",hose constant gUidance and collabora-
tlOn 10 the many tasks which I set before myself have
ever been a source cf msplratlOn to me But for him I
1
would not have ventured to enter thiS field Whatever
good pomts there may be 10 thiS work are mostly due to
him, but for any shortcomings I alone am responsible He
has not only read the ortgmal typescript of thiS work
and made valuable suggestIOns and saved me from a
number of errors, but has al"o gone over the proofs
To my colleague and Inseparable compamon, Mr. P. K.
GODE, I have never looked 10 vam for help and
encour2gement HIS ready co-operatlOr. has added a
valuable chapter to thiS work in the shape of Appendix
II, and he has read over the proofs and helped me in
xii PREFACE
every possible way. The eight years of our acquaintance
have been the most fruitful in our lives, and since 1937
our joint labours for the cause of Indology have found
shape in much editorial activity. I cannot thank him
enough for his goodness and collaboration which have
made possible many of the ambitious projects which I
mitiated and brought to a successful conclusion.
My thanks are also due to Prmclpal R. D.
KARMARKAR for his constant encouragement while I was
servmg as Professor of Sanskrltic Languages 10 the S P.
College and for placing at my disposal many maccessible
publications since I have known him. To Qr. 1. J. S.
TARAPOREWALA I have to express my special thanks for
lettmg me have the free use of 'lis personal hbrary ;
slmtlarly Dr. P. M. JOSHI kept at my disposal for as
long as I required most of the books needed by me from
the UniverSity Library, and I hereby tender him my
most sincere thanks
Above all I have to offer my thanks to Mr. M. N.
KULKARNI of the Karnatak Pubhsl-ting House, and the
Karnatak Printmg Press for giving this excellent appear-
ance to the work. Both as Publishers and Printers of
the New Indian Ant,quary they have upheld their great
tradition for artistic printing and special regard for
scholarly endeavours in the face of uneconomic produc-
tion, and it IS mdeed a pleasure to me to dedicate the
present work to the noble cause which they have
undertaken. *
The sale proceeds of tins work will be devoted to the promotiOl)
of the New Indicm Antiquary
PREFACE xiii
Fmally I have to acknowledge my indebtedness to
the University of Bombay for the substantial financial
help It has granted towards the cost of the pubhcation
of this book
Vljayadasaml
30th September, 1941
Deccan College Research Institute,
Poona.
S. M. KATRE
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Textual cntlClsm has naturally to deal with texts It may
be defined as 'the skilled and methodical exercise of the human
tnte1lect on the settlement of texts By a text we under-
stand a document wntten m a language known, more or less,
to the mqulrer, and assumed to have a meanmg which has
been or can be ascertamed" 1 Such being the case, It will be
appropnate, m order to clanfy the nature of the problems con-
frontmg a textual cntlc, to begm With a sketch of the hiStory
.of textual tranSnllSSlon m India up to the penod when pnntlng
was mtroduced
Smce a text Implies, accordmg to the above defimtlon, a
wratten document, the knowlE,!dge of wntlng has to be presumed
for the basis of our study Until the discovery of Harappa
.and MohenJo Daro culture, the antiquity of wntmg did not seem
to go back to a very' early age m India, smce the earliest wntten
documents apparently did not reach back beyond the fourth cen-
tury Be although lIterary evidence, especially that denved from
Greek sources, pomted to the currency of wntmg at least a century
J
earlier So far no documents have been discovered either at
Harappa or at Mohen)o Daro, but a large number of seals and
seallngs and pottery fragments are found to contam mscnptlons
m a scn1-t Which has not so far been sua:essfully and oonVtnC-
mgly decIphered The mscnptlons are qUite short Copper tablets
are also found With mscnbed wntmg Mmute characters are
on certam bangles of Vltnfied clay II On thiS eVidence
Sir John MARSHALL remarks 'In the absence of other materials
like clay tablets, we must Infer that the Indus scnbes, m the
place of clay, employed less durable matenals, sqch as birch-bark,
1 POSTAGE In Companwn to LatJn Studies, p 791
2 MiARSHALL, MO'hen,o Daro, I 40
2 INDIAN TEXTUAL CRITICISM
palm-leaves. parchment. wood or cotton cloth. any of which
would naturally have penshed 10 the course of the ages'
In hiS mteresbng book on the Indus Cwd,sat,on. MACKAY
remarks. foIlowmg the lead of Sir John MARSHALL The scnpt
appears very much the same on all the objects. Irrespective of
whether they were unearthed at hIgh or low levels of the two
clbes A dIfferent or more cursIVe style of wntmg may. of
course. have been used for ordmary occaSions, though there IS
at present no eVIdence to prove thiS The complete absence of
any long documents suggests that the wntmg matenals 10 general
use were leather, wood, or even possibly leaves. all of which have
long smce penshed 10 the damp and salty S0114 Certam thm
pottery plaques, rectangular 10 shape With a perforated lug at
one end, may have been mtended for wnbng tablets They are
of small SIZe, rangmg from four to seven mches 10 length. and
were doubtless once covered With a smooth substance from whIch
the wntmg could be washed, after tht fashion of the wooden
tablets sttU used 10 India; Pot-marks are not common at
Mohenjo Daro, although more frequent at Harappa, and when
found on the former site are scratched on the of large
jars In thiS case the marks take the form of characters on the
seat-amulets, but, strangely enough, no potsherd IS known With
any long mscnptlon upon It, unless very soluble 10k was used that
has vaOlshed 10 the course of centunes '6 one sherd has, how-
ever. come to lIght at Mohenjo Daro on Jne Side of which IS
roughly scratched the picture of a boat. and on the reverse a
couple of pictographic characters'7 Further on he remarks
Only one specimen of a thenomorphlc jar has come to hght,
and thiS IS 10 the shape of a couchant ram With a deep hoUow
10 the back. which may have served as an 1Ok-well'8 It IS
apparent from thiS diSCUSSion that although we have no exact
knowledge of the Indus scnpt or the possible wntmg mater.al:.-
used by the Indus scnbes. the exiStence of wntmg dunng the
penod IS beyond doubt
------ - ---- ---
a lind., 35.
, Indus C,vlllsatlon, p. 13
5 Ibid, 139
6 Ibid, 155.
1 Ibid, 155.
8 Ibid . 157.
INTRODUCTION s
Another fact connected With MohenJo Daro but strangely
onutted from the offiCial reports IS the discovery of a Piece of
Silver. bearing the number DK 1341 (N S 9). made by Rao
Bahadur (then Mr) K N. DIKSHIT. on the 1st of January 1926.
on both Sides of which he noted the occurrence of cuneiform
punches 1) TIns Silver piece IS the earhest known cuneiform m-
scnptlon or wntlng found In India. and will form part of the
work of a future palaeographlst who will have to revISe the now
claSSical treatise of BUHLER 111
Such bemg the case. how comes It that there IS no specific
mention of wntIng to be found m Indian literature followmg the
Indus Valley ClvlbsatIon? The problem m India IS fraught With
difficulties smce even for the modem Hindu. the Vedas and Sfistras
exiSt only In the mouth of the teacher,' whose word has more
weight than a wntten text. and they can only be learnt from
teachers. not from manu'lCnpts (Mss) or books Even today
the Hindus esteem only the mukkostha vuJyii. the learning which
the Pandlt has Imprinted on h}s memory As BUHLER says even
the modem poets do not Wish to be read. but hope that their
verses will iJecome .. ornaments for the throats of the learned"
(sota", kontkobhU$antn) " Accordmg to the same scholar, as
far as our observation reaches. thiS state of things has always
been the same smce the earbest times,' but we cannot agree With
him when he says t h ~ t 'Its ultunate cause probably IS that the
beginning of the Hindu lsastras and poetry goes back to a time
when wntmg was unknown. and that a system of oral teachmg.
already traceable m the Rgveda, was fully developed before the
mtroductlc.l of wntten characters,'12 Since the eXistence of wntten
characters before thiS penod IS now proved by the MohenJo Daro
and Harappa seals and amulets But the penod between the
I'ldus Valley pICtographic alphabet and the Mauryan characters
of the Br3hmi or K h a ~ t h i type IS a dark one m Indian hIStory
although efforts are not lacking to connect these two Professor
1) I am mdebted to Prof D D KosAMBI for thiS mformation.
10 IfIIliseM PolIIeogrtIPhie. Strassburg, 1896.
11 lind. p. 4 11 Ibid
LANGDON m8kes out a case for denving the early Brihmi alpha-
bet from the Indus scnpt, but untIl the gap is bridged by fresh
dlscovenes, and until the dark penod has been Illuminated by
the unravellJng of the Indus script Itself, such theories wall re-
malO 10 the field of speculatIon only
LIterary eVIdence for the use of wntmg IS to be found JD
Brahmamcal, BuddhIst and Jam lJteratures, but as the chronology
of these works IS not deterrmnable exactly, we have to conSIder
the eVIdence found 10 foreign dated sources to be more Important
To the last quarter of the fourth century B c refers the stat&-
ment of Nearchos, accordmg to whIch the HlOdus wrote letters
on well beaten cloth, and the note of Q CurtJus, WhIch mentions
the tender Inner bark of trees as servlOg the same purpoee, and
dearly polOts out to the early utIlJsatIon of the well-known blrch-
bark '13 These statements lOdicate the currency of wnting in India
on two different mdlgenous matenals nunng s c 327-25 SImI-
larly the results of palaeograpruc examInatIon of the most ancIent
IndIan lOscnptIons (other than those found at MohenJo Daro
or Harappa) fully agree With the lIterary evidence, WhIch. bears
WItness to the Widely spread use of wnt10g dunng the fifth
century s.c and perhaps even earlJer, as we know It
The study of the development of the wntten characters dunng
the entIre evolutIon of wntIng 10 IndIa, from the Indus Valley
clvlhsatJon to the Brahmi and Khal'O$tili and to their later forms
must form part of a separate treatIse on IndIan palaeography,
and await the deCIpherment of the Indus scnpt For the later
scnpts BUHLER'S excellent monograph on the subject may stall
be consulted
Among the wntIng matenals used by the HlOdus may be
menboned the followmg .
(0) BIrch-bark or the lOner bark of the BhiirJa tree w}ucJ}
the Himalaya produces 10 great quantity, probably already alluded
to by CurtJus as a wntmg matenal used at the time of Alexander's
invasion, and l ~ t e r named as such. 10 Northern Buddhist and
Brahmamcal Sansknt writing The oldest documents yet dls-
18 Ibad, p. 6.
INTRODUCTION 5
covered, written on thls material, are the KharO$thi Dhammapada
from Khotan and the mscrIbed twiSts' tied up With threads
which MASSON discovered m St11pas m Afghanistan Next oome
the fragments of the Godfrey Collections and the Bowe'i" Manu-
scnpt, the leaves of whlch have been cut acoordmg to the SIZe of
the palm-leaves, and lIke these, pierced m the middle In order
to pass a stnng through to hold them together Next m age IS
the Bakhshah Manuscnpt, and then follow 'after a conSiderable
mterval the birch-bark Mss from Kashmir m the lIbrarIes of
Poona, Lahore, Calcutta, London, Oxford, Vienna and Berlm,
none of which are probably earher than the 15th century A D
( b ) Cotton cloth, mentioned by Nearchos, IS also referred
to by some metrIcal Smrtls and several mscnptlons of the Sita
viihana period, as matenal on which offiCial and prIvate docu-
ments were WrItten, and which IS called fJtJIa, PaI.kii or kiirpQs.ka
pata Accordmg to BUPNELL and RICE, Kanarese traders stili
use a kmd of cloth called kodatam, which IS covered With a paste
of tamannd seed and afterwards blackened With charcoal The
letters are wntten With chalk or steatite ,pencil, and the wrltmg
IS white or olack
BUHLER found a silk band vHth the lIst of the Jam S11tras.
wntten m 10k at Jesalmlr, whIle PETERSON discovered a Ms
wntten on cloth dated Vlkrama Samvat 1418 (A D, 1351-52)
at AnahIlvad Patan J In 'the' Ya-men' rum STEIN discovered. a
stnp of white sIlk mscnbed With KharO$thi, and at the anCient
temples of Mlran he found three large pieces of fine coloured sIlk
With KharO$thi mscnpbons Another specimen was found by
him at the Jade Gate', With Similar characters, whIle at the
Great Magazme of th{' Limes he found a narrow strIP of sIlk
beanng a long hne 10 India Briihmi character of a type asso-
With the rule of the Indo-Scythian or Kushana Emperors.
(c) Wooden boards are referred. to 10 Vmayapltaka and the
Jiitakas An mscnptlon of the Western NahapAna
speaks of boards (phol4ka) 10 the gulldhall, on '7hlCh agreements
regardIng loans were recorded Mss on varrushed board. are
common m Burma and an Indian Ms of thiS type, harlIng from
Assam, IS m the possession of the Bodleian L.Drary at Oxford.
(d) Palm-leaves as wnting material are referred to by
Hsuan-Chuang (7th cent AD), but their use seems to go back
to a mlch earlIer penod
The HOrIUZI palm-leaf Ms certamly goes back to the sixth
century, and some fragments 10 the Godfrey Collection from
Kashgar have been aSSigned, on palaeographlc evidence, to the
fourth century, and are older than the Bower Ms Smce the
bhUr/.pottra leaves of the Bower Ms are cut accordmg to
the Size of the palm-leaves, which IS also the case With the
Taxlla Copper-Plate grant belongmg to a penod not later than the
first century AD, It follows that the palm-leaves must have been
10 use even at thiS early penod 10 the PanJab, hundreds of mlles
away from the Deccan,' which was the natural home of the
palm-leaf Their length vanes between one and three feet and
their breadth between one and a quarter to four mChes
The palm-leaf Mss of India are made from the leaves of
Corypho umbracul,Jera or Borassus fiabeU,Jera, the former IS
mdlgenous 10 India but the latter ,was probably mtroduced from
Afnca The leaves of both these trees are long and tapenng.
With central nbs By an exhaustive exammatlOn of the well-
known palm-leaf Mss HOERNLE came to the oonoluslOn that all
the earher palm-leaf Mss are made from the leaves of Corypha
The numerous palm-leaf Mss frorr the Honuzi Ms down-
wards prove that smce anCIent tImes they were wntten on With
10k all over Northern, Eastern, Central and Western IndIa. 10
the DraVIdian distrIcts and 10 Onssa, the letters were, and sttll
are, lOosed WIth a stilus and afterwards blackened WIth soot or
charcoal All palm-leaf Mss are pierced either WIth one hole.
usually 10 the middle, more rarely, 10 speCImens from Kashgar,
on the left, or WIth two holes on the left and the nght, through
whIch stnngs (:.;;tro or sarayontrako) are passed 10 ordet to
keep the leaves together
( e) From a reference 10 Subandhu's V iisavatSattti
1
.. It IS
tnferred that skms were used for wntmg, but 10 VIew 0
1
Its ritual
impunty, thiS mference, so far as Hmdu wntings are concerned,
1& lnd.sche Jialaeogftl,,'ue. p 78
INTRODUCTION
7
is a hWe hazardous In the European collections. pieces of leather
from Kashgar mscnbed with Indian characters are said to exist.
Ounng his epoch-makmg expedition 10 Chmese TUmstan STEIN
(now Sir Aurel) discovered at Nlya about two dozen
<locurnents on leather mostly dated and apparently official, the
matenal used for wntmg bemg little suspected among a Buddhist
population With an Indian CIVIlisatIOn In thiS conneetlon
Vmcent SMITH, (10 hiS short note contnbuted to JRAS 1902,
232 ff) refers to Strabo (xv, 72, 73 translated by McCRINDLE,
AnCIent IndUJ o.s. descnbed by StrOOo, p 71) who has preserved
a notice of an Indian official document on parchment sent to
Augustus Ceaser who died 10 AD 14 Thus the use of leather or
parchment does not altogether seem to be outSIde the scope of
early Indian scnbes 10 spite of the ntual Impunty attached to It
(1) Metals are not only referred to 10 Indian literature, but
many of the Important brants are found to be mscnbed on metal
plates Gold and SIlver plates have been utilized for wntmg and
specimens of votive mscnpboGs have been discovered 10 the Stiipas
at Gangu near Taxda and at BhaJt;tlprolu More numerous than
these are the copper-plates (tiimrapata. tiimrapattra, tiimrasiisQfto
or Simply tamra) used for vanous kmds of documents mtended
to last, and especially land-grants Fa-hlan (about 400 AD) refers
to copper-plate grants handed down from Buddha's time, the
Soghaura plate tells 61S t1.at dunng the Maurya penod offiCial de-
crees were committed to copper This plate has been cast 10 a
mould of sand, mto which the letters and the emblems above
them had been previously scratched With a stIlus or a pomted
Piece of wood Hence both the letters and the emblems appear on
the plate m rehevo All other copper1>lates have been fasluoned
With the hammer, and many among them show distinct traces of
blows Their thickness and Size vary conSiderably. some bemg
()n very thm sheets which could be bent double and wClghmg only
a few ounces, whIle others are exceedmgly massive and are 'lght or
nine pOt."lds 10 weight or even heaVier Their S)ze IS partly deter-
muled by the nature of the wntmg matenal commonly used In
dlstncts where they were ISSUed ongmally, and partly by the extent
()f the document to be engraved, the Size of theJclerk's writing and
)
so forth. The srmths always lIrutated the ongmals given them.
and consequently If these were on palm-leaves, the plates were
made narrow and long; and If they were on bIrch-bark, the plates
became IDlch broader, often almost SQuare The narrow plates
are characterIstic of Southern IndIa and the broader ones of
places further north If more than one plate was requIred, the
several plates were usually connected by copper rmgs passed
through round holes 10 the plates The smgle nng IS found 10 the
south Vanous copper statues show votive mscnptlons on their
bases.
(g) Stones of the most vanous kmds, round and artificIally
smoothed blocks of basalt or trap, as well as artistically carvoo
columns of sandstone, or even pnsms of crystal, have been used
for makmg documents since the most ancient times, such wnt-
mgs vary from offictal and pnvate documents to even poetical
effuSIons Large fragments of plays ~ y the cahamana kmg
Vigraha IV, and by hiS poet-laureate Somadeva, have been found
at AJmer, and a large Jama Sthalapuriina m a number of sargas
exists at BIJholh
(k) Bncks on whIch Buddhtst Satlas are mscnbed have
been found 10 the North-Western Prov1Oces The characters
were apparently scratched on the mOIst clay before It was baked.
(,) Paper M'ss are generally not older than the thIrteenth
century A D It IS very doubtful If a n ~ of t}1e ancient Mss from
Kashgar whIch are wntten on' a pecubar paper, covered With a
layer of gypsum, are of Indian ongin HOERNLE was of op1Oloo
that all of them were wntten 10 Central ASIa Much rema10S
to be done In the case of paper M'ss So far there has not been
any conSIstent or sustamed effort at the study of the material
of these Mss as It comes down to us from different centres and
through different penods A study 10 thiS directIon may enaHe
us, for'1Ostance, to fix wlthm reasonable bmlts the dates of given
paper Mss; by a study of Its composItIon, appearance, Size and
water-marks, .f a'lY, the paper on which Mss are wntt.en may
lend itself to chronological claSSIficatIon, and act as an Indepen-
dent Witness as to the age of the Mss by the Side of palaeography.
In a sense thiS ca.l act as a check on hlstoncal palaeography
INTRODUCTION 9
Ink seems to have been used for wntmg from very early
tImes It has been surmtsed by MAcKAY and others that the
specllnen of a thenomorphlc Jar found at MohenJo Daro m the
shape of a couchant ram WIth a deep hollow m the bade may
have been an mk-well Commg to more well-known ttmes, the
statements of Nearchos and Q CUrtlUS make It very probable that
Ink was used m India already durmg the 4th century B C The
KharO$tb[ Documents from Khotan prove Its populanty at least
m the 1st century A D But the oldest specimen of wnttng With
Ink so far known IS found on the relIc-vase of the Stiipa of Andher
and IS certamly not later than the 2nd century B C Pamted m-
scnpttons are still found m the caves at AJanta The Jams have
later used coloured Ink extenSIvely m theIr Mss BesIdes chalk,
red lead or mlnlurn (hmeuJ,a) was used as a substitute for mk,
already m anCIent ttmes
The general nalllt' of an . mstrument of wntlng' IS leklumi
whtch mcludes the stllus, penclls, brushes, reed. and wooden pens.
Already In the 4th century B C the professIonal wnter IS called
"tnkara or M,kara , In the 7th and 8th centunes A D the writer of
documents JS called davtTapat' , smce the 1lth century the pro-
fessIOnal wnter IS also referred to as kayostha, although as a caste
name It first occurs m thf! Kanasva mscnptlon of A D 738-39.
Other desJgIlattons of the wnters of mscnptlons are
or more rarely koronin,J siison.kfJ and dharmoleklun Calltgra-
1
phlcally Indian Mss are not SIgnIficant
It IS also necessary at thiS stage to know the external ar-
rangements of Inscnpttons and manuscnpts regardmg bnes, group
mg of wl.rds, punctuation and other detads
Already m the earbest mscnpttons mClsed on smoothed stones
the mscnbers have tned to form regular stratght bnes and to
:nrke the upper lids of the matrkiis of equal height Thts effort
on the part of AAoka,'s masons has rarely succeeded m more than
a few consecuttve words, but 1D other documents of the same
penod, as m the Ghasundi Stone mscnptJon, the later and sttU
valId pnnclple has been more carefully observed, accordmg to
which only the vowel SIgns, the superscnbed 1a and SImilar addl-
ttons may protrude above the upper line. The bnes of the Mas.
are always very regular, even 10 the earhest speCJmens, such as
the Praknt Dhammopoda from Khotan or the Fragments of Bud-
dhist Dramas found In Turfan, and probably have been made
WIth the help of a straIght edge In the anCIent palm-leaf Mss
.and later In paper Mss also, the ends of the hnes are marked by
vertIcal double marks or hnes, runnIng across the whole breadth
of the leaves In the Mss the hnes always run honzontally, from
top to bottom
In addItIon to the usual method of writIng words contInuously
WIthout a break, up to the end of a hne, of a verse, half-
verse or any other diVISion, we find already In some of the oldest
documents IOStances of the separatIon of sIngle words, or groups
of words which belong together, either accordIng to their sense or
accordIng to the clerk's manner of readIng Thus In the
Dhommapada from Khotan, each lIne contaInS a verse or half-
verse. In other old Mss such as the Bower Ms sIngle words and
groups of words are often wntten separately, apparently Without
.any pnnclple which can be determl.ned
Stgns of punctuation are not found 10 Kharoethi Inscnptlons
but 10 the Praknt there IS a CIrcular mark, oftf'n
made neghgently, but resembbng the modem Cipher, at the end
.of each verse At the end of a Vagga appears a Sign which IS
found at the end of vanous InscnptIons also and which IS probably
mtended to represent a lotus Brahmi, furnishes a large
number of punctuatIon marks from the earhest times BUHLER
teIlumerates E.lght signs, the SIngle, double and tnple daoQas or
vertical strokes, representing respectIvely the separatIon of groups
of words or prose from verse, the end of sentences and tbe end of
the document, Single and double honzontal strokes. a double
vertical followed by a honzontal stroke. a crescent-bke mark WIth
or WIthout a bar In the mIddle The teachIng of the Inscnpb'lne
WIth reference to the history of Indian punctuatIon may be
summarISed as follows Dunng the earliest penod up to the
beginnIng of out era, only single strokes, either straIght or
-curved, are used, but their use IS rare After the beginnmg of
oUr era, we find more complIcated SignS But up to the 5th
century theIr use remams IrreguJar From that time onwards, we
INTRODUCTION 11
bave, especJally 10 the p r a ~ s on stone, more regular systems of
punctuation The Mandasor Praastl of AD 473-74 proves the
existence of the still valid pnnclple, which reqUires
one stroke after a half-verse and two stroke'S at the end of
a verse But up to the eighth century there are vari-
ous copper-plates and stone mscnptlOns, especially m the south,
Without any punctuation 'n
Smce writing, hke any other human actlvIty, IS not mfalbble,
there are bound to occur mistakes whde engravmg mscnptlons or
wntmg on birch-bark, palm-leaf or paper These may roughly
be diVided mto two categones (a) erroneous words or passages
and (b) omiSSIon of words, letters or phrases, left out by mistakE'
In the earhest mscnptlons, hke the edicts of A&>ka, erroneous
passages are Simply scored out Later, dots or short stroke.;
above or below the hnes are used to mdlcate c1encal errors
These same SignS occur m Mss, where however, m late times,
the delenda are covered With turmenc or a yellow Pigment In
ASoka and other early mS(friptions, letters and words left out
by mistake, are added above or below the hne Without any mdl-
cation of the place to which they belong, or they are also entered
m the mterstlces between the letters In the later mscnptlons and
Mss the spot of the omiSSIon IS mdlcated by a small upright or
mchned cross, the so-called kiikapiida or hamsapiida, and the ad-
denda art given elt}ler) m the margin or between the Imes A
.svostlka IS sometimes put mstead of the cross In South IndIan
Mss the cross IS used also to mdlcate mtentlonal omissions Else-
where, mtentlOnal OmiSSiOnS, or such as have been caused by de-
fects 10 the ongmal copy or exemplar, are marked by dots on the
lme or by short strokes above the hne In some Mss the space
1S left blank The use of the so-called avagT. Sign, mdlcatmg
t ~ e eliSIOn of the vowel a, has been traced first on the Baroda
<Opper-plate of the Rastrakiita king Dhruva dated A D 834-35
A kun4altJ, or nng, and a svtlSt,ka, were utlhzed to mario dlegJble
passages
AbbreViations are first found In certain mscnptlons In West-
.
u IndlSche Palaeogr.h.e, pp 84-85 J
em IndIa, about 150 AD, to WIt In that of Sm PuIUtnal, Naslk
No. 15, and of Sakasena-Ma4hariputra or Sinsena, Kanhen No.
14. In the North-West they are oommon from the Kushana
penod. The oommonest are those indIcating the year, season
month and day and even the fortmght From the 6th century.
the InscnptIons of Western IndIa offer sporadIcally abbrevIatIons
for other words, such as du for duta/ea Since the 11th century,
abbrevIatIons of tItles and the names of tnbes, castes and so
become very common The same holds good for Mss , they are
notIceable even 10 the Dkamm'opoda, gii representmg
giilM
The pagInatIon of Mss IS dependent on the leaf as the umt
and not the page The leaf or pottra IS numbered on the first
page or Imlka 10 the South, on the second elsewhere A few
bIrch-bark leaves found In Central ASIa 10 the Macartney Col-
lectIon and wntten 10 the North Indian I Gupta) Brahmi charac-
ters show the numbenng of the leaves on the first page of the
leaf on the baSIS of which BUHLER assIgned them to South India.
HOERNLE was, however, of the oplmon that the North Indian
characters disproved ItS connection With South Indl&, and this
method of markmg may have been mdependently current In
Central ASia as mstances of paper Mss With Central ASian
Brahmi help to prove, from the Macartney Mss themselves
Wooden covers, cut accord 109 to therslze of the sheets, were
placed, on the bkurJQ fohos and palm-leaves, which had been
drawn on stnngs, and thiS IS still the custom even 'With the paper
Mss In the South the covers are mostly pierced With holes
through whldl the long strmgs are passed, wound round covers
and knotted This procedure was usual already 10 early tllnes
and was observed In the case of palm.leaf Mss from Western and
Northern India In Nepal the covers of particularly valuable
Mss are sometImes made of embossed metal The Mss which
have been thus prepared are usually wrapped up In dyed or even
embrOidered cloth, In Kashrmr, according to the Mushm usage.
Mss are often bound 10 leather
" Such Mss were generally preserved In hbraries attached to
temples, colleges, lPOnastenes, courts of ipnDCes or In the houses
INTRODUCTION 13
of many pnvate 10dlVlduals The aDClent name for the library
1S bhtlrtltibhandagma or SlITosfJalibhtituJagma It IS reported of the
poet Bal)a (about 620 A D.) that he kept hiS own reader, so he
must have possessed a conSiderable pnvate hbrary A famous
royal hbrary of the middle' ages was that o K10g Bhola of Dhira
in the 11th century On the conquest of Milwa, about 1140 A D
Siddharilla Jayasunha transferred It to Anahllvad where It seems
to have been amalgamated With the court hbrary of the Caulukyas
In the course of centunes these hbranes became exceEtimgly well
stocked Thus BUHLER found over 30,000 Mss 10 two Jam
bbranes at Cambay, and over 12,000 10 the Palace Library at
Tanlore The hbrary of the Caulukya Visaladeva (A D 1242-62)
1S said to have furnished the copy of N fn$adhiya, on which Vldya-
dhara wrote the first commentary of the poem, and the Ms of
the KiimtlSutra accord1Og to which the /aylJnUlngolatika was com-
posed by YaSodhara One of the Mss of the Ramayana 10 the
library of the Umverslty of Bonn has been denved from an ex-
emplar In Visaladeva's collectIon In thiS way we have some eVI-
dence as to the enstence of Mss and hbranes hous1Og them smce
the 7th ce..ltury A D at the latest wlthm India, although Indian
Mss of a much earber date have been found 10 the collectlons
discovered outSide India
Thus although the art of wnt10g was certamly known to
India from the age of the Indus Valley CIVlhsatlon, and traces
.)
'Of 1Oscnptlons seen 10 the seal amulets of that penod, and docu-
ments m the shape of 1Oscnptlons belongmg to the 4th century
B.C, the exIstence of wntten texts IS not very much 10 evidence.
The ant..::tulty of the oral traditIon connected With VediC studies
is certamly very great, and even If wntten texts did exiSt their
transmISSion through wntIng seems to have been of secondary
1mportance as compared With the oral transmission Even
PataiiJab (about 150 BC ). whose great commentary on Pi.r)tm's
A$tadhyayi must have been composed 10 wnt1Og, takes no notice
of wntIng as such In fact he explams that the verbal base dIS- IS
tlCciironalmya, and the Pa!Qmtan tra<htion has always been oral,
treating solely of the spoken sounds and never of wntten charac-
ters The doctnne of this school, prtlt,/iianuriisJkyah pOt,ainiyol}.
well dlustrates this pnnclple Even when wntmg became more
common m the later ages, transnusslon of Important works was
not so much documental as oral, and we have the story of a
Benares Pallxht gOing to NadIa m the mIddle ages and brmglng
back the entire text of a famous claSSIC of the Navyanyaya school
In! hiS colossal memory
As a result of this more orthodox and traditional method of
oral transmiSSion of texts, the religiOUS literature of the Hindus
was preserved In a greater degree of punty than secular hterature,
smce the pupd had to repeat them after the teacher and Impress
them on hiS memory In thIS manner the hymns of the RgvedfJ,
as we read them today In our pnnted edItions, have remamed
alnwst unaltered, word for word, syllable for syllable, accent for
accent dunng the last three mllienmums But With secular and
popular hterature the case was somewhat different Here the
texts were certamly exposed to numerous disfigurements, since
r
every teacher or reciter considered himself entitled to alter and
to Improve, to omit and to add, ad l&/ntum, and textual cntlclsm
here faces a difficult and often Impossible when It desIres
to restore their texts to their oldest or ongmal form.
there was a chance that the ongmal tradItIon mIght be Interrupted
and revived later on In parts only, as IS the case WIth the Jam
canon, splIttmg the ongmal Agama Into several mutually related
or contradIctory groups
The transItion from oral to wntten or documental transnus-
sion must have come about gradually With the large group of
texts to be transmItted orally, the number of competent people
havmg mastery of all the alhed groups must have dec eased m
proportIOn to the extent of the texts, glvmg rise to definite lmes of
oral transrmsslOn We lmow m the case of Buddhist and Jam
rehglous bteratures that the task of recordmg theIr canons was
entrusted to definite councIls whIch had thus to assemble at one
place these scattered hnes of transnusslOll and consolIdate the
texts lmown severally to defimte schools of transmiSSIon at one
pomt We have knowledge of several such counClls fOl" fuung the
texts of both BuddhIst and Jam scnptures But literary hIStory IS
not so fortunate af' to record such events With reference to other
INTRODUCTITON IS
texts. Even 10 the cases of these recorded events we have no
defimte 1OformatJon as to the method employed 10 oonsobdating.
these scattered texts mto a uruform whole, we do not know, for
example, whether they were actually wntten down or again merely
translmtted orally by a central school
Just as there was the possibIlity of a break occurnng 10 the
oral tranStmSSlon of texts 1Oterrupt1Og their ongmal tradition, there
was defimtely a greater chance that the wntten text In Its trans-
mlSSlOIl' would be affected by graver mterruptJons We have seen
the nature of the wrlt10g material used In ancient and medieval
India, and from the fact that the maJonty of Indian Mss on
which our texts rest are not earher than the ,10th century A D and
most of them certamly later than the 13th century, we can easdy
understand the penshable nature of the wntten document ThUs.
the preservation of texts, which did not have the good fortune of
be10g orally transmitted the great majority of sacred texts or
even the epIc or puraa:uc matenal, was mamly confined to collection
of Mss and copY1Og them down This copy1Og was so nnportant
that 10 the later Pura.pas, IIi Buddhist Mahayana texts and 10
modem additions to the old epIC, the copy1Og of books and the
'presentatIon of Mss IS praised as a rehglous act, worthy of great
ment The Importance of thiS activity may be guaged from the
fact that the Mss from which we obtam most of our texts, seldom
reach to a! great age, the thousands of texts which have been
thus preserved to us are not the ongmal COPies of the texts but
merely COPies of copies to an undetermmed degree We are thus
mdebted to the unceas10g oopy1Og actiVIties of the aDCIent and
medieval T ndlan scnbes for the great hentage' preserved for us in
the survlv10g or extant Mss If we could only unravel the literary
acttvltJes of the last two thousand years 10 India, we would pro-
bably be shocked by the number of texts which we have Irretnev-
ably lost ow1Og to many causes We have often referetlC9 to texts
of well-known authors in extant Mss. which are not to be dis-
covered so far; Similarly quotations from the works of aut:llom
may not ... be traceable sometimes to the extant Mss of their
texts.
In the case of 1Oscriptions and grants or the
legends preserved 10 coins or other mscnbed matenal, we have
often to deal With certified COPies of the ongmal document The
mistakes, Ifi any, are due to the faulty execution of the mscnber
or mscnbers offiCially workmg under the direction of the author,
or a commission authonsed by the author As the mate'nal IS
durable there IS no question of transmission here, and these docu-
ments have for us the value of the ongmal which may have been
wntten on birch-bark or palm-leaf for the guidance of the mason-
mscnber Such IS, however, not the case With the Mss In the
absence of mechamcal processes which have only been deve-
loped durmg the last few centunes for multlplymg the COPies of
a gIVen Ms It was necessary to copy It by hand transcnptlon,
syllable by syllable, word by word This was necessanly a slow
and tediOUS process, but either due to secular or rebgIous conSI-
derations, the copymg was donq and to the extent to which It was
required Thus the reproduction of any number of COpies of a
given text, accordmg to reqUirements, was made." only by hand
transcnptlon from the actual copy or exemplar before the COPYist
Hence all these are called manu!.cnpts' or manuscnpt copies
The matenal was either birch-bark, palm-leaf or paper as we have
seen above The urge for copymg an old and crumbbng Ms
depended upon Its Importance , before Mss were actually collected
10 hbranes, thiS copymg may have been done mdlVldually by the
persons 10 charge of the Mss and later perhaps at the direction
of the owners of the h b r a n ~ In the mtert:St of the preservation
of texts this penodlcal copymg of Mss was essential, the crumb-
hng exemplar gradually becommg replaced by a fresh copy RaJa-
~ a r a has an mterestlng passage 10 bls KavyamimO,msa,Ul en-
)Olmng upon the poet to make or have several copies made of his
composition 10 order to ensure the preservation of hiS wntmgs
Slmdar conSIderations may have guided the authors themselves to
have more than one copy of their composItions prepared dunng
their bfe-tlme Moreover, If the work of an author became famous,
demands! for COPies of It might come from different parts of India,
either from royal patrons of learmng or from the d_votees of
1. Xtme Festschrift, p. 445
INTRODUCTION 17
learrung In thiS process of transnussion the original copy itself
nught be copIed out a number of tllnes, or some copy made in
thIS process might Itself become the exemplar supplymg the basis
lor fresh copus 11us process might continue Indefirutely even
.at a time when the ongmal Ms was extant, for we have to deal
WIth a penod when travellmg was comparatlvely slow and often
.a pamful expenence and even when there was a deSire to avall
oneself of the ongmal the means might not be at hand.
When we deal With texts we have to conSIder two different
-posBlblhtles As m the case of early Indian hterature, produced
not so much by mdlVldual authors, as by defirute schools, and
transmlttOO orally, the reduction to wntmg must have taken place
at different centres of learnmg or culture at different penods.
Where the sacred nature of the texts demanded the greatest accu-
racy as In VediC hterature, the divergence between the wntten
text and the orally transmitted text would not be great, and there
would be umformlty m Ihe text tradltlon But where such consl-
-derabons did not hold good, the wntten text of a gIven work of
the type conSIdered above would not be umform, each centre
mIght conceIvably have Its own local version ThIS local versIon
m Its further transmISSIon would then pass through such a VICIS-
SItude as would affect any wntten text m general, such as constant
copymg, reViSion and so on In any case we shall not be m a POSI-
tIOn to CIte any copy as the ongmal of the text, though
It may be the first leductlon to wntten form of the orally trans-
Imtted text For between thiS reduction to wntmg and the actual
composition of the text he a number of generations of reciters,
scholars and redactors who have left their Impress on the text as
a whole But m the case of an mdlVldual author whose work
was also orally transmItted, the extent of the dIvergence between
lus ongmal composItion and the first wntten text would not be
so great, and the possibilIty of local versions would be sunilarly
rurtalled In OPPOSltioo to the heterogeneous elements In the
class-compoSItIons orally transmItted, the work of the IndIVidual
author show greater homogeneity. second possibility
is that of the author himself reducing lus work to wntlng; thIS
he can do In hIS own hand or In that of another but under lus
. 2
ersorta1 supervision and corrected by him 10 his own hand. The
,nginal copy which IS thus wntten 10 the hand of the author
limself or at rns direction and corrected by him 10 his own hand
I designated the autogroph Now thiS autograph becomes the
loal authonty so far as the partlcular text IS concerned We
tave thus two types of texts, one for WhIch there IS no autograph
nd one for wluch there IS, extant or nonextant The problems
Insmg from these two sets wIll naturally dIverge accordmg to
ne dIstance separatmg the ongm of the orally transmItted text
rom Its first wntten exemplar In the first case, and 10 the second
Iccordmg to the mterval between the autograph' and the earlIest
urvlVmg exemplar.
CHAPTER II
KINDS OF TEXTS
We have unfortunately no wntten hIStory of the textual tra-
dlnon In IndIa We do not know, for Instance, the fate of KAh-
dasa's or Bhavabhiln's autograph texts, or what Important COPIes
of them exIsted In the vanous pe:nods of hIStOry succeedmg
them Even theIr own dates are matters of controversy The
only Well-known medIeval hst of manuscnpts IS that of the col-
lecnon of Kavindraciirya, a Benares Pandlt (1656 AD) 1 Of the-
other famous collectJons we get only scattered InformatIon from
colophons In the vanous Mss themselves In thel absence of such
a hIStory we can only pIcture to ourselves the condItIons under
WhIch the autographs or theIr ImmedIate or dIStant copies gave rise
to the dIfferent Mss which we find today In the vanOlls Manu-
scnpt Llbranes In and outSIde India
We have already defined an autograph Now texts may be
either autographs, or ImmedIate c o p u ~ s of autographs, or COPIes
of COPIes, and thIS In any degree
Autographs are not exempted from the operatIons of textual
cnnclsm Even In our .own days It IS common eXlpenence that
the editOrs of Journtlls remove their contnbutors' shps of the
pen , Editors of books correct, usually In footnotes, the SImIlar
lapses of thEn authors But WIth thIs branch of textual cntIClsm
modem Indian scholarshJp IS not dIrectly concerned ThIS IS
not the case, however, WIth ImmedIate copies Textual crincism
may be called upon to repaIr the nuschtef done to lDscnptIons or
texts Inscobed on stones by maltreatment, weathermg or by the
errors of the stone cutter. Examples of thIs type may be seen
1 TIns hst, Mr GoDE tells me, IS not qUite authentiC, as It con
tains a number of Mss wntten long after Kavindn-=A hst of about
295 texts IS given m an mteresting mscriptlon In Pegu In Burma of
c. 1442 A D donated to the Buddhist Sangha by Taungdwin and tits
wife. (Cct. fll PtIlm-lm/ M .... Colombo, p. xxv). .
almost on every page of the different epigraphical publications
m India.
The chtef provlOce of Indian textual crltlasm deals 10 the
malO with COPies of COpies As we have seen 10 the Introduction,
the texts which have come down to us were COPied for the most
part, not on stone or other Impenshable material, but on birch-
bark, 'palm-leaf and paper, these had to be COPied several times
at different !penods both by way of precaution agamst wear and
tear as well as a means to satisfy the desire of other persons than
the first possessor to become acqualOted With their contents This
copymg was done, as mentIOned before, not by any mechamcal
reproduct1ons of the origmal such as, for example, the photogra-
phiC faCSimiles of modem times, but through COPies made by the
human hand directed, more or less, by the human mtelhgence If
the latter had not been the case, Indian textual cntlclsm would
have httIe to do With Indian texts Now a copy made 10 thiS
way can never exactly reproduce that frotn which It IS COPied, that
IS, ItS exemplar Errors have an lOevltable way of creeplOg 10 so
that a copy, qua copy, can never be the equal of the exemplar
and may even be much ItS lOfenor The detenora\lon so pro-
duced lOcreases With the number of successive copymgs or 10 other
words the degree of error lOcreass 10 successive transcriptions
and With the gradual loss of the autograph and Its lnunedlate
COpies, COpies of COpies to any degree of descent Will have to serve

as sources of further transcriptions SlOce< 10 transmItted texts
generally the degree of error lOcreases continuously under ordmary
orcumstances, therefore the age of a Ms IS an Important con-
siderat,on, although It IS not an absolute crltenon for ~ e absence
<or presence of errors
TIllS deterioration may be Illustrated by a numerical example.
If 100 be taken to lOdlcate perfect correctness and the text A IS
conSIdered to have been COPied tWice, B' from A and C from -B,
then let us assume that the errors of the first COPYist have re-
moved S pc of the truth from rus copy B, and the errors of the
'SeCOnd COPYiSt Mve removed 3 pc again of the truth, from his
<.OpY C, which IS COPied from thIS B. The relative values of the
two COPies Band C wtll be respectively 97 and 9409. If a copy
I
KINDS OF TEXTS 21
D were now to be made from C WIth the same degree of error.
Its relative value will then be 9117 The Importance of this is
obVIOUS when we remember that the text of most Sanskrit and
Praknt classICS IS a transm,tted text or one wruch has passed
through we do not know how many stages of copylOg.
The process of hand transcnptIon of texts may be compared
With the compositor's art 10 modem prlOtIng prE'SSeS, whether
hand-settIng or machme-settlOg IS employed The compositor WIll
first have hIS copy' before hIm, on the baSIS of whIch he selects
rus type letter by letter Of course WIth mechanIcal advantages
at hIS dIsposal the errors 10 composIng wIll be greatly reduced;
but where such deVIces are not at hand, the composItor may be
lIkened to thf! ancient scrIbe, WIth all hIS lImItatIons Instead of
wntmg the text letter by letter, he selects the types, and hIS eye
wIll constantly shIft from the compose to hIS copy' and poEI81bly
hIS mmd may be wanr\enng elsewhere unless the text IS very
lOterestIng to hIm As soon as the text IS composed, the galley
proofs are gone through carefulll by a set of proof-readers who-
compare them WIth the ongmal rcopy' and mark the correctIons.
of any errors aCCIdentally made In thIS sense prmtIng IS a cor-
porate work whIch may be absent 10 hand transcrIptIon Cor-
respondmg to the proof-readers the anCIent SCrIbes have at tImes
taken advantage of revIsers' who went through the transcnp-
bon comparIng It WIth tts exemPlar and marking the changes or
correctIons 10 the Ms. Itself, If the author of the text IS
he WIll hImself correct the prmter's errors before g1V1ng the Im-
prImatur, and If he IS dead some representatIve of the author will
do thIS [.nal proof-readmg. In the case of hand-tranSCrIbed texts
thIS advantage may not be generally, even when the
author or hIS representative IS ahve Thus 10 good prInting the
te"tt IS authonsed and defin,twe as far as that particular edItIon
IS concerned, but not so In the case of hand transcnbmg where
the errors WIll vary mdlvldually, each SUcce8Slve transcrIption
necessary for multIplYing the number of COP'es WIll contnbute
fresh sources of error 10 the text. But the most fundamental
dIfference IS that the compositor has got the autograph as his 'copy,.
whereas the COPYIst may have either the autog_apb, Its immediate
copy, or a copy of a copy to any degree. To the extent by which
the COPYist IS separated from the autograph, to that extent will hts
degree of error mcrease. In the case of the compositor the errors
rem8lrung Will be fewer 10 companson; but sttl1, 10 SPite of the
Qre taken, a few Will rernam.
The deViations from the ongmal which thus occur 10 both
Qses are due to two well known causes visual errors and psycho-
logtcal errors, and each of these Will differ to a greater or less
extent With every compositor or COPYist The scnbe or COPYIst
18 prone to comnut both types of error, and thus deViate, even
if sbghtly, from hiS ongtnal ViSUal errors compnse subsbtu-
tions, ODUSSlons or additions which the eye of the senbe makes
through weakness or mattentlOn PsycholOgical errors anse from
the tendency of the mmd to read some meanmg mto Its own
mistakes or the mIstakes In the exemplar from which the copy
IS made. The malO COrruptionS 10 qlassl cal texts are largely
due to errors of thiS class Even the best senbe cannot copy
mechamcally for long WIthout allmymg some play to rus mtelb-
gence, even at the worst he hardly ever COpies letter for letter
any wnbng that he understands In most 10stances It Will be
found that the scnbes copy words and not letters.
The pathology of texts ans10g from these two malO sources
of error Will be dealt With 10 another chapter. But some of the
-charactenstics of the scnbe may be consfderfd here Scnbal errors
found 10 the transcnpbon may date from the onglnal or autograph
Itself. The dictum that even Homer nods sometimes' (Quando-
,que bonus dormuDt H omerus) explains the nature of the errors
10 the autograph Even the best authors do not al.ys write
worthtly of themselves. Lapses from feliCIty of style, from clear-
ness, from consiStency or even-through carelessness-from cor-
Teet grammar may occur now and then 10 the best of wntll'gs
If thiS be so In the case of the author who IS generally an ac-
complished scholar, It IS much more so 10 the case of the senbe.
He Will go on a ~ d m g , unconSCIously and oonsc:lously also, to the
errors already found 10 his exemplar. Most of these are due to
the default on the part of the senbe or COPYist, and they may be
arranged roughly .n the order 10 which the vobtion of the copytSt
KINDS OF TEXTS 23
is absent or present as involuntary (or mec:hanic:alh semi-volun-
tary and voluntary. Another classificatton of these errors calls
them ,accIdental and deliberate
The exemplar utilized by the COPYIst may become IllegIble
through damp or constant handlmg, portions of It may be tom
away, or whole leaves may become detached and either lost or
mIsplaced The weakest parts of a manuscript were the margms,
and hence the begmnmgs and the ends of lmes as well as the
top and bottom bnes were specIally bable to mJury. So some of
the errors Introduced In the copy may be due to such external
defects of the exemplar Thus WIth the famous Praknt Dhammtl-
poda fragments dIscovered by DUTREUIL DE RHINS, where thE'
external InJUries to the text caused breakmg of leaves, the
assemblmg of whole leaves caused certaIn errors In SENART'S
edItion
If the text IS extenSIve, Its transcnptlon may' be made by one
or more than one COPYIst In the latter case we have to deal not
WIth the psychology of one scnbE! but of many, compbcatIng the
study of the text tradItion For at thIS dIstance of tIme we can-
not say whzther the transcnptlon was done at the same place on
the baSIS of a smgle exemplar or whether the manuscnpt was
assembled from umts made up at dIfferent glaces or dIfferent
times on the baSIS of dIfferent exemplars, for It IS qUite reasonable
to expect that parts of .lngger works mIght have been COPied out
separately 10 1Odlvld'ual manuscnpts The nature of the material
and the palaeographtcal eVIdence may 10dlcate to us the chrono-
lOgIcal strata of the comPOSIte parts of such a text Hence it
IS n e c ~ 1 r y to dlst10gulsh the dIfferent hands which have been
at work on the manuscnpt
As the texts have come down to US, a manuscnpt IS not usual-
ly a clean copy or a s10gle piece of writing. It IS very commonly
found to contam alterations by erasure, addItions or, substitutions
which are due either to the scnbe or scnbes of the manuscript, or
to some other person or persons called the 'Te1Jsser or 'Te1Jssers
The rela..rve Importance of these corrections may be very dtfferent.
Every scnbe has hiS own IdiosynCI'aCles and every manu-
'SCnpt has peculantles of Its own. The Idlosyreracy of the scrIbe
24
INDIAN TEXTUAL CRITICISM
appears in traits of handwnt10g ; 10 a proneness to certam lands
of error and comparatlve IIDllUUllty from others; 10 a bias of
thought or taste which has 10fluenced his work where he had tw&
or more variants to choose between Such pecubantles can only
be learnt by close and contlnuous study of the manuscnpt
The special Virtues of a scnbe should be honesty and care ..
-or 10 one word fidelity-(and 1Otelbgence) But It IS rare to
find these developed In a high degree, for however mechamcal the
hansa.ct1on may be, human intelbgence finds ways and means In
an unconscIous manner, through visual as well as psychological
faults, of IntroducIng fresh sources of error In the transcnptlon
But strange as It may seem, the mechamcal COPYIng of a
stupid but faithful scnbe tells us more about the text than the
Intelhgent but unfaithful transcnptlOn of another, morc quahfied
scnbe ThiS fidelity IS to be Judged by Internal tests A scnbe
who preserves in his text lacuM and otlfer faults of hiS exemplar
Without tryIng to correct them IS probably trustworthy If he IS
faithful In small things he IS bkely to be faithful In general also_
If he scrupulously presErves for Instance the special ortho-
graphical pecubantIes of hiS exemplar or records the presence of a:
lacuna or IllegibilIty In what he IS cOPYing, he Inspm.s u:: With
confidence
There are two kInds of transmission by means of which we
have received the extant texts One IS Jle lIcensed or protected
tranSmISSion wherein the text IS COPied under the direction of the
author or a representative of the author, or the learned posspssor
of the exemplar or at the Instance of a royal patron emplOYing
real scholars to SUpervise thiS COPYIng In other wordS, control
is exemsed on the COPYiSt In order to ensure the Integnty of the
text; for If such control were not exercised the Integnty of the
text would be certain to be ImpaIred even dunng the life-time of
the author The chances of such corruption are InfinItely greater
when the author IS dead The other type which IS probably much
more frequent IS the haphazard or unhcensed transmiSSion. In
this case manuscnpts were often COPIt'd by stupid and Ill-educated
men who were not altogether Ignorant of the meamng of what
they wrote. The handicaps attendant on such pnvately made:
KINDS 0.' TEXTS 25
:lOInes at a tune when the ongmal exemplars were regarded as
:uxunes and protected zealously from any encroachment even by
learned may be gathered from the trouble which modem
!Cholars have to undergo 10 order to secure transcnpts of Mas.
preserved 10 some pnvately owned bbranes One modem case
may be Cited with reference to the Dhovala, /cyodkavala and
M ahOdhavlJi,z, the only authentic Mss. of which are preserved m
the Jam pontIfical seat at Mudlbldn 10 South Kanara It was
)oIy With mfimte patience, diplomacy and huge expenditure that"
transcnpts could be obtamed after a long penod.
Now With reference to such transmitted texts we have al-
ready mentioned that the extant Mss show often times the hands
[)f revisers We do not know either how the Ms was transcribed
[)r how the reviser corrected the work of the COPYist. It may have
been through hiS own unaided efforts that the COPYist transcnbed
hts exemplar, or he may Itave had the assistance of another scnbe
[)r reader who read out the text aloud whde the copymg was
done Simllarly the reviser may have gone through the trans-
cnpt comparmg It with the ongmal either by hiS own unaided
efforts or WIth the help of another who read out from the exem-
plar Such corrections are generally made, as said before, e1ther
In the margm or between the hnes Passages, omitted by
mistake 10 the copy, would also be shown slmtlarly. Now
Imagme for a moment the manner 10 wroch Mss travelled from

place to place If a Ms. belonged to a nch patron he might
conceivably take It With him 10 hiS travels, accompamed by some
scholar-compamon, there would then be a POSSlblhty that 10
different of learnmg which he ViSited there might exist
other exemplars of the same text, and a companson of hiS copy
With such exemplars would supply the reviser vanant readmgs,
adtlitlonal passages, etc which would be noted m the marg10 or
between the hnes. As SUKTHANKAR suggests, places of pllgrim-
ages may have played an Important part 10 thiS reViSion, correc-
bon or conftatlon of Mas ... It may be sunmsed ", he says, .. that
celebrated places of ptlgnmage hke U JJaymi,
and others. W1th recitations of the ep1CS held periodically in t1ieir
famous shrmes. have played an Important r6lp In the dissemina-
bon of the knowledge of local versIons among the PIOUS
VlSlting pllgnms. whose number undoubtedly mcluded the bards
and the professIonal recIters of the epIcs" To a shghtly less
d:tent thIS may apply to other lands of texts as well, particularly'
the more popular plays and poems That some such thmg must
have taken place can well be mferred from the dIfferent types of
texts whIch have been transmItted to us today.
If such corrected copIes themselves become the sources of fur-
thE-or transcnpts, the new COPYIst has often the chOIce of a readmg,
and accordmg to hIS bkes and dlshkes he would prefer the one
and reject the other Slmdarly WIth the addltJonal passages
ThIs would ultJmately hasten the speed w1th wh1ch the texts became
.corrupt.
In addltJon to the revIsIon of the transcnpts carned out by
these so-callEd correctors, there are certam cases wherem the on-
gmal author h1mself reVIsed hIS autograph several tJmes We see
1t often 10 our days W1th reference to pnnted works But 10 the
absence of such mechanIcal reproducUon, the author mIght eIther
rewnte hIS own manuscnpt entJrely accordmg to hIS rev1sed form,
or more hkely add or alter 10 the first autograph Itself before
mak10g a second autograph of 1t. In both cases the COPYISt has
before h1m an autograph corrected or reVIsed by the author hIm-
self and he has the chOIce of two readmgs, both tracmg the1r ongm
to the author himself, and he w111 accept the one and reject the
other accordmg to hIS ChOIce, or else he may add the rejected
readmg 10 the margm or 10 between the hnes In subsE.tiuent trans-
cnptJons of thiS transm1tted text the margmtJl,o or 10terbnear read-
lOgs may be completely omItted c.
From an examination of all the avadable Mss of Malali-
miidhatJQ, BHANDARKAR concluded that Bhavabhiib had hlInself
made certam alteratJons 10 h1s autograph, and thus 10 a seoSf'
rev1sed It The same factor IS brought out by Todar MALL 10
h1s edlt10n of MGhaviroc(lnta The followmg two mstances may
be C1ted for BHANDARKAR'S assumptlons. Mm. I 3
a
reads 10 h1s
edttion, supported by SIX out of the nme Mss. collated .
kalyiiniiniim tvam ass mahasiim bhiilanam vJSvamurte, for
which the other three Mss. Bh. K1 and 0 read
KINDS OF TEXTS 27
Ieolyaniiniim tuam ina maJutsijm iJi$e tuam u.dnatse, which
at>pears the better to account for the prayer contamed In the
followmg line, and the Ms. C agrees WIth the first hne except 10 the
last two words where It agrees WIth the mmor group Agam 10
III 7- we have 10 the constItuted text, based merely on the com-
mentary of Jagaddhara and the Ms N, the followmg:
s1iihalayot. UtlCOntlm Ie sramslU'aly angomangam, ..whICh IS con-
SIdered by BHANDARKAR to be better than the read10g of the
eIght other Mss. which show sathSrayati for sramsayati of the
text The supenor read10g of the Southern Ms N nught be due
to the 10genulty of the learned readers on that SIde, as the south
was for some tIme the home of culture and leammg, but the
number of such equally sUItable passage'\ places the balance of
probabdlty 10 favour of the author's reVISIons
The correctors o( Mss have at times acted also as edItOrs
1n the sense that they ha'e tned to Improve theIr text by a com-
panson of dIfferent extant Mss on whIch they could lay theIr hands,
besIdes the exemplar used, 10 theIr attempts to fill 10 the lacume
of the Ms or correct the erroi-s WhICh have crept mto It In thIS
'Sense they act as redactors of the Mss
The ravages of tIme, the laXIty and Ignorance of scnbes, and
the speed WIth whIch a work could become corrupt, may be Il-
lustrated from the hIstory of the text of /iianesuari accordIng
to the tradItIonal a ~ u t l t The text composed by Jftanevar 10
&tka 1212 (A D 1290) had already become so corrupt by the tIme
of the poet Eknliith that he had to revIse it from the
Mss avaIlable to hIm in the &tka year 1506 (AD 1584), withm
less than 300 years of the autograph We have unfortunately
no means at present of amVlng at the pnnClples employed by Ek-
nith in hIS purificatIon of the text of /iiiineSUQ.1i, unless we dIscover
several pre-Etmath Mss of the text But he must have had the
lmowledge that a text could be Improved by companson of dIffer-
ent manuscnpts in common with other ancient retiactors This
explams also why most Mss contam Inargmal 9r interlinear cor-
rectIons ;<.l that the edItors dld not work scientIfically IS not theIr
fault but that of the penod 10 whIch they lived This knowledge ted
to the productIon of what are known as conftatJd Mas. or _cla-
codices, by crossing or Intermixing the contents of different copies.
of a given text available to them With their own exemplar.
ThIS Crossing or lDtermlXlng was not done on any well-established
pr10Clples and was therefore ecleet.e 10 a deletenous sense.
Since the transmitted texts were handed down through suc-
cess1ve transcnptlOns from earher sources ultnnately gOing back
to a common source, all the Mss of a given text, 10 so far as they
are authentic, are related to one another and thiS relationship can
be shown 10 the form of a pedigree 2
In other words they represent a tradition running along
certam determinable hnes, but 10 a maJonty of cases each strand
of thiS tradition does not remain by Itself As mentIOned before.
they have been 10tertwlned from the very beg1On1Og by the con-
tinuous actiVIties of revisers and redactors
Thus, the manuscnpt tradition 10 India shows that whIle the
ravages of time and other causes destroyed the majorIty of
f
autographs or their Immediate COpies or even early descendante.,
their late COpies, which have SUrvIVed to our days, present to
us tats In a mutilated or defaced' or deterIorated condition In
some cases the 10JUrIes done to the text may be of such a nature
as to make It almost un10telhglble
A very large number of texts have completely disappeared 10
India due to ravages of time, vandalism or umntentlonal destruc-
tion, by the ummportance of the text self and by attacks from
worms and white-ants, leav10g no trace at aU except In some stray
references 10 extant texts, But, fortunately, ow1Og to the un-
ceaSlDg bterary actiVIties of Mahayana Buddhists, some Import-
ant texts, Brahmanlcal as well as Buddhist, but largely, Buddhlst,
h a v ~ been preserved 10 the Tibetan and ChlDese archIVes either
In Tibetan and Chmese transliterations or In translations In some
cases we have adaptations of the lost texts, the most claSSical
example beIng that of GULQ&Qhya's Brhatkatha, Irrevocably fost.
according to tradlbon, lD ItS onglnal PaiSaci form, but preserved
lD two mdependent Sansknt adaptations by K$emendra and Soma-
deva Informabbn about some of these lost texts IS s .. ppbed to
-,---; The t;sts -or -ch;racter,sbcs by means of which tlus can be
established Will be: given 10 the chapter on RecenSIon
KINDS OF TEXTS 29
us through the follow1Og sources. ( 1) translations, (2) references
hy tItle 10 extant Mss, (3) cItatIons or quotatIons, and (4) com-
mentanes
While the literary and textual history of India IS stIlI a
subject for fresh 1Ovestlgatlon of unbmIted scope, certam factors
emerge from a study of extant Mss We have seen that these
Mss generally fall 1Oto one or more strands of a contInuous
tradition They are wntten 10 the dIfferent SCripts prevaIl10g 10
the various parts of the country. Now It IS Improbable that the
professIonal COPYists were acqua10ted WIth more than one or at
most two SCripts 10 the medIeval period Naturally their copymg
actIvItIes would be confined to eIther one or two SCripts From
thts It follows that the manuscript traditIOn descended 10 a line
parallel to the SCript 10 which the exemplar was written An
exemplar would be transbterated mto another SCript by a copy-
ISt who knew both SCriPts, and then thIS copy would be the source
of a fresh hne of tranS011SSlOn 10 that SCript The less known
a scnpt, the greater the chance of Its Mss follow1Og a umform
tradItIon, unless the correctors or redactors or the scnbes them-
se1ves were acquamted With more than two SCripts and had the
opportumtIes of consulting several Mss for mak10g these COPIes
.As SUKTHANKAR remarks, thts f1Tmc,ps.um dlv,sIon,s IS not so
arbItrary aSlt mIght appear at first SIght. It IS found from experl'
ence that thIS dIfference of SCrIpts corresponds, as a
matter of fact, to deep underIY10g textual dIfferences The only
exceptIon to thIS general rule would be Devanagari wruch was a
sort of wlgar' SCrIpt, WIdely used and understood 10 IndIa
WhIle thts prmclple IS not entIrely mechamcal or arbItrary, It IS
also not Ideal or perfect. It IS contravened, for mstance, through
the mterventIon or thIS Devanagari SCript Another cause of dIS-
turbance IS that along the boundaries of prov1Oces USIng dIfferent
'SCriPts and SpeakIng dIfferent languages, there are 10vanably
bIl10gual and bi-scriptal zones, and the' opportumtIes mentIoned
above are operatIve In IDlx10g the dIfferent strands of the tradl-
non reprnented by the two scnpts l
CHAPTER III
SOME FUNDAMENTAL ASPECTS OF TEXTUAL
CRITICISM
Textual cntIclsm has for Its sole object the InterpretatIon
and controllIng of the eVIdence contaIned WIthIn the manuscnpts.
of a text or In documents so that we can reach as far back as
poSSIble and try to recover the authentIc text or to determIne as
nearly as poSSIble the words wntten by the author hImself In
other words, It IS the skIlled and methodIcal exerCIse of the human
Intellect on the settlement of a text WIth the sole object of res-
tonng It, so far as possIble, to Its ongInal form By' ongInal
form' we understand the form Intended by the author Such
a restoratIon IS often called a entteal r:eenszon
AccordIng to one accepted practIce, Textual CntIClsm IS dIVI-
ded Into two processes (1) RecenSIon (reeensto) and (2) Emen-
datIon (emendatlo) ThIS IS the Cllstomary dIVISIon By recen-
sIon IS meant the selectIOn of the most trustworthy manUSCrIpts
or documentary eVIdence as a baSIS on whIch the autograph or
a text standIng nearest to It may be founded ThIS selectIon IS
only possIble after a thorough cntIcal e't8mInatlon of all the evI-
dence that IS avaIlable EmendatIon IS the attempt to elImInate
all the untrustworthy elements m the manuscnpt tradItIon whIch
even the best documents. or manuscnpts exhIbIt. In a sense It IS
an attempt to transcend the tradItIon and therefore 3 delIberate
but systematIc attempt to overrule the WrItten evIdence.
As F W HALL says, 'many people tend to regard textual
cribClsm as a dIsease But It IS neIther a dIsease nor a science,
but SImply the applIcatIon of common sense to a class of problems
which beset all mquIrers whose eVIdence rests. upon the authorIty
of manuscript documents'1 Most of these problems are con-
nected WIth errors mtroduced m the text through successive
1 Companion to ClassiCtlI Studies, p. hi.
SOME FUNDAMENTAL ASPECTS OF TEXTUAL CRITICISM 31
transcnptlon. And before correctIng them the editor is bound to
COllSlder the history of the text upon whIch he IS working. Other-
Wise he may be trymg to correct errors which are of such anaent
standmg as to be mcurable by modem methods, or he may be
questlOnmg a .text which can be traced back to the origmal
author Hence the claSSical model, appbed to the cntlClsm of
Greek and Latm texts, divides textual cntlClsm mto four proces-
ses' (1) HeumtJcs or assemblmg and arrangmg the entire maten-
al consisting of manuscnpts and testlmoma In the form of a
genealogical tree or pedigree or stemma cod,eum, (2) Recensso or
restoration of the text to Its most ancient type possible on the
baSIS of the above matenal, (3) Emendat.o or restoration of the
text of the author, and (4) H'gher CntJeasm or separation of
thfJ sources utilIzed by the author
The first process enables the editor to classify the manuscript
eVidence mto defimte strands of traditIOn, either totally mdepend-
ent or mutually related oy mtermlxmg. ThiS begms With the
1Ovestlgatlon of the eVidence to be found 10 the tranSmItted form
of the text for which we have to rely on monuscripts. Thest
may be either extant or non-extant. The eVidence of extant
manuscnpts must be ascertamed by eollatlon To collate a
manuscnpt IS to observe and record everythmg 10 It which may be
of use for determlmng what stood 10 the source or sources from
whIch It IS denved S o m ~ practical hmts for collatmg are given
In SUKTHANKAR'S P?olegomena to the cntlcal edition of the
Adlparvan of the Mababbarata and m EDGERTON'S Poficatantra
Reconstructed In the case of a poetical text the smgle stanza may
be taken as a UnIt, and some good Ms. or a reliable edition taken
as the standard, and thiS may be wntten syllable by syllable m
properly dIVided squares on a smgle sheet of paper at the head.
Devlabons from thiS may then be indIcated 10 the correspondmg
squares. The left-hand margin will show the manuscript collated
while a larger nght-hand margin will be reserved for special
remarks, for addlbonal passages, etc Full details about the
method OZ collation used for the cnbca1 edition of the Mahi-
bhiirata may be studied from SUKTHANKAR'S Prolego",,,..
referred to above.
The method employed by EDGERTON IS as follows: He
fifst selected the versIons of the PlIIicatantra which, on the baSIS
of preVIous Studies, could be assumed to contain all, or at least
practically all, the eVidence which could be used m reconstruct-
mg the ongmal PlIIicotantra Then he undertook a minute
companson of all the matenals found In each In so far
as they corresponded to matenals found In any of the others
For thiS purpose the text was diVided mto the smallest possible
UnIts, each UnIt consisting, as a rule. of a smgle prose sentence or
sometImes of a part of a sentence The collation then proceeded
along lines Similar to those referred to above In this manner
both prose and verse texts may be collated
On the baSIS of such collations the genealOgIcal relatIonship
of the manuscnpts becomes clear, and thiS may then be represented
by means of a stemma or pedigree
The second process IS the process of interpretatIon It
mterprets the wntten eVidence of the lIllanuscnpts, weighs them
In certain hghts, and settles the text on their basiS to the
posSIble form on pnnClples whIch wIll be stated In the next
chapter ThiS aspect IS really the antIquanan phase of textual
cntIclsm and ItS aim IS to discover what IS the earlfest asCertain-
able form of the text With which we are dealing
The third process IS fundamentally to arnve at the text of
the author, and m a sense getting behmd the wntten eVidence by
overrulIng It where necessary from certam .ntnnslc consideratIons.
This IS possible because most of our claSSical authoI"S/ do not stand
alone. As HALL says, If every claSSical author stood alone, and if
the only SUrvlVlng eVIdence of hiS work was m the shape of manu-
scnpts, It would not be posSible to penetrate far mto the hiStory
of the text which lIes behmd the manuscnpts It mIght often
be poSSible to say that a manuscnpt or group of manuscnpts
was COPied from an archetype of a certam penod and of a ce.tam
handwritIng, but the pomt at whIch the mqUlry would have to
stop stIll not be very far removed from the age to whIch
the earlIest manuscripts belonged The cntIc would tben be 10
the position of a mining engineer who could only argue as to
the course of a gold reef from the outcrop VISible above the
SOME FUNDAMENTAL ASPECTS OF 'TEXTUAL CRITICISM 33
surface And Just as the engineer will get his evidence of the
course of a reef by boring below the surface at varioUs points,
so too the textual cnbc can often find external or indirect
evIdence of the condlbon of a text In the ages before the existing
manuscnpt tradItion begins Such InciJrect evidence is often
termed testimonium (plural testamofUa) In large enbcal editiOns
and gIVen a separate! section These are generally divided Into
the follOWing categones
Anthologies (or F1onlegla) or colleebons of extracts, either
meciJe\'al or anCIent Thus we have Hala's Sottastii, rilgadhara's
Paddhatl or Jalhapa's Suktlmuktovol., to menbon a few only
The eVIdence denved from such quotations made from an
ancIent text by other authors are often excee'dlngly valuable, as
very often such authors antedate the oldest avaJlable Mss of the
text by several centunes
Translabons froUl one language Into another may be of help
In restonng the onglnal 'U!xt or vIce verso ESpeclally where the
translation was made at a penod antenor to the oldest surviVIng
Mss of the text In question, Its value WIll be exceedingly great
and Its eVidence wJlI form an indIspensable part of a proper
apparatus cntzeus For a maJonty of Mahayana texts In Sans-
knt, the greatest eVIdence for the reconstruction of the original
text IS from Tibetan and C h l n ~ translations made at an early
penod For the Mahabharata we have the Janavese (C AD. 1000)
-
and the Telugu (c AltD 1025) adaptations or epItomes of the on-
glnal text In Javanese and Telugu respectIvely of the eleventh
century, antedating the earlIest extant Mss of the Mababharata
again by several centunes
DIrect Quotations of many passages of onglnal texts are
found dIspersed In later literature. partIcularly of a techOlcal
nature Thus In works on Grammar and Alamldira, for Instance,
arc!" to be found numerous CItatiOns from emher works as illus-
trations of the particular rules diSCUssed or types defined. These
mayor may not be CIted WIth the author's name
ObVl9us Imltabons (including Parodies) -may be used to
restore the words either of the Imitator or the ImItated We
have for instance the famous Meghaduto of Kahdasa worked
3 J
mto the body of another poem entitled Piirsviibh)'Ull4ya of Jma-
sena 10 such a way that each stanza of the latter borrows one: or
two hnes from the former
EpItomes and Adaptations (mcludmg Paraphrases) also help
us to partIally what was 10 the ongmal text utJhzed for
such epItomes or adaptatIons Thus the BhiirolomanJQ1i by the
Kasmiri poet K$emendra IS an epitome of the Kasmiri VersIon'
of the Mohabhiirota, and throws some light on this Version
AncIent Commentanes are another source of a subsIdIary
character ; If the text commented upon IS quoted eIther completely
or 10 the shape of lemmata, such CItations help us 10 reconstruct-
109 the correspondmg part of the text
In the case of texts gomg back not to a smgle author but to
a school of tradItional hterature as IS represented for instance
10 the Mahlibharata or the vanous Pur3:Qas, parallel versIons of
mmor epIsodes or passages are to be met WIth 10 other works
Thus there IS a parallel versIon of the Sakuntal3. epIsode (MtJhii-
bhiirata I, 62 ff) 10 the Padma-puriina
The last stage 10 textual cntIC;lsm IS the separatIon of the
sources utIhzed by the author Although some prehmmary
studIes 10 thIS hne have appeared by such emment Scholars bke
LUDERS (Dae Sage von It IS yet too early 10 the
hIstory of IndIan textual cntIclsm to attempt thiS task, 10 the
absence, particularly, of SCIentIfically edIted texts of well-known
claSSICS So for the purposes of the work thiS fOUrtil
stage In the cntIcal estImate of texts WIll not be 10cluded
CHAPTER IV
THE PROBLEM OF CRITICAL RECENSION
We shall assume that the edItor has decIded to bnng out a
cntIcal edItIon of a text whIch has not been edIted at all or at
least not crItically edited so far. The first th10g that he has
to do IS to find out the evIdence avadable for thIs purpose, which
wIll be 10 most cases transmItted handwntten COPIes or manu-
scnpts Thanks to the contmued efforts of scholars over a penod
of nearly aI century we have today a large number of catalogues,
hand-lIsts and even descnptIVe catalogues
l
of Sansknt, Praknt
and Vernacular manuscnpts depOSIted 10 the many famous pUblIC
IIbranes, som.etlmes, as 10 the case of MITRA'S NotIces, we have
even mention of Mss tl. be found 10 pnvate possessIon In the
case of Sansknt Mss the excellent CataJogus Catalogorum of
AUFRECHT prOVIdes 10 general consohdated 1Oformatlon about
dIfferent texts and the Mss of such texts known to be In eXIstence
from the vanous notices, descnptIons, etc whIch have been pub-
lIshed 10 mdlVldual catalogues, hand-lIsts or Journals Although
the work of collect1Og and descnbmg Mss IS still 10 progress and
fresh 1OformatIon IS added from year to year, the edItor has to
be satisfied WIth whtttever 1Oformatlon he can get from avaIlable
sources The first task then IS to find what Mss are avaIlable
for hIS purpose and then have access to them for the pUrpose of
collatIon and contInuous study He has to satisfy hImself that
he IS dealIng WIth genumely transmItted COPIes of the text by
oontmuous reading of the documents and notmg theIr pecuharitJes
After all the avallable Mss have been collated and carefully
eXdmmed the edItor has to select all the really trustworthy
Mas as hiS WItnesses for the constitutIon of the text. Just
as the general character of a Witness has a bear10g on the Credl-
bdlty of any depositIon whIch he makes, so also the general
1 or French Catalogues raasonnes
character of a Ms wIll aid us In detemllrung the value of Its testi-
mony With regard to a partlaJ.lar readmg. Of two Mss, say
A and B, a companson shows that wherever they differ, the
number of readmgs which are certaIn or highly probable IS much
larger In B than In A, then the supenonty of B In general trust-
worthiness may be taken IOta account In such cases where the
chOice of readIng between A and that of B IS dIfficult This IS
not an absolute cnterion for the genUIneness of all the readings
of B, for A may chance to preserve In some cases the true read-
Ing as agamst B although It may be the worse of the two Mss
Thus the Ms B which PISCHEL collated for the second edition of
Stikuntala abounds With blunders of every land such as the sense-
less amu$m6n for the common word a ~ m i i n , an Index of the
learnIng and Intelhgence of the scnbe and though It seldom pre-
sents an ongmal readIng there are a few Instances where It does :
thus at 1-4-4 ItS readIng ah,aritNlu for ak,nidu, IS also the read-
JOg of the shorter recensIOn of S India r
In WeighIng the relative trustworthmess of Mss so selected
it must be remembered, as mentioned already, that each Ms has
Its own pecuhantIes These pecuhantIes can be leilrned only
by close and contInUOUS study of the particular manuscnpt, and
to learn these IS the essential part of the textual cntlc's bUSIness
In short the doctnne IS that all the trustworthy Witnesses to a text
must be heard and heard contmuously before a verdict IS given
It IS, as WOLF says, a recenslo and not a mere reccigmtw that
is required 2 This IS even more essential In those cases where
the text has come down to us in a SIngle manuscnpt An intImate
acquaIntance with the general characteristics of these solItary
witnesses is needed in amving at a conclUSIOn that a partIcular
readmg is corrupt, and 10 attempting to amend It. This IS
especially the case With Inscnptions On the other hand It
becomeS increasingly difficult to compare Mss In respect of their
general trustworthiness when their number IS large It IS abso-
lutely necessary 10 these cases to enquire whether, and to what
extent, the genealogy of the Mss can be traced
II HALL, op cit, p 122
THE PROBLEM OF CRITICAL RECENSION 37
Thus the problem of RecensIOn IS not always SImple and
depends to a large extent on the mam types of tradItion which the
extant witnesses of the text themselves present. ConSistent With
the prOVISO mentioned 10 the preced10g paragraph about the need
of continuous study of each manuscript preserved as a Witness
of the text, we may conSider here for the sake of convemence the
maln types separately.
Under favourable conditions, when a text IS not completely
lost, It may be transmitted and preserved u ~ one of the following
ways. (I) In one manuscript only and (11) 10 more than one
manuscript
NoW when the transmission rests only on one extant manus-
Cript (codex fm,cum) , the Critical recenSIon IS regarded as the
most accurate depictIon and decIpherment of thiS sobtary witness
This IS the case WIth the majority of 1OscriptIons and copper-
plate grants SImilarly With the fragments discovered In Khotan
and Turfan, such as the fragments of Buddhist plays, edited by
LUDERS, as also texts which have survived only 10 a s10gle known
extant manuscript lIke Visvanatha's Kosakalpataru or Ninya-
deva's BharattJbha$ya
The genealogical method rests on conslderatJons of a Simple
k10d which we have already discussed 10 the earber chapters.
But its e'lnployment IS of recent date For before the days of
the raIlways few scholam had the means of consult1Og all the Mss.
of any given work ~ t t e r e d 10 all the distant lIbraries and private
collections of thIS vast sub-continent or even getting collations.
accurately prepared At the same tIme the modem mechanical
process l for obtammg facslmJles of the required Mss were un-
known.
The varymg written COPIes of a text, bemg transmitted copus
hjplded down through centurIes of WrItten transmiSSIon, cannot be
uitImately independent of each other they are descendants of a
common orlgmal, now probably lost, descended through variOUS.
streams of tradition If thiS common orig1Oal}s a Written arche-
type. ti\ere wdl be a complete concatenatIon of COpies and
exemplars finally reachmg back to It. If we can discove( all
the facts relative to theIr transmiSSion, we) can construct an
aocurate pedigree of their descent The nearer we are to achlevlOg
this, the better we shall be able to sift the spunous readlOgs from
the genume
The general prlOclple accordlOg to which we decIde on the
denvatlon of manuscnpts IS that, apart from aCCIdent, Identity
of readlOg Imphes Identity of ongm The source of the read 109
may very well be the author's autograph, but, If not, It must be
'SOme manuscnpt 10 the hne of transmiSSIon Suppose there are
,fifteen manuscnpts of a given text, and 10 a gIVen passage eight
of them show one readmg as agamst seven showmg another
readlOg This fact shows that the common ancestor of the eight
had the one readlOg, and the common ancestor of the seven the
other If there IS no contamlOatIon
The more usual tests to decide the genealogIcal relat,onshlp
between manuscnpts are
1 Omissions of words and passagls and transposlttons of
passages OmIssIons are the surest test of affimty, says HALL,
smce If they are numerous they can hardly have ansen bv
aCCIdent, and all of these cannot have been Imported mto a text
by a companson WIth other manuscnpts They' frequently
imply a far closer connection than could be mferred by IdentIty
of readmg, and often show the Immediate descent of one manu-
SCrIpt from another 3
2 Agreement 10 a number of pecutlar \1"eadmgs or 10 other
pecullantles. It must be remembered that the relationshIp bet-
ween manuscnpts IS not always simple, each manuscnpt accepted
a ~ a factor 10 constructmg the text is not necessarIly descended
from one smgle ancestor, so that complete Identity of reading IS
not always poSSIble from manuscnpts derived ultimately from the
same source.
3 Tlus rule compares favourably WIth the law In Linguistics
that whIle conservations may Inchcate the commuruty of source of the
languages stuched, \.'Ommon mnovatlons are the true Inchcators of the
mutual relatronslup between them Identity of reachng In ger.eral may
be I.'Ompared With conservation, while OnuSSlonS mentroned above may
be Viewed as innovations for the purpose we have m View, namely the
THE PROBLEM OF CRITICAL RECENSION t 39
The collations of the manuscnpts which the editor has pre-
pared as a baSIS for the cntIcal recenSIon will Imbcate In general
such agreements on the strength of which he will ~ able to claaslfy
the manuscripts
It may sometimes happen that the pecuhar resemblances of
two manuscnpts may not be such as to warrant the derivation of
one from the other, but might be sufficient to establish some con-
nection between them We Infer that thiS connection arises from
.commumty of source, In thiS manner we arrive at the Idea of a
famdy of manuscripts
Let us suppose that there are eight manuscripts of a text
which we designate as ABC D E F G H If we find that of these
A stands apart 10 the peculiarities of Its readmgs, showmg no
great Similarity to any of the other seven, while Be on the one
SIde and D E F G H on the other Side much resemble each other
though dlffenng consldprably from the rest, we can express thiS
fact by saymg that B C form one fanuly, descended from a. hypo-
thetical common ancestor which we may indicate by X' and
DE F G H another family, descended from a hypothetical
common ancestor which we may call Y , We have already seen
how ~ r r o r s creep In continued transmiSSion of manuscupts, It
Will be reasonable then to expect that the readmgs of X' will
be freer from errors than those of either B or C , and Since .
IS the hypothetical so.Jrce from which Be denve, ItS readtngs

will 'be of a higher antiquity and authOrity than any of the read-
lOgs of Band C taken smgly The readings of X' are naturally
to be deduced by companng those of Band C For If X' were
extant, we would then be able to verify the fact that X' IS more
ancient and more authontatIve than Band C taken Singly, and
to explain at least some of the scribal errors which have crept into
the text of B and C Similarly the readmgs of Y' will be of a
higher antiquity and greater authonty than those of D E F G H
taken SIngly Now If we find that in the farmly D E F G H,
G and H agree among themselves to a greater extent than With
D E 1! In the pecuhantles of their readings while preserving their
general farmly charactenstlcs, It would follow that G and H are
.descended from a common hypothetical allC*'l8tor W,' which be-
.40
INDIAN TEXtUAL CRITICISM
lQqgs ,to ,the falJl1ily D E F 'W', and that the readmgs of W
by the comparIson of those of G and H are of
greater antiqUIty and of hIgher value than the latter taken smgly.
Nor need we stop here, we may compare the readmgs of D E F
and W' and arrIve at ' Y' and further compare those of ' Y' and
, X' WIth each other and WIth those of A, and thus deduce the
readlOgs of a still more remote ancestor WhICh we may call Z '.
ThIS 'Z' will be the hypothetIcal common ancestor of all the
eight manuscrIpts WhICh are extant of a gIven text It IS WIth thIS
, Z' that the transmission of the manuscrIpts first breaks off lOto
several streams or hnes of descent, such as A, 'X' and' Y,' and
therefore the remotest common ancestor whIch can be restored
by a comparIson of the readmgs of A, 'X' and 'Y' from the
extant transmItted COples of the text It IS therefore called the
dlchetype of all the extant manuscrIpts, and we may thus gel
a pedigree of manuscrIpts or a stemma loduum, WhICh may be
gIven. as follows:
'z'
I
r---
'X'
I
, ,
B C
( archetYpe )
-- --I
'y'
I
I ,--,
D E F
I
'W'
I
--- -( ----
I I
G H
In the above stemm'O, the hypothetical parent codIces' X'
, Y' may be called the sub-archetypes or the non-extant Im-
me(ilate descendants of the archetype WhICh separated mto dIstmct
hnes of descent or transrrusslon as eVIdenced by extant manus-
(

"The simplest applIcatIon of the genealogy of manuscnpts lOr
siftIng the readmgs'"Is m connection With a famIly of manuscnpts,
w h ~ It can be shown that one of them IS the source from which
all the rest are denved If there are twelve manuscripts ABC D
E F G H I / K L, and the eleven manuscnpts commenCIng With
B and endmg with L are shown to be dawed from A, the problem
of recenSlon IS at once slmpWied, for eleven of these manuscnpts
have no mdependent value for the purpose of determmlng the
ongmal readmg, smce, wherever they vary from their parent
codex A, the vanatlOn must be a result of thf! scnbe's IdiOSyn-
cracies and errors or conjectures. All the derived COPies may
therefore be disregarded except In places where t h ~ ongmal source
has been damaged Slnce these COpies were made. The cardmal
pnnclple of the textual cntlc IS to utlhze only mdependent Wit-
nesses of a given text; hence the denved COPies have no value
or very httle value as mdependent witnesses Therefore, except
10 special condltlons, the denved COPies of an extant parent codex
are to be ehmmatt!d
But great cautlon IS necessary 10 exammmg the alleged proofs
of such a denvatlon , a clear demonstratlon of It must be obtained
before the elImmabon of the alleged COPies It may happen that
the COPYist cf a given manuscnpt has restored the corrupt readmg
of hIS parent codex through felICItous conjecture or by companng
It With a dIfferent exemplar, If the latter be proved, then hiS
copy retams Its claIm to be an mdependent witness 10 such places,
and cannot altogether be elIminated.
When the parent codex IS non-extant, as for example W
X' or Y', Its readmgs have to be reconstructed from the eVIdence
of Its descendants If we have done our work properly, the text
that we a-nve at for X' and Y' Will be freer from errors of
copymg than the texts of B and C, and D E F and G H respect-
ively, and that of Z' freer from such errors than that of any
extant manuscnpts The process of elImmatlon here IS With
respect to those manuscnpts which have no mdependent value 10
the reconstruction of the parent codex, subject to the same safe-
guards and condltlons as 10 the earlIer case considered
In tite stemtmO given above the reconstructed readings of
X' and Y' may either agree or differ. If they agree t h ~
they must belong to Z " that. IS, they must be ongmal , If they
differ 'both cannot be the read10gs of ' Z' , one of them may then
be the read10g of 'Z', while the other may be due to transcnp-
tIonal error or to sporadic conjectures of the COPYIst, we have here
the chOlce of two readmgs which are called varumts one of whlch
lllBY be that of Z ' In such cases X' and Y' along With A may
be called "ar,ant bearers of the parent codex Z ' Similarly,
10 the case of W' G and H are the vanant bearers If 10 the
y' famdy of manuscnpts only D and G are extant, then the
read10gs of Y' wIll have to be reconstructed from the eVidence
of only D and G, and when these two disagree we have to make
a selection of the two subvanants, and the readmgs so reconstruct-
ed wdl'be the vanants for Z'
Our procedure so far has been on the assumption that there
has been no mixture or crossmg between the famdles X' and
Y , But thiS IS mostly an Ideal condition to be WiShed for, as
10 general manuscnpts are not so umfur'mly denved 10 the same
strand of tradition A number of manuscnpts have been produced
by a combmabon of two or more different manuscnpts In the
absent! of a regular history of the tranSmISSion ?f texts It IS
exceed10gly dIfficult to unravel the dIfferent strands m theIr 10-
dependent transmtsslon, as more often than not they appear 1Oter-
tw10ed even from an early penod ThiS process of 1Otertw1Omg
of the dIfferent strands of transmISSion IS termed crossmg or
,nterm,;nng and the codIces so produced are called conftatcd
manuscnpts or m,sch-codtCes
That a text may be Improved by the companson of two
cocilces IS not a modem discovery We have examples of vanant
readings (patka or patkiintaras) mentioned by commentators bke
Devabodha and ATjunamlsra of the MtJhiibMrala, and an 1Oterest-
ing expenment 10 medIeval textual cnticlsm has been referred to
by Mr GoDE 10 rus paper Textual CnoC1sm 10 the Thirteenth
Century '4 The accompany 109 diagram mdlcates a stemma cod,-
cum where K and L are conftated manuscnpts, be10g formed by
the mtenmxture of A and B and of C and F respect. l y
6 Woolnet' CAmmemoratron Volume, pp 106-1OS
I
'X'
I
-I ---
A B
\//
K
I
'Y'
1
I I
C F
\/
L
I
G
There need not be any hmlt to thiS fusIOn , and the greateI
its extent, the more difficult does It become to trace the trans
miSSion of a text As WESTCOTT and HORT say, 'The gam 01
loss to the mtrmslc punty of texts from mlxture With other t e x t ~
IS, from the nature of t ~ case, mdetermlnable In most c a ~
there would be both gam and loss, but both would be fortUitoUS,
and they might bear to each other any conceivable proportion"
Thus whether such crossmg' produces an mtnnslcally betteI
text depends' of course upon the Judgment and mSlght of thE
crosser Smce crossmg or mtermlxture Imphes the exercise 01
ChOIce, It may be accompamed by other efforts at Improvmg thf
text, m thiS case. the text wIll, m all probablbty, suffer For eVeII
m the case of emendallon& made by scholars, there IS only a small
portion representmg real Improvement of the text, naturally thE
SCrIbal emendations represent even a smaller proportion of real Im-
provements
The yalue of a conftated manuscrIpt hes particularly m suet
cases where one of the manuscrIpts from which It IS compounded
IS lost Then It wIll have the merIt of an mdependent witness t(J
suell of the readmgs of the lost manuscrIpt and therefore of pre
servmg traces of the truth which would otherwise be Irrecover
able
A very mterestmg case of such conftatlon jS With referenCE
to the P/lRcatontTO tradition By a detaded and careful study oj

II Quoted by POSTGATE, CompanIon to Latin .'jtudles, P 795.
the matenal EDGERTON tries to establish four independent
streams, represented as follows:
1. TantrakhayJldi, SimplIcior and Plil1l}.abhadra.
2. Southern Paficatantra, Nepalese Paiicatantra and the
Hltopadeaa.
3. The Brhatkathi versIons (namely, Sornadeva and

4 The Pahiavi versions
To the first group belongs also m part, smce ap-
parently he used TantrakhiyIldi , therefore hiS text IS contaminated
With TantrakhiYlka, and Slgmficant only when agreemg with 2
and 4, but not With 1 On the other hand Piil1l}.abhadra made
partIal use of at least one different stream, not secondanly related
to any of the others So we have traces here of at least a fifth
stream, which however nowhe're appears m a pure and uncon-
taminated form m the texts which have Consequently for
thiS hypothetical fifth stream the value of Pii11l)8bhadra would be
that of an mdependent Witness
The genealogical method, stnctly speakmg, cannot be ap-
phed to conflated manuscnpts as such Their mutual relatIons
are more often than not very difficult to disentangle. Occasion-
ally however we may detect a common stram m these manu-
SCrIpts, shown by their agreements m peculIar corruptIons or m
good readmgs which would have been hard to discover by un-
aided conJecture This wIll lead then to a partial applIcatIon
of the genealogical method to portIons of manuscnpts
It may sometnnes happen that good readmgs found m
manuscnpts which are generally untrustworthy, and which are
not worth CItIng contInuously. These may then be Cited only
In such cases where their testImony IS helpful In restoring the
text
In a large number of cases, due to complex: JnlXture of the
different hnes of transmission, It may happen that the genealogical
relatIonship between manuscnpts IS too obscure to afford ground
for the' applIcation of such a method. This IS the case, for
instance, With the manuscnpts of the M aLatimOtlhova utilized for
hiS edition by late Sir Ramalmshna Gopal BHANDARKAR.
Suppose there are SIX manuscnpts ABC D E F, and their
history IS not clear so far as the hnes of tranSmISSIon are con-
cerned, we cannot say that ABC form one famIly, descended
from a common ancestor, whIle D E F form another A com-
panson may, however, show that certam good readmgs are com-
mon to ABC, but are not found In D E F This fact wIll IndI-
.cate that, so far as those readings are concerned, some good manu-
script was the source common to ABC, though that ancestry
may be! In other respects diverse or mIxed TIus method IS mter-
mechate between those based on the eVidence derived from the
known character of a smgle document and the genealogical eVi-
dence of a famIly of documents
By a methodical use of the eVidence of extant and non-
extant manuscnpts (whose readmgs are mferred from the denvmg
extant manuscnpts), we shall arrIve at what may be called the
transmItted text TIus transmItted text wtll be dIfferent from
any eXlstmg one It wIlll10t be the best one, and not even neces-
sanly a good one, but It wIll be the most anClent one accordmg
to the dIrect hne of transmIssIon, and the purest 10 the sense of
bemg the freest from traceable errod! of copymg and unauthonsed
improvements
In order to understand the method of reconstructmg the lost
archetype of a gIven number of extant manuscnpts, let us conSIder
a hypothetical case where we have rune extant manuscnpts abc a
~ f g It i A close examInation: and companson of thar readmgs
shows that they may be dlVlded mto two sets or tamlhes conSIst-
ing respectIvely of (J bed and e f g h z We may express this
fact by saying that the first four are descended from a common
non-extant ancestor X and the remammg five from another
common lost ancestor Y Now a further scruttny may show that
the family of five again falls mto three smaller sets e, f s, and
g h- These smaller sets show that e stands apart, f and , are
denved from a common ancestor S, , bemg merely a copy denved
from f , and g hare denved from a lost parent codex T In thiS
typical dISCUSSion the lower case letters indicate extant IJUUlU-
$Cripts, wilde the capital letters Indicate non-extant manuscrit::ts
We shall suppose that the hnes of transmission are not inter-
woven; in other words the trawtlon IS umform and none of the
manuscnpts are conflated That IS to say, there IS no eVidence
of mIXture, either between the famIlies descended from X and Y
respectlvely or between the smaller sets wlthm Y The stemma
wIll then stand as follows, 0 be10g the Ongmal and A the lost
archetype from which X and Yare denved
0
I
A
I I
I
X Y (K}
I __
I
I I I
I
a b c d e S
T
I
I I
f
g
h
I
e
If 0 and A can be demonstrated to be Identical, then we can re-
'Place the symbol A by 0 .
Let us now examme the read10gs of all these manu-
scnpts and compare them mmutely If we are satisfied that ,
IS a duect copy of f, then we ellmmate I altogether except 10 such
read10gs where f has been damaged after the copy I was made
from It {
We now come to the problem of reconstructmg the read10gs
of A on the eVldenre supphed by the read10gs of abc d t? f g h
(and I, accord1Og to the provIso mentloned above)
(1) A read10g which IS shown by all the eight manuscnpts.
(or rune If we mclude ,) must have been that of A This IS the
malO postulate of textual CrItiCism, namely, that a read10g In
which there IS general agreement between what may be pr.ved
to be (more or less) 10dependent manuscnpts, must be the ori-
gmal readmg of the archetype
(2) If all \.he four descendants of X have one and
all the five of Y have another, then the genealogIcal eVidence does
not enable us to decide which was the read10g of A The number
47
of manuscrIpts arrayed on either side IS nnmaterIal, and so also
the fact that there IS a consensus between three smaller sets of Y.
One of the cord'nol doctranes of textual cntJCJSm 'Sf thot cod,ces
are to be we,ghed and not counted So mere numbers on either
Side do not help us m arnvmg at the correct readmg of A In
this case there can be no absolute certamty as to the readmg 10
A Other thmgs bemg equal, one of the two readmgs may be
that of A, provIded the documentary' or tranSCrIptIonal probabIhty
shows that the other readmg can be a corruptIon of the one ac-
cepted Thus for mstance If (JI b c d represent Northern manu-
SCrIPts havmg a read 109 dh'$Ihda and the five remammg manu-
scnpts bemg Southern have a read 109 v'$/h,tii, we can see that
may be the read10g of A smce v'$th,tii IS transcnptlon-
ally possIble, because dh and v of early northern SCrIpt are almost
SimIlar
(3) Next let us suppose that the descendants of X (or of Y)
are dIvided among themS('ves The rf.'presentatlves of T (g and
h) are found dlssent10g from those of Sand e, t8nd agreemg WIth
abc d Is the read10g of Y to be mferred from T or from S and
e ? It wIll be clear that It should be 10ferred from T, because,
excludmg the hypothesiS of mIXture or accidental co1Ocldence. the
agreement of T With abc d can be explamed only on the SUPPOSI-
tion that T has preserved the read10g common to X and Y, which
must also have been the read10g of A The read10gs of S and e
10 thiS case must be left aSIde as mlslectlons or corruptions
The advantage of the genealOgical method, whenever It IS
posSible, IS twofold (I) the work IS slmphfied by the ehmlnatIon
of certam varIants and (11) It becomes poSSible to lOfer some
read10gs ot A besIdes those 10 whIch all Its desandants agree
We shall now conSider bnefly the typical cases of constltu-
bon of the texts of the different non-extant manuscnpts whose
eXlt!ence at some time 10 the past must be assumed m order to
explam the relatlOnslup m whIch the extant manuscnpts stand to
each other In the stemma given above
( 1 ) The text of T can be constituted
(a) through the agreement of g and h
(b) through the agreement of g or h and the remammg
manuscripts, because these agreements within the
Y family can be explained only on the basis of the
ongmahty of these agreements descend 109 from Y
itself. The case of T agreeing With 0 bed has
already been dealt With It follows from thls that
the special faults or corruptlons or mlslectlons of
g and h cannot in general make the constltutlon
of the text of T doubtful The text of T Will
however remain doubtful when g and h' do not
either agree among themselves or With the re-
mammg manuscnpts, or when they are mdepend-
ent of each other 10 the same corruptions.
(2) In the same manner and With the same certamty or
absence of certamty the text of S can be estabhshed on the basis
of f and T.
(3) Slmllarly and to the same eJflent we can constitute the
text of Y on the baSIS of e, SandT.
(4) The text of X can be ,estabhshed
(0) through the concordant readmgs of any two manus-
cnpts abc d taken at random, or
(b) through the agreement between any two manus-
cnpts of thiS group With the manuscnpts of the
Y group, because such agreements can only be ex-
plamed on the baSIS or h ~ l r bemg the common
readmgs of X and Y and therefore of A If 0 b
t d vary among themselves and dtffer from Y,
glvmg confbctmg readmgs, the text of X wlll re-
malO doubtful It follows from this that all parti-
cular readlOgs of aI b c 'ttl e S (f) g and hare 10
general worthless for the constitution of the texts
of X and Y. They should therefore be eb-
mmated.
The present oonslderatlon can be equally
al-phed to such cases where the arcltetype A
breaks up mto a further number of streams of
transmiSSion In addition to X and Y, and the text
of X and Y can be oonstItuted under the same
principles of reconstruction
(5) In the oonstItutIon of the: archetype A the cm:umstanc:es
are somewhat different If Its transmission had broken mto two
streams X and Y, and X and Y agreed among themselves, then
the conoordant readmg would be that of A as has already been
explamed m great detail above. If they conflict With each other
one of these discordant readings can be that of A But as men-
tIoned aoove the genealOgical method does not help us here.
Other thmgs bemg equal, ooth transcriptIonal (or documentary)
probability and mtnnSlC probablhty Will have to be taken IOta
conSIderation for setthng the text, such conSideratIons Will form
part of the next chapter
(a) If of the two faJDlhes X and Y only one manus-
cript each such as a and s were preserved, we
oould confiltute the text of A! With a slJDllar cer-
tamty , Q and , would then be the variant bearers.
But an essentIlll detenoratIon would stIll remain,
If 10 an already corrupt text 10 X and Y further
damage were to arIse 10 the hne of tranSJDlSSlon,
or If 10 a bad readmg of X, stlll retained pure in
Y, a later corruptIon took place 10 i
(b) A Similar s ~ t e of affairS would be met With If only
IQ e anll , were preserved Through the agreement
of e , agaInst a, a and Y (I e, e I) would become
the vanant bearers If a , agree agamst e or " e
agamst I, then the Isolated readmgs are worthless.
If a , and e all oonfuct With one another, then
neither Y nor A can be constItuted With the exist-
ing material Attempts must then be made, from
the sub-variants' of e and , to constitute the
readmgs of Y, so that these varIants may then be
conSidered as havmg equal value With those of a,
as seen from the pomt of VIew or recenSion
(6) If only Q b, or e g, or g h are preserved, then It w1l1
be possible onlY' to constItute the text of the p a ~ t codices X or
4
Y or T, and for each of these lost sources the two extant manus-
copts are the varIant bearers
(7) If A were dIvided. mto three (or more than three) hnes
of transmlSS10n such as X, Y and K (or more), the text of A
can be constituted through the agreements between any two of
these sub-archetypes In such cases where these groups give con-
filcttng readmgs, or when the agreements between any two are of
such a nature as! to be aceJdentaI and mdependent of each other,
there can be no absolute certamty as to the readmg of A.
The reasomng above IS based on the assumption that there IS no
internuxmg or fUSion between the different strands of the tranSInl8-
SIOO. Let us now conSider cases where such contammatIon or COD-
flatIon has taken place If, for Instance, the received manuscnpts
deVIate from theIr sources and cross With these different sources,
say, XY agamst K, XK agamst Yor YK agamst X, the Isolated
readmgs of X Y and K WhIch, under nopnal CIrcumstances would
be conSIdered worthless and ehInlnated, WIll all become presump-
tive van ants ' for the constitution of A, for X Y and K are all
.contamxnated, and the agreement of any two With a
readmg of the thIrd Will give us a set of two vanants l.avmg equal
value for the constItutIon of the archetype
A practical dlustratIon of these prmciples appbed to what
are defimte1y known as conflated manuscnpts IS seen 10 the cntIcal
recensIon of the MahabhaTota The stem.ma codu:um here dIVIdes
r
the streams mto Nand S, N havmg separated agam mto two
subgroups v and y The cntlcal exammatlon has shown that even
the relatively pure K versIons are not free from contammatlon
The malO pnnclple underlymg all specUlatIon as to
says SUKTHANKAR, In hIS Prolegomena, IS the postulated ongJ-
nabty of agreement between what may be proved to be more or
less mdependent versions The rule arlsmg out of the agreeml(Dt
between mdependent recensIOns and versions IS easy to compre-
hend and Simple to apply , only Its sphere of operation IS rather
restncted DIftia.'.lbes arise when there IS ftuctuabon, and that
IS the normal state. So when there was fluctuatIon the 'choice of
the editor fell, as a corollary of the above rule, upon a readmg
which 18 document"!d by the largest number of (what pTJtna facre
51
appear to be) more or less mdependent Versions, and wluch IS
-sqpported by mtnnSlc probabllity. The presumptions of OngJ-
nabty 10 these cases IS frequently confirmed by a lack of defimte
agreemettt between the discrepant versions The chief dtfficulty
comes In when there IS a double agreement, or agreement between
two or more groups of each recenSlon , here one of the agreements,
generally spealong, must be aCCIdental, Slnce both can hardly be
ongmal , and either may be adopted, If th<!y have equal 1Otr1OSlc
ment The balance of probabllity IS equal for such read1Ogs, and
the chOIce dIfficult Only 10 such cases can more weight be gIVen
to the Witness which bears the best character for accuracy Ac-
cordmgly SUKTHANKAR has adopted the readmgs of the group
SlK When the two recensions have alternate readmgs neither of
which can have come from the other and which have equal 10-
tnDSlc ment (N S), the chOIce IS extremely difficult, the balance
.of probablllty IS equal for both recensIOns Applymg the doctnne
that 10 such cases only more Weight 19 to be gIVen to the Witness
which bears the best character for accuracy, the more rehable
Witness may be consistently adopted, as a stop-gap, With a view
to aVOId unnecessary and mdlscnm10atE fUSion of versions
When these tests break down or when they give only a negatIve
result. the expedient adopted by SUKTHANKAR was to find a read-
109 which best explams how the other readmgs may have arISen
Thus 198.18 samudge > samudre, samuhe, somrddhe etc The
true read10g 10 such cases has often proved to be a lecbo d'ffial,or,
or an archrusm or a solecism, thO deSIre to ehmmate them being
the cause of the vanatIon
SlDu:arly the dIfficulty of restonng the texts of sub-arche-
types of different versions when the extant manuscnpts are con-
tammated may be reahzed from the followmg conSideratIons
gaIned from Mahiibhiirota manuscnpt studies Says SUKTHAN-
KAR Suppose we examme SIX manuscnpts of a version
(Grantha) to prepare a cntIcal text of that version It may
happen that four of them (G
12
, 5 ), which are conftated manu-
scnpts, have a secondary read1Og, whlle only two (G
a
'
8
) have the
correct reading In these CIrcumstances the true charac-
ter of the vanants could never be mferrerl from the read-
52
ings of this versIOn (G) Itself, It would be shown only by other
veI'Slons (T or Mar N) In fact, there IS no way of findIng out
whether any of the manuscrIpts of a partIcular versIOn are con-
ftated (If they happen to be conftated) WIthOUt consultmg the
other versions.'6 Thus It IS eVIdent that the Ideal type whIch we
have dISCUssed m thIS chapter needs modIficatIons m actual prac-
bce accordmg to the nature of the extant manuscrIpts WIth whIch
we have to buIld up our CrItIcal recenSIon
The Importance of dISCOVerIng wherever possIble the exact
fibatlon of extant manuscrIpts may be guaged from the foIIow-
mg conSIderatIon supposmg that a manUSCrIpt does not deviate
from Its source, and the tradItion IS pure or unmIxed, It IS not
possIble to settle ItS fibatlon to Its source and other descendants of
Its source If for mstance m the stemm" conSIdered above f does
not show any umque faults m ItS tranSCrIptIon from S, then we
cannot decIde whether , derIves dlrectlt' or through f from S.
Suppose that only a and j are preserved, then , would be a pre-
sumptive vanant bearer, whereas W ~ should have to ebmmate it
completely If we penetrated sufficiently through the hIStOry of the
textual transmISSIon. It would therefore be necessary to subject
to exammatlon all ItS smgular readmgs evE!n If they be m reahty
genume faults
SImIlarly when a COPYIst corrects a fault m hIS source by
a fOrUutous conjecture WIthout openly ackn.)wledgmg It, then It
may gIve rIse to the appearance that hiS transcrIpt descends from
a source other than ItS own exemplar for such a readmg, m
other words there IS a poSSIbilIty that some sort of contammatIon
IS assumed by the classIfier of the manuscrIpt evidence. But cor-
rect readmgs WhICh are found through proper conjecture of the
COPYISt cannot be brought wlthm the field of CrItICIsm agamst
thetr ehmmabon demanded by other arguments Hence gn:at
care IS to be exerCIsed m determmmg the fibatIon of ,manuscnpts
eIther wltlun a smgle strand of tradItIon or wIthm mtertwmed
strands.
6 Prolegomena, p LXXXI
In the absence of exact chronology ather of the authors or
thar transmitted texts, It IS not possible to say whether the arche-
type recovered through cntlcal analysIS of the collatlons from
extant manuscnpts can be IdentIfied WIth the autograph or not.
The archetype may be Identlcal With the ongmal or
may be later than the origmal. If the archetype IS later
than the ongmal, It may be an Immediate copy of the autograph
or the earliest mtermediate copy which can be recovered through
the evidence of extant manuscripts It is not always possible to
say how many stages of transmiSSIon lie between the dtfferent
'Streams of the trarution or between the lost parent codex and the
preserved manuscnpts
CHAPTER V
CAUSES OF CORRUPTION
IN A TRANSMITTED TEXT
All that a proper recenston of a text does IS to report the
eVIdence of the documents, whIch are the pnmary WItnesses to
the text so transmItted, and to decIde whIch documents are the-
most trustworthy OWIng to theIr age or character In most cases
thls bnngs us appreCJably nearer the autograph, stIll It always
leaves a resIduum of passages, greater or less In number accordmg
to the character and hIstory of the text m question, whIch no>
longer p r ~ t the words whIch the author ongmally wrote Such
passages are usually descnbed as coITVPt' and before we allow
such corruptions to remain m the text we must conSIder whether
they can be removed or emended' If It be proved that some
portIon of a text has dIsappeared WIthout leaVIng any trace behmd,
the mJury IS lfreparable, and the edItor should then carefully mark
the lacuna m hIS text But a ma)onty of corrupt passages are
mstances where the text has been defaced but not entIrely de-
stroyed, and can be restored WIth more or less probability by
emendation
In order then that we may succeed m restonng our text from
the eVidence available, mcludmg such eVidently corrupt passages,
we must know and weigh t h ~ causes which tend to VItiate It In Its
vanous kmds
We have already mdlcated that the corruptIons whIch find'
thelr way 10 transmItted texts are eIther VISual and psychological,
aCCIdental or dehberately made, and mvoluntary, sernlvoluntary-
or voluntary No appeal to expenence has so far enabled cnbes-
to frame exhaustive categones of transcnptlonal error or hcense.
It is Impo6S1ble, iis JEBB remarks, to draw up a bst of t h ~ motives
wh!ch might lead to wIlful change, or of the acadents whIch mIght
lead to blunders, for the organs of the tradition were not machmes,
CAUSES OF CORRUPTION IN A TRANSMITTED TEXT 55
but men. Of course expenence teaches that the various types
of f ~ u 1 t s considered below have different frequenCies, and in case
of doubt, dIfferent probabibtIes In order to secure a sound
foundation for thiS department of textual cntIclsm, one must pre-
pare, for the mdlVldual penods of tune, types of bterature and
the regions of wntmg, on the baSIS of such manuscnpts whose
source IS actually extant (and whose readmgs will In general
be ebmmated 10 our cntlcal editions), a statement of all the
mdlvldual faults, arranged accordIng to types, then one must
proceed to the Individual faults of such manuscnpts whose source
can be reconstructed With certaInty through recenSion, m thiS
case the first thmg to do IS to separate those manuscnpts whose
source can be constituted by selectIon from those whose souret>
can only be arrived at by 'dIVInatIOn' or conjecture
As matters stand at present these errors may be classIfied In
several ways Adaptmg the system of claSSification followed by
HALL, we have errors irlSmg from
I Confusions and attempts made to remedy them
( 1 ) ConfUSIOn of SImilar letUtrs and syllables
(2) MlstranscnptIon of words through general resemblance.
(3) MlsmterpretatIon of contractions
(4) Wrong combmatlon or separatIon
( 5 ) ASSimIlation of termmatlons and accommodation to-
nelghbounng constructIon
(6) Transpol
l1
tIon of letters (anagrammatlsm) and of words
and sentences, dislocation of sentences, sections and
pages
(7) Mlstranscnptlon of Sansknt mto Praknt or Vernacular
and VIce versa
( 8 ) Mistake due to change 10 pronunciation
(9) ConfUSIon of Numerals
(10) ConfUSion 10 Proper Names
( 11) Substitution of synonymous or famlbar words for un-
famIlIar
(12) New spellmgs substituted for old.
( 13) Interpolation or the atten1pt to repalT the results of un-
conscIous errors
56
II. Omissions.
(14) Haplography, or the omlSS1Oll of word5 or syllables
with the same begmnmg or ending and
l
komoeoteleuta)
(15) Llpography (portJblePsw) or simple omission of any
kind
III AdditIons.
(16) Repetition from the Immediate (Dlttography) or nelgh-
bourmg context
( 17) Insertion of mterlmear or margmal glosses or notes
(Adscnpts) .
( 18) Conftated readmgs
( 19) AdditIons due to the Inftuence of kindred wntIngs
A few of these errors wIll be Illustrated below. In the degree
in which the volItion of the scribe IS absent or present we shall
arrange them as mvoluntary (or mechamcal), serm-voluntary and
voluntary.
INVOLUNTARY (OR MECHANICAL) CoRRUPTIONS.
Errors of the eye
(a) ConfUSions of Letters TIus IS purely a questIon to be
settled by palaeographlcal eVIdence For mstance In the Deva-
nigari petubar to the Jams there IS frequent mterchange between
the followmg (I) e, tJ and b; (11) ttk and eek; (iiI) tk and liz ,
(IV) bM and 11k and (v) ddt ddk, te, ltk 'ind 44k. In other
vanebes of Devanagari also such confuSIons exIst. A few
examples wIll make thiS clear MahAvlracanta
sth cch-I 1
8
svasthaya > svacchaya E.
o a-II 13
8
mahadoso > mahadtJso B
o

y p-I 4
c
vakyanisyanda-O > o-mspando K, E. B
o
etc-
III 40
d
katpapaya-O > katyat}aya } Md Mt Mg.
t} P kalpiipaya
Y
> katyanaya
ConfuSIons generally occur when the manuscript whIch a
scnbe IS copying IS In an unfamibar wntlng and contams letters or
symbols resemblmg characters 10 the scnpt to which he ill accus-
tomed but haVIng a different value Thus Kv which IS a mode-
rately trustworthy though modern and mcorrect transcnpt of a
.$araeli exemplar of the Adtparvan of the Mahibbirata, shows
cxmfuSlon ansmg from the deceptive sinularity between cer-
tain letters of the $aradi and Devanigari alphabets. The
COPYIst frequently WrItes 1M for sa; u for ta, and sa for tho
(thus U$a for tatka); d4 for T; sa for ma, or for cal; medial u for
subscnpt "a : "ya for "T : tu for tra, tta for tra ; syti for cya : sea
for ceQ, medIal UI for subscnpt t ; bha for ta; $ta for $ya, etc
Any good work on IndIan palaeography wlll gIve full detalls of
the dIfferent characters prevall10g 10 vanous classes of SCrIpts, and
from these a hst may be prepared of characters wlthm the same
SCrIpt which may be mIsunderstood for one another and withm
dIfferent scnpts haVIng such resemblances but dIvergent values
(b) OmISSIOn of letters or syllables, and partIcularly the
SUperscrIpt vowel SIgnS, one case of whIch has been dealt with
labove daso < doso Mahabbarata 1142.25
d
vrthalva sa
vmank$aSI Do for Vlna'nk$yasl, cf T 2G V1OaSI\lyaSl. ThIs mIstake
may be due to faulty hw10g Instances of loss of syllables .
Ram I 2
8
ye madvI\layavaSlnah D8 OmIts ya and reads
VI\lavas108ll), 10 As ye is represented by e and struck off. I sa
nananagam",s1OaQ D6 OmIts na, probably due to the 10fluence
of the nelghbounng letters, 10 tius case It wlll have to be CIted
under HomOlographon below
(c) TransposItIon of letters or syllables (AnagrammatIsm)
Mahaviracanta III 37
d
Jiianena canyo > Mt, Md. JiWle ca nanyo
o
(possIbly through wrong dIVISion of text. Ji'iane-na-canyo).
Ram I. 23
1
kamapravarm)as calva> Ds kamQr-o
(d) AdditIon of letters (from vanous causes) Mabavira-
canta I ~ a mahapuru\lasamram'bho > Bo samarambho
(e) ConfuSIon of words any words 10 the language may
be confused proVIded their general slmIlanty IS sufficIent to over-
come their unlIkeness In some partIcular
II (f) Loss of letters, syllables, words or hnes through sImIlar-
ity of wrItIng (HomOlographon) When the SImIlar letters stand
next to each other we have haplography
Mlilh. 1. 103.13
0
KaDnDl 6 a'bhyasiiyarrl for *a'bhyasuya-
ylm
HomOlographon :
Mvc. II 7rJ lolaloajl)o> lolaa!,lO 1
2
; III 18
6

>pakhaaxiira Bo, 19
3
prasavapamsana > prasavasana E.
(g) Repetltlons, Dittography etc Letters, groups of letters.
words and lInes are wntten twICE) (or oftener) mstead of once
Mbh 157, 21 hlisyanipel)a Sarilkaral). > Kt hiimyabamya-
O
(whIch IS corrupt for hlisyahasya- 0), a clear case of dittography
(h) OmtSSIOns of groups of letters, words and hnes through
SImple neglIgence
Mvc II gs abhlcarantI > acaranti E
SEMI VOLUNTARY AND VOLUNTARY CoRRUPTIONS
(a) PhonetIc confUSIons are lIkely to occur when the COPYIst
transcnbes hIS manuscrIpt at some one else's dIctatIOn Thus the
passage CIted under (b) m the former sectIOn, namely Mbh
1 142 25
d
D5 vmonk$llSt almost sounds lIke vmonk$yast But It
IS not absolutely necessary to consIder (them as errors of the ear,
for scnbes might 10terchange letters or combmatlons of letters
whIch sounded alIke, though to the eye there mIght be no resem-
blance
(b): TranSposItIon of parts of words or wholt words
Ram I 96 ,dam vQC(J!.n.(Im abravit > B2 vacanflm tv ,dam
abravit 'I 11
6
tasmm kale saha tVloyii > A tasm10 kale tvayii
saho.
Mvc I 13
1
Malthdasya ;> Tl T/,I RaJareer malthll-
asya, 14)3 kIlanyat > Tl. anyat kIla, III Mt are re anadvan
punu$iidhom'a > Mg are re purusiidhama anadvan
Mbh. 11 25
d
dhQryate yad dVI]atlbhIh Dl yad dkaryote
dVl
o
(metncally defectIve)
(c) Transposition of one or more lInes ThIS kmd of
transposItIon may 10 realIty be arrested loss A COPYISt finds that
he has aCCidentally omItted a lme or a number of hnes, and
rather than disfigure hiS page or waste hiS matenal and tune he
wrItes the omttted portion In the marg10 or at the foot of the
page, usf1a1ly a Sign to show where It should Ctlme The
succeedmg COPYISt may easily overlook thIS SIgn and thus perma-
nently misplace the passage.
KarpUramaftJari I manuscnpt T transposes verses 2 and 4 ;
similarly In NR verse 7 stands after verse 8
( d) GrammatIcal or other aSSImIlatIon to the Context
Ram I 121 tvam gotJ1 Iu mato mama > A; hi mot,r
mama 1& vrtal). atasahasrena vanaranam tarasvmam > A1 (Ka)
sahosrod co, mfiuenced by plural vanarir)am
tata!) $aka-Pulsndamsca Kahngims calva miirgata >
o Kal,ndiim ca 10 B2 (Ks) through IPubnda m the first pada
Mbh 1 96 8 abuya danam kanyanam gtlIQavadbhyab smrf;am
budlu4k > T 1 gun(lf)adbh.h through budhalh connected With
smrtam
(e) Wrong JunctIons and diVISions of words, generally gomg
back to a stage when texts were wlthoot word diVISion
We may consider here the passage previously Cited Mvc III 37'}
Jfianena canyo > ,.. Jnane na ciinyo > Mt Md Jiiane ca nanyo.
Simllarly the famm .. s Gila verse ahalm valsvanaro bhutvii IS
explamed by the Ignorant reaters even today as aham val sva naro
bhutva
Mbh 196 47
d
abravid-dhasati tada for ha satP
369.25
d
gatram for param aSobhflnam
'1 The follOWIng explanation of the passage IS due to Dr V s.
SUKTHANKAR the express101l haSllJt'i becomes merely averse-filling
word WIthout any cagen<-}' It Implies coquetry at a very cnbcal
moment, qwte InconSIstent With the behaviour of that particular
character (Amba) But In ha sat;, saN IS a PREGNANT word ThiS
mamage to the Kuru' family was alii Improvement OIl her own chOice.
She was not even fonnally engaged to Silva And In order to Improve
her status she could have very eaSIly thrown Silva overboard She
had only chosen him I n her min d vrtah) But belOg
a sati, she would not go back on her chOice (Cf SiiVltri also) And
besause she was a sati (a chaste girl), SOl ParaSurama fought for her
With Bhi4ma That IS also why she propltlated Siva and obtamed a
boon from Him As a mti she earned her hate of BID$ma to the next
htrth, and remcamatmg as S.klumdm she kIlled Bhi$ma Thus we see
how 1'RF8NANT IS the word sati lo this oontext H JlSClti puts the lid on
It, and iinaktng her out to be a coquette, bungles the whole thing
We are prone to acqwesce In a sense wluch mIght satisfy us, but \fluch
would have perverted the Ideology of the anaent
60
(f) Interchange of words or phrases or preposlbons of
kindred meaning or contrasted meanmg or in other words Syno-
nyms or Antonyms Thus odhi and abhi or ati frequently inter-
change ; d. Ram I 16' tJdh,gaccha pihvim > abh.-
pecha. A long bst of synonyms metncally equivalent 18 given
by SUKTHANKAR from the Mahabhirata 10 hiS Prolegomena,
p XXXVII; snmlarly for phrases Thus we have nareSfJara.
nortId,mpd. no.rottamiHuRar$Obha for the first type, and "'5-
vosantam yathi nagmn 10 opposltlon to sfJosantam SfJa IfHJtitUJgfim
for the second type
(g) OrmSSlons or 1Osertlons of seenungly ummportant words.
These compnse mostly monosyllabic particles, common adverbs
and conjunctIons .
Paficatantra: T A 13 ; athiitra bhavan kim kartukama\l
SP 111 atha bhavan kim vaksyati
Hp 55.4 and Hm 14 5 atha bha'{lin lam braviti
(h) False Recollections It may sometImes happen that
something In a passage before! a scnbe may suggest to him some-
thing else and he wdl wnte down' what IS m rus mmd, rather
than what IS before hiS eyes
Thus Mbb. 5.12729
a
reads fJaSyendnyam J,ttimtityam for
which Kl Dl T 1 G
1
8' have J,tiitmanam recollect1Og fJJ]Jtatmii of
220 and o}.tatma of 27
c
(I) Incorporation of marg10aba may be explana-
bons or glosses, Illustrative quotatIOns or readers' comments Thus
in the manuscript of (No. of the Govt. CoI-
tion of Mss at the Bhandarkar Institute), the text incorporates
some defimtlons of the metl""S used Wlthm Itself ; onginally these
passages must have been marginaba, later on incorporated Within
the main text by some subsequent COPYIst
(j) Interpolation. This IS a conscious tampering with the
text by 'Way of substitubon or addlbon with the object
of repairing the tesults of unconSCIous errors 'There h always
8OIl'e motive for interpolation hke some obvious corruption or
lacuna 10 the text which the 1Oterpolator tnes to amend, often
unslolfully. Interpolabon (whIch means pohstung, Improvement)
would mclude both addItIOns and omissions, but these omissions
are the harder to detect when they are desIgned In general It
IS often difficult to tell whether a change was desIgned or not.
Frdm the expenence gamed m thIS dIrectIon by the Mahibhirata
studies carned on at the Bhandarkar Insbtute, we may claSSIfy
mterpolatIons mto the followmg categones
1 SubstItutIon would naturally cover certam mherent dIffi-
cultIes of the text
(1) Manuscnpts betray the surreptItIous efforts of the scribes
and redactors to elIminate hIatus cf Prolegomena XCIII.
(11) Efforts made to correct hypermetnc hnes 1 20
vrnatiim vi$arnndvodaniim > v 1 fn$Qfmarupiim v.natiim,
vtnaliim dinooatianam v'$anno.vodantim kadruh
(111) Efforts made to aVOId solects'm 58616<1 vyathata
vamaniibhavat S vimanii vyatk,to' bhovat
(IV) Removal of archaIsm, and of dIfficult or unfamIhar
words and phrases 5 34 78
d
N apiicitnam S a/JOnitanr
(v) Improvmg upon dIfficult or pecuhar constructIOn or
sense
Mbh 5 7 28
c
N kr$1&fJm ciipkrtam Jiiiitvii yuddhan mene
,.tam 1aY6m > S krm'lm cap, m.aktibtihum timantrya bhlarat-
ar$abha
2 AddItIons whIch may be on any scale from the' mtroduc-
bon of a sentence or a verse to the manufacture of a long pas-
sage or even a whole chapter or poem are to be found, but they
cannot be ascribed to the COPYISts The redactors of the manus-
cnpts must have had access to an UnlImIted but parallel type of
hte!'ature to draw from
(1) Mulbphcabon of ItemS menboned m a hst, or a desIre
to complete the descnptIon m greater detall, cf SUKTHANKAR,
Proleg. po XXXVIII seq
(Ii) Antlclpabon or repetibon of stones, motives or dIS-
courses.
(m) EthiCal, moral or sententIous maxims on occasions most
SUited to them.
(iv) Doctnnal mterpolatIons, as found for Instance 10 the
RarnayalQa Rl 52720-32 confined to the school of RaminuJa,
the passage bemg an apothOOSls of Rama.
(v) Additions due to fillIng out of lacunae (real or lnmgm-
ary) : Mbh 1.482*.
(VI) Harmorusmg mterpolatlons, attemptmg to bring the
conflictmg passages mto harmony Cf Adhy. 139 of the Bom-
bay Edltlon-(App I, No 80 of the Cnt Ed of Mbh )-contalll-
109 the only reference to the alleged mstallatIon of Yudhl$thlra as
helr apparent, and to the exonfl'atlon of ArJuna from the SIn of
fightmg With' hiS own guru
(VII) Actor's Interpolations, In plays adapted for stage act-
109, these Interpolations are held mamly to be responsible, for
lOstance, for the several recensIOns of KAhdasa's Saktmtolam
It wdl thus become apparent that there are very often more
QUses than one at work 10 producmg corruptIon and therefore
It IS not always possible to assign the exact operating cause 10 a
partlcular mstanre In such cases method requires that preference
should be given to causes known to be the most WIdely operative,
regardmg the others as posSIbly or actl1ally contributory
It IS also well recognised that corruption IS apt to breed
corruption, so that when the conditions, ooth extnnslc and mtrm-
SIC, are for any reason unfavourable to the preservation of the
text in ItS punty, the result may be beyond the means of the
textual cntIc, for so rapid IS the textl1al detenoratIon that the
ongmal readmgs become clouded over or driven out by fresh
crops of corrupbons.
CHAPTER VI
EMENDATION
A imowledge of the different types of errors and the IDlS-
duets whIch affect a text 10 transrrusslon, such as those bsted 10
the last chapter, necessanly precedes all Judgment upon Its
.am.dltIon and contents. RecensIOn enables the editor to amve
at the most anCIent form of the translDltted text and hIS work
wIll be thal of an honest man but of a textual antIquanan, not a
textual cntIc, Since the restoratIon of the text, as far as possible,
to Its ongmal form still remams, If by ongmal form we under-
stand the form mtended by the author
So the first questIon ptat he has to ask htmself IS ' Is thIS
what the anClt:nt author IS hkely to have wntten here?' In
Judg10g thIS question we have to take 1Oto account the general
charactenstlcs of hIS dlcbon aDd of hIS thought and the particular
context On othe negative SIde we can say, WIth tolerable certa1Oty,
that such and such a read10g IS ImpossIble , on the JlOSlbve SIde.
however, such a test may not always be deCISIve The appeal IS
to our own conceptIon of the author's style and m10d and of the
context DIfferent conclUSIons may be reached 10 such cases by
equally competent Judges How are we to esbmate the degree
of probablbty for each of these suggesbons and how are we to
decIde between the nval suggestlOns?
The roltor must therefore conSIder the 10trlDSlc character of
the read10gs that he has arnved at by the prOCESs of recenslOn.
If the translll1tted readmg (that upon whIch the manuscnpts are
or the 'traditIonal' read10g (that whIch both manus-
cripts and dIrect testamoma support) IS completely destitute of
sense, or If It 1Ovolves some flagrant contradIction 10 the passage,
or 10 ItS unmedlate neIghbourhood. or some notIGe8ble and 1Oexph-
cable of forms, constructIons, or usages of words
dlaractenstIc of the author, or some purposeless and tautologfcal
repetitIon. some VIolation of the laws of metre and rhythm as
observed by the author, or some apparent and unaccountable
break m the context, or some mexcusable dIsorder m thf! thought
sequence : then we are entItled to say that It IS corrupt, however
strong the external eVIdence may be m Its favour If such a
corrupbon cannot be removed, then we dlsrmss It as hopelessly
corrupt But m a large numbf!r of cases we can discern a remedy
or remedIes, and when such IS the case we can hIt upon a correc-
tIon whIch satisfies, m all respects, the demands of sense.
context, grammar, style, metre and rhythm as charactensmg the
author, we descnbe thls correctJon as mtnnslcally probable'.
The mtnnslc probability' of a readmg IS relative SImply to the
ongmal author of the tE!Xt and has nothmg do With the-transcnber
of the manuscrIpt
If, m addItion, the reading proposed IS such as IS hkely to.
have been corrupted through ascertamed channels of detenoratlon
(such, as those mentIOned m the last to the traditIOnal'
or transnutted' readmg WIth the vanants of the readmg, we-
shall claIm for our suggestion or conjecture that It has the support
of both mtrmslc and extnnslc' probablbty
The conjecture or proposal so made must possess transcnp-
bonal' probabJhty (also referred to as documenta] , or docu-
mentary' probability), that IS to say, It must explam how the
COPYist came to err, and m order to do thiS It must be palaeo-
graphIcally posslble. In other words, .f we find that certam
transnutted readmgs can be probably aplamed as mere hteral
oorrupbons of other readmgs whIch are beheved, upon other
grounds, to have stood m the archetype, then these latter are said
to be transcnpbonally probable' \.
Just as the mtnnslc probablhty of a readmg IS relatIve simply
to the ongInal author and has nothIng to do With the transcnber
of the manuscnpt, so also the documental probablhty of a read1."lg
is relative simply to the transcnber of the manuscnpt and has
nothing to do with the ongJnal author In other words, when
there are three rea1mgs, say udhah, rddhak and urdhuoh,l which
l
'1 At Mbh 157.7 these, along with other vanants such rU/JIIfm.,
ramyall, have been ated as examples of vanation due
EMENDATION
65
of these readings IS best fitted to account for the other two?
This questIon, It will be seen, has nothIng to do With the IntrInSIC
fit,ness of the three readmgs themselves, that IS their comparative
ment It IS concerned solely WIth theIr transmiSSIon by copyists
On the hypothesIS that udhoh IS the ongmal readIng, can we
suggest how It came to be corrupted to rddhah and urdhvfJh?
ThIS IS what has been called the test of transcrIptional proba-
~ ) J h t y ,
Let us now assume that the edItor has done hIS work! on the
recenSIon carefully and honestly, applymg all the tests which
have been evolved after continuous labours of generations of
textual cntIcs After e!Very such cntIcal exanunatIon four concIu-
'Slons are possIble acceptance, doubt, rejectIon or alteratIOn (10
other words emendation) That IS to say, the cntlc may delI-
berately pronounce that what stands 10 the transmitted text
represents what the author wrote or might well have wntten , that
It IS doubtful whether It does , that It certamly dOOSI not; or, 10
the last event, that It may be replaced With certaInty by some-
thmg that does In the first three cases, namely acceptance, doubt
or rejection 'hiS Judgment wIll be governed by considerations of
mtnnslc probablhttes alone, but 10 the last case It must regard
transcnptlonal probablhty as well
When the only readmg" or each of the several readIngs whIch
our documents suppl IS seen to be ImpossIble, then the remain-
Ing resource for recovenng the text of the author IS conjectural
emendation The emendatIons so suggested must have both
mtnnstc and documentary (or transcnptional) probablhtIes. In
the case vf doubtful readmgs of the manuscripts also we apply
thE'Se tests But there IS thiS dIfference between a conjectural
emendation and the vanants 10 manuscnpts so far as the method
()f ::,pphcatIon of these tests IS concerned We accept the vanant
whIch best satisfies the tests, but we require that the conjectural
-emendation shall sattsfy them absolutely well. The conjecture
to the lecdo difJic1lfO'f ct. P1'olegomena XCII Even 10 the ehnunabon of
tlus lectw d.OicdlOT transcnpbonal probabilIty seems to be ImplIed hy
such vanants as stand nearest to It. either 10 form )or in sound.
5
does not rIse from probabIlity to certamty or approxlInate
certainty, unlf.'SS Its fitness is exact and perfect.
If both probabllitles-mtrmslc as well as transcriptional-
cannot be satlsfied at one and the same tlIne wIth regard to any
emendatlon proposed, there IS thIS dIfference of value between
them. An emendatlon that VIolates documentary probablljty-
whlle it satisfies lOtnnslC probablhty may possIbly be true, though
we have no nght to presume ItS truth, an e:mendatlon on the
other hand whIch satIsfies documentary probablbty and yet VIO-
lates mtrInSIC probabIlity IS wholly valueless Hence the dIctum
that the good entte must be something more than Q mere palaeo-
grapker
2
A proper estImate of mtrmslc probabIlitIes calls for far more
knowledge, Judgment and mSlght than are needed m the case of
documentary or extnnslc probabIlIty Thus conjectural emenda-
tIon IS at once the hIghest and the most dIfficult part of the textual
. ~
CrItIC'S task
There are some cases whIch cannot bs reached even by such
conjectural emendatIOn, for mstance, If the faulty readmg has
been m possessIOn of the text m the penod antenor to our
archetype, datmg from a pertod very near to the autograph, It
may not be poSSIble to have recourss to transcnptlonal probabIlIty
In the ordmary sense, for It w1l1 require knowleoge of the exact
penod of the autograph and of the archetype to arnve at the
transcnptIonal probablhty of the readmg' which IS already m
possession of the transmitted text EmendatIOn m thIS case WIll
be little more than a fortunate guess DlVlnatIon' of thiS kmd
may occaSIonally p r o v ~ to be nght through ths diSCOVery of fresh
eVIdence
Thus there are dangers to the employment of the method of
emendatIon to arnve at the author'Si text which have to be faced
'1
and overcome wherever possible Even when both srts of proba-
bllItles are satIsfied, the readmg remams highly probable unless
the conditIons ~ e satIsfied absolutely well And thiS may not
always be the case l
18 Hw., P tpa.
EMENDATION
67
For IOstance, 10 crItIcally edItIng the Mdhabhtirata,
tIon has played a very IOconsPICUOUS t-ale. InterpretatIon has. in
general. been given preference over emendatIon Even 10
case of corrupt passages, says the readlOg of some
manuscrIpt or other gIVes sense, though It may not be: the ongInal
sense, not even a wholly satIsfactory sense PrecIpItate emenda-
tIon IS, however, to be deprecated, for experIence has shown that
but a small proportion of scholars' corrections are really amend-
ments Moreover, m thiS special case, we know, as yet, too httle
about the epic Idiom and thE' epic world altogether, as also about
the VICISSitudes of the epIc text BeSIdes, who can say that the
ongmal was Imgulstlcally umform, and conformed to any
particular norm ?
What SUKTHANKAR says above holds equally for other kinds
of texts WhICh are not those of a smgle author Emendation IS
to be resorted to, under favourable CIrcumstances, only when all
other rests of scIentific mterpretatlOn fad It IS to be resorted
to merely for the purpose of umfymg divergent and confllctmg
manuscnpt eVidence, never m uPposltIon to the clear and unanim-
ous testImonr of manuscrIpts The emendations are thus not the
amendmentSi of the text m the ordmary sense of the word, made
10 order to eke out a better sense when the manuscnpts! YIeld no
sense or an unsatisfactory sense , they are rather an effort to find,
so to say, a hypothetical focus towards WhIch the discordant
readmgs converge Followmg these pnnclples SUKTHANKAR
made altogether 36 emendations m the huge Adlparvan, (com-
pnsmg between 7000 & 8000 stanzas), bemg concerned mostly WIth
smgle 1S01'ited words, the correctness of these prmcipies have
bem remarkably proved by the discovery 10 Nepal of the oldest
survIvmg manuscnpt of thIS parvan, confirmmg actually fifty
per cent of these emendations
But what has been SaId above need not apply wholly to texts
of mdIvIdual authors Here the circumstances are somewhat
dIfferent. We can study the style, dIction, thought and even the
Idlosyncra.nes of our author by of the eVidence contamed
3 Prolegom,eno, p. XCII.
Wltfun uncorrupted passages which must be still m posses8IOD of
the text preserved m extant manuscnpts. Such anaent parallels
are worth many tJmes as much as their modem correspondents
By sIalfully utlhzmg them we may be m a po6ltJon to emend
the text satlsfactonly where It has become corrupt m Its transnus-
Slon, provided the two probabIlities mmtloned m thiS chapter are
satisfied But m the absence of such ancient parallels, when we
have to make a chOice even between two vanants, the test of
lDtnnslC fitness wIll lead us to prefer the readmg which best
.corresponds With our view of the author's mtentlon And It may
happen that we see only a part of hiS mtentlon The readmg
which we r E ~ e c t may have been preferred by him because It ex-
pressed some element of thought or feelmg which we have faIled
to seize If thiS be so With reference to vanants, we are bkely to
-err still further If we try to emend the text WIth msufficlent
1DSlght mto the author's moods and modes of expressIOn. Thus
I
as far as possible we should try to aVOId subjective Judgment
when the qUE$tlon of an emendatJon anses, and look for anCIent
parallels wlthm the text Itself m 11.8 uncorrupted passages
There are two ViewS among textual cntlcs t'lday between
which we should steer, If we Wish to do our work m the most
'Satisfactory manner One IS that of the so-called conservative '
'SChool who try to thrust emendation from ItS proper sphere, namely
the rEttlOVal of the absolutely VICIOUS, frottl the text, by the methods
()f what IS called sometimes SclentJfic Inre1l>retatlon' ThiS IS
particularly the case With western scholarshlp The method IS
two-fold First, the forable extracbon from the text of a mean-
ing, which IS not In the words, and which would not ~ m them,
were It not seen to be reqUired by the context This IS faclhtated
by the use made of translatJon, which IS a necessary mstrument
for expressmg the thought of one language m terms of the
other But thiS method of representatJon IS a very Imperfect one ;
we may easily Impose on ourselves and others by stramed and
ambiguous rendenngs, examples of which are numerous In the
case of VediC ExegesiS There 19 also ~ more subL.e danger
to whtch we are especially hable In deaImg With dead languages,
namely acquiescml!; m a sense which satJsfies us but which would
EMENDATION 69
not have satisfied the ancient wnter. Above all we must avoid
applymg our ovm standards of taste, style and morality to the
judgement of the text before us The second method IS that of
ascnbmg to the Idiosyncracy' of the author abnormabtles and
eccentriCIties, which, If there were discrepancy 10 the tradition.
would be certamly attributed to Its faultmess That there are
lapses even 10 the best of wnters cannot be denied, but that
should not be made the occasion to retam systematically what IS
faulty 10 the transmItted text, on the ground that It may COnceiV-
ably be genuine, for the retention of such faults wdl do more
harm to the text than theIr systematic reJection
It IS a weakness of the conservative cntlcF to extol mterpreta-
tlon or exegesis at the expense of emendation. Some e.'ven go to
the length of saymg that the successful defence of a passage 10
a text is a greater service than Its successful correction, but thiS
IS not true Both try to no the same thmg . what was prevIOusly
dark bemg now made clear The fault of the OPPOSite school, on
the other hand, IS to disparage Interpretation and to regard cor-
rectIon as the proper field of a scholar A good example of this.
was the late Keshavlal Harshadral DHRU'V A of Ahmedabad. The
bIas IS reflected In the dictum that correctIon should precede In-
terpretatlon' But thIS IS no more than a half-truth Emendation
must IneVItably fall unless It expresses the meanmg whIch the
proper 1OterpretatIon of tl.e passage has shown to be reqUIred The
conservatIve cntIc's chief concern IS for the safety of the traditional
and by preference the transnutted text He urges very nghtly
that If alteratIon IS carned beyond a certam point It cuts away Its
own founuatlon, and so all certamty IS destroyed HIS obJectIve IS
the tmnimum of change
Many people appear to suppose that decISions upon doubtful
pomts can be aVOided by the eJq>edlent of leav10g the tradItIonal
readIng 10 possessIon of the text ThIs rule IS a SImple one and
easy to apply But OWIng to the constItutIon of the human mind
It has a'jlsequences WhICh they have possIbly not contemplated.
" The maxun 19 sth,tllSytJ gatd cintaniyii.
INDIAN TEXroAL CRITICISM
If a corruptIon 19 left 10 a text when somethmg might be subsb-
tuted which would, at least, as a 'stop-gap,' give the sort of sense
reqUIred, It wlll either blot out the sense of the passage or obtam
the requIred sense by d1stortmg the meantng of the other consti-
tuents of the context.
By the other method the e'tittor will provide all necessary
mformabon about the eVidence for the text 10 the notes of hiS
cnbcal apparatus' ; but m the text Itself he wIll give whatever
m each case IS supported by the balance of probab1htIes. Each
and every case he Will decIde on Its own ments W1thOUt reference
to deciSIOns upon other cases not now before h1m Thus, for
mstance, m Mhb 1 92 2 SUKTHANKAR has adopted the r ~ d m g
Gonga 5rir IVa: rupmi of slK
1
agamst the readmg 'strirupodharmi,
of all the N manuscnpts, whlle he has rejected the readmg of these
ume two manuscnpts 10 e . 5ayo:nat has been rejected m favour of
sal,'at of all the other manuscnpts 'Q1e cntIc may well ask, as
WINTERNITZ d1do, 'Why should Is1K
1
be of greater authonty in
the first hne than m the second ?' The reply 1S because the con-
figuratIon of the manuscnpts as well as the 10tnnslc ment of the
readmgs are dl1'ferent m the two hnes 16 Although the present
lllustraoon IS not one of emendatIon, It forcibly bnngs to our
notIce that even m cnbcal recenSIon thIS doctnne 1S of funda-
mental apphcablllty, and It 1S more so when the ed1tor attempts
to emend h1s text Spec1al conslderatIoHs \"fIll be paId to 'doubt-
ful' readmgs, wh1ch wlll be d1stIngu1shed 10 h1s work as 'doubt-
fully accepted' or 'doubtfully reJected' LegItImate doubt anses
when the eVIdence pro et contra of documental and mtnns1C
probabll1ty IS equal, or when documental Probabtllty pomts
strongly to one SIde and mtnnslc probablhty to another IllegItI-
mate doubt IS the uncertamty of the doubter as to whe.'ther he
has exammed the whole of the eVidence Such a doubt IS truch
more frequently felt than acknowledged and Its effect upon cntlcal
work IS highly mJunous On the one hand It IS apt to take
refuge 10 lm uncntlcal acceptance of thE: traditIonal readmgs, and
3 Annals BORI 15167
II Ibid, 16 tp2-103
EMENDATION 71
on the other hand produce a crop of hesItant and mutually
destructive conjectures
&y attemptmg a mean between these two extreme ways of
cntIcal scholarshIp, we shall produce what may be called the con-
-servatlve text' whIch IS neIther an anbquanan's text nor a cnbc's
text, but a comprorruse betWeEn the two When It IS consciously
obtamed It IS arnved at by handlcappmg, more or less heaVIly,
mtnnSlc probabIlIty as compared With documental probabIlity,
or by ralsmg a mmlmum of probabIlIty which shall quabfy a
readmg for adJlllsslon mto the text unbl It IS 10 agreement With
the notIons of the edItor Both these procedures are arbItrary
In theIr pnnclple and lIkely to be erratIc 10 thE'lr applIcatIon
The best procedure therefore IS to apply SCientIfic mterpret-
.atlon to the transmitted text on the baSIS of the varIants avaIlable
from the documents, and 10 case of absolutely VICiOUS readmgs,
apply scrupulously the two tests of documental and mtrlDSlc
probablbtIes to dlscovel a focus towards which the discordant
vanants converge, which may then be adopted 10 the text as a
-conjectural emendatIon In r.ase an ancient parallel IS available,
we shall be perfectly certam of our conJecture, but where It does
not eXIst, we can be tolerably certam of our conjecture.
CIiAPTER VII
SOME CANONS OF TEXTUAL CRITICISM
It wJlI now become apparent from the prEceding chapters
that Textual Cntlclsm IS In effect an art by means of which the
cntlc sktlfully and methodically apphes common sense to a class
of problems which beset all inqUIrers whose eVidence rests upon
the authonty of manuscnpt documents and therefore ultlmately
hmlted by the human agency responsible for their transnllSSlon.
Hence the general rules, founded mamly on observed forms of
error or of bcense, and called canons of cntlClsm', should be
used With due recogmtlon of their bmlted vahdlty
One of the most commonly recogmzed maxims IS 'Prefer the
harder read1Og' or what IS techmcalfy called lectao dafjial.O'r.
ThiS dictum IS vahd In most cases-though not necessanly In
all-where a transcriber has debberately altered the read10g which
he found In hiS exemplar, smce a frequent motive for such change
was a deslfe to make the sense clearer AcCident apart, such deh-
berate changes WIll generally be intellIgible But thiS doctnne 18
not valid 10 a case of aCCIdental error, smce the result may be
a readmg WhiCh, If intellIgible at all, wlll be harder' than the
true one It IS seen, for example In the Mdhiibharata transmis-
Sion, that a large number of divergences which cannot ordinarily
be 'Xplalned by the general methods of textual reconstruction,
are due to thiS lectao dafficdwr which may be In the natllre of an
archaism, or a soleCJsm or a pecuhar construction no longer valid
for the penod of transmiSSion and the deSire to eliminate them
beIng the cause of the observed variation
So far as the genealogical relatlonshlp between manuscnpts
IS concerned there IS thts general rule In a companson of
vanants, the larger arrays of manuscripts represent the earher
divergences, the ~ m a l l e r always represent the later' TIllS may
be ~ from a numerical example. If twenty manuscnpts array
themselves Into two groups of mne and eleven each With reference:
SOME CANONS OF TEXTUAL CRITICISM 73
to the vanants, we can say that the common ancestor of the nine
had one readmg and the common ancestor of the eleven the other.
The vanatlon would take us back to the pomt at which the two
hnes of transnuSSlon diverged Agam, of these mne manuscnpts
arrayed on one side, at a different place, there may be four show-
109 one readmg and five another, both dlvergmg from those of
the eleven , thiS fact mdlcates that lower down 10 the transmiSSion
the Immediate ancestors of the four and five manuscnpts res-
pectlvely diverged from the common ancestor of the mne In
thiS manner the dictum helps us to locate the larger and smaller
arrays for the purpose of buIldmg up t h ~ pedigree of the manu-
scnpts utlhzed for the cntlcal recension of the text, when the
different hnes of transmission are or have remamed mdependent
of each other
In the last chapter we have refared to the two schools of
cntlclsm, the conservative glvmg undue prommence to SCientific
mterpretatIon and the otner school equally gIvmg promme'nce to
conjectural emendatIon In the case of doubtful readmgs gomg
back to the cntlcal recension, of the text the need of makmg a
text compels some sort of deciSion 10 every mstance The' doubt-
ful' readings of the tradition wIll sometimes be doubtfully
accepted and sometImes doubtfully rejected on the eVidence
aVaIlable, and wIll appear With the accepteds In the text But With
regard to the emendatl01\S that are less than ceTtam, the attitude
of the conservatIve <.'tltlC IS clearly If somewhat cruddy expressed
m the dictum It IS better to leave 10 the text what, If not the
ongmal readmg, IS at least the remams of It' The dictum appears
to be baSP,d on the conception that such a doubtful readmg has a
better claim to ongmahty than the conjectural emendatIOn sugge'St-
ed by the oPPOsite school
In OPPOSItion to the above dictum the thesiS of the other
scliool of cntlcs IS Stop-gaps should be preferred to debns'
In other words, when the constituted read10g of the cntical recen-
sion IS doubtful, It would be better to present 10 the t'Xt some-
thmg wklch the author might have wntten than somethmg which
he could not We have already seen for mstance, in the MMi-
bharata, that when both mtnnSic and extnn.sic or documental
probablhties are equally baland With reference to vanants pre-
sented by the Northern and Southern RecenSIOns, SUKTHANKAR
has preferred the readmgs of N, on account of Its greater punty
and freedom from later accretions, as a stop-gap Here the situa-
tion IS With reference to the selectIOn of two posSible: vanants
which have equal claim for mcluslon or admiSSion mto the cntlcal
text If such a selectIon IS not based on any defined pnnclple
such as the one adopted by SUKTHANKAR, the result would be an
eclectiC text based on no defined pnnclples, and actually a debns
of all kmde of readmgs With refereru:e to emendation the dictum
IS even more forcible, for the doubtful traditional readmg can
perhaps be successfully emended, fully satlsfymg documental and
mtrmSlc probabllitles, and even when the conjecture IS hIghly
probable, It IS something which the author could have wntten
rather than could not, Judgmg from mtnnslc probability alone.
In such cases the emendatIOn, even If only a stop-gap, should be
preferred to the faulty traditional readtng, even when both pro-
babilities are not equally balanced on Its Side
One of the most vexed of textual cntlclsm IS the
question to what extent the admitted ImperfectIons 'lnd mconslS-
tenCles of a text may properly be left m It as due to the default
of an author rather than of a scnbe No umversal rule seems
to be attamable here, each case must be considered on Its own
ments, and the cntIc's procedure must ,necessanly be eclectiC, an
epithet often used, accordmg to TE,' With a tinge of re-
proach the ground for which IS not easy to discover If the
autograph IS not avatlable there IS no means of distinguishing
between mvoluntary 'ITOrs of a scnbe and the mvolunhry errors
or shps of the pen' of the author, for these are m fact only a
'SCnbe's mistakes, the author bemg hiS own amanuens1S. If we
are lucky enough to find ancient parallels Within hIs text at places
where such IDCODslsteDCles or ImperfectIons are not admitted.
the QuestIOn can be solved to some extent This reservatIon is
due to the fact that what IS recogmzed by us as clearly erroneoo:s
or faulty may as 'clearly be mtended by the author and,'1fOt to be
removed by the cotlc Much depends upon the precISIon with
which the error can be corrected, but whenever there are more
r
plausible ways than one of domg this, the general dictum is that
the faulty reading must be allowed to remam
When the transmission of texts proceeds along more than one
lme of descent from the archetype, the divergence of the tradl-
tlon wlll give us sometlmes the ongmal read10g and sometlmes
an unongmal read10g The concordant readmg will necessanly
be the onglnal read1Og, but of the divergent read lOgs found 10
the different strands of the tradltlon 10 their first cleavage, one of
them wlll be the ongmal, and the other non-ongmal, and these are
distributed 10 any degree among the different hnes of descent
Each of these strands of tradltlon, lower down 10 the course of
tranSmiSSion, may agam spht mto several strands The argument
which we have appbed to the first cleavage applies to the second
also, but the term' onglnal' wlll be restncted now to the read-
10gs of the first bne of descent Revert10g to the diSCUSSion of
the whole history of t--anSInlsslOn, we may now say that the
.cleavage lower down 10 the transmission, as represented 10 the
different codices perta1010g to thiS hne of descent, wlll give US
'SOme portion of the transmitted text which IS 'ong1Oal' , some
portion which IS 'unongmal ' so far as the archetype IS concerned,
but ' onglnal' as far as the sub-archetype goes , and the remamlng
unonglnal' With reference both to the archetype and the sub-
archetype What IS ong1Oal' to the sub-archetype but un-
.ongmal' to the arc!J.etYi>e, may be called the secondary charac-
t ~ n s t l c of the codices belong1Og to thiS bne of descent The re-
latlonslllp between the different vemons 10 thiS descent so far as
such unongmal' agreement IS concerned may be termed
secondary
There are two ways of lookmg at this secondary' mterrelatlon-
ship The first we have defined above. The second may be defined
as follows. when two VersIonS are descended, in whole or 10
part, from a common parent later than the archetype, and there-
fore secondary to It 10 comparison, then they are secondarily
lOterrelptEd.
The dlst1Octlon whIch is thus made between onginal 'and
condary relatlonship of versionS IS merely a corollary of the
pnDClple of genealogical relanonslup of manuscnpts. It 18 useful
m restormg the text of the archetype or the transmitted text'
for when there are such secondary mterrelationsrups between the
(btIe.'rent versions, whether the vel'Slons are pure or conftated, a
knowledge of such secondary relatlonsrup will enable us to deter-
mme whether the agreement between the dltIerent versions IS
ongmal' or secondary ,
The detennmatlon of such secondary relationship IS based
generally on the followmg two proofs. ( 1) Proof that thf: versions.
m quesnon agree m showmg a not InconSiderable number of
unportant and stnklng features which cannot be reasonably
supposed to have belonged to the archetype, nor to have been
added or deleted mdependentIy 10 the same place In the several
versIOns where they occur. The longer the addition or omiSSion,
the more certam we can be of the relationship betw'en the ver-
sions. For it IS much harder to suppose that two redactors should
have added or oIrutted (except as a haiography) the same pas-
sage, by mere chance and mdependently of each other, to or
from the same place 10 'the text (2) Proof also IS requlfed that
they belong to one hne of descent m the shape of Cl)nstant and
far-reach1Og agreements 10 mmor verbal details which must be
so regular as to be over-whelmmg 10 their force The strength
of both the above presumptions IS greatest With larger sectIons
of the text, less With bnef phrases and least With SIngle words.
The presumptions are strengthened by lack 01 any posItive agree-
ment among the rema101Og. discordant versions
Secondary 1OterrelatIonslllp IS to be dlst10gulshed from con-
fiatlon The first represents a UnIform descent from Sflme sub-
archetype for the whole or part of the text for which such relatIon-
shiP holds good, whlle the second represents Indlscnm10ate JIllXing
of the dltIerent strands of these 10dependent traditions In such
mtermlx10g even secondary charactenstIcs, that 18 to say, such
as are unongmal' With respect to the transmitted text', may
be Included. so that when there IS confiatIon between manuscnpts
belong1Og to two sndependent hnes of transIruSSlon, such! s"COndary
fea.tJres may be mcluded m the conflatlon It is therefore es-
sential to make every attempt to ellIrunate secondary agreements
whether in pure or mixed tradItIons, and leave only the 'original'
agreements in possesslon of the cntIcal recension.
When deahng Wlth the verslons of a text we generally find
vanatlon 10 the extent of completely preserved verslOns, one of
them be10g the smallest and the other the largest, Wlth a few
10termedlate versions thrown 10 between these two extremes The
bnefer version lS more generally termed the 'textus simplicior'
and the fuller version the 'textus omattor' One of the gene 'Cally
accepted rules of textual cnttclsm IS that the fuller versions must
be assumed a pnon to be later and the briefer ones earhe'C. But
hke other d,cta of textual cnttclsm too much Importance should
not be given to thiS One may come dangerously near to operatmg
With It as a hard-and-fast aXIOm For ordmanly there 1S no
ve'nnon whlch does not contam both omissions and Inserttons, be
they dehberate or aCCldental Some may tend more or less
strongly 10 one dtrectlon, some 10 the other, bun none w1l1 be con-
~ s t e n t Still the dactumi has 1tS value, and helps us 10 locallZ1Og
elther the OmiSSion or the 1Oserbon on theJ bas1s of these two types
.of vemoos, the textus s,mpllCWT and the textus ornataOf'. Thus
the' 1S1K veTSlon of the Mahabharata gives the textus sf#ll/JlaciOf',
and though 1tself not free from certaIn 1Osertlons whlch are clearly
1OterpoiatIons, to be so Judged on manuscnpt eVidence, stIll helps
us 10 constitutIng the text of the archetype to a greater extent
than the other verslOOs.. Sl1mlarly the Southern RecenSIon gIves
us the textus omati&r, and yet, though aboundIng In large accre-
tIons, It has a great Importantt for the constttution of the cntlcal
text, when the Northern RecenSIon IS In doubt
CHAPTER VIII
PRACTICAL HINTS ON THE EDITING OF TEXTS
We have seen In general how a text has to be edited cntl-
cally on the baSIS of the eVidence taken from the extant manu-
scnpts of the text and the test,monJa apperta.lDmg thereto, and
also how the cntIcal recensIOn has to be arnved at As soon as
all the extant manuscripts of the text have been located, It IS the
duty of the edItor to secure them, and, If that 151 not possible, to
secure rotographs or microfilm and photo-coples of the manuscript!>
for the edltonal work In the case of manual transcnpts the
editor should personally compare, If possible, the transcnpt wIth
the ongmal and reebfy 10 It any scnbal or other errors due to
the personahty of the transcnber For We have already seen how
thiS personality of the senbe mtrudes upon us at every step and
how we have to get behmd rum 10 order to arnve at hiS copy'
From such matenal hiS collation wIll commence, leacmg step by
step to a deep study of the manuscnpts, the determInation of
their pecubantIes and genealOgical relationship and Judgment on
their relative trustworthmess, the constitution of the cntlcal recen-
sion and the restonng of the text to Its angInal fonn wherever
posstble In the present chapter some practical hmts wIll be given
regarding the thmgs which are essential 10 a cntlcal edition
The Introduction must begin With a descnptIon of the CrItlcaF
apparatus which has been utilIzed by the editor for 1'-,s work
First then comes a general account of the manuscnpts, deahng With
the number of extant manuscnpts as far as they are known,
the number of manuscnpts actually exammed for the cntIcal
re.tenslon and the number fully or partIally collated, and the
reasons for selectmg the manuscnpts so collated. All mdepend-
ent avaIlable Mss should be used except such as are denved from
extant Mss
The chOice of the cntlca1 apparatus wIll depend upon several
considerations, such as the seripts 10 which the manuscripts are
PRACTICAL HINTS ON THE EDITING OF TEXTS 79
transcribed, or the places from wluch they hall ongmally, the-
relatlve age of the manuscnpts, or discrepant types wltlun a ver-
sion 10 preference to SlmIlar types All these reasons which affect
the choice of the cntIcal apparatus should be stated clearly and
brIefly 10 thiS general account.
Then the editor should brIefly 10dicate the classtficatlon of
the manuscnpts 1Oto recensions and versIons as determine.'d by
his collatIons, and accord1Og to thiS classIficatIon he should then
give a lIst of the manuscrIpts form1Og the CrItIcal apparatus The
lIst wIll begin, under each recension and version, With a ssglum or
abbrevIated SIgn for the manuscrIpt by WhIch the edItor denotes
Its read10gs 10 lus apparatus cntscus, and detaIls of the place of
deposIt, name of the lIbrary and IdentdicatIOn number WhICh It
bears In the catalogue of that lIbrary, and Its date If It bears one
Wlule assIgn10g the ssglum to a manuscnpt the edItor should
aVOId uSlng any arbItrary SIgnS The szglum should have some
character rem1Od1Og us uf the manuscrIpt for WhICh It stands 10
the crItlcal apparatus , thIS may have reference to the place from
which It halls , or 10 such cases where a text has been preserved
10 more than one SCrIpt, the name of the scnpt may 10dicate the
manuscnpt When there are more manuscrIpts than one 10 a
given scnpt or had10g from the same place, numerals placed be-
low the abbrevIatIon (subbnear or 10fralmear or 1Ofenor) may
10dicate them severally Thus G
1
G
l
G ~ G
r
wIll 10dicate
r manuscrIpts WrItte. 10 the Grantha character If the symbol has
reference to the SCrIPt, or r manuscrIpts halhng from Gwahor If
the reference IS to the place of deposIt The comb1OatIon of the al-
phabetlcal symbol and numerals can be made SCIentIfic by asslgn-
109 to the numerals 10 theIr ascend10g order an 1Ocreas1Og degree
of Impunty 10 the manuSCI'lpts represented by them; thus G
1
wIll be supenor to G
2
, and thiS agam to G
s
and so on
Now begtns a detaIled account of the manu9Cl'lpts 10 the
order 10dlcated 10 the list given above. TIlls account will give
the ssglum, followed by the place of deposIt, name of the library,
the pres"',..mark of the hbrary, the number of lolios, the number
of lines 10 each fobo and the number of letters in each hne, the
material on which It IS wntten and the style of Its handWrItIng.
This external descnpoon also takes account of the orthographlCal
pecullantles of the' manuscnpt, the nature and condloon of the
manuscript, existence of marginalia and mterllnear corrections,
Idiosyncracies 10 the numbenng of the fohos, the number of
sections, lacunae (If any), etc. The begmnmg and end of the text
should also be given, and some mtermedlate colophons whenever
they give us some mformatlon about the history of Its trans-
InlSSlon Incldentally the name of the patron at whose mstance
the manuscnpt may have been transcribed, the name of the scnlx:,
the place of transcnptlon and the date of transcnptIon or of the
, copy' so transcnbed, should find a place tn thiS descnptlon when-
ever Circumstances permit the editor to gam thiS mformatlon If
the manuscnpt bears a title or titles, thiS should also be tndlcated
10 the detaIled account WhIle dealIng With the style of wntlng
the editor should mdlcate whether the manuscnpt IS 10 one UnI-
form handwntmg or whether several 'hands' are seen to be at
work on It. SimIlarly With regard to ute additions or correctIons
entered 10 the margin or between the hnes We have already seen
that correctIOns entered 10 the first hand are of different (and of
much greater) value than those entered by a second hand All
such mformatlon as will help the reader to picture to hunself
the condition and value of the manuscnpt for cntlcal purposes
should be recorded here
In the case of manuscnpts which have been ehmmated thE'
reasons for such ehmmatlon must be stat ... d SimIlarly when
manuscnpts are partIally collated, the editor should mdl(;ate the
places where such collation begins and ends 10 the detailed account
of each manuscript
Another Important feature which should form part of this
detaIled account IS a Judgment With reference to the trustWOrthi-
ness of the manuscript.
Many manuscnpts contam praS,ashs wntten by the trans-
criber at the begmmng of some section of the work As they often
contain some hlstoncal mformatlon, but are not relevant to the
text itself, they should be mwcated 10 the detalled aCCOU"lt rather
than in the cntical apparatus
When partial collations have been given there should be a
PRACTICAL HINTS ON THE EDITING OF TEXTS' 81
table shOWlllg the manuscnpts collated for different portions of
the text, so that the cntlcal reader may have easy access to thiS
lOformation when StudylOg the const1tuted text and the notes of
the cntlcal apparatus Bemg tabular 10 fann, reference IS made
easy and saves the reader a lot of unnecessary trouble
After the manuscnpts have been descnbed 10 detad, the editor
should gIVe detaIled mformatlon of the testlmoma which are
avaIlable, such as ancient. commentanes, epitomes, adaptations
and fionlegla, and which have been utlhzed for the study of thE'
text
The relationship of the manuscnpts as expressed 10 a genea-
logy should now be represented If possible 10 the form of a
pedigree or stemma codwum Some method should be adopted
here to mdlcate hnes of transmiSSion between non-extant codices
whose existence at some time can be assumed on the eVidence
presented by the extant manuscnpts, so that these can be sepa-
)
rated from the hnes of transmISSIon of defi.mtely known manu-
scnpts, extant or non-extant The SImplest way IS to mdicate
the former by a senes of <lots and the latter by contmuous
straIght Imes"
The non-extant manuscrIpts or those whIch are no longer In
exIstence but whose exIstence at some time 10 the past must be
assumed 10 order to explam the relation m WhICh the extant manus-
CrIpts stand to each othor should be mdlcated tither by Greek
letters (a p y )'or by starred letters (A* B* C" a* b* c*)
The latter method corresponds to the starred forms used m hngu-
IStiCS to explam the relationship between cognate vocables, and
may therefore be adoilted
Where practIcable the edItor should 10dlcate the probable
or the exact recorded date of hIS manuscnpts by numerals added
at tjle top of the siglo. used for mdicatmg them, standIng foJ" the
centunes of the ChnstIan era Thus Mll wIll mdicate that the
manuscnpt destgnated by the slglum M IS dated somewhere wlthm
the eleventh century , SImilarly K13-14 WIll that the period
to which K belongs hes somewhere between the thirteenth and
fourteenth CElltunes A.D If the dates cannot be gIVen exactly
defi.rute evIdence, but the lower. hmit can be by extnn-
sic evidence, thiS bunt may be slIlularly mdlcated by an asterisk
attached to the numeral (thus KXIII*)
Immediately after the pedigree mentioned above, an explana-
tion of the SJgla used 10 the pedigree should be given, precedmg
a diSCUSSion surveymg the recensions and their versions
In such a cntIcal survey the editor should mdlcate the maIn
agreements and differences between the recensIOns and follow thiS
up With a similar treatment of the vemons belongmg to each
recenSion If there IS the received text which has been n01lllahzed,.
and which IS generally called the vulgate', the editor should also
mdlcate the malO dlffe:rences between the recensions and the VUl-
gate As the recensions dlfferenoate from each other by the UDl-
of their divergent readmgs and by discrepancies which are
numerous and multlfanous, these deViations should be classified
and mdlcated 10 the mtroductlOn For It IS on such a baSIS that
the recensions are postulated by the edttor and the cnoeal reader
should have before him the findmgs of the editor, which should
be well documented
After dealing With the recenSions, the editor's next task IS
to esttmate the character and mutual relations Gf the vanous
versIOns and their manuscnpts The mdlcatlons here must be
as detatled as possible to Justify hiS claSSification of the manu-
scnpt matenal, the affimtIes and deViations between mdlvldual
manuscnpts of given versIOns bemg }Y.operly diSCUssed With eVI-
dence drawn from the edition Where sub-recensions exiSt between
the recension and ItS splitting up mto several versions, the sub-
recension must be studied 10 equally great detail, and the results
of the mvestlgatlon placed before the reader The ec'ltor should
remember that he IS glvmg a samplmg of hiS far more detailed
investtgatton and therefore take care in selecting hiS examples
which should be both typical as well as Important he
should not only demonstrate the comlllUIl1ty of soure' between
two manuscnpts or two versions, but also estabbsh on mcontro-
verttble that the one IS not a mere copy of the other but
is Independent WIthin that particular strand of the ttdIlsmlSSlon.
S1milarly if oonfiated manuscnpts exist 10 the different versions,.
mstances of confiatlon must be pomted out.
So far the editor has merely stated his judgment on the
nature of the manuscnpts matenal utJIJZed by hun and their
relatJve trustworthmess With respect to the constJtutJon of the text.
He should now deal with the cntJcal pnnclples Iwhlch he has fol-
lowed 10 the constJtutJon of the text With specIal reference to thE!
matenal before rum So thiS part of his work IS 10 no a
text-book on textual cntJCJsm, but merely the apphcatlon of the
general principles With speCIal reference to the case under con-
slsieratJon If he deviates from the well-establIshed claSSIcal
pnOClples of cntIClsm, he should mdlcate the nature of his mate-
nal Which IS responsible for such a departure If there are diffi-
cultIes 10 their applIcatIon he should mdlcate them Havmg
evaluated the manuscnpts utIhzed by him, he should state the
manner 10 which he has conStituted the text If he has emended
the transmitted text' so reached, he should mdlcate Just those
reasons wruch have led him to conJecture' the ongmat readmg
If there are mterpolatIons of a lengthy nature the editor should
discuss them 10 the mtroductlon, mdlcatmg specifically hiS reasons
for not mcludmg them wlthm the text Short mterpolatJons need
not be diSCUssed
If there are other editions of the text besides hiS, the editor
should diSCUSS them, mdlcatmg their lImitatIons, 10 the hght of
the matenal wruch he has hImSelf utJhzed He should, 10 OthE'r
words, evaluate them Im,l-lartlally
Whenever It IS possible, the editor should then refer to the
known hiStory of the author and the text, the different works
attnbuted to him and evaluation of the hterary ments of the
author, hiS pecuhantJes and IdiosyncraCies As we have not
dealt With the problem of hIgher cntJClsm, we shall not mdicate
here the methods which may be employed to separate the sources
which the author has utilIzed But what may be done by the
editor IS to mdlcate the parallel versions wstJng at the proper
place in the cntJcal apparatus, and give their conspectus in the
introducbon. The editor should particularly take palOS to collect
all references made by lus author to known or unknown autl\o-
nties found 10 the text, the names of authors as well as works, and
any other infonnatJon of historical unportance JSUch as dynastic
)
names, names of lOdlvldual rulers, etc whIch may be found scatter-
-ed 10 the text. CItatIons by hIS author should be traced, as far
as possIble, and the result of such traclOg lOdlcated 10 the lOtro-
ductIon SImIlarly If hIS text has been commented upon, the
editor should the bnef hIstory of these commentators and
evaluate theIr commentanes for an understandlOg of the text
The edItor IS also expected to deal wIth hIS text from the pomt
of vIew of lIterature, and thus furnIsh a short but cntlcal account
and estImate of the author's contnbutIon to the partIcular type
of lIterature and hIS place wlthm It, the lOfluences which have
moulded hiS thought and expression and hiS own mfluence on the
subsequent age
WIth respect to the text Itself, many methods have been
employed by dIfferent editOrs 10 pnntmg such cntIcal recensIOns
No defimte rules can be laid down here to mdlcate the varymg
nablre of the text as constItuted, expret'!ed 10 the four categones
accepted, doubtfully accepted, doubtfully rejected and rejected,
whatever system the editor adopts,_ he should clearly IOdlcate It 10
hIS lIst of abbreViatIons and dlacntIcal SignS The general prac-
tIce has been to mdlcate conjectural emendatIon 6y an asterIsk
precedlOg the emendatIon conJecblred WIth regard to other
matters the practice seems to fluct11ate Paul MAAS suggests the
followlOg symbols for defimte types conjecblral addItIons are to
be mdlcated by the SignS < >, the \hatter added conjecturally
being placed wlthm them, conjectural athetIsatIon through double
square brackets {[ ,]}. completIon of mechamcal damages
through square brackets and false localIzed corruptIons through
a dagger t The difference between < > and the brackets
IS Important, the first mdlcabng that already the establIshlOg of
the lacuna depends upon surmise and the SE.'COnd that an attested
lacuna IS filled out, mtrmslcally agree10g With the surroul1dlOg
text , It IS also met WIth 10 such cases where the tradItIon expressly
attestsl that there was a lacuna 10 Its exemplar EDGERTON 10 hIS
roman1Zed Pancotantro ReconstTfUCted employs Ital,cs for parts
0' the text whIch are not verbally certaltl, whIle he emp10ys paren-
theses ( ) to enclose parts whIch may not have been 10 the ongmal,
even lD general cm.se. SUKTHANKAR employs a wavy
lDder the text when It IS less than certa1O, and an astensk for
l conjectural emendatIon.
Smce the text has been constituted on the eVidence of all the
lersions of each recensIOn and 10 eacl1 case supported by the

)alance of probabllltles, all Important devIations 10 the manu-
ICnpts are to be noted 10 the cntlcal apparatus, so that every
:ntlcal reader may have, at hIS disposal, the entire matenal for
:ontrolhng and correcting the constituted text, where necessary.
[t IS hke the verdIct gIven by a Judge, supported by all the eVI
:lence collected I ~ the court, pro et contra, but JUst as there
ire dIfferent Judges who may dIfferently 10terpret the eVIdence
"ecorded, so also there are cntlcal readers, probably as quahfied
is the editor, but not hav10g the opportumtles of record1Og the
:vldence, who may eIther confirm or dIffer from the read10gs con-
ItitUted by the editor As the cntlcal edition IS pnmanly address-
!d to such readers, It IS the duty of the edItor to record all the
mportant deVIations 10 the manuscnpts 10 the cntlcal notes
lppended to the text Thus under the text are to be shown, 10 a
;enes ( 1) The sum total of the deVIations from the archetype,
lS far as they are not already 10dlcated 10 the text Itself, (2)
:he rejected vanants together WIth the scnbe's mIstakes, not so
nuch to show that they do not come 1Oto conSideratIon for tht"
;etthng of the text but Just to pomt out to the reader that at thiS
)lace the text does not go back to the archetype, but only to a
;tratum lower down m the transmIssIon, (3) the sub-vanants,
n case they do not agree WIth each other or WIth the major
V'anants and (4) common readmgs of more vanants bearers.
:;hort 1Ott'rpolatIons of mdlvldual manuscnpts or groups of manu-
ICnpts should also be mserted m the cntIcal notes, the longer bemg
reserved for an appendIX The appendiX may also contam shorter
Interpolations or addItional passages for whIch the eVIdence rest.!
)nly on one manuscnpt or on a very small and 10Slgmficant group
:>f Mss The place of occurrence of such additIOnal passages
wlthm the text should also be mdlcated m the footnotes of the
cntlcal a,paratus Thus the apparatus cnhcus together With the
apperubx conta1Omg the larger additIons and 1Oterpolatlons 71111
give the entire manuscnpt matenal available for the coQstJtutJon.
of the text, and the editor's task so far as the cntical rec:ens1on IS
concerned IS now completed. He has given all the relevant m-
formation about hiS matenal m the mtroduct1on and the pnnCl-
pies employed In the oonsbtutlon of the text; and m the cntlcal
edition, bestdes the constItuted text, mdlcatlng exactly the
balance of probablhtles m each mdlvldual case, he has an
tlfJPtlTatus cntacus where the entire manuscnpts matenal is well
digested and presented on defi01te prmclples The cntlcal reader
Will now have before hIm all the slgOlficant matenal on the baSIS
of which he can either agree With the constItuted text of the
editor, or constitute It himself m the lIght of hiS expenence and
on the baSIS of the matenal here presented
We now come to another aspect of cntlcal editing which does
not form part, stnctly speakmg, of textual cntlclsm, but whIch
IS nevertheless essentIal for eIther lexical study or for stylIstlcs
Among the appendiCes and mdlCe& which the editor may well supply
there ought to be (1) an mdex of all tile padas of the verse part
of hiS text, whether the text IS found m the constituted part or m
the cntlcal apparatus or m the 89PeIldtx contammg the longer
additionS, (2) an mdex verborum of all unusual. words, If a
complete mdex verborum IS not practIcable, (3) an mdex of all
the words found m the text and the cntlcal apparatus, but re-
ference berng given to one or two occurrences only, (4) all hls-
toncal and geograprucal mformatlon cpntamed wlthm the text,
mcludmg a complete mdex of proper name.s
There should IJe a concordance of the vanous prInted eciltIons
of the text already m eXIstence so that references of thiS edItion
may easIly be converted to those of another edition (All these
are the necessary corollaries of cntIcal edItmg of texts
If there are paralle1 versIOns m other texts, the editor WI)]
have to consider them m a separate appendIx, and correlate the
eVidence withm them The actual mterpretatlon of these versions
forms part of higher cntlClsm, and IS therefore left out of con-
Slderatlon m the present work
We hav.e dealt here with what may be called the Cawer en-
ticllm' of the text (German Niede1'e Textkrit,k or French cnt'que
"erbole), hmiting ourselves to HeunstIcs, RecenSlo and Emendatio.
(
'The subject of hIgher cntIclsm may perhaps be dealt WIth profi-
tably m a separate work, as condItions 10 IndIa so far are not
!avourable to Its study m the absence of exact chronology on thE"
one hand and mtenSlve study of defimte penods of hterature on
the other
One last word may here be added on dlfferent methods of
.actually presentIng the crItical apparatus, some prefer to give
thts apparatus nnmedlately on the same page, the constituted
text appeanng on the upper half of the page and the cntlcal
apparatus occupymg the lower half, others gIVe the apparatus
at the end of the volume as vanant readIngs' Stnct scholar-
shIp WIth regard to the cntlCal apparatus IS shghtly dIfferent from
merely glVlng vanant readmgs But m any case It helps the reader
to have all the matenal utlhzed for the constltutlOn of the text
on the same page where the text 18 pnnted And m a maJonty
()f cntIcal edItIons thIS method has been umformly adopted
There IS one case wh.cb we have not conSIdered here When
the autograph of the author and ItS copy (whether ImmedIate or
mtermechate) are not WIdely separated 10 pomt of tlme, and
thIS copy happens to be the best manuscnpt survlV10g of the text,
the best course would be to prmt It, WIth m10Imal change, correct-
Ing only the obVIOUS and unavOIdable clencal errors, and mdlcate
the: deVIations of other Important manuscnpts m the cntlcal
apparatus ThIS course IS only of hmlted vahdlty and appbes to
works of authors w}:o have hved wlthm the last seven or eIght
hundred years, there IS saId to be m exIstence a copy of lliane-
5vari made by the dISCIple of SaCCldananda BaM, the orlgmal
amanuensIs of Jiianadeva, 10 the saka year 1272 (= 1350 A.D.)1
wlthm 60 yearS of the autograph Itself In the absence of other
pre-Ekanath manuscnpts of thIS work, the only course open for
a CrItical EdItor IS to pnnt the text of this codex, correcting only
1 A nucrofilm of thIs Ms IS In the Deccan College Research InstI-
tute The second figure In the date IS rubbed off, but on the baS1s
of ItS readIngs the Ms appears to be, If not the actual ongmal WrItten
in 1350 D, a dIrect copy of the ongmal The chscovery' of thIs Ms.
-and Its microfilnung are due to the enterpnse of Dr R G HARlHE,
RegIstrar of the above InstItute
88
obvious clerIcal errors, and record In the cntIcal notes the varIants
from all other dated manuscnpts of the text along WIth the more
Important of the COPIes whIch are not dated but whIch appear old
If a stlll earlIer copy of the text IS actually dIscovered, and on
companson WIth thIS codex IS found to be supenor to It, our task.
wIll now be to adopt the text of the earlIer codex and authentIcate
It With the help of the second codex, and record all the vanants
as before In the crmcal notes In the case of authors who lIved
smce 1200 AD, the problem of textuil cntIclsm IS not so great,
and the method here adopted, may be followed provIded the dIf-
ference In POInt of tIme between our oldest and best manuscnpt
and the autograph IS not very great Texts whIch have a relIgIOUS
flavour are often bound to undergo great changes In the course of
transmIssion, and the method IndIcated here wIll not hold good
for them Thus the work of Lilasuka Bllvamangala exiSts In two
recenSIons, and It IS not possible to arrIve at hiS text by authenti-
catIng the readIngs of the best survIvling manuscnpts for the
simple reason that systematIc conftatIon has been earned on
through a conSIderable penod In cases the regular process-
of HeurIstIcs, RecenSIO and EmendatIo have to be applIed In
the case of some mInor works there may not be more than t" 0-
or three manuscnpts m exIStence, and the problem of cntIcal re-
cenSIon IS very much SImplIfied here If there IS only one recension
notIceable, the best manuscnpt wdl be ten as the norm and Its
readIngs authenticated WIth the help of the refoammg manuscnpts
If there are two recenSions, the genealogIcal method wIll gIve us.
the cntlcal text
The malO dIfnculty of textual cntIClsm WIll come y.rhen the
edItor deals WIth non-Vedic texts such as the EpICS and the
Puranas, for there wlll be a large number of versIOns and sub-
recenSIons, wherem conftatIon has been carned on for ages to-
gether The best model of such an edition IS the CrItIcal Edition
of the Mahabharata undertaken by the Bhandarkar Oriental
Research InstItute of Poona No editor undertakmg SImIlar work
on the Puranas or other equally dIfficult texts can afford tf' neglect
the pnnClJ)les and methods employed and perfected by SUKTHAN-
KAR In hIS CrItIcal of the Adlparvan
APPENDIX I
A GLOSSARY OF SOME IMPORTANT TERMS USED IN
TEXTUAL CRITICISM
Accidental what IS not conSCIously or intentionally done, that whlch
IS entlrely due to chance" apphed espeoally to addltlons, errors
and ODUSSlons when they are not dehberate
Adscript an msertlOn of Interhnear or margmal gloss or note within
the text
Amanuensis a clerk who writes from dlctatlon
Amorphous shapeless, anomalous, unorgamzed, apphed to a text
wfuch 1'1 not fixed, such a text IS also called a ;lW4d text In
general It refers to such popular texts like the epics and the
puriinas which exist already m different versIOns at different places
before being reduced t ~ Wrltmg
Amplification enlarging or adding detalls , partlClllarly With reference
to the additional passages and mterpolatlons found m transmitted
texts
Anagrammatism transpoSition of letters, forming words With the
letters of another
Antonym a word which IS the oppoSIte of another
Apapith
a
a wrong reading, a faulty reading
Apparatus criticus the Ciltlcal material collated from the manuscnpts
of a 'transrmtted !ext' on the evidence of wruch the cntlcal recen-
Sion IS arnved at This IS generally presented In a well ordered
manner' under the constltuted text or In a separate appendix.
Archetypus or Archetype ongmal model or prototype, apphed to
the hypothetical common ance'ltor of a family or group of manu-
scnpts Ordinarily It IS applied to any hypothetical common parent
codex of any group of manuscnpts or codices, Irrespectlve of
whether It IS Immediately denved from the autograph of the text
before the breaking of Its transnuSSlon mto several strands or IS
only an intermediary hypothetlcal hnk In the transmiSSIon after
the first diViSion takes place In the tra.nsmlSSlon But strictly
speaking It IS better to reserve thiS name fol' that common tSOW'CJe
of alP extant manuscnpts 10 which the first divergence took place
With reference to Its transmiSSIon For mtennedlate hnks the term
HyparchetyfJUs or Sub-archetype may be used
Athetise, (0. athetisation) , to cut out, drop out or conscIOusly omIt
Wlth a purpose, used espeC1ally when the text IS confiated, and
the portlon under dlscuSSlon IS mtnnSlcally not borne out
Authenticity validlty or genuineness of a passage as bemg ong1l1aJ
or not. Authenticate to estabhsh the truth or validity or genwne-
ness of a readlng, used especially when the cntlcal recension
amounts to the pnntmg of the best and the most trustworthy manu-
scnpt correctmg the obVlous and mevltable scnbal errors
Autograph the ongmal copy of a text as wntten by the author him-
self, or its reVISIon by the author m hllS own hand
Codex a manuscript volume, plural codices
Codices deteriores manuscnpts which are very untrustworthy but
oCcaSJonaly contammg a correct or ongmal readmg, and whose eVI-
dence therefore IS not worth collatmg throughout
Codices impressi typis pnnted volumes
Codices recentiores recent COPies of manuscnpt., of httle value
Codices scripti wntten volumes
Conjecture the apphcatlon of human mgenwty In arnvmg at a read-
Ing In the text by a process of common sense guess by gomg beyond
the eVldence of the manuscnpts Such a correct readmg IS called
a conJectural emendatJon
Collation the collectIon of all the slgmficant eVldence m a manu-
scnpt winch may be of use towards determmmg what stood In Its
source or sources
Colophon the tall pIece of a manuscn,pt or a section thereof, record-
mg the endlng of a section, part or the whAle work Itself
Composite Version a versIOn which IS not denved from a smgle
recenSJon or subreceinSlOll, but partakmg the charactenstlcs of more
than one, or m other words, nuxmg two or more than two sub-
recenSIons or recenSions.
Conflate to MIX, blend, IntertwIne, or cross the different hnes of trans-
miSSIon of a text by a companson of manuscnpts belongmg to
mdependent hnes of transmiSSion Confiate readmgs are those
which have been arnved at by the above process of . crossmg ,
Conflation the process of crossmg' or blendIng, see above
Constitutio textus the constitution of the text to the earhest form
possible, I.e, that of the Archetypus, on the eVidence "If extant
,manuscnpts. It IS called the transmitted text'
Constituted Text the text of the archetype, transmitted text:
APPENDIX I 91
Contamination blendmg or crossmg of two mdependeot veJ'8101l8,
subrecenSlons or recenSlons or of two manuscnpts belongmg to
different verSlons or recenSlons
Corrector the pemon who goes over a transcript and corrects the
scnbal errors by companson WIth Its exemplar. He may be the
scnbe hunse1f oftentunes Synonym. Revuer
Corruption spodmg by mistakes, defacement, detenoratlon, debased
or erroneous form of a word or passage 10 a text
Critical Recension restorabon of a text, so far as possible, to Its
ongmal form, If by ongmal form' wet understand the form m
tended by Its author
Critique a set piece of cntlcIsm, pomtlng out of a fault, Judgment,
mqulring mto
Crux hterally, a cross, hence a desperate readmg, often shown With
a dagger or cross m pnnted editions, whence the nsme Plural
cruces
Damnum damage, mJury, loss, d. defectro, omt.sSw.
Defectio defection, loss, disappearance Cf. damnum, omfSSfIJ.
Apphed for lacunae caused by defacement of text
Diaskeuesis revl'Slon ( of a hterary work), recenSIon.
Differentia dtverSlty of readtngs, discrepant readings, charactenzlOg
the lOderendence of versions or manuscnpts Another word would
be
,
Diorthotes a corrector or reviser
Dittography aCCidental wrItmg tWice over of a letter, word or phrase .
. Divinatio dlvlOabon, cOdJecture, prophetic msplratlon, correct anb
Clpatlon on msuffiClent eVidence
Documental Probability the probablhty that one set of words can
be derived from another grapl:l1cally, by the resemblance between
the I-dtvldual syllables of one and of the other.
Eclectic takmg everythmg lOto account, chooSlng from vanous InUrces
Eclectic fusion a fUSion between variOUS sources
Ec!i'tio princeps the first or foremost edition PI editiones principes.
Eliminatio codicum descriptorum the ehmmatlOn of manuscnpts
which have no mdependent value, such as transcnpts of an extant
codex
Eliminatio lectionum singularium the ehmlnation of smgular or
peculiar readings (of a SIngle manuscript or group of manustnpts
whose eVidence IS not trustworthy).
92
Eliminatio ehminabon, throWlOg out of ooDSlderation, not takmg !R-
to acoount for the purpose 10 hand
Elision OJDlSS1on 10 pronunCIation
Emendatio emendation, the third stage 10 Classtcal of
textual cnbClsm whereby the tranSDlltted text' IS restored as far
as pos9lble to the ongmal form as It was wntten by Its author
Examinauo examlnabon, the contmuous study of the manuscnpt
before amvmg at a Judgment regardmg Its trustworthmess and
nobClng Its peCllllantles
Exegesis mterpretatlOn of the matenal presented by the evidence
of the manuscnpts Without getting behmd such evidence by
Emendatlo
Exemplar a codex whIch forms a copy' for further transcnptlon,
a model or ongmal source from whIch transcnpts are dtrectly made
Cf Sk
Extant exIstIng, sUfVlvmg, applied to codex, manuscnpt, etc
Extrinsic Probability external probability, unconnected With contex-
tual or mtnnSlc probabIlity but referrmll; to conditions external to
the sense of the passage Cf doCllmental probablhty
Fluid cf Amorphous
Genealogical Method the method by means of which the manu-
scnpts allow themselves to be filiated to one another leadmg to a
pedtgree showmg the descent of vanous manuscnpts from common
sources and the relations between them
Gloss word mserted 10 marglD or between the hnes to explam word
10 text
thought, Judgment, optmon, maXim,
Graphical probability d. documental probability
Hand person who tran'lCI'lbes by hand manuscnpts or corrects them
after companng them With their exemplars or other copies of the
texts represented therem
Hapax legomenon word for which only one use IS recorded
Haplography OIDlSSlon of words or syllables With the same beglD-
nmg or endmg
Hermenei. mterpretatlon
Hermeneutic Exegetical, mterpretative
Heuristics assemblmg of the matenal (manuscnpts, testlrno..la, etc.}
end fixmg theIr mterrelatlonshtp
Hiatus break between two vowels whIch do not coalesce.
APPENDIX I 93
Higher CritiClsm the fourth aspect of textual cntlClsm 10 Classtcal
Philology, the seperatlon of the source'J utlhzed by the author
Homoeoarcta loss of Imes between two hnes which begm Similarly
Homoeographon loss of letters, syllables, words, phrases or hnes
through Slmilanty of wntmg
Homoeoteleuta loss of hnes between two hnes which end Similarly
Homonym word of same form as another but different sense , name-
sake I
Hyparchetypus sub-archet}'}>e, or the hypothetical source of extant
manu'SCIlpts lower down In the transmiSSIon of the text than the
archetype It represents the second divergence m the lme of tradi-
tion, the first startIng With the archetype Itself
Hypermetric of verse(s) haVing redundant syllable(s)
Hypothetical common ancestor a manuscnpt wruch IS no longer
m eXistence but whose eXistence at some tm e m the past must lx:
assumed In order to explaIn the relatIOn In wruch the extant manu-
scnpts stand to each other It IS conSidered as the source of all
such manuscnpts
Illummate the method employed to decoralte a manuscnpt WIth
VarIOUS deSigns, docorate (Initial letters, etc) a manuscnpt With
gold, colour etc
mfra bneam below the lme, abr en! 1m
Incunabula books pnnted early, espeCially before 1500
Inorganic extraneous, not formmg a part of, out of context
Inter lineas between the hnes, abr mt 1m
Interpolation Insertion I of words, Pa,ssages etc WithIn a text
Literally, pohshIng, IIn,provement by pohshmg
Interpretation exegesIs, makmg out meamng of words, explanation
Intrinsic probability the prdlabihty dependmg upon the context,
mherent or essential probablhty
Itacism exceSSIve use of the letter'
Katharsis cleanSIng, purgmg, catharSis
Lacuna gap in a manuscnpt where some part has been lost or obhter-
ated Plural lacunae.
Lapsus calami shp of the pen
Lectio difficilior a hard readmg, the more diffiC11lt of two readmgs.
Lectio facilior a Simple or easy reading, the sunpler or easIer of
two' ' readmgs
Lectio singular a Singular or IOdtVldual readlOg
.Lectio vulgata a wlgar reading, a common ~ n g .
Lemma atabon by the commentator of a word begmnmg a verse or
sentence In the text PI lemmata.
LUis word,
Lineal ascendant when a manuscnpt IS chrectly coPIed from another
or through any number of intermediate copies, that copy will be
the 11neal ascendant of the manuscnpt.
Lineal descendant m OPPOOltlOI) to the above, the manuscrIpt IS
deSIgnated a lineal descendant of that copy
Lipograpby SImple onussion of any kind Cf parablepS1a
Lower Criticism German NJedere Textkrrtik or French cntsque
verbole, as opposed to Higher CntlaSIn, eompnses Hamsbes,
Recensio and EmendatlO
Manuscript(s) handwntten copy (copIes) of any text, abr Ms(s)
Marginalia marginal notes found m most manuscnpts
Misch-codex a conflated manuscnpt, where the different streams of
Independent tradltton are Intermmgled
Mislection wrong reachng
Non-extant not exlsbng or SUrvIVing, lost Apphed to codIces
Obleize to mark WIth an obelus or obelisk, whlch was used In
anClent Mss to mdlcate that the word In the language IS spunous.
Omission leaVIng out Cf damnum, dejectlO
Original what 19 Intended by the author
Parablepsia cf L1pography
ParadlotbCisels emendation made by the scnbe
Par.dosls the tradltllmai text
Pith
a
readmg, vanant reachng
vanant reading
Pedigree (of manuscnpts) shOWing the mterreiatlonsiup between the
vanous extant manuscnpts In the form of a fanuly tree or stemma
cod;cum
Pothi a manuscnpt volume oooSlsbng of loose fo11os.
Prakfepa Interpolation
Praksipta mterpolated
Praiutl dedicatory verses found at the begllwng of texts or porbonll
or divisions of texts.
APPENDIX I 95
Presumptive variants are ISOlated rea<imgs found In oontlated manu-
scripts whIch, under normal condItions, would have been eItminated
for the constdutw textus, but have now the value of Independent
readIngs in the absence of posItive eVIdence that they are corrupt.
and thus the nght to be conSIdered as variants
Probability cf. under Documental (or Documentary), Extrinsic.
Graphical, Intrinsic and Transcriptional
Probatione(s) penna(e) somethmg wntten on the margin of the
manuSCrIpt foho for trym.g the pen or qudl
Propria manu In one's own hand, In the hand of the onglnal
SCrIbe abr. pr m
Received Text the text as It has come down In Its normahzed form.
often called the Vulgate. cf., Textus receptus.
Recensio restfJll'atlon of the text to that of the archetype, CrItIcal
examInatIOn
Recension m the combInation 'CrItical recenSIon' It apphes to the
constItuted text or the text of the authon as far as that IS possible.
OrdInanly It apphes to the first lIne of dIVISIon of the transmIS-
SIon from the archetype, and It should be so lllluted In Its usage.
The secondary cleavage of the RecenSIon gIVes us, the sub-recenslon,
and of thIS agam the Verston and further the sub-verSIon
Rec1amante(s) catch word(s) or expresslOn(s) generally used to In-
dIcate the connection betwaen the qUIres of a codex, I e the first
word of a new qUIre IS repeated below the last lIne of the preced-
Ing qUIre
Recognitio recogmtIon, notIce
Recto nght hand page of open book Cf verso.
Redaction edItIng, putting Into hterary form
edItor
Rhapsodist person who writes a PIece of epIc verse of length for one
tec1tatIon
Roll a document m the form of a cyhnder obtaIned by turning the
paper over and over on Itself WIthOUt foldIng
Rotograph white on black pnnt by a speCIal process of a page or
pages of a manuscrIpt
Scholium anCIent grammanan's margmal note on passage or word In
claSSIcal author, and by extension a commentary. Plural scholia.
Scripta! 1ixation the reductIon to wntten form of text exIsting be-
{ore in oral tradItIon only.
Scriptum continua continuous wnting Without chVlSlon between
words or phrases or sentences
Secondary apphed to what 1S not ongmal' or mtended by the
author and yet finds place m the vanous stages of the textual trans-
tnlSSlOn, secondary relat1onsh1p between two Mss or verstOIlS 19
defined as common descent from a source or sources lower down
In the transmIsSIon than the archetype
Secunda manu m second hand or m the hand of a person other than
the ongmal scribe, abr sec m
Selectio oselectlon after due conSIderation, apphed to reachngs pre-
sented by extant manuscnpts
Siglum the abbreVlated Slgn, usually a letter of the alphabet or a
numeral or a combmatJon of both, by winch a manuscnpt IS de-
Slgnated m the notes of the cntJcal apparatus -Plural sigla.
Socthapatra an extra leaf In the manuscnpt contammg adchtlonal
passages, eIther umntentlonally left out of the Initial transcrIPt
or found 10 other Mss and added to hiS own text by a scnbe,
edItor or owner
Solecism flagrant offence agamst grammar, IdIom or etIquette
Stemma(ta) codicum pedlgree(s) of manuscnpts, shown m the fonn
of a family tree
Stichometry the measunng of hnes to a page and letters to a hne m
a gIven codex
Sub-recension when cI Rect:nSlon further diverges Into different hnes
of transmtSSlon whtch arc themselves the further sources of dIver-
gence, these sources are termed sub-recenSlons
Sub-variant vanant recorded 10 the sub-recenSlon or verSion whtch,
under normal Circumstances, would be ehtnlnated for the constItu-
tIon of the text of the archetype, but would be essentll"1 for the.
constItutIon of the text of the recensIOn
Superscript ISOmethtng 10scnbed over another
supra lineam above the hne , abr sup lin
Synonym word IdentIcal and coextensive 10 sense and usage with
another of the same language
Testimonium eVldence of a partial nature, other than the du.U
documentary eVldenC'e, found In quotations, commentaries, trans-
latIons, adaptatIons, resumes, parodtes, etc. for setthng the condi-
tIon of the text -Plural testimonia.
APPENDIX I 97
Textual Dynamics an expressaon c:omed by SUKTHANKAR and
applted to the laws goverrung the mampuiatton of a text which.
has not become fixed at any penod of Its transnuSSlon .... t has
grown from strength to strength, or In other words to the textual
cntlClsm of a fluid text represented by a fluctuating tradition. Cf.
Bbh Adl Prolegomena p CII.
Textual Statics textual cntlasm as apphed to a text wluch was
fixed and ngld at the time of Its transmission, and to which the
claSSIcal mode of approach through HeunstJ.cs, Recen8lO, Emenda-
tto and Higher CntlClsm 0 can be apphed
Textus omatior an ornate text, apphed to that recenSIon or version
or codex where the fuller text of a work IS preserved.
Textus simplicior a simple text apphed to that recenS10n or ver-
SIon or codex where the shorter text of a work IS preserved.
Textus receptus the received text, the normabzed text or more
commonly the 'Vulgate'
Traditio tradition, the hiStory of textual transmtSSlOn
Traditional reading a reading wluch IS supported both by the
manuscnpts and the testunoma Cf Transmitted reading.
Transcript a copy made (by ,hand) from an exemplar
Transcriptional probability cf documental probablhty
Transmission the preservation of a text through a long hne of copies
made from the orlglnal or Intennedlary COPies, all of which go
back ulbmately to a single source Haphazard transmtSSlon indi-
cates a transmiSSIon where no 'protectlon' IS afforded to the text
and therefore the chances of corruption, crOSSIng and Inftabon are
constderable Protd:t.ed transmIssIon mdlcates favourable conditions
for the proper preservation of the text, and the copying IS done
under recogruzed boches, supemslng the work of the scnbes
Transmitted reading a reading supported by the manuscnpts alone.
Transmitted text the text of the archetype
Unoriginal what IS not Intended by the author, and therefore not
belongtng onglnally to the text.
Ur used as an affix and added to titles of works bke Ur-Mbh U,-
1W, etc
Ur-text the autograph or onglnal text.
Varia (e) Jectione(s) vanant readlng(s) or vanant(s).
, .
Variant one of the several readings wmch can be that of the text we
are consbbltlng.
7
Variant bearer any codex whose reachngs may be c:onsidered for the
oonstltut1Oll of the text under conSlderatIon.
Version the further Ilne of chvergence from the SUb-recenSlOD or when
there IS no sub-recenSlon, from the recenSlon Itself.
Verso left-hand page of open bbok or back of Recto. Cf. Sk.
Prstham as opposed to ankah
Vulgate the receIVed or normallzed text of any work Ongmally
applled to the LatIn verSlOO of the BIble prepared by Jerome late
10 the fourth century AD, and by transference applled to the
popular or commonly known and accepted fonn of a text, as
opposed to the cntlcal text or editIon (LatIn vulgata).
APPENDIX II
A Braef Note on the H.stor, ancl Progress of Catologuing
of Sans1erst and other MSS in Ind.a and
Outs.de (Between A.D. 1800 and 1941).
BUT for the hIgh entertamed by our ancestors for
manuscnpts smce the art of wntmg came mto vogue the trans-
mission of the Wide vanety of thought that now permeates our
life and culture would have been an Imposslblhty The oral
communication of texts from generation to generation as 10 the
case of the Rgveda must have been matenally facIlitated by the
earliest attempt to put thiS magnum opus of our R$lS 10 WrItten
characters, whether on the bhurla-potra, the tiila-palrfZ (palm-
leaves) or any other 'IT'edlUm then available to our forefathers.
The history of the wrItlngt of manuscnpts 10 India before the
Chnstian era IS dIfficult to reconstruct but not so 10 the case of
the wntlOg of Manuscnpts after the Chnstian era" as some MSS.
of thiS latter period belonging to the early centunes of the ChrIS-
tian era are avaIlable for such study Apart from these MSS
on BhurltJ etc, recently a MS,
3
conslstmg of 20 leaves of gold
1. MAx MULLER In HIStory of Anaent Sansknt LIterature
(1859) devotes no leSs than 27 pages to the questIon of "IntroductIon
of Wntmg" (pp 257 to 270 of Pamm Office repnnt of Max MtJu.ER's
HIstory). Dr BUHLER, who 40 years later publIshed hiS work on
lndttln Paloeography, IS thanked by MAx MULLER In the Preface for the
mdex at the end of hiS HIStory Dr BUHLER IS mentIoned here aa
.. a pupd of Professor BENFEY" In the monthly magazine "The
Dawn" (Calcutta, January 1901) Sir Jadunath SARKAR (then Profes-
sor of Enghsh, Patna College) has given a summary of BUHLER's IndIan
Palaeography whIch gives the history of IndIan alphabets from 350
BC to 1300 AD
2 See pp 2-3 supra and App III below.
a VIde p 179 of Report of Arch. Sur t1f India (1926-27).
WhIle tills gold MS. was prepared the Olmese were usmg
paper for their MSS (Vide pp. 7176 of the Journal of the Am,"..,
Orient. Society, Vol. 61, No.2, June W. HUMMEL's paper on
with wnting lIlClsed m me SIde of each leaf has been discovered
m Burma dunng excavations at Hmawza by Mons Charles
DvROISELLE Thts MS. IS 61" In length and about 11" m
breadth and contains short extracts from the Abl"dhamma and
Vinaya Palakos From the palalograplucal pomt of View It IS
regarded as the most mstructJve find yet made m Burma. The
-characters of thiS MS. are Slnular to those of the mscnptlons
lIlcised round the lower and upper nms of a large SlIver stupa
found at the place and of the same date viz 6th or begmmng of
the 7th century A.D.
These rare finds 10dlcate the Importance attached by the
:ancIents to MSS and the sanctity With which they were cared
for and preserved by them 10 spite of the pohtical VlclSSltudes
of the changing penods of history In SPite of all thiS care and
.eanctJty and 10 SPite of the wealth of MSS. preserved 10 India
and Greater India their neglect If not destruction was the order
.of the day durlOg the early penod 0: the Bntlsh advent' 10
India ow1Og to several factors, which need not be discussed here
.. The Development of the Book In allna" In whIch we find the Story
of the ChInese book as It developed step by step from the wooden or
bamboo sz,p to the silk or paper scroll, from the scroll to the folded
album and from the album to the paged book of modem tllnes) We
note here the early chronology of thIS story from HUMMEL'S very
learned and instructive paper -
B C 13th rmd 14th dlvlnabon bones WIth Inscnp-
bons chscovered In 1899 In Honan province show that books exIst-
ed at thrs tJme (Shang dynasty) The PIctograph for a 'volume'
appears on these bones and on early bronzes.
1st Century B C-Thousands of Inscnbed slips found In the desert
sands of Chmese Turkestan
A. D 96-Seventy-elght wooden shps containing an Inventory of
weapons, chscovered by Folke BERGMANN of Sven HEDIN's Expech-
bon (about 10 l'E'Bf8 ago) 10 Central ASIa
A D 103-Ts'a Lun, the ;,wentor (1f paper offered hIS product to the
throne. Ts'," YUGK a scholar who died 37 years after paper was
first made wrote to a fnend as follows _" I send you the works
of the Phi1osopher H si4 In ten scrolls-unable to afford a copy on
811k, I am obbged to send you one on paper ".
Edward MOOR 1D hIS NflT'fatlfJB of Operations etc. agarnst Tlpoo
Sultan (London, 1794) makes some remarlcs about eanarese dacu
APPENDIX II
101
We owe much to the European scholars in the matter of criti-
cal study of our MSS. and the early lustory of Indology is doaely
amnected WIth theIr bves and labours. The work of Sir William
JONES, MAx Mtn.I.ER, CoLEBROOKE and a host of other scholars
has laid the foundatlons of cntical scholarshipi' m the field of
ments _u On pubhc or unportant matters the Canarese, we beheve,
Write on oommon paper, but their orcbnary accounts and wntlngs are
done WIth a white pencIl on black paper, or rather a cloth which is
prepared sometrung hke our slate paper and the penal 18 a 10ssl1,
very sundar to French Chalk" MOOR obtamed speamens of these
documents from a waggoo load of them kept m a paaoda at Dondrug
but they were obvIously account books
Samt Riimadasa of (seventeenth century) has got a
special chapter m rus magnum opu.s the DiisabodluJ called the lelelatmtr
mri4jNma which oontams detaIled mstructlons reo the wntIng of MSS
In Devanigari characters and their preservatIon. We propose to gIve
an Enghsh rendering of It Q.n a future OICClLSIon for the benefit of the
students of Indian pala!ography.
6 The cntIcal scholarshtp m the field of research m Indology IS
necessanly oonnected With the uiea of collectlng MSS and pnntIng
thetr hsts or catalogues The ongm and development of thIS Idea IS
admIrably dealt With by Dr. S K BELVALKAR m hiS Foreword to
Vol I of the Descnpt,ve Catalogue of the Govt MSS LUnary (now
With the B 0 R. Institute, Poona), Bombay, 1916 We note here the
early chronology of thiS ongm and development -
cAD 17'14 to 1'l'l9-Slr ,obert CHAMBE'JIS, a fnend of SIr William
JONES and BURKE sometlme PresIdent of the Asiatic Soctety
of Bengal, collected a bbrary of Indian books (Vide II VOITTede"
to WEBER'S Catalogue of Berlm MSS 1853). The uruque col-
lection of Sansknt MSS was later purchased by the Prussian
Government m 1842 and depoSIted in the Impertal Library of
Berhn.
1789-Slr Wdham JONES pubhshed hiS Enghsh Translation of
Siikrmtoltz.
1782-Col MACKENZIE landed m India as cadet of Engllleers on the
Madras Estabbshment.
1796-1806-MACKENZIE was employed tn the tnvestigation of the Geo-
graphy of the Deccan. He later became Surveyor General of India.
He collected MSS , inscriptions, plans, maps, and other anti-
quane materIal HIS oollection was purchased by the East Intia
Company fOl' 10,000.
1828-Catalogue of Mackenzte Collections by H. H. 'fILSON, published,
102
Indology in general and of Sansknt leam10g 10 particular The.
hlStory of this Critical Scholarship is now too well-known to.
every IndologIst to be repeated 10 thiS short I\ote, which will
be confined to the hiStory of GatalogUlngt' of MSS 10 India
We may, however, record here a fact not so well known to Indian
Sanskntlsts that the first European to ev10ce 10terest 10 Sansknt
was a Gennan JesUit, who IS referred to by BernIer 10 hIS Travels?
1868 (10th May)-Pamht the cluet Pancht of the
Lahore Durbar addresses a letter to the Viceroy and Governor-
General of Incha, III which he comphments the Government of
Incha on the orders they had Issued .. for collectmg the Catalogues.
of Sanskrit, Arabic and PerSIan books m eXistence III many parts.
of Incha" and urges the necessity of oomplimg a Catalogue .. of
all Sansknt MSS In Incha and Europe"
8 Vide .. Papers relating to the Collectron and Preservatwn of the
Records of anCJent Sans/tnt L,terattlre of Indw" by A E GoUGH,
Calcutta, 1878 -Mr STOKES, the Secretary of the Legislative Counctl
drew up a scheme for codlectmg and catalogumg MSS TIus scheme
was approved by the Government of Incha In their order No 4338-48-
dated Simla, 3rd November 1868 The Government of Bombay actmg
under the orders orr Government of India on 10th Dfember 1868 re-
quested Dr KIELHORN and Dr BUHLER to undertake the search of
MSS 10 the Bombay Presidency The Bombay Government had,
however, already taken the mltiative 10 thiS matter by keepmg some
money at the disposal of:pr BUHLER on 1st November 1866 for the
purchase of MSS The MSS collected!:ty Dr BUHLER With the help-
of thiS money now form the 1866-68 collec\lon of the Governme"t
MSS Library at the B 0 R Instltute For further history of thiS
search for MSS Vide Dr BELVALKAR's Foreword referred to already
(paras 7 ff )
7 Constable's Edn London, 1891, p 329-Bernler okserves -" I
was acquamted With Rev Father Roo a JeS1llt, a German by birth and
Missionary at Agra who had made great profiCIency III the study of
Sanscnt " HIS full name was Father Hemrlch ROTH, S J He was
attached to the Goa MiSSIon He Journeyed from Goa to Agra about
AD 1650-1660, and stuched Sanskrit dunng these years Roth went
back to Rome from Agra about AD 1665 He drew up for Father
KIRCHER five engraved plates pubhs.'led by KIRCHER III hiS Chma Illus-
trata referred to by Berruer (on p 332) The first four plates con-
Utn the alphabet and elements (10 Devaniigari characters)' of Sansknt
explamed In Latin, the 5th plate IS Our Lord's Prayer and an Ave
Mana 10 Sansknt and Lattn to serve as an exemse for beginners
APPENDIX II
103
in a letter dated 4th October 1667 and whose full name was
Father Heinnch ROTH This scholar drew up "the first speci-
mens of Sansknt ever pnnted or engraved (as for a book) 10
Europe or lOdeed anywhere" These specimens wIll be found
between folIos 162 and 163 of Chuza IllustrotfiJ of Athanasius
KIRCHER,9 S J , pubbshed at Amsterdam by Janszon 10 AD 1667.
Though the first specimens of Sansknt were put 10 prmt as early
as AD 1667 the first publIshed Catalogue of Sansknt MSS
appeared 10 A D 18071() I e 240 years after the appearance of
KIRCHER'S Ch,na Illustrata The progress of Catalogumg of
Sansknt and other MSS 10 India and outside smce A D. 1807
wIll be apparent from the followmg table based on the bst of
Catalogues appended to the present note .-
A D
Author or Compder
Place of PublIcatIOn
I I ~ ' ~
Deposu of Catalogue
- - ~ - - - - - - ~ - --- - -------- - - ~ - - ~
1807
EdItor of SIr Wliham
}
London
Jones' Works
London
1828 H H WILSON Calcutta
I
1
Fort
Calcutta
1838 I
St Wliham
1846 Otto BoHTLlNGK St Petersburg St Petersburg
1853
A WEBER Berhn BerlIn
W Iiham TAYLOR
I
Fort
Madras
1857
St George
:859 Fltze<iward HALL Calcutta
1861 T S Condaswaml IYER Fort
I
Madras
St George
8 Vide p 332 of BernIer's Travels, foot-notes 1-3
9 ibId, KIRCHER (born 1602 and dIed at Rome 1680 AD) was
.one tmle Professor of OrIental Languages at Wurtzburg -For other
cunous engravings after IndIan draWings, VIde pp. 156-162 of Chma
lllustrata -AUFRECHT In hiS Catalogus Catalogorum Jefers to the MSS.
In the possession of Prof. Juitus JOLLY at Wurzburg and at the Wurz-
burg Umverslty (VIde C. C III, p IV).
Ie) Vld.: pp 401-415 of Vol XIII SIT Wtlltam lones' Works, Lon-
don, 1807, where a Catalogue of Sansknt and other Oriental M ~ S .
presented by Sir Wilham and Lady JONES has been pnnted.
104
A.D.
1864
1864
1865
1868
1869
1869
1870
1870
1871
1871
1872
1874
1874
1874
1875
1875
1876
1876
1876
Author or eomp,ler
I
Place of
Deposit
I
Place of
PublictJIion
of CtJlalogue
\
T S. Condaswaul1 hER
Theodore AUFRECHT
Benares
Oxford
Benares
Oxford
Tubmgen
R. ROTH
R LAWRENCE
Handwntten list)
F KIELHORN
Th. AUFRECHT
James D'ALWIS
A. C. BURNELL
G BUHLER
RaJendralal MITRA
G BUHLER
F. KIELHORN
G BUHLER
(187273)
J., S NESFIELD
G BUHLER
(187475)
Georg ORTERER
E B CoWELL and
J, .f;GGWNG
Tubmgen
I Khatmandoo
Bnmbay l'
Presidency f I, Bombay
Southern
DIVISion
Cambndge i Cambndge
Ceylon
GUJarat,
Kathlawar,
Kachch,
Smc'l,
,Khandesh
I
I Gu)arat
iCentral
!Provmces
'North
I Western
I Provmces
Calcutta
Surat
l Nagpur
}
Senares
I'
100dh
Bombay
I
5 Glrgaum,
1 Bombay
lOr Martm }
tHaug's
i Collections at Munchen
'Munchen
I London
London
1877 RaJendralal MITRA
Calcutta
N W.
Provtnces
Bonll2
I Calcutta
18771886
APPENDIX II
105
J_
I Place of
l'lIIee 01
AD. Autlwr or ComJ1iler
Deposit
PNblktllion
of Catalogue
----- -
\G
I
1877 BUHLER Kashrmr,
RaJPUtana,
}-.
!
Central
I
Incha
1878 Pancht Devi PRAw>
Oudh Allahabad
1878 'J NESFIELD and
I
Oudh Calcutta
!
Devi PRAsAD
1878
A E GoUGH Papers
1
I
relabng to
I
Sansknt
Literature
r
Calcutta
and its
I
catalogumg
etc
J
1879 I Pt. Devi PRAs"
Oudh
Allahabad
1879 Pancht KAsHiNATH
(1879-80)
Lahore
KUNTE
1880-81
Pand!t KASHiNATH
.
(1880-81)
Lahore
KUNTE
1880
A C BURNELL Tan]Ore
London
1880
RaJendralal MITRA Boomer
Calcutta
1880
R G BHANDARKAR
Bombay
1880-85
Gustav OPPERT Southern
l
Incha
Madras
1881-1890 Pand!t Dlvi PRASAD Oudh
1881 F KIELHORN Bombay
l
&mbay
Pre9ldency
1881 F. KIELHORN Poona
(1877-81)
1881 A Csoma de Koaos and
I ..
Pans
M Leon FnR
1882 G BUHLER Wlen Wlen
1 ~ Pt Kashmath KUNTE GUJranwala,
}
Delhl and Lahore
Punjab London
1882 H. ()IJ)ENBERG
London
1882 - Ra)eDdralal MITRA Nepal Calcutta
1882 R. G BHANDARKAR Bombay
(1881-82)
Place of
ce 0
AD. Author or Ct>mJn1er Publicotion
DeposIt
of Catalogu,
- ----- --

,
1882 Bhau DaJl Collection Bombay
I Bombay
18&3 B NANJIO Chmese

Trans of
Buddlust
Tftprtaka-
Catalogue
18&3
CecIl BENDALL
Cambndge
[Cambndge
1883
P PETERSON
I
Bombay
li-
(1882-83)
Circle
1884
LeWIS RICE
Mysore &
} Bangalore
Coorg
1884
E KIELHORN and
I
I
R G BHANDARKAR

(VlSrambag
Poona
'Poona
I
Collections )
J

1884
P PETERSON
1-
}
Circle
Bombay
1884 R G BHANDARKAR Bombay
}
I PreSIdency
Itombay
1886 A WEBER (Vol II)
Berhn Berlm
1887 P PETERSON Bombay
} IBombay
\ Circle
1887 R G
I Bombay
}
Bombay
I Pres:dency
1887-1904 EGGELING
I London
London
(India Office MSS )
1888 S R BHANDARKAR Poona Bombay
1890-1893
Pt Devi PRAsAD Oudh
}
Allal>abad
Provmce
1892 P PETERSON Ulwar
Bombay
1892 Theodor AUFRECHT Florence
LeiPZig
1892 BerlIn
Berhn
1892
HfljikeSa SHASTRY
Calcutta
Calcutta
1893 (Govt On. MSS
I
Madras
Madras
Library)
1893 R. G BHANDARKAR Bombay )
Bombay
PreBIdency
J
18fti A. F R HOERNLE Central ASIa
Calcutta
1894
I M. A STEIN Jammu
,Bombay
, I
,
I
AD
1894
1894
1895
1895
1895-1902
1895
1896-1899
1897
1898
1898
1898-99
1899
1899
1899-1901
1900
'900
1900
1901
1901-1939
1901
1901
1902
1902
APPENDIX II
107
Author 01 Compiler
Place of
DepoSIt
Place of
PublICatson
of Catalogue
P PETERSON
R. G BHANDARKAR
P. PETERSON
Hara Prasad SASTRI
H ~ i k e S a SHASTRY and}
Siva Candra Gur
E HULTZSCH
Bombay
Circle
Bombay
PrCSldency
Bombay
Circle
Bengal
Calcutta
Southern
Imha
P PETERSON Bombay
I
Circle
R G BHANDARKAR Bombay
I I PreSidency
Hara Prasad SH "STRI Bengal
G. BUHLER Tubmgen
(Sansknt & Tamil MSS) i South
'I IndIa
Richard GARBE Tubmgen
P PETERSON I Bombay
':Clrcle
I Pt KuiiJa Vthari ~ I, Calcutta
NY;;"YABHU$ANA S
Ra)endralal MIT"" ! Bengal
P CoRDIER (Hand-hst) Bengal
} I
Bombay
} Bombay
} Bombay
Calcutta
Calcutta
)
} I Madras
} Bombay
} Bombay
Calcutta
Wlen
} Madras
}
Tubmgen
Bombay
Calcutta
Calcutta
I Haraprasad SHASTRI Report for }
i 1895-1900
I Th AUFRECHT LetPZlg
S Kuppuswaml SHASTRI }
I and others (Vols I to Madras
, XXVII) I
t
A V. KATHAWATE I Bombay }
! PreSIdency Bombay
1 A CALEATON Pans I
I Whish CollectIOn I (South }
i I IndIa) Ii London
! 'London
i Jam Svetiimbara Con-I (Jama MSS. 1 I Bomba
I terence 1 m IndIa) f y
Madras
108
A. D. __ I ____ Compiler I
1902 I M. de Z - -d
1902
1904
1905
1905
1906
1907
1907
1907
1908
1908
1908
1909
1909
1912
1912
1913-1939
1915
1916
1916
1917
1918
1919
1919
1920
1921
192?
1923
SINGHE I n on
Ceol BENDALL I London
RaJendralal MITRA I Bengal
M. WIINTERNITZ and } Ovford
A. B KEITH
Hara Prasad SHASTRI'} Nepal
and C BENDALL
Hara Prasad SHASTRI
Rajendralal MITRA
A. CALEATON
S. R. BHANDARKAR
Bengal
Pans
RaJPUtana
and Central
India
Calcutta
(Jam MSS)
Sabscandra

VIDYABHU- Budarllst
Works
S VIDYABHU$ANA
1h AUFRECHT
P CoRDIER
M A. STEIN
A CALEATON
S. Kuppuswanu
and others
P CoRDIER
A F R. HoERNLE
Tibet
Munchen
Pans
Oxford
Pans
SASTRI Madras
Pans
East
Turkestan
Professors of Sanskrit, }
Deccan College, Poona Poona
Hara Prasad SAsrRI Calcutta
N D MIRONOFF Petrograd
Suparsva Das GUPTA Arrah
Govt Sansknt Library } Be
(1897-1919) I nares
Telugu Academy Cocanada
R. A SASTRI ( Kavidra-
cirya List)
Govt. Onental Library Mysore
Gopinatb KA VIRAJ Senares
I
Place of
PublicatIon

I
London
London
Calcutta
I Oxford
I Calcutta
Calcutta
Calcutta
iPans
}i-
y
I Calcutta
} iCalcutta
!Calcutta
iMunchen

Pans
I Madras
iPans
} Oxford
Poona
Calcutta
Petrograd
Arr.m
Benares
Coamada
Baroda
Mysore
Benares
APPENDIX II
A D. Author or Compiler Ploce of Publicotion
I
e ()
____ __________________ _____
1923 C. D DALAL and L. B.
Jesalmere Baroda
GANDHI
1923 Haraprasad SAsTRI
Calcutta Calcutta
1923
Haraprasad SAsTRI }
(History & GE!9ir8- Calcutta
Calcutta
phy)
1924 Jacques BACOT Pans Pans
1925-1930 H D VELANKAR
Bombay
Bombay
1925
G. K Smooo..,..... }
and K S Ramswa-
Baroda Baroda
ml SASTRI
1925
Haraprasad SASTRI
Calcutta
Calcutta
1925
Haraprasad SASTRI
Calcutta
Calcutta
1925
B O. R. Institute
Poona
Poona
1926
HIRALAL Central
1
I
ProVInces Nagpur
and Berar
1926 Adyar Library
,
Adyar Adyar
1927
K. P. JAnOWAL ..... }
Ananta Prasad Mtthtla Patna
SHAS'l'Rr'
1928 P. P S SAsrRI TanJore TanJore
1928 Govt. On Library Mvsore Mysore
1928 Adyar Library,
Adyar
Adyar
1929 (Marathi MSS) TanJore TanJore
1929
K SambaSlva SASTRI
Tnvandrum Trivandrum
1930 R FICK Gottmgen Berlin
1930 Hemacandra GoSWAMI Assam Calcutta
1930 T. R Gambler PARRY Oxford London
1950-31
OtanI Dalgaku Library Kyoto
Kyoto (Japan}
1931
I Haraprasad SASTRI Calcutta Calcutta
1931
I Marcelle LALou
Pans Pans
19::2
Punjab UniverSIty Lahore Lahore
1933-38
S. S DEVA Dhulta Dhuha
1933
K P. JAYASWAL Mlthtla Patna
1933
Sn Adak Pannalal
}
Dlgambar Jam Jhalrapatan
Sarasvatl Bhavan
1934 Jean FILLIOZAT Pans Pans
I
110
Author or ComJnler I Ploce of
DeposIt
AD
I
p:;u::rwn
of Catalogue
1935 - - -) ---
I
l-----
,Calcutta
I
1935
1935
1936
1936
1936
1937
1937
1937
1938
1938
1939
1940
1940
VARTI
H R KAPADIA
A B KEITH and }
F W THOMAS
Oriental MSS Library
H R KAPADIA
P K GoDE
M A SIMSAR
P K CoDE
Poona iPoona
I Oxford
London
I
U JJ81n I U JJ81R
Poona Poona
Poona Poona
I
Phdadelpl:l1a Phtladelphla
Poona Poona
L B GANDHI and
CD DALAL
} Pattan I Baroda
Umted States} IN H
H. I POLEMAN
and Canada ew aven
S K BELVALKAR Poona Poona
H. D SHARMA Poona Poona
P K GoDE Poona Poona
I H R KAPADIA IPoona Poona
The above table shows at a glance the hIstory and progress
of Catalogumg of Sansknt and other MSS whether deposited m
India or outSide ThIs history covers a penod of about 135 years
from A D 1807 to 1941 The list of catalogues pubhshed along
With thIS note IS by no means exhaustIve as detaIled mforIIldtlon
regardmg all the publIshed catalogues of MSS many smgle
source was not aVaIlable Secondly, these entnes are based 00
actual exammatIon of only some of these catalogues ava.lable at
the B 0 R Institute, Poona Entnes regarding catalogues not
actually exammed are taken from AUFRECHT'S Catalogus Cflta-
ltigOTUlm (3 Parts) and from the Pr()fJlSJonol FascICulus of
New Catalogus Catalogorum pubhshed by the UmverSIty of
Madras m 1937 Though the present hst of ratalogues IS neces-
sanly tentatIve It IS suffiCIent to acquamt the reader WIth the
history and progress of CatalogUIng of IndIan l\1SS. can,ed out
by European and IndIan scholars In SPite of thIS progress which
has brought home the Indian scholars the Importance of their
APPENDIX II 111
undymg natIOnal wealth the work of pubbshmg Descriptive Cata-
logues of MSS has not rece1ved the attentJ.on It deserves. All
research m Indology depends on these MSS and the earher we
explOIt these decaying sources of our history and culture the
better for the ennchment of our lIterature and hIstory. It is
strongly to be hoped, therefore, that the present custodians of
MSS collectIons m IndIa, whether ProvmClal Governments, rulers
of Indian States, learned bodies or publIc lIbraries will concen-
trate their resources and attentIOn on the Cataloguing of their
MSS m general and preparmg theIr Descnptlve Catalogues
ll
in
particular
CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF CATALOGUES
1807
Catalogue of SamcT;t and Other OnentiJl MflInUscripts presented to the
Royal Soctety by Sir Wilham and Lady JONES, (Pages 401-415 of
Vol XIII of S,r Wuliam Jones' Works, London, 1807)
1828
DescTlpt,ve Catalogue of the OTtental Manuscnpts collected by the late
L.eut -Col Colin MackenzIe, by H H WILSON, Calcutta, 1828.
1838
Suclpustaka (a hst of MSc; of Fort WlIham, the ASiatic SocIety m Cal-
cutta, etc), Cakutta, 1838
1846
VerzerchnlSs der auf Indien bezugllChen Handsch.nften und Holzdrue.ke
1m AsratlSchen Museum, von Otto BoHTLIGK, (Pnnted m nas
ASlatlsche Museum an St Petersburg von Dr Bernh DoRN)
St Petersberg, 1846
11 Vide pp 73-81 of Festschnft Prof P V Kane (1941) where
Prof Chmtaharan CHAKRAVARTI of Calcutta wntes on the .. Study of
Manuscnpts" and makes a fervent appeal to Government to start a
MSS. Department hke the EPlgrapluc Department for the proper care
and scl4;nttfic catalogwng of Mss. He also suggests new legislation
to penalise vendallsm WIth MSS The MtHlern Revf#)W (Septtmber
1941) has already endorsed some of Prof. CHAKRAVARTI'. suggestIOns.
Codka I.ttI Bibliotheetle R.giM HatJietu:is mumer_i el de,mph
a N. L. WJSTDGAARD, Havmae, 1846.
1853
Hatulsclrriflen-VerZleclutwe, Komglichen Btblwthek, by Dr. WBBER,
Berhn, 1853 (Vol. I).
1857
Catalogue rll&SOmie of Omntal MSS In' the L.brary 0/ the College
Fort. SaInt GW1ge, IWW .n charge of the Board of Examiner., by
Rev WlIham TAYLOR, Vol I, Madras, 1857
1859
ContnbutJon towards an Index to the Blbhography of the Inman
Phll0s0phlcal Systems, by F HALL Calcutta, 1859-HALL descnbes
thts Index as .. a tolerably complete mmcatlon of extant Hmdu
SopIusttcs ".
1861
Alplulbetscal CtIt.gue oj the OnentaL Manuscnpts fn the Library oj
the BOflfd of ExtImmeT., by T S Condaswaml hER, ,Madras 1861
1864
Catalogue of MSS m the Library of the Bmarts Stmsknt College,
(Published as a Suppleinent to Pandit, Vol III-IX, Benares,
1864-74) l
Ctltalogus Codscum StlllScr.tscorum B.bliothecae Botlleitmae Confeat
Th Oxonu, 1864
1865
Indisc1rer Hand.chri/tM der Ko.glichen 'UnifJemtat.-
Bibliothek om Tubmgen. Anhang. Inmsche Handschnften der
Komghchen Oeffenthchen Blbhothek m Stuttgart, Von R Rcr.H,
Tilbmgen, 1865.
1868
1M' of s.uMlt W.,., S"P/NJIed to be rare ill the Nepalese LtbrfSTles
., K"",,,,.,,.,, Signed R. LAWRENCE, Resident, Nepal Restdency,
2nd August. 1868.
(
APPENDIX II 113
1869
A CJ4ssIjied tUl AlphabetICal Catalogue of Sanslmt Manuscripts in the
Southern DivistOn of the Bombay Presidency, by F. KlELHORN,
FllSClc1e I, Bombay, 1869.
Cotalogue of Sanskrit Manuscnpts In the Library of TrmUY CoUege,
Cambndge, by Th AUFRECHT Cambndge, 1869
1870
A Descnptlve Catalogue of Pal!, and Smhalese Ltbrary Works
of Ceylon, by James 0' ALVIS, 1870
Catalogue of a CollectIon of Sansknt MSS, by A C BURNELL, Part I
(Vedtc MSS), London, 1870
1871
Catalogue of Sansknt MSS, contamed In the Pnvate Ltbranes of
GUjarat, Kathlawad, Kachchh, Smdh and KhandeS, Fasclcules I
to IV, 1871-1873 by G. BUHLER
Notsees of Sanskrit MSS, by RaJendralal MITRA, Calcutta, Vols I to
XI (1871 to 1895)
1872
Report on the results of the Search for Sanskrit Manuscnpts In GUJa-
rat dunng 1871-72, by G BUHLER, Surat, 1872
1874
Catalogue of SanskTJt eXlSt'tng In the Central Provinces, by
F KIELHORN, Nagpur, 1874
Catalogue of SanskrIt MSS m Private Llbrar.es of (he North-West
Provnsees, Part I, Benares, 1874.
1875
RejXYtt on Sanskr.t ManuSCripts 1872-73, by G. BUHLER, Bombay, 1874.
A ::atalogue of SanskTlt MOItUScripts existing in (Judh for the quarter
endmg 30th September 1875, by J. S NESFIELO.
1876
Report 0 Sansknt Manuscripts 1874-75, by G. BUHLER, Girgaun. 1875-
er,eicMrus der onentallSchen (JUs dem NfJChlasse des PrOfUllot
e
Dr.
Mart;" Haug in Munchen, by Dr Georg ORTERER, MUnchen, 18'76.
)
114 INDIAN TEXTUAL aUTICISM
Catalogu6 of BuddlJ1st" Sansknt MSS In the R A. S. London (HodlSOD'
CollectIon), by E. B CoWELL and J EcGELING. I RAS. N. S.
1876.
Catalogs Llbrorum MfJtIUS1:nptorum OnentalfUm (J loonne Gulldeme,-
stem adornetl, FaSCIculus VII, Bonnae, 1876.
1877
Descnptwe Catalogue of Sansknt MSS In the Library of the ASIIlIt.c
SoCIety of Bengal, Part I, (Grammar), by Rajendralil MITRA,
Calcutta, 1877 '
Catalogue of Sansknt MSS In PrIVate LJlJrartes of the North Western
Parts I to X (from 1877-86)
Detmled Report of a Search of Sansknt Manuscrrpts made (an 1875-76)
In Kashmir, Ra,/JUtana and Central ltulfa, by G BUHLER (Extra
No XXXIVA, Vol XII of the Journal of the Bombay Branch of
the Royal AS1atlc SoClety,) Bombay, 1877
1878
LI:.t of San:.knt MSS dIScovered m OudA dunng the year 1877, by
Pandtt DEViPRASADA, Allahabad, 1878
LIst of SanskTit MSS dIScovered an OUdh ,durmg the year 1876, Prepared
by John NESFIELD aSSlsted by Pand1t DEViPRASADA, Calcutta, 1878.
Papers relatmg to the Collection and Preservation of the Records of
Anc1ent Sanslmt L1terature, by A E GoUGH, Calcutta, 1878
1879
"
LISts of Sansknt MSS dIScovered In Oudh (dlinng 1879), by Pandtl.
DEViPRASAD, Allahabad, 1879
"
Report on the Compllat.on of a Catalogue of Semsknt MSS jor thff
year 1879-80, by Pt Kashmath KUNTE, Lahore.
1880
Report on Semsknt MSS for the year 1880-91, by Pt Kashinath KUNTE.
ClasSified Index to the Sans/mt MSS an the Palace at 1'Gn1O'fe, by IJ. C
BURNELL, London, 1880 '
Catalogue &1 Sansknt Manuscnpts mI the Ltbrary of H H the Maha-
raJa of fJ,/um.er, by RaJendraUiI MITRA, Calcutta, 1880
A Rel/JO'Tt fin 122 ManwCTJpts, by R. G BHANDARKAR, Bombaf, 1880
Lasts of Samknt MSS an PTlVate L.branes of Southern Indua, by Gustav
QpPERT, Vol I (1880), II 1885, Madras.
l.
APPENDIX 11 115
1881
Catalogue 01 Sansknt MSS e:Jistmg m Oudh, by DEviPRASAD, Fasacules
III-XIII (1881 to 1890).
Report on the Search lor Sanskrat Manuscripts m the Bombay Pres.-
dmcy durmg 1880-81, by F. KIELHORN, Bombay, 1881
lAsts 01 the Sanskrit ManuscTlpts purchased ffnl Governnzgnt dunng
the years 187'1-78, and 1869-78 and a LIst of the Manuscnpts pur-
chased lrom May to November 1881, by F KIELHORN, Poona,
1881
Annales du Musee GUlmet Tome Dewtlme, Pans, 1881 Analyse du
KandJour, A Cosma de KOROS add M Leon FEER and Abrege des
Matleres du TondJour par Cosma DE KOROS
1882
Vber eme kurzl,ch fur die W,mer Unaversltat erworbene Sammlung von
Sanskrit und Prakr,t-Handscn!ten, von George BUH:tJlR, Wlen,
1882
Statement silO wang the oM and Tare MSS tn GUJranwala and DelhI
Dlstncts, PunJab exaIll1ned dunng the year 1881-82, by Pandlt
Kashmath KUNTE, Lahore, 1 ~ 2
Catalogue of P'th MSS m the India Office Library, by H OLDENBERG,
London, 1882, (AppendIx to the Journal of the Pall Text Sooety,
1882)
The Sansknt Buddlust Literature of Nepal, by RaJendralal MITRA,
Calcutta, 1882
4. Re/JMt 0fII the Sear .. h 01 Sanskrit Manuscnpts durmg 1881-82, by
R G BHANDARKAR, Bombay, 1882
Catalogue of MSS and Books belongmg to the Bhau DUll MemoTlal,
Bombay, 1882
1883
A Catalogue of the Clunese Translation of the Buddlust Tnpltaka.
~ y B NANJIO, Oxford, MDCCCLXXXIII (1883)
Catalogue of the BuddlllStlC Manuscnpts m the UnIverSIty Library,
Cambndge, by Ceol BENDALL, Cambndge, 1883
A Report on the Search for SanskrIt Manuscnpts in the Bombay elTele,
August 1882 to March 1883, by P PETERSON, Extra No XLI, Vol
XVI of the Journal of the Bombay Branch. of the Royal .Asltlc
Sooety, Bombay, 1883
1884
Ctltfllo"" of Stnr.shrit MSS In My!JtWe tmd Coor" by Lewis
Bangalore, 1884.
A. Ctlttzlo,tU' 01 the Sanskrit ManuscTlpts ." the lAbMry 01 the Decc""
College, (bemg bsts of the two ViSrimbig CollecbonB)-Part I
prepared under the supenntendence of F KIELHORN, Part 11 and:
Index prepared under the supenntendence of R G BHANDARKAR,
1884
A Second Report of OperatIOns m Search of Sansknt Manuscnpts in
the Bombay CIrrII' Apnl 1883 to March 1884 bv P PETERSON.
Extra No XLIV, Vol. XVII of the Journal of the Bombay Branch
of the Royal AsIatic SocIety, Bombay, 1884.
A Report on the SefR'Ch lor Sansknt Manuscnpts in the Bombay Pres ...
dency dunng, 1882-83, by R G BHANDARKAR, Bombay, 1884.
1886
l-'erze;chmss der SanskTlt und Prakr.t Hattdschn/ten (der Komghchen
Blbhothek m Berlm) Von A WmER, Berhn, 1886 (ThiS Catalogue"
IS a contmuatlon of the Volume published In 1853 and descnbes
numbers 1405-1772
1887
A Thud Report of Operations 10 Search of Sansknt Manuscnpts In the
Bombay Circle Apnl 1884 to March 1886, by P PETERsoN.
Extra No XLV of Vol XVII of tfte Journal of the Bombay
Branch of the Royal ASIatiC Society, BomLay, 1887
A Report on the Search for Sansknt Manuscnpts .,,. the Bombay PreSI-
dency durmg 1883-84, by R. G. BHANDARKAR, Bombay, 1887
Catalogue 01 Sanslmt MSS .n the LIbrary of the Indlfl
Part I (Vedtc) 1887
Part II (VyikaraJ;18 etc) 1889
Part III (Rhetoric) 1891
Part IV (Philosophy etc) 1894
Part V (Medrtme etc) 1896
Part VI (Poetical Literature-
EPiC & Paurantk bterature)
1899
Part VII (Kiivya, Nataka) 1904.
1888
CatUlo,ue of the CollectlOIIS of MSS de/JOssted '" the DecCIIIJ CoUe,s, bY'
S. R. BHANDARKAR, Bombay, 1888.
APPENDIX II 111
1890
Ctllalogue of Sanskrit MSS esisting in Oudh Pr'01J'ince for 'he y",
by Pt nevi PRAsAD (XX! to XXII) 1890 to 1893, Allahabad.
1892
Catalogue of the Sanskrit MSS, In the Library of H H the MaharaJa.
of Ulwar, by P PImI:RsoN, Bombay, 1892
Florent,ne Sanskrit MSS examined by Theodor AUFRECHT, LeiPZig, 1892.
Htmdschnftm-Verzerchnw del Konrglfchen Btbliothek Zll Berltn,
3, Berhn, 1892
DescnptlVe Catalogue of Sanslmt MSS in the Lsbrary ", the Calcutt.
Sanskr.t College, by Hptikea SHASTRY, Parts I to IX, Calcutta,
1892
1893
Alphabettcal Index 0/ MSS .n the Govt Onental MSS L,brary,
Madras, 1893
LISts of Sansk"t MSS m Pnvatfl/ LtbTlIIIlIIS In the BombIIy Presidency ..
by R G BHANDARKAR, Part I, Bombay, 1893
The Weber Manuscnpts Another Collecbon of AnCIent MSS from
Central Asia by Dr A. F. R. HioBRNLE, (Repnnt from JASB ..
Vol. LXII, Pt. Z, Ie.)
Catalogue of SfMtSk"t M""",scnptSl at Jammu, by M A STEIN, N. S
Press, Bombay, 1894

1894
A Fourth Report of Operations In Search of Sanskrit -Manuscn,pts lit
the Bombay Circle, Apnl 1886 to March 1892, by P PETERSON.
Extra No XLIXA of Vol XVIII of the Journal of the Bombay
Branch of the Royal ASlabc Soctety, Bombay, 1894
A RepqTt on the Search JOT Sanskrit Manuscnpts m the Bombay Pre)l
dency dunng 1884-81, by R G. BHANDARKAR, Bombay, 1894
1895
An Alphabet,cal Index of Manusc"pts puTchaaed upto 1891, (Pnnted at
the end of Notices of Sansknt Manuacnpl:s, by M M. Haraprasad
SASTRI, Vol XI, Calcutta, 1895. (MSS tn this hst are descnbect
'3' the volumes of the Descnpbve Catalogue of the ASIatic So6ety
Bengal, by M M. Haraprasad Sastn).
118 INDIAN TEXTUAL aUnCISM
Descnpt'We Catalogue of Sems/mt MSS In the LIbrary of the Calcutta
Sanrkr.t CoUege, by H(likeea SAsTRI & SIva Candra GUI, Vol I
(1895), Vol II (1898), Vol III {1900), Vol IV (1902) Vol. V,
FaSCl I, Calcutta.
Reports on SmlskTlt MSS In Southern IndIO, by E HULTZSCH, No.1.
Madras, 1895 No. 2 Madras, 1903'?
A FIfth Report of OperatJons In Search of Sanskn1! Manuscnpts In the
Bombay Circle, Apnl1892 to March 1895, by P PETERSON, Bom
bay, 1896.
1896
Fifth Report of OperatIOns In Search of Sansknt MSS, In the Bombay
Circle, by P. PETERSON, Bombay, 1896 S,xth Report, Bombay,
1899
1898
A Report on the SetJ1ch for SanskTlt Manuscnpts. In the Bombay
Presidency dunng 1887-91, by R G Bombay, 1897.
Notfces oj Srmsk,nt MSS (2nd Senes), by M M Haraprasiid SAsTRI,
Vols I and II, Calcutta, 1898
Sltzungsbenchte der Kals Akadeaue der Wissenschaften In. Wlen Philo-
SOplllsch-Hlstonsche classe, Band CXXXVII IV The Tubmger
Katha-Handschnften und Ihre Beshung Zum TalttJrlyiiral)yaka
L Von Schroeder Herapransgegeben Mit Emem Nachtrage von
G BUHLER, Wlen, 1898 '"
Report on a Sear'C'h JOT SanskTlt and Tam,l 'uss, fOT the year 1896-97
and 1893-94, No 1 (1898), No 2 (1899), Madras
!'
1899
deT Indlschen Handsc.h.nften der KomgllChen UnlfleTSltats
-Brblwthek, (Zuwachs der Jahre 1865-1899) von Richard GARBE,
Tublngen, 1899
A SiXth Report of Operations In Search of Sansknt Manuscnpts m t..le
Bombay CIrcle, Apnl 1895 to March 1898, by P. PETI!RSON, Bom-
bay, 1899 (This contains also a hst of MSS purchased by Prof.
PETERSON In 1898-99)
Catalogue of Pnnted Books and MSS In Sanskr,t belong,ni; the
8rlental LAbrary oj the AstatIC Society oj Bengal, by Pt. Kuii.Ja
Vlhii.n NYAYABHueAN, 3 Foscscus, Calcutta, 1899-1901.
APPENDIX II
1900
NIJtices of SfMSlnit MSS. by R. MITRA. Vol I, Calcutta, 1900.
Lut of non-medICal MSS collected by Dr. P Cord.er ,n Bengal, (Janu-
ary 1898 and June 1900)
Report /or the Search 0/ SanskTit MSS (1895-1900), By Haraprasid
SASTRI.
1901
Katalog der der Unwers.tats-B.bllothek In
LeJpzsg, von Theodor AUFRECHT. LeIPZig, 1901.
Descnptlve Catalogue of the Sansknt MSS of the Govt. Onental
Library, Madras, Vols I to XXVII (1901 to 1939).
A Report 071 the Search to'( Sanskrit ManuscrIpts In the Bombay Presi-
dency during 1891-95, by A V KATHAWATE, Bombay, 1901
Blbhotheque Natlonale. Catalogue Sommalre des Manuscripts Sanscnts
et PallS, Pans, 1901 II' 2e FaSCIcule-Manuscnpts Fibs Par A.
CALEATON 1
1902
Catalogue of South [ndum S4nsknt MSS (especuzlly those of the
CollectIOn) In the Royal Astal'lc SOCIety, London, 1902
Jalna Granthivall, published by Jam Svetimbara Conference,
1902 (A List of Jain Works)
Catalogue of the late Prof Fr Max Mll11er's Sansknt MSS, compiled
by Don M de WrlKREMASINGHE, JRAS, 1902, PP. 611-651.
A Catalogue of the Sansknt Manuscnpts m the Bntlsh Museum, by
CeCil BENDALL, London, 1902.
1904
Notrees of &nskTlt MSS, by R MITRA, Vol II, Calcutta, 1904
1905
Catalogue of Sansknt ManUSCrIpts m the Bodhen Library, Vol II
begun by Dr M. WINTERNITZ and completed by Dr A. B KEITH ..
Oxford, 1905
A Cata,l,ogue of Palm-leaf and Selected Paper Manuscnpts belongmg.
to the Durbar Llbrary, Nepal, by M M Haraprasad'sASnu, M.A.
WIth a Histoncal Introduction by Prof C BENDALL, M A. Cal'cutta ..
1900.
1906
R ~ on the Search of Sansknt ManuscrIpts, by M. M. Haraptaaad
SASTRI, 1906.
1907
NotICes of Strmknt MSS, by R MITRA, Calcutta, 1907 Vol III
Blbhotheque N abonaIe, Department des Manuscnpts, Catalogue Som
matre des Manuscnpts Sanscnts et Pahs par A OALEATON, Pans.
I ler FaClcule ManuscrIpts Sansen.s, 1907
Report of Second Tour m Search of Sansknt Manuscnpts made in
RaJPutana and Central IndIa, 10 190405 and 190006, by S R.
BHANDARKAR, M A, 1907
1908
AlphabetIcal LIst of Jam MSS belongmg to the Govt m the Onental
LIbrary of the ASIatIC SocIety, Bengal, JASB, 1908 (pp 407440).
Descnpbve LIst of Works OIl Midhyannka Phll0e0phy, by M M. Dr.
Sabschandra VWYABHUSHAN, JASB, IS)8 (pp 367-370)
Descnptlve LIst of Some Rare Sansknt Works on Grammar, LexIco-
graphy, and Prosody, recovered from TIbet, by M M Dr Sabs-
chandra VJDYABHUSHAN, JASB, 1908, (pp 500-598)
1909
.DJe SanskntHandschnften der K Hof und Statsblbhothek tn Munchen.
Theodor AUFRECHT, Murchen, 1909. Tomt I, Pars V Catalogus
CodIcum Manuscnptorum Blbhothecae l{eglae MonaceDSls.
.catalogue du Fonds Tlbetam de la Blbhotheque Nabonale Par P.
CamIER, Pans, MOCCCCIX Part II.
1912
Catalogue of the Stem CollectJon of Sansknt Manuscnpts from Kash
mlr, Collected by M. A STEIN and now deposited In the Inman
Instltute, Oxford, by G L M CLANSON JRAS 1912, (pp 587627).
Blbhotheque Nabonale. Catalogue Somnuure des Manuscnpts, Pans
1912 III. Catalogue Somnuure des Manuscnpts Indlens etc. Par
A. CALEATON.
1913
TrtermuIl Catalo,ue of MSS-Govt. Ori MSS LIbrary, Madras, Vols. I
to VIII (19131009).
APPENDIX II
121
1915
Catalogue du Fonds Tlbetain de La Nabonale par
CoRDIER, Pans, Part III, M,DCCCCXV
1916
Manuscnpt Remains of Buddlustlc Literature found m East Turkestan.
by A F. R HOERNLE. Oxford. 1916
Descnpbve Catalogue of the Government CollectIOns of Manuscnpts.
deposlted m the BhandarKar O. R Institute, Poona, Vol I t Vedic-
Literature) 1916
1917
A Descnpbve Catalogue of Sansknt Manuscnpts m the Government
CollectIOns under the care of the Asiatlc Soaety of Bengal, by
M M Haraprasad SASTRI, Vol I (BuddhIstic) Calcutta, 1917.
o
1918
Catalogue of Inman Manuscripts Library Pubhcatlon Department,
Collection of E P MINAE'{ and some fnends, complied by N D
MIRONOFF Pt I, Pubhshed by the RUSSIan Academy of SCIences..
Petrograu, 1918
1919
A Catalogue of Samskrta, Prikrta an. Hmdi Works 10 the Jaml
Slddhanta Bhavan, Afrah, edited by Suparsva DAS GUPTA, B A
Arrah, 1919
A Catalogue of Sansknt Manuscnpts acqUired for tbe Government
Sanskrit LIbrary. Sarasvatl Bhavana, Benares. 1897-1919 (1907
and '908 not available)
1920
LlI't of Manuscnpts m the Telugu Academy, Cocanada, pubhshed lit
1920, m Telugu Scnpt m the Journal of the Academy (ao. MSS).
1921
Kavindri1cirya LIst, edited WIth Introduction. by R. Anantakrishna
SAsrRr, GOS XVII, 1921 (A LIst of the MSS which exJsted.011CIt
In the LIbrary of Kavindricirya, Benares).
1922
Catalogue of Sansknt Manuscnpts m the Government Onental LIbrary,
Mysore, 1922 (A mere bst of Names)
1923
DesCrIptIve Catalogue of SanskrIt ManuloCflpts depoSIted m the Govern-
ment Sansknt LIbrary, Sarasvatl Bhavana, Benares, Vol I, Piirva
Mimiimsii, by M M Gopmath KAVIRAJ, M A. 1923 (A LIst WIth
extracts from Select Manuscnpts) (
A Catalogue of ManuSCrIpts In Jesalmere Bhlll)Qars GOS XXI, Baroda,
1923.
Descnptlve Catalogue of MSS (A S B) by M M Haraprasad SASTRI,
VoL II (Vedic), Calcutta, 1923
Descnpbve Catalogue of MSS (A S B) Vol IV (HIstory and Geo-
graphy) Calcutta, 1923
1924
l
La collectIon Tlbetam Sclul10ng von Canstadt it la Blbhotheque de
l' msbtut, Par Jacques BACOT Journal ASlatique CCV, 1924,
pp 321-348
1925
DescriPtIve Catalogue of Sansknt and Praknt MSS m the Library of
the Bombay Branch of [lOyal ASiatIC Society, Vols I to IV, by
H D VELANKAR, Bombay, 1925 to 1 9 ~ O .
Catalogue of ManuscrIpts m the Central Llblary, Baroda Vol I
'(Vedic) by G K SHRIGONDEKAR M A and K S Ramaswann
SASTRI, SIromlll)1, GOS XXVII, 1925 (A LIst WIth an appendix of
extracts from Select MSS)
DescrIptive Catalogue of MSS (A S B) Vol V (Puril)a), 'by H P
SHASTRI, Calcutta, 1925
Descnptlve Catalogue of MSS (A S B) by M M Haraprasad SASTRI,
Vol. III (Smrb), Calcutta, 1925.
LIsts of Manuscnpts collected for the Government Manuscripts LIbrary,
by Professors of Sansknt at the Deccan and Elphmstone Colleges
contammg the followmg collectIOns -
(1) 1895-1902, (n) 1899-1915, (m) 1902-1907 (IV) 1'd07-1915.
Xv) 1916-1918, (VI) 1919-1924 (Vll) 1866-68
Published by B. 0 R InstItute, Poona, 1925
APPENDIX II
1926
Catalogue of Sansknt and Prikrta Manuscnpts In the Central Provin-
ces and Berar, by Rai Bahadur H1RALAL, BoA, Nagpur, 1926, (A List).
A Catalogue of Sansknt Manu)cnpts In the Adyar LWrfITY, (a mere
Index of Names) by the Panchts of the Adyar Library, Part I
(Adyar, 1926)
1927
Descnptlve Catalogue of Manuscnpts In Mlthlla, Pubhshed by Bihar
and Onssa Research Soc1ety, Patna. Vol. I (Smrtl MSS), by Dr.
K P JAYASVlAL and Dr. Ananta Prasad SHASTRI, 1927
1928
Descnpbve Catalogue of Sansknt MSS In the Sarasvatl Mahal Library.
TanlOfe, by P P. S SHASTRI, Snrangam, Vol I to Vol , 1928
to
A Supplemental Catalogue of Sansknt Manuscnpts Secured for the
Govt Onental. Library, Mysore, 1928 (a mere hst of names)
A Catalogue of Sans/mt Monuscnpts 1n the Adyar LIbrary, by the
Panchts I)f the Adyar Library, (a mere Index of Names), Part II.
Adyar, 1928
1929
Descnpbve Catalogue of J.1arathl MSS and Books In the Sarasvati
Mahal Library 'Pamore, Vol I to Vol TanJore, 1929 to
Revised Catalogue of the Palace Granthappura (Llbra'l)' Tnvandrum,
by K SambaSlva SASTRI, 1929 (A hst of MSS and pnnted books
also)
1930
Nachnchten von der Geselleschaft der Wlssenschaften zu Gotbngen.
Ph11ologJsch-Hlstonsche Klasse, 1930, Heft I, pp 65 ff Ktelhorns
Handschnften-Sammlung, by R FICK Berhn, 1930, (Last part
of the Catalogue With Index)
Dllcnptiv, Catalogue of Asstmaese MSS, by Hemachandra GosvAM(
publ1shed by the UruverSlty of Calcutta on behalf of the Govern-
ment of Assam, 1930 (Part II of thiS volume descnbes Sansknt
MSS)
A Catalogue of Photographs of Sansknt Manuscrl,pts, purchased for
the Adrmmstrators of Max Muller's Memonal Fund, Compded
by T. R. GAMBIER-PARRY, M A, Oxford Umversity Press, London,
1930.
1931
.A Complete Analytical Catalogue of the KanJur DtvISlon of the TIbetan
Tnpltaka, edited m Pekmg dunng the K'ang-HSl Era and at pre-
sent kept m the LIbrary of the Own Dalgaku, Kyoto, m winch
the Contents of each Siitra are collated with their corresponding
parts In the exIstmg Sansknt, Pill and Clunese Texts, etc
Published by the Otam D81gaku LIbrary, Kyoto, Japan, Part I
(1930), Part II (1931)
Descnptlve Catalogue of MSS (A S B) Vol VI (Vyakarana), by
H P SHASTRI, Calcutta, 1931
Catalogue du Fonds Tlbet81n de la Blbhotheque Nabonale par Marcelle
LALou. Quatneme Partie I Les MOO-Man, Pans, 1931.
e
,Catalogue of Sansknt Manuscripts m the Punjab UmverSlty Library,
Vol I, 1932 (a hst only) Lahore
1933
.sri Riimtldiisi SamsodluJ" (Khaodas I-II), by S S Deva, Secretary,
Satkiryotte]ak Sabhi Dhuha (Saka 1855=A.D 1933) This IS
a Catalogue of Marathl &:ld Sansknt MSS numbenng 1875 m the
collectlO1l of Sri Samartha Vagdevata M.lndu Dhulm (Khal}.Qa 1-
1933), Khal}.c;Ia 11-1938.
Descnptlve of Manuscripts m MIthda, pubhshed by the
BIhar and Onssa Research Soctety, Patna, Vol II (LIterature,
Prosody and Rhetonc) by Dr K P JIAYASWAL, 1933
A Catalogue of Sansknt ManuscrIpts and other Books m Sri Adak
PannaIal Digambar Jam Sarasvatl Bhavan, Jhalrapatan (wIth the
title Granthanamavali), 1933.
1934
Bibllotheque Natlonale, Department des Manuscnpts Etat des Manus-
aipta etc. de Ia CollectJ.on Palmyr Corc:her, par Jean IofLLIOZAT
lExtrait du Journal A81atlque, Jan-March 1934) Pans, MDCCCC
XXXIV.
APPENDIX .. 125
1935
Descriptive Catalogue of Sanskrit MSS m the Vailgiya Sihitya Pari-
~ t , Calcutta, by Chtntaharan CHAKRAVARTI, M'.tA, Calcutta, 1935
(A hst).
Descnptlve Catalogue of the Government Collections of Manuscnpts
(B 0 R Institute, Poona) Vol. XVII, Part I, (Jama Literature
and Philosophy), by H. R KAPADIA, M A, 1935
Catalogue tJ/ Smtskrit arad Primt MSS in the Ulnar" of 'he Inditut
Office, Vol II (Brahmameal and Jama MSS), by A B KlmH
WIth a Supplement on Buddhists, by F W. THOMAS, Oxford, 1935,
(m 2 parts).
1936
A Catalogue of Onental Manuscnpts collected till the end of March
1935, and preserved m the Oriental MSS Library (Prachya Grantha
Samgraha) Ullain, 1936 (A hst only)
DescrIptIve Catalogue of the Government Collections of Manuscnpts
(B. 0 R Institute, Poc}ta), Vol XVII, Part II, (Jama Literature
and Philosophy), by H R KAPADIA, M A, 1936
lB. O. R. Institute, Poona) Vol XII, (Alamkira, Sailgita and
Nitya) by P K GoDE, M A.
1937
Onental Manuscnpts of t h ~ John Fredenck LeWIS Collection m the
Free Library of PGtladefphla, by Muhammad Ahmed SIMGAR, H M ,
MBA, Des Phlladelph18, 1937 Pp 178-183 descnbe 8 Sansknt
MSS)
(B O. R. Institute, Poona), Vol XIV (Nitaka) by P K. GoDE,
1937
Descnpbve Catalogue of Manuscripts m the Jam Bhaodirs at Pattan,
Part I (Palm-leaf MSS) GOS, Baroda, 1937, by L. B. GANDHI,
on the bllSls of Notes of the late C D DALAL
1938
A Censu&- of Inmc ManuscrJ,pts in the Umted States and Canada, by
H. I PoLEMAN, American Oriental Senes, Vol. 12, AmerIcan Ori-
ental SoCIety, New Haven, ConneCticut, U. S A 1938.
)
126
INDIAN TEXTUAL !CRITICISM
Descnpbve Catalogue of Government Collecbons of Manuscnpt&
(B O. R. InstItute, Poona) Vol II, Part I, (Grammar) by S. K.
BELVALKAR, M' A, PH D, 1938
1939
Descnptlve Catalogue of Government Collecbons of Manuscnpts
(B 0 R InstItute, Poona), Vol XVI, Part I, (V81dyaka) by
H D. SHARMA, M A, PH D, 1939
1940'
Descnpbve Catalogue of Government Collecbons of Manuscnpts
(B O. R Institute, Poona), Vol XIII, Part I (Kavya), by P K.
GonE, M A, 1940
Descnpbve Catalogue of the Government Collections of Manuscnpts
(B 0 R Institute, Poona), Vol XVII, Part III (Jama Litera
ture and Plulosophy) by H R KAPADIA, MoIA, 1940
-P K GOOE
ADDENDA
The followmg hst has been drawn up SInce the preiCedmg hst was
printed off
1 A Pnnted Catalogue of 114 Sansknt MSS In the pnvate LIb-
rary of the MaharaJB, Tagore Castlfl, Calcutta
2 Descnpbve Catalogue of the Sansknt Manuscnpts 10 the
TanJOre Maharaja SarfOJI'S Saraswab Mahal Library, Tan
Jore, By P P S SAsTRJ, BoA (Oxon.) , M.A.-19 Vola. Vol.
XIX IS a mere hst of names of works
3 Catalogue of Sansknt Manuscnpts collected by the Curator of
the Department for the pubhcatlon of Sanscnpt Manuscnpts,
Tnvandrum, By T Ganapab SAsTRJ, (7 parts).
4. Lists of MSS collected by the .curator for the pubhcabon of
Sansknt MSS, Tnvandrum, pubhshed as Appendices to the
Annual AdmlOlstrabon Reports of the Travancore State
5. Annual Reports of the Sn Adak Pannalal Olganim.. Jam Sa
rasvatl Bhavan Sukhinand Dbarrnawi, Bombay (in 5
parts)
APPENDIX II 127
6. Descnptlve Catalogue of Sansknt Manuscnpts In the Govern-
ment Oriental Library, Mysore This 18 In the press.
7. Descnptlve Catalogue. of Sansknt Manuscripts In the Govern-
ment Onental MSS Library, Madras Vols XX-XXVII by
Prof. S Kuppuswanu SASTRI, M A
8 Descnptlve CataJ.ogue of Sansknt Manuscnpts In the Govern-
ment Onental MSS Library, Madras Vol XVI, XVII and
XIX by Prof M RANGACHARYA, M A and Prof S Kuppu-
swami SASTRI, M A
9 DeSCrIptive Catalogue of Sansknt Manuscripts 10 the Govern-
ment Onental MSS Library, Madras Vol II-XV and
XVIII by Prof M RANGACHARYA, M A
10 Descriptive Catalogue of SanskrIt Manuscnpts 10 the Govern-
ment Oriental MSS Library, Madras Vol I, Parts 11 and
1lI by Prof M Sheshagm SASTRI, M A and Prof M
RANGACHARYA, M A
11 DeSCriptive Catalogue of Sansknt Manuscnpts 10 the Govern-
ment Onental MSS Library, Madras Vol I, Part I by
Prof M. Seshagm SASTRI, M A
1? A Catalogue of the Manuscripts 10 the Mandhk Library, Fer-
gu!!'JOn College, Poona
13 A List of Thirty Sanskrit MSS In Kamnipa Journal of the
Assam Research Society, Vol III, Part 4
14 A List of Buddhistic LogIc W o r k ~ by Rev Rahula SANKRTYA-
YANA Journal ~ f the Bihar and Onssa Research SoCIety,
Vol XXII,JPart I
15 A Supplementary Catalogue of Sansknt Works ,10 the Sarae-
vat! Bhandaram Ubrary of H H the Maharaja of Mysore
Signed by F KIELHORN
16 A few ongmaI MSS now preserved 10 the Umverslty Library
of Strassburg-iGoLDSTuCKER
17 DIe Sansknt-Handschnften der Umversltats-Blbhothek
zu GQttmgen Beschnehen von Professor F KIELHORN
18 Alphabetical hsts of MSS In the Ind180 Institute, Oxford by
A. B KEITH
_19. L Ll!,t of TIbetan Buddlnst Manuscnpts, by Rev Rihula
SANKRTYAYANA Journal of the BIhar and Orissa Resellrch
Society, Vol XXUI, Part 1
128 , INDIAN TEXTUAL CRITICISM
20. A L1st of 69 MSS. from the Pnvate Collectwn of MSS With
Pandit Dbarmanith SAs1'R1. Sansknt Teacher. Government
HIgh School, Mangaldal Assam, pubhshed in an Assamese
dally
21. Llste der mdlschen Handschnften 1m BeSltze des Prof H
JACOBI (Pr1Oted 10 ZDMG Vol 33, 693)
22 Ober eme Sammlung mdlscher Handschnften und Inschnften
von E HULTZSCH (Pnnted In ZDMG Vol 401)
23 Two Lists of Sansknt MSS by G BUHLIiR (Prmted 10 ZDMG
Vol 42, 530)
24. A consohdated Catalogue of the Collections of Manuscnpts
deposited m the Deccan College (from l ~ l 8 8 4 ) With an
Index by S R BHANDARKAR
25. De Cochabus nonnulhs Indlsas qUI In Blbhotheca Umversl-
tatis LundenSls asservantur ScrifiSlt Hlamar EDGREN.
Lunds Um Aarsknft Tom XIX (15 MSS)
26. A Parbat hst of rare MSS belongmg to the Adyar Library (60
works)
27 List of F'lfteen MSS 10 the Ed10burgh UmverSlty Library by
Prof EGGELING
.
28 MSS m the posseSSIon of Prof Juhus JOLLY at .Wurzburg and
at the Wurzburg Umverslty Library
29. Tod MSS In the Royal ASlatlc Society, London.
APPENDIX III
ON SOME IMPORTANT MANUSCRIPrS
AND CRITICAL EDITIONS
As the present work IS mamly addressed to postgraduate students
.of Inchan UmverSitles wh.o Wish' to take up the crltlcal echtlng of ancient
or medieval Indian claSSIcal texts, and generally to other scholars who
have not yet mastered the! fundamental aspects govermng the textual
cntiC1<m1 of Inman texts, thiS appenmx allns at glvmg JUst a little worm
atlon about some nnportant manuscnpts and cntlcal emt1Ons, a know
ledge of which Will add to their general eqUipment No attempt has
been made here either to be exhaustive 10 the treatment of tboae Mas
.or critical echtlons se1ected for descnptlOn here, or to be comprehensive
10 that selectIOn It IS hoped that the bnef 1Oformabon oontamed herem
wdl lead the reader htmself toO make further mvestlgatlons In this fasa
natlng tield and make s o m ~ detimte and onglnal oontnbutlon to our
knowledge of Indian texts, whtch I ~ after all the malO obJect of the
presentworic
A. Manuscripts.
Bakhshlli Manuscript In 1881 a mathematlcal work written
.on blrchbark was found at Bakhshili near Mardin on the northwest
frontler of Ineba This manuscnpt was ~ to be of great age. It
was found by a tenantpf Mfan An-Wan-Udmn, Inspect.or' of Pollee, who
'brought It toO the ASSIstant C.onumSSloOner at Mardin , the tinder of the
Ms alleged that he found It whtle mggmg In a ruined stone enc:loaure on
one of the mounds near Bakhshili, but this account 18 rather unsatis.-
factory, ~ d acoormng to Mr KAYE who has edited It for the Govern-
ment .of Incba In 1927, It IS not altogether rehable The Ms was subse-
quently sent to the Lleutenant-Govemor of PanJab who, on the advice
General CUNNINGHAM, had It sent to Dr lWlrRNLE In 1902 Dr.
HOI!fNLE presented the Ms to the Bodleian Library where It forms part
.of one of the most valuable collect1OD8 of Indle Mss. It c:onsiats of 70
leaves of birch-bark but some .of these are mere scraps, and the 8lIeJ'llIl!
Size of the leaves IS 7 by 4 mches. It IS wntten 10 the Siradi scnpt and
the lang1l8ge 18 popular Sansknt partaktng .of Middle Indo-Aryan duIrac-
tensttca Wfdch led earher scholars to adopt the designatJon Gitbi dta.
lect'. The style of writing, however, is not uniform and seeI'8l haslds'
am be dlstinguisl1ed. Immediately after its discovery scholars 8IIRDIIed
8 t
on several grounds that the Ms belonged to the second century A.D.
while HoERNLE placed It not later than the 10th century A.D. Mr KAYE
has, on a very elaborate exammatlon of the scnpt, arrived at the ron-
elUSIon that the Ms belongs to the 12th century A D The Ms. has been
edited and published by the Archreological Survey of Incba as New Im-
penal Senes, Vol XUII, Parts 1-11 1927/ Part m, 1933
Bower Manuscript. Whlie Lleut BoWER was at Kuchar at
Kashgana, a man offered to show hIm a subterranean town, proVIded
he would go there 10 the nuddle of the plght The same man procured
for him a packet of old Mss wntten on bIrch-bark, dug out of the foot
of one of the curious old erecbOns, Just outslCle thIS subterranean Clty
The Me conSISted of 56 leaves, some 10 SIngle thickness and some oj
two to four tlucknesses, for the most part wntten on both SIdes The
wntlng 18 10 black 10k and 10 several hands Some leaves appear per-
fectly fresh and clear , others are ,much discoloured, all are very bnt-
tle and tender The first notice of thIS Ms appears 10 the Proceedmgs
of the ASIatIc Soclety of Bengal for November 1890, and agam 10 Apnl
1891 In I ASB 1891 HOERNLE gIves hiS findings regardmg the date of
the Ms. on palreograpluc eVidence as the tifth century AD. The Me;
consists of not less than five dlstmct portions as follows A, leaves 1-31,
contams a medical treatise , B, 32-36, a collection of proverbial saymgs ,
C, 37-40, a story of how a charm agamst snake-bIte was gIVen by
Buddha to Ananda, D, 41-46, a collection once agam of proVefblal
saYings, and E, 47-51, the beginmng of another rnedlcai treatIse The
remammg fohos are detached leaves The whole Ms IS wntten 10 the
North.:-Westem Gupta characters It has been edited by HOERNLE and
pubh,shed 10 three ,parts 10 the ArchreologlcaI Survey of India Seneo.
Codex K 5 IS well-known 10 lramAn St\ldles as the best (and
oomplete) Ms. for the restoration of the Avesta text It IS now m the
Rask colleetlQ'l of Mss. depoSIted 10 the Copenhagen Library Thts
codex contaIDs the Vasna WIth PahlaVi translatIOn, and IS the best and
oldest of all Mas of the text It contains 327 fohos, paged With Deva-
nigari numbers, measunng 10! 'by 8! mches, WIth 17 lines to the page.
There IS a double colophon 10 PahlaVi and Sansknt on fol 326b, ae-
oording to tlus Herbad Mttro-apin-Kai-KhusrOvo M l t r o - ~ Spend-
did-Mltro-apin MarzapBn Bahram COPIed the Ms. 10 Cambay from
a ,Ms. of Herbad RQstam Mltr6-ipin to order for ClIuI Sangam Hi the
aforesaid CIty; fimshed on the day Asman of the month of Den A. Y
692, ,Ssrilvat 1379 (November 17, 1323 A.D). Fol. 70-77 soli existed
1ft WlISTI!:RGAARD's day when he edited the Avesta, but these were 10
utter decay while GELDNER used them for hIS edition. 'me Ms. has
sinCe been reproduced by chromophotograpby by the Copenhagen ROYBI
Library.
APPENDIX III 131
Fragments of Indian Litetat'&ire found in Turfan. A German
Expedition under GR6NwmL and HtlTH was organised to tour Turfan
m 1902. Dunng 1904-1907 two further expeditions were organised with
State cooperation under the direc:bon of LE Coo and GRONWEDEL The
hterary remains which they unearthed was sent to Berlin, and under
the able edltorslup of LtlDKRs they were pubhshed m a ames entitled
Kleinere Stmslmt Te:xte under the &egiS of the Konigbch Preusstsche
Turfan-Epedlt1On. One of the most lIDportant of these finds has been
edited by LUDIi:Rs Inmself as the first Heft In thiS senes, called BTflCh-
stucke BuddhfStfSCher Dramen In 1911 These fragments of palm-leaf
Mss were discovered by LE CoQ In the cave temple at Mmgsl and
total 144 PIeces The matenal, palm-leaf, shows definitely that the
fragments hall from India whence they were taken to Turfan. A study
of the script shows that It IS identical With that found In the mscnptlons
of the Northern K$atrapas and the Kushanas Thus these fragments
are m effect the earhest palm-leaf documents winch have come down
to us The fragments here edited represent parts of two plays which
are attnbuted to ASvaghoea
Gilgit Manuscripts 'Vre found In a stupa near Gllglt oWing to
a chance discovery made by a cow-boy Before the Wazlr of GlIglt
took charge of them a substantial portion of the Mss and all the pamt-
ed covers had passed Into the hands of adventurers The bundle of
leaves which were thus damaged are now In the posseSSIon of the
Kashmir Darbar and are In Government custody On palaeograpillcal
grounds the Mss are to be dated not later than the 7th century, and
are therefore the earliest Mss to be discovered Within India The Mss
were depoaated Within the vault of a stiipa The language 10 which these
Mas are composed IS what termed by EDGERTON as Buddhist Sans-
Jent SImilar to that fouftd 10 Mahavastu, Lal.tav.stara, etc One of the
chief features 'of the Mss IS that the end of one text and the beginning
of another are not separated by any space, and as far as this feature
IS concerned they may be compared With Tibetan xyiographs. The dis-
covery of t'lese Mss was first announced by Sir Aurel STEIN In the
Statunum of 24th July 1931. Later M HAcx.IN VISIted the actual spot
and wrote on them in 1932 (fA 14-15). The first volume based on
these Mss entitled the Gllglt Manuscnpts baa been edited for the Gov
ernm..mt of Kasbnur by Dr. Nahnaksha DATT with the asaiatanee of
Prof D M. BHATTACIIARYA and Vldgiviric:llu Sluv Nath SHARMA In
1939
Godfrey Manuscripts are 80 called becauae they were received
by Capt. S. H. GoIlnEY, British Jomt Conuniaaioner of Ladale, fn}m
some PathaD merchants whom he had be1ped to croaa the flooded Ia
trade route at Kargll in July 1895, aUeged to be dufS up near aome Old
132
INDIAN TEXTUAL I:RITICISM
buned oty 10 the Vloruty of Kuchar The collect.lon con8lSts of 71
PIeces of paper Ms most of winch are mutilated TIus was partially
reproduced by HOERNLE in , ASB for 1897.
Horiuzi Manuscript. In the preface to a Chmese-Sansknt-Ja-
panese vocabulary entitled Thousand Sansknt and Otinese Words'.
l!dlted by a priest called ZakumlO 10 1127. the folloWing entry OCCUI'Ii
. In the monastery of HorlUzl 10 Yamato, there are preserved the Pra-
Jiiipinlirutihrdayasiitra and Sonshlo-ciharaut, wntten on two palm-
leaves, handed down from Central India, and at the end of these, the
fourteen sounds of tM Sldciham (a)a:lhabet) are wntten In the pre-
sent edition of the vocabulary the alphabet IS 10 Imttatlon of that of the
palm leaves, except 10 such forms of as cannot be distinguIshed
from those prevalent among the scnveners of the present day' ThIS
IS conciuSlve eVIdence 00 show that so late as 1727 palm-leaves con-
tammg the text of Sansknt Siitras were sttil preserved 10 the monas-
tery of Honuzl This monastery IS one among the famous eleven
monastenes established by Pnnce Umayado who died In 621 A D The
traditIon perta1010g to the Manuscnpts potnts out that they were 10
tM ,posse8SIon of some Chmese pnests who ltved m a monastery on the
mountam called Nan-yo m the provmce of Hang{Ko) 10 Chma In
the 37th year of Pnnce Umayado, 1 e 10 AD 609, a retalOer of the
Mikado, by name Irnoko, brought Clem to Japan. The followmg In-
(onnatlon IS recorded by MAx MULLER In hiS preface to Anecdotd (}xtm
I. I, P 10. Honuzl, proVInce of Yamato, head pnest
PralMpAl"amltllhpdaya-sQtra and Ushoishadhara@, now transferred to
the Impenal Government They eXisted at Honuzi m 1727 when they
were seen by ZakUffiIO. wer" copied by Zlogon 10 the seventeenth cen-
tury, brought to Japan 10 609 AD. Iny have belonged 00 Sodhl-
dharma (A D 520) and were attnooted to Kal>jRpa These have been
edited bY' him and NANJIO 10 Anec Oxon I, 111, With an a.ppendlx on
Pabeographlcal Remarks on Honuzi Palm-leaf Mss. by G BUHLER who
remarks as follows ' The Ms IS eVidently wntten by an Indian scribe
and cannot be dated later than the first half of the SIXth c JIltury The
SIZe of the leaves IS IJI t lOches 10 length and from 2 to Ii mches broad
Each leaf shows two small holes, placed 3 Inches from etther end and
almost exactly 10 the mIddle between the tq> and the bottom. diViding
the fourth hne 1000 three parts The first leaf contams SIX and cl half
hnes and the second seven hoes. The characters resemble the Gupta
vanety on the eVIdence of wiuch BUHLER places them 10 the first half
of the sixth century.
Kbarosthi Dhammapada, also called Pnkrit Dlwnmapada
Manuscript Dutreuil de Rhins, consists of remarkable fragments
of a bitch-bark codex which the Ill-starred French traveller, M OuTRE-
APPENDIX III 133
UlL DE RHINS acquIred In Khotan ID 1892 The larger part of the8e
fragments had already been acquIred by M. PETROWSKY, RUSSlan Con-
sul General at Kisbgar, through whose medtatlon they were sent to the
ImpenaI Academy at St PeterSburg The actual find-8JlOt of these
fragments is not known, but the Kohman cave on the hIli of GoSrnga
was alleged to be the source from whIch the fragments were recovered
by some natIves Both M DUTREUIL DE RHlNS who first vIsIted the
place and receIved the fragments and M GRENARD who vISIted the spot
cl month later and secured what he beheved to be the rest of the Ms.
were 19norant of the actual fiad-spot Accordtng to STEIN thIS must
ever remam undecJded, SInce Jus visit to the cave under dtscussion
showed that there were no traces of any recent openmg VISIble any-
where m the rock walls The Dutrerul de RIMs Ms IS now In Pans
wlule Its larger portion IS m St Petersburg These fragments are as-
sIgned to mea 2()() AD, have been edIted by SENART 10 / A 1898, and
agam by BARUA for the Calcutta UDlversity under the title PTaknt
Dham71l/.JfJQd4 On account of the Identification of Kohmiri WIth the
Mt. GoSrnga, RHYS DAVIDS called thIS codex as the Gosinga
Kbarosthi Ms. (/ RAS 1899, 426)
Macartney Collectio1\s of Fragments consIst of mere scraps
of Mss They had been presented to Mr MAcARTNEY, Bntlsh Agent
III Kashgar, by the Manager of the Chmese ForeIgn Commerce In that
town, and are beheved to have been dug out 10 a mound near Kuchar.
HOERNLE however beheved that the loabty where these fragments were
found was the same from whIch the Bower and Weber Mss have been
recovered The matertai of these fragments IS of three dtfferent ktnds
palm-leaf, bIrch-bark and paper The fl"Nffients number 145 PieceS.
oonSlsbng of 13 birch-bark, 9 palm-leaf and the rest paper Irrespec-
tlVe of the matenal they are mscnbed WIth two dtstmct types of Brih-
mi Northern Indtan (G\ij)ta) and Central ASIan. They have been
reproduced m part by HOERNLE In JASB 1897.
Macartney Manuscripts were obtamed by Mr. G MACARTNEY.
SpeaaI As8Jstant for Cunese Aff81rs at Kasbgar to Lt.CoI. SIr A C_
TALIIOr, Bntlsb ReSIdent In Kasbmtr They conSIst of 6 sets Set I
found In the same SIte as the Bower Ms and another Ms found here
finds Its place 10 the Weber Ms The scnpt IS two-fold, Central Asian
and 'Northern Indtan Bribmi (Gupta) Set IV found at Karakul
Mazan Khojan about 50 nules east of Guma, the Ms w a . . ~ simply
picked up from the sand. Set II found at Aksufil, N -E of Khotan,
Set IU found at ]abu Kum, 50 to 60 nules N -E. of Khotan Set V
CJII1Dd ill ae desert at Kuk Gumbaz, 5 days' man:b east of Guma It
wu found near a arcular wall of baked bncks 3 feet htgh 10 anotfter
wail m which a hole plastered over was dtscovered. Set VI was.
134
INDIAN TEXTUAL aUTICISM
pieked Up from the ground at Kuk Gumbaz. to tbmIfLE
the Me. Ib probably beJonga to the 2nd century A D. The matenal is
a soft kind of paper with a darlash colour. The pagmatlon on Ms Ib
J& on the obverae, cf p. 12 above Several folios of these Mss. have
been reproduced in IASB 1897.
Blrchbark Ms of the Mahlbhlrata m Sirada characters con-
tainmg fragments of the Ach and Vanaparvans and the whole of Sabhi,
No 159 of 187576, purchased for the Government of Bombay by
BOHLER In KaSmir Belongs probably to the 16th or 17th century It
18 a uruque and valuable manuscnpt, oon81Stlng of 114 foltos some of
winch are fragmentary Its Slglum IS $1 m the cntlca1 apparatus of the
Poona Cntlcal Echtlon It represents the textus S1mpbClor of the Great
EPIC, hemg the shortest known vemon For further detail., Vide
SUKTHANKAR, P1'D'legDme1lG, pp X'XI, XLVIIXLVIII
The oldest extant Ms. of the Adiparvan IS a palm.leaf Ms
recently acqUired by Ra,Jaguru Hemral Pancht,lu of NEpll and IS about
700 years old The wntmg IS throughout In old faded mk. and It con-
taIn& only the Achparvan but IS complete m Itself Without any foltos
JDl881Dg. The average foho measures 21" by 21" and contains umfonn-
ly 7 hnes of wrltmg From the speamen photographs SUKTHANKAR
wmpared the scnpl: WIth BUHLER's Paleograplusche Tafeln and found
that it comes close to the scnpt of Tafel VI, No XL
Me. No 1691 of A.D 1179) A full descnptlon of thl" oldest Nepab
manuBCr'ljplt of the Great EPIC 18 given by SUKTHANKAR In his EPIC
Stuches VII, Amrals BORI, 19 201-262 WIth full collations for the Adl-
parvan
The Paippalada Ms. t:n the Atharva Veda was onglnally m the
poaaes8lon of the bbrary of H H the late Mahal'llJa Ranbir Smgh of
Jammu and Kashmtr In the year 1875 the MaharaJa had thts M!:
sent to Sar Wilbam MuIR, the then Lieutenant Governor, by whom It
was In tum despatched to Prof RoTH of Germany On the death of
Prof. ROTH In 1895 the M8 passed on to the Tublngen UmverSJ.ty It
18 the moet pnceless Me. 80 far as the KaSmin receD810n of 'l!he Atharva
Veda is concerned, being a oodeat urucum. It COll818ts of 275 blrch-
bark leaves wntten on both 8ldes and 1S about 450 years old. It IS
wntten In the Siradi characters, 8lZe of leaves 25 em. by 20 an. text
space covers 20 by 15 em and the wntlng IS In Indelible mk, abeOlute-
1y nonaenllltive to damp and water This uruque Ms was reproduced
by cbropwphotograpby by Professors M. BLOOMFJBU) and R GARBE
and pubbabed In Baltunore In 1901
Petrowsky Manuscript. This forms a oomplementait codex to
thi! M, Dutreuil de Rhins and IS in fact the larger part of the lIiqIe
work wluch we know today as the KhanJl$thi or Praknt DhmnmIJ/NItItz
APPENDIX III 135
The men who 80Id the preaous leaves to the two French travellers
DUTREUIL DE RHINS and GRENARD took care to hide the fact that a
1arger portion of the fragments had been sold by them to the agents
of M PETRoWSKY, RUSSIan Consul at Klishgar Through'the media-
tIOn of M PETRoWSKY thiS collectIOn was subsequently sent to 8t
Petersburg where the. RUSSIan scholar Serge edited the
fragments On account of then first connection With M PETROWSKI
theY' got their name from him
Weber Manuscripts. Tht Rev F WEBER, MoraVian MISSIon-
ary m Leh In Ladak receIved 80me Maooscnpts from an Afghan mer-
chant who found them m the neighbourhood of a place called Kwg8l',
In a house' which was m rums m hiS search for buned treasure. KUI-
gar IS about 60 mIles south of Yarkhand, wIthIn the borders of the
ChInese terntory These Mss seem to form a group of mne (posSIbly
eleven) different Mss All are wntten on paper of which there are two
kmds The Mss divide themselves Into two groups Indian (Nos 1-4)
.md Central ASian (Nos 5-9) The Indian group Written In the
North-W e!!tem Gupta characters, Similar to those m the Bower Ms ,
the other IS the Central ASIan Nligari According to HOERNLE no part
of these Mss can be later than c 700 A D On the basts of the tnden-
tate y he dates them at about c 500 A D beIng contemporary to or a
little antenor to the Bower Ms.
B. Cntical Editions.
Hanv(J1fIsapurana. von edited by LudWig Au.IlORF,
1936, on the baSIS of 3 Mss AlU, B16 and C DIVided mto two re-
cenSions, represented by A on the one Slt.e and Band C on the other
Kahdiisris Sakuntola (.dengah RecenSion) edited by R PISCHEL,
1st ed 1877, 2nd ed i922 The first ekittlOn was based on the follow.
mg Mss Zl8, S17, N, R, 1
19
, coffi1nentary of CandraSekhara: 0 9, Ca,
of Sankara S. All 1JI characters, a Devanigari Ms. D was
used up to beglnmng of Act II only Other editions utIbzed y
(CHEzy Ib30), P (Sak 1786), 8 (Sam 1926) and e (Sak 1892) For
the second edition two additional Mss. Hand B were collated, H being
collated at begmrung of Act 11 only
KarpUramtm}arj of Rdjaekhara, edited by Sten KONOW, 1901
Based on U Mss A BtI6 C W
15
(Jam group), N19 {)19 pt9 (Nigari),
R (Kasilmm), STU (Grantha) BURNELL opmed that T was copied
from S, KONOW however derIved it from U, perhaps contammated
With S In Its corrections Among the Jam Mss B W are relatively
old, B beibg very corrupt P IS a modem transcnpt. NOR are QUlte
modem, agreeing with the Jam' group as ag:aIngj; STU 0 R and A
C are much more 'cIoeely connected The edition by Manomoban
136 INDIAN TEXTUAL lCRlTICISM
GHOSH utIlised m addItIon 8 new Mss 4 m the Southern scnpt and
.. 1n Devanigari as follows Devanigari Dl" G I J, Telugu X Y,
MalayaJam Z and Grantha V The Southern RecenSIOn IS tnfenor to
the Northern W IS the best among these Mss D resembles 0, G
goes WIth N and I wIth R J, though a Devanigari Ms appears to
be a recent copy of some South Inchan Me and resembles T U The
Northern Recen'l1On I'! orubdlVlded mto two Versions A C, B, P, W and
OR (D I), N (G), The ')authern Into S, U T (J X Y V) WIth Z
agreemg partially WIth each
Mahlibhiirata, cnucally echted by Dr V S SUKTHANKAR WIth
cooperatIon of other scholars For details see Prolegomena '1 he ech-
tJon IS based on a nummum of ten Mss, but many of the parvans
stand collated from twenty, some from thirty and a few from as many
as forty , the first two adhyiyas of the Adl were collated from no less
than 'IllI.ty Mss The chief represented m the Ml>lI arc Siradii.
Devanigari transcnpts of Siradi Mss, Nepili, Matthtli, Bengab, Deva-
nigari, Telugu, Grantha and Malayilam These MIs diVIde them-
selves pnmanly mto the Northern and Southern RecenSIons and each
chVldes Itself further mto a smaller number of groups The Northern
RecenSIon IS subdIVIded tnto the North-'Western and Central Groups.
comamstng respectively the Siradi (With Its Devanagari transcripts.
represented by the SJgifl S and K respectIvely), and the Nepah
Matthtli (V). Bengali (B) and Devanigari (D) respectively' The
Southern RecellSlon IS further subdtVlded mto Te1ugu (1) and Grantha
(G) on the one hand and Malayilam (M) on the other The S group
represents the textus snnplSCtoT M represents the best Southern ver-
SIOn BeSIdes these the Dev4l'lagari verstons of Ar]unanuSra (Da)
NiIalcaJ,ta (On). and Ratnagarbha (Dr) have been uultzed Of the dated
Mas. of Adi. the followmg should be noticed l{n 1739, Kl 1783, K,
1638. Ka 1519, K. 1694, 1511, VI 1528, BI 1740, 1759, Bu 1786.
08
2
1620, Dr;! 1701 SI belongs either to the 16th or 17th century
and tncludea a praSasb of kmg JayasunhariJa at whose bIdding the
Ms. was COpted, and thus pomts out to Nepal! samvat 516 AD 1395
as the date of composition
MGhii/NTiitia of Achpurib)a, echted by P L V AIDU,
1937_ The cntlcal echtlon IS based on 5 Mss GiG K M1D :81
7
P and
a commentaiy 1'JAI* G (1518 AJ 111' the best of these Mss "tuch
diVIde tbemaehres IOto two recenSIonS *X and "Y, .. X IS represent-
ed by G. *Ie, *K'l (c 15(0), and K (c 1600), Y IS represented by the
tbm: remauung Mss P B and M
.t1f BhGllalJlrUtI, echted by Todl.c MALL.
una. AltDtether 18 M .. have been collated T
l
-
4
for Act I only.
K E W Sc Is Mr are complete, 11 Bo Alw and Md end with Act V
APPENDIX III 13T
Cu Mt Mg break off With the 46th verse of Act V , B was avaiJabie
for the last act only Sc:npts Telugu (Mt Tl T
t
), Grantha (Me
Mr Ta T
6
). Kasbmin (K), DevanIgari all the rest The Northetn
RecenaIon 18 divided mto four IDlnor groupe a8 follows' 111' So' Wl.
SCI" 1,."0. A1w Md, and Ca'17 K B E The Southern ReceJlSlOl1 is
OOIl8btuted on T 1 Mt Mr and Mg
MdlGtimadluJv4 fly BllavtllDtUtI, echted by R G BHANDARKAR, 1st
ed 1876, 2nd ed 1905 The first ec:boon stands c:01Iated from the fol-
lowmg (A"B), BiB, C, D, En, G and N A 18 the Calcutta edltion of
KaIlasachandra Datta, N IS ill Telugu characters, rest 10 Devanigari
(A) eN collated throughout, B up to IDlddle of Act X only, D UbCJ"
up to IDlddle of Ad VI and replaced thereafter by E, G used 10 Act
VIn where E shows a lacuna, and 10 X where B breaks off All Mas.
are mdependent of one another, but A D and B C appear to form
groups N agrees more With B C, and E WIth A D Thus there are
two lWijor groups ~ D E and BeN WIth G standmg between them.
For the second edlbon the followmg additional Mss have been used
BhIR. Kl' ~ (10 saradii scnpt). 0
17
Thus collabon stands from.
rune Mas (A) C N B D(E G) Bh Kl ~ 0 According to BHAN-
DARKAR all rune are mdepcndent of each other and do not allow them-
selves to be cl8SS1fied mto a stemma The smaller groups are, how-
ever, represented by Kl ~ . N ,0. and the larger by Kl ~ N 0, and
A ~ Bh C D The commentary of Jagaddhara CJ
IS
On thIS basts
It should be pDSSlble to trace the genealogy of these Mss
PlI1amiitmaprokasa of Yogindu, edIted by A N UPADHYE, 1937.
on the basis of the followmg Mss Alo B18 0" plD Q19 Rl'9 S T K
M The Shorter RecellSlon IS represente1 by *K:t: from whIm are des-
cended T(M) and K, tJ.,ft Longer RecenSIon IS represented by *P'
from whIch are d e n ~ d P (R IS contammated WIth K as well as WIth
the text of Brahmadeva) or the text of Bilacandla's commentary on
the one hand, and B C and S or the text of Brahmac:te.a, W11h Q as a
mJSch-CtJdex denvlDg from K and B C S
Ram .. yano The problems wnnected With the cntlcal recenSIon c{
thIS epiC were first dealt WIth by the late Prof JACOBI and recently by
Dr. RUBEN 10 hiS Stud.UI AD' attempt to edit It cntlcally 18 being
made by Dr Raghu VIM of the Internabonal Academy of Indian Cul-
ture at Lahore and a tnal fasacule has been pubhsbed WIthout either
a Prolegomena or even a bare descnpbon of the mbcal apparatus and
the lDterrelatlonshlP between the vanous recenSIons of the epiC. Per
haps It IS reserved for the final volume A mocal echbon of the North-
Western.RecenSlon has been brought out by the D. A. V College au-
thonbes of Lahore. but the reply of SuKTHANKAR to those of rus Eur0-
pean crItICS who suggested that before any attempt IS made to CODIb-
138
INDIAN TEXTUAL ICRITICISM
-lute the final text of the Great Epic, the cnocal echtJoas of all the chf-
ferent versions or recensions should be made, holds good In tlu8 case
.5udl cntlcal echtlOll8 naturally Include much secondary reacbngs and
tbeae are hard to detect unless the eVidence of all extant Mas belong-
Jng to cbfferent reteD8lons and Vet'SlOllS IS taken mto account RUBEN's
findIngs may be summansed here Lllre the Mahiibhiirota, the Riimi-
yQt)fS Mss dIVide themselves mto two recenSIonS, the Northern and the
Southern, and these agam subdtVlde themselves mto two verSIons each
Thus the Northern RecenSIon compnses the North-Western and the
North-Eastern VerSIons, and the Southelll RecenSIon compnses the Ver-
8IOIl of the AmrttMatakalikii and the VerSIon of the Commentary of
.Rim8nu)a RUBEN beheves that unlike the Mbh tradition the Rim
Mas cannot be chVlded mto groups correspondIng to their scnpts The
Bengali VerSIon was pnnted by GoRRESIO m the eduto prmceps of thiS
text SInce 1843
RiimiiyCllla of Viilmiln (m ItS North-Western RecenSIon) Sundara-
kiJ:xIa, edIted by VIshvabandhu SHASTRI, Lahore, 1940 Based on 10
Mss. A'16, F AlB, 0
8
, B'1B, Pl9, RI9 and MI'J Accord1Og
to the Ecbtor all these represent a Unitary veTSlon, but the question how
iar It IS a uniform, non-conflate verSIon, IS Il9t eVident from the present
edition. The EdItor has mdIcated m hiS Preface hiS reacttOR to Dr
S. K DE's review of the earher parts, but Mlssed the purport of
SUKTHANKAR's remarks about cntlca1 "editions of any versions 1fh1Fh
are not entirely free from conflatlon
SuvarJltlbhiisol'tomasUtr4, herausgegeben von Johannes NOBEL,
LeiPZig 1937 The edition IS based on seven Mss A BI8 C D Et"l F
.and G The first SIX are paper Mss In Nepali scnpt and G IS a palm-
leaf Ms m the same scnpt t By their COm.IDOn faults and common
.corrections the paper Mss form 1Oto one \,.rOup as agamst G Even
Wlthtn the major group CF are more nearly related, and 10 a large'
number of cases CF stand apart from BDE, as far as the title of the
work IS concenied BDE have SuvarnaprobhiisDttamasutrtITii14 as agamst
ACF (and G) wh1C:h have SuVG/'nG(pra) bhOsottamasutreMrtfriija In
adchtion the fragments of Sanslmt texts found m Central contam
part of our text, of munense value for the constitution of the text m
VIeW of their age and punty for parts of chapters XIII and
XIV those recovered by Senator Otto DoNNER dunng 1906-1908 and
edited by J N. REtrn!a, another part echted by F W. THOMASin
.HoIRNLE's Manuscript Remtrim of Buddhist llteralllfe found in EtIIt-
4Jm Tur.t." Vol I, covermg parts of Otapters V and XIII, those
edited by N. D MJRONOV covenng parts of Olapters III, VI, VII and
VIII ; these are respecbvely mchcated by the Slgla R, H and M , HMR
.aaree. in great measure with G. As test .. the echtor has utilised
Oneae and Tibetan translations :-(1) Chmese translations of Dhar-
APPENDIX III 139
~ (c 414-433'), I-wng (c 700), Tibetan translatione: Tib. I
(between m;.ss A.D.), Tlb. II and Tib 1lI (between 804-15). In
adchtlon there IS m the Berlm Col1ect!on of Turfan Mea. a portion of
the Khotan-Saka translation, edited by Sten KoNOW. Further details
regarding the evaluation of all these WItnesseS for the colISlitutlo ,.,,-
tN'S should be gathered from NOBEL'S learned mtroductJon.
SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY
Trua blbhography 18 only mtended as a pomter to further studies
m the meU10ds of textual cntlasm as developed for vanous classes of
problems amnected WIth different types of hterature and IS therefore
not meant to be exhausbve Thus no reference IS given, for 1llStance,
to the frwtful development of textuaJ cntlCloml as applted to Biblical
studies
A
BIRT, Theodor Knhk und Hermeneut.k, Munchen 1913 (Ivan VON
MULLER's Handbucb der AltertumSWlssenschaft 1
3
). A very fonnal
treabse deabng m gfeat det&l With textuaJ problems oonnected
WIth Greek and Latm claSSICS It IS meant only for advanced
textual cntl(:S
EOOERTON,;' PtiiicGtlmt1'" R.ctmstructed 1924 Amencan Onental
Senes Nos 3-4 A useful and partJClllarly well-lllustrated book on
the practJ.cal apphcabon of the doctnnes of textual cntlasm to
a class of problems whIch IS not generally met WIth m Latin or
Greek: class1cs NaturaJly the conClUSIons amved at are Important
though somewhat c:ontroverBlaJ, paltlClllarly m opposltlon to thoee
enumerated by HERTEL m hiS PtJiicatantTQ (H(S 11-14)
HALL, F W Companwn to ClasSICal Texts, OX/01'd 1913 18 an excel-
lent mtroductlon to the subJect, glvmg detatlep account of the
rust"ry of Greek and Latm Texts, and the pnnaples of textual
cntlasm appbed to them cover pages 108-198.
HAVET, L MtIII1IUl de c"trque verbale applitpd6 IIU% t"tes latfll,S,
Pans 1911 This IS a major work 10 Latin textual critlasm and
oontams most of the precious doctnnes of textual mtlasm htdden
10 a mass of examples and therefore meant only for very critical
readers.
JIIIB, Sir RIchard C Textual Cntlasm, pp 720-733 in A ~
to !;,eek SttuireJII echted by Leonerd WHIBLBY', Cambridge Univer-
SIty Press 1916 A good account of the subJect, indiapenaable for
English readers.
,
MMs, Paul. Textlmllk, Le1pzJ.g 1927 (Emlettung In me Altertuml--
Wlsaenachaft herausgegeben VOIl Alfred GERcKE and Eduard NORJl&N
II) One 01. the clearest and best books on the subJect, glVUl&
succmctly and tn algebraIc formube all the fundamental pnnaple$
of the subJect Illustrated at the end WIth some select examples.
Very uaeful and suggestive
POSTGATE., J P (1) Textual Cntlusm, pp 791-805 of A Compa.mon
to Latm Stud.es2 echted by SIr John EdWin SANDYS, Cambndge
Uruversaty Press 1913 (2) Textual CntlClsm 10 EncyclopoedItJ
Bnttmnlw' Vol 22, pp. 6-11 Perhaps the most bnlhant but
account of textual cntlClsm tn the Enghsh language
RUBEN, Walter Stud.en zur Riimiiyana, Stuttgart
1936 (Bonner ,Onentahstlscbe Studlen Heft 19) Follows In great
detaIl the hnes laid down by SUKTHANKAR for the Mbh as apphed
to the textual htstoty of Riimayana Indispensable for wheal
students of the ePIc
SUKTHANKAR, V S Prolegomena to the cnttcal edition of the AdI-
parvan of the Mahabharata, Poona 1933 A work of capttal Im-
portance the fundamental pnrk1ple& of textual cntlasm
all appheel to cl8loSlcal texts of Europe have been discussed de. now
from the Indian standpotnt and deternuned once for all for ClOndl-
tUlII'! winch have not come Wtthtn the expenence of textual criLl\-S
10 the We&t The bast.:; of textual cnttClsm for furtner w<JIl"k In
Inman claSSICS
SUKTHANKAR. V. S. EpIC Studies I-VIlI IBBRAS (NS) 4. 157-
178, BORI 11 Ib1:-191, 259-283, 1690-113, 17185-202.
181-76, 19201-262, Kane 4.2-487 , EPIC QuestIonS, I
Bullet", DCRI 11-7 Theae studtelJ attempt to answer WIth great
prectSlOn and to detatl '-Orne of the fundamental crItiCIsmS wbtch
were levelled agalOst the pnnctple.:; whIch SUKTHANKAR had
evolved or tl:.etr application ID partIcular contexts, and are conse-
quently of mestlmable help to students of textual cntlasru They
are luad, to the potnt, and IlIunnnatlng many dark comers of the
subJect whIm could not be properly dealt WIth 10 detatl In the
ProlegfmumtJ
B
Besides the works mentIOned under A above, the follOWIng have
been m the preparatIon of thIS work
BHANDARKAR, R G Miilatimiidhata-2nd edition. Bombay 1905
APPENDIX III 141
BUHLER, G. Ind.sehe Pf.Ilaeographk, StrtJSSlNrg, 1896 Translation in
English, as revised by FLEET. hac; appeared as a supplement in
the Indftln .4ntiquaTY for 1904, without plates
.Dt:. S K, UdytJ'ga.pa.rvan of the cntlcal edItion of the Mahibhirata,
Poona 1939-40
KONOW, Sten, Kar,/JUramanrari. Harvard 1901 (HOS 4)
MALL, Todar. Mohaviracanto, Oxford 1928
PISCHEL, R, Sokuntala-2nd,edltion, Harvard 1921 (ROS 16).
WINTERNITZ, Hist&ry of J.ndian LItera/UTe, Calcutta
INDEX
Abbrevlabons, 11.
accepteds, 73.
acCidental COinCidence, 47.
acadental errors, 23, 54.
actors' Interpolations, 62
adaptation (s), 34 81
addibons, 22, 23
adscnpts, 56
dge of a Ms 20
agreement In a number of pecubar
readIngs, 38
alteratIOns by erasure, 23
amanuenSIs, 74
anagrammabsm, 55, 57
ancient commentanes, 34, CJl
anC1ent parallels, 68, 74
anCient redactors, 27
33
anbquanan of textual crltt-
Clsm, 32
apparatus cntrcus, 33, 79, 85, 86
archaism. 51. 72.
archetype, 32, 40, 46, 50, 53, 66,
75, 76, 85. J
ArJunamlsra, 42
8SSlnulation to nelghbourmg con-
text, 55
authenbc text, 30
authonsed text, 21
autograph, 17, 30, 38, 53, 54, 87
Bwbshali Ms 5
balance of probablbty, 51, 85, 86
BHANDARKAR, R G 26, 27, 44
BhmattlllUliilari of 34
Bbavabhiitl, 19, 26.
blluT1G, of.
blbngual zones, 29
birch-bark, I, 4, 8, 11, 16, 20
blscnptal zones. 29
Borassus flabeUqera, 6.
Bower Ms, 5, 6, 10
Brihmi, 3, 4, 5, 10, 12
BrhatkatlW, 44
Bncks, 8
BUHLER, 3, 4, 5, 10, 12, 13
BURNELL, 5
Canons of critiCism, 72
Catalogus CatalogoT14n1 of AUF-
RECHT, 35
catalo gues Tm:.onnes 35n
certain readmgs, 36
certlfied coples, 16
chalk, 9
ctllnese Translations, 28, 33
CltInese Transhteratlons, 28
chOIce of a reading, 26
Citations, 29
claSSIfication of Mss, 79
codex umeum, 37
collatIOn, 32, 33, 35, 39, 78
coloured IDk, 9.
commentanes, 29
cpmmumty of source, 38n, 39
complex mtXture different hnes
of tradition, 44
completton of mechamcal dam-
ages, 84.
compoSItor, 22.
composator's art, 21.
concordance of pnnted editions,.
86.
amfigurataon of Mas, 70.
contlated Mss., 27, 43, 44, 50, 81.
conftated reacbngs, 56.
conftabon, 25, 50, 76, 82
144 INDIAN TEXTUAL ICRITICISM
Q)IlfuSlOll of ( S1rmlar) letters, 55,
56.
Q)Ilfu8lon of words, 57
conjecture, 55, 71, 74
<OIlJectural adehtlon, 84.
aJIlJectural athettsabon, 84.
conjectural emendabon, 66, 73,
84,85
.conservations, 38n
.c:onservatlve cntlcs, 69
.conservabve text, 71
.constituted readmg, 73
.constitUtion of the text, S5
contammataon, 50
.cotton cloth, 2, 5
corrupt (pasaages), 54.
corruptionS, 47, 48, 54, 63, 70
oCOples of copies, IS, 20
copper-plate(s), 7
mpper-plate grants, 15
copper nngs, 8
copymg of Mss, 15
corrector( s), 26, 27
Corypha umbTacullfera 6
.court hbrary, 13
Clltlcal apparatus, 70, 78, 79, 81,
83, 86, 87
Cllbcal echtlon, 35
c:ntlcal recenSIon 30, 39, 52, 70,
73,84,86,88
4:Titique verbale, 86
crossing, 42, 2C
cuneIform, 3
CurtlUS, 4, 5, 9
DefiDlte (echtJon), 21
delenda, 11
delIberate (errors), 23, 54.
denvation of Mss, 38
denved oollles, 41.
ciescnptlve catalogues, 35.
'Devabodba. 52
DevtmIgari, 29.
DltavtM, 25
DHRVVA, K H, 69
DIe Sage von R'yaST"ga, 34
different at work on a M .. ,
23
DIKSHIT, K N, 3
direct quotations, 33
ch900rdant reachnp, 49
discordant vanants, 71
chscrepanCles, 82
chSl'repant type, 79
chscrepent verstons, 51
Dlttography, 56, 58
chvergent readmgs, 82 .
diVInation (dit',nalzo ). 55, 66
doctnnal mterpolatlon, 62
document(s), I, 8, 16, 30, 35
documental probablhty, 64, 70,
71,74
documental transnuSSlon, 14
documrntary eVIdence, 30
documentary probabilIty, 47, 49,
64,66
ckJubtful reamngs, 73
DUTREUIL DE 23
EDGERTON, F, 31, 32, 44. 85
electJc, 28, 75
Eknitha, 27
ementi...tJo, 30, 31, 86, 88
emendation, 66, 70. 73
emended (passages), 54
epitomes, 34, 81
erroneous words or passages, 11
elI.egeSls, 69
exemplar, 20, 21
extant Mss., 15
extant Witnesses, 37
external arrangement of Mss. 9
extnnSlc probability, 64
Fac'Illl11les. 20. 37.
false reooIlections, 60
family of Mss., 39
feliCItous conjecture, 41
INDEX 145
filiation of Mss, 52.
first hand, SO.
flordegla, 33, 81.
Fragments of BuddhISt Dfllm6S,
10.
fUSIon (of texts), 43, 50.
Genealogical eVIdence, 46
genealogIcal method, 37, 44, 47,
49,88
genealogy of Mss, 36, 40
genealogIcal relatlons}up ( of
Mss ), 32, 38, 72, 76, 78
general account of Mss, 78
general famIly charactenstlcs of
Mss,39
GoDE, P K, 42
Godfrey CollectIOn, 5, 9
gold-plates, 7
grammatical as'>lmllabon to, con-
text, 59
GuniiQ}lya's Brhatkatha, 28
Hala's Sattasa; 33
HALL, F W, 30, 32, 55
hand-transcnptlon, 21
haphazard transmission, 24
Haplography, 56, 57.
Harappa, 1, 2, 3, 4
:.armomsmg mterpolatlons, 62
HARSHE, R G 87n
HeunstJcs, 31, 86, 88
HIgher CntJClsm, 31
hIghly prot.clble readmgs, 36
hmgula, 9
history of a text, 31.
HJto,padesa, 44
HOERNLE, 6, 8, 12
homoeoarcta, 56
homoeographon, 57
homoeoleuta, 56
Horiuzi p a ~ - I e a f Ms, 6
HORT,43.
Hsuan-Chwang, 6.
hypothetical common ancestor,
39,40.
hypothetIcal source, 39
IncorporatIOn of margmalia, 60.
Indus scnpt, 2, 4
Indus Valley ClV1hsatlOn, 13.
Ink-well, 2, 9.
unmedlate copy, 21-22
Innovations, 38
mscnbed tWistS, 5
mscnptlons, 15
Instrument of wntmg, 9
mtentional onuSSlonS, 11
mterchange of words and phrases,
60
mterlinear corrections, 27, SO.
mterhnear readmgs, 26.
mtermlXIng, 28, 50, 42
mterpolatlon, 55, 60-61
mterpretilbon, 32, 69
mtrmSlc character of readmgs, 63.
mtnnSlc fitness, 68
mtnnsic ment, 70
mtnnSlC probablhty, 49, 51, 64,
65, 66, 70, 71, 74
mtnnslc punty (of texts), 43
mvol-.ntary (errors), 23, 54
Isolated readmgs, 49, 50
Jagaddhara, 27
JalhaJ.1a's Suktsmuktavtdi, 33.
I ayadhavalii, 25.
'ayamangalatikii, 13
JEBB, 54
Jfi.anadeva, 87
Ji'ianesvar, 27
/fiiinesvari, 27, 87
Kahdiisa, 19, 61.
Kahdasa's $iikunttda, 62
KiimUSiUtra, 13
Kiivyamimiimsii, 16.
KharOl?tbl, 3, 4, 5
Khar03thi Dhammopoaa, 5, 10,
12
Documents, 9
Kharotthi inscriptions, 10.
KOSAMBI, D. D 3n
K4emendra, 28
Lacuna(e), 62, 24
LANGDON,4
later accretions, 74
laxity and Ignorance of scnbes,
27
leather, 2.
leaves, 2
lectr.o d'fficllioT, 51, 65n, 72
legends on coms, 16
hbranes,12
hcensed transmission, 24
Lilasuka Bilvamangala, 88
hne of descent, 40.
Llpography, 56.
locahzed corruptions, 84
local verSIon (s), 17, 26
Lower Criticism, 86
LUDERS, 34
MASS, Paul, 84
Macartney Collection, 12
Macartney Mss, 12
MACKAY, 2, 9
Mahabh4rata, 31, 33, 34, 42, 50,
51, 57, 50, 67, 72, 73, 77, 85
MahGdhovala,
Mahiyana Buddll1sts, 28
MahoviTocanta, 26, 56, 57
mam postulate of textual cnti-
cism, 46.
Molotimiidhava, 26, 44
MALL,- Todar, 26
manuscnpt(s), 30
marginal corrections, 27
marg.nalw, 26, 80
MARsHAL, Sir John, 1, 2
Mauryan characters, 3
McCRINDLE, 7.
mechanical (errors), 23.
mechamcal reproductlon, 20.
Methaduta of Kiihdisa, 33.
metals for wntmg, 7.
microfilm, 78
numum,9,
misch-codices, 27-28, 42
mlslectlon, 47, 48
mlS'transcnptlon, 55
MITRA's NotIces, 35
mixture, 42, 47
Mohenjo-Daro, 1, 2, 3, 4, 9.
mutual relatlonslup of Mss 38n_
13
Nlinyadeva's 37_
Nearchos, 4, 5, 9
Nepalese PaiU:atantra, 44
Nledere Textkntlk, 86
ObVIOUS Imitations, 33
omiSSIOn (s), 22
omiSSIon of letters, 11, 57
omission of syllables, 57
onusslOn of words, 38
oral traditIOn, 13.
oral transmiSSIOn, 15
ongmal, 46
onglnal copies, 15
ongmal document, 16
ongmal readings, 41, 75
onglnal reading of archetype, 46.
ongmahty of agreemeli.s, 48.
Padnw/JUrona, 34
pagmabon of Mss, 12
PatSiici, 28.
palm-leaf, 9, 11, 16, 20.
palm-leaf Mss, 10.
palm-leaves, 6, 8, 12
pmicatantra, 43, 50, 84,
Pancatantra Reconstructed, 31, 32
Pat).mi's 13.
INDEX
paper, 8, 11, 16, 20.
paper Mss., 10.
parablepsia, 56.
parallel verSIons, 34, 86.
paraphrase(s), 34,
parchment, 2.
parodIes, 33
Piirsviibhyudaya of Jmasena, 34.
PataiiJah, 13
piilka, 42
piithiintaro, 42
pathology of texts, 22
pedIgree, 28, 38, 73, 81, 82
pedIgree of Mss, 40
PETERSON, 5,
phonetic confusIOn, 58
photo-coPIes, 78
pIctographIc alphabet, 3
pictographiC characters, 2
PISCHEL, 36.
POSTGATE, 43n, 74
Praknt Dhammapada, 10, 23
p1aSast's, 80
preClpltate emendation, 67
presumptIVe vanant( s), 50.
pnsms of crystal, 8
problem of recensIOn, 41
professional copyist, 29.
protected transmiSSIon, 24 ,
psychologIcal errors, 22, 24, 54
punctuation, 9, 10, 11
Pur8J;1as, S4
Piin,)abhadra, 44.
Quotations, 29
RijaSekhara, 16
Ramiiyana, 13
ravages of time, 27
received text, 82.
recensio, 30, 31, 36, 86, 88
recensi09, 49, 55, 63, 82
recogn;tio, 36.
reClter(Ii), 17.
,
redactor(s), 17, 28, 61.
red lead, 9.
rejected vanants, 85.
relabve age of Mss., 79.
relative trustworthmess of Mss..
36.
repetitions, 58.
revlser(s), 21, 23, 28
revision of a Ms, 25, 26
Rgveda, 14
RICE,5
rotographs, 78.
royal hbrary, 13,
SacCldinanda &ha, 87.
Sakuntali episode, 34
Siikuntala, 36
SandeSariisoka, 60
Siirangdhllzrapaddhatl, 33.
SCIentliic mterpretatIon, 67, 68.
71, 73.
scnbal emendations, 43.
scnbal errors, 39
second hand, 80
secondary agreement, 75.
secondary features, 76,
secondary (mter)relatlonshlp, 75.
"6
semlvoluntary corruptions, 58
semlvoluntary errors, 23, 54.
selection (selectw) , 55
short mterpolaboM, 83, 85.
'SJglum (plural s,gla), 79, 81. 82.
Silver plates, 7.
Slmphclor, 44
skms used for writing, 6.
SMITH, Vmcent, 7
soleCism, 51, 61, 72
solitary witnesses, 36
Somadeva, 8, 28
Paiicatantra, 44
starred forms, 81
stemmo, 41, 46, 41, 52
stemmo codicum, 40, 42, 50, 81.
(JNDIAN TEXTUAL CRITICISM
atones for writmg, 18, 19, 20. transposition of S1.
atones, maltreatment of, 19. true readmgs, 36.
stDnes, weathering of, 20 trustworthy Mss, 35.
STEIN (S11' Aurel), 5, 7. turmenc, 11.
Strabo, 7.
Subandhu,6
subarchetype, 40, 50, 51, 75
IlUbrecenslOIl, 82
substItutions, 22, 23, 61.
subvana'nts, 42, 49, 85
SUKTHANKAR, V S, 25, 29, 31,
Unauthonsed Improvements, 45
umform trachtlon, 29
unhcensed tranBmlSS10n, 24
unongmal readmg, 75.
50, 51, 59n, 50, 67, 70, 74, 84, V8r18nt(s), 42
88
TantTakhyay.ka, 44
Taxllia Copper-plate grant, 6
text, 1
textual anbquanan, 63
textual cntlc, 63
textual cntlC1sm, 1, 14, 30, 31, 8S'
lextus OTIflUUJT, 77.
lextus sfmpl,cUJ1, 77.
testlmomum (plural testlmoma) ,
33, 63, 78, 81
TIbetan translations, 28, 33
TIbetan transhteratlons, 28
traceable errors of copymg, 45.
tradItional readmg, 63, 64, 74.
transcnber, 78.
transcnpbonal error, 42
transcnptlooal probablhty, 47, 49,
64, 65, 66.
translabons, 29, 33, 68
transmlSS10n of Mss, 40
transnlltted COpies, 37
tranSInltted readmg, 63, 64
transnlltted text, 21, 28, 45, 71.
76.83
transpositioo of letters, 57
transpomtlOn of parts of words.
58.
vanant bearers, 42, 50.
Vasavadatta, 6.
VedJ.c exegesIs, 68
VIgraha IV, 8
vIrtues of a scrIbe, 24
VISUal errors, 22, 24, 54
VIsvanatha's Kosakalpataru.
voluntary corrupbons, 53
voluntmy errors. 23, 54
wlgar scnpt, 29
wlgate, 82
WESTOOrT, 43
WINTERNITZ, 70
WOLF, 36.
wood for wntmg, 2.
wooden ooards, 5
37.
wooden covers for Mss, 12.
wnbng matenals, 2, 7, 1&
wntlng tablets, 2
wntten archetype. 37
written text(s), 13, 15
wrong combmatlon, 55.
wrong chVlSlon of words, 59.
wrong JunctIon, 59
wrong separatIon, 55.
Yellow pigment, 11.

Introduction To Indian Textual Criticism, by S. M. Katre (1941)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Introduction To Indian Textual Criticism, by S. M. Katre (1941)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INTRODUCTION TO

You might also like