G
The examples adduced in the MSS. of the Commentary amount
to about 3,400. Of those which are given in my extracts, many,
I regret, had to be left unidentified. No sufficient time was per-
mitted to me for examining thoroughly the extensive literature
quoted by the commentator. Those who are better read in clas-
sical literature, or have access to books unknown to me, will easily
identify a greater number of passages.
As regards the spelling of individual words, I have often
adhered to the orthography of the Kasmir MSS, (see Prof. Stein’s
Rajataramgini, Preface to vol. I., p. xvi), thus deviating from the
authority of the St. Petersburg Dictionaries, It may be that
I have gone too far: but I thought it expedient to preserve
the peculiarities of the Mankhakosa also with regard to tlie
orthography.
In the Various Readings, II. Commentary, pp. 108-116, I have
taken into account chiefly the manuscript S., the basis of my edi-
tion. I have noted only the more important variations from B.;
more especially the numerous interpolations, consisting mostly of
quotations from the Visvaprakasa and extracts from the Rayamu-
kutt ilka on the Amarakosa, have not been given complete. A
few conjectures and corrections and a few additional references
and miscellaneous notes have been added to the Various Read-
ings. The reader is requested to pay regard also to the additional
corrections at the end of the volume.
The three Indexes, p. 117, will, it is hoped, prove useful to
those who, with me, believe in the importance of the native
dictionaries and their commentaries.
Finally, the abbreviations, which I have introduced into the
Commentary and the Various Readings, have been duly explained
at the end of the volume. As to the figures following the sigla,
the reader is requested to bear in mind that two figures usually
refer to the pages and lines in the case of dramas, romances and
Alaihka’asastras, but to the cantos (chapters) and verses in the
case of Kavyas, of the Kavyadarsa and of the Rudratalaihkara.
The examples adduced in the MSS. of the Commentary amount
to about 3,400. Of those which are given in my extracts, many,
I regret, had to be left unidentified. No sufficient time was per-
mitted to me for examining thoroughly the extensive literature
quoted by the commentator. Those who are better read in clas-
sical literature, or have access to books unknown to me, will easily
identify a greater number of passages.
As regards the spelling of individual words, I have often
adhered to the orthography of the Kasmir MSS, (see Prof. Stein’s
Rajataramgini, Preface to vol. I., p. xvi), thus deviating from the
authority of the St. Petersburg Dictionaries, It may be that
I have gone too far: but I thought it expedient to preserve
the peculiarities of the Mankhakosa also with regard to tlie
orthography.
In the Various Readings, II. Commentary, pp. 108-116, I have
taken into account chiefly the manuscript S., the basis of my edi-
tion. I have noted only the more important variations from B.;
more especially the numerous interpolations, consisting mostly of
quotations from the Visvaprakasa and extracts from the Rayamu-
kutt ilka on the Amarakosa, have not been given complete. A
few conjectures and corrections and a few additional references
and miscellaneous notes have been added to the Various Read-
ings. The reader is requested to pay regard also to the additional
corrections at the end of the volume.
The three Indexes, p. 117, will, it is hoped, prove useful to
those who, with me, believe in the importance of the native
dictionaries and their commentaries.
Finally, the abbreviations, which I have introduced into the
Commentary and the Various Readings, have been duly explained
at the end of the volume. As to the figures following the sigla,
the reader is requested to bear in mind that two figures usually
refer to the pages and lines in the case of dramas, romances and
Alaihka’asastras, but to the cantos (chapters) and verses in the
case of Kavyas, of the Kavyadarsa and of the Rudratalaihkara.