________________
AUGUST 2, 1872.]
WEBER ON THE RAMAYANA.
241
gether unnoticed. The narrative really begins, the bridge is finished (16314), not before (Ram. after the mention of Rama's birth and a few v. 92). Kumbhakarna is killed by Lakshbrief words regarding his youth (15947—50), maņa (16426), not by the arrow of Râma. The with the wish of Dasaratha to inaugurate him as twice-performed sacrifice of Indrajit in heir-apparent to the throne. Even the Ayodhya- Nikumbhila (Ram. VI. 19, 89; 52, 18) is wantkânda and a great part of the Aranyakanda are ing. The striking down of Rama and Lakshdispatched in a few verses (15950—90). The maņa by the Sarabandha (arrow-charm) of Inmore detailed account begins, in accordance withdrajit occurs only once (16466), not twice, the purpose for which the story is told, with the as in the Ram. VI. 19, 76 ; 52, 51; and conappearance before R & vana of the mutilated sequently their revival is necessary only once, not SarpanakhA(Rám. III. 36, Gorresio); but | twice (Ram. VI. 24, 2; 53, 2ff.) The herb that from this point onward the various incidents of has the power of healing wounds is not fetched the Râmîyana are related in essentially the even once (much less twice, Ram. VI. 53 and 83)
mandare in that neem althongh with many by Hanumant from Gandha madan variations in details. The putting of Kabandha but is found in the hand of Bugriva (16 470). to death is told without the alleviating balm of Sit & does not pass through any fire ordeal, but his restoration to life (Ram. III. 75, 83). The the gods summoned by her as witnesses, Vâyu, story of Savari is wanting. Equally so is the Agni, Varuņa, Brahma, all come of their own account of the dream sent by Brahma to comfort accord, and bear testimony to her chastity. Sitâ. The dream of Trija tâ (Ram. V. 21) Without doubt, then, this narrative in the and Râ vana's visit to Sita (Ram. V. 27) are Mahabharata is in many respects more priinserted between the installation of Sugriva mitive than that of the Râmîyana ;t and (Ram. IV. 26) and the subsequent summons in fact we are now and then tempted to ask, addressed to him four months afterwards to come whether, instead of an epitome of the latter forth and take part in the battle (Ram. IV. 32); work, we may not rather have before us the oriinserted here, no doubt, because the discovery ginal out of which the Ramayana has been of Sita by Hanumant, in connection with developed ? Or ought we to assume only that which these incidents are narrated in the the Mahâbhârata contains the epitome of an Ramayana, is only slightly touched on in this earlier recension of our text of the Ramayana ? episode, and indeed merely in the brief re- an assumption, however, which would imply, port of it which Hanumant himself gives to with regard to the latter, an alteration so serious Râm a.. The god of the Ocean consents here in the interval, that we could no longer speak at once to the building of a bridge under with any propriety of the identity of the work ; Nala's direction (16300), without waiting, as in as there would in that case be rather two disthe Ramayana, V. 98, to have that consent tinct texts treating of the same subject, and forced from him by the arrow of Râma. Vi- agreeing substantially in the main, but with bhishaņa comes over as a deserter only after important variations in detail. Or, thirdly,
It is worthy of notice that a portion of this report recals sity on the part of the people with reference to this matter the story of Ikaros-that, amely, which tells that the vulture
sought to satisfy it elf by supplementing the story with the Sampati singed his wings when, in a race with his brother repudiation of Sita, as we find this related in the UttaraJattyus, be flew too near the sun (16246). Cl. Ram. VII.
kanda, in the Raghunsa, in the Uttararamacharita, 88, 79.
&c. But if they went anquestionably great deal
too far in their punctiliousness, yet it must be allowed In the Bombay edition the fetching of the herb occuzs
that in this respect they show throughout a higher shoral only once (VI. 74, 88ff.); while, on the second occasion of
tone than we find among the Greeks, in whose epic ita being used, Surbens inmediately applies the herb. which is already by this time in his possession (VI. 92, 241.). And
Menelaos without any hesitation takes back the beautiso it is also in A (fol. 588 and 75a) and in C (fol. 260b
fal Helen as the wife of his boson, after she has and 287b).
spent years with her paramour, Paris ! In the Maha
bharata the Pandavas do not make Draupadi herself Thus, the circumstance that Rama is satisfied with the etter on account of her being disgraced by Duhs'asang, or oath of Sicâ and the testimony of the gods to her innocence
of her being carried away by Jayadratha, as she was quite especially appears to ine to be more ancient than the re
innocent in the matter (just as Sit & was); but they rent presentation in the Ramiyana, where she is not purified
1-their fury exclusively upon the offender; and in this reuntil she has first passed through the ordeal of tire (VI. 111,
spect the Mababharata unquestionably occupies & more 25ft.). It is singular enough that in the Uttaralanda
primitive and more chivalroos stand-point, even al comAlso, twice over (48, 67; 104, 3), Râms speaks only of the pared with what is contained in thir episode. onth of Sita and the testimony of the gods to her purity. & Though of course this would not hold good for the not at all of the ordeal; so that the latter could hardly entire narrative in the Ramayana, but only frota 11. 36 have existed in the R&miyana at the time when the onward, as the preceding incidents in Rima's history, which Uttarakanda was composed ! In the course of time, were of no importance so far as the purpose wa concerned even the ordeal was felt to be no longer satisfying and the for naich the episode was introdu ed into the Mahabharata constantly growing feeling of fastidiousness and scrupulo- are accordingly almost entirely wanting in that poem.
dere ratherseed in and
