________________
FEBRUARY, 1873.]
CORRESPONDENCE, &c.
57
verbs with ne-a construction which, it should be Our space will not allow us to go page by page noted, is rejected in speaking by at least one-half through this interesting book. The syntax is partiof those who use the language. It is, however, cularly good, bringing out in the clearest and most wrong to call the form of the conjunctive parti- refreshingly intelligent way, in spite of occasional ciple in -as kiye, liye, &c.-“ an irregular misapprehensions, the many-sided expressiveness of form," it being in reality the original form of a language which has no parellel for vivacity and this participle, and derived from the locative of
graceful turns of phrase, except in the most the Sanskrit past participle in ta, as krite, yate, &c., polished Parisian French. We conclude, then, by and some centuries older than the modern forms in congratulating Professor Dowson on having writke, kar, and larke. In fact, a group of ancient and ten by far the best Urdu Grammar that has yet much-used verbs has retained the older form, which appeared, and having thus rendered the acquisition has almost dropped out of use in other verbs.
of the most elegant and useful of all the Indian It is amusing to see the respect with which, on | vernaculars both easy and pleasant to the student ; page 113 (note), the inaccuracies of the Bagh-o- and if he pursues, as we hope he may, his task of Bahar and its fellows are treated. They are elevated editing a complete series of educational works, wo to the dignity of a crabbed passage in Thucydides, would recommend him to write to some one in India and the blunders on the ignorant münshi are treated for a selection of genuine native works, such as with the same respect as we should accord to the are current among the people, and not to content genvine phrases of the idiomatic Greek historian. himself with the threadbare and indecent trash The construction with ne is really so modern and which Forbes has raised to the position of Classics. artificial an invention, that it is extremely common Professor Dowson's Grammar is a distinct advance to find natives misusing it.
on Forbes; his texts should also be an advance.-J.B.
CORRESPONDENCE AND MISCELLANEA. REMARKS ON PARTS X. AND XI.
is also of the greatest interest. Last winter Burnell too By Pror. WEBER, BERLIN.
found a copy of the same work in Telinga character:
a comparison of both versions will no doubt yield To the Editor of the Indian Antiquary. much critical help for the restoration of the text, and Sir-I beg to offer you some observations on Nos. for the correction of Somadeva's later work. There X. and XI. of your Indian Antiquary, as they are very can scarcely be a doubt that the Bhútabhúshá of full of important and interesting communications. Gunadhya's original composition, according to I begin with the paper of B. G. Bhandarkar on the Dandin's testimony on the Pais'achabhasha, in which Date of Patanjali. Clever as it is, it is a great pity it was written according to Kshemendra and Somathat its author was not aware that I treated the deva, is but a Brahmanical slur on the fact that same subject ten years ago in my critique of Gold- Gunadhya was a Buddhist and wrote in Pali stücker's "Panini" (Indische Studien, V. 150 ff.). (Mr. Gorrey, in a very clever critique on my paper on Patanjali's mentioning the Pushyamitra Sabha the S'aptas'atakam of Hala, in the Journal Asiatique, (thus, Pushyamitra, not Pushpamitra, is the name, Aout-Sept. 1872, p. 217, arrives at nearly the according to the northern Buddhists) and the Chan- same conclusion; even Somadeva's work contains dragupta Sabha is already noticed there. But the some direct allusions to the Buddhist Játakas question regarding his age does not depend upon (65, 45, 72, 120 ed. Brockhaus); and the Buddhist this only, but has further light thrown upon it when character of many of its tales is quite manifest we adduce and criticise the testimonies of the (see my Indische Streifen, II. 367). The more we VAkyapadiya and the Bajatarangin as quoted learn of the Játakas, the more namerous are the by Goldstücker; and the final conclusion at which I stories shown to be which are found in India arrive is, that Patanjali lived about 25 after Christ. for the first time, and never afterwards appear in There is, after all, only one point in this argument the Brahmanical fable-and-tale collections. Some of which requires further elucidation. Kern, in his them are originally Æsopic, borrowed by the Budexcellent preface to his edition of Varahamihira's dhists from the Greeks, but arranged by them in their Brihat Sanhita (pp. 37, 98), refers the passage own way (see Indische Studien, III. 356-61). "arunad Yavano Madhyamikan," not to the Bud- The passage from Kumarila's Tantravirttika, dhist sect of that name, but to & people in middle which forms the subject of Burnell's very valuable India, mentioned in the Brihats. 14,2 (see also communication, was pointed out previously by Sankshepas'ankarajaya, 15, 156, in Aufrecht's Cata- Colebrooke (Misc. Essays, I. 315). That the Andhra logue of the Sanskrit MSS. of the Bodleian Library, and Dravida Br&hmans were in early times fully p. 2586).
engaged in literary pursuits, is manifest from the Bahler's paper on the Vrihatkath of Kehemendra fact that, according to Skyana, the last (tenth)