________________
BOWER MANUSCRIPT
xliii
comparatively small number of cases they have been corrected by some revising hand, and some of these corrected errors have been already referred to in the Section on Correction (p. xl), and others will be referred to below in the Section on Revision (p. xliv). The subjoined list refers only to uncorrected errors, and comprises only selected examples. For many others the footnotes to the transcribed texts may be consulted.
CHAPTER IV]
etc.
The most frequent error consists in a miswritten letter or syllable. Thus in Part I fol. 169 (p. 1) guna is written for gana; fol. 3a (p. 4) Suérutaigramanâḥ probably for Suśrutaikamanah (i.e. Suśruta êkamanál); fol. 368 (p. 5) prathamanêshu for pradhamanêshu In Part II, fol. 2b (p. 28), phalâni for. palâni; fol. 668 (p. 35), arpané for armaşê (possibly only a badly written m); fol. 24b9 (p. 63), mâdhyagâd for mâvyagâd; fol. 296+ (p. 71) tô yê for tôyam, etc. In Part IV, fol. 2a2 (p. 193), nishpala for nishphala; fol. 3a7 (p. 194) sahayês for sahayais, etc. In Part V, fol. 3at (p. 205) saśchâ for paschâ; fol. 3a (p. 205) upastitam for upasthitam; fol. 4a5 (p. 206), puvva for pûrvva, etc. In Part VI, fol. 2a (p. 223), sulam for sûlam, etc. In Part VII, fol. 2a (p. 237), kritayam for kritâyâ, etc.
Or, a letter or syllable is misplaced. Thus in Part I, fol. 4b5 (p. 7), savakara for savaraka, fol. 5a (p. 8), pilpan for piplum. In Part II fol. 10a4 (p. 41), krôñchânadani for kriñchâdanâni. In Part V, fol. 565 (p. 207) isvaram sarana for isvara-saranam. In Part II, fol. 2461o a whole colophon is misplaced (see ante, p. xli).
Or, a letter or syllable is omitted. Thus in Part I, fol. 26 (p. 3). prayujan for prayuйjan; fol. 3al (p. 4), munir for munibhir. In Part II, fol. 1a (p. 26) chatum for chaturdasam; fol. 10a (p. 41) gundânâm for gundrânâm; fol. 19a (p. 57), jivani for jivaniyâni. In Part IV, fol. 2al (p. 192), tatash for satatam. In Part V, fol. 26 (p. 204), vichêhi for vichintêhi; fol. 4a5, samusthita for samupasthita. In Part VI, fol. 3bs (p. 224), ugâdhipêna kâlêna for uragâdhipa-kálêna; fol. 4ae, (p. 225), ktayê for muktayê, etc. Occasionally even a half-verse, or a whole verse, or a whole clause, is missed out; see note 244, p. 126, note 459, p. 171, and note 2, p. 226.
Or, a superfluous letter or syllable is inserted. Thus, in Part I, fol. 16e (p. 1), ôtkshit" for ôkshit. In Part II, fol. 4b (p. 32), nâ nâmnâ for nâmnâ; fol. 24b" (p. 63), mâ at the beginning of the line. In Part IV, fol. 165 (p. 192), balamamantaram for balamantaram In Part V, fol. 1a3 (p. 203), tataḥstêsham for tatastéshâm; and exactly the same superfluous visarga in Part VI, fol. 1a2 (p. 222), daharaḥ staruṇaḥ for daharastaruṇaḥ. A superfluous anusvára is rather common; e.g., in Part I, fol. 16" (p. 1), jvalanti for jvalanti; Part III, fol. 3a (p. 183), śrinvamnti: Part IV, fol. 3a (p. 194), sarvanthâ; Part V, fol. 1a (p. 203), mâmnusha; Part VI, fol. 1at (p. 222), dârúmni; fol. 2at (p. 223), arôchakas, m for arôchakam; in this case there is a superfluous comma in addition to the superfluous anusvåra. Once there occur also two superfluous verses, see note 114, p. 98.
Occasionally there occur entirely wrong words, such as pushte for pakti in Part I, fol. 3a2 (p. 4); sa-patrán for sa-pushpân, in Part II, fol. 2266 (p. 59); dvitiya for tritiya, in Part IV, fol. 5al- (p. 195) and 243 for 343, in Part V, fol. 3a (p. 205). But the responsibility for these errors possibly lies rather with the original writers of the treatises than with the scribes who copied them in the Bower Manuscript. Still such grossly blundered readings, as kâéyêshasnó in Part I, fol. 3a (p. 4), and chashkashu in Part V, fol. 2a (p. 204), are probably to be laid to the charge of the scribes, who may not have been able, or careful enough, to read correctly their original. They are certainly responsible for such curiosities as those referred to in note 32, p. 3, and note 77, p. 7.
In this connection a brief reference may be made to certain defects due to the inferior quality of the birch-bark on which the scribes wrote rather than to the scribes themselves. To this category belong half-formed letters, such as may be seen, e.g., in Part II, fols. 7a7, 1864, 22a7, and in Part V, fol. 264 (see note 21, p. 193); and want of evenness, or continuity, in the lines of writing, as, e.g., in Part II, fol. 11a, lines 5 ff.
