Recent Russian Publications On Indian Epic

Author(s): J W De Jong
Publisher: J W De Jong

Page 41

RUSSIAN PUBLICATIONS ON THE INDIAN EPIC 41
the history of the epics. As Grintser remarks several times, the existence of several recensions of one epic is typical for the oral epic. In the past analysts have tried to discover the original nucleus of the epic and the accretions which were added to it in later times. Dodds has drawn attention to the fact that in oral transmission successive poems not only incorporate but as a rule remodel early work. He adds that older analysts were misled by the analogy of excavation, in which it is often possible to expose untouched layers of earlier material (op. cit., p. 16). Analysis will still be possible and even indispensable. It belongs to the very nature of an orally transmitted poem to incorporate both older and newer elements. However, a critical analysis will have to take into account the fact that often the oldest elements of an oral poem have been retouched more than later elements. Johnston rightly remarked that the late date of a passage is often obvious from the fact that there is a high degree of agreement between different recensions. It is usually thought that agreement between recensions is an indication as to the original, common element but this rule is certainly much more valid for a work belonging to the written tradition than for an oral composition.
Grintser's bibliography lists 463 items and he seems to have missed very little of importance for the study of the Indian epics. When discussing the relation between R and Asvaghosa's Buddhacarita, Grintser remarks that
1 The Buddhacarita, part II (Calcutta, 1936), p. xlix.