________________
REVIEWS
203
Pollock follows.Cm's rather far-fetched explanation. It is certainly preferable to read karmacestabhir, cf. PW 'durch Kraftanstrengung des Geistes'. See also PW for abhisamstabhya ‘kräftigen, aufrichten'.
2.66.32: "for he anticipated yet another calamity” (dvitīyāpriyaśamsanāt). Rather 'because she told another unpleasant news.'
2.72.1: "Now, as the grief-stricken Bharata was making the journey back" (atha yātrām samihantam ... bharatam sokasamtaptam). Pollock notes that his translation is in disagreement with the commentators, who understand “preparing for contemplating') the journey. It is difficult to understand Pollock's translation for the conversation between Bharata and Satrughna takes place in Ayodhyā after Bharata's return from Rājagtha and before his departure to the forest to see Rāma.
2.74.18ab: The translation omits these two pādas.
2.93.36: "he reached in vain for Rāma's feet and collapsed in tears” (pādāv aprāpya rāmasya papāta bharato rudan). Rather 'before reaching Rāma's feet'.
. 2.94.48: “And when a thief, either caught in the act or discovered with the stolen property" (grhītaś caiva prstaś ca kāle drstah sakāranah). In Mahābhārata 2.5.94 van Buitenen translated sakārana as 'with his tools'. PW has 'Anzeichen, Beleg, Beweisgrund' which is less probable.
In his article on some lexical problems in the Vālmīki Rāmāyana Pollock remarked that we have no complete grammar of the epic dialect, no adequate dictionary (let alone specialized lexica, as of particles), and worst of all no concordances. In the age of the computer it ought not to be too difficult to make a concordance. There is no dictionary of the Rāmāyana but one can find much lexical material on the Rāmāyana in the great Petersburg dictionary. It would be useful to list all the references to the Rāmāyana as, for instance, Scharpe has done for the references to the Kādambarī in the small Petersburg dictionary. Both Goldman and Pollock could have given more references to the great Petersburg dictionary. In the annotation of these two volumes and especially in that of the second one there are many important remarks on lexical matters and it is to be hoped that after the completion of the translation of the entire Rāmāyana all these items will be indexed in a supplementary volume.
Misprints are very rare. I have noted the following ones in volume 2: p. 450, note 22: prsthah; p. 478, note 22: rūpap; p. 482, note 69: bristle toothbrushes; p. 500, note 19: duhkam; p. 546: Raghaven. In volume one (p. 89, n. 21) there is a reference to Kenney 1974 but this is not listed in the bibliography.
