________________
Vol. XX, 1996
REVIEWS
195
Acārya Tulasi and Yuvacarya Mahaprajna, Ladnun, 1980. Jain lexicography, especially when dealing with Prakrit terms, has often been coupled with grammatical and etymological observatons. In several cases, comparisions of Ardhamāgadhi / Jaina Māhārāştri terms with their Buddhist counterparts have proved fruitful, especially when an evaluation of semantic evolutions is necessary. Since 1983 upto 1993, Tatia, Kyoshu, Mette and Balbir have contributed in the field of technical terms. And Cailat, Norman and Watnabe have worked on miscellaneous topics. In his article on 'The Study of Jaina Art', Klaus Bruhn clarifies that Jaina art, being mainly "Jaina-sponsored art" by a particular community, has by necessity its own distinct physiognomy. The period selected by him is 1972-1991. The extraneous factors which intensified both actual research work and the stream of publications during the period were the 2500th anniversary of the Nirvan of Mahāvīra (1974-75) and 1000th anniversary of the consecretion of the Gommateśvara statue at Shravan Belgola (1981). For documentation of Western Indian Jain painting, he has to rely on the numerous publications by S.M. Navab. Much material which is not found in the Navab publication has been supplied by U.P. Shah. Pictorial presentation has so far been inadequate for painted wooden book-covers or pătalis and palm-leaf manuscripts. A very general deficit in the publication of paintings on cloth (svetambara) and of murals (Digambara) exists. A documentation of sculptural and architectural remains is necessary and possible in the case of Jaina sites which are undergoing changes due to jirnoddhāra activities, Deogarh in the Lalitpur District being a case in point. In cataloguing, collections, manuscripts, and single illustrations have each to be considered as such; here again we are indebted to U.P. Shah and Moti Chandra, but valuable information can also be derived from some of the Nawab publications. In an "annotated" bibliography of art (including iconography) publications which help us to "understand the representations, i.e. to relate them to the texts as far as possible, also have to be mentioned. A simplifying but useful diagnosis would be the statement that the meaning of both "understanding" and "indentification” will change from case to case. Here, as elsewhere, U.P. Shah has set new standards. It is only in the case of miniature paintings and narrative panels (not very frequent in Jaina art) that we are able to tackle the textimage (text-picture) issue in a more confident matter. The foundation ofr an adequate understanding of those texts which have received the greatest number of paintings has been laid by W. Norman Brown. His list of authors notices Klaus Bruhn, Collette Giallat, Madhusudan A. Dhaky, Saryu V. Doshi, Karl J. Khandalawala, Gritli Von Mitterwallner, Ramesh Prasad Mohapatra, Sarabhai Manilal Nawab, Shadkshari Settar, Umakant Premanand Shah, Harihar Singh, Calembur Sivaramamurti and Maruti Nandan Prasad Tiwari. His bibliography notices 37 works of the above authors, and others like R. Kumar, S.V. Doshi, A. Ghosh, B.N. Goswamy, R.P. Hingorani, M. Chandra, G.D. Sontheimer and D.M. Srinivasan. In his 'Detailed Exposition of the Prakrit word 'Vibhāsä', an item in Jaina Exegetical
