IV. Introduction to the text of Pūrṇa-bhadra. A. First part, extending to the death, in 1881, of Benfey. 1. Editions: Kosegarten's; Kielhorn-Bühler's; other Indian editions. 2. Translations: of Benfey, Lancereau, Pavolini, Fritze, Galanos. 3. Semitic recensions and their effluxes. 4. Benfey's results as contained in his Pantschatantra of 1859 and his Introduction to Bickell's Old Syriac Kalilag und Damnag of 1876. B. Second part, from the death of Benfey. 5. Bibliography of the various treatises. 6. History of the Sanskrit Pancha-tantra. Form, age, and name of the original Pancha-tantra. 7. The Brahmanical recensions of the work: Guṇāḍhya, Nepalese fragment, etc.; Tantra-ākhyāyika; Southern Pancha-tantra. 8. Jaina recensions: so-called Simplicior, its age, etc.; so-called Ornatior, author, age, etc.; Megha-vijaya; later recensions; mixed recensions. 9. Buddhist recension, Tantra-ākhyāna.
V. Notes to the several stories of Pūrṇa-bhadra's text. Parallels in the Jātaka, etc. References to Benfey.
VI. Indices. 1. Of names. 2. Of things. 3. Of verses. 4. Of meters.
The Çakuntalā, a Hindu drama by Kālidāsa: the Bengālī recension critically edited in the original Sanskrit and Prākrits by Richard Pischel, Professor of Sanskrit in the University of Berlin.
Thirty years ago Pischel made his first edition of this master-piece of the Hindu drama. Meantime he has published, as a very important part of the Bühler-Kielhorn Grundriss der Indo-Arischen Philologie, his elaborate Grammatik der Prākrit Sprachen. In the way of experience and study, therefore, his equipment as an editor of this play is peculiarly complete. As for the externals of paper and print and binding, it is intended that this edition shall be got up in a manner to correspond with its scholarly character and with the intrinsic merit of the play; and it is to be sold at a very moderate price.
The Çakuntalā, translated into English from the edition of Professor Pischel, with an exegetical and illustrative commentary, by Arthur William Ryder.
Whereas Dr. Ryder's version of The Little Clay Cart (vol. ix. of this Series) was primarily a literary one and aimed to avoid technicalities, his work upon the Çakuntalā is primarily philological, and of it the technical commentary is an essential part. In this comment he hopes to include the most or all that is of substantive importance in the observations of his predecessors whether Occidental or Hindu; to treat the relation of the subject-matter of the play to the older forms thereof as seen in the Epos and the Jātaka; to bring out the double meanings and the various other Hindu "embellishments" of the play; to note the parallelisms in poetic thought or diction or technique between the Çakuntalā and the other works of Kālidāsa and of the Indian literature; to illustrate the allusions to the mythology and antiquities of India by citations translated from the best native authorities; to show, throughout, the relation of this play as a work of art to the Hindu canons of dramaturgy; and at least to assemble the data for the solution of the important critical question whether the Çakuntalā may not have served as the model play upon which the earlier of those canons were based.
The Commentary (Yoga-bhāshya) on Patañjali's aphorisms of the Yoga philosophy, translated from the original Sanskrit into English, with indices of quotations and of philosophical terms, by Dr. James Haughton Woods, Instructor in Philosophy in Harvard University.
[ 5 ]
