Onderstaande tekst is niet 100% betrouwbaar

C, regularly collated with the MSS. containing only the text, is a MS. of the Benares College Library, written Samvat 1839 (A. D. 1782). A direct or indirect copy, but at all events a copy, is Codex 854 (Chambers 819) in the Berlin Library, written Samvat 1844 (A. D. 1787). Another copy again is a Codex of Fort YVilliam, dated Samvat 1878 (A. D. 1821). The Codices of the I. O. in London have been compared only partially. A Codex from Kashmere, which a KashmereBrahman had the kindness to send for my use, came too late to be compared throughout; its deviations, so far as the text is concerned, are noticed from Chapter LXXVIII. Amongst all the Codices of C, the Benares Codex, and consequently also those of Fort William and Berlin, are the most corrupt, and at the same time the best, because they are least adulterated by half-competent hands, and their errors are only due to the scribes.

For particulars about A, B, C (Berlin Codd.) see Weber's Catalogue.

D, a MS. in the I. O. Library No. 2294, text; date Samvat 1870 (A.

D. 1818).

E, do., No. 812, text; incomplete; in Bengali character.

G, do., used only occasionally.

O, do., No. 2219, contain only the three chapters, Purusalaksanam, Panca-Mahapurusa-laksanam, Strïlaksanam.

N, a MS. of the Benares College Library, text; date Samvat 1691 (A. D. 1634).

S, a MS. of the As. Soc. Bengal, No. 626, text; date Samvat 1857 (A. D. 1800).

Out of these MSS. A and S agree closely with each other, from Chapter XXXI; so do B and D, from Ch. XXVII. N agrees with B, D, from about the middle of Ch. XLVIII till nearly the end of Ch. LXIX, but this part is written by a different hand and on different paper from the rest. E is the most modernized and adulterated, and stands perhaps aloof, although it shows many striking coincidences with S in that part of S where S does not coincide with A; Band D, and partly N, show manifest traces of being influenced by the commentary; A and S show, it would seem, a total independence of C, and may be considered as constituting a class apart, which can scarcely be said of B, D, N, E. The differences of C and A, S are here and there so remarkable that one might think them to exhibit different redactions, perhaps different editions issued by the author. As a general remark, applying to all the MSS. it may be said that all of them are worse than indifferent.

It is no mock modesty that prompts me to say that, having such materials at my disposal, I look upon this first edition of the Brhat-Samhita as