End Notes

1 Cf. Colebrooke, Misc. Essays II 63 ff.; Weber, Ind. Stud. Bd. 8; F.L. Pullé, F. Belloni-Filippie A. Ballini in SIFI VIII. 1912; H. Jacobi, Über die Entwicklung der indischen Metrik in nachvedischer Zeit, ZDMG 38, 590ff., 40, 336ff.

2 See Volume I, p. 56, 157 (trans. pp. 62, 180).

3 See Volume I, p. 245 (trans. pp. 288-89). Text with the commentary MÔtasaüjãvanã of Halàyudha (2nd half of 10th century) published in Km. [i.e. Kavyà Màlà] 91, 1908. [The text of this work is transcribed elsewhere on this website (without the commentary at the moment), see øri Piügala's Chandasèàstra]

4 This circumstance too speaks in support of the assumption that originally it was in the erotic lyrics that metres were used in India, since in this poetry the variety of metres is the greatest. Writers of epics use comparitively smaller number of metres. In the oldest dramas there occur approximately twenty metres.

5 For example la=laghu, i.e. ßlight, or short syllableû; ga=garu, i.e. ßheavy or long syllableû; ma for ÜÜÜ; ya for ÛÜÜ; ra for ÜÛÜ etc.

6 PràkÔta Piügala-såtras (text with commentary) published in Km [i.e. Kavyà Màlà] 41, 1894. Cf. Weber, Ind. Stud. 8, 202 ff; Pischel, Pràkrit Spachen (Gundriss) p. 30f; Keith, Catalogue of Pràkrit MSS. in Bodl. c. 48. According to Jacobi (Bhavisattakaha of Dhaõavàla, p. 5*) the PràkÔta Piügala belongs to the 14th century A.D. at the earliest.

7 According to Jacobi, Ind. Stud. 17, 442ff., [the] Chandoviciti, which is no more available, [is] a work of Daõóin, [that] had become a standard work for poets. P.V. Kane Ind. Ant. 40, 1911, 177 f.) has pointed out that by Chandoviciti (Kàvyàdarèa I, 12) we should understand ßprosodyû in general and not the title of a work, and that neither Daõóin nor Vàmana had written a work on prosody. But it must not be taken to mean that when rhetoricians prescribe the study of prosody for poets they directly mean the work of Piügala as assumed by Kane. A PràkÔta-Piügalasåtra was published in the Bibl. Ind. 1902, too. Ratnasekhara's Chandakoèa a pendant to PràkÔta-Piügalasåtra has been dealt with by W. Schubring ZDMG 75, 1921, p. 97ff.

8 Published with a commentary in Bombay, NSP 1908. An English translation of this work appeared in the Pandit, Vol. IX, 45 f., 91ff., 140 ff. Kedàrabhañña was the son of Pavyeka or Pabbeka. According to Krishnamacharya (167) he must have written the VÔttaratnàkara in the beginning of the 15th century. [But] since he is very often cited by Mallinàtha, who lived in the 15th century, he must have been somewhat older.

9 Cf. Colebrooke, Misc. Ess. II, 65; H. Ewald in the Zeitschrift fr die Kunde des Morgenlandes, Bonn 1842, IV, 57ff; Aufrecht, CC. 1, 675; Eggeling, lnd. 0ff. Cat. II, 1082 ff. H. Brockhaus has published it in his book ßÜber den Druck sanskritischer Werke mit lateinischen Buchstabenû (Leipzig, 1841). It has been printed several times in India, also in Haeberlin 9-14.

10 Published in Km., Part II, 1886, 29-54.

11 So, for example, Pàõini liked Upajàti, Bhàravi, the Vaüèastha, Bhavabhåti, the øikhariõã, Kàlidàsa, the Mandàkràntà, etc. On the use of metres in Indian poets see also Khnau, ZDMG. 1890, p. 1ff.

12 Bühler, Hemacandra, p. 33, 82.

13 Published in Km. 1895, Cf. Eggeling, Ind. Off. Cat. II, p. 301ff.