Bhandarkar Report 1904
BHANDAKAR REPORT on the search of Prākṛit and Saṃskṛit manuscripts 1904 [66 of 69]
(← … https://www.om-arham.org/blog/view/9586/bhandarkar-report-1904)
66. The next question, therefore, is as to the form of the catalogues. Amongst the catalogues hitherto published there may be recognized three principal classes. One of them is on a very elaborate scale and is represented by such catalogues as those of the Sanskrit manuscripts in the Bodleian Library by Aufrecht[1] in Latin and of the Sanskrit and Prakrit manuscripts in the Royal Library in Berlin compiled by Weber in German. The latter Aufrecht calls “a pattern of what a catalogue ought to be." At Indore I came to know of a proposal made to catalogue the manuscripts in Central India on a scale perhaps even more elaborate. This is unnecessary in the case of works already published or fully analysed in catalogues already published. Cataloguing on that scale will, moreover, take far too many years, judging from the experience of the compilers of previous catalogues of that character,[2] and such catalogues of collections of which the permanence is not assured would be a waste of labour. Another class of catalogues is represented by Oppert's in the south and by Dr. Kielhorn's of the manuscripts in the Central Provinces and Bühler's of manuscripts in Gujarat. The catalogues give merely the name of a manuscript and that of its author, the number of leaves, etc., the subject matter and the date of the manuscript. Of such catalogues Aufrecht has more than once complained saying that "in the present state of our knowledge of Sanskrit literature mere lists of names are of little value, and lead only to confusion." The third is a class intermediate between the two already mentioned and is represented by Dr. Rajendralal Mitra's Notices of Sanskrit Manuscripts and their continuation by Haraprasāda Śāstrī and Part I. of Lists of Sanskrit Manuscripts in the Bombay Presidency compiled under the superintendence of Dr. R.G. Bhandarkar. These, besides giving the information contained in the catalogues of the second class I have referred to, give also the introductory and final portions of the manuscripts. Of these Aufrecht says that “the copious extracts are very useful and enable the attentive reader to judge of the contents of a work even where he is deserted by the English text." Many a time the extracts give very valuable information. Dr. Bühler himself in the preface to his Catalogue of Sanskrit Manuscripts in Gujarat, Fascicle I. (published in 1871), speaks of the new lists that were being then made and that were, according to Babu Rajendralal Mitra's plan, to give the first and last ślokas of each manuscript, though these have somehow not been published. If, therefore, Government decide that the cataloguing of the manuscripts in Central India and Rajputana should be undertaken, it should be done on the plan of Dr. Rajendralal Mitra's “Notices.''
[continuation … → … https://www.om-arham.org/blog/view/9588/bhandarkar-report-1904]
