INTERPRETING MAHABHARATA EPISODES AS SOURCES FOR

THE HISTORY OF IDEAS

By

I. PROUDFOOT

A student of the history of ideas in early India can scarcely afford to
disregard the materials offered by the didactic portions of the Mahabharata.'
The very bulk of these materials, the encyc10paedic range of topics they
encompass, and the free-ranging treatment they adopt an make the Maha
bharata an especially rich source for the history of religious, social, and
political ideas. While there may often be a broad affinity bet\veen Maha
bharata materials and the later law-books, the didactic episodes are parti
cularly interesting in that they tend to present ideals and practices 'in a living
situation, not - as in the law-book - drily compartmentaJized in greyenumera
tioDs of duties. 2 From this point of view, the Mahabharata" is a potentially
richer source for understanding the implications of ideals and practices, and
the social contexts in which they were manifested. But at the same time, the
idiosyncrasy of Mahabharata episodes places greater difficulties and uncer
tainties in the way of interpreting them. The probJem of the relative chrono
logy of Mahabharata materials is, for instance, made more intractible by the
rarity of c10sely cognate parallel texts sach as the d~armasastra corpus
provides; definition of the stand point from which a doctrine or practice is
perceived is much more open for Mahi:ibharata materi.al than for a law
treatise. Yet such difficulties of interpretation are symptoms of the same
characteristics which make the Mahabharata most valuable as source meterial :
if we are to mine the rich lodes of information the text contains, the
difficulties of analysis must be turned to advantage and " the uncertainties
made less.

Higher criticism of the AJahdbhiirata corpus:

Alsdorf's study, "Beitrage zur Geschichte von Vegetarismus und
Rinderverehrung in Indien "3, focussing principally on dharmasastra material,

1 Including not only the 'pseudo epic' of books xii, xiii, but other didactic and
homiletic interludes, especially in book iii.

2 A point stl'e~sed by E. W. Hopkios, The Reti!Jio '!~8 of India ( Boston, 1895 ), pp.
3"t9-350, .~65.

3 A bhandlu'fI.!}en rler A !.:ademie de?· Wisse1~schaften 'lwd der Liter(j,t~'r. Geiste8- una
Soziatwissenschajtlicl,en KtoBse, .Jahrgaog 1961.

6 [Annals, BORl ]

42 A nncds BORI, L.X ( 1979 )

has pointed up the great analytical value of identifying disparate materials
juxtaposed in a single text sequence. In such a situation it is possible not
only to compare and contrast the component materials themselves, but more
importantly to examine the relationships in which they stand one to another.
If the combination of disparate materials is a virtue, then the Mah1lbh1lrata
is the embodiment of all that is good. In the controversies which have raged
back and forth across the terrain of the Mah1lbhfirata authorship question,
it has never been responsibly denied that the Mahfibharata - especially in its
didactic secti~ns - is a compilation which has brought into intimate juxta
position materials of differing origins often expressing seemingly quite distinct
points ofview.4 Consequently, the Mahabhfirata offers glimpses of the
dynamics of. intellectual life lacking in texts which more single-mindedly
expound a unitary- point of view. In this respect, the chaos which makes the
Mahabhfirata a " literary monstrosity"5 is also its particular strength.

It is, therefore, doing the less than full justice to the Mahabharata
material to treat it in the manner characteristic of survey works, that is either
by generalizing a timeless synthetic Mahibharata view, or by admitting a
diversity of views and arranging them according to necess~rily a priori or
independently-deduced assumptions about historical changes in values and
outlook. The product of the former tendency reduces the rich variety of
Mahabharata evidences to a generality which may be more misleading than
it is informative. The latter approach, while more sensitive to the Maha
b}larata material, suffers by subjugating the Mahabharata evidence to the
convictions of the analyst or to the pattern of development deducible from the
evidence of other less internally diverse works widely separated in time. A
symptom of the anaemia of this approach is the passive use of Mah3:bharata
passages as illust.rative material only. The handling of Mahfibharata materia]
in this manner is not only unconstructive, it is also open to uncontrollable
vagaries of interpretation. To appreciate this point it is only necessary to
put side by side the following extracts discussing non-injury. The first is
from W. N. Brown:

The Mahfibharata, taken as a whole, shows Brahmanic rule
and' popular practice to be at variance. In one passage the
text states that he who kills a cow lives as many years in hell

4: J. Dahlmann, Ge1~e8i8 des lIf(~lj('i,bh{j,rata ( Perlin, IS99 ), pp. IHI-130, argues only
that the::e was a single process of compilation; V. S. Sukthankar, On the llIecming
of' the l..VahXt.bh(~r((,t(t (Bombay, 1957 ), pp. 2~-2:~, pausing in his polemic, retreats
even from this position.

5 Dahlmann, (te11e8';.s des .l.lfaht"ibhara,ta, p. n. Cf. H. Oldenberg, Da.s lIiahii.bhr;'rata,

Seine E'~t!J'.elo'w!J •. ~e·i/~ Inlwlt, .sei-l~e P01·m ( Guttingen, 192~ ), pp. 1 and 76~

PROUDFOOT: },jbh. Episodes - History of icleCM

as there are hairs on the cow's body ... and various other passages
command Ahinisa. Yet elsewhere meat-eating is mentioned in
a ca sual manner and the existence of a butcher shop is nothing
out of the ordinary. 6

the second from Holtzmann :

Nahu~a was charged with heresy for declaring that the kilHng
and sacrificing of animals was unlawful. By contrast the }ater, .
didactic portions of the Epic come out in favour of a.himsa: 'i

43

What Holtzmann's predilection would have as a differenti~tion of antiquity,
Brown sees as a differentiation of popular practice and brahmanic 'ideal. It
is only an added compJication that Brown should cite t~le Dha~mavyadha

episodeB for his instance of the butcher's shop, when the hero of the episode,
the pious hunter, is at great pains to dissociate himself from killing or eating
meat.9 Plucking references out of the massive corpus of Mah~bharata
material proves nothing more than that the devil can quote scriptures to his
own puspose. The wealth of material is so great and the relationship of
various passages one to another is so indeterminate that the Mahabhiirata is
capable of contributing neither confirmation nor refutation of any hypothesis
argued on extrinsic grounds.

The amenability of higher criticism to be turned into self-fulfilling
prophecy through unconsciously circular argumentation not stabilized by
objective underpinnings is well illustrated in the case of the Bhagavaglta, that
part of the Mahabharata which, with the exception of the early chapters of
the Adiparvan, has received most attention from critical analysts. lo Repu
table scholars have argued that the extant Bhagavadglta represents a Vaiglava
revision of an older pantheistic poem; 11 the converse: that it is a theistic work
with accretions of veda ntic materials; 12 and the redical alternative: that it is

6 W. N. Brown, ,. The Sanctity of the Cow in Hinduism ", .]olwWJ,l of the J.1Iadras
University, vol. 28, no. 2 ( Jan. 1957 ), p. 35.

'I A. H01tzmann, Das lYItJ,hCibhrl,1-ata nnd seille Theile ( Kiel, 1892-1895 ), Bk. It
p. 36; ., Dem Nahu$a .... flir die ahi:tp.sa;" ( my translation ).

8 Mbh. iii. 198-206; the specific reference is Mbh. iii. 198.10.
9 Mbh. iii. 198. 31-3~.

10 L. van Schroader, Blw(jalJad-Gitci,. Des Erhabene10 Sallg (J ena, 1920 ), pp. vii-xv;
and G. S. Khair, Questfo?' t11e 01'igi1~al GitCi( Bomba.y, 1969 }, pp. 7-12, survey the
major text-critical interpretations.

11 Holtzmann, D(l,s jl1ahcibhc7,1-ata nnd sei1~e Tl,eite, Eh:. Il, pp. 163-160; similarly
Hopkins, Religions of India, pp. 389-400.

12 R. Garbe, " Bhagavad-Git.a ", EHcyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, ad. J. Hast
ings (Edinburgh, 1908-1926), val. Il, p. 536a-b; and his Die Bhaga1,nd;;itiL.mit
eine1' Ei1lteit1mg ii,be1- ihre ursprii,1lgliche Gest (~lt, i hr Leh?'en '!wd ihr Alte7'

( Leipzig, 1905 ), pp. 7-8, 12-15.

44 Annal8 iJOR1,Lk ( 1979 )

wrong to "apply Procrustean methods, and by excisions ... to force into a
unified mould the sayings of a writer who never dreamed of the necessity
or desirability of such unity. ,,13 The diversity of interpretations is not
attributable to careless or superficial study, but to the inevitable subjectivity
of argumentation \vhich feeds on the stuff of its own conclusion.

The two requirements for a fruitful explojtation of the Mahabharata's
wealth ·of in~ormation are a sound delineation of the component passages
which may be regarded as the units making up a given Mahabharata tract,
and a reasoned account of their association in the context where they are

found. In his treatment of dharmasastra materials, Alsdorf was greatly
assisted in· ITIounting his argument on these points by the availability of
serveral an.afogous, even cognate, works in the genre and of others in a

continu ing scholastic traditioll, which enabled him to draw telling inferences
establishing a chronology on the basis of comparative study. a Such facilities
are rarely afford~d to the Mahlibharata analyst.Is Consequently one is left
to fall back on the internal eVldence of the Mahlibharata tradition itself for
one's dedllction both of the segmentation of the text and of the interrelations
of th~ segments.

Appreciations of the construction of the extant Mahlibharata text have
ranged across a spectrum from the holistic to the atomistic.16 The foremost

13 F. Edgerbon, The Bhaga7Jad Gillt ( New York, 196·1 ), p. 108. Also R. C Zaehner
Tl&e Bhagavad-GU(i., with It commer&tary blJ,sed on the original S016rCeS (Oxford,
1969 I, pp. 1-2, 4-5. Garbe, Die BlwUltoadgit(6, pp. 8-11, argues to refube such,
views. P. Deusseo, Vier phl:Z0sophi.~che Te'xte de.~ MalH7,bh{j,I·,.~tarn ..•. ( Leipzig,
1906 ), pp. v-vi, adopts a po!Sitioo similar to Edgerbon's but sees the work not as a
synthesi<; bnt a8 an organic expression of a bl'ansitional philosophy.

14 Alsdorf," Veget:~ri!3mu8 und Rindervet'ehrung ". pp. 572-585, 59')-60:3.
15 Some ca.ses which spring to millll i1re Morton Smith's UHe of tht'ee Am ha stories in

the nlahabh~Lrata ( ,. The Story of Aruua ill the Mahabharaba ", Adywr Library

B1dletin, yo:' 19 ( J965), pp. ~'5-1;32 ), which was not pl'ofibabla; Hopkins' com
p~.rison of the Hamopa.khyaua and RamayaJ?a (The Great Epic oj India. Its
ChaN,cter (I,Hd 01'igin [ Calcutta, 1969; first publ. 1901 ], pp. 58-~4). which is not
bel~ful for detaits of textual reconstrucbion; the comparison of Mahabharata.
maleria.ls with puraJ?ic parallels ( for which see Holtzmann, Das lYlahc'tbharata und
seine 'l'heil e, Bk. IV, pp. 29-58 ), but as in the case of H. Liiders' comparison of
~~yas.plga sto~ies ( .. Die Sage VOIl ~syasniga ", Nach1'i(~hte1i der Ge8elZscl~ajt der

}V1:s se1w.:hajten Z1{, Gottingen, Jahrgang 1897, pp. 87-135 ) and my own of Dharma

vyadha stories in bile Manabharata and PadmapUral?a, the correspondences are
generally so ioexplicit aDd so partial as to he of little use.

16 The latter term is Sukthankar's characterization of the so-called 'c analytical "
theory. See his survey of treatment.s, On the .Mea1~ing oj the Jfahdbhd?'ata, pp.
1-3i; or G. J. Held, The .J.l1rthij,bharata: An Ethaologic:al Study (Amsterdam,
19:35 ), pp. J-27; or R. N. DLl.nciekar, "The Mahabharata, Ol'igin and. Growth ",
Unive1'sity 0/ Ceyl01. Review, vol. 12 ( 1954), pp. 68-75.

PROUD FOOT : lUbh. Episodes - History of Ideas 45

exponent of the syncretic or holistic view has been Joseph Dahlmann. In his
Genesis des Mahabharata, he accepts that the Mahabharata contains masses
of discrete materials, which, in some cases, had existed independently prior to
their incorporation in the Mahabharata, but argues that the process of
'compiling these diverse materials was undertaken at one time, on a single
plan which ratlects a coherent view on topics of dharmasastra.17 This
conception of the composition process allows Dahlmann to attribute what
others would see as symptoms of a process of accretion to the composite
nature of the Mahabharata corpus. 18 In opposition to this syncretic position,
the Occidental scholarly orthodoxy, led by Holtzmann,19 Hopkins,20 Winter·
nitz,21 and OIdenberg,22 has seen the Mahabharata as the product of a process
of revisions and accretions widely separated in time and attributable to several
or numerous bands. Two principal arguments are advanced in support of
this position: first, that the disorderliness and inherent improbability of parts
of the text and the incompatibility of values expressed in the text are such
t'hat it is more happily' attributed to several composers than to the incompe·
tence of one; secondly, that the internal evidence relating to content and style
points to times of composition so far separated that development of the text
over a long period of time seems to be suggested. It will be noticed that the
assertions of both camps are in fact alternative interpretations of the same
evidence. However, on specific points in which Mahabharata passages can
be dated on external evidence,23 and in the ] ight of the persuasive evidence

11 DHohlmann, Gene.si8 des l1IaMibhci,f'ata, pp. 119-130. Sukthankar, 01~ tlie .J.'I£ecmil'[J of
the J.l1aMibharata" pp. 28-31, and S. Levi "[ Compte renuu: ] The J.llalicibh[wflta fC)r
the first time crit.ically edited by Ybhnu S. Sukthankar ..... " .]o·zo"lial aiSiatique,
vol. 215 ( 1929 ), pp. :345-3l8, adopt qualified holi~tic portions les::! keenly argued
than Dah1mann's uncompromising stance.

18 For instance, he argues that the repetitions of gcWH6 material ~n widely separated
parts of the text are Dot evidence of interpolat:oo but only evidence that as the
rhapsodic framework which st.ructl1re~ the Epic dialogue progresse~ tho composer
has drawn materhl from t.he same formerly indepo:ldeut itil,(7,sa,~ to deal with
situations or questions which recur as the frame story t.rave~·ses similar ground.
Dahlmann, GenesiiS des MahiJ.blAl/,?·ata, pp. U3-1~6, 129-130.

19 Holtzmann, Das Mal,r7,bM;'1'ata ~wd sei71e Theile, Bk. I.
20 HopkiDs, Great Epic, ch. 5, 6.

21 M. WiDternitz, A. History of b~dian Jjiterat~&re, vol. I, pt. rr (2nd edn., Calcutta,
1963 ), pp. i73-2SS, and 330-·U7 passim.

22 Olden bel'g, Da8 J.1£ahablH'i,rata, pp. 2~57.

23 See, e. g. Ludwig's reply to DahlmallD's fil'st book in hi::; " Das Mahabharata als
EfJos nod als Rechtsbuch, ein Problem ausz Altindiens Oultur- und Litteratur.
geschichte von Joseph Dahlmann S. J. ", 8itzl~I~[J8be1";,cl~te der konigtichen bohmi.
:,;Gh6n . ({e.<cllschnjt der Wisse71scha/te>&, Ct'~S8f, /1't1' Phitosophie, Ge:,;chichte und
Pl&ilotoyie, 1896, V, pp. l-5. Dahlmann) unrepentant, roplie8 with polemic in
his Genesis des j;fal~db7~(jr'ata, p. 6.

Annais BORI, LX ( 19'19 )

provided by the compilation of the Poona Critical Edition24 which irrefutably
demonstrates that a great many accretions both extensive and minute have
been -added to branches of the l\iabiibhiirata tradition subsequent to the time
of the archetypal text, it is unreasonable not to accept that there has been
accretion anterior to the archetypal text. Against the ever-rolling stream of
the Critical Edition's publication, latter-day syncretists have been able only
to inveigh and inveigle witb obscurantist protests25 or chauvinist complaint. Z6

While it may be that as an account of the present form of the whole
Mahabharata corpus, Dablmann's syncretic approach must be discarded, that
jS riot to say that all contribution by Dahlmann to the debate on bow Maha::
bhiirata material is to be handled for the purpose of ideological analysis is
invalidated. It is a matter of disagreement among members of the atomist
party as to how frequently the Maba:bharata has been subjected to revision
and interpolation,27 and in their general surveys they have tended to postulate
the interpolation of whole episodes or clusters of episodes. Thus, when we
come to analyse a single episode, the atomistic theories offer no rule of thumb
disposing us to find either internal complexity or internal unity in any episode.
In principle, then, when dealing with an episode or didactic tract, it is
respectable to take up a position anywhere in the spectrum from Dahlmann's
synthetic holism to an enthusiastic attribution of every irregularity to the
effects of interpolation. Analysts tending to Dahlmann's position, who are
waryof too liberally positing interpolation, are obliged either to demand less
rigorous logic and consistency from their single composer28 or to expend

u, V. S. Sukthankar, S. K. Belvalkar, and P. L. Vaidya (eds.), The lJfalHJ.bhir.rata
j01' the j ir st time CritiGatly Edited (PoOlla, 1933-1972 ).

25 S. Levi," [ Compte reudu : j T/~e lI-fahii.bharata for the first time critically edited
by Vishou S. Sukthankar .. . ... ", Jo~tr7lal asiatiq ·l~e, VD!. 215 (1929), pp. 345-348,
and vol. ~~5 ( 1935 ) .. pp. 281-283. M. Biardeau, " Some More Considerations about
Textual Criticism ", PUr(61}a, vol. 10 ( 1968 ), pp. 115-123, tries to develop S. Levi's
objections to Western textual criticism. V M. Bedekat', " Principles of Maha.
uhiirata Textual Criticism: the need for a restatement " , Pw'ar:a, vo!. 11 ( 1969 ),
pp. 212··2:24, cogently defends 8ukthankar on most points.

26 Sukthankar, OB the J.l1eani1Jg of the jJ.lah("bha1·(~ta, pp. 29-31, 85-87, 124. The irony
of Sukthankar' s position and bis reliance on the Vulgate text is rightly noted by
his editor, p. ix. .

21 C. V. Vaidya, 'Phe lYlalu7,bharata : A Cl'it ·icism (Delhi, 966), pp. 2, 147, proposes
three stages corresponding with the three recitals mentioned in the Adiparvanj
Holtznlann, Das .l.lfahabhc61oata ~md seine Th eile, Bk. I, pp. 67-69, also proposes
three stages, but they are quite unorthodox:. Hopkins, Great Ep/,t;, pp. 397-398,
sees a multiplicity of accretions, but would r a nk them ill five main stages; ,,7inter.
mtz, Histo 'ry of India7A Lite1°ature, vol. I, pt. lI, pp. 409-410, assumes countless
interpolations without proposing identifiable stages of development affecting the
whole epic.

28 As e. g., Edgerton, Bhagavad Giti6, pp. 106, 108.

PROUD FOOT : Mbh. Epi80des - HistOTY of Ideas 47

considerable effort in trying to comprehend an underlying or subtly defined
consistency which is not evident prima facie.2 9 The more willing the analyst'
to invoke interpolation, the more stringent the demands he may make of each '
of his several postulated contributors and the more easily he is able to impose
his own conceptions of what conjunctions of ideas are appropriate and
what are not. 3:) The residual value of Dahlmann 's work is his warning against
the dangers of excessive indulgence in suppositions of multiple authorship.
He tellingly observes that while it is possible to track down apparent incon
sistencies in the Mahabharata, there is no theoretical barrier to continuing
the process ad infinitum, reducing such analysis to absurdity. Dahlmann
points out that such a method of analysis permits the critic to attribute every
contradiction apparent to him to the long cultural history of the Maha:bharata
tradition and the diverse influences which have affected it. By doing so, he
excuses himself from the task of giving a" scientific" explanation of the
contradictions or of considering them in relation to the whole.31 While the
last part of Dahlmann's objection must be rejected insofar as it is possible
to account for an interpolator's intention just as mush as to impiite- a
composer's, his general point that a discipline is removed from the analySis
by the possibility of invoking interpolation as a cleus ex machina32 is well
taken. Elsewhere, Dahlmann stresses the importance of sensitivity in relating
material to its context - to the speakers involved, to the precise aspect of the
topic being considered, to the angle from which a question is approacked.33

By undertaking such study in preference to crying" interpolation" at every
turn, the analyst may be led to a deeper understanding of the meaning of his
material. And yet, to make this ideal of restraint an absolute dogma, in the
manner of Dahlmann, is to indulge in mystification.

It will be seen that general considerations of analytical approach have
little of practical value to tell us about the makeup of any given episode._
They consist in SUbjective judgements of balance which offer no criterion
for determining the optimum stegmentation of a text. Thus, when Otto

29 As e. g., Deussen, Vie?' philosophische Texte, pp. v-vi, elaborated in his Die
1~achvedische Philosophie fie?" Inder .. (4th edn" Leipzig, 19:22 L pp. 15-18. Dahl
mann's jesuitical acuity has also excited comment: van Schl'oeder, Das Erhabene'i
Sang, p. vii.

so A se.t of consciously ideological prerequisites is, for example: spelt out in Khair,
Q~,est for the Original G~ta, pp. 115-1 :W, xv, aad passim.

SI Dahlmann, GeHesis des lY[ah.(7,bh{{,',.(~ta, p. 6

32 Hopldns, G,·eat Epic, pp. 369-:370, unashamedly espouses this antinomian attitude
with respect to the' pseudo-epic '.Also Oldellberg, Das l1itthabh(katlt, pp. 76-78;
Winternitz, History of buiian Lite1'atlwe, vo!. I; pt, Il, p. 386,

33 Dahlmann, Ge1iesis des A/(titabhu1'ata, p. 130.

48 Annc~l8 BORI, L./.Y ( 1979 )

dissects the BhagavadgIta into an original stock and eight independent
tracts,34 there is no reason to suppose that he is wrong. But it is essentially
a matter of taste whether we prefer his segmentation to Garbe's twofold
stratification,:<s or Khair's threefold 0ne.36 And Edgerton, who had no
hesitation in excising many contaminations from his edition of the Sabha
parvan,37 nor in acknowledging that the BhagavadgWi itself is probably an
interpolation, and that "such interpolations are numerous in the Maha
bharata; so numerous that we may fairly regard them as a regular habit ",38

is nevertheless still prepared to assert that the Bhagavadgita should be seen
as a unity which de1iberately proposes a1ternative and logically incompatible
ways of salvation. Thus the very diversity and seeming in compatibilities
which inspired others to dissect and stratify the text provide Edgerton with
the key to comprehending the meaning of this "frankly mystical and
ewotional " composition.39

To put analysis on a less subjective footing, it is highly desirable that
t~esegmentation and stratigraphy of a passage should be deduced as far as
possible on grounds other than those relating to the imputed intentions of
the one or several composers - that is, it should not be based primarily on
inferences concerning the intended significance of the passage or parts of the
passage. Attempts have been made to meet this desideratum both by
bringing to bear the evidence of cognate material in sources independent of
the Mahabharata or appearing el:.ewhere in the Nlahabl]arata, and by using
internal evidence of a formal kind, examining the text for flaws of construc
tion, syntactic non sequiturs, and contrasts of style. The classic study combin
ing external comparative evidence with the internal evidence of construction
is Lliders' andysis of the ~~yasp:iga episode.40 Studies relying more heavily
on stylistic analysis and based upon Hopkins' study of epic versification,

u R. Otto, Die Urgest(llt der B!~agavad-Gita l Ti.i.bingen, 1934) and Die Lehr·Trak·
tate dtlr Bhagavad-Gitc(, ( Ti.i.bingen, 1935 )

ss Garbe, Bhagavadg'it((" pp. 6-18,58, etc.

36 Khair, Q1,est for the O?'igi?w1. Giti6, pp. 37-46, 121-153.

3T Note especially Edgerton, 8abha.p(f,?·1)an ( Poona, 1944 ), pp. xxxiv-xxxv. Edgerton's
stance is more ruthless than Sukthankar's.

38 Edgerton, Bhagavad Gita, p. 105, n. 1.

39 Edgerton, Bhagavad GitC6, p. 193.

40 "Die Sage van ~~yasniga." Nftchr£chten der Ge.seU-sclwjt de?' Wissenschaften Zt6

GOttinUe.·I1" Jabrgnng 1897, pp. 90-103. \y. D. 0' Flahel'ty, Ajcetici~m a7~d E7'oti
ci.9m i?~ the NIyth()lo~l?J of Si/m ( LondoD. 1973 ), diE'cU8SeS the Jf.~y3sp1ga story from
a totally di tfeeent poiut of view, synthesizing all reflexes of th9 tIde indiscriminately
and applying extrinsic categories in order ~o elicit the supposed essentia.l meaning
~ not form) of the story. .

PROUDFOOT : Mbh. El)isodes - History of Ideas 49

ha ve been applied to particular episodes by Morton Smith41 and on a
broader canvas by Mary Carroll Smith.42 Let us consider what we have
to learn from such studies.

Lii.ders' treatment of the ~~yasrnga episode:

Lliders' study of the R~yasplga episode in the TlrthayiHdi of the
Arat;lyakaparvan43 is of interest both because it provides a paradigm for criti
cal studies of Mahabharata episodes and also because it indirectly illustrates
the immense contribution the Poona Critical Edition has made to questions
of text history.

Lliders does not set down a manifesto of analytical principles, but a
consistent procedure of argumentation is deducible from his parallel treat
ments of two aspects of the story. In each case the foundation of Lliders '
argument is that there are illogicalities in the progression of the narrative
which are best explained as the products of a reworking of an older
story.44 He demonstrates this by showing that the excision of certain
verses and" s1ight changes" to others will greatly improve the cogency of
the narrative. 45 Having in this way identified and confirmed certain non
original materials, Lliders imputes from them the intentions of the reviser
namely, the advancement of brahmanic prestige and the preservation of the
princes' virginity. With those imputed intentions in mind, Lliders surveys
the text, identifying passages which contribute to realizing these aims, and
if they can be excised without harm to the remainder of the material,
proposes that they too be regarded as accretions, or if it is not possible to
excise them painlessly, proposes that they be regarded as revisions of earlier
material. 46

By following this line of argument, Lliders moves from formal or
logical grounds upon which key revisions can be deduced to imputing the
reviser's intention, and only then argues from the imputed intention or
ideological interest of the reviser in order to detect further accreted material.
This procedure is impeccable: neither the fact of accretion nor the intention

41 R. Morton Smith, " Story of Amba "; .. The Story of Nala in the l\lahabharata".
Jo~'r1,al of the Oriental Institu.te, Baroda, vol. 9 ( 1960), pp. 357-386; " The
Story of Sakuntala in the Mahabharata ", Jou.rn(l·l of the Bihar Research Society,
vol. 46 ( 1960 ), pp. 163-176.

"2 M. C. Smith, The Core of bidia's Great Epic ( unpublished doctora.l dissertation,
Harvard, 1972 ).

4.3 Mbh. iii. 110-113.
U Liiders," ~syas~llga ", pp. 90,93; also Pp. 104-106 on the Ramayal?-a version.
45 Liiders," ~~yasniga ", pp. 90-93, proposing tbat the text has been .. leicht

verandert " ( p. 91 ). .
'6 Liiders," ~sya.splga ", pp. 93, 102-103.

7 [Annals, BO!lI]

50 Annc£ls BURl, LX ( 1979 )

of the accretor are assumed a priori. The subsequent reversal of the direction
of the- reasoning - using deduction of intention to infer accretion - is a
valid extension of the analysis, for it is improbable that every piece of
accreted material should happen to be detectable on formal or structural
grounds. Consequently, without this further step, the analysis would most
probably remain incomplete. However - and this Liiders does not acknow
ledge - accretions delineated on the criterion of content are established with
less certainty than those complementarily attested on formal grounds. This
qualification applies especially to instances where the revision of pre-existent
material is proposed, since in these cases the analyst's inference of revision
and the deduction by which it is derived have to defend themselves before
the highest court of appeal- the overt testimony of the extant textY

Having deduced and inferred a delineation of original and revised
materials, Liiders argues cogently that the revision of the story was sub
sequent to its incorporation in the Mahabharata corpus.48 And' finally he
turns outside the Mahabharata version of the story in order to draw
inferences concerning the relative antiquity of the accretion-cum-revision he
had proposed. He does this by focussing attention on two short passages
which have parallels in the Padmapurat;la version of the R~yasplga story suffi
ciently close to suggest genetic relationship.49 By arguing that these passages
have features which suggest lack of originality in the Mahabharata text while
they are both at home in the Padmapurat;la contexts, Lliders reasonably
contends that the passages are accretions in the Mahabharata corpus intro
duced by a transmitter who was acquainted with the Padmapurat;la account
of the story. From the relationship of the passages to the Padmapurat;la
varsion Lliders concludes that the general revision of the Mahabharata story
must have post-dated the composition of the Padmapurat;la story.

As Lliders was working from the single testimony of the Vulgate text
he did not have access to the readings of other branches of the Mahubharata
tradition. It is interesting, therefore, to note that LLiders' analysis is at
once magnificently confirmed and utterly destroyed by the new light cast on the
text by the Critical Edition of the Mahabharata. The Critical Edition reveals
that the two passages Liiders had singled out as almost verbatim quotations
from the Padmapurat:ta are in fact contaminations which appear in only

'7 Thus in considering Ltiders' emendation sdnta/ve8g{1, it is necessary to balance the
requirement of multiple alteration against the strength of the inference based on
the mention of santa in the introductory q uestioll ( " ~~yaspiga ". p. 93 ).

48 Liiders," ~syas~'nga ", pp.92, 93.
49 Mbh. (VuIg. ) iii. 110. 37ab = ( C. E. ) iii. 110. 543*;

M.bh. ( Vnlg. ) Hi. Ill. H = ( C. E. ) iii. Ill. 548*; at Liider9, " ?~yaspiga ", p. 99

PROUDFOOT: 1I1bh. Episodes -l1isto'l"Y of tdeCfJ8 51

about half the collated manuscripts. 50 In this respect Ltiders" judicious eye
was able to achieve through higher criticism of the Vulgate text what the
compilation of a critical edition . would powerful1y confirm. But at the same
time the Critical Edition shows that these passages are contaminations while
the material comprising the other parts of Liiders' hypothesized general
revision were already present in the archetypal text. Thus the testimony of
the Critical Edition refutes Liiders' contention that there was a single general
revision of the Mahabharata material inspired by the Padmapura.Q.a version. 51

With hindsight we can recognize that Liiders' self-criticism on this point was
deficient. Although the two passages of close verbal correspondence esta
bli~hed that a reviser of the Mahabharata version knew the Padmapura.Q.a
text, Liiders failed to demonstrate any relationship between these passages
and the other materials he hypothesized as accreted. They share no common
theme; nor was it explained why the verbal correspondence should be manifest
on.Iy in these incidental passages and not in those parts of the accretion more
expressive of the reviser's intentions.52 Apparently Liiders found the hypo
thesis of a single reworking attractive for its heuristic simplicity.53 Never
theless, the lesson of the Critical Edition is that sheer methodological
elegance was not realistic in this case. Furthermore, once the Critical Edition
has separated in time the passages which establish unequivocally a debt to the
Padmapuru.Q.a from L iiders' . other hypothesized revisions there is no longer
any reason to attribute the reworking which Liiders deduced on internal
evidence to the hand of a single reviser. Since its component elements have
no obvious connexion, it is not even heuristically advantageous to do so.
The power of the analytical tool with which the Critical Edition has provided
us may thus be gauged from the fact that in place of Liiders' twofold strati-

50 Mbh. iiI. no. 543* i 14 MSS, plus 2 MSS marg. sec. manu out of 28 collated MSS;
Mbh iii. 110. 548*; in the same N MSS a9 the fOl'egoing, but in no S MS.

51 Ltiders.'" ~~yaspiga ", p. 102. Of course, while, Liiders' reasoning is shown thus
to be ill-founded, that is not proof that there was not a PadmapuraJ?a-inapired
revision, but without the benefit of almost verbatim textual para.llels this is
probably unprovable.

62 Indeed on the contrary, Ltiders, "~~yas~liga ", p. 102, points out the reviser's
freedom in developing his own elaborations. Nor does Ltiders reflect sufficiently
on the implications of bis observation of verbal correspondences between the
Pa.dmapura.J?a text bond parts of the Mahabharata text which, in his reconstruction,
Qelong on the older level ( p. 103 ).

63 This may be inferred from LUders' admirably discriminating qualification of the
Padmapura.r:a connexion: while he calls the relationship of the paired passages
in the Mahabharata and Padmapura.r:a texts ., undeniable" (unabweichIich,
., ~~yaspiga ", p. 100), he says only that" we might. also accept" (di.irfen wir
aber such annehmen, ,. ~~yaspiga ", p. 102) that the major revision was inspired
by the PadmapuraJ?a version.

52 Annals iJoili, LX ( 1979 )

,fication of original and revised materials, on the basis of the evidence he
himself adduces, we are now obliged to think in terms of accretion on four
levels between the original incorporation of the story and the Vulgate text

, (viz. incorporation of original material; the two revisions thematically distin·
guished by Lliders; the contaminations ).54 Thus the Critical Edition teaches
us directly and by example that the history of the Mah8:bh8:rata has
probably been more complex than there were hitherto grounds to suppose.

For analysis of other episodes in the Mah8:bh8:rata, Lliders' treatment
of the ~§yasfliga episode stands as both a model and a caution. Lliders'

. analysis is exemplary in its method of argumentation, moving to ideological
inference only from formal criteria. It is also exemplary in distinguishing
absolutely between the question of the relative antiquity of elements making
up a story judged against an inferred prototype and the question of the
relative antiquity of the incorporation of materials into the Mah8:bh8:rata

. corpus. (This is the fundamental issue upon which Dahlmann and the
- atomistic school part company). On the other hand, Lliders' treatment
of the episode has a cautionary sequel which points up the dangers inherent
in a too-enthusiastic embracing of presuppositions inspired purely by metho
dological concerns.

It should also be observed that the :t:t~yasnlga episode is narrative in
presentation rather than didactic. Because of this, Ltiders' task in building
arguments on inconsequentiaHties in plot development which are devoid of
direct ideological significance will hnve been easier than the task of the
analyst of a tract in which a large part of the material has the form of a
statically conducted colloquy and in which accretions or revisions may be
expected to deal purely and directly with ideological interests. To cope with
such didactic material, perhaps Otto's analysis of the Bhagavadglta provides
a more relevant exemplar. In his deduction of an old continuum now
fragmented through interpolation, Otto offers useful insights into how Lliders'
use of evidence from a prefatory question can be developed to include details
of the setting of the dialogue and the concluding statement as well. 55 The
inferences derived from these elements of structural signficance can then take
the place of plot-derived inferences in analysis of a narrative episode.

Statistical analyses of style :

Metrical and stylistic criteria did not figure largely in Liiders' analysis.
Yet because metrical patterns and other symptoms of style are objectively

64 In fact, since there are other contaminations in doscent lines collateral: to that of
the Vulgate text, this understato!'! the complexity of the hi!'!tory of the tradition.

66 Otto, Urgestalt der Bhagavad-Gitd, pp. 7-14. 'l'he overall validity of Otto'!'! acaly.
~is is not a.t issue here.

PROtJDFOOT : },Jbh. Episodes - Iiistm'y of Ideas

quantifiable there should be a great deal to gain from developing the use of
such criteria as a means of minimizing the otherwise considerable reliance on
the analyst's discretion. Moreover, with the aid of the modern digital com
puter both the burdensome tasks of making the quantifications themselves and
of eliciting their significant patterns are very much lightened. Since criteria

' of style will apply regardless of whether an episode is narrative or didactic in
content, it may indeed prove particularly worthwhile for our purposes to
consider how stylistic analysis might be validly conducted and whether its
application to the analysis of Mah8:bharata episodes wm produce useful
results.

An extended attempt to apply stylistic criteria to the analysis of Maha
bharata episodes has been made by Morton Smith. 56 His aim is to use sta
tistics of style as an ancillary aid to literary criticism, asserting that the key
decisions in dismembering a passage must continue to be made on " literary"
(sc. higher criticism) grounds. 57 While it is not necessary to linger over
Morton Smith's cavalier dogmatism on certain principles of higher criticism,
we may notice that Morton Smith fails to treat his quantifications of style in
a statistically valid manner. In the first place, he does not make allowance
for the fundamental statistical reality that it is highly improbable that two

. samples taken from the same corpus of material shouJd match each other
exactly in any number of given variables. The statistician's task is, therefore,
not to demonstrate that there are differences between two samples, but to
determine whether or not the degree of difference is so great that it is
significant. Only if there is a significant difference ( at a prescribed level of
certainty) has one the right to conclude that the samples examined are not
likely to have been drawn from the same corpus. Secondly, Morton Smith
does not allow for the fact that in order to calculate the degrees of significance
of difference, it is necessary to have a statistically viable quantity of material. 58

Consequently his use of stylistic indicators reduces the subjectivity of his
analysis not one whit. A statistical determination of stylistic differences has
remained just as elusive for Morton Smith as it would have been for a self
confessedly subjective literary critic. While this result is undoubtedly attri
butable in part to Morton Smith's unrigorous use of quantified stylistic data,
it may also be the case that the materia] involved is simply not amenable to

56 Morton Smith, 'c Story of Am ba. ", " Story of Nala ", " Story of Sakuotala ".
57 Morton Smith, " Story of Nab", p. 360.
58 H. Jacobi, The Ramaya1}a ( tr. S. N. Ghosal, Baroda, 1960; first pub!. 1893), p. 24,

notes this limitation OD the usefulness of the technique. Word frequency counts
in a corpus as Jarge as the entire Sa.bbaparvan may be valid ( B. A. A. J. va.n Nooten,
j[ah(7,bh,i,rata 7'ext Analysi8 with the Aid of thp, Digitc'('l Computer ( Unpubli
shed doctora.l disserta.tion, Univ. of Ca.lifornia, 1963).

54 Annals BOR!, LX ( 1979 )

a properly statistical analysis of style. The extent to which the latter possi
bility may be the case can best be gauged througb considering the demands
of a disciplined statistical analysis. For this purpose, the example of Traut
mann's study of Kautilya's Arthasastra59 provides instructive insights.

Trautmann's interesting study of the Arthasastra authorship problem
draws upon analytical techniques developed for deciding questions of dispu
ted authorship in western classical and modern writings.60 Trautmann's task
is to apply the fundamental principles of these statistical analyses to the
particula~ circumstances of the Arthasastra in order to determine' whether
there had been multiple authorship of the extant text, and - if it should
emerge that there had been - to identify the contributions made by each
contributing author.

From Trautmann's treatment it is clear that a reliable and objectively
interpretable quantification of style will be produced only by an analysis
which is built around certain jndispensable requirements. First, since the
analysis is based upon the statistically described frequencies of elements of
style, it is absolutely necessary to have samples sufficiently large to produce
discriminating results. 61 The more freq uent the occurrence of the element of
style, the less bulky the sample of the text will have to be; the converse
applies for more thinly distributed elements. F or a range of discriminators
not different in kind from most of these proposed by Morton Smith,62 Traut
mann considers a sample of 2,000 words in length the minimum sample upon
which reliable results can be generated. 63 For rarer markers of style, such
as the less common particles or combinations of particles,64 or lexical usages,
correspondingly larger sampJes would be necessary. Secondly, the statistics
derived from these samples must be sUbjected to mathematically respectable

59 T. R. Trautmann, Ka~t,tilya and the A rtha,gr&stra, A Statistiaal Investigation of

the A Hthor13hip and El)ol~btio'/l of tl,e TeJ:t ( Leiden, 1971 ).

60 Trautmann, Kau.tity (md the Arthasdstra, pp. 78-81. He appears to have followed
A. Q. Morton, ., The Authorship of Greek Prose ", Jou.rnaZ of the Royal Statis
tical Soaiety, Series A, vol. 129 ( 1965 ), pp. 16P-233, both in some details and in
the strategy of approach.

61 Trautmann, Kau.tilya and the Arthasdstra, pp. 81, 85, 115.

62 Trautmann, Kau,tilya and the Arthasdst1'a, employs particle frequency and
frequency distribution (pp. 82-88) and compound length distribution (pp.
130-131 ) as his principal criteria.

68 Trautmann, Kantitya and the Arthas(('stra, p. 82 ; equivalent to 300 sentences of
prose; Pl'. 97-98·: or 300 Slokas.

6i B. A. A. ,1. van Nooten, "Redundancy in Mahabharata Verse Composition ",
Journat of the A merica1i SO'Jiety, vo!. 89 ( 1969 ), pp. 50-58.

PROUDFOOT: 1JJbh. Ep'isocles - Histo'l'y of Ideas 55

tests of significance : 6~ only if the difference between the statistical descrip
tion of two samples of material is calculated to be of such a degree that there
is only a small chance that it would arise in random sampling from the same
corpus of material can it be presumed that the \-vork of different authors is
involved. Thirdly, the stylistic criteria which are subjected to statistical ana
lysis must be effective discriminators of authorship.56 (Although even with
effective discriminators it remains true that while the comparison of sets of
statistics indicates the probability of different authorship if there are signi
ficant differences in the stylistic data, the lack of significant difference cannot
conversely lead to a presumption of common authorship.67 )

It is perhaps the requirement of a statistically viable sample which
represents the most serious obstacle to the application of a statistical analy
sis of style to the Mahabharata. The evidence of the Critical Edition with
respect to contaminations (the euphemistically termed "star passages")
and the implications of the higher criticism conducted by Liiders and others
suggest that the contributions of various hands to the extant Mahabharata
text have often been so short that no statistically valid conclusions could be
derived from them. 68 In every circumstance where interpolations of less
than three hundred stanzas are either posited or suspected, the technique of
statistical analysis is utterly debilitated.

Beside this practical limitation on Mahabharata studies, we must also
take account of the theoretical problem that in order to produce valid results
it is necessary to work from quantifications of criteria which are effective
discriminators of style. The determination of which criteria are effective
discriminators presents no difficulty when the statistical analysis is intended
to deal with a passage of disputed or unknown authorship, seeking to attri
bute it or refute its attribution to a given author of whom there are other
writings of undisputed authorship available for comparative analysis. In
such a case it is possible, by submitting to comparative analysis samples from
his writings together with the writings of others which are ostensibly similar,

65 Trautmann uses the X 2 text a.nd-for sentence length distribution- tbe F test of
variance ratio: Kautilyn and the Arthas(/'stra, pp. 85-86, p. 124.

66 'frautmann, Kautilya, and the ArthaSdstrl.t, p. 83.
67 Ibid.; cf. Morton Smith, ,. Story of Sakuntala," p. 175, directly contradicting this

position.
68 The whole story of ~~yaS.piga falls well below Trautmano's statistical tbreshold,

as does the story of Tuladhiira sborn of its contaminations but including
its ancillary chapters. All the interpola.tions identified by Garbe in his Bhctgavad.
gitd even if attrihuted to a single author, also fall below the threshold; likewise
each of the revisionsbypothesized by Khair, (J~&est f01' the O'riginal GU(/' and ~
f01'tio1'i the same applies to Ot,to's [Trgestalt der Bhagc:,vnd!Jitci..

56 Annal8 BORI, LX· ( 1979 )

to extract constant and contrastive elements of the known author's style
which will therefore be capable of acting as significant discriminators of his
style when the passage at issue is tested. In the case of the Arthasastra, no
other works attributable to " Kautilya " or any of the hands which may have
been involved in the compilation are available for collateral testing. To
circumvent this difficulty, Trautmann hit upon the tactic of making compara·
tive analyses of other quite unrelated and dissimilar works of known author
ship in ·order to deduce a generalized statement about criteria likely to be
effective discriminators universal to the Sanskrit language. 69 At best this
compromise with necessity must reduce the discriminating power of the cho
sen criteria by limiting the range of indicators which can be regarded as
generally safe; 70 at worst, we can never be sure that the generally discri
minating criteria will be reliable indicators for a particular author. In order
to minimize the danger of using sporadically unreliable indicators, Traut·
mann emphasizes the heJpfulness of " utterly mundane" elements of styleT1

which are unlikely to be affected by an author's conscious striving for effect.
However, even if a pattern of usage is uDconscious, this does not mean that
it is impervious to being affected by the content or conscious (rhetorical)
style of a passage.72

Stylistic analysis of the Mahabharata, tOOt has to be undertaken with
out the availability of control writings which can be attributed to known
hands. Consequently the power of such analysis must be reduced, just as it
was with the Arthasastra. At the samc time it is probably true that Traut
mann's ingenuity has provided a workable substitute procedure by propo
sing general discriminators. Indeed, analysis of Mahabharata material should
be benefited somewhat by the appJicabiJity of additional criteria relating to
metrical elements Qf style.73

A further dimension is lent to the theoretical problems of statistical

69 Trautmano, /{autilya and the A1·thasd.~t1·a, pp. 91-114, 123-130.
70 Cf. Trautmann, Ka11.tity(J, and the A ,·thaS{bstra, p. 92, on the possiblity of assigning

weights to the relative discriminating power of certain words.
71 Trautmann, Kau .titya and the Artha{:(!,stra, PP 79-81. Examples are common parti.

cles ( atlll1', api, eva ) and metrical forms (pathya I vip1,Za ratio, types of vipulci.

etc. )
72 In fact TrautmanD incidentally notes one case where such an effect is suggested:

Kau.tilya and the ArthaStt8t1·a, p. 116: on the heavy use of vd in Book 7.
T3 Tho statistics of p,J,thya/vipula sloka scansions in proportion to one another,

pioneered by Hopkins, G,·eal Epic, pp. 219-252, and employed by Morton Smith,

are most promising. See also Trautmann, K a~& .tilya and the A rthas((,stra, pp.
lW~-ll~. The spol·udic distribution and small proportion of tri$ ~ubh ~tanzas are
limitations on their general statistical usefulness, although special studies may be
tailored around their pattE)t"ns of occurrence, e. g . Mary Carrol Smi th, Core of the
Great Epir.. . .

PROUDFOOT : Mbh. Epi80des - History of Icleas 57

analysis by the fact that in Arthasastra and Ma ha:bharata studies we are
investigating not unitary works of either known or disputed authorship but
composite works whose authors are not only unknown from other writingsi
but whose contributions to the composite works ar~ not necessarily defined
with accuracy or certainty.74 How, then, is the analyst to proceed with the
identification of samples of meterial which can confidentJy be attributed to a
single author? Failure to eliminate interpolations will vitiate the analysis
by diluting or skewing the statistics. If the delineation of component
segments of the composite work is done on non-statistical grounds, then the
statistical analysis is only as vaild as the assumptions of authorship upon
which it is ba sed: it does not offer any confirmation or refutation of the
hypothesized segmentation; it only offers results which are based on that
segmentation.75

Nor is it feasible to generate the segmentation of a passage through
any statistical analysis of style. It may seem, prima jacie, possible to test
exhaustively all possible segmentation patterns on the assumption that the
segmentation which gives either the largest number of significant differences
or a significant difference at the highest degree of certainty is most likely to
delineate the contributions of accretors. Given an indeterminate but arbi
trarily limited number of authors76 making contributions of indeterminate
size and indeterminate and not necessarily continuous placement, and given a
certain number of stylistic discriminators, the number of hypothetically
possible segmentations and of the calculations for testing them would be
extremely high, although doubtless not beyond the capacity of a digital
computer to handle. The infeasibility of the proposal arises rather from'
several theoretical obstacles: first, that even when a large bulk of material is
being subjected to statistical segmentation, and when the number of contri
buting authors is arbitrarily limited, a large proportion of hypothetical
combinations would be statistically vitiated by containing one or more
segments of a sample size too smal1 to allow calculation of significance of
differences; 77 secondly, that there are no realistic criteria for preferring

a Cf. Morton Smith, ,. Story of Nala ", p. 366, on adhyaya divisions. Trautmann,
KaHtilya and the Arthasastra, pp. 70-76, unconvincingly supposes that each book
of the Arthasastra ( excluding the verse colophons associated with chapter divi
sions ) is the composition of a. single author.

15 This is a coronary of the point made earlier that lack of significant difference
between samples is not positive evidence of common authorship.

16 Without this limitation, the analysis would tend to resolve itself into the most
diverse result, viz. a. number of segments equal to the number of basic units of
analysis.

11 In practice of course the observation of page 53f. above applies, and it is likely
that not only some samples but even the whole corpus will be diaqua1ifi~d.

8 ~ 4nnals, B.O.R.1. ]

58 Annals BORI, LX ( 1979 )

several significant differences at a certain degree of certainty to a single
significant difference at a higher degree of certainty; and, th1rdly, underly
ing the second objection, that it is improper to turn the analytical procedure
on its head, to use statements concerning the statistical probability that a
relationship of a certain kind exists between given knowns to posit a single
most probable relationship between unknowns.

In sum, it seems that statistical studies of style will not make any
contribution to analysis of the Mahabharata text beyond corroborating ( but
not establishing or refuting) segmentations which happen to comprise
components large enough to provide a statistical base. In the fundamental
problem of deriving the segmentation, we have no alternative but to try to
push further along the jungle path which Lliders began to clear.

Proposing a workable methodology:

The desideratum for an analysis of the authorship of a Mahabharata
passage is that, given the material extant, it should produce the conclusion
which most nearly corresponds with the historical reality of the composition
and transmission of the text. We have no means of knowing the historical
reality except through analysis of the text. Because the results cannot be
corroborated or refuted from any independent source, their only recom
mendation can be t.hat the process of analysis which produced them was
subject to internal corroborations and exposed to potential refutations at
every turn of its development. While this in itself is no guarantee that the
results will have any verisimilitude, at least three is no procedure which can
produce more authoritative results.

Although at first sight the approach may seem somewhat Luddite, the
most reliable and productive principle of analysis is simply to let the text
speak for itse1f as far as possible. Imputed relationships of the material
under consideration with other presumed like or cognate passages in related
or independent traditions may have suggestive or corroborative value, but
in the last ana1ysis, the precise nature of their relationship with the text at
issue, and therefore their significance for unravelling it, can only be deter
mined in terms of that text itself. Even Liiders, whose overall approach
was comparative, declined to use comparative materia1 for more than corro
boration of accretions he had deduced from his study of the R~yasplga
episode itself. Furthermore, by focussing his analysis in the first piace solely
on the materials of the passage for analysis, the analyst imposes upon him
self the healthy discipline of giving the text - read in its plain sense and
construed in the context it provides itself - the presumptive power of ipte.l'
pretation.

PROUDFOOT: Jlbh. Episodes - Histo'ry of Ideas 59

With all the good will and sensitivity in the world, however, the analyst
will stumble over passages which, read plainly, do not make good sense or
do not make sense at all. Since it is the fundamental assumption of rational
analysis that an author does not write nonsense, it is in situations where the
extant text appears to lack straightforward sense that interpolation, textual
derangement, or omission should be hypothesized. In some cases the
incoherence or self-contradictions of the text will be beyond doubt; in others,
however, the analyst will be called upon to exercise discretion in deciding
the question of degree which separate~ permissible latitude from impermissible
laxity. It is both inappropriate and unwise to place demands of absolute
consistency and flawless expression on an author :78 in the first place, it is
unreasonable to expect superhuman perfection from a human composer,
especially one who is often not composing ex nihilo or in vacuo, but adapting
his memory's half-formed metric phrases or rhetorical sequences with an eye
to the context for which his composition is intended; and in the second
place, in demanding more than a reasonable freedom from inconsequentia..;
lities there is a danger that the analyst may prescribe as stringent require
ments his own predispositions.79 It is reasonable to expect of a composer
only competent coherence, not more.

The fact that judgement of degrees of deiirament may be discretionary
will generaUy not weaken the analysis, however, for it is merely the basis for
hypothesizfng interpolation. Confirmation of the hypothesis depends on the
application of a test: simply, whether or not the text is improved formally
and structurally with the excision of the hypothesized interpolation.80 If
the excision leaves a hiatus or makes the text less consequent, then there is
a presumption against the proposed interpolation. The practical application
of this test may involve a balancing of the infelicities created by excising the
material against those perpetuated by leaving it in place. But the necessity
for such a decision is ultimately inescapable; it lies at the heart . of the
analytical method, for the ultimate justification of t.he analysis is that by
segmenting a passage into discrete components attributable to various hands
the good sanse of the sum of the parts may be made greater than the sense
of the whole.

18 Cf. A. Esteller's statement of Ltiders' "rationality principle" ( c, The Maha.
bharata Text Criticism (Apropos of a recent publica.tion) ", Jo~&rnal of the
Bombay Bra1lch, Royal .Asiatic Society, n. s., val. 27 (1951), p. 248). Luders
would not, I think, concur with Esteller's outrageous damning of the licence,
gullibility, nonsensicality and devilry with which the tribe of scribe-transmitters
has degraded an original authentic and faultless text.

19 Morton Smith is, I fear, guilty of many offences of this nature.
80 Such structural and formal ( syntactical) tests of continuity are to be distingui

shed absolutely from subjective assertions like that of Garbe, Die Bhagavad
Gitd, p. 16.

60 Annals BORI, LX ( 1979 )

The validity of this test for hiatus hinges upon an assumption that, in
the absence of indications to the contrary, everything which was ever present
in the tradition is now present, i.e. that nothing has been lost or revised. A
practical corollary of this assumption is that textual asperities are always to
be attributed to the disruption attendant upon incorporation of an inter
polation rather than to omission. Whether or not this assumption
accurately reflects the reality of a stable text tradition is immaterial; it is a
methodological imperative. Since it is possible to support or refute an
argument only on the basis of extan t evidence, to change or revise the extant
matetiai without positive textual support is tantamount to tampering with
the evidence. An interpreter's guess about omisson or revision remains
impermissible because there is no way in which it can be shown to be
incorrect, and hence no way to comfirm it logically. Moreover, a too-ready
resort to emendation by the anaiyst may palliate vexations which might better
be diagnosed as symptoms of interpolation.81

Because we have only the extant material available to us, we cannot
directly gauge how likely it is that our analysis will be vitiated by its ignorance
of alterations made to the older parts of a text in the course of accommo
dating new material. 'Vith the evidence now provided by the Critical Edition
collation, however, we are able to judge the frequency of such alterations in
the tradition since the time of the archetypal text. While evidence arising
under later conditions cannGt be applied unthinkingly to the development
of the tradition prior to the archetypal text, it is nevertheless the best
evidence we have. Thus Edgerton is relevant when he observes that so far
as the Sabhaparvan text is concerned,

probably not one of the some fifty MSS I have studied for Book
2, nor any of the genealogical ancestors, ever deliberately or

intentionlly omitted a single line of the text; ... and it appears
that no scribe, no redactor, ever knowingly sacrificed a single
line which he found in his original. Not even if he found
something which seemed to him incomprehensible, inconsistent
with the context, irreligious or immoral. 82

81 An extreme case of such a practice is Deussen's emendation of ahil!t ,~(7, to anahi1!UHj
in Mbb. xii. 256, 6a ( Vier phito8ophische Text e, p. 434, AS 265. 6).

82 Edgerton, Sabh(j,parvan, •• Introduction ", p. xxxiv (Edgerton's emphasis). Note
especially Sukthankar, Adipa,'vcw (Poona, 1933), " Prolegomena", pp. lii-liii;
also his "Epic Studies, lIT. Dr. Ruben on the Critical Edition of the Maha
bharata ", A 'M~ats of the Bha1Jdarkar 01-iental Research In stitute, vol. 11 (] 930 ),
pp. 272-275, concurs. Note, however, a.n instance in which Be!n\lkar thinks mate
rial has been deliberately omitted from S'l alune (8(mti,pan'rJ,1i [ P oooa, 1966],
" Introduction ", pp. xxiii); the case may, however, be one of incomplete distri
bution of a contamintion.

PROUDFOOT : }lbh. Episodes - jj i8tory of t dea8 61

. There are, of course, many instances of accidental loss, as for instance through
' haplology, but because such omissions are random and because there is also

evidence of a compensating factor in restitution by contamination from
collateral versions, they are probably not a serious threat to the analysis.
With revisions, the situation is somewhat different. The collation of the
Critical Edition does, indeed, provide evidence of revisions where the context
of the material has been so changed by interpolation that it has come to be
felt necessary to harmonize the sense of the older material with the new.83

From the theoretical point of view the implications of this are unfortunate,
for however probable a revision may seem, invocation of textual alteration
without textual support must remain impermissible;8~ and even in cases where
there is indirect textual support for an emendation, argumentation which
does not involve revision should generally be preferred to the alternative.

Elegance is added to the analysis by taking consideration of the
hypothesized interpolation one step further and attempting to give a credible
account of the motivation for its composition. This involves determining
the point or aspect of the older text which inspired the interpolator to
compose or insert his contribution, and accounting for the placement of the
interpolation in relation to the postulated point of attraction. Being argued
ex hypothesi the treatment has no predicative value. The virtue of the
exercise is that it carries the spirit of the analysis across into the realm of
interpolation. The discipline of the principle that the text is to be understood
read in its plain sense and construed in the context it provides itself is not
dissipated by the necessary redefinition of context; even when interpolation
is proposed, the context remains partly that supplied by the prior text.
Dealing with the products of two minds, the analyst has more flexibility in
accounting for inconsistencies of outlook. or infelicities of plot develoment,
but he is never released from the obligation of justifying his inferences
on th~ basis of the interpolator's composition and the prior text as it may
have appeared to him. While it is credible that an interpolator's compre
hension of the totality of the prior text may have been deficient or that he
may have overlooked subtleties implicit in the outlook of an earlier composer,
it is neither necessary nor warranted to believe that the interpolator's work
is the product of an inferior mind. By withbolding such derogation, the
particular riches of the Mahabharata corpus are unlocked. In an intensively

ss E ... the emendations sparaha to Sra,ddha. of Mbh. xii. 256. 6e and 16a, or
~(t1!lbhava,ti to sa1Jlbha,'fllti of Mbh. xii. 255. 37f.

84. Liiders' emendations ~ant(6 to veSya are backed by evidence of the story's intro-
duction. See note 47 above. .

62 Annal8 BORl, LX ( 1979 )

interpolated tradition, there is ample opportunity to observe and describe
the meeting of minds which occurs between every interpolator and his
predeces sors.

The results of analysis conducted on the lines indicated are the more
reliable the more strictly the initial segmentation of the text and hypothe
sizing of interpolation is derived from formal or structural grounds. Deli
neation of an interpolation througb complementary faults of syntax in the
extant text is a far sounder base for the hypothesis than, for instance, an
apparent shift of ideological position. The more formal the criteria, the
less scope there is for the intrusion of the analyst's preconceptions.s5 Not
only is the analysis· more securely founded in more objectively discernible
features of the text, but it need hardly be added that when the analysis ·of
Mahabharata material is being undertaken with an interest in moral
history in view, there is an additional impulse for the analyst to indulge in
self-fulfilling prophecy and therefore even more reason to be wary of ideo
logically-mounted segment a tion s.

It should also be noted that segmentation on other than formal or
structural grounds does not offer the opportunity for distinguishing between
materials complied by a single composer and materials properly attributed · to
separate contributors to the Mahabharata corpus. While this is an essential
distinction for reconstructing the history of the text tradition, it might be
thoug!. that the distinction is rather academic as far as a history of ideas is
concerned: what does is matter if distinguishable materials were combined
for incorporation or incorporated separately? But unless this distinction is
observed we lose a part of the special contribution which the Mahabharata

. can make to a histcry of ideas by giving an insight into how related
ideas were dynamically related in the minds of earlier writers. Only
if we can presume that certain materials were, in the mind of an unknown
composer, relevantly combined in the exposition of his ideological outlook
can we use them to attempt to discern the coherent thread, the angle of
vision, which binds his composition into a whole. If every ideological
conception were segmented and considered as discrete from the remaining
text, our insight would be very much shallower.

Nevertheless, it cannot be overlooked that interpolation may have
• taken place without leaving formal or structural traces. In such cases, it would

85 The problematical nature of argument based on "jedes inhaltliche Kriterium" is
well illustrated by W. Ruben's discussion, .. Schwierigkeiten der Textkritik des
Mahabharata ". A eta O"iwtalia [ Lund ], vol. 8 ( 1929 ), pp. 253-254. Sukthankar,
., Epic Studies, Ill", pp. 263-264, seems to have misunderstood Ruben's point.

FROUDFOOT : Mbh. Episocles - If i8tory of 1 cleas 63

produce greater verisimilitude in the analysis to accept a segmentation based
on ideological grounds. The obstacle to doing so, however, is the' impossibility
of determining when, short of outright contradiction in the text, such
ideologically generated segmentation would be justified. Since there is no
way of separating judgements on this question from the analyst's own
perceptions (or preconceptions), it is methodically preferab1e to adopt a
conservative formalist position. The results will be more, not less, interesting.

The supreme potential of the Mahabharata corpus for the history of
ideas is, thus, a product of precisely those qualities which have in the past
made scholars shy of drawing upon it. 86 It encompasses a vast amount of
material on diverse topics, and has been subjected to intensive interp01ation
over many centuries. While on the one hand this makes the corpus as a
whole dauntingly unwieldy, on the other hand detailed and disciplined
analyses of Mahabharara episodes promise insights into the intellectual life
of early India with an intimacy not available from any other source.

86 On the unattractiveness of Mahabharat.a didactic material, it is only necessary to
cite Oldenberg's condemnation of the Santi parvan as a jum ble of countless episodes
whose treatment is matched in its bulk only hy its supediciality and sloganizing,
full of crass contradiction ( Das JIalH'i.bharata, pp. 76,77 ). iI~ is, perha.ps, outdone
only by Venkatachellam Iyer, Notes of a Study of the Preliminary Ohapters of
the Mahabhii.rc,ta. Being an attempt to separate genuine frorn spurious rnatter
(Madras, 1922), who calls the Santiparvan and Anusasanaparvan" Stupendous
forgeries unsurpassed for the daring involved in the enterprise" ( p. 271). adding
that" we dhollld thank ourselves that the chapters r of sermons] are no greater
than they are in numher" ( p. 279). See also E6t.eller~ ., The Mahabba.rata TeJl;t·
Criticism ", p. 242.


Your bowser does not recognise Javascript:   many features of this site will not work.
malay concordance project

home

about

papers

blogs

searching

texts

direct search
Warkah Terengganu

bibliography

text notes

list of words
List of words
Common words listed by frequency ( ‰ )
below
Double-click on any word to search for it in context
A
A
B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

W

Y

Z

0-9

‰

Abdul  .. 6

Abdullah  .. 4

Abidin  .. 4

Abu  .. 5

ada  .. 20

adakah  .. 1

adalah  .. 5

adanya  .. 3

Adapun  .. 4

adat  .. 3

agama  .. 5

agamanya  .. 1

ahl  .. 5

ahli  .. 1

Ahmad  .. 2

`ain  .. 1

Air  .. 1

akal  .. 2

akan  .. 27

akhirat  .. 3

akhiriah  .. 1

akuannya  .. 1

`ala  .. 2

alaihi  .. 1

`alaihi  .. 3

`alaihim  .. 1

`alaihimu  .. 1

Alam  .. 1

`alamin  .. 1

albid  .. 1

al  .. 51

Alhamdulillahi  .. 2

Ali  .. 2

Allah  .. 18

almarhum  .. 3

aman  .. 2

Amin  .. 1

anakanda  .. 14

anakandalah  .. 1

anak  .. 1

anbia´  .. 1

antara  .. 11

apabila  .. 10

apa  .. 10

Apatah  .. 1

`Aqd  .. 2

asing  .. 1

atas  .. 18

atau  .. 13

ataupun  .. 1

aturan  .. 2

awal  .. 1

Awang  .. 1

ayahanda  .. 5

ayahandanya  .. 1

Ayam  .. 4

Ayer  .. 1

a`zam  .. 1

B

A
B
C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

W

Y

Z

0-9

‰

Babu  .. 1

Babullahu  .. 1

Badr  .. 1

Badrul  .. 1

ba`du  .. 1

bagaimana  .. 12

bagi  .. 7

baginya  .. 1

bahawa  .. 7

bahrain  .. 1

baik  .. 2

bait  .. 1

bakal  .. 1

Bakar  .. 5

balad  .. 1

balik  .. 1

Bandi  .. 9

bangsa  .. 1

banyak  .. 1

barang  .. 13

Barat  .. 1

basirata  .. 1

batinnya  .. 1

bawa  .. 2

bawah  .. 8

bayar  .. 1

beberapa  .. 8

Bedolah  .. 1

belakang  .. 1

belum  .. 2

benar  .. 1

Bentara  .. 1

Berang  .. 1

berapa  .. 1

berat  .. 4

berbangkit  .. 1

berbetulan  .. 1

berbuat  .. 1

berbudi  .. 1

berdiri  .. 1

berharap  .. 1

berhentikan  .. 1

berhimpun  .. 1

berkehendak  .. 1

berkelahi  .. 1

berkhalwat  .. 1

berkuasalah  .. 1

berkuat  .. 1

berlainan  .. 1

berlaku  .. 2

berlawan  .. 1

berlebih-lebihlah  .. 1

bermati-matian  .. 2

bermula  .. 3

bernama  .. 3

bernaung  .. 2

berpakatan  .. 1

berpaling  .. 3

berpegang  .. 1

bersegera  .. 1

berserta  .. 1

berseteruan  .. 1

bersetuju  .. 1

bersuatu  .. 1

bersungguh-sungguh  .. 4

bertahan  .. 1

bertambah-tambah  .. 1

bertanda  .. 1

bertandatangan  .. 1

bertanya  .. 2

besar-besar  .. 1

Besar  .. 10

besarlah  .. 2

betul  .. 1

bicara  .. 9

bicarakan  .. 1

Bi  .. 1

Bilangan  .. 1

bimbang  .. 1

bin  .. 9

bini  .. 1

Bismiilahi  .. 1

boleh  .. 18

bolehlah  .. 1

Brang  .. 1

British  .. 1

buat  .. 1

budi  .. 1

bulan  .. 4

buluh  .. 1

Bunga  .. 3

C

A

B
C
D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

W

Y

Z

0-9

‰

campuri  .. 1

cemburunya  .. 1

cemeti  .. 1

Centeng  .. 1

Chik  .. 1

Cik  .. 4

Cina  .. 1

cinta  .. 1

concession  .. 1

D

A

B

C
D
E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

W

Y

Z

0-9

‰

daerah  .. 3

Da  .. 1

dahulu  .. 4

dalam  .. 41

dan  .. 114

dapat  .. 12

dapatlah  .. 1

dari  .. 9

daripada  .. 21

daripadanya  .. 4

datang  .. 11

datuk  .. 2

daya  .. 1

dayanya  .. 1

demikian  .. 8

demikianlah  .. 5

denda  .. 5

dengan  .. 75

derhaka  .. 4

dia  .. 8

diambil  .. 1

diam  .. 1

diampunkan  .. 1

dibaca  .. 1

dibatalkan  .. 1

dibawakan  .. 1

dibenci  .. 1

dibentangkan  .. 1

diberi  .. 1

dibicara  .. 1

didakwa  .. 1

didapati  .. 3

di  .. 63

digagahi  .. 2

dihamparkan  .. 1

diharapkan  .. 1

diikut  .. 1

dijadikan  .. 1

dijalankan  .. 3

dijatuhkan  .. 1

dijawab  .. 3

dikabulkan  .. 2

dikatakan  .. 3

dikehendak  .. 1

dikehendaki  .. 3

dikekalkan  .. 1

dikeluar  .. 1

Dikeluarkan  .. 1

dikerjakan  .. 1

dikuati  .. 1

dilemahkan  .. 1

dilepaskan  .. 2

diletakkan  .. 1

Dimaklumkan  .. 1

dimesyuaratkan  .. 1

dimudahkan  .. 1

dinyatakan  .. 1

dipemyatakan  .. 1

diperbuat  .. 4

diperiksakan  .. 1

diperjalankan  .. 1

dipermaklumkan  .. 1

dipernyatakan  .. 2

diperoleh  .. 1

diperolehi  .. 1

diperpegang  .. 1

dipersembahkan  .. 1

Dipertuan  .. 8

diri  .. 6

Disebab  .. 1

diserah  .. 1

diserahkan  .. 1

ditakdirkan  .. 2

ditakuti  .. 1

ditangkap  .. 1

ditolak  .. 1

dixx  .. 1

doa  .. 2

dua  .. 4

duanya  .. 4

duduk  .. 2

Duli  .. 2

dunia  .. 3

duniawiah  .. 1

E

A

B

C

D
E
F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

W

Y

Z

0-9

‰

ehwal  .. 4

Ejen  .. 2

elok  .. 1

eloknya  .. 1

Emas  .. 3

Embong  .. 2

empat  .. 1

Encik  .. 3

Engku  .. 4

F

A

B

C

D

E
F
G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

W

Y

Z

0-9

‰

faham  .. 3

fahamlah  .. 1

fasal  .. 1

fi  .. 1

fikir  .. 2

fikirkan  .. 1

fu´ad  .. 1

G

A

B

C

D

E

F
G
H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

W

Y

Z

0-9

‰

Gabenor  .. 3

ganti  .. 3

ghaib  .. 1

Gunong  .. 1

Gunung  .. 1

H

A

B

C

D

E

F

G
H
I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

W

Y

Z

0-9

‰

habis  .. 1

hadapan  .. 3

hadiah  .. 1

hadirin  .. 1

hairan  .. 1

hajat  .. 2

Haji  .. 13

hak  .. 8

hakikat  .. 1

hakiki  .. 1

Hakim  .. 1

haknya  .. 1

hal  .. 15

hal-hal  .. 1

hamba  .. 1

hamdu  .. 2

hampir  .. 1

hanya  .. 3

haraplah  .. 1

hari  .. 4

Hassan  .. 1

hati  .. 4

helah  .. 1

hendak  .. 11

hendaklah  .. 8

H  .. 2

Hijrah  .. 2

hikmat  .. 3

hikmatnya  .. 1

hilang  .. 2

hilir  .. 3

hingga  .. 1

hirau  .. 1

Hitam  .. 1

hormatnya  .. 1

hukuman  .. 1

hukum  .. 2

hulu  .. 1

Humphreys  .. 2

huquq  .. 1

I

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H
I
J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

W

Y

Z

0-9

‰

ia  .. 23

iaitu  .. 10

iaitulah  .. 1

ialah  .. 4

`ibad  .. 1

ibn  .. 1

Idrus  .. 3

ijmak  .. 1

ikhlas  .. 1

iktikad  .. 1

ikutan  .. 2

ikut  .. 1

ila  .. 1

Ilahi  .. 1

ilallahi  .. 1

ilmu  .. 1

ilmunya  .. 1

imam  .. 2

ingatan  .. 1

ingat  .. 1

Inggeris  .. 22

ini  .. 26

inilah  .. 5

insya  .. 3

Isa  .. 1

Ishak  .. 1

Islam  .. 3

Ismail  .. 6

Isnin  .. 2

Istana  .. 1

istiadat  .. 2

istimewa  .. 3

itu  .. 97

itulah  .. 4

`izzati  .. 1

J

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I
J
K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

W

Y

Z

0-9

‰

Jabatan  .. 1

jadi  .. 7

jadilah  .. 2

jaga  .. 1

jajahan  .. 1

jalan  .. 12

jalankan  .. 1

jalannya  .. 1

Jamadilawal  .. 1

Jamadilthani  .. 2

Jamadil-thani  .. 2

jam  .. 1

Jangan  .. 1

jatuh  .. 1

jawab  .. 5

jawabnya  .. 2

jawapan  .. 1

jaya  .. 1

jel  .. 1

jenazah  .. 1

jenis  .. 1

jerat  .. 2

jeratnya  .. 1

jika  .. 10

jikalau  .. 8

jua  .. 4

juga  .. 7

Jukaka  .. 1

jumlah  .. 1

junjung  .. 1

K

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J
K
L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

W

Y

Z

0-9

‰

Kadir  .. 1

kafir  .. 1

Kajang  .. 3

kali  .. 1

Kampung  .. 1

karena  .. 6

kata  .. 2

katanya  .. 3

kawannya  .. 1

kawasan  .. 1

kayu  .. 1

keadaan  .. 1

keadilan  .. 3

kebajikan  .. 2

kebenaran  .. 3

keberatan  .. 2

Kechik  .. 1

kedaifan  .. 2

kedatangan  .. 5

kedatangannya  .. 1

kedua  .. 7

keduanya  .. 2

kedudukannya  .. 1

ke  .. 9

kehendak  .. 3

kehendaknya  .. 1

kehidupan  .. 1

kehormatannya  .. 1

kejahatan  .. 1

kekal  .. 1

kekerasan  .. 1

kekuasaan  .. 2

kekuatan  .. 1

kelak  .. 1

kelepasan  .. 1

keluar  .. 1

keluarkan  .. 1

keluh  .. 1

kelu  .. 1

Kemaman  .. 12

kembali  .. 1

kemudian  .. 12

kenyataan  .. 4

kepada  .. 36

kepadanya  .. 8

kepala-kepala  .. 3

keputusan  .. 1

kerajaan  .. 30

kerana  .. 10

Keria  .. 1

kerja  .. 1

kesah  .. 1

kesalahan  .. 6

kesalahannya  .. 1

kesejahteraannya  .. 1

kesenangan  .. 2

kesukaan  .. 1

ketahui  .. 1

ketahuikan  .. 1

Ketahuilah  .. 1

keterangan  .. 1

ketika  .. 3

khabar  .. 1

khalif  .. 1

Khas  .. 2

khatam  .. 1

khulafa´  .. 1

kira  .. 1

kiranya  .. 1

kita  .. 85

Kompeni  .. 1

konsul  .. 1

konsulnya  .. 1

kuala  .. 5

kuasa  .. 3

Kucai  .. 2

kulli  .. 1

kumpulan  .. 9

kusutnya  .. 1

L

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K
L
M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

W

Y

Z

0-9

‰

Lafaz  .. 1

lagi  .. 11

lain  .. 9

lainnya  .. 3

lalu  .. 7

langsung  .. 1

lari  .. 2

Latiff  .. 1

lazim  .. 1

Lebai  .. 1

Leh  .. 1

lepas  .. 1

lidah  .. 1

li  .. 2

lihat  .. 1

lima  .. 1

Limbong  .. 1

llahi  .. 3

llahu  .. 3

lombong  .. 1

Long  .. 1

luar  .. 1

luluskan  .. 1

M

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L
M
N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

W

Y

Z

0-9

‰

ma`asyar  .. 1

ma`asy  .. 1

Maha  .. 2

Mahamulia  .. 2

mahmud  .. 2

majlis  .. 2

majmu`  .. 1

maka  .. 65

maklumkan  .. 1

maksud  .. 1

maksudnya  .. 1

malam  .. 1

maliku  .. 1

Mamat  .. 1

mana  .. 1

manager  .. 9

mana-mana  .. 2

manfaat  .. 1

mangkat  .. 2

manusia  .. 1

marhum  .. 3

marji`i  .. 1

masa  .. 7

masing-masing  .. 1

masuk  .. 4

masuklah  .. 1

mata-mata  .. 8

Mat  .. 3

mati  .. 1

mazahir  .. 1

Maziah  .. 1

melainkan  .. 6

melalui  .. 1

melawat  .. 1

Melayu  .. 1

melemparkan  .. 1

melemparlahlah  .. 1

melengkapi  .. 1

melepaskan  .. 2

memadailah  .. 1

memalingkan  .. 1

memasuki  .. 1

membangkitkan  .. 1

membatalkan  .. 1

membawa  .. 2

membawanya  .. 1

membayar  .. 1

memberi  .. 8

memberitahu  .. 2

membetuli  .. 2

membetulkan  .. 1

membukakan  .. 1

memelihara  .. 1

memeliharakan  .. 1

memeriksakan  .. 1

memerintahkan  .. 4

meminta  .. 2

mempermasukkan  .. 1

memudahkan  .. 1

memulai  .. 1

memutuskan  .. 1

menaburlah  .. 1

menangkap  .. 5

menaruh  .. 1

menaruhkan  .. 1

menaungkan  .. 1

mencari-cari  .. 1

mencari  .. 1

mencarikan  .. 1

mencari-mencari  .. 1

mencinta-cinta  .. 1

mencuba  .. 1

mendapat  .. 1

mendatangkan  .. 1

mendengar  .. 2

menderhaka  .. 2

mendirikan  .. 1

menerima  .. 3

mengadakan  .. 1

mengalirkan  .. 1

mengambil  .. 1

mengampun  .. 1

mengangkatkan  .. 1

mengatakan  .. 3

mengaturkan  .. 1

mengedarkan  .. 1

mengepung  .. 1

mengerasi  .. 1

mengerjakan  .. 2

mengetahui  .. 1

menghadap  .. 2

menghasilkan  .. 1

menghilangkan  .. 2

menghuraikan  .. 1

mengikat  .. 2

mengikut  .. 2

mengingkarkan  .. 1

mengiringi  .. 1

menimbangkan  .. 1

menjadi  .. 3

menjadikan  .. 2

menjaga  .. 2

menjalankan  .. 1

menjatuhkan  .. 1

Menjing  .. 2

menjunjung  .. 1

menolakkan  .. 1

menolongi  .. 1

mentasraflah  .. 1

Menteri  .. 1

menumpang  .. 1

menumpanglah  .. 1

menunjukkan  .. 2

menurutkan  .. 1

menyalahi  .. 1

menyatakan  .. 1

menyerah  .. 3

menyerahkan  .. 3

menyigerakan  .. 1

menyuruh  .. 2

mereka  .. 11

mesti  .. 2

mezahirkan  .. 1

mi`ad  .. 1

miliknya  .. 2

minta  .. 9

m.l  .. 1

muafakat  .. 2

muamalat  .. 1

Muda  .. 7

mudik  .. 3

Muhammad  .. 8

Muharam  .. 1

muhit  .. 1

muka  .. 1

Mulia  .. 3

munasabah  .. 1

mungkar  .. 3

Musa  .. 1

muslihat  .. 2

Muslimin  .. 3

Mustafa  .. 1

musyawwarat  .. 1

musykilkan  .. 1

mutlisan  .. 1

muzahir  .. 1

muzahirkan  .. 1

N

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M
N
O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

W

Y

Z

0-9

‰

Nabi  .. 1

Naib  .. 1

nama  .. 2

Nama-nama  .. 1

namusa  .. 1

Nara  .. 1

nasihat  .. 1

nawahinya  .. 1

nazri  .. 1

negeri  .. 10

nenek  .. 1

neraca  .. 1

nescaya  .. 2

Ngah  .. 2

Nik  .. 1

nyata  .. 1

Nyior  .. 1

O

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N
O
P

Q

R

S

T

U

W

Y

Z

0-9

‰

oleh  .. 15

orang  .. 18

P

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O
P
Q

R

S

T

U

W

Y

Z

0-9

‰

pada  .. 45

padanya  .. 1

paduka  .. 22

Pahang  .. 1

pakatan  .. 2

pakatannya  .. 1

Paloh  .. 2

palsu  .. 1

Paluh  .. 2

pandangan  .. 2

pandang  .. 1

Panglima  .. 2

Pasir  .. 1

pass  .. 1

patik  .. 33

patut  .. 6

patutlah  .. 1

pegawai  .. 4

pekerjaan  .. 5

pekerjaannya  .. 1

peliharaan  .. 1

pemberi  .. 3

pemberitahuan  .. 2

Pemberitahu  .. 1

pemerintahan  .. 4

penaungan  .. 1

penaungannya  .. 1

pendapat  .. 1

pengaduan  .. 1

pengetahuan  .. 3

penghulu  .. 4

pentadbiran  .. 1

penyerahan  .. 1

Perang  .. 1

Perat  .. 2

peraturan  .. 1

perbuatan  .. 1

perdagangan  .. 1

perdamaian  .. 1

peredaran  .. 1

pergaduhan  .. 1

pergi  .. 2

periksa  .. 4

perintahan  .. 3

perintah  .. 4

perintahkan  .. 1

perjanjian  .. 2

perjawapan  .. 1

perjawatannya  .. 1

perkara  .. 9

permaklumkan  .. 1

permohonan  .. 1

pernah  .. 3

pernyatakan  .. 1

perolehan  .. 1

persahabatan  .. 2

pertama  .. 1

pertolongan  .. 1

pertunjukan  .. 2

pertunjukannya  .. 1

Pesuruh  .. 1

Pesuruhjaya  .. 1

petang  .. 1

pihak  .. 7

pilih  .. 1

pilihkan  .. 1

pinjam  .. 1

Pitas  .. 1

polis  .. 8

Por  .. 1

Pueh  .. 1

pukul  .. 1

pula  .. 10

puluh  .. 1

pun  .. 8

punya  .. 2

Putih  .. 1

Q

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P
Q
R

S

T

U

W

Y

Z

0-9

‰

qat`an  .. 1

q.d  .. 1

R

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q
R
S

T

U

W

Y

Z

0-9

‰

Rabb  .. 1

rabbi  .. 1

Rabbul  .. 1

Rahim  .. 2

Rahman  .. 4

raja  .. 6

rakyat  .. 4

Ramadan  .. 2

Rasul  .. 4

Rasulullah  .. 1

rasyidin  .. 1

ratus  .. 1

rayuan  .. 1

report  .. 2

Residen  .. 1

ringgit  .. 4

rundingan  .. 1

S

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R
S
T

U

W

Y

Z

0-9

‰

sa`adah  .. 1

Safar  .. 3

sahaja  .. 2

sahbihi  .. 1

sah  .. 1

sakit  .. 1

salah  .. 2

salam  .. 3

salatu  .. 2

salinan  .. 1

salla  .. 2

sallallahu  .. 2

sallam  .. 2

Salleh  .. 2

sama  .. 3

sampai  .. 3

sangat  .. 6

s.a  .. 2

satu  .. 5

Sayyid  .. 5

Sayyidina  .. 2

sebab  .. 5

sebagai  .. 1

sebaiklah  .. 1

sebelah  .. 4

sebenarnya  .. 1

secukup  .. 1

sedia  .. 3

Sedialah  .. 1

segala  .. 12

segera  .. 1

sehingga  .. 1

sekalian  .. 12

sekali-kali  .. 5

sekalipun  .. 2

sekarang  .. 3

sekuasa  .. 1

selama-lama  .. 1

selama-lamanya  .. 1

semata-mata  .. 3

sembahkan  .. 1

sembahyang  .. 3

sempadan  .. 3

semua  .. 1

semuanya  .. 3

senangnya  .. 1

senantiasalah  .. 1

sendiri  .. 3

sengaja  .. 2

sentiasalah  .. 1

sentosa  .. 1

seolah-olah  .. 1

seolah-olahnya  .. 1

seorang  .. 4

sepatutnya  .. 1

seperti  .. 6

serah  .. 1

serahkan  .. 1

seratus  .. 1

serba  .. 1

seri  .. 18

serta  .. 11

sesiapa  .. 3

sesungguhnya  .. 4

setengah  .. 1

setengah-setengah  .. 1

seteru  .. 2

setia  .. 6

Setiausaha  .. 4

siam  .. 38

siapa  .. 1

siasat  .. 2

sisi  .. 1

smi  .. 1

suatu  .. 2

subhanahu  .. 8

sudah  .. 4

sudahlah  .. 2

Sudin  .. 1

suka  .. 4

sukanya  .. 1

sukarlah  .. 2

Sulaiman  .. 3

Sultan  .. 7

Sungai  .. 4

sungguhpun  .. 1

supaya  .. 6

surat  .. 9

suratnya  .. 1

suruh  .. 3

susah  .. 1

s.w  .. 1

syada´id  .. 1

Syah  .. 1

syak  .. 1

syarak  .. 2

syarat  .. 2

syaratnya  .. 1

syari`ah  .. 1

syariat  .. 3

T

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S
T
U

W

Y

Z

0-9

‰

Ta`ala  .. 8

tadi`i  .. 1

tahanan  .. 1

Tahir  .. 1

tahuan  .. 2

tahu  .. 4

tahun  .. 9

takdir  .. 5

takluknya  .. 2

takrif  .. 1

takut  .. 1

tali  .. 4

tamak  .. 1

tanah  .. 1

tanda  .. 1

tangan  .. 3

tangannya  .. 1

tangkap  .. 3

tapis  .. 1

taslim  .. 1

tasraf  .. 2

tasrafnya  .. 1

tauliah  .. 1

tawajjaha  .. 2

tawajjuh  .. 2

telah  .. 21

Telemong  .. 2

tembak  .. 3

tempat  .. 4

Tengku  .. 15

tentang  .. 1

terang  .. 1

terbuka  .. 1

terdiri  .. 1

Terengganu  .. 21

terhenti  .. 3

terikat  .. 1

terima  .. 4

terkaya  .. 2

terlalu  .. 1

terlebih  .. 3

terlebihlah  .. 1

terlepas  .. 1

termaklum  .. 3

tersangkut  .. 1

Tersat  .. 3

tersebut  .. 4

terserah  .. 1

tertanggung  .. 3

tertentulah  .. 1

tertibnya  .. 1

tetapi  .. 5

tetapinya  .. 2

tetapkan  .. 1

tetaplah  .. 1

tiada  .. 21

tiadalah  .. 7

tiap  .. 12

tiba  .. 2

tidak  .. 8

tidaklah  .. 1

tiga  .. 2

tilik  .. 1

timbangan  .. 1

timbang  .. 1

Timur  .. 2

tinggal  .. 1

tipu  .. 2

Titah  .. 3

titahnya  .. 1

titian  .. 1

tolakkan  .. 1

tolong  .. 1

triti  .. 6

tritinya  .. 1

tuan  .. 10

tuliskan  .. 1

tunailah  .. 1

U

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T
U
W

Y

Z

0-9

‰

ul  .. 2

ullah  .. 1

Umar  .. 3

umbi  .. 1

umpamanya  .. 1

undang  .. 4

untuk  .. 1

usaha  .. 4

usia  .. 1

W

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U
W
Y

Z

0-9

‰

wa  .. 22

wahdah  .. 1

wajiblah  .. 2

wakiahnya  .. 1

wakilnya  .. 1

walau  .. 1

Wan  .. 2

wang  .. 2

Wangsa  .. 1

waqi`ahnya  .. 1

Warta  .. 1

wasitah  .. 2

Y

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

W
Y
Z

0-9

‰

ya  .. 1

yakni  .. 1

yang  .. 132

Yusoff  .. 2

Z

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

W

Y
Z
0-9

‰

zahir  .. 4

zahirlah  .. 1

Zainal  .. 4

Zain  .. 1

Zakaria  .. 1

zalim  .. 1

Zulhijah  .. 1

0-9

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

S

T

U

W

Y

Z
0-9
‰

$200  .. 1

$100  .. 1

1  .. 4

2  .. 4

3  .. 3

4  .. 2

5  .. 2

6  .. 1

7  .. 1

8  .. 2

9  .. 1

10  .. 1

11  .. 1

12  .. 1

19  .. 2

21  .. 3

22  .. 1

100  .. 1

200  .. 1

1295/1346  .. 1

1320  .. 2

1324  .. 1

1326  .. 1

1327  .. 2

1329  .. 1

1335  .. 1

1336  .. 4

1337  .. 2

1346  .. 1

12951346  .. 1

By frequency

The most frequently occuring words (top 20%).

132 ..  yang

114 ..  dan

97 ..  itu

85 ..  kita

75 ..  dengan

65 ..  maka

63 ..  di

51 ..  al

45 ..  pada

41 ..  dalam

38 ..  siam

36 ..  kepada

33 ..  patik

30 ..  kerajaan

27 ..  akan

26 ..  ini

23 ..  ia

22 ..  Inggeris, paduka, wa

21 ..  daripada, telah, Terengganu, tiada

20 ..  ada

18 ..  Allah, atas, boleh, orang, seri

15 ..  hal, oleh, Tengku

14 ..  anakanda

13 ..  atau, barang, Haji

12 ..  bagaimana, dapat, jalan, Kemaman, kemudian, segala, sekalian, tiap

11 ..  antara, datang, hendak, lagi, mereka, serta

10 ..  apabila, apa, Besar, iaitu, jika, kerana, negeri, pula, tuan

9 ..  Bandi, bicara, bin, dari, ke, kumpulan, lain, manager, minta, perkara, surat, tahun

8 ..  bawah, beberapa, demikian, dia, Dipertuan, hak, hendaklah, jikalau, kepadanya, mata-mata, memberi, Muhammad, polis, pun, subhanahu, Ta`ala, tidak

7 ..  bagi, bahawa, jadi, juga, kedua, lalu, masa, Muda, pihak, Sultan, tiadalah

6 ..  Abdul, diri, Ismail, karena, kesalahan, melainkan, patut, raja, sangat, seperti, setia, supaya, triti

5 ..  Abu, adalah, agama, ahl, ayahanda, Bakar, demikianlah, denda, inilah, jawab, kedatangan, kuala, menangkap, pekerjaan, satu, Sayyid, sebab, sekali-kali, takdir, tetapi

4 ..  Abdullah, Abidin, Adapun, Ayam, berat, bersungguh-sungguh, bulan, Cik, dahulu, daripadanya, derhaka, diperbuat, dua, duanya, ehwal, Engku, hari, hati, ialah, itulah, jua, kenyataan, masuk, memerintahkan, pegawai, pemerintahan, penghulu, periksa, perintah, Rahman, rakyat, Rasul, ringgit, sebelah, seorang, sesungguhnya, Setiausaha, sudah, suka, Sungai, tahu, tali, tempat, terima, tersebut, undang, usaha, zahir, Zainal, 1, 2, 1336
top


Your bowser does not recognise Javascript:   many features of this site will not work.
malay concordance project

home

about

papers

blogs

searching

texts

direct search
Hikayat Bakhtiar

bibliography

text notes

list of words
Text notes
[ There are no notes for this text. ]
top


Your bowser does not recognise Javascript:   many features of this site will not work.
malay concordance project
home
about
papers
blogs
searching
texts
direct search
Hikayat Sang Boma
\n

\n

bibliography
\n

text notes
\n

list of words
\n\n
Bibliography
\n\n
\n

title:

\n\tHikayat Sang Boma\n

\n

edition:

\n\tSang Boma, tjetakan ketiga, Djakarta: Balai Pustaka, 1959.\n

\n

manuscript:

\n\tMl 360, Perpustakaan Nasional Republik Indonesia, Jakarta.\n

\n

dates:

\n\ttext:  ±1600 (according to Braginsky: 15-16 century);   \n\tmanuscript:  1850.\n

\n

provenance:

\n\ttext & manuscript:  unknown.\n

\n

words:

\n\t92113 words.\n

\n

references:

\n\tto the pages (3-327) and lines of the printed edition,\n\tthus:
Boma 105:16.\n

\n\n
\n\n
\n

\n\n

Editorial notes and bibliography\n

This text was first published in 1924.   In that edition, it is stated that the text is taken from a manuscript in the Batavian Society collection.   Details in the catalogue of that collection made by Van Ronkel allow the inference that the base manusript is Bat.Gen. 360 (now Ml 360), a manuscript purchased from an unspecified source in 1904.  Van Ronkel describes it as ‘very accurate and complete’.\n

References:\n

\n

Ph.S. van Ronkel, Catalogus der Maleische handschriften in het Museum van het Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschappen, Batavia: Albrecht, 1909.\nVerhandelingen van het Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschappen, deel 57. Item LXXX, p.93.\n

Sang Boma, disalin dari naskah toelisan tangan hoeroep Arab, kepoenjaan Bataviaasch Genootschap oleh Balai Poestaka, Weltevreden : Commissie voor de Volkslectuur / Balai Poestaka, 1924. Serie no. 279.\n

V. Braginsky, The Heritage of Traditional Malay Literature: A historical survey of genres, writings and literary views, Leiden: KITLV Press, 2004 (Verhandelingen van het Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde, 214), pp.152-156.\n

\n

Preparation\n

Added:  January 2010\n

The printed edition was scanned in Canberra by the MCP, and its\nspelling modernised.\n

\n
top


Your bowser does not recognise Javascript:   many features of this site will not work.
malay concordance project
home
about
papers
blogs
searching
texts
direct search
Surat Farqhuar
\n

\n

bibliography
\n

text notes
\n

list of words
\n\n
Text notes
\n\n\n

MCP text

\n\n

\n\t

Farq 29:21

\n\t

19

\n\t

MS:  sembilan belas;   BHS:  11

\n

\n\t

Farq 81:10

\n\t

Akir

\n\t

? Akil

\n

\n\t

Farq 90:15

\n\t

amanat

\n\t

BHS:  [u]manat

\n

\n\t

Farq 91:17

\n\t

amanat

\n\t

BHS:  [u]manat

\n

\n\t

Farq 11:40

\n\t

awari

\n\t

a.w.r.y

\n

\n\t

Farq 70:9

\n\t

Ba`lawi

\n\t

BHS:  Ba`lui

\n

\n\t

Farq 45:1

\n\t

Belawa

\n\t

b.l.a.w.a

\n

\n\t

Farq 109:10

\n\t

\tbuldan

\n\t

BHS:  baladan

\n

\n\t

Farq 41:7

\n\t

cekanya

\n\t

c.k.a.ny

\n

\n\t

Farq 60:8

\n\t

endung

\n\t

a.n.d.w.ng

\n

\n\t

Farq 45:10

\n\t

Ganggik

\n\t

[dalam Tuhfat al-Nafis, ia digelar Daeng Ronggik]

\n

\n\t

Farq 30:15

\n\t

`ilat

\n\t

`.l.a.t\"

\n

\n\t

Farq 84:2

\n\t

Kanzul

\n\t

BHS:  Kanzun

\n

\n\t

Farq 97:2

\n\t

Kanzul

\n\t

BHS:  Kanzun

\n

\n\t

Farq 103:1

\n\t

Kanzul

\n\t

BHS:  Kanzun

\n

\n\t

Farq 104:1

\n\t

Kanzul

\n\t

BHS:  Kanzun

\n

\n\t

Farq 108:1

\n\t

Kanzul

\n\t

BHS:  Kanzun

\n

\n\t

Farq 109:1

\n\t

Kanzul

\n\t

BHS:  Kanzun

\n

\n\t

Farq 114:2

\n\t

Kanzul

\n\t

BHS:  Kanzun

\n

\n\t

Farq 7:14

\n\t

Melakanya

\n\t

= William Farqhuar

\n

\n\t

Farq 97:9

\n\t

\tmembasyarkan

\n\t

Arabic b.s:r, 'discern'

\n

\n\t

Farq 16:23

\n\t

mengapa

\n\t

m.`.a.f, ? = maaf

\n

\n\t

Farq 53:14

\n\t

murah

\n\t

m.w.r.h

\n

\n\t

Farq 53:19

\n\t

\tmurah

\n\t

m.w.w.r.h

\n

\n\t

Farq 59:8

\n\t

Nit

\n\t

n.y.t

\n

\n\t

Farq 29:5

\n\t

Panglima .. kita

\n\t

BHS:  panglima perang kita

\n

\n\t

Farq 84:9

\n\t

Queiros

\n\t

s.y.q.a.y.r.y.s, ?

\n

\n\t

Farq 34:8

\n\t

Repah

\n\t

r.p.h

\n

\n\t

Farq 57:21

\n\t

setolob

\n\t

s.t.w.l.b

\n

\n\t

Farq 16:3

\n\t

sezarah

\n\t

BHS:  selarah

\n

\n\t

Farq 20:4

\n\t

sezarah

\n\t

BHS:  selarah

\n

\n\t

Farq 21:4

\n\t

sezarah

\n\t

BHS:  selarah

\n

\n\t

Farq 23:4

\n\t

sezarah

\n\t

BHS:  selarah

\n

\n\t

Farq 24:4

\n\t

sezarah

\n\t

BHS:  selarah

\n

\n\t

Farq 25:4

\n\t

sezarah

\n\t

BHS:  selarah

\n

\n\t

Farq 30:4

\n\t

\tsezarah

\n\t

BHS:  selarah

\n

\n\t

Farq 50:4

\n\t

\tsezarah

\n\t

BHS:  selarah

\n

\n\t

Farq 52:4

\n\t

sezarah

\n\t

BHS:  selarah

\n

\n\t

Farq 66:3

\n\t

sezarah

\n\t

BHS:  selarah

\n

\n\t

Farq 67:3

\n\t

sezarah

\n\t

BHS:  selarah

\n

\n\t

Farq 52:13

\n\t

tab

\n\t

t.b

\n\n\n\n\n\n
top


Your bowser does not recognise Javascript:   many features of this site will not work.
malay concordance project

home

about

papers

blogs

searching

texts

direct search
Surat Perjanjian Riau-Belanda

bibliography

text notes

list of words
Text notes
MCP text

PRiau 70:29

ada

seharusnya:  di

PRiau 219:11

Adolf .. Yukes

Adolf Marcus Jockes

PRiau 221:17

Adolf .. Yukes

Adolf Marcus Jockes

PRiau 279:26

akhadhat

Dutch text:   leenrijk, ‘apanage’

PRiau 188:11

Antoni .. Bloqzil

Antonie Henri Gijsbertus Blokzeijl

PRiau 189:38

Antoni .. Bloqzil

Antonie Henri Gijsbertus Blokzeijl

PRiau 194:13

Antoni .. Bloqzil

Antonie Henri Gijsbertus Blokzeijl

PRiau 195:32

Antoni .. Bloqzil

Antonie Henri Gijsbertus Blokzeijl

PRiau 5:30

baiknya

text:  baiknyah

PRiau 110:25

baligh

text:  baliq

PRiau 110:37

baligh

text:  baliq

PRiau 157:16

bawah

salinan:   bawa

PRiau 244:4

bersepakat

text:  bersupaqat

PRiau 242:7

bir-`uzur

Dutch text:   onbekwaam, ‘incapacitated’

PRiau 224:27

Biram

text:  Beram

PRiau 135:10

da`wa

text:  da wa

PRiau 22:5

dagangannya

text:  gadangannya

PRiau 256:28

Direktur

text:  Direqtiur

PRiau 26:38

disukakan

text:  desukakan

PRiau 161:3

Elisa Nethkher

Eliza Netscher

PRiau 161:34

Elisa Nethkher

Eliza Netscher

PRiau 71:24

Elot .. Jakub

Elout Cornelis Pieter Jacob

PRiau 215:35

Ernest .. Halewen

Ernest Auguste Halewijn

PRiau 199:10

Ernest .. Halewin

Ernest Auguste Halewijn

PRiau 203:9

Ernest .. Halewin

Ernest Auguste Halewijn

PRiau 137:28

Graf

van de Graaf

PRiau 137:35

Graf

= van de Graaf

PRiau 70:33

Grot

Groot

PRiau 32:29

(h)awal

text:  dihawal

PRiau 286:32

Henri fan Ek

Henri van Eck

PRiau 160:39

Herman .. van de Wall

Herman Theodor Friedrich Karl Emil Wilhelm August Casimir von de Wall

PRiau 225:25

Hukhkamer

Hoogkamer

PRiau 160:14

ialah

text:  ya lah

PRiau 254:22

ihwal

text:  idjiwal

PRiau 168:5

Ioan .. Tobias

Joan Hendrik Tobias

PRiau 17:42

iqrar

text:  iqral

PRiau 4:3

Jakop

text:  Jakap

PRiau 4:5

Jakop Piter fan Bram

Jacob Pieter van Braam

PRiau 12:29

Jakop Piter fan Bram

Jacob Pieter van Braam

PRiau 13:20

Jakop Piter fan Bram

Jacob Pieter van Braam

PRiau 281:5

kancing

Dutch text:   der plaatselijke waarde, ‘of the local value’

PRiau 143:30

kelamin

Dutch text:   huisgezin/klan, ‘household/clan’

PRiau 143:39

kelasinya

Dutch text:   huisgezin, ‘household’

PRiau 20:36

Komdan

Dutch text:   Commandant

PRiau 63:10

Krisman

Krijgsman

PRiau 166:3

Ludon

? Laudon

PRiau 154:33

ma`na

text:  ma'ni

PRiau 154:32

ma`nanya

text:  ma'ninya

PRiau 65:7

Malwil fan Kornbeh

Melvill van Carnbee, Schout-bij-nacht

PRiau 113:41

me...

rusak

PRiau 165:14

Meier

Pieter Mijer

PRiau 194:10

menaru[h]

text:  menaru´

PRiau 194:23

menaru[h]

text:  menaru´

PRiau 24:4

menaungi

text:  manawangi

PRiau 43:28

menaungi

text:  menawangi

PRiau 17:2

mezahirkan

text:  muzhahirkan

PRiau 224:2

Mof

Dutch text:   straat Moff, ‘Moff strait’

PRiau 56:11

mupakat

text:  mupamaqat

PRiau 137:25

Pahud

Ch.F.  Pahud

PRiau 79:14

pak

text:  faq

PRiau 28:15

peairannya

Dutch text:   gewapende Vaartuigen, ‘armed vessels’

PRiau 49:29

peairannya

Dutch text:   gewapende Vaartuigen, ‘armed vessels’

PRiau 136:35

Q. Meiyer

Pieter Mijer

PRiau 102:38

rahim

text:  rahum, Dutch text:   menschelijke, ‘humane’

PRiau 158:10

rahim

text:  rahum, Dutch text:   menschelijke, ‘humane’

PRiau 213:38

raja

Dutch:  Heerendiensten, ‘corvee’

PRiau 224:33

rude

Dutch text:   roeden, ‘roods’

PRiau 152:3

sail

shail, ? sial

PRiau 152:7

sail

shail, ? sial

PRiau 16:13

satar

text:  sathae

PRiau 16:31

satar

text:  sathara

PRiau 159:33

tabik

text:  talik

PRiau 211:32

takluknya

text:  taquqnya

PRiau 195:37

taruh

text:  taro'

PRiau 53:28

Trom

Tromp

PRiau 9:30

Utrek

Utrecht

PRiau 12:23

Walandawi

text:  Walandui

PRiau 37:28

Walterbek

Constantijn Wolterbeek

PRiau 65:11

Wapers Melis

Wappers Melis

PRiau 223:12

Wilem .. Hukhkamer

Willem Cornelis Hoogkamer

PRiau 286:17

Wilem Alber de Kanter

Willem Albert de Kanter

PRiau 290:38

Wilem Alber de Kanter

Willem Albert de Kanter

PRiau 300:11

Wilem Yakob Rahder

Willem Jacob Rahder

PRiau 302:13

Wilem Yakob Rahder

Willem Jacob Rahder

PRiau 37:29

Willems

text:  Wiliams

PRiau 237:33

William Alber de Kanter

Willem Albert de Kanter

PRiau 33:43

yang

text:  pang

PRiau 108:43

yarpas

Dutch text:   jaarpas, ‘annual pass’

PRiau 109:8

yarpas

Dutch text:   jaarpas

PRiau 249:10

yarpas

Dutch text:   jaarpas

PRiau 250:27

yarpas

Dutch text:   jaarpas

PRiau 231:12

Ye-er

Jr, junior;  > M.  Reep Jr.

PRiau 108:41

zeberif

Dutch text:   zeebrief, ‘marine certificate’

PRiau 109:7

zeberif

Dutch text:   zeebrief

PRiau 249:9

zeberif

Dutch text:   zeebrief

PRiau 250:26

zeberif

Dutch text:   zeebrief
top


Your bowser does not recognise Javascript:   many features of this site will not work.
malay concordance project

home

about

papers

blogs

searching

texts

direct search
Surat Beriluminasi Raja Nusantara

bibliography

text notes

list of words
Text notes
MCP text

SRN 26:col

1262

lebih baik:  1264

SRN 28:col

1753

4 Zulhijah 1753 AJ (Kamsia) = Mon 10 Juli 1826

SRN 4:4

adalah

adalah adalah

SRN 34:1

Bayern

b.y.r.n

SRN 38:5

[Chassé]

f.t.r.s d.d t.y.w d.w.s [Chassé]

SRN 41:2

cita

c.t

SRN 16:2

dupi

Bah. Jawa,   = ketika

SRN 4:3

ferkat

f.r.k.a.t, frigate

SRN 24:5

fles

Bah. Belanda,   = botol

SRN 1:7

gadang

? gading

SRN 47:2

h.y.r.h

seharusnya:  hijrah

SRN 47:2

h.y.r.h

seharusnya:  hijrah

SRN 47:col

h.y.r.h

seharusnya:  hijrah

SRN 48:2

h.y.r.h

seharusnya:  hijrah

SRN 48:4

h.y.r.h

seharusnya:  hijrah

SRN 48:col

h.y.r.h

seharusnya:  hijrah

SRN 36:2

helo

h.y.l.w

SRN 36:2

helo

h.y.l.w

SRN 34:1

Isobel la Catholica

a.y.s.b.y.l.h k.t.h.w.l.k.a

SRN 43:2

istori

? setori

SRN 4:s

j

jim

SRN 3:6

julang-julang

? julung-julung

SRN 24:5

kerun

k.r.w.n, mungkin kata Belanda ‘kroon’, yakni unsur hiasan untuk tempat lilin (Wilkinson)

SRN 24:5

klinken

bah.  Belanda, sejenis kancing

SRN 14:2

komitir

= Bah. Belanda:  gecommitteerde, ‘orang yang ditugaskan’

SRN 19:6

krip

bah.  Belanda, sepotong kain hitam di lengan baju sebagai tanda berkabung

SRN 21:2

Lansier

l.i.n.s.n.y

SRN 15:2

makān

Arabic:  place

SRN 14:2

menzahirkan

men[z]ahirkan

SRN 34:1

met ster

m.y.t s.t.r

SRN 31:3

ordonnans

h.r.d.n.s,   Bah. Belanda ‘ordonnans’, = perajurit pembantu seorang perwira

SRN 33:2

p.r.t.y.l.a

? Bah.  Belanda:  vertellen

SRN 47:2

p.w.n.t

? pond

SRN 24:5

pasment

p.s.m.n.t, ialah kata Belanda (dari bahasa Prancis) ‘passement’, yaitu sejenis bordir dari kain songket

SRN 44:2

s.a s.f.y.t

sa sepita [?]

SRN 35:col

s.m

singkatan dari:  sallā  Allāhu `alaihi wa sallam

SRN 2:5

sahabat

sahabat-sahabat

SRN 2:2

seperti

seperti seperti

SRN 11:3

Sevenhoven

s.y.p.h.w.p.v

SRN 9:3

Sturler

S.t.l.w.r,   ? Sturler

SRN 32:2

top

t.w.b

SRN 22:1

viscount

s.k.a.w.n

SRN 27:col

Zulkaidah

seharusnya:  Zulhijjah
top