INTRODUCTION 1. How I came to edit the Brhaddevatā. AMON MONG the secondary works of Vedic literature, the Brhaddevata has always attracted a considerable share of interest on the part of Vedic scholars. When Roth, in 1846, published his treatise, Zur Litteratur und Geschichte des Weda, he knew the work only from the quotations occurring in the commentaries of Sadgurusisya and Sayana, which were then, of course, accessible in manuscript only. He remarks, however (p. 49), that copies would in all probability yet be found in India. Not long after this a MS. (b) of the Brhaddevata was actually acquired, along with the Chambers collection of Sanskrit MSS., by the Royal Library at Berlin. Adalbert Kuhn made it the basis of his account of the Brhaddevata published in the first volume (pp. 101-120) of Indische Studien (1850). Kuhn transcribed this MS., subsequently adding colla- tions from another MS. (h), which Haug procured at Poona in 1865, and which is now in the Royal Library at Munich. As he found these two MSS. insufficient for the purpose, Kuhn was unable to carry out his intention of publishing an edition of the Brhaddevatā. Meanwhile Max Müller had obtained from India, in the sixties, three modern copies by the aid of Drs. Bühler and Bhau Dāji. He, too, seems at one time to have contemplated editing the Brhaddevata; for among his papers I found a transcript, in his own hand, coming down to the tenth Varga of the second Adhyāya. But the inadequacy of his MS. material doubtless deterred him from proceeding any further. Later on, Dr. Thibaut, while resident in Oxford as Max Müller's assistant, made extensive collations with a view to bringing out a critical edition of the Brhaddevata. But he, too, relinquished the project, being convinced that a text constituted from the MS. material at his disposal, would prove too conjectural in its character. ¹ See Wickremasinghe's Catalogue of the Max Müller Sanskrit MSS. in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1902, p. 641, no. 57.
