48 President's Address. [Feb. 



studies under Schlegel and Lassen. His first publication was the Prabodha 

 Chandrodaya, which appeared in 1812. He proceeded to Paris from Bonn 

 and then became a pupil of Eugene Burnouf, and later he paid a short visit 

 to England. In 1859 he was invited by Professor Wilson to come again to 

 England and assist in the preparation of a new edition of his Sanskrit dic- 

 tionary. He undertook the revision, but under his hands it became so vast 

 an undertaking that only six fasciculi, containing the greater portion of the 

 first letter, were published. A few years after his arrival in England, he was 

 appointed Professor of Sanskrit at University College, London. In 1861, 

 he published his essay on Panini, as introductory to a facsimile edition of the 

 Manava Kalpa Sutra. He also carried through the press for the Indian 

 Government a photo-lithographic facsimile of the Mahabhashya which is 

 nearly complete. 



Dr. Groldstucker was elected a corresponding member of this Society 

 in 1863. 



A general review of the work done by the Society during the year will 

 I think show that there has been no diminution of zeal, no want of earnest 

 and thoughtful work. 



The issue of the Bibliotheca Indica, which the Society have voluntarily 

 undertaken to edit on behalf of the Government which supplies the neces- 

 sary funds, has, on the whole, progressed very satisfactorily. I feel bound 

 to allude to this subject rather more pointedly than otherwise I should feel 

 justified in doing, because during the year some critical remarks have 

 issued from the pen of one at least of the ablest orientalists of Europe. Prof. 

 Weber in a review of the labours of the Society in connection with the Biblio- 

 theca Indica, as extending from 1865 to 1870, acknowledges in a hearty man- 

 ner the judicious selection of works for publication, and fully admits that 

 the several editors, principally native scholars, have truly performed all that 

 could have been at all expected from them. In truth, Professor Weber speaks 

 only in terms of praise and approval, of the works selected and the mode in 

 which they have been edited. But his objections are based, I may say almost 

 solely, on the delays which have occurred in the issue of successive parts or 

 fasciculi of various works which extend over many pages. Now, no one can 

 be more thoroughly alive to the force of this objection than the Philological 

 Committee of the Society, under whose special charge these publications are. 

 But I fear Professor Weber's experience of the conditions of literary work 

 of this kind in Europe, and in the midst of the learned centres of literary 

 activity, where he resides, scarcely enables him to realize the almost unspeak- 

 able difficulties which accompany the effort here. There is not among the 

 long list of editors of our Bibliotheca, one single person who has not heavy 

 and continuous official duties to perform which occupy by far the larger 

 portion of his time, and which give none of that literary ease, so essential to 



