1860.] Literary Intelligence. 201 



the trade. His edition of the Unádi Súfcras is very useful and care- 

 fully edited. There is not much doing in Sanskrit on the Continent. 

 ... I received the sepárate copies of the Essay on Writing which was 

 inserted in the Journal. Bóhtlingk has written an Essay in answer 

 to my hypothesis, but it contains no new facfcs, and does not seem to 

 me to remove any of the difficulties which I stated." 



We have received during the present year two new parts of Messrs. 

 Bóhtlingk and Roth's Sanskrit Dictionary, which carry the work 

 down to rT'Rf^. It is seldom that we can detect any omissions in 

 this excellent work ; but we may venture to notice an oversight in 

 the latter part. Under the word ^"^TC we have only a quotation from 

 the Mahábh,, where it is a proper ñame, followed by the remark, 

 " Welche Bed. hat aber das Wort, Málatí-Mádhava 148-8 ?" The 

 learned editors appear to have overlooked the fact that this obscure 

 word is a favourite with Bhavabhúti. It occurs in the Mál-Mádh., 

 p. 3.3 in the phrase ^*p:iTT*n*n where the scholiast explains it by 

 Slí%lf (Prof. Wilson translates it " possessing ñames of note."). In 

 the prologue to the Mahávírach. we have ^f^TU # in a similar 

 sense. The use of this word in Mal. M., p. 148, 8, 



is by no means so infrequent as the editors' remark would lead us to 

 suppose. The same meaning (as applied to the blossoms of the Ka- 

 damba) occurs in an earlier part of this very play (p. 48, last line) in 

 the lines 



where the scholiast explains it by gtfif ; and a parallel is also to be 

 found in the Mahávíracharita (Trithen's ed. p. 99, 17) where it is 

 applied to the masses of clouds, 



C. 



* So the Calcutta edition, explained by Pundit Táránáth Tarkabáchaspati 

 ^*5KT¡fSj¡%*ifa?r?n: The London edition reads faultily ^"^5TCT.\ 



