172 Reply to Mr. Groivse. [No. 4, 



I do not criticise Mr. Growse's specimens of translation, as the Hin- 

 di from which he translates is not traceable in either of my copies of 

 Chand, and appears not to be written by Chand at all, but by some 

 modern author who has borrowed the poet's name. 



Lines 1-4. These lines stand as follows : 



^TT fw: ^jffT ^ I 

 ^ ■ J 



This shews how erroneous Mr. Growse's version is. It foists in a 

 second 1xfa in the first line, then writes durg for drugg i not knowing 

 that Ghand always throws the r back in such words as these, as srab for 

 sarb, dhram for dharm, subran for subam and many others, and then 

 to eke out the rhyme alters bliug into bhurg a purely imaginary word : 

 bhug is a common Chand corruption for bhuj ' arm,' and the compound 

 mahdbhug means, as I have translated it 'mighty armed' like ' maha 

 bahu' a common epithet of kings. Mr. Growse's notes on these four 

 lines are simple nonsense ; and his mistake of supposing suvijaya ' very 

 victorious' to be the name of the king is the more ridiculous because 

 the real name Padam Sen is given a few lines further on. 



4. Sevahi, says Mr. Growse is a verb ! If so, it would be interesting 

 to know what part of the verb it is. Mr. Growse is, it would seem, 

 unaware of the Prakrit form of the dative plural (Lassen Inst. B. p. 311, 

 where it is wrongly given as an instrumental) from the Sanskrit from 

 ^W, which in Prakrit becomes %^f^ and finally ^Nf^f. 



As to nisan meaning ' a kettledrum,' it may be so, but I do not find 

 it in five of the best dictionaries ; and as the real texts read bahusadh 

 or sddd and not ndd, I prefer to retain the ordinary translation of 

 'standards.' 



5. Here again Mr. Growse's text is absurdly wrong; a reference to 

 my text as given below will shew that my rendering is correct. The 

 " puissant chiefs" of Mr. Growse's translation, are evidently a creation 

 of his own brain, or of his Pandit's, for I do not see how he gets it out 

 of his own text even. 



7. " Mr. B. has entirely omitted the words hay sankhi." Yes, I 

 have, because they are not in the text. 



8. " Apparently Mr. B. has wrongly divided the words." Mr. B. 



