163 
1883.] A. F. Rudolf TToernle —Note on the preceding Essay. 
chandra’s express authority for looking on the termination as indicating 
theloc. sing.; and since the suffix Fxf (as a locative suffix) is in all probability 
a mere variety of the suffix Ft, we may assume that, even though not 
noticed by Hemachandra, it might also be used with bases in a, just as with 
bases in i and u* However that may be, it is certain that in after times 
both suffixes and f% were used as terminations of the locative singular. 
This is proved both by the usage of Tulsi Das in his Ramayan and of the 
Maithili, as already stated in the preceding Essay, pp. 126, 130. If modern 
pandits maintain that the suffix rt is always used by Tulsi Das in a plural 
sense, they can only do by saying that when it is used in the singular it con¬ 
veys an honorific sense. But this is merely an easy method of theirs of squar¬ 
ing awkward facts with a pre-conceived theory. Pace the pandits, we must 
judge for ourselves ; for instance, taking the example, quoted on p. 123, 
there is no conceivable reason why “ not in season,” should 
have a plural sense, whether honorific or otherwise, standing as it does by 
the side of the singular fFg “ in season”. Many other examples, of similar 
undeniable singulars, might be cited. 
It may be added that in the examples quoted above (p. 160) from 
Chand the words “in this part,” “ on the seventh day,” and 
many other similar instances, cannot well be explained as anything else 
than locatives. 
However, I am not absolutely concerned to prove that every single 
modern form in v: or ^ corresponds to an Ap. Prak. locative. It is certain 
that a later period, the affixes Ft and fx? were used in a much looser way, 
as a sort of general inflectional suffix (as may be seen from the examples, 
cited on pp. 122—125), and it is, therefore, quite permissible to say, that 
the modern termination v; is used in the sense of the instrumental in certain 
cases (viz., in the regular declension of the Maithili, see Grierson’s Mth. 
Gr. Part I, p. 9). This does not apply, however, to phrases like qiw" 
etc., which can be directly traced to the Ap. Pr. and shown to be locatives. 
But in any case, by whatever particular case-name they may be called, the 
modern forms in y, ^ are direct descendants of Ap. Pr. forms in 
I will only add, in conclusion, that I am inclined to agree with the 
theory put forward on pp. 154ff regarding the probable derivation of the 
verbal noun in a or i, obi. ai or e, though I should carry up the descent of 
the oblique forms to the Ap. Pr. terminations in and 55 rather than to 
the literary Pr. termination in Thus, the obi. and (p. 151) 
correspond to the oblique and EfF (see p. 151), and I would identify 
the South Maithili and Magadhi oblique epo (pronounced ghardw with aw 
as in the English “law”) with Ap. Pr Ef*;^, while the Magadhi obi. is 
the same as Ap. Pr. Eppf%. I hope to have another opportunity of further 
explaining this view. 
* Indeed, as H. C. gives both forms (= ^^f^) and (— 
promiscuously, he virtually allows the unnasalised suffix r? to a-basos. 
