Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
18. The group aya is to be changed into aia or ea. Ex. wv ve nayasi becomes naiasi. g. The group va is to be changed into ua, and this ua to be treated as a kind of diphthong and therefore long. Ex. kamvatamak becomes kamuatama#; varunak becomes Garunah, 10. The short vowel in the reduplicated syllable of perfects is to be lengthened. Ex. tatanah, dadhire. 11. Short vowels before all aspirates may be lengthened. Ex. rathas becomes rathaz; sakhA becomes sakha. 12, Short vowels before h and all sibilants may be lengthened. Ex. mahini becomes mahini ; usigam becomes usigdm ; rishate becomes rishate; dasat becomes dasat. 13. The short vowel before t may be lengthened. Ex. vagavatahk becomes vagavatah; atithi becomes atithiz. 14. The short vowel before d may be lengthened, Ex. udaram becomes udaram; ud ava becomes ud ava. 15. The short vowel before p may be lengthened. Ex, ap4m becomes ap4m; tapushim becomes tapushim ; g7‘hapatim becomes grthapatim. 16. The short vowel before g and g may be lengthened, Ex. sAnushag asat becomes sdnushag asat; yunagan becomes yunagan. Let us now turn back for one moment to look at the slaughter which has been committed! Is there one single rule of prosody that has been spared? Is there one single short syllable that must always remain short, or a long syllable that must always remain long? If all restrictions of prosody are thus removed, our metres, no doubt, become perfectly regular. But it should be remembered that these metrical rules, for which all this carnage has been committed, are not founded upon any a priori principles, but deduced by ancient or modern metricians from those very hymns which seem so constantly to violate PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. cxi
2But it should be remembered that these metrical rules, for which all this carnage has been committed, are not founded upon any a priori principles, but deduced by ancient or modern metricians from those very hymns which seem so constantly to violate PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. cxi them. Neither ancient nor modern metricians had, as far as we know, any evidence to go upon besides the hymns of the Rig-veda; and the philosophical speculations as to the origin of metres in which some of them indulge, and from which they would fain derive some of their unbending rules, are, as need hardly be said, of no consequence whatever. I cannot understand what definite idea even modern writers connect with such statements as that, for instance, the Trishfubh metre sprang from the Gagati metre, that the eleven syllables of the former are an abbreviation of the twelve syllables of the latter. Surely, metres are not made artificially, and by addition or subtraction. Metres have a natural origin in the rhythmic sentiment of different people, and they become artificial and arithmetical in the same way as language with its innate principles of law and analogy becomes in course of time grammatical and artificial. To derive one metre from another is like deriving a genitive from a nominative, which we may do indeed for grammatical purposes, but which no one would venture to do who is at all acquainted with the natural and independent production of grammatical forms. Were we to arrange the Trishtubh and Gagati metres in chronological order, I should decidedly place the Trishfubh first, for we see, as it were before our eyes, how sometimes one foot, sometimes two and three feet in a Trish¢tubh verse admit an additional syllable at the end, particularly in set phrases which would not submit to a Trishtubh ending. The phrase sam no bhava dvipade sam katushpade is evidently a solemn phrase, and we see it brought in without hesitation, even though every other line of the same strophe or hymn is Trish¢ubh, i.e. hendecasyllabic, not dodecasyllabic. See, for instance, VI, 74, 1; VII, 54, 1; X, 85,44; 165,1. However, I maintain by no means that this was the actual origin of Gagati metres; I only refer to it in order to show the groundlessness of metrical theories which represent the component elements, a foot of one or two or four syllables as given first, and as afterwards compounded into systems of two, three or four such feet, and who therefore would wish us to look upon the hendecasy]-~ labic Trishfubh as originally a dodecasyllabic Gagati, only cxii VEDIC HYMNS.
3deprived of its tail. If my explanation of the name of Trishtubh, i. e. Three-step, is right, its origin must be ascribed to a far more natural process than that of artificial amputation. It was to accompany a choros, i.e. a dance, which after advancing freely for eight steps in one direction, turned back (vrtta) with three steps, the second of which was strongly marked, and would therefore, whether in song or recitation, be naturally accompanied by a long syllable. It certainly is so in the vast majority of Trishtubhs which have been handed down to us. But if among these verses we find a small number in which this simple and palpable rhythm is violated, and which nevertheless were preserved from the first in that imperfect form, although the temptation to set them right must have been as great to the ancient as it has proved to be to the modern students of the Veda, are we to say that nearly all, if not all, the rules that determine the length and shortness of syllables, and which alone give character to every verse, are to be suspended? Or, ought we not rather to consider, whether the ancient choregic poets may not have indulged occasionally in an irregular movement? We see that this was so with regard to Gayatrf verses. We see the greater freedom of the first and second pddas occasionally extend to the third ; and it will be impossible, without intolerable violence, to remove all the varieties of the last pada of a Gayatri of which I have given examples above, pages civ seqq. It is, of course, impossible to give here all the evidence that might be brought forward in support of similar freedom Traishfubha in Trishfubh verses, and I admit that the Vritta. number of real varieties with them is smaller than with the Gayatris. In order to make the evidence which I have to bring forward in support of these varieties as unassailable as possible, I have excluded nearly every pada that occurs only in the first, second, or third line of a strophe, and have restricted myself, with few exceptions, and those chiefly referring to padas that had been quoted by other scholars in support of their own theories, to the final padas of Trishfubh verses. Yet even with this limited evidence, I think I shall be able to establish at least three PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. CXill varieties of Trishtubh. Preserving the same classification which I adopted before for the Gayatris, so as to include the important eighth syllable of the Trishfubh, which does not properly belong to the vrétta, I maintain that class 4. vu--, class 5. ---- , and class 8, — uu — must be recognised as legimate endings in the hymns of the Veda, and that by recognising them we are relieved from nearly all, if not all, the more violent prosodial licences which Professor Kuhn felt himself obliged to admit in his theory of Vedic metres. §4.vu--.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
18. The group aya is to be changed into aia or ea. Ex. wv ve nayasi becomes naiasi. g. The group va is to be changed into ua, and this ua to be treated as a kind of diphthong and therefore long. Ex. kamvatamak becomes kamuatama#; varunak becomes Garunah, 10. The short vowel in the reduplicated syllable of perfects is to be lengthened. Ex. tatanah, dadhire. 11. Short vowels before all aspirates may be lengthened. Ex. rathas becomes rathaz; sakhA becomes sakha. 12, Short vowels before h and all sibilants may be lengthened. Ex. mahini becomes mahini ; usigam becomes usigdm ; rishate becomes rishate; dasat becomes dasat. 13. The short vowel before t may be lengthened. Ex. vagavatahk becomes vagavatah; atithi becomes atithiz. 14. The short vowel before d may be lengthened, Ex. udaram becomes udaram; ud ava becomes ud ava. 15. The short vowel before p may be lengthened. Ex, ap4m becomes ap4m; tapushim becomes tapushim ; g7‘hapatim becomes grthapatim. 16. The short vowel before g and g may be lengthened, Ex. sAnushag asat becomes sdnushag asat; yunagan becomes yunagan. Let us now turn back for one moment to look at the slaughter which has been committed! Is there one single rule of prosody that has been spared? Is there one single short syllable that must always remain short, or a long syllable that must always remain long? If all restrictions of prosody are thus removed, our metres, no doubt, become perfectly regular. But it should be remembered that these metrical rules, for which all this carnage has been committed, are not founded upon any a priori principles, but deduced by ancient or modern metricians from those very hymns which seem so constantly to violate PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. cxi
2But it should be remembered that these metrical rules, for which all this carnage has been committed, are not founded upon any a priori principles, but deduced by ancient or modern metricians from those very hymns which seem so constantly to violate PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. cxi them. Neither ancient nor modern metricians had, as far as we know, any evidence to go upon besides the hymns of the Rig-veda; and the philosophical speculations as to the origin of metres in which some of them indulge, and from which they would fain derive some of their unbending rules, are, as need hardly be said, of no consequence whatever. I cannot understand what definite idea even modern writers connect with such statements as that, for instance, the Trishfubh metre sprang from the Gagati metre, that the eleven syllables of the former are an abbreviation of the twelve syllables of the latter. Surely, metres are not made artificially, and by addition or subtraction. Metres have a natural origin in the rhythmic sentiment of different people, and they become artificial and arithmetical in the same way as language with its innate principles of law and analogy becomes in course of time grammatical and artificial. To derive one metre from another is like deriving a genitive from a nominative, which we may do indeed for grammatical purposes, but which no one would venture to do who is at all acquainted with the natural and independent production of grammatical forms. Were we to arrange the Trishtubh and Gagati metres in chronological order, I should decidedly place the Trishfubh first, for we see, as it were before our eyes, how sometimes one foot, sometimes two and three feet in a Trish¢tubh verse admit an additional syllable at the end, particularly in set phrases which would not submit to a Trishtubh ending. The phrase sam no bhava dvipade sam katushpade is evidently a solemn phrase, and we see it brought in without hesitation, even though every other line of the same strophe or hymn is Trish¢ubh, i.e. hendecasyllabic, not dodecasyllabic. See, for instance, VI, 74, 1; VII, 54, 1; X, 85,44; 165,1. However, I maintain by no means that this was the actual origin of Gagati metres; I only refer to it in order to show the groundlessness of metrical theories which represent the component elements, a foot of one or two or four syllables as given first, and as afterwards compounded into systems of two, three or four such feet, and who therefore would wish us to look upon the hendecasy]-~ labic Trishfubh as originally a dodecasyllabic Gagati, only cxii VEDIC HYMNS.
3deprived of its tail. If my explanation of the name of Trishtubh, i. e. Three-step, is right, its origin must be ascribed to a far more natural process than that of artificial amputation. It was to accompany a choros, i.e. a dance, which after advancing freely for eight steps in one direction, turned back (vrtta) with three steps, the second of which was strongly marked, and would therefore, whether in song or recitation, be naturally accompanied by a long syllable. It certainly is so in the vast majority of Trishtubhs which have been handed down to us. But if among these verses we find a small number in which this simple and palpable rhythm is violated, and which nevertheless were preserved from the first in that imperfect form, although the temptation to set them right must have been as great to the ancient as it has proved to be to the modern students of the Veda, are we to say that nearly all, if not all, the rules that determine the length and shortness of syllables, and which alone give character to every verse, are to be suspended? Or, ought we not rather to consider, whether the ancient choregic poets may not have indulged occasionally in an irregular movement? We see that this was so with regard to Gayatrf verses. We see the greater freedom of the first and second pddas occasionally extend to the third ; and it will be impossible, without intolerable violence, to remove all the varieties of the last pada of a Gayatri of which I have given examples above, pages civ seqq. It is, of course, impossible to give here all the evidence that might be brought forward in support of similar freedom Traishfubha in Trishfubh verses, and I admit that the Vritta. number of real varieties with them is smaller than with the Gayatris. In order to make the evidence which I have to bring forward in support of these varieties as unassailable as possible, I have excluded nearly every pada that occurs only in the first, second, or third line of a strophe, and have restricted myself, with few exceptions, and those chiefly referring to padas that had been quoted by other scholars in support of their own theories, to the final padas of Trishfubh verses. Yet even with this limited evidence, I think I shall be able to establish at least three PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. CXill varieties of Trishtubh. Preserving the same classification which I adopted before for the Gayatris, so as to include the important eighth syllable of the Trishfubh, which does not properly belong to the vrétta, I maintain that class 4. vu--, class 5. ---- , and class 8, — uu — must be recognised as legimate endings in the hymns of the Veda, and that by recognising them we are relieved from nearly all, if not all, the more violent prosodial licences which Professor Kuhn felt himself obliged to admit in his theory of Vedic metres. §4.vu--.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.