India office OPAC?

banks at banks at
Tue Aug 31 18:03:18 UTC 1993

>> ... since ten years
>> ago, the Bodleian for example, did not even have a proper card catalogue. I
>> routinely dial into the various American library catalogues, of course.
>That's not quite fair to the Bod.

But a word of warning: the Bodley on-line catalogue does *not* include all
the holdings. As with many other British libraries now going on-line,
retrospective catalogue conversion is a long, slow and expensive process.
The lack of an entry does not mean the book is not in the library (of
course this is only really relevant to those who wish to use the library in

Marcus Banks, Oxford


> From Tkatschow at 31 1993 Aug PST 13:29:50
Date: 31 Aug 1993 13:29:50 PST
From: Tkatschow at
Subject: RE: text of Rasaratnakara

To Dominik Wujastyk,

    RE: The Sanskrit Manuscript of the Rasaratnakara

Dominik, I don't  know whether you remember me from the Indian 
Studies conference in Wisconsin about five years ago. But I was 
the young scholar who had lunch with you and discussed Nagarjuna's
text of the Rasaratnakara and its relationship to tantra and 
alchemy. I would like to know if you edited and translated the 
entire text, and if so where and how can I get a copy of these
materials. Also I would like to know if I could obtain a copy of
the text text itself. The one you had at the time of the conference.
Please let me know id this is possible and how much it will cost and 
where where to contact you by mail. Thankyou.

                                            Dwight Tkatschow
                                            Ritsumeikan Institute
                                            Vancouver, B.C., Canada

> From mehta at 31 1993 Aug U 15:34:58
Date: 31 Aug 1993 15:34:58 U
From: "Mehta, Shailendra" <mehta at>
Subject: RE: India office OPAC?

Dominik wrote,

>That's not quite fair to the Bod.  The Bod has a venerable set of
>catalogues going back to the time of Thomas, including the Indian
>Institute.  Finding something was always rather complicated, since
>some catalogues were cards, others books, and so forth.  But it was
>(mostly) catalogued, if you had the patience and help from staff.

I am rather fond of the Bod. (I even used to have a wonderful etching of it in
my study -- now gifted to a young friend of mine, who took a fancy to it when
he was ten years of age.)

But it was indeed rather odd that its references were organized largely by
pasting labels in books. It boggled the mind. (The amount of repasting would
increase exponentially with the size of the collection.) I wonder why they
*ever* used books ? But then I never understood why my friends had to sign
copyright forms for 14th century material either. Perhaps someone can explain.
That, in any case, was what I had in mind. 

The India Insititue of course was another matter altogether. It had a card
catalogue, for one thing. I have memories of many pleasant hours spent there. 



More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list