COMMERCIAL EDS. + CRIT. EDS

[rwl at uts.cc.utexas.edu]

To Ashok's precisely correct clarifications I would add that the assumption
that the readings of the oldest surviving manuscript carry more weight is
also not necessarily correct.

>In more than one communication on the subject specified above I have seen,
>explicitly or implicitly, an assumption to the effect that a reading
>supported by the greatest number of manuscripts carries weight. A more
>precise and defensible way is to hold that a reading supported by ("good
>mansuscripts in) the greatest number of versions or recensions carries
>weight.
>
>Once this is realised, the severity of even the problems encountered in the
>case of fluid texts (such as the Mahaabhaarata, the Puraanas and the
>compositions of Sants) diminishes considerably. The versions or recensions
>are usually representative of a good geographical spread. As in the case of
>languages, forms/readings attested in the widest geographical spread are
>usually older forms/readings.
>
>Dr.Lorenzen's contribution indicates that in the case of some texts it may
>be rewarding to prepare different critical editions for the different
>periods (and perhaps even for the different regions) of the prevalence of a
>text. However, we would not be able to determine whether this is warranted
>or how exactly we should  use the editions coming out of such efforts for
>larger historicalreconstruction if the costant aim is not to recover the
>oldest accessible form.
>
>Ashok Aklujkar
>
>