None

[George Cardona]

Dear colleague, I'm glad I was able to help.  I regret, however, that I am unable to give you any detailed information concerning the geographical distribution of the kaapya and kaapeya descendants.  I know that both the derivates occur in passages of early Upani.sads (B.rhadaara.nyaka, Chaandogya), and I'll check as soon as I can and get back to you.  If I recall correctly, though, I don't think these inform us definitively about geographical distribution.  All the more disappointing in view of what you say about the Tamil Nadu situation!  Sorry not to be able to help more.  By the way, Agrawal's is not a real book but merely a small pamphlet with materials extracted from his larger work (India as known to Paa.nini).  It may be that you cannot obtain the pamphlet.  If you wish, I can easily make a xerographic copy and send it to you by mail.  With best wishes, George Cardona

-----Original Message-----
>From: Jean-Luc Chevillard <jean-luc.chevillard at UNIV-PARIS-DIDEROT.FR>
>Sent: Apr 11, 2009 11:10 AM
>To: INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk
>Subject: "kaapya-" vs. "kaapeya-" (Re: Actual use of gotra (=vr.ddha) and yuvan
>
>Dear Professor Cardona,
>
>thank you very much for this clarification. I shall try to find the 1963 
>book by V.S. Agrawal.
>
>I have a related question, concerning another sūtra, namely PS_4,1.107:
>
>kapi-bodhād āṅgirase || PS_4,1.107 || {{Vasu: "The affix 'yañ' comes in 
>the sense of a Gotra descendant, after the words /kapi/ and /bodha/, 
>when the special descendants of the family of the Angiras are meant."}} 
>{{Boehtlingk: "Von /kapi/ und /bodha/, wenn ein Âṅgirasa gemeint ist"}} 
>{{Renou: "(Le suffixe secondaire 'yañ' est valable pour former un 
>patronymique restreint) après les noms /kapiḥ/ et /bodhaḥ/ quand il 
>s'agit du clan des Aṅgiras." [NOTE EXPLICATIVE: /kāpyaḥ/ 'petit-fils de 
>kapi, des Aṅgiras', /baudhyaḥ/ 'petit-fils de Bodha']}}
>
>I see in the 1953 book by John Brough (/The Early Brahmanical System of 
>Gotra and Pravara/, Cambridge University Press), on p. 30 (fn. 1) and on 
>p. 33, that the "kapis" oscillate between the the /Kevala Angirases/ and 
>the /Bharadvājas/ (exogamous unit VII, subset of "Aṅgirases" [according 
>to page 29: "both the Gautamas and the Bhāradvājas [are classified] 
>under the Angirases"]).
>
>I see in the notes by Vasu (p.668 in the 1988 reprint) that the 
>specification "āṅgirase" (inside PS_4,1.107) seems to be a criterion for 
>choosing either the form /kāpyaḥ/ (if Angiras) or /kāpēyaḥ/ (if not 
>Angiras?).
>
>Is it known in which part of India the form /kāpyaḥ/ was found and in 
>which part of India the form /kāpēyaḥ/  was found?
>
>I am especially interested in the case of Tamil Nadu brahmins, because 
>the inside /Karandai Tamil Sangam Plates/ (of king Rajendrachola I) 
>[Archaeological survey of India, 1984, K.G. Krishnan (ed.)], 10 
>different brahmins (among the 1083 brahmins who are enumerated) have 
>"kapi" as their gotra, namely the Brahmins numbered 167, 201, 225, 237, 
>239, 306, 439, 906, 937 & 954.
>
>I would be grateful for any comment on actual usage.
>
>-- Jean-Luc Chevillard (Paris)
>
>
>George Cardona a écrit :
>> Dear colleague, The "suutras" are clearly not part of the original A.s.taadhyaayii text as known to Kaatyaayana and Patanjali. *4.1.166: v.rddhasya ca puujaayaam is vaarttika 3 to 4.1.163 (jiivati tu va.m'sye yuvaa.  *4.1.167: yuuna's ca kutsaayaam is included as part of the suutra text of the Kaa'sikaav.rtti but is identified as not part of the original text by Kaiya.ta in his Pradiipam (Rohtak ed. III.617) on 4.1.162 (apatyam pautraprabh.rti gotram) vt. 2 (jiivadva.m'sya.m ca kutsitam), where Kaiya.ta cites yuuna's ca kutsaayaam and remarks that this statement shows the suutra in question does not stem from the sage: yuuna's ca kutsaayaam iti suutram anaar.sam iti vacanam.  In his Bhaa.sya on 4.1.162 vt. 2 (Kielhorn-Abhyankar ed. II.265.5-8), Patanjali remarks that someone whose father is still alive but is independent is addressed using a gotra term; such an offspring bears the technical name 'gotra' out of scorn, as when one addresses one who should be called gaargyaaya.na (using a yuvan term) is addressed as gargya.  Conversely, an elder who rspresents his line and is properly referred to using a gotra term like gaargya may affectionately be addressed using a yuvan term like gaargyaaya.na, now used as an honorific, since youth is something desirable (Bh. on 4.1.163 vt. 3, II.265.23-25).  There is a very old but still informative pamphlet by V. S. Agrawal, 'Gotras in Paa.nini'(Varanasi, 1963), but I don't know of a detailed study of the usage in the domains you mention.  I hope this helps.  George Cardona  
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>   
>>> From: Jean-Luc Chevillard <jean-luc.chevillard at UNIV-PARIS-DIDEROT.FR>
>>> Sent: Apr 9, 2009 4:47 AM
>>> To: INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk
>>> Subject: Actual use of gotra (=vr.ddha) and yuvan
>>>
>>> Dear list members,
>>>
>>> I would like to have information regarding the actual use of /gotra/ (or 
>>> /vṛddha/ ?) and /yuvan/ for referring to individuals or for adressing them.
>>>
>>> I would like to have a clear understanding of the purport of the 
>>> following two sūtra-s (found among the sūtra-s of Pāṇini but said to be 
>>> in fact vārttika-s):
>>>
>>> vṛddhasya ca pūjāyām || PS_4,1.166 || {{Vasu: "The Gotra is sometimes 
>>> optionally regarded as Yuvan, when respectful reference to him is 
>>> intended"}} {{Boehtlingk: "Auch statt des Geschlechtsnamens kann man das 
>>> zweite Patronymicum brauchen, wenn man Jemand ehren will."}} {{Renou: 
>>> "(Le nom technique de /yuvan/) peut être le substitut (du patronymique 
>>> restreint) dit /vṛddha/ quand il y a intention d'honorer."}}
>>>
>>> yūnaś ca kutsāyām || PS_4,1.167 || {{Vasu: "The Yuvan is optionally 
>>> spoken of as Gotra, when contemptuous reference to him is intended"}} 
>>> {{Boehtlingk: "Auch den Juvan kann man mit dem Geschlechtsnamen 
>>> bezeichnen, wenn man ihn schmähen will"}} {{Renou: "(Le nom technique de 
>>> /vṛddha/) peut être le substitut du nom de /yuvan/ quand il y a 
>>> intention de critiquer"}}
>>>
>>> Has anybody written (in English, or French, or German, ...) on the 
>>> actual use as seen in literature, in inscriptions, etc.?
>>>
>>> I would be grateful for any bibliographical pointer or for comments.
>>>
>>> -- Jean-Luc Chevillard (Paris)
>>>     
>>
>>