xxviii PREFACE
The affairs of Harsa have recently been considered once more, 1 with the usual indecisive results.
The necessity of economy of space, no less than the meagre resources of the Library of a University perforce incurious of Oriental Letters, has necessitated the reduction of bibliographical references to a minimum, but I have, I trust, passed over nothing of permanent value ; as in my Religion and Philosophy of the Veda and Upanishads, I have omitted such work as seems to display mere ingenuity or unscientifically to revive ancient errors. Specific acknowledgements will be found in the notes ; a more general debt is due to the historians of literature and the editors of anthologies, and I tender grateful thanks to Professors Macdonell, Peterson, Thomas, Weber, Oldenberg, von Schroeder, and Winter- nitz. By devoting special attention to matters of style and literary form I have endeavoured to avoid dealing at length with issues already effectively discussed by my predecessors. In my short sketch of Classical Sanskrit Literature, written in 1923 for The Heritage of India Series, 1 have anticipated many of the views which here are set out in detail and supported by further argument.
I have to express my most sincere appreciation of the willing- ness of the Delegates of the Press to publish this work as well as my Sanskrit Drama, and of the great assistance rendered to me in preparing it by my wife.
A. BERRIEDALE KEITH.
University of Edinburgh, February 1928.
1 Nihar Ranjan Ray, IHQ. iii. 769-92. Congratulations are due to the editor, Dr. Narendra Nath Law, of this most interesting Quarterly, in which there has already appeared much useful and suggestive work on .a wide range of topics.
