The present reviewer has ben told on a number of occasions by Western students of Buddhism, including some members of university faculties, that Guenther's works are incomprehensible or useless to them. I know that this is a rather harsh judgment to repeat and prefer that a milder evaluation would be possible for the work under review which should be, and will be, judged on its own merits. After all, Guenther in the present book takes up a subject which has been studied for centuries in Tibet-the four systems of Buddhist philosophy ("the four siddhmta, Tib. grub mthcC) which are the Vaibhasika, Sautrantika, Yogacara (=Cittamatra), and Madhyamika. Since a number of Tibetan works of this genre are now available in reprints made in northern India by the Tibetans themselves, it is relatively easy to check upon Guenther's meth¬odology and standards. Unfortunately, he does not provide much cause of praise. It would be the better part of politeness to simply not review such a book, but then a reviewer with control of the sources would have abnegated his responsibility to the readers. Another consideration is that Guenther himself has displayed in print a rather virulent antipathy toward the scholarly approach in the scope of his interests. There¬fore, the reviewer must take up the somewhat unpleasant task of evaluating this book.
The title is the first occasion for perplexity. How indeed is "philosophy" to be found in both "theory" and "practice" ? Guenther himself states (p. 18): "In philoso¬phizing we travel the path to the primal source of our being. As a methodical reflection it can be subsumed under three questions: What do I know ? What is authentic or true ? How do I know ?" Also (p. 19): "Hence 'path'and 'knowledge'and 'awareness' are synonymous in Buddhism." He thereby clarifies that the title of the book does not conform to the contents, which are concerned with theory and not with practice. This judgment is further certified by Guenther's own main sources for th:s book, two of the native Tibetan siddhmta works, a Gelugpa one by Jigs-med dbangpo - his Jewel Garland-and a Rning-ma-pa one by Mi-pham J'am-dbyangs rnam-rgyal rgya-mtsho-his Summary. Consultation of the references to the path shows that it is the view toward the path that is meant rather than the drawn-out practical instruction on the path which is a favorite topic of Buddhist scriptures.
The author does not mention, presumably because he does not know, that it is Atisa - according to the initial folios of Tsong-kha-pa's Lam rim chen mo—who, at the outset of the second diffusion of Buddhism in Tibet, brings with his arrival
in 1042 A. D. the study of Buddhist philosophy in the form of the four siddhmta. It is Guenther's misrepresentation to suggest (preface, x)that the Rning-ma-pa work by Mi-pham constitutes a teaching that stems from the eighth century (the time of Padmasambhava).
Guenther's procedure has been to separate out in chanters devoted to each of the four siddhmta relevant material from each of the two texts, along with his own intro¬ductory remarks. Thus he does not give a full translation of the two treatises, at least not of the one by Dkon-mchog 'Jigs-med dbang-po, the Grub pa'i mtha'i mam parbzagpa rinpo che'i phreng bales byaba (the "Jewel Garland"). In this Gelugpa work, available in a north India reprint, I have compared his treatment of the Svatan-trika Madhyamika school attributed to the appropriate section of this treatise, with the Tibetan section itself in the edition accessible to me.
There is a remarkable failure in what can be called the translator's integrity or conscience. That is to say, we suppose of a translator, when he indicates to the reader that he is rendering a section of the Tibetan book, as does Guenther (pp. 130-136) with the heading "From the Jewel Garland, Grub pa'i mtha'i rnam-par bzhag -pa iin-po che'i phreng-ba, fol. 12a," that what he give there ;s a translation of the Tibetan text. We suppose that if he does not give the translation in entirety, or changes the order, summarizes and paraphrases at pleasure, that he would so inform the reader. But Guenther makes these modifications without informing the reader.
In Guenther's exposition of the "Jewel Garland," section on the Madhyamika Svatantrika, he first makes introductory remarks about the Madhyamika school culled from the text. He follows with subsections "Contents of the Philosophical Faith of the Yogacara-Madhyamika-Svatantrikas" (pp. 131-135) and "Contents of the philoso¬phical Faith of the Sautrantika-Madhyamika-Svatantrikas" (pp. 135-136). His content does not always follow the order of the text. It would take too long to detail all his vagaries, but an incredible example should be mentioned. What first aroused the suspi¬cions of the reviewer was noticing on Guenther's page 132 under the Yogacara subse¬ction the remark, "The ultimately real is further divided into sixteen types of nothingness which can be subsumed under four headings." Consultation of the Tibetan text failed to turn up this remark in the given subsection, but the remark (I reserve judgment on his rendition) was found in the second subsection on the Sautrantrika. What the Yog¬acara subsection states (p. 50 in my booklet edition of the Tibetan) is as follows (in part)-my translation followed by the original Tibetan in transcription:
They (the Yogacara-Madhyamika-Svatantrikas) held that the special natures of the four Truths, to wit, the sixteen, impermanence, etc. as well as the personality's void of accomplishment by permanence, singleness, or independence, are the coarse kind of pudgala-nairHtmya (non-self of personality); while the personality's void of any self-sufficient substance is the subtle kind of pudgala-naira.tmya.
/bden bzi'i khyad chos mi rtag sogs bcu drug dan/ganzag rtag cig ran dbah can gyis grub pas ston pa gan zag gi bdag med rags pa dan/gan zag ran rkya thub pa'i rdzas yod kyis ston pa gan zag gi bdag med phra mo yin la/ It is obvious that Guenther has omitted not only this passage but other important materials concerning this sub-school, while including under this heading materials that the Tibetan author did not include. Guenther has so mixed up the respective contents of the two sub-schools that it is useless to read these pages of his book to get information on the topic. And observing his performance here, it does not seem wor¬thwhile to investigate his representation of the other schools treated by th'"s Tibetan author.
Besides, Guenther admits that the "Jewel Garland" work follows the Indian tradition. Therefore, it is fair to notice the translation of terms in the light of the fact that this school (the Gelugpa) ordinarily uses Buddhist terms in the contextual meanings of the translations from Sanskrit of the Tibetan canon (the Kanjur and Tanjur). Referring again to a passage, his p. 133, included under the Yogacara subse¬ction of the Svatantika-which is actually in the Sautrantrika subsection in the original Tibetan-he renders it as folloWvS:
Traversing the Path. Belief in the absolute status of the self is for them wishfulness and emotivity, and belief in the absolute status of the entities of reality other than the self is intellectual fog. The latter is of two kinds: coarse, >'nsofar as it is the belief that the objective and the subjective are of different material; and subtle, insofar as it is the belief that the psychophysical constituents and other entities of reality exist in truth. This is the Tibetan for the foregoing:
/gnis pa lam gyi span bya ni/gan zag gi bdag 'dzin non sgrib dan/ chos kyi bdag 'dzin ses sgrib tu' dod tin/ ses sgrib la yan gzun 'dzin rdzas 'gzan du 'dzin pa lta bu zes sgrib rags pa dan phun sogs kyi chos bden grub tu 'dzin pa Ita - bu zes sgrib phra mo gnis su'dod do/. Now translating the same passage with fidelity to the well-established Sanskrit-Tibetan correspondences, we have;
Second, they claim that among the things to be eliminated on the path, the imputa¬tion that there is the self of personality {pud.gala-z.tman) is the obscuration of defile¬ment (klesa-avarana) and the imputation that there is the self of nature (dharma-Htman) is the obscuration of the knowable (jneya-avarana). Furthermore, they claim in regard to the obscuration of the knowable that there is a coarse kind of obscu¬ration of the knowable, to wit, the imputation that apprehended and apprehender area different substance; and that there is a subtle kind of obscuration of the knowable, to wit, the imputation that the natures (dharma) in the personality agg¬regates (skandha), etc. happen by reason of their truth (bden grub).
I cite this one example to show how Guenther's penchant for such terms as"wishfulness" and "emotivity" is more important for him than is faithful translation of a passage. Even if we should give him the benefit of the doubt and allow that he may have under¬stood the original Tibetan, it is even more serious that he should convert the well-written Tibetan into English sentences that continually fail to communicate the original sense of the Tibetan. To present more examples from this portion of his book would entail unwarranted space.
A final consideration is Guenther's obvious intention to set forth a kind of superiority for Mi-pham's text, e. g. (p. 142):
While the Prasangikas are traditionally held to represent the climax of Buddhist philosophy,Mi -pham 'Jam-dbyangs rnam-rgyal rgya-mtsho makes it abundantly
clear that they merely represent the climax of Buddhist epistemology and that the next step in the philosophical quest is the one from epistemology to Being.
Therefore he is the only one who deals with Tantrism in his Summary, while The Jewel Garland lets philosophy end here with epistemology.
Guenther seems not to know that the Gelugpa tradition, in which The Jewel Garland
was written, also places the Tantric attainment higher than non-tantric Mahayana
Buddhism. This is made clear in a brief work of Tsong-kha-pa (founder of the Gelugpa)
included in my "Observations on Translation from the Classical Tibetan Language
into European Languages," Indo-Iranian Journal, XIV, 3/4 (1972), stating at p. 178:
"It is well known that the Mantra path far surpasses the Paramita path, like the sun
and moon". Furthermore, after a masterful exposition of the Prasangika position in
the last section of his Lam rim chen «7o,Tsong-kha-pa concludes with a brief introduction
to Tantra. Therefore, the superior status of Tantrism in Tibetan Buddhism is not a
bone of contention here, although Westerners may wonder why Tantrism is accorded
such an exalted place. Rather, it is a question of whether such Tantric materials belong
in a siddhanta work. Guenther tries to justify the inclusion in Mi-pham's work by
claiming it to be "the next step in the philosophical quest," suggesting to the reader
that Tantrism is justifiably included in the category of philosophy. However, students
of Buddhist Tantra can easily determine that the Tantra involves procedures for
body, speech, and mind known as gestures (mudra), incantations (mantra or dharanl),
and intense concentration (samiidhi). This is scarcely to be termed "philosophy."
The authors of the siddhanta treatises that summarize the main non-Buddhist as well
as the Buddhist philosophical positions, were well advised to exclude Tantric material,
even though such authors themselves - certainly in Tibet - were also generally followers
of the Tantras and frequently authors of works in this latter field.
In conclusion, it is a pity that a fine class of Tibetan treatise, the grub mtha' {siddha¬nta), should be introduced to Western readers in such a garbled fashion. I hope that some competent translator will accurately render the entire text of the Jewel Garland into a European language, with notes and introduction approriate for this text.
i
f OPERA MINORA. By Giuseppe Tucci. Universita di Roma, Studi
Orientali Pubblicati a Cura della Scuola Orientale Volume. VI (Parti I e II). 615 pp. Roma: Dott. Giovanni Bardi, Editore, 1971.
The scholarly limitations of the traditional Festschriften have long been recong-nized. The editors of these elegant volumes are therefore to be commended for choosing to honor Giuseppe Tucci with the republication of a selection of his own works rather than the usual Melanges. In two volumes totaling over six hundred pages, the scritti minori ("minori per mole, non per valore" as Luciano Petech puts it in his brief introduction) of this great scholar are presented, and there is virtually no one in the field of Himalayan studies to whom these works will not be of great use.
There is no way to review such works as these except to list the contents. I have incorporated the changes mentioned in Peteche's avvertenza (p. ix) so that readers will be aware of the differences between the articles as presented here and their original versions:
Parti: 1. Note sulle fonti di Kalidasa
2. Note ed appunti sul Divyavadana
3. Linee di una storia del materialismo indiano (pp. 48-156): complete re-working of the third chapter; appendixes of the original text omitted (pp. 687 -713)
4. Note sul Saudarananda Kavya di Asvaghosa
5. The Vadavidhi
6. Is the Nyayapravesa by Dinnaga ?
7. A visit to an 'astronomical" temple in India
8. Bhamaha and Dinnaga
9. Animadversiones Indicae
10. A fragment from the Pratltya-samutpadavyakhya of Vasubandhu
11. The Jatinirakxti of Jitari
12. Note indologiche
13. Notes on the Nyayapravesa by Sankarasvamin
Part II: 1. The sea and land travels of a Buddhist Sadhu in the sixteenth century (pp. 305-320): important changes and corrections.
2. The Ratnavall of Nagarjuna
3. Some glosses upon the Guhyasamaja
4. On some bronze objects discovered in Western Tibet
5. Indian paintings in Western Tibetan temples
6. Nel Tibet Centrale: relazione preliminare della spedizione 1939
7. Travels of Tibetan pilgrims in the Swat valley (pp. 369-418): many corrections and additions; the appendix containing the Tibstan text has been omitted (pp. 85-103 of the original edition).
8. Alessandro Csma {sic) de Koros
9. Minor Sanskrit Texts on the PrajMparamita.
10. The validity of Tibetan historical tradition
11. Preistoria tibetana
12. Tibetan Notes
13. Buddhist Notes
14. Ratnakarasanti on Mraya-paravrtti
15. Earth in India and Tibet
16. The sacral character of the kings of ancient Tibet
17. The symbolism of the temple of bSam-yas
18. The Fifth Dalai-Lama as a Sanskrit scholar
20. A Hindu image in the Himalayas
21. The wives of Sron-btsan-sgam-po
At the beginning of part one appears a bibliography of Tucci's works from
1911 to 1970. It numbers almost three hundred items and gives testimony to the enor¬
mous breadth of interest of this great scholar.
MsSVig
The title is the first occasion for perplexity. How indeed is "philosophy" to be found in both "theory" and "practice" ? Guenther himself states (p. 18): "In philoso¬phizing we travel the path to the primal source of our being. As a methodical reflection it can be subsumed under three questions: What do I know ? What is authentic or true ? How do I know ?" Also (p. 19): "Hence 'path'and 'knowledge'and 'awareness' are synonymous in Buddhism." He thereby clarifies that the title of the book does not conform to the contents, which are concerned with theory and not with practice. This judgment is further certified by Guenther's own main sources for th:s book, two of the native Tibetan siddhmta works, a Gelugpa one by Jigs-med dbangpo - his Jewel Garland-and a Rning-ma-pa one by Mi-pham J'am-dbyangs rnam-rgyal rgya-mtsho-his Summary. Consultation of the references to the path shows that it is the view toward the path that is meant rather than the drawn-out practical instruction on the path which is a favorite topic of Buddhist sc
The author does not mention, presumably because he does not know, that it is Atisa - according to the initial folios of Tsong-kha-pa's Lam rim chen mo—who, at the outset of the second diffusion of Buddhism in Tibet, brings with his arrival
in 1042 A. D. the study of Buddhist philosophy in the form of the four siddhmta. It is Guenther's misrepresentation to suggest (preface, x)that the Rning-ma-pa work by Mi-pham constitutes a teaching that stems from the eighth century (the time of Padmasambhava).
Guenther's procedure has been to separate out in chanters devoted to each of the four siddhmta relevant material from each of the two texts, along with his own intro¬ductory remarks. Thus he does not give a full translation of the two treatises, at least not of the one by Dkon-mchog 'Jigs-med dbang-po, the Grub pa'i mtha'i mam parbzagpa rinpo che'i phreng bales byaba (the "Jewel Garland"). In this Gelugpa work, available in a north India reprint, I have compared his treatment of the Svatan-trika Madhyamika school attributed to the appropriate section of this treatise, with the Tibetan section itself in the edition accessible to me.
There is a remarkable failure in what can be called the translator's integrity or conscience. That is to say, we suppose of a translator, when he indicates to the reader that he is rendering a section of the Tibetan book, as does Guenther (pp. 130-136) with the heading "From the Jewel Garland, Grub pa'i mtha'i rnam-par bzhag -pa iin-po che'i phreng-ba, fol. 12a," that what he give there ;s a translation of the Tibetan text. We suppose that if he does not give the translation in entirety, or changes the order, summarizes and paraphrases at pleasure, that he would so inform the reader. But Guenther makes these modifications without informing the reader.
In Guenther's exposition of the "Jewel Garland," section on the Madhyamika Svatantrika, he first makes introductory remarks about the Madhyamika school culled from the text. He follows with subsections "Contents of the Philosophical Faith of the Yogacara-Madhyamika-Svatantrikas" (pp. 131-135) and "Contents of the philoso¬phical Faith of the Sautrantika-Madhyamika-Svatantrikas" (pp. 135-136). His content does not always follow the order of the text. It would take too long to detail all his vagaries, but an incredible example should be mentioned. What first aroused the suspi¬cions of the reviewer was noticing on Guenther's page 132 under the Yogacara subse¬ction the remark, "The ultimately real is further divided into sixteen types of nothingness which can be subsumed under four headings." Consultation of the Tibetan text failed to turn up this remark in the given subsection, but the remark (I reserve judgment on his rendition) was found in the second subsection on the Sautrantrika. What the Yog¬acara subsection states (p. 50 in my booklet edition of the Tibetan) is as follows (in part)-my translation followed by the original Tibetan in transc
They (the Yogacara-Madhyamika-Svatantrikas) held that the special natures of the four Truths, to wit, the sixteen, impermanence, etc. as well as the personality's void of accomplishment by permanence, singleness, or independence, are the coarse kind of pudgala-nairHtmya (non-self of personality); while the personality's void of any self-sufficient substance is the subtle kind of pudgala-naira.tmya.
/bden bzi'i khyad chos mi rtag sogs bcu drug dan/ganzag rtag cig ran dbah can gyis grub pas ston pa gan zag gi bdag med rags pa dan/gan zag ran rkya thub pa'i rdzas yod kyis ston pa gan zag gi bdag med phra mo yin la/ It is obvious that Guenther has omitted not only this passage but other important materials concerning this sub-school, while including under this heading materials that the Tibetan author did not include. Guenther has so mixed up the respective contents of the two sub-schools that it is useless to read these pages of his book to get information on the topic. And observing his performance here, it does not seem wor¬thwhile to investigate his representation of the other schools treated by th'"s Tibetan author.
Besides, Guenther admits that the "Jewel Garland" work follows the Indian tradition. Therefore, it is fair to notice the translation of terms in the light of the fact that this school (the Gelugpa) ordinarily uses Buddhist terms in the contextual meanings of the translations from Sanskrit of the Tibetan canon (the Kanjur and Tanjur). Referring again to a passage, his p. 133, included under the Yogacara subse¬ction of the Svatantika-which is actually in the Sautrantrika subsection in the original Tibetan-he renders it as folloWvS:
Traversing the Path. Belief in the absolute status of the self is for them wishfulness and emotivity, and belief in the absolute status of the entities of reality other than the self is intellectual fog. The latter is of two kinds: coarse, >'nsofar as it is the belief that the ob
/gnis pa lam gyi span bya ni/gan zag gi bdag 'dzin non sgrib dan/ chos kyi bdag 'dzin ses sgrib tu' dod tin/ ses sgrib la yan gzun 'dzin rdzas 'gzan du 'dzin pa lta bu zes sgrib rags pa dan phun sogs kyi chos bden grub tu 'dzin pa Ita - bu zes sgrib phra mo gnis su'dod do/. Now translating the same passage with fidelity to the well-established Sanskrit-Tibetan correspondences, we have;
Second, they claim that among the things to be eliminated on the path, the imputa¬tion that there is the self of personality {pud.gala-z.tman) is the obscuration of defile¬ment (klesa-avarana) and the imputation that there is the self of nature (dharma-Htman) is the obscuration of the knowable (jneya-avarana). Furthermore, they claim in regard to the obscuration of the knowable that there is a coarse kind of obscu¬ration of the knowable, to wit, the imputation that apprehended and apprehender area different substance; and that there is a subtle kind of obscuration of the knowable, to wit, the imputation that the natures (dharma) in the personality agg¬regates (skandha), etc. happen by reason of their truth (bden grub).
I cite this one example to show how Guenther's penchant for such terms as"wishfulness" and "emotivity" is more important for him than is faithful translation of a passage. Even if we should give him the benefit of the doubt and allow that he may have under¬stood the original Tibetan, it is even more serious that he should convert the well-written Tibetan into English sentences that continually fail to communicate the original sense of the Tibetan. To present more examples from this portion of his book would entail unwarranted space.
A final consideration is Guenther's obvious intention to set forth a kind of superiority for Mi-pham's text, e. g. (p. 142):
While the Prasangikas are traditionally held to represent the climax of Buddhist philosophy,Mi -pham 'Jam-dbyangs rnam-rgyal rgya-mtsho makes it abundantly
clear that they merely represent the climax of Buddhist epistemology and that the next step in the philosophical quest is the one from epistemology to Being.
Therefore he is the only one who deals with Tantrism in his Summary, while The Jewel Garland lets philosophy end here with epistemology.
Guenther seems not to know that the Gelugpa tradition, in which The Jewel Garland
was written, also places the Tantric attainment higher than non-tantric Mahayana
Buddhism. This is made clear in a brief work of Tsong-kha-pa (founder of the Gelugpa)
included in my "Observations on Translation from the Classical Tibetan Language
into European Languages," Indo-Iranian Journal, XIV, 3/4 (1972), stating at p. 178:
"It is well known that the Mantra path far surpasses the Paramita path, like the sun
and moon". Furthermore, after a masterful exposition of the Prasangika position in
the last section of his Lam rim chen «7o,Tsong-kha-pa concludes with a brief introduction
to Tantra. Therefore, the superior status of Tantrism in Tibetan Buddhism is not a
bone of contention here, although Westerners may wonder why Tantrism is accorded
such an exalted place. Rather, it is a question of whether such Tantric materials belong
in a siddhanta work. Guenther tries to justify the inclusion in Mi-pham's work by
claiming it to be "the next step in the philosophical quest," suggesting to the reader
that Tantrism is justifiably included in the category of philosophy. However, students
of Buddhist Tantra can easily determine that the Tantra involves procedures for
body, speech, and mind known as gestures (mudra), incantations (mantra or dharanl),
and intense concentration (samiidhi). This is scarcely to be termed "philosophy."
The authors of the siddhanta treatises that summarize the main non-Buddhist as well
as the Buddhist philosophical positions, were well advised to exclude Tantric material,
even though such authors themselves - certainly in Tibet - were also generally followers
of the Tantras and frequently authors of works in this latter field.
In conclusion, it is a pity that a fine class of Tibetan treatise, the grub mtha' {siddha¬nta), should be introduced to Western readers in such a garbled fashion. I hope that some competent translator will accurately render the entire text of the Jewel Garland into a European language, with notes and introduction approriate for this text.
i
f OPERA MINORA. By Giuseppe Tucci. Universita di Roma, Studi
Orientali Pubblicati a Cura della Scuola Orientale Volume. VI (Parti I e II). 615 pp. Roma: Dott. Giovanni Bardi, Editore, 1971.
The scholarly limitations of the traditional Festschriften have long been recong-nized. The editors of these elegant volumes are therefore to be commended for choosing to honor Giuseppe Tucci with the republication of a selection of his own works rather than the usual Melanges. In two volumes totaling over six hundred pages, the scritti minori ("minori per mole, non per valore" as Luciano Petech puts it in his brief introduction) of this great scholar are presented, and there is virtually no one in the field of Himalayan studies to whom these works will not be of great use.
There is no way to review such works as these except to list the contents. I have incorporated the changes mentioned in Peteche's avvertenza (p. ix) so that readers will be aware of the differences between the articles as presented here and their original versions:
Parti: 1. Note sulle fonti di Kalidasa
2. Note ed appunti sul Divyavadana
3. Linee di una storia del materialismo indiano (pp. 48-156): complete re-working of the third chapter; appendixes of the original text omitted (pp. 687 -713)
4. Note sul Saudarananda Kavya di Asvaghosa
5. The Vadavidhi
6. Is the Nyayapravesa by Dinnaga ?
7. A visit to an 'astronomical" temple in India
8. Bhamaha and Dinnaga
9. Animadversiones Indicae
10. A fragment from the Pratltya-samutpadavyakhya of Vasubandhu
11. The Jatinirakxti of Jitari
12. Note indologiche
13. Notes on the Nyayapravesa by Sankarasvamin
Part II: 1. The sea and land travels of a Buddhist Sadhu in the sixteenth century (pp. 305-320): important changes and corrections.
2. The Ratnavall of Nagarjuna
3. Some glosses upon the Guhyasamaja
4. On some bronze ob
5. Indian paintings in Western Tibetan temples
6. Nel Tibet Centrale: relazione preliminare della spedizione 1939
7. Travels of Tibetan pilgrims in the Swat valley (pp. 369-418): many corrections and additions; the appendix containing the Tibstan text has been omitted (pp. 85-103 of the original edition).
8. Alessandro Csma {sic) de Koros
9. Minor Sanskrit Texts on the PrajMparamita.
10. The validity of Tibetan historical tradition
11. Preistoria tibetana
12. Tibetan Notes
13. Buddhist Notes
14. Ratnakarasanti on Mraya-paravrtti
15. Earth in India and Tibet
16. The sacral character of the kings of ancient Tibet
17. The symbolism of the temple of bSam-yas
18. The Fifth Dalai-Lama as a Sanskrit scholar
20. A Hindu image in the Himalayas
21. The wives of Sron-btsan-sgam-po
At the beginning of part one appears a bibliography of Tucci's works from
1911 to 1970. It numbers almost three hundred items and gives testimony to the enor¬
mous breadth of interest of this great scholar.
MsSVig