No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 March 2011
page 167 note 1 The attempt on p. 195 ff. to connect this word t¯tha with the technical tīrthaǤkara and titthiya, and thus specifically to make the patronage of sectarian leaders a prime object of polity, seems to me needless and unconvincing. It is best to leave the word indefinite; different statesmen interpreted it differently.
page 167 note 2 The correctness of this īnterpretation of kila-saṅgha in Katiṭ. (p. 100) may be doubted: the author on p. 103 admits that in Aṅguttara-n. the same word refers to clan-government.
page 168 note 1 Professor Bhandarkar's discussion of the “paternal view of kingship” on p. 164 ff., though good in itaelf, is quite irrelevant in thia lecture, as this view implies no theory of the origin of kingship.