Author, translation and copyist

Kirpal Singh’s 1963 catalogue distinguishes an author from a copyist in its Mahabharat entries, S.H.R. 2250 and 2251. It names Krishan Lal as author and Gopal Singh as scribe. The English commentary says the colophon identifies a versified translation from Sanskrit, while describing a commission by Guru Gobind Singh as a belief. It separately connects the copyist with Nabha State. These are different roles and levels of certainty. Neither the copyist’s employment nor a later collection association establishes when the original translation was composed. Preserve the catalogue’s qualifications and the two manuscript numbers when recording this example. The pair is catalogued as incomplete.[1]

A later title

Harjeet Singh Grewal’s study examines another layer of description in Munich manuscript Cod.panj.11. He notes a title and rudimentary contents table among its frontmatter and discusses Trumpp’s notes on the text. He contrasts these interventions with a colophon’s traditional function: stating completion, sometimes naming an author or date, and potentially describing the benefits of reading or hearing the work. A heading encountered near the opening can therefore have a different history from a statement at the end. These annotations are discussed in scholarship; they are not automatically contemporary with the copied text.[2]

A composite reference

His inventory also shows why the shelfmark alone is insufficient as a locator. Under Cod.panj.3, the grammar material comprises three workbooks, organised around nouns, pronouns and verbs, with separate folio spans. Other shelfmarks contain multiple named works. Identify the component and folio alongside the volume reference when following an argument about copying or annotation. That level of detail distinguishes the text being studied from the container in which it is now preserved. This guide relies on Grewal’s inventory and interpretation; it does not independently identify a scribe from handwriting.[2]

Sources & notes

Source records include access dates and, where known, limits on what was examined. Checks used AI assistance; independent human or specialist review has not been completed.

  1. Kirpal Singh. A Catalogue of Punjabi and Urdu Manuscripts in the Sikh History Research Department ↗institutional manuscript catalogue · Source date: 1963 · Locator: Actual 1963 catalogue: title/imprint PDF pages 2–3; printed page 63 / PDF page 77, entries 80–81, S.H.R. 2250 and 2251. Accessed 2026-11-02.Actual 266-page scan downloaded and selected text read; printed page 63 was rendered and visually inspected, including its English commentary. No physical manuscripts or independent transcription of the Gurmukhi colophon were examined. The modern centre webpage repeats this entry and shares the whole catalogue family. The commission attribution remains a stated belief, not newly verified patronage.Return to Author, translation and copyist, paragraph 1 ↑
  2. Harjeet Singh Grewal. Janamsākhī: Retracing Networks of Interpretation ↗doctoral manuscript study · Source date: 2017 · Locator: Actual selected chapter text supplied by the search reader: printed page 200, Table 4.1 and workbook paragraph; printed page 210, frontmatter/colophon discussion and note 43; title leaf in harjeets_1.pdf. Accessed 2026-11-02.Actual complete relevant paragraphs and inventory supplied by the search reader were read. The title leaf separately identifies the author, University of Michigan dissertation and 2017 date. Direct repository opening returned 403; the local download was HTML rather than a PDF and is not represented as an inspected full dissertation. No original Munich manuscript or handwriting was independently examined.Return to A later title, paragraph 1 ↑Return to A composite reference, paragraph 1 ↑
Help improve this entry. Suggest a correction with a source.
Record PH-COL-0069 · English edition · human review not performed