Hindu Law and Judicature from the Dharma-Sástra of Yájnavalkya

Transcriber's note:
1. The spelling, accents, and diacritical marks of Sanskrit words was not consistent through the book. These have been made consistent.
2. The corrections noted in the Corrigenda on page v have been made in the text.

Such impression was coincided in, and therefore proved correct, by a long list of local subscribers eminently qualified, by position and experience, to decide.
Dr. Röer is responsible for the fidelity of the rendering, so far as depends on knowledge of the Sanscrit language and literature, of Hindu mythology and philosophy. Mr. Montriou has aided, so far as enabled by juridical acquirements and experience. The language of translation has, therefore, been a joint labour, often the result of much and anxious discussion, and, if not unfrequently but a choice of doubtful alternatives, yet, always a choice made with pains and circumspection.
We have not neglected constant comparison with Stenzler's German translation as well as with the several detached passages as translated by Colebrooke and W. Macnaghten.
References to, and extracts from, the standard commentary upon Yájnavalkya, the Mitákshará, necessarily form the staple of our notes. All such extracts are distinguished by the initial ( M. ), and the author of the commentary we invariably refer to as, the Commentator.
At the same time, we have not blindly or implicitly followed this commentator. In some sense all Hindu glosses are untrustworthy guides. They assume the text to be the language of inspiration; and, as the several Dharma Śástras not merely differ, but often dispose of the same subject in a contradictory manner, Pandits deem it their duty to reconcile all discrepancies, how forced soever their interpretations may be. In passages so dealt with, we have endeavoured to give the plain meaning of the original text.
E. R.
W. A. M.
August 1858.