LIEBICH, Bruno Arthur Franz Karl. Altwasser, Kr. Waldenburg, Silesia (now Stary Zdrój in Poland)7.1.1862 — Breslau 4.7.1939. German Indologist. Professor in Heidelberg and Breslau. Son of a mill owner. In 1880-85 studies at Breslau, Munich and Göttingen. Ph.D. 1885 Göttingen. In 1886-88 worked as voluntary (Volontär) in Breslau University Library. From 1892 PD and from 1897 ao. Professor at Breslau. From 1912 ao. Professor für indische Philologie at Heidelberg. From 1923 Hillebrandt’s successor as ord. Professor at Breslau, in 1928 retired (and succeeded by Strauss).
Liebich was an Indologist, who almost completely concentrated on Sanskrit grammatical tradition, especially on Candragomin and the Dhātupāṭha. In 1885 he proposed the theory of a linguistic conformity between the Aitareyabrāhmaṇa and Pāṇini, but in 1891 he substituted the Gṛhyasūtras for the Aitareyabr., and in the 1920s thought that the Brāhmaṇas were much earlier than Pāṇini. He was also interested in German linguistics.
Stache-Rosen (1990) and Stache-Weiske (2017, 540) claim that he was first at Heidelberg and in 1902-28 ord. Professor at Breslau, but Hillebrandt only retired in 1921. Thus Drüll seems more reliable. Even the N.D.B. cannot name his parents.
Publications: Diss. “Die casuslehre der indischen grammatiker verglichen mit dem gebrauch der casus im Aitareya-Brâhmaṇa (ein beitrag zur syntax der sanskrit-sprache)”, BB 10, 1886, 205-234 & 11, 1886, 273-315; habil.diss. Zwei Kapitel der Kāçikā. 1. Einleitung u. Übersetzungsprobe. 40+11 p. Trebnitz i. Schl. 1892.
– Pānini. Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis der indischen Literatur und Grammatik. 164 p. Lp. 1891.
– “Das Candravyākaraṇa”, NGGW 1895, 272-321; Analyse der Candravṛtti. 38 p. Zur Einführung in die indische einheimische Sprachwissenschaft 4. SHeidAW 11:13, 1920; Konkordanz Pāṇini–Candra. 52 p. Ind. Forsch. 6. Breslau 1928.
– Edited: Cāndra-Vyākaraṇa, die Grammatik des Candragomin. Sūtra, Uṇādi, Dhātupāṭha. 292 p. A.K.M. 11:4. Lp. 1902; Candra-Vṛtti. Original-Kommentar Candragomin’s zu seinem grammatischen Sūtra. 534 p. A.K.M. 14. Lp. 1918.
– “Das Datum des Candragomin”, WZKM 1899; “Das Datum Candragomin’s und Kālidāsa’s”, Jahresber. der Schles. Ges. f. vaterl. Kultur 81, Breslau 1903; “Das Datum des Kālidāsa”, IF 31, 1912–13, 198-203.
– Sanskrit-Lesebuch. Zur Einführung in die altindische Sprache und Literatur. 10+651 p. Lp. 1905.
– Das Kātantra. 95 p. Zur Einführung in die indische einheimische Sprachwissenschaft 1. SHeidAW 10:4, 1919.
– Historische Einführung und Dhātupāṭha. 53 p. Zur Einführung in die indische einheimische Sprachwissenschaft 2. SHeidAW 10:15, 1919; edited: Dhātupāṭha. 86 p. Zur Einführung in die indische einheimische Sprachwissenschaft 3. SHeidAW 11:10, 1920; Materialien zum Dhātupāṭha. 60 p. SHeidAW 12:7, 1921.
– Edited: Kṣīrataraṅginī, Kṣīrasvāmin’s Kommentarie zu Pāṇini’s Dhātupāṭha. 389 p. Ind. Forsch. 8-9. Breslau 1930.
– Die vier indischen Açramas. 40 p. Breslau 1936.
– Die Wortfamilien der lebenden hochdeutschen Sprache. 6+520 p. Breslau 1899, 2nd ed. 1905.
Sources: D. Drüll, Heidelberger Gelehrtenlexikon 1803–1932. 1986; Renou, JA 220, 1932, 149-164; Staal 1985, 158ff.; Stache-Rosen 1990, 145f.; F. Wilhelm, N.D.B. 14, 1985, 491f.; briefly D.B.E. 6, 1997, 383; briefly German Wikipedia; photo in Rau 77, another in his first ed., a third in Sardesai.
Last Updated on 2 years by Admin
