reading. So also kanchit and not kinchit. The paraphrase, according to
Nilakantha, in kanchit dhanurdharam na ganayan, etc.

210. 147 is a triplet.

211. The Bengal reading sudakshinas at the end of 49 dose not seem to be
correct. I adopt the Bombay reading sudarnnam.

212. The Bombay edition reads the first line of 3 differently. The Bengal
reading is also defective. The correct reading seems to be Rathanaga
instead of Naranaga.

213. This is a Triplet.

214. Instead of mattagaje, the Bombay edition reads tatragaje.

215. There seems to be a mistake in this sloka in its reference to the
Pandavas. The reading, however, that occurs in all the printed edition,
is the same. In one manuscript I find Kamrava-yodhavurgais (which I
adopt) for Pandava-Kauraveyais.

216. The second line of 30, as it occurs in the Bengal texts, is adopted
by me. A slight difference of reading occurs between the Bengal and the
Bombay editions.

217. As regards almost every one of these slokas, differences of reading
are observable between the Bengal texts and the Bombay edition. The
readings of the Bombay edition are almost uniformly better. Then, again,
many of those verses are disfigured with syntactical pleonasms and other
grave errors. Abounding with tiresome repetitions that scarcely attract
notice amid the variety of synonyms with which the language of the
original abounds and amid also the melodious flow of the rhythm, the
defects become glaring in translation. At the latter, however, of
faithfulness, I have been obliged to sacrifice elegance, in rendering
this section.

218. The Bengal reading tatha loka is incorrect. The Bombay text
correctly reads tadaloka. Then also, instead of the Bengal reading
rajasacaa samavrite (which is faulty), the true reading is raja tamasa
vrite.

219. Lokanamabhave is explained by Nilakantha as pralaya-kale.

220. A different reading occurs in the Bombay edition.

221. Nalikas, as used here, appear to have been some species of shafts.
In an earlier note, relying on other authorities, I took it to mean some
kind of air-gun.

222. Vaikartana may also mean one who has peeled off his skin of natural
armour. To preserve dramatic propriety, the Hindu commentators explain it
in this sense when it occurs in any such passage, for the real origin of
Karna, viz., his procreation by the deity of the sun, became known after
his death.

223. The second line of 9 is read differently in the Calcutta edition