^{page 518 note 1} Cf. Lanman, in Hertel's, Panchatantra, pp. xxvi seqGoogle Scholar.

^{page 518 note 2} That Devanāgarī was used in my Aitareya Āraṇyaka was due to the exigencies of the Anecdota series of which it formed a volume.

^{page 519 note 1} The Mantra material is embodied in advance of publication of the text of xix, etc., in Bloomfield's Vedic Concordance.

^{page 519 note 2} xxv, 4.

^{page 519 note 3} vi, 2, 4, 5.

^{page 519 note 4} x, 2, 3, 4.

^{page 519 note 5} ZDMG., lv, 553–6.

^{page 520 note 1} ZDMG., lv, 546 seq.

^{page 520 note 2} v, 4, 11, 1 seq.

^{page 520 note 3} iii, 4, 7.

^{page 520 note 4} xxi, 4.

^{page 520 note 5} Loc. cit., p. 548.

^{page 520 note 6} x, 2, 3, 18. The reference in Bürk (p. 549, n. 1) to Weber's Indische Studien is incorrect.

^{page 520 note 7} Cf. Eggeling, , SBE., xliii, 310 seqGoogle Scholar.

^{page 521 note 1} See my remarks, JRAS., 1909, 590 seq., to which I have nothing to add. Professor Garbe very kindly called my attention to the fact that I had not in my note dealt with Bürk's evidence, and this omission I now repair.

^{page 521 note 2} x, 6.

^{page 521 note 3} Cf. xxvi, 9; and for the Pañcālas, xxx, 2.

^{page 521 note 4} JRAS., 1910, p. 51, n. 5. The great war is unknown to the Brāhmaṇas, and it is legitimate to suppose that it was of later date, if it occurred at all.

^{page 521 note 5} Ibid., p. 53, n. 4.

^{page 521 note 6} vii, 34.

^{page 521 note 7} Cf. Sieg, , Die Sagenstoffe des Ṛgveda, pp. 129 seq.Google Scholar; Muir, , Sanskrit Texts, i, 272Google Scholar; Macdonell, , Bṛhaddevatā, i, p. xxixGoogle Scholar.

^{page 521 note 8} JRAS., 1909, pp. 149 seq.

^{page 522 note 1} Absolute accuracy is not aimed at, but the figures are such as to render it needless. The imperfect is in fact the only narrative tense; the perfect is sporadic and rather peculiar (uvāca, etc., predominate).

^{page 522 note 2} Acucyavat, xx, l; abhūt, xx, 7; abhūvan, xxiii, 7; xxix, 1; acaiḥ, acaiṣam, xxii, 6; aceṣṭa, xxii, 7, 8; upāgāt, xxii, 8; agan (bis), xxv, 5; upāgāḥ, xxvi, 2; akramīt, avocathāḥ, xxv, 2; aspṚkṣaḥ, āprāḥ, adṚṃhīḥ, xxvi, 5; agām, xxix, 7; agāt, xxviii, 4; asnihat, adrāpsīt, xxviii, 4; agrahīṣṭa, xxx, 2; adabhat, xxx, 7.

^{page 523 note 1} Ádat in xx, 9, is a clearly correct conjecture of von Sohroeder.

^{page 523 note 2} Āptum arhati, xxi, 12; xxix, 3, 6 (bis); gantum arhati, xxx, 9; samaṣṭum arhati, xxix, 1; bodhayitum arhati, xxii, 2.

^{page 523 note 3} So aśahiuvan prāṇitum, xxvii, 3, but udyamaṃ nāśaknuvan, xxviii, 7.

^{page 523 note 4} See my notes, ZDMG., lxiii, 336 seq.; JRAS., 1910, pp. 226, 227.

^{page 524 note 1} Cf. my Śāṅkhāyana Āraṇyaka, p. xv.

^{page 524 note 2} Maitrāyaṇī Saṃhitā, ii, 13, n. 5.

^{page 524 note 3} v, 11, 2.

^{page 524 note 4} Cf. my Aitareya Araṇyaka, p. 204.

^{page 524 note 5} vi, 3, 46.

^{page 525 note 1} JRAS., 1910, pp. 151 seq.

^{page 525 note 2} See e.g. Pañcaviṇśa Brāhmaṇa, xxi, 12, 2: sa rāṣṭram abhavad arāṣṭram itare.