^{page 401 note 1} Read probably sūryalataiś.

^{page 401 note 2} Meant probably for dhātubhiḥ.

^{page 401 note 3} This may be understood in three ways—tat sthiram asti, or tat sthirayati (which are equivalent), or tat-stho ramati.

^{page 401 note 4} Read citrito 'yaṁ; but this should be neuter.

^{page 401 note 5} Read sattvāḥ.

^{page 401 note 6} Pāṇḍya (if this be the word) may be an abstract noun from pāṇḍu, “creamy whiteness” (which is the ground-colour of the painting); but pāṇḍu also means two plants.

^{page 401 note 7} Śubhi may = śubha, which means “gorocanā (yellow)”, and also the “plant priyaṅgu”.

^{page 401 note 8} Sūryalatā is the name of two plants.

^{page 401 note 9} For 1912, pp. 1066–70.

^{page 401 note 10} ZDMG., vol. lxvi, pp. 275–82.Google Scholar

^{page 403 note 1} See Professor Hultzsch in his preface to the Meghadūta, p. ix.Google Scholar

^{page 403 note 2} Viz. in Vallabhadeva's Subhāṣitāvali, Nos. 1674; 1678 (= Ṛt. vi, 16; 19). See Dr. F. W. Thomas in his book Kavīndravacanasamuccaya: A Sanskrit Anthology of Verses, ed. with introduction and notes by F. W. Thomas. Calcutta, 1912 (Bibl. Ind., n.s., No. 1309), pp. 30 seqq.

^{page 404 note 1} See Professor Hultzsch, loc. cit., p. x seq.

^{page 404 note 2} In Professor Hultzsch's edition.

^{page 404 note 3} In v, 10, pracaṇḍasūryātapatāpitā; v, 11Google Scholar, pracaṇḍātapatāpitā; v, 20Google Scholar, sūryātapatāpitaḥ.

^{page 404 note 4} Cf. also i, 2^d; v, 2^d. i, 7^b; vi, 13^a.

^{page 405 note 1} At the end of section 4 Mr. Keith himself admits “that the repetition in the Meghadūta seems more artistic than in the Ṛtusaṁhāra”.

^{page 405 note 2} A History of Sanskrit Literature, by Macdonell, Arthur A., London, 1905, p. 337.Google Scholar

^{page 405 note 3} See i, 3–10, 12, 28; ii, 2, 10–12, 18–22, 24, 25; iii, 9, 19, 20, 23–6; iv, 2–7, 11–17; v, 3–16; vi, 1, 4–13, 15, 16, 18, 21, 26, 27. The list omits all verses which contain e.g. merely an Upamā of erotic nature.

^{page 406 note 1} In his Appendix to the Catalogue of Sanskrit MSS. in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, 1909, p. 28, No. 217, Mr. Keith asserts the same by saying: “the style and manner [of the Ṛtusaṁhāra] are entirely those of Kālidāsa.”

^{page 406 note 2} Beiträge zur älteren Geschichte der Alaṃhāraśāstra, Berlin, 1911, p. 9.Google Scholar

^{page 407 note 1} About this Alaṁkāra see Nobel, , Beiträge zur älteren Geschichte des Alaṃkāraśāstra, pp. 67 seqq.Google Scholar

^{page 409 note 1} The word kavi does not correspond to the English “poet”. The authors of the Mahābhārata or of the Vedic hymns cannot be called kavis, nor are their works kāvyas.