Note [1:146:4:5]5. On the form nri'n standing for different cases,

compare Lanman, Noun-Inflection, 430; Bergaigne, Religion Vedique, I, 136, note 1; Pischel, Vedische Studien, I, 42, and Gottinger Gel. Anzeigen, 1890, p. 541 seq.; Hillebrandt, Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenl. Gesellschaft, XLVIII, 420. Here it seems most natural to take nri'n, as Pischel has proposed, as standing for the dative plural. Bartholomae (Studien zur indogermanischen Sprachgeschichte, I, 118, comp. p. 48), referring to III, 14, 4, believes that nri'n (or, more correctly, *nri'm), both here and there is genitive plural, and that Agni is called 'the sun of men' because men are able to light this sun themselves. To me it seems very doubtful that this is a Vedic idea, and as to the verse III, 14, 4, I believe that nri'n there is a regular accusative plural: Agni is called there, 'a sun that spreads out men over their dwellings.'

Verse 5.

Note [1:146:5:1]1. Ilenyah. Comp. I, 1, 1, note 2.

Note [1:146:5:2]2. Agni may be called mahah, 'the great one.' But it seems more natural to read mahe, the ancient pronunciation of which word before a word commencing with a vowel (maha') coincided, or nearly coincided, with that of mahah. The translation then would be: 'he who is to be magnified in order that the great and the small may live.'