III, 53, 18. asi (Aufr. p. 262) instead of ási (M. M. vol. ii, p. 934) is wrong, because hí requires that the accent should remain on ási. S 1, S 2, S 3, P 1, P 2 have ási.

IV, 4, 7. svá â´yushe (Aufr. p. 279) instead of svá â´yushi (M. M. vol. iii, p. 37) is not supported by any good MSS., nor required by the sense of the passage. S 1, S 2, S 3, P 1, P 2 have â´yushi.

IV, 5, 7. árupitam, in the Pada, (Aufr. p. 280) instead of â´rupitam (M. M. vol. iii, p. 45) is right, as had been shown in the Prâtisâkhya, Sûtra 179, though by a misprint the long â of the Samhitâ had been put in the place of the short a of the Pada.

IV, 5, 9. read gaúh (M. M. vol. iii, p. 46) instead of góh (Aufr. p. 281).

IV, 15, 2. yâ´ti, with the accent on the first syllable, is supported by all MSS. against yâti (Aufr. p. 287). The same applies to yâ´ti in IV, 29, 2, and to várante in IV, 31, 9.

IV, 18, 11. amî, without any accent (Aufr. p. 293), instead of amî´ (M. M. vol. iii, p. 105) is wrong, because amî´ is never unaccented.

IV, 21, 9. no, without an accent (Aufr. p. 296), instead of nó (M. M. vol. iii, p. 120) is wrong.

IV, 26, 3. átithigvam (Aufr. p. 300) instead of atithigvám (M. M. vol. iii, p. 140) and VI, 47, 22, átithigvasya (Aufr. p. 437) instead of atithigvásya (M. M. vol. iii, p. 776) are wrong, far atithigvá never occurs again except with the accent on the last syllable. The MSS. do not vary. Nor do they vary in the accentuation of kútsa: hence kutsám (Aufr. p. 300) should be kútsam (M. M. vol. iii p. 139).

IV, 36, 6. Professor Aufrecht (p. 309) has altered the accent of â´vishuh into âvishúh, but the MSS. are unanimous in favour of â´vishuh (M. M. vol. iii, p. 181).

Again in IV, 41, 9, the MSS. support the accentuation of ágman (M. M. vol. iii, p. 200), while Professor Aufrecht (p. 313) has altered it to agman.

IV, 42, 9. ádâsat, being preceded by hí, ought to have the accent; (Aufrecht, p. 314, has adâsat without the accent.) For the same reason, V, 29, 3, ávindat (M. M. vol. iii, p. 342) ought not to have been altered to avindat (Aufr. p. 344).

IV, 50, 4. vyóman is a misprint for vyòman.

V, 15, 5. Professor Aufrecht (p. 338) writes dîrghám instead of dógham (M. M. vol. iii, p. 314). This, no doubt, was done intentionally, and not by accident, as we see from the change of accent. But dógham, though it occurs but once, is supported in this place by all the best MSS., and has been accepted by Professor Roth in his Dictionary.

V, 34, 4. práyato (Aufr. p. 351) instead of práyatâ (M. M. vol. iii, p. 371) is wrong.

V, 42, 9. visármânam (Aufr. p. 358) instead of visarmâ´nam (M. M. vol. iii, p. 402) is wrong.

V, 44, 4. parvané (Aufr. p. 360) instead of pravané (M. M. vol. iii, p. 415) is wrong.

V, 83, 4. vânti (Aufr. p. 389) instead of vâ´nti (M. M. vol. iii, p. 554) is supported by no MSS.