^{page 135 note 1} Strictly speaking, there are four recensions. The part of the play from beginning down to V, 46 (a ₁), which is Bhavabhūti's genuine work, is preserved with no serious variations in all MSS.; the part thence to the of Act V exists in three different forms, viz. the vulgate (b ₂), the composition ascribed by Vīrarāghava and some MSS. to “a certain Subrahmaṇya” (b ₃), and yet another (b ₄); and Acts VI–VII, certainly spurious, are found in two forms, the vulgate (c ₂) and the composition of Subrahmaṇya (c ₃). The MSS. contain either (1) a₁ alone, or (2) a₁+b₂+c₂, or (3) a₁ + b₂ + c₃, or (4) a₁ + b₄ + c. Todar Mall, whose exposition of these relations is somewhat wanting in clearness, suggests that a ₁ represents the poet's first draft, and that he subsequently revised this and added b ₂; the latter hypothesis, I must confess, does not appear to me to be very probable.

^{page 137 note 1} See Pischel, , Gramm. d. Pkt.-Sprachen, § 348 fGoogle Scholar.