Pratinidhi scrict No. 1 wherein all the additional stanzas and line dis covered by Schrader and the variants discussed by him and many others besides them had been taken notice of. Further in 1937 Sastri Jivarईm Kalidas of Gorica, Kathiavad, published a fresh edition of the Kakmir recension based on a single Ms, which he said, he had chanced to Recure from Surat. According to him that MS. is in the form of a Pothi, containing both the Gita and the Harvana and is dated Sadyat 1235 A. D. 1178-79 ). This is not a critical edition in the strict sense of that term, in that it does not contain any foot-notes as to any alternat readings in the Kamir recension. It nevertheless constitutes an additional edition of that recension inasmuch as (1) it is based on a MSpurporting to be the oldest one of that recension yet brought to light and that too obtained from an unimaginable source, (2) substantially agrees with those on which the previous editions had been based and (3) is preceded by an Introduction in which the question of the original extent of the work is considered with reference to the stanza 43-7 in the Balpharyan and with due regard to the previous attempts made by scholars to solve it and in which a con. clusion different from that of Schrader has seen recorded, it being that the Gia must have originally contained 745 stanzas, that the additional stanzas and half-stanza8 included therein may have formed part of the dissing 45 and that, therefore, the search for them must be continued. Lastly, DrChintamani of Madras published in 1941 a scholarly edition of the work with the complete commentary of Rajamaka Rama kavi alias Ramakaitha named Sarvatobhadra as No. 14 of the Madras Uritersity Sanskrit Series. The manuscript material utilised by him for its press copy consisted of 5 MSS., one of which was the India Office Ms. utilised by Dr. Schrader and the remaining four obtained from the Bhandarkar Institute, Poona, three of which were quite com. plete. Dr. Kunhan Raja states in his Foreword to it that while this edition was in the press, another of the same recension with the same commentary had been published from Poona in the Anandircule Sanskrit Series but that the former had the distinction of having been preceded by a scholarly Introduction and followed by two Indices, one as to the Ardhas (halfstanzas ) and the other as to the citations cop tained in the commentary, duly traced to their sources. So far as my present purpose is concerned it is distinguishable by the existence at the end of the Introduction of a Comparative Table of the readings adopted by Ramakavi and Abhinavagupta throughout the work and by Bhaskara upto 7. 16 and by a discussion therein as to the original extent of the work
1. According to Dr. Belvakar (Bhagavadgita with the commentary of Anandavag. dhan, P. 385) ,this Ms. itue£ is not of that year but in a copy of one of that year, made In Srivat 1544 (A.D. 1487-88).
