476 ([return])
[ Literally, “will not get or obtain you.”]
477 ([return])
[ There can be no doubt that (in the second line of 19 corresponding with the first line of 19 of the Bombay text), Arjuni should be a nominative, and not an accusative. The Bombay reading, therefore, is vicious. The Burdwan Pundits also err in taking that word as occurring in the accusative form.]
478 ([return])
[ I think Yatavrata had better be read Yatavratam. It would then mean Bhishma.]
479 ([return])
[ Both the Bengal and the Bombay texts are confusing here. I follow the text as settled by the Burdwan Pundits. If the erudition of the Burdwan Pundits be rejected, 28 would read as, “Virata, at the head of his forces, encountered Jayadratha supported by his own troops, and also Vardhaskhemi’s heir, O Chastiser of foes.” This would be evidently wrong.]
480 ([return])
[ This Susarman was not the king of the Trigartas but another person who was on the Pandava side.]