⌊The mss. seem to support the division of the book into two hymns: thus, at the end of anuvāka 1, several mss. say anuvāke arthasūkta 1; ṛcā (!) 64; [supply presumably daçatayaḥ] 6. And, at the end of the second, they say anuvāke arthasūkta 1; ṛcā 75. Moreover, as noted on page 768, some mss. sum up the book as of two hymns.⌋
⌊The Major Anukr., on the other hand, seems rather to indicate that the book should not be divided into two hymns: 1. by its mingling the verses of the whole book together (see the next paragraph, which is by Mr. Whitney) in its metrical and other definitions; and 2. by its expression çatatamyā [ṛcā] 'hundredth verse,' which implies a continuous counting from the beginning of the book beyond the limits of the first anuvāka (or hymn?), which contains only 64 verses. Per contra, this method of designating a verse by any ordinal higher than the first few ordinals is very unusual, and (so far as I have noted) unexampled, save by the expression trayoviṅçatikayā in the next clause and by the ordinals of Kāuç. 49. 24, 25 (see note to x. 5. 6).⌋
The descriptions of meter etc. are ⌊by the Major Anukr.⌋ given together for the whole book; they are here separated for the two recognized divisions (anuvākas, treated as hymns) in accordance with the method elsewhere followed. The order of verses is so much disregarded in the metrical etc. descriptions as to make one wonder whether the arrangement contemplated by the Anukr. was the same with that which we have ⌊cf. p. 740, top⌋; yet minor deviations from the order are not very rare elsewhere. Other special points are mentioned in the notes to the verses.
⌊The Major Anukr. begins its treatment of the book as follows: satyene ’ti (xiv. 1. 1) sāikonacatvāriṅçachataṁ dvayānuvākakāṇḍam. Sāvitrī Sūryā. ātmadāivatam. ānuṣṭubham. prathamābhiḥ pañcabhiḥ (xiv. 1. 1-5) somam astāut; parābhiḥ (xiv. 1. 6-?) svavivāham; çatatamyā [?] (xiv. 2. 36) devān; trayoviṅçatikayā (xiv. 1. 23) somārkāu; parayā (xiv. 1. 24) candramasam.⌋
⌊That is to say: 'The double-anuvāka-hook (the expression dvaya is a little strange: the phrase would fit also books xv. and xvi.) that begins with satyena has [verses] a-hundred-and-forty-save-one (64 + 75 = 139). [The seer is] Sūryā,1 daughter of Savitar (cf. AV. vi. 82. 2; xiv. 2. 30; Bergaigne, Rel. Véd. ii. 486 f.). The deity is the same. The meter, anuṣṭubh. With the first five verses she praised (or mentioned, laudavit: see note to i. 7. 1) Soma; with the next verses (does this mean the verses from 6 to the end of the book? or to the end of the Sūryā-hymn proper, vss. 6-16?), her own wedding; with the hundredth verse (100 = 64 [vss. of h. 1] + 36 [vss. of h. 2]: hence xiv. 2. 36), the gods2; with the twenty-third verse (xiv. 1. 23), moon and sun; with the next (xiv. 1. 24), the moon.'⌋
1 ⌊The RV. Anukr. also ascribes the corresponding RV. hymn (x. 85) to Sūryā Sāvitrī.⌋
2 ⌊This statement does not fit xiv. 2. 36. On the other hand. Dr. Ryder points out that it does fit xiv. 2. 46 and that the RV. Anukr. makes devāḥ the deity of RV. x. 85. 17 (which = AV. xiv. 2. 46): and he accordingly offers the suggestion that çatatamyā may be a text-error for daça-çatatamyā.⌋
⌊The Major Anukr. continues: parā [?] (xiv. 1. 25-?) nṛṇāṁ vivāhamantrāçiṣaḥ. parā dehy (xiv. 1. 25) açlīlā tanūr (xiv. 1. 27) iti dve vadhūvāsaḥsaṁsparçamocanyāu. ye vadhva (xiv. 2. 10) iti yakṣmanāçanī. parā (xiv. 2. 11) dampatyoḥ paripanthināçanī.⌋
