I have very attentively scrutinised every one of the 1795 listed "corrections" for the entire Savitri, studying each one in relation to its immediate as well as overall context. This has confirmed my earlier fears. I have been by now able to demonstrate that before being sent to the press the Table of Corrections indeed needed a second re-appraisal; for, it is now recognised that at least some of the listed "corrections" - if not many, many - could by no means be incorporated into the body of Savitri. The spell of initial complacency is broken and I am satisfied that my labour of love has been vindicated. I said "at least some". In fact, the number is quite large. Then what's the use of 'correcting' a hundred 'transmission errors' if at the same time we introduce on our own thirty new "errors" arising out of hasty judgment or misjudgment? And this misjudgment has been on many counts. One failed to take into consideration the fact that the altered contexts necessitated some alterations in punctuations / capitalisation, etc.