As is well known, there existed several schools of the RV: Patafijali knows of 21, other texts of 3 to 27 ones. The CaranavyOha of the YV names A~val~yana, S~fikhayana, S~kala, Bg.skala, Mg.n.dftkeya, while the AV-Car. Vy. (=Par. 49,6) has: ,~v., Safikh., S~dhy~iyana, S~k., B~sk., Audumbara, M~n.d~ka which are also found in the Orissa (Paipp.) version of this text. Another AV-Par., 46.3, which quotes the beginnings and ends of the four Vedas, has for RV agnim ?l.e... as the beginning, but the last stanza of book 10 reads: tac cham yor dv.r.n?mahe... ~am catu.spade. This is found in RVKh 5,1.5 (and 5.3.7) and is quoted in SGS 2.11.13; at 4.5.7-9 and Kau.sGS 3.5.6-9 (=S~mbhavya-GS) the beginning and subsequently the last stanzas of books 1-9 of RV are quoted, but book 10 again ends with tac chain yor... -Since long, this verse has been known to have formed the last stanza of the B~.skala-Sarfihit~ of RV, the text of which from time to time has been claimed to have survived in Kerala, Rajasthan or Assam; this has not yet been substantiated. -There is a good tradition that the B~kala-RV differed slightly from our Sakala version. 1 This is typical for RV tradition only: the other Vedas usually show much wider divergencies. Levelling off of the differences in RV tradition consequently was comparatively easy, and this may have contributed to the process of unification of RV tradition, which may be called, with Bronkhorst (StlI 8/9 passim), 'S~kalisation'. The remnants of the older tradition, such as AV-Par. 46, therefore are of special importance. Unfortunately, the AV-Par. are of various ancestry and not easily datable. In the present chapter, however, there are other remnants of old Veda tradition which could indicate the antiquity of its contents. 2 -While the B~.skala text originally was followed by the Aitareya/ ,~val~yana and the Kausitaki (S~mbhavya)/S~fikh~yana 3 schools of the RV, these ~akhcis now apparently follow the S~kala text. (This should be checked on the spot.) Similar is the case of the Kashmir RV, which agrees with the S~kala text in excluding the Vglakhilyas but does not present them in the Khila collection as a group: they are found as Kh.