in his great plays. No doubt, now and then KUDILA catches himself as passing into certain compunctious moods, but as creatures that shun light and love darkness for its own sake he checks and chides himself for such occasional and strange relapse into moral musings. In the mental history of great villains such streaks of fine ethical impulse are at odd intervals brought in by master artists to cast a momentary glow and thus heighten the surrounding gloom of the darkened souls. A villain who passes to his grave without the least consciousness of what is good and virtuous is not the villain to arouse human interest. By his utter unconsciousness of virtue he sinks below the human level. He is fit only to herd with the brutes or at best with immature children and insane persons! Human interest gathers round only those who know what is right and yet do not do the right for reasons many and varied. From the varieties of such reasons varieties of villains arise. In the case of KUDILA, we have seen how inordinate self-seeking and ambition have poisoned his whole nature and made it impervious to good influences from outside. He doubts even Sundara (I,iii, 34-35), 'Virtue' and 'Vice' are in his view no better than meaningless catch-words used to mislead and decoy the ignorant and the gullible (I.v. 56-7). At the touch of this terrible magician even an altruistic act is made to take on the colour of base selfishness. (compare his analysis of புண்ணியம் in I.v. 83-92.) Wanting in faith in human virtue, he has not however lost faith in human reason, in human cunning and capacity to wrestle with circumstances and bend them to his own good. Revolving in his own mind how all his schemes have fared well, KUDILA exultingly exclaims புத்தியேசகலசக்தியும் (I.v. 1). In another place, he idolises perseverance and ascribes all our weal and woe to that human source. He has no patience with those who seek to derive these from heavenly constellations and their influence on mundane affairs (V.i. 23-29). Thus relying on himself, he is ever wide-awake. He is dowered with great caution and foresight. His rule of conduct is always to fear defeat and to be forearmed for any possible danger (V.i. 2-3). His schemes, however, are found to miscarry not because of any want of foresight on his part - intellectually KUDILA deserves to win - but owing to a fundamental moral flaw in his character. His defective moral vision does not allow him to gauge the opposing forces at their true value. His reading of the character of SUNDARA and PURUSHOTHAMA, for instance, was utterly faulty and we find both of them moving in their accustomed grooves undisturbed by KUDILA'S schemes and thus materially helping towards the frustration of those schemes. Having such schemes of his own which will not brook scrutiny, KUDILA must necessarily have to his credit a certain wiliness of disposition. The cunning trait, which distinguishes him and which is the invariable result of intelligence being divorced from ethical emotions in a nature