गुप्त अभिलेख संग्रह (जे. एफ. फ्लीट - गुप्त सम्राटों एवं परवर्ती नरेशों के ऐतिहासिक पाषाण व ताम्रलेख)

The correct theory of the cycle, according to the requirements of the system actually
applied in the records now under consideration, with the proper method of determining each
of the saṁvatsaras, has now been demonstrated by Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit, in his paper which is
published as Appendix III. below. And, by calculations based on the Sūrya-Siddhānta,
he has worked out all the results required for a full treatment of the dates in question ; giv-
ing the full English and Hindu dates throughout, in order that both European and Hindu
astronomers may be in a position to easily check his results. In publishing his results, I am
confident that no essential errors can be established in them ; even though it should be
shewn, by more exhaustive calculations, that his longitudes for the heliacal risings of
Jupiter are capable of slight corrections.¹ And, as will be seen, his results corroborate, in
the most emphatic manner, all that has been established in the preceding pages ; first,
approximately, from the statements of Albêrûnî, the Mandasôr inscription of Mâlava-Saṁ-
vat 529 expired, and the Eraṇ pillar inscription of Budhagupta of Gupta-Saṁvat 165 ; and
then, exactly, by the Verâwal inscription of Valabhî-Saṁvat 945.
It is not essential, for the most part, to enquire whether any of the dates, which give
correct results with the running difference of two hundred and forty-two years between
current Gupta and current Śaka years, also give, by coincidence, correct results with any
of the suggested earlier epochs. And, indeed, to make any such inquiry systematic and
thorough, it would be obligatory to make the calculations, throughout, for at least a dozen
years or so before and after the proposed epochs. Such inquiries are certainly unneces-
sary in respect of any epoch as early as that proposed by Mr. Thomas. It seemed worth
while, however, to calculate the dates now under consideration, and to give the results,
for the epochs proposed by General Cunningham and Sir E. Clive Bayley ; both of whom
have dealt with the whole subject on the clear understanding that these dates are recorded
in the era that was actually used by the Early Guptas themselves. And it will be seen

---

according to the mean-sign system, I find that, for the purposes of such rules as that given by
Varâhamihira in the Bṛihat-Saṁhitâ, viii. 20, 21, the Śaka years must be treated as commencing with
the Mêsha-Saṁkrânti or entrance of the Sun into Aries, and not with Chaitra śukla 1 ; though
the latter is the initial day that is required for the notation of tithis. For instance, by Varâhamihira's
rule, the Viśvâvasu saṁvatsara of the Sixty-Year Cycle was current at the commencement of Śaka-
Saṁvat 748 current (A.D. 825-26); and, by Gen. Cunningham's extension of the rule (Indian Eras,
p. 27), the Mahâ-Âśvayuja saṁvatsara of the Twelve-Year Cycle was current on the same date. In
Śaka-Saṁvat 748, the Mêsha-Saṁkrânti occurred on the 21st March, A.D. 825; and Chaitra śukla 1
ended on the 22nd February. The Viśvâvasu saṁvatsara of the Sixty-Year Cycle according to the
Northern System, and, with it, the Mahâ-Âśvayuja saṁvatsara of the Twelve-Year Cycle by the mean-
sign system, actually commenced on the 15th March; and thus they were current at the Mêsha-Saṁ-
krânti, but not on Chaitra śukla 1. And the same will often happen when the saṁvatsaras are com-
mencing shortly before the Mêsha-Saṁkrânti. This application of such rules as that given by Varâ-
hamihira, is, in fact, the natural one ; though it may not be apparent at first sight. For, the Mêsha-
Saṁkrânti is a very definite point in the year ; whereas, Chaitra śukla 1 is always shifting backwards
and forwards by about eleven and nineteen days at a time, and its circumstances could not be met by
any such hard-and-fast rules.
¹ See, e.g., page 110 below, note 1.