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

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS; APPENDIX I. 137
APPENDIX I.
A Note on the Epoch and Reckoning of the Śaka Era.
Gen. Sir A. Cunningham's Tables,¹ and Ganpat Krishnaji's and Kero
Lakshman Chhatre's almanacs, shew the period from the 5th April, A.D. 1886, to the
24th March, A.D. 1887, as corresponding to Śaka-Saṁvat 1808. So, also, the Sâyana-
Pañchâṅg shews the same period, as corresponding to Śaka-Saṁvat 1808, as the ordinary
nirayaṇa luni-solar year; the period covered by Śaka-Saṁvat 1808, as a sâyana year, being
from the 6th March, A.D. 1886, to the 22nd February, A.D. 1887. For all purposes of cal-
culation, however, this Śaka year has to be taken as "the year 1808, expired;" even if²
we were working out the very first day of it, Chaitra śukla 1. The Tables are intended for
this application of the number; and there are, in fact, no grounds for doubting that the
above period really is equivalent to Śaka-Saṁvat 1808 expired, and 1809 current. But
it is quoted, for all ordinary purposes, simply as Śaka-Saṁvat 1808. And, if a Hindu
were converting "Saturday, the 1st January, A.D. 1887," into its corresponding Hindu
date, he would write down, as the result, "Śakê 1808 Pausha śukla saptamî Śanivâra;" in
which, not only does he abstain from including any word meaning "expired," but he
actually uses, instead even of the crude form Śaka, the Sanskrit locative Śakê, which literally
means "in Śaka (1808)," i.e. "while Śaka 1808 is current;" and this is the meaning
which the mention of the year presents to any Hindu who is not an astronomer, and
¹ The proper method of applying his Tables may perhaps be inferred from his remarks (e.g.
Indian Eras, pp. 5, 48, 52) that the numbers of the years in Hindu dates refer to years actually elapsed;
and that the Hindus count only by completed years. But I am speaking of the meaning which the
Tables present to a general reader, at first sight. Thus, anyone turning to his Table XVII. p. 199,
—to which there is not attached a note that the Hindu years given therein are expired years,—in
order to ascertain the Śaka equivalent of A.D 1886-87, finds Śaka-Saṁvat 1808; and naturally takes
it as a current year. So, also, with any similar Tables; e.g. those in Mr. C. Patell's Chronology.
Such Tables would be much more useful for general purposes, if they shewed the current Hindu years
opposite the current Christian years, as is done in the case of the saṁvatsaras of the two cycles of
Jupiter; leaving it to anyone who has to make a particular calculation, to take the preceding year as
the basis of his work. And, in ordinary writing, the current Hindu years should certainly be quoted
with the current Christian years.
² Unless with Tables based on the Mêsha-Saṁkrânti, or entrance of the sun into Aries, as Prof.
K. L. Chhatre's Tables are; in which the Śaka year is practically treated as commencing with the
day of the Mêsha-Saṁkrânti. With such Tables, for any tithi connected with Śaka-Saṁvat (1809
current and) 1808 expired, up to the tithi that coincided with the solar day on which the Mêsha-Saṁ-
krânti occurred, we must work with the basis of even one year still earlier, viz. Śaka-Saṁvat 1807
expired.