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

140 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
Narmadâ, they distinguish this samvatsara by the name of Vyaya; and, on the north
side, by the name of Vilambin; now, in this year, the king (is) Saturn." But, in the
corresponding passage in the same almanac for the preceding year, Śaka-Saṁvat 1807,
after giving in the same words the number of the solar years that had expired from the
commencement of the saṁdhyâ of the Kaliyuga up to the commencement of the Śaka
era, the text runs — tatô vartamâna-vatsar-ârambhakâla-paryantaṁ sapt-ôttar-âshṭâdaśa-
śata-(1807)-mitâni varshâṇi gatâni; amuṁ vartamâna-saṁvatsaraṁ Narmadâyâ dakshiṇê
bhâgê Pârthiva-nâmnâ vyavaharanti, uttarê bhâgê cha Hêmalamba-nâmnâ; ath=âsmin
varshê râjâ Bhaumaḥ,—"from then, up to the commencement of the current year, there
have expired years which are measured by eighteen hundred, increased by seven, (1807);
on the south side of the Narmadâ, they distinguish this current saṁvatsara by the name
of Pârthiva; and, on the north side, by the name of Hêmalamba; now, in this year, the
king (is) Mars."¹ In passing, therefore, from Śaka-Saṁvat 1807 to 1808, a verbal dis-
tinction, at least, was made between expired and current years; and the phraseology
adopted in the almanac for Śaka-Saṁvat 1808, has been repeated in the almanac for the
next year, 1809. In one instance, A.D. 85-86, the Pârthiva or Hêmalamba samvatsara,
each current, was treated as equivalent to Śaka-Saṁvat 1807 expired; while, in the
other, A.D. 1886-87, the Vyaya or Vilambin samvatsara, each current, and each the next
in the cycle after respectively Pârthiva and Hêmalamba, is treated as equivalent to
Śaka-Saṁvat 1808 current. What were the reasons for this change, I do not know; and
I will leave it to Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit, one of the editors of the almanac, to explain them
elsewhere. But, by the literal interpretation of the phraseology for A.D. 1885-86, and
in accordance with the principles of the Tables, that period was equivalent to Śaka-
Saṁvat 1807 expired, (and 1808 current); and A.D. 1886-87 should have been described
as being represented by Śaka-Saṁvat 1808 expired, (and 1809 current).
I have now to quote the fact that, in Madras, the same English period, A.D. 1886-87,
is actually called Śaka-Saṁvat 1809, with the same saṁvatsara of the Sixty-Year
Cycle, Vyaya, attached to it. There are, it is true, two somewhat varying practices to
be found in Southern India. Thus, the Telugu Siddhânta-Pañchâṅgam, published,
I think, in the Arcot District, gives the luni-solar period from the 5th April, A.D. 1886, to
the 24th March, A.D. 1887, as being the Vyaya samvatsara, and as corresponding to
Śaka-Saṁvat 1808 expired; and at the commencement, it quotes the expired years
throughout; thus — "Kaliyuga-gat-âbdâḥ 4987; Śâlivâhana-Śaka-gat-âbdâḥ 1808; Vikra-
mârka-Śaka-gat-âbdâḥ 1943." But, on the other hand, the Telugu Calendar, published
at Madras, gives the same luni-solar period, from the 5th April, A.D. 1886, to the 24th
March, A.D. 1887, as being the Vyaya samvatsara, and as corresponding to Śaka-Saṁvat
¹ Except for reading amuṁ vartamâna-vatsaraṁ, and omitting atha before asmin varshê, the
text is exactly the same in Bapu Deva Shastri's almanac for Śaka-Saṁvat 1807. I have not been
able to obtain a copy of his almanac for the next year.