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

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS; APPENDIX III. 175
astronomer to make more detailed calculations, when absolute accuracy is required. But,
even supposing that the said verse of Varâhamihira implies the mean-sign system, it will
only prove that he gives both systems.
Let us now turn to the more modern period. Of the authorities quoted above in
support of the heliacal-rising system, the Muhûrta-Tattva and the Jyôtishadarpaṇa are
comparatively modern. The author of the first is the father of the well-known Gaṇêśa
Daivajña, the author of the Grahalâghava; and, therefore, its date is about Śaka-Saṁvat
1420 expired (A.D. 1498-99); and it was written at Nandgaum on the western coast,
about forty-five miles south of Bombay. The date of the second, as I have determined
from certain data in it, is Śaka-Saṁvat 1479 expired (A.D. 1557-58); and it was written
at Koṇḍapalli, somewhere in the Karṇâṭaka country. And, in addition to these two, a
third reference to the heliacal-rising system has been given above, at page 171 note 1,
from Raṅganâtha's commentary on the Sûrya-Siddhânta. The date of this commentary
is Śaka-Saṁvat 1525 expired (A.D. 1603-1604); and it was written at Benares. These
details suffice to shew that the heliacal-rising system is referred to in works of a modern
period, and belonging to different parts of the country.
It is true that the use of the Twelve-Year Cycle is rare. This is shewn by the
fact that some astronomical works do not refer to it, in either system, though it would not have
been beyond their sphere to do so; and by the fact that, out of many hundreds of inscrip-
tions, only seven have been found, mentioning the saṁvatsaras of it.¹ But, if the use of
the heliacal-rising system is rare, the use of the mean-sign system is still more so. The saṁ-
vatsaras mentioned in the four records of the Early Gupta period, which give full details
for calculation, are proved to belong to the heliacal-rising system. And, while I have
been able to quote no less than eleven authorities referring to that system, a distinct reference
to the mean-sign system is to be found in only two; viz. Âryabhaṭa and Brahmagupta,
as quoted above. If to these we add an interpolated verse in the Siddhânta-Śirômaṇi,
and also hold that Garga and Varâhamihira give the system, even then the number comes to
only five.² And, in about eight of such works as would be expected to refer to the system,
of a date later than A.D. 1478, which I have examined, I find a reference to it in none at all.
Looking to the present time, if the mean-sign system is used in one part of the
country, the heliacal-rising system is used in another;³ while, in others, both systems are
almost, if not quite, unknown. The mean-sign system is doubtless the more convenient

¹ viz. the five records of the Mahârâjas Hastin and Saṁkshôbha; and the two grants of the
Kadamba chieftain Mṛigêśavarman, referred to at page 106 above, note 1.
² A verse containing a reference to the system, is given, as belonging to Śrîpati, in Pandit
Bapu Deva Shastri's edition of the Siddhânta-Śirômaṇi, p. 13, note; but I do not find it in the
Ratnamâlâ of Śrîpati.
³ See page 173 above, note 1.