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

178 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
(l. 15), in numerical symbols here and throughout the series, is (Gupta)-Saṁvat 316,
Jyaishṭha-śukla-divâ-daśamyâm; which, with the epoch of A.D. 319-20, answers, approxi-
mately, to the 3rd May, A.D. 635.
B.—Dr. Bhagwanlal Indraji's inscription No. 5; Ind. Ant. Vol. IX. p. 168 f.—The
charter is issued from Mânagṛiha (line 1). The inscription is one of the Bhaṭṭâraka
and Mahârâja, the illustrious Śivadêva I. (l. 2 f.), the banner of the Lichchhavikula.
It recorded some act, the details of which are broken away and lost, done by him, as in
inscription A., on the advice, or at the request, of the Mahâsâmanta, the illustrious
Aṁśuvarman (l. 8 f.).¹ The date, and the name of the Dûtaka, are broken away and
lost in line 11 ff.
C.—Dr. Bhagwanlal Indraji's inscription No. 6; Ind. Ant. Vol. IX. p. 169 f.—The
charter is issued from the house or palace called Kailâsakûṭabhavana (line 1). The
inscription is one of the Mahâsâmanta, the illustrious Aṁśuvarman (l. 2). The
Dûtaka is the Mahâsarva[daṇḍanâ]yaka Vikra[masêna] (l. 14).² The date (l. 14)
is (Harsha)-Saṁvat 34, Jyaishṭha-śukla-daśamyâm; which, with the epoch³ of A.D.
605-606, answers, approximately, to the 18th May, A.D. 639.
¹ As in page 177 above, note 3.
² This is the name as completed by Dr. Bhagwanlal Indraji. But, if we accept it as correct, we
must be careful not to confuse this person with the Râjaputra Vikramasêna who was the Dûtaka of
inscription S. below, more than two hundred years later.—I have not seen the original rubbing of
this inscription.
³ This epoch is taken from Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit's calculation of the date in the Dighwâ-Dubaulî
grant of the Mahârâja Mahêndrapâla. At the end (Ind. Ant. Vol. XV. p. 113, line 14) we have, for
the assignment of the charter, the year 155, Mâgha śu di 10; and from line 12 we learn that, when
making the grant, the Mahârâja had bathed on the occasion of the Kumbha-Saṁkrânti or entrance
of the Sun into Aquarius. The epoch of the era is fixed approximately by a statement of Albêrûnî
(Albêrûnî's India, Translation, Vol. II. p. 5), to the effect that, in a Kaśmîrî almanac, he had read
that Harshavardhana was six hundred and sixty-four years later than Vikramâditya. Subject to some
doubt as to whether Albêrûnî is speaking of the epoch of the era, or of its first current year, and as to
whether the Vikrama year indicated by him is to be taken as current or as expired, this statement
indicates, approximately, Śaka-Saṁvat 528 expired, and 529 current (A.D. 606-607), as the epoch or
year 0 of the era. And this is the epoch selected by Gen. Cunningham (Indian Eras, pp. 64 f., 157 ff.),
on the authority of Albêrûnî's statement. By calculations based on the Sûrya-Siddhânta, however,
Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit finds that an epoch one year earlier than this is required, in order that the details
of the date in the Dighwâ-Dubaulî grant may work out correctly. Thus, with the basis of Harsha-
Saṁvat 155 + Śaka-Saṁvat 527 expired = Śaka-Saṁvat 682 expired, the Kumbha-Saṁkrânti
occurred at 43 ghaṭîs, 40 palas, on Monday, the 19th January, A.D. 761; and the ninth tithi of the
bright fortnight of Mâgha ended about four hours later, at 53 ghaṭîs, 15 palas, on the same day. Or,
by the Ârya-Siddhânta, the times were, for the Saṁkrânti, 42 ghaṭîs, 30 palas; and for the tithi,
52 ghaṭîs, 41 palas. In both cases, the ghaṭîs and palas are from mean sunrise at Ujjain. And he
adds the note—"the puṇyakâla or meritorious time for performing religious duties in connection
with a saṁkrânti, is, according to some authorities, from sixteen ghaṭîs before, to sixteen ghaṭîs after,
the time of the saṁkrânti; and, according to others, in the case of some saṁkrântis, from ten to