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

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS; INTRODUCTION. 37
of Albêrûnî's statements, and by the Verâwal inscription of Valabhî-Saṁvat 945, that
the Valabhî era commenced A.D. 319 (id. p. 4) or A.D. 318-19 (id. p. 4, note 1),
and, by Albêrûnî's statements, that a family of Guptas reigned as paramount sovereigns
in Gujarât shortly before that date, and were then exterminated, he arrived at the con-
clusions—(1) that this Valabhî era, commencing A.D. 319, may have been established
by the Mahârâja Guhasêna of Valabhî, and may have dated from his accession, or
from some striking event of his reign ; (2) that there could scarcely be a doubt that these
Guptas, who had reigned shortly before A.D. 319, were identical with the Guptas of the
Allâhâbâd, Junâgaḍh, and Bhitarî inscriptions; (3) that the Guptas were the immediate
successors of the Indo-Scythians in Saurâshtra, though traces of the latter might be found,
west of the Indus, down to the end of the fourth century A.D.; and (4) that the so-called
Sâh kings preceded the Indo-Scythians. His chronological results are tabulated on
p. 48 of the same volume. Anterior to B.C. 157 he placed “one or more Sâh kings,”
who are represented on p. 49 by “Îśvaradatta, son of Varsha.”¹ He is followed by thir-
teen Sâh kings, whose coin-dates are interpreted as being all dated in the fourth century
of an era which was assumed to be Albêrûnî's era of Harsha commencing B.C. 457; and
the result for the thirteen kings was from B.C. 157 to B.C. 57. Then comes the Indo-
Scythic conquest; to which is allotted the date of B.C. 26. Then the Guptas. And
then the Valabhî era, commencing A.D. 319. In this Table, curiously enough, no date is
entered opposite the Guptas. But this was probably a printer's omission. For, referring
to the note commencing on p. 4, we find it distinctly stated (id. p. 5) that the dates in the
Gupta inscriptions, and in the Valabhî charters, are to be referred to the Śaka era.
These results contained the first intimation that the rulers of Valabhî acted with such in-
consistency as to invent an era of their own, dating from the extermination of the Guptas,
and yet to continue to use the Gupta era in preference to their own; and also the first
intimation of the exact epoch, anterior to A.D. 319, to which the Gupta dates were to be
referred. One point on which Mr. Thomas was evidently inclined to lay some stress (id.
p. 13 ff.), is Albêrûnî's statement,—based on, but in its application different from, Hindu
tradition,—that the Śaka era commemorated the defeat and slaughter of a Śaka or
Scythian king by a king named Vikramâditya, who, as Albêrûnî points out, is evidently
not identical with the supposed founder of the Vikrama era ; coupled with the occurrence
of this last name, Vikramâditya, as a secondary title, on some of the Early Gupta coins.²
¹ i.e., literally, “Îśvaradatta, son of a year”!! The legend on his coin is given, on id. p. 50, as end-
ing with Varsha putha, in which putha is taken (id. p. 51) as a Zend substitute for the Sanskrit putra,
'a son'!! The two aksharas are in reality the first two syllables of the Sanskrit word prathame,—
varshe prathame, “in the first year ;” see Newton, in Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. VII. p. 8, and
Plate, No. 8 ; see also Plate i. No. 1, accompanying Thomas' paper, where the legend is almost equally
clear.
² I myself think it not at all improbable that, hereafter, it may be shewn that the name of
Vikrama, or Vikramâditya, came to be connected with the Mâlava era of B C. 57, in consequence of
some confused reminiscence of a conquest of the Indo-Scythians by Chandragupta I. or II. But the
establishment of the Śaka era is not concerned in this question at all.