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

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS; INTRODUCTION. 69
The Determination of the Exact Epoch of the Era.
I have shewn, so far, that the Early Gupta dates, and, with them, any others that
can be proved to belong to the same uniform series, are to be referred to the epoch of
A.D. 319-20, or thereabouts, brought to notice by Albêrûnî and substantiated by the
Verâwal inscription of Valabhî-Saṁvat 945.
It now remains to be shewn why, out of the three possible epochs of A.D. 318-19,
319-20, and 320-21, current, which appear, at first sight, to be deducible from Albêrûnî's
statements, we have to select, as the true and exact epoch, that of A.D. 319-20,
equivalent to Śaka-Saṁvat 241 expired.
This point is one that can be settled only by accurate calculations of the recorded
dates, explained in detail, so that it may be seen that the process applied is satisfactory,
and that the inferences drawn are correct. And, as a preliminary matter, we must deter-
mine what was the nature of the years of the Gupta-Valabhî era.
The Scheme of the Gupta-Valabhî Year.
Bearing in mind that, in all cases in which the notation and computation of tithis
or lunar days are concerned, as also of solar days connected with lunar months, the years
of the Kaliyuga era¹ and of the northern Vikrama era have to be treated as commencing,
like the years of the Śaka era, with the first day of the bright fortnight of the month
Chaitra (March-April); and also that the decision as to the order of the dark and bright
lunar fortnights of the months must of necessity go with the decision as to the general
northern or southern nature of the era and its years, since we cannot have a northern year
coupled with the southern arrangement of the fortnights, or a southern year coupled with
the northern arrangement,—the question now before us is, whether the years of the Gupta-
Valabhî era had a distinct scheme and initial day of their own, or whether they followed
the scheme and initial day of the years of the Śaka era, according to either the northern
or the southern arrangement, or the scheme and initial day of the years of the southern
Vikrama era.
¹ This era is also of extremely exceptional use in epigraphical records. The only instances that I
can quote are (1) the Aihole inscription of the Western Chalukya king Pulikêśin II. (Ind. Ant. Vol. VIII.
p. 237 ff.), which is dated when three thousand seven hundred and thirty-five years had elapsed from
the Bhârata war, supplemented by the statement that, at the same time, five hundred and fifty-six
years of the Śaka kings also had gone by, in (their own era as a sub-division of) the Kali age, the
figures of which are marked by those of the Bhârata war; and (2) some of the inscriptions of the
Kâdambas of Goa, ranging from A.D. 1167 to 1247 (Jour. Bo. Br. As. Soc. Vol. IX. pp. 241 f.,
262 ff., and Ind. Ant. Vol. XIV. p. 288 ff.), which, for some capricious reason, are dated in the Kaliyuga,
without any reference to the Śaka era at all, though other records of the same family (see my
Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts, p. 90 ff.) are dated in the Śaka era, and in that alone.