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

90 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
nesday, the 4th July, or Thursday, the 5th July, A.D. 1263, for the thirteenth tithi, but,
in either case, Friday, the 6th July, for the thirteenth solar day; with northern Śaka-
Saṁvat 1187 expired, Saturday, the 13th June, A.D. 1265, for both the thirteenth tithi and
the thirteenth solar day; and with southern Śaka-Saṁvat 1187 expired, Sunday, the 12th
July, A.D. 1265, for the thirteenth tithi, but Monday, the 13th July, for the thirteenth
solar day. The last is the only other case in which the result includes a Sunday at all.
But it is of no practical value; because it is obtained by the treatment of the Śaka year as
a southern year, whereas I have already shewn that this is not the treatment which is to
be applied; and, still more conclusively, because it would have to be allotted to the
southern Vikrama-Saṁvat 1321 expired, whereas the record specifically refers to the
preceding year, 1320 (expired).
The true English equivalent of the given date, therefore, really is Sunday, the 25th
May, A.D. 1264. This result, and this alone, answers all the requirements of the record.
It is the equivalent of a date which falls, as recorded, within the limits of southern
Vikrama-Saṁvat 1320 (expired); though it is not the equivalent of any day in the month
Âshâḍha as referred to that year; for, if it is treated as the equivalent of a date referred
to that year (and to southern Śaka-Saṁvat 1186 expired), then, of course, it represents
the thirteenth tithi and solar day of the dark fortnight of the month Jyêshtha, preceding
Âshâḍha. It answers to the specified day of the natural, not the intercalated, month;
as is expressly required, partly by the absence, in the record, of any specification of the
intercalated month, and partly by the general prohibition regarding intercalated months.
Also, as is seen from the particulars given above, it is obtainable only by treating the
expired Śaka year, which is the basis of the calculation, as a northern year. According-
ly, it not only bears out in all respects the results obtained from the date in the Êraṇ
pillar inscription of Budhagupta, but also goes beyond them. It definitely proves the
running difference of two hundred and forty-two years between current Gupta-Valabhî and
current Śaka years. It also proves that the true original scheme of the years of the
Gupta-Valabhî era,—viz. the regular Pûrṇimânta northern scheme, as established at
page 76 f. above,—was preserved, in Kâṭhiâwâḍ, up to at any rate A.D. 1264. It
gives Śaka-Saṁvat 1187 current (A.D. 1264-65), as the equivalent of the given current
Gupta-Valabhî year. And it definitely proves that the exact epoch of the era was Śaka-
Saṁvat 241 expired, or 242 current, corresponding to A.D. 319-20.
This result, therefore, will now be taken, in the place of the result obtained from the
date of the Êraṇ pillar inscription of Budhagupta of Gupta-Saṁvat 165, as furnishing the
definite standard, on the analogy of which we must calculate all the remaining dates in the
Gupta-Valabhî era that supply details for computation.
The Verâwal Inscription of Valabhî-Saṁvat 927.
The third and last date, with the mention of a week-day, that I have to comment on,
is contained in an inscription which has not as yet been published, but has been placed at