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

94 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
in the text to two months of that name; the bright fortnight of the second Mârgaśirsha;
and the second tithi or lunar day. And, on the analogy of the Verâwal inscription
of Valabhî-Saṁvat 945, the given intercalated month should belong to Gupta-Saṁvat
330 + 242 = Śaka-Saṁvat 572 current (A.D. 649-50); and the calculation should be
made with the basis of Śaka-Saṁvat 571 expired.
General Cunningham, however,¹ shews no intercalation in that year; but, in the pre-
ceding year, Śaka-Saṁvat 571, an intercalation of the month Kârttika, which would fall in
A.D. 648; and this appears to be quite correct, in accordance with the regulation of inter-
calations by the actual place of the sun. Looking further into the matter, Dr. Schram, as
reported by Dr. Bühler,² found that in A.D. 648 there certainly was an intercalated month,
which, according to the present method would be Kârttika, but according to the rule
for mean intercalations, would be Mârgaśîrsha. So, also, Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit finds, by
actual calculation from the Sûrya-Siddhânta, that, by mean intercalation, in A.D. 648
there was an intercalated month between the natural Mârgaśirsha and the natural
Pausha, which would be named Mârgaśîrsha according to the verse Mêsh-Adi-sthê
savitari &c., that is quoted as belonging to the Brahma-Siddhânta;³ though it would
be named Pausha according to the present practice. In either case, the two intercalated
fortnights are, of course, the same lunar period; the only difference is in respect of
the name by which that period should be called. And, in finding that period coupled
with the name of Mârgaśîrsha, there is the fact, which must be admitted, that, in contra-
vention of the usual rule, the grant recorded in this inscription was made in the intercala-
ted month; a deviation for which I cannot find any reason in the record itself. Having
regard to this and other points, I asked Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit to also make the necessary
calculations on the possibility of the abbreviation dvi for dvitîya, ‘the second,’ qualifying,
not only the word Mârgaśira, but the whole expression Mârgaśira śu 2; i.e. on the possi-
bility of the intercalation or repetition referring to the tithi or lunar day, not to the month;
in which case the date might have been referred, quite regularly, to Śaka-Saṁvat 572. He
finds, however, that the second tithi of the bright fortnight of Mârgaśîrsha of Śaka-Saṁvat
572, falling in A.D. 649, was not a repeated tithi, either by Prof. K. L. Chhatre’s Table, or
by the Sûrya-Siddhânta; and that, on the contrary, by the Sûrya-Siddhânta, there is the
possibility of this tithi having been expunged, in the far eastern parts of India. It is certain,
therefore, that the intercalation refers to the month; not to the tithi. And it is equally
certain that in Śaka-Saṁvat 571 there was an intercalated month, falling in A.D. 648,
which might be named Mârgaśira or Mârgaśîrsha, and which evidently was actually so
named in the almanac that was consulted by the drafter of this record. This being the
case, there cannot have been an intercalation of the same month, or in fact of any month
at all, in the following year, Śaka-Saṁvat 572. Therefore, the Mârgaśîrsha of this record
¹ Indian Eras, p. 158.
² Ind. Ant. Vol. XV. p. 338.
³ See page 88 above, note 5.

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS; INTRODUCTION. 95
undoubtedly fell, not in A.D. 649, as should be the case according to the true Gupta
Valabhî reckoning, but in A.D. 648; and belonged, for astronomical purposes, to Śaka-
Saṁvat 571, or, according to the popular usage of Gujarât, to the southern Vikrama-Saṁvat
706. And, since the localities mentioned in the charter connect it absolutely with a pro-
vince of Gujarât,¹ the year 330 of this record must have commenced, like the southern
Vikrama-Saṁvat 706, with the month Kârttika that preceded the true commencement of
Gupta-Saṁvat 330, with Chaitra śukla 1 of Śaka-Saṁvat 572, according to the original
scheme of the years of the era.
The result, therefore, gives the southern Vikrama-Saṁvat 706 current (A.D. 648-49),
as the nominal equivalent of the given current Gupta year. And this date, with that of the
Verâwal inscription of Valabhî-Saṁvat 927, must be allotted to a class of cases, in which the
running difference of exactly two hundred and forty-two years between current Gupta-Valabhî
and current Śaka years was not maintained, in consequence of a local adaptation of the
Gupta-Valabhî year to the scheme of the southern Vikrama year, made in such a way that,
as pointed out at page 73 above, each subsequent Gupta-Valabhî year, where this
adaptation was applied, commenced five lunations before the true commencement of the
year according to the original scheme. The anomaly, however, is natural enough in the
present instance, because of the locality to which the record refers itself.
The Nêpâl Inscription of the year 386.
The next inscription that I have to notice, is the Nêpâl inscription of Mânadêva,
of the Sûryavaṁśi or Lichchhavi family of Mânagṛiha, on the lower part of a broken pillar
placed to the left of the door of the temple of the god Chângu-Nârâyaṇa, about five miles
to the north-east of Khâṭmâṇḍu; in which the date (from Dr. Bhagwanlal Indraji's publish-
ed text and lithograph; Ind. Ant. Vol. IX. p. 163, line 1 f.) runs — saṁvat 300 80 6
Jyêshṭha-m[â]sa-śukla-pakshê pratipadi 1 [Rô]hiṇî-nakshattra-yukt[ê*] chandramasi
m[u]hûrttê praśastê=Bhijiti,—" the year 300 (and) 80 (and) 6; in the bright fortnight of
the month Jyêshṭha, on the first tithi or lunar day, (or in figures) 1; the moon being in
conjunction with the Rôhiṇî nakshatra; in the excellent muhûrta (named) Abhijit."
The Nêpâl inscriptions were first brought to notice by Dr. Bhagwanlal Indraji, in the
Ind. Ant. Vol. IX. p. 163 ff.; and his view of the historical results of them was given in
the same Journal, Vol. XIII. p. 411 ff. My own view, originally published in the same
Journal, Vol. XIV. p. 342 ff., will be found explained in detail in Appendix IV. below.
And all that it is necessary to state here, is, that the earliest inscriptions disclose the use
of two eras; viz. the so-called Gupta era, and the Harsha era. At the time, however,
when Dr. Bhagwanlal Indraji wrote, the fact that the Gupta era was used in some of these
¹The charter was issued from the victorious camp at Bharukachchha, i.e. the modern Broach
(Bharuch); and it records the grant of some lands in the Khêṭaka âhâra, or the territorial division of
which the chief town was Khêṭaka, i.e. the modern Kaira (Khêḍâ).

96 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
records, was not apparent. And it only became clear on Mr. Bendall's discovery of the
Gôlmâḍhiṭôl inscription of the Mahârâja Śivadêva I. of Mânagṛiha, which he published
originally in the Ind. Ant. Vol. XIV. p. 97 f., and has given again, with a slight correction
in the reading of the date, in his Journey in Nêpâl and Northern India, p. 72, and Plate
viii. This inscription is dated in the year 316, without any specification of the era. But
the clue to the interpretation of the date is given by its mention of the Mahâsâmanta
Aṁśuvarman, as the contemporary¹ of Śivadêva I. Aṁśuvarman's approximate date, viz.
about A.D. 637, was very well known from Hiuen Tsiang's mention of him.² And, as the
Nêpâl series included three inscriptions of Aṁśuvarman himself, dated in the years 34, 39,
and 44 or 45 of an unspecified era, and another, of Jishṇugupta, dated in the year 48, and
mentioning Aṁśuvarman, Dr. Bhagwanlal Indraji very properly referred these dates to the
era running from the accession of Harshavardhana of Kanauj, and commencing³ in A.D.
606. This much being quite cert in, it follows that the date the year 316 for Śivadêva
I., the contemporary of Aṁśuvarman, must of necessity be referred to a starting-point just
about three hundred years before the Harsha era. And the era which exactly meets the
requirements of the case is the Gupta era; for, 316 + A.D. 319-20 = A.D. 635-36; which
is in due accordance with the recorded dates that we have for Aṁśuvarman in the Harsha
era, representing from A.D. 639 to 649 or 650.
As regards the present inscription of Mânadêv its palæography, as well as a general
consideration of the historical results, shews that the year 386, quoted in it, belongs to the
same series with the year 316 that is quoted in the Gôlmâḍhiṭôl inscription of Śiv. lêva I.
And, accordingly, this record gives us, for calculation, Gupta-Saṁvat 386, current; the
month Jyêshṭha (May-June); the bright fortnight; the first tithi or lunar day; the Rôhiṇî
nakshatra or lunar mansion; and the Abhijit muhûrta or thirtieth part of the day and
night. And, on the analogy of the Verâwal inscription of Valabhî-Saṁvat 945, the given
tithi should belong to Gupta-Saṁvat 386 + 242 = Śaka-Saṁvat 628 current (A.D. 705-
706); and the calculation should be made with the basis of Śaka-Saṁvat 627 expired.
Making the calculations by the Sûrya-Siddhânta, and applying the results to the
longitude of Khâṭmâṇḍu, Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit finds that, with the basis of Śaka-Saṁvat
627 expired, the given tithi, belonging to Śaka-Saṁvat 628 current, ended on Tuesday,
¹ This is also recorded in the other inscription of Śivadêva I., No. 5 of Dr. Bhagwanlal Indraji's
Nêpâl series, Ind. Ant. Vol. IX. p. 168 ff. But, unfortunately for the general chronological results
arrived at by him from those inscriptions,—which involved the application of the Vikrama era for the
interpretation of such of the Nêpâl dates as belong really to the Gupta era,—the date of Śivadêva I.
is there broken away and lost.
² See Beal's Buddh. Rec. West. World, Vol. II. p. 81; also Ind. Ant. Vol. XIII. p. 422, and Vol.
XIV. p. 345.
³ On this point see a note in Appendix IV. below.

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS; INTRODUCTION. 97
the 28th April,¹ A.D. 705, at 57 ghaṭîs, 12 palas, after sunrise; that there was the Kṛittikâ
nakshatra up to 11 ghaṭîs, 3 palas, after sunrise, and then the Rôhiṇî nakshatra, which
continued up to 11 ghaṭîs, 18 palas, after sunrise on the next day, Wednesday; and that,
consequently, the Abhijit muhûrta, being the eighth in order among the muhûrtas, and
beginning after the expiration of fourteen ghaṭîs after sunrise, occurred, as required by the
record, while the Rôhiṇî nakshatra was current. He also finds that the same conditions
of the nakshatra and the muhûrta did not occur, if the given tithi is treated as belonging
to Śaka-Saṁvat 627 or 629 current.
The result, therefore, answers, as is required, to the running difference of two hundred
and forty-two years between current Gupta-Valabhî and current Śaka years; and to the
treatment of the Gupta year as a northern Śaka year. And it gives Śaka-Saṁvat 628
current (A.D. 705-706), as the equivalent of the given current Gupta year. But, like the
result for the date in the Êraṇ pillar inscription of Budhagupta, it does not, in itself, prove
conclusively either the exact epoch of the era, or the scheme of the year; for the reason
that, being a date in a bright fortnight, this Jyêshṭha śukla 1 was the same tithi, and
ended on the same solar day, represented by the 28th April, all over India, in the southern
as well as the northern Śaka-Saṁvat 628, and in southern Vikrama-Saṁvat 762, as well
as in northern Vikrama-Saṁvat 763.
The Môrbi Grant of the year 586.
The last date that I have to notice from the present point of view, is contained in the
Môrbi grant of Jâiṅka, from Kâṭhiâwâḍ, published by Dr. R. G. Bhandarkar in the Ind.
Ant. Vol. II. p. 257 f. The record includes two dates. In line 16 f., in connection with
the making of the grant, we have (from the published lithograph)—pañch-âśîtyâ yutê=
tîtê samânâṁ śata-pañchakê l Gôptê dadâv=adô nṛipaḥ s-ôparâgê=rkka-maṇḍalê ll,—
"five centuries of years, together with eighty-five (years), having passed by, the king gave
this (charter) at (the village of) Gôpta, when the disc of the sun was eclipsed;" in which the
year is expressly coupled with a word meaning "expired." And in line 19 f., in connection
with the writing of the charter, we have—saṁvat 585 Phâlguna su(śu) di 5,—"the year
585; the month Phâlguna; the bright fortnight; the (solar) day 5;" without any indication
whether the year is an expired one, or current. The eclipse is also mentioned in line 3, in
the words — mârttaṇḍa-maṇḍal-âśrayiṇi Svavbhânô(read Svarbbhânau),—"while
Svarbhânu (i.e. Râhu, the personified ascending node) is resting on the disc of the sun."
There is some difficulty in disposing finally of the whole bearing of this record;
owing to the fact that the first plate was lost sight of, without being procured for
¹ Śaka-Saṁvat 628 current commenced rather early, on, approximately, Sunday, the 1st March,
A.D. 705. And hence the reason why the month Jyêshṭha, which ordinarily answers to May-June,
commenced on the 28th April, and of course ended before the end of May.
Nb

98 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.

examination at all; and now, even the second plate also, the published one, has been mis-
laid and is not forthcoming. And I have to point out that, in the second part of the
verse, Dr. R. G. Bhandarkar read Gauptê, instead of Gôptê; and translated "five
hundred and eighty-five years of the Guptas having elapsed." The lithograph, however,
shews distinctly that the original has Gôptê; and it is only by the correction of ô into au
that the name of the Guptas can be introduced into the passage.¹ But, even then, the
adjective Gauptê occupies an irregularly detached place, which any skilful composer
would have avoided, from the noun, śata-pañchakê, which it qualifies. While, on the
other hand, I have shewn, in my remarks on the nomenclature of the era, at page 19 ff. above,
that we have no reason at all to look for the use of such an adjective as Gaupta,
'belonging to the Guptas;' and, if we maintain the original reading of Gôptê, we have a
locative case, which we have every reason to expect in immediate connection with the
verb dadau, "he gave," and which will then give us the name of the village at which the
grant was made. And, until the original first plate of the grant is produced, to prove that
Gôpta was not the name of the village,² or otherwise to explain the passage, this is the
reading and interpretation that I adopt.
In accordance, however, with the palæography of the grant, I see no reason for
referring the date to any except the Gupta-Valabhî era; irrespective of the question
whether the era is mentioned by name, or not. This record, therefore, gives us, for
calculation, an eclipse of the sun, which took place on some unspecified date in Gupta-
Saṁvat 586 current, as the original text specifies that the year 585 had expired. And,
on the analogy of the Verâwal inscription of Valabhî-Saṁvat 945, the eclipse should be
found in Gupta-Saṁvat 586 + 242 = Śaka-Saṁvat 828 current, somewhere between ³
the 10th March, A.D. 905, and the 27th February, A.D. 906. Also, it should,
presumably, be visible at the place at which the grant was made on the occasion of it.
And, though there is nothing, in the existing remnant of the record, to indicate
with certainty the exact locality to which it belongs, still there is nothing against the
supposition that it really belongs to Môrbi itself, or to that neighbourhood. We have,
therefore, to look for a solar eclipse, occurring in Śaka-Saṁvat 828 current, and visible
at Môrbi, or near that town, in the north of Kâṭhiâwâḍ.

¹ The mistake of ô for au does occur in the word svavbhânô, for svarbbhânau, in line 3 of the
grant. But in line 9, in the word paurvva, the au is formed quite correctly and completely.
² We might easily find its present representative in the modern name of Gôp, which occurs in
the case of a village, in Kâṭhiâwâḍ, about seventy-five miles south-west of Môrbi; twenty-five miles
south of Nawânagar or Jâmnagar; and fifty miles east of Dhiniki, where there was found the copper-
plate grant of Jâikadêva, which purports to be dated in Vikrama-Saṁvat 794 (see page 62 above,
note 1.)
³ Of course, as it could only take place at a new-moon conjunction, it did not occur on the
given solar day for the writing of the charter.—The limits within which we must look for it, are the
first and the last days of Śaka-Saṁvat 828 current, as given in Indian Eras, p. 167.

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS; INTRODUCTION. 99
General Cunningham’s Table¹ mentions no solar eclipse, as having occurred during
the period defined above. But, by calculations from Prof. K. L. Chhatre’s Tables,
Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit finds² that there was an eclipse of the sun, on Tuesday, the 7th
May, A.D. 905, corresponding to the new-moon tithi of the Pûrṇimânta northern Jyesh-
ṭha of Śaka-Saṁvat 828 current, which fully answers the required conditions.³ It was visible
at Môrbî; over almost the whole of Southern India; and in Ceylon. The magnitude,
at Môrbî, was one ninth of the sun’s disc; and, in the southern parts of India, greater than
this. And the middle of the eclipse, at Môrbî, was at 12.9 midday of the Môrbî mean
civil time. This eclipse, accordingly, was very distinctly visible at Môrbî; even if it was
not known beforehand, from calculations.
This result, therefore, fully answers to the conditions of the record. It does not, in
itself, furnish conclusive proof, either as to the exact epoch of the era, or as to the scheme
of the year; for the reason that, if treated as a southern date, the day of the eclipse,
represented in that case by the new-moon tithi of the Amânta southern Vaiśâkha, belonged
to the southern Śaka-Saṁvat 828, and to the southern Vikrama-Saṁvat 962, as well as to
the northern Śaka-Saṁvat 828 and Vikrama-Saṁvat 963. But it answers, as is required,
to the running difference of two hundred and forty-two years between current Gupta-Valabhî
and current Saka years; and to the treatment of the Gupta year as a northern Śaka year.
And it gives Śaka-Saṁvat 828 current (A.D. 905-906), as the equivalent of the indicated
current Gupta year.
In respect of the given solar day for the writing of the charter, viz. the fifth solar day
in the bright fortnight of the month Phâlguna (February-March), as the name of the week-
day is not given, the only test that we can apply is the presumption⁴ that the running
number of the lunar tithi is the same as that of the solar day; i.e. that the fifth lunar tithi
ended on the fifth solar day of the fortnight. If the year 586, connected with this solar
day, is to be taken as expired, as in connection with the eclipse, this should be the case in
Śaka-Saṁvat 828. And, by calculations for that year from Prof. K. L. Chhatre’s Tables,
Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit finds that the preceding new-moon tithi, which was that of the
Pûrṇimânta northern Phâlguna, or the Amânta southern Mâgha, ended on Monday, the
27th January, A.D. 906; and that the fifth tithi of the bright fortnight of Phâlguna ended

¹ See Indian Eras, p. 213.
² For his calculations, which are based on the apparent longitudes of the sun and the moon, he
has taken the latitude and longitude of Môrbî, which I was not then able to supply to him, as ..2° 45′
N. and 70° 51′ E. I now find that, in Thornton’s Gazetteer of India, the figures are 22° 49′ N. and
70° 53′ E. Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit states, however, that the difference will not palpably affect his results.
³ So also Prof. K. L. Chhatre himself obtained the same eclipse; see Dr. R. G. Bhandarkar’s
Early History of the Dekkan, p. 99, where, with a slight difference of phraseology, the eclipse is
given as occurring "on the 30th of Vaiśâkha, Śaka 827;" the reference being to the Amânta
southern month and the expired Śaka year.
⁴ See page 85 above, note 1.

• 2h

100 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
on Saturday, the 1st February, which was the fifth successive solar day. If this date
is accepted, then the charter was written nine months after the making of the grant.¹ On
the other hand, if the year 585 is here to be taken as current, there should be the same
agreement of the lunar tithi and the solar day in Śaka-Saṁvat 827. And, for this year,
Mr. Sh. B Dikshit finds that the preceding new-moon tithi ended on Thursday, the 7th
February, A.D. 925; and that the fifth tithi of the bright fortnight of Phâlguna ended
on Tuesday, the 12th February, which was again the fifth successive solar day. If this
date is accepted, then the charter was prepared two months before the actual making of
the grant.
It may perhaps be argued, hereafter, in opposition to my results for the exact epoch
of the era, that all the Gupta-Valabhî dates are recorded in expired years, whether the
fact is distinctly stated or not; and, consequently, that it is as an expired year, not cur-
rent, that the year 165 of the Êraṇ pillar inscription is equivalent to A.D. 484-85 current,
and that the year 585 expired, of the present record, is equivalent to A.D. 904-905 cur-
rent. In that case, the solar eclipse would have to be found in Gupta-Saṁvat 585+242=
Śaka-Saṁvat 827 current, somewhere between ² the 21st March, A.D. 904, and the 9th
March, A.D. 905. During this period, there were two eclipses of the sun;³ on Saturday,
the 16th June, A.D. 904, corresponding to the new-moon tithi of the Pûrṇimânta northern
Âshâḍha of Śaka-Saṁvat 827 current; and on Saturday, the 10th November, A.D. 904,
corresponding to the new-moon tithi of the Pûrṇimânta northern Mârgaśîrsha of the
same Śaka year. In respect of the first of them, Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit finds that it was
not visible anywhere in India; but only in the more northern parts of the earth. This,
therefore, cannot be the eclipse intended. In respect of the second of them, he finds
that it was visible at Môrbi; over more than half the northern part of Kâṭhiâwâḍ; and,
to the south, along the coast, as far as Surat, one hundred and seventy miles south-east
of Môrbi, and in the interior, a little further still. And, at Môrbi, the middle of the eclipse
was at 11.54 A.M. of the Môrbi mean civil time. At Ahmadâbâd, one hundred and twenty
miles east by north from Môrbi, one twelfth of the sun's disc was eclipsed; and, in the
more northern parts of India, a considerably greater surface. But, at Môrbi itself, the
magnitude of the eclipse was very small; extending there to only one twenty-fifth part
¹ There is nothing in the record itself, to indicate whether the writing of the charter preceded,
or followed, the making of the grant. The Râjim grant of Tîvaradêva, No. 81, page 291, furnishes
another similar instance. In that instance, the grant was made on the eleventh tithi of Jyêshṭha
(May-June); while the charter was written, or assigned, on the eighth solar day of Kârttika (October-
November); and there is nothing to shew specifically whether it was the following, or the preceding,
Kârttika. That charter may have been written, or assigned, either five months after, or seven months
before, the making of the grant recorded in it.
² See Indian Eras, p. 167. ³ See Indian Eras p. 213.

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS ; INTRODUCTION. 101
of the disc.¹ This eclipse, therefore, setting aside all other considerations, is not in any way
as satisfactory as that of the 7th May, A.D. 905.
The use of the Twelve-Year Cycle of Jupiter in Records of the Early
Gupta period.
I now come to a still more interesting and important part of my inquiry ; viz. to the
use of the Twelve-Year Cycle of Jupiter in the dates of some of the records of the
Early Gupta period.
These dates are found in the inscriptions of the Parivrâjaka Mahârâjas Hastin and
Saṁkshôbha, No. 21, page 93, to No. 25, page 112. And the extreme value of the
records, from the present point of view, is due to the fact that in each instance, except
in No. 24, page 110,² the date is directly connected with an expression which shews expli-
citly that, at the time mentioned, the Gupta sovereignty was still enduring ; and conse-
quently,—since the figures of the years are naturally referable to the same uniform
series with the years quoted in the records of the Early Guptas themselves ; and since the
palæography of the inscriptions is entirely in favour of such a reference,—which shews
also that the dates are recorded in the identical era that was used by the Early Gupta
kings.
The evidence derivable from these records has hitherto been completely misapplied ;
in consequence of the adoption of the view, that the duration of any saṁvatsara or year
of this cycle, is the same with that of the years of the Śaka era, from Chaitra śukla 1 to
Chaitra kṛishṇa 15; and that the means of exactly determining the saṁvatsaras of this
cycle, are provided by the last remainder obtained from certain rules given by Varâhamihira
and others, which in reality only shews what saṁvatsara of the Sixty-Year Cycle of the
same planet according to the Northern System, and of the Twelve-Year Cycle according to
the mean-sign system, is current at the commencement of any given Śaka or Kaliyuga year,
and which does not provide for the determination of the saṁvatsaras on any other given
date in the year.³
¹ Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit has not made actual calculations for the village of Gôp (see page 98 above,
note 2) ; but is able to state that both the eclipses, of the 7th May, A.D. 905, and of the 10th Nov-
ember, A.D. 904, were visible there ; the circumstances of the former eclipse, in respect of visibility,
being more favourable, and those of the latter being less so, at Gôp than at Môrbî.
² For the possible explanation of the omission in this instance, see page 8 above.
³ See, for instance, Indian Eras, p. 26 ff.—This interpretation of the rules in question leaves un-
utilized, and unexplained, the first remainder, obtained from the division by 3750 according to Varâha-
mihira's rule, and by 1875 according to the rule of the Jyôtishṭava. In connection with the Jyôtish-
ṭava rule, however, Warren has shewn (Kala-Sankalita, p. 202) how this remainder gives the means
of determining the actual commencement of each saṁvatsara.—From the use of some Tables drawn
up by Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit, for determining the actual commencement of each saṁvatsara of the Sixty-
Year Cycle according to the Northern System, and of each saṁvatsara of the Twelve-Year Cycle

The correct theory of the cycle, according to the requirements of the system actually
applied in the records now under consideration, with the proper method of determining each
of the saṁvatsaras, has now been demonstrated by Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit, in his paper which is
published as Appendix III. below. And, by calculations based on the Sūrya-Siddhānta,
he has worked out all the results required for a full treatment of the dates in question ; giv-
ing the full English and Hindu dates throughout, in order that both European and Hindu
astronomers may be in a position to easily check his results. In publishing his results, I am
confident that no essential errors can be established in them ; even though it should be
shewn, by more exhaustive calculations, that his longitudes for the heliacal risings of
Jupiter are capable of slight corrections.¹ And, as will be seen, his results corroborate, in
the most emphatic manner, all that has been established in the preceding pages ; first,
approximately, from the statements of Albêrûnî, the Mandasôr inscription of Mâlava-Saṁ-
vat 529 expired, and the Eraṇ pillar inscription of Budhagupta of Gupta-Saṁvat 165 ; and
then, exactly, by the Verâwal inscription of Valabhî-Saṁvat 945.
It is not essential, for the most part, to enquire whether any of the dates, which give
correct results with the running difference of two hundred and forty-two years between
current Gupta and current Śaka years, also give, by coincidence, correct results with any
of the suggested earlier epochs. And, indeed, to make any such inquiry systematic and
thorough, it would be obligatory to make the calculations, throughout, for at least a dozen
years or so before and after the proposed epochs. Such inquiries are certainly unneces-
sary in respect of any epoch as early as that proposed by Mr. Thomas. It seemed worth
while, however, to calculate the dates now under consideration, and to give the results,
for the epochs proposed by General Cunningham and Sir E. Clive Bayley ; both of whom
have dealt with the whole subject on the clear understanding that these dates are recorded
in the era that was actually used by the Early Guptas themselves. And it will be seen

according to the mean-sign system, I find that, for the purposes of such rules as that given by
Varâhamihira in the Bṛihat-Saṁhitâ, viii. 20, 21, the Śaka years must be treated as commencing with
the Mêsha-Saṁkrânti or entrance of the Sun into Aries, and not with Chaitra śukla 1 ; though
the latter is the initial day that is required for the notation of tithis. For instance, by Varâhamihira's
rule, the Viśvâvasu saṁvatsara of the Sixty-Year Cycle was current at the commencement of Śaka-
Saṁvat 748 current (A.D. 825-26); and, by Gen. Cunningham's extension of the rule (Indian Eras,
p. 27), the Mahâ-Âśvayuja saṁvatsara of the Twelve-Year Cycle was current on the same date. In
Śaka-Saṁvat 748, the Mêsha-Saṁkrânti occurred on the 21st March, A.D. 825; and Chaitra śukla 1
ended on the 22nd February. The Viśvâvasu saṁvatsara of the Sixty-Year Cycle according to the
Northern System, and, with it, the Mahâ-Âśvayuja saṁvatsara of the Twelve-Year Cycle by the mean-
sign system, actually commenced on the 15th March; and thus they were current at the Mêsha-Saṁ-
krânti, but not on Chaitra śukla 1. And the same will often happen when the saṁvatsaras are com-
mencing shortly before the Mêsha-Saṁkrânti. This application of such rules as that given by Varâ-
hamihira, is, in fact, the natural one ; though it may not be apparent at first sight. For, the Mêsha-
Saṁkrânti is a very definite point in the year ; whereas, Chaitra śukla 1 is always shifting backwards
and forwards by about eleven and nineteen days at a time, and its circumstances could not be met by
any such hard-and-fast rules.
¹ See, e.g., page 110 below, note 1.

that, with the same heliacal-rising system that is applied to prove the epoch of
A.D. 319-20, the results, as a whole, emphatically fail. In calculating the details with
these two epochs, as with the epoch that I am proving, the Gupta year has been treated
as a Śaka year, commencing with Chaitra śukla 1, and with the Pūrṇimānta northern
arrangement of the lunar fortnights. In some of the cases in which, by this treatment,
and with these two epochs, the results fail, more favourable results might be obtained by
adopting a year commencing with, either the preceding, or the following, Kārttika śukla 1 ;
and by slightly varying the proposed epochs accordingly. But a full consideration of the
details will shew that, with neither of these two epochs, as they stand, and probably with
no epochs in any way approximating to them, is there any method of bringing out perfectly
uniform results throughout.
It might, however, be claimed that General Cunningham's epoch, or Sir E. Clive
Bayley's, or even both of them, could be proved, for the present records, by the other sys-
tem of the Twelve-Year Cycle ; according to which the saṁvatsaras are determined by the
passage of Jupiter among the signs of the zodiac ; and which is, in fact, the system that
they have sought to apply in support of their theories. The results, therefore, according
to this system also, will be given. It will be seen that it is not the system which applies
to the epoch that I am proving ; inasmuch as it gives correct results in only two cases
out of the four by which any absolute proof can be established ;¹ viz. in the case of the
grant B. dated in Gupta-Saṁvat 163, and in the case of the grant C. dated in Gupta-
Saṁvat 191. As regards General Cunningham's and Sir E. Clive Bayley's epochs, it has
always been recognised that this system fails in the case of the grant B. dated in Gupta-
Saṁvat 163, unless the given year is deliberately altered from 163 to 173. As there is
really no justification for this alteration of the original text,² the failure of the system
even in this instance alone, is enough to shew that the proposed epochs are not sustain-
able by means of it. But further, though the fact has not hitherto been recognised, the
system fails also in respect of another of the records. Thus, in the case of the grant C.
dated in Gupta-Saṁvat 191, the given saṁvatsara really was current at the commence-
ment of the given year, in accordance with the rules applied by General Cunningham, and
accepted by Sir E. Clive Bayley, from which, however, it was not properly to be inferred
that it was current through the whole of the same year ; but it came to an end, and was
followed by the next saṁvatsara, with General Cunningham's epoch, nearly three and
a half months, and with Sir E. Clive Bayley's epoch, nearly seven months, before the sub-

¹ The date in the Bhumarā pillar inscription, E. below, furnishes no definite proof in itself ;
because the current Gupta year is not mentioned in it; and consequently the given saṁvatsara
could be proved equally well for epochs differing by a year or more, on either side, from the exact
epochs that are being considered. We can only test it, in so far as to see whether, under any
particular circumstances, the system fails through an omission of the given saṁvatsara.
² See Texts and Translations, page 102, note 1.

104 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
sequent given date in that year. In fact, out of the four leading dates on which any
arguments can be based, with these two epochs this system gives correct results only in
respect of the grant A. dated in Gupta-Saṁvat 156, and the grant D. dated in Gupta-
Saṁvat 209. And, as with the heliacal-rising system, so with this system also, a full
consideration of the details will shew that, even by adopting a scheme for the Gupta year
other than the scheme of the northern Śaka year, with neither of these two epochs is
there any method of bringing out uniform results throughout.
A.—The Khôh Grant of the year 156.
The first inscription is one of the Khôh grants of the Mahârâja Hastin,
No. 21, page 93; in which the date (line 1 ff.) is—shaṭpañchâś-ôttarê=bda-śatê Gupta-
nṛipa-râjya-bhuktau Mahâ-Vaiśâkha-saṁvatsarê Kârttika-mâsa-śukla-paksha-tṛitîyâyâm,
—“in a century of years, increased by the fifty-sixth (year); in the enjoyment of
sovereignty by the Gupta kings; in the Mahâ-Vaiśâkha saṁvatsara; on the third lunar
day of the bright fortnight of the month Kârttika.”
This gives us, for calculation, the Mahâ-Vaiśâkha saṁvatsara, as current on the
third tithi or lunar day of the bright fortnight of the month Kârttika (October-November)
in Gupta-Saṁvat 156 current. And, on the analogy of the Verâwal inscription of
Valabhî-Saṁvat 945, this should be the case in Gupta-Saṁvat 156 + 242 = Śaka-
Saṁvat 398 current;¹ in which year the given tithi corresponds to Sunday, the 19th Octo-
ber, A.D. 475.
Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit finds (see Table IV. page 105 below, Col. A.) that Jupiter’s
rising,² next before the given date, took place on Kârttika śukla 1 of the same year,
Śaka-Saṁvat 398 current, corresponding to Friday, the 17th October, A.D. 475; or,
by the English calendar, on Saturday, the 18th October.³ His longitude then was

¹ Here, and throughout, the year is treated as a northern year. But the details of these dates do
not furnish any actual proof as to the Pûrṇimânta or Amânta arrangement of the lunar fortnights.
² i.e., throughout, his heliacal rising. But the actual calculation is for his first daily rising after
his becoming capable of rising heliacally.
³ Jupiter’s daily rising, next after his becoming capable of rising heliacally, takes place about
forty-four minutes before sunrise, and therefore in the period during which the Hindu and the English
week-days are not identical (see a note in Appendix II. below). In the present case, it took place
at the time in question before sunrise on the English Saturday, the 18th October. Kârttika śukla 2
did not end till after sunrise on that day. Consequently, as current tithis are not quoted, unless
under certain very exceptional conditions not applicable to such occurrences as this, the tithi
on which he rose was Kârttika śukla 1. And this tithi, ending after sunrise on the Friday (and
before sunrise on the Saturday), has to be coupled with Friday, the 17th October, as its week-day.
Hence the apparent, but not actual, difference of a day, according as we take the Hindu or the
English calendar. And a similar difference runs through all the dates of the heliacal risings given
below.

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS; INTRODUCTION. 105
TABLE IV.
The Saṁvatsaras of the Twelve-Year Cycle of Jupiter.

106 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
195° 24'. By both the systems of unequal spaces for the longitudes of the ending-points
of the nakshatras (see Appendix III. Table IX.), he was then in Viśâkhâ; and the
saṁvatsara which then began (see Appendix III. Table VIII.), must have been named
**Mahâ-Vaiśâkha.**¹ Jupiter's next following rising took place on Mârgaśîrsha śukla 13
of Śaka-Saṁvat 399, corresponding to Monday, the 15th November, A.D. 476; or, by the
English calendar, on Tuesday, the 16th November. His longitude then was 225° 35'.
By the Brahma-Siddhânta system of unequal spaces, he was then in Jyeshṭhâ; and the
saṁvatsara which then began, must have been named Mahâ-Jyeshṭha. While, by the
Garga system of unequal spaces, he was then in Anurâdhâ; and the saṁvatsara which then
began, must have again been named Mahâ-Vaiśâkha; which shews that, by this system,
there was at this period a repetition of a saṁvatsara. This difference as to the following
saṁvatsara, however, does not affect the given date. By both the systems of unequal
spaces, with the running difference of two hundred and forty-two years between current
Gupta and current Śaka years, the Mahâ-Vaiśâkha saṁvatsara was current on the
given date. And the result gives Śaka-Saṁvat 398 current (A.D. 475-76), as the equi-
valent of the given current Gupta year.
In connection with the results for this record, the following points have to be noted.
In the first place, Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit has described three systems of fixing the ending-
points of the nakshatras; one of equal spaces; and two of unequal spaces. An exami-
nation of Jupiter's longitudes, as given in Table IV., page 105 above, for each rising
next before the given dates, will shew that, in all the remaining instances, the current
saṁvatsara is proved by all three systems; the only variation is that, in the case of E1,
Jupiter's position, at his rising next before the given date, was, by the system of equal spaces,
in Âślêshâ; but, even then, the current saṁvatsara would be named Mahâ-Mâgha, as also
by the two systems of unequal spaces. So, also, it may be seen that, by all three systems,
we have almost the same results in respect of the following saṁvatsaras; the only variation
is that, in the case of D., Jupiter's position, at his rising next after the given date, was,
by the system of equal spaces, in Bharaṇî, and, accordingly, the saṁvatsara which then
began, would again be named Mahâ-Âśvayuja; which shews that, by this system, there was
a repetition of a saṁvatsara at this period; but this does not affect the saṁvatsara current
on the given date. So far, therefore, as those dates are concerned, the correctness of the
records might be proved by any of the three systems. The same, however, is not the case
in respect of the present record. By the system of equal spaces, Jupiter's position, at his
rising next before the given date, was in Svâti; the saṁvatsara which then began, would
¹I have not been able to obtain the original authority for the use of the prefix mahâ (mahat),
'great.' And it does not occur in connection with the two saṁvatsaras mentioned in the Halsî grants
of the Kâdamba chieftain Mṛigêśavarman; viz. the Pausha saṁvatsara, in line 8 of the grant dated
in his third year (Ind. Ant. Vol. VII. p. 35). and the Vaiśâkha saṁvatsara, in line 10 of the grant
dated in his eighth year (id. Vol. VI. p. 24). I use the prefix, however, throughout, in accordance with
the custom of the original records now under examination.

be named Mahâ-Chaitra; and the Mahâ-Vaiśâkha saṁvatsara would not begin till Jupiter's
rising next after the given date, when, by the same system, his position was in Anurâdhâ.
Accordingly, the system of equal spaces could be applied to the present record, only with a
running difference of two hundred and forty-three years between current Gupta and current
Śaka years; which would be in contradiction with the fact that, to prove the saṁvatsaras of
all the remaining records, it must be applied with the running difference of two hundred and
forty-two years. It is evident, therefore, that, in dealing with these records, the system of
equal spaces is not the correct one; and that we have to apply one or other of the
systems of unequal spaces. This, however, is only natural; for they are both more
ancient than the system of equal spaces; and, the older the system, the greater the cer-
tainty that it is the one in use in the Early Gupta period. Also, the Dêôgaḍh inscription
of king Bhôjadêva of Kanauj, dated Śaka-Saṁvat 784, indicates very plainly that one or
other of the systems of unequal spaces, if not both of them, continued in use, in what had
formed a part of the Early Gupta territory, down to at least the last half of the ninth cen-
tury A.D.¹ Of the two systems of unequal spaces, whether we are to apply the Brahma-
Siddhânta system, or the still more ancient Garga system, cannot at present be decided;
¹ In this inscription, which was brought to notice by Gen. Cunningham in the Archæol. Surv. Ind.
Vol. X. p. 101, and Plate xxxiii. No. 2, and is on a pillar in a detached portico in front of the hall
of a temple at Dêôgaḍh, about sixty miles to the south-west of 'Jhansi' in Scindia's Dominions in
Central India, the date (from an ink-impression; lines 6 ff., 10) runs—saṁvat 919 Asva(śva)yuja-
śukla-paksha-chaturddaśyâṁ Vṛihaspati-dinêna Uttar[â*]-Bhâdrapad[â*]-nakshattrê idaṁ
stambhaṁ samâptam=iti ......... Śakakâl-âbda-sapta-śatâni chatur-aśîty-adhikâni
784,—"the year 919; on the fourteenth tithi or lunar day in the bright fortnight of Aśvayuja; on the
day of Vṛihaspati; under the Uttarâ-Bhâdrapadâ nakshatra, this pillar was finished; ......
...... seven centuries of years, increased by eighty-four, of the Śaka era; (or in figures) 784."
This gives us, for calculation, Vikrama-Saṁvat 919 and Śaka-Saṁvat 784; the month Âśvayuja
(September-October); the day of Vṛihaspati or Jupiter, i.e. Thursday; and the Uttarâ-Bhâdrapadâ
nakshatra. The date, of course, is a northern date; but, as the given tithi is in a bright fortnight,
this point is immaterial.—Taking the Śaka year in question as an expired year, Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit
has obtained as the English equivalent, by both Prof. K. L. Chhatre's Tables and the Sûrya-Siddhânta,
Thursday, the 10th September, A.D. 862. The tithi ended at 56 ghaṭîs, 34 palas, or 22 hrs. 37 min.
36 sec., after sunrise on that day. By the equal-space system of the nakshatras, the moon was in the
Pûrvâ-Bhâdrapadâ nakshatra up to 53 ghaṭîs, 31 palas, or 21 hrs. 24 min. 24 sec., after sunrise on
the Thursday; and she then entered the Uttarâ-Bhâdrapadâ nakshatra; i.e. assuming sunrise at 6
A.M., only 2 hrs. 35 min. 36 sec. before sunrise on the Friday (the time, all through, is for Ujjain,
as I have not the exact longitude of Dêôgaḍh; taking it, approximately, as 78° 15′ E., the time in each
case, will be a little less than ten minutes later). This, however, is a highly improbable hour for the
completion, as stated in the record, of the pillar on which the inscription is engraved. But, by the
unequal-space systems of the nakshatras, the Purvâ-Bhâdrapadâ nakshatra ended at about 23
ghaṭîs, 40 palas, or 9 hrs. 28 min., after sunrise on the Thursday; and the moon then entered the
Uttarâ-Bhâdrapadâ nakshatra; i.e., roughly, about half past three in the afternoon, leaving ample
time, in ordinary working hours, for the completion of the pillar before sunset.—It is evident, there-
fore, that for the determination of the nakshatra in this record, we have to apply one or other of
the systems of unequal spaces.
O 2

108 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
since, the only variation between them is in respect of the saṁvatsara following the
saṁvatsara which was current on the given date of the present record.
Another point is, that, as the following saṁvatsara did not commence till Mârgaśîrsha
śukla 13 of Śaka-Saṁvat 399, the Mahâ-Vaiśâkha saṁvatsara was still current on the given
date, Kârttika śukla 3, in Śaka-Saṁvat 399, as well as in 398, which is the real equivalent
for the Gupta year. So, also, it will be seen that, in the case of D., the Mahâ-Âśvayuja
saṁvatsara was still current on the given date, Chaitra śukla 13, in Śaka-Saṁvat 452, as
well as in 451, which is the true equivalent for the Gupta year of that record. Consequently,
these two dates, A. and D., might be used to support a running difference of two hundred
and forty-three years between current Gupta and current Śaka years, as well as the true
running difference of two hundred and forty-two years. But, apart from the fact that we have
not obtained anything else to support such a result, there is no such alternative in respect
of B. and C.; the saṁvatsaras of those records are proved only with the running differ-
ence of two hundred and forty-two years. All the four cases together, therefore, not only
answer to, but also prove the running difference of two hundred and forty-two
years between current Gupta and current Śaka years.
A final point is, that, on the analogy of the Kaira grant of Dharasêna IV., of the
year 330, and with a year beginning with the month Kârttika next before the commencement
of the northern Śaka year, the given date of Kârttika śukla 3̄, in Gupta-Saṁvat 156, would
belong to Śaka-Saṁv. 397 current. But it would then fall a year, all but two days, ante-
rior to the commencement of the recorded saṁvatsara on Kârttika śukla 1 of Śaka-Saṁvat
398. This record, therefore, also disproves the possibility of our being concerned
with the scheme of the southern Vikrama year, beginning with the month Kârttika
next before the commencement of the northern Śaka year.
On the analogy of the same grant, and with a year, northern or southern, beginning
with the month Mârgaśîrsha next before the commencement of the northern Śaka year,¹
the given date would still belong to Śaka-Saṁvat 398. The possibility, however, of our
being concerned with such a year as this, is disproved by the results for the date of C. below,
in Gupta-Saṁvat 191.
By the mean-sign system, the Mahâ-Vaiśâkha saṁvatsara did not commence till
Vaiśâkha śukla 5 of Śaka-Saṁvat 399 current, corresponding to Wednesday, the 14th
April, A.D. 476; and consequently it was not current on the given date. The saṁvatsara
then current was Mahâ-Chaitra, which commenced on Jyêshṭha kṛishṇa 13 of Śaka-Saṁvat
398, corresponding to Saturday, the 19th April, A.D. 475.
With General Cunningham's epoch of A.D. 166-67, the given date would belong
to Śaka-Saṁvat 245 current ; and its English equivalent would be Sunday, the 30th Septem-
¹ See page 78 above.

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS; INTRODUCTION. 109
ber, A.D. 322. Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit finds that Jupiter's rising, next before the given date,
took place on Kârttika śukla 13 of Śaka-Saṁvat 244, corresponding to Friday, the 20th
October, A.D. 321; or, by the English calendar, on Saturday, the 21st October. His
longitude then was 200° 54′. By all three systems, he was then in Viśâkhâ; and the
saṁvatsara which then began, must have been named Mahâ-Vaiśâkha. Jupiter's next
following rising took place on Pausha krishṇa 10 of Śaka-Saṁvat 245, corresponding to
Tuesday, the 20th November, A.D. 322; or, by the English calendar, on Wednesday, the
21st November. His longitude then was 231° 33′. By the system of equal spaces, and the
Garga system of unequal spaces, he was then in Jyêshṭhâ; and, by the Brahma-Siddhânta
system of unequal spaces, in Mûla; and, by all three systems, the saṁvatsara which then
began, must have been named Mahâ-Jyêshṭha. Accordingly, with this epoch, the Mahâ-
Vaiśâkha saṁvatsara was current on the given date. This, however, is a mere
coincidence. There is the same coincidence in respect of the date of D.; but not in
respect of B. and C.
By the mean-sign system, the Mahâ-Vaiśâkha saṁvatsara commenced on
Phâlguna krishṇa 15 of Śaka-Saṁvat 244 current, corresponding to Friday, the 2nd
February, A.D. 322; and it was followed by Mahâ-Jyêshṭha on Phâlguna śukla 6 of Śaka-
Saṁvat 245, corresponding to Tuesday, the 29th January, A.D. 323. Accordingly, with
this epoch, and by this system also, the Mahâ-Vaiśâkha saṁvatsara was current
on the given date.
With Sir E. Clive Bayley's epoch of A.D. 190-91, the given date would belong to
Śaka-Saṁvat 269 current; and its English equivalent would be Saturday, the 4th October,
A.D. 346. Here, Jupiter's rising, next before the given date, took place on Mârgaśîrsha
krishṇa 3 of Śaka-Saṁvat 268, corresponding to Tuesday, the 29th October, A.D. 345;
or, by the English calendar, on Wednesday, the 30th October. His longitude then was
209° 22′. By all three systems, he was then in Viśâkhâ; and the saṁvatsara which then
began, must have been named Mahâ-Vaiśâkha. Jupiter's next following rising took place
on Pausha krishṇa 15 of Śaka-Saṁvat 269, corresponding to Saturday, the 29th November,
A.D. 346; or, by the English calendar, on Sunday, the 30th November. His longitude then
was 240° 17′. By all three systems, he was then in Mûla; and the saṁvatsara which then
began, must have been named Mahâ-Jyêshṭha. Accordingly, with this epoch also, the
Mahâ-Vaiśâkha saṁvatsara was current on the given date. This again, however,
is a mere coincidence. And again, though there is the same coincidence in respect of the
date of D., it does not occur in respect of B. and C.
By the mean-sign system, the Mahâ-Vaiśâkha saṁvatsara commenced on Kârttika
śukla 11 of Śaka-Saṁvat 268 current, corresponding to Wednesday, the 23rd October,
A.D. 345; and it was followed by Mahâ-Jyêshṭha on Mârgaśîrsha krishṇa 3 of Śaka-
Saṁvat 269,corresponding to Sunday, the 19th October, A.D. 346. Accordingly, with

110 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
this epoch again, and by this system also, the Mahâ-Vaiśâkha samvatsara was
current on the given date.
B.—The Khôh Grant of the year 163.
The next inscription is the other Khôh grant of the Mahârâja Hastin, No. 22,
page 100, in which the date (line 1 f.) is — tri-shashṭy-uttarê-bda-śatê Gupta-nṛipa-
râjya-bhuktau Mah-Âśvayuja-saṁvatsarê Chaitra-mâsa-śukla-paksha-dvitîyâyâm,—“in a
century of years, increased by sixty-three; in the enjoyment of sovereignty by the Gupta
kings; in the Mahâ-Âśvayuja samvatsara; on the second lunar day of the bright fortnight
of the month Chaitra.”
This gives us, for calculation, the Mahâ-Âśvayuja samvatsara, as current on the
second tithi or lunar day of the bright fortnight of the month Chaitra (March-April)
in Gupta-Saṁvat 163 current. And, on the analogy of the Verâwal inscription of Valabhî-
Saṁvat 945, this should be the case in Gupta-Saṁvat 163 + 242 = Śaka-Saṁvat 405
current; in which year the given tithi corresponds to Sunday, the 7th March, A.D. 482.
Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit finds (see Table IV. page 105 above, Col. B.) that Jupiter’s
rising, next before the given date, took place¹ on Vaiśâkha kṛishṇa 6 of the preceding year,
Śaka-Saṁvat 404 current, corresponding to Sunday, the 5th April, A.D. 481; or, by the
English calendar, on Monday, the 6th April. His longitude then was 4° 21'. By both the
systems of unequal spaces,² he was then in Aśvinî; and the samvatsara which then began,
must have been named Mahâ-Âśvayuja. Jupiter’s next following rising took place on
Jyêshṭha śukla 8 of Śaka-Saṁvat 405, corresponding to Wednesday, the 12th May, A.D.
482; or, by the English calendar, on Thursday, the 13th May. His longitude then was
40° 34'. By both the systems of unequal spaces, he was then in Rôhiṇî; and the samvatsara
which then began, must have been named Mahâ-Kârttika. Therefore, by both the systems
of unequal spaces, with the running difference of two hundred and forty-two years between
current Gupta and current Śaka years, the Mahâ-Âśvayuja samvatsara was current
on the given date. And the result gives Śaka-Saṁvat 405 current (A.D. 482-83), as
the equivalent of the given current Gupta year.
In this instance, the given samvatsara was not current on the given date in either the
preceding year, Saka-Saṁvat 404, or the following year, Śaka-Saṁvat 406. The result,
¹ These calculations are not absolutely accurate; but the margin is so wide, that there is no
necessity for exact precision in this case. If there should be any difference at all between Jupiter's
longitudes as found by Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit, and as capable of being determined with exact precision,
it will amount only to a few minutes of arc; and the actual risings of Jupiter could differ from what
he gives, only by one or two days; with the result that Jupiter may have risen, in this instance, on
Vaiśâkha kṛishṇa 5 or 7.
² Also by the system of equal spaces; but see page 107 above. This point need not be noted in
the following instances.

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS; INTRODUCTION. 111
therefore, not only answers to, but also proves, the running difference of two hundred
and forty-two years between current Gupta and current Śaka years.
On the analogy of the Kaira grant of Dharasêna IV. of the year 330, and with a year
beginning either with the month Kârttika, or with the month Mârgaśîrsha, next before the
commencement of the northern Śaka year, the given date of Chaitra śukla 2, in Gupta-
Saṁvat 163, would still belong to Śaka-Saṁvat 405. But, as noted at page 108 above,
the results for the date of A. disprove the possibility of our being concerned with the scheme
of the southern Vikrama year, beginning with the month Kârttika next before the com-
mencement of the northern Śaka year. And, as will be shewn at page 115 below,
the results for the date of C., in Gupta-Saṁvat 191, disprove the possibility of our being
concerned with a year, northern or southern, beginning with the month Mârgaśîrsha next
before the commencement of the northern Śaka year.
By the mean-sign system, the Mahâ-Âśvayuja saṁvatsara commenced on
Chaitra śukla 8 of Śaka-Saṁvat 404 current, corresponding to Tuesday, the 24th March,
A.D. 481; and it was followed by Mahâ-Kârttika on Chaitra śukla 15 of Śaka-Saṁvat 405,
corresponding to Saturday, the 20th March, A.D. 482. Accordingly, by this system also,
the Mahâ-Aśvayuja saṁvatsara was current on the given date.
With General Cunningham's epoch of A.D. 166-67, and with the original
reading of Gupta-Saṁvat 163, the given date would belong to Śaka-Saṁvat 252 current;
and its English equivalent would be Monday, the 17th February, A.D: 329. Mr. Sh. B.
Dikshit finds that Jupiter's rising, next before the given date, took place on Âshâḍha kṛishṇa
6 of Śaka-Saṁvat 251, corresponding to Thursday, the 16th May, A.D. 328; or, by the
English calendar, on Friday, the 17th May. His longitude then was 47° 25'. By all three
systems, he was then in Rôhiṇî; and the saṁvatsara which then began, must have been
named Mahâ-Kârttika. Jupiter's next following rising took place on Âshâḍha śukla 10 of
Śaka-Saṁvat 252, corresponding to Sunday, the 22nd June, A.D. 329; or, by the English
calendar, on Monday, the 23rd June. His longitude then was 82°12'. By all three sys-
tems, he was then in Punarvasu; and the saṁvatsara which then began, must have been
named Mahâ-Pausha; the intervening saṁvatsara, Mahâ-Mârgaśîrsha, being omitted. Ac-
cordingly, with this epoch, and with the real reading of the text, the Mahâ-Âśvayuja saṁ-
vatsara was not current on the given date. For the commencement of the Mahâ-Âsva-
yuja saṁvatsara, we have to go back to Jupiter's rising on Vaiśâkha śukla 3 of Śaka-Saṁ-
vat 250, corresponding to Tuesday, the 11th April, A.D. 327, or, by the English calendar,
on Wednesday, the 12th April; when his longitude was 11° 21', and, by all three systems,
he was in Aśvinî. And thus the given saṁvatsara was current on the same date in the
preceding year.—With the same epoch, and with the proposed corrected reading (see
Texts and Translations, page 102, note 1) of Gupta-Saṁvat 173, the given date would belong
to Śaka-Saṁvat 262 current; and its English equivalent would be Tuesday, the 27th Febru-

112 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
ary, A.D. 339. Here, Jupiter's rising, next before the given date, took place on Chaitra
śukla 2 of Śaka-Saṁvat 261, corresponding to Friday, the 10th March, A.D. 338; or, by
the English calendar, on Saturday, the 11th March. His longitude then was 339° 54′. By
all three systems, he was then in Uttarā-Bhādrapadā; and the saṁvatsara which then began,
must have been named Mahā-Bhādrapada. Jupiter's next following rising took place on
Jyaishṭha krishṇa 11 of Śaka-Saṁvat 262, corresponding to Tuesday, the 17th April, A.D. 339;
or, by the English calendar, on Wednesday, the 18th April. His longitude then was
16° 34′. By all three systems, he was then in Bharaṇī; and the saṁvatsara which then be-
gan, must have been named Mahā-Āśvayuja. Accordingly, with this epoch, even with the
proposed corrected reading, the Mahā-Āśvayuja saṁvatsara was not current on the given
date; but only on the same date in the following year.
By the mean-sign system, and with the original reading of Gupta-Saṁvat
163, the Mahā-Āśvayuja saṁvatsara commenced on Māgha śukla 2 of Śaka-Saṁvat 249
current, corresponding to Thursday, the 12th January, A.D. 327; and was followed by
Mahā-Kārttika on Māgha śukla 9 of Śaka-Saṁvat 250, corresponding to Monday, the 8th
January, A.D. 328; and consequently it was not current on the given date. The saṁ-
vatsara then current was Mahā-Mārgaśīrsha, which commenced on Phālguna krishṇa 1 of
Śaka-Saṁvat 251 current, corresponding to Friday, the 3rd January, A.D. 329.—With the
proposed corrected reading of Gupta-Saṁvat 173, the Mahā-Āśvayuja saṁvatsara
commenced on Pausha krishṇa 9 of Śaka-Saṁvat 261 current, corresponding to Wednes-
day, the 22nd November, A.D. 338; and it was followed by Mahā-Kārttika on Mārga-
śīrsha śukla 1 of Śaka-Saṁvat 262, corresponding to Sunday, the 18th November, A.D.
339. Accordingly, with this epoch, and by this system, with the proposed corrected
reading, the Mahā-Āśvayuja saṁvatsara was current on the given date. The
proposed alteration of the original text, however, cannot be justified.
With Sir E. Clive Bayley's epoch of A.D. 190-91, and with the original read-
ing of Gupta-Saṁvat 163, the given date would belong to Śaka-Saṁvat 276 current;
and its English equivalent would be Monday, the 22nd February, A.D. 353. Here, Jupi-
ter's rising, next before the given date, took place on Āshāḍha krishṇa 12 of Śaka-Saṁ-
vat 275, corresponding to Wednesday, the 27th May, A.D. 352; or, by the English
calendar, on Thursday, the 28th May. His longitude then was 57° 12′. By all three
systems, he was then in Mṛiga; and the saṁvatsara which then began, must have
been named Mahā-Mārgaśīrsha. Jupiter's next following rising took place on Āshāḍha
śukla 13 of Śaka-Saṁvat 276, corresponding to Thursday, the 1st July, A.D. 353;
or, by the English calendar, on Friday, the 2nd July. His longitude then was 91°
19′. By all three systems, he was then in Punarvasu; and the saṁvatsara which
then began, must have been named Mahā-Pausha. Accordingly, with this epoch,
and with the real reading of the text, the Mahā-Āśvayuja saṁvatsara was not cur-
rent on the given date. As a matter of fact, the Mahā-Āśvayuja saṁvatsara of

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS; INTRODUCTION. 113

this cycle may have been omitted. Thus, in Śaka-Saṁvat 273 current, Jupiter's rising
took place on Vaiśâkha kṛishṇa 6, corresponding to Friday, the 16th Mareh, A.D.
350; or, by the English calendar, on Saturday, the 17th March. His longitude then
was 345° 10'. By all three systems, he was then in Uttarâ-Bhâdrapadâ; and the
saṁvatsara which then began, must have been named Mahâ-Bhâdrapada. His next
rising took place on Vaiśâkha śukla 10 of Śaka-Saṁvat 274, corresponding to Monday,
the 22nd April, A.D. 351; or, by the English calendar, on Tuesday, the 23rd April. His
longitude then was 21° 35'. By the system of equal spaces, he was then in Bharaṇî; and
the saṁvatsara which then began, would be named Mahâ-Âśvayuja; and there would be
an omission of the following saṁvatsara, Mahâ-Kârttika. But, by the two systems
of unequal spaces, he was then in Kṛittikâ; and the saṁvatsara which then began, would
be named Mahâ-Kârttika; with an omission of the intervening saṁvatsara, Mahâ-
Âśvayuja. — With the same epoch, and with the proposed corrected reading of
Gupta-Saṁvat 173 (see Texts and Translations, page 102, note 1), the given date would
belong to Śaka-Saṁvat 286 current; and its English equivalent would be Tuesday, the 4th
March, A.D. 363. Here, Jupiter's rising, next before the given date, took place on Chaitra
śukla 9 of Śaka-Saṁvat 285, corresponding to Thursday, the 21st March, A.D. 362;
or, by the English calendar, on Friday, the 22nd March. His longitude then was 350°
11'. By all three systems, he was then in Rêvatî; and the saṁvatsara which then began,
must have been named Mahâ-Âśvayuja. Jupiter's next following rising took place
on Jyêshṭha kṛishṇa 12 of Śaka-Saṁvat 286, corresponding to Sunday, the 27th April,
A.D. 363; or, by the English calendar, on Monday, the 28th April. His longitude then
was 26° 35'. By both the systems of unequal spaces, he was then in Kṛittikâ; and the
saṁvatsara which then began, must have been named Mahâ-Kârttika. By the system
of equal spaces, he was then in Bharaṇî; and, by this system, the saṁvatsara which
then began, must have again been named Mahâ-Âśvayuja; which shews that, by this
system, there was at this period a repetition of a saṁvatsara. Accordingly, with this
epoch, and with the proposed corrected reading, the Mahâ-Âśvayuja saṁvatsara
was current on the given date. This, however, is a mere coincidence. And the pro-
posed correction of the original reading cannot be justified.
By the mean-sign system, and with the original reading of Gupta-Saṁvat 163,
the Mahâ-Âśvayuja saṁvatsara commenced on Kârttika kṛishṇa 1 of Śaka-Saṁvat 273 cur-
rent, corresponding to Wednesday, the 3rd October, A.D. 350; and it was followed by
Mahâ-Kârttika on Kârttika kṛishṇa 8 of Śaka-Saṁvat 274, corresponding to Sunday, the
29th September, A.D. 351; and consequently it was not current on the given date. The
saṁvatsara then current was Mahâ-Mârgaśîrsha, which commenced on Kârttika kṛishṇa
15 of Śaka-Saṁvat 275 current, corresponding to Thursday, the 24th September,
A.D. 352.—With the proposed corrected reading of Gupta-Saṁvat 173, the Mahâ-
Âśvayuja saṁvatsara commenced on Bhâdrapada śukla 7 of Śaka-Saṁvat 285 current,