________________
17
dated as c. 770 A.D. So the year 375 cannot be a V.S. date if counted from 58 B.C. However it fits perfectly if taken as a Vikramāditya Gupta date, i.e. a date after Candra II Gupta, known to have called himself Vikramāditya, usually supposed to have killed the Saka about 395 A.D. (395+375 = 770, or 391+375 = 766 for Miss Duff's date).
This is further confirmation, from a most unexpected source, of our conclusion given in Indian Kāvya Literature Vol. VI, pp. 54ff., that the era of 58 B.C., earlier called krta or vikrama, was, only after the 10th century A.D., confused with the date of Vikramāditya (Gupta). Thus the history of India came to be rewritten. The restoration of the true chronology shows that Vikramāditya fits just after the end of the Purāņa lists of kings, i.e. after Pravīra (= Pravarasena I Vākāțaka, Pargiter, The Purāņa Text of the Dynasties of the Kali Age, p.50 and his introductory note on p.48; Pravira is called son of Vindhyasakti and followed by his own four sons ... among whom we know the empire was divided) and after unnamed Guptas (Pargiter p. 53 and his Introduction p. xii = Candra I). Equally Vikramāditya fits in Jaina tradition after the teachers of Hemacandra's Parisistaparvan. Incidentally those who question the dating of Asoka Maurya in the 3rd century B.C. may refer to Indian Kavya Literature Vol. VII 97177 for the Chinese synchronisms which confirm it via the Mahāvaņsa.
BS A. K. WARDER
APT. 306, 2045 LAKESHORE BOULEVARD WEST TORONTO M8V 276, CANADA
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
