________________
INTERNAL EVIDENCES
279
years before the 5th year of Kbāravela's reign, (viz. 103 + 5 =) 108 years before his accession. Agreeing with K. P. Jayaswal, he takes the era to be counted from 458 B. C. Hence, the canal, according to him, was excavated in 355 B. C., say, at least 33 years before the accession of Chandragupta Maurya. Here, R. D. Banerji appears to have taken the figure 103 to express not the interval between Nandarāja and Khāravela, but a date within the rule of the Nanda dynasty, which may have reckoned from some pre-existing era. But use of any such era in any particular part of the country or epoch is not proved. Khāravela, like Asoka, uses regnal years and not any era.
Dr. Raychaudhari?, on the other hand, suggests that the interpretation of 'ti.vasa-sata' accords substantially with the puranic tradition, regarding the interval between the Nandas and the dynasty to which Sātakarņi, the contemporary of Khāravela, in his second regnal year, belonged (i. e. i 37 years for the Mauryas, 112 years for the Sungas and 45 years for the Kāņvas) say 294 years. If the expression is taken to mean 103 years, Khāravela's accession must be placed (103 - 5 =-) 98 years after Nandarāja. His clevation to the position of Yuvarāja took place nine years before that (i. e. 93 - 9=89 years after Nandarāja and not later than 324-89=235 B. C.). Khāravela's senior partner in the Royal Office was on the throne at that time, and he may have had his predecessor or predecessors. But, we learn from the Asokan inscriptions that Kalinga was actually governed at that time by a Maurya Kumāra and not by a Kalingādhipati or a Chakravarti, under the suzerainty of Asoka. Therefore, 'ti-vasa-sata' may be understood to mean 300 years and not 103 years. Dr. Sircar?, too, holds that there is no
1. PHAI, pp. 229f. 2. AIU, Ch. XIII, p. 216,
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
