________________
326
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
(VOL. III.
nothing except that, after the mention of the traditional king Vikramaditya, who is represented as having reigned for a hundred and thirty-five years, - in order to fill up the chronological interval between the commencement of the Vikrama era (B.C. 58) and the commencement of the Saks era (A.D. 77),-"the era of Salivahana" (i.e. the Saka era), "which dates its "commencement from A.D. 77 in Orissa," is used in all the accounts, and we now come to reigns " of a probable and moderate duration, the first dawning of an approach to the authentic period " of the native history" (ibid. p. 262). And he simply attached to the annals of Orissa & value which neither they, nor any other Hindi records of the same kind that have ever yet come to light, can possibly posses. It is almost needless to say that the annals in question do not include any such names at all as Sivagupta and Bhavagupta; these being real historical names, it is not to be expected that they would be found in such documents. They undoubtedly do preserve & reminiscence of Janamêjaya-Maha-Bhavagupta I. and Yayati-Mahl-Sivagupta, in the names of Yayati-Kêsari, and of Janam@jaya-Kesari which also occurs in the list of the Kësari kings; for, otherwise, there is no reason why such purely Puråņic names should crop up in a series of mostly quite ordinary names. But they do so under completely erroneous and anachronistic circumstances. According to the annals, Yayâti-Kesari was the first of his dynasty, and was succeeded by Suraj' or 'Suriya', .e. Sarya-Kêsari, and Janamêjaya-Kesari came long after him, in the period A.D. 754 to 763; whereas, the copper-plate charters shew that Yayati-MahlŚivagupta was the third king of his line,-that Janamêjaya-Maha-Bhavagupta I. was his predecessor and father, and that he was succeeded by Bhimaratha-Maha-Bhavagupta II., of whom we possibly have a perverted reminiscence in the name of the alleged Bharata-Kêsari who is placed next after Janamôjaya-Kêsari, in the period A.D. 763 to 778. And, - even apart from what I shall shew below, as to the period to which the real Yayâti-Mahl-Sivagupta must be referred,- the annals unconsciously betray themselves, by connecting with the name of Yayati-Kesari events which can have happened only several centuries at least after the period which they would establish for him. They say that, just before him, some people called Yavanas ruled over Orissa for a hundred and forty-six years, and that he established his own dynasty by expelling the Yavanas (ibid. pp. 264, 265, and Orissa, Vol. II. Appendix VII. p. 185): as I will shew further on, though the Yavanas here are the Early Gupta kings, the term elsewhere means, all through the annals, the Musalmans, and the statements connected with Yayati-Kesari mix ap the Early Gupta rule with the Musalman conquests: if then, the statements are based on no actual fact, but simply on what took place generally in Northern India, they cannot refer truly to any time anterior to the period of Mahmûd of Ghazni (A.D. 1001 to 1030), who, moreover, did not penetrate as far as Orissa; while, if they commemorate an actual conquest of Orissa, they cannot possibly refer to any time anterior to A.D. 1567-68, when Sulaiman, king of Bengal, defeated the last independent king of Orissa and practically subjugated the province.
As regards the second mistake, whatever the Šástras may say, or seem to say, the assertion that none but paramount sovereigns could make grants of land is without any basis of fact : any number of epigraphic instances to the contrary could be quoted ; and, though there are instances enough of feudatories and officials making grants with the permission of their suprome kings, yet even then the grants were always made by them in their own names, and not a single authentic case can be quoted of a feudatory or official assuming the name of his king or other superior authority for the purpose of issuing a charter.
1.6. apparently, the people of Orissa use the current Sakn years.
Orissa, Vol. II. Appendix VII. p. 186.- Mr. Stirling did not enumerate all the Kesari kinge; and so this name is not to be found in his account.
It is safficient to note here that, in the Chitorgadh inscription of A.D. 1428 or 1429, Firuz Shah or rusud-din Taghlaq, king of Delhi (A.D. 1351 to 1388), is called "the Yavana king Pêroja" (Ep. Ind. Vol. II. p. 410)
See the Imperial Gazetteer, Vol. X. p. 430.
