________________
No. 14.]
THE EPOCH OF THE KALACHURI-CHEDI ERA.
"the Hindus' usual, not invariable, way of expressing a date is not in the year so and so' but after so many years had elapsed since such and such event had taken place"". The case of the Chedi era, which seemed to be an exception to the general rule, was cited by Fleet in support of his view that the years of the Gupta era, which were not qualified as current or expired, should be taken as current. This controversy about the general practice of the Hindus in dating their records in the middle ages led Kielhorn to revise his conclusion about the epoch of the Chedi era. In his article Die Epoche der Cedi-Aera' contributed to the Festgruss an Roth3 and in another on the Bhera-Ghat inscription of Alhanadevi in the Ep. Ind., Vol. II, pp. 7ff. both of which were published in 1893, he expressed his opinion that in conformity with the common usage observed in the case of other eras, the epoch of the Chedi era should be fixed in such a way that all or at least a great majority of the available verifiable dates would be in expired years. He, therefore, proposed A. D. 247-248 as the epoch of the era. As regards the beginning of the Chedi year he drew attention to the following remark in Colebrooke's letter written at Nagpur on the 30th October 1799: The new year begins here with the light fortnight of Asvina; but opening in the midst of Durga's festival, the New Year's day is only celebrated on the 10th lunar day." Kielhorn thought that the Aśvinadi year, which was current down to Colebrooke's time in a part of the country previously included in the Chedi kingdom, might be reminiscent of the Chedi year and, as such a year suited all the twelve Chedi dates known till then, he fixed the 5th September (Asvina su. di. 1) A. D. 248 as the first day of the first current year and the 26th August (Asvina su. di. 1) A. D. 249 as the first day of the first expired year of the Chedi era. He next showed that all the twelve verifiable Chedi dates in the inscriptions of the Later Kalachuris and their feudatories, which were known till then, were, without exception, in expired years. The two early dates, 456 and 486, of the Nausari and Kävi plates, however, presented difficulties which Kielhorn acknowledged in foot-notes to his List of Northern Inscriptions.
64
Three more Chedi dates containing the necessary data for verification were subsequently discovered and were calculated by Kielhorn before his death, viz., (1) the Sarnath fragmentary stone inscription of the time of Karna dated Samvatsare 8]10 Asvina (Asvina) sudi 15 Ravau (corresponding, for the expired Kalachuri year 810, to Sunday, the 4th October 1058); (2) Tahankāpār (first) plate of Pamparaja' dated Samvata(t) 965 Bhadrapade vadi 10 Mriga-ri(ri)kshe [Soma]dine (corresponding, for the current Chedi year 965, to Monday, the 12th August A. D. 1213); and (3) Tahankapar (second) plate of Pamparaja dated Samvat 966. .. Isva(sva)rasamvatsare Kärti(rtti)ka-mäse Chitra-ri(ri)kshe Ravi-dině Sury-oparage (corresponding, for the expired Chedi year 966, to Sunday, the 5th October A. D. 1214). Besides, he found it necessary to change his reading and the corresponding Christian date in the case of one of the previously known twelve Chedi dates, viz., (4) that of the Sheorinäräyan image inscription which he now read as Kalachuri-samvatsare 1898! Asvina-sudi 7 Soma-dine from a photograph supplied by Dr. (then Mr.) D. R. Bhandarkar and found by calculation to correspond, for the current Chedi year 898, to Monday, the 24th September A. D. 1145.
117
1 See Collected Works of Sir R. G. Bhandarkar, Vol. III, pp. 388-389. The paper was communicated to the Bom. Br. R. A. S. on the 1st August 1889.
Ind. Ant., Vol. XX (1891), p. 387.
See pp. 53-56.
See Life of H. T. Colebrooke by Sir T. E. Colebrooke, p. 163.
Above, Vol. V, Appendix p. 57, notes 6 and 7.
A. S. I. An. Rep. for 1906-7, p. 100.
Above, Vol. IX, pp. 129-130.
Ibid., p. 129.
Ibid., p. 130.
