________________
220
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
[August, 1881.
On the contrary I believe that everything The point of the ecliptic at which we arrive in which may throw any light on this question, this way, would have to be considered, in strongly supports the statement of Albirûni. accordance with the later system of Hindu
Here I may be allowed to allude, first, to the astronomy, as belonging to the Nakshatra dates found in inscriptions, vhich are expressed Chitra. But this system depends entirely on both according to the Gupta era and according the position of the vernal equinox about 560 to a chronological cycle, the nature of which we A.D., -the initial point, that is, the beginning shall immediately discuss.
of Aśvini, being regarded as coincident with These dates stand as follows:
the equinoctial point at that date. We think The year 156, which is a Mahậvaisakha year. it can be shewn, as highly probable, that
Do. 178 do. Mahasvayaja year. previous to that, no attention was paid to the Do. 191 do. Mahâchaitra year. position of the equinox in fixing the limits of
Do. 209 do. Mahâśvayuja year." the twelve divisions of the ecliptic. To deterIt is evident that we have here & cycle mine, therefore, the limits belonging to each of twelve years, the single years of which Nakshatra, we have only to consider the actual received their names in their turn from the positions of the asterisms which gave name lanar months. No one who is even superficially to the twelve divisions. Now, according to acquainted with the Indian calendary systems, Prof. Whitney's map, we have will have any doubt as to the nature of this
Chitrà situated in 182° cycle. It is evident, nor could it escape the
Visakhå , , 205-2150 attention of a scholar like General Cunningham,
Jyêshthå , 230° that the cycle is based on the revolution
Ashadhâs , „ 2550-2650 of Jupiter, which is completed in about twelve The divisions of the ecliptio named after years. The use of such a cycle is attested by these Nakshatras would be somewhat as the Súryasiddhanta (xiv, 17) and by the follows-Chitra, 1650-1950; Visakha, 1950 authorities quoted by Davis (Asiatic Researches, 225°; JyêghthA, 2250-2550, Ashådhås, 2559-285°. vol. III, p. 217). Each year of this cycle was If this be correct, it appears that the yuar 475 called after that Nakshatra of the twelve A.D. (Gupta 156) would be a Mabávaishakha from which the months received their names, year; at all events, the position of Jupiter that and within the extent of which the heliacal year, if it did not fall within the Visakha Nakrising and setting of Jupiter fell in that year. shatra, cannot have been more distant from it Now, if we take 319 as the Gupta epoch, than may be accounted for by the contingenthe conjunction of Sun and Jupiter occurred, cies of intercalation to which the Jovian cycle according to the Indian method of calculation, was subject.** in the first of the four years mentioned, in | Another date to be mentioned here is that 191st degree of the Hindu ecliptic). This is given in the Badhagupta inscription : "after not very far from being correct, for the true 165 years (i. e, in the current 166th year), point at which the conjunction occurred in when Budhagapta was king, on the 12th (lunar) that year, is situated in the 197th degree, day of the bright half-month of Ashâdha, on a as Dr. Lehmann Filhes has kindly calculated Thursday." If we accept the epoch of 319 for me. The holiacal setting or rising of A.D., this date will be the 21st June 484 Jupiter is distant from this point by about 4o. A.D.," which was indeed a Thursday.
is open to grave doubts. All the other inscriptions that belong to the Gurjara dynasty, are dated in the Saka era, and the argument by which Dr. Bühler has tried to show that this era will not do in this inscription, seems by no means strong enough to establish here the use of the Vikramaditya era of which no certain traces are found till much later times.
1 These dates have been collected by Gen. Cunningham in the Archæological Survey Reports, vol. IX. I have not yet been able to see this volume, which contains a new disquisition by Gen. Cunningham on the question of Gupta dates, and I take these dates from the review of Gen. Cunningham's work contained in the Indian Antiquary, vol. IX (1880), p. 253.
"I must confess that I do not understand how the Jorian dates can be reconciled with General Canningham's theory, which he tries to prove in the work quoted, that the Gupta epoch is to be placed in 195 A. D.
See the formale and tables in Warren's Kala. San kalita.
* It is to be regretted that the date of the Morbi inscription (Ind. Ant., vol. II, p. 257 seq. ; vol. IX, p. 808) cannot be made use of here. This inscription contains & royal grint issued "when 585 Gupta year bad elapeed. As the disk of the sun was eclipsed." The date, however, given at the end of the inscription, PhAlgunas di 5. cannot posibly refer to the donatiou itself, but only to its inscriptional record, for of course on the fifth day after new moon
