________________
420
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
[DECEMBER, 1884.
poraneous with the heroes of the Mahabharata, made a displacement of all dynasties, excepting the very latest, a matter of necessity.
But however this may be, the main point for us is to ascertain according to what era A m uvarman really dated his edicts. Three different solutions of this question may be attempted. It may either be assumed that A su varman established an era of his own, or that he used the era of Sriharsha, which, according to Albir û ni, began in 606 or 607 A.D. and was used in Northern India as late as the eleventh century, or that he employed the so-called L8kakála in which the hundreds are left out. The last supposition may, however, be at once dis. carded, because we have in our series inscriptions of his successors, which, to judge from the characters, must be dated in the same era as his own, and go down as far the year 153. If Ambu varman had used the Lokakála, none of his successors would have used a higher figure than 99. It is not equally easy to choose between the two remaining possibilities. In favour of the first it might be urged that according to the account, given by Hinen Thsang and in the Vatnsávali, Amsa varman was a powerful ruler who possessed extraordinary ability and achieved great fame by his conquests as well as by his literary attainments. It is well known that to establish a new era is a wish dear to the heart of ambitious Indian princes and that, to the great detriment of Indian chronology, only too many have succeeded in effecting it. On the other, there are important objections against this supposition. For it appears from the inscriptions that, how. ever great and powerful a king Amavarman may have become eventually, he was originally nothing but a Sâmanta or feudatory of the king of Nepal, who in all probability really governed the country, but in the name of his over-lord.
This is the position which he held according to the undated inscription of Sivadó va (No. 5). In his own inscription of Samvat 34 (No. 6) he, too, assumes no higher title than mahdsámanta, 'thegreat feudal baron.' Vibhuvarman (No. 8) calls him the illustrious' (Sri) Amu varman, and the same ambigaous epithet is used in the inscription of 39 (No. 7). It is only in Jishnugupta's inscription of Samvat 48 (No. 9) that he receives the title mahárájádhiraja, 'great king of kings.' These facts alone are fatal to the supposition that the dates of the inscriptions Nos. 6-15 refer to an era established by Ansu varman. For it is an indisputable axiom that nobody but an anointed king can initiate a Samvat of his own. As Ansu varman was only a Samanta in the year 34 of the era in which he dates, the latter cannot begin with his abhisheka or accession to the throne. Of late some other facts have come to light which also clearly disprove the supposition that the dates of our last ten inscriptions belong to a special Nepalese era, but show that it is one used generally in Northern India during the seventh and eighth centuries. In our inscription No. 15, Jayad é v a, who dates in Samvat 153, states that his mother Vatsa devi was the daughter of a Maukhari prince or chief, Bhôgavarman," and the granddaughter of the great Aditya8 ê na, the illustrious lord of Magadha.' Åditya sê na of Magadha has been long known from the Aphsar inscription, which contains the names of the later Guptas. Quite recently General Cunningham has pub. lished two more documents mentioning him,the Shapur inscription, wbich records the dedication of a statue of Sûrya," and the Deo, Bårnak inscription which contained a grant of land, made to the Vâruņa v â si-bhattáraka.
31 Reinaud, Fragments Arabes et Persans, p. 139. Albirůnt states that he found in a Kasmirien almanac the era of Sriharsha placed 664 years after that of Vikram Aditya. This expression may mean either that it began in 606 or in 607 A.D. If the almanac stated that the Satovat of Srisharsha began 664 years after the abhisheka of Vikrame, the beginning of the era would fall in 606, because the year 1 of the Sriharaha era would have to be deducted from 664 as well as 56. If, on the other hand, the almanao stated that the abhisheka of Brlharsha took place in Vikrama 664, the completion of the first year of the Vikrama era would fall in 608, and its beginning in 807. What Albirani really means, can be settled only by astronomical calculations, in case a number of dates with
the days of the week, or a statement regarding an eclipse are found. The circumstance that the Kaimirian almanae contained the initial point of the Sriharaha era indicates that it was used in Kaimir. For even in our daya the Panchdiigas usually contain something regarding the various eras used in the districts where they are written, as well as sometimes historical information regarding its ancient dynasties.
*See note by Dr. Burgess in Beal's Bud. Rec. of W. Countries, vol. II, p. 81, and Ind. Ant., vol. X, p. 193, note. ** Arch. Rep., vol. XV, Plate ri. 0 Arch. Rep., vol. XVI, pp. 73-76, and Plato xxiv.
