________________
MARCH, 1884.)
A NEW GURJARA COPPER-PLATE GRANT.
75
commenced in A.D. 319, we obtain in each case results incompatible with Dadda II. being contemporary with Harshavardhana. It is plain, therefore, tbat we must discard all these eras, and find some other epoch for the era of the Gurjara grants.
There have lately come into my hands some grants of the Gujarat branch of the Chalukya family, which require to be now fully noticed.
The first of them is the published Nausâri grant, of the year 421, of the Yuvarája Siladitya-SryAsraya." And another is an unpublished Surat grant, of the year 443, of the same person." Taken together, they give the following genealogy and dates :
Pulikeáivallabha, (Pulikėsi II.)
Vikramaditya
JayasimhavarmaSatyâśrâys
Dharâśraya. Vinayaditya
Siladitya-Śryasraya. Satyksraya
The yours 121 and 443. In both the grants the donor is Siladitya Sry Aśraya, with the rank of Yuvardja.
And another of them is an unpublished Balsår grant, noticed by me in my paper on/ the Nauskri grant, which gives the following genealogy and date :
Kirttivarma I.
they were drafted, and the method in which their dates are expressed, there can be no doubt that they are to be referred to the same era as those of the Kaira, Nausâri, and Kavi Gurjara grants.
Now the Surat grant of the year 443 opens with the verseNarasimha-vikrama[ho] stata
vimala-yaki jagati vijayatê virah sthirabala-Vinayadityah
Satyaśrayavallabhal sriman An eulogistic verse of this kind, at the beginning of an inscription, is usually in praise of the grantor's paramount sovereign. It follows, therefore, from this Surat grant, that, as Sileditya-Sryasraya was still a Yuvardja in 443 as he was in 421, his father Jayasimhavarm was still alive in 443; and, further, that in 443 the head of the whole Chalukya family in Western India was Vinayâdity & Satyaórays of the Western Branch, whose capital was at Vatapi or Badâmi.
There are, it is true, two Vinayadityas mentioned in these inscriptions. But it is impossible to confound the two, and to understand the opening verse of the Surat grant as referring to the son of Jayasimhavarma, for the following reasons,-1, because of their different second names of Satyasraya and Mangalarâja ;-and 2, because, even assuming Vinayaditya-Mangalarâja to be the elder brother of stladityaŚryâsraya, it is altogether unaccountable that he should be praised in the opening enlogistic verse, and yet should be entirely passed over in the genealogy, which does mention his cousin Vinayaditya-Satyasraya. Unless the year 443 can be shown to be of later date than Saka 653,-and this is impossible ; since, setting aside all other reasons, I have another unpublished grant which gives the date of the year 490 for Palikêśivallabha-Janåsraya, the younger brother of Vinayaditya-Mangalarkja; and this shows clearly that Vinayaditya-Mangalarå ja must have come between 443 and 490,the truth is that Vinayaditya-Mangalarája was the younger brother of Siladitya-Sry Aśraya ; and the explanation of the omission of the they cannot be utilised in the present discussion. 11 Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. XVI. pp. 18.
The daton of these two, and of the two mentioned below, do not contain any details, such as the names of the days of the wook, that can be made we of for the purposes of caloulations.
Polikkáivallabha (Palikébi II.)
Vikramaditya
Jayasimhavarma. Satyaáraya.
Vinayaditya- Mangalarâja.
Saka 658. The difference of more than two centuries between the year 443 as the latest date of one son, and Saka 653 as the date of another son, of Jayasinhavarmå, shows that the dates we have for Silidity & Sry Aśra ya cannot be referred to the Saks era. And, taking into consideration the characters in which his grants are engraved, the model according to which
To this same peries belong the Kairs grant of Vijayardje, or Vijayavarma of the year 194, Mr. Fleet's Non. XLVI. and XLVII., ante Vol. VII, pp. 2411, and the Nirpar grant of Nagavardhana, Mr. Fleet's No. LXXVI., ants Vol. IX, pp. 1888. But the former contains no mention of any of the Western Chalulyas of V Atapi, and the latter is not dated'; and, consequently,
