________________
MAY, 1887.]
THE YEARS OF THE GUPTA ERA.
.141
THE SCHEME AND EQUATION OF THE YEARS OF THE GUPTA ERA.
BY J. E. FLEET, Bo.C.S., M.B.A.S., C.I.E. TN my paper on "The Epoch of the Gupta ern or the southern arrangement, or of the 1 Era," I intimated (ante, Vol. XV. p. 189.) years of the southern Vikrama era. that, with the rendering given to us by M A reference to the Table on page 143 below Reinaud of Albîrûni's statements, we must will explain at once the difference in the settle certain preliminary points, before any of schemes of these years, and the necessity for the recorded dates can be satisfactorily con- determining the question that we have under verted into English equivalents, and especially consideration. in such a way as to shew clearly and conclu- The Saka years of both Northern and sively whether the difference between the Saka Southern India commence with the first day and Gupta eras is 240, 241, or 242 years; i.e. of the bright fortnight of Chaitra. But, in whether the epoch is Gupta-Samvat 0= A.D. the scheme of the year, there is the importan 918-19, or 319-20, or 320-21.
difference that, in the northern arrangement
the dark fortnight of each month precedes the The Scheme of the Years.
bright;" whereas in the southern year, it is Bearing in mind that, in all cases in wbich the bright fortnight that stands first. Poputhe notation and computation of tithis are larly, and in Panchángs, the northern arrangeconcerned, the years of the Kaliyuga era' andment is called Púrņiminta, or ending with of the northern Vikrama era have to be treated the full-moon,' and the southern arrangement as commencing, like the years of the Saka era, is called Amánta, or ending with the conwith the first day of the bright fortnight of the junction (of the sun and the moon), i.e. with month Chaitra (March-April); and also that the the new-moon;' and these terms will be decision as to the order of the dark and bright found very convenient for practical use. The lunar fortnights of the months must of necessity result of this difference of arrangement, is, go with the decision as to the general northern that, in the northern year, the dark fortnight of or southern nature of the era and its years, since Chaitra stands at the end of the year, instead we cannot have a northern year coupled with of in the place of the second fortnight, which the southern arrangement of the fortnights, or it occupies in the southern year; and that the a southern year coupled with the northern dark half of the southern Chaitra is the same arrangement,- these points resolve themselves lunar period as the dark half of the northern into the question, whether the years of the Vaisakha; and so on all through the year. Gapta-Valabhi era' had a distinct scheme and For dates in the bright fortnights of Sukn initial day of their own, or whether they fol- years, it obviously is immaterial whether we lowed the scheme and initial day of the years follow the northern or the southern system. of the Saka era, according to either the north- But, for dates in the dark fortnights, it is as
This era is also of extremely exceptional use in epigraphical records. The only instances that I can quote are (1) the Aiholo inscription of the Western Chalukya king Palikesin II. of A.D. 634-35 (ante, Vol. VIII. p. 237.), which is dated when three thousand soven hundred and thirty-five years had elapsed from the Bharata war, supplemented by the statement that, at the same time, five hundred and fifty-six years of the Saka kinge also had gone by, in their owners as a subdivision of) the Kali age, the figures of which are marked by those of the Bherata war; and (2) some of the inscriptions of the Kidambas of Gon, ranging from A.D. 1167 to 1947 (Jour. Bo. Br. As. Soc. Vol. IX. pp. 2411., 8628., and ante, Vol. XIV. p. 2881.), which, for some ospricious reason, are dated in the Kaliyaga, without any reference to the Saka ors at all, though other records of the same family (see my Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts, p. 90f.) are dated in the Saks era, and in that alone.
According to the convenience of the moment, I shall
call the era indifferontly the Gupta era, the Valabht oras or the Gupta-Valabhi era. It never had, in ancient times, the name of the Gupta era at all. But, as I have statad on previous occasions, it is convenient to continue the practice, which has been current for nearly fifty yours, of calling it the Guptn er, until we know for certain by whom it was established. In later times, in Kathiwad. it did soquire the name of the Valabhi era. And Abirani tells us that the Gupta and Valabh eras are one and the same, with one and the same epoch. My nomenclature of the era needs no apology, if I point out that, even by those who maintain that the Early Guptas were them selves anterior to A.D. 819-20, it is admitted that the Bo-called Gupta ora which has come down to us in the writings of Albiruni, had the same epooh with the Valabhi era. They only maintain that the Early Guptas used a Gupta ers which was not this Gupta era.
Soe Boal's Buddh. Rec. West. World, Vol. I. p. 71. where Hinen Talang's Account whewe that the arrange ment was just the same twelve centuries ago.
