________________
152
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
[MAY, 1887.
as can be ascertained by Gen. Cunningham's The essential point with which we are conTables, it represents Asbadha krishna 5. Sir cerned in the present inquiry, is, whether the E. Clive Bayley seems to have very soon week-day of Ashadha sokla 12 was a Thursday become aware of the mistake ; since, at the in Gupta-Samvat 165 + A.D. 319.20 = A.D. end of the copy of the Postscript which, with 484-85 = Saka-Samvat 406, treated of course a copy of the principal article, reached me as an expired year, which is the year in from him in May, 1883, there is added, which it should be a Thursday, according to in manuscript, the remark-" this date is the epoch proved by the Verwal inscription of erroneous; but the real date, as calculated Valabhi-Samvat 945. by Professor Jacobi, comes out a Thursday."
Mr. Sh. B, Dikshit has made the necessary The real date of Ashadha sukla 12 of Gupta- calculations, by Prof. K. L. Chhatre's Tables, Samvat 165+ A.D. 190-91 = A.D. 355-56 = for this year; and, in order again to present Saka-Samvat 277, is Thursday, the 8th June, at once all the possible surroundings of the A.D. 355; as obtained, theoretically, from Gen. date, also for the years Saka-Samvat 405 and Cunningham's Tables, and also, by actual 407. His results are, for Saka-Samvat 405, Fri. calculation, by Mr. Sh. B. Dikshit, from Prof. day, the 3rd June, A.D. 483; for Saka-Samvat Kero Lakshman Chhatre's Tables
406, Thursday, the 21st June, A.D. 484 ; And in 1881, in this Journal, ante, Vol. X. and for Saka-Samvat 407, Tuesday, the 11th p. 220, Dr. Oldenberg announced, from the Jane, A.D. 485. The process by which these Tables in Warren's Kala-Sankalita, the correct results are obtained, is published in detail, for result; vit. that with the epoch of A.D. 319- the second result, at page 116 ff. above; so (20), the equivalent English date is Thursday, that, if there is any error in the process, or in the 21st June, A.D. 484.
the application of it, that error may be detected Now, Dr. F. E. Hall's, Gen. Cunningham's, and exposed, and Sir E. Clive Bayley's results, right or wrong, The second result, Thursday, the 21st may be accepted without the slightest hesita- June, A. D. 484, is the only one that answers tion. I would only point out, in the first place, to the week.day mentioned in the record. And As regards Gen. Cunningham's result for the
Gen Canningham's result for the it answers, as is required, to the epoch of epoch of A.D. 166-67, that, by Prof. K. L. A.D. 819-20, and to the treatment of the Chhatre's Tables, Ashidha krishna 12 of Saka-Gupta year as a northern Saka year. But it Samvat 253 was not a Thursday, but really was does not, in itself, prove conclusively either Friday, the 4th June, A.D. 881 ; and secondly, the exact epoch of the era, or the scheme of as a general fact, that I find, from Panchanga, the year for the reason that, being a date in a that in the ten years Sake-Samvat 1799 to bright fortnight, this Åshadba bukla 12 was 1808 inclusive, the position of the twelfth tithi the same tithi, and fell on the same solar day, of the bright fortnight of Åsha dhe varied the 21st June, all over India, in the southern from the 100th to the 102nd solar day in the as well as the northern Saka-Samvat 406, and year; and that, therefore, the results derivable in southern Vikrama-Sauvat 540, as well as in from Gon. Cunningham's Tables being only northern Vikrama-Samvat 541. theoretical and approximate, there is a chance
The Verawal Inscription of Valabhiof the week-day of Ashadha sukla 12 being a Thursday in any year in which Gen. Cunningham
Samvat 927. gives a Monday, Tuesday, or a Wednesday, The third and last date, containing & week. as the initial day.
day, that I have to comment on, is contained And, in the second place in criticising Gen. Cunning- Gupta era, and of A.D. 166-67 was the year 0; and with ham's resulta, he has distorted them all by one year, this, his own epooh, he was right, so far as his theory through adding the Gupta years to A.D. 167-68=Gapta- and arrangement of the samvatsarae goes; and allow Samvat e, instead of to A.D. 166-67, which was the ing for his alteration of Gupta-Samvat 168 into 178, epoch very clearly announced by Gen. Cunningham. It which was endorsed by Sir E. Clive Bayley himself, was only through this distortion, coupled with the substi. in all five instances, in so far as that the samvatsaras tution of Maha Mergasira for Mah. Maghe, that he given by him seem to be really the ones that were arrived at the result that, in respect of the samvatsaras current at the commencement of each Saka year arrived in this series of inscriptions, Gen. Cunningham W88 at by him, wrongly, as the equivalent of a Gupta year right in only one case out of five. Gen. Cunningham though not in every instance on the dates actually speaks everywhere of A.D. 167 as the first year of the recorded.
