________________
246
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
[SEPTEMBER, 1888.
singular of éánta, in apposition with rájyé inet Persans, certain extracts, with French transthe same line, and the real translation is "in lations, from works relating to India, which the tranquil reign of Skandagupta; . . . he had previously published separately in the in the one hundredth year, increased by Journal Asiatique, in September and October, thirty and ten and one" (Corp. Inser. Indic. 1844, and February-March, 1845, he rendered Vol. III. No. 15, page 67), Mr. Prinsep, how- Albêrûnî (id. p. 143) as stating distinctly that ever, read santéḥ, the ablative or genitive sin- the Gupta era dated from the extermination of gular of sánti, quiet, tranquillity, calmness, the Guptas. I do not find that he makes any rest, repose; and, with this reading, it was, of reference to Prinsep on this specific point. But course, hardly possible to do otherwise than he shews, throughout, so good an acquaintance translate it by "after the decease," "of the with Prinsep's writings, as also with those of repose, i.e. death," and "after the death," of other English scholars, that he must certainly Skandagupta, and to make the years that were have read Prinsep's translation of, and comrecorded run from that event. No discussion ments on, the Kaháum inscription. And, of the question was then entered into. But though he may not have intentionally allowed Skandagupta then was, and still is, the last himself to be guided by Prinsep's views, it can known king of the direct succession of the hardly be doubted that he had a reminiscence Early Gupta dynasty. And it is evidently of the purport of them, when he was translatthe above rendering, which first suggested ing Albêrûnî's remarks. In fact, in the face of the idea of an era dating from the extermina- Mr. Rehatsek's, Mr. Kay's, and Prof. Wright's tion of the Gupta power at the death of versions, it is difficult to see how M. Reinaud Skandagupta. can have arrived at the exact words used in his translation, except under some such predispos ing influence.
4
When, in 1845, M. Reinaud republished collectively, under the title of Fragments Arabes
THE EPOCH OF THE NEWAR ERA. BY PROFESSOR F. KIELHORN, C.I.E.; GÖTTINGEN.
"The Newâr era is peculiar to Nêpâl, where it was introduced in A.D. 880 by Raja Râghava Deva." "The year begins in October, and 951 years had expired in 1831." From these statements of Sir A. Cunningham,' with the substance of which the incidental remarks of other scholars agree, it appears that the epoch of the era spoken of is considered to be A.D. 879-80, and that the first year of that era is supposed to have lasted from about October A.D. 880 to about October 881. The expression that the year begins in October suggests the idea, the correctness of which has not been hitherto proved by documentary evidence, that the Newâr year begins with the month Kârttika; and stating more accurately the opinion of those who have written about the matter, the first day of the first current year of the era, according to their view, should be taken to be the day 2,042,759 of the Julian period, =8th Octóber A.D. 880 Kârttika śukla 1 of the (northern) Vikrama year 938, current.
=
In order to arrive at some settlement of the question as to whether or to what extent the Hindus, during the middle ages, were in the habit of dating their documents in expired years, I have examined, amongst others, almost every available date recorded in the national era of Nêpâl; and in the course of the necessary calculations I have incidentally come to the following conclusions regarding the Nêwar
era :
(1.) The epoch of the Nêwar era is A.D. 878-79, and the first day of the first current year of that era is really the day 2,042, 405 of the Julian period, 20th October A.D. 879 Karttika śukla 1 of the (northern) Vikrama year 937, current.
(2.) As regards the arrangement of the two lunar fortnights, the dark half of a month follows upon the bright half of the same month, or, in other words, the scheme of the months is the amánta scheme of the southern Vikrama year. And from (1) and (2) together it follows that
Indian Eras, p. 74.
