________________
366
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
[DECEMBER, 1888.
certain one, 39 that of the year 129, recorded in from Saka-Samvat 930 to 1060, there were six the Mankawâr inscription, Corp. Inscr. Indic. reigns; with an average of twenty-five years, Vol. III, No. 11, page 45. And, as we ought to or seven less than we should have to allot to assume that Chandragupta I. was at least each of the four Early Gapta kings in question. twenty years old when his reign commenced, And even this result is due chiefly to the this gives us a period of a hundred and forty- extraordinarily long reign of Vikramaditya nine years, which, spread over four generations, VI., for fifty-two years, from Saka-Samvat 997 gives to each a duration of thirty-seven years to 1048. If we take the whole period of the and a quarter, or nearly half as much again as Western Châlukya dynasty, covering one hun. the usually accepted average maximum rate of dred and ninety years, from Saka-Samvat 895, twenty-five years for a Hindu generation. This the first year of Taila II., down to Saka-Samvat too, is only dealing with the question of gene- 1084, as the end of the reign and the death of rations. If we take the period of a hundred Taila III., we have ten reigns, with an ave. and twenty-nine years only, from the com- rage duration of just nineteen years each. An mencement of the reign of Chandragupta I. to ! average of thirty-two years for four successive nearly the end of that of Kumaragapta, - which reigns of Hindu fathers and sons, seems, from gives an average of thirty-two years and a every point of view, an impossibility. And quarter for each of the four reigns,-then, as this prevents our making the Gupta era run compared with the average duration, twenty from the commencement of the reign of Chan. years at the outside, of a Hindu reign, the dragupta I. We must, therefore, accept it as excess is still more remarkable. And almost certain that the Early Guptas only adopted exactly the same results are obtained, if, in the era of some other dynasty. And we stead of considering four generations and must look for its origin to some extraneous reigns, down to the end of the time of Kumara source. gupta, we take the latest certain date of Now, it is evident that the Early Guptas Chandragupta II., vix, the year 93 given in the rose to power first as feudatory MahaSáñchi inscription, Corp. Inscr. Indic. Vol. III. rajas, the third of whom, Chandragupta I., No. 5, page 29, and spread the period of ninety- while holding that same rank, established his three years over three reigns, or, on the same independence; so that, his successors mainassumption as regards the age of Chandra- taining the same position, the paramount gupta I., the period of a hundred and thirteen titles, and not his original fendatory title, are years over three generations. On the question always coupled with his name in the genesof generations, I will not base any particularly logical passages in their records. And, from the special objection. An analogy for an abnormal Maharaja Gupta down to Kumaragupta, we average rate might be deduced from the West- have two fendatory governments and four ern Chalukya genealogy, in which we have reigns; which, at the average rate of twenty Saku-Samvat 2 930 for the commencement of years, almost fill up the period indicated by the reign of Vikramaditya V., and Saks-Sam- the latest certain date for Kumâragupta, and, vat 1060 for the end of the reign, and it may by a coincidence, place the commencement of safely be assumed the death, of Sômésvara III. the government of the Maharaja Gupta very in the third generation after him. If we take near to A.D. 320. If, then, we could deterit that Vikramaditya V. was twenty years old in mine the paramount sovereign of whom the Saka-Samvat 930, we have one hundred and fifty Mahárája Gupta was a feudatory, we should years for the four generations, or an average have in him the founder of the era; provided of thirty-seven years and a half for each. But, we could only shew that his successors also
So And it must be very nearly his latest date: for he 41 See my Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts, p. 18, had then been reigning for at least thirty-three full years, Table. and we have the date of the year 136 for his son and 19 The exact year was doubtful when I wrote the book Nuccessor, Skandagupta. -The selection of any later date referred to in the preceding note but it has now been would, of course, only intensify the force of the argument. established by the Kauthêm grant (ante, Vol. XVI. p.
40 The silver coins (see ante, Vol. XIV. p. 65f.) seem to 15ff.) give the year 94 or 95; but the latest absolutely certain 43 'I exclude the short reign of Sômêsvara IV., from date is the one that I quote. Here again, the adoption of Saks-Samyat 1104 to about 1111, because there had been a later date would only strengthen the argument.
meanwhile an interruption of the Western ChAlukys power by the Kalachuris of the Dekkan.
