________________
THE VIKRAMA ERA.
—
411
DECEMBER, 1891.]
1464, 1531, and 1555 (Nos. 149, 22, and 48) the Jovian year was actually current on the day of the date, but had not begun at the commencement of the solar year (mean-sign system). In six dates, of V. 1275, 1386, 1445, 1458, 1707, and 1785 (Nos. 11, 166, 44, 20, 25, and 55) the Jovian year was no longer current on the day of the date, but was current at the commencement of the solar year (northern luni-solar system). And in six other dates, of V. 1232, 1353, 1500, 1650, 1686 and 1877 (Nos. 163, 42, 73, 51, 53, and 175) the Jovian year was current both on the day of the date and also at the commencement of the solar year (either mean-sign system or northern luni-solar system). Regarding the wording of the dates attention may be drawn to the phrase Bhavé samvatsaré púrne in the date No. 166, by which the year Bhâva is distinctly described as, what it really was, an expired year. And in general it may be observed that in no less than five out of the above sixteen dates (Nos. 20, 22, 25, 48, and 200) the 'Saka year is quoted along with the Vikrama year.
Intercalary months: Turning now from the years to the months, we find that intercalary months are distinctly quoted as such in ten dates. With a single exception, all these dates are dates of MSS. In five of them, of V. 1534, 1630, 1724, southern V. 1746 and northern V. 1747 (Nos. 75, 50, 78, 79, and 158), the name of the month is qualified by the word prathama-; in three, of V. 1218, 1298, and 1489 (Nos. 34, 137, and 157), by the word dvitiya- or the abbreviated term dei; and in only one quite modern date (No. 175 of northern V. 1877) by adhika-, which in this instance has reference to the first of the two bright fortnights of the intercalary month. The exception mentioned is the date of a stone inscription of V. 1100 (No. 134) in which the month is poetically described as maya-Bhadrapada, 'the false Bhadrapada,' an expression which my calculation of the date shows to denote the first of the two amanta months Bhadrapada. It may be added that one of the ten dates (No. 157 of V. 1489) furnishes an instance for the well-known fact that calculations by several Siddhantas do not always yield the same intercalary month.
Under the date No. 79 I have shown that the writer has called the same month, which in one place he describes as prathama-Vaisakha, in another place simply Vaisakha, though referring both times to the same lunar fortnight. And my list contains several other dates the months of which were intercalary, though this is not indicated by the wording of the dates. Thus Chaitra was intercalary in the date No. 36 of V. 1232, and Vaisakha in No. 62 of V. 1220, and the bright half of the first date was the second bright half (of the proper Chaitra), and the bright half of the second date the first bright half (of the intercalated Vaisakha). Similarly Jyêshtha was intercalary in the date No. 121 of V. 1877, and Ashâḍha in No. 129 of V. 1320, and the dark halves of both months were the first dark halves (of the purnimanta proper Jyeshtha and Ashâḍha). Of the two dates No. 110 of V. 960 and No. 145 of V. 1315 it is impossible to speak with confidence; and the date No. 166 of V. 1386 is altogether so peculiarly worded that the absence of any reference to the fact that the month of it was intercalary possesses little significance.
Laukika months: In seven dates of copper-plate inscriptions of the Chaulukyas of Anhilvâd, the earliest of which is of the year V. 1256 and the latest of V. 1317, the word laukika- and the abbreviated terms lauks and lau° are prefixed to the names of the months. Thus, in the dates Nos. 9, 13, 39, and 109, of V. 1266, 1283, 1263, and 1256, where the date is first given in words and afterwards repeated in figures, we find laukika Márgga- and lauki Márgga-, laukika-Kárttika- and lauki Karttika-, lau° Sravana- and Srávana-, Bhadrapada. and lau Bhadrapada-. Besides we have in No. 138 of V. 1317 laukika-Jyeshtha-, in No. 164 of V. 1264 lau Ashadha-, and in No. 194 of V. 1299 lau Phaguna. Here the circumstance that the simple Sravana is in the same date employed in the place of lau° Sravana and lau° Bhadrapada in the place of the simple Bhadrapada, as well as the manner in which the dates work out, would almost suffice to prove that the laukika months are nothing else than the ordinary lunar months. But the matter is placed beyond all doubt by certain passages in Jaina literary
