________________
268
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
[OCTOBER, 1896.
In Vol. XXIV. pp. 4 and 5, I have given three dates? (Nos. 140-142) which are quite regular, except that the given year in each case folle short by 1 of the expired year to which the date really belongs. Thus the year of the date No. 140 is put down as Saka-sasivat 1063, but as the European equivalent of the date falls in May A. D. 1142, the year undoubtedly was 'S. 1064 expired. To account for this, it may be supposed that the writer of the date erroneonsly regarded the (expired) Saka years as current ones, and that then, intending to give the number of expired years, he quoted the year which preceded the actually expired year. This class of dates - my chronological list contains about 20 of them -- clearly differs from dates like No. 139, ibid. p. 4, where wrong years have been quoted in consequence of mistakes of which it seems impossible to snggest a general explanation. - On the whole, my experience is that such error of the writers rarely cause as any great difficulty, because the Saka years of the dates may nearly always be checked at once by the Jovian years quoted along with them, which to the Hindus appear to be much more familiar than the numbers of the Saka years, and which they generally quote in a remarkably accurate manner.
Jupiter Years. Commencing with the date No. 44 of the chronological list of 'S. 726 (Vol. XXIV. p. 185), as inany as 822 out of 357 dates quote the years of the sixty-years' cycle of Jupiter to which the dates belong The 35 dates, which fail to do so, are mostly from Java, Bengal, Northern India, Gujarat and Kathiâvâd, or taken from Eastern Chalukya and Eastern Ganga inscriptions. Although, in itself, as independent of the Saka era as of any other era, to the sixty-years? cycle, in practice, is closely connected with the era with which we are dealing here, because, from abont the beginning of the 9th century A. D., it is principally used in the very parts of India where the Saka era also is chiefly employed. And the use of it would seem to be even more common in those parts than that of the Saka era itself, because we hitherto have found there more dates recorded in Jovian years, withont the corresponding Saka years, than we have Saka dates that do not quote the corresponding Jovian years.
The regular dates which admit of exact verification sbew that, excepting a date of S. 867 of which I shall speak below, beginning with 8. 855 (Vol. XXIII. p. 114, No. 8), the system of the sixty-years' cycle followed in these dates can only be the southern luni-soler system by which, irrespectively of Jupiter's position, the name of the Jovian year is merely a name for a certain solar or luni-solar year. The case is different with the dates before 'S. 855, which require a more detailed examination.
The date No. 55 (ibid. p. 122), of S. 726 expired and the year Subhana, corresponds to the 4th April A. D. 804. Here Subbanu, by the southern luni-solar system, cannot be connected with S. 726 expired at all, but by the mean-sign system Subbanu was current both at the
* The year of the date No. 143, ibid. p. 5, which at the time I had to take from a translation, is in the original inscription 1646. See Ep. Carn. Part I. p. 59, No. 100.
This explanation was first given by Dr. Bhandarkar, Early History, 1st ed., p. 107. - On the other hand, in the date No. 184 (Vol. XXIV. p. 14), the year of which appears to be really 8. 1056 current, the writer has given us 9. 1056, probably because he considered 1055 as an expired year and wished to quote the current year.
Years of the sixty-years' cycle are also quoted in six earlier Saks dates of the list (from S. 169 to $. 411), but these are all from spurious records. The date of 8. 726, therefore, is so far the earliest genuine date, with details for verification, that quotes a year of the sixty-years' cycle. And the only earlier instance of the oceurrence in Jate of year of the same cycle we seem to have in the Mahakata (Badami) pillar inscription of the Early Chaluky Habgalba, wbich thereby would be referred to A. D. 602. See ante, Vol. XIX. p. 18.
* In dates of the Vikrama era the years of the sixty-years' eyels are quoted rarely, in those of the Chedi, Gupta and some other eras not at all.
13 Dates like No. 64 in Vol. XXIII. p. 124, and Non, 53 and 54, ibid. Pp. 121 and 122, show that, where the year is luni-solar, the Jovian year coincides with the luni-solar year, while the date No. 188 in Vo). XXIV. p. 4, bews that, where the year is solar, the Jovian year coincides with the solar year. To determine, therefore, what dan pare contained in Articular Jovind year, one must know what kind of calenda war bred.
