Indian Antiquary Vol 52

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Stephen Meredyth Edwardes, Krishnaswami Aiyangar
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 95

APRIL, 1023)
THE DATE OF KANISHKA
83
history of those dynasties is based solely on the study of their coins. Indeed, these two chapters are excellent, and the result of his great labours in this direction is important.
It is common knowledge that the chronology of the Saka and Pahlava Dynasties has so far remained very uncertain, but the question seems now to be definitely settled. Indeed, Prof. Rapson says categorically (pages 576): "In that portion of Pahlava history which oomes after the Christian Era, the period of the reign of Gondopharnes may be regarded as almost definitely fixed ... There can be little doubt that the Era (in the Takht-iBahi inscription) is the Vikrama-savat, which began in 58 B.C., and that therefore Gondopharnes began to reign in 19 A.D., and was still reigning in 45 A.D."
The study of the history of the Kushậnas is reserved for Volume II, and there again the question of dates presents formidable difficulties : " The chronology of this period has been one of the most perplexing problems in the whole of Indian history, and the problem can scarcely be said to be solved positively even now (page 583).” As there is raised here a question of the highest importance to the history of India, I take the liberty of expressing the opinion that the problem may be taken to be practically settled by a careful study of the excavations of Sir John Marshall at Taxila.
Assuming that Gondopharnes was reigning in the region of Taxila in 45 A.D., his successor in Irån was Pacores. During the reign of Pacores the Governor of Taxila was Sagas, nephew of Aspavarman. In the year 64 A.D. (Parjitâr inscription) the same country was occupied by the "Great King " Kushâņa.
If I have rightly understood the reports of the excavations of Sir John Marshall at Taxila (Excavations at Taxila, Arch. Survey Ind., 1912-13, pp. 1 ff; and A Guide to Taxila, Calcutta, 1918), quite distinct stratifications have been discovered in that place, viz:(a) Strata of Gondopharnes, Sasan, etc., (6) Strata of Kujúla-Kadphises and Herm cus; (c) Strata of Vima-Kadphises. The formation of the soil, during the period in which the coins of Kujúla-Kadphises and Hermæus were alone in circulation, in all probability involved a considerable number of years. And then there must have been a fairly long period, during which the coins of V'ima-Kadphises became numerous.
But this is not all, and it is necessary also to draw attention to a point of extreme importance. The town of Sirkap seems to have been abandoned all of a sudden after a certain number of years of the reign of Vima-Kadphises. As a matter of fact, at Sirkap are found the coins of all the predecessors of V'ima, as well as those of V'ima Kadphises himself. But there has never been found a single coin of his sucoessors at Sirkap.
Next, Sir John Marshall makes a remark which is of the first consequence :-"Not a single coin of Soter-Megas has been found at Sirkap." If, on this, we take into consideration that coins of Soter-Megas are very common in India, and that they date from a period before Kanishka, it becomes evident that between the date of the abandonment of Sirkap and the acoession of Kanishka a great number of years must have passed. Moreover, in some other parts of Taxila, e.g., at the Chir stúpa, coins of V'ima-Kadphiscs, Soter-Megas, Kanishka, etc., are found in abundance. In short, the Kushånas got possession of Taxila about 60 A.D., and from that date we must reckon the periods of the coins, (1) of Kujúla and Hermous. (2) of V'ima Kadphises, (3) of Soter Megas, (4) of Kanishka. Each of these periods has undoubtedly covered a large number of years, and in such circumstances it becomes impossible to place the accession of Kanishka in 78 A.D., that is to say, only eighteen years after the immigration of the Kushånas into Northern India.