The Saka era has been adopted for the national reckoning by the Government of India. But there were differing traditions about the circumstances surrounding its origin. The most popular view at present is that the Kusana king Kaniska I ascended the throne in 78 AD when the era commenced.
The Saka era has been adopted for the national reckoning by the Government of India. But there were differing traditions about the circumstances surrounding its origin. The most popular view at present is that the Kusana king Kaniska I ascended the throne in 78 AD when the era commenced.
The Saka era has been adopted for the national reckoning by the Government of India. But there were differing traditions about the circumstances surrounding its origin. The most popular view at present is that the Kusana king Kaniska I ascended the throne in 78 AD when the era commenced.
The Saka era has been adopted for the national reckoning by the Government of India. But there were differing traditions about the circumstances surrounding its origin. The most popular view at present is that the Kusana king Kaniska I ascended the throne in 78 AD when the era commenced.
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 22
Indian Journal of History of Science, 31(1), 1996
SAKA ERA
Atay Mitra Suaster*
The Saka era has been adopted for the national reckoning by the Government
of India and was the most popular for dating texts and inscriptions. especially in
Deccan and South India. But there were differing traditions about the circumstances
surrounding its origin, The earliest tradition traced it to the coronation of Saka king(s)
which was follwed by another tracing its commencement to commemorate the
termination of the Saka rule, while the latest one associated it with Salivahana =
Satavahana, Modern scholars have also been debating this problem for over a century
and the most popular view at present is that the Kusina king Kaniska I ascended the
throne in 78 AD when the Saka era commenced. After critically analysing all the
relevant data it has been established that the era was started by or was counted from.
the accession of the Saka king Castana
Key words : Castana, Kanigka 1, Saka era
The Saka era happens to be one of the two ancient Indian eras still current in
India and Nepal, the other being called Vikrama samvat. An added feature about it is
that it has been adopted by the Government of India after independence as the official
era alongwith the Christian one both of which are employed for all official purposes
and are mentioned and shown daily on the All-India Radio and the Doordarshan
respectively. It commenced in 78 AD, 135 years later than the Vikrama era.
As indicated by its very name, the Saka era has an undoubted extraneous origin.
However, since there exists a great divergence of opinion on the question of its exact
origin and originator, it would be advisable to have at one place all the evidence,
epigraphic, numismatic and literary, which should help provide an adequate perspective
for a proper appreciation of the problem and its satisfactory solution.
In epigraphs the reckoning is referred to variously. It is well known that the
inscriptions and coins of the Saka Ksatrapas of western India (viz. Gujarat and the
Malwa region of the present state of Madhya Pradesh) form the earliest known documents
dated in this era; but in these records the years of this reckoning are mentioned without
any specification of its nomenclature simply as varsa or ‘year’ as if it were a year of
the reign of the concerned ruler, and this is quite natural as the era was in all probability
not started consciously by the beat of a drum! but resulted from the continuation of the
* U.GC. Emeritus Fellow. Nagpur University
Residence: Prachi, 23, Vidya Vihar, Rana Pratap Nagar, Nagpur-440022,68 INDIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY OF SCIENCE
regnal reckoning of a king by his sucessors uninterruptedly. In the inscriptions of these
tulers the dates range from the year? 6 to the year* 203 and on their coins from the year*
100 to 337. It appears that the era had already got formally associated with the Saka
because of its continuous employment by them and come to be known as Saka-kdla (or
by some similar names) during, if not earlier than, the later part of the rule of the
Kardamaka Saka Ksatrapas of western India towards the close of its second century
For, the Yavana-jataka of Sphujidhvaja. said to have been completed in its expired
year® 191, mentions it as samandm Sakandm” (‘of the years of the Sakas' or 'of the years
of the reckoning called Saka’) and kalam Sakandmi (‘the era of the Sakas’), the latter
at least being the same as our Saka-kéila? respectively found employed only slightly
later in inscriptions. In inscriptions the era is first formally referred to the Saka kings
in the Wala (Thane district, Maharashtra) or the Bhoja-Maurya king Suketuvarman
recording the consecration of the god Kotigvara on the full-moon day of Vaisakha in
Saka 322 current!®. In the Hisse-Bordld inscription of the time of the Vakataka king
Devasena (of the Wasim branch) its date is expressed as the year 380 of the Saka
(Sakénam 380)'', which is apparently the same as the Sakandim samanam of the
Yavana-Jataka. It gets regularly associated with the Sakas in inscriptions from the time
of the Calukyas of Baddmi, and the earliest known inscription of the dynasty, Badami
Rock inscription of Vallabhesvara (Pulakesin I), is dated Saka-varsa'? 465. In a few
other inscriptions of the Calukyas of Badami it is referred to as Saka-nrpati-rajy-
abhiseka-samvatsara,’> Saka-nrpati-kala'4 and Saka-bhiibhuja-kala's, In Rastrakiita
inscriptions it is mentioned by such names as Saka-nrpa samvatsara'® and Saka-nrpa-
kala." In other Calukya (Badami) and Rastrakiita records it is referred to only as Saka-
kala or Saka-varsa. In later inscriptions it is mentioned merely as Saka-samvat, Saka-
samvatsara, Saka-kala, Saka-kéla-samvatsara, Saka-varsa, Sakabda, Saka, etc. The
derivative form Saka is also met with quite frequently. As for, literature, next to the
evidence from the Yavana-jataka of Sphujidhvaja cited above, its earliest. known
association with the Saka is met with in Simhasiri's Loka-vibhdga composed in the
thirty - second year of the reign of Simhavarman, the Pallava king of KaficT, corresponding
to the Saka year 380.'8 However, what we now have is only a revised and enlarged
Sanskrit version of the Prakrit work of Sarvanandin,'’ and there is at present no means
to ascertain if the original Prakrit work composed in Saka 380 also contained the
expression Sakdbda though there is nothig impossible in it. However , the earliest
definitely datable mention of the era together with its association with the Sakas or Saka
king/kings in so far as literary sources are concerned is to be encountered in Varahamihira's,
in his Brhat-samhitd he refers to it as Saka-kaila (XII. 4). Sakendra-kala (VU
20) and Saka-bhiipa-kéla (VIL. 21) and in paiica-siddhantika (1. 8) as Sakakala®®. Next
the well-known astronomer Brahmagupta in his Brahma-sphuta-siddhanta(composed in
Saka 550=628 AD) refers to its years as of the Saka kings?! and Vatesvara (Saka 702)
calls it Sakendra-kala.”? There are several such expressions as well as the usual names
known from inscriptions that are mentioned in numerous other contemporary and later
texts”,SAKA ERA 69
The foregoing hurried survey of the extant literary and epigraphic evidence would
show that initially its years are mentioned without naming it. But from the beginnig
of the last decade of its second century we find it associated with and named after
the Sakas or Saka king/kings. It was regarded to have come into existence from the
coronation of a Saka king. In any case, this should suffice to prove its initiation by
some Saka king. Later, however, a very strange development took place, and the era
came to be seen as commemorating the end of the Saka power. Its culmination is to
be noticed in the Arabic polymath Abu al-Raihan ibn Ahmad, better known as alberuni,
observed in his Kitab-ul-Hind, composed early in the second quarter of the eleventh
century AD, on the basis of the beliefs then current in India and conveyed to him by
his informers and found elaborated in some earlier works consulted by him, as follows
“The epoch of the era of Saka or Sakakéila falls 135 years later than that of Vikramaditya.
‘The here-mentioned Saka tyrannised over their country between the river Sindh and
the ocean after he had made Aryavarta in the midst of this realm his dwelling
plac . The Hindus had much to suffer from him, till at last they received help
from the east, when Vikramaditya marched against him, put him to flight and killed
him in the region of Karur, between Multan and the castle of Loni, Now this date
became famous”. The only problem that puzzled him and made him not to accept it
unhesitatingly was long gap of 135 years between the reckonings known after
Vikramaditya and the Sakas, he tried an explanation of the traditions concerning these
eras in his own way. Its beginnings are, however, noticed much earlier. Beginning
in a descending order, Udayana in his Laksanavali, a work on logic, says at the end
that he completed his work when 906 years had elapsed from the end of the Sakas”*
Amarija, in his gloss on the Khanda-khdadyaka of Brahmagupta, states that the Sakas
were foreign (nileccha) kings and the time when they were killed by Vikramaditya,
which is connected with the Sakas, is known as Saka."? Another commentator on this
work, Prthiidaka, (circa 864 AD), also says the same thing when he observes that the
Sakas were foreign (mleccha) rulers and the epoch of their being killed is very
famous’*, Bhatta Utpala (830-31 AD") also observes in his scholium on the
Brhatsamhita( WIL. 20) that time when the foreign rulers known as Saka were destroyed
by the illustrious Vikramaditya is well-known in the world as Saka or Sakendra-
kala. Another astrological writer, Vatesvara (Saka 702), also states that his work was
completed when 702 years had elapsed since the conclusion (i.e. destrdction) of the
Sakas! The famous astronomer, Brahmagupta (born Saka 520), states in his
Brithmasphuta-siddhdnta that 3179 years of the Kali-yuga had passed when the Sakas
came to an end™, This is also echoed in the following stanza where the expression is
Ska-nyp-dnie." Thus from about 628 AD people believed and writers echoed the
popular notion that the Saka era then current commemorated not coming into power
of the Sakas or Saka kings. This belief seems to find some support from a few
inscriptional allusions as well. it is well-known that normally expired (arita) years of
the Saka era are specified. and the expression Saka-nypa-kal-dtita-samvatsaratexpired
years of the Saka king/kings) is of quite frequent occurrence in inscriptions, but when70 INDIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY OF SCIENCE,
another atita or gata is used after specifying the number of years, this wording
assumes extraordinary significance and must be understood to refer to the ‘expired
years counted from the end of the time of the Saka king/king's. Thus, the Siirat plates
of the Rastrakiita ruler Karkardja Suvarnavarsa, dated Saka 743, contain the expression
Saka-nrpa-kél-atita-samvatsara-Satesu saptasu tri-catvariméad = adhikesu (sv-a) titesu,
while in the Kauthem plates of the Kalyana Calukya king Vikramaditya V we are
encountered by the phrase Saka-nrpa-kdl-dtita-samvatsara-Satesu navasu trimsad =
adhikesu gatesu 930.* Likewise, Somadevasiri, in the colophon of his work Yasastilaka-
campit says that it was completed in the expired year 881 since the end of the time
of the Saka kings.*® There are numerous other indications of the prevalence of this
unfounded notion.” This was undoubtedly due to an uncalled for confusion of this
reckoning with that of king Vikrama commencing in 57 BC as we have shown
elsewhere.** What is strange is that such a belief was current regarding the circumstances
leading to the origin of the Gupta era also as we are told by Alberuni*® and we need
not attach undue inportance to these notions.*”
A still more astonishing development took place during the early medieval period
when this reckoning of foreign origin came to be associated with and regarded as
initiated by king Salivahana (= Satavahana) of Pratisthdna (modern Paithan, Jalna
district, Maharashtra). There came into vogue various traditions regarding the
circumstances leading to its foundation According to the Muhitrtamartanda composed
in Saka 1493, it commemorates the birth of king Salivahana.*' An earlier text, Kalpa-
pradipa by the Jaina author Jinaprabhasiri (circa 1300 AD), tells us that Salivahana
was born of a Brahmana widow living at Pratisthana. He defeated king Vikramaditya
of Ujjayini and became sovereign of the entire region up to the river Tapi with
Pratisthana for his capital and started his own era.‘” These references emanate from
texts dating from thirteenth-fourteenth century AD, while it is found mentioned by the
name Salivahana-Saka much earlier. The earliest known such literary work is the
Kannada poem entitled Udbhata-Kavya by Somaraja completed in the expired Saka
year 1144 (1222 AD),*3 whereas in inscriptions it appears at least a couple of centuries
earlier. The earliest yet known reference to it as Salivahana - Saka comes from
Madhya Pradesh. An inscription at Udayagiri (Vidisa district) speaks of the construction
of a temple of Siva by the Paramara King Udayaditya in the Vikrama year 1118
corresponding to the expired year 981 of king Salivahana.“* The next reference, this
time from Maharashtra, is met with in a Marathi epigraph at the Vithoba temple at
Pandharpur dated Salivahana-Saka 1110 = 1188 AD*. The next known reference is
found in the Tasgion plates, dated Salivihana-Saka 1172 expired = 1251 AD, of the
Yadava king Krsna,° followed by the Thane plates of Ramacandra, of the same
dynasty dated Salivahana-Saka 1212.47 It becomes more common during the period of
the Vijayanagara rulers.*® These allusions are indicative of the spread and growing
popularity of this strange notion It is noteworthy, however, that while the number of
such references grows gradually, the era continues to be referred to as Saka-nrpa-kalaSAKA ERA Fal
simultaneously and the number of such records is much larger*®. When the name
Salivahana came to be employed as that of the era itself, the original name - Saka,
which still clung to it, became a general term meaning any era as such, so that the
general expression is Silivihana-Saka. The word Saka thus became synonymous with
samvat or samvatsara and is found used by itself sometimes for Vikrama era also just
as very often samvat/samvatsara alone stands for Vikrama Samvat.5?
The genesis of this strange development cannot be ascertained at present. However,
as the era was current primarily in the Deccan and western India where the Salivahana
tradition was still quite popular and the rule of the Sakas was almost forgotten with
the passage of time, it was attributed to the former, of course quite against known
historical facts. This tradition appears to have been developed in Maharashtra.‘! While
other regions, especially Karnataka, might have contributed to it to some extent.5?
According to some scholars, this purely fictitious development was due to competition
with king Vikramaditya. D.C. Sircar observes, "The association of king Vikramaditya,
originally of North Indian tradition, with the Vikramasamvat led to the people of the
South to fabricate the relation of Satavahana or SAlivahana, with the other popular in
the South."53 "The association of the Scytho-Parthian (viz. Vikrama) era," says he,
“with the name of another popular hero of Indian tradition and folklore, viz.
Vikramaditya, should not therefore be looked upon as a unique case in the history of
India."* However, there was in reality no question of any such competition as the
Vikrama era, as we have shown elsewhere,*® bad nothing to do with the Scytho-
Parthians and was purely indigenous to India. Some other scholars feel, “unhesitatingly”
though quite unreasonably, that "the Saka era was rechristened as Salivahana Saka
historically by the Satavahanas themselves", most probably by Yajiia, “the last and
most powerful Satavahana ruler... who fully avenged Kardamaka Sakas" though they
themselves never called it by this new name even as the Ksatrapas did not call it Saka
themselves.°¢ We have as of now no evidence absolutely dating back to such an early
age and its earliest document is separated from the end of the period of Satavahana
rule by over eight centuries.
Ever since the era came to scholarly notice, attempts have been made to detect
its founder or initiator, and various theories which are no better than sutmises have
been proposed in the absence of any definite information of this point. Pandit
Bhagwanlal Indraji at first identified its founder with the Saka king Vonones known
from an extensive series of silver and base metal coins.*” but he changed this position
in favour of the Ksaharata Mahaksatrapa Nahapdina who, he now said, inaugurated the
era to tommemorate his victory over the Satavahana king Sitakarni and named it after
his Saka overlord. D.R. Bhandarkar felt that Nahapana could not be its founder who
must have belonged to the imperial Saka dynasty who could only have been Vonones®.
Sten Konow was the first scholar to attribute its foundation to a Kusana king, though
he favoured for this honour Vima Kadphises.“ not Kaniska I as usual among the72 INDIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY OF SCIENCE
scholars supporting a Kusana origin theory. He makes a reference to the story of the
Jaina dcarya Kilaka (Kalakacarya-kathanaka) according to which there were two, not
‘one, Saka conquests, viz. one a few years prior to the beginning of the Vikrama era
of 58 BC and the other 135 years there after, which he treats trustworthy. The
reckoning in question was, according to him, in commemoration of the second conquest
by Vima Kadphises whom he is at great pains to prove to be a Saka.*! He calls it the
second Saka era. The western Ksatrapas of Sauristra and Malwa whose records are
dated in this reckoning were, according to him, his viceroys in these regions These
theories, though propounded with great efforts, are no longer taken seriously in scholarly
circles. The most popular view now is that originally propounded by James Fergusson
attributing the foundation of this reckoning to the Kusana emperor Kaniska I. This
view has been followed or championed by additional arguments by several European
and most of the Indian scholars who have written on the subject. They include, inter
alia, E.J. Rapson,® A.M..Boyer,™ J.E. van Lohuizen-de Leeuw,®* A.L. Basham," H.C.
Ray Chaudhuri,‘ J.N. Banerjee, V.V, Mirashi, D.C. Sircar,” B.N. Mukherjee” and
several others, These scholars rightly point out that Kaniska I had initiated a reckoning,
viz. his regnal years were continued by his successors resulting in the evolution of an
era. We have for Kaniska I records dated in years 2-23, Vasiska (or Vajheska or such
other variants), dated in years 24-28, for Huviska, dated in years 28-60, for Kaniska,
son of Vasiska, dated in year 41, and for Vasudeva I, dated in years 67-98. Thus it
is obvious that form Kaniska I started a reckoning running at least for 98 years, and
it is proposed to identify this reckoning with the Saka era, for during the period they
propose to place Kaniska I's reign there is no other era except that known as Saka
But this by itself does establish that Kaniska I was the founder of the Saka era of 78
AD. It is, of course, suggested that the Saka Ksatrapas of Western India (Gujarat and
Malwa), who used this era for dating their inscriptions and coins up to the year 337,
were viceroys or provincial governors of the Kusanas and consequently were obliged
to employ the era of their masters and because of a long association with them it got
the name Saka-kala. However, there are some weighty objections against this equation.
First, there is absolutely no evidence to prove that the Saka Ksatrapas were in any way
connected with, not to speak of their being subordinates to, the Kusinas. Even after
their immigration to Saurastra and Malwa they continued the use of the gubernatorial
titles Ksatrapa and Mahaksatra as a matter of habit without implying any kind of
subordination to any other power even as Pusyamitra remained content with the
military title sen@pati even after killing the last Maurya king and throwing off the
Maurya authority and performing the horse sacrifice symbolising supreme sovereignty.
And even if one were to concede, for argument's sake, on the basis of the titles that
the Saka Ksatrapas were subordinates, there is absolutely no indication that their
overlords were the Kusinas. As of now there is nothing whatever to prove that they
had brought far-flung Deccanese areas under their authority and the Ksatrapas were
their representatives there. The latter issued their own distinctive series of silver and
base metal coins which are quite independent of any Kusina gold coins which are notSAKA ERA 73
known to have been found in any noticeable quantity anywhere in the Deccan despite
numerous excavations and explorations at several ancient sites’'. It is no doubt true
that an inscription of Nahapina’s time at Nasik mentions a denomination of gold coins
called suvarna and value vis-a-vis kdrs@pana,” but, as we have shown elsewhere,”
it refers to the Imperial Roman aureus, and not the gold coins of the Kusanas, as
commonly believed.”* We now have a large number of stone inscriptions of the Saka
Ksatrapas,”5 but none of them contains any indication of their being subservient to the
Imperial Kusanas and they don't name any Kusana emperor at all’, It is sometimes
argued that they did not assume imperial titles.” This argument carries one nowhere
as the Saka Ksatrapas assumed the title rajan, which was the usual title for sovereign
rulers in those early days, on their numerous coins and in inscriptions”’. Till the early
centuries AD, in the Deccan at least, rajan by itself was borne as the regal title by
all the sovereign rulers, and even the Sitavahana emperors were happy with this title
only and it is met with in all their inscriptions and coins. It is only in some of their
prasasti (eulogy) type inscriptions like the Nasik cave inscription of the nineteenth
year of the reign of Vasisthiputra Pulumavi that the somewhat bombastic-looking title
rajaraja is employed for his father Gautamiputra Satakarni’® while he himself
(Pulumavi) is denied this sobriquet. Unfortunately, except the solitary Janagad inscription
of Mahaksatrapa Rudradiman 1”? we have no other inscription eulogising any Ksatrapa
ruler, all the rest being only in the nature of matter-of-fact statements. And this
inscription eulogises Rudradaman I in hyperbolic terms like ‘one who had acquired the
tile mahdksatrapa by himself (svayam=adhigata-mahaksatrapa-namna), ‘one who
had acquired by his own valour all the people’®° (of the countries named thereafter),
‘the extirpator (forcefully) of the Yaudheyas who had become arrogant by their title
‘hero’ among all the Ksatrivas’ (sarvva-aviskrta-vira-sabda-jat-otsek-avidheyanam
yaudhevanam prasahy-otsadakena), ‘one who had obtained fame by not extirpating
Satakarni, the lord of Daksinapatha, whom he had completely defeated twice because
of closeness of relations’ (Daksindpatha-pateh Satakarner=dvir=api nirvyajam=avajity-
Gvajitya sambandh-avidurataya anutsadanat prapta-yasasa), etc. Even for
Candragupta Maurya only the simple title rajar alone is used, and in the Deccan and
South India the same title continued to be employed by the sovereign rulers at least
up to the Vakataka period*! Then again, it was not absolutely essential for a subordinate
ruler to employ the reckoning adopted or initiated by his suzerain in ancient India,
though most subordinates did so as a matter of convenience. Thus. even though eariy
members of the Aulikara dynasty of Dasapura (modern Mandasor) were vassals of the
Imperial Guptas who had their own era, they continued to employ the MalavaVikrama
era in their inscriptions without any hitch’? Moreover. while we have absolutely no
indication of the continuation of the Kaniska era beyond its year 98. the Saka era
continues even now, Then. the era, as we have seen above, though probably resulting
from the continuation of the initiator's regnal years by his successors, came very much
within the period of the Ksatrapas, to be called after the Sakas as early as its year 191.
as indicated by the evidence furnished by the Yavana-jdtaka of Sphujidhvaja. Moreover,74 INDIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY OF SCIENCE,
the Indian tradition made a clear distinction between the Sakas and the Kusnas, In
later times they were believed to belong to the Turuska stock as suggested by the
description of Kaniska in the Raja-tarangini (I. 170) of Kalhana (1149-50 AD). This
statement seems to be supported by the Jaina author Hemacandra who in his Abhidhdna-
cintamani (verse 959) describes the Turuskas as sakhis which is evidently an error for
Sahi which was employed as a title by the Kusnas on their numerous coins and in
Brahmi inscriptions. The regal title yavuga or yaua (chief) used in the Kharosthi~
Prakrit legend on the reverse and zaoou in the Greek legend on the obverse of the
copper coins of Lujula Kadphises, one of the earliest Kusiina monarchs, is sought to
be explained as an Indianised form of the Turkish title jabgu.8* A few other earlier
authorities would have us believe that Kaniska belonged to the Kusa or Tukhara (or
Tus&ra) Stock. The Chinese translation of the Kalpand-mandatika of the Buddhist
writer Kumaralata, which was composed shortly after Kaniska's time, informs us that
Kaniska (Kia-ni-cha) was born in the family (kula) of Kiu-sa (Kusa).'5 The late
Tibetan tradition, based on Matrceta’s original Sanskrit text entitled Maharajaj-Kani
(s) ka-lekha, of which only a Tibetan rendering is now available, refers to king Kanika
(Kaniska)as a northern king of the Kuga race.°° Some scholars believe that the dynastic
name Kusina is a derivative from Kusa,*’ while others hold that both the forms were
prevalent.* In Tibetan sources, it has been pointed out, the family or race to which
Kaniska I belonged is mentioned both as Kusa Kusana, kusa and kusana Tibetan
meaning’a kind of sacred grass’ and 'a class of flower respectively.*? The reason for
substituting Kusa and Kusana for the Indian Kuga and Kusdna respectively in the
Tibetan sources, as suggested by Mukherjee,” might have been due to the Tibetans’
desire to replace apparently meaningless names by names intelligible to them. In fact,
the name Kusina appears to be an Indianised form of the Chinese Kuei-shuang, one
of the five sects into which the Yueh-chih people got divided in Bactria and established
themselves in rule over a large part of the Indian subcontinent in due course. Sten
Konow has taken great pains to show that the Kusinas were Sakas by culture and
nationality,?! but as demonstrated convincingly by Mukherjee, there exists enough
evidence to prove that the Yueh-chih from whom the Kusinas sprang were in no way
Saka by nationality.” It has been pointed out that certain Chinese texts tend to suggest
that the name Yueh-chih = Tou-ch’u-lo was rendered in India was Tukhara or Tusara,°
a people who are mentioned by this name in Indian literature.” It is of no great
consequence to us in the present context whether the Kusanas were actually Turuska
(Turkish), Kusa or Tukhara (or Tusara). In any case, this much is absolutely certain
that in ancient Indian tradition they were never called Saka,°> whereas the Saka
Ksatrapas of western India were definitely known as Saka. Thus, the reckoning of
Kaniska could not have been known as Saka-kala. Moreover, there is a perceptible
difference in the mode of dating the Kusana and the Saka Ksatrapa inscriptions.” It
is sometimes argued that a reckoning need not always be known after its initiator but
could also derive its name from those other powers with whom it was associated
because ot its use by them over a long period, and since the Saka Ksatrapas employedSAKA ERA 75
it for centuries for dating their inscriptions and coins the reckoning in question came
to be called Saka even though it was initiated by the Kusana king Kaniska 1.9” But
this argument does not cut much ice. For it is not after its use for a long time by the
Sakas, but just after, and perhaps before, the passage of just one century and ‘nine
decades of its initiation that we find it clearly associated with and called after the
Sakas.% It would indeed be surprising if at such an early date the memory of its
association with the Kusanas had been forgotten if the reckoning were really initiated
by Kaniska I. To add to it, there is a wide divergence of opinion on the question of
the date of Kaniska I himself who is supposed to have initiated this era starting in 78
AD. His accession has been dated variously from the first century BC to the third
century AD. While the first century BC date is no longer taken seriously by any
scholar at present, most of the Indian historians favour 78 AD for this purpose while
most of their occidental counterparts would prefer a date in the second or third century
AD. Most of the European scholars are inclined to place this event in 128 or 144 AD,
some scholars dating in a few year's this or that side.” Mukherjee, the latest scholar
to give us an exhaustive treatment of the Kusana History,' though himself favouring
78 AD,'°! is cautious in his concluding remarks: “It is not maintained that the above
arguments (in favour of 78 AD!) are absolutely conclusive. Nevertheless, they seem
to be more forceful than the arguments in favour of a later or earlier date for Kaniska
1. so we Should at least provisionally accept'®* A.D. 78 as the inaugural year of his
reign.”!4 As pointed out earlier, there is absolutely no doubt that he did initiate a
reckoning apparently from his accession the date of which is quite uncertain, What
happened to this reckoning after his successors (the latest known year is 98) cannot
be ascertained now. But there should be absolutely no doubt that it was different from.
that called Saka-kala or by such other names.
As against this, there is absolutely no doubt that there were two lines of rulers
in Western India which were definitely known as Saka. These were Ksaharita and
Kardamaka. Of these, the Ksaharatas are represented by Bhiimaka and Nahapana, the
former known exclusively from his copper coins! and the latter from his numerous
inscriptions,! silver and copper coins'”” and indigenous!” and foreign'™ literary
evidence and certainly much more powerful than the former. The Kardamakas,
represented by Castana and his successors, on the other hand, are known from their
numerous inscriptions,'™ and an extensive series of solver and base metal coins.'!' An
analysis of the inscriptional, numismatic and literary evidence should leave no doubt
that the Ksahardtas preceded the Kirdamakas. Those who credit Kaniska with the
initiation of the Saka era starting in 78 AD regard both these lines as vassals of the
Kusinas. But, as we have seen above, this view lacks supporting evidence and is
consequently not sustainable. We must therefore find out the initiator of this reckoning
from amongst these rulers. And there are scholars who have suggested Nahapina and
Castana for this honour. Pandit Bhagwanlal Indraji, as we have seen above, later! '?
gave this credit to Nahapana who, according to him, started this era in commemoration76 INDIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY OF SCIENCE
of his victory over the great Gautamiputra Satakarni and christened it after his Scythian
overlord. Let us see how far this view is feasible in the present state of our information.
We have as of now six inscriptions of Nahapana ranging in years 41 to 46.!"3 These
years are generally referred to the Saka era commencing in 78 AD and accordingly
are supposed to correspond to the period 199 to 124 AD.!'* However, there are valid
reasons to doubt and even dismiss this theory. It goes against the evidence furnished
by the anonymous text Periplous Tes Erythras Thalassaes, commonly known to English-
reading people as Periplus of the Erythraean Sea''S which was most probably composed
in the later-half of the first century AD,''® which speaks of a ruler named Mambarus.
or Mambaros holding sway over the region round Barygaza (Bharuch) in modern
Gujarat.''7 The name is almost unanimously emended to Nambanus or Nambanos
which again is equated with the name Nahapina known from above-mentioned
inscriptions and coins.''® This should leave no doubt regarding the fact that Nahapana
held power at the time of the completion or at least during the period of the visit of
the unknown Egyptian Greek trader-sailor in the first century AD when he must have
collected his information. Thus the years of his records cannot be referred to the Saka
era as that would involve his being placed late in the first quarter of the second
century AD. We are therefore left with no option but to regard these years as referring
to another era or regard them as the years of his reign. And as there is no other
reckoning known as yet that would meet all the requirements during this period,!!9 we
have got to treat these as regnal years of Nahapina.'!% There are in addition some
other data supporting such a hypothesis. As we have seen above, the dates of the
records of Castana are the earliest known years of the Saka era. And it is held by the
supporters of the theory referring Nahap§na's dates to the same era that Castana was
the successor of and later than Nahapana. This position could have been somewhat
feasible earlier when the earliest inscriptions of Castana were the four Andhau
inscriptions dated in the year 52, evidently of the Saka era,'?" so that it could have
been possible to argue that after the death of Nahapana Castana came to power But
now when Castana's inscriptions dated in the years 6 and 11 have come to be known,
if the years of both Nahapana and Castana are assigned to the same reckoning, we
would have to regard the latter as earlier than the former in rule over the same region
which is just impossible as we have a continuous line of Castana's successors till the
year 337 at least. Moreover, even otherwise Nahapana's inscriptions have an earlier,
but not much earlier, look!?!. So we have absolutely no alternative in the present state
of our information but to regard these years as referring to his reign. It may perhaps
be argued that a reign lasting forty-six years in very long, but some reigns as long as
this or even much longer are not quite unknown. The Panduvamsin king Mahdsivagupta
Baldrjuna of South Kosala had as long a reign as fifty-seven years at least,'2? and to
add to it we actually have some evidence in the form of traditions from some later
Jaina texts that lend support to this view. Thus the Tiloyapannatti (IV. 1507) and the
Pattévali-gathas assign to Naravahana (= Nahapana) a reign of forty years while
Jinasena's Harivamsa-purdna (LX. 491) credits him with even a longer reign of forty-SAKA ERA 77
two years. Of course, these are confused traditions but rightly serve the purpose of
indicating a long reign for him; the actual length of the reign was still greater: at least
forty-six years as vouched by his inscriptions. His long reign is also vouched for by
his portraits on his extensive white metal coins which depict him variously as a very
young, young, middle-aged, old and very old man.'?3 The upshot of the entire discussion
is that the year's of Nahapana’s inscriptions cannot be assigned to any era and must
be treated as his regnal years.?4
Then who was the initiator of the Saka era? And the definite answer is that it was
the Kardamaka king Castana. Till recently the earliest inscriptions of his reign were
the four Andhau inscriptions of the year 52 of his joint reign with Rudradaman 1,!°5
and it was to some extent possible to say that he had succeeded Nahapiina (latest
known year 46) in the rule of the Western Indian territories of the Imperial Kusinas
as their viceroy or vassal. But now we have inscriptions of his own reign alone dated
in much earlier years The earliest of these recently discovered inscriptions is the
Daulatpur yasti record dated in the sixth year!?® and the next one is another similar
inscription from Andhau put up in the eleventh year of his reign. ‘77 So his earliest
record is only 5 years later than the initiation of an era. we may therefore regard
Castana as the founder of the reckoning known as Saka era with its epoch in 78 AD.
Thus the inauguration of this era marks the accession of the Kardamaka king Castana
on the Saka throne of Ujjayini. The Indian tradition also seems to support this
conclusion. According to the Jaina Partavalis,135 years after the initiation of the era
by king Vikramaditya of Ujjayini the Sakas once again captured the city and started
their own reckoning. That the tradition actually refers to the line of Castana is vouthed
for by the geographer Ptolemy who mentions in c. 140 AD Tiastenes (Castana) as
ruling from Ozene (Ujjain).'°* This surprising coincidence between the indigenous and
European traditions is what is most remarkable and proves unmistakalby that the era
was actually initiated by Castana and by none else and that the Indian tradition, though
quite late, is substantially correct.'??
The Kardamakas were very powerful and influential. Their kingdom comprised
almost the whole of Gujarat, the adjoining area of Madhya Pradesh including Ujjayint
which happened to be their capital. Sindha province of Pakistan and at times a large
portion of coastal Maharashtra called Aparanta and some other regions only. Their
influence backed by their matrimonial relations end popularity of their silver coinage
which was highly valued and stored as bullion was quite widespread. The hoards of their
silver specie have been found over a large area comprising southern Maharashtra,
Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka and stray finds of these coins have been reported from
so many places and moulds for forging them from places situated as distantly as
Mathura, Sani, Vidisi, Kaundinyapura, Arambhi, Bhokardan and Vaddamanu in the
Guntur district of Andhra Pradesh, to name only a few places, indicating the great
demand for Ksatrapa silver specle over a wide area comprising far-fiung localities.78 INDIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY OF SCIENCE
They had matrimonial alliances with the Satavahanas and had become great patrons of
Indian culture and literature and as such were acceptable to the Indians. Their era also
appears to have spread ever a wide area along with their popularity and influence and
the taint of extraneous origin had almost disappeared. The not quite infrequent migrations
of people from the Saka era using zones to other regions also contributed to the spread
of the era. Apart from the territories under the Saka Ksatrapas where the use of the era,
though generally without the specification of its name, was in vogue from the very
beginning, its earliest yet known employment for dating purposes in inscriptions is met
with in the Waka (Thane district, Maharashtra) inscription of the Maurya Bhoja chief
Suketuvarman dated in the current year of the Saka kings 332,"° and the next one is
encountered inscription from Vidarbha in the Hisse-Borala (Akola district, Maharashtra)
inscription of the time of the Vakataka king Devasena of the Vatsagulma branch dated
in the Saka year 380,'3! the same as the date of the Lokavibhaga of Simhasiri, which
is one of the oldest literary references to the era. As we have pointed out elsewhere,
'32 the use of this era in this inscription which is quite unique in view of all the other
Vakataka records being dated in the regnal years of the individual kings, was probably
due to the fact that the royal officer whose pious act is recorded in it most probably
hailed from Saurashtra. The next specific reference comes from coastal Andhra where
in the Tummalagudem plates of the Visnukundin king Vikramendravarman II which are
dated in the year 488 of the era of the Saka king,!*3 which again is the only instance
of the era being used in the records of the dynasty whose other records specify only the
years of the reigns of individual rulers and must have been apparently due to some
similar reason. In this connection it is worthwhile noting that the Iksvakus, who
preceded the Visnukundins in the rule over coastal Andhra, had close relations, including
matrimonial ones, with the Kardamakas.'* Slightly prior to it, the well-known
astronomer-astrologer Varahamihira, who had settled at Ujjayini made references of the
reckoning of the Saka kings in his Brhat-samhita besides specifying Saka-kala year 427
in his Pafica-siddhantika, as we have seen above. Hence on this era appears to heve
been favoured by astronomers of various regions which contributed quite a lot to its
diffusion. Then the Calukyas of Badami dated all their records in this era, the earliest
known record being the Badami rock inscription of Pulakesin I, dated Saka-varsa
465." In Andhra Pradesh also the establishment of the Vengi branch of the Calukyas
greatly contributed to the entrenchment of this era which, as we have just seen, was
already known and used, though sporadically. Once this era was popularised in the
Kannada-and Telugu-speaking regions by the Calukyas, the succeeding ruling families
not only continued the practice but also carried it to the areas which came under their
rule in the South. The migration of the Kanarese dynasties like the Gangas and Senas
to Bengal and Bihar resulted in the spread of this era to eastern India also. In this way
the Saka era became an all-India phenomenon, But it must be stressed that it is not quite
popular in northern India and is generally not found mentioned in inscriptions while the
Vikrama era is the era par excellence there. Its use is confined to astronomical
astrological works and the alamanacs.SAKA ERA 79
The Saka era began when 135 years of the Vikrama era were over as well as 3179
years of the Kali age. Therefore one has to a add 3179 to Saka year to get a Kali
equivalent, 135 to get a Vikrama era equivalent, AD 78 or 79 (for the last about three
months) to get a Christian era date. The year of the era uniformly begins on the first
day of the bright half of the month of Caitra, and its months are amanta (ending on
the fifteenth tirhi (day) of the dark half or amavasya) in South India and pirnimanta
{ending on the full-moon day or purnima) in North India. Its expired years are mostly
used in inscriptions and literature, the current years being few and far between. But
in those areas of the South where the Saura system is current, its year begins on the
mesa sankranti,
‘The British had introduced and used only the Christian era for all official purposes
and the government of independent India also allowed it to continue as such for nearly
ten years after independence. In November, 1952 the government appointed an expert
committee to study the different eras current in different parts of the country and
recommend an accurate uniform calendar for the entire country, and following the
committee's recommendations the Government adopted and indroduced the Saka era
alongside the Christian era and introduced a reformed calendar with effect from March
22, 1957. Following this reformed calendar the year commences on Caitra 1, and its
twelve months have, like the year of the Christian era, a fixed number of days: 30 or
31. The first six months from Caitra to Bhadra have 3] days and the remaining six
months 30 days each, with Phalguna having 31 days in a leap year.'*6
List OF ABBREVIATIONS
BL Bhandarkar's List, E/, XIX-XXIII, Appendix.
BMC, AWK Catalogue of Indian Coins in the British Museun: Coins of the Andhra
the Western Ksatrapas, the Traiktitaks Dynasty and the
Dynasty by E.J. Rapson.
BSOAS Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, London
University.
cit Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum.
EI Epigraphia Indica.
HISWK The History and Inscriptions of the Satavahanas and the Western
Ksatrapas by V.V. Mirashi
IA Indian Antiquary
THQ Indian Historical Quarterly.
IMB Indian Museum Bulletin.80 INDIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY OF SCIENCE,
JA Journal Asiatique.
JBBRAS Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society.
JOl Journal of the Oriental Institute, Baroda.
JRAS Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society.
KL Kielhorn’s List, EY, VII, Appendix.
REFERENCES AND NoTEs
1, According to the tradition recorded in the Jaina Pairhavélis, however, the era was formally launched
by the Sakas after their second occupation of Ujjayini (the first occupation was during the reign of
Gardabhilla, the father of Vikramaditya) 135 years after the epoch of the Vikrama era, It is quite
possible that though the era emerged as a natural consequence of the continuous use of the regnal
reckoning of the first ruler by his successors, the credit of its formal inauguration was given to the
former.
2. Daultapur inscription of the year 6 of the reign of Cashtana is the earliest record dated in this era as
well as of the Karadamaka Sakas. Vide JO/, pp. 237If.; XXWUL, pp. 34ff.; HISWK, no. 63, pp. 153-
56. Another inscription of the year 11 of the same ruler was published by Shobhana Gokhale in the
Journal of Ancient Indian History. 11, pp. 104-11. See also HISWK, no. 45, pp. 115-16. Before the
publication of both these inscriptions by Shobhana Gokhale, the Andhau inscriptions of the year
of the same king were regarded as the earliest inscriptions of the Kardamaka Sakas.
Ibid., no. 61, pp. 143-48, All the inscriptions of the Kardamaka Sakas have been brought together by
VV. Mirashi in his HISWK, nos. 45-61 and 63, pp. 115-48 and 153-56.
4. For a list of these dates, see Dilip Rajgor, "An Inventory of Dates on Coins and Inscriptions of the
Western Ksatrapas”, Numismatic Studies, 11 (ed. Devendra Handa), New Delhi, 1992, pp. 89-104
5. Pingree, David The Yavana-jataka of Sphujidhvaja, 1, Cambridge (mass), 1978.
Ibid., Ch, 79, verses 61 and 62.
Ibid., Ch. 79, verses 14.
ante
Ibid., Ch. 79, verses 15. What we have now is the enlarged version of the text, but it is quite likely
that these expressions referring to its date were contained in the original work as well.
9. Mukherjee. BN. who has studied this problem at some length, however, expresses his scepticism
about it when he observes, These expressions, however, may refer only to the system of counting of
dates as follwed by the Sakas. and do not necessarily mean the regular use of the name Sukakale as
an appellantion of the reckoning in question”. See /BM, XX. p. 14, However, as pointed out by him
Cibid.), its association with the name Saka, alluding to the popular notion of the ethnic affiliation of
the Saka-Pahlava Kyatrapas of Wester Inida, should have begun at least in the academic circle by
AD. 269-70 if the versified form of the Yavanajataka was actually competed with the Sakas either
during the rule of the "Saka" Ksatrapa family in question or shortly after that and before the fading
of the memory of the strong connection between these rulers and the reckoning concerned
10. Suka-vurge dvatrimaty-adhike satu-traye vrajati Saku-nara-nathdnam Ramesh, K.V. Indian Epigraphy:
1. Delhi, 1984, p. 80. However, see Annual Report on Indian Epigraphy. 1950-51, n0. B36, p. 13.
where it is reported to have been found at Vala in Sauristra and to refer to Suketuvarman ay
Dharmamahiraja and referred to about the sixth century AD on paleographical grounds.
There are some spurious inscriptions of the Western Gangas dated in the year 188 ff., presumably ofSAKA ERA 81
the Saka era (see for one such inscription dated year 188, K.V, Ramesh, Jascriprions of the Western
Gurigas, Delhi, 1984, pp. 10 ff.), which apperar to be spurious, There are also some Maitraka (A List
of the Inscriptions of Northern India in Brahmi and its Derivative Scripts from about 200 A.C.. El.
XIX-XXIII, Appendix, nos. 1078-1079) and Gurjara, (ibid. nos. 1080-1081) dated in the expired
years 400 ff, of the Saka king (s) which are likewise later forgeries by people not aware of the period
of the rule of the dynasties concerned.
Shastri, Ajay Mitra "New Vakataka Inscriptions", The Age of she Vakirakas, ed. Ajay Mitra Shastri,
New Delhi, 1991, pp. 246-47 and 265, notes 139-46. This is the only Vakitaka inscription dated in
the Saku era probably because the person whose pious act is perpetuated by it hailed from Sauriigtra
where the era was prevalent.
El, XXVIL, pp. 4-9
Kicthorn, F. A List of Inscriptions of Southern India from about A.D. $00, £7, VI, Appendix, no. 3.
dated year 500 of Mangalesa,
Ihid., no. 9: Hyderabad pls. of Pulakesin Il, year 534.
Wid., no. 10; Aihole inscription of Pulakesin Il, dated Saka 556 = 634 AD, the actual reference being
to the years of the Saka kings: Paficdsutsu Kalau Kale saidsu paiica-satasu ca, samdsu samatitase
Sakiniam=api biiidbhujdan,
Ihid., No. 66: Kadaba pls, of Rastrakuta Govinda III, dated Saka 735.
See tbid., nos, 54, 61-65, 67-70,74-75,77-78, etc. Suka-nrpa-kal-dtitd-samvatsara is the usual
expression.
Samvatsare tw dvatrimse Kaiie-ia-Simhavarmanah, Asity-agre Sukabdanam siddham=cetac=chata-
traye. Lokavibhiiga, X14.
See Gaurishankar Hirachand Ojha, Bldratiya Pricina Lipimala, Ajmer, 1918, p. 171. fa. 3, for details.
For discussion, see Ajay Mitra Shastri, "Saka Era of Varahamihira", Prof. V.A. Narain commemoration
Volume. The Journal of the Bihar Purdid Parishad, IX-X, pp. 145-56: Vardhamihira and his Times.
Jodhpur, 1991, pp. 31-42.
Saka-nrpanam preceding the specification of the number of years is the actual expression. See Shankar
Balakrishna Dikshit, Bharativa Jyotisa, Hindi translation by Shivanath Jharakhandi, Lucknow, 1957,
p. 300.
Quoted by Satya Srava, The Sakas in india, Lahore, 1947, p. 40.
For some references, see G.H. Ojha, op. cit, p. 171: Satyashrava, op. cit.pp. 35-43
Sachau E., Alberuni's India, 1. London, 1910. p. 6.
He says "since there is a long interval between the era which is called the era of Vikramaditya and
the killing of Saka. we think that the Vikramaditya from whom the era has got its name is not identical
with that one who killed Saka, but only a namesake of his.” fhid. It is curious that an inqusitive
scholar that Alberuni undoubtedly was succumbed to this popular but erroneous notion instead of the
correct position, viz. it marked the establishment (or rather re-establishment) of the Saks tule, It is
curious to note in this conteat that during the early part of the eleventh century AD when Alberuni
wrote his account of India a similar notion was current about the situation leading to the beginning
of the Gupta era, viz. the commencement of the Gupta era commemorated the end of the Gupta rule
See thid.. p. 7
Tark=ambar-ika-pramiteymatiteyu Sakoamaral, Varses-Cdayanas=cakre subodham Laksanivatiar
Cited by Satya Srava, op. cit.p. 42, no. 5.82
29.
30.
3.
38.
39.
40.
4.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
INDIAN JOURNAL OF HISTORY OF SCIENCE
Suk nama mleccha rajands=te yasmin kale Vikramaditvena vyapaditah sa Saka-sambandit kilah
Saka ity-ueyate. Khanda-khadyaka with Vasana-bhashya, ed. by PC. Sengupta, Calcutta, 1925, p. 2.
Saka nama mlecché rajanas=te yasmin kale Vikramaditvena vvapaditah sa Kale=ty artham prasiddhah.
Khandakhidvaka.ed. by P.C. Sengupta with Prithiidaka’s gloss, Calcutta, 1941, p. 3.
For a discussion of his date, see Ajay Mitra Shastri, Vardhamihira and his Times, pp. 201-05.
Saka néima mleccha jatayo rajands=te yasmin kiile Vikramaditya devena vvapiaditah sa Kalo loke
Saka iti prasiddhah, tasmée=Cahakendrakilét Saka-nrpa-vadha kalat.
Kaler=nav-ag-aiku-gundh Sak-dvadheh, Carulogue of Panjab university Library Sanskrit Manuscripts.
Acc. no, 3784, sloka 10. Cited by Satya Srava, op.cit., p. 43, no. 7.
Trini krt-adini Kater=go-g-aika-gindh Sak-ante=bdik. Brahma-sphuta-siddhanta, 1 26.
Ibid, 1. 27.
El, XXI, p. 144, text-lines 49-50.
JA, XVI, p. 21, text-line 61; Kielhorn's List, £1, VI, Appendix, no. 150, p. 27
Saka nrpa-kal-dtiia-samvatsara satasev astasy-ekastty-adhikesu gatesu, Cited in Saya Shrava, op. cits,
p. 45, no. 2
Bhaskaracharya, Siddhanta-siromani, 1. 28 (Nand-idr-indra-gunds=tatha Seka-nrpasy-dnte
Kaler=vatsarah); Sripati, Siddhanta-sekhera, 1. 25 (Yatih Kaler=nava-nag-endu-gunak 3179 Sak-
ane).
‘Saka Era of Varahamihira’, op. cit., pp. 153-54; Varahamihira and his Times, p. 37.
‘As regards Guptakila, people say that the Guptas were wicked powerful people, and that when they
ceased 10 exist this date was used as the epoch of an era.” E. Sachau, op. cit., Il, p. 7.
While Satya Shrava has produced substantial evidence in support of his contention that the Saka era
actually commemorates the end of the Saka rule as stated in few inscriptions and texts and it points
to an earlier Saka era, in our opinion the references cited by him only point to the erroneous notion
prevalent in later times.
Try-aiik-endra-pramite varse Salivihana-janmatah, Krtas=tapasi Martando=yam=alam javat=udgatah,
JBBRAS, X, pp. 132-33. Mithurta-martanda, Alankara, verse 3
‘This reference is later then the earlies
seen in the sequel
scriptional reference by over a century and a half, as will be
Nava:
wa ekasiti Saka gata Silivahina ca nrpadhisa Sake 981, BL, No. 134, p. 22.
Tulpule, $.G. Prachina Marathi Koriva Lekha (Marathi), Pane 1963, p. 91 (Salavuna or Sulahana),
EI, XXVIL, p. 210, text-line 1. The expression is preceded by the honorific srimat in locative singular
(Srimati).
JRAS. V. p. 178: KL, No. 379, LF. Fleet (EI, XIII, P. 199), however. was suspicious that the date of
these plates, of which the originals were lost, did not probably contain any reference to king Salivahana,
and V.V. Mirashi supported it as the same King’s Purushottampuri plates of a tater date also do not
contain such a reference and the tow dates are expressed simply as Saka-mrpa-kal-atita-samvatsara
as in several other records (ibid., XXV. p. 201. But these views need not be taken seriously now as
we are aware that several other Yadava and Vijayanagara inscriptions are dated by both these
terminologies simultaneously48.
49.
55
56.
37.
58
59,
60.
66.
67.
68,
69,
70.
SAKA ERA 83
Vide KL nos. 455, 465, 475, 492, 503, ete. A much larger number of inscriptions of the Vijayanagara
dynasties contains the usual expression, viz, Saka-nrpu-kal-