Indische Palaographie von circa 350 a. Chr. – circa 1300 p. Chr. c23.20

c23.20

C., however, reasoning from the fact that Kaniṣka was a Kuṣana and *not* a Saka king (v. sup. § 64), seeks another origin for the Saka era (he supposes it to have been founded by Caṣṭana, v. inf. § 80), and explains the Kuṣana dates as being of the Seleucid era (B.C. 312), with the hundreds omitted (e. g. year 7 = 407 Seleucid = 95 A.D.). This procedure would make all the Kuṣana dates, as given above, 10 years later. C. justifies it by referring to the fact that the Kuṣanas use the Macedonian, and not the Indian, names of the months in their inscrr. (NChr. 1892, p. 44); compare also BHĀṆḌĀRKAR (Hist. Dek. p. 26 f.). Regarding another possibility, viz. that the dates of Kaniṣka and his successors have to be referred to the second century of the era, used by Śoḍāsa, Liako Kusuluka and others, see WZKM. IX, p. 173 f.