[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [Archaeology, epigraphy and coins](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy) › [Book of Indian Eras, with Tables for Calculating Indian Dates](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883) › c7 # Book of Indian Eras, with Tables for Calculating Indian Dates c7: II.—Bârhaspatya-Mâna Book of Indian Eras, with Tables for Calculating Indian Dates c7 - **Language:** English ## Contents - [c7.s1 Names of the 60 Years of the Jovian Cycle](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.s1) — 1 part ### II.—Bârhaspatya-Mâna ### [c7.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.1) 60-YEAR CYCLE OF JUPITER. ### [c7.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.2) THE \*Bârhaspatya-Mâna\*, or Cycle of Jupiter, is a period of sixty years, or five revolutions of the planet, each year of which has a different name. This era was considered by Warren to be "very ancient;"\* but James Prinsep, misled by Csoma de Kőrös and Bentley, thought it was a "comparatively recent introduction."† The former understood from the Tibetan authorities that the Vrihaspati Chakra was introduced into India about the year 965 A.D., a date which tallied very closely with Bentley's assumed epoch of Varâha Mihira in A.D. 966-67. Happily, Bentley's vagaries have long ago been set to rest, while Colebrooke's date of Varâha Mihira, the author of the Sûrya Siddhânta, has been satisfactorily established. As Varâha died in A.D. 587, his writings describing the Cycles of Jupiter must be referred to the middle of the Sixth Century A.D. But as he quotes Vriddha Garga as his authority,‡ the Jovian Cycle must have been in use before the Christian era. ### [c7.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.3) There are three different modes of reckoning the cycle of sixty years, of which the oldest is certainly that preserved by Varâha Mihira, as the first year of the Kâli-Yuga, by his account, is the twenty-seventh year of the Jovian Cycle. The second is the reckoning of the Jyotishtava, which is clearly only a correction of Varâha Mihira's method, as it makes the first year of the cycle correspond with the first year of the Kâli-Yuga. Both of these reckonings have been in use in Northern India, where the necessary omission of every eighty-sixth year of the Jovian Cycle has always been preserved. The third method is the reckoning followed in the south of India, by which the Jovian year is considered exactly the same as the solar year, and the names are taken in succession, without any correction for the difference between the period of one revolution of the sun and that of one-twelfth part of a revolution of Jupiter. By this mode of reckoning the actual Cycle of Jupiter is entirely lost sight of, and the sixty names become simply the appellations of as many solar years. ### [c7.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.4) ∗ Warren's Kâla Sankâlita, p. 199. † Prinsep's Useful Tables, p. 27. ‡ Davis in Asiatic Researches, III, p. 78. ### [c7.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.5) The Bârhaspatya-Mâna has been fortunate in finding two such capable expounders as Davis and Warren, to whose works I may refer for a complete exposition of the cycle. It will be sufficient here to note the rules for finding the years of the cycle according to the two slightly different modes of the Northern reckoning. ### [c7.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.6) The Sûrya Siddhânta rule, as explained, is as follows:—Divide the expired years of the Kâli-Yuga by 86, add the quotient to the dividend; divide the sum by 60, and the quotient gives the number of cycles expired. Then, if the proposed year should fall less than 31 from the last expunged year of the Chakra, add 28 to the remainder; but if it should be more than 31, add only 27; and the remainder so increased will indicate the current year of the Chakra. Take the year 223 A.D. = 3324 Kâli-Yuga, as an example: ### [c7.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.7) ÷ 86 ) 3324 ( 38 + 3324 = 3362 ÷ 60 ————— 56 + 2 over add 28 —— 30th year of 57th cycle. ### [c7.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.8) A reference to the general table will show that this result is correct, reckoning from Prabhava. ### [c7.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.9) The rule followed in the second method is thus laid down in the Brihat Sanhita:∗ ### [c7.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.10) ∗ Dr. Kern's Translation of the Brihat Sanhita, c. viii, 20-21. ### [c7.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.11) "Multiply the years expired since the era of the Saka King by 11 and the product by 4; add 8589; divide that sum by 3750. To the quotient add the Saka years; divide the sum by 60 (to find the cycles). Taking the same year as before A.D. 223 - 78 = 145 Saka— ### [c7.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.12) 145 4 × 11 + 145 ———— ———— 1595 149 × 4 ÷ 60 ————— ———— Cycles 2+29 years complete 6380 or 30th year current as before. + 8589 ———— ÷ 3750 ) 14969 ( 4 ### [c7.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.13) The Jyotishtava rule is practically the same as that of the Varâha Sanhita; the only real difference being in the amount of the Kshepa, or sum added :—" Multiply the Saka year by 22, add 4291 to the product, and divide by 1875. Next add the quotient to the Saka year, and divide the sum by 60. The remainder will be the last expired year reckoning from Prabhava." ### [c7.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.14) Taking the same year as before A.D. 223 - 78 = 145 Saka, ### [c7.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.15) | Then 145 Saka | 145 Saka | | 22 | 4 | | 290 | 149 | | 290 | ÷ 60 — | | 3190 | Cycles 2 + 29 complete years, | | 4291 | or 30th year current as before. | ### [c7.16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.16) In these last two methods the multiplying by 11 and then by 4 of the first is equivalent to multiplying by 44, which is exactly double the multiplier 22 of the second; just as the divisor 3750 of the first is double 1875 of the second. In other words, (11 × 4)/3750 = 22/1875. There is a slight difference in the Kshepa, or addition, as the half of 8589 is 4294½, or a little more than 4291. As James Prinsep has remarked, the factor 22/1875 "is equivalent to dividing by 85·227, the period when a year is to be expunged by this system." ### [c7.17](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.17) But the same result may be obtained by a further simplification of the process, as follows :—To the Saka date add 195, then divide the sum by 85, and add the quotient to the Saka year. Then divide by 60: the quotient will give the number of cycles expired, and the remainder the number of expired years of the current cycle. Thus taking the same year 145 Saka, the process is ### [c7.18](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.18) | 145 | 145 | | + 195 | + 4 | | 85 ) 340 ( 4 | 149 | | | 60 — | | | Cycles 2 + 29 years expired. | ### [c7.19](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.19) By the Telinga reckoning of Southern India the cycle began twelve years before the Kâli-Yuga, the first year of which corresponds with Pramatha, the thirteenth year of the cycle. The rule for ascertaining the cycle year for any particular date is simply to divide the expired years of the Kali-Yuga by 60, and the quotient will give the number of expired years. ### [c7.20](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.20) Take the same year A.D. 223 + 3161 = 3324 Kali-Yuga. ÷ 60 Cycles 55 + 24 years. ### [c7.21](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.21) add 12 for the years before Pramatha, and the result is 36 years of the cycle expired, and the 37th year current as in the general table. ### [c7.22](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.22) As the years of the 60-year Cycle of Jupiter are only occasionally mentioned in the inscriptions of Northern India, I have not thought it worth while to give the Jyotishtava reckoning in addition to that of the Sûrya Siddhânta. In fact, the difference between the two is never more than one year, and that only between the two periods of omitted years. In the Second Century A.D., the omitted year of the Sûrya Siddhânta reckoning took place in 136, while that of the Jyotishtava was two years later—in 138. In A.D. 394, the omissions took place together. In A.D. 479 the Jyotishtava omitted year preceded that of the Sûrya Siddhânta by one year, but in the present Century the Jyotishtava omitted year, No. 48 in 1848, preceded the other, No. 1 of 1856, by thirteen years. The current years of the two cycles, however, generally correspond, excepting in the short periods between the two omissions, when they differ by only one year. The years 847 and 907 A.D. were initial years of cycles in all three modes of reckoning: and the numbers of all the years coincided from A.D. 825 (the 39th year) down to A.D. 909. ### [c7.23](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.23) The Telinga computation, though useless as an astronomical cycle, is of great value in fixing the dates of inscriptions where the numerical figures are at all doubtful, or where the name of the era may be uncertain. Of the latter class there is a very curious example in an inscription translated by Dr. Hall.\* The record is dated "in the Saka year twelve hundred and seventy-five, called Chitrabhanu, in the light fortnight of Mârgasirsha, its fifth day, and Saturday." Now nothing can apparently be clearer than this date, which corresponds with A.D. 1353; and yet it is absolutely certain that the word 'Saka' cannot be intended for the Saka era,† as the name of Chitrabhanu, which is the 16th year of the Jovian Cycle, corresponds exactly with 1275 of the Vikramâditya era according to the Northern reckoning, while the Saka year 1275 is the 33rd year of the Jovian Cycle in the North, and the 27th year in the South, both many years distant from Chitrabhânu. But besides this evidence there is also that of the week day, \*Saturday\*, which agrees with Mârgasiras-Sudi 5 in the Vikramâditya era, and not in the Saka era, when that date fell on a Monday. Another reason for accepting the earlier date is the fact that Mâlwa had already become a province of the Muhammadan empire of Delhi long before Saka 1275, or A. D. 1353, whereas in Vikrama Samvat 1275, or A.D. 1218, Mâlwa was still under Hindu rule, as the invasion of Iltitmish did not take place until A.D. 1230. ### [c7.24](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.24) ∗ Bengal Asiatic Society's Journal, XXVIII, pp. 4-5. ### [c7.25](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.25) † I have since found an inscription dated in Vikrama Saka. ### [c7.26](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.26) A good example of the Southern mode of reckoning is found in the date of the Kardla copper-plates, in 894 Saka in the year \*Angiras\*, on Wednesday, the full moon of Aswina, during an eclipse of the moon.\* The year \*Angiras\* is the 6th of the cycle corresponding with 894 Saka (or A.D. 972) of the Southern reckoning. According to the Northern reckoning the year was Srimukha, or the 7th. But, strange to say, the full moon of Aswina was not a Wednesday according to Cowasjee Patell,† who makes the luni-solar year of Saka 894 begin on Tuesday the 19th March 972 A.D. The full moon of Aswina is the 192nd day of the ordinary year, which number divided by 7 gives 3 over, or Thursday the 26th of September for the day of full moon. Now we know that there was an eclipse of the moon on Wednesday the 25th of September A.D. 972, which actually was the full moon of Aswina according to the Northern reckoning of the Sûrya Siddhânta. I have calculated the date by both reckonings, and I find that, by the Southern reckoning, the 1st Vaisâkh of the solar year fell on Friday the 22nd March, and the 1st Chaitra-Sudi of the luni-solar year 4·49 days earlier, or on Monday the 18th March 972 A.D., and not on the 19th as given by Cowasjee Patell. According to the Northern reckoning the 1st Vaisâkh of the solar year fell on Saturday the 23rd March, and the 1st Chaitra-Sudi of the luni-solar year 4·808, or five days earlier,—that is, on Monday the 18th March. By both reckonings, therefore, the full moon of Aswina fell on a Wednesday. But the cycle year of Jupiter agrees with the Southern reckoning. ### [c7.27](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.27) † Patell's Chronology, p. 136. ### [c7.28](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.28) The cyclic names, however, sometimes disagree one year with the reckoning of the other eras. Thus there are no less than three inscriptions, all dated in the Saka year 730, whilst each has a different year of the Jovian Cycle assigned to it. These are Vyâya the 20th year, Sarvajit the 21st, and Sarvadhâri the 22nd. The second name agrees with the date according to the Northern reckoning, and the last according to the Southern account. But the first, which occurs in the Nâsik inscription, and should therefore belong to the Southern reckoning, is two years out, and is therefore most probably a mistake. ### [c7.29](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.29) ∗ Royal Asiatic Society's Journal, III, 104. ### [c7.30](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.30) Amongst eighty inscriptions which I have noted as containing year names of the Jovian Cycle, there are only five which conform to the Northern reckoning. The latest is a short record on a pillar in the cloisters of the Lâl Darwâza Masjid at Jaunpur,\* in which the date is stated to be "the year Plava of Samvat 1353." Both dates correspond with A.D. 1296. By the Southern reckoning Plava coincides with Samvat 1358. ### [c7.31](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.31) In the annexed table I have given the Sanskrit names of all the sixty years, with their numbers counting from Prabhava. The numbers only are given in the general table for want of space. In the inscriptions the names only are given; so that whenever the name of a Jovian year is found in an inscription, it will be necessary, in the first place, to refer to this table for its number. ### [c7.32](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.32) I have also given translations of the Tibetan names, which were derived from the Chinese, for all the sixty years. They are formed by a combination of the names of the twelve animals of the smaller cycle of twelve years with the five elements. The first cycle dates from A.D. 1027, and not from 1026, as stated by Csoma de Körös, and adopted by Prinsep.† At page 181 of his Grammar, Csoma correctly states that "the present year 1834 being the 28th year of the 14th cycle," which gives A.D. 1807 as the first year; and therefore in taking 1026 as the first year of the first cycle, he is one year in error. ### [c7.33](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.33) † Tibetan Grammar, p. 195; Prinsep's Useful Tables, p. 30, quotes Csoma; Bengal Asiatic Society's Journal, III, 6, but the passage is not there. ### [c7.34](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.34) Prinsep quotes Csoma's account of a period of 403 years, termed Me-kha-gya-tsho, as preceding the introduction of the Kâla-Chakra, or 60-year Cycle of Jupiter in Tibet; and he adopts his opinion that it has reference to the Hijra era. "If," says Csoma, "we add these 403 years to 622, the first year of the Hijra, we have exactly the year 1025, whence with 1026 commences the first cycle of 60 years of the Tibetans." But the correct date was 1027, and the number 403 most probably had reference to the years passed from the Kashmiri Lok-kâl of A.D. 625 down to A.D. 1027, when the Cycle of Jupiter was introduced. The name was only a symbolical mode of reckoning the number 403: as mé, "fire" = 3; kha, "vacity" = 0; gya-tsho, "ocean" = 4; or put together 403. It had therefore nothing to do with "the entrance of the infidels into Makha." ### [c7.35](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.35) ∗ See Archæological Survey of India, XI, 126. ### [c7.36](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.36) Csoma, in his Chronology, states, that the Baidurya Karpo was "written in the first year of the twelfth cycle, or A.D. 1687." This is correct, as the unit of each initial year of a cycle should be a 7. So also the period elapsed from the introduction of the Kâla-Chakra down to 1687 is said to be 660 years, which gives A.D. 1027 as the first year of the first cycle. ### [c7.37](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.37) It is perhaps only accidental that the year 1027 is also the beginning of the 60-year cycle in Southern India. But the coincidence is curious. In China the cycle began in 1024 A.D., a fact which is proved by the numbers attached to the Tibetan names in the accompanying table, which shows that three years of the Chinese or Tibetan cycle names had already passed when the Indian cycle, commencing with Prabhava, began. ### [c7.38](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.38) In my work on Ladâkh I have made the same mistake of one year as was done by Csoma himself. I stated correctly (p. 396) that the year A.D. 1851 was the 45th year of the 14th cycle; for, deducting 44 from 45 and from 1851, we get the first year = 1807. But in the list of initial years I have given A.D. 1026 down to 1806, instead of A.D. 627 to 1807, owing to my faith in Csoma's accuracy. ### [c7.39](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.39) BÂRHASPATYA-CHAKRA. ### Names of the 60 Years of the Jovian Cycle ### [c7.s1.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7.s1.1) | No. | SANSKRIT. | TIBETAN. | No. | | No. | SANSKRIT. | TIBETAN. | No. | | 1 | Prabhava | Fire-hare | 4 | | 31 | Hemalamba | Fire-bird | 34 | | 2 | Vibhava | Earth-dragon | 5 | | 32 | Vilambin | Earth-dog | 35 | | 3 | Sukla | Earth-serpent | 6 | | 33 | Vikârin | Earth-hog | 36 | | 4 | Pramoda | Iron-horse | 7 | | 34 | Sarvari | Iron-mouse | 37 | | 5 | Prajâpati | Iron-sheep | 8 | | 35 | Plava | Iron-ox | 38 | | 6 | Angiras | Water-ape | 9 | | 36 | Sobhakrit | Water-tiger | 39 | | 7 | Sri Mukha | Water-bird | 10 | | 37 | Subhakrit | Water-hare | 40 | | 8 | Bhâva | Wood-dog | 11 | | 38 | Krodhin | Wood-dragon | 41 | | 9 | Yuvan | Wood-hog | 12 | | 39 | Viswavasu | Wood-serpent | 42 | | 10 | Dhatar | Fire-mouse | 13 | | 40 | Parâbhava | Fire-horse | 43 | | 11 | Iswara | Fire-ox | 14 | | 41 | Plavanga | Fire-sheep | 44 | | 12 | Bahudhânya | Earth-tiger | 15 | | 42 | Kilaka | Earth-ape | 45 | | 13 | Pramâthin | Earth-hare | 16 | | 43 | Sanmya | Earth-bird | 46 | | 14 | Vikrama | Iron-dragon | 17 | | 44 | Sâdhârana | Iron-dog | 47 | | 15 | Vrisha | Iron-serpent | 18 | | 45 | Radhakrit | Iron-hog | 48 | | 16 | Chitrabhânu | Water-horse | 19 | | 46 | Paridhâvin | Water-mouse | 49 | | 17 | Subhânu | Water-sheep | 20 | | 47 | Pramâdin | Water-ox | 50 | | 18 | Târana | Wood-ape | 21 | | 48 | Ananda | Wood-tiger | 51 | | 19 | Pârthiva | Wood-bird | 22 | | 49 | Râkshasa | Wood-hare | 52 | | 20 | Vyaya | Fire-dog | 23 | | 50 | Anala | Fire-dragon | 53 | | 21 | Sarvajit | Fire-hog | 24 | | 51 | Pingala | Fire-serpent | 54 | | 22 | Sarvadhârin | Earth-mouse | 25 | | 52 | Kâlayútka | Earth-house | 55 | | 23 | Virodhin | Earth-ox | 26 | | 53 | Siddhârtha | Earth-sheep | 56 | | 24 | Vikrita | Iron-tiger | 27 | | 54 | Randra | Iron-ape | 57 | | 25 | Khara | Iron-ape | 28 | | 55 | Durmati | Iron-bird | 58 | | 26 | Nandana | Water-dragon | 29 | | 56 | Dundubhi | Water-dog | 59 | | 27 | Vijaya | Water-serpent | 30 | | 57 | Udgârin | Water-hog | 60 | | 28 | Jaya | Wood-horse | 31 | | 58 | Raktâksha | Wood-mouse | 1 | | 29 | Manmatha | Wood-sheep | 32 | | 59 | Krodha | Wood-ox | 2 | | 30 | Durmukha | Fire-ape | 33 | | 60 | Kshaya | Fire-tiger | 3 | ## Linked texts (2) - [Bṛhatsaṃhitā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.astro.samhita.rsi.brhatsamhita) — Varāhamihira, Sanskrit - [Sūryasiddhānta](https://indike.org/pramana/in.astro.siddhanta.early.suryasiddhanta) — Maya, Sanskrit --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.epigraphy.cunningham-1883.c7) · Pramāṇa