Indian Epigraphy c15.t1.35

c15.t1.35

From the nature of the Indian year and month discussed above, it will be seen that the verification of the dates of some records is beset with difficulties. By way of illustration, it may be pointed out that it is often difficult to determine whether the years quoted, even when they are referred to an era, are Kārttikādi, Caitrādi, Āṣāḍhādi or Śrāvaṇādi and whether the month is Amānta or Pūrṇimānta. It is also often unknown whether the regnal years of kings were counted exactly from the date of his accession or they were adjusted with the regular years of the almanac. Another difficulty is that the years were sometimes regarded as current though generally they were counted as expired.² But there is a greater difficulty which is the possibility of errors in the enumeration of the dates. There is no doubt that such errors account for a large number of irregular dates in the inscriptions of various ages in different parts of the country.