Early History of the Dekkan down to the Mahomedan Conquest c13.8

c13.8

⁴ Prof Oldenberg thinks Kanishka to be the founder of the era but this view is, I think, untenable (1)—A dynasty of three kings only cannot perpetuate an era The dynasty of the Guptas composed of seven kings was in power for more than a hundred and fifty years, but their era died a natural death in the course of a few centuries (2)—The characters in Kanishka's inscriptions, especially the ya as conjoined with a preceding consonant, are later than those we find in the first century One has simply to compare Inscription No 1 in Plate XIII of the third volume of General Cunningham's Arch Reports with No 4 to see the great difference in the forms of the letters in the times of the earliest Kshatrapas and of Kanishka The former belongs to the time of the Kshatrapa Śoḍâsa and the letters are almost like those we find in Ushavadâta's inscriptions at Nâsik, while those in the latter, which is dated in the ninth year of Kanishka, are considerably later, and both the inscriptions exist in Mathurâ (3)—There is no ground to believe that Kanishka reigned over Gujarât and Mahârâshtra, but the Śaka era began to be used very early, especially in the last country (4)—The Guptas whose gold coinage is a close imitation of that of the Indo-Scythian dynasty, came to power in A D 319 while the last of the three kings Kanishka, Hushka and Vâsudeva must, if the reign of the first began in A D 78, have ceased to reign about A D 178, *i c*, about 100 years after the foundation of the dynasty And the latest date of Vâsudeva is 89 If so, an interval of 140 years must have elapsed between the last of the Indo-Scythian kings and the first Gupta, but the close resemblance in the coinage necessitates the supposition that it was much shorter. Albîrûnî's statement that the initial date of the Gupta era was 241 Saka, *i.e.*, 319 A.D., has been pronounced unreliable by some antiquarians. As to this point and the era of the Satrap dates, see Appendix A.