Early History of the Dekkan down to the Mahomedan Conquest c24.16

c24.16

Now the Bombay mode of reckoning, which is one year behind that prevalent in Madras, is, I believe, due to a mistake We have seen it was more usual in recording a date to mark the years that had expired than the current year A word expressive of that sense such as *gateshu*, "having elapsed," was used after the number, and another such as *pravartamâne*, "being current," was used in connection with the name of the cyclic year These words were, for brevity's sake, afterwards dropped, and in the course of time the sense, to express which they were used, was also forgotten, and the number came to be regarded as denoting the current year. So that what we do on this side of the country is that we use the *past* or *expired* year without knowing that it is the *past* year. And there are in the inscriptions instances of mistakes due to the circumstance that the real *past* year came to be regarded as the current year. Thus in No. 86 of the Pâli, Sanskrit, and old Kânarese inscriptions, Śaka 911 is given along with the cyclic year *Vikṛiti*. Now, according to the tables, the number of years that had expired before *Vikṛiti* was 912 and the current year was 913. This discrepancy is to be explained by the supposition that Śaka 912 which represented the years that had expired came to be thought of as the current year, just as we, on this side of the country, consider 1805 as the current year now, though it indicates the past year, and the writer of the inscription wishing to give the years that had expired before his current year, put them as 911. The same is the case with Nos. 27, 67, 115, 130, 224, and 284, the Śaka dates in which are 1444, 1084, 1430, 1453, 1114, and 1128, respectively, and are two years behind the current year as determined by the cyclic years given along with them. In some cases the Śaka dates are in advance of the *Saṁvatsara* or cyclic year by one year. Thus in the Vaṇi-Ḍiṇḍorî grant of Govinda III. the Śaka date is 730 and the Saṁvatsara *Vyaya*, and in the Kânheri inscription of Amoghavarsha we have Śaka 775 and the *Prajâpati* Saṁvatsara. [135] Now the Śaka years immediately preceding Vyaya and Prajâpati were 728 and 773, while the current years were 729 and 774 respectively. This difference might be accounted for on the supposition that the *current* years 729 and 774 were from the usual custom understood to be past years and the writers of the documents desirous of giving the current years added 1 and put them down as 730 and 775 The date in No 79 of Pâlî, Sanskrit, and old Kânarese inscriptions is three years behind the current Samvatsara, and that in No 228, four years, No 221 has 1113 for 1121, and No 246, 1492 for 1485 These must be considered to be mistakes