The Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts of the Bombay Presidency from the Earliest Historical Times to the Musalman Conquest c8.s15.67

c8.s15.67

⁴ On a stone on the bank of a tank outside the village (*Carn.-Desa Inscr.* Vol. II. p. 133; P. S. and O.-C. *Inscr.* No. 185; *Mysore Inscriptions*, p. 109. As regards the date, the Vrishabha-*samkranti*, or passage of the sun into Taurus, took place on the day given by me; and the full-moon occurred on the same or the preceding day; The week-day, however, was Wednesday, for the *samkranti*. And Von Oppolzer's *Canon der Finsternisse* shews no eclipse for this full-moon.— In the preceding month Chaitra, the Mesha-*samkranti*, or passage of the sun into Aries, took place on the forenoon of Sunday, 24th March. And the *Canon* shews an eclipse of the moon on the Monday. But, as the *samkranti* and eclipse do not both come to the Sunday, there do not appear sufficient grounds for assuming that Vaisakha is a mistake for Chaitra. In this record, the Sarvadharin *samvatsara* is cited as the sixteenth of the Kalachurya years. The transcript in *Carn.-Desa Inscr.* indeed, substitutes "second" for "sixteenth." But this was done simply because the *samvatsara* in question was the second year of Bijjala's son Somesvara. And the photograph shews the reading of the original quite clearly and unmistakably,— *srimut-Kalachurya-varshada 16neya Sarvadhari-samvatsarada*, &c. This would point to another Kalachurya reckoning, of which the first year would be the *Srimukha samvatsara*, *Saka-Samvat* 1076 current, = A. D. 1153-54,— earlier by three years than the commencement of Bijjala's reckoning. But I have not met with any other date in accordance with such a reckoning. I cannot suggest any historical starting-point for it. And it seems, on the whole, probable that simply a mistake was made, in writing or engraving 16neya instead of 13neya.