The Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts of the Bombay Presidency from the Earliest Historical Times to the Musalman Conquest c8.s8.4

c8.s8.4

Again, Albiruni's statement that the initial date of the Gupta era and the Valabhî era was the same seems to some not "at all probable." To my mind the improbability is not so great as to render valueless what clearly is contemporary evidence. We all know that the date occurring in a grant of one of the sons of the founder of the dynasty is 207, and we have a large number of grants of subsequent kings with dates posterior to this and in harmony with it. So that it is clear that these dates cannot refer to an era dating from the foundation of the dynasty. Such a long time as 207 years cannot be considered to have elapsed between the father who founded the dynasty and his son, even supposing him to have been a posthumous son. The dates, therefore, are understood to refer to the Gupta era. What, then, could have been the Valabhî era, if it was never used by the Valabhî princes during the 275 years or thereabouts of the existence of their dynasty? An era cannot receive the name of a certain line of princes unless used by those princes, at least on a few occasions, and enforced. The era used by the Valabhî princes must be the Valabhî era. One certainly would expect that it should be so. The only supposition, therefore, on which the whole becomes intelligible is that the era introduced by the Valabhîs in Surâshṭra and used by them was called the Valabhî era by their subjects, and not one dating from the foundation of the dynasty; for such a one, we see, was not used by the Valabhî princes themselves. The era introduced and used by the Valabhîs was that of the Guptas, whose dependents they were in the beginning, and hence Albiruni's statement that the initial date of the Gupta and Valabhî eras was the same is true. From an inscription at Somanâth discovered by Colonel Tod, we gather that Śaka 242 was the first year of the Valabhî era. Hence, therefore, the initial date of the Gupta era was 242 Śaka, as stated by Albiruni.