The Cambridge History of India, Vol. I: Ancient India v1.c17.181.2

v1.c17.181.2

but these conclusions can claim no scientific value, as they rest on assumptions as to the exact meaning of the passage which cannot be justified. The possible margin of error in the calculations is at least five hundred years; and we are therefore reduced to the view that this evidence only indicates that the observation which is recorded was made some centuries B.C. The same conclusion can be drawn from the fact that in quite a number of places the month Phālguna is called the beginning of the year. In the view of Jacobi, this shows that the year began with the winter solstice at full moon in Phalgunī, and thus would correspond with his view that in the Rigveda the sun at the summer solstice was in Uttara-Phalgunī. But, in this case also, the result is unacceptable; for it is nowhere stated that the beginning of the year was dated from the winter solstice. The most probable explanation is that the full moon in Phalgunī was deemed to be the beginning of the year, because it marked, at the time when it was so termed, the beginning of spring. Since the new moon in Maghā was at the winter solstice, the full moon in Phalgunī would fall about a month and a half later in the first week of February, which is compatible with Feb.