The Cambridge History of India, Vol. I: Ancient India v1.c24.196

v1.c24.196

³ The dates assigned to these three inscriptions by different scholars vary somewhat, especially in regard to the record on the Bahistān Rock, although they are included approximately within the limits given. In respect to dating the Bahistān edict, much depends upon the interpretation of the O.P. phrase *hamahyāyā(h) tharda(h)*; for if, following Weissbach, we take it to mean ‘in one and the same year,’ all the events chronicled must have taken place within about a year after Darius succeeded to the throne, whereas otherwise they may be regarded as extending over two or three or even more years. See F. H. Weissbach, *Zur neubabylon. u. achämenid. Chronologie*, in *Z.D.M.G.* LXII, 640–641; idem, *Keilinschr. d. Achämeniden*, pp. lxix–lxxiii, Leipzig, 1911; idem, *Zum bab. Kalender*, in *Hilprecht Anniversary Volume*, pp. 285–290 (with Table), Leipzig, 1909; refer also to King and Thompson, *Inscr. Behistūn*, pp. xli–xliii; Prášek, *Gesch. d. Med. u. Pers.* II, 37–38; Sarre and Herzfeld, *Iranische Felsreliefs*, pp. 17–33, 106–107; cf. also Justi, *Grundr. d. iran. Philol.* II, 430.