History of Kanauj to the Moslem Conquest c15.s2.t3.4

c15.s2.t3.4

Kalhaṇa mentions the year 25 of the Laukika or Saptarṣi era as the time of the finishing of his great work, which he began in 24 Laukika era corresponding to 1070 Saka according to the method of turning a Laukika into a Saka year given in Sir R. G. Bhandarkar’s *Report on Manuscripts* (1883-84, p. 84). The sum of the duration of reigns from Jayasiṃha, who had at this date ruled for twenty-two years, to Lalitāditya has been given by Sankara P. Pandit on the basis of his computation as 455 years, 7 months and 11 days.² If we, therefore, subtract these years from 1071 Saka i.e., the year 25 of the Laukika era, we get *circa* Saka 615 or 693 A. D., as the date of Lalitāditya’s accession to the throne. He is recorded to have reigned for 36 years, 7 months and 11 days, and thus, according to Kalhaṇa, Lalitāditya’s reign may be fixed between 693 and 730 A. D. A comparison with Chinese chronology, however, throws doubt on the correctness of these dates. The Chinese Annals of the Tang dynasty represent Tchen-t’o-lo-pi-li or Candrāpīḍa, the second predecessor of Muktāpīḍa, as having sent an embassy to the Chinese court in the year 713 A. D. to seek its aid against the Arabs, and as receiving investiture as king from the Emperor of China in 720 A. D., whereas according to Kalhaṇa’s chronology Candrāpīḍa was already dead in 689 A. D. As the Chinese have been more precise in their system of chronology, evidently there must be a mistake of at least 31 years in Kalhaṇa’s calculation, supposing Candrāpīḍa to have died the very year he received the title from China. Hence if we apply the correction of 31 years, Lalitāditya’s date will fall between 724 and 760 A. D., and being his contemporary Yaśovarman must also be assigned to the same period.