Page:Sewell Dikshit The Indian Calendar (1896) proc.djvu/58

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

42

THE INDIAN CALENDAR.

amânta scheme of months, the Chaitrâdi year is found to be more commonly joined with the pûrṇimânta scheme: but neither scheme can be exclusively connected with either the Kârttikâdi or Chaitrâdi year.

The era was called the "Mâlava" era from about A.D. 450 to 850. The earliest known date containing the word "Vikrama" is Vikrama-samvat 898 (about A.D. 840); but there the era is somewhat vaguely described as "the time called Vikrama"; and it is in a poem composed in the Vikrama year 1050 (about A.D. 992) that we hear for the first time of a king called Vikrama in connection with it. (See Ind. Antiq., XX., p. 404).

At the present day the Vikrama era is sometimes called the "Vikrama-samvat", and sometimes the word "samvat" is used alone as meaning a year of that era. But we have instances in which the word "samvat" (which is obviously an abbreviation of the word samvatsara, or year) is used to denote the years of the Śaka, Siṁha, or Valabhi eras^[1] indiscriminately.

In some native pañchâṅgs from parts of the Madras presidency and Mysore for recent years the current Vikrama dates are given in correspondence with current Śaka dates; for example, the year corresponding to A.D. 1893—94 said to be Śaka 1816, or Vikrama 1951. (See remarks on the Śaka era above.)

The Christian era. This has come into use in India only since the establishment of the English rule. Its years at present are tropical solar commencing with January 1st, and are taken as current years. January corresponds at the present time with parts of the luni-solar amânta months Mârgaśîrsha and Pausha, or Pausha and Mâgha. Before the introduction of the new style, however, in 1752 A.D., it coincided with parts of amânta Pausha and Mâgha, or Mâgha and Phâlguna. The Christian months, as regards their correspondence with luni-solar and solar months, are given in Table II., Part ii.

The Śaka era.—This era is extensively used over the whole of India; and in most parts of Southern India, except in Tinnevelly and part of Malabar, it is used exclusively. In other parts it is used in addition to local eras. In all the Karaṇas, or practical works on astronomy it is used almost exclusively.^[2] Its years are Chaitrâdi for luni-solar, and Meshâdi for solar, reckoning. Its months are pûrṇimânta in the North and amânta in Southern India. Current years are given in some pañchâṅgs, but the expired years are in use in most^[3] parts of India.

The Chedi or Kalachuri era.—This era is not now in use. Prof. F. Kielhorn, examining the dates contained in ten inscriptions of this era from 793 to 934,^[4] has come to the conclusion

↑ See Ind. Ant., vol. XII., pp. 213, 293; XI., p. 242 ff.
↑ I have seen only two examples in which authors of Karaṇas have used any other era along with the Śaka. The author of the Râma-vinoda gives, as the starting-point for calculations, the Akbar year 35 together with the Śaka year 1512 (expired), and the author of the Phattesâhaprakâśa fixes as its starting-point the 48th year of "Phattesâha" coupled with the Śaka year 1626. [S. B D.]
↑ Certain Telugu (luni-solar) and Tamil (solar) pañchâṅgs for the last few years, which I have procured, and which were printed at Madras and are clearly in use in that Presidency, as well as a Canarese pañchâṅg for A.D. 1893, (Śakâ 1816 current, 1815 expired) edited by the Palace Astronomer of H. H. the Mahârâjâ of Mysore, give the current Śaka years. But I strongly doubt whether the authors of these pañchâṅgs are themselves acquainted with the distinction between so-called current and expired years. For instance, there is a pañchâṅg annually prepared by Mr. Aṇṇa Ayyaṅgâr, a resident of Kañjnûr in the Tanjore District, which appears to be in general use in the Tamil country, and in that for the solar Meshâdi year corresponding to 1887—88 he uses the expired Śaka year, calling this 1809, while in those for two other years that I have seen the current Śaka year is used. I have conversed with several Tamil gentlemen at Poona, and learn from them that in their part of India the generality of people are acquainted only with the name of the samvatsara of the 60-year cycle, and give no numerical value to the years. Where the years are numbered, however, the expired year is in general use. I am therefore inclined to believe that the so-called current Śaka years are nowhere in use; and it becomes a question whether the so-called expired Śaka year is really an expired one. [S. B. D.]
↑ Indian Antiquary for August, 1888, vol. XVII., p. 215, and the Academy, of 10th Dec., 1887, p 394 f. I had myself calculated these same inscription-dates in March, 1887, and had, in conjunction with Dr. Fleet, arrived at nearly the same conclusions as Dr. Kielhorn's, but we did not then settle the epoch, believing that the data were not sufficiently reliable (Corpus. Inscrip. Indic., Vol. III., Introd., p 9. [S. B. D.] See also Dr. Kielhorn's Paper read before the Oriental Congress in London. [R. S.]

[1] See Ind. Ant., vol. XII., pp. 213, 293; XI., p. 242 ff.

[2] I have seen only two examples in which authors of Karaṇas have used any other era along with the Śaka. The author of the Râma-vinoda gives, as the starting-point for calculations, the Akbar year 35 together with the Śaka year 1512 (expired), and the author of the Phattesâhaprakâśa fixes as its starting-point the 48th year of "Phattesâha" coupled with the Śaka year 1626. [S. B D.]

[3] Certain Telugu (luni-solar) and Tamil (solar) pañchâṅgs for the last few years, which I have procured, and which were printed at Madras and are clearly in use in that Presidency, as well as a Canarese pañchâṅg for A.D. 1893, (Śakâ 1816 current, 1815 expired) edited by the Palace Astronomer of H. H. the Mahârâjâ of Mysore, give the current Śaka years. But I strongly doubt whether the authors of these pañchâṅgs are themselves acquainted with the distinction between so-called current and expired years. For instance, there is a pañchâṅg annually prepared by Mr. Aṇṇa Ayyaṅgâr, a resident of Kañjnûr in the Tanjore District, which appears to be in general use in the Tamil country, and in that for the solar Meshâdi year corresponding to 1887—88 he uses the expired Śaka year, calling this 1809, while in those for two other years that I have seen the current Śaka year is used. I have conversed with several Tamil gentlemen at Poona, and learn from them that in their part of India the generality of people are acquainted only with the name of the samvatsara of the 60-year cycle, and give no numerical value to the years. Where the years are numbered, however, the expired year is in general use. I am therefore inclined to believe that the so-called current Śaka years are nowhere in use; and it becomes a question whether the so-called expired Śaka year is really an expired one. [S. B. D.]

[4] Indian Antiquary for August, 1888, vol. XVII., p. 215, and the Academy, of 10th Dec., 1887, p 394 f. I had myself calculated these same inscription-dates in March, 1887, and had, in conjunction with Dr. Fleet, arrived at nearly the same conclusions as Dr. Kielhorn's, but we did not then settle the epoch, believing that the data were not sufficiently reliable (Corpus. Inscrip. Indic., Vol. III., Introd., p 9. [S. B. D.] See also Dr. Kielhorn's Paper read before the Oriental Congress in London. [R. S.]

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]