2 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. [N.S., XVII, 
bered that some of the most important inscriptions were 
unknown to him. Thus the Uddandapura inscription of Naraya- 
napala! shows that the king ruled for at least 54 years, and 
this alone is liable to upset the chronological scheme put forward 
by him. But, even apart from this, his views are liable to 
serious objections. According to his scheme the first three 
kings ruled from 735 to 892 A.D., i.e. for a period of more 
working hypothesis, unless very strong evidence is forthcoming 
in support of it. Dr. V. A. Smith rejected the Puranic state- 
contention of Dr. Smith, made as late as 1914, that the main 
outline of the Pala chronology has been firmly laid by him 
es 
period of Gopala II. This shows that his proposed dates for 
— and Devapala require to be considerably pushed 
ack, 
_ As regards Mr. Banerji’s theory, it is impossible to recon- 
cile its different parts with one another. Thus he holds that 
7 Lee 
(2bid., p. eee must therefore have ascended the throne 
\. ear i i i 
or at least 13 
