8 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. [N.S., XVII, 
There are, however, two inscriptions of a king Asoka- 
calladeva-of Gaya which have been relied upon to prove that 
brief summary of these inscriptions together with all 
the relevant points has been given by Mr Banerji in his paper 
(i) Srimal-Lakhvanasenasy = atita-rajye sam 51 . 
(ii) Srimal-Laksmanasena-deva-padanam-alita-rajye-san 74. 
Vaisakha vadi 12 Gurau. 
D 
prefixed to the word rajye, that although the years were still 
counted from the commencement of the reign of Laksmanasena, 
that reign itself was a thing of the past.? This theory was 
ultimately abandoned by Dr. Kielhorn,? but has been re-stated 
by Mr. Banerji* and upheld by other scholars.$ 
Before we discuss the true significance of the expression 
atita-rajye we shall point out the yee irreconcilable 
ed. 
year of the Laksmanasena era, that Bodh-Gaya and its adja- 
cent parts were in the possession of the Sena kings. This is 
indicated by the use of the era of Laksmanasena which could 
not have been used by a king of a distant country like 
belonged to Govindapala, but it had ceased to do so in the 
ro ign. So one ean immediately infer that 
Gaya and its adjacent parts were wrested from Govindapila 
s 
. it. continued in the possession of the*Sena kings of Bengal.’’s 
ust be remembered in the first place, that the express- 
ion denoting dates in the two Bodh-Gaya inscriptions is 
exaetly similar to a series of expressions denoting dates with 
! Ep. Ind. XII, p. 27 ff. Mr. Banerji’s text has < rajya-sain’ in bot 
t he records and the date as 72 in the last. ( Op. cit., p. 272). Evidently 
hese are due to oversight. is 
2 Op. cit, P, 2, note 3. 
: Synchroniatic List jor Northern India, Ep. Ind. Vol. VIII. 
‘Pp. crt. 
5 Mr. ‘S.°Kumar in Ind. Ant., 1913, Pp. 185; Dr. Hoernle in a private 
letter to Mr, Banerji ( Banglar Itihasa, p. 304), 
5 Op*ecit, p. 280. 
