Vol. IX, No. 7.] Laksmanasena. 273 
[N.S.] 
above. Their identity, however, may be established in the 
following way :— 
Asokacalla is associated with the bhiksu Dharmmarak- 
Sita in inscriptions nos. land IV. In both inscriptions Dharm- 
maraksita is styled Kama-raja-guru and consequently it must 
be admitted that the Asokacallas mentioned in these two in- 
scriptions are one and the same personage. Again, the officers 
of the king mentioned in inscription no. III are also men- 
tioned in inscription no. [V; consequently it must be admit- 
ted that the Asokacallas mentioned in inscriptions no. I, III 
and IV are one and the same person. Inscription no. II 
does not give any detail about the king, but he is most pro- 
bably the same as the one mentioned in the remaining inscrip- 
tions. The correct reading of the name of the king seems to 
Th 
Aégokacalla in inscriptions nos. I and III and Aéokavalla in 
nos. II and IV. The former have been neatly and carefully 
full of spelling mistakes. Consequently the spelling in the 
neater inscriptions should be followed. There is practically 
very little difference between va and ca in inscriptions nos. If 
and IV. 
- The most important point in these inscriptions are the 
dates in no. Il and IIf. The use of the word attta in express- 
ing the date is peculiar, and various scholars have translated 
it in various ways. Some twenty years ago Dr. Kielhorn 
Laksmanasena.? He proved beyond doubt that the initial 
year of the Laksmanasena era was equivalent to Saka 1041 
and not Saka 1028. The modern almanacs of Tirhut, on 
which the former theories were based, are not reliable and the 
grant of Sivasimha which has been published by Dr. Grierson 
‘* During the reign of Laksmanasena the years of bis reign 
would be described as Srimal=Laks ee 
1 Ind. Ant., Vol. X, p. 342. = feat 
3 Madoneats $8. r 3 Ind. Ant., Vol. XIX, p. I. 
+ Proc. A.S B. 1895, p. 144, pl. IIL. 
6 Ep. Ind., Vol. V., App. No. 166. 
