Vol. HI, No. 7.1 Notes on Indian Mathematics. - 485 



IN.S.] 



nd. i, 103), *' three numei^l 



, sfgus, the first of which is clearlj 7; The following two may have 



been 26, as Sir A. Cunningham has read them and has I'epre- 



sented tliem . , . ., biit in the impression thej Mre by no means 



certain. " / ,/ 



(9) There appears to be no direct evidence to sliovv that the 

 Torkhede plates j of S. 735 or A.D. 813 are not reliable. Bdhler 



quoted them, but Dr. Liiders' argument against the authenticity of 

 the Kadaba plates, in which the date is recorded in word symbols 

 (Epigr. Ind. iv.,335, and Ind. Antiq. xii., 18), holds more forcibly in 



the case of the Torkhede plates. The next unsuspicious date, it 

 will be seen, is S. 789 or A.D. 867, and there are no others until the 

 tenth century. These rather wide gaps call for some explanation. 



(10) The figures are marked in Dr. Kielhorn's list as 

 doubtful. 



(11) \A transcript of the Kanheri inscription of S. 775 is 

 given in Ind. Antiq. xiii., p. 134. No plates are given and Dr. 

 Kielhom says the date should be 773. The transcript was made for 

 an eye-copy published by Dr. West, whom we know to be unreliable 

 in the interpretation of figures. '' The forms of the letters are 

 essentially the same as the Samangad copperplate grant of Saka 



675" (q. v.). 



(12) I have found no published plates of the Kalyan 

 Ambarnatli temple inscription of S. 782 and it is omitted from Dr. 

 Kielhorn's lists. We may neglect it as evidence. 



, (13) The Deogadh inscription of S. 784 and V. 919 is one 

 of the examples given by Dr. Fleet, according to whom ** The 

 date, as far as the lithograph can he relied tipon^ is Samvat 



919 Asvayuja-sukla-paksha- chaturdsyam Vfihas- 

 pati-dinenauttara-Bbadi^pada-Nakshatre .... S'aka-Kal-abda- 

 sapta-satanichatur-asity-adhikani, 784n. It answers, by general 

 Cunningham's calculation to Thursday, the 10th September, A.D. 

 862." The symbols (Table I (gr)) are extremely suspicious. 



(14) In the lithograph of the Gwalior inscription of V. 933 

 the figures of the date (Table I (^)), to say the least, are curious 

 although tliH other figures contained in the plate, viz., 270, 187, 

 50 are normal enough, but of the 11th century type; and there 

 are otuer curious points connected with them. Dr. Hultzsch 

 writes: " At the time of this inscription the ruler of Gwalior 



was the par amehara Bhojadeva. Another inscription of a para- 

 mesvara Bhojadeva was discovered by General Cunningham at 



Deogarh (v. ante). Its date Samvat 919 and S'aka 784 led Gene- 

 ral Cunningham to suppose that the date of this Gwalior inscrip- 

 tion, Samvat 933, has to be referred to the Vikrama era. Refer- 

 ring to the date of an inscription at Peheva, Samvat 276 (see 

 below), to the era of S'riharsha, General Cunningham further 

 identified the paramesvara Bhojadeva of the Deogarh inscription 

 and of this Gwalior inscription with . . . , the son of , , . . 

 BAmabhadradeva . . , . Another identification of General Cun- 

 ningham is also uncertain." (Epigr, Ind. L, 155). 



(15) There are two plates of the date S. 789, The 



