82 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. [March, 1908. 
be no objection against naming i a se agetabaci Kaniska 
II, Vasudeva IT and Vasu (deva) I Kaniska II seems to have 
been the direct successor of Va aes I. In my ites on the 
‘‘Scythian Period of Indian History ” (Indian Antiquary,1908, p.25) 
I have tried to show that the 26th year of the reign of Gondo- 
phernes or Guduphara falls on the 103rd year of the Saka era and 
that the North-Western Provinces of the Kughan empire must have 
been acquired by Gondophernes in the earlier part of the reign of 
Vasudeva I. The reigns of the Parthian conqueror and his suc- 
cessors must have been very short because in the Panjtar i cage 
tion, the date of which must be reckoned according to the 
era, we find a Kushan king still ruling over the provinces to ithe 
west of the Indus. The reigns of Abdagases and Or rthagnes 
must have been completed before the gaia year 122, z.e., 200 
A.D., the 4 of the Panjtar inscription. 
u from the execution of the coins Mr. V. A. Smith 
has nines: Kaniska II and Vasudeva II in the hi century * 
A.D., while he places Vasu or Vasudeva Aas 200 A.D.§ <Ac- 
cording to his Lankika era theory Vasu becomes to some extent 
a contemporary of Vasudeva I. But I find that ; Cunningham has 
described some coins of Vasu which bear on their obverse the 
full Greek legend of re coins of Kaniska I] * (PAONANO 
PAOKANHPKO KOPANO). 
The probability is then in favour of the fact that Vasu for 
ome time acknowledged the suzerainty of Kaniska IJ. Conse- 
Vasudeva I lived a year longer, we find that the date of the acces- 
sion of his successor Kaniska II falls in the year 178 A.D. At this 
time serious disturbances must have been going on in the Kushan 
kingdom, because three years later we find the Parthian king i - 
complete possession of the fair province of Gandhara. Itis qui 
certain that Gandhara was included in the Kushan empire pan 
the earlier years of the reign of Vasudeva [, because some of his 
coins were found in the square stipas at Ali Masjid. Vasu- 

he Panjtar es has been partially edited , Cunningham with 
a arawing in the Reports of the Archzological Survey, » V,p. 14. 
talogue of the ply in the Indian Museum, Vol. — “87. 
3 oe id. 
4 Numismatic aoa 1893, p. 118-19, pl. VIII, Nos. 5-8. I have been 
obliged to accept Canningham’s readings of the Greek legends on the obverse 
of these coins, becaus rage <i are no coins of ka IT issued by Vasu in 
the Joint Cabinet. The coins of Vasu in the Joint Cabinet 00 seem to be late er than 
not very bad, but I have not been able to make ont the complete nd. I 
have relied on Cunningham, because I find e dis- 
tinction between Kaniska II and Vasudeva II among the later great Kughans. 
The validity of the assertion that Vasu was a subordinate prince under 
Kaniska II depends entirely upon the pasate of Cunningham’s readings. 
