Vol. VII, No. 11.) The Vikramaditya Samvatsara. 741 
[N.S. | 
Habban ; more likely it was that while Thomas was hesitating 
on account of the difficulty of the road, the offer of Habban 
seemed to him to afford a practicable opening. At all events 
But 
reat 
Western India at the time was Baragaza (Barooch) on the Ba 
of Cambay, and Ba aragaza was at the period under the govern- 
ment of the ‘** Saka ’’ dynasty of Sindh, whose capital was at 
Sagala, which we must from the description in the Periplus 
of the Erythrian sea identify with modern Sukkur on the Indus. 
Sandaruk was plainly then but the Greek merchants’ way of 
pronouncing Sindhu-rajya, which in its turn meant simply the 
kingdom of Sindh. 
45. Here they were received honourably, and the two were 
invited to take part in the festivities attending the marriage 
: the Rajah’s daughter. The two adjoining states of Sindhu 
ushan were at peace, so that this happened before the 
surtabene of the war wherein Salivahan defeated the ‘‘ Indo- 
Skyths *’ in the great battle of Kahror, which gave rise to the 
Sakan Era beginning with 79 A.D. The Rajah afterwards 
assisted Thomas on his way to the court of King Gondophares, 
so that we have good grounds for concluding that Gundobert 
was alive between the years 45 re 60 A.D. We thus obtain a 
sequence of three sovereigns extending from B.C. 79 to A.D. 
55-60, of whom we know that the first lived to extreme old age, 
a case not altogether unexampled. 
46. The evidence of coins has, however, been interpreted 
as indicating another king with the somewhat questionsble 
name of Vasu Deva. Wilson in Ariana Antiqua describes a 
gold coin on which was the first portion a hs similar legend, 
Shaonano-shao, as above interpreted. The r portion was, 
AZ 
the occurrence of a Sanscrit alongside a Getic name need not of 
itself excite any surprise, but in this case this does not seem to 
be the true explanation. Mr. E. Thomas (in the Journal R. A. S., 
vol. ix, 1, 1876) gives an inscription in the Indo-Pali alphabet 
found at othe which he reads :—Mahdraja Ka 
Gushana, Vasu samvardhaka ; and translates :—‘‘ The Maharaja 
Kanes hka, ati of the Dominion of the Gushans.’’ The 
date se is Samvat 18. 
. The first portion of the inscription has been above 
ma that the present may be better interpreted as 
Mahéraja, King A 7k Widener of the Dominion. As in the 
form 
tite and to he a Getic form of Cynise , King), we may read in 
BAZO 4 HO of Cunningham, Pratt for the doubtful 
HanWJN, fe inated VASU (VAR) 4 (A)NA, A where 4 stands for 
