48 Pavana-ditam or Wind-Messenger. | March, 1905. 
(2) Crimal-Laksmanasena-devapadam-atita-rajye sam 74 Vaiga- 
kha-vadi 12 Gurau:! 
Literally, these would mean—“ years 51 or 74 expired of 
Laksmanasena’s reign,” 7.e., his regnal years. But may not the 
years really refer to that of a general era which fell in that king’s 
reign? Several such instances are known in Indian epigra- 
phy, e.g.— 
(1) In the Junagarh inscription of Rudradaman— 
. 4—“* Rudradamno varshe dvi-saptatitame 70 2.” 
(2) In the Garhva inscription of Candragupta II— 
1. 1O—* Ciz-Candragupta-rajya samvvatsare 80 8.°” 
(3) Bilsar inscription of Dhruvacarman— 
1. 6—* Cr7-Kumaraguptasy-abhivarddhamana-vijaya- 
rajya-samvatsare shan-navate.’”* 
(4) Garhva inscription of Kumaragupta [— 
1, 2—* Cri-Kumaragupta-rajya-sainvatsare 90 8.” 
(5) Kosam inscription of Bhimavarman— 
l. I—* Maharajasya Cri-Bhimavarmanah samvat 100 
3\0) 9), © 
(6) Halsi plates of Kakusthavarman— 
1, 4—* Sva-vaijayike acititame samvatsare,”’ 7 
In (1) the year is referred to Vaka era and in (2) to (5) 
_the years to Gupta era ; they are not considered to be regnal years. 
More facts are needed to arrive at a reliable conclusion. On 
: the existing data the safest theory at present 
sie eee ees is to take the first year of eae ee the 
year. first year of the dynastic founder, and to 
believe that on the accession of Laksmanasena, the era was. 
either formally adopted or made so widely prevalent that the era 
came to be known as Laksmanasena’s. This theory meets the 
objections above raised on the ground of length of years or the 
dates of compilation of the Dana-sa@gara and the Adbhuta-sagara. 
It also helps to explain the following additional facts :— 
In the Deopara inscription, v. 20, Vijayasena is described to 
have assailed the lord of Gauda, to have put down the prince of 
Kamartipa and defeated the Kalinga. In the succeeding verse, 21, 
Ind. Ant. X, p. 346. 
Ep. Ind., VIII., p. 41 and note 6. 
Fleet’s Gupta Inécriptions, p. 37. 
” ” > p. 43. 
” ” 2) 
I 
2 
3 
4 
5 5 
Gas ok 3 “ p. 267. 
1 Jnd. Ant. VI, p. 23. 
