Erroneous equation of the Samvat era. 81 



vat of Vikramaditya into the Christian era by subtracting 56 instead 

 of 57, thereby inducing a constant error of one year in all dates of 

 chronicles, deeds, and inscriptions so read. "We have taken some trou- 

 ble to trace the origin of this mistake, from curiosity, and it shews how 

 subject we are to rest upon the assertions of others without duly 

 scrutinizing the data on which they may be grounded. 



Vikramaditya died in the Kali yuga year 3044, according to Wil- 

 ford, whose essays in the 9th and 10th vols, of the Asiatic Researches 

 contain the fullest information on the history of the three supposed 

 princes of this name., and of their common rival Salivahana. The 1st 

 Samvat, therefore, concurs with the year 3045 K. Y. ; and to convert the 

 latter into the former, 3044 must be uniformly deducted. This calcula- 

 tion agrees with Warren's Kdla Sankalita, (see prec. Sec, p. 25, and 

 tab. 71,) also with Abul Fazl's statement, that " in the fortieth year of 

 Akber's reign (A. H. 1003, commencing 5th Dec. 1594, and ending 

 25th Nov. 1595, A. D.) there had elapsed 4696 years of the era of 

 Yudhisthira (K ali yuga)," making its commencement, 3 101 B. C. 

 Also 1652 years of the era of Vikramaditya (1652- 1595=57 B. C.) 

 and 1517 years of the era of Salivahana, (1595-1517=78 A. D.) 

 The Bengali Almanacs, published at Nadiyd, give precisely the same 

 agreement*. The Almanac of the Sadar Dewdni, and the statements 

 at the head of all the regulations of Government, coincide therewith : 

 thus, the Samvat year 1877 began on the 15th March, 1820— 57 

 years difference. If further evidence is required of the knowledge of 

 the true era in possession of English authors, we have in Buchanan's 

 Mysore, vol. iii. 112 : — " 3786 years of the Kali yuga had now elapsed, 

 of which the particulars are, 3044 years of Yudhisthira. 



135 years of Vikrama. 

 607 years of Salivahana. 



3786 K. Y., or A. D. 685." 



Here the interval between 3044, whence the Samvat commenced, to 

 the Saca, is 135, or 57+78 years ; (or 135 — 685—607 = 57). 



Again, Dr. Hunter, in his account of the Astronomical labours of 

 Raja Jai Sinh, dates them in " 1750 Samvat, or 1693 A. D.," mak- 

 ing the interval 57 years. 



Sir Wm. Jones, residing in Calcutta, where the Samvat is not used, 



* One Bengali Almanac, however, printed in Calcutta, which was brought to us 

 for comparison, had both the Samvat and the Saca era one year in defect ! the 

 Bengali san being the only era now used in Bengal, little care is taken in regard 

 to the rest. The Kali yuga, the foundation of all, was however correct. 

 C 



