other Samvats — Newdr era, %c. 83 



native almanacs or to pandits. Mr. Stirling, in his Account of Orissa, 

 has the right epoch of the Kali yuga ; but he applies a wrong equation 

 ( + 77) to the Saca era of his Orissa rajas. It is possible that this may 

 be the mode of reckoning in that province ; for we find the Saca vary 

 a year or two also in Burmah and Java, if these variations are not 

 indeed attributable to our English references ; for, as we have seen 

 above, they are by no means infallible ! 



The term Samvat does not apply exclusively to the era of Vikra- 

 ma'ditya. Colebrooke first corrected this erroneous supposition in 

 regard to the Samvat of the Gaur inscriptions, which probably com- 

 menced with the Bhupdla dynasty, about 1000 A. D. Colonel Tod has 

 also established the fact of a Balabhi Samvat in Gujerat, dating in 318 

 A. D., and a Siva Singha Samvat, in the same country, coinciding with 

 1113 A. D. This circumstance must be particularly attended to in 

 examining ancient documents. 



Kirkpatrick mentions, that Raghava Deva introduced the Samvat 

 era into Nepal ; adding, that the Newdr era is however generally used 

 there, its origin being unknown. Now in the list of Nepal rajas, from 

 Hara Sinha Deva, A. D. 1323, back to Raghava Deva, there are but 

 three reigns of extravagant lengths, viz. of 88, 85, and 80 years : if 

 these be cut down to the usual average, the date of Raghava will fall 

 about 880, which is the epoch of the Newdr era, so that in all proba- 

 bility the term Samvat in this case merely applied to the latter era, 

 and not to that of Vikrama'ditya. 



It is frequently the custom in eastern authors to estimate dates 

 backwards from the epoch of the writer or compiler. Thus, in the 

 Buddhist chronology of Tibet, translated in M. Csoma's Tibetan 

 Grammar, we find " from the incarnation of Shaky a 2647 years," 

 meaning anterior to A. D. 1686. In these cases, and particularly 

 where time is estimated in cycles, great caution is necessary in fixing 

 the initial date, and it is not improbable that from this source has 

 arisen much of the confusion of Hindu chronology ; as, for instance, 

 from throwing back the origin of the Kdla chakra system, or Jovian 

 cycle of 60 years, which is traced (see page 29) to the year A. D. 965, 

 as far as regards its introduction into India. Individual inaccuracies 

 are hardly to be wondered at where events are yhiefly chronicled 

 from after-recollection. Thus the bard Chand is 100 years out in one 

 place, according to Tod. Ameer Khan's Biography is one year out 

 for a long period, and endless instances of the same inaccuracy might 

 be adduced. The Muhommadans are generally very particular in their 

 dates, and so are the Hindus where they inscribe a deed on brass ; — in 

 c 2 



