18G1-] 
15 
The Inscriptions of Erikaina. 
on the fourteenth of As'hadha, in the year one hundred and sixty- 
five, in the reign of Budhagupta, in Surashtra, comprehending the 
country between a river whose name, though partially erased, may 
he easily made out as the Kalindi, or Jamna, and the Narmada, or 
Nerbudda.” 
As the inscription relating to the temple was formerly interpreted, 
it dates during the reign of “ Tarapani,” and yet “ before his time.” 
Still, as Mr. Thomas justly observes, — though not with reference to 
this incongruity, — Mr. Prinsep “ was clearly disposed to infer that 
the temple w^s built prior to the erection of the pilllar and the 
supposition is borne out by the extract cited above. With several 
other of his positions, it must now give place to deductions built 
upon privileges of investigation which were denied to my prede- 
cessors. For instance, Dhanyavishnu is not called “ minister 
“ Vaidalavishnu” is the offspring of an erroneous reading, and so a 
present to history which may as well be returned ; there is no 
mention of “ Surashtra” in either inscription ; and Tarapani” is 
undoubtedly a misdecipherment for ‘ Toramana.” This last fact, if 
my memory does not fail me, was detected by Mr. Thomas. But 
what is by far most important of all, the date of the more ancient 
inscriptionf was unravelled amiss as to the numerical day of the 
vishnu.’ The inadvertence escaped the editorial eye of Mr. Thomas. See his 
valuable publication entitled “ Prinsep’s Indian Antiquities,” &c., Yol. I., 
p. 248. 
* Ibid., Vol. I., p. 340. 
+ Since writing this paper, I have had time, before sending it to the press, 
to refer, for a solution of the date in question, to my friend Bapu Reva S'astrin, 
Professor of Mathematics in the Benares College. He apprizes me, in reply, 
that it conforms to the era of Vikramaditya, and does not conform to that of 
S'alivahana. It is, therefore, all but demonstrably certain that Budhagupta 
was reigning on Thursday, the seventh of June, in the year of our Lord one 
hundred and eight, new style. Toramana must have flourished shortly aftor 
him ; with something of likelihood, indeed, as his next successor. To Budha- 
gupta’s registration, relatively to the other Guptas, we have not the smallest 
trustworthy clue. As for chronologic adjustments grounded on comparison of 
the letters on old Hindu coins, they cannot, I maintain, bo other than exceedingly 
insecure. In order to pronounce with assurance on the time of any of the 
Guptas but Budha, we must pause for fresh facts. 
