1894.] V. A. Smith — History and Coinage of the Gupta Period. 195 
The best solution of the problem yet offered seems to me to be 
Cunningham’s alternative guess that the date is expressed in a special 
White Hun Era. “ The only remarkable date in the history of the 
White Huns which I can suggest is the final expulsion of the Sassanians 
from the countries to the north of the Oxus by Chu-Khan in A.D. 456 
or 457. If the year 52 be reckoned from this point, we get A.D. 508 or 
509 for the establishment of Toramana’s rule in Malwa.” T 
I think it is tolerably clear that an era otherwise unknown is used 
on these coins, and it may be provisionally named the White Hun Era. 
The limiting dates for Toramana appear to be fixed with tolerable 
precision, l^ana Varman has been provisionally dated by Dr. Hoernle 
in A. D. 564. This date must apparently be moved back. If the 
Hun Era is taken as A. D. 456, then I^ana Yarman’s date (456 + 54) 
is A. D. 510. If the Hun Era is taken as A.D. 448, ^ana Yarman’s 
date will be A. D. 502. The subject requires further discussion, which 
I cannot at present undertake. 
Dr. Hoey’s third coin resembles the Gupta coins in having the 
king’s head turned to the right, and in being evidently dated in the 
Gupta Era. 
No. 3. (PI. VI, fig. 15). Obv. Head to right; execution coarse, 
and in high relief. Date in three characters, of peculiar 
form which may perhaps be read as 166. The date of 
Budha Gupta’s coin is 174 of the Gupta Era. 
Rev. Eantail peacock device. The legend, which is difficult to 
read, seems to begin with f%f5f viji —, and to end with 
the name Qrl Harikanta. 
Section III. Coppee Coinage of Tobamana. 
The arrangement of the copper coins of Toramana presents many 
difficulties, which I am not yet in a position to solve. Some of the coins 
bearing the name of Toramana (or at least its first syllable, or first two 
syllables) may belong to a king of Ka^mir of perhaps later date than 
the White Hun chief. The exact date of this Toramana of Ka^mir is 
not known. In Coins of Mediaeval India (p. 39J), he is dated A.D. 520 
and made to be contemporary with the White Hun chief. 
Cunningham’s remarks on the subject of the two Toramanas are as 
follows: — 
“ With regard to the supposed identity of the Toramanas of Eran 
and Gwalior \_scil. the White Hun chief] with the Toramana of Ka$- 
mlr, which was originally advocated by Rajendralal and Bhau DajI, 
1 Trans., p. 228. See post, p. 208, M. Drouin dates the Hun Era from A. D. 448. 
