2 
H. Beveridge —The Era of Lachhman Sen. [No. 1, 
14 th February 1556, old style. He made liis Tarikh Ilahi begin with the 
first year of his reign, but he took for its commencement the period of 
the vernal equinox or the time when the sun enters. This Aries 
was the Nauroz of the Persians and the first day of their month of 
Farwardin. This Nauroz began on 10th March, old style, or 21st March, 
new style, and so the Divine Era began on 21st March 1556. But though 
it was made to begin then, the era was not invented or at least not 
promulgated till 992 A. H., corresponding to 1584 A. D. In that year 
a farman or edict was issued by Akbar. This farman was probably 
drafted by the eminent astronomer and philosopher, called Mir Fath 
’Ali of Shiraz, for it was he who corrected the Tables of Ulagh Beg 
for the purpose of the new era. The farman is given at pp. 10-13 of 
Yol. II of the Akbarnama, Ed. Bibliotheca Indica. In it the other eras in 
use in the world are referred to, and at p. 12, 7 lines from top, we have 
the important words ^ ^ 
“ In the country of Bang (Bengal) dates are calculated from the 
beginning of the reign of Lachhman Sen. From that period till now 
there have been 465 years.” 
Then the farman goes on to mention the Salivahan and Vikrama- 
ditya eras, and states that 1506 years of the Salivahan, and 1641 of the 
Vikramaditya era have elapsed. If we deduct these periods, we get 
1584—465 = 1119 A. D. for the beginning of the Lachhman Sen era, 
1584—1506 = 78 A. D. for the beginning of the Salivahan era, and 
1584—1641 = — 57, i. e ., 57 B. C. for the beginning of the Vikrama¬ 
ditya era. These two last dates are right according to clironologists, so 
that we may place reliance on the Lachhman Sen one. But if Abu-1-Fazl 
is right, and it is likely that he is right, for the date is given in a solemn 
public document and at a time when the Lachhman Sen era was in 
use, Dr. Mitra and the almanac-makers of Tirhut are wrong about the 
beginning of the era ; and General Cunningham is wrong both about 
the date and the event commemorated by the era. 
According to Abu-1-Fazl the era began in 1119 A. D., i. e., about 
twelve years after the date given by the Tirhut almanac-makers. 
Possibly Abu-1-Fazl is wrong, and possibly too there is a misprint* in 
the Bibliotheca Indica edition, but there is a circumstance which seems 
to me to corroborate Abu-l-Fazl. This is that the Tabaqat-i-Nasiri says 
that Lachhman had been on the throne for eighty years, when he was 
expelled by Bakhtiyar Khilji (Raverty’s translation of the Tabaqat-i- 
Nasiri, p. 554). 
# Major Price’s MS., however, must have given also the figures 465. 
