North Indian Inscriptions

THE GUPTA ERA

reasoning and says: “Or, again, without any correction at all, we might translate ‘the king gave this (charter) (at the village of) Gōpta.” “We might easily find its present representative in the modern name of Gōp, which occurs in the case of a village, in Kāṭhiāwāḍ, above seventyfive miles south-west of Mōrbē; twenty-five miles south of Nawānagar or Jāmnagar; and fifty miles east of Dhiniki, where there was found the copper-plate grant of Jāiṅkadēva, …” This argument is, of course, based upon the supposition that Gōptē, and not Gauptē, is the correct reading, and, consequently, deserves no consideration now. It is true that he says that “Dr. R. G. Bhandarkar has stated in 1889 (JBBRAS., Vol. XVII, p. 977) that he found among his papers two impressions by Dr. Burgess which show that the reading of the original is gauptē; and that he asked Dr. Peterson to take charge of these impressions, as Secretary of the Bombay Asiatic Society, and deposit in the Society’s Museum, where they would be available for inspection. I have not been able to obtain them for inspection, either from Dr. Peterson, or from the Museum, But the point is of importance, only as regards the nomenclature of the era.” This is what Fleet says in 1891. Nevertheless, in 1898-99, F. Kielhorn reads it as G[au]ptē dadāv=adō nṛipaḥ. G. Bühler is more emphatic later on, and says: “it cannot be doubted that the true reading in line 17 is gauptē and that the verse . . . really proves the era has been called ‘that of the Gupta’ in A. D. 904 or 905.”

       An earlier reference to the era used by the Guptas is contained in the grants of the Mahārājas Hastin and Saṁkshōbha of the Nṛipati-Parivrājaka family, bearing several dates. One of these, expressed in the Khoh copper-plate inscription¹ of Mahārāja Hastin is tri-shashty-uttarē=bda-śatē Gupta-nṛipa-rājya-bhuktau, etc. This Fleet translates by “in a century of years increased by sixty-three in the enjoyment of sovereignty by the Gupta Kings.” This is vague and dubious, for, in the first place, what is meant by “in a century of years increased by sixty-three ?” Obviously, Fleet means by it “in the hundred and sixty-third year.” If this had been really the case, we should have had the Sanskrit expression tri-shashty-uttarē=bda-śatatamē, instead of . . . śatē. Obviously some such word as gatē or vyatītē has to be understood after śatē, and we have to translate the expression by “when a century of years, increased by sixty-three (had elapsed).” Secondly, Fleet curiously separates tri-shashty-uttarē=bda-śatē from Gupta-nṛipa-rājya-bhuktau. But, as the former clause gives the year 163 (elapsed), the question naturally arises: to what era does the year belong ? And if the clause following contains the word Gupta, the conclusion is irresistible that the date 163 is here intended to be a year of the Gupta era and that Gupta-nṛipa-rājya-bhuktau had better be rendered by “while the enjoyment of sovereignty by the Gupta kings was continuing.” The conclusion is thus natural that the Gupta era, according to the grants of the Mahārājas Hastin and Saṁkshōbha, was the era originated, and not merely adopted, by the Gupta kings. This was certainly the view prevalent as early as the last quarter of the fifth century A.D. when the Guptas were still in power.

       An earlier reference still to the Gupta era is supplied by two inscriptions of this period, both found at Sārnāth. One (No. 34 below) is dated Gupta year 154 and belongs to the reign of Kumāragupta II. The wording of the date is as follows: Varsha-śatē Guptānāṁ sa-chatuḥ-paṁchāśad-uttarē bhūmiṁ / rakshati Kumāraguptē, etc. etc.: “When a century of years, increased by fifty-four, of the Guptas (had passed away), . . . when Kumāragupta was protecting the earth.” The other Sārnāth inscription (No. 36 A and B below) is dated Gupta year 157 and refers itself to the reign of Budhagupta. The actual wording of the date is: Guptānāṁ samatikkrāntē sapta-paṁchāśad-uttarē [ ﺍ*] śatē samānāṁ pṛithivīṁ Budhaguptē praśāsati [ﺍﺍ*] : “when a century of years, increased by fifty-seven, of the Guptas, had passed away, (and) when Budhagupta was ruling the earth . . .” The rulers referred to in these inscriptions as living are Gupta kings and the years also are considered as belonging to the Gupta era. No reasonable doubt
___________________________________________________________________

¹ CII., Vol. III, 1888, No.22.