9058009421

14 W. K. ANTARKAR

Shri Saslry has diseusscd at grcat lenglh anoihcr topie, which hc calls the Persian Synchronism, which has a grcat bcaring on ancicnl Indian chronology. Thcrcin he sccms to havc provcd almosl conelusivcIy that expressions likc

Pilico or WW or cvcn 3TFł> or 5TT% occurring

ollcn in ancicnt Indian literaturę cannot be identified with Salivahana Saka,

/

but has to be eonstrucd to mcan the Saka Era, starlcd by the Persian King

Cyrus the Grcat, to commcmorale his victory ovcr the Medes, in which he

was grcat!) assisted by the Hindu King with bolh “men and money". This

Era was then adoplcd and used by the Indians also for recording their own

evcnts in history. It was, howcver, wrongly iJentified by the then Oricnlalisls

with the Sali. S., which resullcd in interpreting all Saka reckonings of ShtebW

/ /

etc. in tenns of the Sali. S., thereby posl-daling many evcnts in Indian history by about 628 years. Hc points out lwu or thrcc cascs of this lype as follows :

1) Varahamihira, the grcat aslionomcr, givcs 427 of Swfatf as the year of the composition of his work TJT&SFćT 2N&. This comcs to 123 B.C., if 3i'-ł>4»i<* = 550 B.C. bul to 505 A.D. if 5FF - Sali. Ś. (= 78 A.D.). Similarly, Varaha.*s dealh is said to havc lakcn place in 509 of WTTO, which comcs to 4 | B.C. if 5FK = 550 B.C., but to 587 A.D. if SFFTTć* = Sali. Ś.

Now Bhattotpala, the commcntator of *7^7.2). says al the cud of his commcnlary of Varaha.'s    that the same was wriltcn in 5FE 888, which

comcs to 33 A.D. if 5F7> - 550 B.C., bul to 966 A D. if 5Fł> -Śali.Ś. In the laltcr casc, howcver, the olher parlieulars viz. M of % (of 888) do not taiły, but they taiły with 338 A.D. If now the commentary on Varaha.^łs work was wriltcn in 338 A.D., the work itsclf must have cxistcd prior to il and then Varaha., the aulhor, could not havc wriltcn Tdfo. #.in 505 A.D. or continucd to live up to 587 A.D. This mcans that 3F& must be taken to mean w-wo - 550 B.C. only and not Śali/Ś!

To avoid this conclusion, Shri Sudhakara Dwivcdi allcrs the stanza so

i    i

as lo suit the Sali.S. rcckoning, bul clscwhcre he mentions, though grudgingly the vcry same parlieulars as in the earlicr vcrsion of the stanza.

2) One Bhaskara, son of one Mahadcva and author of a work RkMiIi says that hc was born in 5TH> 1036 or of SFByrfrRWT, that he compiclcd ftł. %. in 1072 and    in 1105. Now, these threc

figures will come to 486 A.D., 522 A.D. and 555 A.D. resp., if = twiw * 550 B.C.j bul lo 1114 A.D., 1150 A.D. and 1183 A.D. respectively, il' STRi a Śali.Ś. Albcruni writing in 1030 A.D. mentions Bhfiskara and says that his    (i.e.,    ) was known in the country in 899 AD.

Weber admits dcarly that hc cannot solvc this riddle and then says that Albc.'s BhSskara must be diilcrcnt Irom the olher BhSskara, bolh sons of Mah8dcva, but firsl the author of 'RdfrTCRT and the sccond (of Albę.) the author of. 43URTR. Hc docs not at all bother to considcr or show even prima