XXIX THE DATE OF KANISHKA BY J. H. MARSHALL, C.I.E., LITT.D., F.S.A. T N the discussion on the date of Kanishka which took place last year much prominence was given to the so-called Vikrama era of 58 B.C., and arguments were put forward by those who favoured an early date for Kanishka to prove, not only that this era was founded by him, but that all the recorded dates of the Saka, Pahlava, and Kushan rulers of Northern India are referable to it. Some discoveries which I have recently made at Taxila throw, I think, fresh light on this question, and, though they do not settle precisely the date of Kanishka, appear to prove that he was not at any rate the founder of the era of 58 B.C. and could not have come to the throne until the close of the first century A.D. or later. One of these discoveries I made in a small chapel immediately west of the so-called " Chir" stupa. The chapel in question is built in a small diaper type of masonry, which came into vogue at Taxila about the middle of the first century A.D. and lasted for about a hundred years. Its entrance faces the main stupa, and near the back wall opposite this entrance, and about a foot below the floor, I found a deposit consisting of a steatite vessel with a silver vase inside, and in the vase an inscribed scroll and a small gold casket containing some minute bone relics. A heavy stone placed over the deposit had, unfortunately, been crushed down by the fall of the roof and had broken both the steatite vessel and the silver vase, but had left the gold casket uninjured and chipped only a few fragments from the edge of the scroll, nearly all of which I was, happily, able to recover Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. INSEAD, on 06 Mar 2018 at 11:08:26, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0035869X00047444 974 THE DATE OF KANISHKA Taxila inscription of the year 136 ft- -f^ <*- JV- §^ ? > c ^ ^ ^ Jr ^ c~- ^ cA. A. <^ JV- V V A- * - 5; " r * - Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. INSEAD, on 06 Mar 2018 at 11:08:26, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0035869X00047444 THE DATE OF KANISHKA 975 by carefully sifting and washing the earth in the vicinity. The cleaning and transcription of the record was a matter of exceptional difficulty, as the scroll, which is only 6| inches long by If inches wide and of very thin metal, had been rolled up tightly, face inwards, in order that it might be enclosed in the silver vase ; moreover, the metal of which it is composed is silver alloyed with a small percentage of copper, which had formed an efflorescence on the surface of the extremely brittle band, with the result that I could neither unroll it without breaking it nor subject it to the usual chemical treatment. By the use of strong acid, however, applied with a zinc pencil, I was able to remove the copper efflorescence and expose, one by one, the punctured dots of the lettering on the back of the scroll, and then, having transcribed these with the aid of a mirror, to break off a section of the scroll and so continue the process of cleaning and transcription. In this way I succeeded in making a complete copy of the record from the back of the scroll, while the letters were yet intact. Afterwards I cleaned in like manner and copied the face of each of the broken sections, and was gratified to find that my second transcript was in accurate agreement with the first. I mention these details in order to explain why it is impracticable to present a purely mechanical reproduction of the record, and why the transcript given below, which was made section by section and necessarily without any reference to the meaning of the record, may be regarded as trustworthy. My reading of this inscription is as follows :•— Text Line 1. Sa 100.20.10.4.1.1 Ayasa Ashadasa masasa divase 10.4.1 isa divase pradistavita Bhagavato dhatuo Dhurasa(?)- 1. 2. kena Dhitaphria-putrana Bahaliena Noachae nagare vastavena tena ime pradistavita Bhagavato dhatuo dhamara- JRAS. 1914. 63 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. INSEAD, on 06 Mar 2018 at 11:08:26, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0035869X00047444 976 THE DATE OF KANISHKA 1. 3. ie Tachhasie Tanuae Bodhisatvagahami maha- rajasa rajatirajasa devaputrasa Khushanasa arogadachhinae ]. 4. sarva-budhana puyae prachaga-budhana puyae arahana puyae sarvasa(tva)na puyae mata-pitu puyae mitra-macha-fiati-sa- 1. 5. dhihona puyae atmano arogadachhinae nianae hotu a . de sa ma parichago Translation In the year 136 of Azes, on the 15th day of the month of Ashadha —on this day relics of the Holy One (Buddha) were enshrined by Dhurasakes (?), son of Dhitaphria, a Bactrian, resident at the town of Noacha. By him these relics of the Holy One were enshrined in the Bodhisattva chapel at Tanua (?) in Takha^ila of the religious realm, for the bestowal of perfect health upon the great king, king of kings, the divine Khushana; for the veneration of all Buddhas; for the veneration of individual Buddhas ; for the veneration of the Saints; for the veneration of all sentient beings ; for the veneration of (his) parents; for the veneration of (his) friends, advisers, kinsmen, and associates; for the bestowal of perfect health upon himself. May this gift be ... For Dhitaphria-putrana Mr. D. R. Bhandarkar suggests the reading dliitastria-putrana, which, in combination with bahaliena, he would translate " accompanied by his daughters, wife and sons ". For the meaning of Bahaliena (= " a man from Balkh") I am indebted to Professor Rapson and Professor Konow. To Mr. Bhandarkar I am also indebted for the suggestion that dhamaraia = Skt. dharmarajya. The absence of any royal titles attached to the name of Azes is exceptional, but will hardly occasion surprise when it is borne in mind that his era had been in use for more than a century, and that his dynasty had been Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. INSEAD, on 06 Mar 2018 at 11:08:26, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0035869X00047444 THE DATE OF KANISHKA 977 supplanted by that of the Kushans. When did this era of Azes commence ? That it is one and the same as the era in which the Gondophernes and Panjtar records are dated will, I think, be admitted by everyone, and I shall not therefore pause to discuss the point. If, then, Dr. Fleet is correct in referring the dates of the latter records to the era of 58 B.C., it follows that it was Azes I and not Kanishka who founded that era. That Azes I came to the throne about that date is now, indeed, attested by the evidence of coins and other antiquities at Taxila, which indicate that he was reigning in the third quarter of the first century B.C., while the probability that he may have founded an era is also suggested by the abundance of his coins, which denote his pre-eminence among the Saka-Pahlava sovereigns. Notwithstanding, however, the very strong reasons which Dr. Fleet has adduced for referring the dates in the Gondophernes and Panjtar records to the era of 58 B.C., the identity of the era of Azes and the Vikrama era can hardly be regarded as fully established, and, to my mind, it is quite possible that the era of Azes will be found to have commenced a few years earlier or later than 58 B.C. Assuming that it started actually in that year, the date given in the new inscription will fall in the year A.D. 79; and the next important point is to determine which of the Kushan kings is referred to as reigning in that year. That he is identical with the nameless Kushan ruler mentioned in the Panjtar record of fourteen years earlier is probable; and here, again, I think Dr. Fleet may be correct in identifying the latter with Vima-Kadphises. On the other hand, it is also possible that Kujula-Kadphises may be meant. The monogram on the scroll is characteristic of coins of Vima- Kadphises, but it is also found on coins of his predecessor.1 1 Cf. Vincent Smith, Catalogue of Coins in the Indian Museum, p. 67, Nos. 17, 22, 24. Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. INSEAD, on 06 Mar 2018 at 11:08:26, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0035869X00047444 978 THE DATE OF KANISHKA Again, the title maharajasa rajatirajasa also suggests Vima-Kadphises ; indeed.it was stated by several speakers during the discussion on the date of Kanishka that Kujula-Kadphises was only a petty local chief (yavuga = jabgou), never " a king of kings ", like his successor. But this assertion is erroneous. On some of his coins Kujula- Kadphises styles himself maharaja rajadirajasa,1 and, according to Cunningham, devaputrasa also.2 That lie ruled, moreover, at Taxila, and consequently over the north-west of the Punjab and Frontier generally, is abundantly clear from his coins, which are found there in larger numbers than those of any other kings except Azes I and Azes II.3 Other considerations, too, favour the identification with Kujula- rather than Vima- Kadphises.