The Spread of the Saka Era in South India
Summary
D.C. Sircar challenges V.V. Mirashi’s claim that the Saka era was absent from South India between Saka years 46 and 465 and reappeared under a hypothetical southern Saka dynasty. Sircar argues that Mirashi misidentifies ‘Mahisa‑visaya’; inscriptions like the Hebbata grant of Kadamba king Vishnuvarman show that Mahisa country was in Mysore, not Hyderabad. He notes that the Jain text ‘Lokavibhaga’, completed in Saka 380 at Kanci, demonstrates that the Saka era was used in South India during the period Mirashi claims it was unused. According to Sircar, Jain scholars from Gujarat and Kathiawad spread the Vikrama and Saka eras to the south, so there is no need to posit a southern Saka ruling family. He criticises Mirashi for basing his theory on conjectural dynasties and misread place names. The note concludes that the Saka era’s presence in the south resulted from cultural diffusion rather than political rule.
AI-generated summary, automatically checked against the article text.
Conclusion
Sircar concludes that inscriptions and the Jain chronicle ‘Lokavibhaga’ prove the Saka era was used in South India between Saka 46 and 465. This evidence refutes Mirashi’s claim of a hiatus and removes the need to assume a southern Saka dynasty. The Saka era spread through Jain influence from Gujarat‑Kathiawad, highlighting the importance of cultural agents in chronological history.