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 Hyderabadfile:///home/oai/share/iq_articles/saka_era_south_india.pdf#:~:text=Now%2C%2010%20locating%20the%20Mahisa,our%20knowledge%20of%20%E0%A4%98%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%9F%20subject. 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 unusedfile:///home/oai/share/iq_articles/saka_era_south_india.pdf#:~:text=Professor%20Mirashi%20has%20not%20been,Saka%20years%2046%20and%20465. 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 familyfile:///home/oai/share/iq_articles/saka_era_south_india.pdf#:~:text=But%20it%20cercainly%20supports%20the,D. 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.