07-03-2008, 05:53 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-Bodhi+Jul 3 2008, 05:39 PM-->QUOTE(Bodhi @ Jul 3 2008, 05:39 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Ashok Kumar+Jul 3 2008, 05:37 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ashok Kumar @ Jul 3 2008, 05:37 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->May be the question you are trying to ask is this:
"On what basis do the hindu panchanga makers believe that the Vikrami era started 2065 years ago"?
[right][snapback]83739[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Generally that is one way of looking at it Ashok Ji. Not just Hindu pa~nchAnga makers, but also historians...there seems to be a very firm agreement.
[right][snapback]83740[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Although historians accept the Vikrami era as starting 2065 years ago, they don't agree with its association with king Vikramaditya. Present historians associate Vikramaditya with Chandragupta-II of Gupta empire and they date the end of his rein to 413 AD.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gupta_Empire
In fact Vikrami era is another instance where the historians don't give any regard to traditional hindu dates, and put much more faith in "Indologists'" dating. Early colonial Indologists came up with many such dates on rather flimsy bases, but the dating has survived due to their followers repeating them ad nauseum.
To recap: Current historians accept Vikrami era ONLY as a time-keeping artifice. They don't assign ANY historical value to it.
"On what basis do the hindu panchanga makers believe that the Vikrami era started 2065 years ago"?
[right][snapback]83739[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Generally that is one way of looking at it Ashok Ji. Not just Hindu pa~nchAnga makers, but also historians...there seems to be a very firm agreement.
[right][snapback]83740[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Although historians accept the Vikrami era as starting 2065 years ago, they don't agree with its association with king Vikramaditya. Present historians associate Vikramaditya with Chandragupta-II of Gupta empire and they date the end of his rein to 413 AD.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gupta_Empire
In fact Vikrami era is another instance where the historians don't give any regard to traditional hindu dates, and put much more faith in "Indologists'" dating. Early colonial Indologists came up with many such dates on rather flimsy bases, but the dating has survived due to their followers repeating them ad nauseum.
To recap: Current historians accept Vikrami era ONLY as a time-keeping artifice. They don't assign ANY historical value to it.