The Badami rock inscription of Pulakesin I is dated in the Saka year 465. If the same were to be dated in Vikrama Samvat, the year would be

examrobotsa's picture
Q: 102 (IAS/1997)
The Badami rock inscription of Pulakesin I is dated in the Saka year 465. If the same were to be dated in Vikrama Samvat, the year would be

question_subject: 

History

question_exam: 

IAS

stats: 

0,104,163,104,40,62,61

keywords: 

{'badami rock inscription': [0, 1, 0, 0], 'pulakesin': [0, 1, 1, 0], 'vikrama samvat': [0, 1, 0, 0], 'saka year': [0, 1, 0, 0], 'year': [27, 4, 33, 49]}

The Saka Era is a historical calendar era based on the epoch of the traditional Indian calendar. This era starts in 78 A.D. The Vikrama Samvat is another historical calendar era used in the Indian subcontinent. Its epoch, or year zero, is 58 B.C. When converting Saka 465 to Vikrama Samvat, one must add 136 years (58 AD + 78 AD).

Option 1, 601 is the correct answer as when you add 136 years to 465 (Saka year) you get 601, which is a Vikrama Samvat year.

Option 2, 300 is incorrect because it`s 301 less than the correct answer. You cannot get this number by adding or subtracting reasonable numbers to or from Saka 465.

Option 3, 330, is incorrect for the same reason. This option implies deducting 58 years from the Saka year, which is a common mistake.

Option 4, 407, is near but not directly converting Saka year to Vikrama Samvat. It seems like someone subtracted 58 from Saka 465, resulting in a wrong answer.

To sum up, Saka 465 is the same year as Vik

Practice this on app