The Malaw Samvat was also known as
- (a)Kalchuri Samvat
- (b)Krit Samvat
- (c)Saka Samvat
- (d)Gupta Samvat
Correct — B, Krit Samvat. The era now popularly called the 'Vikram Samvat' (reckoned from 57-58 BCE) was NOT called 'Vikrama' in its own early inscriptions — it was first recorded as the Krita (Krit) era, and later as the Malava era, named after the Malava tribe/region of what is now western Madhya Pradesh. The association with a legendary King Vikramaditya of Ujjain, and the name 'Vikrama Samvat', appears only from around the 9th century CE onward. So 'Malava Samvat' and 'Krit Samvat' are two historical names for the very same era.
- (a)Kalchuri Samvat — The Kalachuri (Chedi) era is a separate reckoning, begun c. 248-249 CE and used mainly in Central India by the Kalachuri dynasty — a different starting point and different sponsoring dynasty from the Malava/Krita era.
- (c)Saka Samvat — The Saka era began in 78 CE (today the basis of India's National Calendar) — over a century after the Malava/Krita era began, and named for the Saka rulers, not the Malava region.
- (d)Gupta Samvat — The Gupta era began in 319-320 CE, marking the rise of the Gupta dynasty — centuries later than the Malava/Krita era and unrelated to it in origin.
Ancient and early-medieval India used several regnal/dynastic eras rather than one shared calendar. The era that eventually became the 'Vikram Samvat' (still used in the Hindu calendar today) was recorded in its earliest inscriptions simply as the Krita era, then as the Malava era — after the Malava tribe of the region around present-day western Madhya Pradesh/Rajasthan. Only centuries later did tradition attach it to a legendary King Vikramaditya of Ujjain and rename it 'Vikrama Samvat'.
The trick is recognising that 'Vikram Samvat', 'Krita Samvat', and 'Malava Samvat' are the SAME era at different points in its naming history, not three different eras — the trap is picking a genuinely distinct era (Saka, Gupta, Kalachuri) that only sounds similarly 'ancient'.
- Same era, different names over time: Krita → Malava → Vikrama Samvat
- Reckoned from c. 57-58 BCE; the earliest inscriptions calling it 'Vikrama' date only from the 9th century CE
- Saka era began 78 CE; Gupta era began 319-320 CE; Kalachuri (Chedi) era began c. 248-249 CE — each a separate dynastic reckoning
- Named 'Malava' after the Malava tribe/region of western Madhya Pradesh
Same era, different names across time — Malava/Krita Samvat is what later became known as Vikram Samvat.
- Treating 'Malava Samvat', 'Krita Samvat', and 'Vikram Samvat' as three separate eras — they are the same era at different points in its naming history
- Confusing the Saka era (78 CE, national calendar) with the older Vikrama/Malava era (57-58 BCE)
Usually a direct 'X era is also known as' question, or a match-the-eras-to-start-dates question (UPSC 1995 did this) — memorising the four start dates (Vikrama/Malava 58 BCE, Saka 78 CE, Gupta 320 CE, Kalachuri 248 CE) answers most variants.
Match List I with List II and select the correct answer by using the codes given below the lists: List I (Eras) — I. Vikrama era II. Saka era III. Gupta era IV. Kali era; List II (Reckoned from) — A) 3102 B.C. B) 320 A.D. C) 78 A.D. D) 58 B.C. E) 248 A.D.
- (a) I-B, II-D, III-E, IV-A
- (b) I-A, II-C, III-B, IV-D
- (c) I-D, II-E, III-B, IV-C
- (d) I-D, II-C, III-B, IV-A
Answer(d) I-D, II-C, III-B, IV-A — Vikrama era 58 B.C., Saka era 78 A.D., Gupta era 320 A.D., Kali era 3102 B.C.
Tests the same core fact — matching each ancient Indian era (including Vikrama, i.e. Malava/Krita Samvat) to its correct start date.
- practice — not a real PYQ
The Saka era, used as the basis of India's National Calendar, is reckoned from:
- (a)58 BCE
- (b)78 CE
- (c)320 CE
- (d)248 CE
Answer(b) 78 CE — the Saka era underlies India's National Calendar.
- practice — not a real PYQ
The Gupta era is reckoned to have begun in:
- (a)57 BCE
- (b)78 CE
- (c)319-320 CE
- (d)606 CE
Answer(c) 319-320 CE — marking the rise of the Gupta dynasty under Chandragupta I.