Relative dating sequence
The reason it matters, is that inscriptions in India and Central Asia are date for a hundred years in the era that Kanishka founded.Fixing that era would provide a chronological assistance to art and political historians interested in the history of North India and Central Asia..A new piece of evidence, or a radical interpretation of a previous one, which clinches once and for all the date of Kanishka's era.The problem with such a method is that so many convincing arguments have been put forward for so many different dates, that no faith can really be placed in them.Chinese sources to demonstrate 115 AD (Narain, 1990).Comparison with Roman coins for 3rd century (Gobl, 1999). The most recent such attempt is that of Harry Falk, in which he claims to have demonstrated the first year of Kanishka's era was 127AD.So here, I will employ the second method, of attempting a synthesis of the available evidence. Previously the objective was to find a date which was compatible with all the evidence. No date can be proposed which is not incompatible with some of the evidence.
Our solution, it cannot be doubted lies in the first half of the second century.
This may seem illogical, as readers might assume that the second method is superior to the first.
This is not actually true, the first method is the one that has been employed to date numerous other eras (Greek/Yavanna, Azes, Saka, Gupta, Bactrian Letters).
Chart 2, which concentrates on the period 90 AD to 170 AD shows this clearly.
At either end the support for a dating falls away rapidly.
Search for relative dating sequence:
I have then presented this information graphically below.