[ 51 ) of all, we find that in 1389 years, which have elapsed since the date, general precession has amounted to 19' 23'7" ; while, had the Súrya-Siddhanta's year been in use throughout, the sun must have been in error by 3° 1530”, thus making the ayanánsa 22° 38' 37" in Saka 1816 last. The amount, however, differs from that observed by 28", - & quantity too large to be neglected. On the other hand, if Gayeśa's length of the year be taken, the error in the sun amounts to 2 9'54", making the ayanánsa actually less by nearly 38? It is remarkable that the length of the year assumed by Bhaskara makes the total 22' 12' 21", nearly the same as is observed.* From the observed ayanánsa and the fact of its commence- ment in Saka 427, the precessional rate becomes 57" 45. This is lower than that obtained by us from the Súrya-Siddhanta's year, but nearly the same as we obtained from S'iromaụi's year, This discrepancy between the rate calculated from Sírya-Sid- dhánta and that found above can be explained by supposing that the Stúrya-Siddhanta's year may not have been in use through. out the large interval of 1389 years, and that the rate of preces- sion is not known so accurately as may be sufficient for the great bength of time. The fact of Varáha's Sürya-Siddhánta giving a slightly shorter year (as shewn by Dr. Thibaut), makes no sensible difference in the result. Be the explanation what it The formula 6024116+ .00011314* is adopted, for calculating the general precession. See Chauvenet's Astronomy. The procession constant appears to be a little too large, As is remarled by the author. A calculation made from Bessel's constant, allowing for its variation, lundor's the general procession nearly 1? less. Digitized by Google
