Talk:Satavahana dynasty

Andhra Satavahanas

Satavahanas were referred to as Andhra Satavahanas in ancient literature. It would be appropriate to have a separate section: "Andhra Satavahana Dynasty".

I was under the impression that Andhra and Satavahana's are synonymous that is why I suggested that the Andhra dynasty section be merged with the Satavahana section. If there are anymore names it is known by we can redirect them to this page. IF the Andhra Satavahana Dynasty is a seperate entity and not just a different then ok make a new section and merge the Andhra dynasty with that section. I am leaving this for those who know more than me to clarify and do, if there is something technical holding anyone back on how to do this please ask I will help with that but lets get this sorted out.

--Tigeroo 07:06, 26 July 2006 (UTC) Reply: It is not a serious issue because both are almost synonymous.

Connecting Sahatavahanas to Marathas

It is gross misrepresentation of history to call the Shatavahanas as "a Maratha clan". The concept of Maratha is a recent one arising with the popularity of Marathi language after 14th centuary AD. Calling Shatavahanas as "a maratha clan" is an ignorant misrepresentation of history. I have heard some unsubstantiated theroies that even lord Krishna was a Maratha which I think is "frivolous" at best. Please provide historical evidence from a "non Marathi Historians" of repute to justify this claim or rest is peace. Decendents of the Shatavahanas probably became Kadambas of North Karnataka, Chutus of Maharashtra, Ikshavakus of A.P. Their decendents went on to be called Chalukyas of deccan, Rashtrakutas of Deccan etc. Eventually we see the rise of Marathas after 17th centuary.

Dinesh Kannambadi

Your have mentioned: I have heard some unsubstantiated theroies that even lord Krishna was a Maratha which I think is "frivolous" at best. Now I want to propose that Lord Krishna was an Andhra instead. Bhagavatham says that Lord Krishna was the leader of Andhaka, Vrishni, Bhoja and Satwata clans. Andhra was was equated with Andhaka by Budhist literature. To the third counsel which was held during the reign of Ashoka under the guidance of Mogalliputta Tissa Thera, delegates of as many as six sects from Andhra i.e. Chaityaka, Purvasaila, Aparasila, Uttarsila, Rajagirika, Siddarthika all described as Andhakas participated. It may be surmised that after Lord Krishnas death, Andhaka\Andhras loitered around Dwaraka and Saurashtra for a fairly long time and by the time of Mauryan rule they were found to have spread to Maharashtra and Deccan.They must have ruled these areas as feudatories of the Mauryans. That is why they were called Andhra Bhrityas (i.e Andhra Servants of Mauryas).

Asokan edict says "Here in the king's domain among the Yavanas (Greeks), the Kambojas, the Nabhakas, the Nabhapamkits, the Bhojas, the Pitinikas, the Andhras and the Palidas, everywhere people are following Beloved-of-the-Gods' instructions in Dhamma." Rock Edict Nb13 (S. Dhammika). Note the Bhojas and Andhras here.

Kharavela's Hathigumpha inscriptions puts Satavahanas to the west of Orissa not to the south of it.

Aitareya Brahmana says that Andhras were an Aryan tribe who fell out with other Aryans (Viswamaithra's curse). This rivalry was reflected in capturing of power from the last Brahmanical king of Magadha by Simuka. Ambedkar says that Manu Smriti was compiled during Sunga usurpers' rule. In contrast Andhras follow Apastamba Smriti. All this shows that Andhras split from their northern brothern during Maha Bharata period and later during the heyday of Budhism. This rivalry seems to be the reason behind the distortion of Hindu puranic and other texts. And lastly Lord Krishna who is of dark complexion is reckoned to be a non-aryan. If he is indeed an Andhra/Andhaka, then the Telugu people can claim to have produced a long line of warrior clans. First they fought Adharma of Kauravas under Krishna's leadership. Later they opposed the Brahmanical tyranny under Andhra Satavahanas. During mediaevel period they fought the foreign invaders under the Vijayanagara Empire particularly under the able generalship of Krishna Deva Raya. So the hijacking of Andhra glory should henceforth stop. Prasad

Tribes, Clans, Rulers all this been in India for Centuries

Why there is resistance to acknowledge earlier Maharashtrian Kingdoms, prior to 16 th century Maratha Empire.

Fact remains Maratha land has produced best of local warriors (Satavahanas, Rashtrakutas, Yadava, Marathas) in India who challeged forign rule time to time.

Terms Maharatta and Maharatti may have come from common orgin Maharashtri, some time during 9-10th century, but these ruling / warrior families (now referred as Clans) were present even before that.

Interestingly Warriors from Maharashtra did not observed Caste System. All the tribal warriors fought together or idependentely. Caste system entered maharashtra with northern migrants. Even in Shivaji's army Mahars and Marathas have own battles togehter.

Clan's are in place for centuries, superiorities of casts is later introduced(during 8-9th century) by forigners

Parochialism

This is pure parochialism. Do not change the early versions incorporating your pet theories.

Did you check the reference to Iravatham Mahadevan's discussion and direct translation?

Excuse me...Did you check the reference I gave.. I did not do it without a basis. I have given the exact reference. Please do not act immaturely. I have done this by giving my name and email address so anybody having a dispute could contact me. May I know who you are? I feel you should at least have signed your comments accusing me of Parochialism with your name and contact. Do you need an image of the reference faxed? Please tell me: Do you have any proof for what you were asserting earlier to my change: that it is Telugu? Please cite proof form some scholarly source.

I do not wish to engage in childish internet fights. If you wish to have your misinformation you are very welcome to have it. Anybody truthful is not going to respect it.

Periannan Chandrasekaran perichandra@yahoo.com

Pure parochialism

The only historical controversy is whether Satavahanas were of Andhra or Mahrashtra origin? Satavahanas were Brahmins of Aryan descent. One wonders how they became Dravidian Tamils? May be, in your imagination!!!

Satavahanas are from Maharashtra

Satavahanas are supposed to be aryans mixed with local natives of sahyadri forming capital at Junnar near Pune.

Marathi_language was offical language of Satavahana kings.

Satavahanas from Maharashtra is just speculation

Dear unknown,

What is the basis for your story.If so what were they doing in Madhya Pradesh,Andhra Pradesh and Vidharba regions instead of ruling in the actual heartland of Maharastra.And the whole so called Aryan theory has been laughed at by recent historians.

--Fort5000 16:27, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Satavahanas were not the first native indian rulers to issue coins

"They were thought to be the first native Indian rulers to issue their own coins with portraits of their rulers, starting with king Vashishtiputra Shri Pulumavi (r. 130-158 CE), a practice derived from that of the Indo-Greek kings to the northwest."

I have tried to rectify this mistake, but it is repeatedly re-edited. Please find latest information on this at http://www.hinduonnet.com/2007/01/28/stories/2007012800201800.htm (which I had added on when I initially edited.)

Also, "Arahanaku Vahitti makanaku Tiru Hatakaniko." legend on the reverse of the coin is not Prakrit. What is the difference between "Prakrit" and "Prakrit Brahmi" legend, as user PHG is insisting below the coin pictures? The legend on the front is in Prakrit Brahmi, and reverse legend is in Tamil Brahmi. Which means, there were different languages using the same Brahmi-type letters. See http://www.hindu.com/2004/05/26/stories/2004052602871200.htm for some details. The language "Arahanaku Vahitti makanaku Tiru Hatakaniko" is clearly Tamil. Thanks.

Chauvanism

This is an example of Tamil chauvanism which tries to paint Tamils/Tamil language as the most ancient not only in India but also the whole world. The coin looks like a Roman coin. Unless it is proved to be of native origin one cannot agree to the statement. During Satavahana times Proto-Dravidian which gave rise to Telugu was prevalent in the region. Proto-Dravidian language also gave rise to Tamil. Prevalence of some common words is logical. That does not mean it was Tamil language written on Satavahana coins. The repeated 'Tamilization' of the coin smacks of pure fanaticism.

There is no chauvinism here

Telugu was already prevalent as a separate language from Proto Dravidian at Satavahana times. So, the legend on the reverse side of the coin in question is either in Tamil or Telugu. There is no possibility of that being in Proto-Dravidian. Now, that Prakrit was the literary language used officially in the Deccan is well established. The only other languages that used Brahmi letters with local adaptations were Tamil, and to a certain extent, Sinhalese. This fact is also established : Ref: "Early Tamil Epigraphy -From earliest times to Sixth Century A.D." - Iravatham Mahadevan [Harvard University Publication 2003]. There are no known Telugu inscriptions until a much later period. There is no need for either Tamil or Telugu Chauvinism here. The reverse side of the Satavahana coin is indeed in Tamil Brahmi. This only raises the possibility that Satavahana suzerainty may have extended into the Tamil regions, where the literary (and official) language remained the native language of the area. If anyone continues to edit it as "Telugu" legend, then they only give a wrong information about a vital aspect of their own history.

Telugu on the Coin

This a clear proof that Telugu was used during Satavahana times contrary to the general opinion that Prakrit was the court language. The sentence has vowel-ending Telugu words. Words in other Dravidian landuages rarely end with vowels.Kumarrao 10:30, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Stop prmotoing pro-andhra agenda here

Everyone knows Satavahana's ruled from present Maharashtra and they had lineage in northern eastern India. The language used by Satavahana was Prakrit (pro-marathi).

Get real and stop falsifying facts. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.113.48.11 (talk) 13:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

Telugu/Marathi

It is an acepted fact that Satavahanas were Andhras. They preferred Prakrit because Telugu was evolving from Proto-Dravidian at that time. Andhra is Sanskrit name for Telugu. Al-Biruni mentioned in his Kitab-ul Hind that a language by name Andhri was spoken in South India. Telugu words were found in Gathsaptasati. The Proto-Dravidian words in Satavahana coins were undoubtedly Proto-Telugu.Kumarrao 07:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Accepted Fact? by Whom!!! Andrait will accept whatever suits them

• If Satavahana's were Andhras, why they accepted Prakrit as language of Court ?
• If Satvahana were from Andhra, Wierd they came from North East and were called Sakas by all historians?
• The map which is pasted clearly shows Prathisthapana-Paithan, in heart of Maharashtra (well away 300 km from Andhra state, as capital (indicated by star) of Satavahana kingdom
• The Satavahanas established Western Satrap kingdom after defeating Vikramaditya
• Looks like Satavahana ditched Andhraites and without any regard for Andhra-land, Satavahana's improved and flourished present Gujarat, Maharashtra states

Not sure what will be acheived by distorting history on wiki-page where anyone can edit/add anything... still if it helps (looks like Andhra do not have any king to be proud of) let's keep your version on this anybody-can-edit page...

History version that I am aware of - Satavahana's were from Maharashtra (mix of north-eastern migrants and local maharashtrian tribes), they established capital in Junnar and promoted local prakrit language. They ruled as far as possible on east (andhra) and west(gujarat). After expanding in new area's they supported the local cultures in new areas and established another cities in new area.

Incorrect map

The map shows the Pandyan kingdom located somewhere around the Karnataka region. This is incorrect and should be fixed. Parthi ^{talk/contribs} 01:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC)