Ancient History of the Deccan c3.s5: § 3. The later Sātavāhana kings

Ancient History of the Deccan c3.s5

Language: English

§ 3. The later Sātavāhana kings

c3.s5.1

If 78 A. D. is the first year of the reign of Chashtana, it is probable that the destruction of the Kshaharātas by Gautamiputra took place in 78 A. D. or a little earlier.

It is probable that Chashtana was a Saka prince, who, for some reasons not known, entered into an alliance with Gautamiputra against the Kshaharātas. Perhaps he was either a petty prince of Sind or Rājputāna who invaded the Kshaharāta empire or a vassal of the Kshaharātas who revolted against his suzerain.

c3.s5.3

The form of the hair on the head of Chashtana differs from that of the king represented on the coins bearing the name of Nahapāna.

c3.s5.4

It seems that Chashtana was first a vassal of Gautamiputra for the following three reasons: (1) Chashtana first bore only the title of Kshatrapa (2) The reverse side of the coins of Chashtana contains the Chaitya with 3 arches which characterises the coins restruck by Gautamiputra (3) The Nāsik inscription says that Gautamiputra was the lord of Surāshtra and Mālwa.

c3.s5.5

However, Chashtana, even as a Kshatrapa, had coins struck in his own name, and there is room to think that the powers of Gautamiputra in the states of Chashtana were only nominal.

c3.s5.6

The mother of Gautamiputra was the queen Gautami Balasri which justifies the name of Gautamiputra borne by her son. We know, in fact, that the kings of this epoch often added before their name the gōtra of their mother.

c3.s5.7

The son of Gautamiputra reigned under the name of Vāsishthiputra Śri Puḷumāvi.

c3.s5.8

The famous Nāsik inscription, in which the queen Balasri, mother of Gautamiputra and grandmother of Vāsishthiputra Puḷumāvi, tells us that her son destroyed the Sakas, is dated in the 19th year of the reign of her grandson Puḷumāvi (Ep. Ind. Vol. VIII., p. 61).

c3.s5.9

At Nāsik, there are two inscriptions of Gautamiputra dated in the years 18 (insc. No. 1125 of Lüders's list) and 24 (insc. No. 1126). Professor D. R. Bhandarkar who has discussed this subject recently (Ind. Ant., Vol. XLVII, page 152) says : "Sir Ramkrishna Bhandarkar contends that all " these dates pertain to the reign of Puḷumāvi and that he " reigned conjointly with his father, the former over Mahā- " rāṣṭra and the latter over the hereditary Śatavāhana " dominions. The latter view alone can be correct. For in in- " scription No. 5, Gautamiputra Śātakarṇi, who is the donor " there along with his mother, issues a grant in favour of " Buddhist monks, who, it is expressly stated were staying in " the cave which was the pious gift of theirs. This cave which " was a pious gift of Śātakarṇi and his mother must doubtless " be cave No. 3 which, as we have seen above, was excavated " and given over to the Bhadrāyaṇiyas. But then we have " also seen that this cave was presented to these monks in the " 19th regnal year, not of Śātakarṇi but of Puḷumāvi." " (Dekkan of the Śātavāhana Period by Prof. D. R. Bhandar- " kar).

c3.s5.10

I regret I cannot accept this theory. On the contrary, the inscriptions themselves clearly show that Gautamiputra and Puḷumāvi have reigned in succession. Indeed, Gautamiputra, in the year 24, states distinctly that the cave was excavated under the orders of his mother and himself : "Pious gift of ours"; and in the inscription of queen Balaśrī in the 19th year of Puḷumāvi, the queen mother makes a solemn gift of the cave in her own name. This can be explained in only one way : the excavation of the cave was begun under the orders of Gautamiputra and his mother before the 18th year of Gautamiputra and was finished only after the death of Gautamiputra and during the reign of his son Puḷumāvi; we have proof of it in the fact that it was the latter king that had it embellished with paintings. The cave not having been consecrated officially, this consecration took place only in the 19th year of Puḷumāvi. Since the king Gautamiputra was dead, the queen Balaśrī made the gift officially herself.

c3.s5.11

I have besides another remark to make on this occasion.

c3.s5.12

I think that the meaning of the inscription of the queen Balaśrī has not been correctly understood till now. We wonder why this inscription dated in the reign of Puḷumāvi contains exclusively the eulogies of Gautamīputra. I believe that the real meaning of the inscription, is this: the queen mother, when she was officially presenting the cave, cannot forget that it was under the orders of her son that the excavation of the cave was begun; it was therefore quite natural to eulogise the glorious Gautamīputra. Thus the inscription of Balaśrī has a clear meaning: it is the funeral oration on the great king delivered by an inconsolable mother.

c3.s5.13

Again the supposition that Gautamīputra was not the king of the region about Nāsik is untenable: 1) because Gautamīputra gives orders to the officers of Nāsik; 2) according to the inscription of Balaśrī he reigned over Surāṣṭra, Aparānta, and, Vidarba; and Mr. Bhandarkar admits that he reigned also over the South; why should the Nāsik region alone form an exception? 3) We have seldom seen a father dating his grants in the reign (and especially in the 24th year) of the reign of his son; 4) and lastly we have a positive proof of it in the hoard of Joghaltembhi.

c3.s5.14

We have said that this treasure consisted of 13250 coins bearing the name of Nahapāna of which 9270 had been restruck by Gautamīputra (J. B. B. R. A. S., Vol XXII, page 224). It is remarkable that in this treasure there is not a single coin of Vāsiṣṭhīputra Puḷumāvi who, as we know, has struck coins in his own name (see: Rapson, Coins of the Āndhra dynasty, page 20). As Joghaltembhi is a village in the environs of Nāsik, we have to conclude that, after the destruction of the Śakas, it was Gautamīputra that reigned in this place and that the treasure was buried during his reign and before the accession of Puḷumāvi. But Rev. H. R. Scott who has examined the hoard of Joghaltembhi carefully has made an important remark: "Judging from the condition of the coins, I should say that they must have been a very long time in circulation and that both before and after being counter-struck (J B. B. R. A. S., Vol XXII, p. 224); and he adds "They could not have been buried earlier than 20 years after Śātakarṇi's victory". So, there is no doubt that Gautamīputra reigned in the Nāsik region for a long time, since the coins have had time to get considerably worn out. Puḷumâvi has therefore reigned at Nâsik for more than 15 years after the destruction of the Kshaharâtas.

c3.s5.15

It is certain that Chashtana was for a time the contemporary of Puḷumâvi. In fact, Ptolemy says in his geography (Ind. Ant., Vol XIII., page 366) that Siro Polemaios reigned at Baithana, and Tiastanes at Ozênê. Ozênê is unquestionably Ujjain which was the capital of all the kings of the dynasty of Châshtana, and Baithana is Paiṭana or Paiṭhana, the capital of Puḷumâvi. Unfortunately the evidence of Ptolemy does not enable us to know exactly in what epoch Chashtana and Puḷumâvi lived. We do not know for certain in what year Ptolemy wrote his geography and we know little about the life of this scholar. Olympiodorus says that when Ptolemy was at Canopa in 147, he had already been making astronomical observations for 40 years, which will place Ptolemy's works between 104 and 147 A. D. Ptolemy was not a navigator; he was an astronomer of Alexandria who wrote his geography chiefly with the object of drawing a map of the world with latitudes and longitudes: and has he not the pretension to give his own views about the countries he speaks about. He confines himself to reconstructing the configuration of the countries, relying upon the descriptions given by the travellers in the works which can be had in his days. He himself admits that he follows Marin of Tyr, navigator who made his voyage about 100 A. D. From which book has Ptolemy taken his information about Puḷumâvi and Chashtana? It may not be impossible that it was from the work of Marin of Tyr which unfortunately has not come down to us. But it is certain that this information was obtained from relatively recent sources and as Ptolemy wrote his geography in the first half of the IInd century, we may admit that the information he gives about Chashtana and Puḷumâvi belongs to the beginning of the IInd century.

c3.s5.16

When the Kshaharâtas occupied Northern Deccan, the capital of the Sâtavâhanas was probably Amarâvatî on the lower course of the Krishṇâ. The legend that Śrî Kakulam was the capital has no foundation (see Ind. Ant., Nov. 1913, Vol XLII, page 276). At the time of Gautamîputra and at the beginning of the reign of Puḷumâvi it was Amarâvatî that was the capital : the king was called "Lord of Dhanamkaṭa" (insc. No. 3 at Nâsik. Dhanamkaṭa=Dhânyakaṭaka=Dhanakaṭa-Dhaññakaṭa). Puḷumâvi removed the capital to Paithana (Pratiṣṭhâna).

c3.s5.17

The Purâṇas pretend to give us the history of the Śâtavâhanas to whom they give the name of Ândhras. However, if we compare the information given in the Purâṇas with what is contained in the historical documents we possess, we find that it is only the Matsya that deserves to engage the attention of the historian. We shall not however attach any value to the durations of the reigns given in the Matsya Purâṇa, for, each time we proceed to verify these dates, "the Purâṇas are proved to be in error" (Vincent A. Smith.—Early History of India, 2d Edition, page 194). However the order of succession of the kings is nearer the truth. That order is as follows :

c3.s5.18

Gautamîputra, Puḷomâ, Śivaśrî, Śivaskanda, Yajñaśrî, Vijaya, Caṇḍaśrî Śântikarṇa, Puḷomâ.

c3.s5.19

It is to be remarked that we find here Gautamîputra followed by Puḷumâvi; besides, the inscriptions and the coins are found to confirm the existence of Śivaśrî, of Yajñaśrî and of Caṇḍa.

c3.s5.20

It is almost certain that the Matsya Purâṇa is right in saying that Śiva Śrî was the successor of Puḷumâvi, for we have (Rapson, page 29) the coins bearing the name "Raṇo Vâsiṭhiputa Siva-Siri-Sâtakaṇṇi (Vâsiṣṭhīputra Śiva-Śrî-Śâtakarṇi); and these coins are almost identical with those of Puḷumâvi in regard to the letters of the alphabet, the symbols (chaitya with three arches etc.) and the workmanship. We have also an inscription (No. 1279 of Lüder's list) of Amarâvatî which is dated in the reign of Siri-Sivamaka-Sada who is perhaps Śiva-Śrî-Śâtakarṇi.

c3.s5.21

We have not yet found any documents, coins or inscriptions, mentioning Śivaskanda Śâtakaṇi. However, in cave 36 at Kaṇhêri, there is an inscription (No. 1001 of Lüder's list)

c3.s5.22

dated in the 8th year of king Mâdhariputa Svâmi whose name is followed by another not very legible which Mr. D. R. Bhandarkar (Ind. Ant. Vol XLVII, Part DXCVI, June 1918) has read Sri Sâta. The alphabet of this inscription (as well as of another, No. 1002) seems to show that this king reigned before Yajña Śri. If this palæographical indication and the list given in the Matsya are correct, this Mâdhariputra can be no other than Śivaskanda.

c3.s5.23

Yajña-Śri seems to have had a brilliant reign. It was in fact at the time of Gautamîputra Yajña Śâtakarṇi that was dug the chaitya of Kaṇhêri which is in a degenerate style compared with that of the splendid Chaitya at Kârli, but which is a remarkable monument (insc. No. 1124 of Lüders's list; 16th year of Yajña). It was also during the time of this king that was embellished the VIII cave at Nâsik whose inscription No. 4 is dated in the 7th year of his reign (Ep. Ind. Vol VIII., page 94). A fragment of a pillar discovered at China near the mouth of the Kṛiṣṇâ which has since been transported to the Madras Museum contains an inscription dated in the 27th year of the reign of Yajña (Ep. Ind., Vol. I., page 95): and the coins bearing the very characteristic name "Yajña" are also well known (see Rapson).

c3.s5.24

We know the name of Vijaya only from the Matsya Purâṇa.

c3.s5.25

Chaṇdaśri Śantikarna must probably be identified with Vâsiṭhiputa Chadasâta who reigned at the time when the Koḍavolu inscription was engraved (see Report on Epigraphy; Madras Government orders; inscription No. 228 of 1908), and with Vâsisṭhiputa Siri Caḍa Sâti (Vâsisṭhiputra Śrî Chandra Śâti) of the coins (see Rapson, pages 30 and 32; Mr. Rapson thinks that this king must have preceded Yajña).

c3.s5.26

We shall speak of Puḷumâvi, the last king of this dynasty, in the following chapter concerning the Pallavas and the inscription at Myâkadoni.

c3.s5.27

The inscription (No. 965 of Lüders's list) of Girnar (Junâgaḍh in Kâthiâvâḍ) which is dated in the year 150 A. D. says [Ep. Ind. Vol VIII., p. 47] that Rudradâman, by his own valour [svavîryy-ârjjitânâm] gained Âkarâvantî (Mâḷwâ), Surâshtra (Kâthiâwâḍ), Kachchha (Cutch), Aparânta (the coast to the north of Bombay) etc, destroyed the Yaudhēyas, who were loath to submit, defeated Śātakarṇi, lord of Dakṣiṇāpatha, but on account of the nearness of their connection did not destroy him but himself acquired the name of Mahākṣatrapa.

c3.s5.28

Which king of the Śātavāhana dynasty is called here by the name of Śātakarṇi? The inscriptions and the coins seem to confirm the statement of the Girnar inscription. An inscription at Kaṇhēri (No. 994 of Lüders's list) "exhibits the neat characters of Western Kṣatrapa inscriptions" (Bühler, Ind. Ant., Vol XXXIII, page 43). This inscription, as those of Rudradāman is in Sanskrit and thus differs from all other Śātavāhana inscriptions which are all in Prākṛit. This inscription mentions the queen of Vāsiṣṭhīputra Śri Śātakarṇi, daughter of the mahākṣatrapa Ru[dra]. The last name consists only of two syllables the first of which is certainly "Ru" and the second very probably "dra." Secondly Yajña Śri "issued coins......and they are similar in fabric and style to the Kṣatrapa coins" (Rapson, section 87). The characteristic of these coins is that the head of king Yajña is represented on them, whereas the image of the king is not found in any coin of the other Śātavāhanas. It is therefore certain that it is Yajña who adopted the Kṣatrapa style for these coins. These coins of Yajña (Rapson Pl.VII., El) resemble those of Rudradāman. It has to be remarked that the coif of Rudradāman found on his coins resembles that of Yajña; it is a sort of spherical calotte covering the skull and differs totally from the coif of Chaṣṭana; and the sculptures of the chaitya of Kaṇhēri which are dated in the time of Yajña show us personages who have their hair dressed as Yajña and Rudradāman. It is therefore probable that it was Rudradāman who adopted the coiffure that was used in the Deccan at the time of Yajña Śri. Thus then Rudradāman was almost a contemporary of Yajña and was besides thè father-in-law of Vāsiṣṭhīputra Śātakarṇi, which Yajña was not, as we know that he was a Gautamiputra. Unfortunately we know three Śātavāhanas who bore the name of Vāsiṣṭhīputra : the grèat Puḷumāvi, Śiva Śri and Chanda Śri. We know also a certain Vāsiṣṭhīputra Chatarapana who had reigned 13 years when an inscription at Nānāghāṭ (No. 1120 of Lüders's list) was engraved; it is however probable that this latter Vâsishṭhiputra is no other than Śiva-Śri or Chanda Śri, and the word Chaturapana is suspicious (see J. R. A. S. for 1905, page 798).

c3.s5.29

It is almost certain that the Vâsishṭhiputra who was the son-in-law of Rudradâman was not the great Puḷumâvi: we know in fact that Puḷumâvi was the contemporary of Chashṭana. It appears therefore to be impossible that he should have married the great-grand-daughter of Chashṭana. There yet remain Śiva Śri and Chanda Śri; but it is probable that the son-in-law of Rudradâman was rather Śiva Śri, who might have married the daughter of Rudradâman after having fought with him once and who might have been defeated in his turn about the year 130 A. D., when fighting a second time with the Kshatrapa king. Rudradâman might have been the victor and might have occupied Aparânta for some time up to the reign of Yajña Sri who might have adopted into this region a coinage similar to that of Rudradâman. The above are suppositions, since the documents we have do not enable us to have a correct knowledge of this history.

c3.s5.30

The following might perhaps be the chronology of the Sâtavâhanas in conjunction with that of the Western Kshatrapas:

c3.s5.31

c3.s5.32

In the above chronology we have admitted that Rudradâman was the contemporary of a series of three kings:
(1) Vâsisthiputra Śiva Śri,
(2) Mâdhariputra Sivaskanda,
(3) Gautamiputra Yajña Śri. But some coins found in the Kolhapur region (Rapson, pages 5, 7, 14) have restrucks which enables us to settle the following series:
(1) Vâsisthiputra Vilivâyakura,
(2) Mâdhariputra Sivalakura,
(3) Gautamiputra Vilivâyakura, Can these two series be identified? It is to be remarked that:
(1) The first names, Vâsisthiputra, Mâdhariputra, Gautamiputra, prove nothing, as we know that these names indicate a Gôtra and the custom of prefixing to the real name of a person the name of his mother's Gôtra has been in existence in the dynasties of the neighbours of the Śâtavâhanas (the Âbhiras, the Chuṭus, the Ikshvâkus). There then remain the second names, and they, Vilivâyakura and Sivalakura, have not been found in authentic Śâtavâhana inscriptions.
(2) The coins bear as symbols "bow and arrow" in place of the Ujjain symbol of the coins of Śâtavâhanas.
(3) Again, these coins have been found only in the Kolhapur region; and Ptolemy says, that at Hippokura, in a country which may be situated approximately in this part of the Deccan, there reigned a king named Baleokuros, who, many authors have believed, can be identified with Vilivâyakura. This king will, in that case, be a contemporary of Puḷumâvi and belong to another dynasty. I think therefore that these coins may be provisionally admitted to belong to the "Kolhapur Dynasty." Some coins bearing the names of Śri Rudra Śâtakarṇi and Śri Kṛishṇa Śâtakarṇi have been found (see Rapson, Coins of Indian Museum; Ândhra dynasty) in the Chanda district of the Central Provinces. As these names have been found only in this region, we may suppose that these kings belonged to a peculiar dynasty that subsisted for some time in the Chanda district, when the Śâtavâhanas had been replaced by the Chuṭus, the Nâgas, the Pallavas, the Ikshvâkus and the Bṛihatphalâyanas.

Linked texts (6)

Matsyapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
EIAD 242. Pillar from Chinaganjam – reign of Yaññasiri-Gotamīputta — Prakrit
Epigraphia Indica
Purāṇa — Sanskrit
Nasik cave inscription of the female lay-worshipper Mammā (No. 23) — Prakrit
Nasik cave inscription (No. 16, N. 5) (ed. Hultzsch 1906) — Prakrit