The Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts of the Bombay Presidency from the Earliest Historical Times to the Musalman Conquest c8.s3.144

c8.s3.144

Thus then, the names occurring in the inscriptions and on the coins as well as the order sufficiently agree with those given in the Puranas under the Andhrabhritya dynasty to justify us in believing that the kings mentioned in both are the same. There is, however, no trace of Chatushparna Satakarni unless we are to identify him with Chandasri Satakarni. The name Madhariputra Sakasena also does not occur in the Puranas; and he appears to have belonged to a branch of the dynasty. We shall hereafter assign to him his place in the list. Simuka, whose name occurs in the Nanaghat inscription, and who, as I have already observed, was an earlier occupant of the throne than the reigning prince Satakarni, the third in the Puranic list, must be the same as Sisuka, the founder of the dynasty. For the Devanagari ma is often so carelessly written as to look like sa; hence the true Simuka was corrupted to Sisuka, Sisuka, or Sisuka, in the course of time. The Sindhuka of the Vayu and the Sipraka of the Vishnu are further corruptions. This identification is rendered probable also by the consideration that he who caused the cave to be constructed, and the statues of himself and the younger princes to be carved, might, to give dignity to his race, be expected to get the founder of the dynasty also represented there, especially as he was removed only one degree from him. In this manner the Andhrabhritya dynasty of the Puranas is the same as the Satavahana dynasty of the inscriptions.