The Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts of the Bombay Presidency from the Earliest Historical Times to the Musalman Conquest c8.s3.182

c8.s3.182

latest Andhrabhṛitya date is A.D. 218. Madharîputa Sakasena of the Kânheri inscription, the same as the Madharîputa of the Kolhâpur coins, has been identified with S'iva S'rî, the successor of Puḷumâyi, by Paṇḍit Bhagvânlâl, and I also at one time concurred with him. But the identification is not, I think, tenable. He was probably led to it by his reading Sîrîsena for Sakasena; but I have shown that the reading is incorrect. Mr. Thomas has described a specimen of eleven coins found at Amrâvatî near Dharanikoṭ, the legend on which he reads as Sukasakasa, but it is not unlikely Sakasenasa, "of Sakasena." Besides, Madharîputra Śakasena could not have been the immediate successor of Puḷumayi for a reason which I have already given. One of the Kolhâpur coins figured by Paṇḍit Bhagvânlâl Indraji bears the names of both Gotamîputa and Madharîputa, showing that the piece originally bearing the name of one of them was re-stamped with the name of the other. Mr. Thomas thinks that it was originally Madharîputa's coin. I think it was Gotamîputa's; for, if we see the other figured coins we shall find that they are so stamped as to leave some space between the rim and the legend. This in the present case is utilized and the name of Madharîputa stamped close to the rim, which shows that the thing was done later. Madharîputra Śakasena, therefore, must have been a successor of Gotamîputra Yajña S'rî S'âtakarṇi. But, as we have seen, none of his three Purâṇic successors bore the name, and the name S'akasena is one which has nothing like it on the long list of the Andhrabhṛityas. Still that king must have reigned at Dhanakaṭaka also if my surmise that Mr. Thomas' Sakasaka is the same as Sakasena is correct. In the same manner, as observed before, Chatushparṇa Śâtakarṇi's name does not appear in the Purâṇas. But the Purâṇas cannot be expected to give accurate information on these points. In the Mâtsya Purâṇa another Andhra dynasty of "seven princes sprung from the servants of the original Andhrabhṛitya family will," it is paid, "come into power after that family becomes extinct."¹ The Vâyu has got a similar verse the reading of which, however, is corrupt; but it appears that this new dynasty is there meant to be spoken of as having sprung from the Andhrabhṛitya family itself and must have constituted a separate branch cut off from the main line. And we can very well understand from the points already made out how such a branch could have constituted itself after Yajña Śrî's ceasing to reign. Vâsishṭhîputra Śâtakarṇi whom I have identified with Chaturapana married a Kshatrapa lady. The Kshatrapas, as I have before observed, were foreigners, most probably Śakas who had become Hindus. Madharîputra was not unlikely the son of that lady. And thus he and his father Chaturapana formed, from the very fact of this marriage, a distinct line of princes. Chaturapana appears to have succeeded Yajña Śrî; and Madharîputra to have reigned after Chaturapana. The durations of these reigns cannot be made out, but the latest date of the former is the thirteenth year of his reign, which probably correponds to 185 A.D. and of the latter the eighth. The dates of the later Sâtavâhanas are therefore these :