The Early History of the Deccan (Parts I–XI) v1.c7.s3.8

v1.c7.s3.8

Like the derivation of the name Sātavāhana, the question of the caste of these princes has also given rise to much controversy. Evidence bearing on the issue is available only in the later Sātavāhana records, those of Gotamī Balaśrī, at Nāsik. In these the title *ekabamhaṇa* is applied to Gautamīputra Sātakarṇi. Senart translates it as 'the Unique Brāhmaṇa'.⁶ Dr. D. R. Bhandarkar, however, stands by Sir R. G. Bhandarker's rendering as 'the only protector of Brāhmaṇs',⁷ which is far from making Sātavāhanas Brāhmans. Mr. V. S. Bakhle is emphatic that the epigraphic evidence 'points definitely to the Sātavāhanas as Brahmins', and that Gautamīputra Sātakarṇi 'was not a Kṣatriya but a Brahmin'. Jayaswal says that both the Śuṅgas and the Sātavāhanas were Brāhmans.⁸ Dr. Gopalachari on the other hand maintains with Dr. Bhandarkar that 'the Sātavāhanas were Kṣatriyas and bore the *gotras* of their mothers. They got this institution of tracing descent by mothers through intermarriages with Kṣatriya families in certain localities'.⁹