Satavahana dynasty

Early coin of Satakarni I (70-60 BCE). Obverse legend:
(𑀲𑀺𑀭𑀺) 𑀲𑀸 𑀡𑀺(𑀲), (Siri) Sātakaṇi(sa).[7]

Śātavāhana, Śālivāhana, Śātakarṇi seem to be Sanskritised versions of the indigenous name Sātakaṇi, which appear as Sālavāhaṇa in Prakrit vernacular.[8]

According to one theory, the word "Satavahana" (Brahmi script: 𑀲𑀸𑀤𑀯𑀸𑀳𑀦 Sādavāhana or 𑀲𑀸𑀢𑀯𑀸𑀳𑀦 Sātavāhana,[5] IAST: Sātavāhana) is a Prakrit form of the Sanskrit Sapta-Vahana ("driven by seven"; in Hindu mythology, the chariot of the sun god is drawn by seven horses). This would indicate that the Satavahanas originally claimed association with the legendary solar dynasty, as was common in ancient India.[9] According to Inguva Kartikeya Sarma, the dynasty's name is derived from the words sata ("sharpened", "nimble" or "swift") and vahana ("vehicle"); the expression thus means "one who rides a nimble horse".[10]

Another theory connects their name to the earlier Satiyaputa dynasty. Yet another theory derives their name from the Munda words Sadam ("horse") and Harpan ("son"), implying "son of the performer of a horse sacrifice".[11] Several rulers of the dynasty bear the name or title "Satakarni". Satavahana, Satakarni, Satakani and Shalivahana appear to be variations of the same word. Damodar Dharmanand Kosambi theorised that the word "Satakarni" is derived from the Munda words sada ("horse") and kon ("son").[12]

The Puranas use the name "Andhra" for the Satavahanas. The term "Andhra" may refer to the ethnicity or territory of the dynasty (see Original homeland below). It does not appear in the dynasty's own records.[13]

Tamil epic Silappatikaram mentions a "Nurruvar Kannar", who helped Chera king Senguttuvan during his Himalaya campaign. The direct translation of the term Nurruvar Kannar is "the hundred Karnas" or "Satakarni", hence the Nurruvar Kannar has been identified with the Satavahana dynasty.[14][15][16]

The Kathasaritsagara ascribes a mythical etymology in which a widowed, childless king named Deepakarni was prophesied to find a lion-riding child as his heir. During a jungle hunt, he found such a child riding a yaksha-turned-lion named Sāta. After adoption, the child became the king eventually and came to be known as Sātavāhana or Sāta-supported.

Early sculpture from Pauni, ancient Vidarbha, where coins of Satakarni were also found.[17][18] Pillar with Naga Mucalinda protecting the throne of the Buddha at Pauni (Bhandara District). 2nd-1st century BCE. National Museum of India.[19]

The use of the names "Andhra" and "Andhra-Jatiya" in the Puranas has led some scholars, such as E. J. Rapson and R.G Bhandarkar, to believe that the dynasty originated in the eastern Deccan region (the historic Andhra region, present-day Andhra Pradesh and Telangana).[20][21] At Kotilingala in Telangana, coins bearing the legend "Rano Siri Chimuka Satavahanasa" were found.[22] Epigraphist and numismatist P. V. P. Sastry initially identified Chimuka with the dynasty's founder Simuka,[23] Coins attributed to Simuka's successors Kanha and Satakarni I were also discovered at Kotilingala.[24] Based on these discoveries, historians such as Ajay Mitra Shastri, D. R. Reddy, S. Reddy, and Shankar R. Goyal theorised that Kotlingala was the original home of the Satavahanas. Ajay Mitra Shastri stated that the finding of the coins at Kotilingala give "a clear pointer to the region where we have to locate the original center of the Satavahana political authority."[25] However, the coin samples from Kotlingala are small, and it is not certain if these coins were minted there or reached there from somewhere else.[26] Moreover, the identification of Chimuka of Kotilingala with the dynasty's founder Simuka has been contested by several scholars including P. L. Gupta and I. K. Sarma, who identified Chimuka as a later ruler.[27][28] P. V. P. Sastry also later changed his view and stated that the two kings were different.[23] In addition to the Kotilinga find, a coin of the Satavahana prince Saktikumara, who was in the fourth generation of the founder, has been reported as a stratified find from the Kurnool district of Andhra Pradesh.[25] As for the Puranas, these texts could have been compiled at a later date and it is not certain if the Satavahanas were referred to as Andhras during their time.[28][29]

Another section of scholars believe that the Satavahanas originated in western Deccan (present-day Maharashtra).[20] All four extant inscriptions from the early Satavahana period (c. 1st century BCE) have been found in and around this region. One of the earliest known Satavahana inscriptions was that found at Cave No.19 of the Pandavleni Caves in Nashik district, which was issued during the reign of Kanha (100-70 BCE).[30] An inscription found at Naneghat was issued by Nayanika (or Naganika), the widow of Satakarni I; another inscription found at Naneghat has been dated to the same period on a paleographic basis. A slightly later inscription dated to the reign of Satakarni II has been found at Sanchi in Madhya Pradesh, located to the north of Maharashtra.[6] The majority of the other Satavahana inscriptions have also been found in western Deccan.[26] On the other hand, the epigraphic evidence from eastern Deccan does not mention the Satavahanas before the 4th century CE.[28] At Nevasa, a seal and coins attributed to Kanha have been discovered.[31] Coins attributed to Satakarni I have also been discovered at Nashik, Nevasa, and Pauni in Maharashtra (besides places in eastern Deccan and present-day Madhya Pradesh).[22] Based on this evidence, some historians argue that the Satavahanas initially came to power in the area around their capital Pratishthana (modern Paithan, Maharashtra) and then expanded their territory to eastern Deccan.[32] Carla Sinopoli cautions that the inference about the western Deccan origin of the Satavahanas is "tentative at best" given the small sample of early inscriptions.[33]

Inscription of king Kanha (100-70 BCE)

Cave No.19 of Satavahana king Kanha at the Nasik Caves, 1st century BCE.

Inscription of king Kanha in cave No.19, Nasik Caves. This is one of the oldest known Satavahana inscription, circa 100-70 BCE.[6] Brahmi script:
𑀲𑀸𑀤𑀯𑀸𑀳𑀦𑀓𑀼𑀮𑁂 𑀓𑀦𑁆𑀳𑁂𑀭𑀸𑀚𑀺𑀦𑀺 𑀦𑀸𑀲𑀺𑀓𑁂𑀦
𑀲𑀫𑀡𑁂𑀦 𑀫𑀳𑀸𑀫𑀸𑀢𑁂𑀡 𑀮𑁂𑀡 𑀓𑀸𑀭𑀢
Sādavāhanakule Kanhe rājini Nāsikakena Samaṇena mahāmāteṇa leṇa kārita
"Under King Kanha of the Satavahana family this cave has been caused to be made by the officer in charge of the Sramanas at Nasik".[5]

Naneghat inscription. Dated to 70-60 BCE, in the reign of Satakarni I.[6]

Kanha's Pandavleni mentions the term maha-matra (officer-in-charge), which indicates that the early Satavahanas followed the Mauryan administrative model.[34] C. Margabandhu theorised that the Satavahanas were called Andhras because they were natives of eastern Deccan (the Andhra region), although they first established their empire in western Deccan after having served as Mauryan subordinates. Himanshu Prabha Ray (1986) opposes this theory, stating that the Andhra was originally an ethnic term, and did not come to denote the geographical region of eastern Deccan until well after the Satavahana period.[6] According to Vidya Dehejia, the writers of the Puranas (which could have been written after the Satavahana period) mistook the Satavahana presence in eastern Deccan as evidence for their origin in that region, and wrongly labelled them as "Andhra".[35]

Puranas called the Satavahana kings as Andhra, Andhra-bhṛtya, or Andhra-jatiya. Andhra is both a tribal and a territorial name, the latter territorial denotation of present Telugu lands came into usage only well after the Satavahana period had ended, which meant that the term Andhra represented only the Andhra tribe (who had originated in North India along the Yamuna river banks as per Rigveda) and not the present Andhra region or its Telugu people. The term Andhrabhrityas (Andhra servants) may imply two things, one being that the Andhras were originally servants of the Mauryas or the Sungas. The other one, as per some scholars is that the expression is taken to indicate the servants of some other Andhra rulers. These scholars also suggest Kannada origin for the Satavahanas meaning that the dynasty originated in present-day Karnataka, and initially owed allegiance to some Andhra rulers.[36] A Satavahana inscription found on a slab of the upper drum (medhi) of the Kanaganahalli mahastupa mentions year 16 of Vasisthiputra Sri Chimuka Satavahana's reign, which can be dated from ca. 110 BCE.[37][38][39] V. S. Sukthankar theorised that the territorial division Satavahani-Satahani (Satavahanihara or Satahani-rattha), in present-day Bellary district, was the homeland of the Satavahana family.[40] However, Dr. Gopalchari challenged Sukthankar's theory by pointing out that not a single inscription of the early Satavahanas is found in Bellary District and that the only Satavahana inscription in Bellary District was that of Pulumavi, who belongs to the later-phase of Satavahana history.[41] A stupa in Kanaganahalli village of Karnataka, dated between the first century BCE and first century CE, features limestone panels depicting portraits of Chimuka (Simuka), Satakani (Satakarni) and other Satavahana rulers.[42] As per historian Parmanand Gupta, in the medieval times, Srisailam region or the Sriparvata area was known as Kannadu and Kannavisaya which is the contracted form of Satakarninadu and Satakarnivisaya, which seem to be identical with the territorial indicator Satavahanihara of the Myakadoni inscription of Pulumayi or the Satavahaniratta of the Hirahadagalli grant consisting of the Ballari region indicated to be the original homeland of the Satavahanas as per another historian V. S. Sukthankar.[43]

The varna of the dynasty is debated by modern scholars, who have variously argued for Shudra, Kshatriya, and Brahmana origins of the dynasty.[44]

The Puranas call the founder of the Satavahana family a vṛṣala (Shudra or low-born).[45]

The Nashik inscription of Gautami Balashri describes her son Gautamiputra Satakarni as eka-bamhana (Sanskrit: eka-brahmana). Some scholars, such as V.V. Mirashi, have interpreted the term as "sole Brahmana", and argued that Satavahanas were Brahmanas.[46] Hem Chandra Raychaudhuri interprets the term as "unique Brahmana", and notes that the inscription also describes Gautamiputra as "the destroyer of the pride and conceit of Kshatriyas", which according to him strongly suggests that Gautamiputra claimed to be a Brahmana.[47]

The critics of this theory point out that Gautamiputra's family had matrimonial relations with the non-Brahmana Shakas, and the Satavahanas could not have been Brahmanas because the same inscription also describes Gautamiputra as the one who stopped admixture of varnas (vinivatita chatu vana sankara).[48][49] Historian V. Sundara Rama Sastry argues that the interpretation of the term "eka-bamhana" as "the only Brahmana" does not make sense as the king was obviously not the only member of his varna: instead, he interprets the term as an epithet indicating that the king "excelled even the Brahmans".[46] Historian R. G. Bhandarkar interprets the term "the only protector" of the Brahmanas.[50]

Some Jain works and the Dvātriṃśat-Puttalikā represent Shalivahana (whom some modern scholars identify as a Satavahana king) as of mixed Brahmana and Naga origin. Based on this, some scholars, such as D.C. Sircar, theorize that the Satavahanas were originally non-Brahmanas who started claiming Brahmana status after establishing matrimonial relations with some Brahmana families.[51]

South Asia
150 BCE

SATAVAHANAS

MAHAMEGHA-
VAHANAS

SAMATATAS

AUDUMBARAS

YAUDHEYAS

PAURAVAS

VRISHNIS

KUNINDAS

INDO-
GREEKS

GRECO-
BACTRIANS

MITRAS

ARJUNAYANAS

MALAVAS

SHUNGAS

PANDYAS

CHOLAS

CHERAS

LOULAN

HAN DYNASTY

 

◁ ▷

South Asia circa 150 BCE.[54]

Simuka is mentioned as the first king in a list of royals in a Satavahana inscription at Naneghat. The various Puranas state that the first king of the dynasty ruled for 23 years, and mention his name variously as Sishuka, Sindhuka, Chhismaka, Shipraka, etc. These are believed to be corrupted spellings of Simuka, resulting from copying and re-copying of manuscripts.[55] Simuka cannot be dated with certainty based on available evidence. Based on the following theories, the beginning of the Satavahana rule is dated variously from 271 BCE to 30 BCE.[56] According to the Puranas, the first Andhra king overthrew the Kanva rule. He is named as Balipuccha in some texts.[57] D. C. Sircar dated this event to c. 30 BCE, a theory supported by many other scholars.[53]

The Matsya Purana mentions that the Andhra dynasty ruled for around 450 years. As the Satavahana rule ended in the early 3rd century, the beginning of their rule can be dated to the 3rd century BCE. The Indica of Megasthenes (350 – 290 BCE) mentions a powerful tribe named "Andarae", whose king maintained an army of 100,000 infantry, 2,000 cavalry and 1,000 elephants. If Andarae is identified with the Andhras, this can be considered additional evidence of Satavahana rule starting in the 3rd century BCE. The Brahmanda Purana states that "the four Kanvas will rule the earth for 45 years; then (it) will again go to the Andhras". Based on this statement, the proponents of this theory argue that the Satavahana rule began immediately after the Maurya rule, followed by a Kanva interregnum, and then, a revival of the Satavahana rule. According to one version of the theory Simuka succeeded the Mauryans. A variation of the theory is that Simuka was the person who restored the Satavahana rule by overthrowing the Kanvas; the compiler of the Puranas confused him with the founder of the dynasty.[34]

Most modern scholars believe that the Satavahana ruler began in the first century BCE and lasted until the second century CE. This theory is based on Puranic records as well as archaeological and numismatic evidence. The theory that dates their rule to an earlier period is now largely discredited because the various Puranas contradict each other, and are not fully supported by epigraphic or numismatic evidence.[13]

The oldest Satavahana inscription is the one found on a slab of the upper drum (medhi) of the Kanaganahalli Great Stupa mentioning year 16 of Vasisthiputra Sri Chimuka Satavahana's reign, which can be dated from ca. 110 BCE.[38][39][37]

𑀭𑀸𑀜𑁄 𑀲𑀺𑀭𑀺 𑀙𑀺𑀫𑀼𑀓 𑀲𑀸𑀢𑀯𑀸𑀳𑀦𑀲 𑀲𑁄𑀟𑁂 𑀯𑀙𑀭𑁂 𑁛𑁗 𑀫𑀸𑀢𑀺𑀲𑁂𑀓

Rano siri chimu(ka) sātavāhanasa soḍe vachare 10 6 mātiseka

"In the year sixteen 16 of King Siri Chimuka Sātavāhana"

— Kanaganahalli inscription of the 16th year of Simuka.[58]

On another stone slab at Kanaganahalli, the king is possibly shown together with a Nagaraja, and the inscription reads:

𑀭𑀸𑀚𑀸 𑀲𑀺𑀭𑀺 𑀙𑀺𑀫𑀼𑀓𑁄 𑀲𑀸𑀤𑀯𑀸𑀳𑀦𑁄 𑀦𑀸𑀕𑀭𑀸𑀬 𑀲𑀔𑀥𑀸𑀪𑁄
Rājā Siri Chimuko Sādavāhano nāgarāya Sakhadhābho
"Lord King Simuka the Satavahana, Nagaraja Sakhadhābho"

— Kanaganahalli inscription of Simuka.[59]

Sanchi donations (50 BCE- 0 CE)

The southern gateway of the Great Stupa at Sanchi was, according to an inscription (see arrow), donated under the rule of "King Satakarni", probably Satakarni II.Sinopoli[26]

The inscription appears on the relief of a stupa at the center of the top architrave, at the rear. It is written in three lines in early Brahmi script over the dome of the stupa in this relief.[60] Dated circa 50 BCE- 0 CE.

Text of the inscription:
𑀭𑀸𑀜𑁄 𑀲𑀺𑀭𑀺 𑀲𑀸𑀢𑀓𑀡𑀺𑀲 / 𑀆𑀯𑁂𑀲𑀡𑀺𑀲 𑀯𑀸𑀲𑀺𑀣𑀻𑀧𑀼𑀢𑀲 / 𑀆𑀦𑀁𑀤𑀲 𑀤𑀸𑀦𑀁
Rāño Siri Sātakaṇisa / āvesaṇisa vāsitḥīputasa / Ānaṁdasa dānaṁ
"Gift of Ananda, the son of Vasithi, the foreman of the artisans of rajan Siri Satakarni"[60]

Simuka was succeeded by his brother Kanha (also known as Krishna), who extended the kingdom up to Nashik in the west.[61][34] His successor Satakarni I conquered western Malwa, Anupa (Narmada valley) and Vidarbha, taking advantage of the turmoil caused by Greek invasions of northern India. He performed Vedic sacrifices including Ashvamedha and Rajasuya. Instead of the Buddhists, he patronised Brahmins and donated a substantial amount of wealth to them.[11] The Hathigumpha inscription of the Kalinga king Kharavela mentions a king named "Satakani" or "Satakamini", who some[62] identify with Satakarni I. The inscription describes dispatching of an army and Kharavela's threat to a city. Since the inscription is only partially legible, different scholars interpret the events described in the inscription differently. According to R. D. Banerji and Sailendra Nath Sen, Kharavela sent out an army against Satakarni.[63] According to Bhagwal Lal, Satakarni wanted to avoid an invasion of his kingdom by Kharavela. So, he sent horses, elephants, chariots and men to Kharavela as a tribute.[64] According to Sudhakar Chattopadhyaya, Kharavela's army diverted its course after failing to advance against Satakarni.[65] According to Alain Daniélou, Kharavela was friendly with Satakarni, and only crossed his kingdom without any clashes.[66]

Satakarni's successor Satakarni II ruled for 56 years, during which he captured eastern Malwa from the Shungas.[67] This allowed him access to the Buddhist site of Sanchi, in which he is credited with the building of the decorated gateways around the original Mauryan Empire and Sunga stupas.[68] Satakarni II is known from a dedicatory inscription at Sanchi.[26] He was succeeded by Lambodara. The coins of Lambodara's son and successor Apilaka have been found in eastern Madhya Pradesh.[11] However, Andrew Ollett argues that there is only one Satakarni, as the alleged first Satakarni is assigned ten years, and the second, fifty years by other scholars, but the only dated inscription of this king is Candankheda seal from his reign's year 30, around 60 BCE, and he ruled ca. 88-42 BCE.[69][70]

The Satavahanas contributed greatly to the embellishment of the Buddhist stupa of Sanchi. It was heavily repaired under King Satakarni II. The gateways and the balustrade were built after 70 BCE, and appear to have been commissioned by the Satavahanas. An inscription on the Southern Gateway records that it was the work of Satakarni II's royal architect Ananda.[71] An inscription records the gift of one of the top architraves of the Southern Gateway by the artisans of the Satavahana Emperor Satakarni:

Gift of Ananda, the son of Vasithi, the foreman of the artisans of rajan Siri Satakarni[72]

Sanchi under the Satavahanas 1st century BCE/CE.
		Architrave Architrave Yakshini. Pillar capital. Lion pillar capital. The Miracle of Walking in the air at Savrasti. Pipal tree. Miracle of the Buddha walking on the River Nairanjana Bimbisara with his royal cortege issuing from the city of Rajagriha to visit the Buddha. Foreigners making a dedication to the Great Stupa at Sanchi. Procession of king Suddhodana from Kapilavastu.

Little is known about Apilaka's successors, except cryptic references to one Kuntala Satakarni. The next well-known ruler of the dynasty was Hāla, who composed Gaha Sattasai in Maharashtri Prakrit. Like Hala, his four successors also ruled for very short periods (a total of 12 years), indicating troubled times for the Satavahanas.[11]

Epigraphic and numismatic evidence suggests that the Satavahanas earlier controlled the northern Deccan Plateau, the northern Konkan coastal plains, and the mountain passes connecting these two regions. During 15-40 CE, their northern neighbours - the Western Kshatrapas - extended their influence into these regions.[73] The Western Kshatrapa ruler Nahapana is known to have ruled the former Satavahana territory, as attested by the inscriptions of his governor and son-in-law, Rishabhadatta.[74]

A coin of Nahapana restruck by the Satavahana king Gautamiputra Satakarni. Nahapana's profile and coin legend are still clearly visible.

The defeated "Saka-Yavana-Palhava" (Brahmi script: 𑀲𑀓 𑀬𑀯𑀦 𑀧𑀮𑁆𑀳𑀯) mentioned in the Nasik cave 3 inscription of Queen Gotami Balasiri (end of line 5 of the inscription).[75]

The Satavahana power was revived by Gautamiputra Satakarni, who is considered the greatest of the Satavahana rulers.[61] Charles Higham dates his reign c. 103 – c. 127 CE.[61] S. Nagaraju dates it 106–130 CE,[76] the new consensus is shared by Shailendra Bhandare, Akira Shimada, and Oskar von Hinuber, who regard Gautamiputra Satakarni's reign was ca. 60-85 CE, as it is evident from history that "Gautamiputra Saatakarni" in the year 78CE defeated Vikramaditya of Ujjain, which in turn was celebrated and named "Yug Aadi" means Beginning of New Era (New Year for Andhra, Karnataka, Maharashtra (Gudi padwa), Telangana states). Ever since these states people followed Saatavaahana calendar.[77][78][79] Andrew Ollett considers it as 60-84 CE.[80] The king defeated by him appears to have been the Western Kshatrapa ruler Nahapana, as suggested by Nahapana's coins overstuck with names and titles of Gautamiputra.[74] The Nashik prashasti inscription of Gautamiputra's mother Gautami Balashri, dated to the 20th year after his death, records his achievements. The most liberal interpretation of the inscription suggests that his kingdom extended from the present-day Rajasthan in the north to Krishna river in the south, and from Saurashtra in the west to Kalinga in the east. He assumed the titles Raja-Raja (King of Kings) and Maharaja (Great King), and was described as the Lord of Vindhya.[11]

During the last years of his reign, his administration was apparently handled by his mother, which could have been a result of an illness or military preoccupation.[11] According to the Nasik inscription made by his mother Gautami Balashri, he was the one ...[81]

… who crushed down the pride and conceit of the Kshatriyas; who destroyed the Sakas (Western Satraps), Yavanas (Indo-Greeks) and Pahlavas (Indo-Parthians),... who rooted out the Khakharata family (the Kshaharata family of Nahapana); who restored the glory of the Satavahana race.

— Inscription of Queen Mother Gautami Balashri at Cave No.3 of the Pandavleni Caves in Nashik.

Gautamiputra was succeeded by his son Vasisthiputra Sri Pulamavi (or Pulumayi). According to Sailendra Nath Sen, Pulumavi ruled from 96 to 119 CE.[11] According to Charles Higham, he ascended the throne around 110 CE,[61] according to Shailendra Bhandare, Akira Shimada, and Oskar von Hinuber Vasisthiputra Sri Pulamavi ruled ca. 85-125 CE,[77][82][83] and Andrew Ollett considers it to be ca. 84-119 CE.[80] Pulumavi features in a large number of Satavahana inscriptions and his coins have been found distributed over a wide area. This indicates that he maintained Gautamiputra's territory, and ruled a prosperous kingdom. He is believed to have added the Bellary region to Satakarni's kingdom. His coins featuring ships with double mast have been found on the Coromandel Coast, indicating involvement in maritime trade and naval power. The old stupa at Amaravati was perhaps renovated during his reign.[11] though recent scholarship tends to spread the dates of this wider.

Coin of Vashishtiputra Satakarni.

Pulumavi's successor was his brother Vashishtiputra Satakarni. According to S. N. Sen he ruled during 120–149 CE;[11] according to Charles Higham, his regnal years spanned 138–145 CE.[61] He entered into a marriage alliance with the Western Satraps, marrying the daughter of Rudradaman I.[11]

The Junagadh inscription of Rudradaman I states that he defeated Satakarni, the lord of Dakshinapatha (Deccan), twice. It also states that he spared the life of the defeated ruler because of close relations:[61]

"Rudradaman (...) who obtained good report because he, in spite of having twice in fair fight completely defeated Satakarni, the lord of Dakshinapatha, on account of the nearness of their connection did not destroy him."

— Junagadh rock inscription

According to D. R. Bhandarkar and Dineshchandra Sircar, the ruler defeated by Rudradaman was Gautamiputra Satakarni. However, E. J. Rapson believed that the defeated ruler was his son Vasishthiputra Pulumavi.[84] Shailendra Nath Sen and Charles Higham believe that the defeated ruler was Vashishtiputra's successor Shivaskanda or Shiva Sri Pulumayi (or Pulumavi).[61][11]

As a result of his victories, Rudradaman regained all the former territories previously held by Nahapana, except for the extreme south territories of Pune and Nasik. Satavahana dominions were limited to their original base in the Deccan and eastern central India around Amaravati.

Coin of Yajna Sri Satakarni, British Museum.

Sri Yajna Sātakarni, the last person belonging to the main Satavahana dynastic line, briefly revived the Satavahana rule. According to S. N. Sen, he ruled during 170–199 CE.[11] Charles Higham dates the end of his reign to 181 CE. His coins feature images of ships, which suggest naval and marine trade success.[61] Wide distribution of his coins, and inscriptions at Nashik, Kanheri and Guntur indicate that his rule extended over both eastern and western parts of Deccan. He recovered much of the territory lost the Western Kshatrapas, and issued silver coinage, imitating them. During the last years of his reign, the Abhiras captured the northern parts of the kingdom, around Nashik region.[11]

After Yajna Satakarni, the dynasty was soon extinguished following the rise of its feudatories, perhaps on account of a decline in central power.[85] On the other hand, the Western Satraps would continue to prosper for the next two centuries, until their extinction by the Gupta Empire. Yajna Sri was succeeded by Madhariputra Swami Isvarasena. The next king Vijaya ruled for 6 years. His son Vasishthiputra Sri Chadha Satakarni ruled for 10 years.[11] Pulumavi IV, the last king of the main line, ruled until c. 225 CE. During his reign, several Buddhist monuments were constructed at sites including Nagarjunakonda and Amaravati.[61] Madhya Pradesh was also part of his kingdom.[11]

After the death of Pulumavi IV, the Satavahana empire fragmented into five smaller kingdoms:[11]

1. Northern part, ruled by a collateral branch of the Satavahanas (which ended in early 4th century[61])
2. Western part around Nashik, ruled by the Abhira dynasty
3. Eastern part (Krishna-Guntur region), ruled by the Andhra Ikshvakus
4. South-western parts (northern Karanataka), ruled by the Chutus of Banavasi
5. South-eastern part, ruled by the Pallavas

• 
  Early Satavahana coinage, Satakarni issue, Maharashtra – Vidarbha type, 1st century BCE.
• 
  Satavahana 1st century BCE coin inscribed in Brahmi: "(Sataka)Nisa". British Museum
• 
  Coin of Gautamiputra Yajna Satakarni (r. 167 – 196 CE).

Madhukar Keshav Dhavalikar writes that "The Satavahana sculptures unfortunately has never been recognized as an independent school in spite of the fact it has its own distinctive characteristic features. The earliest in point of time is that in the Bhaja Vihara cave which marks the beginning of sculptural art in the Satavahana dominion around 200BC. It is profusely decorated with carvings, and even pillars have a lotus capital crowned with sphinx-like mythic animals."[119] Dhavalikar also writes that in Chankama "the panel occurring on the west pillar of Northern Gateway portrays a very important event in Buddha's life. It depicts votaries, two each on either side of what looks like a ladder which actually is the promenade which Buddha is supposed to have walked. It is said that Buddha, after attaining Enlightment, spent four weeks near the Bodhi tree. Of these, the third week he spent walking along the promenade (chankama) to and fro."[120]

Along with some of the above major Satavahana sculptures some more sculptures existed—namely, Dvarapala, Gajalaksmi, Shalabhanjikas, Royal Procession, Decorative pillar, etc.[121]

Royal earrings, Andhra Pradesh, 1st century BCE.

Several metal figurines are found that could be attributed to the Satavahanas. A hoard of unique bronze objects were also found from Bramhapuri. Numerous articles obtained from there were Indian but also reflected Roman and Italian influence. A small statue of Poseidon, wine jugs, and a plaque depicting Perseus and Andromeda were also obtained from the house from where the objects were found.[122] The fine elephant in the Ashmolean Museum, the Yaksi image in the British Museum,[123] and the cornucopia found in Posheri, kept at Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Vastu Sangrahalaya[124] can also be attributed to the Satavahana period.

The sculptures of the Amaravati Stupa and the wider Amaravati style represent the architectural development of the Satavahana periods. They built Buddhist stupas in Amravati (95 feet high). They also constructed a large number of stupas at Goli, Jaggiahpeta, Gantasala, Amravati Bhattiprolu, and Shri Parvatam. Caves IX and X, containing Ajanta paintings, were patronised by Satavahana, and the painting throughout the caves appear to have started with them. Ashokan Stupas were enlarged, the earlier bricks and wood works being replaced with stone works. The most famous of these monuments are the stupas, the most famous among them being the Amravati Stupa and the Nagarjunakonda Stupa.

The Satavahana paintings are the earliest surviving specimens—excluding prehistoric rock art—in India, and they are to be found only at the Ajanta Caves. There were two phases of artistic activity of Ajanta: the first occurring in the 2nd to 1st centuries BC, when Hinayana caves were excavated during Satavahana rule; the later in the second half of the 5th century under the Vakatakas. Vagaries of nature and some vandalism have taken a heavy toll on the Ajanta Caves. Only a few fragments related to the Satavahanas have survived in Caves No. 9 and 10, both of which are chaitya-grihas with stupas.

The most important surviving painting of the Satavahana period at Ajanta is the Chhadanta Jataka in Cave No. 10, but that, too, is only fragmentary. It is a painting of an elephant named Bodhisattva with six tusks, related to a mythological story. The human figures, both male and female, are typically Satavahanas, almost identical with their counterparts on the Sanchi Gateways so far as their physiognomy, costumes, and jewellery are concerned. The only difference is that the Sanchi figures have shed some of their weight.[125]

The Satavahana rulers are also remarkable for their contributions to Buddhist art and architecture. They built great stupas in the Krishna River Valley, including the stupa at Amaravati in Andhra Pradesh. The stupas were decorated in marble slabs and sculpted with subjects including scenes from the life of the Buddha, portrayed in a characteristic slim and elegant style. The regional Amaravati style of sculpture also influenced the sculpture of Southeast Asia.[126]

• 
  Amaravati Marbles, fragments of Buddhist stupa
• 
  Fragment of Amaravati stupa
• 
  Mara's assault on the Buddha, 2nd century, Amaravati style
• 
  Scroll supported by Indian Yaksha, Amaravati Stupa, 2nd–3rd century CE.

Himanshu Prabha Ray provides the following chronology, based on archaeological and numismatic evidence:[20]

The various Puranas give different lists of the Satavahana rulers. The Matsya Purana states that 30 Andhra kings ruled for 460 years, but some of its manuscripts name only 19 kings whose reigns add up to 448.5 years. The Vayu Purana also mentions that there were 30 Andhra kings, but its various manuscripts name only 17, 18, and 19 kings respectively; the reigns add up to 272.5, 300, and 411 years respectively. Many of these kings are not attested by historical evidence. On the other hand, some Satavahana kings attested by numismatic evidence (such as Rudra Satakarni) are not mentioned in the Puranas at all.[128]

Different scholars have explained these anomalies in different ways. Scholars such as R. G. Bhandarkar, D. C. Sircar and H. C. Raychaudhuri theorised that the Vayu Purana mentions only the main imperial branch of the dynasty, while the Matsya Purana puts together princes of all its branches.[128]

The names of the Andhra kings (in IAST), as mentioned in the various Puranas, are given below. These names vary across different manuscripts of the same Puranas, and some names are missing in some of the manuscripts. The list given below for each Purana contains the most exhaustive version. In the Puranas, Krishna (IAST: Kṛṣṇa) is described as brother of the first king, who overthrew the Kanva king Susharman. All other kings are described as sons of their predecessors. The first king of the Andhra-Bhrityas is also known as Shudraka or Suraka in the Kumarika Khanda of Skanda Purana (not present in the table below).[129]

S. Nagaraju relies on the Puranic lists of 30 kings, and gives the following regnal dates:[76]

Apart from the two traditional views (long and short chronologies) there is another kind of analysis pointing out to a "Mid-Chronology", as it was already proposed by Dr. Dehejia and others, and particularly most recently by Shailendra Bhandare, who regards Satavahana's rule extended more than three centuries (c. 150 BCE to 250 CE)[133] with the flourish of trans-national trade, urbanism and monumental architecture in South India.

Bhandare regards Simuka to have ruled since around 160-150 BCE and that this date would still fit in well with Pargiter's 460 years to the Satavahanas, as it would fix the end of the dynasty around 300 CE, not too far from the mid-3rd century as consensus approximately lies.[134] Regarding Siri Satakani and his wife Naganika, Bhandhare considers their rule to have been somewhere around 110 +/- 20 BCE.[134]

Bhandare also suggests the following sequence of reigns, based on his analysis of Satavahana coinage:[135]

• Gautamiputa Satakani (ca. 60–85 CE)
• Vasithiputa Siri Pulumayi (ca. 85–125 CE)
• Vasithiputa Siri Satakani (ca. 125–152 CE)
• Vasithiputa Siva Siri Pulumayi (ca. 152–160 CE)
• Vasithiputa Siri Khada Satakani (ca. 160–165 CE)
• Vasithiputa Vijaya Satakani (ca. 165–170 CE)
• Siri Yaña Satakani (ca. 170–200 CE)
• Gotamiputa Siri Cada (ca. 200–215 CE)
• Gotamiputa Siri Vijaya Satakani (ca. 215–225 CE)

On the other hand, based to a large degree on Shailendra Bhandare's work, with slight corrections, Andrew Ollett (2017) mentions the following reigns for the whole Satavahana dynasty:[136]

• Vasisthiputra Sri Chimuka Satavahana (ca. 120–96 BCE)
• Krsna (ca. 96–88 BCE)
• Sri Satakarni (ca. 88–42 BCE)
• Sakti
• Mantalaka
• Sundara
• Gautamiputra Siva Satakarni (?–60 CE)
• Gautamiputra Sri Satakarni (ca. 60–84 CE)
• Vasisthiputra Sri Pulumavi (ca. 84–119 CE)
• Vasisthiputra Sri Satakarni (ca. 119–148 CE)
• Vasisthiputra Sivasri Pulumavi (ca. 148–156 CE)
• Vasisthiputra Sriskanda Satakarni (ca. 156–170 CE)
• Gautamiputra Sriyajña Satakarni (ca. 171–199 CE)
• Gautamiputra Srivijaya Satakarni (ca. 200–205 CE)
• Vasisthiputra Sricanda Satakarni (ca. 206–220 CE)
• Mathariputra Sri Pulumavi (ca. 220–230 CE)