The Satavahana Dynasty of Daksinipatha
By Purushottam Lal Bhargava
Summary
'The Satavahana Dynasty of Daksinipatha' by Purushottam Lal Bhargava reassesses the chronology of the Satavahanas, a dynasty that ruled much of the Deccan around the turn of the Common Era. Bhargava begins by summarising Puranic lists of Satavahana kings and their supposed 300‑year rule, noting that when the regnal years given for each king are totalled they amount to just under three centuries. He presents a table (reproduced from earlier historians) listing each monarch—Simuka, Krishna (Kanha), Satakarni I, Pulumavi I, etc.—with their corresponding regnal periodsfile:///home/oai/share/563026_compressed-273-366.pdf#:~:text=Skand%27agupta%20136%2C%20137%2C%20138%20G,Damodarpur%20copper%20plate. Bhargava then surveys epigraphic and numismatic evidence to adjust these durations. For example, he notes that Gautamiputra Satakarni’s inscription at Nashik indicates that he conquered territory from the Kshaharatas and Western Kshatrapas, suggesting a flourishing empire around the mid‑second century CE. Bhargava examines debates over the sequence of kings named Pulumavi and the identification of “Sivaskanda” with “Sri Yajna Satakarni.” He also addresses the contentious issue of the dynasty’s founder: while most sources identify Simuka as the first Satavahana, some Puranas mention Krishna (Kanha) or Satakarni. By aligning inscriptional dates with astronomical references (such as the use of the Saka era), Bhargava proposes a revised chronology placing the dynasty’s rise around 230 BCE and its decline around 220 CE. The article situates the Satavahanas in the broader political landscape, noting their conflicts with the Sakas and the residual Mauryan powers, and highlights their patronage of Buddhism and Prakrit literature. Bhargava concludes that although the Puranic total of 300 years may be approximate, careful correlation of sources yields a coherent timeline for one of South India’s earliest imperial dynasties.
Conclusion
Bhargava’s study underscores the challenges of reconstructing early Deccan history. By dissecting Puranic regnal lists and supplementing them with inscriptions and coins, he offers a plausible chronology for the Satavahanas. His revised timeline affirms the dynasty’s emergence in the late third century BCE and demise in the early third century CE. The article highlights the dynasty’s political resilience amid rival powers and its cultural contributions to Buddhism and the Prakrit language, demonstrating how critical scrutiny of sources can clarify ancient Indian chronology.