Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela and Bhabru Edict of Asoka

SR No.: 006726
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Shashi Kant
Publisher: D K Print World
Publication Year: 2000
Total Pages: 196
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 16 MB

Page 67

The Date of the Inscription and its Author
the earliest Satavahana record so far known from the Krishna district in Andhra Pradesh on the eastern coast.
The founder of the Satavahana line was Simuka who is assigned a reign of 23 years. He was succeeded by his younger brother Kṛṣṇa (Kanha) who reigned for 18 years. Then came Śrī Satakarni whose exploits are recorded in the Nanaghat inscriptions of his queen Nāgānikā. He reigned for ten years (c. 194-184 BC). He is said to have been a very powerful king who performed many sacrifices including the Rajasūya and the Asvamedha which proclaim political supremacy and ascendancy.
41
Two facts strongly suggest that this Satakarni should be the Satakamnim of the instant epigraph. The passage acitayitaSātakamnim indicates that Satakarni was a powerful ruler with considerable influence to the west of Kalinga and it was really a matter of great courage not to pay any heed to him and send troops in the western direction. On the basis of the available evidence Śrī Śātakarni appears to have possessed such influence and power, but his namesake, the sixth ruler of the line who came 36 years after him, is not credited with any military or political exploits. The tenor of the inscription suggests that Khāravela was a man of action himself and would not have referred to anybody in such a rather deferential tone unless he was convinced of his superiority as a man of action. The event relates to the second year of Khäravela's reign. A year later he himself marches into the Vindhyas and subdues the Rathikas and Bhojakas, the feudatory chiefs most probably owing allegiance to the Satavahanas and at least under their influence. This seems to indicate that the power of the Satavahanas had rather suddenly declined by that time. Khāravela did not come into direct conflict with the Satavahanas most probably because they were remote from his dominions. This discussion leads us to the conclusion that the 2nd regnal year of Khāravela should coincide with the 10th or 9th year of Satakarni's reign, i.e., 184 or 185 BC.
The other fact supporting this synchronism is that a total