Indian Antiquary Vol 47

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarkar
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 76

72
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
( MARCH. 1918
is a clear indication of Satakarņi being a paramount sovereign. 11 Naganikâ was the daughter of the Maharathi Tranakayiro of the Angiya family. She had two sons, viz. Vedisri and Saktisrî (Hakusiri). When the inscription was actually incised, Satakarņi was dead and queen Naganikå was regent during the minority of her son Vedišri. There can be no doubt that Satakarņi was a powerful monarch. For the Hà thigumphi inscription gives us to understand that he was the ruler of the whole country to the west of Kalinga. Satakarni, it is true, has been styled the paramount sovereign of Dakshiņâpatha, but it does not at all mean that his might was confined to the Dekkan only. His second inscription has been found on an arched gateway (torana) of the celebrated stúpa at Sanchi' in the Bhopal State, Central India. This shows that Mâlwâ also owned his sway, and it is quite possible that his power was extended still further north.
A long interval intervenes between the earlier and the later inscriptions of the Satavahana dynasty. A period of 89 years has been unanimously allotted by the Puranas to the first three kings just described. According to this calculation the third king, viz., Satakarni, ceased to reign in A.D. 16. Gautamiputra (Satakarni), according to the Purâņas, came to the throne in A.D. 133, which fits excellently as we shall see shortly. There was thus an interval of 117 years during which no Andhra inscription has so far been found. Of course, we can imagine that Vedisri, when he came of age, succeeded to the throne of his father Satakarni. His name, it is true, is nowhere inentioned in the Puranas, but as a king is described also by his epithets, it is possible that Apilava or Apîtaka may be another name for Vedisri. The Puranas show a remarkable agreement in point of the names and the lengths of the individual names. We may therefore provisionally fill up this long period with reigns recorded in the Puranas, It is true that no Andhra inscription has been discovered during this interval, but a good many epigraphic records are known which belong to this period. They clearly tell us that an alien dynasty had risen to power and had for a time eclipsed the glory of the Satavahanas.
The name of the new dynasty was Kshaharâta, and its members called themselves Kshatrapas. The name Kshatrapa is worth considering. At first sight it seems tempting to take the name to mean Kshatram pâtiti Kshatrapah, the protector of the warrior class. But such a title is unknown to Sanskrit or Prakrit literature, and must be taken to have been borrowed from a foreign language-a conclusion strengthened by the fact that ail the early chiefs of the Kshatrapa families bear foreign names. Like the Greek term Satrap, Kshatrapa seems to be a Sanskrit adaptation of the old Persian kshatra pávan, 'protector of the kingdom', which was used to denote the governor of a Persian province. Four Kshatrapa Houses have
1 Bühler wrongly supposes that the sacrifices narrated in the large Nânânghât inscription were all performed by the queen Näganikâ. He himself admits that" according to tho Sdstras, women are not allowed to offer Brauta sacrifices, and that the Brahmanas who perform such sacrifices for them (striyajaka) are severely blamed." It is true he further says, that " that prohibition does not apply to queens who may be conducting the government of a state, either independently or for minor sons," but this is a mere gratuitous assumption as no proof has been adduced by him in support of his position. Again, the Nânaghat record speaks of Afvamedha sacrifice as having been twice performed. It is inconceivable that Någanikå, even as queen-regent, celebrated it of her own accord and to indicate her paramount sovereignty. An Asvamedha sacrifice is performed by a king who lays claims to universal monarchy by conquering all neighbouring princes and as Naganika's husband Satakami has been styled a pratilatachakra, it is proper and natural to suppose that it was he who celebrated the sacrifice twice. What appears to be the case is that Satakarpi it must be, who carried out the sacrifices referred to in the epigraph, and as all sacrifices are performed by Yajamânas along with their consorte, Naganika has been associated with him. 19 Lüders' List of Brahms Inscriptions, No. 345.
13 Ibid, No. 346.