ARCHAECLOGY AND HISTO ey « 4s) OM fede 2 ED Call oped a (DelL:, 198 1) bape Transition to the Early Historical Phase in the Deccan : A Note Vol TT ‘ 71 Hi B.D. \Chattopadhyaya Perhaps it would not be fae too wrong to hold that the secognisable shape of the early historical Period in the Deccan as also in some adjoining regions like Vidarbha emsrged in the period. of the Sitavahanas. The stages leading up ‘0 the period of the Sitavihanas are, however, at the -moment far from clear, and this lack of clarity has in turn affeted in a large measure our understanding not only of the steucture of the Sitavahana period itself but also of the broad processes which went into the making of the easly historical society in the Devcon, What was happening in the Decoun in the pre-Sitavahana and Sitavihana phases was clearly not identical with the long span of culture change in north India leading up to the emergence of Magadhan empire; yet in the wake ofthe early historical period in the Deccan, there was a certain commonality in the cultural eenients of the {wo repions, suggested, among others, by the use of a commonly derived seript and of varieties of coins, This brief note does not purport to examine the vast corpus of archaeological data. from the Devean, which have accumulated over the yeers, to understand the passage {rom the pre-Sdtavihana, to the Sitavihana phase; it simply attempis to provide, with focus on the significance of the numis- matic evidence, a fresh review of the problem and to olfer tentative suggestions, t Archacologically the immediate base line to start from for this review is the Megalithic culture Phase, although one ought to remember at the same time that Megalithic and eatly historical do not Aecessarily represent two distinct chronological entities that could not have overlapped. While this implies simultancous existence of Mexalithic eulural teadition with the ewly emerging historical culture and interpenetration between them (stiggested by the evidence of coins and of pottery), there was definitive change in the complexion of eulture at sites. where the Megalithic phase was succeeded by early historical, This change cannot be viewed either in terms of a gradual evolution from the Megalithic cultute nor in terms of a wholesale north Indisn impict because by the stage the early historical phase of the Deccan crystallized, it had absorbed some elements non-indigenous to both orth and south, However, chrorolosically, the appeurance of north Indian traits, suggested by78 Archacology and History Pottery, coinage, script and architectural and sculptural features (associated largely with stfpa at this stage), predates non-indigenous elements,! and the transformation of the ‘proto-historica com Plexion of culture of the Deccan, at its initial phase, may be viewed as deriving from interaction With expanding north and west-central Indian culture zones, dating to pre-Mauryan and Mauryan periods? We may underline this at this stage because i wll have beating on what we hve sy later that the transition derives essentidlty from jnteriction dd not {vom atiministrative integration, despite the occurrence of Aiokan records in suficiently large numbers and the existence of Mauryan ‘administtative centre and officials in the region." Thelunderstanding that iscrucial, so far. as the 1 phase of the transition is concerned, relates to what was happening across the Deccan in. the third-second century B.C. as a result of interaction with northern and central India, and the hypo- thesis we advance is that the process of the emergence of what we may call ‘localities’ marks. this carly transitional phase. And if we are to further understand the structure of the phase represented by the Sitavahanas, whose power bocomes recognisable from the first century B.C., the ‘locality’ come Ponents of the Sitavahana empire need to be given a consideration not generally accorded to. them An analysis of the structure of the ‘localities’ would involve detailed investigation into their asc aeology; what is roughly meant is that ‘localities’ are represented by distinct (in most cases. are! acological) early historical site in relation to the apecifc area in which they occur and by a. pattern of control which is essentially limited to the area but which certainly interacts with other localities” Mathura and Kausimbi of north India of the immediately post-Mauryan period may be cited ay examples ofits two localities; however, both Mathurd and Kaulambr cover a long span of legendary and recorded history in their existence 1s mahdjunapadas anil for the Deccan of the stage we are {alking about perhaps more appropriate parallels would be Madhyamika of the Sibis? in Rajasthan or Agrodaka in Haryana Both, according to coins found in them, corresponded to distinct Janapadas, and despite the absence ofthe term janapada in the Deccan, the ‘localities’ may be taken 16 ,approximate. what is conveyed by the term Janapada, The passage of a ‘locality’ into the early historical phase in the Deecan would imply, to use north Indian parallels once again, soine form of Proto-State formation at a local level und this formation has to be ultimately seen in relation to the pan-Deccan empire of the Satavahanas of a later period. To illustrate the process of the emergence and some traits of localities in pre-Sitavihana Deccan 2, may begin by citing an epigraphic Yocument which has been known to scholars for a longtime pirumiah hs not been examined in relation to the archaeological data bearing upon the cars histori The Bhattiprotu relic casket inscriptions* from the Krishna distric of Andhra Pradesh speak of a rija Khubiraka (Kuberaka) who had obviously emerged as a ruler deltaic Andhra some time during the close of the second century B.C. It would be imonen io regard Kuberaka as x ruler of Andhra—in fact, present state boundaries of Andhra, Kararake Gre Maharashtra would be totally irrelevant to understand the nature pf the “localities of ihe ecatly historical phase, Epigraphic documents from other centres of Andhra may suggest ee aeageence of other ‘locality’ nuclei, not perhaps, at the. same point of time, but nevene, tee dstine from one another. The styeture of the ‘locality which r4jd Kuberaka’ represented wera aronem the, Bhattiprotu inscriptions which nevertheless suggest the association with i cf eek cach as Goldlaka, Sithb, et, Kuberaka hintself was the pramukha of the ‘Sidhe which suggests thatthe king was more aJeadpy of the community than a moverch ana that bis ‘community Was one among others. Whatwpshave here seoms to somewhat correspond to the Ficlets ieee te Berth but since much of the contents of the Bhattiprolu incriptons ie see sufficiently clea iLS —— Transition to the early Historical Phase in the Deccan : A Note~B.D, Chattopadhyaya nm pre-Sitavahana phase, from pre-literate to literate stage, and this is where a coi ‘numismatic evidence, us the only regular series presenting the pre same archaeological context, becomes relevant. ration of the erate to literate sequence in the In the Devean, the earliest inscribed coin-series in the punch-marked series. So far, unlike in norti India, punch-marked coins do not seem to have been found, at the earliest levels, in association with luninscribed east coins.” Although punch-marked coins continued to be manufactured in the early cen- turies of the Christian era, punch-marked coins of the Deccan which can be associated with localities for example, coins from the Amaravati hoard,* the rightly discovered Veerapuram (Kurnool district, Andhra Pradesh)? stray coins from Duvvuru-Athreru® or from Vaddamanu," may date back 10 the Mauryan period. There were two other uninsetibed series, now found to be widely distributed in the Deosin : the uninscribed cast coins and wniscribed die-struck coins? ‘The point which all these uniseribed series taken together make is that despite the possibility of their association with distinct localities of their manufacture, they indicate network of contact within the Deccan in a period removed from that of high incidence of punch marked and uninscribed cast cons in north India alone. The emergence of ‘local’ inscribed series of the Deccan has to be placed against this background, At sites like Kotalinpala in the Karimnagar district? and Veerap iram'* in the Kurnool district, both in Andhra Pradesh, inscribed coins seem 1o succeed tuninser bed coins—much i the same Way as inscribed ‘locel" coins! do in the north. This is not to say that uninseribed coins ceased 10 be minted; they continued! well into the early centuries of the Christicn era, But the mseribed coins, by providing the names of their issuers, for the first me reveal the ‘political’ profile of emergent localities acros the Devean and make comparisons with literary and epigraphic materia! possible, Th t ‘locality’ rule preceded the emergence of the Sita dhanas as major power in the Deccan is by 10w sufficiently clear from the ‘ve {coins such as those of the Kuras and coins with the appellation Mahdrathi bo:h precede and o¥etlap with Satavahana coins in stratigraphic contexts. This stratigraphic position is now further Gonfirmed by excavation at Veerapuram (Kurnool district, ‘Andhra Pradesh) where coins of local Maydrathis first merge with uninscribed coins and then occur ‘with a few Satavihana pieces." ‘The tWo unstratified finds! at Kotalingala in Karimnagar district ‘add substantially to our knowledge lof this phase in that they provide names of local rulers like Godhadra, Samigopa, Chimuki, Kamvaya, Narana, in addition to common Sitavahana coin-legends like Sitavahana and Sitakaroi, Sites which reveal transition to the literate eatly historical phase, through local epigraphy and coin series, are thus many: they extend across the Deccan from coastal ‘Andhra through Karnataka to Maharashtra, from the ‘locality’ where Kuberaka of the Bhattiprolu ‘elie casket inscriptions was a king to Brahmapuri (Kolhapur) where coins of local Kuras have been found in a pre-Sitavahana context."® The transition from the phase of uninseribed coins to that of inscribed coins of local rulers is not enough to grasp the details of processes involved, but a few suggestions may be advanced, —1f the Rathikas and the Bhojas of epigraphs?® are considered to be fources respectively of the terms Mahdrajhi and Makabhoja, then the prefix in both terms would indi- ‘eate emergence of higher status, ‘The term Mahdbhoja occuts in inscriptions® but not on coi the term Mahdratni occurs on both types of material, Mahdrathi was not used in relation to a com munity but was expressive of status, perhaps lower than that of one claiming to be 8 raja, for a distinction in status implied by these terms is suggested by some coins found at Brahmapuri. As & term denoting status Mahdrathi was widely in use in Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra, The jpre-Sitavihana Kuras of Brahmagiti used it, so did the equally early local rulers of Chandravalli and thoue of Veerapuram whose family name was pethaps Hast? ‘The transformation of ethnic na Rathika and Biigja into expressions of status-if such transformation is admitted—points to gradual formation of a stratum of cites at the level of ‘localities’ prior to the emergence of the730 Archaeology and History Sitavihanas as a major power, and this process, taking into consideration different categories of evidence—archacological, epigraphic and numismatic~can be located within’ the time span ‘extending from the second century B.C. to the middle of the first century B.C. This process did not by any means coine to a stop once the Satavahanas rose to power; the penetration of a segment of the Mahimeghavihanas of Kalinga in the Andhra region in the Sitavihana period or the emergence of the Tksviikus and the Kadambas in the pos jana period may be considered ‘local? manifestations of the continuity of the same process. Applyiug the same perspective to an analysis of the early phase of the Sitavahana may yicld fruitful results because it is likely to bring disparate data on them to some kind of order, but such an attempt will be beyond the scope of this note; on the basis of the foregoing only the following points may be made: (@ I the absence of a voluminous, roughly stratfiable litreary evidence to supplement archaeological data,?* the transition to the early historical phase in the Deccan has to be studied not by considering the time span from the second century B.C, to early third century ‘AD. as an undifferentiated one but by envisaging stages which would correspond to changing nature of its archaeological material. Of special significance seems to have been the passage from pre-literate to literate phase in the archaeology of this region—a change which introduces to us a stratum of ‘local’ level lites emerging primarily from within local communities in a situation in wh the network of cultural interaction was wide, i) Tt has not yet been examined in detail how the history and distribution pattern of “local* level elites of the pre-Sitavihana period should affect our view of the structure of the Sitavahana period itself. The archaeological traits of the pre-Sitavahana phase continue into the Sttavahana periods in nuumismatics, for example, the most commonly used Sitavihana coin metals like lead and potin were of yre-Sitavihana origin. It has often been underlined that such groups as those of the Mahdrathis figure prominently i epigraphic records of the Sitavahana period:2* at the same time, there is the general impression that the stratum of local level rulers was, ‘exterminated’. to make room for 4 unified structure of the Sitavihana empire. Itis doubtful if, despite the use of the title daksinapathetvara® by them, the Sitavahanas ever achieved Administrative integration of the entire Deccan, To cite numismatic evidenceyonce again, the Kuras, the Anandas and the ‘Mahdrathi Vathi (Hasti) family soem to have sites, ‘respectively at Vadgaon-Madhavpur (Belgaum),2? Chandravalli?# and Veerapurany? in the Sitavahana period, For understanding the structure of the Sitavahana empire, it may'perhaps be more profitable to locate the ‘nuclear’ areas’ of the Sitavahanas and to examine how they related to the ‘localities’ of the pre-Saiavahana phase. To an extent this can be done by mapping out the aharas or the administrative divisions of the Satavahands and directly held centres such as Vijaya- purt or Nagarjunakonda in different stages of Satavahana history. In contrast to the anonymity of ‘localities’, the Sitavahana dhdras (some of which, like Govardhana, may be identified as having centred around well-known archaeological sites) were offically designat- -ed areas, and if the emergence of territorial names in the Deccan, such as those of Andhra patha, Vetgi, Karmardsira, Kuntala, etc. is considered a departure from the earlier anonymity of ‘localities’, then we may envisage a further stage in the development of the istorical period in the Deccan, deriving from the Satavahana phase. NOTES & REFERENCES 4. Contact wih ths Roman world on a significant scale which accounts for the presence of non-indigenous archacolozical objects and traits in addition o coins, can be dated from the clote of the frst century B.C, 2. This is suggested not only by the drtheidsira account of the advantages of Dokslpapathe route (Vil. 13-24) but= Transition to the early Historical Phase in the Deccan : A Note~B.D. Chattopadhyaya mt alo by such sources as Surana in which Heatighhina is lioked with various points like Ujayint, Kausambt, astiand even Rijagrha; ced in Motichandra, Trade and Trade routes in ancient India, Delbi. 197, pp. 23-24. Bunta, A Tribal Hiserbof bncient Intia—a memismatle approach, Caleuta, 1934, pp. ee MIRE . Ibid, pp. 1 r G., Bhier.*The Bnattiprolu inscriptiohsss Eplgraphia Indica, Vol, 2.\ pp. 328-329; also D.C. Sitcar, Seleet Inseriptons bearing on Indian History and Clilizaton, vol I, second edition, Caleatia University, 1965, pp. 224-28. . According to M. Williams. the meanings of goyhl are: an assembly, meeting, society, association, femlly coonee- tions (es 1, 2. 2. 2. 24 26. ”. 2%. the dependent ot junior branches) frendship, partnership, fellowship, A’ Sanskrit-English Dietlonary, ‘Xeprinted by Moti Lal Banarsidass, Delhi, 1986, p. 387 For references see 8.0. Chattopadnyaya, “South India: A Survey of Numismatic research (1979-1984)' tio pres. . Pil Gupta. The Amararati Hoard of Silver Punch marked colns (Andhra Pradesh Government Museum series, No. 6), Hyder pp. 140-148. TV.G . Sasti etal, Veeruparam : A type site for cultural study tm the Krishna Valley, Hyderabad, 1984, Chapter 8 and Apoendi | LEK. Sarma, ‘Importan’ numismatic finds from Duyuuru and Alluru, dittit Nellore, Andhra Pradesh’, The Journal of Academy of Indian Numtamaties amd Sigllogrephy, Vol. 3 (1980) wD. 12:18. Indian Archaeology 1980-81 A Review, pp. 1-2 1.0. Chattopadhyaya, op. et; see also A. Mitra Sastri."Prs-Satavahana and Satevahana coloage of the Deccan’, residential Address, atthe Nami Journal of the Nunismatie Soclety of India, Vol 48 (1982), pp. I-16, For finds of coins at Kotalingata and discussions on them, ee P.V.P. Sastry, ‘unknowa coins ofthe Satavahanss and their predecessors’, Mumismatle Digest Vol 2, 1. (1978). pp. 10-21; lem, ‘Some more colas from 3, pt, 211979, pp 17-28; PL. Gupea,“Ketatingala find of posteMautya Coins, (bid, Vol. 2, pt, 2.11978) pp 2019 \, 1986; for eheonology also see D.D. Kosambi, Indian Numismatics, Orient Longma 18 see J. Allan, Cutulonue ofthe coins of Ancient India, London, 1936; awe AK. Nar ‘el, Seminar Papers on Local coins of Northern India, ¢.¥00 9.C.--300 8.1, Varanasi, 1968. Sse P.(- Gupta, ‘Satavahana coins from excavations, in A, Mitta Sati, ely Colnage af the Satavahanas ond Coins from Exeevestont, Nagar, 1977, pp. 1286140, 1 TN.G, Sate, op elt PAY P. Sastys op lt 1. Gupta, Satnvanana cons fom excavation feet dem, *Coms fom Hrabmapur excavation af the Deeton College Reseach nstte, Vol. 2 (196-8 09. 3884, {hs Ratha are mentioned in lock Edit V of Atoka; be Bhoas figure nis XI Rock EAlet, D.C. Sica, pp 22,36, The Rahikas and Whoabas ste tenioned together in the Uathigumpea insriptien of haravela te following orn: snr Rrhta-Dhneke dp 213 For reference see H mms P- Ray, Monastery and Guild: Commerce under the Siterdhanas, Oxfors U 16 pp 7 Gipta,‘Satasshans coi from ecanaion’ let TN.G. Sasi, ope. II Weer Godavari sire) inscription of Mahirja Kaligasholiyakadhipat, Mabtmeshan Tro te Vloura (Guntur dvr) intnton at Aira Manasuén of ssond century AD, Eplrapha nde, Vol. 32 pp. 2-87, ‘Two prem which peruse crop upin studied on the Stavthanas late to i) chronology and (i) orignal homeland ren erspesive on he role sy pets be adap by comeing the cae coi tne tf ihe Satay hanas as compatsbe tothe oeal interited series of the Decean. The chronology of the earliest Sitavahana sine my then be comparahe with that of oer lea inscribed srs and thelr tribution pair should indicate prevence of serments of Satavshantfa in diferent areas of the Dean before the thrust Toward western Deccan where the ery econ of he imperial fam’ we locate. For nonin edi, vocal evoltion dew fo the emergence of the exly hsoviealpefiod has been anaiyed by jing utanostion of archaeon ee RS, Shasta, Materiel Culture ond. Sotal Former Tons nAnclen adi, Dai 1983; nd Roma Thapar, From Lloage 9 Save: Socll Formations tn the Mld- Fir Sitenntam Cathe Ganta Valley, Oxford Univers See HimanahaP. Ray, op. ct. Thi vggeved not ony by dona ihofan, bu avo by eves nhee the Sitatabanas ha mieimonit Feltsons wih them This expression ute! hy --Gupta, “Svavahana cons from excava oes Bulletin ity‘oe Archaeology and History 2. For example, Nasik inscription of year 19 of Vasisjhiputra Pujumsvi, D.C, Sitea, op. cit, p. 208. "A two thowand year old towa and ils architecture in Va in M.S. Nagaraja Ruo, ed, Madhu, Delhi, 1981, pp. 47-98 {ha impression one derives (vom the Fact thatthe earliest Satavihana coins at Chandravali are thote of ‘Yajta Satakari; see P.L. Gupta, ‘Satavahana coins from excavations, ae, eit; also, Exeavalion at Chandvavoli (Nysore State, Isued a8 a supplement to the Annual Report of the Mysore Archaeological Development for the year 1929, Bangalore, 1931, p17, 32, T.V.G. Santi, op, cit y-Madhaypur (Nelgavm) in