Review the main features of Satavahana polity.

The Maurya Empire collapsed in 187 BC and with it, ended an epoch of a nearly pan Indian political
power. The fall of the Maurya empire saw the rise of several political powers, often engaged in
conflict in several regions of the subcontinent. The Deccan first experienced a monarchical polity
with the emergence of the Satavahanas. The period in the historiography of early India has been
portrayed as an age of crisis. Such an idea stems from a historians preference for the study of long
lasting empires. The ideal polity is an expansive and centralized polity which is projected as a norm
in the absence of an overall crisis. The post Mauryan phase has been described by many historians as
a phase of crisis.

B D Chattopadhyay has shown that a gradual progress with the emergence and consolidation of
monarchical polity prior to the emergence of the Satavahana dynasty. Inscriptions, coins and the
Puranas furnish principal information about the Satavahana realm. The Satavahanas are identified
with the Andhras of the Puranas.

Some rulers known from coins and inscriptions are not mentioned in the Puranic lists. There is
disagreement about the chronology of the dynasty. Some historians place the beginning of
Satavahana rule in c. 271 BCE and others in c. 30 BCE. It is likely that the rule of this dynasty began in
the mid-1st century BCE and ended in the early 3rd century CE. Historians are also divided on
whether the Satavahanas initially came to power in the eastern or western Deccan. The fact that the
Puranas call them Andhras suggests that they were originally based in the Andhra region or that they
belonged to the Andhra tribe. Apart from the name Andhra', the discovery of early Satavahana coins
at Kotalingala and Sangareddy in the Karimnagar district of Andhra Pradesh has been used to
support the hypothesis that the Satavahanas began their rule in the eastern Deccan. On the other
hand, inscriptions in the Naneghat and Nasik caves point to the western Deccan as their original
locus.

The Satavahana empire eventually came to cover modern Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra; at
times it also included northern Karnataka, eastern and southern Madhya Pradesh, and Saurashtra.
Pliny mentions the Andhra country as including many villages and 30 walled towns, and states that
its rulers had a large army of 100,000 infantry, 2,000 cavalry, and 1,000 elephants.

Given the controversy over the date of the beginning of Satavahana rule, it is difficult to give
absolute dates for the various rulers of this dynasty. However, the sequence of rulers is fairly certain.
The founder Simuka was succeeded by his brother Kanha, who extended the empire westward at
least as far as Nasik. The third king of the dynasty was Satakarni I, who enjoyed a long reign of about
56 years. Kharavela, the Chedi king of Kalinga (in eastern India), claims in his Hathigumpha
inscription to have defied a king named Satakarni in his second regnal year.

The Satavahanas and Shakas were involved in prolonged conflict. Control over the premier ports
such as Bhrigukachcha (Broach), Kalyan, and Suparaka (Sopara) was an important issue in this
conflict. The initial expansion of The Kshaharata Kshatrapas must have been at the expense of the
Satavahanas. The steady rise of the Satavahanas in the wesyern and central parts of Deccan received
a major jolt from the Shaka rulers.
 The fortunes of the Satavahanas were revived by Gautamiputra Satakarni, during whose reign the
empire seems to have reached its peak, in the early part of the second century. The achievements of
this king are described and eulogized in an inscription of his mother Gautami Balashri at Nasik,
engraved after his death, during the reign of his son Pulumayi II. He is described as the destroyer of
the Shakas, Pahlavas, and Yavanas, as the up rooter of the Kshaharatas, and as the restorer of the
glory of the Satavahanas. Gautamiputra defeated Nahapana and recovered many of the territories
that the Shakas had earlier wrested from the Satavahanas.

Gautamiputra’s success was not merely limited to his victories over the Shakas. A Nashik inscription,
dated in the 18th year of Gautamiputra's reign, records the grant to Buddhist monks of a piece of
land that was earlier in the possession of Ushavadata, son-in-law of Nahapana. Another inscription
at Karle refers to the grant of Karajika village (identified with a village in Pune district), suggesting
that the king's control extended over the Pune area. A hoard of Nahapana's coins found at
Jogalthambi in Nashik district includes coins that were re-struck by Gautamiputra. Gautamiputra's
coins have been found in the eastern Deccan as well. The Nashik inscription of Gautami Balashri
suggests that his rule extended from Malwa and Saurashtra in the north to the Krishna in the south,
and from Berar in the east to Konkan in the west. The statement that the king's horses drank the
waters of the three oceans reflects his claim to extensive conquest in trans-Vindhyan India.
However, towards the end of his reign, it is possible that Gautamiputra lost some of the territories
he had conquered from the Kshaharatas to the Kardamakas.

The end of Gautamiputra’s reign of 24 years came when the throne passed on to his son and
successor, Vasishthiputra Pulumayi. His coins have been found in various parts of Andhra Pradesh.
Due to his engagements in the east, the Shakas may have got a chance to recover some of their
territory.

Yajnashri Satakarni was another important Satavahana king. His coins depict ships, some single
masted, others double masted. He seems to have revived the struggle against the Shakas, and was
probably the last king of his dynasty to control the eastern and western Deccan. The successors of
Yajnashri Satakarni included Gautamiputra Vijaya Satakarni, Chanda Satakarni, Vasishthiputra Vijaya
Satakarni, and Pulumavi. Some of the later Satavahana rulers are not mentioned in the Puranic king-
lists and are only known through their coins.

The political and military success of the Satavahanas since the days of Gotamiputra was once again
cut short by a group of Shaka rulers known as Kardamaka house. This family appears to have come
into prominence Kshatapa Chashtana, who was ruling western India with his grandson Rudradaman
I. The Shaka Satavahana struggle entered a new phase. Rudradaman established his power over
northern part of Kathiawad, Kutch, the lower part of the Indus valley among other regions.
Rudradaman I, according to the Junagarh prasasthi, twice defeated Satakarni, the lord of the Deccan
but spared him on account of nearness of relation. There was hostility between the two empires and
was marked by the ascendency of the Shakas. Despite the heavy losses, the Satavahanas maintained
to retain their control over the primary stronghold in Nasik and western Deccan. The spectacular
spread of the Shaka prowess could not be kept up by Rudradaman’s successors. The Shaka-
Satavahana rivalry over a protracted period was indeed a feature of the politics of peninsular India.

The Satavahanas claimed Brahmana descent and anchored themselves to the Brahmanical Vedic
tradition. References to the performance of the great Vedic sacrifices by Satakarni I in the inscription
of Naganika at Naneghat suggest that this was an important means of acquiring political legitimacy.
The use of matronyms by the Satavahana kings is significant, but does not constitute evidence of a
matriarchal or matrilineal system.

Like the Shakas and Kushanas, they too had a number of subordinate chiefs or rulers who
acknowledged their political paramountcy. The maharathis and mahabhojas—local rulers who had
emerged in the pre-Satavahana period—were encapsulated and integrated into the Satavahana
polity, and continued to be important even after the establishment of Satavahana rule. Coins
indicate the sway of families such as the Kuras, Anandas, and the maharathi Hasti in various parts of
the Deccan. The maharathis and mahabhojas mentioned in Satavahana inscriptions appear as
donors at Buddhist cave sites in the western Deccan; they had matrimonial ties with the Satavahanas
and among themselves. The Satavahana empire was divided into a number of large administrative
divisions known as aharas.

The earliest inscriptions recording royal grants of land, including those associate with tax
exemptions, belong to the Satavahana and Kshatrapa periods. The Naneghat inscription of Naganika
(1st century BCE) mentions that villages were among the items offered as dakshina to officiating
priests when certain shrauta sacrifices, including the ashvamedha, were performed by her husband
Satakarni I. A 2nd century CE Nashik cave inscription of Ushavadata describes the donor as one who
has given 16 villages to the gods and Brahmanas. The inscription also records the grant of a field by
Ushavadata to provide food for the Buddhist monks dwelling in the cave. An inscription of
Gautamiputra Satakarni in one of the Nashik caves belongs roughly to the same period. It records
the grant to Buddhist monks of a field located in a village that previously fell within the jurisdiction
of Ushavadata. This is the first inscription that associates certain specific privileges and exemptions
with a gift of land. It states that the land was not to be entered or disturbed by royal troops, was not
to be dug for salt, was free from the control of state officials, and was to enjoy all sorts of immunities
(pariharas).

The Satavahana dynasty came to an end in the mid-3rd century CE. The breakup of the empire paved
the way for the rise of the Vakatakas in the Deccan, Kadambas in Mysore, Abhiras in Maharashtra,
and Ikshvakus in Andhra. It would not be wrong to state that the conflict between the Shakas and
the Satavahanas eventually led to the demise of the latter. An analysis of the struggle underlines
that both sought after common areas. They appeared to have been aware of the importance of the
sea-borne trade of the Roman empire and vied with each other to capture and control the ports like
Sopara and Kalyan. Economic factors strongly influenced this rivalry.