Inscription number 174
Banavasi Inscription of Vinhukada Satkarni — Regnal year 12.
Provenance: In a niche in the courtyard of the Madhukesvara
temple at Banavasl village, 24 kms. from Sirsi, North Kanara Dlstrict, Karnataka.
Script: Brahmi .
Language Prakrit.< /span>
Banavasi is an ancient city located near Sirsi in Karnataka & is known as temple town. Banavasi was the ancient capital of the Kannada empire Kadamba that ruled modern Karnataka state. Banavasi contains some of the oldest architectural monuments in southern India.
References: Bbagwanlal Indraji. Inscriptions from the Cave temples of western India, Rapson 1881., pp.100-01;
Buhler: Ind.Ant, XIV, pp. 331-34, Catalogue of Indian Coins, pp-1iii, Number:25,
A.S.W.I., V. pp.86, Luders:, List of Brahmi Inscriptions, Number 1186, D. C. Sircar; Tha successors of the Satavahana’s, pp.221-23, The Age of imperial unity, pp-208-9, G.S. Gai, Ep.Ind.. XXXIV,
(1962) Pt.V pp-239-42.
Footnote 1
1. Before युव Buhler reads पज and corrects it to पजाय lndra ji estores भजाय
2. Buhler युवसाउ or युवसाओ Indraji
Indraji युवसकुमाराय
3. A mini Purporting to be a halanta one, is legible just along the top of the line.
4. ए is engraved carelessly like ध
5. Buhler, indraji and Gai सजय- The place has
been identified with Banavasi. It was also known as Jayanti or
Vaijayanti (SII, Vol.XL Pt. II, Number-141 Vol VI, pp12 ff.).
6. Manager, administrator =
management or adminstration see the karmaPradipa. The term seems
to be equivalent to , used in certain north Indian inscriptions see Taxila Copper Plate Inscriptions. of
Patika of the year 78, supra vol I, Number 51, 1.5.
During the Satavahana rule,
the karma-pradipas were appointed to administer assigned
areas. The Satavahanas had ruled for close to four centuries. During their rule they had conflict of interest
with their neighbouring kingdoms, the prominent of which was
that of the Western Kshatrapas.
Western Kshatrapas &
Satavahanas had always been into conflict however
the areas that were conquered
by Rudradaman were retained by his successors. The Satavahanas confined themselves to southern india.
English Translation of the inscription
Success ! The 1st day of the 7th fortnight of the atumn (
)season of the year 12, may it lead to
a hundred year reign of the king Satakarni, a source of Joy to
the Vishnukadachutu family and the son of Hariti. This
elephant, tank and vihara are the pious gifts of the Chief Queen sivaskadanagasri, the daughter of a Maharaja, with sons living (and) the mother of the Crown prince. The
administrator here was the minister skandasvati. The cobra
vas sculpted by Nataka, the pupil of the teacher, Damodara, a resident of Sajayanta.
Another pillar-inscription in Sri Kaleswara temple at Malavelli (Shimoga district, Karnataka) mentions that King Satakarni of the Satavahana dynasty was the hariti-putto (son of Hariti). Sumati of the legend might belong to the same lineage of Hariti family.
As is evident from these ancient Inscriptions we have already discussed,
Sanskrit & south indian languages like Tamil, Telgu etc & their scripts had evolved from brahmi Prakrit Khroshthi, and the hypothesis that Aryan,
were aliens, who brought with them some alien culture, appears to be a foolish imagination. Aryans were natives of South Asia and entire south asian region had same Vedic literature, spoken language. Rather modern spoken languages like Hindi and Punjabi are influenced with alien scripts/languages like Urdu, in addition to Sanskrit language. Aryans were natives of South Asia and entire south asian region had same Vedic literature, spoken language. There are also evidences of ancient brahmin tribals in entire south asia
People all over south asia were
familiar with Brahmi script and the Prakrit language. Almost all the records
of the Satavahana period are in Brahmi & Prakrit. Ashramas were the learning institutions.
Brahmins or the Viharas of the Buddhists and the Jains, used to
receive liberal grants from the rulers. In addition to these ashrams the craft and trade
guilds too had served the cause of education.
Footnote 2
Rapson (Category of Indian. coins, P.1iii, Number. 25) was of
the view that the Donor, the daughter of the great king is not named in the inscription. He thinks that
srivaskandanagasri is the name of the prince who is associated in this donation. He identified the danatrix
witn Nagamulannika of the Kanneri inscription ( ASWI, V.
pp.86) who is stated to have been the daughter of the great king and the mother of Skandanagasataka and
attributed the latter record to king Vihnukada-Chutukulalananda Satakarni, He further ideatified the latter king with his namesake mentioned in the
Malavalli Inscription (Ep.Carn VII, pp.251). According to him Sivaskandanagasri of the present record, Skandanagasataka of the Kanheri epigraph and
sivaskandavarman mentioned in the malavalli inscription
were identical. Luders’ (List of brahmi Inscriptions number 1186) also regarded sivaskandanagasri as the prince, whose mother”s name is not given in the record.
N. Lakshminarayan Rao and R.S. Panchamukhi (Karnatakada
Ayasumanetanagalu. pp-3) agree with Rapson ‘s view on various identifications. D.C. Sircar (The Successors of the Satavahanas.pp-221-23, The Age of imperial Unity, pp.208-09) does not accept any of these identifications,
though he too regards sivaskandanagasri as a prince.
G.S. Gai however considers it to be the name of the donatrix whom he considers to be the daughter of the
ruling king and thinks that the king nominated his daughter’s son as the yuvaraja. All this confusion is
caused by tne word, mahabhuviya, which is an apparent mistake for mahadeviya. The donatrix Sivaskandanagasri claims, not only to be the daughter of a King,
but also to be the Chief queen and as such the mother of the Crown Prince.
Compare similar claims of
Gautami Balasri in the Nasika Cave Inscription of
Vasishthiputra Pulumavi-year 19 ( supra. Number.165, 1.10)