On the Satavahana Sata, Sati and Sati
Summary
The article is a scholarly rebuttal by Sant Lal Katare to Mr. Gupta regarding the identity of the name Sati in Satavahana history. Katare argues against Gupta's view that there were three distinct kings named Sati or Saci. The main point of contention is whether the name Sati is a separate name from Satakarni, or merely an abbreviation or variant of it. Katare maintains that Sati is not a different name from Satakarni but is, in fact, an abbreviation of it, just as Sata is. The evidence Katare discusses includes several historical sources. These sources are the coins published by Prof. Mirashi, the Nanaghat inscription of Naganika, the Kanheri cave inscriptions, and the coins published by Rapson and Altekar. Katare criticizes Gupta's reading of the coins and his interpretation of the Nanaghat inscription, specifically regarding the relationship between Sati and Naganika. Katare asserts that Sati was the son of Naganika, not her husband, and that he identifies this Sati with Satakarni of the Nanaghat relievo inscription. Katare also addresses the issue of name variations on coins. He argues that it is not unprecedented in Indian numismatics for a ruler to use both short and long forms of a name on different coins of the same type. He provides examples from the coins of Gautamiputra Sivadatta-Satakarni, where Sita is used for Sitakarni. Furthermore, Katare lists several individuals with the name Sati or Sati, including Saliputasa siri Sati, Madhariputra siri Sata, and Vasisthiputra siri Canda Sati, to demonstrate that if Sati and Sati are considered distinct from Satakarni, then the number of kings with these names would be much more than three. The sources Katare references include his own articles published in the Journal of the Numismatic Society of India (JNSL) and the Indian Historical Quarterly (IHQ), as well as the works of Prof. Mirashi, Rapson, and Altekar. He concludes by stating that Gupta's view cannot be accepted, as the evidence shows that Sata, Sati, and Sati are all variants and abbreviations of Satakarni.
AI-generated summary, automatically checked against the article text.
Conclusion
This article refutes the claim that Sata, Sati, and Saci were three distinct kings separate from Satakarni. The author argues that these names are merely metronymic or abbreviated forms of the standard royal title, Satakarni. By examining various coin legends and inscriptions, including those of Madhariputra Siri Sata, the author demonstrates that short and long forms of names were used interchangeably by the same rulers, a practice supported by numismatic evidence from kings like Gautamiputra Sativahana. The text concludes that the proposed distinction between these names lacks historical basis. Consequently, the argument for three separate kings is invalidated, reinforcing the established scholarly consensus that Sata, Sati, and Saci are synonymous variants of Satakarni, not independent monarchs.