The Satavahanas were the first Deccan-based dynasty to rule over an empire encompassing both southern and northern India, stretching from the Deccan Plateau in the south to Madhya Pradesh in the north, and touching both the western and eastern coasts.
[1]
According to the most widely accepted hypothesis, based on numismatic, archaeological and textual evidence, this polity existed between the beginning of the 1st century BCE and the end of the 2nd century CE, though many scholars are reluctant to assign absolute dates to specific kings.
[2]
Notable rulers include Gautamiputra Satakarani, Vasistiputra, Pulamavi, and Yajnasri. Under their governance, Indian commerce with the Western world intensified and there was a florescence of the arts, particularly in the field of Buddhist iconography.
[1]
However, records are scanty when it comes to the empire’s middle century, which suggests that the Satavahana polity went through two phases of power and prosperity, with an intervening period of regionalization, and perhaps even collapse.
[2]
Population and political organization
The Satavahana polity was ruled by an emperor.
[3]
He was aided, at court, by a number of officials, including attendants and advisors, the mahasenapati (army commander), the superintendent of stores, the treasurer, officials tasked with drafting and registering his documents, and officials tasked with supervising feudal lords.
[3]
[4]
The provinces were governed by feudal lords who were related by blood to the royal family, by lords who struck coins in their own name (perhaps indicating some degree of autonomy from the Satavahanas themselves), and by military commanders in charge of outlying centres.
[3]
The fact that the empire likely suffered some sort of collapse in its middle period suggests that it may have been overly dependent on the abilities of individual rulers rather than a well-designed administrative structure.
[2]
No population estimates for this period could be found in the specialist literature.
[1]: (Murthy and Ramakrishnan 1978, 25-26) H. V. Sreenivasa Murthy and R. Ramakrishnan. 1978. A History of Karnataka. New Delhi: S. Chand.
[2]: (Sinopoli 2001, 166) Carla Sinopoli. 2001. ’On the Edge of Empire: Form and Substance in the Satavahana Dynasty’, in Empires: Perspectives from Archaeology and History, edited by Susan Alcock, Terence D’Altroy, Kathleen D. Morrison and Carla Sinopoli, 155-78. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[3]: (Kamath 1980, 25) Suryanatha Kamath. 1980. A Concise History of Karnataka. Bangalore: Archana Prakashana.
[4]: (Murthy and Ramakrishnan 1978, 32-33) H. V. Sreenivasa Murthy and R. Ramakrishnan. 1978. A History of Karnataka. New Delhi: S. Chand.
| none |
| Vakataka Kingdom |
| unknown |
| UNCLEAR: [None] | |
| Succeeding: Vakataka Kingdom (in_vakataka_k) [None] |
| loose | |
| unitary state |
| 84,000 people |
| [1,200,000 to 1,400,000] km2 | 100 BCE 99 CE |
| [1,400,000 to 1,600,000] km2 | 100 CE 203 CE |
| [7,000,000 to 8,000,000] people | 100 BCE 1 BCE |
| [7,250,000 to 8,250,000] people | 0 CE 100 CE |
| [8,000,000 to 9,000,000] people | 101 CE 203 CE |
| [8,500,000 to 9,500,000] people | 200 CE |
| present |
| present |
| unknown |
| present |
| inferred present |
| present |
| unknown |
| present |
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| Year Range | Satavahana Empire (in_satavahana_emp) was in: |
|---|---|
| (100 BCE 203 CE) | Deccan |
Pratisthana (modern-day Paithan); Benakataka; others. "No single city served as the Satavahana capital throughout the duration of the dynasty’s history. In the early second century CE, Ptolemy referred to Paithan (Pratisthana; in Aurangabad district) as the capital of King Pulamavi; the Nasik inscription of his predecessor Gautamiputra Satakarni referred to him as lord of Benkataka (in the Nasik region). [...] The situation may, at least in part, be associated with structural weaknesses of imperial political and economical organization, thus making the physical presence of the king, court, and military force important to the exercise and authority of imperial authority and revenue collection"
[1]
.
[1]: C. Sinopoli, On the Edge of Empire: Form and Substance in the Satavahana Dynasty, in S. Alcock (ed), Empires (2001), p. 170
Pratisthana (modern-day Paithan); Benakataka; others. "No single city served as the Satavahana capital throughout the duration of the dynasty’s history. In the early second century CE, Ptolemy referred to Paithan (Pratisthana; in Aurangabad district) as the capital of King Pulamavi; the Nasik inscription of his predecessor Gautamiputra Satakarni referred to him as lord of Benkataka (in the Nasik region). [...] The situation may, at least in part, be associated with structural weaknesses of imperial political and economical organization, thus making the physical presence of the king, court, and military force important to the exercise and authority of imperial authority and revenue collection"
[1]
.
[1]: C. Sinopoli, On the Edge of Empire: Form and Substance in the Satavahana Dynasty, in S. Alcock (ed), Empires (2001), p. 170
During the reign of Gautamiputra Satakarni, the empire emerged from a period of decline (dating more or less from the end of Hala’s reign), with military victories against the Shakas, Pallavas, Yavanas, and Shakharatas, which led to annexation of new territory and the re-conquest of previously Satavahana territory
[1]
[2]
.
[1]: U. Singh, A History of Ancient and Medieval India (2008), p. 383
"Chronological problems [...] beset text-based reconstructions of Satavahana chronology and dynastic sequences. [...] Chronological reconstructions fall into two groups. Advocates of the now largely discredited ’long chronology’ support the maximal span of c. 475 years derived from the literal reading of the [Puranic king lists] [...]. This interpretation is problematic given the historical context of the Puranas, the lack of concordance among the texts, and the lack of supporting numismatic or incriptional evidence for many of the rulers named. "Advocates of the more widely accepted ’short chronology’ [...] combine Puranic records with other lines of numismatic, archaeological, and textual evidence and date the Satavahana rule from the beginning of the first century BCE to the end of the second century CE. Even here, many scholars are reluctant to assign absolute dates to specific kings and those who do often select quite disparate dates and name different rulers. Nonetheless, the shorter chronology is the more reasonable given current evidence [...]" [1] .
[1]: C. Sinopoli, On the Edge of Empire: Form and Substance in the Satavahana Dynasty, in S. Alcock (ed), Empires (2001), p. 166
Iskvakus; Pallavas; Chutus; Abhiras; Kurus; Vakatakas [1]
[1]: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/524850/Satavahana-dynasty
NOTE: The Mauryan Empire was the most powerful polity to rule over Southern India before the Satavahanas [1] . However, partly because of difficulties in dating the exact beginning of the Satavahana Empire, it is not clear that there was a direct link between the two polities [2]
[1]: U. Singh, A History of Ancient and Early medieval India (2008), pp. 324-358
[2]: C. Sinopoli, On the Edge of Empire: Form and Substance in the Satavahana Dynasty, in S. Alcock (ed), Empires (2001), p. 159
NOTE: The Mauryan Empire was the most powerful polity to rule over Southern India before the Satavahanas [1] . However, partly because of difficulties in dating the exact beginning of the Satavahana Empire, it is not clear that there was a direct link between the two polities [2]
[1]: U. Singh, A History of Ancient and Early medieval India (2008), pp. 324-358
[2]: C. Sinopoli, On the Edge of Empire: Form and Substance in the Satavahana Dynasty, in S. Alcock (ed), Empires (2001), p. 159
"The Vakatakas succeeded the Satavahanas and rose to regal power sometime around the middle of the 3rd century CE" [1]
[1]: (Sawant 2009) Reshma Sawant. 2008. ‘State Formation Process In The Vidarbha During The Vakataka Period’. Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate and Research Institute 68-69: 137-162.<
"The fragmentation of the kingdom was inevitable as the Satavahana state was very loosely organized, with the local administration, even the maintenance of the royal army, being largely left to their feudatories, who even struck their own coins. This loose state organization was necessitated by the limited economic resources of the kingdom; the soil of their land being poor, the Satavahanas could not afford to maintain a large standing army or an elaborate administrative organization."
[1]
Only centralized after moving east after 140 CE: "The continued invasions by the Sakas of Ujjain (Malwa) and the prospects of encroaching upon the rich regions in the southern and eastern Deccan prompted them to shift their political base to the east around AD 140. The Satavahana state brought with it an organized administration and bureaucracy, a standing army, garrison towns, provincial administrative headquarters and a fortified capital."
[1]: (Eraly 2011, 56) Abraham Eraly. 2011. The First Spring: The Golden Age of India. Viking. Penguin Books India Pvt, Ltd.
"The fragmentation of the kingdom was inevitable as the Satavahana state was very loosely organized, with the local administration, even the maintenance of the royal army, being largely left to their feudatories, who even struck their own coins. This loose state organization was necessitated by the limited economic resources of the kingdom; the soil of their land being poor, the Satavahanas could not afford to maintain a large standing army or an elaborate administrative organization."
[1]
Only centralized after moving east after 140 CE: "The continued invasions by the Sakas of Ujjain (Malwa) and the prospects of encroaching upon the rich regions in the southern and eastern Deccan prompted them to shift their political base to the east around AD 140. The Satavahana state brought with it an organized administration and bureaucracy, a standing army, garrison towns, provincial administrative headquarters and a fortified capital."
[1]: (Eraly 2011, 56) Abraham Eraly. 2011. The First Spring: The Golden Age of India. Viking. Penguin Books India Pvt, Ltd.
Inhabitants [1] . Chase-Dunn also suggests an estimate of 60,000 inhabitants for 200 BCE, but here we are following the "short chronology" of the Satavahana Empire [2] , which starts in the first century BCE.
[1]: Chase-Dunn spreadsheet
[2]: C. Sinopoli, On the Edge of Empire: Form and Substance in the Satavahana Dynasty, in S. Alcock (ed), Empires (2001), p. 166
in squared kilometers
in squared kilometers
People.
Estimated from
[1]
[1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 182-185) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London.
People.
Estimated from
[1]
[1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 182-185) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London.
levels.
Contemporary inscriptions refer to the following three types of settlement beyond the capital
[1]
:
1.Capital
2. nagara (city or palace)3. nigama (market town)4. gama (village)
[1]: C. Sinopoli, On the Edge of Empire: Form and Substance in the Satavahana Dynasty, in S. Alcock (ed), Empires (2001), p. 170
levels.
_Hinduism_
There are no official priestly hierarchies in Hinduism
[1]
. However, several sources allude to the importance, at least for some branches of the religion, of the relationship between student and teacher or guru (e.g.
[2]
), which suggests that perhaps it would not be entirely inappropriate to say that there is indeed a Hindu religious hierarchy, and that it is composed of two levels.
_Buddhism_
"Buddhist monastic communities replaced the caste system with one based on year of ordination. Previously ordained monks enjoyed rights and privileges higher in status than monks ordained later, and monks were categorically of higher status and privilege than nuns. In effect seniority and gender provided criteria for social status and increased access to ’pure’ teachings and exemption from ’impure’ duties."
[3]
.
[1]: http://ezinearticles.com/?Religious-Hierarchy-in-Hinduism&id=1864556
[2]: G. Flood, Introduction, in G. Flood (ed), The Blackwell Comapnion to Hinduism (2003), p. 4
[3]: P. Nietupsky, Hygiene: Buddhist Perspective, in W.M. Johnson, Encyclopedia of Monasticism (2000), p. 628
levels.
A rough hierarchy may have been as follows:
1. Emperor
[1]
2. Mahasenapati
[2]
3. Direct subordinates of the mahasenapati - more than one level?4. Soldiers
[1]: H.V. Sreenivasa Murthy and R. Ramakrishnan, A History of Karnataka (1978), p. 32
[2]: S. Kamath, A Concise History of Karnataka (1980), p. 25
levels.
Note: "the Satavahana state was very loosely organized, with the local administration, even the maintenance of the royal army, being largely left to their feudatories, who even struck their own coins. This loose state organization was necessitated by the limited economic resources of the kingdom; the soil of their land being poor, the Satavahanas could not afford to maintain a large standing army or an elaborate administrative organization."
[1]
The rough hierarchy may have been as follows:
1. Emperor
[2]
_Court_
2. Royal officialsIncluding, among others, the king’s attendants and advisors, the mahasenapati or army commander, the superintendent of stores, the treasurer, officials tasked with drafting and registering the king’s documents, and officials tasked with supervising feudal lords
[2]
[3]
3.4.
_Provincial Government_
2. Mahabhojas and maharathisFeudal lords who were blood relatives of the royal family
[2]
.
2. Rajas Other feudal lords (specifically rajas, who struck coins in their own name, and mahasenapatis, military governors posted at outlying centres)Feudal lords who struck coins in their own name
[2]
.
2. MahasenapatisArmy commanders were sometimes put in charge of governing outlying centres
[2]
.
3. Local administratorsBhojakas, uparikas, gaulmikas, patipalakas
[4]
.
4. GramanisVillage officials in charge of five, sometimes ten villages
[5]
.
5. Village assemblies
[5]
.
NOTE: Sources are often unclear and describe the hierarchy in slightly different ways.
[1]: (Eraly 2011, 56) Abraham Eraly. 2011. The First Spring: The Golden Age of India. Viking. Penguin Books India Pvt, Ltd.
[2]: S. Kamath, A Concise History of Karnataka (1980), p. 25
[3]: H.V. Sreenivasa Murthy and R. Ramakrishnan, A History of Karnataka (1978), pp. 32-33
[4]: R. Thapar (?), South Asia from 200 BC to AD 300, in E. Condurachi, J. Hermann, E. Zurcher (eds), History of Humanity from the 7th Century BC to the 7th Century AD (1996), p. 381
[5]: H.V. Sreenivasa Murthy and R. Ramakrishnan, A History of Karnataka (1978), p. 33
In the below quote, Rocher argues that professional lawyers did not exist in India for much of its history. Unhelpfully, Rocher does not provide dates or much in the way of temporal boundaries. However, the use of the word “ever” in the sentence “no written source allows us to draw the conclusion that the experts on legal matters ever developed into a professional group whose regular activities consisted in representing parties in the court” may perhaps be taken to mean that professional lawyers did not exist in India before the colonial era.
“Thus, we believe that at an early date—let us roughly say at the time of the dharmasutras—professional lawyers or, to be more precise, specialized dharmasastrins could not exist. The Indian sage in those days was a specialist in all of the texts related to a particular Vedic school. His specialized knowledge concentrated on a specific version of the Vedic samhita and all its related texts: brahmana, aranyaka, upanisad, srautasutra, grhyasutra, dharmasutra, etc. There were no specialists on dharmasastra, and, a fortiori, no specialists on law that were part of it.
“But the situation changed. The texts on dharma grew away from the Vedic schools. Gradually there may have come into being a specialized group of learned men whose main interest was dharma, and the various dharmasastras as such.
“Finally, as the amount of textual material increased, we may assume that certain experts, without detaching themselves completely from aspects of dharmasastra and from Hindu learning generally, accumulated a very specialized knowledge of one aspect of dharma: vivada and vyavahara, or, in modern terminology, law. It is very possible that at this stage the nature of legal representation (niyoga) also underwent a certain change. We do not want to exclude the possibility that, at that moment, in a number of cases legal competence played a role in the choice of a representative. We are even willing to accept that Vyasa refers to the very special circumstance in which the representative was paid for his services. However, no written source allows us to draw the conclusion that the experts on legal matters ever developed into a professional group whose regular activities consisted in representing parties in the court. The impression which we gather from the texts is that, even in cases where the representative was chosen because of his special competence on legal matters, and, a fortiori, in all other cases, the necessary condition for a person to represent a party was the existence, between the former and the latter, of a certain form of close personal relationship.”
[1]
[1]: (Rocher 1969: 399-400) Rocher, L. 1969. "Lawyers" in Classical Hindu Law. Law & Society Review 3 (2/3): 383-402. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/QKMEMIHW/library
"The Satavahanas realised the need of building roads and communications to facilitate trade wherever necessary", for example, "[t]here was an easy and well trodden road from Broach leading to the cities of the north (via) Ujjain and Vidisa and finally connected to Pataliputra. In the Deccan itself, a road started from Broach linking Surat with the Salsette parts of the south, where it joined the great road to the North running across the ghats to Junnar, Paithan and Ajanta" [1] .
[1]: C. Margabandhu, Archaeology of the Satavahana Kshatrapa Times (1985), p. 59
Kautilya’s Arthasastra contains a chapter title "Measurement of Space and Time." [1] The Arthaśāstra "probably arose in the first half of the first millennium AD" but probably largely "derive[s] from older handbooks". [2]
[1]: (Subramaniam 2001, 79) Subramaniam, V. in Farazmand, Ali. ed. 2001. Handbook of Comparative and Development Public Administration. CRC Press.
[2]: (Schlingloff 2013: 15) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/DAMFF2NV.
Contemporary sources refer to coins known as Karshapana, Dramma, Pana, and Gadyana [1] . They were made of silver, lead, and potin, an alloy of silver and lead [2] .
[1]: H.V. Sreenivasa Murthy and R. Ramakrishnan, A History of Karnataka (1978), p. 36
[2]: S. Kamath, A Concise History of Karnataka (1980), p. 25
The following quote refers to the Mauryan period, but the literature consulted does not confirm whether or not any such system existed after that empire’s fragmentation: "a communication system linking the empire with tree-lined roads, public wells, rest houses, and a mail service." [1]
[1]: (McClellan III and Dorn 2015, 164) McClellan III, James E. Dorn, Harold. 2015. Science and Technology in World History: An Introduction. JHU Press.
The following quote refers to the Mauryan period, but the literature consulted does not confirm whether or not any such system existed after that empire’s fragmentation: "a communication system linking the empire with tree-lined roads, public wells, rest houses, and a mail service." [1]
[1]: (McClellan III and Dorn 2015, 164) McClellan III, James E. Dorn, Harold. 2015. Science and Technology in World History: An Introduction. JHU Press.
The following quote refers to the Mauryan period, but the literature consulted does not confirm whether or not any such system existed after that empire’s fragmentation: "a communication system linking the empire with tree-lined roads, public wells, rest houses, and a mail service."
[1]
However, permanent messengers would have been useful for the government.
[1]: (McClellan III and Dorn 2015, 164) McClellan III, James E. Dorn, Harold. 2015. Science and Technology in World History: An Introduction. JHU Press.
Towns were protected by "high walls". [1] Satavahana cities "were surrounded by high walls, ramparts and gates constructed with brick and mortar." [2]
[1]: S. Kamath, A Concise History of Karnataka (1980), p. 27
[2]: (Roy 2013, 20) Kaushik Roy. 2013 Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. London.
Towns were protected by "high walls". [1] Satavahana cities "were surrounded by high walls, ramparts and gates constructed with brick and mortar." [2] Were walls also made out of stone?
[1]: S. Kamath, A Concise History of Karnataka (1980), p. 27
[2]: (Roy 2013, 20) Kaushik Roy. 2013 Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. London.
Commenting on Jean Deloche’s ’Studies on Fortification in India’ a book reviewer says that fort construction "with long-term building and modification programs ... became the focal point for local populations as well as for their leaders" and often were "placed at points on the landscape that already were natural strongholds and places of ritual devolution". [1]
[1]: (Smith 2010, 273) Monica L Smith. January 2010. Journal of the American Oriental Society. 130.2. Studies on Fortification in India. Collection Indologie, vol. 104. Four Forts of the Deccan vol. 111. Senji (Gingee): A Fortified City in the Tamil Country. vol. 101 by Jean Deloche.
"Banavasi in North Kanara, an acient capital city of the region measuring 1 km2, goes back at least to the Satavahana period and shows a burnt-brick fortification on rubble foundations and a moat." [1]
[1]: (Chakrabarti 1995, 306) D K Chakrabarti. Post-Mauryan states of mainland South Asia (c. BC 185-AD 320). F R Allchin. 1995. The Archaeology of Early Historic South Asia: The Emergence of Cities and States. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
"Satanikota on the bank of the Tugabhadra was a fortified Satavahana place [palace?] with a ditch cut into the natural bedrock". [1]
[1]: (Chakrabarti 1995, 306) D K Chakrabarti. Post-Mauryan states of mainland South Asia (c. BC 185-AD 320). F R Allchin. 1995. The Archaeology of Early Historic South Asia: The Emergence of Cities and States. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
Indian iron smiths invented the ’wootz’ method of steel creation between 550-450 BCE. The Greek physician Ctesias of Cnidus commented on an Indian steel sword (or a sword of Indian steel?) in the possession of Artaxerxes II of Persia (c400 BCE). [1] At Naikund in Maharashtra: knowledge of steeling and hardening from 700 BCE. [2] Historical records show Indian steel was exported to Abyssinia in 200 BCE. (Biggs et al. 2013 citing Tripathi and Upadhyay 2009, p. 123). [3]
[1]: (Singh 1997, 102) Sarva Daman Singh. 1997. Ancient Indian Warfare: With Special Reference to the Vedic Period. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers. Delhi.
[2]: (Deshpande and Dhokey 2008) P P Deshpande. N B Dhokey. April 2008. Metallographical investigations of iron objects in ancient Vidharbha region of Maharashtra. Transactions of the Indian Institute of Metals. Volume 61. Issue 2-3. Springer. pp. 135-137.
[3]: Lynn Biggs. Berenice Bellina. Marcos Martinon-Torres. Thomas Oliver Pryce. January 2013. Prehistoric iron production technologies in the Upper Thai-MalayPeninsula: metallography and slag inclusion analyses of ironartefacts from Khao Sam Kaeo and Phu Khao Thong. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences. Springer.
First finds of iron weapons in northern India earlier than 1000 BCE and from at least 1000 BCE in Karnataka in south India where iron arrowheads, spears and swords have been found. [1] Ancient Indians used iron for armour cuirasses and breastplates but copper was also used. [2] The Guptas were known for their exceptional skill in iron metallurgy, as demonstrated by the monumental Iron Pillar of Delhi and they may have been the first to use iron helmets for their cavalry.
[1]: (Tewari 2010) Tewari, Rakesh. 2010. Updates on the Antiquity of Iron in South Asia. in Man and Environment. XXXV(2): 81-97. Indian Society for Prehistoric and Quaternary Studies.
[2]: (Singh 1997) Sarva Daman Singh. 1997. Ancient Indian Warfare: With Special Reference to the Vedic Period. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers. Delhi.
A military historian suggests metal armour was not widely used before the Macedonian invasion of Alexander the Great in the late fourth century BCE [1] - do ancient Indian specialists agree? Copper weapons did exist but by this time probably replaced by iron, steel or bronze.
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group.
A military historian suggests metal armour was not widely used before the Macedonian invasion of Alexander the Great in the late fourth century BCE [1] - do ancient Indian specialists agree? Metal weapons did exist. Bronze was not produced in India but was imported and may have been used for weapons perhaps for the elites who could afford them.
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group.
According to Jaina texts, Ajatashatru, a 5th century BCE king of Magadha in North India, used a catapult "capable of hurling huge pieces of stone". [1] A military historian states that ancient Indians had a weapon called the yantra that "may refer to a device for hurling stones and missiles at the enemy, but we have no information as to its design." [2] - do ancient Indian specialists agree? Ancient Indian armies had siege engines that could "fling stones and lead balls wrapped up in burning materials. The Mahabharata mentions an Asma-yantra (a stone-throwing machine) in the battle with Jarasandha and we have further records that such engines were used in later periods to set enemy fortifications alight and that ’liquid fires’ containing naphtha were in use in ancient India." [3]
[1]: (Singh 2008, 272) Upinder Singh. 2008. A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century. Pearson Longman. Delhi.
[2]: (Gabriel 2007, 126-127) Richard A Gabriel. 2007. The Ancient World. Greenwood Publishing Group. Westport.
[3]: (Forbes 1959, 88-89) Robert James Forbes. 1959. More studies in early petroleum history. Brill Archive.
Much later, Byzantines or possibly Chinese were the first to use sling siege engines
In the hot Monsoon climate of India the composite bow decomposed rapidly so Ancient Indians made bows out of Wootz steel. These were "considerably more rigid than their composite bretheren, meaning they were also less powerful. But they were reliable and predictable, and could be stored away in munitions vaults without worry of decomposition." [1] "The Hindus used bows made of cane or bamboos which were inferior in range, accuracy and penetrative power when compared to the composite bows." [2] Composite bow came to India with the Kushanas but "after the collapse of the Gupta Empire, the use of composite bows died out in India." [2] Iron arrow heads. [3] The Satavahanas used many foot archers. [4]
[1]: (O’Bryan 2013, 54) A History of Weapons: Crossbows, Caltrops, Catapults & Lots of Other Things that Can Seriously Mess You Up. Chronicle Books LLC. San Francisco.
[2]: (Roy 2011, 122) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi.
[3]: (Sawant 2009) Reshma Sawant. 2008. ‘State Formation Process In The Vidarbha During The Vakataka Period’. Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate and Research Institute 68-69: 137-162.
[4]: (Roy 2013, 20) Kaushik Roy. 2013 Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. London.
A military historian states the light cavalry of the Mauryans c200 BCE used a javelin in conjunction with a lance [1] - do Mauryan specialists agree? Have not been able to find data for the Satavahanas but we do know "cavalry had an important place in the Satavahana military organisation." [2]
[1]: Gabriel, Richard A. The great armies of antiquity. p. 218-220
[2]: (Sharma 1996, 289) Ram Sharan Sharma. 1996. Aspects of Political Ideas and Institutions in Ancient India. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited. Delhi.
Known to Chinese in the first millennium BCE but Vedic literature does not describe anything like a crossbow although Pant suggests "the weapon mentioned as the nalika in ancient Sanskrit literature was a crossbow." [1] "The hand crossbow was usd on Indian battlefields probably from the third century A.D. It was mainly used as an infantry weapon and occasionally as a cavalry weapon. A Sanskrit inscription at Avanthipuram, in South India, reads: ’... Of him who has the name of Ananta impelled with speed and skillfully discharged from the machines of his bow fitted with the well stretched string....’ Obviously, the machine referred to was a hand crossbow." [1]
[1]: (Phillips 2016) Henry Pratap Phillips. 2016. The History and Chronology of Gunpowder and Gunpowder Weapons (c.1000 to 1850). Notion Press.
"The Hindus used bows made of cane or bamboos which were inferior in range, accuracy and penetrative power when compared to the composite bows." [1] Composite bow came to India with the Kushanas but "after the collapse of the Gupta Empire, the use of composite bows died out in India." [1] ’From the Kushans, the Indians learnt the use of composite bows. The Sanchi sculptures which can be dated to the first century BC show many soldiers carrying strung and unstrung composite bows. Murray B. Emeneau writes that the Guptas used Sassanian types of composite bows.’ [2]
[1]: (Roy 2011, 122) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi.
[2]: (Roy 2013, 23) Kaushik Roy. 2013. Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. London.
Weapon that has only been found in the New World.
A military historian states the Maurayan heavy infantry is known to have used iron weapons including maces, dagger-axes, battle-axes and a slashing sword [1] - do Mauryan specialists agree? Satavahana infantry used short swords. [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group.
[2]: (Roy 2013, 20) Kaushik Roy. 2013 Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. London.
Inferred from their wide distribution throughout India in the period considered, including at sites that may have been part of the Satavahana empire [1] . A military historian states the Maurayan heavy infantry is known to have used iron weapons including maces, dagger-axes, battle-axes and a slashing sword [2] - do Mauryan specialists agree?
[1]: C. Margabandhu, Archaeology of the Satavahana Kshatrapa Times (1985), p. 300
[2]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group.
[1] A military historian states the Maurayan heavy infantry is known to have used iron weapons including maces, dagger-axes, battle-axes and a slashing sword [2] - do Mauryan specialists agree?
[1]: http://www.historydiscussion.net/empires/satavahana-dynasty-rulers-administration-society-and-economic-conditions/736
[2]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group.
According to Pliny the Elder, the Satavahana army included 2,000 cavalrymen. [1] Cavalry "had an important place in the Satavahana military organisation." [2]
[1]: U. Singh, A History of Ancient and Medieval India (2008), p. 382
[2]: (Sharma 1996, 289) Ram Sharan Sharma. 1996. Aspects of Political Ideas and Institutions in Ancient India. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited. Delhi.
In ancient India the buffalo, bullock, yak, goat, camel, elephant, horse, ass and the mule were all used for transport [1] [2] in different regions according to local conditions. [2]
[1]: (Mishra 1987, 83) Kamal Kishore Mishra. 1987. Police Administration in Ancient India. Mittal Publications. Delhi.
[2]: Prakash Charan Prasad. 1977. Foreign Trade and Commerce in Ancient India. Abhinav Publications. New Delhi.
In ancient India the buffalo, bullock, yak, goat, camel, elephant, horse, ass and the mule were all used for transport [1] [2] in different regions according to local conditions. [2] Were camels used in the Deccan region of India?
[1]: (Mishra 1987, 83) Kamal Kishore Mishra. 1987. Police Administration in Ancient India. Mittal Publications. Delhi.
[2]: Prakash Charan Prasad. 1977. Foreign Trade and Commerce in Ancient India. Abhinav Publications. New Delhi.
A military historian suggests the Maurayans carried shields made of raw oxhide stretched over a wood or wicker frame [1] - do Mauryan specialists agree? The Satavahanas were likely no less advanced in terms of their military technology. Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions a leather shield. [2] Satavahana infantry used circular shields. [3]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group.
[2]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
[3]: (Roy 2013, 20) Kaushik Roy. 2013 Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. London.
Ancient Indians used iron for armour cuirasses and breastplates but copper was also used. [1] Likely referring to time following the Macedonian invasion.
[1]: (Singh 1997) Sarva Daman Singh. 1997. Ancient Indian Warfare: With Special Reference to the Vedic Period. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers. Delhi.
Ancient Indians used iron for armour cuirasses and breastplates but copper was also used. [1] Likely referring to time following the Macedonian invasion. Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions metal plate, cuirass, corselet, and breast plate. [2]
[1]: (Singh 1997) Sarva Daman Singh. 1997. Ancient Indian Warfare: With Special Reference to the Vedic Period. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers. Delhi.
[2]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
Ancient Indians used iron for armour cuirasses and breastplates but copper was also used. [1] Likely referring to time following the Macedonian invasion. Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions a thigh guard. [2]
[1]: (Singh 1997) Sarva Daman Singh. 1997. Ancient Indian Warfare: With Special Reference to the Vedic Period. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers. Delhi.
[2]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
A military historian suggests helmets were not widely used until the CE period; soldiers used thick turbans to protect their heads [1] - do ancient Indian specialists agree? A military historian suggests the Maurayans carried shields made of raw oxhide stretched over a wood or wicker frame [2] - do Mauryan specialists agree? Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions "dense structures made of the skin, hooves, and horns/tusks of the river dolphin, rhinocerous, Dhenuka, and cattle" used as armor and a leather shield. [3]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 220) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group.
[2]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group.
[3]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
Ancient Indians used iron for armour cuirasses and breastplates but copper was also used. [1] Likely referring to time following the Macedonian invasion.
[1]: (Singh 1997) Sarva Daman Singh. 1997. Ancient Indian Warfare: With Special Reference to the Vedic Period. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers. Delhi.
A military historian suggests helmets were not widely used until the CE period; soldiers used thick turbans to protect their heads [1] - do ancient Indian specialists agree? Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions a helmet. [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 220) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group.
[2]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
In Ancient India soldiers of the Gupta Empire who could afford to do so and were willing to bear the heat (or for night operations?) wore chain mail. [1] Ancient Indians used iron for armour cuirasses and breastplates but copper was also used. [2] Likely referring to time following the Macedonian invasion. Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions a coat of mail. [3]
[1]: (Rowell 2015 89) Rebecca Rowell. 2015. Ancient India. Abdo Publishing. Minneapolis.
[2]: (Singh 1997) Sarva Daman Singh. 1997. Ancient Indian Warfare: With Special Reference to the Vedic Period. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers. Delhi.
[3]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
Ancient Indians used iron for armour cuirasses and breastplates but copper was also used. [1] Likely referring to time following the Macedonian invasion. Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions a breast plate. [2]
[1]: (Singh 1997) Sarva Daman Singh. 1997. Ancient Indian Warfare: With Special Reference to the Vedic Period. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers. Delhi.
[2]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
’Chalukyas, Pallavas and the Cholas are noted for their naval forces." [1] It can be inferred that no other state had a significant naval force although some of them may have had a smaller navy. The Satavahanas had a lengthy coastline but their capital was based inland and for most of the period they lacked a standing army and sophisticated central administration, which suggests the kings would not have poured resources into sailing assets they would not have seen nor have little control over.
[1]: (Eraly 2011, 163) Abraham Eraly. 2011. The First Spring: The Golden Age of India. Penguin Books India Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi.