Was the Satavahana Dynasty a Maratha Dynasty or a Telugu Dynasty?

[Foot12]

The Satavahana Dynasty ruled a huge part of India from the 2nd century BC to the late 2nd century CE.
The Satavahana rulers defeated the Scythian invaders and successfully protected Peninsular India and Central India. The Dynasty originated in modern Maharashtra and Telangana. Some scholars claim that it was a Maratha Dynasty because most of the records were made in Prakrit and the Maratha language descended from Prakrit. On the other hand there are also scholars who claim that it was a Telugu Dynasty because several ancient Indian texts and foreign records describe the Satavahana rulers as Andhra rulers

 

[DesiGuy]

punjabi

 

[Foot12]

punjabi

Very funny joke

 

[Indischer]

The Satavahana Dynasty ruled a huge part of India from the 2nd century BC to the late 2nd century CE.
The Satavahana rulers defeated the Scythian invaders and successfully protected Peninsular India and Central India. The Dynasty originated in modern Maharashtra and Telangana. Some scholars claim that it was a Maratha Dynasty because most of the records were made in Prakrit and the Maratha language descended from Prakrit. On the other hand there are also scholars who claim that it was a Telugu Dynasty because several ancient Indian texts and foreign records describe the Satavahana rulers as Andhra rulers

The Andhra identity is much older than the Maratha identity. The Satavahanas ruled over present day Maharashtra, but they probably were Andhrakas.

 

[Shark2]

punjabi

Lol. Its obvious that the Satavahana warriors are related to the Maratha people. The Satavahana rulers crushed the Scythian
invaders and the Maratha rulers destroyed the Mughal invaders so its pretty obvious that the Punjabis don't have anything to
do with the Satavahana rulers. Punjabis are like Pakis who didn't achieve anything in the past and who are only good
at dancing and barking.

 

[Shark2]

The Andhra identity is much older than the Maratha identity. The Satavahanas ruled over present day Maharashtra, but they probably were Andhrakas.

Well, this is debatable. But I would say that the Satavahana Dynasty was a Deccani Empire. And the Deccan consists of modern Maharashtra, northern Karnataka and Telangana which produced some of the most powerful Empires in South Asian History.

 

[Prayas]

Well present day Maharashtra,Karnataka,Andhra,Telangana are all part of southern empires.Most of this part of this land rules by common rulers.And no one can claim there heritage as its own as u can find similar structures in this states.

 

[INDIC]

Satavahana were Andhras, Andhras were the people of Godavari river, so it was a Telugu dynasty.

 

[danger007]

Krishnadevarayala is Telugu ruler ...

 

[Shark2]

Krishnadevarayala is Telugu ruler ...

Krishnadevaraya the destroyer of the Turks was a Deccani ruler.

 

[danger007]

Krishnadevaraya the destroyer of the Turks was a Deccani ruler.

Andhra ruler ... His fort is in Vijayanagarm ... Tenali rama krishna etc are telugu...

 

[Shark2]

Andhra ruler ... His fort is in Vijayanagarm ... Tenali rama krishna etc are telugu...

Krishnadevaraya was a Tulu who were originally from Karnataka which is part of the Deccan.

 

[Echo_419]

The Satavahana Dynasty ruled a huge part of India from the 2nd century BC to the late 2nd century CE.
The Satavahana rulers defeated the Scythian invaders and successfully protected Peninsular India and Central India. The Dynasty originated in modern Maharashtra and Telangana. Some scholars claim that it was a Maratha Dynasty because most of the records were made in Prakrit and the Maratha language descended from Prakrit. On the other hand there are also scholars who claim that it was a Telugu Dynasty because several ancient Indian texts and foreign records describe the Satavahana rulers as Andhra rulers

It was Haryanvi

 

[Shark2]

It was Haryanvi

This is doubtful.

 

[Echo_419]

This is doubtful.

Chillax i was kidding