The Origin of the Rashtrakuta dynasty has been a controversial topic and has been debated over the past decades by historians. The differing opinions mostly revolve around issues such as the home of the earliest ancestors of the medieval Rashtrakutas, a possible southern migration during the early part of the first millennium and the relationship between the several Rashtrakuta dynasties that ruled small kingdoms in northern and central India and the Deccan in the 6th century - 7th century. Further, the relationship of these medieval Rashtrakutas to the most important and famous dynasty, the Rashtrakutas of Manyakheta of the 8th century - 10th century time period has also been debated.
While the history of the early Rashtrakutas has caused much debate, the history of the Rashtrakutas of Manyakheta (in present-day Gulbarga) of the 8th–10th centuries can be accurately constructed because numerous contemporaneous inscriptions and texts refer to them. The crux of the Manyakheta empire extended from the Kaveri river in the south to the Narmada in the north. At their peak they were the only south Indian empire that conquered regions in far northern India (Kannauj) as well as the extreme south (Tamilakam). The Lata branch of the empire (in present-day Gujarat) was an important dynasty belonging to the Manyakheta family line which later merged with the Manyakheta kingdom during the 9th century.
Research
Sources The study of the history of the early Rashtrakutas and the Rashtrakutas of Manyakheta has been made possible by the availability of numerous inscriptions spread all over the Deccan, ancient literature in Pali,Reu 1933 p1 contemporaneous Kannada literature such as Kavirajamarga (850) and Vikramarjuna Vijaya (941), Sanskrit writings by Somadeva, Rajashekara, Gunabhadra, Jinasena and others and the notes of Arab travellers of those times such as Suleiman, Ibn Haukal, Al Masudi, Al Istakhri and others.Kamath (2001), p72 Scholars have left no topic unstudied in an effort to accurately propose the history of the Rashtrakutas. Theories about their lineage (Surya Vamsa or Chandra Vamsa), native region and ancestral home have been proposed using clues from inscriptions, royal emblems, ancient clan names such as "Rashtrika", epithets such as Ratta, Rashtrakuta, Lattalura Puravaradhiswara, names of royalty, coins and contemporaneous literature.Reu (1933) pp1-15Kamath (2001), p72-74
Epithets
The appearance of the terms Rathika, Ristika (Rashtrika) or Lathika in conjunction with the terms Kambhoja and Gandhara in some Ashokan inscriptions of the 2nd century BCE from Mansera and Shahbazgarhi in North Western Frontier Province (present day Pakistan), Girnar (Saurashtra) and Dhavali (Kalinga) and the use of the epithet "Ratta" in many later inscriptions had prompted a claim by Reu that the earliest Rashtrakutas were descendants of the Arattas, natives of the Punjab region mentioned in the text of Mahabharata who later migrated south and set up kingdoms there,Hultzsch in Reu 1933, p2 while another theory of J.H. Fleet points more generally to north western regions of India.J.H.Fleet in (Reu 1933, p6) Based on this theory, the Arattas may have become natives of the Deccan having arrived there during the early centuries of the first millennium.Reu (1933), p7
This is counter to the argument by other scholars that the term Rishtika used together with Petenika in the Ashokan inscriptions implied they were hereditary ruling clans from modern Maharashtra regionD.R.Bhandarkar in Reu 1933, p1, p7 and the term "Ratta" implied Maharatta ruling families from modern Maharashtra region.C.V.Vaidya in Reu 1933, p1, p7 But this has been rejected on the basis that from ancient books such as Dipavamsha and Mahavamsha in Pali language it is known the term Maharatta and not Rashtrika has been used to signify inhabitants from modern Maharashtra region and the terms Rashtrika and Petenika appear to be two different displaced ruling tribes.B.N. Reu claims Dr C.V. Vaidya has made an assumption that the Rashtrakutas have lived in the Maharashtra region from the time of King Ashoka simply based on availability of Ashokan inscriptions from that region while inscriptions from other parts of the empire such as Saurashtra, Kalinga and North West also use such clan names. He has further argued that Rashtrika and Petenika are not one term but two separate terms in (Reu 1933, p1, p7) Some scholars argue that the attempt to link the Rashtakutas to Mahrattas or Marathis was driven by a need to project modern political identities onto a much more complex past as these groups wouldn't exist till many centuries later.
It is noted by another scholar that ruling clans called Rathis and Maharathis were in power in parts of present-day Karnataka as well in the early centuries of the Christian era, which is known inscriptions from the region and further proven by the discovery of lead coins from the middle of 3rd century bearing Sadakana Kalalaya Maharathi in the heart of modern Karnataka region near Chitradurga. In the face of these facts it is claimed it can no longer be maintained that the Rathi and Maharathi families were confined only to present day Maharashtra.Altekar (1934), pp20-21 It is claimed there is sufficient inscriptional evidence that several Maharathi families were related to Kannadiga families by marriage and they were naga worshippers, a form of worship very popular in the Mysore region (modern Karnataka). The terms Rathi, Maharathi, Rathika, Rashtriya, Rasthrapathi and Rasthtrakuta were of political and administrative significance and not used to denote any tribes or ethnicity.Altekar (1934), pp24-25 Also, no evidence to confirm that these families were either Aryan or non-Aryan is available.Altekar (1934), p25 C. V. Vaidya claimed that Rashtrakutas were ancestors of modern Marathas. This was rejected by historian A. S. Altekar who showed that they were of the 'Canarese' stock and that their mother tongue was Kannada.Altekar (1934), p18 According to E. P. Rice the northern limits of the Kannada spoken region was pushed back by Maratha raids and conquests in more modern times.
The epithet Ratta, it is also claimed is a Kannada word from which the word Rashtrakuta has been derived. The use of the word Rattagudlu (meaning an office) has been found in inscriptions from present day Andhra Pradesh dated prior to the 8th century indicating it was a South Indian word. From the Deoli plates and Karhad records it is argued there was a prince called Ratta and his son was called Rashtrakuta. Hence it has been argued the Rashtrakutas were of Kannada origin.A.S. Altekar in Kamath 2001, p73 It is also said the term Rashtrakuta means "state headman" where Rashtra means province and Kuta means chieftain or Rashtra means "kingdom" and Kuta means "lofty".Reu (1933), p4
Another epithet used in inscriptions of Amoghavarsha I was Lattalura Puravaradhiswara. It is proposed that it refers to their original home Lattalur, modern day Latur in Maharashtra state, bordering Karnataka.J.H. Fleet in Kamath 2001, p72 This area it is claimed was predominantly Kannada speaking based on surviving vestiges of place names, inscriptions and cultural relics. It is explained that Latta is a Prakrit variation of Ratta and hence Rattana-ur became Lattana-ur and finally Lattalur.Altekar (1934), p23-24 An alternative theory is that Latalurapura is modern day Ratnapur in Bilaspur district of central India.According to Rajvade in Reu 1933, p7 However it is most likely that they were Kannada military aristocrats settled in Maharashtra by their overlords for administrative purpose.
Royal names and signatures In linking possible connections between the medieval Rashtrakuta families to the imperial family of Manyakheta it has been pointed out that only the family members ruling from Elichpur (Berar or modern Amravati district, modern Maharashtra) had names that were very similar to the names of Kings of the Manyakheta dynasty. From the Tivarkhed and Multhai inscriptions it is clear that the kings of this family were Durgaraja, Govindaraja, Svamikaraja and Nannaraja. These names closely resemble the names of Manyakheta kings or their extended family, the name Govindaraja appearing multiple times among the Manyakheta line. These names also appear in the Gujarat line of Rashtrakutas whose family ties with the Manyakheta family is well known.Altekar (1934), p8
It has been noted that princes and princesses of the Rashtrakuta family used pure Kannada names such as Kambarasa, Asagavve, Revakka and Abbalabbe as their personal names indicating that they were native Kannadigas. It has been pointed out that princesses of family lineage belonging to Gujarat signed their royal edicts in Kannada even in their Sanskrit inscriptions. Some examples of this are the Navsari and Baroda plates of Karka I and the Baroda plates of his son Dhruva II. It has been attested by a scholar that the Gujarat Rashtrakuta princes signed their inscriptions in the language of their native home and the race they belonged to.D.R. Bhandarkar in Kamath 2001, p73 It is well known that the Gujarat line of Rashtrakutas were from the same family as the Manyakheta line. It is argued that if the Rashtrakutas were originally a Marathi speaking family, then the Gujarat Rashtrakutas would not have signed their inscriptions in Kannada language and that too in far away Gujarat.Altekar (1934), p21 The theory that under the rule of the Badami Chalukyas of Kannada country, Kannada speaking dynasties were established in the far corners of the Chalukya empire (the vassal Chalukyas of Navasarika) in Gujarat, Andhra and Berar (present day Vidharba region in modern Maharashtra) and hence the ancestors of King Dantidurga, the founder of the Manyakheta empire were Kannadigas. It is further claimed there is proof that in the locality where Dantidurga lived Kannada was the spoken language.Just as the later Maratha ruling families of Baroda, Indore, and Gwallior used their native language Marathi and script in their personal matters, so did the medieval Rashtrakutas preserve their native language Kannada when ruling from Berar- A.S. Altekar (1934), p22, p24
Emblems Several Rashtrakuta families ruled India during the 6th century - 7th century period. Scholars have tried to understand their relationship with the Rashtrakutas of Manyakheta by a comparative study of the emblems.
The only Rashtrakuta family whose royal emblem is similar to that of the rulers of Manyakheta, the golden eagle or Garuda lanchhana (emblem) is that of the family that ruled from Amravathi district of modern Maharashtra. It has been theorised that this line may possibly have been ancestors of the Manyakheta kings. Their inscriptions (Tivarkhed and Multhai) were issued from Achalapura (modern Elichpur) which may have been their capital. Another Rashtrakuta family ruling from Manapura with its founder King Abhimanyu had the emblem of a lion. This makes it improbable that they were the ancestors of the Manyakheta family.Altekar (1934), p6 The location of Manapura is uncertain. John Faithfull Fleet proposed its identification with Manpur in Malwa, and then with Manpur near Bandhavgarh, but later rejected both these theories himself.Epigraphia Indica (Volume 37, Part 1 - Page 12) Bhagawanlal Indraji identified it with Manyakheta (Malkhed) itself. Vasudev Vishnu Mirashi identified it with Man, Satara.
Vamsha (genealogy)