Gautamiputra Satakarni Statue - Amaravathi

Looking nice

Very nice statue

It is near to Budda statue but it is small one

Good statue looks like

Superb

Nothing to say more than we see in the picture. The idiotic maintainance you can see with full of fencing around it like it is very precious material.

This theory has been dismissed by several other scholars, including K. A. Nilakanta Sastri and H. C. Raychaudhuri. G.J. Dubreuil theorizes that the excavation of the cave (where this inscription was found) began during the reign of Gautamiputra. However, the work was finished only after his death, and the inscription was placed on his behalf by his mother, during the reign of his son.[32]Bhandarkar's theory is further weakened by the fact that there is clear historical evidence of Gautamiputra's rule over western Deccan. Moreover, no inscriptions issued jointly by the father-son duo are available.[33] that Gautamiputra and his son Vasishthiputra Pulumavi ruled jointly during the last years of his reign.[30] This theory is based on their interpretations of the various Satavahana inscriptions. In Nashik prashasti, Gautami Balashri calls herself the mother of the great king as well as the grandmother of the great king, indicating that both were kings at that time. There are also indications that Gautamiputra was alive, when this inscription was issued in the 19th regnal year of his son. Despite this, the inscription describes the achievements of Gautamiputra Satakarni, but remains silent about the exploits of his son. Based on these arguments, Bhandarkar speculated that Gautamiputra ruled eastern Deccan, while Vasishthiputra ruled western Deccan.[31] This theory has been dismissed by several other scholars, including K. A. Nilakanta Sastri and H. C. Raychaudhuri. G.J. Dubreuil theorizes that the excavation of the cave (where this inscription was found) began during the reign of Gautamiputra. However, the work was finished only after his death, and the inscription was placed on his behalf by his mother, during the reign of his son.[32] Bhandarkar's theory is further weakened by the fact that there is clear historical evidence of Gautamiputra's rule over western Deccan. Moreover, no inscriptions issued jointly by the father-son duo are available.[33]Historical evidence suggests that the Western Kshatrapas (known to the Satavahanas as Shakas) expanded their empire at the expense of Satavahanas in the years preceding the reign of Gautamiputra Satakarni. Based on the Nashik inscription of his mother, it appears that Gautamiputra revived the Satavahana power. The inscription states that he defeated the Shakas (Western Kshatrapas), the Pahlavas (Indo-Parthians), and the Yavanas (Indo-Greeks).[9] It also states that he emerged victorious in several fights against a confederacy of enemies.[12]Gautamiputra" literally means "son of Gautami", while Satakarni is a title common to several Satavahana kings. Such matronymics also appear in the names of other Satavahana kings, including Vasishthiputra Pulumavi ("Pulumavi, son of Vasishthi"). These do not indicate a matriarchy or a matrilineal descent system.[9] The real explanation for matronymics seems to be that since the rulers married a number of wives from different royal families, a prince was best identified with reference to his mother.[11]The recorded history of Amaravati and nearby Dharanikota dates to 5th century BCE. It was the capital of Satavahanas who ruled from 3rd century BCE to 3rd century CE who are much favor in Buddhism expanded it. The most important historic monument in Amaravathi town is the Mahachaitya. It is protected by the Archaeological Survey of India which maintains a site museum known as old museum.

It was at the entrance of the Dhyana Buddha temple in Amaravati. The statue needs to be maintained properly so that the people can see during night also. As a King he did a lot to our nation.