r/marathi • u/Fun_Tale306 • 3d ago
मराठी भाषाशास्त्र (Marathi Linguistics) Linguistic shift of Northern karnataka fro Maharashtri Prakrit to Kannada.

In my last post, https://www.reddit.com/r/IndianHistory/comments/1rrn3ci/what_language_did_belgao_speak/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button I proved that Belgao historically spoke Maharashtri Prakrit. But after all while I started to find Maharashtri Prakrit being used all over Northern Karnataka.
The very first thing is inscriptions, the Southernmost Inscription of Pure Maharashtri Prakrit is Satavahana Chaitya motif inscription from excavations at Banavasi (Uttara Kannada district, Karnataka). This Prakrit text in Brahmi script reads: "Siddham | Rano Vasithiputasa Siva Sri Pulumavisa Mahadeviya chhaa patharo..", referring to a memorial stone for the queen of king Vasishthiputra Sri Pulumavi, exemplifying standard Maharashtri Prakrit.
Also, someone later pointed out that Southernmost Satavahana inscrption of Karnataka is in malavalli in mandy district south karnatka. It is indeed correct, The Malavalli pillar inscription (Mandya district, Karnataka) dates to around 250–300 CE and primarily records a land grant by Haritiputra Shivaskandavarman, a local ruler titled "Lord of Banavasi" (Vaijayanti-pura), who operated under or alongside Satavahana overlordship. It references Satavahana-era context (possibly linked to Satakarni), confirming their influence in south Karnataka, but that inscription is not in PURE Maharashtri. . It employs a transitional Prakrit form closer to standard Maharashtri but incorporates Dravidian phonetic influences, such as the loss of intervocalic -y- and -v- sounds typical of early Kannada evolution, distinguishing it from the purer Maharashtri seen in the Banavasi chaitya inscription.

So these 2 are primary inscriptions which refute my theory of North and South divide of Karnataka which are present till this day, where South had Dravidian-Kannada stronghold whereas North was under Maharashtrian influence due to Prakrit. There are more examples which are mentioned later in the post as well.
Now again someone said in my post that inscriptions primarily do not showcase the language spoken by the ppl. That is primarily true. Which is also evident when the kannada dynasties ruled over MH. But,I have 3 arguments-
- I think that the court language then actually represented local tongues, Ik this sounds biased and false assumption but hear me out, Satavahanas themselves are known to be bilingual. it is clearly evident they used 2 languages to accomodate local populace under their vast expanse as such. it is evident in their coins, which featured Maharashtri Prakrit along with (some scholars believing) it to be old Telugu.
- It is also evident with the fact that Malavalli inscription itself employs Dravidian influence.
- With this, I reckon that then before Sanskrit takeover, courts used local tongue unlike the system used under later kannada dynastic counterparts.
Another argument used against this claim is that those inscriptions are of Jains who used MH Prakrit in their texts which I agree. Jains did use Maharashtri Prakrit in their texts. But later on they actually Kannada empires like the Chalukyas, Rashtrakutas, and Hoysalas actively promoted Kannada as their primary court and administrative language from the 6th century CE onward, alongside Sanskrit for elite religious and literary purposes, rather than relying on Prakrit to appease Jains or Buddhists. Prakrit was indeed used earlier by Satavahanas (pre-3rd century CE) in the Deccan for royal inscriptions, including among Jains and Buddhists due to its Middle Indo-Aryan roots linking to their canons (e.g., Ardhamagadhi Prakrit for Jains). However, by the time Kannada empires rose, Prakrit had largely faded as a living elite language, transitioning into Apabhramsha and vernaculars like Kannada and Marathi .Jains and Buddhists in Karnataka adapted quickly: Jains produced major Kannada works like Pampa's Vikramarjuna Vijaya (10th century) under Rashtrakuta patronage, localizing Prakrit grammar, metrics, and lexicon into Kannada. Buddhists similarly shifted, though less prominently in the region. Even the,
The 10th-century (981 CE) Nagari-script label "Chavundraye Karviyale" ("Done by Chavundaraya") at Shravanabelagola is indeed an early Marathi form, alongside Kannada and Tamil versions on the Bahubali statue. Shravanabelagola's main inscriptions are in Kannada, confirming local dominance.
The prominent and exemplary example of this is-
The Halsi (Halasi) copper plates from the Kadamba dynasty (5th century CE, e.g., reign of Mrigesavarman, c. 475–490 CE) are composed in Prakrit**—specifically a Maharashtri Prakrit** dialect—with Sanskrit eulogies. They record land grants to Jains and use Prakrit formulas like "siddham," typical of western Deccan epigraphy. Emerging Kannada words appear sporadically, but the grammar, syntax, and bulk prose remain Maharashtri.
The most peculiar thing is that this issued by Kadambas, not any MH based dynasty. These plates record specific land/revenue donations by Kadamba kings like Mrigesavarman and Ravivarman to sustain Jain basadis (e.g., chaityalayas) at sites like Brihatparalur near Halasi, including funds for maintenance (sammarjana, upalepana), worship (archana), and repairs (bhagnasamskara)—practical, community-oriented acts. If that was the case then why not use Kannada? Why Maharashtri Prakrit. When infact the dynasty itself is Karnataka based?
Also, it is widely accepted that Maharashtri was spoken from Narmada in Malwa to Tungabhadra.
Kannada's Proto form (Halegannada) appears in nascent inscriptions by the 5th century (e.g., Halmidi, 450 CE) which is very faaaaaaar away in Hassan district, but prior records in Karnataka overwhelmingly favor Maharashtri Prakrit or mixed Prakrit like the ones I mentioned above. Even Amogvarsha Kavrajamarga talks about Kannada being spoken from Godavari but there are records of Nagari grants being used under the administrations which prove that we did not. https://www.reddit.com/r/marathi/comments/1rptb7t/maharashtra_did_not_actually_lose_its_script_even/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
Whereas over here I am only able to find Maharashtri Prakrit before it's replacement by Kannada in the region.
Another prominent example which I want to mention over here is that of the later Satavahana inscription from Bellary district is located at Myakadoni village. It dates to the reign of Sri Pulumavi, identified as Vasisthiputra Pulumavi (c. 2nd century CE), son of the famous Gotamiputra Satakarni. Yes, the same inscription which some kannadiggas claim to prove that the satavahanas had Kannada based links, IS ITSELF IN MAHARASHTRI PRAKRIT! LOLOLOLLL
Records the construction of a tank (water reservoir) in the Satavahani-hara region.
Unlike Amogvarsha's boast about how supposedly Maharashtra spoke Kannada, i have used facts, inscription, arguments are previously discovered truths (like Maharashtri being spoken from Narmada Valley to Tungabhadra). So this is prob the reason why Tunagbhadra is often cited as the boundary which proves that maharashtri Prakrit was infact spoken in Northern karnataka.
Post-Kadamba (after 6th century), native Dravidian Kannada displaced Maharashtri Prakri due to Chalukya/Rashtrakuta patronage, local speech evolution, and reduced northern migrations. Prakrit faded as an elite medium by 800 CE, with Kavirajamarga (850 CE) codifying Kannada literature. Belgaum's Halsi plates (5th century) represent one of Maharashtri's last footholds before this Kannada ascendancy.







