Talk:Andhra (disambiguation)

Andhra Satavahanas

Satavahanas were referred to as Andhra Satavahanas in ancient literature. It would be appropriate to have a separate section: "Andhra Satavahana Dynasty".

I was under the impression that Andhra and Satavahana's are synonymous that is why I suggested that the Andhra dynasty section be merged with the Satavahana section. If there are anymore names it is known by we can redirect them to this page. IF the Andhra Satavahana Dynasty is a seperate entity and not just a different then ok make a new section and merge the Andhra dynasty with that section. I am leaving this for those who know more than me to clarify and do, if there is something technical holding anyone back on how to do this please ask I will help with that but lets get this sorted out.

--Tigeroo 07:06, 26 July 2006 (UTC) Reply: It is not a serious issue because both are almost synonymous.

Connecting Sahatavahanas to Marathas

It is gross misrepresentation of history to call the Shatavahanas as "a Maratha clan". The concept of Maratha is a recent one arising with the popularity of Marathi language after 14th centuary AD. Calling Shatavahanas as "a maratha clan" is an ignorant misrepresentation of history. I have heard some unsubstantiated theroies that even lord Krishna was a Maratha which I think is "frivolous" at best. Please provide historical evidence from a "non Marathi Historians" of repute to justify this claim or rest is peace. Decendents of the Shatavahanas probably became Kadambas of North Karnataka, Chutus of Maharashtra, Ikshavakus of A.P. Their decendents went on to be called Chalukyas of deccan, Rashtrakutas of Deccan etc. Eventually we see the rise of Marathas after 17th centuary.

Dinesh Kannambadi

== Lord Krishna was an Andhra/Andhaka ==

Your have mentioned: I have heard some unsubstantiated theroies that even lord Krishna was a Maratha which I think is "frivolous" at best. Now I want to propose that Lord Krishna was an Andhra instead. Bhagavatham says that Lord Krishna was the leader of Andhaka, Vrishni, Bhoja and Satwata clans. Andhra was was equated with Andhaka by Budhist literature. To the third counsel which was held during the reign of Ashoka under the guidance of Mogalliputta Tissa Thera, delegates of as many as six sects from Andhra i.e. Chaityaka, Purvasaila, Aparasila, Uttarsila, Rajagirika, Siddarthika all described as Andhakas participated. It may be surmised that after Lord Krishnas death, Andhaka\Andhras loitered around Dwaraka and Saurashtra for a fairly long time and by the time of Mauryan rule they were found to have spread to Maharashtra and Deccan.They must have ruled these areas as feudatories of the Mauryans. That is why they were called Andhra Bhrityas (i.e Andhra Servants of Mauryas).

Asokan edict says "Here in the king's domain among the Yavanas (Greeks), the Kambojas, the Nabhakas, the Nabhapamkits, the Bhojas, the Pitinikas, the Andhras and the Palidas, everywhere people are following Beloved-of-the-Gods' instructions in Dhamma." Rock Edict Nb13 (S. Dhammika). Note the Bhojas and Andhras here.

Kharavela's Hathigumpha inscriptions puts Satavahanas to the west of Orissa not to the south of it.

Aitareya Brahmana says that Andhras were an Aryan tribe who fell out with other Aryans (Viswamaithra's curse). This rivalry was reflected in capturing of power from the last Brahmanical king of Magadha by Simuka. Ambedkar says that Manu Smriti was compiled during Sunga usurpers' rule. In contrast Andhras follow Apastamba Smriti. All this shows that Andhras split from their northern brothern during Maha Bharata period and later during the heyday of Budhism. This rivalry seems to be the reason behind the distortion of Hindu puranic and other texts. And lastly Lord Krishna who is of dark complexion is reckoned to be a non-aryan. If he is indeed an Andhra/Andhaka, then the Telugu people can claim to have produced a long line of warrior clans. First they fought Adharma of Kauravas under Krishna's leadership. Later they opposed the Brahmanical tyranny under Andhra Satavahanas. During mediaevel period they fought the foreign invaders under the Vijayanagara Empire particularly under the able generalship of Krishna Deva Raya. So the hijacking of Andhra glory should henceforth stop. Prasad

Tribes, Clans, Rulers all this been in India for Centuries

Why there is resistance to acknowledge earlier Maharashtrian Kingdoms, prior to 16 th century Maratha Empire.

Fact remains Maratha land has produced best of local warriors (Satavahanas, Rashtrakutas, Yadava, Marathas) in India who challeged forign rule time to time.

Terms Maharatta and Maharatti may have come from common orgin Maharashtri, some time during 9-10th century, but these ruling / warrior families (now referred as Clans) were present even before that.

Interestingly Warriors from Maharashtra did not observed Caste System. All the tribal warriors fought together or idependentely. Caste system entered maharashtra with northern migrants. Even in Shivaji's army Mahars and Marathas have own battles togehter.

Clan's are in place for centuries, superiorities of casts is later introduced(during 8-9th century) by forigners

Parochialism

This is pure parochialism. Do not change the early versions incorporating your pet theories.

Did you check the reference to Iravatham Mahadevan's discussion and direct translation?

Excuse me...Did you check the reference I gave.. I did not do it without a basis. I have given the exact reference. Please do not act immaturely. I have done this by giving my name and email address so anybody having a dispute could contact me. May I know who you are? I feel you should at least have signed your comments accusing me of Parochialism with your name and contact. Do you need an image of the reference faxed? Please tell me: Do you have any proof for what you were asserting earlier to my change: that it is Telugu? Please cite proof form some scholarly source.

I do not wish to engage in childish internet fights. If you wish to have your misinformation you are very welcome to have it. Anybody truthful is not going to respect it.

Periannan Chandrasekaran perichandra@yahoo.com

Pure parochialism

The only historical controversy is whether Satavahanas were of Andhra or Mahrashtra origin? Satavahanas were Brahmins of Aryan descent. One wonders how they became Dravidian Tamils? May be, in your imagination!!!

Satavahanas are from Maharashtra

Satavahanas are supposed to be aryans mixed with local natives of sahyadri forming capital at Junnar near Pune.

Marathi_language was offical language of Satavahana kings.

Satavahanas from Maharashtra is just speculation

Dear unknown,

What is the basis for your story.If so what were they doing in Madhya Pradesh,Andhra Pradesh and Vidharba regions instead of ruling in the actual heartland of Maharastra.And the whole so called Aryan theory has been laughed at by recent historians.

--Fort5000 16:27, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Satavahanas were not the first native indian rulers to issue coins

"They were thought to be the first native Indian rulers to issue their own coins with portraits of their rulers, starting with king Vashishtiputra Shri Pulumavi (r. 130-158 CE), a practice derived from that of the Indo-Greek kings to the northwest."

I have tried to rectify this mistake, but it is repeatedly re-edited. Please find latest information on this at http://www.hinduonnet.com/2007/01/28/stories/2007012800201800.htm (which I had added on when I initially edited.)

Also, "Arahanaku Vahitti makanaku Tiru Hatakaniko." legend on the reverse of the coin is not Prakrit. What is the difference between "Prakrit" and "Prakrit Brahmi" legend, as user PHG is insisting below the coin pictures? The legend on the front is in Prakrit Brahmi, and reverse legend is in Tamil Brahmi. Which means, there were different languages using the same Brahmi-type letters. See http://www.hindu.com/2004/05/26/stories/2004052602871200.htm for some details. The language "Arahanaku Vahitti makanaku Tiru Hatakaniko" is clearly Tamil. Thanks.

Chauvanism

This is an example of Tamil chauvanism which tries to paint Tamils/Tamil language as the most ancient not only in India but also the whole world. The coin looks like a Roman coin. Unless it is proved to be of native origin one cannot agree to the statement. During Satavahana times Proto-Dravidian which gave rise to Telugu was prevalent in the region. Proto-Dravidian language also gave rise to Tamil. Prevalence of some common words is logical. That does not mean it was Tamil language written on Satavahana coins. The repeated 'Tamilization' of the coin smacks of pure fanaticism.

There is no chauvinism here

Telugu was already prevalent as a separate language from Proto Dravidian at Satavahana times. So, the legend on the reverse side of the coin in question is either in Tamil or Telugu. There is no possibility of that being in Proto-Dravidian. Now, that Prakrit was the literary language used officially in the Deccan is well established. The only other languages that used Brahmi letters with local adaptations were Tamil, and to a certain extent, Sinhalese. This fact is also established : Ref: "Early Tamil Epigraphy -From earliest times to Sixth Century A.D." - Iravatham Mahadevan [Harvard University Publication 2003]. There are no known Telugu inscriptions until a much later period. There is no need for either Tamil or Telugu Chauvinism here. The reverse side of the Satavahana coin is indeed in Tamil Brahmi. This only raises the possibility that Satavahana suzerainty may have extended into the Tamil regions, where the literary (and official) language remained the native language of the area. If anyone continues to edit it as "Telugu" legend, then they only give a wrong information about a vital aspect of their own history.

Telugu on the Coin

This a clear proof that Telugu was used during Satavahana times contrary to the general opinion that Prakrit was the court language. The sentence has vowel-ending Telugu words. Words in other Dravidian landuages rarely end with vowels.Kumarrao 10:30, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Stop prmotoing pro-andhra agenda here

Everyone knows Satavahana's ruled from present Maharashtra and they had lineage in northern eastern India. The language used by Satavahana was Prakrit (pro-marathi).

Get real and stop falsifying facts. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.113.48.11 (talk) 13:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

Telugu/Marathi

It is an acepted fact that Satavahanas were Andhras. They preferred Prakrit because Telugu was evolving from Proto-Dravidian at that time. Andhra is Sanskrit name for Telugu. Al-Biruni mentioned in his Kitab-ul Hind that a language by name Andhri was spoken in South India. Telugu words were found in Gathsaptasati. The Proto-Dravidian words in Satavahana coins were undoubtedly Proto-Telugu.Kumarrao 07:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Accepted Fact? by Whom!!! Andrait will accept whatever suits them

• If Satavahana's were Andhras, why they accepted Prakrit as language of Court ?
• If Satvahana were from Andhra, Wierd they came from North East and were called Sakas by all historians?
• The map which is pasted clearly shows Prathisthapana-Paithan, in heart of Maharashtra (well away 300 km from Andhra state, as capital (indicated by star) of Satavahana kingdom
• The Satavahanas established Western Satrap kingdom after defeating Vikramaditya
• Looks like Satavahana ditched Andhraites and without any regard for Andhra-land, Satavahana's improved and flourished present Gujarat, Maharashtra states

Not sure what will be acheived by distorting history on wiki-page where anyone can edit/add anything... still if it helps (looks like Andhra do not have any king to be proud of) let's keep your version on this anybody-can-edit page...

History version that I am aware of - Satavahana's were from Maharashtra (mix of north-eastern migrants and local maharashtrian tribes), they established capital in Junnar and promoted local prakrit language. They ruled as far as possible on east (andhra) and west(gujarat). After expanding in new area's they supported the local cultures in new areas and established another cities in new area. ...Looks like Satavahana ditched Andhraites and without any regard for Andhra-land, Satavahana's improved and flourished present Gujarat, Maharashtra states----

'''''''Andhras are undobtedly descendants of Lord Krishna and Satavahanas — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aavprasad (talk • contribs) 10:40, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

On the contrary they ditched Mahrattas and shifted their capital to Amaravathi near Vijayawada-Guntur in Coastal Andhra. Yes only the Coastal people were called Andhras. Because that region was settled by Andhras right from before christian era. Budhists speak of Andhaka country in Andhra area which sports major budhist centres. The word Andhaka was synonymous with Andhra in Budhist scriptures and Jataka Kathas. Ghata Jataka tells us of one Andhaka Vennu who raised Lord Krishna. This man was actually a totem. symbolising Andhaka-Vrishnis of Krishna Dvaipayana Vyasa to which clan Lord Krishna belongs. There is one Andhra Maha Vishnu (Andhaka Vennu) temple-again in Coastal Andhra (near Vijayawada). The Stala Puran tells of a Andhra Vishnu who defeated a local Daitya King Nishumbha but entered into a truce by marrying his daughter. This means that Andhras who were from North mingled with local populace. Most of the people mistakenly treat Yadava clan to which Krishna belongs as synonymous with Yadava Caste. But remember- When our Epics mention Yadavas, they do it in the sense that Krishna was descended from Yadu- one of Six ancient Chakravarthys of India viz Puru, Kuru, Purukuthsa, Puroorava, Yadu and Turvasa. Vyasa tells us that Andhaka, Vrishni, Bhoja and Satwatas are Yadu descendants. That's why they were called Yadavas. As you can see, lot of misconeptions have crept in over the years. They should be cleared. So Andhras were an Aryan race who migrated from North to Coastal Andhra and mingled with local Dravidian populace. They fought alongside Kauravas in Kurukshetra because Lord Krishna gave over his army to Kuru clan and he himself led Pandavas. Under Satavahanas Budhism flourished on the banks of river Krishna. Another reason to be hated by the Manu-folk of Aryavarta. Moreover there was a language called Andhra Prakrita which is not Telugu. ABK Prasad quoted one such inscription on a copper plate found near Vizag. After Mahabharata War, most of the Andhaka-Vrishnis were annihilated in internicine warfare. The remnants loitered around Maharashtra for quite sometime, eventually establishing Andhra Satavahana empire based in Maharashtra and later migrated to present day Andhra Country in waves due to invasions from North west. Earlier, after Mahabharata war Andhras came in two branches to the present day Andhra- One through Saurashtra, Maharashtra area, the other through Kalinga-Orissa. Again after Scythian invasions another wave under Satavahanas came to Andhra through Telangana. As you can see, they spread all over South India in later times. There are large Telugu populations in Tamilnadu, Karnataka - who were once parts of Vijayanagara Empire. Andhras are the greatest Dharmic warriors following in the footsteps of Lor Krishna Aavprasad (talk) 10:13, 8 April 2014 (UTC)AAV Prasad

References

Incorrect map

The map shows the Pandyan kingdom located somewhere around the Karnataka region. This is incorrect and should be fixed. Parthi ^{talk/contribs} 01:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Andhra Definition

I noticed that you reverted changes I made to Andhra site and Andhra_(disambiguation). Andhra word primarily means coastal Andhra within the context of Andhra pradesh. Telangana and Rayalaseema people don't describe themselves as people of Andhra. They describe themselves as people of Andhra Pradesh or people from Telangana or Rayalaseema. Only coastal Andhra people describe themselves as people of Andhra. Media(specially nationa media) often get confused about this and makes mistakes. My explaination in Andhra_(disambiguation) was to remove this media confusion. I am not sure how and where we include this info. I thought this is right place to explain this.Ramcrk (talk) 18:57, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I'm glad you left a note. I wasn't crazy about taking out content but the WP:MOSDAB requires each entry to have a short description. Could you write a short summary for the introduction of the disambig page? That would be acceptable, as long as it isn't too long. I'd do it myself but I'm fuzzy on the concept. --JaGa^talk 05:53, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

I wrote some description about this. See here. Hope this is acceptable. Thanks. Ramcrk (talk) 18:23, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

See the table below for the definition depending upon context. Ramcrk (talk) 07:06, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Refers to	context
Coastal Andhra	Generally within Andhra Pradesh when talking about regions
Andhra State or Seema-Andhra	Andhra state movement or Telangana movement
Telugu	Language
Andhra Pradesh	National media refers some times by mistake

You've got an article stub here. If the content needs to be kept, it isn't a disambiguation page (and I've updated it). The "ambiguous" entries are primarily partial title matches anyway, so I don't think a disambiguation page is needed. If one is, it would be separate from this stub article. Either the stub article or the disambiguation page could go at the base name, if they both need to exist. -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:19, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree. I have seen lot of people, even journalists of major national news paper publications, confused about this term. Even on wiki, in some articles, both editors and readers are confused about word Andhra. So this explaination is very much needed. Ramcrk (talk) 03:07, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit War

Nagarjuna198, please describe your specific issues with version. Please remember to comment on the content, not the contributor. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:04, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Below are blunders based on personal agenda of Ramcrk:

""Though out history Andhra region meant coastal Andhra region. Starting 11th century the word "Andhra" is used as synonym for Telugu language"" -This statement is bullshit and unsourced. Truth is ""Andhra"" is the name of tribe. Look at his citation "http://beacononline.wordpress.com/2008/07/15/brief-history-of-telangana/". For your information, wikipedia is not a blog.

Read page 33 of this book specially para 2). I phrased that sentense after reading this page. This page 133(para 3) of this book also confirms the same info. Ramcrk (talk) 05:55, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

""because rulers of Andhra region at that time were predominently Telugu speaking compared to Telangana and Rayalaseema regions.""- this is totally out of context. This is article about andhra not a personal story board where you can publish your imaginations — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagarjuna198 (talk • contribs) 03:21, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Page 33(para 1) of this book confirm this info. Ramcrk (talk) 05:57, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

"Precolonial India in practice : society, region, and identity in medieval Andhra" - In that book its also mentioned that Telangana region is mostly Kannada. I can show you 1000 reliable sources to prove you wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagarjuna198 (talk • contribs) 02:14, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Above book did not say Telangana region is mostly Kannada. It said Telangana region at that time ruled by Kannada rulers (more Kannada inscriptions). So, more Kannda influence in the region. Ramcrk (talk) 06:49, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

See the table below for the definition of Andhra depending upon context.

Refers to	context
Coastal Andhra	Generally within Andhra Pradesh when talking about regions
Andhra State or Seema-Andhra	Andhra state movement or Telangana movement
Telugu	Language
Andhra Pradesh	National media refers some times by mistake

The above table makes no sense at all and shouldnt be placed in this article

"Andhra Pradesh || National media refers some times by mistake" - Mistake? Nation is not as clever as him.
"Telugu || Language" - Really?. It should be in a Table?
"Coastal Andhra || Generally within Andhra Pradesh when talking about regions" - Really???? . I think thatswhy its called costal andhra.
"Andhra State or Seema-Andhra || Andhra state movement or Telangana movement" - ???? Really out of context. Wikipedia is not to serve Telangana movement by manipulating history.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagarjuna198 (talk • contribs) 03:21, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Here I am giving various meanings for the word Andhra. See this for more explaination. Ramcrk (talk) 05:47, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Not needed in this article.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagarjuna198 (talk • contribs) 01:44, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

More fake citations from Ramcrk

• ‘Jai Andhra’ backers discuss strategy
• http://mangalorean.com/news.php?newstype=local&newsid=229613
• http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-01-01/hyderabad/28134626_1_telangana-issue-seema-leaders-separate-state
• http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=ec4-AAAAIBAJ&sjid=cUwMAAAAIBAJ&pg=5865,2997689&dq=andhra+seema&hl=en
• http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=P9oYG7HA76QC&dat=19531001&printsec=frontpage
• http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=P9oYG7HA76QC&dat=19560221&printsec=frontpage
• http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-03-12/hyderabad/28683658_1_telangana-seemandhra-rayalaseema

- Neil, Are those citations valid?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagarjuna198 (talk • contribs) 03:21, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

These links are from major news papers or published books available on google books. Why are they not valid? I included these links to show that Andhra word was used in different way in different context. Ramcrk (talk) 05:47, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Haha.. Tell me one thing. I write crap in news paper and will it become benchmark to recreate History?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagarjuna198 (talk • contribs) 01:44, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

I suggest Ramcrk, instead of degrading and showing Andhras in bad light Research and write some informational articles about Telangana.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagarjuna198 (talk • contribs) 03:21, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

I am not degrading Andhra. I am presenting history here. Tell me where I degraded Andhra? Tell me where I included unrelevant info. Telangana had to be included because, some times Andhra Pradesh(which includes Telangana) was referred as Andhra. But historically Andhra always meant Coastal Andhra. See the links provided. Ramcrk (talk) 05:47, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Andhra and Coastal Andhra are used interchangeably. However Andhra word is coined for some Telugu speaking lands under Satavahana rule. Word Telangana only came in to existence in Nizam rule. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagarjuna198 (talk • contribs) 01:44, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

I'd like some more information on the Mangalorean but the Times of India and the Indian Express seem to meet our reliable source criteria. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:54, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

"http://beacononline.wordpress.com/2008/07/15/brief-history-of-telangana/". ?? what about this? - Also based on the remarks above..His version makes sense? really even after my remarks above, if you still take Ramcrk side, Its waste of time trying to convince you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagarjuna198 (talk • contribs) 03:21, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Even Times of India and the Indian Express cited by him are columnist story articles. And even if he is citing right sources, the tone and tenor of article is to show Andhras in bad light.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagarjuna198 (talk • contribs) 03:21, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

The Beacon does not seem to be a reliable source. I'll let Ramcrk respond to the rest of your points. My main aim was to stop the two of you from reverting and starting discussing instead. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 04:18, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree. Blogs can not be source. I used it because it said the article was originally published in another news paper. Anyway we can remove this link. I was trying show history about usage of Andhra as a synonym of Telugu. Ramcrk (talk) 05:36, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

User talk:NeilN. I want to know what you think about rest of the points? considering that it is an article about a place — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagarjuna198 (talk • contribs) 04:25, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm not going to form an opinion until I hear Ramcrk's point of view. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 04:29, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Originally all these links were used in this version. That page was tranformed since then. Reasons for those links are to show how Andhra word is being used in different context. I did not mean to dispect Andhra region or Andhra people in any way. Please let me know how I affended Andhra community. I was trying to present the facts. Ramcrk (talk) 04:57, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Don't you agree the word Andhra means 1) Coastal Andhra 2) Seema-Andhra 3)Andhra pradesh 4) Telugu Language? If you agree, can you please explain in what context we should use this word? Don't you think people confused by word Andhra? My attempt was to remove such confusion. Please don't read any more in to this than that. If you can phrase the content in better way please do so. But I strongly think there is confusion we need to make an attempt to remove the confusion. I included several links where Andhra word is used to refer different regions. Ramcrk (talk) 05:26, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

@(User talk:Ramcrk) Its not about Phrasing, your facts are wrong. Not everything they post online in blogs is right. Even some news paper articles. Good citations means Published sources and Peer-Reviewed Papers which is missing in your edits.
Check some of the facts:

• Historically the word "Andhra" is coined for Telugu land which comprised of "Coastal-Andhra" and present day "Telangana(not Seema)" under satavahana rule and kakatiya rule.

Can you give some references for you info. Here this page in this book by from nuetral person published by international publisher says other wise. If what you are saying is true, why there was Jai Andhra movement in 1972? Andhra never included Telangana. Ramcrk (talk) 06:12, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

"Jai Andhra" movement happened for political gains. Do you think protesters are Historians? Movement happened doesn't mean that two regions share different history. FYI: It is never constitutional to protest or ask for separate state based on "HISTORY". If so India would divide every day. Lastly "Jai Andhra" movement doesnt have anything to do with word Andhra.Nagarjuna198 (talk) 00:19, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

I totally agree that Andhra = Coastal Andhra. But its a historical fact that there was Andhra state(seema-Andhra region), there is Jai Andhra movement. Lot of govt documents and media articles refer region that was part of Andhra state as Andhra region some times. Hence that fact needs to be included in this article for the sake of Wiki readers. Ramcrk (talk) 23:42, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

• Telangana is the name given to Telugu speaking region of Nizam's Hyderabad state even though Andhra and Telangana were together prior to Nizam rule.

Before Mulsim rule in Telangana starting 14th century, Andhra and Telangana were together during Kakatiyas in for about 100 years in 13th century. Before that they were together in 3rd century during Satavahanas. See above link. for more info. Ramcrk (talk) 06:12, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

That link is misnomer Check this and the book is published recently : There are many written by ancient historians.

Check "Andhra Samkshipta Charitra" By Etukoori Balaraama Moorti ' and I can provide you many more if you want.[[[User:Nagarjuna198|Nagarjuna198]] (talk) 00:13, 16 April 2011 (UTC)]

All the content I added to the topic is backed by valid references (books by historians published by well know publishers). If you have eny references which ontradict those fact please give url and include that contents. Its possible there could be contradicting views by historians. If so, we can include both the views for the understanding of wiki readers. Ramcrk (talk) 23:42, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

• Andhra Pradesh is the name given to a modern state comprised of Coastal Andhra, Telangana and Rayal Seema.

I agree. Thats what I am trying to say here. Ramcrk (talk) 23:42, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

• Andhra word is NOT synonymous with Telugu. Andhra is a name of Race or Tribe. Andhra Basha is Language of Andhras. In Antient times "Andhras" spoke a language called "Desi" and later adopted Telugu as mother tongue.

I agree Andhra language is synonymous with Telugu language starting 11th century. Reason being per above link, Telangana region was ruled by Kannada rulers, Andhra region was ruled by Telugu kings. So, during that period, Andhra language become synonym for Telugu language. As Telangana region was ruled by Telugu kings later they called themselves as Andhra rulers(meaning Telugu kings). Ramcrk (talk) 06:12, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Thats pure crap and in Wikipedia articles, you cant put comparative Analysis and your personal research from Telangana agitation stand point. Nagarjuna198 (talk) 00:24, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

You can disagree with me without using such uncilvil language. Ramcrk (talk) 23:42, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

• There is no confusion in this. If you still want to avoid confusion and say Andhra pradesh comprises of 3 different regions, Create a different Article or edit in Andhra Pradesh but since this article is about Andhra, please dont include irrelevant stuff which you think is true because of your Blogs.

Please explain why in Jai Andhra movement Rayala seema is included. Why national news papers call all the residents of Andhra Pradesh as Andhras? If ask anybody in Andhra pradesh, Andhra person means its coastal Andhra. Obviously there is confusion. Ramcrk (talk) 06:12, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

The state is called Andhra pradesh. There is nothing wrong in calling citizens of the state Andhra. But andhra people are called Andhras even in AP. If you feel so, post these edits in Telangana page. Not here. Nagarjuna198 (talk) 00:29, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

I am not saying its wrong. I am just mentioning the fact that because of the Andhra word in Andhra Pradesh, some times people call residents of Andhra pradesh as Andhra. Thats historically incorrect. But its a fact that people are doing it. I just included that fact saying that people are using Andhra word such a way even though historically incorrect. Ramcrk (talk) 23:42, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

This is not the place to post your personal concerns and frustrations. Nagarjuna198 (talk) 00:31, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

I posted explanation about Jai ANdhra above. Nagarjuna198 (talk) 00:34, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

• Telangana Agition is for betterment of Under-developed regions and has not nothing to do with Language, Culture, caste and creed and not because Andhras and Telangana are two different races.(Even though, politicians try ways to Divide and Rule).

I agree. I don't think they are 2 different races. But we have to present the facts what ever they are. Telangana has its own identity. It has own its historical experience is different from Andhra or Rayala seema. Telangana is seperated from Andhra and Rayalaseema by geography too. Eastern Ghats, and Krisha river seperates the Telangana with rest of Telugu land. Thats the reason it has its own culture and identity. At the same time, as Telugu speaking people and as Indians , Telangana have lot of cutural bonding with rest of the Telugu land too. I agree thatDue to Telangana movement Telangana state proponents(most of Telangana people) are highlighting cultural differences and Telangana state opponents(most of Seema-Andhra people) are trying erase Telangana identity. Politics will be politics. Let present the facts here. If you come up with better references I will agree with you. Ramcrk (talk) 06:12, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Nobody is trying to erase identity. If you want something like that, why dont you post them in Telangana Article?

I am contributor to wiki. Not just to Telangana or Andhra related articles. I will contribute to any article which I have intgerest in or when I think I can contribute. I hope you also do the same. Ramcrk (talk) 23:42, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

• Since this article suggests that it is about "Andhra" lets just stick to its Geography and History. Please dont add irrelevant stuff by relating Andhra with various regions and also Telangana agitation. If you still want to avoid confusion, please create another article and name it "Confusions about Name Andhra". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagarjuna198 (talk • contribs) 01:44, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Since you are already agreeing that Andhra means Coastal Andhra, Why we need two pages. We can simply put a redirect here. Only reason this page is to remove confusion. We do have confusion. Nobody knows, when they see a word "Andhra" in a article, does it mean coastal Andhra, Seema-Andhra or Andhra Pradesh. Ramcrk (talk) 06:21, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

@(User talk:Ramcrk) I am not agreeing. You seriously have understanding problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagarjuna198 (talk • contribs) 12:17, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Do you even know where Eastern Ghats are? If they are culturally not related, why do they speak same language.

Eastern Ghats run from West Bengal state in the north, through Orissa and Andhra Pradesh to Tamil Nadu in the south passing some parts of Karnataka. The northern section of ghats start in Orissa and terminate near Guntur just south of the Krishna river.[1] The Deccan Plateau(where Telangana is) lies to the west of the range, between the Eastern Ghats and Western Ghats. The coastal plains(where Coastal Andhra is) lies between the Eastern Ghats and the Bay of Bengal. Telugu language needs more research. I am not saying Andhra and Telangana does not have cultural bonding. All I am saying Telangana has its own identity apart from Telugu identity. It had its own historical experience. Telangana was not ruled by Krishnadeva Raya(Tuluva dynasty) or by Britishers. Entire Telangana was ruled by same rulers(Kakatiyas, Bahamanis, Qutubshahis, Nizams, Hyderabad state, Andhra Pradesh state) at least for last 900 years. Andhra and Telangana were together for less than 250years(during part of Qutubshahis rule, first few decades of Nizams and in Andhra Pradesh)out of last 650years. Ramcrk (talk) 04:26, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

@(User talk:Ramcrk), Just in Case if you try to misinterpret history, it wont add any value. It will go through test of time and Thruth prevails. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagarjuna198 (talk • contribs) 02:39, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Proposal

Rename this article to Andhra (region) and have Andhra as simple disambiguation page. Helpful comments welcome. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:47, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Andhra is a region. Andhra (region) really makes sense?Nagarjuna198 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:24, 19 April 2011 (UTC).

I believe Ramcrk is saying Andhra can refer to different things. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:59, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

• Andhra presently refers to Coastal districts of Andhra Pradesh and thats what is mentioned in this article.
• Andhra pradesh refers to Andhra,Telangana and Rayala seema regions.
• Andhra pradesh has separate page for it.
• Telangana has a separate page too.
• Rayala seema has separate page too.

Nagarjuna198 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:33, 19 April 2011 (UTC).

I agree what you are saying. But newspapers even govt document are using Andhra word for all of the above. Even senior jounalists of major news papers confused about this term Andhra. Lot of wiki contributors are confused about this term. I have seen several links in several places on wiki which points to this page where they should be pointing to Andhra state or Andhra Pradesh. Please give your ideas on how to remove such confusion among people and among wiki readers and contributors. We need some kind of disambiguation page some where where we should mention the fact that media and govt documents use andhra word to refer to other things. I won't change the page. I ask you to think about it. Ramcrk (talk) 05:35, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Media refers to All of these because they are part of state Andhra pradesh and there is nothing wrong in it. Every body is aware of Andhra,Telangana and Rayala seema. 98.114.218.85 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:52, 19 April 2011 (UTC).

(talk), newspapers even govt document are using Andhra word for all of the above because its part of Andhra Pradesh. You think Indian Government/Media is confused about India? Everybody is aware of telangana- Agitation thats going on.Nagarjuna198 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:57, 19 April 2011 (UTC).

Thats my point. Lets include the fact which you are saying here. Lot of people who does not know much about Andhra Pradesh confused about it. Wikipedia is read by whole world not just people from Andhra Pradesh. Lets include the facts so that when they read wom Andhra Pradesh related article they can have better understanding. Ramcrk (talk) 15:38, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

@Ramcrk, then include that in Andhra Pradesh article. thats the right place. @(talk), "newspapers even govt document are using Andhra word for all of the above because its part of Andhra Pradesh" - However There is nothing wrong in that because its now part of Andhra Pradesh. Nagarjuna198 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:38, 20 April 2011 (UTC).

Also I dont agree with your assumption that Indian Government and media doesnt know about its own country.Nagarjuna198 (talk) 01:42, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Here is the deal. When somebody sees the word "Andhra", they will search for word Andhra and comes to this page. In that article they might mean Andhra means Andhra Pradesh or Andhra state or Seema-Andhra but this page talks about coastal Andhra. They get confused. For eg: to avoid similar confusion, there are pages like America, Hyderabad, English. I am thinking about creating similar page for Andhra. Hope you undertand what I am trying to say here. Ramcrk (talk)

No I didnt get you. This article clearly says Andhra merged with Telangana to form Andhra Pradesh which confusion you are talking about? Nagarjuna198 (talk) 02:44, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Try searching "Andhra" in google or wikipedia. first result it gives is Andhra Pradesh. Even if someone comes to this page by mistake, the intro part of this article clearly says " Coastal region of Andhra pradesh is called Andhra". If you are still not satisfied, put a simple disambiguation Link which redirects to Andhra Pradesh or Telangana or Rayalseema.Nagarjuna198 (talk) 02:40, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

I give up. Its upto admins to decide now. I explained why there is a need for disambiguation page. How and where to put it; I will leave to admins. I don't see Americans complaining about disambiguation page for America. I don't see English men complaining about disambiguation page for English. I don't see Hyderabad people complaining about disambiguation page for Hyderabad. I don't understand why Nagarjuna198 having a problem with having disambiguation page for Andhra. Ramcrk (talk) 02:53, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

@Ramcrk: Firstly, Andhra is not America. I suggest you please read my above comment, If you are still not satisfied, put a simple disambiguation link which redirects to Andhra Pradesh or Telangana or Rayalseema. I do have problem with certain subjective lines(very out of context) and chauvinistic remarks of certain authors you put in your edits.

Example:

• "Kakatiyas called themselves as Andhra rulers".- Are they mad to call themselves if they are not?
• "DESPITE popular belief that Satavahanas are Andhras, they never called themselves Andhras." - You just try to fit these sentences and What does it signify except some chauvinistic attitude of a person towards other.
• "Through out the history, only coastal part is called Andhra" - nothing but your personal reflection.

Nagarjuna198 (talk) 03:15, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Dab page: Change this to a dab page as suggested by NeilN. —Abhishek ^{Talk to me} 05:38, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

We already have coastal Andhra page. This page would be duplication of that page. Itstead of maintaining two pages. Lets put redirect one of the pages. Ramcrk (talk) 06:27, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

This should be the right page because Coastal Andhra means only coastal part of Andhra. Its no coastal Andhra. Its actually Andhra. Nagarjuna198 (talk) 03:38, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Support move to dab. Within the English speaking world, Andhra almost exclusively refers to Andhra Pradesh. This page should be named Andhra(region); or better, should be merged to Coastal Andhra. Yes Michael? •^Talk 09:58, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Better to Merge Coastal Andhra to "Andhra" because "Coastal" makes no sense as its more of a colloquial term. and later we create a DAB page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagarjuna198 (talk • contribs) 01:14, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Merge to Coastal Andrah, move title to disambig Following up on arguments laid out here make it clear that this term isn't used predominantly in one context. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 05:16, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Requested move 12 July 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved -- JHunterJ (talk) 00:26, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

---

Andhra → Andhra (disambiguation) – Primary topic for Andhra is Andhra Pradesh, a concise name to refer a state of India. It is collectively more significant and implied than all others entries in dab page; Therefore, Andhra shall be redirected to Andhra Pradesh per WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT, and a hatnote may be placed in Andhra Pradesh page to clarify the same. Ab207 (talk) 17:33, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.