I have come across the curious reticence of Historians when they write on Indian history.
They are prepared to take as authentic texts/books by Authors from the West,from Plato, Thucydides,Xenophon,Ptolomey, Strabo,Megasthanes,Huan -tsuang,The Bible,Iliad,Odessey,Koran ,they brush aside Indian texts as myths,legends and the works of ancient Indian writers as figment of overworked imagination!
But facts of Indian history are being confirmed by Archeology, Etymology, Cultural cross references,asro dating,Archeoastronomy,Carbon dating,Sea floor movements,Glacial movements,Strata verification , Plate Tectonics ,Cave paintings,and Epigraphs.
Western history,as revealed by these tools,are quite nascent when compared to the Timeline of India.
The earlier western texts can not quote the much more ancient Indian texts because they had no access or even if they had,their knowledge was limited because of their poor understanding of Sanskrit ,Brahmi of various hues and the Ethos of Indian culture.
And nearly all of them miss out sources other than those in Sanskrit.
There was and is Tamil,Kannada,Telugu, Bengali.
These languages are also ancient and they have vast literature.
References found in these sync with what is found in Sanskrit.
Sanskrit and these languages quote each other on historical events.
Thus we find that,
Kannada and Tamil kings took part in the Mahabharata war,
Bengal was over twenty-five Thousand years old,
Varanasi is the oldest continuously inhabited city of the world,
So ,when foreign authors write on Indian history,they record what they have seen and not on what happened earlier in India.
Yet some of them like Strabo,Megasthanes,Huan-tsusang,Fa-hien refer to the antiquity of India.
Strabo and Megasthanes refer to Tamil and Lanka in detail.
The assignment of dates in Indian history now is based nearly wholly on these western sources,and not much on Indian sources.
If one were to devote time to study Indian texts and cross reference them among Sanskrit,Pali,Tamil,Kannada texts and further check with Epigraphs found in Indian temples,real Indian history would emerge.
It stands to reason to trust these multiple sources as they were independent of each other , region wise language wise and the kings of these countries were at war with others at many a times.
The problem arises when the current date assigned to an event in Indian history is way Off the mark by as much as 10,000 years!
Yet, the evidence is compelling.
One such is the the dating of Tamil Chera kings and the Satavahavana dynasties.
Satavahavana dynasty ruled initially from Prathistana,Amravathi and their kingdom encompassed Central India,Andhra, Maharashtra, Karnataka.
They succeeded the Kanva dynasty.
The first king is Simuka.
One of the greatest kings was Gautamiputra Satakarni.
He assisted the Chera King Cheran Senguttuvan.
As Senguttuvan is dated around 9600 BC,Gautamiputra Satakarni and the Satavahavana dynasty may be dated from the present First Century BC to 9600-9500 BC.
‘This declaration by this king happened in the first century CE. This is known from the fact that this king was a friend of Gautamiputra Satakarniwhose time period has been documented. The name Satakarni is “Nootruvar kannar” in Tamil. He provided boats to enable Cheran’s army to cross the Ganges. From there onwards, till their destination in the Himalayas, they had met with some resistance. Silappadhikaram makes a mention that this Cheran king won over the “ill-mouthed Yavanas” before reaching the Himalayas (from where he procured the stone for making the image of Kannagi)..