Which one of the following South Indian kingdoms is not mentioned by name in the rock edicts and inscriptions of Emperor Ashoka?

Introduction / Context:
Ashoka's rock and pillar edicts are some of the most important sources for ancient Indian history. They not only describe his policy of Dhamma but also mention several contemporary kingdoms and peoples. Among these are certain South Indian states that maintained friendly relations with the Mauryan Empire. Examinations frequently test your knowledge of which South Indian polities are named in Ashokan inscriptions and which are not. This question asks you to identify the kingdom that is not mentioned by name in his edicts.

Given Data / Assumptions:
- The focus is on South Indian kingdoms in the time of Ashoka. - Options given are Satavahanas, Satiyaputa, Chola and Pandya. - We assume the standard list of kingdoms named in Ashoka's inscriptions. - The task is to pick the one that does not appear in those inscriptions.

Concept / Approach:
In one of his rock edicts, Ashoka mentions South Indian kingdoms such as the Cholas, Pandyas, Satiyaputas and Keralaputras, indicating that his influence or message of Dhamma extended beyond his core empire. The Satavahanas, however, rose to prominence only later, after the decline of the Mauryan dynasty, and their rule is usually placed in the post Mauryan period. Therefore, while Satiyaputa, Chola and Pandya are expressly mentioned in Ashokan inscriptions, the Satavahanas are not.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Recall that Ashoka ruled in the third century BCE and that he issued edicts engraved on rocks and pillars across the subcontinent. Step 2: Recognise that one major rock edict lists South Indian kingdoms such as the Cholas, Pandyas, Satiyaputas and Keralaputras, noted for friendly relations and exchanges of envoys. Step 3: Note that Satiyaputa, Chola and Pandya all appear in this list, which ties them clearly to Ashoka's time. Step 4: Understand that the Satavahanas were a later Deccan dynasty that came into prominence after the fall of the Mauryas and are not named in Ashoka's own inscriptions. Step 5: Therefore, among the options offered, Satavahanas is the kingdom not mentioned in Ashokan inscriptions.

Verification / Alternative check:
If you review standard ancient Indian history textbooks, they usually provide a direct quotation or summary of the edict that mentions South Indian kingdoms. You will see the names Chola, Pandya, Satiyaputa and Keralaputra listed together, while Satavahana is absent. Later chapters then introduce the Satavahanas as rulers who filled the power vacuum in the Deccan after the Mauryas. This chronological order and the explicit list in the edict confirm that Satavahanas is the correct answer for a question framed in this way.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Satiyaputa is wrong because the Satiyaputas are specifically named by Ashoka as one of the South Indian polities in his edicts.

Chola is wrong because the Cholas are clearly mentioned and are known to have maintained diplomatic relations with Ashoka's empire.

Pandya is wrong because the Pandyas, like the Cholas, are listed in the same rock edict as friendly South Indian neighbours.

Common Pitfalls:
A frequent mistake is to assume that any well known South Indian dynasty such as the Satavahanas must appear in all major ancient inscriptions. Another pitfall is confusing the historical periods of different dynasties. To avoid this, always remember that Satavahanas belong to the post Mauryan era, while the South Indian kingdoms mentioned by Ashoka are Chola, Pandya, Satiyaputa and Keralaputra. Keeping this simple chronological separation in mind will help you answer many related questions with confidence.

Final Answer:
The South Indian kingdom not mentioned in Ashokan inscriptions is the Satavahanas.