Jump to content

Talk:Maurya Empire: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
DrDuke101 (talk | contribs)
Line 135: Line 135:
::::::::These are my views and of course it’s up to the community to decide which option is better. I hope we can reach a consensus quickly. Thanks! [[User:DrDuke101|ᗟ𝖗ᗟ𝓊𝑘𝘦💀]] ([[User talk:DrDuke101|talk]]) 14:35, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
::::::::These are my views and of course it’s up to the community to decide which option is better. I hope we can reach a consensus quickly. Thanks! [[User:DrDuke101|ᗟ𝖗ᗟ𝓊𝑘𝘦💀]] ([[User talk:DrDuke101|talk]]) 14:35, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
:::::::::Qing dynasty also included parts of Russia ,was Russia and china also same?? I believe ancient Indian should be used because its capital, culture, religion all were from India. Qing cannot be Chinese dynasty vid Maurya is not Indian..?? [[User:Vkk123|Vkk123]] ([[User talk:Vkk123|talk]]) 17:31, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
:::::::::Qing dynasty also included parts of Russia ,was Russia and china also same?? I believe ancient Indian should be used because its capital, culture, religion all were from India. Qing cannot be Chinese dynasty vid Maurya is not Indian..?? [[User:Vkk123|Vkk123]] ([[User talk:Vkk123|talk]]) 17:31, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
::::::::::The Qing dynasty’s expansion into parts of Russia does not imply that China & Russia were one single country. Russia has its own history, culture etc as with China. Russia had interactions with China during the time that the Qing dynasty ruled China & Mongolia but that does not mean that Russia was part of the Qing empire. [[User:DrDuke101|ᗟ𝖗ᗟ𝓊𝑘𝘦💀]] ([[User talk:DrDuke101|talk]]) 09:02, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
:::::::::also South Asia does not give the accurate geography of mauryan Empire when it is called India people do understand that it had Indian culture Indian religion which South Asia does not give, today South Asia has Muslim population but at that time there was no Islam so when you use South Asia it actually destroy the meaning of Marian empires history, Mauryan Empire is always called in ancient Indian kingdom, except Wikipedia, I guess people like you are the reason why. [[User:Vkk123|Vkk123]] ([[User talk:Vkk123|talk]]) 17:33, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
:::::::::also South Asia does not give the accurate geography of mauryan Empire when it is called India people do understand that it had Indian culture Indian religion which South Asia does not give, today South Asia has Muslim population but at that time there was no Islam so when you use South Asia it actually destroy the meaning of Marian empires history, Mauryan Empire is always called in ancient Indian kingdom, except Wikipedia, I guess people like you are the reason why. [[User:Vkk123|Vkk123]] ([[User talk:Vkk123|talk]]) 17:33, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
{{od}}
{{od}}

Revision as of 09:02, 23 August 2023

Template:Vital article

caste

Among the Indo-Aryan people of the Gangetic plain, who were conquered by the Mauryan Empire, the caste system was consolidated, and the rights of women declined, though "these developments did not affect people living in large parts of the subcontinent. can we please remove this line it isnt supported anywhere, its just a big myth. please look at these references https://books.google.co.in/books?id=uYXDB2gIYbwC&pg=PA133&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

https://arstechnica.com/science/2016/01/the-caste-system-has-left-its-mark-on-indians-genomes/

Chandragupta Maurya religion.

Hey in the religion section. Can you correct the part a little bit.It would be better if you added' chandragupta initially a follower of Brahmanism. We have ample of evidences of chandragupta performing various brahmaincal rituals and sacrifices according to Greeks and various other sources ((sastri 1988 pg no. 163-164. )) And many other sources in Chandragupta official Wikipedia page. 103.81.213.136 (talk) 11:51, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion of New Map for infobox

Hello all, I want to suggest a new map which has been put below instead of the second map in the infobox. I am going to put both maps here, it would be good if we can reach a consensus (the first one is the new map)!

India in 250 B. C
Maurya Empire, c.250 BCE 2

ᗟ𝖗ᗟ𝓊𝑘𝘦💀 (talk) 16:38, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As a fan of Joppen's maps, I normally would have little argument with your proposal, but the lower, fuller, map in the current infobox has been made by user:Avantiputra7 based on maps or details in the sources that are listed in the map's caption. It, moreover, displays the sites of Asoka's edicts, which Joppen's map does not, though it does display the physical features very well. PS I have the original atlas of Joppen 1907 and I can scan a higher-def version of your proposed map, if I haven't already uploaded it on WP. Thanks, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:18, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The present maps are in the same style and quite detailed, forming a twin; why would we replace the second one of them? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 02:08, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Joshua Jonathan,
I appreciate your engagement in this matter. Allow me to provide some additional context regarding the request for the removal of the second map in the same style.
While I understand that the existing maps share a similar style and level of detail, the concern regarding the second map revolves around its historical accuracy and authenticity. It has come to attention that this particular map might not be aligned with the latest research findings from reputable historical sources and institutions.
The reasons for the request to remove the second map are centered on the following key points:
  • Ensuring Historical Accuracy: It is imperative that any map featured on Wikipedia accurately reflects historical information. The concerns raised about the authenticity of the second map highlight potential inaccuracies that could mislead readers seeking precise historical details.
  • Scholarly Endorsement: The omission of the second map from official Indian history textbooks and the lack of endorsement by the Indian Archaeological Survey of India raise doubts about its reliability as an accurate representation of historical events and boundaries.
  • Mitigating Misinformation: As Wikipedia aims to provide accurate and reliable information, the presence of a map that may not be historically sound could inadvertently contribute to the dissemination of misinformation.
I kindly request your understanding in considering these concerns. While both maps may share a similar style, it is vital that the content presented on Wikipedia maintains the highest standards of historical accuracy and integrity. If there are ways to address the potential issues with the second map like this -
File:The Great Mauryan Empire.png
The Great Mauryan Empire designed by Simeon Netchev who is author in World History Encyclopedia[1]
and ensure its alignment with reputable historical research, that could indeed be a valuable solution.
Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to your insights and guidance on this matter.
Best regards ... विशाल कुमार मौर्य (talk) 11:38, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

Some remarks:
  • re "Ensuring Historical Accuracy": the Avantiputra7-map has muliple references;
  • re "Scholarly Endorsement": lack of endorsement by the ASI may actually be an endorsement by itself; but maybe you've got sources which explicitly oppose the authors referenced by Avantiputra7?;
  • re "Mitigating Misinformation": again, multiple sources; please substantiate your suggestion that the map may not be historically accurate.
Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 14:57, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why the map is very unauthorised?
Territories of the Maurya Empire conceptualized as core areas or linear networks separated by large autonomous regions in the works of scholars such as: historians Hermann Kulke and Dietmar Rothermund;[1] Burton Stein;[2] David Ludden;[3] and Romila Thapar;[4] anthropologists Monica L. Smith[5] and Stanley Jeyaraja Tambiah;[4] archaeologist Robin Coningham;[4] and historical demographer Tim Dyson.[6]
🧾 Reason why it's an unauthorised photo-
  • Point 1- Chandrgupta Maurya (322BCE) already won the Aria ,Kamboj ,Arachosia ,Gedrosia from Selucus.That map don't show Aria,Arachosia ,Gedrosia in Mauryan Empire.
  • Point 2- Ashoka defeated the Kalinga but this map don't show Kalinga in Mauryan Empire.
  • Point 3- I have checked the reference that given in the name of historians but all the references are fake , on opening these books pages they're not contain any information about Mauryan Empire expansion like this.
Wikipedia is for providing authentic information not to promote such hoax 😞.I think any narrow minded person created this pic by his own and add this pic a year later just to defame buddhist Ashoka Empire.
Sincerely, Vishalji01 (talk) 15:46, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Deletion of Inaccurate Mauryan Empire Map on Wikipedia

Dear Wikipedia Admins,

I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to kindly request the deletion of an inaccurate Mauryan Empire map that is currently featured on a Wikipedia page. The map in question has raised concerns regarding its historical accuracy, authenticity, and its alignment with established scholarly standards. I believe that its removal would greatly contribute to maintaining the integrity and reliability of the content on Wikipedia.

Several compelling reasons support the need for the removal of this misrepresented map:

  • Historical Inaccuracy: The map inaccurately depicts the territorial extent and boundaries of the Mauryan Empire, potentially misleading readers who are seeking precise historical information.
  • Lack of Archaeological Endorsement: The Indian Archaeological Survey of India, a recognized authority in historical research, has not validated the authenticity of the map. The absence of archaeological support further questions its reliability.
  • Exclusion from Educational Materials: The misrepresented map is notably absent from Indian history textbooks, which are widely acknowledged as reliable sources of historical information. This omission raises doubts about its credibility and historical accuracy.
  • Potential Dissemination of Misinformation: Including an unsupported map can inadvertently spread misinformation, undermining the educational value that Wikipedia aims to provide.
  • Maintaining Scholarly Standards: Wikipedia serves as a platform for sharing accurate and well-researched information. The inclusion of an inaccurate map contradicts this goal and may compromise the platform's reputation.
  • Avoiding Bias and Misrepresentation: The misrepresented map may introduce bias or misconceptions to readers seeking unbiased historical information.

Considering these concerns, I kindly request the deletion of the inaccurate Mauryan Empire map from the Wikipedia page. Doing so will contribute to upholding the principles of scholarly accuracy, neutrality, and responsible information dissemination that Wikipedia represents.

Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Your dedication to maintaining the reliability and credibility of Wikipedia is greatly appreciated. Please let me know if there are any further steps or information required to facilitate the removal of the inaccurate map.

Sincerely, विशाल कुमार मौर्य विशाल कुमार मौर्य (talk) 11:29, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly substaintiate your claim that the map is inaccurate; mere statements won't suffice. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 16:44, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am pasting my reply here again, I don't have time to write all again.
Why the map is very unauthoris?
Territories of the Maurya Empire conceptualized as core areas or linear networks separated by large autonomous regions in the works of scholars such as: historians Hermann Kulke and Dietmar Rothermund;[1] Burton Stein;[2] David Ludden;[3] and Romila Thapar;[4] anthropologists Monica L. Smith[5] and Stanley Jeyaraja Tambiah;[4] archaeologist Robin Coningham;[4] and historical demographer Tim Dyson.[6]

References

  1. ^ a b Hermann Kulke 2004, p. 69-70.
  2. ^ a b Stein, Burton (2010), A History of India, John Wiley & Sons, p. 74, ISBN 978-1-4443-2351-1, In the past it was not uncommon for historians to conflate the vast space thus outlined with the oppressive realm described in the Arthashastra and to posit one of the earliest and certainly one of the largest totalitarian regimes in all of history. Such a picture is no longer considered believable; at present what is taken to be the realm of Ashoka is a discontinuous set of several core regions separated by very large areas occupied by relatively autonomous peoples.
  3. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference Ludden2013-lead-4 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  4. ^ a b c d e f Coningham, Robin; Young, Ruth (2015), The Archaeology of South Asia: From the Indus to Asoka, c.6500 BCE – 200 CE, Cambridge University Press, pp. 451–466, ISBN 978-1-316-41898-7
  5. ^ a b Coningham, Robin; Young, Ruth (2015), The Archaeology of South Asia: From the Indus to Asoka, c.6500 BCE – 200 CE, Cambridge University Press, p. 453, ISBN 978-1-316-41898-7
  6. ^ a b Dyson, Tim (2018), A Population History of India: From the First Modern People to the Present Day, Oxford University Press, pp. 16–17, ISBN 978-0-19-882905-8, Magadha power came to extend over the main cities and communication routes of the Ganges basin. Then, under Chandragupta Maurya (c.321–297 bce), and subsequently Ashoka his grandson, Pataliputra became the centre of the loose-knit Mauryan 'Empire' which during Ashoka's reign (c.268–232 bce) briefly had a presence throughout the main urban centres and arteries of the subcontinent, except for the extreme south.
🧾 Reasons -
  • Point 1- Chandrgupta Maurya (322BCE) already won the Aria ,Kamboj ,Arachosia ,Gedrosia from Selucus.That map don't show Aria,Arachosia ,Gedrosia.
  • Point 2- Ashoka defeated the Kalinga but this map don't show Kalinga in Mauryan Empire.
  • Point 3- I have checked the reference that given in the name of historians but all the references are fake , on opening these books pages they're not contain any information about Mauryan Empire expansion like this.
Wikipedia is for providing authentic information not to promote such hoax 😞.
Sincerely, Vishalji01 (talk) 15:55, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Talking machine, right? Stein (2010):

In the past it was not uncommon for historians to conflate the vast space thus outlined with the oppressive realm described in the Arthashastra and to posit one of the earliest and certainly one of the largest totalitarian regimes in all of history. Such a picture is no longer considered believable; at present what is taken to be the realm of Ashoka is a discontinuous set of several core regions separated by very large areas occupied by relatively autonomous peoples.

Wonder who'll be here first, F&f or the blocking admin? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 16:44, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The admin. Thanks. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 18:58, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

South Asia versus Indian subcontinent

@Vkk123: a convention, or consensus, has developed to write "South Asia" instead of "Indian subcontinent" or "India." Please stick to this convention. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 17:47, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

also Joshua all the reference given in the text are referring the place as ancient India or Indian subcontinent there is not a single mention of South Asia so please don't mention South Asia according to yourself let it be instant India or Indian subcontinent. Vkk123 (talk) 18:52, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's the same place - don't get worked up about it. The trouble with talking about "ancient India" is that many will not realize this includes the area of modern Pakistan (and sometimes Nepal etc). Johnbod (talk) 20:04, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
then term Indian continent should not have any problem, and I also respectfully told you that South Asia is a political term mostly, For geographical term, in historical prospective, we use Indian subcontinent.
Thank you Vkk123 (talk) 04:55, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Maurya Empire extended into what's now Afghanistan, hence "Indian subcontinent" does not suffice. @Doug Weller and Regents Park: FYI. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 18:24, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
it was not Afghanistan where Maurya Empire started , and you will also see in every history books in any country that maren empire is called ancient Kingdom of India, South Asia is political term just because few parts of Afghanistan was added during mauryan Empire the whole Empire cannot become something else. just for example Qing dynasty of China is called dynasty of ancient China but there was no China then and the land of Qing dynasty extended to present day Mongolia and Russia but it is still called Chinese dynasty. Vkk123 (talk) 04:27, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
when Chinese dynasty who extended to other parts of the country that exist now and still be called Chinese Empire or Chinese dynasty of ancient China then I don't find anything wrong with ancient India or Indian subcontinent, and also for example the crown rule in India is called British India not British South Asia because at that time whole South Asia was united India, so history is not written according to what things are now history is written what was then. Vkk123 (talk) 04:29, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.britannica.com/place/Mauryan-Empire
please aslo have a look on Britannica link and other reliable article about mauryan Empire it all mention Ancient india or indian subcontinent, Wikipedia cannot just make things up itself Wikipedia is a compilation of knowledge from different sources so Wikipedia should use the term that is used in history books or articles. Vkk123 (talk) 04:44, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I feel “South Asia” is a better term vis-a-vis “Indian subcontinent ” as the Mauryan Empire included Afghanistan (which is not part of the subcontinent) during the reign of Ashoka (I may be wrong about which Mauryan emperor conquered Afghanista more..), thanks ᗟ𝖗ᗟ𝓊𝑘𝘦💀 (talk) 08:35, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Qing dynasty aslo included present a Mongolia and parts of Russia then why it is called ancient Chinese dynasty and not East Asian dynasty change that please.. Vkk123 (talk) 13:18, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The term “South Asia” gives a more inclusive and accurate understanding of the countries associated with the Mauryan empire i.e. India, Nepal, Pakistan, Afghanistan etc. As Afghanistan was not part of the subcontinent I strongly believe this is the correct way of addressing the region that the empire governed.
My answer related to the Qing dynasty is that historically Mongolia was part of China due to so many imperial dynasties of China which governed China and Mongolia for example the Yuan dynasty (Genghis’ successors in China & Mongolia). I feel this is the reason why it was called the Chinese Imperial dynasty rather than East Asian dynasty.
Lastly, due to Afghanistan being part of the Mauryan empire we cannot say ancient India as it will denote that Afghanistan is a part of the Indian subcontinent (which it is not).
These are my views and of course it’s up to the community to decide which option is better. I hope we can reach a consensus quickly. Thanks! ᗟ𝖗ᗟ𝓊𝑘𝘦💀 (talk) 14:35, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Qing dynasty also included parts of Russia ,was Russia and china also same?? I believe ancient Indian should be used because its capital, culture, religion all were from India. Qing cannot be Chinese dynasty vid Maurya is not Indian..?? Vkk123 (talk) 17:31, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Qing dynasty’s expansion into parts of Russia does not imply that China & Russia were one single country. Russia has its own history, culture etc as with China. Russia had interactions with China during the time that the Qing dynasty ruled China & Mongolia but that does not mean that Russia was part of the Qing empire. ᗟ𝖗ᗟ𝓊𝑘𝘦💀 (talk) 09:02, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
also South Asia does not give the accurate geography of mauryan Empire when it is called India people do understand that it had Indian culture Indian religion which South Asia does not give, today South Asia has Muslim population but at that time there was no Islam so when you use South Asia it actually destroy the meaning of Marian empires history, Mauryan Empire is always called in ancient Indian kingdom, except Wikipedia, I guess people like you are the reason why. Vkk123 (talk) 17:33, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding "always": Repeat]. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 18:08, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]