Jump to content

Talk:Kashmir

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 65.88.88.176 (talk) at 21:10, 10 June 2016. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Template:WP1.0

The Pakistani name for Kashmir

Shouldn't the Pakistani name for Kashmir be given in the lede? I realize this is an article fraught with contention, but it seems reasonable to include it, even if the Indian editors may not want to include it.__209.179.8.124 (talk) 02:49, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@209.179.8.124: And, what is the Pakistani name for Kashmir? Vanjagenije (talk) 14:57, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The national language of Pakistan is Urdu. The Urdu name for Kashmir is given in the first sentence of the article. Maproom (talk) 19:13, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As anticipated a great effort is being made to Semitize the Aryan nation of Kashmir by false data. This can never be achieved.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Kashmir. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:36, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Kashmir. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:14, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Extent of "Kashmir"

@Fowler&fowler: The text that said that the extent of "Kashmir" varied through time is correct. The rulers of the Kashmir valley dominated the surrounding areas and all the area under their control was called "Kashmir." I don't have sources ready at present. But this is an important point because it is part of the justification of using the term for the wider region at present. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:45, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to see those sources. The only reason why Kashmir is used for the wider geographical region today is that the Dogra rulers of the princely state, of Kashmir and Jammu, who had been rulers of Jammu until they, in succession, invaded Ladakh and Baltistan in the 1830s and early 40s, purchased the valley cheaply from the British as reward for betraying the Sikhs in 1846, and established treaties of vassalage with the Hunza and Nagar to the north. All contemporary internationally vetted RS, such as Chitralekha Zutshi's Language of Belonging: Islam, Regional Identity, and the Making of Kashmir, Columbia University Press, 2003; and Mridu Rai, Hindu Ruler, Muslim Subjects: Islam Rights and the History of Kashmir, Princeton University Press, 2004, use the terms, Kashmir, Kashmir Valley, and the Valley synonymously for the pre-1846 era. To be sure, there were political entities such as the Mughal Soubah of Kashmir, whose capital alternated between Kabul and Kandahar, but the geographical term was always reserved for the valley. Extending a political term to a geographical would be akin to describing the geographical term Bengal to once have included Uttar Pradesh or United Provinces, because latter was technically a part of the Bengal Presidency in the 19th century. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 07:36, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure what you mean by "pre-1846 era." During the times when Kashmir lost its hold over the surrounding regions (and even itself), sure "Kashmir" meant just the valley. This is the "Kashmir proper." But when Kashmir was a major power, it lent its name to the surrounding regions. See for example, Wink,[1] pp. 233-234 and also other occurrences of Kashmir in the book. The Chachnama states that the border of Kashmir was at a place called panj mahiyat, whose precise location is not known but historians interpret it to be somewhere in northwestern Punjab. At that time, apparently, there was no "Punjab", only "Sindh" and "Kashmir." -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:52, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Wink, André (2002), Al-Hind, the Making of the Indo-Islamic World: Early Medieval India and the Expansion of Islam 7Th-11th Centuries, BRILL, pp. 233–234, ISBN 0-391-04173-8
Well, then why don't we say that in the lead:
"According to the definitive interpretation of Rajatrangini---the hallmark of Kashmiri historiography---by Professor Andre Wink of the University of Wisconsin, during the early Indian medieval age, there was no Punjab, no land watered by five rivers, no remnants of the Sapta Sindhu so beloved of the Vedas. There was only Sind and Kashmir. The river Indus, after it coursed at great speed around the western anchor of the Himalayas, the Nanga Parbat, flowed directly into Sind. This could only have been possible if the ingenious Hindu Kashmiris had knowledge of advanced aqueduct technology and so we may assume that the Roman arch was reinvented in Kashmir."
In other words, I'm wise to Hindu nationalist irredentism. That a posited kingdom based in the Kashmir valley from time to time expanded in frontiers or became part of a larger empire, does not change the geographical denotation of Kashmir, which has always been the valley. After the mid 19th century, the geographical denotation itself changed. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:15, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, you know the history of this article better than I do. If "Kashmir" means the same as Kashmir Valley, why do we need two separate articles for them? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:29, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Kautilya3: Because, after 1846, the term Kashmir began to be used both informally and officially for the princely state of Kashmir and Jammu (the British name). This article was originally titled Kashmir region, and it stopped (historically) in 1947. The Kashmir and Jammu (princely state), created later, and still later changed to J&K (princely state) (apparently the ruling Dogra's name for their state), was a content fork, almost a copy at first, whose creation I opposed, but it slipped through anyway. The Kashmir valley is another content fork, which, if I remember correctly, was created mainly to make the reference to the Kashmir valley in this article a blue link. This is Wikipedia my friend (and I mean the last bit). (Sorry for my blunt tone in my posts above, but this article (for all kinds of reasons) attracts drive-bys, which you most assuredly are not; in fact, I'm glad that you're watching over this article, as my visits are increasingly sporadic. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:00, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for telling me the history of the articles. But, my point is that the traditional extent of "Kashmir" is not much different from that of the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. It has always been larger than the Kashmir valley. The mountains provide natural boundaries and these don't change over time. The disputed sentence was added here. I think the editor is right that all the historical maps show the extent of Kashmir to be the same. (There is nothing to indicate that the editor is a Hindu nationalist. Judging from the edit history, he/she is probably a Shin.) In the one case when the boundaries have been precisely recorded, viz., Chachnama, we do have confirmation. I expect that the fertile Kashmir valley would have provided the revenue and the surrounding mountain regions would have provided the fighting forces. This natural ecology of the place was broken by the Durranis. But, historically speaking, this is an aberration rather than the norm. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:36, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kashmir&oldid=724690045"