This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Bharata (Mahabharata) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1Auto-archiving period: 90 days
![]() |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I kindly request the administrators to delete this page because there is hardly any sourced information , And contains misleading information Jainallotrope ( talk) 22:10, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
The term "emperor" is applicable to Bharata Chakravartin as well -- this article should be moved to something like Bharata (son of Dushyanta), Bharata (son of Shakuntala), or Bharata (Mahabharata). utcursch | talk 17:39, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
( ←) There are 5 Bharatas:
Besides several other kings and sages in Hinduism called Bharata. Both the Hindu and Jain Bharata Chakravatis as well as Vedic Bharata are claimed to be root of the Name of India as Bharata-varsha. Redtigerxyz Talk 16:57, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Why has Kurukshetra been regarded so highly ever since the early Vedic period? Actually, the Rgvedic archetype of the Mahabharata, the “Ten Kings’ Battle” (dasarajna), took place further west on the Parusni (Ravi). Due to the victory of the Bharata chieftain Sudas in this battle, the Bharata tribe was able to settle in the Kurukshetra area.[4] The evolvement of the small tribal Bharata domination into that of a much larger Kuru realm is not recorded by our texts. The Kurus suddenly appear on the scene in the post-Rgvedic texts. As so often, the Sanskrit texts record only the results of certain developments. [1]
B. N. Mukherjee continues:
Originally denoting a part of northern India (as denoted by the Hathigumpha inscription of c. 1st century BC),[29] the name Bhāratavarsha came to signify by sometime in the early centuries of the Christian Era the whole of the subcontinent. The Natyasastra of Bharata, which is to be placed by c. 3rd century AD,[30] if not a still earlier age,[31] used the name Bhāratavarsha in the sense of the whole (or nearly so) of the Indian subcontinent.[32] [2]
-- Kautilya3 ( talk) 17:56, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
References
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Bharata (Mahabharata) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1Auto-archiving period: 90 days
![]() |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I kindly request the administrators to delete this page because there is hardly any sourced information , And contains misleading information Jainallotrope ( talk) 22:10, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
The term "emperor" is applicable to Bharata Chakravartin as well -- this article should be moved to something like Bharata (son of Dushyanta), Bharata (son of Shakuntala), or Bharata (Mahabharata). utcursch | talk 17:39, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
( ←) There are 5 Bharatas:
Besides several other kings and sages in Hinduism called Bharata. Both the Hindu and Jain Bharata Chakravatis as well as Vedic Bharata are claimed to be root of the Name of India as Bharata-varsha. Redtigerxyz Talk 16:57, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Why has Kurukshetra been regarded so highly ever since the early Vedic period? Actually, the Rgvedic archetype of the Mahabharata, the “Ten Kings’ Battle” (dasarajna), took place further west on the Parusni (Ravi). Due to the victory of the Bharata chieftain Sudas in this battle, the Bharata tribe was able to settle in the Kurukshetra area.[4] The evolvement of the small tribal Bharata domination into that of a much larger Kuru realm is not recorded by our texts. The Kurus suddenly appear on the scene in the post-Rgvedic texts. As so often, the Sanskrit texts record only the results of certain developments. [1]
B. N. Mukherjee continues:
Originally denoting a part of northern India (as denoted by the Hathigumpha inscription of c. 1st century BC),[29] the name Bhāratavarsha came to signify by sometime in the early centuries of the Christian Era the whole of the subcontinent. The Natyasastra of Bharata, which is to be placed by c. 3rd century AD,[30] if not a still earlier age,[31] used the name Bhāratavarsha in the sense of the whole (or nearly so) of the Indian subcontinent.[32] [2]
-- Kautilya3 ( talk) 17:56, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
References