![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think Karkota dynasty is a better title for this page than the Karkota empire. The boundaries of the empire change in course of time, but the dynasty is of lasting interest. Cheers, Kautilya3 ( talk) 15:55, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
I made the following comment (edited) in the List of largest empires Talk page:
"There is one glaring anomaly for which the article on the empire needs some work: the Karkota Dynasty of Kashmir has recently been messed with in this table, but has a totally unreferenced article with what seem suspicious numbers. I've added a comment to its Talk page. The numbers in this table are totally incompatible with the listed rank (much too large). However, I'm not an expert, and haven't found any reliable sources on a quick search. I think the article is best titled "Karkota Dynasty" - there seems to have been a single region ruled by several dynasties. It originally had that name, but it was changed. The size needs to be sourced, in the Karkota article if not here. If somebody has the information, please correct relevant articles, but be sure to include sources." Pol098 ( talk) 20:55, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
@ Utcursch:, Regarding the claims of Central Asian conquest [1], see Andre Wink's first volume, which has a section on the Karkotas. I don't think this is an extraordinary claim by the way. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 00:20, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
@ Amitrochates: What is the source of this map: File:Karkota Empire, India (derived).jpg? The boundaries depicted here don't match even Kalhana's Rajatarangini. utcursch | talk 17:17, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
I tried rewriting the pages about the individual rulers of this dynasty other than Lalitaditya and there is a dearth of material to flesh out anything apart from six-seven line stubs. This article can easily contain all the information about non-Lalitaditya rulers without getting masive. TrangaBellam ( talk) 13:26, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
Greetings! Yes, I do try to directly copy information from museum notices next to the object. Although I make mistakes sometimes (alas) I think this is indeed information provided by the museum. I myself am not an expert, though. with all best wishes, Daderot ( talk)
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (
link), which describes Kashmir works of art from the 5th to the 11th century.{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (
link), but just give me the quote, I will add it.Cf. Pal 1975, pl. 28, a standing bronze Buddha in the Seattle Art Museum, ca. early tenth century has similar heavily corded loop folds down the torso; and ibid. pl. 29, a bronze crowned Buddha in the Metropolitan Museum, dating from the late ninth or early tenth century also has the stylised feature of the stomach muscles showing through the garment.This note is in the chapter
The Sculpture of Avantipura. TrangaBellam ( talk) 19:48, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
@ TrangaBellam: He are some of the images which I uploaded from the Metropolitan Museum of Art. There are about 80 images available with the Search "Kingdom of Kashmir" [9]. I'm also adding the Kartota image from Sackler. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 09:56, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
References
Fig 59a: Vajrasattva Kashmir , 8th century H : 65/8 in . ( 16.9 cm ) Pan - Asian Collection A regal Bodhisattva is seated on a lotus which rests on a pedestal of unusual form. The pedestal is composed of two tiers of jagged and contorted rock formations, the stylized design of the rockery being indicated by shallow , uneven incisions peculiar to Kashmiri bronzes . The narrow , recessed portions between the two tiers appear to be crushed by the entwined tails of two nāgas who , at the same time , are engaged in adoring the deity . The rock formations obviously represent a mountain , but the exact significance of the behaviour of the någas is not known . Clad in a dhoti , the Bodhisattva is elaborately crowned and ornamented . His hair is gathered up behind in what is generally known as the Parthian bob and is held in place by a filet . Five identical effigies of a seated Buddha - each showing the samadhimudra - are delineated on the crown and at the back . The Bodhisattva carries the thunderbolt ( vajra ) against his chest and a bell ( ghanță ) against his thigh . Because of the emblems and the manner in which they are disposed , the Bodhisattva may be identified as Vajrasattva .
Can anybody access this edition of Rajatarangini? TrangaBellam ( talk) 17:25, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Almost all scholars reject Kalhana's details of Muktapida/Lalitapida's conquests as vastly exaggerated and running contrary to other sources. I wish to see some author specializing in pre-modern Kashmir who uses these maps. TrangaBellam ( talk) 09:19, 25 March 2021 (UTC) @ पाटलिपुत्र: TrangaBellam ( talk) 14:50, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
@ TrangaBellam: Regarding [12]. The point is that the Karkota Dynasty replaced the Alchon Huns in Kashmir. It's an important point to give appropriate background to the rise of the dynasty. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 14:14, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi @ TrangaBellam: On Wikipedia you are not supposed to erase referenced content, just because it conflicts with your own personal evaluation of primary sources. This is called Original Research ( WP:OR) and is not acceptable here. The references being used in the segment you removed repeatedly [13] are good ones, and simply explain how the Karkotas came to replace the Alchon Huns/ Hunas in Kashmir, which is extremely relevant to this article:
I could also cite this book, which you could use to express doubts about all scholarly interpretations surrounding the Rajatarangini:
Again, you cannot just erase referenced material just because you don't like it, or even because you don't find it convincing. However, you can try to improve on it, balancing it by bringing alternative sources etc... That's called collaborative editing. Also keep in mind that repeated reverts of referenced material is an offense that can cause you to be blocked from editing. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 16:12, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
...Khinkhila was then apparently succeeded by King Yudhishthira, who seems to have been the last independent Hephthalite Hunnic ruler of northwestern India. According to the differing interpretations of the available evidence, he (or perhaps his predecessor) was either forced to submit to the Western Turks around 625 AD and then eliminated before 630 AD or alternatively continued to rule in some capacity until the middle of the seventh century AD...He cleverly omits mentioning Karkota/Pratapaditya and introduces significant factors of doubt on multiple aspects unlike Dani. (Cites Dani's work, though.)
Khinkhila was succeeded by his son Yudhishthira who, according to the Rajataranginı, ruled for 40 years (until c.670), when he was dethroned by Pratapaditya, son of Durlabhavardhana, the ruler of the Karkota dynasty.is demonstrably false. Also, the UNESCO volumes were more of an exercise in political monkey-balancing than scholarship.
@ TrangaBellam: Thanks, but I don't know about Biswas. Your view on "History of Civilizations of Central Asia: The crossroads of civilizations, A.D. 250 to 750", published by Unesco, seems unnecessarily harsh, as even your reviewer praises the quality of its contributions in respect to the history of the region. I've also found this interesting quote from Pratapaditya Pal (History of art, but nice summary):
"Before the Karkotas came to the throne, Kashmir may have been occupied by a long succession of foreign rulers or tribes. Certainly both the Kushänas and the Huns were present in the area for centuries. Indeed, the history of Kashmir begins to take shape only with the foundation of the Karkota dynasty around AD 625. The immediate predecessors of the Karkotas appear to have been Huns..."
— PAL, PRATAPADITYA (1973). "BRONZES OF KASHMIR: THEIR SOURCES AND INFLUENCES". Journal of the Royal Society of Arts. 121 (5207): 727. ISSN 0035-9114.
पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 19:40, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
References
@ TrangaBellam: In respect to the sentence "However, Gudrun Melzer notes that Biswas did not take into account a different chronology proposed by two German historians (Humbach and Göbl), which has since received eminence.", it would be interesting to know what the eminent chronology in question is.... otherwise the sentence is a bit useless... पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 09:43, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Historically, the rise of the Karkotas in 625 CE followed the rule of the Kushans and the Hunas in the region of Kashmir? I don't have the book and Gbooks don't work. TrangaBellam ( talk) 09:56, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@ TrangaBellam: Bakker is interesting in that he is very recent and authoritative, and describes the rule of the Alchon Huns in Kashmir in the 6th century, in the context of the Rajatarangini:
Other sources are interesting too:
Again, Pratapaditya Pal:
पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 10:24, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@ TrangaBellam: Your note: "Göbl notes Khingila to precede Toramana, based on numsimatic evidence....". Göbl here is actually refering to a much different Khingila, from a much earlier time: Khingila I (c. 440 - 490 CE) p.372, so I'm afraid this remark (and probably the whole sentence) has no bearing on the chronology of the Karkotas. Cheers पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 14:31, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Melzer notes that Narendraditya Khinkhila was "most probably" a different rulerdoes not make any sense. There exist a quite-reputed scholar (may be more, I need to read) who challenges Melzer and deem both to be the same ruler.
quite-reputed scholarbeing A.D.H. Bivar. TrangaBellam ( talk) 11:53, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Alexander Cunningham does not assert that the coin was minted under Vajraditya (he expresses a probability; Pg 44). Also, Stein has borrowed quite a lot from Cunningham's work but notes Vajraditya's reign to not have any historical evidence. It can be (thus) said that Stein did not agree with Cunningham's hypothesis.
So, we are left with Mitchiner (3650). What do they say? TrangaBellam ( talk) 13:55, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
@ TrangaBellam: Re. your repeated deletions [14] [15] [16] This is referenced material. In what sense do you think it is a "Misinterpretation of Cribb"? पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 08:05, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
a contemporary ofserves to this effect, which your framing fails to imply. His citations (Stein and Kuwayama) take a similar approach.
So have you read Bunyan, or are you just lobbing off the WP page which I had linked in order to have the last word? Fowler&fowler «Talk» 12:31, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
@ TrangaBellam: Why are you deleting the Chinese dates referenced from Joe Cribb [21]? If you do not have a good reason to delete it, it has to stay. You cannot just say "no consensus" and zap referenced material, just making gratuitous accusations of "incompetence" to an established user... you have to make your point about the specific issue at hand and your specific rationale for deleting. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 06:21, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Lalitaditya Muktapida is otherwise known from Chinese sources, as he is mentioned in the Chinese Tang Dynasty Chronicles, as a contemporary of the 736-747 CE period(or the similar line over Candrapida) impresses upon any average reader that the Chinese sources assign a regnal span of 736-747 CE. As I have argued, that is not the case. Please do not copy words from specialist publications without understanding the context in which they are used and accordingly, simplifying them. TrangaBellam ( talk) 06:35, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
"impresses upon any average reader that the Chinese sources assign a regnal span of 736-747 CE": not at all. First, these are the exact words of the author Joe Cribb, following your claim that my previous version suggested regnal date, which it did not (Why would I want to suggest that these are regnal dates anyway? I really don't care). It is a bit rich from you to challenge the exact, unambiguous, words of such a reliable source as Joe Cribb. Second, the English in this sentence is very clear that these are not regnal dates, but just the dates for which Chinese sources mention him. If you do not have a problem with the Chinese sources and with Joe Cribb in themselves, then what would be your preferred wording?? पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 06:46, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Please do not copy words from specialist publications without understanding the context in which they are used. I plan to discuss the dates assigned by Chinese sources in a note. And, every referenced information need not be added to our article. TrangaBellam ( talk) 07:32, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
I think that the page should be moved to "Karkota dynasty" to match other dynasty pages, such as Ayyubid dynasty, Tang dynasty, or Utpala dynasty. Is there any reason why this page has dynasty capitalized? PikaSamus ( talk) 23:55, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
@ RegentsPark: can you please semi-protect this article for indefinite time? Zero valuable contributions from newbies except caste-warring. TrangaBellam ( talk) 20:14, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
2409:4063:4E9B:24CF:795:57A6:2EEF:3ADE ( talk) 08:16, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Karkota was a Kashmiri brahmin dynasty.
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think Karkota dynasty is a better title for this page than the Karkota empire. The boundaries of the empire change in course of time, but the dynasty is of lasting interest. Cheers, Kautilya3 ( talk) 15:55, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
I made the following comment (edited) in the List of largest empires Talk page:
"There is one glaring anomaly for which the article on the empire needs some work: the Karkota Dynasty of Kashmir has recently been messed with in this table, but has a totally unreferenced article with what seem suspicious numbers. I've added a comment to its Talk page. The numbers in this table are totally incompatible with the listed rank (much too large). However, I'm not an expert, and haven't found any reliable sources on a quick search. I think the article is best titled "Karkota Dynasty" - there seems to have been a single region ruled by several dynasties. It originally had that name, but it was changed. The size needs to be sourced, in the Karkota article if not here. If somebody has the information, please correct relevant articles, but be sure to include sources." Pol098 ( talk) 20:55, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
@ Utcursch:, Regarding the claims of Central Asian conquest [1], see Andre Wink's first volume, which has a section on the Karkotas. I don't think this is an extraordinary claim by the way. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 00:20, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
@ Amitrochates: What is the source of this map: File:Karkota Empire, India (derived).jpg? The boundaries depicted here don't match even Kalhana's Rajatarangini. utcursch | talk 17:17, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
I tried rewriting the pages about the individual rulers of this dynasty other than Lalitaditya and there is a dearth of material to flesh out anything apart from six-seven line stubs. This article can easily contain all the information about non-Lalitaditya rulers without getting masive. TrangaBellam ( talk) 13:26, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
Greetings! Yes, I do try to directly copy information from museum notices next to the object. Although I make mistakes sometimes (alas) I think this is indeed information provided by the museum. I myself am not an expert, though. with all best wishes, Daderot ( talk)
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (
link), which describes Kashmir works of art from the 5th to the 11th century.{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (
link), but just give me the quote, I will add it.Cf. Pal 1975, pl. 28, a standing bronze Buddha in the Seattle Art Museum, ca. early tenth century has similar heavily corded loop folds down the torso; and ibid. pl. 29, a bronze crowned Buddha in the Metropolitan Museum, dating from the late ninth or early tenth century also has the stylised feature of the stomach muscles showing through the garment.This note is in the chapter
The Sculpture of Avantipura. TrangaBellam ( talk) 19:48, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
@ TrangaBellam: He are some of the images which I uploaded from the Metropolitan Museum of Art. There are about 80 images available with the Search "Kingdom of Kashmir" [9]. I'm also adding the Kartota image from Sackler. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 09:56, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
References
Fig 59a: Vajrasattva Kashmir , 8th century H : 65/8 in . ( 16.9 cm ) Pan - Asian Collection A regal Bodhisattva is seated on a lotus which rests on a pedestal of unusual form. The pedestal is composed of two tiers of jagged and contorted rock formations, the stylized design of the rockery being indicated by shallow , uneven incisions peculiar to Kashmiri bronzes . The narrow , recessed portions between the two tiers appear to be crushed by the entwined tails of two nāgas who , at the same time , are engaged in adoring the deity . The rock formations obviously represent a mountain , but the exact significance of the behaviour of the någas is not known . Clad in a dhoti , the Bodhisattva is elaborately crowned and ornamented . His hair is gathered up behind in what is generally known as the Parthian bob and is held in place by a filet . Five identical effigies of a seated Buddha - each showing the samadhimudra - are delineated on the crown and at the back . The Bodhisattva carries the thunderbolt ( vajra ) against his chest and a bell ( ghanță ) against his thigh . Because of the emblems and the manner in which they are disposed , the Bodhisattva may be identified as Vajrasattva .
Can anybody access this edition of Rajatarangini? TrangaBellam ( talk) 17:25, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Almost all scholars reject Kalhana's details of Muktapida/Lalitapida's conquests as vastly exaggerated and running contrary to other sources. I wish to see some author specializing in pre-modern Kashmir who uses these maps. TrangaBellam ( talk) 09:19, 25 March 2021 (UTC) @ पाटलिपुत्र: TrangaBellam ( talk) 14:50, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
@ TrangaBellam: Regarding [12]. The point is that the Karkota Dynasty replaced the Alchon Huns in Kashmir. It's an important point to give appropriate background to the rise of the dynasty. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 14:14, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi @ TrangaBellam: On Wikipedia you are not supposed to erase referenced content, just because it conflicts with your own personal evaluation of primary sources. This is called Original Research ( WP:OR) and is not acceptable here. The references being used in the segment you removed repeatedly [13] are good ones, and simply explain how the Karkotas came to replace the Alchon Huns/ Hunas in Kashmir, which is extremely relevant to this article:
I could also cite this book, which you could use to express doubts about all scholarly interpretations surrounding the Rajatarangini:
Again, you cannot just erase referenced material just because you don't like it, or even because you don't find it convincing. However, you can try to improve on it, balancing it by bringing alternative sources etc... That's called collaborative editing. Also keep in mind that repeated reverts of referenced material is an offense that can cause you to be blocked from editing. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 16:12, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
...Khinkhila was then apparently succeeded by King Yudhishthira, who seems to have been the last independent Hephthalite Hunnic ruler of northwestern India. According to the differing interpretations of the available evidence, he (or perhaps his predecessor) was either forced to submit to the Western Turks around 625 AD and then eliminated before 630 AD or alternatively continued to rule in some capacity until the middle of the seventh century AD...He cleverly omits mentioning Karkota/Pratapaditya and introduces significant factors of doubt on multiple aspects unlike Dani. (Cites Dani's work, though.)
Khinkhila was succeeded by his son Yudhishthira who, according to the Rajataranginı, ruled for 40 years (until c.670), when he was dethroned by Pratapaditya, son of Durlabhavardhana, the ruler of the Karkota dynasty.is demonstrably false. Also, the UNESCO volumes were more of an exercise in political monkey-balancing than scholarship.
@ TrangaBellam: Thanks, but I don't know about Biswas. Your view on "History of Civilizations of Central Asia: The crossroads of civilizations, A.D. 250 to 750", published by Unesco, seems unnecessarily harsh, as even your reviewer praises the quality of its contributions in respect to the history of the region. I've also found this interesting quote from Pratapaditya Pal (History of art, but nice summary):
"Before the Karkotas came to the throne, Kashmir may have been occupied by a long succession of foreign rulers or tribes. Certainly both the Kushänas and the Huns were present in the area for centuries. Indeed, the history of Kashmir begins to take shape only with the foundation of the Karkota dynasty around AD 625. The immediate predecessors of the Karkotas appear to have been Huns..."
— PAL, PRATAPADITYA (1973). "BRONZES OF KASHMIR: THEIR SOURCES AND INFLUENCES". Journal of the Royal Society of Arts. 121 (5207): 727. ISSN 0035-9114.
पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 19:40, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
References
@ TrangaBellam: In respect to the sentence "However, Gudrun Melzer notes that Biswas did not take into account a different chronology proposed by two German historians (Humbach and Göbl), which has since received eminence.", it would be interesting to know what the eminent chronology in question is.... otherwise the sentence is a bit useless... पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 09:43, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Historically, the rise of the Karkotas in 625 CE followed the rule of the Kushans and the Hunas in the region of Kashmir? I don't have the book and Gbooks don't work. TrangaBellam ( talk) 09:56, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@ TrangaBellam: Bakker is interesting in that he is very recent and authoritative, and describes the rule of the Alchon Huns in Kashmir in the 6th century, in the context of the Rajatarangini:
Other sources are interesting too:
Again, Pratapaditya Pal:
पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 10:24, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@ TrangaBellam: Your note: "Göbl notes Khingila to precede Toramana, based on numsimatic evidence....". Göbl here is actually refering to a much different Khingila, from a much earlier time: Khingila I (c. 440 - 490 CE) p.372, so I'm afraid this remark (and probably the whole sentence) has no bearing on the chronology of the Karkotas. Cheers पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 14:31, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Melzer notes that Narendraditya Khinkhila was "most probably" a different rulerdoes not make any sense. There exist a quite-reputed scholar (may be more, I need to read) who challenges Melzer and deem both to be the same ruler.
quite-reputed scholarbeing A.D.H. Bivar. TrangaBellam ( talk) 11:53, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Alexander Cunningham does not assert that the coin was minted under Vajraditya (he expresses a probability; Pg 44). Also, Stein has borrowed quite a lot from Cunningham's work but notes Vajraditya's reign to not have any historical evidence. It can be (thus) said that Stein did not agree with Cunningham's hypothesis.
So, we are left with Mitchiner (3650). What do they say? TrangaBellam ( talk) 13:55, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
@ TrangaBellam: Re. your repeated deletions [14] [15] [16] This is referenced material. In what sense do you think it is a "Misinterpretation of Cribb"? पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 08:05, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
a contemporary ofserves to this effect, which your framing fails to imply. His citations (Stein and Kuwayama) take a similar approach.
So have you read Bunyan, or are you just lobbing off the WP page which I had linked in order to have the last word? Fowler&fowler «Talk» 12:31, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
@ TrangaBellam: Why are you deleting the Chinese dates referenced from Joe Cribb [21]? If you do not have a good reason to delete it, it has to stay. You cannot just say "no consensus" and zap referenced material, just making gratuitous accusations of "incompetence" to an established user... you have to make your point about the specific issue at hand and your specific rationale for deleting. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 06:21, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Lalitaditya Muktapida is otherwise known from Chinese sources, as he is mentioned in the Chinese Tang Dynasty Chronicles, as a contemporary of the 736-747 CE period(or the similar line over Candrapida) impresses upon any average reader that the Chinese sources assign a regnal span of 736-747 CE. As I have argued, that is not the case. Please do not copy words from specialist publications without understanding the context in which they are used and accordingly, simplifying them. TrangaBellam ( talk) 06:35, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
"impresses upon any average reader that the Chinese sources assign a regnal span of 736-747 CE": not at all. First, these are the exact words of the author Joe Cribb, following your claim that my previous version suggested regnal date, which it did not (Why would I want to suggest that these are regnal dates anyway? I really don't care). It is a bit rich from you to challenge the exact, unambiguous, words of such a reliable source as Joe Cribb. Second, the English in this sentence is very clear that these are not regnal dates, but just the dates for which Chinese sources mention him. If you do not have a problem with the Chinese sources and with Joe Cribb in themselves, then what would be your preferred wording?? पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 06:46, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Please do not copy words from specialist publications without understanding the context in which they are used. I plan to discuss the dates assigned by Chinese sources in a note. And, every referenced information need not be added to our article. TrangaBellam ( talk) 07:32, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
I think that the page should be moved to "Karkota dynasty" to match other dynasty pages, such as Ayyubid dynasty, Tang dynasty, or Utpala dynasty. Is there any reason why this page has dynasty capitalized? PikaSamus ( talk) 23:55, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
@ RegentsPark: can you please semi-protect this article for indefinite time? Zero valuable contributions from newbies except caste-warring. TrangaBellam ( talk) 20:14, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
2409:4063:4E9B:24CF:795:57A6:2EEF:3ADE ( talk) 08:16, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Karkota was a Kashmiri brahmin dynasty.