Talk:Maurya Empire

Semi-protected edit request on 7 August 2024

Iran should be added to the "today part of" subsection. Parts of modern-day Iran (Sistan and Baluchistan Province and Khorasan Province) were in the Mauryan empire. JGallagher83 (talk) 23:24, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done Please wait for your request to be processed instead of making an another request with the exact same content in a different IP/account. This is considered disruptive. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 01:07, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 10 August 2024

Iran should be added to the "Today part of" subsection. 174.62.255.4 (talk) 18:20, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: Duplicate request. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 01:04, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

References

"Hinduism"

@PadFoot2008: infoboxes summarize the article; you're tipping the border of WP:DISRUPTIVE. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 06:01, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
NB: even Brahmanism is hardly supported by the sources; rather the opposite. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 06:37, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

This is ironical! You are the one who is unilaterally, disruptively replacing Hinduism with Brahmanism all over the Wiki and when I revert your edits, you say that I am disruptive. PadFoot (talk) 08:19, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

I stick to scholarly sources, you push a Hindutva-narrative. "Hinduism" is not supported by the sources, and even "Brahmanism" is questionable. The long-standing version says "Brahmanism"; see, for example, 17 october 2023, or 23 november 2021. "Hinduism" was first added here, with a source (Sailendra Nath Sen, Ancient Indian History and Civilization) which says "During the Mauryan perid Brahmanism was an important religion." Nath Sen is outright contradicted by Bronkhorst and Omvedt, the other two sources for "Brahmanism." Regards, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 08:47, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

@Joshua Jonathan, if it is the long standing version then I wouldn't revert any further. Also I don't "push" any narrative. You support the section of scholars that consider the term "Hinduism" to encompass the religions in India from the classical period onwards, while I see the scholars that consider "Hinduism" as encompassing the post-synthesis religions as well as Brahmanism and Vedism as being more plausible. If you are going to be making personal attacks on me, and claim that I support some weird stupid propaganda, then I do not know what to think of you anymore. PadFoot (talk) 11:40, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

It's even worse: you reverted this edit of mine, from 9 september 2023, edit-summary

correction after checking the sources; they say "Brahmanism," as expected; what we today call "Hinduism" just *started* to emerge at the time of the Mauryan Empire, partly as a Brahmanical response to the influence and popularity of Buddhism

Instead of checking the sources, you removed the quotes from those sources diff. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 09:41, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

More quotes:

• Thapar, Romila (1960). "Aśoka and Buddhism". Past & Present, Nov., 1960, No. 18 (Nov., 1960), pp. 43-51. :

• "the Mauryas did not conform to the accepted religion of most royal families of the time, Brahmanism."

• Bronkhorst, Johannes (2011). "Candragupta Maurya and his importance for Indian history". Indologica Taurinensia 37 (2011 [2014]), 107-121.

• "We know that Aśoka’s personal leanings were toward Buddhism, and tradition testifies to the fact that all the other rulers of the Maurya empire had strong links with Jainism, sometimes Ajivikism, but never with Brahmanism. A persistent tradition maintains that Candragupta was a Jaina."
• "The picture that is slowly gaining ground in modern research is that the establishment of the Maurya empire spelt disaster for traditional Brahmanism. Brahmins in earlier days performed rituals at the courts of kings in the Brahmanical heartland. This Brahmanical heartland was conquered by rulers from Pāṭaliputra, who had no respect for Brahmanical rituals and needed no Brahmins at their courts."
• "the region of Magadha had not been brahmanized at the time of Candragupta."

With respect to the Hindu synthesis, Bronkhorst again:

• "This incorporation into a larger empire, first presumably by the Nandas, then by the Mauryas, took away all the respect and privileges that Brahmins had so far enjoyed, and might have meant the disappearance of Brahmins as a distinct group of people. The reason [110] why this did not happen is that Brahmanism reinvented itself. Deprived of their earlier privileges, Brahmins made an effort to find new ways to make themselves indispensable for rulers, and to gain the respect of others."
• "It [118] was because of the Maurya empire that Brahmanism had to reinvent itself. It was because of that empire that Brahmanism transformed itself from a ritual tradition linked to local rulers in a relatively restricted part of India into a socio-political ideology that succeeded in imposing itself on vast parts of South and Southeast Asia, together covering an area larger than the Roman empire ever had."

So, even "Brahmanism" is questionable. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 02:04, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 August 2024

Iran should be added to the "Today part of" section. Suhas18891995 (talk) 22:31, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

 Not done:Duplicate request. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 01:04, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

References

First Indian Empire

it is also reffered to as the first indian empire

just like how First persian empire

should i add it along with the mauryan empire?

first persian empire has many names and all of them are in the first paragraph why not put this also in the first paragraph

https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/mauryan-empire/ WhatAGreatWikiTuber (talk) 10:37, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

No. The source you've provided says it was the first pan-Indian empire, not that it is referred to as "The First Indian Empire". RegentsPark (comment) 19:16, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

so should we add that it was the first pan-indian empire? WhatAGreatWikiTuber (talk) 13:59, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

https://archive.org/details/indianempire0000roxb_o3e6what about this WhatAGreatWikiTuber (talk) 17:54, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

We don't emulate material for grades 5-8 (material which instantly contradicts itself anyway) or primary school textbooks. NebY (talk) 18:15, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

dynasty?

wasnt it a dynasty of the Magadha kingdom and not an empire? like the qing dynasty JingJongPascal (talk) 06:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Wrong MAP

The above map (with holes) should be of 261 BCE , Which is their low end estimate JingJongPascal (talk) 09:16, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Better Map.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Standard_Mauryan_Empire.png

This is the standard "textbook" map of the Maurya Empire which is used globally in studies. It is accepted by globally by nearly all the Historians.

Author of Map and Description : @Buddhamitra sangha

The current map with holes is not universally accepted.

Some maps references:

• ASI (Archeological Survey Of India) referenced rough map of Mauryan Empire : [1]
• British Historian Geoffrey Parker created map on Mauryan Empire : [2]
• British historian Patrick K. O'Brien created Mauryan Empire Map : [3]
• American historian Gerald Danzer created Mauryan Empire Map : [4]
• British Historian Charles Allen created Mauryan Empire Map : [5]
• Historian Robert W. Strayer and Eric Nelson created Mauryan Empire Map : [6]
• Irish Historian and Indologist Vincent Arthur Smith created Mauryan Empire Map : [7]
• Anthropologist and Bioarcheologist Professor Ian Barnes created Mauryan Empire Map : [8]
• By World History Encyclopaedia : [9]
• Historical Geographer Charles Joppen created Mauryan Empire Map : [10]

Greek Historian on Empire extent(regarding Chandragupta) :

• Greek historians mentioned the result of Seleucid–Mauryan war where Seleucid Empire's eastern satrapies( Gedrosia,Arachosia, Aria, and Paropamisadae) ceded to Mauryan Empire :

• • " Seleucus crossed the Indus and waged war with Sandrocottus [Maurya], king of he Indians, who dwelt on the banks of that stream, until they came to an understanding with each other and contracted a marriage relationship. Some of these exploits were performed before the death of Antigonus and some afterward."

— Appian, History of Rome, The Syrian Wars 55[11]

• • "The geographical position of the tribes is as follows: along the Indus are the Paropamisadae, above whom lies the Paropamisus mountain: then, towards the south, the Arachoti: then next, towards the south, the Gedroseni, with the other tribes that occupy the seaboard; and the Indus lies, latitudinally, alongside all these places; and of these places, in part, some that lie along the Indus are held by Indians, although they formerly belonged to the Persians. Alexander [III 'the Great' of Macedon] took these away from the Arians and established settlements of his own, but Seleucus Nicator gave them to Sandrocottus [Chandragupta], upon terms of intermarriage and of receiving in exchange five hundred elephants. "

— Strabo 15.2.9[12]

• Greecian historian Pliny also quoted a passage from Megasthanes work about Chandragupta Empire boundaries:

• • " Most geographers, in fact, do not look upon India as bounded by the river Indus, but add to it the four satrapies of the Gedrose, the Arachotë, the Aria, and the Paropamisadë, the River Cophes thus forming the extreme boundary of India. According to other writers, however, all these territories, are reckoned as belonging to the country of the Aria. "

— Pliny, Natural History VI, 23[13]

• Megasthenes defined the region that Chandragupta won from Seleucus as likely western side Gedrosia which shares boundaries with the Euphrates River, and eastern side Arachosia shares boundaries with the Indus. The northern frontier boundary formed by Hindukush mountain range:

• • " India, which is in shape quadrilateral, has its eastern as well as its 'western side bounded by the great sea, but on the northern side it is divided by Mount Hemôdos from that part of Skythia which is inhabited by those Skythians who are called the Sakai, while the fourth or western side is bounded by the river called the Indus. "

- Book I Fragment I , Indica, Megasthanes[14]

• • " Sandrokottos (Chandragupta) the king of the Indians, India forms the largest of the four parts into which Southern Asia is divided, while the smallest part is that region which is included between the Euphrates and our own sea. The two remaining parts, which are separated from the others by the Euphrates and the Indus, and lie between these rivers... India is bounded on its eastern side, right onwards to the south, by the great ocean; that its northern frontier is formed by the Kaukasos range(Hindukush Range) as far as the junction of that range with Tauros; and that the boundary."

- Book I Fragment II , Indica, Megasthanes[15]

JingJongPascal (talk) 13:38, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

clearly it is the 'standard' extent of the Mauryan Empire.

Each empire specially ancient ones, have multiple debates and extents by different historians, the one universally accepted should be taken into consideration. JingJongPascal (talk) 13:40, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Discussed before; see talkpage history. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 17:23, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

By saying that your ignoring all the sources written by the author of the map JingJongPascal (talk) 17:56, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

This is the standard "textbook" map of the Maurya Empire which is used globally in studies. It is accepted by globally by nearly all the Historians. -says which source? Confirmation-bias WP:OR. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 19:40, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

the author has listed around 10 sources just below it JingJongPascal (talk) 05:28, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

And which says that it is "the standard "textbook" map of the Maurya Empire," or "accepted by globally by nearly all the Historians"? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 08:10, 7 November 2024 (UTC)