Jump to content

Talk:History of Punjab/Archives/ 1

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


Maurya Empire

Edited the section and included the most relevant information about Mauryans in "History of Punjab". This asrticle is about "History of Punjab" and not about "History of India". Therefore, took out irrelevant parts of the article relating to India and included only the most relevant parts relating to Punjab History. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.193.5.163 (talk) 17:44, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Maurya Empire

Mauryan Empire under Ashoka the Great
Main article: Maurya Empire

Punjab was conquered by the Maurya Empire, which was led by Chandragupta Maurya of Magadha in modern day Bihar, who overthrew the powerful Nanda Dynasty of Magadha. They were focusing on taking over Central Asia. Seleucus is said to have reach a peace treaty with Chandragupta by giving control of the territory south of the Hindu Kush to him upon intermarriage and 500 elephants.

Alexander took these away from the Indo-Aryans and established settlements of his own, but Seleucus Nicator gave them to Sandrocottus (Chandragupta), upon terms of intermarriage and of receiving in exchange 500 elephants.<ref name="aisk">{{cite web |url=http://www.aisk.org/aisk/NHDAHGTK05.php |title=An Historical Guide to Kabul: The Name |author=Nancy Hatch Dupree / Aḥmad ʻAlī Kuhzād|publisher=American International School of Kabul |year=1972 |accessdate=2010-09-18}}</ref>

— Strabo, 64 BC–24 AD

With an area of 5,000,000 sq km, it was one of the world's largest empires in its time, and the largest ever in the Indian subcontinent. At its greatest extent, the empire stretched to the north along the natural boundaries of the Himalayas, and to the east stretching into what is now Assam. To the west, it conquered beyond modern Pakistan, annexing Balochistan, south eastern parts of Iran and much of what is now Afghanistan, including the modern Herat<ref name="historyfiles.co.uk">http://www.historyfiles.co.uk/FeaturesFarEast/India_IronAge_Mauryas01.htm</ref> and Kandahar provinces. The Empire was expanded into India's central and southern regions by the emperors Chandragupta and Bindusara, but it excluded a small portion of unexplored tribal and forested regions near Kalinga (modern Odisha), till it was conquered by Ashoka. Its decline began 60 years after Ashoka's rule ended, and it dissolved in 185 BC with the foundation of the Sunga Dynasty in Magadha.

After the Kalinga War, the Empire experienced half a century of peace and security under Ashoka. Mauryan India also enjoyed an era of social harmony, religious transformation, and expansion of the sciences and of knowledge. Chandragupta Maurya's embrace of Jainism increased social and religious renewal and reform across his society, while Ashoka's embrace of Buddhism has been said to have been the foundation of the reign of social and political peace and non-violence across all of India. Ashoka sponsored the spreading of Buddhist ideals into Sri Lanka, Southeast Asia, West Asia and Mediterranean Europe.<ref name="historyfiles.co.uk"/>

The italicised part above is relevant to "History of India" and not to "History of Punjab". Hence it needs to be taken out. Since Chandragupta collected an army of the Sakas, Yavanas, Kambojas, Parasikas, Bahlikas and the Kiratas to recapture Punjba (and later also the Nanda Dynasty of Magadha), hence this part is crucial and should be included in the article under the "Maurya Empire" section.

Thanks

Cleanup Suggestion

I'm going to start a cleanup of this article in order to bring it up to GA status. Lots of grammar and stylistic issues remain in the article, and the presence of lots of original research has to be smoothed out. BreadBuddy (talk) 21:07, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Good idea. I noticed in passing that several of the References actually are not spelled out in the list of Sources, I've marked them up for you or someone familiar with the area to fill in. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:57, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
There are many more errors of various kinds. This is not even near GA level, IMHO, but perhaps you can bring it up to speed. I will post a full listing of reference errors within the next 24 hours; have a few other things to do first. Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 14:48, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
What should I do to smooth out the reference errors? And Lingzhi what else do you say I should do, as you've said it isn't anywhere near GA level. Thank you both for helping me.BreadBuddy (talk) 23:19, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
I apologize if this is a stupid question, but do I add all the unique references under sources or do I just do the ones that are listed?BreadBuddy (talk) 23:50, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
  • There are different ways to do the references/sources, but... there are dozens of errors here... For example, you are using a full citation to a book each time you cite it. That's not necessary, it's extra work, and you multiply errors...you have 7 full references to "Singh, Mohinder. History and Culture of Panjab. Atlantic Publishers" and another 7 full refeences to "Grewal, J.S (1990). The Sikhs of the Punjab, Volumes 2-3"...and... I could help you but it might take a couple weeks because I can only put in a little time helping you on any given day.... Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 01:24, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
Okay thanks, I don't mean to inconvenience you, so I'll go ahead and make the corrections. Do let me know if there is other mistakes.BreadBuddy (talk) 02:00, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
  • There are still a phenomenal numbers of reference errors. Please either fix or withdraw the GA nomination. Well, actually, they need fixing anyway but certainly it has no chance at GAN in this state. - Sitush (talk) 17:48, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • In fact, this is a quick fail at GAN. The sourcing is often very poor even if the citations actually worked as they should. There is only a very limited scope for use of sources written during or before the British Raj era. - Sitush (talk) 18:11, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
Those Raj sources were those that had been in the article since before I worked on it. I'll find replacements.BreadBuddy (talk) 19:01, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
OK, thanks. One of the things that is implied when someone nominates an article for GA is that they've checked all of this type of thing. It is their nomination, their problem, and they're sort of expected to have made a decent attempt to resolve at least the glaring issues. Of course, editing being a subjective thing in many respects, there are always likely to be suggestions made by the reviewer and it is also quite likely - especially in a big article - that some small errors will have crept through (grammar, linking etc). Big stuff like this, though, really shouldn't be happening and it is disrespectful to the reviewer because it wastes their time. - Sitush (talk) 02:50, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Land of X Rivers

We say that the region used to be known as the land of seven rivers but I think Punjab means land of five rivers. That will need an explanation and I can't see one in the article. - Sitush (talk) 02:54, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

It may be possible to write it up from this. - Sitush (talk) 03:31, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Ice Age

Paleography etc is not my strong point but we're saying that traces of human habitation have been found that date from around the Cryogenian period. It is well known that there are big controversies concerning the Indus Valley Civilisation, many driven by right-wing Hindu nationalism and conspiracy theorists. Is this one of them? If not then I'm surprised that our article on that period refers to fossils but not to habitation. - Sitush (talk) 03:14, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Actually, I see now that it is obviously wrong but the source does indeed say "second Ice Age". Someone is going to have to find the right link and work out why either our article on Ice Age is wrong (unlikely) or the source chooses to count from some different point. I have no real interest in this topic and am not prepared to do all of the vast amount of work that is required. - Sitush (talk) 03:30, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Bronze Age, presumably. - Sitush (talk) 04:03, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

title of this article The

Am I the only one that thinks the title of this article is not proper English? It should either read 'History of Punjab' or 'History of the Punjab area'. I'll move it if there is not a good reason it is titled the way it is. - Taxman 17:57, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)

No. Like The Hague, "The Congo", andother such places, The Punjab is always referred to as "The Punjab"/"the Punjab".67.118.240.18 00:18, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Not so. The name Panjab is not invariable used with a definite article in English. In English, "Panjab" and "the Panjab" are each just as good as the other. And in the Panjabi language, as well as Urdu-Hindi, there is no definite article, so for the natives of the region the name is simply "Panjab".
It would be hard to quantify, but in most writing about India I have encountered, "The Punjab" is the most common treatment in English of the Punjab region, which encompasses both the Indian and Pakistani Punjab and is the subject of this article. The definite article is often dropped when referring to either Pakistan's Punjab province or India's Punjab state. Compare to History of the Netherlands. The fact that Punjabi has no definite article is irrelevant; this is an English language encyclopedia. Tom Radulovich 8 July 2005 03:55 (UTC)

I am not happy with this article - I have to admit that I have yet to read all of it (I have read about 75%) but I am not happy with the presentation of information, and what seems like the relatively few references. Further, there seems to be little historical source examination (yes, I know - everyone's a critic) - but I would have expected at least one British historical reference to have been quoted (given the intimate involvement of the British in the history of this area). Also, some Primary source information (has anyone gotten round to excavating any battle sites for example).

Just a thought - the article makes Brilliant story reading (if you follow all the characters and battles) - but one thing I know about history is that it's not meant to be this entertaining (there are always details and bookwork to get through).

Again, sorry for being a critic - but I felt that the above had to be said...

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on History of the Punjab. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:29, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

meaning of the word punjab

The word "Punjab" means The Land of Five Rivers: Chenab, Ravi, Sutlej, Jhelum and Beas; which is wrongly mentioned in the artice as "The Land of Seven Rivers" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.190.95.143 (talk) 12:32, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Ancient history of Punjab

MO 106.204.195.22 (talk) 03:12, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:History_of_Punjab/Archives/_1&oldid=1138954032"