Template talk:Maurya Empire infobox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This template is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
Template	This page is a Template and does not require a rating on the quality scale.
	This article is maintained by the Indian history workgroup.
More information about this template... NA This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the importance scale.

[edit] Created

I just created this Maurya Empire infobox for transclusion into all articles relating to the Maurya Empire. Rumpelstiltskin223 10:24, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

as i am currently editing a text books for history which includes the mauryan empire, i came across this interesting talk on which language. What do you tell a 6th grader? Pali, Prakrit or both? akk 203.196.139.92 (talk) 09:44, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Languages in Mauryan Empire

• The following discussion has been moved from Talk:Maurya Empire[1] Rumpelstiltskin223 19:13, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

To Devanampriya, while Pali and Sanskrit were native Indian languages that does not mean that they were the ONLY languages in Mauryan Empire.Please read Romila Thapars "Ashoka and the Decline of the Mauryas" where she clearly writes that Greek and Aramaic were also spoken in the Empire because the Satraapies of the Achemenid Persians that were in present day Balochistan and NWFP were taken over by Mauryans and they spoke Aramaic there and also Greek due to Selucid and Bactrian influence. Also, Ashoka edicts were written in Pali, Greek and Aramaic, 3 languages. Rumpelstiltskin223 03:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

To Rumpelstiltskin223:

Exactly, they were not the only languages in the empire, but the administrative languages were Prakrit and Sanskrit. Pali gained currency under Ashoka and greek and aramaic were used to keep contact with foreigners, which is why those edicts were available only in the extreme northwest. See age of the mauryas and nandas by Nilakantha Shastri. If you wish to compile all the languages in the empire (and there were hundreds), then proceed and post, but there is no reason to overreach on the official nature of greek and aramaic when there was none. In fact, the court language was ardhamagadhi (a dialect of Prakrit), and really and truly should be the only language up there. This was agreed to by an administrator.

Devanampriya 03:35, 11 January 2007 (UTC)Devanampriya

I see your point, but the thing is that Greek and Aramaic are "Special Languages" due to various historical reasons, as are Sanskrit , Pali and Prakrit. Sanskrit bcoz it is the language of the Vedas and Upanishads, Prakrit bcoz it was widely spoken, Pali because Buddha preached using it, Greek because it was the chief language of the Greeks and Aramaic becasue it was the de-facto lingua franca of many regions in the Middle East and South Asia. Even the earliest Bibles were written in Aramaic and Jesus Christ spoke it also. Thus, these languages deserve special mention in this context and the other "lesser" languages need not, for whatever historical reason. Plus, many people don't know that Aramaic was widely spoken in NW India in ancient times and this will educate them.Rumpelstiltskin223

Rumpelstiltskin223,

While I appreciate your efforts to continue the dialogue, I must disagree with you. First off your designation of other languages as "lesser" is inaccurate at best and insulting at worst. Telugu is spoken by 80 million people today and is the 13th most widely spoken language in the world with a long literary history. The same goes for Tamil--which in fact is recognized as one of the world's classical languages. Prakrit is the administrative language of the empire and most widely used language (with western prakrit in gandhara, rajasthan, punjab, and avanti, and eastern prakrit (magadhi) in the gangetic and bengal. It is the language of the court, the bureaucracy, and the army. Clearly this is the chief language of the empire and also by far the dominant language on edicts. You don't have to take my word for, this is all sourced material from "The Age of the Nandas and Mauryas", "Ancient India", etc, etc. Simply because there were greek subjects of the empire does not make them deserving of some special status, and ditto for middle easterners using aramaic. The fact that greek is the language of the greeks does not make it special in the indian context.

You seem like a reasonable and informed person, but your point above betrays a slight eurocentricity. greek and aramaic may be important for european scholars, but that does not justify their elevation to the levels of prakrit and pali within the mauryan empire. After all, the goal here is to present as accurate and objective a perspective as possible within the context.

I have absolutely no problem with aramaic and greek being mentioned in the section on mauryan contacts with the west or under subjects of the empire. in fact, i encourage it as it does educate readers, which is our goal. but to assert that these were two of the main languages in the empire is not accurate. that is the reason why i must contest this inclusion.

regards,

Devanampriya

The Tamil and Telegu analogy is untenable here as the languages were not widely spoken in the Mauryan empire (the Mauryans never made it that far South). If they had, I would support inclusion of Tamil in the infobox as it is not a "lesser language" at all. Your accusations of Eurocentrism are rather funny since I consider myself rather anti-Eurocentrist. Besides, Aramaic is not a European language but a middle-eastern one so I fail to see how your accusation stands. I think we need statistics on Greek and Aramaic speakers in the Mauryan Empire from reliable sources. Could you provide a quote and page # from your book? I do not have it. Regardless, my main contention is that Greek and Aramaic are very important regardless of how many people spoke it simply bcoz Ashoka wrote his edits in them, together with pali. That's all. Rumpelstiltskin223 02:39, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Rumpelstiltskin223,

I should refer you to the map of the mauryan empire which encompasses the entire Andhra region of India (where Telugu was and is spoken). The Andhras are mentioned as a distinct Indian people, starting from the Aitareya Brahamana. So yes, the Mauryas did make it that far south. Moreover, Ashokan inscriptions are found as far south as Nellore, far enough south to account for tamil speakers within the empire. Indeed, tamil sangam literature is replete with mentions of thundering mauryan war chariots and their bright white banners.

Regarding Eurocentrism, it is unfortunate that you see yourself in such a light yet believe that Greek and Aramaic should be accorded special status, as they are important to Europeans (who are predominantly Christian). Since your explanation for Aramaic's special status was predicated upon that fact (that it was the language of Christ), that is how the accusation stands.

Lastly, one should note that Ashoka's edicts in Greek and Aramaic are found in the extreme Northwest of the subcontinent, in Afghanistan, in tandem with Prakrit inscriptions (i.e Shahbazgarhi). Greek and Aramaic were obviously not the only languages spoken there, whether by traders or subjects.

Ultimately, as I mentioned above, you seem like a reasonable person, so I would not prefer to see this discussion devolve into rancor. As I mention to PHG below, we have a number of other contemporaneous empires with similarly diverse populations, and official inscriptions in a variety of languages, but for some reason, the corollary did not apply to them.

Regards,

Devanampriya

Hi again Devanampriya,

• I am afraid that speaking about administrative language for an empire whose administration is unknown is kind of suspicious.
• Greek and Aramaic were clearly important languages in the Mauryan Empire (to the point of Ashoka making edits in them), and it is precisely because the Mauryans expanded northwestward that such populations came under their sway. If we ackowledge the conquests, we also have to accept their linguistic consequences. As far as I know, Ashoka did not make edict in other languages than Prakrit, Greek and Aramaic (and if there are others, we should probably mention them).
• This is an encyclopedia (which means "all knowledge"). The more information we put on a subject, the better. Deleting "Greek" and "Aramaic" is a loss of information. Should you wish to add other languages, please do so, I am just not an expert on them, but many you are. The reality of the Mauryan Empire is that a multitude of languages were spoken, and the article can only gain by expressing this variety. PHG 08:33, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello PHG

• Again PHG, perhaps you should do some research. As noted in a plethora of works, such as "Age of the Nandas and Mauryas" the court language and the language of the bureaucracy was very clearly Prakrit and the court language very clearly Prakrit. Moreover, there were other, non edict inscriptions left behind by bureaucrats and governors, in the Prakrit language.
• Linguistic consequences? In that case, expansion into peninsular and eastern India would have corresponding consequences there as well. Accordingly, the Greek and Aramaic were not the only languages for inscription in the Northwest. In fact, numerous edicts throughout Afghanistan were in the Prakrit language. Your inclusion of Greek and Aramaic gives the misleading impression that these were somehow the offical languages of the Northwest, which clearly is not the case.
• Encyclopedia? Removal of information? Thanks for your enriching thoughts. Perhaps David Duke's theories on non-white people should also be included in those articles as any corresponding removal would be tantamount to a loss of information as well. As stated above, I am not averse to the addition of greek and aramaic in the article as they clearly were languages used on Ashokan edicts--for the benefit of traders and the small populations of greeks settled there. But you should be mindful that in all these regions, the greeks were very much a minority among the indigenous prakrit speaking people and assorted tribals. Your portrayal here, unsurprisingly, skews the perspective of the reader. Greek and Aramaic must be included in the article, but their importance should not be overstated by including them in the template, as you seek to do. After all, Mandarin, Spanish, and Vietnamese are not listed as the official languages of the United States, in spite of huge populations in California and numerous government signage and official documents in those languages. You talk of variety, but the Roman Empire is a case and point in that, yet where is the listing of Gaelic, Aramaic, Basque, Thracian, Egyptian, etc, etc alongside Latin? Let's be realistic here and apply the appropriate corollary.

Regards,

Devanampriya

Hi Devanampriya.

Strictly speaking, an official language is "typically the language used in a nation's legislative bodies". If Ashoka makes edicts fixing the rules of the land in Prakrit, Greek and Aramaic, and not in other languages, that pretty much makes them official languages of that country, although I agree Prakrit would be by far more current. A country like Canada has both French and English as official languages, and issues declarations in both. And actually, the United States does not have an official language at the national level in order to have the flexibility to cover a multitude of local situations. I do not think it is a major issue, but the insistence to say that Prakrit was the only official language contradicts the facts.PHG 21:41, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello PHG,

But that's precisely the point, the U.S. has not declared english as its official language, at least not yet, but it is the "language used in a nation's legislative bodies" without exception, in spite of some signage here and there in other languages. So your comment does not pass muster. Moreover, you have scholars such as Keay pointing out that edicts were written in the Greek and Aramaic for the benefit of foreigners (hence their location in the extreme northwest), not because these languages had some type of special status or dominant currency among the population. Moreover, only a few of Ashoka's edicts( and no one else's) have greek and aramaic in an extremely localized cluster. As such, that should be pretty indicative of status. Lastly, as discussed before, there were plenty of other languages in use, but only Prakrit was used from Afganistan (including the regions where the greek/aramaic edicts were posted) to Bengal and Kashmir to Karnataka. This obviously is a major issue because you give the misleading impression that these were offical languages of the empire when they were not. Moreover, it gives the impression that the populations in the Northwest were primarily Greek and Aramaic speaking, which was also not the case. Lastly, if it was not a major issue, you wouldn't insist on reverting back to your version. As always, my concern is accuracy and nothing else. Your portrayal stands in opposition to that.

Devanampriya

Hi Devanampriya,

Besides the fact that your good faith is now seriously in question (sock-pupetting, see your talk page), you seem to ignore the fact that there was a strong Hellenistic and Iranian presence in the Mauryan territories of the northwest. Hellenistic cities such as Alexandria in Arachosia survived with a Greek population as late as the 1st century (see Isidore of Charax). This is why Ashoka used Greek and Aramaic to communicate to them. Denying that Greek and Aramaic were used by the Mauryan government for official communications makes no sense. PHG 19:04, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello PHG,

I believe your good faith can be similarly seriously questioned due to your wikipedia violations, see your talk page. Regardless, I am not ignoring the presence of greeks and Iranians in the Northwest. If you read my posts, you will see that I clearly mention that these languages should be mentioned and discussed at length in the edicts section (which they are); however, you are ignoring the predominant presence of Prakrit speakers in the Northwest. The nature of your template version implies that Greek and Aramaic were in wider currency in the Northwest than Prakrit. This is totally false, see Shastri. An official communication differs from the administrative language of the Empire. You will also note that Keay states that those edicts were written in greek and aramaic in order to keep contact with foreigners. His words, not mine. It appears that your denial is not in line with accuracy here...

Devanampriya

Not my template by the way. What violations? If you talk about revert, I don't think they are more than 3 reverts anywhere, especially as new adjustments to the map kept being done in accordance with discussion. I am not sure you can say the same of your edits. Please balance a variety of sources. Eradicating mention of Greek and Aramaic is just wrong and contrary to many (although possibly not all) scholarly opinions. PHG 07:15, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Your violations include sneaky vandalism and npov violation. Regardless, I am not here to trade accusations with you. You would do well to take your own advice and apply it on the indo greek page. In any event, the complaint is the same as always--you aggrandize mention of the greeks. I have not eradicated mention of greek and aramaic in the entire article. They are clearly mentioned and elaborated upon under the edict section--an appropriate place. However, your edit gives the misleading impression that these were the dominant languages in the northwest of the empire, which was not the case. This is supported by a variety of sources, not in the least being Shastri. I understand your passion for greece and its history, but let us give an accurate account of indian history.

72.255.11.133 03:16, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Link

{{editprotected}}

• I have no opinion on whether Greek should or should not be mentioned in this infobox; however, if it is (as it is in the currently protected version), the link should be to Greek language, which is an article about the language, and not to the disambiguation page Greek. Russ (talk) 14:44, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

YDone. ~ Amalas rawr ^{=^_^=} 15:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)