Talk:Pala Empire

The Map

The Map 1 grossly exaggerates the territorial reach of the Pala Empire under Devapala. The Palas controlled the Gangetic Plain that is true but they never controlled the vast areas depicted here, especially the southern territories of the Pandyas, the western domains of the Pratiharas, or the far northern regions near the Himalayas. The Map shows the Pals controlled Kamboja, even Chakrabarti in the exact same page that @Based Kashmiri cited, said," the inscriptional claim of Devapala’s subjugation of the Kambojas in the northwest is an exaggeration because the Sahi rulers were then very powerful in Punjab and the northwestern province."

There is no definitive record of any expedition of Devapala to the extreme south, the inscriptions may have meant the Rashtrakutas, in any case, his victory in the south could only have been a temporary one. the Pals likely defeated the Rashtrakutas and the Pratiharas and subdued (but not conquered) them for some time and this was exaggerated by the inscriptions.

Please use Map 2 like Normal Wikipedia, it is a much more accurate map. AlvaKedak (talk) 12:50, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

“The Map shows the Pals controlled Kamboja, even Chakrabarti in the exact same page that @Based Kashmiri cited, said," the inscriptional claim of Devapala’s subjugation of the Kambojas in the northwest is an exaggeration because the Sahi rulers were then very powerful in Punjab and the northwestern province."”
No? Shah Sufi Mostafizur Rahman & Dilip K. Chakrabarti has states that A. M. Chowdhury believes that subjugation of the Kambojas may be exaggeration. However the both of them have rejected A. M. Chowdhury's theory in the next page and states We also find no difficulty in accepting the idea of a Pala raid in the Kamboja land in the northwest. and they also mentions and accept the subjugation of the Kambojas in the previous page. (See page no: 75 (Chakrabarti; Oxford), 51 (Rahman; Archeological Department)
“There is no definitive record of any expedition of Devapala to the extreme south, the inscriptions may have meant the Rashtrakutas, in any case, his victory in the south could only have been a temporary one. the Pals likely defeated the Rashtrakutas and the Pratiharas and subdued (but not conquered) them for some time and this was exaggerated by the inscriptions.”
The Dravida King which Devapala fought was the Pandyan King and not the Rashtrakutas, Earlier (British Raj Era/Outdated) Historians used to believe the Dravidas were Rashtrakutas however RC Majumdar has debunked that false theory and all the modern historians (DC Sicar, D.K. Chakrabarti, Rahman, Sinha) and academic sources agree with him. (See Comprehensive History of India Vol.3 Part-1 By RC Majumdar pg 677.) Based Kashmiri (talk) 14:33, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

I will admit, I made a mistake with the Kambuja example, I misread it. But that still does not change the fact that there isn't any actual evidence to support that claim. I feel like you need to at least state the possibility that the inscriptions are exaggerating (it isn't uncommon) as there isn't any concrete evidence. Especially with the claim that they conquered the Pandyas (again and I can not stress this enough, there is no evidence for it.) If there are conflicting claims, write about both and let the reader decide.

About the map, I still think it better to use 1 as it is still more accurate. AlvaKedak (talk) 15:06, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't understand when Academic sources from Oxford, ASI and historians like D.K Chakrabarti (works for Cambridge University & his Source is from Oxford University), Rc Majumdar, etc accepts it then how can you call it exaggeration. No reliable sources rejects his conquests. Based Kashmiri (talk) 15:10, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Also D.K. Chakravarti has used multiple Inscriptions for Devapala's conquests, he doesn't solely relies on the badal pillar inscription. @AlvaKedak. Based Kashmiri (talk) 15:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

I have done some research on R.C. Majumdar since you mentioned him and apparently he has been noted for promoting Hindu nationalist views and communal interpretations of history, now I know this subject has nothing to do with Muslims, I am still a bit hesitant to trust a Hindu Nationalist (or any kind of nationalist).

Anyways, about the Map. According to Sailendra Nath Sen is a former Professor of History in the University of Calcutta, "Epigraphic records credit him (Devapala) in hyperbolic language with extensive conquests from the Himalayas to the Vindhyas and from the eastern to the western Deccan.". He states that the inscriptions exaggerated the size of the empire.

From what I read Chakrabarti didn't explicitly reject A. M. Chowdhury's theory, rather he stated that he finds no difficulty in accepting the idea of a Pala raid in the Kamboja land in the northwest, raiding is different from conquering. (I don't really have access to Rahman" book, so I don't really know whether or not he corroborates your point here which is why I don't mention him)

He also doesn't explicitly state that the Pratiharas were conquered, just that they were defeated.

About the Pandyas, According to Sen, Devapala's victory in the south could only have a temporary significance., even if they did conquer the Pandyas and held on to it for more than a year, your map would still be inaccurate as you also gave the territories of the Cholas and the Pallavas to the Palas (The Pandyas only conquered those areas during the 13th century).

About Utkala, while it is true that they conquered the Bhauma dynasty which ruled that region, you gave the Palas all of Odisha when in reality the Bhaumas ruled Nothern and Eastern portions of Modern day Odisha. AlvaKedak (talk) 10:39, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Remember, unlike the Prathiharas and the Rashtrakutas, no inscriptions invoke the Palas as their suzerain beyond thir core territory (what is now West Bengal and Bihar), even Majumdar admits this, so it is difficult to truly know the actual extent of the Pala Empire. AlvaKedak (talk) 10:54, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Again half information. Your attempts at twisting the truth won't work, pal. The historical consensus about what really happened is already well-established, and it's not in doubt so stop trying to twist the facts and just accept that you're wrong instead of being agnorant. You need to read all three kingdoms and learn some facts before coming up with such arguments.

“Majumdar makes a very important point about the character of the Pala conquests under Dharmapala and Devapala:

In the case of the Imperial Guptas and Gurjara-Pratiharas, not only inscriptions all over Northern India invoke their name as suzerain, but we have also the records of their officers governing remote territories like Kathiawar Peninsula. No such records of the Pala emperors have yet been discovered beyond the confines of the modern provinces of Bengal and Bihar. It is, therefore, reason- able to assume that so far as the rest of the imperial territories were concerned, they were governed by local rulers who acknowledged the suzerainty of the Palas”

— Chakrabarti, Dilip K. (1992). Ancient Bangladesh, a study of the archaeologcial sources. Internet Archive. Delhi ; New York : Oxford University Press. p. 75.

Based Kashmiri (talk) 12:08, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

“I have done some research on R.C. Majumdar since you mentioned him and apparently he has been noted for promoting Hindu nationalist views and communal interpretations of history[1][2], now I know this subject has nothing to do with Muslims, I am still a bit hesitant to trust a Hindu Nationalist (or any kind of nationalist).”
I am NOT a hindu, Devapala was also not a hindu. I've absolutely no idea why you're trying to say. Infact one of the Archeologists (who's source I've used) is also a Muslim.
R. C. Majumdar is a reliable historian, according to the guidelines of Wikipedia we can cite him (although I've not cited him). Your mere opinion about him doesn't makes him unreliable, S. Guichard and A. G. Noorani (people you cited) are not even historians thus they are unreliable.
“Anyways, about the Map. According to Sailendra Nath Sen is a former Professor of History in the University of Calcutta, "Epigraphic records credit him (Devapala) in hyperbolic language with extensive conquests from the Himalayas to the Vindhyas and from the eastern to the western Deccan.".He states that the inscriptions exaggerated the size of the empire.”
Sailendra Nath Sen does not states his inscriptions are false. Sailendra Nath Sen is not a scholar thus he is also unreliable see [1].
“From what I read Chakrabarti didn't explicitly reject A. M. Chowdhury's theory, rather he stated that he finds no difficulty in accepting the idea of a Pala raid in the Kamboja land in the northwest, raiding is different from conquering.
He also doesn't explicitly state that the Pratiharas were conquered, just that they were defeated.”
Chowdhury's statement is a mere opinion of his. As per the latest archeological research by Chakrabarti (he works for Cambridge University and his Source is from Oxford University) and Rahman who are archeologicals states that Pratiharas and Kambojas were SUBJUGATED, I've even quoted it in the article.
“About the Pandyas, According to Sen......”
Again, Sailendra Nath Sen is not reliable sources I'm not gonna talk about Pandyans again. Also Cholas and Pallavas were not ruling those territories, it was under Pandyans
“About Utkala, while it is true that they conquered the Bhauma dynasty which ruled that region, you gave the Palas all of Odisha when in reality the Bhaumas ruled Nothern and Eastern portions of Modern day Odisha.”
The entire chapter six of this source [2] mentions Orissa being under Bhaumakaras.

“The Tibetan historian Taranatha says that Devapala raised a big army and 'conquered the whole of Odisha'” Source: [3]

“His son Devapala continued the imperialist policy and conquered Orissa and Assam.” Source: [4]

Based Kashmiri (talk) 11:46, 14 September 2024 (UTC)