Talk:Kamrup region

Definition
This is an article about the Kamrup region, which has been consistently defined as between Manas and Barnadi rivers since 1639, for nearly 4 hundred years. The only other definition of Kamrup was the kingdom Koch Hajo under Raghudev and Parikshit Narayan, for less than 50 years (1581-1615). The ancient Kamarupa has its own article. Chaipau (talk) 09:13, 25 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Proper sources are given in article, Kamarupa article is about kingdom while this for geographical region. No Indian history on any subject begins as late as second millennium.POV pushing hampers article devolpment. भास्कर् bhagawati  Speak 18:17, 25 January 2013 (UTC)


 * The Kamarupa kingdom page is Kamarupa. Is this a POV fork then? Chaipau (talk) 18:53, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The source you have given details Brahmaputra river as the eastern boundary. Which kingdom of the past had that boundary.  Barma is not at all a reliable source.  Chaipau (talk) 19:06, 25 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Surely he is, supported by dozen of other sources which you are capable of finding. Please restore the previous version and engage ain calm talk here. I don't like to complain of editwarring or so on. भास्कर् bhagawati Speak 19:13, 25 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Barma is not a reliable source. He is very opinionated, and rambling.  His boundaries of the Kamarupa kingdom is flawed.  According to his boundary, Kamarupa is to the west of Sankosh river.  Is this the region you are trying to describe here?  Because this does not correspond to any historical region.  Chaipau (talk) 20:07, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

This article is about ancient Kamrup, so don't add medieval things here, you can do that in dedicated article named Undivided Kamrup district. Please don't remove any citations or material attached with them as it is serious violation of Wikipedia's policy. भास्कर् bhagawati Speak 00:45, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
 * There is already an article about ancient Kamrup: Kamarupa. There is no need for another article.  Chaipau (talk) 07:34, 14 February 2013 (UTC)


 * As i said earlier, geography and Kingdom i.e politics are different things and should be addressed in different ways. We have Undivided Kamrup district for medieval and modern Kamrup and this article is dedicated on ancient Kamrup as an area, culture and society etc. भास्कर् bhagawati  Speak 02:31, 15 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Kamrup region is a part of Assam. That is the standard definition.  You cannot make this article one on ancient Kamarupa.  Chaipau (talk) 08:28, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Kamrup region
This is the second request---please do not insert erroneous information on Kamrup region without a discussion. Kamrup, if defined as the region to the west and north of Brahmaputra, will be placed outside present-day Assam. This is obviously wrong. Chaipau (talk) 12:21, 18 February 2013 (UTC)


 * You should properly discuss before making any drastic changes to article with creator of page because what you are doing is duplicating the article Undivided Kamrup district which was not intent at time of creation of this article. Historically Kamrup = North Bengal+West Assam which keep on adding larger areas in subsequent periods which should be reflected in lede. भास्कर् bhagawati  Speak 09:42, 20 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Please take note of WP:OWN. The historical and modern usage of "Kamrup region" is very clearly delineated in the article.  Chaipau (talk) 10:18, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, North-Bengal+Lower Assam was known as Kamata/Koch, not Kamrup, in the period 12th-16th century. This does not belong in the lede, but it is discussed in the main body of the article.  Chaipau (talk) 10:24, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

When i said discuss with creator, it means questioning him the purpose of creation as identical article in form of Undivided Kamrup district is already there. As this article is about ancient Kamrup, it should display in lede.

Kamata etc. are are political terms not geographical. Kamrup is known as Kamrup in ancient times, Turks and other invaders calls it Kamrup in middle ages and modern administrative district formed with same name.

Kamrup region of Assam
Most references today refer to Kamrup as a region of Assam. User:Bhaskarbhagavati, please stop inserting your POV here. Here is an example: Chaipau (talk) 11:03, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
 * http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=%22kamrup+region%22&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C39&as_sdtp=


 * That Kamrup region referred is todays undivided Kamrup district whereas historically it is North Bengal+West Assam (S K Chatterjee - One would expect one and identical language to have been current in North Central Bengal (Pundra-vardhana) and North Bengal and West Assam (Kamarupa) in the 7th century. As created it originally that way, i will put it likewise before you can provide your sources. भास्कर् bhagawati  Speak 16:57, 21 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry, take this further in the dispute resolution process. I have given you evidence how "Kamrup region" is used today.  Kamarupa already exists, which treats the 7th century kingdom, in great detail. Chaipau (talk) 18:31, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Kamrup, an historical region, now in West Bengal, Bangladesh and Assam
Please do not keep insisting that Kamrup region is about the 7th century Kamarupa kingdom. "Kamrup region" is used in the current literature to denote an amorphous region that is largely congruous to Unidivided Kamrup district (here). Chaipau (talk) 10:57, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Even your favorite author, Sukhbilas Barma writes this: "There was never any linguistic uniformity between the Ahom dominated East Assam and Goalpara-Kamrup region" (Bhawaiya, p103). So he too excludes Kamrup region from the Goalpara region. (It is a different matter that the quote he uses from Grierson does not support the linguistic aspect of this statement.) Chaipau (talk) 11:02, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
 * For both instances Kamrup region referred is very small area which is todays Undivided Kamrup district while this article is about historical Kamrup Region which is existing from immemorial times comprising of entire Brahmaputra Valley, North Bengal and North Bangladesh which is given with references. भास्कर् bhagawati  Speak 05:23, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * That historical "region" is Kamarupa. The boundaries of this kingdom is given here  That kingdom is not called "Kamrup region", as is made very clear in the scholar.google.com link I have provided above.  Chaipau (talk) 09:19, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Kamrup kingdom is kingdom in ancient lands of Kamrup. Kingdom is limited to a time period but land is not. See Ancient Rome and Roman Kingdom, separate articles for ancient region and kingdom. भास्कर् bhagawati  Speak 13:38, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Ancient Rome is about a civilization, not a geographical region. Furthermore, "Kamrup region" is used in the literature with a specific meaning, with a modern definition.  You seem to be ignoring the examples, and here it is: (http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=%22kamrup+region%22&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C39&as_sdtp=)  This alone shows you cannot redefine the meaning of "Kamrup region" for Wikipedia according to your POV.  Chaipau (talk) 15:32, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

In Ancient Rome article, in lede itself geographic terms are used such as Italian Peninsula, Mediterranean Sea and said to centered around ancient city of Rome. In every ancient region an civilisation thrives so as the ancient Kamrup. भास्कर् bhagawati Speak 05:21, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Lede dispute -- A summary
Dispute on WP:ANI: Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive788

User:Bhaskarbhagawati (BB) is insisting that this article denote a historical region as opposed to the current definition, which defines it as a contemporary region. I oppose this effort for the following reasons:
 * The current usage of "Kamrup region" denotes a region within Lower Assam, and which does not include the Goalpara region. This region is associated with the Undivided Kamrup district, established more than 150 years ago in 1836, and in the 17th century as "Sarkar Kamrup" under the Mughals.  Under the Ahoms, this region was under the control of the Borphukan.  So the comtemporary definition is not new, but at least four hundred years old!
 * Even under the Ahoms, part of the Borphukan's domain was called Kamrup, and the eastern and western boundaries of this region was identical to those of the later Undivided Kamrup district.
 * There are more than one older historical regions that can be called "Kamrup"
 * Kamarupa (4th-12th century), though by convention this is spelled with two extra vowels, this kingdom can be called "Kamrup". Since Kamarupa already exists, a separate article to denote the same region would be a POV fork at best.
 * Koch Hajo (16th century) is called Kamrup in Ekasarana documents.   This roughly covers the present Kamrup region, Goalpara region and the western part of the undivided Darrang district.
 * Kamata kingdom (15th century). Sometimes BB tries to define yet another region as "Kamrup", which includes North Bengal, parts of Bangladesh and Lower Assam. Though there is a historic region (12th-15th century) that was defined with these regions, the name used is Kamata and occasionally as Kamrup.  This region in known today not as Kamrup, but Kamtapur.
 * The lede BB is trying to insert is yet another definition, that places Kamrup outside Assam.
 * BB sometimes claims "kamrup region" should denote Kamarupa, and sometimes the Kamata kingdom.

The references for this situation is already given in the text of this article. The current lede reflects the text of the body of the article with cited references, and by itself does not display explicit citations. Chaipau (talk) 16:55, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


 * For modern Kamrup we have Undivided Kamrup district and for ancient Kamrup, this was created. We two articles, one for kingdom other for ancient Kamrup region. भास्कर् bhagawati  Speak 05:24, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * You have just restated your position and have not addressed the chief issues:
 * Why should we use "Kamrup region" to denote a historic region when currently the literature uses it to denote a region in Lower Assam excluding Goalpara region? (note: it is probably related that you have initiated Articles_for_deletion/Goalpara_region)
 * Why should we prefer one particular historical region, when there exist many (more than two)?
 * Why should we insert an isolated source (Barma, "Bhawaiyya") that does not agree with most of the other standard works, especially when it contradicts itself elsewhere.
 * Chaipau (talk) 11:27, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Compromise
The lede is under dispute resolution and discussion on the talk page. Please do not make changes in it before it is resolved. Chaipau (talk) 09:42, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * As this article originally created for "Ancient Kamrup" was in lede dispute because of some objections raised by you, i have tried to reach in some compromise by incorporating both views till consensus can reached. So i don't think it should be reverted like this. भास्कर् Bhagawati  Speak 14:21, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * As far as original intention is concerned, please look at WP:OWN and WP:POVFUNNEL.
 * If you are writing a compromise text, present it here, not in the article page itself.
 * Chaipau (talk) 00:56, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Compromise Text
We can begin with the compromise by looking at the current text and making changes to it, if necessary. Chaipau (talk) 11:11, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Version 0
Kamrup region (1639–present) is the region between the Manas river in the west and the Barnadi river in the east on the north bank of the Brahmaputra river and a corresponding area on the south bank. Two other historical regions are associated with this name: Kamarupa (4th-12th century) a vast region encompassing Assam, northern Bangladesh and North Bengal; and Koch Hajo (1581-1615) (Kamrup in Ekasarana documents) encompassing the region between the Sankosh and the Bhareli rivers.

Chaipau (talk) 11:11, 8 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Question here is ancient area with the name of Kamrup exist or not. I urge you to check Kamrup "Rural" and "Metropolitan" district websites as well. भास्कर् Bhagawati  Speak 16:26, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * If you are making a point, make one. Please do not expect others to search the web and make your points.  Chaipau (talk)
 * http://kamrup.nic.in/histfr.htm http://kamrupmetro.nic.in/history.asp भास्कर् Bhagawati  Speak 17:06, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Bhagawati, do you recommend that we use websites that recount ancient legends as WP:Reliable sources about the history of the Kamrup region? How about trying to find the results of solid scholarship, for instance, from academic sources. Have any historians written about this? EdJohnston (talk) 18:58, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I will provide more quotes from scholars. भास्कर् Bhagawati  Speak 21:18, 17 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Assamese Women in Indian Independence Movement,Guptajit Pathak,2008 The 'Natis or the 'Devadasis' played an important role in the religious history of Kamrup or ancient Assam. They adorned the beauty of the temples.


 * Advanced Study In The History Of Medieval India: (1000-1526) - Volume 1,J.L. Mehta - 1980 The Brahmaputra valley in Assam, known as Kamrup (Kamarupa) in ancient times, had been under the control of a Brahman family since ages.


 * Modern Indian Literature: An Anthology. Plays and prose,K. M. George - 1995 In the lower part of ancient Kamrup, there lived a poet named Pitambar. Though a contemporary of Sankardev, he was not influenced by him. He also composed poetical works in the form of songs.


 * Census of India, 1981. Series 3, Assam: District census handbook,India. Director of Census Operations, Assam Sri S.N. Choudhury in his book "Endi-silk lndustry" mentioned that "the art of sericulture was known to the ancient Kamrup as early as the epic age and silk was used as early as the vedic age.


 * Inscriptions of ancient Nepal - Volume 1,D. Regmi - 1983 Hiuen Tsang's Kama-lupo (Kamarupa) is identified with west Assam. भास्कर् Bhagawati  Speak 01:38, 18 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't understand the point of these random quotes from internet searches results. Chaipau (talk) 03:11, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Mention of ancient Kamrup by different authors in their works. भास्कर् Bhagawati  Speak 11:23, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * So? How do they address the issue at point --- that there were different regions at different times in the past that were called Kamarupa/Kamrup?  Chaipau (talk) 14:23, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * True, you are partially correct here; yes there are different times but the same region which keep on shrinking and expanding. I have created this article for ancient Kamrup. भास्कर् Bhagawati  Speak 09:12, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Kamrup region
The lead is under dispute. Please do not edit before resolving the dispute. The ball is in your court. Chaipau (talk) 16:11, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Dispute is whether in this article we discuss ancient Kamrup only (my stand) or Kamrup as whole (your stand). Till now i have not removed any medieval and modern things which is perfectly all right and article is standing as you wanted. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 16:28, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I am disputing your characterization of the issue itself. You know very well what the dispute is---you are resisting a wide body of historical work that states unambiguously the origins of "Kamrup region" and you are trying to insert your POV instead.  At first you tried to create a connection between "Kamrup region" and Kamarupa.  The dispute resolution process above bears testimony of this effort of yours.  You let the dispute fester because you have no evidence to back your assertions.  Now you seem to have given that up on that effort and you are now trying to connect it to "Kamapitha", a part of Kamarupa, not the whole.  When I pointed out that the region of Kampitha is variously defined in different sources , you resisted that information and reverted my changes .  You are just POV pushing here and your edits are disruptive.  Chaipau (talk) 15:22, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Kamapitha
BB, you are trying to connect the Kamrup region with Kamapitha, but this is untenable. The source you have provided, Goswami, merely quotes R M Nath, who does not give any source. The discussion at Talk:Kamapitha shows that a consensus is not possible when the sources themselves do not agree and no one has provided a convincing argument one way or the other. So please do not change the lede again. Chaipau (talk) 11:51, 3 July 2013 (UTC)


 * We are already discussing it at talk Kamapitha, put issues there. भास्कर् Bhagawati  Speak 16:12, 3 July 2013 (UTC)


 * What do you hope to achieve there? The evidence is very clear that you do not have consensus on Kamapitha.  Chaipau (talk) 16:22, 3 July 2013 (UTC)