Dwaraka, Krishna's capital city by the sea. Same as modern Dwaraka in Gujarat.
Dwaitavana Lake, the lake near Kamyaka forest where some Gandharvas fought and defeated
the Kauravas.
Ekachakrapura, The place where Bhima slayed Bakasura.
Hastinapura, The capital of the Kauravas (the Kurus). Near modern Delhi.
Indraprastha, The capital of the Pandavas
(the Pandus) whence they ruled for 36 years.
Kampilya, Capital of Panchala ruled by Drupada.
Kamyaka, the forest where the Pandavas spent the 12th year of forest exile.
Kurujangala, the kingdom ruled by Janamejaya.
Kurukshetra, (lit. the plain of the Kurus) the battlefield where the Great War was
fought. Now a village in Haryana, between Delhi and Chandigargh.
Upaplavya, a territory of Matsya kingdom.
Varanavata, The Pandavas were sent to live here in a fire-trap.
HOW MANY FOUGHT IN THE WAR?
• Vyasa
says that 18 Akshunis (divisions) fought in the battle. An
akshauni is 21, 870 chariots, 21, 870 elephants, 65, 610
horses and 109, 350 foot soldiers.
• Assuming two people per chariot, two per elephant and
one rider per horse, this approximates to
2 x 21,870 + 2 x 21, 870 + 65, 610 + 109, 350 = 183 680 fighters per
akshauni (division).
• With 18 divisions, this comes to 183, 680 x 18 = 3, 306, 240 men in arms.
• Adding a few more for logistical services such as
cooks, barbers, cleaners, stable hands, and so on, we get a round figure of 4
million people in the armed services. This is larger than the number of people in
the armed services of India today.
WHEN WAS IT FOUGHT?
• According to our ancient astrologers (as cited by
Dr. Mahidhara Nalini Mohan, National Physical Laboratory), Kali Yuga started in 3138 B. C. and the
Great Mahabhaarata War was fought in 3102 B. C. This is almost the same as that
quoted by Dr. Veda Vyasa, IAS.
• According to Western indologists, the War took place no
earlier than 12 B. C. This is far
different from the calculations coming from Indian sources.
• How do we resolve this discripancy?
• Dr. Nalini Mohan says that one sure-shot of verifying
these counter claims is to look for astrological evidence. For example, the
death of Bhisma is an important events
in Mahaabharata. Important for us because Bhishma deliberately waited for an
auspicious moment to die. What is that auspicious moment? We know Bhisma waited
for the Sun's northward journey. Did Vyasa mention anything else about the positions
of stars in the sky that would be useful to us in fixing the date? Perhaps the muhoortham of Krishna's death was
mentioned. How can these muhoorthams help us?
• For example, modern astronomy tells us that there is a
natural phenomenon called the precession of the equinoxes. To make it simple,
let me explain as fallows. We know that the Earth spins like a top. As it spins,
its axis does not always point exactly in the same direction; it
precesses. As a result, at a fixed
moment of a year, say the Spring Equinox time, the Sun does not always rise in
the same Raasi (constellation) year after year; it progressively shifts from Raasi to Raasi as
time goes by. After about 26, 000 years the whole cycle repeats. For example,
if we know that Bhisma died at a time when the Sun
was rising, at the Spring Equinox time, in the constellation Taurus, then we
know for sure that Bhisma died in 2050 B. C. This is modern scientific
knowledge. If someone who really understands Mahabhaarata can tell us if there
is any mention of the Raasi in which the Sun was rising during the Mahabharata
times, we can tell when exactly the story took place.
• Less accurate way of establishing the date is by
making some conjectures about population
of India at the time of the War.
• Vyasa says
that 18 Akshunis (divisions) fought in the battle. Vyasa also says that an
akshauni is 21, 870 chariots, 21, 870 elephants, 65, 610 horses and 109, 350
foot soldiers.
• Assuming two people per chariot, two per elephant and
one rider per horse, this approximates to
2 x 21,870 + 2 x 21, 870 + 65, 610 + 109, 350 = 183 680 fighters per
akshauni (division).
• With 18 divisions, this comes to 183, 680 x 18 = 3, 306, 240 men in arms.
• Adding a few more for logistical services such as
cooks, barbers, cleaners, stable hands, and so on, we get a round figure of4
million people in the armed services.
• How much of a population
should a country have to support 4 million people in the armed forces? This is
a hard question to answer. But, let me try the following approach - just for
the fun of it.
• During World War II, the one great war we know well,
the world's population was about 2.5 billion people. It was estimated that 50 million
people died in that war. That is, one out of 50 people on this planet died
during that war. That is 2% of world's
population.
• If a great war's toll was the same then as it is now,
then we can assume that 2% of India's population also died during the Great
War. But, how many of the 4 million people serving in the armed forces died
during the Mahabhaarata War? The poet says all of the fighting men died, save a
handful. If this literal interpretation is true, then India's population in
2050 B. C. should be around 50 times 4 million, or 200 million. Is this
possible?
• Recently released United Nations data tells us how the
population of this planet grew
since A. D. 1650. In fact U. N. says
that world's populaion in A. D. 1650 stood at 0.5 billion. But, what we want is
India's population in 2050 B. C. This is the beginning of the weakest link in
the argument.
• We need two items to get what we want. First, what was
the world's population in 2050 B. C.?
Second, what fraction of it lived in India at that time? We really do not know
the answer to these two questions.
• The crudest thing we can do is to assume that these
ratios and proportions are more or less the same now as it had been then. Working
backwards in time, we can estimate the World's population in 12 B. C. It comes
to about 300 million people. Just like at WWII time, if every seventh person
was an Indian (now, it is every sixth!), then India's population in 12 B. C.
would have been about a seventh of 300 million or about 40 million. Can a population
of 40 million support a war in which 4 million people fought and died? That is
10% of the population. In World War II only 2% ofthe population died.
• One of the unreasonable assumptions we have made
earlier aws to say that ALL the
soldiers died. Let us say that every 4th soldier (a high rate, though) actually died. That is, actually one million
soldiers died. Now, can a poopulation of 40 million sustain the death of one million soldiers. This is 2.5%, a figure
comparable to WWII death rate. This line of argument lends credence to the
theory put forward by western indologists. Really, I do not know what their
logic was.
• In 2050 B. C. my estimate of the World's population
stands at 50 million people. Perhaps, India's share of this (every seventh person,
once again) would have been seven million. Unless, something is amiss somewhere, I know that it is
impossible to fight a war and lose 50%
of the population. A possible way, credible or not, of justifying this scenario
is to assume that all of the world's population of that time lived in India! An
alternative explanation would be to suspect the sizes of the divisions given by
Vyasa.
We know that at WWII time, every fifth person on this globe was an Indian. We also know that the world's population at that time was 2.5 billion. That is, at WWII time, India's population was about 0.5 billion, perhaps a little less.
Perhaps about 10% of Earth's population directly participated in the fighting. This also shows that the figures shown in Mahabharata are not completely out of line.
In World War II, about 50
million people died. This 50 million perhaps inclued civilians also. Let us
assume that about a fourth, or 10 million, of the deaths are civilian and the
rest, 40 million are battlefield deaths.
At that time, the population
of this palnet was about 2 billion. That is, about 2% of the planet died while fighting in the War. Suppose we assume
that a like number of casualties
occurred during the Mahaabharata War. Now the approximate population of North
India at that time can be estimated. That is 1 million represents 2% of the
population from which the fighting men are drawn. This works out to about 50
million people. If India contained 50 million people, it would have the stamina
to support a war of the magnitude we have been talking about.
In 2000BC, the Earth's
population was about 100 million
people.
Assuming that most of this population was concentrated in Europe and Asia and apportioning 2/3 of this to Asia and the rest to Europe, it looks like Asia had 60 million. Of this about 20% can be assigned to India. This comes to 12 million. We estimated 18 million.
Year Population
(in Billions)
2000BC ?? (50 million)
1000BC 0.1 (100 million)
1 0.3 (300 million)
1650 0.5
1850 1.131
1950 2.516
1975 4.079
1990 5.3111
2000 6.463
2025 10.978
2050 21.161
2075 46.261
2100 109.405
In 2000 BC, the Earth's
population was about 100 million
people.
Assuming that most of this
population was concentrated in Europe and Asia and apportioning 2/3 of this to
Asia and the rest to Europe, it looks like Asia had 60 million. Of this about
20% can be assigned to India. This comes to 12 million. We estimated 18
million.
Compare this with the
situation at or around World War II.
The world's population at that time is about 2.5 billion people. It was
estimated that 50 million people died in that war. That is 2500/50 = 50. That
is 1 out of 50 people died or 2%. Perhaps about 10% of Earth's population
directly participated in the fighting. This also shows that the figures shown
in Mahabharata are not completely out of line.
Time Scales
When Yudhishthira was 16,
the Pandavas came back to Hastinapura
At this time Kunti (and Pandu) would have been 32
At this time Vichitravirya would have been 48
At this time Bhishma would have been 64
At this time Vyasa would have been 65
When Yudhishthira was 20, he
performed Rajasuya at Indraprastha
When Yudhishthira was 22, he
lost the game of dice
When Yudhishthira was 34,
Pandavas rescued Kauravas from Gandharvas
When Yudhishthira was 34,
Duhsala married Jayadratha, the Sindhu king
When Yudhishthira was 35,
the Pandavas finished forest life
At this time the Great Battle took place
At this time Bhishma would have been 83
(Probably Vyasa wrote the story at this time)
At this time Abhimanyu would have been 16
At this time Parikshita would have been 0
When Yudhishthira was 71,
the Pandavas left for the Himalayas
At this time Parikshita would have been 35 (or 17, if no
Abhimanya)
At this time Vyasa would have been 119
(The claim is Kali Yuga started this year) 3105 B.C.
(The claim is Krishna died this year)
(The claim is Parikshita ruled for 60 years)
When P died Vyasa would have been 179
At this time Janamejaya would have been 19
It was stated that
Parikshita ruled for 60 years. Then, he would have been 95 when he died due to a snake (Takshaka) bite. Then, when Parikshita died, Janamejaya would have
been 79. Vyasa would have been 179, an
impossibility
If Parikshita ruled only 25
years (if the scripture means until he reached 60),
then Janamejaya would have ascended the throne at age 44. In this case, Vyasa's age at the time of the
Snake sacrifice would have been 144,
still an unbelievable age. (Remember the Pandavas and Krishna died at a human age. Why should Vyasa live this long?
To me it appears that someone has introduced a couple of nonexistent
generations. Is it possible that Parikshita is the son of Arjuna?
According to Dr. Veda Vyasa, IAS, Ph.D
Mahabharata War took place in Sep. 3138 B. C.
Kali Yuga started at 2 hr. 27 m. 30 sec. on 20 Feb. 3105 B. C.
Janamejaya's Sarpa Yaga took place in 3045 B. C.