Critically discuss the opinion of the different historians about Mahabharata as a historical source.
(i) Mahabharata’s historical facts are doubted by a few European historians. According to them a few of the characters of Mahabharata are historical but most of the events are imaginary. In the Mahabharata, the Pandavas are mentioned as brothers of the Kauravas but in Vedic literature, name of Kauravas is found mentioned several times, but there is no mention of the Pandavas. Waber in his History of Indian Literature, has written that “The character of the Pandavas is imaginary and it has been added to the Mahabharata later on. Besides, these supporting rulers of the Pandavas and the Kauravas mentioned in the Mahabharata were not at all contemporaries”.
(ii) There are some scholars who believe in the facticity of the tale. Archaeologist BB Lal went a long distance to prove it, he dugged a placed named Hastinapura, the name resembles the one mentioned in the text but we really do not know whether they are the same. Although in some other texts we find the names mentioned in Mahabharata, so it looks like some figures were historical.
(iii) Mahabharata is an important source to know the facts about social life of that age. In this epic we find descriptions of caste system, about social evils, about position of the women, about political system and war strategy etc. And it becomes very useful in constructing social history of that time.
Tips: -
Imp.