1580:: "Both are equally correct and neutral" - color and colour is are spelling variants, BC and BCE are arconyms with quite different unfolded meaning. The first, BC, is a reference to an unprooven religious believe of massively missionizing Christendom, legitimated only by christian propaganda and use. The latter, BCE, is the correct description of the phenomenon of christian superpositing references to calendary notations of time, in addition , what makes it also the polittically correct acronym is, that it can be read alternatively both as before christian era by christians and before common era by muslims, hindus, and the rest of the un-christian world.
1594:: Say by some "original" autors/admins and unlegitimately adopted rules from unsensitive desputed realms (like color -colour - cases) can not , and should not be ported to the sensitive/complicated/historcally-charged cases of terms and formulations of supremacy of missionizing faiths, cults and religions, (like xtianity,scientology and islam) but be better adressed with original sensitive neutral agreed uppon rulings - without rear views to "original" autors claiming wikipedia articles as their property (no trespassingĀ ;). 4 agree - 2 oppose -- I would like to thank everyone for his time and patience , regards --
604:
bce. Was
Thucydides written in the 10th century, or 1500 years earlier? The obvious answer is 1500 years earlier. Also, the oldest manuscripts among the dead sea scrolls are dated to 2nd century bce. The oldest fragments of the old testament to the 7th century bce. The oldest surviving copy of an ancient work has no bearing on when it was written, unless it was believed to be written later. Josephus wrote in the 1st century. The oldest copies of his works are much later, yet Josephus still wrote his works in the 1st century.
31:
1169:? In which country? Citizens in one country may already have to listen to (or be burdened) with having to follow what their own politicians think, without having to worry about what the politicians in the next country say is correct. But Knowledge is used in all countries, and isn't supposed to push someone's political agenda on the whole world. So please don't embarrass yourself by suggesting that "it's politically correct" is ever a persuasive argument to do anything here.
757:, not Sanskrit. It has been described as a "paradox" that the first evidence of written Sanskrit occurs centuries later than that of the Prakrit languages which are its linguistic descendants. When Sanskrit was written down, it was first used for texts of an administrative, literary or scientific nature. The sacred texts were preserved orally, and were set down in writing, "reluctantly" (according to one commentator), and at a comparatively late date.
304:
294:
273:
1587:: The argumentaive low point and last resort of referenc to the original author is not a all relevant. let's say: a hole class of jesuit students, called by their jesuit padre to propagandize "pagan" wikipedia-articles and "protect" them as their "property", would result in the bizare situation, that some claimed "original" autorship would result in utilizing the wikipedia, which has a wouldwide scope, as a christian propaganda-mashine.
82:
64:
733:. Writing was not introduced to India until after Sanskrit had evolved into the Prakrits; when it was written, the choice of writing system was influenced by the regional scripts of the scribes. Therefore, Sanskrit has no native script of its own. As such, virtually all of the major writing systems of South Asia have been used for the production of Sanskrit manuscripts. Since the late 19th century,
485:
467:
22:
399:
378:
171:
150:
181:
1545:
a bit suspicious about the reason why the article leaves off at the end of the Roman Empire--it strikes me as too
Eurocentric a marker; it might still be useful, but we need to find another reason for it. (The same goes with the term "Classical Antiquity," which doesn't make much sense for Chinese and Indian literatures....)
1544:
I looked over the article, and there are simply too many instances of BCE--we don't need that for every item in the list when the list is clear that the whole period is all within the same millenium/century. So, I took out most of the BCE/CEs and left only the ones at the top of each group. Also, I'm
1229:
is, in fact, the more neutral term here, especially since (as
Darktower points out) this article is world-wide in scope and not limited to Christian literature or tradition. Obviously we need to use some sort of dating system, and since we are on the English Knowledge site, it makes sense to use the
1668:
Secondly, whoever wrote this seems to have confused literature and texts. There is a difference that can be read on almost any wiki pages on literature. The title of the article is ancient literature yet the list is titled ancient texts. For instance, although I've entertained myself for hours with
674:
Brahmi
Hinguyt script appeared in India by the 5th century BC and it is the ancestor of all Indian writing systems.Even if the oral tradition is older,the written form of a text can be considered as literature.The written form of Rigveda cannot be older than the 5th century BC.The oral tradition of
596:
needs to be added to the reference as its a long way from the spurious dating of the books of Moses. Their is no evidence of any Jewish books prior to approximately 50 B.C. The Dead Sea
Scrolls are possibly the oldest and they date back to the turn of the 2nd millennium. Their writing must be dated
1702:
It is ludicrous for this
Knowledge page (which amazingly lacks citations) to put the composition of the Book of Job at the 4th century BC when the majority of historians put it at the 6th century BC. The page should be quickly edited to invoke the proper scholarly dating for the Book of Job rather
1560:
The actual consensus is that you have no business visiting talkpages of articles you had no part in developing and trying to switch the era convention used. BC vs. BCE is treated exactly on the same footing as "color" vs. "colour". Both are equally correct and neutral, and you are welcome to keep
1164:
I saw your "reasons" the first time, I just said they were feeble ones. For starters, "Politically correct" shouldn't even be mentioned here as if it were a legitimate reason, because this is a neutral encyclopedia, and the very idea goes against all our principles. What the heck is "politically
603:
That's not how it works. By that logic, every single item on this page would need to be dated to the oldest extant manuscript. Every classical Greek and Latin text would need to be dated to the
Medieval period. Homer would need to be dated to the 1st century bce, rather than the 8th or 7th century
743:
standard writing system for
Sanskrit publication, quite possibly because of the European practice of printing Sanskritic texts in this script. DevanÄgari is written from left to right, lacks distinct letter cases, and is recognisable by a distinctive horizontal line running along the tops of the
1672:
Finally, as stated at the top of the article, the main section does not have a single reference. It, and the whole page, should be removed based solely on this. It has been a year and a half since, and the authors seem to be more concerned with petty squabbles over BC/BCE than any real content.
1814:
I'm planning on rewriting and expanding this page, expanding relevant sections from my sandbox as they reach a publishable state. The goal is to bring it up to par with the "centuries in literature" pages, and then bring all of those pages up to a higher standard since many of them are lacking
1048:? Give me a break! Our policy is to be neutral and go with what is most commonly used, not "politically correct" and prescriptive. Growing academic usage? Still not prevalent. All this does is get people riled up, actually, with all the resistance it has caused. What was the purpose again?
1183:
Um, I don't mean to be rude here or to attack you, but you don't know what "politcal correctness" is. You might want to do a little reading and then reread what myself and the others have written here. Although the best course of action would probably be to just see how the vote plays out.
1133:
Knowledge policy dictates that the consensus of the
Knowledge community decides which should be used, and which usage is more common elsewhere has no relevance in such a decision (though it may influence individual's voting, of course).
1165:
correct" anyway? Who gets to decree what is "correct" "politically"? Politicians - or what? Yeah, "politically correct" must mean correct in a political sense, i.e. whatever some politician says is correct. Oh, really? Politicians in
1324:
just changed it back again. This issue only requires a majority anyway, not a consensus, according to the Manual of Style, and that's what we currently have. Can someone please help so that I'm not just edit warring? Thanks.
1011:
I suggest we change the dating convention from BC to BCE, due to the latter's political correctness and growing academic use. I've already done the work, so if we agree upon the change, it can be made with just a few clicks.
1372:
I still don't see what the harm is in changing to the more popular conclusion, even as votes may still be on their way, but waiting a couple more days to properly adjust the article is fine with me if that user would like.
1790:
Another one is Aulus
Postumius Albinus, but he isn't even listed here. Likewise, there are a whole slew of ancient writers from the Hellenistic period absent, as well as all the early church writers(both Greek and Latin)
1757:
Why doesn't this article include any of the Old Testament apocrypha like the Book of Enoch or the New Testament apocrypha like the Gospel of Thomas? There are dozens of books like these that are missing from the article.
1815:
necessary works and citations. Based on how much material there is so far from my research, I think there is good justification for having the 5th century BCE onward ultimately be their own pages (e.g.
1819:) once more properly cited material has been added, with everything from the 26th century BCE to the end of the 6th century BCE staying on this page. Are there any objections to those ideas?
1268:
Okay, so then I'll go ahead and change it back to BCE/CE for the time being. If the consensus ever changes back, I'll of course revert to BC/AD again. Thanks for participating, everyone. --
772:
If the Rigveda should be on the list as early as the oral tradition started, then the greek oral tradition also belongs much earlier, long before Homer wrote them down in around 800 BC.
1955:
525:
1665:
First off, how is it that such a simplistic and non-controversial page is locked? Locking is only for biographies, major articles and pages under review. Who locked this and why?
1711:
that was used to cite a 6th century BC dating -- Kugler & Hartin 2009, p. 193. 2. --- or Kugler, Robert; Hartin, Patrick J. (2009). An Introduction to the Bible. Eerdmans.
824:(320 to 550 CE). Literature definition - (from Latin litterae (plural); letter) is the art of written work. The word literature literally means "things made from letters").
531:
1960:
1895:
1354:
I think the WP policy on consensus suggests that we should wait more than just a few hours. Give it a couple of days and then see if there's a clear motion either way.
1950:
909:
1945:
501:
449:
439:
1935:
360:
350:
1071:
state anything about common usage having any role in the decision. Despite how riled up this may get you, we'll just vote and see what everyone thinks. --
1925:
1900:
1890:
255:
245:
209:
1230:
European "Common Era" convention. (That is, even people who don't believe in Christ can accept BCE and CE as historically accurate yet neutral terms.)
1910:
1885:
1880:
126:
1113:
Sorry, I did list my reasons, but I suppose in blocks of text they may have been missed. Let me list my reasons outright for everyone's convenience:
1940:
1930:
492:
472:
1920:
767:
415:
132:
995:
963:
929:
326:
35:
1796:
762:
So the Rigveda are merely a oral tradition and can not be literature before 1st century BC. it were probably not put in writing until the
686:
605:
217:
553:
Please provide reference to archaeological discovery rather than beliefs or social title opinion. Please date relative to that evidence.
1915:
1677:
1646:
1512:
What they used to be shouldn't have an impact on your decision. Above you'll find some reasons why BCE and CE are the better choice. --
1099:
I'm just saying you haven't given any solid reason to change, just a couple of feeble reasons, and there is more reason not to change.
1067:
Actually, the neutral policy specifically talks about the usage of BCE vs. BC on this site, and states that there is no preference. It
655:
The Sumerian, Akkadian, and Babylonian text dates are completely wrong in many cases. I'll be working over the next week to fix that.
1875:
1759:
1615:
1595:
560:
1795:
This has the potential to be a great page and general resource, but it seems to be an article that was abandoned in its early stages.
1905:
1715:
406:
383:
1122:
The article is about texts of the ancient world, and few entries in the list have any relevance to Christianity (the basis of BC).
1630:
we encode history in many of our conventions and we ought to maintain B.C and A.D as it indicates a natural historical reference.
317:
278:
213:
102:
221:
194:
155:
1502:. Both BC/AD and BCE/CE refer to the same dates. Therefore there is no need to change them. The original terms should stand.
729:
Sanskrit was spoken in an oral society, and the oral tradition was maintained through the development of early classical
1676:
For such an important topic that should have ample intelligent contributors this page is quite simply an embarrassment.
44:
784:
98:
94:
89:
69:
1816:
1174:
1104:
1053:
500:
related articles on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1704:
1550:
1414:
1359:
1308:
1235:
860:
I do not want to start a edit war with you my friendĀ :) let's stop this discussion, may you have a nice dayĀ :)
690:
1800:
609:
1650:
988:. The earliest South Indian inscriptions in Tamil Brahmi, written in early Tamil, belong to the same period.
1681:
1300:
768:
http://news.oneindia.in/2008/02/28/rigveda-manuscripts-in-preserved-safely-in-pune-institute-1204269314.html
1763:
1619:
1599:
564:
1743:
1321:
1170:
1100:
1049:
50:
1687:
1642:
1611:
1513:
1471:
1437:
1374:
1326:
1269:
1185:
1135:
1072:
1013:
865:
829:
791:
682:
556:
1566:
1546:
1505:
1410:
1355:
1304:
1231:
730:
709:
660:
977:
750:
414:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
325:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1824:
205:
1409:
Well, if no one else chimes in on this topic by Sunday night, I say to go ahead and change em!
628:
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Ancient_literature&diff=233737145&oldid=229473618
1712:
1130:
Knowledge's Manual of Style states that there is no preference between the usage of BCE or BC.
497:
309:
1857:
1838:
1777:
There are Roman historians listed under "Latin," but they wrote their annals in Greek only.
1738:
1723:
1258:
981:
579:
186:
861:
825:
787:
749:
The earliest known inscriptions in Sanskrit date to the 1st century BCE. They are in the
645:
980:
inscriptions dating from the 3rd century BCE onwards, the oldest appearing on the famous
1562:
1503:
846:
804:
705:
656:
293:
272:
1561:
your personal preference to yourself, unless you are the article's original author. --
1869:
1820:
785:
http://www.insidescience.org/content/geneticists-estimate-publication-date-iliad/946
1783:
Quintus Fabius Pictor (3rd century BCE) Lucius Cincius Alimentus (3rd century BCE)
839:
821:
763:
701:
1853:
1834:
1734:
1719:
1708:
1254:
575:
411:
817:
735:
641:
322:
299:
176:
816:
So you will not recognize that Rigveda are a oral tradition, and not written
783:
derived from centuries of oral tradition going back to the 13th century B.C.
679:
epics are much older than the 8th century BC when we have the written form.
1861:
1842:
1828:
1804:
1767:
1746:
1727:
1691:
1654:
1603:
1570:
1554:
1535:
1507:
1493:
1418:
1396:
1363:
1348:
1312:
1291:
1262:
1239:
1207:
1178:
1157:
1108:
1094:
1057:
1035:
869:
849:
843:
833:
813:
807:
801:
795:
713:
694:
664:
649:
613:
583:
568:
484:
466:
200:
81:
63:
766:. In fact the oldest manuscript are dated back to 1464 A D. Read more at:
723:
780:
754:
676:
1707:). Here is the scholarly citation on Knowledge's official page on the
985:
398:
377:
1044:. You say we have to follow "Political correctness" like that's a
633:
Nobody has tackled them properly. I don't have relevant knowledge.
776:
170:
149:
700:
This is a judgement best left to the actual experts, isn't it.
204:-related subjects on Knowledge. Please participate by editing
15:
842:
describes expert opinion perfectly well and is well sourced.
856:
My opinion? it is not Literature before it is writting down
1733:
No, it needs to be changed but it needs to be in line with
1852:
Please make sure you get a reliable source before posting
623:
Verify and integrate better this sequence of short edits:
101:, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
1669:
them, dictionaries are clearly not pieces of literature.
1470:
Lol alright, I'm going to finally fix the article now. --
1303:
page--we'll see if they decide to make the same change.
627:
1737:
which looks right but I've only made a cursory check.
1639:
The good work is lacking a VIP writer imo. Regards.
1119:
The use of BCE is growing in the academic community.
496:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
410:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
321:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
994:
harvcoltxt error: no target: CITEREFMahadevan2003 (
530:This article has not yet received a rating on the
131:This article has not yet received a rating on the
928:harvcoltxt error: no target: CITEREFWhitney1889 (
1249:In the context of world-wide ancient literature
962:harvcoltxt error: no target: CITEREFMasica1991 (
1698:Book of Job not composed in the 4th century BC
198:. This project provides a central approach to
1956:Unknown-importance Ancient Near East articles
800:Don't attempt to contradict another article.
8:
1116:BCE is politically correct, while BC is not.
838:This is not about your opinion, the article
597:to evidence not what you want them to be???
1810:Planned Rewrite and future for this page...
1703:than some fringe position in academia (see
93:, an attempt to structure and organize all
1253:appears to be the most appropriate useage.
554:
461:
372:
267:
144:
58:
21:
19:
989:
941:
939:
1961:Ancient Near East articles by assessment
1896:Knowledge level-5 vital articles in Arts
1299:Thanks. I put a similar question to the
953:
951:
97:. If you wish to help, please visit the
923:
908:was invoked but never defined (see the
885:
510:Knowledge:WikiProject Ancient Near East
463:
374:
269:
146:
60:
957:
753:script, which was originally used for
636:They are poor in form but make sense.
593:Josephus lived from A.D 37 until 100
513:Template:WikiProject Ancient Near East
1951:List-Class Ancient Near East articles
1528:
1486:
1452:
1389:
1341:
1320:Well I tried to change the page, but
1284:
1200:
1150:
1087:
1028:
7:
1515:
1473:
1439:
1376:
1328:
1271:
1187:
1137:
1074:
1015:
490:This article is within the scope of
404:This article is within the scope of
315:This article is within the scope of
87:This article is within the scope of
1946:Low-importance Archaeology articles
900:
49:It is of interest to the following
1936:Low-importance Literature articles
589:Birth and Death dates for Josephus
14:
1926:Mid-importance Mythology articles
1901:List-Class vital articles in Arts
1891:List-Class level-5 vital articles
1531:
1489:
1459:takes a seat and twiddles thumbs.
1455:
1392:
1344:
1287:
1203:
1153:
1090:
1031:
744:letters that links them together.
549:Dating by Archaeological Evidence
424:Knowledge:WikiProject Archaeology
1911:Unknown-importance List articles
1886:Knowledge vital articles in Arts
1881:Knowledge level-5 vital articles
1787:Gaius Acilius (2nd century BCE)
1522:
1480:
1446:
1383:
1335:
1278:
1194:
1144:
1081:
1022:
483:
465:
427:Template:WikiProject Archaeology
397:
376:
335:Knowledge:WikiProject Literature
302:
292:
271:
179:
169:
148:
80:
62:
29:
20:
1941:List-Class Archaeology articles
1661:Serious problems with this page
444:This article has been rated as
355:This article has been rated as
338:Template:WikiProject Literature
250:This article has been rated as
230:Knowledge:WikiProject Mythology
1931:List-Class Literature articles
1862:18:38, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
233:Template:WikiProject Mythology
1:
1921:List-Class Mythology articles
1817:4th century BCE in literature
1805:17:47, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
1525:
1483:
1449:
1386:
1338:
1281:
1197:
1147:
1084:
1025:
976:In northern India, there are
695:08:01, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
650:03:00, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
614:17:34, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
504:and see a list of open tasks.
493:WikiProject Ancient Near East
418:and see a list of open tasks.
329:and see a list of open tasks.
192:This article is supported by
1829:22:18, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
1747:06:30, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
1728:21:07, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
1692:11:55, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
1571:08:08, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
1519:
1477:
1443:
1380:
1332:
1275:
1191:
1141:
1078:
1019:
714:08:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
584:15:26, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
1843:10:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
1773:Latin vs Greek in Roman era
1655:03:16, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
1604:15:18, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
982:Prakrit pillar inscriptions
870:12:12, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
665:19:45, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
111:Knowledge:WikiProject Lists
1977:
1916:WikiProject Lists articles
1768:09:12, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
1718:. --- any objections here?
850:11:45, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
834:11:02, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
808:09:53, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
796:13:13, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
532:project's importance scale
516:Ancient Near East articles
450:project's importance scale
361:project's importance scale
256:project's importance scale
133:project's importance scale
114:Template:WikiProject Lists
1876:List-Class vital articles
1555:04:48, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
1536:02:48, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
1508:02:25, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
1494:00:38, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
1419:05:43, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
1397:03:23, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
1364:03:18, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
1349:03:13, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
1313:02:48, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
1292:02:23, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
1263:20:04, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
1240:16:13, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
1208:22:11, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
1179:12:16, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
1158:06:31, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
1109:06:18, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
1095:06:07, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
1058:06:00, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
1036:05:48, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
569:12:16, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
529:
478:
443:
392:
354:
287:
249:
164:
130:
75:
57:
1906:List-Class List articles
220:standards, or visit the
1301:Talk:Chinese literature
407:WikiProject Archaeology
95:list pages on Knowledge
318:WikiProject Literature
945:Salomon (1998), p. 86
195:WikiProject Mythology
36:level-5 vital article
904:The named reference
892:Salomon (1998), p. 7
430:Archaeology articles
812:Hello my friendĀ :)
731:Sanskrit literature
341:Literature articles
1753:Many missing texts
1705:WP:Fringe theories
1127:Additional notes:
236:Mythology articles
210:assess and improve
45:content assessment
1645:comment added by
1614:comment added by
1569:
1007:Dating Convention
712:
685:comment added by
571:
559:comment added by
546:
545:
542:
541:
538:
537:
507:Ancient Near East
498:Ancient Near East
473:Ancient Near East
460:
459:
456:
455:
371:
370:
367:
366:
310:Literature portal
266:
265:
262:
261:
224:for more details.
143:
142:
139:
138:
90:WikiProject Lists
1968:
1741:
1694:
1657:
1623:
1583:Quite obviously
1576:Quite obviously
1565:
1533:
1530:
1527:
1524:
1521:
1517:
1491:
1488:
1485:
1482:
1479:
1475:
1457:
1454:
1451:
1448:
1445:
1441:
1394:
1391:
1388:
1385:
1382:
1378:
1346:
1343:
1340:
1337:
1334:
1330:
1322:Til Eulenspiegel
1289:
1286:
1283:
1280:
1277:
1273:
1205:
1202:
1199:
1196:
1193:
1189:
1171:Til Eulenspiegel
1155:
1152:
1149:
1146:
1143:
1139:
1101:Til Eulenspiegel
1092:
1089:
1086:
1083:
1080:
1076:
1050:Til Eulenspiegel
1033:
1030:
1027:
1024:
1021:
1017:
1000:
999:
974:
968:
967:
955:
946:
943:
934:
933:
921:
915:
914:
913:
907:
899:
893:
890:
708:
697:
518:
517:
514:
511:
508:
487:
480:
479:
469:
462:
432:
431:
428:
425:
422:
401:
394:
393:
388:
380:
373:
343:
342:
339:
336:
333:
312:
307:
306:
305:
296:
289:
288:
283:
275:
268:
238:
237:
234:
231:
228:
222:WikiProject page
189:
187:Mythology portal
184:
183:
182:
173:
166:
165:
160:
152:
145:
119:
118:
115:
112:
109:
84:
77:
76:
66:
59:
42:
33:
32:
25:
24:
23:
16:
1976:
1975:
1971:
1970:
1969:
1967:
1966:
1965:
1866:
1865:
1850:
1812:
1775:
1755:
1739:
1700:
1685:
1663:
1640:
1637:
1624:
1609:
1167:what government
1009:
1004:
1003:
993:
990:Mahadevan (2003
975:
971:
961:
956:
949:
944:
937:
927:
922:
918:
905:
903:
901:
896:
891:
887:
882:
739:has become the
680:
672:
621:
619:Some poor edits
591:
551:
515:
512:
509:
506:
505:
429:
426:
423:
420:
419:
386:
340:
337:
334:
331:
330:
308:
303:
301:
281:
235:
232:
229:
226:
225:
185:
180:
178:
158:
116:
113:
110:
107:
106:
43:on Knowledge's
40:
30:
12:
11:
5:
1974:
1972:
1964:
1963:
1958:
1953:
1948:
1943:
1938:
1933:
1928:
1923:
1918:
1913:
1908:
1903:
1898:
1893:
1888:
1883:
1878:
1868:
1867:
1849:
1846:
1811:
1808:
1797:174.253.64.148
1794:
1786:
1774:
1771:
1754:
1751:
1750:
1749:
1699:
1696:
1690:comment added
1662:
1659:
1636:
1633:
1632:
1631:
1608:
1607:
1606:
1588:
1581:
1558:
1557:
1547:Aristophanes68
1541:
1540:
1539:
1538:
1468:
1467:
1466:
1465:
1464:
1463:
1462:
1461:
1426:
1425:
1424:
1423:
1422:
1421:
1411:Aristophanes68
1402:
1401:
1400:
1399:
1367:
1366:
1356:Aristophanes68
1318:
1317:
1316:
1315:
1305:Aristophanes68
1266:
1265:
1243:
1242:
1232:Aristophanes68
1219:
1218:
1217:
1216:
1215:
1214:
1213:
1212:
1211:
1210:
1161:
1160:
1131:
1125:
1124:
1123:
1120:
1117:
1061:
1060:
1008:
1005:
1002:
1001:
969:
947:
935:
916:
894:
884:
883:
881:
878:
877:
876:
875:
874:
873:
872:
854:
853:
852:
773:
770:
759:
758:
746:
745:
727:
718:
687:193.92.181.203
671:
668:
631:
630:
620:
617:
606:174.253.64.148
600:
590:
587:
550:
547:
544:
543:
540:
539:
536:
535:
528:
522:
521:
519:
502:the discussion
488:
476:
475:
470:
458:
457:
454:
453:
446:Low-importance
442:
436:
435:
433:
416:the discussion
402:
390:
389:
387:Lowāimportance
381:
369:
368:
365:
364:
357:Low-importance
353:
347:
346:
344:
327:the discussion
314:
313:
297:
285:
284:
282:Lowāimportance
276:
264:
263:
260:
259:
252:Mid-importance
248:
242:
241:
239:
208:, and help us
191:
190:
174:
162:
161:
159:Midāimportance
153:
141:
140:
137:
136:
129:
123:
122:
120:
85:
73:
72:
67:
55:
54:
48:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1973:
1962:
1959:
1957:
1954:
1952:
1949:
1947:
1944:
1942:
1939:
1937:
1934:
1932:
1929:
1927:
1924:
1922:
1919:
1917:
1914:
1912:
1909:
1907:
1904:
1902:
1899:
1897:
1894:
1892:
1889:
1887:
1884:
1882:
1879:
1877:
1874:
1873:
1871:
1864:
1863:
1859:
1855:
1847:
1845:
1844:
1840:
1836:
1831:
1830:
1826:
1822:
1818:
1809:
1807:
1806:
1802:
1798:
1792:
1788:
1784:
1781:
1778:
1772:
1770:
1769:
1765:
1761:
1752:
1748:
1745:
1742:
1736:
1732:
1731:
1730:
1729:
1725:
1721:
1717:
1716:9780802846365
1714:
1710:
1706:
1697:
1695:
1693:
1689:
1683:
1679:
1678:99.239.72.120
1674:
1670:
1666:
1660:
1658:
1656:
1652:
1648:
1647:201.89.144.86
1644:
1634:
1629:
1626:
1625:
1621:
1617:
1613:
1605:
1601:
1597:
1593:
1589:
1586:
1582:
1579:
1575:
1574:
1573:
1572:
1568:
1564:
1556:
1552:
1548:
1543:
1542:
1537:
1534:
1518:
1511:
1510:
1509:
1506:
1504:
1501:
1498:
1497:
1496:
1495:
1492:
1476:
1460:
1458:
1442:
1434:
1433:
1432:
1431:
1430:
1429:
1428:
1427:
1420:
1416:
1412:
1408:
1407:
1406:
1405:
1404:
1403:
1398:
1395:
1379:
1371:
1370:
1369:
1368:
1365:
1361:
1357:
1353:
1352:
1351:
1350:
1347:
1331:
1323:
1314:
1310:
1306:
1302:
1298:
1297:
1296:
1295:
1294:
1293:
1290:
1274:
1264:
1260:
1256:
1252:
1248:
1245:
1244:
1241:
1237:
1233:
1228:
1224:
1221:
1220:
1209:
1206:
1190:
1182:
1181:
1180:
1176:
1172:
1168:
1163:
1162:
1159:
1156:
1140:
1132:
1129:
1128:
1126:
1121:
1118:
1115:
1114:
1112:
1111:
1110:
1106:
1102:
1098:
1097:
1096:
1093:
1077:
1070:
1066:
1063:
1062:
1059:
1055:
1051:
1047:
1043:
1040:
1039:
1038:
1037:
1034:
1018:
1006:
997:
991:
987:
983:
979:
973:
970:
965:
959:
954:
952:
948:
942:
940:
936:
931:
925:
924:Whitney (1889
920:
917:
911:
898:
895:
889:
886:
879:
871:
867:
863:
859:
855:
851:
848:
845:
841:
837:
836:
835:
831:
827:
823:
819:
815:
811:
810:
809:
806:
803:
799:
798:
797:
793:
789:
786:
782:
778:
774:
771:
769:
765:
761:
760:
756:
752:
748:
747:
742:
738:
737:
732:
728:
725:
721:
720:
719:
716:
715:
711:
707:
703:
698:
696:
692:
688:
684:
678:
669:
667:
666:
662:
658:
653:
652:
651:
647:
643:
637:
634:
629:
626:
625:
624:
618:
616:
615:
611:
607:
601:
598:
594:
588:
586:
585:
581:
577:
572:
570:
566:
562:
558:
548:
533:
527:
524:
523:
520:
503:
499:
495:
494:
489:
486:
482:
481:
477:
474:
471:
468:
464:
451:
447:
441:
438:
437:
434:
417:
413:
409:
408:
403:
400:
396:
395:
391:
385:
382:
379:
375:
362:
358:
352:
349:
348:
345:
328:
324:
320:
319:
311:
300:
298:
295:
291:
290:
286:
280:
277:
274:
270:
257:
253:
247:
244:
243:
240:
223:
219:
215:
211:
207:
203:
202:
197:
196:
188:
177:
175:
172:
168:
167:
163:
157:
154:
151:
147:
134:
128:
125:
124:
121:
117:List articles
104:
100:
96:
92:
91:
86:
83:
79:
78:
74:
71:
68:
65:
61:
56:
52:
46:
38:
37:
27:
18:
17:
1851:
1832:
1813:
1793:
1789:
1785:
1782:
1779:
1776:
1760:110.22.20.51
1756:
1701:
1675:
1671:
1667:
1664:
1641:ā Preceding
1638:
1627:
1616:85.183.56.74
1610:ā Preceding
1596:85.183.56.74
1591:
1590:Conclusions_
1584:
1577:
1559:
1514:
1499:
1472:
1469:
1438:
1435:
1375:
1327:
1319:
1270:
1267:
1250:
1246:
1226:
1222:
1186:
1166:
1136:
1073:
1068:
1064:
1045:
1041:
1014:
1010:
972:
958:Masica (1991
919:
902:Cite error:
897:
888:
857:
840:Vedic period
822:Gupta period
775:The stories
764:Gupta period
740:
734:
717:
699:
673:
654:
640:
638:
635:
632:
622:
602:
599:
595:
592:
573:
561:210.1.222.21
555:āĀ Preceding
552:
491:
445:
405:
356:
316:
251:
212:articles to
199:
193:
99:project page
88:
51:WikiProjects
34:
1821:- car chasm
1740:Doug Weller
1735:Book of Job
1709:Book of Job
1686:āPreceding
820:before the
681:āPreceding
421:Archaeology
412:Archaeology
384:Archaeology
206:the article
1870:Categories
1780:They are:
1046:good thing
862:Lactasamir
826:Lactasamir
818:Literature
788:Lactasamir
736:Devanagari
332:Literature
323:Literature
279:Literature
103:discussion
41:List-class
1516:Darktower
1474:Darktower
1440:Darktower
1377:Darktower
1329:Darktower
1272:Darktower
1188:Darktower
1138:Darktower
1075:Darktower
1016:Darktower
910:help page
726:article -
722:From the
657:NJMauthor
227:Mythology
201:Mythology
156:Mythology
39:is rated
1833:I agree
1643:unsigned
1612:unsigned
1585:wrong #2
1578:wrong #1
1225:I think
1069:does not
984:of king
741:de facto
724:Sanskrit
683:unsigned
574:I agree
557:unsigned
1688:undated
1628:Oppose:
906:banerji
880:Reflist
781:Odyssey
755:Prakrit
677:Homeric
670:Rigveda
448:on the
359:on the
254:on the
1854:Omnism
1848:Source
1835:Omnism
1720:Korvex
1635:Strabo
1500:Oppose
1255:Buistr
1247:Agree:
1223:Agree:
1065:Agree:
1042:Oppose
986:Ashoka
978:Brahmi
847:(tock)
805:(tock)
751:Brahmi
576:Omnism
47:scale.
1592:Agree
960::135)
777:Iliad
702:WP:RS
642:6birc
108:Lists
70:Lists
28:This
1858:talk
1839:talk
1825:talk
1801:talk
1764:talk
1744:talk
1724:talk
1713:ISBN
1682:talk
1651:talk
1620:talk
1600:talk
1567:(š³)
1551:talk
1415:talk
1360:talk
1309:talk
1259:talk
1236:talk
1175:talk
1105:talk
1054:talk
996:help
964:help
930:help
866:talk
858:FACT
844:Shii
830:talk
814:Shii
802:Shii
792:talk
779:and
710:(š³)
704:. --
691:talk
675:the
661:talk
646:talk
610:talk
580:talk
565:talk
216:and
214:good
1684:)
1563:dab
1251:BCE
1227:BCE
992::?)
926::?)
706:dab
526:???
440:Low
351:Low
246:Mid
218:1.0
127:???
1872::
1860:)
1841:)
1827:)
1803:)
1766:)
1758:--
1726:)
1653:)
1622:)
1602:)
1553:)
1436:--
1417:)
1373:--
1362:)
1325:--
1311:)
1261:)
1238:)
1184:--
1177:)
1134:--
1107:)
1056:)
1012:--
950:^
938:^
912:).
868:)
832:)
794:)
693:)
663:)
648:)
612:)
582:)
567:)
1856:(
1837:(
1823:(
1799:(
1762:(
1722:(
1680:(
1649:(
1618:(
1598:(
1549:(
1532:5
1529:4
1526:3
1523:2
1520:1
1490:5
1487:4
1484:3
1481:2
1478:1
1456:5
1453:4
1450:3
1447:2
1444:1
1413:(
1393:5
1390:4
1387:3
1384:2
1381:1
1358:(
1345:5
1342:4
1339:3
1336:2
1333:1
1307:(
1288:5
1285:4
1282:3
1279:2
1276:1
1257:(
1234:(
1204:5
1201:4
1198:3
1195:2
1192:1
1173:(
1154:5
1151:4
1148:3
1145:2
1142:1
1103:(
1091:5
1088:4
1085:3
1082:2
1079:1
1052:(
1032:5
1029:4
1026:3
1023:2
1020:1
998:)
966:)
932:)
864:(
828:(
790:(
689:(
659:(
644:(
639:ā
608:(
578:(
563:(
534:.
452:.
363:.
258:.
135:.
105:.
53::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
