Talk:Western Chalukya Empire

New map proposal

Current map

New proposed map:
Territory of the Western Chalukyas circa 1050-1150.

I would like to propose a new map for the infobox of this article (see proposal to the right). The new map is exactly sourced to Joseph E. Schwartzberg's A Historical Atlas of South Asia: please see the map online under "Calukyas of Kalyani" in Schwartzberg, Joseph E. (1978). A Historical atlas of South Asia. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 147, map XIV.3 (e). ISBN 0226742210.. The new map also provides more details (topographical details, major cities, more accurate boundaries), and avoids using anachronistic modern national and regional boundaries. Per Schwartzberg, the territorial boundaries correspond to the period 1050-1150. Thank you for your comments. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 08:55, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

References

• The map you propose has some issues. The Cholas were still very powerful and often contested over Andhra with the Chalukyas and both empires won and lost some

of the territories you have included under the Chalukyas from 1050-1150. In fact Andhra was firmly under the Cholas till about 1179. Some Chalukya territories were lost after 1126 but your map does not reflect all that. So I suggest we retain the existing map.Pied Hornbill (talk) 03:19, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Area

From hit and trial and by adding current modern day districts I have estimated the area to be 35 or 4 thousand km²

Obviously this is original research but is factually based on books which mention their extent but not necessarily their size. JingJongPascal (talk) 16:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Map

Hi @Pied Hornbill can you describe in detail why you have removed the map as both of them shows the same territory and are of same year but with improvement in graphics and removal of anachronistic modern day boundaries. Also I was not able to understand your reasoning of how subordinate and overlord have same boundaries. I think you should look for the year gap and also the map which you have now placed and the one you have removed had the same extent.

Regards

Rawn3012 (talk) 14:32, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

any reverts? Rawn3012 (talk) 12:35, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi User:Rawn3012. The Western Chalukyas had 4 major vassals. The Seuna Yadavas of Devagiri, The Hoysala Kingdom, the Kalachuri dynasty and the Kakatiya dynasty and this was true until their first defeat to their vassal Kakatiyas sometime around c.1170. In other words their empire consisted of territories of all the four vassals plus their own hereditary lands centered around Basavakalyana (their royal capital). The map I replaced may not have been taken from a valid source as the territories there looked pretty much the same as their Seuna vassals which makes no sense. The map I replaced with is taken from a valid history source authored by a well known historian Suryanatha Kamat and was the same map that was in use since this article became FA.Pied Hornbill (talk) 19:49, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the reverts!!! What I wanted to tell you is that both maps use the same source, have the same boundaries sketched, and are of the same year. The only difference is improvements like the removal of modern-day boundaries, additions of cities, and overall a better graphically represented Also, the map you have added has same boundaries as their vassals, Senua Yadavs. I also admire that this map has been used since the article has been nominated for FA, but this one looks old. That's why I made the same map using the same source and boundaries. Hence, I have re-added the former but if you have any objections or something which you want to put up you are free to take action and notify me on talk page.

Regards

Rawn3012 (talk) 01:32, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. If you look closely the original map comprises southern territories covering the upper Kaveri river valley (modern southern Karnataka close to the Tamil Nadu border that was the chiefdom of the vasal Hoysalas), where as in your map you have trimmed that portion out, ending their southern boundaries at the Tungabhadra river valley in central Karnataka. Consequently you have taken out portions of their south-eastern territories as well. This is unfortunately what happens when you don't have the reference points of the modern map. You should keep these two maps side by side and compare to get a better idea of what I am seeing.Pied Hornbill (talk) 04:19, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Comparison of maps:

Original map

Your map