On why the kingdoms who supported the Kauravas did what they did, it is instructive to read about the conquests Karna did after the humiliation of the Kauravas @ the hands of the Gandharvas. It discusses all the kingdoms that he subjugated and the ones that just had a friendship w/ him. Bhagadatta fell in the latter category - he wasn't defeated by Karna, IIRC, but he did become an ally of the Kauravas after that. In fact, Drupad was the only ruler who managed to withstand Karna, and paid him some taxes. Of course, it was inconceivable that Drupad could have supported the Kauravas, given both what happened to Draupadi, as well as his enmity w/ Drona.
OK. I am very clear now on this point.
On Krishna's wives, his 8 principle wives are the ones who he married first - since that's how the hierarchy of sautans was determined. So even his marriage to Lakshmanaa had to have happened b4 Narakasura's death. I know that SB does not follow a chronological order - Banasura's war is described pretty early, as is Rukmi's death. If Rukmi was there to offer his services to both sides in Udyog Parva, his death had to have happened in the 36 years b/w the end of the Kauravas and the end of the Yadavas & Pandavas.
I still can't agree that other 5 principle wives had to marry Krishna chronologically before those 16,100 wives in order to be counted as principal wives. I think those 5 wives might have got higher status (Or just specific separately known identities nothing else) just because of their stature and position before marriage (relative to those helpless 16,100 wives also too many in number all equal reducing their individual importance) and the way Krishna married them. The chronology rule for status may not be applicable in all cases or especially such abnormal case. Those 16,100 wives may just be formal wives rescued by Krishna and under his shelter in Dwarika.
In which case, the other possibility is that while in MB, Krishna may have met the Pandavas the first time in Draupadi's swayamvara, Krishna may actually have known the Pandavas from much earlier, and Arjun helped Krishna win some of his wives even before the house of lac. But problem here - in the chapter about Satrajit's death in the Syamantaka gem episodes, after Krishna married Satyabhama, he & Balarama left for Hastinapur, and while there, heard about the demise of the Pandavas in the house of lac. While he was there, Satyabhama came to him reporting that her father had been murdered, and Krishna left Hastinapur for Dwarka to kill Satadhandva.
OK. Quite clear. Your analyzing is very very agreeable.
Since Satyabhama was unarguably the 3rd of Krishna's wives, and the Pandavas were incognito b4 Draupadi's swayamvara, there is no way Arjun could have helped Krishna find Kalindhi b4 the Khandavprastha episodes, which was when it seems he helped Krishna. So most of the Arjun-Krishna tales in their happier days seem to have happened either during the burning of the Khandavprastha forests, or during Arjun's prayashchita yatra. Incidentally, I always get mixed up as to whether it was 1 year or 12 years. Cutting Arjun loose from duties @ Indraprastha seems pretty cavalier on the part of the Pandavas, if they made that agreement about how to conjugally share Draupadi. But this exile would probably have been the time that Arjun spent the bulk of it w/ Krishna & Dwarka, getting to be a mentor, if not guru, of Satyaki & Pradhyumna, as well as helping in some of Krishna's marriages as well.
Yes. Those were 12 years clear as per rules agreed by Pandavas at the time of marriage with Draupadi. Arjun had to stay in the forest as Brahmachari during those 12 years (even though he married thrice during that period that's the interesting part of it). He stayed in Manipur with Chitrangadaa for 3 years. In fact towards the end of his forest stay, before going to Dwarika, he once again went to Manipur to see his son Babhruvaahan grown up and met him and crowned him then & there.
This is the text when the rule was laid down between Pandavas after marriage with Draupadi:
Pandavas, thus addressed by the great Rishi Narada,
consulting with one another, established a rule amongst themselves
in the presence of the celestial Rishi himself endued with immeasurable
energy. And the rule they made was that when one of them would be
sitting with Draupadi, any of the other four who would see that one thus must
retire into the forest for twelve years, passing his days as brahmacharin.
On the conquests, a few things look strange by what you have described. For instance, if Nakul was conquering the West, how did Hastinapur fall under that - Hastinapur was NE of Indraprastha, as any map would show one. The Yadavas, otoh, were in Dwarka, which is south. But more significantly, I think that even for the Rajasuya yagna, the Pandavas would have matrimonial allies and co-hosts, if you will. So rulers like Kuntibhoj, Shalya, Drupada, Ugrasena would not have been subjected to any invasions or conquests, since their daughters were bahus of the Pandavas.
Also, its unbelievable that Nakul could have subjugated Hastinapur given that Bheeshma was running it - probably, Yudhisthir might have bypassed them and had separate deals w/ Dhritarashtra. Incidentally, BRC's serial made too much of the camaraderie b/w them, which really never existed. Nakul was nowhere even close to being a match for the likes of Bheeshma, Drona, Kripa or Ashwatthama, who he would have had to come into battle against there. If Nakul went west, I think he would have subjugated Kekaya and Shakuni's Gandhara, although it raises a question of how that wouldn't have started a war? I'll start a discussion on that in the Mahabharata thread.
Nakul finished his journey of West and then went to Hastinapur (sent by Yudhishthir again) to invite them. I have written in my previous posts the names of all the kings who either were conquered by Pandavas or who welcomed and entertained them happily and were being just invited for the friendship and the sacrifice function of Supremacy of Yudhishthir celebrated. Similarly, we can look at other Samdhis and in laws of Pandavas that they were simply invited cordially during the journey of conquests on the way and were not invaded.
If Arjun was assigned the east and took on rulers like Bhagadatta (I'm assuming that Krishna must have slain Narakasura by then), then Karna's kingdom Anga must have fallen on the way. Which then begs the question - how did he not go to war w/ Karna? I don't think Bhima would have covered Karna, given the direction he was headed. After all, Karna was a sworn ally of Duryodhan and a mortal enemy of Arjun, and there would have been no greater justification of a war on his part than Arjun even using his kingdom as transit territory to invade Pragjyotisha. Or did Karna never live even one day in Anga?
(this was discussed a bit in the Pandava thread - I'll try pulling it back to the front).
Arjun headed to North and Bheem to East as per KMG and my post on the previous page. It was Bheem who conquered Karna as per KMG translation and not Arjun. The only strange thing is the kingdom of Pragjyotish which came on the way of Arjun towards North which is geographically not conceivable.
Bhima did defeat Ayodhya's Brihadbala - and Karna defeated the same ruler later, so he fought on the Kaurava side in the war, but was only noted to have fought Abhimanyu every time. His first point of invasion was Chedi, but Sishupala welcomed him, despite being a tad bitter over him killing Jarasandha, apparently hoping that Bhima would be his new benefactor against Krishna. Kashi and Karusa fell to the East, so I'd imagine that rather than Arjun, it was Krishna who killed those 2 rulers so that all Arjun had to do was persuade their very novice rulers to accept Yudhisthir's suzerainty. Magadha was a mere formality, since after Jarasandha's death, Krishna had made acceptance of Yushisthir's suzerainty a condition for installing Sahadev to the throne.
Yes. About Shishupal, it is clearly mentioned that he entertained Bheem for 1 month. And yes. It is also mentioned very clearly that going to meet Sahadev and get the acknowledgement from him of sway under Pandavas was just a formality.
Rather, I think that Bhima's further expeditions would have covered kingdoms like Avanti, Vidarbha, S Kosala and maybe beyond. The description above seems to suggest that Sahadev would have covered the north, since Bhima was already covering the South, and Arjun the East, and Nakul the West.
Sahdev covered South. In fact not just today's South India but anything South of Gwalior/Chedi (Northern part of MP). In fact strange point here is that even Saurashtra is mentioned in his conquest (which is today's Western India) which in fact is very close to Dwarika if we consider Prabhas and Veraval of those days to be Saurashtra (Dwarika is in fact part of today's Saurashtra) whereas it was Nakul who went to Dwarika. So Dwarika and rest of Saurashtra was border line between Nakul and Sahdev. Chedi was the border line between Bheem and Sahdev. Ayodhya was the border line between Bheem and Arjun. And Bheem's journey extended upto Angdesh (Kaling was covered by Sahdev) and hence beyond West Bengal, the region of Pragjyotish was covered by Arjun (probably the entire portion of Himalayas just above Bheem's journey (Nepal-Bhutan) and Pragjyotish also came in that line. Sahdev's journey seems to be the lengthiest and he, Bheem and Arjun seem to have covered more kings than Nakul.
P.S. I imported the Games thread questions here, since I thought that these threads would be a better place to discuss them, rather than break the flow of the games threads. This thread is a good first point to check, but the others I linked are good as well for seeing what's already been discussed. Most of them got unglued due to too many stickies, but you can respond to those and they'll come back in front.
Yeah. Exactly what I guessed and mentioned that you considered this to be better place and gave me past reference to align my mind with other members on the topic. I said sorry purely by self realization of posting the question here without checking other threads or without asking you personally rather than misunderstanding the your intention of posting that link of Mahabharat doubts to make me feel my fault. I just said sorry for duplicating the same query and haven't doubted your intention don't worry. I just said I posted here guessing that you possibly hinted me to do it or was probably expecting me to do it.