Who were the madra, sindhu, sauviras and gandhari people and which areas did these tribes reside according to Mahabharata? What information about these tribes are available?
Re: Western tribes of Mahabharata
Sindhu and gandhara are self explanatory, as far as what I have read from google madras formed central Punjab and pauvaras were seraiki
Re: Western tribes of Mahabharata
Aapney Aisa bouncer bowl Kiya hai ke hum out ho gaye. Mahabharata and Ramayana were passed on thru! Word of mouth or by reading books. The ones I read did not focus on this aspect. The kaur! Babloooooos kaka in Usa probably have better techniwicks on A bouncing wicket!
Re: Western tribes of Mahabharata
^ I have read a few things on Wikipedia and they are quite interesting, it would be good if some one else has some information from other sources as well. I will share the information That I have got later today.
Re: Western tribes of Mahabharata
Gandhari (Qandhari) might be Pathans. That means Pathans are mentioned in Mahabharata 
Re: Western tribes of Mahabharata
^ gandhari or gandhara would be northern Punjab and khyber pakhtunkhwa (taxila, swat, charsadda and peshawar etc)
Re: Western tribes of Mahabharata
Mahabharata covered Afghanistan through Burma I think. The kingdom of Magadha ( or was it Matsya) was present day Burma I vaguely recall. Gandhari definitely hailed from present day Pakistan. North Indians and Pakistanis have a common heritage. We southies are the outsiders!
Re: Western tribes of Mahabharata
^ lol :D, maybe the southies are the people of the land.
Re: Western tribes of Mahabharata
Madras during vedic times were present in the areas now constituting Central Punjab, and its center/capital was Sakala (today’s Sialkot).
Madra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Madra was a part of the Bahika or Vahika country. Some hold that Madra was Vahika country.[SUP][2]](Madra - Wikipedia)[/SUP] They held the central parts of Punjab — the region lying between river Chenab and Ravi.[SUP][3]](Madra - Wikipedia)[/SUP] In epic period, they occupied the district of Sialkot.[SUP][4]](Madra - Wikipedia)[/SUP] Pāṇini does not offer derivation of Bahika but Katyayana derives it from *Bahis ‘outer edge’ with the suffix *ikak.[SUP][5]](Madra - Wikipedia)[/SUP] **This agrees with Mahabharata description of Bahika as the country of five rivers but was where Dharma was weak (*****dharma-bahya), devoid of religion (*****nashta-dharma) and impure (***aśuchi).[SUP][6]](Madra - Wikipedia)
[/SUP]*****
People of Punjab were Uttarmabharadas who were from Balkh (now in Afghanistan).
The Uttamabhadras are an ancient Indian tribe described in the Mahabharata. They lived in the Punjab.[SUP][1]](Uttamabhadras - Wikipedia)[/SUP] Uttamabhadras originally were people of Balkh who had entered India in Vedic times. In Vedic times, they were closely related toKurus and the Purus. In Kurukshetra war, we also find Madras associated with the Kurus.[SUP][2]](Uttamabhadras - Wikipedia)[/SUP] King Shalya had taken part in the Mahabharata war, on behalf of the Kauravas. Madri, the mother of Pandava-putras Nakula and Sahadeva, was a Madra princess. Madri has also been referred to as Bahliki i.e. princess of Bahlika janapada/tribe and king Salya has been referred to as Bahlika-pungava i.e. foremost among the Bahlikas. Epic also refers to king Ashvapati of Madra, the beloved of the Paura Janapadas, who was father of Savitri. King Vyusitashva was a descendent of Puru a famous king of Rigvedic times.[SUP][3]](Uttamabhadras - Wikipedia)[/SUP]
Re: Western tribes of Mahabharata
Sauviras were the people who most probably form the Seraiki belt now.
Sauvira Kingdom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Sauvira was a kingdom mentioned in the epic Mahabharata, and may be the etymological origin of the name of the Saraiki people.[SUP][1]](Sauvira kingdom - Wikipedia)[/SUP] According to the epic, Jayadratha was the king of Sindhus, Sauviras and Sivis. Probably Sauvira and Sivi were two kingdoms close to the Sindhu kingdom and Jayadratha conquered them. Jayadratha was an ally of Duryodhana and husband of Duryodhana’s sister Dussala. The kingdom of Sauvira was also mentioned to be not very far away from Dwaraka and Anarta kingdoms. According to Bhagwat Puran Sauviras were once connected with Abhira tribe.[SUP][2]](Sauvira kingdom - Wikipedia)[/SUP]
According to some texts, Sauvira was south of Sindhu in the delta of the Indus river; while later historians (Al-Beruni) considered Sauvira to represent southwest Punjab, including Multan,Mithankot and adjacent areas at the region of the confluence of Indus river with other rivers of Punjab in modern Pakistan. Sauvira is presumed to be derived from two words: Su (great or good) or Sau (one hundred) and Veer (brave or wise).
Military habits
The Gandharas (or Gandharvas), the Sindhus, and the Sauviras fight best with their nails and lances. They are brave and endued with great strength. Their armies are capable of vanquishing all forces, The Usinaras are possessed of great strength and skilled in all kinds of weapons. The Easterners are skilled in fighting from the backs of war elephants and are conversant with all the ways of unfair fight. The Yavanas, the Kamvojas, and those that dwell aroundMathura are well skilled in fighting with bare arms. The Southerners are skilled in fighting sword in hand (12:100).
Re: Western tribes of Mahabharata
**The cultural similarities between Gandharas, Madras, Sauviras and Sindhus.
Sauvira Kingdom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Cultural afinity**
Main article Bahlika Culture
Culturally Sauviras were mentioned as similar to the Madras as per Karna:- The Prasthalas, the Madras, the Gandharas, the Arattas, those called Khasas, the Vasatis, the Sindhus and the Sauviras are almost as blamable in their practices (8:44).
Re: Western tribes of Mahabharata
Bahlika Kingdom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
All the western Indian kingdoms were known by the general name **Bahlika (Vahika, Vahlika and Valhika are variations of the name) meaning *outsider. Thus these people were considered as *outsiders of the Vedic culture. However, the name Bahlika is sometimes used to denote a kingdom within the present Punjab, different from Madra, Sindhu, Kekeya, Gandhara or Kamboja.
Re: Western tribes of Mahabharata
^ lol :D, maybe the southies are the people of the land.
Just a random thought. May be Southern regions remained less affected of invasions and mixing up with the northern invaders due to remoteness of these areas surrounded by sea
Re: Western tribes of Mahabharata
^ that would be the reason I agree, but there are a few things worth understanding, firstly the regions forming Pakistan now (especially northern parts) have always had an influence from central Asia (long before the invasions of Muslims), secondly the texts that I have quoted state the Cultural similarities between punjabis, seraikis and sindhis and another interesting thing that the rest of the Indians used to consider these people impure and scum on earth even in Vedic times, and another thing is that the people of western parts were thought to have 'weak dharma'.
Re: Western tribes of Mahabharata
Just a random thought. May be Southern regions remained less affected of invasions and mixing up with the northern invaders due to remoteness of these areas surrounded by sea
Invasion maybe. But the south has always been connected to the rest of the world including pre-Islamic Arabia through a flourishing sea trade from ancient times. Islam came to South India through traders in 7th century and through invaders in N. India in 12th century. The first Indian mosque is thought to have been built in 629 A.D in Kerala. Thomas one of the apostle of Jesus also arrived here to teach Christianity. So there was mixing with outside world but we were thankfully not plagued by the Invasions from bigots and barbarians like N. India was.:)
Re: Western tribes of Mahabharata
Bahilkas existed on the fringe of vedic culture but were by no means outsiders. They were of the same lineage as the Kauravas and the Pandavas. They intermarried within the vedic culture. The mother of the Kauravas was the princess of Gandhara which was a Bahilka kingdom. Their cultural practices were different.
Bahlika mentioned as a kingdom of Ancient India (Bharata Varsha)
- Mbh (6,9)
…the Angas, the Vangas, the Kalingas, the Yakrillomans; the Mallas, the Suddellas, the Pranradas, the Mahikas, the Sasikas; the 'Valhikas, the Vatadhanas, the Abhiras, the Kalajoshakas; the Aparantas, the Parantas, the Pahnabhas, the Charmamandalas; the Atavisikharas, the Mahabhutas, the Upavrittas, the Anupavrittas, the Surashatras, Kekayas; the Kutas, the Maheyas, the Kakshas, the Samudranishkutas; the Andhras…
from your own link.
उत्तरं यत्समुद्रस्य हिमाद्रेश्चैव दक्षिणम् ।वर्षं तद् भारतं नाम भारती यत्र संततिः ।।“The country (varṣam) that lies north of the ocean and south of the snowy mountains is called Bhāratam; there dwell the descendants of Bharata.”
as described in our texts.
The king who managed to conquer the whole of Bharata varsha was called saamrat or Emperor
Re: Western tribes of Mahabharata
There were some differences between Culture being practiced in Bahlika as compared to the rest.
Bahlika Culture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
**Bahlika Culture was a form of culture that prevailed in ancient India. This culture was linked to the Vedic culture,[SUP]citation needed][/SUP] but with many variations.[SUP]citation needed][/SUP] Often these variations were seen by the people following Vedic culture as deviations[SUP]citation needed][/SUP] and they had a feeling of contempt upon the members of this culture. It was followed mostly in the regions west to the Indus and Sarasvati River. Mahabharata contains two chapters (44,45) in its 8th book (Karna Parva:- the battles under the Kaurava generallisimo Karna), describing a conversation between Karna and Shalya, another Kaurava generallisimo. This chapters give some light to this ancient culture.
**Dispute between Karna and Shalya in the midst of Kurukshetra War
Karna and Shalya were two generals in the Kaurava army during the Kurukshetra War. They engaged in a verbal dispute, owing to their dislike of each other. Both of them hailed from a different culture. Shalya was from the west, being the king of Madra in the Bahlika region. Karna was from the east, being the king of Anga. Both these kingdom existed in the fringes of Vedic culture, practiced in its normal form mainly in Kuru - Panchala kingdoms in the middle. It should be noted that this description of Bahlika culture is biased against Bahlikas, due to Karna’s dislike of Shalya. Careful observation reveals many good traits in this culture.[SUP]citation needed]
[/SUP]**
edit]The actual location of the Bahlika culture
Karna said, Listen with devoted attention to this, O ruler of the Madras (Shalya), that was heard by me while it was recited in the presence of Dhritarashtra. In Dhritarashtra’s court, the Brahmanas used to narrate the accounts of diverse delightful regions and many kings of ancient times. An old Brahmana while reciting old histories, said these words, blaming the Vahikas and Madrakas, ‘One should always avoid the Vahikas, those impure people that are out of the pale of virtue, and that live away from the Himavat and the Ganges and Saraswati and Yamuna and Kurukshetra and the Sindhu and its five tributary rivers. (8,44)
edit]The food habits of Bahlikas in the town of Sakala
I remember from the days of my youth that a slaughter-ground for kine and a space for storing intoxicating spirits always distinguish the entrances of the abodes of the Vahika kings. On some very secret mission I had to live among the Vahikas. In consequence of such residence the conduct of these people is well known to me. There is a town of the name of Sakala (modern day Sialkote), a river of the name of Apaga, and a clan of the Vahikas known by the name of the Jarttikas. The practices of these people are very censurable. They drink the liquor called Gauda, and eat fried barley with it. They also eat beef with garlic. They also eat cakes of flour mixed with meat, and boiled rice that is bought from others. Of righteous practices they have none. (8,44)
More on the location and nature of the Bahlika culture
I must, however, speak again to thee about what another Brahmana had said unto us in the Kuru court, ‘There where forests of Pilus stand, and those five rivers flow, viz., the Satadru, the Vipasa, the Iravati, the Chandrabhaga, and theVitasta and which have the Sindhu for their sixth, there in those regions removed from the Himavat, are the countries called by the name of the Arattas. Those regions are without virtue and religion. No one should go thither. The gods, the pitris, and the brahmanas, never accept gifts from those that are fallen, or those that are begotten by Shudras on the girls of other castes, or the Vahikas who never perform sacrifices and are exceedingly irreligious.’ That learned Brahmana had also said in the Kuru court, ‘The Vahikas, without any feelings of revulsion, eat of wooden vessels having deep stomachs and earthen plates and vessels that have been licked by dogs and that are stained with pounded barley and other corn. The Vahikas drink the milk of sheep and camels and asses and eat curds and other preparations from those different kinds of milk. Those degraded people number many *******s among them. There is no food and no milk that they do not take. The Aratta-Vahikas that are steeped in ignorance, should be avoided.’ Thou shouldst know this, O Shalya. I must, however, again speak to thee about what another Brahmana had said unto me in the Kuru court, ‘How can one go to heaven, having drunk milk in the town called Yugandhara, and resided in the place called Acyutasthala, and bathed in the spot called Bhutilaya? There where the five rivers flow just after issuing from the mountains, there among the Aratta-Vahikas, no respectable person should dwell even for two days. There are two Pishacas named Vahi and Hika in the river Vipasa. The Vahikas are the offspring of those two Pisachas. They are not creatures created by the Creator. Being of such low origin, how can they be conversant with the duties ordained in the scriptures? (8,44)
Comparison of Vedic culture in various kingdoms
edit]Adherence to Religion
The Kauravas with the Pancalas, the Salwas, the Matsyas, the Naimishas, the Koshalas, the Kasapaundras, the Kalingas, the Magadhas, and the Cedis who are all highly blessed, know what the eternal religion is. The wicked even of these various countries know what religion is. The Vahikas, however, live without righteousness. Beginning with the Matsyas, the residents of the Kuru and the Pancala countries, the Naimishas as well and the other respectable peoples, the pious among all races are conversant with the eternal truths of religion. **This cannot be said of the Madrakas and the crooked-hearted race that resides in the country of the five rivers. 
**In days of yore, when the eternal religion was reverenced in all countries, the Grandsire, observing the practices of the country of the five rivers, cried fie on them. When even in the Krita age, the Grandsire condemn the practices of the country of the five waters. When all people were observant of the duties of their respective orders, the Grandsire had to find fault with these men. Thou shouldst know all this, O Shalya. (8,45)
Practice of Religion
The Pancalas observe the duties enjoined in the Vedas; the Kauravas observe truth; the Matsyas and the Surasenas perform sacrifices, the Easterners follow non-Vedic practices; the Southerners also followed non-vedic beliefs. Fie on the Arattas and the people of the country of the five rivers! Commencing with the Pancalas, the Kauravas, the Naimishas, the Matsyas,–all these,–know what religion is. The old men among the Northerners, the Angas, the Magadhas, (without themselves knowing what virtue is) follow the practices of the pious. Many gods, headed by Agni, dwell in the East. The pitris dwell in the South that is presided over by Yama of righteous deeds. The West is protected by the mighty Varuna who overlooks the other gods there. The north is protected by the divine Soma along with the Brahmanas. So Rakshasas and Pishacas protect the Himavat, the best of mountains. The Guhyakas (Yakshas, O great king, protect the mountains of Gandhamadana. (Vahikas have no especial protectors). (8,45)
Comparison of Knowledge, skills and languages
The Magadhas are comprehenders of signs; the Koshalas comprehend from what they see; the Kurus and the Pancalas comprehend from a half-uttered speech; the Salwas cannot comprehend till the whole speech is uttered. TheMountaineers, like the Sivis, are very stupid. The Yavanas, O king, are omniscient; the Suras are particularly so. The Mlecchas are wedded to the creations of their own fancy, that other peoples cannot understand. The Vahikas resent beneficial counsels; as regards the Madrakas there are none amongst those (mentioned above.) (8,45)
*The following lines seems to be pure propaganda of Karna against Shalya
*
**Thou, O Shalya, art so. Thou shouldst not reply to me. The Madrakas are regarded on Earth as the dirt of every nation. So the Madra woman is called the dirt of the whole female sex. They that have for their practices the drinking of spirits, the destruction of the embryo by procuring miscarriage, and the robbing of other people’s wealth, there is no sin that they have not. Fie on the Arattas and the people of the country of the five rivers. (8,45)
**
**I shall, however, again speak to thee. A Rakshasa of the name of Kalmashapada, while plunging in a tank, said, Eleemosynation is a kshatriya’s dirt, while the non-observance of vows is a brahmana’s dirt. The Vahikas are the dirt of the Earth, and the Madra women are the dirt of the whole female sex. The mlecchas are the dirt of mankind: the oilmen are the dirt of the Mlecchas; eunuchs are the dirt of oilmen; they who avail of the priestly ministrations of Kshatriyas, in their sacrifices, are the dirt of eunuchs. The sin of those again that have the last-named persons for their priests, of also of the Madrakas, shall be thine. (8,45)
**
Re: Western tribes of Mahabharata
This one is especially funny, Punjab seems to be in the line of fire even then :):
This cannot be said of the Madrakas and the crooked-hearted race that resides in the country of the five rivers.
Re: Western tribes of Mahabharata
- Mbh (6,9)
...the Angas, the Vangas, the Kalingas, the Yakrillomans; the Mallas, the Suddellas, the Pranradas, the Mahikas, the Sasikas; the 'Valhikas, the Vatadhanas, the Abhiras, the Kalajoshakas; the Aparantas, the Parantas, the Pahnabhas, the Charmamandalas; the Atavisikharas, the Mahabhutas, the Upavrittas, the Anupavrittas, the Surashatras, Kekayas; the Kutas, the Maheyas, the Kakshas, the Samudranishkutas; the Andhras...
What dos this mean?
[QUOTE]
from your own link.
उत्तरं यत्समुद्रस्य हिमाद्रेश्चैव दक्षिणम् ।वर्षं तद् भारतं नाम भारती यत्र संततिः ।।"The country (varṣam) that lies north of the ocean and south of the snowy mountains is called Bhāratam; there dwell the descendants of Bharata."
as described in our texts.
The king who managed to conquer the whole of Bharata varsha was called saamrat or Emperor
[/QUOTE]
Descendants of Bharata? Bharata the king? the people would have been the same initially (I dont disagree), but the location of the Vahlikas exposed them to outside influence (Persians, Bactrians etc) due to which with the passage of time they would have induced variations in the things being practiced there with reference to other areas of the subcontinent.
As far as I see reading these texts, it seems as if by Mahabharat (Vedic) times, subcontinent was already divided into various kingdoms who lent support to Kauvaras or Pandavas.
Have you got any other reference to their culture, maybe something from another source?
Re: Western tribes of Mahabharata
What dos this mean?
Vahilkas = Bahilkas
Descendants of Bharata? Bharata the king? the people would have been the same initially (I dont disagree), but the location of the Vahlikas exposed them to outside influence (Persians, Bactrians etc) due to which with the passage of time they would have induced variations in the things being practiced there with reference to other areas of the subcontinent.
As far as I see reading these texts, it seems as if by Mahabharat (Vedic) times, subcontinent was already divided into various kingdoms who lent support to Kauvaras or Pandavas.
Have you got any other reference to the culture, maybe something from another source?
Decendants of Bharata are Indians just like muslims are considered the decendants of Ishamel(?). Just because afghanistan and parts of Pakistan were conquered by the PreIslamic-Persian empire, the culture and religions of people did bot change. They were citizens of Persia for taxation purposes. Culturally and relgionwise they were left alone.
Just like all the Arabs are not one monotomous cultural entity but are diverse people, so too were the people of ancient India. Pakthas or Pashtuns are mentioned as a vedic tribe in the RigVeda.
Mahmud of Ghazna who ruled between 998 and 1030 expelled the Hindus from Gandhara.
It is surmised from the writings of Al Biruni that some Pashtuns living in Pakhtunkhwa (present-day western Pakistan) had not been completely converted. Al Biruni, writing in Tarikh al Hind, also alludes to the Pashtun tribes of Pakhtunkhwa as Hindus.
Al Beruni mentions the Afghans once (ed Sachau, I 208) saying that in the western mountains of India live various tribes of Afghans who extend to the neighbourhood of the Sindh (ie Indus) valley. Thus in the eleventh century when the Afghans are first mentioned, they are found occupying the Sulaiman Mountains now occupied by their descendents, the very tribes which the advocates of the exclusive claims of the Durannis will not admit to be true Afghans. Al Beruni no doubt also alludes to them in the passage (loc. Cit .p 199) where he says that rebellious savage races, tribes of Hindus, or akin to them inhabit the mountains which form the frontier of India towards the west.[SUP][7]](Muslim conquests of Afghanistan - Wikipedia)[/SUP]
The most explicit mentioning of the Afghans appears in Al- Baruni’s Tarikh Al-Hind (eleventh century AD). Here it is said that various tribes of Afghans lived in the mountains in the west of India. Al Baruni adds that they were savage people and he describes them as Hindus.[SUP][8]](Muslim conquests of Afghanistan - Wikipedia)[/SUP]