Originally posted by: CaptainSpark
Many characters serve to funtions 🤣 I mean if this is an account of events then they should be mentioned no? I don't consider it history completely but considering it is i am saying this.
Isn't Dushala's birth mentioned when Kauravas were born?
"Vaisampayana continued, 'That ball of flesh then, sprinkled over with
p. 242
water, became, in time, divided into a hundred and one parts, each about the size of the thumb. These were then put into those pots full of clarified butter that had been placed at a concealed spot and were watched with care. The illustrious Vyasa then said unto the daughter of Suvala that she should open the covers of the pots after full two years. And having said this and made these arrangements, the wise Dwaipayana went to the Himavat mountains for devoting himself to asceticism.
Then, O king, within a month, were born a full hundred sons unto Dhritarashtra and a daughter also in excess of this hundred.
If she was mentioned only to be Jayadrath's wife, then why not mention when Jayadrath is mentioned saying wife of him was sister to Duryodhan hence sindhu supported kauravas.
Her birth is mentioned so I don't think Suthanu was ignored because she was a girl. Moreover, Upapandavas serve no purpose too. No harm in adding a line (like dushala citation above) Stating daughters were also born. Besides her son would play an important role in inheritance and if she is married to Bhanu that's an alliance as well