The cities established by certain kings has been noted in detail. All the characters in the "epic" are well-portrayed. Even single facet of their character and important events in their life have been recorded. Are such detailed accounts important in a "Maha-kavya"? The weapons mentioned in the Ramayan and the Mahabharat are somewhat same. Infact, some weapons in the Ramayan are not mentioned in the latter "epic". (eg. Soorya'stra, Yamya'stra, Shoolva'stra..etc.) [ Considering the true occurance of the two great events, the above mentioned weapons might have disappreared in the era in-between the two events took place]. If it were a poetic fiction, such comprehensive account of the events on the battle-field would'nt have been given. For a poem, it is far-fetched. It will only serve the purpose of boring the reader to death! The description of such myriad of characters is astonishing. It is impossible for one single-mind to be the genesis of that number of personality-types. It could only be true if the Mahabharat is the recording of a real-life drama. The time and place of events have been accurately recorded. All such recordings are redudant for a "Maha-kavya". Not much poetic description of the flora-and-fauna is given. Such description in ornate language is only used in fictional works and not while recording history. Vyas mentions to have written this "itihas" after the death of King Dhrutarashtra. Why would he write so ? Did Shakespeare say that he wrote "Haml
