CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · People & Ideas

Raghavdas

dadupanthi writer

Correspondence, annotated notebooks and portrait silhouettes prepared for research
People and ideasInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionMay 28, 2026
Entity authorityQ139892669 ↗
Source-derived summary

Rāghavdās was a Dadupanthi writer. He belonged to the lineage of Haridās of the Naga Sadhus of the Dadupanthis. He composed the Bhaktmāl in 1660 or 1720, a hagiographical work. The text covers fifty-two direct disciples of Dadu and many later Dadupanthi disciples. It is also the earliest extant work covering the life of Kabir.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Raghavdas” as dadupanthi writer. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Raghavdas, dadupanthi and writer.

Editorial reviewStrongest as a route into the people, institutions and dated events that shaped the subject’s public record. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1660, 1720—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Raghavdas, dadupanthi and writer providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Raghavdas”, the useful work is to connect “dadupanthi writer” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

Chronology provides the most reliable spine for this subject; interpretation should follow only after identities and dates are secure. The source revision retrieved here is dated May 28, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q139892669. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1660 and 1720.

Critical limits

Later biographies can compress uncertainty and repeat inherited reputations, so apparently settled claims may still require comparison. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Read biographical claims against dates, named institutions and the cited references. Distinguish a subject’s later reputation from evidence produced during their lifetime.

Best used for
  • Establishing names and roles
  • Building a first chronology
  • Locating cited institutions
Verify next

Personal papers, civil or court records, institutional files and the scholarship cited by the source.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Raghavdas”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Raghavdas primary sources, Raghavdas archive and Raghavdas research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Raghavdas”?
  2. How has the subject’s reputation changed across later accounts?
  3. Which claims depend on a single source or contested interpretation?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Raghavdas” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.