Well, there might have been hype around Bhanu Bhakta, but surely that hype was none of his doing. It doesn't matter to me what he is called so much as what he pioneered and did. It is for that which he should be recognized IMHO. If some over zealous historians exaggerated his role, that's another story, and perhaps Mr Onta has a point, but from where I stand, I think his role was most valuable in showing that it can be done and serving as an inspiration for other littérateurs. Just a thought.