Jump to content
coffee_rules

Correcting Indian History

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, sandeep said:

I like Sanjeev, but some of his content can get repetitive at times.


He’s not a historian by profession, but does it for passion. I don’t think he does constant research , but seems to peddle the same information from last few years. But, the point being, none of his revisions are taken seriously by academia/scholars as they need to be peer-reviews and you know how academics a reviews their peers. It’s all an old boys’ club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Long read...

https://www.dharmadispatch.in/amp/story/commentary/de-secularizing-indian-history-why-the-ugc-deserves-our-kudos?__twitter_impression=true

 

The new syllabus uses the word "invasion" in connection with several Muslim rulers such as Babar - a term the current DU syllabus shuns. "In the draft syllabus, the term 'invasion' has been used only in the case of Muslim rulers, not even against the East India Company," Meena said.

In other words, truth will be told truthfully. How would you describe Babar’s barbarism, which he—like his predecessor-invaders—has himself gloated about in Babarnama? Oh wait! It was not an invasion but “arrival” according to Mohammad Habib’s “school” of distory. The current DU syllabus shuns the term “invasion” because it follows Habib’s template. For a detailed explanation of this template and its Leftist institutionalization, read the Shuddho-Ashuddho section in Arun Shourie’s Eminent Historians.”


“It appears that the journalist “reporting” this piece either forgot to or hesitated to use the term “eminent” instead of “prominent.” There’s a good reason these works were deservedly dropped. They were precisely the works that destroyed three generations of Indian children, and especially instilled self-hatred and national hatred in the psyches of Hindu children. On the subject of R.S. Sharma, we have some fine eviscerationsdone by the sharp pen of Dr. Shankar Saran. And then, we have dedicated a four-part series to document the distortionist eminence of Irfan Habib. There’s another side to the dropping of their books, once again, unearthed by Arun Shourie to whom we owe an incredible debt of gratitude.“

 

Hopefully Arun Shourie gets back a respectable place in BJP and not go rogue and senile like Yashwant Sinha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, coffee_rules said:

Kids learning too much about Moghuls and not much of others. Why do kids need to know about culinary habits of Moghul kings.. or rather any king for that matter?

 

 

Have to read the whole book and compare objectively before making conclusions.  Is Ms. Jain cherry-picking to feed her confirmation bias?  Are there any cool facts about other kings?  

 

Aurangzeb was a vegetarian?  The only animals he mercilessly killed belonged to the species Homo sapiens.  What a joke!  Are they trying to humanize this devil?   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BacktoCricaddict said:

Have to read the whole book and compare objectively before making conclusions.  Is Ms. Jain cherry-picking to feed her confirmation bias?  Are there any cool facts about other kings?  

 

Aurangzeb was a vegetarian?  The only animals he mercilessly killed belonged to the species Homo sapiens.  What a joke!  Are they trying to humanize this devil?   

Does being a vegetarian humanize a person? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

Have to read the whole book and compare objectively before making conclusions.  Is Ms. Jain cherry-picking to feed her confirmation bias?  Are there any cool facts about other kings?  

 

Compare it to your own schooling before getting all statistical ? Have you ever studied about culinary preferences of any kings in school texts in social studies? Showing Babar as a "Indian" fish-loving king humanizes him and glossify over the atrocities he represented in demolishing Ram Temple. This is a clear strategy since the 80s.  To show Moghuls as indigenous to India. They were outwardly looking, Persian language loving and serviant to  Turkish/Persian caliphate allegiance people. They should not represent India and our kids shouldn't be studying about them as our own. 

 

 

52 minutes ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

Aurangzeb was a vegetarian?  The only animals he mercilessly killed belonged to the species Homo sapiens.  What a joke!  Are they trying to humanize this devil?   

 

Vegetarianism is a noble virtue especially for Indians (UCs) and Jains. Any King shown as vegetarian will be hailed as a great guy. Hence the association with Aurangzeb. As if we didn't know that and people are surprised about this fact!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most history text books  go from Aryan invasion to porus losing to Alexander to the golden age of the Mughals to arrival of Vasco mamaji to British empire,Gandhi,Nehru etc 

 

Footnotes sprinkled in for Vijaynagara empire,Marathas,Ranjit Singh etc.

 

No mention of how Cholas and Tamil kings help propagate hinduism to south east Asia or all the other glorious kingdoms across India. No dedicated chapter on Chanakya’s

contribution or Charaka’s

contribution to medicine etc. sure there is a reference to converts like Tansen etc.

 

At least those history books did mention aryabhatta and his 0 and if they didn’t Manoj kumar did so we are hanging on to that  till date.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

 

Compare it to your own schooling before getting all statistical ? Have you ever studied about culinary preferences of any kings in school texts in social studies?

Maybe you should be asking for the whole book so you have better context before making bias claims.  Maybe talking about culinary preferences of every king there was is a new way to show these kings in a new light.  It may be trivial and unimportant, but if they are also discussing Rana Pratap's and Prithviraj Chauhan's and Krishnadevaraya's favorite foods, then the bias claim is invalid.  

 

Vegetarianism is a noble virtue especially for Indians (UCs) and Jains. Any King shown as vegetarian will be hailed as a great guy. Hence the association with Aurangzeb. As if we didn't know that and people are surprised about this fact!

It was a rhetorical question.  Of course they were trying to humanize the devil Aurangzeb.  It is obvious.  Like people do with Hitler - he killed millions but was a vegetarian and teetotaler - pure fellow.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@BacktoCricaddict I have gone through the books when my kids studied in Indian schools from 2014-17, when I recently lived in Bengaluru. These books talk more about Moghuls and there is no mention of what Prithviraj Chauhan had for breakfast type of articles. But there is one chapter dedicated for each Moghul king.

 

Each Moghul King had court historians who would record what they ate each night in Baburnama, Akbarnama and hence they get all these sundry details

Edited by coffee_rules
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

@BacktoCricaddict I have gone through the books when my kids studied in Indian schools from 2014-17, when I recently lived in Bengaluru. These books talk more about Moghuls and there is no mention of what Prithviraj Chauhan had for breakfast type of articles. But there is one chapter dedicated for each Moghul king.

 

Each Moghul King had court historians who would record what they ate each night in Baburnama, Akbarnama and hence they get all these sundry details


there was the Prithviraj Chauhan series on TV, and they also kept his adulthood and actual fight part, short and quick.

 

Similarly, now there is Ahilyabai , popular show on Sony TV. They are extensively lengthening and making up stories about her childhood drama. But will wrap up series quickly on the actual main part about her fight against invaders or of the safeguarding of temples.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

Negation of Islamic atrocities and normalization of destruction of temples. Human chain to protect temples  was not invented in Bengaluru riots. Arabs did it when Mahmud Ghazni destroyed the Somnath temple, as per our eminent historians

 

 

Nonsense. Infact the first attack on Somnath occured under Arabs. The temple was later reconstructed by Pratihar Rajputs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

Negation of Islamic atrocities and normalization of destruction of temples. Human chain to protect temples  was not invented in Bengaluru riots. Arabs did it when Mahmud Ghazni destroyed the Somnath temple, as per our eminent historians

 

 

 

Biggest failure of BJP govt. 

 

7 years and did nothing. Maybe not important for Modi-Shah as it doesn't impact elections. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Thu Apr 08 2021 at 7:24 AM, someone said:


there was the Prithviraj Chauhan series on TV, and they also kept his adulthood and actual fight part, short and quick.

 

Similarly, now there is Ahilyabai , popular show on Sony TV. They are extensively lengthening and making up stories about her childhood drama. But will wrap up series quickly on the actual main part about her fight against invaders or of the safeguarding of temples.

Actually these TV serials sometimes end up Glorifying these losers...  Jaichand is an commie/Marxist  attempt to malign Rajput community & sadly everyone fell for it. 

He was actually the most Powerful King in North India not Prithvi raj & almost Defeated Ghori in the battle of Chandwar...  Ghori had massive luck on his side to escape defeat...  Whereas Prithviraj was comfortably routed by a smaller army..  And he was most careless of the lot.  His bard ultimately had to write some poems to save his dignity otherwise the foolishness he displayed is only matched by Raja Dahir of Sindh.  These two Kings are the prime reasons of Muslim conquest in North & Central India. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...