Vijay.Sharma Posted December 22, 2011 Posted December 22, 2011 I am starting this thread to have a debate about Indian History There are many myths and what we are taught in schools is not the true History insofar as the chronology and dates go. Of course I don't claim to know the entire truth but being a student of History I know there are lots of questions to be asked and lots of things to be unlearned. Our history was well accepted until the European Indologists started translating Sanskrit and Indian language records. They came with their notions of a 6000 year Earth, and also some mistakes were made in translating and new theories were developed. European hegemony has been ruling the world for the last 300 years and therefore it is no surprise that we are forced to learn their version. Despite this, the modern western Indologists are the forerunners in righting the wrongs as it were. The biggest problem in Indian chronology occurred because of 2 Emperors with the same name - Chandragupta. While one of the European Indologist, William Jones, wrongly mapped Alexander to be peer of CG of Maurya dynasty, a few other European Indologists mapped him correctly to Gupta dynasty. Also the dates for Buddha are very varied even among the European Indologists itself ranging from 1400 BC to 100 BC. Somehow William Jones' version stuck and that's what we learn in schools despite a mountain of evidence against it. For the guys who think all Indian records are not scientific and that "science" is only what is verified in the last 20-30 years, we have various evidences for various different events in Indian history from technical areas as varied as oceanography to astrophysics to language studies to geology. It might make sense for us to review the process of documenting history first. Let us take the example of the India-England series in 2011 as an example for this. First source of evidence - People who have played in the series writing about it. Ex - Bell or Dravid has written in his autobiography about the series. In case above is not available, then second source - someone who watched it has written about it. Ex - cricinfo reports, journalists reports, etc. Our first source of evidence for Mughal emperors are the officially sanctioned "nama" akbarnama, badshanama, etc. Its funny why there is no mention of any taj mahal being built in any of the mughal emperor's namas. If both the above not available then we have the third source which would be a second person account...a person who has heard of the event and has written about it but that person lived around the same time of the event. These become corroboratory evidences for the first and second sources if they exist. The French historian who was trvaelling India in 1630s wrote about a building whose description its the Taj Mahal as having existed for a couple of centuries and was bought by Shah Jahan. Also monuments, artificial structures and things fall under these kind of evidences Fourth source of evidence - when no record from the actual event exists but a record from a generation or some decades later mentioning that the event happened exists. The Bible and story of Jesus are essentially fourth sources of evidence. Fifth source of evidence - the above process goes on and there are corroboratory evidences when different other records also mention about the event. Also trvaelling historians from different civilizations write about it in their books. For example - Seleucos Nikator mentioning Chandragupta Gupta As far as Indian History is concerned we have either the first or second source of evidence for most of the modern period - since 3100 BC. Where we do not have direct written accounts, we have corroborative evidences like sculptures, buildings, and other artifacts. These records have been continuously updated with new events and new kings periods by traditional schools. What more we have many many many corroborative evidences like monuments, temples, inscriptions on temples, battle-field remains like arrow heads, weapons, skeletons, etc, etc. Phew long one! I'll post the chronology that I believe is the right one shortly In the meanwhile maybe some specifics we can start discussing. I hope it is an interesting topic for you folks.
Vijay.Sharma Posted December 22, 2011 Author Posted December 22, 2011 How about getting rid of the myth of Aryan crap once and for all. Here are "Scientific" evidences based on genetic studies - Now, if there truly was an invasion (or migration as they said later, or slow trickle down as they claim today) of European / Central Asian "Aryan" chaps around 2000-1500 BC or whatever then it should show up in our genes right? From Nature magazine - http://www.nature.com/jhg/journal/v54/n1/pdf/jhg20082a.pdf This report, although you need access to read full report, says that the dna is of autochthonous origin meaning originated in the place where it was found. Maybe our Genetic professionals here can weigh in Next is a series of evidences from various studies done since 1990s captured in this article - http://www.archaeologyonline.net/artifacts/genetics-aryan-debate.html Some excerpts - “We found an extensive deep late Pleistocene genetic link between contemporary Europeans and Indians, provided by the mtDNA haplogroup U, which encompasses roughly a fifth of mtDNA lineages of both populations. Our estimate for this split [between Europeans and Indians] is close to the suggested time for the peopling of Asia and the first expansion of anatomically modern humans in Eurasia and likely pre-dates their spread to Europe.” “The supposed Aryan invasion of India 3,000–4,000 years before present therefore did not make a major splash in the Indian gene pool. This is especially counter-indicated by the presence of equal, though very low, frequencies of the western Eurasian mtDNA types in both southern and northern India. Thus, the ‘caucasoid’ features of south Asians may best be considered ‘pre-caucasoid’ — that is, part of a diverse north or north-east African gene pool that yielded separate origins for western Eurasian and southern Asian populations over 50,000 years ago.” Both the above quotes are from white boy resarchers for those who believe validity of research depends upon color of researcher
mishra Posted December 22, 2011 Posted December 22, 2011 BTW @OP Try watching BBC documentary on CFz1HUt-cSU
surajmal Posted December 22, 2011 Posted December 22, 2011 Vjiay, while you are off the reservation on many things regarding Indian History, I agree that the present account of Indian History has been severely distorted by marxists and western d!ick sucking @holes. Its gonna take some serious funding to bring truth to the forefront. But I don't think even that will be enough considering much of the primary documents were destroyed during islamic invasions. Archaelogical discovery is the only way forward but ASI is a seriously underfunded and decrepit institute.
mishra Posted December 22, 2011 Posted December 22, 2011 Shwetabh bhai... Phir thik hai.... I got confused with Vijay's update.... @Vijay I have seenI think most of that documentary. He did talk about few very amazing facts about our language and genetic relations with Africans
Vijay.Sharma Posted December 22, 2011 Author Posted December 22, 2011 BTW @OP Try watching BBC documentary on CFz1HUt-cSUI saw this entire documentary when it was first aired on Discovery (or was it Nat Geo?) some two years back. They perpetuated the myth of Indian chronology though
Vijay.Sharma Posted December 22, 2011 Author Posted December 22, 2011 Vjiay' date=' [b']while you are off the reservation on many things regarding Indian History, I agree that the present account of Indian History has been severely distorted by marxists and western d!ick sucking @holes. Its gonna take some serious funding to bring truth to the forefront. But I don't think even that will be enough considering much of the primary documents were destroyed during islamic invasions. Archaelogical discovery is the only way forward but ASI is a seriously underfunded and decrepit institute.OK I am not a school teacher, I am not a professional historian but I believe I that I am a little more knowledgeable than the average person on Indian History and World History because of my curiosity to learn about it right thru my childhood...from about 8 years of age. Without trying to be modest I would teach my teachers History and helped prepare aunties and uncles in the neighborhood on Indian History when they took their UPSC exams even before my 10th standard. And all this History was the history that I learned in school. Given I hae always been interested in the subject when I learned of the new developments I was as taken aback as anyone else but I dont accept things as is...I have done my own research and hence hold the pov's that I do. Now, if you can please tell me which places am I "off the reservation" I may be able to know my incorrect understandings better and rectify them. If you are referring to belief in ancient warfare...no I dont believe there were nuclear wars or anything like that...my mind is open to question them not accept them as gospel truth. We do not have enough evidence for them. Where we have evidence I will present my case but where we dont I will have an open mind. So again, which places am I off the reservation?
Vijay.Sharma Posted December 22, 2011 Author Posted December 22, 2011 Shwetabh bhai... Phir thik hai.... I got confused with Vijay's update.... @Vijay I have seenI think most of that documentary. He did talk about few very amazing facts about our language and genetic relations with AfricansO yes he does. But along with that he also talks about the Aryan migration (but iirc he also mentions that it is being questioned) and it is his dates that are the perpetuation of what we are taught in schools.
mishra Posted December 22, 2011 Posted December 22, 2011 I will share some personal experience with you. You may decide what to infer... Some years back i was watching East is East---- In One scene Om Puri visits his group of friends in Bradford and starts discussing Indo Pak. And All him and his frnd together say... Kameni Indira... And I couldnt stop laughing.... Now few months back I was with my all Indian frnds at a party.... Unlike Amreesh puri and his Bradford gang , This group wasmostly docs/engineer/accounntant.... We started discussing about some BBC documentary named India on wheels (automobile demand and driving habits of Indian). We ended up agreeing to one fact that BBC allways shows India in bad light... Kameene Gorey(Atleast 4-5 people uttereed that word rest nodded in agreement).... And it immediately reminded me of that movie.
Rajiv Posted December 22, 2011 Posted December 22, 2011 I will share some personal experience with you. You may decide what to infer... Some years back i was watching East is East---- In One scene Om Puri visits his group of friends in Bradford and starts discussing Indo Pak. And All him and his frnd together say... Kameni Indira... And I couldnt stop laughing.... Now few months back I was with my all Indian frnds at a party.... Unlike Amreesh puri and his Bradford gang , This group wasmostly docs/engineer/accounntant.... We started discussing about some BBC documentary named India on wheels (automobile demand and driving habits of Indian). We ended up agreeing to one fact that BBC allways shows India in bad light... Kameene Gorey(Atleast 4-5 people uttereed that word rest nodded in agreement).... And it immediately reminded me of that movie. Om Puri
Alchemist Posted December 22, 2011 Posted December 22, 2011 To OP. What is your chronology about Indian History ? And how changing it will affect our current situation ?
Vijay.Sharma Posted December 22, 2011 Author Posted December 22, 2011 To OP. What is your chronology about Indian History ? And how changing it will affect our current situation ?The same reasons why studying history is important. Why do we teach children History? Why do we spend so much on History research and maintaining History? The question is this - when you know that what you are being taught is wrong History (because research and evidence is clearly showing it) then does it make sense for you to teach it? But if your question was related to this particular thread in this forum....since this forum allows for people to start threads on varied topics and interested people join in the conversation I have started it. If people are interested in the subject then they will discuss it. And people who may not be interested retain the option not to join it. Edit - will post the chronology later
Alchemist Posted December 22, 2011 Posted December 22, 2011 The same reasons why studying history is important. Why do we teach children History? Why do we spend so much on History research and maintaining History? The question is this - when you know that what you are being taught is wrong History (because research and evidence is clearly showing it) then does it make sense for you to teach it? But if your question was related to this particular thread in this forum....since this forum allows for people to start threads on varied topics and interested people join in the conversation I have started it. If people are interested in the subject then they will discuss it. And people who may not be interested retain the option not to join it. Edit - will post the chronology later You did not answer how its going to change the present or the future ? As for the bolded part, I think History should be optional. I mean, after all most of the History is written by winners or people who survived.
mishra Posted December 22, 2011 Posted December 22, 2011 Few reasonss as far as I am concerned. 1. Nature of Indian social fabric is such that it can not absorb hard facts.... Religious Groups will run riot if it every child is taught all those invasion/partition history and its gory details. 2. We can not afford to dig whole Kurukshetra to find out evidence Mahabharat.. We are a developing country and can not spend too much energy/resources figuring out past.. 3. The Indus valley civilization u are talking about lies in Pakistan... And they dont give VISA to us or promise wont shoot our excavators
Vijay.Sharma Posted December 22, 2011 Author Posted December 22, 2011 You did not answer how its going to change the present or the future ? I am sure study of History has its own value in social things. Just like why we study history of industrial revolution, greek age, roman age, chinese civilization, etc. What value do they have for the present or the future? If it has no value then let us not study it at all. But if we do study it then we must at least try to study the accurate history? What is the point in studying inaccurate history? As for the bolded part' date=' I think History should be optional. I mean, after all most of the History is written by winners or people who survived.[/quote']It is anyway an optional subject. Not everyone studies advanced history. In school upto about 10th standard history is taught. All I am saying is that, if you are teaching it then try to teach the history that is closest to the truth as evaluated by a rational and logical process.
Vijay.Sharma Posted December 22, 2011 Author Posted December 22, 2011 Few reasonss as far as I am concerned. 1. Nature of Indian social fabric is such that it can not absorb hard facts.... Religious Groups will run riot if it every child is taught all those invasion/partition history and its gory details. 2. We can not afford to dig whole Kurukshetra to find out evidence Mahabharat.. We are a developing country and can not spend too much energy/resources figuring out past.. 3. The Indus valley civilization u are talking about lies in Pakistan... And they dont give VISA to us or promise wont shoot our excavatorsThe Indus Valley civilization is just a continuity of Indian civilization for thousands of years. There is no separate Indus Valley civilization as has been taught in schools. The European belief was that there was an Indus valley civilization which was invaded by Aryans (later changed to migrated by Aryans, further later changed to slow trickle down by Aryans) and these Indus valley dwellers were driven to the south. There was no such invasion. Indus valley, actually it should be called thr Saraswati valley civilization always existed as part of Bharatvarsha's civilization and was part of the Uttarpatta region of India. A lot of its area was under what were known as the Kashmir Empires back then. People left that place and migrated to NorthWest, East and South since the 300 year drought dried up the Saraswati year between 2100-1800 BC If we dont teach historical facts just because some people dont like it then why do we even need to invest in science. Every scientific discovery offends one or the other religious group. So do we stop science? If science shows us that the indigenous recorded history of India is true then do we stop scientific inquiry?
Manny_Pacquiao Posted December 22, 2011 Posted December 22, 2011 vijay sahab, you are wasting your time. if you are so concerned with the issue of revisionist history u should contact some ppl in a related field or in academia. they are the ones that get paid to read stuff like this. this is a cricket forum
Alchemist Posted December 22, 2011 Posted December 22, 2011 The Indus Valley civilization is just a continuity of Indian civilization for thousands of years. There is no separate Indus Valley civilization as has been taught in schools. The European belief was that there was an Indus valley civilization which was invaded by Aryans (later changed to migrated by Aryans, further later changed to slow trickle down by Aryans) and these Indus valley dwellers were driven to the south. There was no such invasion. Indus valley, actually it should be called thr Saraswati valley civilization always existed as part of Bharatvarsha's civilization and was part of the Uttarpatta region of India. A lot of its area was under what were known as the Kashmir Empires back then. People left that place and migrated to NorthWest, East and South since the 300 year drought dried up the Saraswati year between 2100-1800 BC If we dont teach historical facts just because some people dont like it then why do we even need to invest in science. Every scientific discovery offends one or the other religious group. So do we stop science? If science shows us that the indigenous recorded history of India is true then do we stop scientific inquiry? Do you think people invest in science to study history ?
Vijay.Sharma Posted December 22, 2011 Author Posted December 22, 2011 Do you think people invest in science to study history ?Huh? Where did that come from? I am drawing a parallel not a causal relation
Vijay.Sharma Posted December 22, 2011 Author Posted December 22, 2011 vijay sahab' date=' you are wasting your time. if you are so concerned with the issue of revisionist history u should contact some ppl in a related field or in academia. they are the ones that get paid to read stuff like this. this is a cricket forum[/quote']Are all the threads on this site related to cricket? Those who are interested and are intrigued might contribute otherwise the thread will die a natural death. People start threads on which model did not wear which clothes, which celebrity had a baby, which pakistani tv presenter got owned, whose music sucks, etc. Interested people join in those threads, no?
Recommended Posts