‘Indian history was distorted by the British’

[Icewolf]

Indian history

-Dravidian migration into South India
-Aryan invasion
-Hindu culture borrowed from Aryan IVC
-Caste system started
-Warring Hindu kingdoms
-Islamic invasion
-British invasion
-Caste system ended
-British left
-Caste system restarted
-Partition
-Republic of India

 

[Joe Shearer]

Indian history

-Dravidian migration into South India
-Aryan invasion
-Hindu culture borrowed from Aryan IVC
-Caste system started
-Warring Hindu kingdoms
-Islamic invasion
-British invasion
-Caste system ended
-British left
-Caste system restarted
-Partition
-Republic of India

You forgot to complete it:

- Icewolf learns to read and write; birth of historical studies in Pakistan.

How could you?

 

[Icewolf]

You forgot to complete it:

- Icewolf learns to read and write; birth of historical studies in Pakistan.

How could you?

How old are you?

 

[dronedevta]

Right wing historians are waste of time , they will tell you only THEIR side of history . The Invasion theory died in 1960s after Western Historians themselves debunked the useless so called harrapa massacre theory of wheeler and "indira became un-accused".

AIT is Still used as a political tool by Dravidian chauvinist , dalit protester and some western guys like Michael Witzel. On the other hand sanghi historians use 1890's theories like Indigenous Aryans.


The most possible theory after discovery of late IVC sites 1600-1700 BC in Post wheeler period which clearly show a change in culture with some aspects of early Vedic period is the MIGRATION Theory .So it can be said the Rigvedic People (I would not call them 'Aryans' because they never used this name for their population) came to the subcontinent in around 2200-2000 BC .

If anyone wants to read more about the different views on this controversial subject ,I suggest you to read "Indo-Aryan Controversy Evidence and Inference in Indian History" By Edwin Bryant & Laurie Patton.


If anyone wants digital edition i can upload it .

Indian history

-Dravidian migration into South India
-Aryan invasion
-Hindu culture borrowed from Aryan IVC
-Caste system started
-Warring Hindu kingdoms
-Islamic invasion
-British invasion
-Caste system ended
-British left
-Caste system restarted
-Partition
-Republic of India

This is a good propaganda material not history ,

when are you starting you madrassa imean public school in pak?

 

[Srinivas]

I have read somewhere that the earth is flat and that the moon is made of green cheese. Since I have read these somewhere, I can't say where, the matter then stands proven beyond doubt.

Hilarious.

What ever I have stated is exactly right, Arya vartha stated in Mahabharata means land of nobles and there are prayers in "Rigveda" which says "Oh Lord convert all commoners to Aryans".

Aryan is a term used to represent a person who attained a status of noble through his deeds nothing more.


In Ancient Indian society there is nothing called by birth every thing has to be achieved through his deeds, through the centuries the rules got twisted and ended up like our present society.

 

[dronedevta]

...well if you put Harvard and MIT studies together with the 'arya' mentioned in the Vedas one may conclude that Ancestral North Indian (ANI) are the 'aryans' and that Hinduism is at least 40000 years old.

Two words arya(with small 'a') and Arya(with bigger 'A') are mentioned in the vedas (rigveda) and none of them denote a race .

 

[for truth]

now don't be so harsh on our chubby 'Icewolf', if you have noticed, it says "Posted via Mobile Device " below his post, obviously our chubby wolf here knows how to use mobile, at-least we should give him credit for having learnt to use mobile.

 

[Srinivas]

Indian history

-Dravidian migration into South India
-Aryan invasion
-Hindu culture borrowed from Aryan IVC
-Caste system started
-Warring Hindu kingdoms
-Islamic invasion
-British invasion
-Caste system ended
-British left
-Caste system restarted
-Partition
-Republic of India

To start with the word Dravidian was used to designate a group of people who speak Dravidian languages, they are evidence that people in south western pakistan still speak languages related to Dravidian groups.

Aryan Invasion do not mean blood Invasion and recent studies showed that the Rigvedic was composed in Indian subcontinent and the date is also pushed back Much older than the previous date.

IVC is later period than Rigveda

In Mahabharata there is no caste system and this book was composed in B.C. To start with there are only two categories

1) Vysyas who are natives.

2) Shudras who are immigrants.

The guys who can fight and learned fighting skills are called Kshatriya's (Warrior group) and the guys who are interested in studies are called priests (you may call them Bhrahmins, Rishis or Acharya's etc).

India is a at its peak when Mauryans rules close to 400 years. During that time Buddhism became popular which opposed the Brahmanisation of Indian society which also freezed the flexible divisions in system of Indian society (there by bringing in the caste system).
Buddhism opposed this and emperors started embracing Buddhism and Jainism.

-- During the golden ages of India Shankaracharya revived the Hinduism in India by debating with Buddhist monks and defeating them. Shankaracharya also opposed the rigidity in Indian society (caste system).

-- Islamic Invasions

-- British rule

-- Partition based on religion

-- Secular republic of India

-- India's emergence on the world stage as a biggest democracy, an economic and military power.


Regarding caste system in Today's India, I oppose it and some of the twisted traditions like caste are embedded for centuries but I hope gradually these evil systems will go.

 

[Azazel]

Utter nonsense. No Indian history other than Kalhan's account existed from before mediaeval times, so the question of a distorted account is moot. There was nothing to oppose to the British reconstruction, which was pathbreaking in so many ways, including the original question of the origin of the trifurcated series of languages available in south Asia, in the reconstruction and harmonisation of the Puranic king-lists, in the extraction of the facts relating to the Buddha and his times, and his teachings, including identification of his place of birth, in the identification of Asoka as the author of the pillar edicts and in dozens of other instances.


What started as an account from a European point of view merged with imperialist explanations which subtly and not so subtly backed the legitimacy and basis of British rule, and was opposed and moderated by the writings of nationalist historians. This latest spell of revisionist histories by a pack of new age speculators egged on by the remnants of ancient social power structures in a bid to re-establish their death-grip on Indian society lacks any legitimacy. Works produced by this genre are as authentic and as useful as Linda Goodman's Sun Signs. They are equally for the foolish and unwary.

Denial of Indian intellect? What produced the vast body of work, largely original research, that illuminates mainstream Indian history today?

Well that's the problem here isn't.Indians were never good at writing history,Most of our knowledge of ancient India comes from foreign historians.Greek Megasthenes,Chinese travallers like Faxian and Xuanzang not to mention the long line of Muslim and European historians who wrote about India.We have relied on them too much we often don't seem to acknowledge their mistakes.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Well that's the problem here isn't.Indians were never good at writing history,Most of our knowledge of ancient India comes from foreign historians.Greek Megasthenes,Chinese travallers like Faxian and Xuanzang not to mention the long line of Muslim and European historians who wrote about India.We have relied on them too much we often don't seem to acknowledge their mistakes.

Yes and no.

We don't have historical accounts of our own, so the sources of Indian history are:

1. Foreign accounts;
2. Reconstructions from Indian literature and religious texts;
3. Epigraphy and numismatics;
4. Archaeology.

In each of these, the lead was taken by Europeans, largely the British, although the contributions of the French, the Germans, and other races, down to the Swedish, the Russian and the Hungarian, are significant. However, that was the lead. That was then.

Indian history today is firmly in the hands of Indians. We have a sufficient body of solid historical writing to dispense with the hyper-patriotic effusions of Hindu-centric revisionists. We can do without the excesses of Indian versions of Icewolf, like one of the posters above. And there is certainly no lack of self-confidence among contemporary Indian historians about the writings of the Europeans, or there would have been no Subaltern School.

The lunatic fringe belongs to the fringe.

 

[dronedevta]

To start with the word Dravidian was used to designate a group of people who speak Dravidian languages, they are evidence that people in south western pakistan still speak languages related to Dravidian groups.

Correct ! so what does it implies ?

Aryan Invasion do not mean blood Invasion and recent studies showed that the Rigvedic was composed in Indian subcontinent and the date is also pushed back Much older than the previous date.

True ! Rigveda knows from helmand river to bihar But date is not pushed back on the contrary it has come down to 1700-1800 BCE(earliest parts).

IVC is later period than Rigveda

No evidence .

In Mahabharata there is no caste system and this book was composed in B.C.

caste is present in MB and it was composed from around 600 BC to 400 AD roughly.

 

[Rusty]

More right wing nonsense.
These people would also be convinced that gravity does not exist if it was part of their mantra.
No point arguing with them

 

[True pakistani 22]

Indian history

-Dravidian migration into South India
-Aryan invasion
-Hindu culture borrowed from Aryan IVC
-Caste system started
-Warring Hindu kingdoms
-Islamic invasion
-British invasion
-Caste system ended
-British left
-Caste system restarted
-Partition
-Republic of India

Yes this is Indian History

 

[Ayush]

super nice thread.

 

[Srinivas]

Correct ! so what does it implies ?



True ! Rigveda knows from helmand river to bihar But date is not pushed back on the contrary it has come down to 1700-1800 BCE(earliest parts).



No evidence .




caste is present in MB and it was composed from around 600 BC to 400 AD roughly.

Rigveda is dated between 5000 B.C to 600 B.C.

http://greenvalleykashmir.com/CMS/Files2/EARLY AND LATER VEDIC PERIOD.pdf

Read the Virat parva of Mahabharata, Caste system is not there during that period, Pandavas was considered as shudras immigrants when they went to Virat kingdom