Tuesday, August 18, 2009

page9

Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 17 Feb 2009 12:08 am
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 20 Sep 2007 03:23 am
Posts: 595
Location: USA
Ramana -
Having read the Arthashastra, I don't remember reading anything about torture, whether positive or negative? Are you sure he adovacated such a thing?

Perhaps its just me reading into the some of the posts, but it seems like people are saying that Buddhism and Jainism were peaceful and Hinduism was violent. Seems like some odd version of a self-goal.

If people are not and were just stating possible reasons why things happen, then disregard the last comment.


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 17 Feb 2009 03:37 am
BRF Oldie
Offline

Joined: 09 Feb 1999 07:01 am
Posts: 4081
From Kaushal
X post

Quote:

In the meantime i have discovered something about Wilfred Skawen Blunt He made the following comments about England . I might note that when he was brought to my attention by Acharya i had a particular aversion to him for suggesting the formation of a Sunni Islamic state in the subcontinent, without so much as a perfunctory bow to the strong sentiments of the majority of the population. But it turns out that my suspicions that he was a complex character and a far more multi dimensional man, then such an egregious viewpoint would indicate.Still any friend of such an evil man as Lord Lytton cannot be regarded as a decent human being .



This quote is from the pen of William Durant in The case for india" in which he makes an impassioned plea to the rest of the world for Britain to grant self rule to India
"In his book, “Secret History of the English Occupation of Egypt” (p. 47), Wilfrid Scawen Blunt gives some strong and important testimony regarding British rule in India as seen close at hand and under the most favorable light. He was an intimate personal friend of Lord Lytton (Lord Lytton barely qualifes as a member of the human race, because under his watch several millions of Indians died ) , who at that time was the Viceroy of India. Mr. Blunt went there to make a study of the condition of things there. He found that British rule in India, instead of being a blessing, was working India’s ruin. Of the British Imperial system in general he writes:

"India's famines have been severer and more frequent , its agricultural poverty hasdeepened. The rural population has become more hopelessly in debt abnd their despair was desperate.The system of constantly enhancing the land values (i,e, thereby raising the valuation and assessment) has not been altered. The salt tax still rubs the very poor. What was bad twenty five years ago was worse today. At any rate there is the same drain of Indian food to alien mouths. Endemic famines and endemic plagues are facts which no official statistics can explain away
“It is one of the evils of the English Imperial system that it cannot meddle anywhere among free people, even with quite innocent intentions, without in the end doing evil. Of India he writes: “I am disappointed with India, which seems just as ill governed as the rest of Asia, only with good intentions instead of bad ones or none at all. There is just the same heavy taxation, government by foreign officials, and waste of money, that one sees in Turkey"


. The result is the same, and I don’t see much difference between making the starving Hindoo pay for a cathedral at Calcutta and taxing Bulgarians for a palace on the Bosphorus….In India the ‘natives’ as they call them, are a race of slaves, frightened, unhappy, terribly thin. Though myself a good Conservative and member of the London Carlton Club, I own to being shocked at the bondage in which they are held, and my faith in British institutions and blessings of English rule has received a severe blow……if we go on developing the country at the present rate, the inhabitants will have, sooner or later, to resort to cannibalism, for there will be nothing but each other left to eat.”


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 17 Feb 2009 04:09 am
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 29 Jul 2003 06:01 am
Posts: 302
Location: India
brihaspati wrote:
Accepting that the Palas appear to have favoured "Buddhism" over other faiths, and still waged war does not detract from the possible influence of Buddhist morals on waging war under "niti" - same could be apparent in the various central-northern Indian princes under Jaina influence - the indications of "magnanimity" or principled stand in waging war against the Muslims by the north-Indian princes shows up a weakness not seen in the Arthasastra or the legendary tactical exploits of Ashoka.

The matching of Islamic tactics by ruthless deception and everything aimed at liquidation and erasure of the "enemy" was absent - time and time again we find the enemy allowed to escape, not pursued, allowed to recover, not tortured to death, not enslaved, - no enjoyment of the Sadistic torture or treatment of relatives and dependants as part of psychological warfare - no - all these are present on the Islamic side, present in theory in Arthasastra, but noweher present in the behaviour of the Indian princes. I think this is a clear indication of Buddhist and Jaina morals that modified and restricted strategic and tactical flexibility in warfare from the Indian side.


Jainism found shelter among the powerful Rajput rulers in Rajasthan, during the Islamic invasions, but none of these rulers were Jains themselves. The so-called "magnanimity" is not evident in any of the battles from contemporary accounts. They have been added later (best example is the Prithviraj Raso which has lots of unsubstantiated stories added centuries later).

Just read Mughal invader Babur's description of the power of Maharana Sanga, the Rajput ruler of Mewar:

Now the sway of the accursed Pagan, May the Almighty consign him to perdition at the day of judgement, was so extensive in the country of Hind, that before the rising of the sun of the imperial dominion, and before our attaining the Khilafat and empire yet the standards of the heathen streamed in two hundred cities inhabited by people of the faith; where­by the destruction of mosques and holy places had ensued, and the women and children of the Musulmans of these towns and cities have been made captives.

This is confirmed by contemporary inscriptions in Mewar on the destruction of mosques, which had been built after the demolition of temples, and on the capture of the Yavanis (the foreign-origin Muslim women). Such matching of Islamic tactics was common in other states also.


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 17 Feb 2009 04:38 am
Forum Moderator
Offline

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 12:00 am
Posts: 7269
Keshav wrote:
Ramana -
Having read the Arthashastra, I don't remember reading anything about torture, whether positive or negative? Are you sure he adovacated such a thing?

Perhaps its just me reading into the some of the posts, but it seems like people are saying that Buddhism and Jainism were peaceful and Hinduism was violent. Seems like some odd version of a self-goal.

If people are not and were just stating possible reasons why things happen, then disregard the last comment.



Pardon me! Did I say that?


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 18 Feb 2009 01:44 am
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 20 Sep 2007 03:23 am
Posts: 595
Location: USA
ramana wrote:
Pardon me! Did I say that?


Sorry, it was Brihaspati who said that, not you. You quoted him so I got mixed up.

Brihaspati, any comment?


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 18 Feb 2009 01:50 am
Forum Moderator
Offline

Joined: 17 Aug 2005 03:39 pm
Posts: 3510
Location: aadim kaler chandim him, todaye bandha ghorar dim !!
Keshav wrote:
Ramana -
Having read the Arthashastra, I don't remember reading anything about torture, whether positive or negative? Are you sure he adovacated such a thing?

tho' not directed at me I'll try to answer.
do you have LN Rangarajan's version ?
AFAIR I too haven't come across torture per se but very harsh capital punishments were present.
(like burning alive for treason)
Keshav wrote:
Perhaps its just me reading into the some of the posts, but it seems like people are saying that Buddhism and Jainism were peaceful and Hinduism was violent. Seems like some odd version of a self-goal.

If people are not and were just stating possible reasons why things happen, then disregard the last comment.

I think people are saying that jainism and buddhism were pacifist(not just peaceful) and hinduism wasn't pacifist. (it can still be peaceful. it is IMHO)


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 18 Feb 2009 01:56 am
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 20 Sep 2007 03:23 am
Posts: 595
Location: USA
Rahul M wrote:
tho' not directed at me I'll try to answer.
do you have LN Rangarajan's version ?
AFAIR I too haven't come across torture per se but very harsh capital punishments were present.
(like burning alive for treason)


Yes, I have Rangarajan's version (Penguin). It's interesting to note that Chanakya is somewhat liberal when it comes to internal jurisprudence. Capital punishment is not carried out with the exception of great crimes against the state.

Quote:
I think people are saying that jainism and buddhism were pacifist(not just peaceful) and hinduism wasn't pacifist. (it can still be peaceful. it is IMHO)


Okay, that makes sense. Thanks.


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 18 Feb 2009 08:51 am
BRF Oldie
Offline

Joined: 02 Nov 2005 09:27 am
Posts: 2394
Quote:
17 February 2009 | Nature
News

Rethinking silk's origins

Did the Indian subcontinent start spinning without Chinese know-how?


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 18 Feb 2009 05:40 pm
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 18 Nov 2008 09:55 pm
Posts: 1593
For "torture" in Arthasastra, look at Chapter 8, - Trial and troture to elicit confessions in Book 4, "The removal of thorns" - the 85th chapter of the entire text. Torture is specified as "karma", there are four of them, six punishments (shatdandah), seven kinds of whipping (kasha) two kinds of suspension from above (uparinibandhan) and water tube (udakanalika-cha). Those interested can read up the details in the rest of the chapter. :mrgreen: By the way, I find R.D Shyamasastri's translation quite useful - it can be quite illuminating to compare the Sanskrit text (the Munich MS is a good one), the Penguin version and Shyamasastriji's translation.


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 18 Feb 2009 05:59 pm
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 18 Nov 2008 09:55 pm
Posts: 1593
I have not simply discussed or characterized the "Hindu" as non-pacifist and Buddhist/Jains as pacifist. My main concern was their attitudes to ruthlessness and ethics in war. I am yet to find support for behaviour in war and military conflict that goes against "morals" or "ethical principles" propounded in the various sects or stages of development in Buddhism and Jainism. Moreover these moral or ethical principles are primarily based on non-aggression, and non-violence. A lot of Buddhist or Jaina texts of the period leading up to the Muslim invasions could now be missing - either destroyed in the invasions or now securely hidden in family libraries or monasteries who will deny their existence. But I am positive that these texts did not have provisions to justify "any and all means" to destroy the enemy. Without lengthening this too much, think of the second battle of Tarain - how the Rajput army stalled believeing in Ghori's plea that he was only acting for his brother and the "peace terms" proposed by the Rajputs had to be discussed, and then being forced to face battle mounted early on in the day on an empty stomach. What prevented the tactical thinking that similar ruses or deceptions had to be practised on the Muslims and perhaps even attacked at night without warning while carrying out "peace negotiations". What prevented hot pursuit after the previous year's battle and strike terror into Muslims by systematically carrying out Sharia-style retaliations and complete liquidation of all Muslims in the Punjab and northern Indus? what prevented aggressive foreign policy to destroy the economic foundations of the Caliphate by disrupting trade on the Arabian sea and blockading the Gulf? This even after facing Muslim strategy for five hundred years!


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 18 Feb 2009 08:26 pm
Forum Moderator
Offline

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 12:00 am
Posts: 7269
brihaspati, Contrast that to Kamparaya's action against the Madurai sultanate as described by his wife Gangadevi's work "Veer Kamparaya Charitra" aka "Madura Vijayam" which was dismissed by Thapraites as poetry instead of history. This action allowed the Vijayanagara to stand for over two hundred years.


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 18 Feb 2009 08:31 pm
BRFite -Trainee
Offline

Joined: 30 Jun 2006 09:08 pm
Posts: 98
Location: MASA Land
Mods,
I am not so sure, if I am right in posting this thing out here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qutub_Minar

is the page for Qutub Minar on wiki, and as most of you over here know that Qutub Minar was built by demolishing hundreds of jain temples and that the stone from those temples was even used in building the minar(which one can see on the notice boards posted by ASI on the minar site).
The link does not mention any thing about the same, so if anyone has a wiki account with the ability of editing, please do the same.


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 18 Feb 2009 08:36 pm
Forum Moderator
Offline

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 12:00 am
Posts: 7269
Rajsunder, its already known that the structure was re-built or commandeered by Aibek. Please take up with wiki folks .

Thanks, ramana


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 18 Feb 2009 08:39 pm
Forum Moderator
Offline

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 12:00 am
Posts: 7269
X-posted...
anupmisra wrote:
Unless this has been linked before, this site has interesting maps of ancient India through the Vedic period and middle ages. Some maps even describe battle campaigns. Some dates are wrong but overall it gives an idea of various tribes and kingdoms of ancient India as well as the political divisions that followed.

Schwartzberg Historical Atlas



Wish could have those Flash maps for detailed study off line!


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 18 Feb 2009 08:56 pm
Forum Moderator
Offline

Joined: 17 Aug 2005 03:39 pm
Posts: 3510
Location: aadim kaler chandim him, todaye bandha ghorar dim !!
rajsunder, you don't need an account for editing wiki.

if you are not logged in however your IP will be visible. anyway, registering on wiki is free and takes a couple of minutes at most.

you can also post this at the BR wiki edit page : viewtopic.php?f=1&t=4051&start=0&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

btw, you better give some references for that info, though everyone knows it's true.
I remember vividly a broken ganesha murti placed beside a drain.


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 18 Feb 2009 09:25 pm
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 18 Nov 2008 09:55 pm
Posts: 1593
Ramanaji,
yes that episode is very relevant. I was thinking that maybe we should have a collection based on the theme "military strategy against Islamic armies in India". The Sangam strategy could have been an indicator of the experience gained over 200 years of facing Muslims after their consolidation in the North.


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 19 Feb 2009 01:23 am
BRF Oldie
Offline

Joined: 09 Feb 1999 07:01 am
Posts: 4081
Quote:
02 Dec 2008
Hindu Nationalists:Indigenous Resilience
By Brannon Parker

http://mwcnews.net/content/view/26990&Itemid=1 [[[also see comments]]]]

I am currently in Mumbai, India and have been here in India for the past three months. I am here doing research on the tribal cultures of India. I actually arrived in Mumbai about 4 hrs before the terror attacks took place. The mood is quite somber and the people are frustrated. Despite all that, the Indian people continue with their lives. I would compare it to the mood most Americans have when they hear about or see a horrific car accident. The fact is terror has been feasting on India for quite some time now. Approximately 70,000 Indians have died due to this onslaught of terror.

It is disheartening to see alternative news portals broadcasting the Main Stream Media's vilification of the Hindu Nationalists. In sync with the Globalists agenda, they have latched onto the Hindus as the new whipping boys. It is also strange that despite India being hit by terror for decades, only now the suddenly concerned Westerners are paying attention. What is unfortunate is that these same people are bandying about theories of Indian involvement.

Maybe if this were the first and only attack, people such speculation would have merit. Out of ignorance of the reality in India they pass arround anti-Indian propaganda that suits their mistrust of media and understandable interest in knowing the truth. Recently on Dec 2nd, another terror attack occurred in Assam, India. Now why didnt that get any play in the world media. Where are all the theorists on that attack?

Anti-Indian Propaganda is making the rounds claiming that Hindu Nationalists were involved in the Mumbai attacks.Please consider. If such people were an all powerful group capable of International terrorism or even domestic terrorism why do the very same corporate media outlets attack them? The same corporate media that gave us Obama and Osama, the lies about 9/11, Iraq, Iran, Georgia etc spend a disproprotionate effort in demonizing the Hindu Nationalist groups. A majority of Indian media is owned by the very same corporates that control the Western media. Rupert Murdoch owns about 6 TV stations here. The Indian media is blatantly hostile to the RSS, BJP, VHP and all other Hindu Nationalist groups.

It is because these Hindu Nationalists are dedicated to an India that is based on Indigenous traditions and the Indian way of life. Contrary to the media and Communists-Islamic-pseudo-secular propaganda machine's claims these Hindus do not see themselves as a religious based group. They thus consider any Indian, regardless of their way of worship as Hindus. The fact is nearly all Indian Muslims and Christians have always been Indians. They merely changed their methods of worship and are thus considered as Muslim Hindus and Christian Hindus.

This is evident from the fact that Naqvi, the Chairman of the BJP, the Hindu Nationalist Party is a Muslim. During the Gujarat riots, that are used as proof that the BJP pursues a genocidal anti-Muslim idealogy, the BJP Prime Minister of India, Vajpayee appointed a Muslim, Dr. Kalam as the President of India. Time magazine responded by declaring Vajpayee as a drunkard, unfit to rule such an important nation like India. The testimony of prime witnesses used to blame Narendra Modi, the Chief Minister of Gujarat, for the riots, revealed that they were pressured and coerced by Teesta Setalvaad to lie in court. The case collapsed. Yet still the anti-traditionalists continue to point to these very claims that have been repudiated by the Muslim witnesses. When people depend on lies to make their case, one is wise to question their credibility.

The Nanavati Commision, after years of investigation, has given a clean chit to the BJP administration.The only 'proof' used to discredit the BJP comes from its political enemies and the Pakistanis. If you want to accept that as proof go ahead. Yet if one believes it is unbiased they are only fooling themselves and throwing fairness and justice out the window. Another lie that is constantly bandied about is that the Sangh Parivar killed Gandhi. This is based on the fact that the assasin had been a member of the RSS 20 years earlier. He had also been a member of the Congress party yet none attempt to link the Congress party to the killing. In fact the RSS has repeatedly taken media outlets to court over these attempts at defamation and won every time. For those who discount this, being biased against the Indian judicial system, the UK courts also agreed that the RSS had nothing to do with the assasination of Gandhi. In fact the whole effort to tie the RSS to the crime is reminicent of the Cointelpro operations done against the American Indian Movement. AIM.

As far as Indian Muslims and Christains are concerned, they are considered just as much Indian as any Hindu. The Sangh Parivar's Rashtriya Muslim Manch is proof of this. This group is a dedicated group of Muslim Indian Nationalists. They recognize they are Indians first, above and beyond any other identity. According to the Sangh leadership, the only authentic minority groups in India are the Parsis and Jews who migrated here from Iran and areas in West Asia .

Indian Nationalism

Efforts to defame the Hindu Nationalists as anti-Muslim and anti-Christian have been proven to be part of Pakistan 's ISI operations. In 2000, Christian churches were bombed throughout South India. The media went into a frenzy blaming the BJP and other Hindu Nationalist groups. The blasts were, in reality, masterminded by a Pakistan-based Deendar Anjuman group. The group had planned a series of attacks on churches in Bangalore , Hubli and Gulbarga . Some people, led by key person Ibrahim, were caught by the city police when the bomb, which they were carrying to plant in a church, exploded. As a result two people died and Ibrahim seriously injured. Anti-christian and anti-hindu pamphlets used to enrage public sentiment were also found in the van. The accused believed that blasts at churches in India would trigger a civil war between Hindus and Christians. A religious leader from Afghanistan would invade and conquer India , which would be converted into an Islamic country. On November 30, 2008, 11 of these terrorists were given the death sentence.

The Hindu Nationalists are authentic Indian Patriots. They are demonized as racists and fascists merely based upon their Love of country and culture. Attempts are being made to blame Hindus for the Mumbai terror attacks. The ludicrous 'proof' of the attackers being Hindu is based on a photo of one terrorist. He is displaying a red string on his wrists. The Chinese Government media was the first to float this theory and Pakistan is spreading it. How difficult is it for the terrorists to intentionally wear and display such an identifying marker? In my opinion this is part of the campaign to demonize the Hindu Nationalists. The intention is quite clear. India 's enemies have Think tanks dedicated to this kind of psychological warfare.

Muslims Love the Koran and their Whiskey too

As for the claims that the Mumbai Attackers drank beer at Leopold's cafe, just before they began their massacre, the employess and owner who were there, stated the rumor to be a total fabrication. There are also claims that they rented rooms at the Nariman House and ordered liquor. These claims appear to be false as well. Yet the fact is when a Jihadist is on a mission, they are allowed to use any means, including acts considered haram (forbidden) to Muslims, such as drinking, lying and killing in the cause of Islam. As for Muslims and drinking, a friend of mine, who happens to be from a well to do Indian Muslim family frequently drank alchohol and partied hard. I actually first met him at a night club/hooka lounge. I asked him about his drinking and smoking. He said as long as his parents dont know about it, its no problem. He also said that he knows many people who worked in Saudi Arabia and in the Palaces of the Saudi princes. They all have bars installed in the cellars and they love hard liquors like Whiskey.

American Indians and Indians

The Hindu Nationalists are very similar to American Indian traditionalists such as Tecumseh, Pontiac, and Sitting Bull etc. It is disappointing to see, that in the zeal to expose Israeli agencies like Mossad, people are gullibly accepting the propaganda of those dedicated to the destruction of India. As the Western and Corporate powers conquered the world they destroyed any and all Indigenous based power structures that they encountered. India survived this onslaught due its vast population and vibrant culture. China was conquered and basically sterilized by the British agent Mao. India is currently reeling under the onslaught of these same Maoist forces in a silent war that has killed thousands. The Hindu Nationalists are the only people resisting the Maoist take over of the rural areas. Their success in this regard is a primary reason that they are being targeted.

Red Corridor of Terror

At this moment a vast red corridor stretches across India . If the Hindu Nationalists win the upcoming 2009 elections, these forces will begin a massive campaign to destabilize the Nation. With the Western backed Maoist conquest of Nepal, the Maoist now have a dedicated supply line for support and tactical backup. During the Maoist insurrection, three members of the North Korean mission to Nepal were caught attempting to smuggle 100Kg of gold ingots into Nepal . This was the second such instance that the North Koreans were caught smuggling gold into Neal. (North Koreans are the agents of the London based Globalist Powers used in the same capacity of Pakistan in order to keep South Korea and Japan in check.)

The Indian Maoists have frequently been discovered with top of the line satellite communication gear and weaponry. For an alleged group of disgruntled farmers allegedly driven to violence by their economic desperation, it is quite strange that they have somehow amassed such expensive equipment.

Another smoking gun is the implicit silence of the alleged human rights groups and pseudo-secularists regarding the Maoist carnage and atrocities. These same people that repeatedly scream and holler about the great danger of Hindu extremists have never called attention to the Maoists. Why would they? They are Maoists and Marxists themselves. They represent the Overground voice for the Terrorist underground.

America Threatens India with China

Pakistan invaded India 5 times, China invaded twice. Not once has India invaded a neighbor. The West's refusal to support India as Pakistan and China attacked and terrorized India pushed India into the Soviet Russian sphere. In fact India 's entire nuclear program was developed as a result of former US President Nixon's attempt to attack India during the 1971 Bangladesh war. US Documents exposed that the US President had secretly entreated China to menace India by moving Chinese troops to the Indian border. During the 1971 crisis Russia supported India forcing Nixon to back down. The quote below reveals this forgotten chapter of US-Indian relations.

"General Tewari was present at a briefing the three defense services held for Indira Gandhi. She was seated at a large table. On one side was General S H F J Manekshaw, the army chief, and on the other Admiral S M Nanda, the navy chief. During the course of the presentation, the admiral intervened and said: 'Madam, the US 8th Fleet is sailing into the Bay of Bengal .' Nothing happened; the briefing continued. After sometime, the admiral repeated, 'Madam, I have to inform you that the 8th Fleet is sailing into the Bay of Bengal .' She cut him off immediately: 'Admiral, I heard you the first time, let us go on with the briefing.' All the officers present were stunned. Ultimately, their morale was tremendously boosted by the prime minister's attitude. She had demonstrated her utter contempt for the American bluff.

On November 10, Nixon instructed Kissinger to ask the Chinese to move some troops toward the Indian frontier. 'Threaten to move forces or move them, Henry, that's what they must do now.' This was conveyed to Huang Hua , China 's envoy to the United Nations. Kissinger told Huang the US would be prepared for a military confrontation with the Soviet Union if the Soviet Union attacked China ." 1971 War: How the US tried to corner India by Claude Arpi

Pakistan Prepares it's Nukes

In 1999, Pakistan prepared its Nukes for an attack on India . It was Clinton who forced the Pakistanis to back down. This can be verified on the documentary "Countdown to Armageddon". 'Pakistan was actually preparing to use its nuclear missiles.' Avoiding a Nuclear Catastrophe: Arms Control after the 2002 India–Pakistan Crisis by Carranza M.E Some have theorized that Kennedy countermanded British demands to let India fall to China during its 1962 invasion. However Kennedy sent weapons and assistance to India further angering the powers in London.

The tragedy is that those committed to truth have been infiltrated by those committed to conquest. Pakistan has been repeatedly defeated by India, despite having the benefit of surprise on its side. Its use of the tactic of 'a thousand cuts' is meant to bleed India. The grafting of its agenda and propaganda to forums and groups dedicated towards freedom in the West, has allowed it to gain sympathy from those who would normally despise such agents of oppression.

Israel-Pakistan:Saudi-British Creations

The British created Pakistan for the sole purpose of suppressing India and its eventual growth as a major world power. It is also important to note that Saudi Arabia agreed to the creation of Israel in exchange for the creation of Pakistan. At the time the main source of Saudi income was Muslim Haj pilgrims. India was its largest source of such pilgrims. Fearing its loss of revenue upon the freedom of India, the Saudis negotiated the creation of Israel with the British. A vast chunk of India (Pakistan) for a minute albiet crucial portion of West Asia (Israel).The American House of Saud: The Secret Petrodollar Connection: Steven Emerson

British Erase Indian History

The Empire erased the history of the Hindu Maratha Confederacy founded by Chatrapati Shivaji. These Marathas liberated India from Islamic rule and planted the Maratha Flag from Afghanistan in the NW to Orissa in the East and Kanya Kumari in the South. For nearly a century, the Marathas ruled most of India. They successfully defeated the Portuguese, the French, the Dutch and the British in repeated engagements. The Marathas, both Hindu and Muslim, accomplished one of the most successful indigenous military campaigns in history. Their targets were the foreign Moghuls and the European powers.

Modern Islamic scholars, British historians and Indian Leftists joined together to erase these facts from the history of India. Time magazine recently quoted a Muslim scholar;s claim that the British cheated Islam when they failed to give all of India to Islam upon their departure. He alleged India was taken from the Muslims by the British so it should have been returned to the Muslims in 1947. Either through ignorance or an intentional effort at disinformation, some Indian Muslims ignore history. A majority of Indian Territory was ceded to the British by the Marathas after they had succumbed to the political intrigues of the British 'Divide and Rule Policies' and had suffered massive defeats in the three major wars known as the Anglo-Maratha wars. The very simple and basic reality is that Britain signed treaties with the Marathas in order to gain control of most of India. This proves that, rather than the Muslims, it was the Marathas that were in control of much of 18th century India. The British would not waste time signing treaties with a power of no consequence.

The First Anglo-Maratha War (1775-1782) was the beginning of the end of the Maratha Empire. It ended with the Treaty of Salbai.

The Second Anglo-Maratha War (1803 - 1805) was the second conflict between the British East India Company and the Maratha Empire in India . On 12/17/1803, Raghuji Bhonsale (II) of Nagpur signed the Treaty of Deogaon with the British after the Battle of Laswari and gave up the province of Cuttack including Balasore.

The Third Anglo-Maratha War (1817-1818) was a final and decisive conflict between the British East India Company and the Maratha Empire in India , which left the Company in control of most of India . Defeat was swift, followed by the pensioning of the peshwa and the annexation of his territories, thus completing the supremacy of the British in India . The Muslim ruler Nizam'Ali Khan was a British ally in the second and third Maratha Wars (1803-05, 1817-19) The British were quick to succor a built-in and vengeful minority group in their conquest of India. This pattern continues with its use of Pakistan .

Sikh Liberation of Kashmir

The Sikhs, another Indigenous group, were also successful in freeing many parts of India from Foreign rule. These foreign administrations were led by Afghan, Turkish and the Moghuls (Indian for the Mongol descendants of Genghis Khan). Both the Marathas and the Sikhs represented Indic based communities and cultures. For them their holy land was India itself rather than far-off Mecca or Jerusalem . These Native groups had been successful in pushing back 600 years of foreign rule. We see the evidence of this by the fact that Kashmir was taken by the British from the Sikhs and then allegedly sold by them to the Dogras. The Afghans established their rule over the territory of Kashmir in 1752. In 1819 the Sikhs from the Punjab replaced the Afghans as the rulers of Kashmir . The British defeated the Sikhs in 1846 and forced them to relinquish control. However, instead of extending British colonial rule over Kashmir , it is claimed that the British sold the territory to a Kashmiri Dogra prince who they maintained as a vassal. Yet Dipak Basu has revealed that the 'sale of Kashmir' story is a fabrication.

"After the defeat of the Sikh Empire by the East India Company, The Treaty of Lahore and later the Treaty of Amritsar between the defeated Sikh Empire and the East India Company was signed by Gulab Singh, a commander of the Sikh Empire Ranjit Singh and the grandfather of Hari Singh, and great grandfather of Karan Singh. As a part of the Treaty of Surrender in Lahore, Jammu & Kashmir was given to the father of Hari Singh, who would be treated as independent ruler allied to the East India Company. Then the Maharaja gave a huge sum of money to the British to take revenge on the Muslim rulers of Afghanistan, who previously declared independence from the Sikh Empire. If you go backward, the ancestors of the same Maharaja was appointed as the Mughal Governor of Jammu by Emperor Akhbar himself. Thus, it is just a Pakistani and British propaganda that Hari Singh was just a Dogra businessman with a lot of money purchsed Jammu & Kashmir."

Verifiable History Denied

These are verifiable historical facts. Unfortunately the establishment academia, specifically Leftists, Marxists, Muslims and others deny the history of India 's successful Indigenous Pre-British era freedom struggle. They are continuing the British policy of denigrating India 's sense of Nationhood. When Pakistan first invaded Kashmir in the Indo-Pakistani War of 1947, the Pakistanis were led by British Generals. British officers helped the Pakistanis plan the attack. British officers on the scene led the revolts of the Islamist factions of Kashmir forces, arresting and murdering Pro-Indian Kashmiri Dogra officers especially in the Gilgit region. They acted as a backbone for the mass of Pakistani tribal militias and coordinated their attacks. The British have maintained these connections to this very day.

India's Hindu:The Last Indigenous Power Base

Today's Hindu groups represent the very same Indic based Indigenous groups of the 1700s. They had reclaimed India for the Indians. The British defeated them and usurped India and its wealth for the bankers of London . They soaked up the treasures of India from the banks of the Ganges and squeezed them out on the banks of the Thames . They have never given up their control of India and have merely adapted their methods of control. India 's Hindu Nationalists represent the greatest threat to their continued hegemony. Pakistan is fulfilling its role as the local Agent Provocateur on behalf of the Empire. Buying into Anti-Indian Pakistani propaganda supports these schemes.

It is a fact that there have been some contacts between Israel and some Hindu Nationalists. Just as in History some American Native groups allied with the French against the British and vice versa. However to lump them all into one great conspiracy is not credible. It would be the same as blaming Chief Pontiac for every act of the French.

Westerners have now become more cognizant of India and its place in the world. However it is important not to buy into the agit-prop of the forces dedicated to the destabilization of India . They are attempting to graft themselves unto the legitimate efforts of those dedicated to the exposure of the Globalists. The anti-Hindu agenda is an important aspect of the New World Order's campaign. India represents one 6th of humanity. The Globalists are pushing for the final conquest of India . To succeed they must first destroy the world's last remaining Indigenous power structure, the Indian Hindus.

IMF and the Globalists Attack on India and Pakistan

The most likely culprits behind the Mumbai massacre appear to be connected to the ongoing Globalist scheme to create a one world economy. The IMF is pushing for the creation of a common global regulator. India has been actively fighting against the IMF. It is also notable that on November 30th India 's Prime Minister took control of the Finance Ministry. India 's former Finance Minister Chidambaran was appointed to become Home Minister after the resignation of Shivraj Patil. By taking control of the Finance Ministry Prime Minister Manmohan Singh appears to have taken the IMF head on.

IMF Set to Ruin Pakistan

As for Pakistan and the IMF, The IMF loan of $7.6 billion might result in 3 million job cuts, rendering more people jobless and increasing the poverty level of the country in the next 2 years. This was predicted by the RBS bank analyst in a discussion held on the recent IMF loan to Pakistan. The discussion was titled 'IMF: pain or panacea." Caymanmama.com - Pakistan News

Think Global and Follow the Money

This allows for the development of accurate conclusions. Terrorists are the chaos troops for powerful vested interests. The basic foundation of terrorism began with the British development of the Pirates that attacked the superior Spanish fleets back in the 1600s. It allowed the British plausible deniability while they ruthlessly savaged the Spanish Armadas and robbed them of their gold. Secretly the British controlled the pirates and gained control of vast hordes of Spanish wealth. Of course the Spanish gold was looted from the Native Americans and mined by slaves. The British continued their proxy war by the use of pirates. Today's Terrorists are the direct descendants of these same forces. The British powers that waged the Opium wars against China have never relinquished their power or control of the black market trade. Believe it or not most terror is still controlled by forces based in London .

Norway: The Terrorist Nation

Norway is also involved in its support of the LTTE in Sri Lanka as revealed by Norwegians against Terrorism http://www.svik.org/nat.pdf (Frequently taken offline)

heres google's html cache

http://72.14.235.132/search?q=cache:QTQR9A....pdf.&hl=en&ct=
clnk&cd=1&gl=in26

The Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad) is deeply involved in East Timor. In fact East Timor is the location of the longest lasting Norad-financed project coordinated by the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate. After East Timor's Independance from Indonesia, which was granted after much ethnic strife, Norway successfully took control of a majority of East Timor's oil production.

Slamming Wahhabi Islam upon the Islamic World

OPEC nations, particularly Saudi Arabia and its promotion of radical Wahhabi Islam are complicit partners as well. Thus after NATO 'liberated' Kosovo the Saudis poured millions of petro dollars into the region, destroyed the ancient Turkish mosques and rebuilt them into modern Wahhabi Mosques. So what do I have to say about terrorists? I say they are controlled at the highest levels. The recent efforts of Pakistani President Zardari to make peace with India are a serious threat to continued British machinations against Peace in South Asia . The Mumbai attacks are a direct attempt to instigate a massive war between India and Pakistan . India 's obstinate refusals to give up control of its financial institutions to a common global regulator and become indebted to the IMF are also a factor. Indian PM's men resist IMF influence. India 's sound economy allows it to resist the IMF. The powers behind the IMF are the powers behind terror.

PM's men resist IMF influence

Many of us have been opposing the growing influence of IMF here as they would soon begin to dictate terms on policy formulation," a senior government official said.

16 Nov 2008, 0353 hrs IST, Shantanu Nandan Sharma, ET Bureau NEW DELHI: A section of key policy makers in India are strongly resisting attempts by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to resume an active role in the country as they believe Asia has always remained at the bottom of IMF's priority list.

In a letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, dated November 11, PM's Economic Advisory Council (EAC) member Satish C Jha termed IMF's response to the present crisis as "strange and worrisome" and accused the international body of indulging in "ethnocentric and geographical bias".

"What we find strange and worrisome is that the IMF has once again relegated Asia to the bottom of the priority list in terms of assistance and has been far more focused on Eastern Europe and Russia . This is a repeat of 1997, when the IMF was late and reluctant to offer funds to Asia claiming that market forces should sort out the crisis. There is a certain degree of ethnocentric and geographical bias within the IMF, which is negative for Asia ," he wrote. SundayET has a copy of Mr Jha's letter to the PM. The IMF has influenced India 's approach to the crisis, according to officials in the finance ministry and the Prime Minister's Office (PMO).

In fact, the appointment of former IMF chief economist Raghuram Rajan as honorary economic adviser to Prime Minister just two weeks before the G-20 meet is believed to be a well-designed approach before the meet. EAC member Mr Jha further argued that IMF-led approach won't help much. "It has become apparent, as was witnessed in the Asian financial crisis of 1997 that Asia may once again be at the bottom of the list of assistance from the IMF in times of crisis. This must be halted," he further added.

In fact, IMF has made attempts to have full-fledged operation in the country, according to Indian government officials. When contacted by Sunday ET, an IMF spokesperson from Washington said; "The IMF works closely with the Indian authorities through the annual Article IV review, as we do with other member countries. It is the member country, not the IMF, that decides whether additional advice or assistance by the Fund should be requested. We stand ready to respond to their needs."

"Ultimately, it was included in the deal that India must have an IMF programme to draw 20% of the stipulated amount ($3 bn) for swapping. Many of us have been opposing the growing influence of IMF here as they would soon begin to dictate terms on policy formulation," a senior government official said.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/Economy/

PMs_men_resist_IMF_influence/articleshow/3718373.cms

Strauss-Kahn smiles from afar Dominique Strauss-Kahn, managing director of the International Monetary Fund is a leading French Socialist. Recent Headline from Financial Times, UK - 27 Nov 2008

'Standards global, regulation national': FM

On Board Prime Minister's Special Aircraft, November 14, 2008First Published: 09:29 IST(14/11/2008)

New global regulatory standards, prudential norms, greater surveillance mechanism and reform of the IMF are among the key points that the Indian contingent will raise on November 15 at the Summit on Financial Markets and the World Economy in Washington DC, Finance Minister P Chidambaram told reporters. Most important among these, in terms of having a widespread impact, will be the setting up of common regulatory and accounting standards across the globe or at least for G20 nations. "We must have convergence of accounting standards," Chidambaram said. 'Not taking an election-constricted view': FM The politics of a process that will be put in place in the November 15 Summit will not be restricted by the soon-to-change leaderships in the US and India , said Finance Minister P. Chidambaram."The resolution of this crisis will take us to a point of time well beyond January 20, 2009 (that's when President-elect Barack Obama will take charge as President)," he said. "Likewise, it will take us to a point of time well beyond May 22, 2009 (when a new government takes charge in India ). So I don't think we are going to take a election-constricted point of view.He pointed out that US President George Bush and Obama are reported to have talked about these issues are great lengths only two days ago. "I think Obama inputs will be there in whatever President Bush presents."Briefing reporters on the impact of the crisis on India , Finance Minister P. Chidambaram repeated what is now getting to be a somewhat permanent government line: "We will be indirectly impacted. Our growth, our exports and currency flows will be affected. We can weather the crisis and still return a decent growth in 2008-09," he added."Even the IMF's last week's assessment places India 's growth rate in the current fiscal at 7.8 per cent."

But he dismissed the idea of a common global regulator saying, "I don't think regulation can be raised to a global regulator. That's too ambitious, and perhaps not possible in today's circumstances. Regulation must be national."The need for global standards goes hand in hand with IMF reforms. "IMF," Chidambaram said, "was unable to provide the early warning signals to the crisis." That does not mean the creation of new multilateral agencies and financial institutions, informally being called Bretton Woods II, he added. "But surely IMF must begin to discuss within itself governance reforms.""We need to put in place a surveillance mechanism that would have identified the huge risks being taken by some financial entities," Chidambaram said, adding that an "agreeable entity" is needed. "This is what we talked about in Sao Paulo and this is what we'll talk about in the Summit ."Coming four days after finance ministers and central bank governors of G20 countries met in Sao Paulo and two days before the US President George Bush-initiated Summit, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has the Indian agenda laid out."I will put forward our views on the need for greater inclusivity in the international financial system, the need to ensure that growth prospects of developing countries do not suffer, and the need to avoid protectionist tendencies," Singh said in a November 13 departure statement."Today there are only a handful of economies that are driving global economic growth," Chidambaram said. "These include China , India and few others. It is very important that the few countries that are able to drive economic growth should not suffer. More resources should be made available to these countries."On that front, he clarified that India did not seek IMF funds. "We don't need an IMF programme," he said. "We need a development programme. So if World Bank is willing to give us more, we will be happy to take it."The new financial order, the seeds for which will be laid in the Summit , needs to become more inclusive, Chidambaram said. "G7 is too small. It must expand." G20, perhaps, represents the new grouping.Among the new prudential norms that are needed, Chidambaram listed common norms for capital adequacy, risk assessment and risk weights.Taking Singh's anti-protectionist agenda forward, Chidambaram said the crisis should not lead to the creation of "protectionist cocoons. We must now try to ensure free flow of goods and services, capital." Which echoes one part of what George Bush wrote in his October 22 letter inviting the...http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage ... atchType1=


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 19 Feb 2009 02:31 am
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 29 Jul 2003 06:01 am
Posts: 302
Location: India
brihaspati wrote:
Without lengthening this too much, think of the second battle of Tarain - how the Rajput army stalled believeing in Ghori's plea that he was only acting for his brother and the "peace terms" proposed by the Rajputs had to be discussed, and then being forced to face battle mounted early on in the day on an empty stomach. What prevented the tactical thinking that similar ruses or deceptions had to be practised on the Muslims and perhaps even attacked at night without warning while carrying out "peace negotiations".


The Rajput army did not "stall". Prithviraj's best general was engaged in another campaign and he was buying time so that he could be reinforced in time for the battle. And who said that ruses and deceptions were not carried out by Rajputs?

They happened all the time. As I said earlier contemporary accounts do not mention any "magnanimity" or chivalry....they have been added much later along with many other fanciful stories.

brihaspati wrote:
What prevented hot pursuit after the previous year's battle and strike terror into Muslims by systematically carrying out Sharia-style retaliations and complete liquidation of all Muslims in the Punjab and northern Indus?


Again, who said there was no "hot pursuit"? Immediately after the Turks were defeated and were fleeing on their fast-paced horses, the Chauhans gave chase and slaughtered the fugitives but they could not keep up on their inferior horses. And then they had to dispatch the Turk garrison in Sarhind fort, which was surrendered after a siege of 13 months.

If they avoided taking Sarhind, the 1200 Turk cavalry in Sarhind fort would not have sat idle—they would’ve swooped down to raid the Chauhan Kingdom and cut-off Prithviraj’s communication links until their master returned from Ghazni with a fresh army. Alternatively they could have followed the Chauhan army into Punjab and harassed them with cavalry maneuvers for several months until the return of Muhammad Ghori.

Punjab had then been under Muslim occupation then for under 200 years....in all that time neither Mahmud Ghaznavi, or Masud Ghaznavi, or Ibrahim Ghaznavi could liquidate or convert the Hindu population or destroy Hindu states. And you expected Prithviraj single-handedly and in just one year to carry out "Sharia-style retaliations and complete liquidation of all Muslims in the Punjab"......and expected him further to extend it to the "northern Indus region" all in a single campaign! :rotfl:

Even the tiny Madurai Sultanate in the faraway southern tip of India, isolated from other Islamic lands and surrounded by Hindu States, was not destroyed in one campaign. No it took 30 years of continuous war with the Hoysalas and Vijaynagar for that. Similarly in the north the Rajputs of Mewar began dominating the neighboring sultanates (four in total) after several generations of campaigning.

brihaspati wrote:
what prevented aggressive foreign policy to destroy the economic foundations of the Caliphate by disrupting trade on the Arabian sea and blockading the Gulf? This even after facing Muslim strategy for five hundred years!


:?: Are we still discussing Prithviraj and his land-locked kingdom or is this rant meant for southern Indian kingdoms?

Disrupting trade on the Arabian Sea...HOW? Blockading the Gulf....with what? What were the capabilities of seafaring powers in India, or indeed in other parts of the world, for such a gigantic project?


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 19 Feb 2009 06:26 pm
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 18 Nov 2008 09:55 pm
Posts: 1593
Airavatji,

Quote:
The Rajput army did not "stall". Prithviraj's best general was engaged in another campaign and he was buying time so that he could be reinforced in time for the battle. And who said that ruses and deceptions were not carried out by Rajputs?

Well, but the fact remains that he and his army were "surprised" by Ghori, early in the day, and on an empty stomach. Surely, there must have been advance guard to spy on enemy preparations round the clock - if so much experienced in ruses and deceptions? And what stopped them from using similar ruses and deceptions in this particular case? Surely you use such tactcial moves more when you are militarily "weaker" (as you say that the best general was away and this was enough to delay fighting).


Quote:
They happened all the time. As I said earlier contemporary accounts do not mention any "magnanimity" or chivalry....they have been added much later along with many other fanciful stories.
I don't think I mentioned magnanimity - I pointed to lack of evidence of ruthlessness of the order shown by Islamic armies to impose their hegemony.


Quote:
Again, who said there was no "hot pursuit"? Immediately after the Turks were defeated and were fleeing on their fast-paced horses, the Chauhans gave chase and slaughtered the fugitives but they could not keep up on their inferior horses.

If they could not keep pace with the Turks, it meant that the Turks were leaving the field unprotected. This would have been a golden opportunity to liquidate any Muslim settlement or any Indian who had sided with the Muslims in the area.

Quote:
And then they had to dispatch the Turk garrison in Sarhind fort, which was surrendered after a siege of 13 months.
If they avoided taking Sarhind, the 1200 Turk cavalry in Sarhind fort would not have sat idle—they would’ve swooped down to raid the Chauhan Kingdom and cut-off Prithviraj’s communication links until their master returned from Ghazni with a fresh army. Alternatively they could have followed the Chauhan army into Punjab and harassed them with cavalry maneuvers for several months until the return of Muhammad Ghori.


This is the mistaken thinking of positional warfare. When needed you have to move quickly to mobile and fluid warfare. If the Turks had to be effective, they had to come out in concentrated formations moving swiftly to harass and bleed the Rajputs. This would have weakened their garrison in Sirhind. Yes the population and villages would have suffered for some time, but the Turks would have been forced to be dispersed and destroyed. A siege lasting 13 months for the geopgraphy of Sirhind is itself a big question for me - was everything tried out - tunneling to weaken the walls, setting fire, throwing dead and diseased animal carcasses inside, ctaching some of the Turks - not killing them, but taking them to the walls of Sirhind and flaying them alive and throwing the skin inside the walls - to warn that if those inside don't give up eventually when the fort is overrun this will be the fate of the Muslims and their collaborators (flaying alive appears to be okay with Islamic armies to practice on non-Muslims) ? Genocide is now politically incorrect and a crime if practised on Muslims or Jews only, but then it was not so! Ghori retreated all the way to Ghazni leaving the Multan stronghold and surrounding Muslim populations at the mercy of the Chauhans. We have claims that they finished off straggler Turks - but no evidence that they undertook a systematic liquidation and genocide of the unprotected Muslim populations. Militarily this would have made sense in removing support when Ghori returned.

Quote:
Punjab had then been under Muslim occupation then for under 200 years....in all that time neither Mahmud Ghaznavi, or Masud Ghaznavi, or Ibrahim Ghaznavi could liquidate or convert the Hindu population or destroy Hindu states. And you expected Prithviraj single-handedly and in just one year to carry out "Sharia-style retaliations and complete liquidation of all Muslims in the Punjab"......and expected him further to extend it to the "northern Indus region" all in a single campaign! :rotfl:

It is indeed reassuring to see that we can laugh at our own folly! :D In all of two centuries, Mahmud-Mahsud-Ibrahim Gaznavi could not liquidate/convert/destroy Hindus - which implies that the Hindus were tough enough to resist them - which implies that the Muslims were not strong enough - which implies that liquidation/conversion/destruction of the Muslims in the area should have been feasible. Are you sure that you are talking about the same group in the two sentences - for the second seems to imply that even though Muslims are weak they cannot bes destroyed because they are as strong as the Hindus who could not be digested in 200 years!


Quote:
Even the tiny Madurai Sultanate in the faraway southern tip of India, isolated from other Islamic lands and surrounded by Hindu States, was not destroyed in one campaign. No it took 30 years of continuous war with the Hoysalas and Vijaynagar for that. Similarly in the north the Rajputs of Mewar began dominating the neighboring sultanates (four in total) after several generations of campaigning.

Now is that observation of tenacity or apparent persistence of the Muslim power contradictory to my hypothesis that their opponents were not as ruthless as them?

Quote:
:?: Are we still discussing Prithviraj and his land-locked kingdom or is this rant meant for southern Indian kingdoms?
Disrupting trade on the Arabian Sea...HOW? Blockading the Gulf....with what? What were the capabilities of seafaring powers in India, or indeed in other parts of the world, for such a gigantic project?


The comment started out as a general question on the possibility of ethical self-imposed retsrictions on the Hindu side. I don't rant :D Apparently the Arabs with much less resources and history of naval experience compared to India were already dominating the entire Arabian Sea trade. We also have observations from Chinese and other sources that Indian shipping had fallen behind by this time, where Arabs, Chinese and Srri Lanka dominated. If Arabs and Sri Lanka could dominate the sea-lanes why couldnt Indian powers do so? Maintaining strong coastal presence all along the Sind-Baloch territory right up to the gulf was not impossible and not allowing the Arab/Persian naval power to grow in the Indian Ocean should have been a matter of state policy. The gulf was crucial, for the real planning of thrust on India came from Iraqi power centre of Islam on the Gulf.


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 19 Feb 2009 06:37 pm
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 31 Oct 2005 12:36 am
Posts: 936
Brihaspati ji: Airavat is the resident expert on Indian history, especially its battles. When he talks, we listen. :)


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 19 Feb 2009 11:56 pm
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 29 Jul 2003 06:01 am
Posts: 302
Location: India
brihaspati wrote:
Well, but the fact remains that he and his army were "surprised" by Ghori, early in the day, and on an empty stomach.


In the first battle, the Turks and Rajputs had a head-on clash, in which the favorite Turk tactics of horse-archery and maneuvers were not possible, leading to their defeat. So in the second battle Ghori, even though he had brought a larger army, did not risk a direct clash. While both sides were playing for time in their negotiations, Muhammad first tried a night attack, but the Hindus were vigilant and defeated the Turks. In the darkness again horse-maneuvers were not effective. But this attack gave Ghori a correct estimate of his enemy's army, which was smaller than in the previous battle.

So Ghori no longer had the need to stay on the defensive. He formed his cavalry into four divisions of 10,000 horse, keeping the rest in reserve, and sent them to harass the Hindu army from all sides. The Turks were now in their element with hit-and-run cavalry maneuvers and horse archery—the combined arms (elephants, cavalry, infantry) of the Hindus could not chase after one and repel another division simultaneously. The order of the Chauhan army broke down, along with the communications between its various elements, and Ghori charged with his main division and finally defeated Prithviraj. The Chauhan King was either killed or captured according to the different accounts.

There was no surprise, nor were "empty stomachs" the cause of defeat. In the heat of battle adrenaline always takes over, and neither hunger nor injury stands in the way of a warrior. Refer to the fury of the cavalry charge by the starving Maratha army at the Third Battle of Panipat.

Quote:
A siege lasting 13 months for the geopgraphy of Sirhind is itself a big question for me - was everything tried out - tunneling to weaken the walls, setting fire, throwing dead and diseased animal carcasses inside, ctaching some of the Turks - not killing them, but taking them to the walls of Sirhind and flaying them alive and throwing the skin inside the walls - to warn that if those inside don't give up eventually when the fort is overrun this will be the fate of the Muslims and their collaborators (flaying alive appears to be okay with Islamic armies to practice on non-Muslims) ?


Everything is always tried in a siege but the whole point of having forts is that they have in-built safeguards against these methods. Hindu forts also lasted several months of siege despite the Turks throwing everything at them.

Quote:
Genocide is now politically incorrect and a crime if practised on Muslims or Jews only, but then it was not so! Ghori retreated all the way to Ghazni leaving the Multan stronghold and surrounding Muslim populations at the mercy of the Chauhans. We have claims that they finished off straggler Turks - but no evidence that they undertook a systematic liquidation and genocide of the unprotected Muslim populations. Militarily this would have made sense in removing support when Ghori returned.


There were no "unprotected Muslim populations" east of Lahore, only garrisons in forts, each of which had to be besieged and taken. And even west of Lahore there were still Hindu principalities and populations, particularly in the Salt Range.

Moreover attempts to liquidate civilians, besides being adharmic, would've been a self-goal. If the regular army spends its energy liquidating village after village, it would take up so much time that they would not have the resources to fight the enemy, who would've replenished his resources and collected a fresh army in that time. Secondly such bloody work ruins the economy and deprives your army of resources. If the Sikhs had tried genocide against Punjabi Muslim populations in the 19th century, the Punjab economy would've been ruined, and the land invaded and occupied by the British and the Afghans.

Quote:
In all of two centuries, Mahmud-Mahsud-Ibrahim Gaznavi could not liquidate/convert/destroy Hindus - which implies that the Hindus were tough enough to resist them - which implies that the Muslims were not strong enough - which implies that liquidation/conversion/destruction of the Muslims in the area should have been feasible.


No. All it implies is that "Sharia-style methods and complete liquidation" never work. And specially not after only one battle! Mahmud Ghaznavi captured Punjab bit-by-bit after 22 years of continuous war against the Hindu Shahis.

Quote:
If Arabs and Sri Lanka could dominate the sea-lanes why couldnt Indian powers do so? Maintaining strong coastal presence all along the Sind-Baloch territory right up to the gulf was not impossible and not allowing the Arab/Persian naval power to grow in the Indian Ocean should have been a matter of state policy. The gulf was crucial, for the real planning of thrust on India came from Iraqi power centre of Islam on the Gulf.


Which state? Raja Dahir who ruled Sindh, the Pratihars and allied Rajput clans in Rajasthan-MP-Gujarat, the Rashtrakutas in Maharashtra?

The real thrust on India came not from the Arabs but the Turks of Central Asia.

And dominating the sea lanes? The bulk of this domination was by merchant shipping and not war vessels....and Indian powers had their fair share of the sea trade. Indian ships from Gujarat, Konkan, Malabar, TN, Orissa bought spices and other goods from Malacca to India. Chinese ships, which in the past used to sail up to India, now stopped in Malacca where they traded with the Indians and Arabs.

In the west Indian ships carried their goods to eastern Africa and Hormuz in the Persian Gulf. Only the Red Sea trade was dominated by the Arabs. The Arabs also controlled the all-important horse trade. This is why Arab traders were welcomed and allowed to settle in Rashtrakuta territory as well as on the Kerala coast.

Indian shipping actually began to decline in the 17th and 18th centuries with the intrusion of European powers, their use of war vessels, and the practice of piracy.


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 20 Feb 2009 01:34 am
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 20 Sep 2007 03:23 am
Posts: 595
Location: USA
The Arabs only attempted their conquest of India with the beginning of Caliphate. The early Muslims were practically waiting for Mohammad to die so they could expand - and expand they did, very rapidly.

As far as I know, the first attempt at colonization by an Arab was by sea under the command of Mohammad bin Qasim but he was small fry compared to later Turks and Afghans and Rajputs completely routed him.

Perhaps Airavat can confirm?


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 20 Feb 2009 01:42 am
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 31 Oct 2005 12:36 am
Posts: 936
Keshav wrote:
The Arabs only attempted their conquest of India with the beginning of Caliphate. The early Muslims were practically waiting for Mohammad to die so they could expand - and expand they did, very rapidly.

As far as I know, the first attempt at colonization by an Arab was by sea under the command of Mohammad bin Qasim but he was small fry compared to later Turks and Afghans and Rajputs completely routed him.

Perhaps Airavat can confirm?
No, the first attempts (not at conquests but raids), were much earlier than Quasim. It was around 636 AD, in Thane and I think about 641 AD in Gujrat. These raids were by sea. They were repulsed.


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 20 Feb 2009 02:28 am
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 18 Nov 2008 09:55 pm
Posts: 1593
Regarding empty stomach:
Dr. Jadunath Sarkar: "It was the Hindu practice to prepare for the pitched battle by waking at 3 O'clock in the morning, performing the morning wash and worship, eating the cooked food (pakwan) kept ready before hand, putting on arms and marching out to their appointed places in the line of battle before sunrise. But in the second battle of Naraina (also called Tarain, Taraori) the Rajputs could take no breakfast; they had to snatch up their arms and form their lines as best as they could in a hurry. In vain did they try to pursue the Turko-Afghan army from 9 o'clock in the morning to 3 o'clock in the afternoon at the end of which the Hindus were utterly exhausted from the fighting, hunger and thirst." (Jadunath Sarkar, Military History of India.)

Regarding the importance of Islamic power base in the Gulf and the sea-route:

Hajjaj bin Yusuf Sakifi, the governor of the eastern provinces of the Caliphate, (mostly Iraq) but practically over all territories of former Persian empire, sent two expeditions against Debal (708 C.E.), the first under Ubaidulla and the other under Budail. The third campaign was led by his nephew and son-in-law Imaduddin Muhammad bin Qasim. Under Hajjaj, one army under Kutaiba reached Kashgar, another army reached Kabul, and a third (under Muhammad bin Qasim) advanced towards the lower Indus through Makran. The reigning Ummayad Caliph Walid I (705-715 C.E.) permitted the expedition after Hajjaj promised to repay the Caliph all expenses. The supposed targets of the campaign were spreading Islam and conquering Sind, and acquisition of maximum wealth for use by Hajjaj and payment to the Caliph. (Al Biladuri, Chachnama)

The governor of Makran, Muhammad Harun, supplied reinforcements and five catapults. This included a great catapult known as "the Bride", (worked by five hundred men), which was sent by sea to meet him at Debal. (Al Biladuri, Eliott and Dowson, Vol I, Appendix, p.434.)

The importance of the Gulf power base of Islam continues in Mahmud's case :

On accession, he vowed to the Caliph of Baghdad "to undertake every year a campaign against the idolaters of India", convinced that "jihad was central to Islam and that one campaign at least must be undertaken against the unbelievers every year." Mahmud always included the Caliph's name on his coins, represented himself in his Fateh-namas as a "warrior for the faith", sent to Baghdad plundered wealth and slaves from his Indian campaign. The Caliph Al-Qadir Billah in turn praised the talents and exploits of Mahmud, conferred upon him the titles of Amin-ul-millah and Yamin-ud-daula (the Right hand) after which his house is known as Yamini Dynasty.

Regarding navy:

Up to the 7th century, historians find and report that the Indian empires had powerful navies and merchant fleet, with an active interest taken by the highly organized state administrations in the maintenance, development, and deployment of fleets of ships both for military and commercial purpose. The Arthasastra mentions state-owned vessels lent to merchants and used for cruising, transport of men and material as well as commerical operations. Megasthenes [McCrindle, Ancient India as described in Classical literature] reports that the Indian shipbuilders were salaried public servants and that ships built in the royal yards were hired to ocean voagers and traders. A Jataka story also refers to sailors as King's salaried men. The Periplus of the Erythrean Sea, describes native fishermen in the King's service stationed at the entrances of the western sea-ports in well-manned large boats going up the coast as far as Syrastrene, from which they pilot vessels to Barygaza (Bahrukaccha - Broach). These pilots in royal service are called sagara-palogananam (literally knowledgeable in the arts of sea and sails) in a Kanheri inscription (Proc. of I.H.C., 1960). The Satavahana kings actively promoted and regulated shipping as proved in the ship coins of Sri Yajna Satakarni [Rapson, coins of the Andhra Dynasty]. There are supporting evidence in Harshacharita [Life of Harsha, by Bana] and Ptolemy. This tradition was kept alive by the Pallava and Kurumvara kings, some of whose coinage seems to reflect the Satavahana style, as well as other literary indications, and archaeological indications of the presence of South Indian ships in South East Asia. The last such indication of naval concerns we find curiously enough in the 7th century when Bhaskaravarma [reputed to have invaded parts of Gaura-Vanga or north Bengal], a ruler of Assam is reported to own 30,000 ships.

In this period, pirates are reported to have sailed in "great" and powerful vessels called Bira, and that they were looting sailors and merchants all over the Arabian sea, including the Gulf area, southern Red Sea, Ceylon and as far as Zanzibar. [ Al Beruni, Marco Polo, Ibn Batuta- Voyages, Badger - A History of the Imams and Sayyids of Oman] Any kingdom whose sailors had the capacity to maintain such large ships with military intent and skill [piracy is only a form of naval warfare in the ancient world - and quite prestigious depending on how valuable the pirate was to the ruler - Elizabeth I of England would be a prime example] - and could dominate the whole of the Arabian sea, would also have the capacity to launch sea-borne attacks. In fact some historians fall for the Islamic chronicler claims of raiding Indian ports by sea to "chastize Indian pirates". However, the quality of Indian shipping appears to have declined and does not support claims of continued Indian dominance over sea-trade on the western sea-board. Chinese and Arabian sources, claim that at this period, Indian ships were smaller, slower, and less powerful than both Chinese and Arabian ships, but the largest ones actually belonged to the kingdom of Ceylon.[Al, Beruni, Hourani- Arab seafaring, Chau-ju-kua]. That Indians did resort to Naval warfare is indicated by scattered references like the Dasakumaracharita, in which a prince of Tamralipti [ancient seaport in Midnapore, modern WestBengal] "swarms" around a "Yavana" [at this period anyone coming from the west of India] ship, or the Prabandhachintamani, which talks of three princes of King Yogaraja looting near the port of Somesvara a ship belonging to another country. the Prabandhachintamani describes explicitly how an Arab Muslim trader, Saida (Sayyad) had become so powerful as to initiate a naval fight against Vastupala, a minister of Chalukya state. It is interesting to note that the same story describes in great detail that the dispute arose at the port of Stambha (Cambay) and Saida called on an Indian ally Mahasadhanika Sanka from the port of Bhrgukachha (Broach). Harihara, who was associated with Vastupala and therefore a contemporary, [satisfies at least three of Thaparite criteria for acceptability of textual sources - it is contemporary, it is from the "attacked side", it is from a non-Muslim side which claims to have "repressed" a non-upper-caste-Hindu] has awritten a play Sankhaparabhava Vyayoga, which claims ultimate victory of Vastupala. The fact that one "Hindu" helped Sayida against another would perhaps have been highlighted by the Thaparite School to prove the "extremely cordial relationship" between Indians and Muslim Arabs, had not this incident also involved proof of involvement of the Arab Muslim traders in direct naval military action against Indian states.

Regarding presence of Muslims inside "Hindu" territories:

Ibn Asir mentions explicitly in his Kamil-ut-Tawarikh, that there were "Mussalmans in the country of Banaras" from the days of Sabuktigin.[Elliot and Dowson]. Muhammad Aufi also speaks of Bahram Gur of Iran coming to Hindustan under the guise of a Muslim merchant (not strictly possible but indicates a common model). When Bakhtyiar appeared in Nudiya people thought that he was a Muslim trader come to sell horses - implying that visits to this old Hindu city on the banks of the Ganges in modern West Bengal, by Muslim traders was quite common and that Muslim military leaders were in the habit of using this acceptance to disguise themselves for spying or raiding or surprise attacks. Taranath mentions settlement of "Turuskas" (at this period a generic name for Muslims) in the AntarVedi or Ganges-Yamuna Doab. He also significantly mentions that during the time of Lavasena and his successors and prior to the invasions and destruction of the Buddhist university townships of Odantapuri and Vikramasila the number of "Turuskas" had significantly increased.

Regarding Arabs vs Turks :

In addition to the legitimacy and authority provided by the Gulf based Islamic power centre as described above, the Arabs had been successful in establishing fortified colonies around Multan and Mansurah. These were advance posts of expansion, intelligence gathering by all the subsequent Islamic invaders, including the Turks.


Last edited by brihaspati on 20 Feb 2009 02:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 20 Feb 2009 02:49 am
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 18 Nov 2008 09:55 pm
Posts: 1593
Quote:
Moreover attempts to liquidate civilians, besides being adharmic, would've been a self-goal. If the regular army spends its energy liquidating village after village, it would take up so much time that they would not have the resources to fight the enemy, who would've replenished his resources and collected a fresh army in that time. Secondly such bloody work ruins the economy and deprives your army of resources. If the Sikhs had tried genocide against Punjabi Muslim populations in the 19th century, the Punjab economy would've been ruined, and the land invaded and occupied by the British and the Afghans.


But apparently, there were very few Muslims to start with according to you - surely that dispenses the logistics issue! By the time Sikhs had come on to the scene the numbers game would have been against them. Forgotten now, but I think there has been estimates of rapid increase of Muslim population proportion in the Punjab by comparing changing frequency of Arabic personal names in narrative texts - in the 14th century. And is it agreed then, that even if logistics was not an issue with few Muslim heads to roll, "being adharmic" would be a taboo and would affect how you behaved towards your enemy - an enemy about which an ancestor, Prithiviraja II, the successor to Vigraharaja, already is of the opinion in his Hansi stone inscription of 1168 C.E. that the Hammira (Amir) was a “dagger pointed at the whole world” ?


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 20 Feb 2009 05:56 am
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 30 Jan 2008 05:52 pm
Posts: 159
Consider me novice. I am just presenting something in the service of Gurus only!.

Quote:
Ibn Asir mentions explicitly in his Kamil-ut-Tawarikh, that there were "Mussalmans in the country of Banaras" from the days of Sabuktigin.[Elliot and Dowson]. Muhammad Aufi also speaks of Bahram Gur of Iran coming to Hindustan under the guise of a Muslim merchant (not strictly possible but indicates a common model). When Bakhtyiar appeared in Nudiya people thought that he was a Muslim trader come to sell horses - implying that visits to this old Hindu city on the banks of the Ganges in modern West Bengal, by Muslim traders was quite common and that Muslim military leaders were in the habit of using this acceptance to disguise themselves for spying or raiding or surprise attacks. Taranath mentions settlement of "Turuskas" (at this period a generic name for Muslims) in the AntarVedi or Ganges-Yamuna Doab. He also significantly mentions that during the time of Lavasena and his successors and prior to the invasions and destruction of the Buddhist university townships of Odantapuri and Vikramasila the number of "Turuskas" had significantly increased.


Quote:
REAL CAUSES OF HINDU DEFEATS

Finally, Dr. Misra lays his probing finger on the real factors which contributed to Hindu defeats during this period. The very first factor, according to him, was the lack of a forward policy vis-a-vis the Muslim invaders. In his own words, “What the Rajputs really lacked was a spirit of aggression so conspicuous among the Muslims, and a will to force the war in the enemy’s dominions and thus destroy the base of his power.”5

Secondly, a forward policy could not be pursued in the absence of a “strong central government for even the whole of northern India which could think and act for the whole country”. As a result, “The Rajput rulers found it difficult to look beyond the territorial limits of their own kingdoms and their regional interests pushed the national issues into the background.”6 Compared to a strong central authority, the various confederacies organised by the Rajputs proved to be patch-works which came apart either under the impact of military defeat, or as soon as the immediate purpose of stopping the enemy had been served.

Thirdly, the military organisation of the Rajputs was inferior as compared to that of the Muslims. The Rajputs depended mainly on feudal levies assembled on the spur of the moment. “These feudal levies with no unity of training and organisation, coming together at the last moment, fighting under the leadership of and for their individual leaders, could not be expected to beat back an enemy united in purpose and organisation and acting as on coordinate unit.” A medieval Muslim historian quoted by Dr. Misra said so in so many words: “A commander with a heterogeneous army consisting of soldiers - a hundred from here and a hundred from there - cannot achieve anything. An army with so varied and so many component elements has never been able to achieve anything great.”7

Fourthly, “The cavalry and mounted archers of the invading armies gave them a decisive superiority over the home forces. The Indian rulers too maintained cavalry units. But the Arabic and Turkoman horses were much better adapted to warfare… The second strong point of the Turkish military machine was its mounted archery. Their deadly arrows easily covered a range of eighty to hundred paces… Reference to archery among the Indian armies after the age of the epics is conspicuous by its absence.”8

Lastly, “the strategy and tactics employed by the invaders on the battlefield proved decisive in their favour. Indians failed to keep pace with the developments of military strategy taking place in Central Asia before the advent of Islam. The Arabs and Turks perfected them… Besides, the traditional Rajput chivalry looked upon the battle as a ritual or a tournament for displaying their fighting skill and swordsmanship under well-recognised rules of sport. Did not Manu, the ancient law-giver proclaim – ‘A battle was ideally a gigantic tournament with many rules: a warrior fighting from a chariot might not strike one on foot; an enemy in flight, wounded or asking a quarter, might not be slain; the lives of enemy soldiers who had lost their weapons were to be respected; poisoned weapons were not to be used; homage and not annexation was the rightful fruit of victory.’ The Arabs and the Turks, on the other hand, knew no rules and waged a grim and ruthless struggle to destroy their enemies. Feints and sudden attacks, manoeuvering under the cover of darkness and pretending defeat and flights, keeping a large reserve to be used only at critical moments - all these took the Indians by surprise and crippled their fighting capacity. The Indians never tried to take advantage of their enemy’s weakness and perhaps considered it unchivalrous to do so. Such magnanimity on the part of Indian kings… was a sure invitation to disaster against a ruthless foe who recognised no moral or ideological scruples in the pursuit of victory.”9


SAPPERS AND MINERS OF ISLAMIC IMPERIALISM

Muslims had two more advantages in addition to their aggressiveness and superiority in the art of warfare. “During this long period of Indian resistance”, observes Dr. Misra, “the infiltration of Arabs, and later on the Turks, continued almost unabated into India, both through armed invasions as well as through peaceful migration from Central Asia. The Hindus, true to their catholicity of religious outlook and rich tradition of tolerance, never obstructed the peaceful immigrants and even zealously granted them security and full religious freedom… The greatest Chishti saint of India, Shaikh Muinuddin Chishti, came to Ajmer just before the battles of Tarain and was able to attract a number of devoted followers… It is all the more remarkable that this Hindu tolerance towards the Muslim merchants and mystics should have continued even after the invasions of Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni… As Professor Habib points out, ‘the far-flung campaigns of Sultan Mahmud would have been impossible without an accurate knowledge of trade routes and local resources, which was probably obtained from Muslim merchants.’ The same can be said to hold good about the invasions of Muhammad Ghori or Qutbuddin Aibak.”10 The sufis were working not only as the spies of Islamic imperialism but also as deceivers of gullible Hindu masses.

http://voiceofdharma.org/books/hhrmi/ch5.htm


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 20 Feb 2009 06:19 am
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 29 Jul 2003 06:01 am
Posts: 302
Location: India
brihaspati wrote:
Regarding empty stomach:
Dr. Jadunath Sarkar: "It was the Hindu practice to prepare for the pitched battle by waking at 3 O'clock in the morning, performing the morning wash and worship, eating the cooked food (pakwan) kept ready before hand, putting on arms and marching out to their appointed places in the line of battle before sunrise. But in the second battle of Naraina (also called Tarain, Taraori) the Rajputs could take no breakfast; they had to snatch up their arms and form their lines as best as they could in a hurry. In vain did they try to pursue the Turko-Afghan army from 9 o'clock in the morning to 3 o'clock in the afternoon at the end of which the Hindus were utterly exhausted from the fighting, hunger and thirst." (Jadunath Sarkar, Military History of India.)


Well that was exactly my point. Sarkar says, "In vain did they try to pursue the Turko-Afghan army." With the Turk tactics of horse maneuvers and archery I wrote, "Hindus could not chase after one and repel another division simultaneously."

The battle itself lasted six hours. It was not hunger alone but the cavalry tactics which caused exhaustion. If the Turks had tried a headlong charge of cavalry, as in the first battle, what would have been the result?

Similarly the Marathas at Panipat did the exact same morning wash and worship as the Rajputs six centuries earlier, this too described by Jadunath Sarkar. Pumped on adrenaline they continued the fight until bodily exhaustion set in after 5 hours. This battle also ended by 3:30 pm! Hunger alone was not the cause of their defeat either.

brihaspati wrote:
The importance of the Gulf power base of Islam continues in Mahmud's case :

On accession, he vowed to the Caliph of Baghdad "to undertake every year a campaign against the idolaters of India", convinced that "jihad was central to Islam and that one campaign at least must be undertaken against the unbelievers every year." Mahmud always included the Caliph's name on his coins, represented himself in his Fateh-namas as a "warrior for the faith", sent to Baghdad plundered wealth and slaves from his Indian campaign. The Caliph Al-Qadir Billah in turn praised the talents and exploits of Mahmud, conferred upon him the titles of Amin-ul-millah and Yamin-ud-daula (the Right hand) after which his house is known as Yamini Dynasty.


How does all this make "the Gulf" a power base for Mahmud? Every Sultan till Mubarak Khalji acknowledged the supremacy of the Caliph, but every campaign in India was by the Turks, and not the Arabs. Did the Turk power in India disappear after the destruction of the Caliphate by the Mongols? NO, it actually increased from the flood of Turk refugees who joined the army of the Delhi Sultans.

And as for sending slaves, please note that Muhammad Tughlaq sent hundreds of Indian slaves to the Emperor of China, according to Ibn Batutah. The Mughals used to gift money and presents to Muslim rulers in Arabia, Iran, and Central Asia.

brihaspati wrote:
Regarding the importance of Islamic power base in the Gulf and the sea-route:

Up to the 7th century, historians find and report that the Indian empires had powerful navies and merchant fleet.......

However, the quality of Indian shipping appears to have declined and does not support claims of continued Indian dominance over sea-trade on the western sea-board. Chinese and Arabian sources, claim that at this period, Indian ships were smaller, slower, and less powerful than both Chinese and Arabian ships, but the largest ones actually belonged to the kingdom of Ceylon.


No boss, Indian merchant shipping continued to play a major role in the sea trade until the onset of the European powers. My source, The History and Culture of the Indian People, says:

A few junks from China still reached India but most of them stopped at Malacca. The junks of China were strongly built, the timber being fastened by nails. The ships owned by Indians and Arabs (including Egyptians) were built mainly, if not exclusively, in India, but they were very frail as their heavy planks were made fast with cocoanut cordage and wooden pins.

So Arabs and Indians were in the same boat, literally :mrgreen:.

It then goes on: The Arabs exercised a strict monopoly in the trade from Malabar to the Red Sea. They also shared with Indian ships the carrying trade between Gujarat on the one hand and the Red Sea, Persian Gulf, and East Africa on the other.

This as the position in the 15th century when the Portuguese ships entered Indian waters, and the other Europeans followed in the 17th century.

brihaspati wrote:
Regarding presence of Muslims inside "Hindu" territories:


Yes all this is well known but the whole point is your demand for a genocide by Prithivraj after his victory over Ghori. This was not possible, without first destroying the Turk garrisons at Sarhind, Jalandhar, Lahore, Multan, Sialkot, etc. You expected the Hindus to just skirt these forts and carry out genocide....of whom? Leaving armed garrisons sitting pretty behind you while you carry out "genocide" would be a suicide mission.

And it was not possible after just one battle, while Mahmud Ghaznavi took 22 years of continuous war to annex Punjab!

And your next post:

Quote:
But apparently, there were very few Muslims to start with according to you - surely that dispenses the logistics issue! By the time Sikhs had come on to the scene the numbers game would have been against them.

And is it agreed then, that even if logistics was not an issue with few Muslim heads to roll, "being adharmic" would be a taboo and would affect how you behaved towards your enemy - an enemy about which an ancestor, Prithiviraja II, the successor to Vigraharaja, already is of the opinion in his Hansi stone inscription of 1168 C.E. that the Hammira (Amir) was a “dagger pointed at the whole world” ?


The numbers game was against the Sikhs, but did they even try "genocide" against one village of Punjabi Muslims? On the contrary Ranjit Singh recruited them in his army and gave them freedom of worship, a wise policy to strengthen the economy of his kingdom.

The enemy the inscription talked about were the TURKS not ordinary Muslim villagers. And I said it would be "adharmic" to kill civilians not "the enemy". Ordinary Muslim civilians lived in Rajput states also, the Langa and Manganiyar Muslims regarded the Rajputs as their jajmaan (patrons). All through the Rajput conflict with the Turks and Mughals there is not one instance of these communities playing traitor.

Quote:
Regarding Arabs vs Turks :

In addition to the legitimacy and authority provided by the Gulf based Islamic power centre as described above, the Arabs had been successful in establishing fortified colonies around Multan and Mansurah. These were advance posts of expansion, intelligence gathering by all the subsequent Islamic invaders, including the Turks.


Mansurah and Multan were what remained after the defeat of the Arabs at the hands of the Pratihars. Hardly potent kingdoms. And the Shia colony in Multan, far from being an advance base, was actually a target for the Sunni fanatic Mahmud Ghaznavi!

The principal establishment of Islamic power in India, and its expansion, was by the Turks.


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 20 Feb 2009 07:23 am
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 29 Jul 2003 06:01 am
Posts: 302
Location: India
gandharva wrote:
REAL CAUSES OF HINDU DEFEATS


Before discussing the points from your link let me first put down a list of Hindu victories. And apologies to members from other parts of India, but since the link hovers around Rajputs, I am limiting the list to Rajasthan Rajputs:

Pratihars head a confederacy of clans to defeat the Arabs.

Chandellas defeat or repulse Mahmud Ghaznavi.

Prithviraj defeats Ghori, Chaulukyas defeat Ghori.

Rana Hammir Sesodia of Mewar liberates Chittor, and defeats a Turk army sent to its relief. He then sacks, or takes tribute from, Ajmer and Ranthambhor.

Rao Mallinath Rathor of Marwar takes the help of Turks against his own brother, but then double-crosses the Turks, and carries off the daughter of the Turk chief (governor of Gujarat, Mandor, or Ajmer?)

Rana Kshetrasimha of Mewar defeats the Sultan of Malwa.

Rao Chunda of Marwar captures Mandor from the Turks.

Rana Kumbha of Mewar fights long wars against the combined forces of the Sultans of Gujarta, Malwa, Nagaur. Simultaneously there is war with the neighboring Rajput kingdom of Marwar. Ultimately a peace treaty between the two kingdoms ends with the destruction of the Nagaur Sultanate, the destruction of its main mosque by Kumbha, and the takeover of its lands by the Marwar kingdom.

The Rathors capture a nawab of Ajmer, who abducted a Hindu girl, insert spikes in his body and drag him through the streets of the town.

Rana Sanga defeats the Sultan of Malwa and dismembers his kingdom, annexing the major part. Sanga invades the Sultanate of Gujarat, where the destruction of mosques and plunder of cities, takes place. Musulman women (Yavanis) are abducted. Sanga defeats Ibrahim Lodi in two battles.

The list goes on....but to the points:

Quote:
a forward policy could not be pursued in the absence of a “strong central government for even the whole of northern India which could think and act for the whole country”. As a result, “The Rajput rulers found it difficult to look beyond the territorial limits of their own kingdoms and their regional interests pushed the national issues into the background.”6 Compared to a strong central authority, the various confederacies organised by the Rajputs proved to be patch-works which came apart either under the impact of military defeat, or as soon as the immediate purpose of stopping the enemy had been served.


This is correct and I've described this long ago in limitations of Rajputs and it was vividly illustrated at the Battle of Khanua.

gandharva wrote:
Thirdly, the military organisation of the Rajputs was inferior as compared to that of the Muslims. The Rajputs depended mainly on feudal levies assembled on the spur of the moment. “These feudal levies with no unity of training and organisation, coming together at the last moment, fighting under the leadership of and for their individual leaders, could not be expected to beat back an enemy united in purpose and organisation and acting as on coordinate unit.” A medieval Muslim historian quoted by Dr. Misra said so in so many words: “A commander with a heterogeneous army consisting of soldiers - a hundred from here and a hundred from there - cannot achieve anything. An army with so varied and so many component elements has never been able to achieve anything great.”


Then how does this explain Hindu victories listed above?

gandharva wrote:
Fourthly, “The cavalry and mounted archers of the invading armies gave them a decisive superiority over the home forces. The Indian rulers too maintained cavalry units. But the Arabic and Turkoman horses were much better adapted to warfare… The second strong point of the Turkish military machine was its mounted archery. Their deadly arrows easily covered a range of eighty to hundred paces… Reference to archery among the Indian armies after the age of the epics is conspicuous by its absence.”


This was my point also. However the horse breeds were improved through selective breeding in Rajasthan, giving us the Kathiawari and magnificent Marwari breeds. These horse breeds provided the military resources to the new Rajput kingdoms like Marwar and Mewar, which defeated the Turks and drove them out of Rajputana in the 14th century.

Similarly the Vijaynagar Empire made up for the lack of horses through good relations with the Arab merchants and later the Portuguese, and imported 5000 horses almost every year for its army straight from their breeding grounds in Iraq and Iran.

gandharva wrote:
Besides, the traditional Rajput chivalry looked upon the battle as a ritual or a tournament for displaying their fighting skill and swordsmanship under well-recognised rules of sport. Did not Manu, the ancient law-giver proclaim – ‘A battle was ideally a gigantic tournament with many rules: a warrior fighting from a chariot might not strike one on foot; an enemy in flight, wounded or asking a quarter, might not be slain; the lives of enemy soldiers who had lost their weapons were to be respected; poisoned weapons were not to be used; homage and not annexation was the rightful fruit of victory.’

The Arabs and the Turks, on the other hand, knew no rules and waged a grim and ruthless struggle to destroy their enemies. Feints and sudden attacks, manoeuvering under the cover of darkness and pretending defeat and flights, keeping a large reserve to be used only at critical moments - all these took the Indians by surprise and crippled their fighting capacity. The Indians never tried to take advantage of their enemy’s weakness and perhaps considered it unchivalrous to do so. Such magnanimity on the part of Indian kings… was a sure invitation to disaster against a ruthless foe who recognised no moral or ideological scruples in the pursuit of victory.”


Chivalry, magnanimity, and sundry are generalized statements not borne out by contemporary accounts. And they certainly don't explain Hindu victories!

Maybe Rajputs had a chivalry on/chivalry off button? When they lost it was because the button was on, and when they won it was because the button was off.

More seriously, because war is serious business, the causes of victory/defeat are many sided and should not be limited to chivalry, magnanimity, or hunger. Study a kingdom or empire, describe its resources and capabilities, study geo-political shifts, economic development, changes in military tactics, changes in military technology, etc. and then write an article on "why always losing"?

After that also write another article explaining "why sometimes winning"?


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 20 Feb 2009 07:48 am
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 30 Jan 2008 05:52 pm
Posts: 159
Airavat Ji,

What is your take on Ghazi Mian Masud and battle of Baharaich?. I mean how much is the fiction and how much is the reality in it?.

Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghazi_Saiyyad_Salar_Masud

"This bitter and bloody war was fought in the month of June 1033. In this furious war, no side took any prisoners and it ended only with the slaughter of the entire invading army along with many martyrs from the defending Hindu army.

The battle of Baharaich ended on 14th June 1033. At the gory end, the entire invading army along with their commander lay dead. Not one enemy soldier was allowed to return. There still exists today near Baharaich the grave of the commander of the invader - Prince Ghazi Mian Masud. There he is hailed today by the local Muslims as a Ghazi and a Peer. And every year till this day an Urs (Muslim religious assemblage) is held in his memory."


Sri Goswami Tulsidas was so much peeved at Hindus visiting this shrine that he wrote:

लही आँखि कब आँधरे बाँझ पूत कब ल्याइ ।
कब कोढ़ी काया लही जग बहराइच जाइ ॥
--Dohavali

(When did a blind person regained his eye sight?, when did a barren woman got son?. And when a leper
was cured for his leprosy and got his beautiful body back?. But even then people visit Baharaich)


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 20 Feb 2009 08:25 am
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 23 Aug 2007 10:27 am
Posts: 1523
Location: Naaahhhh
@Airavat et al..

Ok the matter is not that Rajputs were naive gallants and Muslims the scheming murderers.

The question is more -- did the Rajput code of chivalry and in general overall dharmic lack of total war also play a role in the victories and defeat?

Remember all moral condurums also have a practical side -- the Rajputs could not wage a total war since they were the holders of the land and needed it to sustain the kingdom; where as the the Turks were invaders and upsurpers and could wage total war because even a broken India was much better than no India, and a certain amount of damage was actually good since it gave them a tabula rasa for putting their mark over; resettling their population from ethnically cleansed areas and so forth.

Any comments?


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 20 Feb 2009 04:26 pm
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 18 Nov 2008 09:55 pm
Posts: 1593
Quote:
Airavat wrote
Well that was exactly my point. Sarkar says, "In vain did they try to pursue the Turko-Afghan army." With the Turk tactics of horse maneuvers and archery I wrote, "Hindus could not chase after one and repel another division simultaneously."
The battle itself lasted six hours. It was not hunger alone but the cavalry tactics which caused exhaustion. If the Turks had tried a headlong charge of cavalry, as in the first battle, what would have been the result?
Similarly the Marathas at Panipat did the exact same morning wash and worship as the Rajputs six centuries earlier, this too described by Jadunath Sarkar. Pumped on adrenaline they continued the fight until bodily exhaustion set in after 5 hours. This battle also ended by 3:30 pm! Hunger alone was not the cause of their defeat either.


Well, I have never said that no other factiors were involvd in the defeat. :D Battlefield tactics could come as a surprise, although in this case then we have to assume that in the numerous engagements with the Turks, this was the first time the "harrying from a distance" with rotating groups was ever used. I simply said that empty stomach could be a contributing factor that should have been avoided as a known factor unlike the surprises in tactics factors which need not be predictable. Adrenaline only lasts until the bodies glucose falls to a certain point - the exhaustion that comes after that is worse than if more glucose were available to start with. Ask anyone engaging in endurance sports.

Quote:
How does all this make "the Gulf" a power base for Mahmud? Every Sultan till Mubarak Khalji acknowledged the supremacy of the Caliph, but every campaign in India was by the Turks, and not the Arabs. Did the Turk power in India disappear after the destruction of the Caliphate by the Mongols? NO, it actually increased from the flood of Turk refugees who joined the army of the Delhi Sultans.


I did not say that it makes the Gulf a power base for Mahmud, but an ideological and political centre which played the role of initiator in the early days of attacks on Sind and Punjab, and in the latter days as a legitimizing authority. Because of the ideological importance of this base in Iraq in the early days, any damage inflicted here would have necessitated withdrawal of forces in the hinterland and engaged in expansion elsewhere to defend the focus of Islamic authority. By the time of Mongol appearance, Islamic authority had shifted more to the Near East, after the exploits of the Kurdi-Syrian Salahuddin against the Crusaders. Even though after Salahuddins death the Muslim factions fell fighting each other, overall centre of gravity had shifted to the western parts and paved the way for the rise of the Ottoman empire later.

Quote:
And as for sending slaves, please note that Muhammad Tughlaq sent hundreds of Indian slaves to the Emperor of China, according to Ibn Batutah. The Mughals used to gift money and presents to Muslim rulers in Arabia, Iran, and Central Asia.

Sending slaves or gifts to a king, warlord or a non-Muslim ruler is not the same thing to an Islamic mind as sending slaves and gifts to the Caliph, however puppet that Caliph might be.


Quote:
No boss, Indian merchant shipping continued to play a major role in the sea trade until the onset of the European powers. My source, The History and Culture of the Indian People, says:

A few junks from China still reached India but most of them stopped at Malacca. The junks of China were strongly built, the timber being fastened by nails. The ships owned by Indians and Arabs (including Egyptians) were built mainly, if not exclusively, in India, but they were very frail as their heavy planks were made fast with cocoanut cordage and wooden pins.

So Arabs and Indians were in the same boat, literally :mrgreen:.

It then goes on: The Arabs exercised a strict monopoly in the trade from Malabar to the Red Sea. They also shared with Indian ships the carrying trade between Gujarat on the one hand and the Red Sea, Persian Gulf, and East Africa on the other.


So Arabs and Indians were in the same boat literally , yet the Arabs exercised a strict monopoly in the trade from Malabar to the Red Sea? And while they exercised a strict monopoly they shared in that monopoly with Indian ships in the very same area?

Chau ju kua states that from San-fots'i (Palembang, E. Sumatra) Nan-p'i (Malabar) is a little more than a month's voyage. Elsehwhere he says that it takes a Tsuan-chou ship a month to reach Ku-lin (Quilon) from Lan-Li (extreme N.W. coast of Sumatra). The Akhbar of Sulaiman gives one month as the time taken to reach Kalah-Bar (Kedah) from Kulam Mali (Quilon) [Hourani - Arab Seafaring]. Contrast this with the contemporary Samaraichchakaha stating that the ship sailing from Tamralipti reached Subarnabhumi in two months. Allowing for possible exaggarations in reports of the embassy to China sent by the king of Chu-lein (Chola) [Chau-ju-kua] we read that the voyage took 1150 days out of which it was under sail for only 247 days. The same author reports that the Ta-Shih (Arabs) too 100 days to reach their own country from Tsuan-chou. The Akhbar of Sulaiman gives a similar 120 days as journey time from Masquat to Canton. [Hourani]. In any case you probably noticed that I tried to point out the importance of sea-tansport for war purpose as used by the Arabs in their attacks on Sind and Gujarat in th early days, and no such indication on the part of Indians.


Quote:
Yes all this is well known but the whole point is your demand for a genocide by Prithivraj after his victory over Ghori. This was not possible, without first destroying the Turk garrisons at Sarhind, Jalandhar, Lahore, Multan, Sialkot, etc. You expected the Hindus to just skirt these forts and carry out genocide....of whom? Leaving armed garrisons sitting pretty behind you while you carry out "genocide" would be a suicide mission.
And it was not possible after just one battle, while Mahmud Ghaznavi took 22 years of continuous war to annex Punjab!


First, the other alternative side to the story of just one battle is : Hammira-mahakavya stating that Prithviraja defeated Muhammad Ghuri at least seven times while Prabandhachintamani and Prithvirajaraso states twenty-one. Dasharatha Sharma's version is that Ghurids raided Chauhan territories soon after the occupation of Lahore in AD 1186 but were defeated.

Anyway, Prithviraj III had come to power in 1177, one year before Ghuri attempted his first disastrous expedition to Gujarat, when he succumbed to his minister Kadambabhasa's advice not to coordinate with the Chalukyas against Ghori. This was 12 years before the battle of Tarain. He allowed Ghori, and inveterate enemy of the Ghaznavids out of blood-feud, to absorb the Ghaznavid forts you mention. These could have been attacked before by the Rajputs, isnt it, since they could apparently be done following the first Muslim recorded battle of Tarain?

Quote:
And your next post:

The numbers game was against the Sikhs, but did they even try "genocide" against one village of Punjabi Muslims? On the contrary Ranjit Singh recruited them in his army and gave them freedom of worship, a wise policy to strengthen the economy of his kingdom.

The enemy the inscription talked about were the TURKS not ordinary Muslim villagers. And I said it would be "adharmic" to kill civilians not "the enemy". Ordinary Muslim civilians lived in Rajput states also, the Langa and Manganiyar Muslims regarded the Rajputs as their jajmaan (patrons). All through the Rajput conflict with the Turks and Mughals there is not one instance of these communities playing traitor.


Well I think I have also read that Maharaja Ranjit Singhji apparently allowed the Qazi courts to function and dispose "justice" on all. Will fish out the references to the claims and post later. However, the population ratios simply could have been disastrous if the Muslims had been subjected to genocide - as it would have shifted military power balance, and not necessarily damaged the economy severely. In the Punjab, Muslims were the big-landowners, under Mughal patronage and system. Poor Muslims probably did not own much land or means of production and under the Mughal system would be more dependent on the state extraction of surplus from mostly non-Muslim producers and their liquidation might not have significantly reduced productive economic capacity. This wasn't the case in the early days of advent of Islam in Punjab.

Quote:
Mansurah and Multan were what remained after the defeat of the Arabs at the hands of the Pratihars. Hardly potent kingdoms. And the Shia colony in Multan, far from being an advance base, was actually a target for the Sunni fanatic Mahmud Ghaznavi!
The principal establishment of Islamic power in India, and its expansion, was by the Turks.

I thought Mahmud used the excuse of Ismailis in Multan! Anyway, the fact is that as you state, even after defeat, these remained in Muslim hands. Muhammad Habib himself acknowledges the possible role of "civilians" in providing detailed knowledge that makes the "far-flung" campaigns of Mahmud's ilk at all possible and successful. The "civilian" Arab settlers and indigenous Muslim converts or products of "Islamic conversion" would form a valuable network of information passing back all the way to warlords like Mahmud. The wishes of such civilians are clear from the never-quoted translations of Z.A.Desai about the Arabic dual plaque for Somnath - may the rule of the foreign Islamic ruler closest in connection or allegiance or affinity spread over the civilian's domicile among non-Muslims and may one day Islam hold sway replacing all others.


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 20 Feb 2009 05:02 pm
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 31 Oct 2005 12:36 am
Posts: 936
Also, the post by Gandharva, with a reference to VOI is a very broad sweep and does not seek to explain every battle. The only way to test those reasons, is to know every battle between Muslim hoarders and Hindu Kings and gauge, if the reasons mentioned in the reference are largely true. Any views, Airavat?


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 20 Feb 2009 05:11 pm
Forum Moderator
Offline

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 12:00 am
Posts: 7269
And the lurking underlying factor in all these is the 1200 year drought cycle which sapped the fiduciary strength of the Indian kingdoms in that period.


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 20 Feb 2009 06:50 pm
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 10 Jan 2009 06:44 pm
Posts: 251
Why is it that Maharana Pratap's exploits find no mention. IMO he was better than his father Rana Sanga


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 21 Feb 2009 01:26 am
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 29 Jul 2003 06:01 am
Posts: 302
Location: India
brihaspati wrote:
Battlefield tactics could come as a surprise, although in this case then we have to assume that in the numerous engagements with the Turks, this was the first time the "harrying from a distance" with rotating groups was ever used.


Rotating groups could be used here because of the smaller size of the Chauhan army as compared to the previous battle. His most important commander Skanda was engaged against other enemies; another general missing from this battle was Udayraj (from Bengal). This must have reduced the Chauhan army by 30%....when the weakness of the army became known to Ghori he got a free hand to deploy his cavalry as mentioned above.

And even if they had a "full stomach" there was no way to effectively counter these tactics with their small army, and the combined arms of elephants, cavalry, infantry.

Quote:
So Arabs and Indians were in the same boat literally , yet the Arabs exercised a strict monopoly in the trade from Malabar to the Red Sea? And while they exercised a strict monopoly they shared in that monopoly with Indian ships in the very same area?


Read the two sentences again: The Arabs exercised a strict monopoly in the trade from Malabar to the Red Sea. They also shared with Indian ships the carrying trade between Gujarat on the one hand and the Red Sea, Persian Gulf, and East Africa on the other.

Arabs had settled in large numbers in Malabar (the Kerala coast) but not in Gujarat, which is why they had a monopoly in the trade from the former region. In the Chaulukya kingdom of Gujarat, Jagadu a merchant of international renown owned a large number of ships and traded with Persia, Arabia, and South-East Asia.

Quote:
First, the other alternative side to the story of just one battle is : Hammira-mahakavya stating that Prithviraja defeated Muhammad Ghuri at least seven times while Prabandhachintamani and Prithvirajaraso states twenty-one. Dasharatha Sharma's version is that Ghurids raided Chauhan territories soon after the occupation of Lahore in AD 1186 but were defeated.

....when he succumbed to his minister Kadambabhasa's advice not to coordinate with the Chalukyas against Ghori. He allowed Ghori, and inveterate enemy of the Ghaznavids out of blood-feud, to absorb the Ghaznavid forts you mention. These could have been attacked before by the Rajputs, isnt it, since they could apparently be done following the first Muslim recorded battle of Tarain?


The Hammir Mahakavya and Prithviraj Raso were written centuries after the actual event and contain many unsubstantiated stories. The contemporary account is the Prithviraj-vijaya written by the Kashmiri Jayank who lived in the Chauhan kings's court.

The Prithviraj-vijay describes Ghori's invasion of 1178.....there was no question of coordinating with the Chaulukyas. The latter had tried to spread their rule north; they had made the Chauhans of Nadol and the Parmars of Mt. Abu their vassals. And Ghori actually asked Prithviraj for an alliance against the Chaulukyas, though he had heard of the Chauhan King's extreme hostility to Muslims. The young king rejected this proposal despite his enmity with the Chaulukyas (Give him credit for this; a truly nationalistic act).

Ghori then attacked the Chauhans of Nadol, vassals of Gujarat but clan-brothers of Prithviraj, on his way to invade Gujarat. When Prithviraj heard of the sack of Nadol he was enraged and resolved to crush Ghori but his minister told him to let the Turks exhaust themselves in the war against the Chaulukyas, before swooping down on them. But soon after a messenger from Gujarat brought the news that the invader had been defeated near Mt. Abu by Mulraja Chaulukya and had fled away.

And as for "absorbing the Ghaznavid forts" this was also being done. The Chauhan king Arnoraja defeated the Turushkas and slaughtered a large number around 1135. The next ruler Vigrahraja conquered Delhi from the Tomars and Hansi (in Haryana) from the Muslims around 1153. Next Prithviraj II defeated the Ghaznavid ruler Khusrav Malik, and burnt their city Panchpattan on the banks of the Sutlej around 1168.

While the Chauhans were expanding their kingdom north, they also had to fight against their Hindu neighbors like the Chandellas in the south-east and the Chaulukyas in the south. In 1105 Prithviraj I fought against the Chaulukya invaders who had reached up to Pushkar. So while annexing Muslim territory they also needed to fight Hindu neighbors and annex Hindu territory like Delhi. Prithviraj had to fight a war against Gujarat in 1187-88. So expecting Prithviraj to "absorb Ghaznavid forts" while he was engaged in fighting the Chaulukyas and Chandellas is naive.

Just as the Vijaynagar rulers attacked the Hoysala kingdom, even while the latter's ruler Ballal III was fighting to the death against the Sultanate of Madurai! After his death and the destruction of his army, the next Hoysala king Ballal IV could not resist the Vijaynagar army and lost his kingdom to them. By your demand that Hindu Kingdoms should have formed alliances against Muslims, without fighting each other, the Vijaynagar Kingdom would not have been able to expand its territory to cover a large part of South India!

The Ghoris did not have a major threat to their kingdom from neighboring Muslim powers until the rise of the Khwarazims who conquered Nishapur and Herat from them in 1201. This allowed them a free hand in all their military campaigns in North India.

Quote:
In the Punjab, Muslims were the big-landowners, under Mughal patronage and system. Poor Muslims probably did not own much land or means of production and under the Mughal system would be more dependent on the state extraction of surplus from mostly non-Muslim producers and their liquidation might not have significantly reduced productive economic capacity.


Punjab had a Muslim majority population, the landowners were Muslim, but the "producers" were "mostly" non-Muslim? Did the "poor Muslims" live on trees? :rotfl:

Quote:
I thought Mahmud used the excuse of Ismailis in Multan!


Ismailis are Shias.


Last edited by Airavat on 21 Feb 2009 02:35 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 21 Feb 2009 02:25 am
BRFite -Trainee
Offline

Joined: 17 Jan 2003 07:01 am
Posts: 58
Location: USA
rajsunder wrote:
Mods,
I am not so sure, if I am right in posting this thing out here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qutub_Minar

is the page for Qutub Minar on wiki, and as most of you over here know that Qutub Minar was built by demolishing hundreds of jain temples and that the stone from those temples was even used in building the minar(which one can see on the notice boards posted by ASI on the minar site).
The link does not mention any thing about the same, so if anyone has a wiki account with the ability of editing, please do the same.

The ASI plaque says that Quwwatul-Islam Masjid was built "with the carved columns and other architectural members of Twenty-Seven Hindu and Jain temples"

I have a photograph of that plaque and also some of the columns with hindu idols if you are interested.


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 21 Feb 2009 03:00 am
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 18 Nov 2008 09:55 pm
Posts: 1593
Airavatji,
I can see that you will consistently ignore points I raise that does not suit your hypotheses, and you will also ignore references that do not agree with your opinions. We are both working from narrative sources, almost none of which can strictly be substantiated beyond dispute. They are all after all claims by this or that human author, even at the time point they are supposed to have been written. The highlighting of a few stories like that of Jagadu in Jagaducharita (who is said to have maintained agents in the middle east) are usually touted a lot in the Thaparite literature to prove amicable trading relationship and perfect symmetry of Indian-Arab trade presence. However there are alternative opinions about Arab disruption of direct Indian merchants' sea-trade, increasing shift from direct shipping to financial trade and warehousing, decline in quality of ships, and decreasing presence and penetration of Indian merchants in the middle east while Arab presence increased not only on the coasts but also in the interior of India. We could also go into the Gujarat Arab question, as I can estimate the sources from which you conclude the thinness of Arab presence in Gujarat compared to Malabar. But I have a feeling that these alternative views sourced again from narratives would be either ignored by you or dismissed as unsubstantiated.

When we are reduced to :rotfl: at other's opinions that for me is a sign that it is time to disengage. :D Let us each have our opinions, all based on hardly ever substantiable narrative claims, and wait for more tangible and concrete findings. Meanwhile, there is no dearth of other issues to chew on!


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 21 Feb 2009 03:16 am
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 29 Jul 2003 06:01 am
Posts: 302
Location: India
The Prithviraj-vijay also has some other interesting nuggets about the Chauhan-Chaulukya conflict. Prithviraj made a night attack (whither chivalry and the mythical kshatriya code of war?) on Gujarat which was repulsed by an army under the general Dharavarsha Parmar. But later the Chaulukya kingdom signed a peace treaty with the Chauhans.

After the war some merchants from Ajmer visited Gujarat, but were stopped on the way by the Dandanayak Abhayada, who asked the minister Jaggadeva Pratihar if he could seize the valuable articles of these visitors from the enemy state?

Jaggadeva replied that he had signed a treaty after taking a lot of trouble and that, "If Abhayda therefore laid his hands on the people of Sapadalaksha (Ajmer), he would have him sewn in the belly of a donkey."

This was a method of torture, since under the sun the dead animal's skin shrank, slowly and excruciatingly suffocating the prisoner to death.

Another nugget from this book says that Prithviraj had to subdue a rebellion by his cousin Nagarjuna, who captured the city of Gudapura. Prithviraj besieged that place but Nagarjuna fled away.....his army resisted Prithviraj for some time but were eventually defeated. Prithviraj captured the family and followers of Nagarjuna and took them to Ajmer, where he hung the severed heads of his enemies on the gates of the fort to serve as warning to other rebels.

We are indeed lucky that this text has survived to reveal such valuable information. Therefore "ruses and deceptions" like night attacks, ruthless acts like cutting off heads, and torture were still around. So don't take the claims of chivalry, magnanimity, lack of aggression, being filled in people of a certain era, seriously. They are not borne out by contemporary accounts and have only been added in later writings.

And Brihaspati,

I haven't read any "Thaparite literature". My sources for the sea trade are in "History and Culture of the Indian People" which has authors like RC Majumdar, Jadunath Sarkar, and KM Munshi, each of whom is criticised and abused by the leftists for describing the brutal truth of Islamic invasions in this series of books.


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 21 Feb 2009 07:05 am
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 29 Jul 2003 06:01 am
Posts: 302
Location: India
Here is a vicious critique of RC Majumdar and the "History and Culture of the Indian People" from the bastion of left-wing extremism and dhimmitude, the [url='http:www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl1416/14160600.htm']Chindu[/url]:

In India, the contrary interpretation found its high priest in the well-known historian R. C. Majumdar. To him the entire period from c. 1200 onwards was one of foreign rule;
Muslims were alien to Indian (Hindu) culture;
the Hindus, oppressed and humiliated, wished nothing better than to slaughter "the Mlechhas" (Muslims);
the British regime was a successor more civilised than "Muslim rule";
yet real opposition to the British came from Hindus, not Muslims, even in 1857;
and, finally, the national movement's course was throughout distorted by concessions made to Muslims by Gandhiji, who was so much personally to blame for Partition.

This view runs like a red thread in the volumes of History and Culture of the Indian People (first volume issued 1951), published by the Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan with financial assistance from the Government of India, and edited by R. C. Majumdar, whose great industry must extract admiration from his worst critics.

Majumdar went on to author texts on the Rebellion of 1857 and the freedom movement in which the same stance was firmly maintained. Though after Majumdar's death (1980), there has not appeared on the scene a historian of similar calibre in the Hindutva (or even the 'soft Hindutva') camp, the often unproven hypotheses and inferences that he bequeathed have all become firm truths for a very large number of educated people in India.

The article is by that slimeball Irfan Habib who terms Majumdar a "Hindutva" historian even though he passed away long before that term was coined. Brihaspati was citing Muhammad Habib as one of his sources; he was Irfan's father as well as the father of the "Thaparite school" of concocted history.


Top
Profile
Report this post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Distorted history- Causes, consequences, remedies
PostPosted: 21 Feb 2009 05:53 pm
BRFite
Offline

Joined: 18 Nov 2008 09:55 pm
Posts: 1593
Airavatji,
I thought I had already disengaged. I guess you are the type who will go at the person rather than his ideas. :D Just because Muhammad Habib was the father of Irfan Habib doesn't make him automatically a founder of the Thaparite School of Indian history. If you read Muhammad Habib's works you can see that he writes frankly about the possible contribution of Muslim settlers and civilians and merchants in helping spread Islamic conquest. He wrote introductions for works by Indian historians now vilified by Thaparites as Islam-bashers, one author in particular whose work on Islamic slavery has been chastized by the son virulently. If you really read Muhammad Habib, I am sure that if you are really rational and unbiased you will appreciate that he acknowledges many of the atrocious side to Islamic rule that the Thaparites deny completely. In spite of Irfan Habib's politics read his early theses on the Agrarian System of Mughal India and his lesser known short work on the potential of development of Capitalist forms within Mughal economy. After Moreland his work on this area should not be thrown away as trash. He tries to show many things, including lack of caste differentiation among Indian labour which go against the grain of Thaparite strands. In fact the irony is that the latter Irfan Habib criticizes authors for exposing stuff he himslef had once exposed - particularly about slavery.

I am very much aware of R.C.Majumdar, or Jadunath Sarkar's works, and their criticism at the hands of Thaparites. I do not simply study modern historians but also try to read up narrative texts they use or their translations. Every historian is limited by his or her current understanding, and just because someone is a R.C,Majumdar or Jadunath Sarkar, does not necessarily mean that we have to stop at their analysis. Many of the "nationalist" historians worked within the framework of AIT theory - look at for example R.C.Dutts two volume work on "Hindu civilization". I have much more reasons to respect both Majumdar and Sarkar for their work than you can imagine. I discarded my school textbook at class 4 level and took up Advanced history of India by R.C.Majumdar, H.C.Raychaudhury and Kalikinkar Dutta. I can still write down from memory most parts of the book. I was continuously harassed, opposed and informally show-caused for quoting from these authors by relevant teachers, at least one of which led to one of my many "suspensions" :mrgreen: Two years later I obtained Jadunath Sarkar's works on the decline of the Mughal empire and on Aurangzeb. Subsequently I have collected most of their works as published.

I go for logic, data, and I do not believe in stopping at any level of understanding. I go as far as looking up sources as possible, and not stop only at a particular historian's understanding. When I want to read up on sea-trade I would look up not only Indian sources but also Chinese and Arab and Ceylonese sources. In studying Islamic invasions I studied Persian originals for some of these chronicles whose translations are not available in full.

And in the end, as I have mentioned before, it all reduces to claims in narrative texts. We can go into deconstructing the Kashmiri immigrant court-poet Jayank's Prithviraj-vijaya if you want - but it will be to no purpose. Contemporary sources may not always write everything - they themselves could be under many restrictions and considerations or suffer from incompleteness of current knowledge. Later authors are relatively free of such constraints, they can also reserach on their own, etc. At the same time yes it is true that they might pick up a lot of imaginary notions and stories. For example Kalhana is supposed to be reliable, but he also writes of periods he could not be contemporary of - his research is supposed to be good.

No comments:

Post a Comment