Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

22

I think the OP knows that the Dravidians were in India before the Aryans, and is asking why historians don't talk more about them. The answer is that Sanskrit (Aryan) scholarship has been going on in the west for centuries, while we still can't read the Indus Valley (probably Dravidian) script. Most of what we know about the Indus Valley civilization is ...


22

It is actually a bit of a myth that everyone believed the world to be flat until Columbus. It is true that a lot of ancient societies believed that as a matter of cultural mythology. This was true both for the ancient Greeks as well as the ancient Indians. However, any ancient navigator who looked to the horizon on the sea on a calm day could clearly see ...


21

First, the easier part on Christianity. As the other reply says, the British were (mostly) unwilling to convert Indians in order to avoid inflaming local religious sentiments. In fact, the British were so cautious on this that they would probably even tolerated the practices of sati and child marriage had some Indian reformers (such as Ram Mohan Roy) not ...


18

Hitler did not consider Indians to be Aryans at all. Instead, he believed them to be barbaric Asians who did not deserve to enjoy freedom as a country. He wanted India to remain subjugated under the British (he said this openly in his book) permanently. He pointedly refused Bose's request to withdraw this statement in his only meeting with Bose. As for ...


17

Personally, I don't think anything ever went particularly "wrong" with India. They only fell behind the civilizations of Western Europe, not the rest of the world. So the proper question to ask here is what suddenly went right with heretofore backward Europe. To my mind the answer to this question is clear: The printing press. Nearly overnight Europeans had ...


17

It looks fairly likely this story was invented around the turn of the 21'st Century. The hits against it are: No reference to it has ever been found any older than 1998 (reportedly from a American neo-gnostic publication). Lord Macauly is known to have been in the middle of a stint in India (halfway around the world) in 1835 when this was supposedly ...


16

To begin, the following passage from Britain, the Commonwealth and the End of Empire by Dr John Darwin discusses the "staggering blow" Great Britain felt after granting independence to India. ... Repairing Britain The huge sense of relief at a more or less dignified exit, and much platitudinous rhetoric, disguised the fact that the end of ...


15

There are a good number of reasons why the British were able to do so, and in fact rule over India effectively for over a century. Disunity among Indian princely states. India was more a collection of warring princely states, at loggerheads with each other. The British sucessfully used this to play off one state against another. Add to it there was no ...


15

Yes, Bose was welcome in Germany. The Germans could have denied him entry if they wanted to, and so there are no doubts that they were happy to see him in their country. However, Hitler repeatedly refused to issue a declaration supporting India's independence, and this suggests that he personally did not support Bose's cause. It also has to be remembered ...


14

China had a permanent seat since 1945 As one of the "Big Four" allies in World War II (China, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States), the Republic of China (ROC) was one of the founding members of the United Nations. President Franklin Roosevelt had acknowledged China's war effort in World War II and stated his desire to allow China ...


13

From independent sources, I'd go with the India.com version: India never received any such offer. The UN actually existed during WW2. This is what the group of countries allied against the Axis powers called themselves. The Security Council was the group of countries that were actually the major allies supplying large numbers of troops in the fight, and ...


13

The actual decision of how to divide the country - how to draw the partition line - was the work of, Sir Cyril Radcliffe, chair of the Border Commissions. There were two border Commissions. One for Punjab and the other for Bengal. Each commission had 4 representatives. Of which, 2 were from the Indian National Congress and the other 2 were from the Muslim ...


13

The partition of India was undertaken per the Indian Independence Act of the British Parliament, taken after consultation with the main interest groups. Gandhi agreed to the partition reluctantly; other groups, such as the Muslim League, enthusiastically.


13

The British East India Company did not set out to conquer and rule India, nor did that situation manifest itself overnight, nor by any single battle or treaty. The British built ties with stable commercial interests in India, leaving the freedom to act opportunistically in Indian politics as the Mughal Empire crumbled outmaneuvered European rivals in ...


13

I think @T.E.D.'s answer makes a very convincing case for the speech being a modern forgery, like the Protocols or the Dulles Plan. It's also, imho, a very inept forgery. As T.E.D. has pointed out the language is too modern. As one who has read some works by Macaulay, I must also add that the style does not seem to be his and is very much inferior. To ...


13

In regards to the battle between Alexander and Porus, both accounts are correct, in their own way. Alexander won the battle, and received an acknowledgement of such from Porus; Porus won the war, by convincing the Greek army (if perhaps not Alexander himself) that continuing was pointlessly expensive. Both sides saved face through the reappointment of ...


12

Frankly a country made up of two large population lobes completely separated by 3000 kilometers of relatively hostile neighbor (or twice that in ocean) is bound to break up eventually. It just logistically can't work out very well, and culturally they are bound to start going their separate ways. I'm unaware of any country like that in history that lasted ...


12

First of all, Hong Kong is now China (from 1997), based off your question, I wasn't sure if you knew. India and Hong Kong were very different stories. India was most definitely hurt by Great Britain. For example, Great Britain had a total monopoly on Indian salt. That meant that the Indians produced salt, and then, the British took it and sold it back to ...


12

In 1943, some 3 million indian subjects of the British Raj died due to bengal famine. I think the most authentic and rich source for examining and finding evidences against Churchill in this incident is Madhusree Mukerjee's book, 'Churchill's Secret War', which reveals a side of Churchill's largely ignored in the West and considerably tarnishes his heroic ...


11

Madras was bombarded by a German warship during World War I. That's the only instance I could find in either war of an Indian city coming under that kind of fire from German regular armed forces. Germany had no aircraft carriers, and their only real long-range bomber in WWII, the Heinkel HE 177, appears to have only been used in the Eastern and Western ...


10

First off the wikipedia page that you cite to is based on the Economist Intelligence Unit's Democracy Index ("EIUDI") which is not an academic source. The methodology used to assemble the report is not known, but that doesn't mean that it is not useful. With that in mind from the EIUDI 2011 Report: Flawed democracies: These countries also have free and ...


10

According to Freedom at Midnight by Dominique Lapierre and Larry Collins (I have a link to Wikipedia but have read the book multiple times), the idea for Pakistan came from a British Raj (wasn't sure whether to write India or Pakistan here) student studying in England who pitched the idea to Mohammed Ali Jinnah at a dinner. Jinnah wasn't receptive to the ...


10

A quick search of Google netted this entry from Wikipedia. The page says that conflict started in 711 CE with Islamic expansion, specifically by the Umayyad Caliphate. While this doesn't qualify as a riot, this marks the start of violent relationships between the two groups. This is reiterated here and here, although the time frames differ slightly from each ...


10

Hitler was an Chameleon opportunist who used the word "Aryan", in different contexts to supplement his political ideologies, which were mainly to conquer Europe, and the systematic eradication of Jews. The Earliest definition of Aryan, given out by the Nazis, was a race of people belonging to "Indo-European tribes" and the five European sub-races Nordic, ...


9

Given that both are thought to date back to the 4th or 5th centuries BCE, and the poetic verse structure strongly implies a long history as an oral tradition before it was committed to writing, this would be very much like asking how true the Iliad is. The purpose of epic poems is not really to act as a historical document like we think of them today. The ...


8

Largely from Hinduism and Jainism. Adding onto this was his exposure to Buddhist and Theosophical thought while he was a student in London. His eventual philosophy of Satyagraha came to fruition from his experiences in South Africa.


8

No Kalapas are defined as the smallest units of physical matter If we stop at wikipedia, then Hinduism, modern physics and the ancient greeks have a theory of the atom. But a definition does not really equate to a theory. Kalapas are material units very much smaller than atoms, which die out immediately after they come into being. Each kalapa is a ...


7

One thing that might be a factor is the culture of each country going in. During the colonial period the British got a great deal of their military manpower from India. However, it wasn't evenly distributed. In fact, the native colonial Indian military units were heavily Muslim. The result of this is that Muslim Indians grew to view the military very ...


7

I think everyone who has posted here (@ihtkwot, @mgb, @Russell) have all brought up important points. I agree with @ihtkwot and @Russell that Russia simply did not have the military capacity to challenge Britain's hold on India (a territory that the British would have vigorously defended). Also, Russia seemed far more interested in territories to the west ...


7

Well, as a matter of fact yes. It seems a little odd today, but during the period of European supremacy (aka: The colonial era), it was quite common for companies to band together to exploit European military superiority for financial gain when, for whatever reason, the country they were operating in had scruples against doing so itself. In fact, Wikipedia ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible