Timeline for How historically accurate is 'India: A History' by John Keay?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 10, 2015 at 15:57 | comment | added | CGCampbell | @SamuelRussell Did you mean to link in sources? | |
| Feb 10, 2015 at 10:03 | comment | added | Samuel Russell | Neither of the types of account you list are "history," the first once was, the second never has been. | |
| Feb 10, 2015 at 3:37 | comment | added | taninamdar | I understand what you mean. But what I wanted to ask is whether the bias is "too much". For example, I am aware two very biased narratives of Indian history — one that claims India was essentially a barbarian area before colonization, and another which claims Indian wars used nuclear weapons thousands of years earlier. So, it's fine if there are a few biased statements here and there, but is it objective in general? I hope this makes sense. | |
| Feb 10, 2015 at 2:13 | history | answered | Samuel Russell | CC BY-SA 3.0 |