Distortions in Indian History

This news report can serve as a primer on true Indian history:

‘Set right distortions in history curriculum’
Staff Reporter

---

Still being taught in schools as facts, says former chief of ASI B.B. Lal

---

NEW DELHI: Pointing out that “there is absolutely no proof that the Vedas were written around 1200 BC and that the invading Aryans massacred the people of the Indus Valley”, former Director-General of Archaeological Survey of India B. B. Lal on Friday lamented that “unfortunately, these malicious distortions are still being taught in our schools as facts”.
Addressing the International Conference on Indian History, Civilisation and Geopolitics-2009 (ICIH-2009) that began here, Prof. Lal cautioned that new distortions in Indian history were being introduced even today. In his paper presented at the conference, he said it was the duty of Indian historians to set these distortions right through cogent evidence and sustainable arguments.
“Though the perception and mind-set of historians plays a dominant role in history-writing, it is important for Indians to identify and challenge the distortions that have been deliberately introduced over the centuries,” he said.
Shivaji Singh, former Head of the Department of Ancient History, Gorakhpur University, rejected the oft-repeated charge that Indians have no sense of history. “Ancient Indians had a robust historical tradition that originated during the Rig Vedic times and continued to develop and proliferate till the end of the medieval period. This tradition has created a rich and huge mass of historical literature that is unparalleled in the world,” he said. Prof. Singh explained that the indigenous Indian sense of history was unique because its main purpose was man’s self-fulfilment and self-realisation instead of vague objective such as furtherance of freedom, rationalism and individualism that are prevalent in the West.
Kosla Vepa, Director of the US-based Indic Studies Foundation that has organised the three-day conference, spoke about the demeaning condescension that many Western historians have bestowed upon India. “Books on Indian history sold abroad deliberately neglect our ancient history so as to minimise and sideline its contributions. At the same time, they try to whitewash the horrors that the British rule inflicted on India. Changing the content of the textbooks worldwide to correct these distortions should be our goal.”

The Hindu : New Delhi News : ‘Set right distortions in history curriculum’

My immediate question is whether Prof Lal & Co are Members of BJP, RSS, Shiv Sena and the like..

In my mind,

1. Exact dates of the Aryan Migration is not clear..I am very positive there was MIGRATION from Central Asia. When exactly did it happen? Long before or long after the Mohanjeddaro, Harappan, Mehrgarh Civilization? When?

2. Whether Migrating Northerners were a menace to the local population or were friendly people?

3. I don't want to believe that Northern Migrants destroyed the glorious Indus Valley Civilization... maybe a wishful thinking.

Let the Indian Historians meticulously research the records and archeological evidence to say some thing useful... instead of playing Dirty Politics!

Wait & watch.

Theories proposed by the western historians regarding migration from central europe are in the wane now. AIT - aryan invasion theory gave way to AMT - aryan migration theory and now the theory most talked about is OIT - out of india theory.

Prof. Lal is a respected academic; a brief bio on him from wiki.

[h=1]B. B. Lal[/h]From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Braj Basi Lal (born in Jhansi, India in 1921), better known as B. B. Lal, is an Indian archaeologist. He was the Director General of theArchaeological Survey of India from 1968 to 1972, and has served as President of the World Archaeological Congress. He also worked in for UNESCO committees. He received the Padma Bhushan award by the Government of India in 2000.
He has done excavations in the Indus Valley Civilization with Mortimer Wheeler and other archaeologists. He has had an archaeological career spanning more than half‑a‑century. He was trained in excavation by the veteran archaeologist, Wheeler at Taxila, Harappa and other sites in the 1940s. Out of his many pupils Wheeler chose Lal to entrust the excavation of the early historic site of Sisupalgarh in Orissabefore relinquishing the charge of the Director General of Archaeology in India in 1947.
The British archaeologists, Stuart Piggott and D.H. Gordon, in their reviews of B. B. Lal’s classic article on the Copper Hoards of the Gangetic basin (Piggott 1954), and his Hastinapura excavation report (Gordon 1957), both published in Ancient India, the annual journal of the Archaeological Survey of India, hailed them as models of research and excavation reporting. In subsequent years Lal excavated the mesolithic site of Birbhanpur in West Bengal, the Chalcolithic site of Gilund and the Harappan site of Kalibangan, both in Rajasthan, and the Ramayana sites of Ayodhya, Bharadwaj Ashram, Nandigram, Chitrakut and Shringaverapura in Uttar Pradesh.

“there is absolutely no proof that the Vedas were written around 1200 BC and that the invading Aryans massacred the people of the Indus Valley”

Click to expand...

I am not aware in which school/s and class/es such inputs are being given even today. May be parents of school-going children will be able to clarify. AFAIK, the present scholarly opinion is that the Indus-valley civilization disappeared due to the drying up of the river Sarasvati. This is a somewhat accurately dateable geological phenomenon but then it brings forward the dates of the vedas which again does not suit the claims of the Hindu chauvinists about the hoary past of their vedic civilization.

Studies of the hindu scriptures has put paid to any notion of "invading Aryan hordes" but the migrating Aryans must necessarily have met with resistance at some points, fought battles and won some, lost some. It is also the present state of opinion that the Aryan migration need not have been a one-time phenomenon and there could have been more than one large migration through the NW frontier in different time points of ancient history and all of them need not have been the veda-following Aryans.

Shivaji Singh, former Head of the Department of Ancient History, Gorakhpur University, rejected the oft-repeated charge that Indians have no sense of history. “Ancient Indians had a robust historical tradition that originated during the Rig Vedic times and continued to develop and proliferate till the end of the medieval period. This tradition has created a rich and huge mass of historical literature that is unparalleled in the world,” he said. Prof. Singh explained that the indigenous Indian sense of history was unique because its main purpose was man’s self-fulfilment and self-realisation instead of vague objective such as furtherance of freedom, rationalism and individualism that are prevalent in the West.

Click to expand...

This is just hot air; ancient Indians did not have the sense of history as viewed from the commonsense pov.

The Hindu : New Delhi News : ‘Purge history books of bias’
New Delhi

‘Purge history books of bias’
Staff ReporterNEW DELHI: The former Union Minister, Subramanian Swamy, has charged that wilful distortions in writing Indian history have been occurring solely due to state support since the British times.
“The British rulers wrote our history to divide and rule us. But what is the excuse of Indian governments after Independence to continue with the same policy?”
He was delivering the valedictory address at a three-day international conference on “Indian History, Civilisation and Geopolitics” here on Sunday.
Dr. Swamy said myths spread by biased historians overtook Indian history, while actual events and places had been declared myths.
He demanded a reorientation of the state policy to purge history books of a false chronology of ancient India and myths such as Aryan invasion and racial divide of north and south Indians. colonial biases.”
Vicious mythQuoting dozens of slokas, scholar S. Ram Mohan said: “[That] women had no rights in ancient India is a vicious myth spread by colonial historians.
“The reality is that all the three ancient code books of Hindus — Manu Smriti, Narad Smriti and Yajnavalkya Smriti — have a common theme of social welfare and an egalitarian society, with a very high status assigned to women and the deprived sections.”

sarang said:

...Quoting dozens of slokas, scholar S. Ram Mohan said: .....
“The reality is that all the three ancient code books of Hindus — Manu Smriti, Narad Smriti and Yajnavalkya Smriti — have a common theme of social welfare and an egalitarian society, with a very high status assigned to women and the deprived sections.”

Click to expand...

Such absurd claims would have gone unchallenged in an earlier era when these texts were not readily accessible to general public. Today they are available readily online, and, for all the attempts to present a ஒய்யாரக் கொண்டை, the crawling ஈரும் பேனும் in the dharsmashasthras cannot be covered up in this day and age.

I will not accept/believe even a single word that Sub Swamy says... he wants to hog public attention towards his political ambition!

He is one of the thousands of dirty politicians in India... He is not an unbiased Historian...

On what basis he calls the Inconvenient Truths as Myth?

There are many Swamys in this Forum too! Watch out....!

Thiru.Yamaha,
I agree with you that Mr.Subramanya swamy is a poltician and so his views on History
may not be authentic.You are a Scientist and I, as a common man respect your views about Science.
Similarly Mr.B.B.Lal,Dr.R.Nagaswamy have devoted their entire life in
Archaeological Research. You have to give weightage to their view point also.

In India everyone knows that professors and historians emanating from JNU
(Jawaharlal Nehru University,New Delhi)are a biased lot and always try to project only leftist views.
If you go through the detailed judgement of Allahabad High Court of one of the three judges (in Ayodhya Dispute),You will see the hollowness of such Historians.Their ignorance of Indian History came to light during their cross examination.

"Similarly Mr.B.B.Lal,Dr.R.Nagaswamy have devoted their entire life in
Archaeological Research. You have to give weightage to their view point also." post 8

Dear Krish Sir:

Yes, I am willing to listen to Pro. Lal and other academic people or Experts in the field..

Let them answer the questions I ask in post 2...

However, their political leanings also matter to me, besides the data they present to the world.

That's all.

Cheers.

This is what happens to academic freedom when the tender sentiments of Hindutva gang is hurt...

The Hindu : News / National : History Dept. demands re-introduction of Ramanujan's essay on Ramayana

The essay of Prof. Ramanujam being censored is a fascinating one, worth the read many times over. I just don't see what the objection is. I sincerely request the "other" side to tutor me, what is all the fuss about?

This essay strikes me as an eminently scholarly and respectful work, explaining the context of different telling of Ramayana. What is the reason for the religious to get upset about? I am asking this question sincerely, to really understand what the objection is about.

Cheers!

p.s. For the full text of the essay, click here.

This is what happens; punishment comes from different sources!!! Angana and witzel and their cronies get money from islamic countries and do what is ordered by you know who. American universities are no different when their interests or usa's interests are hurt. Ramanujam's essay deserves the same fate; obviously it is not acceptable even to the secular congress. I have not read ramanujan's essay, but I believe it contains derogatory remarks about rama and sita. Perhaps you can try writing an essay on allah or prophet muhammed and get it prescribed for literature students. The price of freedom will be 'head'. At least nobody is barred from publishing or reading ramanujan's poetry/essays. The history students are told that ramayana is not history - so why read ramanujan-ramayana?

Angana chattergee is the first to shout and sign petitions against hindus when a single muslim is attacked or a dalit is attacked (credentials of attacker will be conveniently ignored). Since the institute has not revealed the reasons for her and her live in husband's, the issue must be serious or unmentionable.

You may be interested to know about some developments on the Hindu-hater Prof. Angana Chatterjee. The California Institute of Integral Studies (CIIS) issued a notice on the suspension and ongoing termination proceedings against Prof. Angana Chatterji and her colleague/husband Richard Shapiro, until recently Head of the Social and Cultural Anthropology Department at CIIS. Michael Witzel, Steve farmer and some other people are trying their best for the immediate reinstatement of Professors Angana and to their full faculty status.

Nara said:

This is what happens to academic freedom when the tender sentiments of Hindutva gang is hurt...

The Hindu : News / National : History Dept. demands re-introduction of Ramanujan's essay on Ramayana

Click to expand...

The indian history congress is does not allow papers that contradict theories of western indologists, does not invite scholars who have done research on alternative theories to present their findings, do not allow participants ask questions. Let us hope IHC is rid of the control of communists, leftists and pseudo secularists and works as an unbiased history body. IHC openly admits that it will not accept alternate views and quick to label them as hindutva historians.

INDIAN HISTORY CONGRESS

Concerns of history
PARVATHI MENON
in Mysore

Reacting to the criticism that the IHC does not accommodate those historians who subscribe to the Hindutva view of India's past and who have challenged some established theories of Indian history, Ramakrishna Chatterjee said: "The reason why you will not find that perception of our past acceptable here is because the majority of historians do not accept that it represents a `viewpoint' in history. Distortion of history and historical facts cannot constitute a `view' of history. We refuse to recognise it as history at all."

Concerns of history

This is only an abstract of the paper; I wonder IHC would have accepted this Truth cannot be hidden for ever by strong arm tactics. Let us ensure that all "hindutva" claims including the seemingly bizarre are not dismissed by the so called secularists who have everything to lose if the truth is revealed and established.

The keynote address was delivered by Prof. B. B. Lal, who is a world renowned scholar and giant in Archeology [2]. Prof. ... on South Asian Archaeology, held at University of Bologna, Ravenna, Italy on July 2-6, 2007

Keynote Address delivered by
Professor B. B. Lal
(Former Director General, Archaeological Survey of India)
For quite some time a series of postulates have been distorting our vision of India's past. Some of these are:
1. The Vedas are no older than 1200 BCE and the Vedic people were nomads.
2. The authors of the Harappan Civilization, ascribable to the 3rd millennium BCE, were a Dravidian-speaking people.This civilization was destroyed by Aryan invaders and thereby became extinct.
3. When it was demonstrated that there was no 'Aryan Invasion', another theory was floated, namely that the Aryans were immigrants from the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex of Central Asia.
Recent excavations at a number of sites in Rajasthan, Haryana, Panjab and Gujarat and a fresh study of the Vedic texts have demonstrated that all the above postulates are ill-founded. We now know for certain that ---
1. The Rigveda is much older than 2000 BCE. A close scrutiny of the text clearly demonstrates that the Rigvedic people were not nomads.
2. The Rigvedic domain and the area occupied by the Harappan Civilization were co-terminus and that the Vedas and this civilization are but two faces of the same coin.
3. The Harappan Civilization did not become extinct. On the other hand, many of its features are noticeable even today.
4. The roots of the Harappan Civilization, on the basis of C-14 dating, go back to the 5th millennium BCE, if not earlier.
Thus, the Harappan/Vedic people were indigenous and not invaders or immigrants.
5. Further, archaeological and literary evidences combine to show that a section of the Vedic people emigrated to as far west as Turkey, via Iran, some time at the beginning of the 2nd millennium BCE.

sarang said:

..... Ramanujam's essay deserves the same fate; ....... I have not read ramanujan's essay,

Click to expand...

You have not read the essay, but you are sure it deserves to be barred, interestingly, this attitude is not uncommon among right-wing religious people the world over.

...but I believe it contains derogatory remarks about rama and sita.

Click to expand...

I read the essay, it presents an interesting analysis of various telling of Ramayana from Valmiki to Kampan to Kannada version, to Jain and even Thailand. It includes beautiful translation of Valmiki and Kampan verses. The tone of the essay is academic, i.e. non-judgmental. This is why I am really perplexed.

sarang, please do me a favor, please tell me what you find as derogatory remarks about Rama and Sita in the essay.

Thank you ....

sarang said:

5. Further, archaeological and literary evidences combine to show that a section of the Vedic people emigrated to as far west as Turkey, via Iran, some time at the beginning of the 2nd millennium BCE.

Click to expand...

There is some problem here. Archaeological excavationa at Goebekli Tepe, Nevali Cori, Nemrut Dag etc., in Turkey have unearthed what is now believed to be a very ancient temple-based religion with a "clean-shaven head with Shikha" all of which is dated 12000 years or older. The Kikkuli horse training document of the Mitannis dated 3500 years old (before the present) approx. also shows Indo-Aryan influences. But we do not have any reliable references to either of these in our vedas or the older scriptures. Unless we postulate that the vedic Indo-Aryans spread from the banks of the Sarasvati river westwards to present day Turkey and around in the very beginnings of civilization, it will be difficult to explain these. A more rational hypothesis which will satisfactorily explain the apparent ignorance of the other migrant branches by the vedic Indo-Aryans, will be that a civilization which originated somewhere in the Sintashta area, spread all around and one group (or more waves of emigration) found its way into the Indus valley and slowly progressed eastwards, and later, southwards, to finally influence the whole of the Indian subcontinent with its culture, ideas and religious beliefs.

Dear Sangom Sir,

Am very puzzled by the fact that the trayi vedas do not support idol worship. Since its composers came from a non-temple culture, it wud mean they had nothing to do with the temple-culture of asia-minor.

I feel the term 'indo-aryan' is somewhat misleading because it may be construed to mean that all indo-aryan speakers followed the same culture. I feel it is more appropriate to think that indo-aryans were a diverse group of people who followed different cultures. Some amongst them followed the temple-culture, some did not.

Then again, am puzzled by the term 'indo-aryan' and 'vedic-indo-aryan'. Witzel argues the language of BMAC forms a substratum in proto-indo-iranian. But then Staal says the language of BMAC is non-indoeuropean. Which possibly means that an unknown language, say language X, which was non-indoaryan, gave rise to proto-indoaryan languages.

I suppose we just have to wait for the reconstruction of BMAC language to be completed. It will be interesting to know which older language (or linguistic group(s)) gave rise to proto-indoaryan languages and its diverse cultures. Who knows, it may be possible that language X gave rise to branches, which diverged due to cultural-differences also, and subsequently evolved parallely.

I found this very interesting -- [ THE SINTASHTA CULTURE AND SOME QUESTIONS <br>OF INDO-EUROPEANS ORIGINS. - S.A.Grigoryev ]

Regards.

Nara said:

For the full text of the essay, click here.

Click to expand...

Thanks much for the link sir.

Reacting to the criticism that the IHC does not accommodate those historians who subscribe to the Hindutva view of India's past and who have challenged some established theories of Indian history, Ramakrishna Chatterjee said: "The reason why you will not find that perception of our past acceptable here is because the majority of historians do not accept that it represents a `viewpoint' in history. Distortion of history and historical facts cannot constitute a `view' of history. We refuse to recognise it as history at all." - post 13.

Hindutva pov of History is for political consumption to whip up Ultra-nationalism... how can it be a History?

Chatterjee knows how to think!

happyhindu said:

Dear Sangom Sir,

Am very puzzled by the fact that the trayi vedas do not support idol worship. Since its composers came from a non-temple culture, it wud mean they had nothing to do with the temple-culture of asia-minor.

I feel the term 'indo-aryan' is somewhat misleading because it may be construed to mean that all indo-aryan speakers followed the same culture. I feel it is more appropriate to think that indo-aryans were a diverse group of people who followed different cultures. Some amongst them followed the temple-culture, some did not.

Then again, am puzzled by the term 'indo-aryan' and 'vedic-indo-aryan'. Witzel argues the language of BMAC forms a substratum in proto-indo-iranian. But then Staal says the language of BMAC is non-indoeuropean. Which possibly means that an unknown language, say language X, which was non-indoaryan, gave rise to proto-indoaryan languages.

I suppose we just have to wait for the reconstruction of BMAC language to be completed. It will be interesting to know which older language (or linguistic group(s)) gave rise to proto-indoaryan languages and its diverse cultures. Who knows, it may be possible that language X gave rise to branches, which diverged due to cultural-differences also, and subsequently evolved parallely.

I found this very interesting -- [ THE SINTASHTA CULTURE AND SOME QUESTIONS <br>OF INDO-EUROPEANS ORIGINS. - S.A.Grigoryev ]

Regards.

Click to expand...

Smt. HH,

I agree that the terms Indo-Aryans, Vedic Indo-Aryans, etc., create confusion. But I have used them somewhat loosely in my post.

The trayee veda people did not apparently support temple worship. But that by itself may not lead us to conclude that the Asia minor civilization had nothing to do with the trayee veda people, will it? What I am proposing is not that the Asia minor was the cradle of the proto-Aryan culture but the Sintashta (-Petrovka) area to the East of Asia minor. I believe it is possible that some civilization which took birth in and around that region spread to all directions; while so spreading the original ideas, beliefs and customs might very well have absorbed the various different local inputs. While those which eventually spread to Turkey believed in building Temple-cum-astronomical observatory for enabling its priests to make some weather/season predictions, the branch which migrated to the banks of the Sindhu believed only in the fire-sacrifices, and so on.

Is this not a feasible scenario?

After the conflict with China in 1962,Government of India appointed a committe
of senior Army officers to find out the causes of defeat of Indian Army by the Chinese.
If I am correct the contents of the report was not made public till date,nor placed in the Parliament and discussed.Can we consider this as distortion of Indian History?The general public may never come to know as to what exactly happened.
Earlier,one Shri.P.N.OAK had serious doubt about Taj Mahal.It is often reported that there are some rooms in the basement of the building and if those rooms are opened under the orders of the Secular Government,the truth whether the building was constructed only for Mumtaj by the then Moghul ruler will come to light.I really wonder why such doubts are allowed to prevail in the mind of
general public and why the Government of the day is not taking action to remove the doubts in the minds of people.Then how can we ensure and satisfy that the Indian History is not being distorted.

Very interesting! I am sure IHC will accept a research paper with these findings.

sangom said:

Smt. HH,

I agree that the terms Indo-Aryans, Vedic Indo-Aryans, etc., create confusion. But I have used them somewhat loosely in my post.

The trayee veda people did not apparently support temple worship. But that by itself may not lead us to conclude that the Asia minor civilization had nothing to do with the trayee veda people, will it? What I am proposing is not that the Asia minor was the cradle of the proto-Aryan culture but the Sintashta (-Petrovka) area to the East of Asia minor. I believe it is possible that some civilization which took birth in and around that region spread to all directions; while so spreading the original ideas, beliefs and customs might very well have absorbed the various different local inputs. While those which eventually spread to Turkey believed in building Temple-cum-astronomical observatory for enabling its priests to make some weather/season predictions, the branch which migrated to the banks of the Sindhu believed only in the fire-sacrifices, and so on.

Is this not a feasible scenario?

Click to expand...

No, thanks. If ramanujan wants to wants to demean rama, lakshmana, sita, hanuman and valmiki, drawing on sources claiming to be regional oral traditions and authors like dmk annadurai, it is his birthright to write whatever he fancies. but when there is a dispute between two parties, decision taken by a competent authority is final. ramanujan's essay is available for those who want; it is not banned or carrying a copy will not attract punishment.

If ramanujan's literary ambitions are served by saying santhal oral tradition ramayan is superior to valmiki's, he is welcome to it.

Nara said:

You have not read the essay, but you are sure it deserves to be barred, interestingly, this attitude is not uncommon among right-wing religious people the world over.


I read the essay, it presents an interesting analysis of various telling of Ramayana from Valmiki to Kampan to Kannada version, to Jain and even Thailand. It includes beautiful translation of Valmiki and Kampan verses. The tone of the essay is academic, i.e. non-judgmental. This is why I am really perplexed.

sarang, please do me a favor, please tell me what you find as derogatory remarks about Rama and Sita in the essay.

Thank you ....

Click to expand...

I understand that there are many versions of Ramayana berating Rama and his people and extolling Ravana and his side; it is generally believed to be the response of the ancient local tribes who were killed and displaced by the newly colonizing people for whom Rama was a hero or even God. The Villipputtooraar Bharatam is also reported to have a similar critical view of the original Mahabharata. Since I could so far not get a copy of this, I am unable to say for sure.

sangom said:

I understand that there are many versions of Ramayana berating Rama and his people and extolling Ravana and his side;

Click to expand...

Dear Sangom sir, speaking only of the essay by Ramanuja, it has nothing bad about Rama or Sita. He does not demean Valmiki or say oral traditions are superior to Valmiki like sarang says, which Ravi likes. They both have obviously not read the essay but are making false accusations. sarang taking offense without even bothering to read the essay reminds me of people taking exceptions to the book Satanic Verses by Salman Rashdie. Of course there is a big difference in how the way the two religious right-wingers acted.

Cheers!