PDA

View Full Version : Let us Discuss What is History



DrRajpalSingh
February 26th, 2012, 08:26 PM
Friends, For the past few months a very interesting and enjoyable discussion is going on the pages of JatLand.com on various facets of Indian culture, civilization and history. It is very significant to note that we are trying to put our own point of view or hypothesis to prove it or to disapprove the other persons point of view without quoting historical data on the issue involved. This leads us nowhere. Would it not be good if we first of all let everyone know, according to your perception, what really is history and how does it differ from fiction. Yes, your valuable opinions, views, points of agreement and disagreement on this topic are invited.

Come Join Us through this thread and contribute to enable us to understand clearly what history is and how it is written and commented upon; what are its impacts, uses and abuses and so on and so forth!

vijay
February 26th, 2012, 08:53 PM
For me, History is the information about the past. The civilization, the people, incidents, wars, changes, the reason behind those events, date wise sequence of those events and the outcome of those events. Each and everything supported by the Facts and Figures.

lrburdak
February 26th, 2012, 10:19 PM
Mathematically: History = Itihas = It so happened

ygulia
February 26th, 2012, 11:01 PM
As per my understanding, history is the story of the mankind and civilization of the past.

dndeswal
February 27th, 2012, 12:30 AM
.

Though writing of human history could mean a sequence or chronology of events, with the passage of time it becomes a mixture of myths, perceptions, notions and realities. The heroes of yesteryears could be remembered as villains and today’s great personalities could possibly be termed as traitors or a gang of mafia. History is written by winners of wars, not losers. Human memory is very short and, in today’s world, it is rather easy to mould the public mind by a series and repetitions of misinformation. For example, America of today has a huge propaganda machinery, using mass electronic and print media world-wide. If this machinery continues its propaganda, for example against a single nation, the world attention is diverted and the truth simply hides behind the curtain. Hitler had well said that if a lie is repeated for one hundred times, it automatically converts into truth. Writers of history are also human beings and they cannot remain unaffected from such propaganda machinery, both written and verbal.

Hitler and Stalin were heroes of yesterday, today they are villains. It is also possible that tomorrow Gandhi may be termed as greatest traitor (in fact many have started calling him like that).

Mahabharata, no doubt, is a historical episode. But 100 sons of Queen Gandhari, Droupadi having five husbands, Krishna’s lifting the mountain – are all myths. But common man treats these stories as real happenings.

Time is the real Hero, the undefeatable ! It may also bury the languages in which history is written. Today we are writing on paper which has short life-span. In the past, history was also written on stones, copper-plates etc. These also get into oblivion with the passage of time !

.

DrRajpalSingh
February 27th, 2012, 07:50 AM
Friends,

Your all posts are to the point and shed light on various dimensions of history. We hope to hear from other fellow JatLanders in the subsequent discussion. Yes, we hope and wish they join us to share their perception of history.

Regards

bazardparveen
February 27th, 2012, 08:48 AM
I am not good at history. As far as I believe, history is something which binds the society. Here, I wish to share Dr. Subramanian Swamy's talk regarding identity of India.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbt8Lt0khl0


Its bit long talk. One day, I had discussion with friends on the same. They interpreted him biased in favor of Hindus. But, personally, I didn't find that thing in entire speech. He was simply saying that our unity is in danger. We need to get an ideology for the nation like USA and others have. That will help people to stand united for the nation.

I leave it to your individual wisdom to interpret his words.

Fateh
February 27th, 2012, 11:09 AM
Generally, a soldier and a jat is good at creating history rather than writing or commenting on history, however, in brief History is a record/account of past event/incidents, mostly influenced by the writer and the governing/administrative authorities, generally actual happening over looked due to some interest of some one/authority. It is a study of past events, must be very carefully interpreted/assessed/analised.

I totally agree with the views of mr Dayanand Deswal,

Dr sahab how about DS solution means your views on the subject please.

Fateh
February 27th, 2012, 02:10 PM
Mathematically: History = Itihas = It so happened

Generally, history is available as it was written/presented, not correctly so happened

dahiyavijay7
February 27th, 2012, 02:54 PM
In indian context, History is misrepresentation of facts by the Bengali brahmin Historians. They distorted the facts and give a very false image of our history.

DrRajpalSingh
February 27th, 2012, 07:56 PM
Generally, history is available as it was written/presented, not correctly so happened

Dear Friend,

Very good point of view.

Kindly quote distortions to substantiate your hypothesis to prove that it did not haappen as it is presented.

Regards

DrRajpalSingh
February 27th, 2012, 08:03 PM
In indian context, History is misrepresentation of facts by the Bengali brahmin Historians. They distorted the facts and give a very false image of our history.

Dear Dahiya Sahib,

Please share specific examples of the facts distorted by the allegedly 'Bengali Brahmin Historians.' I bet you will be doing a great service to the nation by setting history in the true form as it happened.

Hope to see you shortly on this thread through your valued comments and with regards.

DrRajpalSingh
February 27th, 2012, 08:10 PM
Dear Kharab Sahib,

I welcome your comments but I could not understand fully what do you want to convey: "Dr sahab how about DS solution means your views on the subject please."

Please further throw some light and oblige.

Prikshit
February 27th, 2012, 08:14 PM
Friends, For the past few months a very interesting and enjoyable discussion is going on the pages of JatLand.com on various facets of Indian culture, civilization and history. It is very significant to note that we are trying to put our own point of view or hypothesis to prove it or to disapprove the other persons point of view without quoting historical data on the issue involved. This leads us nowhere. Would it not be good if we first of all let everyone know, according to your perception, what really is history and how does it differ from fiction. Yes, your valuable opinions, views, points of agreement and disagreement on this topic are invited.

Come Join Us through this thread and contribute to enable us to understand clearly what history is and how it is written and commented upon; what are its impacts, uses and abuses and so on and so forth!

HISTORY: Healthy Information in the form of a story

DrRajpalSingh
February 27th, 2012, 08:25 PM
I am not good at history. As far as I believe, history is something which binds the society. Here, I wish to share Dr. Subramanian Swamy's talk regarding identity of India.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbt8Lt0khl0


Its bit long talk. One day, I had discussion with friends on the same. They interpreted him biased in favor of Hindus. But, personally, I didn't find that thing in entire speech. He was simply saying that our unity is in danger. We need to get an ideology for the nation like USA and others have. That will help people to stand united for the nation.

I leave it to your individual wisdom to interpret his words.

Dear friend,

very interesting issues have been raised by you regarding the uses of history but Dr. S Swamy's talk is not history but contemporary commentary on the issues involved in politics. Therefore it is suggested that after the storm is over on the contemporary issues, events and personalities and all records involved in all this gamut are thrown open, then only they could be analysed and put to use in writing the historical account. Till then, it cannot be called history.

Regards

DrRajpalSingh
February 27th, 2012, 08:59 PM
[QUOTE=dndeswal....... Hitler and Stalin were heroes of yesterday, today they are villains. It is also possible that tomorrow Gandhi may be termed as greatest traitor (in fact many have started calling him like that).

Mahabharata, no doubt, is a historical episode. But 100 sons of Queen Gandhari, Droupadi having five husbands, Krishna’s lifting the mountain – are all myths. But common man treats these stories as real happenings. ....[/QUOTE]

Deswal Sahib,

You deserve congratulations for raising several very interesting issues regarding sources, history, historians and gave suitable examples randomly chosen from various countries of the globe which give an insight of your deep knowledge of the subject being discussed.

It requires a marathon discussion and vast knowledge. As a student of history, according to my humble understanding, the period of Hitler, Stalin and for that matter Mahatma Gandhi is not that distant as could be objectively analysed because of so many people being alive out of those who had talked and walked in person with them and also that bits of information about them is coming out even now and then. Their name is even today used or abused by not few but a large number of people throughout the world. This puts the trio in the category of contemporary important persons whose objective evaluation is still to come. At that time, they may be treated as heroes or otherwise who knows. Therefore, we must wait till the dust of contemporary politics sets down.

It is universally agreed that Mahabharata War is a historical episode and several persons, places and events mentioned in the epic have been identified with the help of archaeological and literary evidence.

But the compilation of the events took several hundreds of years and the present book Mahabharata became an epic. That is why, there are many unbelievable narrations that have polluted the historical narrative.

I will turn to other issues in subsequent posts to share my point of view with you all.

Regards.

DrRajpalSingh
February 27th, 2012, 09:08 PM
HISTORY: Healthy Information in the form of a story

Dear Prikshit,

Beautiful rhythmic post.

But it is wrong to juxtapose the two as history and story are poles apart; history first depends on healthy and unhealthy both sort of sources to arrive at some generalisations and then starts critical evaluation of the information at the hands of so many minds involved. Story may or may not depend upon historical narratives but history can never be based solely on stories.

Regards

vijay
February 27th, 2012, 09:18 PM
HISTORY: Healthy Information in the form of a story

History can be treated as a story but a story can not be treated as History. Fact and Fiction are two totally different terms.

Prikshit
February 27th, 2012, 09:43 PM
Dear Prikshit,

Beautiful rhythmic post.

But it is wrong to juxtapose the two as history and story are poles apart; history first depends on healthy and unhealthy both sort of sources to arrive at some generalisations and then starts critical evaluation of the information at the hands of so many minds involved. Story may or may not depend upon historical narratives but history can never be based solely on stories.

Regards
Healthy in the sense it is good to know, generally told in the form of a story.

DrRajpalSingh
February 27th, 2012, 10:15 PM
Healthy in the sense it is good to know, generally told in the form of a story.

Thanks for correcting me.

dndeswal
February 28th, 2012, 02:42 AM
A good example of distortion of facts are NCERT history books. In the Class VI History book titled “Our Pasts”, I find many misleading facts which are taught to our young generation:

http://ncert.nic.in/NCERTS/textbook/textbook.htm?fess1=12-12

QUOTE
Page 4 :
Names of the land
Two of the words we often use for our country are India and Bharat. The word India comes from the Indus, called Sindhu in Sanskrit. Find Iran and Greece in your atlas. The Iranians and the Greeks who came through the northwest about 2500 years ago and were familiar with the Indus, called it the Hindos or the Indos, and the land to the east of the river was called India. The name Bharata was used for a group of people who lived in the northwest, and who are mentioned in the Rigveda, the earliest composition in Sanskrit (dated to about 3500 years ago). Later it was used for the country.
UNQUOTE

MY COMMENTS: Bharata, as we all know, is named after King Bharat. Rigveda is known to be the oldest book of the world. The writer of this books says that it was written just 3500 year ago ! Mahabharata war was fought 5100 year ago and Rigveda was written much before Mahabharata. Any learned Indian scholar can prove this.


QUOTE
Page 54:

The ashvamedha or horse sacrifice was one such ritual. A horse was let loose to wander freely and it was guarded by the raja’s men. If the horse wandered into the kingdoms of other rajas and they stopped it, they had to fight. If they allowed the horse to pass, it meant that they accepted that the raja who wanted to perform the sacrifice was stronger than them. These rajas were then invited to the sacrifice, which was performed by specially trained priests, who were rewarded with gifts. The raja who organised the sacrifice was recognised as being very powerful, and all those who came brought gifts for him.
UNQUOTE

MY COMMENTS - The author translates the theme "Ashvamedha Yajna" as "sacrificing the horse to the altar of holy fire of Yajna". Elsewhere, in some other such books, the word "Gomedha" has been translated as "sacrificing a cow to the holy fire of Yajna". Sanskrit term 'medha' (मेध) does not mean "killing" in Vedic Sanskrit. We all know what is meant by Ashvamedha Yajna.

14042

Fateh
February 28th, 2012, 10:25 AM
Dear Kharab Sahib,

I welcome your comments but I could not understand fully what do you want to convey: "Dr sahab how about DS solution means your views on the subject please."

Please further throw some light and oblige.

Dr sahab, please note the spelling of my gotra is kharb not kharab.
I wanted your views on the subject, nothing else, In defence services, person who teaches in the class during training, is called directing staff and generally his views are taken finally correct solution to the problem.

Fateh
February 28th, 2012, 11:14 AM
[QUOTE=DrRajpalSingh;298572]Dear Friend,

Very good point of view.

Kindly quote distortions to substantiate your hypothesis to prove that it did not haappen as it is presented.

Dr sahab, It is well known fact that no historical event is put up on paper or some other material without considerable influence of the writer and the the authority concern and not only that, history is burnt/destryed and rewritten with change of ruling power, Dear friend what to talk about distortions, even distortions are distorted many times so there is no point of giving examples I consider our entire history available presently, is untrue, Even you compare a perticular event in old books and new books, you will find many changes and confusion, Brother, it is not understood as to how and why you considered my views as hypothesis, I am really keen to know the reasons for calling my views as hypothesis, If you donot consider me as capable/qualified to share my views on history in that case friend, you shouldnot have asked all of us to express our views. Such utterences/expressions/remarks, strengthen my views that people consider faujis & farmers, totally uneducated irrespective of their qualification/capability/experience etc. However, you being an educated and experienced person and being farmer, atlist you shouldnot have such impression about us.

regards

vikda
February 28th, 2012, 12:30 PM
Mere hisaab se aisi baat nahi hai Sir....Rajpal sir toh sabhi ko apni baat prove/elaborate karne ko keh rahe hain..sirf aapko nahi...please don't take it otherwise....we all respect you and your views....

[QUOTE=DrRajpalSingh;298572]Dear Friend,

Very good point of view.

Kindly quote distortions to substantiate your hypothesis to prove that it did not haappen as it is presented.

Dr sahab, It is well known fact that no historical event is put up on paper or some other material without considerable influence of the writer and the the authority concern and not only that, history is burnt/destryed and rewritten with change of ruling power, Dear friend what to talk about distortions, even distortions are distorted many times so there is no point of giving examples I consider our entire history available presently, is untrue, Even you compare a perticular event in old books and new books, you will find many changes and confusion, Brother, it is not understood as to how and why you considered my views as hypothesis, I am really keen to know the reasons for calling my views as hypothesis, If you donot consider me as capable/qualified to share my views on history in that case friend, you shouldnot have asked all of us to express our views. Such utterences/expressions/remarks, strengthen my views that people consider faujis & farmers, totally uneducated irrespective of their qualification/capability/experience etc. However, you being an educated and experienced person and being farmer, atlist you shouldnot have such impression about us.

regards

dahiyavijay7
February 28th, 2012, 02:06 PM
Dear Dahiya Sahib,

Please share specific examples of the facts distorted by the allegedly 'Bengali Brahmin Historians.' I bet you will be doing a great service to the nation by setting history in the true form as it happened.

Hope to see you shortly on this thread through your valued comments and with regards.

The first distorted fact about our history is the perception made by our history books that the Britishers established their rule in India, because the people were fed up with Indian rulers. The common people did not protest the overthrew of Indian rulers by the Britishers. This perception is true only with Bengal. The british rule was established in India through the Bengal province. The britisher fought the battle of Plassey 23 June 1757 to overthrough Siraj-ud-daulah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siraj-ud-daulah). In fact, the cowardice of Bengali people was not repeated in other states. The history of Haryana suggests that british military had to fight in every village to take over their control. The people of Haryana fought hard and even the british soldiers armed with weapons were frightened to come to village alone. However, NCERT history books only carries the image of Bengal invasion. Further, our historians do not give the name or incidence suggesting the rule of Jats in the country. We are called “Kshtriyas”, however, I never read anywhere in my school books that any Jat ever ruled in the country. Our NCERT books only tells that the Jat people were goons residing around Delhi. Further take the case of “Tejo Mahalya” thread discussed at Jatland. Why nobody ever tried to find and establish the truth of Taj Mahal. Nobody discuss the contribution made by the Haryanavi people in freedom struggle except the instances of some congressi Brahmin and Baniyas. Further, who tells us the truth about the establishment of the Congress? Our history books regard the congress as an Indian political party engaged in freedom struggle. However, the truth is Congress was established by a british officer just to foil the freedom movement. Their idea was to make a group of rich and elite, but power hungry people of india and associate the feeling/struggle sentiment of people with them, so that instead of handling large masses, they had to just cajole a few greedy people by giving them false sense of respect and authority in the Govt.
Where did our NCERT books any incidence of brutality inflicted by the Britishers/Muslims on our people? In fact our books laud the british raj for development work. If the incidence of the brutality is brought to the public, the people shall forget the name of Hitler. The Hitler was nothing in cruelty in comparison to the Britishers/Mougals. Our NCERT books defame the Hitler by giving the incidence of cruelty with pictures, why do not it give the same treatment to the Britisher?
What was Khilafat Movement? Our NCERT tells that Khilafat movement (1919–1924) was a freedom struggle by Muslims (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslims) in British India (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_India). However, the reality is that it was a khalifa movement. The muslims tried to influence the British government (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_government) to protect the Ottoman Empire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Empire) during the aftermath (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aftermath_of_World_War_I) of World War I (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I) by this movement. The Ottoman empire was governed by the Khalifa, however the britishers partitioned the empire and several new independent muslims states emerged. The independent muslim states were quite happy with the partition. However, the Indian muslim were against it, so they protested. And what was their manner of protest. Thousand of Hindus were beaten to death, cut down to pieces, women were raped and torn off by the muslims. The muslims were protesting against the britishers by making atrocities against the Hindus. Why our history books do not show this ugly realty to us? Who was Mr. Nehru? Where did he come from? What was his surname? What was his source of wealth? Nobody answered.

In fact, there are so many facts concealed by the Govt, giving a totally different picture of our history, then representing any reality.

ravinderjeet
February 28th, 2012, 02:16 PM
The first distorted fact about our history is the perception made by our history books that the Britishers established their rule in India, because the people were fed up with Indian rulers. The common people did not protest the overthrew of Indian rulers by the Britishers. This perception is true only with Bengal. The british rule was established in India through the Bengal province. The britisher fought the battle of Plassey 23 June 1757 to overthrough Siraj-ud-daulah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siraj-ud-daulah). In fact, the cowardice of Bengali people was not repeated in other states. The history of Haryana suggests that british military had to fight in every village to take over their control. The people of Haryana fought hard and e
What was Khilafat Movement? Our NCERT tells that Khilafat movement (1919–1924) was a freedom struggle by Muslims (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslims) in British India (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_India). However, the reality is that it was a khalifa movement. The muslims tried to influence the British government (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_government) to protect the Ottoman Empire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Empire) during the aftermath (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aftermath_of_World_War_I) of World War I (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I) by this movement. The Ottoman empire was governed by the Khalifa, however the britishers partitioned the empire and several new independent muslims states emerged. The independent muslim states were quite happy with the partition. However, the Indian muslim were against it, so they protested. And what was their manner of protest. Thousand of Hindus were beaten to death, cut down to pieces, women were raped and torn off by the muslims. The muslims were protesting against the britishers by making atrocities against the Hindus. Why our history books do not show this ugly realty to us? Who was Mr. Nehru? Where did he come from? What was his surname? What was his source of wealth? Nobody answered.

In fact, there are so many facts concealed by the Govt, giving a totally different picture of our history, then representing any reality.

विजेंदर ,आप की इस डाक (पोस्ट) के लिए एक हजार "लाइक्स "|

Sure
February 28th, 2012, 02:40 PM
Dear friend,

very interesting issues have been raised by you regarding the uses of history but Dr. S Swamy's talk is not history but contemporary commentary on the issues involved in politics. Therefore it is suggested that after the storm is over on the contemporary issues, events and personalities and all records involved in all this gamut are thrown open, then only they could be analysed and put to use in writing the historical account. Till then, it cannot be called history.

Regards
Fact will not be kept as it is, So called analysed and put to use in writing is nothing but distortion with facts in the interest of historians or govt. These will be interpreted to give view what exactly these people want. Historians don’t want to understand the view of people they just want to superimpose their own views.

Sure
February 28th, 2012, 03:44 PM
I admire and respect Dr. Rajpal Singh and all his contributions to JL. Everyone is not in position to elobrate everything, but this does not mean that person don’t have their own views to put in a social debate, another thing about proving, this made almost impossible and distorted with such an extent by rulers and historians by disproving things which were not in their interest. So just take their abusive presentation with presentable words. Dr Rajpal Singh is here at such a respectable age that I don’t think he needs some explanation to understand the post. 99% of population in history were not able to read and write, so there is no written views of them, that dosen't mean they are not existing and those should not be acounted for and only what is written should be acounted with the presentation and distorted facts put by the rulers.

DrRajpalSingh
February 28th, 2012, 04:27 PM
Fact will not be kept as it is, So called analysed and put to use in writing is nothing but distortion with facts in the interest of historians or govt. These will be interpreted to give view what exactly these people want. Historians don’t want to understand the view of people they just want to superimpose their own views.

Dear friend,

It is good to learn about your views on history and historians.

But to say that historians don't want to understand the view of people, is off the mark. They have to limit their observations on the available sources of History of the period they are dealing with.

Further, analysis does not mean distortion but this exercise involves comparison and contrast with other facts available on the issue being researched. If one historian, suppose hides or distorts a fact, others will dig it out and use to make it objective history. So none can impose his or her history on others.

Regards.

DrRajpalSingh
February 28th, 2012, 04:34 PM
Dr sahab, please note the spelling of my gotra is kharb not kharab.
I wanted your views on the subject, nothing else, In defence services, person who teaches in the class during training, is called directing staff and generally his views are taken finally correct solution to the problem.

Respected Kharb Sahib, the inadvertent spelling mistake is regretted and it will not be repeated in future as I shall remain more vigilant while posting my views.

DrRajpalSingh
February 28th, 2012, 04:57 PM
[QUOTE=DrRajpalSingh;298572]Dear Friend,

Very good point of view.

Kindly quote distortions to substantiate your hypothesis to prove that it did not haappen as it is presented.

Dr sahab, It is well known fact that no historical event is put up on paper or some other material without considerable influence of the writer and the the authority concern and not only that, history is burnt/destryed and rewritten with change of ruling power, Dear friend what to talk about distortions, even distortions are distorted many times so there is no point of giving examples I consider our entire history available presently, is untrue, Even you compare a perticular event in old books and new books, you will find many changes and confusion, Brother, it is not understood as to how and why you considered my views as hypothesis, I am really keen to know the reasons for calling my views as hypothesis, If you donot consider me as capable/qualified to share my views on history in that case friend, you shouldnot have asked all of us to express our views. Such utterences/expressions/remarks, strengthen my views that people consider faujis & farmers, totally uneducated irrespective of their qualification/capability/experience etc. However, you being an educated and experienced person and being farmer, atlist you shouldnot have such impression about us. regards

My respected Friend,

First let me clarify that the views expressed by me are my hypothesis i.e. that I am trying to test my view point on history. So long as they are not accepted or to say they are rejected, they will become anti-thesis of my views. Then, I will try to find new facts and present them anew before my antagonist to revise his hypothesis; or if I do not have new facts to refute his point view; then the views of both the persons will become a thesis.
This is what I mean by saying the analysis of the sources or facts or data and this is the procedure to arrive at some acceptable conclusion on a specific issue.

My valued friend, do not feel offended on minor difference of opinion on any topic. Further, by asking your goodself to point out specific cases of distortion I did not challenge your capacity to do so, but, my intention was to make the debate more lively.

In earlier post under some other thread I had assured you and once again reiterate that I will be the last man to show disrespect to anyone least to the persons belonging to our defence services like you. I fail to understand what made you to suspect my integrity on the issue.

Cheers and join the debate with happy mood, my honourable Sir.

Regards,

DrRajpalSingh
February 28th, 2012, 05:11 PM
The first distorted fact about our history is the perception made by our history books that the Britishers established their rule in India, because the people were fed up with Indian rulers. The common people did not protest the overthrew of Indian rulers by the Britishers. This perception is true only with Bengal. The british rule was established in India through the Bengal province. The britisher fought the battle of Plassey 23 June 1757 to overthrough Siraj-ud-daulah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siraj-ud-daulah). In fact, the cowardice of Bengali people was not repeated in other states. The history of Haryana suggests that british military had to fight in every village to take over their control. The people of Haryana fought hard and even the british soldiers armed with weapons were frightened to come to village alone. However, NCERT history books only carries the image of Bengal invasion. Further, our historians do not give the name or incidence suggesting the rule of Jats in the country. We are called “Kshtriyas”, however, I never read anywhere in my school books that any Jat ever ruled in the country. Our NCERT books only tells that the Jat people were goons residing around Delhi. Further take the case of “Tejo Mahalya” thread discussed at Jatland. Why nobody ever tried to find and establish the truth of Taj Mahal. Nobody discuss the contribution made by the Haryanavi people in freedom struggle except the instances of some congressi Brahmin and Baniyas. Further, who tells us the truth about the establishment of the Congress? Our history books regard the congress as an Indian political party engaged in freedom struggle. However, the truth is Congress was established by a british officer just to foil the freedom movement. Their idea was to make a group of rich and elite, but power hungry people of india and associate the feeling/struggle sentiment of people with them, so that instead of handling large masses, they had to just cajole a few greedy people by giving them false sense of respect and authority in the Govt.
Where did our NCERT books any incidence of brutality inflicted by the Britishers/Muslims on our people? In fact our books laud the british raj for development work. If the incidence of the brutality is brought to the public, the people shall forget the name of Hitler. The Hitler was nothing in cruelty in comparison to the Britishers/Mougals. Our NCERT books defame the Hitler by giving the incidence of cruelty with pictures, why do not it give the same treatment to the Britisher?
What was Khilafat Movement? Our NCERT tells that Khilafat movement (1919–1924) was a freedom struggle by Muslims (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslims) in British India (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_India). However, the reality is that it was a khalifa movement. The muslims tried to influence the British government (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_government) to protect the Ottoman Empire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Empire) during the aftermath (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aftermath_of_World_War_I) of World War I (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I) by this movement. The Ottoman empire was governed by the Khalifa, however the britishers partitioned the empire and several new independent muslims states emerged. The independent muslim states were quite happy with the partition. However, the Indian muslim were against it, so they protested. And what was their manner of protest. Thousand of Hindus were beaten to death, cut down to pieces, women were raped and torn off by the muslims. The muslims were protesting against the britishers by making atrocities against the Hindus. Why our history books do not show this ugly realty to us? Who was Mr. Nehru? Where did he come from? What was his surname? What was his source of wealth? Nobody answered.

In fact, there are so many facts concealed by the Govt, giving a totally different picture of our history, then representing any reality.

Another interesting point of view to be debated by many, welcome.

Fateh
February 29th, 2012, 12:54 PM
[QUOTE=Fateh;298601]

My respected Friend,

First let me clarify that the views expressed by me are my hypothesis i.e. that I am trying to test my view point on history. So long as they are not accepted or to say they are rejected, they will become anti-thesis of my views. Then, I will try to find new facts and present them anew before my antagonist to revise his hypothesis; or if I do not have new facts to refute his point view; then the views of both the persons will become a thesis.
This is what I mean by saying the analysis of the sources or facts or data and this is the procedure to arrive at some acceptable conclusion on a specific issue.

My valued friend, do not feel offended on minor difference of opinion on any topic. Further, by asking your goodself to point out specific cases of distortion I did not challenge your capacity to do so, but, my intention was to make the debate more lively.

In earlier post under some other thread I had assured you and once again reiterate that I will be the last man to show disrespect to anyone least to the persons belonging to our defence services like you. I fail to understand what made you to suspect my integrity on the issue.

Cheers and join the debate with happy mood, my honourable Sir.

Regards,

Respected Friend, neither, the explaination was required nor it answers my quirry, Brother, neither you asked our views with supporting proof nor you gave any such example in your opening post for us to follow, also you have not even given your views which could have been answered by us and naming our views as hypothesis is not only insult of ours but show inner personalty of the person who uses such word, any way the matter of hypothesis is over, but what about your views on history,regards

DrRajpalSingh
February 29th, 2012, 08:15 PM
[QUOTE=DrRajpalSingh;298628]


Respected Friend, neither, the explaination was required nor it answers my quirry, Brother, neither you asked our views with supporting proof nor you gave any such example in your opening post for us to follow, also you have not even given your views which could have been answered by us and naming our views as hypothesis is not only insult of ours but show inner personalty of the person who uses such word, any way the matter of hypothesis is over, but what about your views on history,regards




Dear Friend,
According to thesaurus, Hypothesis is used synonymously to convey any or all the following words:
Theory, Premise, Suggestion, Supposition, Proposition, Guess, assumption and so on.
If I have used this word properly, then, it is requested that nobody should feel offended and, in turn, I need not be condemned for the crime which I have not committed.

I have been sharing with you all what little I know about the subject of thread and will sum up the discussion in due course of time.


Thanks

Fateh
March 1st, 2012, 12:06 PM
[QUOTE=Fateh;298696]




Dear Friend,
According to thesaurus, Hypothesis is used synonymously to convey any or all the following words:
Theory, Premise, Suggestion, Supposition, Proposition, Guess, assumption and so on.
If I have used this word properly, then, it is requested that nobody should feel offended and, in turn, I need not be condemned for the crime which I have not committed.

I have been sharing with you all what little I know about the subject of thread and will sum up the discussion in due course of time.


Thanks

Dear Brother, it is ok, let us proceed on the discussion, I will waite for your summingup,regards

SumitJattan
March 2nd, 2012, 02:05 AM
Many people have many perceptions about the meaning of history for me history is the experience gained by our forfathers which tells us to follow a specific path or to avoid certain path as we are much familiar with Jat culture so i am taking the example from our past , we people fought against Taimur which states that we are united for the national cause , We people always more or less respect other castes thats why we accept the refugees from the western India after division with due respect . Though anyone can easily see the imprints of caste system on us but still we respect other castes this teaches me in my history people give more value to repect and documented history is more or less distorted the biggest example is why Alexender the great left India unconquered after defeating Poru raj . For me history is basically a solution book for the problems . The history is better captured in the ancient books which are not written in order to praise some one or by some court writters . The authors like Chanakya , Panini , Mahatma Gandhi can give us correct picture of history becuase they dont have any self praising goals but again the ways to present a specific incident depends from person to person so in the end i can only sum up my words by saying that one must have some analytical skills in order to get maximum out of history .

DrRajpalSingh
March 2nd, 2012, 07:56 PM
Friend,

I agree with your summing up: "in the end i can only sum up my words by saying that one must have some analytical skills in order to get maximum out of history." It would be right thing for anyone interested in history to go deeper and deeper in the subject of his choice for deriving inferences from history. History teaches us to learn from the mistakes made in past so as we can improve upon them in the present and make our future bright. It is also said that history repeats itself but always in different way. So one must remain cautious while learning from historical events.

Thanks.

Prikshit
March 2nd, 2012, 08:55 PM
Friend,

I agree with your summing up: "in the end i can only sum up my words by saying that one must have some analytical skills in order to get maximum out of history." It would be right thing for anyone interested in history to go deeper and deeper in the subject of his choice for deriving inferences from history. History teaches us to learn from the mistakes made in past so as we can improve upon them in the present and make our future bright. It is also said that history repeats itself but always in different way. So one must remain cautious while learning from historical events.

Thanks.

Sir,

You are right, but what one takes from it is decided by the way is it presented to us.

Regards,

Prikshit
March 2nd, 2012, 08:57 PM
Many people have many perceptions about the meaning of history for me history is the experience gained by our forfathers which tells us to follow a specific path or to avoid certain path as we are much familiar with Jat culture so i am taking the example from our past , we people fought against Taimur which states that we are united for the national cause , We people always more or less respect other castes thats why we accept the refugees from the western India after division with due respect . Though anyone can easily see the imprints of caste system on us but still we respect other castes this teaches me in my history people give more value to repect and documented history is more or less distorted the biggest example is why Alexender the great left India unconquered after defeating Poru raj . For me history is basically a solution book for the problems . The history is better captured in the ancient books which are not written in order to praise some one or by some court writters . The authors like Chanakya , Panini , Mahatma Gandhi can give us correct picture of history becuase they dont have any self praising goals but again the ways to present a specific incident depends from person to person so in the end i can only sum up my words by saying that one must have some analytical skills in order to get maximum out of history .

But these days it is presented in a different manner to create chaos and disharmony. Now it is up to the individual to filter out the good.

DrRajpalSingh
March 2nd, 2012, 09:18 PM
Friend, You are right that some 'Historical events' are sometimes presented in twisted form by some people to suit their partisan views. So due attention must be paid to assess/evaluate these writings before accepting them as historical facts.

SumitJattan
March 3rd, 2012, 12:03 AM
Respected Rajpal Sir,

This is where education comes into play by eduaction i dont mean the paper degrees but the level of your thought process .

Thanks and Regards
Sumit Chaudhary

SumitJattan
March 3rd, 2012, 12:11 AM
But these days it is presented in a different manner to create chaos and disharmony. Now it is up to the individual to filter out the good.

Dear Prikshit,

People use these distorted facts from centuries to influence other , those who have some capabilities always argue them you will find a lot of examples in our past for now i can only say Raja Ram Mohan Roy was one such personality who argued about the justified social injustice .

With Regards
Sumit Chaudhary

DrRajpalSingh
March 3rd, 2012, 01:06 AM
Dear Prikshit,

People use these distorted facts from centuries to influence other , those who have some capabilities always argue them you will find a lot of examples in our past for now i can only say Raja Ram Mohan Roy was one such personality who argued about the justified social injustice .

With Regards
Sumit Chaudhary

Sumit Bhai,

Kindly clarify what do you intend to convey about views of Raja Ram Mohan Roy by using phrase: the justified social injustice and also quote source of your information please.

Thanks

SumitJattan
March 3rd, 2012, 04:36 AM
Sumit Bhai,

Kindly clarify what do you intend to convey about views of Raja Ram Mohan Roy by using phrase: the justified social injustice and also quote source of your information please.

Thanks

Respected Rajpal Sir,

I am not a scholar of history but a history lover ...I do not have any such source for the quotes but i can give you some examples which can prove it.

My first example is Sati Pratha ... I dont think any one can justify it under normal conditions but we followed it for centuries and Raja Ram Mohan Roy opposed that ,child marriage , no remarriage of widows , Dev dasis ...... all happened in our society and no one opposed it . We justified the unequal treatment of human beings under the justification of caste system .

Sir I dont have any source of it but these things happened in our society and we justified it without any logical reasoning . Hope my response has answered your query. Please pardon me if i hurt any one.

Thanks and Regards
Sumit Chaudhary

Fateh
March 5th, 2012, 11:49 AM
Dear Sumit, It was not only RM ROY who only opposed such social evils but there had been many common/well known people, most social reformers, all heros of Bhagti movement etc, who were against, raised their voices and wrote against such evils during past. Dear different perceptions about many practices/traditions in the society existed every where and in all periods, some people accepted activities by heart, some just followed, some did not follow but quitely and some objected openly and raised their voice also, some voices were recorded in books, some individuals worked more even with more results but ignored by the history writers, did not recognised/forgotten by the society.
Each story/historical recorded/unrecorded event is like an information, before agreeing/accepting such inforemation, its source has to be authonticated/assessed, the information has to be co-related, varified and assessed with available information/facts on the subject and than analized by the individual with his ability, knowledge and experience.

DrRajpalSingh
March 5th, 2012, 05:09 PM
Dear Sumit, It was not only RM ROY who only opposed such social evils but there had been many common/well known people, most social reformers, all heros of Bhagti movement etc, who were against, raised their voices and wrote against such evils during past. Dear different perceptions about many practices/traditions in the society existed every where and in all periods, some people accepted activities by heart, some just followed, some did not follow but quitely and some objected openly and raised their voice also, some voices were recorded in books, some individuals worked more even with more results but ignored by the history writers, did not recognised/forgotten by the society.
Each story/historical recorded/unrecorded event is like an information, before agreeing/accepting such inforemation, its source has to be authonticated/assessed, the information has to be co-related, varified and assessed with available information/facts on the subject and than analized by the individual with his ability, knowledge and experience.

You deserve our Congratulations for this excellent post.

DrRajpalSingh
March 5th, 2012, 05:29 PM
Respected Rajpal Sir,

I am not a scholar of history but a history lover ...I do not have any such source for the quotes but i can give you some examples which can prove it.

My first example is Sati Pratha ... I dont think any one can justify it under normal conditions but we followed it for centuries and Raja Ram Mohan Roy opposed that ,child marriage , no remarriage of widows , Dev dasis ...... all happened in our society and no one opposed it . We justified the unequal treatment of human beings under the justification of caste system .

Sir I dont have any source of it but these things happened in our society and we justified it without any logical reasoning . Hope my response has answered your query. Please pardon me if i hurt any one.Thanks and Regards Sumit Chaudhary

Dear Sumit,

I appreciate your zeal to learn and share your knowledge. I think the acts noted by you are condemn-able by every one. But it is wrong to draw off the track conclusions as depicted by the words darkened (of course by me) of your post.

We find opposition to these evils through the ages by sane people as recorded in Indian History. For example Akbar encouraged remarriage of widows and made their killing a cognizable offence. Undoubtedly the step was to discourage killing widows by burnning them in the pyre with their husbands. But we have no access to data how and to what extent the rule was enforced.

Thanks

SumitJattan
March 6th, 2012, 12:28 AM
Dear Sumit,

I appreciate your zeal to learn and share your knowledge. I think the acts noted by you are condemn-able by every one. But it is wrong to draw off the track conclusions as depicted by the words darkened (of course by me) of your post.

We find opposition to these evils through the ages by sane people as recorded in Indian History. For example Akbar encouraged remarriage of widows and made their killing a cognizable offence. Undoubtedly the step was to discourage killing widows by burnning them in the pyre with their husbands. But we have no access to data how and to what extent the rule was enforced.

Thanks

Respected Rajpal Sir,


You are right , i was unable to clearly show my intentions behind the darkened words highlighted by you my intentions were just to say that no one opposed those evil practices strong enough to force the governments to take some strong steps to ban them , If you check my post 43 . I said the same words that logical thinkers always opposed them and opposing some thing and forbidding something are totally different terms.
You are right Akbar opposed Sati Pratha but did he passed some harsh laws against this practice? No he dint . If he wanted he can pass the same type law as he abolished the Jaziya on hindus but he dint . I am just highlighting what he said was no woman could commit sati without the specific permission of his Kotwals. Once the Kotwals got to know about it, they were instructed to delay the woman's decision for as long as possible and to offer pensions, gifts and rehabilitative help to prevent women from committing sati and the impact this was limited only to Agra region . Not only Akbar even in the annals of our history you can find Lord Buddha had also opposed this practice .
I have mentioned Raja Ram Mohan Roy because he was only prominent Hindu who along with missionaries forced Lord William Bentinck to pass a law against it and that law formally banned it. The clauses of that law are mentioned below :

Sati was declared illegal and a criminal offence.


Zamindars, petty land owners, local agents and officers in charge of revenue collection were made accountable to immediately intimidate police officers of any intended sacrifice.
In case of wilful neglect, the responsible officer was liable to a fine of Rs.200 ( a very big amount in 1829 ) or 6 months in jail for default.
On intimidation, the police official was to go to the spot and declare the gathering illegal, prevail upon the crowd to disperse, explain that any persistence was likely to make them all liable to a crime and if necessary prevent the sati from taking place or go and inform the nearest magistrate of the names and addresses of all those present.
If the sacrifice was over, a full and immediate inquiry had to be undertaken in the same way as for any unnatural death.
Aiding and abetting a sacrifice whether voluntary or not was to deemed culpable homicide.
Punishment was at the discretion of the court according to the nature and circumstances of the case.
For any violence or compulsion or helping or assisting in burning of a widow while she laboured under a state of intoxication or stupefaction or because any other cause impeded her free will, the court was constrained to pronounce death penalty



Sir Its not easy to stop some evil completely without harsh laws .


Thanks and Regards
Sumit Chaudhary

Fateh
March 6th, 2012, 12:50 PM
You deserve our Congratulations for this excellent post.

Dr sahab thanks for liking my views and complements please, regards

Hariom1972
March 8th, 2012, 02:47 PM
http://www.francoisgautier.com/en-art/

I think that the author is right when he says that history is about documentation.
i have reproduced from Francois Gautier website, a para which appealed to me and it also tells as to what is History.
"History (like journalism) is about documentation and first-hand experience"
There are an incredible number of farhans, original edicts of Aurangzeb hand-written in Persian, in India's museums, particularly in Rajasthan, such as the Bikaner archives. It was not always easy to scan them, we encountered resistance, sometimes downright hostility and we had to go once to the chief minister to get permission. Indeed, the director of Bikaner archives told us that in 50 years we were the first ones asking for the farhans dealing with Aurangzeb's destructive deeds. Then we asked painters from Rajasthan to reproduce in the ancient Mughal style some of the edicts: the destruction of Somnath temple; the trampling of Hindus protesting jaziya tax by Aurangzeb's elephants; or the order from Aurangzeb prohibiting Hindus to ride horses and palanquins; or the beheading of Teg Bahadur and Dara Shikoh.
People might say: 'OK, this is all true, Aurangzeb was indeed a monster, but why rake up the past, when we have tensions between Muslims and Hindus today?' There are two reasons for this exhibition. The first is that no nation can move forward unless its children are taught to look squarely at their own history, the good and the bad, the evil and the pure.
Let Hindus and Muslims then come to terms with what happened under Aurangzeb, because Muslims suffered as much as Hindus. It was not only Shah Jahan or Dara Shikoh who were murdered, but also the forefathers of today's Indian Muslims who have been converted at 90 per cent. Aurangzeb was the Hitler [ Images (http://search.rediff.com/imgsrch/default.php?MT=hitler) ], the asura of medieval India. No street is named after Hitler in the West, yet in New Delhi we have Aurangzeb Road, a constant reminder of the horrors Aurangzeb perpetrated against Indians, including his own people.

Moar
March 8th, 2012, 06:45 PM
GentleMen: This is History >>>> http://www.jattworld.com/online/library/books/history-and-study-jats-dr-b-s-dhillon

DrRajpalSingh
March 8th, 2012, 11:04 PM
Respected Rajpal Sir,


You are right , i was unable to clearly show my intentions behind the darkened words highlighted by you my intentions were just to say that no one opposed those evil practices strong enough to force the governments to take some strong steps to ban them , If you check my post 43 . I said the same words that logical thinkers always opposed them and opposing some thing and forbidding something are totally different terms.
You are right Akbar opposed Sati Pratha but did he passed some harsh laws against this practice? No he dint . If he wanted he can pass the same type law as he abolished the Jaziya on hindus but he dint . I am just highlighting what he said was no woman could commit sati without the specific permission of his Kotwals. Once the Kotwals got to know about it, they were instructed to delay the woman's decision for as long as possible and to offer pensions, gifts and rehabilitative help to prevent women from committing sati and the impact this was limited only to Agra region . Not only Akbar even in the annals of our history you can find Lord Buddha had also opposed this practice .
I have mentioned Raja Ram Mohan Roy because he was only prominent Hindu who along with missionaries forced Lord William Bentinck to pass a law against it and that law formally banned it. The clauses of that law are mentioned below :

Sati was declared illegal and a criminal offence.


Zamindars, petty land owners, local agents and officers in charge of revenue collection were made accountable to immediately intimidate police officers of any intended sacrifice.
In case of wilful neglect, the responsible officer was liable to a fine of Rs.200 ( a very big amount in 1829 ) or 6 months in jail for default.
On intimidation, the police official was to go to the spot and declare the gathering illegal, prevail upon the crowd to disperse, explain that any persistence was likely to make them all liable to a crime and if necessary prevent the sati from taking place or go and inform the nearest magistrate of the names and addresses of all those present.
If the sacrifice was over, a full and immediate inquiry had to be undertaken in the same way as for any unnatural death.
Aiding and abetting a sacrifice whether voluntary or not was to deemed culpable homicide.
Punishment was at the discretion of the court according to the nature and circumstances of the case.
For any violence or compulsion or helping or assisting in burning of a widow while she laboured under a state of intoxication or stupefaction or because any other cause impeded her free will, the court was constrained to pronounce death penalty


Sir Its not easy to stop some evil completely without harsh laws .
Thanks and Regards Sumit Chaudhary

Excellent piece of writing for which we must congratulate you.

However, I may add a piece of advice: while making comparison in history, choose contemporary persons events, issues because objective conditions and immediate conditions affecting historical decisions continue to change with the passage of time.

Thanks

DrRajpalSingh
April 27th, 2012, 06:59 AM
Let us try to understand what is History.

The word 'History' is employed to designate the sum total of the events and occurrences of the past.

History makes an attempt to distinguish between all the events of the past and the little knowledge that we know about it, which is chiefly obtained from records..

The history is that branch of knowledge which has for its object the ascertaining, recording and explaining of facts and events of the past..

The mass of facts, consisting of past events and activities of nations, societies and civilizations, written from varying points of view and different motives, make up the body of knowledge called history. It is from this material also called sources that scholars have drawn the text books.

An author opines:''History is the study of human life. it is not only related to the past of the man, but it stresses on present also. History lightens that regiment in which the child lives and prolongs his life."

Friends, Your learned comments to make history as a subject of study more understandable are invited. Thanks.

DrRajpalSingh
May 31st, 2012, 05:29 PM
Friends,

To reconstruct the history of any caste, community, event or activities of person or group of persons one has to collect original sources to substantiate his or her narrative. These contemporary sources are collected in the form of
i. Archaeological sources
ii. Numismatics
iii. Monuments/remains of monuments
iv. Literary records in the form of documents, books, seals and so on
v. Folk lores and traditions
vi Any other, miscellaneous...

Every kind of source has its historical significance and is capable of solving very knotty puzzles if found and used judiciously.
In view of long spanning History of the Jats through the ages there are several unplugged gaps, many distortions and many periods totally ignored.

Through this post, I invite the readers to post the distortions, gaps and lacuna in the history of the Jats or general history of India or the world about the Jats and also request them to provide, if any, links, information about these sources so that a well documented and authentic history of the community could be reconstructed in due course of time by the community.

Hoping for a constructive and cooperative debate and discussion on the issue.

Thanks.

ravinderjeet
May 31st, 2012, 05:40 PM
डा , राजपाल जी आप कदे सोरम गए सो , जा ना गए सो ते एक बे जा के आओ |

swaich
May 31st, 2012, 05:41 PM
My view is that some parts of history can never be verified and as such there will always be multiple versions to the same event. This is because everyone has a bias. For European historians, Alexander invasions into Asia Minor were a part of his grand plans to unify the known world and facilitate exchange of languages, cultures etc. For Asians whose ancestors probably bore the brunt of his invasions, saw palaces destroyed, crops ravaged he was just an invader looking for loot and glory. History will tell you when Alexander attacked a city, but it can never describe in singularity his motivations, effects etc.

DrRajpalSingh
May 31st, 2012, 09:30 PM
डा , राजपाल जी आप कदे सोरम गए सो , जा ना गए सो ते एक बे जा के आओ |


Thank you Ravinderjeet Bhai for guiding me towards the need of the use of Sarvakhap Panchayat Records.

I had gone to Sauram way back in 1981 to 1983 several times when I was collecting source material for my thesis in History of the Jats from 1669 to 1768 A.D.

Fortunately I had chance to have long discussions on the topic with Chaudhary Qabul Singh and also Chaudhary Nihal Singh Arya of Delhi, both of whom had good knowledge about the matter available at Sarvakhap Panchayat HQs and had brought out books based on those records. I have also read and collected some of these records in English Translation used by Dr. M.C Pradhan for his Ph.D. work submitted with Oxford University and subsequently brought our in book form.

However, I could not lay my hands on much of the original records because by that time G C Dwivedi from Benaras University had taken away much of the documents promising to return the same later on to Chaudhary Qabul Singh but he did not do so. in the meantime he submitted the thesis and later passed away. Now no one knows about the whereabouts of those documents. Yes his thesis has been published in the book form by Maharaja Surajmal Memorial Education Society.

Thanks and regards.

DrRajpalSingh
May 31st, 2012, 10:32 PM
My view is that some parts of history can never be verified and as such there will always be multiple versions to the same event. This is because everyone has a bias. For European historians, Alexander invasions into Asia Minor were a part of his grand plans to unify the known world and facilitate exchange of languages, cultures etc. For Asians whose ancestors probably bore the brunt of his invasions, saw palaces destroyed, crops ravaged he was just an invader looking for loot and glory. History will tell you when Alexander attacked a city, but it can never describe in singularity his motivations, effects etc.

Your surmise is not based on reality of the historical findings. What you say is two points of views among the readers not Historical narration. In case of divergence of views based on different sources, the historians compare and analyse the authenticity and importance of the sources, and then try to arrive at some tentative conclusions which remain open for further alteration if new source material is unearthed from some quarter.
Thus history, being a branch of social science faculty continues to grow under the process specified above but no two versions remain in vogue for long.

Thanks

prashantacmet
June 1st, 2012, 11:47 AM
Thank you Ravinderjeet Bhai for guiding me towards the need of the use of Sarvakhap Panchayat Records.

I had gone to Sauram way back in 1981 to 1983 several times when I was collecting source material for my thesis in History of the Jats from 1669 to 1768 A.D.

Fortunately I had chance to have long discussions on the topic with Chaudhary Qabul Singh and also Chaudhary Nihal Singh Arya of Delhi, both of whom had good knowledge about the matter available at Sarvakhap Panchayat HQs and had brought out books based on those records. I have also read and collected some of these records in English Translation used by Dr. M.C Pradhan for his Ph.D. work submitted with Oxford University and subsequently brought our in book form.

However, I could not lay my hands on much of the original records because by that time G C Dwivedi from Benaras University had taken away much of the documents promising to return the same later on to Chaudhary Qabul Singh but he did not do so. in the meantime he submitted the thesis and later passed away. Now no one knows about the whereabouts of those documents. Yes his thesis has been published in the book form by Maharaja Surajmal Memorial Education Society.

Thanks and regards.
Rajpal ji, Haamne to nu suna tha ki ek lugai aag silgaya kare thi sarvkhap ke documents tai....records to chulhe main jaa liye..eibbe kuch na dhara souram main.........baaki rahe sahi cheez uss dwivedi ne den ke ke jaroorat thi...yeh jaat baawli poonch hi rahenge. I have herad that sarvkhap panchayat was constituted at the time of harsha..do these record say anything about harsha..was he a jat?..and what is the name of the book published after extracting info from sarvkhap records?

swaich
June 1st, 2012, 02:38 PM
Your surmise is not based on reality of the historical findings. What you say is two points of views among the readers not Historical narration. In case of divergence of views based on different sources, the historians compare and analyse the authenticity and importance of the sources, and then try to arrive at some tentative conclusions which remain open for further alteration if new source material is unearthed from some quarter.
Thus history, being a branch of social science faculty continues to grow under the process specified above but no two versions remain in vogue for long.

Thanks

The bold above is whats controversial for me in the study of history. The historian or the analyst's own prejudices and biases do come into play when analyzing historical sources, do they not? :)

And I understand that after some time truth does come out due to new found evidences, sources etc. But untill then, especially for historical events before the advent of mass publication there would always be divergent views.

ravinderjeet
June 1st, 2012, 02:44 PM
The bold above is whats controversial for me in the study of history. The historian or the analyst's own prejudices and biases do come into play when analyzing historical sources, do they not? :)

And I understand that after some time truth does come out due to new found evidences, sources etc. But untill then, especially for historical events before the advent of mass publication there would always be divergent views.


Yes ,it is so.

DrRajpalSingh
June 2nd, 2012, 02:52 PM
Yes ,it is so.

and


The bold above is whats controversial for me in the study of history. The historian or the analyst's own prejudices and biases do come into play when analyzing historical sources, do they not? :)

And I understand that after some time truth does come out due to new found evidences, sources etc. But untill then, especially for historical events before the advent of mass publication there would always be divergent views.


Ravinderjeet ji and Swaichji,

It is not so. The fact of the matter is as follows.
The biased history never makes room in the academic fraternity. The yard stick applied is 'objectivity' in historical narration that is detachment of the author/scholar i.e., he/she has not to take sides and present the facts as such based on the references quoted. Thus prejudiced writing is continuously replaced in view of the newer found facts.
So long as there exists scarcity of solid reliable evidence, one, two or as many as reference based views are put for open debate and this is the methodology not demerit that there appear divergence of views on any specific issue. Therefore we must not be afraid of this phenomenon.

Even today, in the age of explosion of information technology, many gaps and dark places remain to be plugged and illuminated as there continues to be lack of historical sources/data even today. I mean to convey that none can claim to have written final word in history because there is always scope of coming to light newer data/sources/references. History writing requires rigorous practice and that comes with experience and expertise.

Thanks.

VirJ
June 3rd, 2012, 10:05 AM
History is written by the winners. They manipulate the facts, destroy evidences to suit their purpose. Also there are diff view points to narrate history. For Bristishers and few indians Bhagat singh was a terrortist but for us he was one of the greatest soul of 20th centuary. Even Osama is a hero for many. I was once told by a Greek that in their school books Alexandra conquered India but our books said different things. Many claims Prithvi Raj Chauhan died somewhere close to UP but we were told he didnt die in India.

What Swaich is saying is somewhat true

Fateh
June 3rd, 2012, 10:56 AM
History is written by the winners. They manipulate the facts, destroy evidences to suit their purpose. Also there are diff view points to narrate history. For Bristishers and few indians Bhagat singh was a terrortist but for us he was one of the greatest soul of 20th centuary. Even Osama is a hero for many. I was once told by a Greek that in their school books Alexandra conquered India but our books said different things. Many claims Prithvi Raj Chauhan died somewhere close to UP but we were told he didnt die in India.

What Swaich is saying is somewhat true

Brother I agree with you

DrRajpalSingh
June 3rd, 2012, 09:58 PM
History is written by the winners. They manipulate the facts, destroy evidences to suit their purpose. Also there are diff view points to narrate history. ... I was once told by a Greek that in their school books Alexandra conquered India but our books said different things.

What Swaich is saying is somewhat true
Friend,

History is neither written by winners nor looser.

History takes the care of both the sides.

Regarding Alexandra's campaign, what Indian's think or Greeks perceive is not history. For a proper grasp of the topic please read standard books available in very large number in various libraries throughout the world. Reality has been dug out by the laborious efforts of historians and it is established that he had faced such a fierce opposition i n India that his soldiers threatened to go back to their country if he tried to cross over Beas River. So terrified the Greeks were that they had to retreat and even then they were made to escape avoiding Indian attackers. This is accepted by historians of all the nations including India that leave alone conquering India, he could not win whole of the Punjab. And within three years, Chandergupta Maurya, the Jat emperor, removed all the signs of Hellenic invasion from the face of India by beating them back from here. This is History.

Regarding your partial acceptance of Saiwach;s statement, kindly share with us how much do you agree and how much you do not agree!!!

But do not doubt the reliability of History so long as you have no strong valid reference material. Please provide foundation of source material for your belief or perception. Come out with facts after rigorous reading and then try to supplement the existing knowledge.

Thanks

DrRajpalSingh
June 3rd, 2012, 10:06 PM
Brother I agree with you

Dear Friend,

It would be good of you, if you could share with us about Alexandra's invasion of India as you are from Indian Army and, perhaps, would have studied something about him.

Is there any reference that he conquered India as one of our friends has surmised in his post.

Regards

vijay
June 3rd, 2012, 10:14 PM
History is not written but it happened. It may take some time to bring forward the actual events with accurate date but its not all about what winners want to write. The winners may manipulate the circumstances for the time being but sooner or later truth comes out like a new day. Historian may have their own biases but then facts don't have any preferences.

DrRajpalSingh
June 4th, 2012, 06:47 AM
History is not written but it happened. It may take some time to bring forward the actual events with accurate date but its not all about what winners want to write. The winners may manipulate the circumstances for the time being but sooner or later truth comes out like a new day. Historian may have their own biases but then facts don't have any preferences.

The word 'History' is used for:

'the event as it happened in the past', or/and also 'the record of the same as presented in the book form.'

Fateh
June 4th, 2012, 08:21 AM
Dear Friend,

It would be good of you, if you could share with us about Alexandra's invasion of India as you are from Indian Army and, perhaps, would have studied something about him.

Is there any reference that he conquered India as one of our friends has surmised in his post.

Regards

Dear, in Army we do discuss various good battles fought, tactics/weapons/leadership traits displayed, however, Alexander had less importance in todays warfare, Also neither I am in teaching profession nor have some library/time to put few lines from books and you will agree that in this old age and without in touch to such material, it is difficult to write some thing and specially when people ask proof for every thing whether to understand or to collect material for future self use.However, For Army, his move with lightning speed and surprised his enemies, was an important contribution of his, At the age of 22, he started his project of expansion, with in ten years he conquered Asia minor, Syria, Egypt, Mesopotamia and Iran. H e reached India in 327BC, HE WAS WELCOMED BY AMBHI, KING OF TAXILA, WITH THE HELP OF AMBHI HIS ARMY MARCHED FORWARD TO CROSS hYDASPES9 JHELUM, to his surprise he found the mighty Army of PORUS, A FIERCE BATTLE FOLLOWED, PORUS ARMY FOUGHT WELL BUT unfortunately Porus got wounded and got captured, Here Alexander behaved like a good soldier and porus was let free with his kingdom, From here he had to return back due to to reasons, a) he and his people realized the strength and fighting spirit of Indians and also realized that it would be very difficult to move against Nandas. b) his soldiers were tired, were away from their families for last 10 years, so very reluctantly he returned back, Further you can analyses and let us know your expert views

Fateh
June 4th, 2012, 08:36 AM
History is not written but it happened. It may take some time to bring forward the actual events with accurate date but its not all about what winners want to write. The winners may manipulate the circumstances for the time being but sooner or later truth comes out like a new day. Historian may have their own biases but then facts don't have any preferences.

Brother, you are absolutely right, but here we were discussing history/account/details of the happenings which is made available to coming generations is mostly effected by the ruling power and human weaknesses of the so called historians and further poor/ misinterpretation or biased projection and conveyed to students by our so called expert teachers, regards

DrRajpalSingh
June 4th, 2012, 10:01 AM
Dear, in Army we do discuss various good battles fought, tactics/weapons/leadership traits displayed, however, Alexander had less importance in todays warfare, Also neither I am in teaching profession nor have some library/time to put few lines from books and you will agree that in this old age and without in touch to such material, it is difficult to write some thing and specially when people ask proof for every thing whether to understand or to collect material for future self use.However, For Army, his move with lightning speed and surprised his enemies, was an important contribution of his, At the age of 22, he started his project of expansion, with in ten years he conquered Asia minor, Syria, Egypt, Mesopotamia and Iran. H e reached India in 327BC, HE WAS WELCOMED BY AMBHI, KING OF TAXILA, WITH THE HELP OF AMBHI HIS ARMY MARCHED FORWARD TO CROSS hYDASPES9 JHELUM, to his surprise he found the mighty Army of PORUS, A FIERCE BATTLE FOLLOWED, PORUS ARMY FOUGHT WELL BUT unfortunately Porus got wounded and got captured, Here Alexander behaved like a good soldier and porus was let free with his kingdom, From here he had to return back due to to reasons, a) he and his people realized the strength and fighting spirit of Indians and also realized that it would be very difficult to move against Nandas. b) his soldiers were tired, were away from their families for last 10 years, so very reluctantly he returned back, Further you can analyses and let us know your expert views

Thanks for your valuable input. I will try to put further illuminate the incident/event relating to Porus and Alexandra in some other post after verifying some of the references yet to be cross checked by me in due course.
Thanks

DrRajpalSingh
June 4th, 2012, 10:15 AM
Brother, you are absolutely right, but here we were discussing history/account/details of the happenings which is made available to coming generations is mostly effected by the ruling power and human weaknesses of the so called historians and further poor/ misinterpretation or biased projection and conveyed to students by our so called expert teachers, regards

Friend,
Kindly guide us whom to approach to believe to know about HISTORY! As per your post 'so called historians' and 'so called expert teachers,' are producing narrations that are 'biased,poor/misinterpretation.'

Please suggest an alternate source so that the subject of history could gain reliability in the eyes of the readers.

Regards

VirJ
June 4th, 2012, 03:28 PM
To Dr Rajpal:

1. History is written by the winners: I said this in reference to Swaich post. History is witness that history has been used as a propaganda. There are many accounts where we can see this. This is what I was refering to. In that example the Greeks have their version and we have our same way for Chauhan we have our version and others have different version. Now if you ask Indians 70-80% (conservative approach) would agree with our version. So for majority this is history. Not everyone has time and skills to dig in the facts and do analysis so majority believe the propaganda. Lacks of facts in some situation increase the chances of propaganda. In the past it was much easier and winners were the only survivors (often) and had the chances to manipulate facts, write whatever they wanted. If history is only what happened then all history books should be same. The winner/ruler are in greater position to hide and manipulate the facts. Just an example in China govt is in greater control and i am sure would have been hiding lot of facts from the public and rest of the world. In future what will get reported is what they leave as evidence and that will become history which someone like you would be analysing. Ruler also control who will write the history. Lakan army tried to control the history of Tamil Tigers and Indira tried to control operation Blue Star history by only allowing M. Tully.

2. The other aspect is the different viewpoints. As Swaich said different people have different view points of some historical facts. I think i already said on this.

By this I am not trying to demean the profession of history.

Fateh
June 4th, 2012, 04:24 PM
Friend,
Kindly guide us whom to approach to believe to know about HISTORY! As per your post 'so called historians' and 'so called expert teachers,' are producing narrations that are 'biased,poor/misinterpretation.'

Please suggest an alternate source so that the subject of history could gain reliability in the eyes of the readers.

Regards
Dr Sahab, I hope you will agree to the fact that very few incidents have been written by some eye witness and even eye witnesses covered some happening you may find different views by most of them due to their different understanding, different perception, difference in knowledge/ experience/ intelligence level/expression capability/language/pre-concieved ideas//preferences/biases/etc, It is also fact that ruling power/winner always try to influence the record, It is also fact that even one version of some incident is made available to few people, most of them will have different understanding/perception/belief. Thus my dear one has to live with the truth, ofcourse, in most cases, certain facts remain same and when we read more number of views on the subject, we can reach closure to the truth but again depends upon the person who interpret it, so enjoy, continue working and believe what your soul say to you, The history was/is/will not a science. Simple example- you have written a book on Ch Devi lal, some more people must have also written on him, certain facts may be same but views on his personality traits/his contribution/ his nature/his work etc, will always be different, So dear relax, enjoy life, be always happy, live in present, do not compare with any body, have less expectations from all, control desire/eggo/anger/greed/attachment/proud etc and finally be satisfied

Approach yourself

DrRajpalSingh
June 4th, 2012, 08:08 PM
Respected Sir,
Thanks for your philosophic words showing concern about me, I am so obliged to you and try to follow them to my utmost capacity.

But I take the opportunity to reciprocate the sentiments and sermons in full measure to you for application in your own life too:

"So dear relax, enjoy life, be always happy, live in present, do not compare with any body, have less expectations from all, control desire/eggo/anger/greed/attachment/proud etc and finally be satisfied. Approach yourself."

​Thanks

Fateh
June 5th, 2012, 07:05 AM
Respected Sir,
Thanks for your philosophic words showing concern about me, I am so obliged to you and try to follow them to my utmost capacity.

But I take the opportunity to reciprocate the sentiments and sermons in full measure to you for application in your own life too:

"So dear relax, enjoy life, be always happy, live in present, do not compare with any body, have less expectations from all, control desire/eggo/anger/greed/attachment/proud etc and finally be satisfied. Approach yourself."

​Thanks

Brother, I always believed that best method of teaching is - by self example, Though, it is not possible to achieve goal in one day, but I can assure you that I am trying my best for all above, not for showing to people but for my happiness, most have entered room of my habit but I am still unable to control few of them, please do not mind it was to share with you my thinking and being an elder I do have concern, thanks

DrRajpalSingh
June 5th, 2012, 07:15 AM
To Dr Rajpal:

1. History is written by the winners: I said this in reference to Swaich post. History is witness that history has been used as a propaganda. There are many accounts where we can see this. This is what I was refering to. In that example the Greeks have their version and we have our same way for Chauhan we have our version and others have different version. Now if you ask Indians 70-80% (conservative approach) would agree with our version. So for majority this is history. Not everyone has time and skills to dig in the facts and do analysis so majority believe the propaganda. Lacks of facts in some situation increase the chances of propaganda. In the past it was much easier and winners were the only survivors (often) and had the chances to manipulate facts, write whatever they wanted. If history is only what happened then all history books should be same. The winner/ruler are in greater position to hide and manipulate the facts. Just an example in China govt is in greater control and i am sure would have been hiding lot of facts from the public and rest of the world. In future what will get reported is what they leave as evidence and that will become history which someone like you would be analysing. Ruler also control who will write the history. Lakan army tried to control the history of Tamil Tigers and Indira tried to control operation Blue Star history by only allowing M. Tully.

2. The other aspect is the different viewpoints. As Swaich said different people have different view points of some historical facts. I think i already said on this.

By this I am not trying to demean the profession of history.

Friend,

I fully agree with you that history and propaganda have separate identities and serve separate purposes. It is also true that the ruling elites try to resort to propaganda by using discriminate information which seems to them to serve their purpose to influence the public opinion in their favour. But with the passage of time, new facts/sources of information start to emerge, the propaganda documents began to give way to critical analysis and thus ground for writing history is prepared. In due course of time, authentic historical narration emerges.

That is why contemporary history is not considered by many as 'History' because full rigorous of historical methodology, which is perquisite of history, are/cannot applied to write it. This aspect of contemporary history and history needs to be recognised and kept into mind when we talk of History.

Of course different viewpoints are there on different historical events. But this should not be construed weakness in any manner. Rather existence of different points of view suggest that there is further scope of research and reinterpretation and whatever has been written on such a specific point more work has yet to be done to arrive at an universally acceptable point of view.

Thanks for your enlightening views on the topic.

DrRajpalSingh
June 5th, 2012, 07:46 AM
History is not written but it happened. It may take some time to bring forward the actual events with accurate date but its not all about what winners want to write. The winners may manipulate the circumstances for the time being but sooner or later truth comes out like a new day. Historian may have their own biases but then facts don't have any preferences.

You are right Friend that History is all about actual events that happened in the past. Objective {dispassionate] historians use all accessible and available facts to advance their point of view and give no preferential treatment to one source or the other. They treat sources of information as tools of history writing and use them in their work.

Thanks.

anilsangwan
June 5th, 2012, 09:08 AM
Can feel a bit harsh to History teachers or lovers.... but seems the way it is written in text books and it is taught, makes it very boring subject. I know exceptions are always there.

मेरे जिसे हिस्ट्री में बोदे आदमी तें बूझोगे या फेर किसे छटी सात्मी आठ्मी के बालक ने बूझोगे तो न्यू कह गा..."हिस्ट्री के पेपर में कितना इ लिख ल्यो.... नंबर 50-60 तें उपर कोणी आवें... मास्टर बिलांत तें नाप नाप के नंबर दिया करें...|| तारिख आर सन की घोल्मथोल माचे बिना ना रह... जितना पढो उतनी इ खिचड़ी...


Never ever thought that someone would even distort History as no one can benefit out of it. एब जा के बेरi पाटे स आक हिस्ट्री लिखण में भी राजनीति चाली सें...... एर गलत हिस्ट्री लिखण का मोटा नुक्सान स जाती और वर्ग विशेष के उपर .........

ravinderjeet
June 5th, 2012, 06:00 PM
जा इतिहासकार इतने-ए सही अर गलत के बारे में इतनी ड़ून्घी जांच पड़ताल करें सें अर इमानदार सें ते फेर भारत अर पाकिस्तान की हिस्ट्री एक होणी चाहिए , आजादी तें पहलम की | पाकिस्तान के इतिहासकार ते न्यू कहवें सें अक इस्लाम अर पाकिस्तान धरती पे कदीमी स |

DrRajpalSingh
June 5th, 2012, 06:43 PM
जा इतिहासकार इतने-ए सही अर गलत के बारे में इतनी ड़ून्घी जांच पड़ताल करें सें अर इमानदार सें ते फेर भारत अर पाकिस्तान की हिस्ट्री एक होणी चाहिए , आजादी तें पहलम की | पाकिस्तान के इतिहासकार ते न्यू कहवें सें अक इस्लाम अर पाकिस्तान धरती पे कदीमी स |

Dost, Aap ne sahi baat kahi hai kee aisa hona chahiya.

Pakistan mein aisa kahate hain to yeh history nahin, propaganda hai; yadi yeh history hoti to aap bhee yeh sawal nahin uthate kyonki aap ne pahle hee history kee puri jaankari hai aur Pakistan mein jo propaganda ho raha hai use aap bhee history nahin mante.

Is baare mein mein aap kya kahana chahenge historians galat hain yaa propaganda karaane wale!!

ravinderjeet
June 5th, 2012, 06:59 PM
Dost, Aap ne sahi baat kahi hai kee aisa hona chahiya.

Pakistan mein aisa kahate hain to yeh history nahin, propaganda hai; yadi yeh history hoti to aap bhee yeh sawal nahin uthate kyonki aap ne pahle hee history kee puri jaankari hai aur Pakistan mein jo propaganda ho raha hai use aap bhee history nahin mante.

Is baare mein mein aap kya kahana chahenge historians galat hain yaa propaganda karaane wale!!



अधिकतर इतिहासकार ( नकली ) प्रोपगेंडा करने वाले ही हैं | जो लोग पैसा ले कर इतिहास लिखते हैं ,गाते हैं , वे भांड कहलाते हैं |भारत का इतिहास जो आजकल किताबों में पढ़ाया जा रहा हे ,वो भी झूठ का पुलिंदा हे |इतिहास लिखने के लिए इतिहासकार का इमानदार होना बहुत जरुरी हे | इतिहासकार में इतनी हिम्मत होणी चाहिए की अगर उस्से पता चले की उसका बाप कोई और हे तो उसको भी वो सवीकार कर सके और सच्चाई लिख सके | मेरा उद्देश्य किसी की भावनाओं को ठेस पहुंचाना नहीं हे ----- सद- भावनाओं सहित |

DrRajpalSingh
June 5th, 2012, 07:02 PM
Can feel a bit harsh to History teachers or lovers.... but seems the way it is written in text books and it is taught, makes it very boring subject. I know exceptions are always there.

मेरे जिसे हिस्ट्री में बोदे आदमी तें बूझोगे या फेर किसे छटी सात्मी आठ्मी के बालक ने बूझोगे तो न्यू कह गा..."हिस्ट्री के पेपर में कितना इ लिख ल्यो.... नंबर 50-60 तें उपर कोणी आवें... मास्टर बिलांत तें नाप नाप के नंबर दिया करें...|| तारिख आर सन की घोल्मथोल माचे बिना ना रह... जितना पढो उतनी इ खिचड़ी...


Never ever thought that someone would even distort History as no one can benefit out of it. एब जा के बेरi पाटे स आक हिस्ट्री लिखण में भी राजनीति चाली सें...... एर गलत हिस्ट्री लिखण का मोटा नुक्सान स जाती और वर्ग विशेष के उपर .........

Sangwanji,

Wrong assumptions and perceptions about the subject of history in the minds of parents like us have caused to grow this type of fear in the minds of the young school going children. The facts are contrary to what you have posted here:

1. No exclusive history subject is taught at school level up to secondary/matriculation level anywhere in India.

2. Social studies comprising history, geography, civics and economics makes one subject. This amalgamation of several papers in one subject leads to the knotty problem for the young minds to grasp all of them and get good marks. However, the victim or villain becomes history in the eyes of the ignorant child or his/her parents.

3. If we look at the syllabus of even social studies up to 10th level or History as a separate subject at 10+2 level and the marking scheme, major portion of it is divided into objective type of question-answer form, so gone are the days when the students used to get highest 50-60 marks. These days majority of them get over 75 marks and in some cases 98 or 99 percent marks which could be verified from going through the results declared by various state and central boards.
Thanks

mandeep333
June 5th, 2012, 09:00 PM
History is recorded in numerous diaries, letters, journals, articles, etc. Other evidence comes in art, such as paintings, pottery, statues, etc.
It's sad, but we are forced to believe a specific historic reality as fact, when most of it is bullshit.

Everybody believes that the Nazis were very cruel. But do we ever realise how "evil & cruel" the Russians and Japanese were? Russian troops committed more war crimes on their way to Berlin than Hitler could have imagined. Rape, murder, massacres, executions of random people, etc. The Japanese killed 20 million people. They still worship war criminals today. These crimes are recorded in history books, but never taught in schools. Reason is simply because Comrade Stalin won the war (and nobody can say anything bad about Comrade Stalin, who singlehandly drove the evil Nazi capitalists back and conquered Berlin), and eventually Japan has become America's friend.

We know history happened because there are letters, artifacts, eyewitness accounts, physical evidence, etc. However, sometimes things are left out, sometimes things are framed in a certain way, etc.

You just have to trust your grandparents, who trusted their grandparents, and hope your grandchildren will trust you. If enough people trust their relatives backwards in history, then their version of history will be the official one.

Textbooks are another case, as they usually are biased in one way or the other, for one reason or another. I believe they do succeed in distorting history somewhat, because parents don't take the time (or haven't trusted/never listened to their grandparents/have forgotten/aren't interested etc) to check what the books are telling their children.

My these views are not meant to hurt anyone's feelings. But they actually demonstrate what I personally feel.

DrRajpalSingh
June 5th, 2012, 09:29 PM
History is recorded in numerous diaries, letters, journals, articles, etc. Other evidence comes in art, such as paintings, pottery, statues, etc.
It's sad, but we are forced to believe a specific historic reality as fact, when most of it is bullshit.

Everybody believes that the Nazis were very cruel. But do we ever realise how "evil & cruel" the Russians and Japanese were? Russian troops committed more war crimes on their way to Berlin than Hitler could have imagined. Rape, murder, massacres, executions of random people, etc. The Japanese killed 20 million people. They still worship war criminals today. These crimes are recorded in history books, but never taught in schools. Reason is simply because Comrade Stalin won the war (and nobody can say anything bad about Comrade Stalin, who singlehandly drove the evil Nazi capitalists back and conquered Berlin), and eventually Japan has become America's friend.

We know history happened because there are letters, artifacts, eyewitness accounts, physical evidence, etc. However, sometimes things are left out, sometimes things are framed in a certain way, etc.

You just have to trust your grandparents, who trusted their grandparents, and hope your grandchildren will trust you. If enough people trust their relatives backwards in history, then their version of history will be the official one.

Textbooks are another case, as they usually are biased in one way or the other, for one reason or another. I believe they do succeed in distorting history somewhat, because parents don't take the time (or haven't trusted/never listened to their grandparents/have forgotten/aren't interested etc) to check what the books are telling their children.

My these views are not meant to hurt anyone's feelings. But they actually demonstrate what I personally feel.

Friend,
You are right that the records of the Nazi atrocities were brought to light earlier than their opponents engaged in the WW II. But the acts of omissions and commissions including atrocities committed by all the participants are gradually coming up and in due course of time, they will surely find place on the pages of history books of the world.
I would like to draw your attention to one interesting point. The contemporary history i.e. history belonging to the latest about 100 years is known as contemporary history and the conclusions arrived on in it are generally considered tentative subject to verification by the historians in the light of emergence of newer reliable sources of information. This is so because in many countries much of the records labeled as 'confidential' by the officials is kept out of the reach of the authors/public for a certain period after expiry of that period it is let open for use by the general public.

This contemporary history part becomes a bone of contention and also creates doubt in the general readers about the reliability of history itself.
Thanks.

P.S:Bold portion of the quote mine.

Fateh
June 6th, 2012, 07:14 AM
Dr sahab, I know history is your subject/profession, but frankly speaking your views are theoretical, you are ignoring the facts/practical part and with your good language and theoretical knowledge of the subject, you are trying to over shadow the facts, other wise you also know what is history, Any way, I respect you and your love for the history, please do not mind my jat style of straight talk, it is a discussion nothing else

DrRajpalSingh
June 6th, 2012, 07:19 AM
Dr sahab, I know history is your subject/profession, but frankly speaking your views are theoretical, you are ignoring the facts/practical part and with your good language and theoretical knowledge of the subject, you are trying to over shadow the facts, other wise you also know what is history, Any way, I respect you and your love for the history, please do not mind my jat style of straight talk, it is a discussion nothing else

Thanks friend for accepting partially what theory of history is. I love your forthright style.

It is another thing what ideally it should be!!!

ravinderjeet
June 6th, 2012, 10:25 AM
डा . राजपाल जी ,में आप तें एक इमानदार उत्तर की अपेक्षआ करूं सु | आप न्यू बताओ ( बात ने घुमाइओ मतन्या ) म्हारी किताबां में न्यू पढ़ाया जावे स अक दुसरे विश्व युद्ध में जापा​नियां ने भारत पे ( बिर्टिश इंडिया , इन्क्लुडिंग बर्महा ) आकर्मण कर दिया था , और घणे अत्याचार करे थे , जनता पे ,और भारत के एक बड़े भू भाग को जीत लिया था ( आज के कोहिमा ताहीं आ गे थे ) उन को भारत की फौज ने हराया अर घणे सारे मेडल भी जीते ( जिनमे जाट भी सें , वे देश भक्त कुहाये )|

दुसरा पक्ष ---- जिन्न ने म्हारी इतिहास की किताब जापानी कहवे स ,वे आजाद हिंद फौज के फौजी थे जिन ताहीं जापानी गोला बारूद की सहायता देवें थे | जो फौजी बिर्टिश भारतीय फौज ने छोड़ के ने आजाद हिंद फौज में रळ गे वे भगोड़े कहलाये | भारत के आजाद होए पाछे आज हाम उन् ने एक ओड ने ते देशभक्त कहवाँ सां अर सवतंत्रता सेनानी कह के ने पेनसन देवाँ सां , अर दूसरी ओड़ ने भारतीय फौज के रिकार्ड के अनुसार भगोड़े कहवाँ सां , अर विदेशी या जापनी आक्रमणकारी कहवाँ सां |
१) सुभाष चन्द्र बोस देशद्रोही था या देशभक्त था ?
२) बिर्टिश भारतीय फौज के भगोड़े सेनिक देश द्रोही थे या देश भक्त थे ?
३) ये जा विदेशी अत्याचारी थे तो देश भक्त क्यूकर हो गे ?
४) जो फोजियाँ ने बिर्टिश भारतीय फौज की ओड़ तें लड़दी हाण मेडल लिए ( जो की आजाद हिंद के आपने-ए भाइयां ने मार के ने लिए सें ,जिन्न ने हाम आज सवतंत्रता सेनानी कहवाँ सां ,की इज्ज़त किः बात पे करी जा स ? देश भक्तों को मारने के लिए ?


ये दोनु बात एक-ए इतिहास की किताब में पढ़ाई जावें सें | ये इतिहासकार बावली बूच सें अक इह देश के नागरिक बावली बूच सें ?


----- सद- भावनाओं सहित |

Fateh
June 6th, 2012, 12:35 PM
Thanks friend for accepting partially what theory of history is. I love your forthright style.

It is another thing what ideally it should be!!!

Dear, ideal also has diffwerent standard/measurement for different people, however, in this case theoretical ideals do not go forward, now you are requested to answer few very pertinent questions raised by mr Ravinderjeet,regards

DrRajpalSingh
June 6th, 2012, 08:56 PM
डा . राजपाल जी ,में आप तें एक इमानदार उत्तर की अपेक्षआ करूं सु | आप न्यू बताओ ( बात ने घुमाइओ मतन्या ) म्हारी किताबां में न्यू पढ़ाया जावे स अक दुसरे विश्व युद्ध में जापा​नियां ने भारत पे ( बिर्टिश इंडिया , इन्क्लुडिंग बर्महा ) आकर्मण कर दिया था , और घणे अत्याचार करे थे , जनता पे ,और भारत के एक बड़े भू भाग को जीत लिया था ( आज के कोहिमा ताहीं आ गे थे ) उन को भारत की फौज ने हराया अर घणे सारे मेडल भी जीते ( जिनमे जाट भी सें , वे देश भक्त कुहाये )|

दुसरा पक्ष ---- जिन्न ने म्हारी इतिहास की किताब जापानी कहवे स ,वे आजाद हिंद फौज के फौजी थे जिन ताहीं जापानी गोला बारूद की सहायता देवें थे | जो फौजी बिर्टिश भारतीय फौज ने छोड़ के ने आजाद हिंद फौज में रळ गे वे भगोड़े कहलाये | भारत के आजाद होए पाछे आज हाम उन् ने एक ओड ने ते देशभक्त कहवाँ सां अर सवतंत्रता सेनानी कह के ने पेनसन देवाँ सां , अर दूसरी ओड़ ने भारतीय फौज के रिकार्ड के अनुसार भगोड़े कहवाँ सां , अर विदेशी या जापनी आक्रमणकारी कहवाँ सां |
१) सुभाष चन्द्र बोस देशद्रोही था या देशभक्त था ?
२) बिर्टिश भारतीय फौज के भगोड़े सेनिक देश द्रोही थे या देश भक्त थे ?
३) ये जा विदेशी अत्याचारी थे तो देश भक्त क्यूकर हो गे ?
४) जो फोजियाँ ने बिर्टिश भारतीय फौज की ओड़ तें लड़दी हाण मेडल लिए ( जो की आजाद हिंद के आपने-ए भाइयां ने मार के ने लिए सें ,जिन्न ने हाम आज सवतंत्रता सेनानी कहवाँ सां ,की इज्ज़त किः बात पे करी जा स ? देश भक्तों को मारने के लिए ?

ये दोनु बात एक-ए इतिहास की किताब में पढ़ाई जावें सें | ये इतिहासकार बावली बूच सें अक इह देश के नागरिक बावली बूच सें ?
----- सद- भावनाओं सहित |

Ravinderjeet Singh ji,

I welcome your very good and relevant questions on a very serious topic of the Saga of Sacrifice by our valiant forefathers to free India from the grinding yoke of the slavery to the British.
First of all I beg pardon for replying your questions in English. The replies to the issues raised according to my understanding of History as a subject of study are produced as under:

1. Undoubtedly, Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose was a patriot par excellence .

2. The Indians from British forces of those times who joined INA were patriots and have found their hon'ble place of pride in the books of Indian History.
The atrocities committed by the Japanese in Korea and Burma are not any longer hidden from the world and Govt. of Japan has openly accepted that in recent years.

Kindly remember Burma had ceased to be a part of India in 1935 i.e. before the beginning of the WW II.

We have full chapters on the sterling contribution of Freedom fighters including therein full chapters on S. Bhagat Singh and HSRA, Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose and INA at our degree level courses of study of Kurukshetra University and there is no reference about any atrocities committed by INA on the then British Indians.

Therefore, before I could post comment on questions 3 and 4 raised by you, would you be kind enough to inform us the name of the book/author to whom you are referring or quote the relevant paragraph where this description happens. You would appreciate that this would facilitate proper comment by all the participants in the discussion on the issue.

Regards

P.S.: Kind attention Sh. F.S. Kharb with reference to his post No 90 on this thread discussion.

Fateh
June 7th, 2012, 07:36 AM
Ravinderjeet Singh ji,

I welcome your very good and relevant questions on a very serious topic of the Saga of Sacrifice by our valiant forefathers to free India from the grinding yoke of the slavery to the British.
First of all I beg pardon for replying your questions in English. The replies to the issues raised according to my understanding of History as a subject of study are produced as under:

1. Undoubtedly, Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose was a patriot par excellence .

2. The Indians from British forces of those times who joined INA were patriots and have found their hon'ble place of pride in the books of Indian History.
The atrocities committed by the Japanese in Korea and Burma are not any longer hidden from the world and Govt. of Japan has openly accepted that in recent years.

Kindly remember Burma had ceased to be a part of India in 1935 i.e. before the beginning of the WW II.

We have full chapters on the sterling contribution of Freedom fighters including therein full chapters on S. Bhagat Singh and HSRA, Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose and INA at our degree level courses of study of Kurukshetra University and there is no reference about any atrocities committed by INA on the then British Indians.

Therefore, before I could post comment on questions 3 and 4 raised by you, would you be kind enough to inform us the name of the book/author to whom you are referring or quote the relevant paragraph where this description happens. You would appreciate that this would facilitate proper comment by all the participants in the discussion on the issue.

Regards

P.S.: Kind attention Sh. F.S. Kharb with reference to his post No 90 on this thread discussion.

Yes I am following, but your full reply is yet to appear, regards

DrRajpalSingh
June 7th, 2012, 08:37 AM
[/COLOR]Yes I am following, but your full reply is yet to appear, regards

Thanks.

Kindly make it convenient to supply the required information on points 3 and 4 as requested by me in the earlier post so that proper analysis of the topic could be accomplished.

ravinderjeet
June 7th, 2012, 11:15 AM
डा . राजपाल जी ,में आप तें एक इमानदार उत्तर की अपेक्षआ करूं सु | आप न्यू बताओ ( बात ने घुमाइओ मतन्या ) म्हारी


Ravinderjeet Singh ji,

I welcome your very good and relevant questions on a very serious topic of the Saga of Sacrifice by our valiant forefathers to free India from the grinding yoke of the slavery to the British.
First of all I beg pardon for replying your questions in English. The replies to the issues raised according to my understanding of History as a subject of study are produced as under:

1. Undoubtedly, Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose was a patriot par excellence .

2. The Indians from British forces of those times who joined INA were patriots and have found their hon'ble place of pride in the books of Indian History.
The atrocities committed by the Japanese in Korea and Burma are not any longer hidden from the world and Govt. of Japan has openly accepted that in recent years.

Kindly remember Burma had ceased to be a part of India in 1935 i.e. before the beginning of the WW II.

We have full chapters on the sterling contribution of Freedom fighters including therein full chapters on S. Bhagat Singh and HSRA, Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose and INA at our degree level courses of study of Kurukshetra University and there is no reference about any atrocities committed by INA on the then British Indians.

Therefore, before I could post comment on questions 3 and 4 raised by you, would you be kind enough to inform us the name of the book/author to whom you are referring or quote the relevant paragraph where this description happens. You would appreciate that this would facilitate proper comment by all the participants in the discussion on the issue.

Regards

P.S.: Kind attention Sh. F.S. Kharb with reference to his post No 90 on this thread discussion.


डा. राजपाल जी , मन्ने दो बात लाल हरफां में लिखी थी | पर आपने उन् पे ध्यान कोणी दिया | आप एक अच्छे नोकरशाह होंगे या हो सकते हैं | जो हर दुसरे के किये हुए अच्छे काम का करेडिट खुद लेता हे और अपनी हर कमी या गलत काम को किसी दुसरे पर धकेल देता हे | आपने अपने जबाब में वही किया हे | में इस बहस में और भाग नहीं लेना चाहता ---धन्यवाद ---- सद- भावनाओं सहित |

DrRajpalSingh
June 7th, 2012, 04:18 PM
डा . राजपाल जी ,में आप तें एक इमानदार उत्तर की अपेक्षआ करूं सु | आप न्यू बताओ ( बात ने घुमाइओ मतन्या ) म्हारी


डा. राजपाल जी , मन्ने दो बात लाल हरफां में लिखी थी | पर आपने उन् पे ध्यान कोणी दिया | आप एक अच्छे नोकरशाह होंगे या हो सकते हैं | जो हर दुसरे के किये हुए अच्छे काम का करेडिट खुद लेता हे और अपनी हर कमी या गलत काम को किसी दुसरे पर धकेल देता हे | आपने अपने जबाब में वही किया हे | में इस बहस में और भाग नहीं लेना चाहता ---धन्यवाद ---- सद- भावनाओं सहित |

BHAI Sahib,

Meine bhee Do Tuck Jawab Diye hein.

Pahle aap yah batayen kee aapke Question Nos. 1 aur 2 ke utteron mein ghumao kahan Hai ? Kya aapko inme ghumao ya be-imaana nazar aata Hai.

Mera manana hai ki yeh jawab aap ke disha nirdesh ke anusaar hain tatha sapast aur sidhe diya gaye Hain.



Question No. 3 aur 4 se sambhdit mangi gai suchna milne ka intzar rahega, tabhi unke jawab diya ja sakte hein.

Mere kaam aur mere vyaktigat jeevan ke baare mein aapke subh vichar jaankar hardik khushi hui;

Itane badhia testimonial ke liye danyavad!!!

Saadar Pranaam.

Fateh
June 7th, 2012, 07:12 PM
BHAI Sahib,

Meine bhee Do Tuck Jawab Diye hein.

Pahle aap yah batayen kee aapke Question Nos. 1 aur 2 ke utteron mein ghumao kahan Hai ? Kya aapko inme ghumao ya be-imaana nazar aata Hai.

Mera manana hai ki yeh jawab aap ke disha nirdesh ke anusaar hain tatha sapast aur sidhe diya gaye Hain.



Question No. 3 aur 4 se sambhdit mangi gai suchna milne ka intzar rahega, tabhi unke jawab diya ja sakte hein.

Mere kaam aur mere vyaktigat jeevan ke baare mein aapke subh vichar jaankar hardik khushi hui;

Itane badhia testimonial ke liye danyavad!!!

Saadar Pranaam.
Brother, does history of England calls Netaji and Army personnel who crossed over towards Netaji, patriots,also why Nehru gave in writing to British Govt that if Netaji appears in India, he will be handed over to them, was he considered a patriot by the newly form govt of India, For your kind information some Army personnel who tried to cross over but could not do it or some who were caught were punished by the British Indian Army. Secondly dear what for you need to know the book and author to answer, if you do not believe or if q-3 & 4 are wrong/irrelevent etc, than you say so and give correct version from your side, Anther Question- what do you call those Indian soldiers who fought against patriots under the banner of British, some of them got awards and got regularly money from Independent Indian Govt.

DrRajpalSingh
June 7th, 2012, 08:35 PM
Brother, does history of England calls Netaji and Army personnel who crossed over towards Netaji, patriots,also why Nehru gave in writing to British Govt that if Netaji appears in India, he will be handed over to them, was he considered a patriot by the newly form govt of India, For your kind information some Army personnel who tried to cross over but could not do it or some who were caught were punished by the British Indian Army. Secondly dear what for you need to know the book and author to answer, if you do not believe or if q-3 & 4 are wrong/irrelevent etc, than you say so and give correct version from your side, Anther Question- what do you call those Indian soldiers who fought against patriots under the banner of British, some of them got awards and got regularly money from Independent Indian Govt.
My Esteemed Friend,

1. It is a great revelation from you that it was so, would you kindly let us know if you have seen the document or throw light on the whereabouts of the document at present' The reference is to your comment: [why Nehru gave in writing to British Govt that if Netaji appears in India, he will be handed over to them, was he considered a patriot by the newly form govt of India].

2. Then you say, ''Secondly dear what for you need to know the book and author to answer..." The reason is:

To critically analyse any statement in the history books, first of all one has to go through the context, references quoted and then filling the gap, if any, only on the basis of the same on the basis of newer additional data.

That is why I request you to do this favour. If you have no such reference, then, instead of dragging the issue further, admit it or supply the needful reference so that the issue could be clinched.

Yes there is an alternative.

Dear Friend, I hereby publicly admit that I am ignorant about the rules/regulations and army manual on the issue and consider you as the fittest person to enlighten us on the basis of your practical experience and knowledge regarding the issues as are being discussed, especially raised under questions 3 and 4. Would you oblige us please!

3. The two out of 4 questions under discussion are straight and my replies to two of them are even straighter in line with the need of the intellectual parameters prevalent all over the world. Your comments on these two points are eagerly awaited.

4. The veneration to 'Patriotism' is limited to the boundaries of the country to which such Hero belongs.

Thanks

Fateh
June 8th, 2012, 06:22 AM
My Esteemed Friend,

1. It is a great revelation from you that it was so, would you kindly let us know if you have seen the document or throw light on the whereabouts of the document at present' The reference is to your comment: [why Nehru gave in writing to British Govt that if Netaji appears in India, he will be handed over to them, was he considered a patriot by the newly form govt of India].

2. Then you say, ''Secondly dear what for you need to know the book and author to answer..." The reason is:

To critically analyse any statement in the history books, first of all one has to go through the context, references quoted and then filling the gap, if any, only on the basis of the same on the basis of newer additional data.

That is why I request you to do this favour. If you have no such reference, then, instead of dragging the issue further, admit it or supply the needful reference so that the issue could be clinched.

Yes there is an alternative.

Dear Friend, I hereby publicly admit that I am ignorant about the rules/regulations and army manual on the issue and consider you as the fittest person to enlighten us on the basis of your practical experience and knowledge regarding the issues as are being discussed, especially raised under questions 3 and 4. Would you oblige us please!

3. The two out of 4 questions under discussion are straight and my replies to two of them are even straighter in line with the need of the intellectual parameters prevalent all over the world. Your comments on these two points are eagerly awaited.

4. The veneration to 'Patriotism' is limited to the boundaries of the country to which such Hero belongs.

Thanks
Dr saheb, If references were left by the rulers than the situation might have been different, but kindly trace some elderly person in your village/home town Dadari and ask about it.
second point, we wanted to know your reply not analysis, we are also talking with in boundaries. Here discussion is on your subject the History, where is the requirement of rules, regulations and Army manual.THUS PLEASE DO NOT CONFUSE THE ISSUE. Mr Rajpal please do not thing that we are testing your knowledge, Had we know the answer, we would not have asked you. So if you can answer than do it or stop the discussion, it is not a competition. So relax, regards

DrRajpalSingh
June 8th, 2012, 07:39 AM
Dr saheb, If references were left by the rulers than the situation might have been different, but kindly trace some elderly person in your village/home town Dadari and ask about it.
second point, we wanted to know your reply not analysis, we are also talking with in boundaries. Here discussion is on your subject the History, where is the requirement of rules, regulations and Army manual.THUS PLEASE DO NOT CONFUSE THE ISSUE. Mr Rajpal please do not thing that we are testing your knowledge, Had we know the answer, we would not have asked you. So if you can answer than do it or stop the discussion, it is not a competition. So relax, regards

Thanks Friend for closing the issue on a happy note that there is no reference available, as of now, on the questions raised.

Let us move to some other topic for a healthier discussion.

I would like to invite valued views of the Jatlanders on the Topic: Perspectives on the History of Jats; i.e. Jat Itihas kee aaj dasha aur dishayein.

DrRajpalSingh
June 8th, 2012, 10:37 AM
Friends,

Jat historiography has traversed many a crosses since appearance of Dr. K.R. Qanungo's pioneering work on Jat History in 1925 and followed by Desharaj Jhaghina's path breaking Jat Itihas in c. 1934. Then the task was followed by Lt. Ramswarup Joon in 1940's, Captain Dalip Singh Ahalawat and B.S. Dahiya in 1980's and the last but not the least Dr. Hukam Singh in 1990's as well as by four authors [Dr Mahendra Singh Arya, Dharmpal Singh Dudee, Kishan Singh Faujdar & Vijendra Singh Narwar:] in the Ādhunik Jat Itihasa in 1998. All of them have done yeoman's service to bring the lost pages of the origin and contribution of the community as a whole to light of the day. [Regional histories and biographies have not been included].
Several other writers and authors have also contributed in this 'yajana' of writing the Jat History whose names must be enlisted here but due to certain constraints this could not be done. But I beg to submit that this should not be construed as disregard to their contribution or disrespect to their person.

The editorial team of the Jatland Wiki pages has made sterling contribution, in addition to other aspects of Jat History, they have especially facilitated a thorough and unbiased critical study of origin of Jat gotras which constitute the community, and made it available to the public for their comments.

In a way, the issue pertaining to the origin of the Jats, has been discussed threadbare and tentative conclusions on the issue have been carried near crystallization. The newer references/data if and when emerge, could be included as and when received and wherever required.

Now, the time has arrived to produce a Comprehensive Political, Social and Economic History of the Jats which could be done by not one man but by a team of persons taking up certain part/s of it and then before publication critically analysed/edited by the editorial board constituted for the purpose!

Leaving aside Pre-historic and Proto historic times for Volume I of the proposed project, we can start with preparing an authentic account of Volume II relating to the period c 600 B C to c 650 A.D. and in the like manner further volumes could be planned.

Are there any takers of this idea on Jat History and come forward to join the proposed Project Or to suggest alternate better plan or Project!!

Thanks.

Fateh
June 8th, 2012, 06:24 PM
Thanks Friend for closing the issue on a happy note that there is no reference available, as of now, on the questions raised.

Let us move to some other topic for a healthier discussion.

I would like to invite valued views of the Jatlanders on the Topic: Perspectives on the History of Jats; i.e. Jat Itihas kee aaj dasha aur dishayein.


Look Brother, I do understand, what your first line says, please do not through the ball in my court, please accept gracefully if you can not or do not want to answer above questions, neither I know such method of pushing the blame to other side nor my age and status permit me to reply in the same coins, also such small things do not matter much. Friend, every body is not expected to know every thing in this world and there is no age limit of learning, request to start writing on a straight line at list when matter is with in the family. again request you to take it a friendly advise only, regards

mandeep333
June 8th, 2012, 09:26 PM
I believe history is primarily concerned with the evolution of mankind. It traces the whole story of man as well as of his progress in civilization a culture from the dim past up to the present day. It indicates his failures and his successes, describes his laws and his wars, and reveals his religions and his arts. It gives an account of the significant developments that took place in the past with reference to the countries and the men and women who played a noteworthy part.

It preserves the traditional and cultural values of a nation, and serves as a beacon light, guiding society in confronting various crises.A study of history is essential for good citizenship. This is the most common justification for the place of history in school curricula. Sometimes advocates of citizenship history hope merely to promote national identity and loyalty through a history spiced by vivid stories and lessons in individual success and morality. But the importance of history for citizenship goes beyond this narrow goal and can even challenge it at some points. Therefore history ought to be neutral, unbiased and impartial.

DrRajpalSingh
June 8th, 2012, 09:29 PM
Look Brother, I do understand, what your first line says, please do not through the ball in my court, please accept gracefully if you can not or do not want to answer above questions, neither I know such method of pushing the blame to other side nor my age and status permit me to reply in the same coins, also such small things do not matter much. Friend, every body is not expected to know every thing in this world and there is no age limit of learning, request to start writing on a straight line at list when matter is with in the family. again request you to take it a friendly advise only, regards

No comments. Thanks.

DrRajpalSingh
June 8th, 2012, 09:32 PM
I believe history is primarily concerned with the evolution of mankind. It traces the whole story of man as well as of his progress in civilization a culture from the dim past up to the present day. It indicates his failures and his successes, describes his laws and his wars, and reveals his religions and his arts. It gives an account of the significant developments that took place in the past with reference to the countries and the men and women who played a noteworthy part.

It preserves the traditional and cultural values of a nation, and serves as a beacon light, guiding society in confronting various crises.A study of history is essential for good citizenship. This is the most common justification for the place of history in school curricula. Sometimes advocates of citizenship history hope merely to promote national identity and loyalty through a history spiced by vivid stories and lessons in individual success and morality. But the importance of history for citizenship goes beyond this narrow goal and can even challenge it at some points. Therefore history ought to be neutral, unbiased and impartial.

Friend,

I fully endorse your views.

Thanks

narenderkharb
June 8th, 2012, 10:35 PM
Friends,

Jat historiography has traversed many a crosses since appearance of Dr. K.R. Qanungo's pioneering work on Jat History in 1925 and followed by Desharaj Jhaghina's path breaking Jat Itihas in c. 1934. Then the task was followed by Lt. Ramswarup Joon in 1940's, Captain Dalip Singh Ahalawat and B.S. Dahiya in 1980's and the last but not the least Dr. Hukam Singh in 1990's as well as by four authors [Dr Mahendra Singh Arya, Dharmpal Singh Dudee, Kishan Singh Faujdar & Vijendra Singh Narwar:] in the Ādhunik Jat Itihasa in 1998. All of them have done yeoman's service to bring the lost pages of the origin and contribution of the community as a whole to light of the day. [Regional histories and biographies have not been included].
Several other writers and authors have also contributed in this 'yajana' of writing the Jat History whose names must be enlisted here but due to certain constraints this could not be done. But I beg to submit that this should not be construed as disregard to their contribution or disrespect to their person.

The editorial team of the Jatland Wiki pages has made sterling contribution, in addition to other aspects of Jat History, they have especially facilitated a thorough and unbiased critical study of origin of Jat gotras which constitute the community, and made it available to the public for their comments.

In a way, the issue pertaining to the origin of the Jats, has been discussed threadbare and tentative conclusions on the issue have been carried near crystallization. The newer references/data if and when emerge, could be included as and when received and wherever required.

Now, the time has arrived to produce a Comprehensive Political, Social and Economic History of the Jats which could be done by not one man but by a team of persons taking up certain part/s of it and then before publication critically analysed/edited by the editorial board constituted for the purpose!

Leaving aside Pre-historic and Proto historic times for Volume I of the proposed project, we can start with preparing an authentic account of Volume II relating to the period c 600 B C to c 650 A.D. and in the like manner further volumes could be planned.

Are there any takers of this idea on Jat History and come forward to join the proposed Project Or to suggest alternate better plan or Project!!

Thanks.


Nice post and a very valuable suggestion.

I did my efforts in this direction by arranging a meeting of Jat Historians at Surajmal institute along with some history lovers from Jatland and Jat history yahoo site. Now it is time to involve more writers and historians and present an accurate account of our history.I will be available for all kind of assistance in this regard.
Thanks and Regards.

Narender Kharb

Fateh
June 9th, 2012, 05:24 AM
No comments. Thanks.

I appreciate and welcome your no comments, thanks

DrRajpalSingh
June 10th, 2012, 09:33 PM
I appreciate and welcome your no comments, thanks

I, too, like it.

Fateh
June 11th, 2012, 06:15 AM
I, too, like it.

Let the ball rest in my court yard, I do not mind, but dear I would like to share with you that any kind of complex, superiority or inferiority, not good for health, one must remove the burden as early as possible,

DrRajpalSingh
June 11th, 2012, 08:25 AM
Let the ball rest in my court yard, I do not mind, but dear I would like to share with you that any kind of complex, superiority or inferiority, not good for health, one must remove the burden as early as possible,

Thanks Friend.

If we join discussion on some issue, then the ball of arguments keeps shuttling from one court to another and it is not expected to rest in this or that court.

Therefore, please consider would it not be appropriate for both of us to take up some other relevant topic/s and contribute our humble bit to make them more informative and interesting.

I do agree that we must definitely avoid all sorts of 'complexes'.

Regards

Fateh
June 11th, 2012, 05:52 PM
Thanks Friend.

If we join discussion on some issue, then the ball of arguments keeps shuttling from one court to another and it is not expected to rest in this or that court.

Therefore, please consider would it not be appropriate for both of us to take up some other relevant topic/s and contribute our humble bit to make them more informative and interesting.

I do agree that we must definitely avoid all sorts of 'complexes'.

Regards

Thanks, dear agreed, go ahead

rekhasmriti
June 13th, 2012, 06:33 AM
For me history- just like a story- which is not fiction rather absolute truth with fact.

Sir - I was never a good scorer when it comes to History

However I have always enjoyed history- coz its interesting- one learns a lot from it

DrRajpalSingh
June 13th, 2012, 10:00 PM
Friends,
For sometime past, we have been discussing what history is and some very interesting and valuable points have emerged. Today, I take the opportunity to reproduce below the views of a very famous career advisor on the topic with due acknowledgements to the author and the news paper. She is none else than Usha Albuquerque, who writes in her column, ‘Field in Focus: HISTORY’ under the headline, ‘Past that can build your future, in The Tribune, Chandigarh, dated 13th June, 2012 on the significance of history as a subject of study , its vast area, additional skills and so on. THIS REPRODUCTION OF THE LEARNED AUTHOR ATTEMPTS AT MAKING THE MEANING AND RELEVANCE OF THE SUBJECT MORE UNDERSTANDABLE TO US ALL}

“History is much misunderstood subject, and even as we brush it off in terms of significance, history books and historical fiction remains best sellers, history has its own television channels which millions watch around the world, and some of the best movies made in the recent times have been based on historical events. Obviously, the popular interest in history reflects a desire to know more about ourselves, but we often dismiss its value as a subject that can help us succeed in future.”
She goes on to describe history as a vast subject. According to her, “History is study of human self-knowledge and provides clues to what man is, can do and what man have done. The value of history, then, is not only in learning from the past [we really never do] but it helps to inform us so that we might make better decisions in the future. The study of history, therefore, benefits a student in two ways—it provides domain knowledge in the subject useful for a range of occupations directly related to the study of history, and it also imparts a wide range of transferable skills, which are important in many indirectly related career fields. Understanding and analysis of issues and events are of key importance to historians and can be applied in many other fields of work. For those interested in the social and cultural aspects of history, there are options such as archaeology, museology and art restoration. A study of fossils, monuments, manuscripts, coins and excavated remains can provide you with the knowledge of societies that existed in the ancient past, and lead you on a trail of jobs that can take you right up to the Smithsonian Museum.
‘’In addition, the study of history hones general abilities, such as memory and intelligence, as also analytical and communication skills that are highly usable in other academic pursuits and in almost any career you choose to get into. The extensive knowledge that graduates gain affects the manner in which they can gather, organise, represent interpret and critically analyse information in their environments. This, in turn, affects their ability to put forward ideas and arguments in a concise manner and to reason, and to solve problems.’’
........[To be contd.....]

lrburdak
June 14th, 2012, 08:01 AM
Dr Rajpalji

We have created a page on Jatland Wiki - General History

I have transferred some content as provided by you. Can you further improve it ?

DrRajpalSingh
June 14th, 2012, 09:02 AM
Dr Rajpalji

We have created a page on Jatland Wiki - General History (http://www.jatland.com/w/index.php?title=General History)

I have transferred some content as provided by you. Can you further improve it ?

Thanks, I will make my sincere endeavour to do so.

Fateh
June 14th, 2012, 03:43 PM
Friends,
For sometime past, we have been discussing what history is and some very interesting and valuable points have emerged. Today, I take the opportunity to reproduce below the views of a very famous career advisor on the topic with due acknowledgements to the author and the news paper. She is none else than Usha Albuquerque, who writes in her column, ‘Field in Focus: HISTORY’ under the headline, ‘Past that can build your future, in The Tribune, Chandigarh, dated 13th June, 2012 on the significance of history as a subject of study , its vast area, additional skills and so on. THIS REPRODUCTION OF THE LEARNED AUTHOR ATTEMPTS AT MAKING THE MEANING AND RELEVANCE OF THE SUBJECT MORE UNDERSTANDABLE TO US ALL}

“History is much misunderstood subject, and even as we brush it off in terms of significance, history books and historical fiction remains best sellers, history has its own television channels which millions watch around the world, and some of the best movies made in the recent times have been based on historical events. Obviously, the popular interest in history reflects a desire to know more about ourselves, but we often dismiss its value as a subject that can help us succeed in future.”
She goes on to describe history as a vast subject. According to her, “History is study of human self-knowledge and provides clues to what man is, can do and what man have done. The value of history, then, is not only in learning from the past [we really never do] but it helps to inform us so that we might make better decisions in the future. The study of history, therefore, benefits a student in two ways—it provides domain knowledge in the subject useful for a range of occupations directly related to the study of history, and it also imparts a wide range of transferable skills, which are important in many indirectly related career fields. Understanding and analysis of issues and events are of key importance to historians and can be applied in many other fields of work. For those interested in the social and cultural aspects of history, there are options such as archaeology, museology and art restoration. A study of fossils, monuments, manuscripts, coins and excavated remains can provide you with the knowledge of societies that existed in the ancient past, and lead you on a trail of jobs that can take you right up to the Smithsonian Museum.
‘’In addition, the study of history hones general abilities, such as memory and intelligence, as also analytical and communication skills that are highly usable in other academic pursuits and in almost any career you choose to get into. The extensive knowledge that graduates gain affects the manner in which they can gather, organise, represent interpret and critically analyse information in their environments. This, in turn, affects their ability to put forward ideas and arguments in a concise manner and to reason, and to solve problems.’’
........[To be contd.....]

Rajpalji, any information about yesterday and past is history and it is obeous most we want to know about matter of his/her interest but the real point of discussion was that the history written/painted is correct/how much/how far correct or its correctness is effected by various facters which we have already discussed earlier, I think your above motiational expression for young children, doesnot hold good for our discussion, we expect some good contribution from you even coping from books, regards

Fateh
June 14th, 2012, 03:45 PM
Friends,
For sometime past, we have been discussing what history is and some very interesting and valuable points have emerged. Today, I take the opportunity to reproduce below the views of a very famous career advisor on the topic with due acknowledgements to the author and the news paper. She is none else than Usha Albuquerque, who writes in her column, ‘Field in Focus: HISTORY’ under the headline, ‘Past that can build your future, in The Tribune, Chandigarh, dated 13th June, 2012 on the significance of history as a subject of study , its vast area, additional skills and so on. THIS REPRODUCTION OF THE LEARNED AUTHOR ATTEMPTS AT MAKING THE MEANING AND RELEVANCE OF THE SUBJECT MORE UNDERSTANDABLE TO US ALL}

“History is much misunderstood subject, and even as we brush it off in terms of significance, history books and historical fiction remains best sellers, history has its own television channels which millions watch around the world, and some of the best movies made in the recent times have been based on historical events. Obviously, the popular interest in history reflects a desire to know more about ourselves, but we often dismiss its value as a subject that can help us succeed in future.”
She goes on to describe history as a vast subject. According to her, “History is study of human self-knowledge and provides clues to what man is, can do and what man have done. The value of history, then, is not only in learning from the past [we really never do] but it helps to inform us so that we might make better decisions in the future. The study of history, therefore, benefits a student in two ways—it provides domain knowledge in the subject useful for a range of occupations directly related to the study of history, and it also imparts a wide range of transferable skills, which are important in many indirectly related career fields. Understanding and analysis of issues and events are of key importance to historians and can be applied in many other fields of work. For those interested in the social and cultural aspects of history, there are options such as archaeology, museology and art restoration. A study of fossils, monuments, manuscripts, coins and excavated remains can provide you with the knowledge of societies that existed in the ancient past, and lead you on a trail of jobs that can take you right up to the Smithsonian Museum.
‘’In addition, the study of history hones general abilities, such as memory and intelligence, as also analytical and communication skills that are highly usable in other academic pursuits and in almost any career you choose to get into. The extensive knowledge that graduates gain affects the manner in which they can gather, organise, represent interpret and critically analyse information in their environments. This, in turn, affects their ability to put forward ideas and arguments in a concise manner and to reason, and to solve problems.’’
........[To be contd.....]

Rajpalji, any information about yesterday and past is history and it is obeous most we want to know about matter of his/her interest but the real point of discussion was that the history written/painted is correct/how much/how far correct or its correctness is effected by various facters which we have already discussed earlier, I think your above motiational expression for young children, doesnot hold good for our discussion, we expect some good contribution from you even coping from books, regards

Fateh
June 14th, 2012, 03:50 PM
Dr Rajpalji

We have created a page on Jatland Wiki - General History (http://www.jatland.com/w/index.php?title=General%20History)

I have transferred some content as provided by you. Can you further improve it ?
Transferring contents at this stage is not correct, this is how truth/correctness of history is effected, but it is your judgement/impression and your wish

DrRajpalSingh
June 14th, 2012, 05:24 PM
Rajpalji, any information about yesterday and past is history and it is obeous most we want to know about matter of his/her interest but the real point of discussion was that the history written/painted is correct/how much/how far correct or its correctness is effected by various facters which we have already discussed earlier, I think your above motiational expression for young children, doesnot hold good for our discussion, we expect some good contribution from you even coping from books, regards

Friend,

I have noted very carefully your liking and disliking as well as the piece of advice contained in the last line of the post on the issue!!! Any other relevant instruction/piece of advice or direction from the seniors is always welcome. I shall try to do my utmost to follow the same with due sincerity.

But, I beg to submit many points described in the aforesaid post are relevant for everyone interested in understanding after all what history is. Then, the theme of the thread is not exclusively meant for the seniors only.

Thanks.

tarzon
June 14th, 2012, 06:00 PM
History is nothing but the manipulated facts!

swaich
June 15th, 2012, 12:17 AM
and




Ravinderjeet ji and Swaichji,

It is not so. The fact of the matter is as follows.
The biased history never makes room in the academic fraternity. The yard stick applied is 'objectivity' in historical narration that is detachment of the author/scholar i.e., he/she has not to take sides and present the facts as such based on the references quoted. Thus prejudiced writing is continuously replaced in view of the newer found facts.
So long as there exists scarcity of solid reliable evidence, one, two or as many as reference based views are put for open debate and this is the methodology not demerit that there appear divergence of views on any specific issue. Therefore we must not be afraid of this phenomenon.

Even today, in the age of explosion of information technology, many gaps and dark places remain to be plugged and illuminated as there continues to be lack of historical sources/data even today. I mean to convey that none can claim to have written final word in history because there is always scope of coming to light newer data/sources/references. History writing requires rigorous practice and that comes with experience and expertise.

Thanks.

My apologies I couldnt respond to your post earlier. The term used above "academic fraternity", its composition surely varies from one region/institution to another, does it not? Lets take the Bangladesh War's example. Indian historians will justify it as helping our Bengali brother out of humanitarian reasons, while Pak ones will call it a shrewd game of "aag mein ghee fekna". Whats the real truth here? Perhaps neither, perhaps a mixture of the two narratives. But in this case, even the academic fraternity will be biased depending upon their country.

I understand that this does not mean we can disregard all historical research as biased or one sided. We all know the first man came from Africa, agriculture started around Anatolia and the Native Americans reached their current lands via the frozen Bering Straits. All this historical information is verified and undisputed. But it is only when history mingles into ethnic, nationalistic and cultural domains do disputes and concerns of bias arise.

Fateh
June 16th, 2012, 08:28 AM
Friend,

I have noted very carefully your liking and disliking as well as the piece of advice contained in the last line of the post on the issue!!! Any other relevant instruction/piece of advice or direction from the seniors is always welcome. I shall try to do my utmost to follow the same with due sincerity.

But, I beg to submit many points described in the aforesaid post are relevant for everyone interested in understanding after all what history is. Then, the theme of the thread is not exclusively meant for the seniors only.

Thanks.

Dear friend your impression/assessment/noting is not correct but you are free to note as per your ability/liking.

DrRajpalSingh
June 16th, 2012, 11:09 AM
Dear friend your impression/assessment/noting is not correct but you are free to note as per your ability/liking.


Dear Friend,
I admit lack of abilities and limited knowledge of the subject at my command and am curious to learn from all corners; that is why I had initiated discussion on the topic to solicit opinion of the experts. Kindly specify what is 'incorrect' in my statement and what according to you is correct position!

Therefore, would it not be in the fitness of things if, instead of discussing individual likings or abilities, you come out to add to our knowledge on the topic of the thread by posting your valued views.
Thanks and regards.

Fateh
June 16th, 2012, 02:30 PM
Dear Friend,
I admit lack of abilities and limited knowledge of the subject at my command and am curious to learn from all corners; that is why I had initiated discussion on the topic to solicit opinion of the experts. Kindly specify what is 'incorrect' in my statement and what according to you is correct position!

Therefore, would it not be in the fitness of things if, instead of discussing individual likings or abilities, you come out to add to our knowledge on the topic of the thread by posting your valued views.
Thanks and regards.Please pardon me friend, dear word in address is used for younger/junior, for young people you are always using respectful words where as for elders you are using different words which is not correct 2- opening lines of your post in question where you noted my liking/disliking is in correct, My dear being elder and had been very high in status, still I have lot of regards, effection and respect for you, but one cannot clap with one hand, regards

DrRajpalSingh
June 16th, 2012, 04:02 PM
Please pardon me friend, dear word in address is used for younger/junior, for young people you are always using respectful words where as for elders you are using different words which is not correct 2- opening lines of your post in question where you noted my liking/disliking is in correct, My dear being elder and had been very high in status, still I have lot of regards, effection and respect for you, but one cannot clap with one hand, regards

Respected Friend,

Thanks for your love and affection towards me which is a greater treasure for me than anything else!

Regards and thanks.

narvir
June 23rd, 2012, 02:06 PM
Sir,

For me history is a reality.

History is the witness that testifies to the passing of time,
it illuminates reality, vitalizes memory, provides guidance in daily life, and brings us tidings of antiquity.

It contains examples of mistakes to avoid, preserves the memory of alternatives ways of doing things, and is the basis for self-understanding.

Dhanyawad

with regards

DrRajpalSingh
July 4th, 2012, 05:44 PM
Sir,

For me history is a reality.

History is the witness that testifies to the passing of time,
it illuminates reality, vitalizes memory, provides guidance in daily life, and brings us tidings of antiquity.

It contains examples of mistakes to avoid, preserves the memory of alternatives ways of doing things, and is the basis for self-understanding.

Dhanyawad with regards

Congratulations Friend,

You have very beautifully summed up some of the finer characteristics and vital features of history. Further it may be added that history paves a sound footing for the present and proper perspective for future also.

Regards,

DrRajpalSingh
July 11th, 2012, 07:39 AM
Today's politics is the history of tomorrow, remembering this the Jat community should at present indulge in such activities as may find pages in the future books of history. What do you think, share!!!

DrRajpalSingh
November 1st, 2012, 09:48 PM
According to Lala Hardayal [a great revolutionary freedom fighter] ''History ...... is the record of all that Man has thought and done, dared and suffered felt and cherished. Man is not only a subject or a voter, he is also a parent, a bread-winner, am art-lover and a thinker. The whole of his work must be known and appreciated [in History]." ============= source Hints for Self Culture, Jaico Published ed., p.48.

DrRajpalSingh
November 1st, 2012, 09:58 PM
Who prepares the material to fit in the pages of history i.e. Maker of History, replies H W Longfellow, an American Poet Laureate as quoted below:

"All are architects of Fate,
Working in these walls of Times,
For the structure that we raise,
Time is with materials filled;
Our todays and yesterdays,
Are the blocks with which we build,
Build today, then, strong and sure,
With a firm and ample base,
And ascending and secure,
Shall tomorrow find its place."

Moar
November 1st, 2012, 10:12 PM
* Merriam-Webster Dictionary (>> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/history <<) : a chronological record of significant events (as affecting a nation or institution) often including an explanation of their causes / a treatise presenting systematically related natural phenomena / an established record


* In the pamphlet by Marx and Friedrich Engels, Marx says : "The history of hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles."


* Joseph Goebbels said, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” . . . . and . . . . “The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.”

DrRajpalSingh
November 1st, 2012, 10:35 PM
Friend,

The last two quotes are lop sided views and have been demolished due to limited scope prescribed of history. Though Marxist theory of class struggle and materialistic interpretation caught the fancy of historians for fairly a long time but has never been an acceptable view in historical circles.

History encompasses in scope much more than prescribed by these narrow minded political propagandasits of the yore to serve their purpose of popularizing their socialistic [Marxism] or autocratic/Nazism ideology.

Thanks.

Moar
November 2nd, 2012, 11:08 AM
narrow minded political propagandasits

Karl Marx doesn't deserve to be referred as a "narrow minded political propagandasit" by people living in a society that is dominated by — "semi-compradors" and "semi-feudalists" !! — सद्भावनाओं सहित |

DrRajpalSingh
February 27th, 2013, 10:52 PM
Karl Marx doesn't deserve to be referred as a "narrow minded political propagandasit" by people living in a society that is dominated by — "semi-compradors" and "semi-feudalists" !! — सद्भावनाओं सहित |

Please re-read the post under reference; it is not related with Karl Marx but relates to his so called followers.

DrRajpalSingh
February 27th, 2013, 10:55 PM
''History,'' according to Cicero, ''is the teacher of life.''

DrRajpalSingh
February 27th, 2013, 10:58 PM
History is considered as a store house of knowledge

due to its coverage of multifaceted activities of humanity from time immemorial,

enhancing learning experiences of each generation.

DrRajpalSingh
February 27th, 2013, 11:00 PM
According to E H Carr ''History....is an unending dialogue between the past and present''.

Anil787
February 28th, 2013, 12:03 AM
history is actually a discription related to any specific thing .

DrRajpalSingh
February 28th, 2013, 03:41 AM
History is :



1
an account of important events in the order in which they happened <a history of the American civil rights movement during the 1960s>Synonyms annals (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/annals), chronicle (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/chronicle), record (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/record)
Related Words blog (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/blog), commentary (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/commentary), diary (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/diary), journal (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/journal), memoir (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/memoir),reminiscence (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reminiscence)(s); autobiography (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/autobiography), biography (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/biography), life (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/life); epic (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/epic), legend (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/legend),narrative (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/narrative), saga (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/saga), story (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/story), tale (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tale); archives (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/archives), documentation (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/documentation), log (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/log),register (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/register), report (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/report); chronology (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/chronology), genealogy (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/genealogy)


2
a relating of events usually in the order in which they happened <we heard the whole history of her illness in excruciating detail>Synonyms chronicle (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/chronicle), chronology (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/chronology), commentary (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/commentary) (usuallycommentaries), history (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/history), narration (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/narration), narrative (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/narrative), record (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/record), report (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/report),story (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/story)
Related Words version (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/version); deposition (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/deposition), documentation (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/documentation),testament (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/testament), testimonial (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/testimonial), testimony (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/testimony), witness (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/witness); annals (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/annals), blog (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/blog),diary (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/diary), journal (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/journal), log (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/log), logbook (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/logbook), memoir (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/memoir); minutes (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/minutes), procès-verbal (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proces-verbal);anecdote (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anecdote), tale (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tale), yarn (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/yarn); epic (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/epic), saga (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/saga); gest (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gest) (or geste), romance (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/romance);recital (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/recital), recitation (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/recitation); case history (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/case+history), case study (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/case+study)


3
the events or experience of former times <history has many lessons to teach us, if only we would listen>Synonyms auld lang syne (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/auld+lang+syne), history (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/history), yesterday (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/yesterday), yesteryear (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/yesteryear),yore (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/yore)
Related Words bygone (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bygone); flashback (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flashback); annals (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/annals), chronicle (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/chronicle), record (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/record);memoir (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/memoir); antiquity (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/antiquity), long ago (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/long+ago)
Near Antonyms by-and-by (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/by-and-by), future (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/future), futurity (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/futurity), hereafter (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hereafter),offing (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/offing), tomorrow (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tomorrow); moment (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/moment), now (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/now), present (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/present), today (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/today)

Source acknowledged: http://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/history?show=0&t=1362002839

DrRajpalSingh
February 28th, 2013, 03:48 AM
Let us understand more about what for actually word 'History' stands for:

his·to·ry noun \ˈhis-t(ə-)rē\
plural his·to·ries




Definition of HISTORY1
: tale (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tale), story (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/story)

2
a : a chronological record of significant events (as affecting a nation or institution) often including an explanation of their causes
b : a treatise presenting systematically related natural phenomena
c : an account of a patient's medical background
d : an established record <a prisoner with a history of violence>

3
: a branch of knowledge that records and explains past events <medieval history>

4
a : events that form the subject matter of a history
b : events of the past
c : one that is finished or done for <the winning streak washistory> <you're history>
d : previous treatment, handling, or experience (as of a metal)

http://www.merriam-webster.com/styles/default/images/reference/external.jpg See history defined for English-language learners » (http://www.learnersdictionary.com/search/history)

See history defined for kids » (http://www.wordcentral.com/cgi-bin/student?book=Student&va=history)

Examples of HISTORY

I studied history in college.
a professor of medieval history
They were one of the greatest teams in history.
It was one of the most destructive storms in modernhistory.
It was a period in American history when most people lived and worked on farms.
The history of space exploration is a fascinating topic.
He wrote a well-known history of the British empire.
The book begins with a brief history of the Internet.



Origin of HISTORYMiddle English histoire, historie, from Anglo-French estoire, histoire, from Latin historia, from Greek, inquiry, history, from histōr, istōr knowing, learned; akin to Greek eidenai to know — more at wit (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wit)First Known Use: 14th century''

Source acknowledged :http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/history

DrRajpalSingh
February 28th, 2013, 03:52 AM
history is actually a discription related to any specific thing .

Welcome your first post on the JatLand forum.

keep it up please.

DrRajpalSingh
February 28th, 2013, 04:31 AM
To refresh the memory of the participants it is suggested to remember that there are generally five approaches to study the problem of settling any chronological order of an event which happened in the remote past. They are:

Literary method

Archaeological Method

Radio Carbon Technique

Astronomical Method

and

Cross Contacts Method.

prateekdhaka
February 28th, 2013, 12:37 PM
History is an argument without end.

bsbana
February 28th, 2013, 03:10 PM
It doesn't matter if history we are taught is imaginary or real but if we assume it as real, it's consequence will be real.
As I shall imagine, I shall become.

DrRajpalSingh
April 19th, 2013, 05:47 PM
Since history is description of past, events, persons and progress of mankind, it must be as objective as possible.

DrRajpalSingh
April 19th, 2013, 08:34 PM
When we sit to write history of the Vedic Age India, generally it is understood that, the Rigveda is the sole authority to supply information to be used for reconstruction of history forgetting the fact that it is not so. When we talk about the Vedic India, we are taking about not only the era of final shaping of the Four Vedas but also of the period covered by the composition of the Brahamans, Arnayaks, Upnishadas and other auxiliary literature also which throws a flood of light on the Vedic Age culture and life of various tribes.

Moreover, tradition based literature contained in the oldest Pauranic and Epic literature also has to be used after sifting chaff from the floor with critical analysis. In this way, comparative study can only lead to right path of reconstruction of ancient history of India or any part of the world.

Then, one would have to look all around for availability of archaeological remains, if any, available to compare and contrast the data so collected and then only one could proceed to finally declare that one's hypotheses could be called conclusion. Also one has to remember that conclusions so arrived in social sciences and history are subject to revision on availability of newer data from time to time.

DrRajpalSingh
May 2nd, 2013, 06:05 PM
The history of the world is the record of a man in quest of his daily bread and butter.

-------H.Van Loon

vicky84
May 3rd, 2013, 03:52 AM
How about shifting this thread to Dedicated "History" section.

DrRajpalSingh
May 3rd, 2013, 07:34 AM
How about shifting this thread to Dedicated "History" section.

Good idea. It is for the administrator/editor to decide to delete or merge it with any other thread or sub section/subforum.

DrRajpalSingh
April 6th, 2016, 09:20 PM
Thanks the administrators for shifting this thread to its proper place.

The views/comments of members on the topic are solicited.

DrRajpalSingh
April 6th, 2016, 09:25 PM
.....edited....

DrRajpalSingh
April 6th, 2016, 11:10 PM
For providing foundation of historical facts one has to depend upon depositories, archives and museums where reference material is available. Without quoting sources of information whether primary or secondary as the case may be, none can write even a word on historical events, persons et all. Therefore, except comments in the form of interpretation of data one has to quote and acknowledge the original sources accordingly.

neel6318
September 10th, 2017, 01:37 PM
"History" is the study of events happened and the cause & consequences afterwards effecting general social life. History is also about facts burried beneath sand particles since AD and BC. History is to make us familiar by the surroundings which are not in easy approach of every individual. History is like an accident, which later becomes a fact or incident as record. History is to define life existence and sustenance. History is to connect with present events. History is all about a live story told by ancestors. History is to represent it to new generation, like of Victory at Kargil. History is a documentary evidence. History is a holy verdict in Parliament!

It is very vast to make it compile in self-defined terminology rather than giving its etymology from google to many.

Everyone has well said about our general subject of curriculum or anyone's personal interest.

I never loved to cram lengthy answers as it always make me go in sleep immediately after holding book in my hands. But, on personal note, sometimes I go in depth to seek the eternity. In my opinion, I take it in broader context in relation to human mind and soul.

Thanks for the wonderful topic chosen to talk and mingle.

AryanPoonia
September 10th, 2017, 08:04 PM
History is not something to feel proud or ashamed, it is all about learning. The main focus should be on history of ideas that helps mankind to create a progressive society.

neel6318
September 10th, 2017, 08:08 PM
History is not something to feel proud or ashamed, it is all about learning. The main focus should be on history of ideas that helps mankind to create a progressive society.

very good!:star:

Dgmjat
September 24th, 2017, 01:59 AM
The quality and accuracy of history depends on its conduits: the reciters and writers of history.

As Winston Churchill wrote, "History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it."

David Mahal

neel6318
September 24th, 2017, 07:26 PM
The quality and accuracy of history depends on its conduits: the reciters and writers of history.

As Winston Churchill wrote, "History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it."

David Mahal

True and very nice quotation! But somewhere it is taught that in any war/business/educational thought/information, if one has to prove to be the best "leave a margin line of truth", then let others explore beyond it. :topsy_turvy: