Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 33 of 33

Thread: The Event/incident/Moment That Changed History

  1. #21
    In 1857, the first War of Indian Independence was waged by the Indians to bring to an end

    the hegemony of the British East India Company. How strange that the Indian effort failed to

    attain the goal but the British Parliament accomplished the task by taking India under the direct

    control of the British Queen who was designated as the Empress of India who ruled over India by

    appointing her Viceroy. Thus the rule of the British East India Company gave way to direct British

    rule over India from 1858 to 1947.
    History is best when created, better when re-constructed and worst when invented.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to DrRajpalSingh For This Useful Post:

    rajpaldular (June 19th, 2013)

  3. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRajpalSingh View Post
    Dashratha's eldest son Rama was all set to take over in his hands the reign of Ayodhya from his father next morning.

    But the moment Kaikayee demanded fulfillment of the word given by her husband, every plan shattered and instead of throne,

    Rama had to move to Jungles for fourteen years.

    Thus the momentary decision of his step mother changed the smooth flow of history.
    Does the Kaikayee, Dashrath episode qualify as a historical event?

    While the existence of a great king named Rama who fought a war with a foreign enemy is probably somewhat verifiable by historical sources, isn't the occurrence of events you quoted above, more mythology than history?
    Pagdi Sambhal Jatta..!

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to swaich For This Useful Post:

    DrRajpalSingh (June 20th, 2013)

  5. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by swaich View Post
    Does the Kaikayee, Dashrath episode qualify as a historical event?

    While the existence of a great king named Rama who fought a war with a foreign enemy is probably somewhat verifiable by historical sources, isn't the occurrence of events you quoted above, more mythology than history?

    Friend,

    The blend of myth and history is of course there in the Epics

    but a discernible eye could easily make difference between the two.

    The majority of the names of the cities/towns/places and persons

    given in both the Epics have been historically identified. The name

    Dasharatha, the father of Rama of Ayodhya mentioned in the Ramayana,

    has been well settled as a historical figure.
    History is best when created, better when re-constructed and worst when invented.

  6. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRajpalSingh View Post
    Friend,

    The blend of myth and history is of course there in the Epics

    but a discernible eye could easily make difference between the two.

    The majority of the names of the cities/towns/places and persons

    given in both the Epics have been historically identified. The name

    Dasharatha, the father of Rama of Ayodhya mentioned in the Ramayana,

    has been well settled as a historical figure.
    Perhaps you didnt read carefully, I cannot dispute the presence of a king named Ram and his father Dashrath. But did this episode between Kaikayee and Dashrath really occur? Is there are a record for this incident?
    Pagdi Sambhal Jatta..!

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to swaich For This Useful Post:

    DrRajpalSingh (June 22nd, 2013)

  8. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by swaich View Post
    Perhaps you didnt read carefully, I cannot dispute the presence of a king named Ram and his father Dashrath. But did this episode between Kaikayee and Dashrath really occur? Is there are a record for this incident?
    It is to be noted that in the studies of history of remote past in the absence of contrary evidence, traditions, recorded in any form, are accepted provisionally as source of information of the particular event or person. As and when some other solid information like numismatics, archaeological remains, eyewitness record etc. is found the tradition is tested in comparison with the newer evidence and rejected to the extent it contradicts the former.

    As regards the incident recorded in the Ramayana regarding fulfillment of earlier commitment made by Dashratha to his beloved queen Kaikaiyee for having saved the King's life during the course of war against enemy and subsequent events leading to banishment of Rama to exile for fourteen years show, the tradition assumes historical significance.

    Though no contrary evidence, perhaps, has been brought to notice so far by anyone yet it is open to suspicion in the eyes of some historians.!!
    History is best when created, better when re-constructed and worst when invented.

  9. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRajpalSingh View Post
    It is to be noted that in the studies of history of remote past in the absence of contrary evidence, traditions, recorded in any form, are accepted provisionally as source of information of the particular event or person. As and when some other solid information like numismatics, archaeological remains, eyewitness record etc. is found the tradition is tested in comparison with the newer evidence and rejected to the extent it contradicts the former.

    As regards the incident recorded in the Ramayana regarding fulfillment of earlier commitment made by Dashratha to his beloved queen Kaikaiyee for having saved the King's life during the course of war against enemy and subsequent events leading to banishment of Rama to exile for fourteen years show, the tradition assumes historical significance.

    Though no contrary evidence, perhaps, has been brought to notice so far by anyone yet it is open to suspicion in the eyes of some historians.!!
    If I understand this right, untill a solid proof - numismatics, archaelogical remains and eyewitness accounts, contradicting oral tradition is not found, oral traditions are accepted as fact. Right?
    Pagdi Sambhal Jatta..!

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to swaich For This Useful Post:

    vikda (September 30th, 2013)

  11. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by swaich View Post
    If I understand this right, untill a solid proof - numismatics, archaelogical remains and eyewitness accounts, contradicting oral tradition is not found, oral traditions are accepted as fact. Right?
    Not absolute facts but tentative ones !
    History is best when created, better when re-constructed and worst when invented.

  12. #28
    The declaration by the British that they would go back freeing India preponing the earlier announced date of before June 1948 to 1947 created ripples in the political circles across the globe.

    In India leaders of all political parties lost control over the ever fast changing political equations and became helpless before the torrent of incidents/events that followed this declaration.

    This declaration changed the face of the history and geography of India, which within a few months of declaration stood partitioned into East Pakistan [now Bangladesh], West Pakistan [now Pakistan] and remnant region India.
    Last edited by DrRajpalSingh; September 29th, 2013 at 10:01 AM.
    History is best when created, better when re-constructed and worst when invented.

  13. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRajpalSingh View Post
    Friend,

    The blend of myth and history is of course there in the Epics

    but a discernible eye could easily make difference between the two.

    The majority of the names of the cities/towns/places and persons

    given in both the Epics have been historically identified. The name

    Dasharatha, the father of Rama of Ayodhya mentioned in the Ramayana,

    has been well settled as a historical figure.

    Dr. Rajpal, a few points to consider. Agreed that Ramayana, happened at some point of history in India and this has been told by mythological and religious account.

    Now the main points are:

    1. Ramayana predated Mahabharata. There are no artifacts that have been archaeologically dug, scientifically dated that can be related to kings or stories of Mahabharata and if there are so, please tell their location. So, talking about Ramayana takes even a much back stage due to it is older then Mahabharata.

    2. Okey, agreed that cities, towns, places, etc. have the same names, but the fact remains at what time did these cities get this name in history? According to some authors Mahabharata occured between 1800BC and 2500BC, so that means, Ramayana is older than 2500BC. So, where is the proof that the cities were called with same names in such an ancient period.


    .

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to maddhan1979 For This Useful Post:

    DrRajpalSingh (September 29th, 2013), vikda (September 30th, 2013)

  15. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by maddhan1979 View Post
    Dr. Rajpal, a few points to consider. Agreed that Ramayana, happened at some point of history in India and this has been told by mythological and religious account.

    Now the main points are:

    1. Ramayana predated Mahabharata. There are no artifacts that have been archaeologically dug, scientifically dated that can be related to kings or stories of Mahabharata and if there are so, please tell their location. So, talking about Ramayana takes even a much back stage due to it is older then Mahabharata.

    2. Okey, agreed that cities, towns, places, etc. have the same names, but the fact remains at what time did these cities get this name in history? According to some authors Mahabharata occured between 1800BC and 2500BC, so that means, Ramayana is older than 2500BC. So, where is the proof that the cities were called with same names in such an ancient period.


    .
    Friend,

    Like so many other scholars you have also raised valid questions which seek logical answers. The same is the purpose of the debate started by me by initiating this thread.

    In fact this is the accepted method of research to start a debate and then get as many points of view explored as possible to reach nearer truth of the historical truth.

    Then what where and when did the events described in the Ramayana happen or did they not happen at all.

    Kindly share your study please.


    Thanks
    History is best when created, better when re-constructed and worst when invented.

  16. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRajpalSingh View Post
    Friend,

    Like so many other scholars you have also raised valid questions which seek logical answers. The same is the purpose of the debate started by me by initiating this thread.

    In fact this is the accepted method of research to start a debate and then get as many points of view explored as possible to reach nearer truth of the historical truth.

    Then what where and when did the events described in the Ramayana happen or did they not happen at all.

    Kindly share your study please.


    Thanks
    There is no point in just talking blah blah about ancient past, until and unless some archaeologists start digging and take out relevant artifacts and remains of the sites of these stories and events.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to maddhan1979 For This Useful Post:

    urmiladuhan (September 29th, 2013)

  18. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by maddhan1979 View Post
    Dr. Rajpal, a few points to consider. Agreed that Ramayana, happened at some point of history in India and this has been told by mythological and religious account.

    Now the main points are:

    1. Ramayana predated Mahabharata. There are no artifacts that have been archaeologically dug, scientifically dated that can be related to kings or stories of Mahabharata and if there are so, please tell their location. So, talking about Ramayana takes even a much back stage due to it is older then Mahabharata.

    2. Okey, agreed that cities, towns, places, etc. have the same names, but the fact remains at what time did these cities get this name in history? According to some authors Mahabharata occured between 1800BC and 2500BC, so that means, Ramayana is older than 2500BC. So, where is the proof that the cities were called with same names in such an ancient period.


    .
    The closer they are to today's identifiable city names, more are the chances that the epic names may not be so ancient as some believe.
    Attention seekers and attention getters are two different class of people.

  19. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by urmiladuhan View Post
    The closer they are to today's identifiable city names, more are the chances that the epic names may not be so ancient as some believe.
    Perhaps they existed when the Epics were authored, not vice versa !
    History is best when created, better when re-constructed and worst when invented.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •