History of Mughalstan

Samar Abbas abbas at IOPB.RES.IN
Thu Aug 31 16:03:37 UTC 2000

Prof. Robert Zydenbos wrote:
> [T]here is not much difference with Europe (with its various
> kingdoms and empires...I have in fact been arguing this ...
> for at least eleven years.

 The common features between Europe and South Asia are indeed many:
- SIZE: Each nation-state in India is roughly the same size (both population
and area) as those of Europe. Thus, there are 50 mill. Telugus, and 50
mill. Frenchmen, while Gujarat is as big as Spain etc.

- HISTORY: The nations of South Asia are older than the European ones.
Thus Gujarat is mentioned in the 2nd century as `Gurjara-desha'; while
France arose after the collapse of the Carolingian Empire much after the
6th century. Likewise, we have Vanga -> Bengal;  Malayala ->
Malayalam-Desh; Utkala -> Orissa; etc.

- JANAPADA: The very word `Janapada' may be translated as `ethnic
nation-state'; it proves the concept of European nation was general.

- Napoleon and Ashoka: For a short while, militarised states could annex
neighbouring territories. The Mauryan Empire lasted for barely one
century; the Hapsburg lasted for three. Just as most peoples saw
Napoleon's empire as `occupied territories'; the peoples under Ashoka did
so too. They broke up when the nations reasserted themselves.

- Jews and Brahmins: The only all-European community are the Jews who form
5-10% of the population; the only all-Indian community are the Brahmins
who likewise form 5-10% of the population. Both also attempted to increase
their IQ by discarding their own low-IQ members into the mainstream, and
marrying high-IQ persons outside their community. Neither are warrior
communities; they monopolised intellectual fields.

Thus, nanda chandran wrote:
> The thread was strong enough for brahmins down the ages to migrate to
> newer places *inside* Bhaaratvarsha and ... to spread the Vedic dharma.

 In order to defend the concept of a monolithic nation-state, recourse
must always be had to Brahmanic civilization as this alone is the sole
"common thread" present in South Asia. However, this is an outside
superposition upon the various ethnic nations of South Asia -
"Brahmanisation" occurred in the post-Buddhist phase. However, trying to
justify a common nationhood because 5% Brahmins share a common culture is
analogous to trying to justify a common European nationhood because the 5
% Jews share a common culture. The fact that Jews in Poland and England
share a common language and religion does not imply a common historicity;
likewise the fact that Nanda Chandran's "Brahmins down the ages" settled
across India had an effect analogous to the settling of Jews across

nanda chandran wrote:
> Can you find parallels in India to the notorious enemities in Europe :
> the Celts/Picts Vs the Anglo Saxons, the English Vs the French, ...

Ashoka (Magadhi or Bihari) slaughtered 150,000 Oriyas (`Kalinga'), then
there are Veerapan, etc.

> Would the French have tolerated the British as rulers or vice versa?

Remember Joan of Arc ? The English ruled Calais for 900 years.


More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list