Violence in Indian historical process

[Ramadas]

> Briefly, because the former is hypothetical, whereas the latter is
political.
>  Please try being more hypothetical and less political.  Please.  You are
> ruining this list.

Dear George,
In school we learnt, endlessly, it seemed, about the history of Britain.
About invasions, conquests, decimation of populations because of the same,
and so on. About the conflicts between the royal houses [war of roses etc].
About the religious persecutions of the reformation. About the destruction
of churches, and so on.

But when it comes to Indian history, yourself, and others, say that such
study is not history but politics.

To my humble perception, it is your, and others, statements saying not to
investigate the Indian historical past, that are political. It is strange
that a place designed to share knowledge on *Indology* is not allowed to do
same. The Mogul and Muslim invasions and conquests cannot be swept under the
carpet and forgotten about, just as the conquests and invasions in your
history cannot be forgotten about.

Best wishes for the coming new year
Ramadas