Viveka & Rta/Satya

[Rajarshi Banerjee]

Factual history can be known only by considering various views.
 Until now, Indian history has been the monopoly of Europe. It is
 refreshing to see competition.

RB> I have seen the AIT compared with the spanish invasion of south america.
The AMT also reminds me of an - eastward ho, covered wagon scenario like the
settling of the american west.

Are comparisions scientific? The spanish had guns, canons, armour, steel,
new disases all of which had a drastic effect on the native population
particularly the diseases. It was an interaction of two civilizations
separated by a huge technological gap. The northern neighbours of the meso
americans had barely started agriculture and the region was nowhere as
advanced as europe.

Can the AMT / AIT be compared with this.

Why cant we compare it with say the invasion of the pathans from central
asia. Instead of north west india their influence spread in bengal.
Bangladesh is today a muslim nation but their language is heavily
sanskitized sometimes even more so than their bengali neighbours in the
west. The propogation of religious beliefs and language may not be
correlated. Judaic religions spread to europe but not the language.

What is so special about central asia in the first place. parjanya the vedic
storm/rain god as a bull is similar to a sumerian god having similar
function. onagers draw the asvins chariot also hintng at west asian
influence, influences can come from anywhere.

Anyway so many scenarios are possible the evidence is too sketchy to support
any of them. Is it too too much for indian text books to admit that the
early indian history is not known, high-light various competing theories and
leave it at that?

RB