Jat History

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-Ravi Chaudhary+Aug 30 2006, 08:59 PM-->QUOTE(Ravi Chaudhary @ Aug 30 2006, 08:59 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-digvijay+Aug 30 2006, 11:16 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(digvijay @ Aug 30 2006, 11:16 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Ravi,
Nandibum cannot answer basic questions.

-Digvijay
[right][snapback]56469[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

You must slow down

If you wish to participate and learn from a discussion , you must follow the thread scientifically and to its logical conclusion. Not throwup side threads contuniously


1. First we must deal with your misconception that Beveridge's original (1921)translation refers to Rana Sanga as a Rajput. It does not

Dilip Hiro's abridged version( 2006) is the only one that contains that, and we must logically conclude that he fabricated this information.

..................
Ravi Chaudhary
[right][snapback]56484[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ravi,
Sanga being a Jat is a stupid assertion. I walked into a book store saw a baburnama sitting on the bookshelf looked at the index and posted what was written in it. If you have a problem with this book go talk to the publisher or the author.

I have posted pointed questions for you and others and frankly you all are living in a make believe world that Surajmal was greater / more powerful then Sanga, Chittaur was Jittaur and ...... (list is long).

So it would be fruitful if you start answering questions that were asked in last couple of posts from me.

-Digvijay