10-31-2006, 03:45 AM
If you read most accounts of Indian history you do not get a sense for the driving impulse of the various kingdoms and the dynasties that come and go. As an example no book mentions why the Nizam was able to create a kingdom in Telangana region of modern day Andhra Pradesh, that his was a successor state to the Shia Qutb Shahi state which in turn was a successor to the Kaktiya Kingdom which could trace its origns to previous rulers like the Ikshvakus and Satavahanas. Again we can see same pattern with Delhi. Why did Delhi become the political center of the India throughout ages?
Why is this so?
The end result is that Indian rulers come and go without purpose across the canvas of Indian history and it all appears ahistorical. By not mentioning hte continuity in Indian history across dynasties and religions the history writers have made sure that there is no sense of unity of purpose and the people get considered as without a sense of history ie sheep to be slaughtered or ruled. This is important to understand as the AIT.
Why is this so?
The end result is that Indian rulers come and go without purpose across the canvas of Indian history and it all appears ahistorical. By not mentioning hte continuity in Indian history across dynasties and religions the history writers have made sure that there is no sense of unity of purpose and the people get considered as without a sense of history ie sheep to be slaughtered or ruled. This is important to understand as the AIT.