01-30-2006, 10:29 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-PPS+Jan 30 2006, 11:03 AM-->QUOTE(PPS @ Jan 30 2006, 11:03 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->I find it ironic that when it comes to Indian history the Nazi interpretation is still more acceptable that that proposed by indian (and now american) scholars.
On a completely different matter, does anyone have a good explanation of where the name "India" comes from. From what I have read, it is the hellenised version of "Hindu", which is in turn the persian word for "Sindhu". From the above reasoning it would appear that we are identifying ourselves using terminology used by Persians and Greeks to refer to people living on the other side of the the rives Sindhu (Indus). I would certainly appreciate input from anyone on this board if they have a different interpretation/explanation.
[right][snapback]45946[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
for a first post, what you wrote is indeed superb. hope to see more from you in future.
and yes india does get its name the way you said.
sindhu (sanskrit) ---> hindu (persian) ---> ind-ia (greek)
as for the nazi interpretations, thats the biggest irony of them all.
whenever i tried to point out the follies of AIT (and the correct concept of out-of-india theory) to real and virtual foreigners, they accused me of nationalism, (hindu) fundamentalism, racial supremacism - when in truth its the ficticious AIT which is all of the aforemantioned and then some. Thats like pot calling, .. chalk black. The ait is purely a child of racially supremacist world view, of colonial mindset, and christian fundamentalism.
On a completely different matter, does anyone have a good explanation of where the name "India" comes from. From what I have read, it is the hellenised version of "Hindu", which is in turn the persian word for "Sindhu". From the above reasoning it would appear that we are identifying ourselves using terminology used by Persians and Greeks to refer to people living on the other side of the the rives Sindhu (Indus). I would certainly appreciate input from anyone on this board if they have a different interpretation/explanation.
[right][snapback]45946[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
for a first post, what you wrote is indeed superb. hope to see more from you in future.
and yes india does get its name the way you said.
sindhu (sanskrit) ---> hindu (persian) ---> ind-ia (greek)
as for the nazi interpretations, thats the biggest irony of them all.
whenever i tried to point out the follies of AIT (and the correct concept of out-of-india theory) to real and virtual foreigners, they accused me of nationalism, (hindu) fundamentalism, racial supremacism - when in truth its the ficticious AIT which is all of the aforemantioned and then some. Thats like pot calling, .. chalk black. The ait is purely a child of racially supremacist world view, of colonial mindset, and christian fundamentalism.