09-09-2006, 07:04 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-acharya+Dec 25 2005, 02:00 AM-->QUOTE(acharya @ Dec 25 2005, 02:00 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Quote"
The Kalakcharya- kathnaka states that their kings were known as `Sahi'. Some of these `Sahis' were said to have been induced by a Jain teacher to proceed to Suratta( Surastra) Vishaya ( Country) and Ujjain in the HINDUKADESHA ( India) where they overthrew some local chiefs, and ruled for four years until they were themselves ousted in 58 BC."
Source: Political History of India" Hemchandra Raychaudhuri, 1996
Oxford University press, New Delhi. ISBN 0 19 5643763
[right][snapback]43746[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Here is a pre-Arab/Islamic reference to India being called Hindukadesha prior to 58 BC. So what is the controversey about India being named by Arabs?
The Kalakcharya- kathnaka states that their kings were known as `Sahi'. Some of these `Sahis' were said to have been induced by a Jain teacher to proceed to Suratta( Surastra) Vishaya ( Country) and Ujjain in the HINDUKADESHA ( India) where they overthrew some local chiefs, and ruled for four years until they were themselves ousted in 58 BC."
Source: Political History of India" Hemchandra Raychaudhuri, 1996
Oxford University press, New Delhi. ISBN 0 19 5643763
[right][snapback]43746[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Here is a pre-Arab/Islamic reference to India being called Hindukadesha prior to 58 BC. So what is the controversey about India being named by Arabs?