Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Our Man in Ajmer

literaryreview.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 34 posts

Re: Our Man in Ajmer

#11

Post by selimthegrim »

sudhirc wrote: post #5
gumby wrote: post #2

> …complex game of political chess being played by Nur Jahan with her rival and stepson, Shah Jahan For some context, Shah Jahan is best known outside India as the king who commissioned and spent his fortune on the Taj Mahal. The description in the review drives home how when the British arrived, India was about a third of world GDP, Britain, not so much.

> The description in the review drives home how when the British arrived, India was about a third of world GDP, Britain, not so much. India's GDP share was much higher before the invading Mughal invasion started so they were part of the problem. See Angus Madison's historical list of the ten largest countries by GDP.

Surely you’ve read Irfan Habib on Mughal revenue system?

Re: Our Man in Ajmer

#12

Post by Karrot_Kream »

gumby wrote: post #2

> …complex game of political chess being played by Nur Jahan with her rival and stepson, Shah Jahan For some context, Shah Jahan is best known outside India as the king who commissioned and spent his fortune on the Taj Mahal. The description in the review drives home how when the British arrived, India was about a third of world GDP, Britain, not so much.

Shah Jahan was the 3rd Mughal Emperor and one of the 4 great Mughal rulers. At the time the Mughal empire was much wealthier than England, though Europeans had been in India for a long time now. Arguing over what GDP means doesn't really matter for setting the context of Shah Jahan's empire. It's not like contemporaries at the time had a precise method of measuring these things either.

Re: Our Man in Ajmer

#13

Post by jim_inont »

selimthegrim wrote: post #11
sudhirc wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The description in the review drives home how when the British arrived, India was about a third of world GDP, Britain, not so much. India's GDP share was much higher before the invading Mughal invasion started so they were part of the problem. See Angus Madison's historical list of the ten largest countries by GDP.

Surely you’ve read Irfan Habib on Mughal revenue system?

[flagged]

Re: Our Man in Ajmer

#17

Post by HexDecOctBin »

jim_inont wrote: post #14
ratherlongname wrote: post #8

I don't know when and how I'll ever stop being salty about the colonial powers that absolutely looted my country.

[flagged]

For those who don't know, the Aryan Invasion/Colonisation Theory has been thoroughly debunked; and is almost universally understood to be a fabrication of the British to justify their extractive exploitation of India. Any historical text written in the last few decades covering ancient India will attest to this.

Today, it is referred to only by racists and colonialism apologists. jim_inont seems to be one.

Re: Our Man in Ajmer

#18

Post by sudhirc »

selimthegrim wrote: post #15
jim_inont wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

On the contrary I am recommending him. His methodology is the standard for evaluating if and how Mughals were exploiting peasants.

Both senior and junior Habibs are known to whitewash the Islamic invasion and paint a rosy picture of their rule. Their body of work is full of their own biases. Most of the time they fail to provide the primary sources.

What they do not explain this: Let's assume invaders(Muslims and Christians) came from outside, attacked, raped,killed only to make India a prosperous nation. But why they failed to do it to their native place?

Who in their right mind would believe this fiction propagated by the apologists?

Re: Our Man in Ajmer

#19

Post by selimthegrim »

sudhirc wrote: post #18
selimthegrim wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the contrary I am recommending him. His methodology is the standard for evaluating if and how Mughals were exploiting peasants.

Both senior and junior Habibs are known to whitewash the Islamic invasion and paint a rosy picture of their rule. Their body of work is full of their own biases. Most of the time they fail to provide the primary sources. What they do not explain this: Let's assume invaders(Muslims and Christians) came from outside, attacked, raped,killed only to make India a prosperous nation. But why they failed to do it to their na…

You do know that he is a Marxist right

Re: Our Man in Ajmer

#20

Post by sudhirc »

selimthegrim wrote: post #19
sudhirc wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both senior and junior Habibs are known to whitewash the Islamic invasion and paint a rosy picture of their rule. Their body of work is full of their own biases. Most of the time they fail to provide the primary sources. What they do not explain this: Let's assume invaders(Muslims and Christians) came from outside, attacked, raped,killed only to make India a prosperous nation. But why they failed to do it to their na…

You do know that he is a Marxist right

Why a Marxist would need to defend Muslim invasions? He is one of the many charlatans who posed as Marxist only to advance their agenda of Muslim glorification.

There are many such examples. Famous script writer Javed Akhtar propagated his faith,degraded other faiths and yet declared himself an atheist. How convenient?

Post reply on HN