Was Middle Ages A DarK Age: Any IDEA

A Good debate has taken place on the following link.

Was Middle Ages in Europe A Dark Age!, European History/Renaissance

In India, most the books on Modern World, European history and World History declare that it was a Dark Age. On the other hand, the Political Thought as taught in India refers to the Political thinkers from eleventh and twlefth century. Similarly, in literature also, it is projected in the similar manner but that declare the Divine Comedy as a finnest work of intellectual world. This debate can help them to review your views and develop the right perception about your learnings.

What would have happened, had Britain supported the war efforts of Confederation of America during the Civil War?

Was not the Civil War continuation of the American War of Independence? Were not many conflicts which had given birth to America actually settled in 1865 War?

The rise of America as an independent country, the process of its emergence, the struggle of humanity to make this continent habitable for the people who were coming from Europe, all such things really fascinate and mesmerize. When you read the British historians on the rise of America as an Independent country, you find they fail in their efforts to give satisfactory explanation that why the people decided to separate themselves from Britain when just few years back they had celebrated the coronation of King George III. Similarly, the attempt of the American historians to explain that it was the American Spirit which had come alive that created America lacks somewhere in convincing the un-satiated curiosity of mind on such issues.. In history reading we come across many such issues which leave us unsatisfied. There is another similar issue. Why did French Revolution take place in 1789 and only in France.

Like human nature, history also defy reasoning. You have to learn to understand how the things have turned up. Hegel seems to be right that it is gradual revelation of the ultimate idea and what is that ultimate idea which is running the show of this humanity is yet to come up before us!!

Special Note:
This is an article which
was once published on BBC.com history section. Why did they remove it, I do not
know. Irene, the H-Host first acknowledged them and found them great but after
they had removed the article I was not able to log in again and they neither
responded to my mails.

A Briton Once Asked: Can India be regained again?

Can India be regained again?

Was Churchill going right? Why Simon commission shown a black flag?

There are three statements. The first one is in the Message tittle and rest of the two constitutes the Message. The Title suggests that the proposer believes and some where at the back of his mind, he desires that it would have been beneficial for Britain to retain India as her colony at all cost. He has showed the desire that India should be regained.
This section deals with the tool of "if" and ‘then’ and ‘but’ which is used by historians to discern the truth about the past. However, they never narrate the working of this tool in their final writing. They write only that which they have been able to ascertain. During the process they tackle and take up such assertions and questions which may hurt the sensibility, egos, honours of many people and nations. However, here it is attempted openly and this is an attempt to use this tool.

In order to regain India, first Britain has to abrogate the Indian Independence Act of July 1947 which was passed in the British Parliament. With that, the partition of India and Pakistan would end. Then Britain should take up the cases of the Princely states with the international court and help their inheritors to regain their wealth and title. Kashmir should be handed over to Karan Singh, the son of the last King of Kashmir. Similarly Junagarh and Hyderabad should be returned to their respective heirs. The Lahore Kingdom should handed over to the heirs of Sukherchakia Misl and Kanheyia Misl. Nepal should be allowed to occupy the territory upto Kangra which was once won by Amar Singh Thapa from whom Maharaja Ranjit Singh had snatched. Then the Macmohan line and Durrant line should be abolished and Britain should take up the cause of Tibetians in their own hand. On the eastern side of India, Britain should regain Burma which is now called Mayanmar. It should be ready to end the interference of China in Auranchal Pardesh and Nagaland. On the extreme south, House of Mysore should be restored to Wadiar family and the case of Tamils should taken over by the British Parliament. In this manner, India can be regained.
The next two statements stands apart in time. Churchill was Prime Minister at the time of WW II. Brikenhead was Prime Minister when Simon Commission visited India. Now if Churchill had not decided to join the war or had gone for further appeasement then India could have been saved. Then the Congress government would have not resigned. Then Roosevelt would have not forced Churchill to seek the cooperation of Indians for the war efforts which they had earlier extended during the WW I. Then Churchill would have the satisfaction that he had not taken over the post to preside over the disintegration of the India British Empire. However, that had taken place during the period of Attlee, the Prime Minister of Labour Government. Then, Britain would have not sent the Cripps Mission. Then the Japan would have not attacked India and Indians would have not started Quit India Movement. Then the Communists would have not cooperated with British government in India. Then the British Parliament would have not sent in the Cabinet Mission. Instead, Churchill should have worked to counter the invasion of the Japanese machinery products in India. He should have tried to increase export to India and made the possession of India a viable and useful possession. Then India would have not been lost to Britain.
Simon Commission visited India in February 1928. It was all white men commission which came to review the working of the Political reforms which had started by Indian Council Act 1919. The members of the commission were Lord Linithgow, Cripps and one other English gentleman. It was one of the provision of the Indian Council Act of 1919 that Parliament would review the working of the Act after ten years. But Simon Commission was sent to do the same job before the required period had elapsed. The British Parliament was forced to take this action because of the political maturity acquired by the Indian masses by then. Before that, Indians had cooperated with Britain in their war efforts of WW I because Britain had declared that she was fighting for making world safe for democracy. But the British government belied their expectations and hope. They came up with Rowlatt Act which denied civil liberties to the Indians before passing the Act of 1919. The Indians responded by Non Cooperation Movement. The British retaliated in form of Jalianwala Bagh Massacre. The Indians maintained their composure and did not leave the path of non-violence. The British government gave another setback to the Indians and disappointed the Muslim population of India during the treaty with Turkey and Khalifa. The Indian more mature political activity when they decided to start the Civil Disobedience Movement on the principle of non-violence and Satyagragha. But that did not materialize. The Indians were politically quite mature and their next answer came in form of Swarajist Party. Swarajist Party showed it on the floor of Legislature that the British government was not sincere in its desire to extent political rights to the Indians. But there was left no other option before the British government because the Swarajist party had fully exposed them. During this period, the Indian masses, especially the Bombay Mill workers had on their own forced the Bombay Presidency government to pass the Wages bill which is considered the biggest achievement of the Mill workers in the whole world because they were not lead by any leader of any ideology. It was the victory of a class consciousness. No doubt this period also saw the rise of revolutionary form of movement and communalism in India. But on the whole, Indian had fully demonstrated to Britain and the world that they as a nation were one and also a peaceful people who believed in rightful and peaceful political activities. They had responded in form of Nehru report to an insulting remark of PM Brikenhead. For Indians, in spite of all arguments, judicious presentations, memorandum and legal means, the British government was not ready to take Indians on the commission to review the working of the political rights in India. The British government had sent all white mission. Therefore, as another instance of political activity they greeted the Commission with black flags. It was their peaceful way of showing their resentment. No doubt, it was soon followed by Puran Swaraj resolution and Britain lost India.

Special Note:
This is an article which was once
published on BBC.com history section. Why did they remove it, I do not know.
Irene, the H-Host first acknowledged them and found them great but after they
had removed the article I was not able to log in again and they neither
responded to my mails.

Banning of Cell Phones in Educational Institutions: How Fare Is It?

Recently the Cell Phones are banned in the educational institutions in India. The ban was imposed after two incidences. In the first incidence, the two students of senior classes of DPS Delhi had an oral sex. The boy secretly filmed the incidence and then placed the clippings on the cell phones. It was seen by many people and enjoyed. The clippings reached an engineering graduate student of a prestigious engineering college. He placed those clippings on a CD and placed it on a trading web site Bazee.com. He gave a catchy title "DPS girls having Fun". The CDs were sold and the guy made some money. The incidence brought the law into action and the seller boy was apprehended. The CEO of the selling portal was arrested. The boy and girl of DPS were removed from the school. The schools banned the cell phones.
The second incidence occurred in Punjab in Khanna. It involved the students of A. S. College. They tried to kidnap a girl. First, it was reported that it was a mere incidence of eve teasing. Then came the news, that the management of the college had taken a serious note of the incidence and had rusticated the students involved in the incidences. The crime was committed. The law took it course and the students were arrested. The Khanna college banned the cell phones.
The question arises that how far the use of the cell phone are cause of the crime. The crime could have committed even without the phones.
Secondly, the cell phone is definitely an improved technology for communication. It has facilitated the communication. It has become a boon. The people may argue that it has reduced their privacy and intruded into their freedom but this no criticism.
The use of cell phone or for that any technology does not promote any crime or become the cause of the crime. The technology is nothing in itself. It the use of the technology and how one absorb the technology in ones own life that gives meaning to technology. Technology in itself is nothing. But in India, every thing is taken in a very foolish manner.
Does the use of public address systems a nuisance? Every morning the Gurudwaras and Mandirs start blowing at full blast in the early morning. Every next day, a jagrata continue to deep in night disturbing the serenity of the evening or the middle of the night. Every marriage season is a season of noise irritant for the neighbors. No body object to that?
People drive their cars at high beam at night with additional lamps. They become the major cause of accidents or damage to the cars of other people. No body object.
Cell phones and internet are boons. They are the technology which would take us to new modern era. The way the printing press brought Renaissance, similarly these two technologies will bring new Renaissance.
In European countries they are using internet, computers and related technology for promoting education. They call it as ICT projects. In India also Eduset is being used for promoting education through these technologies. But, I do not see it around me. I do not find my fellow colleagues using computers and technology as their teaching tools. There was a remark when a question was raised that computers should be used and therefore every one should learn computer. The remarks was that they were now suppose to learn these fads in old age. It is all bullshit, such was the remarks.
When the Cell phones came they said, it was another fashion. Now every teacher is carrying it. But they are banning it for the students. They do not use computers. They consider internet as something as a work of a Satin. But their son is in a foreign country, they would like to talk to him on internet. One of our Old colleague started skipping his regular walks. The friends learnt that he had started visiting cyber café. For what, was he using Internet? He was hocked to chatting. Now this was the only use of Internet which could have thought of.
My other colleague kept on pestering me for long time to show him something ‘Real’ on the internet. Another colleague castigated the young teachers of computer section of misusing the internet when one of the young appointee showed his inability to show him pornographic site.
There is something missing in the reasoning faculty of the society while finding faults with new technology and placing bans on it. The society can never stop the march on the technology. It is improving and taking place in our life. If crime is committed with the help of some device, the fault is with social practices and virtues and not with the technology. The fault is with our own understanding of our value system and the manner in which we are following them or putting them to misuse. There is no misuse of technology. It is only for college debates that there can be a topic of misuse of technology. In real life, there is no such thing. Even if court is putting ban, then the worthy court should reconsider its decision. Has not court given a verdict contrary to one of its own judgement which it had given in case of CDMA technology versus GSM technology.
The ban on cell phones is ridiculous. If the camera phones are culprit, then it is the man not the technology. It is failure of the value system. But the society, the sanctifying society will never accept it.

First use of the term "Hindustan"

I placed this query with H-Net that when was the word Hindustan used for the first time.

I received following answer: It is not clear if Dr. Jodi Singh or Dr. Sharma have the usage in theGuru Granth Sahib identified as a 'first use' by an Indian writer, orabsolute first use. A quick glance at the _Encyclopedia of Islam_ articleon "Hind" in Volume 3: 404-434 includes references to "Hindustan" beingemployed in the early 13th century CE. But I encourage others to offerother specifics.
It was an answer by Frank Conlon, Professor Emeritus, Washington University.

The second response was as follows:
the term "Hindustan" was known to the Muslim Persians at least sincethe early 11th century (see the just published entry "Hindu" in theEncyclopaedia Iranica, and the soon forthcoming various articles on"India"). At that time it was known to the Persian poet Ferdowsi,who referred to "Hendustan" in the "Shah-Nameh" or "Book of Kings".Best,Dr. Christoph W. Marcinkowski:

The third response was this:
The earliest use of the word is in a third century inscription of theSasanian king Shahpur I: it mentions to hndstan, 'stan' being a MiddlePersian suffix.The reference is to the north western part of India.D N JhaProfessor of HistoryUniversity of Delhi

It was a great experience to learn about this fact. I thank it to www and computers. Had I tried it on my own, I do not think that I have found a better answer or anything near to it.

But it also left me with a sad feeling.

I placed this query with an American scholar. It was mere a query though the urge to seek answer to this question was equally important. The surprising thing was that I received an authoritative answer. Among the answers, I also received an answer from my native scholar who is person of great standing in the field of history. He is also presently the chairman of the coming IHC. I directed one of my query to him. I have not received any confirmation from him.

It left me sad. I am just thinking that how these western scholars work for their field. But in my country, there is so much talk of Guru, sharing of knowledge, the Shrutis and Samritis but our scholars do not feel it civilized to answer the queries of their fellow seeker.

It is just an experience which hides itself numerous other thoughts and feeling. But I am just disenchanted to some extend.

On the other hand, it also gives me encouragement to continue with my efforts of seeking knowledge.

My Articles

My articles on internet are mainly posted on the link http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/?o=1
All you have to do is to reach the link and find the name on any one of the posting. Where you find sumir, click it. you will get my profile and photograph. On the right hand side you may find a link, "members postings". Click that link and you will find all the postings made by me till date.

Most of my postings are on history. Some of the postings are related to other topics which have been discussed on that forum.

Some of the major works on the site are:

The word of the Mild Orientalism

The Black Hole in Calcutta

Was the Middle Ages in European History a Dark Age!