The Encounter Between the Persian and the Sanskrit Worlds: Richard M. Eaton and William Dalrymple
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 сен 2024
- Richard M. Eaton has been obsessed with India ever since riding an elephant at the St. Louis Zoo at age three, especially its long-term relations with Persian culture, Islam, and the Iranian plateau before the British period. He teaches history at the University of Arizona.
William Dalrymple is the bestselling author of In Xanadu, City of Djinns, From the Holy Mountain, Age of Kali, White Mughals, The Last Mughal, Nine Lives, Return of a King, and Kohinoor. He has won many awards, including the Wolfson Prize for History, the Hemingway, the Kapuscinski, the Thomas Cook, and the Duff Cooper Memorial Prize. He has also been awarded the Arthur Ross Bronze Medal of the US Council on Foreign Relations and the prestigious President's Medal by the British Academy. His most recent books are The Anarchy: The Relentless Rise of the East India Company and Forgotten Masters: Indian Painting for the East India Company. Dalrymple is one of the founders and a co-director of the Jaipur Literature Festival.
Focusing on the assimilation of Persianate culture into the very fabric of the Indian subcontinent, academic and author Richard M. Eaton’s book ‘India in the Persianate Age’ explores its integration with India’s Sanskritic cultures, seeping into our language, art, architecture, literature, cuisine, and more.
In conversation with author and Festival Co-Director William Dalrymple, Eaton takes us on a journey through the influences and traditions that made India establish its diverse cultural roots.
Social media links:
Facebook: www.facebook.c...
Twitter: / jaipurlitfest
Instagram: / jaipurlitfest
#festival #jaipurliteraturefestival #jaipur_lit_fest #jaipurliteraturefestival2021 #jlf2021 #literature #literaturefestival #theencounterbetweenthepersian
Absolutely fantastic presentation by Professor Eaton as always.
I thought Hindu kings were constantly warring. The Mahabharata was about war. The Ramayana is about war and alliances. The 10 king war from the Rigveda. Why would we Indians be under the impression that there was a a Hindu peaceful eden? I think only the British are under such an illusion.
No wars, no kingdoms. It’s Eden, when civilians, women, children are protected by strict rules of engagement in wars. Some of early Turks weren’t in war, they were thugs, looters, and savages.
Very nice and intelligent talk. Thanks
Professor Eaton shines , as always . He has no match !
Very important but (unfortunately)very little discussed topic of history of indian subcontinent. ❤
I’ve come to similar conclusions.
Being non-religious and not having a dog in the fight other than seeking truth, i found that there was a wealthy and beautiful indo-persianate culture that was India until the British came in and divided and conquered.. creating extremist versions of Hindu and islam. When before it was a Sufi zen culture. In this process, they destroyed a beautiful history based around experiencing the divine reality and pushed us into materialism and ethno-nationalism. That’s the only way they could get us to forget who we are and get us into worker bees so they (foreign nationals) could live like kings. They used Jesuit freemasonry Roman Catholic Church cults to infiltrate and also bought out our own people to fight against each other - which continues to this day.
Control history = control the future.
Very straight.....and raw....
There is simply no match of the level of rigorous research both William and Richard brings to the table. The only authentic and anti-modernist critic of the bulwark of Islamophobic modernist history that comes from India is unfortunately from non-Indian historians. That this video has had so little comments posted on it shows how little interest is paid towards authentic research that attempts to correct the unjustifiable bias toward Muslim encounters by Indian academe and popular culture.
aniruddh kanisetti, manu pillai, and ramachandra guha are fighting their ass off against fellow hindus to protect muslims from defamation. give some credit
Two Hindu-haters having a love session. All part of image makeover of the invaders to whitewash crimes against humanity. Sad that enslaved converts lap this up.
My biggest takeaway from the book:
hindu mothers used to beat their hindu childrens which clearly means that hindu mothers loved muslims invaders. yes thats pretty much the logic of the book.
For instance eaton mentions how a pillar was discovered near delhi which was inscribed supposedly by a Bhramin in sanskrit stating how glorious the delhi sultanate is and how greatful he is to live under such a rule. Eaton then juxtapose the same with a document written by a priest of chola dynasty, after they conquered bangal and brought it under the chola umbrella, the priest writes something along the lines of the pillar inscription by a bhrahmn. eaton than insinuates that how glorious and tolerant the muslims were that even bhrahmins praised them in their vernacular (sanskrit) , without being paid to do so (only eaton could tell if he was paid or not) contrary to the priest in Chola's darbar who was apparently paid (according to eaton) to write the praise of raj raja chola and therefore muslim kings good and hindu king evil. see how nasty the hindus were that they paid priests to portray themselves in a positive light. WTF eaton
Ha hahaha. Great Rebuttal. Thanks
Starts at 2:40
Indians want a balanced account of history {which they notice in R. Eaton's Persianate age where he does not make absurd claims by putting numbers on temple desecration} esp. considering how it's communities have been through multiple Orientalist projections. Argument is not for a non-violent India prior to coming of Turks rather argument is to develop a comparative system where continuities, changes etc. can be better understood.
Kings are always mostly bloodthirsty & violent but the question is about degree, methods, differences etc. Why later Indian kingdoms did not follow the example of erecting tower from severed heads of their opponents ? The problem is academics take a particular view & stretch it to extremes to make their point which in turn results in public doing the same against their arguments.
Regarding temple desecration - We can notice promotions of Iconoclasm & it's patterns. E.g. severed heads of statues. Were these not promoted by Islam & if that was the case then why academia does not link the two ?
Why claim temple desecration or destruction was same in ancient India when the differences can clearly be noticed ?
Same process does not mean same objective & that they are same {esp. by removing context}. E.g. - Cultural appropriation - Historically cultural appropriation was a method by which societies learned with & from each other but as has been clearly demonstrated by Race studies that these same tools were then weaponized & employed to do race oppression.
There are many ways to interpret the inscription - One of the way is to say that since Hindus {not in religious but in ethnic sense here - People of Indus} lacked the sense of identity prior to encountering Muslims {Which R. Eaton acknowledges in the book Persianate age} & hence they tried to continue their practices in the changed environment without thinking about it in terms of differences.
If temples were desecrated to cut opposing side to it's size then it puts the question on 'Divine Kingship' Mughal ideal - Kingship is divine if it is as per 'Ruler's' beliefs but if opposition's beliefs are different then everything is fair game.
Again - Temple authorities permitting mosque was about 2 things - 1. Lack of identitarian understanding among Hindus thus implication of allowing Mosque not understood & 2. The prevailing threat of Muslim ruler attacking & destroying the region.
Did the attitude towards God shifted in Indian subcontinent after encountering Islam & why. Why other Sciences decline compared to earlier period ?
I enjoyed Vijaynagara discussion in the end.
if eaton's take on indian history is balanced then i consider myself a better historian than eaton.
@@Pasdpawn I was comparing R. Eaton of this video with his earlier self & ofcourse he is biased but he is relatively better than before.
Somnath temple was built in 7th century but needn’t be fortified ever despite of the fact that according to eaton (and i somewhat also agree) that hindus were ransacking fellow hindu temples for booty way before muslims invaded, but according to the unbiased author eaton, it was fortified in 13 century by solanki king to protect it from… guess who… Hindu kings and not muslim invaders. So basically the need of fortifications didnt arrive until the peaceful muslims invaded india and even after they did, the fortifications were meant against hindus and not muslims. What?????After all muslim invaders were only there for the liberation of the downtrodden from the evil bhramans. The book reads from a muslim apologist perspective despite of the fact that the book covers Indian history if India and not muslim. Hindus are just bystanders watching their religion decimated by the peaceful invaders and doing absolutely nothing about it. Infact the unbiased eaton also mentions an instance in kashmir muslim dynasty where the sultan was advised by “hindus” to melt the golden buddha statue in order to overcome the financial crunch that the kashmir was facing in 14 century. After all hindus were iconoclasts and muslims liberated them. Additionally he mentions an instance of Lalleshwari, a female hindu preacher, who professed her religion and how she was against idol worshiping and stuff.
All the bad aspects of the then hindu society are portrayed as “hindu” aspects and the positive aspects of hinduism are refered to as “classical INDIAN thought”
No wonder leftists have mastered the art of selling a propaganda in such an academically sophisticated manner.
Make eaton prime minister of puxtan or bangladesh or some islamic sh*thole, afterall ignorant muslim simps (also alot of degenerate self loathing hindus, duh!) are the ones who made this book apparently a best seller.
Smell any biases yet? Read the book
He is truly dishonest in the cmparisons he makes, he tries to draw parallels between a hindu king taking away idols to benefit from the blessing and a steppe hooligan setting fire to and destroying temples
"Make eaton prime minister of puxtan or bangladesh or some islamic sh*thole, afterall ignorant muslim simps (also alot of degenerate self loathing hindus, duh!) are the ones who made this book apparently a best seller. " Yes it is you mr unbiased we should listen to instead of the professor 😂😂
1. The part about Kashmir Sultan is a deliberate lie. The Sultan Sikandar was advised by fanatic Muslim clerics to demolish Hindu temples to meet Timur's financial demands, who then destroyed 4 temple complexes and also imposed Jizya tax on non-Muslims. Sikandar's rule was made prominent by his Anti-Hindu bigotry, which was in stark contrast to his son & successor Zain al-Abidin's rule, which was marked by his patronage of both Sanskrit & Persian literature, his abolition of Jizya, and is often considered Kashmir's "Golden Age".
2. I don't understand your issue with Lalleshwari's poetry. Her poem belongs to the category of "Bhakti" or devotion poems that preach unity with God (in her case "Shiva"), and challenges the performative elements of worship.
In the history of our subcontinent, there are both tales of flourishing coexistence and stark bigotry between the two faiths. I guess a reader like you (probably a fanatic) will read the latter to vindicate your preconceived opinions.
I'm reading Richard Eaton's book, India in the Persianate age.... It's absolutely fantastic and gives the lie to distorted view of Indian history created by British imperialism. I have nothing but admiration for this brilliant scholar. Nawab Dalrymple, sorry William not so much! 😅 His book about Delhi is very good though. 👍
Both of them are great indic historian of mordern time .
Ashamed to see indian could not produce people of calibre like Mr eaton
Why? Are Irfan Habib and Romila Thapar not of the same caliber?
@@abhishekmhatre1554 yes indeed they fall in the same group as eaton, a group created by sophiscated propaganda and cherry piking on the history to lure in pseudo intellectual simps (mostly muslims majority of whom are converted but still think they are somehow decedents of the invaders. they are genetically closer to indian langoors than tughlaqas, changezs, and ghoris) lol
William must be really cold hahaha
Sophistry and leap of logic abound. Old foggies.
a classic trait of left cabal. after all sophististry in lying is what brings in so many delusional simps in his support. Hail prophet mohammad
Lack of information and monotonous ....
Page 284
"A particularly bitter controversy arose when one of his judges ordered the execution of a Brahmin who had allegedly cursed the Prophet of Islam. Akbar was infuriated when he heard of this, Muslim rulers were legally obliged to protect their non-Muslim subjects, even if they committed the act of which the Brahmin was accused. In response, the emperor exiled the judge to Mecca."
This is a completely made up story. No sources are even cited for this.
Moreover, a chapter down the line, mr. Keaton quotes none other than Mrs. Trushcke
Variously understood as ‘perfect reconciliation’, ‘universal toleration’, ‘peace with all’ or ‘complete civility’, this appears to
have been a product of Akbar’s inclusivist religious outlook, which not only acknowledged the presence of cultural diversity in Mughal India but challenged his subjects to engage with new sources of knowledge, even if they conflicted with the traditions of their own community.70"
This is a citation loop, where the facts are completely made up by one author, cited by another, who becomes the source of another author down the line to concoct a narrative. In other words, a citation loop.