Let us Discuss What is History

[sumitjattan]

Respected Rajpal Sir,

This is where education comes into play by eduaction i dont mean the paper degrees but the level of your thought process .

Thanks and Regards
Sumit Chaudhary

 

[sumitjattan]

But these days it is presented in a different manner to create chaos and disharmony. Now it is up to the individual to filter out the good.

Dear Prikshit,

People use these distorted facts from centuries to influence other , those who have some capabilities always argue them you will find a lot of examples in our past for now i can only say Raja Ram Mohan Roy was one such personality who argued about the justified social injustice .

With Regards
Sumit Chaudhary

 

[drrajpalsingh]

Dear Prikshit,

People use these distorted facts from centuries to influence other , those who have some capabilities always argue them you will find a lot of examples in our past for now i can only say Raja Ram Mohan Roy was one such personality who argued about the justified social injustice .

With Regards
Sumit Chaudhary

Sumit Bhai,

Kindly clarify what do you intend to convey about views of Raja Ram Mohan Roy by using phrase: the justified social injustice and also quote source of your information please.

Thanks

 

[sumitjattan]

Sumit Bhai,

Kindly clarify what do you intend to convey about views of Raja Ram Mohan Roy by using phrase: the justified social injustice and also quote source of your information please.

Thanks

Respected Rajpal Sir,

I am not a scholar of history but a history lover ...I do not have any such source for the quotes but i can give you some examples which can prove it.

My first example is Sati Pratha ... I dont think any one can justify it under normal conditions but we followed it for centuries and Raja Ram Mohan Roy opposed that ,child marriage , no remarriage of widows , Dev dasis ...... all happened in our society and no one opposed it . We justified the unequal treatment of human beings under the justification of caste system .

Sir I dont have any source of it but these things happened in our society and we justified it without any logical reasoning . Hope my response has answered your query. Please pardon me if i hurt any one.

Thanks and Regards
Sumit Chaudhary

 

[fateh]

Dear Sumit, It was not only RM ROY who only opposed such social evils but there had been many common/well known people, most social reformers, all heros of Bhagti movement etc, who were against, raised their voices and wrote against such evils during past. Dear different perceptions about many practices/traditions in the society existed every where and in all periods, some people accepted activities by heart, some just followed, some did not follow but quitely and some objected openly and raised their voice also, some voices were recorded in books, some individuals worked more even with more results but ignored by the history writers, did not recognised/forgotten by the society.
Each story/historical recorded/unrecorded event is like an information, before agreeing/accepting such inforemation, its source has to be authonticated/assessed, the information has to be co-related, varified and assessed with available information/facts on the subject and than analized by the individual with his ability, knowledge and experience.

 

[drrajpalsingh]

Dear Sumit, It was not only RM ROY who only opposed such social evils but there had been many common/well known people, most social reformers, all heros of Bhagti movement etc, who were against, raised their voices and wrote against such evils during past. Dear different perceptions about many practices/traditions in the society existed every where and in all periods, some people accepted activities by heart, some just followed, some did not follow but quitely and some objected openly and raised their voice also, some voices were recorded in books, some individuals worked more even with more results but ignored by the history writers, did not recognised/forgotten by the society.
Each story/historical recorded/unrecorded event is like an information, before agreeing/accepting such inforemation, its source has to be authonticated/assessed, the information has to be co-related, varified and assessed with available information/facts on the subject and than analized by the individual with his ability, knowledge and experience.

You deserve our Congratulations for this excellent post.

 

[drrajpalsingh]

Respected Rajpal Sir,

I am not a scholar of history but a history lover ...I do not have any such source for the quotes but i can give you some examples which can prove it.

My first example is Sati Pratha ... I dont think any one can justify it under normal conditions but we followed it for centuries and Raja Ram Mohan Roy opposed that ,child marriage , no remarriage of widows , Dev dasis ...... all happened in our society and no one opposed it . We justified the unequal treatment of human beings under the justification of caste system .

Sir I dont have any source of it but these things happened in our society and we justified it without any logical reasoning . Hope my response has answered your query. Please pardon me if i hurt any one.Thanks and Regards Sumit Chaudhary

Dear Sumit,

I appreciate your zeal to learn and share your knowledge. I think the acts noted by you are condemn-able by every one. But it is wrong to draw off the track conclusions as depicted by the words darkened (of course by me) of your post.

We find opposition to these evils through the ages by sane people as recorded in Indian History. For example Akbar encouraged remarriage of widows and made their killing a cognizable offence. Undoubtedly the step was to discourage killing widows by burnning them in the pyre with their husbands. But we have no access to data how and to what extent the rule was enforced.

Thanks

 

[sumitjattan]

Dear Sumit,

I appreciate your zeal to learn and share your knowledge. I think the acts noted by you are condemn-able by every one. But it is wrong to draw off the track conclusions as depicted by the words darkened (of course by me) of your post.

We find opposition to these evils through the ages by sane people as recorded in Indian History. For example Akbar encouraged remarriage of widows and made their killing a cognizable offence. Undoubtedly the step was to discourage killing widows by burnning them in the pyre with their husbands. But we have no access to data how and to what extent the rule was enforced.

Thanks

Respected Rajpal Sir,


You are right , i was unable to clearly show my intentions behind the darkened words highlighted by you my intentions were just to say that no one opposed those evil practices strong enough to force the governments to take some strong steps to ban them , If you check my post 43 . I said the same words that logical thinkers always opposed them and opposing some thing and forbidding something are totally different terms.
You are right Akbar opposed Sati Pratha but did he passed some harsh laws against this practice? No he dint . If he wanted he can pass the same type law as he abolished the Jaziya on hindus but he dint . I am just highlighting what he said was no woman could commit sati without the specific permission of his Kotwals. Once the Kotwals got to know about it, they were instructed to delay the woman's decision for as long as possible and to offer pensions, gifts and rehabilitative help to prevent women from committing sati and the impact this was limited only to Agra region . Not only Akbar even in the annals of our history you can find Lord Buddha had also opposed this practice .
I have mentioned Raja Ram Mohan Roy because he was only prominent Hindu who along with missionaries forced Lord William Bentinck to pass a law against it and that law formally banned it. The clauses of that law are mentioned below :

Sati was declared illegal and a criminal offence.

• Zamindars, petty land owners, local agents and officers in charge of revenue collection were made accountable to immediately intimidate police officers of any intended sacrifice.
• In case of wilful neglect, the responsible officer was liable to a fine of Rs.200 ( a very big amount in 1829 ) or 6 months in jail for default.
• On intimidation, the police official was to go to the spot and declare the gathering illegal, prevail upon the crowd to disperse, explain that any persistence was likely to make them all liable to a crime and if necessary prevent the sati from taking place or go and inform the nearest magistrate of the names and addresses of all those present.
• If the sacrifice was over, a full and immediate inquiry had to be undertaken in the same way as for any unnatural death.
• Aiding and abetting a sacrifice whether voluntary or not was to deemed culpable homicide.
• Punishment was at the discretion of the court according to the nature and circumstances of the case.
• For any violence or compulsion or helping or assisting in burning of a widow while she laboured under a state of intoxication or stupefaction or because any other cause impeded her free will, the court was constrained to pronounce death penalty

Sir Its not easy to stop some evil completely without harsh laws .


Thanks and Regards
Sumit Chaudhary

 

[fateh]

You deserve our Congratulations for this excellent post.

Dr sahab thanks for liking my views and complements please, regards

 

[hariom1972]

http://www.francoisgautier.com/en-art/

I think that the author is right when he says that history is about documentation.
i have reproduced from Francois Gautier website, a para which appealed to me and it also tells as to what is History.
"History (like journalism) is about documentation and first-hand experience"
There are an incredible number of farhans, original edicts of Aurangzeb hand-written in Persian, in India's museums, particularly in Rajasthan, such as the Bikaner archives. It was not always easy to scan them, we encountered resistance, sometimes downright hostility and we had to go once to the chief minister to get permission. Indeed, the director of Bikaner archives told us that in 50 years we were the first ones asking for the farhans dealing with Aurangzeb's destructive deeds. Then we asked painters from Rajasthan to reproduce in the ancient Mughal style some of the edicts: the destruction of Somnath temple; the trampling of Hindus protesting jaziya tax by Aurangzeb's elephants; or the order from Aurangzeb prohibiting Hindus to ride horses and palanquins; or the beheading of Teg Bahadur and Dara Shikoh.
People might say: 'OK, this is all true, Aurangzeb was indeed a monster, but why rake up the past, when we have tensions between Muslims and Hindus today?' There are two reasons for this exhibition. The first is that no nation can move forward unless its children are taught to look squarely at their own history, the good and the bad, the evil and the pure.
Let Hindus and Muslims then come to terms with what happened under Aurangzeb, because Muslims suffered as much as Hindus. It was not only Shah Jahan or Dara Shikoh who were murdered, but also the forefathers of today's Indian Muslims who have been converted at 90 per cent. Aurangzeb was the Hitler [ Images ], the asura of medieval India. No street is named after Hitler in the West, yet in New Delhi we have Aurangzeb Road, a constant reminder of the horrors Aurangzeb perpetrated against Indians, including his own people.

 

[moar]

GentleMen: This is History >>>> http://www.jattworld.com/online/library/books/history-and-study-jats-dr-b-s-dhillon

 

[drrajpalsingh]

Respected Rajpal Sir,


You are right , i was unable to clearly show my intentions behind the darkened words highlighted by you my intentions were just to say that no one opposed those evil practices strong enough to force the governments to take some strong steps to ban them , If you check my post 43 . I said the same words that logical thinkers always opposed them and opposing some thing and forbidding something are totally different terms.
You are right Akbar opposed Sati Pratha but did he passed some harsh laws against this practice? No he dint . If he wanted he can pass the same type law as he abolished the Jaziya on hindus but he dint . I am just highlighting what he said was no woman could commit sati without the specific permission of his Kotwals. Once the Kotwals got to know about it, they were instructed to delay the woman's decision for as long as possible and to offer pensions, gifts and rehabilitative help to prevent women from committing sati and the impact this was limited only to Agra region . Not only Akbar even in the annals of our history you can find Lord Buddha had also opposed this practice .
I have mentioned Raja Ram Mohan Roy because he was only prominent Hindu who along with missionaries forced Lord William Bentinck to pass a law against it and that law formally banned it. The clauses of that law are mentioned below :

Sati was declared illegal and a criminal offence.

• Zamindars, petty land owners, local agents and officers in charge of revenue collection were made accountable to immediately intimidate police officers of any intended sacrifice.
• In case of wilful neglect, the responsible officer was liable to a fine of Rs.200 ( a very big amount in 1829 ) or 6 months in jail for default.
• On intimidation, the police official was to go to the spot and declare the gathering illegal, prevail upon the crowd to disperse, explain that any persistence was likely to make them all liable to a crime and if necessary prevent the sati from taking place or go and inform the nearest magistrate of the names and addresses of all those present.
• If the sacrifice was over, a full and immediate inquiry had to be undertaken in the same way as for any unnatural death.
• Aiding and abetting a sacrifice whether voluntary or not was to deemed culpable homicide.
• Punishment was at the discretion of the court according to the nature and circumstances of the case.
• For any violence or compulsion or helping or assisting in burning of a widow while she laboured under a state of intoxication or stupefaction or because any other cause impeded her free will, the court was constrained to pronounce death penalty

Sir Its not easy to stop some evil completely without harsh laws .
Thanks and Regards Sumit Chaudhary

Excellent piece of writing for which we must congratulate you.

However, I may add a piece of advice: while making comparison in history, choose contemporary persons events, issues because objective conditions and immediate conditions affecting historical decisions continue to change with the passage of time.

Thanks

 

[drrajpalsingh]

Let us try to understand what is History.

The word 'History' is employed to designate the sum total of the events and occurrences of the past.

History makes an attempt to distinguish between all the events of the past and the little knowledge that we know about it, which is chiefly obtained from records..

The history is that branch of knowledge which has for its object the ascertaining, recording and explaining of facts and events of the past..

The mass of facts, consisting of past events and activities of nations, societies and civilizations, written from varying points of view and different motives, make up the body of knowledge called history. It is from this material also called sources that scholars have drawn the text books.

An author opines:''History is the study of human life. it is not only related to the past of the man, but it stresses on present also. History lightens that regiment in which the child lives and prolongs his life."

Friends, Your learned comments to make history as a subject of study more understandable are invited. Thanks.

 

[drrajpalsingh]

Friends,

To reconstruct the history of any caste, community, event or activities of person or group of persons one has to collect original sources to substantiate his or her narrative. These contemporary sources are collected in the form of
i. Archaeological sources
ii. Numismatics
iii. Monuments/remains of monuments
iv. Literary records in the form of documents, books, seals and so on
v. Folk lores and traditions
vi Any other, miscellaneous...

Every kind of source has its historical significance and is capable of solving very knotty puzzles if found and used judiciously.
In view of long spanning History of the Jats through the ages there are several unplugged gaps, many distortions and many periods totally ignored.

Through this post, I invite the readers to post the distortions, gaps and lacuna in the history of the Jats or general history of India or the world about the Jats and also request them to provide, if any, links, information about these sources so that a well documented and authentic history of the community could be reconstructed in due course of time by the community.

Hoping for a constructive and cooperative debate and discussion on the issue.

Thanks.

 

[ravinderjeet]

डा , राजपाल जी आप कदे सोरम गए सो , जा ना गए सो ते एक बे जा के आओ |​

 

[swaich]

My view is that some parts of history can never be verified and as such there will always be multiple versions to the same event. This is because everyone has a bias. For European historians, Alexander invasions into Asia Minor were a part of his grand plans to unify the known world and facilitate exchange of languages, cultures etc. For Asians whose ancestors probably bore the brunt of his invasions, saw palaces destroyed, crops ravaged he was just an invader looking for loot and glory. History will tell you when Alexander attacked a city, but it can never describe in singularity his motivations, effects etc.

 

[drrajpalsingh]

डा , राजपाल जी आप कदे सोरम गए सो , जा ना गए सो ते एक बे जा के आओ |​

Thank you Ravinderjeet Bhai for guiding me towards the need of the use of Sarvakhap Panchayat Records.

I had gone to Sauram way back in 1981 to 1983 several times when I was collecting source material for my thesis in History of the Jats from 1669 to 1768 A.D.

Fortunately I had chance to have long discussions on the topic with Chaudhary Qabul Singh and also Chaudhary Nihal Singh Arya of Delhi, both of whom had good knowledge about the matter available at Sarvakhap Panchayat HQs and had brought out books based on those records. I have also read and collected some of these records in English Translation used by Dr. M.C Pradhan for his Ph.D. work submitted with Oxford University and subsequently brought our in book form.

However, I could not lay my hands on much of the original records because by that time G C Dwivedi from Benaras University had taken away much of the documents promising to return the same later on to Chaudhary Qabul Singh but he did not do so. in the meantime he submitted the thesis and later passed away. Now no one knows about the whereabouts of those documents. Yes his thesis has been published in the book form by Maharaja Surajmal Memorial Education Society.

Thanks and regards.

 

[drrajpalsingh]

My view is that some parts of history can never be verified and as such there will always be multiple versions to the same event. This is because everyone has a bias. For European historians, Alexander invasions into Asia Minor were a part of his grand plans to unify the known world and facilitate exchange of languages, cultures etc. For Asians whose ancestors probably bore the brunt of his invasions, saw palaces destroyed, crops ravaged he was just an invader looking for loot and glory. History will tell you when Alexander attacked a city, but it can never describe in singularity his motivations, effects etc.

Your surmise is not based on reality of the historical findings. What you say is two points of views among the readers not Historical narration. In case of divergence of views based on different sources, the historians compare and analyse the authenticity and importance of the sources, and then try to arrive at some tentative conclusions which remain open for further alteration if new source material is unearthed from some quarter.
Thus history, being a branch of social science faculty continues to grow under the process specified above but no two versions remain in vogue for long.

Thanks

 

[prashantacmet]

Thank you Ravinderjeet Bhai for guiding me towards the need of the use of Sarvakhap Panchayat Records.

I had gone to Sauram way back in 1981 to 1983 several times when I was collecting source material for my thesis in History of the Jats from 1669 to 1768 A.D.

Fortunately I had chance to have long discussions on the topic with Chaudhary Qabul Singh and also Chaudhary Nihal Singh Arya of Delhi, both of whom had good knowledge about the matter available at Sarvakhap Panchayat HQs and had brought out books based on those records. I have also read and collected some of these records in English Translation used by Dr. M.C Pradhan for his Ph.D. work submitted with Oxford University and subsequently brought our in book form.

However, I could not lay my hands on much of the original records because by that time G C Dwivedi from Benaras University had taken away much of the documents promising to return the same later on to Chaudhary Qabul Singh but he did not do so. in the meantime he submitted the thesis and later passed away. Now no one knows about the whereabouts of those documents. Yes his thesis has been published in the book form by Maharaja Surajmal Memorial Education Society.

Thanks and regards.

Rajpal ji, Haamne to nu suna tha ki ek lugai aag silgaya kare thi sarvkhap ke documents tai....records to chulhe main jaa liye..eibbe kuch na dhara souram main.........baaki rahe sahi cheez uss dwivedi ne den ke ke jaroorat thi...yeh jaat baawli poonch hi rahenge. I have herad that sarvkhap panchayat was constituted at the time of harsha..do these record say anything about harsha..was he a jat?..and what is the name of the book published after extracting info from sarvkhap records?

 

[swaich]

Your surmise is not based on reality of the historical findings. What you say is two points of views among the readers not Historical narration. In case of divergence of views based on different sources, the historians compare and analyse the authenticity and importance of the sources, and then try to arrive at some tentative conclusions which remain open for further alteration if new source material is unearthed from some quarter.
Thus history, being a branch of social science faculty continues to grow under the process specified above but no two versions remain in vogue for long.

Thanks

The bold above is whats controversial for me in the study of history. The historian or the analyst's own prejudices and biases do come into play when analyzing historical sources, do they not?

And I understand that after some time truth does come out due to new found evidences, sources etc. But untill then, especially for historical events before the advent of mass publication there would always be divergent views.