Author's view: The author blames albeit in part the Historiographers for creating a divisive mindset amongst us by not terming the British, French and Portugese as Christian invaders as opposed to terming those who came from West and North West as Muslim invaders.
My Comments: The European Imperialists did not bring their Navy or land forces to invade India. Their aim initially was purely commercial. They came here as traders and obtained trading rights by agreeing to pay taxes or rent or bartered real estate either among themselves or from the local chieftains. Those who came from North and West engaged in battles, looted treasures ( 18 times by a well known one) and carried them home, captured and overrun territories.Barring Portugese, neither the British nor the French imposed their religion under duress.(though by inducement). How the French and British settled their scores using the (Indian) resources of our princely states and extracting a heavy price from the Maharajas and Nawabs are very well documented. It is a different story as to how the kings, the princes and nawabs fell prey to the designs of the British, French and Portuguese (East India) Companies who exploited to the hilt their palace intrigues, their petty jealousies, plain greed and lust. Why blame the Historiographers for not calling them invaders?
The author himself in page 36 says that that the Muslim settlers came to India as invaders or raiders or with the invaders!!!
The author himself in page 36 says that that the Muslim settlers came to India as invaders or raiders or with the invaders!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment