History has many events that have changed the course of history to a greater extent. Those events makes us to think, 'Why it happened like that? What would have happened if it was otherwise?�� There are many such incidents in Indian History.
Listing out some that I consider to be very crucial.
1. Huns invasion The Huns invasions by the end of 5th century caused the end to the Great Imperial Gupta Empire. Guptas age is considered as Golden age. They resisted the Huns to a greater extent but that made them weak, caused the disintegration of their empire and it got reduced to multiple Independent kingdoms. Guptas didn't go back to their glorious past. They were the last prominent dynasty that ruled North India.
2. After Harshavardhana After the downfall of the Gupta Empire in the middle of the sixth century C.E., North India reverted back to small republics and small monarchial states. Harsha united the small republics to form a great empire that includes most of the North India. He ruled for 41 years. After Harsha's death, apparently without any heirs, his empire died with him. The kingdom disintegrated rapidly into small states. If anyone would have inherited the empire found by Harsha, they could have easily lasted for at least one or two centuries. The disintegration of the Harsha's Empire and the chaos created by the power vacuum in North India really helped the Invading Muslim rulers.
3. Pallavas-Chalukyas wars The rivalry between the Pallavas and Chalukyas caused numerous battles from 7th Century to 8th century. This caused the decline of both the Empires. Neither Pallavas nor Chalukyas had a decisive victory. If Chalukyas had eliminated Pallavas they could have annexed some parts of North India or they would have at least played a part against Muslim invasion. But Pallavas had two enemies to face (Chalukyas and Pandyas) that paved way for their decline and the emergence of Imperial Chola Empire. Chalukyas and Pallavas are great in their own way, but rivalry between them didn't allow them to maintain a Great Empire and more importantly their presence made no impact on the North India.
4. North and South India's political disconnection. After the Great Harshavardhana no other king from North India emerged to form an Empire, they ruled small kingdoms and were quite often engaged in war among themselves. By the 9th Century, the South India was under the rule of Imperial Cholas. Why the Cholas didn't tried to annex some parts of Northwest India. Whether they had any contacts with Northwest India? When the Tanjore's Great Temple and other chola temples were built, in the same century Somnath temple and other temples were devastated and looted by Mahmud of Ghazni. Why Crusade kind of wars didn't happened? Rajendra conquered North India along the East coast, why such an effort was not done towards West Coast. Cholas conquered Southeast Asian Kingdoms, but why they didn't try their hand to save the North India where numerous Temples were destroyed.
5.Babur's Battles with Rajput Rana Sanga Babur records in his memoirs that he had sleepless nights because of continuing worries over Rana Sanga, the Rajput ruler of Mewar. The Rajputs had, prior to Babur's intervention, succeeded in conquering some of territory of the Sultanate. They ruled an area commonly known as "Rajputana". It was not a unified kingdom, but rather a confederacy of principalities, under the informal suzerainty of Rana Sanga, head of the senior Rajput dynasty. The Rajputs had possibly heard word of the heavy casualties inflicted by Lodhi on Babur's forces, and believed that they could capture Delhi, and possibly all Hindustan, bringing it back into Hindu Rajput hands. The two armies fought each other forty miles west of Agra at Khanwa. In a possibly apocryphal tale referred in Antiquities of Rajasthan, Babur is supposed to have sent about 1,500 choice cavalry as an advance guard to attack Sanga. Sanga��s Rajputs heavily defeated these. Babur then wanted to discuss peace terms. Sanga sent his general Silhadi (Shiladitya) to the parley. Babur is said to have won over this general by promising him an independent kingdom. Silhadi came back and reported that Babur did not want peace and preferred to fight. The Battle of Khanwa began on March 17, 1527 Silhadi and his army left the field. Whatever the truth of this tale, it seems plausible that a treacherous Tomar who led the vanguard of Sanga's army at Khanwa went over to Babur, causing Sanga to retreat and costing him a likely victory. Within a year he was dead, probably poisoned by one of his own ministers, and a major rival to Babur had been removed.
The Battle of Khanwa is more important than the First Battle of Panipat, for if Rana Sanga had won, India's history would have been apparently different.
6. Second Battle of Panipat-1556 Hemu (Hemchandra) was a military chief of the Afghan King Muhammad Adil Shah was seeking to expel the Mughals from India, taking advantage of Humayun's death, Hemu marched to Agra and Delhi and occupied it without difficulty, and became the ruler under the title 'Raja Vikramaditya'. To counter this, Bairam Khan (Akbar's guardian) marched towards Delhi. On November 5 both the armies met at Panipat. Hemu with a large army including 1,500 war elephants had initial success. There was a pitched battle and Hemu was on a winning spree when a stray arrow struck him in the eye. He fell unconscious. As in many other battles, the loss of the leader caused panic among the troops and turned the tide of the battle. The Mughals won the battle. This is an example of a one-day event that could have changed history.
7. Battle of Talikota (January 26, 1565) The Deccan sultanates of Ahmednagar, Berar, Bidar, Bijapur and Golconda who had formed a grand alliance, met the Vijayanagar army at Talikota, on the banks of the Krishna River, in present day Karnataka state. Some minor Hindu kingdoms that held grudges against the Vijayanagara Empire also aided the sultanates. Rama Raya the chief of Vijayanagar army was captured in the battlefield and beheaded; his head was put on display as a trophy on a spear. The entire Vijayanagar army was struck with panic and disarray and started retreating resulting a complete victory for the sultanates. What followed was pillaging and the destruction of Vijayanagara. The loss was more than, that it should have been, for some reasons they occupants of the Splendid Vijayanagar city hearing the defeat in war fled and didn't thought of
Tamil Nadu state board does include Tamil History, but not to the extend or the elobarate coverage given to the North Indian history. The history books mainly covers the pre independce history in detail and neglect our glorious past. that is really a shame.
Summave schoolla history pass aga mudiyala...ithula namma oor kadhaikala vera setha...kandipppa extra 2 years aagum. Suganya madam schoolla nalla padippaanga pola irukku....
History as a subject it comes from standards 1st to 10th. Indha 10 years curriculam-le we can easily include South and North Indian history, pre-independence and International history.
Only thing to be taken care of is area of importance. Namba ooru kadhai ellaam koncham elaborate-a sollitu, remaining can be shortened.
Hi Suganya mam You are very Correct and True . and we can also study a history in 11th and 12 th too.Our Syllabus are repeated from the beginning to end as a History Student in Schools I too know and experienced this
Our History syllabus wants to be changed and give a chance to our froth coming generations to know abt our greatest personalities of Our beloved nation and it also encourages them to be Patriot towards our nation too.
Mr.Muruganantham sonna mathiri naan fail aana extra 2 years aagumnuthaan sonnen. Yennala 6th standard history pass panna modiyala..neenga 11th, 12thla vera itha padikka solreenga...;)
History should be taught as a subject without having exams on it. It should be fun learning history. then it can be taught in 11th and 12th. There is already enough pressure to get marks..history should relieve the pressure and bring an element of fun to the experience. Learning about Ashoka, Krishnadeva raya, Indus valley civilisation should be fun. Exams should not be conducted on where Ashoka planted trees and who was the last Mughal emperor.
History is learnt to keep our culture alive and let the present generation learn about past mistakes. It should not be forced upon. The child should be happy learning history.
Well said, point taken.. but again, if the child needs to have interest in history, then it should start at home.. If as parents, we dont have an inclination to knowing or letting our children know, then its tough to get it induced in the children.
I used to read history, the same way I used to read stories or novels, by fantasising a little bit..
Maybe we as parents can make history interesting by taking them to historical places and making them know and feel proud about their culture.
I am a new member of this group Anybody can help me to learn about history Basicaly i am an Garment exporter from tirupur But i got intrset bcoz of www.varalaaru.com Anybody help me please
Nothing can be forced in to anyone. I do not think any of the schools is teaching history now a days. they usually ask the students to read in the class( atleast that's how my teachers taught me).
I feel the reason why tamil history is neglected in the history books are either the persons setting the syallabi is not aware of history of tamil nadu(which is very unlikely) or they would have felt there is not enough visual evidence for the history( some thing like Qutub Minar, Agra Fort, Shivaji's fort at Maharastra). There are very few monuments to tell the students to explain the glory of it like Tanjai Periya Koil, Mamallapuram.
You know one thing I ask two days before my staff reg age of tanjavoor temple he said about 135 years old You know the tragedy he was studied in famous school in tirupur this is how our history live in school
:) its such a comical thing, that many people dont know about the crowning glory and achievements of our ancestors.. this is very much like a vadivel joke..
I have observed in many instances, a person very good about historical facts or culture is not recognised by his environment itself. We can see many people who lack interest in History or culture and they merely excuse themselves as these things are old and those things are not of any importance to their personal growth.
We find very less persons interested in taking pride of our own historial acheivments and past glory. Many people try to emulate the western practices and feel guilt and shame in following our age old customs.
The most irony is if someone takes time to explain things about History of temple or its architectural importance normally he gets very less audience to hear and the person's effort or that knowledge is considered as waste of time.
IMHO awareness of our glorious past should be emphasised to all. Actually we are slowing loosing a lot to modernisation, our habits, our culture, our food, our architecture, our dress and the list is pretty long. To be frank the pride of our habits is not within ourselves and most Indians complain about the Indian habits.
The most painful thing is slowing the great native Literature works are being read in English through its translations only. Our language has a well defined Grammer and its beauty and excellence has no match, and we still like to read through its translations just like a foreigner.
you are right yesterday i said to my father that i am going to tanjavoor to see the temple He ask is it a pilgrimage and i said no i just want to feel the raja raja cholans presence He replied is that will give any penefit to our factory???
Please read through this article. I am of the opinion, there is a new breed of youth, even amongst the western idealised ones, just like us who are interested in our culture, history and our ancient achievements.. Lets infect our friends and family with our history and culture bug.. :)
My wife was never historically inclined, but now she is, after I started to taking a little interest with history, arts & culture.. I think it all starts with our enthusiasm and pride.. and then it affects everybody else.
Yes I strongly second your opinion recently i have been to madurai and there was a book exhibition the first one as far as i know. I dont think the organisers have expected so much of crowd, the place was crowded like anything i really felt very happy to see so many ppl behind tamil books. I think now a new set of people working in different streams have devoloped some interest in indian history, thanks to Kalki for his great work many of them have been inspired by Ponniyin selvan like me.
I was very happy to see Ponniyin selvan kept at the entrance of almost all the book counters.
Though our education system does not promote Indian history I am convinced that these books will surely take the history further with them to the future generations.
I very much agree with your opinion, I too strongly believe that - one should try to correct himself first, before trying to correct others.
I personally, as many of us, attribute Great Kalki for my interest to Arts and history. I my opinion, SS emphasizes more on the Arts and its importance, its impact influenced me to start carving on chalks.
Inspite of History being a subject and forcefully included in the curriculam (with exams, of course !!), most of the younger generation feel that its of no use reading history.
Assume if history in taught in school without exams, I dont think anyone will be there in the class.
As Dhamo said, today's younger generation feel that knowing abt the past is mere waste. I would say this attitude prevails among them, becoz of present day parents. None of my friends in school, college, work-place were interested either in architecture, literature or history. (Finally I got PS grp friends....:) )
Today's parents want their kids to go abroad for studies, speak English from KinderGarden, to behave westernised and many more. Hardly parents teach kids abt own culture and its glory.
I am sure that this nature will be carried forward to the next generation also. Very unlikely that people mentality would change...
I would like to endorse Suganya's statement, its really hard to get friend who is interested in history and its associated stuffs.
For sure History is for self-esteem, in other words, just like respecting and carring forward our fore-fathers or ancestors ethics.
The problem we face now is, will the future generations will get a History teacher with same knowledge as that of our age or our past generations? What we all want is, the future generations should not say - Indian society and its culture is extinct, just like Egyptian Civilization.
We have so many living temples and great work of art and literature, that we have to carry along and to make sure the coming generations should also carry forward with much care and so on.
Good to see so many people participating in this thread. Lots of new faces.
We have discussed such things a lot earlier and cannot say THIS is the problem.
One side - there are people who likes to be called Mom and Dad by their kids rather than amma and appa. They buy them only Harry Potter and talk only in English. This group feels that only if they talk in English and read english books they are cultured. We have been brainwashed to behave like this and accept whatever comes from the west without questioning. But lots of questions and criticism on our own culture and traditions.
On the other side - a welcome change - as Bhuvaneshwari has put right - reading habit has increased, lots of people thronging for tamil books..the crowds at book fairs are really pleasing to see. As said earlier, almost all stalls pose PS and SS books outside their stall.
Swami Vivekananda,before he presented his paper, i think its on 23rd September, he asked the gathering - "How many of you have read the Hindu Scriptures?". Only 3-4 hands raised up amongst the 4000+ delegates from all religions.
He thundered ," How dare you then come and preach us without knowing what is in Hinudism?".....
Well suited for even our own country men. We, even without knowing or reading what our culture is or what we are, we start complaining about our country and claim that westerners are correct. Thats the basic reason why we are rotting in this front. Shouldnt we asking ourselves "How dare we?".
I got only one thing to say that too said by somebody else by the name of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi.. "Be the change that you want to see".. I guess it all starts with us, to know and to be the change instead of simply lamenting the lack of something.. :) Sorry for the advice.
We can observe some anger in rrc when he banishes ravidasan and co in the udayarkudi inscription.
in history we have always observed tyrants being more successful in man management
for 2 decades till the allied bombs started falling on their roofs the germans were willing to do whatever the leader demanded. and in the mean time he was exterminating enemies and anything he considered decandent. the common man pulled out books from the libraries and burnt them just because their leader called them bad.
I certainly think loyalty of the soldier comes from the commanding nature of the leader than his anbu paasam aaruthal etc..
Wars are usually ruthless and hence outcome of war is nothing but destruction, killage, pilferage, rapes and mass-murders... for that matter, Utthama did not wage any war, many authors claim that was the most peaceful period for the Chola kingdom, but that did set the stage for RRC to set up and train an army that could do his bidding..
Whatever the reasons for war, for eg. Uthagai erriupu as a revenge for slaying the messenger simply shows that RRC was more interested in being drawn into a war, than being pictured as an aggressor.. Passive Aggression a strange word(sounds oxymoronic) could be the trait that made him stood apart.. What are the other reasons for Gangavadi, nulambavadi, kodunganallur, madurai, lakshawadeep, kadaram.. Maybe we can disect and find the reasons and the cause for passive aggressive behaviour..
Dear Rahul I think uyour arguement is a standard Indian one ...Nothing can be good there must be a flaw and its hidden
We have discussed RRC as RRC more than Kalkis AMV with historical facts and yet if you insist somethings hidden....We need RRC in the flesh to allay your doubts isnt it...
You had me laughing there. Do you know why this argument is a standard Indian one it is because the beliefs are also standard Indian ones. I honestly dont understand why ruthlessness in a ruler is taken as a flaw!! This is ridiculous, ruthlessness is mandatory to rule a kingdom as big as RRC's. A king has to appear before his subjects so that they learn to love him and respect him. If my father was not ruthless with me in my studies, behavioral aspects then i would not have respected him. First comes fear, then respect and then love. No subject would have ever loved a weak king.
Do you believe that there was no threat to his throne during his reign? Every dynasty faced such threats daily. How do you think such threats were eliminated, by having round table parent teacher meetings. If Rajendra was to have a good reign then RRC should have eliminated all potential threats.
Im not pointing out flaws in RRC's character, im trying to bring about a discussion on another side of his character which has not been written or discussed anywhere.
I cant bring RRC to prove whether he was ruthless. But can you bring him to prove that he was not. Just because certain things were not written does not mean they did not exist. This side of RRC's character existed. Im sticking to my theory, come what may!! Maybe this is another Indian trait.