News

  • ‘Paradigm shift’ in history? – II

     

    news
    Scholarship is not local but universal. Those who want to turn it back in indigenous fashion may succeed for a while but their pronouncements will eventually be thrown out on the dung heap of history. The history of a great civilisation such as the Indian one does not deserve to be hijacked by narrow parochial, nationalistic, chauvinistic or political interests. A truly international approach is needed, with input from many sides.

    pdf  Read News

  • ‘Paradigm shift’ in history? — I

    news
    Frawley may `love’ India all the way he wants, but if he really wants to understand, he must at least begin to study the required sciences, be they anthropology, linguistics, philology, biology or geography. Of course, he does not see the need as he already knows the `secrets’ of the Veda.


    pdf  Read News

  • Ecology, rhetoric or dumbing down? — II

    news
    Simple solutions to complex problems may be appealing to many, and are successful in politics. But they are not suitable in scholarship, where manifold facts do not allow for a one-fits-all theory that takes care of complex subjects such as Indian prehistory.


    pdf  Read News

  • Ecology, rhetoric or dumbing down? — I

    news
    As long as the scholarly world has not agreed on any of the many dozens of “decipherments” of the Indus seals, much of the prehistory of the subcontinent remains steeped in mystery, in spite of ever-expanding archaeological data.


    pdf  Read News

  • Rewriting history

    news
    Sir,— I was disappointed to read the reported remarks on India being the only former colony not to rewrite history: Reassessing earlier historical writing is an ongoing process in all civilizations. David Frawley and N.S. Rajaram are wrong in claiming that India “has failed to rewrite the history dictated by its former colonial masters”. Historiography has not stopped in 1947.


    pdf  Read News