Govind Sharma

quora.com/profile/Govind-Sharma-787/answers

How can I help India to eradicate poverty?

Govind Sharma
Answered 2h ago
Originally Answered: How can I eradicate poverty in India?
You can't.

Not one case exists in history of a poor democratic country lifting itself into prosperity. Not
even ONE. At best you might get India into the lower echelons of Mid Income states, but no
more. It's not only unprecedented, it's- in all likelihood- impossible.

1/85
All the “wealthy Democracies” you see around were inevitably Genocidal Colonial Powers in
their “glory days” or Totalitarian Police States (if not both) which only discovered the joys of
“Human Rights” and “Freedom” when the Television and the Radio elevated Casus Belli
from an excuse to keep neighbouring Kings from hanging up on a psychopathic
warmonger to a referendum designed to awaken the inner psychopath inside every pleb,
slavering to murder-rape his neighbour.

40 years ago, South Korea was a basket case. Pakistan towered over it in every way. Vast
agricultural wealth, a monoreligious population which could've been easily used to drive
economic growth, vast mineral deposits, and defacto permission from the civilized West to
murder-rape nations. Any rational actor would've bet upon the Pakistanis. What went
wrong?

The Woke would blame the Pakistani Army and Peaceful clergy. Absurd.

It's the Pakistani Army and Peaceful clergy's obsession with Democracy that has lead to
Pakistan's troubles.

The same with China. Can anyone even imagine a democratic China pulling off what they
have since Deng? Hell- can anyone even imagine a Democratic China?

As the scholars of the Sarvastivada school warned us 2200 years ago, Democracy is the
triumph of the tempestuous inner beast over the disciplined and respectful man, ever
conscious of his duties. It is a waste of public energy, a corruption of national spirit, and an
excuse for nations to exult in the basest impulses of their weltanschauung. No plague is
more noxious to the fate of Nations.

369 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

RecommendedAll
If I were armed with a fully automatic weapon during the time of medieval warfare, would
anyone be able stop me if I had great positioning and a surplus of ammunition?
Govind Sharma
Answered 8h ago
Gunpowder was known to Bharatas by the early 13th, possibly even the 12th Century. By
the 14th Century, armies across the Continent were fielding aequebuses & artillery by the
thousands, of both local and foreign manufacture.

The Siege of Ranthambore- around 1299 CE to 1300 CE- featured grenades, rocket
launchers, hand cannons, and possibly even early guns. The Citadel couldn't be taken until
after months of sapping and mining, a process that must've killed thousands by itself. By
the end of the Siege, all ten towers of the Citadel were in ruins.

More than 300 years later- early modern period, A travelling Peaceful convoy was attacked
by a small band of Rajput cavalrymen at roughly the same location.

However the guy in charge-a certain Mirza Rustam- appears to have had access to a new
design, which cooled better and quickly than Rajput muskets. When the latter realised this,
they abandoned the assault and moved back.

A similar case played out in the Rathore revolt against the Mughals.
2/85
When Durgadasa's troops came to arrest Tahir Khan- Superintendent of Police of Jodhpur,
they are oppossed by a certain Roop Ram, a Kachwaha captain with around 200 men,
mostly cavalry with carbines. While the Peaceful fled, the Rathores and Kachwahas fought;
the smaller size of carbines giving the latter an edge over their opponents' muskets, the
carbines' natural inaccuracy mitigated by the nature of close quarters urban warfare. The
Rathore forces- under some unknown Captain- appear to have retreated than fought on.

Then they mortared this Roop Ram's lot.

On the other hand, you had the experience of Shah Khwaja, a captain under the Emperor
Akbar during his conquest of Sindh. A certain Nahmardi- probably some officer in the Sindh
Army- had managed to raise a militia of 800 bowmen and 300 mounted archers with which
they attacked 70 Mughal cavalrymen under the aforementioned Captain. Two bursts of
carbine and musket fire broke the Militia who'd never heard gunfire in their lives. Nahmardi
tried to raise them again, failed, and ended up surrendering a few weeks later. Centuries
earlier, a similar case had occured in Marwar when Rajput cavalrymen drove off a band of
Ahadis who'd taken over a few villages. More than 500 rebels were killed in contrast to the
death of a mere 3 State troops, who'd been armed in Mail, and bore swords and guns.

So, how did Medieval populations deal with small skirmishes featuring massive
technological advantages on side of one faction?

Rolfmao- how do you think they did?

Invariably they fled or surrendered, unless there was no option in which case they holed up
behind walls and fought till the death. Even slight differences in training and equipment
was reason enough for superior forces to abandon operations until they could get
equivalent arms or to hide in the forests until the logistical demands, Gunpowder Warfare
usually placed on its users, forced the armies to retreat.

Your AK-47 will have entire villages and possibly small forces surrendering to you the
minute you turn on the charm and reduce 20–30 men to corpses before their eyes. Their
captains will surrender and ply you with gold, lands, titles, anything just to stop.

Then they'll cut your throat at night while you sleep off the drugged wines.

At least that's what would have happened in India where normal people lived. From a brief
purview of the other answers, it's clear medieval Europe was populated by the love children
of Chuck Norris and Superman who would've bitchslapped any time-travelling Rambo into
the next century by the power of HEMA and Darwin, I presume.

310 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

In ancient times, what was the best military tactic to counter heavy cavalry?
Govind Sharma
Answered 8h ago
What do the Shastras say?

Santiparva suggests that they find a proper wilderness, overgrown with trees and cane
bushes, and lob stuff at the cavalry. Agni Purana tells them to find a hill and maintain
ranks. Kautilya wanted infantry to do the same, and emphasized on the importance of Drill.
3/85
Nitiprakasika would rather have them make field fortifications. Prayers to Skanda, lord of
hosts, and Rudra, lord of infantry, were recommended.

From close study of the Shastras and associated poems/ plays/ novels like Magha's
Sishupalavadha, it's easy to note how commentators are slowly becoming more and more
skeptical of infantry's chances against cavalry.

Anyway.

So the Shastras are clear.

Find good terrain and force enemy cavalry to come to you. Maintain rigid formation by the
means of constant drilling. Pray to the immortal gods, keep your weapons close and build
field fortifications whenever possible- traps, mud-banks, stakes etc.

Solid advice, in my opinion.

280 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

Why is Japanese oil so popular in India?
Govind Sharma
Answered Fri
Questions like this are “impossible” to answer because Quorans would refuse to believe
that they've been born, without a proper birth certificate signed by a notarized Government
official- and presumably would off themselves if none is forthcoming to correct the wrongs
their existence has played with the Paperwork of Bureacrats.

As such, reality matters less than the statement thereof by a sufficiently unquestionable
authority.

Anyway.

The story that I've heard of “Japani tel” isn't one anyone would be writing down in black and
white. It was told to me by a schoolmate's uncle who is a homoeopathic quack a few years
ago when I had asked him about his business model.

Japani tel is apparently a cure for sexual impotency, erectile dsyfunction, and premature
ejaculation.

It's useless in curing any of these, of course. But it's quite a potent stimulant and has mild
hallucogenic/ narcotic effects- a bit like “safe” heroin. Anyway its users usually have no
cause for concern. However the decline in true forest cover in India and the gradual
extinction of its component herbs will likely lead to its complete marginalization in the
future.

Anyway.

Japani Tel is, very likely, medieval western Indian invention. It was probably created on the
Konkan coast.

But why did they call it “Japani”?

>> Because back then, Hindu started fighting Peacefuls and Pretas who were putting Hindu
4/85
women as sex slaves in brothels. The alternative was to bring in Peaceful “courtesans” to
staff them but their numbers were low and they wouldn't enter Pretas brothels anyway.

But where does Japan come in here?

That's where they began sourcing sex slaves for brothels at the time. The Pretas would
kidnap Japanese girls or, very often, convert them to their religion and promise to take
them to meet their god in Europe. Instead the girls would turn up as sex slaves in brothels
across the Konkan and Gujarat.

I found his statements interesting so I did my own research.

Apparently, the Pretas took advantage of the troubles period of Sengoku Jidai in Japan to
preach their unholy cult and garnered no few converts by their usual tricks. Quite a few of
the latter were taken to meet their pope chap… just kidding, the guys were murdered and
the chicks enslaved. Japanese sex slaves were being sold from Goa to Africa at one point.

Incidentally, the time was marked by the wars of the Mughal Emperor Akbar who- though
not opposed to slavery by any means, disliked the damage to trade brought about by
raiding for slaves. The flow of Firang and Rusi slaves also dried up around the time,
primarily on account of the Ottomans being defeated by the Pretas on the western sea as
well as the beginning of the Safavid wars.

When Toyotomi Hideyoshi managed to unite Japan, he - like any decent human being-
stamped down on the Yahweh nonsense, and demanded the girls back. The first Shogun,
Tokugawa Ieyasu, improved on his former master's works and expelled the Pretas
altogether except for an enclave in Nagasaki for the more saner among them.

Most of those girls were probably sent back but tens of thousands must've already died in
brothels.

The brothels did sell various types of quackery and snake oil though- one particular Variant
of which, the aforementioned Japanese oil, seems to have stuck around for some reason. A
century later, it'd be spread across India as trade and travel improved in the wake of the
Maratha campaigns and abolitionist efforts.

2.6k Views · View Upvoters

RecommendedAll
Why is India viewed as a soul searching destination by people from other countries?
Govind Sharma
Answered Thu
Because it's dirt cheap to live in India, there's remarkably little oversight, and most people
around have at least a modicum of skill in Angreji.

The spirituality part is just Counter-culture nonsense that's crept up as the West has grown
more and more hedonistic and materialistic by the decade. Folk in the 20s and 50s, being
typically more conflicted about their lives than the average person, naturally end up seeking
alternate modes of living and end up- thanks to generations of similar myth-making helped
along by aging 60s pop stars- in India.

5/85
Lot of it is driven by Israelis as well; they come up here partly to dodge the draft in their
nation and partly because Hindus are probably the only people in the World not to have a
hate boner for them.

And then you have the usual hanger-ons who accompany disillusioned, down-on-their-luck,
confused young tourists everywhere: Mafia, Loansharks, Drug smugglers etc etc. Most of
them are Whites themselves and so the Indian Gormint doesn't dare touch them. Proper
little set-ups they have. Ask around in Himachal and Goa and you'll find HUGE stretches of
land have been all but cordoned off to Indians- save for young college girls of course,
entertainment courtesy of the magnanimous blindness of our “Bharat Bhagya Vidhatas”.

Anyway.

Speaking of magnanity, India also comes up because- as I've said earlier, we're pound for
pound the most free State on Earth, at least in some respects. No Gormint busybody will
track the random Israeli draft-dodger snorting opium in an alley. No one cares if some
British chick goes gallivanting around factories taking pics that'd have her jailed in any
other Asian country. No one cares if some Amrikan intellectual goes digging into
crematoriums to indulge his cannibalistic fetishes.

Which is actually a mistake, since how are we repaid for it?

Three cases which I've personally experienced:

1- Karnataka, Hotel Owner: “I don't have any complaints but they never listen to me when I
tell them not to drink tap water. I've even seen them drinking from a disused well. Once a guy
almost died in my hotel because he ate a half rotten something.”

2- Delhi, Uber driver: “They want to experience 'real' India and demand to go into the
roughest parts of the city even local goondas are wary of entering. Some get drunk in such
places. I give them advice but no one listens!”

3- Chattisgarh, Taxi driver: “Sir, half the Naxal nonsense here will end if they stop these
Whites from coming. They fling money at every group of kids who asks for it and not one
paisa fails to go into acquiring arms.”

In short, India is not only a place where the Western bourgeoisie can indulge in
sanctimonious schadenfreude, it's also where their Middle Class/ Working Class
counterparts can freely indulge in the sort of care-free heedlessness that's hard to find
anywhere on the globe these days. The Chinese have hukou. The French their cites. India
ensures even a beggar can travel by train across the land; the typical homeless guy in
Amrika will struggle to live in the next block. The tourists might rant and cry about “rape
culture” and “criminal Hindus” as they saunter around, but they know as well as I that they'd
be made into mincemeat if they tried a tenth of what they do here, in some Brazilian Favela.

What draws the typical western tourist to India is this alleged Freedom.

There is no greater threat to the long term health of Indian Tourism than this.

1.6k Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

6/85
Why are the Huns divided into so many different factions after the separation of Xiongnu
like the White Huns (Hepthalite), European Huns, Western Huns, etc.?
Govind Sharma
Answered Thu
There's ZERO proof that the Xiongnu had anything to do with the Huns.

Back in the early 1700s, a French translator 'thought' that the Chinese characters for
Xiongnu were kind of reminiscent of the sound of the word 'Hun'. Gibbon heard the story
and ran with it- possibly because there was simply no other data at the time. Chinese Soft
Power in the 20th Century and the general collapse of Central Asia under British and
Russian colonialism means that while Western historians have no issues questioning every
single line in HoDaFoRE, the Xiongnu = Hun theory remains sacrosanct. All the
archaeological “evidence” that's come about till date has not only been patchy, it's been the
equivalent of saying that the Custer era Native Americans and Napoleonic Carbiniers were
actually the same culture because both used guns & ride horses.

If anything, the Huns were probably Indo-European, the lot the pre-Maurya Shastras called
'Turana'.

That's why Huna names in India are vaguely reminiscent of Sanskrit while those in Europe
all seem to have Germanic undertones. There's a lot of Turkish influence as well. All in all,
you see the typical Indo-European lower Steppe culture with some degree of Turkish
influence.

Anyway.

The reason they seem to be “fragmented” is because they were NEVER united.

You can't have a “pastoral Empire”, unlike what modern historians say. The very idea is
absurd. All such “Empires” were glorified personality cults held together by the charisma
and influence of individual Warriors, and rarely, if ever, survived the death of their
architects.

The term “White Huns” is absurd. There were hundreds of such tribes- with nominally the
same culture, but differing as widely or even more amongst themselves than a Kashmiri &
Ujjaini would've. The fact that the then-prevailing climatic and socioeconomic pressures
led them to behave in certain specific ways that gave them a veneer of a monolithic
political organisation means nothing.

As such, it's all but certain that even their “Empires” owed more to the local settled
populations than to any real “Hunnic culture”. It's clear that the Kidaras were more or less
Gupta vassals from the 4th Century; the late phase Hunnic wars in the 6th Century seem
more like the work of rebelling Huna governors than any sort of “invasion” per se. There's
some evidence that the Emperor Prakashaditya was a puppet of sorts under them, at least
until the Malwa campaigns.

It's an old pattern. Attila's Empire depended on Romanized Goths, Alans, even defectors as
Whatshisname the Christian priest noted. The Magyars got their Administration from
Christians. Similar stuff happened with the Turks and the Arabs. The Xiongnu were so

7/85
sinicized they were open to Chinese royal marriages. The Jin were once Song allies.

Anyway.

In a nutshell- hundreds of tribes share some degree of racial and linguistic and cultural
identity, on account of living in similar environmental conditions. They're forced to move-
most likely on account of worsening weather. Want makes them band, Association with
Civilized races makes them able to band. Inevitably they run afoul of their agrarian/
“comparatively agrarian” neighbours who- since they hold the pens- are inclined to draw a
clear split between themselves and the random tribals they're up against even if the later
just have alliances of convenience.

That's all there is to it.

362 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

What is wrong with relationships in today's society?
Govind Sharma
Answered Tue
I heard this story barely a week ago. This concerns a junior of a guy who'd once worked
with me.

This kid is a recent graduate from one of the most revered colleges of India. So apparently
he'd joined a major MNC via direct recruitment, and landed a prime position in one of their
European offices. He had left a girlfriend back in India, a girl of the same age as him from
another, (far) less prestigious college.

After 2+ years of the status quo, the girlfriend started pressuring him for marriage at the
insistence of her parents.

The kid had no intention of marrying at the time, especially since the girlfriend was also
demanding that he either leave his current location for India or join a more “stable” line of
work; I won't mention the kid's job but it involved quite a bit of roughing it on the road for
weeks on the end. After an year or so of such wrangling, the kid agreed and moved back to
India.

However the job he did get in India, while not bad by average standards, didn't have as
great benefits as his previous one in Europe. The kid had blundered in taking up the very
first choice that had come his way.

This change in income standards wasn't acceptable to the girl.

After the kid failed to upgrade to a better position or to find a better-paying job in the next
few months, they broke up. Four months later, she was bethrothed to another guy through
the arranged marriage route. Thus one, to hear of it, is an Embeeyah in his early 30s and
occupies a management post in a fairly large FMCG.

The kid has turned Devdas, and his family and friends are highly concerned. I was asked by
my ex-colleague for advice since I have a reputation for being “spiritual” for some reason.

Anyway…

8/85
Such problems have become extremely common as Hypergamy has increased
exponentially in Indian society. I personally see no way out save for Houellebecq's ideas.
Your mileage might vary though.

1.4k Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

RecommendedAll
Who would have won in a war between Scythians and Hunas?
Govind Sharma
Answered Tue
The ones who'd had an advantage of 700–800 years of technological and societal
development, I presume.

The Hunas, in particular, started out as Gupta vassals- Kidaras, who are considered an
independent faction by the educated classes, were a “Standard-bearing Ally”, essentially a
protectorate, with permission to mint Imperial coinage from the days of the Emperor
Samudradeva. We've found multiple such specimens as well as a grant but as usually
happens in Hindu history, it's all BS unless Devapharna's spirit manifests itself in front of
JNU to say that he was a general under the Eagle standard.

So presumably they had access to the entire Gupta paraphernalia- iron stirrups, heavy mail,
barded elephants, all-steel bows, field artillery- including Shatagnis & flamethrowers, among
others.

The Scythians lived at a time and place when steel might've well been as dear as gold. The
answer then is obvious.

514 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

Is Karn Sangini the worst in the name of contemporary mythology?
Govind Sharma
Answered Tue
Here's a rule of thumb.

If you're planning on reading ANYTHING about “contemporary” Hindu mythology, the

following checklist would help you guess whether the book is going to be a long, vile, and
poorly written tirade on Dharma and Hindus or the usual sub-par mediocrity one expects
from the usual Indian Corporate wageslave.

1- The writer is an woman (apologies for the sexist term “wo-man” but I'm too tired at
present), especially if she has a 'Hindu' name.

2- The writer has had an college education, especially if it's from one of the big Colleges-
AiyAiyTees or Embeeyahs or the DeeYu types.

3- It features ANY of the primary characters from the great Epics.

ANY single one of these ought to be a warning to the believing Hindu to expect some sort of
attack- whether overt or subversive- upon the very foundations of Dharma.

9/85
Exceptions exist, of course- I can't take names otherwise the usual suspects will accuse me
of advertising for it- but a certain Hindu lady with a “good" education has written a work of
historical fiction upon a Rigvedic era Queen, but one swallow does no summer make.

569 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

Which European army involved in the Napoleonic Wars would have been the worst to be in?
Govind Sharma
Answered Tue
I suppose OP refers to troop comfort and safety, and not combat effectiveness.

Republican Phase: French. Has to be French. They were barely above starvation levels half
the time.

Early Phase: First France, then I suppose it's a tie between Austria and Britain. It becomes
Russia as the time passes.

Mid Phase: Russia.

End Phase: Russia and France.

Britain escapes the list primarily because its Armies spent a lot of time skulking on their
islands. I rate Austria higher than other states because their general situation was so
terrible that the Army wasn't terribly worse off, in comparison. I haven't consider partisan
forces and puppet states like Peninsular War Spain or the Rhine states either, even though
they suffered horribly as well, for obvious reasons. Russia would've merited a place
anyway, given how they'd to march the equivalent of Delhi to Mumbai everytime they
wanted to fight anyone.

All in all- I suppose it's a tie between the French and Russians.

338 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

You and Hamvira Mohapatro upvoted this
RecommendedAll
Unlike Egypt and China, why wasn't mummification practiced in ancient India?
Govind Sharma
Answered Jan 7
Certain North-Eastern tribes did do so. I've read Manipuri records of such practices among
certain hill tribes and even seen a few grainy pics from the early 20th Century of tribal
chieftains maintaining resin-caked skulls of their ancestors. A form of mud-based
mummification, as seen even now in remote regions of SE Asia, also existed.

No trace of all that now. Such remnants were destroyed, in some cases by missionaries
after the locals converted and in the vast majority of cases, by the locals themselves. Infact
some of the early “persecution” faced by Krischans was on account of their hatred for such
ancestor worship. The Chin rebellions in Burma in the 60s saw massive destruction of Chin
tombs by the now-Krischan Chin themselves. Similar vandalism was done by the Karen as
well in the 70s.

Such events probably happened in India as well but have been covered up because we are
a secular state and pagan history is anathema to our educated classes.
10/85
RecommendedAll
Why does Indian media mostly have a negative, hysterical, aggressive and provocative style
of news reporting when it comes to Pakistan or China?
Govind Sharma
Answered Jan 7
OP has made himself Anonymous but I think I can guess which cohort he's from. Anyway…

They don't.

Not entirely, anyway.

Pakistan coverage, apart from the Republic, us usually extremely “well-balanced” and
“broad-minded”. In other words, the channels all but fall over themselves to cheer on the
Pakistani generals, ambassadors, Intellectuals or whatever random “guest” they might've
invited then. Any sane country would've long lined them up for investigation but NDTV and
its like are run by Journalists after all, a higher breed of humans compared to us Hindus-
and thus the laws of neither Man nor the Gods apply to them.

How very droll…

The Republic on the other hand is helmed by a certain individual whose political ideology is
what practicing Hindus refer to as “Rayta”- a particularly obnoxious form of chest-thumping
nationalist with the economic sense of a Somali pirate and the moral integrity of the latest
issue of the Cosmopolitan.

OP can rest assured that despite the snarls this paper tiger might belch out at Pakistan,
Raytas LOATHE Hindus far more than any antagonism they might bear towards Pakistanis.

They know that we know they're truth: the Rayta “supports” Hinduism not for love of the
immortal gods, but because they believe that a Hindu society will give their hedonism
greater license than would be expected under the Sharia law that'll inevitably rise if the
ongoing Ghazwa-e-Hind against us Hindus succeeds.

It probably will, but anyway.

Both of these two cohorts, however, feel free to hide their obvious disdain for the Hindu and
loathing for Dharma by distracting the Hindu hordes by mindless Nationalistic chanting
against “acceptable enemies”- that is, “enemies” not protected by the great umbrella of the
shadowy interests that fund and promote the environment within which such Media
channels flourish.

I won't name names since I hope even the typical Quoran reads the newspaper.

In other words- China, drunk on its temporary financial success, has COMPLETELY ignored
any form of real Ally building and meta-Civilizational narrative, and is blundering about like
a Musth-maddened Elephant in a swamp, gloriously unaware of the Hunter coming to take
the shot.

11/85
If I've read OP right, his brethren have mass-reported and collapsed my last answer that did
speak on such matters on the charges of “plagiarism” or some such excuse so I won't
waste my time on yoking a dead bullock to the plough.

Winnie the Ping should really read that copy of Seshisai…

516 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

What was the staple food in different parts of India around five hundred years back?
Govind Sharma
Answered Jan 6
Let me guess- OP read some of the woke articles by harem lover's lot from the big colleges
about how Bharatas used to live on rice-water before the Peacefuls and Angrej, in their
unparalleled munificence, taught us how to eat…

Anyway.

Depends on various factors, but the distinguishing factor appears to have the availability of
water- based upon which the populace consumed either rice or wheat or millets. Grain
prices were roughly uniform across major trade routes, reflecting the observations of
diarists and visiting Firangs that trade was fairly robust- as long as the traders were well-
armed.

I'll briefly describe the dietary regimen of two Hindus, roughly at the turn of the century.
Given the relative static social scenario in rural Orissa, I presume it'd have been the same in
the 16th Century as well.

The Zamindar would wake up at 4 AM. After his prayers, daily morning rounds, and
discussions with the guards & agents, he'll eat pakhala- semi-fermented rice with curds,
ginger, lemon- or chuda-n rice, cheese, curds, butter, bananas, coconuts- at around 7 AM. At
11 AM, he would eat lunch- usually during his rounds of his lands- under a tree, similar fare
for most part. In a pouch, he'd invariably carry dry gram or peas, jaggery, and pounded
ginger. Not only was the mixture allegedly an excellent remedy for fever & cholera, a single
fistful could keep an Oriya Zamindar going for days. At around 9–10 PM, he will eat the first
and only proper meal of his day- rice with various preparations of stews and fried items,
complete with pickles and preserves of several types. The dinners were long, for these were
the only time that the Zamindar could meet with his children and/or the servants of the
Household. Good Oriya Zamindars didn't touch Alcohol.

The common peasant- in this case, an woodcutter/ carpenter- would wake up at roughly 3–
4 AM. He'd eat a few fistfuls of chuda or pakhala and set out for work. Around 10 AM and 3
PM, he will prepare and make chuda of the flattened/ puffed rice he'd carry and feral-
growing bananas and some taro varieties which he'd eat. At 8 PM, he'd eat Pakhala with
pickles and some form of stew or fried items.

Both would've also snacked on local fruits such as mangoes, papayas, ripe jackfruits,
melons, dates, berries, and sugar-roasted sesame seeds, especially after work or during
festivals.

12/85
The Zamindari would've been typical self-sufficient in all cases with granaries capable of
storing produce for almost six months for everything and two years of rice, or emergencies.
In general, barring famines and the one lean month, agrarian Orissa was fairly self-
sufficient in food; partly since there was neither MNREGA nor subsidized rice to make
laziness the National virtue.

The common people ate the local choice of grain. Common vegetables included eggplants,
peas, lentils of various sorts, several variety of melons, leafy vegetables, taro, yams,
cabbages, jackfruit, carrots, and beans. Most were seasonal, there was little scope of
imports unless the crops themselves had been introduced for cultivation- like carrots had
been, possibly during the Classical period.

Coconuts, Mangoes, Oranges, Apples, Grapes, Papayas, Pomegranates, and various kinds
of berries were ubiquitous- however even those were all seasonal and often restricted to
the Rich. Don't believe the vandal Babur's words that he introduced anything.

The riverine and coastal populace often are fish, however late medieval/ early modern India
appears to have been less inclined to non-vegetarianism than their Classical counterparts.
On the occasions that they did, they had dry roasts as well as baked dishes in mud ovens;
I've eaten such on the banks of the Chilika myself. Stews, Kebabs, even Fried food was
common among Hindus.

The most common animal utilized for food were pigs and boars, fish, and - in rare cases-
goats, which is usually detested for their destructive grazing practices and avoided in
farms. Chicken and Duck were rarely used for meat, with eggs usually eaten only by
children. Meat was by no means a staple however with even the Hindus who could
regularly afford it preferring to avoid unnecessary slaughter of life.

Tea was commonly drunk throughout the nation. The Educated classes, for some reason,
claim it was introduced by the Angrej- even though all contemporary Firang travellers in the
16th and 17th Centuries mention how the average Bania was rarely found without a
tumbler of hot black tea with ginger and lemon in his hands. The elderly flavoured theirs
with cardamon, cinnamon, and fruit-infused butter. However the most common drink for
adults was spiced buttermilk or warmed curd-drinks, though many preferred to take plain
milk. For some reason, Bharatas hadn't- and still haven't- realised that we are all supposed
to be lactose intolerant as per the educated scientists. Then again, given the way local
cows are being murdered for beef and industrialized cattle from gods-know-where are
being brought in, we'll soon be.

By the 17th Century, New World crops such as Tobacco and Chilli peppers had become
popular as well. It took far longer for Potatoes and Tomatoes to become well-known, and
even now several Temples boycott them. Pumpkins, however, have become extremely
common even in the most Traditional temples on account of the gradual disappearance of
several local species of gourds.

Desserts were relatively simple for the common people, though several decadent and rich
sweet dishes were developed in royal kitchens as well. A perusal of Classical and Late
Classical texts show little change in the most predominant styles- though the educated
classes, for some crazy reason, are adamant that the Mughals introduced Sugar to India.
13/85
I'd discuss about various styles of local alcohols but I'll desist since I don't really respect
Quora enough to believe them capable of a true meditation on the merits and overall
philosophy of the art of brewing amongthe nations of the Bharatas. In any case, Sharia will
put an end to any prospect of such.

Hope this has helped. Jai Jagannath.

1.9k Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

Do you have any skills that would enable you to survive and flourish if you were transported
back 700 years in your current place of residence?
Govind Sharma
Answered Jan 6
Anyone in such a predicament will be considered a loon or possibly even murdered.

Using Firang examples (for a point in the future)…

“Language” didn't mean what it does know; French was a collection of over a hundred
dialects and English wouldn't even be remotely understandable to the average Londoner for
another 200 years. Everything would work on personal references; outside one's
community or guild, people would be unpersons or vagabonds. Even the regular acquisition
of food or a minor chill would be a constant concern. And that's in EASY mode- Western
Europe.

Early 14th Century Chodaganga Orissa was NOT Easy Mode.

It's 1319 CE. The glory days of the 13th Century when Oriya writ ran unquestioned from
Ganga to Krishna are gone. Peaceful raiders loot the countryside. Holy cities from Mathura
to Varanasi to Omkareshwar island are gone. Slave markets and Camp hovels profligate in
the ruins of once-great cities.

From North, South, West, the Peacefuls press upon the realm of Gajapati Bhanudeva II
Chodaganga, regent of Jagannath himself. Defeat at any stage means the destruction of
Orissa, the annihilation of Oriya and Oriya culture, the desecration of our Temples, and the
end of the last hope of Hindus on the Continent.

Anyone being transported there from modern times would stick out like a sore thumb.

Even more so than in Early Medieval Firangistans. You see- Medieval Orissa was one of the
most bureaucratic states anywhere in the World. Every inch of land had been mapped out,
parcelled, and monitored. The country was a de facto Theocracy with constant vigilance
against the Mleccha being the motto. From the remote forest outposts in the
Dandakaranya to the mudflats of Kantei, Oriyas faced off against the entire Ummah
stretching from Spain to Siliguri.

The typical educated Oriya youth would be spotted within hours.

He will be lead to the Constable's office in the village - or if one wasn't deputed on account
of budget cuts and/or loss of manpower (Orissa still wouldn't have recovered from the
disaster of the 1280 famine & the final loss of Bengal)- to the local Zamindar. Now the
typical Quoran, even if he were Oriya, wouldn't be able to speak early medieval Oriya OR
14/85
Sanskrit OR early Kannada OR any of the contemporary languages people were expected to
know. And they'd know- “linguistic diversity” only flourishes in poorly centralised areas,
unlike Chodaganga Orissa.

Worse, the typical Quoran would be an Atheist, convinced about the joys of “logic” and
“humanism”. Most likely he'd inform the now-alarmed Constable/ Zamindar of the fact that
their positions are owed to Orissa being a “fascist Imperialistic dictatorship” engaged in the
most grievous mode of Islamophobia, and that the near-constant state of Total War
maintained by Medieval Oriyas was but an expression of their being inherently violent
“Hindu terrorists.”

Then there'll be no more words, for this typical Oriya Quoran would be summarily executed
by the responsible authorities for being a most irritating Peaceful spy.

“Skills” count for nothing. Fortresses can be crushed, Cities can be razed, Books will burn
and the Sciences will be forgotten. But as long as we have the gods, nations will endure.

Anyway…

I, for one, am the minority among minorities along minorities- a believing Hindu among the
few Hindus still left in our secular Republic.

While I may not share the faults of the typical educated Oriya and I'm neither a heretic or an
atheist degenerate- I still can't speak the language, have no clue of the contemporary script,
and no idea how to interact and whom to interact with. I'm pretty sure where my ancestors
would be at the time- give or take a few dozen miles, but even a dozen miles is a big
distance and what on Earth would I be expected to tell the then-reigning Head of the
Household anyway?

On the plus side, Medieval Oriyas were apparently far more polite & honourable than the
modern bunch. So I won't be in trouble unless I go to the border districts with their constant
threat of Peaceful raids.

As it is, we know less about 14th Century Orissa than about the preceding two centuries,
given the havoc the later Peaceful invasions… apologies, I've heard we use “interaction” to
avoid triggering people on Quora… with the libraries and colleges at Puri and Cuttack during
Bhanudeva II, Narasimhadeva III, and Bhanudeva III. So it's not like I can saunter up to some
official whose name I recall from the records and ask for aid. Sriramdeva, the only guy I
recall from the time, would be a mere boy at the time. And I can hardly be expected to turn
up at Barabati Fort and demand entrance. They'd call me a spy.

I foresee a long period of begging in front of the local temple while I stitch together a
working knowledge of the lingo. Then, they'll probably draft me into the army - as with all
able-bodied men they find- during the big Peaceful interactions in the early 1320s. And
what will happen thence, who knows?

Were Tolkien's orcs a metaphor for minorities?

Govind Sharma
Answered Jan 6

15/85
He seems to have associated events and characteristics with the Orcs that we today would
rather refer to when speaking of a very specific Race.

Turakas. Or as the World in general knows them- Turks.

The Romanesque-underpinings of Numenor- and in succession, Gondor, the textbook-copy

of the Siege of Vienna that is the battle of Pelennor fields- right down to the Polish charge
upon the Orkish siege lines, the repeated association of the East and South with evil
arrayed against the Eru-worshipping West. And of course, Tolkien himself described Orcs
as "...squat, broad, flat-nosed, sallow-skinned, with wide mouths and slant eyes; in fact
degraded and repulsive versions of the (to Europeans) least lovely Mongol-types."

That was when he wasn't talking about their “dark skins”.

The Legendarium is the story of the British Empire, heir to Rome, warring against the “evil”
Turkish, Indian, and Chinese as the 20th Century dawned. A well-written story, of course, but
anyway…

248 Views · View Upvoters

You, Bhaskar Puri and Siddharth Bhat upvoted this
RecommendedAll
Why is Kolkata's GDP $150 billion dollars,almost double the GDP of Bangalore?
Govind Sharma
Answered Jan 6
Hardly double. More like 30%-40%.

This with 60%-70% extra population, a proper port, far better agricultural and hydrological
resources, a headstart of nearly 150 years in real terms, as well as the dubious virtues of
the “Indian Renaissance” or whatever the phrase is these days.

Calcutta is 'rich' in the way the fat-encrusted wobbling chins of a glutton dying of Diabetic
Ketoacidosis is a sign of Health.

The primary reason for Calcutta's riches is that, for two hundred years, the Powers-that-be
thatve controlled most of our Holy land of Bharata have persisted in a morally corrupt,
economically stunted, philosophical degenerate Colonial System that leeches the wealth of
'defeated' nations to flatten the seats of the High and Mighty.

Fitting, really- considering the kind of human rights-loving Hypocrites who have ruled
Bengal all this time.

Bengal, being the centre of Firang campaigns all over the Continent, benefitted from the
loot and plunder dragged over the entire Continent. The so-called Bengal Presidency served
as the great beast upon which the city of Calcutta sat and swole like a blood-thirsty
diseased mosquito. The vast agricultural fields of Orissa were divided among absentee
clerk-zamindars in Writers' Building. The sweeping hillsides & meadows of Assam were
overrun by notaries & lawyers from Chandernagore. And the less said of what happened in
Chhotanagpur, the better.

If anyone thought things would improve after 1947, they were clearly wrong in the head.
16/85
The Republic of India is a D.E.M.O.C.R.A.C.Y.

In other words, if you don't have the votes and don't have control of the Gormint- SUCKS to
be you.

As the most populated state of the East & the sole link of Mainland to the North-East,
Bengal benefitted from Delhi's preferential policies towards it - at the expense of other
Eastern and North Eastern states. The Socialist Heroes, when they weren't awarding
themselves Bharat Ratnas and wasting Public Wealth on grandiose parades to build up
their personality cults, bestowed Bread and Circuses upon the Fortunate and heaped
indignities upon the starving Unfortunates.

And here, the capriciousness and malevolence of Bengal's ruling class aided Bengal, albiet
unintentionally. With so much public attention across the Nation fixed upon the most
recent riot or union strike or lynching at Calcutta, who cares if the Chinese overrun a state
or two?

After all- in the words of a noted lover of children, ' that land is worthless; not blade of grass
grows there'.

And thus it's natural that the Republic, in its ceaseless attempts to surpass the Raj it has
replaced- introduce an even greater drainpipe from the “hinterland” to Calcutta. This was
the Freight Equalization Policy.

Neither the guns of Baron Robert Clive nor the ships of Earl Canning struck Oriyas and
Biharis and the peoples of the North-East as great a blow as the pen of the great leaders of
the Republic of India. For forty years, our lands were raped by the great leaders of Delhi. For
forty years, every ingot of iron, every ounce of coal, every single twig that grew and every
single flower that bloomed- nothing was ours, but as not which could not sent to the great
factories of Calcutta- funded by Delhi 'to compensate for the loss of Dhaka', incubated by
Delhi 'to appease the Communists', and coddled by Delhi on account of this glorious
concept of “One Man, One Vote”.

Systematically, the Republic punished any who would've set up industries anywhere in the
East- save Bengal with its vast ports. Systematically, the Republic subsidized the drain of
Eastern metal, the destruction of Eastern forests, the exploitation of Eastern labour. Great
Nehru ensured that all roads from Oriya mines ran to Calcutta, not Bhubaneswar. Glorious
Indira ensured that Coal from Singhbhum lighted factories in Diamond Harbour and not
Ranchi. Heroic Rajiv ensured not one orange could be sold in Guwahati without Writers'
Building sucking it dry.

IT policies, One Window Clearances, Road networks…

Ha! They are nonsense! Bangalore would, presumably according to Quora's doyens, be
better served in creating a neo-Colonial hinterland to suckle it as ravenous lupine cubs lap
the blood from a dying doe's teats!

The prosperity of Calcutta is the prosperity of the Pit- built in the blood and bones of
millions of us lesser Children of India- Orissa, Bihar, Assam, Jharkhand, Chattisgarh-
labouring under the virtues of “Sustainable Development”, “Freight Equalization”, and “Five
17/85
Year Plans”. It is the culmination of all that maddens the just, that inflames the valiant, that
torments the Dharmic. It is the Chains that have bound this People, that have caked the
sinews, cracked the skulls, caked the nerves of the nations of the East whose Aquiline
Banners had once shaken the Walls of cities on the Sindhu. Like a gilded harlot, whose
allurements cover nothing but the disease-ridden charnel house within, the City struts itself
on the sewage-shores of a once-sacred Sea, calling to every Naxalite, Communist, and
Malcontent across the Continent- “FEAST”.

Bangaloreans would have to be deluded to emulate this.

1.9k Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

RecommendedAll
How were the first war elephants trained and tamed?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 30
Yeah, that's a pretty big mystery.

Now it's possible to capture wild Elephants by pure manpower and “break them in”, but it's
risky AF and the beasts have this irritating habit of dying of grief if you kill off their herd-
mates and enslave them. For this reason (among others), the noble ancestors used to
accord near-human intelligence to Elephants.

A man-eating tiger chowing down on half a village or a spooked horse bashing in the brains
of a groom could be ignored, but a man-killing Elephant had to be kept under observation.
They knew what they were doing.

Or that was how the thinking went.

Anyway…

So the traditional method of training Wild Elephants was to have semi-domesticated herds
on “Reserve Forests” continually observed by Forest Officers; no one went around playing
with Dumbo in the middle of Dandarkaranya back then unless they were either crazy or
suicidal. When need arose, they'd drive these semi-domesticated beasts into enclosures
using other Domesticated Elephants as bait/ coercion. Using force was discouraged; the
texts were clear- NOTHING short of Military might- disciplined Infantry preferably- could
bring down a charging Bull Tusker, the ones you really had to keep an eye on. I suppose
some variant of this gradual domestication of local herds was used to build up enough
camadiere between man and beast, in order to raise the first truly “domesticated” herds.
Zahir Dehlvi wrote about just how intelligent these creatures could be; Maula Baksh- who
was the Mughal 'Emperor's' Royal Elephant from the 1790s to the 1850s- was apparently a
murderous animal all had to be wary of, except for when children were involved or the
Mughal puppet had to ride him about town or to War.

Most of these captured “wild” elephants were usually released, both to facilitate
acquaintance with humans among the local Elephant population as well as to provide
ready breeding stock. Naturally the training grounds were usually adjacent to the forests
themselves.

18/85
Now modern knowledge states that it's impossible- or close enough for practical matters-
to breed Elephants in captivity- however the Classical Elephant Trainers did manage to pull
this regularly enough. I'm not sure though whether this was enough to maintain sustainable
populations in more urban/ semi-urban settings.

1.9k Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

Does Macnaghten's British invasion of Afghanistan in 1842 compare with Hannibal's
invasion of Rome?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 29
Macnaghten was dead by 1842, lelwa, put down like the gluttonous pig that he was.

OP is probably thinking of the 1842 Kabul Expedition under Major-general George Pollock of
the British Indian Army- or the “Company” Army, if you choose to swallow the fiction that
the East India Company actually ruled anything.

As for comparisons with Hannibal…

Well- both campaigns were disasters though I'm pretty sure old Hannibal didn't treat his
mercenaries half as badly as Pollock treated his Indian troops- thousands of whom either
died from exposure and lack of supplies or were enslaved by the Afghans as the retreating
British 'forgot' to inform them of the retreat. Hannibal also had a plan- subvert Roman allies
and take Rome- though it fell apart quickly. The British Army had none, save some vague
urge to murder-rape across Afghanistan to take the revenge against the Afghans for
shanking the last bunch of Tommys who'd come to murder-rape across Afghanistan.

Now the British had advantages- such as their surfeit of Artillery which let them take town
after town with little resistance, but Hannibal never had to deal with a full-blown jihad with
Peacefuls pouring in from as far as Turkey, lelwa.

Now the British did try to make it a religious war of sorts as well- especially with their trick
with the Gates of Somnath- but turned out that their silly Hindu sepoys had the irritating
habit of dying when ordered to march 30 miles a day for weeks in bitter cold without any
food. Hannibal, klutz and tyrant that he was, never had such high expectations of his men.

Anyway, all this is a moot point since old Macnaghten was dead anyway.

652 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

RecommendedAll
Which king ruled the greatest kingdom as measured by fraction of global population?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 29
George V of the United Kingdom of Britain and Ireland.

At the height of the British Empire, his government had dominion over more than 500
million people, out of an estimated global population of 1.5 billion.

No one else even comes close. All the crazy numbers thrown about for Rome or China are
pure nonsense, not that anyone will stomach it today without screaming blue murder.
There's no way in Hell Trajan or Taizong ruled over 30% of the World Population or 50% or
19/85
whatever crazy number everyone in the big colleges seems to be pulling out of their arses.

44% for Persia. Seriously?

Anyway, it's a moot point. The West and China are true Empires and demand a history
worthy of their imperial legacy- coupled with whatever underlying steppe psychoses go
along with it in case of the former, no matter how absurd it may sound and the average guy
is low IQ enough to swallow it.

635 Views · View Upvoters

Can a book based on Norse mythology become a bestseller in India?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 28
Why not?

I mean- the way things are, pretty much you'd write stands a good chance of going viral and
popular among the English-speaking classes of the Republic as long as the following
criteria are met.

1- It should pay obsessiance to the fancy concepts of Liberalism, Secularism, and

Humanism that our Constitution champions (unless when it's Hindus in Kashmir, Nagaland,
Arunachal, Mizoram, Kairana etc etc).

2- It should spare no opportunity to shit upon Hindu beliefs, traditions, and deities, under
the guise of “new interpretations” and “women’s rights”- banal nonsense that in any other
major faith would've sparked general rioting and nuclear-backed denunciations over half
the Earth.

Infact since I'm feeling generous and it's the gift-giving season among certain cultists from
the Mleccha lands, here's a free plot.

“Aurangzebus was a Viking, a secular and broad-minded follower of the Profit He-who-must-
not-be-painted, was brave, noble, and all those nice things. He was an intersectional feminist
who identified as a longboat, and ran a prosperous stall in the neighborhood sex slave
market where he oversaw an ever-growing business, driven primarily by his raids on the
vicious, inhuman, tyrannical, and blood-thirsty Hindus who'd cruelly taken over the lands the
Profit had promised the flying horse Aurangzebus possessed in his dreams. They were also
alive, which was a grievous sin in Aurangzebus' god's book- approved by the big colleges and
educated classes of the World. And so on and so forth…”

If that doesn't win the Sahitya Academy, I don't know what will.

614 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

Is it true that people say girls will love you if you have money?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 28
Rolfmao.

20/85
No one's going to be giving any honest answers for such questions- at least on Quora, your
(Liberal's) Answer to every (Politically Correct, as long it's not involving Hindus & Nazis)
Question.

So basically OP's question is whether Women are Golddiggers.

According to Wang and Cao et al from the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing (did you
really expect some Firang or Amriki University doing such a study?), Kayne West was right.

While no one's saying “women are golddiggers”, it was observed that ratings of
“attractiveness” were “around 1000 times more sensitive to salary for females rating males,
compared to makes females.” An increase in Salary by a factor of 10 sufficed to shift
female perception of men's “attractiveness” by more than 2 Standard Deviations.

Now Wang and Cao et al will be a breath of fresh air for anyone seeking a modicum of
honesty and plain-spoken English in such matters. Their Western counterparts, such as the
UCLA study by Fales et al, not only clutter their papers with unnecessary verbiage but
restrict themselves from stating the obvious Kaynesian Truth beyond vague statements
over “preferences for ‘steady income'”.

I recall a similar paper from Singapore but can't be bothered to search for it now. It said
pretty much the same thing- if you're a guy who isn't in, at least, the top 80% income cohort,
and preferably the higher echelons of such, you might as well cut off your balls and apply
for a commission in Daenerys' army.

Gods know things are looking bleak for Westeros in Dance of Dragons but they're way
worse for those who deny the words of our Prophet, St Kayne the West.

916 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

RecommendedAll
Why were the ancient armies (Roman, Persians, Greeks, etc.) so much larger than the
armies of the 700s-1800s?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 26
They lied. End of story.

At Tigranocerta, the Romans - Appian IIRC- claimed to have 10,000 men, two legions, with
which they defeated the Armenian forces numbering upwards of 300,000 with Kataphracts,
Heavy Infantry etc etc. 300,000 is actually on the average side of things, apparently the
Armenians had 700+K troops according to some commentators.

Yeah, right.

This wasn't the end of it. The Emperor Valens had around 15000 men at Adrianople during
his battle with the Goth whatshisname, who'd scrounged up around 10000 fighters from his
refugee camp numbering approx 30000 (he did get vital reinforcements later).

BTW- what do “modern skeptical” Firang historians say was the size of the Roman Army of
the East in the 4th Century? 500000? 650000?

21/85
Yeah, right.

At the end of the day, history is a set of lies agreed upon and, since we are all not islands
into ourselves, it means we are all subsconciously acting in aid of some grand end, which
only the utmost untermensch would confused with vague meaningless inanities like
“Truth”. Case in point being our great TWs on Quora- many of whom have so
enthusiastically defended the Bengal Famine in their time that I wouldn't be surprised that
they'd been, in a earlier birth, the British Army officers who'd architected it.

Anyway…

Around the turn of the century before the last, Hans Delbruck had covered some of the vital
aspects to be considered while reading accounts of such texts. I recommend his works for
those interested, but remember certain issues remain.

As for how to gauge a “plausible” size of armies, it's complicated and relies a lot on
subjective aspects but there are ways. I'll give an example.

Chodaganga Orissa, around the 13th Century, maintained a standing force of roughly 45K-
47K troops, mailed and equipped, with roughly 1 man for every 100 vatis of land. Merely
maintaining this force took up around a third of the total Chodaganga budget of around
1.5–1.6 crore madhas.

However this didn't mean Chodaganga generals actually fielded this force in battles. Bar a
few situations, the typical Oriya army would've most likely numbered around 10K-12K. It'd
need almost 600 vehicles to transport its requirements, a vast column strung out over 5
kms. The average 14th Century Oriya force could cover 35 kms a day but this was
dependent on multiple factors- including the solvency of the State. Two months of
campaigning with a 15K force would force Gajapatis to start borrowing, the full army would
exhaust the treasury even sooner. Entire wagon loads would be eaten. Like Sarala Das once
joked, such an army would drink streams and piss out ponds.

Personally, I'm really skeptical ANY Indian State could field a force of more than 150K at a
time. I see no reason to suspect it was different for the rest of the World. It's literally
impossible. Chevauchee and “living off the Earth” could manage higher numbers- but let's
recall the rule of thumb: for every extra Anikini, it'd have devastated an equivalent amount
of land during the march. So it's going to be murders, rapes, desertions, and a massive
moving famine. Charming.

Anyway, we know that the old Mediterranean Empires in Rome and Greece appear to
subsisting more upon whatever pop culture BS Quora TWs seem to pick up rather than
anything seemingly based on truth, so it's immaterial TBH.

1.3k Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

If Tolkein wrote his books today would they be as popular?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 26
Doubtful.

If he'd written his books today, they'd have called his writing overwrought, clunky, possibly
22/85
even that most horrifying of criticisms in our brave new postmodern world - “old-
fashioned”, gasp.

As it is, a lot of the praise Tolkien here is purely owing to general public disinterest in the
literature and society of the time.

His writing is stunning by postmodern standards- because postmodern writing is crap and
the upper classes of Britain, pre-War, appear to have been, almost universally, literary
virtuousos compared to English-users today.

His world-building owes much to the influence and work of those like McDonald and Lord
Dunsany, both of whom seem to be virtually unknown among Quora's experts for some
reason. Hell- Hindi High Fantasy AND Dark Fantasy predate Tolkien by over fifty years.
Tolkien might've made it respectable for the snotty high IQ classes- but that only came in
the 70s, decades after Oxford Dons were sitting down to discuss the Princess and the
Goblin.

His characterization is, politely speaking, subpar. The movies improved his heroes
significantly, which isn't something that can be said for many such adaptations. And the
Silmarillion is no excuse; I've seen lots of answers on Quora dissing on GRRM- but the
same folk seem to associate “dark & gritty” with “brilliance”. Jaime's character arc blows
any amount of Turins and Maedhross out of the water; Iron Age poets had more multi-
dimensional villains than Tolkien has.

And that's a huge part of the problem with the Silmarillion, in my opinion.

The basis of the entire text- the interaction between Feanor and the Valar- is so
fundamentally against my personal morals and world view that when I first read the text, I
simply couldn't make peace with the idea that we are supposed to see the guy as the
villain. The same philosophical dissonance persisted throughout the text- for example,
when the Elves screw over the dwarves and petty dwarves, and really disturbed me at
points- until I realised the basic truth about the books- they were NEVER meant to be read
by a Pagan.

Which is something I really should've realised earlier while reading LoTR- especially with all
the parts where serpent-worshipping, tea-loving, elephant-riding “evil men" Hindus are busy
playing lickspittle for the “Dark Lord”.

Of course it wasn't personal for Tolkien, given that he wrote worse about his African and
Chinese expies.

Typical White Catholic world view, TBH.

Which makes it really ironic that Tolkien's mass popularity stemmed initially from the
Counter culture lot in the West adopting his works as a flagstaff for European Paganism-
something he really hated. Lel. I'd say the First Mover advantage really worked for him.

To be honest, Tolkien's popularity is emblematic of the general decline in standards when it

comes to popular literature. This isn't just mere snobbishness on my part as some readers
might imagine; I doubt anyone considered Tolkien a “serious” writer back in the 60s or 70s.
23/85
Sanderson, of all people, is apparently an icon now, gods help us, and they tell us that
Erikson and Abercrombie can equal the likes of Wolfe and Herbert. I suppose we ought to
be grateful though; imagine the diversity hordes trying to stuff Magical HEMA and cringy
rapey subplots into their works like Mr Red Knight and his ilk do.

Anyway it's clear that the Golden Age of Fantasy is over. I suppose we may as well be
grateful for Tolkien after all…

650 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

Suryanarayanan R and Shivaprasad Poovandur upvoted this
Is there another writer on Quora like Abhilash Mohanty?
https://www.quora.com/profile/Abhilash-Mohanty-34
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 25
The Shastras say that there exists, on a plane beyond ours, a vast forest beyond human
comprehension with trees that tower into the skies and cast shadows darker than night
itself.

Every blade of grass and every single leaf, within this forest, is of sharp-edged steel.

The unfortunates who are lost in this great forest roam for ages, regreting their decisions in
life. They suffer from hunger and thirst, and thus feast on their own torn flesh. They suffer
from pain and fear, and thus devour their own living minds.

The forest is also abounding with vicious beasts of all kinds, all of which delight in the
suffering of these lost souls. Their beastial laughter echoes amidst the trees of steel and
the thud of their paws haunts the tormented souls during the perpetual twilight.

Pegun Cat also lives in the forest, where he miaows and plays all the time.

There is only Pegun Cat, Saar, and thus there are no other writers like Abhilash Mohanty.
There is only, ever, Abhilash Mohanty. Feel free to seek for him where you will.

428 Views · View Upvoters · Answer requested by Subhajeet Rath ( )

What was the reason for the defeat of the Marathas by the British?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 25
Ideology. Or rather, lack thereof.

If early 19th Century Marathas had been preaching the same vehement style of Hindu
Shahi that Shivaji and Sambhaji once had- forget the secular BS; both were so hardline on
these matters that the average Liberal today would've had a heart attack merely talking
with them- they'd have won handily.

See sections of the 80-point letter that'd once been sent to major Kings of the land…

24/85
25/85
26/85
Mark the vigour, mark the love for the gods, mark the derision for the Mleccha.

Even now some Hindus, even a few among the lamentably educated ones on Quora, have
realised the basic truth that there's no population on Earth more fundamentally good-
natured than the Hindu. Outside Liberal screeching, it's evident that no single Nation has
27/85
been as accomodating, as self-effacing, and as eager to please the Other.

That's nonsense. Remember Machiavelli. Fear or Love, what is the right choice?

Hatred for the Other is the basis of Human Civilization. Quorans ask these days- “why does
PewDiePie's fanclub hate us?”, “why do Whites persist in supporting jihadi states?”, “why do
Jews seem to detest us even though we've done then no harm?”

Somewhere amidst all the politiking, all the luxury, and all the prosperity, the Marathas lost
sight of the one great moving spirit of Humanity- Hatred for the Other.

We don't like to talk about such stuff; and indeed none are better at hiding their hatred of
the other than a certain <<REDACTED>>. The Far East peoples, being less experienced in
the Way of Empires, are therefore far more upfront with their Hate. But they're learning, and
some of the consequent changes in their patterns of interaction can be seen already.

Technology can be bought. Losses can be replaced. Cities can be rebuilt. But the lack of a
proper ideology will doom a people forever, as we can see with Hindus today.

Given the right ideology and true earnestness, Marathas would've not only crushed the
Angrej but the latter would've themselves been praising Pune as well as defending any
atrocities - or rather, improvements- the Marathas may have wroughg upon their
populations. Instead of having TWs mock dead Hindus and praise their blood-stained
Empire to the skies.

The only sin on Earth is losing. Everything else is justifiable. That's all.
28/85
3.3k Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers
RecommendedAll
Is Mughal history a dominant part of our syllabus only because not much is known about
the empires before that, or is it because of the political and cultural ideology of our first
leaders?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 24
On the contrary, there's been spectacularly little “research” per se done on the Mughal
Empire.

Most of what we “know” about the Mughal Empire primarily comes from the records of
Mughal Emperors/ officials themselves and that of contemporary European visitors to the
Continent. Almost nothing regarding the actual socio-economic system of the time, the
technological or economic situation, the records of contemporary Hindu powers, the actual
Bureacratic and Administrative details, etc etc has been either studied or had an iota of
focus laid upon them.

Habib & Moosvi, especially the latter, have -kind-of- worked on the “real” research but it's
the same thing with them as well.

Why so?

See- the basic truth is that the educated classes of Endia don't exactly care for the Mughals
or their Empire or their accomplishments per se, as much as they appreciate how
convenient a tool they are to bash Hindus with. I've earlier answered a question on Quora
regarding the technological developments during Mughal rule; they were no Medicis or
Industrial England, but Mughal-era Officers were fairly into new developments and
sciences.

The Mughal urbanization rate was 15% and climbing daily. The Middle Class was
strengthened. There were karkhanas larger than any factory in Europe. We hear a lot about
Ming and Qing bureacracy but the Mughal bureacracy arguably wiped the floor with them,
dubious “meritocracy” be damned; in no other country in the World was the Government in
a state of low key war with its citizens half the time and yet maintaining a fairly robust
Administration.

Agricultural yield was growing daily, education was becoming commonplace, and a overall
flowering of the economy was only being prevented by the usurious Mughal taxes. A key
reason for the sudden growth during Maratha times- the widespread construction of
temples, forts, and trade networks- is that the superstructure had already been built and the
Marathas weren't robber barons like the post-Akbar Mughals were, to have wasted it.

That's why stuff like Madison's is so irritating. Mughal India was a robber baron Economy,
yes, but it wasn't a subsistence economy by any means. Even contemporary observers
made wild nonsensical claims with no backing. Bernier claimed that Aurangzeb was so
awed with European powers that he'd admonish his teachers for not telling him more about
them; such behaviour would've not only been completely out of character, it's mere
expression invites the question of how Bernier got into the inner Palace Chambers in the
first place. Tavernier criticizes the Mughals for not paying attention to modern military
29/85
developments in Europe and claims they could be easily defeated by a European force a
few thousand strong. Again incorrect- barring their willful blindness on the matter of
Amrika, the Mughals obsessively followed the situation wrt the Ottomans in Europe. We
even have records where they're remarking how Turkish and Firang accounts never
matches. Mughal observers did visit Europe, there was discussion on how warfare worked
there- including a point I recall where some Mughal officer compared Gustav Adolf's
integration of light artillery into infantry cohorts to the similar style of using swivel guns in
India. Of course, a hundred years later when Indian and Western powers did start clashing,
almost all the initial conflicts until the mid 18tg Century were handily won by Indians.

The same pattern crops up again and again. Indian shipbuilders were allegedly useless but
it turns out even European trading companies were having their Ships of the Line built at
Surat by Jain builders. Indian factories apparently didn't exist but even as late as the
Napoleonic Wars, even 2nd string Indian powers can churn out thousands of rockets within
a matter of weeks, if not days.

The Mughals, as I've reminded people again and again, were monstrous and hold no little
part of the blame for the troubles India faced later. However they were also great in their
own right- surely a concept even Hari Puttar-reading Quorans can understand.

The consistent marginalization of Mughal history, coupled with the consistent tomtoming
of their alleged secular virtues- virtues whose non-existence the Mughals themselves were
at pains to point at through their deeds and writings- are the result of the same moving
spirit within the Endian Educated Classes that leads them to downplaying the grandeur of
the Gupta Empire as well as questioning the very existence of icons such as the Emperor
Vikrama.

Denial of Hinduness itself.

Hinduness plays out not only in its defiance of Peace, but also in denial of the Krischan
“Modern” world- a trait it shares, interestingly enough, with the forces of Peace. As such, it
is necessary for the Educated classes that the latter's natural antipathy for the pagan be
played up, not only to assist the Powers-that-be to wipe out the Hindu weltanschauung but
also to enforce their “domination” over the Peaceful and the Peaceful's over us.

That's what it is about, at its core.

As for the bandit Jabberlal Neckscrew, what words remain to be said? As the glorious
leader himself remarked while receiving the Balut Raita, quoting Ranbir from Padmavaat:
“Yeh Taufa humne khud Ko diya hai.”

2k Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

What was considered a large army in Ancient/Medieval times?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 23
All these numbers being thrown around in the other posts sound absurd at best, and plain
unbelievable in most cases.

30/85
When the Peacefuls invaded Orissa during the reign of Gajapati Bhanudeva II with an army
of an estimated 300K troops, it was kind of a world-shattering event for us Oriyas and the
closest our Realm came to extinction during the Chodaganga dynasty. It also marked the
furthest the Peacefuls ever got into Orissa pre-Mughals, with this VAST horde laying siege
on Cuttack itself.

What happened?

This vast army- the largest the Peacefuls had managed to raise in 200 years of Oriya-
Peaceful relations- with troops from all over the North and the Steppes, crumbled and was
annihilated by Oriya forces that probably totalled 40K at most.

Thing is, Medieval Transportation sucked. Medieval Organisation sucked. Medieval

Logistics sucked.

You could, like Napoleon and the typical Peaceful, raise vast numbers of men and keep
them around by raising and pillaging the locals. A peaceful horde, imported from the
Steppe, consisted of a bunch of amateurs in cotton shirts with only a bow and a knife, and
could be raised and maintained at a whim given enough incitement to slaughter and
enslave Kaffirs. You probably could have ten of them for the cost of a single Oriya
infantryman, mailed and equipped.

But they still had to eat. They still had to be maintained on the march. Too big & the
baggage train will kill the army. Too big, and disease will eat the army. Too big, and
confusion will take them during battles.

The numbers should also make sense.

Now exxagerations aside, we can get a good estimate of the mid 14th Century Oriya
economy. A hundred vati under cultivation could maintain a single Oriya soldier. Tolerating
for Oriya Civilization with Peaceful barbarism, we can extrapolate that something like the
Gupta Empire, in theory, could've maintained around 600K- 800K men in arms.

Peacefuls, with their shittier bureacracy and non-existent Administration, probably didn't
manage that.

Anyway you can see that the VAST numbers often thrown about by our Intellectuals don't
really make sense. The educated classes often blame our ancestors for exxagerations; but
where does their skepticism go when some lizard-eater says Prithviraja managed to dig out
200K men from gods-know-where?

Anyway, more “serious” texts like the lexicography of Amara, Kshatriyavarga, give pretty
moderate figures: An Ankini is around 10K infantry or 6K horse. An Akshuani 10 times that.

Readers can clearly observe how the standard Oriya forces- 47K odd considering the
theoretical standard (though I'm sure Cuttack could raise militia and such in a pinch) easily
fall into the typical three-fold division, in Rajahmundry, Radha, and Mahakantara with a
fourth at Cuttack itself with the Gajapati.

31/85
Thus, a typical Oriya professional “army” in the mid 14th Century numbered roughly 10K -
15K, roughly an Ankini in size considering some of the troops would've been on leave or
only on paper.

This force would've consumed upwards of 20 tons of rice each day, every day alongwith
even more supplies of animal provender. It'd require atleast 600 vehicles for a ten day
march between depots; almost 30 kilometres of roads to be cleared and fixed by engineers
for EVERY day of March. 60K Madha was the cost of merely one day stretch's march- this
when the entire Imperial budget amounted to approx. 1.5 crore Madha. In the 15th Century,
Oriya troops could march from Cuttack to Berhampur in a week; almost 35 kilometres
travel every day but a feat that would've literally bankrupted Orissa if tried for more than
two months or so.

Thus, I'm really skeptical that the “usual” Oriya army ever exceeded this number.

Of course, during campaigns and crises, the different armies probably combined - such as
the invasion during Gajapati Bhanudeva II's reign- but it's doubtful that it was the norm. For
one, I doubt there's enough Summer pasture in North Orissa for more than 15K- 20K horses,
and we aren't even considering Elephants.

Note that these numbers 10K- 12K - 15K - 20K also repeatedly figure in the Rajput Wars.

Anyway…

Here you can probably begin to see a possible reason why the Peacefuls collapsed…

A Turaka, a Rohila, a Turana, an Alina, or any other horse-fucking Mleccha is just a man.
Especially so, when he's off his half-starved pony. Then he's just a scared boy running from
a charging Oriya Cavalryman atop his grain-fed warhorse and, shortly thereafter, a bloody
smear on the ground as Oriya Zamindars clash with the real Peaceful heavyweights- their
Slave Cavalry with armament and horses equal to any Hindu.

In theory, Orissa would've NEVER been a match for the Peaceful Sultanates.

Neither the Keshari nor Chodaganga nor Routray could've lasted a month against the
Gupta. But it's evident that the vast hordes the Peacefuls would send against us were
Paper Tigers- with half-starved ghazis & chaff cavalry screening their well maintained
Professionals, possibly because they didn't have the bureacracy and logistics to raise an 8
Akshuani force like the Guptas might've done 500 years ago.

BTW the Pandavas themselves had 7 Akshuanis at Kurukshetra; no wonder the Gupta
Emperors thought that they were gods upon Earth.

1.2k Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

Are there any writings about the people who live in the southern Dark Lands of the LOTR
universe?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 22
The “Darklands” of Tolkien are in the east, not the south.

32/85
BTW- I'm writing all this from memory and I can't be bothered to google so OP will have to
do that himself.

So when Melkor fled to Middle Earth, he took over Eurasia and Ungoliant the Spider took
over Africa. The Darklands were the areas in the East which remained in the darkness for
some reason. Possibly he was inspired from Australia- but the imagery is pretty explicitly
kitsch White Man's Burden Africa.

There's nothing really specific and cleaned up so OP will have to wait till Christopher
Tolkien releases a proper text but in general, the tale of Earendel is what you want.

After enjoying the descriptions of “evil men” (cough - Indians- cough) from the “South” who
worship snakes (like yours truly) and ride elephants (like the ancestors of yours truly) and
their “evil men” brethren (cough- Chinese- cough) who went on horses Mongol-style, you
can read scattered references to all the vivid daydreams of the do-gooding British explorers
who civilized Africa with the word of Eru in one hand and the Gatling gun in the other-
volcanoes, tree men, pgymies, cannibals, the works.

So were they Sauron-worshipping “evil men” as well?

Considering we are having a full-on renactment of the British Raj and the Boxer Rebellion,
to go alongside Fantasy WW1/ Ottoman Wars, I see no reason why there can't be a fantasy
Scramble for Africa in the Legendarium.

Yeah, I'd rather stick to Warhammer Fantasy, even with the Sigmarines…

336 Views · View Upvoters

Siddharth Bhat upvoted this
RecommendedAll
How and why did the Algerians lose the Franco - Algerian wars from 1681 to 1688 to the
French and lose tens of thousands of their soldiers and civilians to the French while the
French suffered no fatalities and no casualties to the Algerians?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 22
You mean the 1800s thing probably; Algeria was firmly under the Turakas back in the
1600s.

Now the Firangs did suffer a few casualties but on the whole, OP is mostly right.

The French conquest of Algeria is actually a pretty standard example of how European
colonialization used to go around. The prevailing powers had been in decline since the
early 18th Century because climatic change had impacted warmer climes far more than
cooler ones- sparking off rebellions and increasing decentralisation. Europeans had far
more standardized systems in contrast to the Algerians whose crack troops used roughly
equivalent tech but were far fewer in number for this reason. And the Europeans had
Nationalism- the greatest religion of the Modern Age.

And of course, let's not forget the driving impulse of the 19th Century Firang state- to regain
the Superpower Status it'd possessed before the Angrej, Rus, and Almana shanked their
Emperor Napoleon.
33/85
1871 was what happened when they really went all out but in the 1830s, the Algerians were
no Prussians. When the French landed 35K men, all the Bey- a Turki “vassal”- had around
9K real troops, nearly all Janissaries who hated him, and a bunch of part-time ghazis and
pirates. On paper, he had equivalent troops. IRL all he had were huge bills and disgruntled
Amirs.

After a round of roughly inconclusive battles, the Janissaries left and the incompetent part-
timers, militia, and pirates melted in the face of the Firangs. The Bey, still getting hate from
Amirs- many of whom were openly talking of how glorious Firang systems were, chose
Surrender and Exile in Romaka rather than return to Kanstaniya and risk his neck.
Everyone's happy- the militia, the Bey, the Amirs, the locals.

Until the Firangs started massacring the Locals, hanging Amirs and Merchants and Ulemas
and basically anyone they didn't like the look of without trial, looting everything they saw,
and basically enslaving the entire Country.

But that's another story and I suspect won't get me many upvotes…

382 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

RecommendedAll
What proof do we have that Australia exists outside of paid government shills on the
Internet?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 22
None. Actually.

Here you're approaching the problem of the unborn birds upon the tree, as described in the
Upanishads, and the fundamental question regarding Proof by Inference that troubled
philosophers for so long.

Infact if OP were a brain in a cat with a constant simulation running around him, he'd have
no way to break free of his containment either, and like the bird, he will eat the sweet and
sour fruits of the senses.

There's a solution to this but it doesn't concern us now.

240 Views · View Upvoters

You upvoted this
RecommendedAll
According to the 10% law of the food chain, top carnivores receive the least amount of
energy compared to all other trophic levels, then how are these organisms the strongest
among all?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 22
Arjan Singh, the naturalist, once tried to tabulate the cases where there was an aggressive
encounter between the apex predator of Indian forests- the Tiger- and the largest grass-
eating whimpy loser- the ridiculous Ele-Fat.

Of course, there was no contest.

34/85
The Strongest of them all- the Tigers- wiped the fl…

No, actually in every single case, it were the Elephants who smashed, gored, stomped,
kicked, and- in one case- chewed the Tiger to death. There was a case where a pair of
courting Tigers did succeed in bringing down an Elephant over a running battle lasting an
entire night but I remember him mentioning that the incident was plain weird.

Stop being a spoilt brat and eat your greens.

321 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

RecommendedAll
Some paintings which look like random strokes by a little kid are auctioned off at huge
prices. Can someone clarify what is special about these paintings that makes them so
great?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 22
Nothing “real” TBH.

Artsy stuff is something referred to in economics as “Veblen Goods”- contradiction to

“normal” law of demand- wherein Demand increases with Price, and vice versa.

Now there are multiple “legit” reasons why such goods come about- perceived quality or
mere Brand perception- but in case of Artsy stuff, I personally doubt it's as innocent. Thing
is- when we consider Art Valuation, NONE of the stakeholders involved are truly
independent or have any incentive to be objective.

No one- neither the Artists themselves nor the Galleries nor the Critics nor the Auction
Houses nor the Buyers- has ANY incentive to be truly objective or to do ANYTHING other
than over-value the “Art”.

The Art World is particularly opaque, even among Velben markets, since one can- given
enough Data- quantify the value of other such products but doing so for a Painting or an
Artist's ability is all but impossible, given there's actually nothing “real” to base it on.

The field of High Value Art itself has such high barriers of entry, such vague requirements
for success, and such mercurial gatekeepers that any sensible observer would rightly
brand it “rigged”. And yet there are none, for you'll always have armies of yes-men rushing
around to justify their expensive Arts Degrees, crowing about how Pollock's vomit-stain
paintings actually comprise of Fractals or how Hirst's dots are genius instead of being the
assault on people's intelligence that they are.

344 Views · View Upvoters

You upvoted this
How was ancient sleeping medication made, what ingredients were used, and could any of
them actually knock someone out cold?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 21

35/85
The question topics include “Ancient Greece” and “Ancient Rome”. What part of my
repertoire leads OP to believe I'm interested in those fields is beyond me. Also I don't think
there are any Ayurveda experts on Kora, barring the odd Republican fraud, so I suggest OP
go on pilgrimage to Haridwar or such places where humble Hindus gather to learn more on
such things.

Also even if I'm answering this, it's not like I've read the accounts of Sushruta or Charaka or
Dibyanath Das or the other saints. I've got a fairly good memory & I take note of the quirky
stuff mentioned in the Classical plays & records I'm fond of, but I don't actually know
anything about half the stuff I write.

Anyway…

Basically Early Classical and Classical surgeons plied the patients with Alcohol and Opium
until they passed out. They'd also make compounds of Arista, Papaya, Katuchotti, etc but
I'm skeptical whether they'd actually work without half-killing the guy. In theory, I've read
that Arista can give a deep dreamless sleep, but it was also used to kill people, lol.

Don't ask me about their Latin names, I don't have a single clue.

384 Views · View Upvoters · Answer requested by Kartik Singh

RecommendedAll
At the end of World War II, Japan was defeated, its market was fragmented and the
Japanese had experienced unthinkable destruction. How in the world did Japan manage to
become one of the greatest economic powers on the planet in such a short time?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 21
Japan was an industrialized and literate country, having escaped both Western
Colonialization and West-backed Internal strife purely by virtue of Balance of Powers. For
the same reason, they had high assabiyya and multiple internal power locii.

India hasn't had either of the latter two since the late 1800s. China only managed to repair
their's in the 1950s-60s as the CPC consolidated.

So the basics were already in place.

What remained was funding, which was provided by the Amrikans, because they soon
realised that they didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of recouping the USD 700+ million
in cash and goods they'd demanded off Tokyo as reparations otherwise, following the War.
As the 50s progressed, pouring Amrikan money into the Japanese “unsinkable Aircraft
Carrier” also became essential for countering Soviet influence.

That's why so many Japanese movies set in urban settings circa 1970s or 80s seem oddly
reminiscent of the Amrikan Golden Age, or as is often remarked today- modern Corporate
Japan resembles Mad Max style Amrikan Corporate culture. It's all been adapted, along
with the money.

South Korea and China, much as they'd hate to admit it, have used the EXACT same model-
only this time, it were the Japanese funding them instead. This is a vital point so many
Indian Nationalists and even Dharmic NrXs like myself often forget while discussing late
36/85
20th Century economic trends. Power had to come from somewhere; those who don't feed
on or are fed by others have to eat themselves, like Stalin's USSR did.

Anyway that's another story.

664 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

Is Jaichand Rathod wrongly framed by historians as he helped Prithviraj in the Second
Battle of Tarain?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 20
Very likely, yes.

Contrary to what the educated classes say, it's pretty evident that Hindu rulers of the Late
Classical/ Early Medieval were not only united in their hatred of the Mleccha for most part,
but also extremely monocultural to a degree the modern Intellectual would bemoan as
“Brahmanical Patriarchical Nazism”.

One can clearly see how spheres of Power had evolved on ethnic lines, with the
Chahamana North, Gahadavala Madhyadesha, and Chalukya West- all of whom were
usually related to each other in some way. Warfare along these States were primarily
restricted to squabbles over border feudatories with the sort of Total War prevalent among
Oriyas and Southerners being relatively rare.

In other words, the Northern Kings had, in response to the preceding 500 years of near-
constant warfare with the Mleccha- created a system that explicitly prized the Security of
their Peoples, restricted inter-Bharata violence, diverted resources from centralised Total
War to a more defensive and diffusive system, and - very importantly- led to a social milieu
where Martial Honour made it obligatory to fight the Mleccha.

Now we know that there used to be great libraries detailing the history of - what we'd call
today- middle “Rajput” kingdoms (the terms are anachronisms as my usage of the “real”
names of these Dynasties demonstrate) at Varanasi, Vallabhi, Bhita and other places where
scholars gathered… But apparently they never existed since the Intellectuals say that
Hindus arose from Hitler's bunker in 1945 CE.

Anyway…

Jayachandra Gahadavala, in the late 12th Century, HAD to march in defence of the
Chahamana.

Not only because Maharaja Prithviraja was his own son-in-law but because prevailing
societal law over all the North and West DEMANDED the prevailing Sovereigns loathe
Mlecchas and kill them whenever they get the chance. This was, by no means, a new
phenomenon. In the words of the Mlecchas themselves, they had no fiercer foe than the
Gurjara Pratihara Emperors.

(Trivia: “Pratihara” literally means “Chamberlain”. Why would an Imperial House claim
descent from a family of mere Chamberlains serving someone else? The answer is obvious
but an intellectual will never get it.)

37/85
At any rate, the usual Intellectual line- parroted from Mleccha hearsay or unreliable folk
tales- that Maharaja Jayachandra was a traitor to Dharma holds no water. Even if the latter
disliked his Chahamana kin, he had to march nonetheless or his own feudal lords would've
either deposed him or used his perceived cowardice as an excuse to either revel or crown a
pretender. As such, we observe that the period following the collapse of the Chahamana
was followed by bloody warfare across the North.

Jayachandra himself fell within a single year of the sacking of Delhi, at a location that'd
come nominally under Chahamana control. Implying that he was, in no manner, neglecting
his duties to his Throne and possibly striving for revenge against the Mlecchas for the
wrongs they're always committing.

The likeliest reason for Maharaja Prithviraja's defeat, in my opinion, is his own merciful
nature which not only let the Mlecchas escape their deserved retribution but would've also
provided them with vital eyewitness intelligence regarding Hindu preparedness and
strategy. A more hard-headed ruler like Maharaja Anangabhimadeva III Chodaganga
wouldn't have had a second's thought over brutally torturing some captured Mleccha
general to death.

As Uncle Janardhan Stalinacharya said: “No Turaka Mleccha to fight in 1191 CE, no
question of discussing who betrayed whom in 2018 CE.”

BTW I'm very skeptical that the Gahadavala were Rathores. Rao Naths historically came out
prominence over what we'd call Solanki-Chahamana borders, possibly as a direct result of
the fall of Delhi. The oldest known Rathore King is a certain Rao Simha who took over
Barmar around 20–25 years after Maharaja Prithviraja's death.

1.7k Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

If you could list 5 must read books according to you, what would be they?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 19
To what end?

Reading books for self improvement is not the same as reading them as an indulgence. I'll
just rank my personal must-reads, but mind that they're all meant for a particular type of
mindset. You're, in all probability, not the type to enjoy them.

1- Decline of the West

2- The Shanti Parva

3- Sex and Culture

4- Name of the Rose

5- Moby Dick

883 Views · View Upvoters

What is the value of Indian 1/12 1886 Anna (old Indian coin)?
Govind Sharma

38/85
Answered Dec 19
Not much. I suppose you can get INR 30–40 for it but it's practically worthless in real
terms. 19th Century coins are common, especially post-1857 ones.

199 Views · View Upvoters

You upvoted this
RecommendedAll
What is the least known about war in history and who were the participants?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 19
If it's the “least known about War” in history then it stands to reason none of us would be
knowing about it, wouldn't it? Maybe the armies of the Winged lions once laid siege upon
the Sky Fortresses of the Kinnaras back in the Dwapara Yuga, who would I know?

I suppose some of the more high IQ Quora writers can dig up the story of some obscure
powwow in some godsforsaken corner of the World but the question seems to be kind of
pointless in the opinion of a simpleton like myself.

262 Views · View Upvoters

You and Ishaan Nidharia upvoted this
Who is best warrior from Hindu mythology?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 19
I usually don't answer such semi heretical questions since I've too much concern for my
immortal soul and don't want to risk my comfy seat in the gilded halls of Indra.

However a brief scan of most posts in this thread till date have led me to do so, lest some
innocent Hindu kid- assuming any of the sort exist these days- walks away with a wrong
idea about the Shastras, thus jeopardizing his own potentially luminous being.

Anyway…

Reading the Bhagavada Gita, it's clearly mentioned that Shri Krishna has stated:

“Among warriors, I am Rama.”

Anyone who disagrees on this matter is not only mistaken, but plain delusional and bound
for some horrible Hell. The rants of the usual malcontents- feminists, communists, liberals,
the educated classes in general- don't matter. Shri Rama is the jewel of the Raghuvansha-
luminous among men, and revered by devas, danavas, gandharvas, manavas, and all the
diverse beings inhabiting this World. End of story.

Jai Jagannath.

801 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

RecommendedAll
In the list of the top 5 kings of Odisha, whom would you include?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 19
Such rankings are meaningless.
39/85
Gajapati Purushottamadeva II is no less honoured and heroic a personality for having been
smashed into the dirt again and again by the treacherous and scheming Mughal swine,
than any of his illustrious ancestors were for glutting the crows of the Continent with
Mleccha corpses and raising cities and temples the likes of which Hindus will never build
again.

Right or wrong, our Gajapatis are Gajapatis, the mortal regents of our Lord upon the Blue
Mountain, and their deeds, be they to whichever end, were deeds befitting their hallowed
names.

Jai Jagannath.

259 Views · View Upvoters · Answer requested by Nihar Ranjan Nanda

You and Hamvira Mohapatro upvoted this
RecommendedAll
Why did Gajapati Prataparudra Deva lose possession of so many forts to Krishna Deva
Raya?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prataparudra_Deva#cite_ref-10
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 19
There are certain metaphysical and ur- Civilizational reasons which were the actual cause
but I'm yet to build a wide-enough fan following on Kora to really start discussing them so
I'll just describe the more prosaic and overt reasons which are more likely to get me
followers.

Basically Orissa was so incredibly over-stretched that even relatively small problems could
compound into serious crises.

Ever-increasing Peaceful population had not only led to a near-constant state of War in the
North, it'd also led to a collapse of Trade Networks that Oriyas had traditionally depended
on. This had gone on with a corresponding bureacratic and agricultural contraction that led
to Wars not only with the North Peacefuls but the Southern Hindus as well. This impacted
Oriyas far worse than it impacted the other two cohorts, since Orissa- almost uniquely
among most Hindu nations- lacks a true large-scale riverine drainage system across the
land, a problem that was earlier manageable with canal networks connecting the Godavari,
Mahanadi, and Damodara but which appears to have fallen into disrepair during the last
days of Routray rule.

I suspect that of the Nine Crore citizens Gajapati Kapilendradeva claimed to rule over, less
than a third were Oriya by blood.

As a result, for almost 200 years, Orissa was not only becoming increasingly militaristic, its
old more bureacratic Chodaganga System had shifted to a more “feudal” Routray system,
since the latter was cheaper to run, more response to external threats, and more robust to
external shocks- such as the Tughlaq campaign till Cuttack during the reign of Gajapati
Bhanudeva II two centuries before Prataparudradeva's reign. The maintenance of such a
Kingdom demanded more and more martial Gajapatis, even with the dejure state of Orissa
as a Theocracy acting as a pressure valve for discontent.

40/85
What does seem to have sparked the final collapse though, appears to have been a series
of poor monsoons, beginning from the middle of the 15th Century which, I suspect, was on
account of the phenomenon known as the Little Ice Age in the Firangistans. Of course,
studies are lacking since our great Intellectuals are incompetent degenerates. A certain Dr
Liddle from Angrejistan had conducted a study on this stuff though and I'd mailed her
asking for more data on this last year but I never got a reply.

Anyway…

We know that 13th Century Orissa was probably the best administered nation in the
Continent with every inch of land accounted for. However this doesn't seem to be the case
come the 15th Century; vast stretches in Mahakantara are seemingly abandoned. There are
extensive lengths of wilderness right outside Berhampur and Bhadrak. This is despite a
massive building and development programs under the Routrays, including what was
probably the first mass education initiative in any Bharata State.

So, we have:-

1- Declining Crop yields amidst Water scarcity.

2- Some sort of Demographic decline among Oriyas.

3- A political system that increasingly relies on Martial victories by the Gajapati to shore up
Administrative stability which is increasingly dependent on cash-strapped Feudal lords who
can't trade anymore.

In the hands of exceptional Gajapatis like Kapilendradeva or Purushottamadeva, this

could've worked but by the reign of Gajapati Prataparudradeva, possibly the situation had
detoriarated too far to be salvaged. Of course, note that Oriyas were FAR more
overstretched during Gajapati Prataparudradeva's time than we'd ever been in history after
the reign of the Emperor Kharavela, more than a millennia earlier.

And the entire peacenik BS by this wanderer named Chaitanya didn't help either. I won't say
much about him for the sake of politeness but no serious Oriya should bear any respect for
this alleged godman.

Nonetheless do note that the Historical Core Oriya territories were scarcely touched, even
at the nadir of Gajapati Prataparudradeva's reign. In theory, he was still reigning over
territories far greater than any Keshari or even most Chodaganga rulers had.

The deathblow to both the Routray line, and the Oriya State in general, came later. But that's
another story.

Jai Jagannath.

Back in our early civilizations, how did people from different empire/country interact with
each other without knowing a common languages before hand?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 19

41/85
They found someone who did or managed with sign language or such until such an
individual could be found.

Several folk have a knack for languages, and given the nature of Human migrations, it's
usually not difficult to find a population with a lesser degree of linguistic drift from one's
own compared to that between the original two tongues in question. In case of completely
different populations- such as the pre-Columbian Americans and Spanish, it might be a tad
more difficult but nothing time and curiosity can't fix.

This is also where Scholarly Tongues and Trade Pidgins played a major factor. Until the
19th Century, ALL educated Hindus had to know Sanskrit without exception, and as a result
even regional tongues had so many Sanskrit loanwords that the average 19th Century
Hindu would've been a defacto unperson in our great modern colleges.

369 Views · View Upvoters

You upvoted this
What has been the relationship between ancient India and ancient Japan? Have these two
come in contact in ancient times?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 18
Ancient times?

Japanese Civilization, as far as the term can be used, began roughly in the 2nd Century
BCE. While we do hear from Japanese kingdoms and such from the 3rd Century CE, these
mentions only really become concrete in any way post the 6th - 7th Centuries.

Thats when the Late Classical Period of Bharata History begins, a full two millennia after
“Ancient India”.

You still get a few common links but no more. The standard “Japanese” temple is basically
a particular form of early Classical Hindu Architectural style for all purposes, of the style
favoured by the Kiratas, pre-Classical Kashmiras, and certain Dravida peoples. The oldest
Buddha statue in Japan, which is supposed to have entered their islands in the 7th Century,
is a 5th Century Gupta figurine from the Mathura school.

Both influences clearly went through Chinese intermediaries with zero sign of direct
contact. Classical texts don't even mention Japan, even though they had a rough idea of the
political situation in contemporary Korea or Garyadesha.

That's your answer. There was zero interaction between Ancient India and Ancient
Japanese, if only because “Ancient India” ended long before large scale human settlement
in Japan.

476 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

RecommendedAll
As a Hindu, do you feel ashamed when you receive fake news and hate propaganda
against India’s minorities in your WhatsApp and other social media?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 18

42/85
Since I'm not a dribbling baboon with an IQ of 50 who delights in incest, raping choir boys,
and fucking goats…

No.

If anyone ought to be ashamed, it should be the maniacs who've been spending the past
multiple centuries murdering everyone who doesn't want to worship the odious so-called
god of theirs, a creature that delights in murdering babies and slaughtering cities.

The early Aryas would've branded this beast a Demon and its cults anathema, and not
loosened their mail and unstrung their bows until this “god” and his fanclub had been
consigned to Asipatravana, but we Hindus are cursed with “modernity” and “Civilization”
and “Secularism” now, and must sit around singing kumbaya as we are, systematically,
wiped out nation by nation in what once used to be our holy land of Bharatavarsha.

As it is, 90% of these degenerate hordes voted for a personal mudhole to wallow in, the
land for which they carved out of the living soil of the Continent forged by Emperor Bharata.
The First Emperor, blessed be his fire-hallowed name, left us all, his heirs, this great land so
that we could preserve Dharma but the great enlightened educated Hindu has fucked it all
up and deserves a stint in the forest himself. Forever.

Any sane peoples would've answered the 1947 nonsense with blood and steel but the
modern Hindu has not only paid the Danelaw, he's saddled himself with the two breeds of
most verminous pack of rodent-like vandals in history, and is sure to be eaten out of home
and hearth soon, all the while hearing sanctimonious nonsense such as this question.

All that remains is to dig out shrouds and prepare for Shaka. Jai Shri Rama.

619 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

RecommendedAll
What does ackee fruit taste like?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 18
“Buttery / Creamy with a mild bitter-sweet aftertaste.”

At least that's what I recall reading in the magazine Science Reporter as a child, back when
some nutcase in Calcutta had tried poisoning his wife with it.

174 Views · View Upvoters

You upvoted this
RecommendedAll
Why do archer soldiers in the Medieval period shoot arrows into the air to eliminate
enemies during a battle?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 17
I don't think it was the preferred mode of Archery in battlefields.

From study of the Shastras and certain contemporary novels and plays, it can be observed
that the preferred kill-shot, or at least the one most archers were recommended to practice
constantly, was to fire a calftooth or leafblade arrow at charging enemies, preferably at eye
43/85
level, with a 80–90 kg drawweight bow.

Note that neither are “armour-penetrating” arrows.

High Trajectory shots were discouraged since they presumably had a tendency to “bounce”
off Helmets, typically thickest at the top. Even Armour-penetrating Finehead arrows were
more likely to get stuck in Armour than carry through and pierce the flesh. They might have
been used but the technique itself is kind of treated as a fluke for games and such.

355 Views · View Upvoters

You, Shivaprasad Poovandur and Shrinivas S upvoted this
RecommendedAll
Do any castles remaining in the 21st century still have moats?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 17
Rolfmao.

My ancestral family house in our village used to have a moat of sorts until around two
decades ago when the 1998 cyclone turned everything into putty. It was a pretty basic
ditch- the water inlets had silted up over the years under British Raj- but you couldn't just
hop over it at will.

My ancestors, small-time Zamindars, had probably built it in early modern times to deter
Peaceful raiders from assaulting our home proper- though I'm pretty sure any real army
passing by saw our folk fleeing to the Lake and staying put in the swamps and islands for
weeks.

Moats and brick towers used to be common in Bharata villages at one point; most were
demolished following the Arms Act under the British Raj. And we know the Republic hates
armed Hindus far more than any London Uffasar did.

The closest major Fortress to Bhubaneswar with a moat is… The Lingaraj Temple. Rolfmao.

The Chodagangas fortified it in the 12th century when they realised that the Peacefuls were
actively trying to wipe out all Pagans and pagan temples and targetting their attacks upon
our temples proper. The moat has mostly been paved over but the Walls, the major inlets
and drains, and some of the feeder lakes remain. They're all being destroyed by the
Republic though- like the real Chandaka fortresses used by Oriya garrisons once.

The largest still extant Moat system in the vicinity is at the Barabati Fort Complex, built by
the Kesharis in the 11th Century. It's not much of a Complex TBH; the walls and the
outlying fortifications, including the glacis were dismantled by the British and whatever
remains is being chipped away by the Republic bit by bit but the Moat remains.

475 Views · View Upvoters

If you were Thorin II Oakenshield, what would you have done differently after taking over
Erebor?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 17
I assume I, as Thorin, have complete knowledge of the book canon…
44/85
The “good” peoples of Middle Earth are all low IQ morons so I'd just pay them off and then
give the call for all and any mercenaries to rally to my banners, possibly buy off a few
Easterling bands since they seem to the only ones (apart from Orcs) actually having any
babies (not getting into the entire Tolkienian Catholic BS about inherent evil here ).

Also, the original battle plan by the Three Allied Armies was pretty solid. It wasn't until the
goblins and wargs counter-flanked them that shit hit the fan. I'd advise my Elven and
Human allies to keep one wing in reserve and pay off the Ravens to keep track of the
movements over the Spurs, possibly build field fortifications around the river since
Dwarves are such awesome engineers that they can fix a decrepit fortress within a week.

Should be an easy curbstomp for the Allies, even without the Eagles. And if Beorn arrives,
all the better. Let's not forget that he was the one who broke the Goblins in the end.

Then I'll settle to playing Kingmaker for the East with my unending wealth. It's not possible
to defeat Sauron militarily but might as well give old Denethor the real MVP a helping hand
in the story.

373 Views · View Upvoters

RecommendedAll
Can we escape Kali Yuga with the help of the Bhagavad Gita?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 17
Originally Answered: Can we escape Kali Yuga with the help of the Bhagavad Gita?
No. The Shastras are quite clear that the decline of Dharma and the descent of our Lord is
inevitable at the end of Kali Yuga; and in his lotus hands will be a sword of great wrath and
exceeding sharpness; and at a mere thought will armies of warriors and weapons and
vehicles rise; and thus that luminous being of great Intellect will bring an end to all things.

That was, more or less, the exact translation of the relevant verses BTW. In a nutshell, we
are fucked.

Also- note that almost every prophecy listed just prior to this- the desertification of the
Sindhu, the overrunning of lands by Mlecchas, the increasing barrenness of women, the
maligning of the Ancestors, the prospect of declining crop yields, hatred of Brahmins,
impending climate change and other meteorological disasters… All are or have come true
either partially or in whole.

So why read the Bhagavada Gita?

Because Virtue in Arya Dharma lies not in the deed, but the doing.

Not only is it possible to acquire greater virtue than was the norm in earlier Yuga by earnest
belief, it is even possible to strive to reverse the flow of Kali. Countless kings and lords
boasted of re-establishing Satya Yuga within their lifetimes and reigns, most famed of
whom was Emperor Vikrama of Malwa. As recently as the 19th Century were vast tracts of
the Continent restored to the virtues of Dharma by the actions of valiant Pagans labouring
against the Mleccha.

The finest guide to such deeds is the Bhagavada Gita, the Song of Shri Krishna that he has
45/85
bestowed upon us. And those who perform their duties, in accordance to the Shastras, will
surely be counted among the valiant within the Faithful in this life and sit alongside the
great heroes of history in the gilded halls of Indra in the next.

708 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

RecommendedAll
How powerful was the king of Magadha known as Dhana Nanda?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 17
As a rule of thumb, anyone who controls Madhyadesha is already one of the Greats of the
time.

Firstly, it was a full-fledged Empire. Magadha had been attempting Continental dominance
for more than a millennium before any Nanda was heard of, and the Empire had already
passed through three dynasties, each of whom had contributed to its growth. All three,
despite leaving copious records, used to be regarded as “mythical” by our worthy
Intellectuals since it's more or less accepted Academic thought that from Hitler's bunker
was the Arya born.

Anyway, they've dug up enough to guarantee at least two of these pre-Nanda dynasties and,
if by some miracle Hindus survive until 2050, the third will also be proved beyond doubt.

Anyway…

The Emperor Dhana was, as I've said earlier, one of the Greatest Lords of the Earth with
dominions stretching over Madhyadesha, Mahakantara, Kalinga, the reaches of Samtata
and Kamarupa, Banga and Anga, Chedidesha, and possibly Andhra. His family had presided
over the growth of the largest burecracy ever built in Bharata and massive infrastructure
development- such as the canal stretching from Mahanadi delta to the Ganga at the very
least as repaired by the Emperor Kharavela four hundred years later.

The Nandas were much maligned by Scribes in the early Classical period, likely on account
of Maurya influence- a situation Indian Intellectuals would usually protest but, in this case,
approve of since the primary Maurya figure in our histories, the Emperor Ashoka was
marked by his adherence to the teachings of Shakyamuni, a rather unorthodox preacher,
while the Nandas were universally sticking to the more accepted schools of Hindu thought.

PS: The Emperor Ashoka was far more orthodox a Hindu than either you or me. The Buddha
himself was far more orthodox a Hindu than either me or you. Wait for my dear friend VH's
book titled “The Buddha was against Caste and Misogyny and other jokes you can tell
yourself.”

576 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

What was the most number of independent states that simultaneously existed within the
Holy Roman Empire?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 17

46/85
There are no real estimates of just exacly how many independent political bodies existed at
any point within the Holy Roman Empire, partly because the definitions and degree of
sovereignty of individual statelets was often vague and partly because ownership of
territorial enclaves was often a contentious and controversial matter. I'll be following this
answer myself in case someone better acquainted with the topic than me is able to provide
a more accurate estimate.

At the end of the 17th Century, the Kleinstaaterei was arguably at its greatest, with over
1800 individually demarcated territorial stretches divided amongst around 300 to 350
more-or-less sovereign political bodies.

226 Views · View Upvoters

RecommendedAll
Do Britishers feel guilty about atrocities committed by their forefathers in the past in
various countries during their rule?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 16
Most followers are Hindus- or rather, Atheists with Hindu names considering the kind of
Indians who frequent Kora… And how someone can answer such questions from the
perspective of other nationalities is beyond me. Cosmopolitanism is the delusion of
degenerates; no man can escape his birth.

Anyways.

As Ferguson's poll on this very matter showed: No.

Infact most are pretty much pleased as punch about their murderous Colonial Empire and
can't wait for it to come back. Lelwa.

As they should be.

From day one, you've been told that the law of Kali Yuga is Matsya Nyaya- big fish eating
smaller fish. From day one, you've been told about the parable of the Wolf and Lamb- not
that ridiculous Almana version but the original Hindu story they took it from- where the Wolf
rips the Lamb from limb to limb and eats it's still-beating heart. From day one, you've been
told again and again that the Kali Yuga is terrible and you must be terrible yourself or it'll
only be moral for others to destroy it. The very minute Indra was born, he demanded of his
mother who the notorious of the Age were, and then went and beat them to death with a
broken chariot wheel, but some racist bald sex-obsessed luddite in a loincloth has told
Hindus that virtue lies in women, being raped by Peacefuls, lying quietly and not distribing
their tormentors overmuch.

Like the Pandit in the sinking boat, you're engaged in telling the boatman the morally right
way of jumping into the river, lest the fish are disturbed.

The hunter of the Malayavat told Bhima thousands of years ago that to live was to kill and
to kill was to live. But you, the great Hindu, are more virtuous than a Pandava, more
luminous than an Aditya, more wise than Chanakya, and more illustrous than Emperor
Vikrama himself.

47/85
Why shouldn't be the… what kind of nonsense is the word “Britisher”… be proud of their
Empire?

Millions died in each of their famines as they forced half the farms to grow opium and
exported the rice in the other half, but the pox of existence for our great leaders and
Intellectuals is the poor Brahmin in his temple. In his words and by his own hand,
Aurangzeb and his fellow Mughals boasted how they've destroyed Hindu temples and
looted Hindu wealth, but the root of all troubles is the Rajput and the Bania who kept faith
as the nation burnt.

Why shouldn't be your “Britishers” be proud?

Some dimwit who'd never been to the Continent cooked up an Aryan Invasion theiry and
our great educated classes swear its truth.

Modern Kannadas are engaged in changing prayers to Tipu Sultan, Jihadi and mass
murderer extraordinaire, but the East India Company ended his reign of terror.

Modern Keralites can't help spewing bile against Hinduism and cheering Peacefuls ac they
hacked them to death, stole their property, and raped their women- but the British Raj put an
end to this crimes.

Clive and co murdered half of Tamil Nadu but some imbecile with a skull - one of their great
leaders - wants to go to meet Elizabeth II for “help” against murderous Hindus since white-
skinned Christ was more Dravidian than Shri Rama whom they garland with shoes.

Kashmir went from the stronghold of Shiva, Surya, and Saraswati to a land with less than
10% Hindus but the minute the British left, it turned full-fledged Caliphate as the great
Indian Army looked on and no one cheers this more than our educated modern enlightened
Kashmiri pandits.

For hundreds of years, Pune fought and suffered under the Peacefuls and British buntge
anger of the modern Maratha is against the Brahmin and none else- doesn't matter that it
was a Brahmin who brought them to their peak of power.

Lahore was the Paris of the East, and every four shops and industries out of five was
owned by Hindus and Sikhs. None of that wealth- most of it earned under the British- saved
any pagan from death or destitution but modern. Hindus believe that drinking Chai and
preaching Vikas will make them Arhanta.

Yes, the British massacred millions of Hindus. So what? The Sarayu turned red when
Mulayam, hero of the educated classes, told the great Indian police, paid by Hindu money,
to slaughter Karsevaks.

Yes, the British had kangaroo courts where no Hindu could get justice. So what? Our great
<<REDACTED>> wake up at 2 AM to hear appeals from outright Jihadis while Hindus
languish years in prisons under nonsense like 498a. Wait till the Minority Rights Protection
nonsense comes, and see what happens.

Yes, the British looted trillions of rupees from Hindus. So what? Hindus pour money into an
army which sits around, jerking off, as Hindus are systematically cleansed in State after
48/85
State. Is an IAS officer superior to an ICS one just because his skin is browner? Clearly not,
the ICS officer wouldn't have allowed the Chinese to enter Tibet, let alone Arunachal
Pradesh.

Let's not speak of Bengal. What can one say about them that remains to be said!

Murderous pack of looters the British Raj might've been but how exactly is the great
Republic of India better for Hindus?

WW2 India was more industrialized than most European nations but the great leaders of
the Hindus shanked the Bania in the side. Naxals and NGOs and Missionaries have overrun
the villages but the great leaders of the Hindus drove Zamindars off their lands. Brahmins
are to blame for every crime under the sun but Heavens forbid we say a word about those
who'd ordered Hindus to open their mouths for them to spit into.

“Discrimination” these educated classes screech, but as far as I can see our holy land has
been “discriminated” into three already, and there's yet more coming if the censuses are
any sign. And while that happens, they've first “discriminated” Brahmins from Hindus; then
it'll be UCs against the rest, then OBCs from SCs/ STs. Then every “original Indian from
before Aryans” will do a Jogi Mandal and clean toilets in a mosque and sell his daughters
in sec slave markets, I suppose.

Modern Hindus on Kora rant over Islamabad and Beijing and pre-WW2 London but
methinks, like any sane person would, than they're not half as poisonous for Hindu
existence as Calcutta and Delhi.

If I were one of your “Britishers”, I'd be damned proud of the old Empire. No succeeding
state was as secure and safe for Hindus.

829 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

When the Kalinga War started who was the King of Kalinga in Odia?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 15
Not sure but whoever it was, it was likely some local lord and not an independent ruler by
himself.

Kalinga was part of the Nanda Empire and early Classical Oriyas considered the old Empire
somewhat sympathetically- contrary to all the hatred the old texts and the Rapepublic's
Intellectuals bear for the Nandas, one of the few points where they agree.

By the time of Ashoka's Kalinga Campaign- the term “Kalinga War” is frankly insulting,
considering how many Wars Oriyas have fought- Orissa had been under some sort of
Magadha Imperium for more than two hundred years and I'm skeptical a recognised royal
house had arisen yet. That'd take another hundred years or so.

436 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

Did the Eastern Orthodox Church persecute heretics and apostates by means similar to the
Inquisition of the Catholic Church?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 15
49/85
Rolfmao.

You're trying to get me banned or something, SP? Everyone knows that Hinduism is the only
discriminatory religion on Earth. The Inquisition was non violent, the heretics deserved it,
the apostates were asking for it, pagans all willingly converted, and there has no force on
Earth more pure and peaceful in history than the Christian churches, unless one considers
the hordes of Peace.

Mark the recent “Conservative” explosion on Kora- so many Christians and self-declared
Atheists defending the Christian world in general and the White world in particular, same
as Liberals and Peacefuls have been doing for Peacefulism for so long. But how much
leeway has been given to Hindus? Same as ever as when Kapil Routray and Saswat Routroy
were banned.

None.

So, of course the Eastern Orthodoxy Church NEVER persecuted anyone. No, sir. Same with
the Catholic Church, all those pernicious lies be damned.

The dozens of anti-pagan and anti-jewish pogroms in Russia were all driven by perfectly
secular, perfectly utilitarian goals and had no religious underpinnings at all, Sir. None at all.
When the Cossacks went around flaying Catholic priests and desecrating catholic graves &
raping catholic women, it was purely a secular practice as mentioned in the holy text, the
God Delusion.

From day one, the Orthodox Church- as with its Catholic cousin- had been nothing but the
light of Freedom and Peace upon this violent pagan Earth.

Such persecutions did we vile Pagans inflict upon these blameless Christians that Indo-
European faiths are all but extinct beyond Chandigarh and Hindus are second-class
citizens within the Secular Republic of India.

When the Orthodox Church's Roman adherents massacred Monophysites and Arians and
drove them into the arms of the invading Peacefuls, it was a Pagan conspiracy. When they
massacred tens of thousands of Paulicians in the streets, it was a conspiracy hatched in
Varanasi. When the Orthodox Church persecuted Bogomils, it was because of the Puri
Sankaracharya trying to destroy Christianity. The Raskol was an attempt by the vicious
Graeco-Roman Pagan, or was it by the Baltic Pagans?

Of course, the Church was never guilty, sir. It was always done under secular authorities.
Who cares that the secular authorities were entirely doing their line in such cases?

The Old Believers were a Pagan conspiracy. Pagans are the agents of their alleged Devil.
Pagans deserve to die since we have slaves and eat babies and sacrifice virgins and
something, same as heretics and apostates. But how can anyone blame the Church? When
someone asks why the Church had to station vast military orders on the borders of every
pagan king getting “Christian inspiration” or why every pagan defeat was followed by mass
realisation that some Jewish carpenter of dubious birth and existence was God himself but
never vice versa or why so even few writings of George Gemistos survive, we are all
malcontents who hate Christianity.
50/85
Then again from Hitler's bunker was the Arya born, and Himmler was the one who ghosted
as the composer of the Vedas. Repeat that enough and Kora might just make you a TW as
well.

Why does Japan have an Emperor? Was Japan really ever an empire throughout its history?
An empire is a sovereign state functioning as an aggregate of nations or people. As far a I
know this has never been the case for Japan.
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 15
Japan is an Empire and has an Emperor because the British, French, Russians, and
Austrians had Empires and Emperors as well.

Royal or Imperial “titles”, in modern historiography, are propaganda points to be utilised by

sovereign nations in national myth-making. This is compounded by the fact that, per se,
they're all rather vague in definition and inherently meaningless. Queen Victoria became an
“Empress” because she didn't want her daughter to outrank her in Continental terms. No
other reason. Similar to the Japanese as well.

Now the original title used by Japanese Emperors, back till the 8th Century, was simply
“Great King of Yamato" and other Chinese-influenced terms, which came to be replaced by
yet another Chinese term- “Son of Heaven”( also a generic claim for most Cultures over the
World). As such, the Emperor is not as much a Head of State, as a spiritual Schelling point
for devout Shintoists both as Head of the Yamato clan, as an expy for Head of all clans, as
well as a descendant of the gods.

In other words, the “Emperor” of the Japanese is more akin to the Christian Pope rather
than any political body per se; by the time we even get any real Japanese records beyond
the odd-(probably forged)-mention, it's already the 8th Century and the “Emperor” is a
puppet controlled by vested feudal interests. This is reflected in the difference in their
terminology for “State/ Imperialism” and “Emperor”.

When the Boshin War ended and even prior to it, a key concern among several Japanese
thinkers was the necessity to demarcate Japan and the Japanese people from European
systems like protectionism, Christianity, and military dependency etc in order to prevent
Japan from falling under the same predicament as other Asian states. The usage of the
term “Emperor” in translations to foreign documents was part of such associated
kulturkampf. As it is, the term is meaningless political dickmeasuring as we've already seen
but sounds grand.

As for OP's doubt on the early history of Japan… technically, early Japan was an “Empire”,
given that it ruled over many “peoples” with differing “culture”. However by this standard,
ALL states were Empires; difficulty in transportation ensured widespread provincialism.

19th Century France was more of an “Empire” of different “nations” than Japan with French
as we know it being a minority language, until Paris standardized/ culturally genocided the
provincial cultures, depending on your stance of such matters. Japan's corresponding
monoculturalisation- as far as such a term could be valid in a premodern society- hadn't
begun over Honshu alone even as late as the 9th Century and was still ongoing in places
like Hokkaido well into the 19th Century and even early 20th.
51/85
Does that qualify as “Empire”? Maybe. But by those standards, the Byzantines weren't an
Empire from roughly after the 11th Century while any standard Indian or Chinese state was
one from day one of inception.

410 Views · View Upvoters

You and Shivaprasad Poovandur upvoted this
RecommendedAll
During ancient times, when one king attacked another hundreds of miles away from his
own kingdom, what stopped the neighboring ones from attacking his own kingdom, which
would presumably be vulnerable due to most of the army away fighting a war?
Govind Sharma
Answered Dec 12
The Ancient Tamils believed that the Five Arms of a good King were the Armies, the
Treasuries, the Ministers- and the Ambassadors and Spies.

A Late Classical Playwright would mock them as the Five Plagues of Kings but that's a
story for another day.

Anyway…

The Shastras advocate for Dharmayuddha and Dharmavijaya to be accomplished by a

properly consecrated Chakravartin who is to uphold Dharma with the help of the populace
of all castes and his brother kingly vassals. However, the Shastras also recognised that all
morals will be lost in the Kali Yuga and men will grow cruel, lazy, ingratiate, greedy,
faithless, the lands and people will splinter into pieces, and Dharma will be lost.

In response to this, the great thinkers of Bharata proposed several ideas to be adopted by
any far-sighted lord who wished to keep his realm secure. Among them were the four
maxims of Chanakya- “Saam, Dham, Dand, Bhed” or Rewards, Threats, Division, and
Punishment.

To such utopian ideals, other thinkers such as Raja Bhoja of the Paramara line of Malwa
have countered with the more realistic “Dand, Bhed, Dand, Bhed”- Punishment, Division,
Punishment, Division.

Note that neither include the terms “Sabka, “Saath” or “Vikas”.

Now the major Shastras are at pains to outline the nature and duties of spies to be used by
the sensible lords for “men see through eyes, cows by smell, brahmins by learning, and
kings by spies.” Do note that while the Ancient and early Classical Tamils advocated rights
for diplomats, their more Northern counterparts had little love or respect for these well-
spoken thugs, according them to be merely yet another rather boisterous malcontent, albeit
ones not to be given the beatings they rightfully deserve for their constant lies.

These spies and ambassadors are to subvert border defences, bribe merchants and
ministers, raise unrest among the rival populace by means of fraudulent prophecies & art,
spread untruths among the opposing armies, and encourage filial strife among opposing
families. Furthermore, armies are unwieldy and require massive amounts of gold to raise
and maintain; proper relations with guildsheads and malcontent vassals can aid any

52/85
enterprising King against his rivals. The flow of gold determines the hiring of mercenaries;
the harvest of crops harkens the shriek of war conches. Skanda is the patron of Warlike
hosts and Cunning thieves alike.

At all points, the King must be conscious of the concept of Circle of States.

Here we might point to the example of the Pallava lords Nanakkasa and Santivarman- who
served their gods, king, and the Tamil people- by not only frustrating the imperial ambitions
of the Highking of the Karnatas, Krishna II of the Kadambas, possibly looking to exploit the
decline of Gupta power- but also winning over their Ganga vassals as well as setting up a
puppet Kadamba pretender through the branch house of Vishnuvarman.

The King Vigraharajadeva of Sakambari, by means of his prowess in such Kutayuddha, kept
his powerful rivals flummoxed while he expanded his territories and acquired great might.
Both Rudradeva, who struggled the fortunes of his Kakatiya line afloat, in the aftermath of
the collapse of the Rashtrakuta Emperors and Lalitaditya of Kashmira, Emperor in his own
right, utilised assassins to weaken rivals on the eve of their campaigns.

Simultaneously, punishments of the most cruel and infamous nature just be adopted
against such actions performed against oneself. The Manimekhalai speaks of a case in
Kalinga where Vasu, lord of Simhapura, had a certain guildsman named Sangama
beheaded under the auspices of the officer Bharata. Similarly, the Shastras recommend
that blinding be a fitting Punishment for rabble-rousers and propagandists. Fear of oneself
weakens the resolve of rivals; Reputation for steadfastness in Dharma encourages doubts
among the enemies and rivals. Tales of one's brutality make the enemies' women call for
for peace and the rivals' recommend for caution.

Fear and brutality was recommended, for this is Kali Yuga; Bharatas live in terrible times
and thus it is recommended that we must be terrible ourselves. Else the end is certain.

A more recent and pertinent example is that of the noted Nazi and Fascist
Anangabhimadeva III Chodaganga, Lord of the Three Kalingas, who upon being told that the
Peacefuls he'd crushed were saddened at not going to their Heaven on account of failing to
slaughter Oriya kaffirs like us, expressed concern over their immortal souls and had them
all impaled alive on tall poles so that their alleged angels would have an easier time taking
them upstairs. On account of this, he lived a long and happy life, and his line held fast and
true to the worship of the true Lord of the Universe for centuries after him.

1.3k Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

RecommendedAll
Why did Genoa provide soldiers to the Byzantine Roman Empire in the last seige of
Constantinople in 1453 but Venice and others did not?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 29
The question is inaccurate. Venice did provide troops and the prospect of a relief Venetian
fleet turning up was a major threat for the Ottomans throughout the period of the Siege.

53/85
By “others”, OP might possibly refer to the French, English, and other Western European
powers. As for why they didn't turn up- there's a long PC answer that'll get me upvotes from
Kora's TWs, the love of the Proles, and a possible TW tag, and then there's the plain unPC
truth that'll have me branded “Islamophobe”, criticised by the great History TWs, and
possibly banned.

Though I have no desire to lie, I will play safe and, since the latter discussion doesn't
exactly pertain to OP's query, desist from elaboration

565 Views · View Upvoters

If Birbal was so smart, why didn't he become a king?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 29
He was a King. Duh.

He was given the title sometime in the 1550s. However he was renowned as a Poet and
Admintrator even before this, and had quite a bit of independent wealth from his service in
the Court of Rewa as a young man.

At the time of his death, he was one of the leading military commanders of the Empire,
despite not being a front-line general. He was most likely primarily responsible for Artillery
logistics, & there's some sign that he funded a good bit of the contemporary research on
Chemicals in India.

438 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

RecommendedAll
Why did the Roman Empire abandon plate armor (forgot the term for it) and instead slowly
adopted scale and chainmail over time?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 24
The Romans never had Plate. What you're probably thinking of is Lorica Segmentata- which
is basically sort of modified reinforced Lamellar (not exactly TBH; completely different in
style).

Lamellar might offer marginally superior protection from penetration than Mail, but the
latter has advantages in maintenance and late Classical weaves could “seal” together from
gravity, providing often better protection with extra flexibility.

In addition, there's zero reason to believe that LS was, at any point, more prevalent than
Mail over the entire army. Ergo the “shift” from LS to mail never happened.

598 Views · View Upvoters

RecommendedAll
What is the ultimate goal of Maoists of India?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 24

54/85
 “O Jagannath! Thus prays your servant (Kapilendradeva) throughout the kingdoms of Oriyas!
I maintained, from the days of my youth, these nations and have given wealth. Now they have
broken the peace, they have disobeyed your word, they have forsaken me. I declare intent to
deal with them, and punish them, each in accordance to the aspect of their deeds and the laws
as have been laid down. O Jagannath! Am I right or wrong?”

-Gajapati Kapilendradeva Routray, 1492 VS

Before reading this, I suggest you read Shri's answer. His is much better than mine TBH.

In the year 1231 VS- can't bother with what that is in Gregorian- Anangabhimadeva II
Chodaganga, Lord of the Three Kalingas- commissioned the largest ever land survey ever
organised in Orissa, in order to help restore Oriya agriculture after the century-long Kalinga-
Chola Wars. Some readers might be better acquainted with the career of his grandson,
Anangabhimadeva III, who cemented his place as one of the great fascists and Nazis of the
Continent by crushing the Mlecchas when they tried to spread peace in Orissa.

Anyway…

From the Damodar Valley to the Godavari Delta to Amarkantak, it was determined that the
Realms of Oriyas and their vassal states covered 62,28,000 vatis with 47,80,000 vatis being
of potential use for Crops, Livestock, Forestry, Cities, etc.

The rest 14,80,000 were determined to be too mountainous or swampy or - interestingly-

'too lazy a populace' for development.

Reminder that this was Imperial Orissa which had no issues sending thousands of people
scuttling all over the land to establish colonies and settlements. And yet, they adjudged the
populace of a quarter of the land simply too inherently unfit for development to bother
sending Oriyas or Brahmin settlers.

Again- literally “not worth development.”

The State Officials at Puri & Cuttack instead elected to just contact the tribal chieftains in
those areas, hand over liaison authority to the local State officers, and guarantee food aid,
iron, medicine in return for wood, furs, amber, honey etc. The Superintendent of Forests
was tasked with this purpose, at least during the 12th Century.

Of course, we know that the Oriya Bureaucracy collapsed in the 16th Century but as it was,
even in the 19th Century, the Forested Hill lands were arguably the most peaceful and
stable in Orissa & ex-Oriya lands in modern Andhra, Jharkhand, and Chattisgarh.

But enough of Imperial Orissa. We live in a Democracy now and Kali Yuga is in full flow.

Now, we must first define the term “Marxist”. Broadly one can recognise five types of the
aforementioned creatures.

1- The “Urban Naxal”.

These wonderful scholars wish for nothing but freedom, human rights, and possibly of the
people- especially themselves & their misbegotten kids. They can be typically found
55/85
attending international conferences on how Teletubbies promote Fascism, in Lutyens
bungalows propositioning dumb college feminist interns, in tax payer-funded colleges
discussing how to shank the tax payers, and in NGO HQs in state capitals telling tribal
leaders how they're with them all the way.

They want the same thing the feminists marching alongside the Islamists during the Iranian
Revolution wanted from the Shah. The destruction of the Republic & it's replacement by a
more “human” State. What they'll achieve is the massacre of hundreds of thousands,
decades of oppression (& very likely genocide), and the balkanization of the Country.

Once they achieve their ends, most Urban Naxals will - like the feminist liberal bourgeoisie
in Iran- flee to the West to attend TED talks and bemoan the end of “Democracy” in India to
Islamist/ Christian Theocratic/ Stalinist Balkan Republics that'd have sprung up then, still
engaged in spreading their virtuous gibberish to…

2- The “Future of the Country”.

Our worthy Youth. Pride of the country. Creme de la creme of the Land. Virtuous on
account of having passed some random exam. Distinguished by the accident of fortunate
birth. Ignorant of who his great grandfather was but all too eager to wax eloquent on the
joys of the gulag and the Party committee.

The more mechanical gifted among them invariably turn into hedonistic psychopaths, but
on the plus side, they often migrate and spare us their inanity.

Their more Artsy counterparts stay on; ranting and screaming on media and the streets,
confident that the State will shower then with our money and secure them from our fists.
The women among them spend their days preaching the dubious joys of feminism and
Bakunin and Mao, and their nights spreading their legs to every wonderful scholar
introduced to them by their WhatsApp group SPOC feminist high Priestess. When they're 30,
their parents marry them off to unsuspecting small town IT workers or, if that's not
possible, beat their breasts and cancel their retirement plans to feed the chick.

The guys go down roughly the same route - except they usually turn druggie or drunkard or
petty criminal. But guys usually have another route…

3- The “Firebrand”.

Whereupon they can enjoy all the privileges accorded to the Urban Naxal without the
hassles of conferences or PhDs or having to write shitty poetry. The eminent scholar
Jayanta Mahapatra had to pen thousands of lines on purple flamingoes & parakeets flying
upside down to justify his Padma Bhushan, the one he returned recently.

A more ethical Youth- one that has no desire to torment generations of school kids with
meaningless modern literature or dubious ethnic pride- can simply turn up at the nearest
Maoist hub with a letter of reference.

Before he leaves, he can enjoy the attention of awed tribal yokels, the pats on the back by
grey-haired scholars, the sparkling kohl-rimmed eyes of feminist chicks.

56/85
When he arrives, he spends the first fortnight in bliss- carried down to wondrous depths of
the silent hills & lonely woods where the fabric between Real and Surreal grows thin, where
strange faces of joyous, heartless, ever-young mortal eternities sport still. But our young lad
is no Imperial Oriya officer; he knows not the unending sacrifices of the Eternal War against
the Mleccha nor the ageless aged laughter of a grandmother as she tells children of their
ancestors nor does he love the mysterious smile of Jagannath as he laughs at us wretches
from atop his great mountain blue throne nor the slow churning of the firmament of Surya
as he gazed down, iron red, upon a World that deserves nothing but the mercy of
annihilation…

And he goes insane, his utterances of Mao & Marx go beyond his feeble delusions of
Dualistic non-reality. He looks into the mirror & he sees terrible ungraspable phantoms that
he sports with. In the mist-haunted half-twilights, hide CRPF jawans and tribal half-allies
and the armies of long-dead Gajapatis and the hosts of Raghu on the eve of their war with
Indra. At night, he lies with one chattering voiceless tribal woman and then another and
then falls out with a screaming voiceless tribal man and, over him, slays another; and
Reason, absurd and frantic, dawns upon him and thus he grows not as bitter and cynical
and suicidal as any Imperial Oriya sub-collector who's had to leave his fine Khurda house to
take a seat in the middle of nowhere, but ascended, beyond woe or Dharma or Mao or
Madness…

In the night, there are shots. A telegram is sent to Delhi & Calcutta & such places as where
the Rich gather, that their student was slain by the fascist Hindu State. The body is thrown
into the woods, and a cigarette lights up the face of…

4- The “Gardener”.

Now when it comes to men, it can generally be said they are fickle, wicked, cruel, false,
greedy, ingratiate, and cowardly. However, above all, they are flowers.

Some grow in ranks, others among weeds. Some have thorns- sharp and cruel, some to the
convictions of other's. Some are of sweet smell. Some can be made into wine. Some please
women, some are crushed.

A wise man, thus, should be a gardener.

He should destroy the spreading weeds of asphalt & steel marching into his garden; there
are many of them and the work is hard. But it must be done: in light, some flowers don't
grow. He must root out brambles bringing discord to his beds; the flowers will appreciate it
and offer him strapping boys and tender girls. He must learn to bandy words with the
elderly schemers who sell him his equipment; they'll tear his garden & steal his flowers
given half a chance. Thus they must be sated- but not at the cost of his own bed.

When twilight comes, he sings to his flowers about the great Flowerland in the sky where
no flower is ever plucked. When the buds droop, he crushes the prettiest and warns against
crows.

57/85
In earlier days, there were lions and they slew gardeners at sight. But now there are but
crows- insane and wild- and as it is, they are engaged in feeding on corpses elsewhere.
Some fly over now and then, but the garden remains at peace

A garden is prettiest when there is but one to rule it.

5- The “Garden of Earthly Delights”.

Gobinda Babu, having served his gods & nation faithfully for over three decades, was
retiring as Junior Secretary of Forests in the year 1291 VS, handing over his charges to the
incredibly young, yet already much-reknowned, Vidhyadhara Patnaik.

Time and the ravages of Peacefuls & the Government of India have ensured that we know
nothing about the career of Honoured Gobinda nor of the early deeds of his protege
Vidhyadhara yet it is a matter of record that the then-young man would go on to be Head of
Accounts for the construction of Konark Surya temple.

As it is, we can imagine the two riding along the river Kuakhai on a quiet evening. Both had
been to Cuttack to meet the Emperor- this was before the establishment of the position of
Gajapati, when mere humans still persisted under the delusion that any save Jagannath
himself could claim Reign over the Oriyas- and had decided to travel to Bhubaneswar to
pray to Mahadeva at Lingaraja, before Vidhyadhara departed for his new post at Angul and
Gobinda left to take up retirement at his small Zamindari near the river Budhabanlanga.

As the horses drifted without direction in the direction of the languid current, we can
imagine the young Vidhyadhara, in the prime of his life and curious about the World outside
the barracks & battlefield, eagerly asking his questions from his elder.

At length, he asked: “Is there anything I must keep in mind, Lord, as I travel to the Hills ?”

The elder bowed his head in thought, and then spoke after a while: “In this World, young sir,
there are many people and many manners of people and as many ways of living as there are
manners.

Most of them desire War.

Given time, maybe this warlike beast that dwells within men can be seduced; we can bid it to
come over to warm beds and warm rice and soft pillows and shaded pillowhouses. But in the
harsher lands of this World, the beast grows gaunt and ever-hungry and gnaws at its siblings
even as it sleeps in the womb.

Four hundred years when half of Orissa fought the other half- or even during my youth when
our conflict with the Sea-Emperor of the Tamils had yet to end, our lands and our people
suffered greatly. And yet it was the fierceness of the War, the Terror and Grief and Fear that,
now I feel, were what succoured us.

Imagine a World where the Keshari Lords of old didn't pick up the Crown from the mud of the
blood-stained fields where they broke their foes. Imagine a World where there were well-
wishers from the North & South, telling us to shake hands over a trench and empty our
barracks of violent soldiers to house their virtuous peace-keeping Auxiliaries.

58/85
Would Cuttack have stood then instead of being a battle line across which Ganjam and
Virajapura glared at each other? Would children play into mango orchards at Khurda instead
of being sold to foreign well wishers? When the Turashkas came, would we have been to
face them if we were a thousand states born in a false peace instead of one People forged
from a true War?

Men respect Strength, child, and nothing more. Despise Cruelty for you're a Bharata. Despise
Ignorance for you're an Oriya. Despise Sloth for you're a Karana. But above all, despise
Weakness and any sign of Weakness, for that is the mark of he who would be Arya.

Having heard all this, do what you see fit.

1.5k Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

You're forced to kill either a man who has the cure for cancer, a man who can start world
peace, or a starving child. Who do you kill?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 23
Define “World Peace”.

Both the Christians and the <<Redacted>> claim that their alleged Profits who apparently
had a hotline to their alleged god came to Earth to bring “World Peace”- but as far as I can
see, it's been the peace of the Grave for multiple Continents and counting.

The Communists are extremely keen on the World Peace thing as well, but Stalin and Mao
could give any Old Testament mass-murderer a run for their money. And if “Peace” means
36 year old wastrels lazing around pontificating on the nature of the Watutsi tribe in
Blackadder and how they align with modern African Transgenderism- while getting fat on
the money I earn, yeah- I'd rather take my chances with the kid & the researcher

The Kid's probably going to be an ingratiate waste of space and the researcher a fraud with
a lot of peer-reviewed garbage…

But then again I was working 16 hours a day at 21 to fund foreign trips by Padma
Bhushans, the Exalted Heroes of the Glorious Republic of India, who spend their days
cursing Hindus and their nights raping interns.

I'm used to being exploited.

906 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

RecommendedAll
If you were Tywin Lannister during “The War of the Five Kings”, how would you conquer the
North in the fastest and most efficient way?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 20
We already know how to conquer the North in the “fastest and most efficient way”
possible.

Do exactly what Canon!Tywin did in the books.

59/85
Chevauchee. Alliances with strategic partners. The odd round of sabotage. Tywin got a LOT
of help from the entire Greyjoy BS (which is partly why I'll never give ASOIF a 10/10) but in
general, the Lannister Strategy was pretty solid.

Essentially get Robb Stark to mess up his social contracts and then arrange for a suitable
Northern replacement to step in and sign a peace.

The problems with this are two-fold.

1- It assumes that Robb Stark, born to rule the North, knows as much- or rather, as little-
known about Medieval Social systems as the typical Modern Liberal Civilized Atheist.

2- It assumes that Tywin is not only as clueless as the aforementioned Robb Stark but that
he's an omniscient tyrant with such absolute authority that he's beyond all social contracts
and is basically a god to his vassals.

Word of advice- Don't read ASOIF for the Medieval politics. The story is great, the
characterization is, a tad crazy, but brilliant, the themes are, though not original, dealt with
well- but as a representation of a “Medieval World”, Westeros leaves much to be desired.

561 Views · View Upvoters

You, Shivaprasad Poovandur and Shrinivas S upvoted this
RecommendedAll
What would have been the reaction of the RSS had Gandhi been killed by a Muslim?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 20
Same thing that happened in real life.

Nothing. Except that in this case, the massive anti-brahmin pogroms conducted by the
Congressis in the wake of Gandhi's assassination would've been avoided.

Indians, mostly those of Hindu birth, have this weird disinclination to either understand or
appreciate Institutional Power.

There's no way on Earth any bunch of what were and are essentially unarmed volunteers
could go up against a massive mechanised colonial army and win, especially when the
government of the day would be fully committed in ensuring that the would-be targets not
only have the first right to India's resources and a third of India for their exclusive use, but
free run over the rest of the land as well.

As it is, the entire story is tedious. So much ado over someone who was a tedious luddite
nonentity at best.

444 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

Why did Colonial Spaniards mate and had kids with the natives in Americas while the
French and British were more "race-pure"?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 20
Probably will get a BNBR ban for this but here we go…

60/85
The Spanish are a mixture of Germanics, North Africans, and Iberians- with the moving
Nationalistic sentiment among them being Catholicism. As such, the Spanish Colonial
Expeditions were, first and foremost, Christian efforts led by an inherently multi-racial
society.

They'd first bring the non-White to the light of Christo the Magnifico, making them fellow
citizens under the Catholic Spanish Crown- barely a decade fresh from Reconquista, and
then start the murder-rape-enslave business.

Firangs pretend otherwise but they had Caste systems- and in many ways, one far more
bloodier than what we had. So did the Japanese, Koreans… but I digress. At any rate,
accepting Non-Whites as fellow human beings didn't mean that it wasn't kosher to enslave
or massacre or exploit them. Even so, the Spanish system did inculcate a certain sense of
civic duty and brotherhood that encouraged a certain degree of racial miscegenation.

In contrast, consider the works of the naturalist and big game hunter Corbett, who died in
the 50s. Corbett was clearly a genial chap, kind to everyone and good-natured. All-round
benefactor to Man and Beast alike.

The thing is- read Corbett's books.

Read them carefully- and you'll find yourself wondering. Did he consider Indians Men or
Beasts?

And this was supposedly a “good” British officer, a hero of the Indian People and
benefactor of Humanity, a man of great personal courage and personal integrity who went
out of his way to help people all over the North. And yet, for all his philanthropy, his attitude
towards Indians resemble Jane Goodall's love for chimpanzees than they do to Salk's
efforts for Humanity.

So essentially, for the average British officer - and I presume, his French counterpart- the
non-White was an animal, a clever animal, maybe, but an animal nonetheless, to be
exploited and beaten and put down when required. The question of racial miscegenation or
cultural interaction didn't arise (save for a few rare cases, mostly in the 19th century) for
which farmer in their right minds would go around fucking his donkeys and ducks?

890 Views · View Upvoters

RecommendedAll
Was Imperial Japan fascist?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 20
Story time!

Showa was a kid in an old second-hand Toyota who'd just got his driving License.

So Showa-san would rush around, one eye on the road, the other on the girls rushing past
him; he's got a beer in the glove chamber and a half a vodka in his belly; he's already
forgotten half the traffic rules his father drilled into him last month and he can't give a
damn about the rest.

61/85
He'd have returned to normal- like the rest of them.

When his neighbour - a nice Spanish Hippie by the name of Dor- had got his licence twenty
years ago, he went over to the neighboring village, ran over the men, raped and enslaved
the women, and skinned the children alive to make leather seats for his high-power SEAT.

C A Dor still has those leather seats btw; they're real soft and nice, everyone likes them.
Damn shame how they were made though- but one can't expect nice Senor Dor to drag his
nose on the ground for every single one of his old sins.

Showa-san- like good old Senor Dor before him- was just being a young hotshot.

So he ran over a few guys, raped and murdered a few girls, and went to town with a knife
and fork on a few kids as well. It was practically a rite of passage in the town. You either
had a car and murder-raped-ate people, or you didn't and were murdered-raped-eaten
yourself.

No one actually minded things much until John knocked over Showa's oil cans and the
angry teen went and bashed in one of the headlights on John's friend Sam's prize GM.
Sam… was an interesting type. He thought of himself as a gentle giant; his enemies called
him a serial killer. At any rate, everyone in town knew that the previous owners of Sam's
house were buried in the backyard. However, the more charitable of his friends insisted that
he was reforming- and that's how things were.

At any rate, Sam fed Showa two big haymakers, and declared to the onlookers that no one
in town could go around messing with others- or he'd teach the bullies the same lesson
he'd just taught the now much-subdued teen.

Across the street, Ivan was saying the same thing to another crowd, while squeezing the
neck of Fritz of the blood-stained BMW.

When each of the crowds took note of the other, they lined up and called each other names.
It was all pretty droll.

As for your question…

Depends on the definitions you use.

Mussolini wouldn't have called them “Fascist”. The average modern Liberal will brand a
dog barking at a feminist throwing stones at it “Fascist”.

So I suppose that by the common meaning of the term in the 21st century, the Showa
Japanese were fascists.

443 Views · View Upvoters · Answer requested by Hamvira Mohapatro

RecommendedAll
Why couldn't any of the Delhi Sultanates (kings) capture Odisha?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 20
Lelwut.

62/85
Very interesting posts, and a clear split between the ones written by a certain community
and the ones written by other groups. B)

The basic reason was two-fold.

1- By the 13th Century, Orissa was possibly the last remaining Gupta-esque State in the
Continent. Registered land records. Censuses. Extensive record-keeping, a lot of which has
even survived- which is more than be said for most other nations in the Continent. The
average Oriya district produced more troops, better troops, and most importantly far more
excess calorific content than its Peaceful counterparts.

2- Theocracy. For the typical Medieval Oriya, Jagannath was the rightful ruler of Orissa and
those who deny his Reign were to be tolerated at worst and killed in every other scenario.
End of story. There were no “loyal Turkish mercenaries” like with Vijayanagara or “peaceful
coexistence” like with the Bengalis in Orissa. You toed the line and worshipped the right
gods, or no one would lift a finger to save you if some collector decided to improve his
chances with the ferrymen on the Baitarani by feeding your Mleccha arse to the crows.

So regarding the answers by a certain community in this thread…

I won't actually spend much time talking about them since all good Hindus, not only Oriyas,
know about that lot and all they're good for. Nothing can be done for them.

As for the statements…

Basically graphical representations of Peaceful Empire-building are always interesting.

Samudradeva could march upto Kanyakumari but Gupta Empire maps always nicely stop at
the Godavari. Kapilendradeva took Bidar and forced Peaceful nobles from Gwalior to
Raichur to grovel at his feet- but heavens forbid any maps depict his Reign going beyond
the Eastern Ghats.

Some drunk guardsman wandering across the border one night is reason enough for the
mapmakers of JNU to compose new epics to the achievements of Sultan Someone-or-the-
other but Eloi forbid someone describes the Damodar Valley or the Godavari delta-
unquestionable Oriya territory for the better part of three millennia- as ever having had
Oriyas living there.

But some bestiality afficiando comes waltzing over with four hundred thousand men,
spends a monsoon fucking goats, burning barns, and dying of dysentery outside the walls
of an Oriya city - and our Intellectuals rush to colour Orissa green- except for the
Mahakantara regions which were apparently “impassable forests".

Medieval Mayurbhanj, Deogarh, Jaypore, Ganjam- “impassable forests”. Yeah, right.

Anyway Kora is a disappointing site and it gets the answers it deserves. The same can be
said for India in general. A wise Hindu would flee for Africa or SE Asia before things get
bad.

How catastrophic were the floods of major rivers for the ancient peoples of the civilizations
of the Near East, India, and China?

63/85
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 20
Pretty bad.

Hastinapura was wiped out at least twice within seven generations- so basically a city of
around 20K-30K, which was huge by global standards even in the 1600s, basically died
every century. Pataliputra was probably destroyed due to a flood in the 7th Century; the
alternative- disease- wouldn't have sufficed to destroy a city of what might've been a million
people so quickly.

Floods were also what probably destroyed the capital of the Vishnukundina- I forget the
name but the place had walls stretching more than ten miles. Some of the floods the city of
Kaushambi survived had the waters climbing to almost half the combined height of the ten
metre high embankments and eleven metre high walls. In the 10th Century, Markatadeva
had over a million cubic metres of clay shifted to protect Cuttack from floods. The largest
man-made lakes in history until the completion of Lake Hoover were the ones made by Raja
Bhoja- and it's very likely they were created to help regulate the flow of the river
Charmanvati- a feat the Republic couldn't emulate until the 80s.

Clearly floods were dangerous enough to warrant all these feats and more.

630 Views · View Upvoters

RecommendedAll
How manly are you?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 18
This question reminded me of a story a senior officer at one of my clients' organisations
once told me.

It’s a tale from another time, a very different time. The events described happened in the
1910s, somewhere in the foothills of the Himalayas. You won't find it in any book or article,
true stories rarely are. The village in question has become the suburb of a certain Tier III
city. The person in question has a small hospital (built by his ) named after him now, but I
doubt many know the story.

This officer's grandfather was the finest huntsman in his village. He had forged his own
sword, one of those Ahom two-handed types, and would go around with it strapped to his
back. He made it after he saw that while spears were effective, the added versatility and
power of a polearm like a two-handed great sword were of more importance.

His chief source of income was to act as a guide for visiting Angrej uffasars on tiger hunts.

Most of these Uffasars were military men from Angrejistan, not locally born, and so had
absolutely no clue of both how to hunt big cats or why to listen to their brown-skinned
guide, let's call Mr Grandfather M.

These Angrej invariably carried heavy Henry-Martini rifles, which they deemed capable of
bringing down an beast in a single shot. So M would help them get to their target, line up
the trail, they'd shoot- and then lie back for a smoke and chat and tell M to retrieve the

64/85
corpse. According to my Client, they'd NEVER offer him either help or a gun. Tiger Coats
were a prize. Indian lives were worthless.

Thus, M would enter some of the most densely-forested thickets in the world, armed with
nothing but a sword- knowing that any bush or ridge could hide behind it the deadliest
animal in the World- an wounded tiger.

He also knew that if he failed to retrieve the tiger skin, the Angrej would curse him and
leave- denying him weeks of payment. He also knew that if he died, the Angrej would tut
and leave for another hill, leaving the wounded tiger free to turn Man-eater and possibly
feed on his own fellow villagers.

“So how did M die?” I asked while sipping my tea.

“Oh no, he died of old age,” my Client laughed. “He was the one who told me the story back
in the 70s”

M presided over a total of 30 such hunts.

In 9 of these, he faced off against wounded tigers alone. The first time, his spear had
broken and a swipe from the tiger had torn his cheek to shreds. For his pains, the Angrej
had given him medicine, a referral to the doctor at the town thirty miles away, and two
rupees. By the time he killed his last tiger, he was getting five rupees and rations for a
week.

M used to carry his sword with one hand on the grip and another around the middle of the
blade, the section blunted for safe usage. Apparently he'd use it like a spear, switching to
broad slashes if the initial thrust didn't connect. He'd had to eschew machetes to carry this
weapon, and so after every hunt his arms and shins would be blood-soaked ruins until his
wife wove jute mocassions for him.

“Sounds like a Man among men!”

“He was. But within his lifetime, he saw how the tiger went extinct in his very hills and he
knew that he'd played no insignificant role in the Fall of such magnificent beasts.”

“He still hunted 30 tigers.”

“He didn't hunt any of them. And even if he did, it's not like he had anything to show for
them. And though back then, he'd speak of making amends, his sons were all busy in their
own work and he was old.”

I've read that Officer's Clubs in the Indian Army and such places would keep track of
Shikars. Several hunters were toasted in lodges and clubs, even as late as Nehru's reign in
the 60s. The skins, treated in the field, would be handed over to Taxonomists and Record-
keepers, and then sent back to Angrejistan to decorate mantlepieces and act as
conversation starters during dinners.

I don't think any of the stories mentioned M, as he crawled into dark ravines in search of
wounded tigers, clad in a dirty dhoti, a headband, and jute mocassions and armed with a
sword he'd forged with the help of the blacksmith from the next village.
65/85
Was Mr M “manly”? Were the Angrej uffasars “manly”? Were the German soldiers the latter
would fight in a few years “manly”?

I don't think such questions can't be answered. As I said, it was a very different time.

1.4k Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

Why did the RSS side with the British during the Quit India Movement?
Your Dada Dadis Sided With British: Kapil Sibal Hits Back at Modi
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 18
Yet again.

Without Kaiser Wilhelm II and Adolf Hitler, I'm very skeptical the farcical “freedom”
movements anywhere would've succeeded. Moderners go around with weird ideas about
the pre-Cold War world, and seventy years of propaganda by NCERT mean that the average
Indian is more ignorant about the nature of the and Society in general than their great
grandparents.

The so-called Congress, by 1947, had successfully wiped out all possible non-communist,
non-Islamic homegrown political opposition to it, back then chiefly represented by the likes
of Savarkar and Bose. Essentially, it was a mass of warring personality cults bearing lip
service to the Head-Cult of Mohandas Gandhi, and subsequently to those of Nehru and
Patel.

Post independence, this mass of personality cults split into multiple factions- chief among
them being a Centre-Right party calling it “Swatantra Party” and the Centre-Left loyalists
under the Nehru-Gandhi family.

Questions over the ideology- or lack thereof- of the Congress led to yet another spilt with
the more cultish members under Congress (Indira) separating from the original Congress
which merged with the Janata Party- which, after several avatars- many of which involved
RSS support- would result in the current Bharatiya Janata Party.

Thus, we have four observations.

1- The so-called Indian Freedom Struggle was a farce which would've gone nowhere
without Kaiser Wilhelm II and Adolf Hitler knocking off most of the British upper class and
professional soldiery, and the Americans and Soviets taking the opportunity to dismantle
the old European Empires.

2- The largest surviving ideological political descendant of the Congress Party that
organised the Quit India Movement is the BJP, the political wing of RSS.

3- When an enemy with a record of eating PoWs comes to your borders, it's preferable not
to sit around banding words with people whose response to sectarian conflict is to tell
Hindu women to lie quietly and not disturb their would-be rapists.

Furthermore- and this might be a shock to kids drunk on NCERT who go around parroting
the likes of Kapil Sibal- lots of well-educated people back then loathed the Congress and
their entire cohort of leaders. While they destested the British, the entire Congress plank of
66/85
mindless “ahimsa”, luddite insanity, quasi-authoritarian cultism, the sheer BS in the post-
Tilak “movements”, and disdain for Hindu rights was simply too disturbing. A cursory
glance at the affairs of the Princely States or other Institutions of the time would reveal
this.

However people get the government that befits their intelligence and Indians got Nehru and
Indira and Sanjay and Rajiv and Sonia and now we have Pappu and Priyanka. If there ever
was a better time for a Quit India Movement redux, I don't know it.

1k Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

You upvoted this
How were troops recruited in the ancient times?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 17
The Shastras recognise six forms of Military Troops, a system that appears to have
persisted till the 9th Century CE over most of Bharatavarsha. I'm using Kamandaki's
system, though not using the original Sanskrit to avoid reporting by Liberals, Lemurs, and
Ambedkarites.

1- State troops.

These were Standing Armies recruited by Provincial government officials and paid in coin
directly by State employees, though in later years, it appears that land grants became
common. However most of these Troops typically came from the Agrarian hinterlands of
great cities and were often following in their fathers' footsteps. Mostwere either Cavalry or
Infantry, with the King or Emperor keeping Elephants and Engineers directly under his own
oversight.

These were the most loyal and professional of all forces available to a Bharata Lord
however with high costs to raise and maintain. Equipping a standard Gupta Heavy
Cavalryman would've taken the equivalent of INR 45+ Lakhs today.

2- Mercenaries.

Hated by all clear-thinking Scholars, Mercenaries were however prized for their ready
availability, lack of need for external oversight, and often great military experience. It's likely
that most Mercenary bands were roving bands of primarily Cavalrymen, Professional
Troops from other States themselves, seeking foreign employment for their own reasons.

Kamandaki recommend that Mercenaries be utilised for risky manoeuvres, and kept an eye
on at all times.Any Lord with significant wealth could hire them if he put the word out.

3- Guild Troops.

Classical Bharata cities were dominated by massive Guild Troops, with powers extending
over multiple State lines. While distrusted by States for multiple reasons, they represented a
standing military power of vital note during times of conflict. More importantly, Guild troops
represented a significant chunk of urban military might since the scholars knew that
degenerate, soft urbanites made for bad troops.

67/85
Any Lord desirous of hiring them could get in touch with his City Head who'd then
presumably contact the Guild Head. Seals of such persons have been discovered in great
number; presumably the larger trade centres held entire cohorts of such troops hired
piecemeal by merchants across the continent. The Guild Troops Captain was to be
accorded the Status of a Cohort general in the Army.

The Shastras recommend that Guild Troops be used for resettlement of ruined areas,
colonization of wilderness, extending Trade networks into borders. Their marginally greater
loyalty to the State compared to Mercenaries however was offset by their lesser
effectiveness, and thus encouraging strife between the two was as “pleasant as watching a
hog and a dog fight.”

4- Militia/ Prisoners of War/ Bribed troops .

Never to be used unless in periods of great crisis, these troops are either difficult to
manage or untrustworthy to the extreme or are the mark of a desperate State.

A strong espionage force is of vital importance here, both to keep a keen eye on Provincial
and District administration and their military preparedness as well as to subvert the
enemy's troops.

Keep them around Professional troops at all times lest they break ranks and flee or lose
cohesion and run amok or, worse, join the enemy at the high pitch of the Battle.

5- State and Feudal Auxiliaries.

A wise King, cognizant of the decline of the Age, would ally or vassalize his neighbours but
must be ever vigilant about them. A king, while rushed to when respected, simply lost
respect by the very act of receiving aid.

Thus the Auxiliary, be it drawn from Allies or Vassals, had to be closely observed and only
taken in during times of strength when the need was to shield one's Professionals from
harm or when the State possessed little coin to pay mercenaries with.

6- Tribal Auxiliaries.

Fierce and undisciplined, tribal auxiliaries could be as effective as State Professionals at

points; however their indiscipline and covetous nature made them a double-edged blade
even in the best of times.

The Shastras recommend that they be used for scouting and clearing the way for the Van
upto a distance of sixteen kilometres, but preferably not for formal manoeuvres. Regular
gifts and good relations with tribal princes and lords- including provision of education,
training, hosting, and good Brahmin scholars- would ensure their aid during times of
conflict.

954 Views · View Upvoters

RecommendedAll
If after the Mahabharata war, Arjuna's son Abhimanyu and Draupadi's five sons would have
remained alive, then who would have been the king of Indraprastha and Hastinapur?

68/85
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 17
Prativindhya, oldest son of Yudhisthira, was the heir to the Realms of the Kurus- and thus,
by extension, all Bharatavarsha- until his death. However, because of his young age- still in
the early 20s when he was murdered, it seems there had never been a formal
announcement on who would've succeeded Yudhisthira.

Prativindhya left no sons in the original Sanskrit versions (so kindly desist from telling me
about random beliefs from the middle of nowhere-nagar) and so the Crown ended up
passing to the eldest surviving male heir in the line, Parikshit.

831 Views · View Upvoters

RecommendedAll
How was the end of Lord Rama of Ayodhya and his dynasty?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 17
Shri Kusha inherited the Throne of Ayodhya, subjugated a Naga King and married his
daughter, and lived a long and happy life amidst prosperous citizenry before sacrificing his
life to kill the demon Durjaya. His brother, Luva established and ruled over the city now
known as Lahore, now lost to Hindus.

Kusha was succeeded as Emperor of Bharatavarsha by his son, Atithi who had a long and
successful reign. Atithi married the princess of the Naishadha kingdom, and had a son
named Nala who succeeded him as Emperor of the lands stretching upto the Great Sea,
and was succeeded in turn by his son Nabha when he renounced the World to dwell with
the gentle beasts of the woods.

From Nabha of the Raghuvamsha was born Pundarika the Archer, and from Pundarika was
born Kshemadhanva, reknowned for his kindness and forbearance. When the latter
renounced the World, he left the Throne to his all-subduing son, Devanika, who was fierce in
War and avenged and guarded the Realms of his father and then succeeded him as
Emperor of the lands between the Mountains and the Sea.

His successor was as skilled in matters of the Court as he had been in the battlefield. The
Emperor Ahinagu knew the hearts of men and recognised the base nature like unto wild
beast inherent within men, and thus took the necessary steps to counter threats to the
Realms of the Bharatas. He was succeeded by his son Pariyatra who conquered the tribes
of the mountains in the West that came to bear his august name. However this unparalleled
Emperor, disliking the demands of Rule, appointed his son Shila as his Viceroy and spent
his life in pleasures. Thus did Shila succeeded him, and Shila's son Unnabha succeed Shila,
and Unnabha's son Vajranabha- he of the deep voice- succeed Unnabha, and Vajranabha's
warlike son Shankhana succeed Vajranabha in turn.

Vyushitashva, who dispatched fierce Cavalrymen to the Shores to keep order, followed
Shankana, and Vishvasaha, friend of the World, succeeded his fierce warrior father.
Hiranyanabha succeeded Vishvasaha when the latter retired to the forests. Kausalya,
learned and scholarly, succeeded Hiranyanabha, and Brahmishtha succeeded him in turn.

Brahmishtha was succeeded by his son Putra, who upon attaining old age himself took
69/85
refuge with the sage Jaimini in the forests left the Realm to his son Pushya. Pushya, in turn,
left the Empire to his son Dhruvasandhi who made peace with his foes. However he was
slain by a lion while hunting, leaving but a single son aged six, of the name Sudarshana-
cursing Bharatavarsha with that most portentous of calamities- an immature Lord.

However Sudarshana excelled as Emperor, keeping his vassals cowed and the citizens
prosperous. But upon his taking to the forests, his heir was Agnivarna and he proved
dissipative and libidinous. He played the drum and the lute, he sported with women in
palace lakes, he drowned himself in wine. Thus if came to be that he contracted a venereal
disease and wasted away and even though the line continued until the slaughter of their
Lord by the Tyrant Ajatashatru of the Haryanka, hated by the gods, the might of the all-
subduing Solar-crested Emperors was broken.

Thus was the fall of the Line of Raghu.

5.5k Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

RecommendedAll
Why didn't the Umayyad caliphate which conquered vast tracts of land from Africa to Iran
continue conquest towards East into the fertile lands of India and modern day Pakistan?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 16
They tried. They lost miserably.

Contrary to what the intellectuals hold, the Gupta Emperors were around well into the 8th
Century and likely held a substantial amount of Authority over the kings of Bharatavarsha.
The end of the Gupta line was marked not by fragmentation of the Empire, but the
constituent kings, guilds, and generals rallying primarily around Pratihara.

Thus until the 10th Century, Imperial Power in India was centred at Ujjaini under one
Emperor, over a territory stretching from the Paripatra mountains in the North to Satpura in
the South and from Amarkantak and Dwarbanga in the East to Makrana in the West.

This was the Power that faced off against the Peaceful hordes.

By the 8th Century, the Hunnic wars had been over 300 years in the past and it's likely that
Arab style light cavalry warfare would've been a nightmare to deal with- not for the Heavily
Armoured Bharata Armies, but for the common peasantry in the fields. Sindhu was
hammered. Mulasthana- and the great Surya temple there- fell to the Mlecchas. There were
raids at the very borders of Madhyadesha.

But ever have Bharata Arms, when led by one mind conversant with Dharma, been superior
to the Mlecchas.

The 8th and 9th Centuries appear to have marked the final shift of Bharata military systems
from the Bureaucractic norms fanoiref by the great Classical Empires to a more feudal-
esque system. These forces were faster to raise, easier to handle, and more responsive to
the Arab raiders. There were drawbacks to this- but that's a story for the 12th Century.

Arabs started losing armies, then territory. Their records are conspicuously silent on these
years but it's a matter of record that visiting Peaceful scholars note how Peaceful rule in
70/85
Bharatavarsha is limited to a single City- Mulasthana, surviving only because they'd
threaten to destroy the Vigraha of Surya every time a Bharata army came over to give them
their just desserts.

However it were Bharatas who had the last laugh. Sometime in the 9th Century, coins
featuring the names of the Lords of Ujjaini begin turning up alongside local deals featuring
Arab names. Some Malwa army finally had swept away the pathetic Peacefuls and restored
Mulasthana to Aryarajaneya and Dharma.

Jai Shri Rama.

A century later, things took a turn for the worse- but that involved the Turashkas and not
the Arabs, and thus is a story for another day.

1.1k Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

RecommendedAll
Is there evidence that the gods worshipped by ancient civilizations were actually
spacefaring extraterrestrial beings?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 16
None.

Nothing.

Nada.

Nonsense.

There's zero proof that any sort of Greys or Reptilians or whatever have ever visited Earth or
are even capable of Space Travel. Such nonsense about Ancient Aliens are the result of
hippies from Firang countries smoking too much weed and snorting far too much cocaine.

As it is, such theories are basically just another form of Firang racial prejudice, suggestions
that the achievements of other non Firang Civilizations weren't achieved by the talents of
those peoples themselves but by the dubious gifts of mythical aliens.

Those who believe such nonsense should free themselves from delusions by worshipping
Ma Chandi.

340 Views · View Upvoters

Was there any examples of ancient/medieval armies having a code of conduct that
prohibited violence against civilians?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 16
The tenets of Dharmayuddha- more or less followed by most Bharata States throughout
history- prohibit the following.

1- Murder of Civilians- especially women, children, the elderly, and brahmins.

2- Destruction of Agricultural lands and orchards, and unpaid acquisition of farmers' crops.

71/85
3- The slaughter of animals, especially Kine, and the pollution of Water Bodies.

4- The annihilation of Cities, Guilds, and Dams- and the desecration of Vigrahas.

5- Extinction of recognized family lines as well as torture and execution of prisoners.

Early Iron Age laws also do not recognise ambushes, hitting below the navel, night attacks,
usage of poisonous gases in sieges, mercenaries, and other such tenets. However these
had mostly been either rejected or being openly ignored by Classical times.

415 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

Who according to you was the greatest leader amongst Lincoln, Gandhi and Mandela?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 16
Lincoln. Duh.

Only one among the three who really had any idea what was going on.

Gandhi was a luddite imbecile who'd read a couple of translations of the Shastras, piled it
together with whatever New Testament gibberish he'd swallowed in South Africa, and went
about masquerading in India as some sort of neo-saint. His advice to Hindus being
slaughtered by the thousands by a few handfuls of Angrej was to stand and take bullets in
the chest; his advice to Hindu women being raped by Peacefuls was to keep still and not
disturb their rapists so much.

And let's not start on the nonsense between 1946 and 1948, or we will be here all day.

Best case scenario: Gandhi was INSANE. Worst case- and something that George Orwell
himself pondered on- Gandhi was a British agent being used as a Safety Valve for post-
Tilak Hindu unrest, the soft velvet glove to the iron fist of the Raj Armies.

BTW- I didn't conflate Gandhi to a Raj Army. Mountbatten did. Read your FoM.

As for Mandela- well, where to begin?

Unlike Gandhi, we can be pretty certain that Mandela possessed that most vital of
requirements for a public leader- Blood lust. He knew where he stood, he knew who his
foes were, and he knew exactly what'd happen if he lost. Liberals and White Nationalists
alike accuse him of being a Terrorist. Absurd! For any South African Black during Mandela's
youth, to take up arms against the Angrej and Vilayat oppressors would've been virtue.

Gandhi's sins lay in the Act. Mandela's lay in the Achievement.

Wisdom says that on vanquishing an enemy, they must be annihilated root and stem if
they're Mleccha but preserved and taught Dharma if they desire to renounce Mlecchas.
Ergo, unless there are inviolable ideological differences, enemies are better off and more
easily co-opted than wiped out.

If Mandela was aware of this- and yet took no real steps to ensure long term White-Black
unity in South Africa, he was no better than the average Somali pirate. But that's not the
disturbing thing.
72/85
What if Mandela was aware of this- no way he wasn't, given how smart he was- and didn't
do what was necessary, do what the likes of LKY or Lincoln did- purely to preserve his
legacy of “Peace and Goodwill” for future generations? For the sake of sanctimonious
personal legacy, he doomed his nation to racial strife, public unrest, economic collapse,
and rule by dimwits. Now South Africa is on the road to be Zimbabwe 2.0. and Mandela's
Achievements have become his failures.

Consider Lincoln though.

He chose War when War was needed. He chose Tyranny when Tyranny was needed. He
chose Reconstruction when Reconstruction was needed.

A Gandhi would've rolled over and allowed the Confederates to get away and gifted them
Sumter, Philadelphia, and Washington itself. Mandela wouldn't have had the balls of
integrity to order something like Sherman's March. Neither would've recognised the
importance of Industrial Might- the lifeblood of States.

Neither did Lincoln enjoy several advantages that the other two did. Mandela worked in the
equivalent of North Korea, and only the two-faced hypocrisy of Western leaders kept the
Apartheid State from collapsing sooner than it did. Gandhi- yeah, right. Without Kaiser
Wilhelm II and Adolf Hitler doing the heavy lifting, I'm prepared to bet every rupee I have
that the Age of Colonialism would've never ended.

Lincoln had several advantages- his White skin that accorded him the status of human in
the eyes of the Firang powers, the American Constitution and the views of their Founding
Fathers (which is more than can be said for most countries), and a relatively large educated
population. Even so, the threat of Angrej and Firang intervention onto the American Civil
War was a clear and present danger- notwithstanding the nonsense about not condoning
Slavery that Firangs use during such discussions. Lincoln's great shield in the Firangistans
was Bismarck but his skill in forcing War upon his enemies ensured that his country
remained free and intact.

It's not even a contest.

2.4k Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

Why did the Western Roman Empire fall? Could it have been delayed?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 15
The real question isn't why the Western Ronan Empire fell, but how it managed to survive
for so long.

As it is, most Civilizational Empires roughly last for a single Spenglerian Minor Cycle-
roughly 250 years. Exceptions are few, but they exist. The Western Roman Empire, judging
from this view, wasn't as great an anomaly as it's Eastern Counterpart was- which chugged
along for, not two or three, but an incredible six- seven, if you accept the nonsensical 1450
CE date for the end- Minor Cycles.

But let's stick to the WRE for now.

Three basic reasons.

73/85
1- Roman Law and Custom was, simply put, a massive Schelling Point in an otherwise
barren Cultural milieu- a state of affairs that partly arose since the Romans themselves-
some of the worst slavers and mass-murderers around- had wiped out any potential
Civilizational seeds. The Tang some distance away, in contrast, didn't really do such things
- which was a possible reason for their later predicament.

As such, successors of the Western Roman Empire were based on Roman Schelling Points.
Compare with what happened in Persia.

2- The Mediterranean. Nice warm-water ports with zero big storms. I can't think of a single
natural feature on Earth to equal it. Bharata Empires wept blood to get the easy
Transportation facilities the gods just poured out for Rome. Go on Twitter and see the
picks of Satavahana highways MT posts. 1st Century CE Telugu engineers basically had to
chop down a mountain range in the middle of what's virtually a desert.

We know from Sultanate records that water Transport cost a stunning 30 times less than
its landed counterpart. Even considering the better highways in Classical times, it's a
differential so great, you can very well see why the Deccan falls off the Gupta agenda after
the destruction of their Fleet in the Kamarupa campaign. And even during their best days,
Indian Seas are all but innavigable storm-wrecked death traps for four months out of
twelve. Until Steam Power, there were only three real waterways in the entire Continent,
none of them interconnected and all walled off by mountains, making even large canals
worthless.

Compare with the Mediterranean. Huge fertile valleys, zero storms, galley transportation.
Rome was basically the Mediterranean; no wonder Europe in general had the wind knocked
out of its sails after Arabs took North Africa.

3- People underestimate the importance of Civilizational Legacy. Let me elaborate.

From the 6th Century BCE to 8th Century CE, Indian history primarily comprised of either a
Bihari ruling the Continent, a Bihari trying to rule the Continent, or a Bihari being attacked by
former vassals in revenge for trying to rule the Continent. From the establishment of
Pataliputra by the Emperor Udabhadra Haryanka to its destruction in the 7th Century CE, it
was the defacto capital of the Continent for nearly 600 years.

The Haryanka, Shishunaga, Nanda, and Maurya continually ruled over an area larger than
Western Europe for over 500 years. Madhyadesha was, barring an interregnum of 200
years, united for over a thousand years under basically the same Bureaucractic system.

So why is the Roman Empire- which frequently changed masters, often crumbled into a
mass of warring principalities, and at two points- effectively vanished off the map for
decades until the likes of Aurelian or Diocletian came around - considered a cohesive entity
but not the Magadha states of Pataliputra?

Legacy.

Rome - or the ideal of it- is THE Schelling point for Western Civilization. In India, the
educated classes mock Raja Bhoja- whom Hindu rulers from Kangra to Karnataka for a
millennium tried to emulate- and deny that Vikrama or Shudraka ever existed.
74/85
Rome is an ideal, and it's a wonder it isn't timeless already. In contrast, Nalanda is a ruin,
Patna a joke, and most of Magadha a Naxalite-haunted wilderness.

If you think Rome is special, trust me- you don't know special until the Chinese finally build
up enough soft power to really start history.

950 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

Why do most people not accept that ancient Egypt and India were white civilizations?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 15
Who says they don't?

White Nationalists and the average Firang on the Street are convinced that the ancient Misr
were actually blue-eyed blondes from presumably Sweden while Bharata was civilized by
Nazi SS troopers who came riding into the Continent on their panzerhorses.

This despite the fact that:-

1- Not one Shastra says anything about such immigration while the Parsuka counterparts
are adamant that, contrary to pop history, they arose in the East.

2- All Shastras are clear that Civilization began on the Saraswati from whence the early
Arya struck out to Prayaga (the first recorded state in Bharata history), Ujjaini, and
Gandhara.

3- Both Bharata and Misr records comment on other races, whom they clearly demarcate
from themselves. Sorry… I forgot that TW Archaeologists on Kora hold that Bharatas were
taught how to write by the Yavana on odd days and the Angrej on even.

But that's all absurd since the Intellectuals know that from Hitler's bunker was the World
born. On all points save this one, is he public enemy number one- but we know that openly
loathing the Hindu is not only acceptable, but near about mandated, in modern Civilization.

1.4k Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

RecommendedAll
Is it true that Alauddin Khilji, after winning Chittorgarh, put a Hindu ruler as in charge of the
fort? If yes, then how did the Sisodia dynasty rule it again?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 14
I'm seeing a lot of Questions like this one, alluding to some sort of Turkish-Mughal-Rajput
bonhomie these days.

I can only wonder what is the meaning behind this… Lol, jk. We all know.

Anyway…

See- on the question of the beginning of Sisodia control of Mewar, there are two competing
accounts. The Intellectual one and the Rajput one.

75/85
The Intellectual Account: Alauddin Khalji had given control of Mewar to some local
dharmadrohhi who had helped him during the Mewar campaign. Enter Hammirdeva Guhila-
or as we know him today, Hammir Guhilot. He acquired Mewar by treachery. The Tughlaq
Sultans… something, something. <<Rajputana isn't mentioned for the next 20 pages.>>

The Rajput Account: Hammir was the grandson of Lakshmana Guhila, who was the young
chieftain of the Sisod zamindari. He and his sons fought in the Siege of Mewar under Raja
Ratan Singh against Khalji and were all either murdered or committed Saka after the fall of
the City.

The orphaned infant Hammir grew up to be a brave chieftain. By defeating the bandits &
deviants in the area, he acquired great fame and built a proto-state.

At this time, the Hindu governor of Mewar was Maldeva, who'd been put in charge by
Alauddin Khalji's son Khizr Khan who'd had to quit his governorship because of the
succession wars. Maldeva, fearful of Hammirdeva's growing popularity, arranged his
daughter's marriage to Hammirdeva in hopes of gaining his strength.

However the Bards say that Hammirdeva declared that he wasn't to act as Karna to
Maldeva's Jarasandha. He overthrew his treacherous father-in-law, executed the Turkish
guards, exiled the Muslim settlers, tore down the Mosques, and told Delhi to come get their
just desserts.

The Tughlaqs sent a massive army against Hammirdeva but were defeated so badly that
not one man returned to Delhi. Encouraged by this, the Rajputs revolted from Malwa to
Sindh and the Turks were all either exiled or killed. The booty captured was utilised to
rebuild forts and temples. Hammirdeva became the first Maharana of Mewar and changed
his family name to Sisodia in honour of his home.

The 14th Century was thus one of the high watermarks of Rajput Art and Architecture.

1.1k Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

RecommendedAll
Why did Chandragupta Maurya and Chanakya attack the outer parts of the Nanda Dynasty
first?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 14
The entire pop culture story about the Emperor Chandra, the brahmin Chanakya, and the
establishment of the Maurya Empire is pure nonsense. The story is not only improbable, it's
completely implausible.

The story of the Emperor Dhana's assaults upon Chankaya's family is lifted almost entirely
from the Puranas- but our Intellectuals won't accept it because “Puranas are all forgeries
written yesterday by Hindu counterfeiters”.

The story of Chandra “taking over border territories” only makes sense if you're an
intellectual with more degrees from big colleges than brain cells.

The most probable- and, I'm fairly certain, accurate- line of events is as follows:-

76/85
1- Chandra is a Maurya, a Bihari Kshatriya line who've obtained great power over the course
of the Haryanka and Nanda wars. He's probably a general or governor of some province.

2- The Nanda Empire is overstretched, extending from the Iravati to the Godavari, and the
unceasing wars have weakened administration and civic authority. Generals and
Administrators are pissed off, so are the Citizens.

3- Chanakya, who's achieved a fair bit of notoriety for his… unorthodox ideas on the nature
of Power, is popular among several discontent Lords of the time. I don't think he was
actively whispering in Chandra's ears throughout though.

4- Chandra and his Allies stage a coup, have Emperor Dhana executed for tyranny or
whatever, and declare the establishment of a police state on the lines of Chankaya's Ideal
State. The Governors in the Provinces are either Biharis themselves and so kin to the
Maurya or are Civilians who hate the militarism of then Magadha or just are fans of the
Chankaya model.

5- Chandra, now Emperor, elevates Chanakya- the spiritual head of the new Imperial
System- to the post of Prime Minister. Thus begins a Police State the likes of which India
won't see again until the rule of the Overtyrant Jabberlal Neckscrew.

Such a rundown of events would make sense for the following reasons.

1- Classical India was arguably far more close-knit than even Modern India. The Elites and
even the average Trader/ Soldier/ wealthy Farmer would've known Sanskrit or a common
Prakrit. They all studied Astronomy in Gujarat, Politics in Punjab, Astronomy and Maths in
Malwa, Theology in Andhra, Logic and Rhetoric in Bihar. All of them studied the same stuff,
heard of the same scholars, and had roughly the same Weltanschauung.

2- The sheer speed at which the Nanda Empire transformed into the Maurya Empire is
phenomenal. I don't buy that one after other BS for a minute. States have inertia and a life
of their own. The Mauryas were, in all likelihood, “inheriting” the State instead of conquering
it.

3- Institutional Power is EVERYTHING. A single person- like the outlaw Pop Culture
pretends the Emperor Chandra was before his enthronement- is NOTHING. Anyone who
tells you otherwise is either a child or a snake oil seller.

4 - The primary Institutions of the Nanda State- as with the Maurya Empire after it- would've
likely been the Army, the Bureaucracy, the Brahmins, Independent Religious Orders, and
Trade Guilds centred in the Provinces. Control over two would've sufficed to make one
Emperor. Chandra appears to have had contacts with at least three. What sort of Outlaw is
that?

Of course, Reality never makes for a good Story , and what is History but a set of Fables
agreed upon by Children?

1.6k Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

You upvoted this
What were some important inventions from the Mughal empire?
77/85
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 14
Answers are of the expected sort.

Gunpowder and guns, and other similar nonsense. One guy all but says that Indians were
incapable of scientific thought but clearly that's in line with Quora BNBR.

Clearly modern intellectuals believe that hating Indians is kosher in society.

At any rate…

Mughal India was essentially a robber economy, outside the reigns of the Emperors Akbar
and Jehangir- and thus we find limited potential for “technological research” outside their
reigns.

What research was this?

1- During Akbar's reign, there was a great deal of interest in labour-saving devices. First, by
increasing the output of individual artists by the means of multiple machines linked to
gears & then by trying to automate the designs and operating them with animal power. We
have mentions of such devices but no clue just how they managed this.

Failed. Because human labour was far cheaper and efficient.

2- Mass-production of Military goods. There seems to have been some kind of Assembly
system for churning out the tens of thousands of guns, bedding, prefabricated wooden
fortifications, and rockets the Mughals used. A single Karkhana with ten men could
apparently produce over ten thousand rockets every week; a rate unparalleled by any other
State until the early 1800s. We have no clue just how they managed this.

Failed. Because the Bureaucracy collapsed under Shah Jehan.

3- Artillery design and development. Mughal Artillery under Jehangir was the finest in the
World. Organ guns were developed. Long-range Rocketry became viable for the first time. A
primitive Gatling-esque gun was developed. These existed and were in vogue even in the
1800s at isolated areas.

Failed. Because the Bureaucracy collapsed under Shah Jehan and excessive State secrecy.
These guns were also neither standardized nor cheap. A single 17th century Karkhana
could be far more advanced than any other similar Institution in the World- but each of
them jealously kept its secrets. So western advancements like standardized shot, logistical
chains, and fast training was impossible.

4- Primitive Refrigerators and Food Preservation techniques. Abu Fazl describes an

invention that could make Ice even in summer. We have mentions and rough designs but
no clue just how they managed this.

Failed. Because it was cheaper to have entire blocks of Himalayan ice transported to Delhi
than make it at the spot.

The Mughals were also keen upon stuff like Chemical warfare- though I'm unaware of any
78/85
attempt to utilise it in any significant manner. They were also extremely- until Aurangzeb
put a stop to transcending the limits placed on Allah, lol- gung-ho on understanding what
made a human tick.

So they'd do stuff like locking up babies and seeing how they grew up in absence of stimuli,
studying the long-term effects of fear and torture on animals and humans, the amount of
pressure a human could take before cracking- both literally and figuratively. Heard the
Akbar-Birbal story of the monkey and its child? There's a good chance it actually happened.

I suppose readers can sense a pattern here.

Anyway, the Mughals never adopted the Printing Press and appear to have actively
opposed it in some manner so they were effectively shooting themselves in the foot every
generation. As it is, the most surprising thing about the entire business is that India's great
intellectuals who otherwise can't stop pontificating on the dubious virtues of these often
brilliant, invariably murderous tyrants- simply DON'T mention any of the more productive
aspects of Mughal Imperium.

It's always Aurangzeb the Secular making pyramids of Hindu skulls or Jehangir the Just
turning the State into a giant sex slave market or Akbar the Great murdering everyone in
Chittor and carrying off the kids to slave into making his “Indo-Islamic” buildings.

What does this, more importantly, teach us about Indian Academics and their inner-most
motives?

When people like us mock and deride Indian scholars and intellectuals, it's more two
reasons:-

1- Thapar and her ilk are not only frauds, they're lazy frauds. Salma-sabrining about “rich
Mughal heritage” is a far more low-risk-high-return strategy than breaking heads against the
typical Firang scholars and Arab NGOs who fund her escapades and thinks of Indians as
subhumans.

2- In some manner, these people are basically daring Hindus. Like O'Brien in 1984, they're
floating off the ground like a soap bubble and daring us to prick them open. They don't give
a shit about the Mughals, save as a tool to threaten and mock Hindus with.

And Hindu scholars believe they can be “debated” and “brought to the right”. Hilarious.

778 Views · View Upvoters

RecommendedAll
Is Akbar the greatest Emperor India had in the last 1000 years?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 13
Define “great”.

If by “great”, you are referring to the ability of a tyrant to deal fire and death, massacre
entire nations, preach division and bigotry and racial hatred, champion religious
discrimination and the denial of the Other, then the answer is obvious.

Glory to His Majesty the Emperor of India, King George V of the United Kingdom and the
79/85
British Dominions.

Otherwise I suppose it'd be a contest between the Emperors Krishnadeva Raya and
Rajendra I Chola. I'm not including the likes of Rajaram II Bhonsle or Kapilendradeva
Routray since they never claimed to be Emperors even though they were the paramount
Powers of their time.

Edit: I messed up big time.

The unquestioned GOAT of Bharata Emperors in the last millennium is Raja Bhoja of the
Parmara family, icon for Hindu Lords for centuries and the ideal for an Arya- skilled in mind,
spirit, and arms- in this sorrowful darkling age.

I'd thought that he was a 10th Century figure so hadn't considered him at first, but he's
actually from the early 11th Century. Thanks to Hamvira Mahapatra for pointing out my
mistakes.

453 Views · View Upvoters

Why does no one point out that after rivalry between Akbar and Pratap, Mewar rulers later
had a wonderful relationship with the Mughals? Shah Jahan was a great friend of the Rana.
Mewar was destroyed later because of Marathas who looted everything.
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 13
Question posted by “Anonymous”. Hmm…

History tells us that of Anon's three assertions, one is a half-truth while the other two are
entirely fallacious.

The reference to “Marathas looting everything” is clearly a reference to the three wars
between Mewar and the Holkar family in the 1750s, 1790s, and 1800s respectively.

What OP neglects to mention is that the Mewar-Holkar wars were, at no point, sanctioned
formally by Pune. A “Maratha” campaign was never organised, even though several
Maratha armies marched in neighbouring states all the time. Furthermore, the Wars began
during the Sisodia-Chauhan wars of succession over Jaipur, which then went out of control
for reasons beyond this answer.

Thus of the five 18th century chevauchee campaigns in Mewar I can think of, only two
involved Marathas and only one was organised by them.

So who led the other three?

One was why Chauhan troops- who were kin to the Sisodia- during a succession conflict.

The other two- and the worst of the lot- were organised by the “great friends” of Mewar, the
Mughal Empire.

By the 17th Century, most of Rajputana was independent of Mughal authority. Plagued by
heavy taxes, repeated insults, demands for sex slaves, etc- all of which had escalated
under the Emperor Shah Jehan- he of the “wonderful relationship”, there were several local

80/85
revolts. Under the Emperor Aurangzeb, this escalated into the revolts by the Rathores
followed by that of the Sisodia. Over time, the conflict spilled into Malwa and Punjab.

The Mewar conflict, in particular, began when the Sisodia family- uniquely among all Hindu
States of Bharata- took in Shrinathji Krishna after Aurangzeb's destruction of Mathura.

Sisodia refusal to return the Vigraha and their continued aid to

Rathores led to invasion by the Mughals. At the end of forty years of
on-off conflict, Aurangzeb's Deccan campaign led to the near
destruction of the Rana's forces which led to a Peace Treaty.
However the Wars went on until the time of Muhammad Shah
Rangila.

This one hundred year-long period, ending in the 1730s, is estimated to have resulted in
over five million Rajput casualties- both Civilian and Military. At three points, all major
Rajput cities- were either sacked or razed to the ground. The Wars ended when Peshwa Baji
Rao I wiped out Islamic nobility in Weastern and Central Bharata- whose effects can still be
seen on the map- and the Mughal Emperor was forced to accept Protection.

Please refer to the careers of Emperor Bahadur Shah I and the Sayyid Brothers for such
details which are beyond the scope of this answer.

Finally, the “destruction” of Mewar is a vague term, since Mewar has historically been one
of the most storied states in Bharata. Mewar's current predicaments in 2018 stem chiefly
from two reasons:-

1- Two centuries of Trade collapse due to, first, the Angrej Raj and, then, Nehruvian
economics.

2- Lack of adequate Industrialization due to seventy years of varying degrees of License Raj
and Subsidies.

The economic restoration of Mewar is not a question for today though so we will stop here.

1.2k Views · View Upvoters

RecommendedAll
If the British hadn’t displaced the Mughals, would an independence movement for
democracy been against the the “foreign” Mughal rule or like the religion of peace they
followed, would they have simply have abdicated?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 11
The Mughal Empire, by the time of Company ascendancy, consisted of the Red Fort, a
handful of slums, and an abattoir for cows and Hindus.

This great Empire- which stretched from Delhi to Palam, to borrow a contemporary saying-
was a toothless nonentity kept afloat only by the paper consent by Islamic Bandit States to
its titular authority in the face of the expanding Maratha Empire, even as the Mughal
Emperors themselves ruled entirely by the consent of Pune.

81/85
The second half of the Eighteenth Century and the first half of the Nineteenth, thus, was
essentially one long showdown between the Maratha Empire on one side- and the
multitudes of Islamic tyrannies and theocracies, and the Turkish, Afghan, Kazakh hordes
they were inviting in the land, as well as the opportunistic Firang powers- especially the
Angrej, Firang, and Vilayat nations. The average Hill Raja with a mere two regiments of line
infantry would've been a greater military asset than the entire Mughal Empire at the time.

A Maratha victory in the Anglo-Maratha wars might've resulted in the exact same thing that
happened in 1857 CE anyway- the pensioning off of the so-called Emperor and the exile of
his misbegotten line to some suitably unpleasant Mleccha land.

774 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

Why did Native Americans never unite against the European colonization that sweep them
away from their ancestral lands?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 10
Asking why Native Americans didn't unite against the Angrej and Ispans is the equivalent of
wondering how Immortan Joe's “army” in Mad Max would've fared against a Scrin invasion.

1- Most Native Americans died long before they ever saw a Firang. 95% were dead of
disease, either intentionally or unintentionally spread by Colonialists within a few decades
of Contact.

2- The ensuing breakdown of Social Order and Civilization was so vast that we weren't
aware of massive cities and nations until recently. Vast complexes once dotted the
Amazonian basin but the once-civilized survivors regressed to Hunter Gatherers so
comprehensively that we looked at the place as a pristine wilderness until Satellite imagery
grew advanced enough.

3- We know that massive urban complexes such as Cahokia existed however such Native
American structures, unlike Meso American ones, were primarily built in flood plains of
rammed earth. Not only do they require more maintenance than stone, we know that floods
can destroy them quickly. Consider Wheeler's studies and the Shastras which point to
massive floods around 800 BC devastating cities across the upper Ganga valley. We see
that urban Civilizations, when they collapse, spark chain reactions ranging from economic
depression to mortality spikes. Ward-Perkins analysis of the fall of Rome demonstrates
how fast and comprehensive such collapses are.

4- 10th Century Malwa had Automatons and were considered the finest builders of
Bharata. Raja Bhoja's Great lakes were the largest man-made water bodies in history till
Hoover dam. Yet near-constant warfare with the Peacefuls, Conquest and Desolation, and
the joys of Angrej and Republic Raj ensured that this once-major centre of political power
became a heap of poverty-stricken dacoit-haunted villages until recently. In 550 CE,
Pataliputra was a wonder of the World, possibly the largest city ever built by man. By 600
CE, it was a ruin populated only by a handful of monks.

Moderners drunk on hedonism and the dubious wonders of their technology, fail to respect
the inevitability of Collapse and the End of all things.

82/85
Imagine a great City by the banks of the Missippi, a metropolis to rival immortal Prayaga or
high-walled Kaushambi. Imagine streets of rammed earth and lined canals and sun-baked
houses, flanked by gardens where is sold the produce of a hundred villages. Imagine
spearmen and heralds, poets and gardeners, kings and magistrates.

Imagine plague. A city of 100,000 men, women, and children- all but wiped out almost
overnight, suffering the most terrible afflictions. Imagine the survivors stumbling from door
to door seeking food and medicine and hope. There are no soldiers to restore order; the
survivors first thieve and then slay. There are no merchants; there is nothing to buy or
trade. There are no farmers; the villages are littered with the dead and dying, same as the
city.

The winter is terrible. Wolves and Bears stalk the crumbling snow-blanced ruins as mothers
struggle to give their dying kids warmth. Men look askew at each other, each wondering
who carries the taint of disease. The canals are silting up but the last engineer is dead. The
gates are crumbling but the last stonesmith fled the city. The strongest- or meanest- calls
himself King; he is slain by another, and so forth. There are no guards. There is no law.
Mist-haunting and Moon-weeping, ghosts and grief haunt the survivors of a once mighty
town.

Spring comes with fresh rains. And floods.

The few families left flee to the forests from whence Man had once emerged. The forest
feeds them. The forest clothes them. The forest comforts them. They forget the taste of
bread and the shine of gold. Their children forget the songs of distant lands and the music
of armies. Their grandchildren forget that once where dwell marsh lizards, there once stood
a shining city that ruled over territory that dwarfed Angrejistan.

Their great grandchildren meet the Angrej, keen-eyed and steel-armed- black with soot,
yellow with gold, red with the blood of a hundred peoples.

Thus was the fall of a Nation.

710 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

RecommendedAll
How did the British rulers in India fail to check the treasures hidden in temple vaults? Was
this mistake their first mistake or is there more to it?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 4
The Angrej were vandals of such reknown that no few contemporary (non Angrej) travellers
remark upon their acts.

The French explorer Louis Rousselet savaged British ‘historians’ in an extensive travelogue
during the 1860s: “The English are busily employed reducing the need for archaeology… of
Indian history. Already all buildings… are reduced to rubble and the same fate is reserved for
the rest, even the Jain statues. When I returned in December 1867, the trees had been cut
down, the statues shattered by workmen’s picks, and the ravine filled with rubble of the
palaces of the Tomars, Chandelas, idols of the Buddhists and Jains.”

83/85
https://topyaps.com/rediscovery-...

Sir Alexander Cunningham, the father of modern Indian Archaeology, mentions countless
such examples of looting and vandalism in his texts. Maurya pillars were lost when Angrej
officials used them for ballast & construction. Ancient temples were torn down for loot.

Except for temples either directly under princely control or far too important for the
community to be stripped completely, the Angrej and their Firang allies carried out looting
on an incredible scale. The Hope diamond used to be in a Telugu temple. And let's not start
on the Missionaries.

437 Views · View Upvoters

RecommendedAll
Why is the Parsi population declining in India?
Govind Sharma
Answered Nov 4
Because all communities that have high levels of female literacy invariably end up with
collapsing TFRs and declining demographic profiles, which inevitably lead to their being
swept away by a fresh cohort of more “patriarchical”, more “intolerant”, more “provincial”
newcomers who have as much love for educated women as the Prince Boar had for the
flamingo.

From Alaska to Azerbaijan, & Sweden to South

Korea, barren wombs and empty kindergartens are
becoming the norm- a norm that, as the texts of
the Ancients demonstrate, was not unknown to the
Sages of the Past.

Certain cohorts allege this phenomenon to be, for

some inexplicable reason, endemic to the “White”
race- even though there have been at least three
separate instances in the past 2500-odd years
where these self-same “White”- or rather,
Germanic- peoples took advantage of such a
predicament befalling their rivals.

But that's a story for another day.

Nonetheless, it's undeniable that throughout all of

recorded human history, there has been not one
case of any Civilization escaping this phenomenon,
though certain ideologies appear to breed a certain
resistance to- or at least, a tendency to mitigate the
worst of - the aforementioned state of affairs. Do
note that for all the wisdom of the Ancients, none
of them appears to have been able to suggest a
feasible solution to this matter.

84/85
What can Parsis thus do in order to prevent their - according to authorities as highly placed
as the Government of the Republic of India?

History tells us- Nothing.

Here we may quote the example of certain worthies of a certain past Civilization who,
though of keen scholarship and cognizant of the approaching doom, spend the dusk of
their nations in the abandon of wine and the joy of music, in the comfort of the knowledge
that life went on even after the fall of Hector and Achilles, for bronze-greaved Greek and
blood-stained Trojan alike.

857 Views · View Upvoters · View Sharers

85/85