Reviews for India: the Ancient Past: A History of the Indian Sub-Continent from C. 7000 BC to Ad 1200

The average rating for India: the Ancient Past: A History of the Indian Sub-Continent from C. 7000 BC to Ad 1200 based on 2 reviews is 3.5 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2019-10-07 00:00:00 Mona Deans The book talks about numerable oft not so popular facets of Indian history (the ones usually not taught in school). Some fasinating things I learned were: 1) the places Fa-hien visited : Peshawar, Kanauj, Kashi, Kapilavastu, Kusinagar, Vaishali, Pataliputra and several other Buddhist sites and leaving later from Tamrapalli towards Ceylon 2) That Aryabhata could have been a native of kerala given he worked at both kusumpura and Nalanda 3) the women who did not commit sati : Rati, kunti, uttara , dusala : these were given as instances by Kalhana in Rajtangi while deprecating the custom of Sati 4) French sculptor Rodin called the depiction of tandava as 'the most perfect representation of rhythmic movement in art' 5) Anaandavardhana and his treatise on the dhvani called "Dhvanyaloka" .He states that all poetic work is endowed with three powers: denoting in a factual way, implying something obliquely, or suggesting an imaginative vist. This was further refined by Kashmir Scholar Abhinavagupta 6) Sanskritists such as Dignaga and Dandin existed in Pallava period 7) Kalhana's very objective way of treating history : In his opinion, a historian must have a vision, he must be impartial, he should present his version of the story from his own perspective, and he must be able to synthesise a number of previous accounts into a coherent whole. and many other titbits of ancient history :) The only issue I had is that Avari is a believer in the Aryan invasion theory and this view seems a bit dated.

Review # 2 was written on 2017-12-03 00:00:00 Denzil De Sousa A good holistic account of the development of Indian culture and civilisation from the paleolithic age to 1200 CE. Burjor Avari is not a professional historian, but he uses good sources for this account. The only drawback is that South Indian history isn't given as much attention as that of the North.