Conscious of the fact that a batallion of "professional" historians & some crazy trolls have begun discrediting me, my work & whatever I said at @IndiaToday conclave with Dr @ShashiTharoor & @sardesairajdeep . Selective screenshots of NCERT books (usual ploy!) to prove falsehood+
Have been used. If such fakery & sleight of hand can be done on social media pity their students who suffer this on a daily basis!
Given below are links of entire books of NCERT :
Class 6:…
Class 7:…
Class 8:…
Anyone can download entire books & see my point proved amply. Class 7 textbook has merely a map in chp 2, pp 16 that just states names of southern dynasties like Rashtrakutas, Pandyas etc. Some hiranyagarbha myth cited to make Rashtrakutas & their brahmin priests appear foolish
On Cholas in same chp they apparently had 400 types of oppressive taxes- of course jizia later was benign! Cholas are disposed off in 3 pages flat. Apparently Mahmud Ghazni was v interested in finding out more about the ppl he conquered & so got Albiruni to write a book (pg 21)+
Bolstering my point of Delhi centricity while all these great kingdoms are disposed off in 2-3 pgs, chp 3 is fully devoted to the "Delhi Sultans" - what their contribution to this country is no one knows, but their tyranny remains unmentioned +
Chp 4 is fully devoted to "Mughal Empire". Chp 5 on "Rulers & Buildings' is also largely about Delhi Sultanate & Mughal architecture/tombs/gardens wt a few temples strewn in between. "Temples and mosques were beautifully constructed because they were places of worship"🤦 (pp 63)
Justification for temple destruction is elaborate by citing apparent Hindu attacks Pandyan king Shrimara Shrivallabha on Srilankan Buddhists- never mind if that demonizes Hindus or creates conflicts between Hindus & Buddhists; Islamic attacks create disharmony in nation building!
Mind u just 3 lines on any temple destruction at all as against 1 page of Hindu pillaging & that too mentioned so casually that Mahmud Ghazni was not a v important ruler & in middle ages it was common to destroy & loot places of worship of defeated rulers (p66). No proofs given!
Chp 6 on Towns, Traders & Craftspersons is where we get 1 page on Vijayanagara Empire (p 82-83) & that too more on Hampi & what Domingo Paes said & it just "fell" in 1565. No separate chapter for this important Empire but couched amidst unrelated matter. +
Chp 7 on Tribals & nomads has brief para on Ahoms (pp 99-100) where Mughals under Mir Jumla's defeat of Ahoms in 1662 is mentioned but Battle of Saraighat 1671 & counter defeat by Lachit Borphukan happily omitted! Less said abt bhakti & sufi movement in chp 8 the better!+
Chp 9 is called "Making of Regional Culture" - when there was no nation according to these worthies what is "national" & what is "regional"? Delhi is "centre" & Cheras of Kerala, Rajputs of Rajasthan, Bengal are merely "Regional"?Here too Mughals intrude the chapter vastly+
Chp 10 has details of Nadir Shah, Nizam-ul-Mulk, awadh nawabs, but Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj is disposed off in less than a quarter of a page that too under a portrait (pp 149). Peshwas get 1 page! Thus ends class 7 history book! +
If this doesn't prove my point of incommensurate portrayal of invaders as against native kingdoms I don't know what else can! I'm told "professional" historians work v hard & shouldn't be insulted. If this shoddy work is what comes after toil, they deserve all the rap on knuckles
Finally all trolls & their overlords sitting in foreign universities, passing slanders against me & my "ineligibilty" - these ad hominem attacks r smthing I'm long used to & they don't bother me one bit. So pls save ur ammunition for some weakling who'd cower under ur bullying.
Professional history doesn't just mean working in a university & churning more liars like oneself. I reject this clergy or should I say as you folks would love to - Brahminism & elitism! I have worked hard for 15 yrs to establish my credentials & won national & international+
Acclaim & Fellowships on the merit of 6 books I have authored & forthcoming one from Routledge UK. Hence certifications from anonymous trolls/"professionals"/media mischief makers/or ur close clique of circular referencers ("peer reviews") is something I reject in totality!
Truth, courage of conviction & a clear conscience along with the support of my readers is all that i have as my strength. The rest of you with no constructive criticisms/feedback & your malicious insinuations are irrelevant to my life or my work! So pls utilize ur time elsewhere!

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Dr. Vikram Sampath, FRHistS

Dr. Vikram Sampath, FRHistS Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @vikramsampath

14 Oct
In this discussion yday with @sardesairajdeep on @IndiaToday @irfhabib claimed that with 40 yrs work on Bhagat Singh he didn't find a single line of support from Savarkar for him. I wasn't given time to produce a counter, so here it is abt the bonhomie of the two men(1)
In an article "Vishwa Prem" published twice in Matwala of 15 & 22 nov 1926 Bhagat Singh spoke of Savarkar's tender heart despite being a revolutionary. "World-lover is the hero whom we do not hesitate a little to call a fierce insurgent, staunch anarchist- the same heroic (2)
Savarkar. Coming in the wave of world love he used to stop walking on the grass thinking that the soft grass would be mowed under the feet" (bhagat singh aur unke saathiyon ke sampoorn dastavez, Satyam ed. 2006, p 93) (3)
Read 13 tweets
11 Jun 20
Since quoting 1930-1940 texts seems to be the flavour of the times, Dr BR Ambedkar in "Pakistan or the Partition of India" 1940

"The brotherhood of Islam is not the universal brotherhood of man. It is brotherhood of Muslims for Muslims only" (1/n).
"There is a fraternity, but its benefit is confined to those within that corporation. For those who are outside the corporation, there is nothing but contempt and enmity." (2/n)
"The second defect of Islam is that it is a system of social self-government and is incompatible with local self-government, because the allegiance of a Muslim does not rest on his domicile in the country which is his but on the faith to which he belongs." (3/n)
Read 4 tweets
28 May 19
On the occasion of the birth anniversary of #VeerSavarkar posting some of my articles on him in recent past in wake of intense calumny he faces all the time! The much-misunderstood, maligned leader of our times! @narendramodi…
His views on social reforms, caste system, untouchability, cow protection etc were way ahead of their times n resisted strongly by the orthdox. An aspect of #VeerSavarkar we r seldom told abt! @narendramodi…
#VeerSavarkar sadly gets dragged in contemporary political mudslinging by opponents of @BJP4India or @narendramodi which does a great disservice to his legacy…
Read 9 tweets
15 May 19
Thank you Yogendra ji and i am glad there is civil discourse. I obviously can't put things in 140 character twitter-war format. But will b addressing all these issues in depth in my book based on years of research. Meanwhile u could read his Hindu Rashtra darshan and also (1/n)
The views of Sir Cripps who met Savarkar too and had remarked that one of the most clear n tough stands on freedom were taken by this man n i was flummoxed by his lawyer-like arguments (not exact words, but sum n substance). (2/n)
Under him the Hindu Mahasabha articulated a clear vision of free India where minorities could enjoy all rights n no special privileges like communal award or excess representations. Many like Savarkar n Ambedkar or Bose did not approve of Gandhi's methods (3/n)
Read 6 tweets
20 Oct 18
My dear Manu. Interesting "conversations" on ur TL appeared on mine n as a dear friend thought of sharing views wt a disclaimer of being neither an expert on Kerala history or Hindu theology or specifically #sabarimala. Open to b corrected (1/n)
1. I reckon u might hv mixed social evils such as dalit non-entry into temples n fundamental theology based on the sthalapuranam of #Sabarimala. Bhutanata upakhyanam doesn't forbid the former but states latter "will" of Deity to maintain naisthika or indefinite brahmacharya(2/n)
2. As part of nationwide reforms in Hindu society to allow dalits etc if these were done at #Sabarimala they didn't contravene it's fundamental character as espoused by the deity n as believed by His followers. (3/n)
Read 19 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!