Sumir Sharma

John This is a response to your post titled “What makes a good historian?” Apropos, first, I am adamant to come to this section of the Forum while responding to your post even when we have exchanged PM on the issue that where your write up should be located. I may sound adamant but I am interested in discussing something else than mere JFK. I understand the core of your activity but you have simultaneously trudged on a path which, I have reason to believe, that every person with a scientific bent of mind when delves into to huge mounts of historic sources always faces a dilemma, that is, if he has to remain scientific and continue with the faith and believe that history is also a mental exercise worthy of any human endevaour and a course worthy of human life then how a historic bent of mind should work. Well, it is right that historian is like a detective. He is a detective who never believes his own findings as final and keeps on evaluating what actually he has found. May be it is so, because, in case of a historian, his subject matter is a human being as that human being has lived over time and place. The scientists of physical sciences still believe like Greek philosophers that if the fact is not fixed and universal than you can not have scientific study of such a fact. You may have only opinions but not the actual fact. You may not like to read the works of Carr, (I myself have not read that small book by E. H. Carr, What is History with spiral on its title as the first pages begun where in he discussed that how he went about writing of history. Such a beginning never attracts me. My understanding of philosophy of history is built around the book by B. Sheik Ali, an Indian writer and Idea of History by Collingwood and a third book by some American writer whose name I have forgotten. The book of Carr is lying somewhere in the stacks of books which I do not look at for a long time and it continues to remain there untouched because a big layer of dust has settled on it and I am allergic to dust.) but I borrow his observation that there is always a need to establish a dialogue between present and past. But how that dialogue can be undertaken? How to lay the bait? How to learn about the site where you can have the right kind of fish? Is not the Ideology that right kind of angler and the bait both combined in one? Whenever I think on such questions, I always stop at passing a judgement that if there is no ideology, then there can be never be any study in history. “Ideology”, Yes this is the word to which I was exposed to, in a very dramatic manner. How Ideology plays its role, became more clear to me after that, by some incidences when the issue of contents of the history in the textbooks of history at Secondary level Schools in India was taken up. It started during the reign of the BJP rule at the Center in India. They started with the demand for the need of re-writing the history of India. I was very happy. There was need to re-write the history of India because, to borrow Romila Thapar verdict, the Indian historians have never studied the history of their country scientifically and they have only reacted to what others have said about India. I remember that I had felt a peculiar agitation in me when I read that once Lord Curzon spoke during a convocation in Calcutta University that “My dear friends, believe me, that India as a nation…” Then, there came the demand that there should by Saraswati Vandana at Schools. What was that? I did not know. Then an accusation followed that the Marxist scholars dominated the Indian history scenario and some changes were made at University level, in NCERT and CBSE. It was soon followed by the demand of re-framing the chapters of Indian History. The ruling party at that argued that the Indian history had never been presented as per the Indian view point and independent India was still following what J. S. Mills had decided for them. Very Right and I admired their judgement. Then came the thud, a thud quite loud at that but devoid of any stuff. They said that there was no Harappa Culture to begin with. May the Archeologist be damned! Then what should be the first chapter of Indian history? It should be Saraswati Civilization? Hay, What was that? They explained that the Aryans lived here since the beginning and it was from here that they had gone out to other countries. (Imagine How Bismarck and Hitler would have reacted to that version.) Very fine, What is the proof? They came up with a very scientific proof! They had exploded the next nuclear bomb at Pokran (Pokhran II). They were undertaking a search that how far the nuclear radiation had polluted the ground water. While exploring the ground water, they had dug out the earth from below and the sediments resembled those which had been discovered near Pehowa and along the course of River Saraswati. (There is not geographical proofs of River Saraswati. It is a mythological River till this day.) It was what they claimed. That showed that the Aryan civilization was flourishing in that region. Well, Does such arguments make sense? I do not know what was the reaction of Shereen Ratnagar, an archeologist of Protohistory of India and ancient Mesopotamia. Then it was followed by other controversies. The government of the time tried to place the portrait of V. D. Savarkar in the Parliament House. How far did I know about Savarkar? I knew that they were revolutionaries. Savarkar brothers had organised associations of Indian youth. Savarkar Senior had written a book in 1902 titled The First War of Independence – 1857 (something like that). They had undertaken some activities in Indian House in London. They were also associated with K S Verma who had promoted such revolutionary Indian youths in London. For me, he was a revolutionary. But I never knew that at any time, he had sought pardon from the British government. I never knew that he died an unknown death in an independent India. It surprised me that other parties, Congress as well Marxists, were totally against projecting Savarkar as a freedom fighter. May be, as a student of history, I have grown to a level, where I do not now belong to any nation. Or I do not have any fixed ideology. Apart from that, the next controversy was that Nathuram Godse was not an ideologue. He was a simple man and a pure nationalist. I stop here and do not dilate further. I know that you have written a book on Gandhi and American press had declared that Indian Nationalists still eulogize the assassin who killed the father of the nation when such attempts were being made. I also remember that Americans were moving nearer to Atal Bihari government before 9/11. Now I come to my first exposure to the Ideology controversy. I was attending a refresher course at Punjab University Chandigarh. Those were the days, when I had studied Guru Nanak in History by J. S. Garewal and was highly satisfied with the addition to my knowledge at that time. I was also satisfied because, the reading of that book had assured me about my own thought about the syllabus of History of Punjab which was being taught at undergraduate level. I have never enjoyed teaching that course. It is to me mainly biographies of Sikh Gurus and in no way can be termed as History of Punjab. I do not know how History of Punjab is taught in Pakistan. What would be the course structure and contents of History of Punjab in Pakistan? Once I met J. S. Garewal. He is an established historian. He had written for Oxford University Press. He has also written for Encyclopedia Britannica. I asked him a question about the structure of subject matter of New Cambridge History. I asked him that I have read Kenith Jones and John F. Richards. They claim to be writing history of South Asia but all the titles are about India. Why do they not call it the history of India and insist on calling it as a history of South Asia. He gave an answer. I persisted with some more queries. He does not give much time but with a smiling face he gave an answer which I hold back for now. I had listen about the strong disliking among the University professors against each other. I had never witnessed that. I also did not know about the groupism of Punjab University. We had a lecture on Punjab history by G. S. Dhillon. I have read his name and also read some of his articles. For me, any person from University and who has written some article or research paper, is worthy of admiration. In that group there were some scholars from Punjabi University Patiala who had better knowledge. they also knew about some conflict among different scholars writing on Punjab history especially on Sikh Gurus. The episode started when one gentleman scholar from Punjabi University raised the question that Garewal version of Sikhs gurus are more balanced than that of other scholars. I never knew that it was some kind of a trigger. There went off that explosion. Outburst of Dr. Dhillon was such that no narration of incidence could make that day alive again. But, the scholar had a class. He ended his session on one note that without ideology there can never be any history. If a historian does not have ideology, he could never analyze the source material. I was not able to understand what he had said. But, on last lines as mentioned above remained with me. I started troubling my mind again and again. It has raised so many issues in my mind. Before continuing with it, I will like that I should to also come up with my understanding of history. I understand that there are no laws in History. The day, the history would start enunciating laws, then it will transformed into a new subject and may not remain what it is today. Secondly, Be clear, that you should not have any value judgement about your subject of reading. Remain Impartial. Do not put your topic in the category of right and wrong. Just see that how the change and continuity had taken place and what was the response of human beings. Now, for nearly four to five years, whenever I read history, or try to ask any question about history, I read history with a theme which can be put in following words. The three main Engines or gears are Power, Wealth and Knowledge. If these three words are put in different manner, then It can be also be said that this trinity is Power, Money and Technology. These three measures have increased value of reading of history for me. Now whenever I read, I question, how power, money and knowledge had played its role at a given time on a given place. But, the issues which have come up is, that what should be analytical tools of a historian. How can he identify a fact? Should he use statistical methods more? What is that faculty which identifies that some thing is fact of history? How far the value and cultural background can possibly be kept out of history bent of mind? What is history trying to give to the society? Is it not mere a slave to political bosses? There are so many questions and the answer is not coming out. Every time, the assessment moves to the conclusion that “Ideology” is required to make a study of history meaningful for TODAY. The turmoil has not reached any conclusion. I have just laid out bare what goes on in my mind. I have not written any research paper. But I claim that I am sincere reader. I am convinced that history is a subject with a stuff. I have grown up to a level where I now just say that History is a philosophy taught be examples. I believe that Chinese has recorded history as their religious activity because that have learnt that this is the only scientific manner to learn about the real goal of human beings. I just stop here abruptly because I just wanted to share it. I have no one around me with whom I can undertake such talks. I have found forum a place where I can undertake such talks on the issue of philosophy of history. That is other thing, your list of definitions of History under topic Philosophy of history Quotations had just left me more confused and amused. But here I am before you, with a sincere and serious discussion and wait for your comment and views.

One of the succinct answer!!! a perfect summary!!! I just wish that I had given such answer to a query in my classroom or in my written lecture. I believe a further detailed explanation of each of thirteen colonies would bring out a good presentation. It can be a useful exercise in order to check ones own understanding and the share the sources from which answer to such questions can be made. Once writing a lecture on the Causes of the Civil War in America, I just started with a line that “the Conflict which became the cause of the Civil War had its origin in the process of establishment of the various colonies. The cause of Sectional Conflict can only be studied and appreciated if we understand the origin and the rise of each colony.” I scrapped those lines and then went for a general type of lecture. The above lines still remain on my computer from where I have copied them. Google affair is good but I feel if one has understanding of such topics, he should come up his version and presentation. Well, I will try.

Dear Tim, Primary Sources are contemporary sources. They can be the eyewitness account, the written material which was written at that time concerning a given event, the various items which belonged to that event or period. Herodotus is the father of history. He was the first person to have used the eyewitness account to write the history. Herodotus had crossexamined the eyewitnesses in such a manner that the reality of the event which would have existed in its true form had been identified and then recorded. He wrote his work called “history” which was an account of war between Grecian and Persians. Before him, whatsoever went around is classified as Myths as there is not evidence to prove the facts given in there. Now these days, the present generation has more primary sources as the media for preserving such sources are many. The people who were directly involved or concerned with JFK assassination whom you desire to meet to seek answers to many of your doubts, are primary sources. All the discussion which you are now carrying on, if it remain confined to the actual facts will become a secondary source. However, primary sources are dealt with great caution. IN history, there are two sources on Mauryan Period. One is Indica by Magathenese which is not available in original form but the details of Indica are given by writers like Strabo and Justin. The latter two were contemporary of Magathenese. The second source is Arthasashtra by Kautilya (Vishnu Gupta) who was the main advisor to the Mauryan King Chandragupta Mauraya. In Indica, it is written that there were seven social classes in India. However, Arthsashtra gives account of four Varnas which was latter called castes. Similarly, the inscriptions on Pillars which were written by Asoka, he identifies classes living on the periphery of the civilized world or Antajatiyas. Similarly, there are two primary sources about the Akbar period. One is by Abu Fazal called Akbarnama and other is by Barani. They gives totally different account of Akbar administration. As Abu Fazal had direct access to the official records and Barani has some different agenda in writing his account, there Abu Fazal account is considered more authentic. But both of them are considered as the primary sources. Hence, the contemporary proofs, writings and eyewitness accounts are primary sources. They are always considered authentic. Secondary Sources are all those written works which are based on the works that had been based contemporary sources. They are sources which are written afterwards. All the books and documents based on the accounts of past are secondary sources. You write a book on JFK debate on the basis of discussion on this forum, then it will be a secondary source. Hence, anything written later, based on the version which is given on the evaluation of primary sources is a secondary source. There is a very good exercise on related sites on this very forum. Even John has raised this question in one of his posting in History debate. He had raised the issue on ideology in the field history. It also deals with dealing with primary sources and secondary sources and the analytic methods adopted in the field of history to reach a scientific conclusion. In Philosophy of History Section of this forum, I will raise such questions for my own benefit. I am posting this answer but with a feeling that meaning is not conveyed as clearly as it should been done. I am interested in learning what John will say. It seems that he is reading something on methodology in history. Your posting is directed towards him. (he is already here with the answer) Finally, you have suggested to say something on Post Modernism in history. I wish that I might soon learn about it. Post Script: John is already with the answer. I just place it for my own benefit so that I may get some comments on it from John.

Dear Rowena, Indians are like that. C. V. Raman, the noble prize winner, placed Chandan dot on his forehead. Indians buy the finest computer and before they start it, they would place Swastika on it (it is different from what Hitler had adopted as his symbol.). They would buy the best car in the market but first take it to the temple and pray to Hanuman, the symbol of Mangal or Mars. If they meet an accident with the new car, they will propitiate the Shani, or the symbol of Saturn. They would raise the biggest refinery with the latest technology and complete it before the scheduled time but before starting it, they would perform the prayers of Maha Mritunjiya yagjna to safeguard against any major accident. If someone get angry, then he prays to moon and wears moti (white stone). From the name ‘Shamita Das’, I guess that she was an Indian and from Bengal, a highly conservative and superstitious place. However, Bengal was in the forefront of Indian Renaissance and National Movement because it was exposed to scientific temper due to the British government which was first based at Calcutta. It shifted to Delhi in 1911 to New Delhi in 1923 The science has never taken up any research on such issues. Is there need to pursue such a course? When the Tsunami struck at India, a leading meteorologist who is also known for his knowledge of numerology, accused the factor of “8”. It was 26 of December that day. Similar, the last earthquake at Bhuja, to which even President Clinton gave so much care, occurred on January 26. Another even on the sub-continent was the death of Pakistan President and Military dictator Zia-ul-Haq. The numerologist had predicted that he would die on August 8, 1988 ie is 8-8-1988. It was reported that he avoided that day. However, he died in a crash on August 17, 1988. That was again 1+7=8 and finally 8-8-1988. Now in case of this forum also, the total members of this forum on December 26 was 1088. If you add the each numeral, then you get 17 and 1+7= 8. The Forum went off the net for three days I believe. Well if you continue with this pattern then dates 8, 17, and 26 of every month would be ominous for the sub-continent. It is really horrifying. Now what would the year 2006 bring for this region? If there is a pattern, then I should get my passport ready and fly out of here. (I am based in India.) Now let us stop here and end with your opening lines. As a scientist, Earthquakes to ‘us’ are simply a natural phenomenon. End of story. John Simkin is really coming up with right type of attitude and arguments which I think should be imbibed by all the researchers and academicians. Kindly take this reply in a lighter way. Well we can afford to do that only if someone very near to us has not perished in that catastrophe. This is also another way of response on the part of human beings. You come out of the cremation or burial of a friend and then just forget that someone like you, alive, kicking, feeling, seeking, all human is no more among us. Can we say, God knows !!!.

Dear John, I desire to direct your attention to a report at link (thread): http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/973923.cms. The government of India has not declined the offer. Rather, it has sought to seek it when it would be required if needed. I think that it is quite fair. Secondly, India has an unwritten but holy policy of not asking for aid during emergencies which is result of her past experiences. It is not that India is self-sufficient (In present world economic scenario, such a concept of Self-sufficiency is redundant). It is still a poor country but with enough strength to stand up again but for that it needs help at different levels. The country does not have the proverbial Roosevelt’s Chicken in every bowl (many Indians are strict vegetarian). The literacy rate is only 53 percent. Similarly there are nearly about forty percent below poverty line. (The exact economic data may differ from the ratios which I have given but I am sure that my figures are near to the actual data). The infrastructure required much improvement. I am not able to access the forum and place my views for which I have desire and need only because electricity supply in my state is very erratic. The plus points are that India is now showing 6% + GDP growth every year for last five years. There is 8 billion $ investment by FII this year though it is quite low as compared to what they have invested in China. However, India is pro-active. The Ministry of science and technology has already placed an order for DART, an early warning system for Arabian Sea and Bay of Bengal. It was fascinating to learn that the Pacific Region organization which could have helped saving many lives, remained confined to sending information to Diego Garcia which keeps eye on Geo-political activities in Indian Ocean. It is situated nearer to Maldives which had suffered badly. They just showed the lack of imagination when they showed their helplessness because they did not know whom to contact at that time. It is said that they had three hours to do that. The Indian government has already thought of sensitizing the people at school level. It was found that only one education board on High level schooling that ICSE had information on Tsunami. Most of Christian Missionaries schools are affiliated to this board. Most of the schools are affiliated to CBSE. There are other similar natural calamities looming above with ominous portents. On such impending calamity can be blockade on Preechu River. The Preechu River is a tributary of Satluj River. The Preechu River in China border could cause great havoc to states which are riparian states along the banks of River Satluj. It is an estimate of experts if the Preechu River busts then nearly 50 odd human settlements between Preechu confluence with Satluj and Gobind Sagar Dam could perish in flash flood. In such eventuality, the water body would just be like another Tsunami. There are similar warnings by the experts concerning the earthquakes are the north India is situated on the contact point of Gondwana plate with Arkans Plate or the Indian Plate with the Asian plate which is cause of the origin of Himalayas. Yes, the western world could feel amazed to some extend. They could be surprised that when your are in difficulty and some good friends are offering you help out of human consideration, then what type values and virtues are forcing you to decline that offer. You may be capable enough to face a crisis but crisis is a crisis. The type of tragedy which South Asian countries had suffered, pained the human heart whole over the world. I do not have the answer to that objection.

The Western Media is covering the Tsunami attack on Asia. They are doing a perfect job. It will be in the right order of things, that the world, which has come out with their full might and as they have those resources and technologies which are required on the ground, should also learn and listen to the people who are actually suffering. The best way is to seek information from the Asian sources. The people there could not reach the western media. It is an opinion that the local media could highlight their plight, their sorrows and their requirements in a manner in which they demand. The following are some of the Print Media which could be the source of information as viewed above. National Level Newspapers: www.timesofindia.com www.hindustantimes.com www.hindu.com This group of publication is from south India. www.tribuneindia.com http://in.indiatimes.com/ http://www.expressindia.com/ www.tribuneindia.com A totally South India based leading group: www.manoramaonline.com A Government of India site www.nic.in This site will provide the government of India information. It includes the activities of the different ministries and the various government institutions and associations. It is the right site for learning about the policies of the Indian government. It also includes the Parliamentary reports and proceedings. The Primitive Tribes of Anadaman and Nicobar Island: The world should also take note of the five primitive tribes of Andaman and Nicobar Island which was more near to the underground earthquake. These tribes are The Great Andamanese, ONGE, JARAWAS, SENTENELESE and SHOMPENS The Sentenlese, a Negroid tribe, had resist all the efforts of the Indian government since long. The Indian Anthropologists are of the view that they have traditional ways of surviving such holocausts.

Graham Davis, Accept my Christmas greetings. “The term "dark" - again, as I thought - often refers to the scarcity of historical and literary evidence in comparison …” You are quite right. A Dark Age in history refers to the scarcity of historical and literary evidences. This is what happens when the words are not used with seriousness and correct perception. Being a teacher, it was quite embarrassing for me when I realized that what I had been explaining to my students was not correct. I am facing another dilemma. In India, the world history period syllabus starts from Renaissance. There are questions like decline of Feudalism; the features of Renaissance and causes of Renaissance. There is no place for teaching the earlier period. Secondly, in all the books which are popular with students, (Question answer forms which in India are called ‘Kunjis’, there are Kunjis even for MD entrance test based on Harrison’s book on Pathology), it is very strongly written that the period preceding Renaissance was a dark age and what had followed was all Renaissance and Enlightenment. Well, I myself had been teaching this. Now, when I am expanding the horizon of my reading, I realize that what I am reading from authorities is something else. The realization has become more painful. I had written a book along with another friend for a different class. Now we had planned to write the book for the world history which is being taught in the third year of Bachelor of Arts Courses. I wrote the chapter and showed it to my friend. I explained him that we have to correct this misconception about the period. He is more practical than me. Suggested that we should present this aspect as it will be different from other books and other teachers would declare our book as a wrong book. Well, I have tried to convince him. He had kept my manuscript and told me that he would make the necessary changes but would also incorporate the facts in the manner in which I am presenting. Let us see, what he would do. I have been trying to figure out the cause of such a perception about the age preceding Renaissance period. What I have been able to make out is that the historians of Enlightened period are the cause. The scholars/historians like Locke, Hume, Brekley etc who wrote during the Enlightened period, projected the preceding period as an irrational, unscientific and crude period. In the words of Collingwood, “the Enlightenment had treated it as unenlightened or barbaric and left in obscurity…” (Idea of History). Same perception was carried to the field of literature and arts which flourished during the Renaissance period. I had presented this view to one of my colleague who is with Political Science Department. He is teaching Political Thought. He also concurred with me. He commented that even they are teaching with the same perspective while all the thinkers which they teach or project as the pioneers of different political thought belonged to thirteenth century of before that. He also desires to recheck his facts after completing his present assignment on which he is working for his doctorate thesis. You have mentioned that your thesis concerned the pre-Renaissance period. Will you give some thought over my contention in light of your own thesis? Regarding Dark Age and Middle Age periodizaiton, which you have mentioned, I again want to differ with you. What I have been able to learn as per the new essays, (Read on the basis of leads given in Encyclopedia Encarta 2003), the period between 500 to 1500 is Middle Ages. The Middle ages was divided into three phases viz Early Middle Ages, High Middle Ages and Late Middle Ages. I am reproducing a portion of my manuscript based on the leads mentioned above. If you find time, just go through it. Middle Ages is a term used for the period in history of Europe from the fifth century to the fifteenth century. The fifth century in the history of Europe marks the end of the Roman Empire. The fifteenth century in European history is identified with the active period of the Renaissance which had started in the fourteenth century. Hence, it is difficult to say that when the Middle Ages ended and Renaissance started. It is a perfect case of continuity and change in history wherein something of Middle ages continued into Renaissance and new changes also came up which ended the Middle ages. The term “Middle Ages” was first used by Flavio Biondo an Apostolic secretary in Rome. He was an historian also. He used this term in his book “Decades of History from the Deterioration of the Roman Empire” first published in 1483. In his book, he tried to show that during this period, a stagnation in cultural development had set in. it is not be concluded that there was period in which cultural activity did not take place. It had its own culture. But there was strong binding of Christian church on each and every aspect of human affair. The paintings were made but they did not depict the natural forms of human beings. They could only be made as per the standards allowed and permitted by the Church. The poetry was written but it had to adhere to the rules permitted by the church. The political activity was there but it had to follow the whims of the bishops of the Church. Each and every aspect of the life in Europe was ordered by the Church. As a result, the development in the human activities was regulated by the Church. Church could ban any thing. It could excommunicate the king. Hayes had therefore called the period of Europe in fourteenth century as the Christendom. The scholars had divided the Middle ages into three phases. Each phase had its unique cultural traits which later became the cause of Renaissance and Reformation. The first stage of Middle ages is called the Early Middle Age. This period extended over three hundred years. It started somewhere at the decline of the Roman Empire (the last Roman Emperor Romulus Augustulus was removed in 476 A. D.). It was also marked by the end of the raids of Germanic races and their final settlement within the boarders of Western Europe. It also marked the coming of the stability of economic condition which suffered dislocation that had started at the decline of the Roman Empire. Therefore, there is no fixed date from which it can be marked as the starting date of the Middle Ages in European History. However, it for from 5th century onwards that the Middle Ages is considered to have started. However, it was a period in which the well established and elaborate system of Roman Empire period tried to coexist with the multiple primitive cultural patterns which were being brought by the Germanic races to the Western Europe. The Early Middle Ages was marked with localized social and economic arrangements. The Germanic races which had arrived in the Western Europe, came in form of Confederacy of tribes. Where they settled down, they tried to establish some thing near to a kingdom. Overall, no central authority existed in Western Europe during this period. The local pattern of social and economic systems also created local political centers. A new pattern of local political authorities emerged in form of seignories. The peasants themselves had come under the protection of the senior landlords which afforded them security. They retained their private right to property in their estates but they got bound to continuous dependence on them. The senior land lords which gave birth to seigniors system, received from them free labour in return of the protection which they provided. The peasants were not allowed to sell off their lands and go away but they retained their right on the land which they tilled. In absence of any central authority, this submission provided them the security from other senior landlords. This was relation between the peasant and local dominant property holders. Among the leading warrior aristocracy, there were social ties based on kinship. However, gradually another relation developed among them based on land grants and with military obligations attached to them. Such relations along with already existing seignorian relations evolved in to Feudalism which became the major political, economic and social feature of the European history during the High Middle Ages and Later Middle Ages. Thus Feudal relations developed when the land was traded for military and other services. The scholars find different sources of the development of such a land based relations to the Roman period and to the traditional relations between the Germanic tribes which had come to the western Europe. The major effect of the development of this relation was that for a long time which spread over whole of the Middle ages, a consolidated or central political authority did not develop. The political authority remained fragmented among the feudal leaders. As long as, the factors which had promoted the development of the feudal system remained the Middle ages continued. With the passage of time, when new factors emerged which effected those factors on which feudal relations based on land based obligation loosened the ties based on such obligations, the feudal system declined. It is not surprising that there was no central political authority in Europe during the Middle Ages. There were no nations which had developed so prominently on during the later stage of the Middle Ages. However, there was another unity in Europe. This unity was imparted to Europe by the Catholic Church. The Roman Catholic Church was the only institution in Europe which had its influence over the whole Western Europe during the Early Middle Ages. The Church reached every corner of the western Europe by spreading its authority through the churches to the whole Western Europe. But it was under the common central control of the Bishops. The Bishops and Cardinals selected the Bishop to the throne of St. Peter. The Bishop on the throne of St. Peter was called the Pope and he was on the top of the authority structure. Thus, a universal organization with a central authority existed in Europe in Early Middle Ages. This was the only institution which united the whole of Western Europe. Such were the main features of the Early Middle Age in Western Europe. This Europe lived with the memory of being in a territory which was once under the central control of the Roman Empire. However, this was the world which had come up on the decline of the Roman Empire. No attempt was made to revive the central authority about which this world had the memory. But this world tried to save that memory of that world by saving the knowledge of that past. The work of the past scholars were copied and systematized. St. Isidore of Seville compiled the encyclopedic work called Etymologies (623). Another main inheritance was the Bible. They preserved Bible in form of hand written copies. In the intellectual field all the worldly achievements and activities in the field of study were the preparation for the understanding of the Bible. High Middle Ages The Early Middle Ages ended in the tenth century when new invaders came to the Western Europe. They were Vikings from the North and Magyars from east from Asian Steppes. They displaced the people. The agricultural activity stopped due to the raids. The population declined. The unity in Europe ended. However, the monasteries which had come up in different parts of the Western Europe remained the pockets of the civilization in Europe. The memory of past was safe because it was made safe in the monasteries during the Early Middle Ages. However, the process of disintegration stopped by 1050. The different areas again became the centers of aggressive human activities. The migration which took place with the invaders created many pockets of settled population. Town life was revived. The Town life started its earlier activity of trade and commerce with more vigour. The Vikings were not such invaders who came only to destroy. The modern scholars have proved they were basically traders. They brought the activity of trade and commerce back to life after spreading out into Europe. They created a complex, dynamic and innovative society. The modern European scholars are more attracted to this period and even have termed it as the twelfth century Renaissance that is different from the Renaissance of the fourteenth century. The High Middle Ages is marked by the end of the controversies about the succession of the Pope. It was followed by fully developed administration of the Roman Catholic Church. It became the most sophisticated governing institution in the Western Europe. It followed by the spread of the political influence of the Pope throughout the Western Europe through diplomacy and the administration of Justice through the extensive spread of the churches throughout the Western Europe. On the spread of political influence of the Pope, the monastic order also grew and flourished. It was monastic order that got involved in the secular world in more elaborate manner. Among the various monastic orders which flourished under the patronage of the Pope, a feudalistic order developed. More new monastic orders developed. The new monastic order like the Cistercians and Franciscans performed many social welfare activities and penetrated the urban life through their pious works. It was through their activities that the Roman Catholic Churches became the center of human existence in the Western Europe. Hayes had rightly said that the Western Europe had become the Christendom. The various rites of the Christian world which came to identify as the outer symbols of the spirituality of the Christianity became the force which joined the whole Western Europe. By bringing the unity in life of the Western Europe, the Roman Catholic world also started a very vigorous world of intellectual activity. It was this intellectual activity which laid the ground in which new changes brought out the Renaissance changes. The monastic order established schools and universities. New degrees were constituted in the field of medicine, law and theology were constituted in the universities established and run by the various monastic orders. The University of Bologna undertook highly commendable work in the field of ecclesiastic and civil law. Similarly, the medicine work preserved in Arabic works were translated into European languages in different universities. It was such inquiries and activities which developed new methodologies in the field of study and inquiry which brought major changes in the field of studies. Scholasticism brought new philosophies which commented on every aspect of writings in the Church. It was under such activities that the High Middle Ages became a great age of philosophy in the history of Western Europe. After the field of philosophy, this Age is also contributed to the field of art by schools of Romanesque and Gothic Art and Architecture. In the field of study, the activity of study did not remain the preserve of monks only. Apart from Latin, the literature was also produced in the vernacular language. The writing in the vernacular language addressed to issue like love poetry, courtly affairs and history for which there was now an educated class to read them. Under the unity imparted by the Church administration which grew in the twelfth century, the thirteen century Europe made tremendous achievement in human affairs. “During the 13th century the achievements of the 12th century were codified and synthesized. Now the human settlements existed for centuries. The trade and commerce bound the Europe in more closely into an economic unity. The commercial activity was carried by the merchant bankers of Italy. They carried their activities to France, England, other countries of Europe, German areas and North Africa. The Europe saw extensive travelling population moving out for a pilgrimage, or to universities for education, or to undertake some trade. The High Middle Ages was also a period of Crusades. Crusades provided an example of the unity of Europe during the Middle Ages which was brought by a central church. It was during the period that works of art in the school of Gothic Architecture and art appeared. It was period of great philosophic works identified with people like St. Thomas Aquinas. In the field of literature, the best example is Divine Comedy by Dante Alighieri. Late Middle Ages The Late Middle Ages was a period of conflict and dissolution. High Middle Ages was a period of institutional unity and intellectual synthesis. During this period the Secular states emerged. It was in such states, the seeds of national feeling started germinating. No doubt, the national feelings did not grow to the level in which it appeared in later period but the change started in Late Middle Ages. For next few centuries, a conflict between Church and State started. The Towns and cities came alive with full of human activities. They grew in size and prosperity. The cities started a struggle to acquire self-political control. With in the urban centers, different classes, guilds and interests started a struggle for achieving control over the urban centers. In the urban centers of Italy, the seignorial corporations started giving importance to the political and social thinking. They developed a vision of a state which had its own right and powers independent of Church and its followers. The people of Europe in urban centers realized that their knowledge and experience could not be synthesized with the divine talks. They learnt that the human affairs on this earth and divinity of the other world work in their own spheres and could not join. It started a period of a new field of knowledge which later was called the political science. However, this stress on political philosophy did not end the faith of the European world in the spiritual world. The European world developed a new vision of spiritual quest. They tried to establish the direct link with the God through personal endeavours. In this quest for the spiritual questions, they did not find any place for the directions from the organized Church of that period. They felt that they could do without the established administration of Roman Catholic Church. They sought the spiritual links in the words of Bible on their own. The mystical experiences became more spiritual than the dependence on the Roman Catholic Church. Mystical experiences were open to all classes of people. They came to be regarded as the personal gift from God. The social rank or cultural attainments were not immaterial for receiving such a gift from the God. The devotional reading of Bible showed a new world to the people of Europe. It did not require the medieval institution of Church. It gave them a different experience from what the Church administration made them to live with. New brotherhood of believers in Bible started emerging. It gave birth to Brethren of the Common Life sect, Franciscan sect etc. They raised the issue of reforming the church. Many of them just thought of living with the guidance of the organized Church of Medieval ages. The Black Deaths brought a situation of crises in which such sects flourished and became more meaningful and attractive to the survived humanity. It were such spiritual novelties which brought the Protestant Reformation. It was during this age the new national identities were established which became the foundation stone of the modern nation states. The robust trade and finance activities laid the foundation of the equally strong European economy which later made it the active civilization in the modern period. Thus, in the dissolution of the medieval world, in its social and cultural turmoil the seeds of the modern age may be found.

I know that if used properly, search-engines come up with the goods 95% of the time. When they don’t, they invariably give you enough leads to find the information offline. I fully agree with you John. I think somewhere on this forum someone had remarked that it is where you look that matters. Secondly, if you have the right question and clarity, it helps you to reach the goal on net itself. What do you actually do in a library? Pick up the books, look at the index, then read a portion of the relevant page and then run to the photostat section. After coming to your desk, you find that there are many such phrases and concepts about which you do not have clarity or the author knows more than you. You spent the time, writing and then rewriting. What is the final result? Waistage of time. Now, with new CDs which is coming with most of the books, there are references of right threads and links and you soon come out with what you really want to write and present like the essay or lecture to your students. I take up a recent case. There was a comment on the first use of word Hindustan in religious book by a leading scholar on Sikh literature. I just placed this query with a discussion forum. I was delighted to receive answer from Dr. D. N. Jha of JNU University Delhi who is considered master of this field. The answer was well formed with the right sources to quote. Now I do not think that Dr. Jha would have ever got oppurtunity to explain this origin. Even if he had done in any of his lecture, it would have gone unnoticed. But, the exact information of its origin required lot of hardword and sweating. Now I am benefitted from it. I think what Mike Devis is referring to is that when suddendly you find that there is demand of charges when you are about the get the required infromation. It is there. Some body has worked hard and believe that he should be paid for it. I do not think it is bad. He may think that his item is saleable, he is in every right to ask for money. But it is you, the seeker, who knows what actually you want. It is you, if your question is right, who can find the answer. secondly there are people who believe that the technolgoy is to facilitate the communication and web in a boon. they are not that commercial minded. What do you think about the information on economy and share market. I remeber that I had to pay for numerous generals to get the figures and datas. Now, all the figures and datas come to me free of cost through emails. Now I am not paying for that. On the whole, the sellers are there but there are real and serious seekers of knowledge and information who believe in sharing and there are many. sumir

I seek the advice of the members of history on the best books on Post Modernism in the field of history. Further, Would any one like to explain this concept in the field of history as studied under subject/topic head "Philosophy of History"

Dear UlrikeSchuhFricke, Two posers: First, in the book "The Idea of HIsoty by R. G. Collingwood edited by Jan Van Der Dussen, 1994, Great Britain", Chapter II page 46 to 85, I have gathered that a very qualified answer has been given to the attitude of the Enlightened period historians towards the Middle Ages as a Dark Age. In there, I think, it has been given in a very restrained manner. We may discuss over it. In my next letter after reading the appropriate lines and giving there reference, I will like to start with philosophical and historiographic explanation of such a perception. If it suits you, then kindly give your views on that. Secondly, I am actually trying to write a book for the World History syllabus of Punjab University, Chandigarh, India. All books which are available in the market are very assertive in declaring Middle Agesas Dark Age. Even a new book which I recently bought written by Irving L Gordon for American history, has also given this concept. On the other hand, Frank Conlon of Washington University has similar view like us. Now the problem is that my coauthor say that I should go along with the general perception and should not try to present a research paper in the book. Well, monetary consideration may change my insistence on presenting this view that Middle ages were Dark ages. I have re-written the chapter with quotation from Collingwood. Now your answer is also giving support to my argument. I seek your permission, to quote your name in my write up in the new manuscript which I may take to my coauthor most probably by this sunday. Kindly revert back at the earliest. I have made a copy of your view and going to add to an appendix which I am presenting along with the chapter in order to convice my author that this view could be published in this manner. Sumir. The perception of the Middle Ages as a period of stagnation was created by the Reniassance and has survived in scientific research and discourse till more or less today. Only slowly is the image of this period changing and I think that most teachers share your feelings. What has been going on fro some time now is a process of re-thinking and re-writing the history of the Middle Ages leaving behind the biased interpretation of Reanissance philosophers and historians and concnetrating on the things which already began in the "Dark Ages" (you mentioned some examples yourself). Actually many things which we associate with the "Dark Ages" like witch-hunts had their high time after the Middle Ages had come to an end. The longer I study and teach the Middle Ages the more complex the subject becomes. What makes the Middle Ages so fascinating and so difficult at the same time that on the one hand the Roman Empire really and truly had come to an end; knowledge was lost but on the other hand new political and social structures developed and of the scientific discoveries we associate with the Renaissance have their roots in the Middle Ages: even people in the Middle Ages saw and knew that the world was round because the could see that the horizon was and is no straight line but a slightly curved one; the famous medieval maps with Jerusalem in the centre of the world were not meant to be geographically correct but were mirrors of a specific philosophical view of the world with Jerusalem as its spiritual centre. <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Dear Tim. If time permits you, I will like to start a discussion with you. 1. We have a topic at Post Graduate Level which reads, Causes of Civil War, Sectional Conflict. Now I have read two books thoroughly. One is by Henry Bamford Parkes and Second is by Baylin and four authors. There are separate sections on Sectional Conflict in Parkes. I think that I know what was the sectional conflict. But I just want to learn from an American friend ( I hope that I can I have that claim) that how does an American describe the sectional conflict which led to the Civil War. Secondly, once there was a question in our university paper which read somewhat like this: Was Civil war a national war or a result of regional conflict? What do you understand from this question? 2. I do not remember the name of the book but it was written by some British author about the American History. It was a library book which I was suppose to return after four weaks. I read early chapters but did not finish the whole book. This always happens with me in case of library books. I prefer to keep my own personal copy of the book if I find it good. Anyhow, While discussing the America War of Independence, the author of that book had dilated on the issue that why did America separate herself from Britain. He was giving a theory that Americans were brothers who had parted their way from their mother Land. So, Can I ask you a question, that why did America separate herself from Britain? The colonial empire which they had built in ninteenth century was not there at that time. In India, Britain had not occupied Delhi even by that time. I hope I am not offending you in any manner. Believe me, it is a query of a teacher and discussion is in the realm of intellectual interaction. Sumir. Sumir, Welcome. I am American, not European, but if you stick around here long enough you will find that I have an opinion on just about everything. Europe, and England most especially, influenced countries worldwide during its days of pervasive colonialism. As the saying went, The Sun Never Sets On The British Empire. The post World War II environment, in which such colonialism was increasingly less viable, marked a critical transition in the emerging third world nations and the growth of nationalism. It was in this environment that India gained its independence. But with the corresponding rise in Cold War tensions, in many ways America moved in to fill the void with its need to align the world according to clear divisions of communist or anti-communist ideology. As U.S. Secretary of State in the 1950s, John Foster Dulles, held, you're either with us or against us. There were a few nations that admirably resisted such black and white definitions; the two that come to mind are Egypt and India. And then of course there was Vietnam. So generally, I find the tansitional period away from colonialism and toward independent nationalism a fascinating era in world history. Again, welcome to the forum. Tim Carroll <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I am lecturer in college at Ludhiana affiliated to Punjab University, Chandigarh, India. I have seen the contents of your web site and find them interesting. I feel like joining it and participate in various topics which are posted there. I am getting more interested in European and American History as these are my papers for teaching at Post Graduate Level. Through the major part of my teaching career I had been teaching Indian History. Now, for the last five years I am teaching American History and learning about many shortcomings in my knowledge about the European World. My main aim is to interact with the teachers and people from European Background to learn and understand their version about their own history.

I am lecturer in college at Ludhiana affiliated to Punjab University, Chandigarh, India. I have seen the contents of your web site and find them interesting. I feel like joining it and participate in various topics which are posted there. I am getting more interested in European and American History as these are my papers for teaching at Post Graduate Level. Through the major part of my teaching career I had been teaching Indian History. Now, for the last five years I am teaching American History and learning about many shortcomings in my knowledge about the European World. My main aim is to interact with the teachers and people from European Background to learn and understand their version about their own history. Therefore, I desire to join you people. I feel that I may get chance to learn more and cover up the gap about my understanding of history of people about people who are foreign to me. This is my understanding of history. I have yet to read a book on History of England which is yet another shortcoming in my study on American history. Every time I take a new book on American history, they start with the European influence over the history of America and they finally come the effect of History of England over America.

Sir, Two years back I had read 'The Twentieth Century World International History' by William Keylor, 1984, Oxford University Press, New York. It is not on British History. However, I share an experience. The author is very candid in accepting that it is a work based on secondary sources. Secondly, I did not have the clarity about the Great Depression. However, after reading the chapter on Great Depression, I found that I had developed the right perception of this phase of world history. It helped me to understand the New Deal from H. B. Parkes which is on History of America. Now I am able to give facts and figures in a better way and if any good query comes from my students, I am very comfortable in answering them. No doubt, I have latter added to my understanding by collecting more data on Great Depression and New Deal. The third thing, which I am able to appreciate about this book is that there is organic unity in narration on every topic. The book is based on secondary sources. But the author has not just gone for a cut and paste method to provide the understanding of a topic. He had first himself understood that what he had read and what he understood from that. Then he has written that in his own words. This is something which as a teacher I appreciate the most. There is an author in India named Dr. A. C. Arora. He has retired from Punjabi University Patiala, Punjab, India. His daughter is a teacher in History Department of PUnjab UNiversity Chandigarh. He has written books on European History and World History. Dr. A. C. Arora is known that he always kept on jotting down from different books and had made files on every topic. In case of his one Book, the World History from Renaissance Period to 1870, which is basically written for University syllabus of PUnjab Universities in INdia. I have made marks on the book showing that from where the Dr. Arora had borrowed his wordings. But the finnest thing about his books is that there is an organic unity. the similar thing I have found in the book of Keylor. Sumir.

I have been teaching to the under graduate classes that Renaissance succeeded Dark Ages. For some time, my understanding was that the Gothic Art was not of high class. The Middle Ages in European History was a period of intellectual stagnation. I have read Hayes who had started history of Europe by declaring that Middle Ages was period of Christendom. I gathered that it was a period of religious fundamentalism. The Roman Church swayed the intellectual world. It regulated the flight of intellectual endeavours and as a result, restricted the world of free thought. I had also read that it was Flavio Biondo an Apostolic secretary in Rome who had given this view in his book titled "Decades of History from the Deterioration of the Roman Empire" first published in 1483. However, recently I was reading on Middle Ages. I read about the achievements of the Scholasticism. The university of Bologna initiated the work of translation of book of Medicines from Arabic world. It is also a fact that it was the 12 th century which ushered into the world of high philosophical achievements in the western world. It was the period when the Gothic and Romanesque Art and Architecture developed and flourished. It was the period when troubadour lyrics and courtly romance were written and sung and immortalized in literature of Europe. I think that it was a civilization which had made tremendous achievements in the field of human endeavours. The above achievements can not be called the achievements of Dark Period or a period of Stagnation. The whole world of Philosophy in politics is result of the High Middle Ages. The coming of Vikings did not prove a drag. For me, they had taken the world forward. The Feudalistic structures which developed along with the spread of the influence of the Roman Catholic Church were a progress in which some social structures of human existences developed which were the best answer for the period. The Europe stabilized. All those factors which we consider as the cause of the Renaissance and Reformation, were mainly appeared during the Middle Ages. All the above factors have forced me to think that it is wrong to call the Middle Ages as a Dark Age. It is not the right expression to term a period. The facts were more bright but when you call it a Dark Age, and do not try to learn about actually what was the Dark Age, because you intend to read only from Renaissance period, you carry wrong impression about the Middle Ages in European History. This is the feeling from which I suffer now. I may have limited knowledge on this field but I had carried the impression on the period in Pre-Renaissance period for a long time that Dark Age was a period of stagnation which was changed by Renaissance. This is how it is written in most of the books available for the university courses written by Indian authors. This is what I had been teaching to my students. Now, after reading about the achievements of Middle Ages I am left with a feeling that it is not the right expression for the Middle Ages in Europe. Hence, I want that you help me to understand that whether it is right to call Middle Ages of European history as a Dark Age. Is it true that it was a Dark Age? sumir

I am lecturer in college at Ludhiana affiliated to Punjab University, Chandigarh, India. I have seen the contents of your web site and find them interesting. I feel like joining it and participate in various topics which are posted there. I am getting more interested in European and American History as these are my papers for teaching at Post Graduate Level. Through the major part of my teaching career I had been teaching Indian History. Now, for the last five years I am teaching American History and learning about many shortcomings in my knowledge about the European World. My main aim is to interact with the teachers and people from European Background to learn and understand their version about their own history. Therefore, I desire to join you people. I feel that I may get chance to learn more and cover up the gap about my understanding of history of people about people who are foreign to me. This is my understanding of history. I have yet to read a book on History of England which is yet another shortcoming in my study on American history. Every time I take a new book on American history, they start with the European influence over the history of America and they finally come the effect of History of England over America.