NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

by Guest Sat Jul 06, 2013 10:05 pm

He set his eyes North. The king himself lead the army. Under king Rajendra Chola and his General Araiyan Rajarajan, the Chola army laid waste to the land. The Kalingas, the Vengi and the Odda kingdom fell before the Chola might. The only the Pala kingdom stood between the Chola and the Ganges. In one of the bloodiest wars of that time, Rajendra Chola‘s army defeated the Palas and king Mahipala lay his crown at the young king’s feet. Rajendra Chola, tired from the battle, walked into the river Ganges. The current was strong but the Chola was not bothered. He cupped his hands poured the water of the Ganges as a sacrifice to Lord Shiva, his protector. He took on the title – ‘Gangaikonda Chola’, the Chola who brought the Ganges....

After defeating the Pala kingdom, King Rajendra Chola came back south, bringing with him water from the Ganges. He built a new city and called it ‘Gangaikonda Cholapuram’ - The city of the Chola who brought the Ganges.

http://whostory.wordpress.com/2013/02/06/gangaikonda-cholapuram-the-chola-who-brought-the-ganges/

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sat Jul 06, 2013 10:15 pm

So you better learn.. THAMIZH.

No Indian King had conquered the South..So it is your responsibility to speak Thamizh.

by Kayalvizhi Sat Jul 06, 2013 10:29 pm

Only post worth something, in the last couple of days.

by Guest Sat Jul 06, 2013 10:29 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:So you better learn.. THAMIZH.

No Indian King had conquered the South..So it is your responsibility to speak Thamizh.

NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram Mauryan-empire-ashoka-265-bce

by Guest Sat Jul 06, 2013 10:31 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:So you better learn.. THAMIZH.

No Indian King had conquered the South..So it is your responsibility to speak Thamizh.

NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram Map21ind-jpg

by Kayalvizhi Sat Jul 06, 2013 10:33 pm

Indian Government to Demolish Ancient Hindu Saivaite Sivan Temple in Tamil Nadu

In addition to the religious importance, the temple has also historical significance. The temple has a number of inscriptions belonging to some important kings who reigned during one the most glorious periods of Tamil Nadu--years of the Imperial Chola Dynasty-- and the Pandya dynasty that followed it for a brief time. Inscriptions in this temple include those from Chola kings Rajendra Cholan I, Rajendra Cholan II, Adhi Rajendra Cholan, and Kulotunga Cholan, and from the Pandyan kings Sundara Pandyan I and Vikrama Pandyan. Some of these inscriptions are about a thousand years old and other go back to about 700 years (range from around 1020 CE to 1300 CE)
---
These kings are among the most notable rulers of Tamil Nadu and key figures in the history of Tamilnadu. Years of the Imperial Chola Dynasty were one of the most glorious periods in the history of Tamil Nadu. Tamils were at one of their military peaks. Chola army defeated kings who ruled parts of today's South India, North India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore and Maldives. Among South Asian kings, only Cholas had mighty enough navies to conquer overseas kingdoms. Cholas also had extensive trade overseas. They traded from Baghdad to China. Chinese records show that Cholas had an embassy in China around 1077.
We shall not allow inscriptions from this golden era be destroyed or relocated to widen a highway. This is our heritage, this is our history. Hindi dominated Indian government may not have any interest in preserving the remnants of Tamil Nadu history or may even want to destroy them to project their ancestral history as the history of India, but we the people of Tamil Nadu have an interest in preserving our historical sites and shall protest their destruction or relocation.

Need for decision making by the Tamil Nadu government, instead of the Indian government, has been noticed at the highest levels in Tamilnadu. Here is a quote from Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa's speech on April 16, 2012.

"There can be no uniform pattern in policing in the country as each State has its own distinct cultural, communal, social and economic aspects."

Full article at http://www.tamiltribune.com/12/0601.html

by Kayalvizhi Sat Jul 06, 2013 10:38 pm

Rashmun,

Uppili should have said no NI king ruled TN.

Your maps don't mean much. These conquests did not lost more than a few years. Sha Jehan never conquered TN. Aurangazub ruled only a few years (the dates on the map is wrong)

by Guest Sat Jul 06, 2013 10:55 pm

Kayalvizhi wrote:Rashmun,

Uppili should have said no NI king ruled TN.

Your maps don't mean much. These conquests did not lost more than a few years. Sha Jehan never conquered TN. Aurangazub ruled only a few years (the dates on the map is wrong)

You are right about Aurangzeb ruling (large parts of) TN for only a few years. After Aurangzeb, large parts of Tamil Nadu continued to be ruled by the Nawabs of Arcot. Here is a nice painting of one of the Nawabs. Enjoy!

NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram Muhammad_Ali_Khan_Nawab_of_Arcot_and_the_Carnatic-1770-by_Tilly_Keitle

NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram Muhammad_Ali_Khan_Nawab_of_Arcot_and_the_Carnatic-1770-by_Tilly_Keitle

Needless to say, the Nawabs were NorthIndians (at least originally). The home town of Nawab Wallajah is in Uttar Pradesh.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sat Jul 06, 2013 11:18 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Needless to say, the Nawabs were NorthIndians (at least originally). The home town of Nawab Wallajah is in Uttar Pradesh.

deceased equine flagellator -- find a different hobby.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sat Jul 06, 2013 11:24 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Needless to say, the Nawabs were NorthIndians (at least originally). The home town of Nawab Wallajah is in Uttar Pradesh.

I knew you would fall into the trap.

The Moguls and the Nawabs are NOT Indians - rather - Hindustani kings. They were of foreign origin prayed a Phoren god and followed a Phoren religion.

The Concept and official naming of Bharat as INdia occured after 1947 and official policy of secularism adapted in 1947. So, My statement stands and that is that. Dont play ring-a-ringa roses with me.

EoD (Execution of Decision).

by Guest Sun Jul 07, 2013 4:42 am

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Needless to say, the Nawabs were NorthIndians (at least originally). The home town of Nawab Wallajah is in Uttar Pradesh.

I knew you would fall into the trap.

The Moguls and the Nawabs are NOT Indians - rather - Hindustani kings. They were of foreign origin prayed a Phoren god and followed a Phoren religion.

The Concept and official naming of Bharat as INdia occured after 1947 and official policy of secularism adapted in 1947. So, My statement stands and that is that. Dont play ring-a-ringa roses with me.

EoD (Execution of Decision).

Although Babur was a foreigner, his descendants starting from Akbar were clearly Indians. Or at least they were as Indian as Raja Raja Chola.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Jul 07, 2013 8:49 am

சரியான அறுவை

by Jebediah Mburuburu Sun Jul 07, 2013 8:59 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:சரியான அறுவை

the correct what? i've forgotten what "aRuvai" means. could it be the same as "aRivu" (knowledge)? does it mean information?

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sun Jul 07, 2013 9:03 am

Jebediah Mburuburu wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:சரியான அறுவை
the correct what? i've forgotten what "aRuvai" means. could it be the same as "aRivu" (knowledge)? does it mean information?

exact opposite...

Ayatollah Rashmunullah and knowledge ? You are staring at some potential Fatwa ????

by Jebediah Mburuburu Sun Jul 07, 2013 9:12 am

Rashmun wrote:
Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Needless to say, the Nawabs were NorthIndians (at least originally). The home town of Nawab Wallajah is in Uttar Pradesh.

I knew you would fall into the trap.

The Moguls and the Nawabs are NOT Indians - rather - Hindustani kings. They were of foreign origin prayed a Phoren god and followed a Phoren religion.

The Concept and official naming of Bharat as INdia occured after 1947 and official policy of secularism adapted in 1947. So, My statement stands and that is that. Dont play ring-a-ringa roses with me.

EoD (Execution of Decision).

Although Babur was a foreigner, his descendants starting from Akbar were clearly Indians. Or at least they were as Indian as Raja Raja Chola.

rashmun, i don't understand the phrase "or at least" in your second sentence above. it implies that questions could be raised about whether raja raja cholan was clearly indian. did you mean that? if you did, why?

by Rishi Sun Jul 07, 2013 9:14 am

Jebediah Mburuburu wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:சரியான அறுவை
the correct what? i've forgotten what "aRuvai" means. could it be the same as "aRivu" (knowledge)? does it mean information?

Basically அறுவை means bore.

If a man goes on and on and what he says is boring, repetitive and has no value then he is called as அறுவை.

அறுவை is derived from "arukkarudhu" which means to saw as in sawing the wood.

You feel like you are being sawed like a tree is being sawed when he goes on and on.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Jul 07, 2013 9:28 am

Rishi wrote:
Jebediah Mburuburu wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:சரியான அறுவை
the correct what? i've forgotten what "aRuvai" means. could it be the same as "aRivu" (knowledge)? does it mean information?

Basically அறுவை means bore.

If a man goes on and on and what he says is boring, repetitive and has no value then he is called as அறுவை.

அறுவை is derived from "arukkarudhu" which means to saw as in sawing the wood.

You feel like you are being sawed like a tree is being sawed when he goes on and on.

also known as deceased equestrian flagellation.

by Jebediah Mburuburu Sun Jul 07, 2013 9:29 am

Rishi wrote:
Jebediah Mburuburu wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:சரியான அறுவை
the correct what? i've forgotten what "aRuvai" means. could it be the same as "aRivu" (knowledge)? does it mean information?

Basically அறுவை means bore.

If a man goes on and on and what he says is boring, repetitive and has no value then he is called as அறுவை.

அறுவை is derived from "arukkarudhu" which means to saw as in sawing the wood.

You feel like you are being sawed like a tree is being sawed when he goes on and on.

interesting explanation. thanks, rishi.

by Guest Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:31 pm

Jebediah Mburuburu wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Needless to say, the Nawabs were NorthIndians (at least originally). The home town of Nawab Wallajah is in Uttar Pradesh.

I knew you would fall into the trap.

The Moguls and the Nawabs are NOT Indians - rather - Hindustani kings. They were of foreign origin prayed a Phoren god and followed a Phoren religion.

The Concept and official naming of Bharat as INdia occured after 1947 and official policy of secularism adapted in 1947. So, My statement stands and that is that. Dont play ring-a-ringa roses with me.

EoD (Execution of Decision).

Although Babur was a foreigner, his descendants starting from Akbar were clearly Indians. Or at least they were as Indian as Raja Raja Chola.
rashmun, i don't understand the phrase "or at least" in your second sentence above. it implies that questions could be raised about whether raja raja cholan was clearly indian. did you mean that? if you did, why?

it has to do with the fact that at the time of Akbar, and also at the time of Raja Raja, India was not a geographical unit as it is now. Of course, as per the maps i have given India was even bigger than it is now during the time of the Mauryan empire under Asoka and also at the time of Aurangzeb. With respect to the Mauryan empire, my guess is that the extreme south was not a part of the empire because King Ashoka had vowed to shun warfare after the slaughter in Eastern India (in present day Orissa) when his army decimated the enemy and he experienced a feeling of revulsion at the death of so many people and became a budhist. It is also possible that the kings of the extreme south were vassals of the Mauryan empire. With respect to the mughal empire, Aurangzeb was in the process of annexing the extreme south when he died.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:38 pm

Rashmun wrote:It is also possible that the kings of the extreme south were vassals of the Mauryan empire.

is making up history your new job?

Rashmun wrote:With respect to the mughal empire, Aurangzeb was in the process of annexing the extreme south when he died.

you almost sound wistful when you say that.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:47 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Rashmun wrote:It is also possible that the kings of the extreme south were vassals of the Mauryan empire.
is making up history your new job?

the google search engine is hard at work. please await results of improbable and clutching-at-straws searches.

by Guest Sun Jul 07, 2013 1:07 pm

Samudragupta , ruler of the Gupta Empire (c. 335 – c. 375 CE), and successor to Chandragupta I, is considered to be one of the greatest military geniuses in Indian history. He was the third ruler of the Gupta Dynasty, who ushered in the Golden Age of India. He was perhaps the greatest king of Gupta dynasty. He was a benevolent ruler, a great warrior and a patron of arts. His name appears in the Javanese text `Tantrikamandaka'.[1] His name is taken to be a title acquired by his conquests (samudra referring to the 'oceans'). Samudragupta the Great is believed to have been his father's chosen successor even though he had several elder brothers. Therefore, some believe that after the death of Chandragupta I, there was a struggle for succession in which Samudragupta prevailed. It is said that Samudragupta became the ruler after subduing his rival Kacha, an obscure prince of the dynasty. He ranks with Ashoka, though in fundamentals both differed radically from each other. 'While Ashoka' says R.K. Mukerjee,'stands for peace and non-violence, Samudragupta for the opposite principle of war and aggression. The one had contempt for conquests, the other had a passion for them'.[2]...

Following this Samudragupta began a campaign against the kingdoms to the south. This southern campaign took him south along the bay of Bengal. He passed through the forest tracts of Madhya Pradesh, crossed the Odisha coast, marched through Ganjam, Vishakapatnam, Godavari, Krishna and Nellore districts and may have reached as far as Kancheepuram. Here however he did not attempt to maintain direct control. After capturing his enemies he reinstated them as tributary kings. This act prevented the Gupta Empire from attaining the almost immediate demise of the Maurya Empire and is a testament to his abilities as a statesman. His ambition was inspired by becoming "Raja Chakravarti" or greatest emperor and "Ekrat", undisputed ruler. In the North, he adopted the policy of "Digvijaya" which meant the conquest and annexation of all territories. In the South, his policy was "Dharma Vijaya" which meant conquest but not annexation.[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samudragupta

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sun Jul 07, 2013 1:11 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Jebediah Mburuburu wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Needless to say, the Nawabs were NorthIndians (at least originally). The home town of Nawab Wallajah is in Uttar Pradesh.

I knew you would fall into the trap.

The Moguls and the Nawabs are NOT Indians - rather - Hindustani kings. They were of foreign origin prayed a Phoren god and followed a Phoren religion.

The Concept and official naming of Bharat as INdia occured after 1947 and official policy of secularism adapted in 1947. So, My statement stands and that is that. Dont play ring-a-ringa roses with me.

EoD (Execution of Decision).

Although Babur was a foreigner, his descendants starting from Akbar were clearly Indians. Or at least they were as Indian as Raja Raja Chola.
rashmun, i don't understand the phrase "or at least" in your second sentence above. it implies that questions could be raised about whether raja raja cholan was clearly indian. did you mean that? if you did, why?

it has to do with the fact that at the time of Akbar, and also at the time of Raja Raja, India was not a geographical unit as it is now. Of course, as per the maps i have given India was even bigger than it is now during the time of the Mauryan empire under Asoka and also at the time of Aurangzeb. With respect to the Mauryan empire, my guess is that the extreme south was not a part of the empire because King Ashoka had vowed to shun warfare after the slaughter in Eastern India (in present day Orissa) when his army decimated the enemy and he experienced a feeling of revulsion at the death of so many people and became a budhist. It is also possible that the kings of the extreme south were vassals of the Mauryan empire. With respect to the mughal empire, Aurangzeb was in the process of annexing the extreme south when he died.

Dear Ayatollah Rashmunullah:

You have proved beyond any doubt - long long back -that you are an utterly stupid, dishonest, agenda-driven afflicted person with OCD who only a Maulana can fall in love...

No need to work so hard in proving us again and again.

by Guest Sun Jul 07, 2013 1:31 pm

Rashmun wrote:Samudragupta , ruler of the Gupta Empire (c. 335 – c. 375 CE), and successor to Chandragupta I, is considered to be one of the greatest military geniuses in Indian history. He was the third ruler of the Gupta Dynasty, who ushered in the Golden Age of India. He was perhaps the greatest king of Gupta dynasty. He was a benevolent ruler, a great warrior and a patron of arts. His name appears in the Javanese text `Tantrikamandaka'.[1] His name is taken to be a title acquired by his conquests (samudra referring to the 'oceans'). Samudragupta the Great is believed to have been his father's chosen successor even though he had several elder brothers. Therefore, some believe that after the death of Chandragupta I, there was a struggle for succession in which Samudragupta prevailed. It is said that Samudragupta became the ruler after subduing his rival Kacha, an obscure prince of the dynasty. He ranks with Ashoka, though in fundamentals both differed radically from each other. 'While Ashoka' says R.K. Mukerjee,'stands for peace and non-violence, Samudragupta for the opposite principle of war and aggression. The one had contempt for conquests, the other had a passion for them'.[2]...

Following this Samudragupta began a campaign against the kingdoms to the south. This southern campaign took him south along the bay of Bengal. He passed through the forest tracts of Madhya Pradesh, crossed the Odisha coast, marched through Ganjam, Vishakapatnam, Godavari, Krishna and Nellore districts and may have reached as far as Kancheepuram. Here however he did not attempt to maintain direct control. After capturing his enemies he reinstated them as tributary kings. This act prevented the Gupta Empire from attaining the almost immediate demise of the Maurya Empire and is a testament to his abilities as a statesman. His ambition was inspired by becoming "Raja Chakravarti" or greatest emperor and "Ekrat", undisputed ruler. In the North, he adopted the policy of "Digvijaya" which meant the conquest and annexation of all territories. In the South, his policy was "Dharma Vijaya" which meant conquest but not annexation.[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samudragupta

Max please share your thoughts on Samudragupta. Thanks.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:19 pm

rashmun -- i have no thoughts on samoothragupta, but i do have a thought or two on your posts. you are not interested in any synthesis or history of any kind. never have been. you have but one goal -- to satisfy your incredible need, scratch that, craving, for somehow asserting some kind of northindian control, real or imagined, current or historical, over the rest of india and indians. this is manifest in your incessant blatherings about the moghals, sanskrit, hindi, minor vassal kings of the moghals in southern india and on and on and on. they all have one purpose only. i am considering somewhat seriously doing what carvaka did with you -- just delete you from view since it serves no purpose to read your posts other than occasional entertainment and frequent irritant of the kind produce by an annoying fly.

by Hellsangel Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:26 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:rashmun -- i have no thoughts on samoothragupta, but i do have a thought or two on your posts. you are not interested in any synthesis or history of any kind. never have been. you have but one goal -- to satisfy your incredible need, scratch that, craving, for somehow asserting some kind of northindian control, real or imagined, current or historical, over the rest of india and indians. this is manifest in your incessant blatherings about the moghals, sanskrit, hindi, minor vassal kings of the moghals in southern india and on and on and on. they all have one purpose only. i am considering somewhat seriously doing what carvaka did with you -- just delete you from view since it serves no purpose to read your posts other than occasional entertainment and frequent irritant of the kind produce by an annoying fly.

Il Professore, why do you spell Samudragupta as Samoothragupta?

by Guest Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:27 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:rashmun -- i have no thoughts on samduragupta, but i do have a thought or two on your posts. you are not interested in any synthesis or history of any kind. never have been. you have but one goal -- to satisfy your incredible need, scratch that, craving, for somehow asserting some kind of northindian control, real or imagined, current or historical, over the rest of india and indians. this is manifest in your incessant blatherings about the moghals, sanskrit, hindi, minor vassal kings of the moghals in southern india and on and on and on. they all have one purpose only. i am considering somewhat seriously doing what carvaka did with you -- just delete you from view since it serves no purpose to read your posts other than occasional entertainment and frequent irritant of the kind produce by an annoying fly.

it is true that i am a nationalist. but i am not for northindian control, real or imagined. Here is an example: I have supported P.Chidambaram for the Prime Minister's position since out of all the possible candidates, he seems to me to be the most competent.

by Guest Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:30 pm

Rashmun wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:rashmun -- i have no thoughts on samduragupta, but i do have a thought or two on your posts. you are not interested in any synthesis or history of any kind. never have been. you have but one goal -- to satisfy your incredible need, scratch that, craving, for somehow asserting some kind of northindian control, real or imagined, current or historical, over the rest of india and indians. this is manifest in your incessant blatherings about the moghals, sanskrit, hindi, minor vassal kings of the moghals in southern india and on and on and on. they all have one purpose only. i am considering somewhat seriously doing what carvaka did with you -- just delete you from view since it serves no purpose to read your posts other than occasional entertainment and frequent irritant of the kind produce by an annoying fly.

it is true that i am a nationalist. but i am not for northindian control, real or imagined. Here is an example: I have supported P.Chidambaram for the Prime Minister's position since out of all the possible candidates, he seems to me to be the most competent.

another thing to consider is that had i been for asserting northindian control, JM would not have been polite towards me.

by Propagandhi711 Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:34 pm

Douchemun, if I were you I'd look though my family heirloom for photographs of yesteryear..I bet you'll come across one or two pics of an ancestor taking it in the rear from a minor Mughal in supplicant donkey position. I'd bet 93 dollars on this sure shot right now

by Guest Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:47 pm

Propagandhi711 wrote:Douchemun, if I were you I'd look though my family heirloom for photographs of yesteryear..I bet you'll come across one or two pics of an ancestor taking it in the rear from a minor Mughal in supplicant donkey position. I'd bet 93 dollars on this sure shot right now

Propa, i wish to know where you picked up your fisherman language from.

by Propagandhi711 Sun Jul 07, 2013 3:01 pm

Never mind my language..pay attention to your assorted psychosis's that folks are highlighting on daily basis

by Guest Sun Jul 07, 2013 3:24 pm

Propagandhi711 wrote:Never mind my language..pay attention to your assorted psychosis's that folks are highlighting on daily basis

there will always be disagreement in discussions related to philosophy, history, politics, etc. Occasionally the disagreements can result in the unfortunate usage of foul language. This has been going on for so long that one can only smile whenever it happens. Now, are you answering my question: Where did you pick up your fisherman language from? Where is your sense of honor? Are you forgetting the moral values instilled in you as a child by your family? Speak up now, or be silent forever.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Jul 07, 2013 7:43 pm

Rashmun wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:rashmun -- i have no thoughts on samduragupta, but i do have a thought or two on your posts. you are not interested in any synthesis or history of any kind. never have been. you have but one goal -- to satisfy your incredible need, scratch that, craving, for somehow asserting some kind of northindian control, real or imagined, current or historical, over the rest of india and indians. this is manifest in your incessant blatherings about the moghals, sanskrit, hindi, minor vassal kings of the moghals in southern india and on and on and on. they all have one purpose only. i am considering somewhat seriously doing what carvaka did with you -- just delete you from view since it serves no purpose to read your posts other than occasional entertainment and frequent irritant of the kind produce by an annoying fly.

it is true that i am a nationalist. but i am not for northindian control, real or imagined. Here is an example: I have supported P.Chidambaram for the Prime Minister's position since out of all the possible candidates, he seems to me to be the most competent.

don't flatter yourself. you are just a garden variety hindi pushing wannabe northindian autocrat. the likes of you have been summarily rejected and pushed aside as politically unsuitable by modern india. you are anachronistic and incompatible with the aspirations of a vibrant and diverse modern democracy on the march. change your ways or be ignored.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sun Jul 07, 2013 7:55 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Propagandhi711 wrote:Douchemun, if I were you I'd look though my family heirloom for photographs of yesteryear..I bet you'll come across one or two pics of an ancestor taking it in the rear from a minor Mughal in supplicant donkey position. I'd bet 93 dollars on this sure shot right now

Propa, i wish to know where you picked up your fisherman language from.

Perhaps in Ganges.....(and so.. you were just being a typical UPite standing and doing your daily thing).

by Guest Sun Jul 07, 2013 10:35 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:rashmun -- i have no thoughts on samduragupta, but i do have a thought or two on your posts. you are not interested in any synthesis or history of any kind. never have been. you have but one goal -- to satisfy your incredible need, scratch that, craving, for somehow asserting some kind of northindian control, real or imagined, current or historical, over the rest of india and indians. this is manifest in your incessant blatherings about the moghals, sanskrit, hindi, minor vassal kings of the moghals in southern india and on and on and on. they all have one purpose only. i am considering somewhat seriously doing what carvaka did with you -- just delete you from view since it serves no purpose to read your posts other than occasional entertainment and frequent irritant of the kind produce by an annoying fly.

it is true that i am a nationalist. but i am not for northindian control, real or imagined. Here is an example: I have supported P.Chidambaram for the Prime Minister's position since out of all the possible candidates, he seems to me to be the most competent.

don't flatter yourself. you are just a garden variety hindi pushing wannabe northindian autocrat. the likes of you have been summarily rejected and pushed aside as politically unsuitable by modern india. you are anachronistic and incompatible with the aspirations of a vibrant and diverse modern democracy on the march. change your ways or be ignored.

"Rashmun is a bright and balanced scholar."
--Prof B. Rao (eminent economics professor) on the old sulekha forum when you were not around

by Kayalvizhi Mon Jul 08, 2013 11:47 am

>> Although Babur was a foreigner, his descendants starting from Akbar were clearly Indians. Or at least they were as Indian as Raja Raja Chola.

Raja Raja Cholan was not an Indian. He never considered him as part of something like India (under whartever name). He considered him a Cholan first, Tamil next. Thats it.

by Hellsangel Mon Jul 08, 2013 11:49 am

Well done Trollus Fishyeyeus! You are back to your careful typos: "whartever", "postring"

by Propagandhi711 Mon Jul 08, 2013 11:52 am

Rashmun wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:rashmun -- i have no thoughts on samduragupta, but i do have a thought or two on your posts. you are not interested in any synthesis or history of any kind. never have been. you have but one goal -- to satisfy your incredible need, scratch that, craving, for somehow asserting some kind of northindian control, real or imagined, current or historical, over the rest of india and indians. this is manifest in your incessant blatherings about the moghals, sanskrit, hindi, minor vassal kings of the moghals in southern india and on and on and on. they all have one purpose only. i am considering somewhat seriously doing what carvaka did with you -- just delete you from view since it serves no purpose to read your posts other than occasional entertainment and frequent irritant of the kind produce by an annoying fly.

it is true that i am a nationalist. but i am not for northindian control, real or imagined. Here is an example: I have supported P.Chidambaram for the Prime Minister's position since out of all the possible candidates, he seems to me to be the most competent.

don't flatter yourself. you are just a garden variety hindi pushing wannabe northindian autocrat. the likes of you have been summarily rejected and pushed aside as politically unsuitable by modern india. you are anachronistic and incompatible with the aspirations of a vibrant and diverse modern democracy on the march. change your ways or be ignored.

"Rashmun is a bright and balanced scholar."
--Prof B. Rao (eminent economics professor) on the old sulekha forum when you were not around

HAAAHHAHAHAAAAA. thanks for the laughs, douchemun

by Sponsored content

NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram

Re: NI-SI synthesis: Gangaikonda Cholapuram