Re: Loveable Nation INDIA

["Rayalaseema Informatics Centre" <ric@nettlinx.com>]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
As pointed out by Krishna C. Tripathi, I was wrong in making the
sweeping
statement that our ancient Indian kings were spending most of their time
in
fighting with one another.

Our ancient kings were in no way superior or inferior to the present day

politicians in trying to remain in power by hook or crook. They were
mostly
content with what they had. They used various methods, including
murdering
people. Waging war however was only the last resort.

Only a few people like Ashoka had the ambition of conquering the entire
India. After seeing bloodshed in the Kalinga war, Asoka became a
Buddhist
and stopped further expansion of his empire.

R. Jagadiswara Rao

----- Original Message -----
From: "Krishna C Tripathi" <krishnact@yahoo.com>
To: <debate@indiapolicy.org>
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 11:15 PM
Subject: Re: Loveable Nation INDIA

> I keep hearing that Indian kings always kept fighting
> among themselv. This doesn't sound correct. Let us
> examine this statement.
>
> 1. There must have been at least 100 kingdomes in
> India in those times.
> Support--> Right we have around 25 big states.Each of
> them can easily accomodate 3 "petty" kingdoms. So the
> number comes to 75. If you add the area of Pakistan
> and Bangladesh it would increase by 40% more, that is
> 105. So lets assume there were 100 petty kingdoms.
>
> 2. On an aveage each should have 3 neighbours. So
> There are 300 points where fighting can start.
>
> 3. From 300 BC (Ashok) to 1200 AD, in 1500 years if
> every one of them fought once in 20 years there must
> have been 300*1500/20=22500 wars during this period.
> If they did not fight once in 20 years we can not call
> them figting often.
>
> 4. Out of these 22500 wars how many do we know?
>
>   Now suppose you can list 100 wars during this period
> and each of them lasting for a year, it would mean 100
> years of war out of 1500*300 years of border that
> implies that these kings were at peace more than
> 99.97% time. That is not lot of warring. Is it?
>
>   This may not relevant to the thread of discussion
> but I wanted to higlight it because this myth of
> Indian infigting has to go. It does not have any proof.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            ../debate/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------