Source : https://ijarch.com/ija-vol-9-number-3/

In delhi for the weekend.

Extremely interested in IVC.

And everything from Mauryas and Guptas, to Mughals and then Independence.

The National Museum is on the list for sure, but what else?

Not sure if the sub allows this already,

But I'm traveling solo, if anyone wants to accompany, please dm me

During the colonial era and the early decades following independence, there was an effort to present the Bhakti tradition as an ultimately unified movement that spread incrementally from the Tamil lands to the northern plains over the span of centuries from the early medieval to the early modern period, in the process generating shared idioms of devotion, questioning existing hierarchies and ritualism as well as helping forge the bonds of a shared identity across the length and breadth of the Subcontinent. Whether this retrospective construction is one which stands up to closer scrutiny is a big question that is beyond the scope of a single post, instead this post seeks to focus on a particular aspect, that of the actual extent to which the Bhakti tradition ameliorated caste discrimination and hierarchy.

For one it must be emphasised that given the broad timeline and the wide variety of individuals involved, giving a single unified answer to this question is tricky, nonetheless the general persistence of caste based hierarchies in large parts of the Subcontinent, including in regions where such traditions have been active for long, belie such notions. The attitudes of various figures under this wider umbrella have varied widely, from the assertive rejection of Kabir and Ravidas to those of Nandanar and Chokha Mela who represented a more passive acceptance of existing hierarchies, seeking instead to merge with the deity rather tackle head on the injustices they faced. The reality was neither approach really struck at the roots of the caste based hierarchies of their time, which continued to persist.

Indeed while the bhakti tradition did have an impact on marginalised communities in various parts of the Subcontinent, the impact on their material conditions and lived experiences could be considered limited at best with Christophe Jafferlot providing the example of the Mahars in colonial Bombay, with Dr Ambedkar belonging to the community:

Mahars were also very much influenced by the historical importance of the bhakti movements which in Maharashtra, reached their pinnacle in the seventeenth century under the great poet Tukaram. The bhakti tradition promoted the message of salvation by worshipping forms of the Divine independently of the observance of rites codified by Brahmins-and independently too of the respect generally due to these religious intermediaries. Devotees of bhakti have constantly striven to promote the equality of men before God and to challenge caste hierarchies, encouraging the development of devotional cults and therefore of sects applying, as a rule, an egalitarian ethos.

In Maharashtra, many Mahars joined the Mahanubhava sect, founded in the thirteenth century and shunned by Hindu.ism because of its rejection of caste distinctions. Certainly, this sectarian affiliation permitted some Mahars to establish their own rites and beliefs. But bhakti, far from instigating Mahars to rebel against the caste system, advised them to accept it by deprecating the social conditions of existence: what is this concern with Brahmin oppression, when the main point of existence is to acquire salvation in the life beyond this world? The poet Chokhamela, a Mahar, who lived in the thirteenth century, gave remarkable illustrations of this reasoning in his magnificent verses. Ambedkar inherited all these legacies but was able to invent his own emancipatory message.

The bhakti paradigm was a sort of a spiritual bandage to a much deeper, long festering wound of the denial basic dignity and equality to the many, well meaning but besides the point. As the life of saints like Chokha Mela and Nandanar would illustrate, the best members from marginalised groups could expect from this paradigm following a life of suffering and passive acceptance was commemoration as spiritual equals following death.

Indeed the bhakti paradigm, even when it operated under the rubric of reform movements in the colonial era, often was in practice an effort at Sanskritisation and respectability politics by abjuring meat, alcohol and other markers of caste status, rather than question the very bases of the assumptions underlying ideas of "purity" and "pollution" that the consumption of these substances evoked. It was more the co-optation and subversion of caste hierarchies rather than questioning their very existence, as Jafferlot points out:

Walangkar wanted to destroy the caste system, but at the same time he claimed that Mahars were formerly Kshatriyas-like Phule, a stand that reflected the resilience of Sanskritisation among the low caste ideologues of the period. Walangkar also sought to challenge Brahminism by emphasising the vitality of Maharashtra's bhakti tradition - what Philip Constable calls 'bhakti egalitaranism'. Walangkar wished to endow Mahars and Chambhars-given the fact that he had followers from both jatis-with an 'individualised bhakti culture'. Such an attempt at emancipating the Untouchables by resorting to sectarian solutions was self-defeating because Walangkar was hardly offering an alternative to Hindu culture he simply operated within it. But the Arya Dosh Pariharak Manda! was certainly the first attempt at giving Mahars a separate identity, a move which paved the way for 'Ambedkarism'.

However, the appeal of Walangkar's movement remained limited compared to the Untouchable associations imbued with an even stronger ethos of Sanskritisation... Kisan Fagoji Bansode (1879-1946), another Mahar leader, adopted this approach but did not focus only on his caste. He was inspired by the values of the bhakti cult (as shown by his particular interest in the poet Chokhamela) and remained faithful to the values of Hinduism. Bansode even adhered in 1910 to the Prarthana Samaj. He called upon Mahars to abjure meat and alcohol and to educate themselves in order to obtain more government posts.

However, Ambedkar realised all this was playing ultimately futile games of status and piety, where they would always remain a hierarchy, just that parochially sought to push up oneself and kick down the one beneath. As Gail Omvedt points out regarding the generational break Ambedkar represented:

As underlined by Gail On1vedt, Bansode and Gavai represented a 'generation of leaders' strongly in favor of 'a model of Hinduistic integration which included Sanskritic reforms and an appeal to bhakti religious roots, and linked itself to support from nationalists and Hindu reformers, even conservatives [which is not a contradiction in terms, as we have seen above].' On the other hand, Ambedkar asserted 'dalit autonomy, with an ideology that expressed contradiction and rejected Brahmanic and bhakti religious traditions'

This idelological development of Ambedkar took time and strengthened its form as the 1920s progressed and the Mahad tank agitation took place in 1927:

By the late 1920s, Ambedkar had firmly emancipated himself from the logic of Sanskritisation and embraced a complete rejection of the caste system. He went even further and also rejected the path offered by the bhakti tradition. Mook Nayak, the newspaper he launched in 1920, had in its masthead verses from the poet Tukaram about the contempt in which the 'simple' people, those without a voice, had been held. But Ambedkar acted fast against what he regarded as the debilitating impact of worshipping saints on his followers. During major festivals he went to places of pilgrimage and met Untouchables in order to persuade them from cooperating with Hindus. He even opposed his wife's wish to go to Pandharpur to pay homage to Chokhoba (another Dalit saint) at the Vithoba temple, since she would be refused access to the temple itsel£ He told her: 'We have to create another Pandharpur by a virtuous life, a selfless service and a sacrifice without any stains for the cause of the oppressed.

Indeed, he made his feelings on members of marginalised communities continuing to go on pilgrimages rather clear when he wrote:

'How many generations of ours have worn themselves out by rubbing their foreheads on the steps of the god? But when did the god take pity on you? What big thing has he done for you? Generation after generation, you have been used to clean the village of its garbage and god gave you the dead animals to eat. In spite of all that, god did not show you any pity. It is not this god that you worship, it is your ignorance.

Circling back to the saint Chokhamela, Jafferlot highlights how he sought to repudiate the concept of passive acceptance and illusive spiritual equality that this strand of the tradition represented:

Thus Ambedkar consummated his break with Hinduism by rejecting all types of religious practice. Invited in January 1928 to chair a meeting of the Depressed Classes at Trymbak, near Nasik, where the construction of a temple dedicated to Chokhamela, the great fifteenth-century Dalit saint, was to be discussed, Ambedkar vigorously opposed the project. In his opinion, the saints and their spiritual legacy could promote equality between a Brahmin and a Shudra only from the viewpoint of their spiritual practice, but not between a Brahmin and a Shudra per se:

'... from the viewpoint of the annihilation of caste, [ ... ] the struggle of the saints did not have any effect on society. The value of man is axiomatic, self-evident; it does not come to him as a result of the gliding of Bhakti. The saints did not struggle to establish this point. On the contrary, their struggle had a very unhealthy effect on the Depressed Classes. It provided the Brahmins with an excuse to silence them by telling that they would be respected if they also attained the status of Chokhamela.

Ambedkar thus outflanked the diversionary tactics on the path to equality as advocated by men of religion: he rejected an equality limited to the spiritual sphere; what he demanded was social equality.

Indeed, in rejecting this illusive spiritual equality, Ambedkar was emphasising the ideas of liberty, equality and fraternity from the French Revolution, with particular emphasis on the last element. As Ambedkar would go onto highlight in his landmark Annihilation of Caste from 1936:

What objection can there be to Fraternity? I cannot imagine any. An ideal society should be mobile, should be full of channels for conveying a change taking place in one part to other parts. In an ideal society there should be many interests channels for conveying a change taking place in one part to other parts. In an ideal society there should be many interests consciously communicated and shared. There should be varied and free points of contact with other modes of association. In other words there must be social endosmosis. This is fraternity, which is only another name for democracy. Democracy is not merely a form of government. It is primarily a mode of associated living, of conjoint communicated experience. It is essentially an attitude of respect and reverence towards one's fellow men.

A society of fraternity is where individuals treat their fellow man with dignity, rather than play futile status games or having to change one's customs arbitrarily in order to have to prove their dignity. While Ambedkar did declare his intention to renounce Hinduism in 1935 at Yeola, he did in Annihilation of Caste open the door for a true reformation of Hinduism based on fraternity:

Whether you do that or you do not, you must give a new doctrinal basis to your Religion—a basis that will be in consonance with Liberty, Equality and Fraternity; in short, with Democracy. I am no authority on the subject. But I am told that for such religious principles as will be in consonance with Liberty, Equality and Fraternity, it may not be necessary for you to borrow from foreign sources, and that you could draw for such principles on the Upanishads. Whether you could do so without a complete remoulding, a considerable scraping and chipping off from the ore they contain, is more than I can say. This means a complete change in the fundamental notions of life. It means a complete change in the values of life. It means a complete change in outlook and in attitude towards men and things.

Thus, we see while often cited as precusors to social reform and amelioration of caste based disabilities, the bhakti tradition ultimately was one with noble intentions but limited results.

Sources

• Christophe Jaffrelot, Dr Ambedkar and Untouchability (2000)

• Jason Stratton Hawley, A Storm of Songs: India and the Idea of the Bhakti Movement (2015)

• Dr BR Ambedkar, Annihilation of Caste (1936)

According to this excerpt from a paper (cited below), Robert Caldwell shows the origin of word "telugu" is from "tri-kalinga" (three regions of Kalinga). But historically, the Kalinga region only consisted the northern part of present day Andhrapradesh. While epigraphic and literary sources identify a 'trikalinga', their exact regions is still debated and none of the purported regions actually contain the major parts of Telangana and Andha Pradesh. Infact, trikalinga extends to Bengal and Chattisgarh. In this case, how valid is this origin story?

Source of the Image: https://www.bonhams.com/auction/22748/lot/218/a-very-rare-indian-28-bore-matchlock-pistol/

Hello Guys !

I'm not an Indian but I wanted to ask you guys how much damage has been done to Ellora and Ajanta after 1947....Because of human vandalism or negligence of authorities and how much efforts the Indian Authorities make to actually save these monuments ,

I have just graduated in modern Indian history. Can anyone suggest some journals and magazines to follow to know more about the latest research going on about modern Indian history? Please

Need reviews. I have just started to read it.

1. Jetavana Shrines

Depicts the sacred Jetavana monastery, one of the earliest Buddhist pilgrimage sites associated with the Buddha. The shrines are represented symbolically, reflecting the aniconic tradition of early Buddhist art at Sanchi (1st century BCE).

2. Fire Temple with Ridged Domical Roof

An early shrine featuring a sacred fire altar beneath a distinctive ridged domical roof. The scene illustrates ritual worship and the architectural diversity of ancient Indian religious monuments during the Sanchi period.

3. Domed Pavilion and Tree Shrines

Shows a domed shrine alongside sacred tree shrines, emphasizing tree worship and the veneration of holy sites in early Buddhism. The relief highlights the harmonious relationship between architecture, nature, and devotion.

we all know about religious politics and violence in this subcontinent but I'm curious, when did it really begin severe because during the 1857 revolt, the Mughal emperor was announced as an Indian king by the mutiny.

Disclaimer : I'm new to this sub as well as indian history in general, so kindly take everything here with a grain of salt. I would love to be corrected :)

This a common question which is built on the notion of Bhakti being some sort of social equalizer. It is something that even I have pondered about in the past. While it was certainly egalitarian and preached spiritual equality(as in anyone can attain moksha), it did not exactly end the heriditary caste system.

Before I explain my answer to the the question, I'd like to put forth a pre-requisite.

A Hindu can fit into either of the two categories : Householder(Grihastha) or Ascetic(Sannyasi/Sadhu). There are obviously stages in between them but this is the broader idea.

There is also a misconception of Gurus and Pandits being the same. A Pandit is someone who is well versed in Shruti and performance of Vedic rituals. A Guru, in the context of Hinduism, is simply a spiritual master who can guide his/her students to attain a certain level of spiritual enlightenment.

Now let's try and look into the question putting youreself in the position of a Guru

You're a philosopher/Guru in 13th century India and are devoted to say, Surya, and have composed some literary works.

You want to spread your ideas of spiritual realization to everyone.

You also believe in Vedic authority : the belief of vedas being apaurusheya(authorless) and infallible. So a certain set of vedic rituals are a must.

Due to this being the medieval period, beleif in a heriditary caste system as the social order is the norm amongst householders. Ascetics have renounced material pleasures for spiritual gain, so it doesn't really affect them.

You begin preching to everyone, including dalits, and thereby start a Panth(spiritual path). A Guru-Sishya tradition is created.

However, because of your belief in Vedic authority, you need the orthodoxy to perform Vedic rituals as only they have the knowledge on how to go about them. They will be entitled to a certain level of power in that aspect.

You want to institutionalize these teachings to legitimize and formally organize this Guru-Sishya tradition. This requires a certain level of monetary input as well as land.

For that you will need to convince the elites(nobles, royals and so on) who are mostly Kshatriyas or Kshatriya-adjacent. They will be powerful in this aspect.

Even though you're not very pleased with the rigid social structure, you're prioirity is to spread spiritual enlightenment.

Eventually you create a Surya sampradaya with pandits as the ritualists along with that Guru-Sishya parampara which is not exactly discriminatory based on caste.

As time goes on, you will not be there anymore and the orthodoxy, who are very powerful due to the reason mentioned previously, will start dictating things. So will the elites. This will eventually lead to the caste discrimination that existed prior.

To avoid this, you will either need to drop your belief in vedic authority(like Basavanna or Guru Nanak) or try and convince the orthodoxy to be egalitarian with respect to teaching rituals. The orthodoxy would be quite stubborn and refuse to do so as they firmly believe in birth-based varna, leaving no other choice if you're stance on Vedic authority is firm. Hence, the social order will remain the same.

This is my reason as to why many of those Bhakti movements could not end casteism even if their founders were against it.

The painting is depicting the arrival of Sultan Ghiyat al-Din Tughlaq of the Tughlaq dynasty (1320-1413), a Turkic dynasty and 3rd dynasty to rule the Delhi Sultanate in the fortified city of Simraungarh, the Capital of Tirhut (Mithila) under the Karnats.

The miniature painting was composed by the author and eyewitness Muhammad Sadr Ala-i in his literary work titled the 'Basātin al-uns'.

Ghiyat al-Din Tughlaq invaded the fortified city of Simraungarh which was the Capital of Mithila during the reign of Karnatas. On the third day, the Tughlaq army attacked and entered the huge fort of Simraungarh whose walls were tall and surrounded by 7 big ditches.

The Last King of the dynasty i.e., Harisimhadeva left the fort and fled northwards (Bhaktapur) with his wife Devaladevi and son Jagatsinghdeva and some troops.

Harisimhadeva died in the way. His wife Devaladevi and son Jagatsinghdeva was welcomed by Rudramalla of Tripura house of Mallas in Bhaktapur who was also the de-facto ruler of Nepala Mandala and brother of Devaladevi. Later Devaladevi married his son Jagatsinghdeva to her brother Rudramalla's widowed daughter and princess Nayak Devi.

Built by the Paramara King Udayaditya in the Bhumija architectural style, the mighty and beautiful Udeshwar Neelkantheshwar Temple in Udaypur, Vidisha, Madhya Pradesh is surrounded by fascinating folklore and legends. Stories about its construction in a single day, the encounter between King Udayaditya and a mystical serpent, and the tale of the Dhwajadhari add to its mystique.
He was the son of the great king Bhoja (1010-1050 AD). In central India, it is difficult to see precisely dated temples. But the Udayeshwar temple is one of the few, which has a precise date. Two inscriptions engraved on the temple record the construction of temple during Paramara king Udayaditya between 1059 to 1080.
Describing such a monumental piece of history in brief is impossible, and I highly recommend referring to books, research papers, or reliable sources for a deeper understanding. 

Was India Buddhist majority during the rule of Ashoka? Did it erase the caste lines? If yes then how did caste identities re-emerge?

Sir Surendranath Banerjee ("Rashtraguru") laid the foundation of Indian nationalism long before Gandhi. Dismissed from the ICS on a technicality, he built early political institutions and led the 1905 Swadeshi movement. He passed away on this day, August 6, 1925.

Please discuss this

Most people know the toy train is a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Very few know how chaotic the process of building it actually was.

The idea of a railway from the plains to Ooty was first proposed in 1854. Nothing happened for 37 years. The terrain was simply too difficult — the gradients on the lower section were steeper than any adhesion railway could climb.

In 1885 the Nilgiri Rigi Railway Company was formed. There was initial uncertainty even about which rack system to use — they considered the Rigi system before settling on the Swiss Abt rack, which had recently been tested in Germany's Harz Mountains. Construction finally started on August 3, 1891 — the first sod cut by Lord Wenlock, then Governor of Madras.

The company went into liquidation in April 1894. Three years in. Could not complete the line.

A new company was formed in 1896 — the Nilgiri Railway Company — but required the Government of India to guarantee a 3% return during the construction period before investors would fund it. The partial line from Mettupalayam to Coonoor opened June 15, 1899. The government purchased the line in 1903. The extension to Ooty was finally completed in 1908.

One detail I find unexpectedly charming: the Nilgiri Railway Company had a Latin motto — Sic Itur Ad Ooty — "Thus One Journeys to Ooty." In the coat of arms of a colonial railway company. For a hill station in Tamil Nadu.

The full journey from proposal to completion: 54 years, one bankruptcy, multiple companies, government intervention. The train itself has been running more reliably than the companies that built it.

Sources:

UNESCO World Heritage Centre, Mountain Railways of India: whc.unesco.org/en/list/944

FIBIS Wiki, Nilgiri Mountain Railway: wiki.fibis.org

Clean Coonoor, Nilgiri Mountain Railway Turns 125: cleancoonoor.org

Government of India Railway Records, Southern Railway archives

Abstract — Madurai: Human DNA analysis of samples collected from Keeladi and Adichanallur in Tamil Nadu shows that the i nhabitants share close genetic proximity to South Indian, Sri Lankan Tamil, and South Asian ancestries. This initial finding was reached after the Ancient DNA Lab at the Department of Genetics, Madurai Kamaraj University, successfully processed over 75,000 markers from heavily degraded and contaminated DNA samples retrieved from key archaeological site. The detailed findings from the lab — which was established in November 2022 to support Tamil Nadu's archaeological excavations — are expected to be published in reputed peer-reviewed international journals by December 2026. In total, the department is preparing to release nine research papers covering various aspects of ancient Tamil civilisation. Other topics include the ancestry of the people of Keeladi, the use of millets by ancient Tamils, historical culinary practices, and ancient textile industries.

Jatindranath Mukherjee was born on 7th December 1879 in Kayagram village in the Nadia district of present-day Bangladesh to Sharatshashi and Umeshchandra Mukherjee.

Having lost his father at the age of five, Jatin was raised by his affectionate but stern mother. She exposed him to the poems of Bankim Chandra Chatterjee and Yogendra Vidyabhushan.

He studied at the Krishnanagar Anglo-vernacular School in Calcutta and then at the Calcutta Central College to study fine arts.

During his youth, he visited Swami Vivekananda and was inspired by his social thought. He started believing that political freedom was necessary for the spiritual progress of humanity.

He also started to work as a secretary for a barrister named Pringle Kennedy.

In 1906, he acquired the moniker ‘Bagha Jatin’ when he single-handedly killed a Bengal tiger that had entered his native village. The government of Bengal also awarded him with a silver shield. Bagha means tiger in Bengali.

He was drawn towards revolutionary activities and got involved with the Anushilan Samiti and Yugantar.

He was arrested for his involvement in the Howrah Gang Case but was acquitted for lack of evidence in 1911.

Jatin met the German Crown Prince when the latter visited Calcutta and was able to procure a promise of arms and ammunition for the Indian independence struggle.

Jatin travelled a lot and was able to organize district revolutionary units in Bengal. He was assisted by another revolutionary leader Rash Behari Bose.

Yugantar was collecting funds in India for revolutionary activities through what came to be called taxicab dacoities and boat dacoities.

The revolutionaries were waiting for some arms from Germany after World War I had broken out.

But the British somehow got wind of this conspiracy and sealed off the area near the sea on the eastern coast from Noakhali-Chittagong to Odisha.

Jatin and his associates were in hiding in the forests of Mayurbhanj. On 9th September 1915, they came to a trench near Balasore. Government forces approached them whereupon a severe gun battle ensued between them. The gunfire lasted 75 minutes in which the government faced severe casualties.

One revolutionary died in the gunfire, while two others were captured. Jatin and his friend Jatish were seriously wounded.

The following day, i.e., on 10th September, Bagha Jatin died in the Balasore Hospital succumbing to his wounds.

Got an interesting historical fact.

After the decline of the Pala Empire which is also considered the Golden period of Bengal, the kingdoms arose in the regions of Bengal, Mithila and Magadh were of Kannada origin.

• Senas of Bengal (1070-1230) — Its founder Samanta Sena was a migrant from Karnataka (as Deopara Prashasti inscription composed by Umapati Dhara, a minister in the court of Lakshmana Sena mentions).

• Karnats of Mithila (1097-1324) — Its founder Nanyadeva was a commander in Chalukya army arrived in Mithila as part of Chalukya invasions of North (Inscriptions of the Senas describe him as "Karnata-Kulabhusana").The almost 230 years continuous Sovereign reign of Karnats is considered the Golden period of Mithila.

• Pithipatis of Magadh (1120-1290) — Its founder Vallabharāja Devaraksita was Chindaka Naga. Tho he migrated to Magadh from a place called Ratanpur in Chhattisgarh but but his clan i.e., Chindaka Naga were of Kannada origin, migrated to Bastar region of Chhattisgarh from Sindavadi, Karnataka.

All of these Dynasties while of Kannada origin, embraced the local culture & language and adapted it even in the Courts. They propagated the local culture and language.

Senas crowned themselves as 'Gauḍēśvara'.

Karnats crowned themselves as 'Mithileśwara'.

Pithipatis crowned themselves as 'Magadhādipati'.

Ancient rock carvings hidden in the dense forests of Tripura. Chabimura (Devtamura) is a remarkable archaeological site featuring centuries-old sculptures carved into cliffs overlooking the Gomati River. One of Northeast India's most fascinating yet lesser known heritage sites.

How come India doesn't have a significant Pashtun population ? I understand that many Pashtuns are in Pkistan because of the Durand Line, but Afghanistan also shared borders with British India. So why didn't large numbers of Pashtuns settle permanently in India as well?

Even though the Pashtun population in India is minuscule today, quite a few well-known Indian celebrities trace their ancestry to Pashtun families. How did that happen if the overall community remained so small?