Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Asian History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Asian History Asian History Forum - China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia, New Zealand, and the Asia-Pacific Region


Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 14th, 2012, 02:16 AM   #21
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: varanasi uttar pradesh, india
Posts: 1,610

you are such a nice man.

there are many things i have to comment upon but as you pointed out it is partly because our cases are different ( not just culturally ).
avantivarman is offline  
Remove Ads
Old December 14th, 2012, 02:37 AM   #22

Jinit's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: India
Posts: 3,394
Blog Entries: 1

First of all some facts.

The chief architecture of Taj mahal was Ustad Ahmad from Lahore not the Persians. There was a panel of architects (Persian, Syrian, Turkish etc). But it is strongly assumed that main architecture was Ustad Ahmad. And most importantly money came from the purse of an Indian ruler.

Second. Althaugh of foreign origin, they didn't have any stronghold outside India. Their political centre was Lahore, Agra and later on in Delhi. So basically India became their homeland. So British argument can't be used here as althaugh they were ruling India, They were ruling it from london.

Third Its not Persian architecture but Indo PErsian architecture. althaugh Indian eliments aren't as strong as they used to be in Akbari architecture but still there are lots of Indian eliments. (Chatri , Chajjas, Jali, Motifs etc) which aren't found in Persian architecture.

So yes it was built in the prominant Persian style, but just because they borrowed some foreign architecture style, doesn't make it foreign.

And Btw if go by this argument then

1. New delhi isn't Indian. It was built by British architects during Britsh raj. And same can be said for many parts of 3 other major Indian cities - Mumbai, Kolkata and Chennai.

2. Chandigarh belongs to France as it was designed by a French architect. and so does Pondicherry which was actually built during French rule.

3. Jamshedpur is Persian as it was established by a person from Parsi community which came from Persia. and So does many famous Indian institutes and buildings like Taj hotel which were built by the Parsis.
Jinit is online now  
Old December 14th, 2012, 02:55 AM   #23

Jinit's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: India
Posts: 3,394
Blog Entries: 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by avantivarman View Post
the problem with indians is that they do not have much to show and so they in order to overcome their sense of inferiority try to claim other heritages as their own.
Wrong. If you think that apart from Taj mahal Indian do not have much to show, then I think you are being mistaken. There are many monuments which can compete with Taj mahal. Taj mahal got famous, thanks to the Britishers who hated the native Indian culture.
Jinit is online now  
Old December 14th, 2012, 02:55 AM   #24
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: varanasi uttar pradesh, india
Posts: 1,610

1. Ustad Ahmad was an architect from lahaur just as Ruskin Bond is a writer from dehradun.

he was originally from Shiraz in Iran and that is beyond dispute.

2. Indo Persian architecture is not Indian .

there is a suffix attached to it.

3. There was nothing so indian about shahjehan, he could not read or write any indian language, was a tyrant of first order and just because he occupied indian lands does not make him indian.
so all you need to do is to enslave indians and then do not return to your home, that will make you indian.

Shahjehan was a turk and turks are not indian ethnicity.


4. that british examples are cited proves that Fire at Will was right when he said that Indian history is nothing but history of conquerors.

BTW, Delhi, Mumbai etc. were set up by british , parsis ( they are not foreigners ) built Jamashedpur are not very good examples to prove the point that taj is indian.


did I claim that they were founded by Indians ?

Chandigarh was not occupied by French and they did not destroy existing buildings of punjab like shahjehan so their case is quite different.
avantivarman is offline  
Old December 14th, 2012, 03:06 AM   #25

avon's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 13,881
Blog Entries: 2

If we had a sub-forum specifically for stupid threads, I could move this one there. As it stands, we do not, so I'll have to lock this one.



Thread closed.
avon is offline  
Closed Thread

  Historum > World History Forum > Asian History

Tags
indian, mahal, taj


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Black Taj Mahal ???? bunyip Asian History 8 August 26th, 2012 05:32 PM
How much Indian? hob Ancient History 27 June 9th, 2012 10:41 PM
Vāru (Indian elephants) Publius Aelius Hadrianus Asian History 51 April 14th, 2012 08:40 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.