08-04-2007, 02:52 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-vishwas+Jul 29 2007, 07:36 AM-->QUOTE(vishwas @ Jul 29 2007, 07:36 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-acharya+Jul 29 2007, 05:09 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(acharya @ Jul 29 2007, 05:09 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->WILL WE EVER LEARN ??????
http://in.news.yahoo.com/001026/48/abd9.html
Friday October 27, 1:30 AM
....
Similarly, in the battle of Haldighati, Babur defeated the confederacy of the Hindu princes under Rana Sanga. Perplexed by the huge line up of Sanga, Babur was wondering whether to fight or withdraw. <b>But when he looked through his field glasses in the evening, he noticed that each camp was emitting smoke and came to learn that all the Hindu soldiers did not share a common kitchen. Inspired by this show of caste disunity among the soldiers, he decided to go ahead and strike. Sanga was defeated.
</b>
.....
Copyright © 2000 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.
[right][snapback]71636[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> Can we see some evidence for this? It suits the purpose of the "historians" so perfectly; it sounds too good to be true.
Some questions:
<b>Did Babur and Rana Sanga fight at Haldighati?</b>
I read that they fought at a different place, Khanwa.
<b>Were field glasses(binoculars) invented by then?</b>
I believe the answer is no.
<b>Were telescopes invented by then?</b>
Not in the western world. Not in much of the east, too.
It also appears that the decisive egde that Babur enjoyed was because of the use of artillery and muskets. Also, Babur also sued for a negotiated settlement soon after his advance guard was destroyed.
However, inspite of all this, the article could be right, but the writer need to cite his sources. The burden on proof is on the writer.
[right][snapback]71639[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No. The writer is clearly clueless. Muslims historians suffer from battle of Badr complex. I.e after a win they want to show to the faithful that they beat a "much larger army" with a much smaller force because "god" is on there side.
This is why babur mentions that Sanga had 100,000 and he had 12,000 men. This is ofcourse wrong.
The reason Rana Sanga lost is because his top general's treachery.
http://hindurajput.blogspot.com/#Rana_Sanga
And who can be more dumb then this fellow when he does not know who fought at Haldighati. http://hindurajput.blogspot.com/#Maharana_Pratap
-Digvijay
http://in.news.yahoo.com/001026/48/abd9.html
Friday October 27, 1:30 AM
....
Similarly, in the battle of Haldighati, Babur defeated the confederacy of the Hindu princes under Rana Sanga. Perplexed by the huge line up of Sanga, Babur was wondering whether to fight or withdraw. <b>But when he looked through his field glasses in the evening, he noticed that each camp was emitting smoke and came to learn that all the Hindu soldiers did not share a common kitchen. Inspired by this show of caste disunity among the soldiers, he decided to go ahead and strike. Sanga was defeated.
</b>
.....
Copyright © 2000 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.
[right][snapback]71636[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> Can we see some evidence for this? It suits the purpose of the "historians" so perfectly; it sounds too good to be true.
Some questions:
<b>Did Babur and Rana Sanga fight at Haldighati?</b>
I read that they fought at a different place, Khanwa.
<b>Were field glasses(binoculars) invented by then?</b>
I believe the answer is no.
<b>Were telescopes invented by then?</b>
Not in the western world. Not in much of the east, too.
It also appears that the decisive egde that Babur enjoyed was because of the use of artillery and muskets. Also, Babur also sued for a negotiated settlement soon after his advance guard was destroyed.
However, inspite of all this, the article could be right, but the writer need to cite his sources. The burden on proof is on the writer.
[right][snapback]71639[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No. The writer is clearly clueless. Muslims historians suffer from battle of Badr complex. I.e after a win they want to show to the faithful that they beat a "much larger army" with a much smaller force because "god" is on there side.
This is why babur mentions that Sanga had 100,000 and he had 12,000 men. This is ofcourse wrong.
The reason Rana Sanga lost is because his top general's treachery.
http://hindurajput.blogspot.com/#Rana_Sanga
And who can be more dumb then this fellow when he does not know who fought at Haldighati. http://hindurajput.blogspot.com/#Maharana_Pratap
-Digvijay