বানিজ্য না শাসন? ব্রিটিশরা কি করে ভারত দখল করল? | The Anarchy-William Dalrymple | SC বই-ঠেক EP 12

[@parthapratimdas597]

Great summarisation!!

[@sandipanghosh3221]

এভাবে গল্প গুলো যদি ইতিহাস বইতে পেতাম কতো ভালোই না লাগতো!!!! অসংখ্য ধন্যবাদ আপনাদের কাছে । আমরা খুবই উপকৃত। Soul connection বই ঠেকের নিয়মিত দর্শক হওয়ার সুবাদে একটা আবদার, যদি রাখা যায়,,,, এই রকম ঐতিহাসিক ঘটনা বলার সময় যদি vedio editing এর সময় map এর reference দেওয়া যায় তাহলে খুবই ভালো লাগতো।

[@santanumukherjee3039]

একসময় প্রচুর গল্প উপন্যাস পড়েছি কিন্তু বয়স বারার সাথে সাথে নন ফিকশন এর প্রতি একটা অদ্ভুত ভালোলাগা তৈরী হয়ে গেছে। এখনো বিশেষ করে প্রচুর থ্রিলার পরি কিন্তু সাথে নন ফিকশন ও থাকে। এখন নতুন বই 5 টা কিনলে তার মধ্যে 3 টে নন ফিকশন হয়।

[@m7bz]

One of the best Bengali podcasts I've listened to! Excellent presentation of a great book. Keep up the good work!

[@myphilosophy]

ভালো লাগছে , বই নিয়ে আপনাদের আলোচনা । বাংলায় এইধরনের চ্যানেল সত্যিই প্রশংসনীয় । পুরনো চ্যানেল থেকে এখানে এসে ভালো হয়েছে এখানে শুধু বই ই পাওয়া যাবে ।

[@budha1014]

এটা আমি একটা কমেন্ট এ বলেছিলাম।ধন্যবাদ এই বই আপলোড করার জন্য। শ্রীপন্থের কলকাতা বইটা নিয়ে ডিসকাস করতে পারেন।পড়ছি।খুবই ইন্টারেস্টইং

[@saswatidatta180]

অসম্ভব সুন্দর এবং আকর্ষণীয় একটি আলোচনা, খুব ভালো লাগছে আপনাদের বই নির্বাচন.... অনেক ধন্যবাদ আপনাদের দুজনকেই ... বইঠেক আলাদা চ্যানেল হওয়ার জন্য আমার কাছে এটা একটা নিজস্ব লাইব্রেরী হয়ে উঠছে ..... আরো এগিয়ে চলুক বইঠেক....❤❤❤

[@ShagataMukherjee]

Alochonata shune shomridhho holam. Game of thrones er parallel ta khub interesting laglo. Ei discussiontar akta continuation hishebe Ramchandra Guhar India After Gandhi nie akta episode hole srota hishebe bhalo lagbe.

[@abhijitmukherjee7608]

Excellent 👍 কত অজানা তথ্য জানতে পারা গেল।

[@al-aminazad862]

অতীতে ফিরে গেলাম। বেশ ভলো কনটেন্ট। বই ঠেকের জন্য শুভকামনা।

[@MrStilMann]

Bepok hoyeche Pemasis da! Thanks Arunava da !

[@meghbanerjeemusic]

Duradanto Aalochona.... Purota shunlaam.... khub vaalo laaglo.... Just Daarun..

[@dritaban]

Khub insightful ekta alochona. Khub pocchonder channel. All the very best to Boi thek from Toronto.

[@PRises]

boi ta porchi ekhon , daruun laglo je bhabe summarize korechen

[@PranoyDutta]

Finally বাংলাতে এরকম content পাওয়া যাচ্ছে যার মধ্যে proper value আছে আর আমাদের মস্তিষ্ক enriched ও হয়। খুব ভালো লাগে আপনদের এই আড্ডা। খুব চাইবো এই বই selection এর line up এর ওপর demography - র চাপ যেন না পড়ে। *George Orwell এর লেখা নিয়ে আলোচনার অপেক্ষায় রইলাম।

[@rajatkbanerjee]

George Orwell niye bolte hole orwellian dystopia noi, Burmese Days niye alochona hok !

[@rakeshkundu8954]

Very good selection of Book...

[@abhijitguha6451]

All the episodes of Boithek are unputdownable but I think this episode is the best so far. Unbelievable eloquence of the rendention. This is going to stay with many of us for many many days. Thank you both!

[@zcahkma]

Just got a Happy feelings

[@rumaghosh9169]

Listened with rapt attention... excellent analysis . Thank you

[@Baishali1912]

Daruun hoche...pls continue rakhben....khub enriched discussion ..

[@teachermcsk6450]

খুব সুন্দর।

[@asitbiswas7042]

osadharon podcast.

[@abhijitguha6451]

How could you remember so many different characters Premashish babu? Osadharon.

[@amalbanerjee1935]

This is an amazing channel. Please carry-on

[@Basudeb_Chandra]

Thankyou for making a dedicated channel for "BoiThek". Loving the concept of it. In bengali language this kinda content is quite rare . Please never quit. Looking forward to see some bengali books too.

[@aeroskypial]

These authentic Bengali discussions on such great books deserve to be on Spotify.

[@markj2118]

Darun laglo.

[@sanchitadeb607]

Woww Ebr Fianally Boithek 😍,, History Amr Aga gorai Khuv priyo subject tobe Premasis sir jevabe Gopper moto kore bojhai Sotti emn School Life e porale ami History te all time tahole 100 marks petam 🎉 but jai hok Thank You Sir eto sundor vabe bojhanor jonno❤

[@Sayan0709]

this is such an underrated channel...😭🙏🙏🙏

[@raisulislam7418]

Please share a detailed analysis on " Capital in twenty first century by thomas pikwtty" thanks

[@SoulConnectionBoiThek]

Thanks for the suggestion. As it is widely believed that Piketty’s Capital is a book that is “bought by everyone, read by none”.

[@manojitsarkar-y9b]

মোঘল শাসনের আগের ভারত নিয়ে একটা episode করলে সমৃদ্ধ হতাম।

[@sankhaghosh9899]

Very nice discussion. Keep it on and keep it up !!

[@বৃহৎবঙ্গ]

Political parties in India by professor Abdur Razzak বইটি পড়ার অনুরোধ রইল।

[@onu007outsider]

বইঠেকের জন্য মুখিয়ে থাকি। আপনারা এগিয়ে যান।

[@parthachakraborty6231]

Your brilliant discussion has encouraged me to read this book once again... Thank you so much.

[@mallikaacharyya7750]

নেতাজি কে নিয়ে একটি নিরপেক্ষ আলোচনা শোনার আশায় থাকলাম। 🙏🏻ভালোথাকবেন।

[@rajatavachanda5927]

দাদা ফারুকশিয়ার ফরমান নিয়ে কিছু বললে ভালো হত দুর্দান্ত অনুষ্ঠান❤

[@deyronit]

bangla abong bangalir ogrogoti hobe apander ei gyan e , khub bhalo initiative

[@rajatavachanda5927]

এরম ইতিহাস নিয়ে আরও ভিডিও চাই❤

[@soumyadiptamajumder8795]

Do a detailed review on the following books: 1. Stalin: New Biography of a New Dictator, by Oleg Khlevniuk & Stalin: Paradoxes of Power, 1878-1928, by Stephen Kotkin 2. History of Freedom Movement in India(3 volumes) by Ramesh Chandra Majumdar 3. Savarkar(2 volumes) by Vikram Sampath 4. Che Guevara by John Lee Anderson 5. India Wins Freedom(unabridged version) by Maulana Azad 6. The Cold War by John Lewis Gaddis 7. Confessions of an Economic Hitman by John Perkins 8. My Frozen Turbulence in Kashmir by Jagmohan 9. Why Nations Fail by Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson 10. Rise and Fall of Great Powers by Paul Kennedy

[@nirvana9891]

এই বই নিয়ে আড্ডার উদ্যোগ প্রশংসনীয়। Dr. Partha Chatterjee র “ The Politics of the Governed: Reflections on Popular Politics in Most of the World” বইটি নিয়ে আড্ডার অনুরোধ রইল।

[@samiksur8617]

Podcast suggestion: A thematic Depiction of the history of bengal by portraying how it originated and evolved as a civilization/ community, can incorporate books such as - History of Bengal ( all the volumes) by Jadunath Sarkar or the RC Majumdar One or the Sabyasachi Bhattacharya one. TIA :)

[@thereviewnation2861]

Plzzz discuss "India that is Bharat " - J Sai Deepak

[@subirdas7665]

Excellent discussion ❤️ keep up

[@avijitmajumdar3292]

বই ঠেক যেন বন্ধ না হয়।।

[@soumyoyt]

sir kolkatar rashta ba kolkatar itihas niye discuss karun please , thanks

[@ArghyaMondal-lc1ux]

Please cover the biography of Isaac Newton by Walter Isaacson

[@debasissirkar]

Appreciate your effort, let me know membership details. So that i can opt for it.

[@asanjanchanda5310]

যখন Anarchy নামে একটা বই পড়লেই তখন Anarchism বলে একটা ব্যাপার হয় সেটা নিয়েও একটু পড়াশোনা করাও সবাই কে। আর তার আগে communism, socialism, capitalism সেগুলো সবাই কে বোঝাও। নইলে Anarchism ধরতে অসুবিধা হবে। যাই হোক মোট কথা এবার পলিটিকাল তত্ত্ব গুলো কভার করো আর লাস্টে পারলে Anarchism টাও কভার করো।❤

[@anishmazumdar6024]

Congratulations for new channel subscribe kore dilam.

[@Pastonaplate]

Its not you.. It's biology boi ta niye discuss korun please

[@budha1014]

Jahangir r por kotodur jani shajahan ase chilen nabab hisabe. Aurngzeb noy. Tahole prothom e ki ota shajahan hobe? Just asking!

[@soumyoyt]

sir please discuss on polasi theke partition by shekhar bandhopadhya

[@bhaumikanirban]

44:26 থেকে 44:41 অংশটা নেই।

[@sankhaghosh9899]

Yes. Ei part ta black screen dekhachhe.

[@soumyadiptamajumder8795]

I'm very disappointed with this book. I had been expecting a lot since this is a very thoroughly studied period yet finds hardly any detailed mention in the mainstream, often brushed aside as a time of chaos and anarchy (as is the book's title). The book is promoted as an approachable journal to track the events and personalities that shaped the 18th century of the Indian subcontinent. However, the sheer disregard for facts and details that are on display in almost every chapter is frustrating for even an amateur historian like me. I'm not into tedious and excruciating details, yet when the very narrative is being changed with fiction, one has to stop. Every chapter has sweeping statements and massive generalizations that fall off after just a preliminary research. The book makes generalizations to basically summarize: Mughal = Incompetent, British = Bad and Greedy, Marathas = Brutal Warlords, Nawabs = Decadent Sops. That is it, despite all of this being far from the truth. Characters like Warren Hastings, Shah Alam, Mirza Najaf Khan, Mahadji Scindia, Naijb ud Daula, Nana Fadnavis etc all have been short changed. Characters like the Sayyid brothers, Safdur Jung, Nizam ul Mulk I, Imad ul Mulk, Sawai Jai Singh, Bajirao, Balaji Nana Saheb, Madhav Rao, Muhammad Beg Khan etc have not even had 2-3 lines dedicated to them. These men who ruled vast areas and were the most powerful rulers of their day find barely any or no mention. There are many more such historical misrepresentations and misinterpretations. Too many really. The above mentioned are simply the early ones, later in the book entire wars and battles such as the battles of Plassey and Buxar, Anglo Maratha Wars, Angle Mysore Wars etc are given such a shoddy treatment that I can't even begin dissecting them. The facts I've mentioned are just the tip of the iceberg. If you are interested in Mughal history, Colonial history, Maratha history or just India in the 18th century, I can recommend you far better books such as Later Mughals by William Irvine and the Fall of the Mughal Empire (4 volumes) by Jadunath Sarkar. Both are freely available online.

[@subhendudutta2007]

জোব চার্নক কি কলকাতায় ঢোকার আগে কয়েক মাস উলুবেড়িয়ায় ছিলেন?

[@kalyanidas2325]

ইতিহাসের অনেক কিছু ই জানতে পারলাম। বাংলাকে শেষ করেছিল বাঙালী জাতি ইংরেজদের সহায়তায়। তাইত মনে হচ্ছে।😢

[@soumyadiptamajumder8795]

Some early mistakes that abound in this book 1. Wrong Historical dates: A recurring problem in the book, the author struggles to write accurate dates and give a coherent chronology of events. For example, The date for battle of Buxar is wrong. Imagine the battle that led to the infamous Treaty of Allahabad between Shah Alam and he East India Company being wrongly dated in a Non-Fiction work set in India. Even other obvious dates are wrong such as the author stating that Shivaji and his Marathas began a war with the Mughals in 1680's, the truth is that he died in 1680. Mughals and Maratha had been warring since late 1650's. These of course are smaller details that don't take away much, but simple due diligence should have been done for such simple errors. 2. Comical Military Descriptions: One of the biggest problem with the author is his over the top and downright inaccurate portrayal of the 17th and 18th century military issues. To start with Mr. Dalrymple triumphantly states that the loss of Rajput Cavalry was a decisive factor for the Mughals in their defeat against the Marathas. Perhaps the author simply forgot Mughal Rajput Generals like Mirza Raje Jai Singh, Raja Jaswant Singh, Sawai Jai Singh etc. Despite rebellions, many Rajput houses actively fought for the Mughals until 1740's. Next Mr. Dalrymple's hilarious description of Nader Shah's invasion of India. This is the most inaccurate account of the invasion and the subsequent battle you'll find anywhere that is published. Mr. Dalrymple states that Nader Shah crossed the Khyber and most of Punjab with no resistance and only at Karnal was he faced by the Mughal army. In describing the Mughal army Dalrymple transcends from history into fantasy, stating that some 100000 Persians faced a bloated Mughal army of a million with over 200000-300000 combatants! That's right! Mr Dalrymple states that a pre-modern regime mobilized at least 200000-300000 soldiers and near a million camp followers. This would not even fly in historical fiction or even fantasy like Game of Thrones, and here we have this for Non-Fiction! Undeterred by any of these fabrications, Dalrymple gives a fictional account of the battle where 'the Persian light cavalry parted like curtains to reveal the Swivel guns' that annihilated the many miles long Mughal heavy cavalry charge. Then Mr Dalrymple states that some 50000-100000 Mughal troops died, and later the Mughal Emperor like an 'idiot' went over to Nader Shah and got captured. This is pure caricature-ish fabrication. He has reduced history to a series of silly tropes to satisfy his narrative of utter Mughal incompetence. Now as per actual history Nader Shah invaded the Mughal empire through the Khyber, where he schemed a brilliant surprise attack against the Governor (Subedar) of Kabul. It is literally on wikipedia, even basic common sense and understanding of the Mughal empire's structure would make it obvious that the Mughals had provincial armies, and that these often acted as the wardens of the border marches of the empire. Next we come to the astronomical numbers given by Dalrymple, needless to say that they are absolutely false. The Mughal army had camp followers numbering around 300000, yet in all the fighting combatants did not exceed 75000. In fact in the actual battle only 30000 Mughals participated. The casualties were around 8000 Mughal dead and 5000 -7500 Persian dead. What gave Nader Shah the victory was that he was able to cut off the Mughal supplies, and due to the vast number of camp follower numbers, they began starving. The Mughal commanders Saadat Ali Khan Burhan ul Mulk and Samsamudaula Khan Dauran did mount 2 ill-coordinated attacks, neither of which were supported by the main Mughal army. These attacks were fended off by Nader Shah by luring them both separately with his light cavalry before ambushing the Mughals piecemeal with both his camel artillery and Jezayarchi musket infantry. There was no great Mughal charge, only these 2 isolated and uncoordinated attacks that were foiled, I have no idea where Mr. Dalrymple got his dramatic account of miles long line of charging Mughal heavy cavalry. The failure of these 2 attacks, and the lack of provisions crippled the Mughal army, on top of that the lighter Persian army not engaging in a pitched contest, staying entrenched beyond the Alimardan river, and sending their light cavalrymen to keep a blockade on the Mughal camp, doomed the campaign for the Mughals. As such the Mughal Emperor was now a caged animal. He could neither attack nor retreat. Thus, due to the famine and starvation in the camp, the Mughal Emperor had no choice but to offer terms to Nader Shah. Unlike how Dalrymple puts it, the Mughal Emperor was not an 'idiot' to go for a meeting with Nader Shah. Muhammad Shah Rangila made many errors in his reign, and was a bad an incompetent Emperor, but he was not a complete idiot as Mr. Dalrymple's parodied account of him shows. His army was in dire straits already. The Persians refused a proper set piece battle, and being more mobile they were able to cut off the Mughal supplies. Also the Mughals did have Zamburak cannons, camel mounted swivel guns. In fact the Zamburak had been a part of the Mughal artillery since the days of Shah Jahan in the mid 17th century. This idea that Nader Shah surprised the Mughals with Zamburak cannons is objectively nonsense. Nader Shah won due to his superior strategy, not his camel 'gizmos' as Dalrymple puts it. The Zamburak did contribute, but it was not an exotic novelty as portrayed by Mr Dalrymple. Also Mr. Dalrymple does not mention that at the time of Nader Shah's invasion, the Mughal empire had lost the vast provinces of Malwa, Bundelkhand, Gujarat and a good chunk of Rajputana to the Marathas. In fact the Mughal Emperor's armies had been beaten at the Battles of Amjhera, Jaitpur, Mandsaur and then at Delhi in 1737, this was followed by the decisive blow at the Battle of Bhopal in late 1737. This rapid flurry of losses from 1729 to 1737 had broken the Mughal authority south of the Chambal river. Over all the combined forces that the Mughals could muster from all his remaining commanders and provinces could not have exceeded 80000. So Nader Shah actually outnumbered the Mughals in the actual battle. 3. Nonsense Economic Narrative: Mr. Dalrymple then goes on to say that after the Mughal decline, regional states that once paid taxes to the Mughals were free to spend on native art and culture, thus ushering a cultural renaissance. This may only have been true for some mountain chiefs of Himachal or Jammu, but for the vast majority it certainly was not true in the slightest. Mr. Dalrymple on one hand states that Maratha conquered former Mughal provinces and plundered them, and then on other he also states that these states had a cultural renaissance thanks to extra tax savings. In his Jaipur lecture, he specifically cites Rajasthan's rich cultural development of the 18th century owing much of it to the declining of Mughal power. Here's the reality, with Marathas now running the show, Rajputana entered a time of unprecedented economic turmoil. The Maratha generals regularly plundered the countryside, exacted heavy tribute and protection money from all states from Punjab to the Deccan. In fact one of the Jaipur Maharajas, Ishwari Singh, the ruler of the very city that Dalrymple was using as an example of his theory, had committed suicide because he could not pay his tribute and protection money to the Maratha warlords. Ishwari Singh had been installed by the Marathas, and his failure to pay their agreed tribute led to a Maratha army invading the State of Jaipur. The Marathas were playing kingmakers and extortionists on the Rajput States, who with their antiquated miltary methods could barely maintain their very existence, mostly by monetary rather than miltary means. The irony of Dalrymple sitting in Jaipur, and stating that Mughal's decline ushered in a great cultural renaissance due to 'tax saving' while in reality most of the Jaipur state was plundered and its chiefs forced to pay crippling tributes is nothing short of dark comedy. 4. Faulty Colonial History (edited note: This one is in context of his lecture, the book, at least the digital copy on kindle, seems to give correct numbers, book readers may skip ahead): Then Mr. Dalrymple saunters around the supremacy of the European infantry armies over the native cavalry armies. He gives the example of the Carnatic wars, where the French and British troops routinely routed Indian cavalry armies. But here's the caveat that the author once again missed. Neither the armies of the Nawab of the Carnatic nor of the Nizam of Hyderabad were 'cavalry armies'. In fact from 1720's onwards, they were made up of combined arms of musketeers, artillery and cavalry. When the French under De Bussy did face a mobile all cavalry army of the Marathas under Balaji Bajirao, he was forced to retreat back. Further Mr. Dalrymple cites a battle of the Adyar river in his speeches regularly where he claims that 30000-40000 Indian cavalry was routed by just a regiment or 2 of European trained infantry. The truth is that a simple wikepedia search will tell you that there were no 30000 horsemen, rather around 10000 Indian troops, with mostly infantry, hardly a 'cavalry army'. South India, with the exception of the Deccan region, is not good for horse breeding and is not a cavalry country. How on earth did Mr. Dalrymple find 30000-40000 all cavalry armies being raised and equipped by a single south Indian Nawab (not even a Governor). Dalrymple's numbers as usual are unfounded in any source, primary or secondary.

[@abcd-ur1zp]

India that is bharat, j sai deepak

[@jaydevmukhopadhyay8793]

আমি চোখ বন্ধ করে সিনেমা দেখলাম।

[@PradipRay-vx3bs]

সিপাহী বিদ্রোহ আসবে না?

[@prelimsiscoming]

Nadir shah toh Iran er Turkey r na

[@ratulhossain7873]

উপস্হাপকের কন্ঠ স্পষ্ট না

[@rakeshbhattacharjee2288]

Being hindu we are grateful to Britishers they saved us from tyrant Shiraj - otherwise hindys would have been killed or converted..