a question to Jim was RE: Keeping the faith: Cuban Jews

Ulhas Joglekar uvj at SPAMvsnl.com
Thu Apr 12 07:14:12 MDT 2001



 >One of the myths with respect to the origin of the word "Indian" is the
 >notion that Columbus thought he had hit "India" and therefore named the
 >indigenous peoples "Indians". Actually, in 1492, there was no such place
or
 >name as India; the whole region was referred to as "Hindustan" by
outsiders
 >and was composed of separate Maharaja-run states. The term "Indian" came
 >from the reference to indigenous peoples as "Gente en Dios" (People of or
 >with God) or Los Indios. Further evidence for this notion, is that
 >indigenous peoples in the now Philippines were also referred to as Los
 >Indios, and of course the Spanish didn't think that the area of the now
 >Philippines was also "India".
 >
 >Jim C


This is not the first time that Jim C. has repeated this nonsense about
India. The word India is derived from river Indus. This was known to ancient
Greece as well Persia. Elementary aquaintance with textbooks on Indian
history would tell you that. Jim C. could refer A.L.Basham's book Wonder
That Was India if he has any doubts. Yes, there was no such thing as India
in 1492, but that is true in the sense that India as a bourgeois nation did
not exist then. In that sense many nations did not exist in 1492. This is
simply one more instance of apalling ignorance about India and Indians on
this List.

Ulhas






More information about the Marxism mailing list