And I think it matters in the sense it's a good example of how we can't really generalize a "culture" or "civilization" because such grand visions are basically marketing for all intents and purposes.
Like during the Islamic Golden Age, was there truly a difference between Byzantine Damascus or Arab Damascus? Can't you argue that al-Khwarizmi is actually a descendent of Persian High Culture, as he was from Khiva in Central Asia before it was Turkified. If it's based on Arabic as a language, then you can argue that most of Indian civilization in the 1st millennium was actually Persian due to Farsi-Dari being the lingua Franca of the educated (eg. My great-grandfather and grandfather both learned Farsi-Dari at the village school).
> Come on, the Levant has probably seen the highest frequency of violent redrawings of boundaries and governments per square mile in human history
I can say the same about Punjab, with the multiple Afghan, Turkic, Maratha, British, and indigenous invasions.
Or Southern China which was only pacified in the 1700s before collapsing into clan wars, a messianic revolution, and then the collapse of the Qing empire so around 150-200 years of war.
All history was bloody and brutal, and the Levant was fairly stable under Ottoman rule, which was around 500 years in those regions. Compared to the multiple Warring States periods in China and India, that's pretty stable.
Also, why are you getting downvoted?!? Nothing you said deserves a downvote.
> you can argue that most of Indian civilization in the 1st millennium was actually Persian
I'd say that's valid, particularly if you're tracing specific intellectual or cultural traditions. (Agree in not keeping culture/civilisational scorecards.)
> can say the same about Punjab, with the multiple Afghan, Turkic, Maratha, British, and indigenous invasions
Fair enough. It's another patch of fertile land, at a crossroads between birth sites of human civilisation. That does advance the point, however, that managed chaos is not necessarily inimical to intellectual traditions being preserved.
> why are you getting downvoted?!? Nothing you said deserves a downvote.
I sort of assume in these discussions everyone gets downvoted and we try to find folks who will change our mind :).
Well, in Lohia's case it was proto-Maoism.
And I think it matters in the sense it's a good example of how we can't really generalize a "culture" or "civilization" because such grand visions are basically marketing for all intents and purposes.
Like during the Islamic Golden Age, was there truly a difference between Byzantine Damascus or Arab Damascus? Can't you argue that al-Khwarizmi is actually a descendent of Persian High Culture, as he was from Khiva in Central Asia before it was Turkified. If it's based on Arabic as a language, then you can argue that most of Indian civilization in the 1st millennium was actually Persian due to Farsi-Dari being the lingua Franca of the educated (eg. My great-grandfather and grandfather both learned Farsi-Dari at the village school).
> Come on, the Levant has probably seen the highest frequency of violent redrawings of boundaries and governments per square mile in human history
I can say the same about Punjab, with the multiple Afghan, Turkic, Maratha, British, and indigenous invasions.
Or Southern China which was only pacified in the 1700s before collapsing into clan wars, a messianic revolution, and then the collapse of the Qing empire so around 150-200 years of war.
All history was bloody and brutal, and the Levant was fairly stable under Ottoman rule, which was around 500 years in those regions. Compared to the multiple Warring States periods in China and India, that's pretty stable.
Also, why are you getting downvoted?!? Nothing you said deserves a downvote.