Sunday, October 31, 2010

The English Rebel

-->
 Title: The English Rebel
Author: David Horspool
Publisher: Penguin 2010 (First published 2009)
ISBN: 978-0-141-02547-6
Pages: 394

David Horspool is History Editor of The Times Literary Supplement. He is a noted columnist and published Why Alfred Burned the Cakes: A King and His eleven-hundred-year Afterlife. This book analyses the strains of revolution over a course of 900 years, right from Norman conquest in 1066 to the protests against Margaret Thatcher’s community charge in 1990. He asserts that rebelliousness is woven into the English social fabric and it expresses itself when several factors, including a sense of justice, equality, moral responsibility or outright personal motives are combined in the right proportion. As the political climate changed over the centuries, the constituents as well as targets of the rebellions also underwent radical (!) change. If it were the dukes, earls or barons who revolted when kingship exercised absolute power over the people, in a democratic setup, it is pressure groups or political parties which are rising up against the establishment.

The single greatest incident which shaped modern English history was the Norman conquest in 1066. William the Conqueror, who emerged victorious was continually harried by rebels like Edgar the Aetheling and Hereward the Wake. Even though they failed to overthrow him, they changed the way he approached the government of the country. Their guerilla tactics inspired both practical and poetic imitators, making the woodland English outlaw the symbol of national identity. And the oppression they fought against, part invention, part reality, would inspire later generations of rebellious followers (p.21). William’s successors were also not having a peaceful time at the throne. Stephen had to face the revolt of Geoffrey de Mandeville. John II assumed reign in 1154. He quarrelled with Thomas Becket, the Archbishop of Canterbury, whom he had elevated to the highest clerical position. However Becket resented the monarch’s intrusion into ecclesiastical affairs and decided to bring him to heel. The Archbishop was assassinated in 1170 by the King’s own men. The forceful protest from a religious figure was the first in English history. Richard, who followed John, was kidnapped while on a crusade to the holy lands. A large sum had to be arranged as the King’s ransom. The inequities in collecting the money prompted William fitz Osbert, a commoner, to rise in arms. He was captured and killed. The heroic deeds of this rebel, who originated from the poor classes might have been the source behind the myths generated regarding Robin Hood.

John, who followed Richard lost Normandy in 1205 to France. The parental land was denied to the Normans and they had to put their feet more firm in the country they conquered. The new king’s squeezing of the people for retaliatory campaigns caused the barons to rise against him. The parliament, which was the representative assembly of the landed class objected to the way the king was spending public money without consulting them. The show of force which ensued compelled John to concede the signing of Magna Carta in 1215 at Runnymede. One stipulation listed in the document having immense historical value was that “All these barons with their full complement of knights and with the commune of the whole of England must rise up against the king if by chance the king turns against his own charter” (p.65). Thus, rebellions were in fact legalised with this important proviso. Henry III, who followed John had a powerful rebel in Simon de Montfort whom he managed to kill by mutilation in 1265. The 14th century saw rebellion turning to regicide. In 1327, Edward II faced the rebel Roger Mortimer who had earlier fled to France. His own queen Isabella and son, later Edward III sided with the rebels. The king was killed while in custody through one of the blood-curdling acts of cruelty.

Plague epidemic which devastated England and much of continental Europe by the middle of the 14th century caused far reaching consequences. A large proportion of people - some claims as much as half – were killed in the pandemic. This caused a shortage of workers in urban centres and the wages shot up by the law of demand and supply. Agricultural labourers who had a very low pay traditionally caught the opportunity and began to migrate to places where the wages were higher. This caused mayhem in agriculture. Artisans also followed the path of the peasants. Monarchy appeared very harsh against the poor by bringing in the Statute of Labourers (1351) which froze the wages at a predetermined level and thus intending to take away the lure of peasants. French wars which raged during 1376-80 prompted the crown to impose poll tax to cover the war expenses. This draconian measure in which the rich and the poor alike were to pay the same amount of tax made the peasants to revolt which came to be known as the Peasants’ Revolt of 1381. Wat Tyler and John Ball assumed leadership of the rebellion. They killed the Archbishop of Canterbury and many lords and came to dictate terms to Richard II. During the negotiations, the Lord Mayor of London stabbed Tyler and the revolt fizzled out. Richard’s reign also ended in rebellion. Henry Bolingbroke, the duke of Lancaster returned from exile in France, deposed and killed Richard II in 1400.

The Duke of Lancaster and his successors reigned in the beginning of the 15th century. By the middle of the century, the kingship was in the person of Henry VI. The Duke of York rebelled against him. The series of battles are known as the Wars of the Roses, taking cue from the coats of arms of the respective duchies. The Duke of York usurped the throne and assumed monarchy as Richard III. The war was finally ended when Henry Tudor defeated Richard III in the Battle of Bosworth in 1485 which established the Tudor dynasty, under the title of Henry VII. The two great monarchs of the Tudor family, Henry VIII and Elizabeth also had to face rebellion. By Elizabeth’s time, far more of the population had a stake in that government, which was run by professionals like William Cecil and Walshingham on less personal lines. An aristocratic rising, particularly one which concentrated its support so narrowly, had little chance of success (p.233). The nervous non-committal responses the rebels received to their entreaties are evidence of a cowed people, not a contented one: time and again, those who were asked to join said that they would if everybody else did, clearly too nervous to take the first step (p.234).

Gun Powder Plot (1605) against James I was the first example of an act of religious terrorism in history. Repressed catholics amassed huge quantities of gun powder in the cellars of Westminster to blast the parliament and king when the parliament was in session. The plot surfaced when the letter from one of the plotters asking Lord Monteagle to stay away from the building was leaked out. Guy Fawkes was discovered and Robert Catesby executed along with their supporters.

Charles I who followed James sidelined parliament which was becoming increasingly more assertive. Matters came to a head when the parliamentarians submitted a Petition of Rights (1628) in which they referred the king to his predecessors’ promises to restrain arbitrary government. Charles was in no mood for changing his style of rule. The parliament put forward the Grand Remonstrance (1641) to the king and he took his time in replying to it; but when he did, more than three weeks later, it was an unusually placatory message, concentrating on the ‘purity and glory’ of the church, and the king’s role in maintaining it against all attacks, whether ‘popish’ or the works of other ‘schismatics and separatists’ (p.257). The King tried to arrest five MPs including Pym, Hampden, Denzel Holles, William Strode and Sir Arthur Haselrig. The forewarned MPs stayed away and Charles and his courtiers who forciby entered parliament against the shouts of ‘privilege of parliament’ had to return empty handed. Civil war ensued from this stubborn attitude and the king’s party lost. Charles himself surrendered to the Scots who handed him over to the English for 200,000 sterlings. Even in captivity, the king tried to drive a wedge between the parliament and its successful army. Tired of the machinations of the monarch, the parliament, under the leadership of Oliver Cromwell tried and executed the king. The monarchy itself was abolished in 1648, though it was restored in 1660 under Charles II.

James II, who followed Charles, was a catholic and was much hated for his bigoted ways. England would stand nothing against its protestant church. Rebels, known as the Immortal Seven invited William of Orange (in Netherlands) to come and assume kingship. William obliged in 1689 and James withdrew without fighting. This cool transfer of power is known in history as the Glorious Revolution, though there are historians who argue that there was neither glory nor revolution in it.

In the 18th century, parliament began to assert more rights and the monarch had to take a back seat. Monarchy was gradually paving the way for oligarchical tendencies from parliament. Its proceedings were not even allowed to be reported. John Wilkes championed the causes of liberty in the middle of the century. Modern era began with the French revolution and the points of contention began more and more to resemble the modern demands of an educated society. Better conditions for industrial workers including miners, universal franchise including women were some of the demands which were raised. The book concludes with the agitation (1990) against Thatcher’s community charges which were projected to be a form of poll tax, the name itself being an object of scorn.

The book brings out two popular slogans rebels assumed. Peaceably if we may, Forcibly if we must (to express that the protestors were determined to have what they wanted) and Not a penny off the pay, not a second on the day (the war cry of the coal miners when wage cuts and increased work hours were proposed) are two memorable slogans.

The book is noted for the wit and humour exuding from virtually every paragraph. The language is impeccable though it sometimes hinders the average reader from enjoying the wit it contains. The contents are well researched and the author’s scholarship is beyond question. Activities ranging over one millennium is represented and analysed in masterful detail. True to his credentials, the author’s assertions are well balanced and thoroughly justifiable.

Every book will have some disadvantages also to be pointed out. This work assumes a moderate to high prior understanding of English history as it absolutely refuses to describe the background in detail. Many events like the Reformation of Henry VIII, constitutional dilemmas associated with Charles I’s encounter with parliament and others are not explained in detail. Only a reader thoroughly at home with the history will be able to find the reading smooth. The author also exhibits a characteristic of jumping the gun, by which he narrates the after effects of a particular rebellion first and then only comes the circumstances which prompted it. Several technical terms like scutage and villeinage are mentioned but not described. This made the flow rather difficult.

The book is highly recommended.

Rating: 3 Star

Saturday, October 23, 2010

Cosmic Jackpot - Why Our Universe Is Just Right For Life















Title:
Cosmic Jackpot – Why Our Universe Is Just Right For Life
Author: Paul Davies
Publisher: Houghton Mifflin Company 2007 (First published 2006)
ISBN: 978-0-618-59226-1
Pages: 269


Paul Davies is an internationally acclaimed physicist and cosmologist and the director of ‘Beyond’, a research institue in Arizona State University dedicated to the study of fundamental concepts in science. He is the author of more than 200 research papers and 27 books on topics ranging from black holes to life on Mars. The asteroid 1992OG was officially renamed Pauldavies in his honour.

This work is essentially philosophical rather than scientific. The origins of the universe, its growth and its eventual fate is discussed, but with an overarching personal touch which gives the lie to the scientific nature of the book. Much prominence is given to the quest for unified theories, but the hallmark of such a theory, if one does exist, is not consistent with the guess of a scientifically oriented mind, as the author asserts.

The origin of the universe was an issue which taxed even the most brilliant minds of all time. Scientists go incoherent when asked about what went before the Big Bang and religiously minded people often turn hostile and sometime violent when compelled to comment on who/what created God, the creator. St. Augustine, who was an intellectual heavyweight of his time, confronted such a question with a really smart answer. His considered answer to what god was doing before creating the universe was that ‘the world was made with time, and not in time’. Modern science also spells out that time itself originated in the Big Bang.

A good discussion on the present situation in particle physics is given. The particles in the standard model of particle physics are as follows. (The electric charge of the particle is shown in brackets).
Leptons
Tau (-1) - Tau Neutrino (0)
Muon (-1) - Muon Neutrino (0)
Electron (-1) - Electron Neutrino (0)

Quarks
Bottom (-1/3) - Top (2/3)
Strange (-1/3) - Charm (2/3)
Down (-1/3) - Up (2/3)
Particles in the Super Symmetry model are as follows. (The spin of the particles is given in brackets)
Higgs (0) - Higgsino (1/2)
Lepton (1/2) - Slepton (0)
Quark (1/2) - Squark (0)
Gluon (1) - Gluino (1/2)
Photon (1) - Photino (1/2)
Z (1) - Zino (1/2)
W (1) - Wino (1/2)
Graviton (2) - Gravitino (3/2)

The main hypotheses the author examined is summarized in an afterword. There are eight in all. We will examine them in turn.

A. The absurd universe: The universe is as it is, mysteriously, and it just happens to permit life. Had it been different, we would not be here to argue about it. The advantage is that it is easy to hold.

B. The unique universe: This view holds that there is a deep underlying unity in Physics, and there is a mathematical theory that will explain it all. The advantage is that this holds the dream of a complete understanding of the universe.

C. The multiverse: Modern cosmological models point strongly to the existence of a multiplicity of cosmic domains. There is variability among the parameters of fundamental constants in those multiple universes. The advantage is that it provides a natural and easy explanation of why the universe is so uncannily fine tuned for life – observers arise only in those universes where conditions are just right.

D. Intelligent design: This is the traditional monotheistic world view that the universe is created by god, and designed to be suitable for life. The advantage is that it is simple, but it is a conversation stopper. The other problem is that the identity of the creator may not be God, but a super civilization or a superduper computer in a highly advanced civilization.

E. The Life principle: In this theory, the bio-friendliness of the universe arises from an overarching law or principle that constrains the universe/multiverse to evolve towards life and mind. It has the advantage of taking life seriously, but the show stopper is that teleology represents a decisive break with traditional scientific thinking.

F. The Self-explaining universe: The universe, or multiverse can explain itself. There are models involving causal loops or backward in-time causation, whereby the universe creates itself. The advantage is that it is self-contained, the disadvantage being we are still left not knowing why this universe is the one that exists, as opposed to all other self explanatory schemes.

G. The fake universe: We are living in a simulation and what we take to be the real world is an ingeniously contrived virtual reality show. This is a variant on the intelligent designer scenario, but upgraded for the information age.

The author’s preferences are the options E & F.

The book is steeped in philosophical quagmire and not at all enjoyable. Anything can happen, as the logic implies, which can be adequately explained by philosophical concepts. In the end, when all is said and done, we are left wondering whether the author was successful in answering the question he pompously posed in the title, “Why our universe is just right for life?”. He has not even troubled himself to examine how a small change in one of the fundamental parameters of nature, like the gravitational constant or electronic charge can affect life. The language in the book is terse and the style contorted. It was the resolve to write a review which prompted me to read it all, being such a difficult one at that.

The book is not recommended.

Rating: 2 Star

Sunday, October 17, 2010

Intervention













 


Title: InterventionAuthor: Robin CookPublisher: MacMillan 2009 (First)Pages: 387ISBN: 978-0-230-74364-9


This time, I took Robin Cook for a change. He had produced several medical thrillers previously, and this one was also declared to be on the same mould. Whatever may be the advantages of Mr. Cook, having a scientific mind is not one of them, or that'd be the impression one'd get from reading this trash of a fiction riddled with historical and factual inaccuracies. Published in 2009, the author had filled in scenes from the Vatican, St. Peter's Basilica and St. Peter's Tomb probably to cash in on the public interest following the papal ascent of Pope Benedict XVI in 2005. A lot of books which were produced during that period invariably involved the prominent characters groping in the dark in the St. Peter's Basilica. There are many pretenders, but there is only one emperor. Dan Brown's 'Angels and Demons' is incomparable in attention to detail, fact and thrill to any of the dime-a-dozen thrillers which were churned out from presses every month.

Jack Stapleton, the famous medical examiner in New York city and is the hero of many of Cook's previous thrillers is the main protagonist. Shawn Daughtry, a famous archeologist and James O'Rourke, the archbishop of New York are class mates of Jack's. Shawn, along with his microbiologist wife Sana hits upon the location of the ossuary of Virgin Mary (no less!) buried in St. Peter's Basilica. They access the ossuary with the help of an ID obtained with the pressure from the cardinal and threatens to publish the details of it. The archbishop is upset because such a collection of bones would go contrary to pope's infallible decree that St. Mary ascended the heavens directly. He tries to persuade his classmate but to no avail. He sends a young fanatic staying in a monastery to Shawn's house to argue him from publishing the details. Steeped in religious superstition and unable to defend himself from the sexual advances of Sana, the enraged monk-zealot turns arsonist and kills his hosts becoming a martyr himself for the sacred cause, a fidayeen (suicide bomber)!

Jack is upset by the neuroblastoma of his three-month old son. The treatment was not progressing as expected. During his job, he picks up a case of death caused by the spinal manipulations performed by a chiropractor. A good argument ensues between him and the chiropractor in which the fallacies of the weird technique is painted in detail. In fact, there is a good coverage on alternative medicine in general. Shawn's wife, who was a microbiologist, separates the mitochondrial DNA from a teeth in the ossuary and finds a match between it, a living Muslim woman in Palestine and the predicted mDNA of Eve herself! Jack is assured that the Palestinian woman is a direct descendent of St. Mary and he flies to Jerusalem along with his wife and cancerous kid. Finding the woman, he begs her to bless the child and say that he has been cured. She does likewise, in return for some money and voila, the child is cured of cancer!

The book is worthless, even though coming as it does from a doyen of medical precision. In an earlier work, titled Seizure, Cook makes his hero separate the DNA from the 'Shroud of Turin' which was thought to contain the blood of Jesus Christ himself and inject it into the brain of a wealthy patient to cure him of Parkinson's. It was Jesus then, and Mary now. It seems Robin Cook can't separate the mythical from the real and is a prisoner of his childhood fantasies! The fact that the Shroud of Turin was proved to be a fake and there was no historical evidence for the life of Jesus, let alone Mary don't prevent the author from coming out with rubbish. The stalwart hero, who started a crusade against alternate medicine ends up with declaring the efficacy of faith healing!

There is an interesting mention about college life and how it affects a person's onward life. As the hero says, "No one seems to realize when you go to college what a wonderful experience it is. At the time it always seems so hectic, with some giant paper or exam weighing you down. And when someone tries to tell you how special college is while you're there, all you can say to yourself is, Oh Sure! If this is the best that it gets, I'm in serious trouble.

The publisher also seems to be callous in the extreme. In the back cover, under the synopsis, it is written that, "When Kevin Murray, now Bishop of the archdiocese of New York, gets wind of Shawn's findings....". Every thing is fine, except that the name of the bishop was James O'Rourke in the book and not Kevin Murray. How such an error can happen! No body even seems to proof read the work! Any way, such an error is apt for a nonsensical book like this.


Rating: 1 Star

Sunday, October 10, 2010

Shah Jahan - The Rise and Fall of the Mughal Emperor

-->












Title: Shah Jahan – The Rise and Fall of the Mughal Emperor
Author: Fergus Nicoll
Publisher: Penguin – Viking 2009 (First)
ISBN: 978-0-670-08303-9
Pages: 265

A superb piece of historical narrative from Fergus Nicoll. The entire life story of the 5th Mughal emperor is traced from his birth to the ignominous death at the hands of his treacherous son and 6th emperor, Aurangzeb. The style is quite lucid and embedded with interesting anecdotes and witty asides. Author’s insights goes often into the minds of the protagonists which makes the book riveting for the reader.

Shah Jahan, was born on Jan 15, 1592 as Khurram to the crown prince Jahangir. He was brought up under the close supervision of his visionary and magnanimous grand father, emperor Akbar. Jahangir, who was a full-scale drunkard and drug addict, turned in rebellion against his father. His efforts failed miserably because of the superior military strength and the personal appeal of his illustrious father. Akbar was planning to crown his grandson, Khusrau, who was Jahangir’s son. Prince Jahangir was a man who wouldn’t let blood relations come between him and the coveted throne. When Akbar fell ill, Jahangir usurped the throne from him, imprisoned his own son and blinded him! Shah Jahan’s luck cleared with this incident, and he soon rose to prominence as the crown prince. His military victories against Mewar, Kandahar and the Deccan provinces made him an essential counterpart to the emperor’s war efforts. When Jahangir married Mehr-al-Nisa, later named Nur Jahan who actively involved herself in state affairs, Shah Jahan found it difficult to reach his ambitions. Jahangir was a puppet in Nur Jahan’s hands and her strategic marital alliances between the princes and her own daughters and nieces forced her to come out in support of Shahryar, Shah Jahan’s incapable brother. Khurram opened revolt, but was soon chastised by the military might of the emperor and had to practically live in exile in the outermost reaches of the empire for six years. His only comfort was his devoted wife, Arjumand Bano Begum, later called Mumtaz Mahal who was the daughter of Asaf Khan, Nur Jahan’s brother. When Jahangir fell ill while in Kashmir, Asaf Khan imprisoned the emperor and the queen, who was his own sister! Khan crowned Dawar Bakhsh Bulaqi as a puppet till Shah Jahan reached Agra. When he arrived there in style from Deccan, Bulaqi was killed. Shah Jahan had earlier arranged the killing of his brother Khusrau who was previously a contender for the throne.

Shah Jahan became the emperor in 1627, at the age of 35. Being a megalomaniac ignorant or insensitive to the grinding poverty prevalent in the empire, he began a series of grand buildings and ornamented thrones. Millions of people perished in famines and pestilence, but Shah Jahan continued building his grand mosques, palaces, mausoleums and thrones without giving the suffering poor any comfort. There were very few emperors in human history who was so distant from the masses over which he ruled roughshod. Mumtaz Mahal died in 1631, while in labour for the 13th time, after delivering a girl child. Shah Jahan built the world renowned Taj Mahal at Agra in memory of her, even though he visited it only once after it was complete. The second time he entered it was for himself to be buried there. He made his eldest son, Dara Shikoh, who was a moderate, the crown prince. Aurangzeb, the third son, strongly resented this, as he was militarily the most able. When the emperor fell ill, struggle for the crown ensued with the four sons of Shah Jahan pitted against each other. Aurangzeb made a tactical alliance with his brother, Murad Bakhsh and defeated his brother Dara Shikoh at the Battle of Samugarh. Dara was chased, imprisoned and beheaded. His headless corpse was carried out in victorious procession through the streets of Delhi. Aurangzeb’s forces defeated his brother Shah Shuja, who was the governor of Bengal and chased him. He fled to the forests of Arakan in Burma and his fate is not known. After defeating his enemy brothers, Aurangzeb turned treacherously against his ally. He imprisoned and killed Murad Bakhsh and Suleiman Shikoh, Dara’s son. Shah Jahan was imprisoned at Agra fort while these fratricidal war was raging around him. Aurangzeb never visited his father in prison and he died at the age of 74, on January 31, 1666. He was buried secretly in Taj Mahal at night.

The story is well known, but Nicoll’s representation is splendid and even those persons well versed in Mughal history would find this book very attractive. A list of the children borne by Mumtaz Mahal is interesting, as such a neat compilation is rare. Their marriage took place on May 10, 1612 and she had given him thirteen children until she died on June 17, 1631. The children were as follows. The date of birth is given in brackets.

1. Hur al Nisa (30.3.1613) died at the age of 3
2. Jahan Ara (1.4.1614)
3. Dara Shikuh (29.3.1615)
4. Shah Shuja (2.7.1616)
5. Roshan Ara (2.9.1617)
6. Aurangzeb (3.11.1618)
7. Umid Bakhsh (16.12.1619) died at the age of 3
8. Thurayya (11.6.1621) died at the age of 7
9. Murad Bakhsh (8.10.1624)
10. Lutfallah (4.11.1626) died at the age of 2
11. Daulat Afza (9.5.1628) died at the age of 1
12. Husn Ara (23.4.1630) died on the same day
13. Gauhar Ara (17.6.1631)

The book is made unavoidable to a student of Mughal history by its collection of very rare portraits of royal members and pictures of palaces and architecture.

As any true book suggests in gory detail, the cruelties of Mughal emperors were notorious. As the author says, “Salim’s behaviour now became more and more erratic. Mixing wine with opium and drinking more than his constitution could handle, he became so unhinged that he spent evenings either in delirium, in a psychotic rage or simply in a stupor, ‘as active as a design on a carpet or a picture on a wall’. In one typical incident, three courtiers were discovered to be planning to abandon Allahabad and transfer their loyalty to Prince Daniyal. One, a court reporter, was flayed alive in Salim’s presence, another was castrated and the third flogged to death.” (p.42). When he crushed Khusrau and his followers, the punishment was no less humane. “Khusraw’s chief commanders, Abd al Rahim Khan and Hussein Beg Badakshi, were subjected to a novel torture. Stripped naked, Hussein Beg was sewn into the hide of a freshly slaughtered ox, while his companion Abd al Rahim was stitched into the skin of an ass, also newly killed. As the men were paraded through the streets of Lahore in this humiliating condition, the hides dried in the sun and shrank, slowly crushing and suffocating the men inside. Hussein passed out and was summarily beheaded, his quartered body displayed by the roadside. Abd al Rahim survived both degradation and discomfort and was eventually ransomed for a small fortune by a loyal courtier.” (p.59). Jahangir also compelled Shah Jahan who had vowed not to touch liquour to taste it. “It was the eve of the prince’s twenty-fifth birthday. The customary weighing ceremony, approved by the court astrologers, had gone off smoothly and the ensuing party was well underway. Noticing that the man of the hour was ignoring the offered goblets of wine, Jahangir pressed him – though, as he noted in his memoir, ‘it took great persistence to get him to drink’. Implicitly questioning the prince’s masculinity, he pointed out that Khurram was a man with a son of his own and that ‘monarchs and princes have always drunk’. His son tried to resist, but the order, for such it was, was not to be refused, even when the dipsomaniac emperor – with breathtaking hypocrisy – presumed to quote the celebrated 10th century Persian physician ‘Avicenna’.

‘Wine is the enemy of the intoxicated and the friend of the sensible,
A little opium is good; too much is the venom of the snake.
All in all, excess in injurious;
But if taken in small doses, it can do the power of good’ (p.94-95)

Not only a drunkard, Jahangir was bigoted and extremely intolerant of other faiths. “By the emperor’s own account, Jahangir imprisoned three young Muslim men who had struck up an acquaintance with a Hindu sanyasi, or holy man, and subjected their companion to one hundred lashes with a whip. The holy man’s teachings, wrote Jahangir, ‘reeked of infidelity and heresy’. ‘The special punishment was in order to maintain the religious law lest any other ignoramus be enticed into similar actions’, the emperor noted piously” (p.56). Temple destruction was the favourite pastime of the Mughals. In the Mewar campaign, “Khurram’s generals smashed and stripped down Hindu temples in the vicinity to use the stone for their own mansions. ‘Temples were destroyed’ he gloated, ‘and foundation-stones for mosques were laid; instead of the conch blowing (in Hindu ceremonials), the cry “Allahu Akbar” resounded” (p.89). When Jahangir conquered the Kangra fort, “Adding insult to the injury of their defeat, he gleefully rubbed the noses of the Hindu residents firmly into the dirt. First he arranged for the Muslim call to prayer and the khutba prayer to echo over the fortress. Then he had a cow slaughtered and, the piece de resistance, commissioned a brand new mosque inside the citadel” (p.113). Shah Jahan was no different. “For at this time, Shah Jahan’s religious attitudes were further hardening and his Islamic conservatism was becoming still more pronounced. At court, the emperor was under pressure from hardline Sunnis who advocated Islamic revivalism and a clearer statement that Sharia law was the empire’s defining judicial and social principle. Such agitators sometimes saw Hinduism as the greatest threat to the security of a properly Muslim nation, and, while Shah Jahan was far from a firebrand Islamist or stern puritan, he was inclined towards spasmodic outbursts of intolerance towards his own citizens. In January 1633, the emperor briskly ordered the demolition of as many as seventy temples at Benares, a Hindu holy site on the Ganges. His mission was described by his officials as ‘the infidel-consuming monarch, who is the guardian of religion (i.e. Islam), commanded that at Benares and throughout the entire imperial dominions, wheresoever idol-temples had been recently built, they should be razed to the ground” (p.205).

The only drawback which can be levelled against the book is a number of spelling and grammatical errors which had creeped up now and then. One would be shocked by the number of such errors in a book published by Penguin-Viking. Apart from this, the book is really fine and commendable.

Highly recommended.

Rating: 4 Star

Monday, October 4, 2010

Zero - Biography of a Dangerous Idea













Title:
Zero – The Biography of a Dangerous Idea
Author: Charles Seife
Publisher: Souvenir Press 2005 (First published 2000)
ISBN: 0-285-63594-8
Pages: 230


A very good book on the origins and development of the idea of zero in mathematics, physics and other exact sciences. The book is well researched and written in a witty and lucid style, emanating the confidence of the author. The book spans three millenia about the subject matter it handles, but the huge span of time is rapidly shrunk into a moment by the mellow narrating style. When historical information are described, the time honoured voice of a historian is heard; while mathematical concepts are portrayed, the erudite voice of a seasoned mathematician is audible behind the lines. The book is a superb one on the face of the fact that so many aspects of human knowledge are condensed into a few hundreds of pages in a way relished by any class of readers. Mathematicians and lay people alike get impressed by the book and I am sure that a book of such a fine stature is very difficult to come by easily in the near future.

Babylonians and Mayans used zero in their maths. The Mayans calendar had starting month with the number zero and on every month, the days started from zero, instead of one as is the case now. The first day of the month was Zip. The next day was 1 Zip, the following day was 2 Zip and so forth, until they reached 19 Zip. The next day was the seating of Zotz’ – 0 Zotz’ followed by 1 Zotz’ and so forth. Each month had 20 days, numbered 0 through 19. While the Greek thinkers abhorred the concept of zero, its philosophy was also devoid of the idea. The Greeks in fact relayed this aversion to zero from the earlier Egyptian civilisation. Since the West based their foundations on Greeks, particularly Aristotle till the Renaissance, zero didn’t percolate to Europe. Absence of zero ensured the lack of the concept of infinity, as they are both complementary. The famous Zeno’s paradox about the race between Achilles and a tortoise is a case in point. Unless calculus and convergent series are not invoked, it is not possible to solve the Zeno’s paradox. In fact, the world waited about 1500 years to solve the issue once and for all, till Newton and Leibniz established calculus as a firm edifice on the palace of mathematics in the 17th century C.E. The author gives the clearest explanation of Zeno’s paradox and how it could be solved. A detailed explanation of Zeno’s paradox may be looked up in the Wikipedia. Suffice it to say that the limit is 2, which is the point at which Achilles crosses the tortoise.

Archimedes used the concept of limits to calculate the area of a parabola, by drawing infinitesimal triangles and rectangles inside it and summing up their areas. The great scientist, mathematician and thinker lived in an era when the Greek sun was about to be eclipsed by the superpower, Rome. Even though Rome’s sway extended over a huge span of land in the ancient period, it was bereft of any mathematical thinking. Archimedes was killed by a Roman soldier when he failed to answer his queries properly and the act is spoken in jest as the greatest contribution of Rome to mathematics. Christianity spread its wings in Europe and Rome faded away. The early Christians cherished the ideals of Aristotle and Greek thinkers and based their theology on it. Zero had no place in it. A good description of the development of our present calendar is given. Christian monks took upon them the task of devising means for the reckoning of days. “Easter was a drifting holiday, so every few generations a monk was drafted to calculate the dates when Easter would fall for the next hundred years. Dionysius Exiguus was one of these monks. In the sixth century, the pope, John I, asked him to extend the Easter tables. While translating and recalculating the tables, Dionysius did a little research on the side; he realized that he could figure out just when Jesus Christ was born. After chugging through a bit of math, he decided that the current year was the 525th year since the birth of Christ.” (p.54). There was no year zero in the calendar.

Such a close start (in those times) was found to be difficult for astronomers and they wanted to start counting the days from an earlier period. The fixing of the date was quite arbitrary and was fixed on January 1, 4713 BC by the scholar Joseph Scaliger in 1583. His Julian date (named after his father, Julius) became the standard way to refer to astronomical events, because it avoided all the weirdness caused by calendars that were constantly under construction.

After this discussion, the author goes to Eastern civilizations to trace out the history of zero. He says that the concept was carried from Babylon to India by the invasion of Alexander the Great. But this assertion is marked by contrast with his earlier comments that Greeks didn’t encourage the ideas about zero. How could Alexander, himself a Greek, carry a concept which he thought clearly to be a fallacy, into a land whose north-western fringe only he could bring under his banner? It is quite probable that the idea spontaneously emerged in India at that time. Indian philosophy was based on duality, as did most of the eastern civilisations. As with the yin and yang of the Far East and Zoroaster’s dualism of good and evil in the Near East, creation and destruction were intermingled in Hinduism” (p.64). “Sometime around the fifth century AD, Indian mathematicians changed their style of numbering; they moved from a Greek-like system to a Babylonian-style one. An important difference between the Babylonian style was that Indian numbers were base-10 instead of base-60. Our numbers evolved from the symbols that the Indians used; by rights they should be called Indian numerals rather than Arabic ones” (p.67).

Seife then explains how the word zero originated. “The Indian name for zero was sunya, meaning empty, which the Arabs turned into sifr. When some western scholars described the new number to their colleagues, they turned sifr into a Latin-sounding word, yielding zephirus, which is the root of our word zero. Other western mathematicians didn’t change the word so heavily and called zero cifra, which became cipher. Zero was so important to the new set of numbers that people started calling all numbers ciphers, which gave the French their term chiffre, digit.” (p.73). Fibonacci, in the 12th century introduced the Arabic numerals into Italy based on his contacts in North Africa where Arab culture flourished. However, the prevailing monarchs received the idea with some trepidation. Many kingdoms banned its use, citing that these numbers were easily alterable. The book then goes on to the Renaissance and the development of calculus. Another major step was taken in the time of Georg Cantor. The book is a little cumbersome at this stage, when his contributions are discussed. Zero appears prominently in modern physical theories like quantum mechanics and relativity. An extensive discussion is given.

A disproportionate amount of space is allotted to physical theories than they warranted in the present frame of study. Since the book was about zero and its development, the innards of quantum mechanics need not be described in too large a detail. This is the only drawback which can be pointed against the book. After he reached the modern age, Seife seems to have lost the sense of direction and to fill pages, he unnecessarily dwelt on relativity and how it developed in the 20th century.

The book is adorned with many clear illustrations and diagrms which clarify the point fully. The description is often very witty. An extract from the footnote on page 54 goes like this, “One dating system had the year 1 based upon the founding of the city of Rome, and the other was based on the accession of the emperor Dioclitian. To the Christian monk, the birth of his Saviour was a more important event than the foundation of a city that had been sacked by Vandals and Goths a few times – or, for that matter, the beginning of the reign of an emperor who had an unfortunate penchant for maintaining his menagerie of exotic animals on a diet of Christians”.

The book is highly recommended.

Rating: 4 Star

Indian Genetics and Varnashram













Title:
Indian Genetics and Varnashram
Author: Ram Chandra Sinha
Publisher: Fine Prints, Kolkata 2009 (First)
ISBN: 978-81-906889-0-1
Pages: 160


Another preposterous book with great title, with nothing but half-baked and pseudo-scientific ideas inside. The author is a geologist by profession and his ignorance of anything other than his chosen field provides sharp obstacles on the flow of argument. The language is utterly mediocre and fails to raise any interest in the reader. The author seems to be confused about what genetics is, and propounds the theory that there are male and female chromosomes and a new life is generated from the union of them (p.156). Ofcourse, there are chromosomes from males and females, but the sense in the book is quite different and laughable. He confesses in the acknowledge that he began this (hopeless) exercise as instructed by his mentor and guru, Sri Sri Thakur Anukul Chandra, whose ideas also are presented in the epilogue. Nothing worthwhile of scientific consideration is listed there, but Sinha is fully convinced that the seer’s insight far surpasses his own. We also would acquiesce to it, seeing the author’s insight on many of the pages.

The book asserts that Varnashram developed from a preliminary division-of-labour concept which hardened into a water-tight system in the post-Vedic age by the Brahmins. Assimilation of several western invaders in the form of parthians, sakas, kushans etc consolidated the development of castes which was firmly rooted on Indian soil by the demise of the Gupta period during the middle of the first millennium C.E. By genetics, the book describes the racial affinities of Indian society at present. Great claims of tracing the history of the subcontinent back to 35,000 to 40,000 years are made, but there is nothing in this book which cannot be obtained from the history text books of high school students. Research is extremely poor and the citations are frequently from unreputed or controversial authors. The author falls in the category of unwarranted glorifiers of Indian past.

An incomplete list of the blunders propounded in the guise of science is given below.

1. The first and second laws of thermodynamics are in total agreement with the concepts of Jiva and Jivatma. It is thus the energy, both potential and kinetic, which is at work all the time and changes with space and time relationship – or, in more simple words, genetics and varnashram. (p.viii, Preface). Erratic concept, insincere assertions and ridiculous mumbo-jumbo!
2. The Mahabharata story of the birth of Dhritharashtra, Pandu and Vidura are given and the author asserts that this story goes to show how the DNA of one human being when merged with others’ produces different traits and characteristics in the offspring, according to the reactions of the recipients (p.xiv, Preface). In other words, it means that if the woman closes her eyes at the time of union, the resulting child will be blind, and if she turns pale, the child will be an albino. How a person who has a doctorate in one of the scientific fields can be so ignorant in these ideas is beyond anybody’s comprehension.
3. Modern man appeared in southern Europe and not in Africa, as claimed by anthropologists (p.11)
4. Alexander’s invasion was in 650 B.C and the historians are wrong (p.48)
5. St. Thomas visited India during the reign of the Parthian king Gondophernes (p.55). St Thomas’ visit is more a piece of belief than historical fact.
6. Varnashram is not man-made, it is in the genes (p.70).
7. Farming was developed in pre-historic societies to pay the services of copper smiths (p.71). Nonsense on stilts!
8. Man’s one generation is 100 to 200 years (p.74)
9. Varna in varnashram is a method of classification as in varnamala (children’s alphabet learning book) and don’t indicate colour.

The book is full of such ridiculous ideas. In one paragraph, he remarks about Dr B R Ambedkar as, “In the present day Indian society Manu has been deemed to be the progenitor of the caste system, so much so that a learned person like Dr B R Ambedkar even burnt manuscripts (!) of the Manusmriti and denounced Hinduism itself and became a Buddhist, though for this action he was rewarded later as being a person fit to write the Constitution of India” (p.96).

This book is to be kept at arm’s length by any person who wants to have a balanced and sane way of viewing the world. Full of gibberish, the book is not at all worthy of the high price in money it demands from the unsuspecting reader. You can’t find anything worthwhile here.

Rating: 1 Star