> > I post a link and you don't bother to read it; curious. Well you keep your > memories and I'll use facts. >
Kevin, I read the link. I read the bibliography it quoted. Some scholarship went into the website, so it needs to be given some weight. How would you compare this to Gautam's source? His was a professor at his college, so you might suspect that that Gautam might be biased in rating him the as among the top historians in the field. But, then again, his college was Harvard, and Harvard is someplace where you would expect top scholars to be located. Your website does contain facts, but it contains more interpretation of facts. That's not a bad thing, that's what historians do. Gautam's post, done from memory of his own study, offeres another interpretation. So, you have different opinions from different historians. And, the question, is, how does one determine who has the better understanding? In physics, that's easy. In history, its not as easy. But, I think it can be done. There has to be a method other than Gautam liking his source and you liking yours. I'd be curious to see what you might think it would be. If you find it an interesting subject, I'll add my perspective. Dan M.
