A History of India

This book is mercifully brief on the deconstruction of literary sources that South Asian area studies are prone to and (again quoting the on-target cover copy) "emphasises and analyses the structural pattern of Indian history." I wish it was longer than 335 pages.The first 2/3 of the book covers the pre-British period -- a good fraction. While relating more of the military viscitudes than I would like, there is some consideration of social, religious, and economic issues as well as ruling strategies. And the focus on 'great empires' is less than in most Indian histories, which is good since India has spent much more time disunited than united.Kulke and Rothermund break with the Hindu/Islamic/British periodization of Indian history, breaking periods before the Guptas and before the Mughals. All in all, it is a substantial improvement over Romila Thapar's effort, and a huge improvement over Stanley Wolpert's book.

This is a heavy tome on a very confusing subject. I was introduced to it in my Civ. class at the UofC. Considering the fact that the imperialist dogs have been the only ones to write an Indian history, much of it is jumbled and false. Kulke and Rothermund do an admirable job of presenting a fairly accurate history. Reads like a text book but nevertheless very readable.

This is a thoughtful and well researched book. It answers some of the questions which bother most Indians are we aryans or dravidians, how did the indus valley civilization dissappear . The manner in which they explain the myths like the one about the vijayanagar empire tells us about the research put in by the authors. I would recommend this book to novices as well as connosieurs of Indian history