Which empire was most destructive to South Asia?

[R1a1]

which empires were the most destructive to south asia?

By destructive I mean, which empires killed and looted the most?

Often I hear Indians blaming Arabs, yet the reality couldn't be more different. Arabs actually were the least destructive of people when they came to south asia, they mostly came for business and trading purposes, and religious arabs came as missionaries not with armies. For thousands of years even before Islam, Arabs and India have had good relations.

I personally think the most destructive, at least in the last 1000 years were central asians, not mughals ( who were better rulers) but all other central Asian armies, which just came for the loot and killed thousands of people on the way

 

[speed]

British, their seeds of destruction have bared fruit today with the concept of nation states.

Mughals, Afghans etc were all just doing it for their own worldly pleasure, Really don't like it when people paint Islam over these Guys.

 

[akheR]

Aren't Mughals "Central Asians" ? I think the different Pashtun rulers were good, esp. the Lodi dynasty, which was the first to bring a tradition of scholarship, arts and architecture but also centralized administration that Babur, after winning at Panipat (1526), simply inherited.

I guess the perception also depends on geography... some Central Asian nations see Timur as a hero, whereas Persians remember him as the one who used to call for "jihad" but built pyramids off Persian (Islamic) heads for fun ; in the same way, Mahmud Ghaznavi is despised in South Asia (and esp. Hindus, as he's the first invader to bring Islam), but Persians "rate" him as he supported Persian culture and literature (the national poet of Iran, Firdowsi, and scholar al Biruni both were at his court.)

 

[Myrmidon]

British, their seeds of destruction have bared fruit today with the concept of nation states.

Mughals, Afghans etc were all just doing it for their own worldly pleasure, Really don't like it when people paint Islam over these Guys.

So Sher Shah Suri the man responsible for one of the best administration systems the subcontinent has ever seen was doing it for his own worldly pleasure?

 

[Chacha_junior]

There was a great book i read in school years ago. I cant remember the name AT this moment. Will come to me . It discussed and compared dutch,portugese,spanish,german,dutch, french and the english empires. Its conclusion was out of all these british was the more humane. British was the last empire and they learned from the mistakes of the previous empire. Basically the point was that the british learned that you did not have to totally crush the native population. You could get more out of the natives that way

 

[speed]

So Sher Shah Suri the man responsible for one of the best administration systems the subcontinent has ever seen was doing it for his own worldly pleasure?

Yh I have read good stuff about Sher Shah suri but His rule was very short lived.

 

[Saeed]

British empire is like the country/empire called oceania in 1984.

 

[Chacha_junior]

what do mean. not following

 

[R1a1]

actually the most destructive could be (aryans), we still dont know what happened exactly when them came more then 3000 years, was it a migration or invasion? did they destroy the dravdian culture in the north?

 

[Saeed]

Aryan theory is sham.

 

[pakistanigoneaussie]

The answer depends on who you ask

 

[Cochin_wala]

There was a great book i read in school years ago. I cant remember the name AT this moment. Will come to me . It discussed and compared dutch,portugese,spanish,german,dutch, french and the english empires. Its conclusion was out of all these british was the more humane. British was the last empire and they learned from the mistakes of the previous empire. Basically the point was that the british learned that you did not have to totally crush the native population. You could get more out of the natives that way

while they looted India, British were positive in many aspects too.
they gifted many things including railways and developing public transport systems in many cities. Sanitation, teaching Habits using toilets. in social context, they erased "Thaskar"(Thugs) groups who used to roam all around India who will target people travelling. ban on Human sacrifices(Bali) other unknown things may include abolishing Sati which may be prevalent in northern India. British may have diluted rigid caste system existed back in the colonial days among Hindus.
British did not impose Christianity on their subjects and they tried to cooperate with natives.

unlike many Nationalists claim, India was not the land of milk and honey least during when British arrived here when Islamic Mughals were ruling them. In a way, majority(Hindus) were freed from Islamic invasion which lasted for many centuries by British. among the 75% negatives of foreign rule, British developed India. that is a truth.

actually the most destructive could be (aryans), we still dont know what happened exactly when them came more then 3000 years, was it a migration or invasion? did they destroy the dravdian culture in the north?

There is a effort to debunk Aryan Invasion theory. but, these people cannot explain why people from various parts of India look different be it build, facial characteristics, color, height etc etc. many Hindu nationalists are against AIT. because, it is very uncomfortable accepting that Vedic civilization was brought by Aryan outsiders.

 

[Ambi]

actually the most destructive could be (aryans), we still dont know what happened exactly when them came more then 3000 years, was it a migration or invasion? did they destroy the dravdian culture in the north?

Interesting question can we compare them with muslim invaders, People of my caste like comparing themselves to aryan ancestors than the native dravidian ones. So there are lot of similarities between upper caste hindus and muslims who claims to be descendants of invaders.

 

[R1a1]

.



There is a effort to debunk Aryan Invasion theory. but, these people cannot explain why people from various parts of India look different be it build, facial characteristics, color, height etc etc. many Hindu nationalists are against AIT. because, it is very uncomfortable accepting that Vedic civilization was brought by Aryan outsiders.

Well things like looks, colour, facial featrues etc... can be explained by which regions of south asia were invaded most, obviously Pakistan area was, followed by North India. Places like south india, though invaded, saw lesser invading influence. People clearly mixed with outsiders during these invasions, and genetics has proof of that. Aryans, Central Asians, Muslims etc... all left genetic markers on the local population

To your last point, most secular people, even in India now agree that the proto indo aryan speakers defiantly came from outside and settled in northern parts of south asia, that is where Rig Veda, the first Vedic book was written.

But my question is, were they invaders or migrants? Currently we have very little proof to suggest anything.

 

[Badsha]

Well things like looks, colour, facial featrues etc... can be explained by which regions of south asia were invaded most, obviously Pakistan area was, followed by North India. Places like south india, though invaded, saw lesser invading influence. People clearly mixed with outsiders during these invasions, and genetics has proof of that. Aryans, Central Asians, Muslims etc... all left genetic markers on the local population

To your last point, most secular people, even in India now agree that the proto indo aryan speakers defiantly came from outside and settled in northern parts of south asia, that is where Rig Veda, the first Vedic book was written.

But my question is, were they invaders or migrants? Currently we have very little proof to suggest anything.

I heard Invaders?

 

[Sandeep]

Ok, may be controversial but has to be Mughal empire. Looted, raped many innocent women. Well, like I said controversial, one of the main religions in the subcontinent was forced down peoples' throats. Don't get me wrong. I have full respect for religions but, you can't deny this either.

 

[Badsha]

Ok, may be controversial but has to be Mughal empire. Looted, raped many innocent women. Well, like I said controversial, one of the main religions in the subcontinent was forced down peoples' throats. Don't get me wrong. I have full respect for religions but, you can't deny this either.

Yep. Akbar basically tried to destroy Islam and yet it was shoved down their throats.

 

[Saeed]

There were no Aryans nor was there any such invasion. The word itself is of Sanskrit origin and god knows how Europeans come to know of it, maybe through Iranians and then they made up this theory of Aryan invasion to claim up all the glory of civilization in ancient India. If you want to prove it then post Genetic tests, any ancient text mentioning so called invasion or other evidence and compare them to that area from which they supposedly invaded India.

 

[Sandeep]

Eradicator,


Strong words. Better put that in a readable fashion. The statement you made is pretty inflammatory and affects the sensitivities of posters.

 

[Itachi]

depends on what south asia counts.

 

[Saeed]

Wrapped thinking by few individuals, OP asked South Asia not your little bubble.

 

[niishaa]

The british exploited the natural resources of the indian subcontinent to power their industrial revolution. The raw materials were used freely as if they were their own from england instead of india and then the superior machine made products from britian were sold in the indian market where local products and industry could not stand the competition and suffered thereby damaging the indian economy and increasing poverty.

Mughals were very much decadent in their lifestyles their affluence came at the cost of the poor people of the sub continent not just mughals even the hindu rulers of the many kingdoms spread all over india cared little for their subjects leading a affluent life, their right to rule never being questioned.

The difference etween Mughals and British was that mughals came as invaders while british came in the guise of a trading company. Both wanted the same accept them as rulers or face the consquences. By the time british arrived mughals were weak so were all other non mughal rulers. The british had better guns and ammunition None of the rulers were strong enough to fight with the british. The british conquered india with little bloodshed as opposed to other invaders.


Maybe i am missing something what other central asians ruled over india..??

It does not matter whose empire ruled better NOBODY WANTS TO BE RULED! I am glad i am born at a time period where we are no longer being ruled by outsiders.

I guess some people might even say Afghans should be grateful for USA occupying them now .. Their lives are better now then under the taliban.!!

 

[Robert]

which empires were the most destructive to south asia?

Imperial Japanese - turned populations into slave labour forces; had battalions of 'comfort women' for their troops to rape; carried out mass vivisection of civilians.

 

[hafeezrocks]

Imperial Japanese - turned populations into slave labour forces; had battalions of 'comfort women' for their troops to rape; carried out mass vivisection of civilians.

I sometimes wonder how the Japanese were so brutal considering their Buddhist background. Have also read about how a few Japanese generals and troops practiced cannibalism.

 

[QazzarFan]

Get some Burnol. We came, we saw and we conquered.

They came, they saw and "we" were conquered would be more legitimate....

- Non-arabs aka mine and your ancestors being subjected to the more violent parts of Islam.

- Mine and your ancestors forcefully being made to read some book which they didn't even understand just so they could please a god that wasn't kind enough to send them a holy book in their own language.

- Many different and beautiful local cultural traits were lost/decimated because of a violent and expansionist ideology to forbade and demonize thousand year old traditions which were ultimately lost as locals were forced to adopt these alien traditions and rituals.

- Billions in wealth and resources were extracted from these conquered lands and taken back to corrupt hands of the kingdom that couldn't give two hoots about the plights of the new non-arab converts.

- Always and still to this day, looked down on them for not being "pure" enough Islamically as only the people to be "true" muslims are those that speak Arabic natively.

 

[lilFlip]

All of them

 

[Ambi]

Definitely the Mughal and other Muslim empires. Bloodthirsty Uncultured desert bandits did everything that they could to destroy the culture of the indigenous people.

You mean Adivasis ? Who occupied their land, destroyed their culture and mistreated them at first.

 

[R1a1]

There were no Aryans nor was there any such invasion. The word itself is of Sanskrit origin and god knows how Europeans come to know of it, maybe through Iranians and then they made up this theory of Aryan invasion to claim up all the glory of civilization in ancient India. If you want to prove it then post Genetic tests, any ancient text mentioning so called invasion or other evidence and compare them to that area from which they supposedly invaded India.

a complex language like Sanskrit didn't just develop out of the the blue, there are proofs of proto Sanskrit and proto indo aryan languages being spoken in central asia before languages like Sanskrit or Avestan were even developed, this is why many linguistics say that the earliest ancestors of all indo european languages may have lived some where between the Caspian sea and Central asia, from there they spread in all directions

 

[R1a1]

You mean Adivasis ? Who occupied their land, destroyed their culture and mistreated them at first.

Actually Adivasi culture was more destroyed by Brahmins, because they were outcasted and treated like lowest of low castes by them, of course all the other invaders including muslims didn't treat them as humans, even though they are the earliest ancestors of all south asians

 

[kinventor]

They came, they saw and "we" were conquered would be more legitimate....

- Non-arabs aka mine and your ancestors being subjected to the more violent parts of Islam.

- Mine and your ancestors forcefully being made to read some book which they didn't even understand just so they could please a god that wasn't kind enough to send them a holy book in their own language.

- Many different and beautiful local cultural traits were lost/decimated because of a violent and expansionist ideology to forbade and demonize thousand year old traditions which were ultimately lost as locals were forced to adopt these alien traditions and rituals.

- Billions in wealth and resources were extracted from these conquered lands and taken back to corrupt hands of the kingdom that couldn't give two hoots about the plights of the new non-arab converts.

- Always and still to this day, looked down on them for not being "pure" enough Islamically as only the people to be "true" muslims are those that speak Arabic natively.

You do realize not everyone in Pakistan is punjabi? Badshah is pashtun.

 

[Ambi]

Actually Adivasi culture was more destroyed by Brahmins, because they were outcasted and treated like lowest of low castes by them, of course all the other invaders including muslims didn't treat them as humans, even though they are the earliest ancestors of all south asians

Yes Hindus destroyed indegenous culture of south asia and they got similar treatment from islamic invaders, what goes around, comes around

 

[Badsha]

They came, they saw and "we" were conquered would be more legitimate....

- Non-arabs aka mine and your ancestors being subjected to the more violent parts of Islam.

- Mine and your ancestors forcefully being made to read some book which they didn't even understand just so they could please a god that wasn't kind enough to send them a holy book in their own language.

- Many different and beautiful local cultural traits were lost/decimated because of a violent and expansionist ideology to forbade and demonize thousand year old traditions which were ultimately lost as locals were forced to adopt these alien traditions and rituals.

- Billions in wealth and resources were extracted from these conquered lands and taken back to corrupt hands of the kingdom that couldn't give two hoots about the plights of the new non-arab converts.

- Always and still to this day, looked down on them for not being "pure" enough Islamically as only the people to be "true" muslims are those that speak Arabic natively.

You're an atheist so your views are obviously going to be against Islam. No surprise in that.

Also, I'm not originally from the lands and even if I was, all the "forced" stuff are facts pulled out off where the sun doesn't shine

 

[Saeed]

They came, they saw and "we" were conquered would be more legitimate....

- Non-arabs aka mine and your ancestors being subjected to the more violent parts of Islam.

- Mine and your ancestors forcefully being made to read some book which they didn't even understand just so they could please a god that wasn't kind enough to send them a holy book in their own language.

- Many different and beautiful local cultural traits were lost/decimated because of a violent and expansionist ideology to forbade and demonize thousand year old traditions which were ultimately lost as locals were forced to adopt these alien traditions and rituals.

- Billions in wealth and resources were extracted from these conquered lands and taken back to corrupt hands of the kingdom that couldn't give two hoots about the plights of the new non-arab converts.

- Always and still to this day, looked down on them for not being "pure" enough Islamically as only the people to be "true" muslims are those that speak Arabic natively.

History class must not be required in Texas to graduate from High School?
Name me one arab other than Mohammad Bin Qasim(He didn't rule much of the SouthAsia anyway) who ruled india for long time!

 

[amax]

History class must not be required in Texas to graduate from High School?
Name me one arab other than Mohammad Bin Qasim(He didn't rule much of the SouthAsia anyway) who ruled india for long time!

He is confusing Central Asians with Arabs.

 

[akheR]

Peoples just love to bash Arabs for fun.
I'd like to know where were the "civilizations" of India, China and Western Europe (lol) when the dirty nomads of Arabia triggered the greatest intellectual adventure in known history, from al Andalus to al Sind.

You should differentiate between Arabs and Central Asian Turkic tribes, who have always been brutal, including (if not more) with Muslims, for instance the Arabs lost their capital Mansura in Sindh because of Mahmud of Ghazni, and I'm sure that had the Arabs bothered to conquer beyond al Sindh, the Subcontinent (Hindus too!) would have produced philosophers, scientists, ... of high calibre, being infected with the educational inflation of the Arabs... yet, apart from Shah Waliullah and Muhammad Iqbal, we only produced one or two decent Sufi poets and a plethora of mirasis.

The Turkic tribes and the British, despite their more or less interest in educational uplift of the natives, never attained the Arabs in that regard, and no one ever did, nor ever will for that matter.

So instead of bashing Arabs when they've literally had the minimum presence possible (apart from Sindh, they inter-married Keralite women - see Mappilas - when they came there as merchants, not soldiers, and that's it), just cry over the bad luck of the Subcontinent to not have been part of the civilization of Grenada, Baghdad, Cairo or Damascus, amongst others.

 

[Saeed]

a complex language like Sanskrit didn't just develop out of the the blue, there are proofs of proto Sanskrit and proto indo aryan languages being spoken in central asia before languages like Sanskrit or Avestan were even developed, this is why many linguistics say that the earliest ancestors of all indo european languages may have lived some where between the Caspian sea and Central asia, from there they spread in all directions

http://uwf.edu/lgoel/documents/amythofaryaninvasionsofindia.pdf
If its being spoken there doesn't mean they came to SouthAsia from central asia, it could have been the other way around. Also please post those proofs. Who are those linguists?

 

[amax]

There is no civilization in India, China or Europe. it is the intellectual Arabs who spread knowledge all over the world with their divine language. well, except if you are a Muslim! otherwise, no one will give credit to Arabs. for others, Arabs are Dirty people following 7th century Bedouin culture where manhood is tested first on goats and camels. the worst regressive culture. I am sure 99% of Europe,Americas,India,China will agree with this.

same here I will take vision of our "local "Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, Abdus Salam and Pervez Hoodbhoy over 'Arabised intellectuals',
Never impressed with Arabs with all the faults and issues(lack of resources, nascent nation etc) we have quadruple our GDP in last decade have somewhat working democratic institutions, to considerable extent Independent media, a working middle class that take academia very seriously who in future will produce brains(have produced some in past) despite having "inferior" genetics.

 

[R1a1]

http://uwf.edu/lgoel/documents/amythofaryaninvasionsofindia.pdf
If its being spoken there doesn't mean they came to SouthAsia from central asia, it could have been the other way around. Also please post those proofs. Who are those linguists?

then what was the language before Sanskrit spoken in south asia? how come there is no proof of such a language? all these are hindu nationalist assumptions, if find proof, let me know

 

[R1a1]

same here I will take vision of our "local "Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, Abdus Salam and Pervez Hoodbhoy over 'Arabised intellectuals',
Never impressed with Arabs with all the faults and issues(lack of resources, nascent nation etc) we have quadruple our GDP in last decade have somewhat working democratic institutions, to considerable extent Independent media, a working middle class that take academia very seriously who in future will produce brains(have produced some in past) despite having "inferior" genetics.

The arabs from the gulf today are a product of extremist Salafi Islam. The people who came to India in the 7th century were a different breed of Arabs. Those Arabs never caused any destruction in India/South Asia, compared to the barbaric central asians who have always looted, raped, murdered Indians/south asians. In all honesty I prefer Arabs ( despite them looking down on south asians) over central asians, because they are more of a business minded people. They have racism, no doubt, but it is a different kind of racism. Central Asian racism is very animalistic, they call south asians all the worse things you can imagine, including monkeys, pigs, daalkhors, you name it. to them we are the worse of worse creatures, which is ironic, considering they are the most broken/divided people in history

Unfortunately that racism has also infiltrated the higher castes of south asia, which look down upon other castes

 

[Bilal7]

I for one am glad that Islam reached the sub-continent, we should all be thankful that we're Muslims today (the ones that are). The British brought cricket so they're not that bad either.

 

[Bilal7]

The arabs from the gulf today are a product of extremist Salafi Islam. The people who came to India in the 7th century were a different breed of Arabs. Those Arabs never caused any destruction in India/South Asia, compared to the barbaric central asians who have always looted, raped, murdered Indians/south asians. In all honesty I prefer Arabs ( despite them looking down on south asians) over central asians, because they are more of a business minded people. They have racism, no doubt, but it is a different kind of racism. Central Asian racism is very animalistic, they call south asians all the worse things you can imagine, including monkeys, pigs, daalkhors, you name it. to them we are the worse of worse creatures, which is ironic, considering they are the most broken/divided people in history

Unfortunately that racism has also infiltrated the higher castes of south asia, which look down upon other castes

These racist Arabs are the secular and westernized ones not the ones stil in touch with their Deen. There is a Saudi Jamaat in Ontario right now and they are some of the most humble and loving people ever.

 

[Indiana Jones]

They came, they saw and "we" were conquered would be more legitimate....

- Non-arabs aka mine and your ancestors being subjected to the more violent parts of Islam.

- Mine and your ancestors forcefully being made to read some book which they didn't even understand just so they could please a god that wasn't kind enough to send them a holy book in their own language.

- Many different and beautiful local cultural traits were lost/decimated because of a violent and expansionist ideology to forbade and demonize thousand year old traditions which were ultimately lost as locals were forced to adopt these alien traditions and rituals.

- Billions in wealth and resources were extracted from these conquered lands and taken back to corrupt hands of the kingdom that couldn't give two hoots about the plights of the new non-arab converts.

- Always and still to this day, looked down on them for not being "pure" enough Islamically as only the people to be "true" muslims are those that speak Arabic natively.

Ha ha ha ha...you spoiled the fun man.

 

[lilFlip]

Peoples just love to bash Arabs for fun.
I'd like to know where were the "civilizations" of India, China and Western Europe (lol) when the dirty nomads of Arabia triggered the greatest intellectual adventure in known history, from al Andalus to al Sind.

You should differentiate between Arabs and Central Asian Turkic tribes, who have always been brutal, including (if not more) with Muslims, for instance the Arabs lost their capital Mansura in Sindh because of Mahmud of Ghazni, and I'm sure that had the Arabs bothered to conquer beyond al Sindh, the Subcontinent (Hindus too!) would have produced philosophers, scientists, ... of high calibre, being infected with the educational inflation of the Arabs... yet, apart from Shah Waliullah and Muhammad Iqbal, we only produced one or two decent Sufi poets and a plethora of mirasis.

The Turkic tribes and the British, despite their more or less interest in educational uplift of the natives, never attained the Arabs in that regard, and no one ever did, nor ever will for that matter.

So instead of bashing Arabs when they've literally had the minimum presence possible (apart from Sindh, they inter-married Keralite women - see Mappilas - when they came there as merchants, not soldiers, and that's it), just cry over the bad luck of the Subcontinent to not have been part of the civilization of Grenada, Baghdad, Cairo or Damascus, amongst others.

Top post!!

Is it true when Arabs were ruled Al-Andalus, Christians (in Paris etc.) would whip in public square anyone who bathed (on Fridays) reason being he/she is Muslim.

http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2011/05/why-bathing-was-uncommon-in-medieval-europe/

Gems:

If most of the entire populace smelling rancid wasn’t enough, during Medieval times in Europe, the streets of cities tended to be coated in feces and urine thanks to people tossing the contents of their chamber pots into the streets. As one 16th century nobleman noted “the streets resembled a fetid stream of turbid water.” He also noted that he had to keep a scented handkerchief held under his nose in order to keep himself from vomiting when walking the streets. If that wasn’t enough, butchers slaughtered animals in the streets and would leave the unusable bits and blood right on the ground. One can only imagine how people survived the stench on sun-baked summer days.
Interestingly, during the Middle Ages, people surprisingly did pay some attention to dental hygiene. Teeth were cleaned by rubbing them with a cloth and mixtures of herbs including the ashes of burnt rosemary.
The Ancient Greeks adopted the idea of bathing from the Hindus who were familiar with the benefits of bathing as early as 3,000 years ago.

Queen Isabella of Spain was horrified and commanded her new subjects to stop this blasphemous bathing practice at once. Isabella boasted that she herself had only bathed twice in her life and every historian takes her word for it.

http://muslimvilla.smfforfree.com/index.php?topic=3219.0;wap2

 

[akheR]

^as late as Louis XVI (or XIV ?) the King of France found not-bathing flattering enough to mention it as a matter of pride to his court, and when the Enlightenment philosopher Montesquieu wrote his "Persian letters" (Les lettres Persanes), about Persian perceptions of Paris (in order to criticize the society from a neutral POV), the fictional Persian "tourist" (thus Montesquieu) noted how dirty Paris was (if so was Paris so late in history, imagine the rest of France, let alone Europe!).

Late 20th century German scholar, Sigrid Hunke, in her seminal "Allah's sun shines on the West" (which, as far as I know, hasn't been translated into English, but is the best book on the subject of Arabic influences on Europe), talks about a 9th century Muslim tourist to modern day Germany who was surprised that the locals took pride in taking bath only twice a year, and wearing the same clothes as less as they could wear them - in her view, it comes out of a Christian view of the world, namely the body is to be hated and primacy must be given to the soul, thus taking a bath contradicts this philosophy and bad perfume out of the body supports it ; on the other hand, Islam's philosophy is positive, the creation, from the whispers of birds to the more complex cosmic laws, are ayat (signs of Allah), and human body, too, wasn't something to be hated, but the exact opposite, the proof being that sexuality was celebrated openly, until quite recently.

 

[akheR]

What India missed by having Turks and Europeans as invaders, instead of Arabs

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/MhoOeHRNSEU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Robert]

Late 20th century German scholar, Sigrid Hunke, in her seminal "Allah's sun shines on the West" (which, as far as I know, hasn't been translated into English, but is the best book on the subject of Arabic influences on Europe), talks about a 9th century Muslim tourist to modern day Germany who was surprised that the locals took pride in taking bath only twice a year, and wearing the same clothes as less as they could wear them - in her view, it comes out of a Christian view of the world, namely the body is to be hated and primacy must be given to the soul, thus taking a bath contradicts this philosophy and bad perfume out of the body supports it ;

Some of the early Christians were a funny lot.

I would be surprised if such a view was Biblical in origin. Did not Jesus allowed Mary to clean his feet with expensive oil, according to Scripture?

 

[Firebat]

British mercenaries investigated over Sri Lanka war crimes

British mercenaries who were involved in the Sri Lankan civil war are being investigated for war crimes by the Metropolitan Police.

Private security company Keenie Meenie Services (KMS) trained an elite unit of the Sri Lankan police called the Special Task Force (STF) in the 1980s to fight Tamil separatists.

The STF has been implicated in a number of human rights abuses.

These have included executions without trial and killings of Tamil civilians.

The investigation is believed to be the first time British mercenaries have been investigated by the Met, which is the UK force responsible for investigating accusations of war crimes or human rights abuses.

A police spokesperson said the Met had received a referral in March concerning allegations of war crimes committed by British mercenaries and following a "scoping exercise", it had launched an investigation.

Much of the evidence concerning KMS's involvement in Sri Lanka has come from declassified UK government documents and freedom of information requests submitted by journalist Phil Miller, whose book, Keenie Meenie: The British Mercenaries Who Got Away With War Crimes, was published in January.

He said the investigation was being closely followed by the UK's 200,000 strong Tamil community - many of whom fled to London during the civil war in Sri Lanka.

"A lot of Tamil people became refugees in the 1980s, that's when KMS were there," Mr Miller said.

"People remember being attacked by helicopter gunships so I think people are quite shocked to learn that in many of those cases helicopters were flown by British mercenaries."

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-55071099