So, you thought these foods are of Indian origin.

Rosgolla comes as a surprise but Samosas and Rajma , I knew came here from Arabia and Mexico respectively, so also kebabs and Biriyani , so also Coffe which came from Africa with the Britishers .I have eaten the tastiest Jalebis in Istambul, Turkey with lots of .almond and pista flakes sprinkled on it. They have different kinds of Jalebis made there using fruits etc..

Oh... you had a sweet experience !!!. Jalebis too vary from country to country.

Surprising origins of gulab jamun. I was aware about the other but not gulab jamun. Some to think of it, chillies and potatoes that are an integral part of Indian cuisine, also are not Indian in their origins.

I too was under the impression that Gulab Jamun is of Indian origin. The list given in the link cleared all my doubts about the origin of foods.

I am quite surprised to know that none of the famous sweets and curry that we relish in India are of Indian origin. Though some of the food items mentioned in the list may not be mentioned in the list might not be of Indian origins, they ve been popularused by Indians. For instance even though chicken tikki masala is said to ve its origin in Glassglow, famous chefs around the world refer to it as Indian curry

Different foods entered India through different foreign invasions and through the travellers who visited different countries and introduced to India.

India must have been a bland place. The Aryans came from Europe, and now our delicacies also came from abroad. The only vegetable that grew here was brinjal and grass for the animals. These studies are not believable and there is a subtle hint of denying Indians credit for being a developed culture before the Europeans discovered her. 

Are you sure brinjal is not of any other country? If it is so we should be proud of brinjal as well as grass.

vijay wrote:

India must have been a bland place. The Aryans came from Europe, and now our delicacies also came from abroad. The only vegetable that grew here was brinjal and grass for the animals. These studies are not believable and there is a subtle hint of denying Indians credit for being a developed culture before the Europeans discovered her. 

 

 

I thought on the same lines. I knew we had no civilization before Mughals or Europeans came to this unfortunate country.

suni51 wrote:

vijay wrote:

India must have been a bland place. The Aryans came from Europe, and now our delicacies also came from abroad. The only vegetable that grew here was brinjal and grass for the animals. These studies are not believable and there is a subtle hint of denying Indians credit for being a developed culture before the Europeans discovered her. 

 

 

I thought on the same lines. I knew we had no civilization before Mughals or Europeans came to this unfortunate country.

 

Beware historians may chase you.

 

rambabu wrote:

suni51 wrote:

vijay wrote:

India must have been a bland place. The Aryans came from Europe, and now our delicacies also came from abroad. The only vegetable that grew here was brinjal and grass for the animals. These studies are not believable and there is a subtle hint of denying Indians credit for being a developed culture before the Europeans discovered her. 

 

 

I thought on the same lines. I knew we had no civilization before Mughals or Europeans came to this unfortunate country.

 

Beware historians may chase you.

 

The historians will only tell me that even the Roti, Chapati, or Fulka (Indian bread) which we always thought was an Indian preparation is originally from Persia or Africa. 

http://indianexpress.com/article/lifestyle/food-wine/food-story-how-indias-favourite-flatbread-roti-was-born/

 

 

Not just rotis , even rice originated in China although some confusion is there about it ...But for all practical purpose Rice originated in China , Basmati rice in India but now in Pakistan..

suni51 wrote:

rambabu wrote:

suni51 wrote:

vijay wrote:

India must have been a bland place. The Aryans came from Europe, and now our delicacies also came from abroad. The only vegetable that grew here was brinjal and grass for the animals. These studies are not believable and there is a subtle hint of denying Indians credit for being a developed culture before the Europeans discovered her. 

 

 

I thought on the same lines. I knew we had no civilization before Mughals or Europeans came to this unfortunate country.

 

Beware historians may chase you.

 

The historians will only tell me that even the Roti, Chapati, or Fulka (Indian bread) which we always thought was an Indian preparation is originally from Persia or Africa. 

http://indianexpress.com/article/lifestyle/food-wine/food-story-how-indias-favourite-flatbread-roti-was-born/

 

Very much convinced. How can anybody deny if the facts are there standing before them ? Despite all this even if someone doesn't believe who cares ?

Fact will not become False if somebody says that he doesn't believe

In the same way, the post said Rasgulla and many such foods are from some other countries providing the proof contrary to the popular belief,One has to believe it. If one doesn't how it matters?

 

 

 

rambabu wrote:

suni51 wrote:

rambabu wrote:

suni51 wrote:

vijay wrote:

India must have been a bland place. The Aryans came from Europe, and now our delicacies also came from abroad. The only vegetable that grew here was brinjal and grass for the animals. These studies are not believable and there is a subtle hint of denying Indians credit for being a developed culture before the Europeans discovered her. 

 

 

I thought on the same lines. I knew we had no civilization before Mughals or Europeans came to this unfortunate country.

 

Beware historians may chase you.

 

The historians will only tell me that even the Roti, Chapati, or Fulka (Indian bread) which we always thought was an Indian preparation is originally from Persia or Africa. 

http://indianexpress.com/article/lifestyle/food-wine/food-story-how-indias-favourite-flatbread-roti-was-born/

 

Very much convinced. How can anybody deny if the facts are there standing before them ? Despite all this even if someone doesn't believe who cares ?

Fact will not become False if somebody says that he doesn't believe

In the same way, the post said Rasgulla and many such foods are from some other countries providing the proof contrary to the popular belief,One has to believe it. If one doesn't how it matters?

 

I do not trust anything unless I have confirmed proofs. Read this famous professor is saying Bhagat Singh and Azad were terrorists, should I believe him?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Bhagat-Singh-Azad-were-terrorists-says-UK-historian/articleshow/30496595.cms

 

 

 

suni51 wrote:

rambabu wrote:

suni51 wrote:

rambabu wrote:

suni51 wrote:

vijay wrote:

India must have been a bland place. The Aryans came from Europe, and now our delicacies also came from abroad. The only vegetable that grew here was brinjal and grass for the animals. These studies are not believable and there is a subtle hint of denying Indians credit for being a developed culture before the Europeans discovered her. 

 

 

I thought on the same lines. I knew we had no civilization before Mughals or Europeans came to this unfortunate country.

 

Beware historians may chase you.

 

The historians will only tell me that even the Roti, Chapati, or Fulka (Indian bread) which we always thought was an Indian preparation is originally from Persia or Africa. 

http://indianexpress.com/article/lifestyle/food-wine/food-story-how-indias-favourite-flatbread-roti-was-born/

 

Very much convinced. How can anybody deny if the facts are there standing before them ? Despite all this even if someone doesn't believe who cares ?

Fact will not become False if somebody says that he doesn't believe

In the same way, the post said Rasgulla and many such foods are from some other countries providing the proof contrary to the popular belief,One has to believe it. If one doesn't how it matters?

 

I do not trust anything unless I have confirmed proofs. Read this famous professor is saying Bhagat Singh and Azad were terrorists, should I believe him?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Bhagat-Singh-Azad-were-terrorists-says-UK-historian/articleshow/30496595.cms

 

 Labeling Bhagat Singh as a traitor is an old issue and it was never taken seriously. You need not believe such outdated versions from a British Historian.

 

 

 

rambabu wrote:

suni51 wrote:

rambabu wrote:

suni51 wrote:

rambabu wrote:

suni51 wrote:

vijay wrote:

India must have been a bland place. The Aryans came from Europe, and now our delicacies also came from abroad. The only vegetable that grew here was brinjal and grass for the animals. These studies are not believable and there is a subtle hint of denying Indians credit for being a developed culture before the Europeans discovered her. 

 

 

I thought on the same lines. I knew we had no civilization before Mughals or Europeans came to this unfortunate country.

 

Beware historians may chase you.

 

The historians will only tell me that even the Roti, Chapati, or Fulka (Indian bread) which we always thought was an Indian preparation is originally from Persia or Africa. 

http://indianexpress.com/article/lifestyle/food-wine/food-story-how-indias-favourite-flatbread-roti-was-born/

 

Very much convinced. How can anybody deny if the facts are there standing before them ? Despite all this even if someone doesn't believe who cares ?

Fact will not become False if somebody says that he doesn't believe

In the same way, the post said Rasgulla and many such foods are from some other countries providing the proof contrary to the popular belief,One has to believe it. If one doesn't how it matters?

 

I do not trust anything unless I have confirmed proofs. Read this famous professor is saying Bhagat Singh and Azad were terrorists, should I believe him?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Bhagat-Singh-Azad-were-terrorists-says-UK-historian/articleshow/30496595.cms

 

 Labeling Bhagat Singh as a traitor is an old issue and it was never taken seriously. You need not believe such outdated versions from a British Historian.

 

The one I mentioned was only last year and it's there in an Indian newspaper (the link provided in above box)

 

 

 

 

suni51 wrote:

rambabu wrote:

suni51 wrote:

rambabu wrote:

suni51 wrote:

rambabu wrote:

suni51 wrote:

vijay wrote:

India must have been a bland place. The Aryans came from Europe, and now our delicacies also came from abroad. The only vegetable that grew here was brinjal and grass for the animals. These studies are not believable and there is a subtle hint of denying Indians credit for being a developed culture before the Europeans discovered her. 

 

 

I thought on the same lines. I knew we had no civilization before Mughals or Europeans came to this unfortunate country.

 

Beware historians may chase you.

 

The historians will only tell me that even the Roti, Chapati, or Fulka (Indian bread) which we always thought was an Indian preparation is originally from Persia or Africa. 

http://indianexpress.com/article/lifestyle/food-wine/food-story-how-indias-favourite-flatbread-roti-was-born/

 

Very much convinced. How can anybody deny if the facts are there standing before them ? Despite all this even if someone doesn't believe who cares ?

Fact will not become False if somebody says that he doesn't believe

In the same way, the post said Rasgulla and many such foods are from some other countries providing the proof contrary to the popular belief,One has to believe it. If one doesn't how it matters?

 

I do not trust anything unless I have confirmed proofs. Read this famous professor is saying Bhagat Singh and Azad were terrorists, should I believe him?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Bhagat-Singh-Azad-were-terrorists-says-UK-historian/articleshow/30496595.cms

 

 Labeling Bhagat Singh as a traitor is an old issue and it was never taken seriously. You need not believe such outdated versions from a British Historian.

 

The one I mentioned was only last year and it's there in an Indian newspaper (the link provided in above box)

 

Whatever it may be, the title of the link article says it was the view of a British Historian

 

 

 

 

 

@ sunil ...I do not trust anything unless I have confirmed proofs. Read this famous professor is saying Bhagat Singh and Azad were terrorists, should I believe him?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Bhagat-Singh-Azad-were-terrorists-says-UK-historian/articleshow/30496595.cms

There was no need for David Hardiman to raise the issue now.I am sure he knew the circumstances under which they operated and everything is fair in war, and thats what they were waging against the British at that time...But to be fair to him he also made a mention of the non violent movement led by Mahatma Gandhi and made a reference to the extremist groups led by Bhagat Singh and Azad..

usha manohar wrote:

@ sunil ...I do not trust anything unless I have confirmed proofs. Read this famous professor is saying Bhagat Singh and Azad were terrorists, should I believe him?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Bhagat-Singh-Azad-were-terrorists-says-UK-historian/articleshow/30496595.cms

 

There was no need for David Hardiman to raise the issue now.I am sure he knew the circumstances under which they operated and everything is fair in war, and thats what they were waging against the British at that time...But to be fair to him he also made a mention of the non violent movement led by Mahatma Gandhi and made a reference to the extremist groups led by Bhagat Singh and Azad..

 

That was the whole problem, he did not use word extremist but terrorist. Extremist is somewhat acceptable in certain cases from certain quarters.

Outdated news on Bhagat Singh in the present times, that too after so many years after independence are irrelevant.