Great visuals accompanied by the most hilariously ill-informed commentary. Quite a few gems to listen too. : )

Its soo beautiful and blissful to hear the chanting and mantra on these ghats in kashi followed by the darshan at kashi vishwanath my experience was amazing .thnx for sharing and reminding the ganges Akshay :-)

The commentary is so stereotypical of British made documentaries of that era. As admin said, it is so ridiculously ill-informed! For instance, Sati wasn't abolished thanks to the 'intervention' of the British. Many Indian rulers had discouraged the practice of Sati long before the British had arrived and Aurangazeb had even passed a law against it in the mid 17th century!

...American not British [see above]...

I wasn't abusing- I was talking the facts-plain old historical facts! And, please don't blame American attitudes for British follies!

angaja thAthamudhe,asi varunA madhye.....

Make sure you get the 'plain old historical facts' right!

My facts are absolutely right! The whole world knows Gandhi and his followers, not American attitudes, drove the British out of India!

...that is very much a matter of opinion...

No! Its a matter of absolute fact!

...I believe that the motto of this group is : "There is more than one truth in history"....Gandhi and his mob were just one factor in a complex puzzle Mr Mathew. There is no doubt that India was heading towards independence from 1919 onwards with the introduction of the Montagu-Chelmsford legislation (further ushered along by the India Act of 1935)... at that stage 'Dominion' status was forseen for India... the calamity of the second world war changed such thinking and radicalised all opinion... Britain was virtually bankrupt in 1945, almost entirely dependent on American loans (which were only, finally repaid a year or two ago) and in no position to continue to uphold Imperial obligations...

Firstly, Mr. Craig, Gandhi didn't have a mob behind him; he had an entire nation. On the other hand, the inept and corrupt British officials had no intention of accepting dominion status for India. From 1919 onwards, negotiations kept dragging on with no end in sight. However, your point on bankruptcy is well taken. But, the fact is bankruptcy was a very small part of the decolonization process. The independence movements were simply too strong for Britain.

...Goodness me... is this the sort of twaddle that they teach in Indian schools ? On what grounds do you describe the ICS as 'inept and corrupt' ? Terms that the rest of the world tends to associate with India post- 1947 !...

We have hit a irreconcilable roadblock ! Lets declare peace and move on ......

I agree with you admin!