What people are saying - Write a review
It is a pioneering attempt in the field and had been much acclaimed. Perhaps this is the first of its kind in English. No doubt, the author took lot of pain to bring out this book. Of course, more details were required to be given. It contains lots of names of literary books whereas trends in development of literature should also have been mentioned in detail: each historical period is marked by some dominant trends. The narration suffers from bias, racial as well as regional. The presented information is mostly second hand derived from books written by European authors who are seldom objective. Europeans suffer from a conviction that chief source of knowledge is Greek language which is not true. Then there is strong feeling of racial superiority, product of colonial era that white race is far superior to all other races in the world – a total misnomer. Their interpretation of every aspect is from that angle. There are haredly any details of literature produced during Achaemenian times (550-330 B.C.), a glorious period when Persia was at the zenith of power – its emperors held sway from the borders of India upto Mediterranean and even Greece was under attack. Lastly, the author has scanty knowledge about India, the power house of knowledge. Perhaps, India being a part of British Colonial Empire was badly suppressed and no credit was to be given to it on any account. Indian civilization is the oldest and the whole of Asia had been under its influence. Sur and Asur, mentioned in the book are not anti to each other. Both are Ayans. The only difference is in attitude to life, whereas Surs lay more emphasis on spiritualism, Asurs do the same on materialism.