印度是世界上历史最悠久的国家之一，但印度的历史却不如日本、中国和伊朗受欢迎。这是为什么？

bob-theknob
likes: 125
Egypt is more famous because the West had a fascination with Egyptology ever since Napoleon discovered the Rosetta Stone (and so do I!).
I don’t think Japanese or Chinese history is really that well known in the west to be honest.
Iran/persia typically had more influence in the west (Persian empire) and in the Islamic world as well, so that’s why it may be more well known.
 
埃及之所以更加出名，是因为自从拿破仑发现了罗塞塔石碑以来，西方就对埃及学产生了浓厚的兴趣（我也是如此！）。
说实话，我认为日本或中国的历史在西方并没有那么广为人知。
伊朗/波斯通常在西方（波斯帝国）和伊斯兰世界都拥有更大的影响力，所以这可能是它更为人所知的原因。
 
Astralesean
likes: 28
Not only that but Egyptian society directly influenced Greek, and the ancient Greeks and Romans both were fascinated with Egypt
 
不仅如此，埃及社会还直接影响了希腊社会，古希腊人和古罗马人都对埃及非常着迷
 
RUaVulcanorVulcant13
likes: 4
>I don’t think Japanese or Chinese history is really that well known in the west to be honest.
Weebs
 
“说实话，我认为日本或中国的历史在西方并没有那么广为人知。”
媚日死宅
 
ThePerfectHunter
likes: 13
They have a fantasized image of Japan and tbh they don't really care too much about their history, saying this as a former weeb lol.
 
他们对日本的形象充满幻想，但是说实话，他们并不太关心日本的历史。我是作为一个曾经的“媚日者”说这句话的，笑。
 
RUaVulcanorVulcant13
likes: 3
I wouldn't say people that are enthusiastic about egyptology *don't* have a fantasized image of Egypt
 
我不会说那些对埃及学充满热情的人“没有”对埃及产生幻想化的印象。
 
ThePerfectHunter
likes: 6
Yeah, but there is still interest in their *history* but not the modern country per say, for Japan I would argue its the other way around.
 
是的，但人们仍然对埃及的历史感兴趣，但并非对现代的埃及感兴趣。对于日本，我认为情况正好相反。
 
sparrow-head
likes: 17
Egyptian Pharoh Tutakhamun who lived 4000 years ago studied about his Pyramid building ancestors who came 2000 years earlier to him.
So there you have it. Egypt stands out because of its recorded history. 6000 continuous years of written record. Only in the last 1500 years they went down. So not many cultures can compare with Egypt when it comes to historians interest.
India is famous for not keeping written records. Tamil which is the most recorded language in India starts it's record only from 300 bce at best. Sanskrit despite its rich literature never written down until recently
 
生活在4000年前的埃及法老图坦卡蒙研究过他建造金字塔的祖先，那些祖先比他早了2000年。
所以你看，埃及之所以突出，是因为它有记载的历史。长达6000年的连续文字记录。他们只是在过去1500年才衰落。因此，在历史学家的兴趣方面，没有多少文化可以与埃及相比。
印度则以不保存文字记录而闻名。泰米尔语是印度记录最多的语言，其记录最早也只能追溯到公元前300年。梵语虽然拥有丰富的文学作品，但直到近代才被书写下来。
 
HistoryLoverboy
likes: 61
Well, Egypt & China have a lot more structural & tangible remains from the Bronze age unlike India.
I mean, Indus Valley Civilization was large & grand. But once it fell, we dont have anything tangible (temple or inscxtions or palaces etc) right till the Mauryan age. Thats 2000 years almost. Maybe more.
Yes, there is evidence of second Urbanization during the Magadhan phase, but nothing remotely as grand as say Pyramids or Collossus of Rhodes or hanging gardens of Babylon.
Also, think about it, the earliest pyramids were made around the time of the Indus Valley Civilization. Not only have they survived till today, but we still cannot make such large pyramids using modern technology. So the fascination With egypt atkeast is definitely warranted.
 
嗯，与印度不同，埃及和中国拥有更多青铜时代的结构和有形遗迹。
我的意思是，印度河流域文明曾经规模宏大。但一旦它衰落，直到孔雀王朝时期，我们就没有任何有形的东西（寺庙、铭文或宫殿等）了。那几乎是2000年。甚至更久。
是的，有证据表明在摩揭陀时期出现了第二次城市化，但没有任何东西能与金字塔、罗德岛巨像或巴比伦空中花园相提并论。
而且，想想看，最早的金字塔大约在印度河流域文明时期建造。它们不仅保存至今，而且我们今天仍然无法使用现代技术建造如此巨大的金字塔。因此，至少对埃及的迷恋是绝对有道理的。
 
LordRenly_b5629
likes: 18
We can make such large pyramids with modern tech. How else did we build the Burj Khalifa?
Its just a waste of money. Even the egyptians ditched pyramids for something like the valley of the kings
 
我们可以用现代技术建造如此巨大的金字塔。要不然，我们是如何建造哈利法塔的呢？
这只是在浪费钱。就连埃及人也放弃了金字塔，转而建造像国王谷这样的地方
 
Devil-Eater24
likes: 3
I'd say that the interest in China and Egypt is similar in the West, it's more about the aesthetic than some important part of their life
It's popularised through media like Indiana Jones and Kung Fu Panda, but Westerners do not necessarily take more interest in learning genuine history of these places or following Taoist principles
 
我想说的是西方对中国和埃及的兴趣是相似的，更多的是关于审美，而不是他们生活中重要的组成部分。
它们通过像《夺宝奇兵》和《功夫熊猫》这样的媒体作品而流行起来，但西方人并不一定会对学习这些地方的真正历史或遵循道家原则产生更大的兴趣。
 
EnthusiasmChance7728
likes: 6
Is china history really more famous than india?
 
中国的历史真的比印度更有名吗？
 
HistoryLoverboy
likes: 30
Famous? I dont know about that.
There is definitely a western fascination to the oriental mysticism. But that includes india too.
China, unlike India, was never fully controlled by the west. They could only create spheres of influence in certain areas. So maybe its more of a respectful curiosity about a culture covering a HUGE landmass.
India also was seen initially in the same light. With incredible fascination. The Europeans also poured over our ancient texts which influenced modern philosophy. But India lost its charm to the western orientalists possibly after completely capitulating to the British.
 
有名？我不太清楚。
西方人确实对东方神秘主义有着浓厚的兴趣。但这其中也包括印度。
与印度不同，中国从未完全被西方控制。他们只能在某些地区建立势力范围。所以，也许这更多的是出于对一个覆盖巨大陆块的文化的好奇和敬畏。
印度最初也被以同样的眼光看待。带着难以置信的迷恋。欧洲人也仔细研究了我们的古代典籍，这些典籍影响了现代哲学。但印度在完全屈服于英国之后，可能就失去了对西方东方学家的魅力。
 
Zestyclose_Tear8621
likes: 6
i don't know about Chinese history, but Chinese is famous because of Hollywood fascination of Chinese culture, king fu, kung fu panda. the famous Gabriel also wrote fictional story on ancient China , they also have huge pulation from
it's all about PR, if you have influence then it can happen. like people now try to learn about Korean and japanese history.
while I dia was famous in 19th century by scientists, who liked the philosophy of Upanishads, grammar of Sanskrit and later by hippies
 
我不了解中国历史，但中国之所以出名，是因为好莱坞对中国文化的迷恋，功夫、功夫熊猫等等。著名的加布里埃尔（可能指某位作家）也写过关于古代中国的虚构故事，收获了庞大的读者群体。
这一切都与公关有关，如果你有影响力，这一切就可能发生。就像人们现在试图了解韩国和日本的历史一样。
而印度在19世纪因科学家而闻名，他们喜欢《奥义书》的哲学、梵语的语法，后来又因嬉皮士而闻名。
 
1stGuyGamez
likes: 8
Not rly, in the 1800s India was heavily romanticised still. In fact orientalism was at its peak in the 1800s. Prior to British rule India was mysterious and intriguing though but after them a lot of ppl started thinking about India
 
并非如此，在19世纪，印度仍然被严重地浪漫化。事实上，东方主义在19世纪达到了顶峰。在英国统治之前，印度是神秘而有趣的，但在他们统治之后，很多人开始以不同的方式看待印度。
 
virkramedam
likes: 2
Nah, who told you lMao? All the stuff westerners know about China are panda, bamboos, great wall of china that's it
 
谁告诉你的？西方人对中国的了解无非是熊猫、竹子、中国长城，仅此而已。
 
neon5k
likes: -5
Indus valley civilisation is acknowledged by everyone as we have archaeological evidence to prove that.
But most don’t consider it as historic India. Ivs died or migrated out, modern day India has taken some influences from it but is not a direct descendant.
 
印度河流域文明已被所有人公认为存在，因为我们有考古证据可以证明这一点。
但大多数人不认为它是历史上的印度。印度河流域文明已经消亡或迁徙出去，现代印度受到它的一些影响，但并非其直接后裔。
 
EnthusiasmChance7728
likes: 9
Wrong, literally every south asian has indus valley dna , just go to southasianancestry and see for yourself
 
错了，几乎每一个南亚人都有印度河流域文明的DNA，你自己去SouthAsianAncestry网站看看就知道了。
 
neon5k
likes: -5
Like I said we share things but ivc is not Indian History. They migrated out and ivs died just like ancient roman and egyptian civilisations.
You will find Aryan DNA as well in North Indians doesn’t mean we are Iranians. Same goes for Chengis Khan the half of world is not Mongol.
 
就像我说的，我们共享着一些东西，但印度河流域文明并非印度历史。他们迁徙出去了，印度河流域文明就像古罗马和埃及文明一样消亡了。
你会在北印度人身上发现雅利安人的DNA，但这并不意味着我们是伊朗人。成吉思汗也是一样，并非半个世界都是蒙古人。
 
x271815
likes: 23
India's history is very famous. The Taj Mahal is probably one of the most recognized monuments in the world.
What I suspect you mean is the BCE history of India.  Ancient India's history is less famous because there are very few monuments for people to admire.  The best we have from BCE are the ruins in Mauryan ruins in Sarnath, which unless you are Indian or Buddhist, is hardly worth the expense and hassle of a trip to India.
By contrast, Greek, Roman, Egyptian and Chinese have magnificent ruins which are major tourist attractions.
 
印度的历史非常有名。泰姬陵可能是世界上最知名的古迹之一。
我猜你指的是印度的公元前历史。古代印度的历史不太出名，因为几乎没有可供人们欣赏的古迹。我们拥有的最好的公元前遗迹是孔雀王朝的鹿野苑遗址，除非你是印度人或佛教徒，否则它几乎不值得你花费精力和波折前往印度。
相比之下，希腊、罗马、埃及和中国拥有宏伟的遗址，是主要的旅游景点。
 
SleestakkLightning
likes: 12
Ancient Egyptian culture directly influenced many of the Mediterranean cultures including the Greeks.
The Chinese very copiously recorded their history and so it's well known. They also didn't have the issue of complete civilizational shifts like in India.
India did have a tradition of historiography, as every king would keep court historians/bards. However this tradition was clearly not as important as in other nations. However, a lot of native historiography was fancified to glorify a king or hero.
Take for example, the tale Prithviraj Raso which is supposed to be a biography of Prithviraj Chauhan. It states that Jaichand of Kannauj allied with Ghori and that Prithviraj killed Ghori.
This is directly contradicted by another tale, the Prithviraja Vijaya which contradicts much of the information in Raso.
Also, it's known that Ghori ruled for a decade after his supposed death. Furthermore, Jaichand who was an "ally" in Raso fought Ghori himself and was killed in the battle.
There was also religious historiography traditions, but many of them were mixed with myths and allegory, and a lot of them were recorded in the forms of prophecies. For example the Puranas wrote about the Greek invasions of the Gangetic plains but wrote about it in the form of prophecy. The Buddhists wrote a lot about history but whitewashed their heroes (Ashoka) and demonized their enemies (Pushyamitra Sunga and Shashanka)
But there clearly was a tradition of history, as many ancient and medi historians would write commentaries on other texts and mentioned writers who we have no idea of.
While people often exagerrate it, there was also clearly a loss of history during the Islamic invasions. Take for example Kalidasa who wrote quite a bit about figures and monarchs who lived many many centuries before him. It's clear that the history of Vedic and ancient India was still known in later times. The Jains and Kashmiris were writing about Chanakya and the Mauryans even in the 12th century. Even in non-history fields, a lot of medi Indian literature was composed of commentaries and addendums to older texts.
But by the British era, Ashoka had been forgotten.
A lot of this was due to the decline of Sanskrit literature in favor of Persian by Muslim rulers, as well as destruction of important repositories of knowledge.
Finally, the Indian climate was not conductive to maintaining books and scrolls, as the humidity would cause them to decay. Egypt on the other hand was dry and many of its records were written on papyrus and stored deep in pyramids.
But if that was the main reason, there would be no reason as I mentioned earlier for later medi writers to be writing commentaries and mentioning scholars of the Vedic and classical ages. It's clear that these records were being kept and rewritten.
While I think the destruction of Nalanda and Vikramashila was a major loss, I don't think it was as big of a loss as compared to the decline of the patronization of Sanskrit literature by Islamic rulers.
Take Kashmir for example. Even after it came under Islamic rule, Sultan Zain-ul-Abidin maintained Sanskrit patronage and Kashmiri historians like Jonaraja continued to maintain Rajatarangini. As such, Kashmir has one of the best historiographic traditions in India. Tamil history is also well documented as Tamil writers kept records and history in Sanskrit and Tamil.
But in my opinion, Indians are just not interested in history. Sanskrit literature is vast, probably one of the biggest in the world. And much of it is rotting away, untouched. If we valued history as much as engineering or math, we would probably know a lot more about our history.
 
古埃及文化直接影响了包括希腊人在内的许多地中海文化。
中国人非常详尽地记录了他们的历史，因此广为人知。他们也没有像印度那样经历彻底的文明更迭。
印度确实有史学编纂的传统，因为每位国王都会保留宫廷史官/吟游诗人。然而，这一传统显然不如其他国家那样重要。而且，许多本土史书都被美化，以颂扬国王或英雄。
以《普里特维拉吉·拉索》为例，它被认为是普里特维拉吉·乔汉的传记。它记载说卡瑙杰的杰伊昌德与古尔王朝的穆罕默德·戈里结盟，普里特维拉吉杀死了戈里。
这与另一部著作《普里特维拉吉·维贾亚》直接矛盾，后者与《拉索》中的许多信息相悖。
而且，众所周知，戈里在他被“杀死”后还统治了十年。此外，在《拉索》中是“盟友”的杰伊昌德亲自与戈里作战，并战死沙场。
印度还有宗教史学编纂的传统，但其中许多都混杂着神话和寓言，而且很多都是以预言的形式记录的。例如，《往世书》记载了希腊人入侵恒河平原的事件，但却是以预言的形式写下的。佛教徒写了很多关于历史的著作，但美化了他们的英雄（阿育王），并将他们的敌人（普贤密多罗·巽伽和沙善迦）妖魔化。
 
但印度显然存在历史学传统，因为许多古代和中世纪的历史学家会撰写对其他文本的评注，并提及我们一无所知的作家。
虽然人们经常夸大这一点，但伊斯兰的入侵，也确实造成了历史的遗失。以迦梨陀娑为例，他写了很多关于在他之前许多个世纪的人物和君主的著作。很明显，吠陀时期和古代印度的历史在后世仍然为人所知。耆那教徒和克什米尔人在12世纪仍在撰写关于查纳基亚和孔雀王朝的著作。即使在非历史领域，许多中世纪的印度文学作品也是对古代文本的评注和附录。
但在英国统治时期，阿育王已经被遗忘。
这在很大程度上是由于穆斯林统治者使用波斯语而导致梵语文学衰落，以及重要的知识宝库遭到破坏。
最后，印度的气候不利于保存书籍和卷轴，因为潮湿会导致它们腐烂。另一方面，埃及气候干燥，许多记录都写在纸莎草纸上，深藏在金字塔中。
但如果这是主要原因，正如我之前提到的，后来的中世纪作家就没有理由撰写评注并提及吠陀和古典时代的学者了。很明显，这些记录一直在被保存和重写。
 
虽然我认为那烂陀寺和超戒寺的摧毁是一个重大损失，但我认为与伊斯兰统治者对梵语文学的赞助减少相比，它造成的损失要小得多。
以克什米尔为例。即使在克什米尔处于伊斯兰统治之下后，苏丹宰因-乌尔-阿比丁仍然维持了对梵语的赞助，像乔纳拉贾这样的克什米尔历史学家继续维护着《王室编年史》。因此，克什米尔拥有印度最好的史学编纂传统之一。泰米尔历史也有很好的记录，因为泰米尔作家用梵语和泰米尔语保存了记录和历史。
但在我看来，印度人只是对历史不感兴趣。梵语文学浩如烟海，可能是世界上最大的文学宝库之一。其中大部分都在腐烂，无人问津。如果我们像重视工程学或数学一样重视历史，我们可能会对我们的历史了解更多。
 
testuser514
likes: 19
Well Indians themselves don’t like Indian history. We often disregard it or conflate our mythologies with our history.
Yea there’s a certain western fascination other countries histories but we straight up disregard the many facets of it and give it the treatment of a school textbook designed to be forgotten.
 
好吧，印度人自己也不喜欢印度历史。我们经常无视它，或者把我们的神话和历史混为一谈。
是的，西方人对其他国家的历史有一定的迷恋，但我们（印度人）直接无视了历史的方方面面，并像对待一本注定要被遗忘的学校教科书一样对待它。
 
FrostingCapable
likes: 6
How about we just take that as a giant hint that the sub continent is not that interesting to the rest of the world and finally stop over glorifying ourselves just to satisfy the collective national ego and start taking steps that would make us relevant in the current & the future world? Naaahh we know that’s not gonna happen realistically so let’s just continue coming up with hyper-victim tactics.
 
不如我们就把这（指之前讨论的印度历史在世界范围内知名度不高）当作一个巨大的暗示，即次大陆对世界其他地方来说并没有那么有趣，并最终停止为了满足集体民族自尊心而过度美化自己，并开始采取能够使我们在当前和未来世界变得重要的措施？唉，我们知道这在现实中不会发生，所以我们还是继续发明/捏造过度受害的策略吧。
 
Historical_Winter563
likes: 3
Egypt is closer to Europe and several european powers ruked Egypt in ancient times to modern era. Also Europeans explored egypt alot during different times, hency the western fascination. China is famous due to Chineae threat that West feels and also Chinese media and movies also opened their culture to west. Same cant be said about India
 
埃及离欧洲更近，而且从古代到近代，有好几个欧洲强国都统治过埃及。欧洲人在不同时期也对埃及进行了大量的探索，因此西方对埃及的迷恋就产生了。中国之所以出名，是因为西方感受到了来自中国的威胁，而且中国媒体和电影也将他们的文化向西方开放。同样的情况不能用在印度身上。
 
ThePerfectHunter
likes: 3
I would say most people are more fascinated with modern Japan rather than Japanese history as a whole.
 
我想说的是，大多数人更着迷于现代日本，而不是整个日本历史。
 
obitachihasuminaruto
likes: 5
Indian history is not famous due, propaganda, vested interests, and euro centric supremicism.
Chinese history is more popular because they have an organized effort to push their narrative, and they have a spine.
Egypt is famous because of its relation to abrahamics.
 
印度历史之所以不出名，是因为宣传、既得利益和欧洲中心主义的优越感。
中国历史更受欢迎，是因为他们有组织地推动他们的叙事，而且他们有骨气。
埃及之所以出名，是因为它与亚伯拉罕诸教的关系。