India: A History - by John Keay

Following the path of Monkey and his friends, I've finally journeyed west into the land of Buddha, and selected this general history as an introduction. (it was easy to find - even the Forest Park Library had a copy)

Overall, it was a pleasant read -- but still a disappointment since Keay didn't venture beyond the details of political history - and that seems to be the least interesting aspect of this civilization. (which is probably why history wasn't written there until the Islamic invasions)

What's needed, is a writer who's more immersed in the cultural life of the area, but since it's so diverse, perhaps an overall survey will always be disappointing.

Being British (Scottish, actually), perhaps the author has favored the Raj, but it does seem that there was something like a Pax Brittanica, and everyone would have been better off if the Brits were still stuck with administering that area of the world. Does anyone argue that the Raj wasn't far less sectarian than either the modern states of Pakistan or India ? (note: this is my observation, not the author's)

Considering the three great centers of world civilization, India seems to have weathered the transition into the modern world much easier than either Europe or China --( and who knows how the Islamic world will ever handle it, unless, like Turkey, it becomes militantly secular)