Awesome! We’ve all been waiting for this for a while, we wanna support you.

Well i don't know if you have read any of my previous requests or not but please consider making a video on the Gupta empire(the golden age of India)

Awesome video but those aah.... sound was not wanted

Arnav Pandey Nice video suggestion. I think his CreatorGuild page is where we can send in requests and also participate in pools for trying to get him to cover certain topics.

we need more and detailed scientific analysis of historical events of Asia especially of india. As we are going through a phase of the 1920s Italy or Germany of mixture of both in current indian politics. Please help us to not being 1930s Europe in near future. BTW you can check out sand roman history channel. Super work 👌👌

For example, Bengal always claimed indepence, whenever Central power in North India grew weak

@ABHISHEK RAJU i abhor discrimination based on religion and caste too. Heck I hate religion. But India has this thing were individual communities were segregated based on tribalistic leanings due to which they only favoured their community members. The Caste System is a direct extreme result of that. Social Darwinianism favors traits that allow self propogation or survival of idealogies as well. This allowed the wholly different communities within the subcontinent. There are segregations based on religious, casteist, racial, ethnic, cultural and linguistic lines as well. In a lot of other parts of the worlds the differences were not along as many lines as here. The only reason this diversity exists is because they closed of any genetic breeding between communities which typically cultminates into a single group identity. Not saying its a good thing. Heck, a common identity would have made things a lot easier (but bloodier) for us. But it is what it is.

@ABHISHEK RAJU Europe was diverse, just like us. And Europe is not a country. India you can say is a rare sight or exception where so much versatile population group was able to unite under one banner and called a nation.

@ABHISHEK RAJU that's true

@ABHISHEK RAJU source

TA Da Dannn! (Anon 1947)

Sounds lovely ke a fake qoute to me. The British United India and created a united nation.

@@mudra5114 you're been sarcastic right?

@@arnavpandey3823 No.

@@mudra5114 stop reading the British propaganda then i guess

Bengal mysore tried

Yeah, in Asia Arabia and Persia declined, while Ottoman's started declining, China was ununited and India fell to brit. Japan understood the assignment

Japan was like not even 10% of what British achieved, They just got lucky they captured some part of china mainly cuz china was going through civil war and weakened by European, Other countries like veitnam and other were like colonies and their people actually supported Japanese To fight against European in asia.

Japan Fighting Britain in Asia would be like Britain Fighting Japan in Europe. Most island nations are built for defense and the Japanese and the British were lucky that most of the world is traversable through water.

@@wolverine9377 Then they got brutal repressed because Japan was actually a colonial power.

Early in the 15th century, the Portuguese had instituted a generations-long programme of exploration, each voyage building on the knowledge gained by the previous ones. They were playing the long game, and would inevitably have reached India sooner or later

That's the trick, follow the winds? That's a very old trick. They were guided on the trip but it wasn't a closely guarded secret. The guide just told them where to go.

Who do you think the portuguese are ? The portuguese were one of the well organized and highly developed maritime power since the roman era even before the arabs started seeing the ocean . But they didn't navigated both the west and east until the colonization . All their navigations were to the places in the european and african continents . Even the Roman empire itself had well established trade networks with the east especially india . The Rome even had it's own port in the exact same indian state of kerala called Muziris where they also had a roman temple and garrisons for the Roman Military . And after the collapse of Rome , the informations about the trades where passed on to the newly formed kingdoms and later to portugal . And there is no surprise that the portugal became the first global sea power in the history . There is no secret for arabs , all they did the job of middle person or an agent between europe and asia . Even without arabs or their knowledge the portugal will find its way to india but takes a bit more time and efforts for them that's all . The exact same portugal reached the brazil and cape of good hope without other's help . Ferdinand magellan , who is the first person to prove the earth is spherical by navigating from one place and circled the globe to reach the starting point is from portugal , and there was no arab or chinese to help him . Even the Portugal is named after port , this shows the influence of oceans has on Portugal and influence of Portugal on all the oceans .

My Indian brother, please widen your reading before you make these broad generalizations. "Without this knowledge , the Portuguese....without any experience" is a statement that reeks of ignorance and points towards your tendency to quote from dubious sources instead of actually reading up.

@@sca8217 If you wish to debate, present your arguments and win it like a professional. No ad hominems please.

The Bengali people have a disorganized society. That's why the conditions being there doesn’t matter, most aren’t going to change their behaviors to match with the requirements for industrialisation.

@Md Miah The key here is 'complicated' and that they weren’t disloyal to their country whilst the Bengalis ( my people) did not even have any loyalty to our country or whatever local leader. This incentivised disloyalty and still does.

@@rejoanbary2155 There is no concept of country in the context of nation state in 18th century bengali society. Thousands of bengalis have sacrificed their lives in the freedom struggle of India, more than any other ethnicities of India. Who tf are you to talk shit about bengalis?

What you read was complete nonsense Bengal was far more poor, was far less technologically advanced, had backwards political organisation, lower agricultural productivity, and was always being attacked from outside powers.

It’s likely that industrialization of Britain happened because of the annexation of Bengal

Bengal sultanate was one of the richest till British and Portuguese pirates arrived

@@dhritishmandeka4371 both of them were by far the richest countries for many millennia, both of them suffered heavy decline, yet one of them is on its way to claim the top, and another is rising again. According to the world bank indian economy grew by 8.4%, according to RBI it grew by 9.5%. The GDP is predicted to overtake France next year. The future is bright, enough with the pessimism!

@N Gaming if per capita mattered, then Switzerland would have been leading the world

@N Gaming the video mentions a centralised system with systematic taxation system combined with a innovative industry, per capita has no place here. If anything, up until the heavy tax barriers imposed by the British, indian textiles still maintained a good foothold, and was actually prefered by European nobles for being finer and better quality, contrary to mass produced factory goods of early industrial period. The de-industrialisation of India had to be very much forced upon by imposing huge tax barriers on indian exports, and not something that was a direct effect of free market. And talking about pre-industrial world, indian factories maintained the top position, and the producers earned more than their European counterparts. Even the farmers of india fared better than Europe (not talking about UK here) because India has bigger and more rivers than Europe, and gets an yearly rain in the form of monsoon. The indian agricultural poverty only happened due to forced opium plantation by East india company, as opium was neither something anyone other than the British brought, and it basically destroys the soil fertility

@N Gaming go ahead and redo middle school

Dang good point!

Current Vijayanagara empire became two different states Telangana and Karnataka.

Dude that IS the answer to this entire video.

Capitalism and Corporation

Europe was unified by Christianity, the Holy Roman Empire and academia by the Latin language. The fights between Catholics and Protestants did not result in stagnation.

Wrong. Indian Kingdoms like Mysore, Maratha and Sikh empire for example were trying to modernize. And Mysore gunpowder technology compared to British at that time. But that time it was too late

@@knowledgedesk1653 how am I wrong though? They were too late, doesn’t mean they would have fared better doing nothing.

So well said. Even during the 1857 mutiny the last Mughal simply didn't bother seizing the opportunity to oust the EIC. The Japanese were smarter in that regard, leading to the Meiji Restoration.

As old Greek and Arab records say Indians were disinterested and ignorant of the outside world and anything outside the subcontinent was nothing to them Just like modern Americans who live in their own bubble Guess wealth is the culprit rich States do grow ignorant overtime

@@knowledgedesk1653 Wrong. Marathas did nothing and never tried to modernise. Hindu cast system was very strong among marathas and they were weak.

Thanks! Many of the academic sources I read insisted upon coal reserves near London, so I wonder if there were small initial reserves near London during the early industrial revolution era.

@@OddCompass sikh empire please

@@OddCompass king porus as well please

@@OddCompass Woooow What an Utter Complete Garbage History you have put in front of whole world... One Simple Question for you!!!! Britian didnot have any Logistics, the Infantry were less in Numbers How those 5000 British Soldiers Defeated More than 5 Crore Soldiers of a Different Geography Terrain???

@@JokerJoker-xc7xb Wow thats the most ignorant statement I have read in 2022 so far

Acapulco was the main trading port between Asia and The Americas as it was right next to the Pacific Ocean, but then those goods from Acapulco would enter Mexico City as Mexico City is inland.

@@zakaryloreto6526 yes but Acapulco was just the harbor like Ostia for Rome. The trading exchanging sending off etc all happened in Mexico city

I remember learning from another UKposts comment that Spain used Mexico as a launchpad into Asia.

@@maYTeus Yes after they realised there's a continent between Europe and Asia they retook from the americas the original Asia goal

@@bnb6868 the Only Trading Ports of Spain in Asia is the Philippines. The Galleon Trade between Manila, Philippines and Acapulco, Mexico. Had two round trips per Year.

Point 3, 4, 5 are hypothetical

Yea, they also for some reason did not bring up the needed wealth and resources from the americas in their points, despite bringing up silver earlier.

@Md Miah he glossed over the systemic deindustrialization of India and acted like it was a natural phenomenon rather than deliberate European policy - Europeans knew what they were doing when they encouraged colonies to become raw material producers but actively discouraged any form of vertical integration. Also did not touch upon cultural factors like akbar banning the printing press to preserve jobs for scribes, and the nature of caste in preventing broad based education in India. European societies got better organized through conflict but also because of social changes that accompanied it

@@echosmith5256 true. britain was lucky it conquered bengal.

@@echosmith5256 yes you are right they always encouraged importation rather than locally manufacturing or helping to bring more technology

Actually the Peshwa of Maratha confederacy, Nizamate of Hyderabad and Kingdom of Mysore did planned to make an anti-british allience but that allience didn't came to reality and failed.

@@SafavidAfsharid3197 The British outplayed and pitted the rulers against each other.

this video is actually all over the place, the very main reason India fell, was because the Mughal Maratha wars left no one central power and complete collapse of socio-economic factors, which the British saw as opportunity and used it very well, simple.

@@SafavidAfsharid3197 I dont actually see them ever being together as these powers are polar opposites of each others

@@harshitjaiswal5529 then you should look into anti-british allience of Nizam-mysore-maratha. Because history is complicated. Ex- Maratha allying with Mughal to invade rajputs or rajputs attacking jatts.

What about cold blooded mass murdering ? Savage blood thirsty minds ?

Are you real Abhijit Iyer Mitra sir?

@@walterwhite9520 he is the real one

@@sourabhdebnath4165 wanted to tell him stop writing chutiyaap stuff on first-post and other websites and news portals. sadly he didnt reply.

@@walterwhite9520 Still better than the shit they publish in The Hindu or The IE lmao

@@walterwhite9520 Nah bro he isnt he would know more about this time period than anyone else

That is true, but it is even more complex than that. The only reason that European markets had access to enough cotton to even produce enough textiles to compete at the ridiculous advantage you just cited is because of colonialism and slavery in the new world. So there is also an element of exploitation and genocide fueling Europe's rise at this time.

That's literally how UK got almost everything, they had the jackpot.

@@kairyumina6407 the cotton also came from india

@@mint8648 my understanding was that Indian grown cotton for the most part was processed into textiles in India, whereas it was American cotton (and eventually also Egyptian cotton) that was being used in the industrial revolution in Britain. It has been a long time since I was in college looking at those primary sources. I do know that a big reason the cobfederacy expected Britain to bail them out was British dependence on southern cotton, but the British had the ability to replace their southern sources with Egyptian options. Though I suppose by that point they had large stakes in India too so they were likely also importing either cotton or textiles or both from india

@UC8S63luqkDOBlEksakwkBZA no lol. Go and see a timeline. Industrial revolution in Britain and Conquering of India took place at the same time. Bengal was de-industrialised so that Britain could industrialize

The curious thing about the Mughals and the Portuguese is that the Portuguese established their power in south-west India years *before* Babur's Mughal forces arrived from the north-west.

@@marksnow7569 yep!

@@marksnow7569 just a few years of difference I guess All happened during the reign of Emperor Shri Krishna Devaraya of Vijayanagaram

@@dv9239 Yes, Goa celebrated its 450th anniversary as a Portuguese colony in 1960

Yess! Thanks for the clarification mate!

That's the bloody history.

"When taxes, high costs of cotton and destroying looms weren't enough, they just resorted cutting off thumbs" That's a myth, which was refuted by Gandhi himself in the 1920s. The thumb-cutting was done by Indian workers themselves to avoid being forced to do skilled work for minimum wages.

​@Unknown All the non-hearsay evidence indicates that the British and their agents did not cut thumbs, though they did a lot of other bad things to Indian workers. Gandhi followed the evidence, and I suggest you do too.

@Unknown And your mum slept with Godse . I learnt it from whatsapp university

Thanks, Aditya! And in fact I did investigate the military revolution in India. I did an entire video on it, actually - check out my gunpowder empires of India video for more details! It led to some centralization initially, but the dissemination of raw iron artillery revived the power of feudal lords and decentralized imperial power once again.

@@OddCompass It wasn't just for economic reasons that the Westerners went exploring (and conquering), they were also generally more curious & interested about the world outside of Europe compared to other peoples of the world.

​@Autodidact And they European were cruel as hell when they invaded and started taking advantage of local weak people .But they were also lucky because they came in good time when India had no Strong or Brutal rulers, if India had a nationalist rulers like emperor Aurangzeb or Ashoka these European would have no chance .

@@mhassan8439 Wrong....nothing could stop the industrial revolution from happening in Europe manly GB...The british smoked the indian subcontinent at the same time they were fighting Napolean just to put in perspective...even China was humilliated in the opium wars decades later not even facing the main british fleet

​@@mhassan8439not at all, European technology of war was far superior than what India possessed and no amount of ferocity of any Indian king could have changed the outcome of the war. This isn't a Bollywood movie we're talking about.

Yeah who would've guessed communism's high corruption is still leaching the life out of that country

And coal did little for industralisation in many places, like China or Poland, until much later.

By that time the Chinese had colonised tibet

It’s an old map made by the British - at that time, the Qing had conquered Tibet and administered it semi-autonomously. That control was short lived however.

yea i think tibet should be marked as separate but with china in parentheses

TRUTH WILL PREVAIL. BHOE GYALO 💪

Dont Worry Tashi, Tibet Will be Intendent one day

Thank you very much!

west relies on reason and trust in human thought to reach the truth, meanwhile east relies on outdated traditional dotrines like religion or thought processes

😂😂 It's not just luck it's indian loot and deindustrialization of india that financed it

Necessity is the mother of all inventions, Europeans were having an energy crisis so they figured out better ways to produce energy

And Hinduism.

India came from word indus which from sindhu so these 3 words along with hindu are related so it's proud being hindu indian sanatani Hindustani etc

Thank to Japanese Empire kicking European out of Asia. The first time in history European was so scared shitless

Thats the reason i love russia ukaine war

It next ended, the dominance still exists in globalisation

@@maheshrathod5593 pathetic, you birng shame to your name.

All thanks to Axis powers

1- Does the west use guns, HOW CAN YOU COPY EAST 2- Does the west drink tea, HOW CAN YOU COPY EAST 3- Does the west use 0?, HOW CAN YOU COPY EAST 4- Does the western military have martial art?, HOW CAN YOU COPY EAST 5- Does the west have art, HOW CAN YOU COPY EAST 6- Does the west literally drink water? , HOW CAN YOU COPY EAST/AFRICANS Look pal i am not saying that Asians are challenging the Europeans because they discovered things first, i'm saying that we are challenging you because we are now doing your stuff better than you.(not challenging your views :>)

Does the west have industrialized so fast if not from the loot they gained by conquering North America ,Australia then later Africa and Asia?

Also Have the west created everything on its own . No . It learned many things from East . It's just they won in last Millenia . 1 Millenia hardly matter sin how long Humnas have stood on Earth.

The West copied a lot from Indian, Chinese and Arab knowledge to create these modern institutions So stop bifurcating knowledge into east or west They are multidisciplinary in nature and has various facets to it..... Knowledge is not an isolated entity

The West should be thankful to the East for their knowledge in mathematics, alchemy, architecture, food imports, spices, tea, gunpowder, firearms, etc

@Unknown they mainly used it to compete with each other. They were not competing just for global dominance

@Unknown because that is how all of human history has worked

@Unknown because if you don't make them others will and they will attack you

@Unknown True

West divides Huns as brown huns & white huns.....LOL. Brown huns came to india & today , they are known as rajputs , gurjar , pratihar.....

@@deveshsonam oh did not know about that. Thanks for letting me know

@@arnavpandey3823 that's bullshit. Nothing like brown Huns exist. I suggest you to read the Wikipedia article on Huns and watch Kings and General's video on them. Side-note: In their video where they talk about India wasn't well researched Imo. Their videos do have a certain bias for which many people don't like them. Also, colonial theories like Jatts are descendants of Indo-Scythians and Rajputs are descendants of Huns ( vice-versa ) are just LARPS! don't listen to randos on the internet, especially people like Paul Arya.

Paul Arya. Rajputs possess the same R1a lineages as most of the subcontinent males. It doesn't make sense to bring up such fake narratives . Not everything you read is true. Genetics defies all such theories

European chaos eliminated feudatories and forged nation states ,easier to Make alliances with stable governments while indian chaos caused more divisions and political fragmentation,also among religious and cultural lines.

@@44krishnan79 European chaos didn't always forge nation states. Germany, the biggest European economy, was a bunch of duchies till 1870. Switzerland, the richest macrostate in Europe is still a confederation of 40 cantons of 3 different ethnicities. Europe never had anything like the Mughal empire. Chaos in western Europe existed till 1945 and that didn't hinder their world domination or technological development in any way, while Indian chaos didn't give rise to anything benefitting Indians. There is some other reason than chaos

@@shamtradtam3769 True brother it could be that they developed heavier artillery for siege warfare and penetrating heavy cavalry armour.Since indians had to face mostly steppe nomads which western europeans didn't face which requires lighter armour and troops ,Moreover better beaurocracy when a British general died more will replace him but if a great general or ruler like peshwa bhaji rao or Maharaja ranjeet singh died there remains a lack of leadership.British had a much more stable political system so they just outlived and waited out the indian empires like Mughal,maratha and Sikh empires.Moreover there was infighting among Sikhs ,Marathas and same community which could be exploited.

@@44krishnan79 I agree that the British have been stable and didn't have a foreign invasion since 1068. It doesn't explain why France, Belgium, Germany, Spain and Portugal were also colonizers. Belgium came into existence just in 1830 and still became a colonizing power. Germany became as soon as it unified. As you said Europe had better technology than India in the 18th century. I'm still looking for the reason behind that

@@shamtradtam3769 By stability I mean political stability not invasions,they had officials and much more advanced political structure based on meritocracy.The 2. question only 1 answer.-the industrial revolution.Just like how Japan became all powerful after the Meiji restoration into a world power.India had huge man power and didn't find the need to industrialize,moreover it was caught off guard by this drastic changes in the 18th century.

All of these empires were ruled by clans who did claim common ancestry but it's true that they were fighting amongst each other. That was the Kshatriya culture of India then.

Sounds like Europe post Western Roman Empire collapse

Thanks, that’s what I wanted to make clear in the video!

For me this lesson can be turned around: Europeans today have to learn what horrible prices you as a society can pay if you allow such divisions to do damage within Europe.

Maybe because India wasn’t a country but dozens of small states.

3Lines, You are 100% right. India was never a united country. It was bunch of many small countries like Europe. It was British which gave a shape and direction to modern united India. Without british, Today's india would still remain as 25 small states.

It is simply because Indians were super divided Look at how when the British tried to fight Aurangzeb, the last major Mughal emperor, they were finished brutally, and the British commander had to bow down to his feet in shame The British waited for several decades after Aurangzeb's death to finally win territories because of constant infighting and civil wars among Indian kingdoms and empires following Aurangzeb 's death

@@KKJ0214 Brits left a huge mess after they left India especially after the horrific partition .... It was sardar Patel and v k Menon who united over 500 princely states into one whole India !!!!

Superior book !!!!!¡¡!!!!!!!

spain also invaded cambodia but failed

@@mint8648 huh didn't know that only know of Formosa and the almost conquest of Brunei. Got the name of it so I can read the wiki?

@@bnb6868 Spanish lostt war with Brunei, they got cannon, body armor too, in 1400-early 1700s, european only operates in coast and small island in Peninsular Malay, Sumatra, Java, Bali, Sulawesi and Borneo, the weak tribe like philpines are the 1st to fall same with non iron America natives.

@@safuwanfauzi5014 what are you talking about Spain won. Brunei went from biggest regional naval power to irrelevance till they discovered oil in the past century. Spain just didn't end up conquering it with that soap drama with the Brunei princess and shit. The main goal of the expedition was to destroy the Brunei navy though because of their piracy

@@safuwanfauzi5014 The hell you're talking about?

I think it would help to not see a certain race as evil based on history, but learn from history to see what humans are capable of. Its to easy to think white people from Europe are inheritly evil dismissing with that that the same reasons that made them commit those terrifying deeds. It makes you vunerable to repeat the same mistakes. I remember reading this quote that anyone denying they could be a nazi soldier would be far morel likely to actually be one then the ones aware that they could be. Doing good being aware of being capable of doing evil is much safer then having the ignorant idea that you are good by default and incapable of evil. Its were the saying comes from that the way to hell is paved with good intentions. Many wars have existed over all of history, kingdoms, races and continents. If one thing is sure is that if a group of humans gets the upper hand over another there is a good chance they will wield that advantage. No matter your race or culture. The industrial revolution combined with the enormous ammount of free resources in the new continent meant powerbalances were completely off for quite a while. Ironically if we see India as a continent, the thing that became their downfall was the wars among each other. Europe had it all, but brought itself down by fighting among each other. The two world wars basically ended the domination of the world. They nerfed themselfs in the end.

@@swamidude2214 very well said. As such we should be consciously, as a society, trying to build institutions and structures that level the playing field as much as possible, and dismantle systems of unfair advantage (systemic racism, sexism, lgbt phobia, ageism, ableism etc). We see our greatest strides forward when we behave inclusively and cooperatively. The more people have access to education, healthcare, shelter, and food, the more potential innovators we have to solve the major problems we face as a society, especially as scientific progress has the potential to render scarcity a far less pressing concern. If we use it that way. Or we can keep building up our capacity to destroy one another and continue acting like we aren't all the same species sharing the same single planet together.

despite the colonialism, china and indian states were still individually richer than european kingdoms.

Kairyu& Mina:you are totally right! there have been good and bad Europeans and good and bad Asians and etc.etc. etc.all over the world for centuries.people of all races and nationalities have committed here and there throughout history.that has been the human condition and we humans of all races and nationalities have got the ability to learn from those mistakes from the past so as to avoid making them again.this youtube channel Odd Compass whatever they're called is really stupidly biased!

When the American colonies were still loyal to the Crown a third of the ships in the British Empire were built in New England.

It's definitely fascinating, but the constant warfare between different nations and empires over time led them to refine everything from military technology to societal changes while other powers continued to worship their kings like gods.

I disagree. I clearly remember Sangam Age being described in my history textbook.

Sangam Age was present in 7th class History. You should have ppayed attention in class.😆

@@DrArnabSahoo brother I know all about the Sangam age. I'm just saying this so that it may raise awareness about the Sangam age to people from other regions or different countries.

Correct! Sadly, the swarming of Tipu by allied English/Maratha/Hyderabadi forces was too much for him to repulse.

The East India Company maintained a very strict policy of not allowing its facilities to be used for the promotion of Christianity or the suppression of other religions until well into the 19th century, when it came under too much influence from British politicians. It only took about a quarter-century from the change of policy to the 1857 uprising and the consequent abolition of the Company.

Not really. Brits wanted the resources and they loot. Remember there were Christians in India before the west. Syrian christians of Kerala have jewish /Assyrian ancestry (dna test) and they were in India before the western conquer. It wasn't the religion that motivated ,it was the resources

I think the French and the Spanish were driven by religious zeal more than the British. In Quebec and the Philippines, the Catholic Church was either dominant in politics or tried to convert as many as possible.

@@freedom_fight I was talking about the European Christians, christians in Kerala did not fight religious wars with Hindus. The christians you talk about were themselves persecuted by Portugese catholics as heretics. Brits wanted to loot , agreed, but they looted non-christians not non-whites, they targetted people for their religion not race. It became about race much later.

@@CuriousAlien nope.. Europeans Targeted mostly non whites and looted non whites. And they looted non white Christians . Race was always their reason 💀. And it's common sense and history. They looted asia for wealth and that's the main reason. And if religion were their main agenda all of the asia would be Christians lol. Hindus never did a thing and the religious high caste hindus assisted with europeans . You need more history class rather than your religious class 💀

are you from west bengal or bangladesh

@@narendrasule5822 Bangladesh

@@noelgrippen4707 I don’t hate it but “ London is a failed society “ ( Andrew Tate ) I was born here and I’m still in school

Bengal destroyed britain by sending all the commies it produces to british universities. 😂

I’ll look into it! And thanks haha, I tried to incorporate some humorous sound effects this time around :p

@@OddCompass Chandragupta Maurya by Purushottam Lal Bhargava was a pretty enlightening book for me😁

​@@OddCompass do not cover imaginary gupta