No positive history, only negative fault finding

There is not much evidence for any Burmese history before the Konbaung era.

Your pointing this out is not a contribution to the history of Burma.

Your completely negative methodology is deeply logically flawed.

No evidence that something existed is not evidence that it did not exist.

The only reason people don't call you on this is that Burma Studies seems to be a tightly knit little coterie of friends many of whom are afraid of losing their jobs.

All the more reason to never be part of it.

You should erase all places in your book where you rely on the Burmese chronicle.

The Burmese conquest of Talaing Thaton was in U Kala's Burmese chronicle before it was in any colonial era scholar's history.

I cringe whenever I hear you criticise Luce for putting forth tentative positive hypotheses. That is science.

To merely show negatively that the evidence is thin?

We all know that already.

You are contributing nothing.

Stop attacking other people (Strachan, Huxley, Frasch, Luce...) and make a positive hypothesis about what that history actually was.

I am going to post verbatim the exact language in which you accuse all your enemies of committing the Mon Paradigm (McCarthyism). Just like Joe McCarthy did during the McCarthy era.

Publish the inscriptions you cite all the time, so we can make up our own mind.

That would be a lasting contribution.

I will continue to pick apart your shoddy scholarship until your readers wake up.

Ad hominem attack me to death like you do everyone else in Burma Studies.

"The Myth of the Downtrodden Talaing" ?

You should be more careful with the names you choose, even if they are meant to describe an event in the distant past.

During the early Konbaung it is well-documented that the Mon did suffer at the hands of the Burmese (See Lieberman's Strange Parallels).

People defeated in warfare always suffer.

The fact that you are part Mon that you are always citing at important parts of your argument is irrelevant.