Ancient Pakistan

[ghazi52]

..............
1857 – 1905
British Colonization and Muslim Reform Movements

• Events

 

[ghazi52]

..................................
1857 – 1905
British Colonization and Muslim Reform Movement

• Personalities

..........................................................

 

[Force-India]

..............
1857 – 1905
British Colonization and Muslim Reform Movements

• Events

Indian history or Pakistani history?

 

[ghazi52]

It is your choice...................

 

[Force-India]

It is your choice...................

 

[niaz]

..................................
1857 – 1905
British Colonization and Muslim Reform Movement

• Personalities

..........................................................

Mirza Asadullah Khan Ghalib was born in 1797 and died 1869. Sir Syed was born in 1817 and died 1898. Mirza Ghalib should come before Sir Syed Ahmed Khan.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Indian history or Pakistani history?

I agree. When we talk about Ancient Pakistan or Pakistan history we must restrict ourselves within Pak region. Of course where we had overarching rule like Moghul or British we have to include that but with a filtrated bias toward this region or else you end in fact plundering Indian history.

Then you might as well call it 2Indian History" Only limitation to PK region or those matters that had major impact should be covered. So for example Tipu of Mysore cannot possibly be included. Howsoever great he did his role impacted only and remained contained to South India when it was not even attached to what is now Pakistan.

On the other most of the Moghuls should covered - Although based in Delhi their rule/reach impacted PK. Thus it can be included. The Indian Muntiny can be included but with nominal coverage simply because its centre of gravity was in the Ganges Plain and had nominal effect on PK. We had barely come under British rule in 1849 when the mutiny broke out in 1857.

So we need to always keep this in mind. Or else we will (with some justification ) get claims by our neighbours that we are just selling the same product but with differant name.

 

[Force-India]

I agree. When we talk about Ancient Pakistan or Pakistan history we must restrict ourselves within Pak region. Of course where we had overarching rule like Moghul or British we have to include that but with a filtrated bias toward this region or else you end in fact plundering Indian history.

Then you might as well call it 2Indian History" Only limitation to PK region or those matters that had major impact should be covered. So for example Tipu of Mysore cannot possibly be included. Howsoever great he did his role impacted only and remained contained to South India when it was not even attached to what is now Pakistan.

On the other most of the Moghuls should covered - Although based in Delhi their rule/reach impacted PK. Thus it can be included. The Indian Muntiny can be included but with nominal coverage simply because its centre of gravity was in the Ganges Plain and had nominal effect on PK. We had barely come under British rule in 1849 when the mutiny broke out in 1857.

So we need to always keep this in mind. Or else we will (with some justification ) get claims by our neighbours that we are just selling the same product but with differant name.

ry
Pakistan was created in 1947. Its Indian history.

Field hockey at the Summer Olympics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Indus Pakistan]

ry
Pakistan was created in 1947. Its Indian history.

Field hockey at the Summer Olympics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Last time I checked India was created in 1947 as well. Before that it was British India and was ran by differant people, was a colony and borders were differant. It included three countries at least those post 1947 those are successor states. Any one has no greater or lesser right on that animal that siezed to exist in 1947.

As regards the name well it does not mean anything. If my name is Alexander it does not mean I am also Alexander Fleming or was around 2000 years ago Alexander the Great. A name can mean differant things at differant times. Let us just say Nehru had gone with just the name Bharat and Pakistan had got the name India would that mean all of sudden because of a stupid name we would own everything ever attached to that name?

A name means differant things at differant times. Hindosh was the Persian name for Sindh satrapy. Later hindosh came to mean India when the British coined the name. You are aware the name "India" is only about 600 years old. If I follow your logic we can't use the name India further than 600 years.

You city today called Mumbai did it come into existance in 1995? The name certainlly came into use that year. Prior to that it was called Bombay? How stupid and absurd would it sound if I said Mumbai was not around before 1995. The fact is it did but under another name. ditto Pakistan. Punjab, sindh etc have ben naround before that. Have a look at this map

You will notice Hindush is Sindh/India. That is like Cassius Clay changing his name to Mohammed Ali. If another guy changed his name to Cassius Clay would not make him the breat boxer just because they share the same name. The same name can mean differant things. So keep this in mind. Don't flux the entire thing by playing on the 'shared' name you have.

Indian Republic is as new as Pakistan. As much as me changing my name to Cassius Clay will not make me the boxer it won't do the same for you. you might get away withn lay people who just look at the outside of the label without checking what is inside it.

 

[ito]

When people say 'Ancient Pakistan'. It makes me laugh.

 

[ghazi52]

I also laugh when people say 'Ancient India'. As there was no India . Name by British.
East India Company and then British India.

 

[Force-India]

I also laugh when people say 'Ancient India'. As there was no India . Name by British.
East India Company and then British India.

Field hockey at the Summer Olympics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So why does wins before 1947 counts in Indian record

 

[Kabira]

Field hockey at the Summer Olympics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So why does wins before 1947 counts in Indian record

Whats with Indians trying to be Pakistanis? Have some self respect men.

 

[Force-India]

Whats with Indians trying to be Pakistanis? Have some self respect men.

Lol

 

[ghazi52]

.........
1905 – 1940
The Struggle for Independence

• Events

.........
... . . . .