What's new

Ancient Pakistan the Defense Wall of India

Aug 19, 2017
3,310
-7
3,338
Country
India
Location
Germany
That certainly is not true. Arab historians in their chronicles have made a distinction between bilad (countries) of Sindh and Hind, refering to Indus basin and Ganga-desh respectively



Anyways so you do agree Hind refers to modern day India...and Sindh to Pakistan?
 

M. Sarmad

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 27, 2013
6,170
54
11,060
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Anyways so you do agree Hind refers to modern day India...and Sindh to Pakistan?

I am talking about Arab historians. When they mentioned "India" or "Arz (land) al Hind", they only meant southern and eastern parts of the Indian peninsula. The Northern parts (modern day Pakistan roughly; the Indus basin) were referred to by Arabs as "The Nation Of Sindh" always.

For reference, consult "Meadows of gold and mines of gems" by Al-Masudi; "the Herodotus of the Arabs" (p.176):

al masudi.jpeg
masudi2.jpeg
 

LeGenD

MODERATOR
Aug 28, 2006
13,335
109
16,469
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
If ever Pakistani cinema get to a stage where they can make proper war movies, battle of hadaspes should be made like they made the 300. The only battle, the darling of western civilisation, Alexander lost. Midget died of the injuries received during the battle. Went straight back to his conquered persia after the battle with tail firmly tucked between his leg. Throughout his retreat down the Indus basin from north to south towards Arabian sea, ancient Pakistanis had fun with his retreating armies. Their remains still can be found in Makran coastline.

Ofcourse western historian wont acknowledge this rather embarrassing defeat to their god like Alexander. They went silent for 300 years and only after time lapsed, they depicted this battle as some sort of honorable victory for Alexander. Lol.

Pakistanis needs to owe what their ancients have done.
If Raja Porus defeated Alexander the Great then how come Alexander still had an army to raid Multan among other places? Back in those days, defeat could translate into loss of an entire army in a region because it wasn't easy to melt away in surroundings.

Raja Porus not only lost a son in the Battle of Hydaspes but became a Satrap of Macedonians. Much of the ancient Pakistan fell under Macedonian rule until Mauryians arrived.

I can understand river indus creating problems for Alexander but his alleged defeat in the Battle of Hydaspes does not reconcile with his other exploits in the region.

And it was the injury that Alexander suffered in the Battle for Multan (Mallian campaign) that took a toll on his health.


 

hydrabadi_arab

FULL MEMBER
Jul 31, 2015
1,065
4
2,188
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
So British also recruited from Bengal and Bihar...but the head were British only..they recruited Greeks and Scythians I will dig up the resources..small tip..donot engage in debate without being able to back resources

No, British didn't recruit from Bengal. Stop lying again and again. They recruited rajputs from Bihar, big difference. Oh btw unlike British, Chanakya who recruited army from Indus was local.
 

Taimoor Khan

ELITE MEMBER
Jan 20, 2016
13,856
4
21,509
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
If Raja Porus defeated Alexander the Great then how come Alexander still had an army to raid Multan among other places? Back in those days, defeat could translate into loss of an entire army in a region because it wasn't easy to melt away in surroundings.

Raja Porus not only lost a son in the Battle of Hydaspes but became a Satrap of Macedonians. Much of the ancient Pakistan fell under Macedonian rule until Mauryians arrived.

I can understand river indus creating problems for Alexander but his alleged defeat in the Battle of Hydaspes does not reconcile with his other exploits in the region.

And it was the injury that Alexander suffered in the Battle for Multan (Mallian campaign) that took a toll on his health.



Losing a war doesnt mean that every men will be culled, thats what retreat looks like, you cut your loses and make a run from battlefield.

You have to understand the odds stacked against Porus, who was not more then a landlord and had an hurriedly army mostly of peasants, against the well oiled machine like army of Alexander, super power of that time. Alexender army outnumbered Porus by some margin. Porus was defending his ground, he stood his ground and not let an inch go to the Greeks, which eventually cut their loses and made the retreat down the Indus. Infact Porus added more territory to his lands after the battle, hardly an act of defeated man. The accounts you see from western sources, they are all based on Greek historians who wrote the account of this war after 300 years after the event. Clearly the silence of 300 years says it all. And then this narrative that Alexander give away Porus his land back as mark of respect towards his bravery are utter non sense. Just before facing Porus in Jhelum (Pakistan), Bessus of Bactria (Afghanistan) fought Alexender tooth and nail but when he lost, Alexander cut his nose and ears to dishonour him first and then crucified him ordering his men not to let vultures eat his body. Then ofcourse, the treachery to the people of Swat (Pakistan) who also fought bravely against this foreign invader, after coming to a truce with people of Swat, he butchered them in the night when they were unexpecting. And here we are with Porus army inflecting heaviest casualties and sufferings ever received by Greek Army under Alexander, in all wars he fought, and he will honour him by given him his lands back! You can call it a BS, a figment of imagination by western historians.

Alexander was a general, he didnt fight the wars, rather rode his famous black horse Bucephalus in all his Asian campaign including conquest of Persia, surrounded by his bodygaurds, overseeing the battlefield. Here is the interesting thing, Bucephalus died in battle of Hadaspes. You dont have to be rocket scientist to come to conclusion that Alexander protective circle was uprooted, and when his horse was brought down, you can only imagine the fate of the rider.

Indeed Porus son died, defending his and his father lands. Here is the interesting thing from history. You know Mangla? Mangla Dam, Mangla fort, Mangla garrison ? They are named after Porus daughter, Mangla. Some legacy of a defeated man!!


According to marshal Zhukov, man who oversaw Nazi retreat from Russia, Alexandra fate was actually worse then Napoleon here in these lands of ancient Pakistan.
 
Last edited:

Myth_buster_1

BANNED
Mar 17, 2008
9,020
-1
9,025
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Just like Germans use Germany when talking about their country among English speakers but Deutschland when among their own people....same for India

Haryana is Gangu Pradesh in your parlance....not part of Ancient coterminous Pakistan..to be fair Bharatas are originally Himalayan foothills...you can check Schwartzberg's Atlas on that I will dig it up




yeah more like foothills of HImachal



Unlike indians who prefer to go with the name india because thats the name that was enforced on you by british empire ... the Germans prefer to go with Deutschland...
If pakistan was a defense wall then why do u guys mainly speak in a language that was created by muslim empire???
Dont forget.... without muslim and british empire india today would be nothing today.
 
Aug 19, 2017
3,310
-7
3,338
Country
India
Location
Germany
Unlike indians who prefer to go with the name india because thats the name that was enforced on you by british empire ... the Germans prefer to go with Deutschland...
If pakistan was a defense wall then why do u guys mainly speak in a language that was created by muslim empire???
Dont forget.... without muslim and british empire india today would be nothing today.


LeL do we use Perso Arabic script?....if the people donot want to be part of a country, past legacy cannot keep it intact...your country best example...drawn up by the British, but still split nonetheless
 

hydrabadi_arab

FULL MEMBER
Jul 31, 2015
1,065
4
2,188
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
So British also recruited from Bengal and Bihar...but the head were British only..they recruited Greeks and Scythians I will dig up the resources..small tip..donot engage in debate without being able to back resources

British didn't recruit single Bengali. They were muslims and rajputs from Bihar. I will not bother to spoon feed you here. Similarly there is no proof of so called Greeks or Scythians soldiers in Chanakya army, this sound like another hindu fantasy. Always remember without indus men you wouldn't be hindu today but some human flesh eating cannibalistic adivasi. Instead now you claim to be brahmin. You will deny this too and demand sources of historical fact so lets end here.
 
Aug 19, 2017
3,310
-7
3,338
Country
India
Location
Germany
No, British didn't recruit from Bengal. Stop lying again and again. They recruited rajputs from Bihar, big difference. Oh btw unlike British, Chanakya who recruited army from Indus was local.

Okay british recruited from Bihar and Biharis under British won victory over the Sikh Empire and then the Talpurs.....not to mention so many from the south Madras regiment also conqeured the Indus Basin....but in the end those soldiers were no stakeholders in the victory....only the British were
 

hydrabadi_arab

FULL MEMBER
Jul 31, 2015
1,065
4
2,188
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Okay british recruited from Bihar and Biharis under British won victory over the Sikh Empire and then the Talpurs.....not to mention so many from the south Madras regiment also conqeured the Indus Basin....but in the end those soldiers were no stakeholders in the victory....only the British were

Chanakya was local of indus, only Maurya origin is disputed who was merely pawn of Chanakya anyway.
 

khanmubashir

FULL MEMBER
Aug 13, 2014
1,892
0
1,639
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
I highly doubt Mauryyas are from Indus ....Chanakya yes...later texts do claim that he took the help of foreign tribes like Greeks and Scythians to topple Nanda


Rajputs are considered pure Gangu race anyways


Ancestors of Mauryas were peacock breeders... (the word literally means Peacock in Indian languages)
Then what are doing peacocks doing


native range of peacocks


2560px-Indian_Peacock_Range.svg.png
Then what are peacocks doing in Sindh and Pakistani Punjab sonny Google
Your zoo geography is even worse then your history
But still much higher then average dumb sanghi of your lot :)
 
Aug 19, 2017
3,310
-7
3,338
Country
India
Location
Germany
Then what are peacocks doing in Sindh and Pakistani Punjab sonny Google
Your zoo geography is even worse then your history
But still much higher then average dumb sanghi of your lot :)


peacock density in India far outstrips anywhere else, which means Mauryas were more likely to have been in India...peaacock range of Pakstan is not oven 0.1% of the overall peacock range
 

Myth_buster_1

BANNED
Mar 17, 2008
9,020
-1
9,025
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
LeL do we use Perso Arabic script?....if the people donot want to be part of a country, past legacy cannot keep it intact...your country best example...drawn up by the British, but still split nonetheless
We are proud of muslim history. We are so glad our ancestors changed their religion. They made our language food culture etc... and i was referring to your oral language hindi which is more commonly spoken especially in bollywood cricket armed forces etc.
The british indeed drew the map but they also created you. They unified regions under one india. India was never one entity but bunch of many different kingdoms or what ever u want to call it or they were majoritally controlled by muslim empires. Without british and muslim empire there would be NO India what it is today.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom