A Brief History of The Warrior Rajputs

[Joe Shearer]

Jholachaap history.

Definitely inferior to khaki chaddi history.

 

[defence_analyst]

Summary of this thread.

Indians saying Pakistani are low caste converts.
Pakistanis saying Indians are actually low castes.

Indians= Ancient People moved from India to western side
Pakistanis= Ancients moved from Pakistan to east

Muslims can't have rajput origin.

Did i miss anything?

 

[jarves]

Summary of this thread.

Indians saying Pakistani are low caste converts.
Pakistanis saying Indians are actually low castes.

Indians= Ancient People moved from India to western side
Pakistanis= Ancients moved from Pakistan to east

Muslims can't have rajput origin.

Did i miss anything?

Pakistani Rajputs are the were the most fiercest warriors.

Indians-No they were not.Indians Rajputs were the real warriors.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Summary of this thread.

Indians saying Pakistani are low caste converts.
Pakistanis saying Indians are actually low castes.

Indians= Ancient People moved from India to western side
Pakistanis= Ancients moved from Pakistan to east

Muslims can't have rajput origin.

Did i miss anything?

That's it, more or less. One would wish there were less, but this is far from a perfect world.

 

[INDIC]

Different Hapta Hindu. It is the northern set.

Hapta Hindu is a region inside India.

Definitely inferior to khaki chaddi history.

I just said, most of Indus valley sites on the dried banks of Ghaggar-Hakra river, you too think this is wrong rightist version.

That's really quite a flimsy reconstruction.

Rakhigarhi was found to inhabited from last 6000 years, the same is mentioned as the spot.

 

[Charon 2]

Ghor is majority Aimak [ Farsi speaking ] Khorasani Turks. Always has been.

Aimaks are Persian speaking people of different origins including Turkic and Mongolic. The Kipchak tribe is obviously of Turkic origin while the Temuri and Chengizi tribes are predominantly Mongolic

I would say that Aimaks are a colorful mix between Tajiks, Mongols and Turkics.

 

[Srinivas]

Different Hapta Hindu. It is the northern set.
How does an Internet prove a theory full of crap?
He uses citations that are full of crap.
How does an Internet prove a theory full of crap?
He uses citations and twists them to prove that they fit his theory.
Crap.

I have np if you hate khakhi history out of your prejudice and embrace colonial history which is full of false assertions and fantasies of those indologists who know absolutely nothing about what they are asserting except degrading Indians and denying their history.

My assertions are based on the excavations and also assertions based on the postulates proposed in AIT theory.

If one looks into the assertion of AIT and apply the same to OIT theory, OIT theory seems to be true and strong.

There is a book called "the lost river" by Micheal Danino.

Book Review: The Lost River

Perhaps you should go through this book and the excavation evidence that is pointing to what I have written in my post. Excavation evidence I mean the new sites that are found in India believed to be on the banks of now dried up Saraswathi river.

Even if one takes into account the similarities between Indo-Aryan Languages, OIT can explain all the migrations and spread of language than AIT.


P.S : I have debated lot of points on this topic and it seems you have changed some of the views on this topic over time. Regarding the negative rating you gave, I consider it as your frustration.

 

[utraash]

I have np if you hate khakhi history out of your prejudice and embrace colonial history which is full of false assertions and fantasies of those indologists who know absolutely nothing about what they are asserting except degrading Indians and denying their history.

My assertions are based on the excavations and also assertions based on the postulates proposed in AIT theory.

If one looks into the assertion of AIT and apply the same to OIT theory, OIT theory seems to be true and strong.

There is a book called "the lost river" by Micheal Danino.

Book Review: The Lost River

Perhaps you should go through this book and the excavation evidence that is pointing to what I have written in my post. Excavation evidence I mean the new sites that are found in India believed to be on the banks of now dried up Saraswathi river.

Even if one takes into account the similarities between Indo-Aryan Languages, OIT can explain all the migrations and spread of language than AIT.


P.S : I have debated lot of points on this topic and it seems you have changed some of the views on this topic over time. Regarding the negative rating you gave, I consider it as your frustration.

there are people in the name of their so called high degree of rationality they can reject anything.... Critical thinking is good for society n intellectuals but acting like they are the last one to see things from critical POV ...same time self glorification of history must be stopped at any cost no matter it hurts our sentiment or belief ... Truth must prevail .........

 

[KingMamba]

Summary of this thread.

Indians saying Pakistani are low caste converts.
Pakistanis saying Indians are actually low castes.

Indians= Ancient People moved from India to western side
Pakistanis= Ancients moved from Pakistan to east

Muslims can't have rajput origin.

Did i miss anything?

You missed the conclusion that Indians make up history to better suit them.

I have np if you hate khakhi history out of your prejudice and embrace colonial history which is full of false assertions and fantasies of those indologists who know absolutely nothing about what they are asserting except degrading Indians and denying their history.

My assertions are based on the excavations and also assertions based on the postulates proposed in AIT theory.

If one looks into the assertion of AIT and apply the same to OIT theory, OIT theory seems to be true and strong.

There is a book called "the lost river" by Micheal Danino.

Book Review: The Lost River

Perhaps you should go through this book and the excavation evidence that is pointing to what I have written in my post. Excavation evidence I mean the new sites that are found in India believed to be on the banks of now dried up Saraswathi river.

Even if one takes into account the similarities between Indo-Aryan Languages, OIT can explain all the migrations and spread of language than AIT.


P.S : I have debated lot of points on this topic and it seems you have changed some of the views on this topic over time. Regarding the negative rating you gave, I consider it as your frustration.

Funny that you accuse him of following colonial history but then you bold the authors name because the author is a foreigner. Also going by the review you posted the conclusion cannot be OIT anyway that is as Joe put it khaki history. Also most of the major studies that have been done on the so called saraswati have concluded that if anything the inhabitants of the IVC started to move east into Bharat not outside of it. Unless you are trying to say IVC started in saraswati before moving out which is again not believed by majority of historians.

 

[INDIC]

Also most of the major studies that have been done on the so called saraswati have concluded that if anything the inhabitants of the IVC started to move east into Bharat not outside of it. Unless you are trying to say IVC started in saraswati before moving out which is again not believed by majority of historians.

They were already in Bharat when they were living in Sapta Sindhu.

 

[KingMamba]

They were already in Bharat when they were living in Sapta Sindhu.

Sapta Sindhu term came after the IVC already ended try again troll.

 

[INDIC]

Sapta Sindhu term came after the IVC already ended try again troll.

Bharat extended until Gandhara in the North-West, Lord Radcliffe wasn't there at that time.

 

[KingMamba]

NO sir i dnt know about Mohammad bin Allafi never heard about him
and you know about daughter of Hazrat Ali(as) Bibi Pak daman?
and why caliph killed Bin Qasim?

Caliph killed Bin Qasim because he was a new Caliph and he wanted to kill everyone close to the Caliph he succeeded.

Bharat extended until Gandhara in the North-West, Lord Radcliffe wasn't there at that time.

Bharat itself as a term was invented after IVC nice try.

What was that word I think you told me that is hindu concept of righteous death and martyrdom? It was something in sanskrit.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Hapta Hindu is a region inside India.

//illustration omitted//

As the name union of five rivers (Pancanada) occurs in this part of the world (the Punjab), we observe that a similar name is used also to the north of the above-mentioned mountain chains (ie, the mountain bordering on the kingdom of Kayabish), for the rivers which flow thence towards the north after having united near Tirmidh and having formed the river of Balkh, are called the union of seven rivers (cf. hapta-hindu of the ancient Iranians). The Zoroastrians of Sogdiana (Bukhara region) have confounded these two things; for they say that the whole of the seven rivers is Sindh, and its upper course is Baridish....

I just said, most of Indus valley sites on the dried banks of Ghaggar-Hakra river, you too think this is wrong rightist version.

No, I don't think that the facts, as you have stated them, are the wrong rightist version. I think that you are being dishonest in not understanding, deliberately, possibly, that this initial claim, of the bulk of the Indus valley sites lying on the banks of the Ghaggar-Hakra is only one part of the actual rightist version. We both know that the argument continues by pointing to this evidence that the bulk of the sites are on the claimed bed of the Sarasvati, and concluding that it is not the Indus Valley civilisation after all, but the right wing name for it.

We needn't go further. The attempt at rewriting history is not wrong in itself: history is always being re-written. The attempt at rewriting it that are in use by a political faction, rewriting it for political purposes, rather than due to a scholastic need, is what is wrong.

Rakhigarhi was found to inhabited from last 6000 years, the same is mentioned as the spot.

Many spots have been discovered which start at about that period and over time merge with the emerging IVC. This is specious and a shallow attempt at taking over the culture as a part of the so-called Indic civilisation.

 

[INDIC]

As the name union of five rivers (Pancanada) occurs in this part of the world (the Punjab), we observe that a similar name is used also to the north of the above-mentioned mountain chains (ie, the mountain bordering on the kingdom of Kayabish), for the rivers which flow thence towards the north after having united near Tirmidh and having formed the river of Balkh, are called the union of seven rivers (cf. hapta-hindu of the ancient Iranians). The Zoroastrians of Sogdiana (Bukhara region) have confounded these two things; for they say that the whole of the seven rivers is Sindh, and its upper course is Baridish....

I took that map from a Zoroastrian website. BTW, I have heard about the name Panchanada once used for North-West.

No, I don't think that the facts, as you have stated them, are the wrong rightist version. I think that you are being dishonest in not understanding, deliberately, possibly, that this initial claim, of the bulk of the Indus valley sites lying on the banks of the Ghaggar-Hakra is only one part of the actual rightist version. We both know that the argument continues by pointing to this evidence that the bulk of the sites are on the claimed bed of the Sarasvati, and concluding that it is not the Indus Valley civilisation after all, but the right wing name for it.

We needn't go further. The attempt at rewriting history is not wrong in itself: history is always being re-written. The attempt at rewriting it that are in use by a political faction, rewriting it for political purposes, rather than due to a scholastic need, is what is wrong.

No rightist history, its based on archaeological discoveries found that most of Indus valley sites concentrated around the banks of dried Ghaggar-Hakra river mostly in Haryana in India and South Punjab(Bahawalpur region) in Pakistan. I also read a research paper about it. The Ghaggar-Hakra being a monsoon fed river was more suitable for winter crop compared to snow fed Indus. When snow melted on the eve of summer, the water level rises in Indus while there was no such issue in case of Ghaggar-Hakra thus making Ghaggar-Hakra more suitable for agriculture.

Many spots have been discovered which start at about that period and over time merge with the emerging IVC. This is specious and a shallow attempt at taking over the culture as a part of the so-called Indic civilisation.

Till now all historians either Marxists or rightists consider Rakhigarhi and other sites in the vicinity of Ghaggar-Hakra and Yamuna as the part of Indus valley civilization and till now I have never heard of any other term. You can look for latest archaeological findings about the time period of Rakhigarhi instead of archaeological findings of 1920s. You can't simply deny it by calling it rightist.