Alexander the Great/ Mauryans/ Graeco-Bactrians

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

Spread their cheeks to their Conquerors like Porus and Ambhi, both Mauryans and Greeks used those as tissue papers and kicked them around when they forgot their Aukaat.

Raja Porus was a hero and brave warrior, recognized as such even by Greek historians. He stood like a rock against the greatest military of the known world and achieved equivalence with them.

Instead of trying to re write history like a retarded idiot learn to accept that you were just a doormat of big empires and do tunuk tunuk run dance.

You have some issues with Punjabis it seems. Please try to keep the racism down. We are having an academic discussion here.

 

[Republic]

The problem is that the Indian government is firing on all cylinders when it comes to appropriating IVC and cities like Taxila, Gandhara.

Bollywood and the Indian media/government are pumping out relentless propaganda to claim our history and our civilization, and at the same time trying to deny us Pakistanis any link to it.

We Pakistanis are held back by our own people who cannot formulate a cohesive historical narrative, and it really shows in our an ability to project our softpower.

Alhamdulilah, the PTI government has begun the great task of opening up more sites and providing more resources to foreign/domestic tourists to improve Pakistan’s own understanding of its history and for the world to acknowledge it.

Imran Khan is doing wonders for our global image of “Ancient Pakistan.” I am excited to be living in this time.

We finally are able to cut through the propaganda and form a cohesive historical narrative based on our history as one of the world’s breadbaskets, first civilizations.

A dynamic history which included so many different actors who set their foot on our soil and each one left their mark to give us our rich culture.

Pakistan and neighboring states like Indian Punjab, Rajasthan, yes.

We also share much in common with Afghanistan, perhaps more as 25% of our population has an origin there and we have been united together for most of our history.

We also share much in culture with Turkey/Turks and Iran, as well, due to Islamic empires’ links.

Why reject all our linkages for only the Indian one?

Nobody is claiming your history. It is a shared history. You have shunned your history for so many years and started your pages of history books from Muhammad bin Kasim. Your after independence history books are filled with literature which vehemently dissociate you people from your roots and associates with Arabs. Every Pakistani house hold keep a self written SIZRA (family history) which proudly associates it with some ancient Arab family. Then how can you claim your history before Bin Kasim ???

You can't set your foot on two boats. Either proudly claim that you are the Sion of IVC or shout in arrogance that you people ruled us for 1000 years. You can't claim both. First you decide what you are (doesn't matter true or false) then write your all literature putting forth that particular narrative.

Regards.

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

Were the above-mentioned people/group of people the forefathers of Pakistanis only? or were they also the forefathers of an equal (if not more) number of Indians (the citizens of the present-day Republic of India)?

I draw a rightful distinction between the historical Indus region and modern-day India. This includes historical and genetic factors which is supported by solid evidence.

Lol as if your ragtag Punjabi "Kingdoms" had any chance to fight against Mauryans, they did what Punjabis are doing since eternity.

Spread their cheeks to their Conquerors like Porus and Ambhi, both Mauryans and Greeks used those as tissue papers and kicked them around when they forgot their Aukaat.

We all know what Ashoka did to people in Punjab when they revolted beforehe became Buddhist.

Helenas marriagewas pre arranged lol.

Instead of trying to re write history like a retarded idiot learn to accept that you were just a doormat of big empires and do tunuk tunuk run dance.

What a childish and distasteful comment.

The Indus Region was weakened first by the Achaemenid conquest and the power vacuum that resulted from their collapse which led to warring city-states. Alexander had to exterminate many tribes, who until then had history dating back hundreds of years as the men fought till death and the women committed mass-suicide.

Porus's tiny Kingdom, which had an army most likely made up of farmer conscripts went up against the most powerful and largest Empire of that time; that certainly deserves respect.

The Indus Region was militarily devastated and had no fight left by the time the Mauryans invaded. Mauryan loose occupation that was marred with revolts lasted less than a century before they were booted out.

The next Indian-origin Empire to directly invade the Indus were the Marathas and we all know how that played out. Their occupation lasted less than a year as the blood of hundreds of thousands of Marathas flowed through our rivers. Descendants of Maratha slaves can still be found in the various corners of Pakistan.

Nobody is claiming your history. It is a shared history. You have shunned your history for so many years and started your pages of history books from Muhammad bin Kasim. Your after independence history books are filled with literature which vehemently dissociate you people from your roots and associates with Arabs. Every Pakistani house hold keep a self written SIZRA (family history) which proudly associates it with some ancient Arab family. Then how can you claim your history before Bin Kasim ???

You can't set your foot on two boats. Either proudly claim that you are the Sion of IVC or shout in arrogance that you people ruled us for 1000 years. You can't claim both. First you decide what you are (doesn't matter true or false) then write your all literature putting forth that particular narrative.

Regards.

We are not setting our foots on two boats, we have our own boat which respectfully contains Islamic and Pre-Islamic history that we have no obligation to choose precedence over one.

There is no binary option as you are trying to conjure, both of these two periods are important to the history and culture of Pakistan.

You should worry about your own.

Nobody is claiming your history. It is a shared history.

What shared history?

I don't see Sudanese trying to claim the Egyptian Civilization because some of it encompassed parts of modern-day Sudan.

Where is the proof of your outlandish claims, and how come Alexander was able to advance deeper into India after the Battle of Hydaspes? You are a senior member of this forum and should be sensible enough to know when to stop and to admit when you are wrong.

He did not advance deeper in to "India" after Hydaspes. He planned to return to Mesopotamia by following the Indus River south and then advancing along the coast Westwards.

You have caught me by surprise, but that is the balanced view. Among the migrants, I suppose you are counting the Scythians and the Parthians, and the Kushana who followed. It is difficult to add to or to subtract from your summation.

All of the peoples that you mentioned definitely contributed, but my post was mainly in reference to the steppe-pastoralists that introduced BMAC culture to the Indus Valley which merged with Harrapan culture, beliefs and traditions to form early Vedism.

Instead of trying to re write history like a retarded idiot learn to accept that you were just a doormat of big empires and do tunuk tunuk run dance.

You clear have some sort of a grudge against Punjabis, are you mad that despite them making up around 3% of your population they dominate your cultural/entertainment industries and your military?

 

[Republic]

="Talwar e Pakistan, post:
We are not setting our foots on two boats, we have our own boat which respectfully contains Islamic and Pre-Islamic history that we have no obligation to choose precedence over one.

There is no binary option as you are trying to conjure, both of these two periods are important to the history and culture of Pakistan.

You should worry about your own.


What shared history?

I don't see Sudanese trying to claim the Egyptian Civilization because some of it encompassed parts of modern-day Sudan.

Have you ever seen British claiming IVC because they ruled India for 150 years ??
Did you hear claiming it by Arabs ??
If you claim that you are descendants of Arab, then you were not there in IVC, and if you claim that you people converted out of love for Sufism (Although Sufism is not Islam, it predates Islam) then you can not claim to rule India for 1000 years. It's as simple as 2+2 = 4. No rocket science.

Your whining and crying will not serve any purpose. The Indus civilization was spread for beyond Pakistan. It was not like Egyptian civilizational extension to Sudan. There is more kilometre square area of Indus civilization out side of Pakistan than inside it.

That's why I call it a shared history.

Regards.

 

[Joe Shearer]

@Talwar e Pakistan

Sir, I had the misfortune of inadvertently reading some other comments.

Please do me a favour; please DO NOT combine an answer to me or to something that I might have written with other answers.

I do not entirely agree with your post, but do not entirely disagree either. Let me post my response separately.

Regards,
'Joe'

 

[LeGenD]

Hi,

Alexander was extremely ruthless and brutal to all his conquests that he made---.

In old warfare as in modern warfare---not all the army was concentrated in one place---. Smaller armies were sent out to search and conquer in the name of the King---.

https://historum.com/threads/alexanders-chest-wound.130984/

https://thesecondachilles.com/2013/11/01/alexanders-injuries-part-2/

Alexander have his episodes of brutality but he wasn't a barbarian. He was creating a new Empire in the wake of his conquest spree and he needed governors (satraps) to manage its affairs in distant lands and established borders, and he understood the importance of cultivating ties with foreign nobilities. For instance, Alexander did not mistreat family members (women) of Darius III, rather married his daughter to cement his ties with Persian nobility. Persians were a great source for supply of manpower, funds and equipment to facilitate his conquest spree further.

Alexander appointed numerous Persian satraps to manage his Empire across the Middle East, Afghanistan and Pakistan; most notable being Oxydates and Atrophates, and the latter was really powerful. Scholarly study in this regard: https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/ja..._JAH&etcc_med=STC_CC_ATTR_VALUE_SOCIAL&print=

Therefore, it is not a big deal that Alexander considered Porus for governorship (satrap) after defeating him due to his regional popularity, courage and character. Unfortunately, one of the finest Alexander's general Eudemus executed Porus at a later stage, and he himself fell victim to Antigonus afterwards. These (internal) trajedies paved way for Mauryans to advance into the region in the aftermath.

As I have reiterated earlier, people should study history properly and not try to propagate falsehood.

 

[Joe Shearer]

And fuckin-

• Pashto, Punjabi [asides the Indian Punjab], Sindhi, Baloch are intelligible with 99% of India?
• The Dravidian language of India is more distant then English and German [both are Anglo-Saxon share]
• Irish can't understand English. Dutch can't understand german. Poles can't understand Slovakian etc?

And I ask again are you Indian or of Indian extraction?

I know you have a hard on for India but Pakistani's are also related to Iranians, Afghans etc.

• First, Gujaratis, Rajasthanis, Haryanvis, and people from Himachal, Uttarakhand, the UP, Bihar and Madhya Pradesh can understand Punjabi spoken by a city-dwelling Punjabi with a slight effort. I say this from personal experience, having worked there twice for several years at a time, and I'm not even from one of these named areas.
• Except for Irishmen and women from remote rural areas, most of the Irish can understand English.
• The Dutch comfortably take to German; we're talking simple conversational exchanges.
• The Poles can certainly understand Slovak, also quite a bit of Russian. I daresay they can make a stab at getting other Slav languages as well, for instance, Ukranian, Byelorussian, and perhaps some of the south Slav languages as well. I don't know about Bulgarian; that may be off the radar for the Poles.

It boils down to the differences between Pakistanis and their neighbours, and the differences among Pakistanis. It does seem that the differences between them and their neighbours, whether to the east or the west, are similar; considering the diversity of their own population, the differences among them are also significant.

Is this similar to diversity in India? Yes, as far as the Indo-European languages are concerned. No, when it comes to the eastern languages and to the southern languages, Bengali, Odiya and Assamese, and the languages of the tribes of Assam, or the Dravidian languages, Telugu, Kannada, Tulu, Tamizh and Malayalam (I've left out one or two arcane tongues).

Thank you.

I do not let the choice of terminologies get in the way of my judgement because this is not wise; your sensitivity in this regard is duly noted but this will hamper your judgement process in the long term. Forces coming from the West recognized inhabitants of now modern era Pakistan as "people of the Indus," and the word India is derived from this perception in ancient and modern writings. Just concentrate on the contents, and not on terminologies. You are free to apply (and utilize) the title Pakistan in your personal writings wherever you deem fit but the course of events should be correctly highlighted.

B/W this is an important discovery: https://archaeologynewsnetwork.blogspot.com/2016/08/pakistan-unearths-city-defeated-by.html (Archaeological evidence of the Siege of Aornos in Swat finally)

Alexander fought many battles in Pakistan, and but his fight with Porus is relatively well-known.

WRT your last sentence only (I am heartily in agreement with the rest): Hydaspes was one of Alexander's four set-piece battles, besides Granicus, Issus and Gaugamela. That is why it is remembered.

Have you ever seen British claiming IVC because they ruled India for 150 years ??
Did you hear claiming it by Arabs ??
If you claim that you are descendants of Arab, then you were not there in IVC, and if you claim that you people converted out of love for Sufism (Although Sufism is not Islam, it predates Islam) then you can not claim to rule India for 1000 years. It's as simple as 2+2 = 4. No rocket science.

Your whining and crying will not serve any purpose. The Indus civilization was spread for beyond Pakistan. It was not like Egyptian civilizational extension to Sudan. There is more kilometre square area of Indus civilization out side of Pakistan than inside it.

That's why I call it a shared history.

Regards.

Not very well known. Some of the settlements elsewhere are on the same scale as the two exemplary ones, Mohenjodaro and Harappa, but since these two were excavated first, there is a tendency to consider them without taking any of the others into account.

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

Did you hear claiming it by Arabs ??
If you claim that you are descendants of Arab, then you were not there in IVC, and if you claim that you people converted out of love for Sufism (Although Sufism is not Islam, it predates Islam) then you can not claim to rule India for 1000 years. It's as simple as 2+2 = 4. No rocket science.

Where did I claim to have Arab ancestry nor did I ever claim that we ruled India for 1000 years, when Pakistanis say that, they say it as Muslims.

We also did not convert out of "love for Sufism" or whatever you meant by that. Majority of our ancestors converted through missionaries, many of whom are associated with Sufis. Most villages for example have a shrine dedicated to the "saint" or missionary that was responsible for converting the tribe/clan/village.

If you think that Sufism is not Islam, then you are very wrong and it showcases the extent of your knowledge in this regard.

Again, I am kindly asking you to worry about your own issues instead of trying to lecture us.

Your whining and crying will not serve any purpose.

No one is whining or crying, the only thing close to that is your little rant.

The Indus civilization was spread for beyond Pakistan. It was not like Egyptian civilizational extension to Sudan.

It can easily be mirrored to the Nile Civilization's extension into Sudan and other regions. The Indus Valley Civilization was centered in the Indus Region (modern-day Pakistan), It encompassed around 80-90% or more of Modern-day Pakistan.

Even Afghanistan had more territory under IVC influence, proportion wise than India did; yet I do not see Afghanis trying to claim the Indus Valley Civilization.

Of-course IVC had influence over meager parts of territory that encompass modern-day India, though they make up only a minuscule 5% (sometimes more or less throughout history) of modern-day India. I have no probably with Western Rajasthanis/Gujaratis or Indian Punjabis claiming IVC, but I do get irked by some Pajheet Kumar living a 1,000 miles away from the Indus in Patna or Calcutta claiming that his ancestors were from the Indus Valley Civilization.

There is more kilometre square area of Indus civilization out side of Pakistan than inside it.

That is a blatant lie.

 

[Republic]

Where did I claim to have Arab ancestry nor did I ever claim that we ruled India for 1000 years, when Pakistanis say that, they say it as Muslims.

We also did not convert out of "love for Sufism" or whatever you meant by that. Majority of our ancestors converted through missionaries, many of whom are associated with Sufis. Most villages for example have a shrine dedicated to the "saint" or missionary that was responsible for converting the tribe/clan/village.

If you think that Sufism is not Islam, then you are very wrong and it showcases the extent of your knowledge in this regard.

Again, I am kindly asking you to worry about your own issues instead of trying to lecture us.

Regarding the bold parts, thanks a lot for doing me this great favour. I am saving your post as link and screen shot both; to reply those Arabian Pakistanis. And it's people, not religion who always rule over others, religion is a non-living thing, an idea, it can not rule or be ruled.

Regarding the italicized part, you people are wrong in interpretation. It means only that your ancestors of that particular village loved and respected that peer/aulia. It doesn't necessarily implies that he might have converted them. Infact most of them never tried to convert any body. That's why their followers increased many fold. In India also we have Dargah and shrine where both Hindu and Muslims visit.
To be precise, my own family peer is some unknown Saiyad Baba, every child of our family has to be shaved first time on his Dargah, and my family is a strict vegetarian Hindu family.

Regarding underlined part,
If @Zarvan declare this statement as fact here on this thread, I will accept it as a fact once for all. And do you accept the fact that Sufism predates Islam or not ??

Lastly, I have every right to resist if you try to claim any shared thing as your own. It's my right full business.

Where did I claim to have Arab ancestry nor did I ever claim that we ruled India for 1000 years, when Pakistanis say that, they say it as Muslims.

We also did not convert out of "love for Sufism" or whatever you meant by that. Majority of our ancestors converted through missionaries, many of whom are associated with Sufis. Most villages for example have a shrine dedicated to the "saint" or missionary that was responsible for converting the tribe/clan/village.

If you think that Sufism is not Islam, then you are very wrong and it showcases the extent of your knowledge in this regard.

Again, I am kindly asking you to worry about your own issues instead of trying to lecture us.


No one is whining or crying, the only thing close to that is your little rant.


It can easily be mirrored to the Nile Civilization's extension into Sudan and other regions. The Indus Valley Civilization was centered in the Indus Region (modern-day Pakistan), It encompassed around 80-90% or more of Modern-day Pakistan.

Even Afghanistan had more territory under IVC influence, proportion wise than India did; yet I do not see Afghanis trying to claim the Indus Valley Civilization.

Of-course IVC had influence over meager parts of territory that encompass modern-day India, though they make up only a minuscule 5% (sometimes more or less throughout history) of modern-day India. I have no probably with Western Rajasthanis/Gujaratis or Indian Punjabis claiming IVC, but I do get irked by some Pajheet Kumar living a 1,000 miles away from the Indus in Patna or Calcutta claiming that his ancestors were from the Indus Valley Civilization.



That is a blatant lie.

Five percent area ? See for yourself and calculate the area. Now let others decide who is lying blatantly.

 

[Zarvan]

Where did I claim to have Arab ancestry nor did I ever claim that we ruled India for 1000 years, when Pakistanis say that, they say it as Muslims.

We also did not convert out of "love for Sufism" or whatever you meant by that. Majority of our ancestors converted through missionaries, many of whom are associated with Sufis. Most villages for example have a shrine dedicated to the "saint" or missionary that was responsible for converting the tribe/clan/village.

If you think that Sufism is not Islam, then you are very wrong and it showcases the extent of your knowledge in this regard.

Again, I am kindly asking you to worry about your own issues instead of trying to lecture us.


No one is whining or crying, the only thing close to that is your little rant.


It can easily be mirrored to the Nile Civilization's extension into Sudan and other regions. The Indus Valley Civilization was centered in the Indus Region (modern-day Pakistan), It encompassed around 80-90% or more of Modern-day Pakistan.

Even Afghanistan had more territory under IVC influence, proportion wise than India did; yet I do not see Afghanis trying to claim the Indus Valley Civilization.

Of-course IVC had influence over meager parts of territory that encompass modern-day India, though they make up only a minuscule 5% (sometimes more or less throughout history) of modern-day India. I have no probably with Western Rajasthanis/Gujaratis or Indian Punjabis claiming IVC, but I do get irked by some Pajheet Kumar living a 1,000 miles away from the Indus in Patna or Calcutta claiming that his ancestors were from the Indus Valley Civilization.



That is a blatant lie.

I was born in family which believes in Sufis and sorry to many things to sufis are in direct contradiction to teachings of ALLAH and his RASOOL SAW

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

I was born in family which believes in Sufis and sorry to many things to sufis are in direct contradiction to teachings of ALLAH and his RASOOL SAW

There is no clear definition of Sufi Islam, many Sufis do things that contradict teachings of Allah and Prophet Muhammad (SAW) but that can be said for all other sects and sub-sects as well.

The "Sufism" you see in rural Pakistan is not real Sufism.

Five percent area ? See for yourself and calculate the area. Now let others decide who is lying blatantly.

Cherry-picking maps will not help your silly claim.

 

[Republic]

There is no clear definition of Sufi Islam, many Sufis do things that contradict teachings of Allah and Prophet Muhammad (SAW) but that can be said for all other sects and sub-sects as well.

The "Sufism" you see in rural Pakistan is not real Sufism.

The most objectionable thing is they don't consider Prophet Mohammed Saw last prophet.
And they were precticing their beliefs before Prophet Muhammad saw.
Besides many more things.
They call their God Allah because it was called Allah in Arebia before Prophet Muhammad saw, and not because Prophet Muhammad saw called the God Allah.
Please correct me @Zarvan Maulana Sahab if I am wrong.
Although our ideology is pole apart, I always consider your version authentic when it comes to Islam.

Regards,

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

The most objectionable thing is they don't consider Prophet Mohammed Saw last prophet.
And they were precticing their beliefs before Prophet Muhammad saw.
Besides many more things.
They call their God Allah because it was called Allah in Arebia before Prophet Muhammad saw, and not because Prophet Muhammad saw called the God Allah.
Please correct me @Zarvan Maulana Sahab if I am wrong.
Although our ideology is pole apart, I always consider your version authentic when it comes to Islam.

Regards,

Everything you said is completely wrong.

 

[Republic]

Cherry-picking maps will not help your silly claim.

Prey tell me which site shown in the map is wrong ???
As I said, let others decide whose claim is silly.

Regards.

Everything you said is completely wrong.

Let @Zarvan tell me this, I Will accept as gospel truth.
Although I can give proof about Sufism older than Islam.

 

[khanmubashir]

Mauryans were real deal, i am personally a fanboy of Chandragupta the great and Chanakya who were badass in their timeline, not only they took ragtag nomads and tribals of North and West India and built an Army of their own but also defeated India's largest Empire at that time but also forged a new dynasty that united all of Bharatvarsh under their rule.

later when one of the best general of Alexander who ruled Persia, Turkey, Levent, Central Asia and Afghanistan attacked their Empire to fulfill the goal of India under greek rule, not only they kicked Selucid back to Iran but also took Afghanistan and astern Iran as a price and his own daughter Helena as a trophy wife to add insult to injury.

this same helena gave birth to the 2nd Mauryan Emperor "Bindusara" who conquered Rajasthan, Gujarat and Most of Deccan for Mauryan Empire.

they were mightiest Emperors of India,from original Kshatriya Bloodline.

Mauryan empire under Chandragupta,

Empire under his son Bindusara

the emblem of Mauryan Empire (lion) and Dynasty(Moreya/peacock)

@padamchen @Nilgiri @ranjeet

And this mighty empire barley lasted 150 years and even shorter in lands of present day Pakistan
and thus the subcontinent remained divided until entry of central Asian again from the west
As for Punjabi or perhaps yr myopic racist description of Indus people
And even ancestry of chunder is of Indus not Ganges
maryan and after 2500 years marhata for some time were fluke of history otherwise its always the Punjabi Sindhi Pashto's all indus people that dominated u
even today north Indian which dominates rest of u r basically product of Indus yr Sikh the tip of yr spear r Punjabi Sonny