What's new

Ancient History not Appreciated by Pakistanis?

Status
Not open for further replies.
its fromi wiki, so it must be true, right?

How can the Harappan Empire/civilisation be sanskritic, when sanskrit was not even their language, and the earliest evidence of sanskrit is a millenia after the abandonment of the Harappan settlements.

The article you have quoted actually discredits teh theories, if you read it till the end.

The second theory is itself cast into doubt with the last words "However, the proto-Dravidian origin theory is far from being confirmed due to an emphasis on linguistic connection while evidence of a broader cultural connection remains to be found."

No matter how hard Bharatiyas try, the shoe just won't fit. Flintoff and vinod, and others have tried, to become the Cinderella upon whose foot the glass shoe of the Harappan civilisation might fit.

You can have a go too.

I'm no historian but more of a history enthusiast.
And i would agree with the summation that current population of of pakistan & even north indian population have nothing to do with the IVC expect they inhabit those places now.

And also if one go by the most solid aryan invasion theory it also give credence to the assumption that its the dravidian ppl who truely built the ancient IVC.
Then later on, its the aryan the ancestors of most pakistani, north indian & Brahmins found all over india,who invaded dravidian ppl of IVC and pushed them in to the interior(south) india.

Now why i say this because there is no ancient historical site which indicates that vast dravidian civilization lived in south india during the IVC time.We also know that dravidian ppl are native indian tribes.Now if they were not living in south india at that point of time where those huge no of dravidian ppl inhabit expect IVC which was big & old enough to give crediance to the theory that its was actually dravidian IVC.

Sankrit & vedic/ traditions are contribution of aryan ppl who came from outside indian subcontinent.

There are millions of Adibasis of india who live jungles found around and south of vindhya mountain range are part of ancient dravidian tribes who still practice animistic pagan way worshiping which harldy bears any resemblace with hindu dharma.

so forgive my audacity to say IVC which pakistan has, actually isnt anyway pakistani ,but surely vedic way of life what they gave up was their for thousands of yrs.
 
History is always written by the winner. Biased. But we need to dig and LEARN from our mistakes more than take pride in the accomplishments of the past.
 
That is totally wrong Khajur. South Indians were not "pushed downwards" by the invading aryans.
South Indians have inhabited south India for as long as humans have lived in the indian subcontinent.

I'm no historian but more of a history enthusiast.
And i would agree with the summation that current population of of pakistan & even north indian population have nothing to do with the IVC expect they inhabit those places now.

And also if one go by the most solid aryan invasion theory it also give credence to the assumption that its the dravidian ppl who truely built the ancient IVC.
Then later on, its the aryan the ancestors of most pakistani, north indian & Brahmins found all over india,who invaded dravidian ppl of IVC and pushed them in to the interior(south) india.

Now why i say this because there is no ancient historical site which indicates that vast dravidian civilization lived in south india during the IVC time.We also know that dravidian ppl are native indian tribes.Now if they were not living in south india at that point of time where those huge no of dravidian ppl inhabit expect IVC which was big & old enough to give crediance to the theory that its was actually dravidian IVC.

Sankrit & vedic/ traditions are contribution of aryan ppl who came from outside indian subcontinent.

There are millions of Adibasis of india who live jungles found around and south of vindhya mountain range are part of ancient dravidian tribes who still practice animistic pagan way worshiping which harldy bears any resemblace with hindu dharma.

so forgive my audacity to say IVC which pakistan has, actually isnt anyway pakistani ,but surely vedic way of life what they gave up was their for thousands of yrs.
 
Neither are they Indian or Afghani, but instead have antescendants from the land mass known today as Pakistan.


You will say that Indian Punjab is India, and therefore we (India) can claim all of Pakistan's history.
The boundaries present today are artificially created, much later. You know that. There was no landmass of Pakistan at whose borders the cultural spread stopped abruptly.

In that case why don't the Spaniards leech everything French and Portuguese, since there were minor overlaps into Spanish territory by these countries throughout.
Exactly!! think in terms of people. IVC people must be now in present India. Whether they are also in Pakistan is a matter of theory and acceptance. Nobody is stopping Iranians from regarding themselves as Aryans.


Why is it only India that leeches off Pakistan in this way? Cursed, surely.
Because India certainly has a share of the heritage. Once again for the owning question look at my previous posts.


You seem to be more concerned about the fact that India attached itself to IVC than Pakistan distancing(the topic) itself from it.
 
That is totally wrong Khajur. South Indians were not "pushed downwards" by the invading aryans.
South Indians have inhabited south India for as long as humans have lived in the indian subcontinent.
That is a matter of theory.
 
Why does the British have so much power on Indian people's identity?
:rofl::rofl: stupid question.
India would not have kept a name like Brit-i-stan, even if the British imposed it.

The reason is that the name 'India' is a sum up of all that is India and comes with a pride.
 
Some Pakistanis will be vehement in stating that Pakistanis are Indian (and some are, like the Muhajirs), some Pakistanis will be vehement in stating they're Afghani (like the refugees who are), so it stands to reason some will be Arab.

Tell me one thing. What is the historical difference between Pushtun tribals on both sides of the Durand line? They may belong to two different modern countries but are they historically different? Can one set of those tribals have heritage to IVC or any civilization for that matter just because of the way the borders of modern Pakistan happened to get formed!

Can you say they have different histories and civilizations!

However it's a scientific fact that most Pakistanis are not Arab

Neither are they Indian or Afghani, but instead have antescendants from the land mass known today as Pakistan.

As for Punjab and Sindh, they would have more of a shared ancestry with Indian Punjab and Gujerat.

You will say that Indian Punjab is India, and therefore we (India) can claim all of Pakistan's history.

In that case why don't the Spaniards leech everything French and Portuguese, since there were minor overlaps into Spanish territory by these countries throughout.

Why is it only India that leeches off Pakistan in this way? Cursed, surely.

Too incoherent! Starts with a wrong premise and ends on another.

No one is "leeching" anything here. Let's come out of the denial that forces one to make absurd claims like Vedism being distinct from Hinduism when Vedas are still the fount of our religion. Its beyond pathetic and a clear sign of the same denial that we saw on the other thread.
 
Thirty six pages ago some wrote that since Indus is in Pakistani therefore Indians cannot claim it there's, And a large discussion broke out specially from Hindu who insisted Blah blah blah..........

Never did any Indian said that in fairness if we claim Indians than you as Muslim Pakistanis can and should claim Taj Mahal and red fort and all grand trunk roads built by Sher shah suri, but not they just lectured Pakistani on their claim and it must be accepted and that is that.

Again i see selfish designs of our adversaries and not a willingness to be concerned and fair. Just bully tactics to claim something that does not belong to them anymore.

So can we stop this now and talk about something that concerns Pakistan, and that India bringing a thid party like Israel in the picture, are guys so desperate that even though you call yourself shining Indian, largest Democracy and yet you have to bring in a country of 5000,000 to help you militarily. that tells what you guys think of you Army. And that your cannot face Brave Pak. Army alone. Need help from a small country like Israel.

It is like an elephant asking a mouse to help him in carrying his load. funnnnnnny.
 
Last edited:
Tell me one thing. What is the historical difference between Pushtun tribals on both sides of the Durand line? They may belong to two different modern countries but are they historically different? Can one set of those tribals have heritage to IVC or any civilization for that matter just because of the way the borders of modern Pakistan happened to get formed!

Can you say they have different histories and civilizations!

How difficult is this to understand?

When someone says "Pakistani history", this includes the history of the Pakistani Pashtuns, not the Afghani Pashtuns.

Pakistani Afghans and Afghan Pashtuns are the same people. When one talks about "Pashtun history", then that includes the Pakistani and Afghani Pashtuns' history.

Got it?

Too incoherent! Starts with a wrong premise and ends on another.

No one is "leeching" anything here. Let's come out of the denial that forces one to make absurd claims like Vedism being distinct from Hinduism when Vedas are still the fount of our religion. Its beyond pathetic and a clear sign of the same denial that we saw on the other thread.

Vedism is a recognized religion and it's recognized as distinct from Hindusim.

I've given examples already of some distinguishing features of it. It's only Hindus that lump the two religions together. I don't lump them because Hinduism is not a part of Pakistani history.
 
To summarise:

Vinod is stuck on arguing how Pakistanis claim to be Arabs.
Even if some Pakistanis do claim such things, it wouldn't become any more true.
Even if it were to be true, the heritage doesn't transfer over to Indians.

Flintlock and Co are jumping in between migrations and shared history theories. In one sentence they will argue Pakistanis and Indians are all the same therefore have common history, and in the other they will argue that Pakistanis are too diverse to have a common history.

I am just realising that you have no intentions of acknowledging real facts, but only interested in inventing your own far fetched theories to include yourselves in Pakistani identity. Prove me wrong.
You are not arguing against anything by criticising Pakistani politics or modern borders. Focus on the people that inhabit the region for a change.

The facts that nobody has been able to counter:

- The Indus region (ancient Pakistan) has continuously been inhabited for 9000+ years, a region which experienced common invasions like any other region on this planet.
- No evidence of any major natural disasters causing mass migrations; Or a massive invading army driving out an entire population.
- Pakistanis are the natives of the Indus valley, and have been for as far back as records go.
 
Last edited:
How difficult is this to understand?

When someone says "Pakistani history", this includes the history of the Pakistani Pashtuns, not the Afghani Pashtuns.

Pakistani Afghans and Afghan Pashtuns are the same people. When one talks about "Pashtun history", then that includes the Pakistani and Afghani Pashtuns' history.

Got it?

And that history is different from the Afghan Pushtuns? Let's say for argument's sake that the Durand line is shifted to unite the Pushtuns again. What happens then? Overnight your identity and your civilization will change to merge with the Tajiks and Uzbeks of Afghanistan now?

All I am saying is that the ancient history substantially shared. No one is trying to take it away from you!

ANyway let's leave it at this. No point in going on in circles. Either come up with something new or just leave it.

Vedism is a recognized religion and it's recognized as distinct from Hindusim.

I've given examples already of some distinguishing features of it. It's only Hindus that lump the two religions together. I don't lump them because Hinduism is not a part of Pakistani history.

And who says so except Mr. Roadrunner!

What you have given is nothing but a figment of your thinking of convenience. Doesn't convince anyone.
 
To summarise:

Vinod is stuck on arguing how Pakistanis claim to be Arabs.
Even if some Pakistanis do claim such things, it wouldn't become any more true.
Even if it were to be true, the heritage doesn't transfer over to Indians.

I have made my point. I am not stuck. Let's move on now.
 
Why is it only India that leeches off Pakistan in this way? Cursed, surely.

Gosh, then I wonder what you make of it when Pakistani missiles are named after Tipu Sultan (reflecting government thinking), when Tipu Sultan here wasn't remotely associated with what is today Pakistan. Even his ancestry can be traced back to South India, unlike a lot of other muslim rulers who were of Iranian/Turkish lineage.
 
Gosh, then I wonder what you make of it when Pakistani missiles are named after Tipu Sultan (reflecting government thinking), when Tipu Sultan here wasn't remotely associated with what is today Pakistan. Even his ancestry can be traced back to South India, unlike a lot of other muslim rulers who were of Iranian/Turkish lineage.
there's more to Tipu Sultan, than Islam. long-ranged missile...kind of symbolic, isn't it?

 
Gosh, then I wonder what you make of it when Pakistani missiles are named after Tipu Sultan (reflecting government thinking), when Tipu Sultan here wasn't remotely associated with what is today Pakistan. Even his ancestry can be traced back to South India, unlike a lot of other muslim rulers who were of Iranian/Turkish lineage.

I dont remember ever claiming Tipu to be of Pakistani heritage. And I do understand the concept of him being of Indian heritage, and not related to Pakistani people.

But would you say that Pakistanis can claim him to be Pakistani because of the 1947 immigration of some Indian Muslims from that region to Pakistan?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom