Ancient Pakistan the Defense Wall of India

[Juggernaut_Flat_Plane_V8]

Maurya was seen in Indus in Alexander invasion time. His origin being gangu is questionable. But in any case he must have been offshoot of indo-aryan who back then were early settlers in ganges from Indus. The idea that he was some adivasi from ganges picked up by racist Chanakya is illogical. And all his early army with who he conquered was made of with men from Indus.

Rajputs origin lies beyond Rajasthan, firmly in Indus.

According to the Buddhist tradition, the ancestors of the Maurya kings had settled in a region where peacocks (mora in Pali) were abundant. Therefore, they came to be known as "Moriyas", literally, "belonging to the place of peacocks". According to another Buddhist account, these ancestors built a city called Moriya-nagara ("Moriya-city"), which was so called, because it was built with the "bricks coloured like peacocks' necks".[41]

The dynasty's connection to the peacocks, as mentioned in the Buddhist and Jain traditions, seems to be corroborated by archaeological evidence. For example, peacock figures are found on the Ashoka pillar at Nandangarh and several sculptures on the Great Stupa of Sanchi. Based on this evidence, modern scholars theorize that the peacock may have been the dynasty's emblem.[42]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

and there is no basis for your Rajput claims..stay in your lane..claim what is Pakstan and not what is rest of subcontinent.....we are descendants of Rakhigarhi and Lothal

 

[hydrabadi_arab]

According to the Buddhist tradition, the ancestors of the Maurya kings had settled in a region where peacocks (mora in Pali) were abundant. Therefore, they came to be known as "Moriyas", literally, "belonging to the place of peacocks". According to another Buddhist account, these ancestors built a city called Moriya-nagara ("Moriya-city"), which was so called, because it was built with the "bricks coloured like peacocks' necks".[41]

The dynasty's connection to the peacocks, as mentioned in the Buddhist and Jain traditions, seems to be corroborated by archaeological evidence. For example, peacock figures are found on the Ashoka pillar at Nandangarh and several sculptures on the Great Stupa of Sanchi. Based on this evidence, modern scholars theorize that the peacock may have been the dynasty's emblem.[42]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

and there is no basis for your Rajput claims..stay in your lane..claim what is Pakstan and not what is rest of subcontinent.....we are descendants of Rakhigarhi and Lothal

I'm saying that he was not low caste dalit adivasi or indigenous to ganges even if not Indus born. Unfortunately we don't have proper ancient sources as brahmins were busy writting BS for the must part. But we can get to conclusion with logic and reality of south asia.

 

[Juggernaut_Flat_Plane_V8]

I'm saying that he was not low caste dalit adivasi or indigenous to ganges even if not Indus born. Unfortunately we don't have proper ancient sources as brahmins were busy writting BS for the must part. But we can get to conclusion with logic and reality of south asia.

All people from Khyber pass onwards have mixtures of three sub-groups in varying degrees .............

Indus farmers
Steppe (Aryans/Yamnaya)
Ancient Ancestral South Indian (what you understand as Adivasi)

those percentages vary a lot

with AASI increasing as you go southern deep in the subcontinent OR as you go down the caste ladder

Steppe percentage being highest in the North as well as those hghest in the caste ladder

the rest being Indus farmer percentage (I donot the pattern of their presence)

A data visaulozer carefully made the below maps based on the latest ancient genetics study done by Reich Labs of Harvard Uni

RPubs - indus ancestry intercative

rpubs.com

RPubs - Steppe interactive

RPubs - AASI_interactive

rpubs.com

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Megasthenes

The original Indika has been lost. The one you are making referance is essentially reonstructed recently by a German using quotations from other sources. Thus this source is extremely weak. It is not even second hand but third or even fourth hand constructed from bits of quotations of weak historical value.

 

[Juggernaut_Flat_Plane_V8]

The original Indika has been lost. The one you are making referance is essentially reonstructed recently by a German using quotations from other sources. Thus this source is extremely weak. It is not even second hand but third or even fourth hand constructed from bits of quotations of weak historical value.

They are from Arrian Anabasis 160 AD...which copied these parts from Megasthenes Indica.. ....so even if we lop off 460 years or so...the modern understanding of India has been there for around 1800 years at least...that's a long time..That's longer than offcial recognition of Christianity in Roman Empire, Longer than even Islam by close to half a millenia

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Indus

On the Indian side there appears to be a sustained effort to conflate Indus Basin with Ganga/Dravidan India and this even extends to geography. The fact is Indus Valley is a clear defined geography which is visible on any physical map. Below is Indus River and you can see the irrigated green tract feeding from it. The fact is the Indus is separated by That desert for mnost of the distance that marks even the modern border. Only in the extreme north where the two Punjabs look as the Siamese Twins. But most of the 1,000 mile axis is separated by real geography. This begins with Thar Desert with the divide marked in yellow and the salt flats of the Rann of Kutch marked white. These physical divides existed long, long time before Radcliffe Line was drawn.

I often get Indian saying people live in Thar desert. People live in every form of divide across the world including Himalayas that divide India from China or Sahara Desert that separates Black Africa from Arab Africa. The fact is these are barriers although no barrier is 100% proof against human movement as even oceans can be crossed. But the fact is Thar Desert historicall has acted as a divide and a barrier.

This is a snap of the actual border region on the Thar Axis. You can see the desert clearly dividing the Indus on the west which is out of the image.

 

[Juggernaut_Flat_Plane_V8]

On the Indian side there appears to conflate Indus Basin with Ganga/Dravian India and this even extends to geography. The fact is Indus Valley is a clear defined geography which is visible on any physical map. Below is Indus River and you can see the irrigated green tract feeding from it. The fact is the Indus is separated by That desert for mnost of the distance that marks even the modern border. Only in the extreme north where the two Punjabs look as the Siamese Twins. But most of the 1,000 mile axis is separated by real geography. This begins with Thar Desert with the divide marked in yellow and the salt flats of the Rann of Kutch marked white. These physical divides existed long, long time before Radcliffe Line was drawn.

I often get Indian saying people live in Thar desert. People live in every form of divide across the world including Himalayas that divide India from China or Sahara Desert that separates Black Africa from Arab Africa. The fact is these are barriers although no barrier is 100% proof against human movement as even oceans can be crossed. But the fact is Thar Desert historicall has acted as a divide and a barrier.

View attachment 757485

View attachment 757486

This is a snap of the actual border region on the Thar Axis. You can see the desert clearly dividing the Indus on the west which is out of the image.

Sir This is my final addition to this debate on this new thread since its an important topic (I would say the most important on PDF), it warranted its own thread

Evolution of the meaning of India throughout history. The Final Debate

Let's see it in a way people would understand Babylonian World Map ca. 600 BCE: (No Mention of Indus or hte big continents only focussing on the Fertile Crescent) Map of Anaximander ca. 550 BC: (Shows Asia but not much else for our relevance) Map of Hecataeus of Miletus ca. 500 BCE...

defence.pk

@Indus Pakistan Other than that yes I would agree that Thar and the salt flats acted as formidable barrier

Most of the times in pre-Modern Age any invading army ran a campaign that involved crossing the Thar desert it resulted in defeat of the aggressor...Be it Arabs against the Pratiharas with Arabs suffering defeat...or Ghori crossing Thar and the salt flats to go to Gujarat but suffering defeat at the hand of the Solankis.....only successful campaigns that involved crossing the Thar desrt seemed to be rather raids than wars of conquest like Kalachuri raid in 860 AD of Sindh to finance war against the Pratiharas....Or Ghazni sacking of Somnath in the 1020s (he was still waylaid by the Jats in modern day coterminous Pakistan on way back)

 

[hydrabadi_arab]

All people from Khyber pass onwards have mixtures of three sub-groups in varying degrees .............

Indus farmers
Steppe (Aryans/Yamnaya)
Ancient Ancestral South Indian (what you understand as Adivasi)

those percentages vary a lot

with AASI increasing as you go southern deep in the subcontinent OR as you go down the caste ladder

Steppe percentage being highest in the North as well as those hghest in the caste ladder

the rest being Indus farmer percentage (I donot the pattern of their presence)

A data visaulozer carefully made the below maps based on the latest ancient genetics study done by Reich Labs of Harvard Uni

RPubs - indus ancestry intercative

rpubs.com

RPubs - Steppe interactive

RPubs - AASI_interactive

rpubs.com

Wth are you talking about? You are in denial about AIT. I'm talking about origin of Maurya and army Chanakaya recruited from Indus. And you are going on about stupid DNA percentages.

 

[Juggernaut_Flat_Plane_V8]

Wth are you talking about? You are in denial about AIT. I'm talking about origin of Maurya and army Chanakaya recruited from Indus. And you are going on about stupid DNA percentages.

They inducted foreign Greek and Scythian forces..Mauryan ruling class firmly Indian as they were peacock breeders...India abounds in Peacock

 

[hydrabadi_arab]

They inducted foreign Greek and Scythian forces..Mauryan ruling class firmly Indian as they were peacock breeders...India abounds in Peacock

There is no evidence of any greek or scythian DNA anywhere in south asia. They were Indus men. Chanakya didn't recruit Greeks and Scythians from Indus. This has been pattern since ancient times. Indus men is not a wall but butcher of Ganges natives. DNA of gangu rajput castes proves this.

 

[Juggernaut_Flat_Plane_V8]

There is no evidence of any greek or scythian DNA anywhere in south asia. They were Indus men. Chanakya didn't recruit Greeks and Scythians from Indus. This has been pattern since ancient times. Indus men is not a wall but butcher of Ganges natives. DNA of gangu rajput castes proves this.

lol yo speak wth zero evidence...it it strue later Indi Greek Kingdoms invaded and ruled over Indus and parts of North India...same for Scythians,...these are post Maurya events

 

[Khan_patriot]

The only thing I care about is my ancestors never let anyone through to the now India or where ever. They were the ones invading and taking back riches.

 

[hydrabadi_arab]

lol yo speak wth zero evidence...it it strue later Indi Greek Kingdoms invaded and ruled over Indus and parts of North India...same for Scythians,...these are post Maurya events

I'm talking about Chankaya recruitment of army from Indus. To many sources, just google it.

 

[Juggernaut_Flat_Plane_V8]

I'm talking about Chankaya recruitment of army from Indus. To many sources, just google it.

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

 

[M. Sarmad]

never said that it was united throughout its whole history..only parts like Maurya, Gupta, Republic of India...but that India meant the whole diamond shaped subcontinent has been firmly established in the minds of foreigners for AT LEAST 2,300 years

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