Arakan under Bengal rule

[Mattrixx]

After going in some of the links I found that, Arakan became the vessel state of Bengal around the year 1399
during Illyas Shahi dynasty of Bengal Sultanate. Before that time there was a significant numbers of
Muslims in Arakan.

From wikepedia,
"The Bengal Sultanate was at its peak under Alauddin Hussain Shah, covering Bengal, and parts of Bihar and Assam, as well as a vassal state in Western Burma (Kingdom of Arakan)"

This seems legitimate and can be found some track of the history of Rohingya people in Arakan.
But because of lack of information online it becomes impossible to change someones belief in this issue.
Most of the people think Rohingyas are the recent migrants from Bangladesh or East Pakistan.

So I want help here. If anyone could provide me with more authentic sources of Bengal rule in Arakan and track of Rohingyas there.


Bengal Sultanate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rohingya people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Tigers of Bengal (A Divine Wind AAR)

@asad71, @[URL='https://defence.pk/members/kalu_miah.13093/']kalu_miah[/URL]

 

[third eye]

A Brief History of Arakan : From Kingdom to a Colony

 

[DarkPrince]

@Zahur Ahmed Chowdhury caste system was created for white skin superiority. lower caste people tend to be dark and short.

now plz dont blah blah about things you dont know

 

[Zahur Ahmed Chowdhury]

@Zahur Ahmed Chowdhury caste system was created for white skin superiority. lower caste people tend to be dark and short.

now plz dont blah blah about thing you dont know

Please read my explanation in the now closed thread (where you just commented). By the way, Muslim elite wouldn't have allowed ex-Hindus to become elite, even if they were formerly Brahmin. The Muslim elite would have been Afghans and Turks. Some regular people in the Subcontinent have Afghan and Turk blood as some of the soldiers will have taken local South Asian wives, but in most cases their blood has become watered down after generations of local admixture.

By the way, not all Brahmins are light and tall while lower castes all short and dark, though generally there is a trend. You can't always tell who is a Brahmin and who isn't. Even Hindus will testify to this.

 

[DarkPrince]

Please read my explanation in the now closed thread (where you just commented). By the way, Muslim elite wouldn't have allowed ex-Hindus to become elite, even if they were formerly Brahmin. The Muslim elite would have been Afghans and Turks. Some regular people in the Subcontinent have Afghan and Turk blood as some of the soldiers will have taken local South Asian wives, but in most cases their blood has become watered down after generations of local admixture.

By the way, not all Brahmins are light and tall while lower castes all short and dark, though generally there is a trend. You can't always tell who is a Brahmin and who isn't. Even Hindus will testify to this.

yes south indian brahmins are dark but tall. so whats you point fair tall pakistanis are lower caste and dark short bengalis

are high caste hindu converts? bro if you are dark and short then thats not a problem why are so insecure about it?

 

[notsuperstitious]

Please read my explanation in the now closed thread (where you just commented). By the way, Muslim elite wouldn't have allowed ex-Hindus to become elite, even if they were formerly Brahmin. The Muslim elite would have been Afghans and Turks. Some regular people in the Subcontinent have Afghan and Turk blood as some of the soldiers will have taken local South Asian wives, but in most cases their blood has become watered down after generations of local admixture.

By the way, not all Brahmins are light and tall while lower castes all short and dark, though generally there is a trend. You can't always tell who is a Brahmin and who isn't. Even Hindus will testify to this.

I do not know you theory, but you are right on two data points.

1) Turkish sultanates were extremely racist and kept locals out of government, even local Muslim converts were treated as second class. This changed only with the Mughals gradually.

2) Of course one can't tell caste in India by looks alone. Check out our home minister and his family, can you tell their caste? (Dalit BTW)

 

[Zahur Ahmed Chowdhury]

I am myself quite fair and of medium height (5ft 10in). Amongst Hindus, you can't always tell who is higher caste and who is lower, though higher castes generally tend to be slightly taller, fairer and I would say, better looking. Gandhi was middle to higher caste (not a Brahmin) but there are plenty of Shudras and Dalits that look better than him in my opinion. Most Brahmins have substantial South Indian (Dravidian) blood in them. In fact, genetically, they don't vary all that much from other castes in their regions.

By the way, there are good number of fairer skinned Bengalis as well. Most people in my family and some other families I've seen, there are people on the lighter side.

Anyway, as a Muslim it doesn't matter to me about caste., skin colour and all that.

 

[DarkPrince]

I am myself quite fair and of medium height (5ft 10in). Amongst Hindus, you can't always tell who is higher caste and who is lower, though higher castes generally tend to be slightly taller, fairer and better looking. Gandhi was middle to higher caste (not a Brahmin) but there are plenty of Shudras and Dalits that look better than him. Most Brahmins have substantial South Indian (Dravidian) blood in them. In fact, genetically, they don't vary all that much from other castes in their regions.

By the way, there are good number of fairer skinned Bengalis as well. Most people in my family and some other families I've seen, there are people on the lighter side.

even i am a fair skin guy. because in bengal all kind of people converted to Islam.

 

[Zahur Ahmed Chowdhury]

South Asians are a mix bag. Because of the various races that have inhabited these regions, as well as foreign invaders, no one can be sure of the exact genetic makeup of themselves. DNA tests may tell you the percentages of admixture from various ancestral groups, I am not convinced they are highly accurate. In any case, genotype of a person doesn't always correlate with phenotype.

 

[Saiful Islam]

even i am a fair skin guy. because in bengal all kind of people converted to Islam.

Forget genetics. Give a Bangladeshi the right food, the right living conditions, the west is a living proof of that. When I first moved here I was shocked to see the amount of tall Bangladeshi boys coming out during Jummah and if you had seen their fathers they were around 5 ft 4. In fact, many of the Bangladeshi boys were taller than their other Asian counterparts (Indians, Pakistanis etc). Another brother mentioned here the diversity within Bangladeshi families and he was spot on, the parents are extremely short but children come out soaring. Now you need to see the new 3rd/4th gen, blooming hell. Environmental factors play a big part here.

 

[Zahur Ahmed Chowdhury]

I agree about diet. It does play a big role. Just look at North and South Korea. They are the same race of people but the affluent South Koreans are some 5 or 6 inches taller on average than North Koreans, a country that happens to be on completely opposite end of the scale in terms of economic prosperity.

 

[The Snow Queen]

2) Of course one can't tell caste in India by looks alone. Check out our home minister and his family, can you tell their caste? (Dalit BTW)

They are Dalits? They look middle caste I think.

 

[notsuperstitious]

They are Dalits? They look middle caste I think.

As I said, in India you can't tell people's caste by looks, but yes you have a better chance of finding out their ''class'' by looks like in any other country.

 

[The Snow Queen]

As I said, in India you can't tell people's caste by looks, but yes you have a better chance of finding out their ''class'' by looks like in any other country.

And how did you know they are dalits?

 

[notsuperstitious]

And how did you know they are dalits?

He's the home minister of India. Its public knowledge.