Coins of Indian iron age provides strong links to bronze age IVC

[W.11]

Do show me, along with sources.

source is mentioned in the very first post.

regards

In my opinion, by the time of the Indo-Aryan migration ICV culture, etc. was pretty much gone, with their cities dried up and migrations into the east. Otherwise they would've copied ICV art, architecture, etc. like the Aryans did in Mesopotamia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirak

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

source is mentioned in the very first post.

Now show me how the '8th' BCE century coin here, besides the square shape, is in any way, familiar to an IVC seal.

 

[W.11]

Now show me how the '8th' BCE century coin here, besides the square shape, is in any way, familiar to an IVC seal.

shows a stand/dhvaja infront of the elephant

regards

 

[Indus Pakistan]

I pushed for this section for 'Pakistan History'. Yes 'Pakistan'. Indians have never accepted the reality of 1947. One of the way it manifests is that they will use the term 'India' to suffocate the existence of Pakistan. So why on a Pakistani Defence Forum are the mods allowing this member [pretty sure he is Indian] in peddling history as 'Indian' and this on Pakistan History section??

@PakSword @Mangus Ortus Novem @waz @RescueRanger etc can you guys take action. Thank you.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Shungas never copied Indo-Greek coins. Later Indian dynasties and Central Asians will copy Indo Greek coins though.

The Shungas continued coin minting production that was the same as the Mauryas and the kingdoms before them.

No Shunga coin goes back to 850BC.

ICV culture is pretty much gone. If some things were saved, it's not significant.

In my opinion, by the time of the Indo-Aryan migration ICV culture, etc. was pretty much gone, with their cities dried up and migrations into the east. Otherwise they would've copied ICV art, architecture, etc. like the Aryans did in Mesopotamia.

Your opinion, of which you have 0 evidence to back up............

 

[PakSword]

I pushed for this section for 'Pakistan History'. Yes 'Pakistan'. Indians have never accepted the reality of 1947. One of the way it manifests is that they will use the term 'India' to suffocate the existence of Pakistan. So why on a Pakistani Defence Forum are the mods allowing this member [pretty sure he is Indian] in peddling history as 'Indian' and this on Pakistan History section??

@PakSword @Mangus Ortus Novem @waz @RescueRanger etc can you guys take action. Thank you.

I am ignoring this guy.. To be honest, I couldn't understand ever what he is trying to say. He is too proud of his Indian roots that he wants to go back in time and embrace Indian culture, which is in no way similar to Indus Valley Civilization culture..

Can't do anything other than giving him a negative rating.. Mods may take action and make a separate section for Indians to teach each other Indian history which no one of us is interested in.

 

[halupridol]

I pushed for this section for 'Pakistan History'. Yes 'Pakistan'. Indians have never accepted the reality of 1947. One of the way it manifests is that they will use the term 'India' to suffocate the existence of Pakistan. So why on a Pakistani Defence Forum are the mods allowing this member [pretty sure he is Indian] in peddling history as 'Indian' and this on Pakistan History section??

@PakSword @Mangus Ortus Novem @waz @RescueRanger etc can you guys take action. Thank you.

Man ,,,Indians have not accepted reality of 1947,,huh.
What about Pakistanis?
Have u considered thm?
Its not me or other Indians,,who starts threads like India ka matlab kya,,IVC ya islam,,we wuzz arabs,,,or invaders maibaap.
Thread started by a pakistani,,,answered by u,anothr pakistani.n Indians dont accept reality.i wud appreciate a bit of clarity in thought.
Btw,,,i dont understand why u bothr.
Its not as if all pakistanis are ready to accept thr past,,,IVC or whatever happened after tht

 

[PakSword]

Man ,,,Indians have not accepted reality of 1947,,huh.
What about Pakistanis?
Have u considered thm?
Its not me or other Indians,,who starts threads like India ka matlab kya,,IVC ya islam,,we wuzz arabs,,,or invaders maibaap.
Thread started by a pakistani,,,answered by u,anothr pakistani.n Indians dont accept reality.i wud appreciate a bit of clarity in thought.
Btw,,,i dont understand why u bothr.
Its not as if all pakistanis are ready to accept thr past,,,IVC or whatever happened after tht

What he wants to say is that these threads shouldn't be created in "Pakistan History" section. If a Pakistani is proud of his Indian history, he should create a thread in an appropriate Indian section and discuss it there.

 

[-blitzkrieg-]

He is too proud of his Indian roots

thats not the problem..he can be proud of whatever thing he wants..he could be a bihari muhajir.

the problem comes when he uses the british-raj era label for us..This is history revisionism and needs to be dealt with full force.

 

[W.11]

I am ignoring this guy.. To be honest, I couldn't understand ever what he is trying to say. He is too proud of his Indian roots that he wants to go back in time and embrace Indian culture, which is in no way similar to Indus Valley Civilization culture..

Can't do anything other than giving him a negative rating.. Mods may take action and make a separate section for Indians to teach each other Indian history which no one of us is interested in.

its not me being ''proud of indian roots'', its you being paranoid about ''india'', im simply discussing indian sub continent/south asian history here, if not ''indian'' which is commonly used word in scholarly circle, can you name me any alternative which i could use instead of ''india''

thats not the problem..he can be proud of whatever thing he wants..he could be a bihari muhajir.

the problem comes when he uses the british-raj era label for us..This is history revisionism and needs to be dealt with full force.

why dont you keep your nationalism out of this history thread?

regards

 

[-blitzkrieg-]

why dont you keep your nationalism out of this history thread?

you expect from others yet dont learn yourself..use nation neutral labels in a history topic if you want us out of your discussion.. nations and their people claim their history,.since you are a proud ethnic indian..you have not right to claim over IVC ..stay in ganga my friend..ganges and Indus were historically two different regions and two different peoples.

 

[W.11]

you expect from others yet dont learn yourself..use nation neutral labels in a history topic if you want us out of your discussion.. nations and their people claim their history,.since you are a proud ethnic indian..you have not right to claim over IVC ..stay in ganga my friend..ganges and Indus were historically two different regions and two different peoples.

and what would that be?

 

[-blitzkrieg-]

and what would that be?

look at your title..
you use the term
'Indian iron age' but for IVC you didnt use 'Pakistan's IVC'.
what does this imply?..are you trying to say IVC is indian as well?

.

 

[W.11]

look at your title..
you use the term
'Indian iron age' but for IVC you didnt use 'Pakistan's IVC'.
what does this imply?..are you trying to say IVC is indian as well?

.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Pakistan

The history of Pakistan encompasses the region of the Indus Valley[1], which spans the western expanse of the Indian subcontinent and the eastern Iranian plateau. The region served both as the fertile ground of a major civilization and as the gateway of South Asia to Central Asia and the Near East.[2][3]

while referring to india, its indian subcontinent, which is commonly used by scholars to refer to the history of the region and not present day india, there is no need of labelling pakistan's IVC and there is no space for such long title for poltical appropriation in the title box either.

If you have any issues me mentioning india why dont you raise this in the scholarly circle.

regards

 

[-blitzkrieg-]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Pakistan



while referring to india, its indian subcontinent, which is commonly used by scholars to refer to the history of the region and not present day india, there is no need of labelling pakistan's IVC and there is no space for such long title for poltical appropriation in the title box either.

If you have any issues me mentioning india why dont you raise this in the scholarly circle.

The precise definition of an "Indian subcontinent" as opposed to "South Asia" in a geopolitical context is somewhat contested.[9][11][36]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_subcontinent

Already contested..
We always say 'bare-sagheer Pak o Hind'


'indian subcontinent' was a British era colonialist approach to unify the land that miserably failed... the term was exceedingly used onwards even after 47 for geo-political reasons and objectives..

The history-revisionism will be countered on every forum.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]