What's new

Did Ancient Pakistanis Defeated The Mighty Alexander The Great.,

Status
Not open for further replies.
The height of arrogance, how is it your history, this hubris by indians is laughable if it wasn't sad, we live on this territory and we claim all of its fruits, how can a Tamil or someone living in UP claim Baba Bulleh Shah or Waris, as part of your civilization, it is not bharat's or its modern incarnation india, to claim as its own.

We own what is on our land, so keep your Ganges Civilization to your self, the IV and all of its cultures and civilization belong to us. :pakistan::pakistan::pakistan::sniper:

If you had studied a bit of history you will know that we South Indians have the most genuine claim on the IVC ,for the simple fact that IVC was pretty much regarded as a proto-Dravidian civilisation,which perhaps explains why Brahui language still spoken in Parts of Balochistan is considered a Dravidian language.

A little bit of History always helps. :wave:
 
The word "India", "Indika" and all references given to india containing IND terms are derived from the word INDUS which place is now in Pakistan.

Do you know what does it means? :azn:


1) Indus flows through China,Pakistan,India

2)It originates from China.

The significance of river Indus in naming India is because historically it was used to specify India's location geographically.

Thats why even the ancient Chinese called India: Yìndù - 印度

The Persian/Arabs used the term Hind,i.e people beyond the Indus river.

It means that if going realistically the Other parts of South asia apart of Indus valley,All are reffered as a PART of Indus valley with remaining Sub continent having no specific refference or Identity.

Because IVC was the most ancient Land in south asia ever known to people thats why refferences of Remaining SC are given to them by deriving them from Indus.

It Implies that The history,Tradition,culture of Indus is the real History and the reamining SB dont have its own specific culture and history.

Now the IVC is the part of PAKISTAN it means that Pakistan is real civilization of SB,The Original Race of SA and ancestors of INDIa,bhutan,Nepal,Bangladesh civilization.

Going by this Its actually Pakistan who should claim all the history,Culture and Tradition of south asia.

Based on a river's course of flow,you are claiming possession of origin of cultures?


But I know that it will hurt you and as a person i will not claim it
Because
I want you to accept my history and my claim on the history of the land in which i am living and i want you to accept the history of the land in which you are living.

More than hurting us,you"ll make a laughing stock of yourself.



And we should share the mutual history That history is mutual of both of us.For people Living in PAK the ancestors of that history and the people in InDIA the ancestors of that history.
Agree!:tup:


and remember History and Ancestor ship has nothing to do with religion.

In this case it actually does,because for many Hinduism is culture as well.
Also our nations were formed on 2 nation theory.
 
Last edited:
One more attempt to distort history,and guess from were it all emerge-Pakistan.

Yes this attempt is to distort those indian efforts in which they are taking our history,Our ancesters.

And we should take back what is ours.

Sorry if you have minded our attempts to distort your our history distortion programme.

To make u people believe urself about ur superior trait u people keep coming which such spectacular stories born out of ur incompetence and subjugation from the new world order, believing this was the same force which conquered the world at one time and will do it once again if the faith in ummah is reinforced.

Where the heck this Ummah comes?

Was there islam present in the Indus valley 5000 years back?
We were hindus at that time :smokin:

No one have claimed anything about superiority.
Actually those are western archeologists who have told that IVC was the first ever modern civilization.Go and argue with them.

We just know that we are Ancestors of IVC.Which world believes that it was Most ancient and first ever modern civilization.


Grow up guys,nobody is even now interested in whom defeated whom,just they will have a look at history and say,Ya Alexander defeated Porus,now whats for dinner tonight


Now when It is acknowleged that PORUS belongs to the Ancestry of PAKs.Suddenly PORUS became Defeated one.And before it he was ...;)
 
The Indus Saga and the Making of Pakistan: Amazon.co.uk: Aitzaz Ahsan: Books

---------- Post added at 12:53 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:52 AM ----------

Synopsis
Drawing on primary sources, especially literature, this work endeavours to establish the separateness of Indus from India. Discarding accepted myths of Indian history, it presents a history of the political culture of the Indus region (now Pakistan) from ancient times to the modern age. It is aimed at historians and scholars as well as general readers interested in the history of the subcontinent.


A link for an ebook?
 
India might not have been a modern nation state, but historians have referred to India and documented India, from thousands of years. There have been innumerable empires, referred to in all history books and documented by all historians as Indian.

he couldnt distinguish between indians (hindustanis) and tribal native americans :lol::lol:


Columbus set sail to discover India, Alexander the great dreamt of conquering India, and so on. India has been known for thousands of years.

it was easier to call it one thing rather than call it by what it REALLY was.....point is, what is today india was never really a single large united entity --unless of course you look at what it was during the golden years (Mughal empire)


Carry on with presenting 'ancient Pakistani history', but frankly, everyone in the world will ask the same questions that we are asking on this thread.

some talk about Pakistani superiority complex, but it seems indian inferiority complex is what is getting in the way

ancient Pakistanis refers to the ancient ancestors of those, in those Indus lands who are today Pakistani......


same way ancient Pakistanis gave their gold and valuables to help support the Ottoman empire during its sad decline --- one of many reasons why the people of Turkey appreciate Pakistan to this day (presumably, Muslims in what is today india as well)
 
No country existed with the same geography before not so long ago..


The boundaries kept changing. It all started with the great Indus valley civilisation and the migration of these people when population grew brought the best of the civilisation to the whole region.
 
Going by the author's logic dr hk khorana,kalpana chawla are pakistanis because their ancestors lived in lahore,c'mon guys this guy telling us that porus was a pakistani, when there was no such nation itself at that time is hilarious,and as sir william wallace once remarked, 'i know i hate the englishmen but since their princess love me they will call me one of their own and i would extremely hate that, for whatever the circumstances iam and i remain a scot'

Who said that PORUS was Pakistani???

I said that he belongs to our ancestors.
He lived and ruled in the areas of modern day Pakistan.

So he belongs to people of Pakistan.

It is just a matter of fact that we marked the boundaries of modern day Pakistan.Named that territory pakistan and now we are called Pakistanis.

But before Pakistanis we were people of Indus valley and aftr that we were Taxalions,Jhelumanions,Sindhis(Deebalions),Balochis,Makranians and no matter how many IONs we were.
 
Did Ancient Pakistanis Defeated The Mighty Alexander The Great.,Time to re-write Pakistan's history.



Year : 326 BCE
Location : Banks of River Jehlum (Hydaspes)
Adversaries: Mighty Roman Army with all the resources one can imagine, the same army which trampled the persians, against a tiny princely state between Jehlum and Chenab, ruled by King which goes down in history by name Porus.
Personalities: A young and ambitious but demunitive Alexander who never tasted a defeated in battlefield , against a 7 feet tall King, who was known to be proud man.

Here is the initial verbal exchange between the two:

http://history-of-macedonia.com/wordpress/...reat-and-porus/


King Poros to Alexander, who plunders cities:I instruct you to withdraw. What can you, a mere man, achieve against a god? Is it because you have destroyed the good fortune of others by meeting weaker men in battle that you think yourself more mighty than me? But I am invincible: not only am I the king of men, but even of gods—when Dionysus (who they say is a god) came here, we used own power to drive him away. So not only do I advise you. but also I instruct you, to set off for Greece with all speed. I am not going to be frightened by your battle with Darius or by all the good fortune you had in the face of the weakness uf the other nations. But vou think von are more mighty. So set off for Greece. Because if we had needed Greece, we would have subjected it long before Xerxes; but as it is, we have paid no attention to it- because it is a useless nation, and there is nothing among them worth the regard of a king—everyone desires what is better.


Alexender to his troops:

“Comrades-in-arms, do not be upset again at the letter of Poros’s that 1 have read out. Remember what Darius wrote too- It is a fact that the only state of mind barbarians have is obtuseness. Like the animals under them—tigers, lions, elephants, which exult in their courage but are easily hunted thanks to man’s nature—the kings of the barbarians too exult in the numbers ol their armies but are easily defeated by the intelligence of the Greeks.”



Alexander, to King Poros, greetings: You have made us even more eager to be spurred on to battle against you by saying that Greece has nothing worth the regard of a king but that you have everything—lands and cities. And i know that every man desires to seize what is better rather than to keep what is worse. Since, then, WE Greeks do not have thesethings and you barbarians possess them, we desire what is better and wish to have them from you. You write to me that you are king of gods and of all men even to the extent of having more power than the god. But i am engaging in war with a loudmouthed man and an absolute barbarian, not with a god. The whole world could not stand up to a god in full armor—the rumble of thunder, the flash of lightning, or the anger of the bolt. So the nations I have defeated in war cause you no astonishment and neither do boastful words on your part make me a coward.

Our history, yes the Pakistani history as we teach to our young minds tell us the though the ancient Pakistani, A Panjabi from ancient lands that lie between Jehlum and Chanab river, fought tooth and nail with the armies of Alexender but eventually lost and brought in Chains infront of Alexander, who being impressed by his bravery spared his life and gave him back his kingdom.

I would say what a load of tosh and mockery of our ancient history it has been, and non other but us (just like in the case of IVC) teaching our kids the wrong version of history. Fools we are.

The version of history which is being told to the rest of world was written by someone after nearly 300 years of Alexender's death. And ofcourse it was written by a Roman. Unbiased source?? My arse.

Here is what now people are coming to realise of actual events that unfolded on the banks of Jehlum.

1) Alexander and his armies only manage to come in the heartlands of ancient Pakistan when the ruler of Texilla Ambi, in his sheer anamosity and hatred for Porus, made a pack with Alexdener to destroy Porus in partnership. Ambi allowed Alexander the safe passage via Taxilla to reach river Jehlum. (This problem of trachery run deeps and still exist in modern day Pakistanis)

2) The depictions by Curtius, Justin, Diodorus, Arrian and Plutarch are quite consistent and reliable in concluding that Alexander was defeated by Porus and had to make a treaty with him to
save his and his soldiers` lives. He was a broken man at his return from his mis-adventures.

3) Mr E.A.W. Badge has included an account of "The Life and Exploits of Alexander" where he writes inter alia the following:

"In the battle of Jhelum a large majority of Alexander`s cavalry was killed. Alexander realized that if he were to continue fighting he would be completely ruined. He requested Porus to stop fighting. Porus was true to traditions and did not kill the surrendered enemy. After this both signed treaty, Alexander then helped him in annexing other territories to his kingdom".

Mr Badge further writes that the soldiers of Alexander were grief-stricken and they began to bewail the loss of their compatriots. They threw off their weapons. They expressed their strong desire to
surrender. They had no desire to fight. Alexander asked them to give up fighting and himself said,
"Porus, please pardon me. I have realized your bravery and strength. Now I cannot bear these agonies. WIth a sad heart I am planning to put an end to my life. I do not desire that my soldiers should also be ruined like me. I am that culprit who has thrust them into the jaw of death. It
does not become a king to thrust his soldiers into the jaws of death."

These expressions of `Alexander, The Great!` do not indicate from any stretch of imagination his victory over Porus? Can such words be uttered by a `World Conquerer"?

4) Alexnder is known to be a cruel man in history. He was neither a noble man nor did
he have a heart of gold. He had meted out very cruel and harsh treatment to his earlier enemies. Basus of Bactria fought tooth and nail with Alexander to defend the freedom of his motherland. When he was brought before Alexander as a prisoner, Alexander ordered his servants to whip
him and then cut off his nose and ears. He then killed him. Many Persian generals were killed by him.
The murder of Kalasthenese, nephew of Aristotle, was committed by Alexander because he criticised Alexander for foolishly imitating the Persian emperors. Alexander also murdered his friend Clytus in anger. His father`s trusted lieutenant Parmenian was also murdered by Alexander.

Considering above, its foolish to assume that Alexander just handover the lands of a "defeated" king and actually help him expand his rule. These are more of less, conditions imposed by Porus on Alexander until the later was given a safe passage down the indus towards the arabian sea, the easiest route back home for Alexander and his armies.

5) Alexander died of injuries later, sustained during this epic battle.

6) The events that followed this battle, clearly showed that the acts of Roman army was of one with tails firmly tucked between their legs and of a defeated army. They only stuck to the indus in their retreat, did not follow the same path where they came from i.e. Afghanistan, their path to Arabian sea without venturing out on lands. Thoughout their journey down indus, they were picked off. I was watching a documentary long time ago in which a historian was tracing the track of so called "victorious Alexander army". They were showing the skeleton of the Roman army Littered around the coast of Pakistan, which btw can still be found. They presented those as the ones died of "thrust" and "hunger". That is laughable. how can a victorious army die of hunger and thrist?? It more like a case of being "picked off" what remained of it.


Conclusion: When are we going to owe something which well and truely belong to us?? Google the name Porus and you will find how indians are highjacking him as a "indian king". When are we going to set the record straight. In hollywood, they glorified insignificant Scot as braveheart, made movie on highly exaggarated spartans, yet here we got a King of a small state, brought down the mighty and egoistic Alexander "The Great" to his knees. No movies for him, yet the people who share the same blood dont even owe him. Shame really.

[video=youtube;aLXl-otSLSI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLXl-otSLSI"][ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7voYWgo3CCc&feature=related"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLXl-otSLSI[/video][/URL]
 
No country existed with the same geography before not so long ago.. .

When some Pakistani says the same thing then why suddenly India goes back to ancient times and became an Ancient country continuing towards the modern india and so on!!

At that time there was no India TOO.

But we always called our selves Race of IVC which was PRESENT at that time.

The word Pakistani comes as an continuation of people of IVC.

Which are today known as Pakistanis.
 
When some Pakistani says the same thing then why suddenly India goes back to ancient times and became an Ancient country continuing towards the modern india and so on!!

At that time there was no India TOO.

But we always called our selves Race of IVC which was PRESENT at that time.

The word Pakistani comes as an continuation of people of IVC.

Which are today known as Pakistanis.

As i said earlier, the guy who was busy doing the paperwork of cutting the nation into 2 parts could easily place the nation anywhere in the whole of India , which was under their control. They chose the present area and people started to move after that according to religion..

so everything doesnt make sense about this nation debates.
 
he couldnt distinguish between indians (hindustanis) and tribal native americans :lol::lol:

Yes! He was not a good with navigation,

But compared to you he certainly knew what the world of 1490 was.

it was easier to call it one thing rather than call it by what it REALLY was.....point is, what is today india was never really a single large united entity --unless of course you look at what it was during the golden years (Mughal empire)

Did you miss the Ashoka's empire pic on the 2nd page.
Also many large Indian empires existed and even if they did not encompass entire modern India,not considering them as historical representation of Indian state is obtuse.

Like many Chinese empires did not encompass entire modern China,but that doesn't mean single large united Chinese entity did not exist.

some talk about Pakistani superiority complex, but it seems indian inferiority complex is what is getting in the way

Thats been your traditional thought to mask your own inferiority complex.

The 1965 slogan,demonizing Hindus in your textbooks,many such examples.

ancient Pakistanis refers to the ancient ancestors of those, in those Indus lands who are today Pakistani......

The term ancient Pakistan is chronologically wrong based on the fact your nation is based on the concept of uniting Muslims of India.
................2 nation theory.

same way ancient Pakistanis gave their gold and valuables to help support the Ottoman empire during its sad decline --- one of many reasons why the people of Turkey appreciate Pakistan to this day (presumably, Muslims in what is today India as well)

Nice of them.
 
My fellow Pakistanis have explained our position so well, I'm truly humbled by our great history,
81-p-3c-pakistan-navy.jpg
 
2695660442_37a59499f0.jpg


There is more awareness of our great history which is separate and distinct from the ganges civilization of india.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom