Hisitory Forum - Discussion

[Indus Pakistan]

Now that we have a history forum guy's we need to get people here who can contribute. I know Bamxa, Whirling Dervish are already on the case but more the better.

I suggest we open threads covering dawn of time upto 1947. We also then try to organize them along a chronological order. These then should be easily available like off the shelf info points. We need to make this easily accessible so that our people are more aware of our past.

At some stage I expect government of Pakistan to do something about this but we can begin a change and spread this as many people as we can. Any ideas please drop them off in this thread.

 

[3.14159]

The discussion over historical aspects of the sub-continent has been passionate and informative, but misleading on several aspects on both sides.

1. Like most geographical entities, the history is intertwined and shared between many cultures, people and political entities across hundreds, indeed thousands of years. Neither side can lay exclusive claim to the history to the exclusion of the other. That is only natural given that throughout history, people have travelled and interacted with adjacent and far-off cultures alike.

2. Claiming the Thar desert as some sort of uncrossable boundary is not correct. Intrepid travellers have found ways to cross much more imposing deserts like the Gobi, Takla Makan, Arabia and even the Sahara with large caravans. Thar itself is criss-crossed with many such paths too. Leave aside mere deserts, people have made trails across the Himalayas also, just like those across other great mountian ranges in the world like the Andes and the Rockies. The human desire to travel surmounts such natural barriers.

3. Geologically, the sub-continent is roughly the area from the Indus to the Irrawaddy, east to west, and bounded by the Himlayas to the north, with its own unique flora and fauna, and also human history. When people arrived from the arid terrain to the west of the subcontinent to the first might river, it would be natural to beleive they have reached thier goal, just like Columbus. However, further exploration would easily lead to the much bigger lands beyond, and we can see that throughout history spread across thousands of years. It is also relevant to note that the lands towards the Far East are a fusion of the cultures of its mighty neighbors, China to the north and India to the west, hence the name Indo-China.

4. Political entities come and go, but history remains. For example, the State of Israel came into being as a political entity only in 1948, but claims thousands of years of the history of the land and culture as Jewish history, not as Israeli history. Similarly, Pakistan, as a modern day Islamic State, can lay claim to not only the history of the Indus Valley civilization, going back thousands of years, but also the glorious Mughal Empire as part of its cultural heritage, but calling it Pakistani would be naive in the extreme. Similarly, modern day political India can claim the heritage going back thousands of years across great upheavals of human history, including before the arrival of Islam in the subcontinent, but it cannot pretend that it has been enriched and decimated in cycles of invasions and empires. This is what intertwined means, and it is only natural and logical to regard it as parts of the same whole.

5. Crucial as history is in giving a sense of roots and foundations to any country, it cannot be a substitute for its present or its future, because these are determined by what is happening now, not what happened hundreds or thousands of years ago. Yes, the ancient lands that constitute both Pakistan and India have a rich and varied history going back thousands, but so does every other modern politcal entity. What each country does with it is the key. Ethiopia may be the birthplace of coffee, but it is the likes of Starbucks that use it best in the present. It is things like this that will determine the future.

 

[Kabira]

Similarly, Pakistan, as a modern day Islamic State, can lay claim to not only the history of the Indus Valley civilization, going back thousands of years, but also the glorious Mughal Empire as part of its cultural heritage, but calling it Pakistani would be naive in the extreme.
.

This section is only meant for Pakistan history or indus basin. It means history of Pakistan is shared with eastern and southern part of Afghanistan and north west part of India like punjab and IoK . And kutch culture of western India bordering Sindh. Byond that we will be looking at south asian and central asian history.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

The discussion over historical aspects of the sub-continent has been passionate and informative, but misleading on several aspects on both sides.

So your saying you come here with impartial mind. Good let us see what you have to say.

1. Like most geographical entities, the history is intertwined and shared between many cultures, people and political entities across hundreds, indeed thousands of years. Neither side can lay exclusive claim to the history to the exclusion of the other. That is only natural given that throughout history, people have travelled and interacted with adjacent and far-off cultures alike.

Yes. Self evident. In fact all human history is intertwiined at some level.

2. Claiming the Thar desert as some sort of uncrossable boundary is not correct. Intrepid travellers have found ways to cross much more imposing deserts like the Gobi, Takla Makan, Arabia and even the Sahara with large caravans. Thar itself is criss-crossed with many such paths too. Leave aside mere deserts, people have made trails across the Himalayas also, just like those across other great mountian ranges in the world like the Andes and the Rockies. The human desire to travel surmounts such natural barriers.

Here you reveal your true colours. Your just another Indian who refuses to let go off the grand British colony that was dismantled in 1947.

(i) Please tell me where you were told Thar was 'uncrossable'? It hinders west east movement is does not stop it.

(ii) What are you trying to say here? That Indus Basin is not a geographic entity? Iberia, Scandanavia and Maghreb also can be crossed over and there are paths linking them but does that mean they are not sub units?

Geologically, the sub-continent is roughly the area from the Indus to the Irrawaddy, east to west, and bounded by the Himlayas to the north, with its own unique flora and fauna, and also human history.

You got to be kidding. The flora and fauna within South Asia is diverse to say the least. In fact it is more diverse than Europe. The climate of Irrawady, Ganges/Brahmaputra basin is nothing and I mean nothing similar to most of the bone dry deserts of Indus basin. If you think they are simliar you need to revisy your geography again.

When people arrived from the arid terrain to the west of the subcontinent to the first might river, it would be natural to beleive they have reached thier goal, just like Columbus

Oh here we are. Now we finally know where this was going to. Just tell me what was their goal? Find the as yet unknown Bharat Republic?

These 'people' I take were the Greeks, Persians who actually wrote about what is now Pakistan.

However, further exploration would easily lead to the much bigger lands beyond, and we can see that throughout history spread across thousands of years. It is also relevant to note that the lands towards the Far East are a fusion of the cultures of its mighty neighbors, China to the north and India to the west, hence the name Indo-China.

So? Unkown is a unkown. The whole point of history is to look at a point in time and conyxtualize to that time. Not reverse engineer from today's reality.

4. Political entities come and go, but history remains. For example, the State of Israel came into being as a political entity only in 1948, but claims thousands of years of the history of the land and culture as Jewish history, not as Israeli history. Similarly, Pakistan, as a modern day Islamic State, can lay claim to not only the history of the Indus Valley civilization, going back thousands of years, but also the glorious Mughal Empire as part of its cultural heritage, but calling it Pakistani would be naive in the extreme. Similarly, modern day political India can claim the heritage going back thousands of years across great upheavals of human history, including before the arrival of Islam in the subcontinent, but it cannot pretend that it has been enriched and decimated in cycles of invasions and empires. This is what intertwined means, and it is only natural and logical to regard it as parts of the same whole.

The problem is your another bloody Indian who wants to relive the British Raj and stamp everything within that huge area as one land, one history, one people. Once you have neatly bundled everything togather you might jst about make us in Pakistan to agree with this if you then named the 'bundle' South Asia because that 'bundle' would a collective of this vast region.

But and this is the clever bit - You guy's then name that 'bundle' India. That is a friggin No, No and No sir because by doing so our history becomes your friggin history. This is what we are left with.

Bombs goes off - Pakistan
Terrorism - Pakistan
Religious radical - Pakistan
Minority discrimination - Pakistan
Misogny - Pakistan
Ignorence - Pakistan
Al Qaida - Pakistan
Bin Laden - Pakistan

So the term 'Pakistan' becomes a good bin for everything crap to be chucked in. But our land has also given some good things so let ius look at the other side of the coin

Harrapa- Indian
Mohenjo Daro - Indian
IVC - Indian
Gandhra - Indian
Taxila - Indian
Porus - indian
Mehr Garh - Indian

Do you see the problem. We are good enough only to be called Pakistani for all the negatives. Nobody said Bin Laden was found in Indian sub Continent. Nobody says Islamic radicalism is a Indian sub continental problem.

Our intention here is to accept the bad as well as the good. No more mothe*in cherrypicking by you runts. Pakistan terrorism and other side of coin Ancient Pakistan. Don't like it piss off. And we are going to tell the world as well. We need to sort it out at home first.

5. Crucial as history is in giving a sense of roots and foundations to any country, it cannot be a substitute for its present or its future, because these are determined by what is happening now, not what happened hundreds or thousands of years ago. Yes, the ancient lands that constitute both Pakistan and India have a rich and varied history going back thousands, but so does every other modern politcal entity. What each country does with it is the key. Ethiopia may be the birthplace of coffee, but it is the likes of Starbucks that use it best in the present. It is things like this that will determine the future.[/QUOTE]

Gibberish. If India or Ethopia has is not my concern. This is Pakistan history and Pakistan forum. Go wax eloquent about India if you want.

Ps. When were you born? Did you come into existance the day your mum and dad clapped their eyes on each other? You could argue yes because as time would move forward the as yet unknown you had become reality. This is ridicalous reasoning. I could also say Pakistan existed then because in time it would come along.

Reality has time have relationship in history. When you do history you relate it to time. Event and time are linked.

 

[3.14159]

.......
What are you trying to say here? That Indus Basin is not a geographic entity? Iberia, Scandanavia and Maghreb also can be crossed over and there are paths linking them but does that mean they are not sub units?...............

The Indus Basin is a subunit of the sub-continent, yes, just as you also accept. It is part of that whole sub-continent, and has an inexplicably intertwined history, the good, the bad and the ugly, and everything in between, without any one side being able to select only the portions that they like.

Further, just as the pasts of all the subunits are linked to the whole, so are their present, as will their future.

To pretend otherwise would be a contrived result.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

The Indus Basin is a subunit of the sub-continent, yes, just as you also accept. It is part of that whole sub-continent, and has an inexplicably intertwined history, the good, the bad and the ugly, and everything in between, without any one side being able to select only the portions that they like.

Further, just as the pasts of all the subunits are linked to the whole, so are their present, as will their future.

To pretend otherwise would be a contrived result.

A cell is always part of wider organic whole and that whole fits in the ecosystem. This is self evident. I don't se why you need to even bring this up. Yes, they are linked for good or bad however that does not mean we do not have right to our own. We do not WANT to be subsumed into a sub continiental whole. We will select a portion. Our portion.

Our portion being the geograhic Indus Basin, the ugly, the nad, the good and everything in between. Furthermore I am not going to discriminate on religion. If my past ancestors were animists, pagans, Zoroastrians, Hindu, Buddhist and Muslim that is fine by me. I will own all of them. Our history the history of Pakistan is the history of the Indus Basin.

This has been terribly neglected by Pakistan but be that it may it is time to begin the change. I think it will take a generation and some but change will happen as I believe we arre at high tide of religious fervour and this will subside. Decade ago to say anything wrong about saudia was tantamount to blasphemy. Now change is palpable. This is all about our secular roots.

 

[3.14159]

A cell is always part of wider organic whole and that whole fits in the ecosystem. This is self evident. I don't se why you need to even bring this up. Yes, they are linked for good or bad however that does not mean we do not have right to our own. We do not WANT to be subsumed into a sub continiental whole. We will select a portion. Our portion.

Our portion being the geograhic Indus Basin, the ugly, the nad, the good and everything in between. Furthermore I am not going to discriminate on religion. If my past ancestors were animists, pagans, Zoroastrians, Hindu, Buddhist and Muslim that is fine by me. I will own all of them. Our history the history of Pakistan is the history of the Indus Basin.

This has been terribly neglected by Pakistan but be that it may it is time to begin the change. I think it will take a generation and some but change will happen as I believe we arre at high tide of religious fervour and this will subside. Decade ago to say anything wrong about saudia was tantamount to blasphemy. Now change is palpable. This is all about our secular roots.

The whole world recognizes the decision made in 1947 by the Muslims of the sub-continent that they wished to be separate from the rest, so that is already a given. It is clear that Pakistan is a separate political entity from 1947 onwards, but it is impossible to disentangle the thousands of years of shared history that belongs to the entire sub-continent, present day political demarcations notwithstanding.

It would be interesting to see how you fit in a thousands years of Mughal glory into your exercise, and how do you think Indochina got its name, since jumping from the Indus to the Mekong without the intervening bits would be problematic, to say the least.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Rubbish. According to your logic as soon as you cross the Bosphorus into Europe there is only one history. European - present day political demarcations notwithstanding.

Tell that to the Greeks, Italians, Germans, French etc

As I said before your conveniently zooming at a level that suits you, so it can be named 'Indian' so you 'Indian's' can milch it as 'Indian' history. That about sums your motivation.

We are going to cover Indus Basin history period similiar to how they have Balkan History, Iberian history within the larger framework of Europe.

 

[3.14159]

Rubbish. According to your logic as soon as you cross the Bosphorus into Europe there is only one history. European - present day political demarcations notwithstanding.

Tell that to the Greeks, Italians, Germans, French etc

As I said before your conveniently zooming at a level that suits you, so it can be named 'Indian' so you 'Indian's' can milch it as 'Indian' history. That about sums your motivation.

We are going to cover Indus Basin history period similiar to how they have Balkan History, Iberian history within the larger framework of Europe.

So how will you fit in a thousand years of Mughal glory into your exercise, and how do you think Indochina got its name?

 

[Indus Pakistan]

How do Europeans do their history? Let us follow their logical format with some examples which we are going to use.

*Arabs conquered Iberia/Spain. Nobody says Arab's conquered Europe because the Arabs only took over Iberia. Ditto:
*Greeks conquered Indus Basin/Pakistan. We are not going to say Greeks conquered India because they only took over Indus Basin.

Romans took over Iberia/Spain therefore during the rule over Iberia it is part of Spanish history, Romans also took over Gaul/France. So both Spain and France today share that part of history, although both will look at it from their unique perspective.

Therefore France and Spain share the same history when both regions were ruled by Rome. However French do not include the European conquest by Arabs because it was only limited to Iberia. This is only part of Spanish history.



Ditto: Moghuls took over Indus Basin/Pakistan and set up at Lahore as capital, later they expanded into what is the Ganges/Peninsular India. So both share that part of history, although both will look at it from their unique perspective.

Therefore Pakistan and India share the same history when both regions were ruled by Moghuls. However India should not include the Greek conquest of South Asia because it was only limited to Indus Basin.


** You know for various times in history large parts of Indus Basin/Pakistan were part of Persian Empire. That needs to be included in Pakistan history but would be silly if included in India history as no part of India was ever part of Persian Empire. In exact was Arabs took over Europe more properly Iberia but you don't get that included in German history because they never took over Central Europe/Germany.

I think what I have said straight forward, logical as 1,2,3. This might not work if Indus Basin was not a definined geographic region but as you can see in my thread on 'Indus Basin' it pretty well is a unique geographic region and has existance beyond political boundaries.

 

[3.14159]

How do Europeans do their history? Let us follow their logical format with some examples which we are going to use.

*Arabs conquered Iberia/Spain. Nobody says Arab's conquered Europe because the Arabs only took over Iberia. Ditto:
*Greeks conquered Indus Basin/Pakistan. We are not going to say Greeks conquered India because they only took over Indus Basin.

Romans took over Iberia/Spain therefore during the rule over Iberia it is part of Spanish history, Romans also took over Gaul/France. So both Spain and France today share that part of history, although both will look at it from their unique perspective.

Therefore France and Spain share the same history when both regions were ruled by Rome. However French do not include the European conquest by Arabs because it was only limited to Iberia. This is only part of Spanish history.



Ditto: Moghuls took over Indus Basin/Pakistan and set up at Lahore as capital, later they expanded into what is the Ganges/Peninsular India. So both share that part of history, although both will look at it from their unique perspective.

Therefore Pakistan and India share the same history when both regions were ruled by Moghuls. However India should not include the Greek conquest of South Asia because it was only limited to Indus Basin.


** You know for various times in history large parts of Indus Basin/Pakistan were part of Persian Empire. That needs to be included in Pakistan history but would be silly if included in India history as no part of India was ever part of Persian Empire. In exact was Arabs took over Europe more properly Iberia but you don't get that included in German history because they never took over Central Europe/Germany.

I think what I have said straight forward, logical as 1,2,3. This might not work if Indus Basin was not a definined geographic region but as you can see in my thread on 'Indus Basin' it pretty well is a unique geographic region and has existance beyond political boundaries.

Your position and your motivation is understandable. Lahore was only the third capital of the Mughal Empire, but as you mention, as long as everyone understands that Pakistan's history is intimately intertwined with that of the entire subcontinent to which it belongs, then there is no problem from a logical point of view, given that the subcontinent ranges from the Indus to the Irrawaddy river basins, west to east.

But caution is advised into creating too much of a single-minded narrow narrative with the aim of providing a secular sense of history and belonging to a political entity that finds itself adrift in modern times. Your efforts are welcomed, but every nation has a history and beautiful landscapes, and neither helps with resolving the problems they face in modern times directly, for example, Egypt's history or Ethiopia's landscapes. Go back far enough and most areas will end up being secular, or at least in an era before any major religion, even Saudi Arabia. Besides, Pakistan's creation as a country for Muslims of the subcontinent and specially its present deal zeal make it highly unlikely that it will be able to do its secular past any justice. After all, look at what is being taught in Pakistani schools even today. If what you propose is to be meaningful, then changing the curriculum to reflect this would be the place to start.

 

[Tiger Genie]

wth is hisitory? at least fix the title then start making up stuff please

 

[Whirling_dervesh]

How do Europeans do their history? Let us follow their logical format with some examples which we are going to use.

*Arabs conquered Iberia/Spain. Nobody says Arab's conquered Europe because the Arabs only took over Iberia. Ditto:
*Greeks conquered Indus Basin/Pakistan. We are not going to say Greeks conquered India because they only took over Indus Basin.

Romans took over Iberia/Spain therefore during the rule over Iberia it is part of Spanish history, Romans also took over Gaul/France. So both Spain and France today share that part of history, although both will look at it from their unique perspective.

Therefore France and Spain share the same history when both regions were ruled by Rome. However French do not include the European conquest by Arabs because it was only limited to Iberia. This is only part of Spanish history.



Ditto: Moghuls took over Indus Basin/Pakistan and set up at Lahore as capital, later they expanded into what is the Ganges/Peninsular India. So both share that part of history, although both will look at it from their unique perspective.

Therefore Pakistan and India share the same history when both regions were ruled by Moghuls. However India should not include the Greek conquest of South Asia because it was only limited to Indus Basin.


** You know for various times in history large parts of Indus Basin/Pakistan were part of Persian Empire. That needs to be included in Pakistan history but would be silly if included in India history as no part of India was ever part of Persian Empire. In exact was Arabs took over Europe more properly Iberia but you don't get that included in German history because they never took over Central Europe/Germany.

I think what I have said straight forward, logical as 1,2,3. This might not work if Indus Basin was not a definined geographic region but as you can see in my thread on 'Indus Basin' it pretty well is a unique geographic region and has existance beyond political boundaries.

Great post...