India stole intellectual rights on Bangladeshi tradition

[Bhairava]

For your enlightment ..........
Alexander fought many battles but atlast gave up on Gangaridhai becoz of their shear force. By the way we have our history books you know?

I asked you to provide links or references.

"The Battle with Porus depressed the spirits of the Macedonians, and made them very unwilling to advance farther into India... This river (the Ganges), they heard, had a breadth of two and thirty stadia, and a depth of 1000 fathoms, while its farther banks were covered all over with armed men, horses and elephants. For the kings of the Gandaritai and the Prasiai were reported to be waiting for him (Alexander) with an army of 80,000 horse, 200,000 foot, 8,000 war-chariots, and 6,000 fighting elephants. "---Plutarch (42-120 AD). Quoted from The Classical Accounts of India, p. 198.

So your claim of Alexander wilting under the fierce Ganridai doesnt hold ground.

It still supports my claim that it was the forces of Porus who blunted the sharp edge of Alexander.

again how desperate, I was talkin 'bout the pal dynasty of bengal what does religion has to do wit this?

In case you forgot - this was your previous post

The last massive transformation in religion was from Buddhism to Islam not from your Hinduism.
Pala dynasty(Buddhists) ruled almost all of India which makes us the Bengals who once ruled you

.
Now you understood why I replied what i replied.

Well only recently under british india Which I'm not interested in, being an indian you shouldn't be either.

Have you seen the extent of the Mauryan or the Gupta empires or the Chola Empires(under Rajendira Chola I)..? I guess not.
Because if you had seen them then you would not have posted this.

 

[diva]

For your enlightment ..........
Alexander fought many battles but atlast gave up on Gangaridhai becoz of their shear force. By the way we have our history books you know?

Screw my knowledge and the world which said porus never crossed punjab. I think he submaried around India and went to Bengal.

 

[Al-zakir]

thn plzz tell me tht saree belongs to whom Islamic and British dynasty ?????????

None. Do you see me crying over this or have I made any comment about Saree? Personally neither me nor my wife care about Saree. You can have it.

 

[integra]

I asked you to provide links or references.



So your claim of Alexander wilting under the fierce Ganridai doesnt hold ground.

It still supports my claim that it was the forces of Porus who blunted the sharp edge of Alexander.

http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/features/07-09/features1425.htm
Here you go and obviously I'm right and you are wrong.

Have you seen the extent of the Mauryan or the Gupta empires or the Chola Empires(under Rajendira Chola I)..? I guess not.
Because if you had seen them then you would not have posted this.

Gupta was from bengal, I know 'bout the other two and the point was we ruled you and vice versa

Anyway don giv a damn they weren't my cousins you know, and don't you sleep?

 

[diva]

http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/features/07-09/features1425.htm
Here you go and obviously I'm right and you are wrong.






Gupta was from bengal, I know 'bout the other two and the point was we ruled you and vice versa

Anyway don giv a damn they weren't my cousins you know, and don't you sleep?

so according to you Alexander had captured whole of norther India and had advanced over to bengal and was reflected back....

 

[integra]

so according to you Alexander had captured whole of norther India and had advanced over to bengal and was reflected back....

Did I give anyother options? well you have your history books and we have ours.
and no mater wot you say me being an Architect knows a little bit of history and culture you know?

 

[Bhairava]

http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/features/07-09/features1425.htm
Here you go and obviously I'm right and you are wrong.

If the quoted part is the base for your assumption then Im afraid you have read it all wrongly.

Dated history begins only in 326 B.C., when the warriors of the Gangaridai and the Prasioi resisted the threatening onslaught of Alexander,

Read the previous post of mine.Quoting it once again.

"The Battle with Porus depressed the spirits of the Macedonians, and made them very unwilling to advance farther into India... This river (the Ganges), they heard, had a breadth of two and thirty stadia, and a depth of 1000 fathoms, while its farther banks were covered all over with armed men, horses and elephants. For the kings of the Gandaritai and the Prasiai were reported to be waiting for him (Alexander) with an army of 80,000 horse, 200,000 foot, 8,000 war-chariots, and 6,000 fighting elephants. "---Plutarch (42-120 AD). Quoted from The Classical Accounts of India, p. 198.

Again it clearly says that it was Porus who blunted the forces of Alexander.

Now concentrate on the underlines parts in blue and red...stress being on "heard" ,"reported" which clearly implies there was never a physical battle.

p.s.: My source is a great Greek Historian,Plutarch and yours seems like a blog or a promotion website.Decide which is more credible.

Gupta was from bengal, I know 'bout the other two and the point was we ruled you and vice versa

Anyway don giv a damn they weren't my cousins you know, and don't you sleep?

We as in.....?? you were all Indians ,inhabitants of Bharat back then..not Bangladeshis...

BTW am in Kuwait..so 2.5 hrs time lag...lolzzz..anyway since you reminded GN..

 

[diva]

Did I give anyother options? well you have your history books and we have ours.
and no mater wot you say me being an Architect knows a little bit of history and culture you know?

so if that was the case then empire of magadh should have been under alexander and then how come chandragupta who was born in magadh became the ruler. because according to history he became ruler after chanakya killed mahapadam nand. if mahapadam nand was already defeated then no point of chanakya killing chandragupta...


either ways if it was roman territory how come selucus also known as selucus nikator attacked magadh later when it was his own territory.

 

[integra]

If the quoted part is the base for your assumption then Im afraid you have read it all wrongly.

No that wasn't my base I could obviously posted wiki links (which there is)but this days they aren't credible either.

Again it clearly says that it was Porus who blunted the forces of Alexander.

Now concentrate on the underlines parts in blue and red...stress being on "heard" ,"reported" which clearly implies there was never a physical battle.

p.s.: My source is a great Greek Historian,Plutarch and yours seems like a blog or a promotion website.Decide which is more credible.

Hasna Jasimuddin Moudud is an archeologist if you are more dependent on books I'll hav to scan some which is not worth my time.

We as in.....?? you were all Indians ,inhabitants of Bharat back then..not Bangladeshis...

may not be bangladeshi but bengala? You can't deny that.

and diva its not fair fighting two against one.

 

[anurag_singh]

so if that was the case then empire of magadh should have been under alexander and then how come chandragupta who was born in magadh became the ruler. because according to history he became ruler after chanakya killed mahapadam nand. if mahapadam nand was already defeated then no point of chanakya killing chandragupta...


either ways if it was roman territory how come selucus also known as selucus nikator attacked magadh later when it was his own territory.

I think it was Dhananand.

 

[diva]

I think it was Dhananand.

dhananad is also called mahapadma nand in some literature. there is disagreement among scholars on his name.

 

[diva]

No that wasn't my base I could obviously posted wiki links (which there is)but this days they aren't credible either.




Hasna Jasimuddin Moudud is an archeologist if you are more dependent on books I'll hav to scan some which is not worth my time.



may not be bangladeshi but bengala? You can't deny that.

and diva its not fair fighting two against one.

Ok lol i rest my case. what can i do if we are 1 billion

 

[fallstuff]

No that wasn't my base I could obviously posted wiki links (which there is)but this days they aren't credible either.




Hasna Jasimuddin Moudud is an archeologist if you are more dependent on books I'll hav to scan some which is not worth my time.



may not be bangladeshi but bengala? You can't deny that.

and diva its not fair fighting two against one.

Stop whining and get used to it. When the Indians come, they swarm you, thats how it goes around here. BTW welcome to the hood !!!

 

[diva]

Stop whining and get used to it. When the Indians come, they swarm you, thats how it goes around here. BTW welcome to the hood !!!

Ok i will take it as a compliment

 

[satishkumarcsc]

No it is you Indians that are confused. No one is talking here about post 1947 situation or identities.

alright lets take Greece for example...there were Spartans, Athenians, Macedonians and a whole bunch of small kingdoms before they were all unified by Agamemnon. It became Greece. India Existed before 1947 or else East India Company would not have been established. We were a Group of kingdoms warring with each other. India was a term coined by Columbus not even the English people. End of the day it was the Indian subcontinent.

India existed and will exist as long as u can dream this world will exist.