Use of the name " India'

[KingMamba]

I have seen many Indian members here claiming that "Buddha was from India", even though everyone knows the Buddha was from Nepal (born in Lumbini).

When I point it out, they say: "It's the same thing". Even though Nepal was not even a part of British India.

Also claiming the achievements and heritage of the Indus Valley Civilization, and even naming themselves India, even though the Indus River is almost entirely within Pakistan.

There does seem to be confusion regarding the geographic term India, and the Republic of India.

Of course therein lies the problem.

 

[nForce]

I give you one simple example.

Did Alexander the Great invade India? The answer is No to Republic of India. However if you mean the term like Scandanavia, Europe, Balkans that is as the geographic India the answer is yes.. However what people then do is distort history to make it look like it was Republic of India just because of the name having geographic and modern republic name. The truth is Alexander's most eastern limit was in Pakistan not India as the map shows below.

Please look at the map below of Alexander's route and the area he conquored. I am using this example to show what i mean by the distortion of facts that occurs and that is used by Indians to their advantage. This happens across the entire spectrum of discourse and is used by Indians to distort everthing to their advantage. This is the cause of our complaints.

I think the solution is that since we now have a republic or country called India since 1947 we use the term South Asia for geographic meaning in particular to prior 1947. That would then resolve lot of the problem. The term 'India' should be only used for post 1947 country. That would confusion and distortion of facts as demonstrated by me in my above example.

Did Alexander invade India ? Yes. Of course geographic India. If anything that is wrong here, it is the inferiority complex that leads one to think that probably India is stealing someone's history, for it is not.

 

[Maira La]

Indeed Maira. A lovely example by you. You conveyed in one sentance what I failed to do in whole page. Maybe I could hire your services ?

Haha, you really need my services? A thousand me can't match the one-man army you are, with your vast arsenal of historical knowledge. ;p

 

[Water Car Engineer]

I'll repeat this one more time.

Greeks named "India" after a river they also named, "Indus". They named the whole subcontinent India after they knew the full extent of it's size. This is fact!! Megasthenes, a Greek ambassador to the Mauryan court all the way in Pataliputra wrote a book called Indica, describing all of India, not just the Indus region. He wasnt the only one out of the Mediterranean to do so, several other Romans, Greeks, etc. did the same and titled their book, about India, "Indica". These became a reference point for knowledgeable Europeans about India.

 

[KingMamba]

Why would we cater to the whims of Jinnah. Let him call his Muslim nation Pakistan. India was always meant to be plural in its nature. We embrace our history. Both its glorious path and shameful ghulami. Our history does not start with Bin Qasim. We are INDIA in all sense.

Half right, Jinnah had a problem with the name India because he forsaw the history snatching that would occer and two because your leaders thought Pakistan would collapse and reunite with "India" and then the name would not be a big deal lol.

 

[Srinivas]

India divided into small kingdoms and British rescuing it is a nonsense theory, under mauryas, Kansas, during golden ages and under mughals India is a united country.

This entire region comes under one civilization state.

In modern day India is divided on religious lines.

India divided into small kingdoms and British rescuing it is a nonsense theory, under mauryas, Kansas, during golden ages and under mughals India is a united country.

This entire region comes under one civilization state.

In modern day India is divided on religious lines.

 

[KingMamba]

I'll repeat this one more time.

Greeks named "India" after a river they also named, "Indus". They named the whole subcontinent India after they knew the full extent of it's size. This is fact!! Megasthenes, a Greek ambassador to the Mauryan court all the way in Pataliputra wrote a book called Indica, describing all of India, not just the Indus region. He wasnt the only one out the Mediterranean to do so, several other Romans, Greeks, etc. did the same and titled their book, about India, "Indica". These became a reference point for knowledgeable Europeans about India.

They named everything east of the Indus and south of China as India, hence for a long time Indonesia was considered India as well or east Indies to be exact. When Columbus set sail he was looking for Indonesia but even today people say he was going to India, this is because of the European naming convention.

 

[nForce]

It's like the USA claiming Canada's and Mexico's history, as well as the history of the entire Americas, because they are called America. Lol.

No its not the same thing. People tend to relate geographic India with the present republic of India because there has been multiple kingdoms and dynasties based in present India that have encompassed those lands which may no longer be a part of present republic of India. It's a part of our history and culture.
And it's not a religious thing.For example, The Angkor Wat temple in Cambodia built by King Suryavarman II has Hindu roots. But do we claim it as Indian ? You need to understand the subject and know about it, before you start talking about it in a manner as if you are a subject matter expert.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

They named everything east of the Indus and south of China as India, hence for a long time Indonesia was considered India as well or east Indies to be exact. When Columbus set sail he was looking for Indonesia but even today people say he was going to India, this is because of the European naming convention.

They were looking for India, particularly South India and sea connectivity to the spice route. The Portuguese were looking for the same under Vasco da Gama. Who took the route around Africa, and successfully landed in Kerala.

It's funny, because it was something set by the Romans originally.

 

[nForce]

Half right, Jinnah had a problem with the name India because he forsaw the history snatching that would occer and two because your leaders thought Pakistan would collapse and reunite with "India" and then the name would not be a big deal lol.

Jinnah wanted India to be named Hindustan, in line with the name Pakistan.
India had a problem with naming a nation on religious lines, even though many great men of arts and letters like Iqbal has used the name Hindustan in their works.

 

[damiendehorn]

Region = South Asia
Countries = Bangladesh
India/Bharat
Bhutan
Nepal
Pakistan
Sri Lanka

I dont see the problem, each country can call themselves what ever they want. Pakistan, Bangladesh and every other nation of South Asia has a history as old as india.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

The map below shows various historical sites that streched from Iran, Afghanistan, Turkmenistan and Pakistan. Most are from 5,000 years well before any modern nation state came into existance. You will notice most of these are in Pakistan.However search internet for each othese sites or or like Kulli or Harappan culture the name India will pop up. Clearly this referance must be to the geograhic India. Again Alexander invaded India.

The actual fact is as can be seen on the ground and in the map below these places are in Pakistan. If India is used as a geographic denominator yes, indeed they are in India but then the Indian's use this to leverage the facts to look like it is their republican India and thiers. This has to stop. Please refer to the map below again. The red line designates the approx area of the Gandhara Bhuddist Kingdom based in Taxila next to modern capittal of Pakistan Islamabad. Taxila also was centre of Greek kingdoms. However 'India' is mostly used in referance to 'Gandhara' and this is used by Indians to claim Gandhara despite the fact that Gandahara never even came close to republic of India. Please click the Wiki article and see what I mean. The entire article has been distorted to make it look like it is India.

Gandhara Kingdom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Echo_419]

Why would we cater to the whims of Jinnah. Let him call his Muslim nation Pakistan. India was always meant to be plural in its nature. We embrace our history. Both its glorious path and shameful ghulami. Our history does not start with Bin Qasim. We are INDIA in all sense.

Agreed India was always a secular & a tolerant country

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Haha, you really need my services? A thousand me can't match the one-man army you are, with your vast arsenal of historical knowledge. ;p

Haaa .... how sweet. I think your a lady who is more than capable of being equal if not more than just equal of me. Modesty at it's best - a quality rare in South Asian's.

 

[Soulspeek]

Yes, and Columbus told this to you over a jug of beer.

They named everything east of the Indus and south of China as India, hence for a long time Indonesia was considered India as well or east Indies to be exact. When Columbus set sail he was looking for Indonesia but even today people say he was going to India, this is because of the European naming convention.