What's new

Was India Ever a Rich Country in its History?

Umar Sheikh Mirza wasn't Iranian. He too was a Turk. Anyway, when did he invade India ?
-- yes.. i am not getting right reference now ..
will provide soon

My post was directed to OP & he is born with the configuration which is not compatible with Ubuntu OS, nor can be upgraded to latest version of current OS. Once you'll get old techie on PDF, you'll realize, that Mother Board is damaged to the extent which cannot be repaired. :sarcastic:
-- yes.. true.. some system need old hands.. newbies should stay away .. current lag jayga...
but i always believe every OS canbe rebooted...:-)
for mother board .. damage yes its serious..
if not replaced we can put assist with low configuration of sub system
 
Fa Hsien, Sung Yun, Hsuan Tsang and I Tsing - all refer to "India" only in their respective historical accounts genius! :coffee: - Now don't ask me who were they :woot:

There is no such thing as 'India'. Your founding father Winston Churchill said you are not a country but a geographical expression. He knows more about the country he created than anyone else.
 
india only thrived under the Islamic rule. For about 1000+ year, Islamosphere remained the most dominant superpower of the globe..like U.S was in 1990's or British in 19th century etc. It was only after Islamic take-over that india found stability, organization, effective tax-collection system crafted by Akbar and so on.

Before that, india was usually bunch of hindu kindgoms invading and killing each other.

Even today, Islamic World vastly outperforms india in almost every aspect...
Pakistanis who chat BS like you come from the only country to never have an indigenous empire.:rofl:
 
lol the way you are quoting that Churchill guy again and again, sounds more like he's your father than India's :omghaha:

There is no such thing as 'India'. Your founding father Winston Churchill said you are not a country but a geographical expression. He knows more about the country he created than anyone else.
 
--
Dear ..
bring the data on table..
or else your claim doesn't stand ...simple
i follow this gentalmans policy for this
"In God We Trust, Everybody Else Must Bring Data to the Table" - N. murthy

LOL!!! Seriously you need data to digest it?

How many empires ruled 100% of this region? None
How many empires ruled major part of subcontinet and kept it united? You can count on finger tips of one hand, Maurya, Gupta, Mughal, British - any else? out of these 2 were foreigners.
How many years these empires lasted after reaching their peak? Collective peak time rule of all these is not even 1000 years.

So, In thousands years of history of the region max 1,000 year it was united. that was also by force.
 
Should have clarified myself, The Mughals were a mixture of Iranic and Turkic peoples.
Origin of Mughal Dynasty
The Mughals were the last powerful descendants of the Mongols; descended from Mongol stock in Turkestan, in the early 1500's they engaged in the last series of conquests to bear the Mongol name. They were, however, quite distant from their original ancestors. The Mughals had become Islamic, for the Middle Eastern Mongol invaders had converted to Islam long before. They had also thoroughly absorbed Middle Eastern culture, especially Persian culture (the Persian word for Mongol is "Mughal," from which we get the English word, "mogul," meaning "tycoon"), and their wars of invasion spread Persian culture throughout India. Much of Persian culture was based on Shi'a Islam and its mystical doctrine of a Divine Light present in the earth in the form of the Imam, or religious guide on earth. It was equally influenced by Sufi mysticism, a branch of Islamic religion that stressed the mystical union of human with god. Much of Persian culture was also derived from Mongolian culture, particularly art, which was based on Chinese models of painting. In many ways, then, the Mughal invasion of India and its importation of Persian culture was a roundabout way of importing far eastern culture into India.

India was no stranger to Islam; it had been invaded by Muslim forces as early as the seventh century AD, and since the early 1300's, the south-eastern portion of India, the Rajput, was dominated by the Dehli sultan, a Turkish invader.

Despite their illustrious ancestors, the Mughals began humbly. When the great Mughal conqueror, Babur the Tiger, came to power in 1483, he ruled over a very small kingdom in Turkestan. With the smallest of armies, he managed to conquer first Afghanistan and then the Dehli sultanate and all of Hindustan. Faced with overwhelming odds (when he fought the Dehli Sultan he was outnumbered ten to one), he overcame his enemies with a new technology: firearms. For this reason, Western historians have dubbed the Mughal Empire, the first gunpowder empire.

Resource:
Washington State University - Pullman, Washington
 
The entire 'Indian' civilisation was formed by the muslims and British.
 
Origin of Mughal Dynasty
The Mughals were the last powerful descendants of the Mongols; descended from Mongol stock in Turkestan, in the early 1500's they engaged in the last series of conquests to bear the Mongol name. They were, however, quite distant from their original ancestors. The Mughals had become Islamic, for the Middle Eastern Mongol invaders had converted to Islam long before. They had also thoroughly absorbed Middle Eastern culture, especially Persian culture (the Persian word for Mongol is "Mughal," from which we get the English word, "mogul," meaning "tycoon"), and their wars of invasion spread Persian culture throughout India. Much of Persian culture was based on Shi'a Islam and its mystical doctrine of a Divine Light present in the earth in the form of the Imam, or religious guide on earth. It was equally influenced by Sufi mysticism, a branch of Islamic religion that stressed the mystical union of human with god. Much of Persian culture was also derived from Mongolian culture, particularly art, which was based on Chinese models of painting. In many ways, then, the Mughal invasion of India and its importation of Persian culture was a roundabout way of importing far eastern culture into India.

India was no stranger to Islam; it had been invaded by Muslim forces as early as the seventh century AD, and since the early 1300's, the south-eastern portion of India, the Rajput, was dominated by the Dehli sultan, a Turkish invader.

Despite their illustrious ancestors, the Mughals began humbly. When the great Mughal conqueror, Babur the Tiger, came to power in 1483, he ruled over a very small kingdom in Turkestan. With the smallest of armies, he managed to conquer first Afghanistan and then the Dehli sultanate and all of Hindustan. Faced with overwhelming odds (when he fought the Dehli Sultan he was outnumbered ten to one), he overcame his enemies with a new technology: firearms. For this reason, Western historians have dubbed the Mughal Empire, the first gunpowder empire.

Resource:
Washington State University - Pullman, Washington

I don't want to divert the actual topic, this topic needs its own thread. But i am sticking on my point that Mughals were mixture of Turkic and Persian peoples.
 
Interesting look at India in the past, but wealth of Indians was heavily concenterated in the hands of the few in the past and same is in the present.

In the past it was royalty, in the present its the billionaires.
 
There is no such thing as 'India'. Your founding father Winston Churchill said you are not a country but a geographical expression. He knows more about the country he created than anyone else.
---
again please read history.. it was mr.clemant ataly after WW2 made indian independace act 1947...
our fouding father is M.Gandhi and many other


hee .. thanks ..
He knows more ....
then you will also accept british in this reference ?
'
The Simla Accord, or the Convention Between Great Britain, China, and Tibet, [in] Simla,[1] is a treaty concerning the status of Tibet negotiated by representatives of the Republic of China, Tibet and Britain in Simla in 1913 and 1914.

The Accord provided that Tibet would be divided into "Outer Tibet" and "Inner Tibet". Outer Tibet, which roughly corresponded to Ü-Tsang and western Kham would "remain in the hands of the Tibetan Government at Lhasa under Chinese suzerainty, but China would not interfere in its administration. "Inner Tibet", roughly, equivalent to Amdo and eastern Kham, would be under the jurisdiction of the Chinese government. The Accord with its annexes also defines the boundary between Tibet and China proper and between Tibet and British India (the latter became known as the McMahon Line).[1][2][nb 1] The latter boundary was later referred to as the McMahon Line."

---
india is land of diversity... its still wonder that despite show much diffrence we can subscribe to PRIDE called
INDIA...
yes WC is right when they were their is was mear peace of land .. for us its mother country..


--
There is no such thing as 'India
India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nope.

Itwas Winston Churchill.

Stop talking Indian propaganda.
--
oops ok .. if its wc then
as per chinese propoganda .. india is small country like japan right
and china already reached saturn and claiming sea ..
China Wednesday said its Air Defence Identification Zone is estabised on satuen
right

Without him, there is no 'India'.

He made your country.
--
history is subject is though with correct dates and person.. or else it become POGO
i am sure you watching POGO in china .. or that is censored tooo
 
Back
Top Bottom