Which king helped India the most?
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Regional History or Period History
Forum Name: History of Oceania, South-East Asia and Pacific
Forum Discription: Discuss the history of SE Asia: Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore etc.
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4679
Printed Date: 28-Apr-2024 at 00:49
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Which king helped India the most?
Posted By: Itihaas
Subject: Which king helped India the most?
Date Posted: 29-Jul-2005 at 00:56
| I would say Ashoka quite personally... |
Replies:
Posted By: Anujkhamar
Date Posted: 29-Jul-2005 at 06:03
| Why is there Asoka twice? (i'm still deciding who to pick) |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 29-Jul-2005 at 06:52
|
What about Shah Jehan? He was the one who began the construction of Taj Mahal. ------------- |
Posted By: Itihaas
Date Posted: 29-Jul-2005 at 10:55
|
Shah Jahan never really built the Taj Mahal... he confiscated Rajut property and redid it to look like the Taj. We know now that the Taj is not really built by Moghals but actually five hundred tears older to Shah Jahan. It was a Rajput Hindu Temple. Anyway he was useless otherwise and had sexual affairs with his daughters. The credit he took for the Taj overshadows his many flaws and failures. Btw, I meant to say pritiviraj Chauhan for the first choice... not Ashoka twice
dang it!! |
Posted By: Tobodai
Date Posted: 29-Jul-2005 at 16:29
|
As much as I love the Mughals I wouldnt say I can think of any Muslim ruler that ever really helped India out in the long turn, mostly by creating social discord through their converts. Chandragupta Maurya for creating the first almost pan-Indian state and hence enabling the rule of Ashoka in the first place. ------------- "the people are nothing but a great beast... I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value." -Alexander Hamilton |
Posted By: Paul
Date Posted: 29-Jul-2005 at 17:35
|
She might not have ruled over all of India but for an Indian ruler I think it's hard to beat the Rani of Jhansi. ------------- Light blue touch paper and stand well back http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk - http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk - http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk |
Posted By: Itihaas
Date Posted: 29-Jul-2005 at 18:39
Rani of Jhansi (Rani Lakshmibhai) although courageous and extremely brave and firm despite her gender doesn't stand much in the grand scheme of Indian History, as she failed in halting the british and really just led an unsuccessful rebel movement. Ashoka is the most Important since his policies led to the world's first missionary religion making Buddhism much more accepted all over Asia. If it weren't for Ashoka we wouldn't have had the religious tollerence, or Buddhism would just be a local religion like Jainism...
|
Posted By: Paul
Date Posted: 29-Jul-2005 at 18:58
I would disagree with her lack of influence, she certainly was an inspiration and influence to the Indian National Congress and raising support and belief for their ideals. ------------- Light blue touch paper and stand well back http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk - http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk - http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk |
Posted By: Anujkhamar
Date Posted: 30-Jul-2005 at 05:08
|
Still decding between Chandragupta and Asoka, it's so hard. On one had
Chandragupta laid the foundations for the first pan-indian state, but
then Asoka did expand it and then did loads for the country culturally
ect. edit: and why is Tipu Sultan in there?! I swear he gave away the Kohi-noor....  |
Posted By: Paul
Date Posted: 30-Jul-2005 at 07:08
|
I thought that was Maharani Jindan. ------------- Light blue touch paper and stand well back http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk - http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk - http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk |
Posted By: Perseas
Date Posted: 31-Jul-2005 at 06:35
|
I am puzzled between choosing Chandragupta or Sandracottus as Greeks were calling him and Ashoka. I 'll give though the lead to Chandragupta as the founder of Mauryan empire. One question...Were the Greeks of that period called by the Indians as 'Jobanaputra'??? ------------- A mathematician is a person who thinks that if there are supposed to be three people in a room, but five come out, then two more must enter the room in order for it to be empty. |
Posted By: Itihaas
Date Posted: 31-Jul-2005 at 10:53
|
I put Tipu Sultan since he was the frst Indian emperor to actually act like a western ruler. Unlike his predecessors he sent emmisiaries to Europe (France especially) and actually manufactured his weaponry in his own nation. His gun smiths were the first non europeans to manufacture modern firearms. He also invested in naval technology and rocketry. The Congrieve rockets were one of the most powerful in the world and developed by Mysore under Tipu Sultan. He reformed the education system. He actually did alot to help Mysore, but didn't last long though... |
Posted By: Itihaas
Date Posted: 31-Jul-2005 at 10:55
looking in my Sanskrit English dictionary I find the word for greek being Yavanna. |
Posted By: Perseas
Date Posted: 31-Jul-2005 at 18:01
|
I am aware that in Sanskrit, Greeks are called Yavana but i was interested to know the exact meaning of Jobanaputra. I assume the first part of the word Jobana is a variation to 'Yavana' and Putra is 'son' but i would like to hear the view of someone who is familiar with Hindi and Sanscrit. Seems Indians used the name Yavana for Ionians/Macedonians/Greeks in general, considering them this way, the same people.
------------- A mathematician is a person who thinks that if there are supposed to be three people in a room, but five come out, then two more must enter the room in order for it to be empty. |
Posted By: Darkness1089
Date Posted: 14-Aug-2005 at 02:04
|
Definately Chandragupta Maurya... Ashoka didn't really do as much as Chandragupta Chandragupta was the military strategist who first brought Imperial unity to India... |
Posted By: baracuda
Date Posted: 14-Aug-2005 at 02:58
Babur  he started the Mughul rulers of India, he hated being called a mongol, and prefered to be called a turk, but the name stuck with him, so in Europe they are called the Mughul, Mugul, Moghul rulers of India, note: Mughul is the Persian/Arabic word for mongol. Anyway, his son and grandchildren ruled until the English.
|
Posted By: Anujkhamar
Date Posted: 14-Aug-2005 at 03:40
but askoka did more economically and culturally, thats why i'm stuck between picking! |
Posted By: OSMANLI
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2005 at 10:05
|
I agree with Baracuda. Babur, he gained Hindustan with only 12,000. He was a military genius, even though he gained the crown at the tender age of 12!!! Only failure- his son Humayun!!! -------------  
|
Posted By: Jhangora
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2005 at 10:50
|
Ashoka for spreading Indian cultural influence overseas. -------------  Jai Badri Vishal
|
Posted By: Darkness1089
Date Posted: 22-Oct-2005 at 15:15
Culturally, yes. Economically, no. Ashoka had setup the empire to crumble due to his Pacifist policies. His successors were mudered and no one laid claim to the Imperial throne and India crumbled. Chandragupta Maurya had done a lot more to in terms of economics and power projection. Just take a look at the Arthashastra. Every single detail relating to the prosperity and well being of the empire is covered. This includes economically supporting his Southern allies (Tamils) to build large fleets and securing ports and entire islands in SE Asia for Indian merchants for the next 1500 years, supporting more than 50,000 war elephants for the empire, and building an insanely large military force to keep any and all threats at bay. He also brought the Indian North East to Indian control. Ashoka added some things like bringing some Nomadic Tribals and Kalinga under Mauryan control, but nothing equal to Chandragupta. |
Posted By: Itihaas
Date Posted: 23-Oct-2005 at 23:53
Yeah Babur conquered but he did nothing to improve the quality of India. He destroyed a few thousand Hindu, Buddhist, and Jain temples and massacred hundreds. Conquest is good, but contribution is just as important. |
Posted By: Itihaas
Date Posted: 23-Oct-2005 at 23:55
| sorry duplicate... |
Posted By: OSMANLI
Date Posted: 24-Oct-2005 at 05:56
|
The Mogul dynasty was created!!! Why is it that non-Muslim Indians can never appreciate any thing that Muslims did. Always so negative. Even with the Taj Mahal your government comes up with propganda to try to use it as a Hindu heritage Open your eyes to the world -------------
|
.Posted By: Itihaas
Date Posted: 24-Oct-2005 at 17:33
Any work relating to trying to site the Taj as a Hindu temple is banned in India. The guy who wrote the book left the country to my knowledge. I just would have rather had India free from an invaders whether they be Brits, Portuguese, Moghals, Afghans, Greeks, Persians,etc. The negatives outweigh the positives in this case. By the way I do appreciate the Islamic contributions to arts, architecture, sciences, etc....I just do not appreciate raw conquest without any other contribution. |