Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Apples n Oranges
Pretorian
Joined: 09-Apr-2006
Location: India
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 172
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Ancient India was Pakistan Posted: 13-Apr-2006 at 22:21 |
Originally posted by Zagros
How did the Chinese and Koreans know what to call Iraq? The name obviously came to them from Westerners. |
Well, the word 'Iraq' as a name for a nation is of very recent origin.
Iraq
Iraq (ee RAHK) is an Arab republic in southwestern Asia which is slightly larger than California. The country is bordered to the north by Turkey, to the west by Syria and Jordan, to the south by Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the Persian Gulf, and to the east by Iran.
Ancient Mesopotamia, the "land between the waters," was located between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers of Iraq. It is part of the "Fertile Crescent" and has been called by anthropologists as the "Cradle of Civilization," possibly the site of the Garden of Eden. One of the first civilizations of the world, Sumer, evolved here more than 5,000 years ago. The first Sumerians are believed to have been immigrants from the highlands of Turkey and Iran. As the area developed, migrations and invasions became more common and influenced the cultural make-up of the region. By the mid-24th century B.C., the Sumerians were overrun by the Akkadians and thus began the rising and falling of a long series of empires in the area. With the spread of iron new weapons of war were developed and the Kingdom of Ashur--or Assyrian, as it is usually called-from the northern part of this region began dominating its neighbors. After the Assyrians fell in the seventh century B.C. the Babylonians reestablished their empire in the region and they were followed by the Medes, Persians, Greeks, and Romans.
Following the seventh century A.D., Islam became entrenched in what is now Iraq. Baghdad, the capital of the Abbasid Caliphate (Islamic Empire), was the leading city of the world for five centuries and was the acknowledged leader of the Arab and Muslim world. In 1258 Baghdad was devastated by the Mongols and was later occupied by the Ottoman Turks. After World War I, the Turks were driven from the area by the British. Britain then created a mandate from three former Ottoman provinces and called this new country Al Iraq (the origin), the name formerly applied to only the southern region of the province of Basra. In 1932, Britain gave independence to this mandate and Iraq became a sovereign, independent state. However, Britain still maintained troops in Iraq and greatly influenced the government.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iraq/overview.h tm
|
Same isn't the case for 'Hind'.I disagree that the Koreans and the Chinese got their name for India from Westerners.
|
|
|
Zagros
Emperor
Suspended
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Apr-2006 at 19:12 |
The region was known locally as Sindh from a Sanskrit root, this region's name was used to refer to the whole of India.
How did the Chinese and Koreans know what to call Iraq? The name obviously came to them from Westerners.
|
|
Apples n Oranges
Pretorian
Joined: 09-Apr-2006
Location: India
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 172
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Apr-2006 at 16:13 |
I guess that elaborates the Persian and European part.
How would you elaborate 'Indu' or 'Yindu', as the Chinese call India.
PSid the science of Etymology begin in "HIND"?
|
|
|
Zagros
Emperor
Suspended
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Apr-2006 at 15:58 |
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim
Originally posted by Rajput
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim
lol! Nadir Shah of Persia? Nadir Shah of Afghanistan! |
Are you mixing the Nadir Shah of the Afsharid Dynasty, born in Khorasan (Iran), with Mohommad Nadir Shah of Afghanistan ?
|
Its a bit hard to tell which Nadir Shah they're talking about but I think the one they are talking about is the one who invaded from Afghanistan in 1738. Although I'm wrong about him being an Afghan. His sucessor Ahmed Shah Abdali was an Afghan, but Nadir Shah (a turk) controlled the whole of Iran as well (the former Safavid Empire) so its probably acceptable to call him a Persian.
|
Correction: a Turkoman.
|
|
Zagros
Emperor
Suspended
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Apr-2006 at 12:09 |
Originally posted by Apples n Oranges
Originally posted by Zagros
India got its name from the Persians referring to the region as Hind, originating from the name of a geographic feature. |
I don't agree Zagros.Persians refer to India as Hind.Koreans call India---Indo & the Chinese Indu.Do you think the Koreans and the Chinese learnt the name of India through the Persians.
Below is the front cover of Indian Passport.In Hindi it says "Bharat Ganrajya".
So I guess your comment 'India got its name from the Persians referring to the region as Hind', needs some elaboration.
|
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=India
I hope that's elaboration enough.
|
|
Anujkhamar
Chieftain
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1027
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Apr-2006 at 11:10 |
Originally posted by Rajput
must have known about the warriors East of the Beas.
|
thats the thing, they so obviously did. The only people claiming it are the creators of Pakhistory.com, and i've already stated above how i feel about them in my 2 previous posts
|
|
Rajput
Shogun
Joined: 09-Mar-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 217
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Apr-2006 at 10:32 |
Originally posted by AnujKhamar
I still think everyone in this thread is ignoring the fact that they knew about the ganges and therefore knew part of India within its current boundries |
Good point and plus it was mentioned by someone earlier on this thread that the Macedonian scouts were par-excellence during their time, cream of the crop so then they must have known about the warriors East of the Beas.
Originally posted by Arjun
If Brahmagupta was a Pakistani then what about Millions strong Multani Hindu community living in India who came to India from "now Paksitan" after partition. |
Even if Brahmagupta was born in Multan it doesn't change the fact that he worked on most of his compilations and literature in Ujjain (Mahdya Pradesh, India) and some of his work was built upon that of his predecessor Aryabhatta, who was born in Patna, Bihar.
I think the 3 mathematicians who were born in present-day pakistan were Panini, Brahmagupta and the most recent one was a South Indian, Subhramanyan Chandrashekhar Ayyar (1910-1995).
|
If God did not create the horse, he would not have created the Rajput.
|
|
Arjun
Immortal Guard
Joined: 27-Feb-2006
Location: India
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Apr-2006 at 09:30 |
[/QUOTE]
Very interesting article and maps Apples n Oranges. It's of
significance in a way that when the ancient Greeks refer to India,
they're actually referring to Pakistan. It reminds me of
Brahmagupta who was the founder of modern Mathematics in many ways,
though he's referred to as "Indian" he's actually Multani from modern
day Pakistan. [/QUOTE]
If Brahmagupta was a Pakistani then what about Millions strong
Multani Hindu community living in India who came to India from
"now Paksitan" after partition. And somewhere down the line you will
claim the nobel laurate Hargobind Khurana and Dr. Manmohan Singh (The
Prime Minister) as Paksitanis since they were also born in the "now
Pakistan". There was no Pakistan before 1947. It was formed on the
basis of religion and not region. Likewise,will you say, people born
between 1947 and 1971 in Bangladesh were pakistanis and their sons
Bangladeshis and fathers Indians. This looks absolutely ridiculous.
|
From the desert lands of Rajasthan
|
|
Anujkhamar
Chieftain
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1027
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Apr-2006 at 08:02 |
<my post edited above, please have a look>
just one thing to add, the source is absolutly pathetic, it just had to be said.
Edited by Anujkhamar
|
|
Apples n Oranges
Pretorian
Joined: 09-Apr-2006
Location: India
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 172
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Apr-2006 at 05:24 |
Originally posted by Zagros
India got its name from the Persians referring to the region as Hind, originating from the name of a geographic feature. |
I don't agree Zagros.Persians refer to India as Hind.Koreans call India---Indo & the Chinese Indu.Do you think the Koreans and the Chinese learnt the name of India through the Persians.
Below is the front cover of Indian Passport.In Hindi it says "Bharat Ganrajya".
So I guess your comment 'India got its name from the Persians referring to the region as Hind', needs some elaboration.
|
|
|
K. V. Ramakrishna Rao
Earl
Joined: 06-Apr-2006
Location: India
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 287
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Apr-2006 at 05:21 |
If Chinese called "Ind", Greeks called India, Persians Hind and laterArabs also Hind, Hidustan by some others, the land is the same Bharat varsha / Barata kanda.
Thinking from today's time and reflecting presentday ideas on the past is historical idiosyncaracy. When John Marshall wrote "5000 years History of Pakistan", historians condemned him, because everybody knew / knows that there was no Pakistan before the creation of "Pakistan" from India or Bharat.
Even the ancient Tamils, very often mentioned or characterized as "Dravidians" opposed "Aryans", record the land where they lived as "Bharat" only. Therefore, that the land where Bharatiyas / modern day Indians lived is Bharat only.
When the Greeks started to know "Ind", it was so big, they referred to it as "India extragangem" and "Idian intra gangem", evidently giving importance to the rive Ganges.
K. V. Ramakrishna Rao.
|
History is not what was written or is written, but it is actually what had happened in the past.
|
|
Anujkhamar
Chieftain
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1027
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Apr-2006 at 04:55 |
Originally posted by Apples n Oranges
So Omar what's your view on this article -
"Ancient India" was Pakistan region,not present day
India!!!!!!!!!!!! |
I still think everyone in this thread is ignoring the fact that they knew about the ganges and therefore knew part of India within its current boundries What the greeks called India is the subcontinant. Yes they refered to Pakistan as India, but back then it didn't exist. The site you got it from is biased and is frankly rubbish as far as i can tell. They took a good name like www.pakhistory.com and used it for frankly not pakistani history. The maps they've posted are not what the Ancient greeks knew of the Indian subcontinent, only Pakistan. I think the fact that they thought the Ganges was the end of the world is enough to state that the maps are wrong. Infact, after looking into this site further i can see that its sole purpose is the get one over Indians. such a shame
Edited by Anujkhamar
|
|
Omar al Hashim
King
Suspended
Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Apr-2006 at 02:07 |
Originally posted by Rajput
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim
lol! Nadir Shah of Persia? Nadir Shah of Afghanistan! |
Are you mixing the Nadir Shah of the Afsharid Dynasty, born in Khorasan (Iran), with Mohommad Nadir Shah of Afghanistan ? |
Its a bit hard to tell which Nadir Shah they're talking about but I
think the one they are talking about is the one who invaded from
Afghanistan in 1738. Although I'm wrong about him being an Afghan. His
sucessor Ahmed Shah Abdali was an Afghan, but Nadir Shah (a turk)
controlled the whole of Iran as well (the former Safavid Empire) so its
probably acceptable to call him a Persian.
|
|
Rajput
Shogun
Joined: 09-Mar-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 217
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Apr-2006 at 21:36 |
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim
lol! Nadir Shah of Persia? Nadir Shah of Afghanistan! |
Are you mixing the Nadir Shah of the Afsharid Dynasty, born in Khorasan (Iran), with Mohommad Nadir Shah of Afghanistan ?
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim
I thought Siqunder was capturing the Persian Empire, and after his long and extensive campaign his soldigers wished for some rest. |
What does the Persian bit have to do with anything? There was a gap of 4 years between the whole Persian bit and Porus during which Omphis invited Alexander to Taxila giving him the status of King of Taxila. Instead of crossing the Beas he chose to conquer south through Mallava territory.
|
If God did not create the horse, he would not have created the Rajput.
|
|
Zagros
Emperor
Suspended
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Apr-2006 at 20:36 |
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim
lol! Nadir Shah of Persia? Nadir Shah of Afghanistan!
|
Try Nader Shah of Iran..
Courtesy of LoA:
Obverse |
In Farsi reads: " sekkeh bar zar kard nam-e saltanat-ra dar jahan/Nader-e Iran-zamin o Khorasan-e Giti setan" . meaning Nadir of the land of Iran and who seizes the world/coin in gold minted in the name of his kingdom in the world. Mint also on obverse. |
Reverse |
Chornogram for year 1148 reads in abjad letters: in the year, what has happened is good , the total value of letters comes to 1148 which was the year that Nadir became the king, however this jolus type for Nadir was minted from 1148 to 1151. | |
|
|
Apples n Oranges
Pretorian
Joined: 09-Apr-2006
Location: India
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 172
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Apr-2006 at 20:29 |
So Omar what's your view on this article - "Ancient India" was Pakistan region,not present day India!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Omar al Hashim
King
Suspended
Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Apr-2006 at 20:22 |
acronym that is `Pakistan' |
Pakistan is not an acronym although one has been made up for it. Pakistan comes from two words, pak (pure) and stan (land).
it was somewhere to be coveted as an intellectual curiosity, a
military pushover and an economic bonanza. To Alexander the Great as to
Mahmud of Ghazni, to Timur the Lame as to his Mughal descendents, and
to Nadir Shah of Persia as to Robert Clive of Plassey, `India' was a
place worth the taking. |
lol! Nadir Shah of Persia? Nadir Shah of Afghanistan!
Originally posted by AlokaParyeta
From what i got from the article, Pakistan should
be named India instead because of a eurocentric view of what is and
what is not considered part of the world.
Personally, i could care less what the greeks thought was part of the
world, what the persians called us, or what the british thought we
should be named, or how far Alexander went. India, Pakistan, Nepal,
Bangladesh, etc., should be interpreted according to their history, not
european. |
Well said.
Originally posted by Rajput
For some reason there was a presumption amongst the Greeks that the
people east of Porus' kingdom (East of Sutluj River), Magadha were far
more fierce than the soldiers of Porus whom the Greeks had fought
thus the Macedonians never ventured East of the Sutluj and into the
Gangetic Valley. |
I thought Siqunder was capturing the Persian Empire, and after his long
and extensive campaign his soldigers wished for some rest.
|
|
Rajput
Shogun
Joined: 09-Mar-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 217
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Apr-2006 at 20:06 |
Originally posted by Apples n Oranges
I think it would be better if 'The Outside World' is replaced by 'Ancient Greeks'. |
Actually that is a good point becauseo from 399-412 AD one Buddhist scholar from China by the name of Fa-Hien recorded his travels across the Himalayas into present day India. He has recorded the names of various Indian dynasties in his works through which I believe one can truly appreciate the might of the Indian Kingdoms, strongest of which was the middle kingdom located in Central India and Fa-Hien describes its influences (language, clothes etc.) on the peoples of Ancient Northern India.
A Record of Buddhistic Kingdoms by James Legge, Paragon Book Reprint Corp. 1965
|
If God did not create the horse, he would not have created the Rajput.
|
|
Apples n Oranges
Pretorian
Joined: 09-Apr-2006
Location: India
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 172
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Apr-2006 at 19:47 |
Originally posted by TeldeInduz
Yeah, Herodotus said that. You can read about it here.
The outside world knew ancient India only by ancient Sindh and the adjoining coastal areas. And it had the strangest notions about the people here. |
I think it would be better if 'The Outside World' is replaced by 'Ancient Greeks'.
It's like arguing, 'The Outside World' in modern history =The United States of America.
|
|
|
Zagros
Emperor
Suspended
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Apr-2006 at 19:46 |
If they were referring to pakistan, then they would have said pakistan, the fact is, that the polity of pakistan did not exist at that time and only came into being 59 years ago.
Britain got its name from the Romans, it originated from one tribe. India got its name from the Persians referring to the region as Hind, originating from the name of a geographic feature.
It is only correct to say that what the Greeks referred to as India, now lies in the modern nation of Pakistan.
|
|