Who Created Harappan / Indus Valley Civilisation? | How Did It End? | Samvaad With Devdutt Pattanaik

[r3alist]

Muslims came to Kerala in around 700AD, that's a foreign culture

Apparently trade with outside world has always been there, foreigners are not new, you said yourself


keralans decided to become Muslim because in the free market of ideas they thought it was the way


And think about the revolutionary ideas of equality of man, the process of cleansing and prayer, as equals..... You can see it right

 

[Master Chief]

Don't like it eh? Let's use your favourite Herodotus again, his own quote says "These Indians dwell far away from the Persians southwards, and were not subjects of King Darius." Hmm interesting which Indians he must be talking about? Care to weigh in?

The fact is did “India” remain synonymous with the administrative territory Hindus? The answer is no.

You conveniently chose a part of History when Persiana ruled over some Hindus and choose to believe only they are Hindus. Your argument falls apart precisely because your own sources don't back you up however less reliable they are.

I'm talking about the naming of "India".

And yes it is true, as far as we know, that the Persians and their Greek subjects derived the nomenclature from the Sanskrit for a specific river but guess what? It ONLY applies to that river, even in your own sacred texts. These texts do not refer to an actual continuous political entity but rather a hopeful vision of what Bharat should be. Clearly, apart from briefly under Ashoka, these disparate regions were never unified in reality. Even if they were, why would you accept calling it India, after only ONE of the rivers mentioned in your script?

Tell me, what do ancient Sanskrit texts refer to the WHOLE subcontinent as, or even coterminous Bharat? Is it "India" or is it something else??

"INDIA" is beyond all doubt an exonym, bequeathed unto the region of the Indus specifically by foreigners who used the word for ONE of the rivers identified in your scriptures.

 

[r3alist]

INDIA" is beyond all doubt an exonym, bequeathed unto the region of the Indus specifically by foreigners who used the word for ONE of the rivers identified in your scriptures.

Same with Persia, it's an exonym



Endonym was Iran, or eran

Lost cause these guys

They won't appreciate this because they cannot digest

And they never expected Pakistan to take time to consider what ancient legacy modern Pakistan has

 

[Master Chief]

Same with Persia, it's an exonym

OT but a funny one.

As a child, my dear khala in Lahore used to teach me much about the world, in terms of basic general knowledge, for which i am thankful that she took the time to make the effort.

One gem of hers in particular when we were discussing ancient empires of the world:

"Beta, did you also know that Persia was also once known as Prussia to the Europeans?"

Of course, I sounded like a complete tit when I sat in history class a month later explaining this to everyone.

Always double checked khala's syllabus material after that day.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Same with Persia, it's an exonym



Endonym was Iran, or eran

Lost cause these guys

They won't appreciate this because they cannot digest

And they never expected Pakistan to take time to consider what ancient legacy modern Pakistan has

For the last 79 years, the indians have been trying to claim the ancient Pakistani civilisations of the Indus Valley, Mohenjendaro and Harappa. It's ONLY very recently that educated and articualte Pakistanis have started to reclaim our heritage.

 

[peagle]

Same with Persia, it's an exonym



Endonym was Iran, or eran

Lost cause these guys

They won't appreciate this because they cannot digest

And they never expected Pakistan to take time to consider what ancient legacy modern Pakistan has

Sorry, but that's a poor comparison, Persia has actual history. The issue isn't just the naming but whether that naming has any relevance to the reality on the ground.
Persia did.

India, Bharat or Hindustan did not and does not. They're still in the process of nation building, trying to create a nation. The only language which unifies them is English, a foreign language. Despite trying to impose Hindi, people refuse to accept "Hindi imposition". Which is why they still do not have a national language.

I love the fact you're using "modern" Pakistan to convey our continuous heritage. It's good but we need to move on and use the name Pakistan as a default acceptable term to describe the history of the Indus region throughout the ages.
Most nations in the world are modern nations, including the name but the term "modern" is not applied to them. It's good to see people like you are making an effort, but we need to continue improving.



It would help the cause if we bin the term Indian subcontinent to the dustbin of history. The only relevant term is South Asia, it eliminates any confusion.

"Subcontinent" is merely a geological term, geology is what is below ground, the tectonic plates.

"South Asia" is a geographical and geopolitical term. The only legally recognised term by the United Nations,
Geography is what's above ground, the landscape, the rivers, mountains, forests and the land.

Geo political is the human societies, their existence and how they operate.

1. Subcontinent merely a geological term, nothing more.

2. South Asia covers the geography (Land) and the geopolitics (People).

 

[peagle]

For the last 79 years, the indians have been trying to claim the ancient Pakistani civilisations of the Indus Valley, Mohenjendaro and Harappa. It's ONLY very recently that educated and articualte Pakistanis have started to reclaim our heritage.

Actually, if you look at the facts we have always claimed it, but not aggressively. The only difference is now we're doing it aggressively, loudly and proudly.

 

[r3alist]

For the last 79 years, the indians have been trying to claim the ancient Pakistani civilisations of the Indus Valley, Mohenjendaro and Harappa. It's ONLY very recently that educated and articualte Pakistanis have started to reclaim our heritage.

Modern day Pakistan are the custodians of


Rigveda
Pāṇini’s Aṣṭādhyāyī
The Bakhshali Manuscript



This is part of the intellectual cultural and spiritual history within the soil of Pakistan


Not any old Indian from thousands of miles away

Modern day Pakistan


Indians are welcome to admire and visit the history of their neighbours.

 

[peagle]

Modern day Pakistan are the custodians of


Rigveda
Pāṇini’s Aṣṭādhyāyī
The Bakhshali Manuscript



This is part of the intellectual cultural and spiritual history within the soil of Pakistan


Not any old Indian from thousands of miles away

Modern day Pakistan


Indians are welcome to admire and visit the history of their neighbours.

I wouldn't mind if we were charitable on this account lol, let them have it, but only as a charitable gift lol

 

[r3alist]

Actually, if you look at the facts we have always claimed it, but not aggressively. The only difference is now we're doing it aggressively, loudly and proudly.

Yes, exactly this

They thought they had Pakistanis psychologically cornered they would not accept ancient history


Reality is more banal, they are over invested in exaggerated foundational myths and Pakistanis were a bit lazy or indifferent

 

[r3alist]

I wouldn't mind if we were charitable on this account lol, let them have it, but only as a charitable gift lol

Treason


They would gladly accept it as if it were something that could be passed around like that


That's basically their argument


So giza pyramid up for grabs....

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Sorry, but that's a poor comparison, Persia has actual history. The issue isn't just the naming but whether that naming has any relevance to the reality on the ground.
Persia did.

India, Bharat or Hindustan did not and does not. They're still in the process of nation building, trying to create a nation. The only language which unifies them is English, a foreign language. Despite trying to impose Hindi, people refuse to accept "Hindi imposition". Which is why they still do not have a national language.

I love the fact you're using "modern" Pakistan to convey our continuous heritage. It's good but we need to move on and use the name Pakistan as a default acceptable term to describe the history of the Indus region throughout the ages.
Most nations in the world are modern nations, including the name but the term "modern" is not applied to them. It's good to see people like you are making an effort, but we need to continue improving.



It would help the cause if we bin the term Indian subcontinent to the dustbin of history. The only relevant term is South Asia, it eliminates any confusion.

"Subcontinent" is merely a geological term, geology is what is below ground, the tectonic plates.

"South Asia" is a geographical and geopolitical term. The only legally recognised term by the United Nations,
Geography is what's above ground, the landscape, the rivers, mountains, forests and the land.

Geo political is the human societies, their existence and how they operate.

1. Subcontinent merely a geological term, nothing more.

2. South Asia covers the geography (Land) and the geopolitics (People).

"south asia" is a british colonial phrase used to describe the lands that the british ruled and referred to as "the british raj".