Opinion piece: Basis of Indian claim to Indus Valley Civlisation?

[peagle]

In the coming period, I plan to write an article on the topic in the heading.
Could you guys please provide the basis for which such claims are made.

It is a historical fact that the Indus Valley Civilisation is a Pakistan Centric Civilisation, rooted in the lands of the Indus Region and the blood of Pakistani nation and it's people.
The only links to India are in East Punjab, which is part of the Indus Region. And, Gujarat, which was traditionally part of the Indus Delta. Any Indian claim is based on the periphery of the Indus Region.


I am aware of the following points, please add as you wish.

1. Second urbanisation period.
2. DNA link.
3. Linguistic (it makes no sense since the Indus script has not been deciphered as yet, please elaborate if you can).
4. Dravidian (I really find this weird, I assume it is linked to the linguistic and DNA claim. if it has another basis, please elaborate).
5. Since East Punjab and Gujarat are in India, everyone else gets to jump on the band wagon(from Assam to Kanyakumari, Is Sri Lanka also Included).


Thank you in advance.
I am unlikely to reply, but looking forward to learning.

 

[Sam6536]

In the coming period, I plan to write an article on the topic in the heading.
Could you guys please provide the basis for which such claims are made.

It is a historical fact that the Indus Valley Civilisation is a Pakistan Centric Civilisation, rooted in the lands of the Indus Region and the blood of Pakistani nation and it's people.
The only links to India are in East Punjab, which is part of the Indus Region. And, Gujarat, which was traditionally part of the Indus Delta. Any Indian claim is based on the periphery of the Indus Region.


I am aware of the following points, please add as you wish.

1. Second urbanisation period.
2. DNA link.
3. Linguistic (it makes no sense since the Indus script has not been deciphered as yet, please elaborate if you can).
4. Dravidian (I really find this weird, I assume it is linked to the linguistic and DNA claim. if it has another basis, please elaborate).
5. Since East Punjab and Gujarat are in India, everyone else gets to jump on the band wagon(from Assam to Kanyakumari, Is Sri Lanka also Included).


Thank you in advance.
I am unlikely to reply, but looking forward to learning.

There is no "claim" per say based on modern nation states. The people of the past had nothing to do with modern day Indians and Pakistanis. It's just that which part of the border the ruins fall upon.

This is just my superficial understanding, I'll have read up on this topic though.

 

[Musings]

There is no "claim" per say based on modern nation states. The people of the past had nothing to do with modern day Indians and Pakistanis. It's just that which part of the border the ruins fall upon.

This is just my superficial understanding, I'll have read up on this topic though.

The heritage of the IVC belongs to the soil. The soil today is known as Pakistan. You cant change this fact. There is signs and facts showing the civilization expanded as far as what is known as India but the heart of it is clearly in Pakistan. Not that Pakistan is looking after it as it should be cherishing it.

 

[Master Chief]

In the coming period, I plan to write an article on the topic in the heading.
Could you guys please provide the basis for which such claims are made.

It is a historical fact that the Indus Valley Civilisation is a Pakistan Centric Civilisation, rooted in the lands of the Indus Region and the blood of Pakistani nation and it's people.
The only links to India are in East Punjab, which is part of the Indus Region. And, Gujarat, which was traditionally part of the Indus Delta. Any Indian claim is based on the periphery of the Indus Region.


I am aware of the following points, please add as you wish.

1. Second urbanisation period.
2. DNA link.
3. Linguistic (it makes no sense since the Indus script has not been deciphered as yet, please elaborate if you can).
4. Dravidian (I really find this weird, I assume it is linked to the linguistic and DNA claim. if it has another basis, please elaborate).
5. Since East Punjab and Gujarat are in India, everyone else gets to jump on the band wagon(from Assam to Kanyakumari, Is Sri Lanka also Included).


Thank you in advance.
I am unlikely to reply, but looking forward to learning.

Shinde et al., 2019, Cell 179, 729–735October 17, 2019 ª 2019 Elsevier Inc.
An Ancient Harappan Genome Lacks Ancestry from Steppe Pastoralists or Iranian Farmers

This is the article that andbhakts enjoy misinterpreting. You must already have seen it. From my reading, it demonstrates without doubt the Iranian predominant origins of the Harappan Civilisation. The individual sampled is 3600 years old and is likely the best representative of the early/mature IVC genome available.

Indo-Aryan DNA was added to the "modern" Pakistani/North Indian genome during later migrations, after or during the decline of the IVC (could have been "invasions" but it makes no difference - the Aryans did definitely come one way or another, which is all that matters).

 

[Mr X]

So I have a change of opinion after learning more about the Indus Valley Civilisation (IVT).

It is true that it was discovered in Pakistan. From Harappa to Moenjodaro and it is still the best place to learn more about IVT. But later discoveries in India showed strong connection of IVT with Northern India. So it is not purely a Pakistani heritage but a shared heritage of both nations. It is like, all of us know the history of ancient Egypt but if modern Egypt is carved into multiple pieces and only one place is called Egypt, it cannot solely claim as the true successor of ancient Egypt if the modern neighbouring nations also have discoveries of ancient Egypt.

 

[Sam6536]

The heritage of the IVC belongs to the soil. The soil today is known as Pakistan. You cant change this fact. There is signs and facts showing the civilization expanded as far as what is known as India but the heart of it is clearly in Pakistan. Not that Pakistan is looking after it as it should be cherishing it.

Yes the ruins are in modern day Pakistan. Just like Taj Mahal is there in modern day Delhi.

I'm not saying that India has a claim to IVC just that if we're going that back modern day nations did not exist, it was a civilisation based on its own merits and classification.

India-Pakistan split happened in 1947 before that the region was mostly heterogeneous with brief period of homogenity. IVC is a important part of the subcontinent.

Pakistan can promote it as a major cultural thing and tourist place though. Tourism is where you guys lack a lot. India meanwhile has market the hell out it's forts and other cultural artifacts.

 

[mythbuster]

One factor that lays credence to Indian claim is that when Indus valley was drying up and river Indus changed her course , the people of the Indus valley migrated to ganges valley.

 

[Master Chief]

So I have a change of opinion after learning more about the Indus Valley Civilisation (IVT).

It is true that it was discovered in Pakistan. From Harappa to Moenjodaro and it is still the best place to learn more about IVT. But later discoveries in India showed strong connection of IVT with Northern India. So it is not purely a Pakistani heritage but a shared heritage of both nations. It is like, all of us know the history of ancient Egypt but if modern Egypt is carved into multiple pieces and only one place is called Egypt, it cannot solely claim as the true successor of ancient Egypt if the modern neighbouring nations also have discoveries of ancient Egypt.

North India does have peripheral sites, but it is fundamentally not the substantive region of the Indus River floodplain.

The IVC is a legacy of what we should regard to be "ancient Pakistan", with peripheral extension into modern India.

The nomenclature has caused confusion.

By referring to the nation state to our east as "India", we all erroneously assume a dominant connection between it and the Indus Valley. This is an accident of nomenclature.

Consider as an analogy the status of "North Macedonia" with regards to the Macedonians of Greece.

Greece has long rejected North Macedonia's erroneous claims upon the legacy of Philip, Alexander and the Macedonians as a mere accident of nomenclature. The modern nation state of Greece is Alexander's legacy and they rightly expect North Macedonia to desist from cultural appropriation beyond some peripheral geographical relevance to Macedonia's empire.

Interestingly, Jinnah knew this and was - as far as we know - irked by Nehru proceeding to name his nation "India" instead of the preferable Gangadesh or Bharat. Had we grown up with "Bharat" next to us for the last 75 years, I can assure you, their misplaced designs over the IVC would have gained less traction.

In terms of the genetics, the religion, the language, the culture, there is nothing substantive for modern Indians to "claim" over the IVC.

 

[Master Chief]

One factor that lays credence to Indian claim is that when Indus valley was drying up and river Indus changed her course , the people of the Indus valley migrated to ganges valley.

If true (and this is not a confirmed fact at all), it simply means ancient Pakistanis are the baap of modern Indians.

 

[Mr X]

North India does have peripheral sites, but it is fundamentally not the substantive region of the Indus River floodplain.

The IVC is a legacy of what we should regard to be "ancient Pakistan", with peripheral extension into modern India.

The nomenclature has caused confusion.

By referring to the nation state to our east as "India", we all erroneously assume a dominant connection between it and the Indus Valley. This is an accident of nomenclature.

Consider as an analogy the status of "North Macedonia" with regards to the Macedonians of Greece.

Greece has long rejected North Macedonia's erroneous claims upon the legacy of Philip, Alexander and the Macedonians as a mere accident of nomenclature. The modern nation state of Greece is Alexander's legacy and they rightly expect North Macedonia to desist from cultural appropriation beyond some peripheral geographical relevance to Macedonia's empire.

Interestingly, Jinnah knew this and was - as far as we know - irked by Nehru proceeding to name his nation "India" instead of the preferable Gangadesh or Bharat. Had we grown up with "Bharat" next to us for the last 75 years, I can assure you, their misplaced designs over the IVC would have gained less traction.

In terms of the genetics, the religion, the language, the culture, there is nothing substantive for modern Indians to "claim" over the IVC.

You have raised some points that I have also mentioned in the past. But the point I am trying to raise is that after the discovery of Harappa and Moenjodarro. It intrigued the historians to discover more sites, majority of which were found in Haryana, Gujarat and Rajasthan. So you can say the real IVT is a shared heritage between Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan as well as Haryana, Gujarat and Rajasthan.

I am not referring to River Indus which largely flows inside Pakistan and the name of India is derived from it. (Technically Pakistan is the rightful successor of India and the modern India should have been named Hindustan or Bharat). I am talking about the IVT that is beyond Indus River as there is no Indus River in Mehrgarh or Nausharo in Balochistan.

 

[Vikramaditya1]

4. Dravidian (I really find this weird, I assume it is linked to the linguistic and DNA claim. if it has another basis, please elaborate).

There is nothing weird here, the study cited by a fellow member missed a crucial part that the other side of the Iranian part is ancient ancestral south Indian (AASI), while none of them are predominant.
Modern Dravidian speaking populations have a mix of AASI, Iranian related ancestry(from neolithic farmer/hunter gatherer) and varying degrees of Steppe ancestry, depending on the region and community. So no they are not exactly IVC but have certain components similar to the DNA found in Rakhigarhi. They also mixed later on so no pure blood IVC whatever that is.

Shinde et al., 2019, Cell 179, 729–735October 17, 2019 ª 2019 Elsevier Inc.
An Ancient Harappan Genome Lacks Ancestry from Steppe Pastoralists or Iranian Farmers

 

[Ali_Baba]

So I have a change of opinion after learning more about the Indus Valley Civilisation (IVT).

It is true that it was discovered in Pakistan. From Harappa to Moenjodaro and it is still the best place to learn more about IVT. But later discoveries in India showed strong connection of IVT with Northern India. So it is not purely a Pakistani heritage but a shared heritage of both nations. It is like, all of us know the history of ancient Egypt but if modern Egypt is carved into multiple pieces and only one place is called Egypt, it cannot solely claim as the true successor of ancient Egypt if the modern neighbouring nations also have discoveries of ancient Egypt.

The question to me, is where is the centre of gravity for the IVT civilisation? It feels like the centre of gravity was modern day Pakistan, and any settlements in parts of India were outlier settlements that were connected to, and looked towards the IVT in Pakistan as their centre.

There has been no large scale discoveries in India that suggest that there was anything more than satellite settlements of the IVT civilisation originating out of modern day Pakistan.

On the basis of the centre of gravity, i would argue it is Pakistani based civilisation.

 

[Whirling_dervesh]

So I have a change of opinion after learning more about the Indus Valley Civilisation (IVT).

It is true that it was discovered in Pakistan. From Harappa to Moenjodaro and it is still the best place to learn more about IVT. But later discoveries in India showed strong connection of IVT with Northern India. So it is not purely a Pakistani heritage but a shared heritage of both nations. It is like, all of us know the history of ancient Egypt but if modern Egypt is carved into multiple pieces and only one place is called Egypt, it cannot solely claim as the true successor of ancient Egypt if the modern neighbouring nations also have discoveries of ancient Egypt.

The indian extensions of punjab haryana etc fit more into the pakistani area than the other way round. The hindutva agenda is to distort this, thats why they keep pulling the saraswati card.

The fact it is INDUS valley, ancient civilisations ran through major Rivers, the Indus through the heart of pakistan with ancient civilisations having cities and settlements around these lifelines.

As ususal indians tailcoat with 0 achievements themselves, they inherited a sub continent due to britsher machinations and nothing else

As i said in another post, sudan also has pyramids, but for them to claim the great egypt on the basis of some similarities is erroneous…….

 

[Vikramaditya1]

Interestingly, Jinnah knew this and was - as far as we know - irked by Nehru proceeding to name his nation "India" instead of the preferable Gangadesh or Bharat. Had we grown up with "Bharat" next to us for the last 75 years, I can assure you, their misplaced designs over the IVC would have gained less traction.

Jinnah didn't care about names Bharat or Gangadesh (? a hilarious recent invention) he wanted to forment the idea of Hindu and Muslim states, hence he wanted India to be Hindustan (I know why you didn't mention that). That's the base of partition. He feared the successor state will inherit the status of British India in short he was worried about the PR and that it'll overshadow his own state.
And why not? When the Portuguese set sail, they were looking for a route to India. The Arab traders before them used to trade with India especially the west coast called it Al Hind, the Chinese who called it Tianzhu/Yindu or even Shendu. So the name was popular among traders, travelers. Pretty sure Jinnah wasn't mad about all this, but rather his own reasoning for seperation.

 

[peagle]

You have raised some points that I have also mentioned in the past. But the point I am trying to raise is that after the discovery of Harappa and Moenjodarro. It intrigued the historians to discover more sites, majority of which were found in Haryana, Gujarat and Rajasthan. So you can say the real IVT is a shared heritage between Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan as well as Haryana, Gujarat and Rajasthan.

I am not referring to River Indus which largely flows inside Pakistan and the name of India is derived from it. (Technically Pakistan is the rightful successor of India and the modern India should have been named Hindustan or Bharat). I am talking about the IVT that is beyond Indus River as there is no Indus River in Mehrgarh or Nausharo in Balochistan.

I think you will find my piece interesting. @MasterChief is touching upon nuance that we Pakistanis tend to miss and grab onto points largely espoused by Indians, because they are loud.
Indus Valley Civilisation is not a point in time. There was a pre and post period.
Mehrgarh was part of the evolutionary trend, while it does not lay on the Indus itself, it was a precursor to the Indus civilisation, part of the same lineage. There are sites on the Makran coast as well.

The sites in India are directly linked only to the Indus, not the bulk of India as it exists today. Every civilisation has a centre point and a periphery. The sites are not in India, that is a broad term, they're just in East Punjab region and Gujarat, which is the Indus delta. But I'll provide details, that's why I wanted to get an idea of different positions before I started writing.