Instagram

Sohail Speaks Yasir's Blog Fazeer's Focus

User Tag List

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 241 to 285 of 285
  1. #241
    Debut
    May 2012
    Venue
    Barad-dr
    Runs
    14,134
    Mentioned
    468 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Traveller55 View Post
    Because first 'documented history' we have, is somewhere around the whole Bimbisara-Prasenjit-Ajatshatru period. Prior to that, there are literally no written history of the kings and the only thing mentioned prior to it, is the Mahabharata - which is half history, half fantasy.

    There are also no epigraphical inscriptions of Indian rulers prior to this period.
    In that case , my question to you : Are the written accounts only way of knowing or corroborating a region's history?


    Tazimi Sirdar

  2. #242
    Debut
    Jan 2018
    Runs
    649
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Slog View Post
    I say so because I once did research on the Maurya empire and I found that there was very little corroboration and too much reliance on legends and folklore. Even the rise of Chandragupta Maurya cannot be ascertained with a degree of reliability, let alone all the exploits later. A lot of what we accept as history is derived straight from the Vedas Hindu mythology
    Err, false.
    Ashoka is quite literally the anchor of South Asian history.
    'Devanampriya Priyadarshi' is associated with Ashoka (as in Ashoka is named with that epithet) in Kalinga inscriptions.

    Ofcourse the start of Chandragupta himself would be clouded- dynastic founders are either very well documented or very poorly.
    But Chandragupta himself is well corroborated in Greek history as Sandrocottus. So his existence is not myth either.

    For the first pan-subcontinent empire, it is natural that their rulers would suffer from a fair degree of mythification.

  3. #243
    Debut
    Jan 2018
    Runs
    649
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by TM Riddle View Post
    In that case , my question to you : Are the written accounts only way of knowing or corroborating a region's history?
    If not for written accounts, inscriptions or coin hoardes, there is literally nothing else to go on.

  4. #244
    Debut
    May 2012
    Venue
    Barad-dr
    Runs
    14,134
    Mentioned
    468 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Traveller55 View Post
    If not for written accounts, inscriptions or coin hoardes, there is literally nothing else to go on.
    There are no written records of IVC and their culture either (if you are gonna bring up the seals then the script hasn't been deciphered yet). Going by your logic , should we question the entire finding?


    Tazimi Sirdar

  5. #245
    Debut
    Jan 2018
    Runs
    649
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by TM Riddle View Post
    There are no written records of IVC and their culture either (if you are gonna bring up the seals then the script hasn't been deciphered yet). Going by your logic , should we question the entire finding?
    IVC is not historical. Ie, we know nothing about them. We know nothing of their politics, who were their kings, what type of government they had, etc. etc.

    its like the same story with pre 5000 BC mesopotamia. We have Ubaid culture. Or the Samarra culture.
    Or more recently, the European cultures like Urnfield, Beaker culture etc around 1000-2000 BC.

    Yes, we have their stuff, we know how people lived in those times in that part of the world. But thats it.

    History is account of who ruled from where, what they did, how they did, etc.

    At that point, the culture just becomes an archeological find, thats it.

    What i meant to say, is we know nothing of the history of the subcontinent - apart from the fact that it was inhabited by farming peoples who made cities - prior to 500s BC. And sometimes, like in the 3000-1800 BC period, the cities were quite sophisticated.

  6. #246
    Debut
    Feb 2015
    Venue
    Karachi/NYC
    Runs
    22,371
    Mentioned
    1243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by TM Riddle View Post
    There are no written records of IVC and their culture either (if you are gonna bring up the seals then the script hasn't been deciphered yet). Going by your logic , should we question the entire finding?
    The claims arent the same.

    what we know about them is deciphered from artefacts, irrigation system, infrastructure etc

    the focus is not on kings and their impact or exploits etc


    #MPGA

  7. #247
    Debut
    May 2012
    Venue
    Barad-dr
    Runs
    14,134
    Mentioned
    468 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Slog View Post
    The claims arent the same.

    what we know about them is deciphered from artefacts, irrigation system, infrastructure etc

    the focus is not on kings and their impact or exploits etc
    That's just one way of looking at history . To me the social , cultural and economic life of original inhabitants matter far more than just studying about a bunch of Kings and Nobles and in IVC's case we have plenty of information available about how general population lived , their religious beliefs , trades with other civilizations etc . That's plenty of info for a civilization with no deciphered written records.


    Tazimi Sirdar

  8. #248
    Debut
    Sep 2007
    Runs
    1,770
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Immchr View Post
    There are a lot of myths being perpetuated as true facts.

    First and foremost, the myth of India always having consisted of small kingdoms and being politically weak most of the time.

    Let us investigate what we know of Indian history -

    We are taught that the 1st pan-Indian empire in Indian history is that of the Mauryans.

    However, the Mauryans largely succeeded the empire that had been created by the Nandas 100 years earlier.

    When Alexander came to India, politically the North-West was fragmented - the reason being almost all of it had been under the Iranian Achaemenid empire which had fallen to Alexander. However, all the small kingdoms and republics that Alexander fought against were very fierce warriors and the Greeks had a very very tough time. On approaching Gangetic plains, the Greeks learnt that what awaited them was the mighty confederacy of Gangaridai and Prasii who were very powerful. The strength of these confederies deflated the hopes of Alexander's troops and they demanded instant ceasing of further conquests. Read history of Alexander's march in India for more.

    The above shows that in Alexander's time, the ancient Indians (Pakistanis & Indians) were quite a military force to reckon with, even when they had small republics & kingdoms.

    After the death of Alexander, one of his generals, Seleucus, inherited most of his Iranian empire. This Seleucus, invaded India - which had united under Chandragupta, to conquer those regions that Chandragupta had conquered from Alexander's army after his death. However, Seleucus met with a resounding loss. Rather than winning back those territories, Seleucus lost all his territories between the Indus and the Kabul to Chandragupta. A majority portion of Afghanistan and Baluchistan passed into the hands of Indian political leadership.

    Though there were ups and downs, these frontier regions always defined the western boundaries of India for outsiders up until the time of Arabs.

    The Persian empire of the Arsacids and Sasanians hardly made any conquests in that frontier region.

    When the Arabs finally conquered Sindh in 712 AD, it was after a long decades old effort which started right from 644 AD. However, the Arabs never were able to conquer the Hindu Kingdoms of Kabul and Zabul which straddled Afghanistan and Pakistan. These powerful kingdoms survived upto 870 AD when Zabul finally fell to the Safarids. The Kabul Shahis, however, existed right upto the extinction of their royal house in 1026 AD under Ghaznavi.

    So, the frontier of India fought on for more than 3 centuries against the Arabs, who eventually gave up all hope of ever conquering those regions. It was finally left to Mahmud Ghaznavi who conquered them.

    -------

    The reason why Mahmud Ghaznavi had such a great success in India was due to 2 factors :-

    1. The 1st was that he was a very gifted and energetic military leader. There was no comparable leader in India at that time who could match him in these traits.

    2. North India, where his campaigns were limited to, had fragmented into smaller kingdoms, after the fall of the mighty Gurjara Pratihara empire. If people are unware of this glorious empire, please search in google, you'll know all there is to know about it. The Pratihars were rulers of North India for more than 2 centuries and were the backbone of Kabul Shahi might in the northwest as well. The Arabs of the 8th & 9th centuries, recorded that the Pratihars were the greatest enemies of Muslims (i.e. the empire of the Caliphate) in India and the small Islamic kingdoms of Mansure & Multan in Sindh, the only remnants of Islamic power in India at that time, greatly feared them. The Arabs, after conquering Sindh, had made inroads into NW India reaching deep into Gujarat and perhaps even Rajasthan & Madhya Pradesh. However, soon enough they were driven back comprehensively and the great state that arose in response to these Arab incursions was the Gurjara Pratihara empire.

    Unfortunately for these Pratihars, they had two very powerful neighbouring empires to contend with, the Palas and the Rashtrakutas. The Rashtrakutas were more powerful than the Pratihars. Infact, the Arabs considered them as one of the 4 great empires of the world. These Rashtrakutas almost always defeated the Pratihars whenever they battled each other.

    Finally in the 10th century, a great invasion by the Rashtrakutas on the capital of Pratihars, Kannauj, almost totally destroyed their power and the various feudatories of Pratihars carved their own little kingdoms. These various feudatories formed most of what later came to be known as the the Rajput dynasties.

    Hence, North India had not recovered from this fall and Ghaznavi entered the right place at the right time. had Ghaznavi met the Pratihars at their peak, he would have been easily driven back to his place and he would not have been the celebrated figure that he is today.

    ----------------

    Similar things can be said about other periods of Indian history but the post will become unreadably long.

    To come to the point, Indian civilization was a very vibrant one before the 11th century. It influenced the entire region of South East Asia comprising modern day states of Indonesia, Burma, Malaysia, Cambodia, Thailand, Vietnam etc. All of this region was so thoroughly Indianised that the Arabs considered it a part of Al-Hind.

    Similarly, the region of Afghanistan as well as vast majority of regions in Central Asia were heavily influenced by India in their pre-Islamic period. The modern Xinjiang region of China, had several kingdoms in the pre-Islamic period, all of them were heavily Indianised. Indianised also was the region of Balkh or Tokharistan. Sogdiana, a country above Tokharistan, was not Buddhist, but here the Hindu religion (for lack of a better word) deeply influenced these multi-religious people. The influence on China also goes without saying.

    Such an enormous amount of cultural influence could not have been wielded by India if it was a people of weak pusillanimous disposition. The evidence clearly shows that in the pre-Islamic period, the Indians must have been a very vibrant, adventurous & brave people.

    However all good things come to an end. That is the nature of this world. Indian civilization from the 11th century began to recede and its civilizational footprint began to shrink. It rather began to absorb influences from outside.

    There is no shame in accepting that during the period of Islamic invasions, 'Hindu' India was not politically a strong counterweight. However, we should remember that the cause of Hindus was not so hopeless as imagined here :-

    1. The powerful Vijayanagar Empire was the richest empire in India at its peak and the Delhi Sultanate or any other contemporary Islamic dynasty in India could not match its richness and affluence. It lasted from 1336 upto 1646. However its political power already greatly declined in 1565.

    2. Hemachandra Vikramaditya, also known as Hemu, was on the verge of establishing Hindu rule over Delhi before he died of a freakish arrow in the battle against the teenage Akbar which he was clearly winning.

    3. There was Rana Sanga who had defeated Ibrahim Lodhi several times and had ambitions to rule Delhi and hence North India. The greatest battle Babur had in India was not with Lodhi but with Rana Sanga.

    4. The Marathas had conquered majority of India at the expense of Mughals before the rise of the British. Infact, the 18th century in India was dominated by the Marathas.

    This is top notch post, and the best post I have read on PP. Amount of information in brief points, amazing. People should read this post who want to know what happened in India before Delhi Sultanate. Are you the original author of this post or did you take it from some one else.

    Btw I m a huge Indian history buff!! Its hard to find much information before Sultanate.

  9. #249
    Debut
    Feb 2015
    Venue
    Karachi/NYC
    Runs
    22,371
    Mentioned
    1243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Traveller55 View Post
    Err, false.
    Ashoka is quite literally the anchor of South Asian history.
    'Devanampriya Priyadarshi' is associated with Ashoka (as in Ashoka is named with that epithet) in Kalinga inscriptions.

    Ofcourse the start of Chandragupta himself would be clouded- dynastic founders are either very well documented or very poorly.
    But Chandragupta himself is well corroborated in Greek history as Sandrocottus. So his existence is not myth either.

    For the first pan-subcontinent empire, it is natural that their rulers would suffer from a fair degree of mythification.
    can you read properly?

    Where have I called Chandragupta;'s existence a myth?

    Ive said his exploits have a lot of fluff and have strong elements of mythification which you actually agree with


    #MPGA

  10. #250
    Debut
    Feb 2013
    Venue
    Guwahati, Assam
    Runs
    6,243
    Mentioned
    256 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Itachi View Post
    Kingdom in my place ruled for 600 years from 1228 to 1826. Not even mughals could beat them. Now that's an achievement. Only issue is, they were silent guardians and never really made them prolific.

    They faced only two loses. Against myanmar and british.
    Our Assam


    If there is a better batsman than Sachin then he hasnt arrived yet: Viv Richards

  11. #251
    Debut
    Feb 2013
    Venue
    Guwahati, Assam
    Runs
    6,243
    Mentioned
    256 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Akbar was the only Muslim emperor who was truly great. The rest, I wouldn't even classify them as animals since it would disgrace all animals on earth. They were a curse to humanity.


    If there is a better batsman than Sachin then he hasnt arrived yet: Viv Richards

  12. #252
    Debut
    Sep 2016
    Runs
    3,783
    Mentioned
    68 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    They couldn't modernize their armies and war strategies. Divisions and rivalries between different Indian kingdoms definitely played a role.


    "Be the best version of yourself"

  13. #253
    Debut
    May 2012
    Venue
    Barad-dr
    Runs
    14,134
    Mentioned
    468 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Hitman View Post
    Akbar was the only Muslim emperor who was truly great. The rest, I wouldn't even classify them as animals since it would disgrace all animals on earth. They were a curse to humanity.
    Lol read about siege of Chittorgarh and the bloodshed that followed afterwards. The Great Akbar ordered the slaughtering of 30 thousand people who were trapped inside the fort including many civilians.
    Truly great my foot!


    Tazimi Sirdar

  14. #254
    Debut
    May 2012
    Venue
    Barad-dr
    Runs
    14,134
    Mentioned
    468 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Hitman View Post
    Our Assam
    Mughals did conquer Assam at one point. It was just that holding it for a longer period was quite a daunting task considering the extremely difficult terrain.
    As soon as the Central Mughal authority waned , Ahoms rebelled again and declared themselves independent.


    Tazimi Sirdar

  15. #255
    Debut
    Feb 2013
    Venue
    Guwahati, Assam
    Runs
    6,243
    Mentioned
    256 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by TM Riddle View Post
    Lol read about siege of Chittorgarh and the bloodshed that followed afterwards. The Great Akbar ordered the slaughtering of 30 thousand people who were trapped inside the fort including many civilians.
    Truly great my foot!
    There goes every bit of my appreciation for him down the drain. I swear I had no bloody idea about the siege. I, till this day believed Akbar was the only Mughul emperor who was above hatred for Hindus.


    If there is a better batsman than Sachin then he hasnt arrived yet: Viv Richards

  16. #256
    Debut
    May 2012
    Venue
    Barad-dr
    Runs
    14,134
    Mentioned
    468 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Hitman View Post
    There goes every bit of my appreciation for him down the drain. I swear I had no bloody idea about the siege. I, till this day believed Akbar was the only Mughul emperor who was above hatred for Hindus.
    He was a jihadi of sorts in his initial days of rule. But tbf he did change later on and became completely secular during last years of his reign.
    But Chittor would always remain a blot on his legacy. Innocent people were massacred that day without any mercy. Rajput ladies performed Jauhar again.


    Tazimi Sirdar

  17. #257
    Debut
    Feb 2013
    Venue
    Guwahati, Assam
    Runs
    6,243
    Mentioned
    256 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by TM Riddle View Post
    He was a jihadi of sorts in his initial days of rule. But tbf he did change later on and became completely secular during last years of his reign.
    But Chittor would always remain a blot on his legacy. Innocent people were massacred that day without any mercy. Rajput ladies performed Jauhar again.
    That is what I believed he always was. In fact the only inappropriate thing I thought till today of his was him beheading the Hindu king Hemu.
    Last edited by Hitman; 20th February 2018 at 15:19.


    If there is a better batsman than Sachin then he hasnt arrived yet: Viv Richards

  18. #258
    Debut
    May 2012
    Venue
    Barad-dr
    Runs
    14,134
    Mentioned
    468 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Hitman View Post
    That is what I believed he always was. In fact the only inappropriate thing I thought till today of his was him beheading the Hindu king Hemu.
    Yeah a narrative of sorts has been created in India to project him as some sort of Great humanitarian and kind ruler who respected all religions and sought to promote harmony among masses.
    This is only partially correct as he was completely opposite at the beginning. You should read the works of Abu Fazal , the famous poet who accompanied him to Chittor. Hindus have been repeatedly called as infidels and idol worshippers who must be annihilated completely.


    Tazimi Sirdar

  19. #259
    Debut
    Feb 2013
    Venue
    Guwahati, Assam
    Runs
    6,243
    Mentioned
    256 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by TM Riddle View Post
    Yeah a narrative of sorts has been created in India to project him as some sort of Great humanitarian and kind ruler who respected all religions and sought to promote harmony among masses.
    This is only partially correct as he was completely opposite at the beginning. You should read the works of Abu Fazal , the famous poet who accompanied him to Chittor. Hindus have been repeatedly called as infidels and idol worshippers who must be annihilated completely.
    And that is exactly what me and my father always believed till today. Abu'l Fazl was apparently one of the nine jewels of his court, isn't it?


    If there is a better batsman than Sachin then he hasnt arrived yet: Viv Richards

  20. #260
    Debut
    May 2012
    Venue
    Barad-dr
    Runs
    14,134
    Mentioned
    468 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Hitman View Post
    And that is exactly what me and my father always believed till today. Abu'l Fazl was apparently one of the nine jewels of his court, isn't it?
    The very same. Wrote Akbarnama which details the exploits of Akbar .
    He has repeatedly insulted Hindus during the siege and called Rajputs all sorts of names.


    Tazimi Sirdar

  21. #261
    Debut
    Dec 2014
    Runs
    1,277
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by TM Riddle View Post
    Lol read about siege of Chittorgarh and the bloodshed that followed afterwards. The Great Akbar ordered the slaughtering of 30 thousand people who were trapped inside the fort including many civilians.
    Truly great my foot!
    It is poor to judge past rulers by today's standards.it was a state of nature world and massacares pillage etc were part and parcel of that period.

  22. #262
    Debut
    Mar 2016
    Runs
    1,193
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by hussain123 View Post
    It is poor to judge past rulers by today's standards.it was a state of nature world and massacares pillage etc were part and parcel of that period.
    He is confusing khilji with Akbar but i don't there was ever a time where killing 30000 civilians was not considered a genocide and the man committing not a monster.

  23. #263
    Debut
    Dec 2014
    Runs
    1,277
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Raw deal View Post
    I'm not twisting story,dude. Its a fact that Islamic invasions have been barbaric, targeted public, looted them. Few of them left after stealing, but few of them stayed behind.
    Shivaji as a sixteen year old started rebelling, Alexander as a 20 year old started conquering the world. That's not the point. Iran, Iraq, Egypt were so easily converted to Islam 100% , but Hinduism didn't. I can talk about my Rajput ancestors who chose death instead of converting, few of the rajput clans converted like we see in Pakistan, people have this " rana" sur name. You can make it all nice, sugarcoat it by saying that they converted because they saw something amazing in Islam and they converted.LOL. But the truth these people were just scared of dying, hence converted once they were defeated in a war.
    There are hundreds of references on internet how these people were converted to Islam.. !!.. Hundreds of temples were razed to ground by mughals and they built a mosque on top of it. Babri masjid in Ayodhya is just a tip of the ice berg. There are hundreds of mosques like that.
    Rajput ancestors?not sure if you post here but i still remember you saying you those when you used to masquerade as a pakistani here tht had a muslim father and a hindu mother.whatever happened to that story?was that a story afterall.

  24. #264
    Debut
    Dec 2014
    Runs
    1,277
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by jagatk View Post
    He is confusing khilji with Akbar but i don't there was ever a time where killing 30000 civilians was not considered a genocide and the man committing not a monster.
    Remember berlin mass rape?ethics in 20th century?

  25. #265
    Debut
    Mar 2016
    Runs
    1,193
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by hussain123 View Post
    Remember berlin mass rape?ethics in 20th century?
    You are confusing history being written by victors and not condemning genocidal maniacs because they lived 100's of years ago.

    This doesn't get much traction because who won but I am sure Germans remember it same with the Bengal famine and Churchill being a mass murderer. Just because it isn't well known doesn't mean it is acceptable.

  26. #266
    Debut
    May 2012
    Venue
    Barad-dr
    Runs
    14,134
    Mentioned
    468 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by jagatk View Post
    He is confusing khilji with Akbar but i don't there was ever a time where killing 30000 civilians was not considered a genocide and the man committing not a monster.
    Am I ? Read Akbarnama dude . Abu Fazl has described the entire events leading from Akbar heading to Mewar to eventual submission of Chittorgarh. This was the 3rd johar. You are the one who's confusing it with the 1st Shaka and Johar which occured in the times of Alauddin.
    Unlike some here I don't obtain my history knowledge from reading Wikipedia articles .


    Tazimi Sirdar

  27. #267
    Debut
    May 2012
    Venue
    Barad-dr
    Runs
    14,134
    Mentioned
    468 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by hussain123 View Post
    It is poor to judge past rulers by today's standards.it was a state of nature world and massacares pillage etc were part and parcel of that period.
    Sure but by the same token we shouldn't hurry to bestow the title of 'Great' on the Kings who were part of mass slaughter campaigns.


    Tazimi Sirdar

  28. #268
    Debut
    Mar 2016
    Runs
    1,193
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by TM Riddle View Post
    Am I ? Read Akbarnama dude . Abu Fazl has described the entire events leading from Akbar heading to Mewar to eventual submission of Chittorgarh. This was the 3rd johar. You are the one who's confusing it with the 1st Shaka and Johar which occured in the times of Alauddin.
    Unlike some here I don't obtain my history knowledge from reading Wikipedia articles .
    Not a history buff, but jauhar was a decision rajputs took not the invaders. Can't consider that as genocide on akbar's part. What happened with khilji was civilian murder on orders of khilji. Is there any written history that says akbar ordered killing of those people?

  29. #269
    Debut
    May 2016
    Runs
    7,817
    Mentioned
    174 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by hussain123 View Post
    It is poor to judge past rulers by today's standards.it was a state of nature world and massacares pillage etc were part and parcel of that period.
    Killing and massacring is a crime of the highest order be it today or 1000 years ago.

    The invaders did massacre people to win their battles. We did not invite Mughals to invade us. We did not invite Turks who are thousands of miles away from Indian subcontinent to come and invade us and rule us.

    All these Mughals and Turks had no business to do with India. They are foreigners who attacked subcontinent unprovoked and killed thousands and lakhs just to spread their empire and in the process Islam. Shameless people are those invaders and no need to glorify their actions.

  30. #270
    Debut
    Mar 2016
    Runs
    1,193
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ok earlier didn't google it just got confused my bad.

  31. #271
    Debut
    May 2012
    Venue
    Barad-dr
    Runs
    14,134
    Mentioned
    468 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by jagatk View Post
    Not a history buff, but jauhar was a decision rajputs took not the invaders. Can't consider that as genocide on akbar's part. What happened with khilji was civilian murder on orders of khilji. Is there any written history that says akbar ordered killing of those people?
    Read my earlier post in reply to Hitman. He ordered killing of 30 thousand innocents most of whom were civilians. I wasn't including Jauhar in that since by the time siege was broken and Imperial forces entered the fort , jauhar has already occured. What left were the non Rajput civilians who were then sentenced to death en masse.


    Tazimi Sirdar

  32. #272
    Debut
    Feb 2015
    Venue
    Karachi/NYC
    Runs
    22,371
    Mentioned
    1243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)
    @TM Riddle - Any examples of great kings in India who ruled over a significant empire (let's say size of akbar's empire) for a considerable time period and didn't take part in campaigns of mass murder?

    Ashoka was involved in among the bloodiest wars of all time aswell. Ofcourse he changed later but those lives don't come back do they? By very essence conquering lands results in death

  33. #273
    Debut
    Feb 2015
    Venue
    Karachi/NYC
    Runs
    22,371
    Mentioned
    1243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)
    Mughals are undeniably great

    Folks here seem to want everyone to sit in their own jhonpri by the Ganges lol

  34. #274
    Debut
    May 2012
    Venue
    Barad-dr
    Runs
    14,134
    Mentioned
    468 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Slog View Post
    @TM Riddle - Any examples of great kings in India who ruled over a significant empire (let's say size of akbar's empire) for a considerable time period and didn't take part in campaigns of mass murder?

    Ashoka was involved in among the bloodiest wars of all time aswell. Ofcourse he changed later but those lives don't come back do they? By very essence conquering lands results in death
    There's a difference between conquering and invading other kingdoms and straight up order a death sentence for hordes of civilians whose only fault was they were at a wrong place at wrong time. For instance , I had no problems with Turks slaughtering Rajputs since that's what they signed up for. It's the mistreatment of general populace which irks me most.

    Speaking of Kings who didn't go on rampage of mass killings and yet acquired a significant territory for themselves, Umm Well off the top of my head There was one Chandragupta Vikramaditya of Gupta dynasty.
    His father Samudragupta also known as Napoleon of India was a great conqueror as well but desisted from butchering innocent souls. There might be one or two off incidents but overall his reign was free from such brutalities.


    Tazimi Sirdar

  35. #275
    Debut
    May 2012
    Venue
    Barad-dr
    Runs
    14,134
    Mentioned
    468 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Slog View Post
    Mughals are undeniably great

    Folks here seem to want everyone to sit in their own jhonpri by the Ganges lol
    Mughals were undoubtedly great. No one is denying that. Their contribution in the field of art , architecture , administration etc was immense and unlike their Western Turkic brethren they were undeniably sons of Hindustan.
    Dunno why are you getting so worked up for no reason at all.


    Tazimi Sirdar

  36. #276
    Debut
    May 2012
    Venue
    Barad-dr
    Runs
    14,134
    Mentioned
    468 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Jhopri by the ganges
    India was one the richest lands in the ancient and medieval times and was famous worldwide for her huge wealth and fertile lands.
    These Invaders who some of you lot take so pride in were the ones living in Jhopris and thus always itched to control the area around Indus and Ganga Yamuna doab for the riches it had to offer.


    Tazimi Sirdar

  37. #277
    Debut
    Feb 2016
    Venue
    USA
    Runs
    44
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Any of the invading barbarians (Qasim, Aibak, Ghaznavi, Ghori, Suri, Mughals, British) never had control of the country side they were only in charge of few selected cities (Lahore, Delhi, agra, surat, etc). They left the local governance to the local Zamindars and nawabs only getting money from them.

    Indians never understood until they got educated in 1800s that they don't have control at the larger aspects beyond their villages and thus India became independent in 1947.

    Barbarians that destroy universities, music, arts, culture and language have actually never ruled any part of the world.

  38. #278
    Debut
    May 2016
    Runs
    7,817
    Mentioned
    174 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Slog View Post
    @TM Riddle - Any examples of great kings in India who ruled over a significant empire (let's say size of akbar's empire) for a considerable time period and didn't take part in campaigns of mass murder?

    Ashoka was involved in among the bloodiest wars of all time aswell. Ofcourse he changed later but those lives don't come back do they? By very essence conquering lands results in death
    What happens in India is a matter of Indians. What Ashoka did was wrong and at least he repented and converted to Buddhism.

    What did Mughals do? What did the other maruaders and conquerors do after they killed thousands? That's right. No repentance. Instead, they ruled our behinds like bosses and we glorify their history to no end.

    If it is okay to murder thousands in the quest to rule, then it was okay for Native Indians to be butchered by Europeans.

    It was okay for Spanish to murder thousands of Native South Americans to establish their empire and spread Christianity.

    Tomorrow if USA attacks some country and rule them and in the process spread democracy, it is okay too.

    Everything is fair in love and war right.

  39. #279
    Debut
    Feb 2013
    Venue
    Guwahati, Assam
    Runs
    6,243
    Mentioned
    256 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by TM Riddle View Post
    The very same. Wrote Akbarnama which details the exploits of Akbar .
    He has repeatedly insulted Hindus during the siege and called Rajputs all sorts of names.
    I just ordered the first volume of the English translation of 'Akbarnama', the book by Abu'l Fazl. Hope it'll be a fascinating read.


    If there is a better batsman than Sachin then he hasnt arrived yet: Viv Richards

  40. #280
    Debut
    May 2012
    Venue
    Barad-dr
    Runs
    14,134
    Mentioned
    468 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Hitman View Post
    I just ordered the first volume of the English translation of 'Akbarnama', the book by Abu'l Fazl. Hope it'll be a fascinating read.
    He was a great poet. Provided some fascinating insights inside the Mughal administration.


    Tazimi Sirdar

  41. #281
    Debut
    Feb 2013
    Venue
    Guwahati, Assam
    Runs
    6,243
    Mentioned
    256 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by TM Riddle View Post
    He was a great poet. Provided some fascinating insights inside the Mughal administration.
    I love reading history. Nothing fascinates more than learning about history and visiting historical sites. I absolutely love it.


    If there is a better batsman than Sachin then he hasnt arrived yet: Viv Richards

  42. #282
    Debut
    Mar 2014
    Runs
    10,829
    Mentioned
    423 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Who was that barbarian who burnt libraries and universities? I don't recall the names.

  43. #283
    Debut
    May 2012
    Venue
    Barad-dr
    Runs
    14,134
    Mentioned
    468 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CricketCartoons View Post
    Who was that barbarian who burnt libraries and universities? I don't recall the names.
    Aapke apne Bakhtiyar Khilji Sahb. The conqueror of Bihar and Bengal.


    Tazimi Sirdar

  44. #284
    Debut
    May 2010
    Venue
    UK
    Runs
    23,568
    Mentioned
    204 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by TM Riddle View Post
    He was a jihadi of sorts in his initial days of rule. But tbf he did change later on and became completely secular during last years of his reign.
    But Chittor would always remain a blot on his legacy. Innocent people were massacred that day without any mercy. Rajput ladies performed Jauhar again.
    India has certainly come a long way from women setting fire to themselves to preserve their honour in the face of defeat, I think this is probably a good thing. Otherwise the old custom of sati would still be expected to be observed, I don't think the modern world would take kindly to it, and rightly so.


    I for one welcome our new In____ overlords - Kent Brockman

  45. #285
    Debut
    May 2012
    Venue
    Barad-dr
    Runs
    14,134
    Mentioned
    468 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cpt. Rishwat View Post
    India has certainly come a long way from women setting fire to themselves to preserve their honour in the face of defeat, I think this is probably a good thing. Otherwise the old custom of sati would still be expected to be observed, I don't think the modern world would take kindly to it, and rightly so.
    You are right. This self immolation stuff belonged to the middle ages only and has no place in the modern society. Thankfully Indian Govt has enacted quite severe laws to prevent anything of that sort from happening.


    Tazimi Sirdar


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •