A Statue for A Pakistani Punjabi Hero.....Porus

[Punjabi Jattan Da Puttar]

I too look different from my neighbours, I am an Alien.

Eissey mat socho bhai

Tum bihari ho, biharis , aliens nahi hote !

 

[humanfirst]

Jats were originally from sindh and they moved to punjab area only in medivial period.And porus was a punjabi rajput king in the lineage of pandavas.Then how come the op's jat family fought against alexander?

 

[GURU DUTT]

kis hoshiaar ne is thake hue thread ko dubaara khola????

kyon gare murde ukhaar rahe ho


"SIKANDER NE PORAS SE"BY MAHENDRA KAPOOR,M:MADAN MOHAN-"ANPADH-1962" - YouTube

 

[Punjabi Jattan Da Puttar]

Jats were originally from sindh and they moved to punjab area only in medivial period.And porus was a punjabi rajput king in the lineage of pandavas.Then how come the op's jat family fought against alexander?

Some jats were from scythian ancestry....

 

[bajwajatt1984]

I believe the fact that there are ethnicity diffrencies between punjabis and bengalis, biharis, tamils, gujaratis sindhis etc. ...

..veer ji there is little bit difference in physical appearance of bengalis, biharis, tamils, gujaratis sindhis and punjabi...but they are not ethicanly different from each other ....skin colour and physical structure change due to climate conduction and eating habits

 

[bajwajatt1984]

scythian .....these are fairy tales created by some third rated european historian .... except pakistanis nobody take these stories in series manner QUOTE=Punjabi Jattan Da Puttar;2569366]Some jats were from scythian ancestry....[/QUOTE]

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

Did you consider that many Pakistanis have Afghan lineage. Also it is Muslim history, and honestly I think the reason they named their missiles as Invaders was to terrify Bharatis. I don't have a problem with Tamils or Marathis being proud of Punjabis, but it sounds ridiculous when someone sitting in Nagpur, is like yeah IVC belongs to us.

Ha ha havent u heard prominent debates regarding IVC?
Many archelogist believe the IVC belongs to the dravidians or tamils because we are the first people to set foot in indian sub continent !!
And the bull seal of IVC is a clinching evidence cos till now only in Tamil nadu bull taming sport or JALLIKATTU is still followed !!
By ur arguements iam sitting in chennai and still i can say IVC belonged to me !!
I am a indian first, and so i can say every indian can have rights over IVC as well as on PURUSHOTTAM or PORUS !!!

 

[Armstrong]

Hmmn, A Pakistani Punjabi Hero ? I can live with the Punjabi aspect of it because by some accounts that I've read, he appears to have belonged to the present day Punjab region; but a 'Pakistani Punjabi' - dude, he was neither a Pakistani nor an Indian, because the contemporary concept of nation-states was unheard of in those times.

I mean there are Kurds out there that talk about Saladin as their hero because he was an ethnic Kurd, yet the scholars of Saladin, at least the ones that I've read, find not a single mention of any kind of ethno-nationalism in any account of Saladin available from his time because the Saracens were a bunch of ethnicities united by a common cause and a common faith.

I think, this Poros fellow belongs as much to India as Asoka or Buddha belong to Pakistan because these lands of ours were considered, more or less, as one body even if there wasn't any unity between the different Maharajas or Rajas of the Indian Sub-continent, hence the term 'Sub-continent', and we as its successor states can and should claim pride in each and everyone of these civilizations. I am proud of Shershah Suri for the GT road and the vision of what a good, traveler friendly road network should look like but I'm equally proud of Asoka for his concepts of what an egalitarian society in the context of those times, could be.

Just because Pakistan was supposed to be a state that protects and further develops the Islamic ideology shouldn't do away with all that came before. There were exemplary gentlemen (and women) before the republics of Pakistan and India, who had created city-states and sometimes nation-states, though not in the contemporary sense, which are worthy of remembrance.

 

[jinxeD_girl]

self delete

 

[jinxeD_girl]

..veer ji there is little bit difference in physical appearance of bengalis, biharis, tamils, gujaratis sindhis and punjabi...but they are not ethicanly different from each other ....skin colour and physical structure change due to climate conduction and eating habits

what are you talking about? why you guyz always mix ethnicity with race? You are right that majority of Indians belong to same race, but ethnically they are different.. Punjabi or Marathi is ethnicity, Indian is nationality, Caucasian etc are races (if there is such a concept). stop mixing ethnicity with nationality with race..

An ethnic group (or ethnicity) is a group of people whose members identify with each other, through a common heritage, often consisting of a common language, a common culture (often including a shared religion) and/or an ideology that stresses common ancestry or endogamy.[1][2][3] Another definition is "...a highly biologically self-perpetuating group sharing an interest in a homeland connected with a specific geographical area, a common language and traditions, including food preferences, and a common religious faith".[4] The concept of ethnicity differs from the closely related term race in that "race" refers to grouping based mostly upon biological criteria, while "ethnicity" also encompasses additional cultural factors.

 

[jinxeD_girl]

..............

 

[Maira La]

It is a shame that their is no significant monument to this ancient battle.

Actually, it's much more of a shame that you guys want to erect the statue of a white Western invader alongside the statue of the guy who tried to defend your land from the invader. Sheer lack of pride I'd say (common among brown people). Europeans would never erect statues of their Turkish or Mongol invaders, ever! And that's pride!

 

[Armstrong]

Actually, it's much more of a shame that you guys want to erect the statue of a white Western invader alongside the statue of the guy who tried to defend your land from the invader. Sheer lack of pride I'd say (common among brown people). Europeans would never erect statues of their Turkish or Mongol invaders, ever! And that's pride!

On the contrary its so far into the past that I'm not sure if many of us can relate to the nationalistic element of it, especially when there wasn't an conceptualization then of present day nation-states and by extension nationalism.

 

[Maira La]

On the contrary its so far into the past that I'm not sure if many of us can relate to the nationalistic element of it, especially when there wasn't an conceptualization then of present day nation-states and by extension nationalism.

Yes there was. Alexander considered the nations living to the "East" of Europe to be uncivilized. However, he was impressed by the intelligence of the Persian people.

 

[Armstrong]

Yes there was. Alexander considered the nations living to the "East" of Europe to be uncivilized. However, he was impressed by the intelligence of the Persian people.

Oh bhai, I was referring to that in the context of Nationalism and Statehood. As I implied in my earlier post : If you'd talk about an Azad Kurdistan to Saladin or a Greater Afghanistan, in the sense it is talked about, to Shershah Suri, they'd think your bonkers.