Ancient History not Appreciated by Pakistanis?

[DarkStar]

Why does the simpler theory of a natural diffusion of people and culture to the East not work for you?

Respectfully, I do not think that there is even evidence of that.

The Harappan Empire had already expanded to the areas of Rajasthan and Northern PUnjab and U.P, and the most famous site in Rajasthan Kalibangan was actually abandoned around the same time as Mohenjo Daro was.

Nothing of the culture, customs, arteifacts, designs, architecture of the Harappans can be found in the later doab settlers.

The decline of the Harappans was not sudden, but a gradual affair, over many centuries. The later Harappan era is markedly different to the early and mature phase, because of the lower quality of the utensils, artefacts, etc.

"Dispersal or dilution are evident from the prevalence of non Harappan pottery styles, impoverishment and disruption from the gradual disuse of the script and from the disappearance of the more fanciful manifestations of Harappan culture, including that obsessive standardisation"

The impoverishment was gradual, as the later ceramics lost their quality, the weights lost their uniformity, the roads lost their alignment.

I think a prolonged economic recession might be one of the main causes of this dissolution, especially the decline of trade with other civilisations which underwent their own upheavels.

It has been proved that the Harappans invested much of their surplus in commodities, which they exchanged with other civilisations. The decline in this trade would have forced them to leave their cities, and concentrate more upon agriculture.

 

[Flintlock]

^Was harappa an empire? I think it was more of a culture than an empire with a central authority.

 

[roadrunner]

The guy at the beginning of the clip talks of the "Ghakkar-Hakra" River.

This is the same river the Hindutva fanatics are trying to claims as the Saraswati - it's all part of the process stealing more Pakistani history.

I'll summarize it.

The Ghakkar-Hakra is some minor dried out river afaik which is being made out to have been some booming river bigger and more important than the Indus. Yet there's no evidence for any of this from the paleochannels that are supposed to have fed it, to the actually bulk of the Saraswati itself. It's simply superimposed.

The image he's showing at the start does locate a lot of sites in Cholistan, Pakistan with one or two along the Ghakkar River. This looks like an attempt to establish the Ghakkar as the Saraswati to me, indirectly. Discover one or two sites along the alleged Saraswati, then say it must have existed, else why these sites?

There is no evidence, in fact it's almost impossible for the Ghakkar-Hakra to have been a major river. Therefore, as water was important to all civilizations in the past, they would have located their sites along the Indus. This was the major river. There is no evidence to suggest Ghakkar-Hakra was anything more than a trickle.

 

[DarkStar]

Is this the same Ghakka river which used to flow near Kalibangan Harappan settlement? It has been conjectured that the drying up of the said river precipitated the abandonment of Kalibangan.

 

[DarkStar]

^Was harappa an empire? I think it was more of a culture than an empire with a central authority.

Well, this is the conclusion of Shireen Ratnagar (Bharatiya Scholar), an authority on Harappan history and commerce. I added this because i liked the sound of it. I knew it would elicit a response from you, though.

On a serious note, do you think its political structure was that of a federation?

 

[Flintlock]

Well, this is the conclusion of Shireen Ratnagar (Bharatiya Scholar), an authority on Harappan history and commerce. I added this because i liked the sound of it. I knew it would elicit a response from you, though.

It would, because I don't think I've seen it being referred to as an empire before.

On a serious note, do you think its political structure was that of a federation?

I don't think there was political order at all. It could have been some sort of ritual order, but even that would be within the citiies themselves.

The cities maintained links with one another mainly through trade and commerce rather than some sort of formalized administration.

 

[DarkStar]

It would, because I don't think I've seen it being referred to as an empire before.



I don't think there was political order at all. It could have been some sort of ritual order, but even that would be within the citiies themselves.

The cities maintained links with one another mainly through trade and commerce rather than some sort of formalized administration.

But how would that explain the complete uniformity of seals, figurines, bricks, streets, standardised weights, etc, in a society without an overriding political structure.

Research points towards something approaching a State, and with such far flung settlements as Gujrat, Baluchistan, and unto the Oxus river in Central Asia, this could definitely be an Empire.

 

[Flintlock]

It would seem astonishing, but if you consider the fact that there were no competing cultures with the Harappan one, which could jostle for influence, its not so surprising.

Actually, there is very little evidence for any sort of state machinery at all. Infact, the most basic tool of the state to exert its power - a standing army - is completely missing.

This indicates if there was ever a power structure, it would have been a ritualistic one based on common beliefs rather than one imposed by a coercive machinery which is the trademark of an empire.

But how would that explain the complete uniformity of seals, figurines, bricks, streets, standardised weights, etc, in a society without an overriding political structure.

Research points towards something approaching a State, and with such far flung settlements as Gujrat, Baluchistan, and unto the Oxus river in Central Asia, this could definitely be an Empire.

 

[roadrunner]

Thinking about it.

Let's assume the IVC was actually distributed along the saraswati, and that a climatic shift caused the Saraswati/GhakkarHakra to disappear (ridiculous, but let's imagine). So the IVC people, as the proponents of Hindutva say, decided to migrate Eastwards (despite there being a bigger river just west of them, the Indus!).

Why then would the people of the Rig Veda settle the Indus Valley, if there was a reduction in the monsoons or whatever?

There was no huge climatic effect that affected only the Saraswati. It's a fictitious river that never existed. The Ghakkar might have existed, and the Hakra too, but it was not a major river, and no existence of paleochannels or anything is evident.

 

[Flintlock]

Thinking about it.

Let's assume the IVC was actually distributed along the saraswati, and that a climatic shift caused the Saraswati/GhakkarHakra to disappear (ridiculous, but let's imagine). So the IVC people, as the proponents of Hindutva say, decided to migrate Eastwards (despite there being a bigger river just west of them, the Indus!).

The river is clearly not the only factor involved. Dr. Gupta mentions a weakening of the Summer monsoon.

Why then would the people of the Rig Veda settle the Indus Valley, if there was a reduction in the monsoons or whatever?

Because they were nomadic peoples, used to far harsher climates of Central Asia, so they probably found the Indus valley hospitable in comparison.

There was no huge climatic effect that affected only the Saraswati. It's a fictitious river that never existed. The Ghakkar might have existed, and the Hakra too, but it was not a major river, and no existence of paleochannels or anything is evident.

Why bring up the Saraswati at all? The Ghaggar-Hakra riverbed is clearly visible in the satellite photos, and it looks big enough for me, and big enough for Michael Wood and Dr. Gupta too, it would seem.

 

[Vinod2070]

Doesn't explain the 1500 to 2000 year gap between the end of the late Harappan era and the vedic era (which is not a historical era at all, as no event, place or person of the vedic era has any proven hostiricity). The gap is enormous, and cannot be wished away.

I think the video did cover some of that. It talked of the historic value of Hastinapur of Mahabharat fame, of Kurukshetra, of the acrchaelogical findings there etc.

See, these epics are thousands of years old, there can be no doubts about that. They may contain elements of myth but they surely would have been influenced by the society and its working when they were created.

The same way as your Hadhiths. Some or many of them may be myths. But they do point to the way the early Arab society functioned.

As for disproving the Geologist's claims, how can one disprove conjecture and speculation? The mythical river of saraswati was believed to meet the gunga jamuna at sangam, not run parallel to them. If not the saraswati, what other mythical river is he talking about?

I think Flintoff has covered it in this thread. I defer to him on this. He obviously is the more knowledgeable on this issue than me.

 

[Vinod2070]

So is the state of India...

But not the Indian civilization!

 

[UnitedPak]

But not the Indian civilization!

This thread is about Pakistani civilisations from the Mehrgarh/Indus Valley period onwards. Any statements on 1947 independence or drive by arguments which have been covered at least twice on each page of this thread should be discouraged.

We seem to have moved on from the stage where Indian members were obsessing about Pakistanis being created 60 years ago and having no links to their history dating 61 years ago. Lets not go back to square one.

 

[roadrunner]

The river is clearly not the only factor involved. Dr. Gupta mentions a weakening of the Summer monsoon.

This is all related to water and proving the existence of the Saraswati, when no Saraswati existed in history. Look at his map. He's giving the impression IVC sites were located along this fictitious Saraswati River.

The Ghakkar-Hakra river was at best a minor river that perhaps did dry up. But it was not a major river, such that inhabitants would look to settle along it as opposed to the Indus. The Indus always was the main river in the region. That is why Harrappa and Mohenjendara (which Michael Wood mentions by name in your clip), were located along the Indus.

Because they were nomadic peoples, used to far harsher climates of Central Asia, so they probably found the Indus valley hospitable in comparison.

This is as speculative as the rest of your ideas.

Your reason for the IVC inhabitants allegedly leaving, is that their water source (monsoons, rivers etc) drying up.

If this was the case, then the Rig Vedic people would leave also, they had more advanced technology for travelling.

This theory of yours that everyone one day decided to pack their bags and leave what was their home is absurd.. The IVC inhabitants were not animals they migrate from place to place in search of fresh pastures. IVC was their home, such a migration you're talking about has never happened in history, and it wouldn't ever happen.

Then there's your suggestion that it was a harsher climate in central asia is just speculation. First the Rig Vedic people coming from central asia is an assumption. Second, the Rig Vedic people evolved whole languages, cultures, and civilizations in the Indus Valley, so it was clearly not an uninhabitable place where the IVC inhabitants could not live.

Why bring up the Saraswati at all? The Ghaggar-Hakra riverbed is clearly visible in the satellite photos, and it looks big enough for me, and big enough for Michael Wood and Dr. Gupta too, it would seem.

Michael Wood is not a researcher, he's a presenter. His academic opinion means very little. He's doing an investigative piece. I could cite some other things, but no need.

It's good enough for Dr Gupta. However, those LANSAT maps do not show the existence of a major river. They show the existence of the Ghakkar-Hakra River afaik, and that's it. They do not show the main bulk of the Saraswati, and provide no evidence it was a major river. That is all extrapolated.

This is a quote from Oldham's 19th century archaeology:

"Between Sutlej and Yamuna there is no opening in the Himalaya through which a large river could have entered the plains"

In order for the Saraswati to have existed, the paleochannels creating the confluence that produced the Saraswati would have needed to arise between the present day Yamuna and Sutlej. It is geologically impossible for any major water source to confluesce and produce a major river (of which there is no evidence of).

The summary of all this is. There was no major "Saraswati civilization". IVC inhabitants were distributed along the Indus River predominantly, which was the major river in the region throughout all of recent history.

Your researcher, Dr Gupta, is trying to make it look like IVC sites were only located along the Ghakkar Hakra River. This is blatantly false.

 

[Vinod2070]

This thread is about Pakistani civilisations from the Mehrgarh/Indus Valley period onwards. Any statements on 1947 independence or drive by arguments which have been covered at least twice on each page of this thread should be discouraged.

We seem to have moved on from the stage where Indian members were obsessing about Pakistanis being created 60 years ago and having no links to their history dating 61 years ago. Lets not go back to square one.

I have seen no good answer to my below post. I feel you guys are just plain confused about what you want. A history based on the current geography created by M/s. Radcliffe and Durand or a history based on what was mentioned by the founders of the Pakistan movement?

I feel strongly that these post facto efforts to come up with a new identity based on pre-Islamic history is welcome (in that you finally are realizing to a small extent what you really are, not trying to be fake Arabs or Central Asians or Persians finally) but if you take it to the logical conclusion, some interesting scenarios emerge.

I hope at least some people would find the courage to think through what this belated embrace of the glorious pre-Islamic civilization means!

No, I am just pointing out the lacuna in the story that some Pakistanis spin. The current geography of your nation is just an accident of history. Where Indian Muslims happened to be in majority!

That is the basis on which Pakistan was created in 1947. That is why you had your majority population in Eastern Pakistan who shared nothing else with Western Pakistanis other than the fact that you were both Indian Muslims who happened to be in states/districts with Muslim majority. That is why your father of the nation wanted Kashmir too.

I guess Pakistanis feel that they are also the inheritors of the Mughal and other Muslim rule in India and even people like Tipu Sultan (in deep South!). So obviously you have no concern for the current geographic boundaries of Pakistan when it suits you.

Now suddenly you forget all that and want to claim even Sanskrit and the pre-Islamic civilization! Tell me, how many schools teach Sanskrit in Pakistan? Is there even one? Are there people even in single digit in Pakistan who know the first grade Sanskrit? Don't the majority of you population consider the pre-Islamic period as Jahiliya when people were waiting to be liberated by invaders?