@Icewolf Brother, Gujuratis are not descendants of IVC. They are a Southern Indian people. They tend to have Australoid features and follow strict rigid Hinduism. Gujurat is the base for BJP, VHP, RSS, Bajrang Dal and other Hindu radical groups.
Way too generous. Typical Gujurati look.
Does Modi look South Indian to you? Btw Modi is a low caste. Also keep in mind there are plenty of fair south Indians and some dark Punjabis. As someone posted already, Malala's father could be mistaken for a South Indian. Anyway skin tone is beside the point, the reason Gujarat can accurately be included in the IVC region is because many important IVC sites have been found there, such as the first port city in the IVC
I see a lot of Patels and other Gujuratis here in the USA. Culturally they are closer to South Indians. Their facial features are thoroughly Australoid, like the picture I posted. They also tend to be Hindu fanatics and big supporters of Modi, who is also Gujurati. We have many jokes about Indian Patels here. They tend to be awkward socially.
Patels come from all over Gujarat, including west guajarat and Kutch. PAtel is simply a landowner caste. They are also native to Maharashtra, where they are called "Patil"
Atleast we can agree on one thing. The rest of India except border states cannot claim IVC. That is mutually understood correct? Just put yes or no.
And I have never seen any Pakistani obsess over Mauryan and Gupta empires. Most Pakistanis don’t even know what that even is.
And no the IVC influenced regions of India really don’t have that many people.
If we count those border states it’s around 158 million people. And I’m being really generous here because there are some areas of Gujarat and Punjab which are not connected to IVC geographically such as Surat Gujarat, and east side of Rajasthan. So most likely around 100 million people. So out of 1.2 billion population of India only around 100-160 million have SOME shared history.
Also, don’t claim your history based on whatever foreigners labeled you as. Just because a Greek scholar one time said the world is flat doesn’t mean it to be true.
Actually the most ancient term for India is the region around the Indus River. Basically Sindh. East of Sindh would be considered a totally different region based on ancient knowledge. remember that Alexander and Bin Qasim never ventured out farther than Sindh because that was where the civilization basically ended to them. The rest of India past Sindh and Gujarat was basically civilziationless to them and useless to them.
The reason Alexander never ventured further was because he could not. If he could barely beat Porus and his elephants, what makes you think he could beat the giant Nanda Empire, which also happens to have native elephant populations?
As for the name thing, its nothing but Pakistanis making drama. Bharat means India in Sanskrit, Hindi, and other Indian languages. Hindustan is how you say it in Urdu.
As for Southern Gujarat not being related to the IVC, Lothal is the biggest IVC City there, and it is in the Bhal region in the Eastern part of the state, so I think it is fair to include the entirety of the state in the IVC region.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhal_region
As for your question. The people in India who can claim IVC are Gujarat, Western Rajasthanis, Punjabis(Including people from CHandigarh), Haryanvis, Himachalis, Dofras, Ladakhis(and baltis) and some paharis. Other than that, no. The number of people that entails. is debateable, especially when you include peoples such as Rajputs and Gujjars who migrated to other parts of India. But in general, I agree with you. The rest of India has its own history and does not need to claim anything from Pakistan.
