Is Pakistan the heir to the Mughals?

[Foinikas]

That is like saying Greece was part of Germany before the collapse of the Third Reich. Just to correct you we were part of British Raj which was dissolved in 1947.

Just like Third Reich was a imposition on various countries of Europe and North Africa, British Raj was also a imposition on various peoples in South Asia.

It emphatically was NOT India as in the meaning it holds today. This infographic should lay bare the actuall situation.

This is British Raj with British flag ruled by London.


View attachment 816596


These are the successor states of the Raj. From east Myanmar [Burma], Bangladesh, Indian Union and Pakistan.

View attachment 816597

or in another way.

View attachment 816598

I'm talking about back then,in the ancient times. It was more or less considered India.

 

[hussain0216]

I'm talking about back then,in the ancient times. It was more or less considered India.

It WAS India

We are the land of the Indus


The people east of us were just nothing to us though

 

[SuvarnaTeja]

I'm talking about back then,in the ancient times. It was more or less considered India.

Correct. Historically Pakistan was called as India.

It WAS India

We are the land of the Indus


The people east of us were just nothing to us though

People to the east of Pakistan were slaves and subjects of rulers who now live in Pakistan.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Well, you mentioned him being dismissive of SDRE people [I don't think it is true],

I'm afraid there are actual speeches of his where he says these things. Digging up one of his speeches is a tedious endeavour, otherwise I would have reproduced it for you.

however, this has nothing to do with being in denial of ancient India as Pakistanis are. The map image is of Pakistan [posted by Indus Pakistan] which is ancient India. The whole world knows this.

What I am going to point out to Indus Pakistan, for whom I have enormous personal respect, is that we find the envoy to the Maurya court, Megasthenes, writing about his embassy at Pataliputra, currently in the state of Bihar, as the Indika. There may have been a short, initial period when the Achaemenids referred to the west bank of the Indus River as India, as their three provinces in south Asia were located on that west bank, fairly close together, but that usage was confined to them, and both to the following Alexandrine Greeks as well as to the Bactrian Greeks, India was the hinterland as well.

The usage suggested by Indus Pakistan is one suggested originally by Aitzaz Ahsan, an understandable suggestion, but one conjured up to meet a specific ethno-national need. I am not interested in getting into a protracted wrangle about that, and about an apparent political coalescence over the centuries on the Indus Valley for marcher kingdoms.

 

[Joe Shearer]

It WAS India

We are the land of the Indus


The people east of us were just nothing to us though

I have already answered this elsewhere. The people of the Indus did not define themselves as India; that was the name used initially by the Achaemenid Persians for three of their provinces that were located in the Indus Valley. Later Greeks - Megasthenes, for instance - were never in any doubt; Pataliputra in Bihar was India. At that time, or later, the people of the Indus Valley had no occasion to deal with names; after a brief interval in the north of rule by the Bactrian Greeks, following the fall of the Mauryas and the defeat of their weak successors, the Sungas, large swathes of territory were ruled by the Northern Satraps and by the Western Satraps. If you look up their territories, those Saka or Scythian dominions extended far beyond the Indus Valley, and were not centred on it either. The Western Satraps ruled right until the Gupta Empire, although they suffered their first setback from the Satavahanas, recovered, and were then wiped out by Samudra Gupta.

Just to round off the tale, the Sakas were succeeded by the Kushana, whose empire straddled a vast amount of territory right into Central Asia. They were certainly not Indus-centric. One branch of the extended Hun confederacy succeeded them, and their rule was interrupted by an expanding Gupta Empire.

The argument is simply not tenable. Not in the light of historical facts.

Not really,,. All Muslims of the sub continent have a right to the Muslim history of the sub continent

It's what forged our identity today

Any other pre Islamic history, for the people of Pakistan is only important if it happened within our land

We don't care what happened to the people east of us, they are not our people

If we take this logic to its fullest extent, all Muslims therefore have a right to the Muslim history of the extended rule of the Sultans who ruled Bengal and its neighbourhood, independently, for large periods of time. They were people quite a bit to the east of what seems to be imagined as the extent of Muslim rule.

These theories are born out of a poor knowledge of the history of the sub-continent. Even the slightest amount of information beyond what turns up on Internet arguments is enough to dissolve these theories.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Not really,,. All Muslims of the sub continent have a right to the Muslim history of the sub continent

It's what forged our identity today

Any other pre Islamic history, for the people of Pakistan is only important if it happened within our land

We don't care what happened to the people east of us, they are not our people

If we take this logic to its fullest extent, all Muslims therefore have a right to the Muslim history of the extended rule of the Sultans who ruled Bengal and its neighbourhood, independently, for large periods of time. They were people quite a bit to the east of what seems to be imagined as the extent of Muslim rule.

These theories are born out of a poor knowledge of the history of the sub-continent. Even the slightest amount of information beyond what turns up on Internet arguments is enough to dissolve these theories.

That is like saying Greece was part of Germany before the collapse of the Third Reich. Just to correct you we were part of British Raj which was dissolved in 1947.

Just like Third Reich was a imposition on various countries of Europe and North Africa, British Raj was also a imposition on various peoples in South Asia.

It emphatically was NOT India as in the meaning it holds today. This infographic should lay bare the actuall situation.

This is British Raj with British flag ruled by London.


View attachment 816596


These are the successor states of the Raj. From east Myanmar [Burma], Bangladesh, Indian Union and Pakistan.

View attachment 816597

or in another way.

View attachment 816598

Perfectly true, as far as the interpretation of the British Raj goes, as far as the last use of India for a united political entity united by British domination goes. It does not apply to European usage through centuries previous to this, and in common use in a dozen European contexts for these centuries.

Since India was a European - originally Greek, derived from Persian - usage, there is not much point in taking up the final 90 years and building a case going back to the 6th century BCE, the probable date of the incursion of the Achaemenids into south Asia. It doesn't compute.

Afghanistan can claim that. Pakistan is just a western wing of gangadesh I would say except pukhtuns and balochis.

While it may salve a few bruised egos, Gangadesh is a coinage fit only for Internet keyboard scholar-warriors.

I'm talking about back then,in the ancient times. It was more or less considered India.

It was. not more or less, but precisely so.

 

[kingQamaR]

Babur and Humayun (1526–1556)

The Mughal Empire was founded by Babur (reigned 1526–1530), a Central Asian ruler who was descended from the Turco-Mongol conqueror Timur (the founder of the Timurid Empire) on his father's side, and from Genghis Khan on his mother's side.

answer is no we are not

 

[sur]

I have recently been watching documentaries about the history of the Mughal Empire in the subcontinent.

I was wondering if Pakistanis today consider their country to be an heir to the Mughal Empire?

Obviously I think between Pakistan and India, Pakistan is culturally the more legitimate heir to the Mughal Empire even though most of the great monuments of the Mughals are in and around Northern India from Delhi to Agra. However, under the BJP led India, I believe Hindutva is actively seeking to shred links and traces of the Mughal past. The Mughals came from around modern day Uzbekistan and Afghanistan, and controlled the territory of Pakistan for most of their reign. They fused Turkic/Persian with local South Asian cultures and are Muslim, so obviously Pakistan can be considered the most accurate modern heir of the Mughal legacy.

Agree or disagree?

There's a saying that implies that we should stop bragging about our ancestors and start performing ourselves:

"پدرم سلطان بود"

This "my father was a king" attitude should have no place among us:

Afghanistan can claim that. Pakistan is just a western wing of gangadesh I would say except pukhtuns and balochis.

It has become a milk shake by now. They have all mixed up to great extent. Same in India, many previously pure races are now living in somewhat of a mixture.
The very advent of Urdu was the time such mixing started.
I would say south asia was world's first multi-cultural society. Loooooong before Amrika, or Canada etc. claimed to be multicultural. With a difference that we have become a milk shake and don't use terms like African-American, or white, etc. to describe people here in south asia.





By the way, below is my racial terminology, just for fun:

New classification of colors,,, more accurate & reality based than based on superiority complex ...

Previous ==== Now
Black ====> Brown
White ====> Bleached
Brown ====> Normal
Yellow ====> White


=
=

 

[hussain0216]

If we take this logic to its fullest extent, all Muslims therefore have a right to the Muslim history of the extended rule of the Sultans who ruled Bengal and its neighbourhood, independently, for large periods of time. They were people quite a bit to the east of what seems to be imagined as the extent of Muslim rule

Sure why not?

 

[Joe Shearer]

Sure why not?

Oh, no reason why not; in fact, it would make sense.

However, my reason for pointing this out is that it goes beyond your (broad) depiction -

Any other pre Islamic history, for the people of Pakistan is only important if it happened within our land

We don't care what happened to the people east of us, they are not our people

It is to be hoped that the point being made is clear from the citation.

 

[Genghis khan1]

There is no clear cut anser to this. The reality is far more nuanced. I don't think any one country is heir to the Moghuls. The legacy of Moghuls is diffused over a large geography.

• Uzbekistan
• Afghanistan
• Pakistan
• India
• etc

The Moghuls hailed from Central Asia, had Turkic heritage, used Persian and adopted high Persian culture, relied on Afghan soldiers, Pakistan was staging post before India was invaded.

Meaning Moguls were in Pakistan before they set foot in India. But later after they conquered the teeming Ganga valley their power base shifted into the Ganga plains and over time became more 'Indian' so in the latter stages the Muslim bayyas of UP have greater claim.

So we have a moving target that no one country can claim as 'heir'. Had Pakistan kept Farsi and Persian high culture then I think it could have come out as the more significant heir.

But as it is Pakistan's claim is no stronger then the rest of the region.

Formation of permanent Muslim identity, language and cultures are all because of Mughals. Pakistan was the logical evolution of their rule. Now UP bayyas don’t have a country or administrative unit to claim cultural heritage, unlike Pakistan.

As far as actual heir or someone wants to claim Royalty status of some sort, than he has to be Mughal first. Baig, chugtai, maldyale clan and so on.

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

I have recently been watching documentaries about the history of the Mughal Empire in the subcontinent.

I was wondering if Pakistanis today consider their country to be an heir to the Mughal Empire?

Obviously I think between Pakistan and India, Pakistan is culturally the more legitimate heir to the Mughal Empire even though most of the great monuments of the Mughals are in and around Northern India from Delhi to Agra. However, under the BJP led India, I believe Hindutva is actively seeking to shred links and traces of the Mughal past. The Mughals came from around modern day Uzbekistan and Afghanistan, and controlled the territory of Pakistan for most of their reign. They fused Turkic/Persian with local South Asian cultures and are Muslim, so obviously Pakistan can be considered the most accurate modern heir of the Mughal legacy.

Agree or disagree?

No, they were foreigners that conquered and occupied our lands. They formed their heartland in Hindustan (Delhi/UP region) and saw modern-day Pakistan as an over-taxed backwater to be exploited.

We are instead heirs to Khushal Khattak, Abdullah Bhatti, Shah Inayat Shaheed, Pir Roshan, Muqarrab Khan and the many other natives of this land that stood against their rule.

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

Given Lahore City the huge Capital of Mughals for centuries, so many big forts, Tombs of Jahangir, and many Mughal leaders not just in Lahore City but everywhere in Pakistan, go to Peshawar, Go to Kandahar, Go to Multan, where from they ruled India for centuries and centuries are truly the heir to the Mughals.

Evidence is all thier to see in Pakistan and even Afghanistan and Uzbekistan and Tajikistan.

Lahore was only the capital for a mere 30 years and was seen as a staging-grounds for what the Mughals considered their real prize: Delhi.

Also the amount of Mughal structures (which they built for themselves by excessively taxing the locals) in Pakistan is only a drop in the ocean compared to the amount of Mughal structures in India.

 

[Darth Vader]

Does it matter.
Being Muslims faith connects us all no matter where someone is from.
And as one species we share history bad or good

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

According to the Pak national anthem she claims an ownership to whatever great stuffs the Muslim Empires of the past had done! Quite a claim for the heritage and legacy of the past Empires are mostly abandoned by other Muslims....

For example, Sherif Husein or Mujib (and their followers) gave a $hit to any such heritage of the Muslim Empires....

Terjuman-I Mazi....