Maps about Bangladesh / Bengal

[integra]

History at the time of gangaridai still remains a mystery, though it's usually thought they were the one who drove back Alexander. The area is probably Norshindi, Wari Boteshshor. Excavations are being done right now very slowly, maybe it'll take another 10 years to finish off the excavations.

 

[Laughing_soldier]

It makes me sad that all those good stuffs made by westerners only. What did our people do? Did they ever do anything?

By the way, we want thos map back specially the on in post#3 .

3000 years of slavery various Indian rules, then 200 years of slavery under british then 24 years of slavery under pakistani and now again indian slavery even affected your thought badly.

 

[Md Akmal]

Present day Bangladesh was always a buddhist region. It was converted to hinduism only during Sena dynasty (11th-12th century AD) and lasted for less than 200 years. Get your facts right Sherlock.

@ No !!!! Again, you are wrong. No convertee was allowed in Hinduism like the Jews.

@ Once the Sena Dynasty (11 & 12 th Century) came they brought lot of young "Brahmon" from Deccan. So far I came to know from Bengal history, the Senas build lot of "Sharaen Mandir" specially in greater Bogra district and in other conquered areas and placed these "Brahmon" to preach "Hinduism" .

@ A special decree was proclaimed that all the married and un-married girls to visit these newly build "Mandirs" and to do "Seba" and in the process of "Seba" the offspring would be legal and this offspring would be considered as "Khutrio".

@ This system continued for around 200 hundred years. Infact there was no religion of the common people, only "Khutrios" were considered as low caste Hindu. The system miserably failed. During this period lot of "Sahabis, Peer, Fakir, Ullamas", came from Arab, Iraq, Persia, Turkey and from Central Asia. So, Bengal became a fertile land for preaching new religion and that is "Islam" by the "Pir and Fakirs". Soon, the majority Budhodist were converted to Muslims. Many Hindus who were victims of "Sotidaho protha" also converted to Islam. That was the main reason we always advocate the majority of East Bengal people were convertee muslim from Budhodist.

@ "Shah Sultan Rumi Burkhi Mahi Sawar" who came from Arakan during the time of Sen Dynasty and settled at Bogra. Shah Makdom of Rajshahi also came during the Sen dynasty and settled at Rajshahi. Later on Shah Jalal, Shah Puran and khan Jahan Ali came and settled in Bengal.

 

[LaBong]

I was right about Bangladeshis in this forum coming from a parallel universe thingy!

 

[Md Akmal]

I was right about Bangladeshis in this forum coming from a parallel universe thingy!

@ Hi Abir, so, you have become Lt General that is why you are too high ! However, congratulation. " Ye silsila chelta rahega".

@ " Apni kemon achen, valu tu. Lok jon tu amake beharee balia fellu". " Koi apni na ameder karent dete chaye chilen, chukai tu bebesha korchen amader shate, ekhon sunchi naki auto mobile factory banaben Chatek ke. ta etu jaga takhte Chateke kano, Sylhet niye newar chinta korchan naki, ta besh besh, sheshta koren, tate doshki ?

 

[LaBong]

@ Hi Abir, so, you have become Lt General that is why you are too high ! However, congratulation. " Ye silsila chelta rahega".

@ " Apni kemon achen, valu tu. Lok jon tu amake beharee balia fellu". " Koi apni na ameder karent dete chaye chilen, chukai tu bebesha korchen amader shate, ekhon sunchi naki auto mobile factory banaben Chatek ke. ta etu jaga takhte Chateke kano, Sylhet niye newar chinta korchan naki, ta besh besh, sheshta koren, tate doshki ?

lol is that sylheti you speaking?

 

[eastwatch]

I was right about Bangladeshis in this forum coming from a parallel universe thingy!

No matter how people try to teach you guys about history, it is fruitless. Idolator Hindus who deny the existence of God, will certainly deny other truths, specially the truth about the Muslims in this sub-continent.

I understand, you believe, at least, that these immigrant Muslims kept the idolators enslaved for more than 6 centuries. You should come with proofs to say now, how and when you have sent the descendents of those foreign muslim immigrants to another Universe. Stop bias.

 

[LaBong]

No matter how people try to teach you guys about history, it is fruitless. Idolator Hindus who deny the existence of God, will certainly deny other truths, specially the truth about the Muslims in this sub-continent.

I understand, you believe, at least, that these immigrant Muslims kept the idolators enslaved for more than 6 centuries. You should come with proofs to say now, how and when you have sent the descendents of those foreign muslim immigrants to another Universe. Stop bias.

Err why would I believe that? As far as I know during Turko-Afghan rule in Bengal, most administrative and even military posts were held by Hindus and also bulk of semi-feudal land owners also were Hindus. The peasant class of Hindu and Muslim Bengalis suffered just as they suffered during British rule.

 

[InFn-0]

3000 years of slavery various Indian rules, then 200 years of slavery under british then 24 years of slavery under pakistani and now again indian slavery even affected your thought badly.

Yea, more typical Indian believe that the whole subcontinent was somehow under the rule of one glorious Indian ruler for the last 3000 years under Hindu rule. Go read up more history.

 

[asad71]

1. Thank you, mil-avia for recharging our memory with these maps.

2.BD sits at the bottom of the Ganges - Brahmaputra valley. It is the center of a land mass which is self contained in resources, food,water,economy, logistics and is populated by races who have coexisted for centuries. Culture is similar if not the same.

3. The are is bordered in the North by the Himalayas, in the South by the Bay of Bengal, in the West by the Rajmahal Hills and in the East by the Naga Hills-Arakan Yoma Ranges. Whenever the power at Delhi was very strong it subjugated this land. Otherwise it remained free. This is the land that Buddha and Buddhism were born in. From here issued teachers who spread Buddhism and the regional culture to far off places like the Caspian - Caucasus, China and Bali. Alexander was thwarted from further incursion because of the powerful kingdom that existed here. Much of Hindu mythological episodes belong to this land. The land was always prosperous and people happy. Even there was an elected king - a first anywhere in the world. Foreign traders/invaders coming to Hindustan were attracted by the fabled wealth of Bengala. The land was and still is fertile - for agriculture even more fertile than Java.

4. In the subcontinent there has always been - and still remains, a push of population from the West to East. The push stopped here because the land could support the influx. But more important has been the Arakan Yoma. It is so inhospitable that even now people cannot cross it. Even cultures could not permeate this formidable barrier of mountain, thick jungle, wild life, malaria and what have you. Today to go to Rangoon an Arakanese have to take a coastal steamer which takes 3.50 days from Akyab.

5. This is the land we lost to the English Co's conspiracy aided by the "bania" money lenders and the Brahmonic high class led by the chief priest of Bardwan on 23 June 1757 at Palashy. When the English/British left in 1947, true to their crooked nature, they left this self contained natural geopolitical economic unit divided in a fashion that has left the peoples wanting in all spheres. Mountbatten, Radcliffe and the Indian Pak leaders who redrew the new maps were all aliens to this land. None of the people deciding our fate was a son of the soil.

6. More later.

 

[eastwatch]

Err why would I believe that? As far as I know during Turko-Afghan rule in Bengal, most administrative and even military posts were held by Hindus and also bulk of semi-feudal land owners also were Hindus. The peasant class of Hindu and Muslim Bengalis suffered just as they suffered during British rule.

I would almost agree to what you said about Hindu domination in the administrative services during muslim rule. But, you have used this logic to conveniently disregard the history of immigration of Muslims in this land. What you said is not history.

Even if Hindus were in good positions during Muslim rule, it did not prohibit people from other poor Muslim countries to come to Bengal and get Khash land from the govt or get a job in the military or other deptts. Military and Justice Deptts were two fields where Muslims dominated.

What is your idea about US or other immigrations from a poor europe (perhaps, you know it was poor)? Did all of them go to USA to get a govt administrative service? They used to get land ownership in most of the cases. The same thing happened in Bengal, too. it was a wide country with a small population.

This vacuum was filled with the coming of new people, who would get a title on the land distributed by the central and local govts. doors were open to muslims in Bengal and all other parts of hindustan. It is very natural that Muslims would be attracted to go and settle in a country where the govt is run by the Muslims.

Bangali Muslims are a mixed blooded people of Turko-Afghan, Arab, Negro, Central Asians, Pathans, local Hindus and Budhists. Our Prophet did not teach us to distinguish between any two different races of people. But, the issue is to find out the correct history. Please read also a post I have written in another thread.

Re: Governors and Sultans of Bengal up to the Mughal Conquest
1) When I say Bengal, it includes today's Bangladesh, west Bengal, Bihar and Jharkhand and upto certain extent Orissa. The natural boundary of Bengal extended upto Teliagiri and Shakligiri Passes that separate Bengal from Ayudh and Hindustan.

2) These two narrow mountain passes were so important for the defence of Bengal that it was said in old days that a three-man team was good enough to repulse an invading army from the other side. Without passing through these two mountain passes it was impossible to come to Bengal without overcrossing the dangerous mountains of Rajmahal or without taking another route through north Bihar.

3) Moreover, the crisscrosses of small and big rivers of Bengal were an impediment for Delhi to continue with even a most passionate seize of Bengal. Flood water would force the invaders retreat out of Bengal.

4) Delhi was conqured by the Turks in 1192, and Bihar and northern Bengal in 1198 (1203 by some scholars). The first four Maliks or Kings of Khilji dynasty were assassinated. Muslim rule in Bengal was associated with many such killings, internal conflicts and palace coups.

5) Khilji is not a family title. There are many different nomadic Turks in the central asia including Afghanistan. Khilji, Khaliji or Khalji is one such group. Khilji Turks used to live a nomadic poor life in those areas. Lure of large grain fields, wealth and a good life in Hindustan and Bengal pushed these poor nomads to fight and immigrate into these lands of plenty,

6) From the very beginning, the Khilji Turks of Bengal opposed a direct rule by the Delhi Turks. So, one can see a hundred warfares between these two regions. Delhi Muslims thought Bengal Turks were their cousines with same bloodline and therefore, Bengal must be an extension of Delhi Sultanate. But, the Muslim Turks of Bengal fought vigorously to foil the efforts of Delhi.

7) So, in such a tug of war between the two forces, until about 1339 AD Bengal was ruled semi-independently by the settler Turks by keeping a nominal tie with Delhi Turks.

8) Fakhruddin Mubarak Shah raised the standard of rebellion and declared independence of Bengal in 1339 AD. This had resulted in many wars between the two Sultanate.

9) During this independent period not only the Turkic families, but also Negroite and Arab families had ruled over this region. There were considerable infusion of these two groups in Bengal.

10) Bengal retained its independence until 1539 AD when Pathan Sultan Sher Shah of Bengal himself became the Emperor of Hindustan. Before this event, Mughal Emperor Humayun was defeated by Sher Shah in two wars in Bihar and had to retreat to Iran.

11) This linkage with Delhi was again broken when Adil Shah or Mobarak Shah killed his own nephew, the grandson of Sher Shah, and seized the throne of Delhi in 1554 AD. The Pathan Subedar Shams al-Din Mohammad Shah of Bengal declared independence and rushed towards Delhi to avenge the killing of Sher Shah's grandson. But, he was defeated and killed in Allahabad by the forces of Adil Shah. His son Sultan Bahadur Shah declared himself the Sultan of Bengal and continued to defy Delhi.

12) North Indian retinues of Suri Dynasty vacated their possessions after Adil Shah was defeated in the 2nd battle of Panipath in 1556 AD at the hands of Humayun. Adil Shah fled to the east, but was killed in a war with Sultan Bahadur Shah of Bengal. But, his Pathan and north Indian retinues were permitted to come and settle in Bengal where their own people were still ruling this region.

13) After the killing of Pathan Sultan Daud Shah in 1576 AD, these Pathans led a continuous war against Delhi until 1605 AD when finally they were defeated and Bengal went under the Delhi Mughal rule.

14) There was a considerable infusion of north Indian muslims during this long period of war. In order to thwart the war efforts of the local rebel Muslim forces in Bengal, Akber took a policy of awarding farm lands, instead of paying cash salaries, to some of his own military people from north India to encourage settlment in Bengal. This had resulted in a considerable immigration of north Indian muslims in Bengal.

15) Since this time until 1757 this region was ruled by the Viceroys sent from or appointed by Delhi Mughals.

 

[justanobserver]

Bangali Muslims are a mixed blooded people of Turko-Afghan, Arab, Negro, Central Asians, Pathans, local Hindus and Budhists (wow that's an ethnic group)

Out eastern neighbors are as deluded as the western ones

 

[LaBong]

I would almost agree to what you said about Hindu domination in the administrative services during muslim rule. But, you have used this logic to conveniently disregard the history of immigration of Muslims in this land. What you said is not history.

Even if I take all the immigration stuff as absolute truth, the fact doesn't change that indigenous Muslim population was treated as bad by the foreign Muslim rulers as they were by the British and evil Calcutta Jamindar babus.

 

[TopCat]

Even if I take all the immigration stuff as absolute truth, the fact doesn't change that indigenous Muslim population was treated as bad by the foreign Muslim rulers as they were by the British and evil Calcutta Jamindar babus.

A person economic condition determined his status in the society, which exist till this day. There is big difference in foreign muslim settlers and the brits and hindu Jaminder is that they inter married with locals. Thats why its very hard to distinguish a foreign flock from the native anymore.

 

[InFn-0]

Well, this immigration thing has happened uncountable times in the past, so there is hardly any point in trying to figure out who is the foreign flock and who is the native flock, because maybe if we look back enough even the native flock will turn out to be another foreign flock.