Pakistanis of Greeks and Macedonians Descent

[faisal6309]

After Aornos, Alexander crossed the Indus and fought and won an epic battle against King Porus, who ruled a region in the Punjab, in the Battle of the Hydaspes in 326 BC. Alexander was impressed by Porus's bravery, and made him an ally. He appointed Porus as satrap, and added to Porus' territory land that he did not previously own. Choosing a local helped him control these lands so distant from Greece. Alexander founded two cities on opposite sides of the Hydaspes river, naming one Bucephala, in honor of his horse, who died around this time. The other was Nicaea (Victory), thought to be located at the site of modern day Mong, Punjab.

East of Porus' kingdom, near the Ganges River, were the Nanda Empire of Magadha and further east the Gangaridai Empire (of modern day Bangladesh). Fearing the prospect of facing other large armies and exhausted by years of campaigning, Alexander's army mutinied at the Hyphasis River (Beas), refusing to march farther east. This river thus marks the easternmost extent of Alexander's conquests.

Plutarch:

"As for the Macedonians, however, their struggle with Porus blunted their courage and stayed their further advance into India. For having had all they could do to repulse an enemy who mustered only twenty thousand infantry and two thousand horse, they violently opposed Alexander when he insisted on crossing the river Ganges also, the width of which, as they learned, was thirty-two furlongs, its depth a hundred fathoms, while its banks on the further side were covered with multitudes of men-at-arms and horsemen and elephants. For they were told that the kings of the Ganderites and Praesii were awaiting them with eighty thousand horsemen, two hundred thousand footmen, eight thousand chariots, and six thousand war elephants."


Alexander tried to persuade his soldiers to march farther, but his general Coenus pleaded with him to change his opinion and return; the men, he said, "longed to again see their parents, their wives and children, their homeland". Alexander eventually agreed and turned south, marching along the Indus. Along the way his army conquered the Malhi (in modern day Multan) and other Indian tribes and sustained an injury during the siege.

If Alexander won that war then he could've used Indian way of battle in future. You know after conquering Persia, he came to India with both Persian and Macedonian soldiers. Well, Macedonian soldiers were exhausted after 7 years of war time but Persian army wasn't. If Porus became his ally then he could've released his Macedonian army and march forward with Persian and Indian armies. Also enemies of Porus helped Alexander for preparing against Porus. Your Greek sources say that Alexander promised them the kingdom of Porus after defeating him. If Porus was defeated then why didn't he stay with his promise. This makes no sense. Hence it is clear that Alexander lost and all the sources where it was cleared that he lost that battle were burnt. When I was searching on this topic last time, it said that oldest preserved story of Alexander was after 60 years of his death.

and WTF have you brought up Nanda? No Pakistani would mention that Ganges Ganga Nanda. Care to explain what has Nanda got to anything? Nanda was from Ganges in India. Porus was Punjabi. But care to explain what has a Ganges Nanda have anything to do with this ?

Your line of thinking smacks of a closet Indian. I should know I have enough arguments with Ganga dwellers and this is exactly what rubbish they spin ...

A learned Pakistani would know what is Nanda, like you pointed out. Because you know it.

Purshottam was a Punjabi, Nanda was from plains of ganga, both were the great kings of this subcontinent India and Pakistan who played major role in defeating and stopping Greek influence in the region. Protected the term DESI.

Who is this Ganges Nanda? Google is not showing something relevant. Only person with Nanda name I know of is Dhana Nanda who was last king of Nanda dynasty and was king at the time when Alexander fought against Porus.
Dhana Nanda - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Nanda empire was way too big when compare to Paurava. He was one famous for his cruelness and had bigger army. Also Indians who allied with Alexander against Porus told that there is a big sea in far east but at that time, greek thought that they would circle back to egypt and then they will reach back home in no time.

Alexander marched towards east.
But he withdrawn due to the formidable military display of Nanda Empire and riot in his own army.
Purushotam fought very well but he defeated because at that war Alexander proved his reputation as one of the finest Military strategists and tactician.

Do you know how he won in Persia? By killing Darius. That is how they were able to control their Persia. He was unable to do so in India. He was afraid to go further because of the truth revealed to him from Indians that there is vast sea in east.

I do not believe Purshottam(Porus) was defeated. It was taught by western system of education to us.

Many western sources also say that Alexander was defeated in India and never ruled it. But most western sources especially european ones say that he won.
I personally don't believe that Alexander won this battle.

 

[Shan-e-ibrahim]

Many western sources also say that Alexander was defeated in India and never ruled it. But most western sources especially european ones say that he won.
I personally don't believe that Alexander won this battle.

It's their way to show others inferior this is what they have been doing. Now if a greek comes to Pakistan he will act like he is some hi fi shot. But in reality they are bankrupt people presenting themselves with false pride of their ancestors in a texido . Of course Greek civilisation must be respected as it was one of the most advance one and ancient like our Indus.

 

[faisal6309]

It's their way to show others inferior this is what they have been doing. Now if a greek comes to Pakistan he will act like he is some hi fi shot. But in reality they are bankrupt people presenting themselves with false pride of their ancestors in a texido . Of course Greek civilisation must be respected as it was one of the most advance one and ancient like our Indus.

Remember 300 movie where Greeks are shown as good people and Iranians as bad people?
In reality, Greeks were bad people and Iranians were good people. Slavery was not allowed in all history of Iran before Islam. But Greeks were fighters and they loved it. After defeating Xerxes of Persia, riot started in whole Greek on who should control Greek. The fight was between Athens and Spartans. After several fights, Spartans won and got control over whole Greek.
Now tell me if Greeks were good people. Yes they were advance and very good in that time but they were bad people.

Umm. Yeah great findings but are quite contenious . I mean alexander came 2400 yrs ago so accuracy is debatable

The Dna might be same but people have long changed. Because one might say
If north pakistani's and macedonians have close to identical genes then india and pak should have 99.99% same DNA and they aren't even 50% similar

P.S : The girls were really beautiful. NEARLY Lost my focus on the article. Also a question DO These people practice a slightly diffrent religion than conventional Islam coz it looks like it

I stopped reading too because of that!!
Now I am thinking to plan a visit to these valleys.

 

[Shan-e-ibrahim]

Remember 300 movie where Greeks are shown as good people and Iranians as bad people?
In reality, Greeks were bad people and Iranians were good people. Slavery was not allowed in all history of Iran before Islam. But Greeks were fighters and they loved it. After defeating Xerxes of Persia, riot started in whole Greek on who should control Greek. The fight was between Athens and Spartans. After several fights, Spartans won and got control over whole Greek.
Now tell me if Greeks were good people. Yes they were advance and very good in that time but they were bad people.

Most of the movies they make, are anti Persia, Indian civilisation. They will do it. They will change every history through information warfare, Britishers came and the first thing they did, they changed the facts. It is upon us whether we believe their version of history or ours. Those who have inferior complex are dangerous to our existence. They should be taught that you are no inferior. Secondly this colour and skin scenario in our society is very bad. I mean which book or which rule says who are dark skinned are inferior? This is Nonsense. Go out play 7 hours in sun in Gujranwala or Karachi, the affects will be seen. Then one is tanned. So that means sun and weather conditions made one inferior? Nonsense!

 

[Force-India]

 

[livingdead]

Pakistan is indeed lucky to be melting pot of so many groups .. genetic diversity is a good thing(sorry for those who were alive during melting process, it was not easy)

 

[Kambojaric]

All the sources which are found on internet are pro greek and macedonian which people call quality source or valid or neutral. This is known as creating inferior complex through print media and information war. Porus (Purshottam) would have either died or given his territory to Mecedonians if was defeated. Who the hell is Alexander to judge the bravery. Well Alexander fought with bravery hence Porus(Purshottam) granted him life by allowing him safe escape. On his return.

And I am bloody damn sure, had he won the battle he would have left with nothing to fight with other empires. And his escape would have been made much more tougher.

So why dont you enlighten us with non-internet sources. Just give me the name of some sources which claim that Porus won and Alexander got kicked out. A random individual being "damn sure" on the net does not mean anything to me. I dont know what your agenda is or what your biases are. As such your opinion is irrelevant for me.

There is one thing being aware of euro-centric propoganda (which I agree does exist too) but in the process dont do the same thing back. Back your claims up with fact.

 

[rockstarIN]

If Alexa


Who is this Ganges Nanda? Google is not showing something relevant. Only person with Nanda name I know of is Dhana Nanda who was last king of Nanda dynasty and was king at the time when Alexander fought against Porus.
Dhana Nanda - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Nanda empire was way too big when compare to Paurava. He was one famous for his cruelness and had bigger army. Also Indians who allied with Alexander against Porus told that there is a big sea in far east but at that time, greek thought that they would circle back to egypt and then they will reach back home in no time.


Do you know how he won in Persia? By killing Darius. That is how they were able to control their Persia. He was unable to do so in India. He was afraid to go further because of the truth revealed to him from Indians that there is vast sea in east.


Many western sources also say that Alexander was defeated in India and never ruled it. But most western sources especially european ones say that he won.
I personally don't believe that Alexander won this battle.

Search Nanda Empire, you will get results.

And whoever is saying Nanda empire has nothing to do with Alexander's attack on India story is like Germany's campaign in WW2 without Russia. Alexander indeed wanted to attack the rest of India but the might of Nanda Army along with the terrain, monsoon etc pulled their army back.

 

[livingdead]

Remember 300 movie where Greeks are shown as good people and Iranians as bad people?
In reality, Greeks were bad people and Iranians were good people. Slavery was not allowed in all history of Iran before Islam. But Greeks were fighters and they loved it. After defeating Xerxes of Persia, riot started in whole Greek on who should control Greek. The fight was between Athens and Spartans. After several fights, Spartans won and got control over whole Greek.
Now tell me if Greeks were good people. Yes they were advance and very good in that time but they were bad people.


I stopped reading too because of that!!
Now I am thinking to plan a visit to these valleys.

there were no good or bad people... come on, you cant make history so simplistic. Not unless you are a teenage girl.
Alex should be given some credit for the campaigns that he managed without much greeks in army, by the time he reached India(modern day pakistan) it was a hugely heterogenous army with all sorts of people.

 

[xyxmt]

After Aornos, Alexander crossed the Indus and fought and won an epic battle against King Porus, who ruled a region in the Punjab, in the Battle of the Hydaspes in 326 BC. Alexander was impressed by Porus's bravery, and made him an ally. He appointed Porus as satrap, and added to Porus' territory land that he did not previously own. Choosing a local helped him control these lands so distant from Greece. Alexander founded two cities on opposite sides of the Hydaspes river, naming one Bucephala, in honor of his horse, who died around this time. The other was Nicaea (Victory), thought to be located at the site of modern day Mong, Punjab.

East of Porus' kingdom, near the Ganges River, were the Nanda Empire of Magadha and further east the Gangaridai Empire (of modern day Bangladesh). Fearing the prospect of facing other large armies and exhausted by years of campaigning, Alexander's army mutinied at the Hyphasis River (Beas), refusing to march farther east. This river thus marks the easternmost extent of Alexander's conquests.

Plutarch:

"As for the Macedonians, however, their struggle with Porus blunted their courage and stayed their further advance into India. For having had all they could do to repulse an enemy who mustered only twenty thousand infantry and two thousand horse, they violently opposed Alexander when he insisted on crossing the river Ganges also, the width of which, as they learned, was thirty-two furlongs, its depth a hundred fathoms, while its banks on the further side were covered with multitudes of men-at-arms and horsemen and elephants. For they were told that the kings of the Ganderites and Praesii were awaiting them with eighty thousand horsemen, two hundred thousand footmen, eight thousand chariots, and six thousand war elephants."


Alexander tried to persuade his soldiers to march farther, but his general Coenus pleaded with him to change his opinion and return; the men, he said, "longed to again see their parents, their wives and children, their homeland". Alexander eventually agreed and turned south, marching along the Indus. Along the way his army conquered the Malhi (in modern day Multan) and other Indian tribes and sustained an injury during the siege.

Alexander the great, who would kill his father for disagreeing with him...listened to his one general's advice and decided to return...what a noble man he was.

by the way the story is told differently in our part of the world.

 

[Jaanbaz]

Their DNA was manipulated

MR Riaz is writing bullshit as usual. No clear research has established the Kalasha as European, btw what do you define as European? Even if they came from Europe thousands of years ago it doesn't make them European, they don't speak any European language nor do they follow Christianity or even European from of Paganism, their culture is unique. Don't fall into the trap of linking everything White skinned as European, the same bullshit was spread by British regarding Aryan invasion theory which has been debunked.

Kalsaha are truly native to the region, they are more Pakistanis then many of us who migrated from different parts of world and settled here.

 

[Kambojaric]

I found this study by Pakistani/Greek/British geneticists who basically found no trace of Greek dna in the Burusho, barely any in the Kalash and extremely small but nevertheless existing one amongst Pashtuns. This correlates with the invasion pattern of Alexander who is not documenated to have ventured as far north as the Chitral Valley and Gilgit Baltistan beyond that. His road rather took him down from Peshawar towards Jhelum and then further south.

a small Greek contribution to the Pathans seems likely, the contribution to the Kalash is unclear and no contribution to the Burusho could be detected.

Poster 533 - Investigation of the Greek ancestry of northern Pakistani ethnic groups using Y chromosomal DNA variation

 

[faisal6309]

there were no good or bad people... come on, you cant make history so simplistic. Not unless you are a teenage girl.
Alex should be given some credit for the campaigns that he managed without much greeks in army, by the time he reached India(modern day pakistan) it was a hugely heterogenous army with all sorts of people.

In this comment, I am talking about Athens and Spartans fighting after defeating Xerxes. I never said that Alexander wasn't good but he wasn't that great. As I said before, he got control over Persia and Babylon because he was able to cut the head of snake i.e. killing king Darius and controlling his empire. Although he didn't really killed Darius. I have read that he ran away and was betrayed by his own soldiers after that. But who knows! Otherwise, there was no chance for him to even get control over Persia with that number of army soldiers. with most of them on foot. He simply didn't made it in battle of Hydaspes because his army didn't have experience fighting in new terrain, environment and against Elephant army.
I also say he might win, if he come back but he died (I think poisoned).

Search Nanda Empire, you will get results.

And whoever is saying Nanda empire has nothing to do with Alexander's attack on India story is like Germany's campaign in WW2 without Russia. Alexander indeed wanted to attack the rest of India but the might of Nanda Army along with the terrain, monsoon etc pulled their army back.

I am talking about same guy but I don't know if he is famous in India with "Ganges Nanda" name. I only remember him as Dhana Nanda. And also what I have read is that as a warning, Nanda sent some soldiers to fighting against Alexander as message that he should not continue his dream of ruling India. I don't know if it is right as source was not good enough for me but I don't see anyone saying anything against it too.

 

[faisal6309]

So why dont you enlighten us with non-internet sources. Just give me the name of some sources which claim that Porus won and Alexander got kicked out. A random individual being "damn sure" on the net does not mean anything to me. I dont know what your agenda is or what your biases are. As such your opinion is irrelevant for me.

There is one thing being aware of euro-centric propoganda (which I agree does exist too) but in the process dont do the same thing back. Back your claims up with fact.

Hi,
Do you know when Battle of Hydaspes happened? Check this Wikipedia image.

Now, do you know what source they used for this Wikipedia page of Battle of Hydaspes? Check this second image.

Do you see something different? Yes, I am trying to show you references. Modern references are of 1960, 1974 and 2004. Ancient references are of 90-30 BC, 60-70 BC, 75 AD and early 2nd century AD. So, if you take 90 BC as oldest reference then it is 236 yeas after this incident. So do you think anyone would be alive at that time? Wasn't there anyone at that time who could write what was happening around them? Isn't it coincidence that no one wrote about Alexanders conquest or may be somebody did and he wasn't allowed to take his work back home which was full of Alexander's failure.
Now, I want everyone to know about burning of Library of Alexandria which resulted in loss of many scrolls and books. The Library of Alexandria in Egypt was one of the largest libraries of the ancient world. Constructed in the 3rd century BC, it functioned as a center of scholarship. The library was believed to have opened during the reign of either Ptolemy I or Ptolemy II (323-246 BC). You should know that Ptolemy I was general under Alexander.

If the Library at Alexandria had not been torched by a mob of zealots (Christians) we would have a much clearer understanding of the origins of religious practices and beliefs.

(The Library at Alexandria was torched in 400 AD and 750,000 volumes were destroyed – and it is no coincidence that it happened so soon after the Council of Nicea which was partly convened in an attempt to hide the pagan origins of the new faith).​

Did Christians burn down the famous Library of Alexandria? - jonsorensen.net
What happened to the Great Library at Alexandria? (Article) - Ancient History Encyclopedia
Destruction of the Library of Alexandria - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Shan-e-ibrahim]

Hi,
Do you know when Battle of Hydaspes happened? Check this Wikipedia image.

View attachment 224959​

Now, do you know what source they used for this Wikipedia page of Battle of Hydaspes? Check this second image.

View attachment 224960​

Do you see something different? Yes, I am trying to show you references. Modern references are of 1960, 1974 and 2004. Ancient references are of 90-30 BC, 60-70 BC, 75 AD and early 2nd century AD. So, if you take 90 BC as oldest reference then it is 236 yeas after this incident. So do you think anyone would be alive at that time? Wasn't there anyone at that time who could write what was happening around them? Isn't it coincidence that no one wrote about Alexanders conquest or may be somebody did and he wasn't allowed to take his work back home which was full of Alexander's failure.
Now, I want everyone to know about burning of Library of Alexandria which resulted in loss of many scrolls and books. The Library of Alexandria in Egypt was one of the largest libraries of the ancient world. Constructed in the 3rd century BC, it functioned as a center of scholarship. The library was believed to have opened during the reign of either Ptolemy I or Ptolemy II (323-246 BC). You should know that Ptolemy I was general under Alexander.

If the Library at Alexandria had not been torched by a mob of zealots (Christians) we would have a much clearer understanding of the origins of religious practices and beliefs.

(The Library at Alexandria was torched in 400 AD and 750,000 volumes were destroyed – and it is no coincidence that it happened so soon after the Council of Nicea which was partly convened in an attempt to hide the pagan origins of the new faith).​

Did Christians burn down the famous Library of Alexandria? - jonsorensen.net
What happened to the Great Library at Alexandria? (Article) - Ancient History Encyclopedia
Destruction of the Library of Alexandria - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Very well said, and that also all greek historian none from our region.