@Mage The size of city is not be it all of listing "greatest" or else Karachi today would be at top of the pile. Greatest is not about counting heads. It is, I should think about some contribution that took humanity to another level. In that regard there are only four regions in the early stages of human civilization. Nile, Tigris/Euphrates, Indus and Hwang Ho or Yellow River.
These approximate to Egypt, iraq, Pakistan and China. Therefore it would appear not possible to fail to include cities in these four countries that contributed to "greatness" of humanity in the list. Harappa showed clear public sanitation which was
first in human history. Mohenjo Daro is epic in it's scale. These cities formed the nucleous of once great civilization. How is it that these are not included? Taxila surely is qualified.
And except some artefacts not much is known about Indus civilization
Not much is known about Çatalhöyük but it is on the list. In fact from the image Çatalhöyük does not look that much differant from Mehr Garh.
But that's much less talked than Sumerian, Egyptian or Persian civilization.
This is very true. it's all about who gets to "shout" and more who gets to write the narrative. The list is entirely Western-centric.
It's not so much where you quote it but more what the source is. Did you bother checking the source that you quoted. It's a Hindutva fanboy posting on Historum. That hardly makes it credible does it? Do you want me to post things there and then quote them so they carry currency with you?
Would you also call him a Hinduvta lover?
I have been through this with a million Ganga-deshis so I find it tedious now to have to go through this with a Pakistani. And least of all such a senior member as you. But still let me lay it out for you.
Sare Jahan Se Acha Hindustan Humara
That says "Hindustan" which is a generic term whose definition has floated around. However since he said this in 1904 exactly 55 years after your Sargodha had become British India. Yes, in 1904 it was "British India" or the British Raj. So if you want to be technical then the correct legal term is "British India". If you want to be geographic then the correct term is "South Asia". The entity that you keep bringing up and giving such value to was built by the British. So your continous referance to "India" appears to be some yearning for British Raj. Sorry the British left in 1947. You want that entity back I suggest you convince PM Theresa May to invade South Asia. Unite it at the bayonet and guns of British soldiers and then slap a Union Jack over it.
Would you also call him a Hinduvta lover?
Yes, I would but he also was the first to ask for Indus region of South Asia to be consolidated into a "independant Muslim state in the North West" so he is exculpated for what he had done or said earlier. Indeed Iqbal and Aitzaz Ahsan [Indus Saga] have influenced my understanding of Pakistan. Ahsan for the Indus man concept [historical] to the more recent "north western" concept of Sir Allama Iqbal . Both Iqbal and Ahsan abstract Indus region as separate. Iqbal calls it the "north western" and Ahsan uses "Indus" but both mean the same tract of land.
Quote
"lqbal seems to be focused on the north western region as the base for the expression of Muslim power, while Jinnah seems to have an all India strategy."
https://www.dawn.com/news/1369436/convergence-and-divergence-of-views