TURNING POINT IN THE HISTORY OF INDIAN SUBCONTINENT

[neokautilya2]

what according to u all was the reason for downfall of a country world leader in arts, science and technology?

what do you think stopped the scientific progress in india??

what acc to u turned an open minded society into a narrow minded one?

what according to you all is the turning point in the history of subcontinent?

turning points-

1.excessive preaching of peace, non violence after the ashoka era and neglecting the threats from central asia

2.attack by mohammad bin qasim

2. defeat of prithvi raj chauhan at the second battle of tarain

3. arrival of the britishers ( was it good)

 

[Rig Vedic]

what according to u all was the reason for downfall of a country world leader in arts, science and technology?

what do you think stopped the scientific progress in india??

what acc to u turned an open minded society into a narrow minded one?

what according to you all is the turning point in the history of subcontinent?

turning points-

1.excessive preaching of peace, non violence after the ashoka era and neglecting the threats from central asia

2.attack by mohammad bin qasim

2. defeat of prithvi raj chauhan at the second battle of tarain

3. arrival of the britishers ( was it good)

I would vote for (1), the incursions of the Kushans and Huns came after Ashoka's pacifism. But maybe some weaknesses were present even before that.

Before Ashoka there was the incursion of Alexander. It was beaten back, but why could Alexander not have been stopped in Afghanistan itself (which was also a Hindu-Buddhist area at the time).

Even before Alexander, there was a period in which the Gandhara Mahajanapada was paying tribute to Emperor Cyrus* of Persia, which can also be considered a weakness.

But no need to worry too much about it, learn the lessons of history and move on, ups and downs have always been happening.

* edited

 

[vsdoc]

Our problem has always been only one, something which we required many centuries of foreign rule to realize and come together:

UNITY.

 

[Kazhugu]

I would vote for (1), the incursions of the Kushans and Huns came after Ashoka's pacifism. But maybe some weaknesses were present even before that.

actually the huns were routed by skandagupta and the kushans were assimilated into the vedic setup and they became indians in culture and civilization....

mbq and arabs were a non-entity as far as indian history is concerned..they had one initial victory on the frontiers..but were completely repulsed when they entered indian mainland....as regards the brits, they were just a logical extension of the previous set of invaders.....

so i would go with option (3)...defeat of Pritviraj by ghauri which laid the foundation of the delhi sultanates and turned the country on its head....

Our problem has always been only one, something which we required many centuries of foreign rule to realize and come together:

UNITY.

you think even now we have that ?..

 

[vsdoc]

you think even now we have that ?..

Yes we are a nation now.

The basics we all agree upon.

And the world over to an outsider we come across as an Indian.

 

[Kazhugu]

Yes we are a nation now.

The basics we all agree upon.

And the world over to an outsider we come across as an Indian.

true....but i was not asking about that...do all of us feel united in the name of india..?

 

[vsdoc]

true....but i was not asking about that...do all of us feel united in the name of india..?

Bro, by and large, all of us do.

Including the people you are referring to.

They still have to get over their moral dilemma of joining the forces en masse though.

The battalion of the Assam Regiment from 1965 are still remembered .....

 

[Joe Shearer]

@Rig Vedic, I was really surprised, unpleasantly surprised to read this post of yours. While we have had our differences, I was under the evidently mistaken impression that you are aware of the basics of Indian history, and are familiar with social structures and political situations at different times. This was a harsh way to learn that I was so utterly mistaken.

I would vote for (1), the incursions of the Kushans and Huns came after Ashoka's pacifism. But maybe some weaknesses were present even before that.

Before Ashoka there was the incursion of Alexander. It was beaten back, but why could Alexander not have been stopped in Afghanistan itself (which was also a Hindu-Buddhist area at the time).

There was nothing called Afghanistan at that time, nor for much later. Are you not even remotely aware of the results of Gaugamela, and the headlong flight of the Persian Emperor to the north-east, past Balkh and what is now Tajikistan, until he was slaughtered by his satrap Bessus? Where was the question of stopping Alexander when he was in hot pursuit of the unfortunate Darius, and the Persians had been broken by the battle, one of the four great set-piece battles that set Alexander's name firmly in the annals of military history as one of the greatest generals of all time?

What sort of a question is this?

Even before Alexander, there was a period in which the Gandhara Mahajanapada was paying tribute to the Emperor Darius of Persia, which can also be considered a weakness.

What Mahajanapada are you talking about? Those in the west had been ground up into paste and absorbed into the Persian Empire, not as tributaries, as you seem to think, but as full-fledged subsidiary provinces. The area you think was then Gandhara had ceased to be Gandhara long before, and was to resume being Gandhara at least fifty to a hundred years later. These areas were the Persian provinces of Bactria, and to the north, where much earlier, proto-historic reconstruction tells us the Parama Kamboja and others of the outlying congeries of Indo-Aryan tribes were located, Sogdiana.

Your verdict that there was some carelessness in national administration as a result of which some provinces landed up with an avoidable revenue leakage is truly stunning in its complete ignorance of reality.


But no need to worry too much about it, learn the lessons of history and move on, ups and downs have always been happening.

That last sentence was the most ironic, coming as it does on the heels of a display of an abysmal lack of information about history.

This forum is at least notionally a defence forum. I know that many have joined to abuse the Pakistanis in particular, and the religion of their majority in general, but at least a rudimentary knowledge of military history is surely not too painful an acquisition.

I am truly appalled at the post and its display of ignorance.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

My guess, is lack of intellectual cooperation with other civilizations.

We hear about scholars or travelers accounts on ancient India.

Do we have any account about Chinese, Persians or Arabs in details by any ancient Indian scholar or traveler?

 

[Bang Galore]

true....but i was not asking about that...do all of us feel united in the name of india..?

More than ever before. The idea of India is stronger today than it was immediately after independence.. We have other identities but the idea of India is strong within.

 

[Kazhugu]

My guess, is lack of intellectual cooperation with other civilizations.

We hear about scholars or travelers accounts on ancient India.

Do we have any account about Chinese, Persians or Arabs in details by any ancient Indian scholar or traveler?

brahmanism man..that was one of our biggest pitfalls....stupid beliefs like one should not cross the borders of bharat...not cross the oceans...

no offence to any brahmin...

 

[Imran Khan]

turning point of south Asian history was BIRTH OF ZARDARI

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

brahmanism man..that was one of our biggest pitfalls....stupid beliefs like one should not cross the borders of bharat...not cross the oceans...

no offence to any brahmin...

Not entirely sure, how far that is correct.

For example Chola empire did extend upto Indonesia.

Casteism certainly a huge failure, though civilizations in those days were hierarchical.

 

[Rig Vedic]

There was nothing called Afghanistan at that time, nor for much later. Are you not even remotely aware of the results of Gaugamela, and the headlong flight of the Persian Emperor to the north-east, past Balkh and what is now Tajikistan, until he was slaughtered by his satrap Bessus? Where was the question of stopping Alexander when he was in hot pursuit of the unfortunate Darius, and the Persians had been broken by the battle, one of the four great set-piece battles that set Alexander's name firmly in the annals of military history as one of the greatest generals of all time?

Considering that Gandhara and the environs of present-day Kabul had been part of the Indic sphere since the days of the Mahabharata, it can be considered a weakness that they were first allowed to come under Persian influence at the time of Emperor Cyrus, and later Alexander should not have been allowed to come anywhere near the Khyber pass.

 

[Kazhugu]

Bro, by and large, all of us do.

Including the people you are referring to.

They still have to get over their moral dilemma of joining the forces en masse though.

The battalion of the Assam Regiment from 1965 are still remembered .....

More than ever before. The idea of India is stronger today than it was immediately after independence.. We have other identities but the idea of India is strong within.

well honestly i was not referring to any specific ethnic, linguistic or religious group.....but one thing is observed is that the religious, regionalistic identities are assuming paramount importance, sometimes at the cost of the indian identity....not many know how to manage their multiple identities correctly.....this is my personal experience...maybe the sample size is small...so i'm not really convinced...anyway, lets hope for the best...

Not entirely sure, how far that is correct.

For example Chola empire did extend upto Indonesia.

Casteism certainly a huge failure, though civilizations in those days were hierarchical.

South was not that much into the vedic stuff....that can be seen even today...

and that hierarchial thing was the biggest drawback....it was only upto the kashtraiyas to fight/defend...if they failed that's it...the shudras,vaishyas would not take sword and rebel..they would just go on with their chores under a new ruler....one thing that comes to my mind are the peasant rebbellions in china against the mongols....why there were no such rebellions in india even though we had the numbers....? the mentality of " your duty is not to fight" was so ingrained in the minds that people did not care picking up swords and rebel.....