Watch "Why did the Mughal Empire Collapse?" on YouTube

[Cobra Arbok]

Can't speak about the Guptas, but I know there are Jats descended from the Mauryans (Google the Mor clan).

You're also forgetting about the Gurjara Pratiharas, the Chauhans, and the numerous other dynasties across India (Solankis, Chavdas, Tomars, etc). Plenty of Pakistanis (and Muslims from the sub-continent as a whole) are descended from or related to them.



They can't have ruled over us if they are us.



I already told you, that's incorrect.



No, because the gene flow sharply decreases among north-west Indians in comparison to Pakistanis (other than high caste Hindus + Punjabis + Kashmiris) even though they were also ruled by the same dynasties.

No matter how you spin it, the fact is the Mughals originated from Uzbekistan, the Kushans from Xinzhang, and the scythians from Greece. They may have married into your society and assimilated, but that does not mean they were native to your land. following that logic, Tipu Sultan is an indigenous South Indian even though he may have had an ancestor from the Punjab. in fact he even considered himself South Indian and spoke Kannada in addition to Urdu, but that is beside the point.

The Mauryans were descended from a caste of Peacock tamers native throughout northern India. And yes, Chandragupta Maurya did defeat Sulocous Nikator. I already posted a link. And the huns were defeated by the Guptas, the Guptas did not fall until centuries later due to internal conflict, and they were replaced by smaller empires such as the Palas and Magadh.


And yes, the Gujar Pratihars have descendants in modern Pakistan who are Muslim. However, the majority of their descendants are in India and are Hindu. Most of the guajr kings were born in India, such as Nagabhata, born in either Madhya Pradesh or Rajasthan. He is most famous for repeatedly defeating Arab invaders from Sindh. As a matter of fact, Gujarat gets its name from the Gujar Pratihars. Many Gujar Kings spoke Gujarati. So I fail to see how they and other similar groups are solely the heritage of Pakistanis and Muslims.

And your comment about genetics proves supports my point about India not being ruled by foreigners as much as Pakistan.

 

[PakSarzameen5823]

No matter how you spin it, the fact is the Mughals originated from Uzbekistan, the Kushans from Xinzhang, and the scythians from Greece.

No matter how you spin it, many Pakistanis are descended from all of these empires and they all revolved around what is now Pakistan (with the exception of the Mughals). Many of them even belonged to the same race (Eastern Iranic) as many Pakistanis for goodness sake.

scythians from Greece.

Wrong, they came from the Steppe.

Tipu Sultan is an indigenous South Indian even though he may have had an ancestor from the Punjab.

He is as much a South Indian as he is a Punjabi hero, because of the fact that his ancestors came from the Punjab but he himself was from southern India.

And yes, Chandragupta Maurya did defeat Sulocous Nikator.

He wasn't a Scythian.

the huns were defeated by the Guptas

After getting completely crippled by them. They destroyed Gupta trade with Europe and Central Asia, attacked right into the heart of their empire, permanently altered the caste system, almost completely wiped out Buddhism from the region (one of the major religions of the Guptas), and even brought an end to Classical Indian Civilisation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gupta_Empire#Decline_of_the_empire

the Guptas did not fall until centuries later due to internal conflict

Wrong, in fact, some factions of the Huns actually outlived the Guptas.

And yes, the Gujar Pratihars have descendants in modern Pakistan who are Muslim.

Not just the Gurjara Pratihars, but also the Chauhans, Tomars, Solankis, Chavdas and Mauryans.

However, the majority of their descendants are in India and are Hindu.

For some of them, yes, for others, I doubt it. I've seen far more Muslim than Hindu Chauhans. There are also more Muslim than Hindu Gujjars.

 

[Cobra Arbok]

No matter how you spin it, many Pakistanis are descended from all of these empires and they all revolved around what is now Pakistan (with the exception of the Mughals). Many of them even belonged to the same race (Eastern Iranic) as many Pakistanis for goodness sake.



Wrong, they came from the Steppe.



He is as much a South Indian as he is a Punjabi hero, because of the fact that his ancestors came from the Punjab but he himself was from southern India.



He wasn't a Scythian.



After getting completely crippled by them. They destroyed Gupta trade with Europe and Central Asia, attacked right into the heart of their empire, permanently altered the caste system, almost completely wiped out Buddhism from the region (one of the major religions of the Guptas), and even brought an end to Classical Indian Civilisation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gupta_Empire#Decline_of_the_empire



Wrong, in fact, some factions of the Huns actually outlived the Guptas.



Not just the Gurjara Pratihars, but also the Chauhans, Tomars, Solankis, Chavdas and Mauryans.



For some of them, yes, for others, I doubt it. I've seen far more Muslim than Hindu Chauhans. There are also more Muslim than Hindu Gujjars.

Even if you were descended from those groups, it doesn't mean they were initially pakistani. And you completely missed the point of the tipu sultan example i used. Even if he had a punjabi ancestor, he was assimilated into south indian society, and identified with south indian culture more than punjabi culture. That is following YOUR logic. And no, the huns did not destroy the guptas. The guptas were weakened by the hun invasions, but they still defeated the huns and made them tributary states. The huns were never able to rule parts of india for any significant lehgth of time. The guptas were hindu, nit buddhIst. uddhism had been declining in south asia long before the hun invasions. And no, the guptas destroyed hun aspirations in south asia, although if you count central asian huns than i guess you can say they outlived the guptas. And classical indian civilization did not die with the fall of the guptas, it ended with the invasion of ghaznavi. Indian civilization lives on with the Palas, the cholas the Gujars, and other empires.

I doubt there are more muslim chauhans than Hindu

Anyway, you are getting to bogged down by details.and missing the point. My point is that modern pakistan has been ruled by foreign powers more than modern india. Modern india was never successfully invaded until around the 10th century with Ghaznavi's invasion, when almost the entirety of north india under foreign rule by the muslim delhi sultanate, a turkik/central asian(not pakistani empire). So out of about 10000 years, north india has been ruled by muslims for about 500 years and then by the british for 100. that doesnt look like getting kicked around like rag dolls as you said earlier.And it doesnt matter whether modern pakistanis are descended from invaders, an invader is an invader.

 

[PakSarzameen5823]

the huns did not destroy the guptas. The guptas were weakened by the hun invasions, but they still defeated the huns and made them tributary states. The huns were never able to rule parts of india for any significant lehgth of time. The guptas were hindu, nit buddhIst. uddhism had been declining in south asia long before the hun invasions. And no, the guptas destroyed hun aspirations in south asia, although if you count central asian huns than i guess you can say they outlived the guptas. And classical indian civilization did not die with the fall of the guptas, it ended with the invasion of ghaznavi. Indian civilization lives on with the Palas, the cholas the Gujars, and other empires.

Read the link I sent you, and absorb the information I've typed.

Modern india was never successfully invaded until around the 10th century with Ghaznavi's invasion

Incorrect, the Huns and Kushans penetrated deep into India, as did the Indo-Aryans.

it doesnt matter whether modern pakistanis are descended from invaders

Yes it does.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

Dude just ignore him. He is a troll, no need to derail a currently decent thread.

hehehe. Troll calling me troll.

You lot are upset because Pakistanis aren't whom you were taught and you aren't what you were taught.

Not all of us are sons of Arabs, Turks, and Persians. Most of us are Iranic (Aryan).

Hindutva history is contrived BS.

 

[Cobra Arbok]

Read the link I sent you, and absorb the information I've typed.



Incorrect, the Huns and Kushans penetrated deep into India, as did the Indo-Aryans.



Yes it does.

your own links show that the guptas defeated the huns and drove themnout of south asia. The reasons for the fall of the guptas were mostly internal conflicts due to the rise of yasodharaman. of course, the huns did cause damage, but not as much as the marathas caused to the mughals. Also it seems most of the damage was caused in modern pakistan, which was then ruled by the guptas. For example taxila was destroyed and declined in significance As for the kushans, except for a short period their territories in india were mostly in the north west. I already said north western india as been ruled by foreign powers. But the first foreign ruler to rule the majority of north india for long periods of time was Ghaznavi and the Delhi Sultanate, which wa succeeded by the mughal empire.

You still have yet to disprove my claim that modern india hss been ruled by foreign powers for less time than modern pakistan. I do not know why you do not want to admit that.

 

[PakSarzameen5823]

your own links show that the guptas defeated the huns and drove themnout of south asia.

My own link shows that they were one of the main causes of the downfall of the Guptas.

modern pakistan, which was then ruled by the guptas.

Most of it was not

But the first foreign ruler to rule the majority of north india for long periods of time was Ghaznavi and the Delhi Sultanate,

No matter how many times you say the same thing, it will never become correct.

You still have yet to disprove my claim that modern india hss been ruled by foreign powers for less time than modern pakistan.

I don't need to because it doesn't bother me. It would only become a point of embarrassment if many Pakistanis weren't descended from them, but we are. So it's a non-issue.

 

[Cobra Arbok]

hehehe. Troll calling me troll.

You lot are upset because Pakistanis aren't whom you were taught and you aren't what you were taught.

Not all of us are sons of Arabs, Turks, and Persians. Most of us are Iranic (Aryan).

Hindutva history is contrived BS.

Yes pakistanis are pakistanis, not turks or arabs like some claim to be. You deserve a nobel prize for that conclusion.

And the reason i call you a troll is because all of your posts are bigoted against indian hindus, especially gujaratis. You refuse to aknowledge any non-muslim history. The fact you claimed the fall of the mughal empire is sorely due to Nadir Shah, a relatively minor historical figure and not the marathas who dominated modern india until the british came is proof of that. I have tried to be reasonable to you, but you refuse to engage in productive discussions.

My own link shows that they were one of the main causes of the downfall of the Guptas.



Most of it was not

No matter how many times you say the same thing, it will never become correct.



I don't need to because it doesn't bother me. It would only become a point of embarrassment if many Pakistanis weren't descended from them, but we are. So it's a non-issue.

ok so which foreign power ruled india before the DS? Aside from the northwest being ruled by the scythians and kushans for a short time. But unlike pakistan, the majority of india was never ruled by any foreign power until the Dehli sultanate. Even then, south and east india were never ruled by muslims except for less than a century under tuqhlaqs and Aurangzeb.


I respect the fact that you are proud of being descended from central asian invaders. Because that is your opinion, i cannot argue with you about that, and we all have our preferances. I am just curious, what is wrong with indigenous south asian culture? Because Indigenous south asians produced some of the most advanced civilizations in human history, between the IVC and ancient dravidin civilizatoons and the ancient cities of the ganges that still thrive today. Like you are proud of being descended from invaders, I am proud that my ancestors created one of the world's oldest continuous civilizations, and that it still survives today. not to mention all the contributions Indian civilizations made in fields such as mathematics, medicine, philosophy, literature, and astronomy. I am not saying the foreign rulers, made no contributions, just not as much as indigenous Indian civilization in my opinion. Different strokes for different folks.

Thank you for a civil, though at times heated, discussion.​

 

[PakSarzameen5823]

Nadir Shah, a relatively minor historical figure

With conclusions like this, it's a wonder anyone bothers to communicate with you.

He is literally described as the Napolean of Persia, the second Alexander, and the last great Asiatic conqueror. His successes have been compared to that of Tamerlane and Ghenghis Khan.

To call him minor is the height of ignorance.

ok so which foreign power ruled india before the DS?

Vedic people.

I respect the fact that you are proud of being descended from central asian invaders.

I'm not. I don't feel proud about these kinds of things to be quite frank, but I do find them interesting and feel satisfaction in knowing that I come from a region that has had many different people assimilate into it's fold.

I am just curious, what is wrong with indigenous south asian culture?

Nothing.

Thank you for a civil, though at times heated, discussion.​

You're welcome.

 

[Cobra Arbok]

With conclusions like this, it's a wonder anyone bothers to communicate with you.

He is literally described as the Napolean of Persia, the second Alexander, and the last great Asiatic conqueror. His successes have been compared to that of Tamerlane and Ghenghis Khan.

To call him minor is the height of ignorance.



Vedic people.



I'm not. I don't feel proud about these kinds of things to be quite frank, but I do find them interesting and feel satisfaction in knowing that I come from a region that has had many different people assimilate into it's fold.



Nothing.



You're welcome.

By minor, I meant in terms of South Asian history. Yes I should have clarified that, my apologies.

 

[PakSarzameen5823]

By minor, I meant in terms of South Asian history. Yes I should have clarified that, my apologies.

That's much less insane but still wrong. Nader Shah really did lay waste to the Mughal Empire and take much of it's wealth. The loot was so big that he ceased all taxes in Iran for multiple years.

 

[KhalaiMakhlooq]

1. Babur was born in Andijan, in the Fergana Valley, in modern Uzbekistan, not Afghanistan (as incorrectly stated in the video)

2. Babur was a male descendant of Tumanay Khan, a male ancestor he shared in common with Genghis Khan. He was fully turko-mongoloid on both mother and father sides.

That would have made the Mughals (Turco-Mongols) ethnically foreign to the Indian-subcontinent. Hence inhabitants would see that as foreign rule, hence always a weak power.

 

[Cobra Arbok]

That's much less insane but still wrong. Nader Shah really did lay waste to the Mughal Empire and take much of it's wealth. The loot was so big that he ceased all taxes in Iran for multiple years.

That may be true but The Mughal empire was already crumbling after the death of Aurangzeb largely due to the costs incurred during the war in the Deccan. If anything, the only reason Nadir Shah was able to crush the Mughals was because it was weakened after losing the war against the Marathas. I am pretty sure it would have turned out differently if Nadir Shah had attacked the Mughals at the Height of Aurangzeb or even Akbar's empire.
Overall, I would say Nadir Shah did not affect South Asian history as much as other figures such as Ahmad Shah Durrani, Chhatrapati Shivaji, Ranjit Singh, Aurangzeb, Tipu Sultan Hyder Ali, and others.

 

[KhalaiMakhlooq]

He is literally described as the Napolean of Persia, the second Alexander, and the last great Asiatic conqueror. His successes have been compared to that of Tamerlane and Ghenghis Khan.

Are you living in a fantasy world?

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

I have tried to be reasonable to you, but you refuse to engage in productive discussions.

That conversation was not with you, why are you so deeply offended?

In fact, I am sure I haven’t talked to you in months.

You came here to create fasad and fitnah and for no other reason.

I am not against Hindus, only radical Hindutva ideologues.

I am also not a fan of Gujurati liars (mostly Hindutva radicals) who claim to be anywhere from Pandits to Rajputs to further colonize Kashmir and East Punjab.

Anyway, you get too emotional so welcome back on my ignore list.