What's new

Why was south Asia so difficult to unify?

single entry point (Khyber pass)
You don't seem to be well read on Pakistan's geography. The Durand Line is not a major barrier and in that sense is no differant from Radcliffe line. Khyber Pass is NOT the single 'entry point'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peiwar_Pass
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gomal_Pass
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khojak_Pass

In addition there are 100s of other crossing points. Give up that notion prevalent in the Ganga that there is some wall on the western marches of South Asia. There is none. The present project launched by Pakisatan Army to fence the Durand Line alludes to this misconception among Gangadeshis. There is no natural barrier which is why fencing is being undertaken as the border is very porous.


35BD391F-8C0F-41A2-9C3B-445C69BB1BB5_w1023_r1_s.jpg



0_1_081303_album.jpg



3500.jpg
 
Last edited:
.
I always wonder why the Maurya (and later the Mughals) have never conquered the land of dravidians

This has to do with the difference in the way the chieftain system is set up in the South (Sangam) compared to the North (Vedic). This system makes use of the topography advantage of defence in the Tamil Nadu, Southern Deccan areas....as it would otherwise would not have been if carbon copy of the various shastras from the vedic system.

There is reason for example the main Tamil god (who is also the war god) is the one of the mountains and hills (and where bulk of his temples are found), this is where the guerrila warfare and resistance could continue relatively easily after any attempted invasion. It has some parellel with the Armenian history (their pre-christian religion also emphasized their mountain, esp mt ararat....and in fact there is continuity of this in their christianity too with ararat being where noah's ark is said to have settled after the flood).

Combine this with the superior technology the south had when it came to metallurgy for quite some time and it became only question of suzerainty at best for the largest empires in subcontinent compared to outright sovereignty. Suzerainty only exists on paper too and means nothing to the hill tribes and warriors. This is why the largest and most powerful southern + deccan empires (like Chola and Chalukya) could never comprehensively defeat each other (And absorb into one large entity) but could push north more easy (Esp along the eastern coastline).

Those (foreigners) that could supplement (without trying to replace) the local chieftain system of south and its nuances and style...did the best long term for their presence. The Pallavas come to mind...and of course the most famous recent one...the British. In fact the British being able to deal effectively with the Southern system first (if you read up on Fort St. George history etc), made it relatively easy for them to deal with rest of subcontinent for their political ambitions.
 
.
You don't seem to be well read on Pakistan's geography. The Durand Line is not a major barrier and in that sense is no differant from Radcliffe line. Khyber Pass is NOT the single 'entry point'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peiwar_Pass
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gomal_Pass
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khojak_Pass

In addition there are 100s of other crossing points. Give up that notion prevalent in the Ganga that there is some wall on the western marches of South Asia. There is none. The present project launched by Pakisatan Army to fence the Durand Line alludes to this misconception among Gangadeshis. There is no natural barrier which is why fencing is being undertaken as the border is very porous.

You seem to be a person who is incapable of voicing his opinion without being excessively rude. I know very well there are many other passes that connects present day Pakistan and Afghanistan, with modern day technology it is easier to curve out even newer routes.

What I meant was for any invading central Asian soldiers around 1500 BCE, khyber pass was the only logical option have any large scale army movement. I may be wrong here in my assumption and you are more than welcome to correct me, without being rude that is. Other-wise, I would not like to engage any further with you.

And for your kind info, I'm not of Gangadeshi descendant, neither from the Dravidian stock; not that I have anything against them, unlike some other racist bigots, who keeps ranting about their superior races...
 
.
What I meant was for any invading central Asian soldiers around 1500 BCE, khyber pass was the only logical option have any large scale army movement. I may be wrong here in my assumption and you are more than welcome to correct me, without being rude that is. Other-wise, I would not like to engage any further with you.
Okay, fair enough. Apology tendered. We get lot of dumb posters peddling Indian propaganda so over time I just have built a reflex that was wrong on this occasion. You appear to be a serious member. On point no, your assumption is incorrect. The Durand Line is not contrary to what perhaps is taught in India, is not a barrier. In fact there is no such barrier on the western marches of South Asia. It is purely arbitrary construct as to where you place the western boundary of South Asia.

The real barrier between South Asia and Central Asia runs right across the middle of Afghanistan in the form of the almost impenetrable mountain range called the Hindu Kush. All of Afghanistan south and east of it falls within South Asia. For instance Kabul is in the Kabul River valley and River Kabul flows east crossing the Af-Pak border north of Khyber Pass. It then flows north of Peshawar before joining the Indus River near Attock. Even today the only all weather road crossing the Hindu Kush in Afghanistan is through the Soviet era built Salang Pass.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salang_Pass


Most of Kabul region/Eastern Afghanistan actually falls within the Indus River catchment area therefore and drains into the wider Indus Valley. The reall barrier as I said before between South/Central Asia is the Hindu Kush which runs along centre of Afghanistan dividing that country. On both side of Durand Line the Pakhtuns are the majority. The only significant thing about Durand Line is that the British chose that as their maximal point of empire this etching Khyber Pass as 'gateway to the sub-continent' when the geographic/ethnic/historical facts say otherwise. Across the Durand there are numerous passes. From the extreme north Kunar Valley [route taken by Alexander the Great], Khyber Pass, Kurram, Tochi Pass, Gomal Pass, Khojack Pass, Bolan Pass, etc etc all marked green in the map below.

The fact that Pakistan is building a fence along the Durand Line should tell you that there is no real barrier. You can cross it at dozens of points. The real barrier is nortth in Afghanistan in the shape of Hindu Kush range. The other point you might like to draw is the division between the Indus Plains and the higher ground west of it but even that leaves Islamabad/Potohar plateau, Peshwar plain on the west and even Karachi falls within that line.


Em5BsWL.jpg



To add further to this in history the Durand Line rarely formed the boundary. For instance Gandhara covered modern day Pakistani capital Islamabad [Taxila is a suburb of the capital] and then spread west across to Peshwar. Then it went over the Khyber Pass into all the way to Kabul.


3943.jpg



Map below of the Indus River catchement area. Notice Kabul region of Afghanistan falls within the Indus Basin and on the east so does Punjab region of India. And of course almost all of Pakistan is within the Indus Basin. I hope this helps to explain my point. The boundary of South Asia on the west is arbitrary and most people tend to inform themselves by the British Raj legacy.


Indus.jpg
 
Last edited:
.
Quite informative post @Kaptaan!! Thanks a ton.. I'll get back to you with more curious queries. My childhood history was rubbish and I wasn't at all interested in the subject back then. I was always a science man... It's only after I turned 40, my interest in history and geography has taken a unprecedented upward turn. A bit occupied now. I'll bother you more pretty soon.
 
.
Quite informative post @Kaptaan!! Thanks a ton.. I'll get back to you with more curious queries. My childhood history was rubbish and I wasn't at all interested in the subject back then. I was always a science man... It's only after I turned 40, my interest in history and geography has taken a unprecedented upward turn. A bit occupied now. I'll bother you more pretty soon.
Not a problem. History/geography are my passions. If you need any info I will be glad to reply.
 
. . .
we are united when it comes to money.
but we are chutiyas when it comes to politics.
goro ki baton mein akar ma behen ek karete rehte hai
 
.
China, Rome, Persia, Ottomans and even Mongols all had huge empires with much bigger land mass under their control and successfully administered them, communications never held them back, so why were South asian states struggling to unify and rule India?

It took the Mauryans and Mughals multiple generations to get their territories together and they still failed to conquer the entire subcontinent.

south asia has a huge population its not simply like deserts of iran or middle east to get conquered so easily. its like europe in itself maybe even more diverse with more population, geograpy also playes a rol in that as well.

only a ruthless tyrant empire like han china could unify south asia, because han chinese butchered and slaughtered all non han chinese and so except han chinese rest of the nationalisties in china perticularly south china went into extinction.
 
.
Not on the scale and frequency happening in south asia

You just aren't aware of them then, bud. This is a very human phenomena, even visible in early Islamic history. The reason it was expounded in our case is that the nation as a whole never aspired to anything.
 
. .
India also lacks a monotheistic religion like Islam or Christianity for it to build a united empire.

Think of it One God, One State, One nation, one empire. Not to mention Islam and Christianity allows for conquest.

Another factor is Indians were too busy fighting each other to even care about uniting. Closest they got was Ashoka in uniting India but he was affected by so much bloodshed and became a man of non violence. There you go the chance in uniting India was thrown out the window.
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom