Pakistani Mehergarh civilizition preceded Pakistani Indus Valley Civilization

Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | ??????? ????? | ???? | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ??????? | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | ???????? ????? | Moin Ansari | ???? ??????? |  ????? ????? |  April 7th, 2009 |

Pakistani Mehergarh civilizition preceded Pakistani Indus Valley Civilization: Pakistan is the home of several Civilizations. As we navigate the corridors of time and look into the seeds of time we discover the seven thousand year old Mehergarh Civilization that encompassed much of Pakistan. After the demise of the Mehergarh Civilization the Indus Valley Civilization came to its zenith around 3500 BC.

Indus Valley Civilization map

If one looks at the map of the Indus Valley Civilization one is astonished that the civilization was within the borders of current day Pakistan. The Mehergarh and the Indus Valley Civilizations were not “Hindu“. The Indus Valley Civilization for example buried their dead, used a pictographic language, read right to left, did not use horses and did not worship the Hindu pantheon. Similarly the Mehergarh Civilization was similar in character.

The Geographic Two Nation Theory. Pakistan existed 5000 years ago as the “Indus Valley Civilization”

Islamabad, April 8 (ANI): Archaeologists have recently found earthenware pottery from 7000-2000 BC, in excavations that took place at Sohr Damb/Nal, a prehistoric site in Balochistan, a province in Pakistan.

According to a report in the Daily Times, the finding was made by Dr Ute Franke, a German archaeologist, who has been following the prehistoric sites in Balochistan since 1981.

The gradual shift of the pottery from very crude and basic vessels to more sophisticated and decorated containers, as well as, urbanity and later migration, highlighted the way the civilization progressed.

In a recent lecture at the Goethe-Institute, Karachi, Dr Franke presented the findings from the various periods in Balochistan history.

From the undisturbed Period I to Period II, where a single grave carried upto to 16 individuals, along with decorative beads and utensils and, later on, Period III, where figurines and refined ceramics were made, to Period IV that shares stark similarities with the Indus Valley Civilization, the changes that took place culturally and technologically were revealed along with the everyday life that was based on a nomadic lifestyle.

Though there was initially the idea that the civilization in Balochistan was linked with the Indus Valley, however, the notion was dispelled by the findings of the German-Pakistani Archaeological Mission. (ANI). Archaeologists find earthenware pottery from 7000-2000 BC in Pakistan, April 8th, 2009 – 3:18 pm ICT by ANI -

Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | ??????? ????? | ???? | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ??????? | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | ???????? ????? | Moin Ansari | ???? ??????? | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate to: Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape Bookmark and Share Add to Technorati RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | November 30th, 2008 | Moin Ansari | ???? ??????? | ????? ????? | 

THE THESIS:  There was no “partition”

THERE WAS NO “PARTITION”: For Britain ” ‘Indian’ Empire” included Somalia, Iraq, Burma, Singapore etc. For the French “India” included Vietnam (Indo-China). For the Dutch “India” included “Indo-n-asia”.

‘India is no more a country than the Equator’.Winston Churchill

Historians in general and many Pakistanis in particular take deep umbrage and dislike the usage of the term “partition” because “partition” implies the division of a whole. Pakistanis prefer Independence. Pakistanis will accept “Separation” but not “partition.” As the maps show, the term “India” was very ephemiral and put in vogue by the British. Before British times, there was no such word. Because there never was a country called “India” there was no partition. 

India is no more a country than the Equator“  Winston Churchill

Initially when Lord Clive of the East Indian company defeated Shirijud Daulah, he called it British Bengal.  When the British formally came to the Subcontinent in 1857, they encountered more than 570 states. When they left the Subcontinent they left more than 570 independent states and two dominions, India and Pakistan. The states on the banks of the Indus decided to live together as Pakistan, as they had lived together for thousands of years. The states on the Gangetic plain banded together to form “Bharat”. The state on the Brahamaputra became its own state. 

Maps showing various sovereign, independent states in the Subcontinent during the British Raj

This map of 1853 “India” does not show half of Pakistan.Constables 1893 British map showing Pakistan, Afghanistan, Burma, Ceylon, Nepal, Bhutan, Sikkim as part of “Indian Empire”Throughout history, the struggle for the independence of the Subcontinent has been struggle against centralism and the struggle has been waged to create for provincial autonomy. The Government of India Act of 1919 set out in clear terms the subjects which were to belong to the provincial sphere and those to the Central sphere. But both the Congress and the Muslim League boycotted the elections to the provincial and Central Legislatures held in November 1920 under the Act, because they felt that the Central vernment had still retained too much of power over the provinces.Presidencies 1893

Each state had its own currency, laws, jails, flag, crest, passport, military, treasury, and British forces were not allowed to enter the state. Many were ruled by Muslims rulers like Hydrabad, Bhopal, Junagarh etc. Maps showing various sovereign, independent states in the Subcontinent during the British Raj

.Hydrabad state wanted to stay independent MadrasBaroda stateBalauchistan 1906.

The separation of Burma is not called “partition”. The independence of Sri Lanka is not called “partition”. the removal of Iraq from the British Indian Empire is not called “partition”. The independence of Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan is not called “partition”. Aden and Somalia becmae independent in the British Indian Empire and are not lamented as being “partitioned” off. For the French, sperating Vietnam from their Indian Empire is not called “partition”. For the Dutch, removing Indonesia from Dutch “India” is not called separation.

“Pakistan” existed 5000 years ago. It was not called “Pakistan”. China 5000 years ago was also called something else. Egypt 5000 years ago was called something else.Baluch reliefHarappan sealsThe Western states had lived together in the Valley of the Indus for more than 5000 years together so it was natural for them to live together

THE BASIS FOR THE THESIS

“Pakistan” existed 5000 years ago.  

Pakistan exsited 5000 Years ago as the IVCThe 5000 year old ancient trade routes between Pakistan and China are being revived with modern freeways that were ocnstructed 20 years ago. 5000 years ago the

 5000 years ago Pakistan was probably not called “Pakistan”. China 5000 years ago was also called something else. Egypt 5000 years ago was called something else.

Kushan Parthian maps show different parts of the worldKushan Parthian map

Indian Empiure includes Ceylon, Burma, AfghanistanThe British Indian Empire included Somalia, Iraq, Aden, Burma and other states. Then there was the French “Indian” Empire, Dutch “Indian” Empire, “Portuguese” Indian Empire and even a Dansih “Indian” Empire. Each one had a different meaning of “India”.The French “Indian” Empire included Vietnam etc. The Dutch Indian Empire included parts of the Subcontinent and Indonesia. Columbus called America “India” and the local inhabitants Indian. Other islands in the new world were called East Indies. South East Asia was called Indo-China.

The French “Indian” EmpireFrench Indian EmpireThe French “Indian” Empire included parts of the Subcontinent and (Indo-China) Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos in it

The Dutch “Indian” Empire included Indonesia in itMany states included. Posessions of the Dutch empire in the Subcontinent

Map showing Burma, Aden, Iraq as part of the “Indian” EmpireRailway maps included Burma

Constables maps of 1893 not shwoing many part of Paksitan in the “Indian” Empireindian-empire-1893-constables-atlas.jpg

Map of Asia showing “India” without Pakistanmap of asia

Map of the Middle East does not show Pakistan as part of the SubcontinentMiddle East map of the 19th century

Timur’s Empire show Pakistan not part of the SubcontinentTimurs’ Empire

THERE WAS NO PARTITION

The Pakistan proposal “Now or Never” was not based on any partition. It was based on the Muslim majority areas coming together.

Muslim vs. HindusCh. Rehmat Ali Pakistannow-or-never-ch-rehmat-ali-pakistan.jpg

“Notwithstanding [a] thousand years of close contact, nationalities which are as divergent today as ever, cannot at any time be expected to transform themselves into one nation merely by means of subjecting them to a democratic constitution and holding them forcibly togdher by unnatural and artificial methods of British Parliamentary statutes. What the unitary government of India for one hundred fifty years had failcd to achieve cannot be realiscd by the imposition of a central federal government. It is inconceivable that the fiat or the writ of a government so constituted can ever command a willing and loyal obedience throughout the sub-continent by various nationalities, except by means of armed force behind it. Quaid E Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah: Founder of Pakistan and the Father of the Nation

 

PakistanPakistan

These maps show the distribution of Muslim majority areas and other areas. The proposal called for Pakistan to be created in the Muslim majority areas

THE PROOF OF THE THESIS

How could a country be partitioned when it has existed for 5000 years as a separate entity. One hundred and Fifty years as part of the British empire does not make “India” a country

Pakistanis and historians detest the word that incorrectly describes the genesis of the country that has existed since time immemorial  

The greatest migration in history was the exchange of 11.5 million people between India and Pakistan in 1947 accompanied by the massacre of another half a million. The migration of 3.5 million Afghan refugees into Pakistan from 1979 to 1987 was almost as disruptive. The separation of Bangladesh was, until the dismemberment of the Soviet empire in 1991, the only successful secession of the post World War II era. Three wars with India over what is essentially a boundary dispute bloodied with ethnic cleansing in Kashmir, and now continued turbulence and terrorism based in part on drug distribution and in part on the presumption of the development of nuclear weapons capacity.When the Elephants dance, the grass gets crushed. The continued CIA involvement in Pakistan. Another Pakistani leaders falls to an international game between the USA, and China and Russia, and Pakistanis again pay the price The term “india” stems from the Arab usage of the word Hind from for the inhabitants who lived on the Sindhu (Indus) river. From Sindh to Hindh. In time all residents beyond the Indus were also called Hindus. 

The Western states, Kalat, Bhawalpur, and provinces Punjab, Sindh, Baluchistan, and NWFP banded together to form “Pakistan” and decided to live together as one country just like they had lived together for thousands of years before the British arrived in the Indus Valley Civilization that existed almost entirely on the banks of the Indus. The states of the Gangetic Civilization that existed on the banks of the Ganges banded together to live form Bharat(constitutional name of “India”). Pakistan had objected to the name “India” being used by Bharat

These maps show the British Indian Empire which included many states. The other maps detail the condition of the Subcontinent on the eve of the British departure.There never was a country called “India.” The Arabs never ventured past Sindh. The nomenclature was for those on the river Indus as Sindhu or Hindu. ”India” is a colonial derivative of the word. During British Times vast areas of Asia came under the jurisdiction of Britain. Iraq, Somalia, Burma and 526 states in the Subcontinent were all part of the British Empire. When the British were leaving all the parts were made independent.Of these, Somalia, Iraq, Burma, and Pakistan are some of the countries that got liberated. There never was any partition because there never was a “whole” to divide. 

At one point Afghanistan was also part of the British Indian Empire. Curzon’s retreat from Afghanistan, and its separation from the “Indian” Empire was not called “partition”. The separation of Iraq from the Indian empire was not called partition. The separation of Aden from British India was not called partition. the separation of the gulf states from “India” was not called partition. The independence of Burma from the British raj in 1933 was not called “partition”. Why is the Pakistani separation called “partition”, as if it was part and parcel of a “whole”.

the-526-states-in-the-subcontinent.gifAfter  Gurdaspur, a Muslim majority area was illegally given to India Kashmir’s link is to India. Why waste people’s time to ask such silly questions? The Naxalites want independence. Why doesn’t India give it to the millions.The British Indian Empire included India, Iraq, Burma etcNehru and Edwina

British Raj (r?j, lit. “rule” in Hindi) or British India, officially the British Indian Empire, and internationally and contemporaneously, India, was the term used synonymously for the region, the rule, and the period, from 1858 to 1947, of the British Empire on the Indian subcontinent. The region included areas directly administered by the United Kingdom (contemporaneously, “British India”) as well as the princely states ruled by individual rulers under the paramountcy of the British Crown. The princely states, which had all entered into treaty arrangements with the British Crown, were allowed a degree of local autonomy in exchange for accepting protection and complete representation in international affairs by Great Britain. The British Indian Empire included the regions of present-day India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, and, in addition, at various times, Aden (from 1858 to 1937), Lower Burma (from 1858 to 1937), Upper Burma (from 1886 to 1937), British Somaliland (briefly from 1884 to 1898), and Singapore (briefly from 1858 to 1867). British India had some ties with British possessions in the Middle East;the Indian rupee served as the currency in many parts of that region. What is now Iraq was, immediately after World War I, administered by the India Office of the British government.Source: Wikipedia

The 5000 year old ancient trade routes between Pakistan and China are being revived with modern freeways that were ocnstructed 20 years ago. 5000 years ago the Harrappan Pakistanis were trading with the ChineseTHE FOUR SUPERPOWERS OF PROTO-HISTORY: China, Egypt, Iraq and Pakistan. The Nile, the Tigris-Euphrates delta, the Yangtze Delta, and the Indus, are the wombs of all civilizations on our earth. These river valley spawned and nurtured humanity. Imagine a world with four superpowers at peace with each other. Imagine a planet where each civilization was immersed in humongous construction projects, urban edification and trade. . How did these proto-world powers interact with each other? Imagine a civilization without any implements of war. Let us look into pre-history and peek into the “seeds” of time. Let us look at the valleys of the world that engendered the Superpowers of the ancient world..

PAKISTAN 5000 YEARS AGO:-The Indus Valley Civilization of South Asia was one of the inceptive civilizations on the planet. It was contemporaneous with the Chinese, Egyptian, and Sumerian civilizations. These were the times when the Egyptians were building huge monuments to their God-kings,the pyramids and the Sphinx. These were the centuries when the Chinese were building palaces for the Shun dynasty. These were exciting eons in the Holy lands too.

These were the centuries when Moses was battling the pharaohs, Abraham was building the Kaaba, David was ruling the kingdom, and Solomon was building the Temple of Yahweh. It was during these centuries that the Indus Valley Civilization flourished and reached its zenith in South Asia.

The IVC built well planned municipalities for its citizens. While the Egyptians spent three generations of their labor force (estimated between 20,000-10000) building useless mausoleum-pyramids to bury the God-kings, the Harappans were successful in eradicating, disease, hunger, and malnutrition.

The Harappans of the IVC did not build huge commemorative, deifying, dedicatory, cenotaphs. The Harappans of Meluhha-IVC built the finest cities of the third millennium.

THE CENTRIFUGAL FORCES IN CURRENT DAY BHARAT

Second, the Northeast if not addressed appropriately could unhook from the Union before the Valley given the acute vulnerability of the Siliguri Corridor, which is merely 10 to 20 kilometer wide and 200 kilometers long. If this critical corridor is choked or subverted or severed by force, the Union of India will have to maintain the Northeast by air. With poor quality of governance for which the country is infamous, the local population may gravitate towards other regional powers.Given a modicum of political will, Danger-I and II may still be manageable, however, Danger III to its territorial integrity in the Northeast may prove to be the most difficult. In fact the entire Northeast can easily be unhooked on multiple counts from the Union. First, these are low populated areas having contiguity with the most densely populated and demographically aggressive country in the world, i.e., Bangladesh. The country has also emerged as a major source of Islamic fundamentalism which impacts grievously on the Northeast. To add to these woes, New Delhi because of sheer vote-bank politics legitimized illegal migration for 22 years through the vehicle of IMDT. Many border districts now have a majority population constituting illegal immigrants from Bangladesh. In near future, this leverage will be used to create an internal upheaval against the Centre as in the case of the Valley. It’s a classic Islamic fundamentalist principle of asymmetric warfare. What cannot be achieved by conventional wars, can be done through infiltration and subsequently internal subversionNaxalites

Because the Subcontinent was never “one” country, there are deep fissures in “Bharat.” The Kashmiris, the Naxalites, the Northeastern states, as well as East Punjab, and Tamil Nadu on the South all want to revert to the pre-1947 era.

There are several other articles on the History of India and Pakistan, and Geographic Two Nation Theory on this site:

http://moinansari.wordpress.com/2007/11/27/the-geographic-two-nation-theory-pakistan-existed-5000-years-ago/

Fair Use Notice:This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | ??????? ????? | ???? | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ??????? | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | ???????? ????? | Moin Ansari | ???? ??????? | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate to: Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape Bookmark and Share Add to Technorati
RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | November 30th, 2008 | Moin Ansari | ???? ??????? | ????? ????? |
 

7 Responses to “Pakistani Mehergarh civilizition preceded Pakistani Indus Valley Civilization”

  1. Vasant Davé says:

    Trying to mould history in convenient political boundaries is doing injustice to the great Indus Valley Civilization.

  2. Dr abdul jamil khan says:

    Calling Indus valley as pakistani civilization is not at all wrong. Same as calling any civiliztion by the name of current country’s name. But Indus valley west to Indus river was part of assyrian/babylonian/elamite empire from 4000 BC upto abt 500 BC., when persian took over but culture had remained same old mideastern arab culture.
    As noted by Dr Malati Shinde the Indus valley was part of mideast and AKKADIAN language in essence had mothered Sanskrit– this was even stated by S K chatterji india’s greatest linguist in 1960s. My own work derives ind0-pak culture system from mideast and that includes hinduism. In urdu/hindi an artificial divide it is elaborated that oldest indian language /culture is austric-munda and dravidian and sanskrit a new incarnation of old arabic grew by absorbing from oldest two. It certainly angers hindu nationalist if any one doublsthat indian system is not orignal and or it is not hindu. Language and cultures are not hindu or muslim but they have evolved cumulatively. Interestingly most indians dont know that the language of indus valley was old arabic ( aramaic) and evidence is ashoka’s inscriptions. Pali prakrit however was the main language.
    Indians must show academic prudence in calling indus valley as oldest pakistani culture and also learn to dissociate ” india’s basic material culture” from hinduism as these are two different things. In the same vein Pakistani culture is not muslim culture.It can be best called as pakistani culture. Finally indus valley arose when mesopotamian farmers in abt 7000BC ( see Dani’s book) founded mehergarh the oldest village in pakistan. several 1000 yrs later the rice farmers from south china migrated with rice technology in abt 2000 BC from east. The integrated rice and wheat culture is what we can call pakistani or indian culture. Reading history as evolution can at least remove the venomous hatred pervading hindus and muslims for some 100 yrs and may even lead to a peace of heart and not peace of politics. I do admire mr Moin for this new focuss on history though he remains indocentric in criticism.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. [...] The temple education in Bharat teaches them that their land extends from Kabul to Raj Kalhani (mythical island East of Hindu Bali in Indonesia). Thus this temple education prohibits them from accepting any of the countries in their borders–Tibet, Sikkim, Bhutan, Nepal, Lanka, Mayanmar, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Pakistani Mehergarh civilizition preceded Pakistani Indus Valley Civilization [...]

  2. [...] The temple education in Bharat teaches them that their land extends from Kabul to Raj Kalhani (mythical island East of Hindu Bali in Indonesia). Thus this temple education prohibits them from accepting any of the countries in their borders–Tibet, Sikkim, Bhutan, Nepal, Lanka, Mayanmar, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Pakistani Mehergarh civilizition preceded Pakistani Indus Valley Civilization [...]

  3. [...] The temple education in Bharat teaches them that their land extends from Kabul to Raj Kalhani (mythical island East of Hindu Bali in Indonesia). Thus this temple education prohibits them from accepting any of the countries in their borders–Tibet, Sikkim, Bhutan, Nepal, Lanka, Mayanmar, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Pakistani Mehergarh civilizition preceded Pakistani Indus Valley Civilization [...]

  4. [...] The temple education in Bharat teaches them that their land extends from Kabul to Raj Kalhani (mythical island East of Hindu Bali in Indonesia). Thus this temple education prohibits them from accepting any of the countries in their borders–Tibet, Sikkim, Bhutan, Nepal, Lanka, Mayanmar, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Pakistani Mehergarh civilizition preceded Pakistani Indus Valley Civilization [...]


Leave a Reply

Categories

Archives