History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum LockedPakistan and ancient Persian empires

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 345
Author
MarcoPolo View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 05-Jul-2007
Location: Planet Earth
Status: Offline
Points: 185
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MarcoPolo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Nov-2007 at 20:58
Back to Top
Conservative View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2007
Location: Iran Inshalla
Status: Offline
Points: 110
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Conservative Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Dec-2007 at 23:05
Originally posted by lara lara wrote:

it is amazing that we never here about this, During the the height of the persian empires such as the great achaemenid empire, Median Empire, Seleucid Empire, Parthia, the area known as Pakistan today was always under them
 
Thats not actually true. The Median and Seleucid empires were not Persian. The Medes were a different Iranian tribe from the Persians and the Seleucids were not even Iranian at all. They were Greco-Macedonian invaders. The extent of the Median empire is not entirely known but it is certain that it did not reach the size of the Achaemenid empire, not by a long shot. At its easternmost point the Median empire probably extended into what is now southern Afghanistan.
 
Quote infact much of the land west of river indus was part of ancient persia, yet people dont even know about it.
 
On what are you basing this on? There are three good books available in English language which deal exclusively with the pre-Islamic empires of Iran (Achaemenid, Parthian and Sassanid) and in none of them is there any mention about Pakistan. Infact in Dr Kaveh Farrokh's book on ancient Persia there are only 3 paragraphs dedicated to the discussion on Persian rule in India (what is now Pakistan) and this comes under the chapter on Darius the Great. Why theres so little content on Pakistan/India is because there is no real evidence that Persian rule extended into the Indian subcontinent. From what Dr Kaveh says in his book (and he's done decades of research on ancient Persia) is that under Darius it is likely that the Achaemenids invaded India and defeated the people they encountered there and probably extracted tribute from them. But the Achaemenids only nominally ruled parts of India (now Pakistan).
 
I think you're mistaking Afghanistan and Pakistan. Much of Afghanistan can be said to have been apart of ancient Persia as opposed to being an area occupied by Persia, but not Pakistan. The territories in Pakistan/India that Darius the Great invaded can not be considered as Persia. They were foreign lands that were invaded by us.
 
The Parthians never ruled beyond what is now Afghanistan and there is little evidence to suggest that the Sassanids did either. Altho it is possible that the Sassanids invaded western India but it is unlikely that they ruled it. I havent read any books to suggest there was ever much of a Persian presence in India. You dont even find any real mention about India in Iranian history books or books on ancient Persia.
 
Anyway if you're interested in a book on just ancient Persia then see Dr Kaveh Farrokh's book 'Shadows in the Desert' or Josef Wiesehofer's "Ancient Persia". There's also another book on the subject by Maria Brosius.


Edited by Conservative - 20-Dec-2007 at 23:08
Back to Top
MarcoPolo View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 05-Jul-2007
Location: Planet Earth
Status: Offline
Points: 185
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MarcoPolo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Dec-2007 at 07:12
I think I might have responded in the wrong forum to this Thread.. my apologies to the moderators! :(
 
anyhow, I will repost here (hopefully AE forum moderators will forgive my mistake)
 
  Pakistan, as proven by the wealth of archeological and physical evidence, had strong links to the Persian Empire.  In fact the Persian Maps that the Greeks/Macedonians used in their quests showed the region making up the modern day republic of Pakistan as being part of the Persian Empire which is how they were able to navigate quite easily in these eastern provinces and sail down the Indus River to return home from Bhambore (near modern day Karachi Pakistan). Afghanistan was also part of it but is a mountainous region that offered a fraction of the wealth(exception being the Kabul valley/herat) as compared to the fertile region of the Indus, Peshawer valley and Panjab fertile rivers where wealth was in abundance.  The Indus satraps where the largest revenue earners for the Persian Empire. 
 
Archealogical evidence include the use of Persian Wheels, Aqueducts, ancient Zorastrian temples, the use of ancient persian empire scripts (Like Aramaic, Kharoshti) whereas further east across the border in india, there is no evidence of the use of these scripts.  Also, Daric coins and many more still unidentified coins from the times of the Persian empire are still found all throughout Pakistan.
 
Most of Pakistan's pre-British Colonial History is recorded in the Persian language until the advent of Urdu which was supported by the colonial rulers to remove the still very strong influence of Persia on the Pakistan region.
 
Herodotus makes mentions on several occasions that the Indus Satrapy (Modern day Pakistan) supplied cavalry and chariots to the Persian Army and even mentions details such as how they were clad in armaments made of ''cotton, carried bows and arrows of cane covered with iron''
 
Furthermore, Perhaps it would help if you looked at some relevant maps to dispel your false notions as they clearly demonstrate that PAKISTAN was part of the Persian Empire.
 
The influence of the Persian Empire and Persian culture is still very strong in Pakistan and continues to influence modern day Pakistanis this is despite having a divergent recent history.  Again, the neglect and misunderstandings that many have in their relationship with one another has prevented people in appreciating their important partnership in ancient times.
 
Here is a map of the Persian Empire under Darius some 150 years prior to Alexander's arrival clearly showing the Panjab and Frontier Region (Currently Pakistan's major populated areas representing 70% of the population) as being a part of the Persian Empire.
Back to Top
Conservative View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2007
Location: Iran Inshalla
Status: Offline
Points: 110
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Conservative Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Dec-2007 at 16:21
Originally posted by MarcoPolo MarcoPolo wrote:

Pakistan, as proven by the wealth of archeological and physical evidence, had strong links to the Persian Empire.  In fact the Persian Maps that the Greeks/Macedonians used in their quests showed the region making up the modern day republic of Pakistan as being part of the Persian Empire which is how they were able to navigate quite easily in these eastern provinces and sail down the Indus River to return home from Bhambore (near modern day Karachi Pakistan). Afghanistan was also part of it but is a mountainous region that offered a fraction of the wealth(exception being the Kabul valley/herat) as compared to the fertile region of the Indus, Peshawer valley and Panjab fertile rivers where wealth was in abundance.  The Indus satraps where the largest revenue earners for the Persian Empire. 
 
Archealogical evidence include the use of Persian Wheels, Aqueducts, ancient Zorastrian temples, the use of ancient persian empire scripts (Like Aramaic, Kharoshti) whereas further east across the border in india, there is no evidence of the use of these scripts.  Also, Daric coins and many more still unidentified coins from the times of the Persian empire are still found all throughout Pakistan.
 
Most of Pakistan's pre-British Colonial History is recorded in the Persian language until the advent of Urdu which was supported by the colonial rulers to remove the still very strong influence of Persia on the Pakistan region.
 
Herodotus makes mentions on several occasions that the Indus Satrapy (Modern day Pakistan) supplied cavalry and chariots to the Persian Army and even mentions details such as how they were clad in armaments made of ''cotton, carried bows and arrows of cane covered with iron''
 
Furthermore, Perhaps it would help if you looked at some relevant maps to dispel your false notions as they clearly demonstrate that PAKISTAN was part of the Persian Empire.
 
The influence of the Persian Empire and Persian culture is still very strong in Pakistan and continues to influence modern day Pakistanis this is despite having a divergent recent history.  Again, the neglect and misunderstandings that many have in their relationship with one another has prevented people in appreciating their important partnership in ancient times.
 
Here is a map of the Persian Empire under Darius some 150 years prior to Alexander's arrival clearly showing the Panjab and Frontier Region (Currently Pakistan's major populated areas representing 70% of the population) as being a part of the Persian Empire.
 
 
 
Interesting. I dont know what Persian maps you're talking about though or what archeological sites there are in Pakistan indicating the presence of the Achaemenids and/or Sassanids over there. Perhaps you could post some pictures or news reports of these finds here because this is the first time i've heard about this. Its not surprising that Persian coins have been found in the subcontinent because Persians traded with India and there have been coins dating back to the Sassanid empire that have been found as far away as Malaysia so that's nothing new. Persia traded with much of Asia during the Sassinid period by land and by sea. But these Persian "archeological sites" in Pakistan is news to me because according to everything i have read the only sources there are for the Persian defeat of India comes from Darius' inscription left behind in Persepolis and i believe there may also be another reference to the invasion of India in an inscription found in Egypt if im not mistaken. But these are the only proofs that Darius did invade India and extracted some of the highest tribute the Achaemenid empire received from its subordinate peoples.
 
Yes you're right that Indians were used in some of the Persian campaigns. The Achaemind army consisted of its primary force made up of Iranian contingents (Persians, Medes, Scythians) and then its auxiliary units who fought in their own ethnic regiments and used their own ethnic attire, equipment etc. These auxiliary units came from the subordinate peoples like the Assyrians, Egyptians, Ethiopians and Indians who all were made to fight for the Persians. But this worked against the Achaemenids especially during the invasions of Greece.
 
By the way i wouldn't trust those maps you find online. We were discussing this on one of the other forums and these maps you find online are usually inflated and based on estimates. They also make no distinction between the territories ruled by the Achaemenids and the actual extent of how far the Persians campaigned militarily. So this is why you find parts of the subcontinent and north eastern Central Asia included in these maps which were no doubt invaded but there are no actual Persian or Greco-Roman sources on the military campaigns in India or how far Darius invaded. All that is known from Persian sources (inscriptions at Persepolis, and possibly one in Egypt) is that Darius invaded India and defeated the Indians after which the Achaemenids extracted very large tributes from them so i really wonder what archeological sites you were talking about because these have never been reported in history books or Iranian archeological and cultural surveys.


Edited by Conservative - 26-Dec-2007 at 16:24
Back to Top
anum View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 14-Dec-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 92
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote anum Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Dec-2007 at 17:06

well ur right, obviously persians didn't invade india, but we are talking about the land west of the indus river, That area was never or for very little period under indian empires. It was under a lot of persian empires. so you can't really call that land indian subcontinent.

Back to Top
anum View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 14-Dec-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 92
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote anum Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Dec-2007 at 17:08
The land west of indus river is on iranian plateau, which is present day baluchistan, Western sindh, western punjab and north western area o pakistan.
Back to Top
Conservative View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2007
Location: Iran Inshalla
Status: Offline
Points: 110
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Conservative Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Dec-2007 at 17:45
Originally posted by anum anum wrote:

well ur right, obviously persians didn't invade india, but we are talking about the land west of the indus river, That area was never or for very little period under indian empires. It was under a lot of persian empires. so you can't really call that land indian subcontinent.

 
Ok i've looked at a map of where the river Indus is and yes it is likely that Darius did cross that river and invade into India (modern Pakistan) but nobody knows how far he went and the few available sources on the matter only indicate that the Achaemenids defeated the Indians after the invasion and extracted very large tributes from them.
 
About your other post yes the entire Baluchestan region lies on the Iranian plateau so that includes whatever Baluch territories that are now in Afghanistan and in Pakistan and yes the Baluch areas have more-or-less always been under Persian rule or under their own autonomy though politically still connected with Iran. The rest of Pakistan is in the Indian subcontinent. I dont know the history of how part of Baluchestan ended up in Pakistan but this is something that must have been quite recent because Baluchestan has very little connection to the subcontinent despite being on its border. I suspect it occurred during the Russian and British 'Great Game' but i hadnt actually thought about that before and perhaps will discuss it on the Iranian forum.
Back to Top
anum View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 14-Dec-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 92
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote anum Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Dec-2007 at 18:06
well baluchistan and also north west frontier area pf pakistan which are pashtuns is also more persian. Punjab and Sindh i agree are still more indian subcontienant culture wise but with huge persian influences. Pakistan basically you could say is in the dividing line between the persians and the indians.
Back to Top
Conservative View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2007
Location: Iran Inshalla
Status: Offline
Points: 110
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Conservative Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Dec-2007 at 19:10
Originally posted by anum anum wrote:

well baluchistan and also north west frontier area pf pakistan which are pashtuns is also more persian. Punjab and Sindh i agree are still more indian subcontienant culture wise but with huge persian influences. Pakistan basically you could say is in the dividing line between the persians and the indians. 
 
Hmmmm, no i dont agree with that at all. Pakistanis are very different from Iranians. They are similar to Indians (well most of them are Indians). Also Pashtuns (Afghans) are quite different from Persians so i dont know how you can conclude that Pashtuns are in some way 'more Persian'. More 'Persian' than what? Indian? Pashtuns are different from both Persians and Indians. Speak to any Iranian and any Afghan and you'll know what i mean. Afghans that speak Dari are close to Iran and before Afghanistan was a state most of it was under Iranian rule, but Afghan Pashtuns have a very different culture from Persians.
 
Baluch also have their own culture and identity which is not Persian, although both Baluch and Persians are apart of the Iranian nation. I dont think you are familiar with Persian culture or Iranian people if you think that Iran only has one culture which is 'Persian'. Iranian civilization is a whole lot more diverse than the subcontinent is and Persian culture does not extend that far east. There are Afghan, Baluch and other smaller Iranic cultures in between.
Back to Top
anum View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 14-Dec-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 92
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote anum Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Dec-2007 at 01:12

well the reason pakistan of today has less persian culture is because it has been part of the indian subcontinent for a long time. We are talking about past here not present day iran or pakistan. There was a time long ago where many parts of pakistan were under the persian empires and persian influence no matter how little is still there.

Back to Top
MarcoPolo View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 05-Jul-2007
Location: Planet Earth
Status: Offline
Points: 185
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MarcoPolo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Dec-2007 at 19:38
Originally posted by Conservative Conservative wrote:

They are similar to Indians (well most of them are Indians).
 
Thats quite innacurrate, only about 4-5% of Pakistan's ethnic groups are originally refugees/migrants from various parts of India which is not reflective of the country as a whole. 
 
 
 
 


Edited by MarcoPolo - 27-Dec-2007 at 19:38
Back to Top
MarcoPolo View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 05-Jul-2007
Location: Planet Earth
Status: Offline
Points: 185
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MarcoPolo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Dec-2007 at 19:40
Originally posted by anum anum wrote:

well the reason pakistan of today has less persian culture is because it has been part of the asian subcontinent for a long time. We are talking about past here not present day iran or pakistan. There was a time long ago where many parts of pakistan were under the persian empires and persian influence no matter how little is still there.

 
Thats very true Anum, its odd how so much has changed and how quickly it has happened.
Back to Top
anum View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 14-Dec-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 92
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote anum Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Dec-2007 at 20:30
its mainly because of what has happend in the last 60 years. Unfortuantly pakistanis have focused on indian culture a lot, watching their movies, practicing thier cultural practices etc....
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 345
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.