Alexander the Great Invades India

  1. #196
    Moderator LETHALFORCE
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    17,303
    Likes
    3687
    United States
    The facts are clear:
    1)winners do not give their Daughter to the loser
    2)the marriage was a peace treaty-why was a peace treaty needed if there was victory by selucus??
    3)CGM gained territory from selecus again losers do not get this
    4) after marriage CGM gifted war 500 elephants which selucus used with great success in his meditarrean campaigns
    5)Helen must have been a good wife and mother looking out for her husband's interest her son was Bindusara and her Grandson was Ashoka the Great both went on to greatly expand the Mauryan empire.

  2. #197
    pmaitra
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    19,263
    Likes
    8412
    India
    Correct. Winners do not give their daughters or territories to losers. That matrimonial alliance was indeed a peace treaty. Those 500 war elephants were probably a mark of dowry, if you will.

    Was CGM in love with Helen or was it a plan of Chanakya or a political alliance? This is debated.

  3. #198
    Moderator LETHALFORCE
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    17,303
    Likes
    3687
    United States
    It was a brilliant move by Chanakya solidifying CGM's position and directing Selucus's focus westward, now that the Eastern side was covered. Meanwhile CGM focused on expansion.
    pmaitra likes this.

  4. #199
    Senior Member S.A.T.A
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,805
    Likes
    411
    India
    ^
    Accoring to jain accounts chronicling the life of Chandragupta Maurya,Emperor Maurya's chief queen and the mother of his son and successor Bindusara,was Durdhara,a daugher of one of Maurya's maternal uncles,hence she was also of Mauryan descent.
    LETHALFORCE likes this.

  5. #200
    Moderator LETHALFORCE
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    17,303
    Likes
    3687
    United States
    Stories passed down claim that Bindusara mother Durdhara had died during child birth. When Bindusara was older he was told that Chanakya had posioned his mother and he ordered a death sentence which, had chanakya flee into a life of sanyas ending his political career and his ties to the Mauriyan empire. The truth was revealed later to Bindusara that Chanakya was not responsible but chanakya refused to come back.

  6. #201
    Retired civfanatic
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    తెలంగాణ
    Posts
    4,600
    Likes
    2464
    India
    Did Chandragupta have any children with Helen?

    Or is it possible that Helen and Durdhara are one and the same (I doubt Indian records would call her "Helen", just as Greek records used the name "Sandrocottos" to refer to Chandragupta)?

  7. #202
    DFI Buddha Godless-Kafir
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    5,821
    Likes
    1766
    India
    Yes, the people at RSS use that as an famous analogy towards Rahul and Sonia. Legend goes that Chanakya the then Prime Minister of Maurya and mentor of Chandragupta claimed that the off-spring with an Greek can not become King or claim to the highest power because his loyalties will be split between Greece and India just as his blood would 50% Indian and 50% Greek, not even the next generation would have be eligible because he would be 75% Indian and 25% Greek and it is only the 4th generation that would be eligible as he would have become more Indian than Greek.

    These are the many examples from History that they use to justify their dislike of Sonia and Rahul and rightly so. Even in the US an immigrant can not aspire to become President. That would mean an easy entry to an foreigner to rule the country.
    Last edited by Godless-Kafir; 11-06-11 at 11:18 PM.

  8. #203
    Moderator LETHALFORCE
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    17,303
    Likes
    3687
    United States
    In US only born citizens can become President. India in this regard is more flexible allowing foreign born Sonia to become Prime minister .

  9. #204
    Moderator LETHALFORCE
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    17,303
    Likes
    3687
    United States
    This seems to have ended when Mughal rule started??

  10. #205
    Retired civfanatic
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    తెలంగాణ
    Posts
    4,600
    Likes
    2464
    India
    Interesting. I don't quite understand the analogy, but interesting that the RSS chums have to go so far back in history to justify their dislike for someone as inept as Rahul.

  11. #206
    Retired civfanatic
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    తెలంగాణ
    Posts
    4,600
    Likes
    2464
    India
    Mauryan rule was ended by an Indian brahmin named Pusyamitra, under whose rule Orthodox Hinduism and caste discrimination/brahman superiority (as prescribed in the Laws of Manu) first came into play.

    Honestly, I would prefer Ashoka and his tolerant Buddhism, even if he was 25% Greek.

  12. #207
    DFI Buddha Godless-Kafir
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    5,821
    Likes
    1766
    India
    Nationalism is born out of an deep attachment to culture and history and it is no surprise they use analogy from their glorious history. For me Nationality is just glorified tribalism and which creates xenophobia to people who follow that very seriously. However i do think it is necessary to keep an eye out. I think i have some psychological scares in me that evoke fear of being dominated and destroyed after i had conversations with Kashmir separatists. However hard i rationalize to let go of silly narrow piss marks on paper, back of my mind i am terrified that such people exist and we need to guard the gates. I dont know if that makes sense!

  13. #208
    Retired civfanatic
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    తెలంగాణ
    Posts
    4,600
    Likes
    2464
    India
    It is true that nationalism is just glorified tribalism. But is that a bad thing? Humans are social creatures. Our natural habitat is in larger groups, whether they be families, tribes, or nations. All human individuals require a sense of belonging and an identity of some sort.

    I could define myself as many things. I am a Telugu speaker. I belong to the Velama caste. I am a Rao. I was born in a strict Hindu family, though I am now atheist.

    But all those things are irrelevant, because I choose to define myself as one thing and one thing only: an Indian. That definition is what gives me the greatest peace of mind, and greatest satisfaction.


    It is part of human nature to associate with people who are similar to you and be afraid of people who are different. There's nothing wrong with that either, nor is that necessarily "xenophobia". We fear what we do not know, or what is different from ourselves.
    Last edited by civfanatic; 11-06-11 at 11:48 PM.

  14. #209
    DFI Buddha Godless-Kafir
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    5,821
    Likes
    1766
    India
    Thats what primitive animals do, dogs piss on trees and sent mark their territory and if another dog comes in they fight. Then are we doomed to such mindless territoriality? Animals cant think and if we humans claim we have gone beyond then are we no better than dogs?


    It was part of human nature, we have evolved to go beyond the animals in every way, cant we go beyond in this? After all we have invented the atomic bomb and WMDs to defend our tribal spheres, so all these so called advancements have been born out of mere animal instinct to chest thump. So would it not be good to go beyond that fallacy, now that we can see the errors and communicate those errors to others? As long as our higher intelligence is imprisoned by lower instinct like fear we will be merely a cave man who killed his neighbor with the jaw bone of an ass. If we are to go beyond the cave man and so far we have not(mentally) then we need to study ourself more than we study the outside world.
    Last edited by Godless-Kafir; 11-06-11 at 11:55 PM.

  15. #210
    Retired civfanatic
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    తెలంగాణ
    Posts
    4,600
    Likes
    2464
    India
    Humans are no different than other animals. Our base desires are still the same. All the inventions we have created cannot change nature.

    And who said other animals can't think?


    We will see the folly of our ways only when we are on the verge of extinction.


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Alexander the Great Invades India
    By LETHALFORCE in forum Defence & Strategic Issues
    Replies: 254
    Last Post: 17-01-12, 07:55 PM
  2. PLA invades US——Red Dawn 2010
    By nimo_cn in forum General Multimedia
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 19-05-11, 12:53 PM
  3. Russia Invades AfghanistanAgain
    By bhramos in forum Europe and Russia
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-04-10, 12:02 AM
  4. In the Foot steps of Alexander
    By Daredevil in forum Defence & Strategic Issues
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-06-09, 03:23 PM