The Greatest Kings in Indian History

Who is the Greatest King in Indian History?

  • Chandragupta Maurya

    Votes: 115 33.7%
  • Ashoka

    Votes: 45 13.2%
  • Raja Chola

    Votes: 34 10.0%
  • Akbar

    Votes: 16 4.7%
  • Sri Krishna Devaraya

    Votes: 18 5.3%
  • Chatrapati Shivaji

    Votes: 58 17.0%
  • Tipu Sultan

    Votes: 9 2.6%
  • Ranjith Singh

    Votes: 10 2.9%
  • Samudra Gupta

    Votes: 11 3.2%
  • Chandragupta Vikramaditya

    Votes: 20 5.9%
  • Harsha

    Votes: 1 0.3%
  • Kanishka

    Votes: 4 1.2%

  • Total voters
    341

LurkerBaba

Super Mod
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
7,882
Likes
8,125
Country flag
Persian has been replaced by english.

So according to that none of us are Indians.
Well we were colonized by the Brits, anyways many flaws in your line of thinking

1. Language of the ruling class is not (necessarily) English
2. English ain't restricted to the elite class, anyone can learn it
3. It does not have the position of a classical and cultural language

That is not logical. Look at the map below. You are suggesting that those born in Harappa are Indians and those born in Mohenjo-Daro are foreigners.
No need for a laywer-like argument mate. All I meant is that there is a clear distinction between the subcontinent and the hordes from Central Asia
 

Galaxy

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
7,086
Likes
3,934
Country flag
I'll start with 50,000 years ago. You're an African, deal with it.
That is fine. 1st human being originated from Africa. But our ancestors didn't invaded and killed millions to live in India. Indus Valley civilization is our ancestors in India or may be something like that.

There must be 1st Human being to start, so all ancestors were Africans. :rolleyes:

[h=1]Indians are ancestors of Japanese, Chinese[/h]But that doesn't mean Chinese ancestors are Indian.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
Yawn. Schools reopen tomorrow. Have to drop the kids .Better get some sleep. Hope this thread comes good and not ended up trashed.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
No need for a laywer-like argument mate. All I meant is that there is a clear distinction between the subcontinent and the hordes from Central Asia
Buddy, you are entitled to your opinion. I am challenging your post not you personally. The point I am making is that you cannot draw a distinct boundary to say who is a foreigner and who is an Indian.

Gandhari was from Gandhara, present day Kandahar, in Afghanistan. In that case, even Gandhari was a foreigner. Therefore, her sons were all half foreigners. In statistical terms, if there were 100 sons, 50% of them were foreigners. I know it sounds silly, but then that is the problem with drawing distinct boundaries.
 

Galaxy

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
7,086
Likes
3,934
Country flag
:pound:

none can argue with that
Everyone can argue with that.

You are saying who is ancestors of whole world ? Yes, 1st human being originated in Africa. so, All ancestors came from Africa.

But it was 50,000 years back. There were lots of change/development in human civilisation. We can only talk/discuss what we have sort of evidence of particular country.
 
Last edited:

The Messiah

Bow Before Me!
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Messages
10,809
Likes
4,619
As much you want. :thumb:

Start with 2,500-3,000 years ago. 8)
In human terms only adivasis are true original inhabitants of the land mass known as Indian subcintinent.

Everyone after them is outsider and that includes you. Infact your lineage would be from central asia and you brand people as outsiders.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
Everyone can argue with that.

You are saying who is ancestors of whole world ? Yes, 1st human being originated in Africa. so, All ancestors came from Africa.

But it was 50,000 years back. There was lots of change in human civilisation. We can only talk/discuss what have sort of evidence of particular country.
So we have reached Africa now from Great Indians Kings? Wow!

The first form of life originated as DNA or RNA. It happened on earth, in the seas. Then came single celled animals and plants, in the seas. Slowly life moved onto the lands. I guess we are all foreigners then.

Let's say the greatest Indian King was an amoeba, something like this:
 
  • Like
Reactions: nrj

LurkerBaba

Super Mod
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
7,882
Likes
8,125
Country flag
Buddy, you are entitled to your opinion. I am challenging your post not you personally. The point I am making is that you cannot draw a distinct boundary to say who is a foreigner and who is an Indian.

Gandhari was from Gandhara, present day Kandahar, in Afghanistan. In that case, even Gandhari was a foreigner. Therefore, her sons were all half foreigners. In statistical terms, if there were 100 sons, 50% of them were foreigners. I know it sounds silly, but then that is the problem with drawing distinct boundaries.
Yeah that is my point, by east of the Indus, I don't mean not a single inch west of it is non-Indic. I'm referring to the natural boundaries of the subcontinent which were close to the Indus river



Gandhara is inside it

 

The Messiah

Bow Before Me!
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Messages
10,809
Likes
4,619
Everyone can argue with that.

You are saying who is ancestors of whole world ? Yes, 1st human being originated in Africa. so, All ancestors came from Africa.

But it was 50,000 years back. There were lots of change/development in human civilisation. We can only talk/discuss what we have sort of evidence of particular country.


we are talking about tens of thousands of years and you've only been here for couple of thousand. that too going by your claim...who knows really ?

i see you are using peaceful migration card again to justify your Indianess but couple of pages ago you said american settling in India wouldn't be Indian and nor would his children. But you see these americans you used as an example are also migrating peacefully.
 

The Messiah

Bow Before Me!
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Messages
10,809
Likes
4,619
Well we were colonized by the Brits, anyways many flaws in your line of thinking

1. Language of the ruling class is not (necessarily) English
2. English ain't restricted to the elite class, anyone can learn it
3. It does not have the position of a classical and cultural language
We are no longer colonized by them so why are we using english ?

Anyone could learn persian aswell provided they had the resources. Its no different.

The english monarchs used to speak in french and english was a language of the commoners.
 

Galaxy

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
7,086
Likes
3,934
Country flag
In human terms only adivasis are true original inhabitants of the land mass known as Indian subcintinent.

Everyone after them is outsider and that includes you. Infact your lineage would be from central asia and you brand people as outsiders.
Who knows ? We can only talk what we know or as per historian/research based on DNA/Clan.

According to your logic everyone in this very world are outsider. Since, 1st human being might be born in Africa after Million of years of transformation from Chimpanzee.

Our civilization/Religion started between 7,000-10,000 years ago. Before that, There is no research. I am sure, even before Human being do lived but they were nomadic. We can only talk on facts and not on assumption. Our civilisation started some 5,000-10,000 years back once growth of Civilisation, Scripts and religion and many other things came into existence.

Yes, All ancestors are African but that is not important.
 
Last edited:

LurkerBaba

Super Mod
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
7,882
Likes
8,125
Country flag
We are no longer colonized by them so why are we using english ?

Anyone could learn persian aswell provided they had the resources. Its no different.

The english monarchs used to speak in french and english was a language of the commoners.
How is this even related to what I said ? You were comparing English with Persian, I countered that, care to debate these points ?

1. Language of the ruling class is not (necessarily) English
2. English ain't restricted to the elite class, anyone can learn it
3. It does not have the position of a classical and cultural language
EDIT: you did make one relevant point

Anyone could learn persian aswell provided they had the resources. Its no different.
Persian was used by the aristocrats in the court. A commoner would have to spend shit loads of resources. Similar would be the case for Sanskrit

English today can simply be used by a call center employee. No need to be uber rich/influential
 
Last edited:

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
Yeah that is my point, by east of the Indus, I don't mean not a single inch west of it is non-Indic. I'm referring to the natural boundaries of the subcontinent which were close to the Indus river
Point noted. Thanks. And yes, I agree.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
Ok I had to check on this thread while I tried to get some sleep. Can we shift this now to members corner? It's getting hilarious.

One last attempt. Are we going to discuss anything close to what the OP wants?? Come on, there is great scope. Let's look at the military able and do it. Great kings were great generals. They had great military acumen. Let's get going in ernest now at least. A good 200 posts and so many pages later!!!!
 

The Messiah

Bow Before Me!
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Messages
10,809
Likes
4,619
Who knows ? We can only talk what we know or as per historian/research based on DNA/Clan.

According to your logic everyone in this very world are outsider. Since, 1st human being might be born in Africa after Million of years of transformation from Chimpanzee.

Our civilization/Religion started between 7,000-10,000 years ago. Before that, There is no research. I am sure, even before Human being do lived but they were nomadic. We can only talk on facts and not on assumption. Our civilisation started some 5,000-10,000 years back once growth of Civilisation, Scripts and religion and many other things came into existence.
No not according to me. It is according to you since you've jumped on it to say who is Indian and who is outsider.

Adivasis were first people to arrive in India...that is not a claim but a fact proven by dna. While i bet you would have roots in central asia if tomorrow your dna was tested.

You are Indian according to my judgement but you are not Indian according to your own scale. Even in vedas it is written that aryans drank a certain type of drink soma and it didn't grow in heartland of India. So what does that mean ?
 

civfanatic

Retired
Ambassador
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
4,562
Likes
2,570
Ok I had to check on this thread while I tried to get some sleep. Can we shift this now to members corner? It's getting hilarious.

One last attempt. Are we going to discuss anything close to what the OP wants?? Come on, there is great scope. Let's look at the military able and do it. Great kings were great generals. They had great military acumen. Let's get going in ernest now at least. A good 200 posts and so many pages later!!!!
I've already responded to the topic at hand with Post #13.

Since no one challenged my post, I guess I'm right and you should all bow down to me.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
Even in vedas it is written that aryans drank a certain type of drink soma and it didn't grow in heartland of India. So what does that mean ?
In Rig Veda, the shloka goes exactly like this:

"O Soma, give us strength, so that, after drinking you, we do not fall asleep." :D
 

Adux

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2009
Messages
4,022
Likes
1,707
Country flag
Some early British indologists have commented on how there is scarcely any evidence to suggest that Buddhists where subject any violence when political patronage on a significant scale ceased towards Buddhism.This lack of voluminous evidence was probably not because Hindus did not persecute the remnant of Buddhism,but due to the fact that Indian society did not preserve the evidence that incriminates them in such acts,if indeed it were so.

This is due to the fact that indian national society and it history was Hindu and why would Hindus put a bad spin on their history.The problem is people here are desperately in search for a neutral or secularized history of India,which will damn every body in equal measure,or to that effect.The fact is Indian history is narrated from the Hindu point of view and there you shall not find self denouement.

A society does not have any use for history which exist only for the sake of academic principle.The society needs history that tells its history,its triumphs,the persecution it went through and how it overcame them,Indian history is a narrative of how the Hindu society did all that.
Brilliant, so you actually agree. It does have a use of History, especially for propaganda purposes, the sheer number of Hindu's over here finding themselves in bad position and feeling uncomfortable about it is crazy, Hindu's have been fed with this notion that they were this sweet nice people who have never done anything wrong and has been always at receiving end of evil Islamist, perfect victim syndrome. But alas, Hindu's have been the worst to other Hindu's, Buddhist and Adivasi's...All of a sudden they see no difference between their Islamist invaders and ancestors.

If you take religion out of it, just see it as the King/Emperor how was done the most for the land mass of India, equality to all the people of that landmass and had a superior vision for the future. I cannot see that in any Hindu Kings nor Islamic Kings. I only see that with modern India and Buddhist India.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top