Recent Posts
#FOOD_LOVER
What do you guys think would have happened if Arabs never accepted Islam?
oNH1bz
No.480005
Would we still be in this mess today? Would we be the super power modibhakts claim we are? Forget all that, would we still eat beef like the early Indians did?
HXJYAT
No.480009
>>480005(OP)
Arabs lost here, turks brought islam here. You'll have to assume islam never happened for what you're thinking of, and that will change the course for everyone history too much.
i9WzTw
No.480017
>>480005(OP)
It was turks and afghans who brought pisslam in the land of Aryas
G5e93j
No.480019
z3nnMy
No.480026
>>480005(OP)
We would be slaves of someone else, it isn't about how strong or united the outsiders are but how weak and divided we are.
oNH1bz
No.480039
>>480009
gayrabs didn't personally bring islam because they were too busy converting North Africans from Coptic-Byzantine Christianity to Islam. It was the afghans (themselves raped by central asian turkics in 11th century) who brought Islam
q5aqKU
No.480060
>>480005(OP)
Most of the islamic expansion in Asia was done by the turkics, the true imperials of the medieval era. They were conquering long before islam too.
Even today you never see them kanging like mujeets of the ones whom they raped and converted
5oqST/
No.480075
>>480005(OP)
Turkic invasions would hv still happened but without islam they would have assimilated into indian culture like scythians, kushans, huns did.
y09OOY
No.480077
dFx4v8
No.480078
oNH1bz
No.480079
>>480060
That is what I'm saying, if the arabs did not initially accept islam as the source then would Afghanistan still be Hindu? Would Ghazni still invade heendustan if he was the same religion? What would the medieval and modern eras look like for the country, since there's a lack of 2 major religions dividing the people I'd assume we'd industrialise faster and resist the British conquest?
y09OOY
No.480081
>>480078
Still had imperial empires who ruled over the writers and bvckbroke them.
y09OOY
No.480085
>>480079
>Would Ghazni still invade heendustan if he was the same religion?
Yes, but there would be no religious motivation. Plundering and all other shit would still happen
>What would the medieval and modern eras look like for the country, since there's a lack of 2 major religions dividing the people I'd assume we'd industrialise faster and resist the British conquest?
Inventions could have been faster but the moghuls would be either Buddhists (more likely) or hindus.
British has an interesting angle. Have you considered if islam motivated ottoman hadn't ever blocked the path which connected asia and Europe?
British wouldn't have been sailors in the first place
5oqST/
No.480088
>>480039
Arab umayyads did try in 8th century but they were repelled by lalitaditya, pratiharas and chalukyas. Next wave of islamic invasions were led by turkic converts(ghaznavids, ghurids) in 12th CE after a period of 400 years. It was the continuation of wider historical trend of central asian horse archers invading subcon except this time they would force islam on natives rather than assimilate like scythians, huns did.
dFx4v8
No.480089
>>480075
Turks invaded for centuries before islam. They lost all those times. Turks are way overrated
>Ghazni only raids, lost to kashmir and ran from Bhoja's army.
>Ghori: Tajik who gave his empire to his turkic slave
>Khaljis: afghans not Turks
>Tughlaq half jaat
Mughals: babar: turko mongol
Humayun: quarter turk
Akbar : half persian
And it keeps diluting.
dFx4v8
No.480095
>480081
Pajeet Turkish armies were led by non Turks with turkish slaves. Infact both the sultans and Mughals had more non Turk aristocracy than Turk. Turks achieved nothing of value , their civillisation was just savages going on rampage which is why today their girls fill brothels of Persia and South Asia.
y09OOY
No.480099
>>480089
Read about huns and kushans retard, they were proto turks.
Also none of your mentioned rulers had their empires established the any non steppe blooded man.
dFx4v8
No.480100
>>480085
Mughals did brutal crime of not focusing on science and tech ,which put india much behind Europe. All that wealth and still no Academy of Sciences.
y09OOY
No.480105
>>480100
Surviving was the game of hindus under mughal rule. A civilization which can't defend itself doesn't deserve scientific prosperity in the place.
dFx4v8
No.480110
>>480099
>Read about huns and kushans retard, they were proto turks.
>Mallory and Mair suggest that the Yuezhi and Wusun were among the nomadic peoples, at least some of whom spoke Iranian languages, who moved into northern Xinjiang from the Central Asian steppe in the 2nd millennium BC.
>Huns
And that proves what? Huns created no civillisation only barbarism and got defeated as quickly as they came.
y09OOY
No.480112
>>480095
Your point? It's was good tilm they had the Turkish ways, once lost they folded quite quickly. But it's complex yeah, and poorangzeb was a retard.
dFx4v8
No.480115
>>480105
Total turkroachsucker cope. Mughals were at mercy of Indians for 150 yrs and raped repeatedly. Padhshah e Alam, from Delhi te palam 
dFx4v8
No.480117
>>480112
Their turkish ways were so good they kept getting into succession struggles every year kek. I would suggest you don't speak about things you don't know
5oqST/
No.480123
>>480079
In that scenario there will be no islam. Entire subcon will be hindu. Iran will be zoroastrian and turks will likely remain buddhist with tengrist elements like central asia was before islamisation. A turkic origin empire will still exist with delhi as capital but they would be patrons of hinduism, buddhism, dharmic faiths and would adopt sanskrit as official language rather than persian. Babur will be a buddhist cum tengrist in this alternate reality. He will invade, akbar will rajputize and you would have a hindu mughal empire. It is likely this empire would last longer due to popular support of natives.
dFx4v8
No.480129
>>480123
Again glazing Turks. Indians defeated Turks dozens of times. The only reason they succeeded is due to islam. Without islam and bt extension persianate culture they are worth nothing.
y09OOY
No.480132
>>480115
I was just discussing historical facts unlike the baitertards who keep posting things to insult you but ig you don't deserve it.
Europeans organized crusades, and collective resistance with centuries of defending their land has them deserve what they now are.
>>480117
And still somehow Hindus were living under absolute terror? See this is the thing I don't like, it's Just history and if you turn a blind eye to it you're just a retard.
Even the Greeks fought and got freedom from turks finally after 3 centuries of Turkish rule
M14mPF
No.480134
>>480005(OP)
Early Indians never ate beef
oNH1bz
No.480139
>>480132
nigha turco-mongol =/= turkish people
Central asians invading us in the mediaeval era are not the same as Turks whos route to Islam was different
5oqST/
No.480140
>>480089
Ofc mixing happened but its still turkic invasions that conquered india. Delhi mamluks were turks. Khiljis were turko afghans. Barring lodhis, all delhi sultans were turkics or turko afghans. Also mughals were essentially turks. Yes they assimilated mongols but they spoke turkic language. Seljuqs, ottomans, safavids were also turkic origin.
y09OOY
No.480145
>>480139
Lot of mixing happened around Transoxiana area after the Mongols expanded but folded as quickly, turks created lasting empires
M14mPF
No.480146
5oqST/
No.480152
>>480129
Retard, all indian muslim empires were turkic origin. They won due to horse archer tactics like mongols who won china. They were the part of wider medieval historical trend of turks conquering persia, byzantines and other sedentary cultures. They would hv won without islam. Scythians, huns too were central asian horse archers and they won without religious motivation.
y09OOY
No.480162
>>480146
Haggubros
5oqST/
No.480171
>>480139
Og turks were central asians. They turkified amatolians. Turkic invaders of india came from central asia. Turks and mongols are cousins. They both were part of Altaic language family in siberia and followed tengrism.
dFx4v8
No.480239
>>480132
>was just discussing historical facts unlike the baitertards who keep posting things to insult you but ig you don't deserve it.
Without giving even a little fact. Stop embarassing yourself with your wikipedia slop.
>Europeans organized crusades, and collective resistance with centuries of defending their land has them deserve what they now are.
And all the crusades failed, the holy land is still with Arabs and Jews. Indians retook most of the land btfoed the Turks and Persians and Afghans.
>And still somehow Hindus were living under absolute terror? See this is the thing I don't like, it's Just history and if you turn a blind eye to it you're just a retard.
Abe loafer, whenever the hindus won they killed and raped the local muslims almost every king did it. It was a 1000 years of struggle and we won. >Terror.
Dumbass almost every pre modern empire had control only on major cities outside of which their control was almost non existent.
>Even the Greeks fought and got freedom from turks finally after 3 centuries of Turkish rule
Point??
dFx4v8
No.480243
>>480140
This is just rubbish. Md ghori was a Tajik , he gave his empire to his mamluk slave. Thts not conquest.
Khiljis were afghanised by then, even Chroniclers don't call them Turk.
>Sayyid dynasty was itself Indian.
You don't know shit. Even tughlaqs were half jat.
>Mughals were turk, spoke turkic
What an absolute bufoon. Mughals spoke persian and Hindavi and then urdu. Even the delhi sultans spoke persian and Hindavi.
>Seljukz, ottomans,Safavids
>From the evidence available at the present time, it is certain that the Safavid family was of indigenous Iranian stock, and not of Turkish ancestry as it is sometimes claimed. It is probable that the family originated in Persian Kurdistan, and later moved to Azerbaijan, where they adopted the Azari form of Turkish spoken there, and eventually settled in the small town of Ardabil sometimes during the eleventh century.
Only ottomans and Seljukz were turk and only ottomans created smthing akin to civillisation.
dFx4v8
No.480248
>>480152
>Retard, all indian muslim empires were turkic origin. They won due to horse archer tactics like mongols who won china.
Abe gadhe Indians had encountered horse archers since the Scythian days. They defeated the Turk Shahis, the Huns, the khagantes on kashmir the Ghaznavids , the mongols too.
>Scythians
Scythians weren't turk.
>Huns
How tf do huns count as winning? Just go home and read smthing outside your NCert newfag.
i9WzTw
No.480249
>>480170
Baniyas are IVC maxxed high iq chads
dFx4v8
No.480252
>>480171
What a clown. Now claiming Mongol achievements for Turks. It's like saying an Arab and a European are same since they are both caucasians.
5oqST/
No.480261
>>480243
>>480248
This is called nitpicking.
>They defeated the Turk Shahis, the Huns, the khagantes on kashmir the Ghaznavids , the mongols too.
Oh somehow they magically won after conversion to islam. It surely had nothing to do with the fact that there was a trend of turkic horse archers were btfoing all neighbouring civilisations 11th century onwards due to invention of stirrup and improvements in horse saddle.
dFx4v8
No.480270
>>480261
>Ignoring the main argument.
Yar retard. I already told you without Islam, Turks would just not have any motive to come again and again to India.
>Stirrups
Guess who had stirrups first?
>The earliest hard foot support was a toe loop that held the big toe and was used in India late in the second century BC,[9][10] though it may have appeared as early as 500 BC.[11] This ancient foot support consisted of a looped rope for the big toe which was at the bottom of a saddle made of fibre or leather. Such a configuration was suitable for the warm climate of south and central India where people used to ride horses barefoot.[12] Buddhist carvings in the temples of Sanchi, Mathura and the Bhaja caves dating back between the 1st and 2nd century BC feature horsemen riding with elaborate saddles with toes slipped under girths.[
5oqST/
No.480274
>>480252
Ofc they are different retard but not as apart as arab(semites) or euros. They both were altaic, tengrists, had similar lifestyle. There is a wider historical trend here of steppe horse archers btfoing sedentary civilisation. I am talking to a dogmatic retard right now who is hung up on denying obvious history.
5oqST/
No.480279
>>480270
Toe stirrup wasnt proper stirrup. It was just loop rope. First proper stirrup was invented by Jurchens and quickly adopted by steppe horse archers.
>already told you without Islam, Turks would just not have any motive to come again and again to India.
Bullshit retarded historical analysis.
dFx4v8
No.480307
>>480274
>Turkic peoples are a collection of diverse ethnic groups of West, Central, East, and North Asia as well as parts of Europe, who speak Turkic languages
>The Mongolic peoples are a collection of East Asian-originated ethnic groups in East Asia, North Asia and Eastern Europe, who speak Mongolic languages. Their ancestors are referred to as Proto-Mongols. The largest contemporary Mongolic ethnic group is the Mongol
>Altaic
You retard do you realise what that is? It's a language family tht includes everyone from Korea to as far as russia. That is like saying we Indians are cousins to Iranians so we defeated Rome. Kek. It's like saying we were never defeated by scythians, British,kushans as they were indo Europeans. Absolute clowmery.
>Tengri
Do you know what a tengri is? A sky Father. Guess who else had Sky father God? Oh Dyaus Pitra so are we cousins to Mongols??
5oqST/
No.480320
>>480243
>Mughals spoke persian and Hindavi and then urdu.
They persianised over generations. Babur spoke chagatai a turkic language. Baburnama itself is in chagatai. What an overconfident retard i am talking to you.
dFx4v8
No.480324
>>480279
>No you izz not real stirrups we izz real stirrups
Even if it take your point, the stirrups has existed since 6th century and yet the Turks were defeated many times like the Turk Shahis, Hunnics, Ghaznavids, Khaganate against Kashmir. So your point falls.
>Retarded historical analysis
No islam, means no Perisinate composite culture develops for the Turks which means they don't develop persian courtly traditions, not adopt persian succession, and centralised rule or bureacracy, no writing. Arab victory in Transoxiana was the begining of downfall for India.
dFx4v8
No.480327
>>480320
>Babur's Bāburnāma is a collection of memoirs, written in the Chagatai language and later translated into Persian, the usual literary language of the Mughal court, during the rule of emperor Akbar.[79] However, Babur's Turkic prose in Bāburnāma is already highly Persianized in its sentence structure, vocabulary, and morphology,[80] and also consists of several phrases and minor poems in Persian.
>Babur wrote most of his poems in Chagatai Turkic, known to him as Türki, but he also composed in Persian. However, he was mostly praised for his literary works written in Turkic, which drew comparison with the poetry of Ali-Shir Nava'i.
They were already persianised. Without Persians there would be nothing that Turks would achieve.
dFx4v8
No.480330
>>480327
The only nobel lineage in this world is of the Aryans. From British Isles to North India. They gave civillisation to people of Egypt, people of Europe, Arabs, Turks and Indians. Everything others have achieved is through them whether it be Dravidians in India or Turks in siberia or Semites in Judea
0IlI2C
No.480332
>>480100
That's less of Mughal issue than it is Islam as an issue, chances are if they didn't follow Islam and were ruling delhi, they wouldn't be some kind of baggage as they were for the nation.
5oqST/
No.480338
>>480307
Retard did i say mongols and turks are sem2sem? All i said was there was a wider trend of steppe horse archers conquering sedentary civilisations and they were related peoples. Title 'khan' for example exists in both mongolian and turkic. Your low iq brain is incapable of doing historical analysis you cant seem to grasp bigger picture and do pattern recognition.
0IlI2C
No.480342
uRN+6Y
No.480346
>>480338
>Title 'khan' for example exists in both mongolian and turkic.
Khan is a mongol word for a ruler/chief. When they attacked turkue it reached there and they started converting while keeping the khan as surnames
0IlI2C
No.480347
>>480307
>Do you know what a tengri is? A sky Father. Guess who else had Sky father God? Oh Dyaus Pitra so are we cousins to Mongols??
>MFW this implies we should fuck mongols
>MFW Dayoos is tengri
5oqST/
No.480369
>>480324
Huns came in 500 ad. Stirrup wasnt adopted by steppe normads until 8th century.
>your point falls.
Yes saar. They are supposed to win each time saar. How dare there be any defeat in centuries of history. They are superhumans saar.
>Perisinate composite culture.
Nothing to do with military prowess of turks. Turks themselves ruled over persians for centuries. They adopted the persian imperial administration and literary tradition. Mongols did the same after assraping persia and establishing ilkhanate. If not for islam, turkic conquerors of india would have adopted sanskrit language and indian system of administration in india.
5oqST/
No.480374
>>480346
It was already in use by Gokturks. Learn more.
