Desi Cartman Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 Ghanta!Teach this history to somebody else:hysterical: Am glad you didn't go all the way to Africa ... You mean southern hemisphere :woot: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted March 22, 2013 Author Share Posted March 22, 2013 No' date=' your IQ number hit zero in 2013.[/quote'] So what was the southie/westie count in 1857 rebellion again ? My zero IQ seems a bit limited to deduce the numbers :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted March 22, 2013 Author Share Posted March 22, 2013 Ghanta!Teach this history to somebody else:hysterical: Am glad you didn't go all the way to Africa ... Ghanta is used to distract from a conversation, i think you need a little bit more reasoning/facts to back up your assessment. I have presented mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoda-esque Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 Ghanta is used to distract from a conversation' date=' i think you need a little bit more reasoning/facts to back up your assessment. I have presented mine.[/quote'] Yes ..keep doing that... Take your pills as well Good entertainment!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted March 22, 2013 Author Share Posted March 22, 2013 Yes ..keep doing that... Take your pills as well Good entertainment!!! So then, no reason to explain to us why Ashoka, Chandragupta, etc. were not our ancestors ? Just hindivadi propaganda, stealing our stalwarts ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoda-esque Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 So then, no reason to explain to us why Ashoka, Chandragupta, etc. were not our ancestors ? Just hindivadi propaganda, stealing our stalwarts ? Why dont you prove that they were your ancestors? Speaking a common language that has been modified sinceis not proof... Dont worry,I will give my reasons.. Show me proof that Present day Bengalis descended from the martial race ofthe Mauryas... To other Bengalis on the forum, I have nothing against Bongs.. But some of the verbal diarrhoea by this poster is little too funny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted March 22, 2013 Author Share Posted March 22, 2013 Why dont you prove that they were your ancestors? Speaking a common language that has been modified sinceis not proof... Same political entity, same language, same language evolution and what else needs to be proven ? These three are complete, categoric proof to ancestorship applied in history. Hell, we even fulfill the 4th criteria that most peoples do not- that our ancestors lived in the same land as us, ruled over the same land, instead of migrating and moving around. What else is needed to prove that the magadha empire were our ancestors ? How about then we prove that Prithvi Raj Chauhan is the ancestor to the hindi-speaking Rajasthanis, that Tolpakkayam is the ancestor of the Tamils, etc. When you trace your social, linguistic and political evolution directly to an entity, it makes it your ancestor. The fact that it is us Bongs, not the hindi-stanis who inherited magadh culture and accomplishments, is quite readily accepted by historians, since those terms are seen as categoric as they come. Dont worry,I will give my reasons.. Show me proof that Present day Bengalis descended from the martial race ofthe Mauryas... To other Bengalis on the forum, I have nothing against Bongs.. But some of the verbal diarrhoea by this poster is little too funny The Mauryas were one of the many families who rose to power in Magadha. There were the Guptas, who come from Radha region (as their inscription in Nepal proves), Mauryas, Palas, Sungas. They all are from magadh-vangadesh region, ruled over this region and are our ancestors in the same vein that Romans are the ancestors to Italians, Rajputs were the ancestors to the Rajasthanis, etc. To deny it, is to have double standards or total ignorance. Asking us to prove that Mauryas were ancestors to us Bongs, is like asking you to prove that Satavahanas were ancestors to the Andhras, the Pandyas as one of the ancestors to the Tamils, etc., ie, to prove the already proven and accepted historical fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surajmal Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 With SachinLara as their cheerleader, Bongs in no time will have Chariots of Fire as their alarm clock wakeup tune. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoda-esque Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 Same political entity, same language, same language evolution and what else needs to be proven ? These three are complete, categoric proof to ancestorship applied in history. Hell, we even fulfill the 4th criteria that most peoples do not- that our ancestors lived in the same land as us, ruled over the same land, instead of migrating and moving around. What else is needed to prove that the magadha empire were our ancestors ? How about then we prove that Prithvi Raj Chauhan is the ancestor to the hindi-speaking Rajasthanis, that Tolpakkayam is the ancestor of the Tamils, etc. When you trace your social, linguistic and political evolution directly to an entity, it makes it your ancestor. The fact that it is us Bongs, not the hindi-stanis who inherited magadh culture and accomplishments, is quite readily accepted by historians, since those terms are seen as categoric as they come. The Mauryas were one of the many families who rose to power in Magadha. There were the Guptas, who come from Radha region (as their inscription in Nepal proves), Mauryas, Palas, Sungas. They all are from magadh-vangadesh region, ruled over this region and are our ancestors in the same vein that Romans are the ancestors to Italians, Rajputs were the ancestors to the Rajasthanis, etc. To deny it, is to have double standards or total ignorance. Asking us to prove that Mauryas were ancestors to us Bongs, is like asking you to prove that Satavahanas were ancestors to the Andhras, the Pandyas as one of the ancestors to the Tamils, etc., ie, to prove the already proven and accepted historical fact. Arre baapre.. Such a long explanation.. But but but no evidence Btw, the vang in your vang pradesh has dravidian origins Perhaps you should claim ancestery from the Dravidians or present day Southies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted March 22, 2013 Author Share Posted March 22, 2013 Arre baapre.. Such a long explanation.. But but but no evidence Btw, the vang in your vang pradesh has dravidian origins Perhaps you should claim ancestery from the Dravidians or present day Southies I said that being considered direct descendant of a political system (which is evidenced), direct descendants of a language, etc. makes you a descandant and that is the proof history operates on. If that is not proof, i would like to tell you, what evidence do you consider as proof, since you are dismissing the standard methodology of history as non-evidential. PS: Vangs are not dravidic, they were austro-asiatic. The same as the Mundas, Khmer, Viets, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted March 23, 2013 Author Share Posted March 23, 2013 Uh oh. The Southie-Northie duffers are mad at the truth, so cutting their parents (us Bongs) out of the deal again. Otherwise, why is this a 'seperate thread' ? :beee: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Uh oh. The Southie-Northie duffers are mad at the truth, so cutting their parents (us Bongs) out of the deal again. Otherwise, why is this a 'seperate thread' ? :beee: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoda-esque Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 The name of Bengal, or Bangla, is of unknown origins. Many theories have been formulated to explain the origin of the word "Bengal" or "Bangla". One theory suggests that the word derives from Dravidian tribes of 1000 B.C present at that time.[8] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted March 23, 2013 Author Share Posted March 23, 2013 With SachinLara as their cheerleader' date=' Bongs in no time will have Chariots of Fire as their alarm clock wakeup tune.[/quote'] We prefer 'rock the Casbah' tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted March 23, 2013 Author Share Posted March 23, 2013 The name of Bengal' date=' or Bangla, is of unknown origins. Many theories have been formulated to explain the origin of the word "Bengal" or "Bangla". One theory suggests that the word derives from Dravidian tribes of 1000 B.C present at that time.[8'] Had you continued reading, you would've foud the next line to be: Other accounts speculate that the name is derived from Banga (বঙ্গ bôngo), which came from the Austric word "Bonga" meaning the Sun-god. historians prefer the austro-asiatic theory over dravidian by and large, since there is austro-asiatic population in the vicinity of bengal and in bengal, while there is zero vestiges of Dravidic culture/language in Bengal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoda-esque Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 No evidence of martial culture? No last names maurya or gupta amongst bengalis? For all you know, the Mauryans conquered the neughboring hapless Vang Pradesis and imposed their language and culture on them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoda-esque Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Had you continued reading, you would've foud the next line to be: Other accounts speculate that the name is derived from Banga (বঙ্গ bôngo), which came from the Austric word "Bonga" meaning the Sun-god. historians prefer the austro-asiatic theory over dravidian by and large, since there is austro-asiatic population in the vicinity of bengal and in bengal, while there is zero vestiges of Dravidic culture/language in Bengal. In 1010 AD, the whole Bengal was under Rajendra Chola I of Chola Dynasty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted March 23, 2013 Author Share Posted March 23, 2013 No evidence of martial culture? No last names maurya or gupta amongst bengalis? For all you know, the Mauryans conquered the neughboring hapless Vang Pradesis and imposed their language and culture on them Given that Mauryas ruled over bengal, inherited from the Nandas, the idea of 'conquered bengal' is as ignorant as they come. As i said, read your history- Bimbisar conquered North and east bengal in 500s BCE. West bengal (Radha/Rahr region) had already been part of his kingdom. Bengal and Magadh were not de-coupled till the 860s CE, almost a millenia and half later by the Scythio-Rajputs. See, this is the level of dufferhood we Bongs grow tired of. You asked me to present evidence- i provided evidence on the basis of linguistics, historical epigraphy and historical methodology. You said that is not enough, but you are yet to specify what would you like to be shown to you as proof, since stanard historicity is not proof enough for you. PS: Last name Gupta is not amongst the Bengalis ? True, we've modified Gupta more than the others have ( as in Sengupa, Dasgupa, etc), you might wanna look up Ishwar Chandra Gupta, Jagadish Gupta, etc. - as bengali as they come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted March 23, 2013 Author Share Posted March 23, 2013 In 1010 AD' date=' the whole Bengal was under Rajendra Chola I of Chola Dynasty[/quote'] Err, no. He came, he conquered, he went away and we paid tribute. Simply winning an odd battle and levying a looting fee, is not evidence of historic presence, otherwise we should say that Rajasthan was under the Abbasid Arabs. Fact is, there is no evidence whatsoever for the existence of Dravidics in the magadh-vangadesh region. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoda-esque Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Guptas were Merchants / Kshatriyas (not sure)..Dasgupta and Senguptas are purohits.So again,No evidence whatsoever. Show me one link yaar.Bekaar mein behes kar rahaan hai.. Gawd, Bengal has been conquered and pwned by nearly every entity/tribe/clan from India and outside. Now I won't go any further since I have grown fond of a few Bengali posters on this forum. I guess you should be enough to embarrass them. Good Night and remember to take those pills :icflove: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts