The history of Pakistan preceding the country's creation in
Iranian plateau, the region of present-day Pakistan served both as the fertile ground of a major civilization and as the gateway of South Asia to Central Asia and the Near East.[3][4]
The ensuing millennia saw the region of present-day Pakistan absorb many influences—represented among others in the ancient, mainly
Allama Iqbal and its founder, Muhammad Ali Jinnah. Since then, the country has experienced both civilian-democratic and military rule, resulting in periods of significant economic and military growth as well as those of instability; significant during the latter, was the secession of East Pakistan as the new nation of Bangladesh
Balochistan, and along a system of perennial, mostly monsoon-fed, rivers that once coursed in the vicinity of the seasonal Ghaggar-Hakra River in parts of north-west India.[23] At its peak, the civilization hosted a population of approximately 5 million spread across hundreds of settlements extending as far as the Arabian Sea to present-day southern and eastern Afghanistan, and the Himalayas.[26]
Inhabitants of the ancient Indus river valley, the Harappans, developed new techniques in metallurgy and handicraft (carneol products, seal carving), and produced copper, bronze, lead, and tin.
The Mature Indus civilisation flourished from about 2600 to 1900 BCE, marking the beginning of urban civilisation in the Indus Valley. The civilisation included urban centres such as
(2500–2000 BCE) in southern Balochistan and was noted for its cities built of brick, roadside drainage system, and multi-storeyed houses. It is thought to have had some kind of municipal organisation as well.
During the
gradual decline began to emerge, and by around 1700 BCE, most of the cities were abandoned. However, the Indus Valley Civilisation did not disappear suddenly, and some elements of the Indus Civilisation may have survived. Aridification of this region during the 3rd millennium BCE may have been the initial spur for the urbanisation associated with the civilisation, but eventually also reduced the water supply enough to cause the civilisation's demise, and to scatter its population eastward. The civilization collapsed around 1700 BCE, though the reasons behind its fall are still unknown. Through the excavation of the Indus cities and analysis of town planning and seals, it has been inferred that the Civilization had high level of sophistication in its town planning, arts, crafts, and trade.[27]
The Vedic Period (c. 1500 – c. 500 BCE) is postulated to have formed during the 1500 BCE to 800 BCE. As Indo-Aryans migrated and settled into the Indus Valley, along with them came their distinctive religious traditions and practices which fused with local culture.
Much of the area corresponding to modern-day Pakistan was subordinated to the Achaemenid Empire and forced to pay tributes to Persia.Ruins at Bhir Mound representing the city of Taxila during the Achaemenid period
The main Vedic tribes remaining in the
Kalat, Khuzdar and Panjgur) and lost most of his army in the Gedrosian Desert (speculated today as the Kharan Desert
).
In 518 BC, Darius led his army through the Khyber Pass and southwards in stages, eventually reaching the Arabian Sea coast in Sindh by 516 BC. Under Persian rule, a system of centralized administration, with a bureaucratic system, was introduced into the Indus Valley for the first time, establishing several satrapies: Gandāra around the general region of Gandhara, Hindush around Punjab and Sindh, Arachosia, encompassing parts of present-day Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and Balochistan,[30]Sattagydia around the Bannu basin,[31] and Gedrosia covering much of the Makran region of southern Balochistan.[32]
What is known about the easternmost satraps and borderlands of the Achaemenid Empire is alluded to in the Darius inscriptions and from Greek sources such as the Histories of Herodotus and the later Alexander Chronicles (Arrian, Strabo et al.). These sources list three Indus Valley tributaries or conquered territories that were subordinated to the Persian Empire and made to pay tributes to the Persian Kings.[31]
By spring of 326 BC, Alexander began on his Indus expedition from Bactria, leaving behind 3500 horses and 10,000 soldiers. He divided his army into two groups. The larger force would enter the Indus Valley through the
. Alexander was commanding a group of shield-bearing guards, foot-companions, archers, Agrianians, and horse-javelin-men and led them against the tribes of the former Gandhara satrapy.
The first tribe they encountered were the
Shangla and Kohistan. Alexander followed close behind their heels and besieged the strategic hill-fort, eventually capturing and destroying the fort and killing everyone inside. The remaining smaller tribes either surrendered or like the Astanenoi tribe of Pushkalavati (Charsadda) were quickly neutralized where 38,000 soldiers and 230,000 oxen were captured by Alexander.[34] Eventually Alexander's smaller force would meet with the larger force which had come through the Khyber Pass met at Attock. With the conquest of Gandhara complete, Alexander switched to strengthening his military supply line, which by now stretched dangerously vulnerable over the Hindu Kush back to Balkh
in Bactria.
After conquering Gandhara and solidifying his supply line back to Bactria, Alexander combined his forces with the King Ambhi of Taxila and crossed the River Indus in July 326 BC to begin the Archosia (Punjab) campaign. His first resistance would come at the
Nanda Dynasty and its vanguard of trampling elephants. Alexander, therefore proceeded south-west along the Indus Valley.[36] Along the way, he engaged in several battles with smaller kingdoms in Multan and Sindh, before marching his army westward across the Makran desert towards what is now Iran
. In crossing the desert, Alexander's army took enormous casualties from hunger and thirst, but fought no human enemy. They encountered the "Fish Eaters", or Ichthyophagi, primitive people who lived on the Makran coast, who had matted hair, no fire, no metal, no clothes, lived in huts made of whale bones, and ate raw seafood.
Territories of the Maurya Empire conceptualized as core areas or linear networks separated by large autonomous regions.
The Maurya Empire was a geographically extensive Iron Agehistorical power in South Asia based in Magadha, having been founded by Chandragupta Maurya in 322 BCE, and existing in loose-knit fashion until 185 BCE.[37] The Maurya Empire was centralized by the conquest of the Indo-Gangetic Plain, and its capital city was located at Pataliputra (modern Patna). Outside this imperial center, the empire's geographical extent was dependent on the loyalty of military commanders who controlled the armed cities sprinkling it.[38][39][40] During Ashoka's rule (ca. 268–232 BCE) the empire briefly controlled the major urban hubs and arteries of the Indian subcontinent excepting the deep south.[37] It declined for about 50 years after Ashoka's rule, and dissolved in 185 BCE with the assassination of Brihadratha by Pushyamitra Shunga and foundation of the Shunga Empire in Magadha.
Chandragupta Maurya raised an army, with the assistance of
Under the Mauryas, internal and external trade, agriculture, and economic activities thrived and expanded across South Asia due to the creation of a single and efficient system of finance, administration, and security. The Maurya dynasty built a precursor of the Grand Trunk Road from Patliputra to Taxila.[45] After the Kalinga War, the Empire experienced nearly half a century of centralized rule under Ashoka. Ashoka's embrace of Buddhism and sponsorship of Buddhist missionaries allowed for the expansion of that faith into Sri Lanka, northwest India, and Central Asia.[46]
The population of South Asia during the Mauryan period has been estimated to be between 15 and 30 million.[47]
The empire's period of dominion was marked by exceptional creativity in art, architecture, inscriptions and produced texts.[48]
Territory of the Indo-Greeks, circa 150 BC[49]Greco-Buddhist representation of the Buddha, seated to the left of a depiction of Vajrapani in the guise of the Hellenic god Heracles[50]
The Indo-Greek
Mathura. The capital Sagala (modern Sialkot) prospered greatly under Menander's rule and Menander is one of the few Bactrian kings mentioned by Greek authors.[51]
The classical
Parthians
and the Yuezhi, who founded the Kushan dynasty.
It is during this period that the fusion of Hellenistic and Asiatic mythological, artistic and religious elements becomes most apparent, especially in the region of Gandhara, straddling western Pakistan and southern Afghanistan. Detailed, humanistic representations of the Buddha begin to emerge, depicting the figure with a close resemblance to the Hellenic god Apollo; Greek mythological motifs such as centaurs, Bacchanalian scenes, Nereids and deities such as Tyche and Heracles are prominent in the Buddhistic art of ancient Pakistan and Afghanistan.[citation needed]
Mathura. The power of the Saka rulers started to decline in the 2nd century CE after the Scythians were defeated by the south Indian Emperor Gautamiputra Satakarni of the Satavahana dynasty.[53][54] Later the Saka kingdom was completely destroyed by Chandragupta II of the Gupta Empire from eastern India in the 4th century.[55]
.A map of India in the 2nd century AD showing the extent of the Kushan Empire (in green) during the reign of Kanishka. Most historians consider the empire to have variously extended as far east as the middle Ganges plain,[58] to Varanasi on the confluence of the Ganges and the Jumna,[59][60] or probably even Pataliputra.[61][62]
The monumental Kanishka stupa is believed to have been established by the king near the outskirts of modern-day Peshawar, Pakistan.
The Kushan dynasty played an important role in the establishment of Buddhism in India and its spread to Central Asia and China. Historian Vincent Smith said about Kanishka in particular:
He played the part of a second Ashoka in the history of Buddhism.[69]
The empire linked the Indian Ocean maritime trade with the commerce of the
Gandharan Art
, which reached its peak during Kushan Rule.
H.G. Rowlinson commented:
The Kushan period is a fitting prelude to the Age of the Guptas.[70]
By the 3rd century, their empire in India was disintegrating and their last known great emperor was Vasudeva I.[71][72]
Alchon Huns
The Alchon Empire was the third of four major
Yasodharman of Malwa and Gupta Emperor Narasimhagupta in the 6th century. Some of them were driven out of India and others were assimilated in the Indian society.[77]
The Turk Shahis ruled Gandhara from the decline of the Kushan Empire in the 3rd century until 870, when they were overthrown by the Hindu Shahis. The Hindu Shahis are believed to belong to the Uḍi/Oḍi tribe, namely the people of Oddiyana in Gandhara.[81][82]
The first king Kallar had moved the capital into Udabandhapura from Kabul, in the modern village of
Muslim Ghaznavid and Hindu Shahi struggles.[88] Sebuk Tigin, however, defeated him, and he was forced to pay an indemnity.[88] Jayapala defaulted on the payment and took to the battlefield once more.[88] Jayapala however, lost control of the entire region between the Kabul Valley and Indus River.[89]
However, the army was defeated in battle against the western forces, particularly against the Mahmud of Ghazni.
Qarakhanids north of the Hindu Kush, Jaipal attacked Ghazni once more and upon suffering yet another defeat by the powerful Ghaznavid forces, near present-day Peshawar. After the Battle of Peshawar, he died because of regretting as his subjects brought disaster and disgrace to the Shahi dynasty.[88][89]
Ghaznavid Empire at its greatest extent in 1030 CE
In 997 CE, the Turkic ruler
Abolfazl Beyhaqi and Ferdowsi described extensive building work in Lahore
, as well as Mahmud's support and patronage of learning, literature and the arts.
Mahmud's successors, known as the
Ghurid Empire of central Afghanistan occupied Ghazni around 1160, and the Ghaznavid capital was shifted to Lahore. Later Muhammad Ghori conquered the Ghaznavid kingdom, occupying Lahore in 1187.[citation needed
Hindu Chaulukya (Solanki) rulers, which forced him to press upon the trumbling Ghaznavids. By 1186–87, he deposed the last Ghaznavid ruler Khusrau Malik, bringing the last of Ghaznevid territory under his control and ending the Ghaznavid empire. The Ghurids were overthrown in 1215, although their conquests in the Indian Subcontinent survived for several centuries under the Delhi Sultanate established by the Ghurid Mamluk Qutb ud-Din Aibak
Mamluk Dynasty, seized the throne of the Sultanate in 1211. Several dynasties ruled their empires from Delhi: the Mamluk (1211–90), the Khalji (1290–1320), the Tughlaq (1320–1413), the Sayyid (1414–1451) and the Lodhi (1451–1526).[100]
Although some kingdoms remained independent of Delhi, almost all of the Indus plain came under the rule of these large sultanates.
The sultans (emperors) of Delhi enjoyed cordial relations with rulers in the
Arabic
languages.
Perhaps the greatest contribution of the Sultanate was its temporary success in insulating South Asia from the Mongol invasion from Central Asia in the 13th century; nonetheless the sultans eventually lost western Pakistan to the Mongols (see the Ilkhanate dynasty). The Sultanate declined after the invasion of Emperor Timur, who founded the Timurid Empire, and was eventually conquered in 1526 by the Mughal Emperor Babar.
, divines and saints from the rest of Muslim world, craftsmen and men and maidens from every region, notably doctors adept in Greek medicine and philosophers from everywhere.
The Soomra dynasty was a local Sindhi Muslim dynasty that ruled between the early 11th century and the 14th century.[101][102][103]
Later chroniclers like
Ali ibn al-Athir (c. late 12th c.) and Ibn Khaldun (c. late 14th c.) attributed the fall of Habbarids to Mahmud of Ghazni, lending credence to the argument of Hafif being the last Habbarid.[104] The Soomras appear to have established themselves as a regional power in this power vacuum.[104][105]
The Ghurids and Ghaznavids continued to rule parts of Sindh, across the eleventh and early twelfth century, alongside Soomrus.[104] The precise delineations are not yet known but Sommrus were probably centered in lower Sindh.[104]
Some of them were adherents of
Sultan of Delhi, and was allowed to continue on as a vassal.[106]
Balochistan from c. 1351 to c. 1524 CE, with their capital at Thatta.[108][109][110]
The
sultan of Delhi. Mohammad bin Tughlaq made an expedition against Sindh in 1351 and died at Sondha, possibly in an attempt to restore the Soomras. With this, the Sammas became independent. The next sultan, Firuz Shah Tughlaq attacked Sindh in 1365 and 1367, unsuccessfully, but with reinforcements from Delhi he later obtained Banbhiniyo's surrender. For a period the Sammas were therefore subject to Delhi again. Later, as the Sultanate of Delhi collapsed they became fully independent.[111] Jam Unar was the founder of Samma dynasty mentioned by Ibn Battuta.[111]
The Samma civilization contributed significantly to the evolution of the
Makli Hill.[112] It has left its mark in Sindh with magnificent structures including the Makli Necropolis of its royals in Thatta.[108][113]
maharajas. Akbar was succeeded by Jahangir who was succeeded by Shah Jahan
. Shah Jahan was replaced by Aurangzeb following the Mughal war of succession (1658–1659).
After the death of Aurangzeb in 1707, different regions of modern Pakistan and India began asserting independence. The empire went into a rapid decline and by about 1720 only really controlled a small region around Delhi. The emperors continued have lip service paid to them as "Emperor of India" by the other powers in South Asia until the British finally abolished the empire in 1858.
The Mughal Empire had a great impact on the culture, cuisine, and architecture of Pakistan.
Maratha Empire
Main article:
Maratha Empire
By early 18th century, the Mughal empire declined. In 1749, the Mughals were induced to cede
Punjab region and the important trans Indus River to Ahmad Shah Durrani in order to save his capital from Afghan attack.[116] Ahmad Shah sacked Delhi in 1757 but permitted the Mughal dynasty to remain in nominal control of the city as long as the ruler acknowledged Ahmad Shah's suzerainty over Punjab, Sindh, and Kashmir. Leaving his second son Timur Shah
to safeguard his interests, Ahmad Shah left India to return to Afghanistan.
In 1751–52, Ahamdiya treaty was signed between the
Raghunathrao. He defeated the Rohillas and Afghan garrisons in Punjab and succeeded in ousting Timur Shah and his court from India and brought Lahore, Multan, Kashmir and other subahs on the Indian side of Attock under Maratha rule.[118]
Thus, upon his return to Kandahar in 1757, Ahmad was forced to return to India and face the Maratha Confederacy.
The Bala Hissar fort in Peshawar was one of the royal residences of the Durrani kings.
In 1758, the
Maratha Empire's general Raghunath Rao attacked and conquered Punjab, frontier regions and Kashmir and drove out Timur Shah Durrani, the son and viceroy of Ahmad Shah Abdali. In 1759, the Marathas and its allies won the Battle of Lahore, defeating the Durranis,[119][120] hence, Lahore, Dera Ghazi Khan, Multan, Peshawar, Kashmir, and other subahs on the south eastern side of Afghanistan's border fell under the Maratha rule.[121]
Ahmad Shah declared a
Marathas, and warriors from various Afghan tribes joined his army. Early skirmishes were followed by decisive victory for the Afghans against the much larger Maratha garrisons in Northwest India and by 1759 Ahmad Shah and his army reached Lahore and were poised to confront the Marathas. By 1760, the Maratha groups had coalesced into a big enough army under the command of Sadashivrao Bhau. Once again, Panipat
was the scene of a confrontation between two warring contenders for control of northern India. The Third Battle of Panipat (14 January 1761), fought between largely Muslim and largely Hindu armies was waged along a twelve-kilometer front. Although the Durrani's army decisively defeated the Marathas, they suffered heavily in the battle.
The victory at Panipat was the high point of Ahmad Shah's—and Afghan—power. However, even prior to his death, the empire began to face challenges in the form of a rising Sikhs in Punjab. In 1762, Ahmad Shah crossed the passes from Afghanistan for the sixth time to subdue the Sikhs. From this time and on, the domination and control of the Empire began to loosen, and by the time of Durrani's death he had completely lost Punjab to the Sikhs, as well as earlier losses of northern territories to the Uzbeks, necessitating a compromise with them.[122]
in the east. The main geographical footprint of the empire was the Punjab region. The formation of the empire was a watershed and represented formidable consolidation of Sikh military power and resurgence of local culture, which had been dominated for hundreds of years by Indo-Afghan and Indo-Mughal hybrid cultures.
The foundations of the Sikh Empire, during the time of the Sikh Khalsa Army, could be defined as early as 1707, starting from the death of
Ranjit Singh in 1801, creating a unified political state. All the misl leaders who were affiliated with the Army were from Punjab's nobility.[124]
were an ambitious and largely successful project, begun in the 1880s, to create new farmland through irrigation, to relieve population pressure elsewhere (most of the areas involved are now in Pakistan).
The Baluchistan Agency largely consisted of princely states and tribal territories, and was governed with a light touch, although near the Afghan border Quetta was built up as a military base, in case of invasion by either the Afghans or the Russians. The 1935 Quetta earthquake was a major disaster. From 1876 the sensitive far north was made a "Chief Commissioner's Province". The border with Afghanistan, which remains the modern border of Pakistan, was finally fixed on the Durand Line in 1893.
against the East India Company; the British were seen as foreign invaders. But the organization declined towards the end of the 19th century.
Minto-Morley Reforms
of 1909 called for separate Muslim electorates.
In 1885, the Indian National Congress was founded as a forum, which later became a party, to promote a nationalist cause.[126] Although the Congress attempted to include the Muslim community in the struggle for independence from the British rule – and some Muslims were very active in the Congress – the majority of Muslim leaders, including the influential Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, did not trust the party.
A turning point came in 1900, when the British administration in the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh acceded to Hindu demands and made Hindi, the version of the Hindustani language written in the Devanagari script, the official language. The proselytisation conducted in the region by the activists of a new Hindu reformist movement also stirred Muslim's concerns about their faith. Eventually, the Muslims feared that the Hindu majority would seek to suppress the rights of Muslims in the region following the departure of the British.
Muslim League
The
Nawab Viqar-ul-Mulk. It addressed the issue of safeguarding interests of Muslims and finalised a programme. A resolution, moved by Nawab Salimullah and seconded by Hakim Ajmal Khan
. Nawab Viqar-ul-Mulk (conservative), declared:
The Musalmans are only a fifth in number as compared with the total population of the country, and it is manifest that if at any remote period the British government ceases to exist in India, then the rule of India would pass into the hands of that community which is nearly four times as large as ourselves ... our life, our property, our honour, and our faith will all be in great danger, when even now that a powerful British administration is protecting its subjects, we the Musalmans have to face most serious difficulties in safe-guarding our interests from the grasping hands of our neighbors.[128]
The constitution and principles of the League were contained in the Green Book, written by
Maulana Mohammad Ali. Its goals at this stage did not include establishing an independent Muslim state, but rather concentrated on protecting Muslim liberties and rights, promoting understanding between the Muslim community and other Indians, educating the Muslim and Indian community at large on the actions of the government, and discouraging violence. However, several factors over the next thirty years, including sectarian violence, led to a re-evaluation of the League's aims.[129][130] Among those Muslims in the Congress who did not initially join the League was Jinnah, a prominent statesman and barrister in Bombay. This was because the first article of the League's platform was "To promote among the Mussalmans (Muslims) of India, feelings of loyalty to the British Government". The League remained loyal to the British administration for five years until the British decided to reverse the partition of Bengal. The Muslim League saw this British decision as partial to Hindus.[131]
– and it became a cause of serious concern for Muslims.
However, Jinnah did not join the League until 1913, when the party changed its platform to one of Indian independence, as a reaction against the British decision to reverse the
Aurobindo
and his brother etc., the British had decided to reunite Bengal again. Till this stage, Jinnah believed in Mutual co-operation to achieve an independent, united 'India', although he argued that Muslims should be guaranteed one-third of the seats in any Indian Parliament.
Allama Sir Muhammad Iqbal
The League gradually became the leading representative body of Indian Muslims. Jinnah became its president in 1916, and negotiated the
Non-Cooperation Movement against the British, which a temperamentally law-abiding barrister Jinnah disapproved of. Jinnah also became convinced that the Congress would renounce its support for separate electorates for Muslims, which indeed it did in 1928. In 1927, the British proposed a constitution for India as recommended by the Simon Commission, but they failed to reconcile all parties. The British then turned the matter over to the League and the Congress, and in 1928 an All-Parties Congress was convened in Delhi. The attempt failed, but two more conferences were held, and at the Bombay conference in May, it was agreed that a small committee should work on the constitution. The prominent Congress leader Motilal Nehru headed the committee, which included two Muslims, Syed Ali Imam and Shoaib Quereshi; Motilal's son, Pt Jawaharlal Nehru, was its secretary. The League, however, rejected the committee's report, the so-called Nehru Report
, arguing that its proposals gave too little representation (one quarter) to Muslims – the League had demanded at least one-third representation in the legislature. Jinnah announced a "parting of the ways" after reading the report, and relations between the Congress and the League began to sour.
Muslim homeland – "Now or Never"
Main articles:
United Kingdom general election, 1929
Chaudhry Khaliquzzaman seconding the Resolution with Jinnah and Ali Khan presiding the session
The
Gandhi; the Muslim League reserved their opinion on the Simon Report declaring that the report was not final and the matters should be decided after consultations with the leaders representing all communities in India.[134]
The Round-table Conferences was held, but these achieved little, since Gandhi and the League were unable to reach a compromise.[134] Witnessing the events of the Round Table Conferences, Jinnah had despaired of politics and particularly of getting mainstream parties like the Congress to be sensitive to minority priorities. During this time in 1930, notable writer and poet, Muhammad Iqbal called for a separate and autonomous nation-state, who in his presidential address to the 1930 convention of the Muslim League said that he felt that a separate Muslim state was essential in an otherwise Hindu-dominated South Asia.[135][136]
India is a continent of human groups belonging to different races, speaking different languages, and professing different religions [...] Personally, I would like to see the Punjab, North-West Frontier Province, Sind and Baluchistan amalgamated into a single state. Self-government within the British Empire, or without the British Empire, the formation of a consolidated North-West Indian Muslim State appears to me to be the final destiny of the Muslims, at least of North-West India.
After coining the name of the nation-state, Ali noticed that there is an acronym formed from the names of the "homelands" of Muslims in northwest India:
After the publication of the pamphlet, the Hindu Press vehemently criticized it, and the word 'Pakstan' used in it.
improve the pronunciation, the name of Pakistan grew in popularity and led to the commencement of the Pakistan Movement, and consequently the creation of Pakistan.[142]
In Urdu and Persian languages, the name encapsulates the concept of Pak ("pure") and stan ("land") and hence a "Pure Land".[143] In 1935, the British government proposed to hand over substantial power to elected Indian provincial legislatures, with elections to be held in 1937.[144] After the elections the League took office in Bengal and Punjab, but the Congress won office in most of the other provinces, and refused to devolve power with the League in provinces with large Muslim minorities citing technical difficulties. The subsequent Congress Rule was unpopular among Muslims and seen as a reign of Hindu tyranny by Muslim leaders. Mohammad Ali Jinnah declared 22 December 1939, a "Day of Deliverance" for Indian Muslims. It was meant to celebrate the resignation of all members of the Congress party from provincial and central offices.[145]
Meanwhile, Muslim ideologues for independence also felt vindicated by the presidential address of
Two Nation Theory
or ethnic exclusivism, which influenced Jinnah profoundly.
1940 Resolution
The Working Committee of the Muslim League in Lahore (1940)
No constitutional plan would be workable or acceptable to the Muslims unless geographical contiguous units are demarcated into regions which should be so constituted with such territorial readjustments as may be necessary. That the areas in which the Muslims are numerically in majority as in the North-Western and Eastern zones of India should be grouped to constitute independent states in which the constituent units shall be autonomous and sovereign ... That adequate, effective and mandatory safeguards shall be specifically provided in the constitution for minorities in the units and in the regions for the protection of their religious, cultural, economic, political, administrative and other rights of the minorities, with their consultation. Arrangements thus should be made for the security of Muslims where they were in a minority.[150]
Important leaders in the Muslim League highlighted that Pakistan would be a 'New Medina', in other words the second Islamic state established after Muhammad's creation of an Islamic state in Medina. Pakistan was popularly envisaged as an Islamic utopia, a successor to the defunct Turkish Caliphate and a leader and protector of the entire Islamic world. Islamic scholars debated over whether it was possible for the proposed Pakistan to truly become an Islamic state.[151][152]
While the Congress' top leadership had been in prison following the 1942 Quit India Movement, there was intense debate among Indian Muslims over the creation of a separate homeland.[152] The majority of Barelvis[153] and Barelvi ulema supported the creation of Pakistan[154] and pirs and Sunni ulema were mobilized by the Muslim League to demonstrate that India's Muslim masses wanted a separate country.[155] The Barelvis believed that any co-operation with Hindus would be counter productive.[156] On the other hand, most Deobandis, who were led by Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani, were opposed to the creation of Pakistan and the two-nation theory. According to them Muslims and Hindus could be one nation and Muslims were only a nation of themselves in the religious sense and not in the territorial sense.[157][158][159] At the same time some Deobandi ulema such as Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Mufti Muhammad Shafi and Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani were supportive of the Muslim League's demand to create a separate Pakistan.[155][160]
Muslims who were living in provinces where they were demographically a minority, such as the United Provinces where the Muslim League enjoyed popular support, were assured by Jinnah that they could remain in India, migrate to Pakistan or continue living in India but as Pakistani citizens.
In the Constituent Assembly elections of 1946, the Muslim League won 425 out of 496 seats reserved for Muslims (polling 89.2% of total votes).[132] The Congress had hitherto refused to acknowledge the Muslim League's claim of being the representative of Indian Muslims but finally acquiesced to the League's claim after the results of this election. The Muslim League's demand for Pakistan had received overwhelming popular support from India's Muslims, especially those Muslims who were living in provinces such as UP where they were a minority.[161]
The British had neither the will, nor the financial resources or military power, to hold India any longer but they were also determined to avoid partition and for this purpose they arranged the Cabinet Mission Plan.[162] According to this plan India would be kept united but would be heavily decentralized with separate groupings of Hindu and Muslim majority provinces. The Muslim League accepted this plan as it contained the 'essence' of Pakistan but the Congress rejected it. After the failure of the Cabinet Mission Plan, Jinnah called for Muslims to observe Direct Action Day to demand the creation of a separate Pakistan. The Direct Action Day morphed into violent riots between Hindus and Muslims in Calcutta, with the violence displaying elements of ethnic cleansing. The riots in Calcutta were followed by intense communal rioting elsewhere, including in Noakhali (where Hindus were attacked by Muslims) and Bihar (where Hindus attacked Muslims) in October, resulting in large-scale displacement. In March 1947, such violence reached Punjab, where Sikhs and Hindus were massacred and driven out by Muslims in the Rawalpindi Division.[163]
The British Prime Minister Attlee appointed Lord Louis Mountbatten as India's last viceroy, to negotiate the independence of Pakistan and India and immediate British withdrawal. British leaders including Mountbatten did not support the creation of Pakistan but failed to convince Jinnah otherwise.[164][165] Mountbatten later confessed that he would most probably have sabotaged the creation of Pakistan had he known that Jinnah was dying of tuberculosis.[166]
In early 1947 the British had announced their desire to grant India its independence by June 1948. However, Lord Mountbatten decided to advance the date. In a meeting in June, Nehru and
Master Tara Singh representing the Sikhs, agreed to partition India along religious lines.[citation needed
On 14 August 1947 Pakistan gained independence. India gained independence the following day. The two provinces of British India: Punjab and Bengal were divided along religious lines by the Radcliffe Commission. Mountbatten is alleged to have influenced the Radcliffe Commission to draw the line in India's favour.[167][168] Punjab's mostly Muslim western part went to Pakistan and its mostly Hindu/Sikh eastern part went to India but there were significant Muslim minorities in Punjab's eastern section and likewise there were many Hindus and Sikhs living in Punjab's western areas.
Intense communal rioting in the Punjab forced the governments of India and Pakistan to agree to a forced population exchange of Muslim and Hindu/Sikh minorities living in Punjab. After this population exchange only a few thousand low-caste Hindus remained in Pakistan's side of Punjab and only a tiny Muslim population remained in the town of Malerkotla in India's part of Punjab.[169] Political scientist Ishtiaq Ahmed says that although Muslims started the violence in Punjab, by the end of 1947 more Muslims had been killed by Hindus and Sikhs in East Punjab than the number of Hindus and Sikhs who had been killed by Muslims in West Punjab.[170][171]
More than ten million people migrated across the new borders and between 200,000 and 2,000,000
first war between India and Pakistan. The conflict
^The precise time span of the period is uncertain. Philological and linguistic evidence indicates that the Rigveda, the oldest of the Vedas, was composed roughly between 1700 and 1100 BCE, also referred to as the early Vedic period.[16]
^The precise time span of the period is uncertain. Philological and linguistic evidence indicates that the Rigveda, the oldest of the Vedas, was composed roughly between 1700 and 1100 BCE, also referred to as the early Vedic period.[16]
valley. These three trade-routes, which carried the bulk of the traffic passing by land between India and Central and Western Asia, played an all-important part in the history of Taxila. (page 1)"
Quote: "The record from South Asia (Pakistan, India and Sri Lanka) has been pivotal in discussions of the archaeological signature of early modern humans east of Africa because of the well-excavated and well-dated sites that have recently been reported in this region and because of the central role South Asia played in early population expansion and dispersals to the east. Genetic studies have revealed that India was the gateway to subsequent colonisation of Asia and Australia and saw the first major population expansion of modern human populations anywhere outside of Africa. South Asia therefore provides a crucial stepping-scone in early modern migration to Southeast Asia and Oceania. (pages 81–2)"
^Coningham, Robin; Young, Ruth (2015), The Archaeology of South Asia: From the Indus to Asoka, c. 6500 BCE – 200 CE, Cambridge University Press Quote: ""Mehrgarh remains one of the key sites in South Asia because it has provided the earliest known undisputed evidence for farming and pastoral communities in the region, and its plant and animal material provide clear evidence for the ongoing manipulation, and domestication, of certain species. Perhaps most importantly in a South Asian context, the role played by zebu makes this a distinctive, localised development, with a character completely different to other parts of the world. Finally, the longevity of the site, and its articulation with the neighbouring site of Nausharo (c. 2800—2000 BCE), provides a very clear continuity from South Asia's first farming villages to the emergence of its first cities (Jarrige, 1984)."
Quote: "page 33: "The earliest discovered instance in India of well-established, settled agricultural society is at Mehrgarh in the hills between the Bolan Pass and the Indus plain (today in Pakistan) (see Map 3.1). From as early as 7000 BCE, communities there started investing increased labor in preparing the land and selecting, planting, tending, and harvesting particular grain-producing plants. They also domesticated animals, including sheep, goats, pigs, and oxen (both humped zebu [Bos indicus] and unhumped [Bos taurus]). Castrating oxen, for instance, turned them from mainly meat sources into domesticated draft-animals as well."
, Quote: "(p 29) "The subcontinent's people were hunter-gatherers for many millennia. There were very few of them. Indeed, 10,000 years ago there may only have been a couple of hundred thousand people, living in small, often isolated groups, the descendants of various 'modern' human incomers. Then, perhaps linked to events in Mesopotamia, about 8,500 years ago agriculture emerged in Baluchistan."
Quote: "During the second half of the fourth and early part of the third millennium B.C., a new development begins to become apparent in the greater Indus system, which we can now see to be a formative stage underlying the Mature Indus of the middle and late third millennium. This development seems to have involved the whole Indus system, and to a lesser extent the Indo-Iranian borderlands to its west, but largely left untouched the subcontinent east of the Indus system. (page 81)"
^ abOberlies (1998:155) gives an estimate of 1100 BCE for the youngest hymns in book 10. Estimates for a terminus post quem of the earliest hymns are more uncertain. Oberlies (p. 158) based on 'cumulative evidence' sets wide range of 1700–1100
^Wright 2009: Quote: "The Indus civilization is one of three in the 'Ancient East' that, along with Mesopotamia and Pharonic Egypt, was a cradle of early civilization in the Old World (Childe 1950). Mesopotamia and Egypt were longer lived, but coexisted with Indus civilization during its florescence between 2600 and 1900 B.C. Of the three, the Indus was the most expansive, extending from today's northeast Afghanistan to Pakistan and India."
^[A.B. Bosworth, "Conquest and Empire: The Reign of Alexander the Great." 1988. p. 146]
^Mukerjee, R. K. History and Culture of Indian People, The Age of Imperial Unity, Foreign Invasion. p. 46.
^Curtius in McCrindle, p. 192, J. W. McCrindle; History of Punjab, Vol I, 1997, p 229, Punjabi University, Patiala (editors): Fauja Singh, L. M. Joshi; Kambojas Through the Ages, 2005, p. 134, Kirpal Singh.
Quote: "Magadha power came to extend over the main cities and communication routes of the Ganges basin. Then, under Chandragupta Maurya (c.321–297 bce), and subsequently Ashoka his grandson, Pataliputra became the centre of the loose-knit Mauryan 'Empire' which during Ashoka's reign (c.268–232 bce) briefly had a presence throughout the main urban centres and arteries of the subcontinent, except for the extreme south."
|quote=The geography of the Mauryan Empire resembled a spider with a small dense body and long spindly legs. The highest echelons of imperial society lived in the inner circle composed of the ruler, his immediate family, other relatives, and close allies, who formed a dynastic core. Outside the core, empire travelled stringy routes dotted with armed cities. Outside the palace, in the capital cities, the highest ranks in the imperial elite were held by military commanders whose active loyalty and success in war determined imperial fortunes. Wherever these men failed or rebelled, dynastic power crumbled. ... Imperial society flourished where elites mingled; they were its backbone, its strength was theirs. Kautilya's Arthasastra indicates that imperial power was concentrated in its original heartland, in old Magadha, where key institutions seem to have survived for about seven hundred years, down to the age of the Guptas. Here, Mauryan officials ruled local society, but not elsewhere. In provincial towns and cities, officials formed a top layer of royalty; under them, old conquered royal families were not removed, but rather subordinated. In most janapadas, the Mauryan Empire consisted of strategic urban sites connected loosely to vast hinterlands through lineages and local elites who were there when the Mauryas arrived and were still in control when they left.
) "has been wrongly included in the list of ceded satrapies by some scholars ... on the basis of wrong assessments of the passage of Strabo ... and a statement by Pliny" (Raychaudhuri & Mukherjee 1996, p. 594).
^John D Grainger 2014, p. 109: Seleucus "must ... have held Aria", and furthermore, his "son Antiochos was active there fifteen years later".
Quote: "Yet Sumit Guha considers that 20 million is an upper limit. This is because the demographic growth experienced in core areas is likely to have been less than that experienced in areas that were more lightly settled in the early historic period. The position taken here is that the population in Mauryan times (320–220 BCE) was between 15 and 30 million—although it may have been a little more, or it may have been a little less."
Quote: "A creative explosion in all the arts was a most remarkable feature of this ancient transformation, a permanent cultural legacy. Mauryan territory was created in its day by awesome armies and dreadful war, but future generations would cherish its beautiful pillars, inscriptions, coins, sculptures, buildings, ceremonies, and texts, particularly later Buddhist writers."
^Si-Yu-Ki, Buddhist Records of the Western World, (Tr. Samuel Beal: Travels of Fa-Hian, The Mission of Sung-Yun and Hwei-S?ng, Books 1–5), Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co. Ltd. London. 1906 and Hill (2009), pp. 29, 318–350
^which began about 127 CE. "Falk 2001, pp. 121–136", Falk (2001), pp. 121–136, Falk, Harry (2004), pp. 167–176 and Hill (2009), pp. 29, 33, 368–371.
^Si-Yu-Ki, Buddhist Records of the Western World, (Tr. Samuel Beal: Travels of Fa-Hian, The Mission of Sung-Yun and Hwei-S?ng, Books 1–5), Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co. Ltd. London. 1906
^Hiuen Tsiang, Si-Yu-Ki, Buddhist Records of the Western World, (Tr. Samuel Beal), Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co. Ltd. London. 1906, pp. 167–168.
^"Note 8: It is now clear that the Hephtalites were not part of those Huns who conquered the land south of the Hindu-Kush and Sind as well in the early 6th century. In fact, this latter Hunnic group was the one commonly known as Alkhon because of the inscriptions on their coins (Vondrovec, 2008)."
^Rahman, Abdul (2002). "New Light on the Khingal, Turk and the Hindu Sahis"(PDF). Ancient Pakistan. XV: 37–42. The Hindu Śāhis were therefore neither Bhattis, or Janjuas, nor Brahmans. They were simply Uḍis/Oḍis. It can now be seen that the term Hindu Śāhi is a misnomer and, based as it is merely upon religious discrimination, should be discarded and forgotten. The correct name is Uḍi or Oḍi Śāhi dynasty.
^Meister, Michael W. (2005). "The Problem of Platform Extensions at Kafirkot North"(PDF). Ancient Pakistan. XVI: 41–48. Rehman (2002: 41) makes a good case for calling the Hindu Śāhis by a more accurate name, "Uḍi Śāhis".
^The Shahi Afghanistan and Punjab, 1973, pp 1, 45–46, 48, 80, Dr D. B. Pandey; The Úakas in India and Their Impact on Indian Life and Culture, 1976, p 80, Vishwa Mitra Mohan – Indo-Scythians; Country, Culture and Political life in early and medieval India, 2004, p 34, Daud Ali.
^Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1954, pp 112 ff; The Shahis of Afghanistan and Punjab, 1973, p 46, Dr D. B. Pandey; The Úakas in India and Their Impact on Indian Life and Culture, 1976, p 80, Vishwa Mitra Mohan – Indo-Scythians.
, ... Jaypala of Waihind saw danger in the consolidation of the kingdom of Ghazna and decided to destroy it. He therefore invaded Ghazna, but was defeated ...
. In 1201 Ghurid troops entered Khurasan and captured Nishapur, Merv, Sarakhs and Tus, reaching as far as Gurgan and Bistam. Kuhistan, a stronghold of the Ismailis, was plundered and all Khurasan was brought temporarily under Ghurid control
. In 1205, Bakhtīyar Khilji sacked Nudiya, the pre-eminent city of western Bengal and established an Islamic government at Laukhnauti, the capital of the predecessor Sena dynasty. On this occasion, commemorative coins were struck in gold and silver in the name of Muhammad b. Sām
^"The Arab Conquest". International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics. 36 (1): 91. 2007. The Soomras are believed to be Parmar Rajputs found even today in Rajasthan, Saurashtra, Kutch and Sindh. The Cambridge History of India refers to the Soomras as "a Rajput dynasty the later members of which accepted Islam" (p. 54 ).
. But as many kings of the dynasty bore Hindu names, it is almost certain that the Soomras were of local origin. Sometimes they are connected with Paramara Rajputs, but of this there is no definite proof.
^U. M. Chokshi; M. R. Trivedi (1989). Gujarat State Gazetteer. Director, Government Print., Stationery and Publications, Gujarat State. p. 274. It was the conquest of Kutch by the Sindhi tribe of Sama Rajputs that marked the emergence of Kutch as a separate kingdom in the 14th century.
. For five years the League remained thoroughly loyalist to and fully supportive of British rule until King George V announced the revocation of Bengal's partition at his coronation Durbar in Delhi in December 1911. The Muslim League viewed that reversal of British policy in Bengal as a victory for "Hindu terrorist tactics".
. In the 1940s a solid majority of the Barelvis were supporters of the Pakistan Movement and played a supporting role in its final phase (1940-7), mostly under the banner of the All-India Sunni Conference which had been founded in 1925.
. During the 1946 election, Barelvi Ulama issued fatwas in favour of the Muslim League.
^ ab"'What's wrong with Pakistan?'". Dawn. 13 September 2013. Retrieved 10 January 2017. However, the fundamentalist dimension in Pakistan movement developed more strongly when the Sunni Ulema and pirs were mobilised to prove that the Muslim masses wanted a Muslim/Islamic state...Even the Grand Mufti of Deoband, Mufti Muhammad Shafi, issued a fatwa in support of the Muslim League's demand.
. For example, the Barelvi ulama supported the formation of the state of Pakistan and thought that any alliance with Hindus (such as that between the Indian National Congress and the Jamiat ulama-I-Hind [JUH]) was counterproductive.
. Believing that Islam was a universal religion, the Deobandi advocated a notion of a composite nationalism according to which Hindus and Muslims constituted one nation.
. Madani...stressed the difference between qaum, meaning a nation, hence a territorial concept, and millat, meaning an Ummah and thus a religious concept.
. Madani makes a crucial distinction between qaum and millat. According to him, qaum connotes a territorial multi-religious entity, while millat refers to the cultural, social and religious unity of Muslims exclusively.
. Retrieved 10 January 2017. Besides, Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi, along with his pupils and disciples, lent his entire support to the demand of Pakistan.
. In the elections of 1946, the Muslim League won 90 percent of the legislative seats reserved for Muslims. It was the power of the big zamindars in Punjab and Sindh behind the Muslim League candidates, and the powerful campaign among the poor peasants of Bengal on economic issues of rural indebtedness and zamindari abolition, that led to this massive landslide victory (Alavi 2002, 14). Even Congress, which had always denied the League's claim to be the only true representative of Indian Muslims had to concede the truth of that claim. The 1946 election was, in effect, a plebiscite among Muslims on Pakistan.
, The signs of 'ethnic cleansing' are first evident evident in the Great Calcutta Killing of 16–19 August 1946. Over 100,000 people were made homeless. They were also present in the wave of violence that rippled out from Calcutta to Bihar, where there were high Muslim casualty figures, and to Noakhali deep in the Ganges-Brahmaputra delta of Bengal. Concerning the Noakhali riots, one British officer spoke of a 'determined and organized' Muslim effort to drive out all the Hindus, who accounted for around a fifth of the total population. Similarly, the Punjab counterparts to this transition of violence were the Rawalpindi massacres of March 1947. The level of death and destruction in such West Punjab villages as Thoa Khalsa was such that communities couldn't live together in its wake.
. Undivided India, their magnificent imperial trophy, was besmirched by the creation of Pakistan, and the division of India was never emotionally accepted by many British leaders, Mountbatten among them.
. Mountbatten's partiality was apparent in his own statements. He tilted openly and heavily towards Congress. While doing so he clearly expressed his lack of support and faith in the Muslim League and its Pakistan idea.
. When Mountbatten was asked by Collins and Lapierre if he would have sabotaged Pakistan if he had known that Jinnah was dying of tuberculosis, his answer was instructive. There was no doubt in his mind about the legality or morality of his position on Pakistan. 'Most probably,' he said (1982:39).
. An estimated 12–15 million people were displaced, and some 2 million died. The legacy of Partition (never without a capital P) remains strong today ...
. The official estimate of the number of abducted women during Partition was placed at 33,000 non-Muslim (Hindu or Sikh predominantly) women in Pakistan, and 50,000 Muslim women in India.
. The horrific statistics that surround women refugees-between 75,000–100,000 Hindu, Muslim and Sikh women who were abducted by men of the other communities, subjected to multiple rapes, mutilations, and, for some, forced marriages and conversions-is matched by the treatment of the abducted women in the hands of the nation-state. In the Constituent Assembly in 1949 it was recorded that of the 50,000 Muslim women abducted in India, 8,000 of then were recovered, and of the 33,000 Hindu and Sikh women abducted, 12,000 were recovered.
. In addition thousands of women on both sides of the newly formed borders (estimated range from 29,000 to 50,000 Muslim women and 15,000 to 35,000 Hindu and Sikh women) were abducted, raped, forced to convert, forced into marriage, forced back into what the two States defined as 'their proper homes,' torn apart from their families once during partition by those who abducted them, and again, after partition, by the State which tried to 'recover' and 'rehabilitate' them.
Wynbrandt, James (2009). A Brief History of Pakistan. New York: Infobase Publishing.
Surveys
Bose, Sugata, and Ayesha Jalal. "Modern South Asia : History, Culture, Political Economy". Fourth edition. London ;: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2018
Weiner, Myron; Ali Banuazizi (1994). The Politics of social transformation in Afghanistan, Iran, and Pakistan. Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press.
Choudhury, G.W. India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and the major powers: politics of a divided subcontinent (1975), by a Pakistani scholar; Covers 1946 to 1974.
Pakistan Journal of Historical Studies, a peer-reviewed semiannual scholarly journal sponsored by the Khaldunia Centre for Historical Research in Lahore, Pakistan.
_without_national_boundaries.svg)
.png)
.jpg)
Definitions from Wiktionary
Media from Commons
News from Wikinews
Quotations from Wikiquote
Texts from Wikisource
Textbooks from Wikibooks
Resources from Wikiversity
Wikimedia Atlas of the History of Pakistan
