What do you think?
Rate this book
The Indus Saga and the Making of Pakistan
Light wear to dust jacket and boards. 'DAMAGED' stamp on FEP; contents otherwise clean, sound, bright throughout.
430 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1997
85 people are currently reading
1328 people want to read
About the author
Aitzaz Ahsan
3 books28 followersAitzaz Ahsan comes from a background steeped in politics; being the third generation from his family to serve as an elected member of a legislative assembly.
He is a member of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) and has served as the Minister of Law, Justice, Interior and Education in the Federal Government between 1988 and 1993.
Elected to the senate of Pakistan in 1994, he was the leader of the House and the leader of the Opposition between the years 1996 and 1999.
After his early education at Aitchison College Lahore and the Government College Lahore, he studied law at Cambridge and was called to the bar at Grays'Inn in 1967. He is a senior advocate in the Supreme Court of Pakistan.
He is also an indefatigable human rights activist and a founder vice-president of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan.
He has been incarcerated under arbitrary detention laws many times by military and authoritarian regimes. During one such prolonged detention, he wrote 'The Indus Saga and Making of Pakistan' a popular socio-political history of the origins of Pakistan.
He is a member of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) and has served as the Minister of Law, Justice, Interior and Education in the Federal Government between 1988 and 1993.
Elected to the senate of Pakistan in 1994, he was the leader of the House and the leader of the Opposition between the years 1996 and 1999.
After his early education at Aitchison College Lahore and the Government College Lahore, he studied law at Cambridge and was called to the bar at Grays'Inn in 1967. He is a senior advocate in the Supreme Court of Pakistan.
He is also an indefatigable human rights activist and a founder vice-president of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan.
He has been incarcerated under arbitrary detention laws many times by military and authoritarian regimes. During one such prolonged detention, he wrote 'The Indus Saga and Making of Pakistan' a popular socio-political history of the origins of Pakistan.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews
April 5, 2011
Ahsan’s work is no less a treat for anyone desperately seeking an alternative history of ideology of Pakistan other than the usual mechanically concocted ones by people like Sharif-ul-Mujahid. Rather than early Arab Muslim conquerors, Ahsan traces ideological and cultural roots of today’s Pakistan in the ancient Indus Valley Civilization. Although the book got good reviews by scholars like late Ahmad Hasan Dani, Ahsan’s method seems to have many flaws, thus diminishing the value of his overall thesis. Take for instance, how almost 60-70 % of his ancient historical version is solely based upon Kosambi (who has a Marxist approach towards history) with virtually no comparisons with nationalist and imperialist versions. Nevertheless, the work is highly original and thought-provoking.
January 14, 2018
Initially I planned to give fewer stars, because the Marxist terminology and interpretational approach he uses feels outdated and too narrow. However after 400+ pages I'm overwhelmed with the amount of information I've consumed, and how much it widened my comprehension of the Subcontinent.
This is a book worth reading because it debunks many myths that we are used to hearing, like the main origin of Islam in the Indus area, and the economic and industrial conditions during the Mughal period. It focuses both on the waves of migrating groups that have left traces in the heritage of the region for millennia, and the fact that geography made Indus (present day Pakistan) a bulwark for various invasions heading Eastwards from Persia, Afghanistan and Central Asia etc, making the Indus person distinctly different from those originating in Hind. But one has to be aware of that he tends to stretch his conclusions too far to fit his agenda, and more maps of the fluctuating borders and place names would have been appreciated.
Religion plays a rather small part here, until the final chapter that deals with the time 1857 to Partition. Since this is a very materialistic interpretation of history it's interesting to see the parallels to how economic conditions affected what religion the driving forces in society chose to adopt. The merchant classes for example, that opted for Buddhism when it appeared, when they saw how restricting the rigid cast-system of Hinduism was for business. It's certainly very different to the social climate of today.
I liked the way he points out that the prehistory of Indus was narrated through the generations in the vernacular, and when Urdu and English were made official languages, the loss of local languages went hand in hand with the loss of these stories, one of many reasons why many Pakistanis have limited knowledge of their pre-Islamic history.
Despite current turmoil and fundamentalism he has a rather positive outlook. He sort of aims to reassure the reader that the Indus has 6 k years of history, and is not in danger of disintegration from the threats of today. It has seen worse, and has always prevailed. It is indeed a history to cherish and to tell
This is a book worth reading because it debunks many myths that we are used to hearing, like the main origin of Islam in the Indus area, and the economic and industrial conditions during the Mughal period. It focuses both on the waves of migrating groups that have left traces in the heritage of the region for millennia, and the fact that geography made Indus (present day Pakistan) a bulwark for various invasions heading Eastwards from Persia, Afghanistan and Central Asia etc, making the Indus person distinctly different from those originating in Hind. But one has to be aware of that he tends to stretch his conclusions too far to fit his agenda, and more maps of the fluctuating borders and place names would have been appreciated.
Religion plays a rather small part here, until the final chapter that deals with the time 1857 to Partition. Since this is a very materialistic interpretation of history it's interesting to see the parallels to how economic conditions affected what religion the driving forces in society chose to adopt. The merchant classes for example, that opted for Buddhism when it appeared, when they saw how restricting the rigid cast-system of Hinduism was for business. It's certainly very different to the social climate of today.
I liked the way he points out that the prehistory of Indus was narrated through the generations in the vernacular, and when Urdu and English were made official languages, the loss of local languages went hand in hand with the loss of these stories, one of many reasons why many Pakistanis have limited knowledge of their pre-Islamic history.
Despite current turmoil and fundamentalism he has a rather positive outlook. He sort of aims to reassure the reader that the Indus has 6 k years of history, and is not in danger of disintegration from the threats of today. It has seen worse, and has always prevailed. It is indeed a history to cherish and to tell
October 11, 2017
Every nation must read about its history and this book serves as a first such book for the modern Pakistani. The writer tries to be as neutral as he can by sharing authentic references frequently during the course of his thesis. His effort shows his genuine concern that he would like the Pakistani to learn about his identity rather than think of himself just as an Un-Indian.
Some really astonishing facts, supported by strong and clear references, make one realize why we (Pakistanis) are the way we are. He also shares his insights as to how can we treat history as a learning ground to improve our political and economic situation as a progressive nation. I would highly recommend this book as it covers a span of 6000 years of history and is detailed enough to bask the reader in the intense romantic socioculture of the Indus Saga.
The only thing this book is missing is a map of Indus and India during the historical progressions traversed within.
All in all, highly recommended for the open minded Pakistani.
Some really astonishing facts, supported by strong and clear references, make one realize why we (Pakistanis) are the way we are. He also shares his insights as to how can we treat history as a learning ground to improve our political and economic situation as a progressive nation. I would highly recommend this book as it covers a span of 6000 years of history and is detailed enough to bask the reader in the intense romantic socioculture of the Indus Saga.
The only thing this book is missing is a map of Indus and India during the historical progressions traversed within.
All in all, highly recommended for the open minded Pakistani.
February 5, 2017
India and Pakistan are sworn enemies. There is more than a passing chance that these two nuclear capable countries may start a war with disastrous consequences for both. Indeed, there is no love lost between the two nations; they were arch enemies right from the start when Pakistan broke out of India in 1947. Being an Indian, I can vouch for the degree of suspicion and enmity we harbour against Pakistan and I expect Pakistanis to share this mistrust towards us. This book suggests that Pakistan nurses a bunker-mentality, always wary of aggression and on the defensive, and a fragility syndrome when one is apprehensive that another country may annex them forcefully. This feeling of insecurity stems from anxiety about the logic behind the birth of Pakistan. A sovereign state for Muslims is a weak argument in the face of enlightenment that is visiting more and more parts of the globe. This book provides a solid basis for the birth and continued existence of Pakistan. ‘The Indus Saga’ is the answer to the question ‘Why Pakistan?’ This post-partition justification of the country also laments the unbridled growth of fundamentalism, which is not what Jinnah wanted for his dream republic. Aitzaz Ahsan is a member of the Pakistan People’s Party and belongs to a family with the tradition social work spanning three generations. He was elected to the federal legislative assembly and served as a minister. He is a lawyer with a solid British education at his back. He was incarcerated under arbitrary detention laws, during one such tenure he wrote this book.
The book is based on the surmise that the Indus River, its tributaries and the area surrounding it, formed a distinct, historical, political, cultural and ethnic entity. Since this territory is exactly what is inside the geographical boundary of Pakistan (West Pakistan, if you reckon the 1947 boundary). The subcontinent has its two large river systems – Indus and Ganga. Indus was always separated from India. Its cultural heritage was so distinct that both Shankara and Vivekananda, the two great Hindu integrators, couldn’t create a synthesis of the two regions. Ahsan claims that of the last 6000 years of Indus history, for nearly 5500 years it led a separate life from the Indian mainstream. Only three universal states, the Mauryan, Mughal and the British could integrate them with a unity of command which lasted hardly five centuries. But this argument is a flimsy one. Many local regions in South India were never held under any of the three universal states, but those are now happy members of the Indian Union. The author then puts forward the bold assertion that racially, ethnically, linguistically and culturally, the people of Pakistan are more closely linked to the people of Central Asia and Iran than Indians. It also rubbishes the claims of many in Pakistan’s ruling elite that they descended from the Arabs – the fountain springs of Islam. He takes great pains to explain the ethnic and societal differences existing between the societies of Arabia and Pakistan, but wryly accepts that often, perceptions become more crucial than the facts, even when a perception has been fabricated deliberately by the ruling elite.
The book is structured in a way as to vindicate the author’s ideas on the issues plaguing modern Pakistan. The priestly aristocracy in Mohenjo Daro was steeped in superstition and rituals. Sloth and stagnation ensued from this atrophy that finally led to the civilization’s downfall. Ahsan points a warning finger at Pakistani society that unless they reject the fundamentalists among them, a similar fate is on the cards. The book inevitably includes many references to ancient Indian history as well, which are based on the works of Kosambi and Romila Thapar. Rafiq Zakaria is relied on for the medieval period. There are many faulty notions expressed in the text on Vedic class structure, terming the Shudras as synonymous with Pariahs and that tantrism coexisted with Buddha. The Indus civilization was crucially dependent on bronze. With the spread of iron, state power migrated to the sources of its ore, in Bihar. The first major empire was founded in Pataliputra under the Mauryas. Alexander’s invasion is projected as the first among a series of foreign raids in which the military prowess of the Indus shielded the rest of the country. He also doubts whether Porus had indeed defeated Alexander, judging by the swift withdrawal of the emperor through a riverine route. The first part of the book logically ends with the Arab conquest of Sindh in 711 CE by Mohammed bin Qasim. However, Ahsan takes a wide detour of the Islamic rule with his remark that brahminism, rise of castes, and village isolation are the reasons of the country’s defeat against European imperialism (p.95). This fast forwarding of the Gupta period towards the British ignores the corroding weaknesses the country had inherited under a millennium of Muslim rule.
Pakistan now reels under the iron grip of Islamic fundamentalism. But this present reality has not hindered many Pakistanis from extolling the virtues of bigoted Muslim kings of the Sultanates of Delhi and Mughal Empire, especially Aurangzeb and Babur. However, this book breaks with this tradition and pictures Babur’s attack as a time of extreme hardship to the Muslims of Indus as well. Babur spared only those Pathans who came to plead before him with a clutch of grass between their teeth and surrendering before him as Babur’s cows (p.150). Strife frequently arose between the Indus cultivator and Delhi kings. Hereditary land rights were assigned for zamindars, who were heavily penalized. Things reached such a pass that the term chaghtay in Punjab came to be denoted for robber barons and cruel administrators. It may be remembered here that Mughals claimed descent from Chaghtay Turks! Indus also produced rebels like Abdullah, who led peasant riots in Punjab against the Mughals. Ahsan generalizes the profligate spending in present day Pakistan as originating from the social mindset generated by frequent raids and plunder of the region, epitomized by the expropriation by Taimur, Babur, Nadir Shah and Ahmed Shah Abdali. The prevailing anarchy that lasted many centuries forced people to spend as much as they can, obviating the logic to save. The idiomatic refrain in Punjab, which goes like “Only that which you eat is yours, The rest will be appropriated by Ahmed Shah” says it all. This is said to be the root cause of consumerism and ostentation in modern Pakistan. The author makes known the contrast between Indian and Pakistani politicians where the former are noted for the simplicity in attire and lifestyle. Those centuries of anarchy increased the tolerance threshold of the elite to cruel rulers. Governors could freely switch loyalty without stigma to the winning party. The only precondition was to fight bravely till submission. The Bengalis didn’t share this trait of meek acquiescence to authority and the author counts this as one of the reasons why East Pakistan parted ways with Pakistan in 1971. The Sufi orders of the Indus – mainly Chishti, Suhrawardy, Qadri and Naqshbandi – preached the message of goodwill and tolerance among the religions.
Even though the Indian and the Indus mindset was bogged down by centuries of mutually injurious interactions, that which precipitated the partition of the country was the transformation of economy under the British. The Hindu middle class adjusted themselves to the foreign power, just as they did with the Muslim invaders earlier, and became tightly integrated with the administration of the country. The Muslims couldn’t do it sooner than Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, since the elite had not fully come to terms with loss of power to an infidel nation. This caused strife among Hindus and Muslims, which was convenient for the British. A joining of forces took place in the 1857 war of independence, by Awadhi and Bengali sepoys. The Punjabi and Sindhi soldiers who kept their loyalty to their white masters wanted to take revenge against the mutineers who had earlier annexed their homelands. Ahsan claims this to be the first victory of Indus against India. The flashpoint was reached when Congress couldn’t accommodate the Muslim League in its ministries formed in 1937. After this humiliating defeat and during the Second World War, Jinnah assured himself the support of the Muslim landed aristocracy and staked claim for a separate homeland for the Muslims. This was granted eventually, but the author insists that what Jinnah had in mind was nothing like what Pakistan had turned out to be.
This is a great effort to provide a logical necessity of the birth of Pakistan. Very few politicians in the world have such caliber to conjure a fully grown rationale out of thin air. Readers have the right to disagree with the author and many omissions can be pointed out on the argument, but still, Ahsan’s strenuous effort to justify the existence of his nation on valid grounds other than religious, is commendable. His style is very endearing and compact. Even with this broad brush, the logic of East Pakistan is missed out. But it won’t cause a problem now; as that part went on to become another nation in 1971. In order to make up for parts of history that are still missing, Ahsan deploys legends as history, particularly the folk tales of Raja Rasalu and Puran. There might be some truth in the legend, but a folk hero who had spent twelve years in a well hidden from the society is hardly history. Similar is the extravagant claim that the Indus region had a republican tradition with elected monarchy. Ahsan’s demarcation of the region west of the Gurdaspur – Kathiawar salient as the Indus region makes it an outpost of India, but the author always treats it as an outpost of Central Asia. Whatever it may be, the region was never autonomous. Either Delhi or Kabul exercised hegemony over it till 1947, when Pakistan was born.
Before I stop, let me express a word of reassurance to any Pakistani who may be reading these lines. We Indians do not want to annex you to our country under the pretext of Akhand Bharat. Those who raise such a cry are motivated more to whip up nationalism than any real desire to put their words into practice. The reason for this reluctance is not hard to see, that we absolutely don’t want 338 million Muslims of Pakistan and Bangladesh to enter our electoral rolls!
The book is gifted with a neat Index and good bibliography. A few photographic plates would’ve added much interest.
The book is highly recommended.
The book is based on the surmise that the Indus River, its tributaries and the area surrounding it, formed a distinct, historical, political, cultural and ethnic entity. Since this territory is exactly what is inside the geographical boundary of Pakistan (West Pakistan, if you reckon the 1947 boundary). The subcontinent has its two large river systems – Indus and Ganga. Indus was always separated from India. Its cultural heritage was so distinct that both Shankara and Vivekananda, the two great Hindu integrators, couldn’t create a synthesis of the two regions. Ahsan claims that of the last 6000 years of Indus history, for nearly 5500 years it led a separate life from the Indian mainstream. Only three universal states, the Mauryan, Mughal and the British could integrate them with a unity of command which lasted hardly five centuries. But this argument is a flimsy one. Many local regions in South India were never held under any of the three universal states, but those are now happy members of the Indian Union. The author then puts forward the bold assertion that racially, ethnically, linguistically and culturally, the people of Pakistan are more closely linked to the people of Central Asia and Iran than Indians. It also rubbishes the claims of many in Pakistan’s ruling elite that they descended from the Arabs – the fountain springs of Islam. He takes great pains to explain the ethnic and societal differences existing between the societies of Arabia and Pakistan, but wryly accepts that often, perceptions become more crucial than the facts, even when a perception has been fabricated deliberately by the ruling elite.
The book is structured in a way as to vindicate the author’s ideas on the issues plaguing modern Pakistan. The priestly aristocracy in Mohenjo Daro was steeped in superstition and rituals. Sloth and stagnation ensued from this atrophy that finally led to the civilization’s downfall. Ahsan points a warning finger at Pakistani society that unless they reject the fundamentalists among them, a similar fate is on the cards. The book inevitably includes many references to ancient Indian history as well, which are based on the works of Kosambi and Romila Thapar. Rafiq Zakaria is relied on for the medieval period. There are many faulty notions expressed in the text on Vedic class structure, terming the Shudras as synonymous with Pariahs and that tantrism coexisted with Buddha. The Indus civilization was crucially dependent on bronze. With the spread of iron, state power migrated to the sources of its ore, in Bihar. The first major empire was founded in Pataliputra under the Mauryas. Alexander’s invasion is projected as the first among a series of foreign raids in which the military prowess of the Indus shielded the rest of the country. He also doubts whether Porus had indeed defeated Alexander, judging by the swift withdrawal of the emperor through a riverine route. The first part of the book logically ends with the Arab conquest of Sindh in 711 CE by Mohammed bin Qasim. However, Ahsan takes a wide detour of the Islamic rule with his remark that brahminism, rise of castes, and village isolation are the reasons of the country’s defeat against European imperialism (p.95). This fast forwarding of the Gupta period towards the British ignores the corroding weaknesses the country had inherited under a millennium of Muslim rule.
Pakistan now reels under the iron grip of Islamic fundamentalism. But this present reality has not hindered many Pakistanis from extolling the virtues of bigoted Muslim kings of the Sultanates of Delhi and Mughal Empire, especially Aurangzeb and Babur. However, this book breaks with this tradition and pictures Babur’s attack as a time of extreme hardship to the Muslims of Indus as well. Babur spared only those Pathans who came to plead before him with a clutch of grass between their teeth and surrendering before him as Babur’s cows (p.150). Strife frequently arose between the Indus cultivator and Delhi kings. Hereditary land rights were assigned for zamindars, who were heavily penalized. Things reached such a pass that the term chaghtay in Punjab came to be denoted for robber barons and cruel administrators. It may be remembered here that Mughals claimed descent from Chaghtay Turks! Indus also produced rebels like Abdullah, who led peasant riots in Punjab against the Mughals. Ahsan generalizes the profligate spending in present day Pakistan as originating from the social mindset generated by frequent raids and plunder of the region, epitomized by the expropriation by Taimur, Babur, Nadir Shah and Ahmed Shah Abdali. The prevailing anarchy that lasted many centuries forced people to spend as much as they can, obviating the logic to save. The idiomatic refrain in Punjab, which goes like “Only that which you eat is yours, The rest will be appropriated by Ahmed Shah” says it all. This is said to be the root cause of consumerism and ostentation in modern Pakistan. The author makes known the contrast between Indian and Pakistani politicians where the former are noted for the simplicity in attire and lifestyle. Those centuries of anarchy increased the tolerance threshold of the elite to cruel rulers. Governors could freely switch loyalty without stigma to the winning party. The only precondition was to fight bravely till submission. The Bengalis didn’t share this trait of meek acquiescence to authority and the author counts this as one of the reasons why East Pakistan parted ways with Pakistan in 1971. The Sufi orders of the Indus – mainly Chishti, Suhrawardy, Qadri and Naqshbandi – preached the message of goodwill and tolerance among the religions.
Even though the Indian and the Indus mindset was bogged down by centuries of mutually injurious interactions, that which precipitated the partition of the country was the transformation of economy under the British. The Hindu middle class adjusted themselves to the foreign power, just as they did with the Muslim invaders earlier, and became tightly integrated with the administration of the country. The Muslims couldn’t do it sooner than Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, since the elite had not fully come to terms with loss of power to an infidel nation. This caused strife among Hindus and Muslims, which was convenient for the British. A joining of forces took place in the 1857 war of independence, by Awadhi and Bengali sepoys. The Punjabi and Sindhi soldiers who kept their loyalty to their white masters wanted to take revenge against the mutineers who had earlier annexed their homelands. Ahsan claims this to be the first victory of Indus against India. The flashpoint was reached when Congress couldn’t accommodate the Muslim League in its ministries formed in 1937. After this humiliating defeat and during the Second World War, Jinnah assured himself the support of the Muslim landed aristocracy and staked claim for a separate homeland for the Muslims. This was granted eventually, but the author insists that what Jinnah had in mind was nothing like what Pakistan had turned out to be.
This is a great effort to provide a logical necessity of the birth of Pakistan. Very few politicians in the world have such caliber to conjure a fully grown rationale out of thin air. Readers have the right to disagree with the author and many omissions can be pointed out on the argument, but still, Ahsan’s strenuous effort to justify the existence of his nation on valid grounds other than religious, is commendable. His style is very endearing and compact. Even with this broad brush, the logic of East Pakistan is missed out. But it won’t cause a problem now; as that part went on to become another nation in 1971. In order to make up for parts of history that are still missing, Ahsan deploys legends as history, particularly the folk tales of Raja Rasalu and Puran. There might be some truth in the legend, but a folk hero who had spent twelve years in a well hidden from the society is hardly history. Similar is the extravagant claim that the Indus region had a republican tradition with elected monarchy. Ahsan’s demarcation of the region west of the Gurdaspur – Kathiawar salient as the Indus region makes it an outpost of India, but the author always treats it as an outpost of Central Asia. Whatever it may be, the region was never autonomous. Either Delhi or Kabul exercised hegemony over it till 1947, when Pakistan was born.
Before I stop, let me express a word of reassurance to any Pakistani who may be reading these lines. We Indians do not want to annex you to our country under the pretext of Akhand Bharat. Those who raise such a cry are motivated more to whip up nationalism than any real desire to put their words into practice. The reason for this reluctance is not hard to see, that we absolutely don’t want 338 million Muslims of Pakistan and Bangladesh to enter our electoral rolls!
The book is gifted with a neat Index and good bibliography. A few photographic plates would’ve added much interest.
The book is highly recommended.
December 30, 2020
چھے ہزار سال کی معلوم تاریخ میں سے ساڑھے پانچ ہزار سال تک پاکستان ایک علیحدہ اکائی کے طور پر قائم رہا ہے۔ اس دوران وادی سندھ شاذونادر ہی ہندوستان کا حصہ رہی تھی۔ یہی اس کتاب ”سندھ ساگر اور قیامِ پاکستان“ کا موضوع ہے۔ کتاب کے پہلے حصے کا عنوان ”دوخطے“ ہے۔ اس میں وادی سندھ اور ہند کی تفریق کا جائزہ بڑی حد تک جغرافیائی عوامل کی بنیاد پر لیاگیا ہے۔ ”دو دنیائیں“ کتاب کا دوسرا حصہ ہے جو وادی سندھ کے باسیوں اور ان کے ساتھ باقی ہندوستان کے لوگوں اور برطانوی حکمرانوں کے اختلافات کے تقابلی جائزے پر مشتمل ہے۔ کتاب کے تیسرے حصے کو ”دوقومیں“ کا عنوان دیا گیا ہے اور اس میں وادی سندھ اور ہند پر مشتمل برصغیر میں بسنے والے مسلمانوں اور ہندوﺅں کے درمیان ناگزیر تفریق کو زیربحث لایا گیا ہے۔ اس طرح ہر تفریق کی ماہیت کا تعین کرنے کے لیے وادی سندھ کے اصل باشندوں کا کھوج لگانی کی کوشش کی گئی ہے اور یہی اس کتاب کا بنیادی مقصد ہے کہ سندھ واسی یعنی پاکستانی شہری کو دریافت کیا جائے اور اس کی اصلیت کا تعین کیا جائے۔ یہ کتاب قبل از تاریخ سے 1947ءتک کے عرصے پر محیط ہے۔
September 6, 2012
This book is an answer to "Discovery of India" by Jawahar Lal Nehru. The book provides an alternate narrative to the idealogy of Pakistan by asserting that the identity of Indus people has been different from that of Ganges people throughout our 5000 year old history.
The three periods in which the subcontinent was politically, economically and socially united were Mauryas, Mughals and British period and if we add these periods of united India, the time Indus is separate and distinct from Ganges is more than the time it is part of Ganges.
A left centric view with facts contrived and manipulated to serve the central thesis, however makes a pleasurable reading because it is not only a nationalistic perspective but also secular one. The significance of animals, clothing and anthropological material is highlighted and the broad contours of history is brushed with poetry, folk heroes and literature of the Indus.
The Arabs dominated the locals of Indus because of the horse and elephant factor. Bactrians, Scythians and Gandharas had a major influence on Indus culture and rebellion is innate to the Indus man.
Aitizaz Ahsan has emerged as an intellectual of a sort and could become a leader like Jawaharlal Nehru in future. I am not sure if he has a son or daughter, the likes of Indira though.
The three periods in which the subcontinent was politically, economically and socially united were Mauryas, Mughals and British period and if we add these periods of united India, the time Indus is separate and distinct from Ganges is more than the time it is part of Ganges.
A left centric view with facts contrived and manipulated to serve the central thesis, however makes a pleasurable reading because it is not only a nationalistic perspective but also secular one. The significance of animals, clothing and anthropological material is highlighted and the broad contours of history is brushed with poetry, folk heroes and literature of the Indus.
The Arabs dominated the locals of Indus because of the horse and elephant factor. Bactrians, Scythians and Gandharas had a major influence on Indus culture and rebellion is innate to the Indus man.
Aitizaz Ahsan has emerged as an intellectual of a sort and could become a leader like Jawaharlal Nehru in future. I am not sure if he has a son or daughter, the likes of Indira though.
Read
October 4, 2011A very interesting book, however the author contrives facts to make them fit his hypothesis and thus compromises on the honesty of the work. If one were to ignore the fact that the work is somehow meant to be an alternate apology for the coming into being of Pakistan, the book is fascinating in large parts. If you have some tolerance for the trivial and at times outright nonsensical and the ability to sift it out for the sake of imbibing some novel and bordering on the brilliant interpretation of the history of North India/ Indus/ whatever.... do give it a read...
March 29, 2011
a very very impressive book on the roots of the Pakistani nation
Read
December 24, 2015Pakistan resolution and Allama Iqbal's vision is not given due importance. Without these two gigantic factors, I consider our history as well as this book INCOMPLETE.
February 4, 2025
This book might be the single worst non-fiction work I’ve ever read. Filled with racist generalizations and Orientalism, the thesis and desire to discuss the “Indus” person as separate from the “Indian” is profoundly stupid and detracts from an otherwise interesting Marxist analysis of the Raj. However, this book gets 1 star because it fails to grapple at all with the most basic objections to its thesis and attempts to oppose mainstream and logical readings of South Asian history with nigh a legitimate citation in sight. Also, the author’s one paragraph reduction of the East/West Pakistan conflict as an issue of culture is tantamount to genocide denial. This book is an embarrassment and it’s shocking anyone was willing to publish it.
January 30, 2018
For long, I had started becoming conscious of my identity as a Punjabi and as a Pakistani. I had always debated upon the idea that Pakistanis were never a part of India. No sir! You may say that Pakistan was cut out from 'British India', but that wasn't India! It was the Indus saga that made me realize that I was right, we never were a part of India. The creation of Pakistan was a force of nature so great that it was bound to happen, for the Indus had an identity of its own since time immemorial.
The book walks its reader through, not a series of events, but through a constructive analysis of how the relations of productions transformed this part of the world. How the 'history' of the Indus was shaped and how it molded into Pakistan.
I have given the 5th star in light of its enlightening experience, otherwise I do not believe many books can be worth 5 stars. Definitely a recommended read.
The book walks its reader through, not a series of events, but through a constructive analysis of how the relations of productions transformed this part of the world. How the 'history' of the Indus was shaped and how it molded into Pakistan.
I have given the 5th star in light of its enlightening experience, otherwise I do not believe many books can be worth 5 stars. Definitely a recommended read.
April 17, 2018
The Indus Saga by senior Pakistani lawyer and politician Aitzaz Ahsan provides the reader with a plethora of historical information regarding the Indus region and India. Ahsan sees the 'Indus man' as being inherently different from his Indian counterpart. The book starts from the bronze age and continues till the formation of Pakistan in 1947. In between, Ahsan recounts the major happenings in India and the Indus.
Overall, the book helped me broaden and enhance my knowledge of the sub-continent and provided me with a great deal of understanding of the region in which we live.
Overall, the book helped me broaden and enhance my knowledge of the sub-continent and provided me with a great deal of understanding of the region in which we live.
December 27, 2010
Well written but I felt the facts were stretched to fit the author's pet theory (his theory completely ignored East Pakistan i.e. Bangladesh just because it didn't fit agree with his hypothesis that modern day Pakistan ("Sind") and India ("Hind") have always been different countries culturally.
April 29, 2020
Heavy but a must read. This topic should be further researched and explored.
April 15, 2022
A lay man like me would love to sneak in history of his region told to the point and in simple words and read in short time. Earlier what stopped me from knowing my history was hard hitting writers and their complex content. Indus saga is simple and short but brief in its meaning introduction of Indus region (pakistan). I think one really feels crisis of identity in this region and this book is the tool to overcome that crisis.
March 13, 2023
Credit to the author for imparting an impetus to the conversation around the civilisational underpinnings, borne out over centuries of experience, of the modern nation state of Pakistan - and therefore, of India and Bangladesh as well.
February 18, 2019
Not because it's a bad book, but because I know Aitzaz Ahsan could have done a much better job.
August 25, 2022
i really liked it, Recommended.
January 8, 2023
Great material but the writing seems hurried, patchy and sometimes condescending. Worth a read though
December 25, 2024
Indus Saga is a mammoth yet accessible read. The central thesis presented is that the modern-day Pakistan is distinct from mainland India in its culture, history, linguistic, and socioeconomic structure. Mr. Aitezaz argues that the Indus River forms a kind of rigid geographical boundary, separating a region historically more aligned with Central Asia than with the rest of India. Thus making the case for two lands, two peoples, and ultimately, two states.
The book is divided into three sections. 1) Prehistory, offering historical case studies from the Greek invasions through to the Arab conquests and the Sultanates. Mr. Aitezaz suggests a historical unity between the Oxus and Indus regions, framing the divide as longstanding. 2) section focuses on the British colonial period, explaining the decline of the Mughals and the rise of elite capture and exploitative systems under British rule. 3) The pre-partition era, from the Battle of Plassey to the 1946 elections - this 190-year period eradicated communal coexistence and made Partition "natural and primordial" and coming ''into a full circle.''
Personally, I’m don't fully buy into the main thesis. While the Marxist framework he uses is insightful, some of his claims feel overly sweeping and deterministic. The notion of a distinct, primordial divide between the Indus and India doesn’t fully hold up, and the argument sometimes feels too ideologically driven, cherry-picking historical examples to support a presupposed conclusion. The idea of a monolithic Indus identity, destined to separate, overlooks the region's complex; evolving nature and the diffusion of cultures over time.
Moreover, Ahsan’s reliance on the outdated Aryan invasion theory, which modern scholarship has largely moved away from in favor of migration theory, weakens his argument. His Marxist lens becomes repetitive and overbearing at times. The book also presents the Indus region as a homogenous entity, which oversimplifies the diverse historical realities.
Finally, the significance of the Gurdaspur Kathiawar salient is not adequately corroborated - as to why give it such an importance? Thus, leaving an important part of the thesis underdeveloped. And if the partition was primordial and destined in a full circle, why mass displacements, confusion, and chaotic and bloody events accompanied partition?
Overall, Indus Saga is a provocative and bold work, as in the words of Khushwant Singh, but it raises as many questions as it answers, leaving gaps while oversimplifying the complexity of history.
One addition: In his 1953 speech, Mumtaz Daultana, who primarily advocated for the One Unit system, made the same arguments about the exclusive Indus history, due to its geography. On this basis, he put forward the proposal of a unitary state model. He argued that a federal type of government was unsuitable, and it was this very thought that made the creation of One Unit possible later in October 1955.
The book is divided into three sections. 1) Prehistory, offering historical case studies from the Greek invasions through to the Arab conquests and the Sultanates. Mr. Aitezaz suggests a historical unity between the Oxus and Indus regions, framing the divide as longstanding. 2) section focuses on the British colonial period, explaining the decline of the Mughals and the rise of elite capture and exploitative systems under British rule. 3) The pre-partition era, from the Battle of Plassey to the 1946 elections - this 190-year period eradicated communal coexistence and made Partition "natural and primordial" and coming ''into a full circle.''
Personally, I’m don't fully buy into the main thesis. While the Marxist framework he uses is insightful, some of his claims feel overly sweeping and deterministic. The notion of a distinct, primordial divide between the Indus and India doesn’t fully hold up, and the argument sometimes feels too ideologically driven, cherry-picking historical examples to support a presupposed conclusion. The idea of a monolithic Indus identity, destined to separate, overlooks the region's complex; evolving nature and the diffusion of cultures over time.
Moreover, Ahsan’s reliance on the outdated Aryan invasion theory, which modern scholarship has largely moved away from in favor of migration theory, weakens his argument. His Marxist lens becomes repetitive and overbearing at times. The book also presents the Indus region as a homogenous entity, which oversimplifies the diverse historical realities.
Finally, the significance of the Gurdaspur Kathiawar salient is not adequately corroborated - as to why give it such an importance? Thus, leaving an important part of the thesis underdeveloped. And if the partition was primordial and destined in a full circle, why mass displacements, confusion, and chaotic and bloody events accompanied partition?
Overall, Indus Saga is a provocative and bold work, as in the words of Khushwant Singh, but it raises as many questions as it answers, leaving gaps while oversimplifying the complexity of history.
One addition: In his 1953 speech, Mumtaz Daultana, who primarily advocated for the One Unit system, made the same arguments about the exclusive Indus history, due to its geography. On this basis, he put forward the proposal of a unitary state model. He argued that a federal type of government was unsuitable, and it was this very thought that made the creation of One Unit possible later in October 1955.
December 9, 2020
I used to think that we had been ruled by many kings, maharajas, foreign invaders but not once did our people resist them.
But in the very beginning of the book, the author has raised this question and then throughout the book he has referred to many historical facts, events, personalities, communities who actually resisted against them and tried to save their land.
Untiring Aryans, the savage Huns, the "Conqueror of the World" Alexander, the unrelenting invaders from Gazni and Afghanistan, the "Scourge of the Earth". Taimur, the militarily wise Mughals, and the ferocious Nadir Shah had to face immense resistance in the Indus region.
This book is one of the most unbiased book ever written on this region with detailed and thorough information. The book covers event from the very beginning till the independence of Pakistan and India in 1947. Recommended 👍
But in the very beginning of the book, the author has raised this question and then throughout the book he has referred to many historical facts, events, personalities, communities who actually resisted against them and tried to save their land.
Untiring Aryans, the savage Huns, the "Conqueror of the World" Alexander, the unrelenting invaders from Gazni and Afghanistan, the "Scourge of the Earth". Taimur, the militarily wise Mughals, and the ferocious Nadir Shah had to face immense resistance in the Indus region.
This book is one of the most unbiased book ever written on this region with detailed and thorough information. The book covers event from the very beginning till the independence of Pakistan and India in 1947. Recommended 👍
August 17, 2012
Why quote so much historical fact in support of so blatantly ahistorical a figure as the "Indus person". A presentist reading of the history of the Indus valley, which is as lacking in nuance as the Two-Nation Theory.
May 20, 2012
amazing book .has covered everything .very well written .but the only reason that i have not given it 5 star is that the author is very biased.
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews