 A strange historical anomaly is sitting in plain sight. The Western world is pretty oblivious to this anomaly, so we are going to try to cover this from a non-biased point of view. Okay? Here it goes. Firstly, you must excuse the overuse of the word India, this can't be helped. Secondly, what is India? Well, India is India, right? Not exactly. The country we know as India is modern India and in fact ancient India incorporates a far larger reach and infrastructure and actually includes an enormity of history from surrounding countries like Pakistan, for example, modern India being the heart of ancient India, but nonetheless we should delve further into this anomaly. The use of the term India in the country we see today has helped spread the perception that it is the only rightful inheritor of this subcontinent's ancient legacy, but it's not. And this can lead to much confusion in years to come as Pakistan's museum in Lahore has included a section titled Ancient Pakistan, when in fact Pakistan shares the rich heritage of the ancients of this region. The exhibit includes references to the Indus Valley Civilization, the Maurya Empire, the Kushan Dynasty and even the Kalsu Empire of Rajit Singh. Recognizing history is one thing, giving it modern labels can and will be confusing. The overreaching nationalistic title of the museum might explain why its curators were reluctant to use the term ancient India for its exhibits. In such a nationalistic framework, there is only one India, the Republic of India, in this narrative the nuance of the term ancient India, which is in addition to including parts of contemporary India, also includes area of Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh is lost. In this simplistic framework, contemporary India becomes the modern day incarnation of the ancient civilization that is India. However, this phenomenon is not unique to Pakistan in its nationalist discourse. The Republic of India, which emerged after the partition of British India embraced its ancient Indian heritage, becoming the visible successor of ancient India. What helped its cause was the continuity in the names India, while on the other hand the contemporary India state drew historical continuity from its ancient past. On the other hand, its exclusive use of the name India also helped spread the perception globally that it was the only rightful inheritor of the legacy of ancient India. A fairly complicated situation exists today and global academia, the term Indian history encapsulates the history of the entire region, but in the popular imagination ancient India ends up being reduced to relating to the past of independent India. For example, the demand that the British return the co-annuer diamond to modern day India shows how historical India and contemporary India are seen as an extension of each other with Pakistan and Bangladesh completely sidelined. On the other hand, within Pakistan there has increasingly been some acknowledgement of this past. The bone of contention however has been how to refer to it and package it. While calling Pakistan part of the border, ancient India is bound to have political repercussions, referring to it as ancient Pakistan also has the potential to mislead. However, even if Pakistan today decides to change its attitude towards its Indian heritage and chooses to accommodate it in its identity, it would find it difficult to shape the global narrative that is indeed one of the successors of ancient India along with Bangladesh and India. The situation is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future and it seems the term ancient India will continue to be associated with contemporary India exclusively. You can find out more on this anomaly in the book Imagining Lahore, the city that is the city that was by Haroon Khalid. We just wanted to make you aware of this in case some of you may have been unaware. It is hard to imagine and recognize this based on the way information is displaced here in the western world. But you guys can let us know what you think below. Anyway, thank you for watching.