Post 15:
Thanks Nandibum. I know of 1 and 3.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->rajput and maratha are a conglomerate of diferent groups <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->(3) I know that Marathas and Rajputs don't form a single ethnicity (as claimed by wackypedia's hints at them being one, classifying them as being an ethnicity dubbed Shaka). Was merely trying to state that Karnatakan traditions tell of contributions to the Maratha caste, which they see as significant. This does not negate significant contributions of Indian people of other regions to the Maratha community. Just that they're not a uniform people (Shakas).
Rajputs are full of different communities too, but wackypedia, supposed scholars from the west, and Paki sites make them out to be uniform Shakas from Central Asia. And of course, people who parrot it back because they don't know better.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In fact people from all groups fought in wars and did cultivation or other works during peace times.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->(1) Yes I know that too. You can still see every village community in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka come up in arms when there's serious trouble (for example, of the missionary kind). And I'll wager that if they did that in the US, the US police would be surprised at how dangerous peaceful villagers can be.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->There were some people who were ancient kashtriyas.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->The ancient Kshatriya groups came to exist from specialisation, as did the other 3 varnas. They eventually became endogamous, probably to pass on teachings (made sense, if one views them as guilds) and eating habits, etc.
I also know that other than these ancient endogamous Kshatriya groups, later, entire communities were gained Kshatriya position. A bit of like being recognised for valour in extreme circumstances and to bring the numbers of Kshatriyas (dwindled after Islamic wars) back up. In the South there are many such communities, Reddy, Menon,...
Now for (2)
- I can accept that the Jatts would have been a population group, still genetically linked with the rest of India, but over time becoming one community as happens over large regions.
- It's new to me that they had spread all the way to Central Asia, up to the Caspian. Nevertheless, it makes sense.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->people known as jats jattae or azats lived from indus to caspian sea <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->This leads me to conclude that they originated in India and from there spread to Central Asia.
Significant time must have passed before the Shaka invasions of the 100 bc where the Shakas in question, by then speaking Iranian, were entrants from Central Asia into India. The Jatts in India would have found the Shaka culture to be as alien as the rest of us and minor or significant frictions ensued, else these incursions would have been called migrations (or merely a one-way population in-flux) not invasions.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->a wider term sythian used for other non jat groups also by Greeks <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->The Shakas, whom reliable books had consistently equated with Scythians (reliable ones still do - don't know the current state of wackypedia) in the past, were all Iranian speaking. Hence Jat or non-Jat, the people Indians and Greeks came across spoke Iranian. Still have to wonder about the Mongolian or Turkic Shakas, though they too spoke Iranian.
With reliable I mean: books from before the Age of Propaganda. The use of reliability in this case has nothing to with its accuracy, just that these books were not motivated by present day propaganda considerations (they could of course still have been motivated by the old-fashioned AIT).
Now here comes my question: why do people who host/join jattworld and the like, identify themselves with Shakas but not with the Indian Jats who had never resided in Central Asia? Why specifically Central Asian Shakas? How do they know that they don't have Indian Jatt ancestry? And what is left of Central Asian Shaka Jatt culture to identify with? It seems like some political ploy. Paki sites promote the same information. Unsurprisingly, they're seriously anti-Hindu. Now with propaganda sites set up to assign alien origins for Jats, Rajputs and Marathas (the latter ignorantly treated as an ethnicity), the problems might grow out of hand.
I think, whatever Indians' opinion of the AIT, whether they believe in it or not, it has left a still indelible mark on their self-esteem. Some North Indians still want some mythical creatures called Aryans to exist. Whether they think these beings were white or North Indian looking is all the difference in consideration between them and the traditional AIT people. Indian scriptures do not speak of a difference from north to south. They speak of a difference from West India/East Afghanistan and Iranian people.
In such a manner, it must somehow speak to the imagination of some vulnerable Jatts that they were Central Asians, in spite of the fact that most Jatts are Indian. "Anything but Indian" seems to be the driving force.
Are there are any Shakas today in Central Asia? Or did all their population drain into present day India-Pakistan regions leaving later Iranians to occupy the central Asian Iranian -stan countries? Or are the Jatts still closely related (genetically) to the Iranians of the -stans? (After all, the Iranians there still speak languages of the Iranian family. But to be honest, from watching the news, they look nothing like Jats.)
If so, won't this skew genetics data unfavourably towards the AIT position, if current Central Asians are auto-classified as European/non-Indian? Then of course the Northwest of India would show a close correlation to 'Central Asians', Jats being related to Jats.
The modern claims that the Jats did not follow the varna system are nonsense. Specialisation occurred the same in the Punjab region as it did in the rest of India. Many Jats (not all) were in the Kshatriya varna. There are exceptions. Just like the already specialised GSBs who migrated south grew and specialised once more. Not all of them are Brahmanas anymore. Some evolved to fill occupations that were not in accordance with this position. Today they merely keep the GSB (Gowda Saraswat Brahmins) title as a community name. If we lived a few thousands of years back, these non-brahmana GSBs would be grouped into the other 3 varnas.
Thanks Nandibum. I know of 1 and 3.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->rajput and maratha are a conglomerate of diferent groups <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->(3) I know that Marathas and Rajputs don't form a single ethnicity (as claimed by wackypedia's hints at them being one, classifying them as being an ethnicity dubbed Shaka). Was merely trying to state that Karnatakan traditions tell of contributions to the Maratha caste, which they see as significant. This does not negate significant contributions of Indian people of other regions to the Maratha community. Just that they're not a uniform people (Shakas).
Rajputs are full of different communities too, but wackypedia, supposed scholars from the west, and Paki sites make them out to be uniform Shakas from Central Asia. And of course, people who parrot it back because they don't know better.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In fact people from all groups fought in wars and did cultivation or other works during peace times.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->(1) Yes I know that too. You can still see every village community in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka come up in arms when there's serious trouble (for example, of the missionary kind). And I'll wager that if they did that in the US, the US police would be surprised at how dangerous peaceful villagers can be.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->There were some people who were ancient kashtriyas.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->The ancient Kshatriya groups came to exist from specialisation, as did the other 3 varnas. They eventually became endogamous, probably to pass on teachings (made sense, if one views them as guilds) and eating habits, etc.
I also know that other than these ancient endogamous Kshatriya groups, later, entire communities were gained Kshatriya position. A bit of like being recognised for valour in extreme circumstances and to bring the numbers of Kshatriyas (dwindled after Islamic wars) back up. In the South there are many such communities, Reddy, Menon,...
Now for (2)
- I can accept that the Jatts would have been a population group, still genetically linked with the rest of India, but over time becoming one community as happens over large regions.
- It's new to me that they had spread all the way to Central Asia, up to the Caspian. Nevertheless, it makes sense.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->people known as jats jattae or azats lived from indus to caspian sea <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->This leads me to conclude that they originated in India and from there spread to Central Asia.
Significant time must have passed before the Shaka invasions of the 100 bc where the Shakas in question, by then speaking Iranian, were entrants from Central Asia into India. The Jatts in India would have found the Shaka culture to be as alien as the rest of us and minor or significant frictions ensued, else these incursions would have been called migrations (or merely a one-way population in-flux) not invasions.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->a wider term sythian used for other non jat groups also by Greeks <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->The Shakas, whom reliable books had consistently equated with Scythians (reliable ones still do - don't know the current state of wackypedia) in the past, were all Iranian speaking. Hence Jat or non-Jat, the people Indians and Greeks came across spoke Iranian. Still have to wonder about the Mongolian or Turkic Shakas, though they too spoke Iranian.
With reliable I mean: books from before the Age of Propaganda. The use of reliability in this case has nothing to with its accuracy, just that these books were not motivated by present day propaganda considerations (they could of course still have been motivated by the old-fashioned AIT).
Now here comes my question: why do people who host/join jattworld and the like, identify themselves with Shakas but not with the Indian Jats who had never resided in Central Asia? Why specifically Central Asian Shakas? How do they know that they don't have Indian Jatt ancestry? And what is left of Central Asian Shaka Jatt culture to identify with? It seems like some political ploy. Paki sites promote the same information. Unsurprisingly, they're seriously anti-Hindu. Now with propaganda sites set up to assign alien origins for Jats, Rajputs and Marathas (the latter ignorantly treated as an ethnicity), the problems might grow out of hand.
I think, whatever Indians' opinion of the AIT, whether they believe in it or not, it has left a still indelible mark on their self-esteem. Some North Indians still want some mythical creatures called Aryans to exist. Whether they think these beings were white or North Indian looking is all the difference in consideration between them and the traditional AIT people. Indian scriptures do not speak of a difference from north to south. They speak of a difference from West India/East Afghanistan and Iranian people.
In such a manner, it must somehow speak to the imagination of some vulnerable Jatts that they were Central Asians, in spite of the fact that most Jatts are Indian. "Anything but Indian" seems to be the driving force.
Are there are any Shakas today in Central Asia? Or did all their population drain into present day India-Pakistan regions leaving later Iranians to occupy the central Asian Iranian -stan countries? Or are the Jatts still closely related (genetically) to the Iranians of the -stans? (After all, the Iranians there still speak languages of the Iranian family. But to be honest, from watching the news, they look nothing like Jats.)
If so, won't this skew genetics data unfavourably towards the AIT position, if current Central Asians are auto-classified as European/non-Indian? Then of course the Northwest of India would show a close correlation to 'Central Asians', Jats being related to Jats.
The modern claims that the Jats did not follow the varna system are nonsense. Specialisation occurred the same in the Punjab region as it did in the rest of India. Many Jats (not all) were in the Kshatriya varna. There are exceptions. Just like the already specialised GSBs who migrated south grew and specialised once more. Not all of them are Brahmanas anymore. Some evolved to fill occupations that were not in accordance with this position. Today they merely keep the GSB (Gowda Saraswat Brahmins) title as a community name. If we lived a few thousands of years back, these non-brahmana GSBs would be grouped into the other 3 varnas.