Nhamaskhar brothers and sisters
First of all would like to say, this is a top website. So much crap out there said against Hindus and India in general, it's refreshing to see a website that tackles the lies and censorship of false Indian history.
Basically, as most of you are probably aware, there has been especially in the past few years, many Indian Tribal groups claiming to be descendents of the shaka's and kushans. One such group r the jats. Most of the arguments they've put forward, in support of being foreign to India r baseless and can be ripped apart and challenged with ease. However, along with this group, others such as gujjars, ahirs, rajputs and so on have started to claim foreign descent. Again, all of their arguments in favour of these claims r easily challanged and ripped apart.
However, my question is. In many history books/websites, we hear of these shaka's and kushans invading India. First of all, to what extent is this true? Most of this history stems from racist views held by colonial minds in order to degrade India's true history. From my own research, what i find hard to understand is, if these shaka's and kushana's did invade, where r they now? What style of archeitecture did they leave? What was their language and what happened to their scripts? It seems to be the case, that these invading groups lost all their culture, and yet were supposed to be the dominant group therefore should have been the one's with the dominant culture.
Ive been reading a book by Sandhya Jain about various Indian tribes. In the book, their is a chapter on various tribes that fought on both sides of the MahaBharat war. In this list r mentioned shaka's and huns. Could these shaka's and huns have been native to India.?
Will be good to hear ur opinions and views.
Namaste, I am no expert but I found the following post from one of the old threads archived which discusses whether Rajputs are indeed descendants of Huns as many historians now claim, hope it helps:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Mr. Yashwant Malaiya's writings
Were Parmaras a branch of the Rashtrakuta clan?
A theory that has been taken for granted is the view that the Rajputs are descendants of Huns etc, and the "agnikunda" of Abu, represented a rite by which the Brahmins elevated them to Kshatriyas, needs critical examination.
The view was presented by Tod in his "Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan" written in 1832, and through repeated uncritical acceptance by generations of historians, it is now taken for granted.
Since the work of Tod, a great deal of archaeological evidence has become available, which clearly show that Rajputs did not originate through the "Agnikunda" ceremony, and that some of the major Rajputs clans actually originated from the Karnataka region. However the established view is part of the text-books, and earlier historians are often cited to support the theory.
Let us see how the historians have themselves added to a myth which has gradually evolved.
As an example let us consider Basham. In "The wonder that was India", 1954, he writes:
"Hunas destroyed or dispersed the older marital tribes of Rajasthan and their place was taken by newcomers, probably acclimatized invaders, from whom most of the rajput clans of the middle ages were descended. ... and the Rajputs, in later times, the kshatriays par excellence, were no doubt largeley descended from such invaders."
I noticed that in "Early India - From The Origins to AD 1300" Romilla Thapar does not question the view even though it came out in 2002. Let me identify the phases of this myth in reverse chronological order.
1. In the current phase, the view is that the Rajputs are descendants of the Huns etc, and agnikunda of Abu represented a purification ceremony.
2. The view represented by Bhavishya Purana is that FOUR rajput clans were created from the agni-kunda of Abu: Pramar (Paramar), Chapuhani (Chahaman or Chauhan), Shukla (Chalukya or Solanki) and Parihar. It says that they were created to annihilate the Buddhists during the time of Ashoka. It is not really possible to date Bhavisha Purana with any degree of certainly, but some part of it are of very late origin.
3. The view in Prathviraj Raso that Vasishtha created THREE rajput clans from the agni-kunda, Pratihar, Chalukya and Panwar (Parwar). The date of Prathviraj Raso as it is available to day, is very controversial, the language is too modern to be the composition of Chandabaradai during Pratviraj's period.
4. Going back further, we come to the Udaipur prashasti and some of the later records. The Udaipur prashasti (from Udaipur, Vidisha) which gives the geneology of the Parmars of Malava, mentions the legend that is frequently mentioned later in Parmara records. Accroding to this, Vishwamitra had taken the cow belonging to Vasishtha. Vasishtha created a warrior from the agnikund at Abu, who was named "Paramar" because he was to kill the others, to get the cow back. This undated prashasti is from the period of Parmar Udayaditya who ruled during 1070 1093. The same legend is given in Vasantgarh inscription of 1042 AD. Thus the original version of the legend applied ONLY to Parmars. It should be noted that Vasistha was the gotra of the Parmars.
5. We then come to the very origin of the Abu agnikunda legend. Padmagupta, who wrote Navasahasanka-charita in about 1005, in praise of his patron, Parmar Sindhuraj (about 995-1055), the predecessor of the famous Bhojadeva (about 1000-1055). There is no mention of the legend before Padmagupta. In fact, Parmar records prior to Sindhuraj point to another view of the origin of Parmars. I will mention about this view soon.
The Parmar copperplates and inscriptions are available in "Inscriptions of the Paramaras, Chandellas, Kachchhapaghatas and two minor Dynasties", which is part 2 of the 3-part Vol III of Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, edited in 1974 by H.V. Trivedi (published in1991).
We have seen that Padmagupta in his Navasahasanka-charita (about 1005) was the first to present the myth about creation of "Paramara", the ancestor of Paramaras, by Vasishtha through the Agnikunda at Abu. Later the legend started appearing in Paramara inscriptions started with the 1042 inscriptions at Vasantagarh.
What do the earlier Parmara records tell us?
The earliest Parmara records are the two grants of Siyaka, each inscribed on two plates, found at Harsola in Gujarat. Both of them mention the same date in 949 AD. One grants a village to a Brahmin Lallopadhayaya, the second to his son Nina
Dikshita. Much of the text is the same.
They mention Akalavarsha (with titles Prathvivallabha Shrivallabha), son of Amoghavarsha. They then mention "tasmin-kule ... jaatah vappaiya rajeti nrapah...", and mention Vairisimha and Siyaka. Simple meaning of this text would be that Vakpatiraj was born in the family of the Amoghavarsha and Akalavarsha. These are obviously Rastrakuta soverigns of Manyakheta, either Amoghavarsha I (814-878) and Krishna II (878-914), or Amoghavarsha III (934-939) and Krishna III (939-966). Apparently at this time Siyaka was a mandalika (a feudatory) of the Rashtrakutas. Thus would make the Paramaras a branch of the Rashtrakitas. That is the view of some of the historians. Others have found the text too disconcerting and have proposed that there is a lacuna in the text and that tasmin-kule refers to some other family, mention of which was left out by mistake of the engraver.
However these are two nearly identical copper-plates with the same initial text. The second copper-plate is obviously in a different hand (I will provide a photograph). It is not likely that two engravers would make exactly the same mistake. We must take the text as it is.
The view that initially the Paramaras regarded themselves to be a branch of the Rashtrakutas is supported by the copper-plate grants of Vakpatiraja. His grants found in vicinities of Dhar (975) and Ujjain (980,982,986) give Vakpatiraj the
titles Prathvivallabha and Shrivallabha and gives Amoghavarsha as his other name (amoghavarsha- parabhidhana-shrimat-vakpatiraj).
A question arises - if the Paramaras were descendants of the Rashtrakutas, why would they give up a famous lineage and start accepting the legend given by Padmagupta?
Before we examine the chronology of the Rashtrakuta-Paramara interaction, we should consider the fact that both Chalukyas (Solanki) and Rasthrakutas (Rathor) who settled in North, eventually forgot their southern origin, even though they kept
their original names. Mularaja established the Chalukya branch at Anahilapatan in 943. The Rashtrakutas under Krishna II had reconquered Gujarat and Indra III made land grants from Navasari in 914. However to the people in the north, the rulers of Karnataka were just obscure houses, not mentioned in any important texts, their memoty did not add any glory. The bards trace the origin of Rathors (houses of Jodhpur and Bikaner) from Kannauj, and Solankis from the the agni- kunda of Abu, which is the prevailing popular view.
The Rashtrakuta king Krishna III dies in 967 causing internal weakness. Paramara Siyaka exploted the opportunity to expand. He invaded the kingdom of Rashtrakuta Khottiga (967-972) and even plundered Manyakheta. In 973, the Chalukyas of Kalyani defeated the Rashtrakutas. The last Rashtrakuta king Indra III retired to Shravanbelgola where he died in sallekhana meditation in 982.
Since the imperial house of Rashtrakutas did not exist, Parmara Vakpatiraja regarded himself as the successor to the Rastrakuta house and took their titles. However the glory of imperial Rashtrakutas was soon forgotten in North making way for creation of the Abu agnikunda myth based on the name "Paramar".
I think there is no need to imagine a lacuna in the Harsola grants.
http://indiaforumarchives.blogspot.com/200...an-history.html<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
A thing that I noticed is that nowadays many groups are claiming foreign descent (Jats, Rajputs etc), this was I believe first promoted by the colonial writers and this is another Aryan Invasion theory in the making if we don't thouroughly investigate this before it becomes a gospel truth. On the Dalistan site there is crap about creating Shakastan etc which again shows us how our enemies are again trying to create a sencond Aryan Invasion type theory, Hindus should be cautitious and should demolish any of these myths before they become prominant.
10-02-2005, 12:39 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-02-2005, 01:30 PM by dhu.)
Rising,
The problem you cited is compounded by the fact that such entities as the Yueh Zi (kushanas) and scythii were originally of mongolian stock; their material culture closely corresponded to that of the huns, mongols, etc. All of the these groups are known to periodocally and regularly sweep across asia from E to W). The problem, I believe, is that these mongolian divisions were accultured to the Persian/Indic ways as they entered C Asia/Gandhara/etc. Therefore, we have such entities as Saka-Haumavarga, etc.
Indians will have to simultaneously disprove the "AIT for Mongolia/Altai", as they try to reestablish nativity of Jats, Rajputs, etc... Yueh Zi, Scythii, etc, have been falsely appropriated as aboriginal russians..
Rising,
Could you please share the arguments (possibly with links) and how you rip them apart?
Thanks
From another list on the topic of Rajputs originating from a fire ceremony named agnikund on Mt.Abu where they were supposed to have been granted dwijahood by Brahmins since they were foreigners:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The origin of the Agnikund legend can be traced excactly.
The original event was related to the Parmar clan (not all the
Rajputs), who were actually descendants of the Rashtrakutas.
The copper-plates of Harsola, that are from 949 AD give the descent
of Bappairaja (Vakpatiraja) from Akalavarsha. Akalavarsha was a
famous Rashtrakuta king.
A later inscription of Vakpatiraj II of the Parmara dynasty mentions
that the king bore titles Amoghavarsha, Prathvivallabha and
Shrivallabha. There are Rashtrakuta titles. This Vakpatiraj II was
an uncle of famous Raja Bhoja.
The legend first apears in Navasahasanka charitra of Padmaguta (11th
cent AD) mentions the first of the Parmara clan. It gives an
account. Vashishta created a hero from his agnikunda and said: "you
will become a lord of the kings called Paramara". This hero's son
Upendra performed many yajnas. His successor was Vakpatiraj I.
It appears that Upendra, the predecessor of Vakpatiraj, was the one
who was involved with several sacrifices. It is likely that these
sacrifices form the core of the legend.
Further developments of legend can be seen in Prathivaraj Raso
(which mentions Parihar, Chalukya and Parmar) and Bhavishya Purana
(which mentions Parmars, Chauhans, Parihars and Solankis).
It is time to recognize the legend as legend. There was a Rajput
clan associated with the yajna at Abu (Parmar), but Rajputs did not
originate from it.
Chaulukya and Rashtrakuta had a long history in Southern India even
before this yajna.
Yashwant
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivili...n/message/50613<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
"Rising,
The problem you cited is compounded by the fact that such entities as the Yueh Zi (kushanas) and scythii were originally of mongolian stock; their material culture closely corresponded to that of the huns, mongols, etc. All of the these groups are known to periodocally and regularly sweep across asia from E to W). The problem, I believe, is that these mongolian divisions were accultured to the Persian/Indic ways as they entered C Asia/Gandhara/etc. Therefore, we have such entities as Saka-Haumavarga, etc.
Indians will have to simultaneously disprove the "AIT for Mongolia/Altai", as they try to reestablish nativity of Jats, Rajputs, etc... Yueh Zi, Scythii, etc, have been falsely appropriated as aboriginal russians.."
Interesting. Thing is, can we even say for sure they were of mongolian stock? I mean take the tocharians. They're known to be from roughly the same area as yueh zi. But these people were said to be blonde haired and blue eyed, basically european looking. However this could simply be more rubbish.
Some people even describe the shaka's as being a persian tribe. And in ur opinion what is/was the standard mongolian build? I presume they r short in height, oriental features and yellow skinned. If we look at these jats/gujars, they dont seem to resemble mongolians at all.
"Rising,
Could you please share the arguments (possibly with links) and how you rip them apart?
Thanks "
Sure. The following websites r some of the worst propagaters of this shaka/kushan rubbish.
www.jatland.com www.jattworld.com www.dalitstan.com
www.jatt.com yahoo jat history group
The above are just a small example. There are many more websites, running into their hundreds claiming jats/rajputs/gujars r descended from foreign tribes.
Now, u may ask why we should be bothered about such claims. Ok. First of all, most of these claims were first talked about by the british colonialists. No one had ever before them even mentined shaka's or kushan's developing into todays jats or rajputs. Secondly, the theory was developed to divide Indians. The theory was developed into a racial concept claiming these various groups r more physically superior to the native population. A theory essentially to divide the Indian people. And if u take a look at the websites above, they take great satisfaction in trying to claim that jats and so on r physically superior to the other tribes. (which is a load of rubbish) These shaka theories r on par with the ait theory. A theory creating to deny India and it's people of it's truthful history.
About ripping their arguments apart, here are some of the factors i discuss.
First of all. The question has to be asked what happened to the culture of these so called superior invading tribes? Usually when an invader attacks, it is them that pushes their own culture, things like language, dress code, religion and so on, on to the natives. What happened to their culture? Secondly, it seems like they have made no contribution, or influenced the natives in any way at all.
Also, it is claimed that these invading shaka's colonised most of north India down to Gujrat. Now, in that particular period, these tribes would have hardly numbered a large population at all. How did they capture and colonise such a large land mass and it's much increased population and not leave a significant mark on it's land and their native people? It just doesnt make sense at all.
Then we can look at physical features. A hell of a lot of these jats and Rajputs in particular, r as dark as n****s. What happened to their original features? These jats claim they like to marry within their own communities, if this was the case,
they would have by large kept their original features. A comparison can be made with parsis and the jews that arrived in India. Now some of these groups arrived in India at a very early stage, parsis in particular, they've managed to retain their features and cultural/religious identity, why couldnt these shaka's or kushans keep them? Like one of the above contributers said, the shaka's/kushans were from
the mongolia/china area. Chances are that they had oriental features. How many of these jats/rajputs have such features? Next to nothing is the answer.
The above are just some of the common sense points that i use when debating with these fanatical colonial theory propagating jats such as ravi chaudry on jat land.
10-10-2005, 03:31 AM
(This post was last modified: 10-10-2005, 03:37 AM by dhu.)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->However this could simply be more rubbish.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Rinsing, what the eurocentrists do not tell you is that the mummification process changes the color of hair. Even Tutankhamen had red hair which led to alot of racist speculation of blonde invaders teaching the Egyptians how to build pyramids . These people that you referenced are close to the Ainu phenotype who are originally from SE Asia and who have also been appropriated by eurocentrists. Also all of their salient technologies such as tattooing, boat burials, geometric designs are from SE Asia. These people were never strong enough to launch Genghis Khan type invasions which have been the prerogative of only the Mongolians within asia. Within India, even the mongolian type incursions would have dissipated without issue. Mongolia and its altai extension is not too distant from india's northern border.
Saka as a Persian tribe is the next best thing the eurocentrics have propped up after their aboriginal russian theory fell apart. Their latest salvo in this regard is Buddha Sakyamuni as a Persian nobleman!!
You should not include Rajputs with these groups...there is not a single Rajput website that propagates a foreign origin theory. Rajputs are staunch Hindus and complete nationalists.
As for this Ravi Chaudury he does not represent all Jats...he trawls around on many forums spewing hatred against Brahmans and Rajputs. He is trying to glorify his own community for political reasons. You'll find this joker going on and on about nasal index, DNA etc.
This Saka-Kushan rubbish does not even apply for my clan, the Gulerias, or any other Rajput clan in Himachal Pradesh. We are a branch of the famous Katoch clan whose antiquity goes back thousands of years to the ancient republic of Trigarta. Our ancestor Raja Susharma Chandra fought in the Mahabharat War (even today the Gulerias and Katoches use the same ancient surname Chand). The Trigartas are mentioned again and again in the ancient Hindu texts and their home is the Kangra valley...to this day the Katoch clan inhabits that valley. See the Katoch lineage at http://www.uq.net.au/~zzhsoszy/ips/k/kangra.html.
For a more realistic origin of Rajputs check this pdf file: http://www.airavat.com/Guerrilla%20Warfare.pdf
It says: "The destruction of the old Hindu kingdoms in North India however cleared the way for a new phenomenon that would dominate Indian history for the next six hundred years---the Rajputs. With titles of Rana, Rai, or Rawal these Rajaputra[2] families ruled small estates and controlled outlying forts in the old kingdoms---in Ajmer the Rajaputras were all Chauhans while in Kannauj they belonged to various clans that had formerly ruled that kingdom or had migrated there from other parts of India. With the simultaneous demise of those two kingdoms and their ruling families these Rajputs now became the first line of defense against further Muslim expansion after 1192.
[2]Literally King's son i.e. Prince, this title was known since ancient times; the Buddha was called a Rajaputra; Harshvardhan of Thanesar called himself a Rajaputra before succeeding his brother on the throne of Kannauj. The other words for princes in North India were Rajanya, Rajkumar and Yuvraj but by the time of the Pratihars (Circa 8th Century) Rajaputra had also come to designate an administrative office in several Northern and Central Indian dynasties."
So when talking about Rajputs you have to see the origin of the word and not the people since they are of the same stock as other Indians. And with regard to the Saka-Kushans it goes on to say: "At the start of the Common Era the Sakas (Scythians) and Kushans (Yeuh-chi) from Central Asia had established their kingdoms in northwestern India. <b>These Saka-Kushans were the ancestors of the Turks </b>and they used both the composite bow and the curved sword called the scimitar---however the blade of this sword was very broad. <b>The Indian warrior clans, ancestors of the Rajputs, adopted these new weapons and eventually overthrew the invaders from different parts of North India[39]. </b>Inscriptions and statues from that period depict warriors astride horses carrying these weapons while paying homage to their clan-goddess.
[39] According to European historians of the 19th Century the Rajputs were descended from these same Sakas and Kushans! However they did not cite actual evidence to back these claims."
So you see there was no real evidence cited by the European historians...the Saka-Kushans were foreigners who had a cultural impact on the local people but they were eventually defeated and overthrown.
10-12-2005, 05:18 AM
(This post was last modified: 10-12-2005, 07:52 AM by dhu.)
Physician Hippocrates on the Scythians:
-lacking body hair
-"tawny" (tan) skinned
-"fat" (the yellowish tinge of mongoloids is due to an extra fat layer in the skin)
-stocky
-eunuchoid-type (hairless?)
-always on horseback
-specifically differentiated as asiatics
-oxen (yak?) wagons
-etc
the sad part of all this is that the euros have falsely appropriated these people as their imaginary steppe horse-loving ancestors.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->http://classics.mit.edu/Hippocrates/airwatpl.24.24.html
In Europe there is a <b>Scythian race, called Sauromatae, </b>which inhabits the confines of the <b>Palus Maeotis, </b>and is <b>different from all other races. </b>Their women mount on horseback, use the bow, and throw the javelin from their horses, and fight with their enemies as long as they are virgins; and they do not lay aside their virginity until they kill three of their enemies, nor have any connection with men until they perform the sacrifices according to law. Whoever takes to herself a husband, gives up riding on horseback unless the necessity of a general expedition obliges her. They have no right breast; for while still of a tender age their mothers heat strongly a copper instrument constructed for this very purpose, and apply it to the right breast, which is burnt up, and its development being arrested, all the strength and fullness are determined to the right shoulder and arm.
As the other <b>Scythians </b>have a peculiarity of shape, and do not resemble any other, the same observation applies to the <b>Egyptians</b>, only that the <b>latter are oppressed by heat and the former by cold.</b> What is called the Scythian desert is a prairie, rich in meadows, high-lying, and well watered; for the rivers which carry off the water from the plains are large. There live those Scythians which are called Nomades, because they have no houses, but live in wagons. The smallest of these wagons have four wheels, but some have six; they are covered in with felt, and they are constructed in the manner of houses, some having but a single apartment, and some three; they are proof against rain, snow, and winds. The wagons are drawn by yokes of oxen, some of two and others of three, and all without horns, for they have no horns, owing to the cold. In these wagons the women live, but the men are carried about on horses, and the sheep, oxen, and horses accompany them; and they remain on any spot as long as there is provender for their cattle, and when that fails they migrate to some other place. They eat boiled meat, and drink the milk of mares, and also eat hippace, which is cheese prepared from the milk of the mare. Such is their mode of life and their customs.
In respect of the seasons and figure of body, the Scythian race, like the Egyptian, have a uniformity of resemblance, different from all other nations; they are by no means prolific, and the wild beasts which are indigenous there are small in size and few in number, for the country lies under the Northern Bears, and the Rhiphaean mountains, whence the north wind blows; the sun comes very near to them only when in the summer solstice, and warms them but for a short period, and not strongly; and the winds blowing from the hot regions of the earth do not reach them, or but seldom, and with little force; but the winds from the north always blow, congealed, as they are, by the snow, ice, and much water, for these never leave the mountains, which are thereby rendered uninhabitable. A thick fog covers the plains during the day, and amidst it they live, so that winter may be said to be always present with them; or, if they have summer, it is only for a few days, and the heat is not very strong. Their plains are high-lying and naked, not crowned with mountains, but extending upwards under the Northern Bears. The wild beasts there are not large, but such as can be sheltered underground; for the cold of winter and the barrenness of the country prevent their growth, and because they have no covert nor shelter. The changes of the seasons, too, are not great nor violent, for, in fact, they change gradually; and therefore their figures resemble one another, as they all equally use the same food, and the same clothing summer and winter, respiring a humid and dense atmosphere, and drinking water from snow and ice; neither do they make any laborious exertions, for neither body nor mind is capable of enduring fatigue when the changes of the seasons are not great. For these reasons <b>their shapes are gross and fleshy, with ill-marked joints, of a humid temperament, and deficient in tone: </b>the internal cavities, and especially those of the intestines, are full of humors; for the belly cannot possibly be dry in such a country, with such a constitution and in such a climate; but <b>owing to their fat, </b>and the <b>absence of hairs from their bodies, their shapes resemble one another, the males being all alike, and so also with the women;</b> for the seasons being of a uniform temperature, no corruption or deterioration takes place in the concretion of the semen, unless from some violent cause, or from disease.
I Will give you a strong proof of the humidity (laxity?) of their constitutions. You will find the greater part of the Scythians, and all the Nomades, with marks of the cautery on their shoulders, arms, wrists, breasts, hip-joints, and loins, and that for no other reason but the humidity and flabbiness of their constitution, for they can neither strain with their bows, nor launch the javelin from their shoulder owing to their humidity and atony: but when they are burnt, much of the humidity in their joints is dried up, and they become better braced, better fed, and their joints get into a more suitable condition. They are flabby and squat at first, because, as in Egypt, they are not swathed (?); and then they pay no attention to horsemanship, so that they may be adepts at it; and because of their sedentary mode of life; for the males, when they cannot be carried about on horseback, sit the most of their time in the wagon, and rarely practise walking, because of their frequent migrations and shiftings of situation; and as to the women, it is amazing how flabby and sluggish they are. <b>The Scythian race are tawny from the cold, and not from the intense heat of the sun, </b>for the whiteness of the skin is parched by the cold, and becomes tawny.
It is impossible that persons of such a constitution could be prolific, for, with the man, the sexual desires are not strong, owing to the laxity of his constitution, the softness and coldness of his belly, from all which causes it is little likely that a man should be given to venery; and besides, from being jaded by exercise on horseback, the men become weak in their desires. On the part of the men these are the causes; but on that of the women, they are embonpoint and humidity; for the womb cannot take in the semen, nor is the menstrual discharge such as it should be, but scanty and at too long intervals; and the mouth of the womb is shut up by fat and does not admit the semen; and, moreover, they themselves are indolent and fat, and their bellies cold and soft. From these causes the Scythian race is not prolific. Their female servants furnish a strong proof of this; for they no sooner have connection with a man than they prove with child, owing to their active course of life and the slenderness of body.
And, in addition to these, there are many eunuchs among the Scythians, who perform female work, and speak like women. Such persons are called effeminates. The inhabitants of the country attribute the cause of their impotence to a god, and venerate and worship such persons, every one dreading that the like might befall himself; but to me it appears that such affections are just as much divine as all others are, and that no one disease is either more divine or more human than another, but that all are alike divine, for that each has its own nature, and that no one arises without a natural cause. But I will explain how I think that the affection takes its rise. From continued exercise on horseback they are seized with chronic defluxions in their joints owing to their legs always hanging down below their horses; they afterwards become lame and stiff at the hip-joint, such of them, at least, as are severely attacked with it. They treat themselves in this way: when the disease is commencing, they open the vein behind either ear, and when the blood flows, sleep, from feebleness, seizes them, and afterwards they awaken, some in good health and others not. To me it appears that the semen is altered by this treatment, for there are veins behind the ears which, if cut, induce impotence; now, these veins would appear to me to be cut. Such persons afterwards, when they go in to women and cannot have connection with them, at first do not think much about it, but remain quiet; but when, after making the attempt two, three, or more times, they succeed no better, fancying they have committed some offence against the god whom they blame for the affection, they put on female attire, reproach themselves for effeminacy, play the part of women, and perform the same work as women do. This the rich among the Scythians endure, not the basest, but the most noble and powerful, owing to their riding on horseback; for the poor are less affected, as they do not ride on horses. And yet, if this disease had been more divine than the others, it ought not to have befallen the most noble and the richest of the Scythians alone, but all alike, or rather those who have little, as not being able to pay honors to the gods, if, indeed, they delight in being thus rewarded by men, and grant favors in return; for it is likely that the rich sacrifice more to the gods, and dedicate more votive offerings, inasmuch as they have wealth, and worship the gods; whereas the poor, from want, do less in this way, and, moreover, upbraid the gods for not giving them wealth, so that those who have few possessions were more likely to bear the punishments of these offences than the rich. But, as I formerly said, these affections are divine just as much as others, for each springs from a natural cause, and this disease arises among the Scythians from such a cause as I have stated. But it attacks other men in like manner, for whenever men ride much and very frequently on horseback, then many are affected with rheums in the joints, sciatica, and gout, and they are inept at venery. But these complaints befall the Scythians, and they are the most impotent of men for the aforesaid causes, and because they always wear breeches, and spend the most of their time on horseback, so as not to touch their privy parts with the hands, and from the cold and fatigue they forget the sexual desire, and do not make the attempt until after they have lost their virility. Thus it is with the race of the Scythians.
The other races in Europe differ from one another, both as to stature and shape, owing to the changes of the seasons, which are very great and frequent, and because the heat is strong, the winters severe, and there are frequent rains, and again protracted droughts, and winds, from which many and diversified changes are induced. These changes are likely to have an effect upon generation in the coagulation of the semen, as this process cannot be the same in summer as in winter, nor in rainy as in dry weather; wherefore, I think, that the figures of Europeans differ more than those of Asiatics; and they differ very much from one another as to stature in the same city; for vitiations of the semen occur in its coagulation more frequently during frequent changes of the seasons, than where they are alike and equable. And the same may be said of their dispositions, for the wild, and unsociable, and the passionate occur in such a constitution; for frequent excitement of the mind induces wildness, and extinguishes sociableness and mildness of disposition, and therefore I think the inhabitants of Europe more courageous than those of Asia; for a climate which is always the same induces indolence, but a changeable climate, laborious exertions both of body and mind; and from rest and indolence cowardice is engendered, and from laborious exertions and pains, courage. On this account the inhabitants of Europe are than the Asiatics, and also owing to their institutions, because they are not governed by kings like the latter, for where men are governed by kings there they must be very cowardly, as I have stated before; for their souls are enslaved, and they will not willingly, or readily undergo dangers in order to promote the power of another; but those that are free undertake dangers on their own account, and not for the sake of others; they court hazard and go out to meet it, for they themselves bear off the rewards of victory, and thus their institutions contribute not a little to their courage.
Such is the general character of Europe and Asia.
And there are in Europe other tribes, differing from one another in stature, shape, and courage: the differences are those I formerly mentioned, and will now explain more clearly............<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
10-12-2005, 07:42 AM
(This post was last modified: 10-12-2005, 07:46 AM by dhu.)
notice the felt pointed cap, typical of scythian art, in this turkic monument. the so-called "animal art" is also a mongol/east siberian import into europe.
http://img14.imagevenue.com/img.php?loc=lo...ic_monument.jpg
As usual, never underestimate the capacity for euro self-delusion. "Linguistic" comedy always trumps the plain and simple facts just as in the case of the indic Sindoi occupiers of Palus Maoetis (Black sea).
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythian
Priscus, the Byzantine emissary to Attila, referred to Attila's followers repeatedly as "Scythians," so some of the Huns may have had Scythian ancestry. However, since their language, Scythian, has been shown to have strong similarities to Eastern Iranian, it is most often held that the Scythians were of Iranian origin.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Rising+Oct 3 2005, 05:28 AM-->QUOTE(Rising @ Oct 3 2005, 05:28 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->"Rising,
Could you please share the arguments (possibly with links) and how you rip them apart?
Thanks "
Sure. The following websites r some of the worst propagaters of this shaka/kushan rubbish.Â
  www.jatland.com     www.jattworld.com        www.dalitstan.com
  www.jatt.com        yahoo jat history group Â
The above are just a small example. There are many more websites, running into their hundreds claiming jats/rajputs/gujars r descended from foreign tribes.
Now, u may ask why we should be bothered about such claims. Ok. First of all, most of these claims were first talked about by the british colonialists. No one had ever before them even mentined shaka's or kushan's developing into todays jats or rajputs. Secondly, the theory was developed to divide Indians. The theory was developed into a racial concept claiming these various groups r more physically superior to the native population. A theory essentially to divide the Indian people. And if u take a look at the websites above, they take great satisfaction in trying to claim that jats and so on r physically superior to the other tribes. (which is a load of rubbish) These shaka theories r on par with the ait theory. A theory creating to deny India and it's people of it's truthful history.
About ripping their arguments apart, here are some of the factors i discuss.Â
First of all. The question has to be asked what happened to the culture of these so called superior invading tribes? Usually when an invader attacks, it is them that pushes their own culture, things like language, dress code, religion and so on, on to the natives. What happened to their culture? Secondly, it seems like they have made no contribution, or influenced the natives in any way at all.Â
Also, it is claimed that these invading shaka's colonised most of north India down to Gujrat. Now, in that particular period, these tribes would have hardly numbered a large population at all. How did they capture and colonise such a large land mass and it's much increased population and not leave a significant mark on it's land and their native people? It just doesnt make sense at all.Â
Then we can look at physical features. A hell of a lot of these jats and Rajputs in particular, r as dark as n****s. What happened to their original features? These jats claim they like to marry within their own communities, if this was the case,
they would have by large kept their original features. A comparison can be made with parsis and the jews that arrived in India. Now some of these groups arrived in India at a very early stage, parsis in particular, they've managed to retain their features and cultural/religious identity, why couldnt these shaka's or kushans keep them? Like one of the above contributers said, the shaka's/kushans were from
the mongolia/china area. Chances are that they had oriental features. How many of these jats/rajputs have such features? Next to nothing is the answer.
The above are just some of the common sense points that i use when debating with these fanatical colonial theory propagating jats such as ravi chaudry on jat land.
[right][snapback]38986[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Interesting
Since my name is meing mentioned, and the group I moderate, I will invite members to visit and join
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JatHistory/
The files section , requires membership, and contains a number of On- line books and other material.
The Yahoo Jat history group,is open to all, and is academically oriented. We have a number of academics from all around the world as members.
Its stated purpose is to explore the history of Jats, which has not received quite the attention it needs from Indian or Western Historians or their Textbooks.
When History is explored, as with any other field, it will clash with ideas, views, held by those who have a vested interest- soemthing quite familiar to those who have been following the AIT/OIT debate.
Rather than simply post knee jerk reactions, members should explore History, and go a little deeper, below the surface.
If we do not do that, we fall prey to stereotypes.
if we do , the data and evidence that appears is quite surprising!
Could our member tell us how "Yueh Zhi" was prounounced, or how the name came about?
What is the basis for his claim that they were Mongoloid?
More later
Ravi Chaudhary
10-14-2005, 07:49 AM
(This post was last modified: 10-14-2005, 08:02 AM by dhu.)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->What is the basis for his claim that they were Mongoloid?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ravi, this evidence has been provided for the case of the Scythians (Saka) in the form of Hippocrates' and Byzantine specific testimony. I would think this would be much weightier evidence than arcane pronunciation exercises. Perhaps you could enlighten us if these supposed powerful Central Asian tribes ever threatened China. The Chinese seem only to have been concerned of the Mongolians. For example, did non-mongoloid Scythians ever invade China? They indeed seem to have made it all the way to Europe.
<!--QuoteBegin-dhu+Oct 14 2005, 07:49 AM-->QUOTE(dhu @ Oct 14 2005, 07:49 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->What is the basis for his claim that they were Mongoloid?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ravi, this evidence has been provided for the case of the Scythians (Saka) in the form of Hippocrates' and Byzantine specific testimony. I would think this would be much weightier evidence than arcane pronunciation exercises. Perhaps you could enlighten us if these supposed powerful Central Asian tribes ever threatened China. The Chinese seem only to have been concerned of the Mongolians. For example, did non-mongoloid Scythians ever invade China?
[right][snapback]39483[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Please tolerate my ignorance!
Now what exactly is the evidence?
Who was Hippocrates?
Byzantine evidence?
Are arcane pronounciations really irrelevant ?
Perhaps 'Archaic' would be a better term to use,, as we are talking about a fairly archaic period- the pre BCE period, over 2000 years ago.
How was "Yueh Zhi" pronounced? How did the term come about?
It may help us a little if we could understand, what it is these people called themselves?
Who exactly was/is a scythian?
What is Scythia? When was it formed?
I do have a few more questions , but could we start with these?
Thanks
Ravi
This Saka-Kushan rubbish does not even apply for my clan, the Gulerias, or any other Rajput clan in Himachal Pradesh. We are a branch of the famous Katoch clan whose antiquity goes back thousands of years to the ancient republic of Trigarta. Our ancestor Raja Susharma Chandra fought in the Mahabharat War (even today the Gulerias and Katoches use the same ancient surname Chand). The Trigartas are mentioned again and again in the ancient Hindu texts and their home is the Kangra valley...to this day the Katoch clan inhabits that valley. See the Katoch lineage at http://www.uq.net.au/~zzhsoszy/ips/k/kangra.html.
I too have a question for Ravi,
<img src='http://www.uq.net.au/~zzhsoszy/ips/k/adityadev.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
From what angle does the 488th Raja of Kangra look like a Saka-Kushan?
<img src='http://www.uq.net.au/~zzhsoszy/ips/j/uq_raghunath.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
The Raja of Jaswan, a branch of the Katoch clan above.
What does a Saka-Kushan look like anyway? <!--emo&  --><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
One more,
<img src='http://www.uq.net.au/~zzhsoszy/ips/k/kotah_brijraj.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
The present 'Maharao' of Kotah, Brijraj Singh.
Does he look like the Saka-Kushan of your dreams?<!--emo& --><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<img src='http://www.uq.net.au/~zzhsoszy/ips/b/vishvendra.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
Vishvendra Singh, HH Bharatpur, a JAT RULER! Saka-Kushan?
All of these photos are from www.uq.net.au/~zzhsoszy/ips/main.html
Nhamaskhar
guleria, some well documented points u make. Seems like chaudhary is obsessed with everything foreign. The name chaudhary itself is a legacy of musla fanatics. chaudhary, u spout your insults and hatred for Brahmins/Rajputs over the net, i urge you to insult them infront of their faces.
<!--QuoteBegin-Rising+Oct 16 2005, 11:08 PM-->QUOTE(Rising @ Oct 16 2005, 11:08 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Â Â Â Â Â Â Â chaudhary, u spout your insults and hatred for Brahmins/Rajputs over the net, i urge you to insult them infront of their faces.
[right][snapback]39615[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There are two issues here
1) you two, consider the history of the people who some call- Saka/ Kushans false.
2) I am accused of insulting "Brahmins/ Rajputs"?
Can we agree these are two issues uppermost in your minds?
Is there, are there, others?
Can you cite them?
Now, can you help us with your evidence for both 1 and 2
Best regards
Ravi Chaudhary
PS: Do you what "trigarta" means?
People may do well to read that article by Yashwant Malaiya. He gives a fairly accurate account for the origin of major Rajput clans. James Tod, I believe tried to create the idea that all Rajputs were of "Scythian" origin. The Rajput clans have considered themselves chandravamsha (descendent of the vedic pa~Ncha jana know as the yadus/ yAdavas) or sUryavamsha (descendent of the vedic kShatriya family of the ikShvAkus) or vahnikula (those purified by the fire). The first two groups are traditional kshatriya gotras, known from both north and south India. The vahnikulas origins are more mysterious. Some accounts believe they were honorary kShatriyas created by the great emperor lalitAditya to fight the turushkas and mlechChas. In Tamil Nad the vahnikulas are believed to have social descended to a prominent backward class called vanniyar after their defeat by the Moslems.
When Bajirao took Delhi it is believed that he wanted to place the rANa of Mewar as the Hindu emperor of bhArata after dethroning the Mogol. This suggests that their ikShvAku claims were well-respected widely in the country.
|
