02-11-2007, 03:52 PM
Hauma,
<!--QuoteBegin-Hauma Hamiddha+Feb 11 2007, 03:31 AM-->QUOTE(Hauma Hamiddha @ Feb 11 2007, 03:31 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->........
-The point whether rAjpUts are related to the ancient kShatriyas of the itihAsas cannot be easily settled.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why not? Mahabharata Book 13, Chap's 118,119,120 makes it abundantly clear where kshatriya and rajaputra are interchangably used.
<!--QuoteBegin-Hauma Hamiddha+Feb 11 2007, 03:31 AM-->QUOTE(Hauma Hamiddha @ Feb 11 2007, 03:31 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->But it is clear that colonial historians have attempted to delegitmize the rAjpUts by calling them descendents of hUnas and so on.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes. W.r.t Hunas lack of good historical records have led to lot of conjecture and speculation.
a) It is recorded by Majumdar that Skandagupta had a decisive win over Huns in middle of fifth century A.D. He also records that the defeat was such that for next 50 years no more Hun incursion into India.
After defetaing the Huns he took the title of Vikramaditya.
b) Skand died in 467 A.D. His successor Purugupta's son Buddhagupta ruled from 477 A.D. to 500 A.D. without a rival and his kingdom was peaceful and prosperous.
c) Then Maitrakas who were generals of Gupta empire made there province of Vallabhi hereditary in beginning of 6th century A.D.
d) It is recorded at an incsription dated 510 A.D. in Eran (Saugor District, Madhya Pradesh):
the mighty king, the glorious Bhanugupta, the bravest man on the earth fought a battle in which his feudatory chief Goparaja was killed and the latter's wife with him in the same funeral pyre - the earliest epigraphic record of the Sati rite in India. It is speculated that Goparaja might be a Huna but no one is sure. With a name like Goparaja it is highly unlikely that he is a Huna.
e) At the beginning of 6th century what historians are sure of is that White Huns, Hepthalites, overran the Persian empire and killed Firuz the king. But no details of the further progress of the Huns into India, and the opposition, if any, offered by the Gupta empire at the frontier are known to us.
f) It is also recorded that Yashodharman defeated Mihirkula, a shiv worshipper, in 528 A.D. Note if Mihirkula was really a Hun why would he be a Shiva worshipper?
g) The presence of Huns in India in 6th century is akin to Greeks recording that "India was a satrap" of Persian empire at the time of Alexander, which we know is patently false. Similarly there was never any period of time where large parts of India were ruled by Huns.
h) And most importantly the central asians have statistically no contribution to the genes of Indian castes as Sahoo a genetecist has demonstrated.
i) Lastly similarity in names does not mean common origin.
So any theory regarding Hunas being absorbed into rajput hood is patently false.
-Digvijay
<!--QuoteBegin-Hauma Hamiddha+Feb 11 2007, 03:31 AM-->QUOTE(Hauma Hamiddha @ Feb 11 2007, 03:31 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->........
-The point whether rAjpUts are related to the ancient kShatriyas of the itihAsas cannot be easily settled.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why not? Mahabharata Book 13, Chap's 118,119,120 makes it abundantly clear where kshatriya and rajaputra are interchangably used.
<!--QuoteBegin-Hauma Hamiddha+Feb 11 2007, 03:31 AM-->QUOTE(Hauma Hamiddha @ Feb 11 2007, 03:31 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->But it is clear that colonial historians have attempted to delegitmize the rAjpUts by calling them descendents of hUnas and so on.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes. W.r.t Hunas lack of good historical records have led to lot of conjecture and speculation.
a) It is recorded by Majumdar that Skandagupta had a decisive win over Huns in middle of fifth century A.D. He also records that the defeat was such that for next 50 years no more Hun incursion into India.
After defetaing the Huns he took the title of Vikramaditya.
b) Skand died in 467 A.D. His successor Purugupta's son Buddhagupta ruled from 477 A.D. to 500 A.D. without a rival and his kingdom was peaceful and prosperous.
c) Then Maitrakas who were generals of Gupta empire made there province of Vallabhi hereditary in beginning of 6th century A.D.
d) It is recorded at an incsription dated 510 A.D. in Eran (Saugor District, Madhya Pradesh):
the mighty king, the glorious Bhanugupta, the bravest man on the earth fought a battle in which his feudatory chief Goparaja was killed and the latter's wife with him in the same funeral pyre - the earliest epigraphic record of the Sati rite in India. It is speculated that Goparaja might be a Huna but no one is sure. With a name like Goparaja it is highly unlikely that he is a Huna.
e) At the beginning of 6th century what historians are sure of is that White Huns, Hepthalites, overran the Persian empire and killed Firuz the king. But no details of the further progress of the Huns into India, and the opposition, if any, offered by the Gupta empire at the frontier are known to us.
f) It is also recorded that Yashodharman defeated Mihirkula, a shiv worshipper, in 528 A.D. Note if Mihirkula was really a Hun why would he be a Shiva worshipper?
g) The presence of Huns in India in 6th century is akin to Greeks recording that "India was a satrap" of Persian empire at the time of Alexander, which we know is patently false. Similarly there was never any period of time where large parts of India were ruled by Huns.
h) And most importantly the central asians have statistically no contribution to the genes of Indian castes as Sahoo a genetecist has demonstrated.
i) Lastly similarity in names does not mean common origin.
So any theory regarding Hunas being absorbed into rajput hood is patently false.
-Digvijay