False Histories-saka/kushana Debate

[Guest]

It is fairly obvious that the original Scythians living in Central Asia had blonde/red hair. This is proved by the mummies that have been excavated in western China and other places.

I have never seen a Jat/Gujjar with blonde/red hair.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The first two groups are traditional kshatriya gotras, known from both north and south India.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I didn't know there were any traditional Kshatriya groups in South India.
Can you tell us who are their modern day descendents?

[Guest]

Hi, I am new member of this forum and I am interested in history. I was surprised to see posts in this thread. Guleriaji, you seem to proud of your clan, thats good, but your denigrating remarks for any other community is unwholesome for this forum. I didn't know pasting two picture could be used to argue a point. What you want to prove by that. About history of Rajputs, no body is blaming your ancestors personally when somebody is stating a historical fact. Its well known that some Rajputs supported Mughals, who was mother of Jahagir?... Its true that Raja of Jaipur fought against Bahratpur and took help of muslims... but we also know history of great people like Prithviraj Chauhan and Rana Pratap... And there is history of Jats fighting against Gazni... their struggle with Mughals is well-known to people... no one can deny that... But your personal hatred of one community can't change hostory and your points may sound baseless...

BTW, its factually wrong to say that Jats didn't protect region near Delhi... Haryana is almost empty of muslims... whereas everyone knows success of Sufism in Rajasthan... but still I am not passing any judgement on any ethnic group, everyone fought well. We should not read history selectively to justify our preassumed beliefs... Indians have history of fighting among ourselves, there was patriot like Rana Pratap and there was traitor like Jaichand... Sadly, you sound more like the later.

-Som

<!--QuoteBegin-PC Guleria+Oct 16 2005, 01:15 PM-->QUOTE(PC Guleria @ Oct 16 2005, 01:15 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->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,


From what angle does the 488th Raja of Kangra look like a Saka-Kushan?


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-->
[right][snapback]39591[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

Again I had to respond. Guleriaji, you are mistaken. I spent some time in Jatland, they have pretty good account of history, no body enjoys to believe that they are from outside.... in academic debate you must consider all the evidences and analyse properly... its not wise to believe in what you like... if there are some evidences that these tribes came from outside, it shd be analysed properly rather than trashing the idea.... of course every clan should be proud of itself. RAjputs, Jats, Sikhs all have glorious history... About dalistan.com, its propaganda... totally rubbish... there are other website that claim Rajputs and Jats came from outside...
Everybody knows politics behind AIT and Indo-schythian theory...

-Som

<!--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. 
   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 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-->

[Guest]

Traitors are those who try to glorify their community by denigrating and falsifying the history of other communities—this applies to that other postor and you.

As for your other rambling speech (yawn) I’ll just repeat some of my other posts.

On the so-called Jat resistance:

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In the reign of Ala-ud-din Khalji the historian Barani writes: "The people were brought to such a state of obedience that one revenue officer would string together twelve khuts, muqaddams, and <b>chaudharies</b> together by the neck and enforce payment by blows." These Jat village headmen were so impoverished that they could not afford to buy horses or weapons; and their wives had to serve as maid-servants in the houses of Muslims to make a living.

This is your wonderful Jat resistance? A few dandas from the Turks and you grovel before them and pay revenue while your women have to become maid-servants?

<b>The fact remains that Muslim rule was fairly consistent over Delhi, Agra, Punjab, Haryana...all areas inhabited by Jats. Coincidence? And the Turks had it fairly easy over these areas...only when they attempted to invade Rajputana, South India, the Himalyan region, and Orissa were they finally defeated.</b> But even after that they continued to rule over the Jats in Delhi-Haryana until the Mughal invasion.

This shows how feeble the Jats were. Only when Aurangzeb was involved in the wars against the Marathas and Rajputs did the Jats get an opportunity to plunder and increase their resources. <b>Even then it was the patronage of Jaipur rulers that allowed them to come up...but the Jats turned against their fellow Hindu benefactors and served in the armies of Mughal generals like Safdar Jung. They weren't true to their salt (namak-haram)</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

On the origin of Rajputs:

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->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. These Saka-Kushans were the ancestors of the Turks and they used both the composite bow and the curved sword called the scimitar---however the blade of this sword was very broad. The Indian warrior clans, ancestors of the Rajputs, adopted these new weapons and eventually overthrew the invaders from different parts of North India[39]. 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.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

[quote=PC Guleria,Nov 3 2005, 01:59 PM]

The tile of thread- False Histories-saka/kushana Debate, ethnicities, is not an inappropriate topic for discussion.

The relationship between the Saka/ Kushan people and the people of the Indian Subcontinent is definitely worthy of investigation.

Who were these people, where did they live, what was their culture, what was their religion, their philosophy, where in Bharat did they settle, wt was the directions of the migrations, and invasions. When are the first attested, who are the descendants today etc etc?

As the “ Kushans” were in Central Asia, and today’s Afghanistan, it is not totally unreasonable to expect a blood and cultural link between them and the people of the Punjab, Sindh, and Rajastan etc

The direction of such a link/or cultural influence is as not important as the link itself. Getting into direction oft means getting bogged down into a sterile debate!

Two posters, Mr. Rising, post # 7, and Mr. Guleria are also upset with some sites.

From post # 7, they are listed below:

To quote:

“Sure. The following websites r some of the worst propagators 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 there hundreds claiming jats/rajputs/gujars r descended from foreign tribes.”

On the Jat question, we have a discussion, which has started on the thread “Jat History” .Perhaps he could start a thread- Rajput History


Since the sites have been listed, perhaps Mr. Guleria or Mr. Rising could post specifically why they consider these versions to be false!!!

People can also visit the sites themselves

That may be more educative!

[Guest]

Guleria, you still haven't refuted the points raised by me... that means you agree that historically Rajputs have collborated with Mughals in politics of power in 18th century... of course there was resistance too from Rajput side but come on you can't change facts by raising your voice and cursing...

I am typing a paragraph from Qanungo's book on history of Jats about how Bhishan singh collaborated with Muslim to fight against Jats of Bharatpur...

"After the death of Rajaram,... the new Raja of Amber(Jaipur), was appointed by the Emperor as faujdar of Mathura with special charge to root out Jats and take Sinsini as his own jagir. He gave the Emperor written undertaking....(details) and... Mughals stormed the fort after three hours of stubborn opposition. Jats disputed every inch of the ground and were dispersed only after losing 1500 of their men. On the imperial side 200 Mughals fell and 700 Rajputs were slain or wounded."

Do you have anything to say on that? Come on, even history textbooks praise Rajput and Mughal collaboration. Of course there was resistance too, thats why I said Rana pratap and Prithviraj... But struggle of Jats is either unknown or undermined by people who have psyche like you...

Everybody known that among all internal factors the Brahamnical society has been most resposible for the degradation of Hinduism. During Vedic period there was not rigid caste structure but it was laid down later by Brahims to their benefit.

Let me mention other historical account. Jats were not strong enough to Ghazni face to face but they used to plunder their retreating army. Every time it used to happen. After Somnath's plunder Jat ransacked Ghazni's army and took booties. Brahmins of that region asked Jats to get rid of impure idols because it is made impure by muslim and there was clash. Jats were never given proper place their deserve in Hinduism, until the work done by Swami Dyandand....

But I don't mean to spread hatred of one community... History shd be studied objectively rather than to bring your personal views in between...

Som

Traitors are those who try to glorify their community by denigrating and falsifying the history of other communities—this applies to that other postor and you.

As for your other rambling speech (yawn) I’ll just repeat some of my other posts.

On the so-called Jat resistance:

[right][snapback]40564[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

[Guest]

Guleria, you should learn something about art of agruing. There are two aspect, rhetoric(subjetive persuation) and dialectic(objective proofs). Your account of cruelity of poor farmers doesn't prove what we are discussing. It shows your mentality and hatred. If you talk of such things, you want me to list all things that were perpetuated on RAjputs, sikhs and Jats by musilm. You want me to give gory details about how Sikhs were treated by muslims in times of Teg bahadur. By giving a particular incident I can't conclude that Sikhs were not powerful enuf to charge back, they did and uprooted Afgans from Panjab. We had common enemy but its saddening to see people like you haven't learned anything about unity.

Som

<!--QuoteBegin-PC Guleria+Nov 3 2005, 01:59 PM-->QUOTE(PC Guleria @ Nov 3 2005, 01:59 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->In the reign of Ala-ud-din Khalji the historian Barani writes: "The people were brought to such a state of obedience that one revenue officer would string together twelve khuts, muqaddams, and <b>chaudharies</b> together by the neck and enforce payment by blows." These Jat village headmen were so impoverished that they could not afford to buy horses or weapons; and their wives had to serve as maid-servants in the houses of Muslims to make a living.

This is your wonderful Jat resistance? A few dandas from the Turks and you grovel before them and pay revenue while your women have to become maid-servants?
[right][snapback]40564[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Bharatvarsh]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Everybody known that among all internal factors the Brahamnical society has been most resposible for the degradation of Hinduism. During Vedic period there was not rigid caste structure but it was laid down later by Brahims to their benefit. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Seems like you learnt the lessons that the colonial masters taught you very well, merely blaming Brahmins and Brahminism is not going to help, you first show us that it was only Brahmins that degraded Hinduism and that they invented the caste system/laid it down for their benefit, even if it was only Brahmins that invented then who asked Jats to follow it, even today Jats prefer to marry with other Jats (not that there is anything wront with that) but why follow Brahminical rules like marrying within ones own Jati/caste/community when you hate Brahminism so much. It is well known that anti brahmin propaganda became very popular from the time the colonial forces came to Bharat, all the crap about caste being the cause of our defeats against invaders is just that "a big load of crap", the most prolific advance of missionaries has been among the tribals in the North East who have no caste system and the regions that were rapidly islamisised were Afghanistan and East Bengal which were influenced by Buddhism during the time of the islamic invasions.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The relationship between the Saka/ Kushan people and the people of the Indian Subcontinent is definitely worthy of investigation.

Who were these people, where did they live, what was their culture, what was their religion, their philosophy, where in Bharat did they settle, wt was the directions of the migrations, and invasions. When are the first attested, who are the descendants today etc etc?
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Yes this is interesting for sure.

You posted the picture of a statue of Kanishka in the other thread.
The head is missing.

Without the head how can you tell what race he was?
He could have been a Turko-mongol for all we know.

[Guest]

Som@
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->But I don't mean to spread hatred of one community... <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, you are doing.
I agree with Bharatvarsh. Some people or community still stick with colonial mindset and can trust twisted history created by them or whatever bring there community on top of other at the cost of degrading others..

Som,
Stick to thread topic.

[Guest]

Dear Bharatvarsh,
What I said is not influenced by colonial writings.... and I don't hate brahmins, I just said it in context of factual history... it should not be taken personally if you are brahmin... Jat follow principles of hinduism even though they didn't enjoy their deserved place in main stream hinduism... even those who work actively for hinduism agree on the point that brahmins have been responsible for degradation of hinduism... let me quote Shurdarshanji(RSS) who told this historical incident... there are many like this... and BTW I really praise RSS for great work they are doing even though media is doing its best to tarnish their image.....

"During Ranjit Singh’s time, a section of Kashmiri Muslims requested him to let them convert back to Hinduism because they realized dark realities of Islam. They were summoned near Jhelum for the ceremony for re-conversion. But then 7-8 ‘raj-purohit’(Kashmiri Pundits) stood in Jhelum water with just their head out and said if Ranjit Singh lets them convert to Hinduism they would kill themselves and sin of ‘brahmin-hatya’ would fall on Ranjit. So they had their way. By those Pundit’s arrogance and foolishness their descendants got kicked out of valley by descendants of same Muslims who wanted to come to Hinduism. They might be just small section of Muslims but I just wanted to make a point. So Hinduism should adapt itself to allow these kinds of movements."

but ultimately, our purpose is not to blame each other but move forward.... and we shd not let this discussion come in between and have feeling of hatred...
Above all we are Indians...


Som

<!--QuoteBegin-Bharatvarsh+Nov 4 2005, 02:18 AM-->QUOTE(Bharatvarsh @ Nov 4 2005, 02:18 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Everybody known that among all internal factors the Brahamnical society has been most resposible for the degradation of Hinduism. During Vedic period there was not rigid caste structure but it was laid down later by Brahims to their benefit. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Seems like you learnt the lessons that the colonial masters taught you very well, merely blaming Brahmins and Brahminism is not going to help, you first show us that it was only Brahmins that degraded Hinduism and that they invented the caste system/laid it down for their benefit, even if it was only Brahmins that invented then who asked Jats to follow it, even today Jats prefer to marry with other Jats (not that there is anything wront with that) but why follow Brahminical rules like marrying within ones own Jati/caste/community when you hate Brahminism so much. It is well known that anti brahmin propaganda became very popular from the time the colonial forces came to Bharat, all the crap about caste being the cause of our defeats against invaders is just that "a big load of crap", the most prolific advance of missionaries has been among the tribals in the North East who have no caste system and the regions that were rapidly islamisised were Afghanistan and East Bengal which were influenced by Buddhism during the time of the islamic invasions.
[right][snapback]40598[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Bharatvarsh]

That being said I don't agree with Guleriaji's denigration of Jats, most communities collaborated to some degree with Muslims and there were many from the same community who resisted the invaders till their last breath, Gokul Jat was hacked to death piece by piece for refusing to become a Muslim but where I object is the garbage about historians being biased only against Jats, till now the control of history writing has been in the hands of anti hindu communists who as Guleriaji said did not have anything good to say about any predominantly Hindu community, for example why would Irfan Habib write about Gokul Jat when he tries to cover up Muslim intolerance and even tries to make out Aurangzeb as secular, writing about Gokul Jat would only prove something that he wants to cover up so he doesn't write about him (so its not because Gokul is a Jat that he is not very well known), its because those who control history writing in India want to cover up any resistance put by any Hindu community against the invaders and if Jats are part of this resistance they will also cover up Jat resistance along with the resistance of other Hindus.

[Bharatvarsh]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->even those who work actively for hinduism agree on the point that brahmins have been responsible for degradation of hinduism... let me quote Shurdarshanji(RSS) who told this historical incident... there are many like this... and BTW I really praise RSS for great work they are doing even though media is doing its best to tarnish their image.....

"During Ranjit Singh’s time, a section of Kashmiri Muslims requested him to let them convert back to Hinduism because they realized dark realities of Islam. They were summoned near Jhelum for the ceremony for re-conversion. But then 7-8 ‘raj-purohit’(Kashmiri Pundits) stood in Jhelum water with just their head out and said if Ranjit Singh lets them convert to Hinduism they would kill themselves and sin of ‘brahmin-hatya’ would fall on Ranjit. So they had their way. By those Pundit’s arrogance and foolishness their descendants got kicked out of valley by descendants of same Muslims who wanted to come to Hinduism. They might be just small section of Muslims but I just wanted to make a point. So Hinduism should adapt itself to allow these kinds of movements."

but ultimately, our purpose is not to blame each other but move forward.... and we shd not let this discussion come in between and have feeling of hatred...
Above all we are Indians...<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Does Shudarshanji provide any primary sources as references for his claim, most of these antedotes travel all over the net through word of mouth but have no proof in real life, an example is the story about Brahmins refusing to recognise Shivaji as a king because he was not a Kshatriya, now this is popular and is taken as a gospel truth all over the net and in real life and I also used to believe it but on the Yahoo group "Indian Civilization", Kalavai Venkat asked the people who proagate this to prove it by providing a primary reference and not one of them could do that, this coming from RSS supremo does not mean it becomes truth, RSS also says a lot of nonsense about Islam being tolerant and as good a religion as Sanatana Dharma, a good start for anyone who calls himself Hindu is to read Voice of India books available online at www.voi.org/books.

And I think we will end this debate now since the real topic of the thread is getting sidetracked.

[Guest]

If I hurt someone by unintentional remarks I am sorry. About Bharatrvarsh' comment, yeah its true that during 18th century power politics played very dirty games.... there were so many battles between various combinations of parties like Mughals, Afgans, Sikhs, Rajputs, Jats, Marathas, Rohilla, Oudh and English fought each other... ultimately what matters is that ourown people -marathas, rajputs, jats and sikhs suffered.... so I don't pass judgement on any group but I STILL hold on to what I said in previous posts because my views are based on reliable sources... and its in spirit of history not biases and judgements....

Som


<!--QuoteBegin-Mudy+Nov 4 2005, 02:35 AM-->QUOTE(Mudy @ Nov 4 2005, 02:35 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Som@
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->But I don't mean to spread hatred of one community... <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, you are doing.
I agree with Bharatvarsh. Some people or community still stick with colonial mindset and can trust twisted history created by them or whatever bring there community on top of other at the cost of degrading others..

Som,
Stick to thread topic.
[right][snapback]40600[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

Bharatvarash, I heard this story vocally from Sudarshanji so can't provide source.
RSS has done a lot to improve caste system... another incident told by dear Sudarshanji is

"Actually successful and interesting story related re-conversion to Hinduism happened in Rajasthan near Ajmer. Muslims have these ‘maulvis’ who keep wandering through Muslims communities through out the country to check that Islamic rules are followed stringently. In some village in Rajasthan they saw that people had Hindu-Muslim mixed names because of cultural background and forced them to keep just Muslim names. These villagers got angry and went to Ajmer’s Pushkar and said since Islam demands them to get rid of something which is has been in their tradition for centuries they want to get rid of Islam itself; and after all their ancestors were Hindus. When maulvis knew the incident they warned that they will burn their whole village. When RSS heard about it, 30 volunteers instantly came to village on cycles for protection. Few days later, whole village celebrated Janmasthami and got converted to Hinduism. Getting inspired by that nearby village also got converted. One by one total 70,000 Muslims were re-converted."

Som

<!--QuoteBegin-Bharatvarsh+Nov 4 2005, 03:06 AM-->QUOTE(Bharatvarsh @ Nov 4 2005, 03:06 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->even those who work actively for hinduism agree on the point that brahmins have been responsible for degradation of hinduism... let me quote Shurdarshanji(RSS) who told this historical incident... there are many like this... and BTW I really praise RSS for great work they are doing even though media is doing its best to tarnish their image.....

"During Ranjit Singh’s time, a section of Kashmiri Muslims requested him to let them convert back to Hinduism because they realized dark realities of Islam. They were summoned near Jhelum for the ceremony for re-conversion. But then 7-8 ‘raj-purohit’(Kashmiri Pundits) stood in Jhelum water with just their head out and said if Ranjit Singh lets them convert to Hinduism they would kill themselves and sin of ‘brahmin-hatya’ would fall on Ranjit. So they had their way. By those Pundit’s arrogance and foolishness their descendants got kicked out of valley by descendants of same Muslims who wanted to come to Hinduism. They might be just small section of Muslims but I just wanted to make a point. So Hinduism should adapt itself to allow these kinds of movements."

but ultimately, our purpose is not to blame each other but move forward.... and we shd not let this discussion come in between and have feeling of hatred...
Above all we are Indians...<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Does Shudarshanji provide any primary sources as references for his claim, most of these antedotes travel all over the net through word of mouth but have no proof in real life, an example is the story about Brahmins refusing to recognise Shivaji as a king because he was not a Kshatriya, now this is popular and is taken as a gospel truth all over the net and in real life and I also used to believe it but on the Yahoo group "Indian Civilization", Kalavai Venkat asked the people who proagate this to prove it by providing a primary reference and not one of them could do that, this coming from RSS supremo does not mean it becomes truth, RSS also says a lot of nonsense about Islam being tolerant and as good a religion as Sanatana Dharma, a good start for anyone who calls himself Hindu is to read Voice of India books available online at www.voi.org/books.

And I think we will end this debate now since the real topic of the thread is getting sidetracked.
[right][snapback]40609[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Its well known that some Rajputs supported Mughals, who was mother of Jahagir? <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I spoke to a friend from Rajasthan and he told me that this is the usual tactic of the casteist morons at Jat forums. These at least are LEGITIMATE marriages between powerful ROYAL FAMILIES...there is a case of mutual respect here.

But Jat women were enjoyed for free by the Mughals and the earlier Turk invaders! Do you know how many concubines they had?? Thousands, all taken mostly from the Jat villagers who had no regard for their women's honor.

This is why Jats are looked down upon by Rajputs in Rajasthan and other places; their women never committed jauhar and thousands were taken away as slaves and concubines by Muslims.

And this is why Muslim Jats in Punjab are called TURKAZAN---illegitimate descendants of Turk fathers! Maybe this is why some Jats are so anxious to prove their foreign origin by the Saka-Kushan theory?

The whole point is that all communities contributed to Indian History in their own way, with what RESOURCES they had. And about this concubine stuff, again apologies to other Jats, but I could not respond personally and had to attack his community.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->"After the death of Rajaram,... the new Raja of Amber(Jaipur), was appointed by the Emperor as faujdar of Mathura with special charge to root out Jats and take Sinsini as his own jagir. He gave the Emperor written undertaking....(details) and... Mughals stormed the fort after three hours of stubborn opposition. Jats disputed every inch of the ground and were dispersed only after losing 1500 of their men. On the imperial side 200 Mughals fell and 700 Rajputs were slain or wounded."

Do you have anything to say on that? Come on, even history textbooks praise Rajput and 
Mughal collaboration. Of course there was resistance too, thats why I said Rana pratap and Prithviraj... But struggle of Jats is either unknown or undermined by people who have psyche like you...
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I have plenty to say on that...it is thanks to the Rajas of Jaipur that the Jat family of Bharatpur came up. But those namak-harams joined the Mughal side when it was convenient.

You quote Qanungo and I'll quote Jadunath Sarkar: Churaman and 6000 Jats joined Sayyid Hussain of Barha in his invasion of Jaipur. But the Mughal-Jat ALLIANCE was defeated at Narnol by the Rajput alliance of Jaipur-Jodhpur-Udaipur. And again Suraj Mal joined the Mughal side and received titles from them. Jat struggle is unknown because Jats were farmers; they had no resources to fight back.

What you call alliance is nothing permanent it is called politics and it happens today also. Shias, Marathas, Sikhs, Rajputs, Mughals, Jats, Afghans all played politics. In fact it is thanks to the policies of Jaipur rulers that the Marathas were able to enter North India.

Now you will quote some instance of history to prove your point and I will quote other instances to prove my point. This will then become a pointless thread and hence I’m not posting anymore on these casteist topics. Ciao baby!

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-mitradena+Nov 4 2005, 02:32 AM-->QUOTE(mitradena @ Nov 4 2005, 02:32 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The relationship between the Saka/ Kushan people and the people of the Indian Subcontinent is definitely worthy of investigation.

Who were these people, where did they live, what was their culture, what was their religion, their philosophy, where in Bharat did they settle, wt was the directions of the migrations, and invasions. When are the first attested, who are the descendants today etc etc?
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Yes this is interesting for sure.

You posted the picture of a statue of Kanishka in the other thread.
The head is missing.

Without the head how can you tell what race he was?
He could have been a Turko-mongol for all we know.
[right][snapback]40599[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->



Mitra

For images , and a “Version” of Kushan History see,the url’s below.

Kaniska’s imagery on the coins for example shows a bearded person, with very non Mongolian looks.

What is interesting is that the coins depict Shivaji, the Trident, and Nandi the bull. The goddess Ardoxo is taken to be the Hindu Goddess Lakshmi.


http://www.med.unc.edu/~nupam/kushan1.html

http://www.anythinganywhere.com/commerce/c...ndi-kushan.html

http://prabhu.50g.com/kushana/kus_images.html


http://prabhu.50g.com/kushanas.html


Other images include Kartikeya.


Historians have been stumped at terms like Yueh Zhi, treating them as nomads

All that has happened is that a Chinese nomenclature has been used for a non Chinese people.

Once the nomenclature came into use, the rest of the would be historians, used the term unconsciously.

The correct pronunciation of Yueh chi is Gut-ia or Jut-ia for 'g' and 'j' sounds are interchangeable.

So we find these people calling themselves Juts, Jats in those time.


There is also a continuity of domination/rule through the period to the later ‘Guptas’[Dharan Jats], and Kushan imagery / customs are found widespread through to Eastern and Southern India. Evidence is there pointing to the spread to the East Asian contries, what is now Indonesia, Vietnam etc.

That should serve as a brief summary

There is lots more.

If you search for Kushan ,Kaniska etc on the Yahoo Jathistory group, you will find more material.

This topic was discussed in some depth.

More comments. insights are welcome.


Ravi Chaudhary

[Guest]

Guleria, You still don't know what is difference with rhetoric and dialect. Everybody suffered during these wars, I would spare to quote some author about how rajput women were treated. But thats not the point, point is how you take it. I kept to only factual information without passing any judgement but your posts are full of hatred. Any body can read all my posts and your posts and see whose points bear more weight. And you also call me castist whereas its you who goes out of debating spirit and puts derogatory remarks.(Its psychological thing where if you have any complex, you repeatedly keep blaming your opponent with the same, so that you get a santion for your not being culprit). I think you are the most castiest fellow in this thread. You have disgusted mentality which shows some kind of complex.
I don't want to argue with you any more.

Som

<!--QuoteBegin-PC Guleria+Nov 4 2005, 08:00 AM-->QUOTE(PC Guleria @ Nov 4 2005, 08:00 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Its well known that some Rajputs supported Mughals, who was mother of Jahagir? <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I spoke to a friend from Rajasthan and he told me that this is the usual tactic of the casteist morons at Jat forums. These at least are LEGITIMATE marriages between powerful ROYAL FAMILIES...there is a case of mutual respect here.

But Jat women were enjoyed for free by the Mughals and the earlier Turk invaders! Do you know how many concubines they had?? Thousands, all taken mostly from the Jat villagers who had no regard for their women's honor.

This is why Jats are looked down upon by Rajputs in Rajasthan and other places; their women never committed jauhar and thousands were taken away as slaves and concubines by Muslims.
[right][snapback]40623[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-Bharatvarsh+Nov 4 2005, 02:55 AM-->QUOTE(Bharatvarsh @ Nov 4 2005, 02:55 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->That being said I don't agree with Guleriaji's denigration of Jats, most communities collaborated to some degree with Muslims and there were many from the same community who resisted the invaders till their last breath, Gokul Jat was hacked to death piece by piece for refusing to become a Muslim but where I object is the garbage about historians being biased only against Jats, till now the control of history writing has been in the hands of anti hindu communists who as Guleriaji said did not have anything good to say about any predominantly Hindu community, for example why would Irfan Habib write about Gokul Jat when he tries to cover up Muslim intolerance and even tries to make out Aurangzeb as secular, writing about Gokul Jat would only prove something that he wants to cover up so he doesn't write about him (so its not because Gokul is a Jat that he is not very well known), its because those who control history writing in India want to cover up any resistance put by any Hindu community against the invaders and if Jats are part of this resistance they will also cover up Jat resistance along with the resistance of other Hindus.
[right][snapback]40608[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


Mr Guleria, within his belief system, is quite right to be ticked off when he sees other views, some of them uncomplementary.

He himself is not denigrating the Jats.

He is simply repeating what he has been taught, and cannot understand why some community is so ungrateful, after all that the Rajputs did for them.
!

His ( and others) belief systems are built upon what they were taught.

So it is only natural for them to believe the History of India, is theirs,and they were the proud defenders of Bharat since time immerorial.

When other views surface they get upset.

Bharatvarsh, It is not a matter of some members of some community collaborating with the Muslims.

It is a matter of bias, a matter of the version of history that is pushed and taught.

On bias, all writers/historians have a bias. I have one too.

When the Jat history is totally ignored or appropriated to other groups, Jats wonder why that is so.?

They look at the names of the authors, see names, which belong to the castes of Kayasths, Brahmins.

They put their work as down to bias.

It all may be unconscious, but then perception as we all know, is reality.

Then the quickest way to destroy a people, is to eradicate from them any knowledge of any heritage they have to be proud of.

For starters simply teach them they have no history!. When they are mentioned , show them as serfs, peasants, namak harams, plunderers and so on.

Why show that they ran an education sytem in 7th /8th century AD? or that many among them took to saintly pursuits, and were renowned scholars in their own rights?. Why show that their republican system survived upto 1857 and beyond, and it can traced back to the BCE period?


This is not something that can be laid at the door at the'secular' JNU historians only.

Hindu historians are equally guilty, for this has been in Indian history books far before the JNU ' eminent historians' crowd came onto the scene.- look at HCIP for example or H C Raichaudhary or Mahajan, or Tripati.

Some react.!( improperly, in my view)

The alienation surfaces in the discussion groups, as Mr Guleria , has noted, and then it feeds upon itself.

The effort should be on educating people, not engaging in brick bats bouts!

It does not help when someone like Airavat Singh is given prominence and the credibility of a good website like Bharat Rakshak


As the Jats start to reconstruct their history, that will upset existing applecarts!


Best regards

Ravi