You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Jats in Indian epics
- Thread starter lrburdak
- Start date
Rama and Jat Kingdoms
Rama (राम) Rāmachandra or Śrī Rāma (श्रीराम), was a king of ancient Ayodhya whose grand story is portrayed in the epic Ramayana. Suryavanshi Vaivasvat Manu's son was Ikshvaku, king of Ayodhya. Ikshvaku's son was Vikukshi and Vikukshi's son was Purjanya. Purjanya defeated Asuras in Deva-asura war as a result of which he was popular as 'Kakustha'.
Some facts from Ramayana
Sugriva was the king in exile of the state in which Ravana carried Sita away. Rama sought the help of the great monkey Sugriva, and the four other monkeys that dwelt on the mountain Rishyamuk. There Sugriva told Rama that he had seen Sita carried away by Ravana and how she had dropped her veil and jewels, and he showed these tokens to Rama and Lakshmana. Rama fared with Sugriva to Vali's city, and overcame Vali and established Sugriva on the throne. Sugriva sent out his marshals to summon the monkey host. They came from Himalaya, Vindhya, Kailash, from east and from west, from far and near, from caves and forests, in hundreds and thousands and millions, and each was captained by a veteran leader. Then Sugriva gave them to Rama and placed under his command. [1]
Rama and Sugriva relied on Hanuman, and gave him his signet ring to show for sign to Sita when he should discover her. A month had passed and monkeys did not find Sita. But there dwelt a mighty and very aged vulture named Sampati in a neighbouring cave, and he, hearing the name of his brother Jatayu, Sampati answered that he had seen Sita carried away by Ravana and that Ravana dwelt in Lanka, a hundred leagues across sea. [2]
Jat republics of Ramayana period
The marshals Sugriva had sent out in search of Sita were all from Jat republics. [3] The republics involved were 1. Videhi 2. Malav 3. Magadh 4. Pudru 5. Dasharna 6. Vidarbha 7. Prishika 8. Vanga 9. Matsya 10. Andhra 11. Vain 12. Chol 13. Pandya 14. Parsen 15. Bhadra 16. Shaka 17. Naga 18. Vahika 19. Daratha 20. Sindhu 21. Kusha 22. Bhoktipur. In addition following Jat republics were also also there namely Panchal, Vrishni, Bhoj, Kshudrak, Taxak, Kaler, Maan, Punia, Aulakh, Bain (Beniwal), which were in Nagavansh sangha. The nagavansha was very powerful at that time. [4]
Connections with Kak or Kakrana Jats
From 'Kakustha' started a Jat vansha known as 'Kusth' or Kakvansh. This later changed due to language variations to 'Kakustha', Kāk, Kāktīya, Kakka, Kuk, Kukkur, Kak and Kākarāṇ. In this very clan was born Dashratha's grandfather Raghu who started Raghuvansh. Raghuvanshi Jats are also descendants of him who are also known as 'Raghuvanshi Sikarwar’. During Ramayana period, in Balmiki Ramayana, Deva samhita, Vishnu Puran, Shiv Puran, Vedas etc there is mention of Jats and their republics at various places. Jatvansha joined his army of Vashishtha Rishi in his support and fought war with Vishvamitra. This was a very severe war in which thousands of Jat soldiers were killed. [5]
Bhaleram Beniwal has provided evidences from ‘Balkand ekonavish sarga shloka-16’, ‘Balkand dvavish sarga shloka-6’, ‘Balkand dvavish sarga shloka-20’, ‘Balkand panchvish sarga shloka-15’, ‘Balkand pratham sarga shloka-56’ to prove that Dashratha and his son Rama were ‘kakusth’ and Raghuvanshi Jats. Rama has been addressed by the names Raghunandan, Raghukul, Kakasthkul, and Raghuvanshi. Later Lava, elder son of Rama started Lamba gotra in Jats and Kusha started Kachhavahi or kushavansha whose descendant Brahdal was killed by Abhimanyu, son of Arjuna. Suryavanshi kushavansha Jats ruled Ayodhya from 3100 BC to 500 BC. In the 21st generation of Ikshvaku was born Mandhata who has been written and proved as Gaurvanshi Jat in genealogy of Suryavanshi kings. [6] One of sons of Mandhata was Ambarish. His son was Yuvanashva and his son was Harit, who was a great Rishi. The descendants of this king became Brahman who were known as Gaur Brahmans. [7]
Animal depiction of warriors
When Rama besieged Lanka, all his supporters like Kishkindha king Sugriva and his commander Hanuman, Jatayu, Jamvanta etc were Jat warriors. Bhaleram Beniwal has pointed out that these characters have been depicted as monkeys or animals is out of jealousy of the manuvadis and agents of dharma who never wanted to bring the true history of Jats. [8]
The Jat hostorian Thakur Deshraj has explained about the reasons of animal depiction of people prevalent in India during Ramayana period. During this period all four varnas had come into existence in Aryans. The duties of each varna were defined but they could change varna. Brahmans had come into a dominant position and had full control over kings and the society. Some kshatriyas like Kartaviryarjuna had become rebellions against the increased influence of Brahmans. In Sarswati ashrama a big organization under the leadership of Parsurama was constituted by Brahmans to penalize such kshatriyas. Brahmans suppressed kshatriyas like Kartaviryarjuna and deprived these kshatriyas from their status. The Aryans by this time had crossed Vindhyas and moving towards south. Vanars were inhabitants in southwest Vindhyas. Pampa sarovar was their main center. Vanars were not monkeys but either aboriginal inhabitants of that area or people of Aryan groups who had come from Iran via Bombay and reached south of Vindhyas. [9]
Other Jat historians have also treated Hanuman as a Jat warrior of Maan gotra. [10] Some other historians treat Vanar as a gotra of jats found in Haryana in India. Lord Hanuman of Ramayana was a kshatriya of Vanar clan. He was not a monkey as is shown in Ramayana. [11]
References
1.↑ Sister Nivedita & Ananda K.Coomaraswamy: Myths and Legends of the Hindus and Bhuddhists, Kolkata, 2001 ISBN 81-7505-197-3
2.↑ Sister Nivedita & Ananda K.Coomaraswamy: Myths and Legends of the Hindus and Bhuddhists, Kolkata, 2001 ISBN 81-7505-197-3
3.↑ Balmiki Ramayana sarga 40-43
4.↑ Bhaleram Beniwal: Jāt Yodhaon ke Balidān, Jaypal Agencies, Agra 2005 (Page 38)
5.↑ Bhaleram Beniwal: Jāt Yodhaon ke Balidān, Jaypal Agencies, Agra 2005 (Page 38)
6.↑ Vishnu Puran part IV Chapter 2-3
7.↑ Bhaleram Beniwal: Jāt Yodhaon ke Balidān, Jaypal Agencies, Agra 2005 (Page 39-40)
8.↑ Bhaleram Beniwal: Jāt Yodhaon ke Balidān, Jaypal Agencies, Agra 2005 (Page 40-41)
9.↑ Thakur Deshraj: Jat Itihasa (Hindi), Maharaja Suraj Mal Smarak Shiksha Sansthan, Delhi, 1934, 2nd edition 1992 (Page 15-19)
10.↑ Dr Mahendra Singh Arya, Dharmpal Singh Dudi, Kishan Singh Faujdar & Vijendra Singh Narwar: Ādhunik Jat Itihasa (The modern history of Jats), Agra 1998 (Page 289)
11.↑ Jat Samaj: Agra November 1999
Rama (राम) Rāmachandra or Śrī Rāma (श्रीराम), was a king of ancient Ayodhya whose grand story is portrayed in the epic Ramayana. Suryavanshi Vaivasvat Manu's son was Ikshvaku, king of Ayodhya. Ikshvaku's son was Vikukshi and Vikukshi's son was Purjanya. Purjanya defeated Asuras in Deva-asura war as a result of which he was popular as 'Kakustha'.
Some facts from Ramayana
Sugriva was the king in exile of the state in which Ravana carried Sita away. Rama sought the help of the great monkey Sugriva, and the four other monkeys that dwelt on the mountain Rishyamuk. There Sugriva told Rama that he had seen Sita carried away by Ravana and how she had dropped her veil and jewels, and he showed these tokens to Rama and Lakshmana. Rama fared with Sugriva to Vali's city, and overcame Vali and established Sugriva on the throne. Sugriva sent out his marshals to summon the monkey host. They came from Himalaya, Vindhya, Kailash, from east and from west, from far and near, from caves and forests, in hundreds and thousands and millions, and each was captained by a veteran leader. Then Sugriva gave them to Rama and placed under his command. [1]
Rama and Sugriva relied on Hanuman, and gave him his signet ring to show for sign to Sita when he should discover her. A month had passed and monkeys did not find Sita. But there dwelt a mighty and very aged vulture named Sampati in a neighbouring cave, and he, hearing the name of his brother Jatayu, Sampati answered that he had seen Sita carried away by Ravana and that Ravana dwelt in Lanka, a hundred leagues across sea. [2]
Jat republics of Ramayana period
The marshals Sugriva had sent out in search of Sita were all from Jat republics. [3] The republics involved were 1. Videhi 2. Malav 3. Magadh 4. Pudru 5. Dasharna 6. Vidarbha 7. Prishika 8. Vanga 9. Matsya 10. Andhra 11. Vain 12. Chol 13. Pandya 14. Parsen 15. Bhadra 16. Shaka 17. Naga 18. Vahika 19. Daratha 20. Sindhu 21. Kusha 22. Bhoktipur. In addition following Jat republics were also also there namely Panchal, Vrishni, Bhoj, Kshudrak, Taxak, Kaler, Maan, Punia, Aulakh, Bain (Beniwal), which were in Nagavansh sangha. The nagavansha was very powerful at that time. [4]
Connections with Kak or Kakrana Jats
From 'Kakustha' started a Jat vansha known as 'Kusth' or Kakvansh. This later changed due to language variations to 'Kakustha', Kāk, Kāktīya, Kakka, Kuk, Kukkur, Kak and Kākarāṇ. In this very clan was born Dashratha's grandfather Raghu who started Raghuvansh. Raghuvanshi Jats are also descendants of him who are also known as 'Raghuvanshi Sikarwar’. During Ramayana period, in Balmiki Ramayana, Deva samhita, Vishnu Puran, Shiv Puran, Vedas etc there is mention of Jats and their republics at various places. Jatvansha joined his army of Vashishtha Rishi in his support and fought war with Vishvamitra. This was a very severe war in which thousands of Jat soldiers were killed. [5]
Bhaleram Beniwal has provided evidences from ‘Balkand ekonavish sarga shloka-16’, ‘Balkand dvavish sarga shloka-6’, ‘Balkand dvavish sarga shloka-20’, ‘Balkand panchvish sarga shloka-15’, ‘Balkand pratham sarga shloka-56’ to prove that Dashratha and his son Rama were ‘kakusth’ and Raghuvanshi Jats. Rama has been addressed by the names Raghunandan, Raghukul, Kakasthkul, and Raghuvanshi. Later Lava, elder son of Rama started Lamba gotra in Jats and Kusha started Kachhavahi or kushavansha whose descendant Brahdal was killed by Abhimanyu, son of Arjuna. Suryavanshi kushavansha Jats ruled Ayodhya from 3100 BC to 500 BC. In the 21st generation of Ikshvaku was born Mandhata who has been written and proved as Gaurvanshi Jat in genealogy of Suryavanshi kings. [6] One of sons of Mandhata was Ambarish. His son was Yuvanashva and his son was Harit, who was a great Rishi. The descendants of this king became Brahman who were known as Gaur Brahmans. [7]
Animal depiction of warriors
When Rama besieged Lanka, all his supporters like Kishkindha king Sugriva and his commander Hanuman, Jatayu, Jamvanta etc were Jat warriors. Bhaleram Beniwal has pointed out that these characters have been depicted as monkeys or animals is out of jealousy of the manuvadis and agents of dharma who never wanted to bring the true history of Jats. [8]
The Jat hostorian Thakur Deshraj has explained about the reasons of animal depiction of people prevalent in India during Ramayana period. During this period all four varnas had come into existence in Aryans. The duties of each varna were defined but they could change varna. Brahmans had come into a dominant position and had full control over kings and the society. Some kshatriyas like Kartaviryarjuna had become rebellions against the increased influence of Brahmans. In Sarswati ashrama a big organization under the leadership of Parsurama was constituted by Brahmans to penalize such kshatriyas. Brahmans suppressed kshatriyas like Kartaviryarjuna and deprived these kshatriyas from their status. The Aryans by this time had crossed Vindhyas and moving towards south. Vanars were inhabitants in southwest Vindhyas. Pampa sarovar was their main center. Vanars were not monkeys but either aboriginal inhabitants of that area or people of Aryan groups who had come from Iran via Bombay and reached south of Vindhyas. [9]
Other Jat historians have also treated Hanuman as a Jat warrior of Maan gotra. [10] Some other historians treat Vanar as a gotra of jats found in Haryana in India. Lord Hanuman of Ramayana was a kshatriya of Vanar clan. He was not a monkey as is shown in Ramayana. [11]
References
1.↑ Sister Nivedita & Ananda K.Coomaraswamy: Myths and Legends of the Hindus and Bhuddhists, Kolkata, 2001 ISBN 81-7505-197-3
2.↑ Sister Nivedita & Ananda K.Coomaraswamy: Myths and Legends of the Hindus and Bhuddhists, Kolkata, 2001 ISBN 81-7505-197-3
3.↑ Balmiki Ramayana sarga 40-43
4.↑ Bhaleram Beniwal: Jāt Yodhaon ke Balidān, Jaypal Agencies, Agra 2005 (Page 38)
5.↑ Bhaleram Beniwal: Jāt Yodhaon ke Balidān, Jaypal Agencies, Agra 2005 (Page 38)
6.↑ Vishnu Puran part IV Chapter 2-3
7.↑ Bhaleram Beniwal: Jāt Yodhaon ke Balidān, Jaypal Agencies, Agra 2005 (Page 39-40)
8.↑ Bhaleram Beniwal: Jāt Yodhaon ke Balidān, Jaypal Agencies, Agra 2005 (Page 40-41)
9.↑ Thakur Deshraj: Jat Itihasa (Hindi), Maharaja Suraj Mal Smarak Shiksha Sansthan, Delhi, 1934, 2nd edition 1992 (Page 15-19)
10.↑ Dr Mahendra Singh Arya, Dharmpal Singh Dudi, Kishan Singh Faujdar & Vijendra Singh Narwar: Ādhunik Jat Itihasa (The modern history of Jats), Agra 1998 (Page 289)
11.↑ Jat Samaj: Agra November 1999
Jat republics of Ramayana period
The marshals Sugriva had sent out in search of Sita were all from Jat republics. [3] The republics involved were 1. Videhi 2. Malav 3. Magadh 4. Pudru 5. Dasharna 6. Vidarbha 7. Prishika 8. Vanga 9. Matsya 10. Andhra 11. Vain 12. Chol 13. Pandya 14. Parsen 15. Bhadra 16. Shaka 17. Naga 18. Vahika 19. Daratha 20. Sindhu 21. Kusha 22. Bhoktipur. In addition following Jat republics were also also there namely Panchal, Vrishni, Bhoj, Kshudrak, Taxak, Kaler, Maan, Punia, Aulakh, Bain (Beniwal), which were in Nagavansh sangha. The nagavansha was very powerful at that time. [4]
Laxman ji, Where is it mentioned that above mentioned republics were Jats?
2) I think it's Mall(Bihar) not Malava(Malloi of Punjab) here, these are two different groups.
8) Vanga was in current Bangal, they consisted mostly non-aryan (or mixture)population. Whats proof that Vanga has anything to do with Jats?
9) Matsya was in current Jaipur, again the proof?
10) Pandya, now thats height. If same as Pandya dynasty, their kingdom was in extreme tip of southern Deccan... Proof?
12) Is this Chol of southern Chola? Then please provide proof.
17) What do Naga have to do with Jats? I am not denying, I am just asking proof. Nagas ruled North India after decline of Kushans and before rising of Maukhari and Gupta. It would be interesting to know relation of these Nagas with Jats.
There are other points in post which could be discussed but lets go step by step.
-vinod
Hi Vinodji,
I have cited reference and again citing the book and author with page number-
Bhaleram Beniwal: Jāt Yodhaon ke Balidān, Jaypal Agencies, Agra 2005 (Page 38)
If you see Dilip Singh Ahlawat's jat Viron ka Itihas and Dudi's Adhunik Itihas again you find mentioned many Nagas as Jats.
regards,
I have cited reference and again citing the book and author with page number-
Bhaleram Beniwal: Jāt Yodhaon ke Balidān, Jaypal Agencies, Agra 2005 (Page 38)
If you see Dilip Singh Ahlawat's jat Viron ka Itihas and Dudi's Adhunik Itihas again you find mentioned many Nagas as Jats.
regards,
Laxman jee,
Hanuman pe to log mujhe joke martee hai ke Hanuman Jat thaa Hanu uska naam aur Maan uska gotra thaa.
but you are saying it was true that hanuman was a Jat? seems to be questionable.
Second thing ke agar pura bharat pe Jaton ka raaj thaa to Jaton ke population Bharat me sirf 2% hi kyo hai.
Hanuman pe to log mujhe joke martee hai ke Hanuman Jat thaa Hanu uska naam aur Maan uska gotra thaa.
but you are saying it was true that hanuman was a Jat? seems to be questionable.
Second thing ke agar pura bharat pe Jaton ka raaj thaa to Jaton ke population Bharat me sirf 2% hi kyo hai.
Mann Bhai the rulers always belong to an elite class and more than often as history has proved they have no blood or clan relationship with their subjects.
So it is highly likely that Jats did rule most of the country but they themselves form a very small proportion of the total population and are mostly found in one certain region.
The British Royal family for example is 0% british 50% German 25% Danish and 25% French .... same for the Jordanian Royal family 25% British 75% Saudi ......... and most of the Royal families are the same .....
So it is highly likely that Jats did rule most of the country but they themselves form a very small proportion of the total population and are mostly found in one certain region.
The British Royal family for example is 0% british 50% German 25% Danish and 25% French .... same for the Jordanian Royal family 25% British 75% Saudi ......... and most of the Royal families are the same .....
Mann Bhai the rulers always belong to an elite class and more than often as history has proved they have no blood or clan relationship with their subjects.
So it is highly likely that Jats did rule most of the country but they themselves form a very small proportion of the total population and are mostly found in one certain region.
The British Royal family for example is 0% british 50% German 25% Danish and 25% French .... same for the Jordanian Royal family 25% British 75% Saudi ......... and most of the Royal families are the same .....
Bhai Kharub
you are right but in my opinion is we all were follower of someone and using there name as gotra (not actually there descendent). if we see the historical facts in Sikhism all who were following Guru Gobind Singh jee started using SINGH as there surname whether they belongs to any caste (chamar, dhanak, khatri, sindhi, and even Jats which were called Jatts after that).
Second thing which i had seen is that Jats in different area is treated differently say in Haryana they are most respected and treated all above in Kshatriyas and in Rajasthan they are treated as inferior by Rajputs and in UP its different again. So what i think is all were dependent on the king there if the king is Rajput they are treated as inferior if the king is Jat they are superior. So it doesn't seems to be logical they we were descendent of Yadav, Shree Ram or Shree Krishan etc.
Mann Bhai Rajputs are no different from Jats ... they are a Jat sub Clan
Rajputs are the Jats who accepted the Brahmanical Order in order to be classified as a superior clan ....
A lot of Rajput and Jat Gotras are the same and a lot of Rajput Clans to this day claim descent their from Jats and so many famous kings have been calimed as Rajput in some books and Jat in some because there was no clear difference .......
So there you go ... Brahamans have fed us with the history we know now .. and they have always tried to play Jats down because Jats have defied them throughout history ..... this was the reason they used Jats (Rajputs) to counter Jats .....
Rajputs are the Jats who accepted the Brahmanical Order in order to be classified as a superior clan ....
A lot of Rajput and Jat Gotras are the same and a lot of Rajput Clans to this day claim descent their from Jats and so many famous kings have been calimed as Rajput in some books and Jat in some because there was no clear difference .......
So there you go ... Brahamans have fed us with the history we know now .. and they have always tried to play Jats down because Jats have defied them throughout history ..... this was the reason they used Jats (Rajputs) to counter Jats .....
Migration of Jats and mention in Buddhist records
Hi members,
There is a useful discussion with an expert of Chinese and Buddhist literature is going on with Wikipedia's discussion page of Jat article on it, at URL-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jat
I place it below for knowledge and adding more info available with members so that Jat article on Wikipedia can be updated accordingly. Please also provide source of your info which is a must to make it authentic on Wikipedia. Thanks
************************************
Migration of Jats
There are historians who consider Jats to be of Indo-Aryan origin. On the basis of ethnological, physical and linguistic standards by many historians like E.B.Havell[1], Qanungo[2], C.V.Vaidya[3], Sir Herbert Risley [4], Thakur Deshraj[5], Mangal Sen Jindal[6]etc., who condider Jats to be Indo-Aryan. Dr Natthan Singh writes that Jats were the pure Aryans and their original homeland was Sapta Sindhu. On the basis of historical facts the Jats are reported to be present in India from 3102 BC. [7] [8] They had to migrate from India on economic, social and political reasons for some period but they returned back to India. In the migration also they did not leave their language and cultural traditions. Due to this reason only Jats do not have linguistic or physical similarities with Huns and Scythians. [9] This view is also supported by Thakur Deshraj who writes that on the basis of ethnological, physical, cultural and linguistic standards Jats are pure Aryans who inhabited the areas on the banks of Ganga-Yamuna or Sarswati-Sindhu during Vedic civilization. [10]
There is other group of Historians like, Sir Alexander Cunnigham [11] and Col James Tod [12], Bhim Singh Dahiya, V. Smith etc who consider the Jats to be of Indo-Scythian stock.
There are data available about genetics of Jats as discussed above.
There is need to clear this position on solid historical facts. It is proposed to add a new section in this article about the migration of Jat population. The migration of Jats has not been mentioned in the article so far. The migration pattern, period and the movement will lead to more clear history and theory about origin of Jats. burdak 11:32, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
^ 1.E.B.Havell: The history of Aryan rule in India, page 32
^ 2.Qanungo: History of the Jats
^ 3.C.V.Vaidya: History of Medieval Hindu India
^ 4.Sir Herbert Risley: The People of India
^5. Thakur Deshraj: Jat Itihasa
^6. Mangal Sen Jindal: History of Origin of Some Clans in India
^ 7.Dr Natthan Singh: Jat - Itihas (Hindi), Jat Samaj Kalyan Parishad Gwalior, 2004 (Page 9)
^ 8.CV Vaidya: Mahabharata a criticizm, Bombay 1904 (Page 55-78)
^9. Dr Natthan Singh: Jat - Itihas (Hindi), Jat Samaj Kalyan Parishad Gwalior, 2004 (Page 38)
^ 10.Thakur Deshraj: Jat Itihasa, Page 64
^ 11.Alexander Cunningham, History of Sikhs
^ 12.James Tod, Annals
Query on historical accuracy of dates for Jats
Dear Shri L R Burdak:
I have just noticed your recent comments. First, I have added a marker to your note which allows all the references you gave to be easily readable - I hope this is O.K. with you?
I was very surprised to find your statement: "On the basis of historical facts the Jats are reported to be present in India from 3102 BC." You give Dr Natthan Singh's book: Jat - Itihas (Hindi), as a reference for this. I have been studying Indian history for more than 25 years and I have never come across any historical information which can be accurately dated earlier than about the middle of the first millenium BCE. If Dr. Natthan Singh's claims can be verified, this would indeed be a landmark in the study of Indian history. Perhaps you would be kind enough to outline the evidence for this very early and remarkably precise dating? Thank you. John Hill 23:14, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Year 3102 BC
Hi John Hill, There are two references cited above with 3102 BC. One is Dr Natthan Singh who is a reputed author of 'History of Jats'. Another reference is that of CV Vaidya who is an authority on Indian history. After your note above I tried to find more references. I found in Sister Nivedita book on Myths of The Hindus and Buddhists[13] in which she has given calculations about Hindu cosmology. She has mentioned that commencement of Kali yuga coincides with the day of the death of Krishna. This way this year coincides with death of Krishna. We have this on wikipedia as well. This year is mentioned on its link page of 3102 BC that:
3102 BC – Astrological evidence places this date to be the death of Krishna at the age of 125
3102 BC — Year 0 of the Kali Yuga begins
Regards, burdak 15:36, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
More on 3102 BC
Dear Shri Burdak, What you are saying, I gather, is that according to Hindu cosmology certain events took place in 3102 BC. While this may be accepted as fact by some Hindus, this sort of calculation is usually not accepted by people of other faiths as "historical fact." Many religious traditions have made calculations of this sort based on their scriptures and traditions. For example, the Anglican Archbishop James Ussher calculated on the basis of comparing information in the Christian scriptures with established historical dates that the world was created in 4004 BC. Nowadays most Christians, including most Anglicans (not to mention people of other faiths), no longer accept this date as worthy of serious consideration. It would be better in a general encyclopedia such as this, I suggest, to present such information in terms as such "calculations based on Hindu cosmology or tradition." Cheers, John Hill 22:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Jat in Mahavamsa
Dear John Hill, Thanks for the suggestions. There is a need to find some solid historical fact. That is why I put it for discussion. I found that you have done a good work in Buddhist literature. Most of the Jats had adopted Buddhism when it was at peak. There is a need to research the Buddhist literature about origin and history of Jats. Mahavansha, provides a continuous historical record of over two millennia. At one point I find a comment about Chandragupta Maurya as under-
"Mahavamsa describes Chandragupta as coming of Kshatriya clan of Maurya: Mauryanam Khattyanam vamsha jata. (Geiger Trans p 27)."
The meaning of this shloka in sanskrit is that Mauryas are Jat of kshatriya clan. Can you suggest further approach about this and links which provide material on Jats in Buddhist literature or traditions. burdak 04:03, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
More on Jat in Mahavamsa
Dear Shree Burdak: Thank you very much for your last note which is, indeed, of great interest and importance as it seems to firmly establish that the Mauryas were of Jat lineage.
Unfortunately, I do not have a copy of the Mahavamsa available other than the on-line in the two internet links given in the Wikipedia article on the Mahavamsa. I haven't been able to find the passage you mention in either of these on-line versions of the Geiger translation but, perhaps, they are not complete or the English translation is faulty. I would be very grateful if you could send me the full quote and reference and any other details you can find. I will search for other references to Jats in my books and notes as soon as I can. I will search for more references to jats in my books and references as soon as I can. Many thanks, John Hill 23:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jat
Hi members,
There is a useful discussion with an expert of Chinese and Buddhist literature is going on with Wikipedia's discussion page of Jat article on it, at URL-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jat
I place it below for knowledge and adding more info available with members so that Jat article on Wikipedia can be updated accordingly. Please also provide source of your info which is a must to make it authentic on Wikipedia. Thanks
************************************
Migration of Jats
There are historians who consider Jats to be of Indo-Aryan origin. On the basis of ethnological, physical and linguistic standards by many historians like E.B.Havell[1], Qanungo[2], C.V.Vaidya[3], Sir Herbert Risley [4], Thakur Deshraj[5], Mangal Sen Jindal[6]etc., who condider Jats to be Indo-Aryan. Dr Natthan Singh writes that Jats were the pure Aryans and their original homeland was Sapta Sindhu. On the basis of historical facts the Jats are reported to be present in India from 3102 BC. [7] [8] They had to migrate from India on economic, social and political reasons for some period but they returned back to India. In the migration also they did not leave their language and cultural traditions. Due to this reason only Jats do not have linguistic or physical similarities with Huns and Scythians. [9] This view is also supported by Thakur Deshraj who writes that on the basis of ethnological, physical, cultural and linguistic standards Jats are pure Aryans who inhabited the areas on the banks of Ganga-Yamuna or Sarswati-Sindhu during Vedic civilization. [10]
There is other group of Historians like, Sir Alexander Cunnigham [11] and Col James Tod [12], Bhim Singh Dahiya, V. Smith etc who consider the Jats to be of Indo-Scythian stock.
There are data available about genetics of Jats as discussed above.
There is need to clear this position on solid historical facts. It is proposed to add a new section in this article about the migration of Jat population. The migration of Jats has not been mentioned in the article so far. The migration pattern, period and the movement will lead to more clear history and theory about origin of Jats. burdak 11:32, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
^ 1.E.B.Havell: The history of Aryan rule in India, page 32
^ 2.Qanungo: History of the Jats
^ 3.C.V.Vaidya: History of Medieval Hindu India
^ 4.Sir Herbert Risley: The People of India
^5. Thakur Deshraj: Jat Itihasa
^6. Mangal Sen Jindal: History of Origin of Some Clans in India
^ 7.Dr Natthan Singh: Jat - Itihas (Hindi), Jat Samaj Kalyan Parishad Gwalior, 2004 (Page 9)
^ 8.CV Vaidya: Mahabharata a criticizm, Bombay 1904 (Page 55-78)
^9. Dr Natthan Singh: Jat - Itihas (Hindi), Jat Samaj Kalyan Parishad Gwalior, 2004 (Page 38)
^ 10.Thakur Deshraj: Jat Itihasa, Page 64
^ 11.Alexander Cunningham, History of Sikhs
^ 12.James Tod, Annals
Query on historical accuracy of dates for Jats
Dear Shri L R Burdak:
I have just noticed your recent comments. First, I have added a marker to your note which allows all the references you gave to be easily readable - I hope this is O.K. with you?
I was very surprised to find your statement: "On the basis of historical facts the Jats are reported to be present in India from 3102 BC." You give Dr Natthan Singh's book: Jat - Itihas (Hindi), as a reference for this. I have been studying Indian history for more than 25 years and I have never come across any historical information which can be accurately dated earlier than about the middle of the first millenium BCE. If Dr. Natthan Singh's claims can be verified, this would indeed be a landmark in the study of Indian history. Perhaps you would be kind enough to outline the evidence for this very early and remarkably precise dating? Thank you. John Hill 23:14, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Year 3102 BC
Hi John Hill, There are two references cited above with 3102 BC. One is Dr Natthan Singh who is a reputed author of 'History of Jats'. Another reference is that of CV Vaidya who is an authority on Indian history. After your note above I tried to find more references. I found in Sister Nivedita book on Myths of The Hindus and Buddhists[13] in which she has given calculations about Hindu cosmology. She has mentioned that commencement of Kali yuga coincides with the day of the death of Krishna. This way this year coincides with death of Krishna. We have this on wikipedia as well. This year is mentioned on its link page of 3102 BC that:
3102 BC – Astrological evidence places this date to be the death of Krishna at the age of 125
3102 BC — Year 0 of the Kali Yuga begins
Regards, burdak 15:36, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
More on 3102 BC
Dear Shri Burdak, What you are saying, I gather, is that according to Hindu cosmology certain events took place in 3102 BC. While this may be accepted as fact by some Hindus, this sort of calculation is usually not accepted by people of other faiths as "historical fact." Many religious traditions have made calculations of this sort based on their scriptures and traditions. For example, the Anglican Archbishop James Ussher calculated on the basis of comparing information in the Christian scriptures with established historical dates that the world was created in 4004 BC. Nowadays most Christians, including most Anglicans (not to mention people of other faiths), no longer accept this date as worthy of serious consideration. It would be better in a general encyclopedia such as this, I suggest, to present such information in terms as such "calculations based on Hindu cosmology or tradition." Cheers, John Hill 22:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Jat in Mahavamsa
Dear John Hill, Thanks for the suggestions. There is a need to find some solid historical fact. That is why I put it for discussion. I found that you have done a good work in Buddhist literature. Most of the Jats had adopted Buddhism when it was at peak. There is a need to research the Buddhist literature about origin and history of Jats. Mahavansha, provides a continuous historical record of over two millennia. At one point I find a comment about Chandragupta Maurya as under-
"Mahavamsa describes Chandragupta as coming of Kshatriya clan of Maurya: Mauryanam Khattyanam vamsha jata. (Geiger Trans p 27)."
The meaning of this shloka in sanskrit is that Mauryas are Jat of kshatriya clan. Can you suggest further approach about this and links which provide material on Jats in Buddhist literature or traditions. burdak 04:03, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
More on Jat in Mahavamsa
Dear Shree Burdak: Thank you very much for your last note which is, indeed, of great interest and importance as it seems to firmly establish that the Mauryas were of Jat lineage.
Unfortunately, I do not have a copy of the Mahavamsa available other than the on-line in the two internet links given in the Wikipedia article on the Mahavamsa. I haven't been able to find the passage you mention in either of these on-line versions of the Geiger translation but, perhaps, they are not complete or the English translation is faulty. I would be very grateful if you could send me the full quote and reference and any other details you can find. I will search for other references to Jats in my books and notes as soon as I can. I will search for more references to jats in my books and references as soon as I can. Many thanks, John Hill 23:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jat
ravichaudhary
New member
One of the problems you are dealing with is many scholars, wear blinkers, and therefore have tunnel vision, able to see only what is directly in front of them.
This is a very narrow minded view.
John Hill, who is a fairly decent sort of person, however ,also has this problem.
His achievement, is, that despite being an English speaker, he learnt some Chinese and translated a manuscript, a 5th century story, which is called a history.
Now that deed is quite an achievement, and needs all praise
The problem becomes, that he like many other such scholars, are not then able to interpret what they have translated, and he simply sees that area, ( Central Asia) as a " Silk Road", and a "Chinese- European "connection.
Their vision is of local people being barbaric nomads, running around the steppes drinking sheep milk.
They are ignorant of and ignore any connection to the older pre Islamic and pre Buddhist Vedic culture the prevailed in these areas since the times of the Sarasvati Sindhu (Indus Valley) Culture, of 3000 BCE to 2000 BCE when the Sarasvati river dried up.
Now this area history goes back to 3,000 BCE and it was highly developed area, with a well developed civilization, a well developed economy, supported by an extensive network of irrigation canals, that would put many modern countries engineering skills to shame.
This is the kind of economy is what produces and did produce the economic surplus that allowed a surpllus of labour, which would allow the scientific discoveries and the philosophical works like the Atharva Ved to be created.
Countless references are there to the Jats, Jateh, Getae, MassaGetae,( greek Literature), Jutia, Gutia( yuehchi in Chinese).
Why are these evidences ignored?
Colonial scholars, pooh pooh everything that does not suit their blinkered view,and the only way these ' scholars' pass off their opinions, as history, and get away with it, is because so far they controlled the chanels of distribution of the information.
The Indian Historians and the Jat Historians are not ignorant of this period. Their historical traditions, and literature are replete with data.- the Mahabharat, and the Vedic literature contains much material with reference to this area and time period.
Recent researches, contrary to John Hill's assertion, show that the Kushans were Jats, and ' Kushan', meaning ' crown' was simply a title or clan name variants of which are still found in the Jats of today.
Rather than John Hill asking the Jats to prove that Kaniska was a Jat, perhaps John Hill should be asked prove to us that he was not a Jat, and if not who was he?.
Ravi Chaudhary
This is a very narrow minded view.
John Hill, who is a fairly decent sort of person, however ,also has this problem.
His achievement, is, that despite being an English speaker, he learnt some Chinese and translated a manuscript, a 5th century story, which is called a history.
Now that deed is quite an achievement, and needs all praise
The problem becomes, that he like many other such scholars, are not then able to interpret what they have translated, and he simply sees that area, ( Central Asia) as a " Silk Road", and a "Chinese- European "connection.
Their vision is of local people being barbaric nomads, running around the steppes drinking sheep milk.
They are ignorant of and ignore any connection to the older pre Islamic and pre Buddhist Vedic culture the prevailed in these areas since the times of the Sarasvati Sindhu (Indus Valley) Culture, of 3000 BCE to 2000 BCE when the Sarasvati river dried up.
Now this area history goes back to 3,000 BCE and it was highly developed area, with a well developed civilization, a well developed economy, supported by an extensive network of irrigation canals, that would put many modern countries engineering skills to shame.
This is the kind of economy is what produces and did produce the economic surplus that allowed a surpllus of labour, which would allow the scientific discoveries and the philosophical works like the Atharva Ved to be created.
Countless references are there to the Jats, Jateh, Getae, MassaGetae,( greek Literature), Jutia, Gutia( yuehchi in Chinese).
Why are these evidences ignored?
Colonial scholars, pooh pooh everything that does not suit their blinkered view,and the only way these ' scholars' pass off their opinions, as history, and get away with it, is because so far they controlled the chanels of distribution of the information.
The Indian Historians and the Jat Historians are not ignorant of this period. Their historical traditions, and literature are replete with data.- the Mahabharat, and the Vedic literature contains much material with reference to this area and time period.
Recent researches, contrary to John Hill's assertion, show that the Kushans were Jats, and ' Kushan', meaning ' crown' was simply a title or clan name variants of which are still found in the Jats of today.
Rather than John Hill asking the Jats to prove that Kaniska was a Jat, perhaps John Hill should be asked prove to us that he was not a Jat, and if not who was he?.
Ravi Chaudhary
ravichaudhary
New member
I have asked John Hill to provide what evidence he has to show that Kaniska was not a Jat
Ravi Chaudhary
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kanishka#Concern_about_the_so-called_.22Clan_of_Kanishka.22
Ravi Chaudhary
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kanishka#Concern_about_the_so-called_.22Clan_of_Kanishka.22
Sources cited for "Clan of Kanishka"
Thanks Raviji for asking evidences from John Hill on Kanishka's clan. We need some more evidences. I have further added a note to that discussion as under -
Hi John Hill, After your note to verify sources about the clan of Kanishka I further searched books with me and put more references at appropriate places in the article on clan of Kanishka's section. All references lead to the same fact that Kanishka was Kaswan Jat and it can not be anything else. Apart from literature and inscriptions the biggest evidence is that Kaswan clan is in Jats as on today in Rajasthan. Majoritry of them are in Churu district in Rajasthan. So as I am from that area and have first hand information about them. If there is any evidence otherwise, as Ravi Chaudhary has said, it may be placed for discussion.
About the origin of Kushans I take from Wikipedia article on Kushan which is as under -
"Chinese sources describe the Guishuang (Ch: 貴霜), i.e. the "Kushans", as one of the five aristocratic tribes of the Yuezhi (Ch: 月氏), a loose confederation of Indo-European peoples. The Yuezhi are also generally considered as the easternmost speakers of Indo-European languages, who had been living in the arid grasslands of eastern Central Asia, in modern-day Xinjiang and Gansu, possibly speaking versions of the Tocharian language, until they were driven west by the Xiongnu in 176–160 BCE. The five tribes constituting the Yuezhi are known in Chinese history as Xiūmì (Ch: 休密), Guishuang (Ch: 貴霜), Shuangmi (Ch: 雙靡), Xidun (Ch: 肸頓), and Dūmì (Ch: 都密).
The Yuezhi reached the Hellenic kingdom of Greco-Bactria, in the Bactrian territory (northernmost Afghanistan and Uzbekistan) around 135 BCE, and displaced the Greek dynasties there, who resettled in Indus basin (in present day Pakistan) in the western part of the Indo-Greek Kingdom.
In the following century, the Guishuang (Ch: 貴霜) gained prominence over the other Yuezhi tribes, and welded them into a tight confederation under yabgu (Commander) Kujula Kadphises. The name Guishuang was adopted in the West and modified into Kushan to designate the confederation, although the Chinese continued to call them Yuezhi."
According to Thakur Deshraj the Shivi gotra Jats of Shivaliks and lower reaches of Lake Manasarowar left this area after the war of Mahabharata and migrated to Uttar Kuru. Some of them settled in Punjab in the area known as 'Yadu ki Dung', some settled in Kashmir and the rest moved far north up to Siberia. [1]
The Krishna vanshi people in Sanskrit were called 'Karshney' and 'Karshniya'. Karshniya or Kasaniya is a gotra of Jats found in Rajasthan. These Krishna vanshi people in China were known as Kushan or Yuezhi.[2]
Bhim Singh Dahiya has established that Kushan or Yuezhi were Jats. There were two branches of Yuezhi people. One of the branches was called 'Ta-Yuezhi' which means 'The great Jats'. The other branch was 'Siao-Yuezhi' which means 'The little Jats'. The Greek historian Herodotus has written Massagetae for Ta-Yuezhi and Thyssagetae for Siao-Yuezhi. The Yuezhi people inhabited the Outer Mongolia and Gansu province of China.[3][4] burdak 03:35, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
1.^ Thakur Deshraj: Jat Itihas (Hindi), Maharaja Suraj Mal Smarak Shiksha Sansthan, Delhi, 1934
2.^ Thakur Deshraj: Jat Itihas (Hindi), Maharaja Suraj Mal Smarak Shiksha Sansthan, Delhi, 1934
3.^ Bhim Singh Dahiya: Aryan Tribes and the Rig Veda, Dahinam Publishers, Haryana, India,1991
4.^ Bhim Singh Dahiya: Jats the Ancient Rulers, Dahinam Publishers
Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kanishka
Thanks Raviji for asking evidences from John Hill on Kanishka's clan. We need some more evidences. I have further added a note to that discussion as under -
Hi John Hill, After your note to verify sources about the clan of Kanishka I further searched books with me and put more references at appropriate places in the article on clan of Kanishka's section. All references lead to the same fact that Kanishka was Kaswan Jat and it can not be anything else. Apart from literature and inscriptions the biggest evidence is that Kaswan clan is in Jats as on today in Rajasthan. Majoritry of them are in Churu district in Rajasthan. So as I am from that area and have first hand information about them. If there is any evidence otherwise, as Ravi Chaudhary has said, it may be placed for discussion.
About the origin of Kushans I take from Wikipedia article on Kushan which is as under -
"Chinese sources describe the Guishuang (Ch: 貴霜), i.e. the "Kushans", as one of the five aristocratic tribes of the Yuezhi (Ch: 月氏), a loose confederation of Indo-European peoples. The Yuezhi are also generally considered as the easternmost speakers of Indo-European languages, who had been living in the arid grasslands of eastern Central Asia, in modern-day Xinjiang and Gansu, possibly speaking versions of the Tocharian language, until they were driven west by the Xiongnu in 176–160 BCE. The five tribes constituting the Yuezhi are known in Chinese history as Xiūmì (Ch: 休密), Guishuang (Ch: 貴霜), Shuangmi (Ch: 雙靡), Xidun (Ch: 肸頓), and Dūmì (Ch: 都密).
The Yuezhi reached the Hellenic kingdom of Greco-Bactria, in the Bactrian territory (northernmost Afghanistan and Uzbekistan) around 135 BCE, and displaced the Greek dynasties there, who resettled in Indus basin (in present day Pakistan) in the western part of the Indo-Greek Kingdom.
In the following century, the Guishuang (Ch: 貴霜) gained prominence over the other Yuezhi tribes, and welded them into a tight confederation under yabgu (Commander) Kujula Kadphises. The name Guishuang was adopted in the West and modified into Kushan to designate the confederation, although the Chinese continued to call them Yuezhi."
According to Thakur Deshraj the Shivi gotra Jats of Shivaliks and lower reaches of Lake Manasarowar left this area after the war of Mahabharata and migrated to Uttar Kuru. Some of them settled in Punjab in the area known as 'Yadu ki Dung', some settled in Kashmir and the rest moved far north up to Siberia. [1]
The Krishna vanshi people in Sanskrit were called 'Karshney' and 'Karshniya'. Karshniya or Kasaniya is a gotra of Jats found in Rajasthan. These Krishna vanshi people in China were known as Kushan or Yuezhi.[2]
Bhim Singh Dahiya has established that Kushan or Yuezhi were Jats. There were two branches of Yuezhi people. One of the branches was called 'Ta-Yuezhi' which means 'The great Jats'. The other branch was 'Siao-Yuezhi' which means 'The little Jats'. The Greek historian Herodotus has written Massagetae for Ta-Yuezhi and Thyssagetae for Siao-Yuezhi. The Yuezhi people inhabited the Outer Mongolia and Gansu province of China.[3][4] burdak 03:35, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
1.^ Thakur Deshraj: Jat Itihas (Hindi), Maharaja Suraj Mal Smarak Shiksha Sansthan, Delhi, 1934
2.^ Thakur Deshraj: Jat Itihas (Hindi), Maharaja Suraj Mal Smarak Shiksha Sansthan, Delhi, 1934
3.^ Bhim Singh Dahiya: Aryan Tribes and the Rig Veda, Dahinam Publishers, Haryana, India,1991
4.^ Bhim Singh Dahiya: Jats the Ancient Rulers, Dahinam Publishers
Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kanishka
ravichaudhary
New member
Yuehzhi or yueh chi is simply the english transliteration of the Chinese script.
The phoentic sound is ' Jutia'.( of the Juts)
The correct terminology to use is the Jutia or Gutia.( the G being pronounced as in "George")
To Western scholars, this is simply ' nomenclature' and they do not pay any attention to this detail , but it causes a lot of distortation.
Burdakji and others, I suggest you use the term "Jutia ( chinese -Yueh Chi)".
This may be a little cumbersome in the begining, but it will get the correct terminology across.
and using correct terminology is important.
Ravi Chaudhary
The phoentic sound is ' Jutia'.( of the Juts)
The correct terminology to use is the Jutia or Gutia.( the G being pronounced as in "George")
To Western scholars, this is simply ' nomenclature' and they do not pay any attention to this detail , but it causes a lot of distortation.
Burdakji and others, I suggest you use the term "Jutia ( chinese -Yueh Chi)".
This may be a little cumbersome in the begining, but it will get the correct terminology across.
and using correct terminology is important.
Ravi Chaudhary
But what if all this is a name coincidence?
totaly different people whit similar names .for exemple lets take 2 diferent people.Armenians and aromanians- in their language even armanians-(a small people from Greece and Macedonia).Their names are similar but they are not from the same root.
The name armenian came from har mannii ,hight places,while aromanians came from the name of city of Rome(post-latin rotacism).
So,is posible that similar names as goths,yutes,jats etc, to be from totaly diferent origins? In thousand of words,name coincidence can be a problem.
Is an african tribe call massai,which is similar whit massa getae,but i bet that is no conection betwin these 2 people.May be is not a good exemple but is the only one that came in my mind now.
totaly different people whit similar names .for exemple lets take 2 diferent people.Armenians and aromanians- in their language even armanians-(a small people from Greece and Macedonia).Their names are similar but they are not from the same root.
The name armenian came from har mannii ,hight places,while aromanians came from the name of city of Rome(post-latin rotacism).
So,is posible that similar names as goths,yutes,jats etc, to be from totaly diferent origins? In thousand of words,name coincidence can be a problem.
Is an african tribe call massai,which is similar whit massa getae,but i bet that is no conection betwin these 2 people.May be is not a good exemple but is the only one that came in my mind now.
narenderkharb
Active member
But what if all this is a name coincidence?
totaly different people whit similar names .for exemple lets take 2 diferent people.Armenians and aromanians- in their language even armanians-(a small people from Greece and Macedonia).Their names are similar but they are not from the same root.
The name armenian came from har mannii ,hight places,while aromanians came from the name of city of Rome(post-latin rotacism).
So,is posible that similar names as goths,yutes,jats etc, to be from totaly diferent origins? In thousand of words,name coincidence can be a problem.
Is an african tribe call massai,which is similar whit massa getae,but i bet that is no conection betwin these 2 people.May be is not a good exemple but is the only one that came in my mind now.
You have a point there.
But yehzhi are also known as tusharas in Indian literature and we find tushara group in Tomar jats and not in any other cast.
But again we find problem relating yehzhi to jats as ..
Yehzhi and Kaniska are said to be tartars not jats..
If we take little yehzhi they are said to have a tradition still prevalent in gujjars of himachal and jammu kashmir of moving cattle up and down the hills with the change of seasons living half year at one place and other half at other place.
narenderkharb
Active member
When we say that jats are considered Indo Aryan or Indo Sythian what we mean by two terms...
As Aryan is not a race and has Irani majority non jat population (genetics) priest non jat class plus possibly jats than it leads we are reffering to religion again their we are not entirly vedic had shiva and other faiths.
When we speak indo sythian than we know sythian had different components many of which were not at all jats again sythian language resemble ossetic languages what about indus area parakrit than.
And sythian may be aryan or aryan may be sythian ..
As Aryan is not a race and has Irani majority non jat population (genetics) priest non jat class plus possibly jats than it leads we are reffering to religion again their we are not entirly vedic had shiva and other faiths.
When we speak indo sythian than we know sythian had different components many of which were not at all jats again sythian language resemble ossetic languages what about indus area parakrit than.
And sythian may be aryan or aryan may be sythian ..
Last edited:
narenderkharb
Active member
When test reports of the skulls of Indus valley sent to England and later published by Archeological survey OF India confirms only two races Jats and Chamars and churrae than what else proof do we need to prove our existence in 3000 BC here.
Note...no other group other than JATS in higher class was mentioned as the inhabitants of this civilization in british report submitted to ASI.
Note...no other group other than JATS in higher class was mentioned as the inhabitants of this civilization in british report submitted to ASI.
ravichaudhary
New member
Test reports
Narendra
Do you have the exact reference and quote?
If so, could you please scan and post it?
Ravi Chaudhary
When test reports of the skulls of Indus valley sent to England and later published by Archeological survey OF India confirms only two races Jats and Chamars and churrae than what else proof do we need to prove our existence in 3000 BC here.
Note...no other group other than JATS in higher class was mentioned as the inhabitants of this civilization in british report submitted to ASI.
Narendra
Do you have the exact reference and quote?
If so, could you please scan and post it?
Ravi Chaudhary
narenderkharb
Active member
This information was provided by a Pakistani historian and is present on internet in pdf files .I will try to find the link..
According to refernce britishers sent the skulls of Indus valley people to england to varify the people who were its inhabitants and scientists after studying reported those skulls of Jats and SCs.
This REPORT was sent in NEHRU times to India and reported in ASI but not quoted by Indian fellows, why cannot unserstand.
Bruhie and than suggestion of southIndian is one of the funniest theories which we see today by a selcted group.
According to refernce britishers sent the skulls of Indus valley people to england to varify the people who were its inhabitants and scientists after studying reported those skulls of Jats and SCs.
This REPORT was sent in NEHRU times to India and reported in ASI but not quoted by Indian fellows, why cannot unserstand.
Bruhie and than suggestion of southIndian is one of the funniest theories which we see today by a selcted group.