First a request to all, plz dont put ji with my name... I had requested this couple of times before... secondly, plz try be sober while writing...
-vinod
-vinod
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
ravichaudhary
New member
Ghangas/Gangas
I had written on this some time go. see: -
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JatHistory/message/3295
The Ghangas
At the turn of the first millennium circa 0 BCE, we find a movement of
Jats from the Afghanistan central Asian area into the Indian
subcontinent. they were known to Indian historians by various names,
as Kushans in the North ,and as Saka in the Sind area.
They established various Janpadhs or republics, and also threw up a
number of rulers, people like Kaniska for the Kushans, and Rudraraman
etc for the Sakas.
Their territory spread from Central Asia, to the Bay of Bengal and
Orissa, and central and Southern India
We find many movements of Jat clans both southwards and back
northwards- Chalukya (Solankis), Rathi Dahiya, Kuntal, Dasarna, and
Virk etc
This is an account of the Ghangas, Gangas clan.
The Ghangas are also written as the Gangas.
In later times some historians took note of the empires established by
a clan, which was known as the Ghangas or Gangas, and as the Eastern
and Western Ghangas. The clan name is the same as the Gang (a),
Ghangas, of Haryana, U.P.
Professor Harihar Quanago made an exploration of the Gangas clan
origins etc, and though his account is steeped in much speculation and
Puranic lore, it does contain some interesting facts, which he has not
been able to connect. Beyond a vague statement that they came from
North India, from the Ganga –Yamuna basins.
We find two major dynasties in South India, over the period, known as
the Eastern Gangas and the Western Gangas.
The empires spread from Karnatak, to Orissa, to Andhra Pradesh.
The Southern Gangas histories state that they came south from North
India. About 500 CE, led by leader Vishnugupta.
They were originally from the land between the Ganga and the Jumna
/Yamuna rivers. They are linked to Ahichtra and Ayodhyapur in the
Ganga/Jumna basin.
All this area is Jat territory.
We also find a Jat Goth ` Gangas" in Modern Haryana, Punjab and
Western U.P.
Who were these Gangas?
In his article, Dr. Harihar Quanago tells us,
That the Gangas came from North India in 5th century CE, and settled
in Karnatak and Kalinga (modern Orissa,) and then ventured further south.
He tells us "In the Andhavaram copperplate inscription of Indravarman
III of Ganga dynasty, the Gangas are described as the descendants of
the `Tumbura' dynasty
So far (per Dr Quanago, but not quite true) no historian has been able
to identify this Tumbura as a dynasty.
It is mentioned in the Vayu Purana that at the foot hills of the
Vindhyas, there was a Janapada (human habitation) named Tumura, Tumbura:
"Toshalah Koshalaschaiva Taipura Vaidisastratha
Tumurastamburaschaiva sat Suranishadhaih saha
Anupastundikerascha Vitihotrahyabantayah
Ete Janapadah sarve Vindhya prustha nivasinah."
[Vayu Purana, 1st Part, 45 chapters, Bharatvarsha Varnana.]
The translation of these lines is given below. The Janapadas such as
Tosali,
Kosala, Tripura, Vidisha, Tumura, Tumhura, Nishadha, Anupa,
Sundhikera, Vitihotra
and Abanti are at the foot of the Vindhyas. This implies that all
these Janapadas are to
the north of the Vindhyas.
"Tumura Tumbura adi Janapada jete
Vindhyagiri antarbhukta emane Samaste."7
These two lines can be translated as follows. The Janapadas like
Tumura, Tumbura
etc. are all situated at the foot of the Vindhyas"
. Bachan Dubey, a researcher, while identifying the Tumbura race, has
aptly stated, while dealing with the Janapadas of Vindhya Pristha of
puranic period, mentions Malaya, Karusa (Baghel Khand), Mekala
(Amarkantak), Utkal, Dasarma (Dhasan), Kiskindha (it is different from
Kiskindha of South India), Tosali (Sisupalagarh in Orissa), Kosala
(Dakshina Kosala, Raipur Bilaspur), Tripuri (Tripuri near Jabalpur),
Vaidisa (Bhelsa), Naisadha (Narvargarh), Tundikara (Sindikar in
Matsya), Vitihotra, Anupa (Omkar Mandhatri along the Narmada) and
Tumbara (Tumain-Tumburu, Masya)".
What this does tell us , and this is confirmed by general history,-
is the expansion of Jats into central and South India, more commonly
known to Historians as the expansion of the
"Kushan' and the' Dharan Gupta' empires.
In the term `Tumura- we easily recognize the `Tumar or Tomar'. Clan of Jats. Utkal, Dasarna, Malaya (Mal, Malli) Kisking, Vaidisa, Matsya, Kara are also all Jat goths or clan names.
He writes:
." This means the Kaivarttas had first settled on the bank of river
Saraju (Sarayu) or river Gogri in Oudh or Ayodhya. There is a
tradition to the effect that their Ancestors had settled in Midnapur district in 822 Saka eras crossing the plateau of Madhya Pradesh. The five leaders who led them to this region had established five separate kingdoms namely, (1) Tamralipta or Tamluk, (2) Balisita or Mainagarh, (3) Turkee, (4) Sujamutha, (5) Kutabpur."
Here we see the movement continues in the year 822 Saka, or circa 746
CE. We find a name Turkee, or Turka, which is another variant of the
Jat Goth Tur or Toor, of which again Tomar, Tumar is a variant.
The Gangas link to the Tomar clan of Jats is also quite interesting.
For brief note about the Gangas of Southern India from Wikipedia,
which will need review and amendment see;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gangas
Ravi Chaudhary
For Harihar's Quanango's article see
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JatHistory/message/3296
Re: Ghangas( Gangas) Jats of North and South India
THE ORIGIN OF GANGA DYNASTY
· A NEW INSIGHT
I had written on this some time go. see: -
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JatHistory/message/3295
The Ghangas
At the turn of the first millennium circa 0 BCE, we find a movement of
Jats from the Afghanistan central Asian area into the Indian
subcontinent. they were known to Indian historians by various names,
as Kushans in the North ,and as Saka in the Sind area.
They established various Janpadhs or republics, and also threw up a
number of rulers, people like Kaniska for the Kushans, and Rudraraman
etc for the Sakas.
Their territory spread from Central Asia, to the Bay of Bengal and
Orissa, and central and Southern India
We find many movements of Jat clans both southwards and back
northwards- Chalukya (Solankis), Rathi Dahiya, Kuntal, Dasarna, and
Virk etc
This is an account of the Ghangas, Gangas clan.
The Ghangas are also written as the Gangas.
In later times some historians took note of the empires established by
a clan, which was known as the Ghangas or Gangas, and as the Eastern
and Western Ghangas. The clan name is the same as the Gang (a),
Ghangas, of Haryana, U.P.
Professor Harihar Quanago made an exploration of the Gangas clan
origins etc, and though his account is steeped in much speculation and
Puranic lore, it does contain some interesting facts, which he has not
been able to connect. Beyond a vague statement that they came from
North India, from the Ganga –Yamuna basins.
We find two major dynasties in South India, over the period, known as
the Eastern Gangas and the Western Gangas.
The empires spread from Karnatak, to Orissa, to Andhra Pradesh.
The Southern Gangas histories state that they came south from North
India. About 500 CE, led by leader Vishnugupta.
They were originally from the land between the Ganga and the Jumna
/Yamuna rivers. They are linked to Ahichtra and Ayodhyapur in the
Ganga/Jumna basin.
All this area is Jat territory.
We also find a Jat Goth ` Gangas" in Modern Haryana, Punjab and
Western U.P.
Who were these Gangas?
In his article, Dr. Harihar Quanago tells us,
That the Gangas came from North India in 5th century CE, and settled
in Karnatak and Kalinga (modern Orissa,) and then ventured further south.
He tells us "In the Andhavaram copperplate inscription of Indravarman
III of Ganga dynasty, the Gangas are described as the descendants of
the `Tumbura' dynasty
So far (per Dr Quanago, but not quite true) no historian has been able
to identify this Tumbura as a dynasty.
It is mentioned in the Vayu Purana that at the foot hills of the
Vindhyas, there was a Janapada (human habitation) named Tumura, Tumbura:
"Toshalah Koshalaschaiva Taipura Vaidisastratha
Tumurastamburaschaiva sat Suranishadhaih saha
Anupastundikerascha Vitihotrahyabantayah
Ete Janapadah sarve Vindhya prustha nivasinah."
[Vayu Purana, 1st Part, 45 chapters, Bharatvarsha Varnana.]
The translation of these lines is given below. The Janapadas such as
Tosali,
Kosala, Tripura, Vidisha, Tumura, Tumhura, Nishadha, Anupa,
Sundhikera, Vitihotra
and Abanti are at the foot of the Vindhyas. This implies that all
these Janapadas are to
the north of the Vindhyas.
"Tumura Tumbura adi Janapada jete
Vindhyagiri antarbhukta emane Samaste."7
These two lines can be translated as follows. The Janapadas like
Tumura, Tumbura
etc. are all situated at the foot of the Vindhyas"
. Bachan Dubey, a researcher, while identifying the Tumbura race, has
aptly stated, while dealing with the Janapadas of Vindhya Pristha of
puranic period, mentions Malaya, Karusa (Baghel Khand), Mekala
(Amarkantak), Utkal, Dasarma (Dhasan), Kiskindha (it is different from
Kiskindha of South India), Tosali (Sisupalagarh in Orissa), Kosala
(Dakshina Kosala, Raipur Bilaspur), Tripuri (Tripuri near Jabalpur),
Vaidisa (Bhelsa), Naisadha (Narvargarh), Tundikara (Sindikar in
Matsya), Vitihotra, Anupa (Omkar Mandhatri along the Narmada) and
Tumbara (Tumain-Tumburu, Masya)".
What this does tell us , and this is confirmed by general history,-
is the expansion of Jats into central and South India, more commonly
known to Historians as the expansion of the
"Kushan' and the' Dharan Gupta' empires.
In the term `Tumura- we easily recognize the `Tumar or Tomar'. Clan of Jats. Utkal, Dasarna, Malaya (Mal, Malli) Kisking, Vaidisa, Matsya, Kara are also all Jat goths or clan names.
He writes:
." This means the Kaivarttas had first settled on the bank of river
Saraju (Sarayu) or river Gogri in Oudh or Ayodhya. There is a
tradition to the effect that their Ancestors had settled in Midnapur district in 822 Saka eras crossing the plateau of Madhya Pradesh. The five leaders who led them to this region had established five separate kingdoms namely, (1) Tamralipta or Tamluk, (2) Balisita or Mainagarh, (3) Turkee, (4) Sujamutha, (5) Kutabpur."
Here we see the movement continues in the year 822 Saka, or circa 746
CE. We find a name Turkee, or Turka, which is another variant of the
Jat Goth Tur or Toor, of which again Tomar, Tumar is a variant.
The Gangas link to the Tomar clan of Jats is also quite interesting.
For brief note about the Gangas of Southern India from Wikipedia,
which will need review and amendment see;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gangas
Ravi Chaudhary
For Harihar's Quanango's article see
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JatHistory/message/3296
Re: Ghangas( Gangas) Jats of North and South India
THE ORIGIN OF GANGA DYNASTY
· A NEW INSIGHT
narenderkharb
Active member
I had written on this some time go. see: -
we find a movement of Jats from the Afghanistan central Asian area into the Indian
subcontinent. they were known to Indian historians by various names,
as Kushans in the North ,and as Saka in the Sind area.
They established various Janpadhs or republics, and also threw up a
number of rulers, people like Kaniska for the Kushans, and Rudraraman
etc for the Sakas.
Their territory spread from Central Asia, to the Bay of Bengal and
Orissa, and central and Southern India
We find many movements of Jat clans both southwards and back
northwards- Chalukya (Solankis), Rathi Dahiya, Kuntal, Dasarna, and
Virk etc
Ravi and laxman ji
This is a major problem with JAT History
We are not able to identify the people who were we related to and than trace their movement.
Where according to Laxman ji sugesstion ghangas may be well settled in bengal areas in 300 BC .according to you they made their movement and settled as kushana and saka somewhere first century BC or AD.
Now you both supporting gangas as ghanghas jats are reffering to diffrent set of people and here entire jat history look just a manipulative excercise.
Now these tomar tur tushar or takhar groups related to kushan jats didn't reach bengal in 300 BC THAN how ghangas Jats could be tomars who were related to ghandarides.
So in order to have a better understanding of our history and a true reflection of our past we should try to identify exact group of people with which we can be identified and for that we need a healthy discussion about various models regarding our antiquity ...
Now I am trying this for a long time on yahoo jat history group , so that our conclusions are solid as solutions are found only via discussions .
But you seems not intersted at all,despite of so many reminders ,I simply can't understand why?really disppointed us.
My emphasis to know your and laxman ji's views was because of the fact that you present that to all others via internet as a jat view point about our history in addition to jattworld and ******** ,unless we have a clear approach about us how can we tell others about our past ,who will read our conflicting asssumptions and suggestions than will simply say it is all a futile attempt to cater to a jat ego.
So let us discuss all these theories and models of jat movement and settlement pattern ,arrive at a conclusion and than present our unquestionable view to others.
Otherwise we are happy as Gangas were Ghanghas jats.. Kabambas were Kadyan jats... Kushan were Kaswans jats.... Chola were Chahal jats...... ,yes all were jats.... but sometimes wonder why you forget Jatavs that were first jats as well on a more similar name and similar reasoning.
Last edited:
Hi Narender ji,
We are searching and unless the search is complete we can not conclude. So keep on searching till we reach truth.
I make you clear that Jatavs were not Jats. The Bharatpur Dynasty established by displacing Balai people dwelling in that area earlier. To run a state it was necessary to keep balai (harijans) in good mood. So it was decided by the Jat rulers of Bharatpur that they be given a title 'Jatav' indicating the brothers of Jats. It is wrong to derive Jat word from Jatav. Jat word is as old as Brahma.
regards,
We are searching and unless the search is complete we can not conclude. So keep on searching till we reach truth.
I make you clear that Jatavs were not Jats. The Bharatpur Dynasty established by displacing Balai people dwelling in that area earlier. To run a state it was necessary to keep balai (harijans) in good mood. So it was decided by the Jat rulers of Bharatpur that they be given a title 'Jatav' indicating the brothers of Jats. It is wrong to derive Jat word from Jatav. Jat word is as old as Brahma.
regards,
Just to clarify... the difference between words Ganga and Ghanghas is not just 2 h's and 1 s... first of all when one writes Gangas, is it plural of गंगा ? or is it गनगस?... Ghanghas (घनघस्)altogether seems to make a different word... on side note, there is a clan Gangah(गंगाह्) clan of Jats is listed in tribes and castes but no other info is available... other remark is that, the words of historians like Thakur Desraj or anyone shouldn't be taken on the face value unless primary ref is quoted in the book... even in that too, its important to see how primary source is interpreted... anyway, good luck...
Kharb, your discussion for model is welcome... start a new thread... I would mostly end up agreeing with that but we could have discussion...
-vinod
Kharb, your discussion for model is welcome... start a new thread... I would mostly end up agreeing with that but we could have discussion...
-vinod
A S Altekar's book is out of print but IT IS ONLINE....
http://dli.iiit.ac.in/cgi-bin/Brows...dia/bookReader_test.cgi?barcode=2030020004253
Sadly on a brief browse it doesn't seem to have much ref to Jats... but looks interesting how panchayat system got developed... its not obvious to link present panchayat system with ancient republics and there are missing links too...
-vinod
http://dli.iiit.ac.in/cgi-bin/Brows...dia/bookReader_test.cgi?barcode=2030020004253
Sadly on a brief browse it doesn't seem to have much ref to Jats... but looks interesting how panchayat system got developed... its not obvious to link present panchayat system with ancient republics and there are missing links too...
-vinod
Ravi ji,
I agree that Sharma's book is probabily best treatment of republics of vedic and northeast India but it's not about republics of northwest India after 500BC(Jat tribes). It's generally said that writers like Jayaswal and Majumdar had been little liberal in glorifying ancient govt system becuase they were nationalist writers in time of India's new independence and there was subconscious attempt to prove that India is capable of governing itself. Something like -Democracy is not new, we knew it 2000 years back.
Sharma says that Altekar's "State and Govt in Ancient India" is better than these writers so I just ordered it. There is another book by Altekar.
A history of village communities in western India, (University of Bombay. Economic series, no. v) (Unknown Binding) by Anant Sadashiv Altekar
http://www.amazon.com/history-villa...f=sr_1_21/102-0232693-2947375?ie=UTF8&s=books
It would be really interesting to read history of village community in northwest india, it might have some missing links about Jat history. But I dont know how to get this book:-((.
-vinod
S
sktewatia
Guest
One important point I'm catching from Burdakji's and all other people here that It is describing Jat migration from North West to rest of India at least after 600 BC with the advent of Iron. Jats carried their social system and material culture and agriculture to further deeper in India. From here is the beginning of Jat/Got (caste system) which originally was nothing but Jat (our race) system only. Modern/ancient caste system of India is nothing but a corrupt form of our Jat system only.
This Aryan-isation/Aryanisation of India from Rigvedic North West India, should in fact be written as Jat-isation/Jatisation in history. Again there are no traces all over in rest of India of Aryan word now but Jat (caste in english) and Got(present gotra) words are abundantly prevalent. Both of these words are derived from We Jats and Gots only.
Though we may all be not very precise here (rather we can not be also because Jat history is yet to be explored), but mota-moti Present dicussion does answer the natural querry that if Jats can be found in North and West right upto Scandinavia then they must be found in east and south (India) also.
This Aryan-isation/Aryanisation of India from Rigvedic North West India, should in fact be written as Jat-isation/Jatisation in history. Again there are no traces all over in rest of India of Aryan word now but Jat (caste in english) and Got(present gotra) words are abundantly prevalent. Both of these words are derived from We Jats and Gots only.
Though we may all be not very precise here (rather we can not be also because Jat history is yet to be explored), but mota-moti Present dicussion does answer the natural querry that if Jats can be found in North and West right upto Scandinavia then they must be found in east and south (India) also.
S
sktewatia
Guest
Q1. Who were the people in the army who fought Kalinga War by Ashoka ?
Q2. Do all agree that Kharavela was a Jat ?
Q3. Where people have gone after Kalingawar ?
Regards,
Ans. 1-3. They were mostly Jats led by Kharvela who faught with another Jat Asoka. Asoka was a young ambitious fellow. A mixture of Jat (bindusar) with Brahmin Mother. His forefathers tolerated Kalinga and deep south due to these reasons only. I recall his expedition to Kabul/Kandhar area also. Similar, he tried in Kalinga. It was basically a fight between Mor and Kharav paals.
His policy of Dhamma can be explained in a similar way as that of Ajatshatru, the son of Bimbisara.
S
sktewatia
Guest
Q.3. People of Kalinga had gone nowhere they had been absorbed over there in Jat (caste) system.
The Ancient Haryana was Aryana and Pandavas the Jats
Five villages demanded by Pandavas
Mahabharata tells that When Pandavas were defeated in chausar they were forced to leave the state for 13 years. During most of this time, they lived at place called Varnavata (modern Bairat) in Jaipur district in Rajasthan. Having lived there for pretty long time, the Pandawas sent a message to the Kauravas that they won't lay their claim to the throne if they were given just five villages. These 5 villages were :
1. Indraprastha (Purana Qila - Delhi
2. Panprastha (Panipat) - Haryana
3. Sonprastha (Sonipat) - Haryana
4. Tilprastha (Tilpat) - Haryana
5. Vyagprastha (Bagpat) - Uttar Pradesh
If you study the population of people who lived in all thse areas mentioned in Mahabharata it is is found to be the homeland of Jats.
The literary-cum-historical analysis and the archaeological evidence from Hastinapur and other related sites clearly indicate that it is the Painted Gray Ware Culture that was associated with the Mahabharata story and the event took place in 900 BC.
All these are still Jat villages. In ancient times these were included in Haryana. Haryana is nothing but Aryana. Here H is absent which is not un common as we speak Hospital as Aspatal in Hindi and Urdu. It is due to linguistic variations.
Thus Aryans were Jats inhabiting ancient Haryana and at the same time their another branch was at Iran which is also known as Aryana. The similarity of many common places and rivers proves this.
Five villages demanded by Pandavas
Mahabharata tells that When Pandavas were defeated in chausar they were forced to leave the state for 13 years. During most of this time, they lived at place called Varnavata (modern Bairat) in Jaipur district in Rajasthan. Having lived there for pretty long time, the Pandawas sent a message to the Kauravas that they won't lay their claim to the throne if they were given just five villages. These 5 villages were :
1. Indraprastha (Purana Qila - Delhi
2. Panprastha (Panipat) - Haryana
3. Sonprastha (Sonipat) - Haryana
4. Tilprastha (Tilpat) - Haryana
5. Vyagprastha (Bagpat) - Uttar Pradesh
If you study the population of people who lived in all thse areas mentioned in Mahabharata it is is found to be the homeland of Jats.
The literary-cum-historical analysis and the archaeological evidence from Hastinapur and other related sites clearly indicate that it is the Painted Gray Ware Culture that was associated with the Mahabharata story and the event took place in 900 BC.
All these are still Jat villages. In ancient times these were included in Haryana. Haryana is nothing but Aryana. Here H is absent which is not un common as we speak Hospital as Aspatal in Hindi and Urdu. It is due to linguistic variations.
Thus Aryans were Jats inhabiting ancient Haryana and at the same time their another branch was at Iran which is also known as Aryana. The similarity of many common places and rivers proves this.
S
sktewatia
Guest
Haryanka dynasty of Bimbisara. And later Nandal Jats there as Nandas in Magdha.
S
sktewatia
Guest
And that Ajatshatru was there. Ajat means non-Jat. He was enemy of non-Jat, the son of Bimbisara.
N
nknauhwar
Guest
We can work out on Ajatshatru now. Who, he was? Why Bindusra, Bimbisra, Kadwasra, Motsara, even Jatasra, Morasara and Narasara are there?
Last edited by a moderator:
N
nknauhwar
Guest
Five villages demanded by Pandavas
Mahabharata tells that When Pandavas were defeated in chausar they were forced to leave the state for 13 years. During most of this time, they lived at place called Varnavata (modern Bairat) in Jaipur district in Rajasthan. Having lived there for pretty long time, the Pandawas sent a message to the Kauravas that they won't lay their claim to the throne if they were given just five villages. These 5 villages were :
1. Indraprastha (Purana Qila - Delhi
2. Panprastha (Panipat) - Haryana
3. Sonprastha (Sonipat) - Haryana
4. Tilprastha (Tilpat) - Haryana
5. Vyagprastha (Bagpat) - Uttar Pradesh
If you study the population of people who lived in all thse areas mentioned in Mahabharata it is is found to be the homeland of Jats.
The literary-cum-historical analysis and the archaeological evidence from Hastinapur and other related sites clearly indicate that it is the Painted Gray Ware Culture that was associated with the Mahabharata story and the event took place in 900 BC.
All these are still Jat villages. In ancient times these were included in Haryana. Haryana is nothing but Aryana. Here H is absent which is not un common as we speak Hospital as Aspatal in Hindi and Urdu. It is due to linguistic variations.
Thus Aryans were Jats inhabiting ancient Haryana and at the same time their another branch was at Iran which is also known as Aryana. The similarity of many common places and rivers proves this.
Please, include Patlipat (Patliputra) of Magadh also.
Usually Pat ending villages/places are found on the banks of rivers. Pandavas were wise enough to demand them.
Even Indraprastha is called as Indpat. I get this clue because I'm from Braj (Mathura) area. In my language Pat is usually associated with water.
Last edited by a moderator:
S
sktewatia
Guest
Its good. Evenfurther extending it Vishakhapatnam, Machhlipatnam, etc. They are also found near water/ocean.
The meaning of Ajatshatru, as deduced in history books that he was enemyless, is wrong. He rather had many enemies, perhaps more than any other king. Even to the extent that his own father and maternal uncles were his enemies. The name is Ajatshatru and not Agyatshatru. He respected Budha and often badly depicted by Brahmnical texts, like Nandas and Mauryas. With beginning of Iron, Jats were able to clear dense forests along river Ganges where continuosly increasing rainfall and enough water in Ganges river (Ganges drains the water of 25% area of India), produced enough surplus food to maintain huge armies. This gave rise to 16 Mahajanpadas. Where different other people were also to be Jatised/Aryanised to make them learn agriculture and civilised/Jat life. So adopting such title by a Jat king is not surprising.
Otherwise also counter question arises that if not Jat, then what else this Haryanka dynasti was????
The meaning of Ajatshatru, as deduced in history books that he was enemyless, is wrong. He rather had many enemies, perhaps more than any other king. Even to the extent that his own father and maternal uncles were his enemies. The name is Ajatshatru and not Agyatshatru. He respected Budha and often badly depicted by Brahmnical texts, like Nandas and Mauryas. With beginning of Iron, Jats were able to clear dense forests along river Ganges where continuosly increasing rainfall and enough water in Ganges river (Ganges drains the water of 25% area of India), produced enough surplus food to maintain huge armies. This gave rise to 16 Mahajanpadas. Where different other people were also to be Jatised/Aryanised to make them learn agriculture and civilised/Jat life. So adopting such title by a Jat king is not surprising.
Otherwise also counter question arises that if not Jat, then what else this Haryanka dynasti was????
S
sktewatia
Guest
Caste/Jat Sytem of Indian Subcontinent: Jat and Brahmins
Brahmins were just one of the 16 royal clans of Aryans or one of the clans of Jats. Their original name Brahm is still Jat got and it is found even today in various european nations also. Many Jats who proceeded further to make other races civilised or to Jatise them came to be known as Brahmins. This Jat/caste system however did not remain same as original Jat system. When these Brahmins came back to make their Jat/Caste/Jati system they were rebuffed by Jats. Little did they know that they were teaching their own masters their own system.
Jat's jatis were their gots, all equal. But later Jat/caste system or even called Brahmanical system came back with different Jats/Jatis which were not equal.
Most of this Jatisation spread and got compacted in India after Iron. The Indus/Aryan civilisations are not mentioning the Iron. Its not depicted anywhere in Mahabharta itself. These are called bronze civilisations. That jungle used to be burnt for clearing the land for agriculture. Thats why fire god was given such importance. Concept of Yagna came from here only.
Some Jat historians were bold like Desraj, Joon and Dahiya etc. That time it was hard to believe what they said. But they did tackle well some crucial and astonishing points in history. I like Kharav's theory also in this regard. Though may not be very precise but heavy arguments are there in its favour.
Brahmins were just one of the 16 royal clans of Aryans or one of the clans of Jats. Their original name Brahm is still Jat got and it is found even today in various european nations also. Many Jats who proceeded further to make other races civilised or to Jatise them came to be known as Brahmins. This Jat/caste system however did not remain same as original Jat system. When these Brahmins came back to make their Jat/Caste/Jati system they were rebuffed by Jats. Little did they know that they were teaching their own masters their own system.
Jat's jatis were their gots, all equal. But later Jat/caste system or even called Brahmanical system came back with different Jats/Jatis which were not equal.
Most of this Jatisation spread and got compacted in India after Iron. The Indus/Aryan civilisations are not mentioning the Iron. Its not depicted anywhere in Mahabharta itself. These are called bronze civilisations. That jungle used to be burnt for clearing the land for agriculture. Thats why fire god was given such importance. Concept of Yagna came from here only.
Some Jat historians were bold like Desraj, Joon and Dahiya etc. That time it was hard to believe what they said. But they did tackle well some crucial and astonishing points in history. I like Kharav's theory also in this regard. Though may not be very precise but heavy arguments are there in its favour.
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks for keeping humor in jat history section, otherwise it become quite boring... Ajatshatru(born of Bimbisara and Lichhavi or Koshal lady) was enemy of Vajjan confedracy which also was, according to you of course, nothing but Jats...
-vinod
-vinod
And that Ajatshatru was there. Ajat means non-Jat. He was enemy of non-Jat, the son of Bimbisara.
S
sktewatia
Guest
Q. 1. What was this Haryanka Dynasty?
Q. 2. Who was Ajat Shatru? Why adopted this Title? What does it mean?
Q. 3. Jat word is found before Mauryas, the More Jats, why so?
Q. 4. Why questioning always please contribute at least something.
Q. 2. Who was Ajat Shatru? Why adopted this Title? What does it mean?
Q. 3. Jat word is found before Mauryas, the More Jats, why so?
Q. 4. Why questioning always please contribute at least something.
S
sktewatia
Guest
there was no ARYAN. and no INVASION. Its Indus civilization and Jats only.