Study of Inscriptions throwing light on the Jat History

Jit?

Dr. Rajpal Ji,
I wanted ypu to respond the core of my post. Kumarapala Raso is a much later wolrk and so is Prithiviraja raso. Let us come to these l.ater. We may later examine the phenomina of many clan names commoln to the Jats and the Rajputs.
At this stage, after patiently lnteracting and pickling up information suppied in various posts, I would like to state that Tod has got the original wrong in translating.
Kindly quote what Kumarpal Raso says regarding the tyerm 'jit'. I would be intereste in knowing and responding.

 
Last edited:
Are we moving ahead or just spinning around? Almost in all the posts, Rajpal ji is emphasizing on Tod translation and Dr. rana is rejecting that based on his opinion (read translation), though he has given his raesons. These posts seem only duplicate and both seem firm at different point. It will be better if rana ji points are countered one by one if they don't seem agreeable.

One more reference given by Rajpal ji is from "kumarpal raso". Rajpal sir, can we focus on inscriptions first?

When we are dealing with issues related with thousands of years old, it takes reasonable time to collect irrefutable results and we have just spent just 12 days to present three inscriptions related with three ruling dynasties and some supportive or disapproval type of interpretations. More and more people are expected to join hands in this endeavour as the discussion progresses, so keep up sharing your inputs in the form of data/comments.

After solving inscriptions puzzle, as a reader I may convince with reasoning given by rana ji for the interpretation of word "Jit " in reference of salindra if he throw some light on kumarpal raso. But i don't see any primary source for kumarpal raso posted by Rajpal ji.

Inscriptions are also counted under literary sources in historical studies and given precedence over books etc. because no interpolation is possible in despoiling the original information recorded on them. But in the instant case, the original inscription is out of reach, so we have to depend on this available source for settling the issue of our discussion.

The information derived from original Kumarpal Raso is quoted by me as given by Tod as well as his own table of genealogy of the 36 royal castes of Rajasthan. [As of now, I have no access to original Kumarpal Raso]. However, those who have doubt about the authenticity of Tod's inclusion of Jats in the list based on KP Raso as quoted above are requested to point out the alternate information from the original KP Raso, if possible, to put the discussion on sound footing.

Friend, Perhaps, You have mistaken the stand of Rana Sahib as well as mine. Both of us want to reach the common destination i.e. authenticated identity of the ruler Salinder's Caste and sub-caste ! I neither accept nor reject Tod on the issue as of now. This is the methodology of historical research that we all are following.

To attain our goal, the present hypotheses framed. Now anti-theses and syntheses will follow and ultimately an agreed point will emerge in the form of THESIS.


Dr. Rana has given valuable insight into the matter and direction to the discussion, and I have also tried to contribute to provide my humble bit by presenting available information to carry forward my hypothesis. The Raso evidence is there to substantiate the presence of Jats as well as Saraya mentioned in the translated version of the Inscription.

You are also requested to share what has led you to be convinced to go this way and not the other way. Give reasonable argument to substantiate your stand, please. [This must be taken in the sense that everybody has his reasoning and all of us are trying to find out the truth without prejudice for or against one another's arguments].

Thanks
 
Last edited:
To all the participants and members of the site, it is requested kiindlly to share their views/comments based on primary as well as secondary sources [preferably primary data] or links on the internet connected data to enable the above hypotheses to be tested to arrive at some reasonable conclusion.
 
Ram Chandra Pura Inscription (Inscription No. II. ) says

"To my foe, salutation! This foe of the race of Jit Cathida, how shall I describe, who is resplendent by the favour of the round bosom of Roodrani, and whose ancestor, the warrior Tukhya, formed the garland on the neck of Mahadeva."


This sentence is missing in Thakur Deshraj's translation in Hindi. Can somebody do its exact Hindi translation ?

Let us reply some questions. Who is the foe here? Why is foe being saluted? Whose ancestor is Tukhya?

What I understand is that the foe of Jit Cathida is Tukhya means Taxaka. But Taxaka is Nagavanshi Jat. So he is not supposed to be foe. Cathida (काठिड़ा) word is local variation of Kathi (कठी), the same people who fought with Alexander. The Kathi are said to have given their name to the Kathiawar region in Gujarat. They are said to be descended from the Sura, an ancient race of sun worshipers found in western India. Colonial British historians consider the Kathi to be a Scythian tribe that settled in the Kathiawar region in the second century B.C. (People of India Gujarat Volume XXI Part Two edited by R.B Lal, P.B.S.V Padmanabham, G Krishnan & M Azeez Mohideen, pp.614-619)


In Madhya Pradesh there is an area in Jhabua district known by the name of Kathiwara. I have visited this area. It is in dense forest. During British rule it was part of Bhopawar Agency, which included Dhar also. Dhar is the place of Origin of Panwars (Parmars) as mentioned by James Tod.

From these evidences we find that Sarya is variant of Sura. But Sura is itself a Jat clan.

Hukum Singh Panwar ([wiki]The Jats:Their Origin, Antiquity and Migrations/Appendices/Appendix No.1[/wiki]) has given the ancestry of Bharatpur rulers starting from 1. Yadu. Shura is at S.No. 37 and Krishna at S.No. 43 as under:

34. Andhaka → 35. Bhajmana → 36. Viduratha → 37. Shura → 38. Shini → 39. Bhoja → 40. Hardika → 41. Devamidha → 42. Vasudeva → 43. Krishna → 44. Pradyumna

Shall we not conclude that King of this Inscription is not Jat?
 
Last edited:
List of some important Gotras of Tak kshatriyas

Dr Naval Viyogi in his book "Nagas: the Ancient Rulers of India, their origin and history" [p.160] has provided a list of some important Gotras of Tak kshatriyas and explained their history. The list is reproduced below which includes Jat as well.

Andoria (Andhra), Bath, Bathon (Paithan or Paitan) Bhat, Bhatti (Yadavas), Chima (Shilpa), Chohan (Rajput), Darji, Dogra (Rajput), Gawhar (Gowharwal Rajput), Jassal, Jat, Kakar, Kalal, Kanait (a branch of Kulindas), Kanaujia, Kanpuri, Khakhar, Khas (Khasa Nag), Kori (Koliya Nag), Lahota (Nag), Lata (Nag), Lodhi, Madar (Madra), Mahar, Mahra, Mahtar (Branch of Satavahanas), Mair, Malwan (Malava), Mor (Morya), Nagara (Nag), Nila (Nag), Pal, Panwar, Pawar (Parmar), Raj-Rishi, Rangra (Rajput), Rathor (Rajput), Rati (Ratti or Rastri), Salotri (Salvagotri) , Taka (Takshak), Tank, Wattu,

If we gone through the book by Dr Naval Viyogi: Nagas – The Ancient Rulers of India. (p.154). This gives reference of Dr Bharat Singh's book - "Pali Sahitya ka Itihas" pp-21 while discussing Etymology of some clans gives following table how alphabets change. It says there is a peculiar tendency in certain alphabets while changing them from sanskrit to pali or prakrit language. Few examples are:

Sanskrit → Prakrat

R → L

P → B

K → H

T → Th or Dh

Ch → J

Sh → Chh


Applying the rule of "tendency in certain alphabets while changing them from sanskrit to pali or prakrit language as above we find -


The clan Taka (Takshaka) in Sanskrit becomes Dhaka in Prakrat.

This explains origin of Dhaka so far not mentioned by Any Jat Historian.

This formula can be used to explain origin of many Jat clans from Nagavansha.

This also leads us to conclude that Jats were in India when Aryans were spreading their rule.
 
Last edited:
Ram Chandra Pura Inscription (Inscription No. II. ) says

"To my foe, salutation! This foe of the race of JIT CATHIDA1, how shall I describe, who is resplendent by the favour of the round bosom of ROODRANI 2, and whose ancestor, the warrior TUKHYA 3, formed the garland on the neck of Mahadeva."

This sentence is missing in Thakur Deshraj's translation in Hindi. Can somebody do its exact Hindi translation ?


Let us reply some questions. Who is the foe here? Why is foe being saluted? Whose ancestor is Tukhya?

What I understand is that the foe of Jit Cathida is Tukhyameans Taxaka. But Taxaka is Nagavanshi Jat. So he is not supposed to be foe. Cathida (काठिड़ा) word is local variation of Kathi (कठी), the same people who fought with Alexander. The Kathi are said to have given their name to the Kathiawar region in Gujarat. They are said to be descended from the Sura, an ancient race of sun worshipers found in western India. Colonial British historians consider the Kathi to be a Scythian tribe that settled in the Kathiawar region in the second century B.C. (People of India Gujarat Volume XXI Part Two edited by R.B Lal, P.B.S.V Padmanabham, G Krishnan & M Azeez Mohideen, pp.614-619)

From these evidences we find that Sarya is variant of Sura. But Sura is itself a Jat clan.

Hukum Singh Panwar (The Jats:Their Origin, Antiquity and Migrations/Appendices/Appendix No.1) has given the ancestry of Bharatpur rulers starting from 1. Yadu. Shura is at S.No. 37 and Krishna at S.No. 43 as under:

34. Andhaka → 35. Bhajmana → 36. Viduratha → 37. Shura → 38. Shini → 39. Bhoja → 40. Hardika → 41. Devamidha → 42. Vasudeva → 43. Krishna → 44. Pradyumna

Shall we not conclude that King of this Inscription is not Jat?

Translation
Laxmzn Ji,
Thanks a lot for giving me a window of light through your observation that Thakur Deshraj has not given the translation of the beneictory verse and then by raising the question that why a foe is being offered salutation here (in Tod's translation). Yes you have rightly questioned- who is the foe here?The answer is already contained in your question. There is no person like jit here. It is a salutation for the hero who has scored victory over the enemies(jitarye in sanskrit). How could Thakur DeshRaj translate into Hindi what was ab initio a wrong renering of the original? I may point out that Thakur Deshraj had not gone along the presentation of the term jit at least in the benedictory portion. He had rendered this term as Jataa (of Shiva) quite rightly, though he faltered in the subsequent stanza. I had, in my earlier posts on Inscription given that direction of reconstruction and interpreting the real import of the term 'ji't by 'Tod,.

Thank you laxman Ji, once again for being able to elicit from depths of my mind what was lurking for quite some time.
 
Takshakas and Jats

I quote from Dr Naval Viyogi: Nagas – The Ancient Rulers of India

"Some scholars think these Jertikas were Jats But it is not acceptable since Taka or Takshakas and Vahika appear in the Mahabharat period (950 B.C.) where as Kushanas, the progenitors of Jats appears on the horizon of history about 1000 ears later, as invaders from North. On the other hand, Jat is the name of a Gotra of Taka Kshatrias. Hence above Jat is not related to Jat caste or Kushanas but Takas.

It has been already observed, that ancient inscriptions in the Pali or Buddhist character have been discovered in various parts of Rajasthan of the race called Tastas , Takshak and Tak relating to the tribes, the Mori (or Maurya) Parmar their descendants. Nagas and Takshakas are synonymous appellation in Sanskrit for the snake, and the Takshak is the celebrated Nagabansha of the early heroic history of India."(Ref: Page-145: Nagas, the Ancient Rulers of India, their Origin and History)

Note - This paragraph brings on record two types of Jats one Jat as a caste and other as a Gotra of Takshaka Kshatriyas. But it clears doubt that Jat as a Gotra existed in the Period of James Tods Inscriptions.
 
Takshakas and Jats

I quote from Dr Naval Viyogi: Nagas – The Ancient Rulers of India

"Some scholars think these Jertikas were Jats But it is not acceptable since Taka or Takshakas and Vahika appear in the Mahabharat period (950 B.C.) where as Kushanas, the progenitors of Jats appears on the horizon of history about 1000 ears later, as invaders from North. On the other hand, Jat is the name of a Gotra of Taka Kshatrias. Hence above Jat is not related to Jat caste or Kushanas but Takas.

It has been already observed, that ancient inscriptions in the Pali or Buddhist character have been discovered in various parts of Rajasthan of the race called Tastas , Takshak and Tak relating to the tribes, the Mori (or Maurya) Parmar their descendants. Nagas and Takshakas are synonymous appellation in Sanskrit for the snake, and the Takshak is the celebrated Nagabansha of the early heroic history of India."(Ref: Page-145: Nagas, the Ancient Rulers of India, their Origin and History)

Note - This paragraph brings on record two types of Jats one Jat as a caste and other as a Gotra of Takshaka Kshatriyas. But it clears doubt that Jat as a Gotra existed in the Period of James Tods Inscriptions.

Dr Naval Viyogi got it wrong all the way.

Taka is a section of Jats not the other way round, used for takshaks(nagas/takshila) or takars/takhars of tokaristan .
 
Last edited:
Narender Ji Dr Naval Viyogi's interpretation is not correct but it proves the antiquity of term Jat. Let us see The History of Takshak:

Dr Naval Viyogi writes that The name of Takshak Nag first appears in the Mahabharata as opponent of Pandavas. Hence, this seems to be one of the most ancient royal families of Naga race, who gave birth to the most of the Naga royal families of ancient India. Their capital was Taka-shar (Taki or Takka-war) near Sialkot. Cunningham mentions other names of this city as Taki and Asurar (of Assyrians). Their ancient traditional capital was Takshila. H. L. Kosare after Mahabharata informs that Arattas had their three branches Takka, Vahika and Jertika (Kosare P-253) (Page-144: Nagas, the Ancient Rulers of India, their Origin and History)

These people, in origin were inhabitants of Panjab or Indus Valley. Still three parts of this land are known as Taka, Majha (Madra) and Malava, which were ruled by three royal families or blood relatives of the same names. Malava is Southern part of Satluj river, land between Beas and Jhelam in general, is known as Majha and whole North-Western part beyond Jhelam or present Pakistan is known as Taka. (Page-144: Nagas, the Ancient Rulers of India, their Origin and History)

Takshaka's contribution to the Indian culture is unparalleled. We know Takshaka federation but we have yet to find such facts about Jats. It also means that at that time Jats were in the federation of Taka or Takshaka. Tastas , Takshak , Tak, Tank, Mori , Maurya, Parmar etc are all Jat clans also.

I quote some of terms in Hindi which are after Takashaka or Taka:

टका = Currency,
टंक = weight equal to four mashas; a coin; typing,
टकसाल = mint,
टंकी = storage tank,
टक = stare,
टकासी = interest charged at the rate of half anna per month,
टकाना= to stitch,
टकैत = prosperous,

तक्षण = wood or stone modelling
 
Last edited:
Shabda Brahma
Laxman Ji,
Yes, it is quite interesting. Bhartari Hari, the famous philosopher-poet-grammarian king had rightly held Shabda (simultaneously incorporating sound and sense together) was Brahma indeed. And the eminent physicist of our Times, FrtzoFCapra has so succinctly put in his recent book'the Hidden connections' that it is all a series of connections, one related to another in some or the other leaving nothing in essence except Brahma, the hidden power, called by any name.
In your list of words given on the above post one could notice the hidden connection i.e.tak, to cut. The oldest coins any where were to begin with those which are classed as punch marked. One could add to your list- tank-to engrave,
 
Narender Ji Dr Naval Viyogi's interpretation is not correct but it proves the antiquity of term Jat. Let us see The History of Takshak:

Dr Naval Viyogi writes that The name of Takshak Nag first appears in the Mahabharata as opponent of Pandavas. Hence, this seems to be one of the most ancient royal families of Naga race, who gave birth to the most of the Naga royal families of ancient India. Their capital was Taka-shar (Taki or Takka-war) near Sialkot. Cunningham mentions other names of this city as Taki and Asurar (of Assyrians). Their ancient traditional capital was Takshila. H. L. Kosare after Mahabharata informs that Arattas had their three branches Takka, Vahika and Jertika (Kosare P-253) (Page-144: Nagas, the Ancient Rulers of India, their Origin and History)

These people, in origin were inhabitants of Panjab or Indus Valley. Still three parts of this land are known as Taka, Majha (Madra) and Malava, which were ruled by three royal families or blood relatives of the same names. Malava is Southern part of Satluj river, land between Beas and Jhelam in general, is known as Majha and whole North-Western part beyond Jhelam or present Pakistan is known as Taka. (Page-144: Nagas, the Ancient Rulers of India, their Origin and History)

Takshaka's contribution to the Indian culture is unparalleled. We know Takshaka federation but we have yet to find such facts about Jats. It also means that at that time Jats were in the federation of Taka or Takshaka. Tastas , Takshak , Tak, Tank, Mori , Maurya, Parmar etc are all Jat clans also.

I quote some of terms in Hindi which are after Takashaka or Taka:

टका = Currency,
टंक = weight equal to four mashas; a coin; typing,
टकसाल = mint,
टंकी = storage tank,
टक = stare,
टकासी = interest charged at the rate of half anna per month,
टकाना= to stitch,
टकैत = prosperous,

तक्षण = wood or stone modelling

Burdak Ji,

Good list of words presented on identification of Nagvanshi/Takshac/Tak.

But, you will appreciate that at present we must concentrate our efforts on identification of the word 'Jat' or Ruling dynasties bearing information about the Jats. Our purpose is to present sufficient epigraph/inscription based material on this thread.

Subsequently we can try to pay attention to finding out other aspect of the problem i.e. clan/sub-clan or culla/gotra etc.
 
Let us come on words related with Jat. We know that every clan has contributed to society in some way or other. So we will find its imprints in some names. Jat being such a big race will certainly leave impressions on society in some form. We do not find the Jat word in the dictionary I am consulting right now. Though we have other all communities like Rajput, Brahman, Chamar, Kumhar but not the Jat. Then we can not suppose to find directly a word Jat in any Inscription.

So we have to find words related with Jat. Here is list which contain Jata (जट):

जटना - to rob, to snatch

जटल - prattling,gossiping, quibbling, tattling

जटा - tress, matted hair, fibrous root, Spikenard, root of a tree, branch, a method of repeating Vedic mantras

जटाजूट - matted and braided hair of head

जटाधर - an epithet of Shiva

जटाधारी - wearing matted hair

जटाना - to be deceived or cheated

जटामासी - Indian spikenard

जटाल - having matted locks of hair on the head, banyan tree

जटाव - potter's clay

जटित - clotted

जटिल - with matted hair, intricate

जठर - stomach

जाठ - wooden axis of oil or sugar mill, the post placed in the centre of a tank

जुट - pair, batch

जुटना - to unite

जुटली - with matted hair

जुटाना - to gather, to add

जुटाव - combination

All the words have sense of Uniting or Shiva's Locks. In Inscriptions we find glorifying of Shiva's Lock but no other God has opportunity to get his hair glorified. You look the image of Shiva. I do not find his lock of hairs as attractive as in Inscriptions. What is the reason? Shiva's Image has Sun, Moon, Snake on his head or neck. I think this indicates that Shiva United all people: Suryavanshi, Chandravansi and Nagavanshi to form Jats. Shiva's lock became Symbol of Jats. That is why there is mythological theory of Origin of Jats from Shiva's Locks. So in any Inscription if Shiva's Lock is glorified we should suspect a Jat component there.

Ex.1. Allahabad pillar inscription of Samudragupta

Samudragupta's fame has been compared with the pale yellow water of the river Ganga, which travelling by many paths, purifies the three worlds, flowing quickly on being liberated from confinement in the thickets of the matted hair (जटा) of (the) god Pashuupati.

प्रदान-भुज-विक्क्रम-प्रशम-शास्त्रवाक्योदयैरुपर्य्युपरि-सञ्चयोच्छ्रित-मनेक-मागर्गं यश: । पुनाति भुवन-त्रयं पशुपतेर्ज्जटान्तर्गुह-निरोध-परोमोक्ष-शीघ्रमिव पाण्डु गाङ्ग (पय:)।।

Ex.2. Mandasor Pillar Inscription of Yashodharman 532 AD

In the Mandasor inscription of Yasodharman and Vishnuvardhana it is stated that when the river Ganga was about to descend from heaven to earth, in order to break the force of its fall, god Siva (Pashupati) received it in the matted hair (जट) coiled above his forehead and projecting like a horn; its waters wandered there for a thousand years, before they eventually reached the earth.

Below is the exact English translation of Line containing this:

(L.6.) He by whom (his) head has never been brought into the humility of obeisance to any other save (the god) Sthanu; he, through the embraces of whose arms (Himalaya) the mountain of snow carries no longer the pride of the title of being a place that is difficult of access; he to whose two feet respect was paid, with complimentary presents of the flowers from the lock of hair on the top of (his) head, by even that (famous) king Mihirakula, whose forehead was pained through being bent low down by the strength of (his) arm in (the act of compelling) obeisance:

Note - It is to be noted that both Samudragupta and Yasodharman are considered to be Jats.
 
Last edited:
Terms from the root Jat-sanghjaate.

laxman Ji,
Your search and examples of all possible words derivable from Paninian dhaatu 'jat' ,meaning sanghate without any trace of the meaning of a communityin them should

logically lead to one conclusion that the term ''jaat which we use today for a community is not Sanskritic in origin.
But I find you again reverting to connect it with Shiva's hai lock xiting some inscriptional text for what purpose I am not able to fathom.
I would love to present you my recent book 'Jat, The Label and The People'. I will leave instructions with the Research and publication at Maharaja Surajmal Institute library tohand over a copy to you or your contact.

You will find the issue of the term discussed in the first two chapters.
 
Dr. Rajpal Ji,
The date given as 770 ( presumably in the malava/vikrama samvat =713 A.D.) is important.Have the3 professional historians not utilised thjis date in the chronological stuies? Is this Bhoja from the same dynasty to which the famous philosopher king Bhoja (11th century A.D.) belonged,or from that of Pratihara king Bhoja(9th cent.A.D.) of Kannauj? or he is entirely different. I have not locate the part where his jat identity is disclosed. kindly help and explain.

We must agree with Rana Saheb here as Neither Tod nor Inscription gives any hint about any Jat connection of maun mori in one or other way .

This not to say that Mori Kings were not Jats, there are evidences about Moryas being Jats which can be discussed in separate thread.It will be interesting to see how the Nagvanshi Moryas turned in to Parmaras and finally agnivansi Kashtriyas .
 
We must agree with Rana Saheb here as Neither Tod nor Inscription gives any hint about any Jat connection of maun mori in one or other way .

This not to say that Mori Kings were not Jats, there are evidences about Moryas being Jats which can be discussed in separate thread.It will be interesting to see how the Nagvanshi Moryas turned in to Parmaras and finally agnivansi Kashtriyas .

Friend,

Agree to what ?

Dr. Rana has just put a question to know if there was some connection between two Bhojas i.e. one ' Bhoja' mentioned in the document under reference and another celebrated King 'Bhoja' of Kanauj belonging to c.11th Century. Second question in his post is whether the inscription has been put to use by professional historians or not !

Therefore, there is no question of going with him or opposing him on the issue.

It is said that "caution, is, no doubt, a commendable virtue for the baffled inquirer after truth",

but

"extreme distrust is far more perilous to history than extreme felicity of belief."
 
Friend,

Agree to what ?

Dr. Rana has just put a question to know if there was some connection between two Bhojas i.e. one ' Bhoja' mentioned in the document under reference and another celebrated King 'Bhoja' of Kanauj belonging to c.11th Century. Second question in his post is whether the inscription has been put to use by professional historians or not !

Therefore, there is no question of going with him or opposing him on the issue.

It is said that "caution, is, no doubt, a commendable virtue for the baffled inquirer after truth",

but

"extreme distrust is far more perilous to history than extreme felicity of belief."

Must have missed it but I was searching word Jit /Jat in above inscription so is Dr Rana as highlighted in quoted post.
 
Must have missed it but I was searching word Jit /Jat in above inscription so is Dr Rana as highlighted in quoted post.

At this stage of discussion, instead of entering into finding out connection between the 'Moris' mentioned in the inscriptions being taken up for discussion and the Jats or old Maurya dynasty, we would prefer to discuss the contents of the Inscriptions as they are found engraved on them. They would automatically speak out when and where they did rule and to which group their identity leads them to connect.

In addition to Inscription 3 brought to notice by Tod, three/four inscriptions have also come to notice which we must take into account while discussing famous 'Man Mori' Inscription as these newer finds by the historians could perhaps throw light on the position of Mori ruling elite of Northern India during the period mentioned in these documents. Here translated versions/references are put before the readers to acquaint them about the presence of the 'MORIS' as testified by their documents and, those who are interested to see the original inscriptions can find out them on the bases of clues given in the standard references along with the references in the discussion here in under:
 
Rajpal ji, As always, you are again dictating the discussion, will you please allow members to open their mouth?.."taang fasai" is not good all the time.
:angel:
 
Last edited:
Back
Top