Origin of Rajputs

[rock127]

Please see if you can find online versions (PDF for example, or links), and share them here.

Ok, may be I can post the pics of book cover or some important excerpts so members can also try to find out the books or online version.

 

[Virendra]

One more question: What is the source or origin of the word, and/or, the clan of "Thakurs?"

@thakur_ritesh, please shed some light.

Words like Khan and Thakur are titles. I'm also not sure how they came to be used as Surnames.

 

[Patriot]

One more question: What is the source or origin of the word, and/or, the clan of "Thakurs?"

@thakur_ritesh, please shed some light.

Thakur as surname is not essentially a Rajput & thakur word does not represent any clan of Rajputs. But Rajputs use word Thakur in the start of name for example Thakur XYZ Singh Shekhawat.

Thakur word in vernacular language may imply one who has stronghold or power.

 

[thakur_ritesh]

Thakurs used to have small time riyasats. The land holding and the number of people in a clan were limited. Invariably, a Thakur, who is a Rajput, will trace his ancestry to Rajasthan, no matter where he might be based today.

Though, @Patriot is right about the way the name is written, but that is not a rule.

Then, Thakur also gets given as titles, I have also heard Brahmins using the surname in Bihar, not sure how true.

 

[Virendra]

Puranas are not accurate sources of info because they have been altered quite a bit. Even some religious heads are of the opinion that they have been tampered with.

You are rejecting all the purans in one shot by some allegations of tampering? This way, how many historic sources in this world would remain credible?
This is akin to saying that since the European scholars did a biased, non-contextual and supremacist treatment in India studies; hence they should not be considered.
Neither are correct. Again, like I said before grain can be separated from chaff if one does his homework.
Not everything has to be taken at face value, and not everything has to be rejected enmasse.

Rajputs have not been intermarrying as much as I believe you are suggesting because of distances. Perhaps after the arrival of Mughals, when marriages were used as political tools that such practices were promoted. (I am guessing)

My point is, the source base of medieval Rajputs genetic stock is not one narrow clan of a single region.
It consists of nearly a dozen old clans spread between Himachal and Gujarat-MP, some of whom are already mentioned.
So looking at the bigger picture, we know that Rajputs and their ancestors have always been spread across a huge belt in north India.
Thus there will obviously be as many variations in the physical appearence as you would expect from any people in such case.
Rajasthan is only the epicentre and not the universe of Rajputs.

 

[nrupatunga]

@Virendra when you say rajasthan is epicentre of rajputs. Why is it so? I mean when they had been ruling across north india why did they cluster themselves in rajasthan. Is it because when muslims came to india they destroyed all other kingdoms, hence only kingdoms which were based out of rajasthan manage to survive. This in turn attracted others to rajasthan.

Also one more thing, how did various groups/families with different customs, regions/origins still are grouped under rajput umbrella. For ex solanki(chalukyas), rathods(rashtrakootas) have their origins in south. How come they are clubbed with say bihari rajputs or HP rajputs???

 

[Virendra]

@Virendra when you say rajasthan is epicentre of rajputs. Why is it so? I mean when they had been ruling across north india why did they cluster themselves in rajasthan. Is it because when muslims came to india they destroyed all other kingdoms, hence only kingdoms which were based out of rajasthan manage to survive. This in turn attracted others to rajasthan.

That is right to an extent. But Rajputs are found outside Rajasthan even today and were so even during the bloodiest of medieval times.
Up north from Rajasthan, hilly areas of Himachal and then Kashmir. Down south in Gujarat and even in MP.
Rajputs were fighting against Mughals even outside Rajputana, such as Bundelas under Maharaj Chhatrasaal.
There is a substantial population of Chauhans in Delhi even today while their origin was in Sambhar, Rajasthan.
There were setbacks in many places, whether in or out of Rajputana.
The ones in gangetic plains like Gahadavals (under JaiChand) were ruoted and due to such setbacks there were migrations into Rajputana.
So comes the difference - State. Outside Rajputana the Rajputs were still there, but Rajput States were gone.
Somehow, the clans and states in Rajputana not only kept resistance on but also protected their culture. Hence the higher visibility.

These reasons attribute to the special place Rajasthan has today when it comes to Rajputs.

Opinion:
I think the Rajputs could never reach their zenith back (collectively or under any specific King), after they lost free access to the gangetic plains and its resources.
Till that hadn't happened, Kanauj in the plains was the Imperial capital of north India .. ruled by the Rajputs.
After the invasions broke into Gangetic plains via Punjab .. on only one occasion (under Sanga) did the Rajputs show some chance of recovering into the gangetic plains.
Sanga having PeelaKhal near Agra as the northern boundary, was obviously breathing on the neck of Ibrahim Lodi.
But we know what happened after that.

Regards,
Virendra

 

[Virendra]

Also one more thing, how did various groups/families with different customs, regions/origins still are grouped under rajput umbrella. For ex solanki(chalukyas), rathods(rashtrakootas) have their origins in south. How come they are clubbed with say bihari rajputs or HP rajputs???

Sorry I cannot offer anything authoritatively on that. I'm only an inconsistent student of medieval and military history.
What I know is,
a) New clans emerge from the old ones all the time and
b) Distance becomes another factor. It was only a branch of Rashtrakutas that had reached UP.
Rathores came out of Badaun in UP from where that branch had vanished.
At the times of Rashtrakutas, there were dynasties acting as States, not clan states as in medieval Rajputana.
Politico-Military realities of north were different from south.
When the centralized polity ended up in north, the clans adjusted to the new season and formed their own small states.
I don't know what you mean by clubbing here.

 

[dhananjay1]

I know Rajasthan is known as epicentre of Rajputs; but Sorry it is not so fixed as if Kshatriyas of Rajasthan had been in Rajasthan since the big bang and the ones of Gangetic plains were always in Gangetic plains.
Marwar's Rathores (branching from Rashtrakutas) were in Gangetic plains, as tributaries of Jaichand Gahadvala when Ghori struck.
Later they migrated to Rajputana and settled in Pali.
Amber's Kachhwahas came in from Gwalior.
Mewar's Guhilots came in from Saurashtra/Gujarat.
Rashtrakutas rose from Deccan to reach till Kannauj i.e. Gangetic plains.
So you see, Clans and dynasties have been fliudly moving here and there. One can't characterize them merely on geography.

When I say 'Rajputs = kshatriya-s of Rajasthan', I am describing the term 'rajput' and not the people. The word 'Rajput' became popular in Rajasthan to describe the clans that were successful in resisting Turk invasion. It was only later that a lot of clans outside Rajasthan started using the word 'Rajput'. As I said it's a game of semantics. The kshatriya-s of Rajasthan and outside of Rajasthan are obviously related and interrelated, that's not the point I am debating here. It's only about the term.

I would rather not dismiss or gulp someone completely. Every author, every historian has succeeded and failed at points.
Need is to separate grain from the chaff. History reading is no clean business. There is a lot of mess to glean through.

No real historian takes Todd seriously when it comes to the distant history. He just reported hearsay and that too mixed with his own imagination. There are far more better sources to study the history of Rajasthan. As I said he is only good for the events he witnessed personally and that too with a pinch of salt.

 

[nrupatunga]

I don't know what you mean by clubbing here.

What i meant was for ex shepard class of say gujurat and bihar are not same. There are lot of difference whether its customs or many other things. But the soldiers/warrior class was still called rajputs whether its bihar or rajasthan or jammu. Similar to shepards as mentioned here, why did not rajputs be classified as different communities in different places?? But are still clubbed as rajputs.

 

[Singh]

You are rejecting all the purans in one shot by some allegations of tampering? This way, how many historic sources in this world would remain credible?
This is akin to saying that since the European scholars did a biased, non-contextual and supremacist treatment in India studies; hence they should not be considered.
Neither are correct. Again, like I said before grain can be separated from chaff if one does his homework.
Not everything has to be taken at face value, and not everything has to be rejected enmasse.

My point was Puranas shouldn't be taken as the primary source, you need other sources to corroborate and triangulate data.

My point is, the source base of medieval Rajputs genetic stock is not one narrow clan of a single region.
It consists of nearly a dozen old clans spread between Himachal and Gujarat-MP, some of whom are already mentioned.
So looking at the bigger picture, we know that Rajputs and their ancestors have always been spread across a huge belt in north India.
Thus there will obviously be as many variations in the physical appearence as you would expect from any people in such case.
Rajasthan is only the epicentre and not the universe of Rajputs.

Because of the differences in culture, language, appearances, customs, and the vast geographic spread etc
I believe Rajputs are from disparate clans. In other words they are not consanguineous relations of one another.

 

[pmaitra]

De-mystifying the "Yavana" Clans

This essay will try to establish the likelihood of the Yavanas being Ionians. In Anthropological studies, two approaches taken are, Ethnological Anthropology, and Linguistic Anthropology. Due to massive invasions and migrations, and inter-mingling of races, Ethnological Anthropology might not be sufficient. The genetic makeup of communities centuries ago have not remained the same. What has remained, however, are accounts, narratives, folklore, and last but not the least, the nomenclature.

As a caveat, it is declared, that the aim of this essay is to establish the probability, and not the certainty, of Yavanas being Ionians.

Ionians
Ionians were people living in the western shores of what today would be modern day Turkey or roughly, Anatolia.

Ionia (Ancient Greek Ἰωνία or Ἰωνίη) is an ancient region of central coastal Anatolia in present-day Turkey, the region nearest Ä°zmir, which was historically Smyrna. It consisted of the northernmost territories of the Ionian League of Greek settlements. Never a unified state, it was named after the Ionian tribe who, in the Archaic Period (800–480 BC), settled mainly the shores and islands of the Aegean Sea. Ionian states were identified by tradition and by their use of Eastern Greek.

Source: Ref [1]

Fig [1]: Ionia, and the rest of Anatolia

Fig [2] The Seleucid Empire in 301 BC.

Fig [3] The Great Seljuq Empire in 1092.

Series of Events:
700 BC (circa) - Ionia comes under the Anatolian Empire. Ref [1] and Fig [1]
500 BC (circa) - Ionia comes under Persian rule (Satrapi), following the defeat of Croesus by Cyrus. Ref [1]
479 BC () - Ionia comes under Greek (Athenian) rule with strong attachment to Persia. Ref [1]
333 BC () - The Greeks (Alexander) defeats the Persians (Darius; Achaemenid Empire). Ref [2]
326 BC () - Battle of Hydaspes (Alexander vs Porus). Ref [3]
312 BC () - Seleucus founds the Seleucid Empire in Babylon. Ref [4]
310 BC (circa) - Chandragupta Maurya founds the Mauryan Empire. Ref [6]
268 BC () - Ashoka Maurya becomes ruler of the Mauryan Empire. Ref [8]
261 BC () - Antiochus II Theos becomes ruler of the Seleucid Empire. Ref [7]
063 BC (circa) - Decline of Seleucid Empire. Ref [4]
1050 AD (circa) - Rise of the Seljuk Empire. Ref [5] and Fig [3]

Meanwhile, in india
While the centre of the Seleucid slowly gave way to the Seljuk Empire, the Mauryan Empire maintained diplomatic relations with the Greeks. Ashoka of the Mauryan Empire and Antiochus II Theos of the Seleucid Empire were contemporaries. Stone edict, erected by Ashoka, refer to the King of Yavanas, refering to Antiochus II Theos, among other Greek rulers, thus:

In the Gandhari original Antiochos is referred to as "Amtiyoko nama Yona-raja" (lit. "The Greek king by the name of Antiokos"), beyond whom live the four other kings: "param ca tena Atiyokena cature 4 rajani Turamaye nama Amtikini nama Maka nama Alikasudaro nama" (lit. "And beyond Antiochus, four kings by the name of Ptolemy, the name of Antigonos, the name of Magas, the name Alexander"

Source: Ref [9] and [10]

Seleucid and Seljuk, are they same?
Both the Seleucid Empire, and the Seljuk Empire were located in approximately the same region. Both the words sounds the same. The Seleucid Empire was founded after the Greeks took over Persia, although, it is unlikely that the Persians had lost their culture, because, later, when the Seljuk Turks would arrive, they would adopt the Persian culture. The Seljuk Turk refers to Turkic people who had migrated from present day Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan to Persia, mixed with the local population, adopted and patronized Persian language and culture. Thus, the Seljuk Turks were probably nominal Turks, i.e. "Turks" in name only.

The Seljuqs mixed with the local population and adopted the Persian culture and language in the following decades.

Source: Ref [5]

[HR][/HR]

Vergina Sun

The Greeks are known to have used the Sun as a symbol.

The significance of the Vergina Sun is unclear. Archaeologists do not agree whether the sun was a symbol of Macedon, an emblem of Philip's Argead dynasty, a religious symbol representing the Twelve Gods of Olympus, or simply a decorative design.

Source: Ref [11]

Hellenic communities do take that the Sun seriously. The Verginal Sun, apart from being in coins from the Hellenic Era, also feature in modern day flag. Ref: Fig [4], [5], and [6]. Moreover, Seleucus could possibly be a cognate of Helios, Helius, or Sol, (ref [12]), all of which mean Sun (or Sun God), although no authoritative source supporting this could be found. Hypothetically speaking, Yavanas could be related to present Chauhan and Chavan clans in India, and if that hypothesis were to be taken true, the connection of the Chauhans with Fire and/or Sun (Agnivanshi or Suryavanshi) would be plausible.

Fig [4]: The Vergina Sun, designated as an official national symbol by the Hellenic Parliament since February 1993, appears on the unofficial Flag of Greek Macedonia.

Fig [5]: The flag of the Republic of Macedonia between 1992 and 1995.

Fig [6]: Vergina Sun on a Greek Coin

[HR][/HR]

References:
[1] Ionia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[2] Darius III - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[3] Battle of the Hydaspes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[4] Seleucid Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[5] Seljuq dynasty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[6] Maurya Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[7] Antiochus II Theos - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[8] Ashoka - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[9] Edicts of Ashoka - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[10] Gandhari.org – Editions – Inscription
[11] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vergina_Sun
[12] http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/sungodsgoddesses/a/070809sungods.htm

 

[civfanatic]

References:
[1] Ionia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[2] Darius III - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[3] Battle of the Hydaspes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[4] Seleucid Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[5] Seljuq dynasty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[6] Maurya Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[7] Antiochus II Theos - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[8] Ashoka - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[9] Edicts of Ashoka - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[10] Gandhari.org – Editions – Inscription
[11] Vergina Sun - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[12] Sun Gods - List of Sun Gods From Ancient Religions

It's rather difficult to take an article seriously with this reference list. Anyway, I think it beyond doubt that the Indian terms "Yona" and "Yavana" mean "Greek". This is because there are numerous terms for Greece and Greeks in other languages which are etymologically similar to "Yona" and "Yavana". A few examples:

• Yauna in Old Persian
• Yunan in New Persian (this term is the same as in modern Hindi and Arabic)
• Yunon in Tajik
• Yavan in Hebrew
• Yunastan in Old Armenian
• Yunanistan in Turkish, Azeri, and Kurdish

 

[pmaitra]

It's rather difficult to take an article seriously with this reference list. Anyway, I think it beyond doubt that the Indian terms "Yona" and "Yavana" mean "Greek". This is because there are numerous terms for Greece and Greeks in other languages which are etymologically similar to "Yona" and "Yavana". A few examples:

• Yauna in Old Persian
• Yunan in New Persian (this term is the same as in modern Hindi and Arabic)
• Yunon in Tajik
• Yavan in Hebrew
• Yunastan in Old Armenian
• Yunanistan in Turkish, Azeri, and Kurdish

Is it easier to take an article seriously with no reference?

The Wikipedia articles themselves have many references.

 

[Singh]

@pmaitra @civfanatic we are not grading papers, so wikipedia should not be discounted.

 

[pmaitra]

Another Interesting List:

Source: 36 royal races - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Virendra]

What i meant was for ex shepard class of say gujurat and bihar are not same. There are lot of difference whether its customs or many other things. But the soldiers/warrior class was still called rajputs whether its bihar or rajasthan or jammu. Similar to shepards as mentioned here, why did not rajputs be classified as different communities in different places?? But are still clubbed as rajputs.

Because Rajputs wherever they be, ultimately are Kshatriyas - common base. But consider this - in north India we've seen Rajput Clan-States evolving from the ruins of Gupta monarchy and imperial/federal structure of dynasties. This clan state transformation didn't follow ditto down south (don't know why).
Thus we see the north clans who grabbed Statehood, clubbed as Rajputs.
I don't know much about Rajputs of Bihar or since when they started getting called Rajputs. But I've read that there were couple of Rajput migrations to Bihar from Rajputana.

No real historian takes Todd seriously when it comes to the distant history. He just reported hearsay and that too mixed with his own imagination. There are far more better sources to study the history of Rajasthan. As I said he is only good for the events he witnessed personally and that too with a pinch of salt.

I have no intention of glorifying Tod, but he didn't just parrot what he was told (though that is also one of the things he did).
He also researched on his own by collecting bardic manuscripts and inscriptions.

My point was Puranas shouldn't be taken as the primary source, you need other sources to corroborate and triangulate data.

Ok. What other sources should we triangulate against? Be mindful that they have to be contemporary or near contemporary, to be put against the testimony of Puranas.
The Greeks today IMO are a mixed stock of ancient Indian immigration and other European/Northern people.

Because of the differences in culture, language, appearances, customs, and the vast geographic spread etc
I believe Rajputs are from disparate clans. In other words they are not consanguineous relations of one another.

Yes, could be from disparate clans but all Indian stock, fighting Sakas & Kushans on occasions. Some were vassals of imperials like Guptas, others held their own clan principalities. I'm out .. will post on 11 of them ancient clans later in detail when I get back.

From one of the bardic manuscripts, a verse line depicting fine internal rhyme created by application of repetitive bi-syllables.

Maarana Marana Karan Rana Maagho Talking about killing and dying in the battle.

Regards,
Virendra

 

[rock127]

I got many books specifically about Rajputs and their origin/clans/castes but it would take some time(more of effort) to checkout.

Please see if you can find online versions (PDF for example, or links), and share them here.

Ok, may be I can post the pics of book cover or some important excerpts so members can also try to find out the books or online version.

Ok here comes the cover pages and links.Would read a bit and post some more info from inside.

 

[rock127]

Ok guys... so I just quick read the book with Mach7 speed and found specific explanations of origins of Rajputs in addition to the descriptions of Rajput casts/origins etc.

Would try to put the stuff here asap and it would answer lot of queries.

 

[Simple_Guy]

Lithuanian tribe traces Rajput roots

Guess it belongs here.