Jump to content

Talk:Rajput

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 8XM (talk | contribs) at 09:51, 10 January 2017 (My recent revert). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Castewarningtalk

Rajput Mughal Alliance

+ + Beginning in 1561, the Mughals actively engaged the Rajputs in warfare and diplomacy. [1] + Toward the end of the 16th century, the Mughal emperor Akbar entered into a series of alliances [2][3][4] [5] with numerous Rajput ruling houses, arranging marriages with Rajput princesses for himself and for his heirs. Mughal-Rajput marriages continued until the early 18th century, bringing many Rajput states into the imperial fold without costly military subjugation. The Rajput practice of giving daughters to the Mughal emperors in return for recognition as nobility and the honour of fighting on behalf of the Empire originated in this arrangement and thus the Mughals were often able to assert their dominance over Rajput chiefs in north India without needing to physically intimidate them.[6][7]

Furthermore, the Rajput relations with Mughal were consolidated by marriage and blood ties; the Akbar's successors, Jahangir and Shah Jahan were sons of Rajput Princesses is therefore not insignifant.[8]


Political Effect of Alliances

The political effect of these alliances was significant.[4] The interaction between Hindu and Muslim nobles in the imperial court resulted in exchange of thoughts and blending of the two cultures. Further, newer generations of the Mughal line represented a merger of Mughal and Rajput blood, thereby strengthening ties between the two. As a result, the Rajputs became the strongest allies of the Mughals, and Rajput soldiers and generals fought for the Mughal army under Akbar, leading it in several campaigns including the conquest of Gujarat in 1572.[9]


Further Reading- 1. Singh, Nau Nihal (2003). The Royal Gurjars: Their Contribution. Anmol Publications. pp. 329–330. ISBN 978-81-261-1414-6.

  • Kisari Mohan Ganguli, The Mahabharata of Krishna-Dwaipayana Vyasa Translated into English Prose, 1883-1896.


More books--

NO link between Vedic Kshatriyas(old Rajas) and medival Rajputs in many cases.[10]


The story of agnikula is not mentioned at all in the original version of the Raso preserved in the Fort Library at Bikaner.[11]

According to the book,a glimpse of medieval Rajasthan by Naravane & Malik the Agnikula theory for Rajputs was invented in 16th century to legitimise the “conversion” of foreign people as pure Kshatriyas.[10]

In the book by Satish Chandra,[12]


In fact, according to a number of scholars, the agnikula clans were originally Gurjaras (or Gurjars)[13] and [[Chauhan] was prominent clan of the Gurjars (or Gujjars).[14] Several scholars including D. B. Bhandarkar, Baij Nath Puri and A. F. Rudolf Hoernle believe that the Pratihara were a branch of Gurjars.[15][16][17][18][19][20] Prithviraj Chauhan,according to several scholars, was a Gurjar.[21][22] Historian Sir Jervoise Athelstane Baines states that the Gurjars were forefathers of the Sisodiyas.[23]


, Rajputana was essentially the country of the Gurjars.[24][25] Historian R. C. Majumdar explained that the region was long known as Gurjaratra (Gurjar nation), early form of Gujarat, before it came to be called Rajputana,later in the Mughal period,16th century.[26]

References

  1. ^ Richards, John F. (1996). The Mughal Empire. Cambridge University Press. pp. 17–21. ISBN 978-0521566032.
  2. ^ Imaging Sound: An Ethnomusicological Study of Music, Art, and Culture in Mughal India Bonnie C. Wade + University of Chicago Press, 1998 - Art - 276 pages
  3. ^ Against History, Against State Shail Mayaram Orient Blackswan, 01-Jan-2006 - 320 pages
  4. ^ a b Chandra, Satish (2005). Medieval India: From Sultanat to the Mughals Part - II. Har-Anand Publications. pp. 105–106. ISBN 978-8124110669.
  5. ^ http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/490092/Rajasthan/46056/History
  6. ^ Wadley, Susan Snow (2004). Raja Nal and the Goddess: The North Indian Epic Dhola in Performance. Indiana University Press. pp. 110–111. ISBN 9780253217240.
  7. ^ Sadasivan, Balaji (2011). The Dancing Girl: A History of Early India. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. pp. 233–234. ISBN 9789814311670.
  8. ^ Dana Leibsohn, Jeanette Favrot Peterson (2012). "Seeing Across Cultures in the Early Modern World". Art. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. pp. 89–90. Retrieved 21 October 2014.
  9. ^ Sarkar 1984, pp. 38–40
  10. ^ a b M. S. Naravane, V. P. Malik. The Rajputs of Rajputana: a glimpse of medieval Rajasthan. APH Publishing, 1999. ISBN 8176481181, 9788176481182. Pg 20
  11. ^ S.R. Bakshi. Early Aryans to Swaraj. p. 325. It has been reported that the story of agnikula is not mentioned at all in the original version of the Raso preserved in the Fort Library at Bikaner. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthor= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  12. ^ Satish, Chandra (1996). Historiography, Religion, and State in Medieval India. Har-Anand Publications. ISBN 8124100357.
  13. ^ Dasharatha Sharma (1975). Early Chauhān dynasties: a study of Chauhān political history, Chauhān political institutions, and life in the Chauhān dominions, from 800 to 1316 A.D. Motilal Banarsidass. p. 280. ISBN 978-0-8426-0618-9. According to a number of scholars, the agnikula clans were originally Gurjaras.
  14. ^ Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland (1834). Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, Volume 1999. Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain & Ireland. p. 651. By that marriage Harsha had contracted an alliance with the dominant race of the Gurjaras, of whom the chohans were a prominent clan.
  15. ^ Cite error: The named reference Jamanadas was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  16. ^ K.M. Munshi (1943). The Glory that was Gurjardesh.
  17. ^ Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland (1834). Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain & Ireland. Cambridge University Press for the Royal Asiatic Society. p. 648. The Parihars (Pratiharas), as Mr. Bhandarkar rightly points out, were one of the divisions of the Gurjaras.
  18. ^ Chopra, Pran Nath (2003). A comprehensive history of ancient India. Sterling Publishers Pvt. Ltd. p. 196. ISBN 81-207-2503-4, ISBN 978-81-207-2503-4. Al-Masudi who visited his (Gurjara mahipala) court, also refers to the great power and resources of the Gurjara pratihara rules of Kannauj.
  19. ^ Bhandarkar, Devadatta Ramakrishna (1989). Some Aspects of Ancient Indian Culture. Asian Educational Services. p. 64. ISBN 8120604571.
  20. ^ Baij Nath Puri, The history of the Gurjara-Pratihāras,Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, 1986, pp.1–3
  21. ^ Dasharatha Sharma (1975). Early Chauhān dynasties: a study of Chauhān political history, Chauhān political institutions, and life in the Chauhān dominions, from 800 to 1316 A.D. Motilal Banarsidass. p. 280. ISBN 0842606181, ISBN 9780842606189. According to a number of scholars, the agnikula class were originally Gurjaras.
  22. ^ Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland (1834). Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, Volume 1999. Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain & Ireland. p. 651. By that marriage Harsha had contracted an alliance with the dominant race of the Gurjaras, of whom the chauhans were a prominent clan.
  23. ^ Cite error: The named reference Sir Jervoise Athelstane Baines 1912 31 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  24. ^ Sir Jivanji Jamshedji Modi (1930). Dr. Modi memorial volume: papers on Indo-Iranian and other subjects. Fort Printing Press. p. 521. Rajputana was essentially the country of the Gurjaras, Gujarat came to be called after...
  25. ^ Asiatic Society of Bombay (1904). Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bombay, Volume 21. p. 416. But this much is certain that Rajputana was essentially the country of the Gurjaras {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthor= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  26. ^ Cite error: The named reference R.C. Majumdar 1994 263 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

Semi-protected edit request on 6 December 2016

I want to make some necessary changes into this article.Please grant me permission for same. Alarsaking (talk) 18:56, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done This is not the right page to request additional user rights.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 19:18, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 6 December 2016

The word Rajput came into existence in 8-9 Centuries but Rajputs were present from the very long time.Kshatriya (also known as warriors ) were also Rajputs who were Kings. Even Lord Rama and Lord Krishna belong to Rajput Clans like Suryavansham and Chandravansham. Please make this changes in your Article. Alarsaking (talk) 19:06, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. Please provide reliable sources to support your claims. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:09, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Goth

the ancient goth of rajput are Barsar Bhatt Chuhan Rasheed Barsar (talk) 08:10, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

moving past theories and into genetics

there have been genetic studies done of the people of India which show the obvious. why then, still, is there mention of unscientific theories and guesswork about some 'foreign origin' still doing the rounds in the Rajput page?

The various theories are described as such, not as fact. Genetic studies are routinely problematic in caste articles: they're couched in generalised terms, are full of provisos, rely on self-identification as caste members, are usually based on very small samples, and are part of a relatively new, fast-changing science. - Sitush (talk) 21:49, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I am not even sure that the point you are trying to make is of any significance. The source is not great but even if we accept it as being reliable, it has little bearing on the Origins section. Whether or not you accept there was some form of coalescence 50,000 years ago, there is little doubt that Indian society has split in numerous ways since that time and has resulted in the formation of numerous social groups/communities/castes etc. This article concerns one of those, not the generality of Indian origins. - Sitush (talk) 00:56, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My recent revert

I re-reverted here because:

  • Chattisgarh and Jharkhand are unsourced in the entire article
  • The "for political motives" change etc is contrary to lengthy past discussions about that paragraph
  • The stuff in the Diet section was unsourced/not in the source
  • The armed forces bit is unsourced

Clear? - Sitush (talk) 19:35, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I could not notice other changes.I had a different point. ::::