Was there a Kshatriya Holocaust on the subcontinent ?

[Joe Shearer]

There are no European languages.
I cannot help you if you need a white guy to certify each of your claim.

No, and I never referred to one; I referred to Indo-European. Do look it up.

India has a slave mentality it cannot come out of unless there is a massive change in the status quo.
Atleast the so called Bakhts have an open mind when it comes to challenging the west on history.

The bhakts are as wrong as you are. In fact, they are ridiculous because all their arguments depend on European premises.

Did you check and determine that Burushaski has nothing to do with the Kalash, or are you still floundering around in the ethnography of the Pamirs?

There are no European languages.
I cannot help you if you need a white guy to certify each of your claim.
India has a slave mentality it cannot come out of unless there is a massive change in the status quo.
Atleast the so called Bakhts have an open mind when it comes to challenging the west on history.

Hmm.

You should stop using the Semitic language you are using to post here.

 

[El Sidd]

No, and I never referred to one; I referred to Indo-European. Do look it up.



The bhakts are as wrong as you are. In fact, they are ridiculous because all their arguments depend on European premises.

Did you check and determine that Burushaski has nothing to do with the Kalash, or are you still floundering around in the ethnography of the Pamirs?



Hmm.

You should stop using the Semitic language you are using to post here.

@Kaptaan
that is where i leave the thread.
you can further the discussion.
it is your territory now.

 

[Imran Khan]

i read a bit abut this but not sure

 

[Joe Shearer]

i read a bit abut this but not sure

Just ask, Chief. I'll try to answer as best as I can.

i read a bit abut this but not sure

The rain has stopped, and I want to dash out and see at least one Puja; missed the whole bloody lot this year

But I'll be back by ten. I hope.

 

[Imran Khan]

Just ask, Chief. I'll try to answer as best as I can.

sir rajpoots were kshariya ? or rajpoots wiped out khashtris ?

 

[Joe Shearer]

sir rajpoots were kshariya ? or rajpoots wiped out khashtris ?

Please don't call me 'Sir'; this is old Joe, your fan, that you are talking to.

It seems most likely that outside the Punjab and specifically the north-west corner of the Punjab, the kshatriyas wiped themselves out. They got killed in the fighting, and didn't reproduce fast enough to maintain themselves; in peace-time, the Brahmins hogged everything, and the Banias took care that whatever money the kshatriya had got sucked out in interest. Only the slowly-outed tribes of the Punjab and the NW remained, but not known as kshatriya; the centre of power had moved east, these peoples were considered wild men not really civilised enough to count, and they remained what they had been, fighting people who knew very little else other than fighting.

Apart from these, who troubled everybody who tried to go past them to attack the main centres, including Mahmud of Ghazni and Muhammad of Ghor, there were tribes of people from central Asia, the Sakas, the Pahlavas, the Kushanas, and the Ephthalites, who swamped the country on both sides of the Indus in the south. They established satrapies and independent kingdoms in what is now Sindh, Gujarat and Rajasthan, and got inside quite a bit, with the Kushanas, up to Mathura. Some historians believe that these were the people who got to be known as Rajputs, as Gujjars and as Jats - substitute kshatriyas.

So, Rajputs were the new kshatriya, but probably descended from these warlike migrants, and the original kshatriyas had wiped themselves out or had wiped each other out.

 

[Imran Khan]

Please don't call me 'Sir'; this is old Joe, your fan, that you are talking to.

It seems most likely that outside the Punjab and specifically the north-west corner of the Punjab, the kshatriyas wiped themselves out. They got killed in the fighting, and didn't reproduce fast enough to maintain themselves; in peace-time, the Brahmins hogged everything, and the Banias took care that whatever money the kshatriya had got sucked out in interest. Only the slowly-outed tribes of the Punjab and the NW remained, but not known as kshatriya; the centre of power had moved east, these peoples were considered wild men not really civilised enough to count, and they remained what they had been, fighting people who knew very little else other than fighting.

Apart from these, who troubled everybody who tried to go past them to attack the main centres, including Mahmud of Ghazni and Muhammad of Ghor, there were tribes of people from central Asia, the Sakas, the Pahlavas, the Kushanas, and the Ephthalites, who swamped the country on both sides of the Indus in the south. They established satrapies and independent kingdoms in what is now Sindh, Gujarat and Rajasthan, and got inside quite a bit, with the Kushanas, up to Mathura. Some historians believe that these were the people who got to be known as Rajputs, as Gujjars and as Jats - substitute kshatriyas.

So, Rajputs were the new kshatriya, but probably descended from these warlike migrants, and the original kshatriyas had wiped themselves out or had wiped each other out.

great read

so what is the status now ? is there tribes claim to be khashtirya ?

or game is over

 

[RowdyRathore]

i dont get it.

opps you were quoted by mistake.

 

[Joe Shearer]

great read

so what is the status now ? is there tribes claim to be khashtirya ?

or game is over

Yes, chief, the Punjabi Khatris think they are kshatriya; others think they are nothing of the kind, but baniyas. Then the Jats, Gujjars and Rajputs, especially the Rajputs, keep claiming that they are kshatriya, with little or no justification.

Down south, the Nair-Menon-Nambiar-Pillai clans claim they are kshatriya. That is why their priests, the VERY PURE Namboodiris, go around with a green look on their faces. There are other weird bits and pieces; there are people calling themselves Poundrya Kshatriyas in the east; others call them 'poNd', Bengali for arse.

Game over.

 

[thesolar65]

Nice read. I love these topics. I have very little knowledge about that far into history.

But not sure who is telling the truth. Am a science guy. May be in future our ancestors can build a Time M/C to know the exact truth!!

 

[Magi Brahmin]

@Imran Khan @Joe Shearer i disagree, you can not wipe out tribes with population of millions.

What happend is mixing. Brahmins raised status of nomadic royal tribes to kshatriya status and mixed them with original kshatriyas.

Thats why a small number of rajput trives holds most of Rajasthan(Kushwaha,Bhati,chauhan) , Gujarat (Zhala, Jadeja, chudasama), Haryana (Tomar), punjab (janjua), and Malwa(Rathores). We can say that these were actually royal nomandic tribes who ruled these regions.

Brahmins took them into vedic fold by giving them status of Kshatriya (Neo Agnivanshi as @padamchen says) and mixed tgem with original arya kshatriyas thats why we find many vedic kshatriya trives in rajput ethinicity.

@Imran Khan tgere are very few surviving original kshatriya tribes in India. Well knows are Gautams, Kaushikas, Puruvanshi, kauravvanshi, Raghuvanshi etc etc.

But the funny thing is @Joe Shearer mainstream rajputs such as chauhan, rarhores etc consider them Inferior even tho these are real kshatriyas are thwy are migrants

Nice read. I love these topics. I have very little knowledge about that far into history.

But not sure who is telling the truth. Am a science guy. May be in future our ancestors can build a Time M/C to know the exact truth!!

Lol nothing wrong in being migrant.

I am a magi brahmin, my ancestors were zoroastrian priests in Persia who migrated into West India and merged with Local Brahmins based on similar culture.

Maybe @padamchen knows more about magis than me.

 

[Taimoor Khan]

Would it have occurred to you that 3,000 years of existence in a sandy terrain would have some effect by way of covering up the remains? Even today, there is no evidence of any flood in the cities.

Its hard to knock common sense in numb minds. But I am not among the ones who give up easily, so here you go, one more try. Now listen carefully. Indus comprised of whole of Pakistan, west India, Iran, Afghanistan and some parts of Turkmenistan. With this huge land mass, with such ancient profile, for such an entity to vanish without trail in history till was discovered back in 1920s while the other two, Babylon and Egypt kept their references and linkage to the history, simple points to one major event which wiped the whole of civilization without tracks.

That shows that you haven't really looked at the record of the excavations. If you had, you have found that there were distinct phases in the cultural development and decline. There was no catastrophic end, no sudden and extreme end.

Unfortunately, if you draw upon your own imagination to supply you the premises, your conclusions are bound to be wrong - or at least imagination-rich.

Educate yourself. Indus is not like Egpyt or Babylon which humanity knew about throughout the recorded history. I am not talking about Indus evolution within its own time frame, I am pointing to the fact that Indus vanished from the history only to be found by a mere accident. And here we are talking about a civilization which was three times bigger then both Babylon and Egypt combined. Atleast try to comprehend on what is said before coming with your trash build upon tunnel vision.

Neither Manu nor Adam existed. Need we waste time on this claptrap?

Right. Now I know why its hard to make you understand. Your ancestry goes to the monkeys.

How quaint. Did he use his hands (I assume that he was male) or did his toes suffice?

Now that I wouldnt know tbh but we can arrange your meeting and you can question yourself?

 

[Joe Shearer]

I agree partly, disagree partly. Please remind me to ask more about Magi Brahmins.

@Imran Khan @Joe Shearer i disagree, you can not wipe out tribes with population of millions.

What happend is mixing. Brahmins raised status of nomadic royal tribes to kshatriya status and mixed them with original kshatriyas.

Thats why a small number of rajput trives holds most of Rajasthan(Kushwaha,Bhati,chauhan) , Gujarat (Zhala, Jadeja, chudasama), Haryana (Tomar), punjab (janjua), and Malwa(Rathores). We can say that these were actually royal nomandic tribes who ruled these regions.

Brahmins took them into vedic fold by giving them status of Kshatriya (Neo Agnivanshi as @padamchen says) and mixed tgem with original arya kshatriyas thats why we find many vedic kshatriya trives in rajput ethinicity.

What you call royal nomadic tribes I call Scythians, Pahlavas and Kushanas.

@Imran Khan tgere are very few surviving original kshatriya tribes in India. Well knows are Gautams, Kaushikas, Puruvanshi, kauravvanshi, Raghuvanshi etc etc.

But the funny thing is @Joe Shearer mainstream rajputs such as chauhan, rarhores etc consider them Inferior even tho these are real kshatriyas are thwy are migrants

I am not too sure that this is tenable. There is nothing to show that Gautams, Kaushiks, and Puru-, Kaurava- and Raghu-vanshis descended from the original kshatriya. We cannot take the origin myth of any group and accept it literally.

Lol nothing wrong in being migrant.

No, nothing. My family was migrant.

I am a magi brahmin, my ancestors were zoroastrian priests in Persia who migrated into West India and merged with Local Brahmins based on similar culture.

Maybe @padamchen knows more about magis than me.

Hey, Doc, what are these Magi Brahmins?

 

[Magi Brahmin]

I agree partly, disagree partly. Please remind me to ask more about Magi Brahmins.



What you call royal nomadic tribes I call Scythians, Pahlavas and Kushanas.



I am not too sure that this is tenable. There is nothing to show that Gautams, Kaushiks, and Puru-, Kaurava- and Raghu-vanshis descended from the original kshatriya. We cannot take the origin myth of any group and accept it literally.



No, nothing. My family was migrant.



Hey, Doc, what are these Magi Brahmins?

buddha was a gautam by gotra and kshatriya by varna. kaushika was a chandravanshi kshatriya who became brahmin by tapasya. even in real history both kaushikas and bhargavas are mentioned as warlike indo aryan tribes who got assimilated into vedic society as kshatriya first and brahmana as later.

all of above share their surnames and gotra with brahmins, we have no doubt that these are true Kshatriyas.

and royal tribes of scythains were kambojas, (@Kambojaric ), kushans, palavas and indo -greeks, thracians also played big role in formation of rajput caste i believe. as indo scythians and greeks migrated and ruled north and west india for many centuries.

 

[Taimoor Khan]

That is just not correct.

If you try and put Abraham in kpk that will again create a timeline problem? Where does Noah fits and Adam goes?

That probably rose from the story that Adam was born in Sri Lanka because of a certain footstep.

I don't see it man.

How do you put Out of Africa and the DNA evidence.


I am all ears

Jamrud to be precise, near Peshawar. According to scholars, Jamrud was the seat of power for Namrud (Nimrod) and there is valley nearby which till date is blacked because of the fire which was lit to put Abraham into. As for Namrud, he was close to the time of Noah because he was known to despise of the God Noah for killing his ancestors in the deluge. Across the border in Afghanistan there is place called Mehtar Lam where the tomb of Noah's father is located. In Baluchistan , Taket-e-Suleman mountain is believed to be the place where Noah and his companions disembarked the Ark and settled around the area. Incidently, Mehrgarh in Baluchistan is the known world oldest human settlement. And then there is a case of Pakhtoon being the original Bani Israel (the desendants of Abraham from Isaac). Quran mentioned that ancestors of Bani Isreal was with Noah in his Arc. Aristotle researched the origins of Hebrew and found out that they were a tribe of Indus dislodged after the deluge.

In nutshell, its all pointing towards our Indus basin as the starting point of Humanity. And time line of Indus actually matches with the religious point of humanity to evolve as a civilization. We are not million years old creature. Islamic scholars at maximum, majority of them gives a time frame 10k years from Adam to present humanity. You put Indus, Mesopotamia and Nile in there, moving from east to west, respectively with timeline, it makes perfect sense. That theory of origins from Africa is a pile of poo to support the Derwin theory of evolution that we came from Monkeys.

You may argue that ivc was destroyed or cursed by God as they say.

I will give that a good thought that the destruction of ivc can be traced in Islamic history. But not by Noah's flood then

I also know that the Persian King Nimrod to be great grandson of Noah.

You can also put Adam in Sri Lanka as well if you dot the migration pattern out of Africa and DNA pattern. It may work.

But try giving two ancient hidden rivers near Bahrain for a thought. That seems more reasonable.


You can see pashtuns as the lost tribe of the bani israel but can you claim other way around?

as in? Things is, Pashtuns are not really lost tribe of bani Israel if you look at the greater scheme of things. They came back to the original lands of their ancestors.