| SAKA - SCYTHIAN - RAJPUTS Origin of Rajputs| Foreign Origin Theory, Kashtriya Theory of Origin, Mixed Origin Theory, Agnikula Theory :
The
word Rajputs derived from Sanskrit word Rajaputra, which means
son of a king. Rajputs rose to prominence during the 6th to 12th
centuries in north Indian history also known as Rajputs era. There
are several major subdivisions of Rajputs, known as vansh or vamsha.
The Rajput are generally considered to be divided into three primary
vansh :
Each of these Vanshs are divided into several clans (kul), who have direct patrilineage from a common male ancestor who supposedly belonged to that Vansh. Some of these 36 main clans are further subdivided into shakhas or “branches”, again based on the same principle of patrilineage.
• Major Suryavanshi clans are Amethiya, Bais, Chattar, Gaur, Kachwaha, Minhas, Pakhral, Patial, Pundir, Naru, Rathore, Sisodias.
• Major Chandravanshi clans are Bachhal, Bhati, Bhangali, Chandels, Chudasama, Jadauns, Jadeja, Jarral, Katoch, Pahore, Raijad, Soam, Tomars.
• Major Agnivanshi clans are Bhaal, Chauhan, Dodiya, Chavda, Mori, Naga, Paramars, Solankis.
The historians have propounded a number of theories regarding their origin. Main principle theories of their origin are :
Foreign Origin Theory :
As per this theory, Rajputs are are descendants of the races like Sakas, Kushans, Huns etc. This argument was supported as the Rajputs are also fire worshipers just like the Sakas and Huns whose main deity was also fire.
• Cunningham described them as the descendants of the Kushans.
• The Rajputs according to Tod, are of Scythian origin. The term Scythian refers to the Huns and other associated tribes who entered in India during fifth and sixth centuries
• A.M.T. Jackson described that one race called Khajara lived in Arminia in the 4th century. When the Hunas attacked India, Khajaras also entered India and both of them settled here by the later part of the sixth century. These Khajaras were called Gurjars by the Indians.
• In the 10th century, Gujarat was referred to as Gurjar. Some scholars believed that the Gurjars entered India through Afghanistan and settled themselves in different parts of India.
Kashtriya Theory of Origin :
The foreign theory were not acceptable to Gauri Shankar Ojha, Ved Vyas, and Vaidya.
In 1926 Gauri Shankar Ojha a Rajastani historian points out that
Rajputs rulers of Mewar, Jaipur and Bikaner are pure Aryans and
are descendants of the Suryavanshi and Chandravanshi dynasties
of the Kshatriyas.
→
The fire worship among the Rajputs came from the Aryans and not
from the foreign races.
Mixed Origin Theory :
Historians like V.A. Smith, Dr. DP Chatterjee concluded that some Rajputs are descendants of foreign races such as Huns, Sakas, Kushans, etc while others are descendants of local Kshatriya clans. They could fight better in battlefields with their sword and with the time they transformed their name and started calling themselves Rajputs.
Agnikul Theory :
This theory is from the book ‘Prthiviraj Raso’ written by Chandbardai in which he written that the Rajputs originated from a sacrificial fire-place burnt on the Mount Abu Mountains. This was done to protect Brahmins after Parshuram killed all Kashtriyas, there was no Kahstriyas present on the earth to protect them. Thus, the Brahmins burnt holy fire and performed yajna for forty days. Ultimately, god provided them with the Rajputs for their security purpose. Out of that Yajna fire four heroes were born and the descendants of these heroes were the four Rajput families :
• Pratihars
• Chauhans
• Solankis
• Paramars
These four agni-kula clans established their power in western India and parts of central India :
• The Pratihars ruled in the region of Kanauj.
• The Chauhans were in power in central Rajasthan.
• The Solankis were ruling the region of Kathiawar.
• The Paramars were in power in the region of Malwa.
History of the Origin of the Rajputs | Indian History :
There is no agreement among scholars regarding the origin of the Rajputs. It has been opined by many scholars that the Rajputs are the descendants of foreign invaders like Sakas, Kushans, white-Huns etc. All these foreigners, who permanently settled in India, were absorbed within the Hindu society and were accorded the status of the Kshatriyas.
It was only afterwards that they claimed their lineage from the ancient Kshatriya families. The other view is that the Rajputs are the descendants of the ancient Brahaman or Kshatriya families and it is only because of certain circumstances that they have been called the Rajputs.
Earliest and much debated opinion concerning the origin of the Rajputs is that all Rajput families were the descendants of the Gurjars and the Guijars were of foreign origin. Therefore, all Rajput families were of foreign origin and only, later on, were placed among Indian Kshatriyas and were called the Rajputs. The adherents of this view argue that we find references to the Gurjars only after the 6th century when foreigners had penetrated in India.
So, they were not of Indian origin but foreigners. Cunningham described them as the descendants of the Kushanas. A.M.T. Jackson described that one race called Khajara lived in Arminia in the 4th century. When the Huns attacked India, Khajaras also entered India and both of them settled themselves here by the beginning of the 6th century. These Khajaras were called Gurjaras by the Indians. Kalhan has narrated the events of the reign of Gurjara king, Alkhan who ruled in Punjab in the 9th century.
A part of Rajputana was called Gurjara-Pradesh in the 9th century while, in the 10th century, Gujarat was referred to as Gurjar. Therefore, some scholars have described that the Gurjars entered India through Afghanistan, settled themselves in different parts of India and were the ancestors of the Rajputs. A stone-inscription at Rajora of 959 A.D. describes Mathandeo, a feudal Chief of Vijaypal as Gurjar-Pratihar.
It led to the conclusion that the Pratihars were also a branch of the Gurjars. The Chalukyas gave the name of Gujarat to that particular territory. It meant that the Chalukyas were also the Gurjaras. Prithviraj Raso also described that the Pratihars, the Chalukyas, the Parmars and the Chauhans originated out of a sacrificial fire-pit which supported the theory of foreign origin of the Rajputs.
Therefore, several scholars described that all thirty-two Kulas of the Rajputs originated from the Gurjaras who were foreigners and, thus, all Rajputs were foreigners and were provided the status of the Kshatriyas only afterwards.
However, this view has not been accepted by the majority of modern historians. It is not certain that the Khajaras were called the Gurjaras. Except the Parmars, rest of the three Rajput Kulas refused to accept their origin out of sacrificial fire-pit. There is no proof that these four Rajput clans had blood relations On the contrary, it has been regarded more reliable that the Parmars and the Chaulukvas had no relation, whatsoever, within the Gurjars.
No early Muslim record has mentioned that the Gurjars were a clan. Rather a particular territory has been referred to as Gurjar. In India, several families were named on the name of the territory’ which they inhabited. Therefore, it is more logical to accept that the Pratihar was that clan which occupied Gurjar-Pradesh.
Arab scholars, Sulaiman and Abu Jaid described Jurj as a state and they used the word jurj for Gurjar-Pradesh. Therefore, modern historians refused to accept this view that all Rajput Kulas were the descendants of the Guijars and as the Guijars were foreigners so all Rajputs had a foreign origin.
Tod, in his Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan, declared that the Rajputs were of Scythian origin. He drew parallels between the customs of foreigners like Sakas, Kushans and Huns, etc. and the Rajputs. He expressed that customs like Ashvamegh-Yagna, worship of horse and arms and the status of women in society were similar among these foreigners and the Rajputs and therefore, declared that the Rajputs were the descendants of these foreigners.
William Brook supported the view of Tod. He contended that many family names of the Rajputs could be traced back only to the period of invasion of these foreigners and particularly those of the Hunas and thus justifies the theory of their origin from foreigners.
He said that even the Gurjars were foreigners who came to India at the time of the invasions of the Hunas, accepted Hinduism, entered into marriage relations with Indians and, thus, gave birth to many Rajput families. Afterwards, they tried to establish their lineage from the ancient Solar or Lunar Kshatriya dynasties.
Dr V.A. Smith supported the same view. He observed that invasions of the Huns seriously affected Indian society which brought about many social changes and also established many new ruling dynasties. Therefore, among the Rajput families many belong to foreigners while many other belong to lower Kshatriya families.
Dr Iswari Prasad and Dr Bhandarkar have also accepted this theory of foreign origin of the Rajputs. Dr Iswari Prasad does not regard the Rajputs as low-born Kshatriyas. However, he accepts that the absorption of foreign invaders within the Hindu society brought about the origin of the Rajputs.
Certain popular beliefs, particularly that of Chand Bardai, the court-poet of Prithviraj Chauhan, state that the Rajputs originated from a sacrificial fire-pit. According to them when Parasuram destroyed all the Kshatriyas then the ancient sages did a Yagna on Mount Abu to safeguard the Vedic religion.
Out of that Yagna fire four heroes were born and the descendants of these heroes were the four Rajput families, viz., the Chauhan, the Solanki or Chalukaya, the Paramar and the Pratihar. This also supports the view of the foreign origin of Rajputs.
But Pandit Gauri Sankar Ojha has refuted the above viewpoint in his book The History of Rajputana. He states that parallels drawn by Colonel Tod between the customs of foreigners who settled in India and the Rajputs do not justify the view that the Rajputs are foreigners. Most of these customs had grown up before the coming of these foreign invaders.
Therefore, the Rajputs did not pursue these customs because of their foreign origin. On the contrary, these foreigners accepted these Indian customs in the process of their being Indianized. He further states that the Rajputs cannot be accepted to be of foreign origin on the basis of race or physical features. Therefore, he regards the Rajputs as descendants of ancient Kshatriya families. Dr Chintamani also supports this view.
A few modern historians like Dr R.C. Majumdar. Dr Hariram and Dr Dashrath Sharma state that most Rajput families are the descendants of ancient Kshatriya or Brahamana families though, of course, the lineage of a few families is doubtful. Dr R.C. Majumdar contends that the Rajputs cannot be accepted to be of foreign origin on the basis of certain parallel customs of the foreigners of their race.
Of course, foreigners were accepted within the Hindu society and accorded the status of lower Kshatriyas but the facts do not permit us to accept the view that political power of India had passed into the hands of these new converts to Hinduism. After the death of Harsh, most of the ruling dynasties belonged to ancient Kshatriya families.
The Puran's and even the Harsh-charit of Banabhatt use the words Rajputra for the sons of Kshatriya-kings. Afterwards, the distortion of the word Rajputra became Rajput. Therefore, the Rajputs were the descendants of the Hindu Kshatriya families. However, all those Kshatriya princes, who established their independent kingdoms after the death of Harsha, called themselves Rajputs.
Of course, certain foreigners also established their independent kingdoms in the North-West and the Western part of India and when they were accepted within the Hindu society they, being rulers, also called themselves Rajputs and were accepted as such. Therefore, there is no doubt that while most of the Rajput families are of Indian origin, a few of them have their origin from among the foreigners. Dr R.C. Majumdar does not accept the theory of the origin of the Rajputs out of sacrificial fire-pit as an historical fact.
He maintains that mostly the Rajputs are the descendants of Hindu Kshatriya or Brahaman families. He writes that Bappa Rawal, the real founder ruler of the Guhilot Rajput family of Mewar was a Brahaman, Harisen, the founder of Gurjar-Pratihar dynasty, was a Brahaman whose one wife was Kshatriya and the other one a Brahaman, the Chandella-Rajputs are the descendants of the sage Chandratreya who was born of the moon; the Parmar-Rajputs claim their origin from the Kshatriya Rashtrakut-family; and the Chalukyas of Badami were Kshatriyas.
Dr Dashrath Sharma has supported the view of Dr Majumdar in his book Early Chauhan Dynasties. On the basis of ancient inscriptions and coins, he has rightly rejected the story of sacrificial-pit and also the view of the foreign origin of the Rajputs as expressed by Tod. V.A. Smith, Bhandarkar. etc. He maintains that the founders of all important dynasties of the Rajputs like the Chauhans, the Guhilots, the Pallavs, the Kadambs, the Pratihars and the Parmars were Brahamans.
After the fall of the empire of Harsh, India passed through a disturbed and unstable state of affairs. At that very time it was further endangered by the attacks of the Arabs and the Turks. Therefore, as had happened many times in ancient India the Brahamans took up arms for the defence of their culture and religion and were called Kshatriya-Rajputs and ultimately Rajputs.
Thus, the view that the Rajputs mostly belonged to foreign races does not hold at present. Of course, the origin of a few families can be traced from foreigners but most of the Rajputs have descended from the aborigines of India and were either Brahamanas or Kshatriyas.
Source :
https://gkrankers.com/
https://www.historydiscussion.net/ |