Talk:Jat/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents 1 July 2005 2 No Mention of Aryan ancestory? 3 I Don't Think So 4 Jat Race ? 5 GENETICS 6 Genetics Update 7 Genetics 2 8 RESPONSE 9 RESONSE 10 Are Jats/ Slavs/Jats/Scythian 11 Jats and Romany 12 Clans 13 Gurdas Mann 14 Kokkars are not Jat. 15 Jats and Basra reference. 16 Now the Basra point and Kokkar point combined. 17 Ghori being killed by Jatts. 18 Jatts and Janjua, Ghakkars and Awan being in constant Conflict 19 What does this really mean? 20 Takhar 21 Jats are yuezhi 22 Jat copyediting 23 Germanic Tribes 24 Removed text, references, and copyediting 25 proposed deletion of paras from main article 26 Kanishka was a Jat King of Kaswan clan 27 Opression section 28 What is a Jat? 29 Serious cleanup and verification of facts needed 30 Migration of Jats 31 Query on historical accuracy of dates for Jats 32 Year 3102 BC 33 More on 3102 BC 34 Jat in Mahavamsa 35 More on Jat in Mahavamsa 36 Were the Mauryas, Kanishka, etc., really Jats? 36.1 Response 36.2 Reply to Ravi Chaudhary 37 Jats Race

July 2005

==jat and jaat these both are totally different creeds . please include the diff in your article H S Mann AIT Pune

==no Mention Of The Gotra " KHATKAR " in the Gotra Section..? i was just going through the gotras section n noticed that you have not mentioned about the "KHATKAR's"==>This gotra is found near Uchana in Jind district in Haryana. There are around 28 villages of Khatkar Gotra. It Would Be Appriciated if this Gotra Is Also Added to the Wikipidia's Web Page " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jat#List_of_Jat_gotras_.28clans.29 "

Cheers... Vivek

No Mention of Aryan ancestory?

The Jatts are not a race of people....So under your history part you should be putting down that they l come from Aryan blood as do most North Indians. Its amazing how many people think Jatts are a race of people.

Jatts are a race or a family at least, other Aryan peoples or non Aryan people can solve there history elsewhere. We have higher achievements than other peoples.

Its common sense Jats are one family and were dominant as we didnt buy our land. We might not be Aryan, we are most likely Central Asian decent. In my region there is no Hindu temple and no remains either. We became Muslim and that was our first religion, so stop making this into a bigger thing than it is.

71.119.249.221 20:11, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I Don't Think So

This is one of he most hilarious and dumb unacademic articles I have read so far. Obvioucly written by a nationalistic amateur, without objectivity and is all over the place. omerlives~~

If the above person disagrees he should make some contructive points so we may get closer to the truth.I don't see how the article can be nationalistic since Jats are Indians,Pakistani,British, Canadian ,Hindu,Sikhs,Muslims and so on.This article has many contributors ,all have differing views.(Although I agree some of the historical facts are a bit over the top )

Try to stay objective,not all jats are scythians nor all english saxons.Keep to and look for the facts not fantasy.

yeah well, regardless of nationality all jats originate from one large particular area in south asia. What we do know that like many other castes it is an agraraian. The point is there is no way to know which jat much like which south asian from pakistan or northern india has scythian blood or greek blood or original vedic blood in terms of clear desecnt and lineage. One jat may have as much scythian blood in terms of percentage (this is getting hilarous) as some other random northern south asian. No group in central asia, the caucus and middle east, or ukraine (cept for Ossetes) know if their family name reflects scythian origin. Even though these lands are where the scythinas originated and dwelled in.....much less south asia which did not have any clossal population displacement from scythians except for the same old pattern of invasions from semi nomadic various central asian tribes which continued until 17th century. growup. This article needs to be rewritten with facts about jats and what we know. Not the hilarious fantasies about saraswati, and croats springing from the bosoms of indian rivers and other such nonsense.

^^ save the emo nonsense and stick to genetics

Jat Race ?

I just like to mention that in the genetics section , I have not stated in any way or form that Jats are a race .They are however an ethnic group eg Race+culture+social history.Of course what we define as race is a separate issue.However people of the same race can be a separate ethnic group eg English and the French.What I am attempting here is to trace the ethnic history of one such group eg the Jats using genetics.It may be the case the genetics of various South Asia groups are the same , however they all have their own separate ethnic history.If you wish to comment about "Jats not being a race" then make such statements in other sections where they mentions terms "Race".Any group which practices some form of isolation, eg caste or marriage practices ,over time these will appear in the genetics.An extreme example is the Kalash whose mtdna is distinctly different from other Pakistani populations,hence giving some indication of their past.

If you wish to gather genetics data from other groups then you are free to begin your own article on wikipedia.I will then add that to the genetics section if relevant.As I have mentioned Jats are made up of clans each having different histories ,within and possibly outside South Asia (as do many other Euroasian groups).

SNP such as R1a ,J2 are they only markers that I know of that have sufficient resolution ,which show clear geographics patterns.It may be the case that other Punjabi groups have similar haplogroups,but until I have data ,I can not comment.

GENETICS

Talking about "blood" is old fashioned,modern genetics uses various chromosomal markers which do enable one to trace human movements.Ossetes Scythian?,we should not confuse language and culture and genetics.Most turks of turkey are not turkman of central asian,nor christians decended from jews.Even jats belong to various clans each has differing histories.The "facts" are that 50% of punjabis are decended from the same male as 50% of slavs ,originating somewhere between the Volga and the Indus in the last 7000 years (average estimate). Also,the presence of castes and gotras separate south asians into specific groups hence we may be able to make direct links between groups inside and outside south asia.Atlthough I would like to remove the mentions of croats/Ukranian being jats since even if some part of these population did share a common history,we can not say in the modern sense that A is B.

Does anybody Know what haplogroup (15,13,29,22,10,14,12,9,16 ) may belong to.I dont think it belongs to R1a1;but is shared between Jats and Ankara Turks.I guess it may be H,L or R1b.

• A recent update shows a match with Spain and Jat haplotype(15,13,29,22,10,14,12,9,16 ),we know that the Alans settled Spain.However there are many gypsies in Spain, so if this haplotype belongs to haplogroup H it could be a match with the Roma gypsies (Although most gypsy matches with Jats seem to belong to R1a1).Also most of the spanish matches are R1a1.

• Using the Yhrd database Jat sikhs and Jat (haryana) share only two haplotypes, unknown(15,13,29,22,10,14,12,9,16) and R1a1(16,13,30,25,11,13,11,14).These markers account for almost 20% of both groups.It could be these males who put the 'Jat' into the Jat.Almost all (99%) of matches between Jats and other world populations are on R1a1.Jats sikhs seem to have twice as many matches and twice the frequency as haryana Jats ;even though the haplogroup distributions are similar.This may be due to the fact that Jat Sikhs have had more contact with Non-Indian groups;this is not surprising since Jat Sikhs live closer to the borders of India.Interestingly Jat Sikhs share two extra haplotypes (possibly haplogroups J2 or R1b) with Iraq Kurds.The high frequency of matches seem to be with Slavic populations.There are also matches with Germanic groups,but tend to be of low frequency.

• There is a debate on whether Aryans or Indo-Europeans came from within or from outside India.Some genetists say R1a1 is the IE marker others J2;others say there is no link between genetics and language.However Jats have R1a1 and J2 markers yet most of the matches are on R1a1 with Euroasian populations.Hence it is very hard to see why there are very few matches with J2,hence one may assume that R1a1 is not of Indian origin.However J2 is also supposed to originate from outside India ,but recent papers suggest there are hardly any Indian haplotype matches with J2 outside India .In Punjab R1a1(50%),J2(20%).India as a whole R1a1(30%),J2 (12%).

If we are to assume that a group of IE left South Asia ,then we must assume there was very little J2 in South Asia at that time.

Or that J2 has a very fast mutation rate, so that any common haplotypes would have been lost,and that the group who left did not return .If they did return then the mutation rate of J2 was so fast that,in a space of 2000 years,J2 had lost all common hyplotypes with groups left outside south Asia.The fast mutation rate theory of J2 seems very unlikley.

Another possibility is that R1a1 was confined to Punjab/North West and J2 to the South West/Gujarat (Gujarat has possibly the highest diversity of J2 in India ).Then these population mixed after the the movement of R1a1 out of South Asia.(If J2 is Dravidian then mixing of J2 in Punjab with R1a resulted in the Dravidian elements in Sanskrit).This may have occured about 1500 bce since the Indo-aryan language of the Mitanni in Turkey/Syria arrives in the area about 1500 bce ,but seems to lack Dravidian elements.)

The third most common haplotype in Jat Sikhs from Yhrd seems to be J/J2 ,with two matches in Germany and one in Bulgaria (distance 2).

A recent paper has shown that R1a1 is 14,000 years old ,hence the spread fo R1a may have nothing to do with IE/Scythians ,but with a migration after the Ice Age 10,000 yrs ago.However the high diversity of R1a in Eastern Europe and India suggest the migration of this group was rapid.The tribal groups also have a high diversity of R1a ,therefore it is possible that R1a originated from South Asia. (Jaspa). Here's a list for matches with Unknown 15..22,10,14,12..

Ankara, Turkey 1 / 39 Eurasian MP / Altaic MP

Antioquia, Colombia [European] 1 / 407 Eurasian MP / European MP / Other European MP

Barcelona, Spain 1 / 224 Eurasian MP / European MP / Western European MP

Beijing, China 1 / 49 East Asian MP / Sino Tibetan MP

Caucasus [Chechenian] 2 / 19 Eurasian MP / Caucasian MP

Caucasus [Ingushian] 1 / 24 Eurasian MP / Caucasian MP

Central Portugal 1 / 489 Eurasian MP / European MP / Western European MP

East Timor 1 / 138 East Asian MP / Austronesian MP

England-Wales, UK [Indo-Pakistani] 1 / 106 Eurasian MP / Indian MP

Hangzhou, China [Han] 1 / 35 East Asian MP / Sino Tibetan MP

London, UK [Indo-Pakistani] 1 / 250 Eurasian MP / Indian MP

Macedonia 1 / 149 Eurasian MP / European MP / South-Eastern European MP

Malaysia [Han Chinese] 1 / 266 East Asian MP / Sino Tibetan MP

Nagoya, Japan 1 / 207 East Asian MP / Japanese MP

Pakistan [Baloch] 2 / 59 Eurasian MP / Indo Iranian MP

Pakistan [Burusho] 7 / 94 Eurasian MP / Indo Iranian MP

Pakistan [Makrani Negroid] 1 / 33 Eurasian MP / Indo Iranian MP

Pakistan [Pathan] 7 / 93 Eurasian MP / Indo Iranian MP

Pakistan [Sindhi] 2 / 122 Eurasian MP / Indo Iranian MP

Panjab, India [Jat Haryana] 28 / 91 Eurasian MP / Indian MP

Panjab, India [Jat Sikhs] 13 / 108 Eurasian MP / Indian MP

Reunion Island [Malbar] 1 / 103 Admixed MP

Russia [Buryat] 1 / 215 Eurasian MP / Altaic MP

Singapore [Indian] 6 / 182 Eurasian MP / Indian MP

Sweden 1 / 405 Eurasian MP / European MP / Western European MP

What this marker is still dont't Know ,it could be R1 which is ancestral to R1a.Although the long allele at DS392 (14) is also suggestive of haplogroups Q ,P and L.

CAN ANYONE HELP ME GET SIMILAR DATA ON BhumiharS? PLEASE REPLY HERE ONLY. I WILL COME AND READ THE REPLY HERE. PLEASE TELL ME WHERE COULD I GET SIMILAR INFO. HAPMAP?

Genetics Update

Given that L is common in South Asia ,I would conclude this haplogroup is L.Therefore the two most common haplogroups in Jats are L and R1a1.

On Ysearch all the Indian L have Ds19=14 where as Jats have DS19=15.Ysearch gives Ds19=15 for one sample in Austria and one in Pakistan.Therefore the L that Jats have is of Pakistani origin.I've got my hands on data from this paper [1]and it seems Jat L is L3,the most common L found in Pakistan.Hence the most common male haplogroups in Jats it seems is L3,R1a1,J2.

It would be interesing to see if the L in Central Asia is L3.

Note L originates somewhere between India and the southern Caucaus,J2 from Eastern Turkey and R1a somewhere Between India and Eastern Europe. R1a I think expanded from Eastern Iran (possibly arriving from India during the Ice Age), since female Iranian contribution to India is recognised (eg H,J mtdna etc), but in Eastern Europe it would be very difficult to distinguish from Eastern European and Iranian mtdna ,except maybe Iranian U7 which is present in Eastern Europe at low frequencies. This would explain the wide spread of certain R1a1 haplotypes but the absence of European haplogroups in India and Indian haplogroups in Europe.There is some Indian mtdna (M) in Iran (5%) and also Indian specific female R lineages,probably arriving during the Ice Age with the original R1a1.

On Yhrd jats have matches with Bhutan on L and R1a1 but it seems not on J2.Could this imply that J2 is the most recent addition to the Jat male population?.Also on Yhrd jats have mayches with Uigurs (Tarim Basin,R1a1)and South Indias (again R1a1).It seems the spread of R1a1 in Jats has come from/spread to over a far greater area than L or J2.Jats L seems to have been confined to the Med/South Asia and J2 (from Y search) to the Middle East (Kurds) and Europe.Interestingly ,male haplogroups R2 ,which is most likely of South asian origin,is found in central asia, the Caucaus and in Kurds and Iranians.R2 accounts for about 8% of Punjabis.

I think we should take Yhrd data with a pinch of salt since both samples are from the same geographic area, hence the data could represent a small number of clans,hence it may not be representative of jats in general.Geography probably plays a big part;however at least Yhrd is a start, until someone does a detailed study of NW India.

Mtdna

'Our findings reveal that the Brahmins and Jat Sikhs may have been founded by a small group of female lineages..'

From "Genomic diversities and affinities among four endogamous groups of Punjab (India) based on autosomal and mitochondrial DNA polymorphisms" ,see links. 40 % on the mtdna is of mediterranean origin ,in nomadic societies acquired females would have been transported back from where the Nomads came (eg the western European mtdna in Mongols).

R1a1 and Jats

I've been using yhrd.org again and from this database it is obvious that many Iranian speaking populations have very few if any matches with Jats ,except Kurds.Yet there are lots of Jat R1a1 matches with European populations, and no matches between European populations and Iranian speaking populations.Therefore the evidence suggests that R1a1 that is present in Jats populated euro-asia, but that found in Iranian speaking people did not.Also given the high diversity of R1a1 in Pakistan and India ,this suggests to me that R1a1 originates from SW or South Asia or even Siberia ?,but not as far west as Europe/Ukraine.However, given what seems to be the absence of haplogroup L in Eastern/Northern Europe, the spread of R1a1 occured before the introduction of L in Jats.The origin of is uncertain ,it originates somewhere between Southern India and the the Caucasus.

R1a1 and Ukraine

I've done another comparison using Yhrd ,and I've read oppenheimers book on the history of the British people.It seems that the high frequency R1a in jats may be due to a secondary migration from the Ukraine.R1a seems to have originated in south Asia,some settled in the Ukraine and then expanded across Euroasia quite recently.The most frequent haplotype is 16,25,11,11,13.However it is also possible that the secondary migration was from the Punjab into the Ukraine,some of the P haplogroup in Ukraine may be R2.Ukraine has also J2 like Punjabis,however there is a lack of L and H in the Ukraine and the lack of 'I' in the Punjab.So one could assume this secondary expansion occurred somewhere between the Punjab and the Ukraine.However the presence of Jat R1a in Southern Indians questions the idea that the secondary expansion occurred from the Ukraine.Therefore it seems that it is halogroups L and H that are intrusive to the Punjab,Indo-aryan markers ?,eg Indo-aryan migration from and within India.

Haplogoup L and Jats

Haplogroup L seems to have spread along the Med ,Southern and North India.It could be Dravidian and may have spread agriculture (L3 ?).

J2 and Jats

A recent paper has shown that Iran has J2's which have not been found in other areas (Turkey),I am questioning if J2 did originate from Turkey.Interestingly the Punjab and Iran males consist mainly of J2(J2a and J2b) and R ,about >50%.A more easterly origin of J2 would explain the absence of E and I in India.In fact I would not be surprised of J2 originated near the Indus or Hindu Hush.

Genetics 2

>>There appears to be a link between Jats and all the Panjabi popuplation.

Balgir, Praveen P. "Restriction Isotyping of Apolipoprotein E among Populations of Punjab, Northwestern India" Human Biology - Volume 75, Number 5, October 2003, pp. 771-776

Balgir, Praveen P. Kaur, Mandeep. • Restriction Isotyping of Apolipoprotein E among Populations of Punjab, Northwestern India [Access article in HTML] [Access article in PDF] Subjects: o Apolipoprotein E. o Human population genetics -- India -- Punjab. Abstract: The molecular polymorphism displayed by apolipoprotein E (apoE, protein; APOE, gene) has been listed as a risk factor for susceptibility to various disorders, such as those associated with lipid metabolism and arteriosclerosis. Data from many population groups are available. The present study endeavors to add to the world population database for alleles encountered at this locus. One hundred sixty-five individuals representing four castes and a mixed group from Punjab, a state in northwestern India, were analyzed for APOE isotyping. Intercaste group comparisons of allele frequencies revealed statistically insignificant differences, pointing to homogeneity at this locus among Punjabi caste groups, which can be considered as one Punjabi population. A further comparison of this Punjabi sample with other populations of the world revealed the Punjabi population to be closer to some European populations than to either African or Asian populations, a pointer to the ethnic origins of the Punjabi population. Keywords: apolipoprotein E, Indian population, Punjabi population, polymorphism, PCR

>>The above abstract introduces nothing new.We already know that there are many markers that are shared across the world,and these will vary between geographical regions.The above gene does not offer the neccessary resolving power to discriminate between populations.A more usefull article is Kivilids and the following:

Genomic diversities and affinities among four endogamous groups of Punjab (India) based on autosomal and mitochondrial DNA polymorphisms" heres a link http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3659/is_200212/ai_n9161997

You can find the abstract on pubmed site.Findarticles lacks data and the original article is subscription (Although if anybody has a link to it,I would be gratefull).

The article states

"The most striking dissimilarity is that in regard to autosomal DNA markers, the Scheduled Castes were clearly very distant from the other castes, but in regard to mtDNA markers they are not very distant from the Khatris and the Jat Sikhs".

Although the article assumes migrations happened one way (into the Punjab),which is certainly wrong;the data is still valid in separating the Punjabi groups.Kivislids paper suggests most of these markers originate in the Punjab or West Asia.

• Could the person who keeps on inserting the above abstract (There appears to be a link...) ,explain how in any way the above has any value in determining the ethnic origins of jats.We know that Jats share many markers with most other Indians ,as do they with Europeans ,Middle East, Central Asia.This article is about Jats and how they came about as a ethnic groups in recent history,not to prove that Jats are part of the human race.Just because Jats have arms and legs that therefore africans are jats since they also have arms and legs.

• Jatts also have some common DNA with Chimps and Orangutans, but it does not mean that is a Jatt race. The above survey is the most comprehensive one to date and proves that the Punjabi population is indeed one populationa dn the Jatts are not seperate genetically in any shape way or form.

RESPONSE

A dimwitted reply from a non-academic. This shows that there is no difference between Jats and and other Punjabi's as a population. This is the most conclusive and upto date survey done, and anyone with a tiny bit off medical knowledge would know this.

• One can always find similarities between populations,it is the difference that have something relevant to add to our knowledge.

• I think the writers of this article are in denial or just plain ignorant. Jatts are no different from the rest of the Punjabi populations.

RESONSE

The above abstract shows jatts are no different geneticaly from other Punjabi caste groups.

Are Jats/ Slavs/Jats/Scythian

Looking at the genetics,Jats share a large number of markers with Slavic groups ,or groups (Germans) that have been in contact with Slavs.They share very few markers with Iranian speaking groups.Unless languages have been swapped around alot,I would guess Jats where originally Slavic or vice versa.However note how many words in Lithuanian overlap with Sanskrit.

I notice in the czech language Jit (Yit) means 'to go'.There are a lot of manjits ,ranjits etcs in India.However jit seems to mean 'conquer' in indo-aryan.Although in order to conquer one has 'to go' to conquer or to travel.So could jit be derived from 'To travel and conquer'.Hence Jit or Jat could mean travellers or those who travelled to conquer.This is not so odd since there are many examples of nouns becoming verbs.Also Czech Jet (Yet) means to go,other than by foot eg horse ?.

Jats and Romany

Jats are no more romany than any other group from South Asia.Romany males consist H(50%) females M4(30%);both markers are rare in NW India/Pakistan <5%.[2].Roma have matches with AP Tribes;Roma matches with jats are on R1a1 which accounts for 50% Eastern Europeans and Punjabis.

Clans

The term Gotra is fron sanskrit meaning Cowpen.

So, Chaudhary's are Jats? Either way, parts of this article are horrible, with their overly flowery language, and I would think that they might violate NPOV. DigiBullet 18:31, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Many castes have gotras,this article only refers to jat gotras.Much of the flowery stuff comes from a Jat web site.

This article still needs a lot of improvement. If you find copyrighted material, you should feel free to remove it or rewrite it; same with POV material. Tom Radulovich 17:59, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

The following gotras are NOT Jat surnames - Verma, Takhar, Mehta

Actually, we do find Takhar, Mehta, and Verma as Jat surnames.

We also find these suranmes inother communities, How and why this occurs is a subject for research and discussion.

Ravi Chaudhary

Be aware that there is a community of Jatt Patels, however they are exclusive and are a minority in this title as there are many more Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaisyas with the surname,

________________________________ __________________________________

Thakar is a Gujjar surname

Gurdas Mann

I would verify whether Gurdas Mann is infact a Jatt as in India it is assumed he is from a Ramgarhia background. His wife is most definitely from a Ramgarhia background.

Kokkars are not Jat.

To state Kokkars are Jatt is a folly because they are essentially the descendants of the original Sassanids who took refuge in India after being defeated by the Arabs in Persia. They are a generally referred to as a Rajput clan owing to their ruling status on the Kuh-i-Jud regions of Punjab and have allied many times with various other clans such as Janjua in defeating and pushing back the Ghorid armies from their regions. Ghakkar is another variation for Kokkar. Although they are not essentially Chandra, Surya or Agnikula Vansh, they were referred to and given status of Rajput by the priests of their time, this was not a self proclaimed title. This therefore proves the fact that Jatts aren't neccesarily an ethnic group at all. Many fallen royals became Jatt i.e. Bhatti, Chauhans etc. again proving that Jat is a class name for farmers and agriculturists and not an ethnic group of seperating branches as I feel is being implied here. So to say that the Jats were in constant battle with Ghakkars is wrong because they are the same people.

Khokkar/ Kokkar Jats are found all over Northern India.

Gakkar is a variation of Khokkar.

The Jats themselves do not claim descent from the Sassanids, nor do they claim descent from Rajputs!

Dr Atal Singh Khokkar, a Jat, wrote a book on Jat History. " Jaton Ki Utpati evam Vistar".

---

Please see Gakhars. However I must stress, that I have met many Ghakhars that distinguish themselves from Kokhars, saying that Kokkars and Gakhars are not the same, yet others state they are. This point would be interesting to investigate. Whats noteworthy is that both groups are mainly found in northern India region, Punjab, both are quite warlike and dominant.

Jats and Basra reference.

The reference of Jatts having been gathered in Syria for war, and having guarded Basra for Hazrat Ali is also questionable as the actual people mentioned in Arabian records is of a tribe called the Zot. This is not a reference confirming Jatts having helped these armies in that region. I believe this is speculation rather than fact, as it isn't believed and confirmed in records. Another reason is that the Arabs used to record the family names of tribes rather than their classes. Jatt is unanimously referred to as a class with many family names who are part of it as is mentioned. Therefore, the records should have read 'the tribe of ______ guarded the region' as opposed to the class.

Now the Basra point and Kokkar point combined.

The last Sassanian king to have lost to Khalid Ibn Walid was himself a Sassanid Kayani (Kayani another name for the Sassani Dynasty of Persia). His later descendants were disbanded, some remained in Iran, some fled to Punjab and Afghanistan regions and were employed in the Hindu Shahi army as top ranking generals and soldiers. They were known by their father Kokkhar Shah (source from the family tree belonging to the Kayanids of Punjab, Rawalpindi, Ghakker Federation). This record proves that the Kokkars could not have been Zots who guarded Basra and then later on were ousted by the same armies as Kings of Persia. Some Kokkars of East Punjab were absorbed many years later into the Jat class, which is a respected agricultural community of proud brave people.

Ghori being killed by Jatts.

This is another mistake and misrepresentation as it has never been discovered or confirmed who killed Ghori so to claim this is a very dodgy point and unfounded. It has however been theorised that some Kokkars of old were defeated by Ghorid armies and later enlisted into his army secretly, then possibly assasinated him and fled. But this has never been proved and the assassins themselves were never caught let alone revealing their tribal affiliations etc. In fact there were many theories that many dispelled Kings of defeated Kingdoms allied to conspire against Ghori. Even if one were to believe the Kokkar theory, that again is proved by above point that Jatts, Zots and Kokkars are seperate entities and peoples. If Kokkars did it, then this claim cannot be made by Jatts by any measure.

The records of the Jats themslves confirm it, that on his return towards Afghanistan, Ghori was attacked by 25,000 Jat Khokars, and beheaded in 1206.

The general was Anirudh Khokkar.

Source : History of the Sarv Khap- ( in Hindi) Nihal Singh Arya.

see: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JatHistory/message/2230

Ravi Chaudhary

The source you have given Ravi is very biased and NPOV is questionable agenda issues to say the least....

How is the name of Anirudh Kokkar found? How was his name recorded as the 'beheader'. Gakhars still dispute their connection with Kokkars and their similarity in clans is very much opposed to this day in many parts of Western Punjab.

• • The name Anirudh Khokkar is from the Jat Haryana Sarv Khap(Haryana republic) historical records).

Why should you consider is biased? Odd?

Ravi Chaudhary

It's biased by the language it uses and the vague facts it portrays. It defames Prithviraj (what are the sources for this other than this one book?), uses unencyclopedic words (read the article), little corroborative fact here still, i.e.Anirudh Kokkhar. Are you claiming this one book as the source? There are many books of the Gakhars that attribute this murder by them and they still distinguish themselves very strongly from Kokhars.

• • • I see, if it praised Pritviraj Chauhan, the it would be OK??.

Muhamad Ghori was not murdered, he was killed, in the battle.Important choice of words.

What you are reading is the Indian Jat versions from their records. Any reason they should be less acceptable than the Islamic ones?

You should also keep in mind that many tribes who converted to Islam, in time tended to 'later' associated themselves with the Arabs, and that religions founder.

History does tend to have more than one version.

There is more discussion on this in the forum, dedictaed to the History of the Jats: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JatHistory/

I suggest you and others go through the archives, become members if you wish, and put your detailed views there.If your views have substance they will prevail

Ravi Chaudhary ***

Jatts and Janjua, Ghakkars and Awan being in constant Conflict

There is no historical reference that can be found regarding conflicts between Jatts and any of the above mentioned Clans. The Janjua records and archives do not show any major conflict or rebellion to their rule until the time of Raja Ranjit Singh when many Jatts allied with him together with other clans. The Ghakker federation records also record similarly no conflict with them before Raja Ranjit Singhs conquest. There were however some disputes between varying communities which were normal in Indias long civil unrest between each Kingdoms, but to make the above point without proof is quite exaggerated.

These points are not meant to offend any one, just clear up some points regarding the historical reference of key events and the positions of a certain clan in contrast to a class.

>>Valid points above,but please state sources.

- Ghakker Kiani federation of Rawalpindi- entire family tree and records of the ghakker/Kokkhar clan.

- Janjua Rajput archives and records of Jhelum Pakistan records of all imperial wars and judgement include political alliances. Also Tahreek-e-Janjua by Raja Muhammad Anwar Janjua

- Islamic History of the 1st 4 Caliphs- many authors of the subject and references that the Zott tribes were essentially localised tribes of the name Zott. making the point unlikely that it was the class name. The only pople classified openly by class were the Bedouin.

The above points are genuine and actually call into question the authors assertions about them. I feel in this context it is up to the author to justify his/her claims.

I agree.

This account of "constant conflict" appears untenable.

Can we have details of the genealogical trees, and other details from the Ghakkar Federation, and Janjua Sahib's book?

ravi 03:17, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Regards to Tehrik e Janjua By Raja Muhammad Anwar Khan Janjua: There are references to a battle that took place between a Ghakkar tribe led by Khan Kayani of Domeli against Raja Derwish Khan Janjua of Garjaak Makhiala for his territory which the Ghakkar chief conceded defat. But there is a lot of discussion of whether Ghakkars are Kokkhars or not. If it is a variance. I have asked the owners of the book to check and get back to me regarding this point for you Ravi.

There is mounting proof though that they may be the same tribe... I think whats important to try and find out is whether the Kayani suffix was used prior to Islamic conversion. It's a suffix denoting their alleged oriogin so it must have been in vogue earlier than Islamic conquests. --86.2.105.229 12:34, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

What does this really mean?

"A recent study of the genetics of the people of Indian Punjab[1] (where about 40% or more of the population are Jats) suggest that the Jats are similar to other populations of the Indus Valley in terms of Y-snp groupings. Also Jats seem to share many common haplotypes with German, Slavic, Baltic, Iranian and Central Asians (http://www.yhrd.org/)."

This is very non-specific, this article should really state what area these Germans, Slavs, Balts, Iranians and Central Asians come from.

The yhrd database contains small samples ,therefore one should not rely on detail.So to say german ,slavic etc is all that is required to make the point that there is a genetic connection.

Takhar

Takhar is a gotra of Jats. I personally know many families. It can be included in the list of Jat gotras. burdak 07:35, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Jats are yuezhi

Bhim Singh Dahiya has established that Kushan or Yuezhi were Jats. There were two branches of Yuezhi people. One of the branches was called "Ta-Yuezhi" which means "The great Jats". The other branch was "Siao-Yuezhi" which means "The little Jats". The Greek historian Herodotus wrote Massagetae for Ta-Yuezhi and Thyssagetae for Siao-Yuezhi. The Yuezhi people inhabited the Outer Mongolia and Gansu province of China.burdak 08:53, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

• Ta Yuezhi - Maha jutae/getea- Massagetae.I see the link in names but did jats originate from India in the first place and migrate out and then back in again ?

Jat copyediting

I have largely completed the copyediting of the article. I did not change much of the content because I admittedly do not know much about the Jats; I leave that to the other editors. The books section is now more standardized, though I do doubt my abilities to cite books correctly. Also, I did not yet edit the section of references. MToje

Hullo - I ran through it and did a little more copyediting, though I too didn't change content because I don't know much about the Jats either. I'd suggest striking the paragraph in the beginning about their military history, though - it's made redundant later in the article. Also, I take it Jat and Jatt are acceptable alternative spellings? If not, then there's quite a few small changes to make.Candle-ends 01:05, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Between 12 BC and 16 AD, the Romans tried to conquer the Germanic tribes but only a small portion of southwestern Germany came under their control. In AD 9 Arminius (Hermann), who had been trained in the Roman service, headed an anti-Roman group of Cherusci and this led to the disastrous defeat and annihilation of three Roman legions under the command of Varus in the famous Battle of the Teutoburg Forest.

Germanic Tribes

Some of the Germanic Tribes included:

Alans, Alemanni, Ampsivari, Angivarii, Angles, Ansivarii, Artrivari, Atuatici, Bajuwaren, Batavians, Belgii, Bructeri, Burgundians, Buri, Caeracates, Cannenfates, Casuarii, Cenni, Chamavi, Chatti, Chasuari, Cherusci, Cimbri, Coldui, Condrusi, Canunefates, Coeresii, Dulgibines, Eburones, Fali, Franks, Frisians, Gepidai, Getae, Goths, Gugerni, Heruli, Hermionies, Hermunduri, Herules, Huns, Ingavones, Istavones, Juthons, Kugern, Latobrigi, Longobards, Lygii, marcomanni, Marini, Marsi, Mattiaci, Menapi, Narisci, Nemetes, Nervii, Northvolkers, Ostrogoths, Peucini, Poemones, Quadi, Rauraci, Rugii, Salains, Saxons, Scardosi, Schryi, Scorolisi, Seducii, Semnones, Sigambri, Suevi, Tenchteri, Teuteri, Teutons, Thuringians, Treveri, Triboci, Tubanti, Tulingern, Tungri, Twihaten, Ubii, Ulmerugi, Usippi, Vandals, Vangiones, Varini, Visigoths and don’t forget our beloved Vikings and their later Scandinavian conquests.

http://www.kisabeth.com/primer_of_our_ancient.htm

Other interesting similarities:

Adhana is a Jat/Gujar tribe (Adhana is also a place in Yemen and in Turkey)

Bessi - Thracian tribe, Cauacasian and Bisseni, Bysseni, Bessi, Beseneu of the Pechenegs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bessi

Dards are Eastern European and Kashmiris

Balti (Kashmiri), Balts/Balti of Lithuania.

Nagara means city, but is also is the name for ancient Negra in Arabia Felix.

Maisi is a Jat Gujjar clan - Mysi is also the name of Mysians of Anatolia.

Gor/Gora/Gaur is middle persian for mountainous region.

Vania may have something to do with Lake Van in Turkey or the Vanir tribe.

Conclusion: They first came westwards from Arabia Felix (HG9) and then some later north from the land of the Slavs (R1a/HG3).

Removed text, references, and copyediting

I finished copyediting this article and removed the tag. Many specific claims made in the article still need to be connected with specific references; see Wikipedia:Footnotes.

The Malwa plateau was under their rule and Harsha, last ruler of the city of Thanesar.

If Harsha was a Jat (it doesn't mention that in his article), he can be re-added to the article. I removed the second part of the above sentence because it was unclear what it has to do with the Jat.

I moved the section on Germanic tribes to Germanic peoples, since it did not have anything to do with the Jat.

The section on genetics is rather murky. I tried to clarify what "Y-SNP" means, but more explanation needs to be given about which halogroups are being referred to at various points. The reference to yhrd.org was non-specific, and not helpful to me in sorting this out or verifying any of the information in the section. Some of what is claimed in the article may be original research, but I'm not sure, due to the unclear references. Also, this section needs a clear summary for laypeople about what the scientific evidence does or does not show about the relationships between the Jat and other ethnic groups.

The intro to the list of clans does not explain the relationship between caste and clan well enough for me to understand it.

Many of the titles in the "Famous Jat people" section need clarification, and acronyms need to be expanded. Some should be linked to articles on the title, if appropriate, after being disambiguated.

• Bhupinder S. Liddar - P.C., M.P., Consul General [3]

Based on the reference, I'm not sure this is correct, especially if these are supposed to mean "Privy Counselor" and "Member of Parliament".

-- Beland 22:32, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

the word jat is from jootna.jootna means to plough.someone who ploughs is called plougher or ploughman and who joots is called jat.like brahmins,kshatriyas and vaishiyas,jats are also aryan.the reason for rajput trible names in jats and gujjars is because some members of the various rajputs tribes adopted agricultural and pastoral occupations and after a few generations started intermarrying with the jats and gujjar tribes.after a few generations they got fully assimilated into their adoptive castes but kept their rajput trible names.rajput trible names are also found in other lower castes and tribals.the reason is similar.some rajput tribe members adopted tribal ways and became tribals and others fell into artisan classes and became artisans.this is not unique to rajputs or in india.some members of royal families all over the world keep falling into non royal occupations.anyway,everybody cann,t become rulers and warriors.some people do drop out of the race.those khokhars who call themselves rajputs are real rajput khokhars and others are not.it is very simple and straightforward to understand.

Response> Everyone in the world ploughs, in Hindi the term is to 'joth'. Mr Beland, if your logic is followed, everyone who ploughs is a "Jat'.

Ditto for your 'rajput'theory The term rajput is not found before 9th century CE, but the Jats and their clan names can be traced right back to Rig Vedic times- 2500 BCE.

For detailed discussions on all this see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JatHistory/

Ravi Chaudhary

81.97.43.235 "ajay jarto hunan" means "ajay conquered hunas".jarto means "jeeta" conquered.it does not mean jat.jartik was an aryan tribe.jat could be short for jartik.in the olden days punjabi language used to be called jartiki or jatki.anyway,rajputs belong to chander vansh and suraj vansh.suraj was title of vivashvantji and chander was title of somji or induji.the vanshas are divided into kuls,raghukul and yadukul etc.all the kulas of chanderji and surajji are called rajkulas"royal families or royal tribes etc".in the olden days they were popularly called kshatriyas.nowadays they are popularly known as rajaputras or simply rajputs and thakurs.vanshas became kulas and kulas have become hundreds of shakhas.so what if they are popularly known as rajputs.the old vanshas and kulas and shakhas have not changed.( posted by 81.97.43.235)

Response>

To: 81.97.43.235

Not so at all.Whoever you are , if you wish to be taken seriously put your name and sign off.

'Jarto' does not mean 'Jeeta'. The 'r'was added , and it part of the Hindization of the term 'Jat'.

Can show the etymology of the words to support your argument?

You claim that 'Ajay' as used in this sentence was a personal name- please show us how you arrive at that. .

If you cannot please hold your peace. The Rajput question has been discussed oft enough.It is a late 12-18th century identity, unheard of before. see Joon's work for starters . (end)

Ravi Chaudhary 02:54, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

"ajay jarto hunan" means as under word by word

ajay = conquered i.e. past form of jay

jarto = jat, when it is sanskritized

hunan = to huns, in sanskrit burdak 16:46, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

proposed deletion of paras from main article

"But before the earliest Muslim conquests the Jats had spread into Punjab proper, where there were firmly established in the beginning of the eleventh century. By the time of Babar, the Jats of the salt range had been in constant conflict with the Gakkhars, Awans and Janjuas. Tod classed the Jats as one of the great Rajput tribes; but here Cunningham differed from him holding the Rajputs to belong to the original Aryan stock, and the Jats to a late wave of immigrants from the north west, probably of Scythian race.

In 'Punjab Castes', Sir Denzil Ibbetson wrote: " .... the original Rajput and the original Jat entered India at different in its history. But if they do originally represent to separate waves of immigration, it is at least exceedingly probable, both from there almost identical physique and facial character and from the close communion which has always existed between them, that they belong to one and the same ethnic stock; and it is almost certain that the joint Jat Rajput stock contains not a few tribes of aboriginal descent, though it is probably in the main Aryo-Scythian, if Scythian be not Aryan."

(Both are just self serving theories of colonial bureaucrats.Unless someone objects with evidence I will remove these two paras)

Ravi Chaudhary 02:54, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

.**********************

If no objection is recived by June 15, I will delet these paras

Ravi Chaudhary 23:25, 10 June 2006 (UTC) == EDITS/VANDALISM by 59.95.200.114 etc ==

---

we are seeing vandal type edits, which do not add to our store of knowledge. Two IPs that come to our attnetin are

59.95.200.114 59.95.201.95

They have requested not to make such vandal edits, both here and on their personal talk pages.

For some reason Internet posters think that they can hde behind anaylmous IP addresses. Tis is not quite true. These posters should also note that the Internet domain is a permanent domain, and their posts will survive permanently, long after we have all left this world. Some care should be then given to what kind of legacy we wish to leave behind.

If they have material they wish to be incorporated, they should discuss it here, on this discussion page

Thay can also go to the 'Yahoo Jathistory' forum or other forums, and there are many listed on the main article page,and discuss the views in detail.

Yahoo Jathistory forum URL

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JatHistory/

The group is academically oriented. Yahoo I believe requires you to create a Yahoo ID. The archives are public, to post and visit the files section membership is requred.( this was a requirement created to avoid trolls)

Membership is only a click away. All serious persons are welcome. Standard etiquette is expected.

For the serious reader, that is nore useful.

Ravi Chaudhary 16:45, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Kanishka was a Jat King of Kaswan clan

Kaswan or Kuswan or Kasuan is a gotra of Jats in Rajasthan and Haryana in India. The word Kaswan is 'XWN' of Tocharian language meaning 'King'. The Taxila Ladle Copper inscription bears this as 'Kaswin' word. In Mahabharata also there is mention of a country named 'Kuswan' which was situated in the north of Mansarovar lake.

Presently Kaswan Jats are living in about 300 villages of Bikaner, Churu and Ratangarh areas. They were rulers in Sindh. Raja Kharwel has mentioned in an article about their rule in 2nd century of Vikram samvat - ‘Hathi Gumpha and three other inscriptions’ (page 24) in Sanskrit as under:

“Kusawanam Kshetriyanam cha Sahayyatavatan prapt masik nagaram”.

This means that the city of 'Masik' was obtained with the help of 'Kuswa' Kshatriyas

According to historian Bhim Singh Dahiya the correct name for Kushans in India is Kasuan, the present Kaswan clan of Jats of Rajasthan and Haryana. This title remains in use by Jat clan indicates their possibility of ancestral lineage from Kushans.

James Legge : A RECORD OF BUDDHISTIC INGDOMS, (Being an Account by the Chinese Monk Fa-Hien of his Travels in India and Ceylon (A.D. 399-414), in Search of the Buddhist Books of Discipline Translated and annotated with a Corean recension of the Chinese text)

mentions in chapter XII about the rule of Kanishka in foot note-4 that “Kanishka appeared, and began to reign, early in our first century, about A.D. 10. He was the last of three brothers, whose original seat was in Yueh-she, immediately mentioned, or Tukhara.”

He further mentions in footnote-6 that “This king was perhaps Kanishka himself, Fa-hien mixing up, in an inartistic way, different legends about him. Eitel suggests that a relic of the old name of the country may still exist in that of the Jats or Juts of the present day. A more common name for it is Tukhara, and he observes that the people were the Indo-Scythians of the Greeks, and the Tartars of Chinese writers, who, driven on by the Huns (180B.C.), conquered Transoxiana, destroyed the Bactrian kingdom (126 B.C.), and finally conquered the Punjab, Cashmere, and great part of India, their greatest king being Kanishak (E. H., p. 152).”

As per above discussion it is clear that the Kushan ruler Kanishka was a Jat. It is proposed accordingly to included this fact in the History of Jats in this article. burdak 15:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

(comment by 212.85.12.211)We cannot include the histories of every jat clan,I suggest you move it to the Kaswan clan page.Otherwise every Jat would want to include their history on the main page.

Response> Kaniska is hardly a non entity. When he ruled, circa -0 BCE-, His empire spread from Central Asia, to the Bay of Bengal, to Central India.

He should mentioned in the main article, briefly, with a link to the main article about him and his clan.

Ravi Chaudhary 21:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Opression section

There are some accuracy questions with the claims provided so I will need a couple of days to get the books cited and check if they accurately reflect the information edited in (I suspect they do not, but I could be wrong). Till then, plz keep the tag in the section.Thx.Hkelkar 12:50, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Of course many groups in south asia aligned themselves with other groups.Also I thought Buddism was very much distroyed by the Huns and then very much erased by the Guptas.I doubt if there where many buddist Jats left at that time.

What is a Jat?

This very basic question does not seem to be answered anywhere in the article – there seems to be no mention of what the difference is between Jats and non-Jats today. I would call this a fairly significant failing. I've also tagged this article for cleanup because it is so disorganised. mgekelly 09:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

So an in order to describe the English we need to describe the differences between the English and French ,Germans,Russians etc ?

Serious cleanup and verification of facts needed

I am appalled to see such a jumble of conflicting theories and hypotheses masquarading as "fact." It seems to me that a number of different people with pet theories as to the origin of the term "Jat" has managed to squeeze his or her ideas onto this page and often tried to present them as factual.

I certainly don't want to hurt feelings or to present myself as a particular expert on the history and derivation of the Jats, but the present article is really below par.

Also, the assumed connections between Jats and Kanishka and the Kushans seem to be based on very old references which were originally little more than speculations by various mostly 19th century scholars based on vague similarities between various names, and do not fit with more up-to-date research.

There may well be some connection Jats and the Kushans - but this is far from proven and and a lot more work needs to be done before such a theory is presented as a serious item in the Wikipedia. I think this whole article needs to be rewritten with a careful examination of the competing theories rather than presenting their conclusions as facts. Verifiable data needs to be carefully presented and thoroughly referenced and appropriately qualified. I will, in the meantime, add a few qualifiers to at least take the edge off some of the wilder claims - but I just don't have the time or energy to do a proper job of rewriting it all. When this is done I would suggest that all other articles in the Wikipedia referring to Jats should be similarly checked and revised as necessary. Is there anyone out there who could try to rewrite this article in a balanced factual manner, please?

>>

John

We appreciate your translation efforts, from chinese sources.

There is plenty of evidence from the Jat historical traditions pointing out the Kaniska is a Jat and recent historical research confirms, not negate that.

It you wish to counter that, then you must provide solid evidence to the contrary.

Ravi Chaudhary 21:40, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Migration of Jats

• There are historians who consider Jats to be of Indo-Aryan origin. On the basis of ethnological, physical and linguistic standards by many historians like E.B.Havell^[1], Qanungo^[2], C.V.Vaidya^[3], Sir Herbert Risley ^[4], Thakur Deshraj^[5], Mangal Sen Jindal^[6]etc., who condider Jats to be Indo-Aryan. Dr Natthan Singh writes that Jats were the pure Aryans and their original homeland was Sapta Sindhu. On the basis of historical facts the Jats are reported to be present in India from 3102 BC. ^{[7] [8]} They had to migrate from India on economic, social and political reasons for some period but they returned back to India. In the migration also they did not leave their language and cultural traditions. Due to this reason only Jats do not have linguistic or physical similarities with Huns and Scythians. ^[9] This view is also supported by Thakur Deshraj who writes that on the basis of ethnological, physical, cultural and linguistic standards Jats are pure Aryans who inhabited the areas on the banks of Ganga-Yamuna or Sarswati-Sindhu during Vedic civilization. ^[10]
• There is other group of Historians like, Sir Alexander Cunnigham ^[11] and Col James Tod ^[12], Bhim Singh Dahiya, V. Smith etc who consider the Jats to be of Indo-Scythian stock.
• There are data available about genetics of Jats as discussed above.
• There is need to clear this position on solid historical facts. It is proposed to add a new section in this article about the migration of Jat population. The migration of Jats has not been mentioned in the article so far. The migration pattern, period and the movement will lead to more clear history and theory about origin of Jats. burdak 11:32, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

1. ^ E.B.Havell: The history of Aryan rule in India, page 32
2. ^ Qanungo: History of the Jats
3. ^ C.V.Vaidya: History of Medieval Hindu India
4. ^ Sir Herbert Risley: The People of India
5. ^ Thakur Deshraj: Jat Itihasa
6. ^ Mangal Sen Jindal: History of Origin of Some Clans in India
7. ^ Dr Natthan Singh: Jat - Itihas (Hindi), Jat Samaj Kalyan Parishad Gwalior, 2004 (Page 9)
8. ^ CV Vaidya: Mahabharata a criticizm, Bombay 1904 (Page 55-78)
9. ^ Dr Natthan Singh: Jat - Itihas (Hindi), Jat Samaj Kalyan Parishad Gwalior, 2004 (Page 38)
10. ^ Thakur Deshraj: Jat Itihasa, Page 64
11. ^ Alexander Cunningham, History of Sikhs
12. ^ James Tod, Annals

Query on historical accuracy of dates for Jats

Dear Shri L R Burdak:

I have just noticed your recent comments. First, I have added a marker to your note which allows all the references you gave to be easily readable - I hope this is O.K. with you?

I was very surprised to find your statement: "On the basis of historical facts the Jats are reported to be present in India from 3102 BC." You give Dr Natthan Singh's book: Jat - Itihas (Hindi), as a reference for this. I have been studying Indian history for more than 25 years and I have never come across any historical information which can be accurately dated earlier than about the middle of the first millenium BCE. If Dr. Natthan Singh's claims can be verified, this would indeed be a landmark in the study of Indian history. Perhaps you would be kind enough to outline the evidence for this very early and remarkably precise dating? Thank you. John Hill 23:14, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Year 3102 BC

Hi John Hill, There are two references cited above with 3102 BC. One is Dr Natthan Singh who is a reputed author of 'History of Jats'. Another reference is that of CV Vaidya who is an authority on Indian history. After your note above I tried to find more references. I found in Sister Nivedita book on Myths of The Hindus and Buddhists^[1] in which she has given calculations about Hindu cosmology. She has mentioned that commencement of Kali yuga coincides with the day of the death of Krishna. This way this year coincides with death of Krishna. We have this on wikipedia as well. This year is mentioned on its link page of 3102 BC that:

• 3102 BC – Astrological evidence places this date to be the death of Krishna at the age of 125
• 3102 BC — Year 0 of the Kali Yuga begins

Regards, burdak 15:36, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

More on 3102 BC

Dear Shri Burdak, What you are saying, I gather, is that according to Hindu cosmology certain events took place in 3102 BC. While this may be accepted as fact by some Hindus, this sort of calculation is usually not accepted by people of other faiths as "historical fact." Many religious traditions have made calculations of this sort based on their scriptures and traditions. For example, the Anglican Archbishop James Ussher calculated on the basis of comparing information in the Christian scriptures with established historical dates that the world was created in 4004 BC. Nowadays most Christians, including most Anglicans (not to mention people of other faiths), no longer accept this date as worthy of serious consideration. It would be better in a general encyclopedia such as this, I suggest, to present such information in terms as such "calculations based on Hindu cosmology or tradition." Cheers, John Hill 22:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Jat in Mahavamsa

Dear John Hill, Thanks for the suggestions. There is a need to find some solid historical fact. That is why I put it for discussion. I found that you have done a good work in Buddhist literature. Most of the Jats had adopted Buddhism when it was at peak. There is a need to research the Buddhist literature about origin and history of Jats. Mahavansha, provides a continuous historical record of over two millennia. At one point I find a comment about Chandragupta Maurya as under-

"Mahavamsa describes Chandragupta as coming of Kshatriya clan of Maurya: Mauryanam Khattyanam vamsha jata. (Geiger Trans p 27)."

The meaning of this shloka in sanskrit is that Mauryas are Jat of kshatriya clan. Can you suggest further approach about this and links which provide material on Jats in Buddhist literature or traditions. burdak 04:03, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

More on Jat in Mahavamsa

Dear Shree Burdak: Thank you very much for your last note which is, indeed, of great interest and importance as it seems to firmly establish that the Mauryas were of Jat lineage.

Unfortunately, I do not have a copy of the Mahavamsa available other than the on-line in the two internet links given in the Wikipedia article on the Mahavamsa. I haven't been able to find the passage you mention in either of these on-line versions of the Geiger translation but, perhaps, they are not complete or the English translation is faulty. I would be very grateful if you could send me the full quote and reference and any other details you can find. I will search for other references to Jats in my books and notes as soon as I can. I will search for more references to jats in my books and references as soon as I can. Many thanks, John Hill 23:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Were the Mauryas, Kanishka, etc., really Jats?

I am getting even more concerned about some of the claims made in this article about historical figures such as Ashoka and Kanishka being claimed to be Jats. First of all, I wish to make it crystal clear that I have no proof or even evidence that they were NOT Jats. Alos, I am in no way trying to be difficult or argumentative. What I am uneasy about is that I have yet to see any credible evidence that they WERE Jats and, until credible evidence is presented I don't believe this claim should be made as established "fact" in a Wikipedia article.

I have been waiting for a reply to my query above (see previous note) to Shree Burdak for the source of the reference he gave which he said was from the Mahavamsa, and which, if correct, would indeed seem to imply that the Mauryas (or at least some of them) were Jats.

Today I happened to spot a note from Ravi Chaudary, dated 14 November (see above), which says:

"There is plenty of evidence from the Jat historical traditions pointing out the Kaniska is a Jat and recent historical research confirms, not negate that.

It you wish to counter that, then you must provide solid evidence to the contrary."

As far as I know, the ethnicity of Kanishka and, for that matter, all the Kushans, remains in doubt. Some scholars assert that they were of Yuezhi stock originally from the region of Gansu and the Tarim Basin (basing their case on the rather unclear evidence of the Chinese histories). Others suggest that they may have been descendants of the indigenous rulers of Guishuang or Badhakshan and others again, suggest they may have been a mixture of both (and even, perhaps, part Bactrian Greek), and that the later Kushans may have been part Indian.

Probably, when they invaded and conquered much of northern India they would have been accorded Kshatriya caste status - like many later foreign conquerors. However, I am sure you will agree with me that not all Kshatriyas are Jats.

I am sorry, Ravi, but I think the "burden of proof" is, rather, on you to present the evidence that Kanishka was a Jat, rather than for me to try to disprove this assertion (which would, of course, be impossible for me to do). "Jat historical traditions" are just that, "historical traditions" - not established historical information. Please also give the references to the "recent historical research" you mention, so that it can be accessed by other scholars.

Until this information is available for examination in peer-reviewed journals or the like, I suggest that the statements that Ashoka, Kanishka, or other early monarchs were Jats should be prefaced with a statement such as "Jat historical traditions assert that . . . " John Hill 02:51, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Response >>

Dear John

My intention is not to get into an argument with you.

If you choose to disregard the Indian and Jat Historians, you are very welcome.

Historical Traditions are what make History.

Someone claiming to write the history of a people , but willfully ignoring the their Historical tradition, may get a few accolades in a closed group, but those are unlikey to last very long.

All that is a happening is that the Historical traditions and records of the Jats are coming into light.

One would think that scholars like you would welcome that, rather then cling to out dated notions

And no , if you wish to counter our historical traditions, and our historians , it is upto to you to counter them solid evidence, rather than simply attempt to cast doubt,and muddy waters.

So far, you have acknowledged you cannot show that Kaniska etc were not Jats!

So if you make an assertation, you must come with a better rationale than you have done upto now!

If you can come up with evidence, I will gladly change my mind.

If you cannot, I will continue accept our ancient historical traditions as being correct.

Best regards

Ravi Chaudhary 03:26, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JatHistory/

Response

Dear Ravi: I certainly don't want to argue for the sake of arguing but you must realise that there is a difference between "historical traditions" and "history." There are many "historical traditions" that have been proven wrong in recent years.

To give just one example - it was almost universally thought until recent years that European Gypsies or Roma orignally came from Egypt (not least by the European Gypsies or Roma themselves). However, recent linguistic evidence suggests that they originally came from India instead.

Another example is the collection of legends surrounding King Arthur in Britain forming quite an elaborate "historical tradition" but, unfortunately, it is still being argued as to whether there ever was a 'real' King Arthur on which the legends were based. And I doubt whether you could find any historian, even a fanatically nationalistic British one, who would dare claim that all the stories told about King Arthur and his court are accurate or could be accepted as "history."

You are, of course, quite at liberty to accept your people's ancient historical traditions as being correct and true - many people of many traditions, cultures and religions do - but you can't expect others to accept them too without reliable and verifiable evidence. Often various traditons are contradictory or can be interpreted in different ways - which has frequently led to arguments and wars. Therefore, until such evidence can be presented clearly and authoritatively, they should not be reported in a work such as the Wikipedia as "history" or "historically factual" but, rather, as "traditions" or "beliefs." John Hill 05:20, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Response>>

Dear John

You are obfuscating the subject.

We are also students of history.

History does include Historical Traditions, not exclude them as you would assert.

Do try and stay with the topic

Nothing you have posted so far, shows that you have any information that would convince anyone that Kaniska and the Kushans were not Jats.

Simply casting doubt, does not a rational argument make.

As a side note, you are using late chinese terminology for a much earlier non chinese people.

This causes considerable confusion.

Hence it becomes even more important to examine the " Kushan' question from a non chinese view.

I will suggest you shift this discussion to the Jathistory group.

Best regards

Ravi Chaudhary 15:50, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Reply to Ravi Chaudhary

Dear Ravi:

You are misrepresenting my statements and I would ask you to please stop doing so. I have never said or even implied that history cannot include historical traditions - but I have said that historical traditions are not necessarily history.

I am only asking you to clearly state when you are dealing with an historical tradition and not a matter of established and widely-accepted fact. So, if indeed there is a tradition that Ashoka and Kanishka (and/or other early famous monarchs) were Jats, there is nothing wrong in presenting them as being Jats according to Jat traditions and, wherever possible, giving the references for this. However, I do strongly object to them being presented as established historical facts - even if some Jats accept them as such - unless you are able to present convincing evidence.

Often there is more than a grain of truth in historical traditions. However, historical traditions on their own are not usually considered to be "history" - as I am sure you are well aware. They need to be checked against as much reliable data as can be gathered and, even then, they are often unable to substantiated thoroughly enough to be generally considered as historical "facts."

A case in point - many Christians literally believe that Jesus was the only son of God, was born of a virgin, was crucified and died on a cross, rose again from the dead, and will be present at a Judgement Day when the righteous will be bodily elevated to heaven. Now, non-Christians (and, indeed, many Christians) do not believe this is literally true (which, by the way, is not necessarily saying there is absolutely no truth in it).

So, in a work like the Wikipedia one would expect a balanced approach to this account and to preface it with something like: "Christian traditions state that . . . ." Or: "The new Testament says that . . . .."

And, of course, this exactly kind of qualification you will find if you go to the Wikipedia article on Christianity, which opens with the passage: "Christianity is a monotheistic[1] religion centered on Jesus of Nazareth, and on his life and teachings as presented in the New Testament.[2] Christians believe Jesus is the Son of God and the awaited Messiah prophesied in the Old Testament, therefore they call him the Christ."

All I am asking for is a similar regard for presenting an accurate, balanced, well-referenced account on Jats and their history.

Now, to a couple more minor points which you raised. You state:

"Nothing you have posted so far, shows that you have any information that would convince anyone that Kaniska and the Kushans were not Jats.

Simply casting doubt, does not a rational argument make."

I have never tried to convince anyone that Kanishka and the Kushans were not Jats - only that I have yet to be shown any convincing evidence that this was the case. It is, indeed, quite possible they were Jats, I just don't think a convincing enough case has been made to assert this as fact.

I might also add, as a reply to your comment that - simply because someone states that something is true does not mean others should necessarily accept that it is true.

You then say:

"As a side note, you are using late chinese terminology for a much earlier non chinese people."

Please remember that I was primarily discussing Kanishka and the Chinese names I was using are based on a document which is specifically stated to have been presented to the Chinese Emperor by one of his senior generals in the early 2nd century CE - precisely the period in which it is thought Kanishka was alive.

Other names which have been commonly associated with the Kushans (such as "Tokhara") are still being hotly debated by historians and are not as well attested as the Chinese names.

Finally, you suggest we move this discussion to the "Jathistory" group. Unfortunately, I have been unable to locate this group - would you please give me the directions to find it?

Sincerely, John Hill 01:29, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Jats Race

John hill suggests that Jats have been mixing for a long time;however is it not totally correct.Recent evidence suggest there has been a separation in groups in recent times,for instance [4].So it more likely Jats where mixed in ancient times and less so now.In fact Jats at the ethnic level are quite mixed ,however each clan may have its own history [5].I'll include the uzbek link in the main page.Here's a quote from the paper.

'In conclusion, our results show that, although people from the same lineage and clan share generally a recent common ancestor, no such common ancestry is observed at the tribal level, which is likely to be socially constructed. Further studies of other traditional societies are needed to evaluate the extent to which the pattern observed in Central Asia can be extrapolated to other world regions. In any case, our study demonstrates that the resolution of modern genetic markers allows us to make historical investigations at the scale of kinship groups and to practice a kind of “ethnogenetics.” It explores the roots of the descent groups in patrilineal populations and reveals the mythical nature of the genealogical links between people of a tribe and their claimed ancestor. As anthropologist Lawrence Krader pointed out, “genealogy is at once ideology and history” (Krader 1963a, p. 157).'

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.48.46.141 (talk) 16:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC).