Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 27

Thread: Famous Jat - Rajput Blood Rivalry of Rajasthan, Historical insight !!

  1. #1

    Lightbulb Famous Jat - Rajput Blood Rivalry of Rajasthan, Historical insight !!

    Hi All,

    Being a Rajasthani Jat myself, I've felt, sometimes witnessed and heard a lot of stories from elders about famous rivalry between two prominent communities of Rajasthan. Even there're couple of very famous movies made on this particular rivalry-

    1) Ghulami - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089201/
    2) Bantwara - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0096896/

    This is very much true Rajputs were mostly rulers and land lords at that time in most of Rajasthan except Bharatpur and Dholpur states. They used to oppress and discriminate all the classes mostly Farmers and of course Jats. But Jats always been free soul, fearless and brave race and it was out of question to tolerate such injustice as a result conflict, fights used to arise when Jat refused to give them 'Lagaan' or discard their social discrimination or inhuman behaviour to poor people. As a result many Jat farmers used to become Rebel and started fighting for cause of their rights. There're so many such stories of local rebels who used to loot 'Thakurs' or 'Sahukars' in those times. After independence, winds of change brought freedom and democracy and wiped away aristocracy and oppression, however it was really hard for Rajputs to leave their ages old ruling and as a result they started harassing progressive, hard working Jats by different means like not giving admission to brilliant Jat students in their funded colleges (My Tauji has been victim), failing them in interviews etc but they couldn't hold on to their cheap tricks and Jats defeated them in all means.

    Now my question for Historians (Specially Burdak Ji and Ravi Ji) is what was the reason that Rajputs came in power in particular in Rajasthan and why didn't Jat leaders from Haryana, Punjab and UP didn't help poor Jat farmers before? Why didn't Raja Suraj Mal tried to spread his kingdom and help fellow Jats of Shekhawati and other area?


    Although that kinda rivalry no more exist but still there're minor differences and minor conflict arises between the communities once in a while but still Jats at large don't like Rajputs. Their false sense of pride, fake aristocracy and show off, hard to take.


    I seriously request you all to watch movie Ghulami and Bantwara to feel the real zeal. Both movies are available on youtube.

    Ghulami -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McWqJr_2zHE
    Bantwara -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jpuphGl0kQ



    Cheers
    Jit
    Last edited by cooljat; March 26th, 2012 at 09:53 PM.
    .. " Until Lions have their historians, tales of the hunt shall always glorify the hunter! " ..



  2. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to cooljat For This Useful Post:

    arjunsmalik (September 30th, 2012), AryanPoonia (December 29th, 2014), ashishsehrawat9 (March 28th, 2012), deshi-jat (March 27th, 2012), deveshdahiya (May 14th, 2014), DRMOTHSARA (May 28th, 2014), op1955 (March 27th, 2012), ravinderjeet (March 28th, 2012), saurabhjaglan (March 27th, 2012), sukhbirhooda (March 27th, 2012), vijaykajla1 (March 26th, 2012), vishalsunsunwal (March 27th, 2012)

  3. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by cooljat View Post
    Hi All ..........Now my question for Historians (Specially Burdak Ji and Ravi Ji) is what was the reason that Rajputs came in power in particular in Rajasthan and why didn't Jat leaders from Haryana, Punjab and UP didn't help poor Jat farmers before? Why didn't Raja Suraj Mal tried to spread his kingdom and help fellow Jats of Shekhawati and other area?.........Cheers Jit

    Dear Friend,

    You have raised three very important questions in the quote under reference. I invite your attention to the third question first i.e. regarding Maharaja Suraj Mal. To understand the reasons for Maharaja Suraj Mal's failure to spread his Kingdom to Shekhawati region, you will have to take an objective view of the then prevailing fluid political condition in India.

    Though the bricks for foundation of the Jat kingdom had been laid by Churaman Singh in defacto form, but Bharatpur Kingdom rose as a dejure power initially under Badan Singh who had secured help or rather patronage of Sawai Jai Singh, the founder of the modern Jaipur city in opposition to his elder cousin (Churaman and then his successor Mohkam Singh) and dislodged his dynasty. He never assumed the title of a king and inspite of being real king of Deeg (his capital town), remained faithful to the Kachhwah ruler for his timely help in getting the leadership of the rising power of the Sinsinwar ruling house.
    From heart of hearts neither Sawai Jai Singh liked the rise of the strong Jat State in the region so close to their capital nor the then Mughal rulers (of course the weaklings) liked emergence of the Jat rule in the region lying between the two capital towns Agra and Delhi. The Jats outmanevoured both the parties and under the patronage of blind and aged Badan Singh and active leadership of Maharaja Suraj Mal the foundation, establishment and development of the Jat power was so startling that all the contemporary powers contesting for the supremacy in Indian politics like Ruhellas, Nawab of Oudh, Mughal emperors, Ahmad Shah Abdali and the Marathas started to knock at the doors of Maharaja Suraj Mal for help, but he rightly described as 'Pluto of the Jat Community' kept his cards close to his chest.

    The Mughal forces, the Marathas, the Ruhellas and the Abdalis were defeated at one time or the other by the Jat military strength under the leadership of Maharaja Suraj Mal and his young son Jawahar Singh. This happened between 1730 and 1763 AD.

    See this was the time when Abdalis invaded India 7-8 times, the Marathas crossed Chambal several times, destroyed the power of Jat Ranas of Gohad (Gwalior) , terrified and changed several Mughal rulers of Delhi and imposed levy on many rulers of north India including almost all the Rajputana Rulers. During this period the Jats under benign leadership of Maharaja Suraj Mal not only survived their attacks but spread their hold on the areas spread from Itawa, Hathras, Aligarh, Bullandshahar, Muzafarnagar, Agra, Dholpur, Bharatpur, Karauli, Alwar, Mewat, Rewari, Dadri, Rohtak, Jhajjar and several other parts of Haryana.
    But unfortunately, when Jats tried to capture Delhi, Maharaja Suraj Mal, at the premature age of 56, was murdered under mysterious conditions on 25th December 1763 in the ravines of Hindaun near Delhi. In this way he could not proceed towards Shekhawati region of Rajasthan. (For fuller Details, please See, Rise of the Jat Power by Dr. Raj Pal Singh, 1988, Harman Publishing House, New Delhi and JatLand Wiki pages, library section etc.).

    Regards
    Last edited by DrRajpalSingh; March 27th, 2012 at 02:04 AM.

  4. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to DrRajpalSingh For This Useful Post:

    cooljat (March 27th, 2012), deshi-jat (March 27th, 2012), dndeswal (March 27th, 2012), Krchoudhary (March 30th, 2012), maddhan1979 (January 6th, 2013), malikdeepak1 (March 27th, 2012), op1955 (March 27th, 2012), ravinderjeet (March 28th, 2012), sukhbirhooda (March 27th, 2012), vishalsunsunwal (March 27th, 2012), ZaildarTejSeng (September 7th, 2014)

  5. #3

    The rivalry and its political economy

    It has been one of the interesting observations, and quite repeating itself in sublime form. But, there used to be times when this jealousy exacerbated in visible conflict. There are some universal processes which raise the tempo of this conflict, which is simply a conflict of power and resources. Jats and Rajputs got entangled because after the decline of Harsha's Empire and before the advent of Arabs in western part of Indian subcontinent, the feudal monarchies were emerging at several places. And, caste alignments were not mature but tribes were aligning to create new ruling castes, that is why find some Jat gotras in Rajputs or vice versa.

    The feudal structure initially invited lot of caste-tribe alignment of interests where Jats followed Rajput leaders to secure material resources. The Rathores of Bikaner are very visible example.

    When Islam came, it took advantage of this divisiveness and also certain ruling castes gotras especially Brahmins and Rajput groups also sought Islamic allegiance for maintaining their power interest. This created new polarisation. So, at some places Hindu Rajputs and Jats came together like in Punjab to forge a common front against the Imperial Islam. Whereas others, like the Bhatti Rajputs of Jaisalmer sought some form of allegiance to Islam.

    During medieval period the Rajput polity depended much on Islam for its successful rule. Hence, the era of internal colonialism started after the invasion of the Turks. The Rajputs paid tributes to Delhi durbar by exploiting the Jat peasantry. Thus, the advent of Islam created the conditions of exploitation, particularly in case of Rajasthan a situation of internal colonialist model of feudalism emerged, as practised by the Rajput rulers. And, it is this that is essentially the bedrock of Jat-Rajput animosity, there were more than 4 dozens of lag-begar levied.

    The Jats of Punjab of PEPSU to be precise had direct Muslim rulers so they became the subjects of empire, unlike the case of Rajasthan Jats, who were indirect subjects. Therefore, when the British dislodged the Muslim rulers, the Jats of PEPSU directly confronted the British Imperialism, see all Ghadar Party members were from this part. Whereas, the Jats of Rajasthan still faced the same fate with internal colonialism and brutal British exploitation. So, for the Jats of Rajasthan it was a double struggle, which made them extraordinary in confronting the situation.

    And, it is no simple coincidence that in all the Jat-prevailing regions of north India, it is the Jats of Rajasthan who came closest to class struggle ideology. And, today no less than three MLAs come from communist party movement, because the Kisan Sabha represented that particular political economy of Jat struggle.

    More later on.......

    Ambrish Dhaka
    Shanghai, China
    Last edited by Ambijat; March 27th, 2012 at 08:33 AM.
    Keep a bigger heart than than what you had yesterday!

  6. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Ambijat For This Useful Post:

    cooljat (March 27th, 2012), dndeswal (March 27th, 2012), DRMOTHSARA (June 23rd, 2014), DrRajpalSingh (March 27th, 2012), lrburdak (March 27th, 2012), op1955 (March 27th, 2012), ravinderjeet (March 28th, 2012), rsdalal (March 28th, 2012), sukhbirhooda (March 27th, 2012), vishalsunsunwal (March 27th, 2012)

  7. #4
    Friend,
    Excellent historical piece of writing, congrts.

    But minor question remains to be probed in your next part of the article. To understand Jat-Rajput relations several factors have to be analysed as it,is not that easy to make sweeping averments unsubstantiated by facts. Could you further explain the meaning of the sentence: "The Rajputs paid tributes to Delhi durbar by exploiting the Jat peasantry."

    Historical narrative does not support this statement because the exploitation effected all the agriculturist castes and communities and no segregation of Jats from other castes was done at that point of time. I would be the happiest person if you could negate it.

    Regards

  8. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRajpalSingh View Post
    Friend,
    Could you further explain the meaning of the sentence: "The Rajputs paid tributes to Delhi durbar by exploiting the Jat peasantry."

    Historical narrative does not support this statement because the exploitation effected all the agriculturist castes and communities and no segregation of Jats from other castes was done at that point of time. I would be the happiest person if you could negate it.

    Regards
    I think I dont have to prove that Rajput paid tribute to Delhi, Mughals onwards. The jats represented the major share of peasantry, sometimes jat as a colloquial term can represent the larger set of peasantry. After all Shekhawati Kisan Andolan is taken more or less in that spirit by scholars and critics alike.
    Well since the discussion was on analysis of Jat-Rajput relations, I explain with the basic forces of production of relations. Have I said somewhere that "segregation of Jats from other castes was done at that point of time". I think I have said it nowhere.
    Last edited by Ambijat; March 28th, 2012 at 04:57 AM.
    Keep a bigger heart than than what you had yesterday!

  9. #6
    We have discussed every thing in article [Wiki]Shekhawati Kisan Andolan [/Wiki]

    Initially till the early 20th century Jat farmers were either not that unhappy with Rajput Jagirdars or were not aware of alternative ways. The system of equal division of states within Jagirdar brothers proved very taxing for the farmers and they had to rise against oppressions and exploitation by Jagirdars. All Jat farmers from Haryana and Punjab came to their help. Movement got boost from outside support.
    Laxman Burdak

  10. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to lrburdak For This Useful Post:

    bishanleo2001 (March 27th, 2012), cooljat (March 28th, 2012), DrRajpalSingh (March 27th, 2012), ravinderjeet (March 28th, 2012), saurabhjaglan (March 28th, 2012)

  11. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by lrburdak View Post
    We have discussed every thing in article Shekhawati Kisan Andolan

    Initially till the early 20th century Jat farmers were either not that unhappy with Rajput Jagirdars or were not aware of alternative ways. The system of equal division of states within Jagirdar brothers proved very taxing for the farmers and they had to rise against oppressions and exploitation by Jagirdars. All Jat farmers from Haryana and Punjab came to their help. Movement got boost from outside support.
    Burdak Sahib,
    You are right to say that the relations between the feudal lords and the peasantry were not based on caste system. This is true about the period of the rise, foundation, establishment and stabilisation of the Bharatpur ruling family. There was rivalry between the supporters of Churaman Singh who happened to be from Jodhpur house (Rathors) and supporters of Churaman's cousin, Badan Singh, who happened to be Amber/Jaipur's Kachhwah rulers.

    Initially Churaman and Ajit Singh Rathor Group had upper hand in this period of politics but after the fall of the Sayyid brothers at the Mughal court, Badan Singh-Jai Singh combine had upper hand and succeeded in dislodging Churaman's son and successor Mohkam Singh from Thun (the then capital of the Sinsinwars.) who took shelter at Jodhpur and spent his rest of life in the hope of getting back leadership of the Sinsinwar royal house.

    The relationship between Badan Singh and Kachhwah ruling house worsened on the death of Sawai Jai Singh when succession war was fought between his two sons (Ishwari Singh, the elder son) and (Madho Singh, the younger one) because in the battle of Bagru Badan Sngh's Son, Suraj Mal had fought and won it in favour of Ishwari Singh who became King of Jaipur. This caused soaring feelings in the mind of defeated Madho Singh.
    After a few years Madho Singh became ruler of Jaipur (after the death of his brother Ishwari Singh) but the times had changed because by that time, under the leadership of Suraj Mal Jats had carved out a niche in the politics of India and Madho Singh kept hidden his enmity to his chest.
    Then followed the death of Suraj Mal and his younger son Nahar Singh's hobnobbing with Madho Singh to get the mantle of leadership of the Jats with Kachhawa's help. But the eldest son and successor Jawahar Singh out manevoured both of them and became ruler of the Bharatpur.
    He, cultivated friendship with Vijay Singh Rathor the ruler of Jodhpur who was against Madho Singh.

    To overawe Madho Singh and to cement his friendship with Vijay Singh, Maharaja Jawahar Singh undertook journey to Pushkar near Ajmer. Royal ladies including Queen mother, Maharani Kishori also went there to take bath in the sacred Pushkar lake. Naturally the occasion turned into a type of military strength show by the Jats. The oath of friendship and exchange of pugree between Jawahar Singh and Vijay Singh further infuriated Madho singh who bore enmity against the Sinsinwars due to their earlier role in favour of the succession issue of Ishwari singh in 1748.
    Partap Singh, the deposed Raja of Machheri (Alwar) who had been driven away earlier from his home by Madho Singh and had been staying at Bharatpur as refugee and had been entrusted to look after arrangements there in Jawahar Singh's absence, deceived his mentor, went to Jaipur during this time and advised Madho Singh to take advantage of the situation. Madho Singh decided to attack the returning back entourage of Bharatpur house.

    Vijay Singh Rathore came with his forces in fvour of Jawahar Singh about a few miles from Ajmer but on the persuasion of Jawahar, he leaving behind a strong contingent returned to his state. Enroute near Khetri a fierce battle was contested between the Sinsinwar and Kachhwah rulers resulting into heavy loss of life on both sides.

    After his return safely to Bharatpur, Jawahar indulged in his victorious campaign and extended his realms towards Gohad, Gawalior and Jhansi. But he was mysteriously murdered in 1768 in which many pointed finger towards Kachhwa ruler.

    Thus from 1707 to 1768, the Jats had friendship or enmity at the same time with one or the other Rajput clan and there was no question of enmity between the Jat community and the Rajput Community as such. The enmity was among ruling houses for one upmanship. And this applies to all the ruling houses of India of 18th century.


    Therefore, we must desist citing out of context examples from the pages of history and thus avoid spreading caste/community rivalry and hatred and must follow the dictum: Live and Let Live!
    This is the purpose of this post and also of history to be taught and learnt to cement brotherhood ties among the people of India.

    Thanks.
    Last edited by DrRajpalSingh; March 28th, 2012 at 07:57 AM.

  12. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to DrRajpalSingh For This Useful Post:

    cooljat (March 28th, 2012), dndeswal (March 28th, 2012), ZaildarTejSeng (September 7th, 2014)

  13. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Ambijat View Post
    I think I dont have to prove that Rajput paid tribute to Delhi, Mughals onwards. The jats represented the major share of peasantry, sometimes jat as a colloquial term can represent the larger set of peasantry. After all Shekhawati Kisan Andolan is taken more or less in that spirit by scholars and critics alike.
    Well since the discussion was on analysis of Jat-Rajput relations, I explain with the basic forces of production of relations. Have I said somewhere that "segregation of Jats from other castes was done at that point of time". I think I have said it nowhere.
    Friend,

    I have already accepted the beauty of your analytic prowess and you have further elucidated it in your present post.

    To put the record straight I reiterate that you have not used the words shown in bold by me. But by implication the meaning of the sentence in your earlier post that: "The Rajputs paid tributes to Delhi durbar by exploiting the Jat peasantry" conveyed the same view i.e. the Jats only were made target of exploitation and other castes/communities engaged in agricultural pursuits were let off by the Rajputs.

    Now, as agreed upon by you, we may say that all agriculturist people including the Jats therein suffered at the hands of the feudal lords in that age and it was not a caste/community based issue.

    Thanks and regards


  14. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRajpalSingh View Post
    Burdak Sahib,
    You are right to say that the relations between the feudal lords and the peasantry were not based on caste system. This is true about the period of the rise, foundation, establishment and stabilisation of the Bharatpur ruling family. There was rivalry between the supporters of Churaman Singh who happened to be from Jodhpur house (Rathors) and supporters of Churaman's cousin, Badan Singh, who happened to be Amber/Jaipur's Kachhwah rulers.

    Initially Churaman and Ajit Singh Rathor Group had upper hand in this period of politics but after the fall of the Sayyid brothers at the Mughal court, Badan Singh-Jai Singh combine had upper hand and succeeded in dislodging Churaman's son and successor Mohkam Singh from Thun (the then capital of the Sinsinwars.) who took shelter at Jodhpur and spent his rest of life in the hope of getting back leadership of the Sinsinwar royal house.

    The relationship between Badan Singh and Kachhwah ruling house worsened on the death of Sawai Jai Singh when succession war was fought between his two sons (Ishwari Singh, the elder son) and (Madho Singh, the younger one) because in the battle of Bagru Badan Sngh's Son, Suraj Mal had fought and won it in favour of Ishwari Singh who became King of Jaipur. This caused soaring feelings in the mind of defeated Madho Singh.
    After a few years Madho Singh became ruler of Jaipur (after the death of his brother Ishwari Singh) but the times had changed because by that time, under the leadership of Suraj Mal Jats had carved out a niche in the politics of India and Madho Singh kept hidden his enmity to his chest.
    Then followed the death of Suraj Mal and his younger son Nahar Singh's hobnobbing with Madho Singh to get the mantle of leadership of the Jats with Kachhawa's help. But the eldest son and successor Jawahar Singh out manevoured both of them and became ruler of the Bharatpur.
    He, cultivated friendship with Vijay Singh Rathor the ruler of Jodhpur who was against Madho Singh.

    To overawe Madho Singh and to cement his friendship with Vijay Singh, Maharaja Jawahar Singh undertook journey to Pushkar near Ajmer. Royal ladies including Queen mother, Maharani Kishori also went there to take bath in the sacred Pushkar lake. Naturally the occasion turned into a type of military strength show by the Jats. The oath of friendship and exchange of pugree between Jawahar Singh and Vijay Singh further infuriated Madho singh who bore enmity against the Sinsinwars due to their earlier role in favour of the succession issue of Ishwari singh in 1748.
    Partap Singh, the deposed Raja of Machheri (Alwar) who had been driven away earlier from his home by Madho Singh and had been staying at Bharatpur as refugee and had been entrusted to look after arrangements there in Jawahar Singh's absence, deceived his mentor, went to Jaipur during this time and advised Madho Singh to take advantage of the situation. Madho Singh decided to attack the returning back entourage of Bharatpur house.

    Vijay Singh Rathore came with his forces in fvour of Jawahar Singh about a few miles from Ajmer but on the persuasion of Jawahar, he leaving behind a strong contingent returned to his state. Enroute near Khetri a fierce battle was contested between the Sinsinwar and Kachhwah rulers resulting into heavy loss of life on both sides.

    After his return safely to Bharatpur, Jawahar indulged in his victorious campaign and extended his realms towards Gohad, Gawalior and Jhansi. But he was mysteriously murdered in 1768 in which many pointed finger towards Kachhwa ruler.

    Thus from 1707 to 1768, the Jats had friendship or enmity at the same time with one or the other Rajput clan and there was no question of enmity between the Jat community and the Rajput Community as such. The enmity was among ruling houses for one upmanship. And this applies to all the ruling houses of India of 18th century.


    Therefore, we must desist citing out of context examples from the pages of history and thus avoid spreading caste/community rivalry and hatred and must follow the dictum: Live and Let Live!
    This is the purpose of this post and also of history to be taught and learnt to cement brotherhood ties among the people of India.

    Thanks.
    Rajpal ji..burdak ji was talking about early 20th century and you dragged it back to 17th century. I don't think this example suits anywhere to what burdak ji said. Apart from Bharatpur and dholpur, all the royal houses of rajasthan were Rajputs, I guess you did not read the history of shekhawati Kisan andolan! .No-one can deny the facts how rajputs oppressed farmers (most of them jats). There existed no harmony between jats and rajputs in the entire history. Rajuts always disdained jats and never showed respects for us. They despised jats from the core of their hearts and rajasthani jats have been direct victims of them . So you can try to cement the brotherhood but can not change the history
    Become more and more innocent, less knowledgeable and more childlike. Take life as fun - because that's precisely what it is!

  15. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by prashantacmet View Post
    Rajpal ji..burdak ji was talking about early 20th century and you dragged it back to 17th century. I don't think this example suits anywhere to what burdak ji said. Apart from Bharatpur and dholpur, all the royal houses of rajasthan were Rajputs, I guess you did not read the history of shekhawati Kisan andolan! .No-one can deny the facts how rajputs oppressed farmers (most of them jats). There existed no harmony between jats and rajputs in the entire history. Rajuts always disdained jats and never showed respects for us. They despised jats from the core of their hearts and rajasthani jats have been direct victims of them . So you can try to cement the brotherhood but can not change the history

    Friend,

    You are right that I cannot change history but the same logic applies to every one in equal measure.
    Kindly remember that to understand 20th century you will have to understand historical background and also let me produce the following points for your perusal.
    i)History cannot be compartmentalised between isolated periods to make it suit one's prejudices by choosing specific incidents occurred at some point of time.
    ii) With all humility at my command kindly permit me to say that during last three decades as a researcher, I have not only read the Wiki version of Shekhawati movement but much more alongwith examining sources available at Rajasthan State Archives Bikaner, regional collections at Jaipur, Alwar andat National Archives, Delhi; NMNL etc. on the issue and several other authors like Satish Chandra, Nurul Hasan, Harbans Singh Mukhia, Irfan Habib, Rana, Guha et. all, who are accepted by one and all as authorities on the peasant studies.

    Therefore, mind please, with due regards to the author and what Burdakji has produced in Wiki section, it is description of one movement only based on a good research work by eminent Jat Historian and my friend Dr. Pema Ram Ji. But it cannot be accepted as final word on the issue before all the relevant material is exhaustively examined. It is to be remembered that it presents a thesis prepared by him prepared on the basis of accessible and available data on which he could lay his hands and as such other researchers have the right to comment on it in the light of further researches on the topic. Also read Thakur Des Raj Jaghina's Book on the topic and Raghubir Singh Sashtri's biography of Chaudhary Chhotu Ram if you have not read them earlier for more refreshing details on several points. (I, as a student of history am busy in collection of data for my thesis on the issue).

    iii) Is anybody ready to throw some light on the peasant rising in first half of the last century in other parts of Rajasthan. The authors are invited to throw some light on the position of the agriculturists in the territories of the then Dholpur and Bharatpur states. Was it qualitatively different from other native states' farmers of the day or better/worse!

    iv) Friend, the issue involved is not concerned to castes only but to the issue of ruling elites' relation with the peasant as a class, which has always been an exploited lot in our country irrespective of the caste or faith of the ruler of the day and the elite.

    v)Further, Shekhawati movement was not the first nor the only movement in Rajasthan; it was a movement limited to an area of two three districts, so it can not be labeled as a representative data to conclude that hands of the Jats and the Rajputs as castes/communities throughout the history and in every nook and corner of the country were always at the throats of one another at all times of history. Remember, who was IG of Bikaner ruler at that time. I know, this sentence is not going to be digested by many without a pinch of salt. But history is history and it must not be used to preach sectarian ideology or perpetuation of false pride in one's past days.

    Regards,
    Last edited by DrRajpalSingh; March 28th, 2012 at 10:50 PM.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to DrRajpalSingh For This Useful Post:

    ZaildarTejSeng (September 7th, 2014)

  17. #11
    Ghulami is based on true incident at fatehpur,today Rangit sing's nephew is wanted in ''Dariya encounter' ' this town is very fast.... every thing is possible here
    Thanks & Regards,

    Anil Jakhar
    jakhar.anilk@gmail.com
    +91 93143 91300
    Birodi badi \ Nawal garh, Fatehpur Shekhawati, Rajasthan, India


  18. #12

  19. #13
    Good information culled from
    Tod's two volumes of 1829, Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan.

  20. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by cooljat
    Now my question for Historians (Specially Burdak Ji and Ravi Ji) is what was the reason that Rajputs came in power in particular in Rajasthan and why didn't Jat leaders from Haryana, Punjab and UP didn't help poor Jat farmers before? Why didn't Raja Suraj Mal tried to spread his kingdom and help fellow Jats of Shekhawati and other area?


    Jats didn't have monarchical system, they were mostly clan based oligarchies. History was dominated by militaristic societies, Rajputs were monarchical, this thing favored Rajputs over Jats but different Rajput clans used to fight among each other and they lost their sovereignty to Mughals. I think if Jat has monarchical system, it would have stopped advance of both Mughals and Rajputs.
    Most Jat clans in Bikaner and other neighboring regions enjoyed sovereignty till 16th century. Sekhwati regions were ruled by Kayamkhani Muslims, Jat and Rajput fought together to oust Khayamkhani from power, but Rajputs betrayed Jhujhar Singh Nehra and captured power. In British period, Rajputs in Jodhpur and Jaipur kingdom started to oppress Jats because they got protection from Britishers, however in Bikaner relations were not that bad.

  21. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to bsbana For This Useful Post:

    cooljat (January 6th, 2013), maddhan1979 (January 5th, 2013), vijaykajla1 (January 5th, 2013), ZaildarTejSeng (September 7th, 2014)

  22. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by bsbana View Post


    Jats didn't have monarchical system, they were mostly clan based oligarchies. History was dominated by militaristic societies, Rajputs were monarchical, this thing favored Rajputs over Jats but different Rajput clans used to fight among each other and they lost their sovereignty to Mughals. I think if Jat has monarchical system, it would have stopped advance of both Mughals and Rajputs.
    Most Jat clans in Bikaner and other neighboring regions enjoyed sovereignty till 16th century. Sekhwati regions were ruled by Kayamkhani Muslims, Jat and Rajput fought together to oust Khayamkhani from power, but Rajputs betrayed Jhujhar Singh Nehra and captured power. In British period, Rajputs in Jodhpur and Jaipur kingdom started to oppress Jats because they got protection from Britishers, however in Bikaner relations were not that bad.
    Very vague and sweeping statements covering thousands' years of history.

  23. #16
    Bana Sahab rightly said. This baat is 100% parcent fitt. Jats have been so much divided in oligarchy system and still are divided, so they are never able to rise above their small time interests and serve for a common cause of the community. A Jat never realizes that he will go down in the same soil after his death where his ancestors have toiled for ages. He is always fighting for his small time interest.
    I once had a talk with a muslim Jat from Muzaffarnagar area, this person's family name was "Baliyan", i asked him what is the difference between you and other "Jats". He told me there is no difference and once a common meeting of several Khaps was organized where muslim Jats were present and muslim Jats put forward a demand that they are ready to leave their way of life but then the other members of community will have to treat them equally and will have to start cross marriages. At this the other "Jats", disagreed. I guess "Hindu Jats" should rise above religion.
    Rajputs were the outshoot of different communities, their gotras are derived out of all casts and communities of north India.
    A Rajput once told me this connects with some yagya performed by priests somewhere in Rajasthan or Gujrat, when the wars in the name of religion started happening very strongly. The wars in the name of religion could have been one reason for their monarchical system, as the old divisions of clan were broken for a common cause.
    Interestingly Rajpoots have gotras of Jats, Guujars, Fisherman community (Kashyap), Brahmin community, etc. Rajpoots are present from North to mid India and North West Bharat ( Pakistan and Afghanistan) to East of India.
    Last edited by maddhan1979; January 6th, 2013 at 04:50 AM.

  24. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to maddhan1979 For This Useful Post:

    bsbana (January 5th, 2013), op1955 (January 5th, 2013), ZaildarTejSeng (September 7th, 2014)

  25. #17
    A Jat' s strength lies in Jat as a community not caste or religion.

  26. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to maddhan1979 For This Useful Post:

    cooljat (January 6th, 2013), op1955 (January 5th, 2013)

  27. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRajpalSingh View Post
    Very vague and sweeping statements covering thousands' years of history.
    Thousands of years ?? I don't think that our history goes back to thousands of years if it's not for speculations which connect Jats with different political dynasties.
    Even if there were monarchical Jats in past, I guess most if not all of them were converted into Rajput fold. So we were left with non-elite Jats who were mostly farmers and they were organized over clan based oligarchies(Khap). This system in past did discourage rise of centralized leadership among Jats. In past, leadership mattered more because past was dominated by militaristic societies, oligarchies and democracy are more suitable to modern world.
    Last edited by bsbana; January 5th, 2013 at 09:36 PM.

  28. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to bsbana For This Useful Post:

    cooljat (January 6th, 2013), maddhan1979 (January 5th, 2013)

  29. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by bsbana View Post
    Thousands of years ?? I don't think that our history goes back to thousands of years if it's not for speculations which connect Jats with different political dynasties.
    Even if there were monarchical Jats in past, I guess most if not all of them were converted into Rajput fold. So we were left with non-elite Jats who were mostly farmers and they were organized over clan based oligarchies(Khap). This system in past did discourage rise of centralized leadership among Jats. In past, leadership mattered more because past was dominated by militaristic societies, oligarchies and democracy are more suitable to modern world.

    Rightly said. . "Oligarchies are more suitable to modern world", is not 100% korecct, in some cases it might be usefull but i think in modern world with changing times to maintain our identity in this population mass of India, we need to have a bit more centralized leadership that seeps down in a hierarchical system.

  30. The Following User Says Thank You to maddhan1979 For This Useful Post:

    cooljat (January 6th, 2013)

  31. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by maddhan1979 View Post
    Rightly said. . "Oligarchies are more suitable to modern world", is not 100% korecct, in some cases it might be usefull but i think in modern world with changing times to maintain our identity in this population mass of India, we need to have a bit more centralized leadership that seeps down in a hierarchical system.
    This will be able to mobilize masses to achieve results.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •