jatt history is bundle of lie..is it??

[prashantacmet]

I was surfing the internet for jatt history in punjab between 1600-1900 AD. Came across various disucssion , few of them drew my attention. People from other community claim that jatt historians have twisted the facts and many icons of other community have been claimed by them. If someone is having a good knowledge about jatt hisory I am keen to start a discussion and want to clarify few doubts. Now let me start with few points

1. maharaja ranjeet singh was a SANSI not jatt in any mean

- Even today there is no clan such as sansi in jatt..sansi was a communal, poor and lower class tribe...now-a-days they are enlsited as ST..sandhawalia is the village of ranjeet singh ancestors, so they were called sansi-sandhawalia and as they acquired land and accumulated power, they got mixed in jatt brotherhood, jatt gave their daughter to them, mother of ranjeet singh was a AULAKH jatti, these sansi-sandhawalia were noted later as sansi-jatt in imperial gazetteer so today they call themselves jatts
- even today there are very few jatts of so-called sansi-sandhawalia clan
- ranjeet singh was 5 feet 3 inch, black and a ugly man , not having any jatt features
- jatt misals of that time did not recruit mazhabi sikhs (sikh churas) in their misals, sukerchakia misal was having lot of mazhabi
- customs/traditions of maharaja ranjeet singh did not match to jatts as sati-pratha
- none of the british historian recognized ranjeet singh as jatt, he was called SANSI. jatt historians after independence claiming sansi -sandhawalia from jatt lineage.

2. baba deep singh sandhu was a mazhabi sikh not jatt

- mazhabi sikhs form almost 10% of punjab population. mazhabi are sikh-churas(scavengers) who abandoned valmiki-cult and joined sikhism, they are famous for their war-like quality. 10 light sikh infantry is having a big chunk of mazhabi sikhs. historically, Guru hargovind made an army of sikh nihangs. All sikh-nihangs were/are mazhabi.

- mazhabi and jatts have common sir name as sandhu, maan, gill etc. few says that mazhabi adopted the sirnames of their jatt masters, others have different story

- deep singh faimly was not having an land, after his sacrifice land was given to him. Even today in his village , his house is adjoining mazhabi not jatts

- mazhabi claims that later on jatt snatched their icon and started calling baba deep singh as jatt

- akali phule singh was also a mazhabi not jatt as per them...surprised!!

3. few mazhabi joined jatts bortherhood as they acquired land.

- 200-300 yeras back jatt was not a group in punjab but was a culture, whoever owned land and was doing farming, he was called jatt
- it was the same concept as rajput. any tom,dick and harry who ruled even few villages started calling himself rajput. Similary jatt ethinicty was corrupted in last 300-400 years, many other community acquired land, they got mixed with jatts and jatts accepted them

- ATWAL jatts of today are from mazhabi lineage. Even jatt historian shamsher singh has accepted that


any rebuttal is appreciated!

[urmiladuhan]

In my humble opinion I think one should look at the evidence and make up ones own mind about it. People may say different things.

Regards,

Urmila.

I was surfing the internet for jatt history in punjab between 1600-1900 AD. Came across various disucssion , few of them drew my attention. People from other community claim that jatt historians have twisted the facts and many icons of other community have been claimed by them. If someone is having a good knowledge about jatt hisory I am keen to start a discussion and want to clarify few doubts. Now let me start with few points

1. maharaja ranjeet singh was a SANSI not jatt in any mean

- Even today there is no clan such as sansi in jatt..sansi was a communal, poor and lower class tribe...now-a-days they are enlsited as ST..sandhawalia is the village of ranjeet singh ancestors, so they were called sansi-sandhawalia and as they acquired land and accumulated power, they got mixed in jatt brotherhood, jatt gave their daughter to them, mother of ranjeet singh was a AULAKH jatti, these sansi-sandhawalia were noted later as sansi-jatt in imperial gazetteer so today they call themselves jatts
- even today there are very few jatts of so-called sansi-sandhawalia clan
- ranjeet singh was 5 feet 3 inch, black and a ugly man , not having any jatt features
- jatt misals of that time did not recruit mazhabi sikhs (sikh churas) in their misals, sukerchakia misal was having lot of mazhabi
- customs/traditions of maharaja ranjeet singh did not match to jatts as sati-pratha
- none of the british historian recognized ranjeet singh as jatt, he was called SANSI. jatt historians after independence claiming sansi -sandhawalia from jatt lineage.

2. baba deep singh sandhu was a mazhabi sikh not jatt

- mazhabi sikhs form almost 10% of punjab population. mazhabi are sikh-churas(scavengers) who abandoned valmiki-cult and joined sikhism, they are famous for their war-like quality. 10 light sikh infantry is having a big chunk of mazhabi sikhs. historically, Guru hargovind made an army of sikh nihangs. All sikh-nihangs were/are mazhabi.

- mazhabi and jatts have common sir name as sandhu, maan, gill etc. few says that mazhabi adopted the sirnames of their jatt masters, others have different story

- deep singh faimly was not having an land, after his sacrifice land was given to him. Even today in his village , his house is adjoining mazhabi not jatts

- mazhabi claims that later on jatt snatched their icon and started calling baba deep singh as jatt

- akali phule singh was also a mazhabi not jatt as per them...surprised!!

3. few mazhabi joined jatts bortherhood as they acquired land.

- 200-300 yeras back jatt was not a group in punjab but was a culture, whoever owned land and was doing farming, he was called jatt
- it was the same concept as rajput. any tom,dick and harry who ruled even few villages started calling himself rajput. Similary jatt ethinicty was corrupted in last 300-400 years, may other community acquired land, they got mixed with jatts and jatts accepted them

- ATWAL jatts of today are from mazhabi lineage. Even jatt historian shamsher singh has accepted that


any rebuttal is appreciated!

[prashantacmet]

In my humble opinion I think one should look at the evidence and make up ones own mind about it. People may say different things.

Regards,

Urmila.

yes..that's why I have started this thread. To see the evidences. If you have any information, please share.

Let me start with ranjeet singh with the view of few historians


1)
In The History of the Panjab, by Syed Muhamad Latif (Cal- cutta, Central Press Company, Limited, 1891), p. 335,

"In 1488, there died an ancestor of the Maharajah, named Kalu, a Bhatti Jat, who had settled at Rajah Sansi, near Amritsar, and whose son, named Jaddoman, was believed to be really the son of a member of the tribe which frequented that place. Jaddoman was brought up in the Sansis' camp, and led the life of a freebooter with them. Budha, nicknamed Desu, fifth in descent from Jaddoman, became a Sikh in 1692. Nodh Singh (died 1752), the son of Budha, married the granddaughter of Besu, Sansi chief of Majitha; he was a famous highway robber, a dharwa, and, assisted by his wife's relatives, Golab Singh and Amar Singh, amassed much wealth. The latter became chiefs of Majitha. Charat Singh, the son of Nodh Singh, married the daughter of Amir Singh, Gujarwal, the grandson of Sim Nath, a Sansi whose conviction of the truth of the Sikh religion induced him to receive the pahul (Sikh baptism) at the advanced age of one hundred years. The ancestors of the Maharajah appear to have established themselves at Rajah Sansi, where they collected round them a number of Sansis, Mazbis (Bhangis), and other wandering robbers, and depredated the surrounding country. With these forces! Charat Singh, in 1762, engaged the invading army of the Afghan King, Ahmad Sah Durani, harassed the march of the Afghans, cut off their stragglers, and plundered their baggage.

see: Journal of the Gypsy Lore Society , Page 114, Gypsy Lore Society - 1912 "


2. ) Sir Lepel Griffin writes in Punjab Chiefs, Vol. 1, on p 219...

"and from Sansi the Sindhanwalias and the Sansis have a common descent. The Sansis were the theivish and degraded tribe [sic] and the house of Sindhanwalia naturally feeling ashamed of its Sansi name invented a romantic story to account for it, But the relationship between the nobles and the beggars, does not seem the less certain and if history of Maharaja Ranjit Singh is attentively considered it will appear that much his policy and many of his actions had the true Sansi complexion"

[bsbana]

History changes as historian changes
1. Many Meena Historians claim that Prathvi Raj Chauhan was a Meena, Same is claimed by Gujjars
3. There is a book written by Jewish historian that all ancient nobility among Aryans and Scythian belonged to Jewish lineage and he proved it by his own logic.
4. There are many scheduled tribes in Rajasthan who has folklore connecting themselves with Rajputs.
Such claims based on folklore can't be accepted as truth, Ranjeet Singh being a Sansi is based on folklore, it doesn't matter much if folklore is documented by English historians.

"and from Sansi the Sindhanwalias and the Sansis have a common descent. The Sansis were the theivish and degraded tribe [sic] and the house of Sindhanwalia naturally feeling ashamed of its Sansi name invented a romantic story to account for it, But the relationship between the nobles and the beggars, does not seem the less certain and if history of Maharaja Ranjit Singh is attentively considered it will appear that much his policy and many of his actions had the true Sansi complexion"

[prashantacmet]

History changes as historian changes
1. Many Meena Historians claim that Prathvi Raj Chauhan was a Meena, Same is claimed by Gujjars
3. There is a book written by Jewish historian that all ancient nobility among Aryans and Scythian belonged to Jewish lineage and he proved it by his own logic.
4. There are many scheduled tribes in Rajasthan who has folklore connecting themselves with Rajputs.
Such claims based on folklore can't be accepted as truth, Ranjeet Singh being a Sansi is based on folklore, it doesn't matter much if folklore is documented by English historians.
[/COLOR]

So can you please enlighten about the evidences that conclude he was a jatt. Even sansi says that theya re connected with Bhatti rajputs ,some rajput ancestrory is also claimed by sidhu-jatt As you said ranjeet singh being sansi is based on folklore..will you please put forth few eveidences that prove shim a jatt

[bsbana]

So can you please enlighten about the evidences that conclude he was a jatt. Even sansi says that theya re connected with Bhatti rajputs ,some rajput ancestrory is also claimed by sidhu-jatt As you said ranjeet singh being sansi is based on folklore..will you please put forth few eveidences that prove shim a jatt

Sansi connection with Bhattis as well as Ranjeet Singh seems folklore to me.
Ranjeet Singh is accepted as Jat just like PR Chauhan is accepted as Rajput(though there is chauhan clan name in many castes).
We can't establish any fact with certainty as far as History is considered. Just like today's historian write ethnocentric/ideological history, historians of past were also not free of bias. Heck we can't be certain about things happening in present, there will be different narratives of same story. Jat history is as true as Rajput History or Brahmanical Purans or Islamic version of history and as false as latter.
In my opinion, a dominant group write his history in such a way that they seem invincible clans throughout history.

[prashantacmet]

Sansi connection with Bhattis as well as Ranjeet Singh seems folklore to me.
Ranjeet Singh is accepted as Jat just like PR Chauhan is accepted as Rajput(though there is chauhan clan name in many castes).
We can't establish any fact with certainty as far as History is considered. Just like today's historian write ethnocentric/ideological history, historians of past were also not free of bias. Heck we can't be certain about things happening in present, there will be different narratives of same story. Jat history is as true as Rajput History or Brahmanical Purans or Islamic version of history and as false as latter.
In my opinion, a dominant group write his history in such a way that they seem invincible clans throughout history.

sansi connection with bhatti rajputs may be a folklore but not the second statement. It lloks like a possibility that ranjeet singh had a connection with sansi and I raised few points .
I understand your points so I was curious to figure the evidences historians have collected to prove him a jatt. I am not determined that maharaja was a sansi, there are few historians who say it and I found that stuff and seeing that I am getting inclined to belive that he was a sansi. I am looking for the evidences or some re-known historians write-up that say him a jatt. origin of ranjeet singh is disputed and many historians said that. there is no fume without fire. If you have something that proved him a jatt please share.Though what you are saying is completely true and I understand that. I am just curious to dig into it. Hope you understand my curiousity.

[cooljat]

.

.. " Until Lions have their historians, tales of the hunt shall always glorify the hunter! " ..


Read my Signature. It sums up.

[prashantacmet]

.

.. " Until Lions have their historians, tales of the hunt shall always glorify the hunter! " ..


Read my Signature. It sums up.

Bhai..baat aapki theek hai..par iss signature ko dekh kar hum history ke saare chapter close nahi kar sakte...we need discussion and soemtimes things hurts...let us face that or tear that apart with facts...I am looking for a serious discussion and wants our historians to clarify their stand and why?

[prashantacmet]

got info about few other things about ranjeet singh . here are few points..

1. ancestors of ranjeet singh were part of singhpuria misal..that was led by nawab kapoor singh virk...another legendry jatt in history of punjab.....they later parted their way with singhpuria misal

2. father of ranjeet singh was maha singh..and mother was raj kaur , daughter of raja gajpat of jind...raja gajpat was from the lineage of Phulkia Misal....phulkia misal founded and executed by sidhu-brara jatt lineage..so gajpat of jind was probabaly a sidhu-brar jatt.... so ranjeet singh mother was a jatti as I read..few says raja gajpat was a sansi... under jassa singh ahluwalia (ahluwalia misa) sikh rule was spread in haryana by phulkia people.

3. ranjeet singh killed his mother..because he doubted that she was having a illicit relationship after his father death
4. all three successors of ranjeet singh were from jatt wives..kharak singh 's mother was datar kaur..daughter of chief of nakkai misal(sandhu jatt). sher'singh mother was from kanhaiya misal ( another sandhu jatt misal).....sada -kaur was leading the kanhiaya misal at that time..sada kaur , a gill jatti and mothe rin law of ranjet singh..having good interfere in ranjeet singh state affairs
5. motherof dallep singh was rani jindan kaur ..aulakh jatti..
6. most prominent misal was bhangi misal...leaded by hari singh dhillon..they were called bhangi due to their addiction of bhaang...sukerchakia misal and ramgarhia misal joined hands and defeated bhangi misals

7. sansar chand katoch of kangra..a rajput king alo gave their daughters to ranjeet singh..and one of them sat on the pyre of ranjeet singh when he died...so sat-pratha was in vogue of ranjeet singh family or it was just his rajput wife act...jatts have rare examples of sati-pratha..

8. so jatts gave their daughters, rajput gave their daughters to ranjeet singh family..if he was a sansi and rose to the status of jatts by achieving power and strength..still it makes a little sense that so many jatts and rajputs had given their daughters to a low class family.......

[dahiyaBadshah]

i was surfing the internet for jatt history in punjab between 1600-1900 ad. Came across various disucssion , few of them drew my attention. People from other community claim that jatt historians have twisted the facts and many icons of other community have been claimed by them. If someone is having a good knowledge about jatt hisory i am keen to start a discussion and want to clarify few doubts. Now let me start with few points

1. Maharaja ranjeet singh was a sansi not jatt in any mean

- even today there is no clan such as sansi in jatt..sansi was a communal, poor and lower class tribe...now-a-days they are enlsited as st..sandhawalia is the village of ranjeet singh ancestors, so they were called sansi-sandhawalia and as they acquired land and accumulated power, they got mixed in jatt brotherhood, jatt gave their daughter to them, mother of ranjeet singh was a aulakh jatti, these sansi-sandhawalia were noted later as sansi-jatt in imperial gazetteer so today they call themselves jatts
- even today there are very few jatts of so-called sansi-sandhawalia clan
- ranjeet singh was 5 feet 3 inch, black and a ugly man , not having any jatt features
- jatt misals of that time did not recruit mazhabi sikhs (sikh churas) in their misals, sukerchakia misal was having lot of mazhabi
- customs/traditions of maharaja ranjeet singh did not match to jatts as sati-pratha
- none of the british historian recognized ranjeet singh as jatt, he was called sansi. Jatt historians after independence claiming sansi -sandhawalia from jatt lineage.

2. Baba deep singh sandhu was a mazhabi sikh not jatt

- mazhabi sikhs form almost 10% of punjab population. Mazhabi are sikh-churas(scavengers) who abandoned valmiki-cult and joined sikhism, they are famous for their war-like quality. 10 light sikh infantry is having a big chunk of mazhabi sikhs. Historically, guru hargovind made an army of sikh nihangs. All sikh-nihangs were/are mazhabi.

- mazhabi and jatts have common sir name as sandhu, maan, gill etc. Few says that mazhabi adopted the sirnames of their jatt masters, others have different story

- deep singh faimly was not having an land, after his sacrifice land was given to him. Even today in his village , his house is adjoining mazhabi not jatts

- mazhabi claims that later on jatt snatched their icon and started calling baba deep singh as jatt

- akali phule singh was also a mazhabi not jatt as per them...surprised!!

3. Few mazhabi joined jatts bortherhood as they acquired land.

- 200-300 yeras back jatt was not a group in punjab but was a culture, whoever owned land and was doing farming, he was called jatt
- it was the same concept as rajput. Any tom,dick and harry who ruled even few villages started calling himself rajput. Similary jatt ethinicty was corrupted in last 300-400 years, many other community acquired land, they got mixed with jatts and jatts accepted them

- atwal jatts of today are from mazhabi lineage. Even jatt historian shamsher singh has accepted that


any rebuttal is appreciated!

i just wish he would stop talking. No rebuttal just silence please.

[DrRajpalSingh]

Prashant Bhai,

You started the thread with the surmise ''jatt history is bundle of lie..is it??

I was surfing the internet for jatt history in punjab between 1600-1900 AD. Came across various disucssion , few of them drew my attention. People from other community claim that jatt historians have twisted the facts and many icons of other community have been claimed by them. If someone is having a good knowledge about jatt hisory I am keen to start a discussion and want to clarify few doubts. Now let me start with few points

1. maharaja ranjeet singh was a SANSI not jatt in any mean

------"

Now you have yourself proved that he was Jat/Jatt:

got info about few other things about ranjeet singh . here are few points..

1. ancestors of ranjeet singh were part of singhpuria misal..that was led by nawab kapoor singh virk...another legendry jatt in history of punjab.....they later parted their way with singhpuria misal

2. father of ranjeet singh was maha singh..and mother was raj kaur , daughter of raja gajpat of jind...raja gajpat was from the lineage of Phulkia Misal....phulkia misal founded and executed by sidhu-brara jatt lineage..so gajpat of jind was probabaly a sidhu-brar jatt.... so ranjeet singh mother was a jatti as I read..few says raja gajpat was a sansi... under jassa singh ahluwalia (ahluwalia misa) sikh rule was spread in haryana by phulkia people.

3. ranjeet singh killed his mother..because he doubted that she was having a illicit relationship after his father death
4. all three successors of ranjeet singh were from jatt wives..kharak singh 's mother was datar kaur..daughter of chief of nakkai misal(sandhu jatt). sher'singh mother was from kanhaiya misal ( another sandhu jatt misal).....sada -kaur was leading the kanhiaya misal at that time..sada kaur , a gill jatti and mothe rin law of ranjet singh..having good interfere in ranjeet singh state affairs
5. motherof dallep singh was rani jindan kaur ..aulakh jatti..
6. most prominent misal was bhangi misal...leaded by hari singh dhillon..they were called bhangi due to their addiction of bhaang...sukerchakia misal and ramgarhia misal joined hands and defeated bhangi misals

7. sansar chand katoch of kangra..a rajput king alo gave their daughters to ranjeet singh..and one of them sat on the pyre of ranjeet singh when he died...so sat-pratha was in vogue of ranjeet singh family or it was just his rajput wife act...jatts have rare examples of sati-pratha..

8. so jatts gave their daughters, rajput gave their daughters to ranjeet singh family..if he was a sansi and rose to the status of jatts by achieving power and strength..still it makes a little sense that so many jatts and rajputs had given their daughters to a low class family.......

Then, kindly check out if the title of the thread conveys right message , There may be gaps, ambiguities or some sort of unclarity here and there but the entire Jat history does not qualify to be called 'bundle of lies' as you yourself have proved. We must be careful in choosing the thread headings and avoid giving other people to misuse a handle provided by us to beat us.

Thanks and regards

[prashantacmet]

Prashant Bhai,

You started the thread with the surmise ''jatt history is bundle of lie..is it??

I was surfing the internet for jatt history in punjab between 1600-1900 AD. Came across various disucssion , few of them drew my attention. People from other community claim that jatt historians have twisted the facts and many icons of other community have been claimed by them. If someone is having a good knowledge about jatt hisory I am keen to start a discussion and want to clarify few doubts. Now let me start with few points

1. maharaja ranjeet singh was a SANSI not jatt in any mean

------"

Now you have yourself proved that he was Jat/Jatt:

Then, kindly check out if the title of the thread conveys right message , There may be gaps, ambiguities or some sort of unclarity here and there but the entire Jat history does not qualify to be called 'bundle of lies' as you yourself have proved. We must be careful in choosing the thread headings and avoid giving other people to misuse a handle provided by us to beat us.

Thanks and regards

Rajpal ji..i AGREE THAT I DID NOT CHOOSE THE RIGHT TITLE..but in thread title itself.."is it??" itself re-present a dominant eagerness to find few answers. If guys taking offense rather than sharing something that can rebuff my arguments...i can not help it... I am sort of thinking that we have to accept what we are..I don't take any proud in claiming our clans to be great, rulers etc if truth is otherwise..

as your signature rightly conveys " history is worst when invented" ..hope you also understand the message of signature......

[prashantacmet]

i just wish he would stop talking. No rebuttal just silence please.

...what do you mean?

[DrRajpalSingh]

Rajpal ji..i AGREE THAT I DID NOT CHOOSE THE RIGHT TITLE..but in thread title itself.."is it??" itself re-present a dominant eagerness to find few answers. If guys taking offense rather than sharing something that can rebuff my arguments...i can not help it... I am sort of thinking that we have to accept what we are..I don't take any proud in claiming our clans to be great, rulers etc if truth is otherwise..

as your signature rightly conveys " history is worst when invented" ..hope you also understand the message of signature......

Friend,

None of the standard books on Sikh History do not say that Ranjit Singh was not a Jat. For example one can go through the pages of any of the books like History of Sikhs by Khushwant Singh; History of Sikh People by Dr. Gopal Singh and The Sikhs : Their Journey of Five Hundred Years by Raj Pal Singh; History of Punjab by Dr. Hari Ram Gupta. If taken together all of them have studied this theme and have concluded that he was a Jat of Sukarchakia Misal and founded Lahore Durbar Government with Lahore as its headquarters.

History does not tell us to be proud or not of the past but is the narrative of what has happened in the past and it has to be as it happened nothing more nor less.

Thanks for reminding me of my signature which indeed reflects my way of thinking on the subject

Regards and best wishes,.

[prashantacmet]

Friend,

None of the standard books on Sikh History do not say that Ranjit Singh was not a Jat. For example one can go through the pages of any of the books like History of Sikhs by Khushwant Singh; History of Sikh People by Dr. Gopal Singh and The Sikhs : Their Journey of Five Hundred Years by Raj Pal Singh; History of Punjab by Dr. Hari Ram Gupta. If taken together all of them have studied this theme and have concluded that he was a Jat of Sukarchakia Misal and founded Lahore Durbar Government with Lahore as its headquarters.

History does not tell us to be proud or not of the past but is the narrative of what has happened in the past and it has to be as it happened nothing more nor less.

Thanks for reminding me of my signature which indeed reflects my way of thinking on the subject

Regards and best wishes,.

Ok..rajpal ji..so these books don't qualify for the standard books ?

- The History of the Panjab, by Syed Muhamad Latif (Cal- cutta, Central Press Company, Limited, 1891)
- Sir Lepel Griffin writes in Punjab Chiefs, Vol. 1
-
Journal of the Gypsy Lore Society , Page 114, Gypsy Lore Society - 1912

..can you please tell me the timeline of books you mentioned..i don't see if any of them was written more than 40-50 years before..

The books i have mentioned those go back to more than 100 years...will you consider it?

I think khuswant singh never mentioned clan/rac eof ranjeet singh did he..can you please re-produce the excerpt for me..?

Can you please tell me the clan name of ranjeet singh? Looking for a fruitful discussion on this topic

Regards,

[DrRajpalSingh]

Friends,

The crux of the matter and the problem which has long been agitating the minds of historians as well as lay persons is unsatisfying quest for identity formation of the community known as Jats. The problem has further been complicated by identifying the community on the basis of the present day Clans or Gotras which go to the Vedic or epic periods.

But when we starts a comparative study of various other communities like Ahirs, Gujars, Rajputs, Nais {Barbers}, Jogis, Badhis {Carpenters} and even many among now known in India as Scheduled Castes, one or the other clan name surfaces in anyone or many of them. All these claimants try to grab the opportunity to portray such person as their ancestor.

In this way every important warrior/king/great personality is tried to be grabbed by one or the other caste historians. And here starts the mad race of establishing such important dignitaries as the sole proprietorship of a specific community.

If by some miraculous effort some day some one succeeds in solving the puzzle of identity of each and every caste of the present day India, the problem would be solved once for all times to come !

The key to understanding the history of the Jats lies in understanding of etymology and origin of the word Jat and then find out its identity formation as when and how a group of people began to be addressed as "JATS".

Is there any taker to solve the perplexed puzzle.

Thanks and regards

[DrRajpalSingh]

Ok..rajpal ji..so these books don't qualify for the standard books ?

- The History of the Panjab, by Syed Muhamad Latif (Cal- cutta, Central Press Company, Limited, 1891)
- Sir Lepel Griffin writes in Punjab Chiefs, Vol. 1
-
Journal of the Gypsy Lore Society , Page 114, Gypsy Lore Society - 1912

..can you please tell me the timeline of books you mentioned..i don't see if any of them was written more than 40-50 years before..

The books i have mentioned those go back to more than 100 years...will you consider it?

I think khuswant singh never mentioned clan/rac eof ranjeet singh did he..can you please re-produce the excerpt for me..?

Can you please tell me the clan name of ranjeet singh? Looking for a fruitful discussion on this topic

Regards,

Friend,

With due regard to the authors mentioned by you, kindly see that in those days the original sources were not so easily available and all the books mentioned by you are not research books. More on specific books:

I have critically read S.M Latif's book and have encountered with so many mistakes/distortions/half truths because of his limited access to original sources when the book was written. Moreover, he comes up as a bit prejudiced author against some specific communities at several places.

I have not been able to lay my hands on the Gypsy lore Society Journal .

Sir Lapel Griffin's Handbook on Punjab Chiefs is not a research book but was written to facilitate newly appointed British officers about general background of the concerned area's who is who ! There are several discrepancies in many handbooks written by the British officers both Military and Civil during those days.

The writing of books in recent years have more advantage of using latest sources available and accessible to the authors; thus their value cannot be undermined in any way, only condition is that they must be well researched.

I will definitely come back with quotation from Khushwant Singh Book on Maharaja Ranjit Singh also in addition to relevant quote from History of the Sikhs.

Thanks and regards

[prashantacmet]

Thanks fopr your words rajpal ji..

with your information can we discuss about the clan name and family history of sukerchakia misal. What do your sources say?

[DrRajpalSingh]

Thanks fopr your words rajpal ji..

with your information can we discuss about the clan name and family history of sukerchakia misal. What do your sources say?

Friend,

I am out of station and will revert to the topic after consulting my books.In the meantime, you can go through the Jat Land wiki pages to know

what they have to offer on the subject : http://www.jatland.com/home/Maharaja...Singh_(Punjab) and also for Sukarchakia,

http://www.jatland.com/home/Sukerchakia
Thanks and regards,