|
|
Post by CHAUHAN on Feb 23, 2010 3:02:34 GMT 5.5
hiiiiiii harsh bro ............kaha busy ho....
Mr. harshana sorry about my mistakes my english is not well.
|
|
|
|
Post by AP Singh on Feb 23, 2010 12:15:47 GMT 5.5
presently its condidering about gurjars that came in india abt 6th century nd perhaps they were white hunas......now the que is if gurjars were related to hunas or were white hunas then why the struggle took place between them.....kanishk fought wid hunas nd further... jainendra samrat yashodharma also fought wid hunas, both they were great warrior of gujjar origin. now the que arises about georgia. i read the conclusions of Dr ratan lal verma(bhartiya sanskriti k rakshak) realy a grt book abt our history with fects.,,,,Dr verma said that the gurjars were not foreigners, they went to many part of mid asia lyk iran and georgia as a results of struggles between gujjars and hunas....and its possible that georgia was named after them. but surely they were indian nd not came from georgia or mid asia.
These Huns ( leftover group who were settled alongside the Great wall of China) invaded in around 5th. Century and had fights with Gujjars( the people of their own clan)ruling over regions having prest day Afghanistan and Pakistan. There are chinese historical records available that prince of Whote Huns ( Gujjars) even married the princess of Red Huns ( called Hignu or red huns or real Huns, a mongolian race).
The White Huns who came along with the original batch of Gujjars are part of Gujjars today and is celebrated Gotra of Gujjars. The White Huns who came later were regarded different than Gujjars. |
|
|
|
Post by AP Singh on Feb 23, 2010 12:34:29 GMT 5.5
dhabhai bolte the ........nd nw also in fact bcoz of blood relation gujjars in rajasthan consider them as brother. .
Dhabi ( Dhabai) is a very celebrated very old and celebrated Gotra of Gujjars. You may find historical evidences about Dhabi Gujjars on as early a date as 6th. century.
You may find similar fabricated stories about Khatana and other Gujjar Gotras was well which are nothing but a part of larger game to steal the Gujjar History.
Even the clan of Great Emperors of Gujjar Pratihar were not left without these false and fabricated translation of words. Harishchanra Brahmin story is also similar. He was actually a Rashtrakut Brahmin and not even a Gujjar Brahmin and was adversary of Gujjars but some of historians called him Gujjar Pratihar just to glorify him. |
|
|
|
Post by CHAUHAN on Feb 24, 2010 3:43:26 GMT 5.5
hiiiiii mr AP Singh ji,
u said that huns were a branch of gujjars, but i think its become a branch of gujjars later when huns were defeated by the gujjars some of huns accepted as gujjars who did not go with huns from india and also present in gujjars as a gotra in same num as other gotra not so much.
and also as i think huns were a big community diffrent from gujjars not a branch of gujjars wid diffrent rules of war nd wid a diffrent culture ... there style of attack was quite diffrent from gujjars they were lyk terrorist...they were never said them gujjars but alwayz huns.
while janendra samrat yashodhrma who fought wid huns known as founder of gurjarrashtra, and also pratihars wrote them gurjars in their inscriptions........... and there is also one strong fact dat there is no example of a big struggle in history in between gujjars, if huns were gujjars y they attacked on gurjarrashtra in such a manner.
in fact huns obeyed no ruls in wars they killed womens , child, nd raped or married by pressure with womens. and on the other side gurjar's policies were quite diffrent to win any state, so as i think gujjars were diffrent from huns nd huns were a big clan diffrent from gurjars wid their own sub casts so plz dont try to include them in gurjars.
|
|
|
|
Post by CHAUHAN on Feb 24, 2010 3:58:49 GMT 5.5
Mr AP singh ji i m not sure about dhabhai, perhaps i wrote wrong, perhaps that was diffrent term from dhabhai....m confused abt it now. but the saying about gujjri(gujjri ka dudh...) is true nd its also accepted by some rajputs still.
and now i want to say that we r going out of topic we shud discuss now abt ....how can we change the history written in text book.
now a days rajputs hav been famous in common people and considrs as warriors bollywood has played an imp role in this.but if a group of financially strong nd intelligent gujjars meet to a film producer with hostorical facts they can think abt us. also a moovie named as veer gurjar(based upon solankees of gujrat) was made recently. nd totally as i observed image of gujjars in othr ppl is lyk brave ppls......... first we can use print media.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ashok Harsana on Feb 24, 2010 10:09:16 GMT 5.5
There might be a spossibility that Huns were a different group, but white huns or Hepthalites were a branch of Gujjars for sure. They were related to kushans by blood (same thing can be said about kushanshahs and red Huns or Chionites).
There culture was somewhat different as they were ruling a a different area.
And in my opinion their was no defined way for WAR in the past, thats why we say "everything is fair in love and war".
|
|
|
|
Post by CHAUHAN on Feb 28, 2010 23:29:07 GMT 5.5
hiiiiii sorry for being dscnctd for 3 or 4 days due to some prblm, harshana bhai u said dat the culture was somewhat diff. but when we read the history written by gujjar n non gujjar writers we find out dat the way of war of huns was quite diffrent....(hun ek bahut vishal aur barbar jati thi) ...and its also seen dat huns were biggest anemies of gujjars at that tym of janendra samrat....nd perhaps they were of mangolian origin...
although the yuhechees,uigars,gurj,kurd,turk were related to gurjars .....nd most of them were half gujjars(mixture of gujjars nd huns) so were not pure. in the battle of centrel asia (kaansu mountain) gujjars were defeated by huns den gujjars move from central asia to marwad via punjab these gurj kurd etc were remained nd half blood gujjars.
nd it was common recently to establish relationships by marriges between warrior clans...
as example the kanishka also married with the princess of china's samrat as a result of compromisation of war between them.
nd also harshana bro ur opinions r wrong about way of war, as u know the great pratihars mihirbhoj nd nagbhatt wrote them in thier inscriptions as raghuvanshi nd desendent of lord laxman nd they obeyed always standard rules of war.......history tells that gujjars usually
never touch touch womens nd never killed childrens...nd u also kno that huns were quite diffrent bcoz they were destroyer.
|
|
|
|
Post by CHAUHAN on Feb 28, 2010 23:34:16 GMT 5.5
we can take the help of inscriptions(shilalekh) of that times of many kingdoms....in all inscriptions gujjars were wrote diffrent from huns in an inscription (vaishya vanshi harsh vardhan k pita prabhakar vardhan ko hun namak hirno k liye sher k saman aur gurjaro ki neend me badha dalne wala btaya h) there r a lot of such inscriptions...(bhagwan shiva k sivay kisi aur k chrno me na jhukne wale hunadhipati mihirkul ka sir janendra samrat yashodharma k charno me ragda gaya tha. )...
|
|
|
|
Post by Ashok Harsana on Mar 1, 2010 0:04:18 GMT 5.5
Dear Sandeep, Many renowned hsitorians were of the opinion that Gujjars came to India with Huns, as there were many similarties and the word Gujjar was used as a separate caste after 5th century (the attack of Huns). Gujjars might had fought against Huns but they were still related to each other. The Royal Pratihars (Tomars of Salumbare or lumbare subclan) were called the descendents of Raghu. But that has a very wide meaning. We all know that most of the Mid Asian popultaion were of Indian origin and migrated to Russia and other places after the war of Mahabharta. See here: ![]() E:\Gurjars\Artcle On Gujars\Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland By Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1\page1_2.jpeg [/img] |
|
|
|
Post by CHAUHAN on Mar 1, 2010 1:34:42 GMT 5.5
|
|
