Are Punjabi/Potohari Rajputs just Jatts and Gujjars?

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
4,990
New Delhi, India
#22
Dewal, no one is interested in such topics like 'Jahnus'. That is why such topics remain on Wikipedia. I think, if such articles remain unvisited for some period of time, the Wikipedia 'bots' will automtically remove them. All such topics trying to eulogize as particular caste or clan are just personal egos.
 
Jan 2019
76
Valencia
#23
Dewal, no one is interested in such topics like 'Jahnus'. That is why such topics remain on Wikipedia. I think, if such articles remain unvisited for some period of time, the Wikipedia 'bots' will automtically remove them. All such topics trying to eulogize as particular caste or clan are just personal egos.
That's exactly my point, only notable topics are well sourced and researched. There are many such articles that have zero sources or extremely unreliable sources but have existed for more than 10 years.

Another such example:

Hon clan - Wikipedia

Some Pakistani "clan". Not a single reference any where on the article. Existed for more than 10 years.

Anyway, you still have yet to address the points I made.
 

Shaheen

Ad Honorem
May 2011
2,499
Sweden
#24
Bhatis are a Rajput caste i believe? Theres a Bhati Darwaza (Gate) in old Lahore named after the Bhati community who resided there. Dulla Bhatti is a popular Punjabi "Robin Hood" like figure.
 
Jan 2019
76
Valencia
#26
Bhatis are a Rajput caste i believe? Theres a Bhati Darwaza (Gate) in old Lahore named after the Bhati community who resided there. Dulla Bhatti is a popular Punjabi "Robin Hood" like figure.
Yeah, Bhattis ruled in Jaisalmer I believe. But in Punjab, Bhatti surname is used by Rajputs, Jatt, Gujjars and some low-castes as well which adds to the confusion.
 
Jan 2019
10
Pakistan
#27
I am exasperated by people who deride Wikipedia. It is one of the most wonderful resources on internet on all things under the sun. False things do not last long on Wikipedia nd someone or the other is bound to correct it. It always mentions and asks for sources. And here, our people so easily dismiss it.Sure, they were/are not known as Rajpoots, but as Kshatriyas (in local parlance - Khatri). When they were defeated by invaders right from Alexander's time, had no principalities to rule and were not allowed to take up arms, they had to take up trading as profession. If they adopted Islam then they were allowed to take up arms and land holdings. The Muslim Rathores, Chauhans and Ranas (and various castes and clans) of Pakistan have that ancestry. It is quite a simple thing which is being needlessly complicated. Jats and Gujars are different from them.
You have no idea what you are talking about , stay way from pakistani Punjabi history if you don't know any of it
 
Aug 2014
1,032
pakistan
#28
That seems a fabricated history. Gakhars are recorded as Hindus when Ghurids were invading India.
Thats what they claim but i agree they must be of Hindu background (their chiefs had Hindu title of Rai). But you are confusing Khokhars with Gakhars, a common mistake that people make due to faulty translations by Britishers like Briggs, Elliot etc. Gakhars first appear in record history in Baburnama. The people who came into contact with Mahmud of Ghazna, Muhammad bin Sam of Ghor and Jalaluddin Khwarzemi, were Khokhars not Gakhars.
 

Similar History Discussions