This page 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.

The Shahi or Shahiya rulers of Kabol/Kapishi, are generally split into two eras the Hindu Turkish Shahis and the Hindu Shahis with the changeover occurring sometime around 870 AD. The Turk Shahi dynasty is believed by some to have descended from the Kushans, and by others by Turks (Tarushkas), but there is no firm evidence for the same. The so called Turkish Hindu Shahi was overthrown by Hindu Shahi dynasty led by Kallar Brahman and is believed to have ruled until 1020.

It appears that the Turk Shahi and Hindu Shahi dynasties were both of Kamboja lineage.

• Sixth Century Sanskrit writer Varamihira (505- 587 AD), in his Brhat Samhita, makes several mentions of Kambojas and their kingdoms but not of any Shahi or Turk-Shahi dynasty.

• 5th century Markendeya Purana also refers to the Kambojas as well as Pahlavas as ruling both in north-west (Afghanistan) as well as in south-west India (Gujarat/Saurashtra), but curiously it makes no reference to the Shahis.

The people of Kabul have historically been very patriotic and seldom brooked interference from outside. They fought Assyrians, Achaemenids, Macedoninas, the Kushans etc from 7th century BCE till second c CE and later the Arabs and other Muslim rulers from 663 A.D. to 1021 A.D, but never accepted their suzerainty. This is in line with the traditional warlike background of the ancient Kambojas and Gandharas.

Kabol valley/Kapishi has been a stronghold of the Kambojas/Gandharas since ancient times. Kapisi, the center of Shahi power is the later time Kaffirstan (now Nurestan) where the warlike clans like Kams, Kamoz/Kaumoj, Kamtoz etc still hold which irrefragably reminds us of their connections to the ancient Kambojas. In fact, Dr S Levi and other scholars derive name Kapisa from usual Sanskrit name Kamboja. Even earlier, it were the same ancient people, the Assakenois/Aspasios ( Ashvakas= Kambojas) of the classical sources, who had offered obstinate resistance to the foreign invaders...the Assyrians, Achaemenids and the Macedonians.

In historical background, Chinese pilgrim Hsuan-tsang who visited Kapisa (about 60 km north of modern Kabul) in 7th century reports its ruler king Shahi Khingala as belonging to Kshatriya lineage.

Rajatarangini of Kashmiri Sanskrit scholar/Historian Kalhana refers to war expeditions of king Lalitaditya of Kashmir (ruled 8th century AD) against the kingdoms of the Kambojas (Rajatrangini: 4.164-4.165)and then also the Daradas (4.169, 4.171).

Even Alberuni (start of 11th century) writing on the Shahis tells us of the Hindu kings residing in Kabul. The last king of this race ( Kshatriya) was Lagutarman (Katorman). Alberuni further informs us that the reign of this dynasty at its height extended from the Hindu Kush to the Himalaya and that Lagutarman’s wazir (minister) was Kallar, a Brahman, who overhrew the Kshatriya ruler and occupied the royal throne. After Kallar, followed a series of kings named Samand, Kamalu, Bhim, Jaipal, Anandpal and Tarojanpal (Trilochanpal) who are believed to be of Brahman (Kallar) lineage.

FOLLOWING IS TRANSLATED EXTRACT FROM ALBERUNI:

The last king of this race was Lagaturman and his Wazir was Kallar, a Brahman. The latter had been fortunate , insofar as he had found, by accident, hidden treasure which gave him much influence and power. In consequence the "last king of this Tibet house", after it had held the royal power for so long a period, let it by degrees slip from his hands. Besides, Lagaturman had bad manners and a worse behavior, on account of which people compalined of him greatly to the Wazir. Now the Wazir put him in chains and imprisoned him for correction, but himself finding the ruling sweet, his riches eanbled him to carry out his plans, and so he occupied royal throne. After him ruled the Brahmin kings Samand, Kamalu, Bhima, Jaipala, Anandpala, Tarojanpala. THe last was killed in Hijri 412 (1021) and his son Bhimapala five years later (Tarikh-i-Hind, tr Sachau, 1910, ii, 13).

(At another place also, Alberuni calls this earlier Royal House (i.e of Brahatkin/Lagaturma's) as belonging to Turk/Katorman and originating from Tibet).

IMPORTANT COMMENT: The ancient Puranic (Brahama Purana 53/16) and other Sanskrit/Pali literature attests that a part of Tibet was known as Kamboja. Scholars maintain that these Tibetan Kambojas infact belonged the same race/line as the Kabol/Pamirian/Badakshan Kambojas. So it is possible that Brahatkin, the founder of the so-called Turk Hindu Shahi Dynasty had moved from the Tibetean Kambojas section, but this may be a specualtion. Looks like there is some confusion in Alberuni's above statement with regard to the Tibetan origin of the Brahatkin/Lagaturma's so-called Turk Hindu Shahi dynasty. The Royal House must have been of local origin rather than of Tibetan.

We know that the so called Turk Hindu Shahi Dynasty is said to have ruled Kabol uptil approx 870 AD and the so called Brahmin Hindu Shahi Dynasty is known to have ruled till 1020 AD.

Now, from the Grant Charters of Pala kings of Bengal we learn that a Kamboja dynasty was ruling in Kabol valley in north-west India in 9th century AD. Pala king Devapala (reign 810-850 AD) had led his war expedition against the Hunas (south Punjab) and the Kabol valley Kambojas, in ninth century AD as is amply demonstrated by Pala king Devapala’s Monghyr Charter (B-8, i.e: Kambojesu cha yasya vajiyuvbhih …kantashchiran dikshitah: see Epigraphia Indica, XVII p 305). These were the people who have also been known by different names like the Kabulis and Zabulis but they were of the Kamboja lineage, ethically speaking.

Read : Devapala

What was this Kamboja kingdom whom the 9th century Grant Charters of Pala king Devapala of Bengal (reign 810 – 850 AD) makes a powerful inscriptional reference????. It is notable that the Charters of the Pala kings of Bengal make references to the Kambojas, Gandharas, Hunas etc of north-west, Latas, Malavas etc of the west, Kulitas, Khasas etc of north and Karnatas etc of the south etc but they make no mention to the Shahis.

The specific reference only to Kamboja in the extreme north-west confirms the fact that the Shahis rulers of north-east Afhanistan, in fact, had belonged to the Kamboja/Gandhara lineages.

Somebody from among the Wikipedian readers needs to shed further light on this issue/question.

BTW :

Shahi as a Kamboj clan name, is still found among the modern Kamboj in Amritsar in Punjab (See: Glossary of Tribes and Castes of Punjab and North West Frontier Province, 1910, Voll III, p 524, H. A. Rose). For Kamboj clans, see also [1]

Likewise, Kallara as Kamboj clan name is also still found among the Punjab Kamboj community which surname may have evolved from the Kallar, the surname of the first ruler of the Hindu Shahi---- the so called a Brahmin ruler of Alberuni. This evolution from Kallar == > Kallara is not surprising since the clan name Nagra (found among the Kamboj as well as the Jat lineages) is stated to have similarly evolved from Nagar or Nagarahar (in Afghanistan) i.e Nagar == > Nagra. Thus, in fact, the Brahmin minister Kallar who had usurped throne of Kapishi/Kabol from the Kshatriya ruler probably himself also belonged to the Brahmin Kamboja lineage.

This is because ancient Kambojas were not only from the Kshatriya lineage but also had practiced Brahmanism and had Brahmin lineage i.e they followed both Kshatriya s well as Brahmana professions in ancient times.

For Kamboja as Kshatriyas, See: [2];

For Brahminism of the Kambojas See: Brahmanism of Ancient Kambojas;

For ancient Kamboj location see: Kamboja Location, Also see': [3].

As late as eleventh century AD, Muslim Geographer Idrisi (11th c AD) refers to a tiny remanant of the old north-west Kamboja kingdom located in the northern Afghanistan which according to him shared boundaries with Badakshan (See: Sidhant Kaumudi Arthaprakashika, 1996, p 20-22, Acharya R. R. Pande; Ancient Kamboja People and the Country, 1981, p 44, Dr J. L. Kamboj; Kambojas Through the Ages, 2005, p 220, S Kirpal Singh). Thus, though the Shahi Kamboja dynasty was practically lost to history by the start of eleventh century, its one tiny remanant was still attested in north Afghanistan by Idrisi.

Morover, the so-called Shahi Turk (Katorman), in actuality, may have been from the Kator, Katir/Katawar---the name of one preeminent warlike sub-tribe of the former Siyaposh Kafirs (Kamtoz) of Kafirstan...This may again link the Shahis to the Kambojas...the center of the land of action of the Shahi kingdom is still occupied by the Kator Nurestanis.

Let’s discuss the issue in a professional manner to determine the truth hidden under the pall of time.

Also, can somebody offer an ancient evidence linking the Janjuas to the Shahis and Janamejya Pandava/Kaurava and making them as their modern representatives?

Thanks

Sze cavalry01 13:13, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

The following line of rulers of Shahi be noted:

870 AD- Kallar
900 AD - Samand
925 AD - Kamalu
950 AD - Bhima

…………….

975 AD - Jaypala
1000 AD - Anandpala
1021 AD_ Tirlochanpala
1026 AD – Bhimapala

(Important Note: The throne of Bhima whicvh is linked to Bhhima of Pandavas by Janjua accounts in fact may have belonged to the above Bhima o from Kallar lineage).

The Janjuas claim that the Shahi dyanasty from Jaiyapala onwards was Janjua Rajput dynasty. For proof, evidence is presented from Arab Geographer A. Masudi.

Now A. Masudi was in India in 915 AD. He makes the following statement with reference to Gandhar rulers of Sind of his time:

“The country of Kandahar is called the country of Rahbut”  

which statement, right or wrong, has been relied upon by the Janjuas to prove that Kandhahar (= Gandhar = Kabol + Gandhar) was inhabited/ruled by Janjua Rajput people whom Masudi called Rahbut (Rajputs?). But it is not at all certain that if by term Rahbut, Masudi actually meant Rajput. This is because nowhere else in his writings Masudi attests Rahbut or Rajput for other kings of India like those of Balhara (Gujarat), Malvawa, Rajputana, Kanauj, and many other warlike ruling clans/rulers surrounding Kanauj, Saurashtra, Avanti etc who are were unquestionably Rajputs as well all know.

Now important Question for Supersaiyan:

(1): If Rahbut indeed meant Rajput, then why did not Masudi use the same name/title for the Rajput rulers of Balhara, Kanauj, Malava, lower Sind, and numerous ruling clans who are well known as Rajput from numerous other latter sources? It is important to observe that nowhere else Masudi has used name Rahbut even in respect of any of the other well known Rajput people like those of Gujarat/Saurashtra, Malva/Avanti, Kanauj, Bundhel-Khand etc etc. Then why for Sind alone? (This tells us that Rahbut of Masudi must have been used by Masudi in some other context than Rajput).

(2): Masudi's above statement relates to (915 AD) or earlier time (when he was India), but the so-called first Janjua emperor of Gandhar i.e Shahi Jayapal, is known to have assumed power of Shahis in 950 AD. It is claimed that from him onwards the Gandhar was ruled by the Janjua Rajput Shahi line. Well, if Jaipala (950 AD-) was indeed the first king of the Janjua Rajput (Rahbut) in the Hindu Shahi line, then name Rahbut of Masudi (915 AD) does not apply to to the Janjuas Rajputs in Gandhara since they were not sovereign or else the inhabitants of Gandhar/Kabol at that time. If at all, the name Rahbut must have referred to their predecossor line of rulers i.e, King Kallar and his lineage, who had usurped power from Buddhist Turki Shahi line of Lagaturman.

Thus it is clear that the name Rahbut if indeed equivalent to Rajput, must have been used by Masudi (915 AD) for the the sovereigns and the people of Gandhara/Kabol who had preceded Jaipala (950 AD) line.

Is Rajput as popular name attested as early as 900+ century in India? I think term Rajput gaiine currency much later in time.

Supersaiyan, can you offer your comments on these two points?

Sze cavalry01 00:14, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Another evidence in favor of Sahi Dynasty of Kabol/Waihind being from Kamboj lineage:

There is yet another important link which may allude to the Hindu Shahi being from the Kamboj lineage. The suffix “-pala” has been used after the name of the rulers of Kabol/Gandhara viz: Jaypala (950 AD), Anandspala(1000 AD), Trilochanpala 1021 AD), Bhimapala (1026) etc .

The same suffix “-pala” has also been used by the Kamboja rulers of Bengal (viz: Rajayapala, Nayapala, Narainapala, Dharamapala) who were also almost contemporary to the Hindu-Sahi kings of Kabol/Gandhara in the north-west. See: Kamboja Dynasty of Bengal

The Kamboja prince of Bengal Rajyapala had seized north-west Bengal around the middle of tenth century (~950 AD). prince Rajayapala was followed by more Kamboja rulers viz: Nayapala and Narayanapala etc and Dharamapala of Kamboj lineage is stated to have ruled in Dhandbhukti in Bengal during beginning of eleventh century (~1120 AD).

Interstingly the two ruling dynasties i.e The Kamboja Pala Dynasty of Bengal and the Hindu Shahi Dynasty of Kabol/Gandhar were contemporary, and both use –pala as the part of their name. One of them (the dynasty of northwest Bengal) unquestionably belongs to the Kambojas (Kambojavamsatilaka), it can therefore be deduced that the other one of the Kabol/Gandhar may also have been of Kamboja lineage since the soverigns used -pala after their names and further the Kamboja stronghold in Kabol/Kapishi region is known from numerous other sources as well. Moreover, Pala king Devapala of Bengal (810-850 AD) claims to have reached the northwest Kambojas (in Kabol valley) in one of his north-west military expeditions after defeating the Hunas in south-east Punjab.

There are many more references to Kambojas in control of Kabol/Gandhar region in the time frame around 9/10 th century AD which we would like to produce sometimes later.

Also, “-pala” as part of the name is documented to have been used by the Kambojas as early as 3rd c BCE. This is amply attested by ancient Inscriptions of Sinhala where Goplala is shown to be the name of one Kamboja chieftain (Pramukha) in Sri Lanka.

Original Sinhalese: 'Gota-Kabojhi(ya]na parumaka-Gopalaha bariya upasika-Citaya lepe iagaio'

Translation: "The cave of the female lay-devotee Citta, wife of Gopala, the chief of the incorporated Kambojiyas, [is dedicated] to the Saiügha".

Dr. S. Paranavitana, 1970 [4]

Thus, an indication of a connection between the Kamboja Dynasty of Bengal and the Shahi Dynasty of Gandhara ruled by Shahis like Jaipala, Anadapala etc can be seen from the above evidence also.

Sze cavalry01 00:14, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Following views of H. A. Rose (Glossary of Tribes and Castes) are very much relevant on this subject. The discussion here also surfacially touches Shahi Dynasty of Kabol/Kapish....so-called Katorman Dynasty (of Turk Hindu Shahi) by Alberuni:

KATOR/SIAPOSH KAFIRS: a race mentioned by several Muhammedan historians of India. Baihaki in his Tarikh-I-Sabaktigin mentions that all the Hindus Kators were brought under rule of the Sultan Masu’d, but he does not specify their locality (E. H. I. 1, p 128). Abu Rihan Al-Biruni speaks of Katorman as the last of the Turk kings of Kabol (i.e Turkish Hindu Shahi) (Ibid, p 408), but the dynasty appears to have been also called Katormán, Katorian or Kayorman (Ibid p 405-08). Elliot gives a full account of them, but it is doubtful if the dynasty was generally called Katorman (Ibid pp 407-08). Taimur however, unquestionably found the Kators in alliance with SIAPOSH and holding a kingdom which extended from the frontier of Kashmir to mountains of Kabol and contained many towns and villages. Their ruler was called Adaslshu, Uda or Udashu (which recalls Udyana or Swat) and had his capital at Jorkal. He describes the Kators as men of a powerful frame and fair complexions, idolators for the most part, and speaking a tongue distinct from Turki, Persian, Hindi or Kashmiri (Ibid pp 400-01; cf pp 480-81). Taimur attacked their strongholds, reaching, according to Raverty, that part of Kafirstan known as Kashtur while Prince Rustam advanced into those parts of where the Katibi, (Kati), Siaposh, Pandu and Salao now dwell (Notes on Afganistan, p 136). This was in 1398 A.D. and in the end of 15th c Sultan Mahmud, descendent of Taimur led expeditions against the Kator Kafirs and Siaposh and thereby earned the title of Ghazi. Raverty identifies the Kator with Spin or White Kafirs (Wai Kafirs: Ibid p 135) but the historians of Akbar, who sent an expedition under Jahangir in 1581 against the Siaposh Kafirs of mountains of Kator, and Abu’l Fazal in his history of Taimur’s expedition speak of the Hiduan-I-Kator, a country which they describe as bounding Burner, Swat and Bajaur on the north. The family of Mihtar of Chitral is still called the Kator (vide p 174 supra), and Biddulpf’s proposed identification of the Kathae or Khattar of Attock can not be regarded as proved (It is abandoned by Irvine: J. R. A. S. 1911, pp 217-219) .

[Glossary of Tribes and Castes of Panjab and north-west Frontier Province...by H. A. Rose, p 485, for details]

The following Wikipedia articles may be relevant here.

Kators
Kam
Siahposh
Kafirs of Hindukush

Sze cavalry01 21:10, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Following extract is taken from the Shahi (The main Wikipedia article):

"The initial Hindu Shahi dynasty, was the House of Kallar, but in 964 AD the rule was assumed from Bhima upon his death by the Janjua emperor Maharajadiraja Jayapala, son of Rai Asatapala Janjua and a descendant of Emperor Janamejaya"

The references (following) given AS SUCH, in support of the above statement, seems incomplete and personal views of the authors and therefore may be specualtive.

(Coins of Medieval India, A.Cunningham, London, 1894, p56, p62, The Last Two Dynasties of The Sahis, A Rehman, 1988, Delhi, p131, p48, p49, p3001, Chronicles of Early Janjuas Dr H.Khan, 2003 iUniverse, p3, p5, p8, p9).

What is needed here is:

An ancient inscriptional or literary evidence which establishes that (1) prince Jayapala & Anandapala, Tarojanpala etc were not from the same line as the rulers Spala Deva (Kallar?), Samanta, Bhima Deva (of the coins) OR Samand, Kamalu, Bhima as mentioned by Alberuni? (2) an inscriptional or literary evidence supporting that Anadapala descended from the Kuru Janamejaya's line.

Dear Supersaiyan, let's discuss the topic. You may want to furnish the relevant text from these references which establishes these connections?

Thanks

Sze cavalry01 22:11, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi. All literature on the subject of the ethnicity of the back ground of the Shahis is speculative Sze, especially a thousand years on. The above speculate the background of the Shahis to be in the Janjua based on the family name, the Janjuas own assetrions (which are the only clan in Punjab to assert this) as well as the geographical evidence i.e. Nandana, koh i jud as well as the fact that the Rajghar fort of the Sahis was inherited and rebuilt by a later descendant Raja Mal Khan Janjua. It is written that the original temple and fort area was built by a kauru/Pandu (Pandava) and thats according the Jhelum district Gazetteers research. There is now actual evidence available at all confirming who the actual Shahis were.

Secondly, Alberuni himself wrote Jayapala to be the son of a Haital, which was deciphered to be meaning Satpala (he also wrote Tirlochan are Tirlojhan etc)

But what I do find quite strange is the connection to the Kamboh people. As they haven't made this assertion before in any literary text (considering such a prominent dynastic alleged connection) and also the basis for it, by the name Shahi as a gotra is quite weak. I say this because the Shahis never called themselves Shahis (Note the Bara Kot inscriptions etc) and the title was used for other notable kings by the same originator i.e. Alberuni Saheb. I am more interested where the connections to the Janjua came about and the fact that the Janjuas have always held a firm belief for centuries of this case, it bears a little better assertion than a recent speculative theory. I have asked an Afghan researcher the same and he also cannot locate a Kamboh identity to the Kabul Shahs at all. But then just because it isn't apparent doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I hope I can be of some use, but my current work commitments (promotion exams) are quite strenuous, so apologies for any periods of absence Sze. Nice to work with you though :-) Raja

Hi, I disagree, I have not seen any assertion that Janjuas are the descendants of the Shahis. The evidence you presented is not sufficient to validate the claim. John Keay, the premier Historian on South Asian history writes in his book "India a History" that the Shahi blood may have survived in the Bhattis Rajputs. Everything else suggests that these folks got dissolved and like many a dynasties before them the lineage came to a dead end. I'll see what else I can digup on these folks. But for now I believe that speculative assertions such as these should not be added like so. No medeival historical reference is available that may hint Janjua successor clan-name identity to the Shahis. Omerlives 12:54, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Bhatti connection is a completely new one on me! It's confirmed that the Shahi kingdom was known as the country of the Rajput (Masudi) so the possibility is ofcourse there. But the family name Ja'haj would rule out any similarity to Bhatti by any linguistics. It would also seem strange that the Bhatti history (which is quite well documented both in Rajasthan and Punjab) would omit this one period of significant rule. I would be interested in what evidence you can dig to support this claim beyond a speculated claim by Mr Keeay. If thats to be given credibility, then Sir Alexander Cunningham and Dr Ahmad Hasan Dani both made the assertions of the Janjua being Shahis and deserve no less credibility (both are famous known historians, archeologists and SAC was also an ethnologist).

As mentioned above first, there exists no record to confirm that exact origin of the Shahis beyond what is currently available. What is available is the facts that they were definitely known as Rajputs (Masudi's account) and their family name was similar to Ja'haj (Masudi). Their prime fort was inherited by a Janjua Chief (Malot fort) and amongst their heirlooms, some Pandava relics were also present and taken away by Mahmud Ghazni (Janjuas are Pandavas). These are all facts. Beyond this, one can only speculate ofcourse. But all info on the subject would be useful here, no doubt- Raja

Dear Raja, Keay doesnot provide any hard evidence for his assertion bu neither do you. I would like to know more about Ja'haj and what does that have to do with Janjuas. Could you further elaborate the inheritance of the fort? Where is Malot fort located? from whom did the Janjuas acquire it and how (the british?). How are Janjuas related to the pandavas and are Pandava relics only found in that fort or are they widely dispersed throgh out the region of north punjab, northwest fronties and afghanistan? I agree any claim for direct descent from Shahis hitherto is all speculation and unsatisfactory. Omerlives 14:49, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Dear Omerlives,

The assertion is made by the historians mentioned above, not by me. I merely displayed the citations of their work. (therefore, no hard evidence,but then that was always maintained that there is none for any claim....)

For your info, Malot fort is located in Chakwal, and was originally called Rajghar (also Sahighar in some literature) Raja Mal is known to have been the ruler of Malot and rebuilt the fort in his age (the fort was considerably fallen and hence the rebuild). Today it is quite a state of ruin but a known ancient research site and an attraction of Chakwal Pakistan. The british never took it over because it was now completely useless as a functioning fort. You are more than welcome to research it and it's history, you will not be dissappointed. Regarding the Pandavas connection, the Janjuas have always alleged descendancy from tehn Pandavas and this was recorded back in the age of the last 12th century by other clans too. (i.e. Mohyals in the Gulshan e Mohyali) so this is not a new assertion. It's a bit too coincidental that relics of the Pandavas, plus a known Pandav connection to the fort and it's temple, plus a family who ruled the fort being alleged descendants of this clan all in the same region, same fort? Even a cynical mind would address this with caution ofcourse, but not outright denial for mentioned reasons above. But then it's not the Janjuas connection to the Pandavas being questioned here, it's the Shahis ethnic clan name. Masudi recorded it as similar to Ja'haj. Sir Alexander Cunningham, Dr Hussain Khan, Dr Ahmad Hasan Dani all deciphered it to be Janjua. Thats their connection, outside of the Janjuas ancient claim to this in the first place. The facts are available for all to red and speculate my friend, no one falls short or rises with the speculative research - Raja

Raja wrote:

Secondly, Alberuni himself wrote Jayapala to be the son of a Haital, which was deciphered to be meaning Satpala (Satpala (he also wrote Tirlochan are Tirlojhan etc))

Sze:

If Alberuni correctly writes Jayapala, it does not sound reasonbale/convincing to argue that he has written Haital for Satpala. And he wrote Tarojanapala for Tarlochanpala…..which I think is close enough.

Dear friend Raja ji, can you quote here the exact text from Alberuini, from Sachau’s translation or some other, which shows that Alberuni wrote Haital for Satpala. Right now I do not have access to that book.

No problem. The deciphering was actually examined much closer and better detail by Dr Abdur Rehman who researched the two Shahi dynasties relentlessly in the late 70's. According the the Tarikh i Guzida (p390-92) Jayapala was the son of Haital. Ferishta records Ashtpal or Hatpal (missing vowels make the deciphering a challenge in this respect) as Jayapala's father. Tarikh i Khairat gives it as Jaipal wa Haital (Yayapala s/o Haital). Y Misra ji restored it as Jetripal but the Arabic letters of H and J are not closely linked to have made such a big jump in the name from Hai to Jet. Dr Abdur Rahman took into consideration linguistics (Arabic and Persian) and came to this conclusion that the Asta was the correct. Asata pala was also the ruler of Kabul and the contemporary of Kamalu. (Last two dynasties of the Shahis) I am fairly in agreement with this deciphering, as all and every matter has been taken into consideration by researchers on the very topic.-- Raja 11:06, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Sze: Let's us settle on this issue: Please tell how Satpala being the name of Jaipala's father proves king Jaipala to be aKshatriya/Rajput?.

Raja wrote:

Hindushahi dynasty rulers had Ja’haj as their family name as Masudi writes.

Family name Ja'haj would rule out any similarity to Bhatti by any linguistics.

Sze:

I think Masudi actually wrote Chach not Ja’haj. Can you verify?. Ibbeston says that Chach could be Jaj and then it could be Janj and then from Janj he derives Janjua!!. This is really a far-cry and longer road, from Kabol to Peshawer via Sogdiana!

A shorter and direct route should be: Chach => Jaj (linguistically possible since ch => j very often). But now Jaj (pronounced like English Judge) is both a Kamboj as well as Jat surname (Jat Jhajh, Kamboj Jaj/Juj, also written as Judge...and pronounced like Judge also).

Yet another path could be Chach = > Chachar, which again is also Kamboj as well as Jat surname. Thus if you want to follow clan name Ja’haj (actually Chach), then Kamboj and the Jat may put a more convincing claim, assuming of course that Gandhara /Kapisha had been the ancient home of the Kambojas.

I see your point, but the statement by Masudi that the land of the Shahi's was the country of the Rajput, would undoubtedly remove the Kamboh and Jat possibility. -- Raja 11:06, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Sze:

How can you say that the Kamboj are not Kshatriyas (=Rajputs)?. As I have already directed you to reference on Wikipedia, the Kambojas, the ancestors of the Kamboj/kamboh were indeed Kshatriyas. See again [5].

Supersaiyan/Raja wrote:

But what I do find quite strange is the connection to the Kamboh people. As they haven't made this assertion before in any literary text (considering such a prominent dynastic alleged connection) and also the basis for it, by the name Shahi as a gotra is quite weak. I say this because the Shahis never called themselves Shahis (Note the Bara Kot inscriptions etc) and the title was used for other notable kings by the same originator i.e. Alberuni Saheb.

Sze rejoinder:

Of course, the claims have been made earlier but did not get wide publicity as they should have gotten (See: “Kamboja Prakasha, 1980”, S. Bishan Singh for example; For more authentic approach, the claim also stands in “Kambojas Through the Ages, 2005”, S Kirpal Singh). The Shahi rulers may not have called them as such, but name "Shahi" as an "Al" seems to have gotten stuck to their future representatives. This is perfectly natural and acceptable. This happens so often real life. In actual practice, many new surnames have taken shape like this one and with time they have become genuine clan names.

Even before the Kamboj/Kamboh themselves laid rightful claim to the Shahi dynasty of Afghanistan, the British colonial writers had themselves pointed out the connection of Kambojs not only with Pala kings of Bengal including Pala king Gopala, Dharama Pala, Devapala, Rajyapala, Narayanapala, Nayapala, Mahipala etc etc based on the Dinajpur Pillar Inscriptions which makes the Kambojs as the Lords of Gauda ---Kambojanvaya Gaudapati i.e lords of Gauda, born in Kamboj family (and Kamboja-Vamsha-Tilaka (i.e Glory of the Kamboj tribe) but also connected the Shahi Dynasty of Afghanistan with the Kamboja race, and calls the Afghanistan Kambojas as the ancestral homeland of Devapala of the renowned Pala dynasty of Bengal Bihar (810-850 AD) (See Article: The Pal Kings of Bengal in "Calcutta Review, June 1874, pp 74, 95, 96, E Vesey Westmacott, Bengal Civil Service, Bengal Asiatic Society of Royal Asiatic Society, F. R. G. S). So much so, modern scholars like Dr S K. Chatterjee have also connected the origin of Pala Kings of Bengal from North-west Panjab which obviously is the Kamboj/Gandhar (See: The Pace of Assam in the History and Civilization of India, p 20, Dr S. K. Chatterjee, Published by Dept. of Publication, University of Gauhati, 1970).

In addition, one ancient inscription and several ancient Buddhist manuscripts found from Gilgit area between upper Indus and river Kabul shed some light on three kings who ruled in Gilgit region in 6-7th c AD. They also wore Shahi titles and their names are mentioned as Patoladeva alias Navasurendradiyta Nandin, Srideva alias Surendra Vikrmadiyta Nandin and Patoladeva alias Vajraditya Nandin. It is very relevant to mention here that each of the Shahi rulers mentioned in the above list of Gilgit rulers has Nandin as his surname or last name(The Shahis of Afghanistan and the Punjab, 1973, p 1, Dr Deena Bandhu Pandey). It is more than likely that the surname Nandin refers to their clan name. It is also very remarkable that the modern Kamboj tribe of northern Punjab still has Nandan (Nandin) as one of their important clan names. Similarily, the Shahi is also one of the clan names among the Panjab Kambojs (See: A Glossary of the Tribes & Castes of the Punjab & North-west Frontier Province: Based on the Census Report for the Punjab, 1883, by the Late Sir Denzil Ibbetson ... & the Census Report for the Punjab, 1892, by Sir Edward Maclagan ... & Comp. Vol III, H.A. Rose. 1914 (edition), p 524). These can not be mere isolated coincidences. Sze cavalry01 ( talk) 18:43, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I still disagree this point. The fact that a foreign title be adopted as a family name and then become so consistently by other local tribes seems dubious to me. Can proof be provided where a foreign element called a particular tribe by a name different to it's actual name and the tribe later adopted THAT actual name? knowing the patriotic Indian soul and it's innate rebellion against the foreign rebellion, this would not seem plausible to name your whole clan after THAT name. The Hund slab does not even call Jayapala a Shahi despite being a slab in his glory! (Parambhattaraka Maharajadhiraja Paramesvara Sri Jayapaladeva) I dont agree his future representatives (whoever they may be) would have adopted this name. Other kings were also called Shahi's by Alberuni, yet they didnt adopt this as a name for their future dynasties either.

Sze:

How do you say that Shahi was a foreign title for the Kambojas?. Please explain

Regarding the claim of the Kambohs, you state a Mohyal claim to Janjua being Pandavas of Janamejaya in the 12th century to be a new assertion, but a claim by Kambohs in the 80's and last year to be early? These claims were not brought to the attention of the colonial researchers of the dynasty and neither recorded by another clan pre colonial period. There are other tribes who also claim today (with the free availability of information about the Shahis)to be Shahis, so this does not surprise me.-- Raja 11:06, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Supersaiyan/Raja wrote:

It is written that the original temple and fort area was built by a kauru/Pandu (Pandava) and thats according the Jhelum district Gazetteers research. There is now actual evidence available at all confirming who the actual Shahis were.

Sze:

'Jhelum Gazetteer 1904 is not a research book. It is compilation work by the British officers for their administrative convenience and knowlede for the Indian-bound English Administrative officers to help them understand the locals/Indians and rule them better.

I agree. So the information is a compilation of local record rather than investigating accounts. In that case, if a local record asserts the history of a certain structure to be built by a certain people, it would be recorded. This is an important part of investigation infact and was recorded, so cannot be dismissed Im afraid.-- Raja 11:06, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Supersaiyan/Raja wrote:

It's confirmed that the Shahi kingdom was known as the country of the Rajput (Masudi) so the possibility is ofcourse there.

Sze:

Can you quote the exact wording from Masudi?.

Supersaiyn:

No problem. Kandahar (Gandhara) is called the country of the Rahbut (Last two dynasties of the Sahis, p48)

Sze response:

Clarification needed:

I have not come across term "Rahbut" anywhere. Is it Rahbut or Rajput? Can you present full relevant text of Masudi as well as its English translation by a noted English scholar?

Shahi kingdom included mainly Kabol, Kapishi, Swat, Peshawer, Nangarahara, Waihind--- all west of river Indus. To the east of Indus, it included Taxila/Rawalpindi, Punch, and parts as far as Batinda and Sirhind etc. Now during Shai period (800 -1000 AD), the Kapisha/Kabol/Swat was the land of the ancient Kambojs, the Peshawer, Waihind (Lahore), Taxila that of the ancient Gandhars (by the way, Gandharas were also Kambojas). This is irrefutably attested by Pala king Devapala (810-850 AD) of Bengal. Inscriptions of Dharamapala (770-810), second king of Palas attest the Gandharas (southern side of Kabol valley) as paying him tributes and homage, while inscriptions of Devapala (810-850 AD) indicate that he clashed with the Kambojas in north-west. Devapala also defeated the Hunas in south-east Punjab before reaching the land of Kambojas. Devapala also attests the Muslim (Yavanas) kingdom in Sindhu/Multan. No other tribe/ethnicity is attested in the north-west by Devapala’s 9th century inscriptions except the above three. Now if Masudi calls the Shahi dynasty as the land of the Rajputs (means Kshatriyas), then Masudi’s term Rajput obviously should refer to the Gandharas/Kambojas of the above region. Rajput literally equates to Kshatriya and undoubtedly Kambojas/Gandharas were Kshatriyas as attested by numerous ancient Sanskrit texts like Puranas, Mahabharata, Panini’s Ashtadhyayi, Manusmriti and Kautiliya’s Arathashastra [6].

Not surprising, Hiuen Tsang (7th c Chinese Pilgrim) attests that the ruler of Kapishi/Kabol was Kashatriya. And according to Persiacs-9, (Early East Iran and Arthaveda, 1981, p 92, Dr Michael Witzel), in 7th century, the Kabol area (i.e Kabol valley, Kapishi. Lamghan etc) was in the control of East Iranians called Kambojas. Thus, it is clear from above references that it were the Kambojas who had constituted the land of Kapisha/Kabol valley whose sovereign is designates as Kshatriya by Hiuen Tsang. This may refer to the first rulers of Shahis which were called Buddhist Turk Shahis; Alberuni attests that this so-called Buddhist Turk Shahi had ruled for 60 generations which mean the first so-called Shai Turk Dynasty had ruled for approx 15X60 = 900 years to be on the moderate side; And the later rulers called Hindu Shahis ruled from 870 to 1021 approx.. Actually, the Tibetan origin of first Shahi Dynasty may connect them to the Kambojas. In fact, the seventh century AD ruler of Tibet has a name "Srongadzan-Gambo" (640-698 AD) where Gamboh of Tibetan text is taken to mean Kamboj. [7] (read pages 491 through 501). It is irreputable fact of history that Kamvojas were ruling in Tibet in 5th c AD as attested by Brahama Purana (verse 53/16). There is more evidence to this too (Manuscripts No 7763 & 7777 described in the catalogue of Sanskrit and Prakrit Mss. in the library of India house, Vol II Part II, Dr R. C. Majumdar).

Sze:

BTW, there are instances where the ruling families, whether they are Kshatriyas/Rajanyas or not, sometimes, have been styled Kshatriyas i.e. Rajanyas/Rajputs. That is not a conclusive evidence that Shahi were indeed Janjua Rajputs.

Supersaiyn wrote:

However, if a foreign element who knows not the difference between a kshatriya and a Rajput or any other clan records the name Rajput for the sovereigns of Gandhara, which no other non Rajput clan would ever claim to use, then this cannot be denied, or dismissed to mean possibly other Non Rajput clans. This makes no sense to me. Had Masudi said 'Kshatriyas' or warrior kings then it would be the case. But this cannot be denied hence when such a specific tribal affilation is recorded.-- Raja 11:06, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Sze:

It does not make sense to me. Has Masudi also used the term Kshatriya for other Indians anywhere in his book anywhere?. Besides so-called Rajputs, there were, of course, Kshatriyas in India at his times. If does not use Kshatriya anywhere in his text, it is fair to conclude that, for him, the terms Rahbut (Rajput?) and Kshatriya wwere same. But first please answer if Masudi has also used the term Kshatriya in his text Book anywhere?

BTW: "Warrior" being an English could not have been used by Masudi

Supersaiyan/Raja wrote:

Regarding the Pandavas connection, the Janjuas have always alleged descendancy from the Pandavas and this was recorded back in the age of the last 12th century by other clans too. (i.e. Mohyals in the Gulshan e Mohyali) so this is not a new assertion.?????

Supersaiyn:

An assertion recorded in the 12th century (over 800years ago) before the Muslim conquests, is being called new? Granted that the assertion is of a lineage which is possibly (never confirmed ever) to be 4000years old, it is still from a neutral source which recorded something in it's own records about another tribe. It is older than a 1980's assertion.-- Raja 11:06, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Sze:

DID I ACTUALLY USE "NEW" in my text? Butt question still remains. Mohiyals are Brahmins. How can they claim connections with Kshatriya Pandavas/Pauravas/Kauravas???

Sze:

Can you quote the exact wording of Gulshan e Mohyali here. What does the author says on Mohyals? Mohyals otherwise claim to be Brahman lineage, while Pandavas/Kauravas were Kshatriyas. Moreover, there are past references where the Janjuas also claim Rathod/Rathor lineage. Also some writers who connect Janjuas with Yadubansis i.e of Yadava stock. There are other origin theories too.

Supersaiyn:

Ofcourse, I will infact provide you the internet link to a page with some of this replicated info.[Mohyal reference| http://66.249.93.104/search?q=cache:uDsCFRzZmBcJ:www.mohyal.com/gms/m_member.htm+raja+mal+mohyal&hl=en&gl=uk&ct=clnk&cd=5

Supersaiyn:

There are many origin theories for many tribes, but none have held any authenticity save two theories (The Juan Juan theory and the Pandava theory). The records that stated the Rathore side have also stated Pandava connection at the same time (which were only made during the colonial era by lay villagemen to a census keeper) which ofcourse is in direct contention. The Pandava connection has NEVER been denied and ALWAYS asserted by Janjua records, colonial writes such as Sir Lepel H Griffin etc) The exact origin of any tribe can never be known (not any tribe, geneological trees or not Im afraid) therefore any theory which is more plausible is just that, more plausible. According to the Punjab Castes, Kambohs have stated to be the sons of Raja Karan. So you can see from this Sze ji.

Raja Karan issue:

Supersaiyn, it is coincifdence that you have brought out this point. I was actually going to dwell upon this issue. See my next write-up.

Supersaiyn:

Mohyals claim to be the Hindu Shahi dynasty (which I find very plausible up to Bhimdeva) and maybe they were the last house also. It is quite a plausible theory i.e. they are Brahmin warrior clans.-- Raja 11:06, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Sze:

Yes, one possibility exists here. The ancestors of Mohiyals may have been originally Kaurava/Pandava Kshatriyas but became Brahmans in later times.

Supersaiyan/Raja wrote:

It's a bit too coincidental that relics of the Pandavas, plus a known Pandav connection to the fort and it's temple, plus a family who ruled the fort being alleged descendants of this clan all in the same region, same fort? Even a cynical mind would address this with caution of course, but not outright denial for mentioned reasons above.

Sze:

Mahabharata, according to soberest estimates, took place about 1200 BCE i.e about 3200 years ago.(However, most people place it at 3125 BCE) What kind of Kaurava/Pandava relics could have survived this long rough and tumble of time? Can you name/identify the relics? There is no evidence of any written script prevalent at that earlier times. How can one be sure that those relics really belonged to Kauravas/Pandavas? Note that there was no script in vogue at that early time

Supersaiyn wrote:

During the capture of Bhimnagar by Mahmud the looting of certain riches including, ..a richly decorated throne reputed to have belonged to raja Bhim of the legendary Pandava dynasty (Last two dynasties of the Shahis, p153-154)(Unsuri, p85, Gardizi p180) I made reference to what was reported, not claim it. This has been mentioned by, again, foreign elements who made this claim. But a claim nonetheless that was consistent a possible Pandava connection.-- Raja 11:06, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Sze:

Hi Supersaiyn: The following statement is utterly absurd and unbelieavable.

..a richly decorated throne reputed to have belonged to raja Bhim of the legendary Pandava dynasty

Did any Muslim writer made the above statement? If so in which ancient (i.e. medieval age) text book?

Firstly, the time-gap is so long that it is impossible that the throne could have been with the family all through the ages. Mahabharata is believed to have been foufght in 3125 BCE. Secondly, Bhima, Arjuna, Nakula and Sehdeva were not kings, but were aides to king Yudhishtra. Hence no relevancy for kingly throne of Bhima. Why not of Yudhishtra's throne?. The throne if at all it was looted must have belonged to last king Bhimapala of the Sahi dynasty who fell in the battle with Mahmud's forces in 1026 AD.

Rumours/or ridiculous folk-tales should not be made the part of serious history of a people or a tribe.

Regards

Sze cavalry01 02:54, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Supersaiyn wrote: Secondly, Alberuni himself wrote Jayapala to be the son of a Haital, which was deciphered to be meaning Satpala (Satpala (he also wrote Tirlochan are Tirlojhan etc))

How does Jaipala being son of Satpala proves him to be of Janjua Rajput origin. And what about same Alberuni saying that Jaipala/Anandapla, Trilochanpala, Bhimapala etc belonged to Brahman lineage. Note that Alberuni was in north-west India in 1000+ years and he is believed to have personally met Anandpala/Trilochanpala etc so his evidence on Jaipala/Anadapala etc being Brahman is difficult to refute.

Sze cavalry01 01:48, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Supersaiyn wrote:

"The exact origin of any tribe can never be known (not any tribe, geneological trees or not Im afraid) therefore any theory which is more plausible is just that, more plausible. According to the Punjab Castes, Kambohs have stated to be the sons of Raja Karan. So you can see from this Sze ji".

That is good point. I myself wanted to raise this. Good that you have brought this issue, Thanks.

ON THE RELIABILITY OF LOCAL ACCOUNTS FOUND IN THE BRITISH DESIGNED GAZETTEERS:

One need to read the following accounts about the tribes of Punjab as narrated by peoples of Panjab/North-west Frontier Province and which stand incorporated in the British Designed Punjab Gazetteer from which Ibetson/Rose derive their material. How can one believe suchlike folk stories as serious matter of history?

CLASSICAL CASE OF RAJA KARAN.

EXAMPLES FROM THE GLOSSARY OF TRIBES/PANJAB CASTES ETC

[1] KHAKH JATT CLAN is descendent of RAJA KARAN.!. In Bahawalpur, this Jat tribe gave the following genealogy: Raja Karan had a son named Kamdo who had a son named Pargo who had a son named Janjuhan who had a son named Khakh. Khakh had four sons: Babbar, Gabbar (Gaawar/Gabar/Gawar), Rabbar, and Jhaggar (Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North West Frontier Province, 1911, Vol II, H. A. Rose, p 31).

[2] BABAR JATT CLAN: Babbar is a Jatt clan in Dera Ghazi Khan- probably immigrants from the east or aboriginal- and in Bahawalpur. Babbar is said to be descedants of Raja Karan (See: Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North West Frontier Province, 1911, Vol II, H. A. Rose, p 31).

[3] JANJUHAN JATT CLAN: Janjuhan is a Mohammadan Jatt as well as Arain clan name. Janjuhan is also a descent of Raja Karan (Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North West Frontier Province, 1911, Vol II, H. A. Rose, read pp 31 and 356 together).

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JatHistory/message/1569

[4] WARAH/BARAH, BARAH/WARAH..JATT clans descended from RAJA KARAN. Name derived from Sanskritic: Varaha which means boar. This tribe is said to be in Jullunder to be Rajputs descendend from Raja Karan of the Mahabharat (See Website below; See also: Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North West Frontier Province, 1911, p 65, H. A. Rose")

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JatHistory/message/1012

[5] DHILLON, GORAYE/GORAYA JATS are descendents of RAJA KARAN! God Sun/Suraj had an illustrious son called Karana (refertence is obviously to Pandava’s elder brother, Karan/Kama ....a great charity giver) is stated by this tradition to have had four sons (1) Chattar Sain (2) Brikh Sain (3) Loh sain (4) Chandor Sain….. The Dhillon/Goraya Jats are described to be the descendents of this Loh sain, the above said son of Raja Karan. (See: Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North West Frontier Province, 1911, Vol II, p 237/238, H. A. Rose etc)

[6] THATHA/THATHIAL, NARU/NARWAHA JAT CLANS are descendents of RAJA KARAN! At another place of ROSE's GLOSSARY (p 467/468), the SAME legendary Raja Karan is stated to have fathered only two sons (1) Thathu (2) Naru…… and Glossary states...From Thathhu originated Thathal Jats/Rajputs and from Naru originated Narwaha gotras Jats/rajputs [Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North West Frontier Province, 1911, Vol III, pp 467/468, H. A. Rose).

[7] At another place in the same classic books (by the colonial British Writers), the KHARRAL Rajput/KHARRALl Jat clans are also stated to be the descendants of Raja Bhupa who, according to H. A. Rose, was a direct descendant of RAJA KARAN and was originally settled in Uch/Multan (See: Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North West Frontier Province, 1911, Vol II, p 496, H. A. Rose; Punjab Castes, 1974 Edition, p 131, Denzil Ibbetson).

[8] H. A. Rose writes: "The Multan tradition discloses that the LANGHAHS (LAHNGAS) are PUNWARS and are allied to the KHARRALS, HARRALS, BHUTTAS, AND THE LAKS "( See: Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North West Frontier Province, 1911, Vol II, p 496, fn; See also: Multan Gazetteer, 1902, p 138). All these are thje so-called Jatt/Rajput clans (though Langhas are also found among the Kambohs, and Bhuttas are predominantly Arains). Since they are all related to the KHARRALS, as seen above, hence they are also to be treated as the descendants of the same Raja Karan.

[9] BARIA/VARYA, WARAH a Rajput tribe, said in Jullundur, to be Solar Rajput, descended from Raja Karan of the Mahabharata (See: Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North West Frontier Province, 1911, p 65 by H.A. Rose).

[10] The KATHIAS of Ravi/Chenab Punjab also claim to be descendants of RAJA KARAN (See: Denzil Ibbetson , Punjab Castes, p 131; Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North West Frontier Province, 1911, Vol II, p 482 fn, H. A. Rose).

[11] H. A. Rose as well as Denzil Ibbetson note that "The Kathias claim to be PUNWAR Rajputs" (See: Denzil Ibbetson , Punjab Castes, p 130, Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North West Frontier Province, 1911, Vol II, p 482, H. A. Rose). This makes the PUNWARS who are related to the KATHIAS also the descendants of celebrated Raja Karan.

[12] The Kathias have TWO MAIN divisions viz. (1) The KATHIAS proper and (2) the BAGHELAS. Since Kathias are said to have descended from Raja Karan, and since the BAGHELAS are a section of the Kathias, hence by corollary, the BAGHELA rajputs are also the descendants of the same Raja Karan.

[13] Further more, the BALWANA and the PAWAR are said to be other leading clans of the KATHIAS and hence as a consequence, are also the descendants of same Raja Karan (See: Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North West Frontier Province, 1911, Vol II, pp 48, H. A. Rose; Punjab Castes, 1974, p 131, Denzil Ibbetson).

In nutshell, the the KATHIAS/KATHIS, BAGHELAS, BALWANAS and PAWARS are all the descendants of same celebrated Raja Karan.

[14] RAJPUT SECTIONS of KATHIAWAR also claim to be descendants of the same RAJA KARAN.(See: Denzil Ibbetson , Punjab Castes, p 131; See also: Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North West Frontier Province, 1911, Vol II, p 483, H. A. Rose)

(15] What is more funny/interesting, the Kamboj tribe is said to have originated from the same legendary RAJA KARAN (of Mahabharata?). (See numerous refs: Glossary of Tribes & Castes by H. Rose p 443-445; Also read: "Kamboh" in Panjab Castes by Denzil Ibbetson , pp 149/150; REPORT ON THE REVISED LAND REVENUE SETTLEMENT OF THE MONTGOMERY DISTRICT IN ..., 1878, p 50, C. A. Roe and W. E. Purser; Gazetteer of the Montgomery District (Sahiwal), 1883-84, Edition 1990, p 68, Punjab (Pakistan), Punjab (Pakistan - Sahiwal District (Pakistan); The Tribes and Castes of the North-western Provinces and Oudh, 1896, p 206, William Crooke - Ethnology; Folklore of the Punjab, 1971, p 8, Sohindara Siṅgha Waṇajārā Bedī - Folklore; Bibliotheca Indica, 1949, p 388, Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal, Asiatick Society (Calcutta, India); Punjabi Musalmans, 1991, p 89, J. M. Wikeley - Ethnology; ʻAin-i-Akbari of Abul Fazl-i-ʻAllami , 1948, p 388, Abū al-Faz̤l ibn Mubārak, Jadunath Sarkar; The Historical Background of Pakistan and Its People, 1973, p 128; An Observation: Perspective of Pakistan, 1987, p 100, Ahmed Abdulla; Punjab, the Land of Beauty, Love, and Mysticism, 1992, p 211, Syed Abdul Quddus - Punjab (India); See also: Kamboj Itihaas, p 7, 1972, H. S. Thind). And the learned and very knowledgeable Mirasees of the Kambojs of Panjab also flatter the Kamboj population by stating that their ancestor, RAJA KARAN, was a great charity-giver and used to donate 50 ser (40 kg) of gold to the poors every day, before taking his breakfast!!!!!!!.

[16] The Kakezai caste claim origin from Afghans and alos cliam as descendents of Kakka, son of (RAJA) KARAN. (Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North West Frontier Province, 1911, Vol II, p 355, H. A. Rose)

[17] According to Punjab Gazetteer, the Arains Caste of Pakistan (which is numbering about 70 milliosn?) are said to be descendants of /related to RAJA KARAN! This is because Rai Chajju (i.e. RAI JAJ OF Mr W. E. PURSER, H. A. ROSE & WILLIAM CROOKE etc), the ancestor of most of the Arains, was a relative of RAJA KARAN as the very scholarly writers like Ahmed Abdulla or Syed Abdul Quddus declare (See: The Historical Background of Pakistan and Its People, 1973, p 128; An Observation: Perspective of Pakistan, 1987, p 100, Ahmed Abdulla; Punjab, the Land of Beauty, Love, and Mysticism, 1992, p 211, Syed Abdul Quddus - Punjab (India)).

[18] Bhutta (Bhutto) clan of the Arains of Jalandhar Tehsil stated that they were descendants of Raja Bhutta, fifth in descent from Raja Karan, and were settled originally in Uch (Refs: North Indian Notes and Queries, 1896, p 64; ˜The tribes and castes of the north-western provinces and Oudh in four..., 1999, p 206, William Crooke; North Indian Notes and Queries, 1896, p 64, Mythology, Hindu; Jalandhar Settlement Report, p 82, sqq ; Cf: ˜The œtribes and castes of the north-western provinces and Oudh…, 1999 edition, p 206, William Crooke; See also: North Indian Notes and Queries, 1896, p 64, Hindu Mythology; A Glossary of the Tribes & Castes of the Punjab & North-west Frontier Province, 1911, Vol II, p 15, H. A. Rose etc). The Buttas, along with Harrals, Punwars, Laks, as seen above are also the sections of Kharrals (Multan Gazetteer, 1902, p 138)

[19] The Bhuttas/Bhuttos (a clan of the Jatts & Rajputs) would similarily be the descendants of the legendary RAJA KARAN, since Bhutta/Bhutto is merely a clan name and is shared by Arains, Rajputs and the Jatts. Since clan names are always a fixed parameter whereas tribe or caste may change, hence the Bhuttas/Bhuttos found among the Arains , Rajputs and the Jatts come of the same original stock and hence all must be descendants of same Raja Karan.

[20] The Story does not end here!!!. One only needs to go through each & every page of these Bibles of the Punjab Castes written by these great British Gazetteers of 19th/20th c AD to fully learn as to how many more of the Panjab tribes/clans can be said to have descended from the (KAMBOJ) RAJA KARAN....Probably the list would be endless!!

BTW: If RAJA KARAN was indeed the ancestor of the Kamboh/Kamboj tribe (and also of the ARAINS, as these colonial era Bible books want us to believe, and which many modern half-baked scholars like Mr Ahmed Abdulla, Syed Abdul Quddus and their ilk also thoughtlessly continue to promote and repeat on every page, here and there), then, this RAJA KARAN, definitely can't be the Pandava brother RAJA KARNA who had fought in Mahabharata war. This is because the Kambojs/Kambohs, WHO ARE OTHERWISE SAID TO BE HIS SUPPOSED DESCENDANTS, were already existing in millions at the time of this KAURAVA/PANDAVA RAJA KARAN, and had participated in the Mahabharata war with full division (Akshauhin) army of the the wrathful warriors which besides the Kambojas, also included the Shakas, Yavans, Tukharas and the Khasass. And very interestingly, in the same Kurukshetra war, the legendary RAJA KARAN had also participated on behalf of the Kauravas.

See: Kurukshetra War and the Kambojas.

Furthermore, if this legendary RAJA KARAN was indeed a Kamboj/Kamboh, then how come so many non-Kamboj clans like the Jat/Rajput clans (DHILLON, GORAYA, THATHIAL, KHAKH, VARYA, BRAH, BARIA, WARAH, NARU, NARWAHA, KATHIS, KAKEZAI, KHARRALS, PAWARS, LAKS, HARRALS, THE RAJPUTS (OF SURASHTER/KATHIAWAD), THE BHUTTOS/BHUTTAS and the KATHIAS OF RAVI/CHENAB etc) could also be the descedants of the same (KAMBOJ) RAJA KARAN, unless these JATTS/RAJPUTS/KATHAS/BHUTTOS/KATHIS/KHARRALS/PUNWARS/BAGHELAS/BALWANAS/PAWARS etc along with the ARAINS, were ALL ORIGINALLY FROM the Kamboj/Kamboh race?. If this is accepted, (which has to be accepted if the colonial Pursers, Wilsons, Roses and Ibbetsons etc are to be believed), then all these DHILLON, GORAYA, THATHIAL, KHAKH, VARYA, BRAH, BARIA, WARAH, NARU, KHARRAL, HARRAL, BABBAR, LAK, PAWAR, JANJUHAN, NARWAHA, KATHIS, KAKEZAI, ALL RAJPUTS OF SURASHTER/KATHIAWAD, THE BHUTTOS/BHUTTAS, PUNWARS, BAGHLESA, BALWANAS, and, of course, the ARAINS must be accepted, without any hitch or hindrance, purely as a Kamboh/Kamboja breed-- the modern representatives of the famed ancient Kshatriyas of Mahabharata fame, known as the Kambojas, who are also said to be the forefathers of the modern Kamboj/Kamboh communty of Punjab/North-eastern Afghanistan. (DOES THIS MAKE SENSE TO THE NAIVE READERS WHO BELIEVE IN THE LEGENDARY RAJA KARAN??????).

The Kambojs/Gandhars are one of the earliest and very ancient known Indo=Iranic tribes of north-west (now Indian Punjab and Pakistan). The Jatts, Rajputs, Arains, Kharals, Khokhars, Awans etc are merely the caste names and are only a phenomenon which occured much later in time on the Indian soil. All these occupational (Caste) names must be assumed to have been derived/evolved from the diverse ethnics of the Kambojas, Sakas, Pahlavas, Yavanas, Paradas, Kushanas, Hunas, Gurjaras etc. Since all the above mentioned ancient tribes, (NOTE: A minuscule population of the Kamboj, Kathis and Gujjar tribes, are still maintaining their ancient Tribal Identity), have already completely lost their original tribal Identity and therefore, have shifted from the TRIBAL DOMAIN into the CASTE-DOMAIN, it logically follows therefore that the Jatts, the Arains, the Rajputs and numerous other Indo-Iranic castes of the modern north-west regions, must have all evolved/derived from the above referred to ancient tribes of the Kambojas, Kambojas, Pahlavas, Paradas, Yavanas, Risikas/Yuechis, Hunas, and Gurjaras of the antiquity etc. Of course, many of the above said tribes were allied/cognate tribes, as some ancient references reveal. There could be no other explaination possible.

See Raja Karan: Raja Karan

MORAL OF THE STORY

One should not put too much confidence and trust on these PURSERS, IBETTSONS, ROSES AND THE LIKES....the British Designed Gazetteers of the nineteenth century. British Raj had its own motivations and Ajenda. These writers, sure enough, compiled and recorded more of the fictions, myths and nonsense as relayed to them by the Punajb Miraasis/Bhatts and are therefore, are more of MYTHICAL than historical value.

Satbir Singh ( talk) 03:18, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

There are several hypothesis on the origin of JANJUAS:

Traditional Accounts:

Swayambhuva Manu had three sons and one daughter Ella. Ella was married to Buddha and from this unions was born Pururavas Aila. From him was born Ayu who had a son Nahusha whi in turn had sons Yati and Yayati. From Yayati were born five sons viz.: Yadu, Turvas, Druhyu, Anu and Puru. Anu gave rise to Anavas which included Ushinaras, Madras, Kekayas tribes. Kauravas/Pandavas descended from Puru, Yadavas from Yadu, Yavanas from Turvasa , Kambojas/Gandhara from Druhyu (while another view makes Kambojas and Gandharas, Angas/Vangas as the descendents of Anu/Anava).

1. Yaduvamshi (Chandra Vamsi origin) of Janjuas: One account is that Janjuas are descended from Yadhuvamsi Rajputs, Yadu or Yadava stock (Sir Lepel Griffin; Ibbetson, Punajb Castes p 113). Abu Fazal, author of Aina-i-Akbari, also makes the Janjuaas a branch of the Yadus stock (Ibbetson, op cit p 113).

2. Anu/Anava Origin of Janjuas: According to General Cunningham, the Janjuas are Aryanas and are descendents of Anu, Anava tribe, lineage of Anu, son of Yayati and grand son of Nahusha. This lineage belongs to the lunar lineage of Aryanas. Cunnuigham also derives Awans from Anu/Anabvas and connect them with Janjuas.

3. Rathod Origin (Suryavamsi origin) of Janjuas: Ibbestson writes: The Janjuas themselves say that they are descendents of Raja Mal Rathod who migrated at about 980 from Jodhpur or Kanauj to Jahlam and built Malot (Ibbetson, Punjab Castes, p 113). The Janjua geneologies show a striking uniformity in only giving from 18 to 23 geneartions since the time of Raja Mal. One of his son is said to have been called Jud, (the old name of Salt Range) and according to Mr Brandreth, only the descendents of Jud’s brother are called Janjuas. As stated above, according to Cunningham, Awans are related to Janjuas and descendeed from this Jud.

4. General A. Cunningham also identifies Janjuhas or Januhas with ancient republican people called Yaudeheyas (Latter Indo- Scythians, p 98). Dr Buddha Prakash also accepts that the a section of Yaudheyas spread into west Punjab and are the modern Janjuahas living in the district of Potowar between Jhellum and Indus (Evolution of Heroic Tradtions in ancient Punjab, 1971, p 109, Dr Buddha Prakash).

5. Kaurava/Pandava Origin of Janjuas: Now the latest view is that the Janjuas have descended from Janamejaya, grand son of Arjuna and thus they cliam to be of Paurava/Kauravas/Pandava lineage. It appears that the name Janmejaya is being connected to Janjua on phonetical grounds which linguistically is impossible exceopt for a folk etymolgy. No valid evidence is presented to claim this lineage.

The above numerous hypothesesis seems to becloud rather than ellucidating the true origin of Janjuas. The hypotheses as presented above make the Janjuas either YADAVAS or the ANAVAS or of PAURAVAS/KAURAVAS/PANDAVAS lineage.

6. Another account which has the support from Abu Fazal makes the Janjuas as havindg descended from Yavanasva, one from the lineage of Ikshvaku kings. This is because the Rathods of Jodhpur/Kanauj claims to belong to the Solar/Ikshvaku lineage (See: Tod in Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan, Vol II, Appendage Table I, also see p 2). But James Tod rejects this Ikshvaku connections of Rathods and makes them as the descendents of Yavanaswa, whom Tod connects with the Ashvakas/Assakenois/Asii tribe of Swat/Kabol valley (See Tod, Vol II, p 2). But now according to numerous modern scholars, the Aswaka/Asvakas/Asii/Assakenois/Aspasios are none else than Kambojas (See Ashvakas). Some people write that Kambojas, Gandharas, Sauviras, Sindhus, Angas and Kalingas are also Anavas and descended from Anu [8]. But according Dr J. L. Kamboj, the Kambojas and Gandharas were descendents of Druhyu, the third son of Yayati (Ancient Kamboja, People and the Country, 1981, p 23).

On Name Janjua:

1. One account is that when the descendents of Raja Mal Rathod converted to Islam, the caste-thread (Janju) was broken and the neo-converts were nicknamed as Janjuas (Thomson). Thus initially though an Al (septal name), it later got concretised into a a clan name. This kind of surname originis are very common in India.

2. According to General A. Cunningham, name Janjua evolved from Chach as Chach => Jaj => Janj => Janjua. Chach was a tract of land in Rawalpindi under the old kings of Waihind/Hund(Lahore) i.e Hindu Shahi rulers of Kabol/Kapishi/Peshawer/Jallabad and Taxila/Rawalpindi etc. Masudi says that the kings of Waihind/Hund bore the name Chach or Jaj (see: Punajb Castes, p 112, Ibbetson). Interstingly, Cunningham also relates the Janjuas to the Anu/Anavas (Chandravamsi line of Indo-Aryan kings: See above).

3. But according to their (Janjua’s) own accounts, the name of their tribe is derived from Janjua, the name of one of their ancestors who was 8 or 9 generations prior to Raja Mal. Thus Janjuas are eponymous descendents of some person named Janjua according to this narration (See: Glossary of Tribes, Vol II, p 355, fn, H. A. Rose). This theory seems valid as this is mostly the way many clans have got their names. The Kambojas are stated to have been eponymously named after Kamboja/Kambujiya, Kurus/Kauravas after Kuru ancestor, Gandharas after Gandhara, Purus/Pauravas after Puru, Yadadavs/Yadus after Yadu and so forth and so on.

Sze cavalry01 02:05, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Supersaiyn wrote:

"------I say this because the Shahis never called themselves Shahis (Note the Bara Kot inscriptions etc) and the title was used for other notable kings by the same originator i.e. Alberuni Saheb".

Sze:

Hi Supersaiyan

Whether the Sahis called them as such or not I have no clear information as yet with me. But there is another ancient text Rajatarangini, written in 12th century AD by Sanskrit scholar Kalhana which refers to the kings of Waihind and not only calls them as Shahis but also Kshatriyas. The book does not call thenm Rajput if Kshatriya is not same as Rajput or vice versa. Note that Rajatarangini has been regarded by many scholars as one of the most valuable and authentic sources for Indian history.

Following is the extract taken from Rajatrangini, Verse VIII, 3230, Translated by noted English scholar A. Stein.

Steins Translation of Verse VIII, 3230: "To this day, the appellation Shahi throws its lustre on a numberless host of Kshatriyas abroad who trace their origin to the (Shahi) family" (See for evidence quote in: Evolution of Heroic Traditions in ancient Punjab, 1971, p 147, Dr Buddha Prakash)

Thus the appellation Shahi did apply to the future Kshatriya representavives of the Shahis per evidence of Kalhana. Since Shahi/Sahi clan name is found among the Kambojas also, this means that those from the Shahi Kamboj clan name are the most likely modern representaives of the Shahis of 8-10th centuries.

Sze cavalry01 18:19, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Apologies for late reply, work reasons permit little time at the moment.

I must say, you're knowledge seems quite good and infact may help me somewhat inm my own research, so on that point thank you for your contact :-)

If you dont mind, I will answer the points on this section as easier to keep up with the points so far, rather than answer the above (tedious reading etc);

1. Pandava Bhim throne issue - this was mentioned by Utbi at the time and although I myself cannot comment on it's veracity (as cant anyone) it was never the less mentioned. This is not my assertion but is recorded by Utbi in his text and was further included by Dr Andur Rehman of Peshawar University, Dept of archeology (the statement refercne on footnotes states, Unsuri p85 and Gardizi p180) and during Aandapala's time. Hence it was not during Bhimpalas time at all.

2. Shahi as a name - my point regarding this was not of the Kambojas but of the Shahis using the name Shahi (used by other foreign writers to describe the dynasties and not used by themselves as proven in the Bari Kot inscriptions) as a family name forever after their demise seems a little dubious as no other clan has ever done this, espcially one with much grudge against the foreign conquerors. This doesn't negate Kamboja Shahis using Shahi as a surname (from whatever origin they got it from) this distinction must be made here. What origin do the Kamboja provide for their name Shahi? - Prof Abdur Rehman states, "The term Hindu Sahi was in no way the official title of and was coined by Alberuni for the practical purpose of distinguishing the two dynasties" (Last two dynasties of the Sahis p89) This also supports the above Im afraid.

3. Raja Karan issue - you proved a point I have been raging on for ages about :-) I saw the same Kamboja reference in the Mahabharata and wondered at that point. But my point here was that the Kambohs themselves mentioned the Karan issue to the writers sources, which you ofcourse (as I expected) disagreed upon. It displays that one person's view of origin is neither neccesarily true or wrong either. You mention sources for the Janjua origins, most of which are from the same method and same writers! Origins are an elusive quest and many varied opinions (same tribe, but different regions, each have a different stories of origin) which is my point that localised influences affect a tribe's identity and what they deem important to them. Which brings me to my next issue;

4. Janjua issue - I am very glad that you could be of some use to me here (believe me I appreciate any and every help here!) Now, the local accounts of Janjua being Rathor, only appear during the colonial era. No reference from any text (500yrs or older infact) exists to record them as so. If there is, please let me know. - The point of them Latest Pandava theory is a very wrong assertion. Sir Lepel H Griffin recorded that they themselves refer to be of the "Pandus", as well citing the Rathor theory also. (which ofcourse is in direct contention as mentioned above, but mentioned none the less at the same time, denoting some confusion here, rather than clear concise accounts) Now here I provided you with a reference which, with due respect, I think you became somewhat confused with. The Mohyals are not saying that Janjua are from them or vice versa, they recorded that during their history, they served under Raja Mal of Raja Drupet and the father of the five branches. They held a very esteemed position in the royal family and hence recorded it over 800yrs ago. They did infact clarify that some Bali historians reckoned that Raja Mal was a Bali monarch, but clarified this could not be so as his father Drupet concluded he was the son of Janamejaya. (Note they recorded Rathor nowhere here) no by my estimation, being the oldest mention of origin by a well known Janjua (Raja Mal is a well known patri arch of the Janjua) by an independent well documented clan, I wuld cite this reference a little more credible than the 'theorised' Rathor connection. But if the proof were there, I am game. With due respect, I dont believe any clan can claim a valid proof of origin dating back many hundreds of years, it's scientifically impossible to prove. But a consistent account here is more plausible. Infact of all the sources mentioned (abu Fazl, 16th century - Cunningham, Ibbetson, 19th century), the oldest one is infact the Mohyal's record (of Raja Mal's father's lineage from Janamejaya) which was 800yrs back...centuries before even Abu Fazl! So how you purport this to be the latest with no evidence (despite even the page link given) is beyond my comprehension. But what you mention of the Ishvaku kings is a very interesting point, and I would like to explore that further somewhat with you if possible Sze:-) -But to clear up some misconceptions on this issue; Janjuas of Bhir are known as Janjua and Jodh's by Jud is wrong, because the Malik Hast and Raja Sangar Khan that met Babur (the source that the colonialists used) were in fact of the branch of Jodh and not Bhir, hence this is wrong from the outset by the colonialists theory. Well Sir LH Griffin himself (their contempory) asked the Janjua, he was told by them that they were Pandava and Chandravanshi in origin. So the consistency of this claim has continued since at least the 12th century.

-The Juan Juan theory is a also a very prominent theory (certainly recent and also quite scientifically sound). Dr Ahmad Hasan Dhani, famous archeologist and historian holds more water from a scientific cognitive point of view, than many fabled stories of epic sagas and descendants of Aryan or Indo-Iranian kings. Where is the proof that the assimilated Hunnic tribes show their lineage? There wont be any as most tribes (as stated and acknowledged by even Jawaharlal Nehru ji himself) that were converted were given lineages to ancient heroes and kingdoms. The chances of ANY of their descendants being alive today is extremely remote. What records are there to negate this? None. Yet the sources and claims you mention above are all from mythic and the one theory that may also stand equally if not more stronger has been left unmentioned.

-Regarding their name, Thompsons theory of the Janju breaking is not confirmed Janjua sources. Infact Sir Arthur Brandreth also didnt agree with this. The Janjuas own claim to belong to a Rai Janjua seems plausible but again, I am dubious to any claims without proof by any clan. Another theory is that the name is derived from the Juan Juan dynasty of the Steppes. Again, this is just as plausible as any and follows the same line of plausibility as mentioned by you above i.e. clan names becoming a progressed apical name from an apical originators name.

But then the issue of Janjua origin is not being questioned, the last Sahi origins are, hence my wonder at where this issue has gotten lost.

5. Kshatriya Masudi issue - from the text I have seen, it does not mention warrior kings or Kshatriyas, it simply states Rahbut (which is written in Arabic EXACTLY as Rajput save for ONE DOT, hence it has been equated by all scholars on the subject to be in fact Rajput. I did not state that Kambojas were not Kshatriyas in those times, so please let's be clear about that, lol. If Kalhana refers to them as Sahiputras this doesn't negate the Rajputra connection, as Masudi had already covered this point in his text, even if Kalhana was somewhat vague in his text 200yrs later. Are you saying that ALL kshatriyas are Rajputs? I would strogly disagree. Rajputs are known Kshatriyas, but not all Kshatriyas are Rajputs. By that logic, Ashoka Maurya would also be a Rajput? Can you advise which foreign historians wrote the word Kshatriyas and also intertwined it with Rajputs as the same thing? Rajput is a very specific word, to call ALL tribes by that seems too dubious a theory to conclude that when he called a tribe Rajputs he meant Kshatriyas, hence other non Rajput tribes.

6. Jayapala son of Haital/Satpal issue - it doesn't prove anything, save the fact that Jayapala was not Bhimpala's son. Alberuni did state that they were all from the same clan, but then he also didn't mention/confirm their actual parentage. Haital/Asatapal may have been a Mohyal, the possibility is no doubt there. But many scholars and researchers have had differing opinions on this, and no doubt many more will debate it no end. This is an open ended debate.

7. The Pala dynasties records confirming Kambojas/Gandharas rule - I am a little confused by this source. The First king of the Hindu Shahis, Kallar is believed to have come into control as a king in around approx 850, yet your reference speaks of a record of towards the end of this period. More likely to then refer to the initial Turk dynasty. Were the Kambojas also referred to as Turks by foreign sources? -You mentioned Lahore and Waihand as the same during your theorisation of this same Pala record i.e. (I quote) "the Kapisha/Kabol/Swat was the land of the ancient Kambojs, the Peshawer, Waihind (Lahore)". This is an error. Waihind was NOT Lahore at all. The term Waihind was written by Muslim historians for Udhabhand. This isn't surprising when one notes that Hsuan Tseng also referred to Udhabhanda/pura as Wu-to-kia-han-cha. This is generally widely acknowledged as the case. Lahore only became part of Sahi territory in the end of the 10th century (after Anandpala took it during his governorship under Jayapala's instruction) hence NOT during the 9th century where you connect the Pala record with the possible Kamboja territory.

-The fact that the Pala kings did not mention the Sahis, but only the tribes closer to them who they clashed with, doesn't negate that other tribes ruled elsewhere. Did he mention the Lawiks, Bhattis, the Gakhars/Kokhars who were huge tribes and also residents of the same areas? BTW Alberuni, Masudi etc did not mention the Palas at all either for that matter. Therefore, if such prominent tribes and ethnicities were not mentioned by an account, it doesn't mean they didnt exist. I do not feel this account proves any theory relating to Kamboj rule over Kabul at all. It is cited by numerous Arab chroniclers that the initial Sahis were Turks in many accounts at varying stages up to Kallar's rule.

-Huen Tsang's mention that the ruler of Kabul was a Kshatriya, states just that, his caste affiliation. Not his ethnicity. He is one source, who only states the ruler's status. However, many other historians referred to the kings as Turks (directly the actual ethnicity) this ofcourse negates Huen Tsang as a source confirming Kambojas as the initial Sahis.

-The fact that the Shahi contempory Alberuni distinguished that the Hindu Shahis of Kabul were initially "Turks" (exact word used) displays that this was common knowledge of the day, any reference to his contemporary Hindu Shahi Jayapala being from the same peoples has been undoubtedly quashed here by a unanimously agreed authentic source who btw referred to him belonging to the same clan as Kallar, a Brahmin.

Are you implying that the whole dynasty from Barhatikin to Bhimpala were all one and the same race/tribe/clan?

As stated earlier, there is NO PROOF whatsoever who the last Kabul Shahs were. I am convinced that the 1st were Turks (too many sources confirm, to simply negate this), the 2nd were Brahmin as Alberuni and others mentioned (Mohyals most likely who are a militant Brahmin clan confederacy) but the last is an open to all speculation. There will never be conclusive convincing unanimous proof for this last and probably most known branch.

It's late and I hope I have got to all your points mentioned, apologies if any left out, lol. If you could kindly leave me a message whenever you have posted here, I would be grateful Sze, helps me keep track :-)-- Raja 01:33, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Dear Raja/Supersaiyn

Let’s us not go in circles: Long story short:

On the issue of Rahbut:

“The country of Kandahar is called the country of Rahbut” (Masudi) 

And you assert that Jaipala (Janjua Rajput according to you) onwards was a different ruling lineage than the prior dynasty started by Kallar (which according to Aleberuni was Brahman); and which was still different from its predecessor dynasty which was Tibeten/Turk (again according to Alberuni).

Now let us stick to the above information/facts for the sake of argument.

Mark the following chronology on the Shahi rulers of Kabol/Gandhar/Waihind (By the way, Oraf Caroe identify Lahur/Lahore with Hund/Waihind and I had followed Oraf Caroe).

Shahi Rulers:

• Khingala of Kapisa (7th c.)
  
• Surendra of Gilgit (6-7th c.)
  
• Kallar (c. 890-895) of Kabul
  
• Kamaluka (895-921)
  
• Bhima (921-964), son of Kamaluka
  
• Jayapala (964-1001)
  
• Anandapala (1001-c.1010), son of Jayapala
  
• Trilochanapala (ruled c.1010-1021-22; assassinated by mutinous troops)
  
• Bhímapála (died in 1022-1026)
  

Few Comments:

(1) We know that Arab geographer Masudi was in India from 915-916 AD. During his times, the following Rajput rulers were ruling in western, North-western, northern and north-eastern India.

• Gohilas in Mewad
  
• Pramaras in Malwa
  
• Chamans/Chohans in Lata/Sakambri
  
• Chalukyas in part of Saurashtra
  
• Chapas in Junagad in Gujarat
  
• Pratiharas in Kanauj
  
• Chandelas in Bundelkhand
  
• Tuars /Tomars in Delhi/Hariana
  
• Rashtrakutas of Deccan
  
• Palas in Bengal
  

They mostly were all Rajputs of the later times except one or two.

But interestingly, Masudi has nowhere else used term Rahbut for any of these above numerous later-time Rajput rulers of the west, north and the eastern India. Neither has he used the term Kshatriya for any of these ruling clans. If Rajput was in indeed popular currency by Masudi's time, why has Masudi failed to mention even once the title Rahbut for any other of these numerous above-listed later-time well-known Rajput clans/dynasties of west/north/eastern India?. Interestingly, Masudi has used Bauura as a title for the sovereigns of Kanauj. Now the rulers of Kanauj at Masudi's times were indisputably the Prahtiharas. Now, dear Supersain Sahib, what would you identify Masudi’s 'Bauura with? (Pratihara?)

(2) Secondly, around (915/916 AD i.e Masudi’s times), even according to your article, the sovereign of Kabol/Gandhar/Waihind was Brahmin Shahi Kamaluka (895-921 AD); Surely he was contemporary of Masudi and was from Kallar’s lineage. It is obvious that Masudi (915-916 AD) in his geography is referring to the sovereignty/country of Kamaluka (and not of Jaipala/Anandapala etc) of Sind since Shahi Jaipala came in 964 AD, about 50 years after A. Masudi. Therefore, Masudi’s nomenclature Rahbut, sure does not refer to Jaipala/Anandapala etc (Janjua Rajputs according to you) but to Kamaluka's (895-921), the so-called Brahmin (or Brahmanical(?) lineage. Do you agree?

Now it is also an indisputable fact of history that the country/peoples for Shahi kingdom at this time obviously comprised Swat/Kapishi/Lamghan, Peshawweer, Waihind and Taxila (mostly, the well known Kamboja/Gandhara region and people). If this country/region has been termed as the land of Rahbut by A. Masudi (915/916), which at this time was ruled by Brahman dynasty as we have seen above, it automatically attests/proves that the term Rahbut of Masudi did not refer to Rajput since neither Kamaluka is Rajput nor the country and its people are Rajputs (if we follow your definition), though they were indeed Kshatriyas per Sanskrit texts (as well as per Rajatarangini). Do you agree?

(3) Kalhana’s evidence: As already stated, the following is the extract taken from Rajatrangini (author Kalhana), Verse VIII, 3230, Translated by noted English scholar A. Stein.

Steins Translation of Verse VIII, 3230: "To this day, the appellation Shahi throws its lustre on a numberless host of Kshatriyas abroad who trace their origin to the (Shahi) family" (See for evidence quote in: Evolution of Heroic Traditions in ancient Punjab, 1971, p 147, Dr Buddha Prakash)

In the above text, Kalhana obviously refers to the later-Shahis (i.e the -palas) whom he identifies as Kshatriyas and also calls them Shahis. By this time, Shahi may have defintely become an Al (septal name) and therefore, was carried forward by the families who traced them these rules. In due course the Al became clan name.

(4) Summary:

THerefore, as per above discussiuon/facts, it seems very clear that term Rahbut must have been used by Masudi collectively for the people of Kapisha/Lamghan/Swat/Nagarahar,Peshawer, Waihind/Taxila as a whole and either he had referred to them all as "Rajput" (if his Rahbut indeed is Rajput) or ELSE the term Rahbut has been used by him in some context other than Rajput, since the ruler of Gandhara (Kandhahara) at Masudi's times was a Brahmin (per Alberuni) or else Brahmanical follower, and the people of Gandhara kingdom were predominantly the ancient Kshatriyas of the Sanskrit texts (i.e Kambojas/Gandhara). And Rajatrangini (12th c AD) attests the rulers both as “Shahi” as well as Kshatriyas.

Now you can place your own views on record here, and let’s leave the rest of the stuff for latter discussion.

Thanks

Sze cavalry01 17:10, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Sze,

Im glad you took my advice about getting back to the main topic;

1. "what would you identify Masudi’s 'Bauura with?" - Baura was referred to by Masudi to indeed the Pratiharas of Kanauj (who we KNOW were in power). Looking at the context of the way he allayed this info (similar to the way he allayed the info of the Kandahar sovereigns) i.e.,"...the King of Kanauj, who is one of the kings of Sind, is Baura; this is a title common to all kings of Kanauj..." this indicates this as a tribal name rather than a class, a possibly gotra name of the ruling Gurjara branch of Kanauj possibly. He certainly didnt call this to any other dynasty. Rajput interchanged with Kshatriya- Again, please read what has been stated on this issue. Infact you have just proven my point. He never used Rajput for other tribes (who were Rajputs, this is possibly because he genuinely didn't know or venture that far into their class). My point to you (for the 2nd time) is that use of the word Rajput is very specific (it is clearly Rajput because the vowel 'dot' was missing, this is widely accepted too) why would he use such a specific word? I argue that Rajput wasn't a common word for arab historians to use for Kshatriyas. If it was Sze ji, then for the 2nd time prove it. Unless you allude that all Kshatriyas are Rajputs (which is wrong, but vice versa is correct) which brings me neatly to the second point and my related answer;

2. "Masudi’s nomenclature Rahbut, sure does not refer to Jaipala/Anandapala etc (Janjua Rajputs according to you) but to Kamaluka's (895-921), the so-called Brahmin (or Brahmanical(?) lineage. Do you agree?" - Interesting, but not quite Sze ji. With regards to the mention of the Kings of Kandahar, Masudi saheb has stated, "The King of Kandahar, who is one of the kings of Sind and it's mountains, is called Jahaj; this name is common to all sovereigns of that country.....Kandahar is called the country of the Rahbut/Rajput" -What is clear here is that NO he wasn't referring to the Pala's BUT the initial Brahmin Kallar dynasty. Infact Dr Abdur Rehman laboured on this topic also by stating that there was no reason, being a contemporary of Kamaluka and Bhim that none of these names were mentioned, IF he had known them. BUT the significant point here is "this name is common to all the sovereigns of that country" which if one understands the Baura issue, would conclude that Jahaj is the tribal name of the dominant sovereigns of that kingdom. Many took up tributary status to the Shahis throughout their overall kingdom and yet continued to be rulers of their states and minor kingdoms (nothing new here, this continued well into the sway of the Mughal empire). What is clear here is that the king of Kandahar was not a Jahaj but Kamaluka. Therefore it can be questioned who was the King of Kandahar called Jahaj? Is the country of the Shahis called Kandahar? That it ofcourse NO. But then he also says, Kandahar is known as the country of (by your definition Sze) the Rahbut/Rajput " which I believe is a legendary title i.e. the land of the of the Angles for UK Angleterre (in French) England denotes the land of it's most known inhabitants, NOT NECCESARILY of it's rulers (who incidentally in UK are of German descent, lol) This is what I believe happened here. -If taken by your definition of Rajput meaning Kshatriya, then the Mohyal rulers were just that, Kshatriyas, warriors who left their priestly occupation for military engagements. A well known fact. So in effect, your definition also strengthens the Mohyal argument through Masudi's Rajput/Kshatriya assertion, and hence answering a vehement 'yes' to your second question.

3. "Steins Translation of Verse VIII, 3230: "To this day, the appellation Shahi throws its lustre on a numberless host of Kshatriyas abroad who trace their origin to the (Shahi) family" - You still havent fully read my rebuttal to this issue Sze. I'll re input this here for you, Prof Abdur Rehman states, "The term Hindu Sahi was in no way the official name and was coined by Alberuni for the practical purpose of distinguishing the two dynasties" (Last two dynasties of the Sahis p89). Kalhana obviously using the same reference for distinguishing this particular dynasty, does in NO WAY constitute a solid basis for the Kamboja septal name theory.(Infact he being a reliable source etc DID NOT record their tribal name at all! Another proof of his using Sahi as a recognition of this dynasty and not their actual name) - "Kalhana obviously refers to the later-Shahis (i.e the -palas) whom he identifies as Kshatriyas and also calls them Shahis. By this time, Shahi may have defintely become an Al (septal name) and therefore, was carried forward by the families who traced them these rules. In due course the Al became clan name." - We also know that queen Didda of Kashmir was the daughter of Shahi Bhimdev, so intermarriage existed from this dynasty as well as the later Palas. How can we confirm that ONLY the Palas were subject to this statement? We clearly cannot Im afraid.

Chach name issue - This plain was occupied by the Gakhar/Kokhar tribe according to Ferishta, so the loose assertion of it being Kamboh territory and hence etc is somewhat defused here. Gakhars formed a very significant part of the Sahi army and were even mentioned by Ferishta as having a support of 30,000 strong soldiers in their aid. So a significant occupier indeed!

BTW, regarding the Waihind/Lahore issue, whatever the source, they are still not one and the same Sze. Caroe was unfortunately wrong here :-)

None of the above have in anyway made a convincing claim to the Kamboh being the Shahis Im afraid. This assertion was neither made to any colonial writers, who as we have seen recorded many views and even minor localised rumours/legends. -- Raja 18:55, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

(A) Kambojas/Gandharas were one race:

Ancient Sanskrit texts indicate that only Kambojans/Gandharans or their ethnics had occupied region between Hindukush and river Kabol (mostly Kamboja) south of Kabol and east of river Indus including Taxila (mostly Gandhara).

J. Fergusson quoting Wilber says that the people of Taxila belonged to Kambojan group. Author of Myth of Dogman, David Gordon White etc also take Gandharans to be same as the Kambojans. Gandhara was more of a cultural term where as Kamboja had assumed ethnic connotations. There are other scholars who also accept that the Kambojas and Gandharas were non-Indo-Aryan, a barbaric people, from an Irano-Scythic race.

Moreover, Abhisaras and Ursas were also an offshoot of the Kambojas and corresponded to modern Poonch, Naoshehra and Hazara Districts of Kashmir (1944, p 94, Narendra Krishna Sinha, Anil Chandra Banerjee; PHAI, 1996, p 216-18, 132-135, Raychaudhury, Banerjee). Other scholars giving their stamp of approval to this situation are D. C. Sircar, R. C. Majumdar, Dr D. R. Bhandarkar, Dr B. C. Law, K. D. Sethna and several others others. Mahabharaya attests the Rajapura (modern Rajaori) as the metropolitan of the Kambojas (Karana Rajapuram gatva Kamboja nirjitastavya: MBH 7.4.5), while Parama _Kamboja branch of Kambojas was living in Kumudadvipa (southern tip of Sakadvipa) in Transoxian territories (Dr Buddha Prakash, S Kirpal Singh etc).

These people inhabited these regions at least since epic times (MBH II.27.18-27; MBH 7/4/05 etc etc). There have been times when the Kamboja land implied/comprised both Gandhara and Kamboja people and at other times, the Gandhara land represented both the Gandharans and the Kambojans (There are many instances of this scenario) while at other times, they existed as individual entities.

(B) On the Demographics of Ancient Gandhara/Kamboja:

I have already given enough clues that the lands of Kabol valley/Kapishi/Lamghan, Kunar/Swat-Udhyana etc was earlier Paropamisadae (mostly ancient Kamboja) and of Peshawer/Charasada, Waihind/Taxila/Rawalpindi was mostly the ancient Gandhahara. The combined region was what the Shahis are known to have ruled and which has been termed Kandhahar by Masudi (while actually the common name was Gandhahr). This land is known to have been occupied by the Kambojan/Gandharan race even before the time of Herodotus. According to many noted scholars, the demographics and geographical situation of this region has imperceptibly changed since the times of Babur (1526) or since that of Al-Beruni (1015+ AD) or since the times of Ashoka (270 BCE) or even since the times of Herodotus (5th century BCE) !!!!!. It may have indeed happened that some clans from without may have come in the meantime and settled amongst the existing people or else in the land lying vacant around which they may have taken for settlement.

Maurya king Ashoka's edicts (XIII, V) attest only the Yonas, Kambojas and Gandharas (Yona-Kambojesu....; Yona-Kamboja-Gandharanam....), which people as per modern scholarship, were located as follow:

(1) Yonas in Archosia/Kandhahar.
(2) Kambojas mostly in Paropamisadae, but some in Rajori/Punch also.
(3) Gandharas in Charasadha, Jallabad (Nagarahar) Peshawer/Taxila.

Besides Yonas, Kambojas, Gandharas, the edicts also attest the Nabhakas, the Nabhapamkits, the Bhojas, the Pitinikas, the Andhras and the Palida (Paradas?) etc. It may be noted that there is no reference to any other people including the Khokars/Jahaj/Janjuas/Sakas etc in the Ashokan inscriptions.

The demography of north-east Afghanistan/north-west Pakistan comprising mostly these mountainous valleys has not changed perceptibly over the long ages so that the current occupants of Trans- and Cis-Kabol river regions as well as the regions to west of Indus at least, to all intents and purposes, are considered to be the direct representatives of those who were in occupation of this area during Herodotean age or Ashokan age (See discussion: The Pathans, Olaf Caroe, pp 113, 17). This means that the modern representatives of the Kabol/Nagarahar/Jallabad, Lamghan, Kaffisrtan (Kaumoje/Camoje/Kamtoz/Kams), Koh-i-stan, Swat/Udhyana (Yusufzais), Chitral (Yashkuns) Peshawer (Afridis), Hund territories are, in all probababilty, the modern representavives of ancient Kambojas/Gandharas as many scholars conclude. As Mr Thomson himself has reported, the Janjua pedigrees do not run more than 20 generations and if each generation is taken 25 years, it can not go much beyond 1300 AD not much before the times of Mughal/Lodhi rules. And the traditionas narrated by several groups of the Janjuas themselves affirm this view of Mr Thomson, their claim of connections with the Pandavas notwithstanding.

That the Kambojas/Gandharas have been really the most important and dominant people in the north-west baring certain time-gaps is proved from the following evidences from Sanskrit texts and epigraphics. All of this ancient Sanskrit/Epigraphica evidence is mostly post-seventh century AD evidence and hence, most relevant to this topic.

(1) Markendeya Purana (edited 6th c AD) lists Sindhu, Sovira, Pahlavas, Kamboja, Gandharas, Yavanas, Kekayas, Madraka, Daradas, Sakas, Tusharas, Pahlavas, Kulinda, Turushakas, Kulutas, Kira, Tangana, Paradas, Chinas, Ramatha, Kantakara etc as important people of the Uttarapatha but no reference to any Jahaj/Chach/Khokhar people etc (See Kirfel’s List of Bhuvankosha countries of Puranic texts). Markendeya Purana also attests a branch of the Kambojas and Pahlavas was located in/near Gujarat/Sayrashtra/Maharashtra (Markendeya Purana, chapter 58)

(2) Kavyamimasa of Rajshekhar lists Sakas, Kekayas, Kambojas, Vanayuja, Bahlikas, Hunas, Pahlvas, Limpakas, Harahuras, Hansmarag, Ramathas, Karkantha, Huhuka, Sahuda, Barbara, Harhuva, etc (Raj Shekhar Chapter 17, Kavy Mimansa). Since Rajshekhar (880-920 AD) was contemporary with Shahi kingdom, he identifies in their region a country/people called Kambojas/Limpakas but no Chachs/Shahis orJahajs/Janjuas/Khokhars etc.

(3) Sikanda Purana (7th c AD) attests the existing dominant people of Uttarapatha and mentions kingdom of Jallandhar, Hariala (Hariana), Shivapur (Shorkot), Mulsthan (Multan/Sindh), Kamboja (Gandhara/Kamboja) and also attests that Kamboja kingdom commanded the greatest number of villages and cities among this list (See: History of Punjab, Vol I, p 40, Dr L. M. Joshi, Dr Fauja Siungh). There is no reference to Jahaj/Janjuas/ or Khokhars/Syals etc. Some of the information of Sikanda Purana information is also partially attested by 8th century Korean Hui Ch'ao who toured through northern India including the Ke-na-chi-tzu (Kanoj, middle India), Kashmir (Karkota Dynasty), Jallundhur (Tikina) etc.

(4) Brhatakatha Manjari of Kashmiri Pandit Kshmendra (11th AD) referring to 4th century scenario of Chandragupta II (Gupta Dynasty) again refers to numerous tribes of the Uttarapoatha like the Shakas, Mlechahas, Kambojas, Yavanas, Pahlavas, Hunan, Tusharas, Mlecchhas etc, but no reference to the Chach, Jahaj/Janjauas Khokhars etc etc. (Brhatkatha Manjri 10/1/285-86).

(5) Rajatrangini of Kalhana (11th c AD) refers to the later Shahis as Kshatriyas as well as by their Al (septal name) they got during their kingship. Rajatrangini mentions Lalitaditya’s (724-760 AD) war expeditions with the Kalingas, Gaudas, Karnatas, Konkanas, Dwarakas, and then in the north-west with the Kambojas, Tukharas, Bhauttas, Daradas, and then the Pragjyotishas (Assamese) and the Strirajyas (central Himalayas) etc. Again no mention of Jahajas/Janjauas/Khokharas etc.

(6) Even Brhat Samhita of Varahamihira (505-585 AD ) refers to Pahlavas, Kambojas, Sindu, Soviras, Saurashtra, Avaras (Patalas), Abhiras, (14/17-19) and Chinas, Kashmiras etc and many other clans but no reference to Chachs, Jahaj/Khokharas etc.

(7) Hiuen Tsang lists numerous kingdoms and people of Uttarapatha like Kaofeu (Kabol), Kapis, Lan-po (Lampak =Lampika =Lamgan), U-Chang-Na (Udyana), Po-Lu-Lo (Bolor), Ta-Ch'a-Shi-Lo (Takshashila), Sang-Ho-Pu-Lo (Simhapura), Wu-La-Shi (Urasha), Kia-Shi-Mi-Lo (Kashmir), Pun-Nu-Tso (Punach), Holo-shepulo (Rajapura = Rajori) etc. And he also mentions the Kiumito (which is identified with Sanskrit Kamboj). Also based on the characteristics and disposition of the people from the country of Lan-po (Lampak =Lampika =Lamgan) to Holo-shepulo (Rajapura = Rajori), and comparing it with the disposition and characteristics given by Bhuridatta Jataka (Jataka 5, 208) about Kambojas, Scholars like H. C. Raychaudhury, B. C. Law, R. C. Majumdar etc have identified the population of this region as the descendents of the frontier people-- the Kambojas/Gandharas who have been noted in Sanskrit literature mostly with barbarous habits (Political History of Ancient India, 1996, p 134). Here Hiuen Tsang does not refer to any Chach, Syal, Jahaj/Janjua/Khokhars etc in any form of their names? Can you present the evidence here?

(8)Mysore inscriptions of 1055 AD mention various countries and people of 11th century with whome the heroic traders of southern India were engaged in trading and makes mentions of north-west country of Kamboja and Persia. It also makes mention of horses and Lapis lazuli as important items of trade for which Kamboja was noted. The lists starts from southern India upwards and includes Chera, Cholas, Pandya, Malayea, Magadha, Kausala (Bihar), Saurashtra, Gauda (Bengal), Saurashtra, Lata (Gujarat), Kamboja and Parsa (Persia) (History of India, 2004, p 126, Herman Kulke, Dietman Rothermund).

(9) The itenarary of 8th century Shankara Acharya (born 682 AD) gives details of countries/people visited by him and converted from Buddhism to Brahmanism. He starts from eastern India and then goes through Avanti/Malawa, south-western Kambhoja ( =Saurashtra) Girnar, Dwaraka, Kanaka, Gurjara, Pushkara, Sindh, Gandhara/Purushapura, Bahlika (Balkh), Iran, Iraq and the on back journey to Kambojas (Swat/Kunar/Waihins), Daradas and then to Kashmir where he had great religious debate with the Budhists/Jaina monks. From Kashmir he went east to Assam, Gauda (Bihar/Bengal) etc. See Link: [ [9]]. Again no reference to Jahaj/Janjuas/Khokhars etc.

(10) 8th/9th century Pala king Dharama Pala (770- 810 AD) mentions Bhojas, Matsya (Jaepur/Jodhpur), Madras (Central Punjab), Kurus (Thaneswer/Kurukshetra), Yadu (Mathura and Dwaraka), Avanti (Malawa), Yavanas (Muslims of Multan/Sind), Gandhara (=Gandhara: Western Punjab and Kabol valleys: Here Kamboja is not specified which means Gandhara meant both the Gandhara & Kamboja), Kira (Kangra) etc (See: Hist & Culture of Indian People, Vol IV, p 46, Dr Majumda, Dr Pusalkar etc; Ancient India, 2002, Dr V. D. Mahajan).

(11) Again 9th century Pala king of Bengal leads his war expeditions against Pragjyotishas (Assam), then Utkalas, then he takes to Vindya kingdoms. Then the Hunas located north-east of Malwa (in south-east Punjab), then goes further to the Kambojas of Kabol/Kapshia. He does not fight with the Kambojas since no bombastic claim is made from which the scholars deduce that he may have visited Kabol valley in order to recruit Kamboja horses and special cavalry from the Kambojas/Gandhara (Here Gandhara is not mentioned which implies that by Kamboja, both the Gandhara and Kamboja was meant) (See: History and Culture of Indian People, Vol IV, p 50, Dr R. C. Majumdar, Dr A. D. Pusalkar). According toscholars, some chieftain of the Kamboja cavalry later seized political power in north-west Bengal when the Pala power grew week in Bengal/Behar following the successors of Devapala.

Comment: The above two pieces of evidences are from the contemporary inscriptions and hence are indisputable. In none of them there is any reference to Chachs/Jahajs/Janjuas/Khokhars or Syals etc.

(12) The Medieaval era Sanskrit text Shakati-Sagam Tantra carries a descritpion of Shataapanchas Desha (56 countries/tribes) of early medieval era and mentions people of Kurukshetra, Indraprastha, Pandava land (west of Indraprastha), Panchala (Panjab), Kamboja (located north of Panchala. Kamboja here also included Gandhara), extending as far as to Balhlika (Balkh) in the north and to Iran (Mlechcha country in the west). The Mahamlechcha is said to be located to the north–west of Bahlika (See: Shakati-Sagam Tantra , verse 24; See also: Pancala, Kamboja and Panu-Pandya, Journal of Ancient India history, Vol I, Part 2, 1967-68, pp 195-197, Dr D. C. Sircar Ancient kamboja, Peopleand the Country, 1981, p 134, Dr J. L. Kamboj). Like before, there is no reference to the Khokhars, Chachs, Jahaj/Janjuas etc.

(13) 11th century Muslim Geographer still attests a small Kamboja which shared borders with Badakshan. (References already quoted in previous write-ups). Again, no reference by Idiris to Chachs, Janjuas/Jahaj/Khokhars as far as I know.

(14) So forth and so on………………………………

Still many more similar references can be presented which attest the Kambojas/Gandharas in the same location as they always have been and with the same names, at least, as late as 11 th century AD. But unfortunately, there is no reference to the Chachs, Jahaj/JanjuasKhokhar in any of these Sanskrit texts.

It must be remembered that notwithstanding what others claim, the term Jahaj of Masudi is none else than the Shahi Chach. Chach was also a region located east of Indus, exactly opposite to Waihind. The Kallar Shahi Dynasty i.e -palas Shahis--- are stated to have given this name to this region. They were probably also called Chach, which apparently is the "Jahaj" of A. Masudi. (Sir Denzil Ibbetson also connects Masudi's Jahaj/Jaj with Chach, the tract of land in Rawalpindi with which the Shahi Kings were connected. See Puanjab Castes, 1974 Edition, p 113). It sure has nothing to do with name Janjua since the Dynasty at the time of Masudi was Brahman dyanasty and it was, in all probability a Kamboj dynasty since the Kambojas are known to have had both Kshatriya and Brahmanical lineages (Refer to the detailed evidence already presented in earlier postings). Moreover, the land of action is exactly the usual Kamboja/Gandhara land where only the Kambojan/Gandharan race is supposed to have been a most prominent and dominant people. General A. Cunningham’s views expressed in “India Archaological Survey Report” ( 1872-73) (p 82-63) are very amusing/humerous and are now sure outdated. A. Cunnugham also interestingly concluded that Spalapati Deva (title of Brahminist Kallar) means Syalapati Deva which, he says, means: Lord of the Syal Rajputs (!) and therefore connects the Brahman king Kallar to the Syal Rajput tribe!. No wonder, in a similar manner, he also takes Rahbut as Rajput but without any valid reason. Earlier to him, Sir H. M. Elliot had understandably expressed his doubts on the Rahbut being same as Rajput (History of India as told by Its own Historinas, The Mohammadan Period, Vol I, p 22).

As erklier pointed out, linguistically “Jahaj” can be easily derived from “Chach” and indeed the Jahaj of Masudi probably implies Chach and not Janjua. The Jahaj = Janjua connection is unmaintanable. As already seen, Chach was the septal name of the Brahmin rulers at the time of A. Masudi. The Kallar Shahi Dynasty gave this name to the region east of Ohind across river Indus. Name Chach can linguistically change to Jaj (Masudi’s Jahaj) which indeed is also the Kamboj and Jatt surname. It appears to have been derived from Chach and the evolultion perfectly complies with the laws of linguistics. Further, the cluster –pala attached to Jai-pala (964-1002), Anada-pala (1002-1014), Tirlochan-pala (1014-1021and Bhima-pala (1021-1026) etc is in perfect agreement with similar -pala cluster followed after the names of Kamboja rulers of Bengal (Rajya-pala, Naya-pala, Naraiyana-pala, Dharama-pala etc) who were also the very contemporary of the -Pala Shahi Dynasty of Gandhahar (=Kandhahar of Masudi). The Pala Kambojas of Bengal are said to have gone from North-west Kamboja as special cavalry accomapanied by influential kamboja chieftains (H. C. Ray, Dr R. C. Majumdar, Dr N. G. Majumdar, Dr H. C. Raychaudhury etc) who later had seized power in about 950 AD when the Pala dynasty of Bengal grew week. IAlso i is important that one compares the -pala of the Bangal Kamboja rulers with the -pala in thenames of Jaipala, Anada-pala, Tirlochan-pala etc of the Shahi dynasty (964-1002 AD) of Kabol?gandhar.

On Rahbut vs Rajput:

It is ite unconvincing and unmaintanable to say that by misplacement of dots (.), the original name Rajput erroneously got wriiten as Rahbut by Masudi. One can similarily argue that Kanoj of Masudi is a mistake for Sanskrit Kamboj since by mere misplacement of dot (.), in Perian/Urdu language, the Sanskrit Kamboj can also change to Kanoj!.

Your argument that the Rahbut of Masudi was applied to the dominant people of the land even though its ruler was a Brahmin is also erroneous and unmaintainable unless you take the dominant people as the Gandharans/Kambojas themselves since they have indeed been the dominant people in Kabol, Nagararhar, Kunar, Swat, Peshawer, Udhyana, Waihind valleys since ages (and still are). This is amply attested/verified by the numerous post-Christian references which I have presented above which strongly attest Kambojas/Gandharas in this region (as late as 12th c AD) but ABSOLUTELY NO SANSKRIT ATTESTATION for names like Jahaj/Janjauas/Khokhars, unless the Janjuas/Khokhars are also taken to be later-time representative of the Kambojas/Gandharas themselves. The latter view may seem a strong probability in view of numerous Sanskrit evidence presented above; but then Janjuas own colonial-era traditions assert that they had migrated to this region from outside probably 600-700 years ago).

Comment: My guess-shot is that the Janjuas may have been a section from the Juan-Juan tribe of Central Asia. Or may be from the Yavana (also spelt as Javana) of Sanskrit texts. But not very sure.

Notable that I have also presented epic evidence which attests that Rajori/Punch and Hazara regions were the domain of Kambojas during epic times and since no appreciable displacement of population is said to have occurred over the ages as scholars maintain, though new population may have come and got absorbed into the dominant one after accepting their mastery and protection, hence it can be concluded that the modern population of Rajori/Punch/Hazara may have partially descended from ancient Kambojas/Gandharas.

Colonial era British literature on People/history of Punjab/India was definetly biased and one-sided.

Most of it is outdated and erroneous. I have shown the typical case of Raja Karan. Similar is the case of Raja Risalu/Salbahan and there are many different candidates who, like raja Karan, claim Risalu/Salbah lineage. All this is pure BS. There were so numerous distortions/inventions and fabrications of traditions at the time the British took ethnical survey of the people of Panjab. Most of those tradtions are ridiculous and unscientific and unmaintainable in view of later scientific investigations. Hence, we must say good-by to the distorted information on Punjab Ethnography as culled and presented by Briritish Imperialists, which was also designed to serve their imperialistic aims and divisive policies.

If Kambojas did not file a claim for Shahi connectiuons at the time of Census or Ethnical survey, this does not rule out that they don’t have any claims. Also if the British writers or for that matter some non-british writers have not touched this aspect of Kamboja history, still it does not nulify the Kamboja claims on the –pala Shahis. Everyday, new information is being discovred and old opinions and views are being replaced with new ones. I have presented enough factual information from the ancient Sanskrit texts and contemporary epigraphy which makes the Kamboj claim on Pala Shahi as strong, if not more, as somebody else has. With above material, it has been shown/proven that these ancient Sanskrit texts/epigraphies don’t, at all, attest the Jahaj/Janjua claim to Shahi lineage more than they attest the Kamboj claim to the same. In all probability, the -pala Shahis (descendents of Kallar) appear to have come from the Kamboja/Gandhara Kshatriya/Brahmina lineage. This is a fact of history which one must accept with open mind, sooner the better, in view of the over-whelming circumstantial evidence presented above. This is because all so-called claimants to Shahi lineage have only circumstantial and specuative evidence to offer so-far.

NOTE: Frishta belonged to seventeenth century AD and thus much displaced in time from the time frame we are discussing. In this long time gap, some new clans may have come into existence from the old ones or else some may have migrated from without and settled in the empty lands unoccupied by the existing dominat tribes. Frishta accounts, like all other non-Indian accounts, do not represent the people by their traditional ethnic names per Sanskrit accounts. Hence one has also to find a correlation between his accounts and the dominant Traditional Sanskrit accounts

Regards Sze cavalry01 04:17, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Modern Kamboj/kamboh of Punjab:

In 7th and later 10/11th c AD, the Arabs and Turks forced the Kamboj/Gandhar people to convert to Islam when several who were under Buddhist impression converted to Islam and thus stayed-put where their ancestors had been since the times immemorial. Thus many scholars have stated that the Swatis, Yusafzais (from Aspasios), Aspins (from Aspa =horse), Ashkuns, (from Ashvakayan), Afridis (cf: Afrikes-was the name of one brother of Assakenos--a Kamboja chieftain of Massaga--See Political History of ancient India, pp 133, 216-17), Kamoje/Caumoje/Kamtoz (cf Sanskrit Kamboja)etc may have descended from ancient Kambojas/Gandharas. Consequently after islamisation, they also lost touch with their ancient Kamboja/Gandhara heritage as well as names.

But many those who followed Brahmanical way did resist and were therefore put to sword; and some escaped to Punajb/India. The modern Kamboh/Kamboj of Punjab are the ones who are believed to have fled, in wake of Arab/Turk coercions, to avoid islamisation around 7th & 9th/11th c AD and still later. Many of these Hindu Kambojs of Punjab were, however, later also converted to Islam by persuasive methods, rather than coercion by Missioneries like Baba Farid and others. Quite a numbers of the "runaways" who had embraced Islam joined the services of Lodhis/Pathans/Mughals and rose to fame and power, but the community had principally got disintegrated in the light of the above scanerio. See Kamboj in Muslim and British Era.

Many of the remaining ones embraced Sikhism in the last few centuries and about 30% now still exist as Hindus.

Sze cavalry01 04:17, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Your last claim is quite strange Sze, as The Panjab Castes (2002, p201) actually states that 40per cent as Hindu and only 23 per cent as Sikh. So unless you are talking of a later survey/census etc.

The latest statistical Figures on distribution of Kamboj poipulation on religious basis are as under:

Sikh Kamboj = 32.5% Muslim Kamboj = 43% Hindu Kamboj = 24 Jain/Buddhist and others =1% Sze cavalry01 23:42, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

The sources you have claimed are all epic, YES, very very old, yet not one is recent enough to warrant proof that the people called Kamboj were actually rulers at any spot. Infact anyone from Gandhara is now a Kamboj? Thats a very erroneous claim (for obvious reasons), and the only recent source you mention is from a Bengal state from the other side of India, which should have referred to the ruling Turk dynasty of Kandahar at the time, but clearly didn't. Kambojas may have been Gandhara inhabitants, but doesn't necessarily equate them all Gandharas to have been Kambojas at all Im afraid. Thats taking things a bit too far I think, lol.

The Gakhar issue is quite interesting, in that Alberuni mentioned them himself in explicit terms somewhat, from a first hand experience, yet you dismiss this?! It does appear you are trying your best to make this work, but not even a local rumour or legend of this has been recorded in ANY text of them being Shahis. Thats a fact. Until 1980 that is.

I've stated from day one, that one can only speculate the Palas as there is no definitive proof, although the Brahmin claim is supported by Alberuni himself. Just because someone is called, is that now also equated to Ghandara and then to Kamboja? Do you actually allege that the Kamboh were so powerful since the 12th century BC, that they were the only dominant force in that region throughout this entire period despite other tribes rising, Scythian, Greek, Kushan Hunnic invasions and all? What happened to them suddenly that they lost this hugely significant power? Why did it reach a low that even Babur didnt mention them significantly as a tribe at all? Why were they deemed a Pastoral and Agricultural class (save a house or two from Mughal services)? Please, if this were possible, then their power and influence in the region would have been very significant into the Mughal invasion period too, clearly, something which didnt happen (not the few personalities, but their own extensive kingdoms). If their status in the NWFP was really as strong as you suggest (legendary and ruling for millenias) then many local proverbs would also attest this. Page 201-202 of Panjab castes clearly dont.

The information you gave appreciably is strong for THOSE ERAS but how can you state/substantiate a claim from centuries, to BC periods as a strong claim to a much more recent 10th century dynasty? This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, considering the Lawiks were the border power against Ghazna and notthe Gandharas. By your definition, anything Kamboj related (even by name) is Kamboh. According to Jawaharlal Nehru, Cambodia derived it's name froma a previous Kamboja settlement. Does that make them all Kambohs too? Please be realistic Sze, amusement is one thing, but clear fanciful speculation is another. The Peshawar university labouriously researched this topic in the 60's, 70's into the early 80's and not once was the name Kamboh's mentioned. How can you state "just because we weren't asked" as an excuse? Interestingly a branch of Gujars also claims descendancy from Jayapala and Anandpala and they have a source which recorded) this mention too (so it's not a recent internet revolution inspired claim, lol). The strange thing about this claim is that as YOU suggest that the british were biased etc (an excuse I have heard many a time even towards genuine information when it suits the conspiracy theorist) none I believe were more biased upon in western Punjab than the Gujjar. (re Panjab Castes) yet even in this respect they recorded this claim from a section of their community. Now please tell me, why was this claim not brought forward at the time, or indeed at any time, even by Kalhana? This isn't as easily dismissable to biased attitudes Im afraid (because in reality, the British appreciated Agriculturalists as a good source of income and even recorded a claim made by the Kamboh at THAT TIME of Raja Karan descent, and the Iranian origin theory...hence to have left such a recent and strong CV would have been a dubious/nonsensical thing).

Ultimately you can't equate Gandhara with Kamboj forever, especially seeing as other tribes and powers came into force, especially when it's more than evident that the Turks WERE the 1st Shahis of Gandhara. That alone proves that Kambojas were NOT always in power or the ruling elite of Gandhara in the Muslim historians works.

The Rajput issue, I dont believe you are even reading my answer but simply just putting forward your own point. Constructively answer my posed points (just as I answered yours) and we can move forward with this. -- Raja 16:09, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

The Gakharas are known to have existed in Saltrange at least, as early as the time of Mahmud Ghaznvi (1000+) or even earlier. They are thought to be of Iranian extractions. Some of the Gakhar claims seem to be similar to those of the Kambojs. Forinstance, both Gakharas and Kamboj/Kamboh claim to be linked to legendary Kaiyani/Kai dynasty of Persia. The Kais are referenced in Shah-i-nama of Firdausi. Scholars have linked the legendary Kai dynasty of Shah-i-nama with the Achaemenids of Persia. Modern scholars have also traced the Royal name Kambujiya (Cambyses of the Classical writings) with Kambojas of Sanskrit texts (Harvard scholar Dr Michael Witzel, Dr J Charpentier, Dr H. W Bailey, Dr A. A. Macdonell, A. B. Keath, W. Eilers, S Thione and numerous others; see also: La Valle Poussin, L'Inde aux temps des Maurya, p. 15 and 40). Hence, it is very probable that the Gakhars are an ancient people of this region and, in remote antiquity, may be connected with the Kambojas/Gandharas. And, linguistically, the name Khokar is also derivable from Ghakhar. So, is it possible that the Khokhars/Khokars are also Iraninas like the Gakharas and the Kambojas? It is also notable that Khokhar is also a Kamboj surname. Since the Kambojas are the most ancient tribal entity in north-west, still maintaining its ancient tribal identiry, it is therefore quite probale that the Khokhar/Ghakar of saltrange may have been an off-shot from the Kamboja/Gandhara tribe. Many of the Kamboj surnames are also found amongst many of the caste-names of Punjab/norhern India, thereby indicating that many of those caste surnames may have been an off-shot from Kambojas/Gandharas. Thus, in realality, a change may have occured from tribal domain to caste domain. It is also interesting to note that the earlier colonists of Ceylone are attested to have migrated from Simhapura in north-western India and Mahabharata (II.27.28), Chetya Jataka (Jataka Tr III, p275), and Chines pilgrim Hiuen Tsang (ref: Buddhist Records of the Western World, Vol I, pp 143 4ff, Samual Beal) all attest one Simhapura located in north-west and it has been fixed in upper Saltrange (History and Culture of Indian People, Classical Age, pp 111. 132, Dr Majumdar, Dr Pusalkar etc; Ancient India, 2002, Dr V. D. Mahajan etc). It is also pointed out that Lankan colonists had given the name Sinhala to the Island to commemorate their ancestral connections with Sinhapura. This has led to the probability that these colonists had migrated from the Sinhapura of the Saltrange in Gandhara/Kamboja region. It is no wonder that these eartliest known colonists of Sri Lanka were indeed the Kambojas (and Yonas) from north-west. The Kambojas are indeed attested as the predominant colonial group in ancient Sinhales Inscriptions. See for detail: Kamboja Colonists of Sri Lanka. This ancient evidence emphatically links the colonists of Sri Lanka i.e the Kambojas with Sinhapura of Saltrange, which fact is also affirmed by Mahabharata which calls Rajaori (ancient Rajapuram)/Punch as the metropolitan of the Kambojas (Karana Rajapuram gatva kamboja nirjitastyaya MBH 7/4.5 etc). If the Kambojas were in occupation/control of Rajaori/Punch, they may also have been, at least, in parts of Saltrange and this revelation may indeed connect the Gakhars with the ancient Kambojas which is also in agreement with Gakhars' claim that they are connected to Kai/Kaiyani lineage of Persia. Futher, if the surname Khokhar can be supposed to have been derived from Gakkhar (linguistically plausible), then the Khokhars may also likewise be linked to the Gandhara/Kamboja lineage. These are indeed possibilities. Who knows what is shrouded under the pal of antiquity. And we indeed may have very myopic vision of our past.

Regard

Sze cavalry01 18:05, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Supersaiyn, probaly you too don’t read my writeups thoroughly. Anyway, I will try to answer to some of your objections as under. BTW, the figures you have quoted about Hindu and Sikh Kambojs are over 100 years old. The Kamboj Sikhs are indeed a bit over 32% (~600000) of total Kamboj population indeed in India/Pakistan.

Supersaiyn:

If their (kambojas) status in the NWFP was really as strong as you suggest (legendary and ruling for millenias) then many local proverbs would also attest this. Page 201-202 of Panjab castes clearly dont.

Sze:

I have simply stressed them as have been living in the same habitats for all that long ages. This does not mean they have been continous administrators of their own destinly all that times. At one time they were independent and at the other, under the sway of the invaders from across the Oxus. But the demographic situation may not have materially changed (and has not perceptibly changed as per Olaf Caroe too).

Most the proverbs we have these days are not very ancient origin…They are from later mediaval age mostly. The Kambojs practically lost political clout after 11th c AD even in Bengal. The last creditable mention of Kamboj kingdom in north-west can be said to be by Idirisi which is related to early 11th c AD (1000+ AD). Old oral accounts can't last for ever (unless put to writings) since with time, the old order changes giving place to new and old things fade out of oral accounts. It is futile to expect that oral accounts of as early as 11th century or prior to it could still have survived among the local population (Kabol/Peshawer/Swat valley, which many scholars do think predominantly belong to ancient Kamboja/Gandhara extractions. So much so, even the name Kamboj has not survived after 11 th c in its original location as we can very well see. Indeed many isolated claims of the now disintegrated Kamboj nation do allude to this direction. Note that the modern day Kamboj population is a splinter tiny group and can't not be expected to embrace all its past.

And Page 201-202 of Panjab Castes is not a extract from a Bible or a Kuran. Numerous research has undergone in the meantime and new facts have been discovered or are being discovered. (1) Does page 201-2002 refer to any Kamboj connection with Bengal? (2) Or else any Kamboj connection with Gujarat/Saurashtra? (3) Or else does it refers to any Kamboj connection with Sri Lanka? (4) Or else does it refer to any Kamboj connection with Kambodia? If not, then how can one take the Panjab Caste page 201-202 as if it were something like Biblical truth that can't be changed or belied? Should one still regard Raja Karan traditions about Kamboj or other communities/clans of Punjab as if it were truthful. Or the claims of many clans of Punjab who all claim link with Raja Risalu or Raja Salbahn or Raja X or Raja Y or Raja Z etc etc?

Panjab Castes 201-202 had jotted down what was meagrely known of the Kamboj at that time. That was age of illiteracy amongst Kamboj. They were not as much enlightened about their history and past as amny other people probably were. This is the reason not much real information is known about them in these British Gazetteers. Much more realistic and useful information has been discovred now during past one 50 years. And much of the older stuff in the British Gazetteers has been found baseless.

Supersaiyn

and the only recent source you mention is from a Bengal state from the other side of India, which should have referred to the ruling Turk dynasty of Kandahar at the time, but clearly didn't.

Sze:

The fact that Pala references did not mention Turk Shahi dynasty means there was no Turk Shahi dynasty known as such there. It may have been a Kamboja kingdom and Devapala clearly attests it so. Also some people have mistaken the term Kator with Katorman and identify them as a Turkik people which may not be true. The Kators/Katirs/Katawer are also a major section of Siyaposh people who along with the Kams Syaposh had ruled Kunar/Kaffirstan/Swat/Udhyana at the time of Timur’s invasion (1400+) AD. Timur calls them as black-robed infidel Kators and identify them with Syaposhes whom the scholars identify with Kambojs. These people are stated to have been collecting tributes from the Muslims people living on the presincts of their territoies outside of the Kaffirstan/Kunar/Swat/Uddhyana regions. This means they were the real rulers. They are stated to have controlled numerous cities and villages per H. A. Rose.

Does the designation Kator in this latter case also imply that these Kators of Temur were the Turkik people?

Since the Kators were in control of Kapishi/Kafirstan and Kunar/Swat regions at the time of Temur, the ancestors of the same Kators may have been in power in Kapisha/Kabol prior to 870 AD (whom people mistakenly identify as Turk or Katorman) when Brahman Kallar seized the power from the last so-called Katorman ruler. It is also interesting that Huen Tsang calls the earlier ruler of this so-called Tukik dynasty as Kshatriya which reference, in all probability, sem to link them to more indigenised clan like the Kamboj lineage rather than Turkik. And Kambojas have been mentioned as Kshatriyas in ancient Indian texts also.

Note also that Kamboja rulers of Bengal have been designated as KAMBOJA-VAMSHA-TILAKA (i.e the honor of the Kamboja family or lineage) or KAMBOJANYAJENA etc. They were not merely Kambojas since they originally belonged to Kamboja but were Kambojas since they really belonged to the Kamboja ethnicity (VAMSHA). Further, since they also wore the last name –pala, which the Shahi Hindus of Gandhar/Kabol also wore (Jaipala, Anandapala, Bhimapala etc), it also lends creditbility to the view that the Pala Kambojas of Bengal and Pala Shahis of Gandhar/Kamboj may have been related somehow.

Supersaiyn:

The information you gave appreciably is strong for THOSE ERAS but how can you state/substantiate a claim from centuries, to BC periods as a strong claim to a much more recent 10th century dynasty?

Sze

There has not been material change in the ethnic composition in the remote mountainous fastnesses/valleys of north-east Afghanistan which regions in ancient times was Kamboj region. Hence, whatever ethnic composition obtained during the times of Herodotus was still the same in the time of Ashoka and almost same at the time of Aleberuni as well as Babur and is almost same to-date. This is what the scholars like Olaf Caroe also have to say (He gives very convincing reasons for it). Based on the above premise, though the name Kamboj has been lost now, the modern population of the former Gandhar/Kamboj region still, to a greater degree, represents the same people who had inhabited this region at the time of Ashoka and Herodotus.

Supersaiyn:

According to Jawaharlal Nehru, Cambodia derived it's name froma a previous Kamboja settlement. Does that make them all Kambohs too?

Sze:

Well in Cambodia, the Kamboj went as traders and then as colonists just like the sixteenth century Europeans came to India as colonists/traders. Kambojas were only a microscopic surfacial layer in Cambodia and took political control of the land and ultimately mixed with the elite locals and became their part. Yes, it is true that not all Cambodians are from Kamboj lineage, but all of them started to be called Kamboj since the Kamboj colonists gave their name to the land and its people. But for Gandhar/Kamboj of north-west, the situation is dissimiar. This land had been their ancient home-land since ages, where they were in dominant majority. Even migration and settlement of outsiders may not have made appreciable difference since many of the outsiders came, settled and ultimately got absorbed among the local population becoming a part of it. Here the outsiders did not give their name to the local regions/people but rather became their part. And overall demographicas did not change materlally and the ancient population remained still dominant.

• About Kamboj position in Kambodia, read : Kambojas and Kambodia

• About Kamboj colonists in Sri Lanka read: Kamboja Colonists of Sri Lanka

• For Kamboja in Gujarat/Saurashtra, read: [10].

• Also read: Migration of Kambojas

Supersaiyn

The Peshawar university labouriously researched this topic in the 60's, 70's into the early 80's and not once was the name Kamboh's mentioned.

Sze:

Not even did they mention the Kambojas too?

Then indeed the Peshawer University researcher Scholars need to be pitied for/sympathised with. Probably their definition of research has different scope and meaning than realistic research. have they been purblind to Ashoka’s edicts even?, or to the Epic, Puranas, and numerous 10 century Sanskrit texts.....to ancient Inscriptions of Ceylone and or of Bengladesh…?

Have a great day

Sze cavalry01 20:56, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Supersaiyn wrote:

"What happened to them (Kamboh) suddenly that they lost this hugely significant power? Why did it reach a low that even Babur didnt mention them significantly as a tribe at all? Why were they deemed a Pastoral and Agricultural class (save a house or two from Mughal services)? "

Sze:

Hi Supersaiyn, you seems to be indeed very ignorant and uninformed about the Kamboj nation and their history or may be you are saying so due to your latent prejudices if any about the Kamboj. No nation in the world has ever been at its zeninth...what is at the zeninth now will go down with time..like the rise and fall of the tidal waves. Do you know about the Law of Entroppy, Or else Murphy's Law? The higher you go, the more unstable you are and more likely to fall...since only the highs are prone to loose equilibrium position and with little wrong would come hurling down to their natural position of equlibrioum...common to all humanity in general. Does it matter if a section of the Kamboj became agriculturists in recent times. BUt even Kautaliya (4th c BCE) in his Arthashastra (11.1.1-4) attests the the Sanghas and Corporations of the Kamboja Kshatriyas lived not only by warfare but also by Agriculture and trade. So much so, Mahabharata also attests that the Kambojas were terrible warriors as well as also lived by Varata and were rich like a Kuber (God of riches) in wealth and terrible in fight like Yama, the God of Death (MBH 7.23.42). Brhaspati of Varahamihira (505 AD-585 AD) also attests that the Kamboj lived not only as Warriors (use of shasters) but also as agriculturists and traders (Brhat Samhita 5.35). Supersaiyn is it a crime or is it a low status to live by agriculture or as pastoralists? But since Kautiliya (4th c BCE) and Varamihira (6th c AD) both amply attest that the Kamboj nation lived chiefly by occupation of warfare/use of arms, this reference definely should put the Kamboj into the so-called Rajput occupation since Rajputs were so-called since they predominantly lived by warfare (Dr V. A. Smith). But once again, the Kambojas' ancient status as Kshatriyas (or Rajanyas) is more appealing to the Kamboj people than the recent occupational nomenclature like the Rajput (which term is also used in derogatory sense that the name Rajput was applied to the illegimate sons of from ruling princes). So this is why the Kamboj did not like this term and rather always prided in their ancient Kshatriya status. But strictly following Ibbettson's definition of Rajput, the Kamboj were both a Rajput as well as as Kshatriyas since they have been both rulers as well as Fighters/warrior nation. Can you or somebody else refute this historical fact??? WE CHALLENGE it. In 1810-20, Major Tod and other scholars of the age thought that Kambojs lived near Assam. Hence in the royal races of north/north-west, they did not include the Kamboj/Kambohs. Moreover, the real research about the Kamboj only started with the publication of research book titled "SOME KSHATRIYA TRIBES OF ANCIENT INDIA" , 1924, by Dr B. C. Law. Major Tod preceded B. C. Law by about 100 years. That was the misfortune for the Kamboj people. But as the new research reveals now, numerous old myths and misconceptions about the Kamboj are being blown over and many high-sounding glories showered on some other undersving tribes of north/north-west are being debunked mercelessly even though the people want to stick to the British era myths which are hard to die.

A HOUSE OR TWO IN MUGHAL SERVICES????

It was not one or two Kamboj family houses which outshone in Lodhi, Pathan & Mughal rules in India. There were countless Muslim as well as Hindu Kamboj all over northern India from Lahore (Sheikh Anaitula Khan Lahori, Mohammad Salih), Multan (Sheikh Samayudin, Hazarat Abdula Biabani, Shahbaz Khan, Ranbaz Khan, Sheikh Gadai, Sheikh Abdul Jalil, Ilham Alla ), Sirkap/Rawalpindi (Raja Bhim Singh Kamboj family), Khemkaran/Kasur (Raja Yadi Rai, Bidi Rai, Raja Dalpat Rai, Raja Sangatat Rai, Raja Roshan Rai family), Meerut (Nawab Dadan Khan, Sheikh Lalli, Nawab Muhabat Khan, Sheikh Nawab General Khair Andesh Khan Sani, Nawab General Khair Andesh Khan, Afit Andesh Khan etc), Sambhal (Nawab Itmadul-Malik, Prime Minister of Sher Shah Suri etc), Saharanpur, Oudh/Awadh, Atava, Rampur, Muradabad, Murshadabad, Muzaffarnagar, Marhara (Khwaja Hasan, Sir Taj-udin, Sir Ziauddin Ahmed etc), Amroh, Bijnore, Bareili, Kanpur, Gurgaon/Sohna and Nakodar too--- many of those were famous Generals/Manasabdars, some Prime Ministers and Senior Ministers/Ministers, Nobles and Amirs in the Lodhi, Pathan and Mughal reigns.

• For Kamboj in Muslim reign read: Kamboj in Muslim and British Era

The Hindu Kamboj ruled in Naokodar prior to the town was given as Jagir to a Muslim Rajput. Sohna in Gurgaon was also ruled by Kamboj and the mosques and Masoleums which they have left shows how important they were in that location (Punjab Castes Ibettson, Glossary of Tribes, H. A. Rose). So your statements on the Kamboa undoubtedly betrays your ignorance and how poorly informed you are about the actual history of the Kamboj nation.

According to Aina-i-Akbari, (See Trans. by H Blochman, p 339), it was a matter of distinction or honor to belong to the Kamboj nation during Akbar and Jahangir times. According to Encylopedia Britannica, the Indian Muslim like Sayyids and Kamboh (Kamboj) were specially favored for high civil and military positions.

Few other scholars on Kamboj Position during Muslim era:

Muslim Kambohs (Kambojs) became especially influential and powerful during Mughal rule. General Shahbaz Khan Kamboh was the most trusted general of Akbar. (The Sikhs, A. H. Bingley, p 57) Shaikh Gadai Kamboh was the Sadar-i-Jahan in Akbar's reign. (Glossary of Tribes and Castes of Punjab and north-West Frontier Province, Vol I, H. A. Rose; Aina-i-Akbari by Abu-L-Fazl Alami, Trans H. Blochman, p 122). Numerous other Kamboj are known to have occupied very key civil and military positions through out the Mughal reign.

"The Sayyids and the Kambohs among the Indian Muslims were specially favored for high military and civil positions during Mughal rule". (The composition of the Mughal nobility, Concise Encyclopedia Britannica, Online;The Mughal Nobility Under Aurangzeb, 2002, p 21, M. Athar Ali).

"The Indian Muslims, popularly known as Shaikhzadas, belonged largely to certain important clans like the Saiyids of Barha and the Kambohs" (The Mughal Nobility Under Aurangzeb, p 21, M. Athar Ali).

A. L. Basham writes: "The administrative reforms of Akbar changed the structure of even the Muslim leadership. The state was no longer the monopoly of the Mughals, or even the Iranis; the Afghans, and Indian Muslims such as Shaikhzadas, Saiyids, and Kambohs shared in its management. The hereditary status of a new entrant was an important consideration in assigning his first mansab, but promotion depended mainly upon talents and loyalty" (Cultural History of India , July, 1999 - Oxford University Press, USA, p 261, A. L. Basham).

Aina-i-Akbari of Abu-Al-Fazal Alami, a prominent historian of the Akbar period, informs us that it was a matter of honor to belong to the Kamboh lineage during the reigns of Mughal emperors Akbar and Jahangir and that no Kamboh was in economically bad circumstances in whole of India <(Aina-i-Akbari, Abu-al-Fazal, English Trans. by H. Blochman, Part I, pp 436).

Saiyid Waris Shah had to say: "Although the rule of machines has depleted our feelings for one another, yet the Kamboh as a nation to this day is filled with passion" (Sayed Waris Shah).

The Kambohs or Kambojs were classed among the ruling elites during the Muslim rule. (Kamboj Chetna Manch, 1993, Dr. (Prof) Jaspaul K Dhanju).

According to D. Ibbettson (Punjab Castes), Rajput is an occupational group who in the past had been rulers over a region or a people. So Rajput is not a clan/tribe but an occupation. The term Rajput include elements from diverse groups of races like Ancient Indo-Aryans, Sakas, Kambojas, Yavanas, Pahlavas, Kushanas, Hunas as well as aboriginal Bhils/Gonds of India. There are other scholars like V. A. Smith who too define Rajput as an occupational group whose main occupation was exclusively fighting or in administration. Now when you apply this definition to the Kamboj who had been rulers in North-west (Kamboja Mahajanapada of of Buddhist Tradition), Kamboja (a saliant Kshatriya Janapada of Panini), Kamboja of Mahabharata, Kamboja of Ramayana, Kamboja of Purana, Kamboja of Raghuvamsa, Kamboja of Rajatrangini etc etc…, Kambojas do fall in Kashatriya as well as Rajput categories.

Now many Foreign scholars call Paurava (king Porus ) a Rajput. Supersaiyn, was Porus a Rajput????. In a like manner, other princes of ancient India, the Kambojas princes had been called Rajanyas ( which is also the precursor of later term Rajput). Now how can you say that the Kambojas could be Kshatriya but do not meet the Rajput defintion. But it is another matter that the Kamboj themselves have always preferred to be not Rajput but Kshatriyas according to their own choice. After disintegration in about 1000+ AD, the Kamboj nation saw good and bad days. Some section rose high, but others fell due to the stringencies and rigors of the times and circumstances. No people have alwayts been supreme? Rise and fall is the law of nature... The dynamic nations rise after they fall and express their pride in their glorious ancestors. So do the modern Kamboj...They are extremely proude of their glorious and splendourous past which they still commemorate by still keeping their ancient Kamboj Identity still intact. Hello Supersaiyn, can you tell as to how many of the ancient ethnic people like the Kurus, Purus, Kosalas, Magadha, Sakas, Kushanas, Hunas, Pahlavas, Yavanas etc are still known by their ancient ethnic identity? Can you tell us? Since the Kamboj are almost the only very ancient ethnic group still surviving with their ancient Kamboj ID, and there are many clan names of the Kamboj which are also found among many other occupational castes of north/north-west India in cluding the so-called Rajputs etc, it is therefore perfectly reasonable and senseful to conclude that many of these occupational castes or some of their sections must have descended from Ancient Kambojas. This is a stark fact of history no body can deny. If some body dennies, he should not matter. What are your comment dear Supersaiyn.

ON Jana (Tribe), Janapada (Tribal Kingdom/country) , Mahajanapada (Grand Tribal Kingdom/country):

For your information, there are two important ancient stages of tribal evolution…Jana and Janapada. Jana was a tribe ---in nomadic stage and when it got settled at a location, the land it occupied became Jana-Pada (foothold of the tribe). From Janapada on territoral expansion, evolved the Mahajanapada… (Grand Janapada or country)…The Kamboja and other 15 Mahajanapadas are believed to have evolved from 900 BCE and continued till the times of Buddha (6th/5th c BCE). Even Panini 5th c BCE attests Kamboja kingdom and also SPECIFICALLY attests that Kambojas were a ruling Kshatriya tribe. Fouth century AD Raghuvamsa of Kalidasa informs that Kambojs lived as nextdoor neighbors to the Hunas in Badakshan/Pamirs (Parama kambojas) and had fought with Chandragupta II (aka Raghu). Eigth century king Lalitadiyta of Kashmir (724-760 AD) also had to fight with Kambojs, then the Tusharas in Oxus valley and then Bhauttas (Baltistan ) and then the Daradas in Gilgit /Hunza, and then the Strirajya kingdom (in Garwal/Kamaon) etc. The Sanskrit terms Janapada and Mahajanapada only imply that these kingdoms belonged to specfic Janas (tribes) who had founded them and who had settled in them (Dr V. S. Aggarwal, Dr J. C. Vidyalankar). Thus whenever there is a reference to Kambojas in Sanskrit literature, it applies to ethnic people of the Kamboj extraction only and not to anyother people than the Kambojs. This is especially true in the mountainous fastnesses of Kabol, Kapishi, Kafirstan/Kohistan, Lamghan/Swat, Pamirs and parts of Badakshan. The people living there are still the relics from antiquity (Dr Chatterjee, Olaf Caroe etc) and hence connected with ancient inhabitants of this area. Even the linguistic traces of this region also confirm this view.

Note that numerous above ancient referesnces do show that the Kambojas were indeed ruling as independent and soverign people otherwise what was the necessity for these Indian kings to attack the Kambojs living in these regions? Do you follow what it means supersaiyan?

What is the evidence that justifes that the Janjuas had been rulers in ancient times so as to claim a Rajput nomenclature while the Kambojas whose kingdoms have been amply attested by the Epics, Budhistst texts, Panini, Katyayana, Patanjali, Puranas, Rajatrangini, Hiuen Tsang, as well as by Ashoka……and early by Medieval inscriptions of Bengal can’t be nomenclatured as Rajputs, even though, as already stated above, the Kamboj have never been crazy fans to claim for themselves the Rajput noomenclature? But we do believe that Kshatriya is the term with which the ancient Kamboj have profusely and gloriously been connected with. Even the Sacrificial Aryan Sword.. Daivi Khadaga, referenced in the Bhishama parava of Mahabharata, gloriously connects the Kamboj prince with it.

Whatever may have been the stock value of the Kamboj in the recent past, the ancient references like the above profusely attest the glorious and splendorous past of the Kamboj Kshatryia nation.

Read: Mahabharata Sword

This once a glorious race in ancient times, is now vigorously striving to stage a comeback.

Reagards

Sze cavalry01 19:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Masudi’s Rahbut can’t be conclusively identified with Rajput. As already stated, Alberuni does nowhere refers to other so-called Rajputs of Rajaputana, Gujarat/Saurashtra, Avanti/Malava etc anywhere as Rajput or Rahbut or by any other names which can be reckoned as implying Rajput. If Masudi does not refer as Rahbut (Rajput?) to any of the other numerous Rajputs of western or Central India as such, it is unreasonable to think that he should use term Rahbut/Rajput for the sovereigns of Kabol/Gandhar alone. Moreover, during/around Masudi’s times (915-916 AD), the rulers of Kabol were so-called Brahmans (or Brahamanists) of Alberuni from Kallar’s lineage. Obviously, they cant be Rajput. It is also not known for certain if the the manuscript of Masudi is original or altered. For the people of Afghanistan and north-west Frontiers which included ancient Gandhara and Kamboja, Panini uses the term Rohitgiri for Afghans. The later term Rohita is derived from Rohitgiri. Kasika also uses the term Lohita for Afghans. Mahabharata also calls them Lohitas Mandalas (=Rohitas Mandalas). They were known as as Rohas or Rohitas during middle ages. Rohitas can also be pronounced as Rohatas. The term commonly implies parvartiyas or mountaineers or highlanders which the east Afghans indeed were. The Rahbut (=Rahbat) of Masudi probably stands for Rohitas/Rohatas i.e moiuntaineers since the Shahi Kingdom of Kabol/Gandhara mostly comprised mountainous regions and mountaineer or Parvartiya inhabitants. The Parvartya population of ancient Parvartya Vahika countries (living in Gandhar/Kamboja) was distinguished from the Vahikas proper, the latter lived in the Plains of Punjab. It is unreasonable to think that Hindi term Rajput had gained such a popular currency at such an earlier time (Masudi's time 915-916 AD) and in such a far-away/remote land (Kamboj/Gandhar), and far away from the actual land of the (later time) Rajputs which was in predominantly in western India in Saurashtra, Sindh, Rajputana, Malwa, Akara, Gujarat etc. In all probability, it is very far-fetched and wild guess to correlate Masudi’s Rahbut (Rahbat) to Rajput and Masudi’s Jahaj/Jaj (=Chach) to Janjua.

Very interestingly also, Masudi also uses strange term like “Bauura” for the soverign of Kanauj. Sir H. M. Elliot indentifies Bauura with Tomar or Tunwar but Tomar/Tunwar were not rulers of Kanauj during Masudi’s times (915/16 AD) since the sovereigns of Kanauj then were Pratiharas. Now if Masudi’s Bauura does stand for Pratihara (or else Tomara as H. M. Elliot claims), then it is also perfectly reasonable to think that Masudi’s Rahbut( or Rahbat) does stand rather for Rohatas/Rohitas (mountaineer people) instead.

Even an authority as great as Sir H. M. Elliot admits that there is very great risk and difficulty in identifying Hindi names in Arabic manuscripts, in which ignorance and carelessness give rise to every imaginable kind of error. Moreover, Sir H. M. Elliot does not accept Masudi’s Rahbut as Rajput as indisputable, but he expressed a possibility that Rahbut could be Rajput. But as we can see now, some of the information and guesses of H. M. Elliot in his well known book The History of India have proved erroeous and outdated. This is understandable since knowledge is dynamic, not static thing and with times new discoveries are made and some of the old information superceded.

Regards

Sze cavalry01 00:43, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

The Sun and the Serpant, (by Charles Frederick Oldham):

Must read pp 119 to 130 [11].

The author identifies the Shahi Dynasty rulers of Kapishi/Kabol/Gandhara with the Kators. The Kators at this time were Hindus and belonged to Kshatriya lineage. The Kashatriya ruler of Kabol at the time of Hiun Tsang had his ancestral home in Gandhara (P 122). The country was formely under the control of Yethas (Yuches/Kushans) who had retired afterwards about first quarter of 4th century per Sung Yun’s (530 AD) evidence and the local Chief again asserted. The Kator rulers of Shahi had matrimonial alliance with rulers of Jallandhara (Trigarta). The Chohan Raja of Ajmer is said to have also been related to these Shahis by some Matrimonial connections. Some of the tribes of this region are still known by their earlier names mentioned by Manu (X.43-44). The Kambojas have their relics left in the warlike and militarily formidable splinter tribal group (remnants of Kambojas) called Kamojs who now live in Kaffirstan. Their own traditions also say that earlier they were in Gandhar territory before the external invaders (Muslims) forced them to move into Kaffisrtan (pp 127-128). This indeed attests that the Kamoj Kaffirs i,e the descendents of earlier Kambojas had earlier been living in Gandhar. That is why many scholars say that the people of Gandhara were also Kambojas. Now since Tuzak-i-Timuri attests the Kators and Siahposhs as connected people, hence it is clear that the Kators were from the Siahposh people. And Siahposhes are nothing but the Kamboja descendents (See: The Geographical Dictionary of Ancient andMedieval India, Numdo Lal Dey).

See: Siah-Posh Kafirs in History: [12]

Hence the Kators were an offshoot or decendents of ancient Kambojas too. Even now the Kators/Katawers/Kators/Katas form the greatest group of the Siaposh Kaffirs who are identified as an offshoot of Ancient kambojas.

Comments: Some of the observations of Charles Frederick Oldham are not valid and therefore are unacceptable. The people of Gandhara and Kamboja have been followers of various religions...i.e Zoroastrians, Brahmanists, Buddhist as well as Serpant-worshippers. But they indeed were a branch of Iranic people. Contrary to what Frederick Oldham writes, in no way can they be assumed to have been the Aboriginal inhabitants of Kabol/Gandhara whom says as having faced the Aryans. Rather they were section of the Aryan themselves.

In his autobiography called Tuzak-i-Timuri, Timur proudly boasts of the towers of the skulls of the Kators which he built on the mountain in the auspicious month of Ramazan A.H. 800 (1300 CE) (See: Tuzak-i-Timuri , III, pp 400)

Now read the following:

Kata (people)
Hindukush Black-Robed Kafir people
Kom
Hindukush Black-Robed Kafir people

MORE ON THE KATORS

(A) MEDIEVAL AGE REFERENCES TO KATORS

(i) Musulman historian Ibn al-Hussain Baihaki, in hi Tarikh-I Masudi, makes reference to (Siah-Posh) Kators and calls them Hindus. He claims that 'all the Hindu Kators were Kators and says that brought under the rule of Sultan Masud' (1033 CE) (Eliot’s History of India, I, p 128, 125).

(ii) Abu Rihan Al-Biruni speaks of Katorman as the last of the Shahi kings of Kabol (Elliot’s History of India, I, p 408) and the dynasty appears to have been also called Katormán, Katorian or Kayorman (Elliot’s History of India, p 405-08).

NOTE: Based Alberuni’s evidence, modern Historinas/scholars identify Katorman/Katoran with Kator/Katar/Katawar and also identify the first Hindu Shahi Dynasty of Kabol as the Dynasty of Kator Shahis (C. F. Oldham in Sun and Serpent Worship).

(iii) Yet another Medieval time reference to name Kator occurs in the Tuzak-i-Timuri (an autobiography of Amir Timur-e Lang. This reference relates to 1398 AD…end of 14th c/beginning of 15th century AD. But Tuzuk-i Temur ("Institutes of Temur") is stated to be a later fabrication although most of the historical facts are accurate (B.F. Manz, "Tīmūr Lang", in Encyclopaedia of Islam, Online Edition, 2006). Taimur unquestionably found the Kators in alliance with SIAPOSH and holding a kingdom which extended from the frontier of Kashmir to mountains of Kabol and contained many towns and villages. Their ruler was called Adaslshu, Uda or Udashu (which recalls Udyana or Swat) and had his capital at Jorkal. He describes the Kators as men of a powerful frame and fair complexions, idolators for the most part, and speaking a tongue distinct from Turki, Persian, Hindi or Kashmiri (Ibid pp 400-01; cf pp 480-81). Taimur attacked their strongholds, reaching, according to Raverty, that part of Kafirstan known as Kashtur while Prince Rustam advanced into those parts of where the Katibi, (Kati), Siaposh, Pandu and Salao now dwell (Notes on Afganistan, p 136).

(iv) Another reference to Kators is found in Zafarnama (war of Triumph) of Sharaf ad-Din Ali Yazdi. Yazdi (14/15th c AD) was a Persian historian whose works including Zafarnama appeared in Persian literature. As a young man he was a teacher in his native Yazd and a close companion of the Timurid rule Shah Rokh (1405–47).

(v) In the end of 15th c Sultan Mahmud, descendent of Taimur led expeditions against the Kator Kafirs and Siaposh and thereby earned the title of Ghazi.

(vi) Historians of Akbar (16th c AD), who sent an expedition under Jahangir in 1581 against the Siaposh Kafirs of mountains of Kator.

(vii) Tabakat-i-Akbari by Nizamudin Ahmed (sixteenth c AD) makes references to Medieval age Kators of Kafiristan. It also confirms that body of Kators troops were kept on pay under Sultan Masud and a Hind called Tilak was the commander of the Kators.

(viii) Abu’l Fazal, historian of Akbar, in his history of Taimur’s expedition speak of the Hiduan-i-Kator, a country which they describe as bounding Burner, Swat and Bajaur on the north.

(B) MODERN REFERENCE TO KATORS (KATIRS)

H. M Elliot writes: "The Katormáns, or Kators, have hitherto been better known to modern than ancient history. We are informed that it was the name of one of the tribes of Káfiristán, (M Elphinstone, Caubul, Vol II, pp 376, 387) and that the ruler of Chitral to this day bears the title of Sháh Kator (Burnes Bukhara, Vol II, p 209, Journal A. S. Bengal, Vol VII, p 331) and I have heard the same designation given to the chief of Gilgit. The country of Kator is also spoken of by Sádik Isfaháni, as being the country of the Siyáh-poshes, or black-vested, on the borders of Kábul". (Takwimu-l-buldan, p 127)….(See: The History of India, Volume 2: section 98, Sir H. M. Elliot).

Besides M Elphinstone, other investigators like Col John Biddulph, Sir George Scott Robertson, Thomas Holdich, H. W. Bellew etc and more recently, Richard Strands have also investigated the Kafirs of the Hindukush. They have all reported that there are both a country as well as a tribe called Katir or Katawar which still is living in Bashgul valley (Kafiristan).

According to Col John Biddulph, the family name of the rulers of Chitral is Katoor . The name Kator seems to have been applied to the country in early times, before the present Katoor family was founded. (Tribes of the Hindoo Koosh, John Biddulph, 1881, Reprint 2006, p 156, Adamant Media Corporation)

According to Thomas Holdich,, the western parts of Kafirsitan is known as Katawar (Gates of India, p 355, Thomas Holdich).

W. M. Jr Thackston observes: “Kator is attested in earlier Persian sources like Yazdi’s Zafarnama (Book of Triumph) which is supposed to be earlier version of Robertson’s Katir and Katawar. (Baburnama, Memoirs of Babur—Prince and Emperor (Modern Library), 2002, p 22).

Muhammad Haidar Dughlt writes that name of Kator seems to have been applied to the country in early times (The Tarikh-i-Rashidi of Mirza Muhammad Haidar, Dughl t. A History of the Moghuls of Central Asia.... - Page 104 , Muhammad Haidar Dughl t)

Richard Strands, an modern American investigator has spent about 20 years in his extensive and thorough study of Nurestan (earlier Kafiristan), its people, their customs, culture and history. He is the most updated and latest investigator on the subject. Richard Strands uses Kata instead of Katir but also gives earlier designation reported by Elphinstone, Goerge Scott Robertson etc as as Katirs [13].

(C) KATORS/KATIRS vs SIAHPOSH/SPEDPOSH TRIBES

1. Timure’s chroniclers specify the Siahposhes in alliance with KATORS with whom Amir Timur had to fight during his inavsion of India (1398 AD).

3. According to Raverty (Raverty, Eng. tr. II. 630), KATORr was the synonym for the Safed-posh ( white-clad ), but according to later writers, only Siahposh (Black-clad) Kafir is called KATIR or (Kator) (Niamatullah's History of the Afghans - 1958, Page 12, by Niamat Allāh).

3. According to D. B. Pande, the KATIRS belonged to Siahposh as well as Spedposh tribes (Shahis of Afghanistan and Punjab, p xi, Deena Bandu Pande).

4. Later investigators like Sir George Scott Robertson have conducted detailed research by spending two years among the Kafirs in Kafirstan (1889-1891) and have investigated them more closely, thoroughly and scientifically. George Scott Robertson designates the KATIR community as an integral section of the Siahposh group. George Scott Robertson further states that, besides similar robes, the Siahposhes have many other characteristics common including a common language (The Kafirs of Hindukush, 1896, p 74, 75-85, Sir George Scott Robertson).

5. According to Encylopedia Britannica, the Siah-Posh (which includes KATIR, Kam, Kashtoz, Israt/Gourdes) have much in common in dress, language, customs and appearance, the Safed-Posh divisions were not more dissimilar from the Siah-Posh than they were from one another. (See Kafiristan - Online Encyclopædia Britannica).

6. The country of KATOR is also spoken of by Sádik Isfaháni, as being the country of the Siyáh-poshes, or black-vested, on the borders of Kábul". (Takwimu-l-buldan, p 127).

7. According to scholars like Nicholas Barrington, Nicholas Barrington, Joseph T. Kendrick et all, all the Siahposh tribe is collectively also called KATIR. They also report: "... The Sefid Posh tribes (the Presun and WaIGULIS) refer to all the Siah-Posh tribes as KATIRS, whom they regard as being of ONE STOCK LINGUISTICALLY AND ETHNOGRAPHICALLY. ..." . (A Passage to Nuristan: Exploring the Mysterious Afghan Hinterland , 2006, P 80, Nicholas Barrington, Joseph T. Kendrick, Reinhard Schlagintweit, and Sandy Gall (28 February, 2006) - I. B. Tauris & Company) .

8. Richard Strands, as remarked above, is the latest and foremost authority on Nurestanis/(former Kafirs). He has spent about 20 years styding the Nurestanis. He has classified the former Kafir tribe of Kafiristan (modern Nurestan) into Vasi, Kata, Kom, Kstho, Bnio, Jamco and Jasi groups. These include all the groups of former SIAHPOSH tribe, located in Bashgul (Kafiristan). Richerd Strands gives alternative designation for all above groups of ormer Siahposhes as Katir. He also calls them by other alternative names like Kams, Kamoz, Kamoz, Kamtoz and Katoz also. Thus we see that not only KAMS, KAMTOZ, or KAMOZ, but the KATIR as well is the THE COMMON DESIGNATION for the ENTIRE former SIAHPOSH TRIBE tribe of Kafiristan (modern Nurestan) . Read Richard Strand’s Link for: The Vâs'i, Kât'a, K'om, Mum'o, KSt'o, Bini'o, Jâmc'o, and Jâš'I [14]

(D) Katorman, Katoran and Kator relationship

(i) H. M. Elliot writes: “The Katormáns, or Kators, have hitherto been better known to modern than ancient history. We are informed that it was the name of one of the tribes of Káfiristán (Elphinstone’s Kaubol, Vol II, pp 376-77), and that the ruler of Chitral to this day bears the title of Sháh KatorBurnes’ Bukhara Vol II, p 209; Journal of Asiatic Society ofBengal, Vol II, p 331), and I have heard the same designation given to the chief of Gilgit. The country of Kator is also spoken of by Sádik Isfaháni, as being the country of the Siyáh-poshes, or black-vested, on the borders of Kábul (Takwimu-l-buldin, p 127)". (See refs: APPENDIX., ,NOTE A, The Hindú Kings of Kábul, The History of India, Volume 2: section 98; Henry Miers Elliot)

(ii) Abdul Gjani and Abdul Jaleel Najfi write: “The Katormáns, or Kators, have hitherto been better known to modern than ancient history. Elphinstone asserts that it was the name of one of the tribes of Kafiristan (Elphinstone’s Kaubol, Vol II, pp 376-77) (History of Afghanistan, 1989, p 95, Abdul Gjani and Abdul Jaleel Najfi).

(iii) H. W. Bellew writes that Katar, or Kator, is the same people as the Katoran or Katorman. Katar or Kator was also the name of a country called in Kafiristan. The Kator had established an independent kingdom, which extended over the whole of the Indus valley from the Himalaya to Balochistan and Sind, and from Kabul ( An Inquiry into the Ethnography of Afghanistan, 1891, p 146, 155, H. W. Bellew).

(iv): First Encyclopaedia of Islam also observes: “The kators are same the Katorman…”. (E.J. Brill's First Encyclopaedia of Islam, 1913-1936 - Page 161, edited by M Th Houtsma, R Hartmann, T W Arnold, R Basset, H A R Gibb, W Heffening, E Livi-Provengal, A J Wensinck - Architecture - 1993 - 42 pages).

(v) According to H. A. Rose: KATOR/KATORAN/KATORMAN: a race mentioned by several Muhammedan historians of India. Baihaki in his Tarikh-I-Sabaktigin mentions that all the Hindus Kators were brought under rule of the Sultan Masu’d, but he does not specify their locality (E. H. I. 1, p 128). Abu Rihan Al-Biruni speaks of Katorman as the last of the Turk kings of Kabol (i.e Turkish Hindu Shahi) (Ibid, p 408), but the dynasty appears to have been also called Katormán, Katorian or Kayorman (Ibid p 405-08). Elliot gives a full account of them, but it is doubtful if the dynasty was generally called Katorman (Ibid pp 407-08). Taimur however, unquestionably found the Kators in alliance with SIAPOSH and holding a kingdom which extended from the frontier of Kashmir to mountains of Kabol and contained many towns and villages. Their ruler was called Adaslshu, Uda or Udashu (which recalls Udyana or Swat) and had his capital at Jorkal. He describes the Kators as men of a powerful frame and fair complexions, idolators for the most part, and speaking a tongue distinct from Turki, Persian, Hindi or Kashmiri (Ibid pp 400-01; cf pp 480-81). Taimur attacked their strongholds, reaching, according to Raverty, that part of Kafirstan known as Kashtur while Prince Rustam advanced into those parts of where the Katibi, (Kati), Siaposh, Pandu and Salao now dwell (Notes on Afganistan, p 136). This was in 1398 A.D. and in the end of 15th c Sultan Mahmud, descendent of Taimur led expeditions against the Kator Kafirs and Siaposh and thereby earned the title of Ghazi. Raverty identifies the Kator with Spin or White Kafirs (Wai Kafirs: Ibid p 135) but the historians of Akbar, who sent an expedition under Jahangir in 1581 against the Siaposh Kafirs of mountains of Kator, and Abu’l Fazal in his history of Taimur’s expedition speak of the Hiduan-I-Kator, a country which they describe as bounding Burner, Swat and Bajaur on the north. The family of Mihtar of Chitral is still called the Kator (vide p 174 supra), and Biddulpf’s proposed identification of the Kathae or Khattar of Attock can not be regarded as proved (It is abandoned by Irvine: J. R. A. S. 1911, pp 217-219) (Glossary of Tribes and Castes of Panjab and north-west Frontier Province...by H. A. Rose, p 485, for details)

There more similar references which attest Kator = Katorman relationship.

The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians: The Muhammadan Period - Page 407, by Henry Miers Elliot, John Dowson – 1869

The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians. The Muhammadan Period. Volume 5 - Page 58, by Henry Miers Elliot

The History of Foreign Rule in Ancient India – 1986, Page 158, Kailash Chandra Ojha.

(E) KAMOZE/KAMOJE/KAMOGES TRIBES

(i) According to M Elphinstone, the Kafir tradition states that expelled by Muslmans from neighbor of Qandhar, they made several migrations from place to place before they reached their present abode. They state that they consisted of four tribes called CAMOZE, HILAR, SILAR and CAMOJE of which, the three former embraced the mohamadan faith but the fourth retained its ancient faith and quitted the native land. (An Account of the Kingdom of Caubul, p 376-77, M Elphinstone). Thus, Kamoge or Kamoji is the collective name for the entire Siahposh community of Bashgul (Kafiristan). M Elphinstone also refers makes references to the Katir tribe of the Kafirs of Hindukush (M Elphinstone, Caubul, Vol II, pp 376, 387).

NOTE: There is diference of Opinion regarding the identity of Qandhar in above context. Wqhile some scholars identify the Qandhar of traditions with Kandhahar (ancient Archosia), other scholars like Charles Frederick Oldham identify QANDHAR OF Kafir TRADTIONS WITH ancient Gandhara on river Indus/Kabol. (The Sun and the Serpent: A Contribution to the History of Serpent-worship - Page 127/128)

(ii) According to John Biddulph (1881): "... The principal tribe of the Bashgali country is divided into Kamoz (Upper Kam) and Kamtoz (Lower Kam). The termination gal means " country " in the Bushgali tongue, and is apparently the same as we find in Doongagali, Nuttiagali, and other well-known galis near Murree. ..." (Tribes of the Hindoo Koosh, John Biddulph (1880, Reprint: 15 January, 2004), p 127 - Adamant Media Corporation ).

(iii) According to Sir George Scott Robertson’s research and investigations about Kams/Kamoz/Kamtoz/Katirs or Kators (1895 AD) (Read pages 75 to 85, 66-67 of his “The Kafirs of Hindukush”) [15].

George Scott Robertson divides the entire Kafirs community into (1) Siahposhes, (2) Wais, (3) Ashkuns and (4) Presuns.

Among the Siahposhes, Robertson lists the Madugali Katirs (KAMOZ) , Katirs of Kati/Katawar, Kulam ands Ramgulis. The other clans belonging to great Siahposh as reported by George Scott Robertson are KAM (KAMTOZ), Kashtans or Kashtoz and those from Gordes/Israt.

Further Scott Robertson regards the Siahposhes and the Wais/Ashkuns as of Indo-Aryan origin, belonging to ancient Indian population of east Afghanistan. (The Kafirs of Hindukush, p 167, George Scott Robertson, A. D. Arthur David McCormick.

(iv) According to Nature: “ The collective name for the Siahposh tribe of the Hindukush is Kamoge/Kamoji…” (Nature - p 222, Nature Publishing Group).

(v) According to Charles Hamilton Smith “The Kafirs of Kafiritan, including Siahposh (Tor) and Spedposh (Spleen The Kafirs of Hindukush) are collectively known as Kamoges” (The Natural History of the Human Species: Its Typical Forms, Primaeval Distribution, Filiations,...pp 403-405, Charles Hamilton Smith).

(vi) Journal of the United Service Institution of India By United Service Institution of India writes: According to Kafir accounts, their original habitat was Candhahar. Their people were divided into four tribes viz: Hilar, Silar, Kamoz and Kamoj. Three first succumbed to pressure and adopted Muslim faith but the fourth one fled to the mountainous fastnesses to escape islamic conversion. It would thus appear that the Kamoji people who fleeing from their home (Candhahar = Gandhara) sought refuge with their kinsmen settled in the Kama valley adjoining and thence spread up to the course of its river to their present retreats in the inaccessible glens of its head waters. This being the case the " Kamoji Kafir" of the present day are the " Gandhari or ancient people from Peshawar (Journal of the United Service Institution of India, by United Service Institution of India – 1871).

(vii) DR W Leitner: Basing on the conclusions of Dr Bellew’s credible and instructive lecture on Kafiristan and Kafirs, Dr W. leitner, in his Publication on Kafiristan, has connected the Kamojis (Siahposh Kafirs) with the Gandharidae of the Greek accounts (See: Kafiristan, by Dr. W. Leitner).

It may be noted that the Gandharidae of Greeek accounts/Herodotus included the Gandharis as well as the Kambojas.

Other important reference on Kamoze, Kamoje/Kamoge etc:

Zeitschrift für Ethnologie – 1870, Page 411, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Anthropologie, Ethnologie, und Urgeschichte, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Völkerkunde; Researches Into the Physical History of Mankind,– 1844, Page 214, James Cowles Prichard; The Natural History of the Human Species: Its Typical Forms, Primaeval Distribution, Filiations,... -1852, Page 403 by Charles Hamilton Smith – 1852; Caravan Journeys and Wanderings in Persia, Afghanistan, Turkistan, and Beloochistan: With... – 1856, Page 513, Joseph Pierre Ferrier; Die Voelker des oestlichen Asien: Studien und Reisen – 1867, Page 439, Adolf Bastian, Heinrich Kiepert); 1 Die Voelker des Oestlichen Asien: Studien und Reisen: Band III. Reisen in Siam im Jahre 1863 , (2006) , p 18, - Adolf Bastian, Adamant Media Corporation .

(F) Kafirs and Kamojas

(i) According to N. L. Dey: “The Siahposh tribe living in Hindukush Mountains has descended from ancient Kambojas…”(The geographical Dictionary of Ancient and Medieval India, Nundo Lal Dey; These Kamboj People, 1979, p 60, S Kirpal Singh etc).

Also cf: The Shia-posh tribe which now resides on the Hindukush Mountain is said to have descended from Kambojas(The Indian Historical Quarterly, 1963, p 513)

(ii) According to Fraser Tytler and M. C. Gillet: “Now it seems more probable that at this period (3rd /4th c BCE), the ancestors of the Kafirs inhabited an area of much greater extewnt than at present. They may in fact have been , as they themselves say the ancient inhabitants of Central Afghanistan who were gradually forced to retreat into the hills in face of Mohamadan encroachments. It is therefore possible that the Kafirs and Kambojas who were good friends of Greeks (W. W. Taran), are same people, the name Kamboja giving way to word Kafir which is common Muslem name for idolators but being partially retained in name of one of the principle tribe called Kam or Kamtoz.”(Afghanistan, Study of Political Developments in Central and Southern Asia, 3rd Edition, 1967, p 58, W. K. Fraser Tyteler , M. C. Gillet).

(iii) According to Donald Wilber: "Parts of Nuristan formed a portion of the Greek strappy of the Paropamisadea in the fouth and third centuries BC. The people were then called Kambojas and described as of mixed Indo-Iranian descent. Possibly they occupied a much wider area then and were gradually forced... into their present mountains by Moslem onslaught. One of their principal tribes is still called Kam or Kamoz/Kamtoz." [(Afghanistan, its people, its society, its culture, Donal N. Wilber, 1962, p 80, 311).

(iv) According to Country Survey Series: Parts of Nuristan formed a portion of the Greek strappy of the Paropamisadea in the fouth and third centuries BC. The people were then called Kambojas and described as of mixed Indo-Iranian descent. Possibly they occupied a much wider area then and were gradually forced... into their present mountains by Moslem onslaught. One of their principal tribes is still called Kam or Kamoz/Kamtoz……. The Moslem appellation of Kafirs is already mentioned in 1020 AD by the historians of Mahmud (Country Survey Series - Page 53, ( Inc Human Relations Area Files).

(v) In his well known book on Afghani Ethnography, H. W. Bellew writes: “ Other nations mentioned by Manu (in his Manusmriti) in the same category are Kambojia, Yavana and Saka. Bellew indentifies the Kambojia of Manusmriti with Modern Kamboh and Kam of Kafiristan….Kama, kamoj ir Kamoz and Kamtoz are upper and lower Kama respectively..The Kama distt was the chief seat of ancient Kamboh after which it was called Kambojia (An Inquiry into the Ethnography of Afghanistan, 1891, p 150, 146, H. W. Bellwe).

(vi) Accordsing to Acharya R. R. Pande: “Ancient Kambojas were localized around Hindukush mountain. According to Elphinstone, the Kafirs of this region still call them Kamboh” (Sindhant Kaumudi, Artha Prakashaka, 1966, p 20-22, R. R. Pandey).

(vii) According to IHQ: "In the west, the tribe (Kamboja), in ancient days, seem to have extended as far as the eastern parts of Afghanistan for here we find people who call themselves Kamoja and in whom we can trace the survival of Kambojas (Indian Historivcal Quarterly, 1963, p 192).

(viii) According to Dr H. C. Raychaudhury, “The western boundaries of ancient Kamboja went as fars as Kafiristan where we still find the tribes like Camoujees, Kamoze, Camojee which remind us of the Kambojas “ (Politocal History of Ancient India, 1996, p 133, Dr H. C. Raychaudhury, Dr B. N. Mukerjee).

(ix) Cf: Die Kafirs werden Kamoze oder Kamboja genannt (nach Elphinstone) (Adolf Bastian) :See: Die Voelker des Oestlichen Asien Studien und Reisen, Band I. Die Geschichte der Indochinesen, p 456: See link: [16]

(x) cf:There is an apparent trace of their (Kamojas’) name in the Caumogees of Kaferistan, who may have retreated to the mountains before the advance of the Turk tribes (Dr H. H. Wilson). See fn 374:15: [17]

(xi) cf: A trace of Kambojas, in their original seat, seems to remain in the Kaumojas of the Hindukush: See foot note 5: [18]; See also: The Sun and the Serpent: p 127-128, Charles Fredrick Oldham: See link: [19].

(xii) Revue d'ethnographie also notes that the Kamoze, Hilar, Silar and Kamoje were the former clans of the Siaposh Kaffirs and they are linked to the Kambojas of Mahabharata (See: Revue d'ethnographie, p 225. See link: [20]). “

FURTHER REFERENCES ATTESTING KAMBOJA-KAFIR/KATIR CONNECTIONS

Erânische Alterthumskunde – 1871, Page 442, by Friedrich Spiegel; Zeitschrift der Deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft.: Register zu Band 51-60 - Page 715, Heinrich Leberecht Fleischer – 1872; Die Voelker des Oestlichen Asien: Studien und Reisen. Band I. Die Geschichte der Indochinesen - Page 456, Adolf Bastian; The Achaemenids and India, 1974, p 13, Dr S Chattopadhyaya; J.A.S.B. 1874; Journal of Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1874, p 260 fn; Political History of Ancient India, 1996, p 133, fn, Dr H. C. Raychaudhury, Dr B. N. Banerjee; Il Ramayana di Valmici – 1869, p 415, Vālmīki – 1869; Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morganlandes – 1968, Page 57, etc, etc

NOTE 1: According to one source, word Kator still used in Kafiristan with a doubtful meaning but most probably it means HORSEMAN or Lord (Primitive Aryans of American, T. S. Denison, 2003, p 121). Since ancient Kambojas were master horsemen and elite cavalry, it is therefore possible that the Kators/Katir section of the Kafirs originbally came from the Ashvaka (horsemen) branch of the Kambojas who are known to have been residing approximately in the same location where the Kafirs are dwelling today.

Note 2: According to some scholars like Dr J. L. Kamboj, the Katir and Kafir are synonymous in meaning.

(G) KATOR = KATIR = KAMTOZ = KAMOZ =KAM

Richard Strands, is a modern American investigator who has spent about 20 years in his extensive and thorough study of Nurestan (earlier Kafiristan), its people, their customs, culture and history. He is the most updated and latest authority on the subject. Richard classified the former Kafir tribe of Kafiristan (modern Nurestan) into Vasi, Kata, Kom, Kstho, Bnio, Jamco and Jasi groups. These designations include all the groups of former SIAHPOSH tribe, located in Bashgul (Kafiristan). MOREOVER, Richard Strands has also given KATIR as the general alternative designation for all of the above groups of former SIAPOSHE KAFIRS. He also calls them all by other alternative names like Kams, Kamoz, Kamoz, Kamtoz and Katoz also. Thus we see that not only KAM or KAMOZ, or KAMTOZ, but KATIR as well is THE COMMON DESIGNATION for the entire SIAHPOSH TRIBE tribal group of former Kafiristan (modern Nurestan) . Read Richard Strand’s following Link with reference to: Vâs'i, Kât'a, K'om, Mum'o, KSt'o, Bini'o, Jâmc'o, and Jâš'I [21].

(H) KAMA COUNTRY AND ITS CONNECTION WITH KAMBOJ

The region between Jallalabad and Sphedkoh mountains is still called Kamma or Kama [Ref: Struggle for Afghanistan 1991 page 158 by Nancy P Newell, Richards C. Newell, also see Pathans 1958, Olaf Caroe, p 49; also ref: Military Text Books Series: “From Black Mountain to Wazirstan, by Col H. C. Wylly, C. B. 1912, p 237, 227, also make note of Kama Daka, Kama Shilman, Kama Bela regions names. These regions are the modern habitats of the Afridi tribe]. The 'Kama' has been noted by scholars as forming the very root of Sanskrit 'KAMBOJA' and is considered related to it.

H. W. Bellew writes: Kama, Kamoj, or Kamoz and Kamtoz are upper and lower Kama respectively. The Kama disttrict was the seat of of ancient Kamboh after which it was called Kambojia (Kamboja) ( An Inquiry into the ethnography of Afghanistan, 1891, p 146, H. W. Bellew).

According to Dr J. L. Kamboj also, the root Kama carries inmistakeable relics of ancient Kamboj in it.

On Indo-Iranian Forum, Richerd Strands has also expressed the probability of tracing ancient Kamboja in/around Kama valley of Jallabad.. He has also expressed the possibility that Kama carries relic of ancient Kamboja in it.

Thus the Kam/Kam which cluster is so frequently met with in north-eastern Afganistan (Kamabrom, Kamdesh, Kamu (villages), Kamah river, Kama pass, Kamich (a place in Ramgul), Kama Daka, Kama Shilman, Kama Bela in Jallabad; Kazal-kam, Kara-kam regions around Oxus north of Bactria etc) carries inmistakeable signatures of ancicient Kamboja and points to its probable location also. The ancient Kambojas are known to have lived in/around these regions at various phases of history.

(I) ENCYLOPEDIA OF BRITANNICA ON KAFIRS

The Siah-Posh have much in common in dress, language, customs and appearance, the Safed-Posh divisions were not more dissimilar from the Siah-Posh than they were from one another. Perhaps the best division at present possible is into (i) Siah-Posh, (2) Waigulis, and (3) Presungalis or Viron folk. The black-robed Kafirs consist of one very large, widely spread tribe, the Katirs, and four much smaller communities, the Kam, the Madugalis, the Kashtan or Kashtoz, and the Gourdesh. Numerically, it is probable that the Katirs The Slahare more important than all the remaining tribes put Posh. together. They inhabit several valleys, each community being independent of the others, but all acknowledging the same origin and a general relationship. The Katirs fall readily into the following groups: (a) Those of the Bashgal valley, also called Kamoz and Lutdehchis, who occupy eleven villages between Badawan and Sunra, the border hamlet of the Madugal country, namely, Ptsigrom, Pshui or Pshowar, Apsai, Shidgal, Bragamatal (Lutdeh), Bajindra, Badamuk, Oulagal, Chabu, Baprok and Purstam; (b) the Kti or Katwar Kafirs, who live in two settlements in the Kti valley; (c) the Kulam people, who have four villages in the valley of the same name; (d) the Ramgalis, or Gabariks, who are the most numerous, and possess the western part on the Afghan border. Of the remaining tribes of the Siah-Posh, the chief is the Kam or Kamtoz, who inhabit the Bashgal valley, from the Madugal boundary to the Kunar valley, and its lateral branches in seven chief settlements, namely, Urmir, Kambrom or Kamdesh, Mergrom, Kamu, Sarat, Pittigal and Bazgal. The next Siah-Posh tribe in importance is the Muman or Madugal Kafirs, who have three villages in the short tract between the Katirs and the Kam in the Bashgal valley.

Other references on Kators/Katirs:

The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians. The Muhammadan Period. Volume 2, By Henry Miers Elliot, pp 407-409: [22]

The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians. The Muhammadan Period. Volume 3, pp 400-401: By Henry Miers Elliot [23]

Historians of Medieval India, p 92: [24]

Sze cavalry01 04:11, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

"The Katormáns, or Kators, have hitherto been better known to modern than ancient history. We are informed that it was the name of one of the tribes of Káfiristán (Elphinstone’s Kaubol, Vol II, pp 376-77), and that the ruler of Chitral to this day bears the title of Sháh KatorBurnes’ Bukhara Vol II, p 209; Journal of Asiatic Society ofBengal, Vol II, p 331), and I have heard the same designation given to the chief of Gilgit. The country of Kator is also spoken of by Sádik Isfaháni, as being the country of the Siyáh-poshes, or black-vested, on the borders of Kábul (Takwimu-l-buldin, p 127)". (See refs: APPENDIX., ,NOTE A, The Hindú Kings of Kábul, The History of India, Volume 2: section 98; Henry Miers Elliot)

Dr N. L. Dey records that The Siah-posh tribes living in Hindukush mountains are descendents of the ancient Kambojas (see: The Geographical Dictionary of Ancient and Medieval India, Prof Nando Lal Dey). This view is now generally accepted by numerous modern scholars. The general name for the Siaposh Kaffir people is Kamojes or Kamoges (one scholar writes them as Mamoges, which is erronous) (The Natural History of the Human Species: Its Typical Forms, Primaeval Distribution, Filiations,... - Page 403; See also: Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morganlandes, 1968,Page 57)

Refs: 1. The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians. The Muhammadan Period. Volume 2, p 420-422, Henry Miers Elliot)

2.The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians. The Muhammadan Period. Volume 3, p 58, Henry Miers Elliot)

[25]

Dr H. W. Bellew, H. A. Rose and other scholars also hold similar views on Katorman/Kators and it has been pointed out that the early Shahis were from Kator background who are one of the clans of Siah-poshes Kaffirs of the Hindukush.

See : Hindukush Kafir people

Alberuni says that the founder of the first Shahi dynasty of Kabol/Kapishi was Barhtikin and came from Turk lineage and from Tibet country. Alberuni gives very supernatural origin to Barhtikin, the supposed founder of the earlier Shahi dynasty of Kapish/Kabol (which accounts seems highly unbelievable). Here, Alberuni seems to have been misled in his accounts by local myths. First thing is that there is no evidence that Turk ever ruled in Tibet. Further he states that by 870 AD, 60 generations from Barhtikin line had ruled in Kapishi/Kabol. Now if each generation is taken 10 years (very meager number), this points to third century as the origin of the first Shahi Dynasty (so-called Turk-Shahi) by Barhtikin, but if the generation is taken 15 years (which is more reasonable), the origin goes back to first century BCE. If the above traditional account of Alberuni is taken true and generatiuon is 15 years average is assumed, it appears that king Moga of Sai lineage (Scythian) was the originator of this dynasty which after seeing many ups and downs in the succeeding ages may have continued as feudatory to later Kushans, then the Hums and after the fall of Huns/Yethas in sixth century AD, again it may have gained in political power and remerged as the dominant power in Kabol/Kapishi (Turk Shahi of Alberuni). Now king Moga is staed to have belonged to Sai branch of the Trans-Hindukush Scythians, which in all probability, ware the Parama Kambojas of Sakadvipa. (See Parama Kamboja, Komedes, Asii, Invasion of India by Scythian Tribes, India and Central Asia etc etc). Family of King Moga i.e his brother Arta, Arta’s son Kharostas and Kharostas’s daughter princess Aiyasi have all specifically been addressed as belonging to Kamuia/Kamuio clan which according to Scholars like Dr S Konow, Dr K. P. Jaiswal, Dr Buddha Prakash, Dr R. K. Mukerjee, Dr J. L. Kamboj, Chaudhury Yusuf Hasan and numerous others is the Prakritised/Kharosthised version of the Pali Kambojaka or Sanskrit Kamboja or Persian Kambujiya. (see Kamuia). Thus, it is possible that the so-called Turk Shahi dynasty of Kapishi/Kabol was in fact the Kamboja dynasty started by king Moga or Muki in first century BCE, which later continued in eclipsed form as feudatory to the Kushans and later the Hunas/Yethas (480-530 AD), but in the power vacuum which folloed the Hunas, it reasserted itself and re-emerged as the dominant Shahi Dynasty of Kapish/Kabol. It is also probable that the Chinese name Sai may have been used for the Saka title Sahi. The Indo-Scythians rulers prior to Christian era were called Sahi (See: Political History of wore titles like Shahn-Shahi etc. (See: Political History of Ancient India, 1996, p 383, Dr H. C. Raychaudhury, Dr B. N. Banerjee; also: Zeitscrift der Deutschen Morgenlandischen Gesellschaft, 34, pp 247ff, 262, Indian Antiquary, X, p 222; See Jaina Text Prabhavak Carita, Kalacharya Katha; also see: The Kambojas Through the Ages, 2005, p 160, S Kirpal Singh Dardi etc). Since the Parama Kambojas were located in Kumudadvipa, the southern tip of Shakadvipa (of the Indian Texts) or Scythia (of classical writings), the Parama Kambojas, therefore followed definitively Scythian culture. And king Moga (Kamuia/kamuio) being from this Parama Kamboja branch of the Kambojas from across the Oxus (who migrated and settlen in Kabol valley during second c BCE) may indeed have been from this branch. Scholars like Dr B. N. Bannerje etc connect king Moga with Sai branch of the Indo-Scythians (See: Political History of Ancient India, 1996, p 710 fn 13). Hence a correlation/connection between Sai, Sahi and the term Shahi of Medieval age dynasty of the Kabol/Kapish rulers seems highly probable.

Sze cavalry01 15:15, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Common Habitat of Tukharas & Kambojas (2nd c BCE-3-4th c CE)

It is very informative to note that before its occupation by the Tukhara Yue-chis, Badakshan and Alai valley had formed a part of ancient Kamboja i.e. it was a part of the Parama Kamboja country of Mahabharata (MBH 2.27.25). But after its occupation by the Tukharas/Yuechih during second century BCE, it became a part of Tukharistan. Around 4th - 5th century AD, when the fortunes of the Tukharas finally died down, the original population of the (Parama) Kambojas re-asserted themselves and the region again started to be called by its former name i.e. Kamboja (See refs: Bhartya Itihaas ki Ruprekha, p 534, Dr J. C. Vidyalankar; Ancient Kamboja, People and the Country, 1981, pp 129, 300 Dr J. L. Kamboj; Kambojas Through the Ages, 2005, p 159, S Kirpal Singh).

There are several later-time references to these Kambojas of Pamirs/Badakshan. Raghuvamsha, a 5th c Sanskrit play of Kalidasa, attests the Kambojas on river Vamkshu (Oxus) as a neighbors to the Hunas (Raghu: 4.68-70). As the Hunas in 5th century were living in Balkh country, the Kambojas lived in their east of Oxus country, that means Badakshan/Pamirs. They have also been attested as Kiumito by 7th c Chinese pilgrim Hiun Tsang. Eighth century king of Kashmir, king Lalitadiya had invaded the Oxian Kambojas as is attested by Rajatarangini of Kalhana (See: Rajatarangini 4.163-65). Here, they are mentioned as living in the eastern parts of the Oxus valley as very neighbors to the Tukharas who were living in western parts of Oxus valley (See: The Land of the Kambojas, Purana, Vol V, No, July 1962, p 250, Dr D. C. Sircar).

Arabic geographer Al-Idrisi (1099-1166 CE), while writing on Badakshan, its flora, its fauna, its scenic beauty, its quality horses & ponis, its precious stones and mineral wealth etc---at the end, he states that Badakshan shared boundaries with Kamboj. Al-Idrisi belonged to 11th c AD. Obviously, the boundaries of ancient Kamboj had considerably shrunken down at times of Al-Idrisi so that he had to differentiate Badakshan from the Kamboj located in its contiguity i.e. Pamirs (Views of Dr J. C. Vidyalankara, Dr J. L. Kamboj, Acharya R. R. Pande).

Ancient Kamboja = Tukhara

There is yet another powerful evidence which equates the Kamboja = Tokhara. A Buddhist Sanskrit Vinaya text (Gilgit Manuscripts, III, 3, 136, Dr N. Dutt, quoted in B.S.O.A.S XIII, 404) has the expression Satam Kambojikanam kanayanam i.e a hunderd maidens from Kamboja. This has been rendered in Tibetan as Tho-gar yul-gyi bu-mo brgya and in Mongol as To-gar ulus-un yagun ükin. Thus, the proper name Kamboja has been rendered as Tho-gar or To-gar. And Tho-gar/To-gar is Tibetan/Mongolian name for Tokhar/Tukhar. (See refs: Irano-Indica III, H. W. Bailey Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 13, No. 2, 1950 , pp. 389-409; see also: Ancient Kamboja, Iran and Islam, 1971, p 66, Dr H. W. Bailey).

TUKHARA = TURUSHKA =TURK (sometimes)

Now in ancient Sanskrit texts, the Tukharas/Tusharas (Tochario of the classical writings) are sometimes also written as Turushakas which term is synonymous with Turk. Thus, the Kambojas with whom the Tukharas lived together for several centuries in Tukharistan (in ancient Parama- Kamboja) have also mistakenly been called as of Turkish origin as we read from Al-Maqidisi, in his book Al-Muqhni, where he calls the people of this territory as Kumiji and states them probably of Turkish origin (but Al-Muqhni is not sure though). Note that the name Kumiji of Al-Maqidisi (556-624 AH/1161-1227 AD) is equivalent to Sanskrit Kamboji or Kamboja. The Kumijis as predatory tribes (cf: ancient Kambojas refrred to as Mlechas/semi-Barbaric) are also mentioned to be the people of Pamirs/upper Oxus (Buttamen Mountains in Upper Oxus in Khuttal) in the Turkic accounts relating to Ghaznavids (11th c AD).

Dr P. C. Bagchi writes on page 25 of his “India and Central Asia as under: “ Kumito country was east to Khotlan. It has been accepted as Kumeda. In the historical documents of Chinese Chronicler T’ang, it has been mentioned as Kumi; but in those of Wu-K’ong, it has been written as Kiumoche. Moslem writers including Arabs have written it as Kumadh. Al Maqidisi documents that this territory was controlled by war- like people whom he writes as Kumijis (=Kambojas) and call them probably of Turkic origin. The Greek writers have called this (Sogdiana/Fargana) area and its people variously as Cambothi, Kambuson, Komedon, Kambyson etc. The scholars have identified these people with Kambojas mentioned in the Indian literature” (Indian and Central Asia, p 25 by Dr P. C. Bagchi; See Also Ancient Kamboja, People and the Country, 1981, p 301, Dr J. L. Kamboj; The Kambojas Through the Ages, 2005, p 159, S Kirpal Singh).

From references and evidence presented above, one can see that the ancient Kambojas and Tukharas lived in almost the same vast-regions which had been in ancient times the land of the Parama-Kambojas (i.e the Kambojas of Kumudadvipa. Kumudadvipa was the southern tip of Shakadvipa (Scythia) and lied beyond the Oxus in Scythian region of the classical writings). Thus the Tukharas and the Parama-Kambojas lived together from second c BCE till third/forth c AD. Later in fourth century AD, the Kambojas reasserted themselves, became sovereigns and the name of their country changed back from Tukharistan to its former name Kamboja (Dr J. C. Vidyalankar).

Thus we see that the Kambojas having lived for long time in association and under sway of Tukharas are likely to have been amalgamated with the Tukharas. Thus, their culture, customs and social mores may indeed have been affected somewhat by the Tukharas. This may have been the reason as to why, as late as 12/13th c AD, Al-Maqidisi calls the Kumijis (= descendents of ancient Kambojais) as probably of Turkik ethnicity.

Regarding Turkic Shahis of Alberuni

Since Alberuni lived during 11th c AD, and was chief spokesman of Ghaznavid Mahmud, he too may have mistakenly treated the firsr Shahi rulers of Kapishi/Kabol (the Kambojas-- the blood cousins of the Kumijis of Al Maqidisi) as if they were of Turkik origin. This is because the Kambojas of Kapishi/Kabol were, in fact from the same stock as the Pamirian Kambojas (the Kumijis of Al-Maqidis).

See the following web-book for medieval age Kumijis (11th c AD) of Pamirs.

Kumiji tribe of Pamirs/Oxus (The Cambridge History of Iran p 192, edited by R. N. Frye)

[26]

Kumiji tribesmen of Buttanam Mountains in of Pamirs living in the upper Oxus near Khuttal (The Cambridge History of Iran, p 192 edited by R. N. Frye)

[27]

Read also Komedes

Sze cavalry01 15:15, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Alberuni calls the founder of the first Shai dynasty as having come from Tibet. In this context, it is interesting to note that a part of Tibet was called Kamboja. Brahama Purana (53/16), supposed to be a creation of 5th c AD, attests that Kambojas were living near Tibet, Assam and Bengal. "The view that Nepali Traditions apply name Kamboja Desha to Tibet is based on the statement made by Foucher, [Iconographie bouddhique pp 134-135] on the authority of Nepali Pandit of B.H Hdgson. But it is supported by two manuscripts [No 7768 & 7777] described in the Catalogue of Sanskrit and Prakrit Mss in the library of India Office Vol II, Part II". [Dr R. C. Majumdar, History of ancient Bengal, 1971, p 198 (fn 305); Dist Gazeteer [Rajashahi], 1915, p 26; Some Historical Aspects of the Inscriptions of Bengal, Dr B. C. Sen, p 342, fn 1; Dynastic History of Northern India, Vol I, p 309 fn 2, Dr H. C. Ray; Pala-Sena Yuger Amasanucarita, p 70, etc etc ].

Cf: “In course of his military compaign, pala king Devapala is said to have reached Kamboja. The Kambojas of ancient India are known to have been living in north-west, but in this period, they are known to have been living in the north-east India also, and very probably, it was meant Tibet. Thus Devapala might have come into conflict with these Tibetan Kambojas, there is nothing surprising in this because Tibetan sources claim that their kings Khri-Srong-Ide-Btson and his son Mu-Tag-Btsan-Po subdued India and forced Dharamapala to submit. Devapala may have also clashed with them and defeated them” (Bihar Through the Ages, G. Ed. R. R. Diwarkar, 1958, p 312).

According to Tibetean religious text Pag-Sham-Jon-Zang, there was a Kampotes or Kampoche (Kamboja) country in the north and north-east of Loshai Mountain, somewhere between Assam and Bengal (Ref: New light on History of Bengal, IHQ., Vol. XV-4, 1939, p. 511; The Dynstic History of Northern India, I, p 309 by Dr. H. C. Ray). The Khambas state of Tibet still carries the relic of Kamboja name in it. This Khambas is located in the east of Tibet. By the start of AD, these Tibetean Kamboja people had founded a Kamboja colony some where in between Assam and Burma. Interestingly, Brahma Purana (see: shloka 53/16) locates Kambojas in east India around Assam/Burma somewhere. According to Dr R. C. Majumdar and Dr B. R. Chatterjee, there were Yunnan and Szechwan countries in the north of Burma. There was also some Indian colony named Gandhara adjoining this Yunnan territory. (Ref: Campa, p. xiv., Dr R. C. Majumdar; Indian Cultural Influence in Cambodia, pp 278-79 by Dr. B. R. Chatterjee). Dr A. V. Williams (Abraham Valentine Williams) Jackson, Romesh Chunder Dutt, Vincent Arthur Smith, Stanley Lane-Poole, H. M. (Henry Miers) Elliot, William Wilson Hunter, Alfred Comyn Lyall and many others connect the Kambojas with Tibet. [28]

Dr Foucher, Dr Gokhale, and Charles Elliot also accept that ancient Kambojas were in Tibet especially from Hindukush to little Tibet.

(See also: A Companion to Middle Indo-Aryan Literature - Page 168, Sures Chandra Banerji – 1977)

See below some websites books on Kambojas connections withTibet:

[29]; [30]; [31]

There is an ancient reference to prince Srang-tsan-Gampo (Kambo or Kamboj per scholars) of Tibet who married a Chinese princess Wencheng in 641 AD [32].

Numerousus more instances/refersences like this can be cited which illustrate the fact that a section of the Kambojas of Pamirs/Badakshna had slipped to east and held sway in mountainous Tibet also. Thus the kambojas were indeed cconnected with Tibet. It is therefore possible that the Bahrtikin, the founder of so-called Turk Shahi of dynasty of Kabol ( per Alberuni) may have in fact been a Tibetan Kamboja adventurist. The political connections of Tibet and Nepal with Udyana/Swat and kabol valleys are attested from another fcat that a prince from the lineage of Gautama Budha was married to an Udyana princess and after the death of his father-in-law, he ruled Udyna (west of upper Indus…Swat country) (See: The Sun and the Serpent:, pp 115-130, A Contribution to the History of Serpent-worship, Charles Frederick Oldham)

The Kators whom scholars like Dr V. A. Smith, Dr Sir H. M. Elliot, H. A. Rose etc have related to the earlier Turk Shahi dynasty of Kabol/Kapish have been investigated by investigators like M Elphinstone, Sir George Scott Robertson and others and they are connected with Siaposh Kamoz/Kamtoz (Kambojs) Kaffirs of the Hindukush. THe term Kafir, according to one school of scholars is said to have evolved from Kapir which was an alternative name for the people of Kapishi of Panini or Kapisa of Hiuen Tsang. Some scholars suggest that name Katir itself has evolved from Kapir with p giving place to t with course of time (Dr J. L. Kamboj). The change of sh in Kapish to r as Kapir is not unsual as the name of Kushan king Kanishik is also found written as Kanerak i.e r used for sh. Hence Kapish evolved to Kapir and later to Katir with course of time.

It is also of interest to note that Kapish is said to be merely an alternative form of Kamboja per Dr S Levi (See: Indian Antiquaries, 52, part 2, 1923, S Levi) , Dr Wilber, Tytler, Fraser, Taran etc. Buddhist Mahamayuri and Ramayana Manjari of Kshmendra also support this fact as they correlate Kamboja, Kabusha and Kapisha as one entity (Ancient Kamboja, People and the Country, 1981, Dr J. L. Kamboj; Indian Antiquaries, 52, part 2, 1923, S Levi etc).

The Katirs/Kators are more important group of the Kafirs of Kafirstan and they belong to the well known and dominant Siaposh grouping of the Kafirs. THe Siaposh Kafirs have still designations like Kamoje, Silar, Hilar, Kamoze, Kams/Caumojes etc which scholar identify with Kambojas.

Katirs are Kamoz/Kamoje/Kams (=Kamboj)

Sir George Robertson Scott specifically attests the Katirs/Kators and Kamoz/Kamtoz/Kam/Kamoj connection. See his Classic The Kafoirs of the Hindukush, 1896, p 75-77: See link [33]

On the Kamoz/Kamtoz/Kams and Kambojs, see also para 2 of Kambojas.

“The Kambojas still live as Kamboj and Kamboh in the greater Panjab, and as Kams/ Kamoz/ Kaumoj and Katirs/ Kamtoz of the Siyaposh tribe in the Nuristan (former Kafirstan) province of Afghanistan (ref: M. Elphinstone, An account of the kingdom of Caubol, fn p 619; Journal of Royal Asiatic Society, 1843, p 140; Journal of Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1874, p 260 fn; Political History of Ancient India, 1996, p 133, fn, Dr H. C. Raychaudhury, Dr B. N. Banerjee; The Achaemenids and India, 1974, p 13, Dr S Chattopadhyaya; cf:There is an apparent trace of their name in the Caumogees of Kaferistan, who may have retreated to the mountains before the advance of the Turk tribes (Dr H. H. Wilson). See fn 374:15: [34]; Cf: Die Kafirs werden Kamoze oder Kamboja genannt (nach Elphinstone) (Adolf Bastian) :See: Die Voelker des Oestlichen Asien Studien und Reisen, Band I. Die Geschichte der Indochinesen, p 456: See link: [35]; cf: A trace of Kambojas, in their original seat, seems to remain in the Kaumojas of the Hindukush: See foot note 5: [36]; See also: The Sun and the Serpent: p 127-128, Charles Fredrick Oldham: See link: [37]; See also: Die altpersischen Keilinschriften: Im Grundtexte mit Uebersetzung, Grammatik und Glossar – 1881, Page 86, Fr. (Friedrich) Spiegel): See link: [38]. ; Revue d'ethnographie also notes that the Kamoze, Hilar, Silar and Kamoje were the former clans of the Siaposh Kaffirs and they are linked to the Kambojas of Mahabharata (See: Revue d'ethnographie, 225. See link: [39]). “

CONCLUSIUONS:

Hence it is reasonable to think that the first Shahi Dynasty of Kabol/Kapishi, being a Kator dynasty, was of the ancient Kamboj lineage.

Since the Kambojs also acted as their own Brahmins, like the other Vahika people such as the Madras as is attested in Mahabharata also, it is reasobale to think that so-called Kallar Brahmin minister of last king of first Shai Dynasty (which was replaced in ~ 870 AD) was also a Kamboj minister who practiced Brahmanism. It is unthinkable that the orthodox Brahmins from Madhyadesa were ever entertained in the north-west and there were no orthodox Brahmins in the north-west including the Kambojas/Gandhara countries. This is because verse X.43-44 of Manusmriti (200 AD edition) and Mahabharata (500 AD edition) (Mahabharata 13/33/20-21; cf: 13/35/17-18) powerfully attests that the Kambojas, Daradas, Yavanas, Paradas, Sakas etc of north-west did not entertain the Brahmins in their countries. The Karanaparava of Mahabharata specifically attests that the people of Vahikas (which included Madras, Gandharas, Kambojas, Arattas etc…See: Evolution of Heroic Traditions in Ancient Punjab, 1971, p 52-53, Dr Buddha Prakash) acted as their own Brahmins. Karanaparava of Mahabharata also specifically says that among these Vahika people (outsiders, the people of greater Punjab, lying outside the Aryan pale), in the same family, one member acted as Kshatriya and the second practiced as Brahmin. Budhist text Majjhima Nikaya (43.1.3) also specifically attests that there were only two classes of people among these Vahikas including the Kambojas, Yonas etc i.e (1) Aryas (Brahamain/Kshatriya) and (2) Dasas (slaves or serfs).

Yona-Kambojaseu annesu cha panchchantimesu janapadesu dvea vanna,

ayyo ceva daaso ca ayyo hutva daaso hoti daaso hutva ayyo hoti ti.

(Majjhima Nikaya 43.1.3)

Mahabharata calls the people of greater Punjab (which included besides modern eastern and western Punjab , also the north-eastern parts of Afghanistan including Gandhar/Kamboj as well, per Dr Michael Witzel, Dr Buddha Prakash etc) as Rajyayaka while Ashtadhyayi of Panini addresses them as Kshatriyayaka. Accordingly, the Madhyadesa Brahmanical clergy deplored that these greater Punjab people who acted as their own Brahmins and made offerings to gods themselves go in vain (Mahabharata VIII.44.46 ) and that these people knew no Vedas, Vedis and Yajnas (Mahabharata VIII.44.46).

The point I want to make here is that the people of Punjab/Gandhar/Kabol did not follow the soccial and religious customs of Madhyadesa Aryans and hence the orthodox Brahmins of Hindu varnaashramadharama system were not found in north-west including Gandhar/Kamboj. Rather the same families acted both as Kshatriyas as well as Brahminas for purpose of religious rituals. Hence so-called Brahmin Kallar, the founder of second Shahi dynasty of Kabol/Gandhar should not be considered as some orthodox Brahmin following the Varanashramadharama system of Indo-Aryns but the one who practiced Brahmanism and in all probability belonged to the same Kshatriya lineage to which the first Shahi Dynasty itself belonged. Note that, if we take together Hiuen Tsang’s and Alberunini’s evidence, the first Shahi dynasty of Kabol/Kapish was of Kshatriya lineage. And the Kambojas/Gandharas undoubtely were Kshatriyas and dominant people around Kabol/Indus territories as is amply attested by numerous ancient Sanskrit texts.

The Kambojas are taken to be same people as Gandharas i.e both are stated to belong to the same race (See: Myths of the Dog-Man , p 119, David Gordon White (07 May, 1991) - University Of Chicago Press).

Dr J G R Forlong, Dr Fergussan etc quoting Dr Wilford say that the Ancient People of Taxila came from Kamboja (See: Rivers of Life, p 109, Dr J G R Forlong). [40].

Besides there are many other scholars who take the Kambojas and Gandharaas as cognate people and belonging to one race. Looking at the time and space contiguity, it is reasobale to accept this view.

Sze cavalry01 21:03, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Noted scholars also point out that the Kamboja sodiery (especially cavalry) had formed part of the Gurjara-Pratihara armed forces in 8th/10th centuries AD. It is pointed that they (Kambojas) had come to Bengal with the Pratiharas when the latter conquered part of the province (Dr R. C. Majumdar, Dr H. C. Raychaudhury). There is said to have been a Kamboja regiment in the army of Pratiharas which is believed to have been given the responsibility to defend the north-eastern frontiers of Pratihara empire (See: Indian Historical Quarterly, XV-4, Dec 1939, p 511, Dr H. C. Ray; cf: Dynastic History of India, p 311, fn 1; Dr Hem Chander Raychaudhury; History of Ancient Bengal, 1971, p 182-83, Dr R. C. Majumdar; Ancien Kamboja, people and the Country, 1981, p 331-332, Dr J. L. Kamboj ; cf also: Epigraphia Indiaca, Vol XXIV, pp 45-46 etc).

Pratihara Strategy in the north-west:

To maintain military balance against the kingdom of Kashmir on the north-west borders, the Pratiharas had always endavored to keep the Sahi rulers to their side. In fact, the Sahi kingdom of Kabol/Gandhar was a great political game both for the Kashmir rulers and those of Kanauj. After Shahi ruler Thakkana (~964-970 AD) was worsted by General Yasodhara sent by queen Didda, the Gauradian of Abhimanyu of Kashmir (958-972 AD), the Pratiharas are believed to have immediately intervened and dethroned the weak Shahi king Thakkana and put in his place Jayipala, son of Istapala, to restore the military balance in the north-west frontiers in their favour (Dr Buddha Prakash). Hudud-Al-Alam (Edition Minorsky., p 239) clearly says that Jaipala was under the orders of Qinnauj (Kanauj). It also says that Vaihind (Udbhandapura) and Kashmira were dependencies of Rai (ruler) of Qinnauj. As an ally of Pratiharas, Jaiyapala had even overwpowered Kashmir with Pratihara’s support behind him. This is clear from the remark of Firisha that his kingdom extended in length from Sirhind to Lamghan and in breadth from Kashmir to Multan. (Tarikh-Firishta, Trans Briggs Vol I, p 15). Later part of 10th century saw the weakening of power of Pratiharas, thus the Shahi of Gandhara became a paramount power in north-west.

As noted above, since the Pratiharas had Kamboja soldiery and high-ranking officers in their army division, it is highly likely that the imperialistic Pratiharas might have thought it politically expedient to replace the week Shahi ruler Thakkana with someone more dashing, aggressive and energetic military officer on the throne of Shahi on whom they could rely and who could be friendly towards the Pratiharas political interests in the north-west. It is quite reasonable to think that they must have placed someone who must have been loyal to the Pratiharas and also who belonged to the local population to head the Shahi kingdom in Kamboja/Gandhara region. Seeing Dharamapala’s (770-810 AD) and Devapala (810-850 AD) inscriptional evidences which refer to the Kambojas/Gandharas as the kingdoms/people as of most importance in north-west, it is likely and believable that Istapala and his son Jaipala must have been influential and loyal military officeres/Generals/chieftains from the Kamboja clan who had been serving in the army of Pratiharas for a while. Thus, the Pratiharas must have placed Jaiyapala in the saddle so that they might have an edge over the kingdom of Kashmir and also that the new ruler must also belong to the locals so as to avoid dissatifactiuon among the ruled population. This event is said to have taken around 964-970 AD sometimes.

It may not have been a mere coincidence that around the same time, the north-west Bengal was also seized by a one Kamboja chieftain named Rajyapala. It has been poited out that when the fortunes of the Palas sagged low after the death of Narayanapala in second half of tenth century, one influential chieftain from the Kambojas of the Pratihara regiment had seized Gauda from Pala kings (probably from Gopalla-II) and laid the foundation of the Kamboja empire in north-west Bengal (See: Indian Historical Quarterly, XV-4, Dec, 1939, p 511 Dr H. C. Ray; The Dynastic History of the Northern India, p 311, fn.1, Dr H. C. Raychaudhury; History of Ancient Bengal, 1971, pp 182-83, Dr R. C. Majumdar; The Kambojas Through the Ages, 2005, pp 216, 228, S Kirpal Singh; Ancient Kamboja, People and the Country, 1981, pp 330-332, Dr Kamboj).

It is very interesting that king Rajyapala (Kamboja of Bengal), king Natyapala (Kamboja king of Bengal) and king Jaiyapala (of Shahi kingdom of Kapishi/Gandhar) had adopted exactly the similar royal epithets. For instance:

• Rajayapala of Bengal Kamboja Dynasty assumed the following epithet:

(Kambojavamshatilaka) Paramasaugata maharajadhiraja parameshvara paramabhattaraka Rajyapala

• Kamboja ruler Nayapala of Bengal assumed the following epithet:

Parameshvara paramabhattaraka maharajadhirAja Nayapaladeva

See the website: [41]

• Now compare the above royal titles with the following title assumed by Jaipala of Shahi kingdom of Gandhar.

"Parambhattaraka Maharajadhiraja Paramesvara Sri Jayapala deva"

The assumption of similar royal titles by both dynasties seems to indicate/reveal some kind of connection/correlation between the two dyansties.

(i) There is an important observation here. The Kamboja chieftain Rajyapala is stated to have been a influential chief from the Kamboja regiment of the Pratiharas (Dr R. C. Majumdar, H. C. Ray, Dr J. L. Kamboj). He grabbed the north-western parts of Bengal from the Pala rulers Gopala II or his son Vigrahapala II in the second part of 10th century AD. The probable date is stated to be 960-970 AD. Strangely enough, Shahi Jaiypala, son of Istapala, is also stated to have grabbed power in Gandhara/Kamboja (north-west) around 964 AD (or 975 AD according to some scholars). It appears that during this time the Pratiharas had become weaker in Punjab and the Palas in Bengal. The Kamboja regiment and its Chiefs who were miliary supporters of the Pratiharas had took advantage of the fluid situation and grabbed power in east India in Bengal by usurping north-west Bengal/Gauda from the Palas. And almost simultanously, we see a change in the ruling dynasty of Hindu-Shahi of Gandhar/Kamboj where the weak Brahmin Shahi ruler Thakkana was dethroned byPala Shahi Jaiyapala in-between 964-975 AD. Thus the two political events are wonderfully contemporary. It appears that both Rajyapala of Bengal and Shahi Jaipala of who replaced Brahmin Shahi Thakkana in Gandhar/Kamboj were related and were perhaps two sons of Istapala and were military generals in Pratihara army. In all probability, Istapala also appears to have been some influential military general in the Pratihara army and also may have had his sons Rajyapala and Jaipala serving in the Pratihara army as well. When the Pratiharas got weaker in Punjab, Jaipala took advantage of the situation and grabbed power from weaker Brahmin Thakkana in Gandhara and became its soverign. At the same time, Kamboja Rajyapala grabbed power in North-west Bengal where the Pratiharas and Palas both were weaker during second half of tenth century (960-970 AD) and thus set up his independent Kamboja kingdom in Gauda/NW Bengal also. There is a strong circumstantial evidence that both Shahi Jaipala and Rajyapala (Bengal) were two sons of Istapalal and both may have been leading generals in the Pratihara army around this time.

(ii) There is yet other important piece of evidence which supports the view that the Pala Shahi dynasty of Gandhar was of Kamboj lineage. As is well known, the Palas rule in northwest Bengal had been terminated by the Kambojas who belonged to the north-west. It had happened during the time of Pala Gopalla II or Vigrahapala II (some times betwen 960-970 AD) when the Palas and Pratiharas had both become weaker. Later, Pala king Mahipala I (988-1038 AD) had to fight a grim battle with Kambojas and recovered major part of Bengal from them. THis is mentioned in the Bangad Charters of Mahipala-I himself. But there is also evidence that some part of Bengal still continued to be occupied/ruled by the Kamboja rulers since a Kamboja ruler Dharampala Kamboja is known to have been ruling in Dandbhukti during first quarter of 11th century (1020 AD). This shows that Mahipala-I had fought grim battles with the Kambojas to recover his territory but still some reamnained and an animosity thus continued to exist between the Palas and the Kambojas of Bengal which had extended to the north-west as well since the Kambojas in Bengal belonged to Gandhar/Kamboj group and possibily the ruling Kamboja family of Bengal and the Ruling Shahi Pala family of Gandhar/Kamboja (Shahi Jaipala, Anadapala, Tirlochanpala etc) belonged to one Kamboja ruling family or closely else were related scions. Thus in 1008 AD, when Turk ruler Mahmud Ghaznavi invaded Punjab/Gandhar, Shahi Anadapala had sent an urgent patriotic call to various rulers of northern India to come to his military aide. We see that all rulers of north India including Ujjain, Gawallior, Kalinjar, Kanauj, Delhi and Ajmer had come to the aide of Shahi ruler Anadapala of Gandhara but Mahipala-I of Bengal was the only exception who did not come to his aid and did not respond to his call. According to researcher S. Kirpal Singh, Mahipala-I clearly had recent enimity with the Kambojas who had earlier seized his ancestral kingdom from his forefathers. According to him, the Kamboja-Pala ruling family of Bengal and the Shahi-Pala ruling family of Gandhara/Kamboj were related and belonged to same ruling house or were two scions from same lineage, and thus both were stark enemies of the Palas of Bengal. Understandably, Mahpala-I wanted to set his old scores with the Kambojas whoi had seized his ancestral land. Hence Mahipala did not respond to the urgent call of Shahi ruler Anadapala and hence did not come to his aide. In other words, he wanted his adversaries go down the hell due to existing animositry between the two (See: The Kambojas Through the Ages, 2005, p 225). There indeed seems some truth in the above views of S. Kirpal Singh.

Shah Clan among the modern Kamboj:

The Shahi as clan name as found among the modern Kamboj may also allude to this connection since although originally Shahi was just a title or an AL, later on, it semms to have got concretised into a surname or clan name. The instances of surname-formation like this are quite natural in history.

In summary:

More likely scenario:

• It appears very likely that the original Kator dynasty was a dynasty from Kshatriya Kamboja lineage. Some local Kamboja chieftain appears to have reasserted after the Yetha/Yue-chi political clout had sagged in Paropamisadae/Gandhara territies. According to Chinese traveller Sung Yun (~520 AD) evidence, the Yetha rulers had retired approximately by 480 AD (two generations before him) and the locals (Hindu rulers) had assumed the political power in Kabol/Kapishi. Chinese Pilgrim Hiuen Tsang attests that the ruler of this dynasty (631-644) was a Kshatriya king, follower of Buddhism. The Kambojas are known to have been converted to Buddhism during Mauyryan times and moreover, the Kambojas are numerously attested to have been Kshatriyas in ancient Indian traditions. (See link: Kambojas: A Kshatriya Clan: [42]

• The second dynasty was Brahamana, Brahmanical or Brahmanist dynasty per Alberuni's evidence (~1015 AD). It appears to be from Kambojas of Brahmina lineage. It is a fact of history that Kambojas practiced both as Kshatriyas as well as Brahmanas. (See link: Brahmanism of Ancient Kambojas. Even Mahabharata attests that in the Bahika countries (north-west frontier countries i.e Madras, Aratta, Kamboja ---lying outside the Aryavarta), there were Brahmanas as well as Kshatriyas in the same family and that a Kshatriya also acted as Priest for sacrificial duties (Karanaparava of Mahabharata).

• The third Shahi dynasty again was likely of Kshatriya Kamboja lineage. This has attestation from Kalhana's (11 th c AD) Rajatrangini which clearly says the Shahis (latter) as of Kshatriya lineage ( Rajatrangini of Kalhana VIII 3320). (Reference quoted from : Evolution of Heroic Traditions in Ancient Punjab, 1971, p 147, Dr Buddha Prakash).

Sze cavalry01 23:04, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

1. According to seventh century Chinese pilgrim Hiuen Tsang who visited India from 631 to 644 AD, the ruling king of Kapisha during his visit to Kabol/Kapishi in 631 AD was a Kshatriya and he was ruling over a vast territory which included many countries including Peshawer in Gandhara besides the Kapisha which was his political headquarters (Hiuen Tsang). Hiuen Tsang further records that this Kshatriya king had his ancestral home in Gandhara (See: The Sun and the Serpent: A Contribution to the History of Serpent-worship – pp 115-130).

2. According to accounts recorded by nineteenth century investigators like M Elphinstone, Sir George Scott Robertson etc on the tribes of Hindukush, the Kamojes of Kaffirstan had originally four tribes --- Kamoze, Hilar, Silar and Kamoje. According to their own popular traditions, they originally belonged to Kandhahar (i.e. Gandhar) (See: The Sun and the Serpent: A Contribution to the History of Serpent-worship – p 127-128, Charles Frederick Oldham; The Kaffirs of Hindukush, 1896, p 158, George Scott Robertson, A. D. Arthur David McCormick; See also: M. Elphinstone, An Account of the Kingdom of Caubol). Again according to their own accounts, all save the Kamoje had adopted Islam in earlier days of the Moslim invasions but the Kamoje had retreated to the interior mountainous fastenesses of Hindukush to escape conversion.

From the above information, we learn that (1) the ancient Kshatriya king of Kapishi had his ancestral land in Gandhar; and (2) the traditions of Kamoges/Kamojis of Hindukush also reveal that their ancestral land was in Gandhar. These Kamojes are stated to have fled (from Gandhar) during 14th/15th c or earlier Moslem invasions to escape forced conversions (See: The Natural History of the Human Species: Its Typical Forms, Primaeval Distribution, Filiations, pp 404, Charles Hamilton Smith; The Sun and the Serpent: A Contribution to the History of Serpent-worship – p 127-128, Charles Frederick Oldham) while their cognates including Hilar, Silar and Kamoze all adopted Islam and stayed put there. The above evidence not only connects these Kamojas (=Kambojas) with Gandhar but also it connects the rulers of Kapisha, of the times of Hiuen Tsang, to the same Gandhar. This goes to establish that the Kapisha rulers were indeed of Kamboj lineage.

3, We have already seen an indisputable connection between the Kators of Hindukush/Kapishi and the Kamoz i.e ancient Kambojas (of Paropamisadae region). If names like Katoran/Katorman/Katoryan indeed stand for Kator tribe, Kator people and Kator country as H. M. Elliot/H. A. Rose etc say (for which there seems to be no valid reason to disagree), then first Shahi dynasty (erroneously called Turk Hindu-Shahi dynasty) must have been a Buddhist Kamboj dynasty. Thus the evidence in this direction seems svery propelling indeed.

4. Now once again, if Alberuni’s account (1015 AD) on the 60-generations of the so-called Turk Hindu Shahi dynasty having originated from Bahrtikin is to be believed, then the Kshatriya ruler of Kapisha during times of Hiuen Tsang (631-644 AD) must have been from the line of Bahrtikin whom Alberuni states to be a Turkic dynasty. But Alberuni’s other information about the Shahi Turk dynasty, including its miraculous origin seems very supernatural and unconvincing and hence unbelieavable. Moreover, Alberuni is far removed in time about 400 years from Hiuen Tsang’s times and therefore Hiuen Tsang’s account that the ruling king was Kshatriya is more convincing and seems to make the prince a follower of Buddhism or Hinduism and place him in line with the Kambojas/Gandharas because these were the only the predominant ancient people in this region who are suficiently attested to have been Kshatriyas since remote times. There is no evidence from Sanskrit/Pali texts such that a Turkic ruler was ever called or designated as Kshatriya. Why Hiuen Tsang would call a Turk (a foreign or non-Indian) ruler as a Kshatriya?

5. Based on the evidences from ancient Sanskrit texts, Ashoka’s edicts and that from Hiuen Tsang, modern topnotch scholars like Dr Michael Witzel of Harvard University observe that from Vedic age onwards till the time of Hiuen Tsang in 7th century AD, Kabol was in very control of the Kambojas whom he identifies as east Iranians tribes (See: Early Eastern Iran and the Atharvaveda, Persica-9, 1981, p 92). If this is indeed true, then the Kshatriya ruler of Kabol/Kapisha, at the time of Hiuen Tsang, was undoubtedly Kamboj. And if evidence from Alberuni regarding 60-Generations-long-dynasty of so-called Turk-Shahi of Kabol is to be trusted, then it must again be accepted that this long-enduring dynasty was undoubtedly a Kamboj dynasty. There indeed seems to have been some confusion in the database at Kabol or else on the part of the nerrator who related the royal history/traditions of Kabol/Kapsihi to Alberuni which the latter seems to have recorded verbatim.

6. Many scholars tend to disbelieve Alberuni’s evidence regarding the Brahmin lineage of rulers like Jaipala, Anadapala, Tirlochanpala, Bhimpala. They say that Aleberuni may have got wrong information on this line of rulers and designated them as Brahminis. But as is well known, these Shahi rulers were very contemporary of Alberuni. If Alberuni could error in giving wrong information on the true lineage on his very contemporary rulers of Kabol/Gandhar, then it is very understandable to think that Alberuni’s accounts regarding the origin of first Shahi Dynasty of Kabol/Kapishi from Turkic line are also full of gross error. And there are many good reasons to say so.

In all probability, the so-called Tibetan/Turkic dynasty of Kapishi/Kabol must have been, in reality, a Kamboj dynasty. But with time, story got beclouded and myths got added to confound the true origin and ethnicity of the first Shahis of Kabol.

Sze cavalry01 23:26, 16 September 2006 (UTC) Bold text

• According to Persica-9, (Early East Iran and Arthaveda, 1981, p 92, Dr Michael Witzel), in 7th century, the Kabol area (i.e Kabol valley, Kapishi. Lamghan etc) was under the sway of ancient people whom he calls East Iranian Kambojas. There are several literary references in Sanskrit texts which reinforce the above view of scholars like Dr Michael Witzel.

• As late as 11 the century AD, Muslim Geographer Al-Idrisi (b.1100-d.1165 or 1166) also attests Kambojas as sharing borders with Badakshan people.

• Al-Maqidisi, in his book Al-Muqhni, refers to a people living in upper Oxus whom calls Kumijis and states them as probably of Turkish origin (i.e he is not sure of their correct ethnicity though). Note that the name Kumiji of Al-Maqidisi (556-624 AH/1161-1227 AD) is equivalent to Sanskrit Kamboji or Kamboja. Per Turkic accounts relating to Ghaznavids (11th c AD), the Kumijis are stated as predatory tribes (cf: ancient Kambojas referred to as Mlechchas/semi-Barbaric, hardy people) are also stated to be living exactly in Pamirs/upper Oxus (Buttamen Mountains in Upper Oxus in Khuttal) (see REFS: The Cambridge History of Iran, 1975, p 173, 192, Edited by R. N. Frye; Other refs: India and Central Asia, p 25, Dr P. C. Bagchi; Ancient Kambojas, People and the Country, 1981, p 300/301, Dr J. L. Kamboj).

• The Kumijis of Al-Maqidisi are undoubtedly the so-called Kamoges/Kamojis Kaffirs of the Hindukush as described by the later British investigators like M. Elphinstone, Sir George Scott Robertson etc and now by Richard Strands. It is to be noted that Al-Maqidisi is in doubt as to the ethnicity of Kumijis and says that they (Kumijis) probably are of Tukik background. This is understandable since in Rajatrangini which wile dealing with 8th c king of Kashmir, Lalitaditya Muktapida, and his war expeditins against Uttarapatha tribes, it collocates the Kambojas and Turkas (Turushakas) as neighbors (i.e. Kambojas, Tukharas, Bhauttas, Darada in that order ....) in Oxus valley and Karakoram/Baltistan. This location of the Kambojas is also attested by 7th c Chinese pilgrim Hiuen Tsang in his Si-yu-ki. Thus being close neighbors there was some common cultural traits between them..hence doubts on the part of Al Mqidis on Kamboja ethnic background. Even otherwise also, the Tukharas (the so-called ancestors of the Turks) has politically controlled parts of ancient Kamboja regions of Pamirs/Badakshan during second c BCE and continued to hold sway over it for several centuries, but in fith c and later when fortune of Tukharas went down, the local Kamboja rulers reasserted themselves and the name of their ancient country again popped up as Kamboja in Indian Sanskrit texts and Chines accounts (Kiumito of Hiuen Tsang). SoKambojas, in all intents and purposes, naturally were very close to Turks in their culture, custons & language. Even otherwise also, like earlier term Scythian, Yavana--the label Turk has been used as generic name for several Central Asian tribes in Medieval time literature.

• The collective name for Siahposh tribe of the Hindukush is Kamoges/Kamojis ((Nature - p 222, Nature Publishing Group; cf: The geographical Dictionary of Ancient and Medieval India, Nundo Lal Dey; These Kamboj People, 1979, p 60, S Kirpal Singh etc ).

• The Siaposh tribe broadly consists of TWO MAJOR CLANS, the Katirs (Kators or Kamtoz/Kamtozi) and the Kams or Kamoz.....and both are stated to be related/cognate clans (Ref: Kafirs of Hindu Kush, 1896, 75-80, Sr George Scott Robertson). Each of them are further subdivided into numerous subclans. The Kators/Katirs and Kam Kaffirs of Siahposh designation share same language (with minor dialectic varitaion), culture, customs and religion and belong to the same ethnicity and race (Sir Geroge Scott Robertson).

• Numerous scholars now identify the Siahposh tribes of Hindukush (Kams/Kamoz/Camoze/Caumojee, and Kamtozi/Katirs) as the modern representatives of ancient Kambojas. See: Roots of Kamboj in Remote Antiquity [43]

• Ancient Sanskrit name Kapisi (Panini’s Ashtadhyayi) was written as Kapisa (Kai-pi-shi(h)) by Hiuen Tsang. Clasical writers call it Kapiscene or Kophene. Other Chinese records call it Kipin or Chipin. Scholars like Dr S Levi are of the opinions that Sanskrit names KAPISA and KAMBOJAS are identical terms and are Sanskrit equivalent of some non-Sanskrit term which was not easily transliteratable in Sanskrit (See also: Epigraphia Indica, Vol XIX-1, p 11, Indian Antiquary, 203, 1923, p 52; Indian historical quarterly, Vol XXV-3, 1949, pp 190-92; The Indian Historical Quarterly - Page 291 1963; Pre Aryan and Pre Dravidian in India - 1993, P 120, Sylvain Lévi, Jean Przyluski, Jules Bloch, Asian Educational Services; Kathakasankalanam: amskrtagranthebhyah sangrahītani Kathhakabrahmana,- 1981, P xii, Surya Kanta etc). According to History and Culture of Indian People Vol II (p 122), Vol III (p 617) also, Kapisha is equivalent to Kamboja. Other scholars like Dr W. W. Taran, Dr Moti Chandra, Dr S. Chattopadhyaya, W. K. Fraser Tytler, M. C. Gillett, Donald N. Wilber, Bombay Gazetteer and others also hold that Kapisa and Kamboja are identical (See also: Ancient Kamboja, People and the Country,1981, pp 44-46, Dr J. L. Kamboj). Even the evidence from Buddhist Text Mahamayuri (Kabusha) and Ramayanamanjri(by Pt Kshmendra of Kashmir) attests that Kapisa and Kamboja are equivalent (See: Indian Antiquaries, 52, part 2, 1923).

• Furthermore, numerous scholars also identifiy Chinese Kipin with Kapishi/Kapisha (see: Epigraphia Indica XIV, p 291 Dr S Konow; Greeks in Bactria and India, p 473, fn, Dr W. W. Taran; Yuan Chwang I, p 259-60, Watters; Comprehensive History of India, Vol I, p 189, Dr N. K. Sastri; History and Culture of Indian People, The Age of Imperial Unity, 122). Dr E. J. Rapson, Dr L. Petech etc also connect Kipin with Kapisha region.

More References on Kipin = Kapisa/Kabol

• Kipin=Kaofu=Kophene (The Ancient Geography of India. Vol I. The Buddhist Period, including the Campaigns of Alexander etc.., pp 17, 18, 583, by Alexander Cunningham)

• Kipin=Kophese=Kophene = Kabol (Cities of Alexander the Great, 1996, p 4, by Peter Fraser)

• Kipin=Kophene=Kabol =Kamboj (Bombay Gazetteer, 1904, p 500, Bombay Gazetteer Presidency)

• Kipin =Kapisa (Notes sur l’Afghanistan oeuvre posthume, 1931, p 119, by Maurice Fouchet)

• Kapisa = Kipin (Journal of Indian History, p 305, By University of Allahabad. Department of Modern Indian History)

• Chipin = Kipin = Kapisa (Indo-Asian Culture, p 185, by Indian Coincil for Cultural Relations)

• Kipin included Kapisa (Kia-pi-shi(h), in other words, Kipin denoted Kapisa and Kashmir (Kashmir Series Text and Studies, p 4)

• Kipin is identified with Kapisa, modern Begram in Afghanistan (Early Buddhism in Afghanistan, Ecerpt from Mahabodhi, 1984, Vol 94, C. S. Upasak)

• Kipin is identified with Kapisa, modern Begram near Charikar in Afghanistan (Buddhist Studies, a Research Journal of the Department of Buddhist Studies, University of Delhi, Delhi, vol. XV. March, 1991).

• Kipin (Ch: "Chi-pin", Kapisa-Peshawar OR Kabol valley. See Wikipedia Article Yuezhi; Silk Road transmission of Buddhism; Buddhism in Japan; Greco-Buddhism etc etc.

• Kipin =Kapisa' (See map of Ancient India, 2003, p 429, Dr V. D. Mahajan)

• However, Dr Pelliot, Dr Bagchi and Dr Raychaudhury etc identify Kipin with Kashmir (Political History of Ancient India, 1996, p 693, Dr H. C. Raychaudhury; Early History of North India, p 3, Dr S. Chattopadhyava; India and Central Asia, p 126, Dr P. C. Bagchi).

• But Dr B. N. Mukerjee however maintains that name Kipin applied to a large area of north-west which included Kapisa (Kamboja), Gandhara and Kashmir. Dr S Levi remarks that name Kipin applied both to Kashmir before 600 AD but for Kapisha/Kapishi after that period.

• cf also: Kipin kingdom included Kāśmīra, Uddiyana, Taxila, Gandhāra, Peshawar and Kapisa (Ref: JIBIN, JIBIN ROUTE AND CHINA , by Li Chongfeng /China, Professor of Buddhist Art and Archaeology , Director, Institute of Religious Archaeology Dept. of Archaeology, Peking University)

Kabol is also said to be derived from or connected with Kambojas. It is also pointed out that the Sanskrit name of Kabol or Kabul is Kamboj (Supplementary Glossary, p 304, H. M. Elliot). The name is mentioned as Kophes or Kophene in the classical writings. Gazetteer of Bombay Presidency 1904 maintains that ancient name of Kabol was Kambojapura which Ptolemy (160 CE) mentions as Kabura/Kaboura (from Ka(m)bo(j)pura?). Hiuen Tsang refers to the name as Kaofeu, which according to Dr J. W. McCrindle, Dr B. C. Law, Dr R. K. Mukkerji and others is equivalent to Kambu (< Kamboj/Kambuj).

Ptolemy calls Kabol as Kabura and places Kapisa two and a half degrees northwards from it. Kabura is same as Kaboura which derives from Ka(m)bo(jp)ura.

• According to Chinese Buddhist Records, Gunavarman, grandson of the king of Kabol arrived in China by way of Ceylon and Java in AD 424 AD and made his way to Capital of Sung Dynasty in 431 and statey there for one year (Jouranal of Royal Asiatic Society, April, 1903, p 369, M. Anesaki). From this evidence it would be seen that Hindu kings were ruling in Kabol more than two centuries prior to Hiuen Tsang’s arrival in about 631 AD, when he (Hiuen Tsang) found a Kshatriya Hindu king upon the Kabul throne (The Sun and the Serpent: A Contribution to the History of Serpent-worship - Page 125, Charles Frederick Oldham). This also agrees with many ancient Sanskrit texts like Manu, Mahabharata, Panini's Ashtdhyati, Kautiliya's Arthashastra that the Kambojas were Kshatriyas.

• Chinese pilgrim Fahien (400 AD) attests that the people of the Hindukush were Naga-worshippers. He also attests that the people of Udyana/Swat observed same customs as mid-Indians. And Sakya (Budha) visited this land to convert Naga worshippers to Buddhism. (Earlier, Arrian also stated that the Assakenois (Ashvakas) followed Indian culuture and customs ((Indike, I, 1-3)). The people of Oddyana/Swat (i.e Assakenois/Kambojas of the Greeks) entertained strangers for three days and then requested to find a place for themselves. (See: The Sun and the Serpent: A Contribution to the History of Serpent-worship -Page 119/120, Charles Frederick Oldham). The custom described above by Fahien is still prevalent among the Punjab Kamboj and a well known proverb among the Kamboj community exactly reinforces the above ancient observation of Fahien viz: Pahle din Prauhuna, Duja din tauna, tije din Dade Magauna (First day, he is a beloved guest, second day, he is simply a guest but the third day, he loses all the guestly luster and better go).

• Sung Yun (518 AD) Chinese envoy in court of king of Gandhara came to Uddyana by way of Chitral. The king of the country (Udyana/Kapisha/Kabol) was a Buddhist and eat vegetables, and Buddhism flourished. He also mentions Naga Temples besided Buddhist Viharas. Sung Yun attests that the kingdom of Gandhara was destroyed by Yerthas (Hunas) invaders two generations earlier but they had evidently retired from that country before his visit (See: Buddhist Records, page c (100); The Sun and the Serpent: A Contribution to the History of Serpent-worship - Page 119/120, Charles Frederick Oldham)

• According to Hiuen Tsang, the country (between Kabol/Kapishi to Swat/Odyana =i.e Kamboja) is surrounded on three sides by Hindukush, is 4000 lin circuit, on north it adjoins snowy mountains. The people are cruel and king is Kshatiya, is shrewd, brave, determined—he rules about 10 countries of neighborhood (Buddhist Records, i.55). King was Buddhist. There were 100 Viharass, 6000 Priests, also about 10 temples of Devas and about 1000 heretics (The Sun and the Serpent: A Contribution to the History of Serpent-worship - Page 120/121, Charles Frederick Oldham)

• The Pilgrim further states that region South of Hindukush to Kabol, to Indus was inhabited by the Hindus. But the region was simultaneously Brahmanistic, Buddhistic and Naga worshipping. (The Sun and the Serpent: A Contribution to the History of Serpent-worship - Page 124, Charles Frederick Oldham)

• Charles Frederick Oldham remarks that: "Kabol was taken by Arabs/Islamists in the time of Caliph Muawiya approx 660 AD (after about 20 years of the visit of Hiuen Tsang). The king called Kabol Shah (=Shahi of Kabol) made an appeal to the warriors of Hind. These gathered to his assistance in such numbers that the invaders were driven out of Kabol & neighboring countries as far as Bost" (See: Elliot II, p 415; See: The Sun and the Serpent: A Contribution to the History of Serpent-worship - Page 126 Charles Frederick Oldham). "Wether this king was same who had entertained Hiuen Tsang in 631 AD is uncertain but he too must have been Kshatriya, as the warriors of Hind would have taken little notice of his appeal if he were not (Kshatriya). H. H. Wilson observes that the Kambojas were represented by the Kafirs tribe of Kamoj. And it seems likely that a remanant of the Kambojas may may have been driven out into the mountain fastnesses by some of the invaders the country Popular tradition say that the Kamoj were driven out from of the coutry of Candhahar (Gandhar) (Vol I, M Elphinstone, An Account of the Kingdom of Caubul, p 620). The Kambojas and Gandharas were neighbors at the time of Mahabharata"

(See: The Sun and the Serpent: A Contribution to the History of Serpent-worship - Page 126/127 Charles Frederick Oldham).

VIEWS OF CHARLES FREDERICK OLDHAM

“In Gandhara which was governed by an officer from Kapisha (kingdom), was the ancestral home of the king of Kabol/Kapishi and so many other countries. Hiuen Tsang on his way back to China was entertained by this king at the city of Udabhandapura or Waihind which as noticed by Cunningham and more fully by Stein was the capital of Hindu Shahiya dynasty. The pilgraim marched with the king by way of Lamghan to Kabol Hiuen Tsang Memoirs, p 192). This shows that the Kshatriya king of Kabol was one of the Sahis of the Kator or Pala dynasty of Gandhara “ (The Sun and the Serpent: A Contribution to the History of Serpent-worship - Page 122 Charles Frederick Oldham).

“The paramount rulers of the people were Kator Shahis of Kabol and Gandhara (“ (The Sun and the Serpent: A Contribution to the History of Serpent-worship - Page 124 Charles Frederick Oldham).).

After the occupation of Kabol by the Mohammdans, the chiefs of Hindu Shahyas dynasty resided at Udakabhanda. They were still powerful and held nearly the whole Punjab. Their rule extended from Sarhind to Lamghan and from Kashmir to Multan. Until the final overthrow by Muslims in 11th c AD. During the long period of nearly four hundred years, the Kator Shahis were enagaged in almost continous warfare with Muslim invaders (“ (The Sun and the Serpent: A Contribution to the History of Serpent-worship - Page 126/127, Charles Frederick Oldham).).

“So the powerful were the Kators Chiefs that, in Rajatrangini, the glory of the Sahi, among kings, is compared to that of the Sun, amongst the starts of heaven (“ (The Sun and the Serpent: A Contribution to the History of Serpent-worship - Page 127 Charles Frederick Oldham).

VIEWS OF Sir H. M. Elliot

The Katormáns, or Kators, have hitherto been better known to modern than ancient history. We are informed that it was the name of one of the tribes of Káfiristán, (M Elphinstone, Caubul, Vol II, pp 376, 387) and that the ruler of Chitral to this day bears the title of Sháh Kator (Burnes Bukhara, Vol II, p 209, Journal A. S. Bengal, Vol VII, p 331) and I have heard the same designation given to the chief of Gilgit. The country of Kator is also spoken of by Sádik Isfaháni, as being the country of the Siyáh-poshes, or black-vested, on the borders of Kábul. (Takwimu-l-buldan, p 127)….(See: The History of India, Volume 2: section 98, Sir H. M. Elliot)

VIEWS OF H. A. ROSE

KATOR/SIAPOSH KAFIRS: a race mentioned by several Muhammedan historians of India. Baihaki in his Tarikh-I-Sabaktigin mentions that all the Hindus Kators were brought under rule of the Sultan Masu’d, but he does not specify their locality (E. H. I. 1, p 128). Abu Rihan Al-Biruni speaks of Katorman as the last of the Turk kings of Kabol (i.e Turkish Hindu Shahi) (Ibid, p 408), but the dynasty appears to have been also called Katormán, Katorian or Kayorman (Ibid p 405-08). Elliot gives a full account of them, but it is doubtful if the dynasty was generally called Katorman (Ibid pp 407-08). Taimur however, unquestionably found the Kators in alliance with SIAPOSH and holding a kingdom which extended from the frontier of Kashmir to mountains of Kabol and contained many towns and villages. Their ruler was called Adaslshu, Uda or Udashu (which recalls Udyana or Swat) and had his capital at Jorkal. He describes the Kators as men of a powerful frame and fair complexions, idolators for the most part, and speaking a tongue distinct from Turki, Persian, Hindi or Kashmiri (Ibid pp 400-01; cf pp 480-81). Taimur attacked their strongholds, reaching, according to Raverty, that part of Kafirstan known as Kashtur while Prince Rustam advanced into those parts of where the Katibi, (Kati), Siaposh, Pandu and Salao now dwell (Notes on Afganistan, p 136). This was in 1398 A.D. and in the end of 15th c Sultan Mahmud, descendent of Taimur led expeditions against the Kator Kafirs and Siaposh and thereby earned the title of Ghazi. Raverty identifies the Kator with Spin or White Kafirs (Wai Kafirs: Ibid p 135) but the historians of Akbar, who sent an expedition under Jahangir in 1581 against the Siaposh Kafirs of mountains of Kator, and Abu’l Fazal in his history of Taimur’s expedition speak of the Hiduan-I-Kator, a country which they describe as bounding Burner, Swat and Bajaur on the north. The family of Mihtar of Chitral is still called the Kator (vide p 174 supra), and Biddulpf’s proposed identification of the Kathae or Khattar of Attock can not be regarded as proved (It is abandoned by Irvine: J. R. A. S. 1911, pp 217-219) [Glossary of Tribes and Castes of Panjab and north-west Frontier Province...by H. A. Rose, p 485, for details]

Further References 1.The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians. The Muhammadan Period. Volume 3 - Page 400, Henry Miers Elliot.

2. The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians. The Muhammadan Period. Volume 2 – Page, 407, Henry Miers Elliot.

3.The Shahis of Afghanistan and the Punjab, 1973, pp 45, 65, Deena Bandhu Pandey.

4.History of India – 1907, P 183, A. V. Williams (Abraham Valentine Williams) Jackson, Romesh Chunder Dutt, Vincent Arthur Smith, Stanley Lane-Poole, H. M. (Henry Miers) Elliot, William Wilson Hunter, Alfred Comyn Lyall.

5.Historians of Medieval India - 1968, Page 178,

CONCLUSIONS

From the classic book: The Kafirs of the Hindukush by George Scott Robertson, we indisputably learn that the Katirs (medieval era Kators) are a section of the Siahposh Kaffirs and they are still called Kamoz (Sanskrit Kamboj).

The scholars community now accepts that the Siahposh community of Hindukush are the modern representatives of ancient Kambojas (Dr N. L. Dey). For fuller discussion see second para of Wikipedia article Kambojas. See also Link: Roots of Kamboj in Remote Antiquity [44]

Thus, it seems certain that the Kambojs constituted the land of Kapisha/Kabol and Kunar/Swat valleys and their sovereign were designated as Kshatriyas by Hiuen Tsang.

This refers to the earlier rulers of Kabol-Shahi line which have been erroneously identified as Buddhist Turk Shahis by Alberuni.

Alberuni attests that this so-called Buddhist Turk Shahi had ruled for 60 generations which means the first so-called Shahi Turk Dynasty had ruled for approx 15X60 = 900 years to be on the moderate side; And the later rulers called the Hindu Shahis ruled from 870 to 1021 approx. The oirigin first Shahi dynasty may therefore be put moderately at around the start or little prior to Christian era which fits the Kambojas much more than the Turks since Turks were not on the scene of history yet.

The origin of the so-called Turk Shahis given by Alberuni in his Tarikh-i-Hind is fraught with many problems; it is more of a supernatural kind and unconvincing.....the first king Barhtikin is described as having taken birth from the moutainous cave and therefore seems more of a folk myth and than a real history.

From the foregoing discussion and references/evidence, it is pretty much certain that the Kators (Katorman/Katoryan), the sovereigns who had ruled of Kabol/Kapishi/Gandhara for 60 generations (per Aleberuni’s accounts), were non-else than Kator/Katir Kambojas from the Siahposh Kafir grouping. They are likely to have seen the ups and downs in the centuries that rolled by and may have sometimes acted as local Feudatories to the Yavanas, Kushans and later even to the Hunas but as the clout of these foreign invaders fell weaker with time, the local line of feudatory rulers reasserted themselves and became most prominent during the time of Hieun Tsang and later. Since the Kushans have also been known as Tokharas, and the ancient Kambojas have lived under their sway for some times, the identity of the latter appears to have been jumbled up inadvertently down the road and hence the confusion that the Kator shahis of Kapishi/Kabol/Gandhara were of Turk/Tibeten origin.

RECOMMENDED READING

Read Chapter V (pages 115-130) of The Sun and the Serpent: A Contribution to the History of Serpent-worship, Charles Frederick Oldham) [45].

Read pp 75-77 of the Book THE KAFIRS OF THE HINDUKUSH by George Scott Robertson: [46]

Sze cavalry01 20:30, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

The Yetha (Hunas) had occupied Gandhara in about 462 AD. Huna King Tormana (~500-515 AD) ruled Punjab, Kashmir, Rajaputana, and UP (See: History and Culture of Indian People, The Classical Age, p 35, Editors Dr Majumdar, Dr Pusalkar).

Huna king Tormana was succeeded to his empire by his son (?)Mihirakula (515-540 (547?) AD). In 520 AD, Chinese Ambassador Sung Yun came to the court of Huna king of Gandhara. He states that the Hunas had occupied Gandhara two generations prior to him and had brought utter havoc to this country (Gandhara). He further reports that “the disposition of the king (or dynasty) cruel, and vindictive and he practiced the most barbaric atrocities. He did not believe in Buddha and worshipped Demons. Entirely self-reliant on his own strength, he had engaged on a war with the country of Kipin, disputing the boundaries of that kinfgdom and his troops had engaged in it for three years….”

History and Culture of Indian People, Vol III further states that the cruel and barbaric king of Gandhara as referred to by Sung-yun (520 AD) and accounts of Cosmos, an Alexandrine Greek (written 525-535 AD, final form in 547 AD) was Mihirakula. (See: History and Culture of Indian People, The Classical Age, p 36, Editors Dr R. C. Majumdar, Dr A. D. Pusalkar).

Some scholars consider the Kipin of Sung-yun as Kashmir which does not seem to be correct since Kashmir was already conqurered and was being ruled by Toramana (death 515 AD) as is noted above by HIstory and Culture of Indian People (Vol III). Since Mihirakula had succeeded Toramana, Kashmir kingdom (already conquered by Toramana) was also passed on to Mihirakula as a subjugated country. Thus, Sung Yun’s reference to Kipin clearly means Kapisa or Kapisi (and Kabol) area (a part of ancient Kamboja) which at this time was ruled by Kator Shahi Dynasty, if we believe in the statement of Alberuni that Kator Shahi Dynasty (Turk-Shahi according to him) had ruled for 60 generation upto 870 AD. Thus the above referred to fight of the Hunas (under Muhirkula) was undertaken against the Kator rulers of Kabol/Kapisi/Lamghan region (the Kambojas).

It is not clear if the Hunas had ever conquered Kapisa kingdom. Thus it looks like the local chiefs of Kators of Kapisa/Kabol had established their principality in the Pre-Kushan period and may have ruled as local Feudatory to the Kushans but after the disappearance of the Kushans from the scene of history, they may have reasserted themselves (being a predominant Kamboja territory) and established an independent kingdom in parts of Kabol valley, Kapisa and Lamghan and Swat etc. It is also likely that after three years of prolonged war with Huna king of Gandhara, the Kator king may have been subjugated by Hunas and may have agreed to pay tribute and accept Huna supremacy (as Feudatory) but as the Huna rule was short-lived, the Kator Shahi may have soon re-emerged independent soon afterwards. Later, they defnitely had expanded their kingdom to embrace Gandhara as well. (As already reported in some earlier write-up, the ruling familiy of Kapisha/kabol had its ancestral home in Gandhara and we also know that the current popular tradition among the Kamojes of Nurestan says that they originally belonged to Gandhar. See pages 127-128 of LInk [47]. Thus the Kshatriya Kator Shahi king of Kapisha/Kabol indeed belonged to Kamboja lineage.

We also see that when Hiuen Tsang had visited Kapisa/Kabol in 631-644 AD, the reigning king of Kabol/Kapisha kingdom was a Kashatriya. (Note that the Kambojas are abundantly attested as Kshatriyas in numerous ancent Sanskrit texts). The same Kshatriya king had also seen off Hiuen Tsang to China in 644 AD in his homewards journey.

And about 15 years after Hiuen Tsang had left Kabol/Kapisa, the Kapisa kingdom is said to have been invaded by Arabs (460-61 AD) and the king at that time is believed to have been still the same Kshatriya ruler since other Kshatriyas from the Hind are said to have come to his military aid against the Muslim Arabs. SEE LINK: [48]

Read pp 113 through 130 of the above LINK for better perspective.

It appears highly likely that the Kator Shahi Dynasty (erroneously called Turk-Shahi by Alberuni) was Kamboja dynasty since the medieval age Kators are modern Katirs (also Kata according to Richerd Strands' website) and they are indeed a section of prior 1896 Siahposhes Kafirs. These Siaposh Kafirs (Kams/Kamoz and Katirs/Kanmtoz) have abundantly been identified as the modern representatives of ancient Kambojas. Before 1896, they were called Kafirs (infidels) but after 1896, a new designation was applied to them after they were forcibly brought into Islam.

According to Richerd Strands website, Nuristân lies in the Hindu Kush mountains of northeastern Afghânistân, spanning the basins of the Alingâr, Pech, Landai Sin, and Kunar rivers ( a part of the ancient homelnad of Kambojas...Dr W. W. Taran, W. K. Fraser Tytler, M. C. Gillett, Donald N. Wilber etc). It is the homeland of a unique group of Indo-European-speaking tribal peoples, now called Nuristânis, who fled and resisted Islâm as it spread eastward. In 1895-96 the Nuristânis were finally and forcibly conquered by the Afghân armies of Âmir Abdur Rahmân Khân, and the people were obliged to abandon their ancient religious beliefs in favor of Islâm.

Nuristânis are today such devout Muslims that they were the first citizens of Afghânistân to successfully revolt against the communist overthrow of their government in 1978. Their success inspired others throughout the country to rise up and bleed the Soviet Union to death through thirteen years of war. The straw that broke the Soviet Union's back sprouted in Nuristân, and we must acknowledge the pivotal historical role that the Nuristânis played in nurturing the seed [49].

Nuristan remained a scene of some of the bloodiest guerrilla fighting with the Soviet forces from 1979 through 1989.

Reference:

• History and Culture of UIndian People, The Classical Age, Dr R. C. Majumdar, Dr A. D. Pusalkar
• Ancient India, 2002, Dr V. D. Mahajan.
• The Sun and the Serpent: A Contribution to the History of Serpent-worship, 1905, Charles Frederick Oldham

Sze cavalry01 23:46, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Views of Olaf Caroe (The Pathans, 1958)

It would be seen that the Afghan tribes by the time of Alberuni were established just where they are today, east of Kabol and in the mountains as far as the Indus. They were not yet converted and were imaptient of control ….Alberuni is another Herodotus…for the first time in fifteen years, we are granted the glimpses behind the trappings of dynastic annals. Unfortunately he gives no names of these rebellious savages… Afghan tribes, for that we have to wait another five centuries for Babur. But we may surmise that they would not have been so much different from what they were in Babur’s times and as we shall see, in Babur’s times, most of the tribes occupied the ground they do today. At least from Alberuni, we know that by the time of early Ghaznivids, the Afghans have appeared upon the stage in thevery regions where they are today (See: The Pathans, 1958, p 113, Olaf Caroe).

Herodotus and Arrian’s is real history. Theirs were no dark ages. If we can follow in Scylax’s and Alexander’s wake to Indus, and still recognise the topography, let’s not dismiss to readily the evidence of similarity in place and tribal names like Aspasii and Asaceni. Could one awake in Talash (in Swat) to see Alexander (326 BCE) or Babur (1504 AD) pass with their clatter of arms, the waker likely as not would find the men of the villages much the same as he knows them now. Until only the other day, it has been the fashion of the arms that changes…Le-Enfield going back to carbine, carbine to Jezali, and Jezali to bows and arrows of those most warlike men, who more than 2000 years ago, dwelt upon the borders of the country of Paktuike…i.e those inhabitants of Swat and Udyana valleys (See: The Pathans, 1958, p 57, Olaf Caroe, also see p 115)

Olaf caroe further writes that on west of Panjkora or Guraen river lived the Iranians called the Aspasii (from Persian Aspa= horse) and on its east lived the Asaceni (Asvakas of the Sanskrit) who had Indian affinities (Sanskrit Asva = horse). Both these names are derived from horse or chivalry)---(in other words the people were socalled because of their chivalry or cavalry skills). Olaf Caroe has also quoted Dr J. W. McCrindle (Sede Pathans, 1958, pp 56, 443, fn 20) to reinforce his views and thus seems to agree with McCrindle who locates ancient Kamboja at this location and also says that name Afghan has evidently been derived from Asvakan, the Assakenois of the Arrian. Dr McCrindle says that infact Afghanistan was ancient Kamboja and is the Kaofu (Kambu) of Hiuen Tsang. It covered areas of Kabol, kapisa, Lamghan, Jallabad and Hindukush etc,

According to Dr H. C. Raychadhury, Dr B. N. Mukerjee and many others, the Aspasios (Aspasians, Aspasiis) were western Branch of the Assakeninas (Assakenois/Asacenis). Most historian now agree that the Asvakas were a subtribe of the Kambojas where latter name was a general term applying to the people of this country (Dr K. P. Jayswal. Dr E. Lamotte, Dr Buddha Prakash, Dr H. C. Raychaudhury, Dr B. N. Mukerjee, Dr R Thapar, Dr R. C. Majumdar, Dr J. L. Kamboj and others). Accordingly, the people of Swat, Aornos, Talash, Kunar and Kabol were included in the broader term Kambojas. They belonged to same ethnicity but the western section was more Iranian and barbaric while the east section, being exposed to Indo-Iranian civilization was more Indian. THis also fits theview of scholars like Dr Keith, Dr Macdonnel, W. K. Fraser Tytler, M. C. Gillett,, Donald Wilber and others that the Kambojas had both Indian as well as Iranian affinities. This eastern section of the Ashvakas who were located on the borders of Paktuike country is the one whom Herodotus calls as the most warlike of the Indian tribes. These highlanders had earlier played crucial roles in the armies of Achaemenids and later had offered stout resistence to the Macedonian Invaders. The Assakenois of Ariian are the Ashvakayanas of Panini where as the Aspasian/Aspasios of Arrian are the Ashvayanas of Panini.

The relics of the name Assakenoi are still seen in the Aspin of Chitral and the Yashkun of Gilgit, according to Dr J. W. McCrindle (The Invasion Of India By Alexander The Great As Described By Arrian, Q. Curtius, Diodorus, Plutarch And Justin, Dr J. W. McCrindle). The modern descendents of Aspasiis are Yusafzais (Aspasii= Ispazai=Yosafzai) and the Pachais. Other scholars like Dr N. K. Shastri, Dr Buddha Parkash, Dr L. M. Joshi, Dr Fauja Singh, Dr J. L. Kamboj and many others also hold the similar views.

The hallmark of the above discussion is also the fact that the tribal settlements in the remote hilly regions in the north-east Afghanistan/and the Frontiers Pprovince of Pakistan have not undergone material changes since the days of Herodotus and Arrian. Thus, in today's Aspin/Yashkuns (from Ashvakans/Ashvakayans..the Assaekenois of Arrian), Yusefzais, Pachai/Asps (from Aspasii of Strabo, Aspasio of Arrian, Asvayan of Panini), Kamojes/Camujees/Kamoges Katirs/Kators (Siahposh group of M. Elphinstone, Sir George Scott Robertson, Oldham, Bombay Gazetteer etc) etc, we can clearly see the remains of ancient people....all various ramifications of the ancient Kamboja/Gandhara ethnics.

The names have changed though the people are approximately the same according to modern scholars.

Sze cavalry01 00:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Why are the hindu shahis classified under foreign kingdoms? Whatever there origin, they quite obviously had assimilated and considered themselves to be Indian kings. The Arab chroniclers of the period mention them as the staunchest opponents to islamic expansion into India. I will leave this unchanged for a few days and then make the change.

Devanampriya 01:08, 10 January 2007 (UTC)Devanampriya

The source provided for the points 2, 4, 5 and 7 in the reference list is not complete. Please provide the full reference list i.e. Title of the book, Author, Editor and Publisher, Place and Date of Publication. It is only written: Wink pg. ##. I did not find its complete reference. - Ariana 15:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 19:47, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Shahi has several different meanings (including an old currency in Iran) and even Shahi dynasty is ambiguous, because it refers to several different dynasties (look at this search result for example). Kabul-Shahs is the most common term for referring to this dynasty, among the reliable academic texts (see [50]). Alefbe ( talk) 03:01, 23 May 2009 (UTC)