Let's get some facts right, shall we?
The tribal communities of Nags, Munds and Bhils inhabited Maharashtra in ancient times. They were joined by the Aryas, the Shakas and the Huns, who came from the North, as well as by foreigners, who arrived by sea. The Dravidians from the South also settled in the land, joining a group which collectively became known as 'Marathas'.
So 'Maratha' in historical terms refers to an amazing mix of people.
In popular usage, the word Maratha is used to identify a distinct warrior community which has dominated the political scene of Maharashtra since medieval times. This community has several aboriginal tribal elements - for example, Khandoba (sword-father) and and Bhavani (mother goddess), the two chief deities of the Marathas, are aboriginal in character.
Shivaji, a 17th century Maratha chieftain, brought political prominence to the Marathas. You're sure to spot garlanded statues and photos of Shivaji if you're travelling in Bombay.
The tribal communities of Nags, Munds and Bhils inhabited Maharashtra in ancient times. They were joined by the Aryas, the Shakas and the Huns, who came from the North, as well as by foreigners, who arrived by sea. The Dravidians from the South also settled in the land, joining a group which collectively became known as 'Marathas'.
So 'Maratha' in historical terms refers to an amazing mix of people.
In popular usage, the word Maratha is used to identify a distinct warrior community which has dominated the political scene of Maharashtra since medieval times. This community has several aboriginal tribal elements - for example, Khandoba (sword-father) and and Bhavani (mother goddess), the two chief deities of the Marathas, are aboriginal in character.
Shivaji, a 17th century Maratha chieftain, brought political prominence to the Marathas. You're sure to spot garlanded statues and photos of Shivaji if you're travelling in Bombay.
"The tribal communities of Nags, Munds and Bhils inhabited Maharashtra in ancient times"
ReplyDeleteI have no clue who the Munds and Bhils are, Deepa, but I am reasonably sure that the Nags, a Celtic people consisting largely of my mother and several other female relatives, all live near me these days and object to nearly everything I say or do and have no qualms about informing me of their displeasure, coupled with a need to annoy me no end in order to get me to do what they want me to do.
I wonder why you find the need to write about Marathas, Ms. Krishnan, when you yourself are not one.
ReplyDeleteMaratha's were never aboriginal. i am a Maratha and i have zero dravidian or aboriginal features. Maratha's are Indo-Aryan warriors who are Kshatriyas. What Shivaji did was mobilize all the casts of Maharashtra and Karnataka (Brahmin's, Kshatriyas, aboriginals as well as the lower castes) to fight a war that wasnt for the Maratha's but for Hindu's of Hindustan. He is the only Hindu warrior that successfully defended our religious DHARM without differentiating his followers and warriors based on their color, creed or race. Infact, there have been instances of the Maratha Navy fighting wars in alliance with the Portuguese and Dutch to defend India against the attacking British.
I can guarantee you Deepa, that had it not been for Shivaji and the Maratha's, you and I would instead be Muslims praying in a mosque without a single trace of Hinduism in out country. I honestly believe that Shivaji is Hindustan's hero and deserves more credit.
Can you answer me why...people in Delhi oppose a statue of Shivaji being built in Mumbai, when statue's of the repulsive and uncouth Mayawati are being errected in every corener of UP? Why are we as Mumbaikar's not thankful to Shivaji and his army? Today's maratha's are not comparable to Shivaji and his band of me.
Try becoming a shivaji, emulate his spirit than making his "putlas" around town - shivaji would be turning a happy 360 in his grave.
ReplyDeleteLets make the world a "Happy-istan"
hehe marathas are indo aryan kshatriyas????...nice joke. They are definately not kshatriyas. Marathas have no history before Shivaji maharaj. Its the brahmins who have given them the kshatriya status that to for their own benifit. Even today the brahmins do not perform the janeu ceremony for marathas. Marathas hence are indigenious people of maharashtra. Though Shivaji maharaj was a kshatriya by his deeds.
ReplyDeleteShivaji maharaj belong to sisodiya clan
DeletePlease do not get confused with marathas & Marathis..marathas were indeed kshatriya clan whereas marathis are habitats(local mix) of Maharashtra & and of discussed earlier,I m not here to defend anyone but truth is a must
DeleteI m a Rajput so I don't need to be justified and a history student as well
And my friend sisodia is a rajput clan which is of Maharana PRATAP
DeleteShivaji was bhosale...please see history by historians..marathas were great at gorilla warfare..see Google...whereas local left out mix people were known as marathis
DeleteMarathas were great under the leadership of Shivaji,his administration was wow hats off,he dreamt of one nation as a whole..his son sambhaji was another great warrior..and when Maharana pratap died Akbar cried because he could not capture him ever..and the country lost a great warrior..whereas when shivaji died the whole country cried because he has a great dream
The 96 Kshatriya families had come to Maharashtra before and during the medieval times. Their caste and surnames have Rajasthani Kshatriya origin. For example:The surname'Chavan' has its origin in the Rajasthani surname 'Chauhan'of Prithviraj Chavan. The surname 'Chauvan' was associated with the village "Chauhan" situated on the border of Rajasthan and Hariyana in the historical past during the tenure of the king Prithviraj Chavan. The Mohantis came to be called as Mohite, the Powar or Parmars were called as Pawar, the Malik were called as Mulik,etc. If you read the names of all the great-grandfathers of the royal families of the Sindhudurga Kings Sawant in Konkan, they are all Rajasthani names. In today's period it is not available. Moreover, a number of muli-lingual and multi-caste families in Maharashtra have this surname i.e. Chavan. For example: the non-kshatriya Rajput families. the Kannada-speaking Lingayat families, the Hindi speaking Bhangis famiiies, the Banjara families etc. If you study the histoical status of Chavan families you will find that due for their Kshatriya origin,they became the heads of their lands or villages. The possessed titles such as Patil, Deshmukh, Inamdar, Sardar etc.The other subcaste Chavans were not Kshatriya because they carried out their traditional works. It was due to prejudice and jealousy some Orthodox and pretensive historians were not ready to acknowledge the leadership and historical origin of Kshatriya-Marathas.They had declared a boycott on the coronation ceremony of Shivaji under the pretext that he was not a Kshatriya. During his tenure he had punished the corrupted, pretencious,deceptive and anti-social and orthodox leaders in his kingdom. His secular policies had challenged their religious monopolies. In order to maintain it they tried to spread misinformation about him and his community. During that period it was easy for them to mislead common people, but in modern times people can easily recognize their commmunal and castist agenda.Most of the historical records have been destroyed by such people. Therefore,prejudiced young boys are easily misled. Before arriving at a conclusion, they should keep it in their minds that the books of history written in the past were full of ignorance, prejudice against the Maratha rulers. It is for such reasons they are not ready to accept Marathas as Kshatriya. Some of the so-called historians have abolished historical documentary evidence to preserve their monopoly as the highly educated, civilized and culturally upper-caste historians.
DeleteMarathas were kshatriya rajput
DeleteWho says there was no maratha king before Shivaji Maharaj, but konkan was ruled by Shirke's who were Marathas, aurangabad was ruled by Jadhavs who were decentdence of Yadav, some forts were also ruled by more's who were also Marathas, Marathas used to serve to nizams and adilshah, but Shivaji brought them together. Maratha's are rajputs of sisodia clan, Shivaji Maharaj allowed every caste to enter in their army, so many started calling them self as Marathas, some of those are today kunbis Maratha.
DeleteKunbi are different and Maratha were different.Maratha were Kshatriyas.Devgiri kingdom were also called Maratha Kingdom.
DeletePlease correct your information about history of Maratha's. The word Maratha is now commonly used by every marathi speaking community in India. The 96 clan system came into existance during the reign of shivaji maharaj. This clan system included Maratha-Rajput clan (kshatriya), Maratha kshatriya clan's, Kunbi's, dhangar's, Teli's and many more. All were given the maratha status. The one which did not belong to any royal clan were given the clan name (gharana name) of the clan they served. E.g kunbis, dhangars and Telis for example. So all of them started calling themselves as kshatriya's. FYI The clans which originally belong to kshatriya dharma still follow the tread ceremony ritual in their kul dharma. (This one is for whoever say's 'janve' is only worn by brahmins) The original defination is that 'Janve' is worn under the 16 sanskar riti-rivaj followed under sanatana dharma. Brahmins are not the only one wearing Janve. Kshatriya who follow the 16 sanskars also wear them. I know this because I am from Pawar clan (now Vishwasrao - honor bestowed upon our gharana before the reign of shivaji) belonging to the princely state of dhar and devas. Which still has a titular king. Kindly check your history before claiming all the 96k clan to shudra's.
DeleteI'm too a Hindu Mr. Raj G, but i'm secular as Shivaji Maharaj was. Shivaji was a Hindu but he gave jobs to many Muslims, he was not an enemy of Muslims, he believed in secularism. don't spoil his name if you son't know history.he only opposed the cruel rulers who ruled our country and tried to established a secular kingdom.he opposed forceful religious conversions -a policy adopted by then rulers.this does not mean he was orthodox Hindu.many Muslims where on high posts in his army. he had the trust of Muslims too.he was hero of all the communities.
ReplyDeleteI can smell jealousy from the comment posted by 'Anonymous'. The attitude that is reflected from this comment is: If I am not brave or incapable of performing such deeds then resort to verbal bashing or false-propoganda about the ones who are capable of such deeds. That's the way these sissies and morons alleviate their jealousy.
ReplyDeleteRegards,
Suresh
All ppl above are talking shit there statement clearly states how illiterate nd caste bound dis ppl are who are wasting writing such shit articles nd debating for same
ReplyDeleteI don't why everyone wants debate bout these origins.
ReplyDeleteWe should be proud that the Marathas sucessfully created an empire and the tactics they used in the battles are still studied in many military schools all over the world.
Whatever their origin was ,kshatriya ,shudra or any caste, the fact is that they reached this attock and invaded afghans too which no indian power did before.They restored many ancient temples in northern India. And as far as the grandeur of Red fort is concerned it was built by Mughal fanatic rulers who destroyed many Indian architecture Marvels.So we can say that the Marathas settled the score.
I don't why everyone wants debate bout these origins.
ReplyDeleteWe should be proud that the Marathas sucessfully created an empire and the tactics they used in the battles are still studied in many military schools all over the world.
Whatever their origin was ,kshatriya ,shudra or any caste, the fact is that they reached this attock and invaded afghans too which no indian power did before.They restored many ancient temples in northern India. And as far as the grandeur of Red fort is concerned it was built by Mughal fanatic rulers who destroyed many Indian architecture Marvels.So we can say that the Marathas settled the score.
Rajput are shits who were slaves of mughals,even they gave their women to mughals.Marathas were never been slave of anyone and they were greater than Rajputs in everything.
ReplyDeleteIt's not like that bro it's because they were not unitedly opposed Muslim invaders that's why there mindset changed about there bravery
DeleteReally marathas are great in every respect....they are generous beyond the limits than any other castes in India.
ReplyDeleteAll peoples who served this nation our motherland are great whether it's mosurya Gupta Maratha rajputs jatt etc
ReplyDeleteThe thing matters their deeds
And Muslims invaders gave nothing but sorrow to this nation so not respect them because it's not their land it's of all Hindustanis !
Everyone is greatest after smokin some grass.
ReplyDeleteSo chill you all.
Peshwa were Shudras and belongs to Dravid people. But they called themselves Kshatriyas and Shudras by showing there Origin from awadh region in North India. Peshwas were Shudras adopted Brahminsm and called themselves Brahmin They could not able to prove themselves Brahmin .
ReplyDeletePeshwas were Shudras adopted Brahminsm so they called themselves Brahmin and Kshatriya both.All Brahmin were Shudras and all people in Maharashtra were Shudras.
ReplyDeletemarathas are kshatriya rajputs, the rajput which lived in maharashtrian region and spoke marathi were called maratha.This bloody bhramins claimed marathas to be shudras because the bhramins had fear of loosing power. And one more important thing is peshwas were not the rulers of maratha kingdom they were appointed as prime minister to the kingdom..... .But now this bloody bhramins claim of being the king but they arn't. THE BHRAMINS ARE JUST A PIECE OF SHIT AFRAID OF LOOSING POWER HENCE CLAIMING MARATHAS TO BE SHUDRAS.......
ReplyDeleteIm from the Pawar clan too.. and agree completely with Sonal.
ReplyDeleteFirstly I am against the clan/caste system.. but just for some clarification.
These bastards who keep on saying marathas are all shudras are literally illiterate. Go fuck yourselves.
Go back to the 4th century BC, when the great Chandragupta Maurya was called a shudra by local brahmans and was finally initiated by a Brahman from Varnasi and he also performed a Rudraabhishek on Chandragupta. And then suddenly he was not only a Kshatriya (twice born) but also a chakravarthy (king of Kshatriyas).
This kind of story is seen in all dynasties including Chalukya, Rashrtakuta, Chalukya 2, Yadava (Seuna) & Maratha.
So called Rajput clans of PArmar, chauhan, solanki and PArtihar are also shown as legit by means of a sacrificial fire ceremony and then called as Kshatriya.
Please be informed critically before claiming any info.
The Vedas themselves claim that a 'Varna' is not by birth but by deeds only.
Illiterates confuse 'Varna' with 'Jaati'.
Dont let these motherfuckers put anyone down. Believe in the concept of one nation - India.
Jai Hind. Jai Maharashtra.
why did you not publish my comment from wikipedia?
ReplyDeleteI belongs to Pawar clan and now my surname is parbhane because we had given Parbhani Jahangir.....we were from abugad Rajasthan....I have all details about my 40 forefathers,and where they origined from....my gotra is washisht ....we Marathas and even more than 80% of Indian population is Aryan ....thanku
ReplyDeleteIt is well proven by historians that both Maratha caste and Kunbi caste were originally the same. Both are peasant communities of Maharashtra. They are definitely not aryan or anything like that. They are of aboriginal/peasant origin as their Gods such as Mhasoba are totemic. Just google and you will find many books that quote this. I will be quiet about Maratha varna as it will be offensive to them and varna is a human invention anyways - so who cares? Please spread love and not hate based on caste.
ReplyDeleteI got this from the internet. It is from an American academic journal. It sums up the caste system in Maharashtra very nicely. The American Economic Review - Volume 96, Issues 3-4. Nashville, Tenn. American Economic Association. (year:2006) page:1228. High castes include all the Brahmin jatis, as well as a few other elite jatis (CKP and Pathare Prabhus).Low castes include formerly untouchable and backward castes (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Other Backward Castes, as defined by the government of India). Medium castes are drawn mostly from the cultivator jatis, such as the Marathas and the Kunbis, as well as other traditional vocations that were not considered to be ritually impure.
ReplyDelete"Arya" isn't even a race. It's an ethical designation for any human who is Noble and follows Dharma. The writer of this article probably meant Indo-Iranians but even that isn't fully correct. Anyway, Bhils are also a part of Indo-Iranian ethnicity (so called "Aryans"). Their traditional Bhil language is fully Indo-Iranian. The Scythians were also Indo-European (so called "Aryan"). And if genetics is the subject majority of the Deshasta Brahmins, Karhade Brahmins, Devarkukhe Brahmins, Daivadnya Brahmins, etc. have 80% of their genes to be of "Dravidian" or Ancestral South Indian origin, much similar to the Kolis and Kunbis.
ReplyDeleteSo for the sake of Dharma and our Nation stop this idiocy of racism based on outdated concepts of race. If you believe in these bs Aryan-Dravidian pseudo-history, then you still are mentally a slave of the British and their divide and rule policy.
I am maratha my clan deoda chavan rajput in rajsthan and my family migarte to 1345 came to rajsthan and based north maharshtara dhule.my sirname also deore and the same name found rajput in north maharshtara .and my family skin color match Indo Iranian stepe farmers
DeleteHistorians in British times classified only 4 castes in India as pure Aryan, based on the nasal index. They are Marathi Deshastha Brahman, Marathi Koknastha Brahman, Chandraseni Kayastha Prabhu (CKP) and Punjabi Khatris. These details can be found in anthropological books. Whether they are aryan or not is debatable but this is what the British classified them as- it may be divide and rule policy. Ethoven (British) said about Maratha caste that the totemic nature of their devak system suggests that they are largely of a non-Aryan origin.
ReplyDeleteReference:The Indian Journal of Social Work, Volume 25, 1965 page 138
One interesting point that Hindus should note about this manipulative classification is that "coincidentally" all the above mentioned castes (Deshastha, Koknastha, CKP and Khatri) were all very highly educated compared to other individual Hindu communities and hence naturally the British needed them. In fact, if you check the census data, you will find that these 4 castes were the most educated hindu castes in India - their literacy far surpassed even the Brahmin castes of north and south India and Bengal. This data is available online on Indian govt websites and you can easily find the numerical values. So perhaps the British manipulated this aryan/dravidian theory to get these castes to think that they were different from the other Indians. Perfect way to divide and conquer. Just get the most educated/intellectual communities on your side and set them against the other Indians.
In coronation of great king chatrapati Shivaji Maharaja Bhosle some of Brahmin put Exception that Maharaj was shudra . Then they called pundits of pundits shri.vishesvara bhatt commonly known as gagga bhatt then he stated that vikr shiromani shri chattrapati shivraje Bhosle was from sisodia rajput clan . But pundit gagga bhatt has done all his process by his left for because he was not clear . Sir rajputo ko Gail dene also agar rajput nahi hope to Tim 1300 me he converted ho choke hote ;)
ReplyDeleteMy dear friends let me clear as an indian I consider all Indians are one and same but as a marathi I would like to shed light on some topics unknown to many still they keep answering a lot of questions with vague knowledge or whims.
ReplyDeleteHere is the some clarification.
Marathis never consider themselves as south or dravidians.
Most answers given about marathis is by some people either of south or some other states who dont know anything or want to madly include them in their state without asking any true marathi.
If marathis were south they would never had rejected the fact. Secondly the reason why you find culture transfusion is because Maharashtrians ruled 2500 years over south especially karnatak and andhraites but also m.p,. u.p and many other states.
The north Indian race is mixed with people of middle east , because of invasions and not because of they are aryans or anything. The middle east are not aryans brothers try to understand and that is now the mixture of north India. Sorry to say. It is recently checked.
The people of middle india along with bengali and bihar is also not aryan , but different race or tribal .See how jharkhand people look which separated from bihar and people and their cultures. Bengal and bihar are also different in looks and they were one state once upon a time.
The land near to rivers like ganga and sindhu is place of culture formation, here all people from different states or places come together for settling and creating civilizations. People from all parts of different races,ethnicity come together to make a living and create culture.
Look at the fact madhavi was the mother of nakul and sahadev pandavs.
Third the south Indian blood was tested and found to have African traces.
We have a long aryan history to mention in the Ramayana as an part of the aryavart , where lord Rama felt easy to come and rest in Nasik being part of aryavart or the aryan kingdoms.
I hope your misconception about Maharashtrians are cleared.