Editing Rajput (section)

==Etymology and Early references==
===''Rājaputra''===
The word ''Rājaputra'' ({{Langx|sa|राजपुत्र}}; literally "son of a king") finds mention in some ancient [[Hindu]] scriptures like the ''[[Rigveda]]'', ''[[Ramayana]]'' and ''[[Mahabharata]]''.{{sfn|Rima Hooja|2006|p=181}} According to Sabita Singh, the word first appears in a sense other than its literal meaning in the 7th century [[Bakhshali manuscript]] from [[North-West Frontier Province|NWFP]] in reference to a mercenary soldier, while in the 8th century [[Chachnama]] of [[Sindh]], it is used for elite horsemen.<ref name=sab>{{cite book|title=The Politics of Marriage in India Gender and Alliance in Rajasthan|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0bSmDwAAQBAJ&dq=Chachnama+rajput&pg=PT22
|isbn=9780199098286|author=Sabita Singh| date=27 May 2019 |page=2|publisher=Oxford University Press |quote=Deeply set in the minds of historians of all hues is the association of medieval Rajasthan with the Rajputs. This is so deeply set indeed that one tends to forget that the earliest reference to the ''Rajputra'', in  a sense other than that of a prince, comes not from the records of Rajasthan, but occurs in the Bakhshali manuscript (seventh century) from North West Frontier Province, in the sense of mercenary soldier and as Irfan Habib points out in the ''Chachnama'' (eighth century) of Sind, in the sense of an elite horsemen.}}</ref> A late 11th century inscription from [[Mount Abu]] talks of "all the ''rājaputras'' of the illustrious ''Rājaputra'' clan".{{sfn|Brajadulal Chattopadhyaya|1994|p=83|loc="a Mt. Abu inscription of the late eleventh century speaks of ‘all the ''rājaputras'' of the illustrious ''Rājaputra'' clan.}} In [[Kalhana]]'s ''[[Rajatarangini|Rājatarangiṇī]]'' (12th century), the ''rājaputras'' appear as mercenary soldiers claiming high status on account of birth.<ref>
*{{cite book|editor=J.S. Grewal |year=2005 |title=The State and Society in Medieval India  |publisher=Oxford University Press |page=148 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=LKkBJyKdoZ8C&q=The%20State%20and%20Society%20in%20Medieval%20India |isbn=0195667204|quote=Somadeva's Kathāsaritsāgara, composed in Kashmir between 1063 and 1081, shows the rājaputras as mercenary soldiers of some status. There is much evidence to the same effect in Kalhana's Rājatarangini (1149-50), the great history of Kashmir. In an early reference, relating to an incident of the eighth century, the rājaputra could be both a prince and a notable warrior. But early in the eleventh century, the sense of warrior is clear. The rājaputras lead the Kashmiri army sent to assist Shahi Trilochanapāla against Mahmud of Ghazni. A rājaputra is said to be one who has his pay and carries arms, and must therefore be loyal to his master...The rājaputras began to form a loose federation of castes well before the twelfth century in a manner characteristic of the Indian social system. Kalhana regards them as immigrants into Kashmir, one of them coming from as far as Champa (eastern Bihar). And yet they had begun to claim a very high position on account of their birth. Kalhana refers to 'those Rājaputras, Anantapāla and the rest, who claim descent from the thirty-six families, and who in their pride would not concede a higher position to the sun himself'.}}
*{{cite journal|last=Wink|first=Andre |year=2002 |title=The Mahārājas of India |publisher=Brill.com |url=https://brill.com/display/book/9789004483002/B9789004483002_s009.xml?rskey=O3hW42&result=1 |journal=Al-Hind, Volume 1 Early Medieval India and the Expansion of Islam 7th-11th Centuries |pages=219–358 |doi=10.1163/9789004483002_009 |isbn=978-90-04-48300-2 |quote=Page 232 — The earliest extant and most important of these chronicles is the ''Rājatarangiṇī'' or 'Stream of Kings', compiled by Kalhana in about 1150 A.D.<br> Page 239 — Royal troops are then regularly seen engaging in expeditions against various ''dāmara'' chiefs. The mainstay of these royal troops were evidently the 'Rājaputras' and other mercenaries from outside of Kashmir, whose 'bravery' Kalhana contrasts with the conspicuous 'cowardice' of the ''dāmara'' and the rest of the Kashmirian population.|url-access=subscription }}</ref> An inscription from [[Chittor]] (1301) mentions three generations of ''rājaputras''.{{sfn|Brajadulal Chattopadhyaya|1994|p=83|loc="A Chitor inscription of AD 1301 mentions three generations of ''rājaputras'',..}}

B.D Chattopadhyay says that according to the references to ''rajputras'' in medieval and early medieval sources, they represent a mixed caste that constituted a large section of "petty chiefs holding estates".{{sfn|Brajadulal Chattopadhyaya|1994|p=62|ps=:If the early medieval and medieval references to rajputras in general are taken into account, they represent a mixed caste and constituted a fairly large sections of petty chiefs holding estates.}}
Thus, the ''Rajputra'' covers all levels from the actual son of a king to the lowest level landholder.{{sfn|Brajadulal Chattopadhyaya|1994|p=83|ps=:It is understandable then that among the ruling elites, rajputra covered a wide range, from the actual son of a king to the lowest ranking landholder.}} The term is used for a prince under the [[Chahamana]]s but for the lowest ranking "fief" holder under the [[Chalukya]]s.<ref>{{cite book|quote=Irfan Habib says: ''Rajaputras'', for example is used for a prince under Cahamanas, but for the lowest ranking "fief" holder under the Chalukyas. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=oh7ICQAAQBAJ&dq=rajaputra+irfan+habib&pg=PT106 |title=Warfare in Pre-British India - 1500BCE to 1740CE |year=2015 |author=Kaushik Roy |isbn=978-1317586913 |publisher=Taylor & Francis}}</ref>

===''Thakur''===

According to B.D Chattopadhyay, from 700 CE, north India's political and military landscape was dominated by large [[Kshatriya]] landowners called ''thakurs'', some of whom were descended from pastoral tribes and central Asian invaders; they later came to be known as Rajputs.<ref>{{cite book|title=The Routledge History of Global War and Society |editor=Matthew S. Muehlbauer, David J. Ulbrich |year=2018 |isbn=978-1317533184| publisher=Routledge |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1EBNDwAAQBAJ&dq=from+700+CE,+North+India%27s+political+and+military+landscape+was+dominated+by+large+Kshatriya+landowners&pg=RA1-PA1931|page=1931 |quote=The rise of the Rajputs constituted a landmark in Indian military history. Imperial historians identified the Rajputs as one of the Aryan martial races. More recently, Brajadulal Chattopadhyay (1994) has offered a social perspective about their rise to power. He writes that from 700 BCE, large Kshatriya landowners known as ''thakurs'' dominated the political and military landscape of north India. Eventually known as Rajputs, some had descended from the pastoral tribes and central Asian invaders who had merged with the settled society of north India.}}</ref> [[Andre Wink]] notes that the military nobility of Sindh ruler [[Raja Dahir|Dahir]] to which the [[Chachnama]] (8th century) and [[Al-Baladhuri]] (9th century) refer as ''thakurs'' can be seen as Rajputs in the original sense of the word.<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=g2m7_R5P2oAC&dq=Chachnama+rajput&pg=PA155|title=Al-Hind, the Making of the Indo-Islamic World: Early Medieval and the expansion of Islam|page=155|year=2002|publisher=Brill|isbn=0391041738 }}</ref>

===''Rajput''===

The term ''rajput'' is derived from the Sanskrit word ''rājaputra''.<ref>
*{{cite web |url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/490157/Rajput |title=Rajput |publisher=Encyclopædia Britannica |access-date=3 November 2024}}
*{{cite web|website=encyclopaedia.com |url=https://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences-and-law/anthropology-and-archaeology/people/rajputs#:~:text=%22Rajput%22%20identifies%20numerous%20ksatriya%20or,states%20into%20the%20Rajputana%20Province.|title=Rajputs|access-date=3 November 2024}}
*{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=aVd9xS4yo04C&dq=Rajput+derived+from+rajaputra&pg=PA77 |page=77 |author=Vipul Singh |publisher=Macmillan |quote=These so called 'warrior castes' were in effect nothing but military ruling clans which coalecsed into a single caste, that of the Rajputs, the term being derived from the Sanskrit word ''Rajaputra''. |year=2008|title=Interpreting Medieval India: Early medieval, Delhi Sultanate, and regions (circa 750-1550)|isbn=978-0230637610}}
*{{Cite book|quote=The term Rajput was derived from the word ''rajaputra''.|author=Kaushik Roy|page=75 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xx7ICQAAQBAJ&dq=Rajput+derived+from+rajaputra&pg=PA75 |title=Warfare in Pre-British India – 1500BCE to 1740CE |year=2015 |publisher=Taylor & Francis |isbn=978-1317586920}}</ref> Its literal meaning is "son of a king".<ref name=kolff/> The term finds mention in [[Vidyapati]]'s ''[[Kīrtilatā]]'' (1380) among castes inhabiting the [[Jaunpur, Uttar Pradesh|Jaunpur]] city.<ref>
*{{cite journal|title=Society in the Kirtilata of Vidyapati|journal=Proceedings of the Indian History Congress |volume=67 |pages=288, 291|author=Kamal Deo|date=2006 |publisher=Indian History Congress|jstor=44147948 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/44147948|quote=Page 288— Vidyapati comments on the social composition of Jaunpur town also."In the city, people of different caste and class of Hindu religion were living. In the city, mostly they were Brahmin, Kayasth, Rajput and Businessmen."<br>Page 291— बहुल बाहम्ण बहुल काअत्थ , राजपुत्त कुल बहुल , बहुल जाति मिलि बसइ चप्परि ।}}
*{{cite book|title=Perspectives on Indian Society and History: A Critique|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=kwxuAAAAMAAJ&q=Vidyapati+uses+the+local+term+rajput|page=114|author=Hetukar Jha| date=2002 |publisher=Manohar Publishers & Distributors, 2002|isbn=8173044228|quote=Included in this list is the Rajputra, though ''VR'' mentions it separately, which again is a term that appears in contemporary Sanskrit literature. However, Vidyapati uses the local term Rajput.}}</ref>

According to modern scholars, the word "rajput" meant 'horse soldier', 'trooper', 'headman of a village' or 'subordinate chief' before the 15th century.<ref name=kolff>{{cite book|quote=Inevitably , a certain group identity grew up amongst these families : it was summed up in the name of Rajput . This word literally means 'son of a king'. At first used to denote various individuals who achieved such statuses as ' horse - soldier', 'trooper' or 'headman of a village' , and then pretended to the family of some king, it became a generic name for this military and landed class as a whole. |url=https://archive.org/details/naukarrajputsepo0000kolf/page/71/mode/1up?q=Pretended |author=Dirk H. A. Kolff |title=Naukar, Rajput, and Sepoy The Ethnohistory of the Military Labour Market of Hindustan, 1450-1850 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=1990 |isbn=0521381320 |page=71}}</ref>{{sfn|Hastings|2002|p=54|ps=:The Indian historian K. R. Qanungo has pointed out that in " the middle ages ' Rajput ' ordinarily meant a trooper in the service of a chief or a free-lance captain(1960,98); and Dirk Kolff(1990), following both Quango and D.C.Sircar has surely settled the matter with his argument that many Rajput clans came out of pastoralist bands which achieved some degree of landed status in the first half of the second millennium, forming "largely open status groups of clans, lineages, or even families and individuals who achieved statuses as 'horse soldier', 'trooper' or 'headman of village', and pretended to be connected with the family of some king, it became a generic name for this military and landed class(p 71-72) }}<ref name="Peabody2003"/><ref name="Mukta1994"/><ref name=stish/> Individuals or groups with whom the word "rajput" was associated are generally considered ''varna–samkara'' ("mixed caste origin") and inferior to Kshatriya.{{sfn|Norman Ziegler|1976|p=141|ps=:...individuals or groups with which the word was associated were generally considered to owe their origin to miscegenation or varna-samkara ("the mixing of castes") and were thus inferior in rank to Ksatriyas. [...] What I perceive from the above data is a rather widespread change in the subjective perception and the attribution of rank to groups and individuals who emerged in Rajasthan and North India as local chiefs and rulers in the period after the muslim invasions(extending roughly from the thirteenth to the fifteenth centuries). These groups were no longer considered kshatriyas and though they filled roles previously held by kshatriyas and were attributed similar functions of sustaining society and upholding the moral order, they were either groups whose original integrity were seen to have been altered or who had emerged from the lower ranks of the caste system. This change is supported by material from the Rajput chronicles themselves.}}<ref name="Mukta1994">{{cite book |author=Parita Mukta |title=Upholding the Common Life: The Community of Mirabai |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=DlVuAAAAMAAJ |year=1994 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-563115-9 |page=51 |quote=The term 'Rajput' before the fifteenth century meant 'horse soldier', 'trooper', 'headman of a village' or 'subordinate chief'. Moreover, individuals with whom the word was associated were generally considered to be products of varna–samkara of mixed caste origin, and thus inferior in rank to Kshatriyas (Ziegler, 1976, 242--3.)}}</ref><ref name=stish>{{harvnb|Satish Chandra|1982|p=92}}: "D.C Sarkar has noted that in the period before the Muslim invasions, the word Rajput had, apart from Rajputra, had, various meanings, including horse-soldier, trooper, headman of village, subordinate chief., etc. In addition, he notes that individuals or groups with whom the word was associated with are generally considered to be varnasanakara, of mixed caste origin, and thus inferior in rank to Kshatriyas."</ref>

B.D Metcalf and T.R Metcalf write that under the [[Mughals]], the term had become the mark of legitimate kshatriya rule.<ref>{{Cite book|quote=The challenges to Aurangzeb did not come from groups that had been suppressed under Muslim rule and now sought to regain their Autonomy. Marathas, Sikhs, Jats and even Rajputs represented social groups with old names but new cohesion and status. These were not age-old India 'castes'.[...]There was in practice, far more importance given to occupational identities and individual mobility than most commentators have recognized. A major stimulus to the use of the Sanskrit categories appears to have been the claims of aspiring dynasts in the Mughal period who as parvenu Kshatriyas, in turn identified peasants and soldiery as ranked groups, giving new meanings to old titles that had only loose regional or occupational meaning.[...]Under the Mughals, the term ''Rajput'' had become the symbol of legitimate kshatriya rule,...|page=24,25 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=jGCBNTDv7acC&dq=Rajput+legitimate+kshatriya&pg=PA24 |title=A Concise History of India |publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2002 |author=Barbara D. Metcalf, Thomas R. Metcalf|isbn=978-0-521-63974-3 }}</ref>