From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Former countries (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon

This article has comments here.

WikiProject India / History (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (marked as High-importance).

This article has comments here.

WikiProject Pakistan (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has comments here.

This article has an assessment summary page.

Invasion of India by Scythian Tribes[edit]

Now that copyediting has made it clearer what the content of this article is, I suggest that that it be deleted and relevant sections be moved to Indo-scythians, Scythians, Sakas, Scythia, etc.

The content of Invasion of India by Scythian Tribes itself substantially duplicates these articles and I can't see any reason for keeping it as a standalone wikipedia entry.--Saganaki- 11:11, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I basically agree on the merge, but it is kind of hard to digest at this point. Let's dry to clean the article in the coming days. PHG 21:18, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Removed academic titles as per Wikipedia Manual of Style[edit]

I have just been through the article removing the proliferation of academic titles - see: [1]. In the process I made a number of other small edits - mainly spelling and grammar mistakes. Sincerely, John Hill (talk) 10:03, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Marātha people were of Scythian origin[edit]

It seems then most probable that, as already stated, the Marātha caste was of purely military origin, constituted from the various castes of Mahārāshtra who adopted military service, though some of the leading families may have had Rājpūts for their ancestors. Sir D. Ibbetson thought that a similar relation existed in past times between the Rājpūts and Jāts, the landed aristocracy of the Jāt caste being gradually admitted to Rājpūt rank. The Khandaits or swordsmen of Orissa are a caste formed in the same manner from military service. In the Imperial Gazetteer Sir H. Risley suggests that the Marātha people were of Scythian origin:

“The physical type of the people of this region accords fairly well with this theory, while the arguments derived from language and religion do not seem to conflict with it.... On this view the wide-ranging forays of the Marāthas, their guerilla methods of warfare, their unscrupulous dealings with friend and foe, their genius for intrigue and their consequent failure to build up an enduring dominion, might well be regarded as inherited from their Scythian ancestors.”

reference:- 2. 3. 4.


Imperial Gazetteer Sir H. Risley suggests that the Marātha people were of Scythian origin

sonu 17:32, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

sonu 17:20, 23 April 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sagarsinghdevre (talkcontribs) sonu 17:35, 23 April 2009 (UTC) sonu 17:37, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

The maratha would be of Indo-Scythian ancestory. The article is making the claim that Indo-Scythians are of Scythian ancestory when their of both Indian and Scythian ancestory. It cannot therefore be claimed as such when it is clear that they were of mixed blood. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:54, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

This is pure imagination that Marathas are of Indo-Scythian origin. Marathas are coming from local Mahar clan of this region and all the good or bad qualities we see in this community are similar to those of Mahar clan. Word Maratha is from epithet given to Mahar warriors "Maharther" meaning superior Mahar. Pathare Prabhu (talk) 10:15, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a source that says they aren't? There are sources above for the Indo-Scythian origin. --AW (talk) 11:13, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

unreliable sources[edit]

Some sources used in the Descendants of the Indo-Scythians section are patently not reliable. examples are a geocities page, a self published treatise from the rajputana liberation front(!), OR document from,, sikhnet discussion forum, a personal site of a "professional whisky taster"( and a circular reference to a wikipedia mirror. I'm going to remove them, but leaving ones which have some references in their main article. (talk) 04:51, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! This has needed to be done for too long! Cheers, John Hill (talk) 04:55, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

This article is a total mess[edit]

I think this article has turned into a mess - a hodgepodge of different styles, many questionable and unreferenced and POV statements and speculations, the use of different systems of transcribing Chinese (perhaps we could standardise on Pinyin? Does anyone disagree with this suggestion?), much unnecessary repetition, etc., etc. It is a real mess!

I began trying to sort some of it out this evening - but it will be such a huge job to get it into any kind of order and consistency that I gave up. Will try to get back to it when I am better rested but I am really uneasy as I fear I will get bogged down in tiresome arguments with people pushing their own POV speculations and theories. This is not the place for people to try to promote a position that the Indo-Scythians were among their ancestors. Can we together get this article up to Wikipedia standards? Here's hoping! John Hill (talk) 14:49, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

The book Origins and history of Jats and other allied nomadic tribes of India: 900 B.C. - 1947 A.D. (2007) by B.S. Nijjar is an unreliable and misleading work which should not be used in the Wikipedia[edit]

I notice that in edits here and on quite a number of Wikipedia articles relating to Indian, Scythian (Saka) and related history, references are being made to B. S. Nijjars' book (see the title above). Unfortunately, I do not have a copy to hand so can only judge it on the pages I am able to access through Google Books, but even on these few pages I find so many outright mistakes, unsupported claims and outdated positions that the whole book must be considered an unreliable source for the history of this period. Here are just a few examples:

1. On p. 244, Nijjar claims the Kushans are "thought to have been of Yueh-chih stock with a strong admixture of Hephthalits, Saka and Tocharian." He makes no mention at all of who thinks this, or on what grounds. The truth is no one knows who the Kushans really were - there are many theories and little agreement in scholarly circles.

2. On p. 245, he makes the "Yueh-chih (Pinyin yuezhi) a branch of the Kushans, also called Indo-Scyth . . ." Again, he gives no reference or evidence for this amazing statement.

3. On p. 247, there are several errors: first Nijjar claims that the Kushan dynasty is descended from the Yuezhi, contradicting his earlier statements. While this may well be so, it is a contested point and, as usual, there is no proof or references given.

4. On the same page he repeats the long-standing but now discredited notion that Kanishka is connected with the advent of the Saka era of 78 CE. Most scholars now accept Falk's well-reasoned and well-supported argument for Kanishka's era starting c. 127 CE.

5. Again on page 247 he states that Kanishka's empire stretched "from Khotan in the north . . ." Now, a Kushan army did invade the Tarim Basin in 90 CE, but it was soon forced to retreat by the famous Chinese General Ban Chao. Later, in the teens of the second century, Kushan troops are said to have placed a Kashgari hostage prince, Chenpan, on the throne of Kashgar, but not long after this Chenpan came under control of the Chinese. We have no definite historical or archaeological evidence that the Kushans ever controlled Khotan and, even if they did, it must have been for a very brief period.

6. And again, on the same p. 247, Nijjar states: "In outlook, Kanishka was full-fledged Indian . . ." This is pure speculation and demonstrably very unlikely. Kanishka's two longest and most important inscriptions are from northern Afghanistan in the Bactrian language (which is more closely related to Persian than Sanskrit or Prakrits) and, although one of his rarer coins has a Buddha on it, most of his coins feature Iranian deities. So, on what grounds does Nijjar claim that "Kanishka was full-fledged Indian"?

7. Nijjar has a chapter (No. 7) headed "The Kushans (Ancestors of Jat, Ahirs, Rajputs, Baloches, and Pathans) in which he makes a whole series of completely unsupported and unorthodox claims (such as that the Ta Yuan or Dayuan were Tokharians on p. 245). Then, under the sub-heading, "THE EMPEROR KUJULA KADAPHASES", he starts off: "The Yueh-chih succeeded by his son Vima, after whom came Kanishka . . . " WE already have three errors here: the name is usually written Kujula Kadphises, and it is not at all certain that he was a Yueh-chih (Yuezhi), and it has been known for some years now from the Rabatak inscription that, while he did have a son named Vima Tak(tu), this Vima had a son known as Vima Kadphises who, in turn, was the father of Kanishka. So Kanishka was Kujula Kadphises' grandson, not his son as Nijjar claims.

8. Nijjar then goes on making a series of similar mistakes (plus numerous grammatical and spelling errors) - often showing his total ignorance of modern scholarship - I can't even begin to list them all here. I should mention though that, on p. 252, he makes a totally unsupported claim the Kushans were "of Saka stock" - a very contentious and unprovable claim. Indeed, if they were originally Yuezhi (as he earlier claimed), it is most unlikely that they were Sakas for the Chinese histories record that when the Yuezhi moved into the Ili region they defeated the Sakas there and they clearly represent them as two quite different peoples.

9. And so he goes on, making uncertain claims one after another until he reaches the end of his chapter, on page 259, without once saying why he believes that the Kushans were "Ancestors of Jat, Ahirs, Rajputs, Baloches, and Pathans", as stated in the title of the chapter! And his next chapter (Chapter 8) is headed "The Huns (Ancestors of Jat, Ahirs, Rajputs, Baloches, and Pathans)" which, one can only assume in the end, would be similarly inconclusive and full of unsupported claims.

It is for these reasons (and others far too numerous to include here) that I maintain that B. S. Nijjar's book is a seriously flawed and sloppy work, full of errors and unsupported claims. Moreover, Nijjar is clearly unaware of recent scholarship relating to the issues he so confidently presents to the reader as facts.

The book, as a result, is a very unreliable and misleading source for the history of the period and, so, references should not be made to it in the Wikipedia.

I will, therefore, start removing quotes from it, and references to it, wherever I come across them in the Wikipedia and refer people to this note for my justification. Sincerely, John Hill (talk) 08:58, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

To merge or not to merge?[edit]

There has been a box for a long time now suggesting that the articles on Sakas and Indo-Scythians be merged and a request that this possible merger be discussed here. There has been absolutely no discussion so far. I am totally against the idea as many Saka tribes seem to have had nothing to do with India at all, and the term "Indo-Scythian" has been used very loosely for groups of people (such as the Kushans - to give just one example) of whom the origins are still being hotly debated. I propose, therefore, that unless there is a significant number of editors with referenced arguments in favour, that we remove the merge boxes on both articles sometime soon. Any comments? Sincerely, John Hill (talk) 21:57, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I fully agree. Sorry for the belated reply :-) Per Honor et Gloria  20:56, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Today I finally removed the Merge tag which had been sitting on the page since September 2009. John Hill (talk) 05:13, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

-- (talk) 11:07, 1 October 2012 (UTC)==Descendants of the Indo-Scythians== This section of the article appears to be controversial and its claims that this or that group are descended from the Indo-Scythians may well be true, but are presently unprovable.

Many, if not most, people in the northwestern regions of the subcontinent could easily claim to be at least partially descended from the Indo-Scythians. What we have here seems to be a matter of certain groups trying to establish their descent from the Indo-Scythians as fact when, really, none of their claims are well-established. The use of the 1867 book, The history of Palestine and the Sinaitic Peninsula, Volume 1 By Karl Ritter, as a reference is, in my view, completely unwarranted as it is a book filled with speculations and, in this case, tries to establish a connection between the Western classical authors' mention of a place called "Abhīra" ("a name whose antiquity is known to be as great as the of Solomon") near the mouths of the Indus, with the "Afîr" people of the 19th century, and goes on to say these Afîr must have come to the region between one and two thousand years before Christ (p. 113), which does nothing to advance the case that they were descended from the Indo-Scythians who came to India around the turn of the era.

Similarly, the Origins and History of Jats and Other Allied Nomadic Tribes of India by B.S. Nijjar is not a good reference here as it does not state that they were descended from the Indo-Scythians, just that some people claim this, while others claim that the Ahirs were "an old Indian or half-Indian race who were driven south before the Scythians' invasion" (see p. 184). Further, the reference to the 1885 book, Cyclopædia of India and of eastern and southern Asia . . . ., doesn't even give a page number.

This type of making geneological claims using dodgy references is likely to not only be misleadeing, but cause edit wars. So I thought I would try to rewrite the section as neutrally as possible. Then, I must look at the first para grapoh of the article which seems to make similar claims. Sincverely, John Hill (talk) 02:04, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

In the case of a book being unreliable, we could note that in the text. "Such and such book claims ____ but some (and cite who) do not believe the book is accurate for such and such reasons." --AW (talk) 11:50, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Nahapana.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]


An image used in this article, File:Nahapana.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 3 December 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:58, 3 December 2011 (UTC)


Is it worth mentioning that Y (male) DNA haplogroup most common amongst people such as the Jatts of the Panjab is R1a which is the most common haplogroup also found amongst people of Eastern Europe such as Ukranians and Poland? Search r1a to find more. These are the two areas we find the highest percentage of the haplogroup and the fact that both these areas were greatly populated by the Scythians seems coincidental. Tsigano (talk) 20:21, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I just checked out this page: List of R1a frequency by population. I am sorry to contradict you, but it looks like your statement that: "These [i.e. the Panjab and Poland/Ukraine] are the two areas we find the highest percentage of the haplogroup", is simply wrong. The tables given in the article show that the Arora people of the Punjab, H.P., and J&K, West Bengal Brahmins, and the Mohanna people of Sindh have the highest levels of any of the many groups tested. People from Poland and the Ukraine did have relatively high levels - but not nearly as high as the three groups mentioned previously. I don't know how this relates specifically to the Jatts of the Panjab. Furthermore, the determination of possible relationships between groups of people based on one haplogroup is complex and we would need the advice of experts here to determine what the significance of these figures might be. Sincerely, John Hill (talk) 23:46, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Jatts were just an example of people of Northwest India who are high in R1a (R1a1a). The point I am making is how the two areas in the world that the Scythians ended up populating are the two areas (Eastern Europe & North / Northwest India) that are highest in r1a. Scythians and other similar Indo-European related people. Tsigano (talk) 19:37, 20 January 2012 (UTC)


This article discusses the kingdom ruled by the Sakas (Indo-Scythians). I suggest to move this article's content to Saka Kingdom, another article on the same topic. Khestwol (talk)

Tadeusz Sulimirski's The Sarmatians (1970). Praeger Publishers, New York. Pages: 113-114[edit]

TheSuave has made a controversial edit to the page that needs to be discussed, because of the comments texted in the edit summary. Here's the link -->> . Well, Friends, while Tadeusz Sulimirski's book, The Sarmatians, is not available in "full preview" at Google Books, but certainly, I have found-out a way, that maybe satisfactory, as well. A website, , has published a book by a Canadian author, in which the work of Tadeusz Sulimirski has been appreciated, and the Quote mentioned in the Reference-script, that TheSuave has declared to have been "corrupted", is mentioned, and can be verified online. So, Please do Yourselves this much favour, and click on the link that follows, to verify it for the sake of civility -->> (the 70th one). Thanks !! ← Abstruce 20:38, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

The details published, for the Quote, are "Sulimirski, T., The Sarmatians, Praeger Publishers, New York, 1970, pp. 113-114.", that may well be verified online here -->> (the 70th one). ← Abstruce 21:16, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Copy-Paste (Quote), as published:

Sulimirski, T. (Professor, Central and East European Archaeology at the University of London) [70]: He wrote, "The evidence of both the ancient authors and the archaeological remains point to a massive migration of Sacian (Sakas)/Massagetan ("great" Jat) tribes from the Syr Daria Delta (Central Asia) by the middle of the second century B.C. Some of the Syr Darian tribes; they also invaded North India".

Abstruce 21:46,

10 February 2013 (UTC)

I have indeed checked out the Sulimirski reference at Senate House (I study at UoL), and it is safe to say that the bracketed text in said quote is an insertion, most likely from the 'jattworld' website that you have listed. It is likely that whoever added the reference in fact lifted the quote from said 'jattworld' website and proceeded to reference the original Sulimirski book, which does not contain that bracketed text that is attributed to the reference. There are also issues with the 'jattworld' site that you have listed, and I believe it to be a questionable source, as per WP:IRS with an inherent lack of editorial oversight, which throws up issues since the site you have listed is well known for attempting to advance a theory of racial separateness of Jatt populations and their surrounding communities. Also, please refrain from capitalizing certain words in your edit summaries, or directing edit summaries at myself to get my attention - it is much more apt to use talk pages for such matters. Thanks, TheSuave 23:23, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

wOw, how interesting has the scenario gone here, Cheers to that Friend Face-smile.svg

Well, Dear, Jattworld.COM is neither the author of the book, "History and Study of the Jats: With Reference to Sikhs, Scythians, Alans, Sarmatians, Goths and Jutes", nor the publishing house for this specific book; in-which the Quote from Tadeusz Sulimirski's "The Sarmatians" has been published. The author of the book is Dr. Balbir Singh Dhillon, a highly respected personality, around the globe; who seems to have developed interest in history and study of the Jats. The publishing house is "Beta Publishers", Canada.

Jattworld.COM has been broadcasting online "Chapter 1" of the book for research purposes, for passionate emerging scholars. Jattworld.COM is not the only web-site doing so, and wherever the content of Dr. Dhillon's book is available online, the Quote is the very same as copy-pated above. wOw !!

And, I do not see, even a single reason, that Dr. Dhillon would have corrupted/doctored the Quote from Tadeusz Sulimirski's "The Sarmatians".

So, TheSuave, the scenario is like this, You claim to have read the book, "The Sarmatians, Praeger Publishers, New York, 1970", and Your testification clearly "challenges" Dr. Dhillon and Beta, as You have firmly testified that the Quote has been corrupted/doctored !! But, Please note that, till this very moment, NOT even in the highest, I AM directly accusing You of lying, to say the least. But, You have definitely exclaimed Me !! And, I AM not looking forward to have blind faith in Your testification.

Also, alongwith "Praeger", "Thames and Hudson" has also published a book titled "The Sarmatians" by Tadeusz Sulimirski, and that too in the year 1970 (maybe earlier, maybe later). wOw !! Are these companies "sisters" ?! Very much honestly, I haven't read any of the two, yet. I think the content of those both ones, cannot be the very same, or match, beyond a limit, as that may trigger copyright issues; but My knowledge about this is finite.

Anyways, which one have You read, Dear TheSuave ?!

Also, can You locate any online verifiable source that supports Your claim ?! Please PROVEIT. We shall continue with the constructive debate, here. Thanks !! ← Abstruce 20:23, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Well, interestingly, at-least a quick google search reveals that "The Sarmatians" is not available with any of the online 'home delivery' bookstores, in India; not even a used one.... lOl !! And, WorldCat suggests that the nearest library that lists the book in its catalogue is in Singapore Face-smile.svg Singapore is a very good place to be at, but I AM not planning it again any time soon Face-sad.svg So, I guess, I shall spend some more time googling for the book, or, roam around yanking the chain of researchers in the stream of history, to borrow a copy; but that is also not a sure-shot solution. But, I would definitely try and find a copy, but, maybe I have to wait till the next time I will be abroad Face-smile.svg

And, I request that if any Indian Wikipedian is having a copy of the book that is in decent condition, and is interested in selling the book, or, even if aware of any book seller, from whom I can obtain a copy of the book, then Please leave a message at My User_talk page; and, consider it a request. Also, can any Wikipedian locate any online verifiable source (web-site) that is broadcasting "Tadeusz Sulimirski's The Sarmatians (1970). Praeger Publishers, New York" ?! Thanks !! ← Abstruce 11:22, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Still looking for the book !! Wasn't able to get hold of a hard copy here in India !! May get hold of a hard copy next year if what Tolec is saying is not absolutely true, LOL; and, Please don't remind Me of WP:Assume good faith, Wikipedia is not about winning, Wikipedia is not a battleground, and the possibly related ones !! ← Abstruce 19:56, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Are getes also scythians[edit]

Are getes alsp scythian? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sakayriaz (talkcontribs) 13:47, 31 December 2013 (UTC)