Talk:Bharatpur State

Wrong Ruler Depicted As Maharaja of Bharatpur

The ruler in the last picture is Nawab Bahawal Khan Abbassi of Bahawalpur State. It is not the Maharaja of Bharatpur. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.47.219.179 (talk) 23:59, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Corrected. Thank you for pointing out the error. Xufanc (talk) 09:16, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia of bharatpur state is incorrect Yash Choudhary Sonuu (talk) 10:02, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

False history of lineage depicted purposely , which has no factual basis .

The factual history is that the Jat state was established by churaman Jat and before that the landowners of that region, not the descendants of some rajput king. Infact jats only started inhabiting the area in the 16th century . Meethamonkey (talk) 10:09, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Meethamonkey, you are partially correct that the legends were shown as facts and the details were either cherry-picked from reliable sources or unreliably-sourced from the Raj-era sources. As mentioned in this book, it is a reprint of a Raj-era book which was published around one century ago in 1922. Its details are available here. And we don't use such Raj-era sources – see here and here. So I will remove this source.

Similarly, this book is a non-scholarly work. As mentioned here, the author "works in the oil and gas sector of the British government identifying and mitigating risks. He is a former British Army member." His book may be fine for basic facts like Princely States' decorations, medals, etc. But it a poor source for historical legends & claims.

As far as Dr. Ram Pande is concerned, he was one of the few historians who specialise in Bharatpur Jats. As mentioned in his book, it is "substantially a thesis approved for the Degree of Ph. D., by the University of Rajasthan" – see here for its overall details. It is not only his area of expertise but also describes the origin most thoroughly. The book has two full pages about the origin of Bharatpur royal dynasty (see my edit summary). And it covers both facts and legends, along with properly examining them. So I will summarise them in the article. - NitinMlk (talk) 20:21, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

@nitinMlk- 👍👍 go ahead . But I would suggest that the portion regarding lineage should be undermined for the following reasons - 1. The paragraph edited out by me , started of by saying - " a legend current in Bharatpur till late " suggests that the legend is now no longer in prevalence .

2. Also the claim that the sons of Balchand were not admitted as Rajputs seems to hold untrue , as the word Rajput was not in usage during that time period and instead its root word "Rajputra" was used . Also the word Rajput came to signify a social class and a community only after the 15th century .

However I have seen the edits that you have made , and eventhough I believe this story has various problems , I think you have made the relevant additions to suggest that this story has problems . Anyways thanks for sorting this out . Meethamonkey (talk) 00:02, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Copyvio

It seems this edit copy-pasted at least some content from here, but I don't have much time today to check this carefully. - NitinMlk (talk) 21:06, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Maharaja Suraj Mal.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:22, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Origin of Bharatpur Jats

The rulers of Bharatpul" claim to have been originally Jadaun Rajputs, the descendants of Krishna. Sue, a Jadaun Rajput, the 78th in descent from Krishna, is said to have migrated from Bayana to the Deeg jungles and founded the village of Sinsini, named after Sinsina, the genus loci or tutelar deity. Balachand, the fourth in descent from him, was a noted freebooter, and in one of his marauding expeditions made prisoners of a Jat of the Dagar clan and his wife from Hindaun (now in Jaipur) and brought them to his house in Sinsini. Having no children by his own wife, he took the Jat woman into his harem and two sons by her, Bije and Sije. These were regarded as Jats and expelled from the Rajput brotherhood. Having no 'got' of their own they took the name of Sinsinwar, from their pa.ernal village, and from them are descended the Sinsinwar Jats.

Source : https://censusindia.gov.in/nada/index.php/catalog/28801/study-description

Kindly add this under the title of 'Origin of Bharatpur Jats'. Wiki Samant (talk) 08:23, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 January 2025

Steelmax4333 (talk) 11:30, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

"The first paragraph of the history of Bharatpur state is incorrect. I don’t understand why it is included. Please remove that section, as no community would choose a ruler who is a product of two different communities." So it is just false story to degrade jaat ruler. So remove the below secton from this page -

"The rulers of the Bharatpur dynasty were Sinsinwar Jats. As per the origin legend, they claimed their descent from Balchand, a Yadav Rajput, 19th in line from Sindpal, the claimed ancestor of both the Bharatpur and the Karauli families and also a descendant of Madan Pal, a Jadon Rajput. Balchand's wife was infertile, so he had two sons named Vijje and Sijje with a Jat concubine whom he had captured during one of his regular plundering raids. His sons became Jats and adopted Sinsinwar as their gotra based on the village of Sinsini after being rejected as Rajputs. Historian Ram Pande notes several issues with this legend: Sinsini had never been part of Karauli State, the caste of a child is not based on the mother's caste, and they would have become Darogas when rejected as Rajputs instead of Jats.[7] Ram Pande states that this legend was created "to show superiority of Sinsinwar Jats over other Jats."[8]"

 Not done - Reliably sourced content , Ram Pande also explains why he thinks this legend is ahistorical. Removal would require consensus. - Ratnahastin (talk) 11:34, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

"Ram Pande was not born during that era. If I were to publish a book about Ram Pande and include false information just to increase its popularity, that would not be true history and should not be presented as such. You seem to lack accurate knowledge about the Sinsinwars and are mixing in fabricated stories. This is merely a made-up narrative, as I mentioned earlier—no community would choose a ruler based on a lineage that includes a mother's caste from a different community. History has often been written by people who were not present during the time they describe, leading to inaccuracies. Therefore, I strongly urge you to delete that paragraph, as I am certain it was added recently.

Before including such content, you should have at least interviewed the current Bharatpur king, Maharaja Vishvendra Singh. This is Wikipedia, a platform read by countless people, and false information can lead to misleading conclusions. My suggestion is to remove this content entirely, or, if you wish to add accurate information, consult with people connected to the Bharatpur rulers. By doing so, you might gain a clearer understanding. Many historians have made incorrect analyses, so it is essential to verify facts before presenting them as history." Steelmax4333 (talk) 12:12, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Are you suggesting that Ram Pande who was one of the very few historians specialising in the history of Bharatpur state should be discarded because he was not born when Sinsinwar Jats formed their caste? That's ridiculous. - Ratnahastin (talk) 12:20, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I believe so. Is there any other historian other than ram pande from Bharatpur who has written about the same story? There are many people who may not like the rulers and could degrade their origins. If many historians have mentioned this, then there might be a chance it is accurate, but if only one historian is making this claim, it is 99.99% likely to be wrong. I suggest you first go to Bharatpur, meet the people and the current rulers, and do the analysis before adding this point here. just dont fully believe on any history books. Steelmax4333 (talk) 12:37, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

chudaman Jat established the bharatpur jat kingdom not by any descendent of any jadon. Steelmax4333 (talk) 13:02, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Bharatpur State

Moved from User talk:Ratnahastin

I see that you are removing the lead section of Bharatpur state containing lohagarh. As far as i know lead section contains the summary of all important things about the Article and in this case Lohagarh fort is very important because it was impenetrable by the invaders after multiple attemps. And also in current situation the lead is not that too much long so that we need to remove the information about the main fort of state. And if you are removing this the why are you not adding this in body by writing a separate heading like Architecture in the body of article ? TheSlumPanda (talk) 16:57, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

@TheSlumPanda: - As you say lead section contains the summary of all important things about the Article, can you please write the information you wish to include in a neutral and condensed manner in the body first? We can then decide how much of it can be included in the lead while keeping WP:DUE weightage in mind, thanks. - Ratnahastin (talk) 17:02, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

@Ratnahastin, then should i write about the lohagarh fort and deeg palace in concise form in lead and in more elaborate form in body of this article with proper section on architecture, thanks TheSlumPanda (talk) 18:58, 5 January 2025 (UTC)