Guest guest Posted June 8, 2001 Report Share Posted June 8, 2001 INDOLOGY, Michael Witzel <witzel@f...> wrote: > > I am afraid, a too simple view of medieval / recent history: > > >Nepal's final Sanskritization and political consolidation was > >possible only because of a large-scale migration of defeated Hindu > >princes and their followers in the wake of Islamic and Mughal > >conquests of North India. > > This is the legend cultivated by some ... (also, Grierson in his > Linguistic Survey is too simple here: Nepali, Kumaoni, etc. etc., up to > Bangani, belong to the Pahari group of NIA languages which have no direct > relation with Rajasthani languages) > > Well before the Moghuls we have a strong, (archaic) Nepali-speaking > (inscriptions, copper plates!) Malla kingdom in W. Nepal and in the adjoing > areas of W. Tibet (12-13th century, see already G. Tucci). This was > followed by the small 22/24 "kingdoms". Gorkha is just one of them. I am afraid that I did not make my self very clear in my previous post. I did write "final Sanskritization" assuming that it is self evident that there were other migrations in the past too as Dr. MW has clearly pointed out. Of course Nepali (actually Khas Kuri) is not based on any Rajasthani dialects but related to other Pahari dialects neither do all Rajputs speak in Rajasthani related langauges (we have Rajputs in Maharashtra and even a sprinkle in Bengal). My posts was with respect to the Urdu/Persian influence of the current coronation ceremony and the possible influence of Aristocrats claiming Rajput ancestry and their Mughal influenced court habits rubbing off on the locals as well as their descendants. Not only do the many rulers claimed Rajput origins in Nepal but also entire groups of Tharu tribals claim such affinity. They do back their claims with strong cultural traits with Rajasthan but still retaining Tharu dialects. > Its > history can be read in English in Father Miller's (SJ!) book. (These > Jesuits do research after their term of teaching is over). > > >These Aristocrats carried with them the war > >techniques (which aided in the political consolidation) as well as > >the court culture of the Mughals with them in to insular Nepal which > >included aspects of the Urudu/Persian language predominance. > > See above. The Newari speaking Malla kings of the Kathmandu Valley adopted > culture in the same way (Maithili poetical speech, dramas etc. in the > early middle ages, but Mughal culture later on : no 'defeated princes' > here!) Agreed but did the Malla kings (numerous Malla families all over Nepal most unrelated to each other) of Kathmandu valley start of as Newari (actually Nepal Bhasa) speaking (patronizing is better word). Because it looks like that Newari became dominant after a few generations of Malla rule to be eventually replaced by Khaskuri? Thanks. Raveen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.