Mass Conversion To Christianity: A Case Study Of Chuhra Community In Sialkot District (1880- 1930)

[Canuck786]

No prehistory info on tht page

I guess you didn't read these parts:

Greek
The first record of Sialkot dates from the invasion of Alexander the Great, who conquered upper Punjab in 326 BCE.[15] The Anabasis of Alexander, written by the Roman-Greek historian Arrian, recorded that Alexander captured ancient Sialkot, recorded as Sagala, from the Cathaeans, who had entrenched themselves there.[17][18] The city had been home to 80,000 residents on the eve of Alexander's invasion,[18] but was razed as a warning against any other nearby cities that might resist his invasion.[18]

Indo-Greek
The ancient city was rebuilt, and made capital by the Indo-Greek king Menander I, of the Euthydemid dynasty,[19] who ruled between 135 and 160 BCE.[16] The rebuilt city was shifted slightly from the older city, as rebuilding on exactly the same spot was considered an ill-omen.[20]

Under Menander's rule, the city greatly prospered as a major trading centre renowned for its silk.[9][15] Menander embraced Buddhism, in a process recorded in the Buddhist text Milinda Panha.[16] The text offers an early description of the city's cityscape and status as a prosperous trade centre with numerous green spaces.[21] Following his conversion, Sialkot developed as a major centre for Buddhist though.[22]

Ancient Sialkot was recorded by Ptolemy in his 1st century CE work, Geography,[23][19] in which he refers to the city as Euthymedeia (Εύθυμέδεια).[24]

White Huns
Around 460 CE, the Hephthalites, also known as the White Huns, invaded the region from Central Asia,[25] forcing the ruling family of nearby Taxila to seek refuge in Sialkot.[26] Sialkot itself was soon captured, and the city was made capital of the Hephthalite Empire around 515,[27] during the reign of Toramana.[28] During the reign of his son, Mihirakula, the Hephthalite Empire reached its zenith.[29] The Hepthalites were defeated in 528 by a coalition of princes led by Prince Yasodhara.[28]

 

[SIPRA]

Bro, I asked for a reliable academic source. I myself belong to the Sialkot/Narowal area and I have never seen a local Christian/Chuhra claim South Indian origins.

I haven't read the OP article, which specifically talks about Sialkot. Generally, I think, that there is a whole lot of these unfortunate people, who originally belonged to the lowest cast cadres of Hinduism. At various times, a part of them converted to Islam, Christianity or Sikhism, primarily to get out of their persistent social degradation. In Punjab, they are variously called "Churha", "Cheyur", "Musalli", "Chammar", and some other names, perhaps, which I don't recall; though all of these names carry extreme derogatory connotations. Many of them are landless and live in temporary and movable shelters/shacks. I believe that most of them belong to the land.

 

[Crusher]

There is no academic source on my personal experience, sorry to disappoint you. As I said, since you 'belong' to the Sialkot/Narowal area, then you can speak to them. There is a very large Christian mohalla right next to Jamia Masjid by the Net Cafe in Sialkot Cantt. That is the community I spoke to.

Exactly that is what I want to encourage people in pakistan that we should stop blindly believing what is wriiten by "angraiz" during his colonial rule in this part of the world. We have access to every community on the ground and in most cases most of their elders can tell you far more legitimate first hand information about themselves than what we will get from some book in the library written by some "gora sahab", we need to come out of this slave mentality that what is written by "angraiz" is some kind of "divine" truth and we must believe it. We want to know about the origin of "chura" people, we should just talk to them they are everywhere in Sialkot, Gujranwala, Lahore and other areas of punjab, we don't really need to know about them from some sh1tty book written by some foreigner gora sahab some 100 years ago.

 

[Chhatrapati]

The Dharmic religions came with the Indo-Europeans, they're not anymore native to the region than the Abrahamic religions.

haha what now, did you find edicts of Vedas and Upanishads in Greece? Or is it that, Buddha was born in Venice and Mahavira in Rome, Guru Nanak in Russia.
Puns aside, Dharmic religions are not of Indo-European origin, even if it followed Aryan migration theory there is no evidence to suggest that they are foreign to this land. Dharmic religions originated and flourished in the Subcontinent.

 

[Vikki]

I guess you didn't read these parts:

Greek
The first record of Sialkot dates from the invasion of Alexander the Great, who conquered upper Punjab in 326 BCE.[15] The Anabasis of Alexander, written by the Roman-Greek historian Arrian, recorded that Alexander captured ancient Sialkot, recorded as Sagala, from the Cathaeans, who had entrenched themselves there.[17][18] The city had been home to 80,000 residents on the eve of Alexander's invasion,[18] but was razed as a warning against any other nearby cities that might resist his invasion.[18]

Indo-Greek
The ancient city was rebuilt, and made capital by the Indo-Greek king Menander I, of the Euthydemid dynasty,[19] who ruled between 135 and 160 BCE.[16] The rebuilt city was shifted slightly from the older city, as rebuilding on exactly the same spot was considered an ill-omen.[20]

Under Menander's rule, the city greatly prospered as a major trading centre renowned for its silk.[9][15] Menander embraced Buddhism, in a process recorded in the Buddhist text Milinda Panha.[16] The text offers an early description of the city's cityscape and status as a prosperous trade centre with numerous green spaces.[21] Following his conversion, Sialkot developed as a major centre for Buddhist though.[22]

Ancient Sialkot was recorded by Ptolemy in his 1st century CE work, Geography,[23][19] in which he refers to the city as Euthymedeia (Εύθυμέδεια).[24]

White Huns
Around 460 CE, the Hephthalites, also known as the White Huns, invaded the region from Central Asia,[25] forcing the ruling family of nearby Taxila to seek refuge in Sialkot.[26] Sialkot itself was soon captured, and the city was made capital of the Hephthalite Empire around 515,[27] during the reign of Toramana.[28] During the reign of his son, Mihirakula, the Hephthalite Empire reached its zenith.[29] The Hepthalites were defeated in 528 by a coalition of princes led by Prince Yasodhara.[28]

Is that prehistory? Thats almost 2000 years after aryans came to india...
Do you know the definition of prehistory?
The period of time before written records. The writing was very much there by 326bc..who were the people in pakistan before aryans came?

 

[takeiteasy]

That's why Pakistanis & North Indians see Christians as low castes. Christianity is essentially a missionary religion in most of India. FYI, Syrian Christians, Goan, Mangalorean Konkani Christians are considered FC.

 

[Hamza913]

Dharmic religions are not of Indo-European origin,

Yes they are. Literally everyone other than Indian nationalists accept this, the evidence is overwhelming.

 

[M. Sarmad]

There is no academic source on my personal experience, sorry to disappoint you. As I said, since you 'belong' to the Sialkot/Narowal area, then you can speak to them. There is a very large Christian mohalla right next to Jamia Masjid by the Net Cafe in Sialkot Cantt. That is the community I spoke to.

Exactly that is what I want to encourage people in pakistan that we should stop blindly believing what is wriiten by "angraiz" during his colonial rule in this part of the world. We have access to every community on the ground and in most cases most of their elders can tell you far more legitimate first hand information about themselves than what we will get from some book in the library written by some "gora sahab", we need to come out of this slave mentality that what is written by "angraiz" is some kind of "divine" truth and we must believe it. We want to know about the origin of "chura" people, we should just talk to them they are everywhere in Sialkot, Gujranwala, Lahore and other areas of punjab, we don't really need to know about them from some sh1tty book written by some foreigner gora sahab some 100 years ago.

Do you guys know that before their mass conversion to Christianity began in 1880, The Chuhras of Punjab were the fourth largest caste of Punjab after Jats, Rajputs, and Brahmans?


There were 1,078,739 Chuhras in Punjab as per the 1881 Census. Now add 1,072,699 Chamars, 349,272 Mochis (Muslim Chamars) and 5,028 Chamrangs and we are talking about almost 15% of the total population of Punjab here.

You seriously believe they are South Indian immigrants in Punjab?? It is probable that they are essentially of aboriginal origin. They refused to give up their aboriginal beliefs and dietary habits, and that's why they had become 'outcasts' in the first place. Leave aside your bias and try to think rationally.

In Punjab, they are variously called "Churha", "Cheyur", "Musalli", "Chammar", and some other names, perhaps, which I don't recall; though all of these names carry extreme derogatory connotations. Many of them are landless and live in temporary and movable shelters/shacks. I believe that most of them belong to the land.

Chuhras are not the same as Chamars. Both of them, however, have been classified as 'Scavanger castes'...

Musallis and Kutanas are Muslim Churahs, Mazhabi Sikhs and Rangreta are Sikh Chuhras

Yes, they belong to the land of Punjab

 

[Canuck786]

Is that prehistory? Thats almost 2000 years after aryans came to india...
Do you know the definition of prehistory?
The period of time before written records. The writing was very much there by 326bc..who were the people in pakistan before aryans came?

What part of the old city of 'Sagala' being razed by Alexander (erasing old history) and later rebuilt and inhabited at a new location with fresh start by Menander (who was an Indo-Greek King) and his forces wasn't clear to you.

 

[Crusher]

Chuhras are not the same as Chamars. Both of them, however, have been classified as 'Scavanger castes'...

Musallis and Kutanas are Muslim Churahs, Mazhabi Sikhs and Rangreta are Sikh Chuhras

Yes, they belong to the land of Punjab

That is exactly the case most people tend to group churas and chammar together eventhough they are NOT the same people. Muslim Chammars are indeed called "Mochi" in pakistani punjab, essentially leather workers and shoe makers and they always lived within the village. The bias against them originates from the old tradition of hindu's brahminical disgust towards people working with animal leather. "Chura" on the other hand were the clear "outcasts" who were only involved in sweeping or bonded labor work in the past.

Most Chammars tend to be from the indigenous nomadic communities of punjab but I still believe that "Churas" have a predominantly a non-local eastern origins, they just came here from time to time for bonded labor and sweeper works. Chammars/Mochis on the other hand most probably are the remnants of the oldest inhabitants of Punjab. Also Chammars/Mochis look like local "punjabis" with harsh features but mostly darker skin but lighter skinned mochi/chammar individuals are also not "uncommon", whereas the "churas" have non-punjabi soft features and very dark skin tones that are only seen deep in india.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Most Chammars tend to be from the indigenous nomadic communities of punjab but I still believe that "Churas" have a predominantly a non-local eastern origins, they just came here from time to time for bonded labor and sweeper works. Chammars/Mochis on the other hand most probably are the remnants of the oldest inhabitants of Punjab. Also Chammars/Mochis look like local "punjabis" with harsh features but mostly darker skin, whereas the "churas" have non-punjabi soft features and very dark skin tones that are only seen deep in india.

The fact that they were the fourth largest caste in British Punjab undermines the migration theory. Also, there is nothing 'Southern' about the names of their gotras: Sahotra, Gill, Bhatti, Khokhar, Mattu, Kharu, Kaliyana, Ladhar, Sindhu, Chhapriband, Unthwal, Hansi, Dhariwal etc.

 

[Crusher]

The fact that they were the fourth largest caste in British Punjab undermines the migration theory. Also, there is nothing 'Southern' about the names of their gotras: Sahotra, Gill, Bhatti, Khokhar, Mattu, Kharu, Kaliyana, Ladhar, Sindhu, Chhapriband, Unthwal, Hansi, Dhariwal etc.

I believe they just adopted the clan names of their landlords so that is not a big indicator of their indigenous origins. Instead of South india, I believe most of the churas came to punjab from gangetic plains from time to time throughout the history of punjab whenever the agriculture flourished here and there were increased needs for more labor and sweeper workforce, it is always about economy, economy is what drives the migration/settlements of people from one area to the other. Churas definitely look out of place in Gujranwala/Sialkot areas.

 

[M. Sarmad]

I believe they just adopted the clan names of their landlords so that is not a big indicator of their indigenous origins. Instead of South india, I believe most of the churas came to punjab from gangetic plains from time to time throughout the history of punjab whenever the agriculture flourished here and there were increased needs for more labor and sweeper workforce, it is always about economy, economy is what drives the migration/settlements of people from one area to the other. Churas definitely look out of place in Gujranwala/Sialkot areas.

It's mere speculation.... There should be at least some evidence to support this migration theory to even discuss it.

And Chuhras may look out of place in Gujranwala/Sialkot areas, but at the time of partition, they (excluding Musallis) made up 9.56% of the total population of Gujranwala Tehsil, 8.67% of Daska Tehsil, 9.12% of Sheikhupura Tehsil, 8.09% of Shahdara Tehsil, 7.23% of Narowal Tehsil, 6.20% of Sialkot Tehsil, and 6.84% of Gurdaspur Tehsil. These numbers are simply too large to ignore.

 

[Sine Nomine]

The fact that they were the fourth largest caste in British Punjab undermines the migration theory. Also, there is nothing 'Southern' about the names of their gotras: Sahotra, Gill, Bhatti, Khokhar, Mattu, Kharu, Kaliyana, Ladhar, Sindhu, Chhapriband, Unthwal, Hansi, Dhariwal etc.

Most of them have taken these names from a known predominant caste of their area, e.g Khokhar/Bhattis are Rajputs and Sindhu/Gill are Jat.

 

[Nilu Pule]

It's mere speculation.... There should be at least some evidence to support this migration theory to even discuss it.

And Chuhras may look out of place in Gujranwala/Sialkot areas, but at the time of partition, they (excluding Musallis) made up 9.56% of the total population of Gujranwala Tehsil, 8.67% of Daska Tehsil, 9.12% of Sheikhupura Tehsil, 8.09% of Shahdara Tehsil, 7.23% of Narowal Tehsil, 6.20% of Sialkot Tehsil, and 6.84% of Gurdaspur Tehsil. These numbers are simply too large to ignore.

There are so similarities between upper caste Pakistani Punjabis and Indian Punjabis.

The former claims lower caste Punjabis are migrants from South India while the later calls them migrants from UP/Bihar.

Just wow!! These aboriginals of the land are being called "outsider' by descendants of outsiders.

@RIWWIR @SorryNotSorry @Vikki @Levina @jamahir