Translations:Rajput/15/en
Sociologists like Sarah Farris and Reinhard Bendix state that the original Kshatriyas in the northwest who existed until Mauryan times in tiny kingdoms were an extremely cultured, educated and intellectual group who were a threat to the intellectual monopoly of the Brahmins. According to Max Weber, ancient texts show they were not subordinate to the Brahmins in religious matters. These Kshatriyas were later undermined not only by the Brahmin priests of the time but were replaced by the emerging community of Rajputs, who were illiterate mercenaries who worked for kings. Unlike the Kshatriyas, the Rajputs were generally illiterate hence their rise did not present a threat to intellectual monopoly of the Brahmins - and the Rajputs accepted the superiority of the educated Brahmin community.[1][2]
- ↑ Reinhard Bendix (1998). Max Weber: An Intellectual Portrait. Psychology Press. pp. 180–. ISBN 978-0-415-17453-4.
Eventually the position of the old Kshatriya nobility was undermined not only by the Brahmin priests but also by the rise of a warrior caste in northwest India. Most of the Rajputs were illiterate mercenaries in the service of a king.
- ↑ Sara R. Farris (9 September 2013). Max Weber's Theory of Personality: Individuation, Politics and Orientalism in the Sociology of Religion. BRILL. pp. 140–. ISBN 978-90-04-25409-1.
Weber however explained this downgrading of their status by the fact that they represented a threat to the cultural and intellectual monopoly of the Brahmans, as they[Kshatriyas] were also extremely cultured and educated in the art of administration. In about the eight century the Rajput thus began to perform the functions that had formerly belonged to the Kshatriya, assuming their social and economic position and substituting them as the new warrior class. Ancient illiterate merceneries, the Rajput did not represent a threat to the Brahmininc monopoly and were more inclined to accept the Brahmans' superiority, thus contributing to the so called Hindu restoration.