Defeat of Sikh army and death of Hari Singh Nalwa in battle of Jamrud

[Sam_Bajwa]

I know sikhs now days portrays themselves as saviors of Indian hindus (i wonder why?) but when the time came in battle of panipat they didn't join Marathas.

Sikhs were never the saviours of Hindus. sikhs were hindu volunteers who chose to fight against the tyrants .
Punjabi hindu mothers raised their sons as sikhs in those days it's still prevalent to some extent.
Marathas never asked for the help of sikhs and at that time sikhs were not even in a position to help since they had at that time recently faced mass prosecutions by the Mughal reign there was a price on every sikhs head.
Perhaps Rajputs and the Jats were in a position to help but then they had differences with the maratha leaders

Still Jats helped the Marathas after the war and so did sikhs as their moral responsibility Sardar jassa singh attacked the Pathans to rescue more than 2200 girls being taken to afghanistan they were escorted back to their homes.

 

[Samandri]

......................................................

I dig out a piece of information today.,

"In Kohat where the Khattak chiefship of Teri, we are told, " was but little affected by the Sikh conquest" and the Teri chief "at annexation was continued in the management of the whole Teri tahsil ".
Census of India, 1911 .. (1912)p.65

In 1836, however, Ranjit Singh became reconciled to Sultan Muhammad, and restored to him in service jagir Hastnagdar and half Doaba with Kohat, Teri and Hangu, the annual revenues of which were Rs. 1,50,000. At the same time Rasul Khan, the Khattak chief, excited disturbances and the Sikh garrison, which was retiring from Teri, were massacred on the road near Jatta. Harri Singh Nalwa was killed in 1837 in a battle near Jamrud. Tej Singh administered the Peshawar Government for a short time in his place until relieved by General Avitabile, who retained charge for five years from 1838 to 1842, and was again followed by Tej Singh, who governed for four years. In 1846 Tej Singh was succeeded by Sher Singh, who was accompanied by Colonel George Lawrence as assistant to the newly appointed British Resident at Lahore. All this time Sultan Muhammad remained jagirdar and ruler of Kohat.
Report on the settlement of the Kohat district in the Panjáb
Gazetteer of the Kohat District, 1883-4 - Page 30

The Sikhs, on occupying the country, found themselves unable tolevy revenue from the mountaineers. Ranjit Singh placed Sultan Muhammad Khan in a position of importance at Peshawar, and made him a grant of Kohat, Hangu, and Teri. One Rasul Khan became chief of Teri, and on his death in 1843 was succeeded by his adopted son, Khwaja Muhammad Khan. Meanwhile, Sultan Muhammad Khancontinued to govern the rest of the District through his sons, though the country was generally in a disturbed state, and the upper Miranzai villages were practically independent. When the Sikh troops took up arms at Peshawar on the outbreak of the second Sikh War, George Lawrence, the British officer there, took refuge at Kohat ; but Sultan Muhammad Khan played him false, and delivered him over as a prisoner to the Sikhs.
Imperial Gazetteer of India, v. 15, p. 343.
................
So an entire Sikh garrison was destroyed by Khattaks of Teri (modern day Karak district) in 1836 while they were leaving it, thats the event one year before death of hari Singh nalwa. Now Miranzai, Teri , kohat are very close to Peshawer where Hari singh was stationed. Here is the map of location of kohat, it is adjacent to Peshawer,

It is clear that Hari singh failed to subdue the troublesome Pashtun tribes around Peshawer and adjacent districts, there was no writ of Sikh rule beyond peshawer city. The jamrud fort adventurism is beyond my understanding when they didnt have a proper control over the already occupied areas.

 

[Kabira]

Sikhs were never the saviours of Hindus. sikhs were hindu volunteers who chose to fight against the tyrants .
Punjabi hindu mothers raised their sons as sikhs in those days it's still prevalent to some extent.
Marathas never asked for the help of sikhs and at that time sikhs were not even in a position to help since they had at that time recently faced mass prosecutions by the Mughal reign there was a price on every sikhs head.
Perhaps Rajputs and the Jats were in a position to help but then they had differences with the maratha leaders

Still Jats helped the Marathas after the war and so did sikhs as their moral responsibility Sardar jassa singh attacked the Pathans to rescue more than 2200 girls being taken to afghanistan they were escorted back to their homes.

Ok forget about sikhs, seem like even hindus of Rajasthan didn't come out to help Marathas when it mattered. Pashtuns on the other hand were very religiously and ethnically aware and united. So one see pashtuns siding with other pashtuns despite being in opposite band all the time. This type of unity was not seen anywhere, neither among punjabi muslims.

 

[Sam_Bajwa]

That would be the reason in the eyes of British. According to Sir Winston Churchil,

"The Sikh is the guardian of the Marches. He was originally invented to combat the Pathan. His religion was designed to be diametrically opposed
to Mahommedanism. It was a shrewd act of policy.Fanaticism was met by fanaticism. Religious abhorrence was added to racial hatred. The
Pathan invaders were rolled back to the mountains,and the Sikhs established themselves at Lahore and Peshawar. The strong contrast, and much of
the animosity, remain to-day. "

It's a free world that was his perception I totally disagree
The basic teaching of Sikhism is na ko hindu na musalmaan there is no hindu and no Muslim that is all are equal .

Ok forget about sikhs, seem like even hindus of Rajasthan didn't come out to help Marathas when it mattered. Pashtuns on the other hand were very religiously and ethnically aware and united. So one see pashtuns siding with other pashtuns despite being in opposite band all the time. This type of unity was not seen anywhere, neither among punjabi muslims.

Pathans had baloch rohilla and other indian Muslims on their side moreover no one was expecting Marathas to get defeated Rajputs were under the burden of taxes demanded by Marathas but I think they should have helped but that's where we Indians lacked back then unity .

 

[KingMamba]

True Ahmad shah Abdali never looted the punjabi muslims, but neither did the Sikhs. Sikhs only looted the mughal government. And later the sikhs began looting the Afghans while they were on their way back to Afghanistan after looting Delhi. So sikhs were looters who were looting the looters That is the point where Ahmad Shah abdali's conflict with the sikhs began.

Second reason why the sikhs never looted the punjabi muslims was because like the sikhs they were peasents. And the peasentry was the biggest support of the Sikhs. How else could the sikhs have succeeded without their support?

That is incorrect, Sikhs did loot Punjabi Muslim and whenever Abdalis forces came to confront them they retreated into the hills.

 

[Kabira]

It's a

Pathans had baloch rohilla and other indian Muslims on their side moreover no one was expecting Marathas to get defeated Rajputs were under the burden of taxes demanded by Marathas but I think they should have helped but that's where we Indians lacked back then unity .

So accept the fact that sikhs were only looking out for themselves. No need to rewrite history. Also lol at not expecting them to loss, poor excuse.

 

[jatt+gutts]

That would be the reason in the eyes of British. According to Sir Winston Churchil,

"The Sikh is the guardian of the Marches. He was originally invented to combat the Pathan. His religion was designed to be diametrically opposed
to Mahommedanism. It was a shrewd act of policy.Fanaticism was met by fanaticism. Religious abhorrence was added to racial hatred. The
Pathan invaders were rolled back to the mountains,and the Sikhs established themselves at Lahore and Peshawar. The strong contrast, and much of
the animosity, remain to-day. "

lol that's all false.. they didn't distinguished between pathan and non pathans. they were against invaders and looters. Sikh religion was formed because both hindu and muslim religion have some flaws and superstitions.. Sikhism is like improved version of both.

 

[Sam_Bajwa]

That is incorrect, Sikhs did loot Punjabi Muslim and whenever Abdalis forces came to confront them they retreated into the hills.

 

[jatt+gutts]

So accept the fact that sikhs were only looking out for themselves. No need to rewrite history. Also lol at not expecting them to loss, poor excuse.

like always bootlickers will remain bootlickers

 

[Kabira]

lol that's all false.. they didn't distinguished between pathan and non pathans. they were against invaders and looters. Sikh religion was formed because both hindu and muslim religion have some flaws and superstitions.. Sikhism is like improved version of both.

Jatts converted to sikhsm in hope of boty/loot, i know mindset of average shudra jatt.

 

[jatt+gutts]

Jatts converted to sikhsm in hope of boty/loot, i know mindset of average shudra jatt.

should I tell u the truth who were shudra.. you may not like it

 

[Samandri]

It's a free world that was his perception I totally disagree
The basic teaching of Sikhism is na ko hindu na musalmaan there is no hindu and no Muslim that is all are equal .



Pathans had baloch rohilla and other indian Muslims on their side moreover no one was expecting Marathas to get defeated Rajputs were under the burden of taxes demanded by Marathas but I think they should have helped but that's where we Indians lacked back then unity .

Rohillas themselves were Afghans, settled few decades ago in Doab, they provided 38,000 soldiers to Abdali, 3000 of them were Bangash Afghans of farrukhabad. Baloch contingent was only 1,000 cavalry strong under Naseer Khan. While Shuja-ud-daua provided 3000 soldiers. So it was basically a Pashtun vs Maratha war. You can say that only U.P's muslims stood with Abdali, bulk of whom were ethnic Afghan themselves.

 

[Sam_Bajwa]

Samandari even sikhs attacked and killed large afghan armies in punjab during the zenith of abdali that doesn't means abdali had no control on punjab

 

[Samandri]

lol that's all false.. they didn't distinguished between pathan and non pathans. they were against invaders and looters. Sikh religion was formed because both hindu and muslim religion have some flaws and superstitions.. Sikhism is like improved version of both.

Whether its false or not, Thats what colonial British thought about their Sikh subjects.

 

[Sam_Bajwa]

Rohillas themselves were Afghans, settled few decades ago in Doab, they provided 38,000 soldiers to Abdali, 3000 of them were Bangash Afghans of farrukhabad. Baloch contingent was only 1,000 cavalry strong under Naseer Khan. While Shuja-ud-daua provided 3000 soldiers. So it was basically a Pashtun vs Maratha war. You can say that only U.P's muslims stood with Abdali, bulk of whom were ethnic Afghan themselves.

But they were what we. Can call low caste Pathans since the Pathans look down upon them