Punjabi Musalman were tertiary class citizens under Ranjeet Singh

[Hunter]

So in other words your a mongrel.

Sure I'm a mongrel, still it's better then being a smelly Indian looking Paki like yourself. Stop calling yourself Pashtun you punju dog!

[Hunter]

I give no fux about these Hindu lagar bagars. They are coming on this forum in full force pretending to be Afghans. These retards are desperate to do psy-ops over the internet, but they can't speak pashtu or Dari. They pretend to be Afghans by perpetuating **** from overseas Afghans. I don't know why you tolerate them, but I will not.

Luffy, you know me. You think I give a **** about fair skin? The only reason I mentioned it was because I know it will hurt them. This is one of the main things they are sensitive about.

You tolerating them or not wont do anything. Remember you belong to a servile and weak race, your ancestors have watched there women be raped and there land destroyed. Tolerating the worst that humanity has to offer is in your blood paki.

[Samandri]

So what was the religious demographics of their army?

The reason I have a hard time believing that they could take over many parts of what is today Pakistan is because there weren't and aren't that many sikhs period. They just didn't have the population. Empires were coming in from the West, the angrez from the East... intuitively it is very hard to wrap my head around the possibility of Sikhs only defeating people that outnumber them by quite a multiple.

Wikipedia is fine if it's cited. The part I pasted had the URL to the citation.

There was a book about Sikh military under Ranjeet Singh, will try to find details about the composition......Sikh army was not that large, but it was highly efficient, disciplined and mobile army trained along European lines by European officers.....they had artillery......while their opponents, mostly Pashtuns were ill-equipped and undisciplined tribal militias with no artillary, mostly with shields and swords and low-quality topaks....thats why Ranjeet Singh was able to easily conquer West Punjab, Kashmir and parts of KPK. He did not face any formidable army of their won caliber. Also there was civil war going on between Barakzais and Saddozais in Afghanistan, Ranjeet took advantage of it.


. ..........but leadership qualities of Ranjeet Singh should be recognized and admitted, he raised himself from a petty chief to an emperor and united Sikhs under his banner.

[toughpashtun]

This is an interesting topic; in fact I have a few questions on my mind .


1) According to my knowledge,Peshawar and Noshehra dsitricts were under Sikh rule.Which other districts(out of the following) of current day KPK were under
Sikh rule?
Mardan
Charsadda
Swabi
Swat
Dir
Malakand
Kohat
Karak
Lakki Marwat
Bannu
Tank

2) As far as my information goes, no part of current day Fata ever came under Sikh rule.Is that correct?

3)Did the Pashtun areas of Balochistan come under Sikh rule?

4) Which main Pashtun tribes fought against the Sikhs to resist them?
I have read that Khattak and Yusufzai tribes offered resistance when their areas in the Peshawar / Noshera region were being attacked.

[Elite Pakhtun]

Abdali simply slaughtered a 30 thousands strong Sikh army/misl , it was no holocaust........Whatever Sikhs say, is not history but fire side stories. it should be taken with a grain of salt.....

30,000 is a big number, and they were killed in their precious temple place. Back then it represented a sizable portion of the entire sikh population (~1/3 - 1/2). Maybe they make a bigger deal out of it than justified, but it's still significant. Their go-bund character was killed by Pakhtuns.


NotYetRegistered comments on AMA - Sikh Empire: From Banda Singh Bahadur to Maharaja Duleep Singh

[Samandri]

30,000 is a big number, and they were killed in their precious temple place. Back then it represented a sizable portion of the entire sikh population (~1/3 - 1/2). Maybe they make a bigger deal out of it than justified, but it's still significant. Their go-bund character was killed by Pakhtuns.


NotYetRegistered comments on AMA - Sikh Empire: From Banda Singh Bahadur to Maharaja Duleep Singh

They were not slaughtered at temple place..........let me quote from Haroon Rashid's book ;-

"In 1762, Ahmad Shah Abdali arrived first in Jandialah and then Lahore. The Sikhs fled to Sirhind. With Shah’s presence at Lahore, the Sikhs got slack, thinking that he had no intentions of their pursuit. His sudden withdrawal to Lahore and the rumours that this time he wanted to advance beyond Delhi had made the Sikhs complacent. They did not speedily march into Malwa hills as usual. The Shah soon made them repent their blunder. He had come to know about their presence near Maler Kotla. He sallied out from Lahore at the head of his troops with utmost precaution and secrecy. He, covering a distance of 150 miles in about 36 hours, caught the Sikhs unaware and unprepared near Kot Rohera. Joined by the Afghan chiefs of Maler Kotla, Ahmad Shah on 5th May 1762 cut their route of retreat and surrounded them from all sides. Suddenly a panic seized them and general stampede followed. In the evening when Afghans stopped at a pond to water their horses, the Sikhs availed the opportunity. They fled towards Hariana and Barnala leaving behind about thirty thousands dead. Historians variously estimate the Sikh’s casualties from 12000 to 30,000. The survivors were wounded to a man. Tahmas Khan a servant to Mir Mannu and author of “Tahmas Nama,” who took part in the battle, places the Sikh dead at 25000 while Rattan Singh was told by his father a figure of 30,000. 5th May 1762 is remembered as `Bada Ghallughara' or the biggest holocaust in the Sikh History. Views of various non-Afghan writers are given below:-
i. “Tarikh-i-Ahmadi”, as quoted by S M Lateef, the Sikhs suffered 30,000 killed.
ii. Captain Murray, it did not exceed 12,000.
iii. Rai Kanhia Lal, the Sikhs killed numbered about 24,000 men.
iv. Sir John Malcolm, the Sikhs lost more than 24,000 men.
v. Arjan Das Malik, places the Sikh dead at 25000."

[Samandri]

This is an interesting topic; in fact I have a few questions on my mind .


1) According to my knowledge,Peshawar and Noshehra dsitricts were under Sikh rule.Which other districts(out of the following) of current day KPK were under
Sikh rule?
Mardan
Charsadda
Swabi
Swat
Dir
Malakand
Kohat
Karak
Lakki Marwat
Bannu
Tank

2) As far as my information goes, no part of current day Fata ever came under Sikh rule.Is that correct?

3)Did the Pashtun areas of Balochistan come under Sikh rule?

4) Which main Pashtun tribes fought against the Sikhs to resist them?
I have read that Khattak and Yusufzai tribes offered resistance when their areas in the Peshawar / Noshera region were being attacked.

Yes you are correct. No area of FATA ,PATA and FR were under Sikh rule.....the formerly Sikh occupied areas became part of Punjab under British (later NWFP was carved out in 1901) while the independent areas first remained independent then became British administered tribal areas in various phases.......

Following districts of KPK were under Sikh rule ;-

A- Hazara ;- Haripur, Abbotabad, Mansehra

B- Peshawar;- Peshawar , Charsadda, Nowshera, Mardan, Swabi

C- Kohat ;- Kohat , Hangu and Karak

D- Bannu ; Bannu and Lakki Marwat

E- Dera Ismail Khan ;- Dera Ismail Khan and Tank


Entire Malakhand division (Buner, Swat, Malkhand, Dir, Shangla) as well as Batagram and Torghar were not part of Sikh kingdom........Sikhs had built various forts at the borders of present-day FATA....for example Shabqadr fort was built in Charsadda to check the Mohmands (of Mohamand agency) who used to attack Sikhs. Jamrud fort was built to check Khyber agency.......similarly forts were built in Kohat and Bannu to check the respective mountainous regions from present-day FATA....an attempt of penetration into North Waziristan in 1844, ended up in a disaster.

Following tribes resisted the Sikhs in different years'

1- Yousafzais
2- Khattaks
3- Jadoons
4- Tareens
5- Mashwanis
6- Khalils and Daudzais
7- Mohmands
8- Afridis
9- Bangash
10-Wazirs and Mehsuds
11- Bannuchis
12- Marwats
13- Niazis


Yousafzais resisted the hardest and suffered the most........



No Pashtun area of Balochistan came under Sikh rule.....their outermost area in south was Baloch areas of South Punjab (DG Khan, Muzaffragarh etc)

[toughpashtun]

Yes you are correct. No area of FATA ,PATA and FR were under Sikh rule.....the formerly Sikh occupied areas became part of Punjab under British (later NWFP was carved out in 1901) while the independent areas first remained independent then became British administered tribal areas in various phases.......

Following districts of KPK were under Sikh rule ;-

A- Hazara ;- Haripur, Abbotabad, Mansehra

B- Peshawar;- Peshawar , Charsadda, Nowshera, Mardan, Swabi

C- Kohat ;- Kohat , Hangu and Karak

D- Bannu ; Bannu and Lakki Marwat

E- Dera Ismail Khan ;- Dera Ismail Khan and Tank


Entire Malakhand division (Buner, Swat, Malkhand, Dir, Shangla) as well as Batagram and Torghar were not part of Sikh kingdom........Sikhs had built various forts at the borders of present-day FATA....for example Shabqadr fort was built in Charsadda to check the Mohmands (of Mohamand agency) who used to attack Sikhs. Jamrud fort was built to check Khyber agency.......similarly forts were built in Kohat and Bannu to check the respective mountainous regions from present-day FATA....an attempt of penetration into North Waziristan in 1844, ended up in a disaster.

Following tribes resisted the Sikhs in different years'

1- Yousafzais
2- Khattaks
3- Jadoons
4- Tareens
5- Mashwanis
6- Khalils and Daudzais
7- Mohmands
8- Afridis
9- Bangash
10-Wazirs and Mehsuds
11- Bannuchis
12- Marwats
13- Niazis


Yousafzais resisted the hardest and suffered the most........



No Pashtun area of Balochistan came under Sikh rule.....their outermost area in south was Baloch areas of South Punjab (DG Khan, Muzaffragarh etc)

Thanks
But there is one thing I am not sure about. I did some of my own research , and came across an interesting post, i guess on this same website.One guy, claiming to be from Mardan, said that the Sikhs did not rule over Mardan.
He said that when the Sikhs entered Mardan, the local Yusufzai temporarily retreated towards the mountains of Malakand , gathered an army and attacked the Sikhs in Mardan, thereby sending them out of Mardan back into Peshawar and Nowshehra.He also said that the Sikhs did not rule over any Yusufzai area, although the Yusufzai were part of the Pashtun army defeated by the Sikhs in other battles.
Although, this guy did not say anything about whether the Sikhs rules Swabi.Coz if they did, then his claim that the Sikhs did not rule any Yusufzai area would be wrong, considering Swabi is inhabited by the Yusufzai tribe.

[Elite Pakhtun]

They were not slaughtered at temple place..........let me quote from Haroon Rashid's book ;-

Woops... you're right. It's been a while since I read this stuff, so some of it got mixed up in my memory. They did fight after ASD was in Lahore.

However they did desecrate the temple place and filled the water with cow blood. I got the story mixed up thinking they killed them at the temple place, and mixed it with sikh and cow blood. I wish that happened though... would've been great.

From Wikipedia (i.e. Khushwant Singh, A History of the Sikhs, Volume I: 1469–1839, pages. 154-55):

"From the capital, Durrani returned to Amritsar and blew up the Harimandir Sahib which since 1757 the Sikhs had rebuilt. As an act of intended sacrilege, the pool around it was filled with cow carcasses."

[Manzareh]

Woops... you're right. It's been a while since I read this stuff, so some of it got mixed up in my memory. They did fight after ASD was in Lahore.

However they did desecrate the temple place and filled the water with cow blood. I got the story mixed up thinking they killed them at the temple place, and mixed it with sikh and cow blood. I wish that happened though... would've been great.

From Wikipedia (i.e. Khushwant Singh, A History of the Sikhs, Volume I: 1469–1839, pages. 154-55):

"From the capital, Durrani returned to Amritsar and blew up the Harimandir Sahib which since 1757 the Sikhs had rebuilt. As an act of intended sacrilege, the pool around it was filled with cow carcasses."

Sikhs on average are good people bro, don't let hate fill your heart for the everyday hard working joe and jane aka Singh/kaur. They are people with strict principles just like us, religiously they follow monotheism. My gym partner is a Sikh guy he used to be a dickhead a few years ago.. He became a Jatt baptised or watever they call it now believe it or not he stands at a stall collecting money for Syrian orphans on his only day off in the week, sometimes in the rain. What I'm saying is when he wasn't as Sikh as he is now he was a arrogant twat and being a Sikh practicing his Sikhi has made him into a righteous man. I'll tell you a short storey.. Few weeks ago I went to collect him for usual gym, we ended up cutting a car off on the traffic lights that happened to be full of Jamaicans, now in south London these yardies are not the type of people you can reason with, anyway we tried ignoring them but one of them threw a bottle at the car which i heard smash on my bumper, the driver got out the car and opened his trunk, I ended up mashing the guy up in the passenger seat, didn't give him a chance to get out the car, my friend went streight to the guy in the trunk, I got hit a few times from behind in the process.. In all the mayhem I spotted my Sikh friend on the floor, he was stabbed buy the guy in the trunk. Man he almost died for me, he didn't have to intervene since not only my reckless driving was to blame for him being stabbed but also my lack of patience, I love to fight in my life I've been through countless, on the other hand he's just a tough looking dude that hasent really been in trouble before (correct procedure to stay calm, record the registration number of the vehicle take a picture and report to police) .. I have heated discussions with him telling him about Sikhs Slavery to the white man, the wars between afghans and Sikhs even diss him about his hair hygiene the ghee they use and all sorts but in the end when it mattered we were just two humans nothing more nothing less. Yes we had a lot of wars with Sikhs in our history and we hated them as much if not more than they hate/hated us, but in war the enemy is the enemy, in peace then we behave/react peacefully as warriors do. We can't be slandering Sikhs when there isn't one here to verbally fight us back, that's not the way of the warrior its against Pashtunwali.

[Samandri]

Thanks
But there is one thing I am not sure about. I did some of my own research , and came across an interesting post, i guess on this same website.One guy, claiming to be from Mardan, said that the Sikhs did not rule over Mardan.
He said that when the Sikhs entered Mardan, the local Yusufzai temporarily retreated towards the mountains of Malakand , gathered an army and attacked the Sikhs in Mardan, thereby sending them out of Mardan back into Peshawar and Nowshehra.He also said that the Sikhs did not rule over any Yusufzai area, although the Yusufzai were part of the Pashtun army defeated by the Sikhs in other battles.
Although, this guy did not say anything about whether the Sikhs rules Swabi.Coz if they did, then his claim that the Sikhs did not rule any Yusufzai area would be wrong, considering Swabi is inhabited by the Yusufzai tribe.

In national archives of India, the total amount of revenue of Sikhs from Yousafzai territory is given......first it was 50 thousands per year, then it was raised to 80,000 and in 1844 it was raised to 96 thousands rupees per year by Diwan Mulraj (they had employed Hindus for managing their revenue affairs).......so they were extracting tribute from Yousafzai area, usually by force.....entire Yousafzai territory was surrounded by chain of forts from which they were regularly sending expeditions to suppress Yousafzais. Sikh sources are usually clownish (would soon jump to mention Yousafzai mothers hushing their kids by mention of Nalwa name rather than serious facts) .....But serious Hindu authors , who have written on Sikh history, admit that Yousafzai tribe was in constant 'rebellion' against Sikhs and mention the details about chiefs of Mardan who refused to submit to Sikhs despite of the efforts of Ranjeet Singh to win them over with offers of jagirs and positions.......One source says that Ranjeet Singh had stationed 80,000 soldiers in Peshawar valley for maintaining the occupation, which was bulk of their army. They had appointed best of their generals and commanders in Pakhtunkhwa, and their military expenditures there were actually burden on the Sikh empire.

Note: The samah or plain Yousafzais (of Mardan and Swabi) are actually Mandanrs, not proper/true Yousafzais......so it were actually Mandanrs (kin of Yousafzais) who came under Sikh occupation......Mandanrs generally call themselves Yousafzais but have distinct lineage. Most of the big shots of Yousafzai tribe e.g Malik Ahmad, Gaju Khan , Kalu Khan etc were actually Mandanrs......

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

You should be thankful to me, you're going to be the face of Gay Pakistanis:
Me and my boyfriend, openly gay from Pakistan. Really appreciate your support! : gay
Wow 15 upvotes so far!

dude .....i LOST it ....hahahhahahahhaha

his creepy predator stare needs to go on there.

[toughpashtun]

In national archives of India, the total amount of revenue of Sikhs from Yousafzai territory is given......first it was 50 thousands per year, then it was raised to 80,000 and in 1844 it was raised to 96 thousands rupees per year by Diwan Mulraj (they had employed Hindus for managing their revenue affairs).......so they were extracting tribute from Yousafzai area, usually by force.....entire Yousafzai territory was surrounded by chain of forts from which they were regularly sending expeditions to suppress Yousafzais. Sikh sources are usually clownish (would soon jump to mention Yousafzai mothers hushing their kids by mention of Nalwa name rather than serious facts) .....But serious Hindu authors , who have written on Sikh history, admit that Yousafzai tribe was in constant 'rebellion' against Sikhs and mention the details about chiefs of Mardan who refused to submit to Sikhs despite of the efforts of Ranjeet Singh to win them over with offers of jagirs and positions.......One source says that Ranjeet Singh had stationed 80,000 soldiers in Peshawar valley for maintaining the occupation, which was bulk of their army. They had appointed best of their generals and commanders in Pakhtunkhwa, and their military expenditures there were actually burden on the Sikh empire.

Note: The samah or plain Yousafzais (of Mardan and Swabi) are actually Mandanrs, not proper/true Yousafzais......so it were actually Mandanrs (kin of Yousafzais) who came under Sikh occupation......Mandanrs generally call themselves Yousafzais but have distinct lineage. Most of the big shots of Yousafzai tribe e.g Malik Ahmad, Gaju Khan , Kalu Khan etc were actually Mandanrs......

Nice.
So where do the proper Yousafzais live?I mean, the non-Mandanrs?

[toughpashtun]

Sikhs on average are good people bro, don't let hate fill your heart for the everyday hard working joe and jane aka Singh/kaur. They are people with strict principles just like us, religiously they follow monotheism. My gym partner is a Sikh guy he used to be a dickhead a few years ago.. He became a Jatt baptised or watever they call it now believe it or not he stands at a stall collecting money for Syrian orphans on his only day off in the week, sometimes in the rain. What I'm saying is when he wasn't as Sikh as he is now he was a arrogant twat and being a Sikh practicing his Sikhi has made him into a righteous man. I'll tell you a short storey.. Few weeks ago I went to collect him for usual gym, we ended up cutting a car off on the traffic lights that happened to be full of Jamaicans, now in south London these yardies are not the type of people you can reason with, anyway we tried ignoring them but one of them threw a bottle at the car which i heard smash on my bumper, the driver got out the car and opened his trunk, I ended up mashing the guy up in the passenger seat, didn't give him a chance to get out the car, my friend went streight to the guy in the trunk, I got hit a few times from behind in the process.. In all the mayhem I spotted my Sikh friend on the floor, he was stabbed buy the guy in the trunk. Man he almost died for me, he didn't have to intervene since not only my reckless driving was to blame for him being stabbed but also my lack of patience, I love to fight in my life I've been through countless, on the other hand he's just a tough looking dude that hasent really been in trouble before (correct procedure to stay calm, record the registration number of the vehicle take a picture and report to police) .. I have heated discussions with him telling him about Sikhs Slavery to the white man, the wars between afghans and Sikhs even diss him about his hair hygiene the ghee they use and all sorts but in the end when it mattered we were just two humans nothing more nothing less. Yes we had a lot of wars with Sikhs in our history and we hated them as much if not more than they hate/hated us, but in war the enemy is the enemy, in peace then we behave/react peacefully as warriors do. We can't be slandering Sikhs when there isn't one here to verbally fight us back, that's not the way of the warrior its against Pashtunwali.

You have good and bad people in every race.Yes, it sounds cliched but....
Btw, where are you from originally? and what tribe?

[Elite Pakhtun]

Sikhs on average are good people bro, don't let hate fill your heart for the everyday hard working joe and jane aka Singh/kaur. They are people with strict principles just like us, religiously they follow monotheism. My gym partner is a Sikh guy he used to be a dickhead a few years ago.. He became a Jatt baptised or watever they call it now believe it or not he stands at a stall collecting money for Syrian orphans on his only day off in the week, sometimes in the rain. What I'm saying is when he wasn't as Sikh as he is now he was a arrogant twat and being a Sikh practicing his Sikhi has made him into a righteous man. I'll tell you a short storey.. Few weeks ago I went to collect him for usual gym, we ended up cutting a car off on the traffic lights that happened to be full of Jamaicans, now in south London these yardies are not the type of people you can reason with, anyway we tried ignoring them but one of them threw a bottle at the car which i heard smash on my bumper, the driver got out the car and opened his trunk, I ended up mashing the guy up in the passenger seat, didn't give him a chance to get out the car, my friend went streight to the guy in the trunk, I got hit a few times from behind in the process.. In all the mayhem I spotted my Sikh friend on the floor, he was stabbed buy the guy in the trunk. Man he almost died for me, he didn't have to intervene since not only my reckless driving was to blame for him being stabbed but also my lack of patience, I love to fight in my life I've been through countless, on the other hand he's just a tough looking dude that hasent really been in trouble before (correct procedure to stay calm, record the registration number of the vehicle take a picture and report to police) .. I have heated discussions with him telling him about Sikhs Slavery to the white man, the wars between afghans and Sikhs even diss him about his hair hygiene the ghee they use and all sorts but in the end when it mattered we were just two humans nothing more nothing less. Yes we had a lot of wars with Sikhs in our history and we hated them as much if not more than they hate/hated us, but in war the enemy is the enemy, in peace then we behave/react peacefully as warriors do. We can't be slandering Sikhs when there isn't one here to verbally fight us back, that's not the way of the warrior its against Pashtunwali.

Lol sounds like we should embrace this sikhi cr@p. We'll start standing around for donations then.

Jokes aside, what do you know about these people? You had a gym partner, so what? I know them much much better than you think. Probably better than anyone in these forums. The strict principles they have include not eating Halal food and generally being adversarial to muslims. They are an anti-islamic cult, which in and of itself isn't a big deal, but they have a specific hate for Pakhtuns because of our historical fights. The fact that most of them aren't religious (or they are merely peace lovers and have convinced themselves that's all their religion is about) is another story.

I know sikhs personally. I used to be friends with a number of them. Very close with a few. Not for a short time either... we're talking better part of a decade. I've interacted with them thoroughly, been to their events many times, visited their stupid temple to see them in action, seen their culture inside out. I know these people very very well. The ones who do not have a life crisis where they need to be saved by some religious thing are typically liars, backstabbers, and very easily roused by jealousy. Their toilets, oops, I mean gurdawaras go as far as making up fantasy stories. Ones i knew genuinely thought these stupid condom-heads got peshawar for 100 years and got kabul for 100 years and just outright stupid BS (FYI, their empire lasted 50 years in total). They're just stupid poo-njabi animals. Even their ranjeet cunt was known to have used a lot of internal deceit to get to power.

As for your friend, look, he had your back. That is great. But I doubt he was expecting to get stabbed. Was likely not expecting anything other than a pushing shoving contest. Maybe a punch back and forth. If someone told him those guys were armed, and while I can't read his mind, it would be reasonable to assume he would likely not tried to be a hero.

Also, I'm not denying everyone is different. There are good and bad people everywhere. But just like the people here talk about punjabis and indians etc... I must tell you the punjabis on the other side of the border are garabage, and certainly to be seen as enemies. Don't assume because in 1984 5-6 of them died at the hands of hindus, and they still cry about it today, that all of a sudden they're victims too. Most of them ****ed off to former English colonies, and are seriously milking liberal tears. During partition the sikhs were the absolute most savage people. They wiped out entire villages in india that had muslims.

I've dealt with these people longer than you think, and I don't like them bro. They're getting a free lunch wherever they've ****ed off to and they have it out for us without telling us. They also have gained from the recent islamophobia. Search facebook you'll find groups like "sikhs in support of britain first".

They're not a real people. It was some hindu experiment to create cannon fodder to protect themselves, and it got out of hand. ASD made a mistake. He had 2 opportunities to wipe them out completely, at their infancy. Instead he just slaughtered a lot of them (1/4 - 1/3 1st time and 1/3 - 1/2 2nd time) and went away thinking he's sent them a message and now they'll behave themselves. He should've just removed them from history completely. We're still reeling from the effects of that mistake. The sikhs were completely ineffective against the british.

I'm not saying don't be friends with your gym buddy. I'm saying just beware. A bad example: A girl on a date should know that rape is a possibility. She shouldn't assume it's not. Doesn't mean it will happen. It probably won't happen. But be aware of the possibility.