Jump to content

is it a myth or is it true regarding hari singh nalwa


cgy99100
 Share

Recommended Posts

Sayyed Mohd. Lateef, in the "History of the Punjab writes;-"Such was the dread in which the Afghans held him, that to this day the name 'Haria' is repeated by mothers in Peshawar and its neighborhood in frightening their children."


harisingh.jpg


The editor of the <banned word filter activated> Bits newspaper of England wrote in one of his columns around 1881:-"Some people might think that Napoleon was a great General. Some might name Marshall Hendenburgh, Lord Kitchener, General Karobzey or Duke of Wellington etc. And some going further might say Halaku Khan, Changez Khan, Richard or Allaudin etc. But let me tell you that in the North of India a General of the name of Hari Singh Nalwa of the Sikhs prevailed. Had he lived longer and had the sources and artillery of the British, he would have conquered most of Asia and Europe…."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Conquering Afghanistan: What The West Can Learn From India

facebook.png

google.pngmyspace.pngtechnorati.pngsubscribe_rss.png

Afghanistan_2_by_FlappyJack-300x199.jpgBy Rakesh Krishnan

If there’s one thing that really gets me worked up, it is this: the western media keeps peddling the fairy tale that no power – from Alexander 2300 years ago to Britain in the 19th century and Russia 30 years ago – was able to conquer Afghanistan. To me it reeks of ignorance, and reporters in western countries have exhibited a lot of that. Remember, this is the same bunch that devoted reams of newsprint to the lie that al-Qaeda was getting help from Iraq, when in reality Iraq under Saddam Hussein was the most secular in West Asia.

But how could experienced and Pulitzer Prize winning writers ignore facts? Don’t they have armies of researchers at their beck and call? Also, newspapers like the NYT and The Guardian have excellent research departments that can dig out the region’s history!

The truth is that just 180 years ago Maharajah Ranjit Singh (1799-1839) and his brilliant commander Hari Singh Nalwa defeated the Afghans and the tribes of the Khyber Pass area, in the process securing India’s north west border. Had it not been for Ranjit Singh, Peshawar and the north-west frontier provinces of India (now in Pakistan) would have been part of Afghanistan today.

But first a flashback: Afghanistan had always been a part of India; it was called Gandhar, from which the modern Kandahar originates. It was a vibrant province that gave us excellent art, architecture, literature and scientific knowledge – a world far removed from today’s Taliban infested badlands.

It was an Indian province until 1735 when Nadir Shah of Iran emboldened by the weakness of the later Mughals ransacked Delhi and everything on the way. This was a highly opportunistic and reckless act because for the past 25 centuries India and Iran had respected each other’s borders, and though always a bit nervous of each other, the two empires never tried to subvert each other. But because of his greed Nadir Shah hanged the equation. He annexed Afghanistan and asked the Indians to forget about ever getting it back.

However, Ranjit Singh was not prepared to play according to the Persian script. Nadir Shah’s successor, Ahmad Shah Abdali, had been launching repeated raids into Punjab and Delhi. To check this Ranjit Singh decided to build a modern and powerful army with the employment of Frenchmen, Italians, Greeks, Russians, Germans and Austrians. Two of the foreign officers who entered the Maharaja’s service, Ventura and Allard, had served under Napoleon. Says historian Shiv Kumar Gupta: “All these officers were basically engaged by Ranjit Singh for modernisation of his troops. He never put them in supreme command.”

After conquering Multan in 1818 and Kashmir in 1819, Ranjit Singh led his legions across the Indus and took Dera Ghazi Khan in 1820 and Dera Ismail Khan in 1821. Alarmed, the Afghans called for a jehad under the leadership of Azim Khan Burkazi, the ruler of Kabul. A big Afghan army collected on the bank of the Kabul River at Naushehra, but Ranjit Singh won a decisive victory and the Afghans were dispersed in 1823. Peshawar was subdued in 1834.

The Afghans and Pathans had always considered themselves superior to the people on the Indian side. They especially looked down upon Indian Muslims and contemptuously referred to them as Hindko. The fact that the Indians were superior in all respects – wealth, culture, literature, art – mattered little to them, as physical stature was the only basis for this peacock-like strutting. Says historian Kirpal Singh, “The pride of the Afghans and Pathans was pricked for the first time as they had been defeated by the Sikhs whom they considered infidels. Undoubtedly, they were agitated and used to say Khalsa Hum Khuda Shuda (Khalsa too has become believer of God).”

So how did Ranjit Singh manage to conquer such fierce mountain people? Mainly by using a blend of sustained aggression latter smoothened by Indian magnanimity. Of course, his biggest weapon was the scourge of the Afghans –Hari Singh Nalwa, who in one battle defeated 20,000 Hazaras. To defeat the cunning and fierce Hazaras on their treacherous home turf was no mean feat but to do that with only 7000 men was the stuff of legend.

Indeed, Hari Singh had become a legend. He realised that to dominate the warlike tribes, the ikhs had to give them the same treatment the Afghans had given the Indians in the past. According to Kirpal Singh, “Hari Singh set up a very strong administration in the Peshawar valley. He levied a cess of Rs 4 per house on the Yusafzais. This cess was to be collected in cash or in kind. For its

realisation, personal household property could be appropriated. There was scarcely avillage that was not burnt. In such awe were his visitations held that Hari Singh Nalwa’s name was used by Afghan mothers as a term of fright to hush their unruly children.”

Though the spell of Afghan supremacy was broken, the region predominantly populated by turbulent and warlike Muslim tribes could not be securely held unless a large army was permanently stationed there. A force of 12,000 men was posted with Hari Singh to quell any sign of turbulence and to realise the revenue. “The terror of the name of the Khalsa resounded in the valley,” says Kirpal Singh. “Part of the city of Peshawar was burnt and the residence of the governor at Bala Hissar was razed to the ground.”

Ranjit Singh ensured that the Afghans never again became a threat to India. The wild tribes of Swat and Khyber were also tamed. These are the same people who massacred British armies, and against whom the Americans and Pakistanis are now struggling.

There are three reasons why Ranjit Singh won a decisive victory and in Afghanistan and the northwest while the West is floundering.

First, terror tactics were followed by a period of liberal and secular Sikh rule. In fact, secularism was the defining character of Ranjit Singh’s rule. There was no state religion, and religious tolerance was an article of his faith. He refused to treat Muslims like second class citizens. Compare this with the callous strafing of wedding parties by US and European troops or the Nazi

uniforms being worn by Czech troops.

When his victorious army passed through the streets of Peshawar, the maharajah issued strict instructions to his sardars to observe restraint in keeping with the Sikh tradition, not to damage any mosque, not to insult any woman and not to destroy any crops.

Two, like the NATO forces in Afghanistan today, Ranjit Singh’s army was a coalition too. The Indian king’s forces were made up of Sikhs and Hindus, while the artillery almost fully comprised Muslims (as the Sikhs and Hindus thought it below their dignity to serve in this new wing of the military). Over half a dozen European nations are assisting US troops just as European specialists worked for Ranjit Singh. Also, for the first time in Indian history, Mazhabis, for centuries considered untouchables, become a regular component of the army.

However, there is a key difference – Ranjit’s Singh’s forces worked like clockwork with one aim in mind and that was to secure the empire. Today, the US is reluctant to do all the fighting, the British forces are simply not up to the task of taking on the fierce Afghans and relies on bribes to keep away the Taliban fighters. Which Afghan will show his opponent respect if they bribe them

not to shoot? The Ukrainians, Poles, Australians, New Zealanders, Czechs, and who knows how many more nationalities, are present in Afghanistan clearly to curry favour with America and wrap up their respective free trade agreements. Nobody, it seems, has the balls to take on the Afghans, except from 30,000 ft in the air.

Around 30 years ago, the Russian general Nikolai Ogarkov advised Leonid Brezhnev’s cabinet not to invade Afghanistan, saying that the country was unconquerable; today NATO generals are asking Barack Obama to get out of the place or else the Americans will have to leave in the same state as they left Vietnam – in their underpants. But Hari Singh and Ranjit Singh showed how a

mixture of ferocity, valour and compassion could tame Afghanistan. And that’s the third reason: at the end of the day, the Indians just did a much better job of fighting.

Rakesh Krishnan is a features writer at Fairfax New Zealand. He has previously worked with Business world, India Today and Hindustan Times, and was news editor with the Financial Express.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wikipedia isn't a great research tool and banned from colleges and on wikipedia only mentions peshawar the land pathans called home that sikhs conquered i was hoping if someone could list some more territories conquered by the sikhs that pathans call home

sikhistan im not affected by true facts regarding the sikh raj actually im proud of their accomplishments but theirs a difference between fairy tale stories like men fighting battles with their head in one hand and sword in other or one sikh can take on 125 000 men at once

im not changing history and if most of the history hasn't bin researched and is unknown then how do you know what is fact and what is fiction regarding sikh history

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thats why im asking people to list the lands hari singh nalwa conquered that pathans called home as well try to understand what would

motivate afghan mothers across afghanistan to use hari singh nalwa name to scare their kids considering modern day afghanistan wasn't conquered by sikhs

pathans make up their own fairy tale about their history they claim maharaja ranjit singh started off as a pathan puppet and was given lahore but don't have any evidence to back that claim up same with their claim on hari singh nalwa they will claim hari singh nalwa

had asked the british for help in invading peshawar but have zero evidence to back up the claim

theirs sikhs who claim sikhs had fought with their heads chopped off with head in one hand and sword in another but no evidence to back up their claim



best thing to do is look at the claim then find the evidence to back the claim then see the other side of the story and see what they claim

and look at the evidence they provide to back up their claim look at things logically and not just beleive things blindly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ian heath sikh empire in that book he only talked about peshawar

i want to know all the lands hari singh nalwa conquered to take pride in those accomplishments im not against his accomplishments

but their needs to be strong evidence to back the claims other wise sikhs are just going to get looked at as people who tell fairy tail

yes quoting a newspaper is sort of credibile but not really credible if it fails to provide evidence to back that claim

any book or newspaper article loses credibility when it doesn't provide evidence to back their claims

otherwise you should believe every book written calling barack obama a birther and claim he was born in kenya or believe every word

of the bible cause its a book or believe 9/11 was an inside job cause their books and documantry's making claims

books that lack credibility and newspapers that lack credibility is dime a dozen and reason for that is they don't provide strong enough evidence to back their claim

a good credibile book or article is one that provides evidence to back their claim

a horrible book or article is one that makes accusations but fails to provide evidence

in court judge sees two sides of the story and both sides must provide evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt their claim is true

same applys to books documantrys and articles

if sikhs didn't conquere present day afghanistan then how can such a claim be made about afghan mothers an hari singh nalwa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude, I suggest you read the biography on Hari Singh Nalwa by Vanit Nalwa.

Back then the Afghans werent some 'weirdos with a beardo' running around the mountains molesting little boys like the Taliban are now. They were a sovereign power and arguably a super power in Central Asia. Read books like Panth Prakash and the biography to see how the Sikhs wore down their war machine before driving them up the Khyber and taking Peshawar. The forerunners of the Taliban, led by Syed Ahmad, were wiped out in a single campaign, not the long drawn out campaigns that the Yanks and Commies tried.

If the British hadnt overrun Punjab there is a high chance more of Afghanistan would have been taken or that Afghanistan would have become a tributary to Punjab. After Hari Singh Nalwa's death there was talk that Maharajah Ranjit Singh and Prince Nau Nihal Singh would take two divisions and take Jalalabad and Kabul and raze them in revenge for Hari Singh Nalwa's death. The foreign officers and dogra traitors talked them out of it.

Taking and holding of Peshawar was no easy task. The British used tens of thousands of troops, artillery, gatling/machine guns and aircraft to hold onto it, even though the Afghans were using the same equipment they had when they fought the Punjabi Empire. Can you imagine America losing New York to the Russians in a war and having to accept they would never get it back? Or England losing Birmingham to Scotland and having to deal with it? That's what the Sikhs did to the Afghans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thats why im asking people to list the lands hari singh nalwa conquered that pathans called home as well try to understand what would

motivate afghan mothers across afghanistan to use hari singh nalwa name to scare their kids considering modern day afghanistan wasn't conquered by sikhs

pathans make up their own fairy tale about their history they claim maharaja ranjit singh started off as a pathan puppet and was given lahore but don't have any evidence to back that claim up same with their claim on hari singh nalwa they will claim hari singh nalwa

had asked the british for help in invading peshawar but have zero evidence to back up the claim

theirs sikhs who claim sikhs had fought with their heads chopped off with head in one hand and sword in another but no evidence to back up their claim

best thing to do is look at the claim then find the evidence to back the claim then see the other side of the story and see what they claim

and look at the evidence they provide to back up their claim look at things logically and not just beleive things blindly

Did not you read about Peshawer being province of afghnaistan and then broken away permanently by sikh general Nalwa.Is it not a proof enough.

You need basic lesson about world history before you embark on dishing out silly questions. Do you know the demography of

Peshawer provonce.It is almost totally pathan and also what they call wazirstan.Do you know their efforts still alive as they wanted

to merge with afghnaistan. I am not sure if you ever heard name khudai khidmatgar movement led by frontier gandhi who was a thorn for pakistan.

Do you know the jihad gathered by ahmed shah bralevi in this area when he gathered all pathans and was beaten back.

And do not tell me that wikipedia is all untruth. Better read some history of the area without bias and then discuss the topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use