'Indian history was distorted by the British'

[pmaitra]

Yes, there are few of one particular Gotra: Saraswat. They have dwelled in the same region for several thousand of years but Banda Bahadur had no Dogra connection. Bhardwaj, afaik, is a gotra in itself...

Yes, Bhardwaj is a gotra, and is found among Punjabis, and probably among Dogras as well.

 

[Tronic]

Not really. That's prevalent only in Punjab & among Punjabis...

Because no one else has heard of them.

There is historical animosity between the two which continues till date. Unfortunately, their rivalry is played out even today (friends narrated several interesting stories), in several Engineering & Medical colleges across the country.

Historical animosity between whom? If you're inferring a rivalry between the Patiala Kingdom and Ranjit Singh's Kingdom of Lahore, than nothing could be further from the truth. I'm from Patiala and majority of Patialvis hold Ranjit Singh in a much higher regard than they do the Patiala royal family. The Patiala royals are nothing compared to the legacy left behind by Ranjit Singh's kingdom.

Anyway, there are Sikhs who hold grouse against rest-of-India because troops made up from this region (the Bengal Army of Poorabias) under British command defeated & unraveled the Sikh Empire. Which was, in a way, avenged by Sikh troops while quashing the Indian rebellion in Indian war of Independence 1857, when Sikh loyalty to their arch-enemies & subjugators i.e. British, was found overly zealous, considering the unprecedented civilian massacres committed by them in the Indo-gangetic plains.

And, this was when barely 7 years had passed when British had summarily routed the Sikh Empire. Still, Sikh troops' steadfastness to their British masters was never found wanting.

Make up your own mind, first. Sikhs held a grudge against the Poorbias (hinterland Indians) for helping the Brits, or the British themselves?

Not one rebellion was ever organized in history by any remnants/residue of Sikh Empire or any Sikh nobles/fuedal lords/troops. One can easily extrapolate this behavior to post-independence scenarios as well, but that would be gratuitous in this thread.

Because unlike the Dogras, who betrayed their own allies and went running to their British masters, all the Sikh nobles and feudal lords fought the British till their last breath. Even retired Sikh generals, like General Sham Singh Attariwalla, came out of retirement to fight the British and fought till death on the battlefield. Their were no remnants of the Sikh Empire, with even the main Sikh royal family wiped out. Prince Duleep Singh was exiled all the way to Britain at the age of 13.

Secondly, pretty much every major Independence movement under the British was led by the Sikhs. Bose is given all the credit for Azad Hind Fauj but in reality, it was actually founded by a Sikh, General Mohan Singh, and not Bose. Majority of the INA was composed of Sikhs. Babbar Akali Lehar founded by Sikhs. Gadar Movement founded by Sikhs. The movement against the British Colony act led entirely by Sikhs and every single person sentenced for that movement was a Sikh. The examples of Sikh role in the fight against British rule are countless.

What I would like to convey is: historical acrimonies, injustices & wrongs-committed aside, we have already made a fresh state as a modern nation-state in 1947. Lets not undo this by indulging in regional-linguistic chauvinism. No one is looked down upon in modern India (institutionally) which cares more about is present & future.

What else happens on this board? Sikhs like Banda Bahadur are commonly referred to by their pre-conversion names, you belittle the Sikh Empire, while misconstruing the Dogra expeditions as if they were some grand independent campaigns not fought under the Sikh flag.

 

[TrueSpirit]

Because no one else has heard of them.

You may have a point here because Dogra kingdom is less famous than Sikh kingdom for obvious reasons. Dogras were regional heavy-weights, at best. But heavy-weights in their own right. People from this region still remember them fondly with due respect & admiration. They were not the puny as they are being made out & some aspects of their rule make a lot of sense.

Further, anyone with interest in history/politics of J&K would know of Dogras as I do with no direct link to Dogra.

Historical animosity between whom? If you're inferring a rivalry between the Patiala Kingdom and Ranjit Singh's Kingdom of Lahore, than nothing could be further from the truth. I'm from Patiala and majority of Patialvis hold Ranjit Singh in a much higher regard than they do the Patiala royal family. The Patiala royals are nothing compared to the legacy left behind by Ranjit Singh's kingdom.

No, not inferring that. Dogra vs. Sikh, I meant. It is very real & contemporary. No amount of denial can change that. It is evident on DFI, as well.

Make up your own mind, first. Sikhs held a grudge against the Poorbias (hinterland Indians) for helping the Brits, or the British themselves?

Against the Poorabias, only. As the Sikh troops realized that they are no match to the British Indian Army, they joined them & directed their vengeance (out of frustration+humiliation) at Poorbias, as soon as opportunity dawned (within 7 years).

Because unlike the Dogras, who betrayed their own allies and went running to their British masters

I know of multiple versions of truth (as happens all the time), being a disinterested observer but you would only look at it from your perspective because you are a party to this dispute...hope you are getting the drift.,

all the Sikh nobles and feudal lords fought the British till their last breath. Even retired Sikh generals, like General Sham Singh Attariwalla, came out of retirement to fight the British and fought till death on the battlefield. Their were no remnants of the Sikh Empire, with even the main Sikh royal family wiped out. Prince Duleep Singh was exiled all the way to Britain at the age of 13.

Secondly, pretty much every major Independence movement under the British was led by the Sikhs. Bose is given all the credit for Azad Hind Fauj but in reality, it was actually founded by a Sikh, General Mohan Singh, and not Bose. Majority of the INA was composed of Sikhs. Babbar Akali Lehar founded by Sikhs. Gadar Movement founded by Sikhs. The movement against the British Colony act led entirely by Sikhs and every single person sentenced for that movement was a Sikh. The examples of Sikh role in the fight against British rule are countless.

All this is true, afaik. No one can disparage the truth.

But, none of this can be leveraged to condone the role of Sikh troops in 1857. Just after the second Anglo-Sikh war !!

What else happens on this board? Sikhs like Banda Bahadur are commonly referred to by their pre-conversion names

I did so. How does it matters ? His deeds are important, names do not matter in this context.

you belittle the Sikh Empire

I never intended to. All I said is that Sikh Empire (not the Sikh resistance) was a very short-lived entity. To add, even lesser than the Dogra empire.

while misconstruing the Dogra expeditions as if they were some grand independent campaigns not fought under the Sikh flag.

We know the flag & the flag-bearers. No one has disputed that yet.

But, that single feat was beyond-impressive & inspirational because it tested the limits of human endurance & rose the bar like never before. It is excessively hard to emulate, if not impossible. When I read of it, I cannot help but think about Hannibal's dare-devilry in crossing the Pyrenees & Alps, while managing the Gauls at the same time.

 

[Dukes Mangola]

I can prove to some extent than Aryans came from outside india...it might not be invasion but can be taken as migration of people.
Main reason is HORSES, as per vedics , horses were integral part of aryan culture and for kings wars were made on horses.
Sacrifices were made of horses, so they were part and parcel of life of aryans.

But its proven that there were no horses in indian sub continent before 1800 BC, so indus valley civilization which existed before that time was non aryan.
So Aryans came from outside and brought horses with them.

This is factually incorrect.

Horse drawings in the Bhimbetka caves in Madhya Pradesh date back to the neolithic era.

 

[Abhijat]

@SilentKiller , " But its proven that there were no horses in indian sub continent before 1800 BC, so indus valley civilization which existed before that time was non aryan "

Maybe you would like to retract your statement after reading these:

'Horses and rhinos originated in India' - The Hindu

 

[SilentKiller]

This is factually incorrect.

Horse drawings in the Bhimbetka caves in Madhya Pradesh date back to the neolithic era.

Well Horses were there in all parts of world but after last ice age most got extinct, reasons are still unknown same time many species too got extinct same as mammoths, So they got extinct from a lot parts of world, baring central europe.
Even elephants was in kashmir valley but once change in environment, they got extinct there too.
Horses were brought back to Indians by means of trade or by means of aryan migration.
Horses were never part of Indus valley civilization (from religious or daily basis) but some evidence was found about them in as late as 1600 BC.
Topic is still debatable as no one has full facts.
My Believe is that Aryans did came from out side because of many reasons, i can be wrong, but i questions, why horses so important to aryans are missing or almost absent from indus valley civilisation?
Why Shiva resemblance is present in indus valley civilization but strange absence of vishnu ji??
Aryans came from out side and accepted and mingled with people out here...

 

[SilentKiller]

@SilentKiller , " But its proven that there were no horses in indian sub continent before 1800 BC, so indus valley civilization which existed before that time was non aryan "

Maybe you would like to retract your statement after reading these:

'Horses and rhinos originated in India' - The Hindu

Read about megafauna extinction post last iceage.
I know even elephant was there in kashmir valley, many changes lead to extinction of horses from most part of the world
Please read about that..if you quote this news then u now atleast do agree that india separated from africa and joined euroasia, and this brought a lot of changes to world, sea where now Himalayas was there was gone, that why we find shell in Himalayas.
Its not known what lead to extinction of horses from MOST of the world, but it did happened, same way as americans had horses 10,000 years back but when europeans came to america, there were no horses in america, horses now in america where brought by europeans, same way aryans might have brought them to indian sub continent.
why am saying is why is indus valley civilization missing reference of horses? bull, cows and other animals are commonly described but no horses.
Topic is debatable.
Thanks!!

 

[Dukes Mangola]

Well Horses were there in all parts of world but after last ice age most got extinct, reasons are still unknown same time many species too got extinct same as mammoths, So they got extinct from a lot parts of world, baring central europe.
Even elephants was in kashmir valley but once change in environment, they got extinct there too.
Horses were brought back to Indians by means of trade or by means of aryan migration.
Horses were never part of Indus valley civilization (from religious or daily basis) but some evidence was found about them in as late as 1600 BC.
Topic is still debatable as no one has full facts.
My Believe is that Aryans did came from out side because of many reasons, i can be wrong, but i questions, why horses so important to aryans are missing or almost absent from indus valley civilisation?
Why Shiva resemblance is present in indus valley civilization but strange absence of vishnu ji??
Aryans came from out side and accepted and mingled with people out here...

Well, we can postulate devices like extinction of animals to question a theory. But why question the theory to begin with, when the genetic data has already torn to shreds the idea of Aryan migration/Invasion? There is only one Brahma temple in the entire nation that we know of, but that does not mean that Indians are not aware of the significance of Brahma, does it? Asking why there are no Vishnu idols at the Saraswati Valley civilisation is like asking a Shaivite why he does not worship Vishnu. We cannot extrapolate from limited data sets.

 

[sorcerer]

I dont know why theres an "invasion "
To put it simply!!


Sita calls Sri Rama "Arya Putra" in Ramayana

Also

Many will know that Ravana is a son of Brahmin..
Shoorpanekha calls Ravana "Arya Putra" in Ramayana

Meaning The whole of Indian subcontient and its peripheries had the Aryan Race.

So...Oh Welll!!!!:crusin3:

 

[Sambha ka Boss]

Well Horses were there in all parts of world but after last ice age most got extinct, reasons are still unknown same time many species too got extinct same as mammoths, So they got extinct from a lot parts of world, baring central europe.
Even elephants was in kashmir valley but once change in environment, they got extinct there too.
Horses were brought back to Indians by means of trade or by means of aryan migration.
Horses were never part of Indus valley civilization (from religious or daily basis) but some evidence was found about them in as late as 1600 BC.
Topic is still debatable as no one has full facts.
My Believe is that Aryans did came from out side because of many reasons, i can be wrong, but i questions, why horses so important to aryans are missing or almost absent from indus valley civilisation?
Why Shiva resemblance is present in indus valley civilization but strange absence of vishnu ji??
Aryans came from out side and accepted and mingled with people out here...

Horse bones have been found in Surkotada, an Indus valley site in Gujarat. Surkotada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Sambha ka Boss]

I dont know why theres an "invasion "
To put it simply!!


Sita calls Sri Rama "Arya Putra" in Ramayana

Also

Many will know that Ravana is a son of Brahmin..
Shoorpanekha calls Ravana "Arya Putra" in Ramayana

Meaning The whole of Indian subcontient and its peripheries had the Aryan Race.

So...Oh Welll!!!!:crusin3:

To prove Hinduism is invader's religion and our leftists loved the idea of Hinduism being an invader's religion.

 

[Sambha ka Boss]

This is factually incorrect.

Horse drawings in the Bhimbetka caves in Madhya Pradesh date back to the neolithic era.

horse had existed in India during Indus valley civilization. They also claimed Aryans invented chariots although Egyptians and Sumerians too have used Chariots.

 

[sorcerer]

To prove Hinduism is invader's religion and our leftists loved the idea of Hinduism being an invader's religion.

They willl have to reword every works of our ancient rishis!!! Cuz the truth will shine through anyway.. They can start with the countless no of Ramayanas and its versions available...as a start..
If they think the Hindu cult is based on one text like them..they are sooo wrong!


Edit: This is called Sanatana for a reason.. :cool2: