guru gobind singh vs shivaji

[Mehtab Singh]

yup...a lot is in the hand of the media these days, and if u have a biased media, there u go...

[Mehtab Singh]

some more :

http://www.afghan-network.net/Culture/ahmadshah.html

The Sikhs, who had revived by this time, slew Khwaja abid, the Durrani governor of Lahore, and occupied the city. This brought back the Abdali to Lahore in March 1764. He had, however, to return to his own country, after a fortnight's stay at Lahore, owing to the outbreak of a civil war there and a mutiny among his troops. Ahmad Shah Abdali invaded India again in 1767. He could not succeed ineffectively thwarting the Sikhs and had to retreat soon "with a consciousness of his ultimate failure", owing to some internal troubles, chiefly the mutiny of his troops clamoring for pay which they had not received regularly. No sooner had he turned back than the Sikhs reoccupied Lahore and the entire open country. Ahmad Shah Abdali "retained hold of Peshawar and the country west of Attock, while he abandoned the Manjha districts and central Punjab including Lahore to the Sikhs; but the Sind-Sagar and Jech Doab in the western Punjab remained a debatable land which finally came into their possession in the days of his unworthy successors".

http://www.answers.com/topic/third-battle-of-panipat

No major battle was won by the Afghans ever after and there were no invasions in to India, rather the Sikhs gobbled up major chunk of the Afghan kingdom and conducted raids up to Kabul and collected taxes as a result of this pulverisation. On the other hand,marathas were back in Delhi after a decade under Mahadji Scindhia. The story about descendants of prisoners of war is ridiculous. In the next hundred years Afghanistan was invaded by Sikhs and British(with sizeable Indian troops) on numerous occasions as deep as Ghazni and Bamiyan and the territories were under their administration for significant periods if any 'prisoners of war' or descendants theirof wanted to return.

Do u read Marathas anywhere? :e:

[curious_man]

so marathas came all the way up till panipat????

[Balwinder Singh]

yupp they came up to panipat and was defeated there and returned back.

[curious_man]

so after mughal decline....

singhs were busy defending NWFP(north west frontier province.....all that afghanistan, pakistan, khyber pass)

while the marathas were gobbling up rest of india...from south to north....and the britishers from east to north....

hmm....interesting..

but i heard there were 3 battles of panipat...were all sikhs vs marathas???

srry....me lazy for googlism!!!! :e:

[kurtas]

so after mughal decline....

singhs were busy defending NWFP(north west frontier province.....all that afghanistan, pakistan, khyber pass)

while the marathas were gobbling up rest of india...from south to north....and the britishers from east to north....

hmm....interesting..

but i heard there were 3 battles of panipat...were all sikhs vs marathas???

srry....me lazy for googlism!!!! :e:

93747[/snapback]

The Marathas under the military leadership of Ragunath Rao did raise their flag over Attock and this was probably the peak of Peshwa power. After this and the defeat to Panipat the Martha generals split up to form their own Kingdoms (Baroda, Indore, Gwalior etc).

None of the Panipat battles involved Sikhs against Marathas.

[Balwinder Singh]

Sikhs and marathas never fought with each other. In all the wars, foriegn invaders won the war. Marathas fought with Ahmad Shah Abdali and lost the battle.

[S1ngh]

Ancestors who are from lineage of Aryans are always on the front in any battle and thats the fact in case of physical and mental strength. Sikhs, Rajputs, Marathas and Gorakhay are proved to be martial race who are strong. But the thing is that sikhs are different than marathas, gorakhay and rajputs.. Our ancestors didn't care about land, money and setting up the empire to impress others..Sikhs are brave and loyal and that makes us much bigger than others but at same time we don't boost it like others do... anyway time for me to hit bed lol..

[`KuMi´]

i know bare sikhs that boast all the time!!!, buh i suppose in those days sikhs were strong and loyal to their guru

[ms514]

Sat Sri Akal:

Genetics had nothing to do with it. The ancestors of the Sikhs (Aryans) were the same people that opened their mouths so that Mughals could spit into them. They were dirt. Sikhism made these people wake up and become the Sant Siphai that they are, not genetics. If genetics were to play a part, then the Rajputs (genetically warriors) would have been at the front of all battles. Instead, they were busy giving their daughters to the Mughals and selling out "their own people".