From Past:: Battle of Saragarhi: When 21 Sikhs Faced 14,000 Pashtuns And Won

[FullMetalJacket]

@Joe Shearer We got a child on a forum, grow up. Negative rating - A weak move shows how weak you are and so is the comparison between Pashtuns and Sikhs. Don’t even come close.

"Following the death of Hari Singh Nalwa, no further conquests were made" Killed by Pashtuns after he got a little too excited. Cannon fodder (training and weapons in return) on many occasions nothing else, and now living under Hindus.

"Now living under Hindus" better than living under Muslims.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

There is no way that one or two tribes could have mustered the numbers claimed. The figures are just plain fantasy. No doubt modern training, better weapons and secured positions enabled these Sikhs to fight against larger numbers but 10,000s. Yeh of course. Why not make it 100,000 ....

 

[cleverrider]

There is no way that one or two tribes could have mustered the numbers claimed. The figures are just plain fantasy. No doubt modern training, better weapons and secured positions enabled these Sikhs to fight against larger numbers but 10,000s. Yeh of course. Why not make it 100,000 ....

It just here and there say, quoting random articles. Some lines are probably passed down to families, lost in translation on the way down. An overall perspective matters backed up by real information, not some here and there say and the Pajjis on this forum. Stop comparing your - selves with Pashtuns/Afghans, Yes you had a pretty easy road to Peshawar and made allies in the surroundings for a couple of years. That’s about it, were sent packing by other Pashtun tribes. Probably every group of people around the world had that sort of “empire” in some period of time.

The funny thing is some characters on the forum are basing their posts on Gossip from the old days, when it cannot be proved in any form or shape. The overall history can be read, seen, and judged pretty easily.

Various Pashtuns tribes gave beatings to nearly everyone found close to their lands througout their history and Sikhs did receive their fair share when they were the strongest, even after being cannon fodder. Forget the days when pashtuns ruled the entire area.

21 Sikhs......... Faced 14,000 Pashtuns........... And WON

 

[Hephaestus]

Battle of Saragarhi: When 21 Sikhs Faced 14,000 Pashtuns And Won

Let me tell you a story of action, bravery, pride, valour and above all – truth – for it is the story of 21 Sikh men that lived and walked the same earth as you: a story not of fictionalized kings and princes, but of men in the 36th regiment of the British army (now the 4th battalion of the Sikh regiment).

It is the story of those men who refused to give up in the face of adversity and certainty of imminent death. The Indian history books, however, have often shied away from discussing it.

But why are we suddenly interested in one of history’s forgotten battles? These legends are often overlooked, because these were battles fought on behalf of the British. They sit uneasily alongside the stories of India’s struggle for freedom from the colonial masters.

However, lesser-known stories from history are making a resurgence, thanks to pop culture and cinema. There are now two movies being released on the Battle, namely, Ajay Devgn’s Sons of Sardaar: The Battle of Saragarhi, and Raj Kumar Santoshi’s Randeep Hooda starrer Battle of Saragarhi.

In the September 1897, when over 10,000 Afghan tribesmen of the Orakzai and Afridi tribe attacked Saragarhi, North Western Frontier Province (NWFP) (modern day Pakistan), the defending Sikh regiment, under the leadership of Havildar Ishar Singh, knew their fate had already been decided. Yet they held their ground and fought the thousands of enemy troops for several hours.

Here’s all you need to know about the Battle of Saragarhi in a glance:


Chapter 1: Saragarhi

Fort Gulistan. (Photo Courtesy: AustralianSikhHeritage.Com)
Saragarhi served as a communication relay post between Fort Lockart and Fort Gulistan (also called Cavagnari), using heliography (mode of communication that primarily used mirrors and sunlight to convey messages in the 19th and 20th century).

On the morning of 12 September 1897, Havildar Ishar Singh and signalman Gurmukh Singh woke up to find thousands of Pashtun tribesmen marching towards them. The Saragarhi outpost was crucial to communication between the two British forts and breaking the frontier at Saragarhi would mean adverse consequences for the British army.


Chapter 2: Help Fails to Come Through

An artist’s impression of Fort Gulistan on the North-West frontier published in 1897.(Photo Courtesy: AustralianSikhHeritage.Com)
The Commander Officer of the 36th Sikhs, Lt Col Haughton was immediately informed of the situation.

Gurumukh Singh sent the message to Fort Lockart:

“ENEMY APPROACHING THE MAIN GATE...NEED REINFORCEMENT”

Haughton, who had counted close to 14,000 tribesmen marching towards Saragarhi, sent a disheartening reply from Fort Lockart:

“UNABLE TO BREAKTHROUGH...HOLD POSITION”

Havildar Singh discussed the situation with his men and together they reached a consensus and a reply was sent to Lockart:

“UNDERSTOOD”

Former Major General of the Indian Army, Dhruv C Katoch, comments on the massive size of the enemy troops the defending side braved in the battle.

"Some estimates put the figure in the region of 10,000 to 12,000 personnel. The narrowness of the feature and the restricted approaches obviously could not have involved more than a couple of hundred attacking at any point of time, but the sheer numbers available to the attacking force meant that the attackers could make up their losses while the defenders had no means to do so. And that is how the battle unfolded."
Dhruv C Katoch, Former Major General, Indian Army
​

Another account comes from Major AC Yate of the British army who wrote Lieutenant-Colonel John Haughton Commandant of the 36th Sikhs, a hero of Tirah : A Memoir in 1900.

"(Their (Afghan tribes) total number has been variously estimated at from twelve to twenty thousand.) It was, therefore, no longer possible for Colonel Haughton to carry aid to Saragarhi or Gulistan, as he had done twice before. The enemy turned the brunt of their attack on the little post of Saragarhi. Thousands swarmed round it ; other thousands invaded Gulistan; while a third body of the enemy cut off communication with Fort Lockhart."​

Chapter 3: Saragarhi Under Attack

Two soldiers of the 36th Regiment with defenders of the Fort Gulistan. (Photo Courtesy: AustralianSikhHeritage.Com)
The outnumbered Sikhs employed the delay tactic to give sufficient time to the two Forts to prepare themselves for the onslaught that would soon be directed towards them.

After fighting for several hours, as the regiment started running low on ammunition, they employed another war tactic and set the flora around Fort Saragarhi on fire. Though the smoke severely hindered the enemy’s advance, it also cut down affected the Sikhs’ visibility. Taking advantage of the situation, the tribesmen managed to breach a part of Saragarhi wall.

Havildar Ishar Singh, injured and wounded by this time, displayed a final act of bravery and asked his remaining men to retreat to the inner parts of the fort, while he stayed outside, with two other sepoys who had dragged him to his final position, to face the tribesmen in one-on-one combat.


Chapter 4: The Final Combat

Photographed by Lt. Col Haughton survivors of the Gulistan troops with captured Afridi tribesmen. (Photo Courtesy: AustralianSikhHeritage.Com)
By the time the Pashtuns managed to breach the fort entirely, only five Sikhs were left alive, including Gurumukh Singh at the signal tower. The four men engaged in another round of hand to hand combat within the fort.

At 3:30 PM, Gurumukh sent the final message from Sarahgarhi:

“…REQUEST PERMISSION TO DISMOUNT AND JOIN THE FIGHT.”

He received a prompt reply:

“PERMISSION GRANTED”

At 19 years, Gurumukh Singh was the youngest of the Sikhs. After the message, Singh packed his equipment in a leather bag, armed himself with a bayonet and came down to face the tribesmen.

According to Haughton’s accounts, he is said to have taken down 20 men before he was burnt alive by the enemy. He went down fighting:

JO BOLEY SO NIHAAL! SAT SRI AKAAL! (Whoever utters the name of the Timeless Lord, Will be Happy and Immortal)
​

The 21 Sikhs, along with a cook who was staying with them, were killed in the Battle. Dhruv C Katoch writes that there were about 600 bodies that “were strewn around the post after it was retaken, but a large number of these would have been those killed in the counter attack, mostly from artillery fire.”


Chapter 5: Posthumous Honours

Fort Saragarhi after the onslaught. (Photo Courtesy: AustralianSikhHeritage.Com)
The fierce bravery of the 21 Sikhs sent ripples across the world. The British Parliament halted their session mid-way to give a standing ovation to the martyred 21 in September 1897. The British monarch praised the men and said:

"It is no exaggeration to record that the armies which possess the valiant Sikhs cannot face defeat in war."
Queen Victoria, British Parliament 1897​

Saragarhi Memorial Gurudwara in Firozpur, Punjab, India. (Photo Courtesy: AustralianSikhHeritage.Com)
Lt Col Haughton said, and rightly so, that their bravery will never be forgotten:

"We may sorrow for the sacrifice of these brave soldiers, but the Sikh nation, while it lasts, will never forget the glory of the defence."
Lt Col John Haughton, Commandant, 36th Sikh Regiment ​

The entire regiment was posthumously awarded the Indian Order of Merit, the highest bravery award given to Indians at the time. It was also the only time when an entire unit received the highest gallantry award for the same battle.

Every year, 12 September is celebrated as the Saragarhi Day by the Sikh regiment, which is also the most decorated regiment of the Indian army.

Source>>


@Abingdonboy @anant_s @Taygibay @Picdelamirand-oil@Vergennes @randomradio @Ankit Kumar 002 @MilSpec@Koovie @dadeechi @kurup @Rain Man @kaykay @Joe Shearer @Tshering22 @Dandpatta @danger007 @Didact@Soumitra @SrNair @TejasMk3@jbgt90 @ranjeet @4GTejasBVR @The_Showstopper @guest11 @egodoc222@Nilgiri @SarthakGanguly @Omega007 @GURU DUTT @HariPrasad @JanjaWeed @litefire @AMCA @Echo_419 @Dash @hellfire @ito@SR-91 @AMCA @DesiGuy1403 @ranjeet @hellfire @fsayed @SpArK @AUSTERLITZ @nair @proud_indian @Roybot @jbgt90 @Sergi @Water Car Engineer @Perpendicular@Spectre@litefire @AMCA @Perpendicular@Ryuzaki
@CorporateAffairs @GR!FF!N @migflug@Levina@SvenSvensonov @-xXx- @Perpendicular @proud_indian@Mustang06 @Param @Local_Legend @Ali Zadi @hellfire @egodoc222 @CorporateAffairs @Major Shaitan Singh @jha @SmilingBuddha @#hydra# @danish_vij @[Bregs]@Skillrex @Hephaestus @SR-91 @Techy @litefire @R!CK @zebra7 @dev_moh @DesiGuy1403 @itachii @nik141993 @Marxist @Glorino @noksss
@jbgt90 @Skull and Bones @Kraitcorp @amardeep mishra @Slav Defence @waz @WAJsal @Oscar @The Eagle @Blue Marlin @others
------------------------------------------------------------

Would be interested to know from Professionals about possible tactics used to defend entrenchment.

Thanks for the tag. @Techy
I have always been marveled with this piece of history. There should be a movie made on this. A real to the point feature without the melodrama.

 

[Qutb-ud-din Aybak]

In battle of 3234,it has been claimed that SSG commandos took part with Mujaheddin forces.

claimed but its not the truth because at that time no one even USA was not in a position to confront USSR military directly. we just used proxies.

the afghans even claim pakistan military involvement in kanduz.

 

[Omega007]

Read it somewhere else as reported that Tribesmen set fire to the surrounding bushes so taking advantage of smoke, helped to breach into the wall.

While looking at the situation, indeed it is very difficult to breach a fort where the defenders are already positioned and the attackers are in open and seems like the same was on minds of tribesmen as well. Also, by others sources it was reported as 180 casualties of the tribesmen.

No doubt, these reported 21 men fought bravely to defend the post.

Well, it was just a hut and not in fact a fort , rest of what you said is true.

 

[The Eagle]

Well, it was just a hut and not in fact a fort , rest of what you said is true.

Like the statement of 10000 to 120000 against just 21. I hope you understand the truth well.

Even some seniors did come with that fact like the wall of hut to breach, a tower in hut while one defender was signaling during the whole battle etc.

 

[Omega007]

Like the statement of 10000 to 120000 against just 21. I hope you understand the truth well.

You do know how things used to be back then, exaggerating the numbers of your enemies while downplaying your own used to be a standard practice for whatever reasons.The Greeks did that, the Romans did that, so did the British!!

Even some seniors did come with that fact like the wall of hut to breach, a tower in hut while one defender was signaling during the whole battle etc.

I admit, there are some inconsistencies in the narrative.But for all practical intents and purpose, the Sikhs weren't really stationed in a fortress per se.It was more of hut, even if it was a rather well defended one.

 

[GR!FF!N]

@GR!FF!N why are you dragging Pakistan into this?

mentioned SSG because the above post mentioned "Unorganized Forces".I'm not trolling or something.

 

[kadamba-warrior]

Battle of Saragarhi: When 21 Sikhs Faced 14,000 Pashtuns And Won


@Abingdonboy @anant_s @Taygibay @Picdelamirand-oil@Vergennes @randomradio @Ankit Kumar 002 @MilSpec@Koovie @dadeechi @kurup @Rain Man @kaykay @Joe Shearer @Tshering22 @Dandpatta @danger007 @Didact@Soumitra @SrNair @TejasMk3@jbgt90 @ranjeet @4GTejasBVR @The_Showstopper @guest11 @egodoc222@Nilgiri @SarthakGanguly @Omega007 @GURU DUTT @HariPrasad @JanjaWeed @litefire @AMCA @Echo_419 @Dash @hellfire @ito@SR-91 @AMCA @DesiGuy1403 @ranjeet @hellfire @fsayed @SpArK @AUSTERLITZ @nair @proud_indian @Roybot @jbgt90 @Sergi @Water Car Engineer @Perpendicular@Spectre@litefire @AMCA @Perpendicular@Ryuzaki
@CorporateAffairs @GR!FF!N @migflug@Levina@SvenSvensonov @-xXx- @Perpendicular @proud_indian@Mustang06 @Param @Local_Legend @Ali Zadi @hellfire @egodoc222 @CorporateAffairs @Major Shaitan Singh @jha @SmilingBuddha @#hydra# @danish_vij @[Bregs]@Skillrex @Hephaestus @SR-91 @Techy @litefire @R!CK @zebra7 @dev_moh @DesiGuy1403 @itachii @nik141993 @Marxist @Glorino @noksss
@jbgt90 @Skull and Bones @Kraitcorp @amardeep mishra @Slav Defence @waz @WAJsal @Oscar @The Eagle @Blue Marlin @others
------------------------------------------------------------

How I wish we had these men in place when in 1948 the same 'tribesmen' from Pakistan (which must have been the earliest instance of the use of 'non-state' actors by Pakistan) came around to Kashmir - apparently to 'liberate' their Kashmiri brethren from the 'tyranny' of a 'Hindu' ruler!

 

[pakdefender]

hahah this is yet another ridiculous story that our neighbours have cooked up

21 vs 14,000 ... really ?

maybe these 21 could fire from front and back at the same time

dramay baz , story tellers!

In cricket these people make dead pitches to aid their bowler , once they got called out that came up with the name ... wait for it ......raging turner ....... wah wah kya baat hai

 

[Joe Shearer]

hahah this is yet another ridiculous story that our neighbours have cooked up

21 vs 14,000 ... really ?

maybe these 21 could fire from front and back at the same time

dramay baz , story tellers!

In cricket these people make dead pitches to aid their bowler , once they got called out that came up with the name ... wait for it ......raging turner ....... wah wah kya baat hai

This was a British story, not an Indian one.

I have seen ungracious, mean-minded and mean-hearted comments; yours must be among the most outstanding of that kind.

 

[Rain]

good write up but Thread has wrong heading/title The sikh fought well but they did not won all were killed and fort ws over run thats means a victory is not it? Yet we must appreciate bravery of Sikhs at the post!

 

[Omega007]

hahah this is yet another ridiculous story that our neighbours have cooked up

21 vs 14,000 ... really ?

maybe these 21 could fire from front and back at the same time

dramay baz , story tellers!

But this story was invented and popularised by the British, not by us!!And rest assured, none of us here (except the Punjabis may be for reasons obvious to all) actually agree on the figures quoted for the tribals,because we don't think, the tribals could actually manage such a huge number of fighters nor sustain, we aren't really that much delusional nor do we fall for such propaganda so easily........................unlike some others.

In cricket these people make dead pitches to aid their bowler , once they got called out that came up with the name ... wait for it ......raging turner ....... wah wah kya baat hai

World ain't fair m8!!

good write up but Thread has wrong heading/title The sikh fought well but they did not won all were killed and fort ws over run thats means a victory is not it? Yet we must appreciate bravery of Sikhs at the post!

A hut made of stones and mud, with a wall around the courtyard isn't exactly what I would call a fort, a field fortification may be??Rest of your comment is quite on the mark and have to agree with it.

 

[Braith]

But this story was invented and popularised by the British, not by us!!And rest assured, none of us here (except the Punjabis may be for reasons obvious to all) actually agree on the figures quoted for the tribals,because we don't think, the tribals could actually manage such a huge number of fighters nor sustain, we aren't really that much delusional nor do we fall for such propaganda so easily........................unlike some others.

World ain't fair m8!!

A hut made of stones and mud, with a wall around the courtyard isn't exactly what I would call a fort, a field fortification may be??Rest of your comment is quite on the mark and have to agree with it.

Actually it was not popularized by British.....they did pay tribute to their Sikh soldiers but nowhere they mention "20,000 vs 21" or "14,000 vs 21" in any of their reports of 1897 and 1897..........

good write up but Thread has wrong heading/title The sikh fought well but they did not won all were killed and fort ws over run thats means a victory is not it? Yet we must appreciate bravery of Sikhs at the post!

Actually they fought to the death, because Sikhs knew that Pashtuns would not spare their lives if they surrender and might be tortured to death. British reports inform us that Sikh soldiers of their army would torture pathan captives to death and mutilate their dead bodies.......so Pashtuns used to reply in same coin, they would spare the captured Musalman sipahis but would torture the Sikhs ........No one knows in which manner Sikhs fought, but most probably they were driven by the fear, of the fate of being captured alive and made example of. They must have fought desperately because they knew they will be horribly tortured by Pashtuns, and must have been hopeful for arrival of reinforcements. The nearby Lockhart fort was only 1.5 miles away, so its obvious that Pashtuns finished the Sikhs rather quickly and had leveled the small fort to the ground before the reinforcements arrived.

The local villagers, Rabia Khels, who were pro-British, reported to General Lockhart that Afridis and Orakzais suffered around 180 casualties. This claim is made by General Lockhart after the end of war and can be dismissed as unreliable yet its is believable as Pashtuns also had taken heavy tolls due to artillery from Fort Cavagnari. Afridis and Orakzais were without any artillay and it was actually great feat by them to bring down all the forts in the Samna range of hills.......but they were disorganized and they could not suceed against the largest force ever assembled by British in 19th century, against them.

hahah this is yet another ridiculous story that our neighbours have cooked up

21 vs 14,000 ... really ?

maybe these 21 could fire from front and back at the same time

dramay baz , story tellers!

In cricket these people make dead pitches to aid their bowler , once they got called out that came up with the name ... wait for it ......raging turner ....... wah wah kya baat hai

Sikh story tellers , as well as other Indians (who copy such stuff from their sites), are telling a big fat lie that "the Battle at Saragarhi is one of eight stories of collective bravery published by UNESCO". To make the lie believable, they have included "Battle of Thermopylae" in the list of eight stories of collective bravery. UNESCO has never published such stories with such title. Thats why only two entries in this false list are known, people can not (and wont) find the names of other six battles despite of extensive search on web and on books.