Sikh, Pathan and Gurkha soldiers in the eyes of Winston S. Churchill

[Kataria]

What do Pashtuns think of Jats @Marwat Khan Lodhi just curious.

 

[Marwat Khan Lodhi]

What do Pashtuns think of Jats @Marwat Khan Lodhi just curious.

We are neighbour to jats of DI khan, there are stereotypes and jokes about them but i dont want to hurt feelings of any one. Not just jatts, marwats also joke on khattaks and wazirs alot.
We also have marwat jats i.e pashto speaking jats. Tall folk but with extremely dark complexion. Few decades ago marwats had war with jatts and khaisors of DI khan and we captured some fertile territory in DI khan. Maulana fazal rehman is marwat of DI khan.

 

[utraash]

you can find many garhwalis in gurkha regiment and many gurkhas in garhwal rifles. The point is they are born and brought at heights over 2000 meter. My own village is at 1800 meter

be it gurkha garhwali dogri or naga, no one is better than them. Be it Jat, Sikh, pathan, or some gujjar gunda of chakwal.

Being a Garhwali i know what you trying to say though i don't believe in martial race sametime uttranchal have largest population ratio retired from defense forces......

 

[Kataria]

We are neighbour to jats of DI khan, there are stereotypes and jokes about them but i dont want to hurt feelings of any one. Not just jatts, marwats also joke on khattaks and wazirs alot.
We also have marwat jats i.e pashto speaking jats. Tall folk but with extremely dark complexion. Few decades ago marwats had war with jatts and khaisors of DI khan and we captured some fertile territory in DI khan. Maulana fazal rehman is marwat of DI khan.

Jats are tall everywhere I guess. Our pind is in Haryana and we have both light and dark Jats in Haryana as there are in Punjab but if you go down to Rajasthan, people get darker, maybe because of the intense desert heat. Curiously, in Rajasthan the Rajputs are extremely tall. I'm pretty sure they are even taller than jats but yes, Rajasthani Rajputs are very dark.

 

[utraash]

worse thing happened to them was someone told them you are fighters and brave no one can defeat you now go fight . till today they are paying the price of it .

This is what i am trying to say this is nothing to be proud of we fought for their cause not ours ......

 

[historysheeter]

Nah pathan mercenaries were better than gurkha and sikh mercenaries. All of them were serving farangi queen but in the same book churchil writes that pathans have very high rates of desertions. That among british officers, pathan soldiers have the reputation of being treacherous, they desert and then join "rebels". Churchil himself disagrees with those officers, he writes that how can we not expect reluctance of pathans to fight against their own people.
Interestingly, majority of the pashtuns who were prominant in war against british, had once served in militias, scouts and army of british. They gained the experience and training, learnt army tactics and then deserted and join the "rebels" i.e freedom fighters

Brits had Pathan, Sikh and Gurkha all 3 regiments working under them, but they only carried Gurkha regiments for their army.

 

[ghoul]

You are right , tanolis, tarins, karrals, swatis, jadoons and mashwanis offered quite formidible resistance to sikhs while pashtuns of kohat, karak, lakki and DI khan simply melted away. One interesting battle occured at nara (haripur) where 8 thousands sikhs were ambushed by much smaller force of mashwanis and said khanis. Hari singh nalwa barely escaped with his life and sikhs suffered 500 casaulties. Even sikh sources admit this defeat. Rumour spread at that time among sikhs that hari singh got killed.
Though when hari singh recovered, he fell upon the area where he was defeated and put to sword the entire male population of that area.
Haripur people should rename their district.

Karlals, Dhund and possibly Tanoli are the Potohari Hazarewal. After Nadir Shah's invasion, the Gakhars of Potohar had tried to overrun Hazara. The succeeded in lower Hazara(Haripur) and defeated Yousafzai, but couldn't defeat Karlals even though they defeated karlals and dhunds multiple times in battle. The spiritual head family of Gakhars, and even recognized as such, currently reside in Haripur. They are big landlords and very influential in rawalpindi where their head has a huge mansion and has pet lions.

In Hazara, the Pakhtun and Potohari tribes are mixed hence hazarewal are sometimes called punjab pathan. In 90s, the Pakhtuns in Karachi were lead by Sarwar Awan(from Abbottabad) and their tanzeem was called punjabi pakhtun itehad(PPI).

And lastly, Sikhs alone could have never defeated these hillmen of AJK and Hazara. Sikhs take all the credit for Ranjit Singh's empire, but it was the hindu dogra army that the hillmen were said to truly fear. One of the most warlike and bold tribes in sub-continent; Khakha and Bomba were defeated by the Dogras but not subdued.

And btw, the tanoli chief of Amb sent 1500 men in Kashmir liberation war.

 

[historysheeter]

I know Gurkhas are Tough Fighter But You Dont Know What are you talking about Sikh are also good Fighter But No one Can match the hardness of Pathans ( Pak + Afg ) And Even Histroy Shows That Heres a old Saying Famous for Afg
May God keep you away from the venom of the cobra, the teeth of the tiger, and the revenge of the Afghans.

Revenge has nothing to do with fighting skills.

 

[Marwat Khan Lodhi]

Brits had Pathan, Sikh and Gurkha all 3 regiments working under them, but they only carried Gurkha regiments for their army.

Churchil is saying that gurkhas are 100% mercenaries, they have dash of pathan and discipline of sikh. British didnt sikh and pathan fanatics, they needed 100% mercenary

 

[historysheeter]

Nah pathan mercenaries were better than gurkha and sikh mercenaries. All of them were serving farangi queen but in the same book churchil writes that pathans have very high rates of desertions. That among british officers, pathan soldiers have the reputation of being treacherous, they desert and then join "rebels". Churchil himself disagrees with those officers, he writes that how can we not expect reluctance of pathans to fight against their own people.
Interestingly, majority of the pashtuns who were prominant in war against british, had once served in militias, scouts and army of british. They gained the experience and training, learnt army tactics and then deserted and join the "rebels" i.e freedom fighters

Being a deserter and treacherous is not a good quality of a true soldier.

 

[Marwat Khan Lodhi]

@ghoul i disagree with you on tanolis, they are of Pashtun origin. They have migrated from Afghanistan. One of the proof is their submission to Ahmad shah abdali like all 60 tribes, they were represented in his rule like all pashtuns. And as pashtuns they were required to give soldiers for the military expediations in the surroundings. In all of the campaigns to kashmir, tanolis participated along with other pashtun tribes of hazara. On the same principle, kasuria pathans and rohillas of india pledged their loyalty to ahmad shah abdali. Ahmad shah abdali carried out population census of each pashtun tribe and according to their strength, they were required to contribute some ratio of soldiers. E.g population of marwat was 18 thousands and they had to contribute 200 horsemen to his army. No pashtun king has ever such command and authority over his people except abdali. He is to pashtuns what ranjeet singh is to sikhs. Unfortunately our qaum never produced another abdali.

 

[ghoul]

@ghoul i disagree with you on tanolis, they are of Pashtun origin. They have migrated from Afghanistan. One of the proof is their submission to Ahmad shah abdali like all 60 tribes, they were represented in his rule like all pashtuns. And as pashtuns they were required to give soldiers for the military expediations in the surroundings. In all of the campaigns to kashmir, tanolis participated along with other pashtun tribes of hazara. On the same principle, kasuria pathans and rohillas of india pledged their loyalty to ahmad shah abdali. Ahmad shah abdali carried out population census of each pashtun tribe and according to their strength, they were required to contribute some ratio of soldiers. E.g population of marwat was 18 thousands and they had to contribute 200 horsemen to his army. No pashtun king has ever such command and authority over his people except abdali. He is to pashtuns what ranjeet singh is to sikhs. Unfortunately our qaum never produced another abdali.

There's some minor tribe called Tanoli or Taniwali in Afghanistan, which is mistaken for hazarewal Tanoli. Like Fardeen Khan is an Afghan Taniwali, but not a Hazarewal Tanoli. The chief of Hazarewal Tanoli claims Barlas Mughal ancestors, and claims a mughal origin. But some historians and ethnologist connect them to Janjua and Khakha rajputs. I have a firm belief that the Hazarewal Tanoli are not Pakhtuns. Their indic features are just way too obvious.

 

[Marwat Khan Lodhi]

Being a deserter and treacherous is not a good quality of a true soldier.

True but fighting against your own people is worst quality. Sikhs and gurkhas were never in the situation in which they had to fight against their own people on orders of british. But pathan, as explained by churchil, was in complicated position, he had to kill his own people while for sikhs, punjabi musalman and gurkhas, pathans were just different troublesome enemy that they had to kill when ordered to.

There's some minor tribe called Tanoli or Taniwali in Afghanistan, which is mistaken for hazarewal Tanoli. Like Fardeen Khan is an Afghan Taniwali, but not a Hazarewal Tanoli. The chief of Hazarewal Tanoli claims Barlas Mughal ancestors, and claims a mughal origin. But some historians and ethnologist connect them to Janjua and Khakha rajputs. I have a firm belief that the Hazarewal Tanoli are not Pakhtuns. Their indic features are just way too obvious.

Jadoons also have indic features, so do all the hindko speaking pathans. Due to intermarraiges with locals, they must have forgetton pashto in the first place. Still not all tanolis have indic features, overall they look like half pathan half punjabis. I have seen many of them with green eyes.

 

[ghoul]

Jadoons also have indic features, so do all the hindko speaking pathans. Due to intermarraiges with locals, they must have forgetton pashto in the first place. Still not all tanolis have indic features, overall they look like half pathan half punjabis. I have seen many of them with green eyes.

Lol green blue eyes are a quite common in AJK, Potohari people. By Indic I didn't mean a bhaiya. I meant indo-aryan from the term Indic. Tanolis are like the elite of hazara region, I doubt if they mixed too much with the natives. Like I have never seen a Tanoli with Pakhtun features like eagle eyes and hooked nose(no offence of course).

But last and not the least, they themselves claim a barlas origin, so why make them pakhtun lol? Jadoons are also said to be indic rajputs rather than pakhtuns, but not sure if it's true.

 

[ghoul]

What does hooked nose look like? Can you post some picture.
Jadoons are pashtuns, a portion of them live in gadoon area of swabi where they speak pashto.
Barlas, strictly call themeselves. There are barlas families among hindkowans of peshawer. Their last name ends with barlas.
But you have aroused my curosity, i will do some searching on tanolis. I have a page about pashtuns on facebook, many tanolis have joined it. I will also ask them.

Straight nose:

And you'll get mixed responses. They're quite a confused people like mirpuris, who call themselves "Kashmiri" lol. Ask their educated men and chieftain.