This might be too contentious a question for you to answer publicly so feel free to PM me about this if you do want to answer it, but a lot of academic Sikh scholars, both non-Sikhs (McLeod, obviously, but other lesser figures are bunched in this camp) and Sikhs (Oberoi particularly, but I think also Gurinder Mann, maybe one other one), seem to be loudly disliked by more traditional elements of the Sikh community. My best friend is Sikh and he told me stories about how Oberoi (I think it was Oberoi, possibly someone else) actually had to do penance in his local gurudwara (by dealing with the shoes and such) for a much lauded academic book he wrote. I haven't looked closely at this issue since I was an undergraduate almost ten years ago, but it seemed like Sikh historiography was very divided between McCleod and his students on one hand, more traditional hagiographic accounts (mainly produced in India) on the other, and then other academic historians who worked on "safer" subjects between the two. When you write, is the reactions of the traditionalists in India something that you worry about? Has this influenced your choice of topic?

Like, I go on GlobalSikhStudies.net and I just see these numerous and vicious attacks on critical scholars. Like more than a dozen articles for every person they're criticizing. I pulled up one at random right now and in the first paragraph it says:

H. Oberoi is one such pseudo-Sikh who has chosen to follow blindly Trumpp-McLeodian paradigms to make a living as a professor at the cost of a troubled Sikh community.

And then in the second paragraph goes on to call him an out-and-out "enemy of Sikhism". Oy, I can't help but feel bad for this guy, especially when European and North American academics, as far as I know, hailed his book as triumph.

I don't mean to imply that this is something unique to the Sikhism. It's particularly prominent in South Asia, where there are a lot of people committed to traditional narratives who read and publish in English (look at Wendy Doniger and all of her students), but not unique to South Asia at all. Where I study, in Turkey, critical academic works are probably at most thirty years old and still occasionally erupt into firestorms. Orhan Pamuk doesn't go back to Turkey for comments about the killings of Kurds and Armenians in the early 20th century, and other vocally critical scholars like Taner Akcam have faced similar backlash around the same issue, though the subject is opening up a little. On a personal level, I study religion and feel like I face the same quandary. As I've become more Jewish and closer to Hasidic communities in particular, I both want to study these communities and their histories in depth as a hobby, but I know if I do I will only choose "safe subjects" where I won't ever be forced to decide whether or not I'm going to publish something that will publicly goes against the official narrative or otherwise paint the community in a bad light (granted, there are somethings I could imagine publishing that tweak the official narrative, but that would also be conscious and probably specifically to weigh in on a particular contemporary issue in the community, like men working instead of studying or women participating in certain religious rituals, and even then I'd only enter into those discussions after very careful consideration). How do you deal with those tensions in your work?

So I really don't know much about the Sikhs beyond their use as one of the so called "Martial Races" by the British. In the intro, you speak of Guru Hargobind Singh 'militarizing' the Sikhs. What exactly did this entail? How much of a warrior culture existed prior to Hargobind Singh? What was his motivation for doing this?

Why didn't the Sikhs side with the Marathas in 3rd Panipat War? The Marathas after their loss, employed the Sikhs to rescue the war slavewomans; which suggests relations must have been good.

/u/JJatt , what would be the books,or sources/articles you would recommend to a serious student of Sikh History?

(All must be academic).

Also,what would you recommend for a general intro to your current topic?

Do come by /r/Southasianhistory by the way!

Hi, sir, thanks for doing this AMA.

I just have one question, not sure if it's a correct question here, in which case I apologize, but how were the Durrani Afghan rulers seen by the Sikh before they were expulsed from Punjab by Ranjit Singh?

Why didn't Duleep Singh's sons leave any heirs?

For a man who lived on a substantial pension, Duleep Singh left a curiously thin estate. He left just £7,219 to his elder sons, Princes Victor and Frederick. Little is known of his youngest son, Prince Edward. All three died childless. Two of Duleep Singh's daughters, Princesses Catherine and Sophia, lived together and remained unmarried. Princess Catherine's estate was left to Sophia, who in turn reportedly shared it with their mother, Princess Bamba, the Battersea Dogs Home, various elderly people associated with the estate, and a girl's school in Ferozepur. When Princess Bamba died in Lahore in 1957, all she had was £3,000, most of which she left to her lawyer. Princess Catherine possibly never knew of the Swiss account, for there is no mention of it in her will.

A few questions:

1. I've heard that the initial Sikh successes in the First Anglo-Sikh War, particularly at the Battle of Ferozeshah, could have ended British rule in India had the Sikhs been led by commanders who actually wanted to defeat the British. How much truth is there to this viewpoint?

2. Sikh soldiers in particular were instrumental in the ability of the British to defeat the Sepoy Rebellion. Why were Sikhs so happy to join British armies just 20 years after their defeat in the Anglo-Sikh wars?

What was the general atmosphere in Peshawar like during sikh rule there? Did life go on as normal or did the sikhs bring about changes/implement new laws?

What were relations like between the Qing dynasty and the Sikhs? Tibet was a suzerain of the Qing dynasty, so my understanding is that they were obviously not pleased when the Sikhs invaded western Tibet. But could you go into more detail? And what was the impact of the war between the Chinese and the Sikhs?

Why were the Sikhs defeated by the British? They are a martial race and ran a large empire. Yet they seemed to have lost pretty soon to the British. Also, was it the British who defeated the Empire or was it already falling apart and the British just came at the right time?

What is the reason Babadeep Singh's sculpture is portrayed so prominently in the Golden Temple, since even the Gurus are not portrayed in the Harminder Sahib? What was his role in the subsequent establishment of the Sikh Empire?

There was a video I saw that stated the sikh-anglo wars didn't actually take place. Would you happen to know as to why someone would arrive at that conclusion?

Sorry for sounding all conspiracy-theoryish, but history is written by the victor.

About Sikhism in the period you are familiar with:

1. What ancient folklore do the Sikhs use? Why didn't they feel the need to manufacture an ancient mythology to impress converts? Were any prominent scams conducted using religious artifacts of dubious claim - territories?

• Maharaja Ranjit Singh was a Rajput Sikh, just like Rajput Jains (Ashoka/Maurya Empire), right?
• Baluchistan also came under this Sikh-Rajput empire?
• What was the population composition in his empire in different areas ? (religious & ethnic) (also share yearly/decade data, if there was a significant change in this composition from 1710 to 1848?)
• Is it true that his empire extended actually comprised only of Kashmir & Pashtun region, while other areas were simply autonomous but under his book authority?
• Any unusual trivia?

Thanks for doing this AMA, I'm a Maratha and hold Sikh Empire and traditions on the highest pedestal. I've the following questions:

1. How did the Sikhs manage to conquer and rule Afghanistan (Graveyard of Empires)?

2. Guru Govind Singh traveled to Nanded, which is located deep in the Maratha territory. Was there a motive to secure an alliance with the Maratha people, since Sikhs and Marathas were the reason for Mughal Empires downfall?

3. Is there any documentation about the Sikh rule in Tibet and what was it like?

Sri Wahe Guru da khalsa, Sri Wahe Guru di fateh!!

This question might be futile; but, how has the musical culture evolved over time? And, did any of their music become assimilated by European culture?

What were the primary reasons Aurangzeb cited for persecution of Sikh leaders? Especially their murders?

I am currently based in Lahore

Ranjit Singh made Lahore his capital. What can you tell me about his time as the ruler of this area .

To your knowledge, is there anything to hint that the Gurus ate meat? I've heard they indeed did.

What was the relationship like between the Sikh state and the surrounding South Asian states particularly in relation to the British? Did they ever form an alliance or team up or did they seek to use the British against one another?

Why did Sikhism not gain a wider following outside the Punjab, especially since Sikh gurus did preach in other areas of India?

Wow. I know almost nothing about this. Do you have a favorite story from this period of Sikh history? A particularly impressive victory or military campaign, political intrigue.. you know :)

How religious was the Sikh empire? From the name, it's clear that it was an important part of their identity. But was it a theocracy? Was the legal system run by the church? Did religion ever conflict with the state?

Not a sikh or south asian, but I had a book on the history of South Asia and i'm interested in this part of history.

1. When was Lahore conquered by the Sikhs? I've got some sources saying 1801, and some saying around 1770. Was it ever taken back by Ahmad Shah?

2. For those who were conquered by the sikhs in present day Pakistan/Afghanistan, were they forced/coerced to convert? Was a tax imposed on non-sikh civilians, or had their property confiscated from them, during the sikh empire?

3. Was the state of punjab a sikh invention? I heard that it was a unification of the states of Lahore, Ludihana and another one (I forgot the other one, began with an 'M') to promote skih identity.

4. Was there a high rate of conversion from the locals of the conquered territories? Or did the spread of sikhism rely on migrations of the sikh population from the core area (northern india). I wondered why places near Afghanistan or Kashmir didn't have that many sikhs, but the core area (Lahore, Amerisar) had lots, even though they were occupied by sikh peoples for the same amount of time, more or less.

What led to the of the Sikh empire? How did Sikhs interact with the Mughals? How did their military tactics allow them to sustain their empire during a time when massive empires surrounded them?

From what I have read in school (Indian school) and outside is that Sikhs rulers were often double crossed by mughal and/or Muslim counterparts. My question is were the Sikhs ever deceitful?

I am trying to find out if there was any bias in what we were taught in history class. Thanks!!

Hi sir, one question,

What was the relationship between the Akalis and the "traditional" Sikh misldars/the emperors? Is it true the Akalis were feared in some sense for their ferocity and were comprised of mostly lower castes?

Is there any academic record about Guru Gobind Singh or any other Guru? All I know if from Sikh folklore and its more of a mythological content than actual history. Would love if something is available online.