In Our Time - The Sikh Empire

Episode Date: April 7, 2016

Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss the rise of the Sikh Empire at the end of the 18th Century under Ranjit Singh, pictured above, who unified most of the Sikh kingdoms following the decline of the Mughal Empire. He became Maharaja of the Punjab at Lahore in 1801, capturing Amritsar the following year. His empire flourished until 1839, after which a decade of unrest ended with the British annexation. At its peak, the Empire covered the Punjab and stretched from the Khyber Pass in the west to the edge of Tibet in the east, up to Kashmir and down to Mithankot on the Indus River. Ranjit Singh is still remembered as "The Lion of the Punjab."With Gurharpal Singh Professor in Inter-Religious Relations and Development at SOAS, University of LondonChandrika Kaul Lecturer in Modern History at the University of St AndrewsAndSusan Stronge Senior Curator in the Asian Department of the Victoria and Albert MuseumProducer: Simon Tillotson.

Thank you for downloading this episode of In Our Time. For more details about In Our Time and for our terms of use, please go to BBC.co.ukh slash radio 4. I hope you enjoy the program. Hello, in 1799, Rajit Singh and his Sikh army captured Lahore once the Mughal capital of the north. He was 18 years old. His coronation as Maharaja, or great king, two years later,

marked the start of the Sikh Empire. At its peak, the empire covered the Punjab and stretched from the Kaiba Pass in the west to the edge of Tibet in the east, up to Kashmir and down to Mithankop on the Indus River. Ranjit Singh was at the heart of it, known as the lion of the Punjab.

He was the one who united separate factions into one powerful state. He put the gold on the golden temple Amritsa. With his death in 1839, though, the Sikh Empire weakened. There were two wars with the British in a decade, and 50 years after it was first established,

the empire was dissolved, even if the influence of Ranjik Singh's military power is still felt today. With me to discuss the Sikh Empire are Gohapal Singh, Professor in Inter-Religious Relations and Development at Soas University of London, Chandrika Kahl, lecturer in modern

history at the University of St Andrews, and Susan Strong, senior curator in the Asian Department of the Victoria and Albert Museum. Gahapal Singh, what are the origins of Sikhism? Well, Sikh refers to, the term Sikh refers to

disciple or follow-up, and Sikh tradition normally dates the origins of Sikhism from 1469 with the birth of the first Guru Nanak, who was born 60 miles southwest of current day Lahore. Guru Nanak was born at a time of significant social and religious change in northern India, particularly the change amongst subaltern religious groups who questioned orthodoxies of Hinduism and Islam. And within his lifetime, he was able to attract a significant following. Narnik's thought is distinguished by his emphasis on equality,

what we today called lived religions of living in this world to make a change and the emphasis on sharing one's labours. He was followed by nine other gurus, and in the 150 years after his death in 1539, one sees the emergence of the Sikh tradition from a sort of internal pacifist following to a more militant tradition. He was very decisive in his views

It was extraordinary the agenda he brought to it As it were from the beginning He believed in monotheism He was against the caste system He believed in equality of all people And he believed in religious tolerance And that scene went through And has kept going through Sikhism

Who were his followers And how did the following of Sikhism grow Well His followers were initially Within the Punjab Rural Compt mainly disciple,

mainly those from normal farming community from lower caste and indeed of higher caste. But his message was very appealing. In a sense it struck a chord with the

idiom of the time for equality, for gender equality indeed and for change and for a new kind Protestant kind of reformist vision of religion, one that was relevant to contemporary change. And the growth of Sikhism occurs throughout the 16th and 17th century as more and more Juts. These are rural yeoman farmers who are attracted to the tradition, partly because

of the message and its appeal, but also because of political change, which occurs, mostly in the 17th century. Did he, was there, were there places built to take a go and worship in? And so what was the setup? Well, after Nanak's death, Sikhism becomes a larger tradition. There are places of pilgrimage that established. Umritsa is founded by the third guru, Guru Ramdas. And then the fifth guru constructs the current,

or not the current, but the golden temple or the foundations of the golden temple are laid. So as the community grows, the pilgrimage sites and institutions are built. And then indeed the holy book, the Ardicrondi is compiled. And then subsequently, in the persecution of the Sikh gurus, in particular the fifth guru, Gurjan who's martyred by the in Lahore, and the death of the ninth guru leads to the transformation of the tradition. And that's a good segue.

Thank you very much to do my job for me. All help. Welcome. Charnika Kohl, how did these Sikh people then begin? As was just being said, begin. How did their tradition change? Let's say how did they become political as well as religious? Well, I think it's quite important to stress

that they were always political. When, for instance, Amritsa, the land for Amritsa, The land for Amritsa was granted by Akbar, and this is going back to 1580, Ram Dass, the guru at that time, soon set about trying to collect taxes, impose a certain kind of political order amongst his disciples to begin with and so on. But by the time you come to the beginning of the 18th century, the last guru, so essentially late 17th and beginning of the 18th century, you have the last guru. And he essentially, due to a number of reasons, begins to try and build on Nanak's tradition. by imposing a certain political agenda to the spiritual message. So while all the things that Guru Harpana just talked about continue, he also adds, and I'm really simplifying this to one particular element,

he adds the idea of opposition to political wrong. And in this case, in this case, specifically it was the Mughals he was opposing. And he essentially, for instance, writes this very famous epistle called Zafarnamar, in which he sort of points out to the Mughal emperor Orangze, the kind of hollowness, the moral and spiritual hollowness of his regime. So the idea of fighting injustice with force of arms is something that he actually inculcates within his followers and within the wider, hopefully, Punjabi community. I just want to quickly add that I think it's really important to stress that the Sikhs throughout this period

were a minority, even though the numbers increased. And essentially this part of the country was dominated by Muslims. is a 70% Muslim and Hindus. So one of the very important aspects of bringing a political community together was to try and appeal above in a way faith and caste and have a kind of regional national political identity, not national, sorry, a regional identity. And gurus like the last guru try to do that.

You've said 70% Muslims and we're told 20% Hindus that leaves about at most 10% for the Sikhs. So a very small proportion made a kind of very big, effect. So how do they organise to have such a great effect? How do they politically organised? Coming back almost to the original question. Well, I think what begins to happen is that these percentages change because the converts are taken from Muslims, Muslims and Hindus convert to Sikhism too. So we're talking about a slight change of numbers by the time you come to the end of the... You're talking to slight, may I interrupt? I'm just, I'm reading probably from your notes.

But one of the remarkable things is that the, Ranja, he brought in Muslims and his He managed to equalize that. And although a few people change to Sikhism remain, and I think this is important for the conversation, a very small minority, and yet with enormous effect, that's the interesting thing, or one of them. Yes, absolutely. And I think this really goes down to two aspects.

One, that they were given, if you focus it down on Ranjit Singh now, they were given roles within the military, the Kalsa, the militarized wing of Sikhism, in far larger proportion to their population numbers would suggest. They were also given posts within the civil administration in far greater numbers than perhaps their population would suggest. So there was certainly a sense in which they were brought in to the administration. I don't want to leave the Mughals too soon.

You said they opposed what the Mughals were up to. I know this mighty empire. We know lots and lots about them. What did they oppose? Various kinds of oppression, including religious persecution too, because obviously, as Guru Harpa has said, the idea of Sikhism was to try and find the commonality within religion rather than the distinction.

So they always said that the opposition to the Mughals was not, it wasn't a sort of anti-Muslim opposition. It was particularly linked to what the Mughals were doing in terms of how they were oppressing cultivators, the persecution of religious minorities and all kinds of oppressive taxation and so on. So this was a social political opposition rather than a religious one.

And the gurus are very clear on that front. Susan Strong, can you just develop the idea of the Mughals? They'd been there for a long time and we're talking about moving into the 17th, 18th century now. What impact had they had? Well, the impact on the region was profound and it continued into the Sikh period. If you look, for instance, at language, the language of the Mughal Empire was Persian.

It was the language. They were Central Asian invaders. They brought with them the Persian language and Iranian culture, which profoundly shaped Mughal court culture. The Persian language was used as the language of the administration of the entire empire, including the province of Punjab. And Punjab is Persian. It's Punjab, referring to the five rivers that flow across the plains.

And the language continued to be used at the Sikh court of Ranjit Singh. So the histories of his reign were also written in Persian. And there's a legacy, there's a direct link, an echo of the great age of Shah Jahan in the 17th century, in the Sikh history of Ranjit Singh, where he too is referred to as Shah Jahan, Shahjahan king of the world. So that goes on. The capital of the province, which was a mogul province, is, Lahore that was of immense strategic and economic importance. It was at a crossroads of trading routes,

and because of the trading routes, it allowed invaders also to come into the subcontinent. So Lahore had to be heavily fortified. It was of great economic importance, as I just said, but because the moguls lived there for weeks, months, years, even, they left a deep architectural legacy as well. So within the fortified structure, of the palace buildings for the moguls

were also the halls of public and private audience and a mosque, a huge mosque written by, erected by Alam Gheer, Arangzeb. And Ranjit Singh, when he took La Hul, lived in these very same buildings. He, as he often did, I mean, he was an extraordinary man in many ways, almost everyone could think of, but diplomatically he was very clever.

Instead of crushing people, he brought them on his side, again and again and he went inside the husk of the Mughal Empire, didn't he? He took on its trappings. When people painted him portraits, it was of a Mughal Maharaja. Very consciously, in the secular life of the course. Because these are the mighty people and he wanted not to demolish them, but to inhabit them and then take them into his own. To be seen, to allude very consciously to the great imperial past and position himself, his own power within that. But it's true, absolutely, that he brought into the running of his kingdom.

leading Muslim figures, Hindu figures, who were part of his inner circle, his most intimate advisors and companions. And it's a testament, I think, to the charisma, as we would put it now, of his personality, that he was able to control all these fighting factions of Sikhs, but also impose this rule, which brought in everybody else. How turbulent is the Punjab at this time?

Let's talk about the end of the 18th century, this boy, well, youth, and he has been, he's the leader, he becomes Maharaja when he's about 20, against all the odds, he's tremendously successful. He isn't, he isn't pushed around by anybody, and he's very skillfully in all sorts of ways, but he faced a turbulent, the Punjab was in a turbulence because of the declining power of the Mongols, is that right? That's absolutely right. Throughout the 18th century as the great Mogul Empire declined, the situation in the Punjab was desperate, because, it was, mogul power had virtually disappeared throughout the 18th century,

the raid of Nardishah of Iran in 1738 to 9, through the Punjab on Delhi to seize the mogul treasures and then take them back to Iran, had a devastating blow on the power and the economics of the empire. So this allowed other regional powers to rise if they had a strong enough leader and a strong enough army. The situation in the Punjab was that it was repeatedly invaded by Afghan. who devastated monuments, including the Golden Temple, which was destroyed three times and then rebuilt.

So because the Sikh missiles, the clans, were established and fighting between themselves, there was no possibility of uniting to defeat and control all the land. And it was only Ranjit Singh who was able to do that incredibly, given, as you say, his very young age. but he had a very strong advisor in the women of his family about whom I think rather little is known. Can I come back to you then, Gahabotting? He's well prepared, we've been told by Susan there.

Can you just fill us in on what we know of him at that young age when he came to that position? He was born in 1780 and he was the son... He takes Lahore in 1799. So, 1979, yeah. He's a son of a Sikh clan leader. And at a very young age, he's inducted into the warfare, and he sees action at the age of nine

and he's ledged to one a major victory as his father is dying. And then he marries at the age of 15. And this, I think, is a very important aspect, which Susan has alluded to, is that he's influenced incredibly by his mother-in-law of his first marriage, who becomes his advisor and guardian. And then two years later, he marries again with a daughter of another clan leader. So he's in a sense developing his connections and his networks within the missiles

in order to marginalise his opponents. He also shows his political leadership of his group in defeating or at least arresting the extension of power where Shah Zaman and the king of Afghanistan who enters. There must be one of the few people on the planet who actually stopped and conquered the Afghans. Well, absolutely. I think one of the claims that is often made is that with Ranjit Singh later on, in his reign that the Afghans are at least held back and pushed back for some time. You're probably too tactful to say this. I hope I can say it because it is important, I think, in the scheme of things,

although it's at the periphery of the spectrum, is that he was underappreciated, particularly by the snobocracy, the British, because he was only, as it were, five or three, same height as Napoleon as it happens. And he'd been blinded in one eye with smallpox when he was a boy. And he seemed, according to one ridiculous remark by an English lady, a little grey mouse. Well, he was some mouse, wasn't he? Well, he was some mouse, but he was a mouse who had the brain of, I think,

Machiavelli and at least the intuitive intelligence of a great diplomat, as well as a political leader. brilliant had given me segues because exactly I was going to... I mean, will you go again? Sorry. It's all right. Janrika, so how did Ransjid managed to unite the Sikhs in his empire? Well, I think it's really important

just to add, to finish up on that, that he was really quite fortuitous, it was for him, that the Afghans, you know, he managed to, he managed, the Afghans themselves were driven at this point and they were having lots of problems in their own part of the world, so their gaze was taken away from the Pundra.

Also, we have the idea of what is happening in Europe. Napoleon is now the conquering hero. He is subdued Russia and there is this threat of a French-Russian pact which would allow Russia if it so wanted to invade through the roots of the Afghan frontier. And that threatened less more than 10 minutes

that did it. I mean, he left Russia. I know. I know. But the point was that for the British, you mentioned the British. I think for Britain, for the East India Company, they realised that it was far held far more helpful to have Ranjit Singh and his territory as a buffer between this possible invasion, combined invasion of sort of Russia and France. I mean, this might not have been, might have been a red herring.

It is a red herring. But the point is the commanders on the ground felt that this policy of wait and see rather than attack Ranjit Singh, that decision was taken by, if you like, head office in London. Okay, can I ask my original question, which was how did he manage to unite the seat? in his empire, because just a second, because there were several lots of Sikhs, as Susan pointed out in her knowledge, they weren't just one grouping in one area of the Punjab, they were all over the place. How did he manage to unite them in the first place? Through a combination of strength of personality and policy, I think to one extent it was about using his prowess as a military commander to subdue those who wouldn't agree to accept him.

But combined with that, he was very happy to take money off them, to have them as vassive. on the threat of invasion. So the superiority of the army into which he put a lot of money and a lot of thought he had Europeans coming in and training his army. So certainly... French, not British. Indeed, French and Italian. French fleeing from the defeated Napoleon?

Yes, indeed. Ventura and Atard were two very prominent French fleeing from Napoleon's army who came over in 1822. But essentially he managed to make his fighting force and him as the commander-in-chief such a threat that those who didn't accept his suzeranity were happy to pay him vassalage for years to come. So he got the benefit of money, the financial servitude, rather than the actual physical conquering of these lands. So that was one very important part of the story.

And I do think the other part was the fact that it's come up before in discussion. Okay, he was certainly the Maharaja, but he also projected an image of humility, which made him very popular amongst the people. He always tries to sort of come across as someone who was a servant of the Khalsa, even though he was the Maharaja. He tried not to alienate segments of society like the masses, the cultivators who would pay him taxes. So the financial side was strong too. So this was a powerful military state based on, ironically, the consent of the people and indeed a love for Anjid Singh,

which is noted by all contemporaries. So what's being said there, Susan Strong, takes us to his court. What was his court like? Because it seemed to me to run two lines, one the majestic and the other the modest. I think that's absolutely right. The central figure, the heart of this, was this little grey mouse that you alluded to,

the Ranjit Singh, who was not physically prepossessing because of the childhood smallpox, which had left him blind, who was very small. He did not dress. magnificently. He didn't seem to care, probably seeing himself in the ascetic line of the early gurus, perhaps. But the court itself was extremely splendid, and the Europeans who went to the court commented on the profusion of jewelry that was worn by these very tall, handsome chieftains who were leading the army. By this time, is the term in introduced? Yes, well, it would have been worn not just by Sikhs, but it was worn.

They wore Kashmir shawls. Kashmir shawls were extremely present in the court culture, huge exports of these brightly coloured crimson, yellow, green shawls that were worn not just as shawls, but also as saddlecloths for the horses. They were used to line tents and so on. Ranjit Singh, nevertheless, despite his personal, discreet, underdressed appearance, he didn't wear many jewels, could rise to the occasion when it was necessary. And so, for instance, when Mr. McNaughton arrived in 1838 on a very delicate diplomatic mission and was greeted by Ranjit Singh in his summer palace with a garden outside, the paths to Ranjik Singh were lined by these very splendid Sikh warriors,

dressed in profusion of jewelry and red and silk jackets, yellow silk jackets. And they led McNaughton to Ranjit Singh, who was sitting on the golden. throne wearing white muslin clothes and with the Coenor diamond on his arm and a famous long rope of pearls. And what's interesting about this is that at the same time you have the court history recording in incredible detail the preparations that Ranjit Singh made for meetings like this. So they were very carefully orchestrated. The Sikh Sardars were inspected beforehand. They were all lined up in the clothes and the jewellery that they were supposed to be wearing, the history records that notes were taken of the names of each man

and the specific ornaments that he was wearing to check that they wore the same profusion of jewellery on the day. And there are all sorts of preparations like that that are done very carefully weeks ahead. The gifts that are going to be given to the visitors are very carefully selected and calibrated to the rank of each person arriving. So within this modesty there is nevertheless a huge sense of the magnificence of the position of Ranjit Singh within this kingdom.

One of you mentioned, Maccaband, he wasn't going to be out splendid by the Queen from England or her representatives, was he? Not at all. I mean, he was aware of the importance of the Queen and the reign

of the Queen Victoria in England and the strength of the East India Company. but he himself was also very conscious of who he was and who he represented, not only the Punjabis, but also, you know, the Sikh tradition, as Susan has mentioned. Can we go back a little more, which Chandrika mentioned, but just a little more about the army. Yeah.

Because he had a distinct, he was always, it was supposed to be, it was reported as being an intelligent conversationalist, even through translation, people picked that up, more than picked that up, obviously. But he would come back to the army, whose army was this, had that from, Can you tell us about how he organized his army? Well, his army was, it grew out of the Sikh fighting forces in the 18th century, the clans and the missiles. But by the first decade of his reign, it had developed a modern dimension in a sense. It comprised of the artillery, the cavalry, and the infantry.

and it was by and large the majority of the army comprised of Sikhs, but it also had Gurkhas, it had deserters from the East India Company, and as Chandrkas mentioned, it was led by, in part, by some European officers who trained the army on modern lines in modern warfare. So Ranjit Singh was very conscious that if he, If his state was to survive, he needed to modernize and develop modern warfare in order to counteract the growing power of the East India Company. But at the same time, he tried to adapt within it. The elements which had given the Sikhs paramountcy in Punjab in the 18th century, namely the horse warriors who often were kept by, often were kept by,

large landowners and so on. So he was very conscious of, in building a military machine, he needed also to accommodate the key element. And in recognising the fact that his military was, for him, the representation of this, you know, the Circari Khalsa, which is the militant tradition of Sikhism. John Rekar, we've mentioned, I've lost to speeded over once or twice,

his approach to people from other religions. Could you develop that? Yes, certainly. I think he saw himself as propagating the teachings of Sikhism, as a good Sikh, which meant that he, both in terms of his civil and military administration, included men of all faith, but more importantly, in terms of the largest of the state, in terms of giving financial grants in recognizing, for instance, Hindu festivals, giving grants to Hindu temples like the Juala Muki Temple in Khamki Temple in Kham. or Muslim shrines like the Hazarad Bhal in Kashmir. He was seen to be this benefactor who was equally generous across all religious communities. And certainly I think the fact that he did this for over 40 years meant that he built up a reputation as being someone who was for all faiths. And this served him very well in terms of loyalty, both in terms of the administration and the civil service, if you like, but also in the army. And it's quite interesting that, for instance, the artillery, which is really what came very close to defeating the British after his deaths in some of those state battles, was manned by Muslims.

He made it very, very clear that he trusted them enough and they were trained in order to do this. But of course, those who were cynical would also point to the fact that he was doing this in order to ensure that the Sikh element within the Kalsa did not achieve a dominance within the army. he was well aware of their capabilities. And he was conscious... Can you just tell the listeners what it is? Well, Kulsa really refers to it. It means pure, but he really comes to refer by this time to the militarized wing of the Sikh polity.

And essentially these were sort of like the Praetorian Guard, if you like, in the Roman Empire. They were the sort of the frontline troops who were the best trained, the most skilled horsemen, artillery men and so on. So they were a combination of the creme de la creme of the army. The Sikhs dominated the Kalsa, which is interesting in some aspects. But as I explained a moment ago, Ranjit Singh was very conscious of actually ensuring

that there was a religious, if you like, spread of military power, which I think is really important. Susan Strong, how did Ranj Singh develop Amritsa? Well, this was the Golden Temple, which was the site as Gurha. Harpal has said, which was originally a wooded place with a pool of water, which developed into the spiritual heart of Sikhism. And the structure at the centre of a pool was destroyed, as I mentioned earlier,

repeatedly by the Afghans. So one of the first things that Ranjit Singh did, having become Maharaja, was to create a new structure. We don't know what the original structure looked like, but the structure which exists today owes its existence. to Ranjit Singh. And this is partly where the Mughal legacy comes in because the square building in the middle of this pool

surrounded by marble walkways is in two stories. The lower story is clad in white marble, which is directly derived from Mughal architectural tradition, and also very beautifully inlaid with semi-precious stones, with flowers and animals and even figures which you would never have in Mughal architectural. The upper story is clad in gilt copper, so it reflects against the waters of the pool, so you get this shimmering gold image. And then at the top of the building is a pavilion with the golden domes.

And inside, of course, is the holy book, the Guru Grant Saab. And this is the site of worship, and this is where Ranjit Singh went repeatedly as a devout Sikh. He travelled between Lahore and Emirates are very often to go to. the Golden Temple. And also at that time, because it seems when somebody of that authority and genius, one might say, gets in by, everything seemed to develop. There's a huge

surge in commerce and in agriculture and Amn Mn-Sar became a rich town as well as a strategically and religiously important town. It did, and that's the legacy of the stability. You know, if you have political stability, then the economic benefits follow.

And that was in great part of the The success of the kingdom was because Ranjit Singh did manage to make it stable, treated people reasonably was a just ruler and so people followed him. Garni, Guadapal, how significant was the death of Ranjit Singh to the fortunes of the Sikh Empire? Well, in one respect, it's very significant because the whole state and state craft of Ranjit Singh was constructed around the individual. He was the genius who held the whole thing together. He was the, you know, everything spun around him in terms of managing the warring, Sardars, the conflicts,

in extending the empire, the diplomacy of the empire. And by the end of his, I mean, in a sense, if we turn this on his head, that was also the failing of Rundjit Singh Because in constructing such a state, he then can be pulled up short for not having, and this is, you know, some Sikh historians criticizing on the one hand for not institutionalising and building on the empire and creating the framework for further development and others criticizing for actually not living up to the Sikh tradition and that his downfall in a sense can be ascribed to his deviation. from the Sikh tradition

and accommodation of other religions and so on and so forth. Did the British Andrick, did the British wait until Singh's death before waging war on the Sikhs? Yes, indeed. I think there were other reasons... Well, they worried about him.

They weren't going to take him on. They were always worry about him. Yes, they were. And they reluctantly came to a treaty with him in 1809 by which they sort of agreed to not invade him and Ranjin Singh was happy enough to act as the buff as long as they didn't come and threaten his last. Buffer against the Afghans. Buffer against the famous Afghans, who are always with us. Indeed, indeed. But there was also other things happening. The East India Company had by this time,

as it happened, defeated other territories like the Marathas, particularly. By 1819, they had managed to subdue the Marathas. They were now poised with a new young Governor-General, Henry Harding, who had a military background. They were sort of poised in order to sort of take over the Punjab. So with the death of Ranjit Singh, was the classic example of opportunism, where the East India Company were now ready to move. They'd been wanting to do so. And they did, on the pretext of the Sikh army or the Sikh Kalsa, invading territories beyond the subtlid. That was just a pretext in 1845. And there were two very bloody in very, very close-run battles.

Indeed. And I would like to identify two, both, the first one in the first Anglo-Sikh war, which of course was Sifero's poor, where you had the commander-in-chief general, Gough, who nearly lost the empire for the British by acts of ambition and commission. But there was also a great sort of treachery on the part of some of the Sikh commanders, Lal Singh and Thaet Singh in particular, who, when they found the British army almost on its knees, I mean, there were 50 plus European officers who'd been killed. Thousands of seapoys had been killed by, this was Phirospo. This was on the morning of the 21st of December.

instead of actually taking over and defeating the British finally, they decided to retreat. And there's always been controversy about why these Sikh commanders retreated. So I think the history would put it down to treachery combined with bad sort of judgment on the part of the Sikhs to not go for the kill. So the British sort of got away with a victory, you know, the snatched victory from the jaws that defeated, Verospoor. And quickly, very quickly, Chilean Wallabag, in the second Afghan war was a second Anglo-Sikh war was also, equally bloody and it nearly went the other way for the British. So it was a close round thing, but they managed to defeat the Sikhs by 1849.

So, Susan, we have the Sikhs are defeated. The British are still very wary of them. They use them as a buffer state rather than, as I understand it. What happened to the Rangit Singh had left eight children. Predictably they fell out with each other. and they got assassinated one after another. We know all about, I mean, middle age, no mind. What happened to the stuff that he had, the diamonds, the treasures and so on?

Well, you end up with the British taking, annexing the Punjab, and the nominal Maharaja is a little boy, Dilip Singh. And finally, with the annexation, Deleep Singh is separated from his mother, who was a very powerful influence. He is young, as we're talking about it. He is a little boy, yeah. I was looking for an age, that's all. I can't remember, that's right.

No, I think he was old. He was five and then he was... Yes, it's on thexation. He was ten. Ten, yes, exactly. And then he was... Okay, babble little boy. Okay, and I'd go.

So he's taken into the care of Dr. John Logan, who is also given charge of the treasury and inventory and inventorying it and dispersing it. So Logan graciously gives Deleip Singh some of the treasures, some of the best textiles, and then send some of the other star pieces back to England, including Ranjit Singh's Golden Throne, which was displayed in the East India Company's Indian Museum in London.

The Coenor Diamond is part of the Treaty of Lahore. That goes to Queen Victoria, is exhibited in the 1851 exhibition, disappoints the crowds, is recut, loses nearly half its weight. Other jewels which had been collected by Ranjit Singh, and were still in the Treasury, equally go back to England. But most of... No, go back to... Go to England.

Sorry, yes, of course. And so what's left is auctioned in Lahore in a series of sales. And so it's lost because we have no idea who bought it, where it went. Some of it was certainly bought by English collectors in India, but the rest would be dispersed through a network, presumably of Indian dealers. Gohapal. How well positioned... were the Sikh people at the end of empire.

Let's say they've now faced two defeats by the East India Company's army, which is bigger than the British army at the time. How well placed were. What were they doing? How did they react? How did they regroup if they did? Well, I mean, immediately after the annexation of Punjab

and the two defeats, there was a great deal of disillusionment. Naturally so, because an empire had disappeared. those in arms had been disarmed and many in the military wandered across the province and were often unemployed or without a job

and the first 10 years or so were quite difficult for the Sikh community because they were the ruling class as it were in Punjab. What changed the fortunes to some extent? extent was the Indian mutiny or the Indian War of Independence, or the First War of Indian Independence as Indians like to call it. In that, the Sikhs were called on to provide support to the East India Company. And subsequently in the 19th century, we see the whole policy of the

recruitment into the Indian Army changing and Sikhs are recruited in large numbers. So that, in a sense, restores some of the fortunes of the community, but it's still not at the level it was before annexation. They become a very important part. I can't use that back button because I don't know enough about it of the Indian Army. And then, of course, in the First and Second World Wars, the Sikhs join in with the British and are very, very effective as part of those two. wars. Can we spend

the last two, three minutes, talking about the legacy of this extraordinary man. Starting with you, Janiuket, if we can go around the table. What was his greatest legacy? Ranjid Singh. I would say the idea that he nurtured of a regional, national identity, which

transcended religion. He was seen at the time and subsequently as someone who stood for all of Punjab, the line of Punjab. And that persists? I certainly think it does. I think this identity is very strong and it isn't Sikh. It is a Punjabi identity and it transcends, you know, it includes within it people from all communities. So Punjabi Muslims too and Hindus, Punjabi Hindus. I mean, this is this is an idea that is rooted, I think, in the time of the first, from the time of the first, well, the great Sikh empire, the first and only. Yeah, I would echo that. I think he was a, um,

representative of what one might want to say of Punjabi nationalism in its best sense. But I would also add that his greatest legacy was Punjabi militarism. In creating a state around a military meritocracy, he then left a legacy which was taken over by the Indian Army. And one could conceivably argue that, you know, the current day Pakistan is state,

is, in a sense, epitomises Ranjit Singh and his legacy. And finally, I'm afraid, briefly, Susan. Well, I'd say I think he should be seen as a great figure in world history for all the reasons that Chandrick and Gurhappel have said, but also there's the architectural legacy, of course, of the Golden Temple. Well, thank you all very much, as Guhaapal Singh, Chandrit Akal and Susan Strong. Next week we'll be talking about the neutron, which was discovered in Cambridge in 1932. Thanks for listening.

And the In Our Time podcast gets some extra time now with a few minutes of bonus material from Melvin and his guests. So what did we miss out anything significant? I would have liked to say something about the creation of the Kaltzer by the 10th Guru because I think that's seminal to understanding what the Kalsar is. Indeed, yeah. So why do you tell us now that the fortunate people are down there as well? Well, okay.

After the persecution of the fifth guru, we have his son, and then adopts two swords, the Sikhs Guru, adopts the sword which represents temporal power and spiritual power. And that, in the sense, is a defining moment for the transformation of Sikhism into a political force. But the 10th Guru in 1699 creates the Kalsa. He creates the new order which is supposed to embody the Sikh tradition and represents the pure. He baptizes the Kalsar in the Shivalik Hills in current day, Anandpur, Sahib. And then it's in turn baptized himself. So this identity is seen to represent the new order within Sikhism. With the equality of the five.

And it's also embodied in the dress code, the keeping of unshorn hair and so forth. and upon the death of the 10th Guru in 1708, he lays down that the guru ship is ended and it's invested in the Arde Grunth, the Holy Book. But he himself, before he dies, he would also be present in the mystical entity of the Khalsa. So in a sense, you have the twin doctrine of the Guru Grunth and the Guru Pant. And that, the Guru Pant and the presence of the Kalsa

seems to be the spirit which there, then provides the drive towards rule, because there's a prophecy of the 10th Guru that the Kalsa will eventually rule. And the Ranjit Singh state is seen to be the culmination of that prophecy a century later. Can I just quickly add two images to that sort of point. One is the way the iconography associated with the last guru.

You know, he's often portrayed on a stallion with a dove in one hand and a glitter, sort of sabre in the other, you know, sort of symbolizing this coming together of these two traditions. And the other image I'd like to point out is that Amritsa, now Susan talked about the temple, but opposite that there is something called the Akal Tukh, which is a meeting place. It's like a center where every year these missile, the leaders used to meet to discuss politics. So this combination of the spiritual and the political, which is at the heart of the Karlsacic tradition, is epitomised by Amritsa.

And I think that has had all kinds of repercussions in modern politics, modern Indian politics. We're not going to go into that. But I think that's really essential to understanding where the strength of the polity came from. There are many more history and discussion programs from Radio 4 to download for free. Find these on the website at BBC.co.ukuk slash radio 4.