CONTINUED from above> I admit Sikhs sometimes become overzealous in claiming they saved the entire Indian peninsula. But modern ultra nationalist Hindus (esp. those that hail from south India) will not acknowledge that Sikhs did in fact save North India including Kashmir.
I ask you this
Were or were not Sikhs Critical asset north of the Vindhyan range. Could Indian Civilisation north of vindhyan range had survived without Sikhs? Many North Indians will say Sikh contribution was critical - Only Hindus from Haryana & Gujarat would strongly disagree (primarily due to the influence of Arya Samaj). After the Third Battle of Panipat 1761, Maratha power north of the Vindhyan range was broken. In that state of affairs the natural course of history would have been a new Islamic power to rise north of the Vindhyan range beginning in Punjab. Punjab was at least 80% Muslim, and right at the back of Punjab was the Islamic Durrani Empire (Afghan Empire), Islamic Persia, Islamic Mesopotamia & right behind all that was the almost limitless power & strength of Arabs & Turks. But no! Sikhs rose up after the Third Battle of Panipat 1761, and became rulers of the Punjab. Under Maharaja Ranjit Singh Sikhs made Kashmir vassal to them, and when the Sikhs took Peshawar from the Afghans they reversed a 1000 year trend by becoming the first Indians to hit back west to the Iranian plateau. Rightly did the great Hindi bard Bhushana, who forsook the royal favours of the Moghal court to come
