Jump to content

Talk:Battle of Rahon (1710): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 25: Line 25:
::Should be separate articles and can be included in this article as background and aftermath. Since belligerents, total numbers, circumstances are different for each battle, they should be considered separate battle. [[Special:Contributions/207.189.217.195|207.189.217.195]] ([[User talk:207.189.217.195|talk]]) 11:47, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
::Should be separate articles and can be included in this article as background and aftermath. Since belligerents, total numbers, circumstances are different for each battle, they should be considered separate battle. [[Special:Contributions/207.189.217.195|207.189.217.195]] ([[User talk:207.189.217.195|talk]]) 11:47, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
:::Phase one, no battle took place as it’s included in background that “ disillusioned upon hearing the war preparations against them and decided to move their forces and call for reinforcements.” So it’s not battle. Second phase is about this current article and third phase can be included as aftermath in this article and also a separate article due to different circumstances, belligerents and numbers. [[Special:Contributions/207.189.217.195|207.189.217.195]] ([[User talk:207.189.217.195|talk]]) 11:56, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
:::Phase one, no battle took place as it’s included in background that “ disillusioned upon hearing the war preparations against them and decided to move their forces and call for reinforcements.” So it’s not battle. Second phase is about this current article and third phase can be included as aftermath in this article and also a separate article due to different circumstances, belligerents and numbers. [[Special:Contributions/207.189.217.195|207.189.217.195]] ([[User talk:207.189.217.195|talk]]) 11:56, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
::::In this article battle ended with Sikh victory and the belligerents moved to conquer other towns while leaving minimal soldiers at the fort. So it’s not a continuation. 10 days later Shamas khan returned to fight against the minimal force at the fort. That is why this aftermath is separate battle which was a Mughal victory and Can be created as a separate article with total numbers being different as clearly Sikhs were 1000 only. [[Special:Contributions/207.189.217.195|207.189.217.195]] ([[User talk:207.189.217.195|talk]]) 12:08, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 12:08, 9 October 2023

WikiProject iconMilitary history: Asian / South Asia Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.
B checklist
Associated task forces:
Taskforce icon
Asian military history task force
Taskforce icon
South Asian military history task force

Incorrect description for image

the description shown on this page "Painting from an illustrated folio of a Mughal manuscript depicting the Battle of Rahon (1710). From the ‘Tawarikh-i Jahandar Shah’, Awadh or Lucknow, ca.1770. Shamas Khan is depicted being killed by Nar Singh and Pahar Singh" is incorrect due to the fact that Shamas Khan was killed in the Battle of Bahrampur in 1711 not in the battle of rahon.

Source:https://archive.org/details/LifeOfBandaSinghBahadurBasedOnContemporaryAndOriginalRecordsDr.GandaSingh/page/n192/mode/1up?q=shamas Pg 160-163 Twarikh e Khalsa (talk) 02:01, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Twarikh e Khalsa Thanks for bringing this to my attention. The image description’s claim was taken from the original source. Perhaps there’s a difference of opinion amongst scholars regarding which battle he died in? Anyways, I appreciate you looking into this. ThethPunjabi (talk) 18:30, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@ThethPunjabi
i've checked through different sources and all of them universally agree that Shamas Khan along with his uncle Bayazid Khan were both killed in the battle of Bahrampur.
Surjit Gandhi:https://archive.org/details/SikhsInTheEighteenthCentury/page/49/mode/2up
Hari Ram Gupta: https://archive.org/details/HistoryOfTheSikhsVol.IiEvolutionOfSikhConfederacies1707-69/page/n43/mode/2up
Balwant singh dhillion:https://apnaorg.com/books/english/rajasthani-documents-on-banda-singh-bahadur/rajasthani-documents-on-banda-singh-bahadur.pdf
Most of the contemporary authorities all agree that Shamas Khan was killed at Bahrampur,so i dont think which battle he was killed in his disputed.In all likelihood its possible that the painting might be depicting a different battle (possibly the battle of bahrampur). Twarikh e Khalsa (talk) 02:33, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mughal victory

To the VPN 207*, how is the Sikh defeat of a Mughal garrsion which was stationed after the inital fighting took place (which resulted in a Mughal victory and Sikh tactical retreat) a "Sikh victory", but a subsequent Mughal defeat of the Sikh garrsion not a Mughal victory? At the end of the day, the Mughals defeated the Sikhs and managed to repel their invasion and recover the fort, hence this is 100% a Mughal victory. And battles can transpire for many days, even months, so a 10 day gap in fighting does not mean anything. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 04:33, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Phase 1: Mughals besiege the Rahon fort, Sikhs tacticly and surreptitiously retreat (Mughal victory)
  • Phase 2: Sikhs shortly after return to Rahon once the bulk of the Mughal army has disbanded, defeat the Mughal garrison and recover the fort (Sikh victory)
  • Phase 3: Mughals return and defeat the Sikh garrison, recover the fort and re-establish an outpost (Mughal victory)
HaughtonBrit's position that Phase 2 should be the conclusion of the battle is untenable given that the fort was only held by the Sikhs for a few days, but it culminated in Mughal possession of the fort. He is also of the position that Phase 3 should constitute a different battle given that it transpired after the initial fighting (Phase 1), but given that logic, Phase 2 must also be another battle since it also took a place after the Mughal army had disbanded and the initial fighting had concluded. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 05:39, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Should be separate articles and can be included in this article as background and aftermath. Since belligerents, total numbers, circumstances are different for each battle, they should be considered separate battle. 207.189.217.195 (talk) 11:47, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Phase one, no battle took place as it’s included in background that “ disillusioned upon hearing the war preparations against them and decided to move their forces and call for reinforcements.” So it’s not battle. Second phase is about this current article and third phase can be included as aftermath in this article and also a separate article due to different circumstances, belligerents and numbers. 207.189.217.195 (talk) 11:56, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In this article battle ended with Sikh victory and the belligerents moved to conquer other towns while leaving minimal soldiers at the fort. So it’s not a continuation. 10 days later Shamas khan returned to fight against the minimal force at the fort. That is why this aftermath is separate battle which was a Mughal victory and Can be created as a separate article with total numbers being different as clearly Sikhs were 1000 only. 207.189.217.195 (talk) 12:08, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]