This 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.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan articles
This article is part of WikiProject Sikhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with
Sikhism. Please participate by editing the article, or visit the
project page for more details on the projects.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Punjab, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Punjab on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PunjabWikipedia:WikiProject PunjabTemplate:WikiProject PunjabPunjab-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Khyber PakhtunkhwaWikipedia:WikiProject Khyber PakhtunkhwaTemplate:WikiProject Khyber PakhtunkhwaKhyber Pakhtunkhwa articles
(Comments)
The Ghazis were led by Allahbakhsh Khan and the assault was delivered in the early hours of the morning of 21 December, 1826, when the Sikhs lay fast asleep in the intense cold. In the first onslaught many Sikhs were killed. Budh Singh immediately organised his troops in battle array and fell upon the Ghazis, and repulsed them. They left the field and retired into the hills. Budh Singh had won his spurs.
Acc to Hari Gupta Ram the Battle of Akora was actually a Sikh Victory since the Sikhs were Able to Repulse the Attack and the Afghans fled to the Mountains can I please get a Explanation how this Battle is a Afghan Victory?
2003:DE:A707:7B8F:96BA:7A85:6189:1A6B (
talk)
13:43, 28 April 2023 (UTC)reply
References are provided, and Hari Gupta already mentioned that "Budh Singh did not follow up his victory." and as mentioned in the references, many other historians also stated the victory for Afghans. Sikh casualties were five times greater than those of the local Afghans, and Afghans looted the entire Sikh camp.
Kamal Afghan01 (
talk)
16:28, 29 April 2023 (UTC)reply
This article is completely wrong with wrong result in info box. The source says that Budh Singh repulsed the attack and after victory, he did not pursue the retreating Afghans. Below is information from the source that is on the article itself. Here is the source link, page 161.
[1]. Also there were only 4000, not 4000+ and the Sikh causality was only 500, not 500 to 700. This is what the source says:
The Battle of Akora, 21 December, 1826
Akora was an important place 18 km from Attock across River Indus. It was inhabited mostly by Khatak Afghans. Najaf Khan was their chief. When the Sikhs captured Peshawar, he had fled into the hills. At this time Budh Singh Sandhanwalia, was stationed at Akora with ‘’’about 4,000 men’’’. The Sayyid organized his forces and got ready for a night assault. The Sayyid's forces consisted of Hindustanis, the Kandharis, Yusafzais and Khataks. The Ghazis were led by Allahbakhsh Khan and the assault was delivered in the early hours of the morning of 21 December, 1826, when the Sikhs lay fast asleep in the intense cold. In the first onslaught many Sikhs were killed. ‘’’Budh Singh immediately organised his troops in battle array and fell upon the Ghazis, and repulsed them. They left the field and retired into the hills. Budh Singh had won his spurs, but did not follow up his victory.’’’ About 500 Sikhs were killed in all, while the Sayyid lost 36 Hindustanis and 46 Kandharis, including Maulvi Baqar Ali of Patna and their commander Allahbakhsh Khan. The Sayyid shifted his headquarters to Sitana at the foot of Mahaban mountains on the western side of the Indus in the heart of Yusafzais.
The article is completely wrong with wrong result in info box. Page needs to be corrected. The source says that Budh Singh repulsed the attack and after victory, he did not pursue the retreating Afghans. Below is information from the source that is on the article itself. Here is the source link, page 161.
[2]. Also there were only 4000, not 4000+ and the Sikh causality was only 500, not 500 to 700. This is what the source says:
The Battle of Akora, 21 December, 1826
Akora was an important place 18 km from Attock across River Indus. It was inhabited mostly by Khatak Afghans. Najaf Khan was their chief. When the Sikhs captured Peshawar, he had fled into the hills. At this time Budh Singh Sandhanwalia, was stationed at Akora with ‘’’about 4,000 men’’’. The Sayyid organized his forces and got ready for a night assault. The Sayyid's forces consisted of Hindustanis, the Kandharis, Yusafzais and Khataks. The Ghazis were led by Allahbakhsh Khan and the assault was delivered in the early hours of the morning of 21 December, 1826, when the Sikhs lay fast asleep in the intense cold. In the first onslaught many Sikhs were killed. ‘’’Budh Singh immediately organised his troops in battle array and fell upon the Ghazis, and repulsed them. They left the field and retired into the hills. Budh Singh had won his spurs, but did not follow up his victory.’’’ About 500 Sikhs were killed in all, while the Sayyid lost 36 Hindustanis and 46 Kandharis, including Maulvi Baqar Ali of Patna and their commander Allahbakhsh Khan. The Sayyid shifted his headquarters to Sitana at the foot of Mahaban mountains on the western side of the Indus in the heart of Yusafzais.
Other sources do not make any mention of loss either. And some others just completely fail to provide any sort of verification and are unreliable. Only book by acclaimed historian
Hari Ram Gupta provides detail info in his book which I showed earlier. Previous editor said that because Budh Singh didn’t follow up on his victory, he considers this an Afghan victory. It just makes no sense.
2600:1016:B00D:A313:7485:D822:2796:A2F4 (
talk) 13:48, 30 April 2023 (UTC)Sock.
Abecedare (
talk)
20:15, 30 April 2023 (UTC)reply
"In India, the doctrine was introduced by Syed Ahmed Barelvi, who had
adopted its puritan views during his pilgrimage to Holy cities in 1822. He
established a centre at Patna and acquired a large following. He undertook Jihad
(Holy war) against the tyranny of Sikhs on the Muslims in the Frontier provinces
and liberated most of the province from the Sikh Yoke but ultimately he was
killed through a conspiracy of his own men who led the Sikh army through a
secret route behind the Muslim lines at Balakot in 1831. Hisdisciple Titoo Mir,
started the Mowahhid movement in lower Bengal."
The Ghazis were led by Allahbakhsh Khan and the assault was delivered in the early hours of the morning of 21 December, 1826, when the Sikhs lay fast asleep in the intense cold. In the first onslaught many Sikhs were killed. Budh Singh immediately organised his troops in battle array and fell upon the Ghazis, and repulsed them. They left the field and retired into the hills. Budh Singh had won his spurs, but did not follow up his victory.
Historian has given more detail on the battle and this information needs to be included in the article and the result of the battle should be corrected.
71.60.35.187 (
talk)
23:31, 6 January 2024 (UTC)reply
The Encyclopaedia of Islam (already cited) states that Mujahedeen repulsed the Sikhs. Altaf Qadir, who also gives detailed account of war, states same. On the other hand, Hari Gupta's statement suggests that the first battle and the one with Budh Singh were two different events. It is also notable that Sikh casualties were far higher than that of Mujahedeen. If anything, it goes against the sources with higher scholarly value and so there is no reason to change the result, unless there are WP:RS stating that the battle was a Sikh victory.
Sutyarashi (
talk)
07:49, 7 January 2024 (UTC)reply
Debate is not about the number of casualties. Hari Ram Gupta does suggest it is same battle because Budh Singh was present in the battle and because of the attack by Sikhs, the Ghazis left the battle field and retired. Now because of conflict with other books about the result, the result should be shown as disputed and shown as such with maybe with its own section as to why the result is disputed by stating what each book states. Statement of all books are necessary. I think that is fair conclusion.
2601:547:B02:4AB0:A18D:68A6:DF99:934F (
talk)
10:41, 7 January 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Slatersteven: the text was just to show what was written in the source. But the actual suggested text that should be included in the article is this
Sikhs were slain in the first attack while they slept and Budh Singh instantly organized his men and replused the Ghazis who retreated from the battle but Budh Singh did not pursue them after victory.
@
Slatersteven: yes you are right, the result should be inconclusive. Because of conflict with other books about the result, the result should be shown as disputed or inconclusive and shown as such with maybe with its own section as to why the result is disputed by stating what each book states. Statement of all books are necessary. I think that is fair conclusion.
2601:547:B02:B5B9:850B:9DE4:75E:864C (
talk)
12:06, 7 January 2024 (UTC)reply
Does any source other than Hari Gupta calls it a Sikh victory? Hari Gupta's focus is on Sikh history, which means we need sources which have made a neutral assessment of the battle. See
WP:BIASED
No they do refer to same battle. All sources mention that it occurred in November or December of 1826, and that it was first battle between
Sayyid Ahmad Barelvi and the Sikhs. Altaf Qadir and Hari Gupta provide its relatively detailed account as well.
Sutyarashi @
Slatersteven: Hari Ram Gupta is a renowned historian and his merit has never been of question and has been widely used on Wikipedia. The sources associated with the result such as by Altaf Qadar is a book written from Pakhtun point of view so this itself loses its merit of a
WP:RS. The other source by Barbara Daly Metcalf gives the date of November 1826 which is different than what is on the article and such historians instead of research, tend to borrow sources from others like she borrowed this certain line from Rafiuddin Ahmed, also attributed his name on this book here
[7]. This book too has exact same line mentioned by Rafiuddin Ahmed and this same line was borrowed by few others as their primary source. Coming to source by Waleed Ziad, he doesn't mention anything about Akora Khattak or date or any detail that can give better understanding of the battle. All he says Eventually, with support from Yusufzais and other clans, Sayyid Ahmad's Mujhahidin managed to defeat the Sikh armies at Attock in December 1826. What battle is this? Different? Its very clear that the result is disputed and should shown be as such. Please add the suggested text with attrubution to Hari Ram Gupta's source and also create a Dispute section with all significant views by historians.
2601:547:B02:B5B9:850B:9DE4:75E:864C (
talk)
16:50, 7 January 2024 (UTC)reply
Either Hari Gupta is an RS we can use (and thus there is a dispute within RS, who have studied the battle and written about it in-depth) or it is not.
Slatersteven (
talk)
17:00, 7 January 2024 (UTC)reply
I think the issue is not his reliability, rather that he is the only one who states the battle to be a Sikh victory. Thus, if IP wants to change the result, they should provide additional and if possible, higher quality academic sources in support of their claim.
Sutyarashi (
talk)
17:11, 7 January 2024 (UTC)reply
Which many of the other sources seem to disagree on even the date of the battle, they can't be used to ignore one of the few in-depth analyses of the battle.
Slatersteven (
talk)
17:15, 7 January 2024 (UTC)reply
He has described this battle in a single paragraph, before moving to the next battles of Sikhs. I doubt that this can be characterized as "in-depth analyses of the battle".
Hari Ram has given more than enough information from historian point of view in a section completely dedicated to the battle as compared to one liners by other sources. I have not looked into additional sources as of yet due to busy schedule.
2601:547:B02:B5B9:3DE8:BF60:3D4E:5144 (
talk)
18:37, 7 January 2024 (UTC)reply
You had proposed the article for deletion. I wrote it in sense that the battle is significant enough to have a main article for it, as reliable sources exist mentioning it. Hari Gupta is included as well.
However, whether we can use just his source as authoritative statement to dispute the result, is another issue. The fact that all sources agree on Sikh casualties being multiple times higher should not be ignored as well.
Sutyarashi (
talk)
12:56, 8 January 2024 (UTC)reply