By Inderjeet Singh  

SikhNet: April 22, 2016

This research paper examines the composition of the armed forces who accompanied General Zorawar Singh in his most celebrated but ill-fated campaign to Tibet in 1841. The common held view is that he was accompanied by Dogra & Ladakhi troops. I have used Tibetan and contemporary British sources to draw a bit different conclusion. I am thankful to Sardar Amardeep Singh of 'Lost Heritage - The Sikh Legacy in Pakistan' fame who in 2013 produced a picturesque article on Zorawar Singh and introduced everyone to the Tibetan source on this daring campaign. His article provided the inspiration to research further on the subject.

Introduction

The Jammu & Kashmir Rifles, an infantry regiment of Indian army celebrates 15th April every year as Zorawar Day to commemorate birth and success of the legendary commander who is considered as an architect of this regiment. The fore runner of the regiment was raised in 1821 by Gulab Singh Dogra, a key Hindu general of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, the Sikh ruler of Punjab, Kashmir & Peshawar. The regiment takes recruits from the state of Jammu & Kashmir and neighbouring state of Himachal Pradesh.

Zorawar Singh is credited with the conquest of Ladakh (now part of Jammu & Kashmir state) in 1834, which was an independent state but culturally part of Tibetan Buddhism and also knows as Little Tibet. He later led a successful campaign against Gilgit-Baltistan (now part of Pakistan administered Kashmir) in 1839/40. However he is mostly remembered for his daring campaign in Tibet in 1841 and enjoys an iconic status among Hindu Dogra community of Jammu region similar to what Hari Singh Nalwa enjoys among Sikhs.

Existing literature
There are several books written by Indians of this region on the Hindu Rajput General* who belonged to the Bilaspur district of Himachal Pradesh. Their accounts are based on 'Gulabnama', a biography of Raja Gulab Singh Dogra by Diwan Kirpa Ram written at least two decades after the Tibetan campaign. Alexander Cunningham's account of Ladakh campaign by Zorawar Singh is based on Dogra Officer Basti Ram's memories which the later provided in 1847 at the request of Cunningham. The former has mentioned it in his book "Ladak, Physical, Statistical and Historical Notices of the Surrounding Countries" published in 1854.

Due to the discord between Sikhs and Dogras, these accounts exalted their master & Dogra community but ignored the Sikh contribution. Gulab Singh is portrayed as independent ruler during Ranjit Singh's reign which is far from truth. He became independent ruler in 1846. Prior to it he was under Lahore but had internal autonomy over Jammu region.

Dr Harban Singh in Sikh Encyclopaedia writes that Gulab Singh's intrigues against the Lahore government including grabbing the property of late Maharani Chand Kaur infuriated the Khalsa army that in 1845 a force 35,000 strong was sent against him to Jammu. He was brought to Lahore as a hostage and was allowed to return to Jammu as he agreed to pay a fine of 68 lakh rupees, with a promise of future good behaviour. Later the Dogra king wrote and invited East India Company to invade Punjab promising them of his support in lieu of some territory.

Subsequently he did not participate in the Anglo Sikh war but provided military intelligence to Brigadier Wheeler at Ludhiana. Human are complex beings. Gulab Singh due to his bravery and soldiery skills was given Jammu as jagir and the title of Raja by Maharaja Ranjit Singh. Following the death of Maharaja, the three Dogra brothers at Lahore were running the government and de-facto rulers. Subsequent Sikh Maharaja and princes were killed and Gulab Singh lost two of his brothers and sons. His nephew Hira Singh Dogra killed his own uncle and attacked him with an army. It was a bloody and sad period of Punjab history. Nevertheless Gulab Singh was an able army general and he grabbed the opportunity to carve an independent kingdom for himself.

Maharaja Ranjit Singh was a secular person and had ministers and commanders from Sikh, Hindu, Muslim and European Christian communities. During his reign for 40 years from 1799-1839 not a single person was given capital punishment. The region still struggles with abolishing capital punishment in 21st century.
These Indian accounts ignore the Tibetan sources which are important resource to understand the legendary campaign which defined and demarcated the border between India and Tibet (& China) in modern times.

Maharaja Ranjit Singh was a secular person and had ministers and commanders from Sikh, Hindu, Muslim and European Christian communities. During his reign for 40 years from 1799-1839 not a single person was given capital punishment. The region still struggles with abolishing capital punishment in 21st century.

These Indian accounts ignore the Tibetan sources which are important resource to understand the legendary campaign which defined and demarcated the border between India and Tibet (& China) in modern times.

Campaign to Tibet 1841

Most Indian accounts state that Zorawar army consisted for Hindu Dogras and some Buddhist Ladakhis. However Tibetan sources clearly state that Zorawar Singh led a Sikh force during his campaigns in Ladakh and Tibet. The book "Tibet A Political History" by Tsepon W. D. Shakabpa published in 1967 is an important source which cannot be overlooked. The writer is considered an authority on Tibetan history and has written many books on Tibetan history and culture. Tsepon (1907-89) was a Tibetan nobleman, scholar and former Finance Minister of the government of Tibet.

The author states that Zorawar Singh with Sikh and Ladakhi troops entered Tibet and fighting took place at Ngari Korsum in western Tibet between Indian army and a Tibetan force commanded by the generals, Dapon Shatra and Dapon Surkhang. The author mentions that Zorawar Singh's predominantly Sikh forces defeated the ill-equipped Tibetans and advanced up to Taklakhar in Purang, Western Tibet.

It is further mentioned that large scale Tibetan reinforcements were sent to western Tibet under the command of the council minister, Kalon Pallhun. The fighting lasted several months, and as winter approached, Kalon Pallhun intensified his efforts and succeeded in driving Zorawar Singh's troops out of Taklakhar, where the battle lasted five days. The author adds that heavy snow began to fall and the half-frozen Sikhs, unaccustomed to such conditions, were unable to prevent the Tibetans from descending upon them and fierce hand-to-hand combat ensued. Zorawar Singh was recognised by the platoon commander Migmar who hurled a spear at him brought him to ground and carried his head back to the Tibetan camp.

Three thousand Sikhs were killed in the battle. Seven hundred Sikhs and two Ladakhi ministers were taken prisoner. The remainder of the defeated army fled towards Ladakh and was pursued by the Tibetans almost as far as Leh. The Tibetan finally halted at a place called Dumra, now called Nupra. After several months Raja Gulab Singh sent 8000 Sikh reinforcements into Ladakh under the command of Dewan Hari Chand and Wazir Ratun. The Tibetan generals, Dapon Shatra and Dapon Surkhang, with approximately 60 troops, were captured and taken to Leh, the capital of Ladakh.

At Leh, the capital of Ladakh, the party was met by Kalon Pallhun's representative, who negotiated with Dewan Hari Chand. It was agreed, under a temporary treaty, that the Tibetan troops would be withdrawn from Dumra and that neither party would violate the other's territory. Those prisoners wishing to return to their own country would be allowed to do so. They agreed to draw up a more comprehensive treaty later on. The two Tibetan generals and the captured soldiers were repatriated.

Most interestingly the author mentions that 1/3 of the Sikh and Ladakhi prisoners elected to remain in Tibet. The Sikhs were resettled in the warmer regions of southern Tibet by the government and many of them married Tibetan girls. The Sikhs are known to have introduced the cultivation of apricots, apples, grapes, and peaches into the country. Zorawar Singh's army had been well equipped with firearms and cannon, while the Tibetans were armed with swords, spears, bows, and a few primitive muskets brought from Mongolia. The author says that Tibetans admitted that they owed victory to the heavy snowfall.

Sikhs led by a Dogra General?

The above account answered few questions but raised many more. Was it a usual practice for Lahore Army (Maharaja Ranjit Singh's capital was Lahore) to be led by a commander from different religion? Did the Tibetan confused Dogras with Sikhs? Did Chinese fought or assisted Tibetans in the war? If it had not snowed, would Zorawar Singh had won the battle? Lastly what became of these Sikhs who decided to stay in Tibet? This required more research and I was able to find answers to these questions.

Did Tibetan confused Dogras with Sikhs?

The book "One Hundred Thousand Moons: An Advanced Political History of Tibet" by Tsepon W.D. Shakabpa, translated and annotated by Derek F. Maher provides the answer.

In relation to the 1834 Ladakh expedition of Zorawar Singh, the author states that the army was led by Hindu Officers and composed mainly of soldiers from Sikh faith. Tibetans were aware of difference between Hindu and Sikh religion. The author mentions that in 1841 the emboldened Zorawar Singh attacked Tibet itself with Sikhs and Ladakhi troops under his command.

The book 'The Indian Conquest of the Himalayan Territories' by Sukhdev Singh Charak and published in 1978 in appendix provides 'Minutes by Lt Governor TC Robertson at Meerut dated 28th September 1841' states "His (Zorawar Singh) part at that post (Tuklakote, Tibet) is understood to have been lately increased, but is not thought to exceed seven or eight hundred Sikhs with a rabble of some thousand Ladakhis". The author has stated that these minutes as part of 'Secret proceeding of the foreign department, 11 October 1841, No. 50 - National Archives of India, New Delhi.

Mostly surprisingly Mr Charak in his account has not mentioned Sikhs. Like other Indian authors, he states that Dogra and Ladakhi soldiers accompanied Zorawar Singh. It seems that appendices were added but the author did not counter check them with his account.

Was it a usual practice for Punjab Army to be led by a commander from different religion?

A History of the Sikhs: From the Origin of the Nation to the Battles of the Sutlej - JD Cunningham written just after First Anglo Sikh war provides details of Punjab Army in 1844. Diwan Sawan Mall, Hindu Khatri, Governor of Multan had an infantry mainly consisting of Muslims and some Sikhs. Mian Prithi Singh, a Hindu held one of the artillery divisions which mainly consisted of Muslims. Diwan Ajudhia Prashad, a Hindu commanded infantry and cavalry divisions consisting of Sikh soldiers. Diwan Jodha Ram, a Hindu headed an infantry and cavalry divisions consisting of Sikh, Muslims and Hindu Dogras. There are numerous other examples where Sikh generals were leading a mixed regiment hence it is not out of ordinary for a Hindu Rajput (Zorawar Singh) to lead a regiment of Sikhs as they formed the majority of infantry & cavalry. The Muslims form the majority in artillery divisions.

Alexander Cunningham gives the names of 8 chief officers who led the 1834 campaign of Ladakh under Wazir Zorawar Singh, 6 of them are Hindus, one Muslim and Sikh each. He does not comment on the composition of the army but this description of the officers is consistent with the Tibetan sources.

Did Chinese fought or assisted Tibetans in the war?

As per Tibetan sources, during the first Gurkha-Tibetan war (1788-89), the Chinese emperor sent military assistance to Tibet as an ally (or vassal state). Subsequently during the Tibetan Sikh war (1841-42) and the second Gurkha-Tibetan war (1855-56), China did not send military assistance or even general assistance such as weapons. The bodyguard of the Chinese Ambassador in Lhasa did not exceed 100 during this time. The Manchu (Qing) government was unable to replace those who transferred or who became ill or died. The people of mixed Tibetan-Chinese heritage served in their place. It was time of tremendous difficulties for China as she was fighting the Opium War (1839-42) with Britain and France (1857-60). The Taiping Rebellion (1850-64) also occurred during this period. Tsepon rightly says that this it was tumultuous time in China.

Zorawar Singh would have won the battle, if it had not snowed

"Antiquities of Indian Tibet" by AH Francke, published in 1926 is based on all contemporary sources confirms that Tibetan assertion that Zorawar Singh's army was equipped with cannons and modern rifles. In contrast Tibetan army had one matchlock to ten soldiers. Even swords were rare and they relied on clubs, bows/arrows, and stone flinging. The Tibetans admitted that they owed victory to the heavy snowfall.

Alexander Cunningham has given graphic details about the ordeal of the Indian army. In May 1841 Zorawar with his 5000 men entered Rudok and Garo which were won without striking a single blow.

On 7th November and 19th November Zorawar Singh had sent small forces of 300 and 600 men respectively to oppose the advance of Tibetan who made good use of terrain and surrounded them and cut them to pieces. The two armies first met on the 10th December, and began a desultory fire at each other, which continued for three days. On the 12th December 1841 the great Zorawar Singh was killed.

The Indian soldiers fought under very great disadvantages. The battle-field was more than 15,000 feet above the sea, and the time mid-winter, when even the day temperature never rises above the Zero and the intense cold of night can only be borne by people well covered with sheepskins and surrounded by fires. Alexander records that for several nights the Indian troops had been exposed to all the bitterness of the climate. Many had lost the use of their fingers and toes and all were more or less frost-bitten. The only fuel procurable was the Tibetan furze, which yields much more smoke than fire and the more reckless soldiers had actually burned the stocks of their muskets to obtain a little temporary warmth. Alexander adds that on the last fatal day (12th December) not one-half of the men could handle their arms.

What became of these Sikhs who decided to stay in Tibet?

The book "One Hundred Thousand Moons: An Advanced Political History of Tibet" provides answer to this query. More than 200 Sikh soldiers elected to remain in Tibet where they settled in Lhasa, Yarlung, Chongye and other are in the South. Many of these soldiers married Tibetan women, adopted local customs and worked as butchers, cultivated fruit trees and performed other work. Tsepon adds that owning to their status as outsiders in Tibetan culture, many of them seem to have been identified with other marginalised people, a fact which may have contributed to their gradual conversion to Islam. They became known as the 'Singpa Khache' (sing pa kha che) people, a curious blending of names for Sikh and Islamic faiths. The Singpa Khaches came to be stalwarts of the Lhasa Islamic community and their status was legitimised by the fact that Singpa butchers were subsequently selected to provide meat for the table of the Dalai Lama. Tsepon states that there are many descendants of the Sikhs in the Lhokha region.

The book 'The Indian Conquest of the Himalayan Territories' by Sukhdev Singh Charak and published in 1978 provides a translation of Persian letter dated 1st January 1857 regarding repatriation of 106 Dogra soldiers of General Zorawar Singh. The letter addressed to Maharaja Gulab Singh mentions that only 106 persons arrived in Kathmandu at the British resident but only 56 agreed to return back to Kashmir. The remaining flatly refused as they had married in Tibet and had families over there. This concurs with the Tibetan sources and another example of grey and complex human nature. Even after 15 years (war was in 1841/42) Gulab Singh was concerned about the soldiers (who were Sikhs and Ladakhis) who were left behind in Tibet. The author has stated that this letter is preserved in the Government Archival Respiratory, Jammu Persian Records File No. 139, for the year 1855-57.

Reasons for invasion

Zorawar Singh was desirous of acquiring territory. Sohan Lal Suri who was a vakil or attorney at Lahore under Khalsa Raj wrote 5 volumes monumental work in Persian 'Umdat ut Twankh' kept record of all important events in Lahore court. This work records that Zorawar Singh met Maharaja Ranjit Singh in March 1836 and expressed his desire to conquer western Tibet. The Maharaja had politely declined. He had given a similar response to the celebrated Sikh general Hari Singh Nawla when latter wanted to cross Kyber and attack Afghanistan. Perhaps the astute Maharaja was well aware of the problems such an invasion may encounter as both these regions had a very difficult terrain. Zorawar had a better luck with Maharaja's successors who agreed with the proposal.

Cunningham has suggested Zorawar Singh also intended on monopolizing the trade in shawl-wool from Tibet to India. The British East India Company also feared an alliance between Sikhs and Nepal. By annexing western Tibet, the Lahore Darbar would have been neighbours with Nepal. The Sikh Encyclopaedia by Harbans Singh records Bhupal Singh, son of famous Gorkha general Amar Singh Thapa who became an officer in a battalion in the Sikh army under French General Ventura returned to Nepal and was appointed to command a check post on the Indo Nepalese border. Two years later Bhupal Singh was selected to lead an embassy to Lahore. He left Kathmandu on June 1840, but the mission returned without transacting much business owing to the death in Lahore of crown Prince Nau Nihal Singh.

Samadhi (Tomb) of Zorawar Singh

Both Hari Singh Nalwa and Zorawar Singh died while leading their armies in the battle. Their final resting places are out of bounds for most Indians and Sikhs. A humble room exists in Jamrud Fort to mark the last resting place of the great Sikh leader Nalwa. The fort which was constructed by Nalwa himself is at the entrance to the Khyber Pass in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) of Pakistan. The Fort is under the control of Pakistani Army hence out of bounds for most civilians.

It is said that the Tibetans constructed a memorial in the shape of a chorten or Samadhi (tomb) wherein the remains of the Zorawar Singh have been kept. The tomb is a mere heap of stones erected at a distance of a few kilometers from Burang town (also known as Purang) in Tibet Autonomous Region of China, in a secluded place. There is neither a concrete foundation nor brick walling has been done. Indians who visit this area are quite aggrieved to see the state of the tomb of legendary general from their country. But is it Zorawar's tomb?

AH Francke in his book agrees with the famous mountaineer Dr TG Longstaff that the ruined tomb looks far too old to be Zorawar's grave. He connects the ruin with Muhammad Haidar Dughlat Beg, ruler of Kashmir and first cousin of Mughal Emperor Babur' failed Tibetan campaign of 1532 A.D.

Song of Zorawar's wife

During my research, I stumbled upon very intriguing passage. In the book 'A History of Western Tibet: One of the Unknown Empires' by August Hermann Francke and published in 1907 contains a translation of Ladakhi folk song on Zorawar Singh.

The author states that the Ladakhis sing a song of Zorawar's wife whom they believe to have accompanied her husband to Ladakh, and had to return alone across the Zoji Pass (between Srinagar & Leh). According to the author in this song Urdu words are 'mixed in a quaint war' with the Tibetan language.

"I do not wish to eat bread received from the sinful northerners;
I do not wish to drink water received from the sinful northerners.
Amidst the inhabitants of this land I have no friends and relations;
In the northern plain I have no brothers and friends.
In the place of friends and relations I had only Zorawar.
In the place of brothers and friends I had only Zorawar.
And it was only Zorawar who made me a despised widow.
And it was only Zorawar who made his queen a despised widow.
When arriving on the Zoji Pass, my fatherland can be seen.
When arriving on the Zoji Pass, Lahore and the Panjab can been seen.
Although I can see my fatherland, I shall not arrive there.
Although I can see my fatherland, Zorawar's queen will not arrive there."

It is interesting to note that fatherland is used for Punjab and Lahore. The words like 'Mulkh', 'Watan' & 'Desh' are all masculine words for country. During the freedom struggle against British rule in the 20th century, the country was referred as mother and depicted as lady in chains. This is a hot topic currently in India. Nevertheless this is a very fascinating poem. I wish we had the original Ladakhi poem so that it could be translated in Indian languages.

Conclusion

Almost 60 years later in 1903/04 Colonel Francis Younghusband led a successful British expedition to Tibet with Sikh & Gorkha soldiers. This ended the administrative control of China over Tibet but it also exposed the complete lack of modernisation of Tibetan army. Sadly Tibetan did not learn their lessons from history and they had still not embraced the modern military technology and regime when China invaded them in 1950. The Ladakh & Tibetan campaign of Zorawar Singh and subsequent treaty has very important ramifications. It formed the basis of the McMohan Line, the border agreed by British India and Tibet in 1914. China disputes its legal status and on that basis has occupied the area of Aksai Chin which according to the McMohan Line belongs to India. The Sikh-Tibetan war of 1841/42 was fought without any involvement from China hence proves that Tibetan has at least a legitimate claim of sovereignty.

NK Sinha who wrote on Maharaja Ranjit Singh in 1930s in the pre-partitioned India saw him as a national hero who won back Indian territories of Multan, Peshawar and Kashmir from Afghans. As most of these territories are within Pakistan (except part of Kashmir), Ranjit Singh is not seen in that light in India or Pakistan. Among the Zorawar Singh's conquest only Ladakh remains with India. Gilgit-Baltistan is now part of Pakistan administered Kashmir. It seems with time we tend to interpret history in different ways.

There are several books written by Indians of this region on Zorawar Singh surprisingly none of them looked into non Dogra sources and failed to mention that he led Sikhs soldiers in his campaign to Ladakh and Tibet. One account which despite not using non Dogra sources stands out is "Footprints in the Snow: On the Trial of Zorawar Singh" by Brigadier GD Bakshi, who later retired as Major General. It is an unbiased account where the author gives credit to Sikhs for revival of the martial spirit in the region and specifically acknowledges Maharaja Ranjit Singh as a ruler with a vision who modernised his army. He says "The Dogras under Gulab Singh and Zorawar Singh were part of this Sikh military renaissance"

Finally it is time to rewrite the campaigns of General Zorawar Singh by incorporating Tibetan and other non Dogra sources. It is fascinating that a Rajput General led a predominately Sikh force in his legendary campaigns. Sadly we have divided our history and icons but historical facts should not be denied. It is disappointing that so many books have been written on Zorawar Singh and they have partially used Alexander Cunningham's account but failed to respond to the British allegation of his 'cruelty' and 'arrogance' which seem farfetched anyway. Let's celebrate and do not deny the common heritage which we share.

* Dr Sukhpreet Singh Udhoke states that Zorawar Singh was a Sikh and he has mentioned a source for this information. The book is 'Jarnail Zorawar Singh' by Brigadier Gurbachan Singh Bal, published by Punjabi University Patiala. But Dogra sources state he was Hindu. Bhim Singh of J&K National Panthers Party is said to be one of the descendants of the Zorawar Singh. I have not explored this area. My article is about religious composition of the soldiers that accompanied Zorawar Singh. I am happy to be corrected.