Talk:Ranjit Singh

Need your involvement Admin Sahib Ranjit Singh article

Ranjit Singh

• Ranjit Singh (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)[Singh&action=history]

Reason: small level of vandalism.

• RegentsPark, Ranjit singh Article has been conflicted by editor see user:Hind ji,he always edit jat caste related articles or I think he belongs to jat caste please see the log of user:Hind ji[]So your involvement requested to resolve the conflict ,there are variety of resources available on the internet but recently University had his researched on criminal tribes shows Ranjit Singh belongs to sansi caste :Hind ji try to declared Ranjit Singh as jat ,I have added that link as reliable source or as reference but one of user:Hind ji has reverted my edit without informing me .I may also have been wrong ,kindly resolve our issues.hope for early reply Thank you.

https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/archive/features/research-on-tribes-dubbed-criminal-by-british-397524 He trying to create influence of jat caste .

Caste background of Ranjit Singh, Jat or Sansi?

Since a recent editor (@Wikiravidas) is trying to make changes regarding this, here are the sources which support that Ranjit Singh belonged to a Jat background:

References

Clearly, Ranjit Singh was a Jat. His Jat clan also called "Sansi", which led to the confusion that he belonged to the Sansi tribe, which shared the same name. This what reliable sources have to say on the matter.

The sources that Wikiravidas added to somehow support that Ranjit Singh was a Sansi:

1) Shackle, C. (1984). The Sikhs. Atlantic Publishers & Distri. p. 48. Retrieved 13 August 2025. - This is a fake book or a mistake on Google Books. This is actually a reprint of the British Raj-era source: 'Sikhs' (1899) by A. H. Bingley, thus should not be used for caste-related claims as per WP:RAJ. See the link to the book on Google Books (see: ), you can see a preview of the title-page where it clearly states the author was A. H. Bingley, not C. Shackle.

2) Brandt, Carmen (2018). The 'Bedes' of Bengal: Establishing an Ethnic Group through Portrayals. LIT Verlag Münster. p. 250. ISBN 978-3-643-90670-0. Retrieved 13 August 2025. - This is the full quote from the book that Wikiravidas cited that supposedly supports their claim that Ranjit Singh was a Sansi on pages 249–250:

"After the discussion of various narratives of origin of different Sansi groups located in different parts of present-day India and Pakistan in the first chapter (Singh 1965: 1-12), what emerges is the fact that each narrative refers to respectable roots of the Sansis. In the chapter "Maharaja Ranjit-Singh: The most glorious Sansi" (ibid.: 13-22) the author tries to prove that the eminent historic figure Maharaja Ranjit Singh essentially has Sansi roots. It is obvious that the author uses this genealogy in his publication primarily for reinforcing a noble history for the Sansis in general."

It clearly discusses how Singh (1965) tries to attribute Ranjit Singh as being a Sansi to aggrandize the caste in his book. Nowhere in the book do the authors state they believe Rnajit Singh had a Sansi origin.

3) Sher, Sher Singh (1965). The Sansis of Punjab: A Gypsy and De-notified Tribe of Rajput Origin. Munshiram Manoharlal. p. 9. Retrieved 13 August 2025. - As stated in the above source, the author attempted to link Ranjit Singh to a Sansi origin to aggrandize the caste. Also, is this Sher Singh "Sher" even a reliable source? Does not appear to be a historian.

4) Singh, Birinder Pal (29 August 2019). Indigeneity and Occupational Change: The Tribes of Punjab. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-1-000-69977-7. Retrieved 13 August 2025. - Here is the full quote from the book:

"Sher claims that Sher-i-Punjab Maharaja Ranjit Singh belonged to the Sansi community. He contests: 'the history of the Sansis of the Punjab would remain incomplete without an account of the life and ancestry of the great Maharaja ... His real ancestry has been camouflaged by the Jats. The Sansis consider it an historical injustice to them' (1965, 13). Ibbetson and Rose have deliberated on this aspect in the following account:

A Hindu Jat clan (agricultural) found in Montgomery and Amritsar. In the latter District Raja Sansi a village 7 miles from Amritsar is the ancestral home of the Sindhanwalia family which claims Rajput descent and belongs to this got. They are also found in Gujranwala. In Gujranwala they are described as an off shoot of the Bhatti clan and they take their name from one Sansi, whose great-grandson, Udrat, came from Bhatner in Hindustan 18 generations ago, and adopted a pastoral life in that district. (1970, 362)

Jaggi has a different take on this issue. He says: 'There is Sanhsi caste among Jatts in Punjab. But this word is derived from the Sanskrit's "sahsi", that means courageous (himmatwala), one with guts (juratwala). This has no relation with the Sansi" caste. Maharaja Ranjit Singh belonged to this Jatt got' (2005, 221; no italics)."

Again, where exactly do the authors of this book assert that Ranjit Singh was somehow a Sansi? Again, they are providing commentary on the claim of Sher (1965) who tried to link Ranjit Singh to the Sansi caste. They further provide an opposing view by Jaggi which explains that Ranjit Singh was a Jatt.

MaplesyrupSushi (talk) 02:59, 13 August 2025 (UTC) MaplesyrupSushi (talk) 02:59, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@MaplesyrupSushi - Descendants of Sansis of Raja Sansi rose to great power, and they could establish matrimonial relationships with Jatts. Budha Sansi was the first member of family who became Sikh, Comment from books named 'The Sansis of Punjab -A Gypsy and De-notified Tribe of Rajput Origin' Published in 1965. Wikiravidas (talk) 03:55, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Wikiravidas - Did you read my post? This exact book and its unreliability was discussed, in-fact it was discussed in two citations you yourself referenced in your edits. MaplesyrupSushi (talk) 03:57, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@MaplesyrupSushi- Who you are to claim unreliability of anyone's published work. Even the website of sukerchakia clan mentioned Ranjit Singh was ancestors were Sansi.

https://sukerchakia.com/sansi-sikh/ Wikiravidas (talk) 04:03, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Wikiravidas - You lack understanding of Wikipedia policy. I will be taking this to the admins. MaplesyrupSushi (talk) 04:04, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@MaplesyrupSushi - Tribune Newspaper Heading - Vimukt Jati assn stages protest-( Comment - Ram Rashpal said Maharaja Ranjit Singh’s elders belonged to Sansi community, who had later converted to Sikhism.)

Link - https://www.tribuneindia.com/2014/20141114/asrtrib.htm#12 Wikiravidas (talk) 03:57, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Wikiravidas - News articles are not reliable sources for history, as per: WP:HISTRS and WP:SCHOLARSHIP. Also, the news article states that a man named Ram Rashpal Singh, association president of the Vimukt Jati Welfare Association (with the Vimukt Jati being a former so-called "criminal tribe", like the Sansis, obvious conflict of interest) claims that Ranjit Singh was a Sansi. Again, unreliable source. MaplesyrupSushi (talk) 04:02, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Wikiravidas - Since you are unable to provide any reliable sources that Ranjit Singh was a Sansi, please revert your edits. MaplesyrupSushi (talk) 04:03, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@MaplesyrupSushi - It appears probable that from Sansi the Sindhanwalias and Sansis have a common descendant. The Sansis are thievish, and if the history of Maharaja Ranjit Singh is attentively considered, it will appear that much of his policy and many of his actions had a true Sansi complexion. - From book name- Handbook on Sikhs for the Use of Regimental Officers - Page- 128- Published in 1896

https://www.google.com.au/books/edition/Handbook_on_Sikhs_for_the_Use_of_Regimen/LLcbM7qePMwC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=maharaja+ranjit+singh+sansi&pg=PA128&printsec=frontcover Wikiravidas (talk) 04:20, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Wikiravidas Unreliable source. British Raj era sources are not reliable for caste. See: WP:RAJ. MaplesyrupSushi (talk) 04:21, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@MaplesyrupSushi - Maharaja Ranjit Singh of Punjab belonged to the Sansi caste. The Sansi caste, a low caste, was later on designated as a criminal tribe by the British . (After independence the Punjab Government in one decision changed the caste structure… …… Book name—Strategies of Social Change in India,page - 163, published in 1996

https://www.google.com.au/books/edition/Strategies_of_Social_Change_in_India/7lKM4aWhIH0C?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=ranjit+singh+sansi&pg=PA163&printsec=frontcover Wikiravidas (talk) 04:34, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@Sandeepsingh02 - Referring to the symbol of the SUN GOD atop the dome of Maharaja Ranjit Singh clears the air that he was a Suryavanshi. Suryavanshi are descendents of Rishi Kashyap. From here it is evident that Maharaja was a Kshatriya.

@Sandeepsingh02 - Haridwar record states him to be of a "Sansara Khatri caste" and Sansara in modern day time is know as Sansi Village. The ancestors of Maharaja Ranjit Singh migrated from Lahore to Sansara in those times, which means he was a settler in Sansara village and not the original dweller, so the theory as laid down by the historians are contradictory, which the general researchers need to analyze.

@Sandeepsingh02 - Raja Sans Mal of Raja Sansi is the ancestor of Sandhawalias who was the original dweller and settler of the village even before the ancestors of Ranjit Singh came to Sansi Village (Sansara ancient name). Various historians mostly of the British Raj were the paid writers and wanted to dismental the sikh history to a point where everything gets muddled up and people get divided, which as can be witnessed as of today where people trying to lable him to their respective castes completely ignoring the symbol of SUN atop his dome.

@Sandeepsingh02 - The mother of Ranjit Singh was the daughter of Raja Gajpat Singh and his burial Placard mentions him as "RAJPUT", moreover the Patiala family record at Haridwar mentions them as "Rajput Bhati Raghuvanshi", So how cum the Phulkia can be a Jat as claimed by various historians. Like wise these British Raj and post british Raj the Caste influenced Historians have distorted the history in way that it is witnessed today.

@Sandeepsingh02 - Thereafter, after studying the annals of the History and the mythological texts, it is evident that there were four Varnas and prevailed among both the lunar dynasty i.e, the Surya Vanshis (From Kashyap Rishi) and the Chandra Vanshi (from Bhargava Rishi). In the pedigree of Duleep Singh which the Sandhawalias made probably in consultation with the British it is stated that Duleep Singh was a Chandravanshi and the Gotra was Bhargava. SO now, Sandhawalias claim their ancestors to be from Sans Mal a Sansi Jatt, whereas the pedigree that they have of the Duleep Singh with the mention of their names thereunder until chanda singh is completely contradictory as they cannot be Saansi Jat and Chandravanshi Bhargva Gotra together.

@Sandeepsingh02 - Therefore the claims that Maharaja was a Saansi or Sahasi is completely a blunder by the Historians. To look for the caste of Maharaja Ranjit Singh one need to leaarn more about the Suryavanshi, Kashyap Gotra, Kshatriya which he was or Khatri. The Haridwar record, mentions him as "Sansara Khatri Lineage" which is correct in the sense that he was a Khatri who came from Lahore and settled in Sansi Village which in present day is at Ajnala Amritsar.

@Sandeepsingh02 - Therefore, Maharaja was a Khatri of Suryavanshi Clan of Kashyap Gotra. So Chanda Singh (Sandhawalia, as claimed because they dwelled and settled the village Sandha, present day in Pakistan) and Noadh Singh (Sukherchakia, as they settled at Sukherchak) are two different identity and two different clans which were merged by the historians post annexation by the Britishers+ Sandhawalias. With this present Pedigree that they have they tend to establish themselves as Chandravanshi Bhargava Gotra, whereas they claim themselves to be Jat (Sandhu), Saansi-Jat. So the contents as claimed for the Maharaja to be Jat is totally misleading and Wrong.

@Sandeepsingh02 - Moreover, the Kuldevi of Maharaja as per the history is "Durga" which can also be witnessed in his Flag, but there is another controversy here that people and Historians claim this flag to be of DOGRA REGIMENT in the army of Ranjit Singh. There were many Regiments in his army and had their own flag but the Khalsa Khanda Talwar (Khalsa Fauj flag) and the rest were under the flag which had a pix of Durga on one side and the Pix of SURYA (SUN) on the other side. Maharaja Ranjit was a devout Sikh and everyday his day started with his visit to the Gurudwara. His lineage hence forth is of Khatri (KShatriya), Suryavanshi, KAshyap Gotra which is the Gotra of Raja Salvahan also known as descendent of Satavahana Dynasty. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandeepsingh02 (talk • contribs) 11:04, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 October 2025

Change " Ranjit singh" to " Maharaja Ranjit singh" at every location where it comes. 59.92.74.141 (talk) 09:30, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: Maharaja should only be used at the beginning as it is an honorary title, not an actual part of his name. Theeverywhereperson (talk here) 10:21, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Assassination

"Ranjit Singh" had enough support and time to consolidate his own Sikh Empire upon the region of Punjab.

Ranjit Singh gained the support of his English foes by the trade of weapons such as the latest English battle rifles.

Ranjit Singh wanted to use these rifles to defeat Afghanistan, Islamic communities in Pakistan and the Great Mogul emperor of India (whose power had greatly diminished during that century).

The aftermath of such a massive and industrious planning led to his assassination by mysterious characters most likely from within the Islamic community.

06:28, 19 November 2025 (UTC)06:28, 19 November 2025 (UTC)06:28, 19 November 2025 (UTC)~~\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\06:28, 19 November 2025 (UTC)06:28, 19 November 2025 (UTC)06:28, 19 November 2025 (UTC)06:28, 19 November 2025 (UTC)06:28, 19 November 2025 (UTC)06:28, 19 November 2025 (UTC)Toterre6&7 (talk)\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\06:28, 19 November 2025 (UTC)06:28, 19 November 2025 (UTC)06:28, 19 November 2025 (UTC)~~