Sikhs in the late 17th century eastern Punjab were riven by internal conflicts. The Sikh guru declares himself the last guru, & that Sikhs would be governed by a council after his death. The goal of this was to unite the Sikhs & defend against Rajputs.
Mughals killed two sons of last Sikh guru after promising safe passage in 1704. Aurangzeb agreed to meet the guru, but died before meeting him. Guru met Aurangzeb’s successor, but died himself in 1708, leaving Sikhs to be led by the council, the Khalsa.
Banda Bahadur led the Sikhs in a 6-year long anti-Mughal rebellion during the chaotic years following Aurangzeb’s death. His backing was mostly from Khalsa supporters, lower nobility, & Jats from E Punjab. Khalsa gave all men who joined the prestigious name “Singh”.
Sikh rebellion was brutally crushed, but polarized the Punjab between Mughal supporters & Khalsa-supporters. Sikh warbands waged a guerrilla war against the Mughals, filling a power vacuum as Mughal authority in the Punjab weakened. By 1767 Sikhs controlled most of the Punjab.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In line with archaeology, western & central Iberia were populated by hunter-gatherers distinctive from those on Mediterranean coast by their higher Magdalenian ancestry. Those hunter-gatherers had a resurgence over the EEFs as elsewhere during neolithic.
Steppe ancestry in IEs was diluted by the time that they reached SW Iberia at end of third millennium, in line with other studies. However, there are signs of an Eastern Mediterranean migration to Iberia in Bronze Age or earlier:
There was substantial migration to urban areas in Portugal during the Roman period from Eastern Mediterranean and North Africa. If these samples are representative, about half of the urban population was foreign-derived. Date of the site isn't provided, but was after 100 BC.
Caesar's destructiveness around the Rhine can be seen in the palynological record around Cologne. The area was densely cultivated starting about 250 BC and reforested after 50 BC, implying depopulation for a century.
pre-modern mass migrations often had appalling death tolls. Pressure of the German Suebi on the Celt Helvetii must have been tremendous:
Tiberius withdrew Roman troops from east of the Rhine, but left a 10 km no man's land that wasn't resettled by Germans until the late first or early second centuries.
Safavids were, like Ottomans, born in obscurity in chaos of mid-13th century Mongol invasions - although as Sufi order rather than as tribal migration. Contrary to later propaganda, Sheikh Safi was not a sayyid or from a Shia background, but he became prominent in a Shia milieu.
Safavid Order had a waqf (charitable endowment) for its benefit by 1305 in Ardabil. Its network of followers expanded in Anatolia, Khorasan, & Mazandaran under aegis of Ilkhanate & some of its successors, but was forced to arm some of its supporters in at least Ardabil.
Timur, the greatest mystic of his era, liked the Safavid Order & granted it additional lands to financially sustain its missionary efforts. However, the Order was squeezed by his sons, who desires to centralize power in the realm.
Thread with excerpts from "1971: A Global History of the Creation of Bangladesh" by Srinath Raghavan
Eisenhower backed Pakistan, but Kennedy backed India, so by 1965 the USA gave up hope on mediating between the two. That allowed for the Soviets to emerge as the natural mediator in 1965, despite their partiality to India as a result of Pakistan's previous alignment with USA.
Author's sources. While he was able to draw on Indian and foreign archives for thoughts of political leaders, Pakistan's archives are closed. The archives in Bangladesh were destroyed by the Pakistanis prior to their surrender to India in 1971.