Product Code Database
The Phulkian dynasty (or Phoolkian) of Maharajas or Sardar were Sikhs Sikh JatD. A. Low (1991). D. A. Low (ed.). Political Inheritance of Pakistan. Springer. p. 35. .Singh, Harbans (1992–1998). The encyclopaedia of Sikhism. Vol. 3. Patiala: Punjabi University. pp. 336–337. . OCLC 29703420.
target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> Archived from the original on 8 March 2024. royals and aristocrats in the Punjab region of India. Members of the dynasty ruled the Phulkian States of Badrukhan, Bhadaur, Faridkot State, Jind State, Malaudh, Nabha State, and Patiala State, allying themselves with the British Empire according to the terms of the Cis-Sutlej treaty of 1809. The dynasty is named after Phul Sidhu-Brar, the 17th-century common ancestor of the Phulkian states and the founder of the Phulkian Misl. After India's independence in 1947, the Phulkian states had all acceded to India by 1948. Members of the various royal families of the Phulkian dynasty retained their titles until 1971, when the Government of India abolished their titles with the 26th Amendment to the Constitution of India.
The rulers of the Phulkian States shared a common ancestor, the 17th-century Chowdhury Phul Sidhu-Brar, also known as Baba Phul (1627–1689).Harbans Singh9780836428834, Punjabi University. ISBN 9780836428834 Baba Phul was the grandson of a Sikh of Guru Hargobind named Mohan. Mohan founded the settlement of Mehraj in 1627, named after his great-grandfather, Mehraj. In 1631, it is claimed that Mohan once sought the assistance of the sixth Sikh guru against hostile neighbours, who provided military help in the form of 500-men. Another tale connects Phul to the Sikh gurus: it is said that Phul and his brother Sandli were once blessed by Guru Har Rai after being presented to the guru as two starving orphans by their uncle Kala. Sikhs believe the blessing of Guru Har Rai bestowed on the young Phul allowed his descendants to found dynasties and become prosperous rulers.
blessing a young Phul Sidhu-Brar, from 'The Sikh Religion' (1909)]]Baba Phul was the founder of the Phulkian Misl, which was named after him. He lived through the times of Guru Hargobind, the sixth Sikh gurus of the Sikhism religion as well as Guru Har Rai, the seventh Guru. According to historical accounts, Phul had received blessings from both Guru Hargobind and Guru Har Rai. Eventually, Phul received the official designation of Chowdhury from the Mughals and became a tributary sardar of them. Through his eldest son, Tiloka, Phul is the ancestor of the rulers of Nabha State, Jind State and Badrukhan. Through his second son, Rama, Phul is the ancestor of the rulers of Patiala State, Malaudh and Bhadaur.
Gandhi based his arguments on various facts and events. When the Sikh Misls divided themselves into the Buddha Dal and Taruna Dal of the Dal Khalsa in 1734, no Phulkian leader was represented, and there was no Phulkian presence in the Dal Khalsa in 1748. Phulkian leaders did not attend Sarbat Khalsa meetings or distribute loot and territory among their followers, instead adopting Mughal Empire practices of appropriating resources for themselves and rewarding their men with payments and Jagir. While other Misls fought relentlessly against the Mughal Empire and the Durrani Empire, the Phulkian chiefs maintained good relations with these imperial powers, obtained titles from them. Unlike other Misls, they did not inscribe the names of the Sikh gurus on their coins but instead issued coins in the names of rulers of the Mughal Empire and Durrani Empire. In the entire 18th century, none of the Phulkian leaders visited Sikhism's holy cities of Anandpur Sahib and Amritsar, but they frequently visited and were visited by the Mughal and Durrani rulers.
In the early 19th century, the Phulkian states, concerned about the rising power of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, sought protection from the East India Company. Although Ranjit Singh was generally moderate towards the Phulkian rulers and willing to address their issues, his growing influence led to suspicions about his intentions. Consequently, the Cis-Sutlej states, including the Phulkian states, convened and decided to send a deputation to the British Resident in Delhi. The delegation pledged their loyalty to the British and sought their protection, leading to a treaty on 25 April 1809, where Ranjit Singh agreed not to extend his military campaigns into the Cis-Sutlej territories.
As the Phulkian states were freed from the threat of Ranjit Singh, internal conflicts among them surfaced, prompting further British intervention. By 22 August 1811, the British issued another proclamation to protect these states from each other, thereby enhancing their power of interference and control. Over time, these states transitioned from being independent rulers in a treaty alliance with the British to becoming dependencies, or what the British described as Princely state, significantly diminishing their autonomy and consolidating British dominance in the Punjab.
During the British Raj, the Phulkian states of Patiala, Nabha, and Jind were noted for their patronage of North India artists, musicians, and scholars at their court.
What began initially as a war of words from around 1912 had become physical by the 1920s, with Bhupinder Singh complaining that the law courts of Ripudaman Singh had been falsely convicting Patiala police officers, as well as kidnapping girls from Patiala for the royal harem. On top of this, were frequent boundary disputes, which had been a feature of strife between the states for many years because of the way in which the territories intertwined.
There were numerous attempts, with varying degrees of formality, to resolve the dispute. These included high-level court meetings, independent mediators and Sikh community groups such as the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC). The situation was eventually referred to the British authorities in 1923, who instituted a quasi-judicial inquiry the conclusions of which generally supported the grievances raised by Bhupinder Singh and were critical of how Ripudaman Singh was administering his state and attempting to undermine the position of Patiala. Ripudaman, who had gained support from some extremist Akali movement, was told that the British would formally intervene unless he abdicated and that this would lead to him being officially deposed.
The abdication on 8 July 1923, which was effectively forced upon him, saw the British take over the administration of Nabha and caused uproar in Punjab. People in Punjab protested in what they considered to be unwarranted political interference, and lauded Ripudaman Singh both as a Sikh leader and a nationalist. Newspapers in the region, with the support of the SGPC, pointed to his past favouring of the views of nationalists such as Gopal Krishna Gokhale, noted that he had spurned some rituals at his coronation, and alleged he sympathised with the Akalis. They also erroneously claimed that Bhupinder Singh opposed the abdication, which he was quick to deny.
Bhupinder Singh's decision to side with the British and instigate a counterpropaganda campaign at their request drove a wedge between Punjabi Sikhs. Patiala was considered to be the most important of the Sikh states and its prime minister, Daya Kishan Kaul, attempted to mobilise its supporters among the SGPC as well as those citizens of Nabha who had been ill-treated by Ripudaman. He also attempted to feed the press with stories in support of both his state and the British.
== Gallery ==
|
|
