This article'slead sectionmay be too short to adequatelysummarize the key points. Please consider expanding the lead toprovide an accessible overview of all important aspects of the article.(August 2024)

ASikh state is apolitical entity that is ruled by Sikhs.^[1][2] There were variousSikh states, empires, and dynasties, beginning with the first Sikh state established by Banda Singh Bahadur to the Sikh-ruledprincely states ofBritish India. Sikhism turned toward militancy by the end of the 17th century and by the 18th century, the Sikhs had established themselves as a dominant player in regional affairs, becoming the political elite of the Punjab.^[3] This transformation has been described as being one of rebels turning into rulers.^[3] During British-rule, the idea of Sikhs being a unique nation developed further and was aided by the colonial administrative policies.^[4] However, territoriality has not played a major part in the self-identity of the Sikhs.^[4]

Guru Nanak established Sikhism as a religious movement, whereby its followers were called to interact with the Divine directly live in the real-world through their own efforts.^[5] There was a prevailing Sikh belief in the mid-16th century that Guru Nanak was the master of both spirituality and temporality (din anddunia) but that he allowedBabur to have stewardship over political affairs.^[6] The Mughals had established their rule in India by 1526.^[7] However, the Mughals were seen as going against this bestowal when they executed Guru Arjan (in 1606) and Guru Tegh Bahadur (in 1675).^[6] Thus, Guru Gobind Singh was envisioned as coming about to destroy the Mughals and their rule.^[6] After the death of Guru Arjan, his successor Guru Hargobind introduced theMiri-Piri concept and went to war against the Mughals, which politicalized the Sikh movement.^[7]

Guru Gobind Singh was brought up with an education in Indo-Islamic literature, which emulated imperial norms of that era.^[7] From 1677 onwards, the guru dispatched his Sikhs to the wider Indo-Islamic world, and invited scholars from Sanskritic and Islamic backgrounds to his court in Anandpur, with theformation of literary production and study, including in statecraft.^[7] Several texts studied and produced by the Sikh court in this period of the 1680s and 1690s include theHitupdesha,Chanaka Shastra Bhakha,Mahabharata, andShahnamah.^[7] Furthermore, Guru Gobind Singh wrote works that would later become part of theDasam Granth, such asKrishna Avatar,Bachittar Natak Granth, andPakhian Charitar, which expound on statecraft, sovereignty, and the concept ofdharam yudh.^[7] ThePrem Sumarag was compiled in circa 1700, which heavily dealt in kingship and statecraft.^[7] These works helped prepare the Sikhs for future rule and mostly saw themselves existing as an autonomous SikhRaj that had been established by the tenth Sikh guru in Anandpur and Paonta in the late 17th century.^[7] In 1688, the raja of Garhwal launched an attack on the Sikhs at Paonta, with the Sikhs emerging victorious, this battle was following by many others that the Sikhs fought with local Pahari rulers.^[7] In 1689, the Sikhs had fortified Anandpur, establishing demarcated borders.^[7] In 1704, a joint Mughal-Pahari Rajput force destroyed the Sikh raj of Anandpur and Paonta.^[7]

Guru Gobind Singh established the Khalsa, which involved a baptism and shared social-practices.^[5] According to Satnam Singh, the Khalsa was also established to work towards establishing Sikh autonomous rule over territories.^[7] The formalization of the Khalsa order, which is exemplified as being sovereign, in the late 18th century has been described by scholars such as establishing a fundamental aspect of national-construction that allowed for a "national imagination" that gave a shared identity to the Sikh community which allowed for sovereignty and territoriality.^[8] The Khalsa was a marker of the Sikhs being a separateQuom (nation), which Walker Connor (1993) explains allowed for the development of a national identity of some sorts "that joins people, in the sub- conscious conviction of its members, from all its non-members in a most vital way".^[8] Meanwhile, Anne Murphy (2012) and Fenech (2008) believe that any claims to sovereignty were "guru-centric" to establish an environment of a self-governing religious community.^[8] However, not all scholars agree that the establishment of the Khalsa had nationalistic undertones, according to Giorgio Shani (2008) the Khalsa "de-territorialises both sovereignty and the nation" and rather was about unlimited sovereignty.^[8] Murphy, examining the works of thecourt-poet Sainapati, stresses that the Sikhs of the past were not overly bothered with political sovereignty.^[8] According Nicky Gurinder Kaur Singh, Guru Gobind Singh's ideal ofraj was about sharing power with others in a spirit of equality and democracy and not conquering for oneself, domination of a particular piece of territory, nor establishing a dynasty.^[8]

The bardsSatta Doom andBalvand Rai state the following in the Guru Granth Sahib regarding Guru Nanak establishing araj (governance or rule):^[9]

Nanak established the Dominion by raising
the fort of Truth on firm foundations …
With might and bravery of One’s wisdom-sword,
Perfection bestowed the gift of life …
The Light and the method were same,
the Sovereign only changed the body.
Impeccable Divine canopy waves,
the Throne of Guru-ship is occupied.

The Sikh concept ofmiri-piri emphasizes that spirituality and temporality are intrinsically linked to one another, legitimizing Sikh aims to establish their own sovereignty.^[9]Guru Gobind Singh taught the principles ofRaj Karega Khalsa as forming the basis for Sikh-rule in the form of a commitment to political domination.^[9][5] In-response to a question posed byBhai Nand Lal, the tenth guru responded as follows on the issue of sovereignty:^[9]

Nand Lal, listen to this truth:
I will establish the Raj (Sovereignty). (56)
The four categories will become one category,
I will recite Vahiguru (Awe-Wisdom) recitation. (57)
[They will] mount horses and fly hawks,
The Turks (empire) will flee seeing them. (58)
I will make one fight a hundred and twenty-five thousand.
I will free those Singhs (warriors) who ascend (die). (59)
The spears will wave and the elephants will be caparisoned,
The nine-instruments will resound from gate to gate. (60)
When a hundred and twenty-five thousand guns will discharge,
Then the Khalsa will be victorious from wherever the sun shines and sets. (61)
The Khalsa will rule and no one will be a dissenter,
All will unite after exhaustion, those who take refuge will survive. (62)

Rattan Singh Bhangu'sPanth Prakash describes Guru Gobind Singh as being the ruler ofAnandpur in the 1690's, later blessing the Sikhs to rule over theMajha region.^[10]

In 1708 shortly prior to his death, Guru Gobind Singh ordered a group of Khalsa Sikhs to attack Sirhind, kill Wazir Khan, and re-establish Khalsa-rule after the downfall of Anandpur and Paonta in 1704.^[7] Before the Guru dies, he formalizes that the new gurus of the Sikhs would be both theGuru Granth and theGuru Panth, with the panth referring to the initiated body of Khalsa Sikhs.^[7] The first Sikh polity, albeit a short-lived one, was founded byBanda Singh Bahadur in May 1710, a disciple of Guru Gobind Singh, after his forces capturedSirhind and issued silver rupee coinage from theMukhlisgarh Fort based at theShivalik range.^[11][3][7] Khalsa-rule was established in the surrounding tracts of land.^[7] This was a republic that existed from 1710 to 1716.^[9] The issuing of coinage was a mark of sovereignty, marking the beginning of Banda's rule over Sirhind.^[11] Additionally, the Sirhind Sarkar was one of the most wealthiest areas of the Mughal Empire.^[7] Furthermore, Banda rejected using both the traditional IndicBikrami calendar and theIslamicate calendar, creating hisown calendar where the first year commenced on the date of his victory over Sirhind.^[11] Banda's state issued coins in the name of the Sikh gurus.^[11] Banda's rebellion lasted from 1708–1715, with the rebellion eventually failing with the capture of Banda and him and other prominent Sikhs (governors and warriors) under him being executed in Delhi in 1716.^[3][7] His execution marked the end of the short-lived Sikh state.^[7] Banda's short-lived state had existed as a parallel government in northwestern India, which motivated future Sikhs to work toward the same achievement.^[3]

The Mughal Empire in the early 18th century wasone of decline due to a vartiety of factors, such asPersian andAfghan invasions.^[3]Bands of Sikh warriors, excited by the Khalsa ideals of sovereignty and Banda's temporary success, were active during this time, which has been labelled as a "heroic age" of the Sikhs.^[3] These Sikh bands were engaged in-warfare against their enemy, the Mughals, and eventually managed to conquer territory of their own.^[3] According toC. A. Bayly, the Sikhs were a social-movement akin to theMarathas, whom became empowered through their absorption of the "pioneer peasant castes, miscellaneous military adventurers, and groups on the fringe of settled agriculture".^[5][12] By the 18th century, groups of Sikhs had coalesced into bands known asjathas, which were based upon various personal, regional, and kinship-ties.^[5] The jathas themselves were eventually fused further to form a larger grouping:misls.^[5] The misls extended protection over tracts of lands in the central Punjab (doabs andbars) in-exchange for apayment in the form of sharing produce from the land being protected.^[5] The Sikhs began to construct mud-forts, known asgarhis, as they began to conquer territory and establish their rule in the 18th century, such as by thePhulkians atPatiala,Nabha, andJind.^[13] The laterSikh Empire also had a number of forts.^[13]

After the execution of Banda Singh Bahadur after Mughal military victories against the Sikhs, the Sikh rebellion went underground, with the Sikhs adhering to the concept ofRaj Karega Khalsa ("the Khalsa shall rule") to maintain their aspirations for sovereignty.^[7] Between the period of 1726–1733,Zakaria Khan, theMughal viceroy ofLahore province, enacted a genocidal policy against the Sikhs.^[14] After the oppressive anti-Sikh government policy failed to get rid of the Sikh threat, the Mughal government decided to try pacifying the Sikhs by granting them an officialjagir (estate) grant.^[14] Upon Sikh request, aNawab title was offered to the Sikhs, which was bestowed uponKapur Singh in 1733 (sinceDarbara Singh had rejected it), alongside akhilat and bag of gold.^[14] In 1734, Nawab Kapur Singh divided the Sikh congregation into two groups: the Taruna Dal and the Buddha Dal.^[14] Each of these Dals ("armies") were further sub-divided into five groups (with Kapur Singh's own grouping being the additional).^[14] After a short period of peace between the Mughals and Sikhs, differences between them started to grow again due to the restless and provocative antics of the Taruna Dal, and the Nawab-ship that was bestowed upon the Sikhs earlier by the Mughal Empire was revoked and the jagir was confiscated in 1735.^[14] Thus, the former anti-Sikh genocidal policies of the Mughals was put in-place again and the Sikhs once again had to disperse to places of safe haven, such as theLakhi Jungle.^[14]

With theinvasion of India byNadir Shah between January–May 1739 and the total destruction of the Mughal administration in the Punjab as a result, the Sikhs saw an opportunity for themselves and pillaged and sought revenge on their enemies.^[14] According to the contemporary writer Harcharan Das in hisChahár Gulzár Shujá'í, in 1740, one year after the attack of Nader Shah, a large force of Sikhs andJats, including local Muslims, seized the Sirhindsarkar of theJullunder Doab, establishing a short-lived polity with a person named Daranat Shah as its head.^{[15][16][17][18]} The rebellion was eventually crushed by a Mughal force in 1741 under Azimullah Khan and the Sikhs retreated to theLakhi Jungle.^[15][17][19] According toHari Ram Gupta, Daranat Shah wasBaba Deep Singh.^[17]

On 1 July 1745, Zakarian Khan died and he was succeeded by less-effective Mughal administrators, such as Yahiya Khan.^[14] After this point, Kapur Singh divided the Sikh congregation into twenty-five bands (jathas), with each band consisting of about a hundred young Sikh men under the command of a respective leader.^[14] With this reform, a basic confederation structure for military activities of the Sikhs was forming shape.^[14]

From 1748 onwards, the Durrani Empire was invading the subcontinent, with them taking control of the Mughal provinces of Lahore, Multan, Delhi, and Kashmir.^[7] This period is marked by the Afghans, Sikhs, Mughals, and Marathas contesting for control over the wider Punjab region, especially Lahore province.^[7] After an initialinvasion of India by Ahmad Shah Abdali, Kapur Singh realized that the Afghan invader would surely return for more loot, additionally due to the strict ruling-style ofMoin-ul-Mulk, Kapur Singh resolved to reform the then sixty-five (the number of Sikh bands had since swelled from the twenty-five bands that had been established earlier) Sikh bands into elevenmisls on the annual Vaisakhi gathering at Amritsar on 29 March 1748, establishing theSikh Confederacy and its constituent misls, with the united army of all the Sikhs called theDal Khalsa.^[14] The earlier Taruna Dal and Buddha Dal division system that was established earlier in 1734 was retained, with each of the eleven misls being assigned as part of a dal, with the seminal division being as follows:^[14]

• Buddha Dal:^[14]
  • Ahluwalia Misl^[14]
  • Dallewalia Misl^[14]
  • Faizulpuria Misl^[14]
  • Karorasinghia Misl^[14]
  • Nishanwalia Misl^[14]
  • Shaheedan Misl^[14]
• Taruna Dal:^[14]
  • Bhangi Misl^[14]
  • Kanhaiya Misl^[14]
  • Nakai Misl^[14]
  • Ramgarhia Misl^[14]
  • Sukarchakia Misl^[14]

The misls have been described as military bands led by a central leader, known as amisldar.^[3] The chiefs of all the misls would convene bi-annually at the Darbar Sahib in Amritsar for an assembly known as theSarbat Khalsa, with collective decisions being made by the body in-front of the Guru Granth Sahib being termedgurmattas.^[3] From 1750 onwards, the Sikh leaders Jassa Singh Ahluwalia, Jai Singh Kanhaiya, and Hakumat Singh began to occupy territories.^[7] The Sikhs were killed in large numbers by two genocides, theChotta Ghalughara and theVadda Ghalughara but their political ascendency continued, being aided by the Sikhs' attempt at state-formation and its accompanying institutions.^[3] By 1765, theSikhs held Lahore and their influence spread allover the region.^[3]

In the second half of the 18th century, the various Sikh states could be roughly categorized into two groups: the misls of the Sikh Confederacy, concentrated in the formerMughal province of Lahore, and the Sikh principalities/chiefdoms that had been established in the formerMughal province of Delhi, with most being connected to thePhulkian dynasty.^[20] By the 1770s, there were more than sixty Sikh states that had been established between the Indus and Yamuna rivers.^[20]

In the 1760s, marked by thefall of Sirhind in 1763–64, many Sikh kingdoms began to take root after being founded bysardars (chiefs) of the precursory Sikh misls, such as Patiala, Jind, Nabha, Faridkot, Kalsia, Manimajra, Kapurthala, and Kaithal.^{[21][22][23][24][25][26][3]} TheBattle of Sirhind (1764) was a landmark moment inSikh history, as it marked the beginning of Sikh-domination in thecis-Sutlej tract.^[27] Sirhind had been attacked by the Sikhs four times in the 18th century. After the last attack known as the Battle of Sirhind in 13–14 January 1764, the cis-Sutlej tract became dominated by Sikhs after its Afghan governor,Zain Khan Sirhindi, was killed by a coalition of Sikh forces of both theBuddha Dal andTaruna Dal divisions of theDal Khalsa military of theSikh Confederacy.^[28] The victory of the Sikhs ended foreign Afghan-rule over the region.^[28] By 1765, Afghan administration in the region collapsed and was over-turned by the Sikhs.^[7] The Afghans were pushed-out and Khalsa-rule over the land was proclaimed, with the newly conquered territories being divided amongst the Sikh chiefs.^[7] Lepel Henry Griffin stated:^[28]

The storm burst at last. The Sikhs of theMajha country of Lahore, Amritsar, Ferozepur combined their forces at Sirhind, routed and killed the Afghan governor, Zain Khan and pouring across Sutlej occupied the whole country to the Jamna without further opposition. It is enough to say that with few exceptions, the leading families of today are the direct descendants of the conquerors of Zain Khan.

Artillery, supplies, and treasures fell into the possession of the Sikh forces after the victory at Sirhind, which helped them further, especially Ala Singh of Patiala.^[28] The victory helped consolidate the political entity of Patiala.^[28] The settlement of Sirhind was mostly completely destroyed after the battle, which meant its former residents shifted to other locations, especially Patiala in Ala Singh's state.^[28] Ala Singh would strike coins in the aftermath of the victory, with the coins bearing similarities to coins that had earlier been struck by Ahmad Shah Abdali at the Sirhind mint.^[28]

Thesarkar of Sirhind was cut-up and distributed amongst hundreds of both petty and prominent Sikh sardars.^[29] These new Sikh chiefdoms engaged in nation-building, such as by establishing new settlements, improving trade, patronizing artists and writers, and developing relations with other powers of the subcontinent.^[7] The Sikh kingdoms were mostly established in the region from theSutlej river to the Delhi area, although some, such as Kapurthala and the Sikh Empire, laid in the trans-Sutlej region.^[3] Some of the Sikh states located south of the Sutlej were Patiala, Nabha, Jind, Faridkot, Ambala, Shahabad, Thanesar, Kaithal, Jagadhari, and Buria.^[20] A breakthrough was achieved when the Sikhssuccessfully took-over Delhi in the early 1780's, which allowed them to construct gurdwaras in the area.^[6] The Sukerchakia Misl formed theSikh Empire after the capture of Lahore in 1799.^{[30][31][3][5]} Ranjit Singh was able to absorb most of the other misls to form his empire by 1799.^[5][7] In 1801, Ranjit Singh formally established the Kingdom of Lahore.^[3] However, the Sikh states located south of the Sutlej river mostly remained independent from Ranjit Singh's polity, with them initially recognizing Ranjit Singh's suzerainty but later choosing to ally with the British.^[5] The three main states in the cis-Sutlej region were: Patiala, Nabha, and Jind, all of which werePhulkian states.^[5] In 1809, the remaining Sikh monarchies of the cis-Sutlej regioncame under British protection via treaty to protect themselves from being annexed by their powerful neighbour to the north and some of the survived until 1947 in the form of aprincely-state.^[3][5] Patiala utilized its position between the Sikh Empire and British East India Company to expand its influence.^[5] The Sikh Empire expanded Sikh-rule to Kashmiri, Balochi, Pashtun, and Tibetan areas, creating amulticultural state.^[7]

Ranjit Singh's polity led to the state patronage of theSanatan Sikhs, whom he favoured.^[32] The onset of Sikh monarchical-rule also led to the weakening of the authority of the Akal Takht and the ending of collective-decision making in the form of the Sarbat Khalsa.^[32] Meanwhile, the Khalsa Sikhs maintained control over theSikh Army, which allowed them to still wield influence.^[32] After Ranjit Singh died in 1839, his empire quickly fell to the British due to internal infighting and British scheming, resulting in the annexation of the Sikh Empire in 1849.^[32][5] Two Anglo-Sikh wars were fought, the first from 1845–46 and the second from 1848–49.^[5] The other Sikh states either allied with the Sikh Empire or the British East India Company, the states of Patiala, Jind, and Faridkot firmly supported the British, whilst the states of Kapurthala and Nabha were more ambivalent about supporting the British against the Sikh Empire.^[5] Nabha and Kapurthala were punished for their hesitation or allying with the Sikh Empire, but were not extinguished as states.^[5] The deposed boy-king of the Sikh Empire,Duleep Singh, was exiled to England.^[32] In the aftermath of the first Anglo-Sikh war, the region ofKashmir and Jammu was given to the Hindu Dogra ruler Gulab Singh, a former official in Ranjit Singh's court, in 1846 as the British felt they could not defend or occupy such a remote territory.^[5] The Sikh Empire never developed into a modernnation-state, being annexed before such a possible development could take-place, but rather can be described as being a "developing system of power".^[32]

During the colonial period, the British began to preferentiallyrecruit Sikhs into its colonial military in the period after theIndian rebellion of 1857, as the Sikhs helped suppress the mutineers.^[4] Sikhs were labelled as being amartial-race by the British.^[4] After 1857, the British began to more firmly emphasize religious, racial, social, and caste differences amongst its Indian subjects, especially through itsdecennial censuses, the first of which was held in 1871.^[4] The British governed the Punjab through a careful balancing act between the colonial administrators, the landlords, and the traditional custodians of religious sites.^[4] Since annexation in 1849, the British evaluated the custodians of Sikh shrines and allowed them to claim proprietary rights over the religious sites.^[4] This would have major ramifications and lead tomajor social movements amongst the Sikhs.^[4] The British-rule made it possible for the Sikhs to develop further their sense of nationhood, where they began to view their religion as being a world religion and that the Sikhs themselves were a unique nation.^[4]

Earlier British works, such asJohn Malcolm’sSketch of the Sikhs: A Singular Nation (1812) andJoseph Davey Cunningham’sHistory of the Sikhs (1849) characterized the Sikhs as being a nation.^[4] According to Cunningham, Guru Nanak had initiated the separation of his followers from Hindu "idolatry" and Muslim "superstition", whilst Guru Gobind Singh laid the foundation for a "distinct political existence and inspired them with the desire of being socially free and nationally independent", with this being realized and lived according to the author through the foundation of Ranjit Singh's polity.^[4] Cunningham described a pre-modern Sikh nationhood of being bound by the common Khalsa and a shared connection to the Sikh guru.^[4]Max Arthur Macauliffe in the late 19th century believed that the Sikhs were full of merits and at-risk of being absorbed by Hinduism, thus they needed colonial protection to safeguard their unique sense of identity.^[4]

The British Indian military promoted a standardized Khalsa identity to its Sikh recruits, as it highly favoured Khalsa Sikhs.^[4] All Sikh recruits had to be baptized into the Khalsa order through thekhande-di-pahul initiation ceremony.^[4] The Sikh soldiers had to follow the Khalsa dress code and observe to Sikh customs.^[4] A granthi and gurdwara was attached to each Sikh regiment.^[4] Even British officers of Sikh soldiers sometimes wore turbans and wore the Sikh dressing colours, even paying respect to the Guru Granth Sahib.^[4] This British emphasis on Sikhism allowed for the Sikhs to become a hegemonic force.^[4] David Petrie states:^[4]

Sikhs in the Indian Army have been studiously ‘nationalised’ or encouraged to regard themselves as a totally distinct and separate nation. Their national pride has been fostered by every available means.

Some segments of the Sikh community advocate for an independent state calledKhalistan.^[33]

Parganas,'ilaqa, andta'alluqa administrative divisions of Sikh polities tended to much smaller scale in-size compared to the Mughal administrative system and more numerous.^[29] An example of this is the Gujranwala district, which consisted of twenty-six ta'alluqas during Sikh-rule but three or four parganas during Mughal-rule.^[29] An explanation of this is when Sikhs occupied formerly Mughal-controlled territory, they divvied up the Mughal parganas amongst the Sikhsardars.^[29] A subdivision of apargana orta'alluqa was atappa ortopes.^[29] Sikh-rule over Kashmir led to the establishment of four new Kashmiri parganas.^[29] The Mughal pargana was comparable in-nature to the Sikh ta'alluqa.^[29] At the ta'alluqa-level, the Mughal office of the'amil was comparable to the Sikh office of thekardar.^[29] The basis of revenue administration came from the positions of themuqaddam,chaudhari, and theqanungo.^[29]

The Sikh polities did not made radical changes to the pre-existing system but rather made slight changes, which do make them discernible from their predecessors.^[29] Whilst in main areas during the Mughal-period thezabt method was predominant, during Sikh-rule it was theghallabakhshi andkankut that were dominant.^[29] However, the most dominant systems of assessment and collection during Sikh-rule were thebatai andkankut, however thezabt method was employed in some areas.^[29] Outside of main areas, older methods continued unabated for the most part.^[29] Theijara practice became popularized during Sikh-rule but this method led to lower shares of produce being received by the state due to lower rates of assessment.^[29]

Thejagirs bestowed by Sikh states were similar to themansabdari jagirs that were granted by the Mughals.^[29] Thedharmarth grants issued by Sikh states were similar to themadad-i-ma'ash grants of the Mughals.^[29] A key difference however was the proportion of revenue alienated by the way of jagir was much smaller during Sikh-rule in-comparison to Mughal-rule.^[29] However, the proportion of revenue alienated by the way ofdharmarth was much larger during Sikh-rule compared to the predecessor Mughals.^[29] Another difference was that the proportion of hereditary jagirs was larger during Sikh-rule.^[29]

The three classes in-relation to land tenures was the same between Mughal and Sikh-rule:^[29]

1. Peasant proprietor – the most important position^[29]
2. Superior owner (zamindar orta'alluqdar)^[29]
3. Tenant^[29]

During Sikh-rule, the position of the peasant proprietor improved in-relation to the ta'alluqdar whilst the position of the tenant improved in-relation to the other two classes above it.^[29] Sikh ruling classes received a relatively smaller share of surplus land revenue in-comparison to their Mughal counterparts, with the revenue during Sikh-rule being distributed to many sardars and rajas (with both being relatively equal in importance).^[29] Thus, the peasant proprietor and tenant classes were able to enjoy much of the produce they produced.^[29] During the reign of Ranjit Singh of Lahore State, there were no instances of agricultural crises.^[29]

This sectionneeds expansion. You can help byadding missing information.(August 2024)

The following list enumerates historical Sikh states, empires, and dynasties in chronological order, ordered by their establishment year:^[34]

• List of monarchs of Punjab

• Sikh politics
• Former countries in Indian history

• CS1: long volume value
• CS1 maint: work parameter with ISBN
• Wikipedia articles incorporating a citation from the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica with Wikisource reference
• Articles with short description
• Short description matches Wikidata
• Wikipedia introduction cleanup from August 2024
• All pages needing cleanup
• Articles covered by WikiProject Wikify from August 2024
• All articles covered by WikiProject Wikify
• Articles to be expanded from August 2024
• All articles to be expanded