Maharaja Ranjit Singh: The Sikh Ruler, In The Eyes Of Non-sikhs :: essays research papers

According to the famous historian Carlyle, a worthy sovereign should be judged from a sole factor as to how he employs his sword after being victorious. ********** Le Griffin writes that: "Maharaja Ranjit Singh ruled his kingdom exactly according to the Sikh way of life and Sikhism considers everyone as friends and talks about the welfare of all irrespective of caste and creed." ********** The spirit of Gurbani couplet, "The one Lord is the Father of all and we are the children of the one Lord rules supreme in every Sikh heart." Charles Hugal, writes in his book, "Travels in Kashmir and Punjab", that, "probably no person in the world could have established such a large empire with minimum bloodshed as Ranjit Singh has established his kingdom." ********** Affirming Hugal's views, Prinsep, also writes in his book, "Origin of Sikh Power in Punjab", that, "Ranjit Singh's whole career was free of any blemishes like unnecessary atrocities and cruel bloodshed." ********** Historian R.S. Kanungo praising all the aspects of the Kingdom of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, in his writings says, "his empire was the kingdom for 'Welfare for All', in which all were equal sharing partners. In his kingdom there was no special love for Sikhs and no animosity for non-Sikhs. There were no special taxes on any caste to show it down from the other or to label it inferior." ********** W.G. Osborne writes that, "Maharaja Ranjit Singh was so compassionate that outside a battle he did not kill anyone, so much so that in generosity he even forgave those who tried to kill him and felt happiness in forgiving." ********** Charles Hugal in his book, "The Court and Camp of Ranjit Singh", writes that, "Ranjit Singh ruled his kingdom according to the Sikh tenets. All the important positions were given to Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs, entirely based on merit. Even his main advisors were three famous Muslim brothers: Fakir Aziz-ud-Din, his foreign minister; Fakir Nur-ud-Din, his home minister; Fakir Imam-ud-Din, his custodian of the arsenals. Forty-six senior Army officers and two top ranking Generals were Muslims. One General was French and score of military officers were Europeans. In police and civil services he has about one hundred Muslim officers alone. Hindus too, used to hold many key positions in Sarkar-e-Khalsa. Ranjit Singh was secular through-and-through. Since he had lost his one eye in childhood, due to small pox, he used to remark jokingly about himself that, "God Willed that as a true Sikh I should look upon all religions with one eye". Maharaja Ranjit Singh: The Sikh Ruler, In The Eyes Of Non-sikhs :: essays research papers According to the famous historian Carlyle, a worthy sovereign should be judged from a sole factor as to how he employs his sword after being victorious. ********** Le Griffin writes that: "Maharaja Ranjit Singh ruled his kingdom exactly according to the Sikh way of life and Sikhism considers everyone as friends and talks about the welfare of all irrespective of caste and creed." ********** The spirit of Gurbani couplet, "The one Lord is the Father of all and we are the children of the one Lord rules supreme in every Sikh heart." Charles Hugal, writes in his book, "Travels in Kashmir and Punjab", that, "probably no person in the world could have established such a large empire with minimum bloodshed as Ranjit Singh has established his kingdom." ********** Affirming Hugal's views, Prinsep, also writes in his book, "Origin of Sikh Power in Punjab", that, "Ranjit Singh's whole career was free of any blemishes like unnecessary atrocities and cruel bloodshed." ********** Historian R.S. Kanungo praising all the aspects of the Kingdom of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, in his writings says, "his empire was the kingdom for 'Welfare for All', in which all were equal sharing partners. In his kingdom there was no special love for Sikhs and no animosity for non-Sikhs. There were no special taxes on any caste to show it down from the other or to label it inferior." ********** W.G. Osborne writes that, "Maharaja Ranjit Singh was so compassionate that outside a battle he did not kill anyone, so much so that in generosity he even forgave those who tried to kill him and felt happiness in forgiving." ********** Charles Hugal in his book, "The Court and Camp of Ranjit Singh", writes that, "Ranjit Singh ruled his kingdom according to the Sikh tenets. All the important positions were given to Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs, entirely based on merit. Even his main advisors were three famous Muslim brothers: Fakir Aziz-ud-Din, his foreign minister; Fakir Nur-ud-Din, his home minister; Fakir Imam-ud-Din, his custodian of the arsenals. Forty-six senior Army officers and two top ranking Generals were Muslims. One General was French and score of military officers were Europeans. In police and civil services he has about one hundred Muslim officers alone. Hindus too, used to hold many key positions in Sarkar-e-Khalsa. Ranjit Singh was secular through-and-through. Since he had lost his one eye in childhood, due to small pox, he used to remark jokingly about himself that, "God Willed that as a true Sikh I should look upon all religions with one eye".

From 1600 †1763

From 1600 – 1763, several European nations vied for control of the North American continent. Why did England win the struggle? Support your answer with details of each nation's successes and failures. From the early 1600’s to the mid 1700’s, several European nations vied to control North America. Spain, Great Britain, and France were all powerhouses trying to colonize the free world and create a massive empire. Out of the three, England won the struggle because of failures made by the Spanish and French in the years before the American Revolution.The Spanish were the most powerful nation before the colonizing of the West Indies began. They had the Spanish Armada who was known for never losing a single battle. They also had all the riches in the world from all of their explorations. Unfortunately, during the early 1600’s, the Spanish began to experience fatigue from overextension with their army. The Spanish had to take care of problems in their Dutch terri tories causing them to leave the West Indian Islands and Jamaica open for grabs.Great Britain would eventually claim it and they began to work with sugar, the rich man’s crop. One difference between the British and Spanish motives for colonizing was that the Spanish based part of their time converting people to Catholic. The British were not concerned with religion, but more concerned with expanding their empire and making a profit. So by now, the British had colonized most of the Atlantic coast from Maryland down to Georgia. Another nation that wanted to have control over North America was the French.The French owned land from Quebec all the way down to the end of the Mississippi River in New Orleans. They basically controlled â€Å"middle† America. The French were in the business of trapping and fur trade. A very profitable business, but not a very sustainable one on its own. The French never really had a chance to control the New World because they were not as power ful as the Spanish or the British. France lost their hopes of having control in North America when they lost the French and Indian War with Great Britain.Great Britain’s victory over the French caused them to give up most of the land that they claimed and now half of the United States was in control of the British. England won the struggle for control of North America because when they saw a chance to pick up more land from another country, they would grab it. They had the army power to go to war with France and the Spanish had too much on their plate which weakened them. The English controlled the east coast of North America and had many profitable industries such as tobacco, sugar, and indigo. England won based on their power and strategy.

Neutrogenas Leadership Vision, Mission, Value , and Swot...

Running head: NEUTROGENA’S ALIGNMENT WITH JNJ CREDO Neutrogena’s Leadership: Johnson and Johnson’s â€Å"Our Credo† is Our Commitment Thiri Zin Argosy University Abstract Neutrogena commitment to and align with Johnson and Johnson’s Credo is through effective communication from management. Strategy comprehension and community cooperation heavily rely on Leadership’s transparency and transfer of pivotal knowledge. This report analyzes the vision, mission, values and strategy of Neutrogena and Our Credo; Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT), internal processes, implementation timeliness and leadership roles. This report will help identify misalignment between the parent†¦show more content†¦The strategies are base in development and distribution of quality good; with emphasis servicing Dermatologist and consumers. Our Credo is Our Commitment that shapes our business strategies: â€Å"Human Health Care, Managed for the Long Term, Decentralized Management Approach, and Our People and Values† (â€Å"Our Commitment,† n.d.). The strategies focus on the fundamentals of well-being of humanity; our commit ments are to the well-being of healthcare professional, our consumers, our employees, our clients, our vendors and especially our families. Strategic Cascade – Our Commitment to Efficiently Communicate Competitive Advantage is achieve through change, modification, revision and the willingness to change to the way we conduct business while preserving Our Commitments. How can we do something differently, better, faster, and cheaper to maintain competitive advantage? Strategic cascade is simply to â€Å"break down the objectives into smaller chunks for the next organizational level† (Flander, n.d.). Our objectives will align with our strategies through collaboration efforts, transparency and effective communication between Leadership, management, cross-functional teams, and between Our Strategic Positioning It is Our Commitment to excel in the four areas defined in Our Credo, â€Å"Creating Value through Innovation, Global Research/Local