Re: er...
I may be wrong, but I thought all Singhs are Sihks. I however missed "Singh" in the Registers article, I did see it in other journals. I also do not see a "top knot" in this article which again to me would say Sikh.
I may be wrong, but I thought all Singhs are Sihks. I however missed "Singh" in the Registers article, I did see it in other journals. I also do not see a "top knot" in this article which again to me would say Sikh.