Abdalli, Jat Sarv Khap, Maharattas, Panipat

01-07-2004, 06:07 AM

Not sure if it is OK to refer to the forum in the never never land, so I shall refrain for now.

I came across this post toda about "Third Battle of Panipat" from Wikipedia encyclopedia. In one section it said

QUOTERout
The Afgans pursued the fleeing Maratha army and the civilians, while the Maratha front lines ramined largely intact, with some of their artillery units fighting until sundown. Choosing not to launch a night attack, made good their escape that night. Parvati bai escaped the armageddon with her bodyguards, and eventually returned to Pune.

The Afgan cavalry and pikemen ran wild through the streets of Panipat, killing any Maratha soldiers or civilians who offered and resistance. About 6,000 women and children sought shelter with Shuja (allies of Abdali) whose Hindu officers persuaded him to protect them.

Afgan officers who had lost their kin in battle were permitted to carry out masscres the next day, also in Panipat and the surrounding area. They arranged victory mounds of severed heads outside their camps. About 10,000 Maratha civilians and soldiers alike were slain this way on 15th January 1761. Many of the fleeing Maratha women jumped into the Panipat well rather than risk rape and dishonour. Many others did their best to hide in the streets of Panipat when the North Indian Hindus of the town refused to give them refuge.

Abdali's soldiers arrested about 10,000 women and another 10,000 young children and men brought them to their camps. The women were raped, many committed suicide because of constant rapes perpetrated on them. All of the prisoners were exchanged or sold as sex slaves to Afganistan or North India, transported on carts, camels and elephants in bamboo cages.

A conservative estimate places Maratha losses at 35,000 on the Panipat battlefield itself, and another 10,000 or more in surrounding areas. The Afgans are thought to have lost some 30,000.


Pay attention to the second, third and fourth paragraphs. These guys were so upset that a "muslim" army was protrayed as raping 10k hindu women, they edited the Wikipedia and stripped out the said paragraphs.

It now reads like this:

QUOTERout

The Afgans pursued the fleeing Maratha army and the civilians, while the Maratha front lines ramined largely intact, with some of their artillery units fighting until sundown. Choosing not to launch a night attack, made good their escape that night. Parvati bai escaped the armageddon with her bodyguards, and eventually returned to Pune.

A conservative estimate places Maratha losses at 35,000 on the Panipat battlefield itself, and another 10,000 or more in surrounding areas. The Afgans are thought to have lost some 30,000. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Battle_of_Panipat

I am certain these guys havent bothered to check the source of that claim.

I looked at "The wonder that was India, Part II" by Rizvi. It makes a passing reference.

QUOTEIn the Panjab, Ahmad Shah Durrani's invasions destroyed the Mughal administration, leaving the field open for the Sikhs, who have been flattened during Farrukhsiyar's regime. On 15 NOvember, 1756 Ahmad Shah left Peshawar to sack Delhi. There was no one to resist hi. In January 1757 he was acknowledged Emperor in Delhi, but he was interested only in fleecing India of its wealth. Delhi was divided into sectors under Afghan leaders so that they might plunder it systematically. From there Durrani marched upon Mathura and savagely looted the Hindu temples adn rich merchants. The advent of summer made further Afghan advances impossible, and Ahmad Shah returned toÂ country laden with treasure from his Indian invasion.

Ahmad Shah Durrani subsequently resotred Alamgir II to the throne. On 23 June 1757 the commander of the army of the East India Company, Clive, defeated Siraju'd Dawla, Ali Wardi's successor. To justify his aggression, he wrote a long letter to the Emperor, who was no more than a cipher. Alamgir's prime minister, Imadu'l Mulk, first forced the Prince Ali Gawhar to leave and then killed his father, Alamgir II.
The fugitive Prince fled to Bihar and dorwned himself king, assume the title Shah Alam II. Although Imadu'l Mulk raised the pupper ruler to the throne, to all intents and purposes Delhi was controlled by the Marathas. Then Ahmad Shah Durrani marched from Qandahar for the fifth time to eliminate the Marathas, who were now virtual rulers as far as Attock.

On 14 January 1761 the Marathas sustained a crushing defeat on the battlefield of Panipat. Ahmad Shah Durrani returned to Qandahar in March of that year. He had by now lost control of the Panjab. He invaded it three more times to elimnate the Sikhs by died in October 1773 without having made much progress in consolidating the administration of Panjab. The orthodox Sunni hopes of a revival of their power through Durrani were shattered for ever. Sikh domination of the Panjab was also shortlived. In 1803, the English conquered Delhi, although the Mughal emperors continued to rule withing the four walls of the Delhi fort until 1857. But the stead advance of the British is another story

I will try to look into John Keay's depiction tomorrow.

Anyone has more sources please post.

Also, how about forming a group to counter paki hijacking of history as well as depicting the historical truths on the nest. I knwo, we all have limited time, but we can do it. How about a dedicated forum --probably closed visitors-- to discuss the on going modalities?

01-07-2004, 06:34 AM

Few references from the cyberland.

This one from Panipat district govt.

QUOTEThird Battle of Panipat(A.D. 1761) :

The Third Battle of Paniapt was fought on January 14, 1761 between the Afghan invader Ahmed Shah Abdali and the Marathas,the protectors and friends of the Mughal emperor Shah Alam II . In this battle, the Maratha commander Sadashiv Rao Bhau was defeated by the Afghan commander Abdali by his military tactics. The Nawab of Oudh, Shuja-Uddaula and the Rohilla leader Sardar Najib Khan were on the side of Abdali, who in this fierce battle defeated the Maratha army in a decisive manner. Sadashiv Rao Bhau, the young son of Peshwa and a number if Maratha commanders fell on the battle-field. This gave a tremendous blow to the Maratha power. Only six months later,the disheartened Peshwa, balaji Rao, died. The battle proved to be disastrous as not only the Marathas had to bear tremendous losses, but the event marked the beginning of the downfall of the Mughals. On the other hand, there was confrontation among the Muslim rulers. All these paved the way for the rise of British power in India Corporation

Hmmm, these sons of fair & lovely Mughals are defending a afghan raider who is responsible for the fall of their Mughal empire and raise of British empire.

01-07-2004, 06:37 AM

QUOTEThe site of the third Battle of Panipat where the Marathas fought Ahmad Shah Abdali is located a little to the south of Panipat town. Coming onto the highway, we veered to the left. After passing through rows of shops and houses, the road now cut through open green fields and small farm houses. Soon we entered the gates of a well developed garden with shady trees, flowers and a pond with ducks. In one corner of this garden, the government of Haryana has erected a war memorial, marking the site of the most disastrous battle bought at Panipat where Maratha power was extinguished. The memorial marks the spot from where the Maratha general Sadashiv Bhau watched the battle.

It was the dawn of January 14, 1761. In the wintry chill the plain of Panipat lay veiled in a curtain of mist. A long line of fluttering banners marking the cavalry divisions formed the Maratha vanguard. Sadashiv Bhau had 55,000 horsemen, 15,000 foot soldiers and 200 cannon. The Maratha artillery was under the command of the brilliant Ibrahim Khan Gardi, trained by the Fresh General, M de Bussy.

Facing the Marathas were the Afghan hordes of Ahamd Shah Abdali mounded on sturdy horses from Khorasan and transOxiana, 42,000 of them in all. His 38,000 foot soldiers were clad in padded leather and quilted jackets to protect themselves from sword and spear thrusts. Above all, Abdali had a formidable artillery of 2,000 camels mounded with swivel guns.

The battle began at ten Oâclock. The air thudded and shook as the Maratha guns under Ibrahim Khan Gardi spat tongues of orange flame and belched wreaths of black smoke. Under artillery cover, the Maratha infantry advanced and crashed into the Afghan ranks. The engagement was fierce and bloody. A large number of Marathas fell dead or wounded.

When he saw his infantry retreat, Sadashiv Bhau ordered his cavalary to charge. With yellow ochre banners streaming in the wind, the massive wave of Maratha cavalry thundered across the field in a storm of dust.
The cavalry smashed into the Afghan lines and raked through a body of 10,000 horses. The Maratha onslaught was savage and desperate. Soon there was panic among the Afghans and the line began to break up. Some even began to take to their heels, "Where are you running to, "exhorted the Afghan Chief. "Our homeland is far away and you may never reach it."

Just when defeat seemed to stare into Ahmad Shahâs face, a stray shot hit Vishwas Rao, the son of Peshwa Baji Rao, and he fell dead from his horse. When a disheartening cry arose that the Peshwaâs son had been killed, Maratha spirit sank.

When the 17 years old Vishwas Raoâs body was brought to Sadashiv Bhau on the back of an elephant, his rage knew no bounds. Mounting his horse, Sadashiv Bhau rushed into the thick of battle, only to be mercilessly cut down by Afghan horsemen. The Bhauâs death was enough to make the marathas lose heart. Soon they were completely routed.

Little knowing the fate of his magnificent army, the Peshwa Balaji Rao was crossing the Narmada with reinforcements when a tired 'âharkaraâ arrived with a cryptic message "Two pearls have been dissolved, 27 gold coins have been lost and of the silver and copper the total cannot be cast up".

The Peshwa never recovered from the shock of the total debacle at Panipat. He returned to Pune and died a broken man in a temple on Paravati Hill. As for the Marathas they never recovered from the loss at Panipat. The battle changed the course of Indiaâs history. In fact the British could never have had a strong foothold in India as long as the Marathas were powerful.

In the gathering dusk, even as the sun was setting over the swaying fields of wheat at Panipat, we could well imagine what the battlefield must have looked like on the evening of January 14, 1761. A bitter wind would have swept the expanse moaning lamentably like a dirge to the fallen dead. The plain of Panipat will always remain like a page of history stained with blood and haunt the memory for centuries on end.



Walking the streets of Panipat

01-07-2004, 07:05 AM

Harayana Web site
Harayana Web site
QUOTEHistory of Haryana - The third battle of Panipat (1761)
Towards the middle of the 18th century, Marathas, under the leadership of the Peshwas had established their sway over Haryana and most of North India. The intrusion of the Afghan, Ahmed Shah Abdali into India, culminated in the third battle of Panipat on January 14, 1761. Ahmad Shah defeated the Marathas and this marked the end of the Maratha ascendancy. The defeat of the Marathas, rapid decline of the Mughal empire after Aurangzeb's death, leading ultimately to the advent of the British rule.

The main reason for the failure of Marathas were the lack of allies. Though their infantry was based on European style contingent, they failed to woo allies in North India. Their earlier behavior and their political ambitions which led them to loot and plunder, had antagonized all the powers. They had interfered in the internal affairs of the Rajputana states and levied heavy taxes and huge fines on them. They had also made huge territorial and monetary claims upon Awadh. Their raids in the Sikh territory had angered the Sikh chiefs. Similarly the Jat chiefs, on whom also they had imposed heavy fines, did not trust them. They had, therefore, to fight their enemies alone, except for the weak support of Imad -ul-Mulk. Moreover, the senior Maratha chiefs constantly bickered with one another. Each one of them had ambitions of carving out their independent states and had no interest in fighting against a common enemy.

Ahmad Shah (1722?-73), first emir of Afghanistan, was the hereditary chief of the Abdali tribe of Afghans, whom he later renamed the Durrani. He led a contingent of his tribesmen in the service of Nadir Shah, king of Persia, who won control of most of Afghanistan and part of India. When Nadir died, Ahmad founded an independent Afghan kingdom. He invaded the Indian Panjab six times between 1748 and 1752, and he seized and sacked Delhi. Although he was a powerful military leader, Ahmad never succeeded in permanently ruling India; he subsequently withdrew into Afghanistan.

01-07-2004, 07:08 AM

http://www.panipatrefinery.com/panipat_city.html
QUOTEThe site of the third Battle of Panipat where the Marathas fought Ahmad Shah Abdali is located a little to the south of Panipat town. Coming onto the highway, we veered to the left. After passing through rows of shops and houses, the road now cut through open green fields and small farm houses. Soon we entered the gates of a well developed garden with shady trees, flowers and a pond with ducks. In one corner of this garden, the government of Haryana has erected a war memorial, marking the site of the most disastrous battle bought at Panipat where Maratha power was extinguished. The memorial marks the spot from where the Maratha general Sadashiv Bhau watched the battle.

It was the dawn of January 14, 1761. In the wintry chill the plain of Panipat lay veiled in a curtain of mist. A long line of fluttering banners marking the cavalry divisions formed the Maratha vanguard. Sadashiv Bhau had 55,000 horsemen, 15,000 foot soldiers and 200 cannon. The Maratha artillery was under the command of the brilliant Ibrahim Khan Gardi, trained by the Fresh General, M de Bussy.

Facing the Marathas were the Afghan hordes of Ahamd Shah Abdali mounded on sturdy horses from Khorasan and transOxiana, 42,000 of them in all. His 38,000 foot soldiers were clad in padded leather and quilted jackets to protect themselves from sword and spear thrusts. Above all, Abdali had a formidable artillery of 2,000 camels mounded with swivel guns.

The battle began at ten Oâclock. The air thudded and shook as the Maratha guns under Ibrahim Khan Gardi spat tongues of orange flame and belched wreaths of black smoke. Under artillery cover, the Maratha infantry advanced and crashed into the Afghan ranks. The engagement was fierce and bloody. A large number of Marathas fell dead or wounded.

When he saw his infantry retreat, Sadashiv Bhau ordered his cavalary to charge. With yellow ochre banners streaming in the wind, the massive wave of Maratha cavalry thundered across the field in a storm of dust.
The cavalry smashed into the Afghan lines and raked through a body of 10,000 horses. The Maratha onslaught was savage and desperate. Soon there was panic among the Afghans and the line began to break up. Some even began to take to their heels, "Where are you running to, "exhorted the Afghan Chief. "Our homeland is far away and you may never reach it."

Just when defeat seemed to stare into Ahmad Shahâs face, a stray shot hit Vishwas Rao, the son of Peshwa Baji Rao, and he fell dead from his horse. When a disheartening cry arose that the Peshwaâs son had been killed, Maratha spirit sank.

When the 17 years old Vishwas Raoâs body was brought to Sadashiv Bhau on the back of an elephant, his rage knew no bounds. Mounting his horse, Sadashiv Bhau rushed into the thick of battle, only to be mercilessly cut down by Afghan horsemen. The Bhauâs death was enough to make the marathas lose heart. Soon they were completely routed.

Little knowing the fate of his magnificent army, the Peshwa Balaji Rao was crossing the Narmada with reinforcements when a tired 'âharkaraâ arrived with a cryptic message "Two pearls have been dissolved, 27 gold coins have been lost and of the silver and copper the total cannot be cast up".

The Peshwa never recovered from the shock of the total debacle at Panipat. He returned to Pune and died a broken man in a temple on Paravati Hill. As for the Marathas they never recovered from the loss at Panipat. The battle changed the course of Indiaâs history. In fact the British could never have had a strong foothold in India as long as the Marathas were powerful.

In the gathering dusk, even as the sun was setting over the swaying fields of wheat at Panipat, we could well imagine what the battlefield must have looked like on the evening of January 14, 1761. A bitter wind would have swept the expanse moaning lamentably like a dirge to the fallen dead. The plain of Panipat will always remain like a page of history stained with blood and haunt the memory for centuries on end.

01-07-2004, 08:10 AM

A Door Stained by Maratha Blood

QUOTEA carved wooden doorframe which was a witness to the Third Battle of Panipat, about 239 years ago, constructed from the wood of âKala Ambâ (black mango tree), has recently been shifted from Karnal to Panipat to be preserved at the museum in Binjhol.

A team from the Department of Archaeology, Haryana, led by its Deputy Director took possession of the âChaukhatâ. It will be treated with chemicals to be preserved for at least 500 years.

The âchaukhatâ has been made from a mango tree which witnessed the battle between the forces of Ahmad Shah Abdaliand the Marathas. The battle was fought at a place named âKala Ambâ, near Ugrakheri village in 1761.

The place was named after the mango tree. It is a tourist centre now and the Haryana Government is constructing a museum here in the memory of the Marathas.

More than 20,000 Marathas were killed near this spot and it is said that the tree turned black when their blood ran into its roots.

Later, a local pandit, Shugan Chand, got two frames carved out from the wood of this tree and presented these to Queen Victoria. She in turn gifted one of the frames to the King of France, Louis XIV. The second doorframe was used in the Victoria Hall here which was renamed as Gandhi Memorial Hall after independence.

01-08-2004, 02:59 AM

Afghanistan and subcontinent
Aslam Effendi

No country has had such a big impact on the Indo-Pak subcontinent than Afghanistan. The Aryans settled in Afghanistan between 400 BC-300 BC and from here one branch went to Europe and another branch settled in the Indo-Pak subcontinent. Afghanistan was also the route through which many armies invaded the Indo-Pak subcontinent, but all the invaders were not Afghans: some were Greeks; some were Turks; some were White Huns; some were Arabs; some were Mughals. Among the famous invaders were Alexander the Great; Mahmood of Ghazni; Muhammad Ghori, Alauddin Khilji, Zahiruddin Babur; Muhammad bin Qasim; the Lodis; Sher Shah Suri, Nadir Shah Afshar and Ahmad Shah Abdali. The non-Afghan invaders first settled in Afghanistan before invading the Indo-Pak subcontinent and all the invaders made use of Afghan soldiers to carry out their military campaigns. These non-Afghan invaders made use of Afghan soldiers simply because the Afghans were famous for their acts of heroism; and this explains why the original name of Afghanistan was Ashvagan, meaning land of the heroes and from Ashvagan the name evolved into Afghanistan.

Many of the Afghan soldiers who helped the invaders were impressed with the wealth of the subcontinent, so they decided to settle here permanently; many inter-married among the locals and became part of the subcontinentâs soil. A large number of Afghan soldiers settled in the Punjab, inter-married among the Punjabis and so the area in the Punjab between the Beas and the Sutlej came to be known as Chota Afghanistan or mini-Afghanistan. Some of the leading families in the Punjab such as the Nawabs of Mamdot are originally Afghans. Another lot of Afghans settled in other parts of the subcontinent and the more enterprising ones among them became rulers of states such as Bhopal, Rampur, Palanpur. And the Afghan family of Haidar Ali and his son Tipu Sultan established a state in Mysore.

Afghanistan has been the mother of many tribes in the Indo-Pakistan subcontinent: for example, the leading tribes in Balochistan are Afghans: these tribes include the Sheranis, Raisanis, Tarins, Pannis, Achakzais, Kasis etc, etc. And in the NWFP, 70 per cent of the population consists of Pakhtun tribes whose mother is Afghanistan: these tribes include the Mohmands, Masuds, Yousafzais, Barakzais, Waziris, Shinwaris, Afridis, Durranis etc, etc.

Afghanistan is the mother of Hinduism in the subcontinent, as it was in Afghanistan that the most sacred books of Hinduism, the Vedas, were composed; and Afghanistan is the mother of all the Parsees in the subcontinent because the prophet Zoroaster was born here; and Afghanistan is the mother of all those saints and sufis who introduced Islam in the subcontinent. And Afghanistan has some very important and sacred sites for those of the Buddhist faith.

Afghan dynasties such as the Lodis and Suris contributed a lot in the development of the Indo-Pak subcontinent but also worked for Hindu-Muslim unity, so much so that many Hindus were impressed with their behaviour that they voluntarily accepted Islam. <img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/argue.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='argue.gif' /> Sher Shah Suri, a remarkable Afghan King, within only five years, measured the entire area of the Indo-Pak subcontinent; he made land reforms, developed a good currency system and built a road from one end to the other end of the subcontinent. It is interesting to note that he became king after dethroning Humayun, a Mughal; but on his premature death, even Humayun was grieved.

Some of the invaders from Afghanistan conquered some parts of the subcontinent but there were a few who conquered the whole of the subcontinent. For example, Alauddin Khilji spread the authority of Afghanistan and its culture throughout the Indo-Pak subcontinent, right up to Cape Comorin. And after defeating the Marhattas in the third Battle of Panipat, Ahmad Shah Abdali brought the whole of the subcontinent under the influence of Afghanistan; and Kashmir also became part of the Afghan empire. Afghanistanâs influence was so great in Kashmir that many Kashmiri Pundits proudly associated their names with various Afghan tribes. It was not unusual to find Kashmir Pundits with such names as Pundit Anand Kaul Banzai or Pundit Omkar Nath Yusufzai. It was because of Afghan influence that Persian became popular among Kashmiris.

Throughout history the Afghans had been invading the Indo-Pak subcontinent but then a day came when Afghanistan herself became a victim of foreign invasions. A number of times the British tried to establish their rule in Afghanistan but every time they failed. The political leaders in the Indo-Pak subcontinent were witnessing how a small, poorly armed country, was able to challenge the mighty British empire. These political leaders thought that if a small country could challenge British authority, why could a huge subcontinent not do the same. And so Afghanistan provided inspiration to the political leaders of the Indo-Pak subcontinent to fight for their political freedom which they eventually won in 1947.

Today no country offers better investment opportunity to investors in the Indo-Pak subcontinent, than Afghanistan. Besides this, the oil and gas pipeline projects from Central Asia via Afghanistan can have a big impact on the lives of the people of the Indo-Pak subcontinent. But all this will remain a dream unless there is stability in Afghanistan. And this is only possible if those interested in solving Afghanistanâs problems realise that Afghanistan is the worldâs largest tribal society and in such a society, all big and small decisions are made by tribes and not individuals. Century after century, right from the Aryan period, the jirga system has been used to solve the problems of the country. To change such an ancient system overnight is just like changing horses in mid-stream. Those who have recently drafted the constitution for Afghanistan have overlooked the fact that Afghanistan, for the last so many centuries, enjoyed stability because of following the tribal system, its most vital components being a king whose role was to unite all the tribes; a prime minister (Sadar-i-Azam) whose job was to administer the country; and a Loya Jirga whose job was to elect a king, draft constitutions, decide vital issues. Those who have drafted the present constitution of Afghanistan have not given option to the tribes whether they desire their centuries old tribal system of monarchy with which they are familiar or the unfamiliar system of western republicanism which has repeatedly failed to restore stability after the monarchy was derailed. Anything short of this arrangement will never restore stability in Afghanistan and instead of the country proving a blessing for the Indo-Pakistan subcontinent, it can create only problems for it and for the US.

The writer is great grandson of late Afghan King Dost Muhammad Khan, founder of the Muhammadzai Dynasty
effendi pak@yahoo.com

01-11-2004, 11:44 AM

Guess what ??? learn Indian History from Eelam [LTTE]
http://www.eelavar.com/eelam/pageview.ph...7&SID=1005
Medieval Indian History

For a period that has come to be so strongly associated with the Islamic influence and rule in India, Medieval Indian history went for almost three whole centuries under so-called indigenous rulers. For the moment, most of action shifts to the southern peninsula.

The most important dynasty to rise out of the southern India was that of the Cholas. Unlike most of the other dynasties (the Chalukyas, the Pallavas, the Pandyas or the Rashtrakutas), their origins are not traced from outside, but very much from the south itself.

The Deccan region was at this time in much turmoil. To begin with, the Cholas had managed almost immediately to reduce the Pallavas to the status of minor feudatories. The Rashtrakutas were in decline now, but their place was taken by a resurgent branch of the Chalukya family (imaginatively called the later Chalukyas by historians) who were gaining strength in the region of western Deccan. The power equation in the Deccan now involved the later Chalukyas, the Yadavas of Devagiri (northern Deccan; region around Aurangabad), the Kakatiyas of Warangal (Andhra Pradesh) and the Hoysalas of Dorasamudra (Mysore). Much sorting out had to be done before the Cholas finally emerged as unchallenged authorities in the south. This they managed with sheer tenacity over a period of 300 years from 900-1100 AD â and even then for a short while only.

However, the Chola contribution to south Indian history is far more wide-ranging than just political. This period saw the final settling down and consolidation of Tamil culture. In whatever sphere â whether of social institutions, religion, fine arts, music, dance, jewellery â the standards that were set during this period came to be regarded as classical, and dominate, in a modified form, much of the living patterns of south Indians even today. This period also saw the spread of this culture overseas to Southeast Asia, regions with whom the Cholas had strong political and economic relations.

The Cholas came to power rather suddenly when one of family conquered Tanjore (in the middle of Tamil Nadu) and declared himself a king in the middle of the 9th century AD. The first important ruler to emerge from the dynasty was Rajaraja Chola I (985-1014AD) and his son and successor Rajendra Chola (1014-1035AD). Both father and son put their heads down and campaigned in almost every direction. Rajaraja started with annexing large areas of the Deccan, defeating a powerful alliance between the Cheras (of Kerala region), the Pandyas and the rulers of Ceylon (Sri Lanka). This effectively broke the monopoly that these kingdoms had over the trade routes to Southeast Asia. The Cholas had an effective navy and Rajaraja, with a view to control this trade route completely, led an attack to the Maldive Islands too.

Rajendra I ruled together with father for two years before going solo in 1014AD. He aggressively continued his father's imperialist policies with the annexation of the region around modern Hyderabad which was controlled by the Chalukyas at that time. He also turned his attention northwards where he reached right upto the Ganges valley, Orissa and west Bengal areas. However, these were not areas that Rajendra held, or even seriously expected to hold, for long. What were really ambitious were Rajendra Chola's offshore expeditions, involving both the army and the navy against Andaman and Nicobar Islands, the Malay Islands and Sumatra. However, these were not colonizing forays, for he never tried to seriously consolidate or move in on his gains in these regions; they were in main campaigns to protect his trade routes with the Southeast Asian nations. Rajendra Chola I was killed in 1052AD, in battle against his old foes the Chalukyas. The successors of Rajendra I were far too occupied with their problems within the peninsula to worry about overseas expansion. Almost throughout they remained at loggerheads with the Chalukyas, with both carrying attacks and revenge raids against each other.

However, by the middle of the 12th century Chola power was already deep into decline. The south was simply far too divided and no one kingdom stood out as a clear leader. The scene was again rapidly shifting to the north where much liveliness had occurred by this time.

The so-called Islamic 'hordes' had made their first appearance.

This is the time which saw the emergence of Delhi from the mists of obscurity that it had sunk into since it was first inhabited as Indraprastha. It was what the historians call the 'early medieval' period of India â about the 11-12th century AD â when the much travelled Rajputs were floating restlessly around looking for a home before finally finding shelter in the Rajputana area. Here the strategic location of Delhi came to play â it was the doorway to both the fertile Punjab, the fabled land of the fiver rivers, and the fertile Ganges valley.

But first, just who were these Rajputs? We come across the word 'Rajput' for the first time in the 7th century AD. There is no previous record or reference of it and it is certainly not a Sanskrit word. There are as many theories as there are historians about the origin of the Rajputs, including an opinion that they were descended from foreigners, from one of the Indo-Parthian, Indo-Bactrian, Indo-Scythian, Saka, Kushana or Hun strains that were already present in India for quite some centuries. This might just be true, considering the elaborate genealogies that the Brahmans (the priest of the Indian varna or caste system) created to accord them the Kshatriya (warrior) caste. This was a status they always insisted upon, and still do, with surprising and almost undue vehemence. The Rajputs traced their lineage from a mythical fire atop Mount Abu, a mountain in Rajasthan, (Agni Kula or the Fire Family), the sun (Suryavanshi or the Sun Family) and the moon (Chandravanshi or the Moon Family).

The time between the fading away of Harsha Vardhana (606-646AD) and with it the Vardhana might and the rise of Islamic power in India was occupied with the ascent of Rajput power. This, however, was a very short-lived period, mainly due to the in-fighting among the fiercely divided Rajputs.

As can be imagined, India under the Rajputs was not exactly what one could call a single and completely unified unit. Delhi and Ajmer, under the Chauhans, were the most powerful states of this period. However, the first Rajputs to hit Delhi were the Tomaras. In fact, the second city of Delhi, Lal Kot (the Red Fortress) was built in 1060A.D. by Raja Anang Pal, one of the earliest Tomara rulers to settle in Delhi. Their rule was pretty short-lived, though, and soon the Chauhan Rajputs under the generalship of Prithviraj Chauhan seized control of Lal Kot in the 12th century. There were other states where Rajputs were gaining prominence. Like Kanauj (in present Uttar Pradesh) where in this period ruled Jaichand, a Rathore (another Rajput family) ruler, who was a bitter rival of Prithviraj Chauhan. In Bundelkhand (in Madhya Pradesh), the chandravansi (of the moon family) Chandelas were ruling. Malwa and Gujrat were were under the Paramaras (the most important ruler was king Bhoj) and Chaulukyas (who are supposed to descendants of the Chalukyas) respectively.

This was a very troubled time in Indian history. There was no clear central authority in sight and each petty ruler was daring to dream the mad dream of ruling all over the country â which at that point in time meant basically the Gangetic plains and the Deccan. This is the main reason why no ruler was able to hold Delhi long enough to establish a kingdom here, and also the principle reason why the Arabs and Turks didn't exactly have to sweat to the bone to stamp their authority all over them.

And then it happened. In 1000BC, as if on cue, the crescent appeared for the first time over the Indian horizons.

In 1000AD, Mahmud of Ghazni (Afghanistan) encroached upon Indian territories for the first time and then made these invasions almost an annual feature. What with no strong central power, looting the wealth of India to replenish the coffers of Ghazni must have been as easy as finding it. In all, Mahmud invaded India eleven times and the wealth he looted from here went into funding his campaigns in central Asia and mosques, libraries and museums in Ghazni.

Strangely enough, no confederacy appeared to ward off his invasions. After Mahmud's death in 1030AD, any chances of such a mutual consensus being reached among the rulers fizzled out since the significance of his raids as forerunners for others to follow was never quite grasped. The Rajput clans remained almost constantly and thoroughly at war among themselves in the 11th and 12th centuries. It had become a matter of pride to use every supposed slight as an excuse for war, and the prevailing chivalric code allowed no place for either long-sightedness, clear thinking or strategy.

This was around the time that Prithviraj had married the daughter of the king of Kanauj Jaichand â in true Lochinvar style, by carrying her away in the middle of her wedding. The pride of the Kanauj had been stung and had to be avenged.

It so happened that an Afghan ruler Shihab-ud-din Muhammad Ghuri or Mohammad of Ghur (between Ghazni and Herat) was gathering his forces at the frontiers of India, this time in preparation for forcing his way through to Delhi. Even before his forces had rallied around him, the Afghan was surprised by an invitation from Jaichand who offered his help in any way possible to rub out Prithviraj Chauhan from the face of the earth.

However, the Rathore ruler had made one of the grossest miscalculations of his life â in supposing that Ghuri was just another invader looking for dipping into India's bottomless pit of wealth, he erred badly. Ghuri wanted to establish a kingdom here, and in 1185AD he sent the Rajputs abuzz by taking Lahore. The rulers of north India then half-heartedly threw in their lot with the ruler of Delhi Prithviraj and were able to defeat Ghuri in the Battle of Tarain in 1191AD. Unfortunately, here is where the foolhardiness of the Rajput code of honour came into play. Prithviraj had Ghuri captured and, when the latter appealed to his better nature, made the grand gesture of actually setting him free. If he had thought that Ghuri would go out and sin no more, he must have been much disappointed for the Afghan simply sent for reinforcements and launched another attack the very next year. The battle of 1192 was fought at Tarain too; this time Ghuri crushed the Rajputs with one of those clinical and sound defeats that only the Central Asians knew best how to inflict. And when he had Prithviraj he didn't do any such fool thing as letting him go.

This difference in the psychological approach to war, more than anything else, was the undoing of the Indian rulers. The Afghans and Turks regarded war as a serious business, a matter of life and death. But for the Indian princes war seemed to have been a form sport, with its own rules of gallantry and chivalry, to show off their bravery and skill. Man to man, no doubt, the Rajputs were better warriors than the Afghans but, when it came to using their resources, the latter were superb at making each man count. The Rajputs failed to understand the crucial distinction between a battle and a war; strategic retreat, which was the strength of the Afghans and Turks, would have been scorned by them. On the other hand the Afghans were a more patient lot, and were willing to lose a battle to win the war.

The conquest of Delhi by Muhammad Ghuri would change the future of Indian history radically. A word here about the much-maligned 'Islamic hordes' who conquered India and 'stamped out' the so-called 'Hindu' culture.

With the coming of Ghuri came the long rule of Islamic rulers in the country, and for the first time India saw a succession of proper dynastic rule which it had not really seen uptill now. There were no more gaps in rule anymore. No more hundred years of no central authority, and certainly no chaos like the one India had just witnessed before the Islamic conquest of India â until deep into the 18th century AD, for a very brief period before the British took over. Even at their weakest the Islamic rulers were able to provide India with a strongly centralized government. This was largely due to the fact that the Turks stuck together, at first within themselves, and later reluctantly also with the Afghans. And even when the king was weak the Turks saw it as their duty to maintain a strong face and keep the show going.

Of course there were bad times, especially when the ruler suddenly decided to go more Islamic than thou and break temples (which were remodeled as mosques) built by the Hindus, a term which started being used around this time. However, this needs to be put in perspective. Muslims saw idol worship as a blasphemy against Allah and were shocked that the Hindus would think differently. Religious tolerance, especially under the Mughals, was practiced quite actively and even under the infamous Aurangzeb who had lots of political compulsions forcing him to act the way he did.

Also the 'long rule of oppression' under the Muslims for the Hindus is largely a myth. First and foremost the Turks and Afghans were shrewd rulers and even shrewder politicians; they were not really much bothered with God and godliness when it came to ruling. This is evinced by a proclamation from Ala-ud-din Khalji, one of the most powerful rulers of the Delhi Sultanate. He had decreed the state (i.e., himself) to be above the priesthood, and when the latter claimed this as un-Islamic and against the Sharia laws, he said, "I do not know whether this is lawful or unlawful; whatever I think to be for the good of or suitable for the state, that I decree; and as for what may happen to me on the Day of Judgement that I do not know." Clearly he was not losing much sleep over displeasing Allah.

If Qutub-ud-din Aibak and Altamash broke temples to use them in their own buildings, it was largely because they were rather short of both time and building material. Also, these rulers urged their troops on to fighting by raising the banner of jehad (Holy War); just like the kings of the Middle Ages urged on their armies to loot the treasures of the Byzantine empire under the cloak of the Crusades. So they had to give their troops some evidence and justification for raising the cry of a Holy War. At least no mass destruction of books, wisdom and ancient treasures (as occurred in Constantinople, Egypt, the Americas and elsewhere) happened in India â the Arabs, Afghans and Turks, who were quite a scholarly and well-read lot themselves, knew when to stop. The destruction of temples stopped as soon as the Delhi Sultanate settled down and the sultans had more time and money in their hands, which in turn let them free to follow styles which suited their own tastes better.

Anyhow, Delhi and Ajmer passed on to Muhammad of Ghur, who then returned to his own country after leaving Qutubddin Aibak as his viceroy in Delhi. In 1206, when Muhammad was assassinated, Aibak crowned himself Sultan of Delhi, thus laying the foundation for the so-called Slave dynasty of Delhi (the founder having once been a slave), or the Delhi Sultanate.

The Delhi Sultanate had a much longer reign in Delhi than any other dynasty that had come before it. In fact, it remained in power throughout the period between 1190 and 1526. The state's boundaries kept shifting, and at different times included Afghanistan and the Deccan, but the central dynasty did not budge till the Mughals arrived.

For the first some years the Sultanate was largely individual-driven, and given the rather communal tribal nature of the Afghan-Turk polity dynastic rule took its time to take hold. The first to begin the consolidation work the dynasty was Altamash (1211-1236AD), who was the son-in-law and successor of Qutub-ud-din Aibak. The Slave Dynasty is also famous for having given India its first woman king, Raziya Sultan (1237-1240AD), the daughter and successor of Altamash. She was followed by a very tough customer, Ghiyas-ud-din Balban (1266-1286AD) who gave the Delhi Sultanate its character and finished the consolidation work.

Balban left a strong base for his successors to build upon, and thankfully, the times got the right rulers. Now the Sultanate saw the rise of the Khaljis, together with Jala-ud-din Khalji (1290-1296AD) and Ala-ud-din Khalji (1296-1316AD), who were its first real dynasty. They were followed by the Tughlaqs who produced three strong rulers â Ghiyas-ud-din Tughlaq (1320-1414AD), Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq (1325-1351AD) and Feroze Shah Tughlaq (1350-1388AD).

After Feroze Shahâs death, the luck of the Delhi Sultanate ran out and it was sacked thoroughly and absolutely by Timur the Lame, the famous Persian ruler. This was however not the first time that India had been invaded since the Delhi Sultanate took charge. Almost throughout its history, the Sultanate was troubled by repeated invasions from the persistent Mongols (see History of Delhi for more on Mongol invasions). Although the sultans were able to successfully repel all Mongol advances, these invasions took their toll especially since entire armies had to raised and defense budgets allocated for frontier security. To raise the money to fund these, the sultans had to be almost continuously in battle with other areas of India.

The last dynasty of the Delhi Sultanate was that of the Lodis. The ruler in Delhi was Ibrahim Lodi (1517-1526AD), who was a very unpopular king. Not only was he not in with the people of Delhi, who often had a mind of their own about who should rule them and did not shy away from expressing it, he actually fell out very badly with the Maliks (nobles). Ibrahim believed in keeping his nobles firmly in their place â which was, according to him, much beneath the royal throne. In fact, so horrific were his dealings with those that displeased him in any way, real or imagined, that in the end his governor in Punjab, Dilawer Khan, appealed to the latest runaway from Samarkand who was camping in Kabul at that time for help. The latter heeded this SOS with an alacrity that showed that such a campaign had been very much on his mind too. The voice of Dilawar Khan was strengthened by those of the Rajputs, especially Rana Sanga, the Rathore ruler of Mewar, who decided to use this new invader to get rid of the autocratic Ibrahim Lodi.

Zahir-ud-din Muhammad Babur (1526-1530AD), who had the blood of the great central Asian families of Chingez Khan from his mother's side and that of Timur from his father's, had been hunting for a home to call his own since he was a teenager. He had been driven out of Samarkand, his home, and forced to set up a kingdom elsewhere by his cousins and uncles. Babur looked at Kabul in Afghanistan to start afresh. It was while he was here, building a kingdom for himself, that the Indian princes got in touch with him to help him rid of Ibrahim Lodi. Much to his delight of course, for the ink was, so to speak, still wet on the pen with which he had written in his autobiography, Tuzuk-i-Baburi, "From the time I conquered the land of Kabul till now, I had always been bent on subduing Hindustan." That very year, in 1526, he crossed over the Indus to reach Panipat, where he defeated Ibrahim Lodi in one of the most significant battles of Indian history.

It was curtains now for the Delhi Sultanate. The Mughals had arrived.

Babur was a military general of formidable credentials and his troops would follow him everywhere, and indeed did for thoroughly battle-scarred his tenure. The first person he defeated was Rana Sanga who was perhaps appalled at Babur's obvious intentions of getting comfortable and staying on in Delhi. After taking Mewar, Babur moved on other battlefields, defeating many kingdoms with a speed which was astonishing. By the end of it all, Babur had managed to firmly establish the Mughals as the new order to salute in India. He died in controversial circumstances. Some say he was poisoned. There is a more romantic version â apparently, his son and successor Humayun had taken ill, and Babur appealed to God that He should spare the son and take his life instead.

His son Humayun succeeded him in 1530AD, and ruled till 1556AD, in between which there was a break of 16 years when Sher Shah Suri (1540-1556), an Afghan noble, overthrew him. However, after a long struggle Humayun was able to take back his kingdom when Sher Shah Suri died. Not for long though, for Humayun died the very same year by slipping from the staircase of his library. Babur had been a great man, soldier, poet and writer; his son was a poet and remained one till the very end, despite the mantle of kingship being thrust upon him.

Humayun's troubled life, in which he was constantly at pains to reconcile his erudite scholarly nature with the demands of kingship (a struggle which in the end resulted in a severe opium addiction), in the end seemed to justify a couplet which he liked quote:

"Oh Lord, of thine infinite goodness make me a part;Make me a partner of the knowledge of thy attributes;I am broken-hearted from cares and sorrows of life;O calls to thee thy poor madman and lover;Grant me my release."

With the passing away of Humayun, came to end the teething problems of the imperial Mughal dynasty for his son was undoubtedly the greatest ruler India ever produced. Soon after ascending the throne as a mere kid of 14, Jalal-ud-din Muhammad Akbar (1556-1605AD) started to prove why he earned the epithet of Akbar the Great. When Akbar came to throne all his father had left behind were poor fragments of military conquests for him to make sense out of. While Humayun would have given up, Akbar thrived; challenge became him, whether physical or metaphysical.

Every ruler in India at that time knew that Humayun had just barely managed to take his kingdom back and all eyes were on young Akbar â Sikander Sur, Sher Shah Suri's grandson was still around trying to get the kingdom back; the powerful Rajputs from behind their invincible fortresses, the states of Gujrat and Malwa; even the southern kingdoms â they were waiting for his next move.

In 1556AD 14-year-old Akbar led his first army to battle in the famous old battlefield of Panipat which no doubt was a sentimental moment for him because, like all Mughals, he was fiercely clannish. The Second battle of Panipat was fought in between him and Hemu, the Prime Minister of the Sultan of Bengal, who had set out against Akbar the moment he heard the news about Humayun's death. This battle was to decide the future of the young Mughal for Hemu was a formidable antagonist. The Sultan of Bengal, Muhammad Shah Abdali, was but a cipher in the state of affairs in Bengal and Hemu was the l'homme principle. On the way to Panipat he had scared away the Mughal governor in Agra and occupied it. In the battle with so many odds stacked against him, Akbar managed to decisively beat Hemu. What helped him was that Hemu got a little carried away and arrived in battle on an elephant, which made him a pretty much a sitting duck; Akbar shot him an arrow right into the eye. As soon as this occurred Hemu's army panicked and ran away, and Hemu himself was killed by Akbar.

If the first battle of Panipat signalled the arrival of the Mughals, the second was of greater importance. All the pretensions to sovereignty which the Afghans had clung on to since the days of Sher Shah Suri were finally crushed under the advancing Mughal heels.

With this victory Akbar sent a clear signal all over India â he was undoubtedly the Mughal king and intended to be, and was taken seriously. Akbar fought battles all over India, and at the end of it all had an empire that stretched down to the present Karnataka in the south, touching right upto the Hindukush range in the north, all of Rajasthan in the west and after taking in Kashmir and Bihar going on to Bengal in the east.

Akbar ruled the greatest empire that India saw before the British and ruled it with far more authority. One man sitting in his Red Fort in Agra ruled this entire empire with an iron hand.

Akbar was not only a good military man but he had a great head for diplomacy and statesmanship as well. He is famous for his Rajput diplomacy, which included some strategic matrimonial alliances (an idea he was the first to use), that turned the fiercely independent Rajputs from his bitter enemies to staunch allies who were ready to lay down their lives for him. He also made many reforms in administration and army management, and started many innovations.

Diplomacy apart, Akbar was a great visionary in many other fields â like art (painters of his court studied styles from far and wide), philosophy and religion (in 1581 he started a national religion which was an amalgam of Hindu, Islamic and Zoroastrian tenets called the Din-i-Illahi or the religion of God), music, literature and so on. Akbar also held deliberations in religion and philosophy with Buddhists, Jains and Christians, in particular the Jesuits. His court was famous for its nauratan (nine gems) or nine experts chosen over the years from various artistic fields, like Abul Fazl the historian, Raja Birbal the wit, Mia Tansen the legendary singer and so on. There are many stories about Akbar and his nine gems; the ones involving Raja Birbal and him are still popular all over India.

In 1600AD, his son and eventual successor, Jahangir rebelled against Akbar when he away in the Deccan engaged in battle. In the confusion of events to follow, Abul Fazl was killed, which made the great Mughal emperor livid with his son. In fact, he started toying with the idea of making Prince Khusro, his grandson, the heir apparent. This Khusro was a big favorite with the army for his valor and also with the people for his good looks. Realizing his folly Jahangir threw himself at his father's mercy in Agra. The latter, being in no mood to forgive and forget, took his time in coming around but eventually did.

In October 1605 Akbar fell ill and in November that same year that small boy who had stared so many years ago at the battlefield where his grandfather had won such a famous victory, died as king-emperor, the greatest king to have ever ruled India.

Jahangir was crowned emperor by his father when the latter had been on his deathbed in 1605. He had to face the usual share of revolts and rebellions. The very first one being from prince Khusro, in which he was in good company â for Khusro revolted when Jahangir's son, Shah Jahan, came to the throne as well. The single most important person in Jahangir's life was his wife, the enigmatic Nur Jahan, whom he married in 1611.

Nur Jahan was the real power behind Jahangir. She was a great queen, and a woman of amazing gifts. She was quite a beauty and set many trends in designs of clothes, textiles and jewellery. The attar (perfume) of roses was just one of this great lady's innovations. She was also a very capable and shrewd administrator. No detail, however small, escaped the queen's attention. Her ability to keep a cool head was almost legendary and she amazed even battle-hardy generals with her calm and poise in the middle of crisis. She has been accused of nepotism and of giving rise to a class of nobility which composed entirely of her kith and kin, but that she was entirely in control is clear from the fact that she rebuked even her brother when she thought so fit. Jahangir often remarked: "I have sold my kingdom to my beloved queen for a cup of wine and a bowl of soup."

However, Nur Jahan was not without failings and her biggest was ambition, not only for herself but for her child â a daughter from earlier marriage. She tried her best to keep the king and the rightful heir Shah Jahan separated and to make her daughter's husband the king. However, this was one project that Nur Jahan could not complete with success.

Jahangir was not a mere figurehead in his kingdom. He led his armies into battle a number of times and extended the frontiers of his empire further down in the Deccan, although he lost Kandhar. This loss, however, was not his fault but that of the bitter in-fighting between Shah Jahan and his stepmother. Nur Jahan ordered Shah Jahan to move in battle against a rebellion there, but the prince, suspicious of her motives, refused and revolted against Jahangir instead. The emperor got so occupied with his family affairs that he simply forgot about winning Kandhar back, even though it would have been a matter of just a few days siege.

Things became so bad that Jahangir had to resort to the extreme measure of kidnapping his own grandchildren away to Kashmir with him to stop his son. Depsite all this however Shah Jahan, being a huge favorite with the nobility, safely ascended the throne in 1627, when Jahangir died.

The reign of Shah Jahan has been widely acclaimed as the golden period of the Mughal dynasty. There are many reasons for this. Thanks to the firm base left by his grandfather and father, Shah Jahan's reign was relatively peaceful and hence prosperous. Except for one drought in 1630 in the areas of Deccan, Gujrat and Khandesh, the kingdom was secure and free from poverty. The coffers of the state were brimming with the right stuff. So it's no wonder that Shah Jahan was the greatest and most assiduous builder of the Mughal dynasty.

In 1639, he decided to shift his capital to Delhi and construct a new city there on the banks of the Yamuna, near Ferozabad. It was to be called Shahjahanabad and the famously spectacular peacock throne (the one that Nadir Shah took away) was transferred from Agra to the Red Fort, the new seat of the Mughal rulers, on April 8, 1648.

Military and building genius apart, Shah Jahan's capacity for hard work was legendary. Within a year of his taking reins, the revenue of the state had went up in leaps and bounds.

However, his greatest and most memorable of achievements of course was the breathtaking Taj Mahal, which he built in the memory of his wife Mumtaz Mahal, who died in child birth.

There were downsides too. He was a bigoted Muslim and a confirmed nepotist. He provided for the imperial princes before anyone else in the matter of administrative and judicial postings regardless of age, capability and talent. He also started the practise of conferring the cream of the offices on each prince; like Dara Shikoh was made the governor of Punjab and Multan, Aurangzeb was appointed governor of all the four provinces of the Deccan and so on. This might have been just a clever way to keep them occupied, but that was not how the nobility viewed it. The nobles saw this, and rightfully so, as an obstacle in the path of their promotions.

However, the end of Shah Jahan's reign did not live up to the beginning; it saw one of the messiest battles of succession (also see History in Delhi) that Indian history ever witnessed. In September 1657, Shah Jahan fell ill. The prognosis was so unoptimistic that the rumors had it that the emperor was dead. This was enough to spark off intense intrigue in the court. All the four claimants to Shah Jahan's throne were the children of the same mother â although one would never have guessed that from their temperaments and their determination to make it to the throne.

In 1657, Dara Shikoh was 43, Shah Shuja 41, Aurangzeb 39 and Murad 33. All of them were governors of various provinces: Dara was the governor of Punjab, Murad of Gujrat, Aurangzeb of the Deccan and Shah Shuja of Bengal. Two of them emerged clear frontrunners in the battle for the throne quite early: Dara Shikoh and Aurangzeb.

Aurangzeb was with doubt the ablest of Shah Jahan's sons and a clear favorite for the throne. His credentials both in battle and administration were legendary. He was also an orthodox Muslim of the oldest school possible, which made him a hot favorite with the clergy.

As stated earlier, the actual events which unfolded around Shah Jahan's illness were confused. Aiding and abetting the confusion with every word and gesture, for his own aims and purposes, was the favorite son Dara Shikoh. Aurangzeb did not waste much time. Acting on Dara Shikoh's behalf, Aurangzeb along with Murad met the Mughal armies twice in battle, and beat them each time while moving on relentlessly towards Agra, where Shah Jahan was convalescing.

When Shah Jahan heard of Aurangzeb's advance, he expressed a wish to meet Aurangzeb and talk to him. It was the emperor's belief that upon seeing him alive, his son would turn on his heels and go back. Clearly the old king had been ailing only in body and not in mind, for certainly the appearance of Shah Jahan himself would have laid to rest the whole issue of succession. Even the most ardent of Aurangzeb's supporters would have had second thoughts about defying the great Mughal's authority openly.

However, Dara Shikoh lacked the potentate's easy confidence in his son. He was not so convinced that Aurangzeb would meekly go back to where he had come from once he had been reassured by the king. In panic he also gave out that he was the heir-apparent.

So with suspicion and rumours ruling the day and power having the last laugh, Aurangzeb was the most amused of them all. Within a year he had all his brothers out of the way, father permanently in custody in the Agra Fort (where he hung on for eight years before dying in 1666) and was firmly entrenched on the Mughal throne.

If Shah Jahan has been over-romanticised by scholars, his son and successor Aurangzeb has been unduly denigrated. Aurangzeb, it seems, could do nothing right. Later writers were to contrast his bigotry with Akbar's tolerance, his failure against the Marathas rebels with Akbar's successes against the Rajputs; in fact he has been set up as the polar opposite of everything that earned one the Akbarian medal of genius. One writer has said about him, rather tongue-in-cheek, "His life would have been a blameless one, if he had no father to depose, no brothers to murder and no Hindu subjects to oppress."
This picture of him has left such an impact on popular imagination that even today he is regarded as the bad guy of the Mughal regime, the evil king who slayed all Hindus and Sikhs. Hardly anyone remembers that he governed India for nearly as long as Akbar did (over 48 years) and that he left the empire larger than he found it. In fact, Aurangzeb ruled the single largest state ever in Mughal history.

Aurangzeb's rise to the throne has been criticised as being ruthless. However, he was no more cruel than others of his family. He succeeded not because he was crueller but because he was more efficient and more skilled in the game of statecraft with its background of dissimulation; and if it's any consolation, he never shed unnecessary blood. Once established he showed himself a firm and capable administrator who retained his grip of power until his death at the age of 88. True, he lacked the magnetism of his father and great-grandfather, but commanded an awe of his own. In private life he was simple and even austere, in sharp contrast to the rest of the great Mughals. He was an orthodox Sunni Muslim who thought himself a model Muslim ruler.

Aurangzeb's reign really divides into two almost equal portions.

The first twenty-three years were largely a continuation of Shah Jahan's administration with an added footnote of austerity. The emperor sat in pomp in Delhi or progressed in state to Kashmir for the summer. From 1681 he virtually transferred his capital to the Deccan where he spent the rest of his life in camp, superintending the overthrow of the two remaining Deccan kingdoms in 1686-7 and trying fruitlessly to crush the Maratha rebellion. The assured administrator of the first period became the embattled, embittered old man of the second. Along with the change of occupation came a dramatic metamorphosis of character. The scheming and subtle politician became an ascetic; spending long hours in prayer, fasting and copying the Quran, and pouring out his soul in tortured letters. It was in the second or the Deccan phase of his career that Aurangzeb began to drift towards complete intolerance of Hindus. Earlier his devotion towards Islam had very rarely taken the form of any religious bigotry. Now all that changed â the very king who had ordered in February 1659 that "It has been decided according to our cannon law that long standing temples should not be demolishedâ¦ our Royal Command is that you should direct that in future no person shall in unlawful ways interfere with or disturb the Brahmins and other Hindu residents in those places" became a total fanatic.

In this zealousness to promote the cause of Islam, Aurangzeb made many fatal blunders and needless enemies. He alienated the Rajputs, whose valuable and trusted loyalty had been so hard won by his predecessors, so totally that they revolted against him. Eventually he managed to make peace with them, but he could never be easy in his mind about Rajputana again, a fact that hampered his Deccan conquest severely. Then, he made bitter enemies in the Sikhs and the Marathas. Things came to such a head that Guru Teg Bahadur, the 9th Guru of the Sikhs was at first tortured and then executed by Aurangzeb for not accepting Islam; a martyrdom which is mourned to this day by the Sikh community. The 10th Guru of the Sikhs, Guru Govind Singh then raised an open banner of revolt against Aurangzeb.

No, Great-grandfather Akbar would certainly not have approved or been amused. He would have raised his imperial eyebrows at such a royal mess and sharply rebuked Aurangzeb for squandering away what he had worked so hard to achieve. Deccan or no Deccan.

Aurangzeb ended his lonely embittered life in Aurangabad in 1707. Perhaps with relief, but surely with much grief too for surely he knew that with him set the glorious sun that was the Mughal dynasty.

The gallery of the great Mughals is completed by Aurangzeb's son Bahadur Shah, commonly neglected because his reign lasted barely five years. He was an old man (by contemporary standards) of sixty-three when he acceded, yet his achievements in time would have done credit to most men in their prime. He made settlements with the implacable Marathas, tranquillised the Rajputs, decisively defeated the Sikhs in the Punjab, and took their last Guru into his services. He was travelling throughout his reign and only came to rest in Lahore in the last few months of his life.

From here on, the Mughal dynasty begins to disintegrate, and with surprising speed. Many directly blame Aurangzeb and his destructive policies which eroded the faith of the subjects in the Mughals for this. However, this is by far an overstatement. Whatever might have been Aurangzeb's policies, he remained very much the emperor till his dying breath in 1707. True, his policies did lead to resentment; even at the end of Shah Jahan's reign the rot had set in. Aurangzeb in fact tried to stop it and did a good band-aid job for a little while, but then things just went haywire with his persistent Deccan devil.

Deccan wrung Aurangzeb the man, the king, the father and the believer out of all softer emotions and decorum. He simply lost all sense of balance. He alienated a sizeable portion of his subjects along with allies and employees and made completely unnecessary enemies which cost his successors dearly. He tried during his lifetime to put down rebellions all over his empire (the Marathas, the Sikhs, the Satnamis and the Rajputs) by one hand while trying to take Deccan with the other. However, it was like trying to put out a wild fire. Ultimately, it was these alternative power blocs which were cropping up all over the country that sped up the fall of the Mughals. Not to mention the foreign powers who were already among those present: the British stretching their legs in Calcutta, the Portuguese in Goa and the French testing waters in the South.

Of course, it did not help matters that the successors of the great Mughals were weak and unworthy of their forefathers. But that was bound to happen some time or the other, wasn't it? So, from the late-18th century the field was wide open for any new power that wanted to try to set up shop in India.

This was the time when a certain East India Company suddenly realized that they had stumbled upon a gold mine

03-21-2004, 01:06 AM

Don't play with Indian pride, PM warns foreign author 

Mumbai: In view of the controversy on James Laine's book on Chhatrapati Shivaji, Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee today warned the foreign author not to play with "our national pride".
Discuss: Foreign authors better stop playing with our national pride

On the alleged remark against Shivaji and his mother Jijamata in the book titled, 'Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India', Vajpayee said, "we not only condemn it, but also warn the foreign author not to play with our national pride."

Maharashtra government has stated that it would initiate action against the author, Vajpayee said adding, "the centre will support the state government and if the Maharashtra government fails then centre will initiate action on its own."

However, Vajpayee in the past at a function in Mumbai had said the views of a writer should be countered by ideology after the controversy over the book was raked up.

The Congress-NCP led DF government had attacked the saffron alliance for disapproving the state government's decision to ban the book and demanded an apology from the Prime Minister.
link-sify

04-15-2004, 09:03 PM

One might be forgiven for wondering whether this remorse extends to the thousands of Hindus killed by the Mughals starting with Babar. The skulls from the many pyramids that babar built wtih them are watching and waiting for signs of genuine remorse.

But such are the vagaries of destiny, that the descendant of the grand Mughals is now forced to work as domestic help in a foreign country and to beg her government for a handout. She should be thankful that the GOI has taken pity on her and given her something, a something that her ancester Akbar not only never gave the Rajputs of Chittoor but had them slaughtered at the rate of 30,000 a day.

Mughal emperorâs kin seeks Sikhsâ pardon

Amritsar, April 14: The wife of a descendant of the Mughals on Wednesday paid obeisance at the Akal Takht, marking a historic moment in time as she sought pardon for the atrocities committed by her ancestors.

Sultana Begum, the widow of Mirza Mohammed Bedar Bakht, great grandson of Bahadur Shah Zafar, the last recognised Mughal emperor, arrived in this Sikh holy city on Tuesday night just when everybody had given up hope.

âI am feeling relieved,â she said after paying homage at the Golden Temple.Sultana Begum left for Delhi on Wednesday to seek forgiveness at Gurudwara Sis Ganj in Chandni Chowk where the ninth Sikh Guru Tegh Bahadur was beheaded on the orders of Aurengzeb.

âI am not doing it for any kind of publicity. I had this heartfelt desire to seek forgiveness because our family has suffered a lot of misery,â she said. She did not meet any Sikh religious leaders.âI hope the community forgives our lineage and hatred for the Mughals is no longer there. Islam doesnât permit cruelty against anyone,â she said. Mother of five daughters and a son, who works as a cook in Saudi Arabia, Sultana Begum also went to the Durgiana temple here. 
âI belong to a royal lineage. Look at my pathetic condition, living in poverty. I only have a tea-stall in Howrah.âHer plight was highlighted last year after which she got a financial assistance of Rs 50,000 from the Central government.

âSince I am a descendant from the Mughal family, the government should give me two bighas of land and a Rs 50,000 monthly pension,â she demanded. Sultana Begumâs apology at the Golden Temple here marks one more event in the tumultuous history of the Sikhs and the Mughal emperors, who reigned over India for seven generations.

04-20-2004, 02:40 AM

Coincidence that the Mughal kin apologizes and the Global Sikh Community To Invest $ 1 Billion In Pakistan? Or maybe Pakis are washing their dirty money via this route <img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/furious.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='furious.gif' />

And you guys are upset over a bollywood bimbo kissing the paki rag <img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/mad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad.gif' />

11-28-2005, 09:57 AM

QUOTE(Mudy @ Jan 8 2004, 02:59 AM)Afghanistan and subcontinent
Aslam Effendi

No country has had such a big impact on the Indo-Pak subcontinent than Afghanistan. The Aryans settled in Afghanistan between 400 BC-300 BC and from here one branch went to Europe and another branch settled in the Indo-Pak subcontinent. Afghanistan was also the route through which many armies invaded the Indo-Pak subcontinent, but all the invaders were not Afghans: some were Greeks; some were Turks; some were White Huns; some were Arabs; some were Mughals. Among the famous invaders were Alexander the Great; Mahmood of Ghazni; Muhammad Ghori, Alauddin Khilji, Zahiruddin Babur; Muhammad bin Qasim; the Lodis; Sher Shah Suri, Nadir Shah Afshar and Ahmad Shah Abdali. The non-Afghan invaders first settled in Afghanistan before invading the Indo-Pak subcontinent and all the invaders made use of Afghan soldiers to carry out their military campaigns. These non-Afghan invaders made use of Afghan soldiers simply because the Afghans were famous for their acts of heroism; and this explains why the original name of Afghanistan was Ashvagan, meaning land of the heroes and from Ashvagan the name evolved into Afghanistan.

Many of the Afghan soldiers who helped the invaders were impressed with the wealth of the subcontinent, so they decided to settle here permanently; many inter-married among the locals and became part of the subcontinentâs soil. A large number of Afghan soldiers settled in the Punjab, inter-married among the Punjabis and so the area in the Punjab between the Beas and the Sutlej came to be known as Chota Afghanistan or mini-Afghanistan. Some of the leading families in the Punjab such as the Nawabs of Mamdot are originally Afghans. Another lot of Afghans settled in other parts of the subcontinent and the more enterprising ones among them became rulers of states such as Bhopal, Rampur, Palanpur. And the Afghan family of Haidar Ali and his son Tipu Sultan established a state in Mysore.

Afghanistan has been the mother of many tribes in the Indo-Pakistan subcontinent: for example, the leading tribes in Balochistan are Afghans: these tribes include the Sheranis, Raisanis, Tarins, Pannis, Achakzais, Kasis etc, etc. And in the NWFP, 70 per cent of the population consists of Pakhtun tribes whose mother is Afghanistan: these tribes include the Mohmands, Masuds, Yousafzais, Barakzais, Waziris, Shinwaris, Afridis, Durranis etc, etc.

Afghanistan is the mother of Hinduism in the subcontinent, as it was in Afghanistan that the most sacred books of Hinduism, the Vedas, were composed; and Afghanistan is the mother of all the Parsees in the subcontinent because the prophet Zoroaster was born here; and Afghanistan is the mother of all those saints and sufis who introduced Islam in the subcontinent. And Afghanistan has some very important and sacred sites for those of the Buddhist faith.

Afghan dynasties such as the Lodis and Suris contributed a lot in the development of the Indo-Pak subcontinent but also worked for Hindu-Muslim unity, so much so that many Hindus were impressed with their behaviour that they voluntarily accepted Islam.Â <img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/argue.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='argue.gif' /> Sher Shah Suri, a remarkable Afghan King, within only five years, measured the entire area of the Indo-Pak subcontinent; he made land reforms, developed a good currency system and built a road from one end to the other end of the subcontinent. It is interesting to note that he became king after dethroning Humayun, a Mughal; but on his premature death, even Humayun was grieved.

Some of the invaders from Afghanistan conquered some parts of the subcontinent but there were a few who conquered the whole of the subcontinent. For example, Alauddin Khilji spread the authority of Afghanistan and its culture throughout the Indo-Pak subcontinent, right up to Cape Comorin. And after defeating the Marhattas in the third Battle of Panipat, Ahmad Shah Abdali brought the whole of the subcontinent under the influence of Afghanistan; and Kashmir also became part of the Afghan empire. Afghanistanâs influence was so great in Kashmir that many Kashmiri Pundits proudly associated their names with various Afghan tribes. It was not unusual to find Kashmir Pundits with such names as Pundit Anand Kaul Banzai or Pundit Omkar Nath Yusufzai. It was because of Afghan influence that Persian became popular among Kashmiris.

Throughout history the Afghans had been invading the Indo-Pak subcontinent but then a day came when Afghanistan herself became a victim of foreign invasions. A number of times the British tried to establish their rule in Afghanistan but every time they failed. The political leaders in the Indo-Pak subcontinent were witnessing how a small, poorly armed country, was able to challenge the mighty British empire. These political leaders thought that if a small country could challenge British authority, why could a huge subcontinent not do the same. And so Afghanistan provided inspiration to the political leaders of the Indo-Pak subcontinent to fight for their political freedom which they eventually won in 1947.

Today no country offers better investment opportunity to investors in the Indo-Pak subcontinent, than Afghanistan. Besides this, the oil and gas pipeline projects from Central Asia via Afghanistan can have a big impact on the lives of the people of the Indo-Pak subcontinent. But all this will remain a dream unless there is stability in Afghanistan. And this is only possible if those interested in solving Afghanistanâs problems realise that Afghanistan is the worldâs largest tribal society and in such a society, all big and small decisions are made by tribes and not individuals. Century after century, right from the Aryan period, the jirga system has been used to solve the problems of the country. To change such an ancient system overnight is just like changing horses in mid-stream. Those who have recently drafted the constitution for Afghanistan have overlooked the fact that Afghanistan, for the last so many centuries, enjoyed stability because of following the tribal system, its most vital components being a king whose role was to unite all the tribes; a prime minister (Sadar-i-Azam) whose job was to administer the country; and a Loya Jirga whose job was to elect a king, draft constitutions, decide vital issues. Those who have drafted the present constitution of Afghanistan have not given option to the tribes whether they desire their centuries old tribal system of monarchy with which they are familiar or the unfamiliar system of western republicanism which has repeatedly failed to restore stability after the monarchy was derailed. Anything short of this arrangement will never restore stability in Afghanistan and instead of the country proving a blessing for the Indo-Pakistan subcontinent, it can create only problems for it and for the US.

The writer is great grandson of late Afghan King Dost Muhammad Khan, founder of the Muhammadzai Dynasty
effendi pak@yahoo.com
[right][snapback]5290[/snapback][/right]


this post certainly explains why india is so eager to induct cameljockeysthan into the SAARC (afghanistan is in south east asia in case you didnt know) - afterall afghanistan is the place where the vedas were written (by the erudite pathans of central asia). too bad that those vedic afghans (!!) later forgot about the vedas they had written and got impressed by islam instead and then subsequently er.. impressed islam, on us too.

dont we owe a lot to those guys?

11-28-2005, 10:09 AM

QUOTE(Kaushal @ Apr 15 2004, 09:03 PM)Her plight was highlighted last year after which she got a financial assistance of Rs 50,000 from the Central government.



the g.o.i. gave 50 grand of the tax payer's money to the descendant of aurangzeb !!??

12-12-2005, 05:16 AM

QUOTE THE FRUSTRATION OF ISLAM IN INDIA

Long ago, some 12 or 13 years before Partition, I had a chance to pass by a meeting of Muslims in Delhi. The chaste Urdu and the weighty voice of the man making the speech at the moment, made me stand and stare. It was a bearded mullah wearing a fez. He was narrating some history which was new for me.

The mullah mentioned several dates on which some decisive battles had been fought and won by the armies of Islam. I was not familiar with the names of the heroes and generals who had led those armies.

But I knew the names of the countries which, according to the mullah, had been conquered and converted en masse to Islam in rather short spans of time - Arabia, Palestine, Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco, Iran, Khorasan, Turkistan and so on.

There were repeated references to swords and spears and horses and hoofs and countless clashes in which human blood had flowed copiously. In between, some one from the audience stood up and shouted `nÃ£ra-i-takbÃ®r'. And the whole assembly roared back AllÃ£h-o-Akbar with full-throated frenzy.

Then the speaker moved to Sind and Hind. He recounted the many `miracles' which Islam had wrought here with the might of its sword as well as the spell of its Sufis, for more than a thousand years. I knew some of those `miracles' from my own text-books of history, though I had never suspected that they could be made to sound so superhuman as in the mouth of this mullah. And then, all of a sudden, the mullah's voice sank and became almost a whimper. His face too must have fallen, though I could not see it from the distance at which I was standing. He was now telling, in very mournful tones, how Islam had failed to fulfil its mission in this `kambakht (unfortunate) mulk (country)' which was still crawling with kufr (infidelism) in spite of all those arduous endeavours undertaken by the heroes of Islam. A funeral silence fell on the audience, and no one now stood up any more to invite another nÃ£ra-i-takbÃ®r. I moved away from the meeting and sat down in another part of the same park where the mullah's voice reached me no more.

But after some time the atmosphere was rent again by another bout of AllÃ£h-o-Akbar. I wondered what spell the mullah had spread over his audience again.

One thing that had puzzled me a good deal in the mullah's speech was his description of the great GaÃ±gÃ£ as a dahÃ£nÃ£ (rivulet) instead of as a daryÃ£ (river). I had not seen the GaÃ±gÃ£ so far with my own eyes. But my text-books of geography had told me that it was a mighty river, one of the four or five biggest and longest in the world. The mullah's description of it did not fit with a known fact.

He was a middle-aged man, and sounded rather well-read in history and geography. I thought that he should have known better. It was many years later that one day Professor Balraj Madhok cited to me the famous couplet of Altaf Husain Hali in which the GaÃ±gÃ£ had been contemptuously described as a dahÃ£nÃ£.1 I was suddenly reminded of the speech I had heard as a school boy. But by now I had acquired a good knowledge of medieval Indian history. A new image of medieval India had also emerged in my mind by reading K.M. Panikkar's A Survey of Indian History. It was no more the India of Muslim monarchs ruling leisurely over a large empire, building mosques and mazÃ£rs and madrasas and mansions, and patronizing poets and other men of letters. 

On the contrary, it was the story of the long-drawn-out war which took a decisive turn to the disadvantage of Islamic imperialism with the rise of Shivaji. The war had ended in a victory for the Hindus by the middle of the 18th century. A few months earlier, I had finished a Hindi translation of Kincaid's The Grand Rebel which I had named ShaktÃ®putra ShivÃ£jÃ®. I had fully concurred with Kincaid's conclusion that the British had taken over India not from the Muslims but from the Hindus.

Shri H.V. Seshadri has also quoted that couplet of Hali in The Tragic Story of Partition.2 He has also given a brief outline of the long war of liberation which Hindu society had fought and won against Islamic imperialism. He writes: "For 800 years Hindusthan waged a relentless freedom struggle - probably the most stirring saga of crusade for national freedom witnessed anywhere on the face of this earth.

 From Maharana Kumbha to Maharana Pratap Simha and Rajasimha in Rajasthan, from Hakka and Bukka to Krishnadevaraya in the South, from Chhatrapati Shivaji to the Peshwas in Maharashtra, from the various martyr Gurus of the Sikhs including Guru Govind Singh to Banda Bairagi and Ranjit Singh in the Punjab, from Chhatrasal in Bundelkhand to Lachit Barphukan in Assam, countless captains of the war of independence piloted the ship of freedom and steered her through perilous tides and tempests. As a result of their ceaseless and crushing blows, the conquering, sword of Islam lay in dust, shattered to pieces."3

TWO VERSIONS OF MEDIEVAL INDIAN HISTORY

Obviously, there is a deep divide between the two versions of medieval Indian history - Hindu and Muslim. Hindu society may like to forget the first phase of this history during which it suffered defeat after defeat in spite of a succession of great heroes who tried to blunt the sword of Islam, and block the path of Islamic
invasion.

But Hindu society cannot help taking pride in the phase which opened with the rise of Shivaji, and unfolded further under Chhatrasal, Banda Bairagi, Surajmal and Ranjit Singh. On the other hand, the mullah's gaze is galvanized on the period when the sword of Islam swept over the length and breadth of the Hindu homeland. He cannot help feeling humbled when he moves to a later period, and finds the hordes of Islam in hasty retreat before a Hindu counter-attack. The feeling in Hindu society at the end of it all is one of fulfilment; the feeling in the mullah's mind, on the other hand, is one of utter frustration. Islam had suffered in India a second and serious defeat after its first and total rout in Spain.

The political pundits have so far failed to lay their fingers on the forces which led to India's Partition, firstly because they have confined their purview to a brief period of 90 years - from 1857 to 1947. They would have to travel back in time for more than 900 years before they can hope to discover the springs of that deep-seated split - spiritual and cultural - which culminated in the formation of Pakistan.

Secondly, they make a serious mistake when they pit a so-called Hindu revivalism against a so-called Muslim revivalism, and put both of them on par as equally guilty parties for making a mess of it all. They would have to undertake a deeper probe into the intrinsic character and inherent dynamics of each `revivalism', before they can hope to acquire an adequate insight into the interaction of powerful and mutually hostile historical forces.

HINDU AND MUSLIM `REVIVALISM'

Hindu `revivalism' in the 19th century was essentially a resurgence of the national spirit of a people who were native to the land, and who had suffered terribly and for a long time from successive foreign invasions. Hindu society was aspiring to reform and renew itself in the image of its ancient ideals which had endowed it with strength and stability and kept it immune from alien inroads. I n the process, Hindu society had an inalienable right to pronounce its own judgments on imported ideologies which had coerced and corrupted it, as also on `heroes' of the histories enacted by its inveterate enemies.

On the other hand, Muslim `revivalism' was the frenzied reaction of a foreign fraternity which had finally failed to convert a majority of the native population to its own criminal creed, and which was, therefore, feeling terribly frustrated. The diehard descendants of Muslim swordsmen and sufis were now reviving dreams of an empire which their forefathers had built with so much bloodshed but which had been lost in the last round. They were calling upon their confused comrades and converted victims to revert to those medieval mores when Islam had moulded the pagan and peace-loving people of Arabia into a brotherhood of bandits. In the process, they were fast becoming the inmates of a lunatic asylum crowded with some of the most desperate characters.

The history of Arab and Turkish aggressions against India would have been no different from the history of earlier aggressions by the Greeks, the Sakas, the Kushanas, and the Hunas but for the presence of a new factor. A culturally superior and temperamentally compassionate Hindu society would have tamed these latter-day barbarians as well, and turned them into civilized members of its own household. What made the big difference and complicated matters was that the Arabs and the Turks had themselves become victims of the vicious ideology of Islam, and lost their own cultural identity before they came to this country.

 THE PRISON-HOUSE OF ISLAMIC THEOLOGY

Islam was born as a totalitarian and terrorist cult, which it has remained ever since. Its only `religious' achievement was to rationalize the lowest human passions, and stamp them with the supernatural seal of an almighty Allah. It was, therefore, inevitable for it to become an ideology of imperialism with a clean conscience. The followers of Islam thus found it easy to feel convinced that they were carrying out the commandments of Allah while they invaded other countries, indulged in mass slaughter, converted the conquered people by force, misappropriated other people's properties, captured and sold into slavery countless men and women and children, and destroyed every vestige of culture and true spirituality. They could not but regard as legitimate rewards from Allah the loot and the slaves which they took whenever they were victorious.

But what made matters much worse, the same theology prevented the Muslims from coming to terms with reality in moments of defeat. They refused to renounce their claim to ill-gotten gains, and tended to become ever more fanatical and frantic in their efforts to recover what they were made to disgorge.

The theology had laid down that Allah had mandated the whole world to the millat, and entrusted all its wealth and population to the custody of Islam. How could Allah wish otherwise? Every setback had, therefore, to be interpreted and proclaimed as due to a temporary estrangement of Allah simply because the millat had turned away from practising the pieties prescribed by the Prophet and the first four caliphs. The millat had only to return to those old mores, and Allah would restore to it whatever he had taken away in a fit of wrath. As the millat could not live without Allah, Allah also could not maintain himself without the millat. That is how the argument runs in commentary after commentary on the Quran and the Hadis. That is why the millat has alternated between a riotous living at other people's expense, and an equally riotous return to piety.

 THE PIETY OF ISLAM

There are many myths afloat about the piety of early Islam, particularly among those Hindus who want to prove that Islam is as good a religion as their own. Many people get impressed by the piety exhibited and exhorted by the Mullah and the Sufi. They do not know that Islamic piety has always been an inherent function of Islamic fanaticism. The more pious a Muslim, the more dangerous he becomes for his fellow human beings. It was the piety of Islam which made its swordsmen behave as they did, both in victory and defeat. It was the piety of Islam which installed the Mullah and the Sufi at the centre of the millat, and enabled them to control its mind as well as its heart.

When the armies of Islam rode roughshod over the Hindu homeland, the swordsman of Islam was very likely to relax and retreat from callous carnage after some time. He was likely to get satiated after the first few rounds of slaughter and pillage, or feel some sympathy for fellow human beings, or balk at the destruction of beautiful temples and monasteries, or turn away from burning the sacred and secular literature of non-Muslims, or acquire respect for the spirituality and culture of a people who had behaved so differently from his own comrades-in-arms.

It was the Mullah and the Sufi who would not let him relax. They threatened him with hell if he tried to turn away from the work assigned by Allah. The more heinous the crimes which a Muslim monarch or mercenary committed, the higher the place in heaven which the Mullah and the Sufi reserved for him. The greater the slaughter and rapine in which a Muslim army indulged, the more
plentiful the wines and houris which were promised to the ghÃ£zÃ®s.

But the sweep of the sword of Islam could not continue for ever. The Hindus who had been caught unprepared for this sort of `religion' and this sort of `heroism', were not made of clay. They organized a resistance for many years, and finally mounted a counter-attack. The swordsman of Islam was a mortal man in spite of all the praises which Muslim historians and poets had heaped upon him for his invincibility. He fell back as soon as he came in contact with equally sharp or superior steel, then threw away his sword, and finally accepted defeat. It was the Mullah and the Sufi who refused to get reconciled to the new reality. They compiled some more commentaries on the Quran and the Hadis and called upon the millat to conquer India once again. This time the claim was advanced on no better a basis than the right acquired from an earlier `conquest'.

Ever since, the Mullah has sedulously maintained and spread the myth of a Muslim empire in India which was `stolen slyly' by the `wily' British. As an after-thought, he adds that Islam has a message for India and that its `spiritual mission' in India is still unfulfilled. Shri Seshadri has quoted a passage from the preface to F.K. Khan Durrani's Meaning of Pakistan which reveals the mind of the Mullah. It says: "There is not an inch of the soil of India which our forefathers did not once purchase with blood. We cannot be false to the blood of our forefathers. India, the whole of it, is therefore our heritage and it must be reconquered for Islam.

Expansion in the spiritual sense in an inherent necessity of our faith and implies no hatred or enmity towards the Hindus. Rather the reverse. Our ultimate ideal should be the unification of India, spiritually and politically, under the banner of Islam. The final salvation of India is not otherwise possible."4

Perversity loses all
limits once the human mind passes under the spell of Islam. India is to be enslaved again for the `spiritual salvation' of Hindu society! There have been many Mullahs and Muslim scholars in India, Pakistan and the wide world of Islam who have been making similar statements, every now and then. The heroics conveyed was heralded by Shah Waliullah, soon after the Mughal empire started crumbling in the first half of the 18th century. It acquired a feverish pitch after Ahmed shah Abdali, whom Waliullah had invited to wipe out the Marathas and the Jats, also failed to save the situation. The heroes of Islam had disappeared. But the heroics had remained.

The harangues of Waliullah and company were addressed not to an advancing army but to a demoralised crowd of stragglers beating a fast retreat. The retreat would have soon become a rout if the British had not intervened at a critical juncture. The British did not steal any empire from Islam. On the contrary, they saved the residues of Islamic imperialism from being reduced to their real status vis-a-vis a resurgent Hindu society. The residues used the respite to reassemble their ranks, and get ready for another rearguard action. This is the unmistakable impression left on one's mind by a reflective reading of Indian history during that period. The rest is only secularist make-belief relished by the Mullah and the Marxist.

THE `SPIRITUAL MISSION' OF ISLAM

The `spiritual mission' of Islam needs no comment. The residues of Islamic imperialism were not in search of spiritual solace which they could share with their `countrymen'. On the contrary, they were missing the very mundane monopolization of power and pelf which they had enjoyed earlier. This becomes quite clear as one reads the Presidential Address of Janab R.M. Sayani delivered in 1896 at the 12th Session of the Indian National Congress in Allahabad. Speaking of Muslim psychology, he had said: "Before the advent of the British in India, the Musalmans were the rulers of the country. The Musalmans had therefore all the advantages appertaining to it as the ruling class. The sovereigns and the chiefs were their co- religionists and so were the great landlords and great officials.

The court language was their own. Every place of trust and responsibility, or carrying influence and high emoluments was by birthright theirs. The Hindus did occupy some position but the Hindus were tenants-at-will of the Musalmans. The Hindus stood in awe of them. Enjoyment and influence and all good things of the world were theirs. By a stroke of misfortune, the Musalmans had to abdicate their position and descend to the level of their Hindu fellow-countrymen. The Hindus, from a subservient state, came into land, offices and other worldly advantages of their former masters. The Musalmans would have nothing to do with anything in which they might have to come into contact with the Hindus."5

A spectre had started haunting the residues of Islamic imperialism - the spectre of British withdrawal from India leaving the Muslims to find their natural and normal place in a nation which had regained its freedom and initiative. That explains the pathetic appeals of the Muslim League to the British rulers to divide India before they quit.

Had our national leaders understood the historical situation and had they perceived the paralysis behind the heroics, there would have been no partition, no Pakistan, and no Bangladesh. Why and how the national leaders failed to face and defeat a frustrated Islamic fraternity is a story still to be told.

Footnotes:
1 Hati had mourned in his most famous poem that though the invincible armada of Islam had crossed many mighty rivers and seas, it got drowned in the rivulet that was the GaÃ±gÃ£!
2 The Tragic Story of Partition, p. 2.
3 Ibid., p. 1-2.
4 Quoted in Ibid., p. 250.
5 History and Culture of the Indian People, edited by R.C. Majumdar,
Volume XI, The Struggle for Freedom, Bombay, 1981, pp. 296-97.
http://voiceofdharma.com/books/muslimsep/ch5.htm

01-23-2006, 11:23 AM

QUOTEAfghanistan is the mother of Hinduism in the subcontinent, as it was in Afghanistan that the most sacred books of Hinduism, the Vedas, were composed. Who wrote this nonsense, imaginative Muslim Afghans or Pakistanis?
I doubt I need to set the record straight in this forum. Nevertheless, I'm willing to write what everyone here already knows. The Vedas were composed in the Sapta Sindhu region - i.e. Punjab. They don't speak of Afghanistan at all. The Afghan Hindus will not be offended by this, as they - like the rest of us Indian Hindus - know this already. Likewise, they also know that their ancestors have some connections with the authors of the Vedas as do people in all regions of India.

Wait. The article containing that ridiculous statement was written by "Aslam Effendi" which is obviously a Muslim name (Effendi means friend, I believe). No wonder they know nothing about the history of Hinduism or the Vedas, or ... ancient India for that matter.

More stupidity ensues:QUOTEHindus were impressed with their behaviour that they voluntarily accepted Islam Good one. Really funny. I've never come across this inventive load of nonsense before. The Afghan Hindu dynasties were Shaivites that bravely kicked the rears of the alien imperialist fanatics. Shahiyas were among the great many dynasties involved in fighting the invaders. More information about Afghan (and other Hindu) resistance can be found in Sita Ram Goel's book "Heroic Hindu Resistance to Muslim Invaders (636 AD to 1206 AD)" http://www.voiceofdharma.com/books/hhrmi/index.htm
I've never heard of any Afghan Hindus having voluntarily converted (unless someone calls converting to prevent one's own death at the hands of fanatics a voluntary act - in which case, they were ALL voluntary).

05-03-2006, 10:13 PM

As Maharatta, Rajput, Jat relations are being discussed, the battle of Panipat stands out like a watershed- a turning point

Below is a contemporary account from the times.

AHMAD SHAH ABDALI AND SARV-KHAP PANCHAYAT

As recorded by Pandit Kanha Ram , the official Bhat ( historian) of the Haryana Sarvkhap, a contemporary of the times and a witness to the entire episode.

This was researched and forms part of the Book by Prof B K Dabas.- Political and Social History of the Jats.- 2001, Sanjay Prakashan, New Delhi. ISBN : 81-7453-045-2

The book is avaiable from D K Publishers, Ansari Rioad, New Delhi
http://www.dkpdindia.com/

EXTRACT:

It was Samarth Guru Ramdas who brought the Marathas in contact with Jat community and the Haryana Sarv-Khap Panchayat. Later when Peshwas wanted to make India a one whole sovereign state, they furthered this contact.

About in V.S. 1813 Sardar Dattaji, deputed by Marathas, drove out Najib Khan to Shukartal from Delhi. Jats, Gujars and many other brave people of Haryana shared this battle. All those fought this battle abreast with Marathas. Dattaji stayed for some three years in a mud-fort at Shukartal. The Jats were a part of his army. They fought shoulder to shoulder with Marathas to defeat his enemies. In these three years Dattaji eliminated Najib's rule over all the Hindu places of pilgrimage. The Sarv-Khap panchayat always supported Dattaji in subduing Najib.

When Najib felt helpless he invited emperor Abdali of Kandhar for his help. Dattaji was given the responsibility to protect Delhi, Thaneswar and the land between Ganga and Yamuna.

In V.S. 1816 Abdali marched towards India. Dattaji left Shukartal and marched to defend Delhi with his complete Maratha army and 5,000 brave soldiers of Haryana. Datta's army fought with Abdali at Badli. [About 12 kilometers NW of Delhi] The battle lasted for four days. The advance soldiers of Dattaji compelled Abdali to retreat. Abdali was just intending to slip away. In the meantime armies of Najib and Nawab of Lucknow reinforced Abdali. At this hour in addition to Maratha army a force of some ten thousand Sarv-Khap Panchayat Jat soldiers joined Datta. Abdali was attacked on three sides and he suffered a serious loss.

At such a crucial time Najib instigated the Balochs who migrated and settled down in the fifteenth century, and were hawkers and laborers by profession, and they began to trouble the villagers. At this occasion the Sarv Khap Panchayat members of Brij, land between Ganga and Yamuna, reminded Datta that if he had not forgiven Najib, being persuaded by his flattery and display of happiness, he would not have had to face such days, and that it was his own emotion of mercy that proved his enemy. Dattaji retorted, "It is not my fault. I was so directed by Peshwa. According to Peshwa's direction Najib was to be set free, not to be killed." Datta further reminded the Panchayat members that they had asked him not to free Najib, but if he acceded to their request the Peshwa would be angry.

The power of Sarv -Khap Panchayat was divided in three camps-one to maintain peace in the villages, the second to assist Dattaji and third to keep an eye on Abdali's accomplices so that they might not loot the villages. Yet they acted boldly.

In V.S. 1816 in the battle of twelve days Dattaji was struck by a bullet in his stomach and passed away. The Maratha army retreated and assembled at Thaneswar. The new Maratha Commander Jankoji came from Narnaul and Holkar also arrived. This joint army drove back Abdali and his army by guerilla warfare.

The Marathas' immeasurable power was involved against Najib in South.

Unable to overcome the guerilla warfare tactics of Marathas and their Jat allies Abdali was making his mind to return his homeland. At this hour Najib and his associates begged him not to leave and showed their helplessness to the extent that they told him he was their only protector.

In the south the Peshwa after getting free from the Nizam convened a conference of the Marathas and decided to take revenge of Dattaji's death. He also decided to subdue Abdali and outlined a program for a fresh war.

The Maharastra Council deputed Sadashiv Rao Bhau and Bisbas Rao to avenge Datta's death. An army of 200,000 soldiers, 200 huge cannons and 80 small cannons were given to them to confront Abdali. At this occasion the Peshwa exhorted his brother Sada Shiv Rao Bhau, "Promote your contact with all the Indian kings and the Sarv-Khap Panchayat of Haryana."

As per the Peshwa's advice Bhau wrote letters to all of them and invited them for support. [For a photograph of the original letter see

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JatHistory/files/

Sadashiv bhau.doc
Letter from Maharatta general Bhau to the Jat Sarv Khap Panchayat]

Most of the Rajput Rajas of Rajasthan were jealous of the Marathas and they did not support them.

The Jats, Gujars, Ahirs and other people selected Suraj Mal their leader.

In V.S. 1817 a conference was held at Chauhana, an old fort near Delhi. The advisers proposed their own strategy. The small as well as very powerful chiefs of Jats left their decision to be made by five Panchase (the council of five)- Harsahai Pandit, Ramsahai Jat, Bhola Ram Gujar, Ramjas Ahir and Surj Rajput. The Jat panchas of Hathras and Mursan with the above five panchas proceeded to Suraj Mal and all of them accepted Suraj Mal as their commander as he was intelligent and also a skilled man of warfare. Later the Raja of Landtora also joined him.

A meeting (conference) was held in the camp of Raja Bhau in which 551 delegates participated. Bhau was made the chairman. After this Ramrai, an old Pandit of Haryana blessed the conference after enchanting Veda mantras.

In this conference the delegates expressed their notions as under:

"Raja Bhau is born in the house of Chitpawan Brahmins who are staunch followers of religion and true patriots. All the Hindus of northern India should follow them. Whether Hindus or Muslims all will be benefited by our victory in this battle. A foreigner can never be good to us. Beware of split and division. Live united, union is strength. The Indians always were divided so they could not face foreigners and were defeated. Foreigners were not stronger or more virtuous than Indians were. The only cause of the defeat of the Indians was that they never fought as a united force. They were always in divisions. This very evil brought them to subjection. Now the Rajas of Rajasthan do not join Marathas who are the true followers of India's religion and culture, Abdali is foreigner and is the follower of a different faith. Formerly Abdali was a commander of Nadir Shah who looted a booty of million of rupees. Is there somebody to ask these kings, what benefit they had from that battle? Now after nineteen years Abdali has not returned to offer you any thing. Instead he invades us to seize out wealth, and the remaining limited wealth of the Mughal and the lives of thousand of people. The Rajas of Rajasthan will not be with you, rather they are rejoicing to see you entangled with Abdali.
Their blood prefers to be subjected by foreigners than offer cooperation to their own brethren."

The Council appealed to Sujan Singh (Maharaja Suraj Mal) to express his views. He stated:

"Honourable Chairman! The principality of our country is in the hands of Peshwa in these days. The Mughals are nominal emperors. Their court has become as arena of clowns and jokers. This time you come here as a leader of Maharastra Mandal sent by Peshwa. You have passed a distance of thousands of miles to save the country and religion. All our wealth and lives are dedicated to you. Do not fear Abdali. We stand for the prestige of Peshwa. These days Peshwa is like a sheet (Chadar) to cover the Hindu faith. You are his brother and you have a keen desire to strengthen India. You are our representative. We, on behalf of all the Hindus of India, offer you respect equal to the Peshwa. In the first instance you are a Brahmin and besides you are a crown of Hindus. We shall sacrifice our everything on you. My 25,000 soldiers, 60 cannons and all the army of Sarv-Khap panchayat of Haryana will be in your service. Think a little over my views, and the rest is up to you to accept it or not. You are elder and elders may only be beseeched. My suggestions are as under:

1. Before the battle provisions should be accumulated in a safe place like Brij or Bharatpur.

2. To accompany ladies in the battles our strength will be divided. They should therefore be kept in the fort of Deeg.

3. Establish the centre for heavy weapons and other articles at a distant place, and fight the battle with guerilla strategy.

4. Involve Abdali's army in a battle till summer falls, and in the summer make a vigorous attack

5. Do not harm a place of Mohammedan worship. Call a council in the court and choose a Mughal Prince as your chief and thus gain their sympathy. Do not touch precious articles kept in the fort so the Mohammedan may not use this opportunity to make propaganda against us. Invite as many Chiefs as possible to join you and no divide should occur in the organization.

6. All Mohammedan of India will remain with Abdali. Courtiers of Mughals are involved in conspiracy. You must not trust them, yet you must listen to them.

7. It is my special appeal to your chief commandant Ibrahim Gardi that he should consult me for war strategy. For five to six months, guerilla attacks should be only be made, that too only now and then. Keep your contact with Delhi.

8. The heavy loss in the battle of Kunjpura has familiarized Abdali of our power. For some time Abdali had been collecting provisions and troops from the Rohilla State. So the battle is to be fought decisively. Victory or loss is in the hand of God."

Raja Bhau was a great warrior and a brave person. He had won many battles but he was proud. Inexperienced and young fellows accompanied him, and he had no experience of fighting in the plains.

After listening to all the chiefs he called a separate meeting of his associates.

He then removed the silver plates from the ceiling of Red Fort he distributed them among his soldiers. He humiliated the Mughal emperor by selling his precious articles.

He held a meeting in Diwan-i-am and offered the principal rank to his nephew Bisbas (Visvas) Rao. He did not seat Mughal emperor besides him, but seated him but below him, and also insulted many other Mohammedan. This instigated many Mohammedan chiefs.

The women were not kept away from battlefield and the need for edible provisions were not attended to. Equally proud his chief artillery incharge Ibrahim Gardi said, " I shall roast the army of Abdali like Holas (green grams roasted in fire), for is only the matter of one raid."

Raja Bhau attacked with a joint army of Marathas, Sarv-Khap Panchayat, Maharaja Suraj Mal and the army of Holkar of Indore, and suffering little loss he advanced up, as far as Panipat. All Mohammedan kings, chiefs and nawabs were inclined to join with Abdali. The envoys of kings of Rajasthan advised Abdali and Najib, with the message that they must not doubt their favour and they would not remain with Bhau. The words of Rajputs created a hope in Abdali and subsequently he left Rohilkhand and installed his army in the battlefield of Panipat and disconnected Marathas from Delhi.

On finding the Bhau in adverse circumstances King Suraj Mal, Malhar Rao Holkar and Solal, the General of Jat soldiers of the Sarv-Khap panchayat approached Bhau and requested him to work on the suggestions made formerly by Suraj Mal.

The associates of proud king Bhau replied, "We are sure that when an encounter takes place we will play like as at Holi. We will send our reply after a two days consultation." When the meeting was over the Bhau said to his councilors, "Attack the camp of Bharatpur king, loot it, and capture them before they reach here."

When it was known in the camp of Bharatpur and Indore that the camp was to be raided the next night, the two leaving a few soldiers, went away to some distant place over night. The two had an army of 50,000.

A few soldiers of Raja Bhau's army instigated the Bhau saying, "Sujan, Jat of Bharatpur, is only a peasant's son. What knowledge of war he has got? He has known farming only."

Bishbas Rao presented to Sujan on behalf of Peshwa a turban, a note and hundred and one gold coins. An irresponsible chief said as much as, "Return our presents containing the turban and other articles.'" The king of Indore was called a shepherd and about him it was said, "One who earns his livelihood by a herd, getting it to wander over pastures. What can he know of a battle?" These irresponsible associates of Bhau insulted the two kings and also made mockery of them. Noting, this attitude the two kings went away from Bhau's camp to some safe place.

A few fighters of Sarv Khap panchayat also pitched their tents at some distance. The commander Solal, chief of the warriors of the Sarv-Khap panchayat said to his fighters, "We will get our provisions from villages and we will remain calm. These Maratha associates of Bhau have lost their wisdom and they do not listen to anybody. At such an occasion their indecent behavior has separated the allies."

Solal went to the camp of Bhau with four other Pandits. One of who was Kanha Ram and he requested the Bhau to accept the suggestions of Sujan Singh (Suraj Mal) since his views were right. But Bhau's associates did not allow anything to move.

Abdali came to know of this malice through the envoy of Rohillas' and he blocked the way of Marathas. All the provisions of king Bhau were exhausted. The elephants, horses, camels went hungry. The soldiers ate just half rations. The Sarv-Khap panchayat sent some store of grains and straw but for such a big army this was insufficient. The king Bhau said to some of his associates who in a fit of drinking were uttering unmindfully, "It is better to die while fighting instead of dying hungry." Everybody decided to break through the frontiers of Abdali's army and go to Brij or Delhi. All the chiefs were directed to take a charge of their command and make an expedition next morning to break the siege, Ibrahim Gardi was directed to remain in the forefront.

Raja Bhau's army made its expedition early before the dawn. Raja Bhau and Bishbas Rao were mounted on an elephant. The soldiers of Ibrahim Gardi were provided with guns and cannons. In the early hours of the morning about 5,000 hornpipes began to blow on the side of king Bhau and the Marathas rushed at the Afghan army like hungry wolves. The artillery of Ibrahim was emitting fire and the guns' bullets were being showered like rains. The shell showering by Ibrahim was almost roasting the army of Abdalli; about 17,000 soldiers of Rahmat Khan Ruhella also met the same fate. In this battle about 5,000 soldiers of Maratha army were wounded or killed. After defeating the army of about 18,000 soldiers fighting under the command of two chiefs and breaking the line, Ibrahim advanced. King Bhau and the Malls (Warriors) of the Sarv-Khap panchayat made a sudden attack on the army of 40,000 soldiers of Abdali and split them. About noon the victory in the favour of Marathas was almost decided.

Unfortunately after midday Ibrahim Gardi, the chief Commander of Bhau, a very sincere brave and an expert on French Warfare, was shot with three bullets and he was sent for a treatment behind in the camp.
With his absence the army was dispossessed of its real strength. Within no time a small shell fell in the Howdah of Bishbas Rao which burnt him badly and by one of his special messengers he informed his uncle that he should see him in his last hours. Raja Bhau was shocked and was impatient to meet the nephew. But as the situation of the battle was critical, his mates did not allow the Bhau to leave the field. But Bhau under the excessive impatience dismounted from his elephant and rode on his horse and made his way to know the plight of Bishbas Rao.

On the way he was informed by a maiden that 'the camp of his women had been raided by Afghans, the tents had been set ablaze and the ladies were wandering for shelter. The Mohammedan soldiers who were appointed to guard the camp themselves had set the camp afire. 'Save them.' The king Bhau sent a troop in that direction and himself went to Bishbas Rao who was struggling with death and he took his last breath as the Bhau approached him.

The Afghans soldiers of Abdali had full knowledge of this incident and they made a fresh attack on Maratha army after the noon. As Raja Bhau was absent the Maratha army lost its courage, it left the field and the victory changed into the defeat.

In this battle the Marathas met a very heavy loss. There was no household in Maharastra, from which a man did not lose his life in this battle. The power and progress of Marathas shattered. It appeared as if a storm had come, and snatched away all the wealth of the Marathas. Mules laden with silver and gold coins were wandering about without their drivers.

In V.S. 1818 (1761 A.D.) the Marathas lost the field at Panipat but it was solely by ill fate. Otherwise there was no apparent cause of this defeat. The survivor Marathas from this battle moved to the various villages of Haryana. In every village panchayat of Haryana it was decided that every survivors of Bhau's army whether soldier, serf or a chief, if he happened to reach any village must be provided maximum facilities.

What happened to Raja Bhau?

Raja Bhau lost the battle through his own faults.

He did not go back to his mother state Maharastra. Instead he resided in Haryana until his passing away during the V.S. years 1818-1825 (1761-68 A.D.). He lived in the disguise of a hermit in an Ashram (Retreat) of the Nath Panth movement near Rohtak. He met the people, survivors and fighters of the battle, in fairs at Haridwar, Rishikesh and Garh-Ganga. He also stayed at Sisauli, Baraut, Dhakauli, Sanga (Sanwga), Chhaprauli, Harsauli and Kurdi and requested his acquaintances not to reveal any thing about himself. He called himself Bhavaniram (Bhawanand). He passed way at the age of and died at the age of 119. [3]

The Marathas who reached the lands of Haryana and Brij were sumptuously served and greeted. Milk and butter were provided to them in abundance. Physicians were provided to treat the wounded soldiers. After getting cured they were generously provided with way fare and other provisions.

The queen of Bhau, Parvati Bai, with other fifteen ladies stayed at Ailum (now in Muzaffarnagar district, U.P.) for about six months. Later, she was sent, across the Yamuna River,

There were several thousands of wives of Bhau's chiefs, many of whom perished; Afghans and many others committed suicide and some were eaten by beasts or drowned in the rivers kidnaped some.

Raja Sujan Singh proclaimed in his state that the survivors of the battle of Panipat whether soldiers of chiefs, wherever they reach, should be looked after generously -' Their homes are distant, they should be looked upon as family members and looked after them in the best possible manner.'

The expenditure made on their behalf would be borne by the state and in the entire state of Haryana the Marathas were greeted more than hermits and saints. Raja Sujan Singh himself spent as much as one million rupees on them. In all the public chambers (Chaupals) of Haryana roasted grams and gur (molasses) were kept to be provided to them. Butter and milk were amply offered. Although Ahirs and Gujars of Haryana left no service un- rendered, the Jats led them all.

For this offering, sheltering and service to the Marathas, Abdali looked upon the people of Haryana as his enemies and he marched to destroy Bharatpur and Brij. The men and women of Haryana bound with weapons divided themselves in-groups whom the survivor Marathas also joined. An army of 15,000 soldiers from Bharatpur under the command of Jawahar Singh proceeded beyond Mathura. Latter different groups of Nagas, Gosains and Vairagis also joined them, which made the number of fighters as big at 25,000. In this battle near Mathura a heavy loss on both sides occurred. A group of Sikhs also joined the army of Jats.

They fought and killed about 5,000 soldiers of Abdali, 1,000 horses and 500 camels were captured and cash of about 80,000 rupees was recovered. The next night a troop of 4,000 Gujars and Ahirs looted the one thousand soldiers of Abdali who were busy in cooking their meals in their camp. The soldiers were killed and Abdali's mules, donkeys and horses laden with gold and silver were looted.

Then the summer came about. Cholera broke out in the army of Abdali. Consequently changing his intention of destroying Brij, Abdali moved towards his homeland. On the way he was attacked and raided at least three times. It was on account of the cholera that the Brij could be freed such a great disaster.

References

1. This is an original but translated copy of Pt. Kanha Ram's manuscript Pt. Kanha Ram, who had established his camp at Issopur Teel at the time of third battle of Panipat, saw all the events happening before his eyes. He also helped the Maratha army by sending foodgrains.

2. About 12 km. Northwest of Delhi.

3. The people of Haryana erected a shrine (a samadhi) in honour of the Bhau at, an annual fair (a mela) is still held there today.

4. for a photograph of the original letter of the Bhau to the Haryana Sarv Khap see

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JatHistory/files/

sadashiv bhau.doc

05-03-2006, 10:26 PM

Sadashiv Bhau, the choice general of the Mahrattas in the war against Abdalli at Panipat. Thanks to their arrogance they lost.

See message # 53 on this list,

Here is a copy of the original letter Sadashiv Bhau wrote , asking for support from the Haryana Sarv Khap panchyat.

I have also provided from the Khap records, the resolution passed by the panchayat, which provided 25,000 troops to the Maharatta coalition army.

The Maharattas alienated their Jat allies, insisted on looting Delhi, and Maharaja Suraj mall withdrew back to Bharatpur. The Khap soldiers followed the instructions of the Panchayat, and supported the Maharattas thru thick and thin, and most were martyred.

The Bhau lived out his life in Haryana, incognito, and today there is a shrine erected in his memory , He died in SANGHI village in ROHTAK DISTRICT.His Samadhi is in village Sanghi now.

An annual fair , a Mela is still held there today.

For the rest of the account see message 53 on this list.

Below are the accounts of the resolution of the Panchayat and a copy of his letter, and a translation thereof

For the a photo of the original letter see the file Sadashiv Bhau on the files section of this list

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JatHistory/

Ravi Chaudhary

********

SARV KHAP MEETING AND RESOLUTION PASSED

A sarv-khap panchayat was held in Sisauli in 1817 S.B. [A.D. 1760] under the presidentship of Danat Rai who had organized the meeting.

It was called to discuss an appeal for military help by the Maratha general Sada Shiv Bhau, to fight against the invasion of Ahmed Shah Abdali.

The resolutions passed by the panchayat were:

â The appeal for military help should be accepted, because to help the Marathas is to help defend the country. Every khap should provide one army contingent. Two thousand cavalry should be provided. Chaudhry Sheo Lal1 of Shoron village to be appointed commanding general of the sarv-khap armies.

The representatives of the khaps should take a religious vow to fight to the end and should be prepared to sacrifice their lives for the defence of the country.
An army of 20,000 soldiers was raised, and fought under the leadership of the Marathas in the third battle of Panipat against Abdali. The Marathas were defeated and most of the sarv-khap army were martyred.


TEXT OF LETTER FROM BHAU


The text of Sada Shiv Bhauâs letter when translated reads:

âTo the Jats, Gujars, Ahirs and the Jats of 18 khaps, or pads [thambas], or the heads of thoks, and panchayats, I send my regards. For the defence of religion it is the duty of every Hindu to help me in defending the country. Everyone will have to fight for the defence of the country against the coming invasion. From the ninth century [S.B.] the apostates have made this country their stronghold and are ruling over it.

There will be no better opportunity than this [to drive them out]. The servant of the Hindu religion

Â· Sada Shiv Bhau.

This letter is addressed to the Jat, Gujar, Ahir, Rajput and all the Hindu castes. Maharaja Suraj Mal has promised to provide 25,000 soldiers.â

REF: 1] Sheo Lal was the founder of the thok Sheosingh. patti Sheosingh, Shoron village. he was the general appointted by the Sarv Khap Panchayat

Login




Remember me Lost Password?