History of the Maratha nation

[Bharatvarsh2]

<<<Dear Sandhya ji,



Thank you for taking up the issue, however in your article you make an

unwarranted snide remark against the peshavA-s, specifically the Greatest of

them bAlAjI bAjIrAva, which is not only unwarranted but also inaccurate on

account of maharaTTA history.



You wrote: <<When in his teens in 1645 CE, he (shivAjI) began administering his

father's estate under a personalized seal of authority in Sanskrit, a hint that

he envisaged independence and adhered to the Hindu tradition… The Peshwa, in

contrast, accepted the Persian script under the influence of a Muslim courtesan,

and narrow-mindedly refused to convert her to Hindu dharma despite her keenness

to embrace the faith. As a result, the Marathas bowed to the Mughal emperor when

they reached Delhi and missed a historic opportunity to re-establish Hindu rule;

a classic case of muscle without mind, power without political sense! The rest

is history.>>



First of all, in context of the then prevailing times, usage of Persian was a

lesser evil, since we like it or not, it was the language of diplomacy and

politics in contemporary times, and was used by even Hindu kings in their

correspondences, before, during and after the times of cHatrapati as well as

peshavA, up until English reduced that language in the status and eventually

replaced it. The then usage of Persian was no worse than your and mine writing

today in English language.



Coming back to shivAjI’s time, even in his court Persian titles and terms gave

way to saMskR^ita ones, very late in his regime. Contemporary chronicler

sabhAsada writes that it was not until the rAjyAbhiSheka ceremony of shivAjI

that the “Sanskrit titles were ordered to be used in future to designate their

offices, and the Persian titles hitherto current were abolished.” Thus it is

then at the rAjyAbhiSheka time that peshavA himself became mukhya pradhAna,

majmuadAr became AmAtya, waqiA-navIs mantrI, shurU-navIs sachiva, dabIr became

sumanta, and sar-i-naubat senApati, and of course under the guidance of none

other than the then peshavA, the father of the more brilliant bAjIrAva. In his

aspiration of rejuvenating and re-establishing the Hindu institutions, including

the language of saMskR^ita, shivAjI was guided by his far-sighted peshavA, in

commissioning of a handbook of working saMskR^ita for his new-founded state, to

later become famous.



Not only this, but a whole chest of letters written by shivAjI to his North

Indian contemporaries, during the early days, used to be in Persian. For

instance, look up his famed letter he sent for maharaja jayasiMha kacHavAhA of

jaipura (then ambara) when he was besieged by the latter. The letter published

by bAbU jagannAtha dAsa of vArANasI, is in Persian but speaks about establishing

a Hindu collaboration to root out the Islamic menace from dillI: “O Great

Monarch mahArAjA jaisiMha… you are a valiant kShatriya, why do you use your

strength to further the power of the dynasty of bAbUr? Why shed the costly Hindu

blood to make the red-faced musalmAns victorious? ... If you had come to conquer

me, you would find my head humbly at the path you tread, but you come as a

deputy of the tyrant, and I can not decide how I behave towards you… If you

fight in championing our Hindu Religion, you shall find me your comrade in arms…

Being so brave and valiant, it behoves you as a Great Hindu General to lead our

joint armies against Emperor instead, and indeed let us go together and conquer

that city of dillI, let us shed our blood in preserving the ancient religion

which we and our ancestors have followed... etc”.



The above letter of shivAjI is, not in maharaTTI or hindI, but in Persian, so

are several others among shivAjI’s letters and orders. One must bear the

contemporary situation in mind, before blaming bAjIrAva of “in contrast,

accepting the Persian script under the influence of a Muslim courtesan”. In

fact, peshavA-s, and in particular this one, as well as his successors, did the

most meaningful service, than any one else since the days of vijayanagara

empire, in reviving the devabhAShA. This is acknowledged even by the

arch-saMskR^ita-bashers like Sheldon Pollock in his “The Death of Sanskrit”,

where he quoted a stanza of a gujarAtI poet who “sensed that some important

transformation had occurred at the beginning of the second millennium, which

made the great literary courts of the age, such as Bhoja’s, the stuff of legend

(which last things often become); that the cultivation of Sanskrit by

eighteenth-century rulers like the Peshwas of Maharashtra was too little too

late; that the Sanskrit cultural order of his own time was sheer nostalgic

ceremony.”



You have it seems not studied the contribution of peshavA-s for the revival of

saMskR^ita, otherwise you would know that after kAshI, it was pUnA which had

become the greatest center of saMskR^ita revival in the eighteenth century. A

flourishing saMskR^ita university was established by peshavA here, and a network

of smaller schools, or Tol, as they were called, throughout the empire, to

educate people in the devabhAShA. Many poetries and commentaries were produced

here, as much as the political situation could afford. I was informed by a

researcher from Grece, whom I once ran into, when he was in India to do some

researches about Greeks living in India in the Eighteenth century, that peshavA

probably contracted a couple of Greeks from vArANasI, to help his scholars in

pUnA translate some of the Greek Classics of Homer into saMskR^ita. I can not

say how true it is, but such impression does reflect on the services of peshavA,

especially the once you blame, in reviving saMskR^ita. Even bAla ga~NgAdhara

tilaka once spoke of the peshavA's services of reviving the ancient Hindu

mother-language.



Coming to the “Muslim courtesan”, you refer to mastAnI here, whom bAjIrAva

“narrow-mindedly refused to convert to Hindu dharma”. Once again, it is nothing

short of blasphemy against the greatest Hindu Warrior and Strategist we have

known since cHatrapati himself. mastAnI was a daughter of a Hindu father and a

Moslem courtesan, and was gifted to bAjIrAv as a companion by cHatrasAla, after

bAjIrAva had decisively hammered the Nizam of Hyderabad in the classic battle of

Bhopal. (Incidentally, it is from this campaign, that he victoriously returned

not only with mastAnI, but also bhUShaNa, who was living his retired life at

bundelakhaNDa under patronage of cHatrasAla, and who accepted bAjIrAv’s

invitation with object of relating to shAhUjI his reminisces of shivAjI – a

poetry that came to be later known as shiva-bAvanI, as it has 52 pada-s, and

related important milestones of shivAjI’s career. The famed “sivAjI na hoto tau

sunnata hota sabakI” is from this work.) It was not bAjIrAva, whose “narrow

mindedness” it was to not allow the re-conversion of mastAnI, but that of the

moronic brAhmaNa-s who had even out-casted bAjIrAv himself on accusations of

eating meat, drinking wine, smoking tobacco, and keeping Moslem wife etc. (You

must know that a son of bAjIrAva through mastAnI, named by bAjIrAv as

kR^iShNarAva, and raised privately by bAjIrAva as a brAhmaNa, and some pUnA

traditions have it that his father had even performed his thread-ceremony, but

he was not accepted as a Hindu by the more orthodox and was forced to live like

a Moslem, and take the name of shamshir bahAdur. This son of bAjI valiantly

fought against abdAlI in the battle of pAnIpat and fell in the field at the age

of 27). Even the thread ceremony and marriages of bAjIrAva’s legitimate sons

even were blockaded by the orthodox chitapAvana-s, if either bAjIrAv or mastAnI

came anywhere near the ceremonies, and indeed bAjIrAv did not attend these!

bAjIrAva’s younger brother, chimanAjI appA, the hero of vassein, too never

accepted mastAnI, and even tried to eliminate her once when bAjIrAv was away

leading the final battle of his life, in finally crushing the Hyderabad Nizam

one more time before his untimely death.



Coming to “As a result, the Marathas bowed to the Mughal emperor when they

reached Delhi and missed a historic opportunity to re-establish Hindu rule”, the

blame is misplaced. Indeed, a closer analysis will show that bAjIrAv’s energies

were continuously driven towards striking down the most potent Moslem power

center of India, the mughal seat in dillI, and he was restrained from completely

taking them out only by shAhUjI himself. One must read the desperate letters

exchanged between him and the maharaTTA generals and his envoyes in dillI court,

at the time of the invasion of dillI by nAdirshAh from Persia. In one letter

there is a clear reference of waiting for the “most perfect time” for

“eradicating the moghal seat and placing the crown of the Emporer on the rANA of

mevADa”. Refer to Vol 2 of New History of Marathas by G S Sardesai for the

complete letter. It was shAhUjI who decided that any misadventure, as he felt,

probably correctly, that maharaTTA power was spread too thin for any such move,

and who issued a decree to this effect to his generals. You cite bhUShaNa, but

ignore what even bhUShaNa says about bAjIrAva! He calls bAjI a “bAja” (hawk of

hunt), who is ready to prey upon the partridges of dillI (the moghals), but is

obedient to his hunter in sitArA (shAhU).



On that note, you are also not correct when you say that bhUShaNa “quit the

Mughal capital in 1671… composed Shiv Bhooshan, a biography”. bhUShaNa was

neither a native of Moghal Capital, nor an employee of Moghals. He had left his

Kanpur home quite early, had gone to several Hindu rulers, like the Kings of

kumAyUM, and of chitrakUTa, before finally reaching shivAjI after hearing of his

miraculous flight from AgrA. Finally, his first book shivarAja bhUShaNa is not

a biography, nor did he intend it to be, but it is a book of poetics as he

himself says in its preface, that “the valour of shivAjI induced in the poet

heart of bhUShaNa, the intention to revive the native poetics, by creating a

blessed collection of meters, embellishments and phrases, which is what he now

intends to take up.”



Please pardon my nitpicking, but your blame on bAjIrAva is a major error which

needed immediate correction.



http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hinducivil...sage/41867>>>



<<<<<<It is questionable if Bajirao had conquered Delhi then Maratha Rule

would have continued in India. The Marathas lost out to Ahmad Shah

Durani , as far as I can think, it was due to fighting on a

disadvantageous turf - far off from the Maratha Land, ( b ) Durani's

tactics were superior. The Maratha forces were practically wiped out on

the very first day itself.>>>



Anand ji,



There is little cause-effect connection between bAjIrAv's strategy of encircling

dillI but not wiping out moghal rule, and the loss of field to abdAlI three

decades after bAjIrAv's death.



In my opinion the contours of bAjIrAv's thinking can be summarized thus:



A) It was apparent to him that moghals had already been reduced to nominal

powers, and real military strength of moslems was now moving towards

decentralized independent hands like Bengal, Hyderabad, Awadh, the Afcrican

Black Moslems etc., (and the yet upcoming Hyder Ali in Mysore).



<img src='http://www.india-forum.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cool.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='B)' /> North Indian Hindus, especially rAjapUta-s, were still not ready to weild a

common front, much less submit to maharaTTA-s. sikh, jATa, and gorakhA upstarts

were yet to appear prominently on the Radar.



C) He therefore felt, quite correctly, that the policy has to be two fold: one,

somehow not letting the Moslem states to unite under a common banner and open a

common front. two: keeping rAjapUta-s in good humour and not alarming them in

any way. This was possible by pretending for time being to be a friend and

protector of the dillI crown, rather than a foe and predator.



D) This pretension enabled him on two fronts: one, being able to fight one

Moslem power at a time, e.g. the battle of Bhopal, where moghal and awadh

remained neutral while bAjIrAv totally decimated the nizAm's forces ending his

ambitions towards the North. two, rAjapUta-s were not alarmed, as he did not

threaten to replace moghal suzerainty over rAjapUta-s by the maharaTTA one, by

presenting themselves only to be the first among equals in carrying out the task

of Hindu Independence. Refer to his frantic exchange of letters with rAjapUtas,

and urgency of going to dholapura to establish friendship with jaisiMha second

of jaipur, and sending bhUShaNa on a tour of rAjapUtAnA where he conveyed this

message to many houses. bAjIrAv was quite successful in gaining respect and

friendship of North Indian Hindu powers. He became even a personal friend of

many important figures like jaisiMha.



In fact, did not the East India Company imitate exactly the same strategy as

bAjIrAva, several decades later, and with complete success? Clive and

Cornwallis imitated him in great detail -- including posing to be a Hindu

Saviour -- but that subject on some other occasion.



E) shAhU was of the opinion that maharaTTA administration has to be more

solidified, if expansion has to be effective. This was quite correct too.

Since the days of shivAjI, feudal structure, the jAgIradArI and mansabadArI,

which had been the hallmark of moghal administration, was frowned upon.

Generals used to be paid employees of state, not independent jamindars. No

fiefs were allowed, no personal grant of lands, no permanent subedArI etc. a

letter of shivAjI written to his eldest son-in-law clearly reflects this where

he declined the request for a grant of jAgIr to him, explaining his policy.

But this was slightly modified after bAjIrAv when a fort of region was granted

'permanently' to an officer. He himself granted dhAr in MP to the pawAr

Generals, (dhAra was thought to be rightfully belonging to the pawAra-s, the

descendants of Bhojadeva the paramAra). But soon after his death and that of

shAhU, later a vacuum arose in the maharaTTA core, which later peshavA-s tried

to fill, and federalist system became the accepted order. We see the rise of

sindhiyA, holkar, gAyakavADa, bhonsalA etc. eventually leading to the total

decline of the central authority.



F) bAjIrAva was very clear that the Europeans represented a very real danger,

and had decided to not let them play any role in the politics of India.

Therefore his urgency of trying a complete wipeout of Portugese from maharaTTA

lands.



G) Militarily, his huge army consisted only of cavalry, with little or no

infantry, not unlike afghAns. He had pioneered the art of how cavalry should

move and fight in open fields, miles beyond their homeland, and in this it seems

taken cue from Changez Khan's cavalry tactics. (read a wonderful essay by the

AchArya of manasataraMgiNI on this subject.)



H) Which means that on account of unmatched mobility of troops, he was confident

of being able to rapidly reach the trouble zone -- reducing the need for large

permanent encampments of maharaTTA troops. This also allowed him to let moghals

remain in seat and dependant upon maharaTTA-s for protection, while he went

about weakening the other more potent Moslem centers.



Coming to the loss of pAnIpat several decades later. It was a result of exactly

not following the policy of bAjIrAva. maharaTTA-s were openly frowned upon all

over India, hated by Hindus of North India as much as by those of deep south,

bengal and Orissa, due to their ill deeds by now. They were looked upon as

brigands and bandits rather than soldiers of Hindu Independence. National sense

had almost evaporated from them, and replaced by simple lust and greed,

propelled more by a lacking central authority. There are many more resons,

tactical in nature, of the loss of pAnIpat, but this was the root cause for most

part -- they had lost the moral right.



But my insistence remains -- sandhyA jI has done great disservice to the memory

of this National Hero.



http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hinducivil...sage/41889>>>



<<<Ravilochanan ji, will you please elaborate on the 1734 loot of nAthadwArA

temple? Which source informs this? I have of course heard about the sack of

nAthadwArA temple before, but the year is extremely unlikely. It would be more

in line with the later maharaTTA sins of looting of cash at tirupati shrine, or

extracting the poll tax from hindU pilgrims visiting the purI temple (that too

at an exhorbitant rate of ten rupees per head from the pilgrims from north and 5

rupees from those coming from southern countries! quite proto-Thackerays!) But

all of these were events of 1750-60s.



I doubt the year you mention because I had once looked up mevADa's attitude

towards bAjIrAva's through mevADian sources itself, especially the personal

correspondances between mahArANA and maharaTTA-s, and at least the neighbourhood

of this year is extremely unlikely since I could not find any mention of such an

obvious fact which should have otherwise been 'in your face'. I shall be

grateful if you can point out what are the sources which substantiate this

claim. Even Tod, who hardly few decades later wrote detailed description of

mevADa does not mention anything like this. In my visits to nAthadwArA I have

failed to get any details about this too, while of course there is evidence of

loot after 1800.



Of course, bAjIrAva had visited mevADa in 1735 after his victorious campaign in

mAlavA, desirous of seeking an interview with the then mahArANA jagata siMha at

udaipura. While maharANA declined to personally see a mere General of a lesser

king, he sent all ceremonial honours suitable for bAjIrAv, and in a written

instruction asked his Prime Minister to receive bAjIrAva with all pomp and show,

and grant him a status similar to a prince. Also interesting is that while

bAjIrAva came to mevADa to negotiate the treaty of chauth payments, the respects

he and shAhU pay to rANA are unparalleled! You may be interested in the

translated text of the letter preserved in mevADA archives and produced partly

by Tod:



shAhU to rANA via bAjIrAva:



"svasti shrI; worthy of all upamA-s; from whose actions results gains; the

regent of vighna-hartA gaNapati; the amR^ita that has emerged through the

churning of the ocean of Arya kShatriya kula; as bright as Sun; who has made a

river from the tears of the wives of our enemies; shrIman mahArAjAdhirAja

mahArANA shrI jagata siMha jI; chief of all the princes of Aryakula; this writes

shrIman shAhU cHatrapati let his humble rAm-rAm reach you!... Here all is well

with your blessings; always honour me by good accounts which I am always

expecting as source of happiness; Your favour was received by paNDita pradhAna

with great respect; ... ; let your favour between us be enlarged; what more do I

write; yours etc..."



rANA wrote to his Prime Minister bihArIlAl to treat this officer with a similar

dignity and protocol with which his own son the crown prince of mevADa was

treated, also remarking, "malhAra had come last year (referring to holkar), but

this one (bAjIrAv) is enormously more powerful, treat him such." A nominal

annual payment of Rs 1,60,000 was agreed between bAjIrAv and bihArI, payable in

three equal parts to sindhiyA, holkar and pawAra. This treaty was kept for ten

years, but after this maharaTTA-s became looters, making yearly raid of

rAjapUtAnA, bengAl, Orissa for no reason other than extracting money.



http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hinducivil...sage/41905>>>



<<<Radha Ji, Better to read the maharaTTA history written by MaharaTTI-s themselves who have

produced an excellent breed of historians, with the likes of professionals like

Profs R G Bhandarkar and D K Bhandarkar, Vinayak Rajwade, Kashinath Sane,

Vasudev Khare, Dattatraya Parasnis, Vishvanath Mandlik as well as equally

brilliant although non-professionals like Justice Mahadev Ranade. Even

maharaTTI political thinkers like Balagangadghara Tilak and Vinayak Savarkar

were fine scholars and history writers, in particular Tilak who considering his

situation did a very good job as a native Indologist and historian of maharaTTA

age, writing mostly from the prison cells; the credit of identifying the correct

birth date of shivAjI goes to him. In History-writing I think, maharaTTA people

are second only to the tremendously more polished and brilliant, and my

favourite, the va~NgadeshI-s, who have given some of the best historians Hindu

race has ever produced: the likes of Jadunath Sarkar, D C Sircar and Prof R C

Majumdar.



But sorry I digressed, on maharaTTA history, if one can understand maharaTTI

language then one should read the mammoth 'marAThyAnchyA itihAsAchI sAdhane' of

V K Rajwade. For those of us with disadvantage of not knowing maharaTTI, the

basic readings in English are:



- New History of Marathas (3 vols) by G S Sardesai



- History of the Maratha People by Kincaid



- Papers on Maratha History and Introduction to Peshava's Diaries by Mahadev

Govind Ranade published by RAS Bombay



With focus on Shivaji:



- Life and Times of Shivaji by Sir Jadunath Sarkar



- Grand Rebel: An impression of Shivaji founder of the Maratha Empire by Kincaid



Those only interested in an outline may read:



- Main Currents of Maratha History by G S Sardesai



Most of the above are in public domain, and available from free downloads from

several library sites. Let me know if you can not find.



It is tragic but true that since the take over of History Research and writing

by the secularites, further research on such important subjects as the Histories

of maharaTTA, rAjapUta, jATa, sikha, gorakhA, vijayanagara, and other events of

Hindu revivals has almost come to a halt if not indeed reversed.



http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hinducivil...sage/42033>>>



Above posts were from Bodhi, thought people might be interested since they contain some valuable historical info.



<<<Dear Sri Tiwari

Pranaam!!

I found this info when I was going through a history of Nathdwara published by

the Vallabh sect based on their texts (it was available at SriNathji mandir last

year). It was a detailed history of the temple. It had been claimed that the

temple was looted at least twice - once by Holkar in 1734 and once by Daulat Rao

Scindia (the real scoundrel) around 1800. I'll try to get a copy of the book

when I'll visit Nathdwara in a month or so. A friend of mine has 'forgotten'

that he borrowed the book from me. My statement was based on that book. Btw, the

book stated that the Holkars had looted the wealth of the temple and the town.

It did not state that Baji Rao was present in the raid. I personally believe

that it might have been a case of personal robbery by Holkars. But if this is

true, then it turns out that Baji Rao was not able to control his sardars beyond

a limit. It is indeed very sad that a great statesman like Baji Rao (who

destroyed the Portuguese

demons in N.Konkan) had to contend with such robbers as his sardars.



The above info aside, Your translation of the letter is very much appreciated. I

have never seen tis document. Though I have read that Shahu had great respect

for the House of Sisodiyas, Guardians of the legacy of Bappa Rawal (from whom

Shivaji was descended), I have never seen a copy of this letter. Thanks for the

same.

I noted that the letter cited by you refers to Maharana mentioning about

Malhar's visit to Mewar. It calls him very powerful and Baji Rao as more

powerful than Malhar. Is there a reason behind it? Does it point to some

misbehavior by Malhar in Mewar before he was reigned in?

regards

Ravilochanan



http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hinducivil...sage/41955>>>