The Maratha War of Independence

[jetti]

This is the only historical period that indians can be proud of.

i wish you guys had a period you could be proud of too.. but dont worry if you work hard your children can feel it.

 

[Raje amar]

I think it would be wrong to call it as a war between two empires. Marathas led by Shivaji werent an empire by any stretch of the imagination. They were rebels against an aggressive Aurangzeb's Mughal domination of the sub-continent. They outlasted his efforts to control them mainly via guerrilla warfare. Subsequently, the Marathas under the Peshwas did forge a strong empire and once controlled territories as far north as the Ganges and Bengal in the East. If only for their follies and their allies treacheries in the third battle of Panipat they would have been de-facto rulers of the whole of India.

you are correct, but the article stated was after death of the great Shivaji.
after Shivajis death Mughals want to dismental all of Maratha kingdom, so they raided with heavy fire power. the war lasted for 27 years & ended with the end of the Aurangzeb.

 

[Shardul.....the lion]

I am a ethnic maratha, and proud to be indian.

It always amazing to read how 10 to 15 thousand ragtag army led by daughter in law of Shivaji Maharaj fought the great mughal empire with lakhs of army and crores of money at disposable. Marathas fought the mughals for 27-28 yrs with this ragtag army remained fiercly independent.

Within decade or two decades of death of Aurangzeb, Marathas were most dominant force of subcontinent and freed almost whole of India from Mughals.

If IMAO, due to aggressive and independence lovers rajputs, sikhs and marathas, India remain Hindu majority region otherwise it would have converted into muslim region just like middle east, Iran and afghanistan.

 

[Raje amar]

This is the only historical period that indians can be proud of.

we dont need lecture of our history from you.........

India vitnessed many such periods to be proud of,

Ashoka was a great emperor & extended his kingdom till Kandahar (Afganistan). if we would have gone by your logic shoing maps of 2000 years old & claming teritories, there wont be exsistance of your dear friend.

Kingdom of Vijaynagar was the most prosperous eara of Indian civilisation when they use to tread dominda & precious stones on street side vendors.

please grow some brain before speaking about INDIA.

 

[third eye]

I think it would be wrong to call it as a war between two empires. Marathas led by Shivaji werent an empire by any stretch of the imagination. They were rebels against an aggressive Aurangzeb's Mughal domination of the sub-continent. They outlasted his efforts to control them mainly via guerrilla warfare. Subsequently, the Marathas under the Peshwas did forge a strong empire and once controlled territories as far north as the Ganges and Bengal in the East. If only for their follies and their allies treacheries in the third battle of Panipat they would have been de-facto rulers of the whole of India.

To add to the above, calling it a war of independence would be wrong.

It was more wars of dominance. The Mughals had stretched themselves to the extreme. Aurangzeb spent the last two decades of his life in the Deccan trying to quell the locals which included Muslims who would not accept his control.

The Marathas did a fine job in guerrilla warfare and exploited the lie of the land very well.

 

[Nalwa]

If only the Rajputs and the Sikhs had united (Rajputs had a valid grouse against the Marathas because of the Marathas' constant raids into Rajput territories, but I still dont understand why the Sikhs did not side with them) with the Marathas for the greater interests leaving aside their feuds, Abdali would have been sent packing, the Marathas would have remained in power,English would not have made use the opportunity to consolidate their power and history would have been different.

Nationalistic feelings weren't very strong in those days and most Indian kingdoms elevated their rivalries above the threats faced by foreign invaders like Abdali. Add to it some locals who themselves invited foreign invaders to help defeat their local enemies and you have a disjointed place called India.

Sikhs weren't a strong power during the Third battle of Panipat and the Afghan and Mughal governors were powerful in the Punjab. Their rise came about 50 years later when they were able to organize themselves into Misls. I have mentioned this earlier, how the rise of the Sikhs mirrored those of the Marathas, albeit half a century later. Both rose up against the Mughals/Afghan but succumbed to the British,in between leading to a short-lived period of self-rule in the areas they controlled..

 

[Shardul.....the lion]

Nationalistic feelings weren't very strong in those days and most Indian kingdoms elevated their rivalries above the threats faced by foreign invaders like Abdali. Add to it some locals who themselves invited foreign invaders to help defeat their local enemies and you have a disjointed place called India.

Sikhs weren't a strong power during the Third battle of Panipat and the Afghan and Mughal governors were powerful in the Punjab. Their rise came about 50 years later when they were able to organize themselves into Misls. I have mentioned this earlier, how the rise of the Sikhs mirrored those of the Marathas, albeit half a century later. Both rose up against the Mughals/Afghan but succumbed to the British,in between leading to a short-lived period of self-rule in the areas they controlled..

Very true, Nationalism is a european concept. Before it was just loyalty towards particular kings and sultans.

 

[Bhairava]

If IMAO, due to aggressive and independence lovers rajputs, sikhs and marathas, India remain Hindu majority region otherwise it would have converted into muslim region just like middle east, Iran and afghanistan.

What you say also is true to an extent....but you have to note that the vast majority were neither of the three groups and still they retained their faith...it shows the innate spiritual strength and adaptability of the native Dharm too.

 

[ganimi kawa]

To add to the above, calling it a war of independence would be wrong.

It was more wars of dominance. The Mughals had stretched themselves to the extreme.

The Marathas did a fine job in guerrilla warfare and exploited the lie of the land very well.

War of dominance is fought by two empires over a territory that both want to / have annexed.

You do not fight to "dominate" when your heartland is attacked, you fight for "survival"!


Marathas declared their independance from Mughal rule under Shivaji and it was that spirit of independance that Aurangjeb wanted to obliterate!........

It was a fight for "independance and survival"!

Aurangzeb spent the last two decades of his life in the Deccan trying to quell the locals which included Muslims who would not accept his control.

There were no "local" muslims he fought! "Adilshahi" (The founder of the dynasty, Yusuf Adil Shah, was of Persian (Tajik) descent. ) was just an offshoot of islamic invaders which he decimated.

 

[notsuperstitious]

The resistance was heroic. Imagine resisting the greatest military power of the time trying to crush you for 27 years. And all you have is your ragtag army and willpower. They refused to surrender.

End result - Aurangzeb's tomb is in Maharashtra today, and within 7 years of his death maratha forces were in Delhi, playing kingmaker.

 

[aamerjamal]

Aurangzeb was the only gr8 mughal king after Babur.
no doubt about it.

 

[mastaan]

Aurangzeb was the only gr8 mughal king after Babur.
no doubt about it.

Mate, between all Mughal rulers, what Akbar achieved (in the sense of comming together of people, stability, secularism and respect for religions of his people that did not have same religion as his) can not be paralleled by any other Mughal emperor and that is the only reason why people named him 'Akbar the Great'...

And, unless you consider massacres and genocidal killings as a trait of greatness, I don't even know what tells u that Aurangzeb was a great king... For all you know, someone in your family could have been brutally murdered by that barbarian Aurangzeb, before u eventually adopted your religion...

In addition, Aurangzeb was the only reason that Mughal empire died, as he went after Marathas, who turned out to be too hot to handle for a king that did not have the public support...

 

[angeldemon_007]

TWO OF MY HEROES OF THAT TIME.

1) MAHARANA PRATAP

2) SHIVAJI.

 

[SinoChallenger]

The resistance was heroic. Imagine resisting the greatest military power of the time trying to crush you for 27 years. And all you have is your ragtag army and willpower. They refused to surrender.

This is exactly why I respect Shivaji Maharaj. He reminds me of Mao Zedong. Mao Zedong, of course, wrote the book on guerilla warfare, fought the KMT government of China, then lead resistance against the Japanese for 8 years, then defeated the KMT government to control China, then defeated the world superpower USA in Korea, and then defeated USSR in the 1969 border conflict as well as several weaker foes on our periphery.

It's almost like india wishes it was a unified state starting from 300 BC just like China was, but in fact until the British Raj india was always just a collection of hindu kingdoms who fought one another as well as domination from Islam.

Personally, I don't think Maurya Empire is real. There is no historical evidence for it at all. It was most likely just a legend. Gupta Empire may have been real. A Chinese historian recorded something about it. "The first evidence of Sri Gupta comes from the writings of I-tsing around 690 AD who describes that the Poona copper inscription of Prabhavati Gupta, a daughter of Chandra Gupta, describes "Maharaja Sri-Gupta" as the founder of the Gupta dynasty." Maharaja Sri-Gupta - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Birbal]

In March of 1700, Rajaram took his last breath. His queen Tarabai, who was also daughter of the gallant Maratha Commander-in-Chief Hambirao Mohite, took charge of Maratha army. Daughter of a braveheart, Tarabai proved her true mettle for the next seven years. She carried the struggle on with equal valor. Thus began the phase III, the last phase of the prolonged war, with Marathas under the leadership of Tarabai.

After death of Rajaram, his widow, Tarabai assumed the charge of the empire. She herself took to the field and remained mobile and vigil during the crisis. In words of Jadunath Sarkar, 'It is her character that saved the nation in that awful crisis.'

Guess who my avatar is.