The Story of 300 In India You Probably Didn't know

[Crystal-Clear]

What do you mean by neutral historians?! At that time, the people had no idea of an India - Pak conflict or neutrality in terms of history, so they had no reason to be biased.
History was written by the victors.


Either way, here are the references

Rao, V. Raghavendra. "PANIPAT AND THE NIZAM." Proceedings of the Indian History Congress 13 (1950): 204-06.


James Grant Duff "History of the Mahrattas, Vol II (Ch. 5), Printed for Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown, and Green, 1826"


Rawlinson, H. G. Cambridge History of India. IV. p. 424

T. S. Shejwalkar, "Panipat 1761" (in Marathi and English) Deccan College Monograph Series. I., Pune (1946)


Your turn. Please present evidence from your citations that show that there were no (non-combatants/civilians) accompanying the Maratha army.

iask for the source of their info . i could find such historians too .
.
.
the only thing i have to say is there were no neutral historians at that time .

Whatever feels you happy.. I will stick to the version which is believed by majority of historians..

7 Lakh maratha soldiers, how much was population of Maharashtra?? Any Logic?

do you believe such historians when they says any thing like maha bharat etc didnt happen its just a man made stories?

 

[Kompromat]

... and myth making continues.

 

[Kamikaze Pilot]

Pakistan Iran Turkey unity

Why China is excluded?

 

[Peshwa]

iask for the source of their info . i could find such historians too .
.
.
the only thing i have to say is there were no neutral historians at that time .

Do you understand how sources work?
I have given you the books and the page nos to find this info.

I can’t help you anymore.
Besides, I’m yet to see you post a single source proving your point.
So I’m done here unless you can show me some evidence of the same claiming explicitly that no non-combatants were present at the third battle of Panipat.