Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by Virendra »

peter wrote:
Virendra wrote:Peter I still don't understand how the Ajmer shrine (in the heart of Rajputana) survived, if the states like Marwar followed a tit for tat policy as you say.
The states kept fighting the Mohammedans for a millenia, on and off and the latter hardly got any direct rule in the region.
There would surely have been so many lame easy chances to destroy that shrine.
I think during Mughal centuries this shrine safety can be attirbuted to Amber providing Mughals with direct access and logistics till Ajmer.
But before that and in later times like of Ajit Singh, Bakhat Singh ... what gives ?
Secondly, could it be because Ajmer shrine was not built upon an existing temple's destruction and so the Rajputs thought it was unjust to go after it?
This is just my thesis: In rajasthan people fought for their "watan" the hardest. Since Prithviraj's lineage got annhiliated from Ajmer (They did settle Ranathambore and perhaps Gagron but never came back to reclaim Ajmer) there was no one fighting for Ajmer as their watan.

Consequently later when rajputs vied for annexing Ajmer it was to take benefit from it as a trade route. Since the trade happened to / via mughal dominated capital and these rajputs were subservient to the Mughals this kept the rajputs in check. They always got Ajmer as a fief from the central govt which they could not afford to piss off.

I do wonder about who ruled Ajmer from the demise of Pritvhiraj to the ascendancy of Mughals. This period not clear to me.
So then PrithviRaj descendants exit would create a vaccum. Turko-Afghan Sultanates were only "come and go" in Rajputana, (except a small patch in Nagaur) and no allies in Amber yet.
Ajmer would have initially switched hands between Mewar and Marwar, depending upon who was stronger at a time.
Later in 16th century, with the demise of powerful leaders like Sanga and Rao Maldev (in Mewar & Marwar), Amber would have filled the Ajmer vaccum and I assume they had full support of Mughals in that.
The movie Jodha-Akbar talks of raids on pilgrims en-route to Ajmer and Akbar looking to secure the route by marital alliance with Amber as Ajmer subah was under Amber. Don't know how much of all this is true.
peter wrote:What about Kota V's claim that the Mewar dynasty is from the Brahmins? Does it imply that caste system was still in flux and brahmins could become rajputs and vice versa (Vishwamitra the vedic rishi was a rajput apparently and then became a Brahman).
Indeed a debatable topic. I've already put up whatever I got on the differing theories. Even inscriptions seem to be contradicting each other out.
AFAIK, KV didn't dive into the geneology/chronology and kept his claim around inscriptions.
If the Sen chronology, Siladitya, sacking of Vallabhipur in 6th century and birth of Guha in Abu cave are to be believed. Then the Mewar Kings are Kshatriya.
I think the caste system was quite fluid before the medieval centuries.
peter wrote:What does the title Kshatrap mean?
Is like the Mughal 'Subah/Subedar', just the term is related with/derived from Kshatriya. On internet it says Kshatrapi/Kshatrapy is Sanskrit for 'Regional Kingdom'
peter wrote:Was he subservient to Iranians?
Doesn't seem that way. But not sure. He obtained the title of 'Mahakshatrapa' upon taking his throne. He has the Parmar King as sub servient tom himself though.
The Sanskrit Junagadh/Girnar inscription dated 150 CE credits Rudradaman I with supporting the cultural arts and Sanskrit literature and repairing the dam built by the Mauryans.
peter wrote:What about Rudradaman's ancestors? Were they Indians?
They were Sychtians/Sakas. Now Sakas themselves may be Indians of ancient times as many theories say but I don't know.
Higaraka
Abhiraka
Bhumaka
Nahapana
Chastana/Castana (GrandFather)
Jayadaman (Father)
Guess what ... wiki names their dynasty as "Kshaharatas", their dates are unclear and they're all huddled in a few decades of 2nd century C.E.



peter wrote:When you say possible do you mean a section in Maharashtra believes that Shivaji was not a Sisodiya or does it mean that there are references to him of not being a Sisodiya?
Most of the Marathas I met on forums strongly protest the Rajput ancestry theory.
Shivaji has on many occasions 'considered' himself 'Kshatriya', thought he is not directly recorded to have said clearly that he had Sisodia ancestry/geneology.
I think I had mentioned about Airavat's blog post on this already.
RajD
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 29 Mar 2011 16:01

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by RajD »

peter wrote:
Atri wrote:[..]

It might be possible that this was not the case and that he was not of Sisodiya lineage. But this is what he officially claimed even during coronation.

So, +1 to Rajendra ji and RamaY ji.. :)
When you say possible do you mean a section in Maharashtra believes that Shivaji was not a Sisodiya or does it mean that there are references to him of not being a Sisodiya?
There were many established Maratha sardars who use to regard themselves as Khsatriya and had suitably got themselves endorsed by the 'Badshah' as one but refused to recognize his family in the same vein.
Shivaji had to fight against this lot not just in the beginning but through out his life.
On the other hand the system was so rigid at the time that Brahmins sticking to the Puranas ( Parshurama had exterminated all Kshatriyas 21 times) refused to consider anybody as a kshatriya.
Regards.
Rajendra
Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10390
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by Yagnasri »

Bhonsles consider themselves as decendants from Balbir (bastered son of PrudhirajIII) and their by Decendants from Prabupamachandra. Even Shaji was recognised as a Rajput so the tradition is before Shivaji. In fact like AlexIII based his deeds from his father Philip Shivaji also has a base in his father but not the that extent. Jijiya Bai is from the Jhadav family who are decendants of the rulers of Devgir empire. So Shivaji can claim to be Solar dynaste from father side and Lunar from mother side. But no Upanayanam was performed to him and his accesters and therefore they are no Dwijas and can not claim to the Khathiyas. His Upanayanam was performed at the Indrabhisek done to me and he had even remarried his wifes once again.

There were of course many objections to the tradition bound bramins and Shivaji had to bring a Butt from Kashi to argue and perform the cornation cermany. All said and done it is said - Sharathe ithi KShatirya. With that meaning Shivaji Maharaji is more Khathira than many Rajputs.
RajD
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 29 Mar 2011 16:01

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by RajD »

quote/ What about Kota V's claim that the Mewar dynasty is from the Brahmins? Does it imply that caste system was still in flux and brahmins could become rajputs and vice versa (Vishwamitra the vedic rishi was a rajput apparently and then became a Brahman).[/quote]

OT alert but felt necessary to explain a few things in proper perspective.

In ancient times brahmanas had the right to do any 'karma' including 'Kshatrakarma', 'Raj karma'. You will find that guru Vashistha, Dronacharya were gurus of Shri. Ram/Lakshman and Kauravas/Pandavas respectively.
Guru Vishwamitra taught 'shastrastra vidya' to both Shri. Ram and Lakshman.
Rajarshi and brahmarshi were the terms used to call an enlightened rishi from kshatriya and Brahman varnas.
A finer point being the one who had achieved the final enlightenment (Brahmadnyan) was revered as brahmarshi and guru Vashistha was the only one at that time.
Vishwamitra was a Kshatriya raja himself but took sanyas to achieve enligtenment and knowledge. He meditated very hard for long time and achieved it. The most revered 'Gayatri mantra' is his creation along with many devastating astras of the time. Although, he was by far the most brilliant and knowledgeable of his time he was regarded by all as rajarshi because he didn't have control over his anger.
He wanted himself to be regarded as a Brahmarshi by none other than guru Vashistha himself but he refused to do so and told him to achieve control over 'Shadripus' and 'panchendriyas' only then he would recognize him as brahmarshi.
How he ultimately achieved it is a long story. Will be totally OT here.
Lastly : Brahman, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra are varnas. ( Kshatriya is a much larger term than rajput).
Guru Vishwamitra was a Kshatriya and not a rajput. When he achieved final enlightenment he became Brahmarshi which has got no strapping of any varna but is a pure enlightened personality and an unfathomable ocean of knowledge.
Regards.
Rajendra
Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by Virendra »

peter wrote:I do wonder about who ruled Ajmer from the demise of Pritvhiraj to the ascendancy of Mughals. This period not clear to me.
Could find one here :

Kumbha's great grandfather, Rana Kshetra Singh, who ruled Mewar from A.D. 1364 to A.D. 1382, was the son and successor of the celebrated Rana Hammir.
He greatly enlarged the kingdom. He captured Ajmer and Jahazpur, re-annexed Mandalgarh, Mandsor (in Malwa), and the whole of the Chappan to Mewar.
He obtained a victory over the King of Delhi, who was utterly defeated at Bakrole.
He also took the King of Gujarat (Zafar Khan) prisoner in a battle.
Source: Maharana Kumbha by Harbilas Sarda
Ref - verse 22 of Kumbha's Chittor inscription

Later :
Udai Singh the son of Kumbha gave Ajmer, Sakambhari to Marwar's Rathore king Jodha as a token of friendship (they were cousins).
RajD
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 29 Mar 2011 16:01

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by RajD »

Narayana Rao wrote:Bhonsles consider themselves as decendants from Balbir (bastered son of PrudhirajIII) and their by Decendants from Prabupamachandra. Even Shaji was recognised as a Rajput so the tradition is before Shivaji. In fact like AlexIII based his deeds from his father Philip Shivaji also has a base in his father but not the that extent. Jijiya Bai is from the Jhadav family who are decendants of the rulers of Devgir empire. So Shivaji can claim to be Solar dynaste from father side and Lunar from mother side. But no Upanayanam was performed to him and his accesters and therefore they are no Dwijas and can not claim to the Khathiyas. His Upanayanam was performed at the Indrabhisek done to me and he had even remarried his wifes once again.

There were of course many objections to the tradition bound bramins and Shivaji had to bring a Butt from Kashi to argue and perform the cornation cermany. All said and done it is said - Sharathe ithi KShatirya. With that meaning Shivaji Maharaji is more Khathira than many Rajputs.
+100 Narayanaji for the last sentence.
Rest of all has been debated to death like they say from 'time immemorial' and will be done so by naysayers and also the ones who want to debate just for the sake of it.
It is really baffling and also unfortunate that people still feel necessary to find roots of his rajput lineage even 350 years after his death.
I've never come across anybody who says 'so what if he isn't of a rajput lineage'?
People tend to forget that deeds and vision decides a man's greatness. After all, if Shivaji doesn't deserve to be a Kshatriya just on account of his deeds then who else would qualify to be the one?
Regards.
Rajendra
peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by peter »

Virendra wrote:[..]
peter wrote:What does the title Kshatrap mean?
Is like the Mughal 'Subah/Subedar', just the term is related with/derived from Kshatriya. On internet it says Kshatrapi/Kshatrapy is Sanskrit for 'Regional Kingdom'
Very interesting. Could it be related to Satrap? This was an Iranian term for a provincial head. Is there any evidence that Rudradaman and his family were officers of Iranians? I remember that Tod writes about an Iranian connection of the Udaipur royal family. Then there is a legend of Bappa Rawal wanting to go visit Iran and on the way establishing Rawal Pindi. Do not know how to test the veracity of these points.
Virendra wrote:
peter wrote:What about Rudradaman's ancestors? Were they Indians?
They were Sychtians/Sakas. Now Sakas themselves may be Indians of ancient times as many theories say but I don't know.
Higaraka
Abhiraka
Bhumaka
Nahapana
Chastana/Castana (GrandFather)
Jayadaman (Father)
Guess what ... wiki names their dynasty as "Kshaharatas", their dates are unclear and they're all huddled in a few decades of 2nd century C.E.
What does Kshaharatas mean? With names like Jayadaman one could assume an Indic origin of this group. But how does one figure out the meaning of the name Chastana?
Last edited by peter on 23 Oct 2012 12:31, edited 1 time in total.
peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by peter »

Narayana Rao wrote:Bhonsles consider themselves as decendants from Balbir (bastered son of PrudhirajIII) and their by Decendants from Prabupamachandra. Even Shaji was recognised as a Rajput so the tradition is before Shivaji. In fact like AlexIII based his deeds from his father Philip Shivaji also has a base in his father but not the that extent. Jijiya Bai is from the Jhadav family who are decendants of the rulers of Devgir empire. So Shivaji can claim to be Solar dynaste from father side and Lunar from mother side. But no Upanayanam was performed to him and his accesters and therefore they are no Dwijas and can not claim to the Khathiyas. His Upanayanam was performed at the Indrabhisek done to me and he had even remarried his wifes once again.

There were of course many objections to the tradition bound bramins and Shivaji had to bring a Butt from Kashi to argue and perform the cornation cermany. All said and done it is said - Sharathe ithi KShatirya. With that meaning Shivaji Maharaji is more Khathira than many Rajputs.
Prithviraj 3 is who? Banbir (not Balbir) was couple of generations before Maharana Pratap. Are you talking about him? I do not think there is any chance of his sons being Bhosales because the genealogists would have recorded this fact as it is not from too long ago. Where did you get this info from?
peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by peter »

RajD wrote:[..]
It is really baffling and also unfortunate that people still feel necessary to find roots of his rajput lineage even 350 years after his death.
[..]
What is the point in having history as a topic of study? Are you confident about the lineage of Shivaji? If so please do enlighten us.
member_19686
BRFite
Posts: 1330
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by member_19686 »

Katare wrote:
If you have to look this hard to find evidence of something, it in itself shows how rare the events are. Anyhow the major problem with looking really hard is that you have to stoop real low to find what you are looking for. Aurangzeb was probably the biggest bigot to ever ruled in India, and you are quoting his biographer Khafi, Your second source is a book promoted and published by "Historical society of Pakistan" and third source is a person who wrote books about "Hindu superiority".

Rana Kumbha was the first Hindu ruler who was given "title of hindu Sultan" by neighboring islamic sultans who were his allies in his major wars with sultan of Malwa. He was praised in many muslim historical accounts for his tolerance and promotion of all faiths in his kingdom. You can't pickup just one source and declare a great rajput like Kumbha a bigot.

You guys are not getting the main point but arguing about technicalities and absoluteness of the argument. Ajmer sharif dargah was established in 12th century at the heart of Rajput heartland and it has always thrived under their protection. Their are no ruins of broken mosques in India while most of the major hindu/buddhist temples still remain broken or scared.

This does not mean that no hindu ever broke any masjid but when it happened it was largely reclamation of their temples or fit of rage, not as a policy. It took Islamic empire centuries to expand over India and many wars that they won against Hindu kings yielded only indemnity/booty, not the territory. Imperial armies attacking Rajput forts would occupy large areas around it for years to fight the wars. In that time all those pious/pure people would need places of worship in the land of infidels. To meet this demand many mosques will be quickly created often by demolishing/converting an existing temple in the area. When these armies left for Delhi with the booty, Rana's will come down from the hills and jungles and restore their home land. For many temples, including somnath, the cycle of destruction and restoration happened many times. There may be cases of over reactions by individuals or bards recording it a few notches higher than it was.
Sorry just because you have some pet theory of yours, we need not discount primary sources that go against your pet theory.

Khafi Khan was a reliable chronicle who gave credit where it was due, he did say that Shivaji forbade destruction of mosques. But he was also very clear on Ajit Singh's actions which in any case are confirmed by the letters of Rajput rulers of those times, unless of course you are going to claim that these letters are all some grand conspiracy and forged.

What the hell does Har Bilas Sarda's other books have to do with him quoting inscriptions commissioned by Kumbha himself?

The inscriptions exist to this day and can easily be verified, so your objections fall flat. Sarda quoting them does not make them any less true unless you are prepared to call Kumbha himself a liar.

I only mentioned some examples which is by no means exhaustive, there were others who did the same. If you are interested you can find them, not my job to spoon feed you.
RajD
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 29 Mar 2011 16:01

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by RajD »

peter wrote:
RajD wrote:[..]
It is really baffling and also unfortunate that people still feel necessary to find roots of his rajput lineage even 350 years after his death.
[..]
What is the point in having history as a topic of study? Are you confident about the lineage of Shivaji? If so please do enlighten us.
Of course, one must learn history in proper perspective and derive correct lessons from it.
Shivaji Maharaj himself cared the least of his lineage and kept on doing magnanimous deeds all his life. He was of the opinion that revival of 'Hindavi Swarajya' was a god's will( in ancient Marathi: 'He rajya vawe hi to Shreenchi iccha' ) and he was just an instrument so much to the extent that he didn't even want to be a king. His mother Jijabai and Shri. Samartha Ramdas Swami convinced him about it in the end. From this point onwards only the question of his lineage comes into picture. As Virendra has mentioned about the maratha posters he met on different forums who protested (doubtful?) the theory of Shivaji's Sisodiya lineage. It has been a very controversial and emotive issue in Maharashtra. Also, as Narayana has written about lineage of Bhosale family through Balbir Singh, a ********. I personally doubt whether Bhosales and that too the great Shahaji Maharaj had accepted this lineage through a ******** just for the heck of it. Shivaji had to fight this lot of maratha sardars purportedly of the rajput lineage who looked down upon him and his family as of a lower cast all his life.
Even Mirza Raja Jaisingh had writtren to Aurangzeb that he would offer his daughter to Shiivaji in matrimony and since he was from lower cast would gleefully accept the same. Further, when he would come to his camp he would be arrested again and sent back to Agra( Shivaji - His Life and Times by Jadunath Sarkar). This shows a glimpse of Shivaji through rajput eyes at that time.
My point is simple. Evidences in this case are always going to be either flimsy or controversial and certainly not conclusive.
It some times sounds like a fetish to prove Sisodiya lineage of Shivaji. I simply feel is it really required of Shivaji to be a rajuput in order to be recognized as a Khsatriya? Why can a maratha from Maharashtra be not called a Kshatriya ?
My last thoughts on this topic: Canvas of the deeds, creed and vision of Chhatrapati Shri. Shivaji Maharaj is so magnanimous and all encompassing that all petty matters like his cast, lineage are a non issue.
He was so selfless and attentive to the good of commoners that they fought a hell of a war even after his death for a generation braving insurmountable odds and destruction that ended Mughal rule over India conclusively and changed the course of our history.
Long before Shivaji was anointed to the throne Shri. Samartha Ramdas Swami had called him a 'Shrimant Yogi'.
Regards.
Rajendra
Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by Virendra »

RajD wrote:Even Mirza Raja Jaisingh had written to Aurangzeb that he would offer his daughter to Shivaji in matrimony and since he was from lower cast would gleefully accept the same. Further, when he would come to his camp he would be
arrested again and sent back to Agra( Shivaji - His Life and Times by Jadunath Sarkar).
Jai Singh went on a war against Shivaji, after Aurangzeb insisted on it. So yes, they were enemies on battlefield.
Jai Singh was a smart General, seasoned Statesman, strategist and an Indian, not a hot blooded ghazi.
It was obvious and wise for Shivaji to try avoid a confrontation with Jai Singh.

Jai Singh's aim was to bring Shivaji to negotiation table with Aurangzeb so things would settle with minimum destruction to either sides.
It was not to arrest him by deceit.
They decided to meet when Jai Singh had laid siege to Purandar fort.
Shivaji was given assurance by Jai Singh that he would not be harmed whether the talks bear fruit or not.
On 11th June both the men met at Jai Singh's court at the foot of Purandar Fort.
23 Forts were surrendered by Shivaji and 12 retained on the condition of loyalty towards the Imperial throne.
Shivaji asked to be excused from attending the Emperor's court and proposed to send his son instead - with a contingent of 5,000 horses (to be paid by means of a jagir) for regular attendance and service under the Emperor.
Next day on 12th June Shivaji vacated parts of Purandar fort that Marathas were still holding and also started surrendering other 22 Forts.
Jai Singh presented Shivaji with an Elephant and two horses and sent him away to Raigarh with his officer.

Jai Singh not only gained the war with Shivaji but also arranged peace between the Mughal throne up north and Marathas in south.
It was the hot headed bigot Aurangzeb who threw it all away and broke the amenable peace.
This happened in the Mughal court in absence of Jai Singh.
Aurangzeb insisted on Shivaji paying visit to the Mughal court.
Jai Singh tried to convince Shivaji by taking the solemn oath that Shivaji and his accomplices would not be harmed, that any harm would first have to through him and his men before it reached Shivaji.
He made his son Ram Singh the caretaker of Shivaji for his stay at the Mughal court.
At the court, not only was Shivaji clueless about protocols of a polished court but also Aurangzeb's court officials did a deliberate unjustifiable neglect of Shivaji.
What transpired at that court that day, revolutionized the court of Indian history as Mughals managed to make Shivaji their bitterest enemy.
Aurangzeb lived to repent this in his last days and admitted the same in his last will (not that he had any positive feelings even then, but perhaps the fleeing of Shivaji from captivity).

For Amber house, the officers of Ram Singh used to record daily Mughal court proceedings every evening. These records are compiled in 'Jaipur archives' and were accessed by Jadunath Sarkar while writing the 'History of Jaipur'. These records provide the most authentic account of what happened that day in Mughal court.
In the audience Hall itself the Mughal court Marshal placed Shivaji among the third grade nobles without consulting the Emperor or any other high official.
Aurangzeb too (on his Birthday), after the formal introduction with Shivaji and exchange of formal greetings, turned to his business as if Shivaji didn't exist.
Upon learning that he had been ranked a five hazari Mansabdar (a rank even his son and servant had) Shivaji erupted in anger and burst out of the court after creating a furious scene.
Shivaji could not be pacified even after Emperor sent 4 officers to reason with him.
This was used by the courtesans who were against Shivaji or Jai Singh (Amber house) in any way.
So did Mirza Raja Jaswant Singh of Marwar, who had fought against Aurangzeb in war of succession and was far uneasy in alliance with Mughals as compared to Amber.
He took an open jibe at Emperor challenging him to punish Shivaji.
So did Roshanara begum, asking for revenge for Shaista Khan (her grand uncle) and saying 'every petty chieftain would rise in rebellion if this was ignored'.

Aurangzeb decided to have Shivaji killed. A startled Ram Singh came forth and said that him and his father (Jai Singh) were oath bound to protect Shivaji. So they would die first before Shivaji was harmed.
Emperor agreed after making Ram Singh sign a bond taking Shivaji's full responsibility against any further unwanted incident.
Shivaji was kept in almost a house arrest in a tent close to Ram Singh's tent. He was guarded by a band of Ram Singh's men in the closest ring and then the Mughal soldiers keeping an eye.

Aurangzeb in correspondence with Jai Singh, asked him what exactly he had promised to Shivaji in peace treaty.
Jai Singh replied with explaining the treaty's terms, that nothing more was promised and also urged the Emperor in his reply that nothing would be gained, but much harm be done if Shivaji was killed or captivated.
He at the same time kept repeating to Ram Singh in his letters that Shivaji and their oath must be protected at any cost.
Above all, the delicate peace subtly woven between Mughals and Marathas by Raja Jai Singh was at stake now.

Shivaji tried to secure his release by bribing court officials to influence Aurangzeb. Shivaji promised to cede his remaining forts if allowed to return home in safety. Aurangzeb replied 'there is no reason he cannot do that by writing from here to his officers in Deccan'.
Then in despair Shivaji asked permission to turn sanyasi and spend remaining days in Prayag/Allahabad.
Aurangzeb grimly replied 'Yes let him live in my fort of Allahabad where my governor will take good care of him."
In those days there was once also an order to send Shivaji to Afghanistan on military campaign.

Then Shivaji decided to make personal preparations for his release.
At first, out of noble consideration he made Ram Singh take back his bail-bond he had signed to Aurangzeb while taking Shivaji's full responsibility. By this he hoped to rid Ram Singh from future responsibility/blame for whatever was to happen.
Shivaji feigned illness and began sending out baskets of sweets as charity. Over time, the mughal soldiers went lax in checking those baskets. On August 17, 1666 Shivaji's half brother Hirji Farzand who looked like him, lay on his cot as a decoy. Shivaji and his son hid themselves in that day's outgoing baskets and escaped from Agra.
Upon detection a huge hue and cry rose in entire Mughal administration.

Since Shivaji had escaped from the proximity of Ram Singh's camp and soldiers, Aurangzeb's suspicion naturally fell on Ram Singh for the feat, he ordered Ram Singh's rank reduction and forbade him from the Court. It is also said that when tortured by Mughal troops, some maratha brahmins said that Ram Singh had helped Shivaji's escape. But I'm unable to verify the same in any record.
RajD wrote:This shows a glimpse of Shivaji through rajput eyes at that time.
I disagree. This is generalization.
Quoting from Airavat's blog :
A contemporary record from the Jaipur archives has notes of conversation between two Rajput officers.
It reports on Shivaji's visit to Agra and confidently asserts:
"Shivaji is very clever; he speaks the right word, after which nobody need say anything on the subject. He is a good genuine Rajput....and says appropriate things marked by the spirit of a Rajput."
In this instance Shivaji is accepted as a Rajput from his bearing and conduct.....but was it also a consequence of Shivaji's private meeting with Raja Jai Singh
The eyewitness account, the Sabhasad Bakhar, written by Krishnaji Anant Sabhasad who was in Shivaji's service, claims that Jai Singh accepted Shivaji's Rajput ancestry and hence promised to protect him as a kindred Rajput from the hostility of the bigoted Aurangzeb.

The bakhar also makes Shivaji describe himself as a Rajput, during the earlier invasion of Aurangzeb's general Shaista Khan:
As soon as the army started from Delhi, the Raje learnt of it. He was at Rajgad. He assembled all the Sarkarkuns, important persons, and the Sarnobat, and questioned them. In the opinion of (them) all- "Peace should be concluded. An interview should be sought. It is not possible to hold out by fighting. What is our force and what is the Delhi army ?" Such were (their) reasons.
The Raje was of opinion (that), "If peace is decided on, there is no influential Rajput, (with the Khan) as would, (considering the fact that) we are Rajputs and he too is a Rajput, protect the Hindu religion and guard our interests. Saista Khan is a Mohammedan, a relation of the Badshah; bribe and corruption cannot be practised on him. Nor will the Khan protect us. If I meet him in peace, he will bring about (our) destruction. It is injurious to us."


Shivaji's father Shahaji also claimed Rajput ancestry. Years before Shivaji's coronation the poet Jayaram, described his patron Shahaji as descended from Dalip and born in the family of the Rana [of Mewar] who was the foremost among all kings of the earth (Hinduan Suraj). And going back even further into the history of the Mudhol principality in Karnataka, whose rulers previously held the significant title of Rana; they still have original documents tracing their descent from the Rajput rulers of Mewar.
RajD wrote:I simply feel is it really required of Shivaji to be a rajput in order to be recognized as a Khsatriya?
No it is not. Frankly, it doesn't matter to me, shouldn't matter so much to anyone. His deeds matter more.
The only reason to take interest in his ancestry is to know the truth .. know the history correctly and completely.
Thats it.

Regards,
Virendra
peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by peter »

peter wrote:
RajD wrote:[..]
It is really baffling and also unfortunate that people still feel necessary to find roots of his rajput lineage even 350 years after his death.
[..]
What is the point in having history as a topic of study? Are you confident about the lineage of Shivaji? If so please do enlighten us.
RajD wrote:Of course, one must learn history in proper perspective and derive correct lessons from it.
Shivaji Maharaj himself cared the least of his lineage and kept on doing magnanimous deeds all his life. [..]
I hear you but is it really true? Have'nt we seen example of both Shahji and Shivaji claiming descent from the house of Mewar? Why would they do so if they did not care about the lineage?
member_23658
BRFite
Posts: 230
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by member_23658 »

I have read an account where in the second coronation, the ancestry proclaimed during the abhishek was of dhangar caste. dhangar is the native shepherd caste of maharastra/deccan. This was to placate some maratha families who were not too happy with the rajput lineage in the first coronation due to regional pride. I cannot however, for the life of me find that link anywhere now so take it for wht its worth.
the point i wish to make is that the claims of rajput / native marathi lineage may have much to do with political / cultural realities of the time (rajputs having the legitimacy at that period to represent hindu royalty) than any historical fact.
RajD
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 29 Mar 2011 16:01

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by RajD »

@Virendra
Please consider this: How many generations would it take for complete assimilation of a family into a totally different environment and society speaking a different language, having totally different customs, traditions, rituals etc.? The most likely answer would be more than a few hundred years. Not even once there is a reference of Eklingji as a kuladevata of Bhosale family nor there is a mention of any specific rajput traditions observed by them. If you have any reference please share it. On the contrary the customs, traditions, rituals observed in their family were totally of Marathi origin.
To give another example: You will find many 'khandani' families who have come from different parts of India( Rajasthan and Marwad included) settled in Maharashtra for more than even hundred years but still they have remained very conspicuous by their language, clothing, traditions, etc. Very few of them know fluent Marathi language at best, forget about customs etc. Have they assimilated into local society even one bit? The answer sadly is a big 'No' with a very few notable exceptions.
In essence, nobody wants to lose the identity as far as possible and that is a human tendency.
One might argue that because their forefathers were persicuted and hounded by various tyrants they fled and came over and lost/hid their identity very fast. Still, such a transformation is not so easy and to be like a son of the soil in an alien land( accepting lower social status, marriage into different society included) is next to impossible at best.
The story that you have described about war and treaty of Purandar, going to Agra, Ram Singh is by hart to any common Marathi person in detail through many famous books in Marathi. 'Raja Shiv Chhatrapati' written by modern bard of Shivaji Shri. B.M. Purandare, 'Shriman Yogi' written by Shri. Ranjit Desai to mention a few.
The instance of Mirza Raja Jaisingh which I've referred to is said to have happened after Shivaji escaped from Agra and reached Rajgad safely. By that time Aurangzebhad had started to treat Raja Jaisingh along with his son Ramsingh like traitors. He had their wealth and jagir impounded and imposed 'durbar bandi' on Ramsingh. Also,The Raja himself by virtue of his age, bad health and personal demoralization along with the Mughal army under his command was not in a position to reconquer Shivaji and his remaining forts.
So, as Jadunath Sarkar( regarded as pro Mughal completely) puts it 'It was the last brazen attempt by Mirza Raja Jaisingh to regain his prestige and good will and pleasure of Aurangzeb'.
All said and done, if Raja Jaisingh really regarded Shivaji a rajput as made out to be, one must ask, 'would he ever have stooped so low'. It was quite an unbecoming of the elderly statesman and it reflects on the deceit and chicanery of the elite ruling class, political climate and expediency as well at that time.
When you are quoting conversation between two rajput officers that 'Shivaji is very clever; he speaks the right word, after which nobody need say anything on the subject. He is a good genuine Rajput....and says appropriate things marked by the spirit of a Rajput', don't you feel it is a gross generalization? Is being clever and statesman like and authoritative having power of a final arbiter is a virtue only of a rajput?
Coming to 'bakhar': It is a (farsi/urdu?) word for official account/collection of documents written/scribbled usually in 'Modi' script of marathi in this case( like a short hand script in English)grossly describing the events as they unfold. This script was invented to scribble down very fast and sort of decoded later into prakrut Marathi. Today, this script has become almost extinct for all practical purposes and very few have the knowlege to read it. Owing to this reason among others although 'bakhars'are referred to but are not regarded as the gospel truth by historians because they could be biased at times.
I'm not saying even once that Shivaji had no rajput ancestry. It may or may not be that way.
My only contention is if there was a complete clarity about the rajput lineage of Shahaji Maharaj and Shivaji as you have tried to put forth, before coronation, Shivaji would never have felt the need to get it researched and endorsed( along with a hefty 'dakshina' / feeof course) by Shri. Gaga Bhatta whom he invited all the way from Kashi to perform the ancient dharmic ritual of coronation which was feared to be almost lost with the time.
Regards.
Rajendra
RajD
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 29 Mar 2011 16:01

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by RajD »

Amol.D wrote:I have read an account where in the second coronation, the ancestry proclaimed during the abhishek was of dhangar caste. dhangar is the native shepherd caste of maharastra/deccan. This was to placate some maratha families who were not too happy with the rajput lineage in the first coronation due to regional pride. I cannot however, for the life of me find that link anywhere now so take it for wht its worth.
the point i wish to make is that the claims of rajput / native marathi lineage may have much to do with political / cultural realities of the time (rajputs having the legitimacy at that period to represent hindu royalty) than any historical fact.
Thw first part about Dhangar cast is totally untrue.
The 96 clan marathas having so called rajput lineage regarded the Bhosale family as from supposedly lowly 'Kunbi' a farmer subcommunity of marathas.
The second part of your post is quite true.
Regards.
Rajendra
RajD
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 29 Mar 2011 16:01

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by RajD »

RajD wrote:Of course, one must learn history in proper perspective and derive correct lessons from it.
Shivaji Maharaj himself cared the least of his lineage and kept on doing magnanimous deeds all his life. [..]
I hear you but is it really true? Have'nt we seen example of both Shahji and Shivaji claiming descent from the house of Mewar? Why would they do so if they did not care about the lineage?[/quote]
It must be political expediency for Shahaji Maharaj and dharmic compulsion for Shivaji Maharaj in order to be qualified for rajyabhishek in accordance with ancient dharmic rituals. Only a khsatriya raja had the right to perform this ritual and according to the cast system at that time one had to be a rajput in order to be recognized as a khsatriya.
Mind well that in the history of Bharatvarsha this was going to be an event that was going to happen after a gap of more than a thousand years denoting the revival of sanatan dharma, giving hope to populace of the nation that there is a ruler with their own 'Hindavi Swarajya' with the backing of the highest seat of sanatan dharma(Sarvoccha dharmic adhishthan) whom they can look up to for their cause.
Regards.
Rajenddra
Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4152
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by Atri »

Amol.D wrote:I have read an account where in the second coronation, the ancestry proclaimed during the abhishek was of dhangar caste. dhangar is the native shepherd caste of maharastra/deccan. This was to placate some maratha families who were not too happy with the rajput lineage in the first coronation due to regional pride. I cannot however, for the life of me find that link anywhere now so take it for wht its worth.
the point i wish to make is that the claims of rajput / native marathi lineage may have much to do with political / cultural realities of the time (rajputs having the legitimacy at that period to represent hindu royalty) than any historical fact.
The second abhisheka was "tantrika" abhisheka, not Vaidika (or Vedokta, as it is called) Abhisheka. Nothing to do with shephard caste etc.
peter wrote:I hear you but is it really true? Have'nt we seen example of both Shahji and Shivaji claiming descent from the house of Mewar? Why would they do so if they did not care about the lineage?
Yes. Records say Shivaji was from Sisodiya lineage. Rest are mere "theories" often arising from modern caste politics to "claim" the right on Shivaji's work and tradition. Few Pawarful politicians are behind this. So, it would be better if it is kept out of this thread. That in itself is a great topic to discuss and I have spoken about it in Assembly election thread in detail.

Rajendra ji,

AFAIK, Gaga Bhat himself came with this proposal. In his own words, he could not find any other king worthy enough to execute the ceremony which was extinct in India since 700 years and which he had very painstakingly resurrected.

I do not know where did this idea of Shivaji inviting a brahmin from Kashi come? I have been trying to trace the origin of this meme and earliest I have found is in Jotiba Phule's writings. :wink: This is one of the "gangotri" of many modern "secular" narratives being popularized by the "usual suspects". :P
Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by Virendra »

having totally different customs, traditions, rituals
???? .... While I don't mind any origin or ancestry for Shivaji, call him what you may like .. I certainly don't think the customs, traditions, rituals are "totally" different. I mean neither the Rajputs are hispanic nor the Marathas are tatars.
How much difference are we talking about?
They were all living adjacent to each other in a giant colony of states for thousands of years .. migrating, mixing to and fro all this while (there wasn't a great wall of China).
The states that divided India only militarily and politically, not socio-culturally.
If that were the case, we wouldn't have been able to gell back as one nation one people.
When you are quoting conversation between two rajput officers that 'Shivaji is very clever; he speaks the right word, after which nobody need say anything on the subject. He is a good genuine Rajput....and says appropriate things marked by the spirit of a Rajput', don't you feel it is a gross generalization? Is being clever and statesman like and authoritative having power of a final arbiter is a virtue only of a rajput?
Please do not color it with your own interpretation.
Where am I or any of those officers saying that only a Rajput can be clever, statesman and powerful.
Argument is - Shivaji like a Rajput speaks the appropriate, is clever and powerful.
Doesn't mean anyone who is such, has to be a Rajput and no one else.
My only contention is if there was a complete clarity about the rajput lineage of Shahaji Maharaj and Shivaji as you have tried to put forth
This is an ongoing discussion mate. I'm not trying to force anything here, nor am I insisting that he had Rajput ancestry.
I don't know.
I am only sharing content that speaks one side of the story. May be it is false or may be it is the half truth.
Like you said, there is lack of clarity on his ancestry. I agree and everyone here knows that.
We are only trying to cross various theories, sources and arguments to see what comes out of the 'manthan'.
We don't have to get worked up on this :)
If Raja Jaisingh really regarded Shivaji a rajput as made out to be, one must ask, 'would he ever have stooped so low'. It was quite an unbecoming of the elderly statesman and it reflects on the deceit and chicanery of the elite ruling class, political climate and expediency as well at that time.
You are mixing Rajput chivalry with the politics of a King. If Rajputness is all that mattered in the world then, why do you think the Rajputana clans and states were infighting (which by the way was a case among Marathas and others also)
Anyway so if he had really planned to do such a thing, yes he stooped low. But how does that politlcal treachery of a King, justify this statement :
"This shows a glimpse of Shivaji through rajput eyes at that time."
One of the reasons for my post was this very generalization and is why I quoted the officers conversation.
So no, though there may be lot of dirty politics enmeshed on top - Rajputs in general were not looking at Shivaji lowly.
Rajputs were not Jai Singh. Jai Singh was a Rajput and a King.
We have seen how, many of the Rajputs helped Mughals, how Marathas helped against Vijaynagar and how Marathas later pillaged the entire Rajputana at the first chance they got.
There is no holier than thou here, so please do not point fingers. That is all I am asking, because then fingers would pop up in every direction.
What would come out of that?

Regards,
Virendra
peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by peter »

Amol.D wrote:I have read an account where in the second coronation, the ancestry proclaimed during the abhishek was of dhangar caste. dhangar is the native shepherd caste of maharastra/deccan. This was to placate some maratha families who were not too happy with the rajput lineage in the first coronation due to regional pride. I cannot however, for the life of me find that link anywhere now so take it for wht its worth.
the point i wish to make is that the claims of rajput / native marathi lineage may have much to do with political / cultural realities of the time (rajputs having the legitimacy at that period to represent hindu royalty) than any historical fact.
I doubt the dhangar lineage claim because it has a logical fallacy. Shivaji was *never known* to placate anyone. If you study his history he had the Deshmukhs and the Maratha Sardars follow a very strict discipline and I don't think there was a Maratha Sardar who could challenge Shivaji. Furthermore you are forgetting that Shahji had claimed the same that theri family was from the Sisodiya sept. In other words Shivaji did not invent anything new. He was merely repeating what he heard from his parents.
peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by peter »

peter wrote:
RajD wrote:Of course, one must learn history in proper perspective and derive correct lessons from it.
Shivaji Maharaj himself cared the least of his lineage and kept on doing magnanimous deeds all his life. [..]
I hear you but is it really true? Have'nt we seen example of both Shahji and Shivaji claiming descent from the house of Mewar? Why would they do so if they did not care about the lineage?
RajD wrote:It must be political expediency for Shahaji Maharaj
Can you please explain this more? What political expediency for Shahji?
RajD wrote: and dharmic compulsion for Shivaji Maharaj in order to be qualified for rajyabhishek in accordance with ancient dharmic rituals.
I find this a bit odd too. Was Samarth Ramdas not a Brahmin? Why would he have any need for Shivaji to cook up an ancestry? Ramdas outlived Shivaji and could have coronated Shivaji without a problem.
RajD wrote: Only a khsatriya raja had the right to perform this ritual and according to the cast system at that time one had to be a rajput in order to be recognized as a khsatriya.
Mind well that in the history of Bharatvarsha this was going to be an event that was going to happen after a gap of more than a thousand years denoting the revival of sanatan dharma,
What event are you talking about?
peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by peter »

Atri wrote:[..]

Yes. Records say Shivaji was from Sisodiya lineage. Rest are mere "theories" often arising from modern caste politics to "claim" the right on Shivaji's work and tradition. Few Pawarful politicians are behind this. So, it would be better if it is kept out of this thread. That in itself is a great topic to discuss and I have spoken about it in Assembly election thread in detail.
Interesting!
Atri wrote:
I do not know where did this idea of Shivaji inviting a brahmin from Kashi come? I have been trying to trace the origin of this meme and earliest I have found is in Jotiba Phule's writings. :wink: This is one of the "gangotri" of many modern "secular" narratives being popularized by the "usual suspects". :P
Is it untrue that contemporary Bhakhars (BTW what does the word Bakhar stand for? Does it mean "Bakhan"? Was it sung? Was there a special caste that sang these Bakhars?) contain no mention of Shivaji's coronation at the hands of Kashi Brhaman?
Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4152
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by Atri »

Peter ji,

1. I will shortly paste the genealogy of Shivaji. I hope that you can read devanagari script. I do not have it in roman script.

2. Bakhar does not come from bakhan ( which is a "tadbhava apabhramsha" of "Vyaakhyaan"). AFAIK, word bakhar is of arabic root.

3. One of the authentic contemporary bakhars "Sabhasad Bakhar" says that Gaga Bhat came to MH with coronation proposal. So do many letters which form primary evidence. You can find them in BISM, Pune. Alternately, there is a latest 2-volume biography if shivaji wrtten by historiam Mehendale in english. You could acquire that. Quite authentic and detailed.

4. Ramdas was a Sannyasi. Sannyasi has no name, caste, varna, family. He cannot be formal part of sny affairs pertaining to first three ashramas except for token blessings and wishing well.
peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by peter »

Atri wrote:Peter ji,

1. I will shortly paste the genealogy of Shivaji. I hope that you can read devanagari script. I do not have it in roman script.
yes I can.
Atri wrote: 2. Bakhar does not come from bakhan ( which is a "tadbhava apabhramsha" of "Vyaakhyaan"). AFAIK, word bakhar is of arabic root.
hmm. There is "lalla vakhyan" composition from Kashmir from the 15th century.
Atri wrote: 3. One of the authentic contemporary bakhars "Sabhasad Bakhar" says that Gaga Bhat came to MH with coronation proposal. So do many letters which form primary evidence. You can find them in BISM, Pune. Alternately, there is a latest 2-volume biography if shivaji wrtten by historiam Mehendale in english. You could acquire that. Quite authentic and detailed.
. Thanks. Will try to acquire the Mehendale book.
Atri wrote: 4. Ramdas was a Sannyasi. Sannyasi has no name, caste, varna, family. He cannot be formal part of sny affairs pertaining to first three ashramas except for token blessings and wishing well.
Wikipedia says Ramdas was Ruguvedi Brahmin.
Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4152
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by Atri »

http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set= ... 525&type=3

I was waiting for the permission of this person who made this available on FB. However, he denied me permission of pasting these images on BRF. Hence I give you the link of this FB album. If you have a FB account, this is very handy album, dating Shivaji's ancestry since days of Raawal Guhil.
peter wrote:
Atri wrote: 4. Ramdas was a Sannyasi. Sannyasi has no name, caste, varna, family. He cannot be formal part of sny affairs pertaining to first three ashramas except for token blessings and wishing well.
Wikipedia says Ramdas was Ruguvedi Brahmin.

Yes, when he was "Narayan Suryaji Thosar". When one takes sannyasa dharma, one performs one's own symbolic funeral and all last rites, give up all the identifications and possessions of "past life" and become someone new. Then he loses rights to be a formal part of any ceremony. Narayan was a kid born in Brahmin family. Ramdas, OTOH, was a sannyasi. Body same, totally different person. Anyways we digress. :)
peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by peter »

Atri wrote:http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set= ... 525&type=3

I was waiting for the permission of this person who made this available on FB. However, he denied me permission of pasting these images on BRF. Hence I give you the link of this FB album. If you have a FB account, this is very handy album, dating Shivaji's ancestry since days of Raawal Guhil.
This was an awesome link! Thanks! Do Marathas have genealogists? They are called "Raoji" or "Bhaats" in Rajasthan. I do wonder if the Mewar bhaats visit/visited Ajay Singh or his sons Sujan or Sajjan in Maharashtra. Would it be possible to inquire this from the facebook account owner?

Also what is your take on the killing of Jijabai's father and brothers at the hands of Nizamshahis?
Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4152
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by Atri »

peter wrote:
Atri wrote:http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set= ... 525&type=3

I was waiting for the permission of this person who made this available on FB. However, he denied me permission of pasting these images on BRF. Hence I give you the link of this FB album. If you have a FB account, this is very handy album, dating Shivaji's ancestry since days of Raawal Guhil.
This was an awesome link! Thanks! Do Marathas have genealogists? They are called "Raoji" or "Bhaats" in Rajasthan. I do wonder if the Mewar bhaats visit/visited Ajay Singh or his sons Sujan or Sajjan in Maharashtra. Would it be possible to inquire this from the facebook account owner?

Also what is your take on the killing of Jijabai's father and brothers at the hands of Nizamshahis?
Yes there is tradition of genealogy keeping among Marathas. Especially the elite 96-clan Marathas and some (historically and politically) elite brahmin families. Most of the dates in Shivaji's life taken from a resource known as "Jedhe Shakavali" and "Jedhe Karina" which are genealogical and other records maintained by Jedhe-Deshmukh family (again the 96-clanners). I will ask this question about Sujan Singh to the owner..

Regarding massacre of Lakhuji Jadhav (Jijabai's father), well it is classic case of killing off a chieftain who was becoming more powerful. Jadhav and Bhonsale were arch-rivals, often massacred each other. But Shahaji shows exemplary courage to forget the family dispute and move away from Nizamshah along with his entire network. But he returned as Nizamshah presented a unique opportunity of establishing Hindavi swaray by Proxy. One can say Shivaji was third attempt by Marathas to establish Hindavi swaraj. First two were by his father. Shivaji inherited the perfected tradition of ghanimi Qavvait along with plenty of men well trained in this lore with right instincts and mindset. All his initial successes until his escape from Panhala fort (when Baji prabhu Deshpande died) are due to the the tactical support provided by these men trained under his father. Shivaji was too young to "create" men. Shivaji's men started showing their presence since his escape from Agra.

The Jadhav clan (descendants of original Yadava rulers of Devagiri) was eliminated in this massacre, and with them whatever was left of the "old guard" vanished. One can say, Yadavas were real "Deccan Kshatriyas" while Bhonsales were migrants when certain individual named "Bhairo singh Sisodiya" migrated to MH and was called "Bhosaavat (Bhairosaa >> Bhosaa >> Bhosavat >> Bhosale)" thereafter. Shivaji was curiously a "mix" of Rajputs and Yadavas of Devagiri (who were generals appointed by earlier Chalukya-Rashtrakuta emperors).
Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by Virendra »

Thanks for the precious posts Atri ji.
peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by peter »

Atri wrote:
peter wrote:[..]

Also what is your take on the killing of Jijabai's father and brothers at the hands of Nizamshahis?
Yes there is tradition of genealogy keeping among Marathas. Especially the elite 96-clan Marathas and some (historically and politically) elite brahmin families. Most of the dates in Shivaji's life taken from a resource known as "Jedhe Shakavali" and "Jedhe Karina" which are genealogical and other records maintained by Jedhe-Deshmukh family (again the 96-clanners). I will ask this question about Sujan Singh to the owner..

Regarding massacre of Lakhuji Jadhav (Jijabai's father), well it is classic case of killing off a chieftain who was becoming more powerful. Jadhav and Bhonsale were arch-rivals, often massacred each other. [..]

The Jadhav clan (descendants of original Yadava rulers of Devagiri) was eliminated in this massacre, and with them whatever was left of the "old guard" vanished. One can say, Yadavas were real "Deccan Kshatriyas" while Bhonsales were migrants when certain individual named "Bhairo singh Sisodiya" migrated to MH and was called "Bhosaavat (Bhairosaa >> Bhosaa >> Bhosavat >> Bhosale)" thereafter. Shivaji was curiously a "mix" of Rajputs and Yadavas of Devagiri (who were generals appointed by earlier Chalukya-Rashtrakuta emperors).
Sorry for a being a bit slow but I did not understand the elimination of the Jadhavs. Can you please add some more details? Apparently Jijabai was very shaken by this.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by ramana »

Atri, Thanks it shows there is continuity in Indian dynasties even while there is constant change!
We see the same with the other dynasties of South India.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12195
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by Pratyush »

^^^

A noobe question. How much of that continuity is a result of a need to seek political legitimacy in the eyes of the population. ie say that I deserve to rule more then XYZ.
peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by peter »

Pratyush wrote:^^^

A noobe question. How much of that continuity is a result of a need to seek political legitimacy in the eyes of the population. ie say that I deserve to rule more then XYZ.
But is'nt it a chickend and egg problem? If you became the king then do you really care for political legitimacy?

If you were not king it did'nt matter how legitimate you were.

As this discussion with Atri is showing Shivaji had bonafide ancestry from the Mewar clan. I do wonder if there are more references to the Varanasi Brahmin "legitimazing" Shivaji before the Jyoti Phule reference given by Atri. Do you know of any?
Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by Virendra »

peter wrote:If you became the king then do you really care for political legitimacy?
I think it depends on the character of the King.
Maharana Sanga had decided to step down after losing his arm and an eye in battle.
He said that in this broken form, he could no longer be considered a leader and a ruler.
Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4152
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by Atri »

peter wrote:
Pratyush wrote:^^^

A noobe question. How much of that continuity is a result of a need to seek political legitimacy in the eyes of the population. ie say that I deserve to rule more then XYZ.
But is'nt it a chickend and egg problem? If you became the king then do you really care for political legitimacy?

If you were not king it did'nt matter how legitimate you were.

As this discussion with Atri is showing Shivaji had bonafide ancestry from the Mewar clan. I do wonder if there are more references to the Varanasi Brahmin "legitimazing" Shivaji before the Jyoti Phule reference given by Atri. Do you know of any?
Peter ji,

I do not think Rajput kings (at least later, post ghuri ones) were coronated by a vedic ceremony. It used to be purana based (smriti based) ascension of throne (manchaka-arohana मंचकारोहण) ceremony. The Vaidik ceremony had vanished from India since around 1000 AD. Also the other "tantrika" ceremony too was unheard before. Gagabhat had very painstakingly revived this dead culture of Shrauta (shruti based) yajna for rajyabhishekam (राज्याभिषेकं).

This was the bone of contention for brahmins to create so much ruckus about Shivaji's coronation. His ancestry was never in doubt nor his authority. It was these technicalities which they were trying to milk. One being not having formally entered brahmacharya ashrama, Shivaji married to 8 ladies. So they performed upanayana on him and he again married his existing wives.

Second was that Without being a vaidikaly coronated he killed many brahmins (of course they conveniently forgot that those so-called brahmins whom shivaji killed were not performing duties of brahmin and were more often than not serving Mlechhas). Only an abhishikta king may kill a brahmin because he then is avatar of vishnu and is conferred with Raaja-danda. This was most expensive objection to settle by donating gold and cows to 1000 brahmins as prayaschitta.

Last was in kali yuga, there are only two varnas - brahmin and shudra. I donot know how this was settled but shivaji in this deed declared that kaliyuga was over. If we look at sri yukteshvara' interpretation of yugas then 4800 years after MBH war (traditionally dated 3101 BCE) it is supposed to end (1700 AD). I do know not whether this interpretation of yugas was prevalent in Gagabhat's school but this one explanation that i could think of which could have satisfied those objecting brahmins.
peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by peter »

peter wrote:
Pratyush wrote:^^^

A noobe question. How much of that continuity is a result of a need to seek political legitimacy in the eyes of the population. ie say that I deserve to rule more then XYZ.
But is'nt it a chickend and egg problem? If you became the king then do you really care for political legitimacy?

If you were not king it did'nt matter how legitimate you were.

As this discussion with Atri is showing Shivaji had bonafide ancestry from the Mewar clan. I do wonder if there are more references to the Varanasi Brahmin "legitimazing" Shivaji before the Jyoti Phule reference given by Atri. Do you know of any?
Atri wrote:
I do not think Rajput kings (at least later, post ghuri ones) were coronated by a vedic ceremony. It used to be purana based (smriti based) ascension of throne (manchaka-arohana मंचकारोहण) ceremony. The Vaidik ceremony had vanished from India since around 1000 AD. Also the other "tantrika" ceremony too was unheard before. Gagabhat had very painstakingly revived this dead culture of Shrauta (shruti based) yajna for rajyabhishekam (राज्याभिषेकं).
[..]
What were the salient difference between the two types of ceremonies?

Would you know what caused the vedic ceremony to disappear in 1000 AD?

Who did the vedic ceremeony around 1000 AD?

Also your earlier post on the clan of Jijabai and their assasination was not clear. Can you please elaborate?
Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4152
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by Atri »

peter wrote: 1. What were the salient difference between the two types of ceremonies? Would you know what caused the vedic ceremony to disappear in 1000 AD? Who did the vedic ceremeony around 1000 AD?

2. Also your earlier post on the clan of Jijabai and their assasination was not clear. Can you please elaborate?
1. Salient features of Vaidika method..

It ain't gadget.. :D Most of Hindu ceremonies are categorized into Vedokta style OR Shrauta style and PuraaNokta style.

Vedokta method of any ceremony (be it wearing an astrological jewel on right day, to Pratishthapna of deity's Moorti, to Regular Sandhyavandanam, to Marriage to death) is considered stringent than puraNokta method. By stringent, I mean the vows and the strictness to follow the ritualistic rules along with the "capability" and "qualification" of Purohita (one who officiates the ceremony, the priest) and the Yajmaana (one who performs the ceremony, the host), the time (muhurta), the pronunciation (Uchchaara) etc along with other aspects of ceremony are expected to be followed to the word. This usually makes it an elaborate ceremony (not necessarily expensive one, but the rules are at times too harsh to follow for a regular householder). So, most of the "Poojas" which we see around are "PuraaNokta" versions which do not require such high degree of stringency.

Vaidik Rajyabhisheka is technically a "marriage" ceremony where king is married to earth, thus earning the title of "Bhupati" and in turn is declared as "Vishnu" himself after "Raaja-Danda" is handed over to him. PuraNokta ceremony OTOH is more pompous and is simple "taking over the office" type of ceremony.

Vaidika method of ceremony is considered superior to PuraNokta method, although that "Vrata" is hard to carry forward. If you have witnessed any Shrauta OR Vaidik ceremony (Atiratram, for example) you will know the difference. Vaidika ceremonies (most of them) had vanished from India (except marriages, some household Yajnas) in islamic times because this Gurukula system which trained such austere priests (the real brahmins, so to say) had vanished OR went in hiding. I do not know if I am clear enough but Puranik form of our (Indic) way of life is toned down, user-friendly version of Vaidik way of life. Ramana ji touched upon it in another thread when he said MBH is Vyasa's way of explaining Vedas to masses. Atiraatram too was resurrected only recently. It is being performed rather regularly these days.

In my opinion, when more and more Vaidik yajnas start coming out of hibernation, it denotes that generation of true priests with right mindset and the infrastructure which churns them out, is slowly taking root. If you have any inclination towards Adhyatma, then you will understand my next sentence which, IMO, says it all - In past 1000 years, India has had saints, social reformers, Ascetics, Sadhus, Sannyasin, tantriks, maantriks, all sorts of people and god-men. What India did not produce after Adi Sankara is "Rshi". There is difference between a Saadhu (good man) and a "Rishi" (an institutionalized and enlightened house-holder philosopher who is not "escapist" in his world-view). IMO, that infrastructure which produces such "Rishis" vanished and is slowly being rebuilt.

This is true significance of Shivaji's Vedokta Rajyabhisheka. This chain, where "adhikaari Purohits, Hotaas, Dvijas" were produced to officiate a ceremony on an "Adhikaari Purusha" had broken and people resorted to other ways, was reset. Even Vijaynagara emperors did not have this ceremony, in spite of being blessed by Vidyaranya Swami himself.

I have no direct evidence for this, but AFAIR reading it, it was Chalukyas and Cholas who last performed this ceremony in this fashion. North was still struggling to get back on feet from Buddhist influence. Then it fell to Islamic waves immediately.

2. Lakhoji Jadhav:

Bahmani sultane broke down into 5 deccan sultanates - Nizamshah of Ahmadnagar, Adilshah of Bijapur, Qutubshah of Golkonda & Bhagyanagaram, Beridshah of Bidar and Imaadshah of Berar. Berar was defeated by Jahangir and assimilated in Mughal territory, while Bidar was defeated by Nizamshah of Nagar and annexed it. The Maratha warlords were constantly changing their alliances. What stayed constant was their fiefdom (Jaagir). So effectively territories were in state of constant flux. Jahangir devourved northern MH and Shahjahan sent armies after armies to defeat these 5 sultanates, one by one.

One can say, ever since Akbar conquered Asheergad, the bad days of upper KG-valley became worse. In the decade of 1620's Shahjahan launched yet another invasion on deccan. Lakhoji Jadhav joined Mogals in 1625. His Jaagir was in today's western Vidarbha. However he switched back to Nizamshah of A'nagar by 1627. Meanwhile a terrible famine had struck deccan which lasted for 12/14 years (1628-1640/42). This was made worse by constant warring which took off all the forest cover of rest of MH (it is said that entire Godavari valley was quite greener, prior to deccan's fall. All the capitals of rashtrakutas, Chalukyas, Saatavahanas Yadavas are in that territory which even today are considered quite arid - The Marathwada region MH-AP-KN common border).

Lakhoji, along with few other Maratha sardars were being wooed by Shahjahan. Prior to this, Bhonsale clan and Jadhav clan had picked up a fight over an elephant which became so serious that they routinely killed each other off, in spite of being relatives (Shahaji was married to Lakhoji's daughter Jijabai). Jijabai promptly broke off all the relations with her "Maikaa". Shahaji too was serving Nizamshah, at that time.

The famine had stopped Mughal invasion by 1629. So, Shahjahan started contacting many chiefs of Nizamshah court, including lakhoji jadhav. Lakhoji had abandoned mughals and joined Nizamshah 2 years prior to this date. However he was not satisfied, perhaps wanted more honor and power perhaps he wished to avoid Shahaji as far as possible or perhaps something else, Nizamshah thought that Lakhoji was contemplating on joining Mughals again. His city, Sindkhed Raja, soon became hotspot for Mughal agents and informers. So under pretext of consultation, he invited entire Jadhav clan to Daulatabad (erstwhile Devagiri) fort. He initially planned to put jadhavs under house arrest. But on 25th July 1629, the entire family was assassinated in court, in presence of Nizamshah.

This alienated all the Marathas (including Bhosle clan) who were on Nizam's side. They all deserted Nizam and joined either Adilshah OR Mughals. Shahaji Bhosale joined Adilshah. The incumbent Sultan "Burhan Nizam shah" was killed shortly, and was replaced by Hussain Nizam shah and then by a minor sultan Murtaza Nizam shah. The period from 1630 to 1638 (reigns of Hussain and Murtaza), Shahaji Bhosale joined Nizams and became the chief administrator. He tried establish his "Hindavi swaraj" by proxy through Hussain. Later, Hussain became difficult to control. Hence IIRC, Shahaji accidented him and installed his child "Murtaza" (2 years old) on throne and started ruling. Eventually he was defeated by Mughal Juggernaut by 1640s and Nizam territory became part of Mughal empire. He then joined Adilshah who made him governor of Bengaluru, KN. By 1644/45 Shivaji started his work. Bulk of these fighters who were fighting alongside Shahaji against Adilshah and Mughals until 1639-42 moved to fight for Shivaji under orders of Shahaji. They lasted until 1660/63.

Rest, as they say, is history.. :)
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by ramana »

Peter and Virendra, You both seem to know a lot about Rajput history and customs. In Amber fort there is a palace of mirrors aka Sheesh Mahal. It is replicated in Agra fort also as sheesh mahal.

My question is who is the ishta devata (has to be some form of Kali)* of the Rajputs of Amber? And is the original sheesh mahal based on her worship or is it based on self gratification?

(Krishna Deva Raya's was Yellamma - chinnamasta devi or Lalita Devi)
-
Atri, Good description of the Vedic Rajayabhishek. Its for that very reason I was sad when the King of Nepal was deposed.

BTW, Radha Kumud Mukherjee gives a good description of the ceremnoy in his two books "Fundamental Unity of India" and the other title I forget.
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by Sanku »

For jaipur

Isht Dev == Baday Seeta Ram ji and later Govind Dev ji came along from Vrindavan

Kul Devi == Jamvai in Ramgarh (Vaishnavi Durga)

Isht Devi == Shila Devi ( Kali) from Jessore
Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by Virendra »

Spot on by Sanku.
Ramana ji I'm not an expert on Rajput history, just an inconsistent student. I think peter and Airavat know better.
About the Sheesh Mahal .. I vaguely remember visiting it once as a small kid.
The only thing I remember is that it was mesmerizing even in low light.
This is what I got from Google baba :-

....Made With Pure Glass. The Reason Why It Was Made Of Glass Was,The Queen Was Not Allowed To Sleep In Open Air During The Ancient Times But She Loved To See The Stars Shining.To This The King Ordered His Architects To Make Something Which Could Solve The Purpose.To This The Architects Made A Room Complete Of Very Small And Big Glasses.After That They Burnt Two Candles And The Relfection Converted That Small Light Into Thousands Of Stars In Those Small And Big Glasses.This Was How The Queen Became Happy.Previously This Room Was Open For All But Now Entry Is Restricted As People Has Spoiled The Glasses By Breaking Them.But Still From Outside We Can See The Amazing Glass Work.
From - http://unseenrajasthan.blogspot.in/2009 ... ce-of.html

Regards,
Virendra
peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Post by peter »

Atri wrote:
peter wrote: 1. What were the salient difference between the two types of ceremonies? Would you know what caused the vedic ceremony to disappear in 1000 AD? Who did the vedic ceremeony around 1000 AD?

2. Also your earlier post on the clan of Jijabai and their assasination was not clear. Can you please elaborate?
1. Salient features of Vaidika method..

It ain't gadget.. :D Most of Hindu ceremonies are categorized into Vedokta style OR Shrauta style and PuraaNokta style.

Vedokta method of any ceremony (be it wearing an astrological jewel on right day, to Pratishthapna of deity's Moorti, to Regular Sandhyavandanam, to Marriage to death) is considered stringent than puraNokta method. [..]
Thank you! This makes it crystal clear.

Some more questions:
a) How do you know so much? Just read a lot or is there an oral tradition that exists where your family is from?

b) What can you say about the relationship of Jaswant Singh of Marwar and Shivaji? Is Jaswant singh present in contemporary Marathi sources?

c) Is there any mention of Durgadas in Marathi sources?

d) When Shivaji escaped from Delhi was Sambhaji left with Kavi Kalash in Mathura/Banaras?
Post Reply