Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 02 Feb 2018 16:58

Wow, I just posted in the IA thread saying I want to find our old nishans !

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 03 Feb 2018 01:32

Akshay Kapoor I asked Ravi Rikhye to write about Shivaji's success factors.

In a nutshell he says the Muslims were a mobile cavalry force while Rajputs were a fortress based defence force.

Shivaji was the only one to realize the utility of mobile cavalry units even with the Maratha horse.
And thus he made a difference.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 03 Feb 2018 03:58

Shivaji introduced (?) (is that the right word?) guerrilla warfare.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 03 Feb 2018 04:54

It wasn't just mobile cavalry and guerilla tactics, Shivaji was simply prepared to do anything that was needed to overcome the huge disparity in men and material that he faced. Fast light cavalry attacks, using terrain to one's advantage (and developing an excellent knowledge of local terrain in the first place), deception, night attacks, harassment raids, covert attacks, strategic retreat when the circumstances are too much against you. The deccan sultanate and the Mughals weren't used to this kind of warfare. Even after Shivaji, the Maratha armies continued using these tactics, especially against the long drawn out war with Aurangzeb, till they eventually had the wherewithal to amass large armies of their own. It was a strategy based on out-thinking your opponent, luring him into traps and anticipating traps set by him and also knowing when to avoid battle. The Afzal Khan story is legend, but one thing to remember isis that Afzal Khan came to meet Shivaji face-to-face after first trying and failing to induce Shivaji into attacking him in the plains where his much larger army would have prevailed. Having avoided that trap, Shivaji then set his own trap by first feigning a desire for peace, positioning and partly hiding his small army carefully and finally facing Afzal Khan himself. The popular story says the Khan struck first and Shivaji reacted and killed him but I'm pretty sure Shivaji knew when he walked into the tent that only one of them was getting out alive. And so did his army because his Lieutenants Kanhoji Jedhe and Netaji palkar knew exactly what to do and when to attack beforehand. They did that to perfection and Afzal Khan's formidable but bewildered army was routed by a force many times smaller.

Shivaji's personally led attack on Shaiste Khan's palace in Pune can be termed as a commando raid/assassination attempt of a target who should have been safe considering the large numbers of Mughal troops encamped in and around the city. Shaiste Khan escaped after losing three fingers and his son. Shivaji and the Maratha's escaped despite all the Mughal troops around.

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 03 Feb 2018 04:56

Maratha forces were not particularly mobile cavalry centric in Shivaji's time -- his could barely assemble enough cavalry to get a low ranking mansabdari from the Mughals. Later he also paid his army a regular salary, and didn't want an expensive large cavalry on the books -- so he kept the size to a bare minimum that the revenue could support.

By Tara Bai's time the entire revenue system Shivaji painstakingly built had collapsed from Sambaji's inept leadership, and she had to innovate by offering the various Maratha sardars direct ability to collect 'chauth' in enemy territory. That laid the foundation and motivation for large irregular cavalry raiding forces; it also fatally weakened the ability of the Marathas to ever field a unified and stable empire.

Guerrilla warfare was nothing new or revolutionary in India -- any village kid who played kabbadi would know the basic principles of raiding, surviving and getting back to safe-zones. Even against the Central Asian hordes, the Ghakkars had famously killed Mohammed of Ghori and the Haryana Sarvkhap had harassed Taimur endlessly on his way back from Delhi raid.

Shivaji's contribution was far greater -- he created an early modern national army that served to protect the people, unlike most medieval armies that existed solely for extortion and looting. He introduced regular taxation (instead of jagirs and mansabdaris), balanced budgets and pensions for veterans and war-widows. Those things are far, far harder to achieve (especially when he was still in a survival mode) than getting together a bunch of armed men and going raiding.

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 03 Feb 2018 05:31

Nachiket, it is untrue that the Deccani Sultans and the Mughals were unaware of guerrilla warfare. Hundreds of Maratha sardars served in Deccani armies as irregular cavalry (including Shivaji's family). Even more Uighurs and Turkmen served in Mughal armies, men who had grown up riding almost before they could walk... and who knew maneuver warfare as well as anyone in the world; there were also Afghans and Rajput veterans of the anti-Afghan wars who knew mountain warfare quiet well in even more punishing terrain than the Deccan.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 03 Feb 2018 10:33

Shivaji understood Muslims better than anyone in Bharat before him. Maybe better than anyone after him. He acted accordingly. That is the major reason why we remember him.

ashish raval · Post by **ashish raval** » 03 Feb 2018 12:57

Murugan wrote:How Gujarat Sultanate came to an end.
Asylum seeker sultan Muzaffar III protected by Jadejas of Nawanagar. Jadejas' fought mughals.

A gripping account of bravery, perfidy and striking back.

The Battle of Bhuchar Mori (The Panipat of Gujarat)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Bhuchar_Mori

There were plenty of battles in Zhalawad between Rajput's (zhala, jadeja, chauhans) and Gujarat sultanate of Mahmud begdo and others. My family's (Raval) history (some written by contemporaries and some from legends in villages) who were chief Pandits of Rajput's of Zhalawad has many stories of martyrdom even by my ancestors who fought and died battling Mahmud to protect cows from Muslim armies. They imparted vedic, military craft, statecraft and sword training to Rajput kings sons. Even today I find their generation as fearless as they would have been back then. We have twin objects in Puja - Vedas and Swords and Dhaal.

Single underlying reasons that Muslims were able to establish rule is because no unity among hindu kings who were busy in di%# measurements than getting together as one unit and fight. Muslims on the other hand fought under sword of Islam and name of Allah.

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 03 Feb 2018 15:45

NRao wrote:Shivaji introduced (?) (is that the right word?) guerrilla warfare.

yes. Watch Maj Arya's show Patriot on the CIJWS. The Dy Commandant draws lineage from Shivaji and talks at length about this and guerrila warfare.

watch here - 1.40 min onwards. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yenkmKQqh54&t=1544s

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 03 Feb 2018 15:52

Yagnasri wrote:Shivaji understood Muslims better than anyone in Bharat before him. Maybe better than anyone after him. He acted accordingly. That is the major reason why we remember him.

and also that action not only saved the civilzation from annihalation but the numerous tactical victories were bound into a strategic victory and and the fonduations of a India wide empire. His military lessons were lost by some of his scuccesors who again left the mobile, highly trained, highly motivated, ably lead , mobile (light infantry, infact the Maratha Regt in Indian army is called Maratha Light Infantry) tactics for long baggage trains, long lines of communication, pomp and show in battlefield and set piece actions. From a purely tactical point of view one should read Gen Raghavan's Infantry in India where he talks about some of these issues.

Slightly OT to tactics- more about how to consolidate the gains of battle and the place of the battle in the longer term civilisational plan - The british took power using one part of Shivaji's army against another. And carried their divide and rule by using Madrasis against Marathas, Marathas against Rajputs and Rajputs against Sikhs. Because they built modern armies with good pay, izzat, equipment and professional officers. Shivaji did that too but his successors forgot these lessons.

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 03 Feb 2018 16:01

ashish raval wrote:
Murugan wrote:How Gujarat Sultanate came to an end.
Asylum seeker sultan Muzaffar III protected by Jadejas of Nawanagar. Jadejas' fought mughals.

A gripping account of bravery, perfidy and striking back.

The Battle of Bhuchar Mori (The Panipat of Gujarat)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Bhuchar_Mori
There were plenty of battles in Zhalawad between Rajput's (zhala, jadeja, chauhans) and Gujarat sultanate of Mahmud begdo and others. My family's (Raval) history (some written by contemporaries and some from legends in villages) who were chief Pandits of Rajput's of Zhalawad has many stories of martyrdom even by my ancestors who fought and died battling Mahmud to protect cows from Muslim armies. They imparted vedic, military craft, statecraft and sword training to Rajput kings sons. Even today I find their generation as fearless as they would have been back then. We have twin objects in Puja - Vedas and Swords and Dhaal.

Single underlying reasons that Muslims were able to establish rule is because no unity among hindu kings who were busy in di%# measurements than getting together as one unit and fight. Muslims on the other hand fought under sword of Islam and name of Allah.

You come from an illustrious ancestory. My pranaam to your lineage.

And yes individual actions count for little - they need to be moulded into a coherent mutually supporting force with a shared vision and identity. One reason the Rajputs couldnt fight mobile was that they fought alone (other Rajputs didn't support) so the fort had to be protected.

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 03 Feb 2018 16:07

ParGha wrote:
Shivaji's contribution was far greater -- he created an early modern national army that served to protect the people, unlike most medieval armies that existed solely for extortion and looting. He introduced regular taxation (instead of jagirs and mansabdaris), balanced budgets and pensions for veterans and war-widows. Those things are far, far harder to achieve (especially when he was still in a survival mode) than getting together a bunch of armed men and going raiding.

Excellent post. Shivaji was a brilliant general, leader, figther, an adminstrator par excellence and great visionary and statemsman. And he started from scratch. He had enormous physical and moral courage and extremely intelligent karama yogi. What a man.

And Nachiket Sahab very good points too.

ashish raval · Post by **ashish raval** » 03 Feb 2018 18:17

Akshay Kapoor wrote:
ashish raval wrote: There were plenty of battles in Zhalawad between Rajput's (zhala, jadeja, chauhans) and Gujarat sultanate of Mahmud begdo and others. My family's (Raval) history (some written by contemporaries and some from legends in villages) who were chief Pandits of Rajput's of Zhalawad has many stories of martyrdom even by my ancestors who fought and died battling Mahmud to protect cows from Muslim armies. They imparted vedic, military craft, statecraft and sword training to Rajput kings sons. Even today I find their generation as fearless as they would have been back then. We have twin objects in Puja - Vedas and Swords and Dhaal.

Single underlying reasons that Muslims were able to establish rule is because no unity among hindu kings who were busy in di%# measurements than getting together as one unit and fight. Muslims on the other hand fought under sword of Islam and name of Allah.
You come from an illustrious ancestory. My pranaam to your lineage.

And yes individual actions count for little - they need to be moulded into a coherent mutually supporting force with a shared vision and identity. One reason the Rajputs couldnt fight mobile was that they fought alone (other Rajputs didn't support) so the fort had to be protected.

Fully agree. History is riddled with this and only if they formed united coherent units they could have not only have successfully fought back but also conquered the land of Vikram Aditya back and cleaned the gandharva land of Malsi.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 03 Feb 2018 20:27

I think another lesson from Shivaji is Dynastic rulers are a bane. Genes and lineage are overrated. Similarly extreme faith in 1 ruler is wrong. We need systems in place. Being weak militarily and economically is an invitation to attack. And our neighbours will attack if they see weakness. Our neighbours to the North East never practiced economics, they believed in loot and plunder. Even Nadir Shah removed taxes for 5 years after the loot in Delhi.

ashthor · Post by **ashthor** » 03 Feb 2018 21:49

Looking Through Broken Glass: Rajput Victories In Indian History

https://swarajyamag.com/culture/looking ... an-history

1. Nagabhata 1 Pushes the Arabs Across the Indus (c 740 AD)
2. Prithviraj Chauhan Crushes Mu’izz-ud-Din Ghori – First Battle of Tarain (1191 AD)
3. The Katoch Rajputs of Kangra Annihilate Muhammad bin Tughlaq’s China Army (1333 AD)
4. Rana Hammir leads the Rajput Renaissance Against Muhammad bin Tughlaq (1336-1340 AD)
5. Battles of Khatoli and Dholpur – Rana Sanga Defeats Ibrahim Khan Lodhi (1518-19 AD)
6. Mewar’s Victories over Malwa and Gujarat Sultanates (Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries)
7. Durgadas Rathore and The Thirty Years War Between Marwar and the Mughal Empire (1678-1707 AD)
8. Siege of Auwa During the Great Rebellion of 1857

More on the above mentioned in the link.

ashthor · Post by **ashthor** » 13 Feb 2018 21:47

Interesting read...never knew about this.

The Indian Village in Tibet

At his monthly press conference, Senior Colonel Wu Qian, the spokesperson for China's ministry of
national defence, answered a question about China maintaining a high military presence close to the Doklam area.

'Dong Lang area is Chinese territory, and, therefore, we will decide the deployment of our troops on our own,' Wu said.

Beijing is always quick to claim territory which is not its own; in the present case, it belongs to Bhutan.

It is probably not in Indian genes to claim other nations' territory; but worse, in some cases, India has been unable
to claim its own territory.

Here is the story of a small parcel of India in Tibet: A village called Minsar.

For centuries, the inhabitants of Minsar, although surrounded by Tibetan territories, paid their taxes to the
kingdom of Ladakh.

More in the link.

http://www.rediff.com/news/special/the- ... 180213.htm

ashthor · Post by **ashthor** » 17 Feb 2018 20:50

So much is written about the Hindu kings of west and south India.

Time to know about a king from East India - Kapilendra Deva Routaray

From Devkot in the North to Tiruchhipalli in the South, the Oriya Empire extended- the single largest Hindu Empire the Continent had seen since the rule of the Pratiharas, over even hundred years ago, and until the coming of Akbar, the single largest Indian Empire since the Tughlaqs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kapilendradeva

https://historyunderyourfeet.wordpress. ... conquerer/

http://purnyabhumiodisha.blogspot.in/20 ... agara.html

http://www.historyofodisha.in/kapilendr ... -1467-a-d/

https://rightlog.in/2017/07/blue-mounta ... es-orissa/

Murugan · Post by **Murugan** » 07 Mar 2018 14:28

Single underlying reasons that Muslims were able to establish rule is because no unity among hindu kings who were busy in di%# measurements than getting together as one unit and fight. Muslims on the other hand fought under sword of Islam and name of Allah.

IIRC, the gujarat sultanate's founder was son of a Tanka Rajput converted to Islam.

"The founder of the dynasty was Zafar Khan (later Muzaffar Shah I) who was governor of Gujarat under the Delhi Sultanate. Zafar Khan's father Sadharan, was a Tanka Rajput convert to Islam, adopted the name Wajih-ul-Mulk, and had given his sister in marriage to Firuz Shah Tughlaq. When the Sultanate was weakened by the sacking of Delhi by Timur in 1398, and Zafar Khan took the opportunity to establish himself as sultan of an independent Gujarat. His son, Ahmed Shah I established the capital at Ahmedabad." (wiki)

Murugan · Post by **Murugan** » 07 Mar 2018 14:36

Akshay Kapoor wrote:...Any thoughts if this is useful ? Murugan, Ramana Sir, Kartik and others ?

This book is good to start with:

https://www.amazon.in/Chola-Navigation- ... 819010005X

and other books issued by Maritime History society:

https://www.amazon.in/sp?_encoding=UTF8 ... asStoreID=

Murugan · Post by **Murugan** » 07 Mar 2018 16:10

NRao wrote:Shivaji introduced (?) (is that the right word?) guerrilla warfare.

MahaRana Pratap = Ganimi Kawa

DHAR, another guerilla warfare way before delhi sultanate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhar_(guerrilla_warfare) (Jadunarth Sarkar's ref is given)

Dhad-padu is a term used in Gujarat for unexpected ambush warfare.

Murugan · Post by **Murugan** » 07 Mar 2018 16:14

The earliest ever rocket use recorded in India was during Sher Shah Suri's conquest of Kalinjir. He died because a rocket fired at Kalinjir rebound and killed Mrs (probably) and Mr Sher Shah Suri.

it was not Tipu.

Murugan · Post by **Murugan** » 07 Mar 2018 16:28

Indian Generals recommended guerilla/dhar/ganimi kava raids against chini during Namka Chu and other 1962 invasions, thus draw them to plains where we were strong. B M Bijji Kaul/Menon/Nehru combined did not find it interesting. It was timmy and his team, probably thorat too suggested this tactic, unfortunately they were never given due respect.

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 07 Mar 2018 17:20

LTG SPP Thorat recommended fighting at the road-heads and not at the peaks; no one in the army ever wants to fight a guerrilla war — they are devastating for the culture and organization of an army.

In fact, LTG Harbaksh Singh, who authorized the creation of the Army Commandos during the 1965 War himself thought that commando/spec-ops culture would be better in the ITBP than in the regular military once it reverted to peace-time.

BN Mullick, the IB Director, wanted to fight the guerrilla war. He did get his way, and the SSB (and to a lesser extent ITBP, BSF and AR) became IB’s armed with wing for fighting stay-behind guerrilla warfare. Not sure why it was reduced to a border guarding force after Kargil Committee reforms, but it would have made more sense to assign its border guarding duties to an expanded ITBP and kept it to its original mission.

csaurabh · Post by **csaurabh** » 07 Mar 2018 17:39

Can anyone suggest me a good book on the Maratha empire? I can't seem to find any good one (in English).

Especially the Maratha history after Shivaji and wars fought with Aurangzeb. I already have a good book on Shivaji, title 'Challenging destiny'.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Mar 2018 20:56

Grant Duff.
It's there in Archive.org

Murugan · Post by **Murugan** » 08 Mar 2018 11:55

ParGha wrote:LTG SPP Thorat recommended fighting at the road-heads and not at the peaks; no one in the army ever wants to fight a guerrilla war — they are devastating for the culture and organization of an army.

...

That was a need of the hour - when the army's culture and organization was devastated by the infamous trio of 1962. More in Shiv Kunal Verma's book (not specifically mentioned as guerilla warfare but lightly armed soldiers harassing the chinis, cutting of their comm lines, drawing them to plains). It is recorded.

Also these tactics did not devastate Maratha army of Shivaji, neither the culture or organization was destroyed . It was devastated while not adopting the same tactics against ahmad shah durrani. Snakrant kosalali hoti.

csaurabh · Post by **csaurabh** » 08 Mar 2018 19:28

ramana wrote:Grant Duff.
It's there in Archive.org

Downloading now.. Isn't there a good book by an Indian author? /disappoint

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 08 Mar 2018 20:40

First read and then get disappointed if needed.
Grant Duff is very accurate of the Marathas.

Pargha and Murugun, Please read Behind the Scene by Maj. Gen Jogindar SIngh.

1962 was botched. It was good in Ladakh and bad in NEFA.
After the balloon went up the local commanders did as they pleased.

B.N. Mallick seems to have studied Soviet era partisan warfare.
What he had in mid is that and not guerilla warfare.

Muruguan, The trio Nehru, Menon, and Mullick are the rotten fellows.
Kaul was a logistics guy appointed to a war role.
Wrong person in wrong role.
Niranjan Prasad was a pilot absorbed into the IA.
Again wrong role. And wrong person. He led two disasters 1962 and 1965.

BTW Kaul did one thing good for Indian Army.
He drew up and perfected the logistics plan to move the Indian Armoured Division to its deployment area by cutting the time to 72 hours. This was used in 1965.

Lt Gen Sinha's biography writes about this facet.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Mar 2018 00:54

Another account of First Battle of Panipat.

First Battle of Panipat

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 30 Mar 2018 02:31

by Akshay Kapoor

Slightly OT to tactics- more about how to consolidate the gains of battle and the place of the battle in the longer term civilisational plan - The british took power using one part of Shivaji's army against another. And carried their divide and rule by using Madrasis against Marathas, Marathas against Rajputs and Rajputs against Sikhs. Because they built modern armies with good pay, izzat, equipment and professional officers. Shivaji did that too but his successors forgot these lessons.

It was not Rajput against the sikhs but "Purbias" aka people of Calcutta presidency aka current Bengal, Bihar, Orissa region.
There were series of 6 Anglo-Sikh (Maharaja Ranjit Singh) wars .

After 13 Misls (Equals) took control of the region between Indus and Yamuna in 1760s., their descendants roughly created these kingdoms in Punjab/Haryana/Himachal.

1. Sarkar Khalsa of Lahore was the largest Sikh empire established by Maharaja Ranjit Singh and ruled from 1799 - 1739) that ruled most of what is Pakistan now except Baluchistan(independent country) and Sindh (ruled by British).

2. Patiala kingdom that ruled 50% of current Himachal stretching from Patiala (Chandigarh-Rajpura-Patiala area)
3. Nabha City of Nabha and few villages around it.
4. Jind city of Jind and few villages around it.
5. Faridkot and its villages

So all of the (2-5) became tributaries of British and supplied soldiers and during the 6 anglo Sikh wars even let British soldiers through their area.

Maharaja Ranjit Singh died in 1839 and his sons and even grandson were killed through various deceit. By 1845 the first anglo Sikh war broke out.

1. 18th December 1845 Battle of Mudki.
2. 19th December 1845 Battle of Ferozeshah.
3. 28th January 1846 Battle of Aliwal.

By the terms imposed by the victorious British through the peace treaty of 9 March, the Lahore Darbar was compelled to give up Jalandhar Doab, pay a war indemnity amounting to a million and a half sterling, reduce its army to 20,000 infantry and 12,000 cavalry, hand over all the guns used in the war and relinquish control of both banks of the Sutlej to the British. A further condition was added two days later on 11 March: the posting of a British unit in Lahore till the end of the year on payment of expenses. The Khalsa Darbar was unable to pay the full war indemnity and ceded in lieu thereof the hill territories between the Beas and the Indus. Kashmir was sold to Gulab Singh Dogra for 75 lakh rupees. A week later, on 16 March, another treaty was signed at Amritsar recognizing him as Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir, affirming the suspicion that Gulab Singh Dogra indeed was involved in sedition against Khalsa Sarkar. Gulab Singh Dogra's direct descendant Maharaja Hari singh signed accession to India.

On April 19, 1848 Vans Agnew of the civil service and Lieutenant Anderson of the Bombay European regiment, having been sent to take charge of Multan from Diwan Mulraj Chopra, were murdered there, and within a short time the Sikh troops and sardars joined in open rebellion.

A hindu gentleman named Diwan Mulraj Chopra led the Khalsa army and there were again 3 battles. Diwan Mulraj Chopra's father named Diwan Sawan Mal Chopra was made Diwan of a muslim majority city Multan after it was won by Ranjit Singh. Sawan Mal Chopra was from the same city of Gujranwala which was ruled by Maharaja Rajit Singh's family since the times of Sardar Charat Singh and they were family friends.

Dalhousie (Governor of India) decided to pile up their armed forces in Punjab and Hugh Gough (commander of East India forces) led the assault in these three battles
1. November-December of 1848 at Ramnagar and Sadaulapur.
3. 13th January 1849 battle of Chillianwala British lost 4000 soldiers and left the battlefield and was thus victory for Sikhs.
4. 21st February 1849 Battle of Gujrat where British did not assaulted the fort but kept firing from their long range cannons outside the reach of Sikh forces.

on 21st February 1849 Sikh army surrendered at Rawalpindi and thus Sikh kingdom was annexed by British and its king Dalip Singh taken to London, converted to Christianity while his mother was exiled to Nepal.

Sikhs saw it largely as victory of Purbias (Bihar-Bengali soldiers)., and then 8 years later in 1857 most of the soldiers of Sarkar Khalsa who were unemployed enlisted with British to fight the 1857 (First war of Independence aka Sepoy rebellion). This 1857 rebellion if looked from the eyes of Sikhs is fight against Purbias .

Shanmukh · Post by **Shanmukh** » 30 Mar 2018 03:29

csaurabh wrote:
ramana wrote:Grant Duff.
It's there in Archive.org
Downloading now.. Isn't there a good book by an Indian author? /disappoint

New History of the Marathas, GS Sardesai. All the volumes are there on archive, I think.

csaurabh · Post by **csaurabh** » 30 Mar 2018 20:33

Shanmukh wrote:
csaurabh wrote:
Downloading now.. Isn't there a good book by an Indian author? /disappoint
New History of the Marathas, GS Sardesai. All the volumes are there on archive, I think.

Thanks.

Reading this ( and also the history of Ahom dynasty, etc. ) led me to the realization that feudal hereditary monarchy is a very weak form of government. Shivaji was the greatest king of his time and yet his successor Sambhaji was vicious and incompetent and generally a poor quality ruler. While we may praise the achievements of these medieval rulers, we also need to acknowledge that it is a good thing those days and systems are behind us. Europe had come to making peace with its past during its transition to modernity in the 19th century, unfortunately for a colonized nation it has been difficult to do. Romanticizing the past is not a great idea, completely forgetting it and becoming 'secular'/leftist is not a good idea either.

CalvinH · Post by **CalvinH** » 31 Mar 2018 01:40

SBajwa wrote:
by Akshay Kapoor

Slightly OT to tactics- more about how to consolidate the gains of battle and the place of the battle in the longer term civilisational plan - The british took power using one part of Shivaji's army against another. And carried their divide and rule by using Madrasis against Marathas, Marathas against Rajputs and Rajputs against Sikhs. Because they built modern armies with good pay, izzat, equipment and professional officers. Shivaji did that too but his successors forgot these lessons.

Sikhs saw it largely as victory of Purbias (Bihar-Bengali soldiers)., and then 8 years later in 1857 most of the soldiers of Sarkar Khalsa who were unemployed enlisted with British to fight the 1857 (First war of Independence aka Sepoy rebellion). This 1857 rebellion if looked from the eyes of Sikhs is fight against Purbias .

This makes no sense to me. Sikhs completely sided with British who disbanded the Sikh empire less then 10 years ago? What about modern day Uttrakhand hillsman and Gurkhas. They were also taking it out on Purbias.

arshyam · Post by **arshyam** » 31 Mar 2018 20:43

Shanmukh wrote:
csaurabh wrote:
Downloading now.. Isn't there a good book by an Indian author? /disappoint
New History of the Marathas, GS Sardesai. All the volumes are there on archive, I think.

Has anyone read this book: Shivaji: The Great Maratha (by Ranjit Desai (Author), translated by Vikrant Pande (Author)). I saw this on IndiaFacts.

Amazon listing

Here's an excerpt: Shivaji: The Great Maratha- An excerpt

Editor’s Note: “Shivaji: The Great Maratha” chronicles the magnificent life and times of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj in graphic detail. This epic text, originally written by Ranjit Desai in Marathi titled “Shriman Yogi”, now finds a new voice in Vikrant Pande’s wonderful translation. Here is an excerpt from the book.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 31 Mar 2018 23:00

Shriman Yogi is a great book from what I heard.

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 01 Apr 2018 08:21

CalvinH wrote:
SBajwa wrote:
Sikhs saw it largely as victory of Purbias (Bihar-Bengali soldiers)., and then 8 years later in 1857 most of the soldiers of Sarkar Khalsa who were unemployed enlisted with British to fight the 1857 (First war of Independence aka Sepoy rebellion). This 1857 rebellion if looked from the eyes of Sikhs is fight against Purbias .
This makes no sense to me. Sikhs completely sided with British who disbanded the Sikh empire less then 10 years ago? What about modern day Uttrakhand hillsman and Gurkhas. They were also taking it out on Purbias.

You are forgetting that very few "White" britishers were in indian armed forces at this time. 99% of the soldiers were Indians whom british used in their John Company (East India Company) army.

Only Ranjit Singh and top guys knew that French or British will win! the common soldier did not.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Apr 2018 22:19

CalvinH, The British historian R. Collingwood writes that one should put themselves in the shoes of the historical figure or situation to see how and why they acted.
This is described in "Idea of History" by R. Collingwood.

Read and be wise.

Murugan · Post by **Murugan** » 06 Jun 2018 11:35

Weapons / related artefacts from Sanauli Excavation 2000 BCE

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 06 Jun 2018 14:30

SBajwa wrote:
CalvinH wrote:
This makes no sense to me. Sikhs completely sided with British who disbanded the Sikh empire less then 10 years ago? What about modern day Uttrakhand hillsman and Gurkhas. They were also taking it out on Purbias.

You are forgetting that very few "White" britishers were in indian armed forces at this time. 99% of the soldiers were Indians whom british used in their John Company (East India Company) army.

Only Ranjit Singh and top guys knew that French or British will win! the common soldier did not.

there was also a religious dimension to this. the company's army was I believe from Awadh and therefore significantly muslim

Virendra · Post by **Virendra** » 19 Nov 2018 20:09

ramana wrote:CalvinH, The British historian R. Collingwood writes that one should put themselves in the shoes of the historical figure or situation to see how and why they acted.
This is described in "Idea of History" by R. Collingwood.

Read and be wise.

presentism
/ˈprɛz(ə)ntɪz(ə)m/Submit
noun
uncritical adherence to present-day attitudes, especially the tendency to interpret past events in terms of modern values and concepts.