Ahmad Shah Durrani's place in Pakistan's history

[Bornubus]

Ohh so they did that because they though Akbar was no longer muslim? Even now many muslims say that Akbar was not proper muslims because of new religion.

Din E Ilahi was not even a proper relegion ,He was regarded Non Muslim even in his own lifetime -- Notably Badauni and Ahmad Sarhindi played a major Role in that

 

[jaatram]

They didn't Hated Akbar infact he was the most respected Mughal in Indian History--

They believed that Akbar wasn't Muslim anymore a common rumour around Agra those days.

Nah .... Akbar wasn't that nobel as he is made sound in the history books. He got what he deserved.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

I know but he was Mughal governor of punjabi arain origin.



Only after sikhs defeated them. Just like muslim waraich chief become sikh ally.

Kharal and Berkley - Blogs - DAWN.COM
Kharal and Berkley II - Blogs - DAWN.COM

 

[jaatram]

Ohh so they did that because they though Akbar was no longer muslim? Even now many muslims say that Akbar was not proper muslims because of new religion.

Jaats never believed in the Brahmin hierarchy, Till today hindu jaats don't believe in that non sense. We don't believe in idol worship. We still follow our old age system of jathera worship.

 

[Kabira]

Jaats never believed in the Brahmin hierarchy, Till today hindu jaats don't believe in that non sense. We don't believe in idol worship. We still follow our old age system of jathera worship.

You guys are hindus, accept it.

 

[jaatram]

You guys are hindus, accept it.

Culturally we are ... no doubt. That's the beauty of Hinduism they accept everything.

 

[django]

Looting is their ancient trait. But i don't know why hindu jaats who are shudras/outcastes in hinduism will bother with hindu burial ritual of muslim king.

Their caste status is not defined, how can you say they are shudras.

Adina Baig wasnt a mughal but a Punjabi arian.. who rose from a peasant status to become the most powerful man in punjab.. he double crossed everybody to achieve power for himself... allied with mughals... to crush the sikhs.. (at the same side supported sikhs against mughals)... and to keep them in power he called on marathas whom he paid 1 lakh per day to fight for him... and thus became the authority in punjab.

Oh Bhai Arain bauth hoshayr chalak lauk hai.

 

[KingMamba]

Sikhs were pragmatic. They knew Punjab was majority Muslim so if they wanted to maintain their rule in the long run they had to accommodate the Muslims (Just like the Mughals did with Hindus and Rajputs in N. India). Theres a reason why the Delhi Sultunate dynasties had roughly two-three monarchs whereas the Mughal dynasty lasted far longer. Large scale uprisings did take place agaisnt Sikh rule in the Potohar region for example by the Janjuas. If the Sikhs however tried to force convert Muslims to Sikhism there would have been even more uprisings and this would give the Pashtuns and other outside powers a chance to intervene. Ranjit Singh knew this hence his pragmatism.

As for the Marathas they too were pragmatic. At the Battle of Panipat for example one of the key Maratha commanders was a Muslim Ibrahim Khan Gardi. The Marathas had however never really ruled over Muslim majority territory so there is no way to be certain if they would have adopted the same policies as the Sikhs but the likelihood in my opinion is that they too would have remained pragmatic and not force convert the Punjabi/Sindhi masses to convert to Hinduism.



Well now we are seriously speculating. For one I find it highly unlikely (let me reinforce the highly) that the Marathas could ever have successfully enforced their rule in Balochistan, KPK and Afghanistan. These territories were overwhelmingly Muslim, on the other side of the subcontinent in harsh desert/mountainous terrain and inhabited by war like peoples. Even the British had immense difficulties controlling the Pashtun/Baloch tribes in the 1800/1900s despite the introduction of planes, machine guns etc. Qandahar would be next to impossible given that Maratha supply lines would be constantly harassed and ambushed along the deserts and in the various passes (Bolan/Khhyber). Im sorry but I see no way how the Marathas with their base in Central India in the pre railway era could ever have exercised serious influence in such far away territory. At most they could have launched attacks to exact tribute and demand nominal sovereignty of the Marathas but to expect them to enforce centralized authority over these territories in my opinion was not possible.

In the case of a Maratha victory at Panipat I still see their power gradually collapsing as they had treated theJats and Rajputs badly. The Brits were masters at divide and rule and at the first moment of Maratha weakness would have allied with the Rajputs/Jats to reduce Maratha power. In the long run I still see the British power gradually increasing their power in South Asia especially as the west starts producing more and more deadly weapons which easterners had no response to (machine guns, bolt action rifles etc.)

I see your point of view, as for my speculating well this whole thread is based on a speculation. Anyway so do you think Pakistan could have been formed if it was Marathas and and not Sikhs who held its regions before Brits came along?

By that time Jats emerged as regional power Most Rajputs already started screwing Mughals ,moreover not All Rajputs were same Sisodiya are one such Clan.

BTW i admire Jats of Mathura they were Brave they Destroyed and Looted the Akbar's Mausoleum exhumed his body and performed his Last rites according to Hindu Tradition and All this when Aurangzeb was Alive

Destroying and looting a grave is not bravery LOL.

 

[Bornubus]

I see your point of view, as for my speculating well this whole thread is based on a speculation. Anyway so do you think Pakistan could have been formed if it was Marathas and and not Sikhs who held its regions before Brits came along?



Destroying and looting a grave is not bravery LOL.

They did not destroyed his grave but only looted his mausoleum, he was respected figure among the jat community around Agra ,he gave them land grants etc

It was a rumour and misunderstanding of that time that akbar wasnt muslim anymore

 

[Truth Finder]

I see your point of view, as for my speculating well this whole thread is based on a speculation. Anyway so do you think Pakistan could have been formed if it was Marathas and and not Sikhs who held its regions before Brits came along?

1)Did more than a century Hindu Dogra rule make Kashmir a Hindu Majority state?

2) Do not communalize Indian History. Do you know who was the the "Guru" of Marathas? A muslim named Malik Ambar.

"In actuality Malik Ambar, respected by the people and feared by neighbouring Sultans, grew from strength to strength. He was to see his crowning glory in the battle of Bhatwadi around October 1624. After crossing the Bhima, Malik Ambar took position and confronted the combined assault of the Mughals and the Bijapur army. In the ensuing rout of the alliance, Malik Ambar, aided by his Maratha light cavalry, established his clear supremacy. This battle saw an unprecedented scale of Maratha participation leading to a collaboration that blurred all religious lines. And Malik Ambar’s trusted right hand man was Maloji, Shivaji’s grandfather. And in the military town of Kirki which Malik Ambar founded, now Aurangabad, he named all the quarters after great Maratha chiefs — Malpura, Khelpura, Vithapura and so on. Muslims and Marathas had united to resist Mughal hegemony in their bid to preserve their own distinct political and regional identity. Malik Ambar provided the inspiring leadership for this enterprise. At the height of his fame and remaining victorious as ever, Malik Ambar died on May 14, 1626 at the age of 78, at Ambarpur, bringing to close an eventful chapter. After his death, the Marathas, fostered and trained by him, would soon be a force to reckon with. Skilfully adopting the guerrilla tactic, they would bring about the downfall of Aurangzeb. Led by Shivaji they would emerge as a major power and write yet another distinct chapter in our chequered history."-A. RANGARAJAN

Noted historian Dr. Beni Prasad notes: "The chief importance of the Deccan campaigns of the Mughals lies in the opportunities of military training and political power which they afforded to the Marathas. Malik Ambar, who was a great master of the art of guerrilla warfare as Shivaji himself, stands as the head of the builders of the Maratha nationality. His primary object was to serve the interest of his own master, but unconsciously he nourished into strength a power which more than avenged the injuries of the South on the Northern power."

His two contributions:

1) The Guerilla warfare for which the Marathas are best known was pioneered by Malik Ambar.

2) He was also the mobilizing force behind the Marathas, the farmers turned into great warriors by Malik Ambar.



I think @Joe Shearer would also agree with me.

 

[pursuit of happiness]

No doubt battle of pani pat changed history of India,Marthas were keen to built first hindu empire on ruins of Mughal Empire but failed,but after 1857 hindus did got a strong position vs Muslims by quickly showing utmost devotion to Raj,those who struggled for Pakistan are no doubt are our true heroes and father of nation but Durrani can be credited for destroying power of Marathas thus ending suffering of Muslims and creating power balance....

--
ending suffering of Muslims
can you support this with proof?it was war of two empires
maraths was winning till noon.. but then destinu turn agant them so their mistke too..
it was political war nothing to relgeius per se

Anyway there was never any ''punjabi muslim nation'' in ethnical sense. A part from common language/dialects. So nothing surprising some people may have supported him. I think Indians don't realize ground realities of real old punjab.



Why do you expect sikhs to support marathas, when maratha ally Adina Beg persecuted sikhs and they had to hide in jungles?

--
can you explain your post with proof?

The power base of the Marathas was in C. India (Pune). Sure they could have invaded Pakistan and maintained a presence there through garrisons (just like the Mughals did in South India whilst based in N India) but could they really have had a tight grip on the native populace? I personally dont think so. In the pre-railway era horses were the prime medium of transport and there were logistical limits present for all armies marching out of their capital cities (for example Vienna in the case of the Ottomans who tried twice to capture Vienna via armies which came out of Istanbul but failed both times). The likelihood is thus that the Indus region would have evaded any kind of strongly centralized Maratha rule and would have remained a remote border region, even if the Marathas had won at Panipat.

With regards to the creation of Pakistan, you have to remember that despite the failure of the Marathas, Pakistan did fall to Non Muslim rule prior to the emergence of the British in the shape of the Sikh Empire. Despite this however the majority of the Muslims could not be broken and Non Muslims remained a minority. Hence I wouldnt read too much into Abdalis victory in relation to the creation of Pakistan although on an individual level his victory at Panipat was of course hugely significant.

--
Pakistan came in 1947

 

[Samandri]

--

maraths was winning till noon.. but then destinu turn agant them so their mistke too..

Marathas were not winning from the beginning, from the very start, Gardi's got too close to right flank of Afghans and made the mockery of himself when his shots were flying above the head of Rohillas for an hour. When he attempted to fight the Rohillas in direct combat, his six battalions got wiped out in the very first phase of battle and he himself got wounded. The Maratha officers like Vithal Shivedv and other officers of their left wing, outflanked gardi and tried to take on Rohilla infantry but were beaten back with heavy losses. I dont need to tell the other details, the point is Marathas started taking heavy losses in the battle from very early on, not due to destiny but due to relatively weak war skills of their commanders and Ahmad Shah Abdali was too good general for them.

 

[pursuit of happiness]

Marathas were not winning from the beginning, from the very start, Gardi's got too close to right flank of Afghans and made the mockery of himself when his shots were flying above the head of Rohillas for an hour. When he attempted to fight the Rohillas in direct combat, his six battalions got wiped out in the very first phase of battle and he himself got wounded. The Maratha officers like Vithal Shivedv and other officers of their left wing, outflanked gardi and tried to take on Rohilla infantry but were beaten back with heavy losses. I dont need to tell the other details, the point is Marathas started taking heavy losses in the battle from very early on, not due to destiny but due to relatively weak war skills of their commanders and Ahmad Shah Abdali was too good general for them.

--
may be
i read like somtihg diffrent ,
gardi was effective .. but maratha genreals disobeyed previous plan and went all out which made thing crumbling..
marathas was wining but after noon times when sun rays going in horse eye.. cavalary becoming weaking..

In the second phase, Bhau himself led the charge against the left-of-center Afghan forces, under the Afghan Vizier Shah Wali Khan. The sheer force of the attack nearly broke the Afghan lines, and soldiers started to desert their positions in the confusion. Desperately trying to rally his forces, Shah Wali appealed to Shuja ud Daulah for assistance. However, the Nawab did not break from his position, effectively splitting the Afghan force's center. Despite Bhau's success, the overenthusiasm of the charge and a phenomenon called "Dakshinayan" on that fateful day, the attack itself failed because the sunlight shone directly into the eyes of the attackers' horses, many of them half-starved Maratha mounts who were exhausted long before they had traveled the two kilometers to the Afghan lines; some simply collapsed.

Third Battle of Panipat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
---

Ahmad Shah Abdali himself paid a flowing tribute to his rivals when in a letter to then Jaipur ruler, Madhav Singh, he wrote : "The Marathas fought with the greatest valour which was beyond the capacity of other races. These dauntless blood-shedders didn't fall short in fighting and doing glorious deeds. But ultimately we won with our superior tactics and with the grace of the Divine Lord." At least 27 Maratha commanders including the scions of Gwalior, Dhar and Dewas Maratha royal families fell in the battle along with the commander in chief Sadashivrao Bhau and Vishwasrao, Peshwa Balaji Bajirao's son .


Read more at: The lost Marathas of third battle of Panipat : North, News - India Today

 

[Truth Finder]

@Samandri , @pursuit of happiness , @save_ghenda , @قناص , @KingMamba ,

1) Marathas lost Panipat because of their hubris.

2) BTW, it was not “such a big thing”. Panipat was “avenged” in a decade and they continued to “dominate” the sub-continent before the British firmly established themselves in the 19th century. Again, the land they lost in the north-west was soon “ruled” by the Sikhs. So, the proposition that "Muslims" benefited from it is totally "fanciful".

 

[pursuit of happiness]

@Samandri , @pursuit of happiness , @save_ghenda , @قناص , @KingMamba ,

1) Marathas lost Panipat because of their hubris.

2) BTW, it was not “such a big thing”. Panipat was “avenged” in a decade and they continued to “dominate” the sub-continent before the British firmly established themselves in the 19th century. Again, the land they lost in the north-west was soon “ruled” by the Sikhs. So, the proposition that "Muslims" benefited from it is totally "fanciful".

-
1. Partly true.. they took very much stuff in their own hand rahter also taking other with them ..
2. Marathas again came back to force in 10 yrs ...not with that might as before but not less than too..
3. it was never relgious war.. Jihad term used by abdali for motivating his force that it.. so for maratha har har mahadev ..
those who feel it war of relgion are in iluusion
4. most benefited by that war was British .. who just saw maratha power gone in one war.. what a huge gain wihout fighting..