Bangla Babble

[LaBong]

I have come to this realization that history of sub continent is different to Hindus and Muslims! i mean viewpoints are different! You guys consider Bokhtiar khilji aggressor and i have to cross Khilji road and Aurangzeb road here everyday ( no sign of shashangk anywhere )! they are loved by us! Same way you have accepted the history where Siraj-ud-daula is portrayed as communal...!

i have posted the p.alo report where they have said all these were baseless propaganda against Nawab... They have highlighted real reasons................... Source are given at the end of the article

The interpretation of events could be relative to Hindus and Muslims, however the events are not.

Bakhtiyar destroyed Nalanada and killed thousands of monk and burned it's library, which is fact, but the interpretation could be different to you and me.

We should try to present the fact and leave the interpretation to individuals.

I'll read the Prothom Alo article, but whatever I said so far are facts, you are free to interpret it in your way, after all, as I said, there were no black and white but shades of dark.

 

[bongbang]

This is a strange greedy self destructive place. We will always have patriotic visionary leaders like Siraj ud daula, A K Fazlul Haq, Suhrawardi, Maulana Bhashani, Sheikh Mujib, Hasina on one side and on the other side we will always have Mir Jafar, Iskandar Mirza, Khwaja Najimuddin, Ziaur Rahman, Golam Azam, Khaleda Zia to pull down the patriots.

 

[kobiraaz]

There is actually no black and white, but shades of dark. Let me post a chronology of events that led to Mirjafars betrayal.

And oh, by the way, Nawabs of Bengal were Turks. not Pashtun.

Jagat seth is a family title enjoyed by two brothers. I did read some research papers on this period and now I would request you to remove some misconceptions that we inherited from our school text books that portayed Siraj as great independant Nawab.

[1] There was seven Hindu Kings/Zamindar under Nawab of Bengal: King of Nadia Krishna Chandra ( who was main conspirator), King of Burdwan, Kingdom of Natore, Kingdom of Ban Bishnupur, etc....

Nawab never ruled Bengal directly. These local kings were ruling more or less independantly paying taxes to Nawab. Nawab's army was also highly dependant on the supplies from these seven kingdoms.

In the first war against British (1748), King of Burwan supplied all the logistics to 40,000 army of Siraj.

[2] During the time of Nawab Alibardi ( grand father of Siraj), relationship between Hindu Kings and Nawab was very cordial. Attack by the Maratha invadors (Bargi) was common ground to be united. While fighting against one of such invasion against Bargi, Alibardi was running away after losing a battle in Bihar. He was abondoned by all of his Generals. However, one small group leader (Mansabdar) didn't leave him. This man was Mirjafar. Strange as it sounds, upon return to Murshidabad, Alibardi elevated Mirjaffor to be one of his main General, as a reward to his loyality and faithfulness. Mirjaffor was a devoted Muslim. He was very loyal and honest to Alibardi. Later on, he was married to Alibardi's family.

[3] Nature of Siraj's communalism needs to be adjudged against [1] & [2]. Several times Siraj expressed dissatisfaction that he had to depend on Hindues for any kind of financing and he predicted that these Kafirs would betray him one day ( he was right indeed). Besides, his force abduction of any woman was a matter of great concern among the Hindu Kings as he even didn't spare their families.

He abducted daughter-in-law (not daughter) of older Jagat Seth brother ( Manik Chand probably). However, he was vehemently opposed by Mirjaffor who was a man of moral character (!) and finally he had to abondon the abduction. Maharani of Natore had a beutiful widow daughter. When she was visiting her palace in Murshidabad, Siraj got a glimpse of her daughter's beauty. He immediately sent his army to capture her. However, the news was leaked and Maharani's widow daughter was evacuated in the disguise of a dead woman.

The fact that Alibardi was a man of honor and Siraj was communal is revealed through several documents:

[A] Communication between Krishna Chandra and Jagat Seth brothers. From their letters, you would learn that Jagar Seth never wanted to help British against Siraj. Reason is simple: Jagat Seth's main business was financing and banking. They knew once East India company would get their grip, they will be knocked out from the business. ( Their business was indeed ruined by East India company). They knew that their business is always safe under Nawab.

However after the abduction of their daughter-in-law, they had no choice but to agree to King of Nadia,Krishna Chandra, who was indeed the first and core conspirator against Siraj.

B. Communication between Lord Clive and East India company senate: Clive mentioned in his communication that Hindu kings are extremely hostile against Siraj and they would help in any attempt to depose him. Clive mentioned that Hindu kings are greatly worried about to protect their religion under Nawab's rule.

C. Communication between Maharani of Natore and Maharaja Krishna Chandra

D. Communication between King of Burdwan and Krishna Chandra:

In C and D, you will find explicit language used by Krishna Chandra to term Siraj as communal. His letter indeed started as an appeal to protect Sanatan Hindu religion against Siraj.

One has to remember, Krishna Chandra and Alibardi were great friend. Krishna Chandra was very loyal to Muslim Nawab Alibardi. So we can not term him to be born communal.

[5] Siraj had nearly 50,000 soldiers against 3000 British soldiers! So he had nothing to be afraid of the British! Hmm..But he was afraid. He was afraid of being betrayed. He knew that Hindu kings were no more on his side. Lord Clive indeed rested in the palace of Krishna Chandra on his way to Palassey. Krishna Chandra provided local logistics to Clive.

Siraj insulted Mirjaffor times and again in the Royal court. Madanlal and Mohanlal, these two Kashmiri hindu generals were his favorite,as myth revealed. He knew Mirjaffor might betray. But still he never trusted Mirmodan or Mohanlal to be in charge of Royal army. They were in charge of a small troup of 1500.​

Siraj-ud-Doula: Clarification from history* Biplab Pal

Don't be rude.

What part of my post made you to think that was written based on a "Hindu" view. You can't make people believe you just by a blanket statement, which makes you look more ignorant if anything.

Post something constructive, refute my points with facts and logic, you'd earn my respect.

The first post you wrote was considered mainstream in the 1800s. However all the present day Bengali historians of well repute refuted those as medieval propaganda to make the illegal British take over legitimate. Most of what you wrote are quoted from 4-5 books by farsi speaking Muslim writers who were contemporary of Siraj. All of them were in search of approval of new colonial masters, Hence their books are considered less reliable.

And the post is full of mistake. Such as You wrote --

Alibardi was running away after losing a battle in Bihar. He was abondoned by all of his Generals. However, one small group leader (Mansabdar) didn't leave him. This man was Mirjafar.
Mirjaffor was a devoted Muslim. He was very loyal and honest to Alibardi. Later on, he was married to Alibardi's family.

This particular incident took place when Alivardi went to Odissa with an escort of 5000 Army to manage a mutinous group.

So it was not Bihar, It was Odissa
It was not a War, but more like " I have come, so stop dissenting" There was no defeat either.
Alivardi was unaware of maratha army of 16,000 near Odissha.
He was surrounded by the maratha army when he was traveling back to Murshidabad.
2000 out of 5000 escort of Alivardi ran at the first sight of 16000 Maratha. But the remaining 3000 Afghan troops protected the Nawab and No Mir Zafar wasnt there. Mir Zafar married into Alivardi family long before this incident took place. Not as a gift for protecting the Nawab as you mentioned.

Then again Mir Jafar was not devout Muslim. His debauchery is well known. Devout Muslims were Murshid Quli , Sarfaraz Khan and Alivardi Khan. Their abstemious lifestyle is well documented.

 

[bluesky]

This is a strange greedy self destructive place. We will always have patriotic visionary leaders like Siraj ud daula, A K Fazlul Haq, Suhrawardi, Maulana Bhashani, Sheikh Mujib, Hasina on one side and on the other side we will always have Mir Jafar, Iskandar Mirza, Khwaja Najimuddin, Ziaur Rahman, Golam Azam, Khaleda Zia to pull down the patriots.

Considering his lack of wisdom as a Nawab, a person or a General of his army, I think, Siraj-ud-Dowla is unworthy of your praise. He was not built up well by his parents and grandparents. He was quarrelsome, drunk, womanizer and also a coward. He left Plassey in a hurry only to save his own life. He also did not direct his troops to the battle.

A Siraj ud Dowla drama was written by D.L. Roy and it was recorded. We were all fond of this recorded version of Siraj life, which was just absurd. Historians in Bangladesh write his history on the basis of this recorded drama. So, Siraj became a hero in our eyes.

But, very few of us study the history of Nawab Mir Quasem Ali Khan who fought a valiant, but an untimely and premature, war to safeguard the independence of Bengal and Hindustan. He was the real patriot. Bengal finally lost its freedom not after Plassey, but immediately after this hero lost to the British in the Battle of Buxer/Bihar in 1762.

 

[bongbang]

Considering his lack of wisdom as a Nawab, a person or a General of his army, I think, Siraj-ud-Dowla is unworthy of your praise. He was not built up well by his parents and grandparents. He was quarrelsome, drunk, womanizer and also a coward. He left Plassey in a hurry only to save his own life. He also did not direct his troops to the battle.

A Siraj ud Dowla drama was written by D.L. Roy and it was recorded. We were all fond of this recorded version of Siraj life, which was just absurd. Historians in Bangladesh write his history on the basis of this recorded drama. So, Siraj became a hero in our eyes.

But, very few of us study the history of Nawab Mir Quasem Ali Khan who fought a valiant, but an untimely and premature, war to safeguard the independence of Bengal and Hindustan. He was the real patriot. Bengal finally lost its freedom not after Plassey, but immediately after this hero lost to the British in the Battle of Buxer/Bihar in 1762.

May be Im using Siraj as a metaphor, have to consider loyalty and courage of his associates as well. If we are talking Siraj, then he and co, similar Mir Jafar, Zia, Mujib. There are always personal level of errors but leaving aside those we have to find out greatness. Maybe we have always the leaders infront of us but kicking out them seeing these errors, instead of giving hands which can make them stronger to lead. For example Siraj had lead the battle of Calcutta and sacked the British. When British understood they cant directly win the battle against the nawab they resorted in all sorts of conspiracy from hatching lie of black hole to secret meetings with Siraj's associates. We cant seriously take all the allegations against him which was written by the British in an agenda to vilify him, which is norm by the victors.

We have to relate between the lineage of greatests, legitimacy and freedom aspiration of people, Siraj naturally comes into the scene. Anyway, I consider Alvardi Khan a more capable person as he had time to show unlike Siraj. If I had used Alivardi Khan to counter Mir Jafar, would that be reasonable in this thread discussion? Btw my family derive lineage from Alivardi Khan.

 

[kobiraaz]

May be Im using Siraj as a metaphor, have to consider loyalty and courage of his associates as well. If we are talking Siraj, then he and co, similar Mir Jafar, Zia, Mujib. There are always personal level of errors but leaving aside those we have to find out greatness. Maybe we have always the leaders infront of us but kicking out them seeing these errors, instead of giving hands which can make them stronger to lead. For example Siraj had lead the battle of Calcutta and sacked the British. When British understood they cant directly win the battle against the nawab they resorted in all sorts of conspiracy from hatching lie of black hole to secret meetings with Siraj's associates. We cant seriously take all the allegations against him which was written by the British in an agenda to vilify him, which is norm by the victors.

We have to relate between the lineage of greatests, legitimacy and freedom aspiration of people, Siraj naturally comes into the scene. Anyway, I consider Alvardi Khan a more capable person as he had time to show unlike Siraj. If I had used Alivardi Khan to counter Mir Jafar, would that be reasonable in this thread discussion? Btw my family derive lineage from Alivardi Khan.

I am sorry to say Alivardi Khan was a traitor. Personally he was very Islamic and Honest Man but He and His elder brother were traitor, Together they destroyed the family that fed them.

Alivardi's father became very poor after Aurangzeb's elder son took the throne. Alivardi family used to work for the second son who was killed. Bankrupted Alivardi Family went to Odissa to Suja Ud Din the son in law of Murshid quli Khan. As Both Suja and Alivardi were related from same iraqi tribe, They found shelter. As they were well educated The elder brother became adviser of Nawab Suja Ud din and Alivardi became General in Bihar.

Together the beothers were deadly combo. When Nadir Shah sacked Delhi, The elder brother advised the Nawab Suja to strengthen the Bihar Army and Disband the Bengal Army. Suja ud din did so and Alivardi became the strongest man in Bengal.

The brothers waited for Suja's death. When He died, They killed the new Nawab Sarfaraz in a conspiracy with the likes of Jagath Seths.

Mir Jafar actually followed Alivardi. Only difference is Alivardi was independent Mir Jafar was not.

Seths conspired twice. Once in 1739 and again in 1757.

Though Labong claims that They did it because Siraj was communal. The truth is complicated. I will discuss it later. Not free right now.

Considering his lack of wisdom as a Nawab, a person or a General of his army, I think, Siraj-ud-Dowla is unworthy of your praise. He was not built up well by his parents and grandparents. He was quarrelsome, drunk, womanizer and also a coward. He left Plassey in a hurry only to save his own life. He also did not direct his troops to the battle.

A Siraj ud Dowla drama was written by D.L. Roy and it was recorded. We were all fond of this recorded version of Siraj life, which was just absurd. Historians in Bangladesh write his history on the basis of this recorded drama. So, Siraj became a hero in our eyes.

But, very few of us study the history of Nawab Mir Quasem Ali Khan who fought a valiant, but an untimely and premature, war to safeguard the independence of Bengal and Hindustan. He was the real patriot. Bengal finally lost its freedom not after Plassey, but immediately after this hero lost to the British in the Battle of Buxer/Bihar in 1762.

I already wrote that All negative aspects of SiraJ are inflated to make the British rule legal.

Siraj ud daula didn't lack wisdom.He alone understood the British intention. Is it a sign of lack of wisdom?

Siraj didn't touch single drop of Alcohol afrer he was made Nawab.

His only mistake was strategic. He tried to win against all his enemies within one year. He neutealized Purnia, Ghasheti Begum, Kolkata and all that happened within one year. A wise ruler takes a lot of time in preparation, Siraj didn't and paid the price. like Robb Stark of Game of thrones

 

[bluesky]

I am sorry to say Alivardi Khan was a traitor. Personally he was very Islamic and Honest Man but He and His elder brother were traitor, Together they destroyed the family that fed them.

Alivardi's father became very poor after Aurangzeb's elder son took the throne. Alivardi family used to work for the second son who was killed. Bankrupted Alivardi Family went to Odissa to Suja Ud Din the son in law of Murshid quli Khan. As Both Suja and Alivardi were related from same iraqi tribe, They found shelter. As they were well educated The elder brother became adviser of Nawab Suja Ud din and Alivardi became General in Bihar.

Together the beothers were deadly combo. When Nadir Shah sacked Delhi, The elder brother advised the Nawab Suja to strengthen the Bihar Army and Disband the Bengal Army. Suja ud din did so and Alivardi became the strongest man in Bengal.

The brothers waited for Suja's death. When He died, They killed the new Nawab Sarfaraz in a conspiracy with the likes of Jagath Seths.

Mir Jafar actually followed Alivardi. Only difference is Alivardi was independent Mir Jafar was not.

Seths conspired twice. Once in 1739 and again in 1757.

Though Labong claims that They did it because Siraj was communal. The truth is complicated. I will discuss it later. Not free right now.



I already wrote that All negative aspects of SiraJ are inflated to make the British rule legal.

Siraj ud daula didn't lack wisdom.He alone understood the British intention. Is it a sign of lack of wisdom?

Siraj didn't touch single drop of Alcohol afrer he was made Nawab.

His only mistake was strategic. He tried to win against all his enemies within one year. He neutealized Purnia, Ghasheti Begum, Kolkata and all that happened within one year. A wise ruler takes a lot of time in preparation, Siraj didn't and paid the price. like Robb Stark of Game of thrones

What other mistakes a Nawab needs for his own and his country's destruction other than those you have stated. He has no strategy because he had little wisdom. Everyone with a position in Bengal was insulted and robbed of his fortune by the Nawab as if all the wealth was needed only for himself. In the process he lost the trust of his close relatives, powerful Hindu Zamindars as well as military generals. He took away the wealth of Ghaseti Begum, demoted Mir Zafar and promoted Mir Madan as Bakshi, instead. Thus, he proved himself as the novice in politics.

He started to consolidate his power by squeezing resources from the large Hindu Zamindars. Many other things created panic among them and caused these powerful families to seek remedy from the East India Co. The conspirators were five very powerful Hindu Amirs at the Murshidabad Court. Their initial proposal to sit Gen. Yar Latif Khan as the next Nawab was overturned by Lord Clive. The Company Officers chose Mir Zafar Ali Khan. All these things happened due to an imprudent policy taken by the sitting Nawab. He has no wisdom.

I am not including his activities during the skirmishes in Plassey.

 

[Michael Corleone]

In my opinion – no matter which course Pakistan took it would have made no difference. One time or the other Bangladesh would have separated from Pakistan. Awami League and Mujeeb would have found another reason for it.

What I implying is as below.
Mujeeb just played a role of politician – Playing on hate for West Pakistan card on Linguistic – ethnic lines more than anything else.
Post independence he failed to address any of the issues previously blamed on West Pakistan and the central govt.
If not Mujeeb it could have been someone else - who towed this line.
And more controversially – i am of the opinion that of all the nations of the Subcontinent, Bangladesh historically has had the greatest propensity for – how to most mildly put it - treason and betrayal.

But I do strongly believe that Bangladesh had every right to become an independent nation.

Great articles but some things I couldn't agree on... like playing the cards on linguistic difference. You guys basically treated us like sub humans... in every field. Example. Fazlur Khãn... the dude who designed Willis tower structure and invented new ways of skyscrapers development... could hardly find any opportunity in Pakistan era and did a job of as a asst. if someone who wasn't as qualified as him! And so he left. Why didn't he get the opportunity? Because he was east Pakistani.

 

[LaBong]

The first post you wrote was considered mainstream in the 1800s. However all the present day Bengali historians of well repute refuted those as medieval propaganda to make the illegal British take over legitimate. Most of what you wrote are quoted from 4-5 books by farsi speaking Muslim writers who were contemporary of Siraj. All of them were in search of approval of new colonial masters, Hence their books are considered less reliable.

And the post is full of mistake. Such as You wrote --



This particular incident took place when Alivardi went to Odissa with an escort of 5000 Army to manage a mutinous group.

So it was not Bihar, It was Odissa
It was not a War, but more like " I have come, so stop dissenting" There was no defeat either.
Alivardi was unaware of maratha army of 16,000 near Odissha.
He was surrounded by the maratha army when he was traveling back to Murshidabad.
2000 out of 5000 escort of Alivardi ran at the first sight of 16000 Maratha. But the remaining 3000 Afghan troops protected the Nawab and No Mir Zafar wasnt there. Mir Zafar married into Alivardi family long before this incident took place. Not as a gift for protecting the Nawab as you mentioned.

Then again Mir Jafar was not devout Muslim. His debauchery is well known. Devout Muslims were Murshid Quli , Sarfaraz Khan and Alivardi Khan. Their abstemious lifestyle is well documented.

Really? You guys still bickering in this sh!thole? That was a 4 year old post.

 

[~Phoenix~]

Pakistani ( terrorist ) babblers can die in a hole -.-