What's new

Maratha Muslim Prince

Joined
Oct 28, 2019
Messages
1,513
Reaction score
-2
Country
India
Location
India
In the summer of 1858, as British troops battled the celebrated rani of Jhansi at the fort of Kalpi, fighting alongside her was a Muslim prince called Ali Bahadur II. Though styled nawab of Banda in his own right, in actual fact, as one account put it, Ali was merely “a titular prince, possessing no political power", living off a pension paid by the English East India Company. Indeed, when the Great Rebellion had convulsed the country the previous year, he first lent protection to local Englishmen before switching to the rebel cause—one tale suggests that it was a rakhi from Lakshmibai that inspired the nawab’s change of heart. His “honorary bodyguard of native troops" was a force to be reckoned with, and in April, for instance, he had faced a Company army with as many as 7,000 men. The battle didn’t go well for Ali, however, and when he fled, the nawab was forced to abandon 17 valuable siege-guns, not to speak of 400 corpses of men who had raised swords bravely in his name.

The Banda nawabs, of whom Ali was the last powerful prince, were a family with a fascinating provenance. It was in 1729 that the celebrated Peshwa Bajirao I, de facto head of the emerging Maratha confederacy, arrived in Bundelkhand to aid the raja Chhatrasal in his time of military need. Not only did Bajirao please his ally enough to open doors into the region for Maratha ambitions, among the presents he took back to Pune was a dancer called Mastani. While some claim she was Chattrasal’s daughter, she first appears in official records in 1730 as a kalavantin (woman of the arts) who was rewarded with robes and ₹233 for performing at Bajirao’s son’s wedding. But she was also in love with her patron, who not only housed her in his palace, but also had a son with her. So it was that a morganatic line of Muslim cousins was born in the house of the Brahmin peshwa, causing, understandably, a scandal that tormented him till the end.

Through the 1730s, Mastani remained with Bajirao, confronting intrigue as well as periods of forced separation. Blame for Bajirao’s appetite for meat and love of alcohol were laid at her door, for instance, and despite all his power, Bajirao was ostracized by Brahmins in Pune for violating the laws of caste and religion. When his legitimate son was invested with the sacred thread, Bajirao had to absent himself so as not to give offence to the priests and his kin and community. Mastani too was policed and often placed under house arrest. Their union, which defied convention as well as immense pressure, sparked a hundred romantic songs, however, and while Mastani faded away after the Bajirao’s death in 1740, there was some consolation in the acceptance his family gave her son. Named Krishnasing Shamsher Bahadur, the boy could not become a Brahmin like his late father. But he did become a loyal general in Bajirao’s army, serving his Hindu half-siblings with valour and honour.

So we have Krishnasing fighting the nizam of Hyderabad under the Maratha flag in 1752, just as he put down rebellion in the Konkan three years later. He invaded Marwar soon after, and by the end of the decade was mediating a succession dispute in Bundelkhand. He even joined a major campaign that saw the Marathas claim such faraway regions as Multan and Peshawar. “Chiranjeev" Shamsher Bahadur was present at the Third Battle of Panipat in 1761—where the Marathas suffered their most demoralizing defeat at the hands of invading Afghans—but this time his name featured among those who were lost: Seriously wounded, he managed to get away from the carnage but succumbed to his injuries. His son took up service in Bajirao’s court, and it was he who established himself as nawab of Banda, winning enough honour for one of the five palace gates in Pune, hitherto called the Mastani Darwaza after his grandmother, to be renamed after him.

Settled in Bundelkhand, the nawabs remained part of the vast Maratha political universe, and, in 1803, it was loyalty to the peshwa that pitched their flag against the British in the Second Anglo-Maratha War. It was an ill-fated enterprise, however, and while the peshwa’s wings were clipped, the nawabs lost all their powers to rule. In return for pledging loyalty to the corporate house that was steadily becoming India’s overlord, they were granted an annuity of ₹4 lakh, and this the family enjoyed for over half a century. In 1823, the titular nawab, a grandson of Shamsher Bahadur’s, died and was replaced by his brother, Zulfikar, whose own death in 1849 brought Ali to the fore. Only 17 years old at the time, he stayed loyal to the Company, before, of course, throwing his hat in the opposite direction a decade later, alongside Lakshmibai, Tantia Tope and other great heroes of Maratha lore.

At first, Ali had every reason, like his allies, to hope for victory. At Koonch, for instance, they had faced Company fire and lost despite technically being on the stronger side. As even their British opponent admitted: “While so many drawbacks weakened me, the enemy, physically speaking, was unusually strong. They were under three rebel leaders of considerable influence, Rao Sahib…the Nawab of Banda, and the Rani of Jhansi." Their next reversal in Kalpi, however, rang the death knell of the dynasty founded by Mastani and Bajirao. Though Ali kept fighting for many more months, in November 1858, when he realized that theirs was fast becoming a lost cause, he surrendered. And though he was accused of several crimes, his life was spared—Bajirao’s great-grandson was exiled to Indore with a reduced pension of ₹36,000, and there he lived till his death in 1873, a prisoner in his own house.

Medium Rare is a column on society, politics and history. Manu S. Pillai is the author of The Ivory Throne (2015)and Rebel Sultans (2018).

https://www.livemint.com/
 
. . . .
Marathas were the first RSS, they spared neither Hindu, Muslim, nor Sikh. They were common thieves, vagabonds, and arsonists.

It is much easier to destroy a country than to build one (as the Mughals and Dilli Sultanat had done.)

What most of us fail to understand, intentionally or unintentionally, is that almost all medieval regimes in India (or the world over) were driven mainly by politics of power, dominance, and wealth. Nationalism, including a religious one, either mattered little or was used as a tool to further their agenda. In many cases, Hindu generals fought and led Mughal incursions against other regions and forces, many of them who were predominantly Hindus. Similarly, Muslims have fought Muslims - perhaps more then they have with Hindus. The Afghans (Muslims) accused Aurangzeb (Muslim) of not having a heart in his chest for Afghans/Pashtoons. If Mahmood of Ghaznavi was so adamant on destroying idols that he had to march from Afghanistan all the way to Somnath in Gujrat 17 times to destroy a temple why did he not do the same with Buddha statues in Bamyan (his own backyard)?

The first Maratha king, Shivaji, actually appears to have meant little to Aurangzeb. He probably viewed him as a more of a distraction compared to other political and military issues of the empire, especially those pertaining to Deccan. Thus, he relegated the Marathas/Shivaji issue to his court officials and generals amongst whom many were Hindus. As a resolution, one of the officials insisted that Aurangzeb appoint Shivaji as a court nobleman and thereby ending the Maratha's militia menace. Aurangzeb agreed but met with resistance from other Hindu noblemen who insisted that unlike them Shivaji had not done anything to deserve such a placement (If someone feels like making corrections please do so but back it up with reliable sources; and not with emotions, romanticism, and nationalism. The source for this paragraph is Audrey Truschke's book Aurangzeb: The Life and Legacy of India's Most Controversial King).

Take notice, Aurangzeb was preoccupied with conquering and maintaining Deccan under the Mughal Empire for much of his rulership. Deccan's monarchy itself was a Muslim.
 
. .
The RSS ideology of elevating highwaymen to nation heroes must be discredited.

It is imperative that Pakistan fight the tide of historical revisionism and fabrications with truth.

Pumping out books, movies, serials, and documentaries is a must. Preferably they should be dubbed, translated into English, Spanish, French, Russian, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, Farsi, Swahili, Indonesian, and Malay.

Let's work on Pakistani soft power and push our narrative.
 
. .
I think the Marathas as they were are not the same as modern Hindutva people try to identify them as. They were not entirely Hindu nationalists and Anti Muslim as they are being portrayed today. They had Muslim allies and Hindu enemies. The Rajput Rajas of Rajasthan did not like them due to the Chauth tax collection. Rajputs even wrote letters to Abdali imploring him to invade India and they would even be willing to finance his invasion.

Mughals in Punjab under Adina Beg were in favour of the Marathas and preferred Maratha over lordship over Afghan dominance which is why Adina Beg formed a tripartite military alliance between Marathas, Mughals and the Sikhs who jointly drove out the Afghans because alone all three were not able to face Afghans under Abdali. The Marathas left Punjab giving rulership to the Mughals under Adina Beg and left the Sikhs without any benefit despite the fact that Sikhs equally helped them and the Mughals in driving out the Afghans beyond the Indus. Adina Beg then saw this as his opportunity to destroy Sikh power and began severe persecution of the Sikhs and drove them out of all of Punjab and into Malwa(southern Punjab). Adina Beg died of natural causes otherwise Sikhs were almost driven to extinction. Sikhs never forgot this and that is why Sikhs did not help the Marathas during the battle of Panipat and preferred to stay neutral.
 
. .
What most of us fail to understand, intentionally or unintentionally, is that almost all medieval regimes in India (or the world over) were driven mainly by politics of power, dominance, and wealth. Nationalism, including a religious one, either mattered little or was used as a tool to further their agenda. In many cases, Hindu generals fought and led Mughal incursions against other regions and forces, many of them who were predominantly Hindus. Similarly, Muslims have fought Muslims - perhaps more then they have with Hindus. The Afghans (Muslims) accused Aurangzeb (Muslim) of not having a heart in his chest for Afghans/Pashtoons. If Mahmood of Ghaznavi was so adamant on destroying idols that he had to march from Afghanistan all the way to Somnath in Gujrat 17 times to destroy a temple why did he not do the same with Buddha statues in Bamyan (his own backyard)?

The first Maratha king, Shivaji, actually appears to have meant little to Aurangzeb. He probably viewed him as a more of a distraction compared to other political and military issues of the empire, especially those pertaining to Deccan. Thus, he relegated the Marathas/Shivaji issue to his court officials and generals amongst whom many were Hindus. As a resolution, one of the officials insisted that Aurangzeb appoint Shivaji as a court nobleman and thereby ending the Maratha's militia menace. Aurangzeb agreed but met with resistance from other Hindu noblemen who insisted that unlike them Shivaji had not done anything to deserve such a placement (If someone feels like making corrections please do so but back it up with reliable sources; and not with emotions, romanticism, and nationalism. The source for this paragraph is Audrey Truschke's book Aurangzeb: The Life and Legacy of India's Most Controversial King).

Take notice, Aurangzeb was preoccupied with conquering and maintaining Deccan under the Mughal Empire for much of his rulership. Deccan's monarchy itself was a Muslim.
We can definitely have a thread on Shivaji's and Aurangzeb's relationship. Shivaji was insulted by Aurangzeb in his court which turned out to be one of the biggest blunders and eventually led to the downfall of Mughal empire. Not under Shivaji, but under later Maratha rulers.

First question : is mastani really real ?
She was fictional character wasn't she??
Didn't you read the post? She was real. Bajirao and she had a son 'Shamsher Bahadur' who fought for the Marathas in many wars. Read the article that I've posted. His descendants were loyal to the Marathas and even had an alliance with some Maratha kings during the Anglo-Maratha wars and later during the 1857 Uprising against British.
 
.
It seems Indians have a totally different perception of history than the reality. Ofcourse, all their petty rulers were Maharajas, and great Mughals and Afghan kings were not important.

https://twitter.com/hashtag/indiainsultspashtunheroes

EKNb2AlWkAEICb7.jpg:large
 
Last edited:
.
We can definitely have a thread on Shivaji's and Aurangzeb's relationship. Shivaji was insulted by Aurangzeb in his court which turned out to be one of the biggest blunders and eventually led to the downfall of Mughal empire. Not under Shivaji, but under later Maratha rulers.


Didn't you read the post? She was real. Bajirao and she had a son 'Shamsher Bahadur' who fought for the Marathas in many wars. Read the article that I've posted. His descendants were loyal to the Marathas and even had an alliance with some Maratha kings during the Anglo-Maratha wars and later during the 1857 Uprising against British.
Come on.they also say that India uses Internet in old world . And that babri mosque was built on a Hindu temple and that taj Mahal was the hindu monument....
One can make up anything .
This is the picture they make up that good Muslims always support their Hindu masters no matter what.

First question : is mastani really real ?
She was fictional character wasn't she??
After reading your whole article only then I dared to ask the question .
Who was anarkali?
She was a myth , a character of imtiaz Ali taj and nothing else .
Who is mastani , a women in which some random Hindu poet has written about .
 
.
.
Marathas had alliances with many muslim kingdoms

1. An alliance is not the same as fighting under them
2. The main Muslim powers in the region (the Durranis, Mughals and Mysoreans) all opposed them

Even Tipu Sultan wanted to form an alliance with Marathas against British..

Yet he still ended up giving them a bloody nose, as did his father.
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom