Marathas in Bengal 1731-1760

[TopCat]

For your voracious apetite of knowledge.
British ruled teritorry in 1857 and hindu ruled teritorry.

 

[Khajur]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Redundant post. I already talked bout 1770 famine and the reason for it. Jharkhand and Orissya was not under british neither mugal rule but marattans.

those area under question goes under british after 1857. They were outside bengal presidency that time specially Rjaputana and lower maratha country which were ruled by marattans or their descendent.

which areas??
Orissa came under british rule by 1803.

Ur knowledge about history is amazing.Thank u.

 

[TopCat]

Marttans were not only in orissya.. i said other part of india where Famine were wide spread.
and not all part of orissya came under british rule. See the map.
The whole areas under maratthan rule were affected by wide spread famine all through those years.
Fact can not be changed with heroes slogans.

 

[Khajur]

For your gracious apetite of knowledge.
British ruled teritorry in 1857 and hindu ruled teritorry.

Those were princely states under british dominion...not ruled by maratha.
British Period

In 1803, the British under the British East India Company occupied Orissa after the Second Anglo-Maratha War. In 1823, Orissa was divided into the three districts of Cuttack, Balasore and Puri, and a number of native tributary states. Orissa was administed as part of the Bengal Presidency. Following famine and floods in 1866, large scale irrigation projects were undertaken in the last half of the 19th century. The coastal section was separated from Bengal and made into the Province of Bihar and Orissa in 1912, in response to local agitation for a separate state for Oriya-speaking peoples. In 1936, Bihar and Orissa separated into separate provinces.


History of Orissa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[TopCat]

I was talking about marttan rules before 1857. But after 1857 and onward they were completely defeated and the whole India came under direct or indirect british rule. Those projects you mentioned were initiated by brits not marattans. thanks...

 

[Khajur]

I was talking about marttan rules before 1857. But after 1857 and onward they were completely defeated and the whole India came under direct or indirect british rule. Those projects you mentioned were initiated by brits not marattans. thanks...

again stuck with 1857??

I didnt say any projects started by the maratha or agreed to the allegation that there was large scale famine in orissa under maratha rule while Bengal did suffer that famine of 1770.

All i said maratha rule of 50 yrs are far better than any pseudo moghul rule from delhi or bengal.Anyway orissa was under muslim rule for only 200 years that explains why over 97% of orissa population is non muslim.

 

[TopCat]

Please go back to my earlier posts. I even did not mention 1770 famine in my first post but i just referred that in the 2nd post. The reason I did not refer in the first post is because the famine was initiated in Bengal due to British action and as the other part of bihar and orissaya always dependend on Bengal they fell prey to that. But yet Marattans were ruling orissya that time and you mentioned in your article that right after 1751 there were massive development project was initiated by marttans. I was just wondering where were those project in 1770 famine?
LOL

 

[Khajur]

Please go back to my earlier posts. I even did not mention 1770 famine in my first post but i just referred that in the 2nd post. The reason I did not refer in the first post is because the famine was initiated in Bengal due to British action and as the other part of bihar and orissaya always dependend on Bengal they fell prey to that. But yet Marattans were ruling orissya that time and you mentioned in your article that right after 1751 there were massive development project was initiated by marttans. I was just wondering where were those project in 1770 famine?
LOL

There was no famine is orissa in 1770...famine happend in Bengal due bad policies of the company.Similar fate was faced by orissa in 1866 ,once it came under the british rule.

 

[TopCat]

again stuck with 1857??
All i said maratha rule of 50 yrs are far better than any pseudo moghul rule from delhi or bengal.Anyway orissa was under muslim rule for only 200 years that explains why over 97% of orissa population is non muslim.

Bengal was converted first then came under Muslim rules and not a single muslim majority population within 1000 miles of Bengal. We dont want to go into this(Things will get nasty here). Yet delhi has only 7% Muslim.

 

[TopCat]

There was no famine is orissa in 1770...famine happend in Bengal due bad policies of the company.Similar fate was faced by orissa in 1866 ,once it came under the british rule.

There was famine in Orissya even though there were no 50% taxation. If we leave orissya alone, there were wide spread famine in other part of the India under marttans rules. Just go back to the list of famine I posted earlier. Its boring to say the same thing again and again.

 

[Khajur]

Bengal was converted first then came under Muslim rules and not a single muslim majority population within 1000 miles of Bengal. We dont want to go into this(Things will get nasty here). Yet delhi has only 7% Muslim.

U have ur opinion and ur history....by the way there was large scale migration of muslims from delhi after partition...and delhi has its own distinct history of getting uproooted and resettling from time to time.

 

[eastwatch]

Though u refutes that u dont see a histotrical topic in any prism of religion... then u go on blaming the maratha for atrocities aganist bengali muslims and held them resposible for the creation of east pakistan.Isnt it the double speak u are famous for??

Certainly, nobody foresaw in those days of Maratha plunder during 1742 to 1751 that the forced migration of Muslims from the western Bengal, Orissa and Jharkhand to eastern Bengal would raise their density there, and someday this majority Muslim area would demand a separate land of its own. However, the end result, i.e, the partition of India could not have been possible if the Muslims remained scattered in east India. Pakistan movement was initiated by the Muslims of Bengal.

There were, of course, many other factors that decided the fate of India in 1947, but the Maratha invasion as a cause cannot be overlooked.

 

[kalu_miah]

eastwatch, it looks like you have some interest in history and bring out a very interesting piece of historical fact about Bangladesh. Good work.

I was talking to an Indian Gujrati friend and co-worker and we were discussing Afghanistan problem for the US. This may be completely off topic, but what in your opinion is a future solution for the Afghan problem, to transition it to a viable state from its current failed status, considering its history, geography and neighborhood. We can move the discussion to appropriate thread later if moderators allow it.

 

[eastwatch]

eastwatch, it looks like you have some interest in history and bring out a very interesting piece of historical fact about Bangladesh. Good work.

I was talking to an Indian Gujrati friend and co-worker and we were discussing Afghanistan problem for the US. This may be completely off topic, but what in your opinion is a future solution for the Afghan problem, to transition it to a viable state from its current failed status, considering its history, geography and neighborhood. We can move the discussion to appropriate thread later if moderators allow it.

Thanks for the suggestion. But, there are many threads regarding Afghan issue, so you may discuss them there. Or you may open a new thread. However, I may not be able to contribute in such a futuristic thread. I am fond of reading history and try very much to evaluate the effects of historical events.

That Bengal became a majority Muslim Province of Hindustan was caused by many events. But, that the Muslims now concentrate in eastern Bengal was caused by a 10 year long assault by the Marathas on the southwest of then Subeh Bangal. North Orissa, Medinipur, Bankura, Jharkhand etc. Muslims living in those areas evacuated in mass from these areas and resettled in the east of Bhagirothi river.

Another reason for such a concentration was the long 30 year war between Bengal and Mughal Delhi from 1575 to 1605. Due to this war many defeated Muslims from the now Orissa, Bihar and Jharkhand moved to the east and continued to fight against the Mughals.

Yet another reason for this concentration was Akber's policy of settling his non-Bangali Muslim followers in areas like Naogaon, Bogra, Pabna and Rangpur. This was needed to offset the strength of local Muslims who were fighting against the Mughals. The Mansabdars were given vast land instead of cash salary, on which each Mansabdar settled his own troops, who then brought their families from Delhi and other places west of Bengal. These people never left and ultimately became local Bangali Muslims.

When a newly appointed military governor declared a new policy whereby all these lands would be re-taken by the Mughal govt, and instead, cash salaries would be given to the troops, these Mughal troops rebelled against their benefactor, combined their hands with the local Chieftains (the Baro Bhuiyans) and then a force of 30,000 marched to the Mughal cantonment in Munger and killed the Governor. The Governor was forced to sign the withdrawal of his previous land requisition order before he was killed.

There are many other events that caused Bengal to be a Muslim majority area and its eastern part to become an overwhelmingly Muslim area. Generally speaking, because the central Indian Muslims migrated to Bengal, therefore, Bengal gradually became a Muslim majority area.

During historical times, there was a saying 'There are thousands of roads to Bengal, but not a single road to come out of it.' Now, because of overpopulation, the saying can be reversed to 'There are million roads out from Bengal, but not a single road to go in.'

 

[kalu_miah]

eastwatch, thanks for another good post with interesting info. on East Bengal and why it had become Muslim majority over time.

History is a fascinating subject. Personally I find it fascinating because much of today's problems are rooted in history and the solutions also I believe can be found from history. People who are preoccupied with only present and are focused on short time frames, I think, cannot see the big picture.