“Hopefully”??? But that gives you away my dear friend!!! Big mistake.

“Please do think about why the Rajputs and the Marathas and the Jats were never able to form a united Hindu front, …, in the 18th century vacuum of Indian politics.”

And I limited my scope only to 18th century and only to the geographies of Jat, Rajput, Maratha-s while it was pertinent for me to add Sikh dimension.

But in your latest post you moved the goalpost, and brought in earlier period, the Shivaji’s time, and a later period, the British time… and for whatever unclear reason ended up concluding with judgement on political leanings and aspirations of forum commentators….

I can not keep up with you.

But I must clarify a few things back to the original scope of discussion that you raised.

Jadunath Sarkar was a greatest of great Indian historian, my personal favorite, and the role model of histeriography. I have read his ‘Shivaji and his Times’ at least half a dozen times so far, besides his work on Awrangzib and related issues, and am a big fan of Jadunath style of history writing. Few come close to him most importantly in honestly following the religion of history scholarship, that is understanding historical moment independent of one’s political/social leanings/bias. We can not mix that great man with the likes of Satish Chandra and other satraps of Marxism, for whom the very object of history writing is to procure support for their current political-socialogical ideologies.

Now, here is the thing. Jadunath did not have access to all the 18th century Maratha-Jat-Sikh sources (Rajuts sources were well available by this time, thanks to Todd). His primary source were Persian sources from Mughal, Bijapur, and Deccan/Hyderabad chroniclers in addition to whatever was available till then. Reading of Jadunath version therefore should be performed in light of later findings, e.g. Bakhars and correspondances of Peshawa-s etc. discovered after his time. For holistic historical facts in this context, one should read original MarahaTTI sources, Jat sources, and pre-1900 Sikh sources, published is last few decades. And in this, don’t undermine the researchers like Professor Dabas.

Now, with this digression behind, we have to first understand what does “united Hindu Front” in 18th century mean. Does the Maratha army waging war against another Hindu ruler mean disunity? While attempting to find an answer to this, one has to not only bear in mind the events and dates, but the underlying sentiments, attitudes, and dynamics of the time.

Mughals were the chakravartins, and after farruksiar, that was practially over. There was a vacuum which needed to be filled by another Chakravartin, whom the rest of the political centers must accept as overlords. Like it always happens with the rise of any new Chakravartin, political tussles were going on, beginning ith the death of farrukhsiar, and several centers of power were contesting for occupying this place. marahaTTa were however the only ones, who had by then the largest coverage both in geographical terms, military terms, and revenue terms. And policy followed by the first 3 peshawa was to softly though surely occuply the place of the Mughal, and it is for this reason that they were on one hand “protecting” the Mughals, and on the other nurturing their own acceptance. In the process, they had allies and supporters, such as Jats, many Rajputs (e.g. Bundi, Manda) and some detractors. As is natural detractors will receive military attention until a stable situation would arrive.

At the cost of another digression, one should study this period in light of how Vijayanagara became the supreme unchallenged power in dakShiNApatha within 50/60 years of its birth. pANDya-s, and rulers of Andhra and kerala readily accepted the overlordship of bukkArAya, while some draviDa kings were to be militarily defeated. And after this, the boundary had to be exmapned nothwards upto Orissa before attaining stability. Compare that with this period, although on a larger scale.

Another case in point will be the period when Delhi sultanate was defeated, and Sher Shah Suri and Hemachanra were asserting themselves from east.

So, in mid of 18th century that is the process which was going on, and certainly the enimity within different Hindu powers was natural. But the larger question is, did the Hindu forces fail to unite together and forge a “common front” when events such as a foreign invasion by Abdali took place? Find out an answer to this, and we shall have a better understanding of the dynamism of those times. The reality is, that under Bhau’s command, marched Jat columns as well as Rajputs and Gurjars. And Sikhs, who were not yet an established united political force, conrtibuted by harrassing Abdali. And next you have to cmpare similar attitude all over India throughout this period. Compare the alliance of marahaTTa-s with southern tribes in war against Hyder Ali near Mysore. Their alliance even with muslim powers of that time such as Awadh nawabs etc., as well.

So my conclusion will be:

As far as united Hindu Front in contingency is needed, that always happened, throughout this period. As far as long term Hindu confederation is concerned, it needed a larget span of time, and was in the process of making, when suddenly interrupted by an even stronger force brought to the scene by the Industrial Revolution in Europe.

I shall ignore remaining points you have innecessarily raised e.g. Shivaji’s Agra visit etc., relevance of which was not clear to me.

It is wonderful that you produced this passage which is based on a Bhat’s account and which has been used for the first time in writing Jat history. Nevertheless I must also add that BK Dabas is a rather unknown entity and I have never read his book. As for the photo of Dattaji’s letter, they need to allow me into their group first! No other historians have used Bhat sources so far, which are altered and edited every few decades, self-admittedly by the Bhats. I had interviewed my family (Jats of Rohtak distt) Bhats and he himself told me. I do not know whether Mr Dabas has used his sources well or not. At least the language of his sources sounds nothing like 18th century. Using terms like sarv-khap panchayat and Haryana for the 18th c Jats, while the Jats who counted in this period were from Bharatpur and Brij! But I do take your word for the time being. I will try and get hold of the book soon.

This does not stop one from looking at the account from Zikr-i Mir (Zikr-I Mir: The Autobiography of the Eighteenth Century Mughal Poet: Mir Muhammad Taqi Mir, translated by C. M. Naim, OUP, 1997). Mir Taqi Mir is in the pay and protection of none other than Suraj Mal c.1761. I am afraid he does not portray friendly relations between Surajmal and JaiSingh or between their successors. The Marathas of course came up till Mathura and Vrindavan in order to gain booty, which is why they were abandoned by one and all in 1761. There are many other sources if you could read up Jadunath Sarkar and Satish Chandra on 18th c, but Mir came to my mind now. Another published source is a translation (by SH Askari) of an account by Shivdas Lakhanvi, which also conveys a rather divided Hindu community.

The passage above says Jeysing wanted an empire from Yamuna to Narmada. How on earth do you think Jats would respond to that? The Gaekwads and Bhonsles and Sindhias would not have liked it either! As a self-respecting Jat, I would not care about his desires. And I can assure you that nobody from Mathura to Rawalpindi would have done so in the 18th c either. Hindu, Sikh or Muslim. Maybe this explains the history of Jat-Rajput conflict in N India back to 18c. Of course Shivaji fleed Agra because he wanted to be superior to a Rajput in the darbar. And indeed as a response he did not call himself samrat or any sanskrit word but HINDU-PADSHAH, a direct influence of the Mughal court.

Why are the Gosain Bahadurs (Giridhar Bahadur is one of them), who are Hindu holy and religious leaders, and were allies of the Bundelas, being called enemies of the religion by Jeysing. Why did another Hindu, Ch.. Appa, kill Giridhar Bahadur? If the Marathas cared about Hindu unity why did they come up to govern Malwa? Were there no Hindus in Malwa? Or did they not trust them? Why did they seek a sanad from the Emperor, and that too in the 18th c, when the Mughal empire was already broken up, and who in your opinion had nothing but the welfare of Islam on mind? Why did the fiction of the Mughal emperor go on till 1857? The answer is because for every Indian that was the only trustworthy symbol. The Rajputs never trusted the Marathas and vice versa. Ever since we have seen partition. Once of India and once of Pakistan, and if things keep going the way they seem now …

My point being there is and was no Hindu unity or Muslim unity in this country, as can be seen in the fate of Pakistan as well as India. People have been dreaming of that since centuries but it has never happened and hopefully it would continue the same way. It is pipe dreams of some upper castes and wannabe OBCs/Dalits. It is high time you accept this so that you would not be surprised by this increasingly fragmented Hindu dream (and I see the Cong and the BJP as more or less same). Do you still blame Muslims for the Jat-Rajput historical tension in India? The latest round was given a boost by none other than the BJP who gave OBC status to Jats! Hindu unity! We are now witnessing the Maratha compassion for the rest of India for almost an year by the way. In Mumbai, Thane, Nasik etc Purbiyas are being forced to realise that compassion. And do not blame the ‘weak Indian state’ for this. The state is built upon the society.

History is for self-reflection. You guys are out for self-glorification and commemoration. Just like Indian politicians and the multiple garlands in which they drown. I am sure you hate all the Yadavs and Mayawati too. Why did they come about in the first place? Why did the BJP kick out all OBC leaders after 1992? Kalyan Singh, Vinay Katiar, Uma Bharti. Where are they? Why? Also, I hope you keep in mind that nobody respects those who blow their own trumpet.

While one can let you carry on with rest of the polemics, this one is too much to digest. Looks like you have never done any reading about the third battle of Panipat and Rajput-Maratha-Jat-Sikh relationships at around that time in 18th century.

A) Jat relations:

AHMAD SHAH ABDALI AND SARV-KHAP PANCHAYAT

As recorded by Pandit Kanha Ram, the official Bhat ( historian) of the Haryana Sarvkhap, a contemporary of the times and a witness to the entire episode. This was researched and forms part of the Book by Prof B K Dabas.- Political and Social History of the Jats.- 2001, Sanjay Prakashan, New Delhi. ISBN : 81-7453-045-2.

Some key parts:

About in V.S. 1813 Sardar Dattaji, deputed by Marathas, drove out Najib Khan to Shukartal from Delhi. Jats, Gujars and many other brave people of Haryana shared this battle. All those fought this battle abreast with Marathas. Dattaji stayed for some three years in a mud-fort at Shukartal. The Jats were a part of his army. They fought shoulder to shoulder with Marathas to defeat this enemies. In these three years Dattaji eliminated Najib’s rule over all the Hindu places of pilgrimage. The Sarv-Khap panchayat always supported Dattaji in subduing Najib.

When Najib felt helpless he invited emperor Abdali of Kandhar for his help. Dattaji was given the responsibility to protect Delhi, Thaneswar and the land between Ganga and Yamuna. In V.S. 1816 Abdali marched towards India. Dattaji left Shukartal and marched to defend Delhi with his complete Maratha army and 5,000 brave soldiers of Haryana. Datta’s army fought with Abdali at Badli. [About 12 kilometers NW of Delhi] The battle lasted for four days. The advance soldiers of Dattaji compelled Abdali to retreat. Abdali was just intending to slip away. In the meantime armies of Najib and Nawab of Lucknow reinforced Abdali. At this hour in addition to Maratha army a force of some ten thousand Sarv-Khap Panchayat Jat soldiers joined Datta. Abdali was attacked on three sides and he suffered a serious loss.

When Maratha Council deputed Sadashiv Rao Bhau and Bisbas Rao to confront Abdali, Peshwa exhorted his brother Sada Shiv Rao Bhau, “Promote your contact with all the Indian kings and the Sarv-Khap Panchayat of Haryana.” As per the Peshwa’s advice Bhau wrote letters to all of them and invited them for support. [For a photograph of the original letter see Sadashiv bhau.doc under http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JatHistory/files/

After the debacle of Panipat, and we need not get into its causes for the present, it was Jat Raja Surajmal of Bharatpur who later gave shelter to Maratha survivors and spent money from his own pocket to rehabilitate and feed them for several months, and he had no need of doing so since he had no political advantage except for the common cause binding Jats and Marathas.

B) Rajputs and Marathas:

this site will help you: http://maratharajputrelations.com

But here is one interesting portion:

Beyond doubts, Jaysing was the patron of Hindu religion and culture. It was his ambition his kingdom from Yamuna to Narmada(27). There was nothing unnatural in it as after the fall of Farrukh Siyar, every Mughal Chief tried to create and independent position for himself, even Giridhar Bahadur(28) in Malwa was not an exception to this rule. It is correct to say that in calling the Marathas into Malwa in 1728 A.D.(29) , his action was motivated by self interest. But when he saw that he could not retain Malwa for himself, he was not sorry to leave it into the hands of the Marathas, because in the view of the Rajpurts of the generation of Sawai Jaysing there was definitely a difference between the Malwa under the Maratha Government and the Malwa under the Mughal Government. Had it not been the fact then Sawai Jaysing would have been the enemy of the Marathas especially after 1736 A.D. when their hold on Malwa was established beyond doubt.

After the defeat the death of Giridhar Bahadur at the hands of Chimaji Appa, Sawai Jaysing congratulated Nandlal Mandloi (30) thus, “You have defended our religion in Malwa and crushed the Muhammedans(31) , establishing Dharma. You have fulfilled my desire.” He was ambitious no doubt but he was religious minded as well. And hence his ambition could not carry him to extreme limit in opposing the Marathas for the possession of Malwa, so as to join hands with the Turani party. He would have certainly liked to retain Malwa for himself to fulfill his cherished dream of the expansion of his kingdom. And he did all efforts to achieve it. But he was sufficiently religious minded to see that in the acquisition of Malwa by the Marathas he was leaving that province to another Hindu power that was nothing but friendly to him. It is a well-known fact that he was the well wisher and supporter of Bajirao till the death of the latter.

There should be no doubt about the fact that Sawai Jaysing saw the “Establishment of Dharma”, in the victories of the Maraths over the muslims (32) had he called the Marathas for his personal gain alone, the story would not have continued from 1728 A.D. till the cession of the Subha of Malwa to the Maraths . It is through him that the demands of the Bajirao (33) relating to Malwa reached the Emperor and it is through his efforts that Balajirao-Bajirao’s son-got the Sanad of Malwa in 1741 A.D. It was due to this partiality of Jaysing towards the Marathas that Sadat Khan gained the confidence of the Emperor in 1735 A.D(34) . This common factor of Hindu religion between the Rajputs and the Marathas was known even to the Emperor. He feared that if Jaysing were displeased, he, being a Hindu, would join Bajirao(35).

http://maratharajputrelations.com/1fp.html

C) Sikh:

Ever wondered why after the defeat by Awrangzib, Guru Govind Singhji moved to Maharashtra where he spent his last days? Also please read up on the role of Sikhs in Confronting and harassing Abdali after Panipat-III.

And yes Shakespeare has often been termed a person who re-told existing stories. Sorry to break your hearts, but please check out at least the wikipedia page on ‘Hamlet’. More importantly, there is nothing wrong with that. Why does every Indian want to be so original and mad about being ‘first’? What is this insecurity?

More importantly, why do you think that the multiple traditions of India, reflected in the many Ramayanas or x y z, have never been in conflict. Please do think about why the Rajputs and the Marathas and the Jats were never able to form a united Hindu front, much to your 21st century chagrin, in the 18th century vacuum of Indian politics. One could recount many more such cases. More importantly, look to the state of the nation now. You can blame the Muslims and the Secularists happily, but I do believe that looking inwards is always more fruitful.

As far as Ramanujam goes, you could give him some respect, for knowing multiple languages, saving some manuscripts, making some of these texts popular outside South India. Why dont some of you go ahead and do some translations yourselves, so that the rest of the world would get to know what only you know about Indian history and culture. And this is from somebody who greatly admires Uma Bharati and Govindacharya, but also the Maoists. I am sure you guys resemble the Pramod Mahajan brand of Bania/Brahmin/Cosmopolitan Nationalism.

I do feel that Ramanujan went a little overboard in this article.It does seem that he was irreverent and was confusing the issues involved.In my enthusiasm to defend AKR,i had missed this essential thread running through.

I do not know about the Santhal tradition,so i cannot comment.But the Jain version seems consistent with the philosophy of its writers.

The Ramayana was appropriated by Jain and Buddhist writers,because of its popularity among the people.They brought up their own versions.The secular junta have gone so far as to assert that Ramayana was originally a Buddhist tale appropriated by the Hindus.SAHMAT(a pseuso secular organisation) organised a painting exhibition in Ayodhya featuring Buddhist Jataka tales where Rama and Sita were portrayed as siblings who married each other.Buddhists were not above such tactics in ancient times.The secular crowd get perverse pleasure in drawing attention to such narratives.Anything that is taboo always attracts curiosity,particularly among those who have made it their life’s mission to spread anarchy.

But the Hindu tradition is unique in accepting such tendencies are a part of this samsara.Even orthodoxy is part of this Maya.But orthodox tradition does not countenance deviant behaviour.

The Buddhist and Jain traditions tried to appropriate the Rama katha.It is not a part of their living traditions,it is a forgotten chapter in their history.But trying to equate the significance of Ramayana in mainstream Sanatana Dharma with obscure tales in other traditions is a gross error tantamount to obfuscation and even mischief.AKR has unwittingly given in to impulses of titillation and cheap theorising.Most human beings are guilty of such sins.

But I would still insist that AKRs work on Tamil poetry(both Sangam and Bhakti) and kannada poetry(Basavas vachanas) as pathbreaking.I also respect his moral courage in exploring his roots.

As one who is passionate about TN-karnataka relations based on mutual respect,harmony and understanding ,he was a pioneer to me.The fact that he translated secular tamil sangam poetry,medieval vaishnava tamil poetry,medieval kannada saiva poetry is an indication of his integrity,intellectual breadth and depth apart from his creative ability.

In general, this struck me:

>>It seems natural for a brilliant indvidual who was exploring language and cultural issues and becoming aware of critical analysis to note that there are multiple interpretations other than the orthodox srivaishnava narrative.

I’m all for multiple interpretations as long as they’re done without altering the basic framework/plot/whatchamacallit of Ramayana. Every single example AKR quotes shows how far each one is from the original. Besides, the orthodox Srivaishnava tradition says Ravana didn’t touch Sita when he abducted her. The original Valmiki epic says he carried her on his shoulders. However, it doesn’t alter the basic story of the Ramayana.

As I’ve shown, AKR is up to mischief because he tries to show that there’s nothing like even a Valmiki Ramayana.