RW Creations's video: bhima koregaon

bhima koregaon The present-day unrest around a historical commemoration is a different phenomenon to the event that set it off in the 19th Century, but flows along the same lines of caste and politics that pervade Indian society. By the time Balaji Baji Rao rose to power in the Maratha empire, the seat of Chhatrapati had been reduced to a sinecure under the British. | Wikipedia Recent events in Maharashtra following the commemoration of a historic battle on January 1 have perplexed many. The context of the celebrations by Dalit organisations is unknown to most people and, therefore, the violent events that followed in the wake of the commemoration have been misread as ‘needless provocation’.   Understanding the historical context of the original battle and the reasons for its commemoration might be one way to develop a holistic understanding of the situation, courtesy Dr. Stewart Gordon’s definitive Marathas 1600-1818. Maratha rule post-Shivaji After the death of Chhatrapati Shivaji in 1680, the Maratha kingdom struggled to hold its own against the Mughals. Shivaji’s sons, Sambhaji and Rajaram (both half-brothers) who came to the throne one after the other met with limited success in holding on to the kingdom that Shivaji had fashioned in western Maharashtra. Sambhaji was killed by the Mughals in 1689 and Sambhaji’s son Shahu was a prisoner in the Mughal camps of Malwa for almost eighteen years before his release in 1708. Succession battles between Tarabai, Rajaram’s widow who attempted to foist her son, Shivaji II on the throne after Rajaram’s death in 1700 and Shahu, who wanted to ascend the throne himself, also queered the Maratha pitch. Even though Shahu did ascend the throne in 1708, from 1713 onwards, it was the Peshwa, Balaji Vishwanath who came to hold the reins of power. Till 1761, when the Maratha defeat at the hands of the Afghan marauder, Ahmad Shah Abdali, in the Third Battle of Panipat tempered Maratha power to an extent, Balaji Vishwanath, a Chitpavan Brahmin by caste and the Peshwas (his son and grandson) who followed him — Bajirao (1720 – 1740) and Balaji Baji Rao (1740 – 1761) — exercised power on the Chattrapati’s behalf. The Chhatrapatis who followed Shahu were reduced to being nominal heads and retired to Satara while the Peshwas held fort at Pune which came to be the real centre of power. The Peshwas were assisted in their military endeavours by various Maratha chiefs — Holkar, Scindia (Shinde), Gaekwad and Bhonsle — who led roving bands of soldiers that aided the Peshwa army. After the 1818 battle, Maratha power, which was anyway on its last legs, was effectively finished. And, ironically, Mahars were involved in its final battle. After the 1761 defeat, Maratha power did recover, at least to the extent that the Marathas were able to hold Delhi for close to two decades from around 1770 to 1790, but the office of the Peshwa became a hugely contested one especially after the death of Madhav Rao in 1773. With multiple claimants from the same family and politically motivated murders of contenders, the Peshwa became a shifty and crafty entity who was forever seeking alliances to strengthen and safeguard his position rather than be a leader of consequence. Nana Phadnavis, a minor official initially and a 1761 veteran, became a figure of such influence post the death of Madhav Rao that the Peshwa, Madhav Rao II committed suicide in 1795, rendered helpless by Phandnavis’s maneuverings. Between 1795 and 1800, when Phadnavis died, the Maratha confederacy almost came apart. Both Scindia and Holkar strove to widen their scope of influence and were no longer beholden to the Peshwa as before. The Peshwas who followed Madhav Rao II were increasingly dependent on someone or other to hold on to their post. Even as Maratha power waxed and waned over the second half of the eighteenth century, the British were increasingly becoming a force to contend with in the Deccan and southern India. Post the death of Tipu Sultan in 1799, the British established themselves as the paramount power. The Subsidiary Alliance instituted by Lord Wellesley in 1798 offered Indian princely states the protection of the East India Company in return for a tribute. With the Peshwa increasingly dependent on Scindia or Holkar, it was clear that Maratha power was on the wane. In 1802, when the forces of the Peshwa and Scindia were defeated by Holkar, the Peshwa fled to the British territory of Bassein and submitted to the Subsidiary Alliance. Effectively, the Peshwa’s power ceased as a result of this and he became a figure of very limited influence. This state of affairs continued till 1817 when the British attempted to foist yet another treaty on the Peshwa, effectively finishing off even the limited influence that he had.