the main reason why the marathas did not have any allies at panipat was the psyche of the north indian hindu kings.they took pride in serving the looter and fanatic muslims and accepted them as the their masters (except the kings of udaipur and maharaja chatrasal ).but they could not digest the thought that the hindu peshwa of deccan acending the throne of delhi.this is nothing but slave mentality of all hindus in this country (especially north india) which prevails even today because of 600 years of muslim rule which their ancestors had to bear.
Re: 3 rd battle of panipat
by abhay bisen on Jan 15, 2011 03:25 PM
no dear i think you do not have any historiacl knowledge about it , the thing which disappointed not India was heavy taxes imposed by Marathas i.e. 25% the call it chauth (1/4th of income) and then serdeshmukhi i.e. tax over tax amount (extra tax over 25% tax) , this definately put extara burdon on people of northern areas and lead to unrest about the rulers , dear it is not slave mentality but lack of the then Maratha rulers who unable to manage this , one reason is maratha donot have any other source of Income other then taxes , on contrary Mughals donot impose that much amout of taxes and even they do not enterfear that much into Rajput territories , but Maratha did that heavely , also one thing u need to understand that why maratha were not able to make alliences ? it is weak point on Maratha side , Shivaji was good in such political affiers and strategies that is why Shivaji was great , but peshwa were not farsighted and loose there good ally , read the colonels post again u will find Maratha were failed diplomatically and also in strategy .
Re: Re: 3 rd battle of panipat
by abhay bisen on Jan 15, 2011 03:29 PM
no dear the diffrence is between administration of Shivaji and Peshwa , Shivaji was good in diplomacy and strategies and he knows how to win wars but Peshwa lack in that , the Afgan do not return because of the same reason money , Abdali also suffered heavely in terms of money and soldiers and after some time he do not have enough money to pay to his solders also the growing rebel of sikh finally crushed him and a new Sikh empire emerged .
I appeal all HINDUS of India whether he is from south/north/east/west to UNITE...If this is possible,NO one will dare attack on us...Hence ban all political parties who beg for mulla votes!!!
Re: Message is clear
by harish anand on Jan 15, 2011 01:43 PM
Friend please read again the story. The Ibrahim gardhi nd his 8000 men did better job than their socalled Hindu Generals.
It is fact most of the Indians kings of different province were un necessarily arrogant, selfish & didn't beleive in unity.Even in case of great Maharana Pratap all Rajputs were not united. Till now we are actually divided un necessarily in the name of region, caste, ethnic identity, language etc. etc. etc. If you dig deeper will find some thing ill is haunting all of us.
But see the ill destiny we still did n't learn from history. Most comments reflects clear cut differentiation on various ism. Come on brothers it is time to forget all bitterness & be united to save united India. CAN WE PLEASE DO THAT AT LEAST THIS TIME TO SAVE OUR BELOVED NATION. LET US PLEDGE TO KEEP ALL OTHER ISM & AIM TO WORK FOR THE UNITY OF NATION.WE ARE SURE DEVELOPMENT & PEACE WILL AUTOMATICALLY RESULT.
Re: Sincere request from all Indian
by harish anand on Jan 15, 2011 01:48 PM
Most of the time in history, India is ruled by those who inherited to rule and nont necessarily entitled to rule. To be entitled to rule, the history shows that whether it is Shivaji or it is Akbar, or Ranjit Singh from Punjab , they envision India as a lovebale one country then with their full force they fought for this cause. Probably, it gives some partial explanation of the difference they made and other idots who got to rule by heritage than by entitlement
Re: THIS IS HISTORY OF KINGS
by this that on Jan 15, 2011 01:27 PM
THAT WAY YOU CAN DEBATE ALL ARABIC COUNTRIES AS YET TO BE RELEASED OUT OF KINGS POWER.
India's history is replete with defeats and tragedies, atleast in the last 1000 years. Common reason is lack of unity and no cohesion between the various regions.
If marathas had support from sikhs and rajputs, things would have been different. It is unfortunate even today things have not changed. We have our army at the border, thats it, otherwise the nation is still divided and lacks cohesion amongst its states.
Re: true marathis (nishant shirdhankar)
by nikhil on Jan 15, 2011 11:00 AM
its the defeat wich the article says u fool..learn from it..staying single and dicrimination always lead to crushing defeat like marathas got..ppl like u shud b chased out of india..have some indian ness..
Re: Re: true marathis (nishant shirdhankar)
by vinayak mhaske on Jan 15, 2011 11:18 AM
the reason for defeat was as the maratha did not received proper support from sikhs and rajput because they belived that if the help the maratha defeat the afgans than the maratha would be rulers of delhi
