Sources of Indian Traditions: Modern India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh

Chapter 1

THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY

FERMENT AND CHANGE

In a wide-ranging survey, the Indian historian K. K. Datta noted in 1977 that in much historical writing the eighteenth century emerges as an inglorious period in the history of India, depicting the country as subjected to dreadful political turmoil, social disorder and confusion and a grievous economic decline.¹ The sources for this judgment, however, were largely members of the old elites who had suffered from the changes that were taking place, foreign observers unfamiliar with the country, or members of the British ruling class in the nineteenth century who wanted to contrast the dire conditions of India under the old rulers with what they believed were the improvements that had taken place under their rule. This view also reflected the accepted interpretation of Muslim rule in India—accepted not only by the British rulers but also by Hindu nationalists, who pictured the golden age of India as destroyed by Muslim invaders.

Recent historical writings by South Asian and Western scholars have noted that the dark picture of the eighteenth century tended to focus on politics in North India and Bengal, ignoring the remarkable social and economic changes taking place in other parts of the country. Thus a careful study of the economic history of the century by Tapan Raychaudhuri can conclude that imperial decay was in fact compensated for to some extent by the prosperity of the new provincial kingdoms and the emergence of new centers of trade and industry.²

The selections in this chapter suggest that some prominent features of Indian society, as surveyed in volume 1, survived and adjusted to the massive political, economic, and intellectual changes that took place after 1700. The sources that we have drawn upon to illustrate these aspects of Indian life are largely literary, which results in little attention to the rich artistic life of the times, such as the many important schools of painting that flourished in the eighteenth century, and the abundant variety of folk traditions.

A problem of nomenclature arises in identifying the two great civilizations that interacted in India in the eighteenth century, because writers both foreign and Indian have tended to label them as Hindu and Islamic. We have endeavored to stress that each of these designations covers a very wide (and also overlapping) spectrum of beliefs and behavior; and they are used here more or less as in the Indian Constitution, Articles 25 to 30, to designate self-identified groups claiming certain characteristics not shared with others.

The wide variety of life in eighteenth-century India cannot be arranged in any very satisfactory pattern, but at least five general historical trends, all closely related to each other, can be identified as characterizing the century, all of which remain part of the legacy of the nations of South Asia in the twenty-first century. Of the five, the reorganization of political power was the most obvious: it is marked by the decline of the Mughal Empire and its replacement by strong regional kingdoms, often under former Mughal governors. The second was the emergence of local groups that had formerly been subservient to the power of the imperial center or to the provincial governor; during the period of Mughal disorganization, when changes in the balance of power were experienced and manipulated after the death of Aurangzeb in 1707, many local groups were successful for the first time in gaining some autonomy. A third aspect of political change entailed the growing resistance of peasant and tribal groups to external authorities. A fourth trend was the devotional and intellectual creativity within both Hindu and Islamic religious communities, which is of special interest and importance since it links the past with later developments. The fifth was the intrusion of European political, economic, and cultural power into the subcontinent in the last decades of the eighteenth century in greater strength than in any previous period, and in ways that helped to shape modern India.

THE REORGANIZATION OF POLITICAL POWER

In the eighteenth century, the governors of the Mughal provinces, or subās, became virtually independent rulers, but without formally rebelling against the Mughal emperor; thus they preserved for themselves a symbol of legitimacy. These major centers of political power, as well as many smaller ones, largely replicated the cultural and administrative styles of the old Mughal capitals of Delhi and Agra. A salient feature of the reorganization of political power was the diffusion of both economic and cultural control to these centers, releasing new energies that built up new political institutions and weakened old ones. Bengal and Hyderabad are two examples of this process.

In other areas, political power passed to groups with roots in the older traditional cultures of India who had also been important participants in the Mughal power structures and had adopted them for their own use. The most powerful of these were the Marathas, centered in what is now the state of Maharashtra, who controlled much of western and central India as far north as Delhi and territories as far south as Thanjavur (Tanjore). At the end of the eighteenth century they posed the main challenge to British expansion; although they were defeated as a military power in 1818, they became a powerful element in the formation of the Indian nationalist movement.

In the Punjab, the Sikhs, a group defined both by regional political identity and by religion, as noted in volume 1, in the eighteenth century under a number of chieftains ousted the Mughal authorities in numerous areas, establishing their own rule. During this period the Sikhs evolved the distinctive symbols of their religious identity, embodied in the special garb of the Khalsa, the order instituted, according to Sikh traditions, by Guru Govind Singh in 1699 to establish Sikh identity and to unite them into a political power. Under their very able leader Ranjīt Singh (1780–1839), they founded a kingdom that dominated the Punjab from 1799 to 1849.

In Rajasthan, the courts of descendants of the ancient chiefs of the region, as well as rulers of small Himalayan kingdoms governed by Rajputs, became centers of religion and remarkable schools of painting, music, and religious poetry. Although they never became a political force comparable to the Marathas or the Sikhs, they self-consciously preserved and patronized a vision of their own traditional culture.

In the south, where Mughal rule had been the weakest, regional chieftains, with historical roots as military chieftains and landlords, asserted their authority. At the great Hindu temples of the south, as well as at the courts of the rulers, sculpture, painting, and music flourished throughout the century, closely allied with the devotional and ritual practices of both the Shaivite and Vaishnavite religious traditions. Many southern rulers asserted their genealogical relations with the great empires of the past, and the cultural continuities with the pre-Islamic period are everywhere evident—in language, literature, religion, art, and architecture. By the end of the century the most powerful regional political power in the south was located in Mysore, whose Hindu rulers, the Wadiyar dynasty, traced their origins to the great Vijayanagar Empire. Their power was usurped by their Muslim general, Haidar Ali, in 1765.

Central to all regional kingdoms from the mid-sixteenth to the mid-eighteenth centuries was what has been called military fiscalism, that is, the extraction of tribute payments from local chiefs under threat of military action, in order to create income for the state. In the unstable environment of the period, especially under the spread of Maratha power from western and central India, but also through the steady expansion of the English East India Company in the east and south, cash was needed to pay for a new style of army, comprised chiefly of infantry groups who rose to prominence with the improved rate of firing and the longer range and accuracy of modern firearms. Such new military groups were supported by states with increased administrative depth and newly important roles for bankers and money-lending.

In addition to the political reorganization associated with indigenous powers, eighteenth-century India was subjected to intrusion from groups outside the subcontinent. Two of these, led by the Persian Nadir Shah in 1738–1739 and the Afghan Ahmad Shah Durrani in 1748–1752, caused terrible suffering in the Punjab and Delhi, and weakened the power of the Mughal emperor. Ultimately, however, it was the British who, through their East India Company and its participation in Indian political life, had far more lasting influence. Although the Portuguese had established their colony at Goa at the beginning of the sixteenth century—defeating local kings, engaging in repeated wars with the Marathas and the Deccan sultanate, and subsequently promulgating repressive religious policies of conversion—by the eighteenth century they had ceased to be major actors. The French and the Dutch had small trading centers on the coast but lost out to the British, who by the end of the eighteenth century had begun the transition from being traders to becoming successors to the Mughals and rulers of an Indian empire. At the end of the eighteenth century they began to reorganize the political landscape.

AURANGZEB: LETTERS TO HIS SONS

When Aurangzeb, the last of the great Mughal emperors, was dying in 1707 at the age of ninety in the Deccan, still at war with the Marathas and other rebels, he is said to have written these letters to his sons, filled with foreboding about the fate of the empire. He tried to divide the empire among them, but as usual a war for the succession broke out. One son, Bahadur Shah, defeated the other two, but he was already an old man and died in 1712. Another war for the succession was followed by uprisings among the Marathas and the Sikhs, as well as palace intrigues that further weakened the imperial institution. The second of Aurangzeb’s letters, to Prince Kam Bakhsh, indicates that Aurangzeb, near death, was thinking about Dara Shikoh, the brother whom he had killed nearly a half-century earlier.

These two letters are not part of Iradat Khan’s actual text (see more on Iradat Khan below), but have been inserted by the translator with the following note: It may not be amiss to insert here two letters written by Aulumgeer to his sons, Azim Shaw and Kaum Buksh, a few days before his death (p. 7). All annotations in parentheses are those of the translator.

To Shaw Azim Shaw: Health to thee! My heart is near thee. Old age has arrived: weakness subdues me, and strength has forsaken all my members. I came a stranger into this world, and a stranger I depart. I know nothing of myself, what I am, and for what I am destined. The instant which passed in power, hath left only sorrow behind it. I have not been the guardian and protector of the empire. My valuable time has been passed vainly. … My son (Kaum Buksh), though gone towards Beejapore, is still near; and thou, my son, are yet nearer. … The camp and followers, helpless and alarmed, are like myself, full of affliction, restless as the quicksilver. Separated from their lord, they know not if they have a master or not. I brought nothing into this world, and, except the infirmities of man, carry nothing out. I have a dread for my salvation, and with what torments I may be punished. Though I have strong reliance on the mercies and bounty of God, yet, regarding my actions, fear will not quit me. … Though Providence will protect the camp, yet, regarding appearances, the endeavours of my sons are indispensably incumbent.

To Kaum Buksh: My son, nearest to my heart. Though in the height of my power, and by God’s permission, I gave you advice, and took with you the greatest pains, yet, as it was not the divine will, you did not attend with the ears of compliance. Now I depart a stranger, and lament my own insignificance, what does it profit me? … My fears for the camp and followers are great; but alas! I know not myself. My back is bent with weakness, and my feet have lost the power of motion. … I have committed numerous crimes, and know not with what punishments I may be seized. … Though the Protector of mankind will guard the camp, yet care is also incumbent on the faithful, and my sons. When I was alive no care was taken; and now I am gone, the consequence may be guessed. The guardianship of a people is the trust by God committed to my sons. … The domestics and courtiers, however deceitful, yet must not be ill-treated. … The complaints of the unpaid troops are as before. Dara Shekkoh, though of much judgment and good understanding, settled large pensions on his people, but paid them ill, and they were ever discontented. I am going. Whatever good or evil I have done, it was for you.

[Scott, A Translation of the Memoirs of Eradut Khan, A Nobleman of Hindostan, containing interesting anecdotes of the Emperor Alamgeer Aurangzebe and of his successors Shaw Aulum and Jehaundar Shaw; in which are displayed the causes of the very precipitate decline of the Mogul Empire in India, trans. [from the Persian] by Jonathan Scott, Captain in the service of the Honourable East India Company and Private Persian Translator to Warren Hastings, late Governor-General of Bengal, &c &c. &c. (London: John Stockdale, 1786), 8–9.]

SHAH WALI ALLAH: THE URGENCY OF POLITICAL INSTABILITY

Shah Wali Allah of Delhi (1703–1762) was a Sufiof the Naqshbandi order who was concerned with the decline of Islamic power in India, which he attributed to political and especially social disunity. This disunity, he felt, manifested itself in what was perceived by his contemporaries as irreconcilably competing schools of jurisprudence and of traditional hadith scholarship, and even in competition among Sufiorders. Most of his works are dedicated to the intellectual pursuit of synthesizing and harmonizing difference; he felt that scholars—and indeed the entire believing community—had a duty to bring about social revival and interschool reconciliation. To this end, he translated the Quran into Persian, wrote Quranic commentaries, authored treatises on the hadiths, and composed works on scholastic theology and jurisprudence. Following the methods of Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi (d. 1624), he attempted to show that Sufism was wholly in accord with traditional Islam. At the same time, he argued that conflicts among the Sufiorders could be solved in a way that would unite them to serve the cause of Muslim renewal in India. Finally, in this reassertion of Islam the Muslim ruler had a vital role to play: he should encourage and patronize Islamic learning and piety, and reclaim the administrative and economic power that had passed into the hands of Hindus. There is little evidence for Shah Wali Allah’s influence in his own time, but he became a very important source for Islamic social and political thought in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries in India and Pakistan.

Shah Wali Allah witnessed a period of precipitous instability in North India after the death of Aurangzeb in 1707: during the remainder of Shah Wali Allah’s life, ten monarchs sat on the throne in Delhi; the Sikhs plundered the northwest from 1708 to 1716, until they were driven back by the Mughals; the Marathas invaded the suburbs of Delhi in 1738, forcing the Mughals to cede territories to them; in 1739 Nadir Shah attacked Delhi; and in the 1740s, the Afghan Rohillas under Ahmad Shah Abdali (later Durrani), were also on the rise. At the Battle of Panipat in 1761, the Maratha forces were defeated by the Afghans, but then Abdali’s army mutinied, forcing him to retreat and ending hopes of a renewed Muslim power in Delhi.

THE ROLE OF THE ISLAMIC RULER

In the 1750s, believing that the decline of Mughal political power and the spiritual decadence of Indian Islam were closely related and could only be countered through the internal unity of the Muslim community and the support of a Muslim ruler, Shah Wali Allah wrote a series of letters to various Muslim leaders, exhorting them either to strengthen the Mughal administration or to aid the Mughals in ousting threats to their empire. One such letter, to Ahmad Shah Abdali, urging him to invade India and reassert Muslim control over the Marathas and Jats,³ is reproduced below. There is no evidence that the Afghan was influenced by the letter, for he had already made a number of raids into India, but it is a good indication of the way the theologian understood the relation between political power and religious faith. Although of minor importance in terms of Shah Wali Allah’s overall intellectual project, such letters to political personages were not uncommon from Sufis of the Naqshbandi order, who spoke from their consciences about injustice and the need for good, stable government.

There has remained nothing of the sultanate except the name. Because the situation of the king’s soldiers has reached this extreme, one may infer to what end has come the ruin of the condition of city people who were on government salary or merchants, etc. They have been gripped in various tyrannies and difficulties of making a living. Besides all this distress and poverty, they all became widowed, bewildered and propertyless when the force of Suraj Mal [a Hindu chieftain] and Safdar Jang [a Mughal governor of Awadh] attacked the Old City of Delhi. Then successive famines descended from the heavens. Altogether, this community of Muslims is to be pitied. At this time every tax and levy that is current in the imperial administration is in the hands of Hindus. There are no accountants or managers not of that sect. Whatever government or authority there is has been concentrated in their houses; whatever bankruptcy and wretchedness there is has fallen upon the Muslims. …

In this age there exists no king, apart from His Majesty [Ahmad Shah], who is a master of means and power, potent for the smashing of the unbelievers’ army, far-sighted and battle-tested. Consequently a prime obligation upon His Majesty is to wage an Indian campaign, break the sway of the unbelieving Marathas and Jats, and rescue the weaknesses of the Muslims who are captive in the hand of the unbelievers. If the power of unbelief should remain at the same level (God forbid!), the Muslims will forget Islam; before much time passes, they will become a people who will not know Islam from unbelief. This too is a mighty trial: the power of preventing that is attainable for His Majesty alone, by the favor of the beneficent God. …

In the name of Almighty God we ask that he expend effort avidly for a holy war against the unbelievers of this territory, so that in the presence of Almighty God a fine reward may be inscribed in His Majesty’s book of deeds, so his name may be recorded in the register of holy warriors …, so in the world innumerable foes may fall at the hand of the heroes (ghāzī) of Islam, so Muslims may obtain rescue from the hand of the unbelievers. God forbid that this [campaign] should come to pass in the manner of Nādir Shāh’s! He scattered the Muslims up and down and went away, leaving the Marathas and Jats safe and sound. Then the rule of the unbelievers gained strength, and the troops of Islam were dispersed. The sultanate of Delhi sank to the level of a boys’ game. …

The victory of Islam is the destiny of the entire community; so, wherever there is a Muslim, [the Muslim warrior-kings] will love him on a par with actual sons and brothers; and wherever there is a warlike unbeliever, they will be like raging lions. So it is necessary that, in these holy wars, the intention of reinforcing Islam be fixed in the mind.

[From Shāh Walī-Ullāh, Siyāsī Maktūbāt, ed. K. A. Nizami (Aligarh: 1950), 11–15, trans. C. Brunner.]

IRADAT KHAN: DECAY AT THE CENTER OF THE EMPIRE

Iradat Khan was the title given to a poet, Mirza Mubarak-Ullah, whose ancestors had been courtiers under the Mughals. Shortly before he died in 1716, Iradat Khan wrote a history of his times, from which this excerpt is taken. As he describes the palace intrigues for control of the imperial office, one senses power slipping away from the imperial institution. For Iradat Khan, the explanation of the weakness of the empire was the character of the contemptible emperor and the people around him.

The ruler of whom he speaks, Jahandar Shah, or Farrukh Siyar, ruled from 1713 to 1719.

When Jehaundar Shaw, by the intrigues and support of the [chief noble] Zoolfeccar Khan, had triumphed over his three brothers, and ascended the throne of empire without the fear or dread of a competitor, all the customs of time were changed. He was in himself a weak man, effeminately careful of his person, fond of ease, indolent, and totally ignorant of the arts of government. He had also blemishes and low vices unworthy of royalty, and unknown among his illustrious ancestors. He made the vast empire of Hindostan an offering to the foolish whims of a public courtezan. … The relations, friends and minions of the mistress, usurped absolute authority in the state; and high offices, great titles, and unreasonable grants from the Imperial domains, were showered profusely on beggarly musicians. Two crores [1 crore=10 million] of rupees annually were settled for the household expenses of the mistress only, exclusive of her cloaths and jewels. … Zoolfeccar Khan, seater, nay even creator of emperors, with such an image of humanity in his hands, became absolute, and so proud, that Pharaoh and Shudad could not have obtained admission to his threshold. He studied to ruin the most ancient families, inventing pretences to put them to death, or disgrace them, that he might plunder their possessions. … The minds of high and low, rich and poor, near or distant, friends or strangers, were turned against him, and wished his destruction. Hindoos and Mussulmans agreed in praying to Heaven for the fall of his power, night and day. Often does the midnight sigh of the widow ruin the riches of an hundred years.

[Scott, A Translation of the Memoirs of Eradut Khan, 80–81.]

REBELLING AGAINST THE MUGHALS: THE SIKHS

The Sikh tradition was founded in the Punjab by Nanak (1469–1539), always referred to by his followers as Guru Nanak. His teaching is found, along with that of his successors, in the collection known as the Ādi Granth, selections from which are given in volume 1. For Guru Nanak, God is eternal, unchanging, beyond time, wholly apart from his creation. According to what is known as the root mantra, this message of Guru Nanak is that the ancient truth, ageless truth, is also, now, truth. And Nanak says, It always will be truth.⁴ He gathered followers around him, and by the beginning of the seventeenth century they formed a sizable community in the Punjab that lived in some tension with the Mughal rulers because they were becoming a state within a state, following their revered leaders, Guru Nanak’s successors in the office of Guru. As members of a community with easily identified symbols—uncut hair, distinctive turbans, a sword, an iron bracelet, and shorts under their outer clothing—they emphasized their separateness. By the early eighteenth century they had become identified as militant enemies of the Mughals. The following selections suggest how they became rebels, feared and hated by the Mughals; but they perceived themselves as a community devoted to a religion of truth for which they were persecuted and which they had to defend.

MUHAMMAD QASIM ON BANDA BAHADUR’S SIKH ARMY

Hostility between the Sikhs and the Mughals was dramatized when the emperor Aurangzeb, alarmed at the growth and strength of the Sikh community, ordered the execution of Guru Tegh Bahadur, the ninth Guru, in 1675. His son and successor, Govind Singh, who is regarded by Sikhs as the last in the line instituted by Guru Nanak, was assassinated in 1708 in South India, probably by imperial order. Two of his sons had already been executed in the Punjab by the Mughals, and he had not named a successor, as had the previous nine Gurus. In this situation, the Sikhs chose a recent convert to Sikhism from a Hindu sect to go back to the Punjab and wreak vengeance on the Mughals. Renamed Banda, slave (that is, slave of the truth), he gathered an army of Sikh followers, sacking towns held by the Mughals and fighting so successfully against the Mughal armies that after five years he controlled large areas of the Punjab. The Mughal authority managed to get an effective army together, and Banda and the Sikhs were defeated. Banda was captured in 1716, taken in chains to Delhi, and executed along with his five-year-old son. A merchant of the East India Company, who was in Delhi at the time, reported that while a hundred Sikhs were being executed every day not one of them apostasized from his religion.

This is the background of the following selections from the Ibratnāma, written in Persian by the historian Muhammad Qasim in 1723. It is remarkable for its praise of Guru Nanak and his religious teachings, along with demeaning references to Banda and his followers. Behind the conventions of Persian rhetoric, these excerpts suggest the increasing weakness of the imperial institution. Some of the passages have been rearranged to create a chronological sequence.

To give the main particulars: In old times in a particular year, there was a dervish by the name of Nānak, clothed in Reality, rooted in Knowledge, endowed with spiritual perfections, rising above physical repute and name. He regarded following the constraints of the threads of Infidelity as absolute Infidelity, and held full obedience to the faith of Islām as Islām. On the one hand, he conversed on the secret virtues of fast and prayer with [Muslim] mystics, scholars and learned men, and, on the other, went in step with the Veda-reading, Reality-comprehending Brahmans. … [A]midst the mass of contradictory elements, he was in every way free from [matters of] peace-and-strife. …

In previous pages, it has been mentioned, that a false Gurū [Bandā], who, during the reign of His Late Majesty Emperor Bahādur Shāh Ghāzī, owing to the weakness of the unachieving Rustam-dil [the imperial commander] and others, who had been slow in his pursuit, was able to wander about in the plains of ignominy and flee into the Northern Mountains. …

When the Imperial Camp was pitched in the … hunting ground of [Jahangir] and [Shāhjahān], that ill-fated falcon of a fox [Bandā Bahādur] fled into the fort of Mukhliṣpūr … [The Emperor], with relaxed mind, sat in luxury and comfort, while deputing the forces of the princes and nobles to storm the fort and kill the Infidels. Young men exhibited bravery to the extent of their strength and power. But the stormy winds, destructive floods … and the bitterness of the cold rendered men and horses useless and weak. … The period of the siege extended to two months. What stratagem and stroke did not come to that deceitful deceiver [Bandā]! At last owing to the disloyalty of some of the persons of the Imperial entrenchments, he made his luckless way in one direction, and going … to the hills of Jammū raised a tumult there. …

Now, owing to the good fortune of the victorious Emperor [Farrukh Siyar, 1713–1719], the time of that ill-fated one was near. …

I, the writer of these warning-laden pages, was then by way of service, posted under the Deputy-Governor. … What bold actions were then seen from those doomed ones [the Sikhs]! Every day, twice or thrice, forty or fifty of those black-faced ones would come out [of their fort] and from outside carry back fodder for their animals. Every time men of this [Imperial] army … tried to stop them, they cut the Mughals down with arrows, muskets and short arms, and went on their way. …

But God’s mercy did not desert [the Mughals; they did not have to storm the fort]. … At last, owing to a number of causes, such as their confinement, the maddening stench of carcasses and putrid matter, the exhaustion of their store of grain and their dying of starvation, those wicked infidels came down to pleading with importunity and helplessness and made the offer that their base chief would [surrender] …

A fateful order was issued for the execution of the Gurū, his son, and the other sweepers [the Sikhs].

[ʿIbratnāma, trans. I. Habib in Sikh History from Persian Sources: Translations of Major Texts, ed. J. S. Grewal and Irfan Habib (New Delhi: Tulika, 2001), 111–112, 122–123, 125–127.]

THE SIKH RELIGIOUS CODE: LIVES OF DISCIPLINE AND DEVOTION

The Sikhs as pictured by their enemies may seem to bear no relation to the Sikhs as pictured in their own religious literature, which breathes a spirit of devotion. As with many religious traditions, however, the truth of one’s faith may become, in the eyes of one’s enemies, fanaticism and bigotry. Sikhism is defined by devotion to the Gurus, especially the originator of the community, Guru Nanak; by reverence for the scripture, the Granth Sāhib; and by adherence to a code of devotion, social behavior, and discipline.

The code of devotion is embodied in what is known as the rahit, of which there are a number of versions, called rahit-nāmās. A few excerpts are given from what is believed by scholars to be one of the earliest extant versions, the Chaupā Singh Rahitnāmā, dating, according to some scholars, from early in the eighteenth century. Like many religious codes, it is intended to define and identify the true believers, who accept the rigorous discipline of the faith.

By the grace of the Eternal One, the True Guru

The text which follows is the Rahit [or pattern of conduct] prescribed by the Satguru. What is the Rahit? The Granth Sahib tells us: If one follows the Rahit that disease [which is separation from God] progressively diminishes. … In the early morning the Gursikh [a devout Sikh] … should bathe or [at least] perform the five ablutions. Let him then recite Japjī [thirty-eight short poems at the beginning of the Ādi Granth that are considered the core statement of faith] five times. According to Guru Ram Das he who recites Japjī five times will acquire the radiance of [true] enlightenment … The Gursikh should then turn to whatever daily occupation is appropriate to the status conferred on him by the Guru. … When it is time to eat give a portion of your food to someone else, as you are able to afford. Invite another Sikh to sit with you in the place where you prepare your food [and share whatever you have with him]. … A Gursikh should not drink intoxicating liquor. As the Granth Sahib says: He who drinks dislodges his reason and becomes demented. … A Gursikh should not stare at another’s wife and he should never have intercourse with any woman other [than his own wife]. … A Gursikh … should not cherish worldly things, and he should always be in complete control of his temper. … A Gursikh should be strictly loyal to his own dharma and should not endeavour to follow another’s [way].

[Chaupa Singh Rahit-nama, trans. and ed. W. H. McLeod (Dunedin: University of Otago Press, 1987), 149, 150, 153, 155, from vv. 1, 2, 7, 11, 44, 65.]

MARATHAS: COURTIERS, REBELS, RAIDERS, AND STATE BUILDERS

In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, Indian nationalists would see the Marathas as Indian patriots and freedom fighters, but in the selections given here they appear in many forms. At times they were courtiers at the Mughal courts; at other times they rebelled, contributing to the weakness of the empire through their invasion of the Punjab, Delhi, and other parts of the empire. They were also seen as plunderers of peasants and merchants throughout India.

THE HISTORY OF KHAFI KHAN AND THE STORY OF TARA BAI

KhafiKhan, an early eighteenth-century historian who was brought up in Aurangzeb’s political and diplomatic service, wrote a history of India from Babur through the death of Aurangzeb and beyond. The Tārīkh-ī Khāfī Khān was published in 1732 during the time of Muhammad Shah and gives an account of one of the most prominent Maratha chieftains of the early part of the century, Nima Sindhia [Shinde], that suggests the complex relationships between the Mughal rulers and their local allies, who were often Hindus, not Muslims. His history also indicates the important political role of women in Maratha society in his reference to the story of Tara Bai (1675–1761), the widow of the Maratha ruler Raja Ram (who was a descendant of the great Shivaji, founder of the dynasty). Along with Ahilya Bai Holkar, she is one of the heroines of Maratha history. Tara Bai acted as regent for her infant son, and took the lead in attacking the imperial territories in the Deccan. Although Aurangzeb gave a favorable reply to Tara Bai’s request for permission to augment her income through a special tax, she became enmeshed in court politics, and the farmān promised to her was never issued.

Nīmā Sindhiā had been one … of the greatest leaders of the accursed armies of the Dakhin. His plundering and destructive raids had extended as far as the province of Mālwā. Now … he had turned the face of repentance to the Imperial throne, with the hope of forgiveness. He had taken part in the battle against Kām Bakhsh [the brother of the emperor, Bahādur Shāh, who had tried to seize the throne], and having thus won the Imperial favour, he and his sons and relations had received the honour of being presented to His Majesty. He received a mansab [revenue for maintaining troops] of 7,000 and 5,000 horse, two lacs of rupees, a robe, and elephant, a drum, etc. … His sons and grandsons each received mansabs of 5,000 and 4,000—altogether 40,000 and 25,000 horse. …

Tārā Bāī was the widow of Rām Rāja … [who had] left two sons by her of tender years. In the reign of the late Emperor Aurangzeb, after a warfare of ten years, she sued for peace, on condition of being allowed to levy [a special tax]. … Aurangzeb declined for various reasons. Now, by the intervention of [a Mughal official], she asked for a farmān [order from the emperor] in the name of her son, granting [a special tax], for which he would suppress other insurgents and restore order in the country. … The King, in his extreme good nature, had resolved in his heart that he would not reject the petition of anyone, whether of high or low degree. The complainants and the defendants made their statements to His Majesty, and although they differed as much as morning and evening, each was accepted, and an order of consent was given.

[Khāfī Khān, Tārīkhī Khāfī Khān, in The History of India, As Told by Its Own Historians: The Mohammedan Period, ed. Sir H. M. Elliot and John Dowson (London: Trübner and Co., 1877), vol. 7, 408–409.]

AHILYA BAI HOLKAR: A MARATHA WOMAN RULER

The reputation of the Marathas as marauders is complicated by the story of one of the most remarkable women in Indian history, Ahilya Bai (r. 1765–1795), who on the death of her son, the ruler of the important Maratha state of Indore, gained control of the government because, as Sir John Malcolm, an English official who knew her, remarked, the men around her recognized her abilities even though they objected to her sex as a disqualification for the conducting of public affairs. The Holkar family is a good example of the rise of new groups to power in the eighteenth century. They were shepherds, who turned from raising sheep to raising a body of armed men in order to gain territory.

The following description of her reign, by Sir John Malcolm, the commander of the British forces in western India, is accepted by modern historians as reliable, although his comments about the derivation of female seclusion must be recognized as part of nineteenth-century rhetoric.

It is not common with the Hindus (unless in those provinces where they have learnt the degrading usage from their Mahomedan conquerors) to confine females, or to compel them to wear veils. The Mahrattas of rank (even the Brahmins) have, with few exceptions, rejected the custom, which is not prescribed by any of their religious institutions. Ahalya Baee, therefore, offended no prejudice, when she took upon herself the direct management of affairs, and sat every day for a considerable period, in open Durbar, transacting business. Her first principle of government appears to have been moderate assessment, and an almost sacred respect for the native rights of village officers and proprietors of land. She heard every complaint in person; and although she continually referred causes to courts of equity and arbitration, and to her ministers, for settlement, she was always accessible; and so strong was her sense of duty, on all points connected with the distribution of justice, that she is represented as not only patient, but unwearied, in the investigation of the most insignificant causes, when appeals were made to her decision.

Aware of the partiality which was to be expected from information supplied by members and adherents of the Holkar family, regarding Ahalya Baee, facts were collected from other quarters to guard against the impressions, which the usual details of her administration are calculated to make. It was thought the picture had been overcharged with bright colours, to bring it more into contrast with the opposite system that has since prevailed in the countries she formerly governed; but, although enquiries have been made among all ranks and classes, nothing has been discovered to diminish the eulogiums, or rather blessings, which are poured forth whenever her name is mentioned. The more, indeed, enquiry is pursued, the more admiration is excited: but it appears above all extraordinary, how she had mental and bodily powers to go through with the labours she imposed upon herself, and which from the age of thirty to that of sixty when she died, were unremitting. The hours gained from the affairs of the state were all given to acts of devotion and charity; and a deep sense of religion appears to have strengthened her mind in the performance of her worldly duties. She used to say, that she deemed herself answerable to God for every exercise of power; and in the full spirit of a pious and benevolent mind was wont to exclaim, when urged by her ministers to acts of extreme severity, Let us, mortals, beware how we destroy ‘the works of the Almighty.’

[Sir John Malcolm, A Memoir of Central India (London: Kingsbury, Parbury, and Allen, 1832), 1:175–177.]

THE MARATHAS AS RAIDERS: A BENGALI PERSPECTIVE

A reaction to Marathas as raiders and invaders in Bengal is given in a remarkable Bengali document written by one Gangaram in about 1752. It is one of the very few extended references from the point of view of the victims. One somewhat extenuating explanation for the invasion is that the Marathas were asked by the imperial administration to punish the governor of Bengal because he had not remitted the emperor’s share of the Bengal taxes to Delhi. For Gangaram, no explanation was necessary beyond the sinful greed of the invaders.

Bargis is the word the local people used for the Marathas, and seems to have meant cavalry.

But then suddenly the Bargis swept down with a great shout and surrounded the people in the fields. They stole all their gold and silver, leaving all other things aside. They cut off the hands of some, and the noses and ears of others. Some they cut down with a single blow. They seized and dragged off the most beautiful of the women, who tried to flee, and tied ropes around their fingers and necks. When one had finished with a woman, another took her, while the raped women screamed for help. The Bargis did many foul and bestial things to the women, and then let them go. Then, when they had plundered all they could in the fields, they entered the villages and set fire to houses … large and small. They destroyed whole villages and swept, looting, into all the four directions. They bound some people, their hands behind their backs, others they threw to the ground and while they were on their backs on the ground, kicked them with shoes [a special insult]. They shouted over and over again, Give us money!, and when they got no money they filled peoples’ nostrils with water, and some they seized and drowned in tanks, and many died of suffocation. In this way they did all manner of foul and evil deeds. When they demanded money and it was not given to them, they would put the man to death. Those who had money gave it. Those who had none were killed.

[Gangārām, The Mahārāshta [sic] Purāna: An Eighteenth Century Bengal Historical Text, trans. and ed. Edward C. Dimock Jr. and Pratul Chandra Gupta (Honolulu: East–West Center Press, 1965), 30.]

FORTS AND WAR: THE ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF ANY KINGDOM

Intrigues, assassinations, diplomacy, alliances, battles: all are the stock-in-trade of our sources from the eighteenth century. Maratha leaders, the most mobile and most farthest-ranging of all the Indian powers of the eighteenth century, were aware, however, that forts on well-guarded hills were essential to their power.

A Maratha writer, in a manuscript said to have been composed early in the century, elaborates on the strategic advantage of Shivaji’s forts.

Forts are the essence of the entire kingdom. If there are no forts then the country is open to foreign attack, the people have no refuge and abandon it. If the land is abandoned then who would call it a kingdom? It is for this reason that preceding kings began by building forts that consolidated their power and enabled them to withstand invasions.

The great king who is in heaven [Shivājī] built this kingdom on the basis of forts. When new lands fell under his rule, he selected choice spots for both land and sea fortifications. Step by step he created a well-controlled realm from Saleri and Ahivant [in the western Khandesh region of Maharashtra] up to the Kaveri River. A powerful enemy like Aurangzeb came and overran great kingdoms like Bijapur and Bhaganagar [Golkunda]; he attacked this kingdom for thirty to thirty-five years. What indeed was impossible for him? But because this kingdom had fortresses a remnant of it survived, and so did the possibility of future recovery.

If a king wishes to protect his kingdom and enlarge it, he should not neglect his own forts but should carefully strengthen them. In conquering new territory, great efforts should be made to capture its strongholds. If the land has no forts, then strong points should be taken and fortified, and the advance should proceed step by step with that. The land should be annexed only after posting garrisons in such places. Thus the kingdom should be enlarged step by step. A kingdom without forts is in a dark situation. Therefore one who desires a kingdom should take to heart that forts are the kingdom, forts are the roots of the kingdom, forts are treasuries, forts are military strength, forts are the glory of the realm, forts are lifeguards. Knowing this, he should not trust anyone and should take personal care to guard the fortresses that exist and construct new ones.

The protection of forts is a delicate task. If one is lost due to the treason, or carelessness or cowardice of the men appointed to command there, then a piece of territory is also gone. The remaining territory is exposed to attack, the enemy grows stronger, and garrison soldiers elsewhere are exposed to temptation and may intrigue with the enemy. So the kingdom suffers blow after blow. For this reason, do not treat the administration of forts as a matter of routine business: enforce the strictest adherence to rules and regulations.

[Shyamakanta N. Banhatti, ed., Ajnapatra (Pune: Suvichar Prakashan Mandala, 1986), 101–102. Trans. S. Guha.]

THE REALITY OF WAR FOR A COMMON SOLDIER

In India, as elsewhere, the hardships of war were borne by the men who attacked the forts. This selection comes from a collection of folk poetry; in it a solder complains, as soldiers have from time immemorial, that that he has to fight in a battle he does not understand, in Karnataka, far from his homeland.

Eyes roll [in shock] gazing on the forts of Bahiravgad and Mangdi!

The forest around them is impenetrable!

Like a woodland preserved for a god!

The impetuous (chief) took the surrounding forts—but now came this fearsome forest!

Spectacular losses were our losses when it was attacked!

The fort did much harm (to us).

Cannon-balls crippled many—left them fit only to beg! But it was taken in the end.

Our guts swell with flatulence! We watch our life-breath depart! while saying How did we earn this fate?

Dysentery is tormenting us! Our assholes froth away! Terrible the heat of Karnataka!

When reminded of home we weep like children! How we remember our children and families!

O Hari! From today seek no employment in Karnataka! Till your fields and live at home!

Here we eat sand at the risk of our lives, our bodies suffer! Food is dear indeed!

[Marathyancya Itihasancin Asadhanen, Khand 3, ed. V. K. Rajwade (Kolhapur: V. K. Rajwade, 1901), doc. 109, vv. 2–5, 93–94. Trans. S. Guha.]

THE CHRONICLE OF BHAUSAHIB: DEFEAT IN 1761 OF THE MARATHAS AT PANIPAT

The defeat of the Maratha armies in 1761 at Panipat, north of Delhi, is a crucial event in eighteenth-century history. It prevented the Marathas, who had gained control of Delhi in 1752, from establishing themselves in North India. Instead, they were forced to return to their bases in central and western India. This defeat was brought about, however, not by the forces of the Mughal emperor but by the Afghan invader Ahmad Shah Abdali (to whom Shah Wali Allah had appealed [see above]). This account of the battle was written in Marathi in the late eighteenth century and is centered on one of the Maratha leaders, Bhausahib. There are many chronicles of this kind in Marathi that give a vivid insight into the nature of war and society at the time. One explanation offered in some of them for the defeat at Panipat is that the Marathas had abandoned their own method of fighting—that is, using swift cut-and-run engagements on horseback—for the Muslim way of fighting pitched infantry battles using muskets. Another is that while the rank-and-file fought bravely on the battlefield, the leaders in Maharashtra were disunited and quarreled amongst themselves.

Meanwhile Visaji Krishna Jogdeo had been assigned five hundred [soldiers] in order to take care of Parvatibai [Bhausaheb’s wife] and a bodyguard of mounted Bargirs set to protect her, and they had been thus ordered: If it becomes known that we have fought our way through, then bringing her set off behind us in the direction of Delhi. And if the news is heard that we have fallen in the field then straightway slay her and yourselves depart. Thus were they told: You should effect it so that it may never be said that the wife of Bhausaheb had fallen into the hands of Giljyas [Afghans]. With these most definite commands they had been placed on guard. Then came the rout and men began to flee. At that time Visaji Krishna and his men took fright and abandoning all concern for the lady fled who knows where in the hope of saving their lives. Nothing took place as Bhausaheb had ordered. Now one half hour only of the day remained and Parvatibai, who was in her howdah, caused the elephant to lie, got down from it and began to run in the direction of the baggage train. She was entirely distracted. A boy of the household was standing there holding a led mare for her but Baisaheb was too much besides herself to mount it. But there was also a body-servant named Janu Bhintada nearby who courageously had kept her company. In such a tumult he was … a powerful man and his mare also strong and broad of back. She came up to him and said, I am the wife of Bhausaheb. Take me on your horse. As soon as she said this he being a fine man answered her steadfastly, Baisaheb, do you place your foot on my stirrup and mount. Immediately she put her foot on the stirrup and that good man gave her his hand and set her behind him, then with her own shawl bound her to his waist. When he looked all around them, all around were Giljyas. Before and behind he saw heaps of dead. He said to the lady, Baisaheb, it seems very difficult for us to come off safe, but through your former merit we will outrun them yet. So saying he lowered his head and drove his horse out from the rest of the troop. The lady’s virtues were great for she came safely through that dreadful calamity. The day set. The Giljyas pursued them a full kos [2.2 miles] but she escaped from this calamity. The mother of Nana Phadnis who had come on pilgrimage to the holy Bhagirathi was taken by the Giljyas. It is not known what became of her after. Nana Phadnis himself was only young. In the confusion he fled away and avoiding capture returned with the stragglers. Nana’s wife was there also. After coming away from the battlefield she abandoned her horse. On foot and in ragged clothes, having thrown away all her jewelry and ornaments and smeared earth upon her body, she went in the direction of Delhi. …

It happened as always when one part of an army flees the other loses courage, and they began to run from there too in whatever direction they could find a path. Those whose horses had any strength left in them managed to cross the ditches and went into the city of Panipat and from there fled in whatever direction they could. … The Giljyas who were cutting off heads gave up their lopping. For how long could they continue? Of the broken army as many as could went to Delhi, a few others to Kurukshetra and a few by back ways and side roads wherever they might, but none of these escaped. They were taken by the Giljyas. At the same time the Giljyas, putting the city of Panipat under their control, began to loot all the goods within the entrenchments. The women they carried off and some they slew and likewise for the men.

The battle which began in the morning after two hours of day went on at full cry unceasingly for three watches. The earth drank much blood. No Hindus had ever fought like this nor been broken like this before. There had never been such a time, nor ever would be. Well let that be! It was God’s doing. It was he that brought about this wonder in that he led all the peoples of the earth to that place and there slew them. Maratha men and troops had been defeated but never died like this. Had any of them ever dug entrenchments all around and remained within them in this way? Maratha men had never done this thing. The old Marathi system of war, followed from ancient times, had been to fight only when the occasion was fair and otherwise to flee. By doing this they had protected the land. When they abandoned this way and depended upon the Muslim system it was not their true way and so this … came about and many men and women of the southern land were destroyed. God’s power is the only truth, and thus it came about! … Then having obtained brahman Marathas and the very best materials for the proper performance of the rite of fire, he had the bodies burned and also dispatched the bones to Benares. …

[Quoted in Ian Raeside, The Decade of Panipat, 1751–1761 (Bombay: Popular Prakashan, 1984), 945–996.]

TIPU SULTAN: VISIONARY RULER OF MYSORE

Of all the new leaders who emerged in the eighteenth century, Tipu Sultan, who succeeded his father Haidar Ali in 1782 as ruler of Mysore, was one of the most interesting and powerful. He understood, as did his father, that the real threat to his power, and that of other Indian rulers, came from the British, who were gaining control of Bengal and large areas in South India. Contemporary British sources depicted him as a bloodthirsty tyrant who must be overthrown for the benefit of the trade of their East India Company and for the welfare of the people of Mysore. Recent historiography, however, has pictured him as a farsighted ruler who sought to protect his territory from the British through skillful diplomacy and by building up the economic resources of his government. He saw the need to modernize the state through acquiring new technology, starting new industries, and carefully controlling the revenue system. To this end he sought alliances with both Indian and foreign states, including, much to the alarm of the British, the French.

A remarkable series of letters, some of them apparently in his own handwriting, articulate Tipu Sultan’s vision of a new kind of Indian state. He was killed in battle by British troops in 1799. The selections here are from the detailed instructions he prepared for envoys to the Ottoman Empire (anachronistically called Turkey in this translation), France, and England.

The particulars of every stage of journey and [leading] members of each of the three States [Turkey, France and England], with indications of status of the said [leading] members and description of their affairs as discovered [by you] and the industries and rarities of each city and territory and the account of the affairs of the cities, should be written down in front of each of you, in the hand of both the said munshis [scribes] and by the Persian-writing … [officials], each in a separate book. Requests should be made in the proper and necessary manner to the Sultan of Turkey and the King of France, for obtaining artisans expert in the manufacture of muskets, guns, clocks, glass, mirrors, chinaware, and cannon-balls, and for such other craftsmen as may be there. You should engage [and bring back with you] such numerous artisans. Apart from them, you should give advances to [other] artisans of the said categories, obtaining from them bonds of agreement to come to this Court, which you should bring with you. …

If any of the three said Rulers enquire as to what goods are deemed better and may be acceptable as presents in your country, you should answer that by the Grace of God everything is available there, but better craftsmen and gifts of muskets and guns, glass, clocks, chinaware, are in demand, and may be given to us to be carried home. …

In that country [Turkey], there is plenty of stone-coal. The stone-coal may be obtained free or at a price in exchange for the nilam stone and sand, which is put aboard ships as ballast; and the stone-coal should be put aboard ships at the time of your return.

As many Turks and Mughal soldiers as may be available should be engaged by making advances of Rupees 10 to 11 to the soldiers per head, and Rupees 50 to 60 to their captains per head, and they be sent with Muhammad Hanif so that he may bring them to this Court. …

Copy of the Letter of Authority for Concluding a Treaty with the King of France . By the will of God, authority is hereby given in regard to the obtaining and giving of written agreement, comprising five clauses, from and to the King of France, as detailed below, so that till the Sun and Moon endure, the bond of friendship and unity between this Government and the King of France should prosper day by day.

Clause I: To wage war against the English, agreement is made that until the taking of the fort of Madras along with the country of Carnatic, the other ports and Bombay and Bengal, together with its dependencies, the two [contracting] rulers will not make peace with the English. If this matter prolongs for ten years, peace should still not be concluded, however much during this period the English should show submissiveness and entreaty, and give satisfactory assurance of acceptance of terms. Peace with them should not be made until the said forts and places are (actually) taken over.

Clause II: Ten thousand Europeans [hat-wearers’] with war-tried high commanders should be dispatched [from France]. If they arrive at Pondicherry or Calicut or elsewhere in any part of the country of this Government, then, after having assisted them to land, this Government would provide them oxen for drawing artillery pieces and grain for food, according to need, together with tents, gun-powder, and cannon balls.

Clause III: The French Commanders, with their army, should be under the authority of this Government in all matters of war strategy, march and halt. If anyone commits an offence, he shall be punished in justice according to his offence. The servants of this Government and the French would be under one authority, and must recognize the same, single master.

Clause IV: After the conquest of the entire country of Carnatic and the fort of Madras, whatever is attached of old as jagir [small territory] to the fort of Pondicherry, that, together with the port of Madras and the country attached to it of old, and, in addition, other ports on the sea-coast of that side, should be given over to the French Commander for the King of France. The fort of Trichinapalli, Thanjavur, etc., in the country of Carnatic, which has been in the possession of Muslims from olden days, would be given over to the custody of the servants of this Government. …

Twelve eunuchs of nine or ten years, of the Abyssinian race or any other, should be purchased and brought back. In case they are available in Jedda or (elsewhere) on the way, they should be bought and sent to Muhammad Hanif, for him to send them to this Court. Whatever expenditure is incurred in the purchase of the said eunuchs, should be paid out of the Government money.

[The Diplomatic Vision of Tipu Sultan: Briefs for Embassies to Turkey and France, 1785–8, in State and Diplomacy Under Tipu Sultan: Documents and Essays, ed. Irfan Habib (New Delhi: Tulika Books, 2001), 29, 32, 33–35.]

THE INFLUENCE OF COMMERCE

The second trend throughout the century is the emergence to new positions of influence of various previously subordinate groups in different regions of India. These included zamindars, or landlords, men of rank and property with roots in the countryside who assumed functions of state power, especially collection of taxes for the Mughals and the creation of private armies as central authority weakened. Among Hindu merchants, the wealthy family known as the Jagat Seths, who had originated in Rajasthan, came to Bengal in the eighteenth century and made a fortune in the silk trade; as bankers to the nawab they also became important in political life. Such merchants were essential elements in the East India Company’s establishment in Bengal. Decentralization of political power meant increased economic and political power for merchants and bankers in most of the successor states, in and beyond Bengal.

BANKERS AND TRADERS: THE POWERS BEHIND THE THRONES

In contrast to Mysore, where Tipu Sultan tried to keep trade and commerce under strict control, in other territories bankers and merchants were able to operate fairly independently. They were especially important in Bengal, in financial dealings with the nawabs,