 Hello and welcome to NewsClick. You are watching Present, Past and the Future. Indian cinema rarely treats historical characters in a balanced manner. Either they are excessively valorized or depicted as villainous. Often, socio-political framework of the present is superimposed on the past. Political players do this all the time. After all, forces of populist nationalism draw strength from falsely constructed notions of the past. History, it is said, can be slave to anyone. Since the film industry is beginning, filmmakers have repeatedly turned to either biopics of past rulers or on real or imaginary romances. In recent years, historical films generated huge controversy. We remember the protests preceding the release of Padmavat. Even the film's title was altered. The recent film Panipat has also has its shares of controversy and has been yanked of theatres in Rajasthan. It has angered the Jat community for its depiction of Raja Surajmal as a person who betrayed the Marathas at a critical moment. The film also angered the government of Afghanistan for the unidimensional portrayal of Ahmad Shah Abdali. The same was in the case of Alauddin Khilji in Padmavat. Filmmakers have really speaking no regard for history. The past is simply a yarn they can spin to register profits. There is no denying that the third battle of Panipat was one of the most important events of the 18th century. The last of the epic battles near Panipat, it took place during a period of transition. The Mughal Empire had gone into a tailspin by then. The defeat of the Marathas in this battle in a way hastened the establishment of British hegemony. Much of the controversy surrounding the film stems from inadequate understanding among people regarding who fought whom and what was the nature of alliances. Were Marathas fighting for the idea of Hindustan, whenever enthusiasm needed to be bolstered, did their troops motivate themselves with the battle cry of Harhar Mahadev? Was the Maratha expansion in the north and west a sign of Hindu assertion to herald the end of Muslim India? Answers to these questions and several more provide clues to unravel the process of Indian nation building. I have with me Tanuja Kothial who teaches history in Ambedkar University. Among other courses she teaches a very interesting course, Understanding the Past, Myths, Epics, Chronicles and History. There certainly is a lot of these in the popular understanding of the final battle of Panipat. Welcome to this program Tanuja. Let me begin by trying to understand the backdrop of the third battle of Panipat. You have a situation what I was telling that the Mughal are going into tailspin. You have the rise of Maratha power and the battle is being fought at Panipat which is far away from the seat of power of the Marathas which is in Pune and Abdali there in Afghanistan. Can't understand this theater. So what we need to understand about Panipat or the battle of Panipat is that it's happening at a time which is very very complex. The Mughal empire is disintegrating. We have a series of emperors coming one after the other with actually very little power. It is shrunk in terms of the territory but it is also shrunk in terms of the kind of influence that exerted on people who held power in different parts of the empire. So there's Rajputs who are regaining their strength after the decline of the Mughal empire. Then you have Jats who have risen. There are various other factions that have come up. There are Marathas in Deccan who come up because of the kind of conflict there is that exists between the Mughal emperors as well as the Dakinisultans in an earlier period. So Marathas are a result of that polity. The rise of Marathas is a result of that polity and increasingly what happens is that different factions including the Mughal emperors begin to depend upon militarily powerful factions to help them control the Northern India as well as have power. So Mughal emperors do not have their own military power anymore and they begin to depend upon one of them is of course Marathas but also on the Afghans also on Rajputs and different factions. So it is a time when different factions are actually fighting to gain more power to exert more control on the Mughal emperors to become powerful by themselves and they all come together in this period. So Marathas basically when they begin to expand northwards there are some areas where they establish their own kingdoms. So Malwa is one so as we know Indore, Baroda, Gwalior. So these are the kingdoms that they established later on but then there are some areas in Rajasthan and in Gujarat where they basically work with the local people. They work basically they have they what they establish is a tributary state. So they collect taxes. They collect taxes, the Chauth and the Sardeshpati. So they collect taxes and in return basically they intervene wherever there is a conflict. So with the decline of the Mughal empire we find that there is a lot of internecine power struggle that takes place for instance among the Rajputs. So Boondi, Miwad, Marwad these are the important areas where actually Marathas intervene. Whenever there is a conflict the Rajputs either call the Afghans or the Marathas to intervene on behalf of the claimant. So one claimant will call Afghans the other will call Marathas and that's how basically Marathas begin expanding northwards. On the other hand after Nadrisha's invasion, Abdali sees himself as the descendant or as a claimant of whatever Nadrisha controlled. So he wants to control Punjab which he sees as his own legacy and that is how basically different factions including people like Safdar Jang and all who are or Najeeb Khan who are entrenched into Mughal politics they all come together in this arena and then they start plotting against one each other. You know the way I was actually talking about I obviously have seen the film. Now what struck me is about the film is that they are presenting the film the Marathas for coming and actually all the way and coming and fighting with the forces of Abdali is because they want to integrate and knit India. They also look at things from a very modern political vocabulary. Abdali is referred to as a Ghuspetia. This is something which is of very recent origin in the political sphere you know this entire thing of an illegal immigrant Ghuspetia that is what is called but it is used in this case. Now the portrayal of how what the Marathas trying to understand from you as a historian you know that what was the basic nature of the Maratha you know confederation or you know the empire and how was it different from the Mughals you know that were they actually driven by this idea of making a Mahan Bharat the Hindu Patpadasi as later on Savarkar you know tried to use. See one thing is that history writing or history as you know depicted by cinema as we are seeing is not really about past it is how we want to see the past through the eyes of the present. Because it helps us give strength in the present. Exactly because that's how we imagine. So we want to imagine the continuity to the idea of the Hindu rastra into the past that we are trying to build or trying to see. So we know the fact that Shivaji had very important Muslims. Not just that that Shivaji is a part of the way in which Mughal polity is rising in Deccan. Exactly. He is a result of that. He is a result of that. Right. And Marathas at that point of time very frankly. That reality will not be convenient to a certain political narrative now. That reality will be difficult and it's a nuanced reality. It's there are no heroes or villains. It's not black and white. It's not black and white. There are no heroes or villains. There are people who are fighting. There are shifting alliances very frankly and if we look into histories of different parts of India whether it is Rajputana or whether it is Odisha or Bengal. Actually you get a very very complex picture of the Maratha presence in that. Marathas are seen as predatory fighters. So Bargi is for instance in Odisha and Bengal is a very very villainous figure. In we have I have for instance seen various exchanges around Rajput Maratha conflicts where there is this very serious conflict happening because Marathas are you know they just raid and they collect taxes without without sort of any kind of mercy or anything else. So there's a complex picture that you have of how Marathas are themselves seen in the 18th century. For us to actually think about Marathas as somebody who carries this idea the germ of this idea of a Hindu nation or you know forget the Hindu nation the idea of basically ending of how we see India today. You know that there is rule exactly 1200 years of 1200 years of Muslim rule but also like what we today see as India as if there was an idea that is something that Shivaji imagined. So was it imagined or not? Not really. Not really. At that point of time very frankly as I say people are working through a series of alliances where they ally with various kinds of people. And they keep on changing. They keep on these alliances are shifting. These are different kinds of alliances. So Suraj Mal for instance is alliance with Marathas earlier but later on he's shifting an alliance and that's. Why does he do it? See at that point of time one is of course the Marathas actually do not have much sympathy in northern India at this point of time. Because as you said predatory. Because of the predatory nature of the Maratha polity. They're not actually coming here to do anything to this land. No exactly. Basically they have a home there and they're strengthening their home. They basically collect tribute and they intervene as mercenary forces whenever it is required and at that point of time as I say everybody is trying to. So it's a different form of plunder. It's a different form of plunder. Instead of taking it in one go you're taking it ensuring a creating a system by which you get annual returns. Returns and at that point of time everybody is basically looking out for what works best for them. So Suraj Mal is looking out for what works best for him. And at that point when he decides to change jump ship it's no longer helping if he continues to be with the Marathas. Exactly. Because he realizes that they are not going to win this battle and he wants to be on the side of the victor. He's trying to establish his own kingdom. He's trying to establish his own territory. So from his perspective, from his point of view it is a perfectly logical and a justified step that he is taking. So this idea that everybody is fighting for India and therefore if Suraj Mal did not help out Marathas at that point of time he was somehow betraying the idea of India is something that you would call anachronism in history. It does not work like that. You do not see what is there today in the time that has gone by. Because the time that has gone by has its own logic. The way things work at that point of time are very very different. You know there is the very interesting narratives in today's Maharashtra that post the third Battle of Panipat. For the Marathas it was a century of gloom that it was possibly the most humiliating experience in their history and it took them a lot of reinvention of the past. To be able to present it as so that they were not really humiliated but they actually gave a very valourous account of themselves in the battle. They got outwitted because of the sheer brutality of Abdali. So instead of saying that we lost because of our own inability but then saying that we lost because the other person had no qualms and no moral value while getting into a battle and violating various norms. Now obviously they were outnumbered. They definitely had inferior military technology. But you know as a historian who studied also the military thing, how do you look at that? What was the real reason for the Marathas suffering such a humiliating defeat? See the Afghan army was far better organised. They were far more organised in terms of what kind of strategy were they going to use? What kind of say for instance the use of cannons, the use of horses, placing and all other kinds of things. So it is a in the film like the show you know that while the Marathas also have cannons but the Afghans are using mounted cannons on camelback and that gives them a certain advantage. They have a military in terms of military technique they have an edge and that edge helps them. Also it is also the way in which alliances are forced. Ultimately Marathas are isolated and that isolation leads to the defeat of Marathas. In the defeat of Marathas how does it start changing the political topography of North India and the rest of India? Also how does it benefit the advent of the British? We know that the battle of Placie has happened just four years prior to that. So they are already in the position of being an ascendant force. See very frankly it is not immediately after the battle of Panipat that the Maratha influence starts declining. They continue for another 50 years at least. 50 years till almost like 1790s. Marathas are still very very influential. They are still very very powerful and they have established their own so whether the Holkers or whether the Sindhiyas or the Gaikwads have actually become very very powerful kingdoms at this point of time. They are developed. But they are small kingdoms. They are small kingdoms. Owing allegiance to Pune. Owing allegiance to Pune. Owing allegiance to Pune but also these are also again shifting allegiances. So not necessarily they are not all bowing to the Peshwas all the time. They are not always going to the Peshwas. They are becoming and there is a lot of internal politics among the Marathas that comes up. So it is the great of what we call in today's jargon regional autonomy. Regional autonomy and what we begin to see actually is so the the kind of consolidated Maratha power that we are talking about prior to the battle of Panipat that begins to decline. The British by this point of time as you 1765 is when Shah Alam gives away the the Diwani rights of Bengal, Bihar and Odisha. So that's a very very powerful moment in 1765. In fact on the other hand we see the Shah Alam as to be escorted from Allahabad to Delhi under the Maratha protection. So but the coming of the British then what means is that British become another power to whom different factions can then appeal for help and protection. So for instance in Rajputana what we find is that very often instead of I mean Rajput king see it in a way that we are paying an indemnity to Marathas we can pay to the British as well. So by 1800 and 12 between 1800 and 12 and 18 subsidiary alliances have been has been signed between the Rajputs and the British. So basically British begin to replace the Marathas in a large way by the beginning of the 19th century. So Marathas by the beginning of the 19th century. You would say that at some point had begun to replace the Mughals at some point. At some point yes. So we can say that it was actually Mughals to the Marathas because of disintegration. Marathas to the British because of the defeat at Panipat. See it's I wouldn't there isn't a direct correlation that just because Marathas. Not a cause and effect. Yeah it's not a cause and effect. British are rising because of their own reasons. They are making their own alliances. They are making their own the military. They are smarter. They are smarter. They are militarily superior. They are organizing in a much more different way and a lot of kingdoms. They also possibly have a greater bigger plan you know of a clear idea of what they want to do in the future. Very much and therefore a lot of kingdoms in northern India begin to see British as a force that they can make an alliance with. Greater benefit to be aligned with them than with the Marathas. Than with the Marathas and so we see increasingly that Maratha kingdoms become isolated kingdoms here and there. So you have the you have the Gaikwads, you have the Holkers, you have the Sindhiyas and then of course you have the Peshwai in Pune. But the kind of consolidated force that they were seen as earlier in the later half of the 80th century. But what about kingdoms like the kingdom of Awad you know for instance you know which plays a very important role in Panipat by siding with Shujaudala sides with Abdali and you know we also say that in the rise of the British Awad plays a very important role especially with the annexation of Awad in the 19th century. What happens in what we call you know the Dua part of northern India? See increasingly what's happening is that the by one way or the other by one means or the other this is before the British decide not to fight the princely states. So at that point of time they are still engaging in battles. They are still trying to either purchase Amindaris or get into alliances through which they can control greater areas and increasingly we see whether so basically the whole point like around Awad is that whole idea of circling Awad somehow. You know so you know Bengal, Bihar and Orissa go on the one hand yes and you have on the other hand you have Delhi right and in between is Awad. So Awad basically gets circled by the British eventually and by 1857 by claiming mismanagement in all they have taken over Awad like so many others. Awad is left with no other option. Awad is left with no other option yes. But just to yeah. You know also you know at least in a notional way the Mughals continue for another century after that. You know what happens to the space which Mughals control you know does it really get divided up into these small kingdoms which you're talking about or are there is there any real kind of influences the Mughals have thereafter. No so the thing is that Mughals continue to have not just a nominal but a very strong cultural influence. See I mean Mughals do not get replaced there is the ultimately the emperor is the Mughal emperor right. Even in 1857. Even in 1857 it is the Mughal emperor. So he remains the emotional bachha of Hindustan whatever. He continues and. So the idea of Hindustan. Not just that you know very powerful kingdoms are still issuing for months in the name. Why is this the case though they have no power. See I would say that basically because there are too many claimants at this point of time there are two the factions are very powerful factions are actually balanced against each other and in that the balance is maintained by having a nominal Mughal emperor there. Could it also be because of the symbolic value of. Very much the very much so therefore. They are being considered to be you know the citadel of this part of northern India at least. It's not just Delhi but it's the kind of legitimacy that the Mughal emperor claims the Mughal dynasty claims. It has been there for such a long time from the. Also because it's very inclusive in nature. See the the Mughal polity actually rests on including various factions. So whether it is Rajputs and even to a certain extent Marathas actually get included into the framework of the Mughal idea. Various kingdoms even whether we are talking about jarts they all get included into it. And Mughals continue to command legitimacy to the extent that very powerful kingdoms are still referring to the Mughal emperor. Even if it is nominally the reference to the Mughal empire is still there till 1857. You know the company the the the company is molding itself on the idea of the Mughal emperor. Of replacing the Mughal emperor. Not any of the other. No none. They're too small. They're too small. So it's only the the idea of actually ruling India comes from the seat of Delhi. If we are talking about an Indian empire. If we are talking about like somebody who actually represents the idea of India it is the Mughals at that point of time. Right. It's not anybody else that reference remains the company Bahadur is quick to understand this become the British are very quick to understand this and British have become too formidable a force by 1850s for anybody to actually you know think of actually having a I mean of course there is the revolt but that revolt is also something that the British managed to crush in the 1857 and that is the end of the Mughal empire. The rest of the factors rest of the northern India and various parts of the Deccan actually get divided among various claimants various kingdoms that come up. There are some very powerful kingdoms like Awadh or Hyderabad or even the Rajput kingdoms become fairly powerful for a certain period of time not for very long but then of course I mean Mughal then the British actually imagine different kinds of politics for you know you teach as a last question you know you teach your students you know so if you have to when you talk about this period and the what Panipat actually did you know yeah you know very quick how do you summarize that what it led to within India. What I mean very frankly if I were to think about that Panipat doesn't have any immediate impact on like there's no sudden shift that's happening alliances continue in the way that it's not like from day to night or night today. So I would say that a lot of these landmarks that we'll try to think about whether it is the battle of Panipat or whether it is the battle of Haldighati. It's not actually a page turner in today's terms. It is imagined as a page turner at a much later time. It is when we start thinking about these events as momentous as something that caused an immediate shift in polity we're thinking about it from the perspective of where we are today at that point of time very frankly Maratha's continue to be very powerful at least another 50 years Abdaali of course is defeated but that doesn't mean that the Afghan Kingdoms go away. The Afghan Kingdoms continue. The six rise. Six rise but then so many other factors rise. So it doesn't like it at a much later period the Marathas are replaced by the British. Like many other points in history it is definitely a transformative. It's a transformative moment but that transformation is something that is slow that happens cumulatively at a later time. When we look back in the past we can say out of the 10 transformative events which are happening around the same time this was possibly slightly more important or maybe very much more important than the others. If we were to think in terms of the three battles of Panipat yes it is the most important one but if we were to actually place importance on these events that we like to think of the momentous events they actually lead to. Fortunately a lot of history these days is actually red or taut as event related and personality based. Thank you for coming and joining me on this program to shed very valuable light on the final battle of Panipat. Thank you very much. Revisiting the past is inevitable in India given how it influences current perceptions and prejudices. It is thereby necessary to ensure that the reading of the past is not done according to current political tastes. In a limited way we keep trying to provide balance in the discourse to prevent the past from being distorted. I hope we have succeeded in this once again. Thank you for having watched this.