WAS THE THIRD BATTLE OF PANIPAT

A TIPPING POINT IN INDIAN HISTORY?

Murad Ali Baig

The Third Battle of Panipat in January 1761 was the longest and bloodiest battle in Indian history. A new Maratha army with modern French canons, superior horses and modern training to fight the European way with artillery and drilled infantry pursued some 70,000 battle hardened Afghan cavalry for over ten weeks all over the northern plains. The ravaging armies stripped the land of all food, fodder, fuel and valuables with the result that the final battle was really determined by the weakness from starvation suffered both by the opposing soldiers and their horses.

The casualties during the final battle on 14 January 1761 were appalling. The Marathas and Afghans, fighting valiantly, each lost about 40,000 soldiers on the battlefield and another 40,000 Marathas were slaughtered after the defeat became a rout. Unknown numbers of civilians and draught bullocks also perished. Unlike most battles in India both adversaries fought staunchly till the very end instead of turning away when they saw the prospects of victory diminishing. Both armies were so depleted after the titanic battle that the exhausted Afghan victors, knowing that there was nothing left in India to plunder, meekly returned to their homeland supporting as many wounded as had died in battle. They never invaded India again. Their enemies the Marathas also limped back to their homeland to never threaten north India again. The tattered remains of the once great Mughal Empire had become so depleted that it was never again able to forge a nation even if a notional Mughal empire survived for nearly another century. The vassal states were so scattered that the British got easy opportunities to pick them off one by one to establish their Indian Empire.

The great Maratha army led by the redoubtable Sadashiv Rao Bhao fought with great skill, courage and admirable determination. His most outstanding general was Ibrahim Khan Gardi who commanded the Maratha artillery and 5000 infantry. His force had been trained by Charles de Bussy while in the service of the Nizam of Hyderabad but he later became a fiercely loyal Maratha commander. Maratha feudatory chiefs like Mahadji Holkar and Jankoji Scindhia however slipped away from the battle when the tide of combat began to turn leaving the Bhau and Gardi to battle it out at the forefront of the action. The bodies of the Bhau and some other Maratha heroes was discovered among heaps of dead the following day and Abdali had the good grace to honor his brave adversaries and send the bodies back to the Marathas for a proper cremation. They were not so kind to Ibrahim Khan Gardi who had been seriously wounded. Considering him a traitor he was allowed to die without proper treatment for his wounds.  

Bhau, veteran of several wars in the Deccan, was nephew of the Peshwa and was like him a tall and fair Saraswat Brahmin. He was greatly respected as a man of religious devotion, austere habits, discipline, authority and great physical fitness. His daily regimen included doing 1200 Suryapranam exercises. Many villages in Haryana believe that Bhau survived and revere his memory to this day. Bhau fought for the Maratha nation that Shivaji had founded and had no interest in forging a Hindu kingdom. This is clear from his own words… “We are concerned with preserving the monarchy of the Chagatai (Mughal) dynasty…”

His adversary Abdali, who founded the Durrani empire, had been a devoted officer of the Persian ruler Nadir Shah and had raided India seven times for plunder. An Indian noble who saw him after Nadir Shah pillaged Delhi said that he saw in him the bearing of a king. A number of Afghan clans settled earlier in the area between Saharanpur and Bareilly rallied to the Afghan cause and helped Abdali with men and materials. The Marathas eventually took up position outside the town of Panipat leaving the Afghans free to sweep the surrounding area of all food, fuel and fodder. The Marathas added to their own deprivation because the raj jyotshi, or court astrologer, said that it was inauspicious to attack before the `Makar Sankranti’ or winter solstice. Only meat from starving bullocks and horses was plentiful but most Marathas were vegetarian. Thus after nearly two months of self inflicted siege the weakened Maratha soldiers and especially their horses sallied forth to fight the fateful battle.

Unlike the Bhau, Abdali did not position himself in the forefront of the battle but rode just behind the lead battalions to command the evolving conflict. The Afghans wore thick leather jackets unlike the Marathas who wore light chain mail on their shoulders and were described by the Afghans as… “barebacked warriors”. Clad in light cotton clothes suitable for the Deccan the Marathas also suffered greatly from the severe cold of winter.   

The Third Battle of Panipat was to be a tipping point in India’s history.

____________

BOX

First and Second battles of Panipat.

The nearly featureless flat plains between Delhi and Ambala was the watershed for several battles that were to shape India’s long history. Eighty kilometers north of Panipat was Kuukshetra where the mythical 18 day battle of the epic Mahabharata was believed to have been fought.

In April 1526 AD Babur invaded India from Kabul with a small force of 12,000 mounted archers and roundly defeated some 100,000 soldiers under Ibrahim Lodi to establish the great Mughal Empire. Babur was the first to use the Chinese invention of gunpowder in India. His row of 700 crude canons mounted on bullock carts were lashed together with the walls of Panipat on his right and the soggy banks of the Jumna River to his left. A skirmishing force led by his son Humayun engaged the Lodis and pretended to retreat enticing the Lodi army, led by some 200 elephants, into a trap. Babur waited till the enemy elephants and cavalry were funneled into a narrow front where they were greeted with a wall of flame. The elephants and horses panicked and fled back trampling the packed soldiers riding behind them. Babur then let loose his mounted archers whose famed Mongol bows wrought havoc among the confused enemy who turned and fled leaving Ibrahim Lodi and some 6000 dead on the killing field. The battle was over in a few hours and Babur’s small band of followers was to found the great Mughal Empire.

The second battle of Panipat in November 1556 really established the Mughal Empire. After Babur’s short reign of five years his son Humayun was driven from India by the Afghan chief Sher Shah Suri. Humayun’s son Akbar inherited the throne after Sher Shah’s death when he was only 13. He was challenged by a huge army of Hindu and Muslim chiefs led by an unlikely Hindu commander called Hemu. Though lame and unable to ride a horse Hemu was a great strategist and victor of 22 battles. He had defeated the Mughals at Agra and Delhi and had a huge force including thousands of elephants facing a small Mughal army. After a chance arrow hit Hemu in the eye and he fell unconscious his huge army fled in dismay. Akbar then ruled for 49 years and was able to really establish the Mughal Empire.  

A chapter for my next book ... 80 More Questions to Understand India... history, mythology and religion.

OUR FARMER FRIENDS

Our rural friends account for more than half of India's population but are a decisive factor in India's politics. As most of us city slickers do not understand the rural mind we find ourselves constantly confused by rural thinking that is so much a part of Indian politics.

The new government has focussed on rural India as a high priority area. The former deputy prime minister. Mr. Devi Lal, was quite correct in stating that India's urban elite do not understand rural India and its problems. Policy makers, bureaucrats, journalists intellectuals and others may have responded by trying to address themselves to this subject, but many of them have hazy or romantic ideas about the real aspirations of our rural masses.

Most city folk imagine the farmer to be some kind of noble savage. Under his grubby exterior… a heart of gold. He is popularly visualised as simple, humble, downtrodden, exploited, stupid, illiterate, though a hard-working fellow, who valiantly struggles against the awesome odds of erratic rains, infertile soils, exploitation by tyrannical landlords and heartless authorities.

Those who have interacted with the farmer, however, know that he can both be noble and savage. He may courageously offer his life for his landlord but also unhesitatingly steal half his crop. He will genuinely rejoice at his landlord's daughter's wedding or weep at his funeral but, will with equal sincerity steal whatever he feels the landlord does not actually need.

His attitude to the government is an extension of his attitude to his landlord. Historically, the government has always been a super landlord. Greek, Mughal, British or Hindu, rulers have all been equally distant foreign entities who ultimately owned their lands through many layers of officials who were regarded both as sources as well as objects of exploitation.

When banks first went into rural credit, the farmers found them easy game and recoveries were disastrous. It was only later when the bank agents established personal bonds and pleaded that their own jobs were at risk that the same poor farmers demonstrated their sense of honour and real financial strength. Farmers have taken full advantage of the recent populist rural policies and rural credit is in a shambles today.

The second characteristic of farmers is that they are the world's greatest complainers. Talk to any farmer, standing beside a bumper crop and you will have to listen to a long tale of sorrow. The problems with labour, insects, fungus, hail and rain or the lack of it and everything under the sun. Farming is a risky business especially in India's climate with its unpredictable floods and droughts. Therefore the farmer cannot be blamed for fearing the evil eye if he speaks too soon.

Self-confidence and pride beneath the humility is common in farmers. The same landless labourer who speaks of his sorrows, if encouraged, will show an almost arrogant disregard for his land lord, the local authorities or even for the opportunities of more income from more work. Humility diminishes inversely with rising caste hierarchy. They are humble whenever in a disadvantageous position, but arrogant when in a position of strength.

Despite their illiteracy, farmers are remarkably educated about the factors that affect their lives. It suits them to pretend to be ignorant fools till they have lulled visiting researchers, officials of other city slickers to reveal whether they have anything to offer or exploit. Then their crafty commonsense backed with a surprising fund of knowledge appears.

They have learned complex and difficult subjects like their caste system, religious mythology, politics and agriculture mostly through a non-formal system of learning. Yet they can quickly understand knowledge about tractors, trucks, pumps, videos and television sets. Their sense for finance is sharp and they understand the principles of diminishing marginal returns and opportunity costs better than their urban cousins. Though illiterate they are not uneducated. By contrast, it is in our cities that we find literates who are uneducated.

There are, however, limited horizons to a farmer's vision. India's cane lobby agitated for and gained a near doubling of cane prices this year. However, only 3% of cultivators grow cane so 97% farmers had to pay more for their gur and sugar. The generous prices for wheat and rice benefited those in the irrigated areas but hurt 70% farmers in the poorer hill and dryland areas. Farmers are not, therefore the best judges of all farmer’s interests in matters of legislation, planning or policy.

Rural poverty has become India's greatest national asset. Politicians and administrators encourage cultivators and promote their tales of woe. A chain of begging bowls stretches from the villages to the blocks, to the districts, to the state capitals, to the centre and then to the World Bank or other foreign benefactors. The sorrows are exaggerated at each stage, just as the benefits are siphoned off at each stage. No one actually wants to break this chain of bounty by abolishing poverty.

Ninety-two million cultivators and their households account for just over half the rural population but their surplus supports 55 million agricultural workers and almost as many millions in local crafts, trades and services. This wealth accounts for nearly half of India's national product, and the farmer's purchasing power is the main engine for industrial growth. The productivity of land is however low. Seventy eight per cent of India's cultivators are small with less than two hectares but they only control 28% of the land. In fact, their actual hold is much less. India may be a land of small farmers but it is not a land of small farms. Huge holdings in big farms survive despite land ceiling laws.

The powerful lobby of big farmers dominates politics at the centre and in the states and control the local administration in the districts. In the name of the poor farmers, they have succeeded in getting huge grants and subsidies which are paid for by the overtaxed urban sectors. Whoever said farmers were simple?

Murad Ali Baig

The Times of India 1991

EXCELLENT REVIEW IN TRIBUNE CHANDIGARH

Sunday November 29, 2015

Kuldip Singh Dhir

The best thing about history is that it can serve as an early warning system. History revisited in Ocean of Cobras has definitely some lessons to share, for it draws our attention to the gory details of an epic battle for secular India. It views the conflict between Dara and Aurangzeb as not one for the throne but between two ideologies. Dara’s love for all religions and secular thinking are poised against Aurangzeb’s staunch Islamic beliefs. Hindus and Muslims have lived together for centuries with little conflict, until alienated by Aurangzeb’s unyielding orthodox beliefs, resulting in widening antagonism in succeeding years. 

Muslim and Hindu fundamentalists will find Dara’s exploration of their core philosophies hard to deny. Though Aurangzeb managed to eliminate all his rivals to rule the mighty Mughal Empire, yet he failed miserably in stopping its relentless slide into ruin. Although it staggered on for another 150 years, it had shattered in body and spirit by the time he died.

Aurangzeb was otherwise a remarkable ruler, intelligent planner, shrewd guide, and wasn’t attracted towards vice, luxury or sloth. A liberal secular empire assiduously built by Akbar was destroyed by his own grandson who mutilated this character with his inflexible bigotry. Murad Ali Baig has portrayed all this in an unputdownable novel. To add drama to dry historical account and transform it into fiction, the novelist has deftly used some literary devices. Mubarak Ali, a fictional eunuch in the imperial Zenana, known to all the princes and princesses, is the narrator of the story. The tools of astrological predictions, soothsayers and omens which was so common in medieval India, have been used to provide psychological justification for behavioural prejudices. Intimate description of moments of romance and desperate yearning make the reader flip pages.

Except for certain brief flashbacks, the narrative moves almost as a whole in a linear manner from 1630 AD and ends with the execution of Dara in 1659 AD. The epilogue takes it further to make the curious readers aware of the fate of all main historical characters in next 50 years, which reads more like history than a novel. The storyline starts with young prince Aurangzeb slipping a small frog down the back of his sister Roshanara’s dress, earning his father’s wrath. Juxtaposed with it is Dara’s similar prank of smearing honey inside Aurangzeb’s cap, which attracts an army of tiny ants making him leap about in frenzy. Unlike Aurangzeb, Dara is not reprimanded. Ordinary events like these have been presented that sow the seeds of distrust, bitterness, prejudice in the psyche of various members of the royal family. 

Kind and merciful Dara’s lofty ideas about unity of all religions and sly and ambitious Aurangzeb’s inflexible orthodoxy are pitted against each other. These leitmotifs take us deeper and deeper into the mysterious ocean of cobras, which is a metaphor for Aurangzeb and his accomplices. Incidentally, the metaphor and the amazing event related to it have been recorded in Storia do Mogor written by Victorian gunner Nicclao Manucci, who served with Dara and the imperial forces in 17th century.

Training and growth of princes, their military expeditions, Deccan diversion, death of Mumtaz, illness of Shah Jahan and the battles for the throne are the foci around which the narrative revolves. This bloody struggle for empire cost more than two lakh deaths in battles at Dharmat, Bahadurpur, Samugarh, Khajua and Deorai. Young men of an entire generation perished in these futile battles. The ruthless killing of Dara is heart wrenching. The novel takes the reader through royal palace into the harem, to royal hunts and to the kingdoms of rivals and rulers. 

Mubarak Ali, the narrator, fights in the armies of rival princes and describes the bloody battles. His adventures take the reader from the limpid lakes of Kashmir to the deserts of Sindh and the lush forests of Central India. 

This is a highly readable and informative tale of adventures, reckless courage, cunning and tender romance, and heart wrenching tragedy, in which fundamentalism vanquished the secular voice. The victory, however, ultimately spelt ruin not only for the victorious ruler, also for his co-religionists and there lies a lesson for us all.