INDIAN INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH INTO TRUE HISTORY

Newsletter 17 of 16 June 1988

1. GENERAL

Mr Godbole has now completed part III of his article "Around London in search of Indian Revolutionaries of 1906-1910". He intends to write part IV, after which the whole of the article would be edited and hopefully a book would be published one day. A video and a set of slides and photographs are required. In February '88 Mr Godbole went to the Newspaper Library in Collindale, London NW9. He noted the following:

(A) Most important papers like The Times are microfilmed. Issues of little used papers like the Sunday Chronicle are still available in the original form.

(B) A very important source of information is the annual indices of the TIMES. These are very well prepared from the year 1907 onwards, the earlier ones prepared by Mr Palmer are bit difficult to follow. There is extensive information under India - unrest. One is surprised by the minute details. For every subject we find date (of Times issue) page number and column in which the information would be found.

(C) Savarkar’s famous book "Indian War of Independence 1857" was proscribed by Government of India (Times 11 Aug. 1909 p. 14) but the British Government does not seem to have proscribed it. There is no such official order. It is therefore surprising that the British Museum Library does not have a copy of the 1909 edition. Mr Sonpatki discovered that the School of Oriental and African Studies does have a copy. But when Mr Godbole tried he found that copy missing from the shelf. The Librarian has promised to investigate.

(D) Udham Singh shot and killed Sir Michael Odwyer, Governor of Punjab at the time of Jalianwala Bagh Massacre. But at the same time he seems to have also wounded Lord Zetland (Secretary of State for India) Lord Lamington (former Governor of Bombay) and Sir Louis Dane. Surprisingly enough the jury took one and a half hour to reach a verdict. The prisoner on being found guilty of murder produced a bundle of papers from his pocket and gave an address which the Judge directed should not be reported in the Press (Times 6 June 1940 p. 4 p. 7) Later we find, the execution of Udham Singh has been fixed to take place at Pentonville Prison on June 25.

(Times 15 June 1940 p. 3 column d. Note - on the same day German Army entered Paris). But for some reason the execution was postponed and Udham Singh finally went to the gallows on 31 July 1940. His death certificate obtained by Mr Sonpatki makes this quite clear. It however does not give his address.

(E) Madanlal Dhingra, after his execution, was buried in the grounds of Pentonville Prison. (Daily News 18 August 1909 p. 7 col. b). His body was exhumed in the presence of Mr Natwarsingh, acting Indian High Commissioner and brought to Delhi Airport on 13 December 1976. Mr Sonpatki got a letter of confirmation from the Home Office.

(F) The infamous blackhole of Calcutta.

The original monument disappeared through neglect early in the 19^th century. Present one placed in front of Calcutta Collectorate by Lord Curzon in 1902. A tablet inside an arch at the Post Office indicates the actual site of the Blackhole.. As this was a sore point, the European Community agreed that this monument should be removed; Fazl-ul-Huq announced today. (Times 24 July 1940 p. 5).

(G) Shyamji Krishnavarma’s monthly "The Indian Sociologist" was published from January 1905 to December 1914. Two issues were published in Paris, others in London , Of the 120 issues, the British Library has 13 issues missing.

(H) The paper "Justice" was published from 19 January 1884 to 22 January 1925. In the days of Savarkar (1906-1910) Mr Hyndman was the editor. He was sympathetic to the Indian cause. The paper was renamed The Social Democrat and ran from February 1925 to December 1933.

(I) Herald of Revolt was published by Guy Aldred, a sympathiser of Savarkar, from December 1910 to May 1914.

(J) In 1909 the British Government decided to give separate electorates to Muslims (Morley-Minto Reforms). No Indian leader saw any danger in this. But it seems that Phirozshah Mehta, as President of the Bombay Provincial Association, protested against this decision, to the Viceroy (Times 3 July 1909 p. 5 col a).

The Newspaper Library is thus a very valuable source of information.

2. NEWS AND CURRENT AFFAIRS

2.1 Aryan theory challenged

"The Independent" of 12 October 1987 carried a report on the front page, by David Keys. Under the heading "Research challenges theories of Aryan origin" he says - the entire basis of early European and Western Asian history is being challenged by a leading Soviet linguist and a top British archaeologist. Their reassessment of European origins is the most fundamental for at least a century.

Research in both countries is suggesting that the ancestors of modern Europeans and Western Asians arrived from what is now Turkey thousands of years earlier than had been thought.

The ideas, which threaten to revolutionise old world pre-history, are being developed independently by Professor Thomas Gamkrelidze, the director of Soviet Georgians Oriental Institute and Cambridge University’s Professor of Archaeology, Dr Colin Renfrew who later this month plans to publish his theories in Archaeology and Language - the Puzzle of Indo-European origins.

Indo-Europeans, perhaps better known as Aryans, have until new been regarded as having arrived in Western Europe only 3,000 to 4,000 years ago from the steppes of Western Russia. Professor Renfrew’s research, however, suggests that they arrived 8,500 years ago from Turkey.

The new approach - based primarily on cultural and linguistic evidence rather than genetic criteria - maintain that Indo-European language and technology spread by 20 miles a generation in the seventh millennium BC. It took around 1,500 years to move from Turkey to the Atlantic - via Greece, Yugoslavia and Southern Germany. The process was more of a slow trickle than the grand migration postulated by many pre-historians in the past.

Professor Renfrew believes this expansion was the result of the population growth caused by the development of fanning. Upturning all previous theories, he suggests that it was the Indo-Europeans who brought farming culture to Europe. The indigenous hunter-gatherers were either absorbed or forced westwards. He believes that, in Western Europe, the Basque language and the now-vanished Pictish language of Scotland are the sole remnants of the pre-Indo-European tongues.

The Indo-European advance from Turkey also moved east, perhaps reaching the Indian subcontinent by 6,000 B.C. according to Professor Renfrew, who destroyed it.

(NOTE - Now that the two white men have said it, the Aryan theory will be questioned).

2.2 Taj Mahal

2.2.1 In her popular programme "That’s Life" Eshter Rantzen repeated the usual story about Taj Mahal (BBC1, Sunday 6th March 1988, 10 p.m.). Mr Godbole promptly wrote her a letter.

2.2.2 Our friend Mr Satyanarayan of London has requested Mr Jayadev of Banglore that Mr Godbole’s book on Taj Mahal should be translated in Kannad and published in the monthly "Utthana" as a series. Dr Sen of Calcutta is getting the Bengali translation published in the monthly Bharat Varta.

2.2.3 Guardian of 15 May 1984 carried a news item. Under the heading "Taj Mahal is falling down", their reporter says - "...A new study by Indian and American experts has found deep cracks (in Taj Mahal). Pollution from a neighbouring oil refinery and 400 foundries is also damaging the monument.

The cracks - measuring between six and ten feet are believed to have been caused by subsidence on the banks of the Yamuna ... and by corrosion of the Iron clamps holding the marble slabs together...."

Despite repeated requests, our friends in India did not supply any details.

3. HOW OUR HISTORY GETS FAISEFTED OR DISTORTED EVEN TODAY

3.1 Tourist Guide to Pune (Poona)

Our friend Mukund Nawathe purchased some time ago Metropolitan Poona Guide by Mr S.M. Kanagali (6th edition 1981). As a matter of curiosity we browsed through it and were astonished by some of the information contained in it.

We must go back to A.D. 613. At this date we find Pune a small village. It consisted of about fifteen dwellings, two of which belonged to Brahmins and the rest to fishermen. (How many villages have fifteen dwellings? Pune is not on the sea coast. What were the fishermen doing there?) Six hundred years later (i.e. in 1213) we find that Allauddin Khilji invaded the city and looted it. (Where does the author get this information from? There is no record of Allauddin Khilji invading Pune) .... In the 17th century Pune was little more than a small village (and yet the author says that this small village which must have been much smaller three hundred years earlier, was invaded by Allauddin Khilji.)

Bajirao the first, Peshwa transferred the capital of the Maratha Empire for all practical purposes from Sahara to Pune in 1735. (False. It was Bajirao’ s son Nanasaheb who transferred the capital after 1740).

... .The defeat suffered by the Indians in Indian Mutiny of 1857 made it clear that armed insurrection was not the way to reach the goal. (After all these years the author still calls it the Indian Mutiny!)

Mangalwar Peth - This was formerly known as Shahistepura. There is a story connected with this name which is as follows: Emperor Aurangzeb sent his courtier Shahistekhan in 1662 (sent for what? for crushing Shivaji) When he came to Pune he founded this peth as his head-quarters. (How stupid! The locality already existed. Shaistakhan simply renamed it after him. There is no mention of Shivaji's daring attack in which Shaistakhan lost three fingers but escaped with life).

Under Shiralsheth, there is no mention of the great benevolence shown by him during a severe famine in Maharashtra. Without this merchant's help a large population would have starved to death.

P. 13. The Parasnath Temple - This is the principal God of the Jains who built this temple with the permission of the Peshwas. Peshwas originally took objection to the building of the temple but were persuaded to grant permission through the good offices of Shankaracharya who gave his consent for the same. (What nonsense! Hindus have never objected to even to Muslims building their mosques. Would they object to a Jain Temple?)

P.15. Budhwar Peth - This area was founded by Emperor Aurangzeb in 1690. It was then known as Mohiyabad. This peth was reorganised by Mr Khasgiwale in the reign of the elder Madhavrao Peshwa. He changed the name to that of Budhwar Peth. (Even Muslims do not write so stupidly. Our adversary, Setu Madhavrao Pagdi admits that Aurangzeb changed the name of Pune to Mohiyabad).

P. 21. The Darga of Sheikh-Salla -.In times gone by there were two temples at this place. They were called Punyeshwar and Narayaneshwar. In 1290 a Fakir named Hissa Mohiddin Kalal came from Delhi broke the idols in the temples and threw them into the river. He destroyed the temples and built a masjid on the site (in other words he converted the temples into mosques) Since then the place came to be known as Sheikh-Salla Darga.... There are two graves in the Darga. In the smaller of the two graves, Mohilul Muluk, the grandson of Aurangzeb is said to have been buried. (In other words the tomb is bogus).

P.23. Shaniwar Peth - This area was called Murjidabab during the regime of the Muslims. It is believed to have been founded in the 17th century. Bajirao Peshwa changed the name to Shaniwar Peth. (Where on earth does the author gets his information from? Even Muslims do not make such an absurd claim).

P.26/27. Khunya Murlidhar - The idol of the deity (Lord Vishnu) is beautiful and delicate. This is anecdote connected with this temple. It was one Mr Gadre who brought this beautiful idol. Nana Phadnavis learnt of this and thought that the image should be installed in the Belbag. So he requested Mr Gadre to give the idol to him. He tried to persuade him, but to no purpose. Nana then decided to bring the idol through the use of force and sent a cavalry force. They demanded the idol from Mr Gadre. But he refused. His refusal resulted into a clash between the forces of Nana and his own. In the ensuing fight quite a lot of combatants were wounded and many met their end. Since then this temple was known as Khunya Murlidhar

(Nothing can be more absurd. An idol is not considered a matter of envy or jealousy. Strict rules are laid down for selection of stone, carving and making an idol. Any priest would have refused to consecrate a temple with an idol obtained through foul means. True there had been bloodbath in the vicinity of this temple, but that fighting had nothing to do with the idol. The fight was over who should play music).

3.2 Moderates and Militants NOT Moderates and Extremists

Political agitation against the British Raj started in Maharashtra (Lokamanya Tilak was aptly called The Father of the Indian Unrest by Sir Valentine Chirol). The two factions were called maval (led first by Justice M.G. Ranade, later by Mr G.K. Gokhale) and jahal (led by Tilak). These two words should have been properly translated as Moderates and Militants. Unfortunately the term Moderates and Extremists was coined and once in use it is being used even today. For example refer to biographies of Tilak by Parvate and others. It is equally wrong to call the Militants as Nationalists. The Moderates were just as Nationalists as the Militants.

(Ref. Lokmanya Tilak by D. Keer 1969 pp.274 to 279, 283, 285, 286).

3.3 Tilak and the Vedokta Affair

In our Newsletter No. 9 of 16 February 1983 we have shown how the famous biographer Dhananjay Keer has done gross injustice to Lokmanya Tilak. He alleges that - Tilak supported the rights of the Brahmins who refused to perform worship with Vedic hymns at the palaces of Maharaja of Baroda and the Maharaja of Kolhapur because he said the Brahmins priests followed the commands of their religion. And according to that religion the non-Brahmins were not entitled to the right of performing their religious rites with Vedic hymns...(Lokamanya Tilak by D. Keer 1969 pp. 174/5).

G.R. Bhide a Brahmin of Kolhapur wrote a book entitled Lokmanya (Tilak) Chhatrapati (Shahu Maharaj) and the Vedokta Affair, in 1962. It has a forward by priest Khuperkar who was 22/23 years of age at the time of the affair and who knew Shahu Maharaj very well. The booklet has been reprinted by Balarao Savarkar in 1987. The important points are:-

In 1901 on his way to the palace one Narayan Bhat did say to a cart driver "A Brahmin need not take a bath before officiating religious ceremonies in the house of a Shudra (i.e. Shahu Maharaj)" For this arrogance he was literally kicked out by Shahu Maharaj. Other Brahmin Priests, far from sympathising with Narayan Bhat, were relieved that he was justly punished. They detested him as he was debauch. Once they had even requested that he should be banned from entering the Mahalaxmi Temple.

When Shahu Maharaj was adopted in the Kolhapur royal family in 1884 the Chief Priest Rajopadhye taught him the famous Gayantri Mantra. Shahu Maharaj also used to perform the famous Shravani rite every year. Khuperkar testifies to that. It is well known that the person performing this rite and who has been taught the Gayatri Mantra is entitled to Vedic rites. Neither Rajopadhye nor any other Brahmin had said that Shahu Maharaj was a shudra and not entitled to Vedic rites. In fact in the palace some rites were Vedic and some Puranic. Shahu Maharaj wanted all rites to be Vedic. Rajopadhye did not object to that. All that he said was that because there had been a lapse of some thirty to forty years Shahu Maharaj should perform a ceremony expressing regret for the lapse (prayaschitta ). That was all. And that was the bone of contention.

Tilak had made his attitude clear in his newspaper KESARI (29 October and

5 November 1901 and 20 May 1902). During his legal proceedings against Valentine Chirol in Bombay High Court, Bhaskarrao Jadhav (notorious Satyasamaji) and Professor Dongare acted as witnesses for Chirol. Dadasaheb Karandikar, Tilak’s lawyer placed the issues of KESARI (1901 to 1908) in front of them and asked - show me where Tilak had opposed Shahu Maharaja right to Vedic rites - Both the witnesses had to confess that Tilak never opposed Shahu Maharaja’s right to Vedic rites. But both had stated otherwise verbally and in writing! Professor Dongare said in the court "I think Tilak was actually saying that the descendents of Shivaji do have a right to Vedic rites."

It is astonishing that even a studious person like Dhananjay Keer should get carried away by popular misconceptions.

4. WORK OF OUR FRIENDS

4.1 Shashi Deo (01-299-1119)

In the May 1988 issue of "London Calling" Mr Deo noticed details of a programme on Taj Mahal by Joy Boatman (BBC Overseas Service, 24 May 1988 at 2000 hrs GMT). After reading the details M/s Godbole and Pradhan wrote letters to the BBC. Mr Richard Dunn (Executive Producer, Features and Arts World Service) replied. Though he ducked the issue he did say "..if there is genuine, impartial scholarly disagreement, this should have been investigated..." We don't expect miracles overnight.

4.2 Bhupendra Patel f01-203 4408)

He noticed an important item in Daily Telegraph of 16th January 1988. Under the heading "Mythological river found underground" Balram Tandon reports -

Indian geologists and hydrographers have discovered the underground river Saraswati which has been part of Hindu mythology for thousand years.

Mr Brahm Dutt, Minister of State for Petroleum and Natural Resources said yesterday the Saraswati runs underground down from the Himalayas for 2000 miles through the Indo-Gangetic plain to the Ganges basin in West Bengal and Bangladesh.

The underground river was discovered while engineers were drilling exploratory wells for oil in the hills and valleys of Shivaliks near the town of Dehra Dun.

According to Indian folklore, the Saraswati disappeared in the mountains thousands of years ago. It joined the river system of the Ganges and Jumna below the holy city of Allahabad where millions of devout Hindus gather at this time every year. They believe the confluence is of three rivers, the Jumna and Ganges being clearly visible and the Saraswati is referred to as "gupt" (unseen).

Indian and Western archaeologists have long accepted the existence for several centuries of a river which for some inexplicable reason disappeared

(Note - where does Mr Tandon get this information from? It has always been fashionable to ridicule the Indian mythology).

Some years ago technicians of the Indian Oil and Natural Gas Commission drilling for oil in Jaisalmer in the heart of Rajasthan desert found a lake of water 9,000 feet underground. This find coincided with Hindu mythology in which the reincarnation of the god Krishna visiting a village thirsting for water sent up the wheel-like weapon

( sudarshan chakra ) which he carried and, when it fell, it bored a well several thousand feet deep for the people.

Is it not high tune to take a fresh look at our scriptures?

4.3 Dr. Vijay V. Bedekar (Thane, India)

In 1986 he visited China. His interview was published in Manoos of Pune in June 1987 issue. We must always get detailed information about our enemies. Bedekar’s visit was therefore very important. Among other things he says:-

In 1949 the Hans were 93% of the population and the minorities (Christians, Maslims, etc) were 7%. According to the 1982 census these percentages were maintained and will be maintained despite the one child per couple policy. In secularised India, in the same period, the percentage of Hindus has dropped from 85% to 75%.

In the border areas (with Russia) China removed the minority communities and settled the majority Han people in those areas. All the border problems have been solved with this method. (Note - A similar solution was advocated in India in the early 1960s. But secularised Hindus promptly rejected it).

5. RESEARCH FINDINGS

5.1 Shivaji and the contribution of Brahmins

Since the days of Mahatma Phule and Dr. Ambedkar, lot of vicious notions have prevailed about the Maharashtrian Brahmins. They rose to high positions under Shivaji, NOT because they were Brahmins but because they were good swordsman and administrators. We quote a few examples from B.M. Purandare’s famous book "Raja Shiva Chhatrapati" (in Marathi)

Shivaji was crowned King in June 1674. At the time of coronation his eight ministers stood facing the main directions as follows:-

Moropant Bingale -	Pantapradahan (Prime Minister)	East
Anajipant -	Pantasachiv (Chief Secretary)	South East
Hambirrao Mohite -	Saranaubat (Commander in Chief)	South
Triambakpant -	Sumant (Foreign Secretary)	South West
Ramdhandrapant -	Amatya	West
Dattajipant -	Mantri (Chronicler)	North West
Raghunathpant -	Panditrao (Ecclesiastical Head)	North
Nirajipant -	Nyayadhisi (Chief Justice)	North East.

All expect Hambirrao Mohite, were Brahmins. According to Shivaji's commandments six out of eight (i.e. exceptions of Panditrao and Nyayadhish) must be capable of leading armies in the battlefields -

What do we know of the seven Brahmin ministers?

Moropant Pingale

Moropant Pingale seems to have joined Shivaji's forces at least at late as 1654. He was ordered to fortify Javali which became the famous Pratapgad (1656-58). He was prominent in the battle that ensued Shivaji’s encounter with Afzalkhan (November 1659). Shivaji carried out a daring attack on Shaistakhan in April 1663. His reserve forces were divided into two. One led by Moropant, other by Netaji Palkar. When Shivaji had to go to Agra (1665-66) he left his mother Jijamata, in charge of affairs of the state, assisted by Moropant Pingale, Nilopant Sonadev Muzumdar and Prataprao Gujar.

When Shivaji escaped from the clutches of Aurangzeb in 1666, he left his nine year old son. Prince Sambhaji with Krishnaji Trimal Mathure, at Mathura, Mr Mathure was brothers-in-law of Moropant Pingale. When things quietened down, Sambhaji was safely escorted to Rajgad by Mathure, an undertaking of immense risk and trust.

Shivaji was forced to lie low during 1666-70. But once he regained strength the battles of liberation started. Moropant attacked and captured the fort of Brahmagiri in October 1670. Shivaji and Moropant captured the large fort of Salher in January 1671. Dilerkhan and Bahadurkhan laid siege to fort in October 1671. This was the biggest Mughal threat to Shivaji. He ordered Moropant Pingale and Prataprao Gujar to march onto Salher. Both joined forces. A ferocious pitched battle took place in February 1672 and the Mughal forces were routed. It was a turning point. It proved that the Marathas could challenge and defeat the Mughal forces in open battle, they did not have to resort to hit and run tactics any longer. After Salher, Morqpant and Prataprao also captured another important fort of Mulher. Aurangzeb was furious. Moropant had extended the Maratha territory to less than hundred miles from Surat.

There were some attempts by Moropant to capture the sea fort of Janjira

(May 1669, August 1676).

Anajipant

Anajipant seems to be also known as Annaji Datto Prabhunikar. He joined Shivaji's forces in 1655. He was made Waknis in 1661 and Sumis in 1662. He carried out the land reforms during the lull of 1666-70. But when fighting broke out in 1670 he took to the sword. He was ordered to capture the fort of Panhala in 1673. He had taken part in some attacks on the Janjira fort. He also took part in the attack and capture of Phonda fort in 1675.

Triambakpant

Triambakpant’s father Sonopant had been in the service of Shahaji (father of Shivaji) since 1629. Shahaji attempted to establish an independent kingdom of his own (March 1633 - October 1635). It failed, and he was forced to seek service under Adilshah. His assistants went with him to Karnatak. When it became clear that Shivaji was destined for something unusual Shahaji sent these experienced loyal assistants to Shivaji in 1642 and they all remained loyal to Shivaji, till their death. They were:-

Shamrajpant Ranzekar

Balkrishnapant Hanamante

Sonopant Vishwanath Dabir

Raghunathpant Ballal Atre

(All were Brahmins)

Sonapant went on diplomatic missions to Aurangzeb (April 1657) to Shahistakhan (October 1660). He passed away in January 1665. Triambakpant had became a close associate of Shivaji since his young days.

Though Shivaji was forced by Jayasigh to go to Agra to bow to Aurangzeb, he had developed a startling plan - to wipe out the Mughals by killing Aurangzeb in his court. (Ref. shivarayanchi Agrayavaril garud zep by Babarao Savarkar; elder brother of Veer Savarkar). So Shivaji had taken few selected assistants and some four hundred soldiers to accompany him. Among them were Nirajipant, Triambakpant, Dabir, Raghunathpant Korade, Dattajipant (Brahmins) when the scheme failed and Shivaji was kept in watch by Phuladkhan’s soldiers, an escape plan was formulated. Triambakpant and Raghunathpant made all the arrangements as they were free to move in and out of camp. Unfortunately there was some hick up. Shivaji escaped and along with Nirajipant and Dattajipant he rushed towards Rajgad. Triambakpant and Raghunathpant were delayed and caught. They faced imprisonment and torture at the hands of Phuladkhan, for seven and half months. They were released by Aurangzeb, following some clever moves by Shivaji. Sister of Raghunathpant Korade was married to Triambankpant.

Raghunathpant

Raghunathpant Korade was first sent by Shivaji on a diplomatic mission to Aurangzeb in April 1657. He was given a title Panditrao and sent by Shivaji on a diplomatic mission to Mirza Raja Jayasing in May 1665. Raja Jayasing insisted that Shivaji should come to his camp unarmed for further discussions. Shivaji performed this daring act along with Raghunathpant Korade on 11, 12, 13th June 1665.

Dattajipant

Dattajipant is already mentioned in Shivaji’s adventure in Agra. He also accompanied Shivaji in the campaign in the South (1676-77).

Niraiipant

Nirajipant was with Shivaji in his adventure in Agra. After Shivaji’s compromise with Aurangzeb in 1666 it was agreed that he and Prataprao Gujar should serve under Prince Muazzam as Prince Sambhaji was only nine. He was sent on a diplomatic mission to Kutubshah in 1672 and imposed an annual tribute of one lakh hon. His son Parlhadpant Niraji was permanent envoy at the court of Kutubshah and was instrumental in the success of Shivaji in the campaign in the South. He was in charge of preparation of Shivaji’s coronation.

Ramchandrapant

Nilopant Sonadev Muzumdar had been in the service of Shivaji since his encounter with Afzulkahn (November 1659). Even at the age 85 he captured the fort of Purandar, and wanted to fight. But Shivaji pleaded with him that administration of the territories is just as important as acquiring them. And grudgingly he accepted the responsibility of administration. He died four years later (1673). His younger son Ramchandrapant too proved to be a swordsman and an administrator.

Ramchandrapant Amatya is well known for the standing orders ( adnyapatre) which outline Shivaji's policies on general administration; selection; control & promotion of civil servants, dealing with Europeans especially the English.

Other Brahmins

There were many other Brahmins who helped Shivaji. Their names have suffix Pant

Raghunathpant Ballal Atre (Sabnis) was mentioned earlier. He captured the fort of Dabhol and surrounding territory in April 1657. Four months later he captured the territory near Danda Rajapuri and had skirmishes with the Siddi of Janjira. He was involved in the fighting that ensued killing of Afzulkhan. He was appointed Subhedar of Prabhavali (c.1663).

Kanhoji Jedhe, a well respected old man, a Deshmukh, helped Shivaji during the dangerous encounter with Afzulkhan. His administrators Dadajipant Krishna and Sakhopant Krishna Lohokare were Brahmin brothers and known swordsmen. Sakhopant captured the important town of Bhivandi (October 1657). Dadajipant was appointed Havaldar of Kalyan at the same time.

Shivaji’s first battle with the Adilshah came in July/August 1648 when Fatehkhan was sent to crush him. He desperately needed the security of a suitable fort, and it was provided by Mahadjipant Neelkantharao Saranaik a Brahmin commandant of the fort of Purandar. Fatehkhan was defeated. Mahadjipant’s grandson Pilaji later served in Shivaji's army.

Triambakpant Bhaskar a swordsman was present on Pratapgad when Shivaji killed Afzulkhan. He defended the Panhalgad fort against Siddi Jauhar during March-September 1660.

Pantaji Gopinath Bokil went on an important diplomatic mission to Afzulkhan and lured him to come to Javali and get killed by Shivaji. And in this encounter, one of Shivaji’s bodyguards was Kataji Ingale (a Brahmin).

Thus it was the Brahmins of Maharashtra (who could not have been even 10%

of Maratha population) who helped Shivaji through thick and thin. He had to fight against men of his own caste. Along with FatehKhan came Naik Nimbalkar (Shivaji’s brother-in-law), with Afzulkhan came Mohite, Yadav, Kharate, Pandhare, Ghatge, Kate, Ghorpade belonging to the 96 major families ( shahannava kuli marathe ) and his uncle Mambajiraje Bhosle, along with Shaistakhan came Suraji Gaikwad, Kakade, Pavar, Ghatge, Kokate, Khandagale, Gade, Trianibakji Bhosle, Jivaji Bhosle, Balaji Bhosle, Parsoji Bhosle, Dattaji Jadhav, Rastum Jadhav and even Savitribai Deshmukh, a lady!

Time has come to attribute to Maharashtrian Brahmins their due share. They not just helped to make Shivaji a king but smashed the myth that the Hindus were born only to be slaves of alien Muslims a revolution indeed.

G.N. Dandekar had written a small book entitled Maharashtra Darshan in 1960.

On page 98 he says- Maharashtra has been a land of warriors. It was rare to see a man without any arms. Brahmins, Marathas (a caste) one time untouchables Mahar and Mang castes even women were fighters. (Note - Rani Laxmibai of Zhansi was a Maharashtrian Brahmin lady who fought with the British nearly two hundred years after Shivaji).

6. BOOK REVIEWS

We would review Bunch of Thoughts by RSS Chief Golwalkar Guruji in the next newsletter.

7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Miss Amita Patel, niece of our friend Bhupendra Patel typed Newsletters 15, 16 and 17. We are very grateful to her.