Thanks for the link Kalyani , lots of information , I only knew what little I studied about Shivaji in my history lessons in school..

One can understand why Shivaji is not hailed because he also fought the Mughals and that is something the grand old Communal party of India will have an objection to.. 

usha manohar wrote:

Thanks for the link Kalyani , lots of information , I only knew what little I studied about Shivaji in my history lessons in school..

One can understand why Shivaji is not hailed because he also fought the Mughals and that is something the grand old Communal party of India will have an objection to.. 

True Usha..the very fact that no one has bothered to comment proves that no one wants to know and accept true history and true heroes. Were Tipu Sultan mentioned or some other similar, there would have been loads of discussion!

Yes Kalyani, many people in India have been mentally dinned into believing that disowning their own people and religion and upholding minorities and making excuses for them even when they are in the wrong is called secularism, a pity that even the educated fall into this trap that the family party has prepared over the years ..

I read a lesson about Shivaji during my school days (Up to 8th) but most of the book was full of Moughals, British and Congress leaders. In fact I never liked history just because I was not interested in who was father of Babar or who was his son. I could never relate with them properly and neither understood the point why was I required to memorize their birth dates. I was greatly relieved when there was no necessity to study from class 9th onward. But I feel it if they had taught us more about our own heroes, I would have concentrated more on history. But personally speaking I have learnt everything about our own heroes on my own.

Shivaji was a great king who fought the powerful Moghuls to expand his empire which was a legitimate goal of the hundreds of kings who existed at that time. He was an empire builder and also a great tactician in guerrilla warfare. He built a large number of forts spread over a large area many of which are standing today also. Like Akbar consolidated the Mughal empire his father/grandfather established, Shivaji greatly consolidated the Maratha empire his father established. The Maratha empire spread from Deep South to North but faced two large defeats against the Afghan Abdalli and later on the British. The Maratha empire was for a large period rule by the Peshwas and not the descendents of Shivaji. IN South and Bengal the rule was enforced very harshly especially in the collection of farm produce from farmers. Shivaji was a noble king who fought to protect and also expand his empire. The Peshwas joined hands with the last Mughal king in the 1857 uprising against the British. It is later on that it has been converted into a Hindu versus Muslim battle which is strictly not true. It is because of this twist that perhaps many are not responding in the forum out of politeness. But I have and you can stat pouring the secular or non secular venom against my remarks. However I maintain that Shivaji seen as a king was a fantastic king.

Most of peoples of India aware with greatness of Shivaji Maharaj. I was not a student of history but I know about Shiavaji Maharaj. Indeed history is written by winners. In Mugal period it was written to please Mugals emiors and after freedom it was written by communists. Maharan Pratap was also great king of Rajasthan who whole life fought with Akba. But history said the Great Akbar, than what is Maharana Pratap?

The same old story, Hindus were never united so they they got what they asked for. There was never shortage of Jaichand's in any period of time.

This is a historians perspective , I guess some people would puck holes even into it if it does not suit them..However, very detailed information about a period of history when people laid down their life for the upkeep of Hinduism and the nation ..

http://www.hinduhistory.info/the-epic-27-year-war-that-saved-hinduism/

Hindu religion did not prevent Hindu kings from fighting with each other. There was no Indian nation till 1857 when British brought the territories of today's India,Pakistan, Bangladesh together to form the new nation of India. Why did Rajputs side with the British? Why did Hindu kings borrow heavily from East India Company to fight against other Hindu kings? The India of !947 was a collection of 500 plus kingdoms. The Muslims came from outside and fought battles and won territories from Hindu kings and subsequent Muslim kings. Please do not see past history with todays biased goggles. See and judge it as it evolved. Shivaji, Rana Pratap were great kings there is no doubt about it. But they fought Mughals to protect their kingdoms, winning some and losing some. Rana Pratap's son became the governor of Kabul under the Mughals. They did not fight as HIndus versus Muslims.

Please come out with facts and not the biased versions which have now become stale and are not real. Happy that I could pull in more members of the forum.

In fighting is a normal occurance, happens in a house and between kingdoms . But , when outsiders invade your nation which was known as Bharat , even if it is a collection of different kingdoms, kings and rulers would fight back, like in the case of Mughals who were outsiders and were bent on stamping out Hinduism , which however much one may want to argue against was the unifying factor between the different kingdoms..Religion and religious customs were an important factor then and now since it is the very foundation on which a society rests. 

There were many reasons why Man Singh became a part of Akbar's court, his sister Jodha was married to Akbar and so on...It was not a willing decision but forced due to circumstances and looked down by the other patriotic Rajputs..