Talk:Sambhaji/Archive 2

Literary Contributions by Sambhaji

Ch.Sambhaji maharaj was highly sophisticated, educated and well versed in few languages other than Marathi. Keshav Pandit, alias Keshav Bhatta of Shringarpur, was an erudite scholar in the Nitishastra and Sanskrit language and literature. He seems to have deeper knowledge of the different forms of Sanskrit literature ; Hindu jurisprudence and the Puranas. He also seems to have made ch.Sambhaji maharaj familiar with the famous works of different sciences and music written by ancient scholars in the Sanskrit language. There are some excellent books by him at very young age.

There are 6 books by him. The most notable is Budhbhushanam which is in Sanskrit and other 3 known books Nayikabhed, Saatsatak, Nakhshikha are in Brij language. (A form of Hindi language).

In Budhbhushanam ch.Sambhaji Maharaj have written poetry on politics. In the book ch.Sambhaji Maharaj writes about dos and donts for a King and discusses military tactics. First few Slokas are praises for ch.Shahaji maharaj (his grandfather) and his father ch.Shivaji maharj, the great.

In Budhbhushan ch.Sambhaji maharaj praises ch.Shivaji Maharaj with following lines:

कलिकालभुजंगमावलीढं निखिलं धर्मवेक्ष्य विक्लवं य:। जगत: पतिरंशतोवतापो: (तीर्ण:) स शिवछत्रपतिजयत्यजेय:॥

Meaning: Like demon anaconda, evil powers swirl around and diminishes the righteousness, A great Shivaji Raje took incarnation to save the earth! Hail to glory of King Shivaji.

Vikram-dattu (talk) 15:25, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

You should address him as shambhaji Maharaj Ankita1501 (talk) 19:18, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Criticism

Copy-paste of contested sections

Carnage at Burhanpur Bahadurkhan Kokaltash, a relative of Aurangzeb was in charge of Burhanpur, a Mughal stronghold. He left Burhanpur to attend a wedding, giving the charge of Burhanpur to Kakarkhan. Bahadurkhan also took with him a territorial army to showoff at the wedding. Sambhaji tricked Mughals into thinking that Marathas were going to attack Surat that had been twice plundered by Shivaji. However, Hambirrao Mohite, the commander of the Maratha army surrounded Burhanpur. Sambhaji also reached Burhanpur in a short time. Thus, within a fortnight of his coronation, Sambhaji along with Hambirrao attacked Burhanpur with 20,000 Marathas. In face of sudden surprise attack the Mughals could not save Burhanpur. Sambhuji than plundered and ravaged the city, his forces completely routed the Mughal garrison and punitively executed captives. The Marathas then looted the city and set its potrts ablaze. In contrast to his fathers tactics, Sambhuji condoned casual rape, torture and violence by his ravaging party. Sambhuji then quickly fled into Baglana, while Khan Jahan Bahadur the commander of the Mughal Army missed an encounter with the Maratha fugitive by a few miles. Mughal accounts regarding Sambhaji's execution Sambhaji and his men were captured by Muqarrab Khan and his Mughal contingent of 25,000. When Sambhaji was presented before the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb, he the emperor knelt in prayer and thanksgiving to Allah. When Sambhaji, was questioned for the atrocities he had committed, he responded with insults to the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb, which were tolerated, but he sealed his fate by insulting the Prophet Muhammad. A panel of Qadi's of the Mughal Empire indited and sentenced Sambhaji to death for slaying innocent people, for condoning casual rape, torture, arson, looting and massacre of good Muslims particularly for the atrocities committed during his ravaging of Burhanpur and its populace. According to most historians, Sambhaji was beheaded and his body was cut into pieces and fed to dogs. Execution When Sambhaji was presented before the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb, he the emperor knelt in prayer and thanksgiving to Allah. When Sambhaji, was questioned for the atrocities he had committed, he responded with insults to the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb, which were tolerated, but he sealed his fate by insulting the Prophet Muhammad. A panel of Qadi's of the Mughal Empire sentenced him to death for slaying innocent people and good Muslims. Sambhaji was beheaded and his body was cut into pieces and fed to dogs. References

Your edits are full of POV. Discuss before adding something. Wachoviadeal (talk) 11:00, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Image of Sambhaji

I have given subtitle and added danpatra para.Can anyone insert an image of Sambhaji. kasarKasar 16:52, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

It is clear that Sambhaji indeed was defamed. Please note that there are no such believable proofs about Sambhaji's bad character. On the contrary he was an exclent ruler.

Please refer to the paragraph below. Citation added. This should be added in the wikipedia page under the title "Legacy and Controvercies".

• During Sambhaji's reign we find no evidence to support notions made popular by Marathi drama and ballads that Sambhaji was constantly drunk or drugged or in his harem. Quite to the contrary there are extant administrative orders right upto the month of his execution.

Glorification, Fact and History : Study of written documents.

It seems that more importants are given on Glorification instead of fact and history. vkvora 16:05, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I was really disappointed at this entry. It is just Shiv Sena propaganda rather than real history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.141.140.200 (talk) 19:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Is this discussion still needed to be kept here? It seems it's already incorporated.

The talk page is too much cluttered with old discussions which not relevant any more.

This and "Image of Sambhaji", etc. should be removed IMO and keep the talk page clean to focus on relevant issues. Vikram-dattu (talk) 16:38, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Clean up required

This article makes for terrible reading. I will try to clean it up to the best of my abilities, but since I do not have the appropriate sources some help would be much appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by YCM Interista (talk • contribs) 18:28, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Almost a year and a half since your complaint, but I ran across this article this week whilst cleaning up Shivaji, and agree it was in terrible condition. I'm almost done now cleaning up the blatant POV and fluff, remove a few cites to novels (really, no history books from academics available?) and general cleanup. Same with this and Shivaji, next step is trying to find actual cites for the bits that appear to be facts, and trying to figure out what vital bits have been skipped for being unflattering. Like how this article glossed over how Sambhaji had been imprisoned by his own father for poor behaviour, not a whisper of that. After these two I'll have to check, but I'd imagine most of the Maratha Empire bio articles are pretty terribly one-sided. MatthewVanitas (talk) 05:33, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

MatthewV, In the article it says and I quote "The Maratha confederacy was thrown into disarray by Sambhaji's death; his younger brother Rajaram returned to the throne to hold it until Sambhaji's young son came of age." This may be factually incorrect and /or misleading In reality: a)Shahu and his mother were kept prisoners by the mughals b)Rajaram was crowned Chhatrapati. He was not to be just a regent in Shahu's absence c) Rajaram passed awy before Shahu was released d)Tarabai, Rajaram's widow fought with Shahu over his claims to the Maratha throne e)She set up a rival court in Kolhapur after being edged out by Shahu. f) Tarabai's Kolhapur state remained in existence until 1947, mostly as a vassal Princely state of the British.Jonathansammy (talk) 16:10, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Jonathan, you raise some good points. At this stage I'm still in the sloppy-generalities point trying to clean this up, so please by all means make any needed modifications. I had seen the "while Shahu was in minority" regent bit in a cited work, but it may be there are different schools of thought on that. We can't get too-too deep into the follow-on details, though clearly I don't want to mislead readers either. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:54, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Possible cites to reinforce

• [1] Good book with details on Sambhaji fighting in Goa.
• [2] Janjira events
• [3] Janjira in Bombay Gazetteer
• [4] Janjira in Gujarat Bombay Gazetteer
• [5] 1893 Poole description as historiography
• [6] Creative Pasts
• [7] Marathas 1600-1818
• [8]Portuguese Mahratta Relations (Chapter 3, Page 89 Onwards). Good document which covers detailed information about Sambhaji's conflict with Portuguese. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vikram-dattu (talk • contribs) 04:56, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

(active list, please feel free to contribute). MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:01, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

How best to cover Sambhaji's confinement at Panhala?

Some 4+ years ago, I wrote the phrase Sambhaji's behaviour, including alleged irresponsibility and addiction to sensual pleasures led Shivaji to imprison his son at Panhala fort in 1678 to curb his behaviour. I don't think it's an inaccurate representation of what RS's say, though the sourcing has become unclear and honestly I want to just scrub the footnotes for that specific phrase and put in really strong footnotes with exact page numbers and brief quotations in the cite to really clearly make the case. I'm also open to discussion of whether the phrasing, though not inaccurate, is unnecessarily inflammatory (as witnessed by the constant attempts to remove it) and if we can achieve the same informational result with more academic language.

Fundamentally: Shambhaji was confined by his father at Panhala fort for some reason', so how do we portray that?

Some passing editors have tried to explain this as "Shivaji's advisors schemed against Sambhaji, who had done nothing wrong" but I haven't seen a good citation for that, nor run across any mention of such in English-language sources. I have run across various claims, including that he was too into drinking and womanizing, that he had harassed/attacked a Brahmin woman, or simpler accounts that just say his father mistrusted him. I'd like to open the discussion so we can arrive on agreed phrasing and absolutely clear footnotes, to best get the point across in an NPOV manner that is as incontestable as is feasible. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:11, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

This is an absolutely brilliant collection of sources by MatthewVanitas. One thing we need to understand is that the Muslim sources also accuse him of similar behavior. Gordon does nothing to clear him - all he says is that he was not constantly drunk. Gordon is talking about the plays not historical stuff. IMHO, "addiction to sensual pleasures" in the current version of article downplays and whitewashes many of these points in these sources that say almost the same thing. Molesting/raping is not a "sensual pleasure" - it is a crime. Wikipedia is not censored. The sources are just too many. But I do not edit this article so I leave it to the experts.Acharya63 (talk) 13:48, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Add potential sources here

Note that we are not necessarily saying all sources here are the best quality, but let us include even less-strong sources in order to get the general trend of what is written on this topic, and in the end will use the strongest sources.

• The crown prince Sambhaji had been brought up under the personal caie of Shivaji and suffered imprisonment with his father at Agra. Though an excellent warrior, he became addicted to sensual pleasures on attaining maturity and displayed irresponsible conduct, unbecoming of a crown prince. What Salim had been to Akbar, Sambhaji was to his father Shivaji.
• His eldest son Sambhaji became addicted to sensual pleasures and Shivaji had to take severe measures to wean him away from his habits. The prince was kept under surveillance at Sringarpur and was later transferred to the Fort of Panhala from which he escaped and joined the Mughal general Diler Khan.

• During Sambhaji's reign we find no evidence to support notions made popular by Marathi drama and ballads that Sambhaji was constantly drunk or drugged or in his harem. Quite to the contrary there are extant administrative orders right upto the month of his execution.

• She even suggested that the Maratha Kingdom should be bestowed upon young Rajaram and the newly acquired territory in Karnatak should be given to Sambhaji.12 After the coronation and before Shivaji's Karnatak campaign, we come across a reference in Chitnis chronicle to Sambhaji's alleged misbehaviour. There is, however, no corroboration for it in any of the Marathi contemporary sources. It is very likely that Soyarabai was herself the source of such allegations and wanted to...
• ...the elder Sambhaji, then twenty-two years old, though brave and intrepid, had misbehaved himself and was, therefore, not trusted by his father, but was kept confined in the fort of Panhala.
• Sambhaji had been confined at Panhala as a punishment for attempting " to violate the person of the wife of a Brahmin. " ( Duff ). This is also referred to in a Bombay letter already noted. Shivaji was so strict and strong in his respect for women that, like Mahmud of Ghazni, he would not spare even his son if he offended in this respect. Sambhaji was put in confinement at Panhala and though subsequently released from Panhala he was kept under strict surveillance at Parali.
• Before Shivaji the Great died in 1680, his eldest son Sambhaji, due to his misconduct, was being kept at Panhala under strict surveillance.
• The good news from Bijapur was spoilt by the conduct of Shivaji's eldest son Sambhaji. He had a large share of his father's talents and courage but, born a king's son, he was impatient of control. He quarrelled with his father, who confined him in Panhala fort.
• Sambhaji had been attracted by the courtly Afghan,5 whom he seems to have met at Aurangabad. He had recently quarrelled with his father and had been confined in Panhala.
• The fate however condemned the fort of Bhupalgad to witness in the last days of Shivaji, his strained relations with his son Sambhaji. ln the course of his great achievements, Shivaji, cursed by the cruel wheel of history, met with one cause of vexation, for his son Sambhaji was a man of unruly habits and vices. Finding that Sambhaji would not listen to his words, the dutiful father confined the son at fort Panhala.
• Unlike his father,' observes Khafi Khan, 'Sambhaji was addicted to wine, and fond of the society of handsome women, and gave himself up to pleasure ' He was not merely dissolute; in 1678 he had actually deserted to the Mughal camp and had attacked the Maratha fort of Bhupalgad, and Shivaji had been forced to keep him in confinement at Panhala.
• During his life-time his son Sambhaji's conduct was a source of grief and vexation to him. When Sambhaji attempted to violate a Brahman's wife, Shivaji confined his son for a time in Panhala fort and, after his release, placed a strict watch over him.
• His return to Raigad was the signal for renewed intrigues by Queen Soyra, urging the claims to the succession of her son Rajaram. As if to justify her insinuations of Sambhaji's instability and selfish indulgence, the senior prince became involved in a discreditable intrigue with a Brahman woman. Shivaji had him arrested and confined in Panhala Fort.
• Sambha or Sambhaji or Shambhuji, the eldest son of Shivaji, was born on 14 May 1657. He grew a reckless youth "devoid of every spark of honour, patriotism or religious fervour". Shivaji failed to reform him and put him in confinement.
• That this was the approach of Shivaji is abundantly clear from a number of his orders and instructions to the officers under him. Let it be noted, in this connection that Shivaji's sincerity with regard to his subjects is established unquestionably by the confinement of Sambhaji, his son and successor designate for misbehaviour, at the Panhala Fort in 1678 A. D. under his own orders.
• The main points in this connection, which require more detailed study are — (l)Why and when the question of partitioning the kingdom came before Shivaji — Whether at the instance of Sambhaji's misbehaviour and immoral ways of life or at the instance of Soyrarai's selfish greed.
• Sambhaji had never been liked by his father because of his wild and licentious ways. During h is own absence in the far south Shivajl had not entrusted him with any administrative work. Further, because of his immoral behaviour, he had been incarcerated in the fort of Panhala.
• Incidentally, there were 20 plays about Sambhajiraje before 1947, and 21 since then up to 1970.4 The play's strength, according to Kulkarni, is its in-depth psychological interpretation of young Sambhaji's gradual estrangement from his father through a series of small episodes where he is more sinned against than sinning. His isolation and being constantly misunderstood culminates in his addiction to liquor induced by bad company; finally he loses his emotional balance.
• Above all, he was incredibly, almost insanely brave. Unfortunately, all these stilling qualities were obscured if not altogether obliterated by an addiction to drugs, an excessive fondness for women, a streak of cruelty and, even more than all these, a consuming distrust towards his father's advisers and associates. Apologists for Sambhaji argue that these failings were the consequence of his father's disapprobation, more than their cause; they say that if Sambhaji was wicked and disloyal...
• Of fine manly features Sambhaji's appearance was perhaps more commanding than his father's. At the age of 9 he accompanied his father to Agra, and upon hi9 return was for a time stationed at Aurangabad as commandant of the Maratha contingent in Mughal service, when he came in direct contact with the loose life led by the Mughal grandees. It was at this time that he must have contracted the evil habits of addiction to sensual pleasures in severe contrast to the austere life of his...
• For example I did not know many aspects of the achievements of Sambhaji, the son of great Shivaji. As the author points in his book, 'Sambhaji wrote many books, 6 of them are available today. His Sanskrit book on politics named Budhabhushanam is the most famous and notable amongst them. Sambhaji explained do's and don'ts of a king in this book and strongly opposed consumption of alcohol, misbehaviour, external affairs etc. Unfortunately a few drama writers misled people by...
• He says that Sambhaji fell in love with the daughter of the Surnis,46 and that Shivaji wanted to punish him severely for this act. Obviously Surnis meant Annaji Datto Surnis, the revenue minister of Shivaji. There is no reason to disbelieve Sambhaji's irresponsible behaviour. Although it is not known whether and if so, Sambhaji was punished, it is certain that Shivaji, so chivalrous where women were concerned, must have been greatly distressed at his son's misbehaviour.
• A sudden and extreme depression took possession of his mind probably on account of his son Sambha- ji's misbehaviour. "Sambhaji fell under disfavour and was kept confined with Umaji Pandit to give him lessons at Shrin- garpur.13 Thereafter Sambhaji was for a time put under Ram- das's care also. But there was no improvement in him...
• Sambhaji was held prisoner in the Panhala fort because of his misbehaviour with a young woman. The relations between the father and the son went sour.
• He did not hesitate to punish his own son, Sambhaji for misbehaviour with a Brahman woman at Sangameshwar.
• During the absence of Shivaji in Karnatak, his eldest son Sambhaji had stayed at Shringarpur. There were reports about his misbehaviour when he was at Raigad earlier. It was to keep him away from the capital that Shivaji had arranged for him and his wife to live at this small place in the Konkan. In September 1677, Sambhaji begot a daughter. More reports came in regarding the misdemeanour of the young prince and Shivaji ordered him to move to Sajjangad.
• But he had washed away all the hopes of Shivaji. He had started getting the information of Sambhaji's ill-character after his coronation only. They say that Sambhaji had infringed the modesty of a Brahmin woman. When Shivaji returned to Maharashtra after Karnataka triumph he...
• Since it is written after the Shivaji Bakhar of Malhar Ramrao Chitnis, whose period of writing is 1811 A. D. it is probable that the cause stated by Chitnis in it for the desertion of Yuvaraj Sambhaji to the Mughals that "Sambhaji committed an outrage on a married Brahmin woman and therefore Shivaji wanted to punish him" might have found an echo in the Busatinussalatin.
• Mr. Laine further made one objectionable statement referring it from Sarkar that, "Sambhaji was chastised for "violating" a brahmin women." (P. 48), is ... this is a chapter of violating a brahmin woman, whether this is a chapter of violating a daughter of Suranis Annaji Datto which is mentioned in Busatin-us- Salatin.
• He further adds that Sabhasad, the chronicler of Shivaji, may not be correct literally in this respect, but the implication therein appears to be probable.24 Jadunath Sarkar comments on this point: "Shambuji (was) a grownup youth notorious for his violent temper and self-indulgent character. . .Shambuji's own conduct brought matters to a crisis. For having violated a beautiful Brahmin woman who was visiting the palace on a religious festival, the prince was removed to Parli [Sqjjangad) ...
• It is alleged that Sambhaji's indecent behaviour with women was a common thing. The matter precipitated when he misbehaved with a Brahmin woman and people fled away from the village.

References

Sambhaji and anarchy

Just a minor observation, looking at GoogleBooks hits for Sambhaji, the word "anarchy" comes a lot, so I'll go look into that. MatthewVanitas (talk) 09:49, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Attempt to Malign image of Great King Sambhaji Maharaj

On wikipedia Page about Sambhaji Maharaj Contains objectionable references about Sambhaji Maharaj and his Character, Also It is based in references which lacks historical evidences and Data. Please refer 'Marriage' Section in Sambhaji Page. I wish this Contents gets deleted as soon as possible. Historyprotect (talk) 16:12, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

@Historyprotect: did you read the section a few points above this one, Talk:Sambhaji#How_best_to_cover_Sambhaji's_confinement_at_Panhala?? A large number of professional scholars agree that Sambhaji is said to have committed moral offenses which caused his father to imprison him at Panhala. Do you have any evidence by reputable scholars that contradicts this? MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:00, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I'll try to assemble the references from reputed authors and Famous Novels. There is great amount of communal Politics behind defaming the great King Sambhaji Maharaj, After Coronation of his Father Great King Shivaji Maharaj, Sambhaji also started his involvement in spreading the regime and Working towards freedom of Hindus from Muslim invaders, But some Ministers who belonged to Brahmin Caste in Shivaji's regime did not like the Idea and They started opposing him and started corrupt practices by taking Gold, Money and Other benefits from Enemies and Started giving tip off to remove Sambhaji. Also they conspired with his Step mother to arrest him and handover Kingdom to his Cousin 'Rajaram Raje', after knowing these facts Furious King Sambhaji given brahmin Ministers ultimate punishment and removed them. With this background Brahmin Community from Maharastra started assuming Sambhaji Raje as their enemy and hated him for the same & they started adjusting history with Wrong references and Fictions events which were never true and Has no historical evidences. Many Authors and Scholars who claim that Sambhaji had bad character and commuted serious crimes against Women are from that Political thinking. In fact unlike other Kings of his Era, he married to only one women and loved her, He was bravest of all, Also had knowledge of many Foreign languages along with Sankrit. I have given some background in Controversy and I'll give references for the same. We can have discussion around it and align that Contents those are added for him are bot based on historical evidences. Thanks Historyprotect (talk) 08:45, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello @Historyprotect:, please do provide sources if you think there is a body of evidence for that argument. But please do not use novels, since those are not necessarily based on fact. Please only use sources from respected scholars and publishers, such as I have done above. Please be advised, even if you do find such content, given the sheer amount of argument for the current version, at best it would be a rebuttal such as "though some scholars dispute this and say..." rather than removing it entirely. There are just a lot of reputable scholars saying Sambhaji appears to have committed immoral acts, and/or quarreled with his father, and that is why he was locked up at Panhala.

I do not doubt that some people have made arguments that Sambhaji was unjustly accused, but just because something is widely believed in the popular culture does not mean it is supported by serious scholars. MatthewVanitas (talk) 09:16, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello @mattewVanitas Here is good reference of material Which proves that some content regarding the marriage of Sambhaji Maharaj and his misbehaved character is Wrong. Reference:Sambhaji, Author: Vishwaas Patil ISBN:978817766651 Author is reputed high ranked Government Officer in India and noted historian.

Book Summary: Sambhaji, the young king, the Second Maratha Chhatrapati who succeeded the throne after his father the great Shivaji Maharaj, continuously fought the Mughals for eight consecutive years, but did not let the Moghul army capture either any of the Maratha forts or any of the ships. He offered himself but did not bow down in front of the Mughal Emperor; he died a hero`s death at a very young age, when he was just 32 years old. For the past 325 years, Sambhaji was often painted in black. He had a poetic mind, he was a very intelligent person, he was concerned about his people, he was brave, he was a great thinker, but all his good qualities were over-looked; his personality was always looked upon with suspicion. Vishwas Patil, the most gifted author today, tells us more about Sambhaji Raje, as he has seen him through the references in history, as he has found him in the very valuable yet ignored documents, as he has heard him in the hilly regions of Sahyadri mountain ranges, among the creeks of the Arabian sea. Sambhaji, son of Shivaji Maharaj, a novel personality with his equally impressive, breath-taking, spectacular, stormy yet very true story. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Historyprotect (talk • contribs) 18:09, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Rewrote the name As Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj and his surname is Bhosale not Bhonsale.

Royal 96 (talk) 09:16, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

This Project Lacks good references

@matthewVanitas Referring to previous Talk, You say that'" There are 30 Authors claimed that he misbehaved" But I checked the references well, Only one of him claim the same J. L. Mehata and he also does not have any scholarly article. Y G Bhave is small book of 96 pages and not based on scholarly references. It is not fair to say that he misbehaved and Raped, Which has also been referred as Conspiracy to defame him in History. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Historyprotect (talk • contribs) 02:58, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Here is good reference of material Which proves that some content regarding the marriage of Sambhaji Maharaj and his misbehaved character is Wrong. Reference:Sambhaji Author: Vishwaas Patil ISBN:978817766651

Author is reputed high ranked Government Officer in India and noted historian.

Book Summary: Sambhaji, the young king, the Second Maratha Chhatrapati who succeeded the throne after his father the great Shivaji Maharaj, continuously fought the Mughals for eight consecutive years, but did not let the Moghul army capture either any of the Maratha forts or any of the ships. He offered himself but did not bow down in front of the Mughal Emperor; he died a hero`s death at a very young age, when he was just 32 years old. For the past 325 years, Sambhaji was often painted in black. He had a poetic mind, he was a very intelligent person, he was concerned about his people, he was brave, he was a great thinker, but all his good qualities were over-looked; his personality was always looked upon with suspicion. Vishwas Patil, the most gifted author today, tells us more about Sambhaji Raje, as he has seen him through the references in history, as he has found him in the very valuable yet ignored documents, as he has heard him in the hilly regions of Sahyadri mountain ranges, among the creeks of the Arabian sea. Sambhaji, son of Shivaji Maharaj, a novel personality with his equally impressive, breath-taking, spectacular, stormy yet very true story. Historyprotect (talk) 18:12, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

@Historyprotect: per your recommendation I have looked into that book: Vishwas Patil (2007). Sambhaji. Mehta Publishing House.

• From what I can tell, Patil is a novelist. It is fine to write novels about Sambhaji, but that does *not* make them credible history. I checked GoogleScholar and I see no papers by Patil in academic journals, and the several other books of his shown on GoogleBooks are novels, not academic history books. So why should we believe Patil and not the literally 30 scholars I cite further up on this page?
• Patil's own summary notes that Sambhaji has a "painted in black" reputation. If we have 30 scholars saying he did bad things, and one single writer (and a novelist at that) saying he did not, it would be very WP:Undue to ignore 30 people and pay attention to one.
• I think it is very unfair of you to say This Project Lacks good references. The article has *plenty* of references, to both Indian and non-Indian scholars, with serious academic reputations, published by major publishing houses over the last thirty years. If you see a source on that list that is not credible, by all means tell us here, but unless you provide specifics it is simply an empty complaint.
• I understand that some people's sentiments are hurt by the reported facts about Sambhaji, as well as the controversy of Shivaji's coronation, but people's feelings do not matter compared to objective historical fact.

Feel free to rebut any of these points, but I still feel quite confident that the article is by and large correctly based on serious historical scholarship. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:55, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

@matthewVanitas Hi, Appreciate Your efforts to validate the references, Sambhaji by Vishwas Patil is Reputed novel and based in historical facts and references mentioned in the same Book, I'll still agree to your points and Will try to bring other references.

But, I didn't see either paper or Scholarly articles by references such As J. L. Mehta & Y G Bhave with whose references the Controversial lines are been added. You can also look at Controversy of American scholar ' James Lane' where it sparked communal violence in India over Wrong references. Also, I request you to add following lines so before Controversial paragraph: "though some scholars dispute this and say..." As You see in Edit history many other people are also attempting or asking to change the Disputed contents. It will — Preceding unsigned comment added by Historyprotect (talk • contribs) 02:40, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

@Historyprotect: the way you're organizing this conversation is very confusing; please put your replies directly after my comments that you are replying to.

• Okay you say that J. L. Mehta has no other scholarship? I checked GoogleScholar and:
  • [CITATION] India and the West the Problem of Understanding -- cited by 28 other scholarly works
  • [BOOK] Advanced study in the history of medieval India -- cited by 17 other scholarly works
  • [CITATION] Philosophy and religion: Essays in interpretation -- cited by 43
  • [CITATION] India and the West -- cited by 6
  • [CITATION] A Political and Cultural History of Viet Nam Upto 1954

So I think we can safely say the Mehta qualifies as a scholar.

• Next, you claim that of the 30 quotes and footnotes I have above, that only one supports moral issues on the part of Sambhaji? I do not understand your reasoning, the vast majority of them refer to immorality, attack(s) on women, drinking, quarreling, etc. Are we both reading the same list of quotations that I provide 30 of? I'm referring to this section: Talk:Sambhaji#How_best_to_cover_Sambhaji's_confinement_at_Panhala?. I have quoted the passage, footnoted the passage, and bolded the parts that explain the Panhala confinement. Are you honestly saying you looked at all those you don't understand why the article says Sambhaji was locked up for moral offenses?
• No we cannot say "but some scholars say" because all you have offered as a contrast is one novel and a novel is a fun work of fiction or semi-fiction, not a serious observation of history. Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is a historical novel, but that doesn't mean that it's historically accurate and it doesn't mean Abraham Lincoln should mention that he hunted vampires.
• We're not citing Laine here, so there's no need to bring him up, but since you did I will say: Laine didn't do anything wrong or inappropriate. Just certain casteist radicals with zero understanding of context or scholarship heard about literally one passage out of context, go upset and burned a university building down. That's not a reflection on Laine, that's a reflection on uneducated idiots who get violent when someone disagrees with their idealized and partisan view of history.

MatthewVanitas (talk) 05:13, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

@MatthewVanitas I appreciate Your Knowledge in the Subject and Approach, It's learning for me. But, As You claimed many scholars are referring to same point about his alleged behaviors and atrocities, But we need to check authenticity of the origin of the information, If Origin is polluted then the same Information has been cascaded through citations, That's exactly my point is. I am more concerned with authenticity of original scripts and not drawing any conclusion from no of citations and scholarly articles. There were 'Bakhars',(Seat of authors) in the time Shivaji and Sambhaji's Era, who were documenting the incidents. There are attempts from particular seat of scholars to pollute the informations and add false references (e.g.Sambhaji was accused of Rape but later his Father subjected him for the thorough investigating and later proved that It was conspiracy to defame her, In fact he saved her from Suicide, Her Husband was corrupt and was taking bribes from enemies to Kill Sambhaji and Shivaji Both, after Knowing this she tried to commit suicide, She was daughter of One on minister in Shivaji's ministry, his name is Anaji Datto, As I told before he hated Sambhaji for various reason inclusion this incident, so he directed some of the Bakhars to write against Sambhaji and defame him historically, Surprisingly Only One Bakhar was against him while other wrote about allegations and investigation and Outcomes. Many Authors have just referred to allegations but have not included the outcome of investigation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Historyprotect (talk • contribs) 04:49, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

@Historyprotect: so your argument is that for the last 100 years, basically *every* scholar writing about Maratha history in English, people with PhD training writing for major publishing houses, somehow is ignoring the greater body of original sources and just using one of them to write their history? That's simply not how academics works. If somehow that were magically the case, all it would take is one single Persian/Sanskrit-speaking academic to write a groundbreaking paper where they explain that, hey they looked into a broader variety of sources that somehow everyone had overlooked and they found an exciting new conclusion. Such a paper would undoubtedly be published in a major journal and widely cited. That is how scholarly history works.

Instead, you're giving evidence such as a novel, and alleging that there exist a number of bakhars that clear Sambhaji. Have you read these bakhars? Have you read any serious scholars that have assessed these bakhars? Or have you just read third-hand accounts on Maratha partisan blogs saying "trust me, certain bakhars exist and prove I'm right, so ignore all the academics"? I don't at all dispute that there are a ton of Maratha people who believe Sambhaji was framed, but I am telling you that decades of scholars writing about Sambhaji, both Indian and non-Indian, apparently feel very comfortable relating that he was locked up for moral offenses. If Maratha partisans want to ignore that scholarship, that's their business, but Wikipedia follows what serious scholars have written, not just popular belief in a community. MatthewVanitas (talk) 05:06, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

@MatthewVanitas, Many People are doing PhD on Sambhaji itself, No history can write off his bravery, Sacrifice and Contribution to India. Come What may, false references cannot take away his glorious history. Stories of his bravery and his legacy will be passed to generations to come and Will continue to motivate. Thanks for the discussion, I'll be signing off from this discussion now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Historyprotect (talk • contribs) 15:43, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I give my consensus to this edit request, this is absolutely true. This edit must be done. Charvak157 (talk) 04:41, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Please Cleanup the article

I had changed some part of the article which was defaming the King but it was immediately undone and the old references were again added. I would say that some references in the article are defaming the great King and are now proven to be wrong history and talking about the references I had also given references to one of the edits but even that edit was reverted back ,So I request to please remove those 3-4 paragraphs defaming the great King which have no historical evidence . No good historical source has been used in the article, distortion of historical facts are more. Thorat411 (talk) 14:21, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

 Not done - and won't be done. Please see the FAQ at the top of this page - and several posts above - Arjayay (talk) 14:39, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Defamation of Sambhaji

Article is too much biased and believes what old historians believed about wrongdoings of Sambhaji. Please note that first attempts of research on Sambhaji started few decades ago and all the history books before, may they be by Scholars or not, are just copy paste of passages from Chitnis Bakhar (This was ordered by Rajaram, Sambhaji's step-brother) which was written by relative of Balaji Chitnis whom Sambhaji executed for treason. Also the Bakhar (Gazetteer) was written after Sambhaji's death. Of course this cannot be treated as a history proof.

Please note that it's not just English authors who did this mistake but even Marathi sources had copy pasted unverified content against Sambhaji.

All the recent findings, administrative orders by Sambhaji prove that he indeed was a capable leader.

I am citing the reference below.

• During Sambhaji's reign we find no evidence to support notions made popular by Marathi drama and ballads that Sambhaji was constantly drunk or drugged or in his harem. Quite to the contrary there are extant administrative orders right upto the month of his execution.

Hope this clears some air and at least some objection is taken with content directly accusing Sambhaji's character. Please read the whole chapter from above reference and correct the page or grant me to do the changes.

I also request you to consider removing references which are older than 5-6 decades. They lack proper research.

Thanks.

About book by JL Mehta:

This book is used as a reference too much in the article that's why it is needed to talk about it. This book writes wrong or half-truth info about Sambhaji and defames him intentionally or un-intentionally. Some blatant mentions as "Sambhaji was incapable leader" are examples of this. Author completely misses the context or the situation. He neglects Aurangzeb's army of 5 lakh on Maratha empire at the time of Sambhaji (which merely has whole army of about 60 to 70K) and his relentless fight against Mughals, Siddis, Portuguese for 9 years which protected and kept Maratha empire alive and fighting. He also seems to have missed the fact that Soyarabai was indeed alive about a year after Sambhaji put some ministers to death for treason. He blatantly says "Sambhaji mercilessly killed his ministers" without stating reasons. This is like calling judge as a murderer. Very bad.

Also, the important fact that there was a heavy drought situation in Maharashtra for 2 years (1687-88) which also is not mentioned. He doesn't even mentions Sambhaji's knowledge of languages, his literary contributions etc. Not expected such poor book by this historian.

Please remove references like these.

Vikram-dattu (talk) 13:21, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Some of the things can be done is to use some research papers or latest well studied history books like Chhatrapati Sambhaji by Kamal Gokhale which are based on authentic sources.

Research paper: Struggle and Sacrifice by M.N. Karbhari Vikram-dattu (talk) 17:04, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

References to the discussion above and which contradicts some statements in the article:

• Bendre VS mentions that Yesubai did not follow Sambhaji in his flight because Bhavanibai (Girl child of Sambhaji) was to be born. She was born on 29th Jan 1679.
• ...The common public is not free from it even now. The adjective "gossipy" fully fits this Bakhar. Chitanis is also biased against Sambhaji who killed auther's forefather Balaji Avji.
• ...Sambhaji wrote Ramsingh of Jaypur in Sanskrit.
• Bendre raised a storm of controversy by his biography of Sambhaji, a son of Shivaji shown as better than his father in some aspects. Bendre has been diligently collecting materials for many years...

References

Hello @Vikram-dattu: as you can see in the sections above, there are a lot of sources that give such a reason for Sambhaji's confinement. And I see that you quote the passage that I quoted from Gordon, but Gordon's passage simply says that tales of Sambhaji later being incapable and drunk are false, not that he was not confined to Panhala for transgressions. Gordon doesn't mention that issue (or Sambhaji at all prior to his inheriting the crown), but Gordon does mention Sambhaji burning villages and the like, which gets back into the category of "things some people don't like hearing about Sambhaji".

If you have specific citations (and please provide a brief quotation, as I have above) that are cutting-edge scholarship and contradict the body of older works, by all means let us know here. Regarding Gokhale, his book it 40 years old, older than most of the sources we're using, and I can't view it on gBooks. Can you please provide a brief quote of what he says about the Panhala confinement? Also I find almost nothing about Gokhale at GoogleScholar; do you have any information about what degree of academic credibility he has?

Regarding Mehta, though no source is perfect, please note an above section where I point out GoogleScholar results showing Mehta has produced several works of history which are heavily cited in other academic works. While that is not definitive, it is a pretty good indication a scholar's work is seen as accurate and useful.

You're under a higher burden of proof here, because frankly we have a ton of people coming here constantly to argue against "defaming" Sambhaji with actual citations to historians, but I appreciate that you are actually disussing the issue and state that you have material supporting contrasting claims. MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:40, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

@MatthewVanitas: I am also trying to gather info about Dr. Kamal Gokhale. It is very unfortunate that English book by her is not available currently. Amazon UK also doesn't have it currently. I don't know if this will be any useful but Marathi version of this book "Shivputra Sambhaji" can be found on Amazon though.

I don't deny if Mehta is a scholar. But in my defence, he doesn't seem to have a needed "research on Sambhaji" either. And as I mentioned he has missed many contributions made by Sambhaji and is in hurry to declare Sambhaji as a incapable ruler. Which can simply disproved by Sambhaji's brilliant military expeditions in his very short reign, etc. Please note that I don't question each and every allegation against Sambhaji but making general statements like, "incapable ruler", "barely functioning anarchy", "He permitted torture and rapes", "He was busy in sensual pleasures" simply are contradictions to Sambhaji's short and successful reign.

I mean what are the odds that if it was barely functioning anarchy that he managed to fight relentlessly and didn't let Swarajya (Maratha Kingdom) to get crushed. It is very important to note the size of Maratha kingdom vs Mughals and that Auranzeb's army of half a million on Marathas. At the very end article says, "After Sambhaji, Maratha Kingdom was thrown into disarray!" Don't we agree that it was Sambhaji who was holding it until then?

I understand this is not enough, and I will continue my quest to find more proper statements by historians about same. But, isn't it sufficient to at least question such blatant statements? Please note that it's very hard to find evidences which give Sambhaji clean cheat in every aspect, but there aren't any solid "proofs" to defame him to that extent either!

I will try my best to gather more info. Please also have a look on "Struggle and Sacrifice", a research paper which shades light on contributions of Sambhaji. Ignore the word "Sacrifice" if you find it objectionable but content is good with references.

By the way, though not relevant, it was me who added quotation of Gordon in your list and one other place. ;) Vikram-dattu (talk) 04:44, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

References

Defection and return

Marriage section. (About Sambhaji's return) Article states: Upon returning home, Sambhaji was unrepentant and was again confined to Panhala.

Which didn't have references backing the statement.

Quite contrary to this, I have a pretty good references which state, that Sambhaji was not confined to Panhala. In fact Shivaji helped Sambhaji to escape Dilir Khan's camp. Shivaji was happy after Sambhaji's return. Also, in contrast to the statement Sambhaji was sorry of his act of defection. Also, though ministers and Soyarabai kept pestering Shivaji to not consider Sambhaji as descendant to thrown, Shivaji was in Sambhaji's favour.

References from book describing the event goes here:

• Sambhaji was much ashamed of himself... Sambhaji realised that inborn enemies could never be friends.
• Shivaji had formed a special army troop to watch Sambhaji. Sambhaji came in contact with this troop and finally reached Panhala.
• "Dilir Khan commited fearful atrocities along the way...and now Sambhaji's conscience was keenly awakened that complete enstrangement took place between them...
• Sambhaji left secretly on the night of 30th Nov, joined band of troops Shivaji had specially formed...

References

Sambhaji defecting to Dilir Khan for about a year and returning after is a major event and it should be covered under new section, say Defection and return. I will add this to article after few days with refinement and few more good sources if nobody objects this. Vikram-dattu (talk) 16:59, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

@Vikram-dattu: is there any indication that Bhawan Singh Rana is a scholar, and not a novelist? While Diamond does publish some history books too, I'm not seeing anything else of Rana's on GoogleScholar. And to be totally blunt, when a book's very title begins with "Chhatrapati" I tend to be a bit suspicious. Kind of like if a book is entitled "Her Royal Majesty Queen Elizabeth" I might suspect the book has a British bias.

As a side-note, whenever you have a GoogleBooks link, you can simply paste it at http://reftag.appspot.com to have it turned into a full Wikipedia footnote, which is more convenient. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:19, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

@MatthewVanitas: Thanks. BS Rana is not a novelist! His other works include Bhagat Singh (Indian freedom fighter) and VS Savarkar. And whilst you find the words "Chhatrapati"(Meaning King) as not history like, it is common practice for Indian historians to use these words. (For example Shahenshah, A book on Aurangzeb.). It is unusual in India to use name without honor. If and Indian writes a book on Elizabeth, it's most likely named as "Queen Elizabeth" if not "Your Majesty..." etc. So, please ignore these mentions wheresoever.

Thanks for the help http://reftag.appspot.com. I shall also thank you for mentioning GoogleScholar as I can see few Sambhaji related articles over there to reinforce. Link I will get back. Vikram-dattu (talk) 10:21, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

References

Administration of Sambhaji

Though Sambhaji was busy in ongoing battles, he continued administration much as in Shivaji's time with officers filled to vacant posts.

List of ministers of Sambhaji:

1. Peshawa (Prime minister) - This was carried by Moropant Pingale from Shivaji's times till his imprisonment in May 1680. This was given to his son Nilopant after Moropant's death in Oct 1680. 2. Sachiv-Suranis (Secretary) : This was with Annaji Datto till his imprisonment. Annaji was executed in 1682 for treason. This post was then given to Ramchandra Nilkanth till 1685. And was given to Shankarji Narayan Gandekar thenafter. 3. Nyayadhish (Supreme Judge): This was with Pralhad Niraji for few years and Kazi Haider afterwards. 4. Sarsenapati (Supreme Commando): Hambirrao Mohite till his death in 1687. It was given to Mhaloji Ghorpade. Mhaloji died in a skirmish in 1689. Mhaloji's son carried out his duties afterwards in Rajaram's reign as well.

Sambhaji's wife Yesubai also has rights of administration. In the absence of Sambhaji she would carry the administrative responsibilities. This also shows the position of women in Sambhaji's time.

Possible areas to focus with proper references:

1. List of ministers (Ashta Pradhans) before and after Prince Akbar's episode. 2. Yesubai's contribution in administation. 3. Sambhaji's investment in Kavi Kalash 4. Administrative policies. 5. Religious policies. 6. Drought situation in 1687-88.

Vikram-dattu (talk) 06:45, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 16 February 2019

PLEASE CHANGE:

"House arrest and defection to the Mughals Sambhaji's behaviour, including alleged irresponsibility and addiction to sensual pleasures led Shivaji to imprison his son at Panhala fort in 1678 to curb his behaviour.[5][7] Sambhaji escaped from the fort with his wife and defected to the Mughals in December 1678 for a year, but then returned home when he learnt of a plan by Dilir Khan, the Mughal viceroy of Deccan to arrest him and send him to Delhi.[8] Upon returning home, Sambhaji was unrepentant and was put under surveillance at Panhala.[5][9]"

TO

"GREAT POLITICAL AND LEADERSHIP SKILLS

For almost one year, Sambhaji Maharaj left the Shivaji Maharaj's Kingdom and joined Aurangzeb's commander, Diler Khan as part of politics. The above was just a brilliant plan of Sambhaji Maharaj, who had learned politics from childhood from Shivaji Maharaj. Shivaji Maharaj had gone south for capturing Adilshahi forts. Sambhaji Maharaj was alone with a small number of men. Diler Khan had come with a big force by orders of Aurangzeb to finish the Maratha Empire. Therefore Sambhaji Maharaj played a trick on him and sent him a letter saying that he was unhappy of Shivaji Maharaj's stance on granting princehood to Rajaram. Diler Khan was happy listening to this. In turn he informed Aurangzeb and asked Sambhaji Maharaj to join him. There was a series of 6 letter communication between Sambhaji Maharaj and Diler Khan. Each time permission from Aurangzeb was taken. This took a lot of time and in the meantime Shivaji Maharaj had returned. TrueMaratha (talk) 22:09, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. - FlightTime (open channel) 22:11, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

@MatthewVanitas thank you so much for considering my argument. I will give my level best to come up with them. Charvak157 (talk) 09:38, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, @MatthewVanitas, Thank you so much for considering my arguments, I will definitely come up with several reliable references to ensure that Sambhaji is not portrayed with a biased point of view and he is portrayed as he was. I am sure, after reading my references the whole wikipedia community will be convinced to the fact that Sambhaji was portrayed wrongly by many and indeed he was a great ruler, military strategist, administrator and a great person. I am sure that wikipedia will make the necessary changes in the article. Currently I am working on those references. But I am a new editor whereas you are a senior editor. Please guide me about how to represent my challenges to sections in the current article? How to suggest new sourced replacements to the challenged sections of the current article? How should I represent the totally new additions which I want to add in the article about Sambhaji? Charvak157 (talk) 14:27, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 March 2020

Sambhaji maharaj had two wives-Other wife's name was durgabai. Source of info-"Chava-by Shivaji Sawant" 2405:204:2297:9ECA:0:0:1BFE:A0 (talk) 08:29, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. It's not clear what changes you want to make; please make a precise request. Moreover, you need to describe the source in sufficient detail that another editor can locate it (and determine if it's reliable). –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 14:34, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Sambhaji - Truth and lie

@MatthewVanitas please do read this and consider this

Your efforts for validating the sources and your approach of trusting multiple sources are absolutely commendable. You have argued in the discussion that many of the English as well as Marathi writers have portrayed Sambhaji Maharaj as an addict, driven by sensual pleasures. Yes, many writers have wrote about him in the same way but in Sambhaji Maharaj's case your approach of trusting majority is not going to work. I will elaborate my point in the next para.

Past historians both British and Marathi have done a major mistake while judging Sambhaji, All of their writings are based on a single source of information. (Chitnis bakhar - written by Malhar Ramrao Chitnis in 1818). It was due to lack of proper sources that all of them have portrayed Sambhaji Maharaj in a bad light.

As Sambhaji Maharaj grew old, from year 1675 or so he started to notice the bribes taken by senior ministers of Shivaji Maharaj especially Annaji Datto. Shivaji Maharaj despite knowing the fact did not object them considering their great contribution to the swarajya. But a young Sambhaji Maharaj reprimanded them for this behaviour and some of the ministers started hating him. They tried to malign his image as a womanizer, alcohol addict and sensual pleasure seeker. All their attempts to malign his image failed at the time. They refused to obey his order in Shivaji Maharaj's abscence. Hence Shivaji Maharaj appointed him (Sambhaji) as the Subhedar of Shringarpur in Konkan.

In 1678 Sambhaji Maharaj escaped to Diler Khan as per the plan of Shivaji Maharaj in order to keep maratha kingdom safe from Diler Khan's forces at a time when a major portion of Maratha Army was busy in Southern India. He returned to Swarajya in 1679 and met Shivaji Maharaj on Panhala fort somewhere around Dec 1679. (Note - he was never confined on Panhala fort by Shivaji Maharaj) In this meeting Shivaji Maharaj gave a complete account of fine details in the Maratha empire (Treasury, Army, Administrative details etc.) so that Sambhaji Maharaj will be able to manage it when necessary. Sambhaji Maharaj was never confined at Panhala by Shivaji Maharaj infact he was appointed to look after the sensitive region Maharashtra-Karnataka border. He carried out army raids against Mughals from Panhala along with reputed Sardar Mhaloji Ghorpade. Shivaji Maharaj died at Raigad on 3rd April, 1680 at this time Sambhaji Maharaj was at Panhala planning further raids into Mughal territory. The ministers Moropant, Annaji Datto, Hiroji Farzand along with several others had conspired with the insecure wife of Shivaji Maharaj, Soyrabai. They planned to sideline Sambhaji and make a 10 year old Rajaram the new king. To do this they closed the gates of Raigad and there was great confusion among general public about the situation. Soyrabai decided to capture Sambhaji and sent Annaji and Moropant with an army of 5,000 men. Sambhaji Maharaj became aware of the plot and started his own preparations. Hambirrao Mohite the commander in chief of the Army (who was the real brother of queen Soyrabai and real maternal uncle of 10 year old Rajaram) arrested the minister duo on the way, and supported his step-nephew Sambhaji Maharaj. The ministers were taking his support for granted as he was the brother of Soyrabai, but he thought about swarajya and knew that only Sambhaji Maharaj was a able person to rule in the scenario. Sambhaji Maharaj with support of Hambirrao captured Raigad, arrested the ministers but he did not arrest Soyrabai, his stepmother. He was coronated on 16th Jan 1681. He released and restored all the ministers in their previous positions. (@MatthewVanitas please note that Hambirrao supported Sambhaji Maharaj who's was his step-nephew against the interests of his real sister Soyrabai. Why would a person help his stepfamily and not his real family? This was because Hambirrao was a mentor and father figure to Sambhaji Maharaj and he knew about his righteousness, courage and skills right from his childhood.)

Even after performing treachery the ministers were not only spared but also got restored to their old positions. Such was the big heart of Sambhaji Maharaj. But the ministers still held a grudge against him. They tried to poison him a few a few months later and also tried to lure the runaway Mughal prince Akbar in their conspiracy. Akbar promptly informed this to Sambhaji Maharaj who's took a decisive action. He captured the ministers at Pali and executed them. (Matthew Vanitas please note that Sambhaji Maharaj spared and restored these ministers at their first treachery considering their great contribution to the empire. and he punished them only at second such event. Now tell me, if a person is addict, driven by sensual pleasures can he be so patient with traitors? Taking a decision to spare them considering their contribution ?) Two of the ministers who was executed during the process Balaji Awji Chitnis and his elder son Awji Balaji. His great great grandson was Malhar Ramrao Chitnis the author of Chitnis Bakhar written in 1818. Now he was prejudice and biased against Sambhaji Maharaj because he punished his great great grandfather Balaji Awji. Hence he maligned Sambhaji Maharaj's image in his bakahr and most of the English as well as Marathi historians have used the same source for writing about Sambhaji. (Note that this source is not a contemporary source for Sambhaji, it was written 129 yrs after the death of Sambhaji.)

In the last 50-60 years historians such as Vishwas Patil, Shivaji Sawant, Kamal Gokhle, V.S.Bendre etc. All have unearthed many authentic contemporary sources from Sambhaji Maharaj's time. Many letters of his time some 300 odd letters have been found in past 50 years. Which unearth the true greatness of the man. Although they may have not published any papers as you guys in western world need for validation. But there are clear sources and references which tell that Sambhaji was not an addict, womanizer or brutality driven person. Infact he was one the greatest kings in India. Not just because of his bravery and military genius but also because of his broad scope of thinking, social reforms, religious tolerance, administrative skills and innovation.

Finally a very important fact. Balaji Awji along with his elder son Awji Balaji was executed by Sambhaji for treachery. Still Khandoji Balaji the younger son Balaji Awji was trusted aide, friend and personal assistant of Sambhaji Maharaj. He saved Sambhaji Maharaj's life in Goa when he was drowning in the floods. He remained loyal to Sambhaji till his death, he advised and served later rulers such as Rajaram, Tarabai and Shahu diligently. (MatthewVanitas tell me, why would a person serve and save life of another person who has punished his own father and elder brother?) The fact that Khandoballal served Sambhaji so loyally is enough to show that it was the ministers who were the culprits for maligning Sambhaji Maharaj. Charvak157 (talk) 05:58, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello @Charvak157:, I'm hearing what you're saying, but you have not presented any sources or citations for these claims. You note above, (and in other past disucssions) I've posted specific quotations from scholars, including their name as well as their publisher, and in some cases brief discussion of their credentials? That is the sort of thing we need to see before considering any counter-arguments for inclusion. We would need to see explicit citations to respected historians, people with solid credentials published in respected academic journals or by academic publishers. There are many many things written about Indian history by people who do not have that level of training or credibility, but on Wikipedia we have to assess arguments who who made them and who published them, people following serious formalized processes to ensure factual accuracy and objectivity.

I am completely open to reading selections from respected academics that back different narratives, but you must provide such citations here so as a community we can assess them and decide how to incorporate them. MatthewVanitas (talk) 06:33, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 May 2020

The page about Sambhaji states that his first wife was Saibai which is incorrect. Saibai was the wife of Shivaji and not Sambhaji, this is a very huge misleading information, hence I request you to please allow me to edit this, or you take this step yourself.

Various Sources to prove: peoplepill.com/people/maharani-saibai/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sai_Bhosale Mrig26 (talk) 06:36, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@Mrig26:  Not done: The article states that Sambhaji was "the eldest son of Shivaji, the founder of the Maratha Empire and his first wife Saibai", where "his" refers to Shivaji, not Sambhaji. If you have a suggestion on how to change the wording to make this more clear, please reopen the request and provide your suggestion. GoingBatty (talk) 17:10, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Sambhaji - Proposed changes to the article

Hello, @MatthewVanitas, Thank you so much for considering my arguments, I will definitely come up with several reliable references to ensure that Sambhaji is not portrayed with a biased point of view and he is portrayed as he was. I am sure, after reading my references the whole wikipedia community will be convinced to the fact that Sambhaji was portrayed wrongly by many and indeed he was a great ruler, military strategist, administrator and a great person. I am sure that wikipedia will make the necessary changes in the article. Currently I am working on those references. But I am a new editor whereas you are a senior editor. Please guide me about how to represent my challenges to sections in the current article? How to suggest new sourced replacements to the challenged sections of the current article? How should I represent the totally new additions which I want to add in the article about Sambhaji? Charvak157 (talk) 14:27, 10 April 2020 (UTC) Charvak157 (talk) 14:33, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Simply present your sources here. You are removing text that is supported by the existing sources, and it looks, inexplicably, as if your ambition is to remove criticism against this long-dead ruler. I am sure that is not your intention, but it is what it looks like. Unfortunately, this article has suffered in the past from editors who wanted to remove anything that was not entirely positive – as you say, a biased point of view, which is something we have to avoid. --bonadea contributions talk 11:40, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@ respected eitors

    The history written about king Sambhaji by Western historians and later by Indian historian is based heavily on limited biased,factually wrong informations, facts..and this is been proved by noted Indian historian named V.S Bendre (he was the first one to bring to light the real history of Sambhaji during 1960's.)  Works of V.S. Bendre are not only based on researches conducted in India but also abroad. His work can be and should be considered as scholarly.. In many of his work which was based around Life of Sambhaji he has mentioned numerous time that history of Sambhaji has been misunderstood , mispresented by historians..to support these statements.i give you the references of his some historical works
His works include "Sadhan-Chikitsa", which is considered a concise introduction to Maratha history and a guide for tools to conduct historical research (in this book he has clearly mentioned wrong history of Sambhaji has been presented after analysing historical materials)

2 Rajaramcharitram (rajaram's journey to jinji ) in this Book there are mentions about Sambhaji's rule and how his history was mispresented (there are references mentioned in that book as well) 3 Dandnitiprkarnam(Criminal jurisprudence) in this work he also mention about Sambhaji's as ound,just and capable ruler.an also scholarly side of Sambhaji 4.chattrapati Sambhaji Maharaj (ek mahan vibhuti)-this is 700 pages historical book based on study of historical facts, works of historians, letters , foreign sources, Indian sources on Sambhaji he has debunked many wrong presentations done on king's life

There is also another historian named "Kamal Gokhale" she holds doctorate in the topic has PhD in it you can also refer to her work called "shivaputra Sambhaji"

 Zeisteno (talk) 22:05, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Sambhaji - old references vs new references

Said article about Sambhaji definitely relies on older references. Sambhaji is historical figure of much mystery, curiosity in his own state of Maharashtra, India as well as globally. This curiosity and mystery arises because his career has not been understood properly due to lack of authentic sources. A fact to support this statement is that, From 1880's to 1960's Sambhaji was the most widely portrayed historical figure in Marathi plays, having more plays based on him even than his father Shivaji. The playwright's and historians based their knowledge on whatever sources were available at that time and hence they have defamed Sambhaji blatantly. This created a false image of Sambhaji which is not backed by proper research into the topic. The sources available on Sambhaji's reign were very few before 1960's. They were based primarily on the 'Chitnis Bakhar' which was written by 'Malhar Ramrao Chitnis' who was a direct descendant of 'Balaji Chitnis' who was executed by Sambhaji in 1681 for conspiring against the empire with some of the fellow ministers. Due to this many reputed Marathi historians well as reputed British(eg - Grant Duff) and other Western historians have also based their work on Chitnis Bakhar. Hence they have portrayed Sambhaji in a bad light. This has resulted in great spread of misinformation about Sambhaji in the masses. Many modern Indian as well as Western historians such as 'J.L.Mehta' have based their work wrongly on the shoulders of these older reputed Marathi and Western historians. I am not challenging the scholarly reputations of these scholars such as JL Mehta. They are definitely reputed scholars but they have definitely based their works on several false refences. Proper research about Sambhaji's career begun in the 1960's. V.S.Bendre spent 40 years examining actual papers, and reliable contemporary references and released his book on Sambhaji in 1960. The book had caused great storm in Maharashtra as this book portrayed Sambhaji in a whole different light. This was the first book which wrote about the capabilities and character of Sambhaji in a positive manner. This book revolutionized the existing belief about Sambhaji and many historians started researching on Sambhaji seriously. Historians such as Dr.Kamal Gokhale were on the forefront along with Bendre. In fact Sambhaji's Samadhi(memorial) at Vadhu-Budruk was discovered by Bendre in 1960. Before that nobody ever knew about his Samadhi. This shows the general ignorance about the ruler before 1960's. Post 1960's progressively many new contemporary sources have been unearthed and published by Marathi Historians. Some 300 odd letters from the reign of Sambhaji are available to this date. Many books which portray Sambhaji in a positive manner have been written after 2000 based on new and proper research. These have cleared many false allegations against Sambhaji. Due to recent, still many of these works have not been translated into English yet hence modern western historians are quite ignorant about Sambhaji and his reign. Historians such as A.D.Pisurlekar have examined contemporary British, Portuguese and Sanskrit sources which actually show the capabilities of Sambhaji. The Portuguese papers describe him as a 'war like prince'. A letter of British governor in Mumbai in 1684 states that Sambhaji is the ruling boss in the region and no one can challenge his authority. French traveller Abbey Carrey(I don't know the proper spelling) has also written about Sambhaji's intelligence in 1672. Almost nothing was known about Sambhaji's political, military capabilities and administration before 1960. These details were unearthed after the proper research began. That's why you will find that older references about Sambhaji's reign only focus on his character and never focused on his military and political and administrative achievements. Hence you will find very less data about his battles and campaigns in those older books. As if no important battle was fought during Sambhaji's reign, and Sambhaji did not have any successes apart from his heroic death. These references have blatantly ignored battles and conflicts during the reign of Sambhaji. But this cannot be true as Aurangzeb the Mughal Emperor (one of the three gunpowder empires of the medieval ages) had arrived in Deccan in 1681 to conquer the Deccan Plateau with a five lakh strong army. Deccan was geared for a showdown between Sambhaji and Aurangzeb and both wanted allies. Aurangzeb formed an anti-Sambhaji alliance with the Siddis, Portuguese and Mysore. While Sambhaji also formed an alliance with Adilshahi and Qutubshahi. Sambhaji defeated Siddis, Portuguese and Mysore in his campaigns which became known only after 1960. His victory at the Battle of Trichinopoly against Chikkadevaraya of Mysore in 1682 is a great example of military genius. Sambhaji actively supported Adilshahi and Qutubshahi militarily against Mughal invasions and sieges. Sambhaji also fought several battles with the Mughals in 1680-89. Sambhaji and his generals defeated the Mughals, harassed them, ransacked their supply chains and reduced them to starvation multiple times. Aurangzeb's two pincer moves in 1683 and 1684 respectively with forces having strength upto 1 lakh were defeated back by Sambhaji and his generals using guirella tactics and avoiding pitched battle. Sambhaji fought along the various borders very effectively. Managing multiple warfronts simultaneously and managing his limited army and resources efficiently. Due to Sambhaji's administrative policies and military capabilities Aurangzeb was never able to break through the core of Maratha Empire In the Sahyadris in his nine-year reign. Sambhaji increased the warfronts to a wider scale to negate mughal numerical superiority. Sambhaji's field army was close to 70,000 pitted against 5,00,000 mughal troops. Sambhaji divided his army into small groups to harass mughal army and ransack supply chains using the mobility of Maratha light cavalry. He placed garrisons atop important passes in the Sahyadris to secure his control. He strengthened the chain of Maratha forts in Sahyadris. He avoided pitched battles against the mughals. However he along with his 30,000 men defeated a 35,000 strong Mughal army in battle of Kalyan for recapturing Kalyan in 1682. Overall the Marathas fought at least 65 battles during Sambhaji's reign which were mostly won by the Marathas. According to older references if Sambhaji was drunkard, womanizer and addict then who fought such a overwhelmingly strong enemy such as Aurangzeb with limited resources?. How did the Marathas even survive the attack of a half a million strong army? How did the Marathas manage to control the coast against Portuguese and British when all their major resources were directed to fight Aurangzeb? All these new facts about Sambhaji have been unearthed only in the past 60 years. Various authors such as Shivaji Sawant, Vishwas Patil, Sadashiv Shivde, Namdeorao Jadhav, S.A.Bahekar, Jaysingrao Pawar have further discovered new sources. A lot of research still needs to be done on the person. Sambhaji was definitely a highly capable ruler who was definitely not a drunkard, womanizer, sensual pleasure seeker. As he was constantly engaged in warfare for his nine years. Sambhaji was politically sound. Sambhaji tried to form various alliances against Aurangzeb. He even tried to modernize his navy. He supported many new generals such as Santaji Ghorpade, Dhanaji Jadhav, Kanhoji Angre were promoted by Sambhaji who went on to became distinguished military commanders In the future. Sambhaji managed the drought situation in Maharashtra in 1687-88 really well by adhering to strict disciplinary policies. He gave certain subsidies to poor people during the drought. Sambhaji definitely played a great role in the solidifying the Maratha Empire. Sambhaji continued all his father's major policies throughout his reign from 1680-89. None of these facts have been mentioned in those old sources. New reliable sources (first class contemporary sources) contain all those facts about Sambhaji. Many new historians have also written that Sambhaji was not running behind women in his youth. He was great scholar and has 7 books to his credit all of which were written from 1670-76, the time when older sources describe him to be drunken and busy with women. The older sources also don't mention anything about this 1672 campaign against the Koli Kings of Jawhar and Ramnagar. He took part in active battles since 1672. He was a busy prince who handled foreign envoys in Shivaji's abscence. If he was busy taking such responsibilities at such a young age then how can he be busy with women and drunk constantly? This is true that no conclusive evidence has been found about Sambhaji's character. But the logical interpretation of the situation definitely makes one think about the capabilities and character of Sambhaji as a ruler. The logical interpretation leads us to think that Sambhaji was not addicted, womanizer and rash infact he was an alert king with great military prowess and administrative abilities and political foresight. Sambhaji did not lose any important Maratha fort when he was alive. All these factors have come into recent consideration by modern historians. Sambhaji's portrayal is getting positive day by day in Maharashtra as new sources are being discovered with time. English is a global language and not much of this work has been translated into English. Hence English writers are still considering the older sources which have been already translated into English before. Hence English writers except Robinson have not written positively about Sambhaji. Even though these Marathi historians may not have papers presented internationally still they have definitely discovered the truth about Sambhaji. This is not a biased point of view glorifying Sambhaji because I have read both the point of views(positive and negative) about Sambhaji. Please do consider my additions to the article based on these new Maratha sources. I keep on posting them time to time on Wikipedia. Please read this @MatthewVanitas, @Bonadea Thank you so much. Charvak157 (talk) 13:56, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Charvak157, I believe your edits over the last two months have been totally unconstructive. You have used novelists Shivaji Sawant and Vishwas Patil as bonafide historians.They can not be considered reliable sources at all.I will wait for other interested parties such as MatthewVanitas and bonadea to weigh in on this matter before deleting anything.Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 22:15, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello @Charvak157: a few points:

• Can you edit that post to leave a blank space between paragraphs? When you don't leave a blank space between paragraphs, they all run together and make it one large block of text that's hard to read.
• I feel you're really fixating on the one single mention in the entire article about "addiction to sensual pleasures" which is solely mentioned in the context of his being confined to Panhala at the age of 21. You're bringing up achievements from years after that a rebuttals to those allegations, which really isn't relevant.
• If there are more recently-published works that bring to light new information about Sambhaji, by all means share them with us. You mention a few names, but if you could link us some of their works, or GoogleScholar entries, etc. that would make this whole thing clearer. I will say though, if a large number of these works are only written in Marathi and aren't cited by other works, aren't scholars we can easily google up credentials on, etc. then that's going to make it very difficult for other Wikipedians here to be able to access and assess the credibility of those works. To be totally frank, if there are scholarly trends that are only present among less-known writers writing in Marathi, to the point those concepts aren't even being discussed in any credible English-language media (even news articles), that raises some questions about the objectivity and larger credibility of the works. MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:27, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello MatthewVanitas, do you mean to say something is true only if it is discussed in some credible English media? Don't label these writers as small and unreliable. They certainly have certain credibility to their work. If they are writing only in Marathi does that mean that their work is not genuine? Charvak157 (talk) 04:42, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello everyone, extending my argument about validity of old references about Sambhaji, I am presenting the comments on reliability of sources on the Marathas written by reputed historians V.S.Bendre and V.K.Rajwade, from the preface of Bendrey's book 'Malojiraje and Shahaji Maharaj' (pg 31-40) These will make it clear why I have been opposing the reliance of this article on the older references. This is a great extensive commentary on the reliability of the sources on the Maratha history.

         Start
      'We must understand the historical truth by assessing the quality, strengths and weaknesses of the evidences used to write  historical writings. These weaknesses are of two types

1) If the writer is biased, then he uses incomplete or wrong information and his writing will be weak and unreliable. 2) The accuracy of historical writings decreases with an increase in the time interval between the historical event and the time of writing. We also have to consider the human tendency of writing history from the author's own point of view.

People who are just writing the history and are not related to concerned historical figure only write about existing beliefs. Their writings cannot be considered as reliable as the writings of the people who were related to the historical figure. Hence, contemporary as well post-event 'bakhars' and 'haqeekats' are 'third class sources'. While contemporary reports and news letters are 'second class sources' In these second class sources, official newsletters, 'shakavalis', autobiographies or information deliberately acquired by other kingdoms etc. can be considered to be more reliable as compared other folklore type second class sources.

Evidences such as Official Letters of the officers, Letters of the families related to the historical event, contemporary accounts statements etc. can be considered as 'first class statements' for judging the historical truth.

By using the above principles in the case of the Maratha Empire 1) The letters of Mughals which tell the account of the Marathas are not as reliable as the letters of Shivaji-Sambhaji, as they already contain a biased point of view against their enemies. Still, it is wrong to ignore them completely.

2) The British newsletters about the Marathas were a good 'second class source' till the point when they were writing it from an impartial point of view. But, since the 18th century, when the British became the competitors of the Marathas, their letters started becoming more and more biased against the Marathas. Hence their reliability fell considerably.

The 'third class sources' such as 'Bakhars' and 'Haqeekats' are often written at the will of a person. Hence they are not backed by proper evidence, and should not be used to reconstruct history.

V.K.Rajwade in his book on 'sources of Maratha history' written around 1910, has clearly mentioned that 'You take any Bakhar in your hand and you will rarely find a bakhar having correct judgement of timeline of historical events. Imaginory Relations of mythological stories, Lack of printing etc. has resulted in creeping of many errors in those 'bakhars'. These bakhars often have exaggerated events without checking their historical validity.'

The bakhars have often given very short informations about 1) Pre-Shivaji and contemporary Muslim kingdoms. 2) Any campaign of Shivaji. 3) The family inter-relations and conditions in Bhosale or the Peshwa family. This information is completely confusing, contrasting, unrealistic, irrelevant that it can never be considered as true without the support of other sources.

If we go on trust the bakhars without the support of 'first class sources' then we are not able to differentiate between the true and false informations given in the Bakhars. Hence, if we write the history based on the Bakhars only, then due to lack of reliable sources, our attempts will mostly fail. Plus even if an event is described in the same way in multiple bakhars, still it cannot be considered true by the principle of majority. Hence, even one 'first class source' such as 'original document' is enough to negate the majority of the Bakhars. Hence, the principle of majority does not work here. A single 'original document' can be trusted more than any Maratha or foreign Bakhars or Bakhar like accounts.

      V.K.Rajwade has written about the Bakhars that the Bakhars within themselves can be classified as third class, second class and first class respectively.

All these Bakhars are useful in some way. 1) Sabhasad Bakhar 2) Malhar Ramrao's Bakhar 3) Shivdigvijaya Are the three most important Bakhars. Like other Bakhars, these Bakhars are also plagued in several aspects such as wrong judgement of timeline, ignorance about the capabilities of the ruler, exaggeration, lack of organized information etc. It is totally necessary to reach out till the roots of the Bakhar's writings to verify it properly before trusting them as history. Available versions of the Bakhars are often second or third versions of the original one, and hence are corrupted with addition of new information.

1) Sabhasad Bakhar is completely written on the basis of pure recall of information, hence it cannot be considered as a completely reliable source.

2) Malhar Ramrao's Bakhar also has certain shortcomings hence cannot be considered as valid.

3) Shivdigvijaya uses old letters but the author was not well trained in organising the information, hence it cannot be considered as a completely reliable source. Hence these 3 major Bakhars are not at all 'first class sources' for examining the Maratha history. The Muslim 'Tawarikhs' also seem to have similar shortcomings and hence are not a reliable source of information.

All these problems give rise to the question that, How can we verify the information in the Bakhars? The answer is Contemporary Marathi, Persian, Kannada, English, Portuguese letters are the only sources to crosscheck the information in the Bakhars. If these are not found then we will not have comprehensive results. And to date very few of such letters have been found.

Reputed historians such as Grant Duff also trusted these Bakhars. Hence information written by him or his students cannot be considered as reliable. These new sources of original letters have not been discovered yet, hence we can trust the information in the Bakhars only if it is verified with an original source.

The reader often fails to understand the historical truth after relying on the Bakhars. And every figure in the Maratha history has been affected to a level due to lack of original sources. Many Bakhar writers did not have access to multiple original sources which limited their sourcing, and led them to insert Imaginory events in the history.

In case of Chatrapati Sambhaji, I (V.S.Bendrey) have compared events and descriptions in the Bakhars and descriptions of the same events in 'original documents' to prove how the descriptions in the Bakhars are Imaginory, Unrealistic and exaggerated.

(My own personal note{charvak157} - I don't have the book written by Bendre on Sambhaji with me right now, I will mention all these comparisons by Bendrey as soon as I get the book.)

In his conclusion V.K.Rajwade has mentioned that

The sources of Maratha History have been written, compiled and published in a disorganised manner. These sources should have been presented in an organized manner. These poorly verified sources can definitely fool the person who is making his assumptions about the history on the basis of these sources.'

          End

Chhatrapati Sambhaji's history has been written by most authors such as Grant Duff, and other reputed historians such as Jadunath Sarkar, G.S.Sardesai etc who worked well before 1960's obviously had to rely on whatever sources were available in the forms of the Bakhars. As I have mentioned in my previous talk, authentic sources about Sambhaji have been discovered only after 1960. And most of these have not been translated into English. Hence, the earlier reputed historians whose work on the Marathas is considered to be seminal were not able to judge Sambhaji properly. These old Bakhars and sources have a portrayed Sambhaji like an imaginary, fiction like character in malicious way, ignoring his capabilities and contributions as a ruler. The bakhars often unrealistic accounts about Sambhaji which bewilder the reader. There are many examples supporting this. I will state one example here. According to the Bakhars, Sambhaji executed his stepmother Soyarabai. By sealing her in a wall alive. But 'Sambhaji's letter to Bakre Shastri of Kudal' in which he expresses grief over the death of Soyarabai. If he executed Soyarabai then why would he grieve for her death? Plus evidences indicating that Soyarabai was alive much after the execution of ministers involved in the plot are available.

Such misinformations about his character have been proven wrong in the past 50-60 years. And exploits of his military, political and administrative achievements have come to the fore in these time which were completely ignored before.

I sign off for today, and complete my today's argument. @MatthewVanitas, @Bonadea, @JonathanSammy please read this. Thank you so much.

Charvak157 (talk) 11:20, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Sambhaji and his religious policy

Hello everyone, the given article does not have any specific section on the religious policies of Sambhaji. I want to create a new section about his religious policy in the article. I have some information with inline citations. I am stating it below.

Sambhaji had a tolerant religious policy. Sambhaji had passed important grants to sacred religious places of all religions which have described as 'Sanadas'.*

• Gokhale, Kamal, Shivputra Sambhaji, Navkamal Publications, 1978, page 434

One Gangadhar Raghunath Kulkarni of Kasabe Harsul, district Aurangabad was forcefully converted to Islam. Sambhaji after his appeal allowed him to get entry into Hinduism.*

• Gokhale Kamal, Shivputra Sambhaji", Navkamal Publications, 1978, page 446

Sambhaji had invited Muslim soldiers of Mangalvedha to join his army. By doing so he had tried to strengthen Shivaji's policy of religious tolerance and equity.*

• Bahekar S.A., "Martiyar Sambhaji", Kasab Publications, Jalgaon, 1999, page 353

The authors cited are Kamal Gokhale and S.A.Bahekar. Please tell me whether these sources will work or not. And can I create the new section in the article? Charvak157 (talk) 06:17, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Note - "Shivputra Sambhaji" and "Martiyar Sambhaji" both are books. Thanks Charvak157 (talk) 06:19, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello everyone, nobody has replied to my proposed additions. I request everyone to have a look at them. Charvak157 (talk) 04:47, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 October 2020

I want to edit this article as there are some mistakes about Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj that can lead to a controversy. Swyam Sharma (talk) 10:26, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

 Not done Nothing to do here, as you did not specify which changes you want to make. --bonadea contributions talk 10:59, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 February 2021

Kindly write Chatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj insted of Sambhaji 2409:4042:2803:BA7A:656:F55:BE49:5C05 (talk) 16:59, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. – robertsky (talk) 18:46, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 March 2021

House arrest and defection to the Mughals Sambhaji's behaviour, including alleged irresponsibility and addiction to sensual pleasures, led Shivaji to imprison his son at Panhala fort in 1678 to curb his behaviour.[5][7] Sambhaji escaped from the fort with his wife and defected to the Mughals in December 1678 for a year, but then returned home when he learnt of a plan by Dilir Khan, the Mughal viceroy of Deccan, to arrest him and send him to Delhi.[8] Upon returning home, Sambhaji was unrepentant and was put under surveillance at Panhala.[5][9]

This is not real history, Dharmaveer Sambhaji Maharaj were not addicted to any kind of pleasure which is shown by wikipedia.. Please do not spread wrong information Sbopulkar (talk) 07:54, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Also see the heading of this talk page. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 08:20, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Change the name of the title to Sambhaji maharaj

He was our maharaja so Edit it immediately Parshya143 (talk) 18:34, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Wrong information about Sambhaji Maharaj

1)Sambhaji Maharaj was loyal to his father as well as the throne so it is wrongly said 'Sambhaji's behaviour, including alleged irresponsibility and addiction to sensual pleasures'.It is proved by his death itself.He did not give anything to Aurangzeb even though he could do so to save his life.He was a very responsible king which can be seen through his love for his subjects(रयत) through his schemes in droughts and nine years of his rule.He was not against any religion and this can also be proved.Aurangzeb's forth son also came to him.

References 1)https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sambhaji 2)https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_involved_in_the_Maratha_Empire Jesbd....shdjx (talk) 10:14, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

 Not done Please see the FAQ at the top of this page. --bonadea contributions talk 16:47, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Wrong content

Purposely added wrong information about Sambhaji Maharaj Thetruthteller7488 (talk) 18:04, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Sambajiraje instant of sambaji

2401:4900:52F7:42A1:2949:6F47:D003:65C1 (talk) 14:00, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:06, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Wrong Information Article about Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj

It contains false information about Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj. He was not imprisoned at Panhala. And Sarsenapati Hambirrao Mohite helped Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj and saved him from the conspiracy ministers. कृष्णा पाटील (talk) 21:59, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

He never insulted the Prophet Mohammad.He was only against Aurangzeb. He also didn't executed Soyrabai,she died of illness.He was also a kind hearted king. Avt 123 (talk) 12:37, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Sambhaji Maharaj never defected to Mughal. It was just a plan of Shivaji Maharaj himself. Avt 123 (talk) 12:44, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Chatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj was never offered the hand os mughal emperor Aurangzeb's daughter instead history and most intelligent historians have stated that when Sambhaji Maharaj' tongue was cut off on their refusal to accept the islam then again the proposal of accepting Islam was put in front of him and then Sambhaji Maharaj ordered pen and paper to write down his answer there he wrote that he will not accept islam even if Aurangzeb offers his daughter's hand to me and he was tortured for not accepting islam and telling aurangzeb the further plans of marathas and not for nit accepting Aurangzeb's daughter's hand. Sambhaji Maharaj is called "dharamveerr" because, he was brutally tortured for more than 40 days and sacrificed his life for Hindu dharma. Therefore I request team Wikipedia to correct this information. Atharva Khutwad Patil (talk) 18:00, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Hey guys, you are doing great efforts to bring out the facts about Sambhaji's life. Please give proper references for your information, then only we will be able to consider them. I am trying my best from my side to find out authentic references which tell the true story of the great Sambhaji Maharaj. Thank you so much. You can see Wikipedia's policy to check how you can cite your references. Charvak157 (talk) 05:34, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Wrong information

It contains false information about Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj. He was not imprisoned at Panhala. And Sarsenapati Hambirrao Mohite helped Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj and saved him from the conspiracy ministers 2409:4042:2380:862A:27:444D:64D5:B967 (talk) 20:10, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

We go by what reliable indenpendent sources say. See this archived discussion for more context and information. --bonadea contributions talk 09:27, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Wrong Information

You are saying this information is from a source. If you don't know that the source information is true or false, still you are showing it. That doesn't make a sense. This information is WRONG!!! 2409:4042:E8A:D918:0:0:90B:E506 (talk) 05:18, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

RIGHT INFORMATION

The history of Maratha empire is great, Shiv Putra Shri Chattrapati Sambhaji Maharaj was a great emperor he treated women with great respect. Even his enemies were scared of him, Sarsenapati Hambirao Mohite was the chief commander of His father and later him. The time when he was charged Hambirrao Mohite helped to disprove all allegations against him. Also you added everything else but never mentioned that Sambaji raje were so brave that they were known as the bravest king of India. If he were not betrayed by his own people he would have become the strongest and the greatest king of all time. Did you know that he and his father had a special place where the women and kids of a particular place affected by war were kept with all resources that people could stay in till they found a reliable source of income.This information is Right!!! 2409:4042:E8A:D918:0:0:90B:E506 (talk) 05:18, 8 April 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8F8:1825:F2E4:F8A5:44FD:9400:1169 (talk)

Add chatrappati shivaji maharaj and not only shivaji

Add chatrappati shivaji maharaj and not only shivaji Vaishiiiii (talk) 00:59, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 June 2022

Want to add chatrapati shivaji maharaj not only shivaji Vaishiiiii (talk) 01:02, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: See FaQ and WP:Honorifics. 💜  melecie  talk - 01:11, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Change title to Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj

It is not only Sambhaji . It is Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj. You are dishonouring them. So please change title to Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj. Thank You. 1.186.197.248 (talk) 19:22, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 June 2022

Kindly change the name from 'Sambhaji' to 'Chatrapati Sambhaji Raje' 103.172.157.142 (talk) 07:41, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: see FAQ Cannolis (talk) 07:43, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

First painting of chhatrapati shambhaji maharaj

Seeing this painting it looks like they (Shambhaji maharaj) were inspired from Mugals' art and culture , but in reality it's not true,they were follower of Hindu religion and culture. Or the painting was made by a mugal artist,in his point of view and style.if that's the matter then you should mention that one,to clear the confusion of visitors, like me.please take a look at it. 2405:205:1582:37E8:0:0:1D01:C0AC (talk) 14:41, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Chattrapati Sambhaji Maharaj's character

He was not irresponsible and sensual addict pls remove this information. also change the title to Chattrapati Sambhaji Maharaj 103.76.56.122 (talk) 19:17, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Wrong information about house arrest and defection to the mughals

As there is information is given that ‘’’due to alleged irresponsibility and addiction to sensual pleasure, led shivaji to imprison his son.’’

This is wrong history has been mentioned and it is circulating in a wrong way. Please verify this information and update the same.

There was ganimi kava has planned by Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj and Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj.

Also there is no evidence in history about sambhaji maharaj sensual pleasure. He was very great king of all time in history.

Request you to please update this information, it hurts our Maratha people sentiment. 114.143.55.26 (talk) 10:16, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Misleading information

Please update below information. This is totally wrong.

Sambhaji's behaviour, including alleged irresponsibility and addiction to sensual pleasures, led Shivaji to imprison his son at Panhala fort in 1678 to curb his behaviour.[6][8] Sambhaji escaped from the fort with his wife and defected to the Mughals in December 1678 for a year, but then returned home when he learnt of a plan by Dilir Khan, the Mughal viceroy of Deccan, to arrest him and send him to Delhi.[9] Upon returning home, Sambhaji was unrepentant and was put under surveillance at Panhala.[6][10]

The entire information has no evidence in history. Sambhaji Maharaj neither behaved irresponsible nor having addiction to sensual pleasure in his entire life. The escaping and defected with Mughals it was planned strategy by chatrapati shivaji maharaj and Sambhaji Maharaj.

Secondly, the information majorly defamed the sambhaji Maharaj's character. He was gentleman and respectful towards womans. Saying 'addicted to sensual pleasure' is disrespecting the sambhaji Maharaj and entire maharashtrian's.

Please please update this all information. Nbasare (talk) 10:52, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Wrong Information about the the great Chatrapati sambhaji maharaj the writer will not understand the greatness of cha. Sambhaji maharaj . Remove the information about arrested and all .

House arrest and defection to the Mughals Sambhaji's behaviour, including alleged irresponsibility and addiction to sensual pleasures, led Shivaji to imprison his son at Panhala fort in 1678 to curb his behaviour.[6][8] Sambhaji escaped from the fort with his wife and defected to the Mughals in December 1678 for a year, but then returned home when he learnt of a plan by Dilir Khan, the Mughal viceroy of Deccan, to arrest him and send him to Delhi.[9] Upon returning home, Sambhaji was unrepentant and was put under surveillance at Panhala.[6][10

This article is totally wrong nothing like this happened . Nilesh varpe (talk) 01:52, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Nilesh varpe:, on Wikipedia we go by what WP:Reliable sources say about a subject, and as you may see in the footnotes for those statements, they are derived from reputable historical works. MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:55, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 January 2023

Under the section titled Accession, the phrase "Soyrabai, and her kinsmen from the Shirke family" is incorrect. Soyrabai was from Mohite family. Her brother Hambirrao Mohite was the army chief. It was Yesubai - Sambhaji's wife who was from Shirke family. Milindpadalkar (talk) 05:43, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 20:43, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 February 2023

I would draw your attention to replace the false information about chhatrapati sambhaji maharaj . The information that he was scandalous and not loyal toward his swaraj is false.. He did not even have any affair with any woman . The only woman in his life was his only queen . He was not imprisoned by shivaji maharaj, he was sent to a fort panhala to isolate for safety and political measures. It was a part of their political conspiracy and plan . The information that he went against swaraj is false. he had made peace treaties with the mughals in order to secure their territory when shivaji maharj had went to an another battle. He treated his people with extreme care and love . He made strict rules and punishment for the people who tortured and harassed women with baning and stopping the human especially the women trafficking performed by the afghans ,mughals, and arabs and freed all the women with respect and safety to their homelands . He was always and always respectful towards women.

I request to replace the false information given on the Wikipedia about him .

Thank you Factbasedinfo (talk) 20:39, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. M.Bitton (talk) 20:49, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

False Information on Chatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj

Read the Book 'Life and Death of Sambhaji' which was written after more than 10 years of extensive research by Medha Deshmukh Bhaskaran. It mentions how Sambhaji maharaj was forced to convert into Islam so that the Hindus the marathas would have no option but to convert to follow suit with his Beloved King. Sambhaji maharaj and Shivaji maharaj had escaped from Aurangzeb clutches when he had planned their execution. This was a black mark on Aurangzebs image, bcz no one has ever escaped before. And this created rage and a feeling of revenge in the mind of Aurangzeb. Trusting and believing on someone who has no clue about the country and the people, who doesnt even belong to the country makes no sense. Sambhaji maharaj had even refuged Akbar who was under the risk of being killed by his own Father Aurangzeb. So the Akbar who is called as the Great seeks refuge of our Chatrapati. Akbar didn't trust his own father bcz his own father was about to kill him. Stop writing false information about our Chatrapati. It's an insult to our King and will not be tolerated.. 182.48.199.98 (talk) 16:17, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: Maratha and Mughal Accounts (which narrate the incident very differently) are already mentioned in segregated paragraphs. Furthermore, you have not provided any quotes and/or links from the specific source you mentioned.

SKAG123 (talk) 22:40, 5 March 2023 (UTC)