Why did Marathas not grab Delhi for themselves rather than reinstating Mughals

greatstreetwarrior

Ad Honorem
Nov 2012
3,873
Even if the Mughals were subservient and paying taxes to Marathas and were also ruling only a small suburb in Delhi. Why did Mahadji Shinde not take Delhi under the Peshwai control rather than keeping it under ceremonial Mughal headship. Would adding Delhi to the Confederacy and thus making it capital or atleast a direct annexed land of the regime not add to Peshwa/Maratha legitimacy.
 

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,817
New Delhi, India
Just as the British did not remove Moghuls or Awadh nawabs, Marathas were satisfied by installing them. The power was with Marathas till they lost in Panipat.
 

rvsakhadeo

Ad Honorem
Sep 2012
9,224
India
Just as the British did not remove Moghuls or Awadh nawabs, Marathas were satisfied by installing them. The power was with Marathas till they lost in Panipat.
You are right about that ! But I wish that if the Marathas at that time had shown the foresightedness that Shivaji Maharaj had shown or even Bajirao-I had shown, the power of Marathas would have become not only legitimate but, they would have acquired a bigger perspective than what they had, at that time. Bajirao-I had expressed to a gathering of his chieftains at the beginning of his rule that the root of the Moghul Empire had to be struck and not its outgrowths, making it clear that the rulers at Delhi were his targets rather than this or that courtier of the Delhi court or small potentates. But the short life of this great prince was not enough for all that he sought to achieve.
 
Jan 2017
112
Bharat
Marathas simply did not have power to do that. They were stronger than any other power based in India but not as strong as to eliminate all traces of their enemies.

Marathas humiliated Nizams again and again but could not fully eliminate them too.
 

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,817
New Delhi, India
I read that Marathas alienated local wherever they went demanding 'chauth'. They were without friends in Panipat and not with their full strength, just their northern contingent. That is why they lost against Abdali. They did not create a strong nation.
 
Aug 2014
1,273
pakistan
For the very same reason, Ahmad Shahi Abdali did not appoint Najib-ud-daula as new king of Delhi after 1761, but just a prime minister.........Najib-ud-daula ruled Delhi and its dependecies for a decade as a dictator and the nominal king Shah Alam was elsewhere, in Awadh. The regions north to Delhi, Rohilkhand and Farrukhabad, were ruled by Pashtuns and they were issuing coins in the name of Ahmad Shah Abdali....so Abdali was capable of annexing Delhi as well as Rohilkhand to his empire, but he did not for the same reasons as Marathas.
 
Jun 2012
1,780
chandigarh
For the very same reason, Ahmad Shahi Abdali did not appoint Najib-ud-daula as new king of Delhi after 1761, but just a prime minister.........Najib-ud-daula ruled Delhi and its dependecies for a decade as a dictator and the nominal king Shah Alam was elsewhere, in Awadh. The regions north to Delhi, Rohilkhand and Farrukhabad, were ruled by Pashtuns and they were issuing coins in the name of Ahmad Shah Abdali....so Abdali was capable of annexing Delhi as well as Rohilkhand to his empire, but he did not for the same reasons as Marathas.
reason abdali did not annex delhi is that marathas fought abdalli in panipat. Although abdalli won it was pyrrhic victory. It restricted the growth of marathas as well as abdalli and pretty much destroyed maratha and abdalli military. Panipat is gateway to delhi.
 

greatstreetwarrior

Ad Honorem
Nov 2012
3,873
reason abdali did not annex delhi is that marathas fought abdalli in panipat. Although abdalli won it was pyrrhic victory. It restricted the growth of marathas as well as abdalli and pretty much destroyed maratha and abdalli military. Panipat is gateway to delhi.
Exactly my point and I would like to reiterate to Azad. Had Abdalli done the mistake of taking Delhi directly, the Marathas would have kept coming back. There is no way he would want to tie himself down in Delhi. Considering Jats and Sikhs from the west and him having alienated Shias of Awadh, he might well have been encircled into a trap if he remained long. Also Azad remember, without Abdalli Rohillas had no chance. Infact right after Najib's death Marathas crushed them.
 

rvsakhadeo

Ad Honorem
Sep 2012
9,224
India
Exactly my point and I would like to reiterate to Azad. Had Abdalli done the mistake of taking Delhi directly, the Marathas would have kept coming back. There is no way he would want to tie himself down in Delhi. Considering Jats and Sikhs from the west and him having alienated Shias of Awadh, he might well have been encircled into a trap if he remained long. Also Azad remember, without Abdalli Rohillas had no chance. Infact right after Najib's death Marathas crushed them.
As far as I recall, Mahadaji Shinde ( aka Mahadaji Scindia, the English distortion ), the great warrior and the first one of the Shinde ( aka Scindia ) clan settled scores with all the parties who had opposed the Maratha Army in the 3rd battle of Panipat in 1761. Janakoji Shinde a firebrand youngster and son of Dattaji Shinde was kia in 1761 at Panipat. Dattaji Shinde was himself kia in the earlier battle with Abdali at Buradi Ghat near Delhi. Mahadaji Shinde avenged the death of his relatives as above by defeating and killing Kutub Shah, one of the local underlings of Abdali who had beheaded the fatally wounded warrior Dattaji lying on the ground.
Marathas attacked Rohilkhand as a revenge and Najib Khan Rohilla, the villain of the 3rd battle of Panipat, was forced to make peace with the Marathas , in 1768. Marathas forced him to give up his district of the Doab i.e.area lying between the Yamuna ( aka Jumna the English distortion ) and Ganga ( aka Ganges , the English distortion ) rivers, near Delhi. He served under the Maratha forces for a brief period, before dying in 1770.
 
Last edited:

greatstreetwarrior

Ad Honorem
Nov 2012
3,873
As far as I recall, Mahadaji Shinde ( aka Mahadaji Scindia, the English distortion ), the great warrior and the first one of the Shinde ( aka Scindia ) clan settled scores with all the parties who had opposed the Maratha Army in the 3rd battle of Panipat in 1761. Janakoji Shinde a firebrand youngster and son of Dattaji Shinde was kia in 1761 at Panipat. Dattaji Shinde was himself kia in the earlier battle with Abdali at Buradi Ghat near Delhi. Mahadaji Shinde avenged the death of his relatives as above by defeating and killing Kutub Shah, one of the local underlings of Abdali who had beheaded the fatally wounded warrior Dattaji lying on the ground.
Marathas attacked Rohilkhand as a revenge and Najib Khan Rohilla, the villain of the 3rd battle of Panipat, was forced to make peace with the Marathas , in 1768. Marathas forced him to give up his district of the Doab i.e.area lying between the Yamuna ( aka Jumna the English distortion ) and Ganga ( aka Ganges , the English distortion ) rivers, near Delhi. He served under the Maratha forces for a brief period, before dying in 1770.
Najib served the Marathas. My god I never knew that. I felt Marathas defeated Rohillas only after his death.