पानीपत १७६१ (मराठा साम्राज्य एवं पानीपत महायुद्ध इतिहास)

whole truth I regret much that I have not been able to prevail upon you to relinquish your plan You may depend upon it you will never make it a satisfactory work I will get you the list of the French army, generals, etc Just to show you how little reliance can be placed even on what are supposed the best accounts of a battle I mention that there are some circumstances men tioned in General -------'s account which did not occur as he relates them He was not on the field during the whole battle particularly not during the latter part of it The battle began I believe at eleven It is impossible to say when each important occurrence took place, nor in what order These are an swers to all your queries but remember I recommend you to leave the battle of Waterloo as it is With the words of these quotations ringing in his ears how dare an Indian writer take up the well worn theme of the battle of Panipat and hope to succeed in the attempt? Waterloo was fought between two most advanced nations represented by such extraordinary men as Napoleon and the Duke of Wellington Everything about it was going on in the most civilized and up to date manner There was no dearth of official despatches reports, explana tions plans memoirs affirmations and contradictions And still we have the comments of the chief actor in the field on the victorious side as quoted above How much more unsatisfactory the state of affairs must be when dealing with Panipat—a battle fought between two parties one of which was backward and the other barbarous! One party could not write an official report of the battle because it simply ceased to exist the other would not write about it be cause it thought it superfluous As for private writings survivors from the defeated and annihilated party could write only apologetically and sometimes with a guilty conscience the members of the victorious party wrote with ex aggeration and bombast, sometimes without any regard for truth knowing that nothing succeeds like success The result is that the historian has to de pend on later gathered partial reports individual memoirs and chronicles written with a purpose, none having a complete vision of the whole affair Even then the material available is very scanty, leaving many lacunæ in the connected story One has to do without maps plans official orders, chits from the generals in their hand writing before the end of the battle as well as later confirmations or denials Such is the basis for Panipat But an historic event on which hung the fate of a nation the destiny of a continent and the future trend of world affairs for centuries cannot, and ought not to go unrelated And it will be granted that the story can best be related by one of the nationals preferably by one belonging to the losing side For thus only can the whole truth about the event come out or find expression With this idea I have ventured to take up the theme and write the follow- ing pages xvii 1