पानीपत १७६१ (मराठा साम्राज्य एवं पानीपत महायुद्ध इतिहास)

a superior official, but thought him to be an ordinary munshi Kashiraj is self-contradictory in his account of Bhau's behaviour On the one hand, he condemns Bhau on his pride and obstinacy, on the other he depicts Bhau as ready to submit to any conditions mediated through the agency of such persons as Kashiraj himself Now to judge Bhau from his own letters, one thing is certain about him and that is that he was never proud, though his tone was often harsh and his manner peremptory Bhau should be the last person to assume a cringing role before a man of Kashiraj's position or to be over confi- dent about him There seems to be some discrepancy in the account of Kashiraj, as is acknowledged by Sir Jadunath Sarkar who has carefully studied the original manuscript. He thinks it due to lapse of memory or loose narrative of events ⁶ We cannot treat it so lightly Kashiraj tells us of Bhau's writing his last chit just before the battle of Panipat, a thing which no thoughtful person will be ready to believe A commander in chief intimating in his autograph the last desperate movement of his army, just before the commencement of the fatal battle, is a thing which cannot be inserted or allowed in fiction or poetry, much less can it be believed in a primary source of history Was Bhau such a fool as to believe and hope that his last note would bear any good and immediate results, after his experience in diplomacy for six months? Would he not rather fear the fatal consequence of pre-intimating his movement to such a consummate general as Ahmad Shah Abdali? It was a matter of astonishment to us when we tried to study this point deeply and found none of the previous writers even suspecting the full import of this, to us, a cock and bull story We call it such because fortunately for the historian there is the clear evidence of a con- temporary letter directly falsifying Kashiraj's narrative Sir Jadunath in his new translation of Kashiraj's narrative has given the name of Bhau's valet who took the last chit to Kashiraj as Balakram, who is styled as Bhau's betel-bearer, and is taken as the most confidential servant of his master ⁷ Anybody with an acquaintance with the Maratha names knows that Balakram is not a common Maratha name On the other hand, a letter from the Purandare Archives pub- lished by Rajwade in his sixth volume clearly gives the name of Bhau's valet as Balaram, a common name amongst the Marathas ⁸ Anupgir Gosawi writes in this post-Panipat letter to Nana Purandare that the Peshwa's valet, Balaram Vaghoji Naik, and some others also had gone to Shuja-ud-daulah's camp on some errand on the Sunday prior to the battle of Panipat, fought on Wednesday, 14th January, 1761 This proves that the chit Kashiraj is talking of as hav- ing been dramatically sent three hours prior to the battle had been actually sent (if at all) three days previous to it We suggest from this small but vital point that Kashiraj had not only forgotten the days and their proper order, but was narrating the whole story with a dramatic touch, as the battle of Panipat is a good theme for such treatment. 6 Fall 2.369 7 Ibid 2 320 8 Rajwade 6 No 407, p 472. P. F—9