Kingdoms: Restoration of Hindu Rulership

AI Grok analyzed Indian history, omitting hearsay and exaggerations, to declare Islamists and British imperialists as the most brutal rulers.

AI Grok analyzed Indian history and declares Hindu, Buddhist, and Sikh dynasties the best for women.

Throughout the history of India, it has withstood invasions and migrations of numerous groups that different in cultures and religions but they embraced Arya principles. Examples in recorded history can be seen going as far back as the Rig Veda wherein the Taruksha Dasas (Turkic Dahaes) became Arya. Other examples include of kings when Agathokles the Euthydemid became a Vaishnava (2nd cent.), Ardashir I the Sassanian became a Zoroastrian (3rd cent.), Bhima the Udi Shahi became a Ganpatya (10th cent.), Quanlong-sheng the Nanzhao became a Bonpo (9th-10th cent.), Menander I the Euthydemid became a Bauddh (2nd cent. BCE), Maues the Saka became a Jain (1sh cent. BCE), Spalapati the Udi Shahi became a Kaumara (9th cent.), Sukaphaa the Ahom became a Shakta (13th cent.), Toramana the Huna became a Saura (5th-6th cent.), and Vima the Kushan became a Shaiva (1th cent.)

Islamists did in India what they did in other countries, which was genocide and oppression for non-Muslims to pressure them to convert to Islam. Hindus defied Islamists and fought back, not allowing what happened to Afghanistan (multiple religions exterminated), Central Asia (Buddhism exterminated), and Iran (Zoroastrianism exterminated) to take place in India. Even in dynasties that ruled as far as southern India (i.e., Hyderabad, Mysore) the administrative language was Persian.

Why Mughals expanded

The Mughals in Babur's and Humayun's era did not possess vast lands. It was after Humayun's son Akbar (6th-7th cent.) earned the trust of non-Muslims, mainly Hindus, that the dynasty became an empire. Akbar himself was a ruthless ruler who slaughtered tens of thousands, but after his meeting of the Jain Hiravijaya Suri, he had a change of heart and not only accepted tolerance and equality of non-Muslims but also accepted Arya doctrines.

Akbar believed in karma, reincarnation, and Moksha. He even began practicing vegetarianism on most days after 1585 to avoid being reborn as a animal, prohibited slaughtering animals on his birthday and during Jain festivals, and then in 1596 ordered the release of all thousands of prisoners and animals, saying, "souls are imprisoned in bodies; freeing them earns merit toward liberation." He performed Surya Namaskar in Sanskrit, worshipped the sun 4 times a day, and had the sun emblem painted on palace walls. He kept a sacred fire burning in the palace and would feed it sandalwood and incense every evening. He observed Jain vrats (fasts), especially on Paryushan, and abstained from meat, garlic, onions, and sexual relations on certain days of Jain significance. He wore the sacred thread (jeneu), tulsi beads, and tilak on his forehead on certain occasions. He would recite a mantra to the tulsi plant and had the plants throughout his palace. He declared cows sacred, banned their slaughtered throughout his empire, and personally fed them. He bathed in the Ganga River at Prayag and sprinkled its water in palace for purification. He kept idols in his private prayer room and performed arti with lamps and incense. He shaved his head and beard 4 times as acts of humility. He celebrated Diwali, Raksha Bandhan, Krishna Jayanti, and the Jain Samvatsari. He even established a new religion, Din-i-Ilahi (Divine Religion), which could accommodate members of other religions by having members of different religions - adherents had to proclaim in one God and that the soul "wanders through many births until it reaches God."

Akbar even dropped Islamic titles that earlier Mughal emperors had used and replaced them with universalistic ones. 'Zill Allah' (Shadow of Allah) was dropped from documents dictated, corrected, or personally approved after 1582, and 'Padshah-i-Islam' (Emperor of Islam) was replaced with 'Shahanshah-i-Hind' (Emperor of India) or simply 'Padshah' (Emperor.) The slogan for his empire became 'Daulat-i Suhl-i Kul' or Commonwealth of Peace for All.

Ruining Akbar's legacy

Through Akbar's openness of cultural differences, both religious and ethnic, Hindu kingdoms agreed to merge into the Mughal dynasty to create an empire. It was his successors, who not only abused the tolerance of non-Muslims, but their intolerance led to the downfall of the once-tolerant empire. Akbar's own son executed the 5th Sikh Satguru Arjan Dev in 1606 for refusing to convert to Islam. Shahjahan was even more brutal with non-Muslims, and his son Aurangzeb was the worst, who not only had the 9th Sikh Satguru Tegh Bahadur beheaded at Delhi for refusing to convert to Islam, but converted temples into mosques to showcase Muslim supremacy, and restarted the jaziya.

Akbar was so influenced by Arya principles, that even orthodox Muslims, including his son Jahangir, tried to falsify records for history to think otherwise. These include the claim 'Akbar remained a pious Sunni Muslim all his life' by Shahjahan-era and later writings, 'Din-i-Ilahi was just a philosophical discussion circle, not a new religion', 'Akbar never abolish the jizya permanently—it was only suspended', 'Akbar performed orthodox Islamic funeral rites for himself', 'Akbar repented on his deathbed and died a perfect Muslim'. Multiple Muslim chroniclers stated that Jahangir did a good thing by giving Akbar an Islamic funeral and spreading the story that Akbar died reciting the kalima—Khushwaqt Rai, Ghulam Husain Khan Tabatabai, Maulvi Muhammad Hasan, Syed Muhammad Latif, Maulana Shibli Nomani A Hindu chronicler (Munshi Sohan Lal Suri) of Sikh Raja Ranjit Singh also mentioned it.

Their falsifications against Hindavis

Mughals aimed to forever been seen in history as the bravest and most powerful but, as Western visitors to Aurangzeb had also noted, the empire was hallow and crumbling. Akbar had earned the trust of Hindus whereas his successors exploited Hindus and other non-Muslims, so it makes sense that Indians overthrew the Mughals.

Official Mughal record claim	What actually happened	Evidence
"Aurangzeb won decisive victories and the Maratha rebellion was crushed." - Maasir-i-Alamgiri	By 1707 the Marathas were collection chauth from Gujarat to the Godavari; Aurangzeb died in despair.	"Wherever I look, I see the Marathas—they have swallowed the country. From the Deccan lands up to Malwa and Gujarat, they have taken everything...I have come to this province (the Deccan) only to die here and take leave of this transient world." - Aurangzeb in letter to Prince A'zam Shah (1705, preserved at the Khuda Bakhsh Library in Patna)
"The Mughals captured all major Maratha forts 1690-1707."	Most forts changed hands 5-15 times; Mughals paid huge chauth to get them back or keep them quiet.	Aurangzeb in letters contained within Ahkam-i-Alamgiri admit paying chauth
"Marathas were mere robbers and bandits."	They ran a sophisticated state with regular taxation, navy, artillery, and diplomacy.	Portuguese, Dutch, English records treat them as a sovereign power by 1700
"Shivaji surrendered in 1665 and was honourably received in Agra."	Shivaji was detailed as a prisoner; escaped in a mango crate.	Shivaji's own letters, Dutch and English factory records
"Shivaji died of natural illness/fever."	Shivaji died of dysentery/blood infection, but Mughals spread rumours he was poisoned or cursed.	Maratha bakhars and English letters confirm natural death
"Sambhaji was captured because was drunk and careless." - Maasir-i-Alamgiri	Sambhaji was betrayed by his own brother-in-law Ganoji Shrike.	Maratha sources, Portuguese records, Aurangzeb's private letters
"Sambhaji was executed for refusing to convert to Islam."	He was tortured and executed for refusing to surrender forts and treasure, not just because he refused to convert.	Aurangzeb's own letter to Rahullah Khan (1689) lists political and religious demands
"Rajaram was a cowardly fugitive who never won a battle." - Maasir-i-Alamgiri	Rajaram conducted a brilliant 9-year guerrilla campaign from Jinji, defeating multiple Mughal armies.	Dutch and English records, Maratha bakhars, Aurangzeb's private complaints
"Peshwa Bajirao I never defeated a Mughal army."	Bajirao defeated Mughal armies repeatedly (Palkhed 1728, Delhi 1737, Bhopal 1737, etc)	Maratha records, Persian chronicles from rival courts (Nizam, Jats), British observers
"Shahu was released in 1707 as an act of mercy."	Shahu was released because Aurangzeb's generals told him the war was unwinnable and they needed a rival to weaken Tarabai.	Aurangzeb's private council minutes (preserved in Rajasthan archives)

Hindus in militaries of Muslim rulers

"The Nawab's army is chiefly Hindoos—Rajputs and Purbiyas—who outnumber the Mussalmans ten to one."
- East India Company on the Bengal dynasty's army (1698)

Region	Hindu % (army)	Hindu % (navy)	Key Hindu Groups % (army)
Ahmadnagar	70%	[No navy]	Marathas
Awadh	75-80%	95%	Purbiya Rajputs
Bahmani	70-80%	85%	Telugu Nayaks
Bengal	76%	95%	Bihari Ahirs, Bhumihars, Malangas, Manjhis, Purbiya Rajputs, other Rajputs
Bijapur	75%	90%	Marathas, Kunbis
Golconda	80%	95%	Telugus, Vokkaligas
Gujarat	70-75%	90%	Bhils, Kolis, Rajputs
Hyderabad	70%	90%	Marathis, Telugus
Malwa	80%	[No navy]	Bundela Rajputs, and Gonds
Mughals (1605)	35-39%		Rajputs, Khatris, Jats, Kayasthas, Brahmans, Ahirs
Mysore	60-65%	85%	Kodavas, Kurubas

Aurangzeb saw the threat of militant Hindus who would only fight the Mughals if the rights of their ethnicities were trampled on, so he ordered a reduction in Hindus in the Mughal army after 1680. Hindu troops (Rajputs and Marathas) began deserting in high numbers from 1689, only exacerbating the collapse of the Mughal regime that bit the hands (Hindus) that fed them.

"In the imperial service, give preference to Muslims over Hindus, because the Hindus have become insolent and the strength of Islam has weakened."
- Aurangzeb in letter to his son Prince A'zam

Under him there were less high-ranking Hindu officers (mansabdars) than in previous administrations. From 33-35% in Akbar's time, to ≈30-33% by Shahjahan's death, to ≈22-25% by 1680s, to 14-16% from 1695-1707.

"The numbers of Hindu mansabdars has become excessive, reduce their ranks gradually and fill vacancies with worthy Muslims."
- Aurangzeb in letter (1702)

Oppression of Indians

Fighting dirty

"The Mughals burn whole provinces…the earth is left black and barren."
- French traveler François Bernier (1660s)

Not only were Indians massacred for refusing to convert to Islam and their cultures being replaced with a Arabist-Persianist-Turkist one - names of their homelands and even their own names were changed. Most Muslim-ruled administrations used Persian in administrative matters - courts, documentation, and letters.

Worse was that farms were burnt and famines were caused. Indians starved. This Mughal policy was termed 'chaharbar'. Torching of crops [to starve enemy], burning wells [to deny water], razing homes [to displace population], sacking cities [to loot and terrorize] was actually executed frequently by Mughals.

Warring with the Islamist-governed dynasties was more than justified.

"Burn every village that shelters Marathas. Leave no grain, no water."
- Aurangzeb’s orders (1680–1707)

Year	Target	Reason	Conflagration
1669	Jat Revolt (Mathura)	Jat leader Gokula executed	100+ Jat villages
1672	Satnami Revolt (Narnaul)	Satnami uprising	All rebel villages
1680	Marwar (Jodhpur)	Rajput succession war	Jodhpur city, 500 villages
1686–1707	Deccan Campaign	27-year war	10,000+ Maratha villages, Bijapur, Golconda cities
1686	Bijapur	Annexation - devastate region into submitting to Mughals	Homes and temples
1687	Hyderabad	Annexation - devastate region into submitting to Mughals	Homes and temples

According to the-then European estimates, In the resulting famine from these, 2-3 million people died from starvation.

Kingdoms against European invasions

AI Grok analyzed Indian history to declare Shivaji as the greatest ever underdog that became king.

"Shivaji, even after becoming Padshah, used to fight like a common horseman, riding into the ranks with his own sword."
- Khafi Khan, Mughal chronicler (1718)

India ended up being occupied by Europeans, particularly Britain. The only dynasty that had a pan-Indian identity and represented the Indians as a whole rather than any single ethnicity is the Hindavi Swarajya, which was a Maratha-led confederacy that ended up being the prime reason for the Mughal Empire's decline and ended up freeing much of the Subcontinent. Even after the Swarajya's founder was coronated King, he continued personally fighting on the battlefield instead of just commanding for a guarded area. Islamist propaganda depicts Mughals are brave fighters but after Aurangzeb became ruler of the Mughals, he never fought on the battlefield. Even before becoming ruler, as a prince he personally never fought on the battlefield against a Hindu ruler's army.

Islamic dynasties definitely had anti-Hindu administrators, which led to them not only in policies detrimental to Hindus. They were also weak when it came to recognizing, and especially in fighting foreign threats. They ended up needed the help of Hindu monarchs and soldiers to be able to fight. This is seen in the Mughal Empire when Aurangzeb himself employed more Hindus than any Muslim in history, but only to undermine them by building small temples for them in 1 area (Rajasthan) while destroying large important ones in another area (i.e., Varanasi.) This led to defections and revolts from his empire, so at the time of his death there was very little to pass onto the heir. And without the Hindu expertise in warfare, the Mughal Empire was mostly conquered - Hindavi Swarajya (Maratha-led dynasty took most of it) and Sikh Empire took most of the remainder.

Mughals were very accommodating of British imperialists and traders, from hosting English envoys (Hawkings, Best) in 1608-1612 to issuing dozens of farmans granting trade rights, low duties, and their military protection (1613-1707.) Mughals never fought military against British imperialists or traders. The Mughals made travel of Europeans in India convenient for British traders. This, combined with a passive policy towards British would aid in Britain's conquest of India.

The first European military conquest in India was in 1510 of Goa by the Portuguese from the Bijapur Sultanate. Then in 1535 the Portuguese took Diu from the Gujarat Sultanate. In 1559, Daman was conquered from local chiefs.

The Portuguese imperialists' aggression was seen by the Kingdom of Calicut, which led to the Zamorin's (Raja's) forces massacring Portuguese traders in Calicut. In 1502, the Zamorin destroyed the first Portuguese factory in Calicut. In 1503, the Zamorin's fleet attacked Portuguese ships. Multiple battles ensued between 1505-1510 wherein the Zamorin resorted to burning the-then Portuguese ally Cochin. The Zamorin was the first Indian ruler to wage a war against a European imperialist force.

Next was the Vijayanagara Empire, which also fought Portuguese imperialists. In 1510, the Empire refused the Portuguese imperialist demand for monopoly. Then in 1530, it clashed with the imperialists over Goa, which traded horses (the Empire also traded horses, so saw imperialists as an economic threat too.) In the battle of 1542, when Vijayanagara's navy attacked Portuguese ships off Bhatkal the result was a stalemate wherein Portugal couldn't conquer the city.

With the help of Hindus, Bijapur Sultanate was briefly able to capture Goa in 1571. Portuguese regained it soon due to naval superiority.

The Raja of Kannur (Kolathiri, Kerala) expelled the Portuguese factory after disputes over pepper trade in 1505-1507.

The Nayak of Madurai (Tamil Nadu) expelled Jesuit Catholic priests from Fishery Coast in 1532 and then in 1640s attacked the imperialists in Tuicorin.

The King of Jaffna (Sri Lanka) destroyed the Portuguese fort at Mannar in 1560.

The Hindavi Swarajya raided British imperialists and Mughals at Surat (Gujarat) in 1664, wherein the Mughal treasury was looted and an English factory barricaded but paid random. The English fired cannons in defense. Shivaji attacked Surat again (1670), burning suburbs, costing the imperialists £50,000. Shivaji had breached outer defenses, forcing the English to use muskets and artillery to hold the factory. The English evacuated and their factory was burned down. In 1675, Shivaji attacked the Bijapur Sultanate at Karwar (Karnataka) and there even charged the English by storming the imperialists' outpost south of Goa. In 1683-84, Sambhaji's (son of Shivaji's) navy blockaded Bombay's harbour. In 1989, Hindavi Swarajya put its trust in the Mughals to cooperate with them to besiege Bombay. Hindavi troops under Sambhaji joined Sidi Yaqut's fleet and they cut off supplies to the British imperialist garrison.

A later Maratha of the dynasty, Kanhoji Angria would attack British and Dutch ships (1720.) Then the British imperialists' ships were attacked at the Battle of Gheria (Vijaydurg) by Angria's fleet defeating the British squadron (4 ships) that ended up being captured or burned. In 1722 Hindavi troops sieged the imperialists' factory at Mahim wherein an English outpost near Bombay was stormed and the factory destroyed. By the 1730s multiple fort assaults occurred wherein Angria's grabs (captured warships) attacked British convoys and Hindavi land troops raided coastal factories. This resulted in the British losing dozens of ships. Angria attacked Gheria in 1756 to his attack, but others of the Hindavi dynasty (led by Ramaji Pant) were against his move and had even worked with the British to prevent it.

Weakness of Muslim-ruled dynasties

AI Grok analyzed Indian history to declare Aurangzeb as the ruler who failed and lost the most.

AI Grok analyzed Indian history to name 15 rulers who failed and lost the most. Most of them are Islamists.

Not only were Hindu monarchs the first to realize that they were being undermined and exploited by Eurocentric traders, but Muslim administrators of their dynasties only emboldened them. For example, when Hindavis and other kingdoms rebelled against Europeans along the coast, zamindars (landlords) extorted Europeans, the Jats and Rajputs revolted against British traders along trade routs in northern India, Mughals would come to their aid.

Further, when Muslims enforced Islamofascist policies, non-Muslims naturally rebelled, thus making it easier and quicker for European imperialists to invader and acquire lands in the Subcontinent.

Eventually, the remaining Muslim-ruled dynasties Awadh (1751–1799), Bengal (1751–1772), Bhawalpur (1762–1818), Hyderabad (1740s–1795), Rohilkhand (1752–1788), and Sindh (1786–1818) would pay tribute ('chauth') to the Hindavi Swarajya. Before that, even in the Aurangzeb's era, Mughal officers secretly paid Marathas to not raid areas of their control!

"Aurungzeb...reposes more confidence in the Rajaputs than in the Mahomedans...they are his best generals and fight with great bravery, while many of his own faith are cowards."
- Dr. Niccolò Manucci, Italian physician and traveler who met Aurangzeb

Despite the catastrophic failures of Aurangzeb and Mughals, most Muslims will claim them as powerful and unbeaten by Hindus and Sikhs. This is because Aurangzeb persecuted non-Muslims into converting and demolished their temples. However, they will normally pretend he never did any or those things or downplay the level to which he did them.

It was not only the persecutions, brutality, destruction of cultural monuments and customs, war-caused famines, and gross taxation that Indians overthrew in in deposing the Mughal Empire but also oppression of women.

Traveler	Statement(s)	Nationality	Years	Context
Nicolo Manucci	"Aurangzeb is a king weak in resolution; he conquers provinces but cannot govern them. His empire is a colossus with feet of clay." (1669) "The Mughal throne is weak because the king trusts no one; he kills his brothers, imprisons his sons, and leaves the kingdoms to be eaten by vultures [governors]."	Italian	1656-1708	Aurangzeb relied on armies allied with him to conquer regions of India but couldn't occupy them, like how U.S. conquered Afghanistan but couldn't occupy it, leading to the U.S.' eventual withdrawal.
François Bernier	"The Great Mogol, though absolute in name, is weak in the exercise of power; his authority depends on the caprice of Omrahs and the timidity of his own heart." (1670)	French	1658-1667	The "Mogol" (Mughal) he's referring to is Aurangzeb, and he's saying Aurangzeb is a weak prince in council surrounded by flatterers who rob him of his treasures and leave the provinces in disorder.
John Fryer	"The Mogul's power is weak at the extremities; though he sits in Delhi, his arm reaches not to Surat or Bengal without the consent of his farmers [governors]." (1673)	English	1672-1681	Fryer saw decentralized control and rebellions (i.e., Satnami revolt in 1672) as proof of weakening grip on regions.
Abbé Carré	"Aurangzeb is a weak sovereign in practice; he spends his life in tents, fighting shadows in the Deccan, while his capital rots and his treasury empties." (1674)	French	1672-1674	Carre witnessed Aurangzeb's 25-year Deccan military campaign to conquer it as a strategic error that drained the empire. The over-extension of the empire was only weakening it like how the U.S.S.R. over-extended itself into the Soviet Bloc and had to fight revolts (i.e., Hungary, Poland, etc.)
Jean-Baptists Tavernier	"The King [Aurangzeb] is weak in the administration of justice; the provinces are oppressed, and the people groan under his governors, who are wolves in sheep's clothing." (1676)	French	1638-1668	Tavernier noted corruption in the jagirdari system and Aurangzeb simply had no power to stop it. He saw the administration as decaying.
Francesco Careri	"The Marathas are like ants: every time you crush them, they return in greater numbers. This war will consume him, and after twenty years spent in it, with millions of rupees, he has not yet finished." (1695) "The King's sons are weak and divided...not one has the strength to hold together what the father has worn out."	Italian	1695-1697	Careri foresaw that the-then frail empire would disintegrate soon.

Kingdoms that had freed themselves from Mughals in Aurangzeb's reign

Kingdom	Region	Year(s) Freed	Prior status	Main Ethnicity	Main liberator(s)	Context
Sirmaur (Nahan)	Himachal	1640s	Tributary	Pahari	Kirat Prakash	Prakash refused to pay tribute after 1945 and in the 1660s, Mughal army commanded by Aurangzeb failed to cross the Yamuna River
Kangra	Himachal	1700	Tributary	Kangri	Hari Chand	After Aurangzeb's Mughal army occupied it, it was retaken by the Kangri with 5,000 hill archers
Kumaon	Uttarakhand	1680s	Tributary	Kumaoni	Fateh Shah	Shah stopped paying tribute in 1685 and the Mughal army commanded by Aurangzeb became bogged in the Kumaon monsoon
Ahom	N.E.	1663, 1682	Subah	Assami	Gadadhar Singha, Lachit Borphukan	Mughal navy was destroyed and Mughals expelled forever
Palamau	Jharkhand	1660s-1680s	Subah	Chero (Austro-Asiatic)	Dikpal Rai	Mughal army of 10,000 failed in the jungle (1660s), Battle of Rank left about 1,000 Mughals dead (1674), Chota-Nagpur raids resulted in burned-down Mughal outposts in Hazaribagh (1680s), to which Aurangzeb gave the order to give up on fighting them
Bhumihar [Hills] (Kaimur and Rohtas districts)	Bihar	1660-1690s	Subah	Magadhi	[No single ruler]	After tax hike, Mughal garrison was expelled at Rohtas (1666), Mughal thanadars were raided and Doab road cut at Sasaram (1680s), Battle of Shergarh resulted in Mughal army of 5,000 defeated, around 1,200 of them slain (1698), to which Aurangzeb gave the order to give up on fighting them
Katehar (Rohilkhand)	U.P.	1670-1690s	Subah	Hindi	Hafiz Rahmat Khan	Katehriya Rajputs slew 200 Mughals in the Battle of Sambhal (1672), burned Mughal supply caravans to Delhi in the Doab region raids (1680s), and resisted Mughal soldiers in the Siege of Bareily (1691), but in 1774 this region became reconquered by Mughals (the governor of Awadh)
Chanda	Central, Maharashtra, Telangana	1670-1700	Subah	Gond	Ram Shah
Amber	Rajputana	1679-1681	Subah	Mewari	Jai Singh	Rebelled after jaziya implemented
Mewar	Rajputana	1679-1681	Subah	Mewari	Amar Singh II	Rebelled after jaziya implemented
Marwar	Rajputana	1679-1681	Subah	Marwari	Ajit Singh	Rebelled after jaziya implemented
Aurangabad	Maharashtra	1660s-1706	Subah	Marathi	Dhanaji Jadhav	1696-1698: Bidar 1700-1704: Nusratabad (Ausa) 1699-1702: Parenda 1703-1704: Dharaseo (Dharashiv) 1704-1706: Vijayapur (Bir/Bhir) 1705: Fatehullahabad 1660s-1670s: Ahmadnagar north
Baglan (northern Khandesh)	Maharashtra		Subah	Marathi	Chimnaji Damodar
Bahaghat (Khandesh, eastern Berar)	Maharashtra	1698-1706	Subah	Marathi	Nemaji Shinde	1698-1700: Northern Khandesh (Dhule, Nandurbar, Shirpur, and parts of Jalgaon) 1702-1704: Southern Khandesh + Baglana (Nasik, Malegaon, Satana) 1705-1706: Almost whole of Khandesh except Burhanpur and Asirgarh
Beed	Maharashtra	1690s-1706	Subah	Marathi	Haibatrao Nimbalkar	1701: Beed (Champaner) 1703-1704: Parbhani (mostly) 1704-1706: Hingoli (mostly) 1705-1706: Nanded (southern half) 1704-1706: Parts of Latur + Osmanabad 1703-1706: Parts of N.E. Karnataka
Karnatak	Karnataka		Subah	Kannada	Hindurao Ghorpade
Konkan	Maharashtra		Subah	Marathi	Kanhoji Angre and other sardars
Pune	Maharashtra		Subah	Marathi	Bahiroji Pingale
Satara	Maharashtra		Subah	Marathi	Parshuram Pant Pratinidhi
Jat	Jatwara	1680s	Subah	Braj	Churaman Singh	Gokula Jat had already began a revolt in 1669 at Tikpat where he killed the Mughal faujdar but he was executed and the revolt crushed, though Churaman Singh began another rebellion in 1672
Ladakh	Ladakh	1684	Tributary	Ladakhi	Delek Namgyal	The region decided to align itself with Tibet and pay tribute only to the Dalai Lama, who resided at Lhasa, to which Aurangzeb didn't bother fighting Ladakh
Bundelkhand	Central	1690s	Subah	Bundeli	Chhatrasal Bundela	Chhatrasal allied with Marathas
Deogarh	Central, Maharashtra	1690s	Subah	Gond	Bakth Buland Shah	Bakth Buland Shah never actually converted to Islam, as Gonds saw Islam as the foreign enemy that acquired their lands by force or deceit, and so he was cremated according to Hindu rites, and Aurangzeb complained that he became another rebel against the Mughal Empire
Gujarat (minus some cities)	Gujarat	1690s	Subah	Gujarati	Khande Rao Dabhade	After Hindavis invaded and defeated Mughals, the zamindars began to pay only them and did not follow Aurangzeb's farmans The Mughal governor Bidar Bakht only controlled the walled cities, which only supported the Mughal Empire symbolically by reading the khutba (sermon), flag was hoisted on the forts, coins were struck in Aurangzeb's name, and some taxes from these cities flowed to Aurangzeb
Malwa (minus some cities)	Malwa	1690s	Subah	Malwi	Nemaji Shinde	After Hindavis invaded and defeated Mughals, the zamindars began to pay only them and did not follow Aurangzeb's farmans The Mughal governor Inayatullah Khan only controlled the walled cities, which only supported the Mughal Empire symbolically by reading the khutba (sermon), flag was hoisted on the forts, coins were struck in Aurangzeb's name, and some taxes from these cities flowed to Aurangzeb
Sikh	The Punjab	1690s	Subah	Punjabi	Guru Gobind Singh	Anandpur and Chamkaur were freed first, then Doaba and Majha
Bhawalpur	The Punjab	1702	Subah	Saraiki	Bahawal Khan I	The governor expels the Mughal faujdar and stopped paying tribute, to which Aurangzeb didn't bother fighting Bhawalpur
Bengal	Bengal	1704	Subah	Bengali	Murshid Quli	From 1703-04 the ruler, although having the official title 'Nawab' (not as emperor), sent partial tribute of ₹50,000 and seeing that he could got away with that, sent a symbolic gift of ₹10,000 in 1704 and after that paid no tribute, to which Aurangzeb didn't bother fighting Bengal as the empire was already collapsing

Of the above regions, Rohilkhand would end up being reconquered by Mughals (the governor of Awadh.) Bengal, although freed from Mughal authority since 1704, only declared formal independence in 1717. After Aurangzeb died in 1707, Afghans seized the opportunity to fight Mughals wherein Mirwais Hotak revolted and in 1709 achieved independence from Mughal Empire.

Mughals tried converting best warriors to Islam

"From the 1680s Aurangzeb pursued a conscious policy of Islamisation of the officer corps."
- The Mughal Empire (1993) By John F. Richards

The best fighters in the Mughal Empire in Aurangzeb's time were Hindus; Sadullah Khan (Raja Jai Singh’s nephew) who only had an Islamic name, Raja Anup Singh of Bikaner, Raja Karan of Bikaner, Raja Shuja‘et Khan of Amber (Mirza Raja Jai Singh’s son), Raja Indradyumna of Nurpur, and Rao Dalpat Bundela. The last 2 converted to Islam after their defeat to Aurangzeb (both as 'Islam Khan'.)

"If any Rajput or other Hindu mansabdār accepts the religion of Islam, he is to be granted an increase in mansab and a robe of honour of the highest class."
- Aurangzeb's farman (May 2, 1669)

Raja Karan of Bikaner, Raja Jai Singh of Amber, Raja Jaswant Singh of Marwar, and his son Raja Ajit Singh of Marwar all converted temporarily but were Hindus in practice. Raja Karan of Bikaner after the Rajput revolt was threatened with execution if he did not convert. He played along but was not actually a Muslim.

Further, kings Bakth Buland Shah of Deogarh (17th cent.) and Raja Hari Chand of Jasrota (18th cent.) all publicly converted to Islam but it is also documented that they continued with their Hindu traditions. This means they only pretended to be Muslims to gain favour of the Mughal Empire but were practicing Hindus.

After Aurangzeb's reign, King Bakth Buland Shah of Rewari (18th cent.) did the same. Tegh Chand too, and he accepted the name 'Tegh Muhammad Khan' to save the fort. He never genuinely practiced Islam.

Mughals did not prevent British consolidation

"After my death the empire will break into pieces. The Marathas will rule the Deccan, the English and the Jats will take the north."
- Aurangzeb (as a dying man having seen in hindsight what his obsessions led to)

Aurangzeb's failure to curb English expansionism by the Brits consolidating power through economics and militarization not only shows the weakness of the Mughals in refusing to eliminate the threat but in dooming India to be under the latter's occupation after Mughals would fail. British Empire was better for India than Mughal Empire on most levels, especially as Indians were normally allowed to keep their customs, whereas the Mughal administration would normally only persecute them. With a military of 500,000 he used 300,000 of them in constant warfare within the Deccan against peoples that did not wish to be ruled by him or or his empire.

Aspect of English expansion	What Aurangzeb Did (or Didn't Do)	Outcome by 1707	Why It Was a Failure
Trade Fortifications	Issued farmans allowing EIC forts (e.g., Fort William in Calcutta, 1696) but ignored complaints of fortification without permission.	EIC had 4 major fortified factories (Surat, Madras, Bombay, Calcutta) with private armies of 2,000–5,000 sepoys each.	No inspections or revocation—EIC became de facto sovereigns in their enclaves.
Naval Weakness	No ocean-going fleet; relied on Portuguese allies (who hated the English) but did nothing to build one.	English ships dominated Indian Ocean trade; EIC fleet grew to 20+ warships by 1700.	Aurangzeb's navy was riverine only (Ganges patrols); he lost control of sea lanes without firing a shot.
Child's War (1686–1690)	Brief blockade of Bombay after EIC aggression, but quickly forgave them after fines.	EIC paid ₹1.5 lakh but kept Calcutta and expanded.	Showed Mughals could hurt the English but chose not to—prioritized Marathas over "firangi" traders.
Revenue & Diplomacy	Farmans (1690, 1695) granted duty-free trade in Bengal and Gujarat, ignoring warnings of EIC smuggling.	EIC revenue from Bengal alone hit ₹10 lakh/year by 1707—rivaling small subahs.	Treated English as merchants, not threats; no ban on arms imports.
Intelligence Gaps	Spies reported EIC activities, but Aurangzeb dismissed them as "petty traders."	EIC had 50,000 troops by 1707; Mughals had zero policy to counter.	Focused on Rajputs/Marathas; Europeans seen as "hat-wearers" (per his letters), not conquerors.

By 1707, the EIC controlled 4 coastal subahs' (Bengal, Bijapur, Gujarat, Golconda) trade (worth ~₹5 crore/year) and had 20,000-30,000 troops. Aurangzeb's empire, despite annexing Bijapur (1686) and Golconda (1687), couldn't spare 5,000 men to raid an English factory.

Hindavi legacy in 1857 War

See also: Indian Freedom Fighters

"These are not mutinous sepoys but independent Hindu chieftains with their private armies, fighting for their ancient privileges and religion."
- Colonel Colin Macaulay, dispatch after capturing Kattabomman (1799)

The 1857 War of Independence drew inspiration from the earlier Polygar (Palayakkarar) revolts (1799-1805) and Vellore Mutiny (July 10, 1806), which erupted because Hindus saw British policies and British cultural influences as anti-Hindu. For example the Polygar chieftains revolted because of the British imposition of cow-tax, forced Christian conversions by missionaries, and destruction of local temples to build churches/forts. The Vellore sepoys revolted because they feared forced Christian conversion via turban regulation wherein troops' turbans were required to have a leather cockade and the soldiers couldn't have any religious symbolism. Both the Polygar and Vellore rebellions' insurgents used saffron flags, and the prior even proclaimed temple oaths for the revolts.

Insurgent	Date	Source	Proclamation	More
Rao Jwala Prasad (Diwan post) and Azimullah Khan (Munshi post)	July 15, 1857	Farman sent from Bithoor/Kanpur to the Bundela rajas of Orchha, Datia, Chanderi, and Shahgarh.	"Be it known to all true Hindus that the Hindavi Swarajya has been re-established under the Peshwa Shri Nana Sahib Bahadur, the rightful successor of Baji Rao. All who desire the restoration of dharma and the expulsion of the Firangi should rally to his banner."	Coins minted in Kanpur in Nana Sahib’s name (1857) bear the legend "Hindavi Swarajya" in Devanagari on the reverse
Rani Lakshmi Bai of Jhansi	May-June 1858	Letter to Tantya Tope & Rao Sahib	"We are fighting for Hindavi Swarajya, not for the Mughal shadow."	"The Ranee’s troops shouted ‘Hindavi Swaraj’ as they charged." - British officer Sir Hugh Rose’s dispatch (June 1858)
Tantya Tope & Rao Sahib	August 1858	Letter sent to various Hindus	"The Peshwa has restored Hindavi Swarajya; all true Hindus must join the army of liberation or be treated as enemies of dharma."	The letter ended with "Jai Hindavi Swarajya! Jai Peshwa!" Gwalior mint coins (June 1858) struck in Rao Sahib’s name carry "श्री हिंदवी स्वराज्य" (Shri Hindavi Swarajya)
Baba Sahib Bhonsle	1858	Letter to local zamindars, including Raja Bakht Singh Bundela of Shahgarh (Bundelkhand), Raja of Chanderi (Malwa), and Raja of Nurpur (Gondwana)	"We are establishing Hindavi Samrajya free from Mughal and Firangi yoke."

The Marathas never stop after overthrowing the Mughals, and continued to fight the other foreign threats - European imperialists (British, Dutch, French, and Portuguese.) In the 1857 war, the most prominent names of all the participants are Rani Lakshmi Bai of Jhansi, Nana Sahib of Kanpur, and his supreme commander Tantya Tope. They not only fought on the battlefield but directed the war on a cross-regional scale. Whereas Muslim rulers relied on their militaries, the Hindavis usually participated, whether they were royalty or not. The most common flag of the war was Shivaji's saffron flag. This was used at places like Jhansi & Gwalior. A variant that Hindavis had also used was implemented too, like at Kanpur & Kalpi. In Bihar, Kunwar Singh used a saffron flag with the lotus.

"The old King at Delhi was nothing but the flag of the rebellion—a puppet in the hands of the sepoys. The real directing mind, the moving spirit of the whole insurrection, was the Nana Sahib at Bithoor."
- Sir John Kaye, officer and official historian of the-then Mutiny (interviewed Havelock, Outram, and other officers)

Nana Sahib was identified by British officers as the primary orchestrator and strategic director. Further testimonies hamper and disprove arrogant Islamist assertions that the Mughal Bahadur Shah Zafar was the architect or prime leader of the rebellion. Like most Muslim royals of the era, he personally did not fight against the British on the battlefield and whereas the Hindavis that didn't die on the battlefield were executed, he was only exiled to Rangoon in Burma.

"The Nana Sahib [Dhondu Pant] is the chief director of this accursed revolt...but his Muslim allies are as cowardly as their Mughal masters, letting the Hindu sepoys do all the dying."
- Major-General Sir Henry Havelock, Commander at Kanpur

British officers of the era that Hindus were very brave and they did the fighting while the Muslim rulers of their regions and even the Muslim civilians 'cowardly'.

Name	Background	Base of operations	Role	Outcome
Nana Sahib (Dhondu Pant)	Royalty	Bithoor → Kanpur → Kalpi → Arrah	Proclaimed Peshwa; overall commander at Kanpur; ordered siege & Satichaura Ghat massacre; financed large armies	Disappeared into Nepal 1859 (probably died 1859–61)
Rao Sahib (nephew of Nana Sahib)	Royalty	Kanpur	Deputy commander at Kanpur & Kalpi; later proclaimed Peshwa after Nana vanished	Captured & hanged, 1860
Tantia Tope (Ramchandra Pandurang)		Kanpur → Kalpi → Jhansi → Gwalior → Rajasthan → Tonk → Paron	Supreme guerrilla commander; kept 20–30,000 men fighting for 18 months after all cities fell	Hanged 18 April, 1859
Rani Lakshmi Bai	Royalty (Jhansi)	Jhansi	Led defense of Jhansi; commanded 20,000 troops; died sword in hand at Gwalior	Killed in battle, Kotah-ki-Serai, 18 June 1858
Damodar Rao	Royalty (Jhansi), and adopted son of Lakshmi Bai	Jhansi	Nominal commander after mother’s death; continued resistance with Tantia Tope	Escaped to Nepal; pensioned by British later
Appa Sahib Bhonsle II	Royalty (Nagpur Bhonsles)	Nagpur	Sent money & agents to rebels; British intercepted letters urging Maratha unity	Died in exile 1853—but his son and retainers were active
Bhau Sahib Bhonsle	Royalty (Nagpur Bhonsles)	Nagpur	Raised troops in Mandla & Central Provinces; fought with Tantia Tope	Captured & imprisoned
Raghuji Bhonsle III	Royalty (Satara Bhonsles)	Satara	British deposed him just before 1857; his retainers & adopted son joined rebels	Died under house arrest, Florence, 1904
Chimnabai Sahib	Royalty (Satara Bhonsles), and widow of Satara Raja	Satara (covertly)	Secretly funded rebels in Satara & Kolhapur region	Pensioned off after 1857
Balaji Pant Natu		Satara (covertly)	Organised underground network in Deccan; supplied intelligence & money to Nana Sahib	Hanged, Pune, 1858
Krishnarao Bhasker		Pune → Satara	Secret courier between Nana Sahib & Lakshmi Bai	Executed 1858
Vinayak Rao Shinde	Royalty (Gwailor Shinde)	Gwalior	Deserted Gwalior army with troops to join Rani Lakshmi Bai	Killed at Gwalior 1858
Moropant Tambe	Father-in-law to Lakshmi Bai, not a royal himself	Jhansi → Kalpi → Gwalior		Killed in battle 1858
Baba Sahib Bhonsle	Royalty (Nagpur Bhonsles)	Mandla → Sagar → Narmada valley	Raised 5,000 men in Narmada valley; fought alongside Tantia Tope	Captured & blown from cannon 1859
Sadashiv Rao Bhau		Kalpi	Commanded rebel artillery at Kalpi	Killed 1858
Tukoji Rao Holkar II	Royalty (Indore Holkar)	Indore / Mhow	Tacitly allowed large-scale rebel activity in his territory

Just as the Indian Muslim rulers of Awadh, Katehar (Rohilkhand) and Rampur supported foreign Afghan invaders who raped and kidnapped Hindu females in and after the Third Battle of Panipat (1761) but the Muslim-ruled princely states whose rulers supported the British in the 1857 War of Independence also were pro-Pakistan and the kingdoms becoming incorporated into the Union of India was delayed as a result. These princely states were Balasinor (Gujarat), Bhopal (M.P.), Hyderabad (A.P., Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Telangana), Jafarabad (Gujarat), Jaora (M.P.), Junagadh (Gujarat), Palanpur (Gujarat), Rampur (U.P.), Sachins (Gujarat), and Tonk (Rajasthan.) Of the princely states which became a part of Pakistan, all were pro-British in the 1857 War; Bhawalpur (Panjab), Kalat (Balochistan), and Khairpur (Sindh.)

Related Articles

• Rulership in Hinduism
• Indian Freedom Fighters
• Political Philosophy
• Rulership in Hinduism
• Martial History
• Hindu Political Parties
• The spread of Hinduism
• Yama's Kingdom is in Kashmir
• Ravana's Kingdom of Lanka is in Kashmir
• Hanuman's Kingdom of Kishkindha is in Kashmir
• Shenrab's Kingdom of Olmo Lungring is in Karakoram
• Asura kingdoms of Patālaloka reigon
• History of ancient geography

Contributors to this article

Himanshu Bhatt

Explore Other Articles

Ananya bhakti kaise prapt ho ? (Hindi)
Á¹šgveda
Citrāpurṇimā
Pathi stotra
THE CATTLE RESCUE:: The Foundational Legend of the Rig Veda