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