top of page

By:

Quaid Najmi

4 January 2025 at 3:26:24 pm

Congress’ solo path for ‘ideological survival’

Mumbai: The Congress party’s decision to contest the forthcoming BrihanMumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) elections independently is being viewed as an attempt to reclaim its ideological space among the public and restore credibility within its cadre, senior leaders indicated. The announcement - made by AICC General Secretary Ramesh Chennithala alongside state president Harshwardhan Sapkal and Mumbai Congress chief Varsha Gaikwad - did not trigger a backlash from the Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi...

Congress’ solo path for ‘ideological survival’

Mumbai: The Congress party’s decision to contest the forthcoming BrihanMumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) elections independently is being viewed as an attempt to reclaim its ideological space among the public and restore credibility within its cadre, senior leaders indicated. The announcement - made by AICC General Secretary Ramesh Chennithala alongside state president Harshwardhan Sapkal and Mumbai Congress chief Varsha Gaikwad - did not trigger a backlash from the Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi (MVA) partners, the Nationalist Congress Party (SP) and Shiv Sena (UBT). According to Congress insiders, the move is the outcome of more than a year of intense internal consultations following the party’ dismal performance in the 2024 Assembly elections, belying huge expectations. A broad consensus reportedly emerged that the party should chart a “lone-wolf” course to safeguard the core ideals of Congress, turning140-years-old, next month. State and Mumbai-level Congress leaders, speaking off the record, said that although the party gained momentum in the 2019 Assembly and 2024 Lok Sabha elections, it was frequently constrained by alliance compulsions. Several MVA partners, they claimed, remained unyielding on larger ideological and political issues. “The Congress had to compromise repeatedly and soften its position, but endured it as part of ‘alliance dharma’. Others did not reciprocate in the same spirit. They made unilateral announcements and declared candidates or policies without consensus,” a senior state leader remarked. Avoid liabilities He added that some alliance-backed candidates later proved to be liabilities. Many either lost narrowly or, even after winning with the support of Congress workers, defected to Mahayuti constituents - the Bharatiya Janata Party, Shiv Sena, or the Nationalist Congress Party. “More than five dozen such desertions have taken place so far, which is unethical, backstabbing the voters and a waste of all our efforts,” he rued. A Mumbai office-bearer elaborated that in certain constituencies, Congress workers effectively propelled weak allied candidates through the campaign. “Our assessment is that post-split, some partners have alienated their grassroots base, especially in the mofussil regions. They increasingly rely on Congress workers. This is causing disillusionment among our cadre, who see deserving leaders being sidelined and organisational growth stagnating,” he said. Chennithala’s declaration on Saturday was unambiguous: “We will contest all 227 seats independently in the BMC polls. This is the demand of our leaders and workers - to go alone in the civic elections.” Gaikwad added that the Congress is a “cultured and respectable party” that cannot ally with just anyone—a subtle reference to the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS), which had earlier targeted North Indians and other communities and is now bidding for an electoral arrangement with the SS(UBT). Both state and city leaders reiterated that barring the BMC elections - where the Congress will take the ‘ekla chalo’ route - the MVA alliance remains intact. This is despite the sharp criticism recently levelled at the Congress by senior SS(UBT) leader Ambadas Danve following the Bihar results. “We are confident that secular-minded voters will support the Congress' fight against the BJP-RSS in local body elections. We welcome backing from like-minded parties and hope to finalize understandings with some soon,” a state functionary hinted. Meanwhile, Chennithala’s firm stance has triggered speculation in political circles about whether the Congress’ informal ‘black-sheep' policy vis-a-vis certain parties will extend beyond the BMC polls.

Maharashtra’s Rankean Chronicler and the Final Word on Shivaji Maharaj

In a lifetime devoted to relentless scholarship, Mehendale sifted legend from fact, giving the Maratha ruler the biography he truly deserved


G.B. Mehendale (1947-2025)
G.B. Mehendale (1947-2025)

The prodigious Gajanan Bhaskar Mehendale, who passed away aged 77 in Pune, was a comprehensive debunker of the many myths associated with Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj and the historiography on the legendary 17th century Maratha warrior king.


A figure of Olympian erudition and quiet humility, Mehendale belonged to that now-extinct species of scholars whose lineage ran through luminaries of the late 19th and early 20th stalwarts like Sir Jadunath Sarkar, Vishwanath Kashinath Rajwade, Vasudev Vaman Khare, G.S. Sardesai – whose craft was defined by a stern fidelity to evidence and the conviction that history was a serious and rigorous discipline that could not be subjected to frivolous ideological sloganeering or faddish theorizing.


That Mehendale, in his 950-page tour de force Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj: His Life and Times (2011), could so effortlessly expose the flaws in the great Sarkar’s Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj and His Times (1919) - a biography that had long dominated the field of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj studies in English - stands as a testament to his scholarly authority and exacting method.


He tellingly began his monumental biography of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj with the famous quote from John Adams, made during the latter’s ‘Argument in Defense of the Soldiers in the Boston Massacre Trials’ in December 1770: “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”


Mehendale’s masterwork, the product of a staggering 30 years of dedicated research, stands as the most technically perfect biography of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, with its fascinating appendices and every controversy and misconception examined in forensic detail.

ree

Born in 1947, the year of India’s independence, Mehendale grew up in an atmosphere where Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj was both folk memory and nationalist icon. He trained first as a student of defence studies at the University of Pune, and even worked as a war correspondent during the Bangladesh War of 1971 before turning fulltime to history research.


In his magnum opus, he admitted that like most Maharashtrian boys he had grown up revering Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Maharaj; what changed was the nature of his reverence. As he read widely in military history, he realized that Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj could be counted among the “great captains of the world” and that his legacy was not just that of a daring cavalryman but also of an astute administrator, a humane statesman and a builder of institutions.


That recognition could have led him down the road of hagiography. Instead, Mehendale became a myth-breaker. Like an ace detective, he forensically cherished myths that abound in the Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj’s exploits and the great ruler’s milieu.


A person who absolutely shunned any manner of celebrity, Mehendale was at home in the libraries and archives of Pune and elsewhere in Maharashtra, spending the best part of his research life at institutes like the Bharat Itihas Sanshodhak Mandal (BISM) and the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute (BORI), immersing himself in Modi scripts, Persian chronicles, Portuguese records, neglected Marathi bakhars, digging up old letters and correspondence to understand and present as definitive a picture of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj and 17th century Maharashtra as was possible.


When it was finally published in English, Mehendale’s ‘Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj: His Life and Times’ became a running dialogue with earlier chroniclers, correcting, nuancing and sometimes outright dismissing their claims, especially in Sarkar’s biography of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj.


For instance, Mehendale debunked stories that the fort of Kondhana was renamed Sinhgad only after Tanaji Malusare’s death in its recapture, observing that a 1663 letter already called Kondhana as ‘Sinhgad,’ seven years before its recapture by Tanaji in 1670.


He further corrected notions of scholars that an awakening in Maharashtra owing to the work of saints had laid the groundwork for Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj’s coming. Likewise, he debunked the notion that Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj’s many marriages were all politically motivated, noting that even a lesser noble like Kanhoji Jedhe had five wives.


Mehendale further refuted the opinion of James Grant Duff and Sarkar that Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj was illiterate, pointing that in the absence of any hard evidence, such a claim on Grant Duff’s part (and echoed by others) carried with it a whiff of sensationalism.


Mehendale pointed out how Sarkar dismissed most Marathi documents as undated, unreliable or altered, while himself relying heavily on undated Persian collections. Sarkar, he argued, had failed to engage with Marathi sources in depth, and in doing so allowed myth carelessness to creep in what Mehendale termed a ‘half-baked’ biography of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. While Sarkar was a master of Persian sources and a formidable chronicler of Aurangzeb and the fall of the Mughal Empire, but to Mehendale’s mind, he had only dabbled in Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj.


Dr. Bal Krishna’s two-volume Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj the Great (1931), the other widely read English biography which made effective use sources, suffered the opposite problem. It was passionately nationalist, a work of uplift rather than of inquiry. Where Sarkar was sceptical, Bal Krishna was celebratory.


However, the biography which Mehendale gives of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj is sober without being bloodless, proud without being parochial. It was in his appendices, those dense but absorbing collections of letters, farmns, and cross-examinations, that one saw his craft at its clearest. Readers linger there not for narrative pleasure but for the thrill of evidence itself, which Mehendale sifted and arranged with lawyerly care.


While giving a talk on truths and half-truths in history, Mehendale took aim at the easy relativism that passes for historical wisdom. “Some people, who are perhaps too indolent to study Persian or the Modi script, keep saying history keeps changing,” Mehendale had remarked. “It is my belief that ninety per cent of history remains as it is. Ten per cent may change owing to new evidence,” he said, in a thinly-veiled rebuke to so-called ‘progressive’ or Marxist historians.


It was his firm view that the historians’ job is not to ‘guide’ society but only to tell from documents what happened. Mehendale’s fastidiousness in source criticism recalled Barthold Georg Niebuhr, who in the early nineteenth century revolutionized Roman history by discarding legend. His devotion to documentation echoed historians like Ranke and Guizot.


It is imperative that his other works in Marathi like ‘Islamachi Olakh’ and ‘Shivachatrapatinche Aramar’ (The Navy of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj) be translated in English and other vernacular languages to enable the country to know the full measure of Mehendale’s scholarly rigour.


In his biography of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, Mehendale joins a rare company of historians who have completely reshapes the very study of their subjects: Golo Mann with Wallenstein, David Chandler with Napoleon’s campaigns, Stephen Kotkin with Stalin or Ian Kershaw with Hitler.


Just as the masterworks of these historians rendered earlier accounts of their subjects provisional, Mehendale’s ‘Shivaji: His Life and Times’ made the works of Sarkar and others seem like a first draft.


It is hard to imagine any matching the comprehensiveness of Mehendale’s magnum opus. Its meticulous appendices, its demolition of errors large and small ensures that it will remain the Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj biography to end all biographies – and the volume that every serious student must confront.


In this sense, Gajanan Bhaskar Mehendale accomplished something rare by writing a work so thorough and so definitive that it may never be superseded.


And that is the highest tribute one can pay a historian. He did what Leopold von Ranke demanded, what John Adams urged, what he himself practiced: he gave us the historical Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, not as a plaster saint or a polemical symbol but as he really was.

Comments


bottom of page