top of page

By:

Abhijit Joshi

31 August 2024 at 10:09:24 am

The Pawar Paradox Never Ends

As speculation over Sharad Pawar’s equations with the NDA resurfaces, Maharashtra is reminded that its most enduring political constant has always been uncertainty. There is an old Mumbai saying that seasoned political observers have long enjoyed repeating: “Ghode ki laath aur boss ki baat par kabhi bharosa mat karna” (never trust a horse’s kick or a boss’ word; either can come without warning). If Maharashtra’s politicians were updating the proverb today, one more cautionary line would...

The Pawar Paradox Never Ends

As speculation over Sharad Pawar’s equations with the NDA resurfaces, Maharashtra is reminded that its most enduring political constant has always been uncertainty. There is an old Mumbai saying that seasoned political observers have long enjoyed repeating: “Ghode ki laath aur boss ki baat par kabhi bharosa mat karna” (never trust a horse’s kick or a boss’ word; either can come without warning). If Maharashtra’s politicians were updating the proverb today, one more cautionary line would surely be included: “Sharad Pawar ke siyasi faisle par kabhi bharosa mat karna” (never assume you know Sharad Pawar's next political move). Few leaders in independent India have reinvented themselves as often, confounded both allies and adversaries with equal regularity, or remained politically relevant across nearly five decades quite like Sharad Pawar. Every major realignment in Maharashtra has, in one way or another, borne his imprint. Backstairs Intrigue That reputation has once again set the state’s political circles buzzing. A late-night meeting between senior NCP (Sharadchandra Pawar) leader Jayant Patil and Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis, followed by indications that Pawar's party could extend conditional support to the Centre's proposed Delimitation Bill, has revived speculation that Maharashtra may be headed towards yet another political reshuffle. Supriya Sule has firmly dismissed suggestions that her party is preparing to join the NDA, insisting that any support for the Delimitation Bill would depend entirely on safeguards ensuring fairness for every state. Yet, the rumours persist. That, perhaps, is the enduring ‘Pawar effect.’ In Maharashtra, a single meeting involving Sharad Pawar is often enough to trigger discussions of an entirely new government. Pawar’s political career has consistently demonstrated that certainty is an illusion. In 1978, barely 38 years old, he engineered one of Maharashtra’s greatest political upsets. Breaking away from the Congress, he toppled the Vasantdada Patil government and stitched together the Progressive Democratic Front, or Pulod, by bringing together parties separated by ideology but united by arithmetic. He became the state’s youngest Chief Minister, a distinction that still defines his public image. That episode also revealed the two principles that have shaped his politics ever since. Ideology, for Pawar, has rarely been an immovable barrier. Political arithmetic has almost always mattered more. Equally, power has never been viewed as permanent. The pattern repeated itself through the decades. Pawar moved between Congress politics and regional politics with remarkable ease, served as India’s Defence Minister, broke away to establish the Nationalist Congress Party in 1999 over Sonia Gandhi's foreign origin, spent nearly fifteen years governing alongside the Congress, and then stunned the political establishment yet again in 2019 by helping construct the Maha Vikas Aghadi. Few believed the Shiv Sena, Congress and NCP could coexist under one roof. Pawar proved otherwise. Even the dramatic dawn swearing-in of Devendra Fadnavis and the late Ajit Pawar in November 2019 ultimately enhanced Sharad Pawar’s reputation. Within days, he had reunited most of his fractured party and succeeded in installing Uddhav Thackeray as Chief Minister. What initially appeared to be his biggest setback became another demonstration of his political resilience. Today, the Sharad Pawar-led NCP is no longer the formidable organisation it was before the split of 2023. While he retains considerable public goodwill, national stature and a respectable parliamentary presence, his legislative strength within Maharashtra has diminished considerably, prompted questions about the party’s future. Reports suggest that sections within the NCP (SP) are increasingly uncomfortable with the prospect of remaining in perpetual opposition and favour exploring some form of understanding with the BJP. Pawar himself is believed to have resisted such suggestions, while Supriya Sule has repeatedly ruled out any immediate shift. Yet the existence of internal debate appears difficult to dismiss. Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis has publicly asserted that there is no question of new entrants joining the Mahayuti. His statement reflects political logic. The BJP already enjoys numerical dominance alongside Eknath Shinde’s Shiv Sena and Ajit Pawar’s NCP. Bringing Sharad Pawar into the alliance may strengthen the NDA externally, but it could also generate fresh leadership ambitions, competing centres of influence and unnecessary internal tensions. Issue-Based Cooperation If there is any movement, therefore, it is more likely to begin with issue-based cooperation in Parliament than with an immediate formal alliance. That explains why the Delimitation Bill has assumed such significance. Supriya Sule has indicated that her party could support the legislation provided the Centre guarantees a uniform 50 percent increase in parliamentary seats for every state. The position differs from that adopted by several INDIA bloc partners and has naturally fuelled speculation. Yet issue-based support should not automatically be interpreted as political surrender. Sharad Pawar has rarely subscribed to the idea that opposition requires opposing every government initiative. Throughout his career he has maintained working relationships across party lines, often separating legislative cooperation from electoral competition. That flexibility has repeatedly helped him preserve political relevance even when his party's electoral fortunes fluctuated. If, despite present denials, Pawar eventually chooses to support or formally align with the NDA, the consequences would extend well beyond Maharashtra. For the INDIA bloc, it would represent perhaps the most damaging psychological blow in western India, depriving it of one of its most experienced strategists and consensus-builders. Congress would lose a veteran ally at precisely the moment it is attempting to rebuild its organisational strength in Maharashtra. Uddhav Thackeray’s Shiv Sena (UBT) could find itself increasingly isolated, forcing a reassessment of both alliances and political strategy before the next Assembly election. And for the BJP, it would amount to the political neutralisation of perhaps its most accomplished regional rival. Sharad Pawar’s greatest political strength has always been his refusal to close any door before absolutely necessary. Strategic ambiguity has been one of its principal instruments. At 85, he remains among the last practitioners of an older style of coalition politics, where negotiation often counts for more than confrontation, and where tomorrow’s ally may well have been yesterday’s fiercest opponent. (The writer is a political observer. Views personal.

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.


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